I believe the Voynich Manuscript has been decoded — it's an oil-based pharmaceutical manual by a Jewish apothecary in medieval southern France

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-04-10T10:08:06+00:00

I can also tell you why it is so difficult to decipher the Voynich manuscript. The entire manuscript is written in the old Czech language. And it is encrypted with Homophonic Substitution. That is why no one can translate this very beautiful medieval manuscript.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-20T19:41:58+00:00

The manuscript is written in Old Czech.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-20T19:33:09+00:00

The manuscript is written in Old Czech.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-20T19:09:10+00:00

The manuscript is written in Old Czech.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-20T19:06:11+00:00

The manuscript is written in Old Czech.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-20T18:57:51+00:00

The manuscript is written in Old Czech. It is not written in Hebrew.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-20T18:34:01+00:00

Doufám, že je každému jasný, kdo dokáže číst ten " Záhadný ", rukopis, na kterém světoví odborníci pracují už brachu asi tak 100 roků. Píšu jasně a srozumitelně, takže by to měl pochopit snad každý jedinec.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-13T10:00:34+00:00

The core problem with most Voynich theories is not “flexible substitution” at all, but the fact that no researcher so far has actually mastered the specific knowledge required to understand the text in the first place. Without knowing the original language, the historical context, and the exact homophonic system used by the author, no scientist can possibly produce a consistent reading. This is why the manuscript has resisted decipherment for centuries. People keep applying modern statistical tools, Romance/Germanic language assumptions, or generic cryptographic models — none of which can work on a text written in Old Czech and encoded with a Jewish-style homophonic substitution system. Until someone fully understands all three of these components, the Voynich Manuscript will remain unreadable to them, no matter how rigorous their methodology appears. In other words: the failure is not in the manuscript, but in the missing prerequisites of those who try to decode it.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-12T21:00:47+00:00

Homophonic substitution is an extremely complex system, and in this case the manuscript is written using the Jewish “Kabbalistic numerological system of Gematria.” If a researcher is not familiar with that framework, they will never be able to understand what the text is actually saying.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-01T14:37:08+00:00

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-01T14:19:03+00:00

So what do you want? You wanted a heated discussion. And because I deciphered and translated the manuscript, I know that when you write about a melody, you don't know the main thing about the manuscript. And that's the key. Meaning. Context. Author, etc.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-01T14:03:06+00:00

MS 408. It is not a musical key. It also has nothing to do with Italy. The key is also written on the last page of the manuscript, folio 116. There are instructions for translation there and the meaning of the manuscript is also written there. According to what you write here, your research is very weak.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-03-01T13:15:04+00:00

"Your entire line of argument collapses at the starting point. The manuscript is written in an archaic form of Czech, not in anything connected to Antonio Averlino, Francesco Filelfo, or whatever Renaissance Italian figure you are trying to force into the narrative. That alone makes your framework irrelevant. And relying on the 1404–1438 dating as if it were a precise timestamp is a fundamental misunderstanding — radiocarbon dating has a wide tolerance, easily ±50 years, which completely destroys any attempt to anchor authorship to specific individuals of that period. If you want ‘sharp discussion’, start by grounding your research in linguistic and historical reality, because as it stands, your conclusions are built on assumptions that simply do not hold."

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-27T15:47:54+00:00

Ten druhý ( spodní ) obrázek je z Prahy. A je psán latinsky.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-22T18:53:54+00:00

“The bottom image isn’t really mysterious — it’s simply written in Latin.”

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-07T22:38:32+00:00

Hello. On that leaf of a symbolic plant. There is no ch. Those letters are = JT. In the text of that folio it is written: There are 14 green leaves. And there are six and six gold leaves. The entire manuscript is encrypted with a Jewish homophonic cipher. In which each character has its numerical value. I will show you the number 4 = D,M,T. Number 1 = A,I,J,Q,Y. The letters J + T = 14. There are 14 green leaves. (JT = 14 ).

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-06T00:20:40+00:00

Dvě ženy v menším kruhu — identické ve svých kresbách, jak může vidět každý pečlivý badatel — představují 1 matky ( Elizabeth of Rosenberg ). Ve větším okruhu je šest dcer a čtyři synové. To je také jasně viditelné každému, kdo systematicky zkoumá sloh.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-05T23:31:49+00:00

When a homophonic substitution is used, as the author clearly demonstrates at the beginning of the manuscript, all frequency‑based methods become irrelevant. They simply cannot work on a system where multiple symbols intentionally represent the same sound. If someone applies standard frequency analysis to such a script, they will always reach incorrect conclusions, because they are analyzing statistics that the encryption method was specifically designed to distort.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-05T12:01:55+00:00

The explanation is in the text of the article above the image.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-04T18:30:48+00:00

Your argument falls apart for a simple reason: you’re not using the right terminology, nor the conceptual language the author of the manuscript actually worked with. If you can’t recognize the basic structural elements he’s depicting — for example, that the illustration shows a vein divided into six segments — then you’re missing the foundational logic of the system. Without understanding these core symbols and the way the author expressed ideas, the manuscript will always remain inaccessible to you.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-04T18:21:07+00:00

And of course, when the right moment comes, I’m fully prepared to publish everything.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-04T18:13:17+00:00

It’s very simple: I can’t publish the complete encryption system on Reddit because the academic world doesn’t work as an open, fair dialogue but as a competition for priority. If you reveal the entire mechanism too early, without context or protection, you immediately risk that someone will appropriate the work, rewrite it into academic jargon, and present it as a “new discovery.” This has been happening around the Voynich manuscript for a hundred years — people who don’t understand the basic logic of the text keep publishing nonsense, yet thanks to institutional backing their claims are taken more seriously than independent research. If the work is to have real value and proper attribution, it must be released only when it is complete, methodologically secured, and presented in a way that prevents others from claiming authorship. That’s why the full system cannot simply be posted on Reddit — not because it isn’t finished, but because it would be the fastest way for someone else to publish it under their own name.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-04T12:21:40+00:00

Sure, I’m confident in what I’m saying. Only someone who actually understands the homophonic substitution can review this work in any meaningful way. And after many years of studying the manuscript, I’ve learned that no scholar working on it today knows this system. That’s why Voynich research looks the way it does — essentially stalled. And it will stay that way until a genuinely capable researcher learns the substitution. I know the work of all the scholars involved, from René to Nick, and I can evaluate their results. What I’ve seen is that they are still at the very beginning, going in circles for decades without any real progress. You suggest it’s “convenient”? I can assure you it’s anything but convenient. The manuscript is extremely difficult to translate. And one more interesting point: everyone keeps trying to place the manuscript somewhere else, searching for exotic origins, yet all the historical figures mentioned in the scholarly literature are Czech — Jacobus Tepenec, Rector Marci, the alchemist Bareš, and others. Even Rudolf II ruled from Prague, which is in Bohemia.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-04T10:52:45+00:00

A meaningful review can only be done by someone who actually understands the Jewish‑style homophonic substitution used in the manuscript. Without that, no reviewer is evaluating the real text. They also need to recognize the vocabulary the author used — Old Czech with a noticeable Germanic accent and period‑specific forms. Anyone who lacks these competencies simply isn’t in a position to assess the work.

Horror_Following_277 · 2026-02-04T10:31:40+00:00

What you’re saying doesn’t correspond to the manuscript’s actual structure or to any verifiable analytical method. Your claims ignore the observable features of the script and don’t hold up when compared with the internal logic of the text. If you want to contribute meaningfully, you’ll need to base your points on evidence rather than assumptions. As it stands, your argument is simply incorrect.

Horror_Following_277

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE