But in all such systems the symbolism employed must finally submit to a mathematical expression, which, indeed, is the test of its truth, for as has been very wisely said, we have reason to suspect all statements of fact which are not capable of a mathematical expression. In this connection the Time factor becomes of the highest importance in Kabalism, and since the matter lies in the region of debate, something may be said in this place that may prove of value. In my Kabala of Numbers and elsewhere I have repeatedly pointed out the fallacy of those systems which ignore the cosmic factors, which alone give symbolism its coherence. Nobody can reasonably ascribe any specific sound or numerical value to a planet, or any influence to any part of the heavens or to any period of time without having regard to some cosmical factor as the basis of the system to which these planetary or time significations belong. Yet I find that such systems are all too prevalent, and that in some glaring instances they assume a factor as the basis of the system, and straightway set about to argue it out of existence. Thus it is stated in one small manual intended for the use of those studying the mysteries of sound and number, that it is “essential to have _an accurate knowledge of the time of the rising of the sun_ at places on particular days,” and the “simple method” of doing this, according to its author, is to “take the sunrise from any reliable almanac ... and add to it for western longitude at the rate of four minutes per degree, and subtract for eastern longitude at the same rate, and _you have the mean local time of sunrise_.” How far this is from the truth any tyro in astronomy will readily perceive. Yet when the error was pointed out to this would-be exponent of the “Mysteries,” instead of being gratefully accepted as a piece of good information which could be utilized in future publications, the unlucky critic was most thoroughly abused, and the matter being finally referred to the authorities at the Greenwich Observatory, it was clearly shown that the critic was right and the author of the “simple method” wrong in every case. The repetition of these errors in subsequent publications leaves one with no alternative but to conclude that either the intricacies of apparent local sunrise are beyond him, or that their introduction into his simple method of expounding the mysteries would undermine his market by rendering the truth too difficult for popular consumption.