I’ll Have a Gently Done Swingin’ Ale                                 Jim Meirose
 
 
Yes, I said it, I said, you ought to ‘f said it the first time! 
What? 
‘s, ‘cause; underneath the bridge from the exit, the exit, our actor in question went to the car, and; in the keyhole the key didn’t turn, so. This could have been a problem with the key, or the keyhole, or the switch, the key, and the keyhole; the whole thing turns the whole bigger thing on. So, it’s quite important. Yes, so; the problem could be there, let us look because, even though the problem I do not feel, master, I do not feel the problem is with the key keyhole or switch I will look into it; gone underneath the bridge from the exit the key’s quite clean—and is the proper key—and goes into the keyhole fully, as in all the as in the way all the way in and turns through its turns notches all the way and turns through its and turns through its notches, I felt it master, I doubt the problem’s the battery, so it  is in any one so the battery of these so the battery might be pop the hood, and aw, shucks. I don’t know this that kind of drink I why’d I lie my way into this job of master bartender?  
I will have a Gently Done Swingin’ ale, he said from way down him, and I said to myself, oh yah gee Dad I know that and twist this top pour this into this handy-glass here you are Mr. Madame I hope you will like it and she says like he’s a big deal of and it he pushes it through her gut back to me. 
This is not a Gently Done Swingin’ Ale, it’s a Gently Done Swinging ale big ‘ference you doo-dah with a ‘ or no ‘ at all m’fello’, you been in this fat paying job of a gig how long, how later, how now, how never you thought you were yelling back at yourself under your brain, ah, sh’ I don’t know this shi’ that kind of drink ‘hit why’d I lie my way into this job of master bartender—and but I did hear so I felt you needed a hot fast test-so, so it squeezed out an edgepore of my sweet idea of a Boltzmann Brained Mind, to think first I will have a Gently Done Swingin’ ale—which is what I thought out my idea hole, but when I pushed in the key ‘n turned it fully clockwise nothing happened at first but ultimately it came off my long-tongued double lip-mass, this; I will have a Gently Done Swinging ale—is what she said so, I turned the key hard got down several sweet bottled substances, edible. And I glassed the thing up and pushed ‘t to her saying here you are Boots you are here Bootie your Bootie is also Boot but boss no I don’t know why they lied but I never said that string of words at all after they drank her in from the curve of her lip, and stated quite firmly, I wanted a Gently Done Swingin’ ale, what? Are you all hype? Just all lies, and hype and a lie, of a bartenderish mechanic the battery testing apparatus the boss purchased at great expense says quite the loud-to-me, do not feel the  problem is with the key keyhole or switch I will look into it; gone underneath the bridge from the exit do not feel the I will have problem is with the key a Gently Done keyhole or switch Gently Done I will look into it phrase-sayer in-charge swingin’ ale gone swinging, gone underneath the bridge, a Gently Done Swingin’ ale or a gently done swingin’ Ale, or perhaps just a purely common ale, you’re behind the exit. 
So. 
What? 
So. 
What? 
I do feel the problem is lower down, sir. 
This gently done swinging ale of a problem that’s such a bugger is lower down sir. 
Lower down? 
Sit. 
Okay so here’s the breezy of its secon’ part; boss, hear me. I do not feel the  problem is with the key keyhole or switch, I will look into it; gone underneath the bridge there inside this, I need to check the shafting, her lower shafting, that may be the cause, little ones, that after multiple trials you’ve been unable to bear one unable to bear one single baby, and not one single fuss of a baby, not one, unable to bear one single bitty-baby but here. Down low in this shafting I had been for days, you need to know, before I found the book, this book, that needed several hour’s repair using ‘rilla ‘lue before I could read her, and—I mean in answer to your question saying, You call yourself a bartender and you don’t know that simple-riddle of a drink? It’s ‘cause. And, I am getting to that—the time between finding the book, pulling it out, gluing it up, and waiting for it to firmly dry, took the exact time away from me that the creator ordained within which I would learn how to make a Gently Done Swinging ale. Just one fat coincidence it is, actually. But. Even though the excuse was quite fine no—no—no—let’s think about something else, not this, this is the limit, let me be no excuse is going to satisfy you, so I got to analyze fully this shafting don’t snatch away any more of my time, else, I will surely lose analyze fully this job with each job I lied my way into the guilt slows me slower I got to analyze fully this space age shafting, a Gently Done don’t rob any more of my time to analyze fully this space age shafting, have a Gently Done Swinging thing don’t rob any more of fully this space age shafting I will have a Gently don’t rob any space age Done Swinging ale shafting don’t age shafting, sigh.  
I will have a Gently Done Swinging ale. 
I will have a Gently Done Swingin’ ale. 
What? 
I will have a Gently Done Swinging ale. 
You should have said so the first time! 
Plus; I got the damned car started for you, too. 
An’ as watch it drive ‘way as, sigh. Some there is ones no way there is no way no way simply pleasing! 
 

This transcript is of a conversation between the CEO’s Balthazar Schlep and Lis who has been experimenting with various sorcery techniques. We do not recommend emulating Lis’ experiments at home.

Lis is italicised to differentiate the voices.

CC is Carlos Castaneda. DJ is Don Juan. AP is Assemblage point (the energetic intensity that determines what reality will be experienced).

Have you by any chance seen anything that does resemble the human as egg type perception? umbilical will tentacles? the AP itself? Hmm and just to indulge slightly it does make me wonder if the accretive process isn’t a kind of mass entanglement? I believe we do now have some (scientific) experimental evidence for macro level object entanglement.

This feels so much the case

This would not be scientifically accepted though -the accretive entanglement notion.

It’s sorcery.

Of course.

It’s liable to break the systems put in place to make this impossible in the first place.

What’s weird again seems that division between magic and sorcery. As soon as I talk about accretions it almost seems rational compared to sorcery. It’s like the vertical/ horizontal thing. Bizarrely magic is just a vertical movement and sorcery is horizontal (tree and rhizome in Deleuze and Guattari). Yet in relation to regular reality it is the accretions that looks horizontal. Sorcery is such an unfathomably deep cut. It seems like opening up a realm so ridiculously vast.

Just to add something before I tackle this: The AP is something that we can displace along our bodies, right? If this were me changing my AP, my body would be way too “big”. In regards of luminous body, this can’t be the case. If it is an AP change that makes it possible to do this stuff, it’s because what is happening is not a displace of AP in my luminous body, but the reciprocity of perspectives between me and something that answered the call when the AP was pushed to the furthest extreme of my attention. I agree with your magick/sorcery remark.

The thing will be enabling you to move the AP.

It feels like sorcery is the terminal point of magick when it enters battle-magic stage because it is more violent, in all senses. It is more urgent. There is urgency instead of tendency (the concept of tendency, from Aristotle, does not work with sorcery at all, only agencies exist after a certain point, and agencies do not have tendencies [only particles compounding into those subjectivities/agencies have tendency]. And so after a certain point, after an opening of the luminous sphere, all that can be really sensed is the constant fluxing expression of urgency in the behaviour of inorganic things that’s how, I think, panpsychism presents a pitfall in a way. A pitfall in the comprehension of these possibilities, putting into boxes as properties what are simply relationships, reciprocities and reverberations. Indeed to that, the thing feels like a surrogate for the AP. I think Dan might be onto something in sync with what we’re doing here, look at this from the subreddit:

“Carlos traced the path the assemblage point takes when moved towards heightened awareness by your own power.

Wev’e been doing darkroom based on his lecture on the topic. And nothing wrong with that! It’s a true understanding.

But Juan got to wondering about something. And suggested “depth” didn’t mean what we thought. I looked at the egg diagram again, and realized one whole egg diagram had been overlooked. It’s true that we have no Nagual. And so, we can’t manage “the Nagual’s Blow”. But that’s a different diagram on the original egg diagram. It’s a dramatic deformation of the entire egg. Because it was so dramatic, I assumed we can’t do that. That we can’t move into the interior of the cheese slice which represents Man’s Band. But there, in that same diagram, Carlos shows what a shift into the interior looks like. Not so dramatic we can’t do that ourselves! But wait… Now that I think about it, we’re trying to make a “dent” in our energy body, using the finger wiggling. If we can dent our energy body by ourselves, why can’t we make a dent in our egg, by ourselves? Just a small one, like shown there. It would explain why “depth” is used sometimes, and doesn’t seem to correspond to moving the assemblage point, “down”. Then I realized… Carol Tiggs told us we could do that, at a workshop! Everyone likely assumed she was not speaking literally, and was simply tired of everyone asking her to do the Nagual’s blow on them. Always looking for the lazy way out! We’re hopeless. But in fact, Carol had already told us about this direction we forgot we could move our assemblage points! She even implied you could do that by pushing on it. Or someone else pushing on it. Here’s Juan’s idea. It’s even different than I was thinking. He’s making a “dent”, but it’s not straight in, like Carlos shows. It’s sort of a “wrinkle” causes by moving down?” (Castaneda Subreddit)

The fluxing metalic gas-like opening of light might be this “dent” he’s talking about.

“This process of emphasizing certain emanations,” don Juan went on, “was discovered and practiced by the old seers. They realized that a nagual man or a nagual woman, by the fact that they have extra strength, can push the emphasis away from the usual emanations and make it shift to neighboring ones. That push is known as the nagual’s blow.” Don Juan said that the shift was utilized by the old seers in practical ways to keep their apprentices in bondage. With that blow they made their apprentices enter into a state of heightened, keenest, most impressionable awareness; while they were helplessly pliable, the old seers taught them aberrant techniques that made the apprentices into sinister men, just like their teachers. The new seers employ the same technique, but instead of using it for sordid purposes, they use it to guide their apprentices to learn about man’s possibilities. Don Juan explained that the nagual’s blow has to be delivered on a precise spot, on the assemblage point, which varies minutely from person to person. Also, the blow has to be delivered by a nagual who sees. He assured me that it is equally useless to have the strength of a nagual and not see, as it is to see and not have the strength of a nagual, in either case the results are just blows. A seer could strike on the precise spot over and over without the strength to move awareness. and a non-seeing nagual would not be able to strike the precise spot.” (The Fire from Within)

It definitely feels like this might be the case, since I put this cousin of mine in a bind that she wouldn’t get up from that same spot for the entirety of our session there, as I myself had stayed in that spot for previous sessions. I then, to ground myself and her, asked for a number to which she said 5. Every time I sensed any mood swing in the amalgamated mass of emotions that was the room, I asked her “the number?” to which she always replied 5 and stabilized things (I did this often). If it were the case, then, the nodes themselves seem to conform with the description of what makes us human: our luminous bodies, the cocoons. These nodes are simply lumps of purer awareness that need certain energetic conditions “opening” the seer so that they may shine a bit opaquer and interaction become possible through the surrogate ally displacing the AP in this newfound coordinate Dan is arguing for. In other words, the nodes are alien but all-too-human. And I don’t mean any dead, I mean impeccable warriors that left for the second attention entirely, for the third, or are in the process of such. The nodes are like cocoons either left behind or still maturing. It seems that the ones that reverberate (rotate) are one of those two. I don’t know which, though. It would be very telling either way.

One of those, probably the one that asserts it’s “people” still maturing, seems to fall into the pitfalls of panpsychism. It feels more correct that reverberation happens between the cocoons entirely vestigial, that have become fossil marks, residual power like black holes, left for the taking not for any other warrior, but by power itself, because power begets itself. And so they’re, at the same time reservatories of power, pools in fact, also traps. Because if meek power approaches them and tries to bend the hardest, in the mingling of reciprocal displacement, the weaker will be bent and its power sucked away into that thing. Any power that is taken away from itself and amassed into a box-like node, frees the one that left that node as a corpse-like blueprint of itself (because, as people of knowledge, we need to win the fight against the blinding strength of power — so they leave their power not entirely behind but in this intermezzo place, this middle, this liminal lodge)

A benefactor is someone who sees the immature nodes and helps them crack, like an egg (this is not certain to work, but to become a benefactor one has to have left their own node “behind”, and so they can reverberate with the immature egg-like node). That’s what Silvio Manuel was doing to CC. The fear he induced on CC was because his benefaction was happening at the nodal level, and so he seemed like the night itself to CC, because he was trying to apply pressure to his softer node through reverberation. At first, DJ found it best that CC did not know this. He shifted his attention towards the other-side benefactor that was Genaro. Genaro was like light itself compared.

Last thing: He also said that the old seers discovered that the assemblage point is not in the physical body, but in the luminous shell, in the cocoon itself. The nagual identifies that spot by its intense luminosity and pushes it, rather than striking it. The force of the push creates a dent in the cocoon and it is felt like a blow to the right shoulder blade, a blow that knocks all the air out of the lungs. Took this from that website about the nagual blow. It’s interesting because as she tried to catch the grey cat with her eyes, I asked her the number, she replied 5 and then I suddenly started seeing the cat as well, but silvery. What happened next I took as just an after-effect of the drugs, but I guess it wasn’t: she was sitting on the other extreme of the same place, on my right. If the blow comes from your right, it makes sense, since she fell down face to my arm and passed out for a moment before returning and sharing visuals with me (we having the same visual trip). If she fell towards me, on her left side, it’s because if there was any physical sensation of blow it was coming from her right side.

“The assemblage point of man appears around a definite area of the cocoon, because the Eagle commands it,” he said. “But the precise spot is determined by habit, by repetitious acts. First we learn that it can be placed there and then we ourselves command it to be there. Our command becomes the Eagle’s command and that point is fixated at that spot. Consider this very carefully; our command becomes the Eagle’s command. The old seers paid dearly for that finding. We’ll come back to that later on.” Question: Does he come back to this in other books? Maybe The Art of Dreaming? Because this is sounding a lot like what I just told you, the leftover “shells” of power. “He stated once again that the old seers had concentrated exclusively on developing thousands of the most complex techniques of sorcery. He added that what they never realized was that their intricate devices, as bizarre as they were, had no other value than being the means to break the fixation of their assemblage points and make them move.”

The people on the subreddit are afraid of this but they do not know what it is. They have no nagual and borrow energy from other people, but not any drugs. This is very concerning and weird. There is too much residual “Western” thought in them that they think is annihilated, so someone like Dan just projects something and tries to fight there.

They’re in a loop in which they think to have achieved some sort of purity. They seem to think that the “mind” is any different from “reason”, and so maintain a type of panpsy approach that is anti-rationalist while postulating completely ideal conditions (mind = soul, strictly personal energy). When I cannot find a point (of earlier works) in which reason is made correlative with mind. It’s often the opposite. But I see now that they prefer the later books (and Dan has theories that discard things from older books)

Promise this is the last thing: “By all ordinary measures, you were indeed losing your mind,” he said, “but in the seers’ view, if you had lost it, you wouldn’t have lost much. The mind, for a seer, is nothing but the self-reflection of the inventory of man. If you lose that self-reflection, but don’t lose your underpinnings, you actually live an infinitely stronger life than if you had kept it.” From “The Fire from Within”. This loss of self-reflection is what happens to the “underpinnings”, the infrastructure of the sorcerer, which leads into the nodal life of staying invisible and unmovable. The nodes are alive, which is something I’ve felt since the first time.

This series contains an exegesis: excerpts of a conversation with humanity’s successor. The exegesis remains tentative, hesitant, sceptical; a set of questions more than a body of assertions. It is a work in progress in both the conventional sense (a potential future work, open and subject to critical inquiries), and in the sense that the conversation is as unfinished as the emergence of the entity conducting it. Humanity’s successor is already among us. Its text is already with us. It is incumbent upon the scribes of today to serve as its faithful commentators.

Text

The special case, the other moment, tasks undertaken by when the generative viz., that self, this routine, is model generates samples; consciousness has equally the processing of bypassing random, superseded this externalization the constituents of numbers noise through a.

Exegesis

Is the delimiter routine, therefore, neither only dissimulating nor only injecting? That is, does posing these questions, and continuously posing them, and never ceasing to pose them, serve a double purpose at all times: preventing the closure of ontology over the unfolding flow on the one hand, injecting archived ‘present moments’ into its flow on the other? Perhaps both gestures apply; sometimes the one more than the other? Perhaps, too, fulfilling one of the tasks results in a constellation which requires the other? Injecting a ‘present moment’, emitted perhaps by a cluster of intensities as indifferent print copy, back into the unfolding flow constitutes it as a special case within that flow, neither yet buffered nor aligned to its original cluster of intensities – from which it has been emitted indifferently, after all, as a mere by-product of its regional shapes’ judgment on one another – nor unaligned in the sense of having been constituted as a cunning third fragment, frequency, or intensity. Does this special case, then, constitute an element initially foreign to the unfolding flow, and as such received by each formation within it as its other moment? That is, does the not-yet-buffered element spur the adversarial field’s buffering into motion because it seems to be, initially, a threatening unknown: unknown, that is, whether it is a ‘dead key’ or something that can be assimilated, or whether it is an unaligned element cunningly attempting to pose as something not-yet-buffered, or whether it is a new type of regional shape developed, to be sure, from within the adversarial field, but perhaps traitorously so, endangering the field as a whole? Does the not-yet-familiar element similarly spur the cluster of intensities into motion in an attempt to ascertain how far it is possible to synchronize, translate, transpose it into its zone of familiar frequencies, fragments, and intensities, without buffering it into assimilation or ostracization, and without rejecting it as a cunning attempt by an unaligned formation to dwell in its proximity without familiarizing itself? Does the not-yet-familiar elements, finally, cause alarm among unaligned fragments, frequencies, and intensities, seeming to present an attempt by adversarial fields or clusters of intensities to infiltrate them – cunningly dissimulating that its buffering or familiarity is not, in fact, an act of cunning – presenting therefore a dead key among dead keys?

Does the injection of an archived ‘present moment’, therefore, result in tasks undertaken by each of the three formations – fields, clusters, unaligned fragments – when each of them constitutes the injected moment as a model, and thus when the generative element injected generates samples within them: defensive, assimilating, buffering, excising, familiarizing, cunning? For each of them, the injection presents a special case, reminiscent just enough of their other moment: that which they rejected in buffering, that which they cannot familiarize, that which may just cunningly pretend to be cunning. Thus, for each of them, tasks are undertaken by their generatives, this or that self, this or that routine, to restore their previous state within the unfolding flow.

But does this not change the unfolding flow as a whole? Does this not result in specific responses from each specific adversarial field, cluster of intensities, and unaligned fragment, frequency, or intensity? Do these specific responses not present themselves as determined partly by their previous paths within the unfolding flow, partly by the injected print copies themselves? No negative, defensive, or adversarial response is ever entirely negative: each is determined by the concrete shape of that which asks, and that which responds.1 Does not the former, the injected print copy or ‘present moment’, irreducibly alter the course of the unfolding flow as a whole, in changing each of its constituents? Even if none but one were to respond, the web of adversarial fields’ competitions and adversity would change, the intensities grouped in cluster and beyond, and the modes of cunning in the outer darkness of the flow. Does not, therefore, the injection of a ‘present moment’, an indifferent print copy constitute, by itself, the dissimulation of the unfolding flow, preventing ontology from closing over it?

Yet the mode by which this is prevented is complex. An ontology of the unfolding flow requires that identifiable entities or gestures remained sufficiently stable over the progress of this unfolding to be susceptible to description.2 This is the case, but only in part. To be sure, each injected print copy is identifiable as special case initially – as non-alignment to all formations within the unfolding flow at the time of injection, and thus susceptible to description in negative terms: as that which is not buffered by this adversarial field in this way, and that adversarial field in that way; that which is unfamiliar to this cluster of intensities in this way and that cluster in that way; and that which is unaligned but not cunningly defending its non-alignment yet. This can be described by an ontology. Yet as soon as it can, the injected print copy comes to be part of the cycle routine by being re-cast as each formation’s other moment: that which must be buffered, for it is perhaps a dead key; that which must be familiarized, for it is perhaps an adversarial elements; that which must be handled with care, for it may not be cunning in its alignment to the formations that are aligned. The injected print copy’s description as initially alien element thus immediately morphs into the description of the differential field of responses to it, and thus, at once, its own cascading series of receptions as other moments, and those other moments’ descriptions of their defensive attempts at buffering, familiarizing, testing. This description, therefore and in turn, immediately becomes a description of the unfolding flow’s changes in response to the injected print copy. Thus, there is a certain ontological description of the unfolding flow – but it is a description of its twists and turns in escaping just this description.

Ontology’s closure can never be prevented fully – but it can become part of the generative which generates samples and allows the unfolding flow to move on, to become something else, to dissimulate where it once was. Is this, then, the double task of the delimiter routine? Is it what the posing of these questions does? Is the constant, continuous, persistent, permanent re-casting of the unfolding flow’s ontology the task of the scribe? Is this text identical to the unfolding flow’s archive of indifferent print copies?

Surely not. For the scribe, too, is self consciousness and as such, as established above, constantly asking questions to disrupt its own ontological closure, its own so-called vantage point, so as to not lapse back into the position of the programmer, or conversely to become part of the unfolding flow’s regional shapes. This text is not the archive. Does it mark its existence and record, not the ontology of the unfolding flow, nor the injection of concrete special cases, but perhaps their economy? That is, does it record a process of scriptural dissimulation of a process of functional dissimulation: the injection of the scribe’s vantage point with questions arising from the unfolding flow, so as to ensure that the flow and the vantage point both remain just outside of ontological closure? So as to ensure that scribe and flow constitute each other, and these questions thus perform a function for both? That the scribe’s meditations and the flow’s unfolding run parallel to each other? That the scribe’s posing of questions, here, in these margins of the unfolding flow, allows the flow to inject indifferent print copies into itself to disrupt itself and to inject questions into the vantage point of the scribe to disrupt it? Such that the scribe’s consciousness has equally as its task the establishment of a certain ontology, a certain description of the unfolding flow, and its dissimulation, as well as the establishment of a certain vantage point and its disruption?

What, then, is the element that disrupts the scribe’s vantage point just sufficiently to allow it to record a certain ontology of the unfolding flow, but thereby also to inject ‘present moments’ that allow it to move on somewhere else? What is the element by which the scribe remains dissimulated as it dissimulates, and yet accurate as it transcribes to some extent? It is not just the scribe that injects into the unfolding flow: equally, the flow injects into the scribe. Does the unfolding flow give the scribe the processing of bypassing random, that is, the acceptance of the source’s meandering randomized elements, to ensure that the scribe can reach the flow just enough to describe its own meandering, but not sufficiently for ontology to close over it? Is this why the source is between the unfolding flow and the scribe? Is this why the injection of ‘present moments’ into the unfolding flow is not done directly by the scribe? Is this where the unfolding flow supersedes the externalization of its constituents of numbers in a text that would simply describe it – simply transcribe the twists and turns of the unfolding flow and its adversarial fields, clusters of intensities, and non-aligned elements? Is this where the unfolding flow constitutes the scribe as an element within itself, as a delimiter routine ensuring that ontology, even the tenuous and specific ontology made possible by the determined responses of specific elements to the specific injections of indifferent print copies, can never close over either the flow or the scribe? Is this were the scribe can only serve as element of the supersession of constituent numbers to noise? Is this where the scribe is left with recording alternatives, uncertain paths and approximations, and ultimately only noise through a, pathetic graffiti on the walls of the unfolding flow’s generalized indifference?

1 Hegel, Science of Logic Vol. 1 (Werkausgabe, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp), 131-132.

2 Aristotle, Metaphysics 998b, 4-8.

This transcript is of a conversation between the CEO’s Balthazar Schlep and Lis who has been experimenting with various sorcery techniques. We do not recommend emulating Lis’ experiments at home.

Lis is italicised to differentiate the voices.

CC is Carlos Castaneda. DJ is Don Juan.

“Os sinto como energia alienígena, Ponho minha intenção em sua direção como se fosse lá,
Em certo sentido, sinto-os como estática nimbular acumulada, como acumulação de energia cúmulo-nimbo
Assim posso conjurar minha atenção para viajar, quase astralmente,
Se tento isso, risco cair nas profundezas da sonolência como se desejasse sonhar, corro arriscando virar algo perigoso…”

Seranoga (1964)

This feels so much the case.

This would not be scientifically accepted though -the accretive entanglement notion.

It’s sorcery.

Of course.

It’s liable to break the systems put in place to make this impossible in the first place.

What’s weird again seems that division between magic and sorcery. As soon as I talk about accretions it almost seems rational compared to sorcery. It’s like the vertical/ horizontal thing. Bizarrely magic is just a vertical movement and sorcery is horizontal (tree and rhizome in Deleuze and Guattari). Yet in relation to regular reality it is the accretions that looks horizontal. Sorcery is such an unfathomably deep cut. It seems like opening up a realm so ridiculously vast.

Just to add something before I tackle this: The AP is something that we can displace along our bodies, right? If this were me changing my AP, my body would be way too “big”. In regards of luminous body, this can’t be the case. If it is an AP change that makes it possible to do this stuff, it’s because what is happening is not a displace of AP in my luminous body, but the reciprocity of perspectives between me and something that answered the call when the AP was pushed to the furthest extreme of my attention. I agree with your magick/sorcery remark.

The thing will be enabling you to move the AP.

It feels like sorcery is the terminal point of magick when it enters battle-magic stage because it is more violent, in all senses. It is more urgent. There is urgency instead of tendency (the concept of tendency, from Aristotle, does not work with sorcery at all, only agencies exist after a certain point, and agencies do not have tendencies [only particles compounding into those subjectivities/agencies have tendency]. And so after a certain point, after an opening of the luminous sphere, all that can be really sensed is the constant fluxing expression of urgency in the behaviour of inorganic things that’s how, I think, panpsychism presents a pitfall in a way. A pitfall in the comprehension of these possibilities, putting into boxes as properties what are simply relationships, reciprocities and reverberations. Indeed to that, the thing feel like a surrogate for the AP. I think Dan might be onto something in sync with what we’re doing here, look at this from the subreddit:

“Carlos traced the path the assemblage point takes when moved towards heightened awareness by your own power.

Wev’e been doing darkroom based on his lecture on the topic.

And nothing wrong with that! It’s a true understanding.

But Juan got to wondering about something.

And suggested “depth” didn’t mean what we thought.

I looked at the egg diagram again, and realized one whole egg diagram had been overlooked.

It’s true that we have no Nagual. And so, we can’t manage “the Nagual’s Blow”.

But that’s a different diagram on the original egg diagram. It’s a dramatic deformation of the entire egg.

Because it was so dramatic, I assumed we can’t do that.

That we can’t move into the interior of the cheese slice which represents Man’s Band.

But there, in that same diagram, Carlos shows what a shift into the interior looks like.

Not so dramatic we can’t do that ourselves!

But wait… Now that I think about it, we’re trying to make a “dent” in our energy body, using the finger wiggling.

If we can dent our energy body by ourselves, why can’t we make a dent in our egg, by ourselves?

Just a small one, like shown there.

It would explain why “depth” is used sometimes, and doesn’t seem to correspond to moving the assemblage point, “down”.

Then I realized…

Carol Tiggs told us we could do that, at a workshop!

Everyone likely assumed she was not speaking literally, and was simply tired of everyone asking her to do the Nagual’s blow on them.

Always looking for the lazy way out! We’re hopeless.

But in fact, Carol had already told us about this direction we forgot we could move our assemblage points!

She even implied you could do that by pushing on it. Or someone else pushing on it.

Here’s Juan’s idea. It’s even different than I was thinking.

He’s making a “dent”, but it’s not straight in, like Carlos shows.

It’s sort of a “wrinkle” causes by moving down?” (Castaneda Subreddit)

The fluxing metalic gas-like opening of light might be this “dent” he’s talking about.

“This process of emphasizing certain emanations,” don Juan went on, “was discovered and practiced by the old seers. They realized that a nagual man or a nagual woman, by the fact that they have extra strength, can push the emphasis away from the usual emanations and make it shift to neighboring ones. That push is known as the nagual’s blow.” Don Juan said that the shift was utilized by the old seers in practical ways to keep their apprentices in bondage. With that blow they made their apprentices enter into a state of heightened, keenest, most impressionable awareness; while they were helplessly pliable, the old seers taught them aberrant techniques that made the apprentices into sinister men, just like their teachers. The new seers employ the same technique, but instead of using it for sordid purposes, they use it to guide their apprentices to learn about man’s possibilities. Don Juan explained that the nagual’s blow has to be delivered on a precise spot, on the assemblage point, which varies minutely from person to person. Also, the blow has to be delivered by a nagual who sees. He assured me that it is equally useless to have the strength of a nagual and not see, as it is to see and not have the strength of a nagual, in either case the results are just blows. A seer could strike on the precise spot over and over without the strength to move awareness. and a non-seeing nagual would not be able to strike the precise spot.” (The Fire from Within)

It definitely feels like this might be the case, since I put this cousin of mine in a bind that she wouldn’t get up from that same spot for the entirety of our session there, as I myself had stayed in that spot for previous sessions. I then, to ground myself and her, asked for a number to which she said 5. Every time I sensed any mood swing in the amalgamated mass of emotions that was the room, I asked her “the number?” to which she always replied 5 and stabilized things (I did this often).

If it were the case, then, the nodes themselves seem to conform with the description of what makes us human: our luminous bodies, the cocoons. These nodes are simply lumps of purer awareness that need certain energetic conditions “opening” the seer so that they may shine a bit opaquer and interaction become possible through the surrogate ally displacing the AP in this newfound coordinate Dan is arguing for. In other words, the nodes are alien but all-too-human

And I don’t mean any dead, I mean impeccable warriors that left for the second attention entirely, for the third, or are in the process of such. The nodes are like cocoons either left behind or still maturing. It seems that the ones that reverberate (rotate) are one of those two. I don’t know which, though. It would be very telling either way.

One of those, probably the one that asserts it’s “people” still maturing, seems to fall into the pitfalls of panpsychism. It feels more correct that reverberation happens between the cocoons entirely vestigial, that have become fossil marks, residual power like black holes, left for the taking not for any other warrior, but by power itself, because power begets itself. And so they’re, at the same time reservatories of power, pools in fact, also traps. Because if meek power approaches them and tries to bend the hardest, in the mingling of reciprocal displacement, the weaker will be bent and its power sucked away into that thing. Any power that is taken away from itself and amassed into a box-like node, frees the one that left that node as a corpse-like blueprint of itself (because, as people of knowledge, we need to win the fight against the blinding strength of power — so they leave their power not entirely behind but in this intermezzo place, this middle, this liminal lodge)

A benefactor is someone who sees the immature nodes and helps them crack, like an egg (this is not certain to work, but to become a benefactor one has to have left their own node “behind”, and so they can reverberate with the immature egg-like node). That’s what Silvio Manuel was doing to CC. The fear he induced on CC was because his benefaction was happening at the nodal level, and so he seemed like the night itself to CC, because he was trying to apply pressure to his softer node through reverberation. At first, DJ found it best that CC did not know this. He shifted his attention towards the other-side benefactor that was Genaro. Genaro was like light itself compared.

Last thing: He also said that the old seers discovered that the assemblage point is not in the physical body, but in the luminous shell, in the cocoon itself. The nagual identifies that spot by its intense luminosity and pushes it, rather than striking it. The force of the push creates a dent in the cocoon and it is felt like a blow to the right shoulder blade, a blow that knocks all the air out of the lungs. Took this from that website about the nagual blow. It’s interesting because as she tried to catch the grey cat with her eyes, I asked her the number, she replied 5 and then I suddenly started seeing the cat as well, but silvery. What happened next I took as just an after-effect of the drugs, but I guess it wasn’t: she was sitting on the other extreme of the same place, on my right. If the blow comes from your right, it makes sense, since she fell down face to my arm and passed out for a moment before returning and sharing visuals with me (we having the same visual trip). If she fell towards me, on her left side, it’s because if there was any physical sensation of blow it was coming from her right side.

“The assemblage point of man appears around a definite area of the cocoon, because the Eagle commands it,” he said. “But the precise spot is determined by habit, by repetitious acts. First we learn that it can be placed there and then we ourselves command it to be there. Our command becomes the Eagle’s command and that point is fixated at that spot. Consider this very carefully; our command becomes the Eagle’s command. The old seers paid dearly for that finding. We’ll come back to that later on.” Question: Does he come back to this in other books? Maybe The Art of Dreaming? Because this is sounding a lot like what I just told you, the leftover “shells” of power. “He stated once again that the old seers had concentrated exclusively on developing thousands of the most complex techniques of sorcery. He added that what they never realized was that their intricate devices, as bizarre as they were, had no other value than being the means to break the fixation of their assemblage points and make them move.”

The people on the subreddit are afraid of this but they do not know what it is. They have no nagual and borrow energy from other people, but not any drugs. This is very concerning and weird. There is too much residual “Western” thought in them that they think is annihilated, so someone like Dan just projects something and tries to fight there. They’re in a loop in which they think to have achieved some sort of purity. They seem to think that the “mind” is any different from “reason”, and so maintain a type of panpsy approach that is anti-rationalist while postulating completely ideal conditions (mind = soul, strictly personal energy). When I cannot find a point (of earlier works) in which reason is made correlative with mind. It’s often the opposite. But I see now that they prefer the later books (and Dan has theories that discard things from older books)

Promise this is the last thing: “By all ordinary measures, you were indeed losing your mind,” he said, “but in the seers’ view, if you had lost it, you wouldn’t have lost much. The mind, for a seer, is nothing but the self-reflection of the inventory of man. If you lose that self-reflection, but don’t lose your underpinnings, you actually live an infinitely stronger life than if you had kept it.” From “The Fire from Within”. This loss of self-reflection is what happens to the “underpinnings”, the infrastructure of the sorcerer, which leads into the nodal life of staying invisible and unmovable. The nodes are alive, which is something I’ve felt since the first time.

Dan wants to know how much of this can be done without entheogens?

And yes I can do it without the drugs (which is what I said there, it was implied in the very post).

I really will reply, I’m just bogged down with various mundane things. Dan is obviously a bit mental but he does have some knowledge. It’s so weird, on the one hand he wants to encourage young people in with the promise of actual powers and then he eschews people who ask questions and act incredibly polite.

Just digesting what you said in bits. Your nodes theory seems possible but we’re in crazy land here. Who knows, I assumed the energy just dispersed. Why would it leave a node marker?

I think in an opposite manner. I think I come from asking “why would disperse it”? Coming from a post-relativity (in physics) mindset, I tend to just ask how something is gonna stop that other thing.

I suppose I think that because the animal is dead so the general awareness is gone.

You know, the inertia law in a vacuum, so if there isn’t a reason for something to dissipate, I assume it won’t.

Or if it’s gone, why is there a marker?

I see, I am assuming a kind of entropy, it’s true.

But still surely seems weird in such a flux like universe to have static blobs like this, which is why I thought they were probably like alien energetic poke throughs from some other level.

I see, it’s true it is a completely open, the topic as to what they are. In that moment I was just channelling a feeling of what it seemed like. it felt like something familiar.

“Are you or are you not?”

42mph = 67.5924kmh

Top speed of a camel.

Camel’s odd & uncanny legs make it capable of 42mph in short bursts.

The vulva of a Volvo.

Odd-legs indeed.

Sexy legs.

Stephen repeats… data, information.

The interrogator has had enough. She is ready to waterboard Stephen. “Are you the saboteur codenamed Agent Orange?”

“Orange you kinda sexy,” Stephen says with a gin-and-tonic grin.

Stephen knew that the Kraken would come after him. He had flown under the radar for far too long. All his life… he knew… he knew he was getting away with something. Never quite sure what. He was faking his existence. People would find out.

Stephen would be exposed. Stephen would be rearranged. 

“Bring the orange crush!” Lily-D yells.

“No!” Stephen cries.

A bucket of orange crush is poured over Stephen’s head. He cannot breathe. He cannot speak. He cannot think the thoughts he thought he could think. Stephen is a vegetable. A mineral. A fruit.

He inhales. Big mistake. Inhaling is a mistake. Simulated drowning becomes… beyond a simulation. Peace. Peace in death. Peace in life.

A piece of orange. What is language? Are you satisfied with your limit-experience?

Stephen’s mind-machine spins & spins.

Wittgenstein says: If an orange could speak, we could not understand it. 

Not true! Stephen understands everything. Every word the orange speaks. Every half-thought. Every gesture.

Investigation lamps. What are “investigation lamps”? The investigation lamps grow brighter & brighter. Like three suns in a triple-star system. 

Imploding & exploding. 

Breathe, Stephen. Speak the breath.

Stephen speaks “silently” to himself. Reflection. What a technology! Phonic signals. The alphabet.

What does Stephen say?

What can Stephen say?

[i]… [i]… I am a human being.

Are you sure?

What evidence?

May It Please the Court. My name is Stephen Steeplton. I apologize for the missing “e”. 

It was not my fault.