When I told poet J.S. Flower about the writings he asked for me to read some to him - which I did on a cellphone call. As you will read below - it is hard to sound `confident' when one is reading such `heavy' material of an esoteric nature - so, I decided to finally begin the process of putting some of the REAL base material thinking I did about the PP onto the internet - and below - I hope - is just the first installment. All of the underlines, etc, are part of the ORIGINAL writing.
Esoteric PhenomenologySept. 1975
Essay of Nagging Questions and Speculative AnswersQ. Can you account, very briefly for how and what non-ordinary reality is to the system?
A. Yes, the not-able-to-not-be is the real of awareness for common consensus. It is not experience itself, it is only the real. Experience itself, is time, the conscious `part’ of the reality structure; able-to-not-be. Time is all the possibilities of a conscious now; of which the space (identity) selects the real. Space, the not-able-to-be, and the `former’ of I-NOT-I relationships, selects what is real to the identity (space); Real-being the not-able-to-not-be, of the I-NOT-I participation in experience. Experience being the conscious (Time) (Able-To-Not-Be) possibilities of space (Identity) relationships with other space identities. IDENTITY BEING THE REAL SELECTING OF EXPERIENCE FOR SPACE. IDENTITY TRANSFORMS POSSIBLE TIME FOR SPACE. Which brings us back to the question; non-ordinary reality is that space selection which because it is a conscious identity, can move into other now experience. ITS IDENTITY SWITCHES ITS TENDENCY FROM TIME TRANSFORMING INTO SPACE; SPACE TRANSFORMS INTO TIME. EXPERIENCE STAYS REAL WITH THE SUBSEQUENT, NOT-ABLE-TO-NOT-BE, I-NOT-I participation of identity in participation with able-to-not-be possibilities, which are only non-space identities. You `rise’ into the able-to-not-be area of reality orientation and `leap’ into `real’ with your identity of time as space. Your identity, still real, has time as space, instead of the usual space as time identity. Both identities being `real’.
In the near future I will update this post as there was one more entry for this Essay Of Nagging Questions And Speculative Answers from January 1976 - stay tuned.
The Update - Question Two
(I have decided to not use the underlines of the original manuscript in this second recap - no phrases in the second question or answer were in all caps from 1975 like in the first answer.)
Q. Just where is, and how plentiful is the not-able-to-be concept?
A. This could be the most difficult question about the system yet; for it shows an understanding of the lack of being behind the appearance of objects – save the perceiver himself. The not-able-to-be is a complete concept which accumulates to the creation of an appearance. The appearance has no duration at all. The appearance is space. Knowing space has no duration prevents one from saying after, yet the next point for a consciousness is different. Not the same; and not-able-to-be (anything but itself).
So, when the more conscious concept (able-to-not-be) decides the next point of space; an appearance of the decision is not-able-to-be for that point. When more than one, potentially able-to-not-be (being) concept, is in relating spaces, the resultant is for the not-able-to-be concepts relating in a new common not-able-to-not-be space.
The relationships of the able-to-not-be’s with all of themselves and the former not-able-to-be appearances; now breaks down into a lower consenus of close spaces; in which relationships are not-able-to-be. The able-to-not-be still decides the next point; however its between/of 2 not-able-to-be’s, which instead of being a point form a line (with the new `common’ consensus of the spaces – not-able-to-be’s.
These lines of spaces in relationship form the new `real’.
The individual able-to-not-be’s are still committed to its not-able-to-be, but with other not-able-to-be’s so close in appearance, decides to follow a line of common time rather than individual space. The not-able-to-be appearances; `flash’; then are truly gone. For a new not-able-to-be has been decided on.
We’re in a field of `real’ not-able-to-be’s, which has able-to-not-be’s attention. Not-able-to-be’s are rare in a land of able-to-not-be consciousness; and the `type’ in not-able-to-not-be spaces are even rarer.
The ultimate goal in all this is convert lots of pages on 4 decade old notebook paper into something digital - stay tuned for upcoming examples of Esoteric Phenomenology