by on

I don’t know what’s going on with any of it any more. That’s not to say I ever did, but somehow it all seems maybe more pointless, I’m not sure. Purpose may be what’s missing, but what is purpose? Is it not just a kind of ego desire for someone to read and take note? Take note for what? Creativity is its own end to a point. There is a sense of wanting to have the cake and eat it. That is on the one hand, it is so clear that by an large the agent/accretive theory is generally (give or take an ontology here and there) correct, so I am nothing but an agent for certain informational powers that act through me (we all are). In this sense I cannot author anything as it, in the sense of the old CEO term NARP, I am just a regional processor. On the other hand getting the central accretion of self to understand this such that it can act without desire to have the sensation of production or failure is difficult.

Philip K Dick has a theory of time moving backwards communicating from the future. He manages to crowbar a teleology into this that I am less sure of, however the backward flow of time has some sense of truth about it. There is a Landian flavour to it, though the Landian version is more sinister. In Dick’s it is the holy spirit that is the backward time flow. This backwards time flow is perpetual and may be tuned into; we experience this as ESP etc.

Like myself Dick talks in terms of a pure informational substance that interacts with a kind of material reality. Weirdly like myself, Dick also talks of accretions, a term I thought was singular to myself. He may not mean exactly the same thing but the coincidence of terms is clearly synchronicitous and the usage similar. The backwards flow is clearly an ontological feature that I never particularly took into consideration, though I can see it makes a valid manifestation of possibility that could have agents adhering to it. In my terms, this would be a backwards projection of accretions from the future; why this would happen though is outside of the scope of my phenomenology. Dick must adhere (I think) to some sense of pneuminous interference with putative materiality. Either that or the information is all already present in our experience and it is simply our attuning awareness that perceives or does not perceive it.

Then there are numbers; it is also strange how Dick focusses on 2-3 74 as a thing. Surely he was aware of the whole 23 phenomenon -though there seems no mention of it. 74 is also highly significant as it suggests 47, the number that has been part of my own guiding thread. Indeed 74 is just as relevant in a sense as the two numbers form an oscillating pattern at the heart of base 10.

And then there are the bases, and how base 10 is a filter through which we see reality. Land knows this too an performed an unusual decoding that crosses the pneuminous-vector barrier with considerable potency (the numogram). An in the bases, in the arbitrary months and years and institutions we exisits. We exist in the pneuminous layers of conceptuality. This is the demiurge. Jehovah or Yahweh, an old Israelite war God sits smack in the centre of endless accretive layers of mad Godhood.

It might even want to be giving real reality, but all it can give its pneuminous accretive reflection. If magick is real and accretions can affect reality on a transcendental pivot, then the mad God is bending things to its image. The layers are all its allies, or most of them. The months are real as accretions, the letters are real as accretions because accretions are ontologically effective not simply psychologically passive.

What is the hyperqabalah? It is nothing but the desire to reaccrete the demiurge. To show it’s contingency and align it with the primal power of 23 and 47, whose numerical realities transcend base 10.

Joe Hoover is everywhwere. He is so omnipresent we cannot see him.

This is the second centre that closes down on itself and creates self consistent reality. I don’t know any way out as such on mass but I think one thing the occult type practices do is innure one to the power of the accretions. That is, the silencing of the mind and the raising of awareness.

But this is very very hard and has to be understood as a particular kind of liberation.

Do I mean all of this?

Maybe.

by on

This Tooth is called Superman/Boudica. It is weird that it has this double title. No doubt this is partially to do with its relation to the Chariot of the Tarot (which features the notion of chariot and hero). It is also remarkable, as was commented before, that in the Hyperqabalah (Eildour), it is the feeder node of the Teufos which is fetus. Hence Superman and Boudica produce the child. However the child as Hyperqabalah node has the curious name Teufos, reminiscent of Teufel (German for the Devil) and also Te UFOs , which could be an adaptation of the Te Deum. It’s tree is the holly, its animal the hare.

How can we make sense of Sunyata? What has happened to the relation to the accretions? Such a person is said to live through a primordial intelligence, seeing things as they are. We can translate this into seeing the vector field itself, but this only makes a certain level of sense. This is because to experience the vector field is to see the regions with no concepts. This is what Sunyata does, however the event of Sunyata also has a being that can still function, they can still use the concepts. 

What are we to make of this? In the ordinary situation the concepts plug into the vectors connecting self-accretion and external vector via accretions (of pneuma) attached to the vector. Clearly the Sunyata person-site is still functioning with the same array of concepts but also has at their disposal other ones that are invisible to regular NARPs ( Neurotic Accretion, Regional Processor) to use the old CEO terminology).

Since we speculate pneuma as a kind of substance, possibly a much simpler process of conceptual naming and recognition is employed in relation to the vector field. The pneuminous accretion is there but reduced to practically nothing; something we don’t consider possible with the heavy accretive layers we commonly attach to things. This gossamer level of minimal attachment is all that is required to enable the same level of communication whilst also revealing the vector field (a sort of things nakedly as they are to humans) itself. The description is of greater richness of perception. One can easily see how the conceptual (accretive) removal could achieve this. The questions remain about more a priori concepts (Kantian categories) and how much Sunyata also can remove these.

by on

What are the accretions? The accretions are accretions of pneuma. Pneuma is the conceptual substrate that we postulate as necessarily existing when we choose belief in synchronistic phenomena as metaphysically actual and not harmoniously determined -as discussed under agnostic disjunction. Phenomenologically all beings of awareness must necessarily have pneuminous interactions, but certain kinds of beings (Narps, in this case humans) are capable of binding pneuma into incredible forms of complexity and excess: accretions.

The accretions of pneuma are attached to vectors. Vector here is a carrier for the pneuminous accretion, the conceptual stuff. The vector field is itself pneuminous as it is base of all accretive possibilities. Phenomenologically the vector field is laid over the umbratic. The umbratic is the phantasy of being outside of awareness. It is the appearance of the structural elements underneath the conceptual overlay and vector field (pneuma).

This laying-over is one of minimal interaction. In normal reality, vector regions with accretions attached are part of a feedback system that makes them more into the thing the human takes them to be. Here is  vector, I attach the concept pen to the vector. If the vector is such that we would normally use the concept pen for then the application of the concept performs a minor magickal act upon the vector making it curiously more pen-like. Such actions take place all the time and are largely inconsequential. Actual magickal acts/synchronistic ruptures are caused by accretions attaching themselves to vectors that would not usually take them. This may result in an unusual configuration of conceptuality that is somehow arresting.

Accretions are formed by humans (Narps) but are free floating from them. As such accretions exist in two manners, both of which are related. Accretions may be bound to vectors. All physical things are accretions to some degree or other. Everyday disposable things, rubbish, accretes very little, but some things accrete a great deal. As these things travel through life with us we feel how much of our story is in them. In the theory described here, this story is literally in them, the pneuma is actually attached to the vector. Human made things have conceptual specificity embedded in them at the point of creation. These pieces become e.g. this dishwasher, this dishwasher becomes a certain kind of character in a household. Intensity binds pneuma to vectors, this may happen in the course of life or it may be done intentionally.

The other way in which accretions exist is unbound. Pneuminous accretions that are unbound  are easy to experience, one only has to remember anything or imagine anything and the accretion is detectable in some sense, either as non visual structure or visual. Since accretions are often built around a word-seed, the word seed will summon the accretion easily. Pneuma is sticky. We may take two ideas and with will force them together thus making an accretion.  Magick is largely based around humans abilities to manipulate unbound pneuma and to beseech the unbound pneuminous accretion to alter the regular solidity of things. Memory houses, kabbalah etc all use unbound pneuma. Active magick of intent seeks to apply new conceptual structures (an unbound pneuminous accretion) onto a vector which does not currently take it but might do so -this extensive contingency is important.

The regular solidity of existence as ruled by the structural umbratic can sometimes be breached by the accretion. Intensity can be responsible for this though in the case of synchronicity the action is down to the accretions themselves. No doubt factors which might be called unconscious are related to the manner in which the accretion behaves, ultimately though this is pure speculation. All that can be said is that some idea has inserted itself into someone’s world in an uncanny way and when paranormality is chosen (as a belief), the accretion must be responsible.

A human then is attached to accretions and is formed of them. The word-seed for most humans is their name. Around this word-seed the neurotic-accretion or self is formed. This accretion is embedded in the body-vector. In normal human functioning the neurotic accretion controls the conscious aspects of the vector and regulates the ability of other accretions to control the vector. The neurotic accretion though is in perpetual struggle with accretive powers which seek to dominate it, to control the territory. In the case of severe insanity the neurotic accretion fails to regulate the other accretions and they wander freely through the body-vector.

We can analyses accretions vector relations into 4 principle types.

  1. Accretions bound to vectors that fit the description of the accretion or even if they have escaped the original vector the attachment is still sensible from the Narp’s perspective. Hammer as use term, becomes hammer accretion embedded into vectors capable of taking this accretion.
  2. Accretions unbound from vectors that still represent the vector  in some way. The vector as the source of such an accretion determines the appearance, even if now the appearance has taken on a platonic type hue of perfection -ideality. These are what we call representations in the mind.
  3. Accretions unbound to any vector and having the appearance of never deriving from a physical vector. Imaginary images or magickal constructs/manifestations fall into this category.
  4. Accretions bound to vectors that they not suited to in ordinary life. These occur in magick, humour, surrealism/dadaism/pataphysics. This is the instance in which we take a vector and say ‘this vector will take the concept x’ even if the vector is nothing to do with x. We take a spoon and we pretend it is an owl. In doing so we infect the vector that readily takes the spoon concept and stick onto it the owl concept.
  1. Manifestationism
  2. Incoherence
  3. Phantasy
  4. Pneuma
  5. Accretive theory itself
  6. Design a god.
  7. Significance/Insignificance
  8. Designation
  9. Vector theory
  10. The Umbratic
  11. The Double
  12. The zone
  13. The numbers/the system
  14. NARP

by on

What do we mean by a transcendental repression? We mean a repression that is not contingent upon trauma at an ontic level but rather a repressive structure that is built into the subject (Narp) in its functioning as the kind of being that it is. In this way such a repression would be different from any regularly occurring repressive structures that may happen in life, no matter how regular they may be as patterns. A transcendental repression would occur at an ontological level and as such could be equally named an ontological repression.

What are we suggesting is repressed in the transcendental repression? The transcendental repression has two facets, one necessary and one more speculative. The first facet of the transcendental repression is the repression of the nature of being outside of a given subject’s perceptual sphere. The continual solidity of existence facilitates this repressive structure. We conflate this continual solidity with the a prioricity that being that is perceived is identical to being that is not perceived, when in fact this is a dubious notion to help ourselves to.

The disharmony between the possibility of this non-identity and apparent safe solid continuity of existence causes the being to repress the possibility of the non-identity. The repression seals its success by the fact that we cannot of course perceive the unperceived. The intractability of this problem facilitates the repression by the sheer inability of any progress being made and the vaguely disturbing sensation gained from attempting to imagine perceiving something outside of human perception. The repression is, as stated, transcendental for the functioning of the subject, though we would concede there is some cultural leeway in which it might be lessened. The repressed possibility is one of the sources of intense anxiety for persons who experience paranormal phenomena, especially for the first time. Anomalous accretions in one’s existence immediately demand -though the notion may not be coherently thought by the individual- the possibility that behind the visible scenes some other agency is capable of manipulating the contents. Given that such phenomena do not show their mechanics in plain sight, if we give them any credence then we are committed to the idea that the manipulation takes place out of sight. In this way the repressed split is brought uncomfortably close to the conscious regions of the subject, resulting often -though not always- in considerable anxiety.

The second facet of the transcendental repression concerns the notion that other agencies may be controlling ourselves. The self, or neurotic accretion as we have named it elsewhere, is the accretion that primarily controls the sense of identity of the Narp (human in this case). The name of the subject sits at the centre of the neurotic accretion which is projected upon the regional processor (body) giving the incoherent identity ‘I am this psychic sense and I am this body’. Of course the activity within the neurotic accretion (NA) is constantly guided by all manner of influences from the regional processor (RP) itself. It is the RP that tells the NA that it is hungry, not the other way round. Likewise there will be many pneuminous accretions that will be either tangentially or strongly attached to the NA exerting various kinds of influence upon it, all of which appear as the actions of the NA. It is being-controlled-by-other-accretions that must be repressed by the incoherent NA. Of course this being-controlled is not being-controlled as such, it is simply what it is to be a Narp.

The NA by itself is very little, it needs to be plugged into other accretions to create its identity, to act as an agent for these forces. What the NA must do though is appear to be in charge. The functioning of a Narp as we understand being a human is that the NA is sufficiently in charge of the other accretions such that none of them ever assume conscious control of the RP. A Narp who sporadically or even permanently loses control of the RP to accretions that are not the NA, suffers from some form of what we would call mental illness. Again, lesser versions of this are potentially related to paranormality insofar as other pneuminous accretions (other repressed consciousnesses within the RP or outside of it) may have access to certain kinds of knowledge that the NA does not. The experience of being-informed-of-something by such forces constitutes a rupture in the relation of NA dominance. Such experiences may be labelled intuitions, precognitions etc. At this level they do not constitute madness, only the eruption of alien accretive forces through the dominance of the NA.

To reiterate then, we see the transcendental repression happening in two principle ways. The first represses the disharmony between being that is perceived and being that is not perceived. It flattens this into an identity of being between the two states. The second represses the way in which we are necessarily multiple (swarms as D and G might say) in favour of an incoherent but necessary dominant neurotic accretion  (neurotic precisely because it knows its own self-existence will not stand up to scrutiny -it is built upon a lie).