Gematria

[J Green]

The age issue comes from Rabi Isaac of Acco. But he is quoted by Kaplan:

"According to the master Kabbalist, Rabbi Isaac of Acco, when counting the years of these cycles, one must not use an ordinary physical year, but rather, a divine year (Otzar Chaim 86b). The Midrash says that each divine day is a thousand years, basing this on the verse, "A thousand years in Your sight are as but yesterday", Psalm 90:4 (Bereshit Rabbah 8:2, Zohar 2: 145b, Sanhedrin 97a). Since each year contains 365.25 days, a divine year would be 365,250 years long. According to this, each cycle of seven thousand divine years would consist of 2,556,750,000 earthly years. This figure of 2.5 billion years is very close to the scientific estimate as to the length of time that life has existed on earth. If we assume that the seventh cycle began with the Biblical account of creation, then this would have occurred when the universe was 15,340,500,000 years old. This is very close to the scientific estimate that the expansion of the universe began some 15 billion years ago." (Aryeh Kaplan, Sefer Yetzirah [Weiser: 1997] 186.)

In the Times and Seasons (vol 5, p. 758), Phelps says that working from the papyrus, the figure is 2,550,000,000. As you can see, there is a difference between Isaac's number and Phelp's. I believe that this difference comes down to using 365 days as a base (Phelps) instead of 365.25 (Isaac) to account for a leap year.

[J Green]

The Aggadic measures like gematriah are generally assumed to have been Greek explanatory devices borrowed by the Kabbalists simply because the name is derived from a Greek root, even though the Greeks generally didn't use this system. For a good opposing view, see Stephen J. Lieberman, "A Mesopotamian Background for the So-Called Aggadic 'Measures' of Biblical Hermeneutics?" in Hebrew Union College Annual, vol 68 (New York: Hebrew Union College, 1988), 157-225.

My view is that the Hebrew Bible is replete with word play and puns and when you have a counting device built into the very language of the text itself, there will of necessity be plays on words that are based on numbers. So I do think gematriah is used. But I also think that this kind of thing can be taken too far.

[canard78]

The age issue comes from Rabi Isaac of Acco. But he is quoted by Kaplan:

"According to the master Kabbalist, Rabbi Isaac of Acco, when counting the years of these cycles, one must not use an ordinary physical year, but rather, a divine year (Otzar Chaim 86b). The Midrash says that each divine day is a thousand years, basing this on the verse, "A thousand years in Your sight are as but yesterday", Psalm 90:4 (Bereshit Rabbah 8:2, Zohar 2: 145b, Sanhedrin 97a). Since each year contains 365.25 days, a divine year would be 365,250 years long. According to this, each cycle of seven thousand divine years would consist of 2,556,750,000 earthly years. This figure of 2.5 billion years is very close to the scientific estimate as to the length of time that life has existed on earth. If we assume that the seventh cycle began with the Biblical account of creation, then this would have occurred when the universe was 15,340,500,000 years old. This is very close to the scientific estimate that the expansion of the universe began some 15 billion years ago." (Aryeh Kaplan, Sefer Yetzirah [Weiser: 1997] 186.)

In the Times and Seasons (vol 5, p. 758), Phelps says that working from the papyrus, the figure is 2,550,000,000. As you can see, there is a difference between Isaac's number and Phelp's. I believe that this difference comes down to using 365 days as a base (Phelps) instead of 365.25 (Isaac) to account for a leap year.

Wow. As the thread's resident sceptic of all things numerically coincidental that's still impressive. Certainly more than the Brigham 76 one. 'Almost thou persuade at me to become a Gematrian (or Gematriatist)...

[volgadon]

The age issue comes from Rabi Isaac of Acco. But he is quoted by Kaplan:

"According to the master Kabbalist, Rabbi Isaac of Acco, when counting the years of these cycles, one must not use an ordinary physical year, but rather, a divine year (Otzar Chaim 86b). The Midrash says that each divine day is a thousand years, basing this on the verse, "A thousand years in Your sight are as but yesterday", Psalm 90:4 (Bereshit Rabbah 8:2, Zohar 2: 145b, Sanhedrin 97a). Since each year contains 365.25 days, a divine year would be 365,250 years long. According to this, each cycle of seven thousand divine years would consist of 2,556,750,000 earthly years. This figure of 2.5 billion years is very close to the scientific estimate as to the length of time that life has existed on earth. If we assume that the seventh cycle began with the Biblical account of creation, then this would have occurred when the universe was 15,340,500,000 years old. This is very close to the scientific estimate that the expansion of the universe began some 15 billion years ago." (Aryeh Kaplan, Sefer Yetzirah [Weiser: 1997] 186.)

In the Times and Seasons (vol 5, p. 758), Phelps says that working from the papyrus, the figure is 2,550,000,000. As you can see, there is a difference between Isaac's number and Phelp's. I believe that this difference comes down to using 365 days as a base (Phelps) instead of 365.25 (Isaac) to account for a leap year.

Both R. Isaac and Phelps are using the idea expressed in the psalm of a day being a thousand years. R. Isaac (by the very nature of his religion) had to be more careful in counting the days of the year. I find it interesting that both used similar logic, but that is about it.

[J Green]

I find it interesting that both used similar logic, but that is about it.

Agreed.

[cursor]

The Count in Sesame Street was once asked his favourite number. 34,969 his answer. He would never say why but the clue was that its square root is 187.

Here's a slightly varied version of #7:

Square the prime number 11 [ 121 ]

Square the prime number 17 [ 289 ]

Multiply the squares [ 121 x 289 = 34,969 ]

Square the result [ 1,222,830,961 ]

Remove commas & insert spaces [ 12 22 83 09 61 ]

Add them together [ 12 + 22 + 83 + 09 + 61 = 187 ]

Notice that 187 = 11 x 17

Edited April 15, 2013 by cursor

[Bill Hamblin]

Gematria developed only when letters began to be used as numbers (A = 1; B = 2, etc). (This is why we use Greek letter-numbers in Euclidian geometry.) This was not the case in ancient Hebrew, where all numbers are spelled out. When means there is very likely no intentional gematria in the Hebrew Bible. Many scholars believe that the number of the beast, 666, is a gematria, being the "number of its name," the addition of the letter-numbers of his name (Rev. 13:17-18, 15:2). However, in the Greek the numbers are spelled out.

Quinn (and to a lesser extent Owens) claim JS and BY used gematria, which I critique in "That Old Black Magic" under the header "Gematria and Adam-God" with full references.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=12&num=2&id=364

[wenglund]

Here's a slightly varied version of #7:

Square the prime number 11 [ 121 ]

Square the prime number 17 [ 289 ]

Multiply the squares [ 121 x 289 = 34,969 ]

Square the result [ 1,222,830,961 ]

Remove commas & insert spaces [ 12 22 83 09 61 ]

Add them together [ 12 + 22 + 83 + 09 + 61 = 187 ]

Notice that 187 = 11 x 17

Here is more fun with a similar formula:

Square the prime number

2

[ 4 ]

Square the prime number

3

[ 9]

Multiply the squares [ 4 x 9 =

36

]

Square the result [

1296

]

Square the result [ 1,679,616 ]

Remove commas & insert spaces [ 1 679 616 ]

Add them together [ 1+679+616 =

1296

]

The square root of

36

is

6

Notice that

6

=

2

x

3

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[volgadon]

Here is more fun with a similar formula:

Square the prime number

2

[ 4 ]

Square the prime number

3

[ 9]

Multiply the squares [ 4 x 9 =

36

]

Square the result [

1296

]

Square the result [ 1,679,616 ]

Remove commas & insert spaces [ 1 679 616 ]

Add them together [ 1+679+616 =

1296

]

The square root of

36

is

6

Notice that

6

=

2

x

3

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Stop it, you two. You are making my head hurt.

[J Green]

Math limerick from Jon Saxton (math textbook author):

( (12 + 144 + 20 + 3 Sqrt[4]) / 7 ) + 5*11 = 9² + 0 .

The limerick as follows:

A dozen, a gross, and a score,

plus three times the square root of four,

divided by seven,

plus five times eleven,

is nine squared and not a bit more.

[J Green]

Gematria developed only when letters began to be used as numbers (A = 1; B = 2, etc). (This is why we use Greek letter-numbers in Euclidian geometry.) This was not the case in ancient Hebrew, where all numbers are spelled out. When means there is very likely no intentional gematria in the Hebrew Bible.

This is certainly the standard view. And widening the field, most scholars have seen the three more controversial measures like gematriah, atbash and notariqon as remnants of Greek influence. On the other hand, we see several instances of uncontroversial atbash in Jeremiah, and Lieberman (in the article cited above) traces gematriah-like hermeneutics in Cuneiform as early as the 8th century BCE (see Lieberman, 174-176). And others feel that early Hebrew did in fact assign numerals to letters, just not in the same way that it starts showing up commonly in the 2^nd century BCE after the earlier system has been refined by the Greeks (Cf. Graham Flegg, Numbers: Their History and Meaning [New York: Dover, 2002], 61.) So there's a minority view out there.

Having said that, I think that most of the playing with numbers in the text that is readily apparent takes a different form. Just as the Mesopotamian king lists are likely founded on a base-sixty expression of their reign, I think the primeval age lists in Genesis have some kind of meaning behind them. Enoch's 365, for example, seems more about solar ascent and his walk with God than with his literal age. Sarah dying at 127 appears to more a statement about her ideal life being blessed than about her literal age. Etc.

Cheers.

[Nathair/|\]

Number is the ruler of forms and ideas, and the cause of gods and daemons.

• As quoted in Life of Pythagoras (c. 300) by Iamblichus of Chalcis, as translated by Thomas Taylor (1818)
  

[volgadon]

This will be my only concession to math.

[Bill Hamblin]

This is certainly the standard view. And widening the field, most scholars have seen the three more controversial measures like gematriah, atbash and notariqon as remnants of Greek influence. On the other hand, we see several instances of uncontroversial atbash in Jeremiah, and Lieberman (in the article cited above) traces gematriah-like hermeneutics in Cuneiform as early as the 8th century BCE (see Lieberman, 174-176). And others feel that early Hebrew did in fact assign numerals to letters, just not in the same way that it starts showing up commonly in the 2^nd century BCE after the earlier system has been refined by the Greeks (Cf. Graham Flegg, Numbers: Their History and Meaning [New York: Dover, 2002], 61.) So there's a minority view out there.

Having said that, I think that most of the playing with numbers in the text that is readily apparent takes a different form. Just as the Mesopotamian king lists are likely founded on a base-sixty expression of their reign, I think the primeval age lists in Genesis have some kind of meaning behind them. Enoch's 365, for example, seems more about solar ascent and his walk with God than with his literal age. Sarah dying at 127 appears to more a statement about her ideal life being blessed than about her literal age. Etc.

Cheers.

Atbash is really a substitution cipher. Also cuneiform languages generally can't equate signs with numbers as classical gematria does, since it is non alphabetic.

There is certainly numerology in the Hebrew Bible. But, whereas all gematria is numerology, not all numerology is gematria.

[J Green]

Atbash is really a substitution cipher.

True. Referenced in the wider context of one of three controversial aggadic measures assumed to have been borrowed from the Greeks.

Also cuneiform languages generally can't equate signs with numbers as classical gematria does, since it is non alphabetic.

Hence the term "gematriah-like." Numbers were more associated with words or spellings rather than with individual signs (see referenced article).

There is certainly numerology in the Hebrew Bible. But, whereas all gematria is numerology, not all numerology is gematria.

Agreed.

Cheers.

[Kenngo1969]

Isn't this just another reminder that with "big data" comes meaningless correlations?

The Count in Sesame Street was once asked his favourite number. 34,969 his answer. He would never say why but the clue was that its square root is 187. ...

And 187, as it happens, is the California Penal Code section for murder! I knew there was something sinister about that Count!

[volgadon]

And what makes it interesting?

Joseph Smith's birth corresponded to the Hebrew year 5566, the numerical value of which equaled the words “Messiah of Joseph.”

As Zvi Mark, the scholar of Bratslav Hasidism, pointed out, this identification was made at least as far back as the 17th century Kabbalist R. Nathan Neta Shapira's book, "Megaleh Amukot on the Torah."

R. Nahman of Bratslav’s most esoteric teachings regarding the Messiah were recorded in a work known as “Megilat Setarim,” which was hidden for nearly two hundred years, until Zvi Mark published it in 2006. In it, R. Nahman taught that the Messiah would assume rule over the world at the age of twelve, but would attain prophecy and inspiration already in infancy. His own son, who was to have combined the twin aspects of both messiahs, was born in the year 5566, but died as an infant. For a detailed discussion of this belief, and its precedents in Kabbalistic literature, see Zvi Mark, “Scroll of Secrets: the Hidden Messianic Vision of R. Nahman of Bratslav,” (Hebrew) Graphit Press Ltd., Jerusalem, 2006, p. 104-132. There is an English translation, but it suffers from several errors, as well as eccentric renderings such as the “Josephine Messiah.”

This tradition of the messiah born that year performing many wonders while yet an infant was also held by R. Itzhak Eyzik of Komarno, who was born shortly after Joseph Smith. From the age of two to five, Itzhak Eyzik prophesied, answering all questions precisely and accurately. “I literally gazed from one end of the world to the other," as he wrote in "Megilat Setarim," his mystical autbiography (not to be confused with R. Nahman's book). As Itzhak Eyzik saw it, this messiah's role was to redeem the transmigrating souls. “The Messiah, son of Joseph, will redeem the transmigrated Souls that fell through sins, transgressions, and rebellions and were transmigrated into inanimate objects, vegetables, animals, and humans.”

I am not claiming that Joseph Smith was the Messiah of Joseph, nor do I wish to diminish the significant differences. It is, however, an interesting convergence.

[canard78]

This will be my only concession to math.

I'll gladly take your sophisticated 4 minutes offering and add to it these meaningless but chortle-inducing 2 minutes:

[inquiringmind]

...I am not claiming that Joseph Smith was the Messiah of Joseph, nor do I wish to diminish the significant differences. It is, however, an interesting convergence..

Why not (and what are the significant differences)?

[volgadon]

Why not (and what are the significant differences)?

Why not? It is still too tentative an identification at the moment and the research tends to be somewhat shallow, so I am not willing to commit to it yet.

As for the differences, one such has to do with the doctrine of transmigration, but the biggest difference in these accounts is the childhood role of the messiah.

[inquiringmind]

Gematria developed only when letters began to be used as numbers (A = 1; B = 2, etc). (This is why we use Greek letter-numbers in Euclidian geometry.) This was not the case in ancient Hebrew, where all numbers are spelled out. When means there is very likely no intentional gematria in the Hebrew Bible. Many scholars believe that the number of the beast, 666, is a gematria, being the "number of its name," the addition of the letter-numbers of his name (Rev. 13:17-18, 15:2). However, in the Greek the numbers are spelled out.

Quinn (and to a lesser extent Owens) claim JS and BY used gematria, which I critique in "That Old Black Magic" under the header "Gematria and Adam-God" with full references.

http://maxwellinstit...12&num=2&id=364

What is "extended," or "filling" gematria?

[Stone holm]

Did Joseph ever say anything about Gematria?

I just posted this question on another forum:

How many numbers can be associated with the Hebrew word for Temple?

I just found out that one number that can be associated with that word (thru Gematria) is 76, and Brigham Young was president of the Mormon Church (and, according to Mormons, the living prophet) at the time the first Mormon Temple was built.

Is God trying to tell us (thru Gematria), that the LDS Church is his Church?

Are you not considering Kirtland a Temple? And Nauvoo might not have been finished while the Prophet Joseph was alive, but it was started while he was living, and the plans for the Missouri Temples were drawn up while he yet lived.

[volgadon]

What is "extended," or "filling" gematria?

When the values of the individual letters are counting by spelling them out in full. So the letter aleph is more than one it is aleph (1) + lamed (30) + pe (80).