3 d Artemis
Artemis is the goddess of the hunt and of the moon. She is also a guardian of the veil between the worlds. D is part of the hyperqab circuit with n (Foetus) before it and f (Urlking) after it. It also has upwards, central and downward paths connecting it to a, 0 and m respectively.
Other accretions are: Hebrew: Gimel, Tarot: Priestess, Wolf, Hedgehog, Tawny owl, Oak, Leucine, Vitamin D, Melatonin, Melanin, Diana, Astaroth, Time.
2 b I-mage
I-mage is the second node of the Hyperqab. It is a feeder node. The feeder nodes connect only to the paths of the circuit. When 2n+1 is applied to them they become a circuit number, hence they are unidirectional. I-mage feeds into Artemis (d).
I-mage is constituted by the concepts of the magician, the image and how the ego is portrayed as an image of power. As a path in the Gra tree (base 10 qabalah) I-mage runs between Sirius and Nyx (1&3)
Additionally accreted concepts are: Deer, Starlings, Rainbows, Rainbow trout, Modus Tollens, Isoleucine, Somatostatin, Thyroid stimulating hormone, Thyrotropin releasing hormone, B vitamins, Biotin, Birch Trees, Hebrew Beth, Tarot: Magus.
Shape
Recent work on the hyperqab has revealed a much more suitable shape. The below shape utilises the circuit of numbers d-f-j-s-l-w-u-p-h-n-d as a circle with the feeders connecting in from the outside. Two cones are formed by the circle connecting to a above and m below. Each number from the circuit connects to a and m. In the centre of the circle is absolute 0. All the circuit numbers form extra paths by connecting to 0, a and m also connect to 0 forming a vertical axis to the system. This forms a total of 52 paths in this instantiation of the hyperqab. We must remember that there are in fact 529 virtual paths to the hyperqab and that any instantiation is to some extent arbitrary. However this instantiation reflects the circuit well, whilst the cones form a powerful symbol of the double-world as it appears to us.
Nodes
The nodes of the hyperqab are the paths of the CEO adjusted qabalah. This is the reason for the name. The whole system is moved up a kind of dimensional level. The 22 paths of the flat tree become paths in a 23 node system utilising base 23. The CEO adjusted the hermetic qabalah by utilising the gra-tree as it fitted with the 47 based circuit in base 10. It then reaccreted the names of the paths and sigilised them. This cannot remove the previous accreted layers however it does make the latest layer take control of the path accretions to some extent. Again, magick is really to root of the accretive term employed as a general philosophy herein. Accretions in this sense are literally conceptual substance stuck together: a symbol, an idea, a number, force them together with the mind until they stick and there you have it, an accretion of pneuma.
To progress we must familiarise ourselves with the nodes of the hyperqab. In doing so we will eventually be in a position to understand the paths of the hyperqab. The table given below shows the accretive layering of the hyperqab nodes as they are rooted in the CEO gra-tree paths.
Recent considerations have moved my theorising away from outright human contingent paranormality –conceptuality as active substance– to a possibility that includes human accretive forces as only one element in the sea of what we call anomalous phenomena. Currently being played with is a ‘reticular ontology’, that is, a conception of everything as and endless series of lines or fibres. This is appropriated from reported occult conceptions of reality in this wise (e.g. the web of wyrd, Castaneda) in conjunction with Deleuze and Guattari’s notion of a line of flight.
Perception of the reticulum is supposed to be the closest one can have to seeing existence as it is in itself (note we do not say this is the case, we merely engage with the concept). It is also sometimes called ‘seeing energy’.
Now a feature of the reticulum is that once perceived, the separation of the perceiving being from the externality is considerably challenged. The lines can be clearly seen to extend straight from the being into the ‘outside’. There is a kind of boundary in so far as the being of awareness is a kind of node, yet the connectivity to the whole is immediately present. Furthermore the lines cannot be considered purely to exist in the regular spatial coordinates available to us; the lines bypass temporality as we know it and dimensionality.
A reticular ontology is essentially panpsychic insofar as all the lines are formed of awareness in a sense. Access to the reticulum is access to greater awareness -all psychic type events can be considered momentary reticular access. The reticulum as a whole is entirely self-aware. This is a postulate.
The formation of nodes (beings like ourselves) has an interesting consequence from this perspective. The more nodes develop there own internal awareness the more they believe they are capable of grasping what is going on. Unfortunately for the nodes, the more the awareness becomes centralised in the node, the less it actually accesses the reticulum. This then is the formula of the inverse increase in awareness in relation to the development of the node:
The greater awareness in the node, the less awareness of connectivity to the reticulum.
This means almost the opposite of Hegel’s PoS is true. The development of conscious is a retrograde step, worse still is self-consciousness, increasing narrowment of reticular awareness continues to occur until the crowning glory of this occurs -the state.
This tragedy also seems to entail a strong kind of unpleasant Kantianism. The more developed we become in investigating things with our own developed tools (maths, science) the less access we actually will have to the thing in itself. Of course Kant bars access to the thing in itself anyway, however the reticular as possible perception not only places the thing in itself partially within reach, it also means human rational attempts to fathom it necessarily get further from it. Consequentially all ‘lower species’ as we think of them have an increased reticular access, with this increasing further as one ends up in the inorganic.
Please don’t misunderstand. This is not an anti-scientific stance. Even if the node/reticular concept is accurate we generally do not live perceiving the reticulum and science has been of tremendous value to us. This occurrence of delving further and further away from perceptual access to something like the in-itself cannot necessarily be seen as worse than reticular access. Our investigations in this relatively solid seeming reality function well so the withdrawal from the reticular possibility can also be seen as highly epistemically satisfying.
This leads us to a second point about such an ontology. When we say that perceiving the reticulum is the actual connection to the ‘outside’, we consider it as a totally time/space transcendent perspective in which anything can be known (though equally there must be caution here, accounts like Monroe’s would suggest that even reticular access has many layers to it). It is minimally a totally superior epistemic state to regular human capacity. So it is easy to consider regular human perception as subtractive in its relation to reality. Even without the reticulum and simply with regard to our scientific understanding there is much we cannot see/hear/detect etc. We subtract from reality and our perception of the world is what we get.
Two points complicate this picture. The reticular ontology is totally compatible with human formed conceptual accretions which we literally layer over the regions of the outside. In the reticulum these are perceivable as emanating lines to nodes (accretions are different kinds of nodes) whereas from regular perception we often confuse concept and object.
This means we not only subtract, but that we add. We add pneuma to the externality and it stays there in the reticulum. However this actual state of confusion of regular perception -in which the connecting lines are not visible is also different from reticular perception, which for all its superior access is subtractive of the human state of perception. So our reality is additive and subtractive
Secondly then, this is why we couch reticular access as only the closest thing to seeing things as they are, for whilst it does show the accretions stuck to the vectors, it does not and cannot show the actual confusion of the nodally perceived reality state itself.
That is, even reticular access itself is subtractive.
Night considered as a power in itself has structural similarities to one of the forms of zones listed in these writings. The zone referred to is the spatial-temporal zone:
“Spatio temporal zonal manifestation appears only at a specific place and time. The entrance
to the Black Lodge in Twin Peaks was exactly such a phenomena. Magick is of course littered
by instructions to do certain things at not only certain times but also at certain places. In this
notion lies the spatio-temporal zone.”
What we mean then is that night functions as a temporal zone -where zone means region more prone to anomalous interference from trajectories not usually experienced (alien, crypto-zoological, ghosts, non-human spirits etc).
Night’s ability to act in this zonal capacity is interesting insofar as it may suggest either something in common or something different to other kinds of temporal zone e.g. astronomical/astrological particulars.
The standard explanation for the zonality of night concerns its ability to restrict human perception. Human accretive reality fields restrain the chaotic outside in a literal fashion. Light is an intricate part of this system. Perpetual feedback systems of solid realities as accretions fed back onto the vectoral (hosting) outside help to maintain the appearance of a near perfectly solid reality. Transcendental repression of small anomalies easily covers over tiny cracks.
Darkness alters this. As light withdraws, even though conceptual and other senses continue to work with the outside to maintain physicality at near similar levels to in daylight, there is necessarily an increase in the lack of stability. Fear of the dark can exacerbate this, both by increasing instability in the system and being attractive to entities that normally are outside of the reach of solid physicality. The instability generated by various anxieties and actual ontological looseness results in an increase in regular reality being breached by the anomalous.
These two processes themselves are also exacerbated by the night-time accretion itself. That is, the historical interconnected threads of the night in the pneuma (conceptual substance) make a vast accretive structure that itself autonomously alters the vector (the time region that the ‘night’ as accretion inhabits). No matter how much rationality may be imposed upon the vector in the modern day, this solidifying pneuma will only be partially successful in altering the mythic powers of the night as accretion.
In zonetology zones have been attributed with generating a kind of vacuum by the withdrawal human conceptual structures (dereliction). This conceptual vacuum has been assumed to be attractive to forces that can create anomaly -the speculative causal ‘reason’. Zones share with the night the accretive overlay effect which can multiply the anomalous potential of a zone.
In this sense though the zone-as-night has more similarity with the spatial zone than with some spatial-temporal zones. Our inevitable experience with this phenomenon on a daily basis bears some resemblance to a spatial zone that we might walk past every day. Twilight also fits this kind of description though twilight itself has a different accretive structure.
However spatial-temporal zones as they are otherwise defined can be shown to be different. Spatial-Temporal zones that are defined by particular configurations (astronomical/astrological) do not have the easy repeating nature of either the night or twilight. If it is augured that to be on a particular hill on a particular day may have some particular other worldly property, (if we accept this) we may infer two possibilities for its truth. i) is that a particular set of actual forces are in play in what we experience as ‘that time and place’ that will yield some kind of anomalous effect. ii) is that, having been given the coordinates for the ‘event’ we accretively project anomalousness onto this vector region and as such we facilitate its occurrence. We might note that if i) is true (so long as we know about the event then so is ii) (the accretion will necessarily be formed) whereas ii) might be true and i) was not.
Of course other forces might be in play on particular nights, however this is besides the point in relation to our zonal delineation. The zonal (anomalous) power of night has two faces, one human accreted ‘the night accretion’ and the other quasi intrinsic to our relation to it -the withdrawal of human visual perception. The power of the temporal zone however potentially comes from a particular intersection of hidden forces that create the zone or solely the application of the accretion to the spatial/temporal vector.
It is the former of these two points that is the crucial distinction between such zonal conceptions. Both faces of the night are contingent on different relations a particular species (humans) has with the night, one accretive and the other a feature of how its perceptual system functions. Clearly these demarcations aren’t absolute and it is hard at some level to strongly separate the withdrawal of light and its hiding of the world from the cultural-mythic accretion of ‘night’. However even treating them as two poles still renders the structure of night as differing from the spatial-temporal zone and its potential for being brought about by either simply accretive powers or actual hidden forces, utilised by humans but potentially simply occurring whether they are aware or not -and accretive powers..
Centre For Experimental Ontology 