Subject: 19 code magic exposed

The first letter: Numbers DO lie!

These days we can here from all sides that numbers do not lie. Many people try to prove their faith`s doctrines and beliefs using numbers and calculations. They usually say :"Numbers do not lie". Well, this is true, numbers do not lie, but also it is true that numbers(just like anything else) could be used to justify lies or to produce lies. Did stickes and ropes used by pharaoh`s magicians lie? No, but they are used and presented by magicians in a such way that it appeared as they are moving, giving the false picture of reality. I`ll repeat , the stickes and ropes used by magicians are presented in a specific way(known to magicians) to give a false picture of the reality, that is, to appear that they are moving and that magicians have some magic power. Even Musa was frighteened a bit: "...Whereupon, their ropes and sticks appeared to him, because of their magic, as if they were moving. And Moses harbored some fear." 20/66-67

In the very same way, today, many people manipulate with numbers and calculations and present them in a way that they appear as miraculous. And the people even call them the Messangers of God! And, in fact, they are nothing but number magicians. It is also true that some people who try to justify/prove their faith using numbers, LIE about thier numbers. Today i`ll show to you an example: In RK`s translation of Quran, in appendix No.1, the following "fact" is presented as miraculous, and as a one of the proofs of divinity of The Quran: Every word in first verse is mentioned in the Quran in multiples of 19. a) The first word (Ism) is mentioned in the Quran 19 times, 19x1. b) The second word (Allah=God) is mentioned in the Quran 2698 times, or 19x142. c) The third word (Al-Rahman=Most Gracious) is mentioned in the Quran 57 times, or 19x3. d) The fourth word (Al-Raheem=Most Merciful) is mentioned in the Quran 114 times, or 19x6.

COMMENT:

NOTHING/NONE of the data above is correct(even if we do not count 9/128-129, the verses that he claimed to be false). I`ll repeat, NOTHING IS CORRECT, nor actuall counts are divisible by 19 . And people even call it a MIRACLE!!?? May God forgive me for being caught by this magic in the past too. May God forgive me my stupidity and all the evil that i have done being bewitched by the numbers, and may all the people that i injured being bewitched forgive me...

Let me analyse data above and explain all the manipulations used to get 19 divisibility for four bismillah`s words, let me expose the number magicians using the Musas stick of our time- God`s Sign -Quran and its criteria and methods that it recommend to us: objective investigation, analysis and rational thinking.

**First word (I)sm in its original form, as it is used in bismillah(invocation), is mentioned 115 times in the quran. Not divisible by 19. To get desired count, that is,19, he completely excluded ALL of its occurences???!!! Instead, he counted the other form of that word, and that is "Ism", or more correct "ASM". But he was not consistent even in this arbitrary counting, he further excluded all of its plural forms and all the forms with sufixxes (hu) and (hi) (what was not the case in other counts, for example when he counted all the forms of the words with root R- SH -D, when he wanted to prove his messengership)

**The second word- Allah, occurs 2815 times in Quran(if 9/128-129 are excluded). Not divisible by 19.

To get 2698(19 divisible) RK exluded 5 occurences of the word Allah. Some justifying it by the fact that these 5 occurences have suffix(hu)mma. Allahumma means "O God!" and it is used when somebody is is calling upon Allah - One and Only True God. PLUS, He also excluded all of its occurences in the bismillahs at the begginings of the quranic chapters EXCEPT in the first one!?, that is, in 1:1. So, the statement that the second word (Allah=God) is mentioned in the Quran 2698 times, or 19x142 is simply A LIE. And, what a lie!! As simple as that.

**The third word Ar-Rahmaan occurs in the quran 169 times. Not divisible by 19.

To get desired 19 divisible count , that is, 57, RK had to exclude all of its occurences in the bismillahs at the begginings of the quranic chapters except in the first one?!?!, that is, 1:1 in hafs version of quranic text.

**The fourth word- Al-Raheem, occurs 146 times in the Qur'an. Not divisible by 19.

To get 19-divisible number, 114, he excluded all of its occurences in the bismillahs at the begginings of the quranic chapters except in the first one!? (1:1) and he also included all the occurences of the word Raheem(80) -that is not orriginaly mentioned in invocation(bismillah). Not to mention that he, again and again, was not consistant in his counting, he included its accusative form (with suffixed alif) what was not the case in the counting of the the word `Quran` where accusative forms were completely excluded!

After all, for all of this doctored counts of RK, it is necessery to exclude 9/128-129 if we want them to be 19-divisable.

So, if one is consistently changing his criteria of counting, he could produce a perfect "miracle"-but then it will not be a miracle, I`ll rather call it - magic. If one is allowed to include what he want and to exclude what he want and when he want it, and if he is allowed to exclude the very same word that he is counting only because it`s meaning in the sentence reffers to something different (for example "QURAN other than this" in 10/15)and other time(while counting other words) to include it, and if he is allowed to count plural forms when he want and not to count it when he want, and if he is allowed to count verb`s form of the arabic words and to exclude it when he want, then , his numbers and calculations, his number`s magic, could appear to be very impressive IN THE CASE IF -somebody did not check, -and if he did not consider continuous changing of counting criteria, -and if he is not aware of all incosistency in the counting and calculations. -Esspecially if he do not respect the fact that magician has been polishing and stranghteening his magic during more then 15 years -and that he had several friends who helped him with all thier strenght -and that they used computers for calculations -and that after magician`s dead, there are hundreds, if not thousands, other magicians who are in power to support his sorcery with their mighty new era computers -and that magicians work hardly day and night to find interesting nubers and its relations -and that magicians themselves are obsessed with numbers in the way that their brains are automatically tuned/ajusted to produce and to find 19-dividable patterns

Plus, what is most important,magicians are usually making thousands of calculations , and only after that they present 20 or 30, that are divisible with 19 or whatever. They never present all of their attempts and calculations, they presents only those that works, in order that their audience may be impressed. And it happens, cause intuitively we are not aware of all the possible ways, combinations and sort of calculations that may be used to get desired results and divisibility. In The Quran there is an ocean of statistics that should be calculated. If some of them come out as 19- divisible, there is nothing miraculous in it. After all, in my opinion, the real miracle lies in the fact that they, actually, did not find anything significant, except maybe a few interesting facts which proves nothing.

In summary, NOTHING of the miraculous counts/calculations (for 4 bismillahs words) from appendix of RK`s translation of Quran, mentioned above was correct, all acctual/true counts are not divisible by 19.Counting criteria were arbitrary and biased- consciously inclined toward producing 19-divisible counts and were very inconsistent. In fact only thing that was consistently applied was INconsistency. By selecting/choosing the criteria of counting with biaseness and with arbitrary exclusions and inclusions of different forms of the words (and keeping secret many of it, not mentioning clearly many of it) magician make up his magic to look very impressive.

Second letter: More on counting

My understanding is also that we need not predefined criteria for counting(or reflecting in your example). But the thing is that if one is allowed to change criteria every time he counts, the miracle dissappears,that is, it is possible to create/generate a miracle changing criteria every time.

For example:

1. a- when counting four bismilah`s words:(i)sm, allah , ar-rahman and ar-raheem, all occurences of these words in the bismellahs on the begginings of the quranic chapters are ***excluded***??? b- when counting "initials"(Ja, sin, etc.), the letters from bismillahs on the begginings of the chapters are **included**???

2.when counting the four bismillah`s words, all occurences in the bismillahs on the beggining of the chapters are excluded **except** those in the first bismellah?? The excuse was that it is only numbered bismillah, but in warsh verison of quranic text it is not numbered . And if we do not count numbered bismilahs, why they are included in counting of letters in the surahs that starts with such a letters/"initials"?

3.when counting four bismillah`s words, their occurences in 1:1 are included for words allah ,arrahman and arraheem but the ocurence of the word -(i)sm- is not included ???

4.the count of word raheeem is included in count of ar-raheeem to get 114, but I am sure that if the count of ar-raheeem alone was dividable with 19, the count of raheem would be excluded. And if that was necessary rk would included all other words with the same root R-H-M, just like it was case with counting all the forms of the words with the root R-SH-D to get the total 19 and justify his messengership?

5.Though the word raheem is not the word originaly mentioned in bismilah, he counted it, he even counted/included its accusative form to get 19 divisibility, THAT was NOT the case when word quran is counted, where he actually excluded its accusative form to get 57, that is, 19 divisibility(additionally he excluded anothe two/three occurences which reffer to "quran other than this" and "non-arabic quran")

6 When counted the word Allah he exluded 5!!! occurences because of its suffix humma??? Allahumma means -O God!

7.The original form of the word -(I)sm -that is found in bismillah,that is SM,is not counted at all, instead of that RK counted ISM, or more correct ASM???!! 7. Nobody claims that -Bi- from the beggining of the bismillah is dividible with 19? Why? If it has been dividible I am sure that it would be presented as a part of the miracle. 8 and on the end of the day we must exclude their occurences in 9/128-129!

Not to add that rk sometimes excluded the words that he counted because they reffered to- for example -non arabic quran- or -quran other than this- or he excluded the word arsh/throne and resuul/messenger refering to other than God`s throne and messanger etc etc etc. When you are allowed to include and exclude whatever you want you can allways get 19 divisibility , but it will not be the miracle .

So the problem is not in authorising the particular criteria , the problem is in changing the criteria whenever it is necessesery to get 19-divisibility. One can take whatever criteria he wants, but he must apply it consistently if he want to claims a miracle. If he continuously change it, just for the sake of getting 19 divisibility, then, he is, actually, not finding, but creating "the miracle". In my opinion that exactly is the case with "No 19 miracle", there is no miracle of No.19.No 19 miracle is a product of manipulating and doctoring the counts to fit 19 divisibility. Peace, Zlatan p.s.i am going to wrote about "initials"- letters found on the beginnings of 29 quranic chapters and we`ll see that there is nothing significant in they occurences in their respective surahs nor combination of surahs that beggin with the same "initials".

Third letter

The response to Aisha Musa`s objections, or, more on "How the number magicians produce their magic?"

"Aisha Y. Musa" wrote: > Numbers do not lie, people both lie and make mistakes. What Goldy shows > here is that except for its occurances in the un-numbered basmallahs, the > word 'al-Rahman' does occur 57 times in the Qur'an. This is the standard > way of counting words, even in software programs of the Qur'an. They do > not count the words in the basmallahs, neither did al-Bayhaqi in his > concordance of the Qur'an. So, goldy now wants to criticize RK for using > the same system others use. > > The word Raheem occurs 114 times without 9:128, and 115 times with it--not > 146 times. If we count the occurance in the un-number basmallahs, it > becomes 227 or 226--not 146. > > So, it is people who lie, as goldy has below.

Salamun alaikum Aisha :)

You probably didnt read carefully my words, so you misunderstood me,that is , you misunderstood what actually my counts are about, and accordingly you found "mistakes" in my counts. I did not said that total count of *Raheem* is 146, but i said that total of *Al*-Raheem is 146(see my original post bellow) in Quran(without excluding anything). Your count is 226, ok., but it includes the 60 occurences of raheem and 20 occurences of raheeman, and these are not words originaly mentioned in the bismillah. We must come back to what my critic acctually was about:I criticised RK cause what he stated was clear manipulation in order that his counts and calculation may appear impressive. He stated that:

** Every word in first verse is mentioned in the Quran in multiples of 19. a) The first word (Ism) is mentioned in the Quran 19 times, 19x1. b) The second word (Allah=God) is mentioned in the Quran 2698 times, or 19x142. c) The third word (Al-Rahman=Most Gracious) is mentioned in the Quran 57 times, or 19x3. d) The fourth word (Al-Raheem=Most Merciful) is mentioned in the Quran 114 times, or 19x6. **

You see, he claimed that Al Raheem is mentioned 114 times in quran. Cant you see it? And what he claimed is not the truth. Cause (even we exclude 9/128-129) Al Raheem is mentioned in quran 146 times. And even if we exclude so called "unnumbered bismillahs"(though there is no reasonable excuse for it, except, doctoring of counts) the acctual count of Ar-Raheem is 34 (again not divisible by 19). What he acctualy done was that he excluded 112 occurences of Ar-Raheem-the form of the word that IS originally mentioned in bismilah!!!??? and included 80 forms of the word raheem (NOT originaly mentioned in bismillah ???!!!) and then he claimed that (I quote)"d) The fourth word(Al-Raheem=Most Merciful) is mentioned in the Quran 114 times, or 19x6."???!!! What can I say? He was master of manipulation, he was the number magician, he was Dr.(Doctorer:) of counts. I am sure that if the count of the word Ar-raheem (without including raheem) was 19-dividible nobody would ever mentioned, nor would be anybody ever thought about including count of raheem in it. And in the case that some critic make objection " why the count of raheem was not included in counting of Al Raheem?", he would be bombarded for "his ignorance of arabic" and for not knowing a BIG difference between raheem and Al-Raheem- which even the worst of your(Aisha`s) students of arabic language knows. And he would be bashed cause he is hallucinating and seeing article Al in the places where it do not exists. That was actually the case when some critics claimed that bisismillah acctually contains (of) not 19 but 20 or more letters- reffering to not written alifs-they were accused for halucinating the unvisible letters. But when it comes to counting words of bismilahs it seems that RK also hallucinated, cause he did not saw(count) the words originally mentioned in bismillah, instead of it he saw(counted) what was suitable for him to get 19 divisible counts. Clear magic. He was bewitched by himself. Why he did not counted originaly mentioned form of ASM, that is SM? Because alif was missing ? But why he then counted the "LiLah" form of ALLaH where alif is also missing?? And instead of it he counted the form ASM but he excluded some of its forms (those with suffixes hu/hi) There is no end for his manipulations and subjectivity, he was imposter with no brackets. Ill repeat NONE of counts that he reported was correct and he managed by his manipulations to get them all divisible by 19. What a magician!!! He is even better than David Coperfield.

Even if we excluded the unnumbered bismillahs and 9/128-129 only one of actual counts of four bismillah`s word would be correct, that is Ar Rahman -57. But there is no rational reason for it . Why would be choice/method for counting that was used by Abdul baqi and few others who published concordance of quran(why would it!!??) be obligatory on us for counting? Who gave them authority to decide how words should be counted? Did Allah gave him authority? I am sure that if counting of"unnumbered bismilahs " could produce 19 divisible counts, that RK and you would accept it wholeheartedly and you would be accusing anybody who mentions abdul baqi`s(or al-Bayhaqi`s) method for idolworship and for blind following of ancestors. In that case your arguments probably would be the following: 1.Are unnumbered bismilahs are part of quran or not? 2.If they are part of quran then isnt it logical that we must count them? 3.You see there is a consistancy in counting/including words of unnumbered bismilahs, cause, we also counted them to get 19 divisibility in sum`s of "initials"/leters on the beggining of some quranic chapters. 4.You would probably say that Allah did not revealed anything about Abdlul baqi,or al-Bayhaqi). And you would asked:" Does God run out of the words?" 5.etc etc

There is no any significance in the ways how anybody counts(otherwise it`s falling in idol worshiping), take whichever you want method of counting but apply it consistently, if you want to claim a miracle.

On the other hand there are at least two versions of quranic text with different numbering. In hafs version, first bismillah is numbered and in warsh version first bismilah is not numbered. If it could produce 19 divisibility, i am sure that rk would accept that words from the first bismilah are also not to be counted, and he would find it very logical and consistent, cause, none of the others bismillahs on the begining of the chapters are not counted.

At the end of the day abdul baqi did not edited his concordance for counting words, but for easy finding of particular word. The purpose of concordance is to give quick refference to quranic words because it is hard for average student to find them all quickly. And everybody who study quran and its concordance knows that words allah, arrahman, and arraheem, are (besides all of their occurences trough quran) mentioned in bismillahs on the begginings of chapters and it is very easy to find them, no need to give refferences for them. And maybe the reason why he gave the refference for first bismilah 1:1 is that he made his concordance according to hafs version of quran.If abdul baqi took warsh version and accordingly not listed first bismillah as numbered, nobody would mentioned abdul baqi here. Besides that, if abdul baqi did not listed 112 bismillah in his concordance of Quran, does it means that they are not part of Quran? Maybe abdul baqi did not believe that 112 unnumbered bismillahs are part of the quran ? Besides, why not follow Flugel`s concordance, or Mustafa Mlivo`s, or Nujumul Furqan concordance, or my concordance( if i ever made it)? Anyhow, for a monotheist, the claim that in order to witness the claimed miracle we should count the words as Abdulbaqi did,or as anybody else did, is at least ridiculous. In short none of counts regarding 4 bismilahs words are miraculous, all acctual/true counts are not divisible by 19.Whenever a consistent method is applied, none (or at the best case only one word) of the 4 words come out as multiple of 19 . Counting criteria used by RK and others were arbitrary and biased- consciously inclined toward producing 19-divisible counts and were very inconsistent. In fact, only thing that was consistently applied was INconsistency. 19 divisibility is achieved by biased counting criteria and by arbitrary exclusions and inclusions of different forms of the words in order that counts may appear impressive and 19-divisible. RK was forced to lie in order that his "miracle " could appear miraculous. He was aware that he must give a simple description of the miracle-in order that the claim could be compared with other books and that audience can clearly see how it is impossible that such system exist except in a God authored book, and also in order to be simple to understand and impossible to imitate, that is,miraculuos. If he gave complicated definition of miracle, full of inconsistencies, exceptions, and arbitrary inclusions and exclusions of various forms of the wods, nobody would consider it as a miraculous. Imagine that RK stated his miracle as follows: *If we look at bismillah and if we count its 4 words trough quran and if we,while counting word Allah, exclude its form with sufix(hu)mme-Allahumme(O God) and if we completely exclude all occurences of the first bismillah`s word , that is, SM, and instead of it if we count ASM-the form not originally mentioned in bismillah, and if we exclude all of its form with sufixes hu/hi and plural forms (what was not the case in counting of other words) and if we count fourth bismillah`s word Ar-Raheem, and if we while counting include in this count the occurences of the word raheem(not originally mentioned in bismilah), and its accusative form- raheeman (what was not the case in counting of some other words) and if we count the third word ar-rahman, and if we while counting exclude all of occurences of these 4 bismillah`s words in the all bismillahs the beggining of quranic chapters except those found in the first bismillah(1:1), and if we exclude two verses that are trough centuries counted as a part of chapter 9, then we get 19-divisibility for all of the 4 words of the bismillah!!! How miraculous!!* Funny, isnt it :). Now we know why he was forced to lie: To make his calculation impressive. Cause stated like this, it would be hardly accepted by anyone. Now, i think, we are much better aware what the magic is all about. You show one side of picture, just like magicians on TV, and your magic looks real. But, if somebody would be able to go to the studio and analyse magician`s show from the other perspectives (behind the scene for example),then, he would realise that there is not magic at all.The miracle is result of a wrong perception, the result of looking from only one aspect-from the aspect that magician present it to you. The similar case is when we dip a stick in the water and looking at it out of the water, the stick appears as broken, or bent out of shape, but if we also dip in water, then, we see it in his real, correct shape. So if we carefully and objectively examine the data, we see that there is no miracle of No 19. 19-divisible counts are result of manpulations and arbitrary exclusions and inclusions of various forms of the words to get 19-divisibility. And it was supposed to be scientific,objective and precise mathematical evidence of preserving Quran???!!! "The miracle" experienced by many (including me in the past), is rather a result of looking at a lot of 19 divisible statistics, ussually achieved by false data and manipulations with counting and calculating criteria, then a carefull scientific, objective and precise examination, as required in quran. It was a very subjective phenomena, it`s (self)deception and wishful thinking. And not a miracle.

Salamalikum, Zlatan