Brhd

[Ci Celli Ddu]

so, following the Semetic (in the linguistic sense=Hebrew & Arabic) and Egyptian custom of emphasizing the consonants in script, what significance could the BRHD of Abrahadabra have?

[m1thr0s]

It might be more useful to look at all of them: BRHDBR, since this gives us the Hexagrammal half of the equation. AAAAA then gives us the Pentagrammal. Crowley actually treats this formula somewhere in his writings...

otherwise I think you have to start looking at letters a little out of context:
B = Beth (Magus), 2
R = Resh (Sun), 200
H = He (Star), 5
D = Daleth (Empress), 4

Total = 211 = 47th Prime (Crowley always mistakenly counted 1 as Prime I think)...
Not sure of its gematria...would have to do some digging...

In the Greek, however, it would add to 111

m1thr0s

[Ci Celli Ddu]

Ah yes, Ive found it here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrahadabra) on Wiki. BRHDBR is fine by me, I just assumed that they're would be no need to repeat a consonant, in the same way that sigils are made from a written text by trimming repetative letters down to just one occurence each, and that there always seems to be more importance given to groups of four, as in the case of IHVH and HVHI

[m1thr0s]

either view has its merits I'd say...

m1thr0s

[Ci Celli Ddu]

B = Beth (Magus), 2
R = Resh (Sun), 200
H = He (Star), 5
D = Daleth (Empress), 4



Have you got a link for the whole alphabet?

[m1thr0s]

try this:

http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/2763/witchy/alphabetvalues.gif

m1thr0s

[MythMath]

How can a stimulant be as potent as
ABRAHADABRA(.com) and still be legal...?

And free...?

[Ainsloch]

In the Greek, however, it would add to 111

m1thr0s

First I should like to say hello, I am new to the forums. I was browsing through some threads when I came to this one. I looked at the values in Greek myself for BRHD and think you mistakenly used the Hebrew value of 5 for H instead of the Greek which is 8 (Eta). From what I can gather, in Greek B:2, R:100, H:8, D:4. Now there are 2xB and 2xR in Abrahadabra, so this would give 2+2+100+100+8+4 which totals to 216. 216 is of course 6x6x6 or 666. I don't think that is a coincidence.

[MythMath]

http://www.aestheteka.com/images/666site.gif
http://www.aestheteka.com/Mark%20of%20the%20Beast.htm

[m1thr0s]

Thank you for your observation Ainsloch. This appears to be a gray area of translation science and one I am not altogether expert in. Since there is no distinction between the letters E and H in Hebrew (both = He= 5), the convention seems to have been to count He's as Epsilons via the Greek, probably turning to numeration itself to resolve the conflict. Yet if we are translating from English to Greek a H would typically resolve as an Eta (=8) as you have indicated. Technically Abrahadabra is neither Hebrew nor English in origin, yet at least one popular translation is via the hebrew Abrah Dbr (Voice of the Chief Seer) which is the numeration bias most adopted by Crowley himself, as implicated throughout the Book of the Law. Viewing Abrahadabra as numerically rooted in the hebrew Aiq Bkr, the H's would typically convert to Epsilons in Greek translation.

But to be thorough, we always need to look at all available possibilities and not simply rest on conventional methods of handling these things. So thank you for bringing this up. There are several fairly in-depth articles in print at this time dealing with this issue. One of these worth looking at can be viewed here (http://www.themagickalreview.org/essays/number/number04-III.php).

Thank you for your comments and welcome to Abrahadabra Forums!

m1thr0s

[Anibis]

First I should like to say hello, I am new to the forums. I was browsing through some threads when I came to this one. I looked at the values in Greek myself for BRHD and think you mistakenly used the Hebrew value of 5 for H instead of the Greek which is 8 (Eta). From what I can gather, in Greek B:2, R:100, H:8, D:4. Now there are 2xB and 2xR in Abrahadabra, so this would give 2+2+100+100+8+4 which totals to 216. 216 is of course 6x6x6 or 666. I don't think that is a coincidence.

This is also 72x3, so the number of letters in the Shem Ha Mephorash... Very curious resonance. Thanks for pointing it out... Fiddly work, gematria...
-Anibis

[Ainsloch]

Thank you for your comments and welcome to Abrahadabra Forums!

m1thr0s

Thank you M1thr0s, for providing me with the oppertunity to share thoughts on matters of interest to me, and thanks for the welcome! To be honest, whether Crowley deliberately incorporated the number 216 with Abrahadabra or not is of little interest to me, it was merely an observation, though it does have some possible relevance to another observation I have made about your discovery. I am not a Crowley "devotee" or anything myself, in fact I have read very little of his writings. Anyway... no the reason I am at these forums is because of the link you highlight between the Tree of Life and the Tetractys. This is indeed a significant insight. I personally think this overshadows anything Crowley contributed with Abrahadabra, because whilst Crowley's magical system was relatively modern, the Tetractys and Tree of Life have a pedigree dating back many centuries! Nontheless, it demonstrates that Crowley certainly had his finger on the pulse, so to speak.

Now, if one thinks about it, it is actually pretty natural that the Tree should fit over the Tetracys, for the sole reason that it is constructed from the Vesica Piscis. As Euclid's first(!) proposition states, one can construct an equilateral triangle from the Vesica. So it follows that a diagram constructed from the Vesica Piscis, as the Tree of Life is, would quite plausibly fit to scale over the Tetractys, which of course is a triangular grid.

However, I am now speaking from hindsight! I had overlooked this link before myself, and I congraulate you for bringing it to light. Often what appears as obvious with hindsight is originally the most difficult to see. It takes someone to think outside of the box, to come at something from a different angle, before new insights are gleaned. I agree when you say we must not stick rigidly to convention. If everyone did, where would we be? Innovators and initiators forge the way ahead, the majority follow. i digress.

So the tree fits perfectly over a Tetractys of the 11th triangular number. The number 11 is then a key, because it provides accurate dimensions for the Tree, both in part and as a whole.

Triangles are one thing, but they are intimately linked to squares, besides being generated by circles! As you note elsewhere the 11 rows of dots gives a 10x10 square. When we invoke the square we move into the dimension of surface area. It is here that the Tree of Life truly reveals its Pythagorean origins. Here I am talking not of the square however ( I will come to that soon), but of the rectangle. If you examine the rectangle that makes up the center of the Tree of Life against the dimensions of the Tetractys, you will see the first in the series of the Pythagorean right angle triangles! Now this is beautiful, because the right angle triangle has really serious pedigree... it is at the heart of construction and architecture, and dates as far back to ancient Egypt, where it was revered, and beyond. Now unveiled in the Tree of Life, it allows us to make the step from abstract symbolism to applied science. Basic science yes, but profound. A little research by anyone who cares to should reveal its pedigree.

The solution of the right angle triangle is accredited to Pythagoras, however it was surely known long before him... he inherited it. However, the Pythagorean school was the first to reveal it openly. a2+b2=c2. Simple, yet it allows us to calculate the hypotenuse of any right angled triangle. With the 3,4,5 triangle, this works as a2 = 3x3 = 9, b2 = 4x4 = 16. Since c2 = a2+b2, c2 must be 25. The ?25 = 5, thus c is 5. There ya have it. Thanks to your insight on the link to the tetractys, this sacred triangle is now revealed at the heart of the Tree of Life. But we are only getting warmed up.

Now our attention has been drawn to the area of the diagram, we can look at the triangles that constitute the upper and lower parts of the Tree. They are contained in squares of 3x3... the Lo Shu square, or the magical square of Saturn! Of course, just as the 3,4,5 rectangle is the first in the series, so too the 3x3 square is the first in the series of magic squares! We must remember, it is the parts that constitute the whole, and the parts of the Tree of Life are underpinned by the Lo Shu square and the Pythagorean 3,4,5 right angle triangle, as revealed by the Tetractys! Powerful stuff.

To return to the link of 216 in all of this, one might note that the sum of the cubes of the 3,4,5 right angle triangle comes to... 216! Area is one thing, but the physical world of form we live in is three dimensional, not two... and cubing is the measure of this.

I hope you didn't mind me using your illustration of the Tetractys/Tree to supplement this post M1thr0s, in fact let me take this oppertunity to complement you on your diagrams throughout this site, they are top notch.

In summing up, by linking the Tree of Life to the Tetractys, the link between circle, equliateral triangle, and the most sacred magic square and rectangle/right angle triangle known is unveiled! It is truly a master combination, is it not?


:D

[MythMath]

Don't forget the curves...

Here's another layer:

http://forums.abrahadabra.com/showthread.php?t=804

[Ainsloch]

Don't forget the curves...


Ahh, yes that is beautiful. I have only been on this site a couple of days, and there is so much to absorb. I need to look into this aspect further, and also the Twinstar. It seems there is nothing that cannot be harmonised with the Tetractys/Tree!

[m1thr0s]

In summing up, by linking the Tree of Life to the Tetractys, the link between circle, equliateral triangle, and the most sacred magic square and rectangle/right angle triangle known is unveiled! It is truly a master combination, is it not?Literally the closest thing to the Philosopher's Stone I have encountered in this world to date. Obviously such impressions have to be born out through extensive testing but this model has returned time and again with significant indicators as the so-called Universal Solvent, if we can understand this to mean a topological constant incorporating all other logical magickal mathematics. Best to avoid "absolutes" going in but the plot thickens as we go deeper into layers, so all in all, it's a very promising prospectus...hidden in plain site...perhaps the most intriguing thing of all. If I had to guess at this point I would wager that down the line this model is going to withstand the toughest scrutiny we can toss at it and if this does in fact occur, we may be on to a whole new technology of higher consciousness here. Only time and the increasing interest of the very best minds will tell.

I believe your assessment of Crowley's work is fair from what you have asserted. Crowley was an extreme contradiction in terms but there is no escaping the fact that he was a brilliant star theorist...however peculiarly he achieved this. He not only identified the language we should be speaking at this moment in time, but also laid in many of the key pathways that would need to be resolved at the earliest possible stages. Prophets are vindicated through time and it's probably too soon yet to be 100% sure of anything but I wouldn't be terribly surprized to find his work being referred to 1000 years from now. But not so much as a religious icon I think as a pioneer in a yet unqualified branch of transmutational science.

In any case, it's good to have you with us Ainsloch. Forums like these are frought with peculiar ebbs & flows...some of which may seem completely insane to you (or me or any of us) at times. Bear with it though...this conversation returns time and time again and we never really know under which stone we may find the next dynamic clue...so all the bizarre meanderings are actually an orchestrated part of the whole process of unfolding I think.

m1thr0s

[Ainsloch]

Forums like these are frought with peculiar ebbs & flows...some of which may seem completely insane to you (or me or any of us) at times. Bear with it though...this conversation returns time and time again and we never really know under which stone we may find the next dynamic clue...so all the bizarre meanderings are actually an orchestrated part of the whole process of unfolding I think.

m1thr0s

Sometimes you have to speculate to accumulate. Yet speculation aside what strikes me about this model is its simplicity. Occam's razor and all that...

[m1thr0s]

Yet speculation aside what strikes me about this model is its simplicity.right...if nature will be our guide then simplicity is not an option...it is a core essential. The more convoluted a model gets the more unnatural it has become and this is indicative of a kind of mental gymnastics nature simply does not engage on a structural level. what we really want is more akin to fractal logic, very clean and simple principles having the innate capacity of infinite variation. wherever we find these patterns, we find something that nature is almost certain to be utilizing already. Simplicity also speaks to archetypal dominances where the simpler it is the higher it tends to rank, just so long as you do not over-simplify relative to context. All these rules are laid down in the binary logic of the I Ching which is another reason that learning this logic is a real advantage in analyzing Body of Light parameters...

The universe doesn't really care what we think...it only really cares about what works. Traditional western magickal analysis is too self-absorbed to see the thing clearly in my experience. The whole trick is coming to think as the universe thinks...

m1thr0s

[Ainsloch]

The whole trick is coming to think as the universe thinks...

m1thr0s

Definitely. If that is achieved then one has completed the "Great Work", reconciled all opposites and transcended duality... thus truly merging microcosm and macrocosm within oneself. Everything is or can be balanced, if only we can locate the centre. Sometimes we have to go from one extreme to the other in the process. Pitfalls lurk around every corner however, and only those with supreme willpower and dedication will hit the mark. Knowledge is one thing, action is quite another entirely. True knowledge is applied knowledge. "Those who live the life know the doctrine."

We also need to learn to read between the lines, and avoid the constraints of dogma, from whatever source it arises. There is black and white, but there is also grey. It all depends on one's perspective. In a universe in which the underlying factor or field is Unity, all polarities and extemes must be viewed as reciprocal in nature, transcended by a third, balancing aspect.

[m1thr0s]

One of the most unexpected things revealed by the Tetractyl model of Abrahadabra is the 729 connection. I still haven't really even begun to discuss all of this yet but have at least set things up a little. But of all the inner principles going on here this is probably the single most mind-boggling in its implications. Nothing in Crowley's work prepared me for the idea that Abrahadabra might be a flagship formula of Trigrammaton itself! I wish there were more resource materials in print to refer people to on this but at this time there simply is not. 729 (curiously, 9³) figures prominently both in Pythagorean as well as Chinese mathematical models of universe. This whole interplay between the Binary and Ternary Hexagrams constitutes a whole new way of thinking about Mind & Matter interconnectivity as identified on a mathematical level.

So the geometry we are witnessing...as profound as it is...turns out to be the frontal layer of a much more comprehensive enginery churning away in the background. In many ways, I don't even know how to approach this in any kind of polished way since we appear to be looking at a whole branch of physics that may not even have an established school as of yet. Whatever it is that might deal in the symbiotic (or perhaps synergetic) interplay between binary and ternary mathematical systems. I know that people attacking Artificial Intelligence have grappled with this somewhat but I don't think anyone has really even begun to scratch the surface yet.

Astonishing to consider that so-called magick may be poised to go from being science's embarrassing distant relative to being the next major revolution in bona fide scientific principle... Something very few people are actually ready to think about I'd say... I only mention it in passing for the moment but these are among the kinds of things we might expect (and even demand) of any so-called Word of the Aeon, considering that the Aeon itself is predicted to be the Aeon of Science... So keep an eye on that at least. So-called "Inner Alchemy" is slated for some startling upgrades over the next few decades in particular...

m1thr0s

[Anibis]

I would add to the historical record that 729 also figures prominently in the theological science of Ramond Lull (http://orbita.bib.ub.es/ramon/p.asp), who went on to become a pretty key player in the rennaisance occult revival. His system, Like the Tai Hsuan Ching is based on the triple application of 9. From what I understand Gurdjiev played with his stuff too...
-Anibis
There is an amazing account of Lull's role in this movement in Frances Yates' 'The Art of Memory'.

[m1thr0s]

Wow...now how could I have missed that! Thanks Anibis...I need to look at his stuff...

Ahhh...this think-tank stuff is just so kewl... so many things you miss if you're too holed up all by yourself...

m1thr0s

[Anibis]

Yeah, it's big... opens up another whole civilization... ;)
-Anibis
And, seriously, M1thr0s, if you haven't check out that book by Yates... it is VERY good.

[Anibis]

Here's a Lull (http://lullianarts.net/) site with some cool tools. Very Catholic.
-Anibis

[m1thr0s]

Here's a Lull (http://lullianarts.net/) site with some cool tools. Very Catholic.yes, very...just a bit hard to swallow all of that...considering we are talking 700 years ago though, I guess one can't be too surprized by the rhetoric. It's actually kind of an interesting bird's eye on how that rhetoric was ultimately dismantled from within...

m1thr0s

[m1thr0s]

It may be of some interest to note that the famous Pythagorean Theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem) is pretty much universally understood by scholars to have been discovered by the Chinese Sages at least 600 years before Pythagoras' time. I have also seen articles sugggesting it may date as far back as the Vedas. The point here is not to rob Pythagoras of anything but simply indicate that various aspects of his life's work seem to have their origins, not in the west, but in the east, dating back to much earlier times.

Much of Pythagoras's work centered on issues of practical interest to engineers, architects, astronomers, lapidaries, or just about anyone contending with spacial relationships in their own line of work so it is not so great a stretch to imagine he was often going over ground that others had also dealt with from practical necessity long before his time.

Many of the issues we are confronted with in identifying anatomical properties of the Body of Light fall into this same category, so again it is not so unreasonable to think we may occasionally find ourselves arriving at similar evidences as were noted in the ancient world, whether by mathematicians or tantrics (in other instances) attempting to arrive at reliable maps of one sort or another.

It is also possible that there was a great deal more sharing of information in the ancient world than we commonly suppose, particularly among scholars whose positions were somewhat differently defined than they are today. In the ancient world, scholars were often the ambassadors and dignitaries to foreign lands much moreso than is common today. I know of at least one book proposing the idea that Pythagoras may have even been Chinese, owing to the demonstrable influence in his work. This would have been explained (even more believably) by his having simply been exposed to these ideas, being in a good position to recognize their worth and expound upon their properties.

Wiki Link: Vesica Pisces (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesica_pisces) (not comprehensive, but a starting point at least...)

m1thr0s

[MythMath]

...Now, if one thinks about it, it is actually pretty natural that the Tree should fit over the Tetracys, for the sole reason that it is constructed from the Vesica Piscis. As Euclid's first(!) proposition states, one can construct an equilateral triangle from the Vesica. So it follows that a diagram constructed from the Vesica Piscis, as the Tree of Life is, would quite plausibly fit to scale over the Tetractys, which of course is a triangular grid.

So the tree fits perfectly over a Tetractys of the 11th triangular number. The number 11 is then a key, because it provides accurate dimensions for the Tree, both in part and as a whole.

If you examine the rectangle that makes up the center of the Tree of Life against the dimensions of the Tetractys, you will see the first in the series of the Pythagorean right angle triangles! Now this is beautiful, because the right angle triangle has really serious pedigree... it is at the heart of construction and architecture, and dates as far back to ancient Egypt, where it was revered, and beyond.

The solution of the right angle triangle is accredited to Pythagoras, however it was surely known long before him... he inherited it. However, the Pythagorean school was the first to reveal it openly. a2+b2=c2.

5+6=11

This twinstar-generated glyph is made entirely of 3,4,5's:

http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q48/MythMath/HexStarglyphcopy.jpg

[m1thr0s]

72 segments in that one? This one is a lot more mirror-like in scope MM (ie, less game-like I suppose), particularly since the TwinStar is clearly present at center... You've got Vesica Pisces stuff running all over it as well...This would could be cranked up without much difficulty at all...

Nice Work, man...

m1thr0s

[MythMath]

Thanks...

I just popped it over the FoL triggered by Ainsloch's comments...

Here, of course, is the 5+6 detail:
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q48/MythMath/5611copy.jpg
And the comment 'mirror-like in scope' = kaleidoscope... ;)

[m1thr0s]

You do realize of course these things are gonna start talking to you pretty soon, right? Looks like maybe it's already started...

Hey, beats the hell outta talking to idiots...lol...

edit: no worries though...the whole conversation is about "hidden" form & function as a rule...totally useful stuff...

m1thr0s

[MythMath]

Oh, I'm gone, daddy, gone...

I'm already anticipating my next dream cycle... :yes:



BTW, thanks again for building these virtual chambers...


Brhd,

MM

[Ainsloch]

Here, of course, is the 5+6 detail:


Excellent work! The symmetry between five and six is beautiful to behold!

I have attached a pic I did a while ago, based on the Tree of Life, just for the heck of it. I call it the Eye of Horus.

[Anibis]

That's a great pic. Thanks.
-Anibis

[Kain]

Amazing work MythMath and Ainsloch... :tyes:

Kain

P.S. By the way, Ainsloch, welcome to Abrahadabra Forums! It's a real pleasure to have you aboard...

[Ainsloch]

Amazing work MythMath and Ainsloch... :tyes:

Kain

P.S. By the way, Ainsloch, welcome to Abrahadabra Forums! It's a real pleasure to have you aboard...

Thanks Kain, it is a real pleasure to be here. This is a very stimulating site... tons of creativity around.

[m1thr0s]

That's a pretty cool image Ainsloch...I like the whole "nervous system" feeling it emits... it's a common complaint of people who don't really get this kind of art that it's all too "straight-line" for their tastes. In most cases this is simply a matter of presenting complex symmetries in ways that can be easily recognized and analyzed. Those of us heavy into these kinds of matrix images already know that there will, in most cases, exist more organic manifestations in nature itself... If we always represented things this way the images would then be accused of being inexact and sloppy.

Can't win 'em all I guess...

m1thr0s

[Ainsloch]

Here is another variation. I did about 20 when I made it... I had a lot of fun with it!

[Kain]

That's great, even more "neural" in feel...

Kain

[MythMath]

Very nice...

I had a vision just now of all of our stuff printed
onto clear acetate sheets and then layered together
like the 'frog anatomy' overlays in old dictionaries... :laugh:

[Anibis]

I have a frag anatomy board like that I found in the science building of our University... all different layer and stuff... Ghoulish! Okay, sorry for the aside...
-Anibis