Great Kabbalistic Art — Hartmann Schopper, 1564-1569

But because these Numbers in any line contain a correlation and correspondence with the sums of the Words, it is because the first number of any such line, which is 0, is thought of and corresponds with the first sum, which is 41. So also the second, which is 1, with the second sum, which is 550, and the third with the third, and so on for the rest. Then, since the numbers of the third and fourth lines have created a single middle between the preceding and subsequent number of the second line, as can be seen in the example above: the final sum of the Query, which is 509, would lack such a proportional Number cohering to it. To achieve this, operate as follows.

If the words of your Query are [even], take the two middle numbers of the last line of this operation, compare these middle ones only to each other, and their difference will be the four proportional of any line corresponding to the final sum of the Words. For example: In the example shown above in the first chapter of this work, in which it is written concerning the surname of the Pontiff to be elected after the death of Pius IV the Florentine original: "Pij quarti Florentini", the words of the Query consist of an odd number. Therefore, so that you may elicit the proportional number corresponding to the final sum there, namely, the sum 559—and it appears here below by example—let the two middle ones of that last line be taken. These numbers, as you see, are 1 and 0, whose difference is 1; which difference you shall write between them in the following form, and you will have by agreement the last proportional cohering to any end of the final sum, namely, 559. Take the example:

A numerical diagram in an inverted pyramid shape used for Kabbalistic divination. The top row consists of word-sums: 16, 215, 376, 99, 300, 195, 78, 460, 359. Seven progressively shorter rows of numbers follow, calculated by the "differences" method. Row 2: 4, 02, 31, 9, 30, 64, 0, 160, 15. Row 3: 4, 3, 3, 0, 10, 0, 7, 4. Row 4: 1, 0, 6, 6, 3. Row 5: 1, 6, 0, 3. Row 6: 5, 6, 3. Row 7: 1, 3. The final Row 8 converges to the single digit 4.

But if the words of the Query are even in number and quantity, then to hunt for the proportional for the final sum of the same query, you will compare the first number of the last line with the middle number of the same line, and you will place their difference (as I said above) either noted in your mind or, to avoid errors, under that fourth line between the first and the middle. Then, with similar care, you will observe the same middle with the last of the same fourth line, and you will write the difference on the opposite side of the other difference between the middle and the last. Then, let these elicited Differences likewise be compared to each other, and you will extract from them the fourth proportional corresponding to the last sum of the query. For example: in the other example written above composed of an equal number of words, you will see that for the first number of the last line there is 0, and the middle Number of the same fourth line is 1, whose difference is 1 (for it is a comparison of a smaller with a larger), which I place below...

this line between them. Then compare the same middle Number, namely 1, with the last Number of the same line, which is 0, whose difference is 1; which difference, like the other, is written below lest it vanish from the mind. Then do not cease to compare these Two elicited Differences to each other, and you will see it bring forth the Fourth proportional, which is 0; which you will keep for the last sum of the query, and for 509. Being mindful, however, that the lines afterwards [are] the two superior Differences through which certain lines are placed underneath, namely 0 and 1, which, as we said, you will either separate with a small line or another sign; and thus you will have completed those four lines composing this first practical operation.

On the Second Operation

which is on the extraction of Roots

Chapter III.

This second Operation occupies itself entirely with extracting Kabbalistic Roots original: "Radicibus" from the sums of the Words, and I will show its Method of operating as briefly as possible. The Method is such.

Write the words of your query by the numbers of the Hebrew-Latin Alphabet as you did in the first operation, for obtaining their sums. Where those numbers of the Alphabet were placed perpendicularly so that you might perfectly collect their sums, here they shall be placed in a flat order, and with the line made, you will place the same sum to elicit the Roots: having rejected the middle points or dots between the number of one line and the number of another. Then, beginning from the left, reduce these numbers to a smaller species of their proportion, by extracting three units original: "tres unitates" from them as many times as necessary, and so proceeding until the end of that word.

But here several things are to be noted. First, that some numbers of the words themselves, being separated from each other, must be placed in turn, so that we may achieve this operation more easily and without error and avoid confusion; for you place the three units to be elicited from them beneath them, namely in the middle of the number from which the triple is drawn, and the next following number, as will be clear in the example below.

Second, it should be noted that when you have reached the last number of a word, there is no need to proceed further; for you shall consider it as useless (although in truth it is not so), by removing no units from it. For such lines of Numbers, whether there were two or three (for we deny that there can be more) must maintain a pyramidal form original: "pyramidalem formam".

Moreover, what is said here regarding the first line composed from the numbers of the Words, the same is likewise to be understood of the second, because you elicit units from the sums: namely, the last number is also to be left there.

Third, one must consider whether the number from which you have to extract three units is capable of this subtraction, namely, whether it is at least 3. For if it is not such, but either 2, 1, or 0, from which it is impossible...