Home Forums Aleister Crowley Writer The number 333

Viewing 13 posts - 16 through 28 (of 28 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #88064

    herupakraath
    Participant
    "wellreadwellbred" wrote:
    herupakraath, where does David Shoemaker states that ‘Qabalah explains the Universe”,

    It may be one of the episodes of Living Thelema; sorry for any confusion. I seldom listen to such things, but I happened listen to the first minute or so of one of the web casts and heard him state as much.

    That Shoemaker said as much should be no surprise to anyone familar with Qabalah; here are a few examples:

    “Kabbalah seeks to define the nature of the universe”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabbalah

    “The guiding principles of Kabbalah simultaneously explain and orchestrate the birth of the universe”

    http://cosmicnavigator.com/about/kabbalah/questions-answers-about-kabbalah

    “The fundamental task of theosophical Kabbalah is to explain the structure of the universe”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jay-michaelson/an-introduction-to-kabbal_b_379296.html

    “The Kabbalah explains the mechanics of creation, the architecture of the universe”

    http://rosecrossohgrc.com/discourses/the-kabbalah/

    “Kabbalah…..it is an attempt by the sages to explain the universe”

    http://ldorvador.org/education/kabbalah/

    “This explains the 4 letters, the tetragrammaton YHVH and how it explains the universe”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ssH0wbnQXU&feature=youtu.be

    “spiritual and intellectual giants throughout history have turned to the Zohar to unravel the secrets of the Bible and the mysteries of the universe”

    http://www.zohar.com/article/what-zohar

    I could go on citing examples ad nauseum.

    #88065

    threefold31
    Participant
    "belmurru" wrote:
    This dark, other half, would later emerge fully personified as Choronzon, the 333 half to his full 666. Therefore, I think that Crowley must have found symbolic significance in the fact that 333 is half of 666, although he mentions that simple observation nowhere (at least nowhere I can recall).  333 is therefore his other half, the dark form he began seeing in his earliest visions under the guidance of Baker and Jones, his own Dweller on the Threshold.

    Dwtw

    There is ample evidence for your conclusion provided by the Trigrammaton Qabalah. With this method we discover that 333 and 666 are ‘opposites’. All numbers (or n-grams) written in base 3 have what are called their ‘antigram’, which is simply the result of switching all lines to their opposite, in the same manner as found in the I Ching. Thus Yang becomes Yin, and vice versa; Tao is neutral and does not change.

    In base 3, the hexagram for the decimal number 666 is written as 220200, while that of 333 is written 110100. Thus they are opposites, complements, or ‘antigrams’. 666 is all Tao and Yin, while 333 is all Tao and Yang.

    What is perhaps most interesting from the point of view of Kabbalah is that the Hexagram of 666 can also have another Tao added at the top, to make a Septagram (without changing its numerical value). When this is done, it will be seen that the resulting figure bears a striking resemblance to the Tree of Life. Its antigram then represents the Tree with the three horizontal paths emphasized.

    As Crowley noted the importance of 333 as a triple ‘Alef spelled-in-full’, it is also worth noting that in the Word of the Aeon – Makhashanah – there are three Alefs. If this word is ‘spelled in full’ it totals 999; the Alefs add to 333, while the remainder adds to 666.

    Mem – 90
    ALEF – 111
    Kaf – 100
    ALEF – 111
    Shin – 360
    ALEF – 111
    Nun – 106
    He – 10

    This is secretly referenced by the passage “Ah! Ah! Ah! Fall back from me. The word, the word of the aeon is MAKHASHANAH”, with the three Alefs represented by the first three words. When these ‘fall back’ from the word of the Aeon, what is left is 666.

    Litlluw
    RLG

    #116771

    choronzonclub
    Participant

    It is Meric not Isaac Casaubon. Isaac was Meric’s father.

    #116780

    belmurru
    Participant

    @choronzonclub

    It is Meric not Isaac Casaubon. Isaac was Meric’s father.

    Yes indeed. Thank you for noticing that sloppy mistake.

    #116783

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    @belmurru

    Credit where credit’s due department, and to get away from sometimes maybe being too critical (with the emphasis on critic-ising), your well-written posts are invariably a pleasure to read filled as they are with often arcane but fascinating background material relayed with occasional understated humour while at the same time also being academically (in its finest sense of informed scholasticism) stringent and impeccably sourced. it’s only a shame that you don’t post more! And in the words of the well-known melody: if only the majority of postings could be in a similar vein, what a wonderful world this could be…

    Prob. going slightly over the top there but nevertheless appreciatively yours
    N Joy

    P.S., is there any more news on this “larger project” of yours yet — has it been completed and when might it be readable, for instance? I am sure I’m not alone in being interested in finding out.

    #116786

    belmurru
    Participant

    @Jamie J Barter

    P.S., is there any more news on this “larger project” of yours yet — has it been completed and when might it be readable, for instance? I am sure I’m not alone in being interested in finding out.

    Thank you very much for the appreciative words, and the encouragement, Jamie.

    The larger project is on the subject of “The Roots of N.O.X., The Night of Pan.” I haven’t worked on it since 2015, however. The part on the number 333 was the seventh root of eight that I found to be relevant to the evolution of the concept.

    Other projects have occupied me in the last few years, three 15th and 16th century texts related to Tarot history. Since they have nothing to do with AC or esotericism, I thought it would be impolite or even abusive of Paul’s generosity to announce their publication here. If that subject interests anyone, however, both books can be previewed on Google Books (I’ll be happy to post the links here if asked).

    • This reply was modified 6 days, 6 hours ago by  belmurru.
    • This reply was modified 6 days, 6 hours ago by  belmurru.
    • This reply was modified 6 days, 6 hours ago by  belmurru.
    #116793

    hermitas
    Participant

    From the OP:

    Despite Choronzon’s own tallying of his name to 333 in the 10th Aethyr, we must not take the later (probably 1925) commentary note to this passage as disingenuous: “חורונזון = 333 = 3 x 111, and 111 = אלף = א = 1. 333 is also άκρασια, impotence, lack of control; and άκολασια, dispersion. The Seer had no idea of these correspondences; nor had Dr. Dee and Sir Edward Kelly, from whom we have the name.”

    The math bit with the equal signs… It’s throwing me. Seems to be kind of a fast and loose string of associations. 111 (Aleph in full) = 333 = akrasia? Aleph = akrasia? Hmmm… That’s not my favorite idea. Anyone care to fill in any blanks about why this association makes sense?

    Thanks.

    • This reply was modified 5 days, 21 hours ago by  hermitas.
    #116795

    Shiva
    Participant

    A General Comment to Choronzon’s Number

    Here’s the deal: Chasing the Disperser down with name and number may be interesting. Maybe someone needs to do this so they can “Order their Mind.” But the reality lies in the following (axiom):

    If anything has a form, a name, or a number, then it is a mental construct, a thoughtform, and is being viewed from below the Abyss. Above the Abyss, there is no form, and no (mortal) Mind to assign or interpret names or numbers. (Sure, there’s a Universal Mind, but that’s in a different dimension, so it forms a side-issue).

    Now Choronzon is not really some terrible demon. The mighty demon evoked in the 10th Aethyr, called ZAX, by Assistant Magician Neuberg, assisting Frater Perdurabo, in the middle of the holy-cow-there’s-nothing-here desert of North Africa, over a hundred years ago, was/is a magnificent example of what one faces. But it was (purposely) overdrawn.

    The Crossing of the Abyss does not necessarily involve the appearance of a demon. The demon is merely a convenient overlay, laid out in medieval, Goetic symbolism, in order to give some substance, some form, to a perfectly natural process know as Losing One’s Mind.

    The Vision and the Voice is an absolute masterpiece of ceremonial magic and initiation. But it was a flash-bang, thank you gang, affair wherein certain Aethyrs were tackled one or two per day. The procedure for crossing the tenth Aethyr in daily life is a prolonged period in which all attachments and support from anyone or anything are removed. This is something that is done to one, not something that one does.

    This is a natural process (an outcome of diligent trudging for a couple decades or so) that is engaged when one (anyone) draws nigh unto the outer periphery of their causal body (at Chesed).

    It has been my experience (and that of others) that no demon need necessarily appear and shred one’s consciousness, but rather that some unknown factor arranges for one (anyone) to lose everything. Note: They don’t lose anything to which they are not attached. If it matters to them, it’ll be taken away.

    Oh yeah, one can force this process by taking The Oath of the Abyss, or some similar resignation from normal, human life, but that doesn’t trigger the final dispersion of the mind. It can start a cosmic take-away process, but it taketh away slowly. The culmination, the part that corresponds to the happy hour in the 10th Aethyr, comes along in its own time … as a crisis.

    Nobody (no one) can force this process to happen by taking some I-give-it-all-up Oath, or by claiming the grade of Magister Templi, 8=3 (soon to be snickered at).

    On the other hand, we are fortunate that we can learn a bit about this process with the use of lega, libation. But that learning only helps a little when the real deal comes up in daily life, without chemical assistance. At such times, there is no demon, no name, no number. One (anyone) can only jump.

    #116796

    soz
    Participant

    @hermitas: “Despite Choronzon’s own tallying of his name to 333 in the 10th Aethyr, we must not take the later (probably 1925) commentary note to this passage as disingenuous: “חורונזון = 333 = 3 x 111, and 111 = אלף = א = 1. 333 is also άκρασια, impotence, lack of control; and άκολασια, dispersion. The Seer had no idea of these correspondences; nor had Dr. Dee and Sir Edward Kelly, from whom we have the name.”

    It looks like there is an problem with the way that the WordPress software formats text that includes Hebrew letters (and, presumably, any character set that is read right-to-left).

    The text that I have, with the Hebrew letters transliterated into English letters, reads

    [Cheth-vau-resh-vau-nun-zain-vau-nun] (Choronzon) = 333 = 3 x 111, and 111 = [Aleph-lamed-peh] = [Aleph] = 1.
    333 is also άκρασια, impotence, lack of control; and άκολασια, dispersion.

    • This reply was modified 5 days, 13 hours ago by  soz. Reason: corrected a typo
    • This reply was modified 5 days, 12 hours ago by  soz. Reason: formatting
    • This reply was modified 5 days, 12 hours ago by  soz. Reason: formatting
    • This reply was modified 5 days, 12 hours ago by  soz. Reason: and more formatting
    • This reply was modified 5 days, 12 hours ago by  soz.
    #116802

    belmurru
    Participant

    @soz @hermitas

    It looks like there is an problem with the way that the WordPress software formats text that includes Hebrew letters (and, presumably, any character set that is read right-to-left).

    Indeed the software mixes up the order; here is a screenshot of my original Word document, which shows the correct formatting:

    Original passage in Word
    http://www.rosscaldwell.com/crowley/gematriachoronzon418.jpg

    And a photo of the note in the book itself, The Vision and the Voice with Commentary and Other Papers (Weiser, 1998), p. 166:

    Original passage in The Vision and the Voice
    http://www.rosscaldwell.com/crowley/gematriachoronzon418img.jpg

    #116803

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant

    Crowley’s wrong translation of άκολασια as “dispersion” – in the context described in the OP for this thread – is easily explained by his attribution of the number 333 to Choronzon. “Dispersion” as the symbolic meaning for the number 333 according to AC, is in line with both his life long habit of speculating about the symbolic meaning of numbers, and with his infatuation with the number 666. That is in this context, the number 333 understood by AC as a symbol for; to disperse, or to “break up” or to “split up” (synonyms for disperse (source: https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/disperse)) the number 666. Or in other words, the number 333 is, or was, in this context understood by AC as a symbol for a “dispersion” of the number 666.

    #116821

    hermitas
    Participant

    @soz @belmerru

    Ah, that makes much more sense. Many thanks for the clarification.

    #116836

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant

    (My emphasis:)

    “In the 28th Æthyr Crowley received what he regarded later as a prophecy concerning his experience of Choronzon in the 10th: ‘Thou shalt be vexed by dispersion.’ Dispersion also adds up to 333 in Greek. In the 10th Æthyr it is even stated explicitly: ‘Choronzon is Dispersion.’ Yet in a footnote Crowley claims not to have realised at the time that there was any correspondence between ‘Dispersion’ and ‘Choronzon’. Casaubon’s spelling of ‘Coronzon’ adds up to 345 in Hebrew (Donald Tyson gets 365 by taking Nun final as 70). So why exactly did Crowley change the spelling from ‘Coronzon’ before he was told the demon’s number in the 10th, if not because he wished to link Choronzon to the forewarning of being vexed by dispersion mentioned in the 28th, and present the demon as responsible for mental scattering and distraction. Did he perhaps, either consciously or subconsciously, desire to have his change legitimised and this is why he had the demon state its number? It’s fascinating that the spelling ‘Choronzon’ is already in use before the 10th Æthyr but the ‘Babalon’ spelling is not, Crowley was still spelling her name ‘Babylon’, and it is in the 10th Æthyr that he first uses the ‘correct’ 156 spelling (gematrically equivalent to ‘Chaos’) alluded to in the 12th Æthyr (in the phrase ‘Gate of the God On’, ie Babalon: BAB = gate; AL = God; ON = On) where it becomes representative of a ‘victory over Choronzon’ and mark of the banishment of illusion. (Of course, if we regard C[h]oronzon/m and Babalon as essentially Enochian words – ‘babalon’ appears in the 6th Enochian Key, which Crowley didn’t appear to notice – their numbers 333 and 156 when rendered in Hebrew are irrelevant and merely a curiosity.)

    The account of the skrying of the 10th Æthyr was unusual among the 30 Æthyrs in that it was subjected to editing and revision.” (Source: https://coronzon.com/choronzon.htm – – – The seven-headed dragon and the demon Choronzon by Joel Biroco The beasts of the Apocalypse and their relationship with precursors in Near Eastern mythology, Enochian entities, & Crowley’s skrying of the Æthyrs in Algeria in 1909 First published in KAOS 14, 2002, slightly revised here)

Viewing 13 posts - 16 through 28 (of 28 total)
  • You must be logged-in to reply to this topic.