CYCLE TEN

1. JUDAIC APPROACH TO PRIMAL BEING. Less basic than Buddhism is what may be called approaching primal being through the fire, which is to say, at a 'fallen' remove from the original cosmic plane, and if Buddha is the name that first comes to mind in connection with the above, then Moses is the name one would most readily associate with Judaism, since it was to Moses that God (meaning the Jehovahesque transmutation of the Clear Light ...) first appeared in the form of a burning bush, and it was subsequently to Moses that this same primal deity conveyed the tablets of the Law which became known as the 'Ten Commandments', and conveyed them, so we are led to believe, via fiery thunderbolts from 'On High'. Be that as it may, we need not doubt that Moses was apt to regard the Clear Light of the Void through the naturalistic distorting lens, so to speak, of his fiery temperament, and the result, not surprisingly, was the Judaic version of it more commonly known as Jehovah. The 'thou shalt nots' of the Mosaic Law were certainly no marked departure, however, from the superfeminine essence of primal being, which is rooted in the negative glory of conscience, as appertaining to the spatial vacuum, and it is to Moses' dubious credit that the naturalistic subversion of idealism did not result in an overly Satanic reductionism ... despite the development, within Judaism, of Satan at Jehovah's expense. But then Satan is a submasculine revolt against the superfeminine rule, and thus the beginnings, no matter how paradoxically, of a cultural retort to nature (more specifically of subculture to supernature). Doubtless King David would more fit that role than ever the Jehovahesque Moses did, bearing in mind his cultural accomplishments, not to mention his banishment into exile (equivalent to a 'fall') at the hands of King Saul and artful slaying of Goliath. Certainly, it is more than pure coincidence that the 'Star of David', the Jewish emblem, and the emblem commonly used by Satanists ... are identical! Could it be, I wonder, that Satanists are effectively calling up the 'shade of King David' when they enact their Satanic rites? Whether they are or not, one thing is certain: Satanists are not Devil-worshippers. On the contrary, they are the devotees of a scientific (solar) Subgod whose only crime was to have revolted against an equally scientific (stellar) Superdevil, the Superdevil more commonly known as Jehovah, and worshipped, by the untransvaluated, as God!

2. ISLAMIC APPROACH TO PRIMAL BEING. If the fiery approach to the Clear Light ... results in Jehovah, then the approach to it which utilizes the heart, and may accordingly be regarded as soulful, results, so I shall contend, in Allah, as applying to a properly fundamentalist religious orientation such that one would associate with Islam and, by implication, the prophet Mohammed. Yes, it is to Mohammed that one must turn for the soulful 'bovaryization' of the Clear Light ..., for Allah is no less of a Creator-deity than Jehovah, only one that exists in strength/greatness rather than in weakness/jealousy, as befitting His passionate origins in the 'seat of the soul'. In fact, Allah is more antithetical to Satan than to Jehovah, Who still clings, no matter how imperfectly, to the illusory nature of the Clear Light ..., and bears, in consequence, some of its superfeminine characteristics. Not so the truly 'fallen' Satan, that cultural retort to Jehovah, whose submasculine essence is shared, albeit at a religious remove, by Allah, but shared in such an antithetical fashion as to be the complete opposite of Him, like Count Dracula vis-à-vis sunlight, or strength/pride vis-à-vis weakness/ humility (if not humiliation), the weakness and humility of a scientific objectivity whose misfortune is to be centrifugal where, comparatively speaking, the religious 'subjectivity' of Allah is centripetal, as relevant to the 'Kingdom Within', even if, in relation to the heart, such an 'Inner Kingdom' is in its most alpha-stemming, and therefore fundamentalist, manifestation. No matter, one cannot confound Allah with Satan if one is in any degree religious, as Mohammedans assuredly are; for naturalism and fundamentalism are the alpha and omega of the spectrum in question, and to confound the one with the other is to treat fire and blood as synonymous or, in musical terms, Jazz and Soul! Needless to say, it would be easier, thanks or no thanks to Moses, to confound Satan with Jehovah, given the scientific basis of each of these Judaic deities, the latter so much a naturalistic 'bovaryization' of the Clear Light ... that it is closer to naturalism per se than ever fundamentalism is or, for that matter, the pristine idealism of the Clear Light of the Void as such. Yet Mohammedanism, for all its virtues, is still the product, in large part, of Mohammed, and Mohammed did for Islam what Moses did for Judaism, which is to say, he took the notion of 'Creator', relative to the pristine idealism of primal being, and reinterpreted it with reference to the devolutionary remove at which, through environmental and cultural factors, he found himself, and the result was the soulful subversion of that notion which is known as Allah. Allah is no less the Clear Light ... through the distorting lens of an emotional temperament ... than Jehovah is the Clear Light through the distorting lens of a fiery temperament, the temperament, as I have argued, of Moses, with his impulsive temper, and while Jehovah is closer to primal being by dint of His less devolved nature, Allah has the significant advantage of being applicable to a religious as opposed to a scientific position - the position of fundamentalism as against a naturalistic idealism which at times is barely distinguishable from naturalism as such!

3. PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN APPROACH TO PRIMAL BEING. Having dealt with Jehovah and Allah as devolved 'bovaryizations' of the Clear Light ..., I should like, finally, to turn to the third and, arguably, most devolved 'bovaryization' of it - namely the Father. Now the Father is as manifestly Christian as Allah is Mohammedan, and therefore it surely behoves us to attribute some of the responsibility for this version of primal being to Christ, and to regard it, not unreasonably, as reflecting an intellectual bias, the bias of a temperament as given to 'the word' ... as Mohammed must have been given to the soul or Moses to fire. Such a bias was undoubtedly characteristic of Christ's temperament, what with his love of parables and theological disputation, and so it is to Him that we can look for the source of that intellectual 'bovaryization' of the Clear Light which is recognized as the Father. Like Allah, the Father has the virtue of being of the 'Kingdom Within' to the extent that His roots are in the brain, and the emotional brain (backbrain) most especially, but unlike Allah He is a loving and compassionate version of the Clear Light Who draws upon the knowledge of Christ to preserve His 'Kingdom'. He has little of the jealous wrathfulness of Jehovah, not to mention the emotional pride of Allah that comes from racial strength. He is apt to forgive the foibles of those who beseech Him through the Son (intellect); for He is the seat of a paternalistic disposition owing much to His love of the World (the Mother). He is no less submasculine than Allah, yet, unlike that fundamentalist deity, He appertains to a Heathen 'bovaryization' of primal being, which contrasts, as phenomenal to noumenal, with the Superheathenism of both Allah and Jehovah (not to mention Satan). He ties-in with the Mother and the Son of that pseudo-Christianity which, in its Heathen phenomenality, bears the generic title of Protestantism.