http://www.shivashakti.com/schools.htm
Note on the 1331 Pundits. The usage of the numbers of Pundits (1, 11, 121, 1331,...) is a hilarious corruption of the actual application of those numbers sourced in Pascal's triangle and possibly imported from independent Chinese and European discoveries (proably the former). ... The triangle begins: 1; 1, 1; 1, 2, 1 1, 3, 3, 1 1, 4, 6, 4, 1; ... denoting a distribution of a set of entites into subsets, not "1,331" or ("121"). For example: One previous contributor for the time being kicked off this forum seemed to categorize people into 3 types: a. Those Enlightened vs Unenlightened, b. females and males (he had a preference for females); and c. Those who perform a certain sex act which won't be mentioned. ... For those interested in the math, this makes 8 possible types of people if each category has only 2 possibilities with no in-betweens. The distribution suming to 8 is (1, 3, 3, 1); with the 1's on either side amounting to (for example); people with a certain trait among all three vs the other "1" on the right, those NOT. ... Example: say the subsets are (a,b,c) = yes: a1 = Enlightened, a2 = NOT Enlightened. b = b1 = female, b2 = male. c1 = performs "the" particular sex act, while c2 does NOT perform that particular act. ... Thus, if a person is (a2, b2, c1); he would be Unenlightened, male, and performs that act. There are 8 possible outcomes with a distribution of (1, 3, 3, 1). That's not "1,331" as in the numbers of Pundits. It's a distribution. However, IF there were 1,3,3,1 Pundits, all of them would be male, some Enlightened while the rest not; and some would of course might perform that particular sex act while others don't.