THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.thelema,alt.occult
From: jake stratton-kent 
Subject: English Qaballa-long
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 15:28:26 +0000

In article <77ur74$gs9@bolt.sonic.net>, hara
 writes
>49990117 IIIom 
>
>shalom alechem, my kin.

93 Tyagi

Methods and traditions called Qabalah or Cabala vary  
in umpteen ways - but then there is not much agreement between the
variant branches of the hebrew system (Kabbalah proper) either.

The path of the Names is the title used to describe his own methods by
no less than Abraham Abulafia, for which see Scholem, pp143 and passim.
Of course many Kabbalists were (and may still be) opposed to Abulafia -
but IMO - for magical purposes - he is the cream of the crop.

His system was *Practical* and ecstatic and had more in common with
magick - as opposed to theoretical and speculative Kabbalah. 

The latter (though influential and useful as window dressing even today)
has little in common with occultism IMO, and some kabbalists also deny
that any connection exists. Such denials explain Abulafias's
controversial status in that tradition. Scholem calls him 'the most
practical kabbalist' - though the term Practical Kabbalah means many
things to many people.

Abraham Abulafia is prominent among my heroes. If any neo-nazis object I
will be pleased to discuss it energetically over the barricade. 

No historical connection is calaimed for EQ with Hebrew Kabbalah, merely
some points of contact in practice - but anti-semiticism is irrelevant
to this distinction.

Some Hermetics are indeed plagiarists. Mathers stole his famous intro to
Kabbalah Unveiled from Christian Ginsburg. Since many agree that the
intro rather than the text is the best part of the book - buy Ginsburgs
instead. 

As far as Crowley goes, provide evidence of plagiarism and it might be
worth arguing the point. AC provided extensive non-sectarian reading
lists, and promoted critique and scepticism. Therefore IMO any
charlatanry he got away with was on those foolish enough not to examine
things for themselves. AC's use of the word Qabalah was hardly a money
spinner. Rather than make a fortune AC *spent* fortunes publishing. 

Hermeticism as an anti-Jewish plot is simply a reflection of the old
idea that it is a Zionist plot, a charge levelled agains it repeatedly
in the past. Neither thesis seems interesting or relevant to me.

In any case, the non-hebrew tradition of Cabala (15th century?) is
almost as old as the Kabbalah (13th?) itself. Neither Mathers or AC
originated the usage of the term in occult circles, and the same
argument applies to EQ. No plot, no misappropriation - simply
established useage.

As observed above, the elements of Kabbalah most interesting to
occultists have frequently been disowned by Kabbalists for sectarian
reasons of their own. The 'Practical Kabbalah' has been disowned, called
'Samaritan magic' and other things by eminent Kabbalists - without
either history or literary evidence on their side. 

Kabbalah is potentially a source of 'error and heresy' in Judaism, and
as such has always been controversial in and out of that tradition. The
more controversial themes are easier to disown than to explain - but are
equally authentic IMO.

>
>
># ...many portions of the 'Hebrew' Kabbalah that interest 
># *occultists* may not be of Hebrew origin, as opposed to 
># Egyptian or Greek - so insisting on Hebrew as a standard 
># in occult 'qabalah' is equally misleading.
>
>could you point out which portions you are indicating here?

according to Ginsburg:

'Nothing can be more evident than that the cardinal and distinctive
doctrines of the kabbalah in it's original form, as stated at the
beginning of the second part of this Essay, are derived from Neo-
Platonism. Any doubt upon this subject must be relinquished when the two
systems are compared...........Rabbi Azariel, whose work, as we have
seen, is the first kabbalistic production, candidly tells us that in
viewing the diety as purely neagtive, and divesting him of all
attributes, he followed the opinion of the philosophers'.

R. Azariels description of Ain Soph is moreover taken word for word from
Proclus. This thesis could go on and on - Hellenistic influence on the
Jews (more of whom lived in Alexendria, where Neoplatonism was founded,
than in Jerusalem) was extreemly extensive, jewish Gnosticsm,
Hekalot/merkaba mysticism and finally the Kabbalah are stacked with non
Judaic elements. These are precisely the elements most interesting to
occultists.

Therefore arguing that we do the Jews a disservice by employing these
elements under the title 'Qabalah' is a misnomer. The Kabbalah
transmitted these elements, it did not originate them.
>
>
># I trust you wouldn't expect a Rabbi to type in the entire Zohar, 
># along with the Bahir and the Sepher Yetsirah etc. etc. to 
># demonstrate there was more to Kabbalah to gematria.
>
>of course, can you refer me to comparably valuable texts which
>you would consider to be 'part of EQ' in the same way that the
>Zohar is part of the kabbalah?
>
certainly, there is a considerable corpus of published material much of
which is being archived on the GAC site (see Stargate URL below). In the
past most critics of EQ have not bothered to examine this material
before making their pronouncements from on high. This has rather muddied
the waters. 

Not a problem ;-)

>a pairing of numbers (traditionally sequenced in counting order:
>1, 2, etc.) with letters (traditionally sequenced in an order that
>derives from previous alphabets from which it in part derives or
>resembles (e.g.)) in their TRADITIONAL sequences would be what I
>would call 'intuitively obvious' in derivation.

and what would be the intuitively obvious numeration scheme? Hundreds,
tens and units? Or serial order? 

> the others which
>you cipher explain that this is an 11-count slide along the
>traditional letter sequence (L is the 12th, W the 23rd...), and
>this implies that you acknowledge that original's sequential
>core, and that the ALWHS system is at least discernable, if not
>intuitively obvious in derivation.

it is more than discernible, it is intrinsic
>
>
>
># ...no system of comparable scope has so far emerged from them.
># the schema appended to Liber Trigrammaton by no less a qabalist 
># than AC himself is no exception
>
>the "qabalisticness" of AC is one of the subjects under
>investigation and thus constitutes a questionable authority.

the 'kabbalisticness' of Abulafia has also been questioned - despite the
fact he precedes the Zohar which is often absurdly taken as some kind of
touch-stone of authenticity. I'm not about to stop using his valuable
material to assist someone else's partizan hair-splitting. 
>
>
># ...it is not usual to argue that another order and value might
># be applied to the hebrew alphabet, it is accepted on the arbitrary
># grounds that it has been around a long time....
>
>and with good reason. basing the sequence merely on the results of
>the divinatory activity would seem to allow a great number of
>possibilities unless there was some constraint.  that this system
>is based on numerical cipher is of more interest to me than if it
>were entirely arbitrary (have arbitrary systems been tried also?).

there are probably hundreds of variant systems, arbitrary and otherwise.
AFAIK EQ alone holds the distinction of having developed into a full
blown system while the others remain 'alternative gematrias' or mere
numerology.
> 
>
>
>what about the even systems?

they break down, dividing the alphabet in half. Only odd numbered ones
go full circle.
>
>
># ...Interested parties are referred to the eq-list and its archive.
>
>what is the URL of the archive?
>this one following?
>
>       http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/7770/

yes - though to access the archive it is necessary to join the list,
whch may be done at the same site, 

see also:

http://members.aol.com/kiblah1/index.html
>
>
># ...'a priori' considerations of 'traditional' letter order and prior
># usage are unlikely to give birth to a qabalah as opposed to a 
># completely synthetic and very closed system, or nothing at all. 
># This is not the case with EQ.
>
>why do you think this is the case that they won't give birth to
>a Thelemic (or other) system of qabalah?

the Siegfried method surpasses that of Mime. 
See AC's intro to Levi's 'key of the mysteries'

> what would be the problem
>of yielding a very closed system?  wouldn't this contain some
>greater degree of revelatory value?

an arbitrary and synthetic system could enshrine one or two keys, and be
selected mainly for its ability to do so. Trying to extrapolate further
would produce dead ends. 

Such ciphers have existed, in Polish Martinism they have only one or two
key numbers and very limited application outside of political
cryptography. AFAIK their sole virtue is providing numerically
recognisable passwords in pamphlets of 'mystical-nationalist' poetry. 

In Italo-German 'latin Cabala' a similar lack of potential exists IMO.
The main virtue consisted of obtaining the number 66 from some latin
terms connected with gold and the Sun.

Q. Why should Eq do better?
A. Pass.


> 
>#> wasn't "BABALON" valued at 65 by Crowley and others? 
>
># no, 
>
>Grant?  what is the history of EQ's usage?  are there any well-
>known EQaballists whom you could cite that have written on the
>subject?  I do remember the 65=> Babalon (5 and 60? or was that
>6 and 50? in the Evul Book?).

the value of BABALON in Hebrew characters (the spelling is *not*
hebraic) is 156. The 'six and fifty' ref in AL is to Nuit. Note that She
also gives I.S.I.S. in notariqon as a 'secret name' and this has the
value 56 in EQ. 

Possibly you are confusing it with 65 as value of ADNI/Adonai in AC's
'hebrew' system.

 65=GODDESS, BABALON, WISDOM, WINE, WATER, HONEY etc. etc. in EQ, and is
a recognisable key-number in that system, which BTW is markedly more
gynocentric than some interpretations of Thelema.

>
>
>#># The Counting Well process (briefly, value of word a times number of
>#># letters in word b and vice versa) produces other startling proofs.
>#> 
>#> from where does this 'Counting Well' process derive? 
>
># 1st generation EQists - 
>
>who were they?

the inventor/discoverer of this technique was Stefan Dajnowicz. AFAIK
EQ's earliest and most important features derive from Jim Lees, Carol
Smith, Stefan Dajnowicz and John Harris. They aren't well known, and
don't wish to be.
>
>
>#>  who named it this?

presumably one of the above. Most likely SD.
>
># the first usage was in reference to a verse in AL where the expression
># 'count well its name' occurs - the technique was first used to expound
># this verse, as it evidently required something of the kind. It has since
># been found relevant in other contexts. The technique is unique to EQ
># AFAIK.
>
>that doesn't tell us the social history of the tradition, though.
>
one day maybe.
>
># a) some mathemagical systems possess latent patterns far superior to
># arbitrary systems.
>
>with this I agree strongly, though intuitively obvious systems of
>matching are of greater relevance in the history of gematria.

AFAYK. 

Ogham and other 'cult alphabets' have had 'secret orders' concealed in
cipher. It is possible - even likely - that this was also true of the
earliest Semitico-Grecian cult alphabets. 

Hebrew derives from a Proto-Canaanite cult alphabet extant long before
the origin of the monotheist kabbalah. Two letters have had name changes
to lose/conceal associations with earlier cults - Heh (now 'a window')
was originally a birth giving goddess whose symbol is common on
Phoenician steles, and Nun (now 'a fish') was Nahash, the serpent. IMO
it is very likely that there was a secret order of letters which
concealed a calender mystery. As I recall the Arabic alphabet also has
such a 'concealed order' for 'cult usage'.

In any case AL speaks of 'obtaining the order & value of the English
Alphabet' 'which strongly suggests that ABC is not the qabalistic order.

>
>
>I'm unsure that 'permutation evaluation' as you have called it,
>is very much different in its arbitrariness (from what you wrote
>above there are something like 13 systems ODD, and my
>calculations indicate that there are more than 24 EVEN systems,
>which allows more than 30 options just from ciphering).

and billions of ways of arbitrarily attributing numbers to the letters.

permuting the alphabet by even numbers is inelegant, as it breaks the
alphabet in half. The second half thus becomes arbitrary, since, as the
series is not continuous a consecutive numbering order is not the only
option.
> 
>
>
># ...EQ is more than an Order & Value, as may readily be seen by
># referring to the primary sources.
>
>which sources are you calling 'primary' here?
>
The New Equinox-British Journal of Magick, volumes 5 and 6, Kaaba
Publications.
The Equinox-British Journal of Thelema, volume 7, Kiblah Publishing.
The Qaballa of AL Kaaba/Kiblah Publishing
The Book of the law and its Qaballa, Kiblah Publishing
L, Kaaba Publications.

AFAIK no critique of EQ has ever referred to these publications which
were very rare in the US. Much of it is archived or being archived on
the site referred to. Some additional material remains unpublished of
which only a small part is actually 'secret'. Some important
breakthrough discoveries have been made since the most recent hard copy.

EQ is an authentic expression of Thelema as it has developed since AC's
demise. It also has the distinction of being a tradition that grew in
England in the absence of the OTO/AA in that country for most of its
development.

IMO As a living tradition within Thelema it deserves more attention and
respect from academics and other Thelemites alike than it has so far
received. Sectarian resistance and poor transatlantic communications
between occultists in the past have so far prevented this - but those
barriers are coming down, and a sensible appraisal may not be too far
away. It seems inconceivable to me that such a development should be
without interest, YMMV.
>
># EQ *is* a Qabalah, not a system of gematria only....
>
>as such, what are the particulars of its elements, plugging in
>the specifics for the components I asked you to define above?

I'm not sure I can use your terminology satisfactorily. However, EQ
permits and facilitates Notariqon, Temurah, Permutation,

it has techniques of use in ritual composition, it has correspondences,
cosmology, and so forth. 

Whatever magicians have done with Cabala, Runes, Ogham etc. Thelemic
magicians may do with EQ. Indeed, anyone who has read Agrippa properly
could use cabalistic principles with *any* alphabet - and English has
the distinction of being the language of the Thelemic Holy Books, and is
thus preferable to Hebrew for thelemic use. No controversy there that I
can see, but relic rustlers may differ. ;>

stay well,

93 93/93

ALWays



JSK.

The Gnostic Alchemical Church of Typhon-Christ

http://members.aol.com/kiblah1/index.html
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/7770/

eq-list-subscribe@makelist.com

All events and institutions other than those 
portrayed in this Journal are fictitious