The great tragedy of Freemasonry, from a purists point of view, is that Freemasonry failed to control its own definitions. We can only speculate as to why, but one of the primary reasons can be inferred based on the inherent teachings and structure of the system. By creating an over riding belief that secrets had to be maintained and controlled within the Lodge System, the general public was effectively cut off from having a grounded rational basis in the larger philosophical basis of the Construction.

Source: Illuminatus Observor

Symbols, fused as they are to Universal Archetypes, become knowable upon reflection and observation, perfected as they are through rational thought and reasoned discourse. The inherent truths within become discernable with a precisely laid foundation. It is this precisely laid foundation that would be the "great work" of the early Continental Masons who set about creating a system set against "ciphers" and "cryptograms" fused to observable phenomena in Nature.

Source: Illuminatus Observor

Originally posted by android1296


"Dennis Fetcho", aka, "The Fetch", claims that English is a product of the Speculative Sciences of Masonry, and he has put together quite a few compelling arguments. For instance, he states,

The great tragedy of Freemasonry, from a purists point of view, is that Freemasonry failed to control its own definitions. We can only speculate as to why, but one of the primary reasons can be inferred based on the inherent teachings and structure of the system. By creating an over riding belief that secrets had to be maintained and controlled within the Lodge System, the general public was effectively cut off from having a grounded rational basis in the larger philosophical basis of the Construction.

Source: Illuminatus Observor

Since Masonry contains within it the philosophical framework of "building" and "constructing", what exactly does Dennis Fetcho mean when he says "the Contruction"?

It is no secret across the Internet that Above Top Secret is a Masonic run forum, or if this is incorrect, then the misconception exists.

But clearly, can anyone here expand on what is being said as regards "Cryptograms" and "Ciphers"?

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Personally, it sounds to me as if he made it all up. He wasn't very clear in what he was talking about, so who knows?

The article was pretty clear. However, any in depth study of English Literature leads you back to the idea of ciphers and cryptograms. Whether we view this from Dees to Bacon (as some claim out there), and of course Manley P. Hall has a whole chapter dedicated to ciphers and cryptograms, so obviously within some of the Masonic schools, the idea of ciphers and cryptograms was not only well understood, but apparently highly developed.

The Illuminatus Observor is one of the view sites out there providing a comprehensive analysis of how this could be done.

The proper way to interpret this relative to the Construct is to place the Oral Traditions (Rishis, Kalevala, Norse Edda's, and so forth) as being of the domain of Isis, while the literal writing of this knowledge, or setting the information down in letter form as being the domain of Osiris. Osiris is "the God", or the Alphabet, while each of the letters, then, become "gods".

Each system relies on the other for their total clarification within the larger system (necessarily comprised of the two).

That Shakespeare (Francis Bacon, et al) can be viewed as being associated with the Osirian Mysteries can be inferred through the use of various cryptological techniques that encoded the number "89", a number known to be associated with Osiris from basic knowledge of the Ordinal Code within Gematria.

Says Manley P. Hall in Secret Teachings of All Ages,

Authors sometimes based their cryptograms upon the numerical value of their own names; for example, Sir Francis Bacon repeatedly used the cryptic number 33--the numerical equivalent of his name. Numerical ciphers often involve the pagination of a book. Imperfect pagination, though generally attributed to carelessness, often conceals important secrets. The mispaginations found in the 1623 folio of "Shakespeare" and the consistent recurrence of similar errors in various volumes printed about the same period have occasioned considerable thought among scholars and cryptogrammatists. In Baconian cryptograms, all page numbers ending in 89 seem to have a special significance. The 89th page of the Comedies in the 1623 folio of "Shakespeare" shows an error of type in the pagination, the "9" being from a considerably smaller font than the "8." The 189th page is entirely missing, there being two pages numbered 187; and page 188 shows the second " 8 " scarcely more than half the size of the first one. Page 289 is correctly numbered and has no unusual features, but page 89 of the Histories is missing. Several volumes published by Bacon show similar errors, page 89 being often involved.

That Osiris is "89" (15+19+9+18+9+19=89=O+S+I+R+I+S) and Shakespeare (Bacon, et al) are encoding the number 89 are forms of "esoteric significances", conjecture par excellence. Those who are "in the know" know precisely the purpose for the number 89, yet nowhere will you find an "owner's manual" that specifically points you in the proper direction.

Hence many call "Hermetic Qaballa" an "artform", denying further the planned and imbedded mathematics, and hence a form of science, into the larger Illuminatus Philosophy.

Source: Illuminatus Observor

AboveTopSecret.com (as we keep saying) is a venue for speculating on conspiracies, not for defending groups upon which some conspiracy theories are based.

Once again...

AboveTopSecret.com is a venue for speculating on and discussing conspiracy theories and is not now nor ever will be expected to be a destination dedicated to the defense of Masonry.