Clear all

# 0 = 2

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter

I am interested in other peoples interpretation of the equation 0 =2 and the number 0 in general.

If I recall correctly, Crowley mentions in the Book of Thoth :
0 = (-1) + (+1)

Which could then be writtne as 0 = (-Infinity) + (+Infinity)

This makes me think of 0 not as "nothing" but rather the homogeneous mixture of two opposites.

Bounded in the space 0, the two appear as "nothing" because the are so well mixed that the two cannot be seen as separate.

This makes me see 0 as not being "nothing" but instead infinite possibilities.

As it is the only number which is neither positive or negative. In stands in the middle and it is only through experience that it "goes" one way or the other.

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

I think f it the everything of nothing. The yes and the no. The number of the paradox. Nothing as well as everything. Infitinite... it is the infinite... if you think about it can you define the opposite of infinite (nothing is a type of infinite [infinite of absense])

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

I think the opposite (which is the same) equation, 2=0, is more compelling to contemplate. 0 is Naught. 0 is not nothing, 0 is No-Thing. 0 is the sum of life, the universe, and everything.

0=2 and 2=0 are great sex magick equations. Though, 3=0 and 4=0 and 5=0 (etc.) can be fun, too. 8)

~Morgan

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

I add a thing to what you yet wrote:

LA is -1; AL is +1. ShT o Set is the Kundalini.

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter

2 = 0 always brings up this little notion...

0 = 2
-2 -2

-2 = 0

(-1)-2 = 0 (-1)
2 = 0

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

AL I:28. None, breathed the light, faint & faery, of the stars, and two.
AL I:29. For I am divided for love's sake, for the chance of union.
AL I:30. This is the creation of the world, that the pain of division is as nothing, and the joy of dissolution all.

2 is the expression of 0 as symmetrical opposites (written as 1 & -1 as many have pointed out), whose sum is 0. 2 is duality - our perception of the entiire universe/existence/consciousness. The universe (2) is a Fool's Knot of apparent duality, an apparent 'knot', which in reality 'pulls out' to become Nothing at all (as -1 + 1 = 0) - see Book of Lies, ch.61 (also ch.0,1,3,57)... 0 appears as/becomes 2 for Experience - experiencer & experienced/perceiver & perceived, etc. - but 2 is always still just 0.

AL II:58. Yea! deem not of change: ye shall be as ye are, & not other. Therefore the kings of the earth shall be Kings for ever: the slaves shall serve. There is none that shall be cast down or lifted up: all is ever as it was.

65 & 210,
111-418

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

"Tool93" wrote:
I think f it the everything of nothing. The yes and the no. The number of the paradox. Nothing as well as everything. Infitinite... it is the infinite... if you think about it can you define the opposite of infinite (nothing is a type of infinite [infinite of absense])

Ah, I was just struck with the bizarre notion that there is no such thing as nothing, only the presence of something else. (Well outside of strange scientific hypotheticals.) Perhaps it is far too late at night. Cheers.

Dr. Jack

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

My conception of this equation at my present level of ignorance (* RA.Wilson's wonderful reminder to the ego) is based around our perception of the world. I see 2 as the union of the subject and object, if we look at a pc screen there are two things - the screen and the observer for instance. So therefore what we normally call One is actually Two. Kether and Chokma - the 'vision of god face to face' - aptly named indeed.
When duality is overcome, one merges with the object and one 'becomes' Kether - (Eh-Heh-Yeh) then we see the illusion of One is gone and there is No thing left.
I keep to this metaphor at the moment because my maths skills are quite shocking 🙂

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

"Uni_Verse" wrote:
I am interested in other peoples interpretation of the equation 0 =2 and the number 0 in general.

Here's a little quote on Zero:

"Ø"

"The Number Zero (Ø) represents nothingness, emptiness, or perfect balance. Intellectually, it is a difficult notion to grasp.

"Zero can be correlated to the Taoist notion of Tao, and to the ancient Greek concept of Chaos, which derived from Gas and implied the nothingness of pure energy from which all manifestation issues. Due to the misunderstanding of early Christians, the meaning of Chaos has changed to mean "disorder," which has nothing to do with the original concept.

"Creation is expressed in the Zero equals Two equation (Ø=2) that refers to nothingness producing a matched pair of opposites. Modern astrophysics has confirmed this equation through the observation of Black Holes.

"A Black Hole is surrounded by an Event Horizon, the equivalent of a magic circle. Inside the Horizon, nothing escapes the potent gravity of the Black Hole. Outside the Horizon, nothing is directly influenced by the Black Hole.

"However, energy is constantly being emitted from the Hole. Paired, ionized (positive and negative) particles are thrown out of the Black Hole and past the Event Horizon. Then, one of four scenarios is enacted:

1. Both ions (positive and negative) fall back into the Black Hole.
2. The positive ion escapes, the negative ion falls back into the Hole.
3. The negative ion escapes, the positive ion falls back into the Hole.
4. Both particles (positive and negative) escape.

"However we look at it, the net effect is that a Black Hole (Ø) is constantly adding energy to the Universe.

"Zero can be identified with the mystical states of Nirvana, Samadhi and Sartori, wherein all duality (i.e., the seer and the thing seen) disappear.

"It is unlikely that the magician will enact an entire ceremony based on the number Ø [but why not?], although that should be the numerical equivalent of the thoughtforms remaining within the circle after a thorough banishing."

Excerpted from The Principles of White Magic (c)2007 - Used with permission as I am the author.

(@priestofal)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 147

Here's another non-mathematical way to express 0 = 2 --

● = " " + 0 or Tao = Symbol/Position/Yin + Content/Energy/Yang

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

"priestofal" wrote:
Here's another non-mathematical way to express 0 = 2 --

● = " " + 0 or Tao = Symbol/Position/Yin + Content/Energy/Yang

So Zero can be interpreted as the cross-cancellation of duality, essentially? The meeting of two somethings creating nothing?

(@priestofal)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 147

Howdy --

I think you mentioned elsewhere that you are new to these parts, so please don't take anything I have to say here as representative of anything but my own twisted musings! But there could be a couple of things here that could send you off into some interesting directions.

So, to dive in --

What prompted my post was a meditation on the meaning of

"(" x ")" or )x(

which appears to be a true representation of the statement

a CIRCLE SQUARED IN ITS FAILURE [= 360 in EQ-11].

(A circle that squares in its failure must have two equal portions in its failure [its breaking apart, presumably] in order to square).

Interior to that is an "x", which is skew-wise from a "+" (a cross like that appears in the middle of the circle-squared key) and in which can be hidden the expression "+1 -1".

But this is no way to do math! (But, of course, 0 = 2 isn't math either).

So...

We try to figure it out.

"0" = "(" x ")" = +1 -1 = 0

or

O = )x( = |-| = 0

or

O = K)x(U = K|-|U = 0 (K and U being another clue, provided that you subscribe to the EQ-11 grid. Also, H = 4, which is of interest not only because it looks like a glyph on 1 - 1 but because of the four-armed cross of the circle).

It does appear that "(" x ")" can equal +1 or -1 depending on whether one is multiplying on the basis of content (quantity -- energy?) or on the basis of position (i.e., on the idea that one is negative to the other), so perhaps there's some relevance to the idea of Uncertainty.

What I am able to deduce is that "0" + 0 must equal something else, which I symbolized by the use of ● . It was my last minute choice to leave the 0 out of one of the terms I used (" ") and I am not entirely sure that I was correct to do so.

You are now completely and pestilentially up to speed on the musings behind my previous categorical statement, though I would claim some "validation" from A.C.'s Liber Trigrammaton, where he talks about Nothing under its three forms and all that derives from it.

To answer your question directly, I assume (without cause or logic) that there are two forms of nothing and that, in their interference (by which they reinforce each other), they create the illusion of something. Also, that the Nothing at the back of these is neither created nor positive nor negative in itself. How one can make a logical leap from the Land of the Two to the Land of the Zero I haven't a clue.

The rest of it that I wrote up there, I leave to brighter minds than mine (provided that I've offered something of value)... or at least to minds that haven't been lazed-out, as mine has, by too much holiday indulgence.

Best.

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

0 = egg

egg = 2, when 'fettered' by ignorance.

(@priestofal)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 147

I agree.

But -- wondering -- if "it's all in the egg" (as I've heard), then is it not the egg itself that chooses and dissolves its own fetters (in which case they are merely 'fetters', as you suggest)? Ignorance becomes the playground of art; perhaps it is the egg that we are trying to entertain.

(Midnight musings).

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

I like to think of zero as everything, but with no difference made between any one thing & any other thing... or of everything lumped together, formless and void, to put it another way.

I find it a useful model at times.

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

This is one of the most important subjects to me. The reference to Advaita or non duality.
This is what Kenneth Grant tells us in Aleister Crowley and the Hidden God:

He first refers to three states of the mind. Sushupti, or dreamless sleep; swapna, or dreaming; and jagrat, generalization of wakeful states..

He then says in page 85:
"Pure Consciousness is the sole reality because it is the only factor common to all three states. there is no dream or dreamer; there is only reality, i.e. Consciousness undivided by subject and object. If this substratum is realized it will shine, totally unobscured, and the organism will automatically function with perfect spontaneity in all states."

There is a fourth state which they call turya and refers to the realized Consciousness in the whole of life, "spontaneity in all states".

This of course is an idea that one will observe several times in the course of studies. I mean non duality is at the core of Zen and Buddhism in general, in Hinduism is also quite obvious. Is also to be clearly stated in the Upanishads, from what little I have read of them and also in Qabbalah.

It is strange how one might walk through all these amazing explanations which so clearly speak of a personal experience open to anyone, and still not see it. It is easy for the mind to believe in "2" and theorize of "0", when actually "0", Ain, is that which requires no belief.

I like very much the teachings of a dead tabacco friendly Gnani, Nisargadatta Maharaj. The core of his Path was to ask oneself "who am I?" (not always with words of course) for in that question all lies surface, all identity.

In "I am That" (a series of conversations about non duality) he was discussing what one really is and someone asked:
-What does it mean to know myself? what is it that I have to know?
-Everything that you are not

(@priestofal)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 147

Oh, it's not difficult to see, even not difficult to be, but there still remains an awful mighty Something Else (assuming that you're all non-goddities like me).

You reminded me of the days, back when I was more into ostensible Zen (?), when I used to say, "The name of my God is Sponse."

I'd say that spontaneity is definitely at the heart of it.

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

The concept of 'spontaneity' is very interesting, and I also believe it is at the heart of the matter... However, only to a degree.

If this is the case, then surely the essence of experience (spontaneity) which separates the initiate from the vulgar must also be poles apart in it's 'experience' too? However, how can we then say that the spontaneity of the initiate is purer? or of a different structure of consciousness to that of the vulgate? We cannot...or can we? Both have karmic consequence...maybe, the idea is that one has beneficial consequences, and the other has unbeneficial consequences....again! a duality!

Are there layers/qualitative states of mind stuff? i.e. levels of consciousness which veil light/gnosis? or is 'all' just consciousness?

If 'all' is consciousness, then the idea of spontaneity is redundant as it's manifestation is a result of conditions and consequences i.e. karmic seeds.

Can we 'really' be spontaneous? or is it the case, that within the adept, they have developed a Magickal Mirror, which can 'observe' something 'other' (praeter-human)?, and that there are subtle radiations of starfire, which precipitate as a phantasm or an oracular gnosis upon the astral light? In this case, even the vulgate is subjected to these radiations, but is wholly unaware of them.

Maybe the '2' in the equation 0=2, refers to a metaphysical orientation of the adept to realise such states, and thus realise the nature of void (0)? In this case, the adept must be hermaphroditic. In magickal praxis the '2' is made up of;

(1) The adept themselves - 'all consciousness'.
(1) The Magickal Mirror - which is cultivated by magickal and mystical exercises to observe and document 'any' transmission of consciousness that is 'other' or praeter-human.

This is just a rambling...

(@threefold31)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 447

"Uni_Verse" wrote:
I am interested in other peoples interpretation of the equation 0 =2 and the number 0 in general.

If I recall correctly, Crowley mentions in the Book of Thoth :
0 = (-1) + (+1)

Dwtw

0 = 2 is a trinitarian formula.

There are two sides to the equation,
and there is the equality itself.

Alternatively, there is the Zero, and the two things
that combine to create it, (or emanate from it).

The absence of thingness is equivalent to its duality being stabilized.

In the TEQ, this expression is seen in the idea of a Transitional Triad.
This is a group of three numbers, expresssed in base 3, whose lines change into each other's, so that any of the numbers can be seen
as the medium for the changes between the other two.
Such a set is closed; once you determine two of the members,
there is one and only one number that can be the third.

For example, when 666 goes through 93, it becomes 249.
This I can notate by saying 666 > 93 = 249

666 = 220200
093 = 010110
249 = 100020

Read down the columns of numbers
to see how the digits change into one another.

This is the general rule. The special rule is that when Zero is one of the three numbers, the other two will be 'Antigrams', meaning that the lines that make them up are opposite each other:

666 = 220200
000 = 000000
333 = 110100

So the antigram of 666 is 333.
When combined, they have to have a Zero as part of their Triad.
One can easily see that this expression is no different than AC's symbolic 0 = 2. And the equality I referred to earlier is simply the triune nature of the number set. 0 is 'equal' to the other two numbers because it makes a triangle with them.

Litlluw
RLG

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

I don't understand the problem. If there is no distinction between one thing and another, there is nothing, nothing to count. If there is distinction, there are at least two things. "I am divided for love's sake".

Do you really think that the 3 chapters of Al have no bearing on each other? There is NO god where I am.

Easy peasy.

93 93/93

Steve W

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

93

(+1) + (-1) = 0
|+1| + |-1| = 2

0 = (+1) + (-1) «=» |+1| + |-1| = 2

Reminds me of a quote from The Book of Law "For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, is every way perfect. The perfect and The Perfect are one Perfect and not two; nay, are none !"
First when I heard about this it came to me a though about some kind of annihilation about the two opposites. And to add together the opposites is mentioned many times in many ways in thelemic texts I`ve read. For example, Book of lies Says:

1.) "Love destroyed self, uniting self with that which is not self, so that love breedeth All and None in One."
and so on..

And when thinking about the uniting of Nuit and Hadit as a totally opposite kind by their nature ( Nuit as a Infinite Space and ever expanding, Hadit as a stationary, burning in every heart of a man. ) Some kind of harmony through uniting of plus and minus.

And also have to quote some Liber Al "My name is Nuit, and my word is six and fifty. Divide, add, multiply and understand."

1.) 6:50 = 0,12
2.) 6 x 50= 300
3.) 60+5 = 56, 5+ 6 = 11

I don`t talk about others now than about the interpretation of the first one. Zero being Nuit comprehending all in one and in none, comma symbolizing Hadit, 1 symbolizing Ra-Roor-Khuit and the 2 symbolizing duality and the world of illusion. This came to my mind, by beginning with 0 and ending to 2. 0 = 2.

Also thinking about the two triangles that form the Hexagram. If we look the two triads, one being normal and other being set upside down. We get the symbol of Fire and a symbol of Water. By putting those together, wouldn`t we get dust? And Phoenix may rise from the dust.. As I remember the Phoenix was used many times as a symbol in Book of Lies. Not always on that way I just told, but as least on some other.

93/93

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

Oops. 60 + 5 should be 6 + 50. Damn math.

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

The Nuit passage approximates the yearly orbit of the earth around the sun, as counted in days (or number of earth rotations).

But more in relation to Nu as Goddess it also represents the 13 cycles of the 28 moon days as 364 in each year.

Divide: 50/6 = 8.3
Multiply: 6x50 = 300

300+56+8.3 = 364.3. 364 = 13x28.

This seems to be the intended formula of the "divide, add, multiply" statement. However it also implies, since Nu is all, that the aspirant should seek a complete innate Understanding of the Universe.

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

Nice interpretation Fourarmored, tnx!

And if coming back little bit I could go deeper in meanings I said earlier.

56. 5 representing Pentagram and Microcosm, and 6 representing Hexagram and Macrocosm. There is this 5=6 I`ve heard earlier and I guess it`s something like that Microcosm includes the macrocosm. And I`ve allready explained earlier how you get hexagram by putting two symbols together inside pentagram ( see this: )

and 11 would be the number of Magick and new beginnings. This is what we get in the first hand as seeing 10 as a number of fullfillment, as a whole and 11 as a first step into something new.. ( raw )

I must quote some part of this book I have on my hands right now..

"... If we recall the allegory of the Tetragrammaton, Pincess/Heh-final, ( anesthized and exiled in the microcosmic world of 5 ), must be awakened by the kiss of Prince/Vav ( her brother-lover-emissary of the macrocosmic world of 6)."

&

"Vav = 6 and in this place, representative of the Holy Guardian Angel. The first phase of the Great Work is to unite the 5 of the magician with the 6 of the H.G.A. and the first in doing that is to "... equate and identify every idea with its opposite..."

And in the word ABRAHADABRA there are five same letters ( 5 x A ) and 6 others ( B,R,H,D,B,R )... what I`ve got its elevent letters, five identical and six diverse, are illustrative of the Great Work accomplished. It joins that which is ABOVE, to that which is BELOW.

And so on.

Right now I can`t remember but was the meaning for 300 ( 6 x 50 ), but I remember it had something to do with some holy spirit or sthing... ok, I dont remember! I confess. I`ll tell later if I`ll find a meaning or remember etc...

- Love is the law -

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

Draconuit does not understand-so much mind machinery.
Become the star-'I AM ONE' within and a part of infinite mind/space.
Do second death-enter N.O.X -Reborn, infinite large/infinite small-
move as beyond =0.
0=2

(@perdurex)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 35

"Uni_Verse" wrote:
I am interested in other peoples interpretation of the equation 0 =2 and the number 0 in general.

If I recall correctly, Crowley mentions in the Book of Thoth :
0 = (-1) + (+1)

Interesting point. In the same book he also gives the following advice:

"Balance against each thought its exact opposite. For the Marriage of these is the Annihilation of Illusion."

This is in reference to Trump VIII, Adjustment, and the similarities to the 0 = (-1) + (+1) formula are clear. Interestingly, he also makes the point that this card is the complement of Trump 0.

It makes for good cosmological acrobatics to compare Trump VIII with Trump VI, The Lovers. Here we see the opposites, male and female, with the winged Orphic egg between them. Crowley explains that the key to this card is that it represents the “Creation of the World”. On a more mundane level we could analogise thus: man + woman = child.

6 = 3 x 2 [The Lovers = three dimensions, by duality]

Trump VIII could therefore be seen as representing the same process in the 4 dimensional world, i.e. the realms not governed by 3-dimensional laws (the astral plane, thoughts, dreams, visions etc…)

8 = 4 x 2 [Trump VIII = four dimensions, by duality]

The ‘Marriage’ of opposite ideas thus annihilates the illusion of reality [0 = (-1) + (+1)] and is therefore a process by which we can obtain access to the fourth dimensional world.

Or something like that... it's explained a little better in Moonchild.

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

Amazing! how so many people can be talking at length and say nothing at all.

Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0

"As for this Trump, we call him "Zero" even though he is placed in the game after the XXI, because he doesn't count at all when he is alone, and he has no other value than what he gives to others, precisely like our zero, showing also that nothing exists without his madness."

-Monsieur Antoine Court de Gébelin, Du Jeu des Tarots