We all know Thelema = 93 in

AlexandrianGreek values, but in Serial Greek values, it has the sum of 44. So you simply multiply the verse number (39), by the English value (156), by the Greek value (44), and you get the sum of the whole Book:39 x 156 x 44 = 267,696

That is a model of simplicity.

In your mind it may be simple, but in fact you use three different numbering systems simultaneously to arrive at the value, while utilizing two mathematical processes, addition and multiplication: there is nothing simple about it. That's not an indictment of the result (not yet anyway 😉 ), just an observation of the process involved.

Dwtw

To say this is not simple is ludicrous. Gematria requires adding up the values of the letters in words.

My 'three different numbering systems' include a) the unambiguous decimal number of the verse - 39, and c) the unambiguous serial value of a Greek word. The only variable is b) the english gematria of a phrase.

It is b) that is being tested. And by multiplying it with the two constants, the entirety of the Book is obtained. There is no simpler way to get to the value of a large Book; multiplication has to enter into it. If I were applying calculus or trigonometry to get the results, then it would be complicated. Arithmetic is not complicated.

So, first, find an EQ that makes the English phrase "The word of the Law is" = 156, while the 19 letters of the Cipher = 208. That will get you one set of odds, that can then be multiplied by the odds against the three

otheroccurrences of this global sumAs I have pointed out in the past, within the range of numbers 2-156, there are 30 values that will divide evenly into 267696, so it is no surprise you can find numeric elements within verses that can be added and multiplied and result in 267696: my question is how can one tell such results are not simply luck?

Yes, there are a lot of factors of the global sum. The way to tell that this is not simply 'luck' is to take another random sequence of glyphs of the same length, multiply them, and see what the result is.

The answer is to apply stringent standards to the work. My comparison of the results produced from within the puzzle of II:76 using the Tri-key and the TEG systems is limited to the puzzle itself, which demonstrates the stringency required, while your suggestion to multiply the results from different verses does not.

Actually, this is backwards. if you got a result in the Cipher that applied to the whole book, then it could only compare to Trigrammaton if it also appeared in 4 other places in the Book.

Your choice of verse I:39 as an example of intentional synchronicity is fascinating, given that I can produce a comparable result with standard gematria technique.

Please do so. Show me a complete verse in the text that produces the grand total of Liber CCXX as produced by the Tri-Key. What exactly is your grand total anyway? And can I find it in a simple verse somewhere in the text? I dunno, maybe in the* most important verse* of the text?

Litlluw

O.L.

]]>Applying the Tri-key to the verse: THE WORD OF THE LAW IS = 93.

I used your TriKey on this verse, why would you imply that it equals 93 when it does not. "The word of the law" = 113 in TriKey. "word of the Law" does equal 93, but not the whole verse-part as your post says. And when I test 93 against the rest of the book using TriKey, not a single word equals 93, nor does anything significant come through.

And this is just a test for Gematria....there is so much more to QBLH than that. The Theoretical QBLH of Liber Trigrammaton does not need Gematria to prove it, though we can use Gematria to explain certain elements of it.

And eventually, you even supercede the use of such devices as QBLH

]]>https://www.lashtal.com/wp-content/uploads/wpforo/attachments/50556/1144-tenor.gif

]]>

How is a simple mathematical sum 'subjective'?

Actually I was referring to other aspects of your work, which are also found in any other comparable effort. Since you brought it up, I do not consider using multiple gematria systems simultaneously, along with numerous other number schemes to arrive at a value, inherently simple.

We all know Thelema = 93 in

AlexandrianGreek values, but in Serial Greek values, it has the sum of 44. So you simply multiply the verse number (39), by the English value (156), by the Greek value (44), and you get the sum of the whole Book:39 x 156 x 44 = 267,696

That is a model of simplicity.

In your mind it may be simple, but in fact you use three different numbering systems simultaneously to arrive at the value, while utilizing two mathematical processes, addition and multiplication: there is nothing simple about it. That's not an indictment of the result (not yet anyway 😉 ), just an observation of the process involved.

So, first, find an EQ that makes the English phrase "The word of the Law is" = 156, while the 19 letters of the Cipher = 208. That will get you one set of odds, that can then be multiplied by the odds against the three

otheroccurrences of this global sum

As I have pointed out in the past, within the range of numbers 2-156, there are 30 values that will divide evenly into 267696, so it is no surprise you can find numeric elements within verses that can be added and multiplied and result in 267696: my question is how can one tell such results are not simply luck? The answer is to apply stringent standards to the work. My comparison of the results produced from within the puzzle of II:76 using the Tri-key and the TEG systems is limited to the puzzle itself, which demonstrates the stringency required, while your suggestion to multiply the results from different verses does not.

Your choice of verse I:39 as an example of intentional synchronicity is fascinating, given that I can produce a comparable result with standard gematria technique. As I have demonstrated in my writings, the real test of a gematria equation is having it equal a value present within the same verse the text appears in, a quality that even luck will seldom be able to accomplish, and yet I can provide numerous examples of it using the Tri-key.

We both know **θελημα** enumerates as the value **93** using Greek gematria; if the value is substituted for the word, the verse will read, **The word of the law is 93**. Applying the Tri-key to the verse: THE WORD OF THE LAW IS = 93.

]]>

When I say English QBLH, I am talking about the letter attribution from Liber Trigrammaton, and as developed further by Bro. Threefold31, R.L. Gillis, in his Book of Mutations. The letter attributions he used in conjunction with Liber Trigrammaton prove Liber L vel Legis.

I was openly critical of RLG's work early in its development,

Dwtw

You certainly were, and still are. It's been great fun!

knowing there had to be more to the

Book of the Lawthan what his work demonstrates,

I suspect the 'more' had to do with proving yourself the Child

and that there had to be a simpler approach than the base-three theories he has written of.

An entire world of digital information is based on two digits. Expanding that to 3 digits is somehow complicated? I'd say it's 70% less complicated than Base 10.

Also, base 3 is simply what Liber Trigrammaton is written in. There is no disputing that.

Being skeptical of his work most certainly drove him forward, and caused him to work harder and dig deeper,

My job was to finish Crowley's work on Liber Triqammaton, which I did. Nothing anyone said or did caused me to work harder, or not harder. But when people put out their own clever creations of English qabalah, I certainly have been a staunch defender of the Holy Book that the prophet gave us. It is the benchmark against which others should be measured. And A.C.'s own initial summary of it was that it solved verse 2:55, as well as calling it 'the ultimate foundation of the highest theoretical qabalah'

What that means is simple: whether you like ternary or not - the 'ultimate foundation' means that the trigrams are the *First Column* in the 777 of the Aeon of Horus. Not decimal numbers, and certainly not Hebrew letters. But trigrams. They are the origin. Everything else can be related to them, *including* multiple systems of English gematria, the most important of which is the one left to us by the Prophet in Liber XXVII.

If someone agrees with TQ or not, it matters little to me, because it's not a creation of my ego. But any discussion of English Qabalah rooted in the instruction of verse 2:55, needs to include it.

just as the skepticism leveled at my work caused me to do the same. If I had accepted RLG's work as definitive, I would have never continued on the path I have taken,

I'm pretty sure no amount of caviling or encouragement from me altered your pursuit of the Qabalah. I assume you're driven to the work because you're looking for answers. I admire your tenacity.

If a theory is correct, no amount skepticism can change that.

I think we can all agree on that.

Much of RLG's work is understandably subjective; if we are to narrow the discussion to the evidence that supports your quoted statement, it has to rest on the global sum 267696, and RLG's ability to produce it using elements within the II:76 puzzle of Liber Legis.

How is a simple mathematical sum 'subjective'?

This sum is found in more places than the Cipher of 2:76; it is also embedded in the first verse of Liber CXXX; in verse 1:46 referring to "nothing, sixty-one, etc'; in the final verse of the Book, and in verse I:39. That's five highly significant parts of the Book that provide the same number.

RLG arrives at the value by multiplying the count of numbers in the puzzle, times the sum of the values in it, times the gematria value of the puzzle letters: 9 x 143 x 208 = 267696. This morning I wrote a program that searches for three random values within the range 1-208, those used by RLG, had the software determine whether the values selected can be multiplied and equal the global sum, and then repeated the cycle millions of times. 1 pattern in every 35,000 produced at random were successful, which means the odds of random success are 1/35000.

This is cherry-picking the data. See above. You have to accommodate all 5 occurrences of the Global Sum. Here's the easiest one from Liber CCXX:

"39. The word of the Law is Thelema" = 39. 156 & 44

We all know Thelema = 93 in *Alexandrian* Greek values, but in Serial Greek values, it has the sum of 44. So you simply multiply the verse number (39), by the English value (156), by the Greek value (44), and you get the sum of the whole Book:

39 x 156 x 44 = 267,696

That is a model of simplicity.

So, first, find an EQ that makes the English phrase "The word of the Law is" = 156, while the 19 letters of the Cipher = 208. That will get you one set of odds, that can then be multiplied by the odds against the three *other* occurrences of this global sum. There are 13 different letters in this phrase, and 8 others in the Cipher - that covers most of the alphabet, leaving only C,J,Q,U,Z, which would have 120 different sums. I think you'll find the odds get much larger than 1/35000

Using the Tri-key, the chances of Aleister Crowley enumerating as the value 113, the sum of the last group of numbers in the puzzle, while the rest of the puzzle produces the value 418, at random, are 1/22 million. If RLG's work proves the

Book of the Law, then so does mine.

What is the sum of the whole Book by the Tri-Key? We are told to not change one letter, as if every little bit counts. I take that verse at face value, and add up everything, and get a total whose sum is

267,696 = 11 x 156 x 156

all of whose factors equal

884988 = 61 x 93 x 156

In the latter case, two of these numbers are significant in the text of Liber Legis, and the third was promised in the Book and later revealed as the true spelling of the name Babalon.

How do other English gematrias stack up against that? That has been my question for over 25 years. What do they reveal that Trigrammaton does not?

I actually like a lot of the results of the Tri-Key, especially because being a limit-case of what kind of value this Book can exhibit, it has to be considered in a discussion of the merits of a given EQ of AL.

Litlluw

Omega Logion

]]>

Sermo-nihil was referring to me as * the vessel who numbers himself 93 on the Unicursal. *While experimenting with the sheet numbers of the Liber L holograph, I arranged them in a 13 x 5 pattern, and realized that by overlaying the unicursal hexagram over the numbers in a certain position, the numbers intersected add up to 93, as shown in my avatar.

Dwtw

Actually, I'M the one who laid them out in the 13 x 5 pattern.

You're the one who came up with the 93 aspect to it.

And still no one has refuted the obvious indication from that 13 x 5 page-number grid that the integer 143 is a key to solving Liber Legis. But that's a different thread.

Litlluw

O.L.

]]>

The thing that attracted me most to RLG's work is that it is based on the *accepted* letter values the Prophet attributed to the Trigrams, and thus, is a continuation of his work.

Your perception is incorrect. Crowley only assigned letters to the trigrams; RLG is responsible for conceiving and assigning the values to the letters.

For me, the whole numbers game you speak of, as in this set of letter-values having these odds of producing this or that number does not prove or disprove anything.

What I offered was an objective comparison of results relating to the II:76 puzzle--if objectivity is of no value, then subjective assessments must be worth even less.

Most people never consider the measurable probabilities relating to gematria, which admittedly means little in most cases, but can be tremendous when there are matching ideological components shared between terms.

The first words I enumerated with the Tri-key are NUIT and HADIT; I learned they share the value 29, which forms a numeric link between them, and reflects their relationship as defined in TBOTL. The same relationship is supported even further beyond the use of gematria, by focusing on the value 29. The digit 2 correlates to Aries, the cardinal sign of Fire, while the digit 9 correlates to the cardinal sign of Water, Cancer, thus depicting the combining of opposites and the relationship of Nuit and Hadit. From another perspective, the value 20 is that of Capricorn, while 9 is that of Cancer; the two signs oppose one another on the Zodiacal skywheel, and also signify the relationship of Nuit and Hadit as complements.

The chances of Nuit and Hadit sharing the same non-specified value at random are 1/58, but having shown the value 29 is significant to the ideas enumerated, a test that requires both names equal 29 shows that only one system in every 54,000 can do so, which examples a demonstrable difference in probability when the gematria value produced is held to be meaningful.

Now consider this: AIN has a value of 20, as do NONE and HAD. The meaning of AIN is NONE, while HAD identifies himself as NONE in verse II:15 of TBOTL; as a group, the equations are an ideological bonanza. In searching for other gematria systems that link the three terms together with a non-specified value, I was unable to find one, despite searching through over two billion gematria systems generated at random. The lack of results serve as tangible proof the authors of TBOTL were aware of the equations, and implemented them in the text of TBOTL.

I have not had the opportunity to make an in-depth analysis of your system, though I have it plugged into my Gematria program. But you also know that his work is nothing like ALW or any other system such as that.

RLG's work is incredible, and indeed, not like anything else.

]]>

If RLG's work proves the *Book of the Law*, then so does mine.

Therein is the conundrum. For me, the whole numbers game you speak of, as in this set of letter-values having these odds of producing this or that number does not prove or disprove anything. The thing that attracted me most to RLG's work is that it is based on the *accepted* letter values the Prophet attributed to the Trigrams, and thus, is a continuation of his work. And it is not just about the Global Sum, there is so much more to his work than just that. If you strip away the Value and Order question and look at just the pure numerical work, then you would see what I mean. I have done a lot of work with his system, and have even expanded it in some respects.

I have not had the opportunity to make an in-depth analysis of your system, though I have it plugged into my Gematria program. But you also know that his work is nothing like ALW or any other system such as that.

That all being said, there are multiple paths to arrive at the same destination. I am sure that your work does prove Liber Legis. The premise you are working with is phenomenal. Both systems give insights not found in those "serial-skip-x-letters" systems.

]]>When I say English QBLH, I am talking about the letter attribution from Liber Trigrammaton, and as developed further by Bro. Threefold31, R.L. Gillis, in his Book of Mutations.

The letter attributions he used in conjunction with Liber Trigrammaton prove Liber L vel Legis.

I was openly critical of RLG's work early in its development, knowing there had to be more to the *Book of the Law* than what his work demonstrates, and that there had to be a simpler approach than the base-three theories he has written of. Being skeptical of his work most certainly drove him forward, and caused him to work harder and dig deeper, just as the skepticism leveled at my work caused me to do the same. If I had accepted RLG's work as definitive, I would have never continued on the path I have taken, which justifies any criticism directed at his or any similar work. If a theory is correct, no amount skepticism can change that.

Much of RLG's work is understandably subjective; if we are to narrow the discussion to the evidence that supports your quoted statement, it has to rest on the global sum 267696, and RLG's ability to produce it using elements within the II:76 puzzle of Liber Legis. RLG arrives at the value by multiplying the count of numbers in the puzzle, times the sum of the values in it, times the gematria value of the puzzle letters: 9 x 143 x 208 = 267696. This morning I wrote a program that searches for three random values within the range 1-208, those used by RLG, had the software determine whether the values selected can be multiplied and equal the global sum, and then repeated the cycle millions of times. 1 pattern in every 35,000 produced at random were successful, which means the odds of random success are 1/35000.

Using the Tri-key, the chances of Aleister Crowley enumerating as the value 113, the sum of the last group of numbers in the puzzle, while the rest of the puzzle produces the value 418, at random, are 1/22 million. If RLG's work proves the *Book of the Law*, then so does mine.

]]>