apologies for all typos, grammar slips, etc.

grammAr !

:)

Hey, what are you talking about? ;)
... just corrected it.

_incredible_ piece of writing, reza, unprocessably informative and mind-twisting!
I would like to ask, first, given that I would assume most people do not have as sophisticated a grasp of these issues as you do, in what concrete ways is this chronomaly expressed in what we know as 'popular islamic militancy' and which we generally try to process through our inherited categories of judaeo-christian theology?

I ask this because it's tempting to think that your analysis displays such exegetical finesse that these lines cannot possibly be followed or incorporated in popular movements (like average american evangelists probably don't read Augustine in detail!). But obviously you are saying the opposite, that they underly islam to the extent of determining the very meaning of its 'submission'.

Reza - since the restoration of the Caliphate - at least in its 'vulgar' (popular?) politico-military manifestation - seems to be a recognizably historical ambition, how does it connect with the achronicity of Islamic Apocalypticism, as outlined here?
What is the temporality of Jihad?
Also, what is at stake in the term (Islamic) 'Chronopolytics'? What is the implicit reference to multiplicity pointing to?
"Islamic Apocalypse is an anti-absolute polytics" - us infidels need more, how can 'surrender' to a unity of any kind, even a nonontological one, support this description? (it reminds me (disturbingly) of Levinas and the 'Absolutely Other' - how can a declaration of 'nonabsoluteness' be sustained within the context of an overall monotheistic commitment? (assuming only Allah and Allah alone could conceivably occupy this 'slot')).

If responding to these questions could prove injurious - please ignore.

Hi guys, thanks ... wonderful questions; i'll return to these issues in the next few days; isp companies are in a some kind of tax strike here (protesting against filtering laws and high tax, etc.) ... they activate their machines for 1 hour in a day.

Nick, most of your questions will be answered in the next pieces ... esp. the third chapter: Time-anomalies and Jihad, so be patient ;) ... plus, don’t worry they don’t cause ‘so much’ trouble :)

us infidels need more, how can 'surrender' to a unity of any kind, even a nonontological one, support this description?

just for now, the answer lies in the meaning / horizon of Unity in theologic glossaries and Unity as the translation of the word Tuhid (which is absolutely a wrong translation when you come to technical aspects). But guess i have expressed what i had in mind very poorly (you are right) ... actually decided to delete this line but had no time to remove it ;) (so just ignore it for now)

as I read it, simply an (impossible without dissolution) surrender to immanence, or horizontal kurtz-gradient, as opposed to a surrender to transcendence, or vertical ascension...?

Reza - love these multi-parters - need to re-read this one a few times before fine tuning the interrogation ;)
(and how 'orthodox' is the mysterious Jay on these issues?)

u/c - as was no doubt obvious, i was quite tuned to your first wave of q.s (pop issues) - not sure that a subtilization of all these points serves more than irrelevant PC purposes if it loses track of the concrete planetary fall out ...

There's an interesting - but probably impossible - topic based on the implications of a simultaneous discussion of the current state of so[c.i.a.l.]ism with Chinese characteristics staged out of the PRC and Islam Today from Iran (won't insult anybody by adding 'Blairism Now live from the UK') - actually be fascinated to do this (which of these dynamically mutating ideological formations is most thoroughly and uninhibitedly 'discussible' right now?) but the gloss has gone off suicidal romanticism from my PoV - just to say, not taking anything for granted about the precariousness of certain lines of inquiry ... (and 'glad' it's Reza in the hot seat) ...

... by 'ideology' i mean anything suggestive of electric cattle-prods ...

what you're suggesting re the impossible topic sounds intriguing but speed of delivery made it maddeningly difficult to decipher, maybe you could give us the slow version....as for the other issues, urbanomic would be more than happy to provide speakeasy space if it helped.

u/c - comment really came out of neural stress based on simultaneously wanting to grill Reza hard while recognizing that the topic he's on now would be the equivalent of me launching into 'Maoist crimes against humanity' or some such - guess I share Reza's ambivalence though, being a fairly sound 21st Century Chinese Marxist (if you ignore the Lemurian Qabbala and time-travel experiments)

Reza - having ever more infidel twitches, since I see the entire Abrahamic tradition as fairly consistent in certain respects - particularly (and IMHO very irritatingly) insofar as it entertains a conception of divinity that is superpersonalized, masculine (Marduk's traits show through very clearly), moody, meddling (interferes in human affairs with 'miracles' and punishments such as recent tsunami according to numerous Muslim authorities), talkative (inspiring holy books etc, with favoured languages, whether Hebrew, Greek or Arabic), evidently with strong moral opinions and sensitivities (doesn't like men sticking their wingwhang in certain places, phobic about pigs), egotistical (gets really annoyed when he ceases to be the focus of attention) ... etc - and these characteristics entirely dominate as far as the concrete impact of the religion is concerned, which can be huge (and hideous).
Yet at the same time the theologians/philosophers and other sophisticates of the religion in question insist that this God is ineffable, ultra-transcendent, ontologically anomalous, 'absolutely other' ... etc
Since there is quite evidently no connection whatsoever between the various incarnations of the Abrahamic God in scripture and vulgar belief on the one hand and in high-theory on the other, why don't the sophisticates cut the umbilical cord and admit that they are really talking about Aristotle's God or Azathoth (both genuinely indifferent to mankind), and certainly not the pompous tyrant sky-god of popular monotheism?
Of course, in all cases the answer to this is that social solidarity trumps intellectual consistency, but it should then be acknowledged that the crudest anthropomorphic wife-beating-jerk-god will actually be the One to triumph (as is seen in all cases). All religions degenerate as they spread (even Buddhism becomes filled with exotic gods, demons and hells), it's just that the Abrahamic faiths start on such a totally disastrous foundation ('one day scheming tribal leader meets psycho sky-daddy (or his official representative)...') that IMHO they really stink to high heaven as they grow ... just 'splainin why the infidels won't be disarming anytime soon ...

for now:

>>> All religions degenerate as they spread (even Buddhism becomes filled with exotic gods, demons and hells), it's just that the Abrahamic faiths start on such a totally disastrous foundation

Why disastrous? if you think strategically, you will see that it is perfectly the unfolding of what Ibn Maymun suggested centuries ago: “I don’t see monotheism as a direct path (Serat-o-Al-mostaghim) but a mother pregnant of its minorities eating their mother as they emerge. Minorities, multiplicative heresies (monotheistic polytics) and anomalies of monotheism are closer to radical infidelity than what people usually think.

But didn’t convince enough about the infidel twitches. ;) My first question: what does separate infidels from monotheistic panoramas; surely infidels are phobic about monotheism (angelophobia instead of being phobic about pigs), talkative, feeding on anomalous egologics and moody too? Think ibn Maymun was right, the encounter with monotheism (either from the inside or the outside) should be strategic, cunning ... (over)reactionary responses to monotheism while abstractly stay away from it stinking core but concretely fuel its (monotheism's) passion for survival.

u/c said: "as I read it, simply an (impossible without dissolution) surrender to immanence, or horizontal kurtz-gradient, as opposed to a surrender to transcendence, or vertical ascension...?"

Remember, that both of these 'developmental trajectories' are possible, but only apply to man. For man to 'transcend' or 'ascend' implies NOT a 'unity with Allah', but is always located 'within' and related to an immanent context. For instance, to grow 'close' to Allah means not that one unites with this Absolute in a 'transcendent' sense where man, then, exists 'outside'. Clearly, he does not, no matter what 'level' of immanence we're talking about. So, for man to 'rise' vertically, which 'appears' to imply a transcending of the manifested, existential, and horizontal realms, actually arrives at another immanent 'state' -- with Allah still fully and Absolutely Outside -- but NOT 'out there' in a 'sense' meaning. It would appear that any developmental pro-ject of man -- either horizontally or vertically (still INSIDE and Encompassed) -- ends in dissolution -- as all beings are transient, contingent, and pro-jected themselves. Though Ghiamat does not 'unveil', it does 'demonstrate' the 'uncontrollable' -- in any immanent context. No being can say 'I am'. Well, they can -- but ;)

Reza -
"Strategically" for who? If God is the enemy, then his strategic advantages are my problems ... flexibility is for hurting your enemy efficiently, not for vacillating about who He is

"a mother pregnant of its minorities eating their mother as they emerge" - you're right to see this as a fascinatingly suggestive phrase, of course, but:
a) why a mother? seems improbable given the consistently masculine character of sky-gods (constantly repeating Marduk's rape-murder of Tiamat).
b) what evidence is there for a dispersive trend within these traditions? Programmed by the original 'jealousy' of Yahweh, don't they all serve as wellsprings of intolerance attempting to eradicate all difference (whether as paganism, idolatry, heresy, apostacy, infidelity ...)?

"angelophobia instead of being phobic about pigs" - actually, both angels and pigs are quite interesting, sure we'll get plenty of opportunities to investigate both

"moody" - but if God is moody, that's something else, right?

"phobic about monotheism" - guilty as charged, without reservation. There's a lot to be phobic about, and anything less than raw animosity falls prey to The Enemy (whose relentless fanaticism requires an equally inflexible response) - I've heard horrible predictions that China could go Christian - visions like that make me fairly relaxed about global thermonuclear species annihilation, but hopefully Renomu will get to us first ...

"reactionary responses to monotheism while abstractly stay away from it stinking core but concretely fuel its (monotheism's) passion for survival" - another excellent phrase, but it implies an interest in de-escalation - i've abandoned any illusions that Monotheism is going to calm down, negotiate or lose interest in survival - best to push it to the max and toughen up for an ocean of killing (but i've been reading a lot of West recently).

PS. But returning to earlier topic ('discussibility') there's a positional dissymmetry that makes a mockery of debate - there are things neither of us 'can say' - if we were talking about Marxism in China i'd be totally in line with being "strategic, cunning" because that is the way to tune into a cultural complex positively subverting itself in a 'polytical' direction, avoiding pointless headbanging opposition. Is Iranian Islam changing along similar positive vectors? Of course, l defer to your judgement on that - and don't expect you to give it publicly - although the evidence from outside is meagre at best. Put into reverse, however, it would seem silly if you started spouting dialectical mumbo-jumbo just because that strategically and cunningly 'makes sense' over here. Likewise, due to the enlightened atheism of my home country's ideology, i can bask in the incendiary love of Iblis without any concern for the consequences ...

PPS. One trigger for this firefight is that for me 'polytics' means precisely and entirely the repudiation of monotheism by whatever mean necessary, so there's bound to be a measure of controversy ...

nick, I see clearly now where you're coming from with the escalation of my mild pop-god pondering to your heavily-camo'ed infidel assault. Have to say, well done for puncturing the air of pious politesse that is automatically activated from the foul depths of HumanOS when people speak in hushed tones of the sky-daddy.

Difficult (in a hyperstitionally productive way? Not sure) to scope out the motivation behind Reza's squirming: "surely infidels are phobic about monotheism" seems like a standard dialectical move (position A is just inverted position B, let's get together) and still think we need to tie this causally to concrete movements to demonstrate its relevance (if that's an issue).

u/c - while not trying to implicate you in my polecat scratching, evidently just following up on your subtle suggestion ...

>>> "Strategically" for who?

For those who seek to subvert monotheism. If it doesn’t work for you or us, it doesn’t mean that it does not work at all. It is not supposed to be an appetizer for our anthropomorphic taste.

We look for efficient, rapid and effective actions (whose effects can be grasped by our organic sensors) but unfortunately, we can’t find such tactics that at the same time kill monotheism and don’t rise from our organic unsophistication, naiveness.

>>> flexibility is for hurting your enemy efficiently, not for vacillating about who He is.

If you are supposed to kill him, I don’t know how you are going to do it without knowing him, his tricks, those which are still unknown, shrouded ... and there are plenty of them for sure (ref. to one of the verses in the Quran).

>>> a) why a mother?

Why not? My apologies but seems you are too obsessed with the symbolic (which is not separable from the crowd’s belief) representation of monotheism as a phallus. When there is no phallus, radical genital surgery is not a good idea ;)

>>> seems improbable given the consistently masculine character of sky-gods (constantly repeating Marduk's rape-murder of Tiamat).

Ok, if you constantly insist on Enuma Elish I should add:

Don’t forget that Tiamat and Apzu gave rise to the puppets who gave birth to Marduk; and don’t forget, they, Tiamat and Apzu, couldn’t afford the cacophonies of their own pets; they were too obsessed with their own affordance-based openness (little Borderless Void) and survival; they were first plotted to undo their Creation Project; but those poor sisters were a bit late. Haven’t you wondered that Tiamat did almost nothing in her battle; Tiamat and her fierce army were almost stupefied and paralyzed before Marduk (is a rotting but decorated phallus that much terrorizing?). We have two conclusions ahead: [1] their self-sacrifice and defeat was exactly a hideous part of the Genesis Project they initiated by hypercampflaging themselves within the rotting Solidus and poisoning its sedimentary rivers (Dejleh and Forat, the two rivers of meso-potamia are the two rivers of toxic blood flowing from Tiamat’s wounded eyes; if they have not dried yet, the wounds are still fresh, there was more toxic blood in her body that anyone could imagine) [2] Tiamat and Apzu were too decadent and arrogant, too blind to see the autonomous power of insurgencies. They were slain in a War or an Assassination that they deserved. Surely, it is not far away from the monstrosity that West indirectly glorifies [3] (which is not really a conclusion) or maybe, they were so innocent (too immaculate in a Christian sense) to show the same kind of monstrosity which means nothing in a War (both happening in the battlefield and surprisingly in Apzu’s realm in the form of assassination).

>>> [Monotheism] eradicate[s] all difference (whether as paganism, idolatry, heresy, apostacy, infidelity ...)?

And at the same giving rise to them!

>>> but hopefully Renomu will get to us first ...

Don’t be so sure ;)

>>> best to push it to the max and toughen up for an ocean of killing (but i've been reading a lot of West recently).

Or shifting its survival to feed something else? As you mentioned, it seems the war happens through Escalation and Diffusion; for Jay’s puppets, escalation is a good back-up but certainly, sometimes, it is too blind to escalate what, its own warmachines or the Enemy. However, escalating tactics usually support the War itself rather than the involved parties.

>>> Is Iranian Islam changing along similar positive vectors?

I can only say:

The underground voices say: Yes. But not exactly a ‘Yes’ that you have in mind.

However, I can understand / estimate the amount of toxin this discussion has released on your nervous system, my apologies for that. West might calm down and be pacified if Jay doesn’t irritate him once in while ;) ... but still i can’t see ‘total indifference’ as a proper tactical or strategic response.

Reza - hey, toxin is good (you usually have to pay for it). just let us know when we're approaching ECP territory ;)
even if things getting tonally stretched, all the topics coming up here are neceessary ones - Sumerian mythos for instance - with a lot of milage
important thing is to realize that one pole(cat) of this board is so far into radical Iblis evil (blasphemies of the most polytheistic idolatrous kinds, consummated in pools of pork fat and raw alcohol) that no compromise is possible - you ain't dealing with tortured PC Christians here - but hoping that doesn't mean we can't also get the latest from the heart of Jihad - that's polytics, isn't it?

"And at the same giving rise to them!" - heresy, apostacy, infidelity, OK, but paganism and idolatry - don't flatter yourself!

"escalating tactics usually support the War itself rather than the involved parties" - you're beginning to sound dangerously as if you've caught the West virus ... but aren't the "involved parties" two strains of the Abrahamic tradition (shame if they burnt the unholy fuck out of each other)

"Yes. But not exactly a ‘Yes’ that you have in mind" - this i especially adore, even if i know it's unlikely i'll ever understand it

love and kisses - Vauung

Maybe the old cliche`, "We have seen the Enemy, and the Enemy is us" needs to be resurrected?

An interesting aspect of the 'phallus' within the anthro-mono-one-concept, is circumcision:

1. Desire of the male sky-god to also BE the Earthly or even Celestial Mother (literal union - BE-ing One within a FORM).

2. Subverting one's own polar Fire - diverting it into a Neurosis; being unable to meet the strategic assault of `nafs` by being tainted and controlled by their INNER 'leash'.
I say 'inner' because even though the 'mark' is an outer, bodily 'cut', it is still firmly WITHIN the creative construct itself. WHO wants to be 'god', in this equation?

3. Even though 'tawhid' in Islam 'resembles' the Judaic and Christian conceptions of monotheism, it cannot properly be called 'the third manifestation' of an 'Abrahamic tree of MONO-theistic faiths' derived from the 'phallus principle' arising out of a Sumerian -- and earlier -- cultural/spiritual context. Though the sky-gods come from 'out there' -- outside the Tellurian's sense perceptions -- these 'gods' are still 'Inside' the construct itself.

We might also want to consider that, within Islam, no battle exists between Iblis and Allah -- as even Iblis is contingent upon this Absolute One -- but not a ONE in a numeric, manifested, immanent, or even a transcending 'unitary' sense. In Islam, man is no-THING. The question is, then, Who or What is Allah and why is he called 'the best of planners'? ;)

Perhaps, Reza can differentiate the Tellurian-Omega state of animal-man from the HUman in an Islamic state of Fitra -- which are not the same 'ontological' conditions?

Valkator - "even Iblis is contingent upon this Absolute One" - oh for God's sake ... (please don't let me interrupt you banging your head against the floor in the general direction of Mecca)
IBLIS = 96 (just take a glance at the goddam Numogram, does 9::6 look like the 'absolute one' to you?)

u/c,

Intentionally ‘reacted’ this way as this ‘infidel’ assault was potentially and heavily dialectical from the first place (don’t want to accuse anyone), no matter we claim it was not our intention.

>>> nick, I see clearly now where you're coming from with the escalation of my mild pop-god pondering to your heavily-camo'ed infidel assault. [...] Difficult (in a hyperstitionally productive way? Not sure) to scope out the motivation behind Reza's squirming.

For example, isn’t it an initiative dialectical formulation? Everyone should be positioned clearly or the position of everyone should be located clearly before connecting these positions (I am here where are you?). However, be patient I wont close this discussion in dialectical loops (more materials later on the whole issue) ;)

>>> still think we need to tie this causally to concrete movements to demonstrate its relevance (if that's an issue).

Yes, agreed, that should be another line of exploration.

Nick,

>>> you ain't dealing with tortured PC Christians here

LOL ... no I never thought so.

>>> important thing is to realize that one pole(cat) of this board is so far into radical Iblis evil

Ok, I’m a Maymunist advocate of monotheism among ‘many other things’.

>>> heresy, apostacy, infidelity, OK, but paganism and idolatry

Should repeat one of Mark’s previous questions: who are pagans anyway? I mean the pagans of this century. heresy, apostacy, infidelity ... I see their activities or active parts but for the pagans I’m not quite sure.

>>> but aren't the "involved parties" two strains of the Abrahamic tradition (shame if they burnt the unholy fuck out of each other.

Yes, exactly I meant the same point.

Hugs, a humble puppet

Valkator,

Excellent reference.

I was referring to the same verse. ‘Makr’ (what has been translated as Plan) in Arabic and Farsi means chaotic strategy with diverging probe-heads rather than a goal-oriented deception.

Reza - re-hugs
"who are pagans anyway? I mean the pagans of this century" - 2 billion + Indians and Chinese among others who've fended off the montheistic onslaught so far ...
gotta get some sleep - looks like this thread could really cook ...
apologies if the time subtleties are getting lost - we'll have plenty of time to pick them up again ...

Nick,

Lol ... In Islam Iblis (Shaytan) will be eventually forgiven by Allah and will serve in Heaven as a pleasing / entertaining Angel for Humans, connect it to the Hulugu line I talked about (he constructed many magnificent mosques over what he had ruined before and became a faithful Muslim) and I bet you will get one of the most nauseating / hilarious scenarios. ;)

Talk about Ahriman (Angra-Maynu, the carrier of Druj, the druj of Full-Death as in Avestan is called) whose origin is also pre-Zoroastrian, Shaytan is somehow disappointing. Ahriman surely is far more subversive, cunning and radical than the 'impersonated / prone to God's deceptions' Iblis (correct pronunciation is Eblis btw).

>>> 2 billion + Indians and Chinese among others who've fended off the montheistic onslaught so far ...

Render off the chinese goverment and you might get another swelling monothiestic crowd in a short time. but that's a ghastly joke ;)

>>> Indians

come on, the indians gave rise to the Zorostarian germ-cell of monothiesm; they have bred more monothistic spawns than anyone.

but my question was who pagans really are and what they are capable of (their characteristics as well)?

I think undercurrent’s suggestions / questions are worth pursuing in this thread before the discussion is sucked into ‘I’m a Satanist / Muslim, who are you?’ slapstick fights.

don't take any notice of me, I have the feeling I'm participating in a qwernopocalyptic discourse whose rules I only partially understand...

Reza - you're a bundle of laughs (my anxieties) right now
not going to let you get IBLIS off the 96 (= Durga) hook, at least without a fight.
Both India and China comments too pointed to dismiss or counter on the spot (went to both countries in search of hard-core antimonotheistic potentialities, can't pretend to have been comforted by the reality on the ground in either place - Bhakti monobollox in India, terrifying 'looking for the next thing' sentiment in China - but as i say, the true looming horror IMHO is a mass Christian conversion wave in the Chinese world - if there was anything however pitifully insignificant that could be done to help obstruct it i'd pitch in 100% ... for me, that really would be the worst - "a ghastly joke" indeed - if the commies spent more time suppressing Christians i could really get to like them)

I'll probably end up making a last stand amongst a bunch of headhunters in Borneo - just hope we go down fighting.

u/c,

>>> don't take any notice of me, I have the feeling I'm participating in a qwernopocalyptic discourse whose rules I only partially understand...

Lol ... don’t worry, I’m not plotting to exploit you as my human shield.

Nick,

>>> Reza - you're a bundle of laughs (my anxieties) right now

lol ... this sounds a wonderful night and I’m going to enjoy it.

>>> not going to let you get IBLIS off the 96 (= Durga) hook, at least without a fight.

“Durga manifested when evil forces threatened the very existence of the Gods.” Oh, sounds ‘Very’ evil, I see (the evil guardian of the bureaucratic indic pantheon) ;) ... should add Druj (Druh) and Drugh has nothing to do with Durga, although the Mother of Abominations affirms everything and everyone.

>>> if the commies spent more time suppressing Christians i could really get to like them

They failed Jay in Kurdistan too, don’t count on them.

And the last thing: I guess Valkator’s discussion deserves a more appropriate answer (contains v. interesting remarks).

Ok, guys, good night ... am going to watch a couple of movie after a hectic week (Suspect Zero and von Trier’s Riget II)

Reza - "Oh, sounds ‘Very’ evil ..." - it's a Chaotic Xenodemon thing, you bookish types wouldn't understand ... ;)

"Valkator" - yes, see if you can drag him off his knees

>>> it's a Chaotic Xenodemon thing, you bookish types wouldn't understand ...

Now, i irritated the nervous system of the beast and waiting to see what is the next symptomatic phase (someone needs these technical pseudo-medical reports for 'her' laboratory) ;) ... a chaotic xenodemon can be pacified too btw.

Reza - "a chaotic xenodemon can be pacified too" - hmmmm

Forgot to say that my friends (one of them is a Basiji General -- he is 39 -- in Kurdistan) noticed me that some of the recent Shabnamehs spread near Marivan border and also in Kurdistan have been signed under a non-iranian name: Jay. They are not sure if this is a western name because they have all heard the stories about a woman wearing Borgha (a cover for women’s face using in South of iran) named Jay who helped them in Operation Mersad (Eternal Light) in Mordad 3, 1367 (1988) by uncovering a few key information about the tactical movements of Mujaheddin-e Khalghs (pseudo-islamic commies who assembled a group after the Revolution). My father’s friends who were in charge of army (Artesh) battalions at that time told me that despite these hypocrites were Iranians but they were torturing and slaughtering more civilians than islamic Sepahies or Basijies, so Artesh, too, willfully (because Artesh was once considered as a decadent leftover of the last regime) helped other military units in Iran to utterly eradicate these crypto-commies. Mujaheddin-e Khalghs were a large army fully armed by Iraqi light and heavy weapons; they expected to conquer Tehran in a few days by passing through Kermanshah and some cities of Kurdistan where rebellions had intense activities, so they had actually planned to reinforce their army by people and rebellions as the march towards Tehran through these cities. What happened was quite different, people escaped them, rebellions didn’t join them and even Artesh’s powerful army divisions joined the battle. The Operation started by the Code ‘Ya Ali’, the mistake of Mujaheddins was their lack of tacticity, they moved their units through in-depth formation to attract people so they were easily overwhelmed by the united army, and after a few days (esp. after a tactical diversion led by Artesh) they were fully trapped and defeated (Mordad 5, 1367)

Another subject attracted me here is the word Yatu (as I quoted one of these shabnamehs at the opening of this post), I guess I have heard a similar word before. Should consult my linguist teammates in the archeological project, they might have a clue. (btw, added this new piece of information to West post)

Don't worry, Nick. I have a good, sturdy pair of CCM shin guards that keep the knees well protected. >:)

I'm curious as to what constitutes a 'strategic opposition' when the 'enclosure' one erects is still inside the 'thought' itself?

My bringing attention to the 'Iblis is not in opposition to Allah' was not to suggest a get on our knees position, or that Islam is the 'demonic, clad in chador'; as such a 'position' and 'intention' is ultimately pointless and useless for that which 'HAS NO NAME'. However, perceptions to this 'effect' are certainly not to be dismissed. 'Eye of the beholder' subjectivities do have a purpose.

Afterall, what IS the significance of 'Be-ing in the desert with Set'?

Along these same lines, I'd be curious as to what the 'Real' meaning of 'Salat' is -- and most importantly -- what the 'Real' actions of 'Salat' signify -- as its MIS-translation into 'prayer' - with all that implies in the anthro-mono sense - seems utterly wrong on all counts. Notice the following associations:

Mer/Ma ka'aba="mother" stone=magnetic center

1. What maintains and increases a magnetic center?
2. What does having a magnetic center signify -- both in the 'outer' planetary environment and 'within' the human body -- BOTH still INSIDE?
3. If both of these 'centers' are understood as 'transducing energy units' -- what is being transduced, and WHO is doing it? For what purpose?

Now, why would the Tellurian-Omega-type be compelled to 'eradicate' the ka'aba -- in both its outer 'world' and 'inner human' centers?

Valkator,

do you mean Salavat or Salat? of course, both are from the same origin; but if you mean Salat i have some information for you.

Reza --

Salat. You can send me the info via email or post it here. Whichever you prefer. :)

ok, will email it to you tomorrow. btw, is this your email address? 'pathofice ...'

and do you have Adobe Acrobat on your machine? (i'm going to use it for embedding Arabic fonts)

reza - very interesting post.

forgive me for being off topic. i was wondering if the number 120 wais significant in the Qu'ran. i did find something related to Surat Al-Naml: it is the 27th Sura with 93 verses, etc.

Reza --

Yep - 'pathofice' is my email, and I do have Adobe so there should be no problem opening it.

`Val`

Valkator - thought-provoking remarks
"I'm curious as to what constitutes a 'strategic opposition' when the 'enclosure' one erects is still inside the 'thought' itself?" - hoping to spiral to a position where this q. can be 'properly addressed' - problem at the moment is that its presuppositions are so remote ('deconstructionist'?) that it is hard to locate a region of contact - try to re-articulate this objection on the Numogram, and you'll probably see the difficulty.
Iblis (= DURGA = PEST = 96) 'opposes' by way of envelopmental incursion from the Absolute Outside (the Trackless Gulfs, unmarked even in the Book of Paths), so 'enclosed' thinking (imaginable only within certain peculiar Hex spaces, and then without 'ontological' security) can only be assumed as a mask (even as 'hypercamouflage' - but of course, here too, radically alien strategic agendas pass each other without cross-communication in deserts of unending night)

Valkator,

The renegade Zoroastrians have shown us, enclosure of this kind if developed strategically can be subverted by the radical openness (butchering lines of openness or openness as 'being opened') from within and without; on the other hand, openness in its accepted function (being open to) has its own dangers [see sorcerers and necromancers series]

Surely organic survival autonomously finds its own region of contact in its expedition to 'accommodate' the Outside not radical communication with it (another danger of sorcerous levis-function to the outside). Strategical account of this communication is to attract something other than organic survival economy locates these regions, although in participation with the organic affordance (a participation which is inexorable).

Also I should add the radical outsideness as mentioned in the text is not radical exteriority in terms of distance (remoteness in terms of contact) but functionality. If the Sun is external to man (its functioning is the undoing of man), it doesn’t mean that it cannot be appropriated and enveloped by terrestrial agencies as something extra-proximal; as I’ll discuss in the piece about Salat the origin of the proto-Semitic word Alah (with a single ‘L’) connects it to the middle eastern sun gods which, of course, are very different from sun gods in other cultures.

Northanger, you are tempting me to buy an ABJAD nummificating CD of the Quran ;)

Yes, ‘120’ is frequently used in the Quran (however, I should find my papers to help you). Also note that 12 is the emphatic finality of Islam (Mahdi, the 12th Imam as the harbinger of Ghiamat who is absent yet present see the previous piece on Takfiri and the notion of absence – Ghiab -- in Islam)

=================================================
Hey everybody, just discovered something in Abjad version of the numogram; it is a connection with the structure of verbal infinitives in Arabic language (excluding exceptions); but not sure how I can express it clearly.
=================================================

Reza - stop teasing!

"‘120’ is frequently used in the Quran" - reason i asked is an interesting proposition presented in this post (by the infamous Hugo, no less):

http://www.gnostica.net/pipermail/enochian-l/2005-January/013388.html

"It seems to me, and 'purists' may scoff, that the Aires are 120 in number, and not 30, solely."

it is a given (if you are an enochian purist) that there are only 30 Enochian Æthyrs. when i suggested to someone that there could possibly be 6 additional æthyrs - let's say i wasn't given that much wiggle room.

this is highly off topic. i'm researching this right now and will post on my site. however, any input that you have i'd love to hear.

and yes, you really must stop teasing everyone

ok, ok ... let me consult with a linguist in Arabic first.

ps. gematria for NELAPR mentioned in previous enochian post:

AQ 120 = NORTH = PACIFICA = ENGLAND = MOLOCH
GON1 18 = FIFTY-FIVE = TZAPHKIEL = THE CIRCLE OF CTHAH WAS FORMED IN A NAME, SHAPE AND NUMBER
GON2 18 = WILLIAM BURROUGHS
D26 CI = TOCZ = ALCHEMY = NICK LAND

in other systems, 120 maps to ECHIDNA STILLWELL, CONVERGENT TWINNING, CARRIER PRODUCTION, RASULON : MOSADDEQON, NORTHERN SUMATRA and RA-HOOR-KHUIT HATH TAKEN HIS SEAT IN THE EAST AT THE EQUINOX OF THE GODS

"Also note that 12 is the emphatic finality of Islam (Mahdi, the 12th Imam as the harbinger of Ghiamat who is absent yet present" - who is the 11TH IMAM = 120?

121 = 12TH IMAM
122 = GHIAMAT

The Numerical Values (Gematria) of Letters of the Alphabet and the Numerical Miracle
http://www.animal-cruelty.com/fakir60/gematria.htm

Example 3

Surat Al-Naml (النمل) opens with the two letters طس. The Serial order of the Sura in the Mus’haf is 27 and we have found that the frequency of the letter ط in the Sura is also 27. س on the other hand occurs 93 times in the Sura. 93 happens to be the number of verses in the Sura. Thus, the total frequency of ط and س is 120, which is the total of the serial number of the Sura plus its number of verses. Finally, the Jum’mal of the word Naml (نمل) is 120.

Reza --

Exactly what I was suggesting, as any strategic 'opposition', or even 'defense' against the Outside follows a course which will see 'the thing' either fractured from the 'pressure' that the Outside exhibits 'externally' (I acting/defending against the whole) -- or 'exploded' due to internal 'combustion' heating to the point that the 'enclosure' cannot hold the growing 'frequency' within (the Whole exploding through I -- because one IS the Outside looking 'in', but hasn't attained to this SELF Recognition).

In either case, the METAmorphosis/Mutation occurs and 'immanence' is asserted in its appropriate 'dimensional' context -- or RE-asserted. It all depends on how one 'gets there' and what one 'is' -- or isn't, as the case may be.

The sinister 'strategerm' of the Z-crowd is not so sinister when the 'I' that cannot be named is REALIZED as the Outside and has 'his' say so in the matter...by not saying a-Thing. Then, there is no-Thing as 'it' always 'is' -- even as it must assert it 'isn't'.

In the context of Islamic Chronopolytics, the 'sinister'strategy is, in essence, no strategy at all...which makes it 'appear' that much more diabolical. The sovereign holds all the cards and 'Man', in his Tellurian nature who 'must'(compulsion) reach the Omega 'point' of 'victory', is still grasping at straws and playing chess with 'someone' he 'thinks' is actually playing too.

Sorry Val, seems the text on Salat is spreading in different directions ... will try to complete it in the next few days.

"When Islam begins to breed all its minorities" - breeds all its minorities? what do you mean by this reza?

Valkator - getting a Sufism vibe from your contributions, but guessing that must be way too easy ...

Reza, something interesting occurred to me : As the compounding of interest is a motif of K+ period-doubling time, I wonder what we can make of the islamic prohibition on charging interest, in relation to your exposition of these chronopolitics? Is this a calming or warding-off mechanism, or what?

u/c,

check your email.

meant to post this awhile ago: AQ 318 = CHRONOPOLYTICS = VENUS TRANSITS = INVISIBLE INVADER

thought this was an interesting conjunction of terms: CHRONO - of course, VENUS-SUN conjunctions create a pentagram (invisible over time) - http://www.mooncatsastrology.com/webpages/venus-cycles.htm

POLYTICS - the elements of hyperstition? unreal (invisible) fictions - http://www.cold-me.net/polytics/index.html

http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9912/msg00122.html
Y2K is not only everywhere computers are, it is everywhere silicon chips are: it is a molecular bug, infecting even the tiniest interstices of the technical environment, an _invisible invader_ into technical systems that have themselves tended to shrink out of human sight. It is a global problem that can only be tackled locally.

nick --

Ibn Arabi is quite an interesting `fella, eh?

In all seriousness, though, there are some interesting threads of thought that come through in many 'sufi' individuals that I've found agreeable.

Valkator - Sufis definitely seem cuddliest Muslims as far as unreformable infidels are concerned - that's probably why Salafists want to kill them ...