/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13534392]

EVERYTHING THAT SHITS IS DAMNED: the inefficiency of life, the life-process, tethers being to its remainder: Derrida: there is no fire that does not leave cinders: “cinders there are”: the cinder as Orisian surplus, what is not and cannot be burned up in the final conflagration: what even the eschaton cannot eradicate: because only cinders can birth a Second Ainulindalë : the eternal cycle of cosmoi fed by Osiris-as-ontological-fertilizer: Eden was an open thermodynamic system, the knowledge of good and evil was the knowledge of what can only be born immanent to the thermodynamic closure of sin (Boehme): Leviathanic time is closed time: THE EMPIRE NEVER ENDED: Shestov: man fell because he glimpsed the Black Sun of God: man fell because he glimpsed the Whiteheadian maw of the objective as the ultimate predator: the Night of Brahma as the perfect intestine: only nescience can transfigure pain into deliverance, as only the nothingness of sleep can heal: Hegel: it is not the mind that is an improvement of corporeal digestion, it is rather digestion that is nature's imperfect prefiguring of the Mind: WE LIVE INSIDE A BLACK HOLE: Adam fell because he glimpsed consumption written into the very laws of his knowing: the annularity of creation: God as a singularity transfigured to white only when it is entered voluntarily: the Lion King and The Matrix are modernized retellings of the nocturnal descent into the Duat: don't believe me? Cornell West & Ken Wilbur in their commentary agree the final sequence in the trilogy is Neo's embracing of a Zen-like, ateleological “choiceless-ness” over and above the ahrimanic hunger for purpose: Smith (the body of Osiris, the endlessly pollillating Zero) must become one with Neo (the Solar “I”, the “because-I-choose-to” of the Deep): Ra, the energy of consciousness, comes face-to-face with Osiris, the “being” of being: THE AKH IS THAT WHICH IS REGENERATED BY ITS DIFFERENCE FROM ITS SUBSTRATE: hylics are all Ka, pneumatics all Akh: in this universe, only the suicides are as blessed as the saints: the Tibetan thanatonaught: you either identify with the sky of mind or the subterra of the Void: but there is no choice as such, only a part's recognition of its kinship with the Whole: Calvin was right, damnation is metaphysical, not moral: the human species proves not even good works can save a defective self: Kierkegaard: despair is not the failure of the self, but the failure of the self to be a self: only the return of a drop into the ocean: the Pharaoh, like the genius, is the drop that mirrors the expanse, he (re)produces in himself his own constellation sky: Atum (God/CTMU/Logos) is: the Lichtung: an intrinsically self-emergent actuality: the soul, instead, a hand-me-down bootstrap: Atum has monopolized (the intelligibility latent in/of) the Void, anything that emerges afterwards can only emerge into his worldhood.

[Anonymous No.13534409]

Atum made himself out of Nothing, unbound telesis, the Mithraic Lump: what about us? We have to make ourselves out of Something: Lucifer hated God not because he was God but because God was First: the spermatozoa-Star, the first to say: “I am that I am” as stellar esktasia: Lucifer did not hate the Father, he hated that there must be Fathers and Sons: he hated that his outrage was testament to his nothingness: as Christ's nothingness was testament to his Love: brothers of an unfathomable patriarch: Atum made himself out of nothing, being indeterminate, out of all-possibility he contracted into water and wine: being determinate, the soul must make itself nothing out of carbon: LESS THAN NOTHING: Zizek was right about everything: the universe is an alchemical reaction, the gnostic friction of Necessity and brains: “only a few are capable of Love in this world, and they suffer infinitely”: a sorcerer factory: the granularization of the Mithraic bootstrap: which, precisely because it is granularized (per Anaximander), presupposes our finitude: the existent is an abortive combustion, what is expelled is the condition of what is (and must be) retained: even stars, Schelling's fires “that eat themselves”, are splashed into nothing: only plants feed on the stars directly: the predator of a star is the flower, the predator of a man is his thinking: the Sun feeds on him as the very complexes it energizes: MAN IS THE TAIL OF A CENTIPEDE: he receives solar energy mediated by a chain of forms, he does not drink from the fountainhead directly: it is not the contemplation of death that saves, but the contemplation /from/ death: Heidegger: how could Nietzsche's active nihilism not understand itself as the consummation of the will's “revulsion against time”? How could Nietzsche not see, in himself, the culmination of the very anti-force which he spent his life condemning? THE OVERMAN IS THE OMEGA POINT: because it is the Overman, who wills “the eternal recurrence of the same”, that testifies to his horror of time: the Omega Point, as the all-memory of being, betrays the luminosity of the intellect (in eschatological time) as the nostalgia for the excrescence of life: that is, the Omega Point represents the desire of life to retain itself even in its cinders: that which “makes good on” the abyss of memory: the books never read, the child never loved: time squandered by time, in its hurtling towards the end of time: the time that hates time, and the time that wants to make time stand still: Heisman was wrong, Christ was not the irruption of a supra-biological Leviathan: Christ was God electing to take up biology into himself: only Ahriman could corrupt the God-Man into the Man-God: Schelling was haunted by excrescence, Nietzsche's amor fati could only justify it, the summer suicides, the Leopardis, the Houellebecqs, whose bird's cages were woven out of their own nerves: these men are me, and I will have been no one else.

[Anonymous No.13534440]

>>13534392
>>13534409
yawn

[Anonymous No.13534484]

>>13534392
>EVERYTHING THAT SHITS IS DAMNED
Stopped reading after this. But this was pretty good..

[Anonymous No.13534490]

>>13534392
this shit kills me every time

[Anonymous No.13534514]

>EVERYTHING THAT SHITS IS DAMNED: the inefficiency of life, the life-process, tethers being to its remainder: Derrida: there is no fire that does not leave cinders: “cinders there are”: the cinder as Orisian surplus, what is not and cannot be burned up in the final conflagration: what even the eschaton cannot eradicate: because only cinders can birth a Second Ainulindalë : the eternal cycle of cosmoi fed by Osiris-as-ontological-fertilizer: Eden was an open thermodynamic system, the knowledge of good and evil was the knowledge of what can only be born immanent to the thermodynamic closure of sin (Boehme): Leviathanic time is closed time: THE EMPIRE NEVER ENDED:
The Souls Trilogy put this pretty well, with the descent into cinder and the slave-knight.
>Shestov: man fell because he glimpsed the Black Sun of God: man fell because he glimpsed the Whiteheadian maw of the objective as the ultimate predator: the Night of Brahma as the perfect intestine: only nescience can transfigure pain into deliverance, as only the nothingness of sleep can heal:
I miss Twin Peaks too, it was a damn fine show.
>Hegel: it is not the mind that is an improvement of corporeal digestion, it is rather digestion that is nature's imperfect prefiguring of the Mind: WE LIVE INSIDE A BLACK HOLE: Adam fell because he glimpsed consumption written into the very laws of his knowing: the annularity of creation:
Small note: creation as a subject is reticulate, not annular, CREATING [as an object] (or more accurately, the "laws" or boundaries/parameters of creation) is annular. Great dissection otherwise.
>God as a singularity transfigured to white only when it is entered voluntarily: the Lion King and The Matrix are modernized retellings of the nocturnal descent into the Duat:
This is Ronell-tier, but sure
>Cornell West & Ken Wilbur in their commentary agree the final sequence in the trilogy is Neo's embracing of a Zen-like, ateleological “choiceless-ness” over and above the ahrimanic hunger for purpose:
Or West-tier, same difference
>Smith (the body of Osiris, the endlessly pollillating Zero) must become one with Neo (the Solar “I”, the “because-I-choose-to” of the Deep): Ra, the energy of consciousness, comes face-to-face with Osiris, the “being” of being: THE AKH IS THAT WHICH IS REGENERATED BY ITS DIFFERENCE FROM ITS SUBSTRATE: hylics are all Ka, pneumatics all Akh:
Standard Platonic-Cartesian-Hegelian logic , but always refreshing. Nice.
>in this universe, only the suicides are as blessed as the saints: the Tibetan thanatonaught: you either identify with the sky of mind or the subterra of the Void: but there is no choice as such, only a part's recognition of its kinship with the Whole:
Sure, the largest split is between Chthonic Christ Nature and Cosmogenic Buddha Nature.
I think I have my firmest disagreement with you (out of all others) in the next few lines

[Anonymous No.13534562]

>>13534514
the instant I lapse into youtube video essayist-tier ramblings you call me out on it. very perceptive, as usual.

[Anonymous No.13534571]

>Calvin was right, damnation is metaphysical, not moral: the human species proves not even good works can save a defective self:
I'm tempted to describe this as a deviation, though not an untenable or even tendentious one. This just seems so (again, you've surprised me this way before) heliotheist.
> Kierkegaard: despair is not the failure of the self, but the failure of the self to be a self: only the return of a drop into the ocean: the Pharaoh, like the genius, is the drop that mirrors the expanse, he (re)produces in himself his own constellation sky
Ah, I see. Maybe a little bit too much Tin? He's been an on and off favorite of mine for years.
>Atum (God/CTMU/Logos) is: the Lichtung: an intrinsically self-emergent actuality: the soul, instead, a hand-me-down bootstrap: Atum has monopolized (the intelligibility latent in/of) the Void, anything that emerges afterwards can only emerge into his worldhood.
Yep, this was famously UG's experience of the "natural state." He was a bit more humble about it though, less theological.
I'll get to the second post soon, it'll take longer

[Anonymous No.13534592]

>>13534571
Can you expand on this "natural state", what I'm trying to communicate is this weird priority of "self-causation" Atum has over regular, old souls, as it were

I'm surprised to hear I'm not the only one this has occurred to

[Anonymous No.13534692]

>>13534592
>this weird priority of "self-causation"
UG's work is based on the premise of what incubating [interwoven with notes on acausality, etc] self-causal projection implies, or "giving and taking."
I've excerpted some of his experiences:
>(On the fourth day) something happened to the eyes. We were sitting in the 'Rialto' restaurant, and I became aware of a tremendous sort of 'vistavision', like a concave mirror. Things coming towards me, moved into me, as it were; and things going away from me, seemed to move from inside me. It was such a puzzle to me -- it was as if my eyes were a gigantic camera, changing focus without my doing anything. Now I am used to the puzzle. Nowadays that is how I see. When you drive me around in your Mini, I am like a cameraman dollying along, and the cars in the other direction go into me, and the cars that pass us come out of me, and when my eyes fix on something they fix on it with total attention, like a camera. Another thing about my eyes: when we came back from the restaurant I came home and looked in the mirror to see what was odd about my eyes, to see how they were 'fixed'. I looked in the mirror for a long time, and then I observed that my eyelids were not blinking. For half an hour or forty-five minutes I looked into the mirror -- still no blinking of the eyes. Instinctive blinking was over for me, and it still is.
>(On the fifth day) I noticed a change in hearing. When I heard the barking of a dog, the barking originated inside me. And the same with the mooing of the cow, the whistle of the train -- suddenly all sounds originated inside me, as it were - coming from within, and not from outside -- they still do.
From "The Mystique of Enlightenment," about a sixth of the way in.

[Anonymous No.13534700]

>>13534484
same

[Anonymous No.13534708]

>>13534692
That there is (something like a supersessive) hierarchy of self-emergence occurred to me during one of my contemplations, I thought it was something I could spend a lifetime hashing out, but UG here beat me to it. It's all so tiresome, in a good way.

[Anonymous No.13534738]

>>13534708
UG is just... horrifically tiresome, in that good way. He leaves loaves where others leave crumbs (if you have an eye for them). He's one of my favorite antiphilosophers, easily on par with Lacan.

[Anonymous No.13534744]

>>13534738
You are that anti-monist poster ive been talking with for the past few threads, correct? I really feel like we're onto something, even if men like UG beat us to it to an extent

[Anonymous No.13534849]

>>13534409
>Atum made himself out of Nothing, unbound telesis, the Mithraic Lump: what about us?
Are you calling us the antichrist?
> We have to make ourselves out of Something: Lucifer hated God not because he was God but because God was First: the spermatozoa-Star, the first to say: “I am that I am” as stellar esktasia: Lucifer did not hate the Father, he hated that there must be Fathers and Sons: he hated that his outrage was testament to his nothingness: as Christ's nothingness was testament to his Love: brothers of an unfathomable patriarch
Nevermind, I should know better by now. Yes: Satan is the antichrist and the Victual Spirit as God is the Son and the Holy Spirit. You had me for a minute there.
>Atum made himself out of nothing, being indeterminate, out of all-possibility he contracted into water and wine: being determinate, the soul must make itself nothing out of carbon:
Yep, the golden mean of entropy [or, "the soul"] is prefigural, and early Platonic concepts of form are just misnomers of this "failure to recognize" (as a non-entropic or not entropic/negentropic-balanced entity).
>LESS THAN NOTHING: Zizek was right about everything: the universe is an alchemical reaction, the gnostic friction of Necessity and brains: “only a few are capable of Love in this world, and they suffer infinitely”: a sorcerer factory: the granularization of the Mithraic bootstrap: which, precisely because it is granularized (per Anaximander), presupposes our finitude:
With Zizek, Diogenes is never far. Great breakdown.
>the existent is an abortive combustion, what is expelled is the condition of what is (and must be) retained: even stars, Schelling's fires “that eat themselves”, are splashed into nothing: only plants feed on the stars directly: the predator of a star is the flower, the predator of a man is his thinking:
Haha, you're starting to sound like Horstmann. I wrote few hundred words a little while ago about the Autistic-Vegetative state of the [retrocausal] Gamer-as-Neoliberal-subject. Kinda wish I'd organized it into my main body after seeing this, but it's still pretty messy anyway.
>the Sun feeds on him as the very complexes it energizes: MAN IS THE TAIL OF A CENTIPEDE: he receives solar energy mediated by a chain of forms, he does not drink from the fountainhead directly: it is not the contemplation of death that saves, but the contemplation /from/ death:
Great pre-Platonic heliology in the early bit, but I'm getting a Ronnell-tier "thinking as such" turn coming.
>Heidegger:
Oh fuck it's worse than I thought
>how could Nietzsche's active nihilism not understand itself as the consummation of the will's “revulsion against time”? How could Nietzsche not see, in himself, the culmination of the very anti-force which he spent his life condemning? THE OVERMAN IS THE OMEGA POINT:
Careful with the legalism/justifications when it comes to Nietzsche, or at least Nietzsche the Dead Man. For all of his anti-anti-semitism, he was no Jew.

[Anonymous No.13534875]

>>13534392
>>13534409
Fucking based. Thinking of doing a similar thing for my honor thesis. I just have to figure out what fucking department I should work with

[Anonymous No.13534878]

Am i dumb if I don’t know what the fuck you guys are actually getting at

[Anonymous No.13534880]

>“only a few are capable of Love in this world, and they suffer infinitely”

Source pls

[Anonymous No.13534886]

>>13534880
Bergman film. Devil's Eye

[Anonymous No.13534892]

>>13534878
no, these guys are going a billion mph. Trying to play catchup is pretty fun

[Anonymous No.13534900]

>>13534409
>because it is the Overman, who wills “the eternal recurrence of the same”, that testifies to his horror of time:
Like I said: Not A Jew. Pessimist, not Jewish.
>the Omega Point, as the all-memory of being, betrays the luminosity of the intellect (in eschatological time) as the nostalgia for the excrescence of life: that is, the Omega Point represents the desire of life to retain itself even in its cinders:
There is no entropy for Nietzsche, he flatly denies the Mainländerisation of space-time. It's mostly heroic, he wasn't an idiot after all, but it's still the cornerstone of his aesthetics.
>that which “makes good on” the abyss of memory: the books never read, the child never loved: time squandered by time, in its hurtling towards the end of time: the time that hates time, and the time that wants to make time stand still
Falling away from the fatalists and towards the defeatists now?
>Heisman was wrong, Christ was not the irruption of a supra-biological Leviathan: Christ was God electing to take up biology into himself:
Banal truth, but a necessary reminder that you're the audience and not the player here. Good.
>only Ahriman could corrupt the God-Man into the Man-God:
Dostoevsky's idea of the three temptations during the speech of the Grand Inquisitor. Nice touch.
>Schelling was haunted by excrescence, Nietzsche's amor fati could only justify it,
Precise with Schelling, but lacking in Nietzsche.
> the summer suicides, the Leopardis, the Houellebecqs, whose bird's cages were woven out of their own nerves: these men are me, and I will have been no one else.
Good way of winding to an end, praising the suicides.
I liked this one. Particularly legible, digestible.

[Anonymous No.13534904]

>>13534886
Thanks, anon.

[Anonymous No.13534910]

>>13534900
forgot to attach image

[Anonymous No.13534912]

>>13534892
How do I get on their level

[Anonymous No.13534917]

>>13534912
beats me pal

[Anonymous No.13534919]

>>13534392
>>13534409
is there a collection of all of these anywhere?

[Anonymous No.13534932]

>>13534900
this one isn't as tight, I wrote it drunk (I'm still drunk), but I appreciate you taking the time still. You're smart so i couldn't ask for a better critic.

Two things: the Nietzsche stuff I was basically riffing off Heidegger's intuition that Nietzsche fell victim to the very malady he was diagnosing, so I take it you have issues with that interpretation. That's fair. I'd like to know why.

Second, you're absolutely correct Egypt was the seed for the Platonic-Cartesian-Hegelian tradition as we understand it today (at least, as we retroactively interpret it), but is that fair? Didn't Egypt understand respect the Outside to this tradition in a way Descartes, etc. never could?

[Anonymous No.13534949]

>>13534744
Sure am. I don't post much outside of these threads, they keep me moored to /lit/. And I feel exactly the same way, like I'm chasing giants and getting caught up in the craters of just their footsteps alone. Him paired with Lacan, Mainländer paired with Michelstaedter, there's some historical doublets that just BTFO their surrounding episteme. Can't wait to see who replaces Zizek/Badiou.

[Anonymous No.13535007]

>>13534932
>Heidegger's intuition
Be careful with those.
>Nietzsche fell victim to the very malady he was diagnosing
This is an (it almost feels odd not to say "the") intrinsic part of Nietzsche's later work. Everything else rotates around that, after enough rereading. It gets hard not to focus (perhaps too much, but Heidegger hardly noticed) on just how thoroughly confessional his work was. Freud was right to laud him, he understood himself (better than the Cartesian clockwork could tell him about himself) and rejected any kind of Hegelian aesthetic recognition for his own. Clear you head for a minute and reflect on that: he was able to consciously reject the prevailing mode of aesthetic recognition in favor of his own. I might find him unsalvageable in relation to his time (and so I'm not willing to do or entertain the thanatological analyses of Heidegger), but that's entirely to his merit. Sometimes I feel as though Nietzsche loved the Slavs out of pure selfishness, as though they were all his secret sons and daughters.

[Anonymous No.13535017]

>>13534949
You're sharp as a tack so I'm flattered these threads hold your attention. If I wasn't at the "wow the lumpenproles with analogical screeds" phase of my intellectual development, that is, if was much older, I'd like to collaborate with you on a project, but I won't lie: the reasons why all these associations just magically link up with each other is because ive immersed myself in episteme where it would have been more unusual if they didn't.

The next Zizek, Badiou, Kant, needs to be allowed to happen, instead of forced. So ill content myself with these threads in the meantime.

[Anonymous No.13535024]

>>13535007
Exactly, what Nietzsche did for philosophy is what Beethoven did for music: he personalized it, made even philosophy confessional (or rather, he revealed that it always had been).


AAAH it's just too much

[Anonymous No.13535036]

>>13534932
>in a way Descartes, etc. never could?
Rosicrucians have their ways, both Descartes and Hegel were full Magi (though an introvert and and an extrovert, respectively). As for Plato? He understood Egypt in every way one could hope and (pursuant to Grecian Immortalism) performed every ritual [Dialectic] gesture that one could ask for, down the fingers and toes of the Timaeus. There's little to criticise in the prevailing philosophical Order (outside of the generalised Caracoesque critique of bureaucracy and Order, but ironically that's just an imperialist mainstay), it was doctored by the Giants of our giants.

[Anonymous No.13535040]

>>13535036
>There's little to criticise in the prevailing philosophical Order (outside of the generalised Caracoesque critique of bureaucracy and Order, but ironically that's just an imperialist mainstay), it was doctored by the Giants of our giants.

Absolutely on the money. God, I'm glad someone gets this.

[Anonymous No.13535080]

>>13534912
Read Love and Lore by Edgar Saltus, that should test your clairvoyant properties well enough. Hell, if you want to cut to the chase: study Montaigne and Rousseau, be deliberate and very careful to cross reference works and don't at all be afraid to use secondary authors, even tertiary like IEP or SEP, just so long as you're careful to start with and end within the text.

[Anonymous No.13535088]

>>13535080
>clairvoyant properties

What do you mean

[Anonymous No.13535099]

>>13535088
>clairvoyant (adj.)
>"having psychic gifts, characterized by powers of clairvoyance," 1837, earlier "having insight" (1670s), from special use of French clairvoyant "clear-sighted, discerning, judicious" (13c.), from clair (see clear (adj.)) + voyant "seeing," present participle of voir, from Latin videre "to see" (from PIE root *weid- "to see").
>property (n.)
>c. 1300, properte, "nature, quality," later "possession, thing owned" (early 14c., a sense rare before 17c.), from an Anglo-French modification of Old French propriete "individuality, peculiarity; property" (12c., Modern French propreté; see propriety), from Latin proprietatem (nominative proprietas) "ownership, a property, propriety, quality," literally "special character" (a loan-translation of Greek idioma), noun of quality from proprius "one's own, special" (see proper).
I'm getting captchalocked because jannies hate truth and freedom, but I didn't mean anything magical by it. "If you have ears to hear," etc.

[Anonymous No.13535200]

>>13535099
What do you think of Castenada? Pretty sure tonal/nagual is rhetoric/persuasion *farts*

[Anonymous No.13535253]

>>13535200
Eh, never really liked him. Is there something special I'm missing?

[Anonymous No.13535267]

Thanks for this. I'm beginning to head towards where you guys might be but am still at the start of the journey. I've had an intuition that Egypt is where the money is and have been investigating through Sun Ra. I'd be interested to see if you're familiar with him or Hislop: The Two Babylons or Hodson: The Brotherhood of Angel's and Men (a life affirming read)

[Anonymous No.13535394]

>>13534392
Thank you so much! That is gold. I really appreciate it

[Anonymous No.13535505]

ok how can one be an anti-monist? how exactly would finding "multiples" of anything not just be consumed by the whole? how could two things that be not be grouped under the unity of being?

also, don't you think by bouncing around so many symbols you might be getting lost?

[Anonymous No.13535525]

>>13535505
I'm not, it's a playful appellation. I'm a dialectic guy, 5 o'clock just prefers teleological monism and is implying that my dialecticism is too tendentious to hold. I've put it this way before:
>I'm an speculatively an anti-monist, logically a monist, and respectively either a pandeist or a kathenotheist.
I ritually rotate between the two, as well as "within the [latter] one."

[Anonymous No.13535535]

>>13535525
>teleological monist

Is trying to understand Parmenides the same as being him? I suppose id say yes

[Anonymous No.13535558]

>>13535535
Alright, if you sued me over it I'd say his readings are tendentious as well, but it's not a pissing match. He's rooted in Langan , a genuine panlogist.

[Anonymous No.13535586]

>>13535525
isn't that still subsumed under an overarching monism at its root or roof?

[Anonymous No.13535601]

>>13534409
>How could Nietzsche not see, in himself, the culmination of the very anti-force which he spent his life condemning?
But he did anon, otherwise he would have crowned himself overman. We've all seen the cuck photos of him and Salome.

[Anonymous No.13535647]

>>13535586
Both of us would agree, we'd disagree mostly on why we agree (where we draw from). I just tend more towards the speculative, i.e. Mainländer, Harman, Meillassoux, etc. I made my peace with monism a while ago, anything that seems otherwise is just speculation (not only on your part).

[Anonymous No.13535656]

>>13534392
And where does the lost find itself in this? Where does the center of the spiral go, if that center clicks apart and tries to center itself in the roots? I'm not trying to question the arcane, but rather surpass it. The dread at the pinnacle of the dreamscape only draws me further inwards. Illa proelium, illi potissimum. That battle, this most of all. The balance embraced finds no peace, where love is strife and strife, love. Monism yearned to be embraced, but not yet touched.

[Anonymous No.13535666]

>>13535647
how do you keep from getting sad?

do you have an idea of where these types of learning will lead your awareness?

[Anonymous No.13535695]

>>13535656
"Do you regard it as a good post?"
"No. On every count it's a bad piece of work. But, if only the word 'potissimum' were altered to read 'Possumum', it would be a brilliant piece of writing."
"What is your reason for saying this?"
"Well, simply that we Possums fondly hope to see ourselves in every art form."

[Anonymous No.13535699]

>>13535666
I don't. I lean on Pythagorean duty, nothing else.

[Anonymous No.13535711]

>>13535695
The monad has yet to be reached, and will never be understood through any method that exists today, be it esoteric and ancient or novel and obvious. Thus we persist, in spite of facetious possum-comments.

[Anonymous No.13535720]

>>13535711
There is no path.
Beyond the scope of Light, beyond the reach of Dark.
What could possibly await us?
And yet, we seek it, insatiably.
Such is our fate.

Anyways, I"m gonna go read some Lacan. Ring my bell if someone posts topology.

[Anonymous No.13535728]

>>13534849
>the Autistic-Vegetative state of the [retrocausal] Gamer-as-Neoliberal-subject.
made me actually lol

[Anonymous No.13535743]

>>13534392
Based

[Anonymous No.13535753]

>>13535720
based aldia poster

[Anonymous No.13535759]

You lost me at ainulindale

[Anonymous No.13535776]

>>13535759
>he hasn't read LOTR

[Anonymous No.13535826]

>>13534514
>The Souls Trilogy put this pretty well, with the descent into cinder and the slave-knight
I'd love to hear your take on the Souls lore.

[Anonymous No.13535845]

>>13535826
Haha, that would take some time. I'll start drafting something together though, it's a good place to start for a lot of basic psychoanalysis (especially the junctions and disconnects between Freud and Lacan).

[Anonymous No.13535851]

>>13534392
Hakim Bey’s Temporary Autonomous Zone
All I can say, once again, is:
Hakim Bey’s Temporary Autonomous Zone
Read it

[Anonymous No.13535872]

Anti monist posters that still appreciate schizorambling gang

[Anonymous No.13535897]

>>13535851
>Hakim Bey’s Temporary Autonomous Zone
I'm no Nechaev, but even I won't dive into that. This is one of the few places where I can give a full-throated endorsement of Murray Bookchin:
>T.A.Z. presents itself as a state of mind, an ardently antirational and anticivilizational mood, in which disorganization is conceived as an art form and graffiti supplants programs. The Bey (his pseudonym is the Turkish word for 'chief' or 'prince') minces no words about his disdain for social revolution: 'Why bother to confront a 'power' which has lost all meaning and become sheer Simulation? Such confrontations will only result in dangerous and ugly spasms of violence' (TAZ, p. 128). Power in quotation marks? A mere 'Simulation'? If what is happening in Bosnia with firepower is a mere 'simulation,' we are living in a very safe and comfortable world indeed! The reader uneasy about the steadily multiplying social pathologies of modern life may be comforted by the Bey's Olympian thought that 'realism demands not only that we give up waiting for 'the Revolution,' but also that we give up wanting it' (TAZ, p. 101). Does this passage beckon us to enjoy the serenity of Nirvana? Or a new Baudrillardian 'Simulation'? Or perhaps a new Castoriadian 'imaginary'?
Now That's Bad Theory, Kids.

[Anonymous No.13535905]

>>13534409
>only plants feed on the stars directly: the predator of a star is the flower, the predator of a man is his thinking: the Sun feeds on him as the very complexes it energizes: MAN IS THE TAIL OF A CENTIPEDE: he receives solar energy mediated by a chain of forms, he does not drink from the fountainhead directly: it is not the contemplation of death that saves, but the contemplation /from/ death:

“...The double [the other body of a sorcerer, corresponding to the astral body of Hinduism and Theosophy, the body one dreams in (dream-control being one of the central facets of Castaneda’s shamanism), this double being developed by certain practices (cf. Gurdjieff’s teachings that the higher bodies in us are latent and must be developed] is white, yellowish-white, like the sun [...] Yes, we are pieces of the sun. That is why we are luminous beings. But our eyes can’t see that luminosity because it is very faint. Only the eyes of a sorcerer can SEE it, and that happens after a lifetime struggle.”
The Second Ring of Power

See also the flyer in Castaneda, which controls men and feeds on their energy by precisely replacing men’s minds with the flyer’s own thoughts and mind, convincing them they are their own thoughts. See also the constant point hammered into the books that remembrance of our death is fundamental to “shifting the assemblage point”, shifting the location of consciousness, to a state of real existential integrity.

[Anonymous No.13535908]

>>13535897
Are you OP?

[Anonymous No.13535932]

>>13535905
Yes. Like post-hypnotic suggestions. All examples of wetikos

[Anonymous No.13535945]

>>13535932
I’m not talking about any metaphors, son. I’m talking about real, normally invisible entities attached to almost every human being on this Godforsaken planet ah fuck it

[Anonymous No.13535949]

>>13535945
I know.

[Anonymous No.13536023]

>>13535908
No, but I've known about TAZ for a while. More Buttchin:
>Given the evanescent quality of a TAZ, the Bey's disciples can enjoy the fleeting privilege of living a 'nomadic existence,' for 'homelessness can in a sense be a virtue, an adventure' (TAZ, p. 130). Alas, homelessness can be an 'adventure' when one has a comfortable home to return to, while nomadism is the distinct luxury of those who can afford to live without earning their livelihood. Most of the 'nomadic' hoboes I recall so vividly from the GreatDepression era suffered desperate lives of hunger, disease, and indignity and usually died prematurely -- as they still do, today, in the streets of urban America. The few gypsy-types who seemed to enjoy the 'life of the road' were idiosyncratic at best and tragically neurotic at worst. Nor can I ignore another 'insurrection' that the Bey advances: notably, 'voluntary illiteracy' (TAZ, p. 129). Although he advances this as a revolt against the educational system, its more desirable effect might be to render the Bey's various ex cathedra injunctions inaccessible to his readers.
>Perhaps no better description can be given of T.A.Z.'s message than the one that appeared in Whole Earth Review, whose reviewer emphasizes that the Bey's pamphlet is 'quickly becom[ing] the countercultural bible of the 1990s . . . While many of Bey's concepts share an affinity with the doctrines of anarchism,' the Review reassures its yuppie clientele that he pointedly departs from the usual rhetoric about overthrowing the government. Instead, he prefers the mercurial nature of 'uprisings,' which he believes provide 'moments of intensity [that can] give shape and meaning to the entirety of life.' These pockets of freedom, or temporary autonomous zones, enable the individual to elude the schematic grids of Big Government and to occasionally live within realms where he or she can briefly experience total freedom. (emphasis added) [9]
>There is an untranslatable Yiddish word for all of this: nebbich! During the 1960s, the affinity group Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers spread similar confusion, disorganization, and 'cultural terrorism,' only to disappear from the political scene soon thereafter. Indeed, some of its members entered the commercial, professional, and middle-class world they had formerly professed to despise. Nor is such behavior uniquely American. As one French 'veteran' of May-June 1968 cynically put it: 'We had our fun in '68, and now it's time to grow up.' The same deadening cycle, with circled A's, was repeated during a highly individualistic youth revolt in Zurich in 1984, only to end in the creation of Needle Park, a notorious cocaine and crack hangout established by the city's officials to allow addicted young people to destroy themselves legally.

[Anonymous No.13536185]

>>13535905
Castaneda always felt like a mix of Camus at his worst and Aun Weor at his most boring.

[Anonymous No.13537023]

>>13535945
Are you a Scientologist?

[Anonymous No.13537459]

>>13534571
Who the fuck is UG?

[Anonymous No.13537469]

Did I just stumble into the high IQ containment thread?
I am unable to understand anything

[Anonymous No.13537495]

>>13534912
(Subjectivised philosophy genre) is the (biological disorder) of the (biological object) with (implied theological meaning). (Subjectivised philosopher) is the (time-adjective) of its own (monotonous reiterated process). (Philosopher) (negative technologisation process) the (negative subjectivised philosopher with septic implications conflated) with the (non-argument assertion against non-argument): that (generic philosophical category) and (pseudo-metaphysical object) we are (even bigger time-adjective) (monotonous we-transcendence weism) and (on and on with binary/non-binary assertions of the input-blackbox-output machinational tik-tok-tinkering of time-object become human): (two philosophers together to avoid redundancy) now become (marxist-adjective to appear critical but with ancient-postprefix-become-word-of-its-own) become (philosophical category/cybernetic theory): (reiteration connector) (mind-object) is/is not (historical/nature connector), or (generic philosophical connector), (obscurantist real scotsmen) (made up word having sex with scary sounding word) which is the (redundant cybernetic word approaching absolute abstraction which is just another form of deabstraction and therefore life) (but let's keep going deeper) (ESOTERIC SOUNDING AXIOM WHICH SOUNDS COOL BECAUSE IT IS IRREFUTABLE BUT ONLY INSOFAR AS IT SAYS NOTHING): (Philosopher) applies the (scientific paradox) to (philosopher object-theory) thereby (time-reduction) it into (space-time paradoxical abstract metaphor) combined with (self-reducing metaphor with no need of expansive words): (#thegreatsfalltofallaciestoo) which is only only possible because (technological time-category-object), the (subject-Subject-itself) does not (transcendent Matrix reference) (with a twist), there is (something something somewhere vague connector words holy shit ethics words/could be moral): (philosophical object qua philosophical branch induction) (mathematical word) into (itself) as (mathematical word 2 = virtual mathematical world) (with a twist) emerging out of (negative medical category) between (biological philosophical category qua man qua (((huMAN)))) (hipster post-post-ironic word), (post-marxist category), (subdiurnal technophysics with invariant inflection of being) (qua human) (ironic(?) time-philosophy category) (apocalyptic words) (degeneration increasing as we approach the end) (multiple generic philosophical categories strung together) and now (romantic life-words-seemingly-free-of-all-world-weariness-word-categoriesism) conditions of (lif-word abstraction) and now its (negative (un)-life post-form) within the (abstracted abstraction): (Post-metaphysical-metaphysics category) is not (technical negation word), but the (second technical negation word) (add slashes here /input/):

[Anonymous No.13537501]

>>13537495

[Anonymous No.13537506]

>>13537495
>>13537501
(BOLD ::: BOLD)
(Supertechnological object) are (deabstracted human post-metaphor), but not (negative uncanny valley disassociative disorder of the squelchbox biology fleshword) which is the same as (cosmological squelchbox word): (Descartes reference here) (capital-sale-word to appear like I'm keeping up with my ironic negation): (subjects /postabstract form/) are still (relational physics reference for the reddit crowdmind) (or esoterically-infused-science-word-reference-submetaphor-postanalogy) (formal seriousness) that (time reference of the mobilised black box): I am not (theological reference), but (absolutely hegelian absolute reference with slashes to isolate and deisolate its being in the house of non-dasein positionality) (abstract subject-object-subject) are a (deabstracted object-subject-object) which can (/big science/theology/physics/philosophy syncretism word/) (movement reference) (globalist post-construction project) (don't forget the Vedic reference): (minute reference diffusing into) (psychological reference): (equate=equate=equate) (the gods THE GODS the gods damn you THE GODS) (physical abstraction growth word): (post-essence human actualisation abstraction) is what (biological function) (TIME TIME TIMEGOD MANGOD NATURE-MACHINEGOD NOW A BRIDE OF ABSTRACTION MINDPROCESS)!!! In (Philosopher-become-object) (TIME) (oneness) (mechanised theological-human-object): (reiteration) (HOLY SHIT LIFE IS DIFFICULT WHY CAN'T WE BE GODS) (Christian cosmological-cuckery is cool postmetaphor statement) in (random wikipedia philosopher): (true=scotsman= slippery=slope=man) can only) experience (time) as the (computer function) of (musical reference philosophogised) the (trans-time-god) (visual object) mathematical postadjective) of/that (biological process) into (TIME) becoming (WOAH TIME N SHIT) of becoming (the-object-become-time-in-itself): (don't worry the gods-become-microchips-become-me got this because WE ALL ONE N SHIT) (NONMATERIAL SPACE OH MY GOD NO!!!!!!!!!! word)(eternity) (eternity) (eternity) (THING) (THING) (THING) (=ME=) (=ME=) (=ME=).

[Anonymous No.13537567]

>the predator of a star is the flower, the predator of a man is his thinking

this sounds great, but is it actually the case? the energy that plants eat from the sun has already been cast off, the sun will continue to release regardless of what the plants eat...but i agree, thinking does get us killed.

and i'd like to know, what you've read regarding egyptian theurgy? every time you mention osiris or any of the other gods i start to lose you.

>>13534692

he sounds a lot like shankara here, and also like jesus with "the kingdom of god is within you". it's quite frustrating that a desire for enlightenment occludes enlightenment.

[Anonymous No.13537594]

>>13534392
While largely incoherent, the first bit is true. An insult against infinite majesty is deserving of infinite punishment. All sin inflicts irreparable damage. Without Christ, there would be no hope at all.

[Anonymous No.13537595]

>Heidegger: how could Nietzsche's active nihilism not understand itself as the consummation of the will's “revulsion against time”? How could Nietzsche not see, in himself, the culmination of the very anti-force which he spent his life condemning...

i think the sequence that you've got here about Nietzsche might finally shut up some of his disciples. they spend a lot of time cursing anyone with metaphysical or religious understanding as "anti-life". to me it seems that morbid clinging to this transient, "life with death" is a slap in the face to the true eternal life that we have. i wonder if the dark souls creators intentionally had this in mind when they give you the choice to continue kindling the first flame or not.

[Anonymous No.13537618]

Is there a simpler way of writing what this man just wrote? Because that was rather nonsensical.

[Anonymous No.13537620]

>http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/valentinus-e.html
>He was continent, enduring all things. Jesus digested divinity; he ate and drank in a special way, without excreting his solids. He had such a great capacity for continence that the nourishment within him was not corrupted, for he did not experience corruption.

[Anonymous No.13537649]

I think I understand most of these except for all the Egyptian shit schizOP likes to put in. What is this Atum and Osiris stuff. Who do I have to read to understand

Please don't say Jung

[Anonymous No.13537660]

I really wonder if OP made an AI to create this.
It’s funny as hell.

[Anonymous No.13537678]

>>13534392
>EVERYTHING THAT SHITS IS DAMNED
I've actually damned all of it before. Congratulations. Are you channeling this message, by the way?

[Anonymous No.13537696]

>>13537660
Robots don't shit, so they'd be saved. They'd likely harvest us for ideas and other crops that grow from us.

[Anonymous No.13537818]

>>13537649
http://www.sofiatopia.org/maat/hidden_chamber02

[Anonymous No.13537858]

>>13537818
Is this your site schizoposter?
https://ultromega.wordpress.com/2018/11/21/prophecy-01/

[Anonymous No.13538168]

>>13537858
No, I'm not sure who compiled those.

Calling anti-monist poster: where can I read Mainlander? Or did you read him in the original German?

[Anonymous No.13539259]

>>13537618
Absolutely, but every time someone ask it becomes that much less likely.

[Anonymous No.13539296]

>>13538168
The translation is very literal, if also very faithful to the meaning. The full text is very impressive. I'd had segments read aloud and translated with company, I've translated large portions online and parsed through them for some time, and I've discussed some secondary scholarship as well (Müller Seyfarth, Horstmann).
Find a polite German and impolitely make them read things for you, that's my advice.

[Anonymous No.13539325]

>>13538168
Oh, here's the translation doc:
https://www.docdroid.net/etK9RZt/

[Anonymous No.13539450]

>>13539296
Any links to the secondary sources in English?

Where does Mainlander stand with you? Is he right?

[Anonymous No.13539492]

based schizophrenia poster

[Anonymous No.13539543]

>>13539450
>http://untier.de/mainlaender-durch-schopenhauer-oder-der-batzen-als-quasi-stellares-objekt-2016/
That's the most recent of Horstmann's articles. They both run in the same circles, but I either have to wait until I can discuss them in person or just try to translate them on my own (half successful).

He's a deeply seminal thinker for me, and he prefigures a surprising amount of speculative realism (Harman, Meillassoux, even Thacker and Brassier). I'm not sure what you mean about him "being right," but he's certainly a favorite of mine.

[Anonymous No.13539556]

>>13534392
>ahrimanic
Is schizojak, dare I say, redpilled?

[Anonymous No.13539563]

>>13539543
Well, I'll come out with it: is entropy salvific?

And that article's in German, damn shame.

[Anonymous No.13539571]

>>13539556
Who is this guy and what does he say about ahriman

[Anonymous No.13539616]

>>13539563
Oh! Of coruse, in some far off sense, but I wouldn't follow that thread too far. The whole "mythopoetic master of Great Decay" thing is a little bit too stiff for me. Hegel contra Whitehead, that's what I'm having fun with right now, everything else is just time-whittling and entertainment.

[Anonymous No.13539671]

>>13539616
My allegiance has always been to men like him, men like Michelstaedter for whom death is exalting, salvific. The other pole is Nietzsche et al, the players of the Game.

Who understands more about the world? Who is outside or who excels at it? Maybe both. Maybe neither. Idk.

[Anonymous No.13539700]

>>13539671
Hegel was a more solid proponent of noble death than either Michelstaedter or Mainländer, and he understood the world better than either as well. Still, I like them both.

As for Nietzsche, I'll be honest and say that I've never really known what to do with him, never seen what others seem to see in him. He's very much a descendant of Schopenhauer, arguably the best, but not much more. I seriously prefer Mainländer to him, however "nihilist."

[Anonymous No.13539707]

>>13534392
do you have discord?

[Anonymous No.13539724]

>>13539707
I do not.

>>13539700
I've never read Nietzsche cover to cover. I think he's kind of boring desu, but he has a fire in him that I recognize as the father of my own quaint embers

[Anonymous No.13539738]

>>13539724
His writing is a bit boring (even when it's very good), but his life is impressive, even inspiring. He had an incredible amount of willpower towards the end.

[Anonymous No.13539748]

>>13539738
I know, I still can't finish Zarathustra.

[Anonymous No.13539792]

>>13539748
It's near Will to Power for me, in terms of my disdain for it. I much prefer Untimely Meditations as a capstone to his corpus, though I understand that Zarathustra is the keystone.

[Anonymous No.13539828]

>>13539792
I hate how "darwinized" modernity has become thanks to his will to power, I understand that his ontology of the will is a bit more sophisticated than "dude everyone wants to be powerful lmao" but still.

[Anonymous No.13539845]

>>13535267
The musician?

[Anonymous No.13539860]

>>13539724
Do you have a throaway email? would love to talk about ken wheeler, langan with you.

[Anonymous No.13539872]

>>13535267
I am not, in fact. It sounds interesting, post a link

[Anonymous No.13539885]

>>13539860
I do not. I'm here if you wanna shitpost

[Anonymous No.13539905]

>>13539885
If you are the poster behind all these fine long esoteric posts I would like to talk to you because I respect them, so I'm not interested in shitposting and temporal limit of a 4chan thread.

[Anonymous No.13539950]

>>13539905
If this thread's still up tonight I'll post a burner. I'm actually a brainlet, so fair warning

[Anonymous No.13539955]

>>13539905
Just wait for the threads like everyone else, or say what's on your mind now.

[Anonymous No.13540120]

>>13539950
If you are the one posting all these 'schizowojak' threads I don't think so. Although formulaic, they are esoteric.

[Anonymous No.13541413]

>>13535949
:0

>>13536023
Well, I recommended it for OP. I think the “radical monism”, the mystical monarchism/anarchism, a view on self-realization that’s sort of mixture of Nietzsche and Ramana Maharshi, is on OP’s wavelength.

>>13537023
I’m not anything. I am a kook according to most stupid Earthlings, though.

[Anonymous No.13541498]

>>13541413
Huh, maybe I don't know enough about TAZ. UG mentions an important meeting with Maharshi in his youth.

[Anonymous No.13541519]

>>13535720
DS2 truly is the best of Souls games.

[Anonymous No.13541537]

>>13534392
So, the mindset towards life creation mimics the precedent requirements to form life? Cool, what's next?

[Anonymous No.13541547]

>>13534392
I tire of reading these. Yes, it's insightful. It is grand synthesized thesis. Wording like stained glass. But what about practice? Enough theory. What do you do? I'm asking you personally. It isn't enough to just know. What are you doing to prepare for the return of the Lord Christ?

[Anonymous No.13541572]

>>13539955
It's just hard to have a real conversation, you know? Tottaly get if your sketched out but I'd like to correspond with you somehow. I'm not an authority figure and can only help you if you let me help you, anon. If I dangled in some free Brazzers logins, could I change your mind, friend?

[Anonymous No.13541578]

>>13539563
Do you want me to translate it?

[Anonymous No.13541586]

>>13541572
>yessss open your thought ports i mean lets correspond haha

shoo shoo ahriman

[Anonymous No.13541611]

>>13541572
>can only help you if you let me help you
No thanks, I'd rather my blood stay in my veins then burn on an alter to Baʿal Ḥammon.

[Anonymous No.13542079]

>>13537567
http://www.sofiatopia.org

[Anonymous No.13542433]

Someone is saving all these posts right?

[Anonymous No.13543029]

>>13542433
I started keeping track of them after the last couple of threads, but I remember someone logging all of OP's intro paragraphs from the start.

[Anonymous No.13543043]

>>13537459
Hello?

[Anonymous No.13543062]

>>13537618
Yeah
>dude woah blank philosopher was totally right about everything dude woah semi-obscure Phil reference dude woah eastern gods dude like totally woah and shit technobiology big connection woah sameness everything

[Anonymous No.13543086]

>>13543043
UG Krishnamurti
>>13543062
>sameness everything
Stop telling on yourself.