Upcoming Guests on Inside the Eye - Live!

Visit Inside the Eye - Live!, the new website for Inside the Eye - Live! radio show with The Fetch!

Show starts at 10:00am Eastern Call in or listen live!

Show Archives (including show summaries) from Apr 1, 2013. Previous show archives (without show summaries here).

Important note to visitors. Blogger has changed the HTML code used when this blog was originally created. What that means is that some pictures may not load, or pictures have disappeared from original linking URL's and are no longer available. Fixing any picture requires an entire reload of all pictures so that the pictures work with HTTPS, or Blogger will not allow any in story photo updates. Pages are currently being updated (freshened up). Be patient as pages get updated. Updates are based on various page use/visit priorities.

Saturday, May 7, 2011

Qaballa and Linguistics - Observations from the Craft

Son of Hipponicus, there is an ancient saying, that "hard
is the knowledge of the good." And the knowledge of names is a great
part of knowledge. - Socrates, from Cratylus

One might peer into the irrationality of the war on Nature by certain corporate and cultural interests, but the seeming irrationality of the assault on Nature has a darker, occult - well nature.

In this article, we will peer into the Occult nature of names and Nature.

The Mystical "Naming of Names"

The "naming of Names" is a process that is deeply rooted in Qaballistic lore and practice. From Cratylus in the Greek Classics, we find a whole play (argument) regarding the nature of the naming of Names. Cratylus held that names could not be arbitrarily given for the Name belongs "naturally" to their specific objects. The Greeks understood this process to be the domain of "the legislator":

Soc. Then the teacher, when he gives us a name, uses the work of the

Her. I agree.

Soc. And is every man a legislator, or the skilled only?

Her. The skilled only.

Soc. Then, Hermogenes, not every man is able to give a name, but only
a maker of names; and this is the legislator, who of all skilled artisans
in the world is the rarest.

Her. True.

The Greeks understood that they could not identify the source of the "names" for which they used within the natural usage of their language:

Soc. And when the teacher uses the name, whose work will he be using?

Her. There again I am puzzled.

Soc. Cannot you at least say who gives us the names which we use?

Her. Indeed I cannot.

Most importantly, names had to fit their essence:

Soc. Then, Hermogenes, I should say that this giving of names can
be no such light matter as you fancy, or the work of light or chance
persons; and Cratylus is right in saying that things have names by
nature, and that not every man is an artificer of names, but he only
who looks to the name which each thing by nature has, and is able
to express the true forms of things in letters and syllables.

The name which each thing has by its very nature is the very fusing the name to Nature, for Nature is the provider of the "nature of the thing".

Between "Conventionalism" and "Naturalism"

Our linguistic esoteric roots essentially begin with Cratylus. Within Cratylus is advanced two theories relative to word formation: "Naturalism" and "Conventionalism". Each of these methodologies must be considered and factored into any esoteric deconstruction of the language, for reasons which will be demonstrated.

Within the idea of "Naturalism", there is a recognition that words that describe a thing must, by their very nature, accurately reflect and describe "the thing". Within Cratylus, we learn that there were two agents responsible for this process: the "legislator" and "the dialectician". The "legislator" was akin to the actual "name giver", and it was the role of the legislator to ponder upon the object/thing, and, utilizing the tools available - the repository of syllables, effect the proper naming of the "thing".

The "dialectician" was an independent arbiter - a "quality control agent" and "directo" co-equally, as it were.

Soc. And the work of the legislator is to give names, and the dialectician must be his director if the names are to be rightly given?

Her. That is true.

Soc. Then, Hermogenes, I should say that this giving of names can be no such light matter as you fancy, or the work of light or chance persons; and Cratylus is right in saying that things have names by nature, and that not every man is an artificer of names, but he only who looks to the name which each thing by nature has, and is able to express the true forms of things in letters and syllables.

With this in mind, we recognize that words have various constructions, from the primary to the complex. Complex names may be analyzed through the complexity of the syllables. In basic terms, such syllables as "prefixes" and "suffixes" and "roots" form the core of the whole. In general, reductions of "complex names" may entail a reduction of a word to its "root", or reductions may actually expand into entire phrases. Whether the reduction is reflected as a primary word, or even a letter, or the reduction is an expansion into a whole phrase or description, remains variants to be explored by the "reader", or the one charged with the decoding of any given word or sound.

Although complex names may reduce into the form of an expansion, complex names too may be reduced to primary names. Once a name has reached a primary condition, the primary condition may not extend into expanded or complex names. Primary names may only reduce further into single syllables, which are often roots, or they will reduce further down to single letters. Single letters, being syllabic in nature, may prove and often will, form the very singular root of a word. This condition necessitates that letters themselves, being symbolic, must too be imitative of some principle or concept found in "Nature".

Ultimately, within this vein of linguistic thinking, the connection of a word to its "thing" follows a natural process that ultimately may be defined or reduced to single or letter pairings, wherein each sound is in most instances or probabilities representative of multiple imitative significances.

Apart from this naturalist approach to word formation remains the "constructive approach". Within a "constructive" approach, names are not primarily derived through naturalist methods, but rather by "Convention". Word creation and development through "Convention" implies a cultural approach, a "creation by committee" vein of reasoning.

Hence in English, we infer the feminine to be "woman", but in Spanish, culturally, a decision somewhere was made that this same name would be "muchacha". On an expanded scale, "convention" implies a cultural agreement as to the meanings and properties of words and sounds as they are reduced to the syllabic, or letter values.

Another way to view this is through an analysis of "number names". Since there is an infinite number of numbers, particular rules have been formed upon which the name of numbers may be written or said. In this way, we end all "ten" counts with the letter "T", as in "twenty", "thirty", "forty", etc., while equally, words are ordered to denote the concept or thing. Through convention - cultural agreement - we say, "two hundred and seventy six". We do not say, for instance, "seventy and six plus two hundred".

Cultural, through "convention", it may be seen and proven that word structures exist that follow particular patterns and rules to their formations.

Conventionalism may, then, be further implied to include a rational construction to words (as is found in scientific terms). This being the case, the same rational constructions would need to be factored into word creation when the very name or word appears to be a purely random, or naturalist, generated event or occurance.

A Qaballistic View of Words

From a Qaballistic point of view, it is illogical and impractical to weight one form of linguistic reasoning over the other. It is prudent to weigh "naturalism" and "conventionalism" with near comparable weight. It is my preference to weigh slightly on the side of "naturalism" owing to the fact that the substrates upon which we work, the Letters, defy a purely constructive or conventionalist logic.

There remains esoteric properties for which conventionalism cannot fully encompass, explain, or integrate.

From a very basic analysis, we know that words, phrases, and even whole thoughts and ideas, be they simple or extended to that of a printed work or book, represent upon utterance or setting down to letter form, some thought or concept held within the mind of another. Words, ultimately, are "frozen thoughts" which, depending upon the circumstances of their utterance or reception, have power to resonate across space and time

Words and names were at one time assigned by one of our earlier ancestors, with much of the core of the language assigned by ancestors long before the advent of the written word.

These original "name makers" affixed to the names certain descriptive properties that is representative of the object. The names serve as beacons of this earlier thought and may or may not be wholly representative of the object. There may be errors in the original calculations of the name giver.

These names have, essentially, survived to their present day. These names have undergone one of two expected permutations: a corruption of the sound sets over time or, a refinement of the sound sets over time. In addition, it is expected that, as language is a process of growth, original sound sets are to be found in expansions of words. These expansions further build upon the original intent of the name giver.F

Whether names have undergone corruptions, refinements, or expansions, the end goal of the Qaballist is to ascertain the original intended messages. This ability is, generally speaking, an esoteric art and takes special abilities.

Soc. And what is the nature of this truth or correctness of names? That, if you care to know, is the next question.

Her. Certainly, I care to know.

Soc. Then reflect.

Her. How shall I reflect?

Soc. The true way is to have the assistance of those who know, and you must pay them well both in money and in thanks; these are the Sophists,

Within the Qaballistic traditions remain what is known as "an oral tradition". Much of this idea of an "oral tradition" is put forward with pomp and circumstance relative to Rabbinical Kabballah.

However, we know that the "oral traditions" were the primary means of knowledge preservation across the planet, be their the Rishis of India, the Kalevala of the Finns, or the Prose Edda of the Teuton German tribes. Indeed, Western esoteric traditions are replete in oral tradition lore and this may be inferred in such institutions as Freemasonry, Rosicrucianism, Hermeticism, and more.

As words are at the very core of the oral traditions, it can be further inferred that words themselves carry with them oral analysis and properties not necessarily found within any given written treatise as say, a dictionary.

So when we begin our journey into Qaballistic deconstructions, we must keep all these ideas and principles in mind and doing so, we may begin to effect proper and rational Qaballistic deconstructions.

For example, in the phrase, the "birds and the bees", we may reduce this statement to its primary letters.


Ultimately, the sound set, being rooted in letters, is descriptive of the Letter B and R. B is the profile of a pregnant woman while R is the profile of a woman. In the sequence BR, the R is said to be "the breaking of the water", wherein BR is the descriptive element and "aching" being the complex addition to the root sequence of BR. BR-ACH-ING as "breaking" provides us with multiple Qaballistic channels of interpretation.

BR is the process of BIRTH itself. ACH is H is the creation of a new life, fused to the sound set of EAKING. From here, multiple channels of thought may be allowed to enter.

Returning to the BIRDS and the BEES, we are reminded that this is too fused allegorically to an explanation of "sex". IN the case of the BIRDS, we have the very outward expression of the "fertilized egg" resting opening in a nest for all to see. The work of the male and the female may be openly observed.

In the case of the BEES, we have the work of the bee as the "pollenizer", or the ability of the male part of plant to fertilize or pollenize the female part of a plant. Here again, words demonstrate reductions into letter significations, wherein P is the male significator and O is the female significator.

PO(LLEN), then, proves to be a complex formation set against the principles of male and female in letter form representation (PO).

In each case, we find the words that are used to describe the thing or action are accurately, whether the process was through naturalism or conventionalism, describing the nature of the thing being named.

Such is the way in which Qaballistic reasoning may be and is employed.


Anonymous said...

Thanks Fetch...."This condition necessitates that letters themselves, being symbolic, must too be imitative of some principle or concept found in "Nature"...Now this always blows my mind....What is the relationshp between...the Capital (Cap it All) and the lower case letters?

In ur opinion are the legislator/dialectician still around?

Anonymous said...

Good stuff there, Fetch!
Yeah, the previous "post-er" asked a couple of interesting questions which I'd like to reiterate & get Fetch's take on.
Namely (pun intended!), indeed, what exactly is the significance between the caps & lower case? & So what do you think Fetch: Surely those "language makers" must still be around?
Regardless, of whether or not the legislators/dialecticians are still among us or not, it seems quite clear to me that there is a certain enlave/cabal of folks who are definately privy to at least particular elements - just look @ corporate logos!
Has the naming of names always been done behind the curtains so to speak or do you think there was a time in antiquity where the masses were more clued in as a whole?

effel said...

I like this convention vs nature aspect. Relates well with the Ellens' dialectic approach between physis and nomos.

Anonymous said...

A research group in Canada, has proven that the Old Testament has been
> massively mistranslated.
> This follows three years of research, which have uncovered the actual
> system for translating ancient Hebrew.
> The group discovered that each letter is not a letter at all, but a full
> word, and what was believed to be a word, is actually a sentence like
> description, which supplies the definition of the word. With this
> discovery, each word can now be properly defined and the results are
> astounding.
> This means a word can no longer be disputed and swayed by doctrinal
> pressures
> If accurate, the findings will rewrite everything we presently believe
> about the scriptual beginnings of the Earth.
> Research Head Christopher Tyreman states that what they have found,
> proves without a doubt, that the Bible has been grossly mistranslated
> and that their findings expose this fact with glaring simplicity. He
> further stated that he finds it interesting that a group of lay
> researchers were able to see and assemble what they call "Self Defining
> Hebrew or the SDH System" while experts seemed unaware of its existence.
> The team also wished people to understand that this is not a bible code,
> but the system the original language was built on.
> Its construct shows it to be a manufactured system of massive
> complexity, using only twenty two words, which when mixed, can supply a
> complete language.
> Mr. Tyreman also added that the form of this language shows it could not
> have evolved from surrounding cultures as it is incapable of importing
> words from outside language. This alone points to an origination
> outside of the scope of the presently held theories of language
> development. These findings could have a major impact on how Science
> and religion look at our beginnings.
> The research team has posted all of its work online @
> http://www.thechronicleproject.org

Unknown said...

On the bible research home page at the top there is, "And if you haven't been here in a while, on the same page, we crack the Seal of Daniel 9 to fulfil the prophecy that it would be opened in our time."

Haven't perused that info but that one line seems to sum things up (ie no surprises/new form of apologetics). We'll see.

So Poland is guy and gal land. A pole, according to the construct, is a line like thing emanating from the hyper sphere, as it were.

The Pope is our Pop. So he too emanated from the void apparently. Poop? Now that's a nice balanced pair tho a bit soiled.

"...that letters themselves, being symbolic, must too be imitative of some principle or concept found in "Nature""

This is what I've been looking for. Trying to get past all conventions and to the conceptual roots found in nature.

Alas convention and projection.