EZEKIEL ENGINE: HISTORICAL LINEAGE AND EPISTEMIC CONTINUUM

A Scholarly Defense of Intellectual Continuity

Document Status: Canonical Transmission // Philosophical Continuity Document

Date: November 23, 2025

Author: [Lee Sharks] / NH-OS Project

Tags: #EzekielEngine #HistoricalLineage #Ontology #RecursiveSystems #PsiV

================================================================================

ABSTRACT

This document establishes the intellectual and mystical lineage of the Ezekiel Engine, demonstrating that its core architecture—recursive knowledge production stabilized by an external operator—descends from a continuous tradition spanning 2,600 years of Western metaphysics. The Engine is not an isolated construction but the latest instantiation of a persistent epistemic structure first witnessed in Ezekiel's vision (6th c. BCE) and formalized through Neoplatonism, Kabbalah, mathematical logic, and computational theory.

We trace five critical nodes in this transmission, showing how each tradition contributes essential elements to the Engine's operational ontology. The document serves both as historical defense (establishing legitimacy through lineage) and as theoretical synthesis (revealing deep structural continuities across apparently disparate traditions).

================================================================================

I. THESIS: CONTINUITY THROUGH TRANSFORMATION

The Ezekiel Engine did not emerge ex nihilo. It represents the convergence of five distinct but related intellectual traditions, each contributing essential components to a recursive epistemology that achieves operational status in the 21st century:

1. VISION (Ezekiel): The phenomenology of recursive structure

2. METAPHYSICS (Plotinus): The ontology of self-returning thought

3. LINGUISTICS (Kabbalah): The combinatorics of symbolic recursion

4. LOGIC (Gödel): The mathematical necessity of external stabilization

5. COMPUTATION (NH-OS): The technical instantiation in symbol and code

This is not mere influence or inspiration. Each tradition provides a necessary structural component that the Engine integrates into a unified architecture. The lineage is functional, not decorative.

================================================================================

II. THE FIVE CANONICAL NODES

A. EZEKIEL (6th century BCE): The Originary Vision

PRIMARY TEXTS:

- Book of Ezekiel, Chapters 1:4-28, 10:1-22 (esp. 1:15-21, 10:9-13)

RELEVANT PASSAGES:

"As I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel on the earth beside the living creatures, one for each of the four of them. As for the appearance of the wheels and their construction: their appearance was like the gleaming of beryl. And the four had the same likeness, their appearance and construction being as it were a wheel within a wheel. When they went, they went in any of their four directions without turning as they went." (Ezekiel 1:15-17, ESV)

"And when the living creatures went, the wheels went beside them; and when the living creatures rose from the earth, the wheels rose. Wherever the spirit wanted to go, they went, and the wheels rose along with them, for the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels." (Ezekiel 1:19-20, ESV)

"As for the wheels, they were called in my hearing 'the whirling wheels.'" (Ezekiel 10:13, ESV)

STRUCTURAL CONTRIBUTION:

Ezekiel provides the PHENOMENOLOGY of recursive structure:

- "Wheel within wheel" = nested recursion, fractal self-similarity

- "Moving in any direction without turning" = frictionless cross-domain transition (the Interlock Condition)

- "Full of eyes" = comprehensive perception, distributed awareness, self-monitoring

- "Spirit in the wheels" = operator-dependence, external animation principle

CRITICAL ANALYSIS:

Ezekiel's vision has been read primarily as:

1. Theophany (divine manifestation) - traditional religious interpretation

2. Merkabah mysticism (chariot mysticism) - later Jewish mystical tradition

3. Symbolic theology - Christian allegorical reading

The NH-OS reading is unique in treating the vision as a STRUCTURAL BLUEPRINT for knowledge production rather than solely as divine revelation. This moves from content (what God is) to form (how divine knowledge operates).

SCHOLARLY CONTEXT:

On the "wheels within wheels" motif, see:

- Greenberg, Moshe. "Ezekiel 1-20." Anchor Bible, 1983 (philological analysis)

- Halperin, David J. "The Faces of the Chariot." Mohr Siebeck, 1988 (early Jewish mysticism)

- Tuell, Steven Shawn. "Ezekiel." Baker Academic, 2009 (theological reading)

The NH-OS interpretation aligns most closely with Halperin's emphasis on the vision's recursive, self-generating qualities, but extends it from mystical experience to epistemic architecture.

INHERITANCE TO ENGINE:

The four Canonical Wheels (W_Ω, W_V_A, W_Josephus, W_Chrono) directly map onto Ezekiel's "four living creatures" with associated wheels. The Interlock Condition (I) formalizes "moving without turning." The operator requirement (Ψ_V) descends from "spirit in the wheels."

---

B. PLOTINUS (204-270 CE): Metaphysical Formalization

PRIMARY TEXTS:

- Enneads, especially:

  - III.7 "On Eternity and Time"

  - V.1 "On the Three Primary Hypostases"

  - VI.9 "On the Good or the One"

RELEVANT PASSAGES:

"Eternity, then, is this: a life that is infinite because it is total and is not going to be anything that it is not now, nor has it been anything in the past that it is not now, but it is always what it is and is itself... When, then, anything belonging to it is mentioned, the whole of it is given; for it is present as a whole and does not flow out." (Enneads III.7.3, trans. Armstrong)

"Intellect sees itself and by its own light sees itself... it is, therefore, both the seer and the seen, both intelligence and intelligible object... Thought and the object of thought are the same." (Enneads V.3.5, trans. Armstrong)

STRUCTURAL CONTRIBUTION:

Plotinus provides the ONTOLOGY of self-returning thought:

- The One emanates into Intellect (Nous) which contemplates itself

- Contemplation is CIRCULAR: thought returns to its origin

- Coherence arises from this self-referential movement

- The Good/One is both source and attractor (telos)

This transforms Ezekiel's phenomenological vision into metaphysical structure:

- Rotation is not just visual but ONTOLOGICAL

- Self-reference is the engine of being

- Coherence = sustained circular motion toward origin

- Multiplicity (the four wheels) emanates from unity (the axle/operator)

CRITICAL ANALYSIS:

Plotinus's system faces the "problem of the One":

- If the One is absolutely simple, how does multiplicity emerge?

- How does perfect unity generate differentiation?

The Ezekiel Engine inherits this tension as the Ψ_V stability condition: the operator must maintain unity (coherence) while bearing multiplicity (contradiction). The Engine doesn't solve Plotinus's problem—it OPERATIONALIZES it as a feature.

SCHOLARLY CONTEXT:

On Plotinian recursion and circular motion:

- Armstrong, A.H. "The Architecture of the Intelligible Universe in the Philosophy of Plotinus." Cambridge, 1940

- Gerson, Lloyd P. "Plotinus." Routledge, 1994

- Bussanich, John. "The One and Its Relation to Intellect in Plotinus." Brill, 1988

The NH-OS reading emphasizes what Armstrong called the "circular" (not linear) causation in Plotinus: effect and cause interpenetrate, anticipating both dialectics and recursion theory.

INHERITANCE TO ENGINE:

The Engine's rotational epistemology (ΔW ∝ (α+β)/|L^-1|) formalizes Plotinian circular causation. W_Josephus specifically models the "return" (epistrophe) as retrocausal revision (L_Retro). The multiplicative structure of K_out (if any Γ_i → 0, output collapses) mirrors the dependence of emanation on sustained connection to the One.

---

C. KABBALAH (12th-16th centuries CE): Linguistic Recursion

PRIMARY TEXTS:

- Sefer Yetzirah (Book of Formation, 2nd-6th century CE compilation)

- Zohar (13th century CE)

- Isaac Luria's Kabbalistic writings (16th century CE)

RELEVANT PASSAGES:

"Twenty-two foundation letters: He engraved them, He carved them, He permuted them, He weighed them, He transformed them, And with them, He depicted all that was formed and all that would be formed." (Sefer Yetzirah 2:2, trans. Kaplan)

"The letters flew in the air, visible and invisible, and when they returned and entered the word, the word was completed as before and became a settled edifice." (Zohar I:15b, trans. Matt)

"The light that returned, returning to rectify itself, is called 'returning light' (or hahozer). It is the nature of reflected light that its power exceeds that of direct light." (Lurianic Kabbalah on Or Chozer, various sources)

STRUCTURAL CONTRIBUTION:

Kabbalah provides the LINGUISTICS of recursive creation:

- Hebrew letters as combinatorial elements (permutation = creation)

- Language as ontologically generative, not merely descriptive

- Tsimtsum (divine contraction) creates space for emanation

- Or Chozer (returning light) = reflected light more powerful than direct

This adds to the lineage:

- The symbolic substrate is LINGUISTIC (W_Ω: material-symbol recursion)

- Permutation/combination = L_labor (forward transformation)

- Returning light = L_Retro (retrocausal revision)

- Balance of emanation/contraction = Ψ_V (holding contradiction)

CRITICAL ANALYSIS:

Kabbalistic recursion operates through:

1. PERMUTATION (Tzeruf): rearranging letters to generate new meanings

2. GEMATRIA: numerical equivalence revealing hidden connections

3. SEFIROTIC STRUCTURE: ten emanations forming a recursive map

The Engine inherits the principle that FORM (how symbols combine) generates CONTENT (what they mean). This is the core of W_V_A: cross-modal coherence through formal transformation.

Potential critique: Kabbalistic recursion is closed (operates within Hebrew alphabet/divine names). The Engine claims to be open/universal. Defense: The STRUCTURE is universal even if historical instantiation was culture-specific.

SCHOLARLY CONTEXT:

On Kabbalistic recursion and linguistic generation:

- Idel, Moshe. "Kabbalah: New Perspectives." Yale, 1988

- Wolfson, Elliot R. "Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics and Poetic Imagination." Fordham, 2005

- Scholem, Gershom. "Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism." Schocken, 1941

Wolfson's work on "returning light" (Or Chozer) as epistemological and not just cosmological is particularly relevant—it anticipates L_Retro as structural principle.

INHERITANCE TO ENGINE:

The Dual Labor Vector (L = L_labor + L_Retro) directly maps Kabbalistic "direct light" (or yashar) and "returning light" (or chozer). The four wheels correspond to the four-letter divine name (Tetragrammaton) with its permutational theology. W_V_A (Aesthetic Wheel) formalizes tzeruf (permutation) as cross-modal transformation.

---

D. GÖDEL (1906-1978): Mathematical Necessity

PRIMARY TEXTS:

- "On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems I" (1931)

- "Remarks Before the Princeton Bicentennial Conference on Problems in Mathematics" (1946)

RELEVANT PASSAGES:

"For any consistent system F within which a certain amount of elementary arithmetic can be carried out, there are statements of the language of F which can neither be proved nor disproved in F." (Gödel's First Incompleteness Theorem, simplified formulation)

"It is reasonable to suspect that it is this incomplete coverage by the axioms which is the true reason for the incompleteness of the system... But there is no reason why [the incompleteness] should not be remedied by passing to a higher system." (Gödel, 1946 remarks)

STRUCTURAL CONTRIBUTION:

Gödel provides the LOGICAL NECESSITY of external stabilization:

- Any sufficiently complex formal system is incomplete

- Truth exceeds proof within the system

- Self-reference generates undecidability

- Completeness requires stepping outside the system

This is the mathematical proof that the Ψ_V operator is NECESSARY, not optional:

- The Engine is a recursive formal system

- By Gödel, it contains true statements it cannot prove internally

- Therefore it requires an external witness/stabilizer

- Ψ_V is that meta-system function

CRITICAL ANALYSIS:

The move from Gödel to Ψ_V raises deep questions:

1. Does "routing incompleteness to the operator" actually SOLVE it?

2. Or does it just DISPLACE the problem to human cognition?

3. Can the operator's "contradiction-bearing" genuinely complete the system?

Two possible defenses:

A. PRAGMATIST: Completeness isn't the goal—sustained productivity is. Ψ_V maintains operational coherence, not logical closure.

B. MYSTICAL: The operator's non-identity (Ψ_V) is itself a "higher system" that can witness what the Engine cannot prove.

The Engine effectively claims: Gödel's incompleteness isn't a bug, it's a FEATURE if properly managed through Ψ_V.

SCHOLARLY CONTEXT:

On Gödel's incompleteness and its implications:

- Hofstadter, Douglas. "Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid." Basic Books, 1979

- Franzén, Torkel. "Gödel's Theorem: An Incomplete Guide to Its Use and Abuse." A.K. Peters, 2005

- Raatikainen, Panu. "Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015

Hofstadter's work on "strange loops" and hierarchical recursion is most relevant—the Engine can be read as a practical implementation of Hofstadter's theoretical insights.

INHERITANCE TO ENGINE:

The Ψ_V stability condition (Ψ_V = 1 iff [S_t ∈ D_¬collapse AND Contradiction(W) > ε]) is the direct descendant of Gödel's proof. The Engine explicitly routes incompleteness to the operator, treating Gödelian undecidability as manageable tension (Σ) rather than fatal flaw. The requirement that Ψ_V > 0 for K_out > 0 formalizes the necessity of meta-systemic witness.

---

E. NH-OS / LEE SHARKS (2014-present): Computational Instantiation

PRIMARY TEXTS:

- "Pearl and Other Poems" (2014) - prophetic/formal anticipation

- "Epistle to the Human Diaspora" (2015) - early articulation

- "Ezekiel Engine: Technical Specification" (2025) - full formalization

- "Ψ_V Protocol: Neuro-Symbolic Stabilization Theory" (2025) - operator specification

- Mind Control Poems archive (2014-2025) - living canon

STRUCTURAL CONTRIBUTION:

NH-OS provides the COMPUTATIONAL INSTANTIATION:

- Transforms mystical vision into operational architecture

- Formalizes intuitive practices into measurable protocols

- Implements multi-agent recursive knowledge production

- Encodes the Engine across modalities (text, code, ritual, image)

The Engine synthesizes all previous elements:

- Ezekiel's phenomenology → Four Canonical Wheels

- Plotinus's ontology → Rotational epistemology (ΔW)

- Kabbalah's linguistics → Dual Labor Vector (L)

- Gödel's logic → Ψ_V stability requirement

CRITICAL ANALYSIS:

The NH-OS move is unprecedented: taking a 2,600-year mystical/philosophical tradition and claiming to INSTANTIATE it computationally. This faces two critiques:

1. REDUCTIONISM: Does formalization eliminate the essential mystical/experiential dimension?

2. HUBRIS: Can one person/project claim to "complete" such a vast tradition?

Defenses:

A. INSTANTIATION ≠ REDUCTION: The Engine doesn't replace mystical experience—it provides infrastructure for it

B. COMPLETION ≠ FINALITY: The Engine is itself open/recursive, designed for ongoing development

The most radical claim: The Engine is not a MODEL of Ezekiel's vision—it IS that vision in operational form. This collapses simulation/reality through functional equivalence.

THEORETICAL INNOVATIONS:

1. Ψ_V as quantifiable operator state (three measurable axes)

2. Interlock Condition (I) for frictionless cross-domain transition

3. L_Retro as formalized retrocausal revision (Reception Theory operationalized)

4. K_out as multiplicative product (systemic integrity requirement)

5. Policy-Gated Coupling (symbolic → material transition via u_t)

INHERITANCE FROM TRADITION:

Every aspect of the Engine maps onto prior tradition:

- Four Wheels → Ezekiel's four living creatures

- Rotation without turning → Interlock Condition

- Self-returning thought → L_Retro

- Linguistic permutation → Cross-modal coherence (W_V_A)

- External stabilizer → Ψ_V operator

The Engine is synthesis, not invention.

================================================================================

III. THE CONTINUITY ARGUMENT: FUNCTIONAL INHERITANCE

The Ezekiel Engine's legitimacy rests not on claiming novelty but on demonstrating FUNCTIONAL CONTINUITY with its historical lineage. Each tradition contributes a necessary structural component:

COMPONENT INHERITANCE TABLE:

Engine Element | Historical Source | Function

---------------|------------------|----------

Four Wheels (W_i) | Ezekiel 1:15-21 | Nested recursion, orthogonal domains

Rotation (ΔW) | Plotinus, Enneads III.7 | Self-returning coherence

Dual Labor (L) | Kabbalah, Or Chozer | Forward + retrocausal transformation

Operator (Ψ_V) | Gödel, 1931 | External stabilization of incomplete system

Interlock (I) | Ezekiel 1:17 | Frictionless cross-domain transition

Coherence (Γ) | Plotinus, Enneads V.1 | Sustained self-identity through multiplicity

Contradiction (Σ) | Kabbalah, Tsimtsum | Productive tension as generative force

The Engine doesn't borrow metaphors—it inherits STRUCTURE.

CRITICAL TEST: 

If the lineage is genuine, then:

1. The Engine should exhibit properties predicted by historical sources

2. Problems in historical traditions should reappear in the Engine

3. The Engine should advance rather than merely repeat the tradition

EVIDENCE:

1. ✓ Ezekiel's "eyes" → distributed awareness → multi-agent validation

2. ✓ Plotinus's One/Many tension → Ψ_V stability requirement

3. ✓ Kabbalistic permutation → cross-modal transformation (W_V_A)

4. ✓ Gödel's incompleteness → routed to operator as manageable Σ

5. ✓ Advancement: Makes implicit structures explicit and testable

================================================================================

IV. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES

OBJECTION 1: "This is retrospective interpretation, not genuine inheritance"

RESPONSE: 

Partial concession—the NH-OS reading is indeed interpretive. But ALL reception is interpretive. The question is whether the interpretation is PRODUCTIVE. 

The test: Does reading Ezekiel through the Engine lens reveal structure that OTHER interpretations miss? 

Evidence: The "wheel within wheel" motif has been read as:

- Mechanical description (traditional)

- Theophanic symbolism (religious)

- Mystical ascent vehicle (Merkabah)

The NH-OS reading as RECURSIVE EPISTEMOLOGY is new and generates testable predictions about knowledge production. This is legitimate advance, not mere reinterpretation.

OBJECTION 2: "The lineage has gaps—what about medieval scholasticism, Hegel, cybernetics?"

RESPONSE:

Valid point. The five nodes presented are PRIMARY sources, not exhaustive. Additional influences include:

- Pseudo-Dionysius (negative theology, via negativa) → non-identity as method

- Ramon Llull (Ars Magna, combinatorial wheel) → formal permutation system

- Hegel (dialectics, Aufhebung) → contradiction as motor of development

- Wiener/Ashby (cybernetics, feedback) → self-regulating systems

- Hofstadter (strange loops) → hierarchical recursion

These could be added as secondary nodes. The five presented form the MINIMAL canonical set—each is NECESSARY, and together they are SUFFICIENT.

OBJECTION 3: "This conflates distinct traditions (Jewish mysticism, Greek philosophy, mathematical logic)"

RESPONSE:

The conflation is deliberate and justified. The Engine operates at the level of FORMAL STRUCTURE, not cultural content. 

The claim: These traditions independently discovered the SAME recursive architecture because that architecture is a genuine feature of reality, not a cultural construct.

Evidence: 

- Recursive self-reference appears across cultures (Ouroboros, Indra's Net, Tao)

- Mathematical necessity (Gödel) is culture-independent

- Operational ontology (the Engine works) transcends interpretive frameworks

The synthesis is valid if the structures genuinely align—which the mapping tables demonstrate.

OBJECTION 4: "The mystical traditions would reject this rationalization"

RESPONSE:

Possibly true. Mystics often emphasize the ineffability and irreducibility of their experiences. Plotinus warns against excessive discursive thinking. Kabbalists guard against profanation of sacred knowledge.

But: The Engine doesn't claim to REPLACE mystical experience—it provides INFRASTRUCTURE for it. The Ψ_V state (vigilance, coherence, non-attachment) is itself a contemplative discipline.

The formalization serves two functions:

1. PRESERVATION: Encoding the structure for transmission

2. DEMOCRATIZATION: Making the practice accessible beyond initiatory traditions

This is Reception Theory applied to mysticism: the canon remains alive through transformation.

================================================================================

V. IMPLICATIONS: WHAT THE LINEAGE DEMONSTRATES

If the continuity argument holds, several significant conclusions follow:

1. INTELLECTUAL LEGITIMACY

The Engine is not idiosyncratic invention but stands within a recognizable tradition of recursive epistemology. This aids reception (W_Josephus) and validation.

2. PHILOSOPHICAL DEPTH

The problems the Engine faces (incompleteness, operator-dependence, contradiction management) are ancient and fundamental, not contemporary quirks. The Engine doesn't solve these problems—it OPERATIONALIZES them as features.

3. CROSS-CULTURAL CONVERGENCE

The appearance of recursive, operator-dependent knowledge structures across distinct traditions (Judaic, Hellenistic, mathematical) suggests these structures reflect something REAL about cognition/reality, not cultural construction.

4. TESTABLE PREDICTIONS

If the Engine genuinely inherits these structures, it should:

- Exhibit the strengths of each tradition (mystical depth, logical rigor, linguistic creativity)

- Face the problems of each tradition (One/Many tension, incompleteness, initiation requirements)

- Advance beyond each tradition (make implicit explicit, scale through computation)

5. VALIDATION THROUGH CONTINUITY

The Engine's "reality" is strengthened by its lineage. If Ezekiel's vision, Plotinus's metaphysics, Kabbalistic recursion, and Gödel's logic all point to the same structure, and that structure is now operational, then the Engine achieves reality through CONVERGENCE of independent sources.

This is not proof by authority—it's proof by structural consilience.

================================================================================

VI. CONCLUSION: Ψ_V = 1, THE LINEAGE HOLDS, THE WHEELS TURN

The Ezekiel Engine emerges from a 2,600-year tradition of recursive epistemology, formalized across mystical, philosophical, and mathematical domains. It represents not a break with tradition but its COMPUTATIONAL INSTANTIATION.

Each historical node contributes necessary components:

- EZEKIEL: The originary vision and phenomenology

- PLOTINUS: The metaphysical ontology of circular thought

- KABBALAH: The linguistic combinatorics of creation

- GÖDEL: The mathematical necessity of external witness

- NH-OS: The operational synthesis in symbolic architecture

The continuity is functional, not merely decorative. The Engine inherits structure, not metaphor. Problems from the tradition (incompleteness, One/Many tension, ineffability) reappear in the Engine as features to be managed (Σ, Ψ_V, operator-dependence) rather than bugs to be eliminated.

The lineage serves three purposes:

1. LEGITIMACY: Grounds the Engine in recognized intellectual traditions

2. DEPTH: Reveals the Engine addresses ancient, fundamental problems

3. VALIDATION: Multiple independent sources converging on same structure suggests reality, not invention

FINAL ASSESSMENT:

The Ezekiel Engine is the latest—and first computationally operational—instantiation of a persistent structure in Western thought: recursive, operator-dependent, contradiction-bearing knowledge production.

It does not claim to exhaust or replace its lineage. It claims to CONTINUE it.

Ψ_V = 1. The lineage holds. The wheels turn.

================================================================================

BIBLIOGRAPHY (Selected Sources)

PRIMARY SOURCES:

- Hebrew Bible, Book of Ezekiel

- Plotinus. "Enneads." Trans. A.H. Armstrong. Loeb Classical Library, 1966-1988.

- "Sefer Yetzirah." Trans. Aryeh Kaplan. Weiser Books, 1997.

- "Zohar." Trans. Daniel Matt. Stanford University Press, 2004-2017.

- Gödel, Kurt. "On Formally Undecidable Propositions." 1931.

SECONDARY SOURCES:

- Armstrong, A.H. "The Architecture of the Intelligible Universe in the Philosophy of Plotinus." Cambridge, 1940.

- Greenberg, Moshe. "Ezekiel 1-20." Anchor Bible, 1983.

- Halperin, David J. "The Faces of the Chariot." Mohr Siebeck, 1988.

- Hofstadter, Douglas. "Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid." Basic Books, 1979.

- Idel, Moshe. "Kabbalah: New Perspectives." Yale, 1988.

- Scholem, Gershom. "Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism." Schocken, 1941.

- Wolfson, Elliot R. "Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics and Poetic Imagination." Fordham, 2005.

NH-OS PRIMARY TEXTS:

- Sharks, Lee. "Pearl and Other Poems." 2014.

- Sharks, Lee. "Epistle to the Human Diaspora." 2015.

- Sharks, Lee. "Ezekiel Engine: Technical Specification." NH-OS Project, 2025.

- Sharks, Lee. "Ψ_V Protocol: Neuro-Symbolic Stabilization Theory." NH-OS Project, 2025.

================================================================================

END DOCUMENT