I recently was shown this article that claims that the Hebrew alphabet, when viewed in what appears to be a spectrogram, the actual frequencies in which the letter hits creates a shape of the physical letter itself. It is hard to explain, see the reference. The problem is, I have done a lot of searching and am unable to find the original research paper. The article above claims "the article is too extensive and technical for reproduction here." I want to see the extensive technical version. Has anyone seen this? Is anyone familiar with this idea?

  • 4
    Did you ever think about the fact that Hebrew letters evolved changing their shapes with the course of time and there is the second script in Hebrew called the Rashi script in which many letters look completely different, for example Tet looks like usual Ayin, Tsadi looks like usual Lamed, etc.? How on Earth can this correlate with what they say in that article?
    – Yellow Sky
    Aug 24, 2014 at 5:51
  • 3
    Hi Yellow Sky. My skepticism is the reason for such a question. I don't believe a spectrogram can show such discontinuous letters in the first place without some manipulation. Regarding the text itself, Rashi script, which is a mix of Hebrew and Aramaic, is not an evolution of Hebrew but rather an alternative. Historically the Torah is written in either Ivri script (first temple period) or Ashuri script. With the article above using the latter.
    – Michael
    Aug 24, 2014 at 13:38
  • There are several lithurgical pronunciations of Hebrew: Iberian Sephardic, North-African, Egyptian, Iraqi and Irani (mostly same as those from Spain, with slight differences). Samaritan, Ashkenazi, Yemenite (which is considered by some as the closest to how it was pronounced in antiquity) and, of course, plenty of proposed reconstructed pronunciations by professional linguists. And, of course, modern Israeli. WHICH pronunciation are we talking about here???
    – Joe Pineda
    Sep 2, 2014 at 2:28
  • Hi Joe, good question. I don't have the source so I cannot answer it.
    – Michael
    Sep 2, 2014 at 23:32

4 Answers 4


The source for this is in a book called The Coming Revolution by Zamir Cohen. I glanced at the book once and I can't say I recommend it as a scientific publication. (A much fuller review is here if you want). One of the differences between books and a peer reviewed journal is that books don't have to be reviewed and approved by other experts in the field - they just have to convince a publisher they'll sell. That means that a book can, for example, only present one side of a scientific debate (even if it's a minority opinion maintained by very few) and still make it to the bookshelf, whereas a peer-reviewed article wouldn't make it past the experts who would notice the imbalance.

I can't find an online preview, so I'm afraid that if you want to see the original "source" you may have to buy the book.

  • Thank you. That would explain why there is no scientific publication available; because it does not exist.
    – Michael
    Aug 24, 2014 at 13:42

Just to add this: what is usually called Hebrew script was in fact borrowed from Aramaic. The Old Hebrew script, as found in the oldest Hebrew inscriptions, looks more like Samaritan script.

  • Arabic, Cyrillic, Greek, and Latin scripts were all also "in fact borrowed from Aramaic". Some hold that all Indic scripts can also be traced back to Aramaic script. Writing has only been independently invented a handful of times in human history. Aug 26, 2014 at 2:23
  • Greek not from Aramaic, but from Phoenecian, a different offshoot of ancient North Semitic script.
    – fdb
    Aug 26, 2014 at 10:08
  • Ah yes you're right (-: Aug 26, 2014 at 11:04

I found this page after hearing same in one of Dan Winter's videos. As much as I've enjoyed his material, it's clear there is fabrication therein. There are several Freemasonic texts which set the record straight. The English alphabet of 26 letters is a better system, in the esoteric sense, to work with. You will also find much in perusing Marty Leeds' material on Pi. Pi, according to many sources including Freemasonry, is the conceptual Substrate to the modern English alphabet.

This would be case closed for me but for the amazing work by Stan Tenen. So I'm not sure what the heck is really going on. Seems to be two wholly exclusive systems (Hebrew/English). There's a chance it could be a comparison of say Runes to Hebrew. Meaning a celestial as to terrestrial or more earthy symbol array.

Yet consider the ado made about Hebrew's 22 letters corresponding to the features of a cube; with the so called Cube of Space. I had Hulse' book on this and took it for granted. I however, only recently, took a cube and counted faces, points and lines... and guess what, it comes out to 26. This, I am sure, evidences what those Freemasonic texts were alluding to. I am not a Freemason.

There is diversion when it comes to the exclusiveness, the high and mightiness, of the Hebrew row. It's not the case.... and likely why we have to endure false claims about spectrograms etc.


I actually have a copy of the original research done by two researchers with a rabbi intoning Hebrew vowels sounds in the 1960's. It wasn't formally published in a journal article. It does show the spectrum of the Hebrew words forming the actual glyph itself. It is entitled "The Qabalistic Primer of Creative Consciousness (previously entitled The Spectrograms of Hebrew Alphabet published and entitled in French as (Spectrogrammes de l'Alphabet Hebraique: Mont-Blanc Suisse) by Carlos Suares (deceased) in collaboration with Fred Alan Wolf, Ph.d

  • 1
    Can you make this available to us somehow? Can you upload a scan?
    – curiousdannii
    Oct 6, 2019 at 8:25

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.