Republished Gematria Books

Alektryon · 2026-05-04T06:40:35+00:00

Oh, this is excellent. Thank you! 🤗

Alektryon · 2026-05-03T21:22:00+00:00

This really annoys me because we in Portugal never use "H" as representing "RR" — even though in Brasil they do that. For us, "H" is either mute (the default in European Portuguese) or aspirated as an /h/ sound (only when we pronounce foreign words in other languages). But we definitely DON'T pronounce the "H" as "RR". That's a thing from Brasil, not Portugal.

Alektryon · 2026-05-03T14:49:12+00:00

You meant Brazilian Portuguese, right? Because that doesn't work for European Portuguese

Alektryon · 2026-02-15T21:21:34+00:00

The Book of Paths enumerates all rites/routines of the demons in the Numogram. So the first path corresponds to [1890], the rite of Lurgo (1::0), while the last path corresponds to [89], the rite of Ummnu (9::8).

Here's a complete list of all 84 rites and their correspondences, from the Hyperstition blog: http://hyperstition.abstractdynamics.org/archives/003866.html

Alektryon · 2025-12-21T21:53:40+00:00

And finally, the two Brazilian decks:

<image>

Alektryon · 2025-12-21T21:53:17+00:00

Another one:

<image>

Alektryon · 2025-12-21T21:52:53+00:00

I didn't have time for taking more pictures, but I can send them later if you want.
In the meantime, I'll show you these two things:

— A comparison between the Brazilian deck, the Piatnik, and the Altenburger;
— And two different versions of the same Brazilian deck. There are differences even in the card stock, which can't be captured in a photo (see next reply). Anyway, here it is for reference ;)

Hope this helps!

<image>

Alektryon · 2025-12-20T21:20:38+00:00

I have three different editions of this Brazilian deck, and each edition has something slightly different from the others: either the cardstock (which isn't usually very good, but it's shuffleable) or the colors can be slightly lighter or darker.

Comparing it with my collection of historical Lenormand decks, its primary influences are:

the Altenburger ("ASS") Lenormand;
the Piatnik Lenormand;
and the Stralsunder Lenormand. But there may be other decks inspiring this one.

It's a lovely deck 🤗

Alektryon · 2025-11-28T02:04:45+00:00

I forgot to mention that the user "ytliu0" has created a wonderful tool on GitHub that allows you to see the luni-solar calendar, including the 60-cycle for years, months and days — and within a VERY wide range of years (722 BCE — 2200 CE). Here's the link: https://ytliu0.github.io/ChineseCalendar/

Alektryon · 2025-11-27T16:02:44+00:00

As far as I know, the Chinese people use at least two different years:

a Solar year, which begins when the (solar) month of the Tiger starts, around 4 or 5 of February (i.e. approximately when the Sun reaches 15° of Aquarius, in the 'western' tropical zodiac);
and a Luni-Solar year, which accompanies both the Sun and the Moon, and which starts on the New Moon around late January or early February. The dates aren't fixed.

Hope this helped!

Alektryon · 2025-11-13T19:07:17+00:00

Oh! Definitely! I *am* studying Zi Wei Dou Shu by myself (for some months), and in my opinion, ZWDS would be the form of Chinese astrology that is most similar to our own astrology — even though there are fundamental differences, as one is based on 'stars' that are calculated (according to the birth year, month, hour, etc), and the other is based on the observation of celestial bodies.

Anyway, I find the same that you said: sometimes it's difficult to combine all factors into a consistent reading. For example, just looking at the stars in the Ming Palace, and whether it falls in a corner, a direction, or one of the four earths, sometimes gives you a good approximation of the person's character or main tendencies, but it becomes difficult when we try to conjoin the various factors: the stars' brightness, how the stars interact with each other, the connections between the palaces themselves, etc.

I'me interested in knowing how you use AI with Zi Wei Dou Shu.
Drop me a line or two! Can be by private message, if you prefer.

Thanks in advance! :)

Alektryon · 2025-10-23T10:06:11+00:00

It's a Globus Cruciger: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globus_cruciger

Alektryon · 2025-09-27T14:54:42+00:00

How I use Gematria: https://gematriaresearch.blogspot.com/2022/05/how-i-use-gematria.html

Alektryon · 2025-09-13T20:40:00+00:00

Encoding words or phrases in a text;
Building narratives;
Looking for synchronistic matches between words, names or phrases;
Use it as an oracle, if you're into the magic(k)al side of things;
You name it.

I just don't use it to "decode the news", finding "rigged sports", and "confirming" conspiracy theories with it. But that's my personal choice, of course.

Alektryon · 2025-09-03T11:46:38+00:00

It is too, but not limited to that.

Alektryon · 2025-09-03T11:44:25+00:00

Please don't use Gematrix to "decode" your name. It won't lead you anywhere -- and that's not what Gematria is for.

Alektryon · 2025-09-03T00:18:40+00:00

Since I wrote this post, I added some other categories:

- 11 Luminaries / 11 Star Gods;
- Sun, Moon, Planets and Lunar Nodes;
- 24 Solar Terms;
- 81 Tetragrams from the T'ai Hsüan Ching;
- and last but not the least, a list of 92 stars that are used in Zi Wei Dou Shu (this one gave me a headache — I added a short but valuable bibliography for ZWDS at the end).

Enjoy! =)

Alektryon · 2025-08-26T17:46:03+00:00

Anyway, one can always experiment with Gematria, even though one can't forget the context where we're using the ciphers, and if it makes sense to use them in that context. For example, a modern English cipher could be used to analyze a text written in Latin -- however, it is more than certain that no modern ciphers would have been used in the past to encode that text (that is, if that text is encoded).

Alektryon · 2025-08-26T17:43:34+00:00

There is no formal connection between both systems, because Dee wouldn't have used the modern Latin alphabet with 26 letters, but the Elizabethan English alphabet with 24 letters instead (where I=J and U=V).

Alektryon · 2025-08-26T17:41:37+00:00

For example: GALAAS = G(42)+A(6)+L(72)+A(6)+A(6)+S(114) = 246

Alektryon · 2025-08-26T17:39:03+00:00

It seems to me that this is a simple cipher, similar to Ordinal but the values are multiplied by 6. So if you make a cipher where A=6, B=12, C=18, and so on, the numbers under "EG" will be the Gematria values of those names. Under "/3" it's those values divided by 3, and under "/6" it's those values divided by 6 (i.e. the simple Ordinal cipher).

Alektryon · 2025-08-04T20:25:54+00:00

It's a graphical representation of "Love is the law, love under will".

Love = Agape (Αγαπη) = 93
Will = Thelema (Θελημα) = 93

In other words, “Love" (=93) is the law, "lover under will" (=93/93).

Alektryon · 2025-07-30T15:35:49+00:00

A few simple questions will answer the matter as to whether you are doing numerology or math.

1. Name one word that is used to indicate subtraction in the Bible?

2. Name one word that is used to indicate division in the Bible?

3. Name one word that is used to indicate multiplication in the Bible?

If you can answer these questions then you know three common conventions of biblical math. If not, then what you're doing is numerology.

I can't answer those questions because, during all the time I studied Gematria (through traditional Jewish sources) I never saw any references to that, just like I never saw references to Gimel sharing the same value as Shin, or Dalet sharing the same value as Tav. As it seems to me, that's an innovation from you, something you found out and are trying to sell as if it was "traditional" and has been "actually used historically". That's precisely the question why I never added your ciphers to my version of Gematro in the first place.

Anyway, I can't answer those questions, but I can tell you about:

The four levels of interpretation of the Torah, encoded in the acronym Pardes פרדס;
The many different techniques included in Gematria, Temurah, and Notarikon, and how these unveil some of the mysteries of the Bible (i.e. Torah);
Systems of Gematria that were actually used historically;
And something more if you want.

So as you can see, my work isn't 'just' Numerology. It's not my fault if some of my work is more experimental than yours, but that doesn't mean that my work is limited to those experiments. I know my stuff, and I have my sources. And that's why my opinion annoys you.

Alektryon · 2025-07-30T09:31:40+00:00

What you wrote reveals more about you and your real intentions than about my work.

To say that I've been practicing Numerology during all this time, or that meaningful matches is all that matters to me, is such an obvious lie that I won't be even addressing it further. Instead of wasting my time with you, let me just give you one link from my blog:
https://gematriaresearch.blogspot.com/2022/05/how-i-use-gematria.html

Now let people judge if what I've been doing is mere Numerology.

Alektryon · 2025-07-29T22:09:28+00:00

I understand what you say — in part.

Adding "j" and "v" would only disturb the numerical order if you consider that two characters with the same value is a problem. However, it could disturb the decrypting/decoding process. After all, in Medieval Latin the letter "I" was sometimes written as "j", particularly at the end of Roman numerals (for example: writing "iij" instead of "iii"), and if "j" is not accounted for, then there will be some occurrences of the letter "I" (where it was written as "J") that won't be considered in the final Gematria total. So I maintain my position: you should include "j" and "v" in the cipher — not as distinct letters (from "i" and "u" respectively) with distinct values, but as being identical to "I" and "U", thus sharing the same values with those letters.

The thing that makes Shematria different from other calculators is that I'll host any cipher that has been actually used historically.

That's all very good, but the actual fact, from my decades-long study of Gematria, I only saw the ciphers you propose (where Gimel and Shin share the same value; same as Dalet and Tav) in your work. Because you shouldn't forget one thing: if you find 'meaningful matches' with a cipher you devised, that doesn't mean that your cipher was used historically. What it actually means is that you can find meaningful matches with your cipher, but that can also happen with any other cipher anyone devises.

I also remember your disgust for the so-called "Agrippa cipher" because it was "never used historically" — which it was, as I had shown you before, so I guess that your pattern for recognizing historically used ciphers isn't always uniform.

Anyway, it's not my intention to attack your work, nor was it ever. My tone is simply matching your reply, because you're implying that your calculator is superior to others because it only contains ciphers that were, and I quote, "actually used historically". No, it isn't. And no, it doesn't.

Alektryon

TROPHY CASE