Applied Qabbala

Lilli Patch - 𝌆𝌕

"English Qabbala is Alphanomics.
The rest is ruined Babel-towers of lunacy."

After the civil wars have been quelled and the status of AQ has been determined, whether as anglossic qabbala's crowning glory or as one gematria of many, there remains the question of whether AQ is a single gematria at all. The other privileged object of lemurianism, the numogram, is understood not to be unitary. Rather, it is a construct of temporal forces such as patience, activity, and subtlety, forces which can manifest as auxiliary structures when placed in different contexts. The prime example is decadence, which emerges as (though needn't remain) a numogrammatic auxiliary geared for playing cards. Can the same occur with AQ?

From one perspective, AQ is already an auxiliary structure. Its 36 glyphs concord with the 36 lemurs of decadence and slot into the mesh-value of the Greater Depths, and the sum of AZ situates the alphabet within the first abyssal road. Despite northanger's claim that AQ is "non-numogrammatic," such connections between the two abound, though at times obscured by AQ's apparently independent origin in hexatrigesimal. The additive methodology of gematria applied to a series of values iterating by one is identical to the methodology of decimal expansion; this is apparent in the AQs of numerals iterating from 0. The appearance of 36 and 45 as AQ's horizons further suggest the realization of decimal numogrammatic subtlety.

Yet the discussion of these auxiliary qualities suggests possible auxiliaries for AQ itself. AZ, for example, is not only a horizon of AQ but also the initialism for northanger's Azrael gematria (see link above). The Azrael gematria, which emerges from AQ by plexing each letter's value, is AQ's auxiliary in following the subtlety of AQ, taking AZ from 45 and bringing it to 9. Proof of this relation is that AZ emerges unconsciously when working with AQ. For example, the concept of internal (de)composition relies heavily on AZ: Barrow's "Nal" allegedly decomposes to 54 because its AZ value is 5+(1+3). AZ sidesteps the question of what role neolemurians should give to non-AQ gematrias: in the manner that decadence is a numogrammaticism, AZ's internal forces are those of AQ.

It is not necessary to stop at AQ's direct auxiliaries; just as AQ has auxiliaries despite being one itself, so too might AZ. The use of plexed internal decomposition (what the Cult of Love refers to as "viscous") and the plexic equivalence of certain glyphs in AZ opens doors for the development of new gematrias. How many derivations can be pursued before the tether to the numogram snaps? How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

🙢

Interpreted semantically, the question of angels and pins is only that, a question. Interpreted qabbalistically, it is also an answer. "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin" is 667 in AQ, or in AZ, 163. Here we find our answer: 667 or 163. Should AQ or AZ be prioritized as an answer? Arguments might be made either way—that AQ lies upstream of AZ and is consequently purer; that AZ turns lettered questions into numeric answers because its letters equal its numbers. Without judging which of these answers is correct, there is also a third way: an auxiliary gematria.

The phrase "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" is 36 letters. Its viscous decomposition, through AZ, turns it into 36 values. As AZ has 36 glyphs taken from AQ, ordinally mapping these values onto glyphs creates an AZ-auxiliary. The result, provisionally titled PIN, is a full-fledged gematria specialized in answering its specific question. But this gematria is not merely an alternative option to AQ and AZ, but rather applies AZ, itself an application of AQ, which itself applies the numogram.

Do we find answers when we interrogate PIN? Well, "how many angels" is PIN 50, giving us the total number of angels. The "head of a pin," however, is only PIN 40, and is consequently unable to sustain them all. Thus, 40 angels can dance on the head of a pin, but 10 must be left out. This is a shame because who wouldn't want to dance on a pin: "dance" is PIN 12 which is also "want" and "pin." Thankfully, PIN goes a step beyond and suggests a better venue. Unlike the inadequate head, the "tail of a pin" is PIN 50, perfect to sustain all 50 angels.

The pin is poised between 40 and 50. M#14 is the mesh-value of 5::4, and the angels on the head (whose AQ is 54) spill over into 40 and 10. The old theological nonsense-question, then, is literally central to numogrammatics, situated on the rift between ana and cth, and the numogram suffices to answer it. How many angels would dance on the head of a pin? As the PIN of "angel" confirms: they would dance on the tail instead. So the acephalic angel, having taken flight from the tails of lemurs, nests in the tails of pins.