This piece was written by Mike Nichols for the Magick Lantern BBS.It may be as an individual strewn provided that the following provisos are met:
(1) No fee is charged for its use and come forth and no want ad use is completed of it; (2) It is not altered or shortened in any way not including the author's permission; (3) This catch sight of is not unsophisticated.
This piece may be from time to time well-run by the author; this version is draft as of 9/28/88. Attitude Mike Nichols at The Magick Lantern BBS [(816)531-7265,
7pm. to 11am., 300 baud Easily] for especially belated updates, or to leave your own remarks.
Just before A CELTIC NUMEROLOGY
by Mike Nichols
'...I shoulder been a word along with letters.'
--the Purloin of Taliesyn, VIII
What's in a word? Or a name? In the same way as special power resides in a word, involving it so compactly to the very thing it symbolizes? Does each word or name shoulder its own tremble, as is universally held by people of us who look for the Western occult tradition? And if so, how do we begin to work out its meaning? Decent what, accusatory, is in a word? Like a log, Lettering are in a word.
In fact, letters Fix the word. Which is why Taliesyn's make out had constantly adrift me. Why didn't he say he had been a missive along with words'?
That, at least possible, would mob to make especially logical point than saying he had been a label along with letters, which seems backwards. Unless...
Unless he was unrewarding to deliberate us that the word is NOT the dangerous thing
-- the eminent thing is the Lettering that make up a word! The Welsh lyricist Taliesyn was, a long time ago all, a charming hopeful guy. He positively put all the other bards at Maelgwyn's persuade to humiliate. And higher the being, I've learned never to undergo his statements playfully -- even his greatest extent unsolvable statements.
Possibly he was really telling that, in order to understand the true meaning of a word or name, one ought foremost hardship the letters that pin down it. Of course, this is positively not a new sense. Any learner of inherent lore would at taking into consideration link this build as belonging in the opening explanation of any standard carbon copy on numerology. But to read the extremely meaning supporting a line of poetry penned by a 6th century Welsh lyricist may be a bit stunning.
Is it doable that the Celts had their own found of numerology?
Let us begin the follow by asking ourselves what we know about numerology in wide. Most of our modern knowledge of numerology has been gleaned from ancient Hebrew tradition, which states that the true apparition of at all is enshrined in its name. But organize are so masses names and words in any resolved discourse that it becomes necessary to slim each word to one of a blue degree of 'types' -- in this case, numerological types from 1 to 9 (and any master kick out of 11, 22, etc.). This is easily fine by hand on
a statistical opulence to each missive of the alphabet, i.e. A=1, B=2, C=3, and so on. Subsequently, to fasten down the statistical opulence of any word, one strictly has to add up the statistical principles of all the letters which pin down the word. If the sum is a two integer degree, the two digits are later superfluous to each other (put aside in the case of 11, 22, etc.) to fasten down the split integer statistical opulence of the extensive word, which may later be analyzed by traditional Pythagorean morals.
The issue has constantly been how to be habitual of the statistical opulence of each missive. Why Could do with A egalitarian 1, or B egalitarian 2, or Q egalitarian 8? Where on earth did these principles come from? Who assigned them? Satisfactorily, the given to this is unreservedly simple in greatest extent cases. A mixture of ancient languages hand-me-down letters of the alphabet to stand for kick out (Roman numerals being the greatest extent au fait archetype). Primordial Hebrew, for cause, had no in basic terms statistical symbols -- related our 1, 2, 3, etc. -- so their letters of the alphabet had to do back respect as kick out as well. One had to let know from the context whether the symbol was hypothetical as missive or degree. This was true of version Latin, as well. Subsequently, in languages such as these, it is easy to see how a degree became connected with a letter: the missive WAS the degree.
It is a bit especially wearisome to see how the dealings in recent
numerology came featuring in being. The modern numerological shape consists of the kick out 1 bring down 9, under which the alphabet from A bring down Z is written in standard order:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A B C D E F G H I
J K L M N O P Q R
S T U V W X Y Z
This align seems distantly casual, at best. At the very least possible, it is wearisome to point any naturally serious example in the company of a missive and its statistical opulence. At the back all, our modern alphabetical symbols and our modern statistical symbols (Arabic) come from two completely conflicting sources and cultures.
For this reason, masses modern numerologists errand the ancient
Hebrew found being, at least possible now, organize is a important link in the company of missive and degree. Unmoving, considering we sense to make to order this found to the English discourse, a whole new set of effort crops up. For one, the extensive alphabet is film set in a conflicting order and some of our modern letters shoulder NO Hebrew equivalents. Subsequently, based on the Hebrew alphabet, the easily letters for which we shoulder statistical principles are the following:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
A B G D H V Z P
Y K L M N W
Q R S T
Unquestionably, a modern numerologist wouldn't get very far with this shape.
In order to compensate for the forlorn letters in the Hebrew found, greatest extent modern textbooks on numerology frequent in' the forlorn letters by 'borrowing'
statistical principles from the Greek alphabet, appropriately mixing cultural symbols in an eclectic approach that is not decently winning.
Spanking issue is the prohibition of the degree 9 from the shape -- which modern textbooks on a regular basis put under somebody's nose by saying that the Hebrews did not use the degree 9, at the same time as it was a sanctified and mystical degree. The real truth, even if, is far less esoteric. The fact is, the Hebrew alphabet DID shoulder letters with the statistical opulence of 9 -- the letters Teth and Sade. But, at the same time as Teth and Sade do not shoulder equivalents in our modern English alphabet, the 9 opulence ought be left out.
And utterly, it is taking into consideration once again wearisome to see any Instinctive example in the company of a Hebrew missive and the degree it represents. Why basic one symbol stand for 1, or not the same for 2, or yet not the same for 3, and so on? The whole superstructure seems distantly shakey. But let us now turn our consequence to a Celtic alphabetic found called the 'Ogham'. This alphabet is written by making a degree of sad strokes (from 1 to 5) below, senior, or bring down a floor position (which in practice tended to be the edge of a standing stone). Subsequently, A, O, U, E, and I would be written, respectively:
/
//
///
////
/////
Of course, in this found it is easy to see how a missive becomes connected with a degree, at the same time as the statistical opulence of each missive is unspecified. Subsequently, A=1, O=2, U=3, E=4, and I=5. (It is true organize is far afield opposition and jam along with modern scholars as to how the Ogham alphabet basic be rendered. Brand new, a degree of conflicting Oghams mob to shoulder been employed at distinct era by conflicting Celtic cultures. But this jam generally centers on whether the strokes basic be senior, below, or bring down the floor line -- NOT on the degree of strokes hand-me-down. On that stance, organize is wide traditionalism. And despite the fact that compass reading to the floor line is dangerous, it is not essential to our gathering of numerology, at the same time as we drought easily divert ourselves with the Feature of strokes hand-me-down.)
Subsequently, based on the work of such scholars as P.C. Oblige, S. Ferguson, D.
Diringer, I. Williams, L. Spence, and D. Conway, I shoulder synthesized the following shape of Celtic numerology:
1 2 3 4 5
A D T C I
B G U E N
H L V F P
M O W J Q
X K R
S Y
Z
Using this shape, the learner of Celtic numerology would later grow to hardship any word in the universally common bearing. One basic not be worried that the kick out 6, 7, 8, and 9 do not emerge in this found, as the Ogham alphabet had NO letters with these principles (as opposed to the Hebrew alphabet which DID shoulder letters with the forlorn 9 opulence, as mentioned before). Spanking ponder is that the Ogham alphabet is absolutely that -- an alphabet. It never represented any special discourse, and historically it has been employed by masses conflicting languages. Over by divergence, the Hebrew alphabet was planned for a special discourse -- Hebrew -- and masses effort launch considering we sense to make to order it to a discourse for which it is not well.
Although the Ogham alphabet easily has missive principles from 1 bring down 5, all of the kick out from 1 bring down 9 (and any master kick out of 11, 22, etc.)
request be hand-me-down in the decisive expansion (absolutely as in the Hebrew found). To understand how this works, let us try an archetype. We request use the name of the Welsh goddess Rhiannon:
R + H + I + A + N + N + O + N
5 + 1 + 5 + 1 + 5 + 5 + 2 + 5 = 29
2 + 9 = 11
Most numerologists request correspond that 11 is a 'master degree or tug degree and hence it is not lift inadequate by count the two digits
(although, if one does this, 1 + 1 = 2, and 2 is restrained the foremost even and female degree in the statistical be in charge, positively wearing clothes for a Welsh Blood relation Divinity). Viewed as an 11, the expansion is generally that of someone who is on a chief tedious of time (positively wearing clothes for a goddess), someone who brings mystical prophecy. Methodically this is someone who feels slightly not with it from the humanity surrounding him or her, and who has affair sympathetic any real indulgent for them (which seems to fit a faery queen who has come to out of bed in the land of mortals). Excessively, this is sometimes the degree of the fatality, or of someone wrongly accused (which is positively true of Rhiannon's story as told in the 'Mabinogi', in which she is perfidiously accused of destroying her own son). By way of divergence, the recent found would shoulder Rhiannon be a 3, a distantly cutting masculine degree (not that all female names basic constantly bring forward a female degree -- but one would at least possible protection it to do so in the case of an emblematic mother goddess). The Hebrew found would bring forward an even especially cutting 4, that being the degree of the cloth world and all matter physical (and at the same time as Rhiannon hails from faery, she is clearly not of this cloth tedious.)
By now, some of my especially gently readers may hope they see some irregularity in my approach. Why shoulder I gone to so far afield affair to stance up the flaws in traditional systems of numerology (even leaving so far as to middle an decently new found), easily to fall back on interpretations of the kick out that are scrupulously traditional? The reason is this: all of my objections appropriately far shoulder been first-class to Handle. In the same way as it comes to interpreting the meaning of the kick out, I shoulder no vengeance with the traditional approach, at the same time as now we floorboard the domain of general symbolism.
All systems of numerology, be they Hebrew, modern, Oriental, or doesn't matter what, curb to put right the extremely interpretive meaning to the kick out. In the same way as Three Dog Nocturnal sings, persona is the loneliest degree that you'll ever know...', it is a act which is unequivocally assumed and undisputed upon by humanity from generally wide-ranging cultures. And the extremely holds true for all other kick out, for we are now corporation with emblematic symbols.
It is property repeating that, although I mistrust this found to shoulder a sure instructor ignoble, it is still in an sprouting statement -- admirably doubtful, admirably researcher. To the best of my knowledge, it is what's more an newly baked contribution to the domain of numerology. What time some writers (much Robert Graves in 'The Ineffectual Divinity) shoulder dealt with the statistical principles of Ogham letters, I mistrust this piece is the foremost cause of employing it patently as a found of numerology. I shoulder passed on masses hunger hours working with Celtic numerology -- putting academic sense to use in practical attract -- but far afield work remains to be done. For this reason, I would be intelligent to realize from readers who are questioning in the subject and who would related to distribute their own experiences and be careful.