Preview the Centretruths eBook version of THE TOTALITY OF NATURE
Op.
79
THE
TOTALITY
OF NATURE
OR
NATURAL
TOTALITARIANISM
Cyclic
Philosophy
Copyright
©
2011 John O'Loughlin
________________
CONTENTS
1.
Cause
and Effect
2.
A
Transvaluated Overall Picture
3.
Returning
to Meaning
4.
Progressive/Regressive
Partnerships
5.
The
End of History
6.
The
Extremes of Self-cultivation
7.
Paradigmatic
Triplicities
8.
Mean
and Shadow
9.
Some
Technological Parallels
10.
Tramp
and Bum
11.
The
Justice of Judgement
12.
Justice
to the People
13.
Contrary
Fates of Rising and Falling
14.
Blessed
and Cursed vis-à-vis Saved
and Damned
15.
Contrasting
Rates of Elemental Affinities
16.
The
Reality of Right and Wrong
17.
Common
and Uncommon in Sensuality and Sensibility
18.
As
in the Beginning ...
19.
The
Moral Desirability of Culture and Civility
20.
The
Totality of Nature
___________
CAUSE
AND
EFFECT
1. Insecurity is a symptom of insanity, a
confirmation,
as it were, of what it means to be insane.
And being insane has a lot to do with what, in previous texts, I
have
described as the negativity of inorganic primacy ... as against the positivity of organic supremacy, and is
therefore due, in
no small measure, to the undue prevalence, on the metachemical
level, of materialism at the expense of fundamentalism; on the chemical
level,
of realism at the expense of nonconformism;
on
the
physical level, of naturalism at the expense of humanism; and on the
metaphysical level, of idealism at the expense of transcendentalism.
2. Thus there would seem to be a
distinction, at
one elemental level or another, between the sanity of adherence to
organic
supremacy and the insanity of adherence to inorganic primacy, a
distinction
which puts fundamentalism, nonconformism,
humanism,
and transcendentalism on the side of sanity, but materialism, realism,
naturalism, and idealism on the side of insanity, with corresponding
distinctions between confidence in relation to the one, and insecurity
in
relation to the other.
3. Insecurity is an all-too-prevalent
aspect of
modern life, of life lived not in relation to organic supremacy - at
least not
to any appreciable extent - but increasingly in response to negative
pressures
arising from the prevalence of inorganic primacy, whether in relation
to
materialism, realism, naturalism, or idealism.
4. People have never felt more insecure;
for,
due to inorganic pressures, they are not able to live in harmony with
the self,
whichever type of self (from metachemical
and
chemical to physical and metaphysical) that may happen to be, but are
at
loggerheads with it in what amounts to a kind of antiself
which is akin, speaking in Sartrean terms,
to 'iron
in the soul'.
5. Religion teaches the wisdom of living in
harmony with self, but science too often practises a doctrine of
self-division,
of self-escapism through anti-selfhood in response to contemporary
materialistic or realistic or naturalistic or idealistic pressures,
depending
on the element, viz. fire, water, vegetation (earth), or air. Hence whereas religion, when genuine, fosters
self-confidence, science undermines the self through the pressures
which
inorganic primacy bring to bear on selfhood, turning one against
oneself or,
rather, one's self in a spirit which is less selfless than
self-corrupted. And this breeds
insecurity, which is due in
no small measure to the insanity of being twisted against the self in
such an
inorganic manner.
6. Instead of being confident in relation
to
one's self, whichever type of self that may happen to be (and certainly
one
may, as a physical type, be more economic than religious or, as a
chemical
type, be more political than scientific), people demonstrate a lack of
self-confidence in the insecurity which constantly surrounds them
because they
are obliged, by technological developments, to learn new techniques or
upgrade
their existing skills or expand their range of employment commitments
beyond
anything they had known in the past.
They do not have time to cultivate self-confidence because they
are too
busy learning how to manipulate and exploit the various machines with
which
they are called upon to earn a living, and the result, all too much of
the
time, is an insecure individual whose insecurity in the face of new
technological challenges is commensurate with the extent to which such
manifestations of inorganic primacy have driven him mad.
7. In short, contemporary urban/industrial
civilization is responsible, in no small measure, for fostering a race
of
insecure individuals whose insecurity is commensurate with the extent
of their
madness in the clutches of inorganic primacy.
The more they are subject to the sway of inorganic pressures the
madder
they become and the further removed, in consequence, from that calm
self-assurance which is the product of living harmoniously with the
self in
relation to organic supremacy.
Contemporary civilization drives them mad and, short of opting
out of it
altogether, there would seem to be little or nothing they can do to
reverse the
trend of modern life towards increased insecurity.
Physically they may be secure, but mentally
and psychically they are all too often a bundle of nerves on the verge
of a
mental breakdown. For that is inevitably
the consequence of what it means to be at loggerheads with the self in
such an
inorganic fashion.
8. Short of doing away with the root causes
of
modern insecurity, there would seem to be little that the individual
can do to
return to a more self-confident lifestyle other than to completely drop
out of
contemporary society, with its urban and industrial/technological
madness. But that may appear a rather
drastic
solution, and the problem can be solved by the individual on a more
personal
and practical level, if only he takes the trouble to reduce his
commitments to
inorganic primacy and step up his commitments to organic supremacy,
thereby
having less to do with machine technology and more time, in
consequence, for
self-cultivation, whether in relation to metachemistry,
chemistry,
physics,
or metaphysics, depending on the type of person.
9. Only thus can the crippling effects of
self-division be overcome, as one establishes a closer relationship
with one's
self than would otherwise be possible. And
in that lies the key not only to confidence but also to sanity, the
bedrock of
such confidence. For
confidence is as much the effect of sanity, as insanity is the cause of
insecurity. An organic cause will
give rise to an organic effect, the secure self that is in harmony with
itself
and not twisted against itself by inorganic pressures stemming from an
over-artificial civilization languishing in the grip of inorganic
primacy.
A
TRANSVALUATED
OVERALL PICTURE
1. At one time the self counted for more
than
the not-self and selflessness. Then the
not-self and selflessness came to displace the self or, rather, to
co-exist
with an egocentric transmutation of self.
It remains to be seen whether, in future, the not-self and
selflessness
are displaced by the self, albeit in terms of a self which owes more to
the
omega of things than ever it does to the alpha.
2. That is just
the
point! At one time the self was
alpha-stemming and absolutist on an instinctive basis which one can
equate with
the id, the most basic manifestation of self.
Then the world intervened and such a self found itself eclipsed
by the
not-self and selflessness on a variety of levels, from metachemical
and chemical to physical and metaphysical.
Only a relativistic self, which is called the ego, could
co-exist,
whether primarily or secondarily, with such a worldly mean.
3. But
if the world is to be overcome, then the self will once again have to
come back
on the agenda, only on the most antithetically conceivable terms to how
it
began - namely on the omega-oriented and absolutist basis of the soul,
which is
the self conceived in relation to essence ... as that which remains
when all
else has passed away.
4. One might say that, in general terms,
life
devolves from the alpha ... of the id-self to the world ... of the
not-self and
selflessness in co-existence with the ego-self, and then evolves from
the
latter to the omega ... of the soul-self, which is as much beyond the
world as
the id-self was before or behind it.
5. At least that is how I would normally
have
thought of the overall picture; although I can see no reason why it
shouldn't
be possible to reverse the above and speak of life evolving from the
alpha ...
of the id-self to the world ... of the not-self and selflessness in
co-existence
with the ego-self, and then devolving from the latter to the omega ...
of the
soul-self, so that the return to self is conceived in terms of
devolution from
the world rather than of evolution beyond it.
6. Thus an evolutionary divergence from
id-self
to not-self and selflessness, and a devolutionary convergence from
not-self and
selflessness to soul-self via ego-self.
To evolve away from the self and to devolve back to it again,
albeit on
the most antithetical terms conceivable.
7. For evolution surely presupposes the
evolving
of not-self and selflessness at the expense of the self, which is the
world
replacing the alpha paradise, call it 'Garden of Eden' or whatever,
while
devolution surely presupposes the devolving from the not-self and
selflessness
to the self, which is the omega paradise, call it post-Human Millennium
or
whatever, replacing the world, with its egocentric relativity.
8. Hence evolution from the id-based alpha
paradise to the world, and devolution from the egocentric world, with
its
various orders of will and spirit, to the soul-centred omega paradise -
self in
the Beginning and in the End, albeit on the most antithetical
conceivable
terms.
9. Such is how I now view the overall
picture of
life, especially human life, on this planet, and it is one which
suggests that
worldly life is but a passing parade that must one day give way to the
otherworldly life which puts the focus back on the self at the expense
of all
that, in contemporary life, alienates one from selfhood, especially the
inner-most selfhood which is commensurate with the soul.
RETURNING
TO
MEANING
1. Human life requires meaning if it is to
progress and not simply stagnate in a swamp of moral decay. For without meaning it becomes reduced to a
matter
of mere survival, and survival too easily revolves around propagation,
and
hence sex.
2. Perhaps things are not quite as bad as
that
these days, but it was not so long ago that sex and, via sex,
propagation was
the virtual be-all-and-end-all of things, as people lived not in
relation to
something beyond and greater than themselves, but merely in relation to
physical survival in a meaningless universe.
3. Such, at any rate, was the negative
doctrine
under which so many of them lived, and it is small wonder, in
consequence, that
sex became so all-important, and eternity (to the extent that the term
figured
at all) was reduced to generative persistence through propagation.
4. Such must continue to remain the fate of
those who refuse to attribute meaning to life or who, blinded by
intellectual
mentors of an Existentialist or a Nihilistic persuasion, find it
undesirable to
do so. For so long as life is regarded
as meaningless, it ceases to have any value beyond sexual reproduction. But as soon as you introduce meaning into
life, it becomes an experiment in self-transcendence in which the world
is but
a passing parade and life - human life in particular - an ongoing
voyage of
self-discovery.
5. Meaninglessness hails from a vacuum and
is
accordingly of female persuasion.
Meaningfulness, on the contrary, stems from a plenum and is
accordingly
of male persuasion. An age or society
that champions or recognizes the pre-eminence of meaninglessness will
be
dominated by female criteria in typically 'free' vein.
One that recognizes the pre-eminence of
meaningfulness, on the other hand, will be led by male criteria in
typically
'bound' vein. The former will be 'open',
the latter 'closed'. The one will be
secular and ... left wing, the other religious and ... right wing.
6. The twentieth
century was, by and large, an age of meaninglessness.
It remains to be seen whether the
twenty-first century can officially embrace meaningfulness in one or a
number
of countries and move beyond 'freedom' into a higher order of binding
than that
which obtained during the more authentically Christian centuries of,
for
example, Western civilization.
7. Only binding or loyalty through faith to
a
'higher way', a new meaning for life or interpretation of life, can
deliver man
from the vacuous freedoms which continue to reduce life, in typically
meaningless vein, to survival, both physical and sexual.
But only where man has the courage to be
'true' to himself, or his gender, and stand up for that which stems
from a
plenum and gives meaning to his existence ... can a new meaningfulness,
a new
doctrine of progressive life, come to pass.
Man needs the courage to be loyal to himself
if
he is to have the will to subscribe to this new doctrine and the
confidence to
advance it.
8. And what is this new doctrine? Precisely that life, if it is to have
meaning, real purposeful meaning, must depart the worldly rule of the
not-self
and selflessness and return more absolutely to self conceived in terms
of the soul. Only thus will redemption of
the ego come to
pass, especially of the metaphysical ego, and life become orientated
towards a
final paradise which owes nothing to the so-called Edenic
paradise from which mankind expelled themselves during the course of
their
evolution towards the world.
9. Thus because the world increasingly
manifests
itself as a context of 'freedom', of meaningless survival in relation
to
not-self and selflessness, it is fitting that the world should be
rejected by
those men who are capable of being 'true' to themselves, in order that
progress
can be made in climbing beyond it towards the heights of that paradise
where
binding to self is of the very essence of meaning, and nothing more
meaningful
could ever be envisaged.
10. For it is only with regard to binding to self
at the expense of freedom from self or, rather, of freedom for
not-self
and selflessness that the world, conceived in relation to the dominance
of, in
particular, the female, or objective, manifestations of these latter
entities,
can be overcome, to be replaced by a society in which otherworldly
criteria of
a truly paradisiacal order become paramount.
Such is the meaning of 'Kingdom Come', which will be a kingdom
beyond
the world rather than either of or before it.
PROGRESSIVE/REGRESSIVE
PARTNERSHIPS
1. To distinguish between progressive
evolution
from the id-self to the not-self and selflessness and regressive
evolution from
the not-self and selflessness to the soul-self, as between that which
leads
from the alpha paradise to the world, including the ego-self, and that
which
leads from the latter to the omega paradise in relation to
natural/synthetic
orders of not-self and selflessness.
2. To distinguish between regressive
devolution
from the not-self and selflessness to the id-self and progressive
devolution
from the not-self and selflessness to the soul-self, as between that
which
leads away from the world, including the ego-self, to the alpha
paradise and
that which leads away from the world to the omega paradise in relation
to
natural/synthetic orders of self.
3. Hence to further distinguish, on the one
hand, between progressive evolution and regressive devolution, as
between the
development of not-self and selflessness at the expense of the id-self
and the
rejection of not-self and selflessness in favour of the id-self.
4. Hence to further distinguish, on the
other
hand, between regressive evolution and progressive devolution, as
between the
rejection of not-self and selflessness in relation to naturalistic
criteria and
the development of the soul-self.
5. That which progresses and regresses in
relation to naturalistic criteria does so both from the alpha paradise
to the
world and from the world to the alpha paradise, whereas that which
progresses
and regresses in relation to synthetic criteria does so only from the
world to
the omega paradise, not from the omega paradise to the world.
6. Regressive evolution from the world is
designed, in its synthetic transmutation of naturalistic criteria in
relation
to the not-self and selflessness, to serve progressive devolution from
the
ego-self to the soul-self.
7. Regressive devolution from the world has
the
effect, in rejecting the not-self and selflessness from the standpoint
of the
id-self, of countering progressive evolution from the id-self to the
ego-self.
8. Thus whereas regressive evolution from
the
world would manifest in the synthetic transmutation of not-self and
selflessness in the interests of the soul-self, regressive devolution
from the
world manifests in the rejection of not-self and selflessness in the
interests
of the id-self.
9. That which returns us to 'the Garden',
viz.
the alpha paradise, is a very different proposition from that which
would
advance us towards the post-Human Millennium, viz. the omega paradise. The former operates within naturalistic
criteria and the rejection of artificiality, the latter in relation to
synthetic criteria that are designed to operate in harmony with the
self, and
are not therefore at artificial variance with it.
10. It is in relation to regressive
evolution/progressive
devolution that one should view Social Transcendentalism, the religious
basis
(so far as I am concerned) of 'Kingdom Come', which is therefore
antithetical
to all forms of neo-primitivism, including fascism, but is not on that
account communist,
i.e. worldly on a socialist/proletarian basis, and hence no more than a
more
exclusively democratic attenuation of the world. Social
Transcendentalism
has nothing less
than world-overcoming as its raison
d'être, for it is that
which leads beyond the world to the omega paradise of 'Kingdom Come'.
11. It fully accepts, however, that such
world-overcoming as would lead to a new order of society in which, for
example,
religious sovereignty was the norm can only be achieved by using the
means of
the world, viz. democracy, to advance beyond the world, so that the
final
decision as to whether the world is overcome in relation to the
development of
'Kingdom Come' rests with the People, the electorate, themselves, and
is not
and never could be something imposed upon them from above.
12. For the People must demonstrate a willingness
to entertain salvation from the world to the otherworldly context of
'Kingdom
Come' if the latter is authentically and legally to come to pass, and
to come
to pass in relation to a specific politico-religious structure which
has been
named Social Transcendentalism and which appeals, initially, to peoples
of
Gaelic descent living first and foremost in Ireland (North and South),
but
also, in the longer term, in countries like Scotland and Wales, not to
mention
islands like the Isle of Man, so that the end-result would be a Gaelic
federation of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales in which not political
sovereignty
but religious sovereignty was the appropriate mode of sovereignty for
peoples
who had democratically elected - in judgmental vein - to be delivered
from the
world, with its sins and/or punishments, to the omega paradise in its
inceptive
manifestation.
THE
END
OF HISTORY
1. A people who had democratically opted to
advance beyond the world to the inceptive manifestation of the omega
paradise,
viz. 'Kingdom Come' conceived in terms of a federal structure in which
political sovereignty had devolved upon a 'God-King' in return for the
religious sovereignty that his truth alone had made possible ... would,
under
Social Transcendentalism, have effectively passed beyond history, since
where
Eternity takes over from the temporal comings and goings of the world
there
must necessarily be an end to history, which is of the world.
2. Hence 'Kingdom Come' will be beyond
history
in the sense that its structure is commensurate with Eternity for mass,
volume,
and space, the three planes of what, in previous texts, I have
described as the
triadic Beyond. Should 'Kingdom Come'
initially manifest, as I would like, in a Gaelic federation of Ireland,
Scotland, and Wales, then those countries would have passed out of the
becoming
of worldly history and into the being of otherworldly eternity, even if
still
subject to the sway or influence of history from, in particular,
countries
still very much a part, for the foreseeable future, of the world.
3. The important thing to grasp is that
history
effectively ends with Eternity, with the coming to pass of 'Kingdom
Come',
since history is a reflection of the world, and once the world has been
democratically and peaceably overcome, then the return to self in terms
of soul
is as much posterior to history as adherence to the primitive id-self
was
anterior to it. So until 'Kingdom Come',
there can be no end to history but, rather, the perpetuation of history
in
conventional, and even unconventional, terms.
4. Both the alpha paradise of adherence to
the
id-self and the (coming) omega paradise of adherence to the soul-self
are
outside of history, or the record of worldly unfolding.
For the very nature of paradise is its
timelessness in relation to an absolutist identity with the self, and
whether
that paradise be apparent (and instinctual) or essential (and soulful),
it will
be eternally independent of worldly becoming.
5. If mankind 'fell' from paradise, it was
in
terms of an evolutionary progression from the id-self towards the
not-self and
selflessness of the egocentric world.
If, in the future, mankind (or a certain section of it
initially)
returns to paradise, it will be in terms of a devolutionary progression
from
the world towards the soul-self, which we may term a 'rise' and equate,
in
consequence, with the resurrection of the worldly 'dead' to the Life
Eternal.
6. In reality the worldly 'dead' are either
subject to the life-in-death of purgatorial punishment or the
death-in-life of
earthly sin, broadly identifiable with the distinction between
Protestants and
Catholics, especially with regard to the ethnic divisions of Ireland,
but,
either way, they can be saved from their respective worldly fates to
the
otherworldly Beyond ... of 'Kingdom Come', wherein history has no
meaning.
7. That man who is saved from the history
of
worldly becoming passes into the eternity of otherworldly being, and
for him
the only thing that really matters is self-realization and, ultimately,
self-transcendence.
8. For to transcend one's self one must
first of
all know one's self, to know oneself as either chemical (and feminine),
physical (and masculine) or metaphysical (and divine), so that one
knows what
kind of self it is that has to be transcended, and how.
9. Knowing oneself is thus not only a
precondition of transcending one's self, but a precondition of knowing
whether
one's mode of self-transcendence will be in giving (and feminine),
taking (and
masculine), or being (and divine), and accordingly germane to the
bottom tier
of mass, the middle tier of volume, or the top tier of space within the
otherworldly context of the triadic Beyond.
10. By and large people of Puritan background
would be in the bottom tier, people of Anglican background in the
middle tier,
and people of Roman Catholic background in the top tier, even though
each tier
would be subsectioned on a three-way basis
in
relation to disparate manifestations of nonconformism,
humanism,
and
transcendentalism, according to the overall dictates of the
elemental context.
11. All tiers, however,
would be of eternity in their deliverance from worldly temporality, and
hence
history. For mass, volume, and
space are not of time but independent of time, especially in the
sensible
manifestations of mass, viz. massed; volume, viz. voluminous; and
space, viz.
spaced, that would typify the triadic Beyond.
12. The only context of 'Kingdom Come' still open
to time would be the administrative aside to the Centre, as I have
often termed
the triadic Beyond itself, and such an aside, the focal-point of a
Christ-like
sacrifice of bearing political 'sins and/or punishments of the world'
in the
interests of the People's salvation from them through religious
sovereignty in
the event of their having democratically opted to be saved from the
world,
would be very sensibly of repetitive time in its refined service of the
Centre
or, more correctly, Centre proper.
THE
EXTREMES
OF SELF-CULTIVATION
1. As I have indicated, one can go in one
of two
directions from the world - either backwards to the instinctual idiocy,
so to
speak, of the id-self or forwards to the emotional sublimity
of the soul-self; backwards to the alpha paradise of self-identity or
forwards
to the omega paradise of self-identity, the former apparent and
superficial,
the latter essential and profound.
2. People are going backwards and forwards
all
the time, even when they are recognizably of the world, and therefore
more
disposed to the not-self and selflessness in tandem with the ego-self
than to
either of the self-oriented extremes. In
that event, they go backwards a bit or forwards a bit, depending on
their
natures, and sometimes they go both backwards and forwards at the same
time or,
at any rate, within the space of a short timespan.
3. Doubtless there are many paradigms of
such
departures from the world to either of the self-oriented paradises,
and we know them or are ignorant of them according to our capacities
for
knowledgeable insight. Take parks, for
example. Are they not symbolically Edenic in their profusion of plant life and
plethora of
simple creatures, from birds and fish to insects and small animals. The
contents of parks may vary from park to
park, but by and large it is not an omega paradise, but an alpha
paradise, a
paradise closer to primeval instinct that is signified by the existence
of such
places, with their tamed countryside for the town and/or city.
4. A person who spends time in the park,
whether
a little time or a lot, is effectively returning to the id-self and
thus
abandoning the world, with its buildings and streets, for an alpha
paradise in
which instinctual life urbanely proliferates.
He is getting back to 'the Garden' in his desire to establish a
closer
relationship with nature, and for him parks are a necessary antidote to
the
city.
5. So going to the park, innocent as it
might
seem, is one of those things a person does when he is of a mind to put
the world
to one side for a while and return, no matter how temporarily, to the
sort of
paradise which is closer to the id than to the soul, being more alpha
than
omega. He may not know this, but that is
nevertheless what a park is, and people spend time in them according to
their
needs and/or insights.
6. Now take the opposite tendency to going
backwards from the world to an alpha paradise - namely, going forwards
from the
world toward an omega paradise, a paradise which is inner rather than
outer,
profound rather than superficial, centripetal rather than centrifugal,
essential rather than apparent, and likely to accord, in consequence,
with the
self conceived essentially ... in relation to the soul.
7. At present I can think of no better
example
of this phenomenon, relatively crude though it is, than a shopping
centre,
especially when there is a certain amount of watery and/or plant life
to be
found in the more pedestrian parts of the environment and, tired of
walking,
one can sit in quite close proximity to nature without having to endure
-
shopping centres without a roof excepted - the inclemencies
of the weather or otherwise put oneself at risk of becoming too 'open'.
8. Now shopping centres may seem to some
people
a curious choice for establishing an antithesis to parks, but they do,
as a
rule, contain nature, whether in watery or plant form, and nature is an
important symbol for mankind of the self, to the extent that it is
generally
closer to self than to either not-self or selflessness, being fixed and
self-absorbed
in its simple, straightforward kind of way.
9. At the time of writing, early in the
twenty-first century, I can say quite categorically that 'Kingdom Come'
hasn't
yet come to pass, and that the world accordingly still exists, to
varying extents,
in all or most countries, especially the West, where it has tended to
peak, so
to speak, in relation to economics, and hence commerce.
The coming of a religious concept of or
approach to 'the Centre' is still, to all intents and purposes (my own
theorizing
excepted), a thing of the future, and consequently it is not surprising
that
centres tend, like shopping centres, to be commercial, or places where
one can
buy and/or sell a variety of produce and products.
10. Hence the shopping centre is pretty much the
'state-of-the-art' situation as it stands at present of what I have
described
as an antithesis to parks, and is thus a kind of embryonic or crude
omega
paradise, a paradise that holds hope of future expansion and
modification in
the direction of religion but which, at this juncture in time, is still
firmly
commercial and thus centred around economics, specifically with regard
to
capital gain.
11. Nevertheless shopping centres provide a
fledgling alternative to the world, with its buildings and streets, its
urban
not-selves and selflessnesses, and it
seems to me
that anyone who is of a mind to go forwards from the world toward an
omega
paradise can do no better, at present, than to visit a shopping centre
and
spend some time meditating or contemplating or whatever in proximity to
a
fountain or a boxed-in arrangement of plant and/or floral life.
12. Of course, one can meditate at home, just as
one can sample plant life in one's back or front garden if one happens
to have
one, but on an analogue with parks it is to the shopping centre that
one must
go if one wishes to sample a taste of the omega paradise as it
currently exists
in the world, and thus go some way towards the self inwardly and
essentially
rather than, as with parks and gardens, outwardly and apparently.
13. And the more one
does
this, the less, it seems to me, will one want to visit parks, with
their vast
open spaces and Edenic associations. One will have become too progressive to have
much time or taste for regressing away from the world in an
alpha-oriented
direction. One's devolution from
not-self and selflessness will be forward-tending, not
backward-tending, and
therefore one will identify less with the id than with the soul.
14. For the soul-self
can
only be cultivated on the basis of an inward-tending orientation, and
to have
such an orientation one needs to be indoors rather than outdoors. Meditating in the park would, frankly, be a
contradiction in terms!
PARADIGMATIC
TRIPLICITIES
1. Parks - buildings/streets - shopping
centres:
this, then, is one of the paradigms of our id-self - not-self and
selflessness/ego-self - soul-self triplicity,
i.e.
the
world flanked by anterior and posterior paradises.
In point of fact it is really more of a quadruplicity,
with
not-self and selflessness standing
apart from ego-self; but for the sake of simplicity and clarity I will
persist
with a tripartite structure. Let us now
take some alternative paradigms.
2. Like cassettes - radio - CDs within the
midi
framework, where radio is a kind of worldly parallel beamed from
stations of
established knowledge and/or strength, in which the not-self and its
selfless
corollary are predominantly discernible, and cassettes or, rather, the
cassette-decks in which cassettes can be played tend to suggest a
closer link
to the self, particularly in connection with the use of blank tapes for
recording purposes, as, from an arguably profounder standpoint, do CD
drives
for the playing of compact discs.
3. Thus the midi that is 'liberal' or
pluralistic in this way would suggest the possibility of two
self-oriented
alternatives to the world, i.e. radio, one of which would correspond,
in its
comparatively superficial and apparent presentation of centrifugal
unfolding,
to an alpha paradise, and the other of which, in its comparatively
profound and
essential presentation of centripetal unfolding, would correspond to an
omega
paradise.
4. Such pluralistic midis would indeed
present
the individual with two alternatives to the worldly radio,
and the individual subject to such alternatives might find himself
utilizing
the cassette deck at one moment and the CD-player the next, thereby
effectively
alternating between the mechanical equivalents of his id-self and his
soul-self.
5. Of course he might choose, in the course
of
time, to utilize one rather than the other, the 'outer' approach to the
self as
opposed to the 'inner' approach to the self or vice versa, and there
are even
individuals who won't have anything to do with such pluralistic
devices, either
because they are not up to them from the standpoint of a strong id-self
bias or
are too progressive for them from the standpoint of a strong soul-self
bias, in
which case they will favour radio-cassette players or radio-CD players
or,
stronger again, cassette players or CD players, not forgetting,
however, those
whose more inveterately worldly bias precludes them from bothering with
anything much beyond and/or behind the radio.
6. Whatever the individual case, it seems
to me
that a park-like parallel can be inferred where the cassette deck
and/or
cassette player is concerned, which would contrast with the
shopping-centre-like parallel of the CD-player, whether in connection
with a
midi or not, and that radio, standing in between the more self-oriented
extremes of sound reproduction, induces a relatively worldly inference
along
the lines of buildings and/or streets, so that it is less of the self
(except
egocentrically) than of the not-self and selflessness.
7. In terms of the above-mentioned
parallels, it
should logically follow that a person with a strong bias for parks over
shopping centres would prefer cassette players, and hence cassettes, to
CD
players, whereas a person with a strong bias for shopping centres over
parks
would prefer CD players, and hence CDs, to cassette players. People with no particular bias either way, on
the other hand, would be happier with midis, if not radios, in what
could
metaphorically be described as a comparatively middle-of-the-road
orientation.
8. In relation to literature, it may be
that
books correspond, in their various permutations, both hardback and
paperback,
to the world, whereas 'books' on cassette, marketed as 'spoken word',
would,
like their musical counterparts, correspond to the id-self, while
'books' or
other literary presentations on CD, by contrast, would assume an
omega-oriented
correlation commensurate with the soul-self.
9. Hence books would parallel radio as the
medium of the world, while both the paradises, alpha and omega, would
have 'the
word' reproduced on either cassettes or CDs - cassettes tending at
present to
prevail over CDs where the spoken word is concerned by dint, I would
guess, of
their greater if not more accessible audio capacity, with CDs being
reserved for
optical storage of more voluminous compilations, like encyclopaedias
and
'collected-works' presentations of old masters.
10. Despite my own suspicion that establishment
literature prefers to regress towards the alpha than progress towards
the
omega, I see a future for both the optical and audio presentation of
original
literary works on CD, and am confident that CD or equivalent media
(like DVD)
will supersede both tapes and books in the course of time, particularly
if and
when the world is 'overcome', no matter how partially, in the interests
of
'Kingdom Come'.
11. Another parallel to the id-self - ego-self (in
conjunction with not-self and selflessness) - soul-self triplicity
that could be mentioned is one which takes a culinary or, rather,
cutlery form,
as in the use of knife and fork with most types of conventional dinner
being
regarded as of the world, but the use of fork held in the right hand in
scooping fashion being considered as of the alpha paradise on account
of its
superficial absolutism, the absolutism, almost, of a fascist salute,
but the
use, by contrast, of a tablespoon held in such fashion suggesting an
omega
orientation by dint of its profounder absolutism, the absolutism, again
to cite
a saluting analogy, of the clenched fist.
12. Be that as it may, I find it impossible to
escape the conclusion that our eating habits, including the means with
which we
raise food to our mouth, can be no less revealing of our ideological or
moral
position than the use of various technologies or environmental
persuasions, and
that as a man eats, so can he be judged!
MEAN
AND
SHADOW
1. The theory of 'means' and 'shadows',
which I
first explored in my previous text, Bringing the Judgement, has
to do
with the relationship between a predominating not-self and a
subordinate
not-self which is paradoxically complementary to it from a contrary
standpoint,
be that standpoint sensual or sensible, noumenal
or
phenomenal.
2. To begin with, it helps to establish the
distinction between the objective axes of space-time and volume-mass,
both of
which are female, and the subjective axes of mass-volume and
time-space, both
of which are male.
3. Hence the plane of space is divisible
between
the objectivity of spatial space and the subjectivity of spaced space,
while
the plane of time is divisible between the subjectivity of sequential
time and
the objectivity of repetitive time, space-time accordingly falling
diagonally
from spatial space to repetitive time, time-space, by contrast, rising diagonally from sequential time to
spaced space.
4. Likewise the plane of volume is
divisible
between the objectivity of volumetric volume and the subjectivity of
voluminous
volume, while the plane of mass is divisible between the subjectivity
of massive
mass and the objectivity of massed mass, volume-mass accordingly
falling
diagonally from volumetric volume to massed mass, mass-volume, by
contrast,
rising diagonally from massive mass to voluminous volume.
5. Thus the axes of space and time, which
are noumenal and hence
upper class, afford us a distinction between the female
objectivity of
space-time and the male subjectivity of time-space, while the axes of
volume
and mass, which are phenomenal and hence lower class, afford us a
distinction
between the female objectivity of volume-mass and the male subjectivity
of
mass-volume.
6. Scholars of my work - if there are any -
will
recall at this point that whereas the objective is rooted in a vacuum
and tends
either to diverge in sensuality or converge in sensibility on a
straight-line
basis, the subjective, by contrast, is centred in a plenum and tends to
diverge
in sensuality or converge in sensibility on a curved-line basis.
7. Hence the femaleness of
objectivity and, by implication, both space-time and volume-mass, but
the
maleness of subjectivity and, by implication, both mass-volume and
time-space.
8. Just as one cannot be both noumenal and phenomenal, upper class and lower
class, at
the same time, so one cannot be of space-time and volume-mass or,
alternatively, of mass-volume and time-space to an identical degree,
since the
one tends to preclude the other and both, moreover, are subject to a
gender
specific integrity, so that he who is of time-space tends not to have
that much
to do with space-time and vice versa, while he who is of mass-volume
tends not
to have that much to do with volume-mass, although neither can be
completely
ruled out.
9. Since these four axes are inseparable
from a
given element, be it fire in relation to space-time, air in relation to
time-space, water in relation to volume-mass, or vegetation (earth) in
relation
to mass-volume, they operate with regard to the various orders of
not-self and
selflessness, will and spirit, both on and across the gender divide,
from the female
elements of fire and water, which are objective, to the male elements
of
vegetation and air, which are subjective.
10. Hence space-time can be organically translated
into a distinction between the eyes and the heart, while time-space
affords one
a like distinction between the ears and the lungs, the former in each
case
sensual and the latter sensible.
11. Likewise volume-mass can be organically
translated into a distinction between the tongue and the womb, while
mass-volume affords one a like distinction between the penis and the
brain, the
former in each case sensual and the latter sensible.
12. Hence quite apart from the gender specific
axes of space-time and time-space, corresponding to eyes-heart and
ears-lungs,
the plane of space is divisible between the objectivity of the eyes and
the
subjectivity of the lungs, while the plane of time is divisible between
the
subjectivity of the ears and the objectivity of the heart.
13. Hence quite apart from the gender specific
axes of volume-mass and mass-volume, corresponding to tongue-womb and
penis-brain, the plane of volume is divisible between the objectivity
of the
tongue and the subjectivity of the brain, while the plane of mass is
divisible
between the subjectivity of the penis and the objectivity of the womb.
14. Now as I have argued in the past, so I shall
continue to argue that a hegemonic upper-class, or noumenal,
position,
be
it sensual or sensible, tends to encourage a contrary lower-class,
or phenomenal, position, whereas a hegemonic lower-class, or
phenomenal,
position, be it sensual or sensible, tends to encourage a contrary
upper-class,
or noumenal, position.
15. Within the male gender options, which the
reader will recall are subjective and elementally divisible between
vegetation
and air, the phenomenality of a hegemonic
penis will
tend to co-exist with the noumenality of
subordinate
lungs, the former sensual and the latter sensible, while, conversely,
the noumenality of hegemonic lungs will
tend to co-exist with
the phenomenality of a subordinate penis,
the former
sensible and the latter sensual.
16. Likewise the phenomenality
of a hegemonic brain will tend to co-exist with the noumenality
of subordinate ears, the former sensible and the latter sensual, while,
conversely, the noumenality of hegemonic
ears will
tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of
a
subordinate brain, the former sensual and the latter sensible.
17. Within the female gender options by contrast,
which the reader will recall are objective and elementally divisible
between
fire and water, the phenomenality of a
hegemonic
tongue will tend to co-exist with the noumenality
of
a subordinate heart, the former sensual and the latter sensible, while,
conversely, the noumenality of a hegemonic
heart will
tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of
a
subordinate tongue, the former sensible and the latter sensual.
18. Likewise the phenomenality
of a hegemonic womb will tend to co-exist with the noumenality
of subordinate eyes, the former sensible and the latter sensual, while,
conversely, the noumenality of hegemonic
eyes will
tend to co-exist with the phenomenality of
a
subordinate womb, the former sensual and the latter sensible.
19. Thus, on the male side of life, either the
penis or the lungs will be hegemonic in the one case, and either the
brain or
the ears in the other case, with the subordinate complement always
standing as
a 'shadow' to the prevailing 'mean', be it sensual or sensible,
vegetative or
airy, noumenal or phenomenal, which is to
say, upper
class in time-space or lower class in mass-volume.
20. Thus, on the female side of life, either the
tongue or the heart will be hegemonic in the one case, and either the
womb or
the eyes in the other case, with the subordinate complement always
standing as
a 'shadow' to the prevailing 'mean', be it sensual or sensible, fiery
or
watery, noumenal or phenomenal, which is
to say,
upper class in space-time or lower class in volume-mass.
SOME
TECHNOLOGICAL
PARALLELS
1. Technology mirrors such 'mean' and
'shadow'
positions as have been outlined above, and one or, rather, two such
instances
of a technological mirroring can be found in the all-too-prevalent
media of
televisions and computers, both of which, I shall argue, are of an
objective
and hence female disposition.
2. Television would seem to be the
principal
manifestation of a parallel to spatial space, be it with regard to the
eyes or,
more inorganically, the stars in stellar-plane mode, and to the 'mean'
of this
eye-based medium must be added the 'shadow', ever subordinate to the
prevailing
technology, of video recorders and/or players, so that one ends up with
a
situation in which metachemical sensuality
co-exists,
as the dominant partner, with chemical sensibility, as though in
reflection of
eyes over womb or, in inorganic terms, of the stellar plane over the
oceanic
aspect of planet Earth.
3. Thus it could be said that the
relationship
of television to video is akin to spatial space to massed mass, which
is akin,
in metaphorical language, to a 'Liberty Belle' parallel co-existing
with a
'Fallen Whore', video-recorders and/or players being open to any number
of
different video tapes, both pre-recorded and blank.
4. Therefore the relationship of television
to
video would be of an objective noumenal
sensuality
standing above an objective phenomenal sensibility as upper-class
'mean' to
lower-class 'shadow', the one outer and the other inner.
5. Let us now consider the possibility of
the
reverse of this double-edged female situation, which would be that of a
lower-class 'mean' standing above or, rather, in a more dominant
relationship
to an upper-class 'shadow', the one phenomenally sensible and the other
noumenally sensual, though both alike would
be objective.
6. To my mind, the only technological
paradigms
of such a situation would be of CPUs vis-à-vis VDUs in computers, since
the
CPU, or central processing unit, is the principal manifestation of the
computer, is indeed the computer itself, while the VDU, or visual
display unit,
is simply the screen upon which all data and videos originating from or
via the
CPU are shown.
7. Hence the VDU stands in a subordinate
relationship to the CPU, which can be regarded as the 'mean' of
computers, and
such a subordinate position, akin to a situation in which eyes are
'shadow' to
the womb or stars to the oceanic aspect of planet Earth, would mean
that with
computers the spatial space/massed mass partnership is the reverse of
what it
is with televisions and videos, so that one could infer the hegemony of
chemical sensibility over metachemical
sensuality.
8. Certainly the CPU is a 'pregnant'
entity, to
speak in womb-coloured metaphor, not only with regard to the hard disc
but also
in respect to the sustained use of CDs and/or compact floppies, and I
fancy
that if we are not dealing here with some technological parallel to the
'Fallen
Whore' alluded to above, then we are dealing with one that parallels
the
'Blessed Virgin' in what would amount to a sort of 'Marian'
manifestation of
the womb that could only invite a symbolic analogue, as far as the VDU
'shadow'
was concerned, with the 'Risen Virgin'.
9. Thus in complete contrast to the
'Liberty
Belle'/'Fallen Whore' parallelism of television and video recorder,
corresponding to spatial-space 'mean' and massed-mass 'shadow', one
would have
for CPUs and VDUs a 'Blessed Virgin'/'Risen Virgin' analogue in which
massed
mass was 'mean' and spatial space 'shadow', thereby suggesting the
overall
distinction between televisions and computers to be one of emphasis
rather than
kind, since both would appear to accord with female objectivity in
relation to
space and mass.
10. And such
objectivity,
as we have already discovered, has more to do with eyes and womb than
with,
say, tongue and heart, even though the latter cannot be wholly excluded. Neither, on the other hand, could a Venusian and lunar parallel, a parallel with the
planet
Venus and the moon, be completely excluded from what I have argued is
basically
one between the stellar and oceanic planes where analogies invoking an
inorganic alternative to organic supremacy are concerned.
11. Probably inorganic primacy is more applicable
than organic supremacy in discussing technology anyway, given the
materialistic
and realistic correlations that particularly accrue to such media as
televisions and computers at the expense, one could argue, of
fundamentalism
and nonconformism, their organic
counterparts.
12. Be that as it may, my understanding of the
above media would not have been possible without a prior philosophical
knowledge of the relationship between 'means' and 'shadows' on both a
gender
specific, i.e. objective or subjective, and a class specific, i.e. noumenal or phenomenal, basis, and I flatter
myself to
think that my own attitude as a male - and a godly male who both
meditates and
practises philosophy - towards them will be less enthusiastic or
supportive
than might otherwise have been the case, weary though I have always
been of, in
particular, television and video.
TRAMP
AND
BUM
1. People can often be heard saying that
such
and such a person - almost invariably a man - is a 'tramp' or that such
and
such a person is a 'bum', but, in reality, no-one who fits such a
pejorative description
is or ever can be exclusively the one thing or the other.
2. In reality, those who approximate to
what the
generality of people think of as 'tramps' or 'bums' are both 'tramps'
and
'bums', since it is as impossible to tramp about all day as to spend
one's
entire time sitting on one's 'bum', i.e. backside, when common sense
alone
dictates that one alternates, in one degree or another, between the two
contexts, the context of walking around and the context of sitting down.
3. Consequently there are no 'tramps' and
no
'bums', since those so described (whether relatively fairly or
unfairly) are,
in reality, both 'tramps' and 'bums' and thus, effectively,
'tramps/bums'.
4. But the
generality
of people, who after all are comparatively unthinking, will persist in
imagining the contrary, simply because they have never bothered to
think about
the situation very deeply or comprehensively, whether through laziness
or
because they have no real experience of being 'tramps' and/or 'bums'
themselves.
5. Consequently they continue to delude
themselves that such and such a person is a 'tramp' or a 'bum' when, in
point
of fact, that is only half of the overall picture in relation to what
is
perceived at the time.
6. Were they less dependent on their eyes
for
information and more capable of independent thought, such of course
would not
be the case, but the great majority of people, being psychologically
commonplace, are incapable of detaching their minds from what they see,
and
consequently what they see conditions
what they
think.
7. In reality, those who are so dominated
by
their eyes, their sight, that they almost invariably allow what they
see to
condition their thinking, often while they are actually seeing it, are
not just
fundamentally evil - for all people are that in greater or lesser
degree - but
openly or unashamedly evil, whether through ignorance or wilful intent.
8. They make no attempt to disguise their
lust
for sight-conditioned thought and would, one fancies, be quite
incapable of not
thinking about anything their eyes latch upon were they put to the
test, so
much does thinking - and usually negatively - about what they see seem
to them
a perfectly natural and acceptable occurrence.
9. Those of us who can detach our minds
from
what we see, who don't invariably comment derogatorily upon what
crosses our
field of vision, particularly where other people are concerned, will
not have
too high an opinion of the type of people described above, but will
rather tend
to despise them for the openly evil and superficial idiots they
actually are!
10. If one doesn't wish to allow one's eyes to
condition one's thinking, particularly in the manner described, it is
because
one knows the eyes to be fundamentally evil in their metachemical
disposition and not something to give free rein to in consequence,
least of all
to an extent that the mind becomes dominated by them in patently heathenistic and - let's face it - female
fashion.
11. It is also because one prefers peace of mind
to a troubled and angry mind, and can see no reason why the mind should
be
allowed to succumb to the influence of sight to such an extent that it
is no
longer a noble thing but a grossly aggressive and aggrieved thing that
would be
more of a burden than a help.
12. Let them keep their petty little vulgar and
negative minds if that's what they want or, more to the point, is all
they are
capable of, because being able to surmount the dominating influence of
their
eyes would be beyond their limited capabilities.
13. And let us nobler types continue to turn away
from the ignoble mob, as from all mob types, lest we become corrupted
by their
psychic poison and lose what self-possessed integrity we have managed
to secure
for ourselves in the face, so often, of their superficial provocation.
14. For the mob is a nasty thing, evil to the core
and unconcerned with higher values, and all those who follow the ways
of the
mob will sooner or later succumb to mob values at the expense of what
is true
and noble, casting stones of 'tramp' or 'bum' upon those who deserve
better but
will never get it from the aggressively superficial.
THE
JUSTICE
OF JUDGEMENT
1. Justice, all higher justice, cries out
for
vengeance against the mob, especially the democratic mob of so-called
people's
agitators and bullies. At present the
mob is still 'king', but if justice is to be done to the higher man,
with his
higher values, including the divine prerogative of truth, then another
type of
'king' must come to the fore to displace from his throne the lying and
hypocritical 'king' who passes for democratic sovereignty and the rule,
in
consequence, of the world.
2. For only the
displacement from his worldly throne of the false king, the sovereign
mob, can
lead to 'Kingdom Come', and thus to the 'God-Kingship' that recognizes
no other
sovereign besides truth and the religious sovereignty that would be its
logical
corollary.
3. Such a displacement, however, can only
proceed by using the world's democratic methodology, the electoral
process, on the
basis of the most paradoxical election in countries and by peoples who,
not
overly enamoured of worldly criteria, would be capable of and willing
to use it
paradoxically, so that the end result, in the event of a majority
mandate for
religious sovereignty, was the democratic overcoming of the world and
the
institution, thereafter, of 'Kingdom Come', as described above.
4. Only in countries and with peoples who
would
be capable of respecting religious sovereignty because of a
sufficiently
religious orientation could such a paradoxical election take place, but
before
it can take place there has to be recognition, by the peoples
concerned, of the
inherent Messianic credibility of he who offers them religious
sovereignty,
since such a man - in reality a God - is the nearest thing to a
Second-Coming
equivalent there is or is ever likely to be, and one must be capable of
anticipating such a Coming if one is likely to take him seriously in
the first
place.
5. I believe the Gaelic peoples, and in
particular the Irish, would be capable of recognizing the bearer of
religious
sovereignty as the Second Coming, and it is for this reason that I have
appealed to them to consider well the opportunity for deliverance from
the
world, with its sins and/or punishments, which acceptance of my
teachings
entail, since there can be no 'Kingdom Come' without a majority wish,
democratically expressed, for religious sovereignty - the ultimate
sovereignty
- and an end, in consequence, to the false kingships of the democratic
world.
6. Judgement beckons, and Judgement, in
this
ultimate sense, is about turning away from the world and embracing the
prospect
of the otherworldly 'Kingdom' which has been prospectively identified
with a
Gaelic federation ... of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales in what would
amount to a
grouping of religiously sovereign peoples presided over by a
'God-King', no
mere mortal but one who, corresponding to a Second Coming in his
Messianic
credibility, was or had been the means by which the world could be
democratically
overcome ... in the interests of his great gift of religious
sovereignty and
the right, by the religiously sovereign people, to religious
self-determination
in what has been described as a triadic Beyond, commensurate with the
religious
aspect of 'Kingdom Come'.
7. I do not say right to 'spiritual'
self-determination, for spirituality is too limited and, in the West,
hyped a
word or tendency to have anything much beyond feminine and, in
particular,
bottom tier applicability in our projected triadic Beyond.
No, I say 'religious', which includes,
besides spirituality, both intellectuality and, more importantly for
those who
are entitled to it, emotionality of the sort that is commensurate with
the soul, and the metaphysical soul most
especially.
8. Hitherto, in the West, the soul has got
rather a raw deal, having been marginalized to the Afterlife, while
spirituality, particularly in the guise of the Holy Spirit, has been
hyped out
of all proportion to its true worth, the worth, in metaphysics (where a
holy
order of spirituality is alone applicable - more, traditionally, in
relation to
sensuality than to sensibility), of a secondary order of heaven and a
third-rate order of spirit, a type of spirit and of heaven which is but
a
means, for the metaphysical ego, or universal self, to
self-transcendence and
thus to the overcoming of ego in soul, the trans-universal self, so to
speak,
of the resurrected 'Son', who, as metaphysical ego, is a first-rate
order of
God become, via the metaphysical spirit and, more initially,
metaphysical will,
a first-rate order of heaven.
9. Thus soul, not spirit, is the
be-all-and-end-all of religion, genuine religion, such that embraces the
truth, whether sensually or, in my case, the case of an advocacy of the
ultimate 'kingdom within' as germane to 'Kingdom Come', sensibly, and
for that
reason one cannot speak of a Trinity along the lines of Father, Son,
and Holy
Spirit and/or Ghost, since such a thing is meaningless and nonsensical
without
reference to a holy order of soul such that is the raison
d'être of religious striving and justification, in consequence, of
Fathers,
Sons or, rather, of Sons, Fathers, and Holy Spirits to begin with,
since
Son-into-Father-through-Holy-Spirit-equals-Holy-Soul, which is the
resurrection
of the Son, i.e. the metaphysical ego, as (temporarily and
intermittently) the
Holy Soul of Heaven, i.e. the metaphysical soul, which is the result of
what
happens to metaphysical ego when it has entrusted itself to both the
metaphysical will and spirit, the Father and the Holy Spirit (to speak
in
theological language) of, in inner terms, the lungs and the breath in
what
amounts to the sensible context of metaphysics, and salvation,
in
consequence, from metaphysical sensuality, i.e. religion centred not in
the lungs
and the breath ... of an ultimate 'kingdom within', but in the ears and
the
airwaves ... of an ultimate 'kingdom without', the sort of 'kingdom',
alas,
upon which the penultimate 'kingdom within' of Christ's vegetative
sensibility
of the brain-centred 'word' backs, as upon a metaphysical anchor to its
own
physical 'rebirth'.
10. But just as the mob rules with democracy, so
the mob has ruled and to some extent continues to rule with
Christianity, with
its more genuine, or Catholic, manifestation in particular, whereby
man-hype in
Christ has tended to monopolize sensible notions of godhead to the
exclusion of
what is genuinely godly ... as germane to the metaphysical context
alone, the
cerebral physics of vegetative sensibility falling back upon the aural
metaphysics
of airy sensuality, as upon a more generalized and primitivistic
Father, the
Father of New Testament usage vis-à-vis Christ.
11. But that Father, the Creatoresque
Father of 'once-born' metaphysics, Who is nevertheless more genuinely
godly
than Christ, is precisely what one must be saved from if one is to
climb the
axis of time-space from ears to lungs, the airwaves to the breath,
metaphysical
sensuality to sensibility, and thus achieve an accommodation, through
the
Second-Coming equivalent, with an ultimate 'kingdom within', no mere
penultimate 'kingdom within' of lower-class Christianity, but that
which, in
saving from the ultimate 'kingdom without' of aural sensuality, brings
the
metaphysically Saved to a superior position to Christ in which not
cerebral
sensibility but respiratory sensibility is the norm, in keeping with
the
metaphysically 're-born' law of 'Kingdom Come'.
12. And in 'Kingdom Come' the ultimate truth
(compared to sensual metaphysics) ... of respiratory sensibility will
take precedence,
in the top tier of our projected triadic Beyond, over both cerebral
sensibility
and uterine sensibility (as one might call the womb-based sensibility
of
maternal spirit), the physical and chemical shortfalls, in volume and
mass,
from the metaphysical sensibility of spaced space, as religiously
exemplified
by transcendental meditation.
JUSTICE
TO
THE PEOPLE
1. The preachers of equality have nothing
in
common with the bringer of religious sovereignty and advocate of
'Kingdom
Come'; for they reduce everything to the lowest-common-denominator of
worldly
'mud', wherein the mob bogs down in its own punishment and sin, whereas
he
opens up the prospect, for salvation-minded Gaels, of a triadic Beyond
in which
persons of Puritan, Anglican, and Roman Catholic denominational
background
would find a tier, duly subdivided along tripartite lines, according
with their
moral and elemental entitlement.
2. In other words, there is no equality
between
so-called men in 'Kingdom Come' except it be the equality of Social
Transcendentalism and an end, in consequence, to worldly schisms. Rather is there a distinction between the
chemical, the physical, and the metaphysical, as between women, men,
and gods.
3. He who identifies his destiny with a
Second
Coming, a Messiah who saves Catholics to a higher order of sensibility
than
that to which Christ would have related, while yet maintaining or
insisting on
new orders of phenomenal salvation (for Anglicans) and damnation (for
Puritans), as, in general terms, for men and women under gods, has
nothing in
common with those who reduce everyone to 'man' and insist that all are
equal
before God.
4. On the contrary, not even men and women
are
equal to one another, never mind either of the phenomenal commonality
of
lower-class persons to those who stand above them as either devils or
gods, noumenal elites of upper-class
persons who have as much in
common with them as beauty or truth with strength or knowledge or, in
emotional
terms, love or joy with pride or pleasure.
5. To preach the equality of all is to fly
in
the face of elemental reality and do a disservice not only to devils
but to
gods as well, seeking, as far as possible, to exclude them from
anything like a
bona
fide existence as, in the event of not being able to
completely exclude beauty and truth, one twists beauty and truth out of
all
recognition to what they would be in societies that did justice to
either the
one or the other, in an attempt to accommodate them to the hegemony of
strength
and/or knowledge, as the case may be.
6. Thus with everything and everyone
reduced to
the world, to the mud of a mobocracy of
woman and/or
man hype, depending by and large on whether feminine or masculine,
Protestant
or Catholic values are paramount, the preachers of equality can live
safely in
the lie that all are equal before God, and that God created all men
equal!
7. Quite apart from the absurdly primitivistic and superstitious nature of their
concept of
God, which no self-respecting meditator
would ever
allow himself to even remotely identify with, such unthinking and
profoundly
subversive people are really the enemies of God, as of the Devil, since
nothing
genuinely godly or devilish can flourish where the criteria of men and
women,
whether with a masculine bias for mankind or a feminine bias for
mankind, are
sacrosanct, as they tend to be in the mud-slavering world of both the
Christian
democratic and anti-Christian democratic mobs.
8. Whether sensible or sensual, Catholic or
Protestant, republican or parliamentary, such preachers of and
believers in
equality are nonetheless less than convinced of their own equality with
one
another, as recent history attests, and are more inclined to preach the
equality of all Catholics or of all Protestants or of all republicans
or of all
parliamentarians than of Catholics with Protestants or vice versa, or
of
republicans with parliamentarians or vice versa.
9. For in reality men and women are no more
equal to one another than, say, devils and gods, and even when you have
effectively excluded devils or gods from your worldview or, failing
that, even
when you have a grudging bias for devils over gods or for gods over
devils,
depending on the type of worldly system, still the inequality of men
and women,
as of masculine and feminine, sin and punishment, knowledge and
strength,
pleasure and pride, remains,
and
no amount of lying or
self-deceiving baloney can alter what is an inexorable fact!
10. Even the preachers of equality find it
difficult to be completely convinced of their doctrine; for no-one is
entirely
bereft of leanings which owe something, though not everything, to the
opposite
sex, never mind to devils or gods, and both strength and knowledge are
obliged
to bow before a perverse concept of each other from the standpoint of
their
respective partisans, as well as embrace an even more perverse concept
of
beauty and/or truth.
11. I have no time for the swinish preachers of
equality and their swamp of worldly mud, in which they would have all
mankind,
and not a few other kinds, bog down for Christian or democratic,
ecclesiastical
or secular good; for they are enemies of the People who demean the
People by
casting them in images of earthly or purgatorial equality which lead to
stagnation and bad feelings and not a few bad smells, to boot!
12. The true deliverer of the People from such
class enemies has no time for equalitarian nonsense and the
mealy-mouthed
hypocrisy which so often accompanies it; for he knows that the People
are more
heterogeneous than these belittling swine who preach equality could
possibly
imagine or would want to admit, and that only when the People are
delivered
from the equalitarian class enemy will they be able to live with one
another on
the unequal basis of women, men, and gods that the triadic Beyond would
be
determined to advance, to the greater advantage not merely of strength
and
knowledge but, more especially, of truth, without which there can be no
hope
for the liberating future and no escape from the crippling past!
CONTRARY
FATES
OF RISING AND FALLING
1. I recently saw a television recording of
a
well-known
2. You can only save or damn that which is
animate and capable of rising or falling, in consequence, from
sensuality to
sensibility within the class and gender parameters of a given elemental
axis,
be it fiery and metachemical, watery and
chemical,
vegetative and physical, or airy and metaphysical.
3. Consequently to speak of the salvation
of
4. Another irony not wasted on me was that
the
cleric to whom I allude above was not a Catholic but a Protestant, and
consequently not someone who would relate, in Catholic vein, to the
phenomenal
salvation of males from mass to volume, as, in vegetation, from phallus
to
brain, and to the phenomenal damnation of females from volume to mass,
as, in
water, from tongue to womb - the former through Christ and the latter
its
Marian corollary.
5. On the contrary, Protestantism in the
British
Isles, and Ulster not least of all, is divisible between the blessed
hegemony
of Presbyterians and Puritans in volumetric volume and the cursed
under-position,
as it were, of Anglicans in massive mass, the former affiliated to the
tongue
in watery sensuality and the latter to the flesh (including the
phallus) in
vegetative sensuality, neither of them germane to contexts of salvation
or
damnation in consequence of their 'once-born' standings within what
amounts to
an inverted triangle.
6. Consequently not only can you not
save or
damn an abstraction like Ulster, but you cannot save or damn
Protestants within
the clerical parameters of Presbyterian/Puritan anti-Christianity and
Anglican
pseudo-Christianity, since both salvation and damnation presuppose an
advancement from sensuality to sensibility, the 'once-born' outer to
the
're-born' inner, and require a Catholic resolve, in consequence, to
keep the norms
of brain and womb sensibly in place, in what is effectively a
non-triangular
framework.
7. Of course, there is less sensibility to
Roman
Catholicism these days and more sensuality, as befitting the age, an
age of heathenistic criteria, but of the
type of sensuality that
is germane to the ears and thus to a 'once-born' order of metaphysics
in what
has been generally described as 'the Father'.
8. Therefore both Protestants and Catholics
exist, by and large, in contexts of sensuality, of blessed or cursed
Heathenism
in which 'once-born' criteria are effectively, if not officially,
paramount,
and one gets tongue over phallus in the one case, that of Protestants,
and eyes
over ears in the other case, that of Catholics - the former in each
case
germane to the female aspect of things and the latter to its male
aspect.
9. Hence both Protestants and Catholics can
be
saved and/or damned from sensuality to sensibility in relation to what
I have
described as the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come', wherein the
Presbyterian/Puritan
'first' shall be bottom-tier Social Transcendental 'lower last' and the
Anglican 'last' shall be middle-tier Social Transcendental 'lower
first', and
Catholics shall be top-tier Social Transcendental 'upper first' if
sufficiently
airy and metaphysical, but administrative-aside Social Transcendental
'upper
last' if habitually more fiery and metachemical.
10. For just as the phenomenal corollary of rising
to brain from phallus in vegetative
sensibility is falling to womb from tongue in watery sensibility, so
the noumenal corollary of rising to lungs
from ears in airy
sensibility is falling to heart from eyes in fiery sensibility, and the
latter
would be very much germane to the administrative aside that serves the
triadic
Beyond, though always with a noumenal bias
that
ensures that truth remains hegemonic over both knowledge and strength,
and
people of Catholic descent consequently remain religiously above those
of
Protestant descent, who will be divided between the bottom two tiers of
our
triadic structure.
11. But structure we have, not utopian 'pie in the
sky' or 'castles in the air' or overly partisan concepts of the Beyond
such
that would exclude a 'new purgatory' and a 'new earth' from what with
me
becomes, in the triadic Beyond, a 'new heaven' in metaphysics over both
physics
and chemistry.
12. Yet the latter would not be a rehash of
Catholic tradition, the sort of tradition which aural decadence would
seem, in
any case, to have left in its wake, but rather strength and knowledge,
womb and
brain, conditioned by inner truth, by lungs, and therefore coloured by
factors
which had not existed before, since Catholicism falls back on the ears,
a
sensual and outer mode of truth and godliness which is precisely that
from
which one must be saved, if one wishes to achieve an accommodation with
metaphysical sensibility.
13. But if the Catholic Father vis-à-vis the
Catholic Christ and Virgin Mary is a kind of New Testament reality, it
must be said
that clerical sleight-of-hand easily accommodates the Old Testament,
and thus
the rule, within a pyramidal triangle, of Jehovah over Satan, of
stellar over
solar, with a peripheral Venusian parallel
to
complete the heathenistic structure in
which female
criteria are hegemonic over male criteria, whose Satanesque
solar 'fallen angel' is accordingly 'fall guy for slag'.
14. Such, however, is the 'once-born' rule for the
negativity of inorganic primacy, wherein ugliness and hatred dominate
falsity
and woe, in typically cosmic fashion.
15. The 'once-born' rule for the positivity of organic supremacy, on the other
hand, is
beauty and love dominating truth and joy, like eyes over ears, and
perhaps here
we should be talking rather more in terms of, say, Moses or, rather,
Saul and
David than of Jehovah and Satan.
16. Be that as it may, Catholicism is no less
disposed, at bottom, than Protestantism to falling back on heathenistic
criteria of a 'once-born' and therefore sensual nature, and it is for
this
reason that Risen-Virgin fundamentalism often gets the jump, so to
speak, on Fatheresque transcendentalism,
as the eyes pull upper-plane
rank on the ears, spatial space over sequential time, like the
sensuality of
framed painting over the sensuality of scored music.
17. I do not 'buy' and have never 'bought' such a heathenistic situation, and that is why I am
against
Catholicism no less than Protestantism and anxious to save and/or damn
both
Catholics and
Protestants to the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come', wherein the
'rebirth' of sensibility is paramount and one can infer a male hegemony
over
the female side of life in saved consequence!
18. With Social Transcendentalism there would be
no falling back on Biblical falsehoods and hypocrisies, but an end,
once and
for all, to the lies that have held people back from the truth and
which
continue so to do, regarding as supreme being that which, in reality,
is
germane to primal doing in the cosmic realm of inorganic primacy, which
is
negative, and to supreme doing in the universal realm of organic
supremacy,
which is positive.
19. Either way, that which is germane to being
becomes 'fall guy for slag', i.e. Satanic and/or Davidian
'Devil', and a taboo on the notion of a counter-Cupidian
axis is consequently maintained, to the exclusion of metaphysical
salvation (as
from sensuality to sensibility, ears to lungs in organic supremacy).
20. I have exposed the lie, the great delusion and
crime at the roots of Bible-inspired religion, and it is for the People
to
judge of the veracity of what I have written in due course and,
hopefully, to
act accordingly, voting, when the time is ripe, for religious
sovereignty and
deliverance, in consequence, not only from 'sins and/or punishments'
(depending
on one's ethnicity) of the world, but, no less importantly, from the
type of
Biblical falsehoods and primitivistic
limitations
that continue to identify the concept of God with Creator, and with a
cosmic
'first mover' moreover, so that that which in reality is metachemical
and diabolic gets to play that which is metaphysical and divine, and
all within
the necessarily heathenistic and
un-Christian
parameters of 'once-born' antinot-selves,
as germane,
in particular, to the cosmos-slavering Old Testament.
21. One cannot be saved from the Old Testament
'Father', since that is on an axis which falls from sensuality to
sensibility,
as from stellar to Venusian, Jehovah to (I
would
guess) Allah, and even to be saved from solar to Saturnian,
rising
from
negative sensuality to sensibility, would be less than organic,
and
therefore something less concerned with truth and joy than with falsity
and
woe. No, one can only be saved from ears
to lungs in organic supremacy, rising from sensual truth and joy in the
not-self/selflessness of ears and airwaves to sensible truth and joy in
the
not-self/selflessness of lungs and breath, wherein the positivity
of supreme being is at its profoundest peak.
22. Thus the metaphysically Saved must turn away
from the Ear Father and the Airwaves Holy Spirit of Heaven if they are
to
embrace the ultimate Holy Soul of Heaven via both the Lung Father and
the
Breath Holy Spirit of Heaven, achieving the transcendence of inner Ego
Son in
due process of soulful resurrection.
23. Such is the
doctrine
that speaks to the metaphysically Cursed, seeking their deliverance
from
sensuality to sensibility and an end, for them, to the spatial
upper-plane
hegemony of the metachemically Blessed,
all those
fire-devils who nonetheless pass for gods in the realm of Risen-Virgin
fundamentalism.
24. This doctrine of the Social Transcendentalist
way to 'Kingdom Come' also speaks to the physically Cursed, that they
may turn
away from the volumetric upper-plane hegemony of the chemically Blessed
and
cease, in consequence, to live under a feminine shadow and the heathenistic freedoms which are permitted to the
blessed
Free.
25. For until those
affiliated to the male side of life take a lead in opting from
sensuality to
sensibility, there will be no damnation of those affiliated to its
female side
from sensuality to sensibility, and no end to the hegemony of heathenistic criteria in consequence!
26. Let the People mark my words well; for the
'Day of Judgement', in which they must judge me and via me themselves,
is at hand,
and nothing short of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty can
or will
deliver the peoples concerned (see 'The Justice of Judgement' above)
from the
blessed freedoms and/or cursed enslavements, according to gender, of
the 'once
born' to the saved bindings and/or damned constraints of the 'reborn'.
BLESSED
AND
CURSED VIS-À-VIS SAVED AND DAMNED
1. The notion that God blesses is a
contradiction in terms. It is not for
God or the godly to bless but to save, and to save the metaphysically Cursed from their enslavement to the freedoms of
the metachemically Blessed.
2. Hence it is not God that blesses but, in
effect, the Devil, the diabolic 'first mover' of things from whom the
'fallen
angel' escaped, as from the hell of stellar primacy in spatial space to
the
comparative heaven of solar primacy in sequential time, primal doing to
primal
being.
3. For the 'first-mover' Creator Devil
is
blessed with hegemonic ascendancy in space over the 'fallen angel' fall
guy
for
slag in time, and is accordingly of the context, in inorganic
primacy,
which is blessed with freedom for itself and from which, in
consequence, the
blessings of freedom for the relevant female antinot-self
(of
stellar
primacy) may be inferred.
4. Of course, when one talks of 'first
movers'
and 'fallen angels' one automatically limits and restricts oneself to
the
cosmic negativity of inorganic primacy, wherein only negative noumenal values like ugliness and hatred in
relation to
cosmic metachemistry, and falsity and woe
in relation
to cosmic metaphysics may be said to apply.
5. To speak of love and beauty in relation
to
universal metachemistry or truth and joy
in relation
to universal metaphysics, on the other hand, is to put oneself 'beyond
the
pale' of Old-Testament usage in what would, in effect, be closer to the
New
Testament, wherein organic supremacy tends to prevail at the expense of
inorganic primacy, being in some sense superimposed upon it, and one
can
accordingly conceive of the outer metachemical
in
terms of the Risen Virgin and the outer metaphysical in terms of the
Father,
neither of which would owe anything, in Jehovahesque
or Satanic outer fashion, to either the stellar plane or the solar
plane but,
on the contrary, would parallel the eyes and the ears respectively,
contexts of
sensual organic supremacy in which only positive values, corresponding
to the
'once-born' manifestations of supreme doing and supreme being, could be
said to
exist.
6. Hence because blessing or the fact of
being
blessed appertains to the ascendant female position in, for instance,
spatial
space over the under-plane position of the male in sequential time, it
follows
that it is the Risen Virgin who is blessed and/or who blesses from a heathenistic or 'once-born' standpoint, whereas
the Father,
corresponding to the ears, is cursed in relation to what in the Risen
Virgin
is, after all, an organic manifestation of the Devil, since of that
which is
organically enslaved to the stellar or, rather, optical freedom for the
outer noumenal not-self which reigns above.
7. Thus in this positive noumenal
context of sensual universality, no less than in its cosmic and
negative
counterpart, it is the New-Testament Risen Virgin, corresponding to a
sensual
manifestation of the Devil, who is blessed and the New-Testament
Father,
corresponding to a sensual manifestation of God, who is cursed ... with
enslavement to the former's freedom.
8. Salvation in positive metaphysics, the
divine
context of airy sensuality and sensibility, is of course from ears to
lungs,
and consequently one must abandon the former in order to be saved to
the
latter, abandoning the Father, as it were, as binding to metaphysical
self
takes the place of enslavement to the metachemical
not-self of the Risen Virgin or equivalent 'once-born' blessed context
of
diabolic hegemony in organic supremacy.
9. For salvation is about binding to self
for
males, whether that self be physical in Christ or metaphysical (as
above) in
the Second-Coming equivalent, whereas that from which one achieves
salvation
would have been enslaved to the free not-self of either the blessed
woman or
the blessed devil, the fleshy phallus duly subservient to the tongue in
the one
context and the ears duly subservient to the eyes in the other, so that
in
cultural terms, for instance, literature (and drama in particular)
would be
entitled to pull rank on sculpture, and painting likewise entitled to
pull rank
on music.
10. Having the self, which is ever subjective and
primary on the male side of life, enslaved by the free not-self of the
ascendant
female aspect of things is indeed a curse, not a blessing, for only the
hegemonic devil and/or woman is blessed, in due heathenistic
fashion, with an ascendant and therefore dominating position from which
she is
free to do and/or give her blessed most.
11. Being saved from the curse of enslavement to
the free ascendancy of the metachemically
and/or
chemically Blessed, on the other hand, is to achieve a binding to self,
which
then causes the female side of things, whether diabolic in space-time
or
feminine in volume-mass, to fall diagonally from sensuality to
sensibility,
wherein the relevant not-selves are placed under constraints which
preclude
their being of any real threat to the hegemonic subjectivity of the
bound males
in physics and/or metaphysics.
12. Thus constraint on the female not-selves in
sensibility is the corollary of binding to self for saved males, and
instead of
a heathenistic situation in which males
are
effectively cursed with under-plane enslavement of self to an ascendant
female
not-self, one has the much more desirable situation, from a male
standpoint, in
which females are no longer objectively dominant over males but
sensibly
subservient to them in either Christian or, with my teachings, Social
Transcendentalist terms, the terms not of womb under brain, but of
heart under
lungs.
13. It is always necessary to constrain the female
side of things in sensibility, because with females, whether noumenally diabolic or phenomenally feminine,
the not-self
is primary and the self secondary on account of the objectivity of
their
vacuously-conditioned dispositions, which drives them
outwards.
14. Self for females is not what comes first but,
on the contrary, what comes second to a dominant not-self, which is
alone
capable of first- or second-rate status in will and/or spirit, power
and/or
glory.
15. For males, on the other hand, it is the other
way around, both the ego and the soul of formal and contented selfhood
capable,
depending on the elemental context, of first- or second-rate status,
and
consequently males will always be less than satisfied, deep down, with
any
situation in which the self is obliged to bow before a not-self
hegemony. That is truly a cursed
situation, and
therefore something from which to be saved and, moreover, from which to
seek
salvation.
16. For salvation is, of course, a male
prerogative, since it alone pertains to the male side of life and is
something
which is agreeable to males on account of their bias for self and
corresponding
interests in achieving, through binding
to self, either a first-rate order of soul (and correlative second-rate
order
of ego) in sensible metaphysics or a first-rate order of ego (and
correlative
second-rate order of soul) in sensible physics, the former salvation
germane,
so I teach, to 'Kingdom Come' and the latter very much the lower-class
way of
Christian tradition.
17. Females can never achieve anything more than
third- and fourth-rate orders of soul and ego, as germane to that
which, being metachemical or chemical,
appertains like beauty/love and
strength/pride to the female side of life, and consequently they have a
vested
interest, you could say, in exploiting first- and second-rate orders of
will
and spirit in their respective sensual not-selves in order to maintain
hegemonic standings over males, whose will and spirit in physical and
metaphysical sensuality is never more than third- or fourth-rate, as
germane to
knowledge/pleasure and truth/joy.
CONTRASTING
RATES
OF ELEMENTAL AFFINITIES
1. To contrast the first-rate power of the
will
to do metachemically through
not-selfish, i.e.
of the not-self, beauty with the fourth-rate power of the will to do
metaphysically through not-selfish truth, and each of these noumenal
absolutes with the phenomenal relativity of the second-rate power of
the will
to do chemically through not-selfish strength and the
third-rate power
of the will to do physically through not-selfish knowledge.
2. To contrast the first-rate glory of the
spirit to give chemically through not-selfish, i.e. of the
not-self,
pride with the fourth-rate glory of the spirit to give
physically
through not-selfish pleasure, and each of these phenomenal relativities
with
the noumenal absolutism of the second-rate
glory of
the spirit to give metachemically
through
not-selfish love and the third-rate glory of the spirit to give
metaphysically through not-selfish joy.
3. To contrast the first-rate form of the
ego to
take physically through selfish, i.e. of the self, knowledge
with the
fourth-rate form of the ego to take chemically through selfish
strength,
and each of these phenomenal relativities with the noumenal
absolutism of the second-rate form of the ego to take
metaphysically
through selfish truth and the third-rate form of the ego to take
metachemically through selfish beauty.
4. To contrast the first-rate contentment
of the
soul to be metaphysically through selfish, i.e. of the self,
joy with
the fourth-rate contentment of the soul to be metachemically
through selfish love, and each of these noumenal
absolutes with the phenomenal relativity of the second-rate contentment
of the
soul to be physically through selfish pleasure and the
third-rate
contentment of the soul to be chemically through selfish pride.
5. That which, as will, does,
always does
apparently, from the most apparent context of the metachemical
will to the least apparent context of the metaphysical will via the
more
(relative to most) apparent context of the chemical will and the less
(relative
to least) apparent context of the physical will. For
the
will, being affiliated to elemental particles,
is ever a thing of appearances.
6. That which, as spirit, gives,
always
gives quantitatively, from the most quantitative context of the
chemical spirit
to the least quantitative context of the physical spirit via the more
(relative
to most) quantitative context of the metachemical
spirit and the less (relative to least) quantitative context of the
metaphysical spirit. For the spirit,
being affiliated to molecular particles, is
ever a
thing of quantities.
7. That which, as ego, takes,
always
takes qualitatively, from the most qualitative context of the physical
ego to
the least qualitative context of the chemical ego via the more
(relative to
most) qualitative context of the metaphysical ego and the less
(relative to
least) qualitative context of the metachemical
ego. For the ego, being affiliated to
molecular wavicles, is ever a thing of qualities.
8. That which, as soul, is, always
is
essentially, from the most essential context of the metaphysical soul
to the
least essential context of the metachemical
soul via
the more (relative to most) essential context of the physical soul and
the less
(relative to least) essential context of the chemical soul. For the soul, being affiliated to elemental wavicles,
is ever a thing of essences.
9. To do in
relation to
beauty, strength, knowledge, and truth, descending, as it were, from
first- to
fourth-rate orders of power.
10. To give in relation
to pride, love, joy, and pleasure, descending from first- to
fourth-rate orders
of glory.
11. To take in relation
to knowledge, truth, beauty, and strength, descending from first- to
fourth-rate orders of form.
12. To be in relation
to
joy, pleasure, pride, and love, descending from first- to fourth-rate
orders of
contentment.
13. To combine, in the
fiery devility of metachemistry,
a
first-rate
power with a second-rate glory, a third-rate form and a
fourth-rate contentment, thereby descending from will to soul via
spirit and
ego.
14. To combine, in the
watery femininity of chemistry, a first-rate glory with a second-rate
power, a
third-rate contentment and a fourth-rate form, thereby descending from
spirit
to ego via will and soul.
15. To combine, in the
vegetative masculinity of physics, a first-rate form with a second-rate
contentment, a third-rate power and a fourth-rate glory, thereby
descending
from ego to spirit via soul and will.
16. To combine, in the
airy divinity of metaphysics, a first-rate contentment with a
second-rate form,
a third-rate glory and a fourth-rate power, thereby descending from
soul to
will via ego and spirit.
17. Metachemistry,
being
of the will per
se, is the context of powerful appearances par
excellence, and hence of beauty.
18. Chemistry, being of the spirit per
se,
is the context of glorious quantities par excellence, and hence
of
pride.
19. Physics, being of the ego per
se,
is the context of formal qualities par excellence, and hence of
knowledge.
20. Metaphysics, being of the soul per
se,
is the context of contented essences par excellence, and hence
of joy.
THE
REALITY
OF RIGHT AND WRONG
1. What is evil?
That which is free in blessed hegemony over the male side of
life,
whether metachemically or chemically,
absolutely or
relatively, in relation to the noumenal
objectivity
of spatial space or to the phenomenal objectivity of volumetric volume.
2. And what is good? That
which
has been brought low from a
blessed hegemony in objective sensuality to a damned constraint (upon
not-self)
in objective sensibility, passing from spatial space to repetitive time
in the noumenal context of metachemistry
and from volumetric volume to massed mass in the phenomenal context of
chemistry.
3. Therefore whereas evil is free and 'once
born', goodness is constrained and 'reborn', though both alike
appertain to the
female side of life in either absolute (and metachemical)
or
relative
(and chemical) terms.
4. What is folly? That
which
is enslaved in cursed subservience
to a female hegemony, whether metaphysically or physically, absolutely
or
relatively, in relation to the noumenal
subjectivity
of sequential time or to the phenomenal subjectivity of massive mass.
5. And what is wise? That
which
has been raised up from a cursed
enslavement in subjective sensuality to a saved binding (to self) in
subjective
sensibility, passing from sequential time to spaced space in the noumenal context of metaphysics and from massive
mass to
voluminous volume in the phenomenal context of physics.
6. Therefore whereas folly is enslaved and
'once
born', wisdom is bound and 'reborn', though both alike appertain to the
male
side of life in absolute (and metaphysical) or relative (and physical)
terms.
7. No less than evil is inextricably linked
to
freedom (of not-self) for female sensuality to dominate male sensuality
in
either eyes (noumenal) or tongue
(phenomenal),
goodness is just as inextricably linked to constraints upon the freedom
(for
not-self) of female sensibility in either heart (noumenal)
or
womb
(phenomenal).
8. And no less than folly is inextricably
linked
to enslavement (of self) by male sensuality in either ears (noumenal)
or phallus (phenomenal), wisdom is just as inextricably linked to
binding (to self)
for male sensibility in either lungs (noumenal)
or
brain
(phenomenal).
9. Now whereas the 'free female' is evil
and the
'enslaved male' a fool, the 'constrained female' is good and the 'bound
male'
wise.
10. Whereas 'the evil' are blessed with the
hegemonic
position of unconstrained freedom over males, 'the good' are damned by
constrained freedom to a subservient position under males.
11. And whereas 'the foolish' are cursed with the
subservient position of enslaved binding under females, 'the wise' are
saved by
the hegemonic position of unenslaved
binding over
females.
12. What is right and what is wrong?
Clearly it is right for males that they
should be delivered from sensuality to sensibility, rising diagonally
through
two planes in either lower-class (phenomenal) or upper-class (noumenal) terms, so that they are no longer
foolishly
enslaved but wisely saved from such a curse, which is wrong for them.
13. Clearly it is right, from a male standpoint,
that females should be delivered from sensuality to sensibility,
falling
diagonally through two planes in either upper-class (noumenal)
or lower-class (phenomenal) terms, so that they are no longer evilly
free but
goodly damned from such a blessing, which is wrong for males.
14. Thus whereas both evil
and folly are wrong, since heathenistically
outer,
goodness and wisdom are right, since non-heathenistically
inner, and therefore less a matter of sensuality than of sensibility.
15. One has to be gender partisan, for it is
obvious, on a utilitarian basis, that evil is and can be 'right' for
females
and goodness 'wrong' for them. But, in
moral reality, it is necessary to differentiate between the wrongness
of
sensuality and the rightness of sensibility, since it would be a poor
kind of
philosopher who accorded rightness to evil and wrongness to goodness
or,
alternatively, rightness to folly and wrongness to wisdom.
16. The damned female is alone good, whether
absolutely in metachemistry or relatively
in
chemistry, and therefore right from a male standpoint, whereas the
saved male
is alone wise, whether relatively in physics or absolutely in
metaphysics, and
therefore inherently right.
COMMON
AND
UNCOMMON IN SENSUALITY AND SENSIBILITY
1. Nations of common sense or, more
correctly,
sensuality, like the British (particularly English), and of uncommon
sense or,
again, sensuality, like the Americans, tend not to have too much time
for what,
from their respective standpoints, must seem like either common
sensibility or
uncommon sensibility. For
they
are
so hooked on sensuality as to be only moderately capable of
sensibility.
2. Nations, on the other hand, of common
sensibility, like the Irish (and even Gaels in general), and of
uncommon
sensibility, like the Indians, tend not to have too much time for what,
from
their respective standpoints, must seem like common sensuality or
uncommon
sensuality. For they
are so given to sensibility as to be only moderately capable of
sensuality.
3. For the heathenistic
sensual, freedom is the highest ideal and they will fight tooth and
nail to
protect the blessed hegemony of evil over folly, of metachemistry
over metaphysics (as in the American case in particular), and of
chemistry over
physics (as in the British case in particular), for they incline, if
unconsciously, to take the curse of under-plane enslavement of the male
side of
things to a female hegemony for granted, being basically ignorant of
the extent
to which both freedom and enslavement are morally wrong.
4. With the non-heathenistic
sensible, on the other hand, binding to self is the highest ideal and
they will
do everything in their power to protect the saved hegemony of wisdom
over
goodness, of physics over chemistry (as in the Irish case
traditionally), and
of metaphysics over metachemistry (as in
the Indian
case traditionally), for they incline to a male hegemony in their
awareness of
the extent to which both binding to self for males and constraining of
the
not-self in females are morally right.
5. Societies, like nations, can accordingly
be
divided into those for which freedom of the sensual not-self is the ne
plus ultra of things and those, on the contrary, for which
binding to the sensible self is the ne
plus ultra
of things - the former with a female bias and the latter with a male
one.
6. Those who uphold freedom may kid
themselves
that it is a righteous ideal but, in reality, it is morally wrong; for
it
implies the hegemony of evil over folly and the enslavement of males to
a
female domination in which heathenistic
criteria of
'once-born' sensuality are paramount, to the inevitable detriment of
male
self-respect.
7. Whether the symbolic illustration of
this be
the 'Liberty Belle' or 'Britannia', a noumenal
and metachemical or a phenomenal and
chemical manifestation of hegemonic
freedom, the result is a crushing victory for evil over goodness,
female
sensuality over female sensibility, and an equally crushing victory for
folly
over wisdom, male sensuality over male sensibility, with a consequence
that
common sensuality in the phenomenal case of evil/folly (Britain) and
uncommon
sensuality in the noumenal case of
evil/folly
(America) will tend to prevail at the expense of common sensibility in
the
phenomenal case of wisdom/goodness (Ireland) and uncommon sensibility
in the noumenal case of wisdom/goodness
(India).
8. For
sensuality, like
sensibility, is common when it is phenomenal and relativistic,
appertaining to
a lower-class mean in volume and mass, whereas sensibility, like
sensuality, is
uncommon when it is noumenal and absolute,
appertaining to an upper-class mean in time and space.
9. The triadic Beyond to which I subscribe
as
the framework of religious praxis for 'Kingdom Come' would accordingly
be
divisible between an upper tier of uncommon sensibility in which
transcendentalism
was in its per
se mode, a middle tier of common sensibility
in which humanism was in its per se mode, and a bottom tier of
common
sensibility in which nonconformism was in
its per
se mode, as well as 'bovaryized'
subdivisions on
every tier relative to chemical, physical, and metaphysical approaches
to mass,
volume, and space.
10. Thus would the triadic Beyond cater to an
upper-class elite, corresponding to 'the saved few', of the bound in
spaced
space, a middle-class commonality, corresponding to 'the saved many',
of the
bound in voluminous volume, and a lower-class commonality,
corresponding to
'the damned many', of the constrained in massed mass, give and take subsectional distinctions between per
se
and 'bovaryized' modes of
transcendentalism,
humanism, and nonconformism.
11. Either way, one would be talking about a
society in which wisdom and goodness were the prevailing ideals, since
sensibility permits of a righteous structure in which the female aspect
of
things is ever subordinate to a male hegemony.
12. And in such a society males would develop
their full potential for self-knowledge and self-transcendence,
becoming as
wise in uncommon or common sensibility as their respectively saved
standings as
gods or men, transcendentalists or humanists, permitted, with nothing
worse
than at times begrudging support from 'the constrained good' of the
nonconformist modes of metaphysics, physics, and chemistry below, i.e.
their
female counterparts.
AS
IN
THE BEGINNING, SO ANTITHETICALLY IN THE END
1. The dividing line between idiocy and
genius
can be very thin, in fact little more than an elastic band or a thong,
as when
long hair hangs loose in the one instance and is tied together in a
ponytail in
the other, the former approximating to the id-self and the latter to
the
soul-self, alpha and omega of the self in relation to hair.
2. One fancies that the man with long hair
hanging loose would prefer, or should be
of a mind, to drink out of a bottle than a can, whereas his ponytailed
counterpart would or should prefer direct recourse to a can, each of
them
outside the worldly parameters of glasses and cups/and or mugs.
3. It would also be logically consistent
for the
one to prefer the use of a scooping fork with his dinner and for the
other,
less of an idiot than a genius, to prefer to wield a spoon, neither of
them
much partial to the use of knife and fork.
4. One would expect to see the loosely
long-haired person lounging around in parks and his ponytailed
antithesis sitting in close proximity to some fountain and/or plant(s)
in a
shopping centre, perhaps consuming a non-alcoholic drink from a can (at
any
rate if he is of a more than communistic persuasion and is accordingly
glad to
leave 'worldly alcohol' in its most attenuated presentation well alone).
5. Not least significant of the
distinctions
between 'the idiot' and 'the genius' would be the preference for tapes,
both
audio and video, on the part of the former and for CDs and/or DVDs on
the part
of the latter, whom one would expect to sport a ponytail and to be
sufficiently
centripetal as to be above or beyond Jazz.
6. For it is not
the
id, remember, which is of especial relevance to 'the genius' but the
soul, and
consequently he will be loathe to entertain anything which is likely to
'jerk
him off' in blatantly alpha-oriented fashion.
7. Returning to 'the Garden' is not on his
agenda, for he is one who looks forward to the paradise to come rather
than
back towards the ancient paradise, which tends to be identified with
nature and
the most 'scenic' or 'exotic' manifestations of nature in particular.
8. It is in 'the Garden' that long hair
hangs
loosely, and that instinct is granted maximum prominence as people
continue to
be held spellbound by the beauty of natural appearances, perceiving
life in
overly libertarian terms.
9. Not so in 'the Centre' of millennial
futurity, where a centralized ponytail would be virtually de
rigueur
for those who were truly 'up to it', third-tier type people (albeit
with a
fringe for females), and the soul is granted maximum prominence as
people defer
to the truth of subnatural essences,
conceiving of
life in overly conservative terms.
10. Neither the relative libertarianism of the
'worldly strong' nor the relative conservatism of the 'worldly
knowledgeable'
greatly appeal to our self-obsessed extremes - the id-oriented 'idiot'
and the
soul-oriented 'genius' - for they are as alpha and omega to that which
comes in
between.
11. However, much as it would take a poor view of
idiots, the triadic Beyond would not be a context in which relatively
libertarian and relatively conservative people had no place, for not
everyone
can be ultra-conservative, and the advocate of 'Kingdom Come' would be
less
than fair to himself if he excluded those who come in between 'the
idiot' and
'the genius' from the Beyond in question, bearing in mind the necessity
of a
comprehensive structure if justice is to be done not only to those who
are
entitled to top-tier status, but to the generality of lower-class
persons for
whom anything more than massed mass or voluminous volume, whether in
nonconformist, humanist, or transcendentalist terms, would be
completely
irrelevant.
12. But more irrelevant than spaced space in
nonconformist, humanist, and transcendentalist terms for the
commonality of
persons in relation to the triadic Beyond of 'Kingdom Come' ... would
be the
idiocy of the id-self and all that which clings to religious or
cultural
tradition of the most primitive and superstitious kind.
13. For what pertains to the one type of paradise
is completely irrelevant to the other, even though that which was in
the
Beginning, namely the self, is and ever shall be also in the End, both
the
phenomenal end of history and the noumenal
end of
eternity in which not the id but the soul is the sovereign
manifestation of the
self, and all else must bow to the reign of that which, in its joyful
being,
justifies divine truth and stands as the eternal refutation of the
beautiful
lie.
14. Thus does the philosopher vanquish the poet
from the ultimate eternity, as the genius of his soul takes its
rightful place
at the head of those who, in their dramatic or narrative leanings, are
destined
to defer to that which is the literary ne
plus ultra
of things and guide to those who, while lacking true genius, are
anything but
idiots!
15. And with the light excluded, 'the dark' and
'the heavy' will approach, on their own respective terms, the
compelling lightness
of the philosopher's beingful genius and
take from it
that which will bring to their darkness and their heaviness, their
giving and
their taking, a lighter tone.
THE
MORAL
DESIRABILITY OF CULTURE AND CIVILITY
1. We have used words like evil, good,
folly,
and wisdom in relation to sensuality and sensibility, contending that
evil is
ever germane to metachemical and chemical
sensuality
and good, by contrast, to the metachemical
and
chemical modes of sensibility, while, on the opposite, or male, side of
the
gender fence, folly is ever germane to physical and metaphysical
sensuality and
wisdom, by contrast, to physical and metaphysical sensibility.
2. Therefore there is a distinction not
only
between absolute evil and relative evil, the evil of the Devil and of
woman,
but also between absolute good and relative good, the good, once again,
of the
Devil and of woman, albeit it be a very different kind of Devil and
woman from
the Devil and woman we have identified, in 'once-born' terms, with evil.
3. Likewise there is a distinction not only
between relative folly and absolute folly, the folly of man and of God,
but
also between relative wisdom and absolute wisdom, the wisdom, once
again, of
man and of God, albeit it be a very different kind of man and God from
the man
and God we have identified, in 'once-born' terms, with folly.
4. Therefore just as
absolute evil and good are equally - though antithetically - diabolic,
or of
the Devil, so absolute folly and wisdom are equally - though
antithetically - divine,
or of God.
5. And just as
relative
evil and good are equally - though antithetically - feminine, or of
woman, so
relative folly and wisdom are equally - though antithetically -
masculine, or
of man.
6. Hence whereas 'the diabolic' and 'the
divine'
can be absolutely right or wrong, depending on the context, so 'the
feminine'
and 'the masculine' can be relatively right or wrong, again depending
on the
context, i.e. whether of sensuality or sensibility.
7. To descend, Devil-wise, in space-time
from absolute
evil to absolute good is to descend, in fiery metachemistry,
from
absolute
wrong to absolute right, from blessed freedom in spatial space
to
damned constraint in repetitive time, which is equivalent to descending
from
the absolute barbarity of noumenal
objectivity in its
sensual mode to the absolute civility of noumenal
objectivity in its sensible mode.
8. To descend, woman-wise, in volume-mass
from
relative evil to relative good is to descend, in watery chemistry, from
relative wrong to relative right, from blessed freedom in volumetric
volume to
damned constraint in massed mass, which is equivalent to descending
from the
relative barbarity of phenomenal objectivity in its sensual mode to the
relative civility of phenomenal objectivity in its sensible mode.
9. To ascend, man-wise, in mass-volume from
relative folly to relative wisdom is to ascend, in vegetative physics,
from
relative wrong to relative right, from cursed enslavement in massive
mass to
saved binding in voluminous volume, which is equivalent to ascending
from the
relative nature of phenomenal subjectivity in its sensual mode to the
relative
culture of phenomenal subjectivity in its sensible mode.
10. To ascend, God-wise, in time-space from
absolute
folly to absolute wisdom is to ascend, in airy metaphysics, from
absolute wrong
to absolute right, from cursed enslavement in sequential time to saved
binding
in spaced space, which is equivalent to ascending from the absolute
nature of noumenal subjectivity in its
sensual mode to the absolute
culture of noumenal subjectivity in its
sensible
mode.
11. Thus just as 'the evil' become good when they
are damned from sensuality to sensibility on either the metachemical
axis of space-time or the chemical axis of volume-mass, so one has a
right to
speak of a correlative descent, in each case, from barbarity to
civility - the
former wrong and the latter right, whether absolutely (in the noumenal contexts of metachemical
sensuality and sensibility) or relatively (in the phenomenal contexts
of
chemical sensuality and sensibility).
12. Thus just as 'the foolish' become wise when
they are saved from sensuality to sensibility on either the physical
axis of
mass-volume or the metaphysical axis of time-space, so one has a right
to speak
of a correlative ascent, in each case, from nature to culture - the
former
wrong and the latter right, whether relatively (in the phenomenal
contexts of
physical sensuality and sensibility) or absolutely (in the noumenal
contexts of metaphysical sensuality and sensibility).
13. It is as incontestable that being barbarous
and natural are 'wrong' as that being civil and cultured are 'right',
since the
evil of barbarity and the folly of naturalism, as in a sense of being
philistine, keep things orientated to a 'once-born' and effectively heathenistic situation of 'the blessed' (with
freedom) and
'the cursed' (with enslavement to freedom) in sensuality, whereas the
goodness
of civility and the wisdom of culture keep things orientated to a
're-born' and
effectively non-heathenistic situation of
'the
constrained' (from freedom) and 'the saved' (with binding to self) in
sensibility.
14. Consequently civility, as in a wider
correlative sense civilization, is a damned good thing that follows
from a
cultured lead by males in either phenomenal or noumenal
contexts of sensibility to maintain a saved hegemony of cultural wisdom
at the
expense not only of natural or philistine folly but, on the female side
of
life, of the barbarous evil that would otherwise win back the
'civilized good'
from their damned constraints.
15. Those with any moral sense or, rather,
sensibility ... will always be on the side of culture and civility
against
nature and barbarity; for they alone are right, whether relatively in
the phenomenality of mass and volume or
absolutely in the noumenality of time and
space, and can accordingly speak of
themselves in relation to wisdom and goodness, enhanced subjectivity
for males
and constrained objectivity of females.
THE
TOTALITY
OF NATURE
1. Readers of my previous text(s) may
recall
that I conceive of Nature in the necessarily comprehensive terms of the
four
elements, viz. fire, water, vegetation (earth), and air, and that
Nature should
accordingly be subdivided, as it were, on a fourfold basis between the unnature of fire, the supernature
of water, the nature-proper of vegetation, and the subnature
of air.
2. Hence Nature is comprehensively
divisible
between that which one cannot live in and yet which is everywhere the
basis of
life, viz. fiery unnature, and those
elemental
manifestations of it in which life is to be found, viz. watery supernature, vegetative nature, and airy subnature.
3. It has also been established that Nature
is
therefore divisible between the female objectivity of unnature
and supernature, corresponding to fire and
water, and
the male subjectivity of nature per se and subnature,
corresponding
to
vegetation and air, so that a straight/curved dichotomy
relative to the distinction between vacuums and plenums can be inferred.
4. Hence the metachemical
'nature' of unnature, the chemical
'nature' of supernature, the physical
'nature' of nature proper, and
the metaphysical 'nature' of subnature -
the female
pair objective and the male pair subjective.
5. Now because Nature in general can be of
space-time metachemistry, of volume-mass
chemistry,
of mass-volume physics, or of time-space metaphysics, we cannot limit
it to
just one axis or plane, let alone sensual or sensible manifestation
thereof, as
though Nature were on a par with barbarity or naturalism or civility or
culture, still less equivalent to naturalism and therefore something to
be
antithetically ranged against, say, culture.
In reality, all of these elemental alternatives are germane to
Nature,
albeit to a different mode of it, depending on the context.
6. In other words, unnature
can be absolutely evil or good, sensually barbarous or sensibly
civilized,
depending whether it is of space-time spatially or repetitively, while supernature can likewise be relatively evil or
good,
sensually barbarous or sensibly civilized, depending whether it is of
volume-mass volumetrically or massedly.
7. Across to the
male
side of the gender fence, which is ever subjective, nature per se can
be
relatively foolish or wise, sensually natural or sensibly cultural,
depending
whether it is of mass-volume massively or voluminously, while subnature can likewise be absolutely foolish or
wise,
sensually natural or sensibly cultural, depending whether it is of
time-space
sequentially or spacedly.
8. Hence one cannot limit Nature to this or
that
element when it embraces, in the totality of its elemental
comprehensiveness,
all the axes and all the immoral and moral, wrong and right positions
of
sensuality and sensibility in consequence, from barbarity and
naturalism in
sensual unnature and subnature
to civility and culture in sensible unnature
and subnature where the space/time
absolutism of the noumenal alternatives is
concerned, and from barbarity and
naturalism in sensual supernature and
nature-proper
to civility and culture in sensible supernature
and
nature-proper where the volume/mass relativity of the phenomenal
alternatives
is concerned.
9. In that respect, culture
and civility are as much a part or aspect of Nature as naturalism and
barbarity, albeit they are - and ever will be - germane to its sensible
manifestations on both relative and absolute, lower and upper class,
terms.
10. I would be less than the philosopher I am if I
didn't assert the desirability of subnature
over
nature, as of metaphysics over physics, and gods, or the godly, over
men, with
a corresponding preference for unnature
over supernature, as of metachemistry
over chemistry, and devils, or the devilish, over women.
For only with a noumenal
bias for sensibility can ultimate justice be done to both culture and
civility,
wisdom and goodness, with the former germane, so I contend, to the top
tier of
our projected triadic Beyond and the latter, by and large, to the
administrative aside which would be pledged to the service and
protection of
the Beyond in question.
11. Certainly the relative culture of sensible
nature over the relative civility of sensible supernature
would still have a right to existence, though not, as I have argued, in
the
Christian context of old (long-since abandoned by a majority of
Catholics), but
in relation to the lower two tiers of the triadic Beyond and the
salvation of
Anglicans from relative naturalism to relative culture, phenomenal
folly to
phenomenal wisdom, and the correlative damnation of Puritans from
relative
barbarity to relative civility, phenomenal evil to phenomenal goodness.
12. Hence a structure of hope for the future in
which the subnature within, corresponding
to an
absolute culture, was in a position to pull moral rank on the nature
within,
corresponding to a relative culture, and to the supernature
within, corresponding to a relative civility, while being served, in
the
administrative aside, by the absolute civility of the unnature
within, whose inner beauty would shine benevolently upon the inner
truth,
knowledge, and strength of the metaphysical, physical, and chemical
manifestations of the triadic Beyond for ever more, eternity without
end.
LONDON
2000
(Revised 2011)
