But we have already seen what the clues are.
The Nabta Playa complex encodes a hyper-dimensional physics, one suggesting a unification of the physical mechanics of the very large with the very small. It thus encodes a physics of dynamic torsion, of rotating systems within cyclic systems within rotating systems. As most readers of my book Babylon’s Banksters are also aware, this also encompasses cyclic systems in aggregate human behavior.
Could there, however, be a more direct link to consciousness, as Brophy suggests? And if so, how does hyper-dimensional geometry and physics fit into the picture?
…Brace yourself…
Notes
1 John Anthony West, “Afterword,” in Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map: Discovery of a Prehistoric, Megalithic, Astrophysical Map and Sculpture of the Universe (New York: Writers Club Press, 2002), p. 119.
2 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 1.
3 Robert M. Schoch, Ph.D., “Foreword,” Ibid., p. xiii.
4 Robert M. Schoch, Ph.D., “Foreword,” Ibid., p. xiv.
5 Ibid., p. xv.
6 Ibid., p. xviii.
7 Ibid., p. xxiii.
8 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., p. 7.
9 Ibid., p. 49.
10 Ibid., p. 9.
11 Thomas G. Brophy, The Origina Map, p. 25.
12 Ibid., p. 10, emphasis added.
13 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 19.
14 Ibid., p. 17. There is further discussion of the astronomical basis of these alignments on pp. 27, 29–35 in conjunction with declinations and ascensions. Brophy notes that the statistical probabilities for these alignments exceeds normal requirements for scientific hypothesis on p. 38.
15 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, pp. 38–39. See also my Genes, Giants, Mopnsters, and Men (Feral House, 2011), pp. 55–89.
16 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., pp. 42–43.
17 Ibid., p. 45.
18 In fact, since Brophy wrote those words, a number of planets orbiting distant stars have in fact been observed.
19 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, pp. 45–46, italicized emphasis added, boldface emphasis in the original.
20 Ibid., p. 46.
21 IBid., p. 48.
22 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 11.
23 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 49.
24 Ibid., emphasis in the original.
25 Ibid., pp. 50–51.
26 Ibid., pp. 53–54.
27 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin, p. 57.
28 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 58.
29 Ibid., p. 54.
30 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 56.
31 Ibid., p. 59.
32 THomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 58.
33 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D.., The Origin Map, p. 61.
34 See my The Giza Death Star (Adventures Unlimited Press, 2001), pp. i-ii, 218ff, 227.
35 “orthogonal”: i.e., perpendicular to. The technique Dr. Brophy is describing is that used in higher-dimensional geometries to describe objects that exist in more than three dimensions. It is easily imagined, for when one draws a straight line, one has one dimension. The second dimension emerges when one imagines a line, and thus a plane, existing perpendicular to that line. One thus, by creating an “orthogonal rotation” through 90 degrees, has created the second dimension. Repeating the process of creating a perpendicularity to both dimensions results in the third dimension. Creating a fourth spatial dimension thus requires perpendicularity, or an orthogonal rotation through 90 degrees to each of the three dimensions, and so on.
36 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 62, emphasis added.
37 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 102.
38 Ibid.
39 Ibid.
40 Thomas G. Brophy, Ph.D., The Origin Map, p. 105, emphasis added.
11
THE MA’ATERIA PRIMA:
SCHWALLER DE LUBICZ AND THE EGYPTIAN VIEW OF
THE PHYSICAL MEDIUM
“The Chinese sages said: One always equals three. The Egyptian sages placed the triad at the origin of each line, as they placed the triangle at the origin of geometric forms. Two irreducible magnitudes are necessary to determine a third. The sages have never taught otherwise.”
“Do you care to translate this as Father, Spirit, and Son or Osiris, Isis, and Horus? Or Brahma, Siva, and Visnu?…You may, but if you are wise and wish not to be led astray, you will say: One, Two, which are Three. This has been represented by initiates for those who need images, so that they may rally around a tradition, and be bound by what is called ‘religion’.”
R.A. Schwaller de Lubicz1
In response to our epigraphs above, we are justified in asking, if the sages “have never taught otherwise” than to make reference to a primordial “trinity” of some sort, then why is that the case? Why do we find trinities not only in Christianity, but more anciently, in the Vedas? In China? In Egypt? And what has that to do with the world Grid and physics?
These questions may be answered by a consideration of the cosmology — the physics and mythological context — surrounding the Egyptian pyramids, and may be summed up in one word, ma’at, their word for the materia prima from which all else derives, and the sacred science they associated with it.
The question assumes importance for another reason, namely, that if one is to understand fully and completely the unique nature of the Egyptian contribution or component of the world Grid, then one must understand the cosmology that lay behind it. Once again, merely looking at numbers and engineering is not enough. One must look also at the texts and the cultural context.
A. The Physical Medium and the Nature of Hieroglyphic Symbols
No one performed the task of penetrating deeply into the meaning and spirit of Egyptian cosmology than the twentieth century’s most accomplished esotericist-scholar, Rene Schwaller de Lubicz. Schwaller begins where most would not, namely, with the one most obvious fact about Egypt: hieroglyphs:
Each hieroglyph can have an arrested, conventional meaning for common usage, but it includes (1) all the ideas that can be connected to it, and (2) the possibility of personal comprehension. This accounts for the cabalistic character of the hieroglyphs and requires the determinative in the writing.2
Just what Schwaller means by “all the ideas that can be connected” to a hieroglyph, he explains a little further on:
Hieroglyphic writing has the advantage over the Hebrew of utilizing images that, without arbitrary deviations, indicate the qualities and functions inherent in each sign.
Cabalistic writing maintains secrecy but offers a clue by accentuating the principal idea, inexpressible by fixed concepts. It always employs a form of transcription with several possible meanings, using an ordinary fact as a hook to catch the thought: a geographic site, for instance, a historical fact, a function, a gesture related to a profession, even a well-known theological form or myth.3>
That is to say, each hieroglyph represents an “ideological” or “conceptual complex” whose principal feature is its analogical, multi-leveled nature.
1. Hieroglyphs and the Analogical Nature of the Physical Medium
It is crucially important to understand what this means, for in the Egyptian cosmology, a hieroglyph is much more than just a symbol of the physical medium, it is an actual operation and manifestation of it. As will be seen a little later in this chapter, the Egyptians held to substantially the same view of the physical medium as did the ancient Vedic culture of India, and in fact, the Egyptians reproduce the topological metaphor describing that cosmology in almost exactly the same way, as an initial primordial triad that results from a “primary scission” or differentiation. Thus, everything that is a differentiable object is, on the Egyptian view, derived from the physical medium, and that includes, of course, hieroglyphs. But the hieroglyphs are also connected much more directly to the physical medium than just by being products of it, by d
int of the fact that the medium, as we have noted in previous chapters, is analogical in nature, that is, that everything produced within it by a process of repeated differentiations still retains some signature of its original archetype, especially in terms of any overlapping functions shared between any of its products. In this sense, a heiroglyph, as Schwaller observed, is meant to be a collection of specific functions; they are designed as psychotronic objects — if we may use that term — as magical talismans or objects to manipulate not only the consciousness of their observer, but also of the physical medium itself. They are, as such, quintessentially magical and alchemical in their intention and design. There is nothing haphazard about them. The hieroglyphs are analogical in nature, because in the ancient view, in the topological metaphor, the medium itself is analogical in nature.
Schwaller thus views hieroglyphs as functions of the physical medium itself in their deepest analogical nature:
In order to understand the meanings of a hieroglyph, the qualities and functions of the represented object must be sought out; if a sign is a composite, the living meaning of its parts must enter into the synthesis.
This presumes an absolute exactitude in the figuration, and excludes any possibility of malformation or negligence. It should also be observed that symmetry is one of the modes of expression, but not to any aesthetic end.4
Because of this close relationship between the hieroglyph and the actual medium itself, Schwaller points out that the difficulty for moderns in comprehending it arises from its deeply analogical nature; we fail to comprehend the nature of a hieroglyph because “out of laziness, or routine, we skirt this analogic thought process and designate the object by a word that expresses for us but a single congealed concept,”5 rather than the deep and multi-layered complex phenomenon and manifestation of the medium that it is.
2. The Hieroglyph, the Unified Intention of Symbol, and the Hidden Elite
Egyptian hieroglyphs thus function as a prime example of the deliberate “unified intention of symbol,” but in a much more deliberate way than they may at first seem to do, for given the analogical and multi-layered levels and associations of meaning in them, any given hieroglyph can, as Schwaller notes, “address itself simultaneously to all as well as to a chosen few;”6it is, in other words, the writing of an elite, of a group of initiates, who are by dint of that fact, privy to all the hieroglyph’s encoded meanings. It is also the writing of an elite intending to manipulate or socially engineer the wider culture by means of the very system of writing it employs, through manipulations of the analogical thought process that each hieroglyph engenders.
B. The Physical Medium and the Role of Sympathetic Magic
As such, the hieroglyph not only links directly to the Egyptian view of the physical medium, but also to its practice of sympathetic magic, an alchemical process that would better be described as “analogical magic.”7 The hieroglyph is the “concretizing image” of a specific subset of functions or ideas within that medium, and hence, as Schwaller puts it once again, “All the qualities and functions it contains must therefore be sought out.”8 The reason for this view of hieroglyphical symbols as analogical symbols, as actual implements inthe practice of analogical magic, follows again from the Egyptians’ nature of the physical medium itself, for indeed, it was itself a gigantic symbol, a “macro-analogy.”9
Function or action is the key here, for the hieroglyph was not understood to be something static or frozen in time, but an actual activity. In one of his more abstruse passages, Schwaller has this to say about it:
…(The) analogy is not the symbol, it is the gesture that will be the symbol evoking the analogy; it summons it forth. This is the directive for the thousand forms of sympathetic sorcery about which much could be written, but it is also the key to sacred magic. The latter, however, demands more than a simple consideration of analogies.
In addition to knowledge of the analogues, sacred magic demands mastery of the proper gesture in the consonant ambiance and of the corresponding cosmic moment.
He labors in vain who does not take this into account.10
In decoding this crucial passage, it is important to remember that Schwaller was both a practicing esotericist, but also a mathematician. Thus, while most people would read this passage as referring to conventional occult magical practices, they ignore the mathematical clues that Schwaller plants in it: by stressing “gesture” and “function,” in addition to a proper timing for the performance of “analogical magic,” Schwaller is pointing, once again, to the “topological metaphor” contained within ancient cosmologies:
To know how to make the proper gesture in the correct milieu at the right cosmic moment: this is sacred magic. The consequence of this gesture is then subordinated to neither time nor space: the effects it has caused will be manifested everywhere and in everything that is harmonically related to the cause.
In this way, often unconsciously, we are magicians. Wisdom consists in knowing how to become consciously so.
…
For this the only guides are analogy and signature. This fact hasled to the establishment of “analogical tables” such as the zodiacand planetary relationships with metals and, further, with the various parts of the human body and with plant and animal types. This is not a whimsical fantasy or even simply a conclusion based on coincidences observed over long periods of time: there does exist a science based on Numbers that reveals the reasons for these coincidences.11
Or to put Schwaller’s words into slightly different diction, once again, there is a direct relationship between consciousness and the physical medium on the ancient view, and analogical magic was, as it were, a process designed to hone the consciousness to manipulate it more efficiently. The hieroglyph, that is to say, the symbol, the physical medium itself, and the performer of the magical act, exist in a complex system that is open-ended with respect to each of its three components.
De Lubicz’s final comments about number should be noted carefully, for what he is actually implying is that, behind all the tables of analogical correspondences that one finds in ancient, mediaeval, and modern esoteric literature, there lies a hidden grammar, an actual analogical calculus that, once known, allows one to perceive the deep mathematical relationships of analogies clearly, and therefore also allows one to dispense with the tables of analogical correspondences themselves. The possession of such a grimoire or “grammar” would make analogical operations formally explicit, and, as Schwaller also implies, be deeply related to mathematics and to numbers as functions of the emergent topology of the medium.
This last statement requires further elaboration.
The physical medium as the Egyptians understood it was of primary importance to Schwaller, who summarized its philosophical presuppositions and implications in a manner that directly reveals the “topological metaphor” we have previously spoken of in context with the Vedic literature of India and the legends of Meso-America:
1. Faith in an origin that cannot be situated in time and space. This is reality absolute, not to be grasped by our intelligence. This cannot be regarded as a mystery: it is the eternal Present Moment, indivisible Unity.
2. Through an internal act, the irrational source undergoes a polarization that manifests itself in spiritual substance. This substance appears as the energy of which the universe is constituted. Such is the mystery of the division into two, which, with the irrational origin, comprises the mystic ternary.
3. The phenomenon of universe in all its aspects is made up of this energy substance to the various degrees of its positive (north) polarity going toward its negative (south) polarity. This becoming is accomplished by alternation, a positive-negative and negative-positive oscillation. Hence the point of equilibrium must be the return to the nonpolarized source, the Present Moment, which cannot be situated.12
Schwaller is here speaking more as a mathematician than as a magician, for the image that he is invoking is that of the primordial “sameness,” that primordial nothing
-everything in which no distitions exist, and which therefore exists in a timeless and spaceless or “placeless place.” By an internal function, that Nothing differentiates itself, and at once there arises what De Lubicz calls the “mystic ternary.” Each broken off or “bracketed” region of an increasingly and repeatedly differentiated “Nothing” “comprise the phenomena composing our universe.”13 The implication of this analogical view of the medium is further revealed when one adds one more presupposition into the mix, namely, that the physical medium, in many ancient cosmologies, was consciousness. It is important that one understands the vast implications of this, for it means that consciousness is not an either-or affair, either one all-encompassing “I” or “Ego,” nor a potentially infinite series of “I’s” or “Egos,” but a both-and: a consciousness able to endlessly differentiate himself into consciousnesses, each with their own unique “I” while remaining part of a greater “I”.14 To put it in terms of our topological metaphor once again, the > remains in each differentiation, yet each differentiation of it possesses its own irreducibly unique signature.
So how, in Schwaller’s terms, would Number emerge as a function of this metaphor? We have already seen how with the “bracketing” or “regionalization” of the primordial “nothing,” for the creation of a common surface > between >and >means that the common surface has the function of 2, a mean between 1, and 3, and so on. Number also emerges thus as a specific topological function in Schwaller’s understanding of the Egyptian cosmology, for one designates the primordial nothing, or first stage, two designates the first differentiation of it, what Schwaller calls the “primary scission,” and three the end result of the process which ends in three unique versions of the same nothing.
Grid of the Gods Page 29