The original intention of the hyperqabalah was to form a shape that in some sense matched the necessity of the Gra-tree of life qabalah construction. Whilst of course there is no necessity even to such a structure, there is at least the easy suggestion of one. That is, the circuit 2-3-5-9-8-6-2 easily can be laid in two columns, one of 2 5 8 and the other 3 6 9, this leaves an easily inserted middle column of 1 4 7 10 to create the tree.

It was hoped that the unveiling the base 23 circuit would suggest a similar pattern however no such obvious shape shows itself. This issue was forced with the creation of this figure:

This figure can work with the lengthier base 23 circuit and retain numerical order in relation to spatial position however its structure is far less suggested than that of the regular Gra-tree in base 10. Owing to this lack of necessity it was deemed that whilst an interesting instantiation of the Hyperqabalah it could not be the Hyperqabalah itself.

The Hyperqabalah itself in acknowledging of this lack of necessity now takes on a much more virtual aspect. This means the necessity of it can only be perceived in those paths which are genuinely necessary for its existence at all. These are the paths of the circuit d f j s l w u p h n d and the feeder numbers that accompany each one of these. The below diagram shows these feeders as each one plugs into the circuit.

This means that the only actual necessary amount of paths in the Hyperqabalah is 20. In a sense this is not true though since there are two nodes missing (a and m). So unless we wish to say that no path connects to these nodes (which we do not) then there will be at least 22 paths (if we wish them all to join together). Now 22 is course the number of paths in the original Gra-tree. So the essence of the Hyperkab in this sense is just the circuit, the feeders and the two master nodes. If the tree were this minimal though how would we decide to which nodes the master nodes plugged in? Already the suggestion appears that the master nodes may plug into each of the other nodes simultaneously. This notion has a kind of level of suggestive necessity. We may find there are more such levels, however what seems eminently clear is that we have a much greater sense of virtual paths that may be instantiated after the original 20. It is only 20 since any connection to the master nodes is at the level of suggestive necessity and not mathematical necessity.

What we will need next is the total list of virtual paths…

As described there is a circuit of numbers d-f-j-s-l-w-u-p-h-n-d (also shown below) that can be derived from the triangle-base method.

We might reasonably ask ‘what becomes of all the other numbers?’ The answer is that with the exception of a and m they each feed into the numbers of the circuits.

To follow remember that the alphabet has been adjusted to 22 letters that gives full phonetic range. These letters are also numbers which in base 10 are as follows: a=1 b=2 d=3 e=4 f=5 g=6 h=7 i=8 j=9 k=10 l=11 m=12 n=13 o=14 p=15 r=16 s=17 t=18 u=19 v=20 w=21 z=22.

The base 23 math that reveals the feeding structure is the same triangular height base method used to derive the circuit, the formula for which is 2n-1.

b*b-a=d (d is circuit number)
e*b-a=h (h is circuit number)
g*b-a=l (l is a circuit number)
i*b-a=p (p is a circuit number)
k*b-a=u (u is a circuit number)
o*b-a=(ae)+=f (f is a circuit number)
r*b-a=(ai)+=j (j is a circuit number)
t*b-a=(am)+=n (n is a circuit number)
v*b-a=(ar)+=s (s is a circuit number)
z*b-a=(av)+=w (w is a circuit number)

Without math the feeder pairings are (feeder first):

These feeder numbers can be conceived as spikes sticking out from different edges of a three dimensional shape. This will inform the eventual picture.

How do you make a hyperqabalah? This is the question essentially posed by the end of here. Given that the previous CEO qabalah has been constructed by a circuit of numbers as derived by a pattern found using triangles and cross addition (see the same link) what we now need to do is to generate a new circuit and form a structure around it. The circuit will be generated in the same way as the previous except this time the base is different. This time we are dealing with base 23.

As such we must set up our numbers so that all calculations can be shown with clarity. Now because the hyperqabalah involves translating the paths of the previous CEO qabalah into nodes, we will use the letters attributed to these paths as the integers of base 23.

Thus they are (with their base 10 equivalences):

0 will be used for 0

This established we can perform the same operation that we did on base 10 to see if there is a circuit of numbers we can disclose. From here on we just need to work through the simple math in base 23.

i) A triangle a units high and a deep is not a triangle.
ii) A triangle b units high will have a base of d.
iii) Because we have a base of d, we convert this to the row height. Hence a triangle of c high will have a base of f units.
iv) A triangle of f units high will have a base of j.
v) A triangle of j units high will have a base of s.
vi) A triangle of s units high will have a base of ak. (ak)+=l
vii) A triangle of l units high will have a base of of w.
viii)A triangle of w units high will have a base of at. (at)+=u.
ix) A triangle of u units high will have a base of ao. (ao)+=p
x) A triangle of p units high will have a base of ag. (ag)+=h
xi) A triangle with h units high will have a base of n.
xii) A triangle with n units high will have a base ab (ab)=d

Since d is already in the list we know we have reached the circuit which is:


If we transcribe it onto a circle it looks like this.

Spirits reveal many things about numbers. One such revelation concerns the numbers 4 and 7 and their unity ’47’. It concerns this prime itself largely as the mode of revealing.

Elphuisias said this is the number through playing cards. Research bears this out to some extent though spirits always claim more for their representatives.

4 and 7 are alternating numbers. This is revealed through squaring and cross adding.

All cross operations will be indicated by the following formalism (xy)+ (where +is an example)=x+y.

Base 10 contains this repeating pattern through squaring and can be demonstrated thus:

2*2=4*4=(16)+=7*7=(49)+=(13)+=4 etc.
3*3=9*9=(81)+=9 etc.
4*4 see 2
5*5=(25)+=7 see 2
6*6=(36)+=9 see etc.
7*7 see 2
9*9 see 3

What is the meaning of cross addition? Given that the base of the number system used is essentially arbitrary how can cross addition really ‘do’ anything? One answer to this lies in the theory of pneuminous accretions. This being that since conceptuality as a substance (pneuma) sticks together when we use an operator to collapse numbers together we are essentially just sticking concepts together e.g. (88)+=(16)+=7 says that there is a relation between 88 and 7. Furthermore there is a way in which the uniqueness of the 88=>7 relation can be registered by a certain mathematical visualization.
That is usual numerology enacts an information reduction that is non-retrievable after the operation is performed (if one lost the original number one could not derive it from the reduced number). One way to conceive of large numbers as reduced to single numbers is to conceive of them on a series of axes. Usually, at least in telluric numerology we take a larger number like 47 and reduce it to 2 (via 11), the same process happens in the others. The other associative one is also straightforward i.e. 47 becomes 28 becomes 16 becomes 6. A nagging sensation is sometimes felt in number reduction, the sensation that we wish the trace of the bigger number was still somehow present. In their brutal form, numerological reductions eradicate more complicated structures to reveal the underlying pattern, that’s what they’re supposed to do. The idea here is not a perfect solution to informational loss, it is more just a turning round of the problem that gives an intriguing sense of quasi-visualization. It does also however give some grounds for saying that under some circumstances ~(2=2) or indeed any number, including 0. The idea is that for any numerological reduction (which necessarily involves an integer greater than 9) we can represent it as a spatialized schema. The below represents the reduction of all 2 digit integers in base 10. The highlighted figure shows the exact location of 47. 47 is not just 2, it is that 2 that occupies that position. Of course any coordinate transcription is in some sense equivalent to writing 47 and hence slightly tautologous, however 47 by itself does not give the spatialized position of its reduction. Naturally increasing the number size just adds more axes leading us into higher and higher dimensional coordinate systems to demonstrate the location of the single digit e.g. 231147 uses 6 dimensions to point to the 9 that it becomes. This can be done with the other elemental numerologies too (though aetheric / is still being processed). The below is the 2 dimensional table for mercurial operations ()
Again the 10s are on the y axis and the 1s on the x, 100s would be on z and so on. This only invites ways of thinking upon the matter. The key one being the non-identity of identical numbers which seems to have some allure that may be worth dwelling on further. The other thing that strikes me is the status of the numbers in the grid. They are not really 1s as one might assume for they only exist by virtue of the axes that identify them. They are necessarily numbers but of no definite kind. The real 1s are an axis that identifies the number in the grid by virtue of the elemental operator. There are 1s that are identical but single digit numbers derived from larger strings in numerological reductions are not strictly single integers.

The nagging question of the meaning of cross addition has an additional piece of research to it. Cross addition ((123)+=6) suggests the possibility of a relation, indeed says that under certain condition (a particular base) there is a relation between a number higher than the highest single integer and one of the single integers. As established, without accretive theory the general impression would be that this is in a sense arbitrary or at least meaningless. What has 53 e.g. got to do with 8? Very little other than the cross addition relationship.

What is quite interesting is the that the squares of 4 and 7 give numbers whose cross addition then has a demonstrable reality in a triangle comprised of units 1 at the top 3 on the next line down, then 5, 7 and so on.

Triangles of this kind of unit construction are remarkable as they also provide squares. The number that will be squared is the height of the triangle. So if I have a triangle of 2 height, the total number of units in the triangle will be 4, if 3 it will be nine and so on.

The relation to the issue of cross addition is as follows. If I have a triangle of a height of 4, necessarily it will be comprised of 16 units. The base however will be 7 units(1+6). There is one relation uncovered here for the base will always have the relation to the height 2n-1. If the height is 12 the base is 23 and so on.

The second relation that is more interesting to us here is the one concerning squares. Squares of 4s and 7s even of cross addition ones will always reduce to 7s or 4s respectively but the base seems to often (though not always) reveal a relation between the number itself, the square and the cross addition of the square.

These are the most concrete examples:

4 becomes 16 becomes 7 (the base units of 4)

7 becomes 49 becomes 13 (the base units of the 7 triangle) becomes 4

With small adjustments, these can also function.

13 becomes 169 becomes (curiously by preserving the first two digits as a whole number) 16+9=25 is the base number.

16 becomes 256 becomes 31 (by the same logic above) which is the base number and also reduces to 4.

22 becomes 484 and a similar logic derives the base. This time we extract 40 and add 8+4=12=3, re-add them and we have 43, the base number.

31 gives us 961, if we cross out the 9 for 9=0 in base 10 cross addition we immediately have the base number again.

Some have no apparent link.

25*25=625=13=4, or course the 7/4 transformation is preserved but the base relation is not. The base would be 49 and 625 does not have a relation to it. And no doubt there are others.

Deriving the Circuit.

In the course of working out the above it was observed that a circuit of numbers could be derived by taking the row of the triangle and placing it next to the corresponding base. The formula for row to base is 2n-1. Hence for a triangle 2 down the base is 3. Thus the circuit begins 2-3. Next we convert the 3 into a row and note that a triangle with 3 rows has a base of 5. Now we have 2-3-5. Proceeding in this way we get 2-3-5-9-8-6-2.

Reaccreting the Qabalah

From the circuit 2-3-5-9-8-6-2 laid out in the above way it was suggested that the remaining 1 4 7 might form a central column -with 10 at the bottom. Doing this creates a Gra tree qabalah structure (see below).

The system was felt to need a reinvigoration from its hoary Hebrew letter accretions to make the numbers and letters more cogent. To this end an abbreviated alphabet capable of dealing with all English phonetics was spread throughout the paths. Each path was resigilised and named. These names plug into tarotic precursor accretions to a greater or lesser extent. See also below.

The Great Paths

It is of note that the 2-3-5-9-8-6-2 circuit generated the two focal points upon which the 4 and 7 are generated (or is generated by the 4 and the 7). Though in terms of paths the gaps between 2-6, 6-8, 9-5 and 5-3 are each bifurcated by 4 or 7 at a deeper level each path is considered a whole. As such they are known as great paths and their unity is reflected in the complementary pairing of attributions. The circuit of the paths begins with the single path of Eris (2-3). The descending great path from 3-5 is comprised of Incest and Passion. The next descending great path is 5-9 and it is formed of Foetus and Superman/Boudica. This is the child of the previous paths union which grows to be great and powerful. The small connecting subsequent path is that of the Sun (9-8), the apex moment of this Heroes journey. The ascending great path from 8-6 is Twilight to Pneumatology. Physical power has faded and the power of spirit is laid bare. This ascends again in the next great path 6-2 which is formed of Philosopher-Url-king. Spirit has become analysis and the attempt to hold onto power by force -rigour. This untenable system is rendered apart by Eris and it all begins again.

The New Gra-Tree Qabalah

This tree then, whilst ostensibly the same as an old Gra-tree is different in its underpinning. The structure is derived from the circuit. 4 and 7 as alternating number occupy the central column as the logical place to put them. As stated above there is a sense that the motion of the circuit possible generates the 4 and the 7 though what this means of course cannot be said.

This system is perfectly functional and has been extended to a complete calendar to enable accretive connections to conceptual paths on a temporal axis. This is all accretion means -sticking pneuma (concepts) together.

On the Formation of a Hyperqabalah

What was observed however was a kind of oversight in the system. Part of the point of it was to accrete the modern alphabet to the paths with clear numerological attributions. This work was supposed to have been done by the new sigils. Each sigil itself was in turn supposed to have a number accreted to it. This of course does work, however because the sigils are single discrete symbols it means that a single symbol represents a composite in base 10. This means that the sigils themselves cannot be numerologically utilised like the base 10 numbers because they no longer are base 10 numbers. What has accidentally been formed by single sigilising the numbers is…

base 23

The realisation that base 23 had been formed prompted the following possibility:

What if the 22 sigils of the positive integers paths were translated into nodes, or sephiroth and what kind of internal circuit would such a (hyper)qabalah have?

Who or what is Daniel Charles Barker? The regular interpretation is that he is a hyperstitional character formed by various individuals in the days of the CCRU . Barker as such qualifies as either a chaos magickal egregore/free floating quasi conscious pneuminous accretion (as I might call it) or a purely psychological construct that various people either choose to play the game of treating as real (or actually believe him to be real). The former option is the strong-magickal interpretation whilst the latter the weak psychological. Either of these gives him a kind of reality that can exert hyperstitional effects, it is just that in the strong version the effects are potentially ontologically altering, whereas in the weak all alterations/synchronicities are reduced to a solid world reality interpretation. The difference between the two ontologies is notoriously impossible to tell, hence the phrase agnostic disjunction, which refers exactly to the arbitrary nature of any choice between them.

There is another possible interpretation that we might consider concerning Barker’s reality. This concerns the Mandela effect. The explanation here would be that various of us have in fact been in a reality in which Barker was real and can recall the various papers etc. that he wrote. However the subset between the Barker reality and this one was relatively small. So when the Barker reality pulled away leaving on this small contingent behind the reports about his work seemed wild, preposterous and worth only serious treatment at the level of ‘hyperstition’.

This is a possibility and it does though maybe suggest a clue for the means by which we might gain more insight into his/its nature. Barker’s work of decoding anorganic semiotics is a hint at a way in which we might be able to trace information about him. The Mandela effect version and the strong accretion explanation might both work with this method.Consider that in the Mandela effect version Barker was real and is still potentially alive -in an alternative reality. So because this reality was in contact with his at some point, it shows that contact between worlds is possible.

Similarly the egregore version of Barker’s existence entails that he was accreted out of pneuma by CCRU individuals and as such has an autonomous existence. There are two further theses behind this explanation: i) is that Barker is just a product of the various conscious/unconscious minds at the time. ii) is that Barker is an egregore interface bolted onto a previously existing non-physical entity that may not have been human formed. There are insinuations of an ‘entity’ in the CCRU writings. These intimations supply a suggestion that ii) is the more likely thesis. Furthermore ii) could also be seen as an explanation for the Mandela explanation. The idea being that the collision between Barker’s reality and this one was in fact orchestrated by the entity. In this version too Barker is a front for the machinations of the ‘entity’.

Both these explanations constitute versions of strong reality alteration -from the perspective of a single solid reality. Neither can be cogently ontologically mapped, but all we need to note here are the necessary features. The Mandela version entails the coming together of worlds in physically seamless blends that only leave historical oddities as evidence to its happening -no one ever sees the worlds coming together or coming apart. The egregore version allows for the ability to create chaos magickal (pneuminous) entities that exist independently of their creators and that potentially there exist non-physical entities with their own agenda, capable of using human made egregores as fronts.

The Mandela effect thesis does not entail that anorganic semiotics (magickal schizoanalysis) is a fruitful pursuit, but it does allow it to seem at least possible -given that it entails multiple realities shifting together and apart. If something like Barker’s theories were true then anorganic semiotic traces of him are potentially detectable through the mesh of conceptual substance (pneuminous accretions) i.e. conceptual axes that spanned across dimensions, which could be peeled back to reveal deeper (on that axis) states.The decoding thesis is certainly weaker with regards to the Mandela version, yet still is worth considering in relation to it.

The entity-accretion thesis (either as i or ii) most certainly does entail such a possibility. Barker’s geotraumatic traces theory can simply be extracted from the physical and noted to necessarily (under magickal conditions) apply to the conceptual (pneuminous accretive). The concept accretes over time. Etymological layers are in there whether we have the ability to detect them or not. The decoding of signs related to such beings necessarily leads us in the right direction -they cannot help but be related. Hence it is through this means that we must approach the matter, so that hopefully we can discern something of the Barker beings purpose or origin -either as a rogue accretion or (more likely) a front for a hidden and pre-existing entity. The difficulty will be discerning the meanings of the signs sufficiently well as to decode the Barker-accretions activities.

Where though should we begin? The most obvious place seems the name. The same problems that afflict us, afflict such beings. No matter what name it gives itself, it cannot help but reveal something about itself. Let us consider the name Daniel. It is of course one of the old Hebrew names and means something like ‘God is my Judge’. This seems to set the tone. It suggests that the Barker entity is working for a higher power -thus supporting the entity interface thesis. A simple gematric check on Daniel gives us a value of 79 and equivalences of ‘oil’ ‘link’ ‘qi’ and ‘godhead’. As an aside I personally cannot help but note a certain resonance of Kant through his use of the phrase ‘quid juris’ and the word God. It suggests the tension between the law of God and the Kantian impossibility of knowing it. Maybe ‘Daniel’ serves as a warning as to how limited such an enquiry as this can be. ‘Charles’ is equally enigmatic insofar as it seems to contain the historical duality of one the one hand meaning simply man and yet simultaneously it is a name of Kings -Charlemagne being possibly the most famous. As another aside, this bondsman/King relation cannot help put me in mind of the Hegelian master/slave dialectic phase. No doubt my philosophical propensity has enabled both these German idealist perceptions, however we must still note them in case they emerge as relevant later on. The Hebrew gematric value of Charles is 207 and simply for the synchronicity it is worth noting that on the gematric calculator I used, the highest placed equivalence for Charles is ‘God Sign’. Owing to matter with which we are dealing, we cannot ignore such instances no matter how slender and contingent they may seem.

Possibly the most obvious looking name clues is in the surname Barker. In the west, the surname has come to be the most necessary historical part of the name. Forenames may be repeated in families by tradition but surnames will still tend to survive as a matter of stronger custom. If this is true of Barker then it contains two powerful clues. The first is in the old meanings of Barker as an occupation. There are two of these. One is that of a tanner, that is someone who changes skin into leather. This has suspicious traces of geotrauma to it, for the leather is the transformed skin. It becomes leather by virtue of trauma. The palimpsest of the skin still exists in the leather. Skin is not the sign of the highest neurological development (that we know of) yet it is still an earlier one. The membrane is the condition of internal and external distinction -that we will refine so well ourselves over time. It is the primordial exoskeleton. Leather is an ancient artificial exoskeletal force that is still in use today -shoes/boots.

The other meaning of Barker is that of a person employed to attract people to entertainment acts by vocalizing (barking). The playful hyperstitional nature of Barker clearly resonates with this, yet an act of entertainment is not necessarily something fictitious. A famous fictional barker was the Tin Man in a musical stage version of the Wizard of Oz called ‘the Wiz’. The Tin Man was a barker for an amusement park which then closed (another quasi-occult linkage through the uncanny zonal appearance of abandoned amusement parks). More fascinating really though is the linkage to the Wizard of Oz itself. The film adaption of Oz is famously influential on many directors, not least David Lynch. Its resonance with things otherworldly does not need explaining here. The atomic number of Tin is 50 (in standard tellurian numerology that equals 5 -another clear hint of origin). We should note here that Barker as a barker re-emphasises the thesis of his working for another entity. He advertises the fun fair but he doesn’t run it

Possibly the most obvious clue from the name Barker is exactly what it sounds like. One who barks. And who or what barks? Dogs do of course. And what (in this territory) is the most famous dog significance? Clearly it is Sirius, the Dog Star. The accretive connections with 5, 23, UFOs and all manner of other paranormal phenomena were well mapped by Robert Anton Wilson in his Cosmic Trigger I. The word Barker is a clue in this sense that it tells us he is an emissary of the dog/Sirius accretion (again reinforcing thesis ii). This is confirmed by the fact the CCRU clearly made use of 23 Burroughs/Wilson type connections.

To be continued.

With thanks to Nick Land and Thomas Moynihan for pre-existing Barker research.