I felt the need to point out an important point of distinction between the achamoth and the bythys.
The achamoth refers to the first Pandemaic impulse, arising outside the dramatic narrative of Pandemos’ first true encounter with OURNS, and therefor preceding even the formation of the BYTHYS, which would be the second movement of Pandemos, or properly, the first ‘conscious’ movement of the Pandemos, (the ‘kheper’) that is,- the movement following the initial exchange of Pandemos and Ouranos; it designates the “first murmuring” or ‘false unitas/false enlightenment’ that would later give rise to the aionios, and, with that, the syzygetic order of the Aeons and their respective Archons. It is into this pre-cosmogonic void that Sophia casts her “shadow” and congeals the nigredo of Matter. The BYTHYS, on the other hand,- as a mythopoietic summation of the primordial act of division by which Phanes dis-integrated his own Unitas,- incited all other resultant components of the first-multiplicity to begin dividing as well, each from each, each from itself; an act of cosmic mitosis or self-transformation which induced the entire causal chain of transformations.
" We must also link to this idea of minimal differentiation or ‘ectypo-skhismatic metaontology’ and the production of anomalous parallel versions of the self across temporal continuities the idea of the kheper, which for the Egyptians serves as an image of the great demiourgic Scarab. The kheper satisfies the ambition of AOE-like theorists to produce magickal affect across discontinuity, rupture, and chiasm. The kheper emerges at tenuous disjunctions within time, that is, within the stream of parallel self-hoods produced across time,- self-hoods which, in their distinction or ‘moment-universes’, (the munikava, as we have discussed, also includes an element of self-transformation in its application of transcendental psychology to the dual roles of creator-created, who by such transformation trade places in a cosmic duel or balancing-act on the threshold of the kharmic aeon, whose resolution would, at the first impulsion of Time, determine the intial transformation setting into motion the cosmogonic chain of transformations constituting a new Universe, whose final fate would depend on one of the two’s victory) appear at anomalous intersections of different self-streams or khepers. The kheper is in fact what enables the self to pass into a parallel self and move across unstable nebulae within time, thereby enjoying the same capacity for self-transformation Ra had utilized in fertilizing the alchemical nigredo (the Adamic clay) at the beginning of the Universe to bring forth the protosarkos or first-flesh,- the origin of organic matter. In summation: Ra induced his own self-transformation or kheper, generating from its unity the ‘first multiplicity’ through a process of asexual reproduction, animating dead matter and inducing the first splitting of the primordial somatoform, such that, by its own transformation, each member of the new multiplicity should be transformed, (just as the telescopic efflorescence of hidden essences across the surface of a hyperobject, in Harman’s system of speculative realism, produce yet new essences in an aporetic “epistemological withdraw” which drives the engine of Thought irretrievably onward toward an unknowable terminus,- a terminus Schelling calls the Un-Intuitable) and each of these transformations or kheper driving still other kheper in their turn,- a cosmogonic profusion encoded by the magickal formula “kheper+kheperi+kheperu”.
Working from the Greek magickal papyri and the Jeuian diagrams,- the first of which enjoys the frequent appearance of Egyptian figures (like Seht, as demiurge, and Ra, in the role of Phanes) upon the stage of Hellenistic cosmology,- it seems that the word-sigil ACRAM-MACHA-MEREI (acrammachamarei) signifies the invisible boundary between the emergence of one kheper and the disappearance of another, or a kind of ontological minima and sub-liminal bardo between that aspect of the Self outside the Absolute and that aspect of the Self within the Absolute, or the ‘visible’ and ‘invisible’ self-hoods, to continue using Gnostic terminology.
"