The mystic/scholar Peter Kingsley suggests the pre-socratics were more akin to shaman-priests than proto-philosophers. With Parmenides as a paradigmatic example he suggests, the information received is from revelation through incubation (journeying) rather than rational contemplation. Plato is thus a misunderstanding of the situation, believing that Parmenides is engaged in anabasis, when in fact it is a catabasis.
We can consider (without ascribing superiority to one over the other) that there are (heuristically) vertical and horizontal dimensions to the esoteric realms. Horizontally the interaction is something more akin to magick, whereas vertically it can be considered more like mysticism. That is, the horizontal of these (to use my terminology) works in the pneuminous accretive structures/conceptual overlays themselves and the horizontal seeks to free ourselves from them.
Even though containing many practical aspects on how to live, Buddhism is concerned almost exclusively with vertical ascent. It eschews all the horizontal manifestations (visions, spirits, powers) as they appear, and insists one simply keep ascending.
Shamanism can be considered as a partial vertical ascent which then occupies sideshoots. In local situations, it may be that out of regional structures (trees, mountains, animals, lakes etc.), a pneuminous world is formed which then can be accessed as an autonomous ‘other world’ by the shaman. This in no way denigrates this world; it contains the potential to impart powerful magickal effects in the ‘real’ world: healing, injury, information.
Castaneda’s later suggestions would be that such worlds are real but endless in quantity and that there is a kind of structure/map to them which is accessible by the movement of the assemblage point. CC ultimately supplies a model that suggests high vertical ascent that liberates the organism in a similar way to Buddhism but retains conscious ability to move horizontally.
All religions, polytheistic or monotheistic, ultimately are still operating in the side shoots. The side shoots can be thought of pneuminous accretions or autonomous spiritual entities –no ontological differentiation between these is currently possible, though it is worth adding that even if they are autonomous beings, they will still end up with concepts projected upon them and thus still have a pneuminous accretive aspect.
Buddhism and other positions that similarly eschew the horizontal can appear to have a superiority to systems that work from the side shoots. However, this purity of ascent can only really be considered as different. Buddhist enlightenment is definitely something, and a particular thing too. The progression endlessly into the silence may be creating a superior interaction with the ineffable and it may be a superior way of exiting a putative karmic wheel. However, it is also possible (as stated above) that this activity is only moving in a different direction and not a functionally superior one.
The vertical ascent of Buddhism involves removing the conceptual/accretive as much as is possible with the notion of ‘seeing things as they are’. This is the notion of attempting to stop the world from speaking back to you the concepts that we have given it. Sunyata is one expression of this at a high level. Heidegger clearly is thinking of this when he links phenomenology to eastern practices.
All the systems practice silencing the mind chatter. As the mind is silenced, so various phenomena manifest. To engage with the other phenomena brings different practical results (horizontal engagement). The horizontal engagement systems can offer the frowned-upon material benefits but also communications with the Gods as to what should be done.
The issue of communication is difficult. Peter Kingsley intimates that we need to re-establish communication with the other world in order to receive how to move forward/re-establish society. The problem here is that one cannot necessarily trust the instructions that emit from this realm. If the denizens of these realms are simply a mish-mash of mytho-poetic accretive forces, then we cannot particularly trust that they will do more the mete out harsh rules and human sacrifice. On the other hand, if they are autonomous beings then equally, we have no guarantee they will guide us with wisdom (or that they will all guide us with wisdom).
Furthermore, since the communication with these realms can lead to regional cults, it is problematic as it reinforces human tendencies towards tribalism, which are not to be encouraged.
Consequently, the realm needs acknowledging but not necessarily utilising as a founding force for society.
Vertical ascent as a societal driver though, is also questionable insofar as it does seem to entail a certain annulment of humanity. This is reasonable in some sense and insofar as sufficient progress towards mass enlightenment is not possible, such a society might work towards vertical aims. However, if mass enlightenment is not possible then it seems likely that the temptations of the horizontal would re-emerge. If mass enlightenment were possible, this would certainly annul society in a regular sense, as it is not clear how such a set of beings would continue to procreate and would instead simply disappear into liberation.
Fairy land type phenomena are assuredly horizontal but equally related to a certain conceptual removal. Machen/Blackwood like disclosures of nature become much more apparent when one attempts to remove everyday interpretive layers imposed upon nature. One can easily imagine how deepened silent engagement with these landscapes would reveal occult manifestations. These may only be deep accretive layers, yet they would only be disclosed by certain layers being stripped away.
This issue bears on the concept of zones. Zones are somehow the Machen/Blackwood perception machine projected onto industrial dereliction. This is only achieved because (as the zonal theory suggests) the regular interpretation of them has been dislodged. The interesting feature of them is that they seem to be able to facilitate this shift almost by themselves.
The vector field (as described in the CEO) research is what facilitates these systems. Buddhism attempts to see the pure vector field, the side shoots use the silence of the vector field to facilate entry into pneuminous realms.
Possibly Zones appear due to the fact that before they become Zones, they indicate industrial noise/the restless life of capital. When empty, the silence is more profound; this triggers (hypothetically) an automatic mini-silence in the processing of the region. This mini-silence allows the weird-perception (Machen-Machine) to plug in, rendering the perception of it akin to the perception of the twisted hawthorn, not as an example of the rosaceae but rather as a fairy abode.
This Tooth is called Passion. In the Hyperqabalah it is Pnaslokied, it is the feeder node for Bnasupach which is related to Pan. Passion as a primal energy feeding Pan seems appropriate.
The notion of feeding is relevant to the note. From a level of ordinary reality one is forced to concede that a piece of art made by an artificial intelligence may be superior to one made by a human artist. Furthermore as AI gets better, so its ability to produce works of art that surpass human abilities will continue.
However from the pneuminous perspective the works remain quite different owing to the underlying metaphysical structure. Pneuminous theory is there to make an ontological connection between phenomena that is actual and not psychological. Things are literally connected on the conceptual (pneuminous) plane and the pneuma can actually do things (magick).
This means that at least in part the artists intent (such as they have one) is a real factor that can never be separated from the art as the pneuminous fibers continue to cling to it, even in death. That is, the dead artist is still an accretion in the pneuma and their fibres still cling to the vector that is the art object. This perpetual connection may be correctly or incorrectly read. Even if incorrectly it does not mean it is wrong experience of art, only that it is wrong in relation to the artists connecting pneuma, the original accretion. The new perspective forms further accretions onto the vector which layer on top of the earlier artists intentional levels.
When AI produces art it does so with none of the intent or passion or conceptual play that humans do. Its accretive relation is totally different to that of a human artist. Because of the way humans form pneuminous accretions, they are entangled with the objects. AI will be producing some kind of pneuminous relation but it is not at all similar to the human relation.
In the diagram we can see that the subject S perceives the art object AO . It folds it into its own pneuminous field understanding it as the artist does or otherwise. Either way there is an increase of pneuma to the AO vector. In the AI relation the subject still perceives/interprets the work but the creator only produces through algorhythmic lines which can contain nothing like ordinary artistic involvement/dedication —there is nothing like effort in the same sense involved. Furthermore, in the human relation, the artist perceives its own art work thus adding extra layers of complexity. The work is created and interpreted by the artist as well as being interpreted by the subject. In the AI relation the artist does not then perceive the work, the work is not appraised by the artist (unless prompted) it has no connection to it other than slender impersonal pneuminous fibres of necessity.
We might argue that currently AI is still prompted by a human and then appraised/selected. This is largely true however it doesn’t massively change the metaphysical difference. There would then be an ‘artist’ behind the AI on the bottom right (in the diagram) which would supply some sense of intent. The pneuminous structure would be somewhat connected but it would still not be identical to a totally human produced artwork. Furthermore the pure AI model can stand as we can readily conceive of an AI artist that once programmed creates things at its own behest, yet still cannot be said to employ effort and passion in the same way.
This is all a moot point in a sense as whilst the pneuminous theory does present a model in which the metaphysical structure of art would be literally different between the various modes, it would also be impossible to tell this difference. No part of this argument says the pneuminous relation is visible, only that under a certain conception of reality, it is necessary.
This Tooth is called Incest and in the Hyperqabalah it is the node Jincdotec. This node is fed by Zirnstaai.
The three (heuristic) spheres of reality are, the regular world, the magickal world and the energetic world. I’m not pretending this is a perfect breakdown but for the purpose of this note it will do.
The everyday world is the one we most commonly live in, or at least most of us. It functions on the bounded level of spatio temporality and gives rise to scientific rationality. This world is perfectly real. It is largely easy to communicate about things at this level because they can be spoken about in ways that people can recognise as having similarities. The rules are the same for all of us.
In this level the accretions may be sort of understood, though it will likely be only psychologically. We may understand that things are seen through concepts, though this is only an interesting feature of how perception occurs and not of ontological significance.
Magickal world functions at the level of the accretions. Magick as an activity that attempts to manipulate the world can do so because the accretions are not simply epistemological but rather ontological. Concepts (accretions of pneuma) plug into regions of ‘reality’ known as vectors and then create a filter through which concept creating organisms like humans view them. This makes a feedback loop of reperceiving the object as the concept thus driving the accretion further into the vector, making the identity between closer (though impossible to reach).
This process is the everyday magickal act of perception which reinforces the reification of object/concepts. It is also the level through which ‘magick’ as a reality manipulating activity takes place. Desired concepts (what the magician wants to happen) are applied (spells) to vector regions (situations that are required to be changed to the will e.g. make next Tuesday a sunny day, make it so I get the job etc). This is all achieved at the pneuminous accretive level, which in a sense is still actions with the world with the only difference being that the strings are pulled in non physical ways.
The last division I have called the energetic world. This name is chosen not arbitrarily but on the other hand only in recognition of how this term is often employed in esoteric systems, designating as it does, a nebulous power that courses through all things.
Energy must in a sense be the pneuma itself, except of course it is not bound into accretions. The practitioners who attempt to engage with this level are the mystics and their kin. Here the actions do not attempt to engage with the accretions but only to dispel them so that reality outside of them can be perceived. This is the most difficult aspect of all occult practice. This is the realm of silencing the mind in endless layers that show themselves. The accretive layers are very very deep.
All these layers interlock. The magician makes some use of the energetic but they do not pursue it. The everyday makes some use and has some perception of the magikcal but they do not pursue it. The energetic is inescapbaly embroiled in both of the above constantly strive to over come them.
This Tooth is called Eris after the Goddess of Strife. It is Zirnstaai in the Hyperqabalah which is the feeder node for Jincdotec. Its tree is the poplar or aspen, animals are beavers and kingfishers.
It is strange and interesting how in the process of pulling out a philosophy, its twists and turns show themselves as it goes. It’s almost as if Hegel was right.
The reticulum as I have described it, is an interconnected series of fibres that connect beings together in endless a-spatial-temporal ways. What seems to be clearer now is that rather than a kind of in itself, the reticulum is the conceptual (pneuminous) in itself.
Whilst interlocking with this in some sense, the energetic levels can in a sense be considered separate from this. This seems to be the case because the energetic levels function outside or at least in a different relation to the accretions.
Herein does lie something of a paradox that we cannot intellectually untangle but that intimates that certain developments of awareness alter the relation between the central point of awareness and the accretive layers. It is paradoxical because accretions are concepts. We necessarily see the world with them. Yet the person who has achieved sunyata has in a sense removed the accretions from the vectors, and yet they can still function.
This must regard the energetic way in which the accretions are attached to the organism. When seamlessly attached in normal circumstances the organism uses energy to attach/maintain the accretions. This results in the positive feedback loop of magickal creation. In a sense, to see things as they are is to break the feedback loop. This returns the access to the object to its primordial use level and stops the formation of archetype and the process of archetype projection.
This too is clearly related to the two kinds of esoteric interaction, but more on that later.
The Mouth of See widens further. This 3rdTooth is called Artemis. Artemis was a cruel Goddess of chastity and wild beasts. Artemis mercilessly punished mortals -poor Actaeon was ripped apart as a deer by his own hunting dogs after accidently seeing the Goddess naked. Artemis is the veil to the other world which should not be punctured. This is why she is chastity. She herself commands the phallus (bow and arrow) with which she defends the other world. It is the node Asnerist in the Hyperqabalah which is fed by Gramier and preceded by Teufos.
The pre-ontology is an almost impossible realm to describe. I don’t pretend to be able to see it clearly. However I think certain phenomenological activities and my play with occult systems as they pass through my region, sometimes have given me glimpses of this.
The problem with the pre-ontology and its relation to the vector field is that the vector field has no concepts in it by definition, so to be able to see it purely is probably impossible (Merleau-Ponty understood this). Sunyata in Buddhism seems to have a description of a kind of state in which the field is free of accretions yet all action is still possible, indeed improved. This sense of emptiness does seem flickeringly visible and in perceiving it one gets the sense that the ground that is seen could give rise to so many conceptual possibilities. It is simulataneously understood as the world we know and empty at the same time. The emptiness looks, is identical and yet due to its emptiness it looks different. When seen as empty, the pre-ontology albeit flickeringly, shows through.
This empty state suddenly reveals that the trees are stil trees but maybe not the regular trees that we know. Everything is more open. This ground always becomes an ontology, to regular awareness the accretions must take hold and a world appears. But underneath it is always what gives rise to it and this is not an academic fancy but an experiencable realm. The pre-ontology can help make sense of descriptions of the world like one finds in the old weird fiction writers like Machen and Blackwood. These intense, living, dark, pagan worlds are visible in the pre-ontology or rather they can spring out of it. These worlds themselves are accretions, layers. But they are not the regular accretions we perceive.
In this sense it is not simply a stripping away that reveals these worlds, but rather a stripping away and reassembly. The entry into them in this sense is perfectly real as (according to the theory) the accretions are not psychologically inert but ontolgically active.
If the pre-ontology can be held and the right route found, then Artemis can indeed be found in the wood. Though who would want to find her, I do not know.
Centre For Experimental Ontology 