FROM SATAN TO SATURN
Copyright © 2011 John O'Loughlin
1. The perceptual outer light of television vis-à-vis the perceptual inner light of video, but the conceptual outer spirit of radio vis-à-vis the conceptual inner spirit of computers.
2. Bottled beer stands to canned beer as the perceptual outer light to the perceptual inner light. Conversely, bottled wine stands to canned wine as the conceptual outer spirit to the conceptual inner spirit.
3. The doing devil stands to the taking man as the perceptual outer light to the perceptual inner light. Conversely, the giving woman stands to the being god as the conceptual outer spirit to the conceptual inner spirit.
4. To progress from guitar-based vocal Pop to synth-based vocal Pop, as from Pop to Superpop. To progress, further, from synth-based instrumental Pop with uilleann pipes to uilleann pipes alone, as from Supra-pop to Ultra-pop. Thus from the outer spirit to the inner spirit in the evolution of pop music.
5. Not to combine the outer spirit with the inner spirit, vocals with uilleann pipes, but to move beyond the outer spirit to the inner spirit, even if via an instrumental Superpop, or synthesizer absolutism, en route to that musical salvation which is of the inner spirit alone, and hence a question of uilleann pipes - arguably the ultimate musical instrument.
6. Supra-pop (synth/uilleann combinations) would be better than Superpop (with or without vocals, though preferably with), but Ultra-pop would be the best possible musical approximation to the inner spirit - an uilleann-pipes exclusivity which transcended synthesizers and therefore paralleled the purity of the transcendental Beyond.
7. From hallucinogenic contemplation to transcendental meditation - from the superconscious to the supra-conscious - from Superpop to Supra-pop. But then, finally, from transcendental meditation to ultra-meditation - from the supra-conscious to the ultra-conscious - from Supra-pop to Ultra-pop.
1. To perceive a correlation between television and frying, video and boiling, radio and baking, and computers and grilling. Such correlations can only be based on distinctions, relative to the contexts in question, between the outer light (television/frying), the inner light (video/boiling), the outer spirit (radio/baking), and the inner spirit (computers/grilling).
2. Being British (which I am not) is
approximately equivalent to being Soviet.
That is to say, it appertains to a superstate/ supernational
which transcends English, Scottish, and Welsh (not to mention, in a
sense, Northern Irish) nationality. The
British superstate, held together by the monarchy, is effectively a
entity rooted in blood and violence, since it was forged, as such
usually are, in the crucible of war, and thus owes its origins to
imperialism. Now a diabolic entity may
be good for imperialism, for Empire-building (and Britain built one of
biggest Empires in world history, thereby becoming 'great'), but it
will be no
good for God-building, for developing the 'Kingdom of Heaven' under
auspices, since such a divine 'kingdom' cannot come to pass where the
still holds sway. Consequently there can
be no possibility of
3. Ireland can - and I hope will - be
then Ireland is a different kettle-of-fish from Britain, closer, in its
soft-line Republicanism and hard-line Catholicism (its Catholic
to the possibility of divine transmutation.
4. The Messianic Second Coming wishes to save the World (of Catholic Republicanism) to the Social Theocratic/ Transcendentalist 'Kingdom of Heaven', wherein religious sovereignty would be the norm, but he cannot save that which is not of the World or not sufficiently of the World but effectively, and officially, in the grip of the parliamentary/nonconformist Overworld (lunar) and the monarchic/masonic Hell (solar), with the working class enslaved to and by both the middle and upper classes conspiring together to thwart any liberation of the working class from the World for the classless Beyond ... of the Social Transcendentalist Centre. He can only 'do business' with the Anglican Church if it looks to be closer to Catholicism than to Nonconformism/Freemasonry ... by dint of being disestablished from the grip of powers whose parliamentary and monarchic status keeps it closer to the latter, as though in a lunar/solar collusion against the World.
5. Thus until the Anglican Church is freed
the parliamentary/monarchic State, probably following a
democratically-engineered revolution in which the British State is
devolved states whose essence is republican, there can be no
Anglicans being saved....Which would of course also be bad for Roman
in Britain, whose entitlement to salvation would be severely
compromised by the
continuance of the British State, quite apart from the fact that they
remain doomed to impotence as a permanent minority.
No, one cannot ignore Catholics in
6. As to Nonconformists and Freemasons - not a hope! The Second Coming cannot 'do business' with the moon and the sun, hard-line Parliamentarians and Monarchists, but only with the earth, or the world. Thus no Nonconformist or Freemason will be entitled to salvation. Repentance followed by conversion ... to either Catholic Anglicanism (assuming the changes I have outlined above had come to pass) or Roman Catholicism ... would be a prerequisite of entitlement to salvation by such people. Only thus would they avoid the damnation of being expelled from the Social Transcendentalist 'Kingdom of Heaven' as moral undesirables - a damnation that will surely apply to all those who defy the will of the Second Coming in this way. For the Mass is crucial to the World, to a bodily and therefore humble people, and unless the wafer is accepted, there is no worldliness but only that which, as Nonconformism and Freemasonry, stands ranged against it. Rest assured that, if the World is to be saved, those who have traditionally shown themselves to be against it ... must be damned!
1. The philosopher is a creature of space and the poet ... a creature of time - the former divine and the latter diabolic.
2. The writer (novelist) is a creature of volume and the playwright (dramatist) a creature of mass - the former purgatorial and the latter mundane, which is to say, of the World.
3. Philosophical space can be spatial or spaced, aphoristic or maxistic. Poetical time can be sequential or repetitive, rhymed or metered.
4. Literary volume can be volumetric or voluminous, essayistic or novelistic. Dramatic mass can be massed or massive, tragic or comic.
5. Although the philosopher is effectively a god and the poet a devil, both are alike noumenal - the former subjectively so and the latter such in objective terms.
6. Although the writer is effectively a purgatorial figure (man) and the playwright a worldly one (woman), both are alike phenomenal - the former objectively so and the latter such in subjective terms.
7. In the '
8. In the 'purgatorial realm' the writer is king, whereas in the 'mundane realm' only the playwright/actor can reign.
9. The spirit of the thinker (philosopher) is no less superior - as noumenal over phenomenal - to the will of the speaker (playwright/actor) ... than the soul of the reader (poet) is superior - as noumenal over phenomenal - to the intellect of the writer (novelist).
10. To think ... is the opposite, as noumenal subjectivity vis-à-vis noumenal objectivity, of to read. To speak ... is the opposite, as phenomenal subjectivity vis-à-vis phenomenal objectivity, of to write.
11. To think ... is to be space, whereas to read ... is to do time. To speak ... is to give mass, whereas to write ... is to take volume.
12. The thinker, a philosopher, is a spiritualist, whereas the reader, a poet, is an emotionalist. The speaker, an actor, is a sensualist, whereas the writer, a novelist, is an intellectualist.
13. To read beyond the outer light of poetry to the inner light of fiction, or vice versa. To speak beyond the outer spirit of drama to the inner spirit of philosophy, or vice versa.
14. Reading and writing, being objective, are alike perceptual contexts. Speaking and thinking, by contrast, are alike conceptual because subjective. We perceive what we read or write. We conceive what we speak or think. One can no more perceive speaking or thinking than ... conceive reading or writing.
15. If God is a thinker and the Devil a reader, then man is a writer and woman a speaker. When writing is eclipsed by reading, or fiction by poetry, then the Devil is king and man ... simply damned. When speaking is transcended by thinking, or drama by philosophy, then God is king and woman ... simply saved. For the writer can only be damned by reading, whereas the speaker can only be saved by thinking. A society with a great many poets but few if any writers, or novelists, is diabolical. A society, by contrast, with a great many philosophers but few if any playwrights ... is divine.
1. Writing is a sort of drug ... analogous to alcohol or heroin. The writer takes volume, the novelist, or writer per se, most especially so.
2. To distinguish the 'outer thought' of talking to oneself from the 'inner thought' of thinking by oneself, and to contrast both of these with the 'outer prayer' of praying out loud and the 'inner prayer' of praying by oneself (to another).
3. 'Outer prayer', or chanting, is equivalent to outer light, whereas 'inner prayer', or contemplation, is equivalent to inner light, both of which contrast with 'outer thought' and 'inner thought' - the former equivalent to outer spirit and the latter to inner spirit.
4. Which is better - to pray or to think? The philosopher, who is a spiritual person, can only answer that question in terms of thought, since thinking is a spiritual use of the intellect, and accordingly it is better to think than to pray. Yet one shouldn't forget that, like prayer, thinking is also divisible, as between outer and inner, and that better than the ranting of 'outer thought' is the quasi-meditative sanity of 'inner thought', the gateway to the meditative Beyond (of pure spirituality). But if thinking inwardly is preferable to thinking outwardly, it could nonetheless be argued that even 'outer thought' is better than 'inner prayer' ... to the degree and in the sense that it is at least a thing of the spirit rather than the light, and accordingly stands closer, as 'bad God' vis-à-vis 'good God', to the salvation of 'inner thought'. He who prays in private to the Son may be objectively less 'diabolical' than he who prays in public to the Father, but he is still far from being even indirectly divine, like the ranters of the Blessed Virgin, who stand closer, in consequence, to the meditators of the Holy Spirit. For if the spirit is divine, then the light can only be comparatively 'diabolic', since objectively ranged against the subjectivity of the World and/or Beyond.
5. Just as there is 'outer thought' and 'inner thought', both of which are contrary to outer and inner forms of prayer, so there is 'outer reading' and 'inner reading', 'outer writing' and 'inner writing', 'outer speaking' and 'inner speaking', all of which contrast, as subjective to objective, with outer and inner forms of lecturing, printing, and talking (oratory).
1. Taking up the thread from where I left off above, we can distinguish 'outer reading' from 'inner reading' on the basis of reading aloud and reading mentally, and then contrast each of these with the 'outer lecturing' of reading to others and the 'inner lecturing' of reciting by memory from a prepared text.
2. 'Outer lecturing', or reading to others, is equivalent to outer heat, whereas 'inner lecturing', or reciting from memory, is equivalent to inner heat, both of which contrast with 'outer reading' and 'inner reading' - the former equivalent to outer soul and the latter to inner soul.
3. Likewise, we can distinguish 'outer writing' from 'inner writing' on the basis of writing to/for another and writing to/for oneself, and then contrast each of these with the 'outer printing' of printing for others and the 'inner printing' of printing for oneself (as in stationary, business cards. etc.).
4. 'Outer printing' is equivalent to outer coldness, whereas 'inner printing' is equivalent to inner coldness, both of which contrast with 'outer writing' and 'inner writing' - the former equivalent to outer intellect and the latter ... to inner intellect.
5. Finally, to distinguish 'outer speaking' from 'inner speaking' on the basis of speaking to others and speaking to one other, and then to contrast each of these with the 'outer talking' of addressing others, e.g. a gathering, and the 'inner talking' of addressing one other, as in an interview.
6. 'Outer talking' is equivalent to outer darkness, whereas 'inner talking' is equivalent to inner darkness, both of which contrast with 'outer speaking' and 'inner speaking' - the former equivalent to outer will and the latter to inner will.
7. The objective, in both its centrifugal and centripetal (outer and inner) manifestations, is extrinsically conditioned, e.g. memorized prayer, prepared lecture, printed notice, formal speech, whereas the subjective, in both its centrifugal and centripetal (outer and inner) manifestations is intrinsically conditioned, e.g. free thought, spontaneous reading, improvisational writing, informal conversation (chat). Thus, for example, the intrinsic nature of centrifugal subjectivity (outer spirit) as against the extrinsic nature of centripetal objectivity (inner light).
1. A mounting tendency of mine to regard sex as having a kind of middle-ground status in between sport and dance, as though it were the result of a compromise between positions more closely affiliated with masculine and feminine extremes - the former effectively lunar and the latter more inherently of the World (planar, or planetary). In such fashion, one could speak of sex as taking a mid-position in a vertical axis which stretches from sport at the apex to dance at the base, the one effectively homosexual on account of its overly masculine connotations and the other no-less effectively lesbian on account of the feminine connotations which accrue to the World, heterosexuality being a sort of sexual compromise between these more extreme positions.
2. Likewise, I find it difficult not to regard Anglicanism as, in some sense, a compromise between Puritan and Catholic extremes within this same lunar/planar axis, a denomination of the Christian Faith which is effectively heterosexual where it could be argued that Puritanism, in its purgatorial masculinity, is homosexual and Catholicism, by contrast, lesbian, since closer to nature, and hence the feminine. Thus where Puritanism affirms the masculine (Christ) and Catholicism the feminine (Blessed Virgin), Anglicanism would seem to be balanced between these two extremes, neither homosexual nor lesbian, but heterosexual and/or androgynous.
3. Unlike Anglicanism, both Puritanism and Catholicism deny sex, the one from a masculine point of view (homosexual) and the other from a feminine point of view (lesbian), as relative to their lunar and planar (planetary) extremes. However, in the late-twentieth century such a denial was less compatible with sex per se than with heterosexuality; for there would seem to be no self-denial where homosexual and lesbian alternatives are concerned, which necessarily relate to Puritan and Catholic positions respectively. Nor is there much self-denial, in regard to these latter denominations, where sport and dance are concerned.
4. Puritanism divested Christianity of so many facets of its humanist integrity, including the removal of Christ's image from the Cross, that it was perhaps inevitable that the resulting abstraction should be a foregone candidate for damnation by politics, particularly in its parliamentary, or liberal, manifestation. For no such abstraction could possibly have the strength or, more correctly, moral substance to hold-out against materialist damnation and, willy-nilly, subversion. The Puritan Christ was doomed to a subordinate authority beside the more powerful Antichrist ... of parliamentary tradition, which was not above speaking-out in defence and ostensible advancement - witness Cromwell and his Puritan followers - of the very same Christ which Parliamentarians had successfully dethroned. Hence a Christ paradoxically dependent upon the Antichrist! A Christ Who, to this very day, is still vigorously defended by people whose (political) role in society is dubiously Christian - indeed, manifestly anti-Christian, and hence Antichristic! No, it is not difficult to see what befalls a Christ who is stripped of his humanity and reduced to the materialistic and hateful symbol of the very thing upon which he was historically crucified! Thank goodness that no such fate befell the Catholic Christ, who was accorded his humanistic due and therefore permitted to prevail in concreto rather than as a pitiful abstraction! The result, logically enough, is that politics did not, and in the circumstances could not, 'turn the tables' on this Catholic Christ, with a result that Eire is still a place where, in James Joyce's memorable words, 'God and the Church come first', being a Catholic Republic and not a republican democracy (like America) or, worse again, a parliamentary democracy (like Britain). Now the reward, naturally enough, for this Catholic preponderance is the possibility of spiritual salvation in and through the Second Coming, and an advancement, in consequence, to the 'Kingdom of Heaven', viz. the Social Transcendentalist Centre, in which the People, having democratically opted for religious sovereignty, would be entitled to institutionally-guaranteed self-realization (of the Holy Spirit of Heaven) for all Eternity. Contrary to those who, in their moral blindness, 'went to the dogs' ... of Empire-building devilry, the true adherents of Christ and his Blessed Mother will be saved ... from the World to the Beyond, wherein only the peace of the Holy Spirit of Heaven shall prevail.
1. Tantric gurus speak of the 'Third Eye' of psychic space which lies between the eyes of sense. But such a psychic eye is closer to the Clear Light of the Void than ever it could be to the Holy Spirit of Heaven, and is therefore a sort of psychic extrapolation from the central star of the Galaxy. Experience of such an 'eye' is likely to be more fundamentalist than transcendentalist, putting the experiencer in touch with the Cosmos, by dint of the parallel which may be presumed to exist between the two phenomena. Thus instead of going beyond the World ... of sense ... one would be returning to the primal Heaven of cosmic being and reverting to a heathen salvation, the sort of salvation which especially appeals to Yoga-centred gurus, with their primal doctrines.
2. Yet anyone with the least shred of Christian sense would see, plainly enough, that the salvation offered by such gurus was spurious and unworthy of Western emulation. Our goal lies beyond the World, but that is only because, as Christians, we are sufficiently evolved to be able to pass beyond the World and aim, through self-overcoming, for the heavenly Beyond. Unfortunately, most Eastern gurus, whether Tantric, Buddhist, Hindu, or whatever, derive from a civilization which, originating many thousands of years ago, never evolved to anything like the same extent or degree of urban/industrial artificiality, but was always more open to the cosmic backdrop and experience than ever modern European civilization could be, given its more transcendental foundations. Which is why gurus tend to reflect this mystical primitivity, if you like, in their religious stance before life, counselling people to get in touch with the Cosmos rather than, like the more evolved Christian sensibility, to transcend the World in the direction not only of what lies beyond it but of what, in its optimum flowering, would be completely antithetical to the Cosmos - an Omega Point, in short, which would stand at the farthest possible moral and psychic remove from the Alpha Point, so to speak, of primal existence, viz. the cosmic Universe, in which the Clear Light of the Void has its pagan throne.
3. Thus it is as a sort of left-over from a comparatively primitive civilization that these gurus exist and seek, knowingly or unknowingly, the subversion and eclipse of Western civilization, attacking it where it is most vulnerable (such as the American Far West) in the hope of transforming it into something closer to their own much older and more basic civilization, one rooted in cosmic Fundamentalism. Doubtless they are successful to a degree, else we would not be aware of their work. But, ultimately, they cannot succeed, since the West, whilst it may be decadent and/or technologically heathen, is still too evolved to be overly partial to Neo-Hindu Fundamentalism. A day will come when it will simply be ripe for Messianic Transcendentalism, moving from a technological alpha towards a spiritual omega, and then there will be no place for Eastern gurus and their cosmic illusions (spatial vacuums), but only a place for the Second Coming and his spiritual truth (airy plenum). Thus speaks the Messianic Servant of the Holy Spirit of Heaven!
1. Hinduism (the world's oldest religion) and its offshoot Buddhism could be defined as being at One with Alpha God (the Creator/Clear Light of the Void), whereas Judaism is more about men vis-à-vis a Creator, with whom no complete identification is possible. Likewise, Mohammedanism rejects direct identification with the Creator, but does so rather more in terms of man (Mohammed) vis-à-vis Alpha God, so that it stands to Judaism as phenomenal to noumenal or, rather, individual to collective, or even the lunar to the planar (worldly). By contrast to Mohammedanism, Christianity, essentially another 'lunar' faith, turns man around (rebirth) so that his relationship is rather more vis-à-vis an Omega God (the 'Kingdom of Heaven' within the self), who thus stands in a 'transvaluated' lunar light vis-à-vis 'the Infidel', or those without any faith in Christ. Yet if Christianity is essentially individualistic, then Socialism, the next significant religious development, is collectivistic, since it is more worldly than lunar in character and thus affirms the relationship between men and an Omega God (the Millennium of classless futurity), which is no less phenomenal than Christianity/Mohammedanism or, for that matter, Judaism, with which it forms a sort of worldly pole, given its omega orientation. Beyond Socialism, however, there is only one possibility - namely a noumenal identification, necessarily antithetical to Hinduism/Buddhism, with Omega God (the Holy Spirit of Heaven), which is the ultimate religion, as superior to Christianity and Socialism as ... Hinduism was to Judaism and Mohammedanism, the True World Religion, one might say, of Social Transcendentalism. It is this being at One with Omega God which will bring religion to its evolutionary consummation, putting Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, and Mohammedanism completely 'beneath the pale' of its omega-oriented integrity, an integrity wherein men are overcome in and by the Holy Spirit of Heaven, thereby becoming divine.
2. To contrast the noumenal absolutism of cosmic Fundamentalism with the noumenal absolutism of Social Transcendentalism, the alpha and omega of religion, which encompasses all the difference between the Clear Light of the Void and the Holy Spirit of Heaven - the former illusory (space), the latter true (air).
3. The devolution of alpha-oriented
from Hinduism and Buddhism to Judaism and Mohammedanism ... contrasts
evolution of omega-oriented religions from Christianity and Socialism
By and large, it is the East which is devolutionary and the West
though this is hardly true of the
4. The American
is conditioned to an alpha orientation by a combination of factors,
the 'stars' on its national flag, the indigenous traditions of
5. I would say that whereas Indian
tends, by and large, towards the light, Chinese spirituality tends, by
contrast, towards the air (witness the Tao)
and is thus
less illusory than truthful. Certainly
the Chinese, with their socialist faith, are no great admirers of
Hinduism/Buddhism, but, at times, ruthless opponents of this
religion, as in
6. Regrettable extent to which American
Jazz in particular, is rarely 'horn free', to use a phrase I have
coined for Rock albums and the like which are beyond recourse to such
fundamentalist instruments as saxophones, trumpets, trombones, etc. No doubt,
1. From the standpoint of Christianity, which is individualistic phenomenality vis-à-vis omega divinity (the 'Kingdom of Heaven' within), the contrary position of Islam ... must seem anti-Christic, since an individualistic phenomenality which is alpha orientated must be rather more negative and devolutionary than positive and evolutionary. Hence a sort of particle/wavicle dichotomy between Mohammedanism and Christianity on the lunar spectrum of intellectual materialism ('the Book'). Likewise, from the standpoint of Socialism, which is collectivistic phenomenality vis-à-vis omega divinity (the classless Millennium to come), the contrary position of Judaism ... must seem anti-Socialist, since a collectivistic phenomenality which is alpha orientated must be rather more negative and devolutionary than positive and evolutionary. Hence a sort of particle/wavicle dichotomy between Judaism and Socialism on the planar spectrum of instinctual realism (the class or, more specifically in this context, gender struggle).
2. Just as Christianity split into various denominations, of which Catholicism, Anglicanism, and Puritanism are the three principal divisions, so Socialism did likewise, with Communism, Nazism, and Fascism symptomatic of the sort of divisions which so characterize Christianity. For, despite superficial differences and antagonistic relations, Communism, Nazism, and Fascism are really different manifestations of Socialism, just as Catholicism, Anglicanism, and Puritanism are different manifestations of and approaches to Christianity. The significant difference between the two religions, however, is that whereas Socialism is, like Judaism before it, a religion of the World, Christianity, like Mohammedanism, is a religion of Purgatory, with, in consequence, a lunar rather than planar fulcrum. Hence where Christianity is most pedantically Christian in Puritanism, Socialism, by contrast, is most pedantically Socialist in Communism, which is no less unequivocally working class than ... Puritanism, its Christian antithesis, is middle class.
3. Thus if Christianity is most middle class (because lunar) in Puritanism, it is rather more balanced between the middle and working classes in Anglicanism, but biased on the side of the working class in Catholicism, the mode of Christianity which more approximates the World. Conversely, if Socialism is most working class in Communism, the worldly mode of Socialism par excellence, it is rather more balanced between the working and middle classes in Nazism, but biased on the side of the middle class in Fascism, the mode of Socialism which more approximates to Purgatory. But such a bias is not commensurate with being middle class per se, any more than the working-class bias of Catholicism would enable one to regard it as a working-class ideology. The fulcrums of Socialism and Christianity being as different (and contrary) as they are, we can no more regard Fascism and Puritanism as identical than ... Communism and Catholicism. This is why Fascists, despite their middle-class bias, are not Puritans, while Catholics, despite their working-class bias, are not Communists. Only Puritans can truly reflect middle-class values, just as, from a contrary standpoint, only Communists truly reflect working-class ones - the former materialistic and the latter realistic, Nonconformism and Humanism, intellect and will, capitalism and syndicalism, democracy and bureaucracy, man and woman.
1. If art is the divine art form per se because essentially concerned with space, and therefore being, rather than with time (music), volume (literature), or mass (sculpture), it nonetheless can be spatial or spaced, alpha or omega, as well as a compromise between either of the two divine extremes. If spatial, then we are talking of drawing, the 'Clear Light ...' of art. If spaced, however, we are talking rather more of painting, the 'Holy Spirit ...' of art. While compromises between drawing and painting on the one hand, and (between) painting and drawing on the other, the former essentially a heavily-shaded drawing and the latter a sharply-linear mode of painting, would constitute inner and outer forms of the light and the spirit respectively. However that may be, art is most true to the Divine when spaced (as in painting) and least true or, more correctly, most false to it when spatial (as in drawing), though spatial space is inherently of the negative divine anyway, since its Being is through light rather than air.
2. Now if drawing and painting constitute a 'naturalistic' antithesis, as germane to traditional art, then it seems to me that a more 'artificial', or contemporary, antithesis could be adduced between, say, computer graphics on the one hand and air-brush art on the other, the former an artificial mode (using computers) of drawing, and the latter, by contrast, an artificial or, rather, transcendental mode of painting, such that takes spaced space to new conceptual heights. Thus where formerly the principal division in art was between drawing and painting, neither of which properly addressed the media of light and air, contemporary art takes this division beyond the figurative phase to a more literal distinction between modes of 'drawing' and 'painting' which amply reflect the use of light and air in the respective production of computer graphics and air-brush art. Doubtless the former is more credibly of the 'Clear Light ...' than conventional drawing, while the latter would be closer to the 'Holy Spirit ...' than oil paintings, whether of 'the Void' or 'Heaven' depending, in each case, upon the ratio of spatial to spaced, or vice versa. For while drawing and painting usually lean towards their respective extremes, we cannot rule out the possibility of 'painterly drawings' or 'linear paintings', the former of inner light and the latter of outer spirit.
3. Light Art per se, e.g. neons and lasers, is much more of the 'Clear Light ...' than ever computer art could be, since a mode of art or, if you will, anti-art which is less Christian than heathen, given its absolutist standing (in free abstraction) in relation to or, rather, contrast with painterly murals and certain kinds of crude 'air art'. Really, 'superheathen' would be a better definition of the sort of - at any rate until quite recently - strictly contemporary 'art' in question, just as 'superchristian' might well serve to define the kind of artificial drawing we have equated with computer graphics. Yet, whatever the terminology, there can be no question that 'light art' is to modern art what the Clear Light of the Void is to religion, namely a vacuous alpha at the farthest possible ideological remove from the Holy Spirit of Heaven, and therefore a mode of art which could only be 'beneath the pale' from an omega-oriented standpoint - the standpoint of the Superchristic civilization still to arise.
1. As spatial art to spaced art, drawings to paintings, so spatial philosophy to spaced philosophy, aphorisms to maxims and/or supernotes - the former numbered from above (thereby maximizing spatial space), the latter numbered at the side (thereby minimizing spatial space in deference to the prosecution of spaced space ... with the assistance, where applicable, of enhanced in-text capitalization). However, space is a factor that has to be respected regardless of the type of space being developed. For space is commensurate with the Divine (being), and thus with true philosophy.
2. Being needs space, but Being can be either negative and spatial or positive and spaced - the difference, in short, between light (outer or inner) and spirit (outer or inner). Hence whereas the negative Being, for example, of the Clear Light of the Void is spatial, the positive Being of the Holy Spirit of Heaven is spaced - the former woeful and the latter joyful, speed and calm.
3. Being is only possible in space (plastic and philosophical), just as Doing is only possible in time (musical and poetical), Taking only possible in volume (writerly and fictional), and Giving only possible in mass (sculptural and dramatic). Whereas the artist/philosopher is a be-er, the musician/poet is a doer, the writer/novelist a taker, and the sculptor/actor a giver - space, time, volume, and mass ... with divine, diabolic, masculine, and feminine implications respectively, as germane to spiritual idealism, emotional (soulful) naturalism, intellectual materialism, and instinctual (wilful) realism.
4. Just as Being can be either spatial or spaced, light or spirit, so Doing can be either sequential or repetitive, fire or soul; Taking either volumetric or voluminous, water or intellect; and Giving either massed or massive, earth or will.
5. The speed of light vis-à-vis the lightness of spirit; the heat of fire vis-à-vis the brightness of soul; the coldness of water vis-à-vis the dullness of intellect; the darkness of earth vis-à-vis the heaviness of will. Space, time, volume, and mass vis-à-vis air, blood, brain, and flesh.
1. The illusion of light created by the speeding of elemental photon particles through the ether as they diverge from the vacuum of spatial space ... contrasts absolutely with the truth of spirit established by the focus of elemental photon wavicles (consciousness) upon the plenum of air which is their Heaven and effective Omega Point.
2. From the centrifugal objectivity of light to the centripetal subjectivity of spirit via the centripetal objectivity of mind and the centrifugal subjectivity of will, as from films to compact discs/floppies via books and tapes.
3. An intellectual's concept of Hell would have to be a place, like school or college, where people were expected and, indeed, encouraged to read. For reading is a sort of centrifugal objectivity, necessarily noumenal, of the mind, and such an activity effectively damns the reader to intellectual Hell, whether or not - though especially when - he is also a poet.
4. Although diabolically antithetical to philosophy, poetry is also, traditionally, a noumenal art form, with a right to space as the appropriate backdrop - usually exemplified by stanza divisions - for its elucidation of time. Whether this time be expressed sequentially or repetitively, weakly or strongly, or, indeed, by both devices, in greater or lesser degree, at once ... will of course depend upon the type of poet. Though the 'best' poets, like for that matter the 'best' musicians, will tend to prefer the repetitive omega to the sequential alpha, being closer to the Father than to His Satanic adversary. Hence stronger metre (rhythm) and less rhyme, alliteration, assonance, and other apparent devices ... more typifying the negativity of the antipoet. In fact, rhyme is closer to light than to heat, being a seduction of the eye, whereas metre directly appeals to the soul in its rhythmic intensities, and thus stirs up the blood - the last thing that the philosopher would want to do! But poets, as we have seen, are of the Damned, and never more so than when, as in a royalist age, time is the principal element and its expression is accordingly unclouded by heavenly or purgatorial or even mundane scruples, being relatively free of space (except in the aforementioned sense), volume, and mass. Such was how poetry used to be before the 'Age of Reason' and after the 'Age of Faith', when time broke free (relatively speaking) of space, or more correctly space-mass, but had not yet succumbed to the domination of volume, with its puritanical horror of free time. For the 'Age of Reason' brought time low, to coin a phrase, and voluminous poems, scorning the spatial dimension of stanza divisions, increasingly came to supplant poetic ones, the Protestant 'bovaryization' of poetry tailored to the lunar unfolding of a narrative cloth. Now all that remained was for this cloth to be dragged through the dramatic mud of a Republican 'bovaryization' ... for the subversion of time to reach rock-bottom, so to speak, and thus fall-in behind mass as the cardinal element. Here time was truly buried, though, alas, not completely and not for ever; since something akin to epic, lyric, and narrative poetry continued to exist and to haunt the poetic imagination with flights of emotional fancy. The final death of poetry has still to come ... with the 'reign' of the philosopher-king. For where God is, there can be no place for the Devil (to do).
1. To distinguish polytechnics/technical colleges from universities on the basis of a planar/lunar division, with the former broadly catering to working-class students and the latter to their middle-class counterparts.
2. Likewise, to distinguish between academies and seminaries on the basis of a solar/stellar division, with the former having an upper-class connotation and the latter a classless one, as befitting the study of religion.
3. Hence where polytechnics/technical colleges are basically of the (mundane) World, universities are of the (purgatorial) Overworld, academies of the (diabolic) Behind, and seminaries of the (divine) Beyond - at least in their bearing on Christian teachings.
4. The naturalistic and scientific nature of academies contrasts, as Devil to God, with the idealistic and religious nature of seminaries.
5. The realistic and economic nature of polytechnics/technical colleges contrasts, as woman to man, with the materialistic and political nature of universities.
6. The doing nature of academies; the taking nature of universities; the giving nature of technical colleges; and the being nature of seminaries - soul, intellect, will, and spirit.
7. An open society may, in its liberalism, have academies, universities, technical colleges, and seminaries, but a closed society that was orientated towards the Divine would build from technical colleges to seminaries ... of a transcendent order (super-seminaries), doing everything in its power to phase-out and/or scale-down universities and (especially) academies. For where God is, there can be no place for the Devil/man (to do/take), neither in learning nor anything else.
8. A classless society is not established on the basis of giving everybody an equal opportunity to 'better himself' in no matter what context, but solely on the basis of phasing-out upper-class, middle-class, and, ultimately, working-class alternatives to properly classless criteria. For classlessness is specifically religious and divine, and that which is neither religious nor divine, in the true spiritual sense, is an obstacle to the development of a classless society. Hence the equalitarian permissiveness of contemporary Liberals is simply a subversion of classlessness which, willy-nilly, perpetuates the class-bound status quo.
9. What interests God, the Second Coming, is not whether a working-class person is free to go to university and savour traditional middle-class privileges, but whether, in spurning such freedoms, the working class are in a position whereby they can be saved from their own status to the transcendent divinity of the classless Beyond. Difficult as this may be when one is literally working class, it would be next-to-impossible for those who had abandoned the World for the lunar and/or solar regions of universities and academies above. For even working-class people who are too deeply into the World (including that of technical colleges) cannot be saved to the classless Beyond.
1. Correlations between drinking and writing (lunar) and smoking and reading (solar), as regards water and fire. The writer (a novelist) is often inebriated, while the reader (whether poet or not) is just as often given to smoking. For drinking assists the writer no less than smoking ... the reader.
2. Analogous to the above, one could contend that eating assists the speaker, e.g. after-dinner speeches, etc., no less than snorting or, at any rate, sniffing ... the thinker. For correlations also exist between eating and talking (planar) and sniffing and thinking (stellar). In this latter regard, the incense in Catholic churches is primarily intended to facilitate religious thought, or prayer.
3. The important thing about prayers is not whether or not there exists a God to listen to and answer them, but that people are given, through religion, a pretext for thinking in the first place. For, being a mode of religious thought, prayer sustains the devotee in his commitment to a heavenly alternative to speaking (worldly), writing (purgatorial), and reading (hellish). Thought, and hence prayer, may not be the ne plus ultra of spirituality, but it is still preferable to speaking, writing, and reading, and if the only way that a person can be induced to think is through prayer, then so be it! His prayers will not be the complete waste of time that cynics and moral ignoramuses might mistake them for! Yet, when all's said and done, prayer is still only relative to a phenomenal age or society, not to one that, through the Second Coming, had passed beyond the intellect to the noumenal 'Kingdom of Heaven', wherein only meditation could do adequate justice to the spirit's quest for divine resolution ... in the 'Peace that surpasses all understanding'.
1. Essence and quality are no more commensurate than appearance and quantity. For whereas quantity and quality are physical, essence and appearance are metaphysical - the former pair phenomenal and the latter pair noumenal.
2. Strictly speaking, essence is correlative with the divine (being), appearance correlative with the diabolic (doing). Likewise, quantity is correlative with the masculine (taking) and quality correlative with the feminine (giving). Hence one should speak of the beingful essence of God, but ... the doingful appearance of the Devil. Or, similarly, of the takingful quantity, as it were, of man, but ... the givingful quality, so to speak, of woman. Consequently, for God what he or, rather, it is ... is more important than what he/it does, takes, or gives. While, for the Devil, what he/it does ... is more important than what he/it is, takes, or gives. Similarly, for man, what he takes ... is more important than what he is, does, or gives. Whereas for woman, by contrast, what she gives ... is more important than what she is, does, or takes. Obviously, the other factors enter into account in all four contexts to greater or lesser extents. But they will be subordinate, so I contend, to the principal attribute of each context!
3. Hence appearance, quantity, and quality will be subordinate to essence in the divine context of Being, whilst essence, quantity, and quality will be subordinate to appearance in the diabolic context of Doing. Likewise, essence, appearance, and quality will be subordinate to quantity in the masculine context of Taking, whilst essence, appearance, and quantity will be subordinate to quality in the feminine context of Giving. In the divine context, to take a single example, the essence of Being, say negative Being, will be the woeful horror vacui of elemental photon particles diverging from a spatial vacuum, which will take metaphysical precedence over the appearance of negative Being, viz. light, or the illusion of speeding photon particles, as well as over the (comparatively physical) quantity and quality of negative Being - the former dependent upon the amount of electricity powering the light energy and the latter upon the nature of the means through which it is filtered to the external environment, e.g. wattage, colour and shape of light bulb, etc. Now the quantity of light is doubtless an important factor in the overall production of light energy, as is the quality of what is produced. But, from a metaphysical standpoint, it is less significant than the essence and even the appearance of light, which brings us back to illusion (speed) and woe (negative Being).
1. Being is not space, but the nature of space, whether spatial or spaced, determines the essence of Being, making for negative (woeful) and positive (joyful) distinctions. Yet while Being is not space, there could be no Being without space. Hence to be, one must first have space. Whether one is then going to be negatively or positively ... will depend upon the kind of space, with alpha and omega implications between the light-producing spatial space (the vacuous Neant or Nothingness of Sartre's negative Being) and the spirit-inducing spaced space (the airy plenum of meditative breathing which leads to positive Being). In the one case, great sadness is the negative essence of what is effectively the Clear Light of the Void. In the other case, by contrast, great joy is the positive essence of what is effectively the Holy Spirit of Heaven.
2. Doing is not time, but the nature of time, whether sequential or repetitive, determines the appearance of Doing, making for negative (weak) and positive (strong) distinctions. Yet while Doing is not time, there could be no Doing without time. Hence to do, one must first have time. Whether one is then going to do negatively or positively ... will depend upon the kind of time, with alpha and omega implications between the heat-producing sequential time (the fiery vacuum of negative Doing) and the soul-inducing repetitive time (the bloody plenum of emotive feeling which leads to positive Doing). In the one case, great weakness is the negative appearance of what is effectively the Clear Heat of Time. In the other case, by contrast, great strength is the positive appearance of what is effectively the Holy Soul of Hell.
3. Taking is not volume, but the nature of volume, whether volumetric or voluminous, determines the quantity of Taking, making for negative (evil) and positive (good) distinctions. Yet while Taking is not volume, there could be no Taking without volume. Hence to take, one must first have volume. Whether one is then going to take negatively or positively ... will depend upon the kind of volume, with alpha and omega implications between the cold-producing volumetric volume (the watery vacuum of negative Taking) and the mind-inducing voluminous volume (the brainy plenum of cogitative thinking which leads to positive Taking). In the one case, great evil is the quantity of what is effectively the Clear Coldness of Volume. In the other case, by contrast, great goodness is the quantity of what is effectively the Holy Mind of Purgatory.
4. Giving is not mass, but the nature of mass, whether massed or massive, determines the quality of Giving, making for negative (painful) and positive (pleasurable) distinctions. Yet while Giving is not mass, there could be no Giving without mass. Hence to give, one must first have mass. Whether one is then going to give negatively or positively ... will depend upon the kind of mass, with alpha and omega implications between the darkness-producing massed mass (the earthy vacuum of negative Giving) and the will-inducing massive mass (the fleshy plenum of associative willing which leads to positive Giving). In the one case, great pain is the quality of what is effectively the Clear Darkness of Mass. In the other case, great pleasure is the quality of what is effectively the Holy Will of the World.
1. The essence of Being contrasts with the appearance of Doing (whether negative or positive in each case). The heavenly condition is essential and the infernal condition apparent. God and Devil.
2. The quantity of Taking contrasts with the quality of Giving (whether negative or positive in each case). The purgatorial condition is quantitative and the mundane condition qualitative. Man and woman.
3. Damnation is from the quantity of Taking to the appearance of Doing, as from Purgatory to Hell.
4. Salvation is from the quality of Giving to the essence of Being, as from the World to Heaven.
5. For God, where God is (essential) is more important than when God is (apparent), what God is (quantitative) or how God is (qualitative). Whereas for the Devil, when the Devil does (apparent) is more important than where the Devil does (essence), what the Devil does (quantitative), or how the Devil does (qualitative).
6. For man, what man takes (quantitative) is more important than how man takes (qualitative), when man takes (apparent), or where man takes (essential). Whereas for woman, how woman gives (qualitative) is more important than what woman gives (quantitative), when woman gives (apparent), or where woman gives (essential).
7. The 'where' of space contrasts with the 'when' of time, while the 'what' of volume contrasts with the 'how' of mass.
8. Unlike man and woman, who are relative and therefore capable of giving (feminine) and taking (masculine), God and the Devil, being absolute, can only be (divine) or do (diabolic), never be and do by turns. Hence whereas even the worst men are capable of giving and the best women of taking, even if to a limited extent ... relative to their basic gender, God is no more capable of doing than the Devil of being. Time is beneath God and space above the Devil. In fact, God would no more be capable of doing evil (in time) than the Devil of being good (in space).
9. As impossible to be evil ... as to do good ... from the standpoints of the Divine and the Diabolic. Absolute goodness is exemplified through Being and absolute evil through Doing. Relative goodness is exemplified through Giving and relative evil through Taking.
10. To contrast the subjectivism (noumenal) of Being with the objectivism (noumenal) of Doing on the one hand, and the objectivity (phenomenal) of Taking with the subjectivity (phenomenal) of Giving on the other hand. Hence where the subjective alternatives are essential (noumenal) and qualitative (phenomenal), the objective alternatives are apparent (noumenal) and quantitative (phenomenal).
1. Those who are intent upon ‘keeping up appearances', e.g. adhering to objectivism, will always be denied the benefit of essences. For subjectivism will remain forever 'beyond their pale'.
2. To be essential, or noumenally subjective, is to care nothing for appearances, since where God is, there can be no place for the Devil (to do).
3. The Saved are always essential (beingful) and the Damned apparent (doingful), whereas the Purgatorial are ever quantitative (takingful) and the Sinful ... qualitative (givingful).
4. The Saved can no more be evil than the Damned can do Good. One can only be good and do evil.
5. The Purgatorial can no more take good than the Sinful can give evil. One can only take (know) evil and give (act) good.
6. To be/give subjectively, but to do/take objectively, thereby differentiating between good (subjectivism/subjectivity) and evil (objectivism/objectivity).
7. Impression and expression are each good (subjective), whereas explosion and implosion are each evil (objective).
8. The spirit is good but the light is evil. Or, more specifically, the inner spirit is absolutely good, while the outer spirit is relatively good - the former noumenally subjective (essential) and the latter phenomenally subjective (qualitative). Conversely, the inner light is relatively evil, while the outer light is absolutely evil - the former phenomenally objective (quantitative) and the latter noumenally objective (apparent).
9. Hence to contrast the absolute evil (noumenally objective) of the Clear Light of the Void with the absolute good (noumenally subjective) of the Holy Spirit of Heaven. Whilst, in between, the relative evil (phenomenally objective) of the Unclear Light of Heaven contrasts with the relative good (phenomenally subjective) of the Unholy Spirit of the Void.
1. Because the outer light is absolutely evil in relation to the relative evil of the inner light, one has a right to speak of it as divine absolute evil (objectivism) in relation to the divine relative evil (objectivity) of the inner light. Conversely, because the inner spirit is absolutely good in relation to the relative good of the outer spirit, one can speak of it as divine absolute good (subjectivism) in relation to the divine relative good (subjectivity) of the outer spirit.
2. Hence to contrast the divine absolute evil of the outer light with the divine absolute good of the inner spirit where the noumenal extremes are concerned, while reserving for the phenomenal middle-ground ... a contrast between the divine relative good of the outer spirit and the divine relative evil of the inner light.
3. Because particles are objective (evil) and wavicles subjective (good), we can contrast the elemental photon particles of the outer light with the elemental photon wavicles of the inner spirit, while reserving for the phenomenal middle-ground a contrast between the molecular photon wavicles of the outer spirit and the molecular photon particles of the inner light.
4. Hence from the elemental photon particles of divine absolute evil to the elemental photon wavicles of divine absolute good via the molecular photon wavicles of divine relative good and the molecular photon particles of divine relative evil, as from the Clear Light of the Void to the Holy Spirit of Heaven via the Unholy Spirit of the Void and the Unclear Light of Heaven.
5. Just as we have drawn distinctions between absolute/relative divine good and evil, so can like absolute/relative distinctions be drawn between diabolic, purgatorial, and mundane (or worldly) good and evil, the good options being subjective and the evil ones objective, as before.
6. Hence to contrast the elemental proton particles of the outer heat with the elemental proton wavicles of the inner soul, while reserving for the phenomenal middle-ground a contrast between the molecular proton wavicles of the outer soul and the molecular proton particles of the inner heat.
7. Thus from the elemental proton particles of diabolic absolute evil to the elemental proton wavicles of diabolic absolute good via the molecular proton wavicles of diabolic relative good and the molecular proton particles of diabolic relative evil, as from the Clear Heat of Time to the Holy Soul of Hell via the Unholy Soul of Time and the Unclear Heat of Hell.
8. Likewise to contrast the elemental neutron particles of the outer coldness with the elemental neutron wavicles of the inner mind, while reserving to the phenomenal middle-ground a contrast between the molecular neutron wavicles of the outer mind and the molecular neutron particles of the inner coldness.
9. Thus from the elemental neutron particles of purgatorial absolute evil to the elemental neutron wavicles of purgatorial absolute good via the molecular neutron wavicles of purgatorial relative good and the molecular neutron particles of purgatorial relative evil, as from the Clear Coldness of Volume to the Holy Mind of Purgatory via the Unholy Mind of Volume and the Unclear Coldness of Purgatory.
10. Finally, to contrast the elemental electron particles of the outer darkness with the elemental electron wavicles of the inner will, while reserving for the phenomenal middle-ground a contrast between the molecular electron wavicles of the outer will and the molecular electron particles of the inner darkness.
11. Thus from the elemental electron particles of mundane absolute evil to the elemental electron wavicles of mundane absolute good via the molecular electron wavicles of mundane relative good and the molecular electron particles of mundane relative evil, as from the Clear Darkness of Mass to the Holy Will of the World via the Unholy Will of Mass and the Unclear Darkness of the World.
1. Although the divine spectrum is characterized by Being (essence), one should distinguish between the apparent Being of the Clear Light of the Void, viz. outer light; the qualitative Being of the Unholy Spirit of the Void, viz. outer spirit; the quantitative Being of the Unclear Light of Heaven, viz. inner light; and the essential Being of the Holy Spirit of Heaven, viz. inner spirit.
2. Likewise, while the diabolic spectrum is characterized by Doing (appearance), one should distinguish between the apparent Doing of the Clear Heat of Time, viz. outer heat; the qualitative Doing of the Unholy Soul of Time, viz. outer soul; the quantitative Doing of the Unclear Heat of Hell, viz. inner heat; and the essential Doing of the Holy Soul of Hell, viz. inner soul.
3. Similarly, while the purgatorial spectrum is characterized by Taking (quantitative), one should distinguish between the apparent Taking of the Clear Coldness of Volume, viz. outer coldness; the qualitative Taking of the Unholy Mind of Volume, viz. outer mind; the quantitative Taking of the Unclear Coldness of Purgatory, viz. inner coldness; and the essential Taking of the Holy Mind of Purgatory, viz. inner mind.
4. Finally, while the mundane spectrum is characterized by Giving (qualitative), one should distinguish between the apparent Giving of the Clear Darkness of Mass, viz. outer darkness; the qualitative Giving of the Unholy Will of Mass, viz. outer will; the quantitative Giving of the Unclear Darkness of the World, viz. inner darkness; and the essential Giving of the Holy Will of the World, viz. inner will.
5. Hence we can speak of apparent, qualitative, quantitative, and essential subdivisions within the overall contexts of Being, Doing, Taking, and Giving, viz. Heaven, Hell, Purgatory, and the World.
1. The supernatural is what lies beyond nature or, more specifically, that which is positively supernatural ... is the ultimate supernature (in contrast to the negative supernature of what lies behind nature as its cosmic precondition). Now if the elemental essence or, if you will, quality of nature is the electron, then the elemental essence of supernature is the photon, whether or not we then distinguish, as I have, between negative and positive supernature on the basis of a particle/wavicle dichotomy, with further subdivisions between the elemental absolutes and the molecular relativities in between - the former noumenal and the latter phenomenal.
2. Be that as it may, we can have no hesitation in ascribing an electron attribute to nature (both negative and positive) and a photon attribute to supernature, while reserving for that which runs contrary to nature, viz. antinature, a neutron attribute, and for that which lies behind antinature, viz. anti-supernature, a proton attribute - the former basically quantitative and the latter fundamentally apparent.
3. Now whereas nature is mundane, antinature is purgatorial. And whereas supernature is divine, anti-supernature is diabolic. Thus while nature and supernature, viz. the electron and the photon, appertain to the subjective side of the Universe, antinature and anti-supernature, viz. the neutron and the proton, appertain to its objective side. Hence a distinction, one might argue, between the feminine earth and the divine Beyond (as well as stellar Heaven in the anterior context of negative Being), on the one hand, but between the masculine moon and the diabolic sun on the other hand, a distinction, in other words, between relative/absolute good and evil. For where nature is phenomenally subjective and supernature ... noumenally subjective, antinature is phenomenally objective and anti-supernature ... noumenally objective. Electrons/photons vis-à-vis neutrons/protons.
1. If the electron is the element of nature, then nature is qualitative, and hence phenomenally subjective, which is to say, relatively good.
2. If the neutron is the element of antinature, then antinature is quantitative, and hence phenomenally objective, which is to say, relatively evil.
3. Hence whatever goes against nature, as antinature, is relatively evil, the evil of the purgatorial Overworld in opposition to the mundane World, or man to woman.
4. If the photon is the element of supernature, then supernature is essential, and hence noumenally subjective, which is to say, absolutely good.
5. If the proton is the element of anti-supernature, then anti-supernature is apparent, and hence noumenally objective, which is to say, absolutely evil.
6. Hence whatever goes against supernature, as anti-supernature, is absolutely evil, the evil of Hell in diabolic opposition to divine Heaven, or the Devil to God.
7. To contrast the eccentricity (soul) of the Father with the psycho-centricity (spirit) of the Holy Ghost on the one hand, but the egocentricity of the Son (intellect) with the concentricity of the Mother (will) on the other hand.
8. Eccentricity, being apparent, is diabolic, whereas psycho-centricity, being essential, is divine.
9. Egocentricity, being quantitative, is purgatorial, whereas concentricity, being qualitative, is mundane.
10. Nonconformism contrasts with Humanism as antinature with nature, whereas Fundamentalism contrasts with Transcendentalism as anti-supernature with supernature.
11. The eccentric person has no spiritual self, whereas the psycho-centric person is all spiritual self, the former being a fundamentalist Devil and the latter a transcendentalist God.
12. The egocentric person has, relatively speaking, no physical self and the concentric person is, relatively speaking, all physical self, the former being a nonconformist Half-Devil (man) and the latter a humanist Half-God (woman).
13. Lacking spiritual self, the eccentric person is damned to the emotional not-self of perceptual appearances.
14. Lacking physical (wilful) self, the egocentric person is confined to the intellectual not-self of perceptual quantities.
15. The emotional not-self of perceptual appearances contrasts absolutely with the spiritual self of conceptual essences, as noumenal objectivity with noumenal subjectivity.
16. The intellectual not-self of perceptual quantities contrasts relatively with the instinctual self of conceptual qualities, as phenomenal objectivity with phenomenal subjectivity.
1. The extent to which human nature is good or evil varies from class to class and society to society, but can nevertheless be quantified on the following metaphysical basis: namely, that human nature is relatively good when the electron is uppermost, since the electron is phenomenally subjective, and hence the element most characteristic of nature. In fact, the term 'human nature' is such that we have to identify it with the electron and thus with relative good; though humanist nature would be more specific to the World, and would contrast with the nonconformist antinature, so to speak, of the Overworld, viz. lunar criteria, as especially applicable to overly masculine and materialist contexts. Hence there is a very literal sense in which, though human(ist) nature is good (relative to the phenomenal subjectivity of the electron), nonconformist antinature is evil, albeit less on absolute than on relative, and hence phenomenal, terms, as germane to the neutron, the element of phenomenal objectivity which has its basis, so to speak, in the lunar artificiality (antinature) of purgatory.
2. Now as the working class are the class, par excellence, of the World, it follows that relative goodness attaches to this class more than to any other, since it is precisely the class in which human(ist) nature, governed by the will, achieves its phenomenal embodiment. By contrast, the middle class, governed by the intellect, are the class, par excellence, of Purgatory, and thus stand to the working class in a relatively evil light, the (inner) light of nonconformist antinature, wherein the neutron has its objective throne.
3. To the extent that they can be identified with the neutron, the middle class are therefore the class enemy of the working class, with an elemental bias that, rooted in the intellect, conduces towards the relative evil of phenomenal objectivity. There is no way in which we could categorically argue that the middle class are commensurate with human(ist) nature. On the contrary, this class is antithetically ranged against it.
4. Yet if the middle class are relatively evil, then the upper class are arguably absolutely evil, since the class, par excellence, of what we may call fundamentalist anti-supernature, as germane to the proton, the element of noumenal objectivity which has its roots in the solar Hell of the diabolic Behind. Now such a Behind contrasts absolutely with the noumenal subjectivity of the divine Beyond, the photon-centred absolute goodness of transcendentalist supernature, which is classless. Hence while the upper class are absolutely evil to the extent that they can be identified with noumenal objectivity, the classless alone are absolutely good, and thus the salvation of the World, viz. the electron-centred working class, where human(ist) nature can and, I believe, will be transmuted upwards and inwards in the course of Messianic time, becoming transcendentally supernatural, or absolutely good. Such is the World's destiny, and it confirms that, while human nature is relatively good, not all mankind can be evaluated according to humanist criteria, since where there is nonconformist antinature (middle class) or fundamentalist anti-supernature (upper class), human nature is only peripheral to the prevailing evil, be it relative or absolute, which characterizes the elemental disposition of these two classes.
1. To contrast the phenomenal subjectivity of pipe smoking with the phenomenal objectivity of cigar smoking - the former mundane and the latter purgatorial.
2. Likewise to contrast the noumenal subjectivity of roll-ups with the noumenal objectivity of cigarettes - the former heavenly and the latter hellish.
3. Although smoking is rooted in the alpha, on whichever spectrum of moral evaluation, we can distinguish between the subjectivity (both noumenal and phenomenal) of roll-ups and pipes on the one hand, and the objectivity (both phenomenal and noumenal) of cigars and cigarettes on the other hand, the former negatively good (both absolutely and relatively) and the latter negatively evil (both relatively and absolutely). Put theologically, one could argue that whereas the smoking of roll-ups correlates with the Antispirit (negative God), pipe smoking correlates with the Antimother (negative woman). And that whereas cigar smoking correlates with the Antichrist (negative man), cigarette smoking correlates with the Antifather (negative Devil). Thus we descend, in negativity, from the divinity of roll-ups to the femininity of pipes via the devility of cigarettes and the masculinity of cigars.
4. From the nonconformist/lunar standpoint of cigars, cigarette smoking corresponds to a fundamentalist/solar damnation. Conversely, from the humanist/planar standpoint of pipes, the smoking of roll-ups corresponds to a transcendentalist/stellar salvation. In fact, where the cigar is middle class, the cigarette is upper class. And where the pipe is working class, the roll-up is classless - though only, of course, in relation to the alpha of negative evaluation. For the omega of positive evaluation will always be beyond smoking ... of whatever type.
5. Magazines, newspapers, co-mags (comic books), and books are all lunar by dint of their intellectual essence, whereas televisions, midis, video-recorders, and computers are planar (planetary) by dint of having an instinctual essence - the former quadruplicity based on the neutron and the latter on the electron. Hence whereas the first-named quadruplicity is nonconformist and materialist, the second one is humanist and realist - all the difference, in sum, between the masculine and the feminine (albeit to greater or lesser degrees, depending upon the nature of the media in question). For although each quadruplicity is phenomenal (as opposed to noumenal), those in the first category are cerebral, or of the head, while those in the second category are corporeal, or of the body, given the lunar/planar, or intellectual/instinctual distinctions which exist between them, as with regard to the purgatorial Overworld and the mundane World. Hence the way to the Beyond is not via magazines, newspapers, co-mags, or books, but via midis and computers, since these are the media of the World which are most subjective, and thus closer to the spirit.
6. Just as the above distinction between a 'neutron' quadruplicity and an 'electron' quadruplicity suggests a kind of middle-class/working-class antithesis, so such an antithesis is suggested by the distinction between acoustic and electric music - the former usually Classical and the latter Popular (pop). For where Classical music is generally intellectual, Pop music, by contrast, is generally instinctual and thus a music (to dance to) of the World as opposed to Purgatory, wherein the acoustic 'neutron' has its intellectual throne. Now on this throne, traditionally, sits man in a sort of objective defiance of the feminine World, his music no less relatively evil in relation to the phenomenal subjectivity of Pop music ... than the above-named quadruplicity (of magazines, newspapers, co-mags, and books) is relatively evil, in its phenomenal objectivity, in relation to the electronic quadruplicity which more typifies human nature in the modern age.
1. From the realism of human nature to the idealism of superhuman supernature, as from electrons to photons, the mundane World to the divine Beyond.
2. From the materialism of inhuman (nonconformist) antinature to the naturalism of super-inhuman (fundamentalist) anti-supernature, as from neutrons to protons, the purgatorial Overworld to the diabolic Behind.
3. That which is contrary to nature is inhuman, for it is a manifestation of the not-self (both phenomenally and noumenally) and therefore objectively evil.
4. Generally, men are against nature and women of it, though this is not to say that all men are evil and all women ... good.
5. Where nature is relatively good and culture absolutely good, civilization is relatively evil and barbarism absolutely evil. For nature is a manifestation of the physical self and culture a manifestation of the metaphysical self, whereas civilization is a manifestation of the physical not-self and barbarism a manifestation of the metaphysical not-self.
6. The physical self, or will, contrasts relatively with the physical not-self, or intellect, whereas the metaphysical self, or spirit, contrasts absolutely with the metaphysical not-self, or soul.
7. Will is the quality of nature, spirit the essence of culture - the former mundane and the latter divine.
8. Intellect is the quantity of civilization, soul the appearance of barbarism - the former purgatorial and the latter diabolic.
9. Woman is the personification of nature and man the personification of civilization - the former relatively good and the latter relatively evil.
10. God is the 'personification' of culture and the Devil the 'personification' of barbarism - the former absolutely good and the latter absolutely evil.
11. The development of the physical self through nature leads to woman, whereas the development of the physical not-self through civilization leads to man.
12. The development of the metaphysical self through culture leads to God, whereas the development of the metaphysical not-self through barbarism leads to the Devil.
13. The element of nature is earth, whereas the element of civilization is water.
14. The element of culture is air, whereas the element of barbarism is fire.
15. The expression of the flesh through earth (food) contrasts relatively with the implosion of the brain through water (ink).
16. The impression of the mind through air (meditation) contrasts absolutely with the explosion of the blood through fire (injury).
17. The expression of the will through the flesh (sex) contrasts relatively with the implosion of the intellect through the brain (word).
18. The impression of the spirit through the mind (conscious focus) contrasts absolutely with the explosion of the soul through the blood (emotion).
1. No less than intellect is dependent upon the brain, so consciousness is dependent upon air. But the ability to focus consciousness is mind, which transcends the brain.
2. Consciousness is never more focused than when it is one with the air in a convergence of absolute mind to the omega point of the psyche, or so-called 'crown centre'.
3. Expressions like 'mind that step' or 'mind your own business' indicate that mind is something which has to be applied to consciousness in order to focus it at a specific point. For consciousness is like a flame that burns on the wick of air, and whether this flame be focused, and holy, or unfocused, and profane, will depend upon the individual and the circumstances in which he finds himself at any given time. Mostly, for a majority of people much of the time, consciousness is compromised by the senses, especially the sense of sight, and accordingly directed outwards toward some phenomenal entity, which becomes its 'object of focus'. Such external mind is rather more profane than holy, descending, through optical vitiation, towards the outer light. In fact, if taken to optical extremes, external mind can be dissipated by the light, becoming completely vacuous and effectively damned. Therefore external mind is less a blessing than a curse, which should always be guarded against with the aid of techniques that further internal mind, or the focus of consciousness upon the air which is its life's blood, so to speak, and ultimate salvation. For the more consciousness is identified with the plenum of air one breathes-in, the more the Holy Spirit (mind) of Heaven will come to pass, as consciousness, focused on the air, becomes absolute mind, the blissful antithesis of absolute not-mind, or light. Only in such absolute mind is salvation achieved, and such a salvation can and ultimately will be made to last for ever.
1. When intellect is focused, we have relative, or phenomenal, mind. But when consciousness is focused, we have absolute, or noumenal, mind. Relative mind, being intellectual, is purgatorial, whereas absolute mind, being spiritual, is divine.
2. People tend to think that they are rooted in the senses and accordingly conditioned by sense impressions, but, in reality, they are rooted or, rather, centred in the spirit, which is dependent upon the air one breathes for its being. For without air there would be no consciousness and therefore no life. Yet to get air we have to breathe, drawing it into our lungs and expelling it again in a continuous process that goes on twenty-four hours a day every single day of the week. In fact, breathing is so natural to us that we carry-on inhaling and exhaling air during our sleep, long after we have closed our eyes and effectively turned our back, so to speak, on the senses. Thus we are essentially creatures of the spirit, whose consciousness continues to flicker on the wick of our breaths even when we are sound asleep, albeit in a comparatively subconscious fashion. We can manage perfectly well without our eyes and ears during all that nocturnal time we are asleep, but without our breathing we would be dead in less than five minutes. Truly, the senses are peripheral to our true being, since no more than means to enable us to get about in the world and relate ourselves to it. How is it, then, that most people act as though the senses were everything and the spirit next-to-nothing?
3. Whatever the individual's case, it is clear that those who allow themselves to become dominated by the senses ... are less Christian than heathen, since they tend to imagine that man is an alpha-stemming creature whose true home is the Cosmos and, at the very least, a more vacuous approach to life which may well lead to the eclipse of consciousness by the light and, as a corollary, to a greater respect for optical sensuality. For there is of course a connection between light and optics, and the more a man goes against his true nature and seeks to take himself back towards the Cosmos, the greater will be the chance of his simply tumbling forwards from this spatial death into sensuous life and an enslavement, all the more poignant, to the senses, the sense of sight not least of all. Thus what was intended to be an escape becomes a trap, and the individual concerned is more at variance with his true nature than before. And yet he, like everybody else, carries on breathing, but so unconsciously as to be scarcely aware of it! His true self is still there, but as though an aside to the sensuous distractions which claim his attention and which he foolishly mistakes for real life. Small wonder that the spiritual life is regarded as a 'rebirth' in a world where most people have seemingly substituted a life dominated by the senses for their true one, unaware that the latter is more natural than the former and that when we home-in on it ... we become supernatural, and thus completely beyond the senses. In fact, that is precisely what saves us from the world of sensuous delusion, making us realize that we are essentially omega orientated, and thus potentially divine. If only people would accept their true centre, they wouldn't carry on behaving like devils, blown hither-and-thither by an eccentricity which has its roots in optical, aural, and other forms of sensuous idolatry. Alas, the World is still too much with them!
4. Thus while man's appearance might suggest that his origins are somewhat less than divine, his essence confirms him in an omega bias which, stretching from the lungs, points towards a divine ending ... in absolute mind. Yet it has been said that man is fashioned in God's image, which would suggest, by contrast, that his origins were divine, since it is in the image of a Creator-God that such a doctrine perceives man, and images are nothing if not apparent. A divine appearance? But surely that is a contradiction in terms! And how can a creature whose appearance leaves so much to be desired from a spiritual point of view ... possibly be fashioned in the image of a divine God, no matter how negative this God may be when judged by truly divine, or omega-oriented, standards, which have nothing whatsoever to do with images? A strange God, indeed, whose image is found on the countenance of man! For what is such a countenance, after all, but a composite, together with the body in general, of disparate and heterogeneous elements, some of which may arguably have been extrapolated from some primal and therefore negative divinity, but assuredly not all of them! Else one would be reduced to conceiving of the Divine in comprehensively composite terms, quite overlooking the moral distinction which indubitably exists between, say, the central star of the Galaxy and peripheral stars like the sun, which exist in a 'fallen' relationship to the central one. No, this image of God may be negatively divine - and thus extrapolated from the Galaxy's central star - so far as the so-called 'Third Eye' of the forehead is concerned; but as for the eyes and ears as well, surely the sun and the moon would be the more likely sources of origin, sources at once diabolic and purgatorial, with the right eye/ear deriving, in their more aggressive nature, from the former and the left eye/ear deriving from the latter, a comparatively more passive source. Hence a 'solar eye' and a 'lunar eye' either side of a 'stellar eye', the 'Third Eye' of mystical Godhead, with an aural back-up for all these eyes (even, I would guess, for the divine eye, with its 'voice of conscience').
5. As regards the nostrils, a similar left/right distinction can also be made, though less in terms of the sun and the moon than with reference to the 'Third Eye' in the case of the right nostril and to the spirit in that of the left one, the former slightly more biased towards exhalation and the latter towards inhalation, a reactive/attractive distinction which points-up a parallel with the light and the air respectively. Thus where the right nostril might be regarded as being, in some sense, alpha stemming on account of its bias towards exhalation, the left nostril would seem to reflect an omega orientation by dint of its slighter bias towards inhalation, thereby running contrary to the 'Third Eye' ... of pineal imagination. Of course, neither nostril is literally of the Divine, since a physical channel for the passage of breath to and from the lungs. But the nostrils are rather more spiritual than sensual, given their close connection with the air. They pander to the spiritual essence of mankind ... as beings for whom the lungs are primary and the senses secondary. We cannot live without them!
1. In regard to the above, I should like to advance the theory that a retroussé nose is more suited to inhalations than to exhalations, in contrast to the greater disposition for exhalations of an aquiline nose. Hence where the snub-nosed person would suggest an omega orientation commensurate with a bias towards inhalation and, by implication, the left nostril, his hook-nosed counterpart would suggest, by contrast, an alpha orientation commensurate with a bias towards exhalation and thus, by implication, the right nostril, the reactive nostril of a light equation. In between, however, would come the more or less balanced breathing (between inhalations and exhalations) of straight-nosed people, who are neither for nor against the air, but effectively neutral in their physiognomic stance between alpha and omega, the light and the spirit.
2. All such speculation is not, of course, to be taken too literally, but used rather more as a loose guide to the relationship between physiognomy and moral type, as well as viewed in relation to the exaggerated claims of traditional religion with regard to the divine image, etc., which no one in his right (or perhaps I should say left) mind would take too seriously, in view of the dubiously divine nature of images anyway, not to mention the manifestly heterogeneous composition of the human countenance ... with or without bodily appurtenances. Only a liberally amoral person would mistake the totality of cosmic precedent for God, notwithstanding the negatively divine standing which attaches to that aspect of it which was truly primal, and hence of the Clear Light of the Void - namely, the central star of this galaxy, and therefore unworthy of the slightest degree of Christian respect. For Christianity is all about the 'Kingdom Within', and the more one develops that ... with the aid, needless to say, of breathing techniques which facilitate enhanced consciousness, the less concern will one have for the 'Kingdom Without' in the starry Cosmos. Verily, that man who is at one with his true nature is no Devil-mongering heathen, but a God-affirming Christian who may yet achieve, through the Second Coming, a Superchristic transcendentalism which should directly lead to the omega point of ultimate salvation. The folly of cosmic fundamentalism can have no place in the life of such a man. His liberation will be complete.
3. My work is no heathen heresy, but the godly gnosis of our time.
1. Not until the British lion lies down
Irish lamb ... will the '
2. The 'Third Eye', or pineal gland of cosmic imagination, only comes awake with the sleep of the visible eyes, opening up to the light of spatial dreams.
3. Soul, or emotion, is dependent upon the blood; intellect, or reason, upon the brain; and spirit, or consciousness, upon the air - Father, Son, and Holy Ghost of the psyche. Likewise will, or instinct, is dependent upon the flesh, being akin to the Mother. One might say that soul is metaphysically affiliated to the blood, intellect likewise affiliated to the brain, spirit metaphysically affiliated to the air, and will likewise affiliated to the flesh (with particular regard to the sex organs).
4. Just as intellect can be called relative mind in relation to the absolute mind of spirit, so soul can be called absolute will in relation to the relative will of the flesh. Hence a distinction between the relative mind of the intellect (brain) and the relative will of the flesh (sex organs) on the one hand, that of the phenomenal, but between the absolute will of the soul (blood) and the absolute mind of the spirit (air) on the other hand, that of the noumenal. Now whereas both relative mind and absolute will are objective, relative will and absolute mind are alike subjective - the former pair commensurate with Purgatory (Christ) and Hell (the Father), the latter pair commensurate with the World (Mother) and Heaven (the Holy Ghost). At least this is the case when we are considering positive manifestations of relative and absolute will/mind. For where the negative options are concerned, we are dealing rather more with the Antichrist and Satan (the Antifather) on the one hand, that of negative relative mind and absolute will respectively, but with the Cursed Whore (Antimother) and Jehovah (the Antispirit) on the other hand, that of negative relative will and absolute mind respectively.
1. The heart is the seat of the soul, pumping blood around the body twenty-four hours a day seven days a week, which is to say, on a continual basis which is no less a manifestation of absolute will than the continual breathing of the lungs a manifestation of absolute mind. For whereas the heart has intimate connections with the blood, and hence soul, the lungs have intimate connections with the air, and hence spirit. Without blood, no emotions. Without air, no consciousness.
2. By comparison to the heart, the sex organs are only intermittently in action ... as instinctual sensations, thereby confirming their relation to relative will, which is less noumenally objective (like the heart) than phenomenally subjective. Similarly, by comparison to the lungs, the brain is only intermittently in action ... as intellectual cogitations, thereby confirming its relation to relative mind, which is less noumenally subjective (like the lungs) than phenomenally objective. Hence while we can distinguish heart from lungs on the basis of an absolute dichotomy, that between the sex organs and the brain is rather more relative, as befitting their phenomenal standings in respective relation, primarily, to the mundane World and the purgatorial Overworld, both of which contrast with the noumenal standings of the heart and the lungs in respective relation, primarily, to Hell and Heaven, viz. soul and spirit, the former effectively diabolic (emotional) and the latter divine (spiritual).
3. Thus whereas the brain and the sex organs provide us with a vertical axis, so to speak, between man and woman, water and earth, the heart and the lungs provide us, by contrast, with a horizontal axis between the Devil and God, fire and air. For human beings are less images of God ... than composites of divine, diabolic, purgatorial, and mundane factors which, deriving from cosmic sources, exist in an uneasy symbiosis of mutual tensions, now this, now that, never entirely any one thing. Therefore the triumph of God over the Devil, man, and woman ultimately presupposes the overcoming of human beings by and through the development of post-human life forms engineered out of them to an ever-more divine pitch. For only in such a development will the Ideal come absolutely to pass, consigning diabolical naturalism, purgatorial materialism, and terrestrial (mundane) realism to the rubbish heaps of human history.
1. Although we concur with Schopenhauer that the world is 'Will and Representation' (or Intellect, Idea, etc.), it should be apparent from the above entries that there is also a lot more to it than Schopenhauer's philosophy would allow, including, not least, the absolute will of soul and the absolute mind of spirit, both of which, while having some bearing on the world, tower above it in contrary directions, as befitting their noumenal status in relation to diabolic and divine alternatives.
2. Yet even if we limit the term 'world' to that which primarily appertains, in quasi-religious fashion, to the World, viz. the feminine realm of nature, the fact remains that the World is less a combination of 'Will' (or sensations) and 'Representation' (or ideas) than a context of sensational will alone, with 'Representation' appertaining to what we have termed the purgatorial Overworld, viz. the masculine realm of civilization, or intellect.
3. Hence the World is both more and less, depending on our definition of it, than a realm of 'Will and Representation'. It is a realm in which both will and mind are locked in a metaphysical struggle for either phenomenal or noumenal control, with relative and absolute implications depending on the type of will or mind in the ascendancy at any given time. Either will eclipses mind in heathen innocence, or mind banishes will to the nether regions, seemingly, of a Christian Hell. Thus did relative mind triumph over relative will, only to be eclipsed, in due historical course, by the absolute will which lies in wait behind it, like the Devil behind man, or the sun behind the moon. Now the World awaits salvation from its relative will in the absolute mind of God.
1. The apparent Being of the outer light contrasts absolutely with the essential Being of the inner spirit, while the qualitative Being of the outer spirit contrasts relatively with the quantitative Being of the inner light.
2. The apparent Doing of the outer heat contrasts absolutely with the essential Doing of the inner soul, while the qualitative Doing of the outer soul contrasts relatively with the quantitative Doing of the inner heat.
3. The apparent Taking of the outer coldness contrasts absolutely with the essential Taking of the inner mind, while the qualitative Taking of the outer mind contrasts relatively with the quantitative Taking of the inner coldness.
4. The apparent Giving of the outer darkness contrasts absolutely with the essential Giving of the inner will, while the qualitative Giving of the outer will contrasts relatively with the quantitative Giving of the inner darkness.
5. The appearance of Doing (Alpha Devil) contrasts absolutely with the essence of Being (Omega God), while the quality of Giving (inner woman) contrasts relatively with the quantity of Taking (outer man).
6. Whereas apparent/quantitative Being is spatial, qualitative/essential Being is spaced.
7. Whereas apparent/quantitative Doing is sequential, qualitative/essential Doing is repetitive.
8. Whereas apparent/quantitative Taking is volumetric, qualitative/essential Taking is voluminous.
9. Whereas apparent/quantitative Giving is massed, qualitative/essential Giving is massive.
10. The perceptual objectivity of spatial Being contrasts, as light, with the conceptual subjectivity of spaced Being, or spirit.
11. The perceptual objectivity of sequential Doing contrasts, as heat, with the conceptual subjectivity of repetitive Doing, or soul.
12. The perceptual objectivity of volumetric Taking contrasts, as coldness, with the conceptual subjectivity of voluminous Taking, or intellect.
13. The perceptual objectivity of massed Giving contrasts, as darkness, with the conceptual subjectivity of massive Giving, or will.
14. Nature is developed through will (flesh) and antinature through darkness (earth).
15. Civilization is developed through mind (brain) and anti-civilization through coldness (water).
16. Barbarism is developed through soul (blood) and anti-barbarism through hotness (fire).
17. Culture is developed through spirit (air) and anticulture through brightness (light).
18. The nature of the Blessed Virgin vis-à-vis the antinature of the Cursed Whore.
19. The civilization of Christ vis-à-vis the anti-civilization of the Antichrist.
20. The barbarism of the Father vis-à-vis the anti-barbarism of the Antifather (Satan).
21. The culture of the Holy Spirit vis-à-vis the anticulture of the Antispirit (Jehovah).
22. The massive nature of the Holy Will of the World (the Mother) vis-à-vis the massed antinature of the Clear Darkness of Mass (the Antimother).
23. The voluminous civilization of the Holy Mind of Purgatory (the Son) vis-à-vis the volumetric anti-civilization of the Clear Coldness of Volume (the Antichrist).
24. The repetitive barbarism of the Holy Soul of Hell (the Father) vis-à-vis the sequential anti-barbarism of the Clear Heat of Time (Satan).
25. The spaced culture of the Holy Spirit of Heaven (the Second Coming) vis-à-vis the spatial anticulture of the Clear Light of the Void (Jehovah).
26. The massive nature of the Unholy Will of Mass (the outer Mother) vis-à-vis the massed antinature of the Unclear Darkness of the World (the inner Antimother).
27. The voluminous civilization of the Unholy Mind of Volume (the outer Son) vis-à-vis the volumetric anti-civilization of the Unclear Coldness of Purgatory (the inner Antison).
28. The repetitive barbarism of the Unholy Soul of Time (the outer Father) vis-à-vis the sequential anti-barbarism of the Unclear Heat of Hell (the inner Antifather).
29. The spaced culture of the Unholy Spirit of the Void (the outer Spirit) vis-à-vis the spatial anticulture of the Unclear Light of Heaven (the inner Antispirit).
1. From the appearance of Being, which is brightness, to the essence of Being, which is spirit - alpha and omega of the divine. Brightness, which is spatial Being, has no essence, while spirit, which is spaced Being, has no appearance.
2. From the appearance of Doing, which is hotness, to the essence of Doing, which is soul - alpha and omega of the diabolic. Hotness, which is sequential Doing, has no essence, while soul, which is repetitive Doing, has no appearance.
3. From the appearance of Taking, which is coldness, to the essence of Taking, which is mind - alpha and omega of the masculine. Coldness, which is volumetric Taking, has no essence, while mind, which is voluminous Taking, has no appearance.
4. From the appearance of Giving, which is darkness, to the essence of Giving, which is will - alpha and omega of the feminine. Darkness, which is massed Giving, has no essence, while will, which is massive Giving, has no appearance.
5. Particles, having no essence, are individual, whereas wavicles, being all essence, are collective - vacuums and plenums of an alpha/omega dichotomy.
6. Hence whereas God is an individual (Jehovah) in the alpha context of photon particles, God is a collective entity (the Holy Spirit of Heaven) in the omega context of photon wavicles.
7. From the quality of Being, which is outer spirit, to the quantity of Being, which is inner light: omega-in-the-alpha and alpha-in-the-omega of the divine. Outer spirit, which is spaced Being, has no quantity, while inner light, which is spatial Being, has no quality.
8. From the quality of Doing, which is outer soul, to the quantity of Doing, which is inner heat: omega-in-the-alpha and alpha-in-the-omega of the diabolic. Outer soul, which is repetitive Doing, has no quantity, while inner heat, which is sequential Doing, has no quality.
9. From the quality of Taking, which is outer mind, to the quantity of Taking, which is inner coldness: omega-in-the-alpha and alpha-in-the-omega of the masculine. Outer mind, which is voluminous Taking, has no quantity, while inner coldness, which is volumetric Taking, has no quality.
10. From the quality of Giving, which is outer will, to the quantity of Giving, which is inner darkness: omega-in-the-alpha and alpha-in-the-omega of the feminine. Outer will, which is massive Giving, has no quantity, while inner darkness, which is massed Giving, has no quality.
11. The being against others of the outer light (elemental photon particles) contrasts absolutely with the being for self of the inner spirit (elemental photon wavicles), while the being against self of the inner light (molecular photon particles) contrasts relatively with the being for others of the outer spirit (molecular photon wavicles).
12. The doing against others of the outer heat (elemental proton particles) contrasts absolutely with the doing for self of the inner soul (elemental proton wavicles), while the doing against self of the inner heat (molecular proton particles) contrasts relatively with the doing for others of the outer soul (molecular proton wavicles).
13. The taking against others of the outer coldness (elemental neutron particles) contrasts absolutely with the taking for self of the inner mind (elemental neutron wavicles), while the taking against self of the inner coldness (molecular neutron particles) contrasts relatively with the taking for others of the outer mind (molecular neutron wavicles).
14. The giving against others of the outer darkness (elemental electron particles) contrasts absolutely with the giving for self of the inner will (elemental electron wavicles), while the giving against self of the inner darkness (molecular electron particles) contrasts relatively with the giving for others of the outer will (molecular electron wavicles).
1. More pedantically than the above, one should distinguish between the noumenal self and the phenomenal self, both outer and inner in negative and positive antitheses, of Being and Giving, in contrast to the noumenal not-self and the phenomenal not-self, both outer and inner in negative and positive antitheses, of Doing and Taking. Thus, for example, the doing against not-others of the outer heat (negative outer noumenal not-self) contrasts absolutely with the doing for not-self of the inner soul (positive inner noumenal not-self), while the doing against not-self of the inner heat (negative inner noumenal not-self) contrasts relatively with the doing for not-others of the outer soul (positive outer noumenal not-self).
2. Likewise, the taking against not-others of the outer coldness (negative outer phenomenal not-self) contrasts absolutely with the taking for not-others of the inner mind (positive inner phenomenal not-self), while the taking against not-self of the inner coldness (negative inner phenomenal not-self) contrasts relatively with the taking for not-others of the outer mind (positive outer phenomenal not-self).
3. One can no more do against/for the noumenal self than be for/against the noumenal not-self; no more take against/for the phenomenal self than give for/against the phenomenal not-self. One can only do against/for the noumenal not-self; take against/for the phenomenal not-self.
4. Similarly, one can no more do against/for other noumenal selves than be for/against other noumenal not-selves; no more take against/for other phenomenal selves than give for/against other phenomenal not-selves. One can only do against/for other noumenal not-selves; take against/for other phenomenal not-selves.
5. The context of Being is germane to the noumenal self, and to nothing else. The context of Doing is germane to the noumenal not-self, and to nothing else. The context of Taking is germane to the phenomenal not-self, and to nothing else. The context of Giving is germane to the phenomenal self, and to nothing else. However, selves, like not-selves, can be negative or positive, as well as outer or inner in either case.
6. Hence to be against others is to be against other negative noumenal selves from the viewpoint of outer negative noumenal self, whereas to be against self is to be against the negative noumenal self from the viewpoint of inner negative noumenal self. Conversely, to be for others is to be for other positive noumenal selves from the standpoint of outer positive noumenal self, whereas to be for self is to be for the positive noumenal self from the standpoint of inner positive noumenal self.
7. Likewise, to do against not-others is to do against other negative noumenal not-selves from the viewpoint of outer negative noumenal not-self, whereas to do against not-self is to do against the negative noumenal not-self from the viewpoint of inner negative noumenal not-self. Conversely, to do for not-others is to do for other positive noumenal not-selves from the standpoint of outer positive noumenal not-self, whereas to do for not-self is to do for the positive noumenal not-self from the standpoint of inner positive noumenal not-self.
8. Similarly, to take against not-others is to take against other negative phenomenal not-selves from the viewpoint of outer negative phenomenal not-self, whereas to take against not-self is to take against the negative phenomenal not-self from the viewpoint of inner negative phenomenal not-self. Conversely, to take for not-others is to take for other positive phenomenal not-selves from the standpoint of outer positive phenomenal not-self, whereas to take for not-self is to take for the positive phenomenal not-self from the standpoint of inner positive not-self.
9. Finally, to give against others is to give against other negative phenomenal selves from the viewpoint of outer phenomenal self, whereas to give against self is to give against the negative phenomenal self from the viewpoint of inner negative phenomenal self. Conversely, to give for others is to give for other positive phenomenal selves from the standpoint of outer positive phenomenal self, whereas to give for self is to give for the positive phenomenal self from the standpoint of inner phenomenal self.
1. The elemental photon particles of the outer negative noumenal self of the Clear Light of Space (the Void); the molecular photon wavicles of the outer positive noumenal self of the Unholy Spirit of Space (the Void); the molecular photon particles of the inner negative noumenal self of the Unclear Light of Heaven; the elemental photon wavicles of the inner positive noumenal self of the Holy Spirit of Heaven.
2. The elemental proton particles of the outer negative noumenal not-self of the Clear Heat of Time; the molecular proton wavicles of the outer positive noumenal not-self of the Unholy Soul of Time; the molecular proton particles of the inner negative noumenal not-self of the Unclear Heat of Hell; the elemental proton wavicles of the inner positive noumenal not-self of the Holy Soul of Hell.
3. The elemental neutron particles of the outer negative phenomenal not-self of the Clear Coldness of Volume; the molecular neutron particles of the outer positive phenomenal not-self of the Unholy Mind of Volume; the molecular neutron particles of the inner negative phenomenal not-self of the Unclear Coldness of Purgatory; the elemental neutron wavicles of the inner positive phenomenal not-self of the Holy Mind of Purgatory.
4. The elemental electron particles of the outer negative phenomenal self of the Clear Darkness of Mass; the molecular electron wavicles of the outer positive phenomenal self of the Unholy Will of Mass; the molecular electron particles of the inner negative phenomenal self of the Unclear Darkness of the World; the elemental electron wavicles of the inner positive phenomenal self of the Holy Will of the World.
5. The alpha of Space vis-à-vis the omega of Heaven; the omega-in-the-alpha of spaced Space vis-à-vis the alpha-in-the-omega of spatial Heaven.
6. The alpha of Time vis-à-vis the omega of Hell; the omega-in-the-alpha of repetitive Time vis-à-vis the alpha-in-the-omega of sequential Hell.
7. The alpha of Volume vis-à-vis the omega of Purgatory; the omega-in-the-alpha of voluminous Volume vis-à-vis the alpha-in-the-omega of volumetric Purgatory.
8. The alpha of Mass vis-à-vis the omega of the World; the omega-in-the-alpha of massive Mass vis-à-vis the alpha-in-the-omega of the massed World.
9. Space is fundamental to the negative element of light, whereas spirit (consciousness) is transcendental to the positive element of air.
10. Time is fundamental to the negative element of fire, whereas soul (emotion) is transcendental to the positive element of blood.
11. Volume is fundamental to the negative element of water, whereas mind (intellect) is transcendental to the positive element of brain.
12. Mass is fundamental to the negative element of earth, whereas will (sensation) is transcendental to the positive element of flesh.
1. Space is as anterior to the light as spirit is posterior to the air.
2. Time is as anterior to the fire as soul is posterior to the blood.
3. Volume is as anterior to the water as mind is posterior to the brain.
4. Mass is as anterior to the earth as will is posterior to the flesh.
5. Space, time, volume, and mass are the metaphysical pre-conditions of light, fire, water, and earth, whereas will, mind, soul, and spirit are the metaphysical post-conditions of flesh, brain, blood, and air.
6. Space is as metaphysically antithetical to spirit as woe to joy, whereas light is as physically antithetical to air as illusion to truth.
7. Time is as metaphysically antithetical to soul as humiliation to pride, whereas fire is as physically antithetical to blood as weakness to strength.
8. Volume is as metaphysically antithetical to mind as hate to love, whereas water is as physically antithetical to brain as evil to goodness.
9. Mass is as metaphysically antithetical to will as pain to pleasure, whereas earth is as physically antithetical to flesh as ugliness to beauty.
10. The negative (vacuous) conditions of space, time, volume, and mass are the metaphysical causes of the negative (objective) physical elements of light, fire, water, and earth.
11. The positive (subjective) conditions of will, mind, soul, and spirit are the metaphysical effects of the positive (plenumous) physical elements of flesh, brain, blood, and air.
12. The illusion of light is metaphysically caused by the woe of space, which drives it outwards.
13. The weakness of fire is metaphysically caused by the humiliation of time, which drives it outwards.
14. The evil of water is metaphysically caused by the hatred of volume, which drives it outwards.
15. The ugliness of earth is metaphysically caused by the pain of mass, which drives it outwards.
16. Conversely, the joy of spirit is the metaphysical effect of the truth of air, which is centred inwards.
17. The pride of soul is the metaphysical effect of the strength of blood, which is centred inwards.
18. The love of mind is the metaphysical effect of the goodness of brain, which is centred inwards.
19. The pleasure of will is the metaphysical effect of the beauty of flesh, which is centred inwards.
1. Where spatial Space is the metaphysical cause of the outer light, spatial Heaven is the effective cause of the inner light. Conversely, where the inner spirit is the metaphysical effect of spaced Heaven, the outer spirit is the causative effect of spaced Space.
2. Where sequential Time is the metaphysical cause of the outer heat, sequential Hell is the effective cause of the inner heat. Conversely, where the inner soul is the metaphysical effect of repetitive Hell, the outer soul is the causative effect of repetitive Time.
3. Where volumetric Volume is the metaphysical cause of the outer coldness, volumetric Purgatory is the effective cause of the inner coldness. Conversely, where the inner mind is the metaphysical effect of voluminous Purgatory, the outer mind is the causative effect of voluminous Volume.
4. Where massed Mass is the metaphysical cause of the outer darkness, the massed World is the effective cause of the inner darkness. Conversely, where the inner will is the metaphysical effect of the massive World, the outer will is the causative effect of massive Mass.
5. Effective causes differ from metaphysical causes as phenomenal relativity from noumenal absolutism, just as causative effects differ from metaphysical effects as phenomenal relativity from noumenal absolutism.
6. The negative elements of ... light, fire, water, and earth are reactions against the metaphysically unsatisfactory nature (vacuous) of the primal conditions.
7. The positive elements of ... flesh, brain, blood, and air are attracted towards the metaphysically satisfactory nature (subjective) of the ultimate conditions.
8. Light reacts against space, but air is attracted towards spirit (consciousness).
9. Fire reacts against time, but blood is attracted towards soul (emotion).
10. Water reacts against volume, but brain is attracted towards mind (intellect).
11. Earth reacts against mass, but flesh is attracted towards will (pleasure).
12. Hence the negative metaphysical conditions and their reactive elements can never be made the goal of evolutionary striving, since nothing defies the notion of an evolutionary goal more than these primal conditions/elements.
13. One cannot approach the Clear Light of Space (the Void), since cosmic light is a reaction against space, and hence an outwards-tending element with a repellent appearance.
14. One can only approach the Holy Spirit of Heaven, since Heaven (air) is an attraction towards spirit, and hence an inwards-tending element with a seductive essence.
15. Spirit is the metaphysical salvation of air, space the metaphysical damnation of light.
16. Likewise, soul is the metaphysical salvation of blood, time the metaphysical damnation of fire.
17. Mind (intellect) is the metaphysical salvation of brain, volume the metaphysical damnation of water.
18. Will (pleasurable sensation) is the metaphysical salvation of flesh, mass the metaphysical damnation of earth.
19. From the truth of air (Heaven) to the joy of spirit (lightness).
20. From the strength of blood (Hell) to the pride of soul (keenness).
21. From the goodness of brain (Purgatory) to the love of mind (dullness).
22. From the beauty of flesh (the World) to the pleasure of will (heaviness).
23. Conversely, from the woe of space (Antiheaven) comes the illusion of light (brightness).
24. From the humiliation of time (Antihell) comes the weakness of fire (hotness).
25. From the hate of volume (Antipurgatory) comes the evil of water (coldness).
26. From the pain of mass (the Antiworld) comes the ugliness of earth (darkness).
1. The Devil and the Devil's demons contrast absolutely with God and God's angels ... as the Ruler and the Ruler's soldiers contrast with the Leader and the Leader's police.
2. The Leader will be in Heaven with police, while the Ruler is in Hell with soldiers.
3. The Saved will be blessed with angelic police, while the Damned are cursed with demonic soldiers.
4. Angelic police are no ordinary, or conventional, police, but the secret police of a heavenly realm (the Centre).
5. Demonic soldiers are no ordinary, or conventional, soldiers, but the splendid soldiers (royal) of a hellish realm (the Kingdom).
6. The angels of God protect the Saved from external subversion, while the Devil's demons restrict the Damned to internal affliction.
7. God is protected by archangels, who constitute an angelic elite, while the Devil is restricted by archdemons, who constitute a demonic elite.
8. Hence the special police (guards) who surround the Leader stand to the secret police as archangels to angels, while the special soldiers (antiguards) who surround the Ruler stand to the splendid soldiers as archdemons to demons.
1. To contrast the noumenal subjectivity of the Leader with the noumenal objectivity of the Ruler - each of whom are equally absolutist in their contrary ways.
2. Likewise to contrast the phenomenal subjectivity of the People's Representative with the phenomenal objectivity of the Senator - each of whom are equally relativistic in their contrary ways.
3. A democratic/bureaucratic society is effectively a society in transition between the military absolutism of an autocracy and the policing absolutism of a theocracy.
4. The more autocratic the society the more militaristic will it be, while, conversely, the most theocratic of societies will be that in which there is least, if any, militarism.
5. The ideal society can only be one in which, from the security point of view, there are most police and fewest soldiers.
6. No State that has been called a 'Police State' has ever been free of soldiers; for the State is always rooted in the army.
7. Only when States are democratically superseded by Centres (as customarily defined by me in relation to a context of mass religious sovereignty) will anything remotely approaching a policing absolutism finally come into being.
8. People who deride the police on principle ... are usually guilty of overlooking the military, and may well be accomplices, wittingly or unwittingly, of militarism.
9. Part of the reason why some people deride the police on principle ... is that such people are usually militarist by dint of their socialistic allegiance to the World - a context, contrary to Purgatory, of conventional militarism.
10. But beyond the
militarism of the World, including that of the Salvation Army, is the
secret/special police of the '
11. Unlike the splendid soldiery, who are rooted in the soul, the conventional soldiery are rooted in the will.
12. Unlike the conventional police, who are centred in the mind, the secret police are centred in the spirit.
13. Hence a correlation with heart and lungs in the absolute military and police contexts, but a correlation with sex organs and brain in the relative military and police contexts - the former noumenal, the latter phenomenal.
1. The poet, with his rhythms (time), is the type of writer most correlative with the military, especially the unconventional militarism of a splendid soldiery, whereas the philosopher, with his thoughts (space) is the type of writer most correlative with the police, with particular reference to the special or secret police.
2. The novelist, with his plots (volume), is the type of writer whose correlation is with the conventional police, while the dramatist, with his scenes (mass), is the type of writer most correlative with conventional soldiery, the soldiery of the field, so to speak.
3. One might speak, albeit metaphorically, of the bureaucracy of drama, the democracy of fiction, the autocracy of poetry, and the theocracy of philosophy, ascending from the World to Heaven via Purgatory and Hell.
1. The autocratic nature of (conventional) television is such that one can do no more than change dictators ... as one switches from one channel to another.
2. I like to think, perhaps somewhat subjectively, of the upper-class character of BBC1, the middle-class character of BBC2, the working-class character of ITV, and the classless character of Channel 4. Hence a tendency on my part to avoid, as far as possible, BBC1 and BBC2, with their overly establishment bias.
3. The sadness of our age (the late-twentieth and early twenty-first century) is due in no small part to the dominating role of television and video and/or cinema, which suck the life out of people as they gaze vacuously at the screen, itself a product, in conventional systems, of a technological vacuum, viz. the cathode-ray tube.
4. If there is to be a joyful age, it will not be one in which people are dominated by television and/or film but, rather, one in which people are free from the heathen lights and able, in consequence, to cultivate their spirit, moving from the 'Kingdom Without' to the 'Kingdom Within'. For only once the latter has been firmly established ... can one move beyond the self to the universal self ... of airy Heaven.
5. By contrast to the universal self ... of airy Heaven, film corresponds to a universal not-self ... of starry Antiheaven and/or Antihell, an artificial manifestation of the Clear Light of Space and/or Clear Heat of Time, which constrains its devotees to an optical and/or aural vacuum.
6. Where the cosmic Clear Light of Space is effectively Jehovahesque in its primal divinity, the filmic Clear Light of Space is Marxian in its correspondence to the more artificial primal divinity of a superheathen age - the age, by and large, of the cinema.
7. The 'fall' of cinema from the Marxian Clear Light of Space to the Bolshevik Clear Heat of Time is traceable, it seems to me, to the advent of, first, sound and, then, colour, with an ever-more degenerate regression culminating, so to speak, in the score-ridden and unashamedly explosive spectacles of contemporary film.
1. Although, being electronic, television is fundamentally of the World, rather than (like cinema) of the alpha Heaven and/or Hell, there is a sense in which black-and-white TV is/was less genuinely of the World than quasi-purgatorial in its monochromatic constitution, thereby standing to colour TV as black-and-white film to colour film in the higher context of cinema.
2. I have often found it helpful to meditate while watching television, thereby refreshing the mind and simultaneously rising above the spirit-destroying context in question. For it cannot be denied that a consciousness well-stocked, as it were, with air is less likely to be dominated by television ... than one which is barely conscious of itself because all but deadened by the mesmerizing spectacles which issue from the screen in hyperbolic disarray and vacuously seduce one's optical attention.
3. My favourite meditation technique for countering the yawn-inducing attraction of television (doubtless something of an enforced retort to the medium in question) is to breathe-in silently through my left nostril and then breathe-out audibly through my right nostril, so that there is a continuous distinction between the two breaths - the former spiritual and the latter chemical. In such fashion, alternating between silence and sound, calmness and combativeness, one can build to and maintain a fairly high spiritual plateau which is comparatively immune to the baneful effects of television, enabling one to partially transcend it while still nominally paying due optical attention to its superficial appearances, the often negative context of which would otherwise depress and/or disgust one.
4. Certainly I am now more aware than ever before as to the extent to which the generally low moral tone of twentieth-century life was due, in no small measure, to the influence of film and television on most people's lives, and not simply with regard to the content - more usually negative, given the superficial, or appearance-based, nature of the medium as such - but, no less significantly, with regard to the vacuously-biased conditioning to persistent optical appreciation, which had (and still has) the effect of turning people outwards and thus rendering them an insipid reflection of the on-screen vacuity which rules their lives. Small wonder if, after years of passive conditioning to such media, most people become morally blind and incapable of that insightfulness which is the hallmark of true wisdom! They become as moronic pawns in the money-spinning moves of powerful men, men without the slightest degree of respect for the inner life, whose only motive is to go financially from strength to strength through the production of ever-more negative and superficial films!
5. To me, the Catholic tendency to accept the placement of ash on the brow at Ash Wednesday signifies a rejection of the 'Third Eye' and implicit denial of 'Cosmic Consciousness', with its light-worshipping basis. It is as though the person concerned has died to the Cosmos in order to be reborn into the Life Eternal which follows from the Christic Resurrection. Such a life, centred in the spirit, is at the opposite pole to the anti-life which affirms cosmic conditioning. And yet, it is the latter which modern civilization encourages ... as the lights are sent out from cameras, films, TV screens, light shows at rock concerts, garish magazines, videos, neon signs, electronic advertisements, fairgrounds, etc. to do their damnedest and effectively undermine true spirituality, creating moral vacuums into which negative forces can step ... to the greater glory of all that is life-denying and destructive!
1. Cans stand to bottles as man to woman, or materialism to realism, with purgatorial (lunar) and mundane (planar) implications. For the can is masculine while the bottle is feminine, and one could argue that whereas drinking straight from a can is homosexual, drinking straight from a bottle - say a small bottle of beer - is lesbian. To pour the contents of a can and/or bottle into a glass, however, and drink from the glass ... would suggest an heterosexual compromise between the two drinking extremes, a compromise never more literally heterosexual than when both cans and bottles are simultaneously utilized by, presumably, members of the opposite sex, so that can-to-glass on the male's part and bottle-to-glass on the female's part, the glasses of identical construction, signifies a coming together of the two genders in a common meeting-point. Yet men are not invariably purgatorial, any more than women are invariably mundane, since ethnic and class correlations also have to be borne in mind, which suggest that while some men prefer bottles to cans, there are women who prefer cans to bottles, and drink accordingly, with or without a glass.
2. Parallel to the above, one could argue for a sort of naturalistic/idealistic antithesis, with regard to drinking, between the use, on the one hand, of a tankard and, on the other hand, of a lidded-beaker with straw - the former of the Devil and the latter of God, with, obviously, diabolic (solar) and divine (stellar) implications. For the tankard, whether made of metal or glass, is generally a centrifugal entity with a ring-like handle, whereas to drink from a lidded-beaker via a straw is much the most centripetal mode of drinking, and the contrast is so great that one is obliged to think along the lines of an alpha/omega basis, the basis of noumenal objectivity on the one hand, and of noumenal subjectivity on the other hand.... This rather contrasts with the vertical axis, so to speak, between the phenomenal objectivity of cans and the phenomenal subjectivity of bottles, whose correlations, as already noted, are with man and woman respectively.
3. Yet if there is anything anterior to the tankard, such that connotes with alpha divinity, then it can only be with regard to the keg, tank, barrel, or whatever, from which the tankard's contents are drawn, so that the publican who, for instance, pulls beer for his customers effectively functions in a Jehovahesque role from which the tankard, or use thereof, constitutes a sort of Satanic fall. Hence where the publican functions as Alpha God, those of his customers who favour draught beer are obliged to become Alpha Devils, and at no small financial and moral cost to themselves!
1. The strength,
'greatness' ... of
2. What happened in the Soviet Union with regard to the break-up of an imperialistic Superstate ... has yet to happen in the United Kingdom ... of Great Britain (in reality three separate nations) and Northern Ireland (in reality the greater part of a province of the Irish nation). For only when the respective components of Great Britain democratically abandon the superstate alpha for the nation-state middle-ground ... will they be in a position similar to Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, etc., from which the possibility of a democratically-sanctioned salvation (in religious sovereignty) from the World (of the middle-ground) can duly be engineered ... compliments of the Second Coming.
3. What applies to Great Britain may even apply, in due course, to the United States of America and to a variety of other countries which retain a superstate status to the detriment of moral progress to the middle-ground and ... beyond. For, assuredly, the 'stars and stripes' are incompatible with the supercross of the Centrist 'Kingdom of Heaven', since having more to do with fire and water than with earth and air. Devolution from the alpha is a precondition of evolution towards the omega. But it must be achieved with the democratic consent of the People as a whole!
1. Miracles, siddhis, and other supernatural powers may be compatible with religious Fundamentalism, but they can have no place in religious Transcendentalism, which is 'beyond the pale' of mystical illusions. A person rooted in the Cosmos, with a fundamentalist respect for the light, may well develop special powers and even be able to perform certain miracles. But a person who has turned his back on such mysticism because reborn into the spirit ... will have no time for miraculous feats, since too evolved to be partial to actions which betray a cosmic allegiance. His bias, on the contrary, will be towards the air and the attainment, through conscious focus, of a joyful lightness. There is nothing miraculous in such a bias. Only truth and deliverance from the World and, by implication, any contiguity with cosmic Pantheism.
2. The true philosopher always writes aphoristically, with spaces between his entries and the avoidance, as a moral necessity, of too voluminous an impression. For volume is of water, and hence the purgatorial Overworld of a lunar materialism, which has nothing whatsoever to do with true philosophy but everything, by contrast, to do with fiction and ... essayistic philosophy, the 'bovaryization' of philosophy relative to a purgatorial, or lunar, civilization ... such that fights shy of truth in its overriding concern, if positive, with intellectual goodness, the goodness, needless to say, of a middle-class mean. No, true philosophy cannot be pursued on an essayistic basis, and that is why, as a self-styled true philosopher (a necessarily classless individual), I have rejected volume in deference to space, albeit with a bias, so far as possible, for spaced space over spatial space, in keeping with my omega orientation. Hence the significance of fairly frequent capitalization in the more intensely spaced passages of my mature philosophy.
3. The genuine philosopher, who is a classless exponent of truth, does not seek to write voluminous tomes, but keeps his work to a length well short of the voluminous, as befitting a Being of space. In fact, truly true philosophy is only really conceivable on computer disc, since even short books, though they may strive to avoid creating an impression of volume, are still basically voluminous entities, and hence less well-suited to a delineation of space. This is one of the main reasons why I do not write books or have my work published in book form, preferring to reserve my best thoughts for computer disc - an altogether more transcendental medium. Thus instead of a book, a word disc. And instead of intellectual goodness or, at best, goodly truth, the Truth ... such that only a genuine philosopher could be expected to write or, rather, key-in.
4. Middle-class civilization, which is by definition lunar and purgatorial, does not encourage true philosophy but seeks to hype such philosophy as it produces to a standing it ill-deserves in relation to the Truth, and to regard its philosophers, in reality 'professors of philosophy' and purveyors of intellectual essays, as bona fide thinkers! Worse, it strives to exclude from the category of serious philosopher ... all those who are without a degree in philosophy (PhD), thereby reducing philosophy to the academic parameters of its universities, wherein the professional teachers of philosophy are regarded as genuine philosophers and all those who pursue philosophy independently of a professorial commitment ... as amateurs or even, if too serious about themselves, charlatans or madmen! For philosophy is only safe, from a middle-class viewpoint, when pursued within the academic context, wherein it will fall well short of the Truth and any threat, in consequence, to the intellectual status quo.... Or so one might be led to infer from the scrupulousness with which middle-class civilization makes academic philosophy the touchstone of what is authentic!
1. One should distinguish the bound cross of lunar extremism from the bound supercross of omega divinity ... as one would distinguish corporate capitalism from centrist corporatism or, more correctly, super-corporatism. For while the bound cross/corporate capitalism is effectively Nazi, the bound supercross/super-corporatism is Social Transcendentalist, and hence affiliated not to the State but to the Centre - the divine context of mass religious sovereignty as philosophically advanced/projected by he who, in his Messianic insights, effectively corresponds to a Second Coming, being the principal advocate of such an ultimate sovereignty. Corporate capitalism is a quasi-collectivist mode of capitalism which stands to Communism as the burning cross (or bound cross) to the unbounded star (or superstar), whereas centrist corporatism should have relevance to Centre trusteeship of the means of production, etc. in the interests of the People's deliverance from economic 'sins of the World', as upheld by Socialism within a broadly Social Democratic framework, and is therefore beyond the bounded star of the latter in the heavenly absolutism of the bound supercross. It is this centrist corporatism which is the economic salvation of the World, whereas corporate capitalism is, in some sense, the damnation of the free capitalism of the purgatorial Overworld, a damnation which takes capitalism closer to the Hell of State Socialism, and thus to the unbounded star.
2. There are two ways in which books can be damned: the first, or internal, way is akin to corporate capitalism, and implies the subversion of the written text through photographic images, thereby causing it to resemble the burning crosses of extreme lunar politics. The second, or external, way is akin to State Capitalism, the capitalism of nationalization within a parliamentary, or lunar, democracy (traditionally the preserve, in Britain, of the Labour Party), and it implies the serialization of books in magazines, wherein the text is necessarily subordinate to the fiery essence of their photographic contents. Thus whereas the internal damnation brings books within the Nazi realm of the bound cross, the external - and more radical - damnation takes them beyond the cross to the Fabian realm of the quasi-star, wherein their damnation is more severe.
3. However, both the above types of damnation, relative to the lunar limbo of a parliamentary democracy, pale to insignificance beside the absolute damnation which afflicts books when they are made into films and thereby depart the lunar realm of liberal civilization for the solar realm of fundamentalist barbarism, ceasing to retain any textual resemblance to their original conceptions. For film is not merely a more radical or fundamentalist mode of intellectual materialism; it is a total eclipse of such materialism by and through the emotional naturalism of a diabolic Hell. It appertains to an entirely different quadruplicity from that in which books are to be found, and the damnation of the latter is so absolute ... that no author can survive its effects upon either his reputation as a writer or the quality of his work. A book that goes from bad to worse, passing through photographs and/or magazines, is one thing. A book that is turned into a film ... can never recover from the eclipse it has suffered. Damnation is effectively complete!
1. Books, like magazines, are rectilinear and therefore 'square', whereas discs, like tapes, are curvilinear and therefore 'hip' or, which amounts to the same thing, round. The writer of books is effectively a 'square', or 'straight', who acquiesces in the objective aspect of things - as, of course, does the reader of books, albeit from a more passive standpoint. By contrast, the writer or, rather, speaker of (audio) tapes ... is a 'hipster', or 'freak', who acquiesces in the subjective aspect of things - as, of course, does the listener to tapes. But beyond the speaker of tapes is the thoughtful keyer-in of (computer) discs, who is a 'superhipster', or 'superfreak', acquiescing in the super-subjective (the noumenally as opposed to phenomenally subjective) aspect of things, etc.
2. Books, magazines, cinema films, etc.
not survive the Last Judgement which the Second Coming will bring in
the 'Kingdom of Heaven' on Earth; for such 'square' things can only be
incompatible with the curvilinear and subjective requirements of the
Transcendentalist Centre. Tapes (both
audio and video) will be carefully analysed in regard to Social
Transcendentalist criteria, and only that which is deemed morally
should make it through to the computerized and/or laser-disc Beyond. That which is not a tape
would be 'beneath the pale', so to speak, of consideration for cultural
salvation, since objectively ranged against the World in rectilinear
and/or opposition to it. Hence
the great majority of books, magazines, films, etc. would be destined
destruction, come the crunch of Judgement.
For the effective equivalence of the Second Coming does not damn
the way they are relatively damned by photography and/or magazines, and
absolutely damned by transcription to film.
The idealistic society of the 'Heavenly Kingdom' is beyond
realism (and hence tapes of one kind or another) and will endeavour to
such realism as is deemed acceptable to its own idealism, while
expanding the domain of heavenly idealism as such.
But that which is materialistic (like
books/magazines) and naturalistic (like films) cannot be saved, but
from the standpoint of the Holy Spirit.
Such Divine Judgement is less a damnation than a rejection ...
media in question, which will accordingly find no place in the '
3. Damnation preserves objectivity, whereas
salvation, in saving worldly subjectivity to the divine Beyond, rejects
the name of the Holy Spirit and all that is sacred.
Hence there can no more be a salvation of objectivity
than ... a damnation of subjectivity.
That which is not already subjective, and round, by the coming
Judgement ... cannot be saved. Nor,
logically, can it be damned. It can only
... as unfit for the '
1. That which is centrifugal is also, by definition, expansive, whether objectively or subjectively, while that which is centripetal is also, by definition, contractive, whether objectively or subjectively. Hence whereas the outer light/spirit is expansive, the inner light/spirit is contractive - the former divergent and the latter convergent.
2. To distinguish washbasins from baths on the relative basis of a lunar/planar dichotomy, as between man and woman, while further distinguishing showers from jacuzzis on the rather more absolute basis of a solar/stellar dichotomy, as between the Devil and God. For it would seem that whereas washbasins and baths are phenomenal, showers and jacuzzis, by contrast, are noumenal, with associations, relevant to this particular quadruplicity, that stretch beyond the World and Purgatory to Hell and Heaven - the former alpha and the latter omega.
3. Thus while the washbasin is suitable for washing hands and face and/or hair, the bath is more suited to the body in general, thereby confirming a worldly (mundane), as opposed to 'overworldly' (purgatorial), connotation ... such that has a greater affiliation with mass than volume.
4. As, however, for the distinction between showers and jacuzzis, we are obliged to consider the contrast between the sun-like diffusion of water spray descending from above and the gravity-defying infusion of water bubbles ascending from below - the former a sort of washing Hell dominated by time, and the latter a sort of bathing Heaven in which space (and jacuzzis are nothing if not spacious) is the primary condition.
5. Thus in an ideal world, people would have regular access to bubble-generating jacuzzis, while showers would be effectively taboo.
1. The cynicism and viciousness of average people is due, in large measure, to the vacuousness of their minds. Were they less mentally or spiritually vacuous, they would not be subject to the critical rages which afflict them at the slightest provocation.
2. The snide presumptions directed at others, particularly at exceptional men, by ill-natured people ... is usually a sad reflection of the hollowness and emptiness of their minds, over which they have only the merest control.
3. Good people do not ordinarily become bad or bad people good. Good people remain good and bad people bad, and so has it always been, given the temperamental and intellectual, not to mention genetic, factors which underline behaviour. Only ... sometimes appearances suggest the contrary!
1. Bad people see in morality not a means to improving themselves/their selves, but an excuse for criticizing and condemning others. It is as though, incapable of becoming good, they must find or imagine faults in others, thereby assuming some degree of superior status over them in their own estimation.
2. We should not forget that while there are bad people and good people, there are also bad peoples and good peoples, the former of whom usually have dominion over the latter, constraining them to objective criteria and thereby preventing or inhibiting their development of subjectivity. In fact, to objective peoples 'subjectivity' is a dirty word and those given to it are perceived as being 'too subjective' or 'overly subjective', or words to that effect.
3. For subjective people(s), the sun and the moon are not just cosmic facts, but a moral problem, since the sun is no less the source of noumenal objectivity in the world ... than the moon is arguably the source of phenomenal objectivity there, and both kinds of objectivity fly in the face of moral, or subjective, considerations. Naturally, we cannot get rid of the sun and the moon, but a time may come when, due to substantial changes in the world, their influence will be considerably reduced, enabling a more subjective humanity to turn increasingly away from the external cosmos in the interests of spiritual development directed towards a supra-terrestrial goal through the 'Kingdom Within'.
4. Although the above entry might seem to be hinting at apocalyptic upheavals, there is no doubt in my mind that positive steps could be taken by peoples with the capability and ideological courage to reduce solar and/or lunar influence on the world, not least of all in terms of building large panels or shields which could be transported into space and, following reassembly there, sited in such a way as to reduce, say, the sun's influence here, thereby systematically changing the structure of existence on Earth with regard to omega-oriented criteria.
5. Doubtless, there would be stages in the degree to which solar influence could be reduced, if not eventually excluded altogether, in this way. But I see no reason why technology should not be able to make substantial contributions to the advancement of evolution on Earth by effectively shielding superhumanity (as we may call a more morally-advanced humanity) from the heathen influences of such cosmic phenomena. After all, it may be necessary, at first, to protect mankind in such fashion from the so-called 'greenhouse effect' caused by depletion of the ozone layer due in no small measure to industrial and other pollutants, and although such a protective strategy would be largely if not entirely pragmatic ... it could well become the basis from which (as so often happens in life) more idealistic motivations would eventually spring, thereby showing the 'greenhouse effect' to have been a sort of blessing in disguise.
1. As regards the negative alternative to positive technological stratagems ... it could even transpire that, rhetorical exaggerations of the apocalyptic variety notwithstanding, the siting of large shields at strategic positions in space specifically to reduce the sun's influence on the earth would lead to martial opposition from reactionary powers that had no wish to further such a reduction themselves, and who were prepared to wage war, by whatever means at their disposal, in defence of heathen traditions.
2. In the event of the above hypothetical scenario ever transpiring, it could happen that victory by the more progressive side would result in the siting of solar shields over the loser's territory, thus assisting his progress towards some kind of moral parity with his former adversary. For unless, one way or another, a 'level playing field' of environment and/or climate is established by dint of recourse to artificial means, it is difficult to foresee a harmonization or standardization of ideological sensibility throughout the planet. Countries which suffer a hot/dry climate will simply continue to lag behind their more fortunate counterparts in temperate zones. Yet, whatever their natural climates, it is my belief and hope that all countries will eventually have access to 'blocking devices' which, situated in space, will considerably reduce the sun's influence and thereby permit a much more uniformly-spread omega orientation than would otherwise be possible. For as long as the sun continues to shine down upon the world, there will always be some justification for fundamentalist reaction to transcendentalist aspirations, and never more deeply than in countries which are most exposed to its powerful rays!
3. Naturally, one would not wish to create a situation in which the earth became too cold in consequence of recourse to such blocking devices, or solar shields, since that could prove of more detriment to mankind's welfare than the unmitigated rays of a too fiercely-felt sun. But some degree of protection from the sun's rays would, I feel confident, still be required, not least of all in relation to continuing ozone depletion, and should this result in a relative loss of temperature ... then alternative sources of heat would have to be utilized, including a much greater reliance on indoor artificial heating than had hitherto obtained and/or the design of specially protective masked zippersuits for use outdoors.
1. The naturalism of the heart vis-à-vis the idealism of the lungs along the horizontal axis, so to speak, of Hell and Heaven.
2. The materialism of the brain vis-à-vis the realism of the sex organs along the vertical axis, so to speak, of Purgatory and the World.
3. Twentieth-century society was rooted in the noumenal objectivity of the heart, and consequently its music was beat-driven and fundamentally emotional, if not emotive.
4. Whenever the heart, and thus passion, is uppermost, the lungs tend to get a raw deal, and not simply in terms of suffering the indignities of tobacco abuse, etc., but with regard to a general marginalization of their status and/or function.
5. It is not the body which is the 'temple of the Holy Ghost', but the lungs, the seat of all that is most divine in human beings.
6. If the lungs are the 'temple of the Holy Ghost', as I believe, then it could be said of the heart that it is the 'temple of the Father', of the brain that it is the 'temple of the Son', and of the womb that it is the 'temple of the Mother'. Thus the Holy Spirit of Heaven could only thrive on the basis of sound lungs, the Holy Soul of Hell (the Father) on the basis of a sound heart, the Holy Mind of Purgatory (the Son) on the basis of a sound brain, and the Holy Will of the World (the Mother) on the basis of a sound womb.
7. Air is the plenum of Heaven, blood the plenum of Hell, intellect the plenum of Purgatory, and sperm the plenum of the World. Hence the spirit (divine) needs air to be holy; the soul (diabolic) needs blood to be holy; the mind (masculine) needs intellect to be holy; and the will (feminine) needs sperm to be holy.
8. Spirit without air is no more holy than soul without blood, mind without intellect, or will without sperm. In fact, spirit without air is merely optical, soul without blood merely aural, mind without intellect merely verbal, and will without sperm merely sexual. Thus instead of the Holy Spirit of Heaven, the Clear Light of Space; instead of the Holy Soul of Hell, the Clear Heat of Time; instead of the Holy Mind of Purgatory, the Clear Coldness of Volume; and instead of the Holy Will of the World, the Clear Darkness of Mass.
9. Now, in this terrible time of ours, is the age when the vacuous alpha proclaims its hollow victory over the plenumous omega, the cross eclipsed by the star, and man is accordingly at odds with his true self. Staring and listening have effectively eclipsed breathing and feeling, while lower down, so to speak, in the phenomenal realms ... speaking and fornicating have effectively eclipsed studying and breeding. Whatever the spectrum one cares to dwell on, be it divine, diabolic, masculine, or feminine, the cursed alpha prevails over the blessed omega, and such will presumably continue to be the case until 'Kingdom Come', when, if all goes well from a Messianic standpoint, the alpha will be cast down and the omega resurrected on a supernoumenal basis ... such that will lead beyond the World to the heaven of ultimate salvation.
10. The Jehovahesque nature of the Clear Light of Space; the Satanic nature of the Clear Heat of Time; the Antichristic nature of the Clear Coldness of Volume; and the Antivirginal nature of the Clear Darkness of Mass. In fact, one could alternatively speak of the antispirit of the Clear Light of Space; the antisoul of the Clear Heat of Time; the antimind of the Clear Coldness of Volume; and the antiwill of the Clear Darkness of Mass, this latter commensurate with the Cursed Whore ... whereas the Holy Will of the World is commensurate with the Blessed Virgin.
11. The vacuous spirit of optical delusion revels in Original Sin, while the vacuous soul of aural delusion revels in the Satanic Fall, the vacuous mind of verbal delusion in the Fall of Man, and the vacuous will of sexual delusion in the Fall of Woman. And being vacuous, such revellings are cursed with the freedoms of their respective stars.
12. Whatever the star's colour, whether white and stellar, or yellow and solar, or blue and lunar, or red and planar (planetary), those under it are cursed with the vacuous alpha of all that is not so much unholy (for that, after all, is only an outer manifestation of holiness), as antiholy, and hence profane, secular, evil, occult. The star is always alpha, and whilst it may have eclipsed the cross in most Western countries, its victory is hollow because confined to a limited period of time, a period of necessarily profane time during which it will continue to devolve towards the extinction which inevitably awaits that which is contrary to human nature and thus morally untenable. The star may be first now or not so, depending on the context, but it will be the supercross of spiritual resurrection which has the final say ... when the time comes for humanity to return to its centre and abandon the delusions of sense which deceived so many twentieth-century people into believing that freedom was a desirable end-in-itself and not merely a fall from some grace to which they may or may not have paid lip service from the hollow vacuums of the shadow selves whose victims they remained. Only the Second Coming can now set humanity free of their delusions for the truth of a binding supreme - the binding to God ... the Holy Spirit of Heaven ... in 'Kingdom Come'.
1. Impossible to remain detached, the requirement of true wisdom, whilst one is yet a victim of the heart, with its passions, emotions, possessiveness, covetousness. For where the heart rules, the lungs are to all intents and purposes 'beyond the pale', and no true wisdom is possible. Thus rejection of the passionate folly of a life based in the heart is a precondition of wisdom, and although such a rejection is not impossible for a youth, whose heart beats more vigorously, it is more likely to be of lasting attainment with maturity, when unseemly passions could well prove of mortal, never mind moral, danger to the individual concerned!
2. One should note a correlation between the moon and the brain, the sun and the heart, the earth and the womb (and/or sex organs generally), and the Beyond and the lungs, bearing in mind, however, that whereas the brain, heart, and sex organs are rooted in the alpha (even if they extend, in positivity, towards the omega), the lungs are alone of the omega, and thus capable of sustaining that which, as spirit, can transcend the World and become one with the heavenly substance, viz. air, upon which we depend for our life.
3. The spirit that is at one with the air one breathes ... is most finely attuned to itself and capable of becoming superconscious of its true essence ... as joy in the lightness of air.
4. Although all men are composites of brain, heart, sex organs, and lungs, the degree to which they have a bias for one or another of the four cardinal elements ... varies from person to person and society to society, from class to class and age to age. We cannot pretend that all men are equal in God ... the Holy Ghost ... when the evidence of life would suggest that not only alternative 'divinities', viz. the Father, the Son, and the Mother, have to be reckoned with, but, worse again, alternative 'antidivinities' ... such as the Antispirit (Jehovah), the Antifather (Satan), the Antison (Antichrist), and the Antimother (Cursed Whore), to which most men at some time or another pay tribute, and from which some of them draw the greater part of their (necessarily negative) elemental allegiance. Hence in the case of the Antispirit, lungs which are subordinate to light and cursed with (spatial) space; in the case of the Antifather, a heart which is subordinate to fire and cursed with (sequential) time; in the case of the Antison, a brain which is subordinate to water and cursed with (volumetric) volume; and in the case of the Antimother, a womb which is subordinate to earth and cursed with (massed) mass. How different, then, from lungs which are host to holy spirit and blessed with (spaced) Heaven; a heart which is host to holy soul and blessed with (repetitive) Hell; a brain which is host to holy mind and blessed with (voluminous) Purgatory; or a womb which is host to holy will and blessed with the (massive) World. And yet, preferable though the latter - and positive - options may be in relation to their negative counterparts, how inadequate and morally inferior are the blessings of the World, Purgatory, and Hell when compared with the blessing of Heaven - the Holy Spirit which is conscious of nothing but the air which it is the privilege of the lungs to host, and which is therefore pure, purged of emotional, intellectual, and sexual impurities in relation to itself!
5. Blessed are the pure in spirit, for they shall be God (the Holy Spirit of Heaven).
6. Blessed, too, are the pure in soul, for they shall feel the Devil (the Holy Soul of Hell).
7. Blessed, also, are the pure in mind, for they shall know Man (the Holy Mind of Purgatory).
8. Blessed, even, are the pure in will, for they shall experience Woman (the Holy Will of the World).
9. But cursed are the impure in light, for they shall be Antigod (the Clear Light of Space).
10. Cursed, too, are the impure in fire, for they shall feel the Antidevil (the Clear Heat of Time).
11. Cursed, also, are the impure in water, for they shall know Antiman (the Clear Coldness of Volume).
12. Cursed, even, are the impure in earth, for they shall experience Antiwoman (the Clear Darkness of Mass).
1. Having contended, some time ago, that magazines, newspapers, co-mags (comic books), and books appertain to a quadruplicity of intellectual materialism which has its axis, so to speak, in the neutron element of a lunar, or nonconformist, civilization, and then contrasted this quadruplicity with the instinctual realism of televisions, midis, video-recorders, and computers ... as germane to the electron(ic) element of a planar, or humanist, civilization, I should now like to categorically distinguish between the black-and-white, or monochromatic, essence of the former quadruplicity when its component media are truly germane to the lunar limbo, so to speak, of nonconformist civilization, and the colour, or polychromatic, essence of the latter quadruplicity when all the media which pertain to it are truly of the World and thus fully humanistic. For it has to be admitted that both the media of the former and the latter quadruplicities can be either monochromatic or polychromatic, black-and-white or colour, and that this justifies us, I believe, in allowing for intermediate positions, relevant to each quadruplicity, and a further distinction, in consequence, between polychromatic magazines, newspapers, co-mags, and books on the one hand, and monochromatic televisions, radios, video-recorders, and computers on the other hand.
2. Now it is my belief that whereas the intellectual quadruplicity will have a parliamentary correlation when monochromatic and thus properly lunar, the instinctual or wilful quadruplicity, by contrast, will have a social republican correlation when polychromatic and thus properly planar, or of the World. The polychromatic alternative to the intellectual quadruplicity, however, will have a nonconformist republican correlation, whereas the monochromatic alternative to the instinctual quadruplicity will have a humanist republican correlation. Thus where opposites meet ... in a kind of no-man's land of 'republican' compromise, the lunar quadruplicity (of magazines, newspapers, co-mags, and books) will be in colour, while the planar quadruplicity (of televisions, radios [midis being more properly of the World], video-recorders, and computers) will be in black-and-white. The opposites that don't meet, like parliamentarians and socialist republicans, will remain respectively monochromatic and polychromatic, lunar and planar, with strongly neutron and electron implications.
3. Heart, womb (or sex organs), and brain form a vicious circle of solar, planar, and lunar correlations which tend to perpetuate the class-bound status quo ... to the detriment of supra-terrestrial salvation from the World and/or its traditional oppressors. Sex has the unfortunate consequence of ultimately transforming the principal protagonists into fathers and mothers, hearts/suns and wombs/earths, whose offspring are fated to become brains/moons ... in the formative years of schooling which follow infancy. Hence fathers, mothers, and sons/daughters, with no holy ghosts of lungs/heavens to speak of ... short, that is, of either or both offspring (sons and daughters) refusing to become fathers and mothers when they grow up but opting, instead, to develop the spirit in transcendence of conventional social patterns, thereby becoming holy. But such transcendence should not be confounded with a defiance of conventional social or sexual patterns ... such that simply results in unconventional ones instead! For homosexuality and lesbianism have nothing to do with the sort of classless spiritual life I have in mind, being inverted forms of sexuality which fall short of fatherhood and motherhood to the degree that sons and daughters do when they opt simply to defy rather than either to conform (and become fathers and mothers themselves) or transcend (and become holy). In fact, homosexuality is akin to polychromatic intellectual materialism (the quadruplicity of colour magazines, newspapers, co-mags, and books), while lesbianism is akin to monochromatic instinctual realism (the quadruplicity of black-and-white televisions, radios, video-recorders, and computers), both of which are somewhat androgynous in relation to the more heterosexual extremes of monochromatic intellectual materialism and polychromatic instinctual realism - the former of which seeks relief from its narrow masculinity through the polychromatic emotional naturalism, so to speak, of (filmic) fatherhood, and the latter of which develops its femininity away from adolescence through the polychromatic wilful realism of motherhood, thereby bringing the World to fruition.
1. Those who, being objective, cannot hinder others ... usually end-up hindering themselves, while, conversely, those who, being subjective, cannot help themselves usually end-up helping others.
2. One of the main reasons why the clergy
not to be taken very seriously in England is that, scorning celibacy,
often marry and thus forfeit such crumbs of spiritual authority as
Roman Catholic clergy by seemingly 'having their cake and eating it'. For if it is one thing to live the relatively
privileged and comfortable life of a priest when one is sworn to
is quite another to do so and share in the fruits of worldly sin as
well! The laity can condone the former,
the latter! Hence in
3. It may be acceptable, relevant to its
criteria of priesthood, for women to become priests in the Anglican
it is doubtful that the Catholic Church could encourage the ordination
women, and for the very sound reason that celibacy for a woman priest
(priestess?) would run contrary to the nature of women as beings for
salvation has less to do (given the ampleness of their flesh) with
high' on the lightness of air ... than with achieving motherhood, and
acquiring a worldly plenum (in pregnancy) to save them from the vacuum
empty womb. Thus for women, celibacy
would be more of a curse than a blessing, and a celibate woman priest
only be a contradiction in terms, since one cannot advance the notion
spiritual salvation (in the plenum of air) from a worldly vacuum (the
womb), which will necessarily condition the psyche along negative
germane, in any case, to the generally critical disposition of women. It is not that women are spiritual beings who
are denied the opportunity to utilize their potential for spiritual
leadership. Women are manifestly not
but fundamentally sensual, and they can no more deny their carnal
nature ... as
creatures of the World ... than (gender-change exceptions to the rule
notwithstanding) become men. What they can
do, and often are doing these days, is to seek additional
alternative) outlets for their considerable energies, thereby acquiring
possibility of professional plenums to supplement their need of
ones. Yet the priesthood is not a
profession but a vocation, and those who enter it do so on the
that a commitment to Christ is also and necessarily a rejection of the
World. Now a man may reject the World
and go beyond it ... to the extent that his priestly vocation permits
a woman who rejects the World does not go beyond it but simply
woman, and therefore imposes a vacuous curse upon herself
which, by its very negative nature, cannot make for the transmission of
positive message, or doctrine, in regard to Christ, but will simply
back from the only salvation which is open to women - namely motherhood
thus keep her chained to a sort of female damnation.
Therefore the Catholic Church is right in its
refusal to ordain women priests since, short of abandoning its
clerical celibacy, the ordination of women would undermine the
bring the Church closer to the Father (through the subconscious need of
female vacuum to be sexually imposed upon) than to the Holy Spirit. Also there would be immense difficulties in
regard to the Confessional, especially with males confessing worldly
shortcomings, or sins, to a woman, the cardinal object of such sin from
standpoint. Then, too, the Mass would
difficulties with regard to its reference to the body of Christ and
association, by default, with womanly flesh.... No, women priests may
place in the Anglican Church, which, stemming from Henry VIII, upholds
freedoms, but they would be grossly out-of-place in the Catholic one,
the closest of all (Western) churches to the heavenly Beyond of
beatitude. The heaviness of the flesh
does not naturally lend itself to the lightness of the air, and where
intimations of the latter are upheld (as in the Catholic Church), there
no justification for those who are more naturally disposed to the
former ... to
lay claim to spiritual leadership. Even
the Catholic Church is something that will ultimately have to be
if the '
1. To contrast the noumenal objectivity of hats, which sit on top of the head, with the noumenal subjectivity of hoods, which fit completely around it.
2. Likewise, to contrast the phenomenal objectivity of umbrellas, which are held above the head, with the phenomenal subjectivity of caps, which fit partly around it.
3. People who do not wear hats, caps, or hoods when outdoors ... are likely to be overt or covert users of umbrellas. In fact, the absence of headgear should enable one to infer the relevance of an umbrella to such people, whether or not such a thing is actually in evidence.
4. Where hats are generally an upper-class mode of headgear, caps are a working-class mode, and hoods a classless mode, whilst umbrellas are a middle-class mode of protection against rain and/or snow, usually used in conjunction with raincoats.
1. The extreme left-wing nature of hats contrasts absolutely with the extreme right-wing nature of hoods, while the left-wing nature of caps contrasts relatively with the right-wing nature of umbrellas.
2. The solar Extreme Left contrasts absolutely with the stellar Extreme Right, while the planar Left contrasts relatively with the lunar Right.
3. The noumenal objectivity (objectivism) of the Extreme Left contrasts absolutely with the noumenal subjectivity (subjectivism) of the Extreme Right, as the Devil with God, while the phenomenal subjectivity of the Left contrasts relatively with the phenomenal objectivity of the Right, as woman with man.
4. One could speak of the heart as extreme left wing, in contrast to the extreme right-wing nature of the lungs.
5. Likewise, to contrast the left-wing nature of the sex organs (including the womb) with the right-wing nature of the brain.
6. To 'fall in love' is to succumb, through the emotions, to the heart, and thus to function as a devil vis-à-vis the object of desire. Hence the subversive nature of love (and sex) from the standpoint of God. For that which turns one against the subjective (and hence the lungs) is subversive, and contrasts with the conversion of the objective to subjectivity.
7. When a man falls back on the heart through love and sex, he puts himself beneath the pale of salvation and all that is holy. He becomes a creature of the Father, effectively extreme left wing in his identification, through love, with the blood. At first he is impressed by the looks of the woman with whom he has 'fallen in love'. Then he expresses himself verbally and/or physically to her. Finally, he explodes into her, causing her to implode in orgasmic response. He is thus a loser twice over - first through expression (a thing of the outer spirit), then through explosion (a thing of the outer light). By contrast, his woman is a winner twice over - first through impression (a thing of the inner spirit), then through implosion (a thing of the inner light). But both fall.
8. Not for nothing are the Extreme Left synonymous with the colour red, in contrast to the white connotation (doubtless in imperfect allusion to the colourlessness of air) accruing to the Extreme Right.
9. Likewise, one can contrast, relatively, the brown of the Left with the blue of the Right, socialism with capitalism.
10. The extreme left-wing nature of time (sequential or repetitive) contrasts absolutely with the extreme right-wing nature of space (spatial or spaced).
11. The left-wing nature of mass (massed or massive) contrasts relatively with the right-wing nature of volume (volumetric or voluminous).
12. The superstar of noumenal objectivity in the extreme left-wing time of the Devil (Satan or the Father) contrasts absolutely with the supercross of noumenal subjectivity in the extreme right-wing space of God (Jehovah or the Holy Ghost).
13. The star of phenomenal subjectivity in the left-wing mass of woman (the Cursed Whore or the Blessed Virgin) contrasts relatively with the cross of phenomenal objectivity in the right-wing volume of man (the Antichrist or Christ).
14. The First (cross) of volume shall be the Last (superstar) of time, while the Last (star) of mass will be the First (supercross) of space.
15. The damnation of the Right (Purgatory) in the Extreme Left (Hell) ... contrasts with the salvation of the Left (the World) in the Extreme Right (Heaven). Cross to superstar, and star to supercross.
16. Neo-Fascism is an imperfect intimation, harking back to fascist opposition to Bolshevism, of the 'Kingdom of Heaven' to come in the Social Transcendentalist Centre, when men will blend into the supreme individualism of the Divine, abandoning the collective delusions of the age for the salvation of God ... the Second Coming's/Holy Ghost's truth.
17. The bad collectivism of the Devil contrasts absolutely with the good individualism of God, while the good collectivity of woman contrasts relatively with the bad individuality of man - objectivism with subjectivism, and subjectivity with objectivity.
1. Man is most devilish when into the heart, most godly when into the lungs, most manly when into the brain, and most womanly when into the womb.
2. In music, the spaces (gaps) between notes are their pitch, while the time (duration) between notes is their rhythm. Hence to contrast the divine nature of pitch with the diabolic nature of rhythm.
3. Likewise, the volume (number) of notes is their melody, while the mass (density) of notes is their harmony. Hence to contrast the masculine nature of melody with the feminine nature of harmony.
4. The spirit of the lungs responds to pitch, the soul of the heart to rhythm, the mind of the brain to melody, and the will of the flesh to harmony.
5. The ultimate, or divine, music can only be rhythm-free ... as it ascends on the lightness of a pitch so spaced ... that there is little or nothing rhythmic about it.
6. Laughter is a diabolical subversion of the lungs by the heart, which causes them to reverberate in rhythmical fashion, echoing its objectivity. In laughter, the Devil demonstrates his contempt for God.
7. In contrast to the above, crying is a divine conversion of the heart to the lungs, as it sobs out its contrition in pitch-oriented fashion, rising and falling with the breath. In crying, the Devil achieves an accommodation with God.
8. Ordinarily the Devil is a jerk, whose sexuality is masturbatory (rhythmic), whose music is percussive, and whose organ is the heart - that triangular embodiment of noumenal objectivity.
9. A country/people with a 'large heart' are likely to have 'small lungs', i.e. will be more Devil than God, and hence more Doing than Being.
10. Heterosexuality achieves an approximation to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful, corresponding, in musical terms, to melody, pitch, and harmony, through petting, kissing, and coupling. The use of hands corresponds to melody, the use of lips to pitch, and the use of the sex organs to harmony. Obviously, such an approximation is necessarily amoral in its all-embracing associations.
11. The sexual jerk knows only the strength of rhythm ... as he masturbates in percussive aloofness from the Good, the True, and the Beautiful.
12. One of the main logical contradictions of Christian theology was the adaptation of the Platonic triad ... of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful ... to the Blessed Trinity, so that God the Father (the True), God the Son (the Good), and God the Holy Ghost (the Beautiful) came to signify, as with Plato, three aspects of the same 'Divinity', what he called Eros, or Love, and these virtues were thought to be somehow interconnected. In reality, however (the sexual analogue of petting [the Good], kissing [the True], and coupling [the Beautiful] notwithstanding), nothing could be further from the truth! For truth has nothing to do with the Father and everything to do with the Holy Spirit, while beauty is a quality, or virtue, of the World, and thus of the Blessed Virgin. What the Platonic triad overlooked ... was strength, the pagan virtue of the Strong, and it is in the Father that strength finds its virtuous place. Hence the phrase 'the Good, the True, and the Beautiful' has nothing whatsoever to do with the Blessed Trinity, but only with the Son, the Holy Spirit, and the Mother (in that order). The Father, corresponding to strength, is 'beneath the pale' of this virtuous phrase, much as, in music, rhythm is 'beneath the pale' of melody, pitch, and harmony, whilst, in sex, masturbating is 'beneath the pale' of petting, kissing, and coupling. Yet such a combination of factors, amounting to a sort of 'Three in One', is a far cry from the Blessed Trinity which, contrary to the goodness, truth, and beauty of our Platonic triad, is rooted in strength, the strength of the Father, Who is the One with whom the goodness of the Son and the beauty (sic) of the Holy Spirit are consanguineous. Clearly, such a patent falsehood will not and cannot do justice to the Holy Spirit, which is far more than beauty! We Social Transcendentalists, for whom the Holy Spirit of Heaven is the One True God, must uproot this falsehood of strength posing as truth ... in order that the Holy Spirit may be set free of the lie and live the truth it so richly deserves. Only then will the Holy Spirit of Heaven come truly to pass, consigning the Holy Soul of Hell, the lie of the Father, to the 'rubbish heap' of theological history, and its Church along with it! For as long as strength continues to pose as truth, people will be obliged to worship this 'truth' rather than achieve the truth themselves. Only in and through the Holy Spirit of Heaven can they ultimately be set free.
1. Being is the form of space, whether the content of the latter be spatial or spaced.
2. Doing is the form of time, whether the content of the latter be sequential or repetitive.
3. Taking is the form of volume, whether the content of the latter be volumetric or voluminous.
4. Giving is the form of mass, whether the content of the latter be massed or massive.
5. Form preponderates over content in the subjective contexts of being/space and giving/mass, whereas content preponderates over form in the objective contexts of doing/time and taking/volume.
6. One can no more have form without content ... than content without form, though the ratio to which form conditions content or content form will vary from context to context.
7. Form is never more preponderant over content than in the absolutist context of noumenal subjectivity, in which form precedes content. Conversely, content is never more preponderant over form than in the absolutist context of noumenal objectivity, in which content precedes form.
8. The supercross and the star are both contexts in which, due to their subjectivity, content is subordinate to form.
9. The cross and the superstar are both contexts in which, due to their objectivity, form is subordinate to content.
10. When content is subordinate to form ... because form precedes content, we have a Classical context.
11. When form is subordinate to content ... because content precedes form, we have a Romantic context.
12. The absolute Classicism of God vis-à-vis the absolute Romanticism of the Devil ... where the being of space and the time of doing are concerned.
13. The relative Classicism of woman vis-à-vis the relative Romanticism of man ... where the giving of mass and the volume of taking are concerned.
14. The notion that there can be form without content or content without form is premised upon the erroneous assumption that form and content are independent entities with truly absolutist properties.
15. The Platonic notion of Pure Form is a delusion of the mind with no basis whatsoever in divine or, indeed, any reality, since all realities, whatever their context, are combinations of form and content to greater or lesser degree.
16. Paint is the content of many so-called Formalist abstract paintings, just as shapes are the form of many so-called Conceptual abstract paintings.
17. God has content no less than the Devil form, but content is considerably subordinate to form in the divine context and, conversely, form considerably subordinate to content in the diabolic one, making for the semblance of absolutism in each case.
18. That art which achieves the most form with the least content ... is of God, and contrasts with the Devil's art of achieving most content with least form.
19. In the noumenal contexts of God and the Devil, both form and content are abstract, whereas in the phenomenal contexts of woman and man ... form and content are concrete, which is to say, Representational rather than Non-representational.
20. The Devil's intense dislike of form is matched only by God's rejection of excessive content. Communism, which is a thing of the Devil, can no more abide 'Formalism', or the semblance of absolute form, in art ... than Fascism can abide the negation of form in 'Conceptualism'. Neo-Plasticism would be as abhorrent to the Devil as, say, Abstract Expressionism to God.
21. In Nonconformism, content generally prevails over form, whereas in Humanism ... form prevails over content, as befitting its subjective basis in the World. Hence the distinction between ethics (Protestant) and aesthetics (Catholic).
22. The problem is not to advance form at the expense of content, but to advance the highest form in conjunction with the highest content, so that, through divine wisdom, the joyful calm of Being ... on the lightness of air ... comes universally to pass. Thus will the World give way to Heaven ... as God transcends woman, and truth replaces beauty as the most perfect manifestation of form.
1. One should be careful not to confound salvation of the World with salvation from the World. For the former, which is Catholic, is through art, whereas the latter, which is transcendentalist, is through air.
2. To distinguish the extreme left-wing nature, relative to the World, of television from the extreme right-wing nature of computers. One could say that the more partial one is to computing, the less time, and indeed inclination, will one have for television, and vice versa.
3. Likewise, to distinguish the left-wing nature, relative to the World, of radios and/or midis from the right-wing nature of video-recorders. The more partial one is to radio and/or midi, the less time, and indeed inclination, will one have for video-recorders, and vice versa.
4. The Devil (solar) of television contrasts horizontally, as heart to lungs, with the God (stellar) of computers, while the man (lunar) of video-recorders contrasts vertically, as brain to body, with the woman (planar) of radio. At any rate, within the electronic, and therefore realistic, context of the World.
5. There is a 'Nazi' suggestion of lunar-to-solar degeneration about televideos, which combine right-wing and extreme left-wing parallels in a single format.
6. Just as television and video-recorders, when 'true' to their nature, are objective media of perceptual orientation, so, likewise, radio and computers are subjective media of conceptual orientation - the former pair relative to the light (both outer and inner), but the latter pair relative to the spirit (both outer and inner). The tendency to use or identify computers with games is a quasi-perceptual mode of 'subjectivity' closer, in nature, to the alpha of spirituality than to its omega, and therefore effectively contrary, so I contend, to the essence of computers as conceptual media for the storage and transmission of data.
7. It could be that an exact parallel exists between football, both rugby and association/Gaelic, and the above-mentioned worldly media of information transmission, insofar as football is worldly to the extent of being played on grass. Hence to distinguish the extreme left-wing nature, relative to the World, of Rugby Union (television) from the extreme right-wing nature ... of Gaelic Football (computers) on the one hand, but the left-wing nature of Association Football (radio) from the right-wing nature of Rugby League (video-recorders) on the other hand. Both types of rugby, scorning nets, are objective games, whereas both types of football, utilizing nets, are subjective. The objectivity of the light (both outer and inner) vis-à-vis the subjectivity of the spirit (both outer and inner).
1. The extreme left-wing nature of crime vis-à-vis the right-wing nature of punishment - barbarism and civilization.
2. The left-wing nature of sin vis-à-vis the extreme right-wing nature of grace - nature and culture.
3. The criminality of the Devil vis-à-vis the punitive redress of man - fundamentalism and nonconformism.
4. The sinfulness of woman vis-à-vis the graciousness of God - humanism and transcendentalism.
5. Crime and punishment hang together like the sun and the moon, whereas sin and grace go together like the earth and the Beyond.
6. By the grace of God ... the Second Coming ... will the World be saved from its sins for the joy of the (Social Transcendentalist) Beyond.
7. The brain of
8. Photography is the modern form of art no less than films the modern form of drama. For photography, like art, is spatial, whereas film, like drama, is massed. Negative Being and negative Giving.
9. Being transcendentalist (of space), art is centred in Alpha God (Jehovah), and music in Omega God (the Holy Spirit).
10. Being fundamentalist (of time), dance is rooted in Alpha Devil (Satan), and poetry in Omega Devil (the Father).
11. Being nonconformist (of volume), pottery is centred in alpha man (the Antichrist), and literature in omega man (Christ).
12. Being humanist (of mass), drama is rooted in alpha woman (the Antimother), and sculpture in omega woman (the Mother).
13. Art is most pure in drawing, the mode of art closest, when linear, to the Clear Light of Space, whereas in painting it is effectively in a fallen state which brings it closer to the Clear Heat of Time. For there is something fiery and solar-like about paint, especially when in bright colours.
14. However that may be, art is essentially no good at intimating of the Holy Spirit of Heaven, for the dimension of spatial space is down and up or backwards and forwards, whereas the dimension of spaced space is in and out, as in the breath, for which only the best music will suffice. For, in the final analysis, art is of the light and music, by contrast, of the spirit, which is all the difference of alpha and omega.
1. When genuine, the artist is a creature of the Clear Light of Space, the musician a creature of the Holy Spirit of Heaven.
2. When genuine, the dancer is a creature of the Clear Heat of Time, the poet a creature of the Holy Soul of Hell.
3. When genuine, the potter is a creature of the Clear Coldness of Volume, the writer a creature of the Holy Mind of Purgatory.
4. When genuine, the actor is a creature of the Clear Darkness of Mass, the sculptor a creature of the Holy Will of the World.
5. The objectivity of men is generally premised upon the penis, the subjectivity of women upon the vagina.
6. God is the conscience of the Devil, and woman the conscience of man.
7. Regarded generically, man, or mankind, is of the mundane World, and hence nature, so that we can speak of the naturalism of man, in contrast to the antinaturalism of antiman, whose throne is in the purgatorial Overworld. However, contrasted with the antinaturalism of antiman is the super-antinaturalism of super-antiman, who appertains to the diabolic Behind, and at the back of super-antiman is the divine Behind of supra-antiman, whose supra-antinaturalism corresponds to the Clear Light of Space. Such a Clear Light is, of course, at the opposite extreme to the Holy Spirit of Heaven, which is the omega goal of evolutionary striving, and if we now proceed beyond man, rather than against or behind him, we shall find that the supernature of superman transcends the World, and hence nature, to stand as the next best, or last, thing to the supra-nature of supra-man ... in the divine Beyond of universal self.
1. There is nothing Christian about marriage, and the notion of a 'Christian marriage' is a contradiction in terms, since Christianity is about denying the World in the interests of heavenly salvation, whereas marriage is a reflection of the World or, rather, of the relationship between worldly and super-antiworldly bodies, viz. woman and man, which resembles the attraction of the earth and the sun. In fact, when love of a particular woman takes possession of a man's heart, he becomes possessive in his attitude towards her, and this possessiveness, analogous to that of the sun for the earth, is what is institutionalized by and through marriage, whether within or without the Church. Such possessiveness is akin to an emotional gravity, the will of which is to suck-in the beloved towards itself and effectively take her over, rendering her will passive to its demands. There is nothing Christian in this, the most heathen of all passions. On the contrary, it signifies the rejection of Christian values in a context, governed by the blood, which has its powerbase in the heart, that seat of the soul and ally of the Devil.
2. If we think of the soul as the metaphysical quality of the blood, and blood as the element of the heart, then heart + blood = Hell, which is the emotional quality of the Devil. Conversely, if we think of the spirit as the metaphysical quality of the air, and air as the element of the lungs, then lungs + air = Heaven, which is the spiritual quality of God. God and the Devil are within us whether or not we are conscious (aware) of the fact, but only when we become tuned-in to either the lungs or the heart will God or the Devil be the principal experience. Hence when we tune-in to the lungs, through meditation, God is all that we are aware of and we accordingly become divine. When, by contrast, we tune-in to the heart, through love, then the Devil is all that we are aware of and we accordingly become diabolic.
3. God, being spirit, seeks deliverance from the World, since spirit rises-up on the lightness of air and naturally or, rather, supernaturally tends away from the flesh. The Devil, being soul, seeks dominion over the World, since soul is attracted by the heaviness of the flesh and antinaturally or, rather, super-antinaturally tends towards it. The deliverance of spirit from the flesh is salvation. The domination of the flesh by the soul is damnation. The lungs deliver and the heart enslaves. There, in the human predicament, is the Faustian dilemma of 'two souls, alas, within my breast do dwell', although we have the freedom to choose between them and to accept or reject the World in consequence. He who speaks of and through the heart has made his pact with the Devil. He who speaks of and through the lungs, by contrast, has made his peace with God.
4. He/she who, by contrast, speaks neither
through the heart nor the lungs but through the brain and/or body (sex
womb, etc.) is neither diabolic nor divine but human-all-too-human, and
him/her the decision - if possible - of God or the Devil has still to
made. Perhaps it is still true that many
are called (to life) but few chosen (by the Devil or by God), and
sitting-on-the-fence has its amoral attractions and even advantages. It does not, however, have eternal sanction,
and it is not, as we have seen, One with the will of either God or the
Devil. The Devil is not future but
past. God is future and no past. When God has His day, the fence will be torn
down and no-one continue to sit upon it.
The meek shall be saved from their sins and only the graces of
prevail - for ever. The meek may now, as
the People, have inherited the earth, but it remains for God to inherit
meek. Only when He does so, will the '
1. Although we speak rather glibly of human beings, the extent to which most people in the late-twentieth century were in fact human beings was, and continues to be, arguably less than would justify the use of such a term in regard to them. The greater number of people are now, as then, primarily and predominantly not human beings at all but either human doings (people closer to the heart than to the lungs in their attitude towards and conduct of life), human takings (people for whom the brain is paramount), or human givings (people for whom the body, and hence the sexual organs and/or womb is the predominating influence). Thus one is obliged to confess that human beings (people for whom the lungs are of paramount importance in their attitude towards and conduct of life) are somewhat in the minority in a world where human doings, human takings, and human givings tend to preponderate ... to the detriment of Being. In fact, the spiritual nature of human beings is such ... that they can only be true outsiders in an age and society dominated by human doings and thus, effectively, by the Devil.
2. To contrast, noumenally, the extreme right-wing and classless nature of human beings with the extreme left-wing and upper-class nature of human doings on the one hand, that of the lungs and the heart, but to contrast, phenomenally, the right-wing and middle-class nature of human takings with the left-wing and working-class nature of human givings on the other hand, that of the brain and the body (sex organs). A human being is effectively a heavenly person, a human doing, by contrast, a hellish one. A human taking is effectively a purgatorial person, a human giving, by contrast, a mundane one.
3. The Solar System contains its own Hell and Heaven in the form of the Sun on the one hand and the planet Saturn on the other hand, the Sun being a raging inferno and Saturn a gaseous globe surrounded by halo-like rings. Hence from the Hell of the Sun to the Heaven of Saturn via the purgatorial and mundane realms of the moon and the earth.
4. Whereas the moon is effectively right wing in its correlation, on Earth, with capitalism, liberalism, parliamentarianism, nonconformism, etc., the earth is effectively left wing in its correlation, in the World, with socialism, humanism, republicanism, Catholicism, etc. By comparison to the earth, the Sun is effectively extreme left wing in its correlation, on Earth, with communism, Bolshevism, authoritarianism, fundamentalism, etc., while, in comparison to the moon, Saturn is effectively extreme right wing in its correlation, in the World, with corporatism, fascism, totalitarianism, transcendentalism, etc.
5. It is questionable whether we would be composites of heart, lungs, brain, and body if the Solar System had been arranged differently; for it seems to me that whereas the heart derives, in its essentials, from the Sun, the lungs derive from a quite contrary source, probably Saturn, and that while these exist in a state of absolute tension on one level, namely noumenal, the brain and the sexual body exist in a state of relative tension on another level, namely phenomenal, with the former deriving, in all probability, from the moon and the latter from the earth itself. Doubtless other sources of derivation also exist in regard, for example, to blood and bones (Venus and Mars?), since mankind is a composite of many different tensions which jostle for supremacy in an uneasy symbiosis based on cosmic precedent.
6. If, traditionally, the heart has maintained an ascendancy over the lungs and continued to dominate life on Earth, it should not be forgotten that the Sun is a more influential and powerful body than Saturn, which remains unseen. Yet, that said, Saturn is structurally closer to us than the Sun, and we achieve our true centre not in the heart but in the lungs, which bring us to God. The heart, by contrast, drives us towards the Devil, wherein we are consumed alive by emotional fire (passion).
7. The esteem in which the heart was held in the twentieth century is proof of the extent to which modern man is a slave of the Devil and a victim of Hell. A more enlightened age would ensure, having minimized the sun's influence, that the heart was relegated to a position of negligible importance ... as the evaluation of life proceeded according to divine principles. The heart would neither be seen nor heard in an age and society when the majority of people, properly become human beings, were more interested in listening to the counsel of their lungs.
8. With time on the 'rubbish heap of history', the beat would fade away, together with the State and all that was contrary to the Centre, wherein God has His throne. Only the divine pitch of a Saturn-oriented (super)humanity adrift on the peace of space would prevail ... for all Eternity.
1. Truth is not only 'beyond the pale' of strength, its diabolic adversary, but also 'beyond the pale' of goodness and beauty, which are more usually apperceived, by their practitioners, as ends-in-themselves rather than as means to a new end - the end, namely of truth. Hence those who struggle for truth have to be aware that not only strength, as symbolized by the Father, but goodness and beauty, as symbolized by the Son and the Mother respectively, are ranged against it from their various standpoints. For truth, which is symbolized by the Holy Spirit, is a pariah wherever class-bound individuals are the order of the day, as they will be in any open society.
2. When nature apes culture, as it often does in women, e.g. elaborate make-up, ponytailed long hair, conspicuous ornaments, seductive clothing, etc., then culture is in trouble. For nature-as-culture suffices for most men, just as beauty-as-truth suffices for most artists. True culture, which is independent of nature, languishes on the periphery of a society which is dominated by nature posing as culture. For such a situation ensures that the World remains an end-in-itself rather than the sinful precondition of a divine Beyond. It is as though the World was playing at being God, with no place, in consequence, for culture or truth, which, sadly, stay very much 'beyond the pale'.
3. A society which shuts out the
divine intervention and deliverance by making a virtue of class-bound
in open-society fashion ... is doomed to perpetuate the World and its
oppressions/oppressors. By making the
Father synonymous with God, Who is in Heaven, such a society precludes
literally coming to pass, since the only God Who is or ever could be in
is the Holy Spirit (of Heaven), and such a God is the One True God in
consequence of 'His' position in Heaven as consciousness of (the
lightness of) air. Yet such a God,
denied Heaven, is necessarily marginalized in societies which make the
synonymous with God. For the Father is
not even what could be called the One False God, the Jehovahesque Clear
of the Void, but no God at all, since He is neither illusion nor truth
strength, and thus an Omega Devil whose position, as the positive
of the weak or negative Devil (Satan), is not in Heaven (the air) but
(the blood), and who is accordingly a Devil in Hell, not a God in
Heaven! Only when this fraudulent God,
Devil, is exposed for what He really signifies, to be democratically
to the 'rubbish heap of (religious) history', will it be possible for
'God' to break free of falsity and embrace the Holy Spirit of Heaven,
as it so
very desperately needs to, if truth is finally to prevail and religion
from the clutches of the great lie, viz. the Almighty.
A positive Devil may be preferable to a
negative one, just as Count Dracula is preferable to the Sun, his great
but such a Devil is still a far cry from God, and God will continue to
in the classless wilderness of the so-called lunatic fringe so long as
place is taken by the Father, and people continue to believe, falsely,
reigns in Heaven and that, ipso
facto, the 'Kingdom of Heaven' depends
upon His will. In reality, it depends
upon the will of the Second Coming, who is One with the Holy Spirit,
will is to see that not only is Heaven understood in relation to
but that it becomes inseparable from the Holy Spirit ... as the Holy
Heaven, which leaves neither room nor place for any other deity's claim
it, and no room or place, in consequence, for the Father.
Nor, needless to say, for the 'Gods' of man
and woman, whose claim on Heaven is even weaker, or more spurious, than
Father's, given their more phenomenal standings, and whose familial
as Son and Mother ... would be no less irrelevant to a post-familial
of Heaven' than the Father. Verily, when
1. Christ is reputed to have said: 'Be thy self', and, to be sure, there is only one self that one can be, viz. the spiritual self. One cannot be, for instance, the emotional self or the intellectual self or the physical self. One can only do/feel the emotional self, take/know the intellectual self, and give/touch the physical self. The only self one can be, strictly speaking, is the spiritual self, and therefore to be one's self is to be one with the spiritual self in its reliance on and identification with the air it breathes. Such is the essence of salvation (from the other selves), and it is what makes one truly divine.
2. A person who was truly Christian, and hence given to being his self, would not be emotional, intellectual, or sexual, but solely spiritual, and thus one who cultivates Being at the expense of Doing, Taking, and Giving, or, equally, breathing at the expense of feeling, knowing, and willing.
3. To be the Holy Spirit of Heaven rather than to do the Holy Soul of Hell, to take the Holy Mind of Purgatory, or to give the Holy Will of the World. Which is to say, to breathe the Holy Spirit of Heaven rather than to feel the Holy Soul of Hell, to know the Holy Mind of Purgatory, or to touch the Holy Will of the World.
4. Before one can be the Holy Spirit of Heaven one must first of all breathe it, e.g. meditate before one contemplates. Before one can do the Holy Soul of Hell one must first of all feel it, e.g. agitate before one demonstrates. Before one can take the Holy Mind of Purgatory one must first of all know it, e.g. cogitate before one imitates. Before one can give the Holy Will of the World one must first of all touch it, e.g. stimulate before one copulates. Hence there is a difference of degree between breathing and being, feeling and doing, knowing and taking, and touching and giving. The one is a precondition of the other.
5. Being is not in meditation but in the contemplation of the joy which results from the lightness of air. Meditation is the technique which 'unlocks the door' into the 'Kingdom Within', wherein one is contemplatively conscious of the freedom which comes from being at one with the essence of air, and is accordingly lifted-up on its lightness in a joyous release from mundane bondage. Hence breathing is the means to the joyful end of Being.
6. Breathe deeply to calm your self; calm your self into the lightness of Being. Experience the spirit as it soars above the body on the wings of its breathing and is saved to Being, which is oneness with the universal spirit whose essence is lightness.
7. Let us not talk, with fools, of the unbearable lightness of Being. Let us rather embrace it as our long-lost home and true refuge!
8. Being is the goal of divine striving (through meditation) and the end to all suffering. Even to flap one's spiritual wings (through breathing) is a sort of suffering in relation to Being, which glides effortlessly upon the waves of gentle air.
1. To be, I need only sit still and get into my breathing, thereby becoming divine. Everything else - heart, brain, body - is transcended by my consciousness of the air I breathe and which refreshes me. I only truly live in and through the air, which is my Heaven. Without it, I, as a spiritual entity, would be dead. There are other types of life, viz. strong life in the blood, good life in the brain, beautiful life in the flesh. But in order to experience true life one must abandon these lower types of life and concentrate on the air, which is the life-blood, so to speak, of the spirit. Only in true life can one become divine.
2. Those who are most true to their spiritual self are of God in their consciousness of Heaven, and for them the lungs take precedence over the heart, the brain, and the flesh. Life for them is mainly spiritual, connected with consciousness of and in the air they breathe on the wings of their lungs. Emotional life, intellectual life, and sexual life are largely beneath their pale, as they strive ever more towards spiritual life, which is alone absolutely perfect in its adherence to truth. One might say that such perfection is an extreme rightness, or correctness, which appertains to God (the Holy Spirit of Heaven) and to God alone! It is in this noumenal subjectivity that Being comes absolutely to pass.
3. In contrast to the extreme rightness of God, we have the extreme wrongness, or incorrectness, of the Devil, which is the noumenal objectivity of the emotional life in relation to the heart and blood. The phenomenal objectivity of the sexual life in its relation to the flesh is, by comparison with the emotional life, only moderately wrong, while the phenomenal subjectivity of the intellectual life in its relation to the brain is, by comparison with the spiritual life, only moderately right, the rightness of man the knower of Purgatory as opposed to the wrongness of woman the bearer of the World. In political terms, rightness translates as Right, whether moderate or extreme, while wrongness translates as Left, whether moderate or extreme. The spiritual life is effectively extreme right-wing and the emotional life effectively extreme left-wing, while the intellectual life is moderate right wing and the sexual life ... moderate left wing. As it is for God and the Devil, so it is for man and woman!
4. The perfections of the subjective, both absolute and relative, stand apart from the imperfections of the objective, both absolute and relative. The absolute perfection of God contrasts noumenally with the absolute imperfection of the Devil, as truth with strength, while the relative perfection of man contrasts phenomenally with the relative imperfection of woman, as goodness with beauty. Perfection is essential, imperfection apparent. Perfection does not show itself. Imperfection does.
1. The noumenal imperfection of the superstar contrasts absolutely with the noumenal perfection of the supercross, while the phenomenal perfection of the cross contrasts relatively with the phenomenal imperfection of the star.
2. If man and woman were merely different from each other rather than morally antithetical, with the intellectual perfection of the one contrasting, phenomenally, with the instinctual imperfection of the other, then we would have to accept that, on the noumenal axis of spiritual and emotional antitheses, God and the Devil were merely different and not morally antithetical. Only an idiot or a scoundrel would in fact do so, since it should be plain to even the least intelligent of people that God and the Devil are morally antithetical, with the former synonymous with culture and the latter with barbarism. Hence we should have no logical difficulty in contending that man and woman are likewise morally antithetical to each other, with the former synonymous with civilization and the latter with nature. To claim that they are merely different would be to take an amoral stance relative to the sort of liberalism which is the born enemy of truth. Yet to admit, as I have, that they are morally antithetical is not, as some would suppose, to say that men are morally superior to women, any more than one could reasonably argue that God is morally superior to the Devil. For one cannot be morally superior to someone or something which is not moral in the first place, but fundamentally and essentially immoral. Man is no more morally superior to woman than God ... to the Devil. Man is morally inferior to God, and woman immorally inferior to the Devil. Or, conversely, God is morally superior to man, and the Devil immorally superior to woman. One can only be superior or inferior to that which is of a like persuasion, not to what is antithetically ranged against one!
3. Man is no less of a 'fall' from God than woman is a 'fall' from the Devil. Adam was One with God until, tasting of the 'forbidden fruit', he fell from grace and entered into carnal relations with Eve, who was tempted by the Devil. Thenceforth, knowing good and evil, he would wander the world as man. Even on the primitive level of negative God and Devil, viz. Jehovah and Satan, we can see that man is closer to God and woman, by contrast, closer to the Devil. How much more so is this the case in regard to positive God and Devil, viz. the Holy Spirit of Heaven and the Holy Soul of Hell, or, in common parlance, the Holy Ghost and the Father! Even in Christian terms, the Mother is closer to the Father, and the Son to the Holy Ghost.
4. The noumenal objectivity of the superstar stands in an absolutely immoral relationship to the phenomenal objectivity of the star, while the noumenal subjectivity of the supercross stands in an absolutely moral relationship to the phenomenal subjectivity of the cross. From extreme left-wing Communism to left-wing Socialism on the one hand, and from right-wing Capitalism to extreme right-wing Corporatism on the other hand. Fundamentalism to humanism; nonconformism to transcendentalism. Authoritarianism to republicanism; parliamentarianism to totalitarianism.
5. Woman is cursed by the harmony of her flesh, and man blessed by the melody of his brain. Similarly, the Devil is cursed by the pulse of his heart and God blessed by the pitch of His lungs.
6. The Devil rides out discarnately (in noumenal terms) on the objectivity of emotion, and incarnately (in phenomenal terms) on the objectivity of sensations. The Love Devil, who is generally male, becomes One with the Flesh Devil, who is generally female. Superstar and star react in complementary fashion to their respective modes of objectivity.
7. To contrast the extreme left-wing essence of naturalism, which is emotional, with the extreme right-wing essence of idealism, which is spiritual. Likewise to contrast the left-wing essence of realism, which is sensual, with the right-wing essence of materialism, which is intellectual. Hence where God is an idealist and the Devil a naturalist, woman is a realist and man a materialist.
8. Usually I think of will as synonymous with the World, and hence sensuality, but, in reality, will is awareness, and awareness can be emotional, sensual, intellectual, or spiritual. In fact, awareness is another word for life, and life, as we have seen, can be emotional, sensual, intellectual, or spiritual. Will or life or awareness is therefore manifold in its division into emotion, sensation, intellect, and spirit, corresponding, so I contend, to protons, electrons, neutrons, and photons - the elemental substrata, so to speak, which metaphysically underlie life. Will is therefore the essence of each element, its life-force or consciousness, and in the will of emotional life, will manifests, through protons, as feeling/doing; in the will of sensual life it manifests, through electrons, as sensing/giving; in the will of intellectual life it manifests, through neutrons, as knowing/taking; and in the will of spiritual life it manifests, through photons, as breathing/being. Hence we can no more speak of one will than of one element. The world, as we generally understand it, is subject to the clash of diverse wills, as, up to a point, is each person, whether he/she be predominantly diabolic, feminine, masculine, or divine, which is to say, emotional, sensual, intellectual, or spiritual.
1. The ideal weather for spirituality is an overcast day, the sort of day when the lure of Folk music is all the stronger, and one can turn to the breath with renewed calmness.
2. To contrast the spirituality of an overcast day with the emotionality of a sunny day, the latter being the sort of day to encourage heart-based activities and perhaps - who knows? - horn-based Jazz.
3. To contrast the intellectuality of a rainy day with the sensuality of a sultry day, or a day of mixed cloud and sunshine - the former being the kind of weather to encourage brain-based activity and the latter the kind of weather to encourage flesh-based activity, with, I would guess, Classical and Pop correlations respectively.
4. Regarding the weather in an ideological light, one could speak of the parliamentarianism of rainy weather but the Nazism of hailstones, given the more extreme nature, relevant to the lunar limbo, of the latter.
5. If sunny weather has a sort of fundamentalist or communist correlation by dint of its emotional bias, then behind the heat of the sun lies the light of the central star of the Galaxy, the alpha transcendentalism of the Clear Light of Space, and I wager that the type of weather most correlative with this ideological position would be a snowstorm, snow being analogous, in its crystallinity, to light, so that it is as though flakes of light were falling from the sky.
6. Thus it should be possible to argue that there is a type of weather for every ideological position, a correlation, if you like, between any given weather pattern and the kind of ideology most applicable to the weather in question. We cannot overlook or underestimate the extent to which ideology and, for that matter, ethnic distinctions are conditioned by climate! A stable climate is likely to encourage a specific ideological allegiance, an unstable climate a variety of alternative allegiances which may well be institutionalized in terms of liberal pluralism.
7. Politically speaking, Britain is given
three-party system of parliamentary democracy which to some extent
allegiances corresponding to the sun (Labour), the moon
the earth (Liberal Democrats), but nothing corresponding to the
of a Saturn-oriented transcendentalism.
Although this may be to some extent conditioned by the climate,
that Britain is a superstate precludes any such transcendental
since that which is rooted in political fundamentalism, and hence a
cannot extend towards political transcendentalism, which must
remain 'beyond the pale'. Only in the
8. If the sun is a context of noumenal objectivity by dint of its fiery essence, then the earth must surely be a context of phenomenal objectivity by dint of the heliotropic bias of nature. A fiery core, a mineral crust, and then an organic soil in which plants strain, objectively, towards the sun. Women, likewise, tend to be heliotropic, not just in the crude sense of being prone to sunbathing, but with regard to their love of men, the man of any given woman functioning as a sort of sun whose emotional rays lovingly envelop her the way the sun's rays envelop the earth. Thus woman is phenomenally objective in her physical generosity towards man, while man is noumenally objective in his emotional generosity towards woman. Men and women join together, as father and mother, superstar and star, and their offspring is analogous to the moon in terms of its development, throughout childhood, of phenomenal subjectivity or, in plain parlance, the intellect. For, unlike the earth, which has plants and things sticking out of it in objective fashion, the moon is a compact entity which is correspondingly subjective, and just as it is embraced by and revolves around the earth, so children revolve around their mother, who is especially sensitive towards them in her phenomenal objectivity. In climatic terms, father, mother, and offspring are akin to a sunny day, a sultry day, and a rainy day respectively, and their basic correspondence to the sun, the earth, and the moon necessarily places them beneath the possibility of divine redemption in and through the noumenal subjectivity of the transcendental Beyond. For, as Christ well knew, such a redemption can only come when one turns one's back on family and ceases to behave in a heathen manner, the kind of manner which is dominated by the superstar and star not only to the detriment of the cross but, most especially, to the exclusion of the supercross, and hence freedom from the World in and through the spirit.
1. In the relations of the sexes, men feel in a big way emotionally but give in a small way physically, whereas women give in a big way physically but feel in a small way emotionally. Man is very literally the lover whose emotional love evokes a physical response from woman. He gives the soul, but she gives the body. Or, rather, his feeling of love causes him to act upon woman, who then gives her body.
2. As flowers depend upon the sun for their life, so woman depends on man for her life ... as a wife and mother. Man is not dependent upon woman to anything like the same extent that woman depends on man. In fact, it is debatable whether man is really dependent upon woman at all. For his real life tends to lie outside the family, in the realms of business and/or some profession.
3. To contrast, noumenally, the extreme left-wing nature of art with the extreme right-wing nature of music on the basis that art is the art form of the heart and music, by contrast, the art form of the lungs. Likewise to contrast, phenomenally, the left-wing nature of sculpture with the right-wing nature of literature on the basis that sculpture is the art form of the body and literature, by contrast, the art form of the brain. Hence where art and sculpture are broadly under the superstar and the star respectively, literature and music are just as respectively under the cross and the supercross.
4. Art and sculpture are fundamentally objective art forms corresponding, in religious terms, to the Father and the Mother respectively, whereas literature and music are fundamentally subjective art forms corresponding to the Son and the Holy Ghost respectively. Hence where art and sculpture are apparent, literature and music are essential - the former pair 'heathen' and the latter pair 'Christian'.
5. To speak, as I believe I have elsewhere done, of the upper-class essence of art in relation to noumenal objectivity, of the working-class essence of sculpture in relation to phenomenal objectivity, of the middle-class essence of literature in relation to phenomenal subjectivity, and of the classless essence of music in relation to noumenal subjectivity. Alternatively, one could say that whereas art is the art form of the Devil and sculpture the art form of woman, literature is the art form of man and music the art form of God.
6. Were God, the Holy Spirit of Heaven, a musician, He would probably be an uilleann piper. In fact, uilleann pipers are the closest of all musicians to God, and therefore correspond to the highest musical ideal.
7. The average Rock band would seem to be a paradigm of coitus in which the guitarists, corresponding to females, are being 'shafted' by the drummer, whose overly phallic drumsticks symbolize the rhythmic penetration of the vagina as maintained by the largely harmonic bias of guitars. Thus it is the drummer who is the 'real man' of the band/group, the one whose noumenal objectivity impinges upon the phenomenal objectivity of the guitarists and their strumming and/or picking. In fact, both rhythm and lead playing are usually aided and abetted by the use of a plectrum, that clitoral parallel which is seemingly stimulated to greater or lesser heights according to the rhythmic impetus coming from the drums, and which may or may not give rise to the musical equivalent of a female orgasm - an extended guitar solo. As to the keyboardist (if any), he is neither a man nor a woman but effectively a youth who normally remains in the intellectual background of what is usually a duel between emotionality and sensuality for the hearts and bodies of prospective or actual fathers and mothers.
8. There is nothing revolutionary about Rock music. On the contrary, it is, together with Jazz, one of the most conservative art forms ever invented! For if Jazz, with its greater bias towards wind and percussion, is arguably a masculine art form, then Rock is its feminine counterpart, a sort of socialistic fall from musical communism which places greater emphasis on guitars and thus gives the female's side of the sexual story, a side which, more open to vocals, is largely heliotropic in its phenomenal objectivity. Hence from the Father to the Mother, with the classical Son and the folksy Holy Ghost effectively 'beyond the pale' of these star-based art forms.
1. If Jazz is extreme left wing and Rock ... left wing, then Classical is right wing and Folk ... extreme right wing - a distinction between barbarism and nature on the one hand, and civilization and culture on the other hand. Jazz, being noumenally objective, is the music of the Devil, and Rock, being phenomenally objective, the music of woman. Classical, being phenomenally subjective, is the music of man, and Folk, being noumenally subjective, the music of God. From horns to uilleann pipes via guitars and keyboards.
2. The synthesizer has the capacity to emulate a variety of instruments including, not least of all, wind and brass - a factor which confirms its paradoxical status as a bridge between keyboards and horns, which suggests to this thinker an analogy with burning crosses and other phenomena appertaining to an extreme lunar identity, the sort of identity I have elsewhere characterized as 'Nazi' by dint of its (relative to the lunar limbo) extreme right-wing correlation. It is as though, by emulating horns, the synthesist is approaching the Hell of cosmic and/or solar Fundamentalism from a radically purgatorial point-of-view, his synthesizer a burning cross which is nonetheless distinct from the superstar of musical Hell per se. As distinct, in fact, from musical Hell as a photobook from a film or a Nazi from a Bolshevik! Yet such a paradox is a sort of Hell all the same, the Nazi Hell of an extreme purgatorial lunacy.
3. The reader will, I trust, be aware of the distinction I habitually draw between the mini-extreme right-wing nature of a purgatorial lunacy and the maxi-extreme right-wing nature of the heavenly Beyond, which is of the Extreme Right per se, and therefore not something affiliated to the lunar limbo after the fashion of Nazism and other forms of so-called fascism having a largely Protestant and/or Germanic origin. The Extreme Right per se is generically far superior to any purgatorial extremism of the burning or crooked cross varieties! In fact, if I categorize Social Transcendentalism as generically 'superfascist', it is on the basis of a maxi-extreme right-wing nature which is no Christian and, in particular, Catholic omega like (Latin) fascism, but a superchristian omega which has less to do with the defence of the Church from, for example, Bolshevik atheism than with the advancement of transcendentalism to the Centre, and thus the 'coming out' of God as the Holy Spirit of Heaven. By comparison to this, the Holy Ghost of fascist precedence would seem to be a rather Pentecostal divinity hemmed-in by Catholic tradition and unable, in consequence, to transcend the Trinity and achieve that divine liberation which only Social Transcendentalism can offer. Yet it is still morally superior to the quasi-Devil of Nazi fundamentalism.
1. Everything that is 'beyond the pale' of Devil-rooted heathenism, and hence effectively 'reborn', is Saturn-orientated. Yet the earth is physically so much closer to the Sun than to Saturn ... that it is more natural to be rooted in the Sun, so to speak, than to aspire, transcendently, towards Saturn.
2. Yet the Sun, corresponding to negative Devil (Satan), is no cultural paradise but a barbarous Hell, and therefore it cannot be said that being rooted in the Sun is an ideal condition. On the contrary, it is most literally a naturalistic condition, and such naturalism imposes upon realism, the world/woman, and breeds materialism, the moon/children. The Sun may be the real power so far as its direct influence upon the world is concerned, but it is a power which no-one but a fool or a moral ignoramus would seek to idealize - at the risk of making a divinity out of the Devil or, worse again, subverting God to diabolic ends. Unfortunately, there are people who do this, whether overtly, as Devil-worshippers, or covertly, through some theological falsehood. Yet God is not and never can be a power ... in the sense of having direct control and influence over others. The Devil is a power and that power is very real, as can be confirmed by the world in which we live, with its autocratic basis.
3. Nevertheless it is possible to turn away from the Devil's power and seek, through the spirit, an accommodation with God, to turn one's back on the Sun, as it were, in the interests of a Saturn-oriented rebirth. It may even be possible, one day, to artificially reduce the sun's influence through the siting of large blocking devices - solar shields, as I have elsewhere called them - in space, and thereby assist in the re-orientation of life on Earth for the great heathen masses. If so, then it won't be the traditional political powers-that-be who are responsible for such a strategy, but a revolutionary elite of Saturn-oriented transcendentalists whom the People have trusted to lead them beyond the World. It will be because the People had democratically opted to be saved from their worldly sins ... through the assumption of religious sovereignty via the Second Coming ... that these transcendentalists would replace the traditional powers-that-be, striving to undermine the Devil's influence at every turn. This is our only hope. Not faith without science or science without faith, but a scientific faith such that brings us spiritually closer to Saturn, as it removes us from the infernal clutches of the Sun.
1. That which is phenomenally objective can also be phenomenally subjective, and vice versa. Whereas that which is noumenally objective can only be noumenally objective, and that which is noumenally subjective only be noumenally subjective. Men and women are both objective and subjective (though not usually at the same time), whereas the Devil can only be objective and God, by contrast, subjective. Hence the distinction between the relativity of the phenomenal and the absolutism of the noumenal.
2. Like man and woman, the earth is both objective and subjective or, rather, it is objective in the alpha context of being Earth and subjective in the omega context of being the World - a distinction, as it were, between science and religion, or nature and nurture, or the Cursed Whore and the Blessed Virgin. A heliotropic nature on the one hand, and a subterranean molten core on the other hand, corresponding, in sexual terms, to the flesh and to the womb - the former sensual and the latter maternal. For just as the earth finds its salvation in the World, so woman finds her salvation in pregnancy, achieving a plenum to replace the vacuum which had sought expression through the flesh, and thereby progressing from the objectivity of nature to the subjectivity of nurture.
3. Such a progression can also be discerned in relation to the moon, which is a comparatively masculine context, albeit one having juvenile correlations on account of its relationship to the earth as a dependent body. If the moon per se is objective in its materiality, then the religious extrapolation from the moon, viz. purgatory, is subjective in its intellectuality, enabling us to distinguish brain from mind on the basis of a lunar/purgatorial dichotomy. Thus if the moon finds its salvation, as it were, in purgatory, so man finds his salvation in intellectuality, the intellectuality of the mind as opposed to the materialism of the brain, thereby passing from Antichrist to Christ, as he departs the objective for the subjective.
4. There is about Christianity per se the ring of a juvenile religion, given its correlation with the purgatorial realm of the intellect, and hence the Word. Not for nothing does one of the best-known and most influential Christian organizations go by the name of the Young Men's Christian Association (YMCA), and it is debatable whether any hard-line Christian has ever been other than juvenile in his puritanical stance before life. Even Christ was essentially juvenile in his refusal to marry and become a father. For as soon as one parts company with the purgatorial realm of the intellect for the diabolical realm of the soul, or emotions, as one does by falling in love with a woman, one effectively ceases to be a Christian. One becomes, instead, a Fundamentalist or Superpagan bent on dominating the woman to sexual ends. Such a devil can have no truck with Christ even if he kids himself, for the sake of ethnic or moral convenience, that he is still Christian. A Christian, however, does not fall in love, marry, and have children. He remains a juvenile at heart or, rather, in principle - dedicated to a puritanical respect for the Word, as revealed through the Holy Bible.
5. Existentialism is the objective counterpart of Christianity, a philosophy of the brain as opposed to a theology of the mind, which reduces everything, in due Antichristic fashion, to materialism. That Sartre, the most famous Existentialist, was ethnically a Protestant ... is neither surprising nor coincidental, since the philosophy of materialism is such that only a Protestant, and a failed or fallen one at that, would countenance it in the first place! There is nothing even particularly Marxist about Existentialism, which is a thoroughly bourgeois philosophy in its reduction of life to material existence - the sort of reduction which, whilst it may have some applicability to objects, has little or no applicability to human beings, least of all live ones! For human beings are not objects but sentient creatures who experience life, and where there is life there is no existence (except of course in the bourgeois realm of a lunar materialism). My chair exists, but I live. Were I to exist, I would be no different from my chair. I would simply be an object, devoid of life, and hence subjectivity. Such a fate is arguably worse than death.
6. Yet there is a correlation, it has to be said, between Existentialism and Marxism ... to the extent that both philosophies pander to objectivity, the former, as we have seen, in material terms, the latter rather more naturally, and hence soulfully, so that one passes, as it were, from the lunar realm of Antichrist to the solar realm of Satan, which burns in a noumenal objectivity that imposes upon the World (of the working class) from its own diabolic Hell of anti-bourgeois sentiment, the sort of sentiment which the Antifather (for that is assuredly what the Satanic Devil amounts to) must needs feel towards the Antichrist for having enslaved the worldly proletariat to material ends, including, ironically, Existentialism and other such patently bourgeois philosophies. Sartre may have attempted to 'suck-up' to Marxism, but it is unlikely that all that many Marxists would have wanted to 'suck-up' to Existentialism. On the contrary, a materialist view of mankind is precisely what Marxists oppose ... in their struggle to liberate the proletariat from bourgeois fetters. Realism is the only view which appeals to them, even when this view is advanced through the distorting lens of a dictatorial naturalism and accordingly dominated by power considerations deriving from Lenin.
1. The common man is, by definition, a social animal whose life revolves around others and only has meaning in relation to others. Therefore it cannot be said of this social animal that it has a self, or inner life, since it is only conscious of itself through others and tends, in consequence, to a phenomenal view of the self. Such a view is commensurate with realism, and thus with the World.
2. Since the World is not an ideal context but a real one, and is subject, moreover, to the demands and constraints of both materialism and naturalism, it falls short of the sort of spiritual perfection which is commensurate with true idealism, and thus the heavenly Beyond. It can never stand as the goal of evolutionary striving, but merely as a precondition of that goal which will only be attained to when the World is democratically overcome and the People accordingly leap from socialism to transcendentalism. Such a leap would not be possible without a Second Coming, and it cannot take place where there is no will to idealism. A people too deeply 'bogged down' in socialism would be unable to make that leap, as would a people who were too dominated by capitalism and/or communism, viz. materialism and naturalism. Only when one is in the World but not of it can one leap, democratically, to the Beyond ... of the Social Transcendentalist Centre, wherein the idealism of religious sovereignty would be the prevailing norm.
3. Now because the prevailing norm would be the idealism of religious sovereignty, the realism of political sovereignty, the materialism of economic sovereignty, and the naturalism of judicial sovereignty will all have to be consigned to the 'rubbish heap of history' or, more specifically, absorbed into and transmuted by the Party and/or Movement of the Second Coming as, taking 'sins of the World' upon itself, it bears them in a Christ-like sacrifice which will permit the People to achieve true liberation in and through the spirit, thereby becoming divine.
1. In the Beginning, God ... the Clear Light of the (Jehovahesque) Void ... is religiously sovereign and people accordingly bow down to 'Him' in worshipful deference. If in the End, by contrast, the People become religiously sovereign, then God ... the Holy Spirit of Heaven ... will be the consequence of that sovereignty.
2. The true philosopher is an idealist (not a realist, a materialist, or a naturalist), and in the development of his idealism ... he comes to realize that his place is beyond the World, and that his vocation is to bring the World, through self-overcoming, to Heaven. It is the true philosopher's will that religious sovereignty should supersede all other sovereignties; for the true philosopher is One with God ... the Holy Spirit of Heaven ... in his allegiance to truth. Only a philosopher - and the truest and most advanced one at that - could have conceived of the concept of religious sovereignty in the first place! For him, the realism of political sovereignty, the materialism of economic sovereignty, and the naturalism of judicial sovereignty are ideologically 'beneath the pale', and therefore irrelevant to the development of idealism within a truly philosophical context.
3. The true philosopher is a Being of the Beyond, not a Doing of the Behind, a Giving of the World, or a Taking of Purgatory. For him, the sun, the earth, and the moon are less philosophical concerns than poetical, theatrical, and fictional concerns respectively, and he wisely regards them as 'beneath the pale' of his Saturn-oriented idealism.
4. Since religion has its true home in idealism, it is necessarily 'bovaryized' away from this home in realism, materialism, and naturalism, which are not contexts corresponding to Heaven (the Holy Spirit), but to the World (the Mother), Purgatory (the Son), and Hell (the Father) respectively.
5. Since politics has its true home in realism, it is necessarily 'bovaryized' away from this home in materialism, naturalism, and idealism, which are not contexts corresponding to the People (republicanism), but to the bourgeoisie (parliamentarianism), the aristocracy (authoritarianism), and the meritocracy (totalitarianism) respectively.
6. Since economics has its true home in materialism, it is necessarily 'bovaryized' away from this home in naturalism, realism, and idealism, which are not contexts corresponding to capitalism (free enterprise), but to communism (state ownership), socialism (syndicalism) and corporatism (centre trusteeship) respectively.
7. Since law has its true home in naturalism, it is necessarily 'bovaryized' away from this home in realism, materialism, and idealism, which are not contexts corresponding to criminal law (penal), but to natural law (public), civil law (private), and church law (ecclesiastical) respectively.
1. A religious society, which is necessarily idealistic, has a 'bovaryized' law (ecclesiastical), politics (totalitarian), and economics (corporate), because it is true to the divine Beyond (transcendentalism).
2. A political society, which is necessarily realistic, has a 'bovaryized' economics (socialist), law (natural), and religion (humanist), because it is true to the mundane World (republicanism).
3. An economic society, which is necessarily materialistic, has a 'bovaryized' politics (parliamentary), religion (nonconformist), and law (civil), because it is true to the purgatorial Overworld (capitalism).
4. A judicial society, which is necessarily naturalistic, has a 'bovaryized' religion (fundamentalist), politics (authoritarian), and economics (communist), because it is true to the diabolic Behind (Bolshevism).
5. The Bolsheviks revelled in 'show trials', as befitting the judicial essence of Soviet Communism, and meted out penal sentences not merely to thousands but to millions of Soviet citizens, condemning them to death and/or slave labour in concentration camps. Such a judicial society was rooted in criminal law - Lenin himself having been a practising lawyer - and necessarily sought the criminalization of millions of its people. This was literally Hell on Earth, the barbarousness of criminal law in the ascendant and constraining politics, economics, and religion to its diabolical will. Lenin, a devil incarnate, revelled in this deplorable state-of-affairs, as, of course, did his more infamous successor, Stalin.
6. When we contrast the alpha of law with the omega of law, viz. criminal law with ecclesiastical law, it becomes evident that whereas the former strives to punish crime or alleged criminal offence, the latter seeks, by contrast, to absolve people from sin, thereby granting them grace. Hence crime and punishment on the one hand, but sin and grace on the other.
7. Just as science is the illustration of law, so art is the illustration of religion. And just as technology is the illustration of economics, so sport is the illustration of politics.
8. It is as impossible to divorce science from law ... as to divorce art from religion, technology from economics, or sport from politics. Impossible, at any rate, without doing a grave disservice to science, art, technology, and sport. Although 'bovaryizations' of each context will of course apply, relevant to the preponderating element at any given time, and such 'bovaryizations', in keeping with their complementary disciplines, have to be accepted on their own terms. Hence a truly religious society, with a genuine art in accompaniment, would necessarily have to include 'bovaryized' modes of law/science, politics/sport, and economics/technology, just as a truly judicial society, with a genuine science in accompaniment, would have to include 'bovaryized' modes of religion/art, politics/sport, and economics/technology.
1. The outer Antifather of criminal law contrasts absolutely with the inner Father of ecclesiastical law, while the outer Father of natural law contrasts relatively with the inner Antifather of civil law.
2. The outer Antispirit of fundamentalism contrasts absolutely with the inner Spirit of transcendentalism, while the outer Spirit of humanism contrasts relatively with the inner Antispirit of nonconformism.
3. The outer Antimother of authoritarianism contrasts absolutely with the inner Mother of totalitarianism, while the outer Mother of republicanism contrasts relatively with the inner Antimother of parliamentarianism.
4. The outer Antichrist of communism contrasts absolutely with the inner Christ of corporatism, while the outer Christ of socialism contrasts relatively with the inner Antichrist of capitalism.
5. The outer Antifather of criminal law corresponds to the Clear Heat of Time and the inner Father of ecclesiastical law to the Holy Soul of Hell, whereas the outer Father of natural law corresponds to the Unholy Soul of Time and the inner Antifather of civil law to the Unclear Heat of Hell.
6. The outer Antispirit of fundamentalism corresponds to the Clear Light of Space and the inner Spirit of transcendentalism to the Holy Spirit of Heaven, whereas the outer Spirit of humanism corresponds to the Unholy Spirit of Space and the inner Antispirit of nonconformism to the Unclear Light of Heaven.
7. The outer Antimother of authoritarianism corresponds to the Clear Darkness of Mass and the inner Mother of totalitarianism to the Holy Will of the World, whereas the outer Mother of republicanism corresponds to the Unholy Will of Mass and the inner Antimother of parliamentarianism to the Unclear Darkness of the World.
8. The outer Antichrist of communism corresponds to the Clear Coldness of Volume and the inner Christ of corporatism to the Holy Mind of Purgatory, whereas the outer Christ of socialism corresponds to the Unholy Mind of Volume and the inner Antichrist of capitalism to the Unclear Coldness of Purgatory.
1. The elemental proton particles of the outer Antifather (Satan) of criminal law contrast absolutely with the elemental proton wavicles of the inner Father of ecclesiastical law, whereas the molecular proton wavicles of the outer Father of natural law contrast relatively with the molecular proton particles of the inner Antifather of civil law.
2. The elemental photon particles of the outer Antispirit (Jehovah) of fundamentalism contrast absolutely with the elemental photon wavicles of the inner Spirit of transcendentalism, whereas the molecular photon wavicles of the outer Spirit of humanism contrast relatively with the molecular photon particles of the inner Antispirit of nonconformism.
3. The elemental electron particles of the outer Antimother of authoritarianism contrast absolutely with the elemental electron wavicles of the inner Mother of totalitarianism, whereas the molecular electron wavicles of the outer Mother of republicanism contrast relatively with the molecular electron particles of the inner Antimother of parliamentarianism.
4. The elemental neutron particles of the outer Antichrist of communism contrast absolutely with the elemental neutron wavicles of the inner Christ of corporatism, whereas the molecular neutron wavicles of the outer Christ of socialism contrast relatively with the molecular neutron particles of the inner Antichrist of capitalism.
5. From the alpha of law to the omega of religion via the omega-in-the-alpha of politics and the alpha-in-the-omega of economics, as from the Clear Heat of Time (elemental proton particles) to the Holy Spirit of Heaven (elemental photon wavicles) via the Unholy Will of Mass (molecular electron wavicles) and the Unclear Coldness of Purgatory (molecular neutron particles). Thus from criminal law, the alpha per se of law, to transcendentalism, the omega per se of religion, via republicanism, the omega-in-the-alpha per se of politics, and capitalism, the alpha-in-the-omega per se of economics, as from Time to Heaven via Mass and Purgatory.
6. The outer negative noumenal objectivity of criminal law contrasts absolutely with the inner noumenal objectivity of ecclesiastical law, whereas the outer noumenal objectivity of natural law contrasts relatively with the inner negative noumenal objectivity of civil law.
7. The outer negative noumenal subjectivity of fundamentalism contrasts absolutely with the inner noumenal subjectivity of transcendentalism, whereas the outer noumenal subjectivity of humanism contrasts relatively with the inner negative noumenal subjectivity of nonconformism.
8. The outer negative phenomenal subjectivity of authoritarianism contrasts absolutely with the inner phenomenal subjectivity of totalitarianism, whereas the outer phenomenal subjectivity of republicanism contrasts relatively with the inner negative phenomenal subjectivity of parliamentarianism.
9. The outer negative phenomenal objectivity of communism contrasts absolutely with the inner phenomenal objectivity of corporatism, whereas the outer phenomenal objectivity of socialism contrasts relatively with the inner negative phenomenal objectivity of capitalism.
1. To take corporatism, totalitarianism,
ecclesiastical law and subordinate them to transcendentalism, thereby
a divine society in which religion takes precedence over economics,
and law. Such a society could only be
Social Transcendentalist, and it would establish the '
2. If their names are anything to judge by, there would seem to be a connection not only between Sunday and the Sun, but also between Saturday and Saturn. Yet whilst a semantic connection would seem to exist between the names of these two days and the aforementioned 'Heavenly Bodies', the actual spirit of each day is contrary to its name. For example, Saturday is anything but Saturn-like in its extrovert character but more sun-like, whereas Sunday is less a day (exceptions notwithstanding) of pagan deference to the Sun than one of rest, a day, traditionally, with an introvert character appropriate to a more religious tone. Thus it is Sunday which is more Saturn-like and Saturday, by contrast, which resembles the raging inferno of the Sun in its shameless extroversion. And yet, how significant this is of the British tendency to divinize the diabolic and to diabolize the divine, to make a God out of Sunday and a Devil out of Saturday, elevating the former to a day of rest and reducing or relegating the latter to a day of zest! Is it not the same in social terms - that royals, who effectively correspond to the Sun, are regarded and treated as if they were Gods, whereas truly religious people, whose spirituality places them subjectively closer to Saturn, are criminalized and regarded as being 'beyond the pale' of what is considered decent and acceptable? A more paradoxical and morally subversive situation couldn't be imagined, and it sadly reflects the extent to which British and, by extrapolation, American society protects itself from a Christian rebirth, or transvaluation, by hyping the diabolic to a divine standing and rubbishing the divine to a diabolic one! In such hypocritical fashion it makes a vice out of Saturn and a virtue out of the Sun, with the Devil being implicitly associated with Saturday and God more explicitly associated with Sunday. Can this travesty of moral justice continue indefinitely? No, obviously not, since only moral correctness has a right to Eternal Life.
3. Even now there are signs of positive change with regard to Sunday becoming less a day of rest and more subject to commercial and sporting activities than in the past. Were Saturday to become correspondingly less commercial and sports-orientated, we would have grounds for optimism with regard to the likelihood of Saturday becoming a day of rest and Sunday, by contrast, one of zestful living, in keeping with their respective names. Then it would be possible to treat Saturday with the divine deference its name deserves and to relegate Sunday to an inferior status by dint of its diabolical connotations - at least in theory. For, in practice, one has to doubt whether a people grown hip to Saturn would in fact be capable of any sort of diabolic deference to the Sun on Sunday, and therefore whether the name 'Sunday' would continue to be morally acceptable in a divinely aware society. My hunch is that it wouldn't be, in which case an alternative name - Airday? - would have to be devised such that made no reference whatsoever to the Sun. For once people become spiritually, and thus morally, aware, there is no way they could continue to divinize the diabolic or to diabolize the divine. Such a liberal paradox would cease to be possible. Wisdom would have put paid to ignorance.
1. If God per
se is the Holy Spirit
of Heaven and the Devil per se the Clear Heat of Time, then man
se is the Unclear Coldness of Purgatory and woman per se the
2. Woman does not usually go beyond the World but finds her 'salvation' in the Holy Will of the World, which is maternal devotion to the Unclear Darkness of the World, viz. her offspring. To achieve such a mundane salvation, however, she must seduce a man-become-Devil to the World or, rather, her flesh, so that he ceases to feel the Clear Heat of Time (love) and achieves release as the Clear Darkness of Mass, which is Devil-become-sin, and thereby enters into carnal relations with the Unholy Will of Mass. Only thus can a woman fulfil herself, achieving through pregnancy the Unclear Darkness of the World and through motherhood her release from this burden in the Holy Will of the World. First weakness is tempted by pleasure; for man-become-Devil is emotionally weak and woman-as-temptress sensuously strong. Then weakness succumbs to ugliness and enters into sin. Assuming pregnancy is the ensuing result of this dual between ugliness and pleasure, pain becomes the woman's fate, and only after she has been delivered from this worldly hell with childbirth ... does she enter into that beauty immortalized by thousands of artists in the form of the Blessed Virgin's maternal devotion to her Child. It is this beauty of the Holy Will of the World which is the salvation of woman, and that is as far as she goes. Truth and Heaven are, for the most part, beyond her powers and desires; for she is fundamentally a creature of the Unholy Will of Mass, which is the flesh and its craving for pleasure, and thus one who sucks-up to the Devil, to man-become-Devil, in order to have her way and thereby capitalize on his emotional fire.
3. Were man-become-Devil to remain merely consumed in his emotional fire instead of succumbing to the pleasure of fleshy temptation, he would be a jerk and a victim, in all probability, of unrequited love. In fact, man-become-Devil is a jerk until he succumbs to the flesh and thereupon enacts the ugliness of copulation, abandoning the solar region for the more earthly one of Devil-become-sin. For a pleasurable relationship with the flesh, with feminine nature, is precisely what is sinful, since it constitutes a fall from love to lust, and usually has the effect of perpetuating the World, which, in pregnancy, is the feminine hell of a pain so intense ... that it puts paid to all pleasure for its duration, as nature is eclipsed by the World, or flesh by the womb, preparatory to the volcano-like deliverance which precipitates pain into the arms of beauty and the relative salvation which this generally entails. Yet if woman transcends the pain of the World, she does not transcend its beauty, and often enough the whole process of seduction and suffering is repeated, as woman slides back from beauty towards pleasure and seduces man-become-Devil afresh, leading him into mortal sin.
1. It is generally understood that man is positive and woman ... negative, and superficially this would appear to be the case. But, in reality, man is less positive than neutral, since he is first and foremost a creature of the brain and/or intellect with a correspondence, in consequence, to the lunar limbo of purgatorial materialism. One could argue, as in fact I have done, that this correspondence implies a juvenile association and should not be considered in relation to man become properly adult. But that begs the question: When does man become properly adult, and thus fully masculine? And the answer might suggest that man is only fully himself in relation to woman, in which case we would be talking of emotional and sexual 'man', which I have elsewhere characterized as man-become-Devil and Devil-become-sin, where we do in fact have a positive correlation.
2. Yet such a correlation exists in relation to the above-mentioned characterizations rather than to man as such, and is therefore a characteristic of the Devil, of man-become-Devil/Devil-become-sin, and not of man. For man, I have argued, is not positive but neutral, a 'middleman', and therefore he cannot act in a positive way without ceasing to be himself and effectively selling-out to the Devil. Hence that which, through love or lust, has the appearance of adult man is really the Devil, who leaves man behind no less than the soul leaves the intellect behind or the sun leaves the moon behind or the heart leaves the brain behind. As soon as one departs the brain for the heart, one abandons the vertical axis of man vis-à-vis fleshy woman for the horizontal axis of fiery Devil vis-à-vis airy God, and man-become-Devil is the emotional result.
3. To contend, on the other hand, that such a departure is really juvenile-become-man is to put man in an emotional, and hence solar, relationship to the World which, besides making his essence soulful instead of intellectual, relegates the Devil (assuming he still figures at all) to a purely copulatory relationship with woman that smacks of mundane heresy, man-become-Devil being the creature who merely imposes himself upon woman for carnal ends. Alternatively, the notion that juvenile-become-devil leads, following seduction, to devil-become-man ... does about as much service, or justice, to man as the above contention to the Devil, since one would then have to regard man as a mundane creature who only achieves full masculinity in the World or, rather, through a copulatory imposition upon the fleshy earth-woman, and was therefore no less mundane - and possibly even more so - than woman. Such a reduction of man to the earth smacks of an even graver heresy than the reduction of the Devil to it, and flies in the face, moreover, of religious tradition, with its very logical placing of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost above the Mother in a transcendent realm which indicates, plainly enough, the distinction between male and female standings in relation to the World. Were man no more than a sort of positive woman, he would be incapable of envisaging a transcendent alternative to the World and its mundane essence. Fortunately, however, man is never more himself than in the neutral realm of a lunar and/or purgatorial Overworld, and it is from there that he has both the option and capacity to become either diabolic or divine, to drift towards the fiery Devil or to rise, on wings of concentrated breath, towards the airy God. Man is Son until he chooses to become either Father or Holy Ghost. No woman has this choice; for the 'Daughter of Woman' differs from the 'Son of Man' as the World from Purgatory. The World is an end-in-itself, roughly commensurate with the 'eternal feminine'; Purgatory isn't.
1. In relative terms, fiction is the purgatory of literature, the materialistic genre, corresponding to volume, which stands above drama, as man above woman or the moon above the earth. The fiction writer, usually a novelist, can be strictly purgatorial or veer towards either Hell or Heaven within a more extreme purgatorial context. In the first case, he will be intellectual and centrist; in the second case, either emotionally left wing or spiritually right wing. In other words, the novelist per se will be strictly purgatorial in his narrative intellectuality, whereas the poetic novelist and the philosophic novelist, while still purgatorial, will signify a sort of diabolic/divine dichotomy according with their contrary biases towards either the soul or the spirit. If we take a parliamentary analogue here, which would indeed be the most appropriate political parallel, we could argue that while the novelist per se was a Liberal, the poetic novelist was a Democratic Socialist and the philosophic novelist a Conservative. Yet neither type of extreme novelist would be either a Devil or a God per se, since that presupposes something rather more extreme than them: namely the poet and the philosopher, the former as a creature of (emotional) Hell, and the latter as a creature of (spiritual) Heaven, with, as it were, authoritarian and totalitarian correlations respectively.
2. Of course, there is no reason why a writer who begins as a novelist shouldn't develop into either a poet or a philosopher, thereby abandoning the literary Purgatory for its Hell or Heaven, and presumably via some kind of poetic or philosophic fiction. For, in truth, one cannot get to Hell or to Heaven except via Purgatory, since the intellect is flanked, so to speak, by the soul and the spirit, the former appertaining to the Devil and the latter to God, the intellect being a kind of Son in between the Father and the Holy Ghost, the Son of literature as opposed to the Father of poetry or the Holy Ghost of philosophy, emotions and consciousness no-less cerebral than the mind (intellect) when it comes to their region of principal focus - heart and lungs deferring to brain. Yes, it is this trinity of literary disciplines, viz. poetry, fiction, and philosophy, which towers above the Mother of drama ... as Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven tower above the World in transcendental apartness from its mundane essence. Go left from literature per se and you bring yourself to the boundaries of poetry. Go right from literature per se and you bring yourself to the boundaries of philosophy. Poetry is an extreme left-wing damnation which burns in an emotional flame, philosophy, by contrast, an extreme right-wing salvation which soars on a spiritual breath.
3. To rise from the Purgatory of intellect to the Heaven of spirit, passing beyond thought to contemplation of the Eternal, as one's consciousness becomes subjectively attuned to the air one breathes in meditative fashion. The 'right-on' of a progression from the rightness of intellect, always a good starting-point, to the extreme rightness of spirit, thereby achieving that peace which surpasses intellectuality because it comes from being at one with the universal self (of the air).
1. The time of the heart (pulse) as against the space of the lungs (breath) where strength and truth are concerned, but the volume of the brain (cells) as against the mass of the body (flesh) where goodness and beauty are concerned.
2. The time of Hell as against the space of Heaven where the Devil and God are concerned, but the volume of Purgatory as against the mass of the World where man and woman are concerned.
3. To contrast the time of poetry with the space of philosophy where noumenal absolutism is concerned, but to contrast the volume of literature with the mass of drama where phenomenal relativity is concerned.
4. The time of the Father contrasts absolutely with the space of the Holy Ghost, whereas the volume of the Son contrasts relatively with the mass of the Mother, who is One with the World (as the Holy Will thereof) where the Father is One with Hell (as the Holy Soul thereof), the Son being One with Purgatory (as the Holy Mind thereof), and the Holy Ghost being One with Heaven (as the Holy Spirit thereof).
5. To contrast the time of communist naturalism with the space of fascist idealism, the former scientific and the latter religious, but to contrast the volume of liberal materialism with the mass of republican realism, the former economic and the latter political.
6. Those who are rooted in the Devil, and hence time, are against God. Those who are centred in God, and hence space, have no truck with the Devil. The former are damned, the latter saved.
7. To be saved from volume to space, as from Christ to the Holy Ghost, literature to philosophy. To be damned from time to mass, as from the Father to the Mother, poetry to drama.
8. To rise from purgatory to Heaven, as from man to God, intellect to spirit. To fall from Hell to the world, as from the Devil to woman, soul to sensuality.
9. To rise from love to joy, as from goodness to truth, ethics to metaphysics. To fall from pride to pleasure, as from strength to beauty, eugenics to aesthetics.
10. To rise from economics to religion, as from capitalism to transcendentalism, materialism to idealism. To fall from science to politics, as from criminal law to republicanism, naturalism to realism.
11. To rise from water to air, like steam. To fall from fire to earth, like sparks.
12. To rise from neutrons to photons, like books (as from softbacks to CD-ROMs). To fall from protons to electrons, like films (as from cinema to television).
13. To rise from the Son of Man to God, like Christ. To fall from the Father of Devil to woman, like Satan.
14. To be saved from the World by Christ is not to be in Heaven but in Purgatory, awaiting the definitive salvation of the Holy Ghost through the Second Coming, and thus the spiritual peace that surpasses all intellectual understanding.
1. To rise from the dullness of intellect to the lightness of spirit, but to fall from the brightness of soul to the heaviness of the flesh.
2. To be borne away on the lightness of spirit to a heavenly salvation, but to be cast down on the heaviness of the flesh to an infernal damnation.
3. Man per se fears the Devil as much as woman per se fears God. For man can be eclipsed by the Devil, no less than woman transcended by God.
4. The more godly the man the less he has to do with woman, while, conversely, the more devilish the woman the more she has to do with man. The godly man is a saint and the devilish woman a whore. The one rises up on the lightness of spirit, while the other sinks down in the heaviness of the flesh.
5. It is impossible to go from the heaviness of the flesh to the lightness of the spirit. For such extremes are mutually exclusive, and he who gets bogged down in the heaviness of the flesh, which is mortal sin, cannot rise up on the lightness of spirit. Only when he ceases to sin and is saved, through Christ, to the dullness of intellect ... can there be any chance of his passing on, via the Second Coming, to the lightness of spirit. For spirit is the heavenly goal that awaits those who have done their penance in Purgatory. Catholics know and understand this perfectly.
6. Man is effectively an animal until he becomes a Christian and renounces as 'sin' all those heathen passions to which ungodly men are subject. He may still continue to sin, but so long as he knows that he is sinning and is ashamed of it, he will not be a heathen animal but a man, and thus a being on route to God, a being for whom the dullness of intellect takes precedence over the heaviness of the flesh, as Purgatory over the World.
7. Generally men go on two legs and animals
four. Could it be, I wonder, that the
distinction between two-wheeled vehicles, like motorbikes, and
ones, like cars, is analogous to that between men and animals? If so, then there are a lot more mechanical
animals on the roads of
8. Broadly, cars correspond, with their extensive seating, to the heaviness of the flesh; motorbikes correspond, with their extensive engineering, to the dullness of the intellect; bicycles correspond, with their extensive spoking, to the brightness of the soul; and scooters correspond, with their extensive panelling, to the lightness of the spirit. Or, put differently, cars have a mundane correlation, motorbikes a purgatorial correlation, bicycles a hellish correlation, and scooters a heavenly correlation. Though, bearing in mind the dependence of cars, motorbikes, and scooters on petrol, it is debatable as to how seriously one can take such correlations in relation to properly omega-oriented worldly, purgatorial, and heavenly alternatives. However that may be, there is clearly a moral as well as a physical distinction between those different modes of private transportation, and I wager that a person's preference for one rather than another is partly conditioned, if subconsciously, by ideological or cultural considerations.
9. In relation to the above, one could speculate that the moped, structurally a sort of cross between a motorbike and a bicycle, has a 'burning cross' correlation such that suggests a Nazi connotation by dint of its having a mechanical, and hence lunar, standing which yet leans, in paradoxical fashion, towards the pedalling Hell of a bicycle sun.
1. One can to some extent infer an alpha/omega, or particle/wavicle, dichotomy between open-topped cars and enclosed cars; plain motorbikes and streamlined motorbikes; track bikes and racing bikes; plain scooters and streamlined scooters. It is obvious that the open-topped car, or sports car, is more alpha stemming and centrifugal than omega orientated and centripetal, particularly when it also has spoked wheels, the spokes of which radiate outwards, as it were, towards the rim of the wheel, thereby suggesting a star-like centrifugal effect....Which is also and more radically suggested by bicycle spokes in what is arguably the most fundamentalist context of 'private' transportation. Generally it will be found, I think, that the more alpha-stemming and thus centrifugal the cycling context, the more will cowhorn-type handlebars obtain, in contrast to the inwards-curving handlebars of racing bikes in what is probably the most omega-oriented or centripetal context of cycling. One can also note, in this mode of transportation, a centrifugal/centripetal distinction between the design of seats where track and racing bikes are respectively concerned, thereby confirming their alpha/omega standing in relation to bicycles generally. Similar factors also apply, of course, to motorbikes and even to scooters, though the latter are usually somewhat more subjective than the former, especially in regard to wheel design.
2. If man is afraid of the Devil and woman afraid of God, as I have maintained, it is because the phenomenal objectivity of man per se aspires towards the noumenal subjectivity of God and does not want to be eclipsed, as it were, by the noumenal objectivity of the Devil. Like-poles repel, unlike-ones attract. The phenomenal is attracted towards the noumenal when the latter is of a contrary orientation to itself, viz. objective to subjective, but finds the idea of noumenal objectivity repellent. Conversely, the phenomenal subjectivity of woman per se is attracted towards the noumenal objectivity of the Devil, or man-become-Devil, but finds the idea of noumenal subjectivity, viz. God, repellent on account of its similar orientation. One type of subjectivity excludes the other, just as one type of objectivity excludes the other.
3. Even objectivity and subjectivity are mutually exclusive when they appertain to the same axis, viz. phenomenal on the one hand, that of man per se and woman per se, and noumenal on the other hand, that of the Devil and God. Sexual relations, for example, are not between man per se and woman per se, phenomenal objectivity and subjectivity, but between man-become-Devil and woman per se, viz. noumenal objectivity and phenomenal subjectivity, the sperm of the former, a quasi-metaphysical substance, entering the flesh (womb) of the latter. Likewise spiritual relations are not between the Devil and God, noumenal objectivity and subjectivity, but between man per se and God, viz. phenomenal objectivity and noumenal subjectivity, the brain of the former, a physical entity, abandoning itself to the spirit of the latter, whether through prayer or, more completely, contemplation, wherein man ceases to exist as God takes over. The opposite of this is of course woman progressively ceasing to exist as first the Devil (copulation) and then Hell (pregnancy) take over, engulfing her in the raging inferno of unconscious processes which then dominate her life. Man, by contrast, achieves release from his conscious self into the superconscious and even supra-conscious self of God, becoming progressively freer from both earthly and, in particular, purgatorial correlations, as his spirit, released from the intellect, soars aloft on wings of universal spirit, becoming indistinguishable from it. For breath and breather are One in the Holy Spirit of Heaven. So, in another context, are woman and child.
1. There is a sense in which, because nuclear weapons tend to reproduce the solar condition of atomic fission on Earth, they are instruments of the Devil and thus of Hell. In fact, so diabolical are nuclear weapons that it is inconceivable they could be developed or used by societies with a divine essence. For a society built around God (the Holy Spirit of Heaven) would be beyond the use of such weapons, just as artists and philosophers, when true, are beyond any sort of acquiescence in their use. Only communist and liberal societies will develop and, if necessary, use nuclear weapons - the former as an instrument of aggressive policy and the latter for defensive purposes, with immoral and amoral implications respectively. If, in the future, such weapons are banned, it will be because divine criteria have come to the fore at the expense of the World and taken mankind beyond the levels at which nuclear weapons become politic. The 'bomb' can only be truly 'banned' from a divine standpoint, the standpoint, I need hardly add, of the Holy Spirit of Heaven, and hence a Social Transcendentalist Centre.
2. Nature is superficially objective (the earth) and profoundly subjective (the World); civilization is profoundly objective (the moon) and superficially subjective (purgatory); barbarism is profoundly objective (the sun) and superficially subjective (hell); culture is superficially objective (the cosmos) and profoundly subjective (heaven). Hence where nature and culture are alike superficially objective and profoundly subjective, civilization and barbarism are alike profoundly objective and superficially subjective. This means that whereas nature and culture are centred in the subjective (to their mutual exclusion), civilization and barbarism are rooted in the objective (to their mutual exclusion).
3. Objects presuppose objectivity. Indeed, the very word 'objectivity' would be unthinkable without an object to which it pertains, like the sun or the moon. Conversely, subjects presuppose subjectivity, and it would be no less unthinkable to conceive of subjectivity where there was no subject. Yet subjectivity has traditionally been given a raw deal in Western society, which is rooted in the objective, both autocratically and plutocratically, and therefore the subjective has generally been regarded as somehow inferior to the objective, the subjectivity of 'subjects' vis-à-vis the reigning monarch, whose status is necessarily objective, being a case in point. Bad as this is in regard to nature, it is much worse where culture is concerned; for no genuine spirituality can thrive where there is a lack of respect, founded on objectivity, for subjective values. Only, alas, a perverted culture whose 'bovaryized' deities reflect the hegemony of the objective, both in law and economics, science and technology. The moral desirability of genuine culture, however, remains as pressing as ever, as does the hope, expressed through the Lord's Prayer, of its eventual attainment. Not until the objective has been democratically overcome, however, will the subjectivity of true culture come to pass, bringing with it not only a New Age but a New Order, the order of the 'Kingdom Within', which is 'beyond the pale' of objective evaluation. It will be as though the World had passed from its own phenomenal subjectivity to the noumenal subjectivity, via the Second Coming, of Saturn, turning away from both the sun and the moon in the process of its heavenly redemption in God.
4. Man-become-devil explodes orgasmically into woman per se, who implodes herself through pregnancy or, rather, her deliverance thereof. Man per se expresses himself through the Word, while the air impresses God, lifting Him to greater heights of joyful Being.
5. To be impressed by the air, one must first of all use the air impressively, focusing it to a point of centrist beatitude. In such fashion, following the path of meditation, the (condition of) supreme Being is cultivated to a pitch of joyful release from mundane bondage.
6. There is no joyful release which is not through and by the air, nor any supreme Being which is independent of this release. The supreme Being of the Holy Spirit is only possible on the basis of a sustained commitment to the cultivation of Heaven, which is to the Holy Spirit what art is to religion. In fact, art is the technique of religion in a realistic context, whereas meditation is the technique of religion in an idealistic and therefore truly divine context, the context of culture per se, whose essence is inner contemplation.
1. The technique of religion in a realistic context, viz. art, could be described as natural culture, since it is the culture of the World, and hence of the Mother.
2. The technique of religion in an idealistic context, viz. meditation, could be described as cultural culture, or culture per se, since it is the culture of Heaven, and hence of the Holy Spirit.
3. The technique of religion in a materialistic context, viz. study, could be described as civilized culture, since it is the culture of Purgatory, and hence of the Son.
4. The technique of religion in a naturalistic context, viz. ritual, could be described, if somewhat paradoxically, as barbarous culture, since it is the culture of Hell, and hence of the Father.
5. The virtue of cultural culture, or culture per se, is truth, which aims to establish unity between the spirit and Heaven, whereas the virtue of barbarous culture, its opposite, is strength, which aims to establish unity between the soul and Hell.
6. The virtue of natural culture is beauty, which aims to establish unity between the flesh and the World, whereas the virtue of civilized culture is goodness, which aims to establish unity between the intellect and Purgatory.
7. Unity is established between the spirit and Heaven through meditation, which paves the way for the contemplative heights of supreme Being, which is joy.
8. Unity is established between the soul and Hell through ritual, which paves the way for the emotional heights of supreme Feeling, which is pride.
9. Unity is established between the flesh and the World through art, which paves the way for the sensual heights of supreme Sensing, which is pleasure.
10. Unity is established between the mind and Purgatory through the Word, which paves the way for the intellectual heights of supreme Knowing, which is love.
11. To be the Holy Spirit of Heaven (God) through truth; to feel the Holy Soul of Hell (the Devil) through strength; to sense the Holy Will of the World (woman) through beauty; to know the Holy Mind of Purgatory (man) through goodness.
12. In an open society, torn between the Sun and Saturn, the moon and the earth, there are as many deities as there are virtues. In a closed society that, by contrast, was omega orientated, and thus 'transvaluated', there could be only one deity, one God, and that the Holy Spirit of Heaven, which is alone true. Such a society, orientated towards Saturn, would have no time for the Gods of strength (the Father), goodness (the Son), or beauty (the Mother). It would have no time for that which was less than divine because, transcending the World, it would be beyond time, volume, and mass in the heavenly space of its Holy Spirit. Such a society can and, I believe, should come about, and not simply to enable us to transcend the above-mentioned deities but, more importantly, in order that we may also transcend the antideities which lie behind them in the cruder realms (particle as opposed to wavicle) of life and which, corresponding more closely to cosmic phenomena, detract from the pursuit of virtue through the pressures of vice. Only when such pressures are overcome and life is no longer rooted in the Antispirit of spatial space ... will the Holy Spirit of Heaven stand a realistic chance of coming absolutely to pass.
1. To contrast, absolutely, the subsanity of the soul with the supersanity of the spirit, but to contrast, relatively, the sanity of the mind with the insanity of the flesh. Or, equivalently, to contrast, in noumenal terms, the sub-reasonableness of the Father with the super-reasonableness of the Holy Ghost, while contrasting, in phenomenal terms, the reasonableness of the Son with the unreasonableness of the Mother.
2. The opposite of sanity is insanity, or that which, in relative terms, is not sane, whereas the opposite of supersanity is subsanity, or that which, in absolute terms, is beneath sanity. Where sanity is intellectual and purgatorial, insanity is sensual and worldly. Where supersanity is spiritual and heavenly, subsanity is emotional and hellish.
3. Because nature is largely heliotropic, it could be argued that nature is fundamentally insane, since orientated backwards, as it were, towards the sun. The same must, to a lesser extent, apply to woman vis-à-vis man-become-Devil, the sensuality of the former sucking-up to the emotionality (love) of the latter in a nature-emulating way.
4. Whereas nature and woman are fundamentally insane by dint of their retrogressive orientation, civilization and man are comparatively sane, since having the capacity to be progressively orientated towards the Beyond and its spiritual supersanity. Such supersanity, contrasting absolutely with the subsanity of the diabolic Behind, or Hell, is one with genuine culture in the 'peace that surpasses all understanding'. Yet understanding, or the Word and its intellectual comprehension, is a precondition of that divine peace, a peace which contrasts with the war between barbarism, viz. man-become-Devil, and nature, viz. woman, for the soul and/or flesh of its principal antagonists.
1. The hellish will of the heart to beat; the heavenly will of the lungs to breathe; the purgatorial will of the brain to think; the mundane will of the penis to ejaculate.
2. As I have already contended, there are four kinds of will, viz. that of the soul, the spirit, the intellect, and the flesh. Yet, despite this fact, the will of the soul, viz. of the heart to beat, is so much more powerful and active than the other types of will ... that it alone has the right to be regarded as the will per se, and thus be conceived in terms of its relation to the Devil, the sun, time, fundamentalism, etc., as that which is at the roots of life. By contrast, the will of the spirit, viz. of the lungs to breathe, is virtually will-less in its heavenly passivity, a passivity of calm breathing which contrasts with the regular pulsations of the heart, as Heaven with Hell, or God with the Devil. It is for this reason that we can speak of transcending or, better, negating the will of the soul through the spirit; though, strictly speaking, it is the mind, or intellect, which negates the will per se, and then the spirit which transcends the mind, since to transcend is to go beyond what already exists as a precondition of transcendence. The mind does, the soul doesn't. In fact, the soul, being fundamentalist, is as far removed from the possibility of transcendence as it is possible to be. God does not transcend the Devil; He exists as his antithesis. God transcends man per se, which is equivalent to saying that Heaven transcends Purgatory, or the spirit ... the mind. God, or Heaven or spirit, is the only transcendence. For the Devil, or Hell or soul, is neither purgatorial nor transcendent but fundamental to nature, and hence the World. Likewise the heart is fundamental to the body, whereas the lungs, by contrast, may be held to transcend the brain.
3. The expression 'over the moon' is doubtless one that most people would be familiar with, though it may not be quite so clear to them that there is only one way in which one can be 'over the moon', viz. in a Saturn-oriented direction, and that such an expression has nothing whatsoever to do with the Sun or, more remotely, the stars in general. Being 'over the moon' is effectively to experience the 'peace that surpasses all understanding' and thus to have transcended the mind through the spirit, or the brain through the lungs. Were one closer to the Sun than to Saturn in one's feelings, however, one would not be 'over the moon' but 'behind' it, and thus effectively damned to an emotional conflagration of fundamentalist import. Joy takes one 'over the moon', but pride and love take one 'behind' it.
4. When one contrasts, in imagination, the fiery inferno of the Sun with the gaseous compactness of Saturn, there can be no doubt in one's mind that the Sun is Hell or, at any rate, hellish (helium being a Hell-like word, as, incidentally, is heliotropic), and Saturn if not literally Heaven then, at any rate, heavenly ... in its seeming calmness, a calmness surrounded by three halo-like rings which suggest, if not confirm, a saintly standing. Be that as it may, only a fool, while cognizant of the distinctions between these two in many ways antithetical bodies, would regard the Sun as being somehow more heavenly than Saturn, as though Heaven were a raging ball of flame! Similarly, only a fool or, more likely, complete madman would regard the Sun as being somehow saner than Saturn. And yet, populist thinking does effectively confirm such a regard, since the earth is so much closer to the Sun than to Saturn or than Saturn is to the Sun ... that many if not most people tend to take their bearings from the Sun and to denounce those whom they perceive as going against it, by rejecting populist attitudes, as madmen! As though cosmic propinquity were alone sufficient to make the Sun sane and Saturn mad, or to justify a stance which dismisses 'rebirths' and 'transvaluations' as insane delusions!
5. No, we may be considerably nearer, and therefore more exposed to, the Sun's influence than to Saturn, but the fact nonetheless remains that the Sun is a raging inferno which is as far removed from true sanity as it is possible to be. Indeed, such an inferno is palpably subsane, which is to say completely mad, whereas Saturn would, I think, more approximate the supersanity of the spirit in its gaseous aloofness from the Sun and comparative calm. But here we are on a largely insane planet, a planet which plays host to the heliotropic nature of Nature, and therefore it is not to be wondered at if the attitude of average down-to-earth folk to the Sun is correspondingly insane. For to have a relatively sane attitude to the Sun, one has to be reborn into Christ and thus be someone who has effectively abandoned the earth for the moon in his ethical stance before life, becoming correspondingly saner in one's mind as intellect eclipses the flesh. Then one can see the Sun for what it really is and re-orientate one's mind towards the purgatorial hope of greater sanity in the spiritual Beyond.
1. The naturalism of the man walking along the street who stares at various women; the materialism of the man walking along the street who looks in shop windows; the realism of the man walking along the street who notices other people; the idealism of the man walking along the street who keeps his eyes to himself, i.e. straight ahead or down.
2. Peace only comes from being at one with one's self, especially through concentrated breathing. When a man is not at one with his self, he is likely to be divided against it and thus a victim, fundamentally, of self-division. All sexual and social relationships are manifestations of self-division; for they only happen because the individuals concerned are divided against their selves, whether emotionally, sensuously, or intellectually. The unity of a couple is merely apparent; in reality each person is divided against his self and therefore fragmented. True unity only comes from being at one with the self. It has nothing whatsoever to do with couples, families, groups, crowds, hordes, etc.
3. The connection between war and sex is so close that war usually has the effect of intensifying sex, resulting in systematic rape. In war, the struggle between opposing armies for, at any rate traditionally, the possession and exploitation of a given landmass ... is paralleled, in sex, by the struggle between men for the possession and exploitation of a given woman. Neither struggle is based on morality, but in power as a means to domination.
4. All states are based on immorality, whatever their constitution. Only the Church can be based on morality, the morality of self-overcoming in the interests of self-realization. Yet the State is not even based on the (phenomenal) self but on the not-selves of power and wealth, the former noumenal (monarchic) and the latter phenomenal (parliamentary). Objective extrapolations, as it were, from the sun and the moon.
1. The fall of art to sculpture via three-dimensional painting on the one hand, but the rise of literature to music via song on the other hand.
2. It could be said that whereas music is 'over the moon', painting, by contrast, is 'behind' it (and thus effectively closer to the solar realm of Hell). Art, utilizing paint, is based on appearances, whereas music, utilizing notes, is centred in essences - the one fundamentally diabolic and the other transcendentally divine. Hence the alpha and omega of the Arts.
3. Art, being objective, is affiliated to the heart, whereas music, being subjective, is affiliated to the lungs. Art manifests the soul, whereas music is a manifestation of the spirit. However, where pagan art is affiliated to the fire, 'Christian' art reveals an affiliation with the blood. And where pagan music is affiliated to the light, 'Christian' music reveals an affiliation with the air. Yet pagan art and music are anti-arts in contrast to art and music per se, which remain affiliated to their respective omega ideals.
1. The relative salvation (Purgatory) of Christ contrasts, phenomenally, with the relative damnation (the World) of the Mother, while the absolute salvation (Heaven) of the Holy Ghost contrasts, noumenally, with the absolute damnation (Hell) of the Father. Likewise, the relative antisalvation (lunar materialism) of the Antichrist contrasts, phenomenally, with the relative antidamnation (mundane realism) of the Antimother, while the absolute antisalvation (cosmic idealism) of the Antispirit contrasts, noumenally, with the absolute antidamnation (solar naturalism) of the Antifather.
2. The relative salvation of the mind (intellect) as opposed to the relative damnation of the flesh (pregnancy) on the one hand, but the absolute salvation of the spirit (air) as opposed to the absolute damnation of the soul (blood) on the other hand. Likewise, the relative antisalvation of the antimind (brain) as opposed to the relative antidamnation of the antiflesh (sex) on the one hand, but the absolute antisalvation of the antispirit (light) as opposed to the absolute antidamnation of the antisoul (fire) on the other hand.
3. 'Anti' equals negative, and negative contrasts with positive as particles with wavicles, alpha with omega, science with religion, objective with subjective, outer with inner, and centrifugal with centripetal.
4. Now that the heart-devil is so paramount, the lung-god is effectively 'beyond the pale', neither seen nor heard, but effectively despised and rejected as a transcendental aberration. The day of deliverance, whereby the lung-god will be freed from the tyranny of the heart-devil, has yet to come, but when it does the lung-god will be paramount and the heart-devil subordinated to its divine will.
5. One cannot ever entirely wrench God from the Devil (or vice versa), but one can transmute them forwards in terms of evolutionary progress and ... alter the ratio of the one to the other.
6. It is debatable whether one can ever entirely wrench omega (diabolic or divine) from alpha; for even the most advanced space centre of the future would probably - indeed almost certainly - have artificial heating and lighting facilities on board which would reflect the most artificial transmutation of the alpha in line with, and effective service of, the ultimate manifestations of the omega, viz. heart- and/or lung-like devices for the sustenance of Eternal Life.
7. Ideological absolutes should more be thought of in terms of greater or lesser ratios of plus to minus, or omega to alpha, than of literally absolute existences. Too literal an absolutism is simply chimerical, and hence both unrealistic and naive.
8. Rock 'n' Roll is, as suggested by the title, the 'sinful' music of those for whom the fall of man-become-Devil to woman-in-nature is of especial practical significance. Such 'sinfulness' is of the relative antidamnation of the antiflesh, viz. sex, whereby the hardness of diabolic 'Rock' enters the softness of natural 'Roll', to enact the Rock 'n' Roll-like rhythms of coitus.
9. Yoga is the 'spirituality' of the World - a sort of feminine subjectivity whose focus is necessarily physical. Women do not, as I have already argued, transcend the World. But neither are they fully and properly feminine until they achieve the World through pregnancy and, ultimately, motherhood. Thus it could be argued that woman per se is of the World and not nature, bearing in mind the superficially objective but profoundly subjective phenomenal distinctions which exist between the two contexts, or poles, of mundane life.
1. Like woman, God per se is also omega and not alpha, which is to say, of Heaven (the Holy Spirit) rather than the Cosmos (the Clear Light), given the superficially objective but profoundly subjective noumenal distinctions which exist between the two poles of divine life. The crucial difference between the subjectivity of woman per se and the subjectivity of God per se, however, is that whereas the former's is phenomenal, the latter's is noumenal - all the difference, in short, between the World and Heaven.
2. In complete contrast to God and woman, both the Devil and man are rooted in the alpha, since their spectra, so to speak, are profoundly objective but superficially subjective, as befitting the objective basis of both the sun and the moon. Hence whereas the Devil per se is of the sun (Satan) rather than of Hell (the Father), man per se is of the moon (Antichrist) rather than of Purgatory (Christ). This explains, in large measure, why man per se is always vulnerable to and likely to become the Devil, given his objective basis. To have any chance of avoiding the Devil and drawing nearer to God, man must be 'born again' and thus go against his natural grain, as it were, in the name of Christ, thereby achieving a degree of purgatorial subjectivity, necessarily superficial, which should nevertheless stand him in good stead for the possibility of divine redemption in the profound subjectivity of the heavenly Beyond.
3. Yet even 'Christic' man is still vulnerable to the possibility of diabolic subversion in the superficial subjectivity of the hellish Behind, becoming One with the Father in a loving relationship to woman. Purgatory is no guarantee of salvation. It can just as easily lead to Hell, and thus to love of a particular woman as a precondition of a fall into sexual sin. The only difference between this and the Satanic Fall is that whereas this one follows from love, the Satanic Fall of the Devil per se follows from hate, from a profoundly objective attitude to women which smacks, in its centrifugal weakness, of so-called Free Love. Such a fall does, however, stem from being man per se, and thus one who is given, in Antichristic materialism, to the profound objectivity of a lunar bias, phenomenal duly eclipsed by noumenal as one slides towards the negative emotions of a solar damnation. If one thing is worse than bound love, it is this free love, which tends to lead not to the World but to nature, wherein it bogs down in the sinful embrace of the Cursed Whore, promiscuity following promiscuity in a vicious circle of sex-for-sex's sake. What 'the Father has joined together' may not be truly of God (the Holy Spirit of Heaven), but it is at least at a subjective remove from the Devil per se, and is thus 'the best of a bad job', so to speak. Better, of course, if, in being 'born again', one avoids succumbing to love and duly concentrates on attaining to the heavenly Beyond of the 'peace that surpasses all understanding', so that, instead of being eclipsed by soul, one's intellect paves the way for the spirit's triumph, and Christic man comes, at last, into the divine presence of God per se.
1. Appearance precedes essence, and thus art, which is rooted in objectivity, precedes music, which, when true, is centred in subjectivity. Art is considerably older than music and achieved its 'classical' perfection not in painting but in drawing, the most objective mode of art. By contrast, music began in a comparatively objective mode, as rhythm, and proceeded to evolve away from this paradoxical situation towards a pitch-oriented subjectivity which, cultural and regional exceptions notwithstanding, has still to achieve a universal perfection.
2. Thus it could be argued that whereas art devolves from its apparent 'perfection' in the most objective mode of art, viz. drawing, music evolves towards its essential perfection in the most subjective mode of music, viz. piping, which is the omega of music, beyond which no further progress is possible. Art arises in the light and declines thereafter, whereas music culminates in the air, which is a divine redemption from its lower and variously 'bovaryized' manifestations. Fundamentally, art is a description of appearances, music, by contrast, a definition of essences. Art exists in concreto, like an upper-class power, as the canvas on the wall, whereas music is invisible to the sight, a spiritual presence which comes and goes on the wings of the airwaves which carry it, like a classless salvation, 'beyond the pale' of concrete verification. Art is for the Damned, music for the Saved.
3. Between the Devil and God, man and woman run their phenomenal course, the former relatively saved by literature and the latter relatively damned by sculpture. Absolute salvation and damnation in the Arts are only possible through music and art respectively. Indeed, the more culturally damned one was, the less would one have to do with music, while, conversely, the more culturally saved one was, the less would one have to do with art. Art is effectively 'beneath the pale' of the cultural saint, just as, conversely, music is 'beyond the pale' of the cultural sinner.
4. He who has not died to art has not begun to live in the spirit of true music. Even airbrush art is essentially 'the best of a bad job', and therefore less a guide to the spirit than the adoption of spiritual means, viz. air, to an apparent end, which is nothing less than a subversion of spirituality, a sort of diabolical usurpation. The truly spiritual person avoids art, for it does not and cannot intimate of essence, even when abstract, but remains resolutely rooted to its objective origins, as though a child of the sun and/or some cosmic galaxy. In fact, abstract art is even more objective than so-called representational art, and only a fool would claim to see essence there, as though essence were something to be looked at from the outside rather than experienced from within!
5. Intimations of immortality are far better achieved through music, and I fancy that even the worst and most 'objective' music would more serve this purpose than the best of the so-called 'subjective' paintings which paradoxically lay claim to spiritual guidance. That which is not music and contrary to it isn't just another approach to the Divine. On the contrary, it stems from a completely different tradition which, fundamentally, has no bearing on the Divine whatsoever! One wouldn't trust the Devil to lead one to God. Neither should one trust art to lead one to music, which is the cultural equivalent of God. A person who has truly found God has little time for the Devil. Art becomes for him a tedious and possibly subversive irrelevance. He is beyond it. Saved from it by the purest music.
1. There are two main sexual modes of kissing, viz. the protracted 'romantic' kiss, in which one or both (though usually the male) partners are engaged in seemingly sucking the air out of the other's lungs, and, contrary to this, the so-called 'French kiss', in which the male partner inserts his tongue into the female's mouth and effectively proceeds to 'deep throat' her. Both modes of kissing, I shall show, are equally diabolical, though in opposite ways. That is to say, in terms of an alpha/omega dichotomy between the negative diabolism, as it were, of the Antifather, viz. Satan, and the positive diabolism of the Father - the former relative to the so-called 'French kiss' and the latter to its more 'romantic' antithesis.
2. Thus the significance of kissing lies in the affirmation of the diabolic and, by implication, negation of the divine, since it is an activity which, at the sexual level we are discussing, stems from the diabolical imposition of man-become-Devil, whether negatively or positively, upon woman, who may or may not respond in kind. In the case of negative kissing, i.e. the 'Satanic' kissing of an overly intrusive tongue, we have the analogy with fire, or 'tongues of fire', as man-become-Satan inserts his tongue into the mouth of woman-as-nature and thereby affirms a free-loving diabolism of a centrifugal weakness, fire effectively eclipsing the light (of her eyes) as his tongue probes deeper into his partner's mouth. In the case of positive kissing, i.e. the 'romantic' kissing of protracted sucking, we have a vampire-like analogy, necessarily partial to the blood, in which man-become-Father applies his lips to woman-as-World and thereby affirms the bound-loving diabolism of a centripetal strength, heart effectively eclipsing lungs as his lips suck out the air from his partner's mouth in the interests of a passionate declaration. Thus where negative kissing is of the Devil per se, and hence fiery, positive kissing is of the Father, whose throne is the heart and medium the blood. In neither of these cases does God, whether negative or positive, alpha or omega, receive the slightest respect. For kissing is an affirmation of fundamentalism and effective refutation, in consequence, of transcendentalism. One kisses when one is not of God but of the Devil in one or both of his diabolical manifestations. A man of God is beyond kissing.
3. If women do not kiss as passionately or lustily as men, or as man-become-Devil, it is because they are less diabolical than natural and/or worldly, and hence creatures who react to the kissing imposition from above in the diabolic Behind. By a like-token, they do not love or lust as vehemently as men, given their mundane status as creatures of nature and/or the World who are the object rather than subject of love or lust, viz. romantic bound love or Satanic free love, according to the mode of descent from above.
1. If Woman is less emotional and spiritual than man, it is not simply because she has a smaller heart and smaller lungs (although this fact is certainly of some relevance here). More significant in this respect is the prominence of her breasts, which tend to 'screen off' both heart and lungs to an extent which ensures that they will always be subordinate to her body. In fact, the relatively close proximity of these milk-producing and milk-bearing organs to both the heart and the lungs guarantees that the latter remain in the shadow, so to speak, of her bodily essence, since the bloody hotness of the heart is no less incapable of rising above the milky coldness of the breasts ... than the airy lightness of the lungs can rise above their fleshy heaviness, with due regard to their milky contents. Hence the breasts act as a sort of barrier to both the soul and the spirit, smothering them beneath the weight of their fluidal contents. For this reason, woman is generally incapable of becoming either genuinely diabolic or divine, but remains rooted to the mundane on account of the preponderating physicality, or fleshiness, of her body. Even in intellectual terms she is generally at a disadvantage to man, given the smaller size of her brain and the considerable demands made upon it by her body. The Trinity is effectively above her, whether in terms of Hell, Purgatory, or Heaven, viz. the Father, the Son, or the Holy Ghost. For not only are Hell and Heaven effectively 'screened off' by her breasts, but Purgatory-as-an-intellectual-means-to-spiritual-Heaven is also largely irrelevant, in view of her physical incapacity to achieve Heaven. She can only really relate to the Mother, and hence the World, of which she is the human microcosm. Christ's message is largely wasted on her!
2. The CND symbol, with its two oblique bands stemming from one vertical band or, equivalently, three bands at the bottom and one elongated band at the top, is rather like an inverted Trinity which, because of its lowly position in the overall design, is subordinate to the Mother, or woman, or feminism, as symbolized by the vertical band at the top. In fact, it was a perfect symbol of the twentieth century, which turned traditional values on their head and brought Hell-Purgatory-Heaven low in order to raise the World up, so that it was woman, paradoxically, who effectively ruled the roost and continued - and continues even now - to dominate the age. But such an inverted situation invariably means that secular values take precedence over religious ones, since there can be no religion, of whatever persuasion, when the Trinity is at the bottom and the Mother at the top. Only heathenism and its mundane corollary - scarcely recognizable in the circumstances as 'sin' - of fleshy self-indulgence.
3. Such, then, is the reality of the Modern Age, with its feminine disregard for masculine or male values, a reality in which naturalism, materialism, and idealism are trodden underfoot by triumphal realism which necessarily subordinates, and subverts, other values in accordance with its mundane will. Certainly it will not help to turn the age, and thus by implication the Trinity, the other way up in order to restore religion to its former prominence. For that would simply be to resurrect the Middle Ages and the Christian civilization in general. Time cannot be reversed, nor would it serve any useful moral purposes for us to attempt reversing it. What we must do is progress to an age in which the highest religious values, viz. those of the Holy Spirit of Heaven, will prevail, with no place, in consequence, for the Holy Soul of Hell, viz. the Father, or the Holy Mind of Purgatory, viz. the Son. Thus if we are to turn the CND symbol up the other way, it must be on a basis that acknowledges the supremacy of the Holy Spirit and indicates an idealistic resolve to go beyond Christ, and thus the central band of our Trinity, through the Second Coming. We must add the arrow of the 'masculine sign' to the third band of the Trinity or, more correctly, align the masculine symbol with the third band of the supercross ... in order that there can be no doubt as to the way ahead, the way of the Holy Spirit of Heaven, and hence the transcendental Beyond, in what would effectively be a Saturn-oriented transvaluation.
1. Christ saves from the Mother through the Blessed Virgin. Likewise, the Holy Spirit saves from the Father through the Second Coming.
2. Given that woman is a creature of nature/the world, one has to ask, after Baudelaire, what business can she have in Church, the 'House of Christ', as of the 'Christian Lord', when she is fundamentally incapable of, and therefore indisposed to, taking the Trinity seriously, the Second Part of it no less than the more extreme First and Third parts, which correspond, so I contend, to Hell and Heaven? Doubtless there has to be an accommodation of woman to religion, and the Blessed Virgin is the exemplar of female virtue. Yet woman is fundamentally irreligious, if not anti-religious, and therefore she can never be more than an interested spectator in the 'House of Christ', which is a sort of purgatorial precondition of Heaven and the spiritual peace that surpasses all (intellectual) understanding. She cannot be a religious leader, and no Church worthy of religious leadership would ever encourage her to take central stage, as it were, and represent Christ to the faithful. Rather, such a representation would amount to a subversion of Christ and hence Purgatory. It would be a reflection of the Mother riding high at the Trinity's expense, with consequences which, though arguably beneficial to the World, could only be detrimental to otherworldly aspirations. For a creature who, for physical reasons, ultimately cannot take Heaven seriously ... will be indisposed to using the intellect as a stepping-stone to the spirit. On the contrary, its use will be in the service of the World and thus the body. For such is the way of things with woman, and a worldly Church is no church at all but a refutation of Christ and formula for heathen darkness.
3. Now is the time of the heathen darkness whose voice is feminism, naturism, worldism, socialism, motherism, healthism, athleticism, equalism, bodyism, animalism, etc. God is indeed 'dead', as far as the Trinity is concerned. But the Dead can be resurrected by the Second Coming, and civilization once more blossom at nature's expense. Only this time civilization will be absolutist and thus orientated, through spiritual culture, towards the transcendental Beyond. The resurrection of God from the dead will apply to the Holy Spirit alone; for that is the only part of the Trinity which is potentially commensurate with God, and thus salvation. Its resurrection, through the Second Coming, will free it from the Trinity and enable it to achieve wholeness as the Holy Spirit of Heaven. This God is alone true. Only this God has a right to Eternal Life. For the Holy Spirit of Heaven is the Resurrection!
1. Civilization is the cradle in which culture is nurtured. Barbarism, by contrast, is the flame which ignites nature.
2. Christ stands between the Father and the Holy Ghost as man between subman and superman. Man can thus go either backwards, within masculinity, to the subman or forwards to the superman; backwards, within Purgatory, to Hell or forwards to Heaven; backwards, within the ego, to the subconscious or forwards to the superconscious; backwards, within Christ, to the Devil or forwards to God; backwards, within sanity, to subsanity or forwards to supersanity; backwards, within the intellect, to the soul or forwards to the spirit; backwards, within nonconformism, to fundamentalism or forwards to transcendentalism; backwards, within materialism, to naturalism or forwards to idealism; backwards, within volume, to time or forwards to space. Man has this choice; woman doesn't. Woman receives what goes backwards, whereas that which goes forwards transcends her.
3. One could paradoxically describe barbarism as noumenal nature and nature as phenomenal barbarism. Or, similarly, culture as noumenal civilization and civilization as phenomenal culture. But the important thing to realize is that nature stems from barbarism, no less than civilization leads to culture. For nature is a phenomenal fall from barbarism, whereas culture is a noumenal rise from civilization.
4. Civilization thrives at nature's
like Purgatory, and hence Christ, at the expense of the World, but only
can lead beyond civilization to a degree which puts barbarism beneath
heavenly pale. This is the true culture
of the '
5. To contrast the 'civilized barbarism' of a constitutional monarchy with the 'barbarous civilization' of a parliamentary democracy - the former relatively noumenal and the latter relatively phenomenal.
6. Likewise to contrast the 'pure barbarism' of an authoritarian monarchy with the 'pure civilization' of a republican democracy - the former absolutely noumenal and the latter absolutely phenomenal.
7. Were there fewer Irish comedians, it is probable that there would be fewer 'Irish jokes'.
8. 'Irish jokes' are rooted in the inability of the British to come to terms with an omega-oriented 'thickness', or centripetal subjectivity.
9. Part of the reason why the British reject too centripetal and subjective a lifestyle is that Britain is, by and large, exposed to more sunshine than Ireland, and accordingly its citizens are generally more pragmatic in regard to 'pagan' values.
10. Were moral values entirely conditioned by climate, however, one could change one's morality from climate to climate or country to country, like a chameleon its colours. There are, fortunately, profounder reasons for adherence to a given pattern of morality than the weather!
11. Were Ireland less exposed to frequent rain, it is likely that the Irish would drink less than is generally the case.
12. Yet, here, too, weather is only a superficial
and apparent reason for
13. At the back of, and anterior to, the subnaturalism of solar fundamentalism lies the supernaturalism of cosmic transcendentalism, the negative supernaturalism of the (Jehovahesque) Clear Light of the Void, which stands in an antithetical context to the positive supernaturalism of the Holy Spirit of Heaven. Both modes of supernaturalism are, however, relative to the Beyond, which is a divine definition. In this regard, they contrast with the subnaturalism not only of solar fundamentalism, which is necessarily negative, but also with the positive subnaturalism of bloody fundamentalism, both of which appertain, in antithetical ways, to the diabolic Behind. Hence the Behind, like the Beyond, can be either alpha or omega, negative or positive, objective or subjective, centrifugal or centripetal, particles or wavicles. Adherence to the one necessarily excludes the other, as does adherence to either of their respective poles. The 'God-person' who is for the Holy Spirit of Heaven (Omega Point) cannot also be for the Clear Light of the Void (Jehovah), and vice versa. Neither can the 'Devil-person' who is for the Holy Soul of Hell (the Father) possibly be for the Clear Heat of Time (Satan), or vice versa.
14. The 'subnaturalism' of fire/soul contrasts, absolutely, with the 'supernaturalism' of light/spirit. Devil and God are as noumenally antithetical as it is possible to be.
15. Every alpha phenomenon acquires an omega alternative and antithesis in the course of time: television acquires a video-tape alternative, radio an audio-tape alternative, record players a compact-disc alternative, computers a CD-ROM alternative. And these omega alternatives grow and prosper at the alpha's expense.
16. Television and radio, together with their tape alternatives, stand to record players and computers, not to mention their compact-disc alternatives, as barbarism and nature to civilization and culture respectively, which is to say, as fundamentalist and humanist phenomena to nonconformist and transcendentalist phenomena. Although, strictly speaking, only radio/audio tapes and record players/compact discs are properly phenomenal, given their planar/lunar standing in between the solar/stellar extremes of television/video tapes and computers/CD-ROMs, which more correspond, on account of their light-emitting properties, to the noumenal.
17. Thus from the particle alpha of television to the wavicle omega of video tapes on the hellish spectrum of solar fundamentalism; from the particle alpha of computers to the wavicle omega of CD-ROMs on the heavenly spectrum of stellar transcendentalism; from the particle alpha of record players to the wavicle omega of compact discs on the purgatorial spectrum of lunar nonconformism; and from the particle alpha of radios to the wavicle omega of audio tapes on the mundane spectrum of planar humanism.
18. Watching television is a little like sucking-up, in heliotropic fashion, to the sun. In fact, it is fundamentally a feminine, and hence heathen, tendency which reflects a mass appeal.
1. The mass of radio/audio tapes; the volume of record player/compact discs; the time of television/video tapes; the space of computers/CD-ROMs.
2. It should not be forgotten that radios, televisions, record players, computers, and their omega extrapolations correspond to a realistic, or mundane, quadruplicity which cannot therefore be judged exactly according to the criteria applicable to naturalism, materialism, and idealism. For this reason the television Hell, for example, is never quite as complete or genuine as, say, the filmic Hell of conventional cinema, as applying to a properly naturalistic context.
3. When one watches television, one is effectively damned to an absolute negative Hell corresponding to solar fundamentalism, whereas when one listens to the radio, one is damned to the relative negative Hell of a planar humanism. Conversely, when one watches a video, one is effectively damned to an absolute positive Hell corresponding to bloody fundamentalism, whereas when one listens to audio tapes, one is damned to the relative positive Hell of a bodily humanism.
4. When one uses one's computer, one is effectively saved to the absolute negative Heaven of a stellar transcendentalism, whereas when one uses the record player, one is saved to the relative negative Purgatory of a lunar nonconformism. Conversely, when one uses CD-ROMs, one is effectively saved to the absolute positive Heaven of an airy transcendentalism, whereas when one uses CDs, one is saved to the relative positive Purgatory of an intellectual nonconformism.
CYCLE ONE HUNDRED
1. Strictly speaking, video recorders are less omega in relation to televisions than a sort of middle-ground precondition of televideos, or television and video recorder in one, which are more genuinely omega in orientation. Likewise, CD-ROM drives that are actually built-in to computers are more genuinely omega orientated than auxiliary CD-ROM drives, or CD-ROMs used in conjunction with conventional computers. One could in fact argue that the use of an auxiliary device with the original format is transitional to composite entities of the above-mentioned order.
2. Words like transcendentalist, fundamentalist, nonconformist, and humanist would seem, at face-value, to be open-ended, broad-based definitions that can be used, if rather loosely, in either an alpha or an omega context. Yet, strictly speaking, they should only be used in relation to the omega, since the alpha, which is scientific, is better served by terms such as idealism, naturalism, materialism, and realism. Hence the distinction between, for example, stellar transcendentalism and heavenly transcendentalism, though philosophically intelligible, would be enhanced by reference to stellar and/or cosmic idealism on the one hand, and heavenly and/or divine transcendentalism on the other hand - the former implying a scientific description germane to the alpha, and the latter a religious description germane to the omega. Science speaks of light, for light is based on the alpha, whereas religion speaks of spirit, since spirit is centred in the omega. A partisan of science would not, one imagines, speak of the omega from a religious standpoint but, rather (assuming he acknowledged it at all), from the viewpoint of science ... as anti-light. Conversely, a man of religion should not speak of the alpha from a scientific viewpoint, but from the standpoint of religion ... as antispirit. For light corresponds to the stellar alpha no less than spirit to the heavenly omega, and to speak of the former in relation to religion and the latter in relation to science ... is simply to subvert and confound the two in-many-ways antithetical contexts. Strictly speaking, the scientist has no more right to speak of spirit, and hence transcendentalism, than the priest to speak of light, and hence idealism.
3. The Cosmos would, one imagines, speak only of the light and God of the spirit, since the Cosmos can only relate to the light and God to the spirit.
4. 'Religions' based on the light are 'pseudo' and therefore quasi-scientific, whereas 'sciences' centred in the spirit are 'pseudo' and therefore quasi-religious. A scientific age, based on the alpha, demands a scientific 'religion', whilst, conversely, a religious age, centred in the omega, demands a religious 'science'. Scientific 'religion' is in the service of science, whereas religious 'science' is the servant of religion.
5. We carry both alpha and omega about with us on all spectra of life - idealist/transcendentalist, naturalist/fundamentalist, materialist/nonconformist, and realist/humanist. Eyes are an idealist alpha, lungs a transcendentalist omega; ears are a naturalist alpha, the heart a fundamentalist omega; the tongue is a materialist alpha, the brain a nonconformist omega; the flesh is a realist alpha, the womb a humanist omega. Hence the scientific nature of eyes, ears, tongue, and flesh, as opposed to the religious nature of lungs, heart, brain, and womb. Eyes (and hence sight) derive from the stellar alpha, whereas lungs are aligned with the heavenly omega; ears (and hence hearing) derive from the solar alpha, whereas the heart is aligned with the hellish omega; the tongue (and hence taste) derives from the lunar alpha, whereas the brain is aligned with the purgatorial omega; the flesh (and hence touch) derives from the planar alpha, whereas the womb is aligned with the mundane omega.
CYCLE ONE HUNDRED-AND-ONE
1. In the absence of a womb, men do not have a worldly subjectivity in the mundane omega. But, unlike women, their lungs are not 'screened off' by protruding breasts to an extent which, in their fluidal heaviness, precludes the possibility of divine subjectivity in the heavenly omega. For this reason they are capable of God.
2. The more one is into the omega, on whichever spectrum, the less one will have to do with the alpha, and vice versa. The truly religious man, who is into his lungs, will not be overly observant or disposed to using his eyes in an aggressively optical manner. In fact, he will probably suffer from poor sight anyway, assuming he is not blind, and therefore be dependent on spectacles or other corrective lenses. Conversely, the man disposed to aggressive optical curiosity will not be given, as a rule, to meditation. On the contrary, his is a scientific disposition, the radical objectivity of which contrasts absolutely with the radical subjectivity of the religious man. Such mutually exclusive tendencies, having special applicability here to idealism/transcendentalism, are also of course to be found in the contexts of naturalism/fundamentalism, materialism/nonconformism, and realism/humanism.
3. Because the alpha is scientific and the omega religious, God per se appertains to the latter context. Hence God per se has nothing whatsoever to do with the cosmic idealism of the (Jehovahesque) Clear Light of the Void, but solely appertains to the divine transcendentalism of the Holy Spirit of Heaven. Likewise, similar criteria applying, the Devil per se has nothing whatsoever to do with the solar naturalism of the Clear Heat of Time (Satan), but solely appertains to the diabolic fundamentalism of the Holy Soul of Hell, viz. the Father. Light is less divine, in truth, than spirit. Similarly, fire is less diabolic than soul. (In fact, neither light nor fire are strictly divine or diabolic anyway). The transcendentalism of air stands apart from the idealism of light, no less than the fundamentalism of blood from the naturalism of fire. Hence whereas the alpha is beneath religion, since anterior to it, the omega is above science, being posterior. God and the Devil are not, as was formerly believed, the Jehovahesque Creator and the Satanic Fallen Creation, viz. central star of galaxy and sun (or anthropomorphic extrapolations thereof), or, alternatively, stellar idealism and solar naturalism, corresponding to light and fire respectively. On the contrary, they are the Holy Ghost and the Father, viz. consciousness, both spiritual and emotional, of air and blood through the respective divine and diabolic agencies of the lungs and the heart - the former corresponding to heavenly transcendentalism and the latter to hellish fundamentalism. This transvaluation of values is at the core of my teachings!
4. Strictly speaking, idealism precedes transcendentalism as light precedes spirit, or eyes the lungs, or the Cosmos ... Heaven. For idealism is scientific and transcendentalism religious - all the difference, in short, between the alpha and omega of photon particles and wavicles. Likewise, naturalism precedes fundamentalism as fire precedes the soul, or ears the heart, or the Sun ... Hell. For naturalism is scientific and fundamentalism religious - all the difference, in short, between the alpha and omega of proton particles and wavicles.
5. Dropping from the noumenal spectra to their phenomenal counterparts, we find that materialism precedes nonconformism as water precedes the mind, or taste the brain, or the moon ... purgatory. For materialism is 'scientific' and nonconformism 'religious' - all the difference, in short, between the alpha and omega of neutron particles and wavicles. Similarly, realism precedes humanism as earth precedes the will, or flesh the womb, or nature ... the world. For realism is 'scientific' and humanism 'religious' - all the difference, in short, between the alpha and omega of electron particles and wavicles.
6. We devolve
elemental to molecular particles, and evolve from molecular to
wavicles. We do not and cannot evolve
from particles to wavicles, for particles and wavicles are antithetical
extremes which require a phenomenal relativity in the molecular before
noumenal absolutism of the elemental can emerge ... into the realms of
religion, depending on the spectrum and type of civilization in
question. The ultimate evolutionary goal
is of course
the true, and therefore divine, religion of the Holy Spirit of Heaven,
beyond the Father, the Mother, and the Son in the elemental photon
a Being supreme.
Such a religion can be achieved, and that is why I am writing
in the hope that, one day, the '
7. The idealism of the light (both outer and inner) vis-à-vis the transcendentalism of the spirit (both outer and inner); the naturalism of the fire vis-à-vis the fundamentalism of the soul; the materialism of the ice vis-à-vis the nonconformism of the mind; the realism of the earth vis-à-vis the humanism of the will.
8. The will of the womb to procreate (the child); the mind of the brain to think (the word); the soul of the heart to feel (the blood); the spirit of the lungs to breathe (the air).
9. Scientific idealism, naturalism, materialism, and realism vis-à-vis religious transcendentalism, fundamentalism, nonconformism, and humanism.
10. The scientific idealism of physics vis-à-vis the religious transcendentalism of Taoism; the scientific naturalism of chemistry vis-à-vis the religious fundamentalism of Mohammedanism; the scientific materialism of technology vis-à-vis the religious nonconformism of Protestantism; the scientific realism of biology vis-à-vis the religious humanism of Catholicism.
CYCLE ONE HUNDRED-AND-TWO
1. The philosopher-genius is a sort of alchemist of the mind who refines upon his thought through successive spirallings of its unfolding, until such time as, attaining to a maximum peak of refinement, he can distil from it the elixir of pure essence, and so become one with the spirit.
2. For man-become-Devil, woman is simply a goal; for God, on the other hand, she is a moral problem.
3. No man can serve both woman and God. A man blows his cover with God as soon as he enters into carnal relations with woman. He ceases to be capable of Heaven and becomes, instead, a plaything of nature and/or the World.
4. It is the grossest form of hypocrisy to treat woman as though she were a passport to Heaven, and thus intimate relations with God! He who settles for woman debars himself from the possibility of divine redemption.
5. Catholicism has this advantage over Protestantism: it remains rooted in the World and thus in the phenomenal subjectivity of woman per se. Thus it has a sense of and affinity with the subjective which is lacking in Protestantism, a mode of Christianity which, in abandoning the World for the lunar Purgatory of Christ (doubtless with honourable intentions initially) is exposed to the objectivity which is fundamentally at the basis of both the lunar and solar spectra. Hence the fatality of parliamentarianism and monarchism to which Protestants, in particular, are exposed at the expense of the (in relation to alpha) weaker subjectivity of purgatorial and hellish omegas. One might say that Nonconformists are fated to a parliamentary domination and Freemasons to a monarchic one, given the nature of the spectra in question. If the former have 'water on the brain', then the latter have 'fire in the blood', and in neither case does the Church (whether biased towards the Son or the Father) come out on top. On the contrary, religion is subverted by political considerations, and the only consequence is one of either Antichristic or Antifatheristic (Satanic) hegemony.
6. If Catholics are not exposed, like their Protestant counterparts, to parliamentary or monarchic domination, they are nonetheless vulnerable to making a religion out of the World, and hence of elevating the Virgin Mary to the status of God, quite as though the Blessed Virgin was the principal distinguishing factor between Catholicism and Protestantism! The regrettable consequence of this moral shortcoming is the identification of woman with moral excellence, and a tendency to be over-conservative in regard to such worldly issues as abortion, divorce, contraception, marriage, family, sex, pornography, etc., to the detriment of genuinely religious, and hence spiritual, issues ... such that appertain to the Holy Spirit (of Heaven) and which, were one to pursue them to any appreciable extent, would call into question not only the worldly criteria surrounding the Mother of Christ but, no less significantly, the fundamentalist criteria underlining the status of God the Father as the principal deity of the Trinity. For if the Blessed Virgin is an obstacle to the 'Kingdom of Heaven' by reducing subjectivity to the phenomenal plane of the World, then the Father is an even greater obstacle to it by dint of his dominant position in the Trinity and effective subversion of Heaven from the standpoint of the blood and its, in relation to fiery objectivity, weak subjectivity such that properly connotes with Hell. It is precisely because the Father 'hogs Heaven' and is incorrectly identified with it ... that the true nature of Heaven as an airy realm of spiritual transcendence is not understood, and the Holy Spirit is accordingly held back from identification with the one factor that would make it fully intelligible as a divine entity - namely the airy Heaven which is its medium and within which it achieves that completeness which would otherwise be sadly lacking, to the detriment of truth.
7. Only as the Holy Spirit of Heaven ...
God come fully and ultimately to pass, and such a coming to pass must
necessarily be at the Father's expense and the consequent subversion of
of which this fundamentally diabolical entity, rooted in the heart, has
been guilty. Only then will the '
CYCLE ONE HUNDRED-AND-THREE
1. Because the brain is subdivisible into four main parts, viz. backbrain, left midbrain, right midbrain, and forebrain, it should be possible to identify the subconscious, and hence subman, with the backbrain; the unconscious, and hence woman, with the left midbrain; the conscious, and hence man, with the right midbrain; and the superconscious, and hence superman, with the forebrain. Hence where man and woman, corresponding to the right and left midbrains respectively, appertain to a phenomenal axis, subman and superman, corresponding to the backbrain and forebrain respectively, appertain to a noumenal axis, the axis, effectively, of the Devil and God. One proceeds, in purgatorial fashion, from man to God, and therefore I shall argue that such a progression corresponds, in physiological terms, to that from the right midbrain to the forebrain, and, in psychological terms, from the conscious to the superconscious, which is less intellectual than spiritual. Conversely, one proceeds or, more correctly, recedes, in diabolical fashion, from subman to woman, and therefore I will argue that such a regression corresponds, in physiological terms, to that from the backbrain to the left midbrain, and, in psychological terms, from the subconscious to the unconscious, which is less emotional than sensual, or instinctual.
2. The progression of man towards superman is therefore from the conscious mind, situated in the right midbrain, towards the superconscious, situated in the forebrain. The regression from the subman towards woman, on the other hand, is from the subconscious, situated in the backbrain, to the unconscious, situated in the left midbrain. Man rises towards God. The Devil sinks towards woman. Such are the respective fates of the right midbrain/conscious and the backbrain/subconscious.
3. One could argue, in alpha/omega fashion, corresponding to a scientific/religious dichotomy, that whereas the physiological subdivisions of the brain are scientific, its psychological subdivisions are religious - a distinction, in short, between negative and positive, particles and wavicles, objective and subjective, centrifugal and centripetal, etc., etc. Hence whereas the satanic fall to nature would be from the backbrain to the left midbrain, the Fatheristic fall, as it were, to the World would be from the subconscious to the unconscious. And where the Christic rise to Heaven would be from the conscious to the superconscious, the Antichristic rise to the Cosmos would be from the right midbrain to the forebrain. One would further have to distinguish, however, between elemental and molecular physiological subdivisions on the one hand, and between molecular and elemental psychological subdivisions on the other hand, in order to establish anything like an objectively comprehensive overall perspective. Hence whereas the alpha-most cosmic point would probably have to do with an elemental forebrain (such that contrasted with the molecular forebrain of an intermediate realm of the light), the omega-most heavenly point would have to do with an elemental superconscious (such that contrasted with the molecular superconscious of an intermediate realm of the spirit).
4. The idealism of the elemental and/or molecular forebrain vis-à-vis the transcendentalism of the molecular and/or elemental superconscious; the naturalism of the elemental and/or molecular backbrain vis-à-vis the fundamentalism of the molecular and/or elemental subconscious; the materialism of the elemental and/or molecular right midbrain vis-à-vis the nonconformism of the molecular and/or elemental conscious; the realism of the elemental and/or molecular left midbrain vis-à-vis the humanism of the molecular and/or elemental unconscious.
5. When one is into the phenomenal not-self ... of the intellect, one reads books generally, since books correspond to other not-selves and are effectively a reflection of the intellectual not-self. When, by contrast, one is into the self ... of the spirit, one vary rarely if ever reads books, but confines one's use of the intellect to the service of one's spiritual insights, whence it functions on a quasi-spiritual basis.
6. However, there is a limit to how much use can be made of the intellect in this 'bovaryized' way; for while the spirit, being absolutist, is infinitely willing, the intellect, being relativistic, is finitely weak, and if over-used by the spirit (as it all-too-easily can be) may well suffer a nervous breakdown or even cause the brain to break, leading to intellectual lunacy and complete cerebral madness, as in the case of Nietzsche, who succumbed to the dominance of the spirit to a degree which his brain was unable to sustain. The chances of this happening are always significantly high, once the spirit gains control of the intellect or, rather, once one allows, through moral conviction and the development of genius, intellect to serve the spirit. For the flesh, remember, is weak, even to the comparatively purgatorial level of the brain.
7. Which is why, ultimately, the intellect must be left behind, as the spirit soars aloft on the wings of heavenly air and achieves the transcendence that surpasses all intellectual usage. For the spirit, being noumenal, is capable of sustaining an absolutist resolve in Oneness with Heaven; the intellect, being phenomenally aligned with the brain, simply isn't. True enlightenment compels one to leave even the 'bovaryized' intellect behind, whose quasi-spirituality was a precondition of true spirituality. Abandoning Purgatory, one soars to Heaven on the wings of Holy Spirit, the pure essence of which is One with God in the 'peace that surpasses all understanding' - the Omega Point ... of the Holy Spirit of Heaven.