Angelic gematria

Josh Norton browe at ctd.com
Mon Apr 14 15:02:18 EDT 1997


At 07:18 AM 4/14/97 -0500, Bruce Kroeze wrote:
>Actually, what I could use would be a side by side listing of values for
various systems, along with explanations of the origins/utility of each
numbering scheme.
>

Here's a few I had handy...

Letter    Aurum Solis    Octal       Greek               Hebrew
                                                        phonetic
                                                       equivalents
B		1		1		2 (beta)		2 (beth)
C,K		2		2		20 (kappa)		20 (kaph)
G		3		3		3 (gamma)		3 (gimel)
D		4		4		4 (delta)		4 (daleth)
F		5		5		6 (digamma)		6 (vav)
A		6		6		1 (alpha)		1 (aleph)
E		7		7		5 (epsilon)		5 (heh)
M		8		8 (10)		40 (mu)		40 (mem)
I,Y		9		16 (20)	10 (iota)		10 (yod)
H		10		24 (30)	8 (eta)		5 (heh)
L		20		32 (40)	30 (lamda)		30 (lamed)
P		30		40 (50)	80 (pi)		80 (peh)
Q		40		48 (60)	90 (koppa)		100 (qoph)
N		50		56 (70)	50 (nu)		50 (nun)
X		60		64 (100)	60 (xi)		90 (tzadhe)
O		70		128 (200)	70 (omicron)		70 (ayin)
R		80		192 (300)	100 (Rho)		200 (resh)
Z		90		256 (400)	7 (zeta)		7 (zayin)
V,U		100		320 (500)	400 (upsilon)		6 (vav)
S		200		384 (600)	200 (sigma)		60 (samek)
T		300		448 (700)	300 (tau)		9 (teth)

The Octal numeration is similar to the Aurum Solis method, except that it
uses base 8 rather than base 10. Both decimal and octal representations of
the numbers are shown. The octal representations (in parentheses) should be
enough to determine the logic behind this method.

The Greek values follow a system suggested by David Allen Hulse in _The
Numerical Structure of Enochian_, basically the same shown in _The Key of
It All_. Despite all his weird arguments, this method basically establishes
an equivalency between the Greek letters and the Enochian letters based on
their sounds. However, the symbolic attributes he ascribes to the letters
are based on the attributes of the _Hebrew_ letter having the same value,
even though those letters do not always have the same sounds.

The Hebrew equivalents simply assign the Enochian letter the value of its
nearest phonetic equivalent in Hebrew. Crowley's custom is followed
equating "F" with the Hebrew Vav, and "E" with the Hebrew Heh. An obvious
variation would be to substitute Tav (400) for Teth as the equivalent for
Gisg, and to substitute Cheth for Enochian Na-Hath (H). I don't buy the
latter equivalence; the gutteral quality of cheth would argue against it.
Clearly since there is not a one-to-one correspondence in this method, you
could not use it as a basis for determining attributes. 

Ben


------------------------
Reality leaves a lot to the imagination. -- John Lennon

Josh Norton (aka Benjamin Rowe) -- browe@ctd.com or browe@one.net
Magick code: MEN/AS QO++++ 666* S G Y W C N+++ POT  <G>
Web site under construction at http://w3.one.net/~browe



More information about the Enochian-l mailing list