... here now, well thats what i'm presenting it as the beginning of the divine orders of introduction now for some apologies first off -- i should be made to read through the rough (but ready!) text myself first -- but as i am anxious to disseminate the coming assemblages -- i have published this text its rawest of mused [or mussed] form for what i would say is the best of two possible reasons: 1) i am lazy and will eventually agonize over revisions, endlessly and to a fault. 2) i wish to expose whatever it is in the process of writing these texts while deepening my own awareness.
In the words other than that of the great DaDaist, i am become "The bachelor Striped Bare for His Bride."
my love and devotion for the TAROT has remained, i believe, the single most influencing force in the expression, not simply, of my artistry, but in my fundamental projection of an external as well as internal presence. i wish i could say such a presence had much to do with me, but i cannot. i have not had nearly enough strength or fortitude to confront such blatantly brilliant honesty within myself ...if i had, i would have seen the unity of all things, and known that it is this what i have been chasing after all these years...
Divine Origins of Historiographic Comedies“Does the presence of oneself confirm or deny the experience of reality?” or “Does the absence of God prove that a God does not exist?” Both of these psudo-questions are rhetorical examples existential statements, yet can be distilled to further refine the essence of my questions. Is experience reality [as that which] and what is not experienced unreal? Such unpardonable queries can be infinitely composed in a vast array and will always be contain by the same infinite outcome of stalemate. The philosophy adapted to the fundamental idea of the unanswerable was, of course, the 1888 pre-bla of Existentialism. It is this likeness which best embodies the purveyor of occult science, any other approach dabbling within the depths of such murkiness classifies one instantly as either a Master or an overly advert compulsive gramating fool. Yet, as always, when presented with the ultimatum of dualism I tend to seek the middle way, thus the path of the Initiate. The origin of an existential essence at the core of our being [] is much the fault of what surrounds us. Matter, or what we know as solid, substantive form is a distinct minority within our cognizant Universe [perhaps excluding the presence of many call dark matter, which has yet to be fully experienced or realized.] Nothingness, or what we conceive of as absence, null and void comprises a far greater ratio of material reality, both on the macrocosmic and microcosmic scale. The path we often seek will be the path we are most likely found. If we orientate the picture just slightly, sometimes other things come into view, and when presented with the same rhetorical or redundant scenario of “the sound of falling trees in the forest” we are now able to contextualize and, of course, like any well-preformed Magick, the secret’s been there along.
[] Contra Science does not boast divine origins, and most begrudgingly admits to anything labeled in the order of paranormal or extra-sensorial phenomena at all [but it does admi mmmmm t]. Clearly the tradition of modern science commits the egregious sin of what can be called mono-contextualism (the pendulum swings of sciences will always be steep). The ability to see from an inordinate number of perspectives, simultaneously, will both deprive and isolate the scientific method and its objectives into obscurity. The awaiting scientific paradigm is formulated in the emerging question: what comes next ? Every generational age must deal with the immediate concerns at hand, and the concerns of the present age are most often rooted in the actions of previous generations. This was the way of our ancestors, one of the last echoing warnings barely still audible over a parrie wind. There is no need here, at the moment, to deconstruct cultural climates [although that is the total need of cultures climate). Without the generational foresight or hindsight we shift instaniously into popular culture. It is obvious when I look about my environment that I can survey little else. How can one even be certain of [] the nature or reason of what one is seeing – if there is no other experience which to differentiate or qualify it with? The assumption that the only definition of reality, is as we experience it, seems stifled if not comical, and infinitely sad because there is little choice of personal objectivity contained behind the generational force field [memory] of the subjective real. The hierarchies of collective and generational intelligence are conducted through the most efficacious of means. For this reason alone it has been the role of nature to transmute the code of life not through oral or cultural disseminations, but through the genesis of genetic and biological evolution, the journey of chemical transmigration, if you will. What is seen in nature is often mimicked - the moth who passes as a bee, the aphids cleverly disguised as thorns, a venom-less snake puffing and rattling – each has transcribed the collective intelligence of life into a practical experience suited for the larger concerns of its reality – chiefly better odds of survival. Other collective forms of intelligence are equally compelled to find ways across numerous generational divides in time and space.
Each stratosphere or link in the chain of life contains and is contained by its own intelligence. No intelligence is inherently better or worse than any other intelligence – it simply is bound by the parameters specific to that intelligence. The threshold of intelligence is always guarded by the tri[] of what can be just [] ability, capability, and willingness.
.
