Jump to content

A History of Cryptology


Kate

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, Allisnum2er said:

Notice the w in "vovv".

This is the only "vv" in all the poem, on line 182 (This is for you Rob 😉).

VV # 55 that is the gematria of ... Adon ! 🙂

And you did not mention, which I know you knew, that VOVV is 74 Simple and Kaye, 26 Reverse, and 11 Short cipher?

LOL

image.png.558dbf6536f35332917af70d4a4e8344.png

  • Like 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Allisnum2er said:

NO Friggen's way! LOL

Seriously this below is a copy/paste from that link!

Famous sci-fi character Spock gets an artistic makeover with these Star Trek Spock bacon paintings. Known as the 'Spock and Bacon' series, these acrylic paintings show the Trekki ponding over crispy slices of bacon.

 

  • Like 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Is this not an amazingly enjoyable dialog! 🙂

 

Yes, I'm aware that the Hebrew symbols sum to 26. I think we covered this already with the flaming heart emblem that uses the tetractys with Hebrew Characters instead of numbers. The whole of the characters sum to 72 (3 x 24) which is the number of the names of God and the geometric suggestion of 9 x 8 which is in the Sonnets dedication. All in all it is that whether one want to insist that 26 is Bacon or not. The problem I have is that there is literally no end to the ways one could equate a number to Bacon. I am not one to subscribe to the idea that Francis Bacon was given initials FB to allow for this coincidence. Should we think that Bacon's parents saw him as a Christ figure? That's something that I am much more willing to suspect is a belief held in a cult of Francis Bacon. It's neat, but it is not compelling. There's really no way into inject Bacon into all this religious symbolism unless you suggest that there was already a cult in his persona in his time.  Boehme used this imagery and Bacon would have known of his esoteric writings. Pretty sure all Rosicrucian's would have. Doesn't mean Bacon was a Rosicrucian. He may have seen right through all that.

spacer.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

The problem I have is that there is literally no end to the ways one could equate a number to Bacon. I am not one to subscribe to the idea that Francis Bacon was given initials FB to allow for this coincidence. Should we think that Bacon's parents saw him as a Christ figure?

Funny thing is I do entertain an idea in my pea brain that Elizabeth's advisor might have created all of Bacon's names and his potential "Virgin Birth" story even as the young Queen was in turmoil about her unexpected and likely unwanted  pregnancy. I admit it is a story imagined in my mind from my studies and research based on the numbers I see and the word clues left in Shakespeare's works, mostly in the Sonnets.

To answer your question, inDeed perhaps Bacon's parents may have been well aware of the Christ figure potential for Bacon's legacy even before he was born. Bacon might have been Elizabeth's "Will" run amuck without restraints a bit too early in her life.

Just me, though.

Send donations and join my Bacon is the modern Day Virgin Born world changer cult with me as the cult leader. I especially would love to have a lot of beautiful scantily clothed women pamper me and feed me the finest sushi, cheese, and the very coldest beer. 😉

 

  • Haha 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Funny thing is I do entertain an idea in my pea brain that Elizabeth's advisor might have created all of Bacon's names and his potential "Virgin Birth" story even as the young Queen was in turmoil about her unexpected and likely unwanted  pregnancy. I admit it is a story imagined in my mind from my studies and research based on the numbers I see and the word clues left in Shakespeare's works, mostly in the Sonnets.

To answer your question, inDeed perhaps Bacon's parents may have been well aware of the Christ figure potential for Bacon's legacy even before he was born. Bacon might have been Elizabeth's "Will" run amuck without restraints a bit too early in her life.

Just me, though.

Send donations and join my Bacon is the modern Day Virgin Born world changer cult with me as the cult leader. I especially would love to have a lot of beautiful scantily clothed women pamper me and feed me the finest sushi, cheese, and the very coldest beer. 😉

 

You're purposely glossing over the fact that a cult is possible without easily identifiable leaders, churches and financial incentives. A society can be caught up in a cult of the self that is promoted by business forces for business rationales. The shopping malls never get equated to churches. The free market isn't promoted as heaven. Humans can be snagged by the cult of personality that is promoted which sells advertising and caters to everyone's desire to want to be someone other than who they are (someone who is allegedly loved by a great many).  If a person is recruited by these efforts his contribution is a mimetic one. He counts as one example to help recruit others. The end goal isn't always the same. You want to seem to have everyone think that the point of a cult is to get rich from it. Not always.

I think we can recognize that the cult of the self and the cult of personality are both playing into the suggestions we are seeing. Bacon would have needed to be in love with himself to have written himself into the stories in the way you often suggest. Others would have needed to have been recruited into a cult or adoration of him from very early on to groom him. One would need to use the context of prophecy to advance this. There is no prophecy in play. Suggestions made to people at any time are ripe for being accepted unconditionally and become self fulfilling prophecies in time.

We ought to understand that these are important aspects of the propagandizing of anyone's life. When it came time to write Henry Kissinger's authorized biography the job was given to a man that is very well known for writing in a story telling style (producing narrative biographies). He creates compelling narratives around the lives of the subjects he tackles. That is to say he presents someone's life to others with borrowed symbolism taken from existing stories (archetypes). This is a shrewd way to whitewash any man's life and to make him look like he is either of the side of the light or the dark. A "you are with him or you are against him" type of dichotomy is given to the world. Priests do the same thing when a dead person is eulogized. There are even professional eulogists one can hire.

If the job came down to you to write Bacon's biography it would be such a story. You'd have no choice because you never knew the man. You'd struggle to know how he should be presented.

Bacon is a cultish figure. He's that because he was a philosopher on the cusp of the modern age of science. There are people who are admirers because of the empiricism and naturalism in the philosophy. His reputation as being a father figure for empiricism allows some to present him as a bright Sun or a point of illumination if they wanted to use that. 

I don't think you are enamored with Bacon the empiricist or the statesman.  I've never seen you write much about what Bacon had to say about reason. You much more prefer to present a story where Bacon is teaming up with characters that are clearly not proponents of reason for reason's sake (Dee, Elizabeth...). These are the schemers who are the manipulators in the historical cast. The manipulators are the ones who lay down the first suggestions. 

Somewhere along the line the Shakespeare authorship question morphed into a Royal bloodline story for you. The suggestion is employing a known archetypical storyline around the dispossessed heir.

I would also argue that you have been recruited by others who have their own interests. It is much easier to identify the rationales when you come to people who try and make their living promoting stories. This sort of networking is beneficial to all involved. 

The whole point of the symbolism we see may be to present the message that Thomas Pained echoed in the quote I singled out. Bacon may have been screaming exactly that from the rooftops to anyone who would pay attention to the narrative that exploits masks. To have overtly said anything like what Paine wrote would not have been possible.

The story of the God symbol is part comedy, part history and part tragedy. It's not an easy subject to present to the masses in a world where the monarch is assuming the role of spokesperson for the deception.

spacer.png

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Allisnum2er said:

Let's take a look at the 26th stanza ...

Let's take a look at the 26th stanza ...

line 2 (B) word 6 (F)  is  "me"

Did you know that 26 squared = 676  ?

67 = Secret or Francis 

6 = 1 + 5

1  with 5 makes 15

15 = 1 + 11 + 3

= A +  L +  C.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

The man in the moone was not a buffoon

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, peethagoras said:

Let's take a look at the 26th stanza ...

line 2 (B) word 6 (F)  is  "me"

Did you know that 26 squared = 676  ?

67 = Secret or Francis 

6 = 1 + 5

1  with 5 makes 15

15 = 1 + 11 + 3

= A +  L +  C.

 

 

 

It would all depend on what is meant by "is". If "is" can be replaced by "might be" then I would be completely unsure if I exist.  I would have to suppose that I do exist, and that would require some sort of external confirmation for me to suspect it. What is the external confirmation that comes to tell us that we are right to see things in one way or another with gematria?

Thinking one can encode and decode with gematria is poison. Any suggestion that uses it as a corner stone is on bad footing. It only seems possible and reasonable.

Bacon did possess a way to encode precisely, and he understood that it was requirement that a coded message should be decodable when identified as a coded message (the identification of one should be difficult to limit the attempts at decoding, because that is another level of security). There are no properties of anything that is accompanied by the number 26, or described by it, that tell us we are looking at a larger coded message. What the exercise does is allow for very large doors of possibility to be opened. In politics that is called opening the Overton window, and it is a very powerful strategy used to start manipulating and recruiting the electorate with.

This is never good for anyone who would want to know anything. However, doing these sort of mechanics does qualify one to write scripts for History Channel shows. If the pursuit of lucre matters then it is important to massively confuse people with things that are very interesting in such a way that they can become embroiled in making sense of it.  Keep that in mind if you want to write a serial novel.

This sort of confused interpretation of facts is what drove Bacon nuts. It is highly unlikely he would have exploited it unless he was pranking the people who who would be caught up in this sort of exercise.

The Rose/Cross story comes with another that I find very useful to make sense of it. It is the "Pilgrim's Progress" that was written by John Bunyan. The moral there is that you can die in a collapsed shaft on the "hill of lucre" or drown in the mud of a "slough of despond" if you get off the straight path. The straight path is free of curves and possibilities. On it there is only what matters that get you to the point of knowing. The hill of lucre and the swamp are both archetypes exploited by the Oak Island story tellers. They confuse you in order that your lost time might become money in their pockets. They know the straight path to getting paid for their investment in that bit of story telling. The entire enterprise must rest on "could it be". As a story teller I feel it is important that you make sense of that.

 

Edited by RoyalCraftiness
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

I am not one to subscribe to the idea that Francis Bacon was given initials FB to allow for this coincidence. Should we think that Bacon's parents saw him as a Christ figure? That's something that I am much more willing to suspect is a belief held in a cult of Francis Bacon.

I do not necessarily subscribe to the idea that Francis Bacon was given initials FB to allow for this coincidence, but I am open to the possibility that Francis Bacon might have played with this coincidence.

"Should we think that Bacon's parents saw him as a Christ figure?"

6 years ago, I did not have preconceived ideas, even if I had heard about the Tudor Theory.

What I think today is based on my research.

Few years ago, they led me to decipher one passage of a play in which I found a reference to one painting and two engravings by Albrecht Dürer.  I only knew one of the two engravings ... Melencholia I.

The second engraving was the following one...

image.png.5624164e6a95e69c6b723014a664767e.png

And the painting was The Madonna of the Carnation.

image.png.cf77b454e20bcd2608eda61c5a8353cc.png

This painting of Dürer with the Child Jesus holding an apple, reminded me the painting of Francis Bacon as a child.

In the same passage I found a reference to the Phoenix Nest, and I learned that it was the title of a book dedicated to Robert Dudley( known to be the lover of the "Virgin" Queen) with a poem telling us that he lived "as a God".

image.png.87a9257ba618bb9912483f05971973c9.png

https://archive.org/details/bim_early-english-books-1475-1640_the-phoenix-nest-_s-r_1593/page/n11/mode/2up

From there, I connected the dots.

In passing, there are some medals from the 16th century related with the Fall of man and the Crucifixion.

https://subastas.monedalia.es/en/lot/900/alemania-1536-germany-medal-1536-the-/

https://www.coinworld.com/news/world-coins/1557-gold-medal-tells-bible-story-of-adam-and-eve.html

 

 

  • Wow! 2

image.png.b8c74f56d5551c745119c268cf9d3db8.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

This sort of confused interpretation of facts is what drove Bacon nuts.

Oh, you knew him and we did not! LOL

In another post you state, "If the job came down to you to write Bacon's biography it would be such a story. You'd have no choice because you never knew the man. You'd struggle to know how he should be presented. "

But you, a self-proclaimed Debater (a Master in my book), you are guilty of what you say I am. LOL

I LOVE IT! When I read your post on my phone at a small restaurant earlier having lunch I laughed out loud. I got a few looks from strangers, but couldn't help myself. 🙂

But neither one of us actually knew Bacon in person. I may know him better because I am not contained in the rigid reality bubble that you have never had (or taken) the opportunity travel outside of.

Some who did know Francis Bacon have said he lived in a visionary state. Eric posted a contemporary description describing a collection of substances, potions, fermenting mixtures, metals, and such in Bacon's home or office, or whatever. To me, I cannot imagine a collection of mixtures where a few do not have properties for a man see beyond our typical view of reality. Ergot extractions, mushroom teas, Syrian Rue, maybe even powerful DMT ayahausca from Peru. Of course marijuana was and has always been medicine in human history. Not to mention how plain old alcohol can induce ecstatic states of mind sometimes. But you, CJ, have a huge handicap never experiencing any of these, except maybe alcohol?

The term "non-ordinary reality" comes to mind. You tend to firmly state we are "impaired" no matter what substance or level of heightened reality we experience, we look at you all and sadly see how you are "handicapped." 😉

Fact is CJ, your Bacon Cult has the possibility of being as far off base as you imply mine in. Likely if Bacon was reading this he'd be laughing his ass off at both of us.

2 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

Thinking one can encode and decode with gematria is poison. Any suggestion that uses it as a corner stone is on bad footing. It only seems possible and reasonable.

I do hear what you are saying, but one can definitely encode and decode with gematria. How do I know? How can I say so with confidence?

Because I have and sometimes will do just that for fun. Granted few will ever recognize, but I try to leave hints just like I believe Bacon did. And sometimes I hit the bullseye of a target. And I am not as clever as Bacon or Dee.

If you 100% believe Bacon never used gematria, then that 100% places you in the group of those we might label as "profane" if he did. Maybe the profane should never pierce the veil.

But I know you to be a Prankster and you help define how we see by stimulating dialog. 🙂

I don't think of you as profane, but I do feel you are missing a few keys.

 

  • Like 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Allisnum2er said:

I do not necessarily subscribe to the idea that Francis Bacon was given initials FB to allow for this coincidence, but I am open to the possibility that Francis Bacon might have played with this coincidence.

"Should we think that Bacon's parents saw him as a Christ figure?"

6 years ago, I did not have preconceived ideas, even if I had heard about the Tudor Theory.

What I think today is based on my research.

Few years ago, they led me to decipher one passage of a play in which I found a reference to one painting and two engravings by Albrecht Dürer.  I only knew one of the two engravings ... Melencholia I.

The second engraving was the following one...

image.png.5624164e6a95e69c6b723014a664767e.png

And the painting was The Madonna of the Carnation.

image.png.cf77b454e20bcd2608eda61c5a8353cc.png

This painting of Dürer with the Child Jesus holding an apple, reminded me the painting of Francis Bacon as a child.

In the same passage I found a reference to the Phoenix Nest, and I learned that it was the title of a book dedicated to Robert Dudley( known to be the lover of the "Virgin" Queen) with a poem telling us that he lived "as a God".

image.png.87a9257ba618bb9912483f05971973c9.png

https://archive.org/details/bim_early-english-books-1475-1640_the-phoenix-nest-_s-r_1593/page/n11/mode/2up

From there, I connected the dots.

In passing, there are some medals from the 16th century related with the Fall of man and the Crucifixion.

https://subastas.monedalia.es/en/lot/900/alemania-1536-germany-medal-1536-the-/

https://www.coinworld.com/news/world-coins/1557-gold-medal-tells-bible-story-of-adam-and-eve.html

 

 

Oh that Apple that changed everything! 🙂

ME:
Are you familiar with the theory that the forbidden apple was indeed a mushroom?

ChatGPT:
Yes, the theory that the "forbidden fruit" mentioned in the biblical account of Adam and Eve in the Book of Genesis might have been a psychedelic mushroom is a speculative interpretation that has been discussed within various circles, particularly those interested in entheogens (substances, often of plant origin, that are used in religious, shamanic, or spiritual contexts to induce altered states of consciousness).

One of the proponents of this theory was Terence McKenna, an ethnobotanist, mystic, and advocate for the use of psychedelic substances. McKenna proposed the "Stoned Ape" hypothesis, which suggests that the consumption of psychedelic mushrooms played a critical role in the evolution of human consciousness, language, and culture. Although McKenna didn't explicitly argue that the forbidden fruit was a mushroom in the context of the Stoned Ape theory, his broader body of work includes discussions about the role of psychedelics in human history and spirituality that align with such interpretations.

The idea that the forbidden fruit could be a mushroom rather than an apple is not supported by mainstream theological or historical scholarship. The Bible does not specify what the forbidden fruit was, and the depiction of it as an apple comes from later interpretations and artistic representations. The mushroom theory is more of a speculative, symbolic interpretation than a claim based on historical or textual evidence. It fits within a larger discourse that considers the role of entheogens in ancient religious and spiritual practices, suggesting that these substances might have been used to induce states of consciousness considered to be encounters with the divine.

  • Like 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Allisnum2er said:

That Apple or that Pomewater 😉 !

https://thetudortravelguide.com/tudor-apples-fritters/

The big shiny red Amanita mushroom does resemble an apple and has a very long history. 😉

https://medium.com/the-collector/illustrations-of-magic-mushrooms-in-early-christian-iconography-c92b5afa13b0

image.png.b90282f6e5a2cfe7b83915fcb0b08fea.png

  • Wow! 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

This sort of confused interpretation of facts is what drove Bacon nuts. It is highly unlikely he would have exploited it unless he was pranking the people who who would be caught up in this sort of exercise.

I am reasonably sure Bacon suggested a perfect cipher could not be proved. I know we who have used ciphers totally get that concept. "You think I said what? Never! You can try to prove it, but you will never be able to!"

Yet entire conversations can be shared by those who understand the language.

So yes, Bacon and others left examples describing ciphers that have rigid rules. The biliteral is a perfect example.

Gematria, acrostics, anagrams, visual symbology and subtle hints in plain text can and sometimes do tell secrets yet have the quality of being denied when needed.

😉

 

  • Like 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Oh, you knew him and we did not! LOL

In another post you state, "If the job came down to you to write Bacon's biography it would be such a story. You'd have no choice because you never knew the man. You'd struggle to know how he should be presented. "

But you, a self-proclaimed Debater (a Master in my book), you are guilty of what you say I am. LOL

I LOVE IT! When I read your post on my phone at a small restaurant earlier having lunch I laughed out loud. I got a few looks from strangers, but couldn't help myself. 🙂

But neither one of us actually knew Bacon in person. I may know him better because I am not contained in the rigid reality bubble that you have never had (or taken) the opportunity travel outside of.

Some who did know Francis Bacon have said he lived in a visionary state. Eric posted a contemporary description describing a collection of substances, potions, fermenting mixtures, metals, and such in Bacon's home or office, or whatever. To me, I cannot imagine a collection of mixtures where a few do not have properties for a man see beyond our typical view of reality. Ergot extractions, mushroom teas, Syrian Rue, maybe even powerful DMT ayahausca from Peru. Of course marijuana was and has always been medicine in human history. Not to mention how plain old alcohol can induce ecstatic states of mind sometimes. But you, CJ, have a huge handicap never experiencing any of these, except maybe alcohol?

The term "non-ordinary reality" comes to mind. You tend to firmly state we are "impaired" no matter what substance or level of heightened reality we experience, we look at you all and sadly see how you are "handicapped." 😉

Fact is CJ, your Bacon Cult has the possibility of being as far off base as you imply mine in. Likely if Bacon was reading this he'd be laughing his ass off at both of us.

I do hear what you are saying, but one can definitely encode and decode with gematria. How do I know? How can I say so with confidence?

Because I have and sometimes will do just that for fun. Granted few will ever recognize, but I try to leave hints just like I believe Bacon did. And sometimes I hit the bullseye of a target. And I am not as clever as Bacon or Dee.

If you 100% believe Bacon never used gematria, then that 100% places you in the group of those we might label as "profane" if he did. Maybe the profane should never pierce the veil.

But I know you to be a Prankster and you help define how we see by stimulating dialog. 🙂

I don't think of you as profane, but I do feel you are missing a few keys.

 

Used for what? You cannot reliably use gematria to code a message. Despite what you say it is NOT a ciphering method per se. He knew that by virtue of understanding basic logic. He knew well that it was one of the tools that had been used in the process of word creation in Hebrew (where its point of being lies). Meaning is not supposed to be decoded from number by treating the exercise as a 1:1 correlation in reverse. 177 does not tell you anything.  If he did attempt to exploit it he would have known that it only had the possibility of snagging those who could be convinced by it. So, yes, he could have built a following of uniformed people who had not read his writings on such things. Had they read what he had to say about bad logic they would not have given it any weight. If that is being used, it is potentially not being used by Bacon. You only prefer that we start off by stating that all this was given by Bacon. It forces you to have to accept a massive contradiction. This you seem only too happy to do in order to keep your beliefs which we cannot even establish the origin point of. Your beliefs were not place in your head by Dee.

It drove him nuts because he maintained that Aristotle's standard on logic and dialectic was in serious error. People touted that work for a VERY long time out of pure convention. Aristotle's well established reputation as a great Philosopher (a King-like figure) only helped to convince many that he should be the last word. The Church could use Aristotle and the other Neoplatonists. There was that much room for error.

We wouldn't know this if Bacon hadn't written so extensively about it (overtly). That is not hidden from you. This, many would argue, was actually his main contribution to the world. We can gloss over that completely and imagine that all Bacon ever represented was a man who was held back from accomplishing anything because he was denied a title making him the representative of God on Earth to his tribe. The title that is bestowed to a person is not what gives merit to his contribution. It matters not one bit that he was or wasn't a dispossessed King. It only maters to those who want to sell books who allege he was. Should he be that in order that he deserve to be believed? No. Life is not a cult of pedestaled personalities. The suggestion can be made, and one can recruit for its acceptance, but then what? Why wouldn't one stop himself in his tracks and point out that it was using methods that Bacon was calling out for being unreliable in the first place? Do you think that is what Bacon was up to? He was giving an example to end all examples of how bad logic was the way to come to points of knowledge? Really? Have you given this much thought aside from determining that this is what you would prefer?

Some theories' only merit are that they are entertaining.  That's not nothing. To be tickled is fun if it is done respectfully. It's probably true that some subjects which are bordering on the comical and the tragic are best dealt with by entertainers. In matters of spirituality there are men like Alan Watts who labelled themselves as spiritual entertainers or showmen who are perfectly fine to listen to as a way to detoxify one's self from the seriousness of some of the mainstream delusions we all grapple with. For whatever reason, Google loves to recommend Alan Watts to me. I suppose he's a good counterbalance to the Jordan Peterson videos they'd want me to consume (serious crap). Neither one or the other is worth betting the farm on. I feel you might enjoy this Alan Watts contribution which touches on the nature of reality. It is covering many of the ideas we are playing with which are dealt by with myth. He's enough of joker for me to suspect that is on to something. lol.  : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpHqYnFELLE

 

 

Edited by RoyalCraftiness
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

I am reasonably sure Bacon suggested a perfect cipher could not be proved. I know we who have used ciphers totally get that concept. "You think I said what? Never! You can try to prove it, but you will never be able to!"

Yet entire conversations can be shared by those who understand the language.

So yes, Bacon and others left examples describing ciphers that have rigid rules. The biliteral is a perfect example.

Gematria, acrostics, anagrams, visual symbology and subtle hints in plain text can and sometimes do tell secrets yet have the quality of being denied when needed.

😉

 

What will be denied? Any interpretation that one gives it?

He's giving clues and hiding them at the same time by using a totally unacceptable method of encryption that you take the liberty to call ciphering method? And we are supposed to know by default what is to be believed? Never! Start at the beginning with this pyramid of suggestions if you can. What is the corner stone of the suggestion? Who is the braniac that first suggested such a thing and why?

The way symbols work is by a hereditary mechanism. We keep borrowing them, first from nature, and then they end up having some recognizable flavor. to us. There's no way for you to know what I have in mind right now with the number 177. It doesn't appear to have had a meaning until it is alleged to have meant "William Shakespeare" if we count this or that way. Some numbers can simply be made to appear by rather simple manipulations of counts. Other times they don't even have to. They just pop up. Case in point is the number 1881 which you have adopted as a symbol. Until the entire world has been exposed to your suggestion over and over don't expect it to float. Other things you could suggest might have a more direct path to being recognized as symbols of cyclical time. That looks merely like a date to most people.

We have no clue what anyone is suggesting with the idea of masks and dispossessed Kings. If I was forced to write an essay about it I would favor suggesting that the point was to present us with the idea that each man is a version of God in his own right. You are just as entitled to be King of England as Bacon ever was. One need not be the child of a great titled whore to fit the bill. You are also just as worthy of being called a God because God is in you as much as he is in any "savage". This is what an enlightened person might conclude about the allodial rights and titles of Kings. You are a mask of God to a reasonable man. You wrote Shakespeare in another version of God, so to speak. The Shakespearean work is of no use to masks of God unless God himself is in each one. This story appeals to you because a part of you is behind it. It doesn't quite matter as much to a mushroom unless it grows on the pages of some lost folio.

Others will say rather childishly: a mask means a secret identity. From there they will try and imagine a juicy secret worthy of being kept secret. "Whose identity is being hidden and why?" or "Might it be the location of the Holy Grail or the Ark?" resonates in their heads that are clearly already completely sold on the idea of the existence of these things. 

It doesn't even matter that it is given TO THE READER  rather overtly that the Sonnets were written by God for some to disregard that as too straightforward to count as a message. It matters more what Constance Mary Fearon Pott may have thought, because she is somehow worthy of being believed in a version of some cult of personality. Never mind that some of her relatives thought she was off her rocker. She wrote books after all...popular books that resonated with uninformed persons. Sigh...

Why wouldn't we favor the idea that you are the rightful King of England Rob? I think you'd make a worthy God for us too. You have all the necessary attributes of a God and of a manipulatable human that would make a great King. In fact, it is entirely within the scope of your argument that John Dee himself arranged it that we would only discover this today by way of your feigning that is was your alias Bacon that we should focus on. By tricking you he managed to inform everyone else, right?  At some point we need to stop with the cleverness and ask ourselves exactly what we know. It's not much. What we can suggest is so much more.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

I am reasonably sure Bacon suggested a perfect cipher could not be proved. I know we who have used ciphers totally get that concept. "You think I said what? Never! You can try to prove it, but you will never be able to!"

Yet entire conversations can be shared by those who understand the language.

So yes, Bacon and others left examples describing ciphers that have rigid rules. The biliteral is a perfect example.

Gematria, acrostics, anagrams, visual symbology and subtle hints in plain text can and sometimes do tell secrets yet have the quality of being denied when needed.

😉

 

 Free we are to try.

But in order to succeed, patience and perseverance are needed,

As well as good knowledge of the hermetic language.

"Corde incipite "

Never forget ! Apply thy heart unto Wisdome.

😉

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

image.png.b8c74f56d5551c745119c268cf9d3db8.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

Used for what? You cannot reliably use gematria to code a message. Despite what you say it is NOT a ciphering method per se. He knew that by virtue of understanding basic logic. He knew well that it was one of the tools that had been used in the process of word creation in Hebrew (where its point of being lies).

OMG! You offer me the most perfect suggestions to development my thoughts! I'll take the following statements one by one. 🙂

"Used for what?"

I'll return with an answer in a moment...

"You cannot reliably use gematria to code a message."

I'll agree there is much truth in what you say. Maybe not total truth, but much. On the other hand among a few who are on the same page, gematria can tell secrets and share messages that nobody else would even consider.

"Despite what you say it is NOT a ciphering method per se. He [Bacon] knew that by virtue of understanding basic logic. "

Interesting as I cannot say myself by definition what gematria is. Maybe it is not a cipher system? Then what is it? There is no doubt that it is a way of communicating names and ideas by using numbers and number counts among whoever knows the formula over space and time. That is a fact you are well aware of.

"He knew well that it was one of the tools that had been used in the process of word creation in Hebrew (where its point of being lies)."

OK, we agree on that Bacon knew and understood gematria and what it is possible of accomplishing. We might also agree Bacon knew and understood the Hebrew and English variations of gematria. You say the purpose word creation in Hebrew had the point of being a lie. I think we might agree that the purpose was not to lie, the purpose was about control. Who lies for no reason? Well, some do as a pathology! LOL

So Bacon had a purpose to help us out of lies and deception on our past manipulations. And we can agree he realized the power of the mighty pyramid of what gematria had helped built before his time.

So as Bacon, since you know what drove him crazy, would he decide that as powerful gematria had always been used for controlling the people of whatever and wherever, and even whenever, he'd not be tempted to play with it for his purpose? Others were actively using gematria. Dee, Elizabeth, and authors leaving their silly gematria signatures in their own works. Bacon who was aware that was 33 Simple cipher would be so turned away from gematria because of what he said in his life work, would just "not, ever use it" because he was so uptight?

"Used for what?"

What if Bacon, knowing what we both agree he knew, wanted to give it a "fifteen minute" attempt to share some Truth instead of lies?

Thank you, CJ, making me feel like I know Bacon even better now than I did last night! 🙂

 

 

  • Like 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Allisnum2er said:

 Free we are to try.

But in order to succeed, patience and perseverance are needed,

As well as good knowledge of the hermetic language.

"Corde incipite "

Never forget ! Apply thy heart unto Wisdome.

😉

Hmmmm...

"Free..."

Of course even CJ must recognize the word "Free" as FREE which is 33 Simple cipher the same as BACON.

Obviously Bacon knew that 400 years ago as he was not an idiot during a time when Cabala was being enjoyed.

"Free we are to try."

FREE WE ARE TO TRY is 174 Simple cipher which is the same as FRANCIS BACON TUDOR.

Count the words:

05 - Free we are to try.

10 - But in order to succeed, patience and perseverance are needed,

09 - As well as good knowledge of the hermetic language.

02 - "Corde incipite "

07 - Never forget ! Apply thy heart unto Wisdome.

5 + 10 + 9 + 2 + 7 = 33 which is the Simple cipher of BACON.

Can't miss the acrostic:

F
B
A
Co
N

Add up all the uppercase letters, F B A C N A W and we have 177 Kaye cipher which I would expect in this series of coincidences as 177 is the Simple cipher for WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.

A few hours ago CJ said, "177 does not tell you anything."

See now is the time for Allisnum2er to tell us all that he never intended any hidden meaning and everything is all merely coincidences. And then I would agree. We might all say we support what CJ says that 177 means nothing and that gematria is something Bacon would ever even consider using for any purpose. Nor would we. Don't chop off our heads in the town square!

Yea, perfect! 🙂

Now I hope I can poke around for more coincidences. 😉

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Hmmmm...

"Free..."

Of course even CJ must recognize the word "Free" as FREE which is 33 Simple cipher the same as BACON.

Obviously Bacon knew that 400 years ago as he was not an idiot during a time when Cabala was being enjoyed.

"Free we are to try."

FREE WE ARE TO TRY is 174 Simple cipher which is the same as FRANCIS BACON TUDOR.

Count the words:

05 - Free we are to try.

10 - But in order to succeed, patience and perseverance are needed,

09 - As well as good knowledge of the hermetic language.

02 - "Corde incipite "

07 - Never forget ! Apply thy heart unto Wisdome.

5 + 10 + 9 + 2 + 7 = 33 which is the Simple cipher of BACON.

Can't miss the acrostic:

F
B
A
Co
N

Add up all the uppercase letters, F B A C N A W and we have 177 Kaye cipher which I would expect in this series of coincidences as 177 is the Simple cipher for WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.

A few hours ago CJ said, "177 does not tell you anything."

See now is the time for Allisnum2er to tell us all that he never intended any hidden meaning and everything is all merely coincidences. And then I would agree. We might all say we support what CJ says that 177 means nothing and that gematria is something Bacon would ever even consider using for any purpose. Nor would we. Don't chop off our heads in the town square!

Yea, perfect! 🙂

Now I hope I can poke around for more coincidences. 😉

 

Well done Rob ! 😊❤️

You're right. Here are the missing elements.

I am very proud of my FBCANAW that is indeed 177 Kay cipher and ... 47 simple cipher.

47 is the simple cipher of ATHENA, the spear-shaker, Francis Bacon's muse and the Goddess of "Wisdome".

Thus, the W of Wisdome gives the final count of 47(ATHENA) / 177 (WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE)

"Wisdome" with a final "e" was also on purpose , giving a total of 155 letters ( WILL SHAKESPEARE simple cipher).

Before "Wisdome" there are 148 letters ( WILLIAM TUDOR simple cipher).

"Corde incipite" is the motto of "Saint FRANCIS International School"

And "Apply thy heart unto Wisdome" is a reference to  one of Bacon's Prayers.

"Teach us, O Lord, so to NUMBER our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom; make us ever mindful of our last end, and continually to exercise the knowledge of grace in our hearts, that in the said divorce of soul and body, we may be translated here to that kingdom of glory prepared for all those that love thee, and shall trust in thee."

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Works_of_Francis_Bacon/Volume_2/Bacons_Prayers

There are also references to your post:

 In your post :

"Try" is the 33rd word (33 = BACON)

" needed" is the 100th and last word (100 = FRANCIS BACON)

"language" is the 55th word (55 = WILL)

I thought it was a good "example". 😉 

 

 

  • Wow! 2

image.png.b8c74f56d5551c745119c268cf9d3db8.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Allisnum2er said:

Well done Rob ! 😊❤️

Well done, Yann!!

Anyone who would read your reply who was not in the circle would read it as it merely plain text. But I bet CJ had to suspect you were toying with the dialog. LOL

FREE is a keyword we know and it is contained in the first line of the Sonnets Dedication poem printed in 1609. It has a long history of use for we in that secret circle that Bacon certainly shares with us. 😉

So the starting word "Free" was a key for me, a powerful suggestion that I should be aware of possible treasures to seek. Especially when written by a genius like Yann who is Allisnum2er.

Does everybody know that the word "free" is a signal? They do now if they read this reply! LOL

Let your Indulgence set me free. Exit.

 

Even "Fr..." can be a wink. "FRom fairest creatures..."

FROM FAIREST CREATURES is 103 Short cipher which is the Simple cipher for SHAKESPEARE.

So Shakespeare leaves his gematria signature in the first three words of the Sonnets. Cool.

But...

ONE HUNDRED THREE is 157 Simple and 365 Kaye cipher that sets the stage for the rest of the Sonnets.

But, might be just yet another coincidence. 😉

Gematria? If not a cipher method, what is it? Hmmm...

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/12/2024 at 6:41 PM, RoyalCraftiness said:

It would all depend on what is meant by "is"

line 2 (B) word 6 (F)  is  "me" 

means the 6th word located on line 2.

F stands for 6 and B stands for 2.

  • Like 1

The man in the moone was not a buffoon

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

Despite what you say it is NOT a ciphering method per se.

Gematria. You, CJ, have studied it more than me. I am a tinkerer as best. Intrigued for sure.

Oh this elephant in the room. OK, I'll be the one to bring it up. To do that I'll share a very quick memory.

In think it was in 2002 that one day an old Jewish guy approached me and asked me why I was playing with the Kabbalah, or Cabala, or whatever. I had seen him around as he worked in the same area. Obviously someone I know knew him. I had an interesting couple hours listening to his words and what he told me.

First he went into the sounds of the Hebrew letters. They were sounds I had never heard before, and I certainly could not try to repeat. I told him it was the numbers and how they work out that had my attention. But he really stressed that the pronunciation and in combinations of letters rearranged had not only meaning, but power. Like a magic, something we do not understand. OK, wow! I think I had heard something like that before, but never from someone who seemed to know what they were talking about. What I was doing with the Tree of Life was as much art and doodling as real Cabala work, in a way. 

Gematria was part of that discussion. The guy was eager to share. Maybe nobody ever had any interest to hear him before, I don't know. The time was when I was just first starting to recognize characteristics of how numbers seem to work, and in the midst of my first real Bacon/Shakespeare lessons about letters and numbers.

So you triggered me to remember what I once learned about gematria. It is a method for leaving signatures, and hinting at this and that, as reliable or unreliable that may be. But from what I believe Bacon and Dee teach us in so many examples and lessons, especially in Shakespeare's works, letters and numbers and how they combine have some powerful magic. Whatever it is, I believe it is Universal and is part of the very vibration of matter and life. We as humans today do not have any explanations that even address it. But to me, there is something about it that we are supposed to learn and in my opinion, Bacon left us easy to follow lessons. That must be part of what his life was devoted to.

What is gematria?

 

 

 

  • Like 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ME: Is gematria a cipher system?

ChatGPT: Gematria can be considered a type of cipher system, but it is distinct in its purpose and application from what we typically classify as ciphers in the context of cryptography. A cipher system is a method of transforming a message to conceal its meaning, usually to secure it against unauthorized interception or to maintain privacy. The primary goal of a cipher is to encode and decode messages so that they can be read only by the intended recipient who knows the decoding method.

Gematria, on the other hand, is more of a numerological system that assigns numerical values to letters, words, and phrases based on a set of predetermined rules. The purpose of gematria is not to encrypt messages for privacy or security but to find hidden meanings, spiritual connections, or mystical insights within the texts. It is used for interpretative purposes, often within a religious, mystical, or esoteric context. Gematria seeks to reveal deeper connections between concepts that are believed to be inherently linked through their numerical equivalence.

While both gematria and cipher systems involve a transformation of textual content based on a set of rules, their goals and uses are quite different:

- **Cipher Systems:** Aimed at securing communication from unauthorized access through encryption. The focus is on confidentiality and the ability to revert the encrypted message back to its original form through decryption.

- **Gematria:** Aimed at uncovering hidden meanings, spiritual insights, or esoteric connections based on numerical equivalence of words or phrases. The focus is on interpretation and finding underlying connections rather than on privacy or message security.

In summary, while gematria operates similarly to a cipher by transforming text according to a rule-based system, its intent and application are oriented towards mysticism and interpretation rather than the cryptographic objectives of confidentiality, integrity, and authentication.

 

Curious, no suggestion one could actually do gematria to plant hidden meaning or insights. 😉

By the way, CJ, I loved listening to Alan Watts decades ago and might watch the video before I go to bed. Thanks!

  • Like 2

T A A A A A A A A A A A T
157     www.Light-of-Truth.com     287
<-- 1 8 8 1 1
O 1 1 8 8 1 -->

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, peethagoras said:

line 2 (B) word 6 (F)  is  "me" 

means the 6th word located on line 2.

F stands for 6 and B stands for 2.

I depends what you mean by "means". If means can be replaced by "might mean" then I cannot possibly know the meaning of anything with any certainty. I could take my cue from you, not knowing from who you got your cue from. What it "is" is going to boil down to which formalism we want to treat it with. The best use is a 1:1 relationship with symbols. Here B is 2 and F is 6 works well to get us to the point where we must wonder if all occasions of F and B were supposed to point to 62, or 26, or 6/2=3, or 6x2=12, or 2/3=0.333... or 2^6=64. Depending on what we favor we ca pursue that line of thinking even further. When we go in the reverse direction and start off with F and B given, 26, does not give you the identity of anyone either. You may assume you should be looking for an individual with initials FB, but why would you?  If you give me FB, I will suggest that you are referring me to the Key of F in a diatonic scale which has only one flat, B. Then I will look up what emotive quality the key of F is supposed to have and wonder whether I should feel serenity and calm from the suggestion. It is all a big can of worms. If we are willing to accept any formalism. If we are going to we must at least be able to show why the one we prefer should be the one everyone defaults to.

Edited by RoyalCraftiness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

OMG! You offer me the most perfect suggestions to development my thoughts! I'll take the following statements one by one. 🙂

"Used for what?"

I'll return with an answer in a moment...

"You cannot reliably use gematria to code a message."

I'll agree there is much truth in what you say. Maybe not total truth, but much. On the other hand among a few who are on the same page, gematria can tell secrets and share messages that nobody else would even consider.

"Despite what you say it is NOT a ciphering method per se. He [Bacon] knew that by virtue of understanding basic logic. "

Interesting as I cannot say myself by definition what gematria is. Maybe it is not a cipher system? Then what is it? There is no doubt that it is a way of communicating names and ideas by using numbers and number counts among whoever knows the formula over space and time. That is a fact you are well aware of.

"He knew well that it was one of the tools that had been used in the process of word creation in Hebrew (where its point of being lies)."

OK, we agree on that Bacon knew and understood gematria and what it is possible of accomplishing. We might also agree Bacon knew and understood the Hebrew and English variations of gematria. You say the purpose word creation in Hebrew had the point of being a lie. I think we might agree that the purpose was not to lie, the purpose was about control. Who lies for no reason? Well, some do as a pathology! LOL

So Bacon had a purpose to help us out of lies and deception on our past manipulations. And we can agree he realized the power of the mighty pyramid of what gematria had helped built before his time.

So as Bacon, since you know what drove him crazy, would he decide that as powerful gematria had always been used for controlling the people of whatever and wherever, and even whenever, he'd not be tempted to play with it for his purpose? Others were actively using gematria. Dee, Elizabeth, and authors leaving their silly gematria signatures in their own works. Bacon who was aware that was 33 Simple cipher would be so turned away from gematria because of what he said in his life work, would just "not, ever use it" because he was so uptight?

"Used for what?"

What if Bacon, knowing what we both agree he knew, wanted to give it a "fifteen minute" attempt to share some Truth instead of lies?

Thank you, CJ, making me feel like I know Bacon even better now than I did last night! 🙂

 

 

Gematria was a formalism used to build words (or select them) in order that the sum of the letter values would compute with some already existing numerical representation which may very well have come from geometry and old ideas about deity (as in the case of the Sumerian pantheon of Gods where each decad had a correspondence). 40 had associations to Enki, for example. It was never intended to be a way for you to sum the character values in a word and come to a number which had a meaning that should then be ascribed to the word. If one limited oneself to having only vocabularies where that worked you'd have a problem because MANY words and expression would have to rejected by virtue of them summing to numbers already taken by some concept. That is not how things evolved. We have tons of words and expressions that sum to the same values. The thing gets even more meaningless if we allow for multiple methods of counting. When doing that we are growing the number of words and expressions that can be shown to sum to the same number. This of course favors the story teller as he has more to play with.

Others were actively using Gematria? Using it unwisely in violation of logic in a way that they assumed had the power to convince? Maybe. What happened then is no different than what happens now. Go to Youtube and look up this stuff. There is no shortage of examples of people still trying to convince themselves and others of things that have no merit. The sad thing is that both the individual and his audience can succeed in creating acceptance of ANY suggestion. Not all of them get accepted widely.  If Dee was talking to angels that is not unlike what some still suggest today. In many ways they feel they should be able to suggest it since they have found that someone already had. Those who take off on a voyages of discovery through what is written can find many examples of what has been discarded along the way in places where they can appear to be quite relevant (in the context of the time when the old suggestions first appeared). The Hebrew Gematria game is an example of this. It was rediscovered again in the 13th century and popularized. Efforts had to be made to stop the spread of it. It resurfaces in almost all esoteric revival period. Nobody was creating words with it times in modern that I know of. "Abracadabra" may be an example of such a thing from earlier.

There is something in linguistics that is called the MERGE function. This is something humans must try and deduce about how we came to think the way that we do. This function presumably allowed us to do interesting things in the realm of set building in our mind. It's a sort of gymnastics that has rules. Sets can borrow things that are in other sets. Linguistics is the study of how we came to think. It it not a way by which we study how we communicate with words. Something very rigid is happening that allows us to communicate imperfectly. There's really nothin special in the fact we communicate. All living things do. What is special about humans has some sort of computational underpinning because we are capable of borrowing and building new sets. At some point our ancestors started thinking in a certain way that must relate to the MERGE idea we have to infer (as opposed to just knowing it). When it comes to communications between humans there's much that we may want to signal. What tends to get expressed are our preferences. 

If someone is making an attempt to communicate with you, and if there is no obvious collaborative intent, we can almost be certain that what is happening is that someone is trying to establish something which is preferred.  I'm not sure it works that way in nature. When trees communicate they use chemicals through their root systems. They can sound the alarm and or pass on chemicals that help in combating infections or pests. It is doubtful that any tree is trying to pass on a message about which tree should be the King of all trees. It is also doubtful that a tree is tryin to trick another one into dying for another's benefit. Some of the attributes we have we are quick to call superior abilities. I suspect that our ability to convince is exactly why we have no hope as a species. We will forever convince ourselves there is nothing wrong when we are achieving what pleases us. Our thinking is the root of a lot of what we do not like about ourselves, but it is doubtful that one can have only the upside without assuming the downside.

We have used myths until it was clear that myths were being used against us. We fought them back with reason. Then we almost immediately started abusing reason until it was clear that reason was being used against us. Now we will turn to myth again. We are in a time when the age of reason has let us down (the reasoning got imperfectly expressed to create advantages exactly as it recruited). The cost of that is that myths are thriving once again in an age when communication is very easy. It is very hard for men using reason to stop the proliferation of myth now. Myth promises so much. Make believe worlds are so much better than a world where one can no longer make or achieve anything he believes is. There is a myth today around the idea that things were great in the past when myths were strong. It is possible to reason all of this, but I doubt that reason is as effective as mimetic phenomena when it comes to merging minds. Our politics hinge on suggestions and their acceptance. Politicians don't even have to attempt to use reason to try and justify why some should be Gods while others clearly aren't even treated as humans.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...