1/0=2/2

▲

1/0

=

  2/2[2]

It is not a concern whether the system devised and utilized within certain magickal orders, namely the R.C. G.D. and O.T.O known generally as the lesser ritual of the pentagram ever had any more literal relevance to the effect supposed by it than does the crude tracings of Veves upon the ground with cornmeal. Observed effect doesn’t account for any intermediate need either way, as if relying upon us to initialize any supposed effect to begin with.

It is enough to know that there is traced for each of five pentagrams, either to invoke or to banish, one for fire, air, water earth and spirit, by prescribed direction from a point attributed thereto.

Admitting the simplicity of this exercise should not be mistaken for comparable ease; as is not the same as thinking about tracing a perfect contiguous geometry upon the template of the mind, absent of any other concern of thought that might take up residence besides the conviction; nor supposing that it is either a matter of “visualization”, simply placing the matter “there”, or of “imagination”, that is, performed, as by tracing with the eyes, or hands, or with one’s whole body someplace in the void; nor of going back and “adjusting” something less than a perfect contiguous geometric line, as clear and as solid as would otherwise appear as if it had been meticulously traced by a rule in with a single motion.

Any other matter is a falsehood- an intrusion of the ego; as Crowley would put it- a break in the meditation. One is sure to find themselves either indulging or deviating or distracting in all types of silly ways before winding up with a full blown mental ‘projection’ of Mickey Mouse with a hard-on.

Otherwise the realization that indeed the process we call thought is something wholly residual and subjective, not, nor ever has been quite what we’ve ever thought it was. And a good thing our lives have never depended upon such seemingly trivial accomplishments. If we have ever found ourselves in some mental iteration say, of some song, or some person or place or thing, and stopped ourselves to discriminate- “Why am I thinking this?” [3]

Not what we thought.[4]

  

The geometry of the pentagram is prescribed for more practical reasons that will become obvious later on. Except for what has already been said for the matter of observed effect, we are forewarned in advance of neglecting to assert our objective attention to the one small detail of undoing what is done and erasing our ‘mistakes’.  If you invoke something-banish it.

But we have several means of approach…

II: Contiguity and Fragmentation

That we may assume to be simpler, perhaps inasmuch as application, until we find that there is not really any such thing as contiguous geometry. For if there were then there would be no such thing as disk fragmentation, and that equally might the arrangement of things in the universe be deliberately randomized for the sake of expedience and efficiency in getting everything done. Nor any accident that we are not completely confused by the meshing together of things, or that there are not just as many pedestrian accidents as vehicular crashes.

Thus an apparent lack of contiguity that wraps things in their own containers and places them in their own little cubby-holes, with the effect that we have the luxury of taking it all for granted and walking at high speed, even stumbling (or shuffling backward), while completely twisted, and still getting home safely.

The next morning vaguely recalling why minus our wallet-casually surrendered and on our way without a scratch. Or the less impending scenario of the newlywed wife who is not quite sure where to place the sofa or what palette she should pick for the living room.

And since we are discriminating we can move things around. It will not matter how we place them now more than how they should wind up later. But first define how they are contained, that is, how they may occupy or share similar space.

The cup test presents a simple question to the adept to account for one’s perception of a thing (in this case a cup) what is rendered first by the mind on examination of the object ‘cup’. The adept almost consistently fails the test, answering with the object itself, or the color of the object, or some other incidental feature failing to answer for what exactly it is one immediately  perceives by perceiving the ‘cup’, or anything else for that matter.

The fact of its substantive container or outline, i.e. contiguous geometry which when removed from the cup leaves no clue of plane orientation, cylindrical form, nor circumference or diameter:

Or that all these facts must be rendered into some space. That a circle or a line begins anywhere it can, as does the appearance of a thing usually, and thankfully transparent to our subjective sense, further away from us than we might otherwise be able to withstand; that even given a plane of orientation would we know it:

As our Kammetic ancestors already wisely divined for us in apportioning the individual soul nine layers, the physical body being the nearest and thus most superficial; the mere texturing of the actual thing as if by selection from a palette. And where but the Swt or shadow of a thing tells us more about what it may than the thing itself:

(a)    We may define the container of any object by tracing its outline through contiguous geometry, and by modular discrimination affect that contiguity along one or many planes. Without a plane of contiguous geometry there is no dimension. No height, no depth, no farness or nearness, concavity or convexity-only a semi relevant blob in which anything can be fitted by fragmenting or de-fragmenting the potential planes merged within them.

(b)   We may condition our perspective to perceive only the shadows of things as far as we are able to detect shadows themselves, during the day or night, not as the play of light upon an object though as an affect of containing the outline of the thing assumed to project the shadow. Again-

(a)   Not what we thought.

(b)   Not what we thought.

[2] Khabs Dw [deosil, widdershins], Du, Do. So we are falsely taught that zero cannot be divided-because we are taught falsely that zero has no value, which of course it does, hence the reason why the Kametians never used 0, and “one” does not really exist except as a partition, which the Kabbalists named Dot, or Da’at (in essence, the decimal point) and the Kametians called Re’ since the answer to division of zero is always the next higher number than it is divided by. E.g. division of zero by 1 = 2, by 2 = 3, by 3 = 4, by 4 = 5, etc.

[3] The fact that we can walk is automatic, not automated. As don Juan says that sorcery is not a matter of talk, nor is walking a matter of thinking. One cannot, unless having suffered the sorcerer’s obligation truly understand this fact that what one is as a hue-man never what one has ever thought oneself to be. Even the inflection in Neo’s complaint upon first awakening; “My eyes hurt” begs to anticipate some lofty explanation, explain some way to think about his pain. Yet Morpheus’ guarded answer to the complaint itself chastises talking over more pertinent things the obvious, paternally shushing him.

[4]The job of the ego is to do one thing and one thing only-to execute code. The ego does not care what the program instructions are in relation to anything else. It will for example, execute the jump instruction jmp without any consideration of the program parameters or rules (height, depth, gravity etc.) When Neo began to think about freeing his mind in order to make the jump- rather than just jumping- he fell.

     Thus the only time you should be thinking is when you are discriminating, i.e. choosing. You cannot choose more than one set of instructions at a time, one line of code at a time.  “Free my mind” and “jump” are two separate instructions.

      Some rules can be bent-others can be broken.

     A monumental effort of consideration is required to fully apprehend and appreciate what is said here. If only we would not take so much for granted so often such things as are right before our eyes: