lashtal.com
Qabalah - english gematria
nlwrykyy - Jul 31, 2008 - 05:32 PM
Post subject: english gematria
So this is a question more for those who are familiar (a basic familiarity is all that's necessary) with the Hebrew alphabet/linguistics. As we know, in Hebrew gematria only the consonants are important, as these are the only letters written down. Even the long vowels are, in essence, made from consonants and clearly have an importance of their own.
My question then, when trying to find the numerical values for the English alphabet, are all letters important. Do the useless schwas in the word "better" have any importance, or is the written truly what gives the value, and not the fact that we would understand bttr just as well, if not to be confused with butter.
II,55: Thou shalt obtain the order & value of the English Alphabet; thou shalt find new symbols to attribute them unto.
I take this to mean that we each have the ability (and responsibility) to obtain a higher meaning of the English alphabet, or for that matter, whatever alphabet is used for the language we speak.
sethur666 - Aug 01, 2008 - 05:59 AM
Post subject: RE: english gematria
There have been various attempts at this, such as the New Aeon Qabala, the Gematria(s) of Nothing and my own English Rose Cabala. IMHO mine yields the best results as it returns values for words and verses of Al in between those of NAQ, which are high, and the GoNs, which are low. For example, in ERC Ra-Hoor-Khuit and Hoor-Paar-Kraat both equal 65, and Thelema (37) times Agape (18 ) = 666.
threefold31 - Aug 01, 2008 - 10:34 PM
Post subject: Re: english gematria
nlwrykyy wrote: › So this is a question more for those who are familiar (a basic familiarity is all that's necessary) with the Hebrew alphabet/linguistics. As we know, in Hebrew gematria only the consonants are important, as these are the only letters written down. Even the long vowels are, in essence, made from consonants and clearly have an importance of their own.
My question then, when trying to find the numerical values for the English alphabet, are all letters important. Do the useless schwas in the word "better" have any importance, or is the written truly what gives the value, and not the fact that we would understand bttr just as well, if not to be confused with butter.
II,55: Thou shalt obtain the order & value of the English Alphabet; thou shalt find new symbols to attribute them unto.
I take this to mean that we each have the ability (and responsibility) to obtain a higher meaning of the English alphabet, or for that matter, whatever alphabet is used for the language we speak.
Dwtw
If you take that verse to apply to any and all readers, then by all means look for a numerical value for the 26 letters. If you take that verse to apply only to the Prophet, then the only indication left to us by him in this regard is found in Liber Trigrammaton. The results of this can be seen in the Trigrammaton English Gematria.
Hebrew is not a truly 'phonetic' alphabet; thus when the Greeks adapted/adopted the letters, they changed some to include true vowel letters, and subsequently attributed the 7 planets to the 7 vowels.
If you want to maintain a distinction between vowels and consonants, remember that Y and W are semi-vowels. Also remember that there are about 40 phonemes in English, and only 26 letters to represent them.
I would say that either interpretation of the verse requires equal consideration be given to all 26 letters of English; this is reinforced by the idea that the Prophet was enjoined not to change so much as the style of a letter in the text.
Litlluw
R. Leo Gillis
ianrons - Aug 02, 2008 - 03:16 PM
Post subject: RE: Re: english gematria
Leo,
I think it's probably necessary to make clear, just in case anyone misinterprets the ambiguity in your second paragraph, that the Greek alphabet is not derived from Hebrew, although they do share a common source.
Ian
nlwrykyy - Aug 02, 2008 - 07:56 PM
Post subject: RE: Re: english gematria
Ian,
True, but nonetheless neither alphabets marked vowels in any specific manner, I can't bother to check for sure but wasn't it the Phonecian script that Greeks "borrowed" (stole 
), which, like all other semitic languages, didn't bother themselves to mark vowels.
And on that note, I suppose since English isn't a semitic language its vowels would count as letters just as much as ה is counted in Hebrew. I checked out the New Aeon Qabbalah, and also the trigrammaton, and while the former is interesting (having decoded the code which the prophet apparently will never know), it seems better to stick with the Hebrew tradition, that is to stay in a base ten system where after that K would be 20, L would be 30.. or at least something similar. Of course I'm completely aware that this would result in very large values.
threefold31 - Aug 03, 2008 - 04:37 PM
Post subject: Re: RE: Re: english gematria
ianrons wrote: › Leo,
I think it's probably necessary to make clear, just in case anyone misinterprets the ambiguity in your second paragraph, that the Greek alphabet is not derived from Hebrew, although they do share a common source.
Ian
Dwtw
Yes, thank you, that paragraph was ambiguous. Rather than go into a long digression, interested readers can investigate for themselves the fascinating history of the development of the English alphabet. An excellent book in this regard is The Alphabetic Labyrinth by Johanna Drucker, but there are many others as well.
My point was that the Greek alphabet made a big advance forward by actually specifying certain letters as vowels, which had not really been done before them. Comparatively speaking, an Alef is not really a vowel, but the letter Alpha definitely is.
Although previous alphabet leters that doubled as numbers certainly used a decimal-based system, the point about trigrammaton is that the Prophet considered this the 'ultimate foundation of the highest theoretical qabalah', and offered a ternary math as a new paradigm. Whether one chooses to work with that new paradigm or the traditional decimal enumeration is a matter of personal aesthetic.
Litlluw
RLG