CYCLE FIVE
1. I like to think that the American rush to urbanize
and industrialize and generally develop technology as quickly and efficiently
as possible owes not a little to the Christian ancestry which most Americans
inherited from the Old World and which made them especially determined, in
consequence, not to be dwarfed and dominated by Nature but to set about
rivalling it as vigorously as possible, in the interests of a sensible retort
to the sensuality which even now is so much more prevalent in that vast
continent than in Europe generally, and Western Europe in particular.
2. Thus the Americans, especially those of
European descent, were bequeathed a Christian conscience which sought the rapid
and sophisticated transformation of a continent still beset by
nature-in-the-raw to a degree which had long before ceased to characterize much
of Western Europe. Even with its
violence and sensuality, latter-day
3. If America now leads the world it is not
because it has or ever returned to nature but, on the contrary, because, right
from the start, it made war on Nature and brought civilization to a continent
that had known only barbarism. This,
incidentally, is generally true of imperialism and colonialism everywhere.
4. Freedom in the democratic and economic sense
is incompatible with being too close to Nature, since naturalism correlates
with primitivity not only in religious terms but also
in political and economic terms. The
struggle against Nature is effectively a struggle for civilization and the
possibility, in consequence, of enhanced sensibility as confirmed by cultural
sophistication attendant upon an indoor lifestyle.
5. To be free from religious or other tyranny is
a mark of any higher civilization, since the tyrant constrains his subjects to
sensuality, and thus prevents their sensible redemption or transmutation. He (though especially She) is something to be
worshipped, and in all worshipful subservience there is a loss of self-respect
and absence, in greater or lesser degree, of the possibility of holiness,
which, as a male reality, is intimately, indeed inextricably, associated with
closeness to self, meaning, needless to say, the brain stem and spinal column
of what passes, in general parlance, for the central nervous system.
6. But holiness is only one side of a dual-sided
sensible equation. The other is
unclearness, and this is as much a female reality, whether in phenomenal or noumenal, lower- or upper-class, terms, as holiness is
male, given the extent to which females are creatures primarily of the
not-self, especially with regard to the objective organs of metachemical
and chemical sensuality and sensibility, and only secondarily of the self,
unlike their male counterparts.
7. There can be no holiness for males, in short,
without a corresponding degree of unclearness for females, who are as much
damned from the evil righteousness of clearness as sensible males are saved
from the foolish unrighteousness of unholiness which,
in sensuality, defers, in fairly worshipful vein, to clearness, pretty much as
a religious primitive, trapped in racial unholiness,
to some cosmic and/or stellar manifestation of cultural clearness.
8. Cultural clearness, which is upheld in the Jehovahesque Old Testament, is the principal enemy of and
obstacle to the possibility of cultural holiness, which is beyond the civilized
level of Christ and thus beyond - and above - prayerful devotion in what
transpires to being a meditative praxis at once the epitome and guarantor of
religious sanctity. He who prays rather
than meditates knows nothing of genuine religion, and hence cultural holiness. He lives the half-wisdom, in Christ, of civilized
holiness, as germane to vegetative sensibility, the sensibility of physical
rebirth, and is but a lower-class shortfall from the airy sensibility, the
sensibility of metaphysical rebirth, in which transcendental meditation has its
divine throne. The man or, rather,
effective god who meditates through consciousness of his breathing is beyond
the scope of Biblical delusion and Creator-rooted religious primitivity. He scorns such a thing as unworthy of true
enlightenment! For, to him, only the
inner light has any claim on metaphysical holiness, the outer light, no matter
how clear, being metachemically antithetical to the
righteousness which is wise and of God in any ultimate sense, ultimate, that is
to say, in relation to the supreme beingfulness of a
sensible manifestation of organic supremacy having reference to metaphysical
rebirth.
9. Thus the true Son, the Son of God who is
metaphysically rather than physically sensible, who is indeed godly rather than
manly in his upper-class male sensibility, counsels against not only the Father
of metaphysical sensuality, Who is a secondary Father compared to the manly
Father of physical sensuality and fulcrum of vegetative sin (in the phallus),
but against both positive (Risen Virgin) and negative (Jehovah) manifestations
of metachemical sensuality, since neither the organic
nor the inorganic mode of cultural clearness can admit of the possibility or do
anything to advance cultural holiness, least of all in relation to organic
supremacy, which requires, on the contrary, the complete and utter repudiation
of all cultural clearness and thus righteous evil, the immoral righteousness of
sensual 'First Movers' who, in their noumenal
objectivity, are really Devils, not Gods.
10. Freedom from worshipful subservience, and even
enslavement, to cosmic and/or universal 'First Movers' in the cultural
clearness of metachemical sensuality is one thing;
binding to cosmic or, better, universal (organic) 'Last Movers' (or, better, 'Last Groovers')
in the cultural holiness of metaphysical sensibility is quite another, and for
this to come properly to pass as ultimate salvation for those males who would
be 'up to it' and entitled to a sensibly transcendental destiny, those who
relate to metachemical sensuality must be brought
low, or damned, to metachemical sensibility in an
unclear deference to holiness, as metaphysically-biased males climb from the
unrighteousness of metaphysical sensuality in the Father to the righteousness
of metaphysical sensibility in the Son, as and when they democratically opt for
salvation from racial unholiness to cultural holiness
through the Second Coming, and officially pass beyond aural sins to respiratory
graces.
11. For freedom is assuredly not the end of the
evolutionary or even devolutionary road but, rather, a half-way house between
other-worship and self-binding, between the primitivity
of false religion and the sublimity of true religion,
and the sooner those who now have and revel in freedom, whether political or
otherwise, realize this, the sooner will the possibility of salvation and/or
damnation (according to gender) from sins and/or crimes of the world come to
pass, and holy and/or unclear binding become the sensible solution, in 'Kingdom
Come', to the dilemmas of contemporary secular freedom which, despite their
social benefits, are always vulnerable to the ungodly seductions of tyrannical
falsehoods, as well as to their own rhetorical aggrandizements.
