Table Of ContentCONTENTS:
THE ABOMINATION OF PRESENCE……………..………….……...1
CRYPTIC ABORTIONS………………………………………..…..….8
CELLULOID AFTERBIRTH……………………..………………..…23
PANOPHICON......................................................................................35
POLITICAL EXCREMENT FOR THE WORMS………………...….42
The Abomination of Presence
Why do things end? All Philosophers agree that presence is full of any and every thing's means of
destruction, so much so that it barely contains anything else, but maintain that presence must be implicitly
distinguished therefrom, strictly defined as that without which neither the things nor their actual means of
destruction would be. The implicit blueprint is the neutrality of presence and the negative Evil of
destruction mixed, if not coinciding, with the positive things. Whereas I claim that it is presence itself that
is Evil, that it absolutely coincides with the means of destruction which are positive and in turn destroy,
or unmake, negative things. In White Gnosticism, that is to say, crypto-Catholic or even pure Catholic
ascription, the world is mere theft, Evil steals from Good, implicit substance is reactively partially
exhausted toward a temporarily deprived byproduct, whereas in Black Gnosticism the world is reverse
theft: Evil as an ever-accumulating input whereby permanent essential byproducts, essentially negative,
are indefinitely deprived through the proactive coincidence of substance and exhaustion that is presence.
Good vanishes not only from the world but from being itself. Things do not end because they are, rather,
they only are insofar as they end. I only disagree with Protestants because they are not Protestant enough:
I am not only Evil, a banal claim that only removes me from Theological gravity, I am a crime scene,
THE crime scene. Not a body given birth at the expense of a soul, but a cadaver given death at its own
expense. Perhaps Catholicism should be taken for its word: growth, change, movement, etc. are all
sanitized terms for death but, moreover, Catholicism makes no distinction between change and entropy,
the latter sucking the former into itself, its objects are implicitly destroyed, and death becomes a
lifelong—or deathlong—process; not so much a classic process with a plausible beginning and end, but a
pejoratively Heraclitean "process" in that nothing ever is to begin with, thus dying has no object and itself
becomes a "thing" per the pejoratively Parmenidean. The resplendent eternal block is the very Black Cube
writhing with ever-accumulating undeath. What is the body? Countless gripping hands shaping its outline,
countless stomping soles squeezing its bones, countless biting teeth rending its innards—the
HYPERCADAVER. The ever-dying cadaver as the "coincidence of opposites" between the mortal body
and immortal soul. The spectrum of things ascribed to presence mirrors this indefinite putrefaction:
perfect, good, mostly god, ambiguous, good and evil, good and necessarily evil, necessarily evil,
necessary—each Philosopher as a generation of maggots eating away a layer of dead meat. The revelation
of necessity itself as absolutely unnecessary is as, or coincides with, cadaver consciousness, pure
putrefaction. As above, so below, indeed! I was not murdered, I have always been dead, or rather, been
death. All lamentation has a common denominator hidden in plain sight: "life is too this" or "life is too
that", it is neither this nor that that constitutes the Evil of life, it is the TOO of presence itself. "Too long",
for example, implies a normal end of eventually reaching the breaking point of the "long", whereas the
TOO alone implies a continuous end, indefinite positional asphyxia on the cross. Ontological
Munchausen by proxy through and through: presence excessively provides the created absence of the
implicit lack of sensory input, the TOO, then provides the protracted fatal overdose, also the TOO.
Incidentally, perhaps this is the skeleton key of the sexes and of reproduction, a sword cast into a wound
that precedes it, its extraction turning the wound inside-out, the point tearing a hole at the tip through
which the "phallic" wound bleeds out, "reproducing" itself in the wake of the vanishing "yonic" sword.
Regardless, just as the question of which tissue is the true one, the healthy or the traumatized, depends on
whether the Subject is alive or dead in the vulgar sense, the Subject being dead in the Theological sense
makes such topologies of violation true. I am an ongoing crime scene. Presence is TOO present to such a
1
degree that it can not only be said to be hidden inside revolution, but that it implicitly abolishes revolution
first and foremost by choosing it as its most exquisitely Evil locus. To briefly cut the Gnostic-Marxist-
Catholic knot, I maintain that both Marxism and Capitalism are nothing but Catholicism: it is not the
Ontology of the Material, of multiplicity, that informs the Epistemology of dispensation, it is the
Epistemology of dispensation, of TOO much presence, that informs the Ontology of the Material.
Without multiplicity there is no exchange, without exchange there is neither Marxism nor Capitalism,
they are both animated by the fact that exchange, per the plurality of Materialism, is purportedly
sanctioned by God himself, per the Catholic idea of dispensation, per revolution itself as the obscene
dimension of TOO much presence. Marxists wrongly thing that the Logical inevitability of revolution is
only stifled by its practical obstacles, whereas Gnostic rightly think that the practical banality of
revolution is only stifled by its Logical absurdity, that that which revolution is meant to abolish not only
does not oppose revolution but itself only operates in and of revolution. Taking a detour through the
cloaca of History: slavery, for example, has not only not been abolished, but the world resulting from the
efforts to do so have made it absolutely impossible to abolish, the world now considers an ever-increasing
number of slaves acceptable, or even good, provided that they constitute a small enough percentage of the
population. This, too, is a non-event, a negative thing of pure created absence made by the positive means
of its destruction which coincide with presence. This is whence one might best spit in the Catholic's face.
The revelation that there is no such thing as a thing, only its destruction, intellectually rehabilitates natural
revelation, from the mire of mixture with the Phenomenal that compromises even Empiricism by the
principle that the Phenomenal itself can lie despite the good faith of the revealing and observing parties,
to a properly Theological status that is only possible by accepting that that which is revealed is
Yaldabaoth. Žižek has identified the polar opposite of my thesis. His claim that the irreducible Godhead-
God divide dispassionately dethrones and splits God—incidentally accounting for Evil, a transparent
permutation of the "absence of good" with the "absence" now inside of God—walks no miles, so to speak.
Whereas I walk two miles and claim that the insoluble presence-Evil coincidence passionately enthrones
Yaldabaoth. What is the meaning of murder, for example? The Catholic is the only one guilty of
everything that he accuses the Gnostic of: he categorically denies the presence and looks for a cause and
resolution beyond it, regardless of parameters, whereas I simply confess that Heaven is for murderers and
Hell is for their victims, a seamless continuation of Yaldabaoth's present gracing of his favorite people
and degradation of his scapegoat—the abomination of presence. Density is the cross and space is
Golgotha. My body is a cross and the world is Golgotha. I am the scene of the worst crime. The scene all
but disappears, just as the cadaver does: old age as the revelation of the future as nothing but a cancerous
accumulation of the past, of TOO much presence, the abject mockery of the Atonement causing the fall
into History rather than its supposed deliverance therefrom, TOO much presence on top of TOO much
presence, utopia implicitly abolished by its own immanence whereby it is nothing but a stage for
recapitulating the accumulating past, TOO much presence inside of TOO much presence; the more
presence scrapes against presence, the less there is. Heaven as pure presence obscuring even its own
meaning. The inescapable velocity of the Black Cube, its omnifinitude, is the coincidence of the pull of
the Hole and the radiance of the Sun. Everything is affected, turned Black, by it without itself ever
imploding and/or exhausting itself. The scene and cadaver alike are the ever-thinning torus of the hole of
ever-increasing pure violation. Yaldabaoth's hand, or mouth, for ouroboric topologies, gripping his ever-
growing phallus. I am sodomized into being. A foreign hand muting no mouth, my presence is by
absence. Moreover, just as presence hides in Material revolution, it hides in Ideal origin all the more. The
crime of the first Phenomenon is committed by the criminal that is the first Noumenon, Yaldabaoth. The
2
Black of presence distinguishes itself from itself in a "truly false" way, the Hole-Sun divide destroying
everything but itself to no end, constituting the abominable torus all by itself. The Black Gnostic must
realize that the White Hole coincides with itself in a "falsely true" way, that there is a true coincidence
without parts, constituting nothing; onanism versus virginity, there is no sex. What is the relation between
absence and presence? Absence is itself only when there is none. Mere lack is a red herring, another
exquisitely Evil dimension of presence, another TOO. The definition of absence is totally deceiving, just
as the definition of Monad and Dyad are likewise useless if limited to Number, and just as presence
reveals itself to be something alien to what it seems. Both presence with no object and object with no
presence are still presence, obviously. Neither presence nor object is still presence, the mere inversion of
both presence and object, a hyperdetermination whereby the destructive front line between them
indefinitely expands in the wake of their relative absence. This is the background of the "big bang" motif,
and for good reason: it is the most perversely false absence, a time bomb of hyperpresence, the dump
from which things are recycled, the axle of the breaking wheel. Whereas absence can only be true once
the fatal front line is abolished. I recall reading an article wherein Golgotha is called something to the
effect of the single point of balance of the Moral scales of the world. Why point of balance? Why merely
Moral? Let us be Christian: the crucifixion is the Ontological center of all things Phenomenal and Ideal.
The crucifixion is the true body, the hypercadaver, the glory of Yaldabaoth. Just as there is little to no
distinction between slaughterhouse and animal, natural revelation ever-closing the gap by mechanizing
the beast and bestializing the machine, body and cross constitute a single Teleology. Not even as two
organs of the same body, but as the figurative atom. Both of the supposed trees, the first one in the Ideal
garden and the last one in the Phenomenal restoration, are means to the end of crucifixion, rather than
vice versa. A "truly false" eschatological singularity in that the eschaton is another TOO, the first and last
one that eats all of its children, the merely Evil "vanishing mediator" is a tool of the all-pervading Evil
good. Apropos of the idea that everything is alive, what if the nightmare also woke up? What if the
breaking wheel also suffered? The trees are "oriental", nothing but bestial lethargy, fish wet with the
water of torture, they do not suffer nearly enough. The crucifixion is the true body per the coincidence of
substance and exhaustion, the one that most Gnostics do not even know they have to escape. The
blueprint of the perverse Monism whereby the many simultaneously constitute an inane one and are
enslaved by it. In this sense, why even bother with the formality of reincarnation? The hypercadaver
makes "transcarnation" possible, I and everyone else as indefinitely generated by a puncture of the nail, a
swing of the hammer, a thrust of the spear; indefinitely haunting the hall of mirrors of suffering as the
delirium of the ever-dying man. The Catholic was right all along! This is the finality of the pejorative
Monad, rightly opposed by some Gnostics, but wrongly opposed through Dualism. The relation between
the Catholic Monad and any and all Dyads is as the relation between its presence and the aforementioned
presences masquerading as absence. The phrase "Hell is separation from God" is a fragment of
"separation form Yaldabaoth, too, is Hell": perhaps the misreading that the many constitute the One is a
true reading of their misbeing in that the fate of any one of the many is to either constitute or restitute the
Catholic Monad, or rather, to constitute or restitute itself therein again, or to be totally separate therefrom
but suffer "total partialism", the apotheosis of being a part, the unilateral determination of the Monad
being just as, if not more, present. The Catholic Monad crushing its Evil parts into one just as, further
down the fractal vista, Catholic love is the perfect emotional Nihilism in that all emotions are said to be
thermodynamic fluctuations of love and, insofar as they are made Evil, to rightly resolve themselves
therein. Catholicism claims that one can only be saved, included, if one is wrong. Indeed, this is by
design. Dualism is another TOO. The Catholic Monad can only be opposed, and destroyed, by the
3
Gnostic Monad, the distinction being hidden in plain sight. The body and the cross coinciding and
sardonically constituting a synthesis, as from the vantage point of the Atonement, as Catholicism and/or
White Gnosticism, and the body and the cross as discrete and arelational, circumscribed by the abolishing
of the fatal front line between them, as from the vantage point of the Victor, as the disjunctive synthesis
of Black Gnosticism. To briefly hijack the otherwise useless idea of spacetime, per Christological
spacetime, the Atonement and Victor leave the cross in truly opposite ways, or, more precisely, in truly
opposite states. Is the "resurrection" of the former not a perverse resurrection of the cross alone? And is
the "resurrection" of the latter not a catastrophe of smashed splinters? What is hidden in plain sight in
Matthew 27:46? The first layer would be that it is dark humor at the expense of the crowd, foretelling the
end of Judaism as they knew it, in that they were the ones about to die forsaken by their God, the second
layer would be that it is an oriental self-exorcism, dying to oneself and such, the third layer would be that
it does not "mean" anything at all, it is a literal description of the Christological advent itself: Yaldabaoth
moves but Jesus does not. Dying destroyed by Death. The Atonement embedded in the Phenomenal world
as the present "vanishing mediator" of a vanishing world, the Victor as the absent vanishing point of
vanishing from the world, the destruction of the excrescent hole of reverse theft. Catholics claim that
Jesus resurrected in body and spirit, some Gnostics claim that he only resurrected in spirit, other that he
did not resurrect at all. Whereas I not only claim that he did not resurrect at all, but that it is precisely by
his absence that he truly appears as triumphant and presents a vista otherwise impossible, that he
resurrected in Death alone, truly "the first begotten of the dead". Perhaps even turning the poisoned pawn
theory against the Father is not radical enough, what he delivers to him is not even that but the anti-fruit,
so to speak: the Catholic claims the Father and Son as apotheoses of predator and prey, respectively, the
latter being perfect by willing throwing itself away into the former. The Victor distinguishes itself from
the Atonement not by doing the opposite of what is commanded but by doing a fatal excess thereof.
"Nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt." Does the Father's glorifying not require a parallel self-
glorifying of the Son? No, but yes, per Yaldabaoth, the Atonement being that which secretly makes the
ouroboros superconductive by indefinite dying. Yes, but no, per Jesus, the Victor being that which makes
the ouroboros bite its own mouth by singular Death. In true Death, absence, Yaldabaoth is most earnestly
"glorified". The Father and Son being one and the same is a fatality, what leers back at the former in the
latter's absence is another Father, the latter being a mirror so perfect that the reflection comes to life. It,
Yaldabaoth, is consummated. Is this "meta-absence" another TOO? No. Rather, is there even a meta-
presence, "as thou wilt"? This is where the "spark" is. In White Gnosticism, the "spark" is Catholic
ascription, a vector for depurating the absurdity of grace. In Black Gnosticism, it does not even exist
unless the literally schizophrenic detonation of rending the hypercadaver by separating body and cross not
so much "creates what it returns to" but destroys what it departs from. Jesus Christ, from bee to wasp: is it
not curious that the alleged self-giving of the Catholic Jesus is a guise of the one thing that he deprives
everyone else of, literal Christianity? The Catholic Christianity is as the single sting of a bee, only
accessible to, and spent in and of, one individual, who happens to be said to coincide with the Father, the
alleged reconciliation being an act of even greater hostility, an Evil good. Whereas the Gnostic Jesus is
truly and radically self-giving in that he only gives literal Christianity and nothing else, the multiple sting
of a wasp as others' Death and entrance into literal Christianity. Is this not what "thou wilt"? Gnosis is an
autopsy, seeing for one's Self, only possible from within the dead "body of Christ", from the vantage point
of being literally Christian. The Eucharist not as the vulgarity of Catholic dessert, but as starvation and/or
poison toward Death. In the realization that Death is the Christological advent one figuratively eats the
cadaver and is pervaded by terminal despair. Can God make an Evil so Evil that he cannot sanitize it? Can
4
God hate and kill a man such that he cannot revive him? Can God debase himself such that he cannot
glorify himself? Finally, some good news. In this sense, why figuratively? There is a Scriptural curiosity
pertaining to the Eucharist in that Jesus describes its alleged literal nature and effectiveness BEFORE his
execution. Taking the Catholic for his word, if the Eucharist is effective before the execution then it is not
necessary for him to die, and if the description is mere metaphor then the whole Catholic doctrine of the
Eucharist is wrong. Of course, the Catholic is implicitly against Scripture. The point being that
PRESENCE OBSCURES MEANING: the Catholic synthesis of the presence of the last supper, the
presence of the execution, and the presence of their current Scriptural order is the prominent
obscurantism. He is, again, the only one guilty of everything that he accuses the Gnostic of. This
synthesis is the fabled "secret knowledge", the presence of a mysteriously harmonizing fourth element,
what the Catholic thinks that "thou wilt"; whereas the Gnostic disjunctive synthesis takes all three as true
and superimposes them as such, rending the hypercadaver, exactly as "thou wilt". The forsaking and the
Death are similarly out of order. The real presence is false. This is the only way in which the Eucharist
can be literal, bilateral transubstantiation of dying into Death, abolishing our mutual presence. Amnesis as
the advent of anamnesis. Christianity as death pangs permanently leaving Jesus. Another disjunctive
synthesis opposing another Catholic obscurantism pertains to the Trinity. Just as the exclusive purpose of
each iteration of Materialism is to hide the embarrassment of the previous one, the Catholic "endlessly
knowing the mystery" of the Trinity appears to be endlessly embarrassing. All members are Yaldabaoth:
the Father and the Son are Yaldabaoth doubled or divided (same difference), and the Spirit is Yaldabaoth
as he "was" prior to the Christological advent. This is the true face of the Catholic Trinity, Yaldabaoth
choking on his own meta-presence in both the classic Trinity and the "Hegelian" Trinity (both Father and
Son die toward dispensing the Spirit), and, moreover, the latter is, in fact, an even stronger and less
legitimate monarchy of the Father. Just as the "real" world is impotent in being fundamentally knowable,
changeable, and destructible through quantitative means, and the "illusory" world is irresistibly strong in
being fundamentally unknowable, immutable, and indestructible through qualitative means, Yaldabaoth is
at his worst when being a ghost, moreover, one projecting from his slaves' eyes, as the truly dispensed
Spirit. Perhaps this is whence one might best realize the transgression of the Christological suicide. If
anything, this is the implicit Trinity "preceding" the Christological advent, not only a hegemony of the
Father, but one where he comes down from his transcendent throne for something much worse, to rule
from the inside-out, each subject implicitly sodomized into being, just as the members of the Trinity itself
are nothing but inert receptacles for the Father's sodomy. Yaldabaoth biting his own mouth, splitting in
half, and forced to be his own vampire in the absence of his hypercadaver. Indeed, the Catholic rightly
concludes that Yaldabaoth truly needs me, and this is precisely why I rebuke him. Conversely, the
Gnostic disjunctive synthesis of the Monadic father and the Sophianic mother is the very absence into
which Jesus disappears. Another Catholic obscurantism is the opposition to "mind-body Dualism". The
common denominator of all Catholic arguments in this sense being a curious ritual murder of that which
the murderer claims does not exist, mind and body coincided in body alone. White Gnosticism would
claim that there is a symmetrical, and useless, mind-body coincidence in mind alone, whereas Black
Gnosticism realizes that the obscurantism is not so much about mind being put to death, but about
absence being murdered to life. The blueprint of Theosis, that metal receives the properties of fire without
becoming fire, is very relevant here: the body receives the properties of absence without becoming absent
through the ritual murder of the mind. I only reject the idea that the body traps the soul because it does not
go far enough. It is the true, or "truly false", mind-body coincidence that attempts to trap absence, the
aforementioned presences masquerading as absence being a "like" attempting to know a "life", and,
5
moreover, to pervert it into the ultimate Ideal origin as Yaldabaoth's most exquisitely Evil locus. What if
it could actually be yesterday or tomorrow rather than indefinitely today? Per White Gnosticism, the
present is crucified, the two cones of past-future telescopically expand therefrom and touch bases therein,
the tips being dead ends of utter incomprehension, constituting the delirium of Time as superfluous to the
coherent present. Conversely, per Black Gnosticism, the points touch in the present, the bases being
"living ends" of utter comprehension purporting absence itself as part of the aforementioned Black Torus,
as alleviating the delirium of the indefinite present and presence. By the Christological suicide, the Torus
is rent, past-future is no longer fodder for the indefinite onanism of today and the "falsely true" yesterday
and tomorrow are resurrected to Death after being murdered to life. The Dead Jesus partaking in the
synthesis of the Monadic and the Sophianic inasmuch as they are synthesized without him, and without
each other, not as the Catholic perfidy of the "vanishing mediator", but as earnestly partaking by
coinciding that in which the partakes and that by which he partakes—ABSENCE. To dispel any suspicion
that this meta-absence is subordinate to meta-presence just as the aforementioned presences masquerading
as absence: perhaps it is the fabled asymmetry, allegedly necessary to end necessity, that is the Antichrist
in that necessity is already doomed, containing its perfectly symmetrical unnecessity which, far from
locking both in an indefinite Dualism, per White Gnosticism, is symmetrical in that it is just as fatal as
necessity—one spark, one Christ, is all it takes to detonate it. Yaldabaoth's Ontological power itself
becoming mere wishful thinking. More to the point that nothing less than despair qualifies as Gnosticism:
the Christological advent is less that irrelevant—Catholic—if one thinks that the Demiurgic incontinence
is anything less than absolute Evil and that good can ever be. Death not as transmigration or
transformation but as the White Hole now opening in the absence of the Black Torus. What distinguishes
this from Buddhism? Is absence not Nirvana? No, in fact, I maintain that it is actually Pleroma. Curiously,
Pleroma is mired in more vulgar crypto-Numeric, crypto-Catholic, definitions than "Monad" or "One",
more to the point that Gnosticism stands alone against Platonism, Hermeticism, Kabbalah,
Zoroastrianism, etc. just as it stands against Catholicism. Taking a tremendous analytic shortcut: there is
no relation between sex and climax. This is tacitly conceded by the analysts most of all, the latter being as
an assassin haunting the analytic edifice of the former. All sexual structures therein are deliberately built
from the outside-in, so much so that the sex thereby defined becomes synonymous with the refraction of
light, the architecture of football stadiums, the insertion of ballots into urns—utter nonsense. The inside-
out "analysis" is fatal. There is, of course, an intermediate White Gnostic vulgarity, something to the
effect of onanism being the true, and good, ouroboric sexuality. But the inside-out "analysis", one that
begins with the climax, reveals something truly radical: climax is subsumed by virginity and sex is
subsumed by onanism, there is only virginity and onanism, no sex. Reproduction, as the end of outside-in
sex, is reproduction of onanism alone, onanism between more than one person, the mere fragmentation of
onanism as a pittance of distinction therefrom. The alleged reproductive "laws" or "instincts" and their
fulfillment even being identical to onanistic compulsion in their vacillation between moral deontology
and utilitarian consequentialism, claiming one as exclusively true whenever the other is called into
question; this, too, being nothing but onanistic. Whereas the climax is a true vantage point into an
absence, of sex, of course, since it does not exist, but also into its own absence, toward virginity as
analogous with the coincidence of absence and plenitude, of pleasure with its own abolishing. In this
sense, the vulgar White Gnostic Pleroma would be the sexual, onanistic, Pleroma of "One is all", and the
Black Gnostic Pleroma would be the climactic, virgin, Pleroma of "One is nothing". The White Hole
coinciding with itself, without entering itself. Since one is precluded from being that by being this and
from being this by being that, it follows that being both of them would mean being neither of them, and
6
that being all of them would mean being nothing at all. "One is all" even being all but synonymous with
"substance is exhaustion". The abomination of accepting all the kingdoms of the world and truly being the
son of Yaldabaoth, exhausted without remainder. An Ontological banquet from the vantage point of the
main course. Conversely, "One is nothing" allows not so much a remainder but the otherwise impossible
finality of "One is One". Walking two miles, going even further than the coincidence of the Monadic
father and Sophianic mother as the mere coincidence of the One and the Virgin, there are individual
coincidences of the One and the One and of the Virgin and the Virgin: the Monad's Monad not only has
no Dyad but IS no Dyad in that it does even touch itself so as to avoid constituting its own intra-Monadic
Dyad, just as the Virgin's Virgin not only has no sex but IS no sex in that it does not touch itself so as to
avoid constituting its own onanistic organ; they are only each other by being nothing but themselves.
"One is nothing" neither as the One apocryphally becoming nothing, which would violate the "One" in the
phrase, nor as the One abiding in nothing, which would violate the "is", but as the literal coincidence of
One being itself and being nothing, of plenitude and absence. The White Hole does not even enter itself.
To dispel any suspicion that this is a crypto-oriental maneuver to turn the intra-Subjective light off: the
light is as that of a (reverse) thief, illuminating what it steals; the soul must escape from the soul first and
foremost, its escape from the body being incidental. Mere soul-body separation constituting something
akin to a house built on top of a burial ground, a cursed relation. Yet another Catholic obscurantism
pertains to salvation: either the inextricably sinful pre-salvation Subject totally coincides with the saved
post-salvation Subject, bringing sin and sinfulness into Heaven and making it an abomination, or the two
Subjects are experientially distinct, contrary to Catholic doctrine. Contiguity, mutual presence, is the fatal
front line of indefinite dying whereby Death cannot be attained. PRESENCE HAS A MONOPOLY OF
YOU. "And so he dwells either in this world or in the resurrection or in the middle place. God forbid that
I be found in there!" This is what is hidden in plain sight in Plato's Parmenides. That Forms are absolutely
incompatible with Phenomena is precisely the point, contiguity is abolished: there is neither a
"coincidence" of Forms and Phenomena in and of Phenomena nor a sodomy of Phenomena by Forms,
rather, the Forms' disappearance up one's cognitive vista is precisely their yonic truth as such, whereby
one is unborn—reasoned out of the world, so to speak. Intra-Subjective absence as the fatality haunting
and ending the "Hegelian" wound. Death Grips' "murdered out windows" phrase is very relevant here:
Leibniz says that "monads have no windows through which anything can enter in or pass out", in this
sense, the "Hegelian" wound is precisely such a window, abolished by the Christological suicide not so
much mending the Monads but destroying them. The advent of the neither and the nor touching without
contiguity being the very "immaculate conception" whereby Jesus Christ unbirths himself into, and
coincides with, the coincidence of the Monadic father and the Sophianic mother. Let us be cataphatically
apophatic and claim that nothing happens in Heaven. Things would truly last forever is only they had
never been.
7
Cryptic Abortions
Just as Rococo distinguishes itself from Baroque not by adding but by subtracting something, pretense,
abortion distinguishes itself from birth by laying it bare. Abortion preemptively fulfills the allegedly
Christian meaning of life, to be destroyed by being torn apart and consumed by others. Walking two miles
with “Hegelians”, indeed, Paul has surpassed both life affirmers and life deniers with an exquisite
coincidence of opposites. God would sell himself short had he only been Ontologically in front of one,
abortion allows him to be behind one as well. Similarly, “Hegelians” are selling themselves short by
worshiping the gap, and by depriving it of its properly Hegelian conclusion. The skull of the fetus is
pierced by closed forceps and torn apart by their opening, perhaps this is the best exegesis of the gap: not
a proper void spanned by the actual, but the void behind which an actual is barricaded. The mirror of the
second death, the first birth, constituting a damned coincidence of another conception, another birth, and
another life; the contiguity cloaked in a negativity so naive that it approaches ideology, a MacGuffin
mystically animating each party, vulgar Platonism of Form-instantiation renamed as Void-actual. Indeed,
the “Hegelian” gap is Hegel’s prominent domestication, just as the alleged gap is the guile of the actual
bottom beneath it; and, stranger still, of his mercantilization, Hegel being thereby subsumed by Marx
under the pretense of the latter returning to the former, the gap being the mere renaming of the mystical
Objective, Material, Phenomenal, etc., the Divine right by which Capitalism, and its “natural” conclusion,
Marxism, are said to rule. This being a properly Hegelian conclusion. Does the blueprint according to
which the actual is vital to God, the latter being across an otherwise impassable gap, if not otherwise not
being at all, not betray something unspeakably perverse? Is it not an invitation to grab a sword by the
blade? Just as the Capitalist disowns the majority, even the totality, of his actions as externalities,
Yaldabaoth cannot be God without the abortion of Creation. The gap is merely a cloak for the more than
total contiguity between Capitalism and externality, or God and Creation. A curtain of the nuptial
chamber, the only thing truly fabricated therein. The vulgarity that actual abortion is a cloak for
something occult is not exactly wrong. The vesica piscis is precisely this: the overcontiguity of the circles,
their mutual destruction and preclusion of the "Hegelian" movement in and of their mere contiguity, an
actual rending under the guise of "symbolic" generation. The circles coinciding in the completion of the
"gap" itself. It is not that the abjection of color as pigment, and the black resulting from the combination
of pigments, is engendered to make color as light, and the white resulting from the combination of lights,
that much more brilliant, rather, the abjection of pigment engenders the coherence of color and
fraudulently makes it the Dialectical means by which light and pigment interact. The light-color-pigment
relation is described as pure mystification by Physics, a Catholic invention, and for good reason. It is
irrelevant if light is coherent and pigment is not or vice versa, it is just the perpetuation of the definitional
mystification, but as soon as color itself is simply dismissed, by Cartesian, Cynic, Gnostic, etc. doubt, the
whole Dialectic reveals itself to be pure obscurantism. On one hand, the actuality of color does absolutely
engender the Dialectic of pigment and light, allegedly through no means other than the Subjective gap
separating them, both of them being nothing but color when merely perceived, neither of them being
imposed as the true one by an Other. On the other hand, the dismissal of color itself is Philosophical taboo
and reveals that that which is enforced, and absolutely bears the mark of the hidden Other, is the Dialectic
itself. I recall seeing a cartoon wherein one fetus asked another if it believed in their mother, the other
replying that it does not because neither of them can see her. Inverting the topology, Yaldabaoth hides
inside his own total prolapse, the verse of the actual and the obverse of the Demiurgic truly precluding a
8
