CYCLE NINE

 

1.   One thing we can be sure of is that although in general terms freedom is more usually associated with sensuality and binding with sensibility, there is both freedom and binding, or liberty and determinism, in each context on both male and female terms, as well as with regard to the noumenal/phenomenal distinction between upper- and lower-class planes.

 

2.   What we must be sure of in our minds is whether the emphasis in any one context is on natural freedom and psychic determinism, whether on primary (female) or secondary (male) terms or, conversely, on psychic freedom and natural determinism, again with primary (male) or secondary (female) implications.  For there is all the difference in the world - and even above it - between freedom in the context of Nature and freedom in the context, by contrast, of Psyche, and any emphasis on the one must necessarily exclude or marginalize the other.

 

3.   When we view life in terms of female righteousness, which is clear in its sensual objectivity, it is obvious that freedom in terms of Nature is of especial significance, and that any contrary freedom to this, such as Psyche, will be undesirable and even discouraged as much as possible.

 

4.   When, on the other hand, we view life in terms of male righteousness, which is holy in its sensible subjectivity, it is no-less obvious that freedom in terms of Psyche is of especial significance, and that any contrary freedom to this, such as Nature, will be considered undesirable and something to avoid as much as possible.

 

5.   The former context will be one in which sensual criteria are uppermost in what may well be a largely rural environment, while the latter context should be one in which sensible criteria are uppermost in what will often be a largely urban environment.  For Nature and Civilization are the sensual/sensible environmental alternatives, and while females are still largely Nature-over-Psyche in civilized environments and males still largely Psyche-over-Nature in naturalistic ones, the fact remains that Nature will be more prevalent in the sensuality of rural environments and Psyche more prevalent in the sensibility of urban ones, with corresponding distinctions between female hegemonies in the one and male hegemonies in the other. 

 

6.   Only in some town-like balance between rural and urban environments is it likely that a balance will be struck between female and male situations, but such a balance is arguably amoral rather than either immoral in relation to a more prevalent sensuality or moral in relation to a more prevalent sensibility, and likely to make for androgynous-type criteria, of which the political doctrine of liberalism, with its dualistic balance, is a salient example.

 

7.   Those who value culture and civilization on the necessarily evil righteous terms of beauty and strength, with subordinate male positions having unrighteous reference to foolish forms of truth and knowledge, will esteem natural freedom and its corollary of psychic determinism in what are patently paganistic and/or heathenistic types of society, whereas those who value civilization and culture on the necessarily wise righteous terms of knowledge and truth, with subordinate female positions having unrighteous reference to good forms of strength and beauty, will esteem psychic freedom and its corollary of natural determinism in what can only be Christian and/or Messianic (Social Transcendentalist) types of society.

 

8.   Either one settles for freedom on the basis of evil and folly, which is of the dark in its hegemonic Nature, or one settles for it on the basis of wisdom and goodness, which is of the light in its hegemonic Psyche.  Either one is a child of darkness, for whom the sensuality of a natural freedom is the prevailing ideal and female criteria are accordingly hegemonic, or one is a child of light, given to the sensibility of a psychic freedom in which the male forms of civilization or culture are hegemonic.

 

9.   Obviously, this dichotomy is to a large extent reflective of a gender struggle, since righteousness for females is contrary, in the clearness of evil, to what it is for males in relation to the holiness of wisdom.  But it is also subject to modification in the course of time as Civilization, in the environmental sense, gets the better of Nature, and the ratio of sensuality to sensibility is accordingly reversed from a sensual predominance in rural contexts to a sensible predominance in urban ones, where the indoor lifestyle tends to take precedence - in some cases considerably - over the outdoor one. 

 

10.  Therefore it is possible to view Civilization as an instrument for the advancement of male sensibility over female sensuality, and of the transmutation of environment from rural to urban as a vehicle of male progress towards moral perfection, or a situation in which freedom is overwhelmingly identified not with Nature but with Psyche, and hence both civilized knowledge and, more importantly, cultural truth take precedence over generative strength and racial beauty, their sensible counterparts on the female, or objective, side of the gender divide.

 

11.  Certainly the Church would seem to have symbolized this interpretation of freedom through recourse to candles, the light of whose flame burns above the body of the candle-proper as a paradigm of Christian morality and the concomitant hegemony of Psyche over Nature, of psychic freedom existing in partnership with natural determinism to the greater advancement of grace, though of a grace always dependent upon the co-existent naturalism of subordinate sin.

 

12.  Even the Statue of Liberty would seem to be embodying male ideals from the basis, paradoxically, of a female form, as she clutches a book inscribed with the date of American Independence in one hand and holds aloft a torch of freedom in the other - surely something that connotes with psychic freedom rather than psychic determinism, as though in a paradigm of knowledge leading to truth.

 

13.  Be that as it may, those who uphold psychic freedom do so as a retort to the natural freedom characterizing Heathen societies and as champions of the cause of Civilization over Nature, which is by and large identifiable with Western civilization in the modern age, and especially with civilized knowledge, the relative form of wisdom owing more to cerebral sensibility than to its respiratory counterpart in the absolute realm of cultural truth.

 

14.  Cerebral sensibility, and hence civilized knowledge, can co-exist, as I have maintained in earlier texts, with both civilized strength and cultural beauty on the sensual side of life, though its partner in sensibility is traditionally and conventionally generative strength, rather like the womb under the brain, or the Mother of Christ under Christ in traditionally Catholic contexts.  It is in this fashion that the New Testament co-exists with the Old Testament, for the Saviour of the New Testament differs radically from the First Mover and Creator-God of the Old, viz. Jehovah, as civilized knowledge in relative wisdom differs from cultural beauty (or, more correctly, cultural ugliness in relation to the negativity in inorganic primacy of stellar-plane cosmos) in absolute evil, the absolute evil of clear righteousness.

 

15.  Therefore no advancement towards cultural truth, as germane to respiratory sensibility, and hence the practice of transcendental meditation, is possible so long as cultural beauty and/or ugliness still remains officially enthroned as 'God', whether negatively in relation to Jehovah in the Old Testament or positively in relation, one could argue, to the Risen Virgin in the New Testament, as we move from explicit inorganic primacy in the one context to implicit organic supremacy in the other, neither of which, being metachemical in their noumenal objectivity, are logically identifiable with divine criteria, and hence with what properly pertains to the realm of God or the godly.

 

16.  The establishment of a context in which cultural truth is officially upheld and widely practised, even if in conjunction with fresh manifestations of civilized knowledge and generative strength, as previously described by me in relation to a triadic Beyond in 'Kingdom Come', obviously requires that the existing official status accorded to cultural beauty be repudiated and cast upon the rubbish heap of religious history; for salvation from sensuality to sensibility is not possible to metaphysical males, for whom this context is especially applicable, except that they reject the hegemony of cultural ugliness and/or beauty, depending on the metachemical context, one might even say the Testament, and turn from the folly of their own grovelling racial falsity and/or truth to the wisdom of cultural truth, without which there can be no ultimate salvation and therefore no absolute wisdom and holiness, the wisdom and holiness not of men, as in the physical sensibility of civilized knowledge, but of Gods.

 

17.  Such a metaphysical context as that to which I allude above, coupled, as it would be, to physical, chemical, and (in the administrative aside to the said Beyond) even metachemical realities, is commensurate with 'Kingdom Come', and it can only come to pass in relation to a democratic mandate for religious sovereignty in what would be a paradoxical kind of election, whereby the chosen electorates of a variety of, in particular initially, Gaelic or Celtic countries, with especial emphasis on Ireland, sought deliverance from 'crimes and/or sins of the world' in the interests of their salvation and/or damnation to the graces and/or punishments' of the otherworldly Beyond of 'Kingdom Come' (which I have customarily identified, in previous texts, with a Gaelic federation ...).  Such a paradoxical election would be commensurate, I have always maintained, with Judgement, and thus with the end, to all intents and purposes, of the world ... should the People so elect. 

 

18.  And it would guarantee to them not merely deliverance from the mundane darkness of the world as well, moreover, as from the cosmic darkness of (un)natural freedom, as symbolized by the metachemical First Mover, the stellar so-called God Whose supposedly divine status is a Primal Lie that precludes Supreme Truth, but deliverance, more importantly, to the light of the ultimate psychic freedom, as and where applicable.