Into the Domain of Matter I

15372839346_dd35ce23ff_o

JOHN CHAPTER 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

In these lines we find a wisdom that informs us of the divine source and nature of Creation. The essence or spirit of this understanding was at one time almost universally understood. Some of the words varied of course. A Neo-Platonist, Greek or not, is more likely to refer to the logos as it is in the Greek original.  In some societies, God might have been referred to as Divine Spirit, Great Spirit or simply The Creator. In all cases we’re expressing the divine origin of creation. In the most simple terms that which is above gives form, life and meaning to that which is below. Indeed, ultimately above and below are the same. Meaning of origins informs us of the meaning of life and, indeed, the afterlife.

Dreamtime Sisters by Colleen Wallace Nungari - Australian Indigenous art

Dreamtime Sisters by Colleen Wallace Nungari – Australian Indigenous art

Allowing for what would be mostly semantics, the people of the Middle East, Europe, South Asia, South East Asia and the Far East would all be in agreement with this simple axiom. The indigenous people of the Americas would also recognize it and the earliest artistic remains from the Paleolithic period indicates that life was sacred and full of meaning for the earliest humans.

The idea that there is no more than a physical material realm, with no notion of the Spirit world, the Afterlife or Re-incarnation would have seemed not only very odd, but also disturbing. Life would have no higher purpose or meaning. Although the opening lines of the Gospel of John are of course written within the context of Christianity, shown by the simple fact that they were included in the New Testament, Nevertheless their significance is universal.

Marx-2

Marx in 1875

In our present age, the term sacred is not taken particularly seriously or is used as a marketing tool or simply patronised ; and the idea of inherent meaning is considered naive. The intellectual framework for the Aquarian Age came from a few sources in the 19th Century. Theses sources have created a new world order that have rendered this world all but unrecognizable to those who came before us. To understand the importance of the impact, I’ll take a short survey.

The works and influence of Karl Marx cannot be underestimated. When combined with what I call ‘fundamentalist’ evolutionary theory and a bit of help from Sigmund Freud, mankind is utterly redefined. Fortunately, we have the ability to dispel this Grand Delusion, using the same tools that constructed it the first place. A cornerstone of Marx’s ideology is the idea that societies are “conditioned” by the mode of production.

Marx presents us with a world in which any belief in anything other than capital and class struggle is considered foolish. Religion is the “opiate of the people” but he is referring to any form of belief that seeks or allegedly finds a higher purpose. The dogma of Marx is rooted in an intransigent materialism. More than that, its adherents claim it to be the only possible reality for sane adults. What could be more Saturnine?

Das Kapital was also a call to revolution, for its own kind of New World Order. Essentially, it was a critical analysis of political economy, meant to show the economic patterns underscoring the capitalist mode of production. A history has shown, the revolution was very good for bankers

The workers of the world needed to rise up against their overlords in order to establish a workers Utopia. Of course this rallying cry has a gaping flaw.  Marx thought the Revolution would begin in England because there he saw the possibilities of Industrial organization He also felt the English would have a small amount of education. The Russian peasantry on the other hand was a dark horse. The shear size of Russia was daunting and an almost entirely illiterate, agricultural population would make ‘working as one” a problem.

Nevertheless, the Revolution really broke in Russia with the agency of the Bolsheviks. The Czar and his family were slaughtered. No time was wasted in securing the Revolution via an iron fist and death squads. Atheism was the State ‘religion’ and no other faith was permitted. Churches were desecrated, some used for the distribution of pornography. All that had been sacred had to be desecrated and degraded. The state went to extraordinary lengths to do this.

Totalitarian societies demand secular gods

Totalitarian societies demand secular gods

Before too long, the USSR has developed the Gulag camps and all intellectuals were suspect and many arrested, only to ‘disappear”. So now we have the ultimate Totalitarian state. Under the Czar, an absolute monarch, the population were subservient to him, but intelligence and spirituality, including the powerful Russian Orthodox Church were accepted as a part of the realm.

The illegalization of all religion and war on artists and intellectuals has been the case in all twentieth century Totalitarian regimes. Marxism then spread from the largest country in the world to China, by far the largest population. The same policies of state atheism and fear of intellectuals were as pronounced in China as in Russia. Upon the invasion of Tibet, Mao Tse Tung told the Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, that “religion is poison.” Mao had no doubts of the source of his philosophy: “The force at the core leading our cause forward is the Chinese Communist Party. The theoretical basis guiding our thinking is Marxism-Leninism. [Opening address at the First Session of the First National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China] (September 15, 1954).

If there has to be a ‘greatest tragedy’ it is the immediate usurpation of any “power of the people” by twisted and psychotic megalomaniacs who made absolute monarchy look fairly decent.  What drives them is an empty dogma that promises a perfect material world if all competing ideologies can be destroyed. Yet what would one reasonably expect of a political system based, more than anything else, on economic theory and some platitudes thrown in for good measure. The leaders help themselves, leaving workers in navy blue pajamas that looked more like prison garb – and were absolutely mandatory – leaving them looking like, and with all the rights, of prisoners.

The worst crime would be to think you were of divine origin and that creation had meaning far beyond the constricts and inanity of a pretend religion based on the illusion of equality. Such ideas are dangerous in a state where the only value is a materialist dogma that keeps the workers poor while enriching the corrupt power brokers at the top.

Of course all of these qualities can be fairly attributed to Aquarius and Saturn. The fixed ideologue who cannot change his mind no matter what, soon becomes a despot. An idea is worth a revolution, but always on Saturn’s terms.

The glyph of Saturn gives us a dominant Cross of Matter over the Crescent of Spirit. The shadow of Communism is Plutocratic Capitalism, often simply referred to as Corporatism. In either case, when all is said and done, the core value is in money and power for its own sake. It glorifies money and wealth to the exclusion of all else.

Playing into this, is the poorly understood Theory of Natural Selection – usually referred to simply as Evolutionary Theory. Some of the most vocal proponents of this theory, like Richard Dawkins, remind me of religious fundamentalists because they appear to believe they have the whole and only truth when it comes to our origins.

Dawkins is well known for his book, appropriately titled “The God Delusion.” I’m personally interested in all branches of science and am familiar enough with true scientific principals to know when I smell a rat. That is not to say that Dawkins and his ilk are without knowledge but they are without first principles and a rigorous scientific method that is capable of questioning itself. which I find very odd.

We live in a culture where a scientist can talk about the origins of life without being able to define what life is or provide us with any scientifically proven way in which life came from inanimate and unconscious matter. I should have thought that would interest an inquiring mind. Moreover, if we dare to invoke the beliefs and cosmologies that we lived with for tens of thousands of years, we are ridiculed.

The fact that scientists don’t know what life is, is strange enough, and in fact precludes any absolute certainty of what is truly happening in the process of so-called evolution. The OED defines scientific naturalism as “The philosophical belief that everything arises from natural properties and causes, and supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted.”

The most glaring fly in the ointments is that one is committed to denying any spiritual dimension in creation. If one were say a ‘soft core’ naturalist, you might pay lip service to spiritual ways of “seeing into the life of things,” as Wordsworth put it. However any such ‘knowledge’ would have no place in this Brave New World – just gimme the facts, ma’am ! I also wonder if some degree of cognitive dissonance is necessary in order to permit the validity of pure mathematics, a symbolic language describing things nobody has yet seen.

Dawkins was asked “can you give a single example of a genetic mutation that results in an increase in information to the genetic evolutionary process” ? There was an uncomfortably long silence and no answer was given.  The interview was posted to YouTube and Dawkins himself tells us the video was not in any way manipulated. I do not wish to discredit Dawkins unduly, but when you decide to go through life with an unremitting smirk of condescension, while  strutting and pontificating through a megaphone, you are bound to attract attention and it won’t all be positive.

Darwin fist talked about varieties of pidgins. He is perfectly aware that he is talking about domesticated birds. In other words they have been bred to improve their usefulness. Nobody would think twice about that fact that one dog looks like an Alsatian while another looks like a Great Pyrenees. But clearly this has precious little to do with evolution, The intellectual agenda of contemporary evolutionary theory appears to be summed up by Dawkins himself:

“Humans have always wondered about the meaning of life…life has no higher purpose than to perpetuate the survival of DNA…life has no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.” (Scheff, Liam. 2007. The Dawkins Delusion. Salvo, 2:94.)’

From inanimate sludge, we are told, a one cell creature arrives on the scene. Given enough time, that first mysterious spark of life will not only explain the existence of all species. alive or extinct, but also the differences within species. However, it has no meaning and any values we put on it are our own. From a traditional point of view, this is a kind of poverty of Spirit – connection with life itself is somehow skewed.

Darwin was in fact reluctant to apply his theory to human beings, which indicates some sort of crack in the theory as understood by the majority of modern biologists. Could it be that evolutionary theory is predicated on a philosophical commitment to to naturalism first and foremost which can only accept evidence that supports the “naturalist” bias, filtering out any evidence or questions that might shake the chosen philosophical bent? What is meant by “naturalism” is the dogmatic belief that only a material reality, as experienced by the senses can be true.

We know that given enough time a species can change dramatically, But how would we trace the connections between a cat and an elephant without resorting to speculation.

Considering too the theory of the Big Bang in astrophysics, the physicist is confronted with what aught to be a serious dilemma – how can we be sure if we don’t know what preceded the Big Bang.  The current Dalai Lama has said that’s he’s fine with the Big Bang as long as their is an infinite number of them, because there is no beginning.

hqdefault (1)w

Finally, let’s take a look at Freud. His best know achievements are the discovery of the unconscious, which is a bitter oxymoron indeed. He is also famous for dividing the psyche into Ego, Id and Superego. This is pseudo science at its finest. The problem with speculating on what is and isn’t conscious is that he had no scientific way to measure this. In fact, he couldn’t give a scientific definition of the origin of consciousness.

The fact that Freud found no way to prove his theories but it didn’t matter because it was lapped up by people who either thirsted for an explanation for their unhappiness or rather liked the idea of having this new psycho language. Freud also believed that not only can a cigar sometimes be just a cigar, but that ultimately all out motivations, fears etc. were sexual – hence the Oedipus and Electra Complexes among others. This last point is where Jung broke with Freud:

“In November 1912, Jung and Freud met in Munich for a meeting among prominent colleagues to discuss psychoanalytical journals. At a talk about a new psychoanalytic essay on Amenhotep IV, Jung expressed his views on how it related to actual conflicts in the psychoanalytic movement. While Jung spoke, Freud suddenly fainted and Jung carried him to a couch” (see Jones, Ernest, ed. Lionel Trilling and Steven Marcus. The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud, 1963.) Jung’s idea of a collective unconscious was deeply upsetting to him for reasons we can only speculate upon.

The language of Freud has entered our languages and still influences the way we think about the human mind. There can be no sacred connection to a creator or other creatures for that matter, when the mind is driven by unconscious forces that mostly have to do with sex and violence. I make a clear distinction between the subconscious and the unconscious mind.

Forgive me if I given anyone short shrift, but again I’m painting with a large brush t show how all of these highly influential theories and materialist and dis-empower human beings. They are forms of slavery in the guise of messiahs. Marxism militantly tried to destroy person and public spiritual and religious life. We all other values are snuffed, then money fills the vacuum. Even science becomes devoted to wealth at the top.

The claim that there cannot be any Creator, nor can we in any meaningful way possess divinity and that Science will answer all our needs and questions is ultimately empty.  It is vain. According to modern science we are made of stardust but cannot originate in or return to a higher place.

imagesQU0ZAC46

Freud with his eternal cigar

Freudian Psychoanalysis was the beginning of an entire industry, but the single most pernicious element in Freudianism is that humans are driven by completely unconscious desire, fears and motivations. The alienation inherent in this idea is horrendous. The psychiatrist is the new priest, Yet is has been reported for several decades that almost nobody gets any better, even after up to thirty years of therapy. If you cannot change the Unconscious, then how could therapy work. After twenty years of analysis, Dudley Moore said “six more months and I go to Lourdes.”

When you look at all this materialist dogma we realize that esteemed scientists and economists have hoodwinked us They have become modern orthodoxy with no room for a deep spiritual connection They have worked exceedingly well, but as I mentioned, any construct can be dismantled with the tools by which it was built. Seeing through the Aquarian promise of an earthly Utopia is the first step to being free of it.

The problem is that these seriously flawed ideologies are still with us. Modern so-called democracies are looking for ways to achieve total control with the help of advanced technocrats.  Naomi Wolf asked that this be spread far and wide.  According to  her source, Scott Wells who has looked over the new 1198 page immigration Bill:

“The Bill gives the Secretary of Homeland Security unlimited power to imprison anyone without charge or trial. She will have total and complete authority over the United States with the power to ignore the US Supreme Court, the US Secretary of State, the US Attorney General, the Secretary of Defence, etc. and rule by decree in any matter anywhere in the United States. Jurisdiction is removed from the US Supreme Court to even decide the Constitutionality of this Act. In short; the Act turns the United States into a tyrannical dictatorship ruled by an unelected bureaucrat.”  The velvet part of this particular act of Fascism is that the Bill is promoted as a wonderful thing. And how many will take the time to read nigh on 1200 pages?

At the top of the page, we have William Blake’s “The Ancient of Days.” This was the frontispiece to Europe: A Prophecy. The Ancient of Days is referred to as Urizen, one of the dozens of characters invented by Blake the visionary. Blake’s system is both eccentric and highly complex. After all, this is the man who wrote “I must create my own system or be enslaved by someone else’s.”

Plate b3 From There is No Natural Religion, a series of philosophical aphorisms by William Blake, written in 1788.

Plate b3 From There is No Natural Religion, a series of philosophical aphorisms by William Blake, written in 1788.

Urizen is a play on words and means ‘horizon.’ Blake was a Cockney so it can also be ‘you eyes on.” In the first instance we are given the limitation implied by horizon – the limit of vision. In the second instance, Blake has said elsewhere that we should see through and not *with* the eyes. Essentially he means spiritual vision. The bearded Ancient of Days is measuring the deeps. He is prescribing existence. This is at the hear of Blake’s system: For Blake the monster was the loss of Spiritual Vision. Blake was also very clear on the fact there “is no Natural religions, by which he means one that must involve more than the limitations of the senses.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s