Fragment 32

In this "Fragment" we shall continue the discussion of Christ as the new Adam. I realized that I had too much material for a single "Fragment", so I decided to break it into parts. We shall use different perspectives, and approaches to make some sense of the material. We shall begin by examining some ideas of Jacob Bohme. The book we shall be concentrating on is Bohme's book: "Incarnation of Christ'', also all quotes in this "Fragment shall be taken from that book. If any of the readers of this "Fragment" are interested in reading "Incarnation of Christ'' both Bohme and I recommend reading his book "Three Principles of the Divine Essence '' first before attempting "Incarnation of Christ''. Bohme is incredibly difficult to read. Hegel even complained he had difficulty reading Bohme. So let us begin with a quote from the book. "The tree Jesus Christ in the light world, who has revealed himself in our soul, as his branches. He has come in Adam's place, who has caused us to decay, and perish, He became Adam in the new birth. Adam brought our souls in the new birth into this world, into death of the fierce wrathfullness; and He brought our soul out of death, through the fire of God, and rekindled it in fire, so that it obtained again the shining light, as otherwise it would necessarily had to remain in the dark death in the source of anguish. The above passage has a lot to unpack. To begin with Bohme had no interest in the historical Jesus. Both Jesus,and Adam are best regarded as states of consciousness.The transmutation of Adam to Christ is a psychic event. Adam represents the fallen state of humans, which is characterized by greed, drunkenness, gluttony, etc. Christ is the new man or better yet the new self; the new self. Christ becomes the homunculus, or the new conscience of humans. Of course, this is not an easy feat to achieve. It involves conscious suffering. Again let us go to a quote from Bohme. "Thus every twig in the soul grows up out of divine wisdom. All must put forth out of the torture chamber, and grow as a branch from the root of the tree: all is generated in anguish. If a man wish to obtain divine knowledge, he must repeatedly enter into the torture chamber, into the center." Bohme was fond of tree metaphors. What Bohme is talking about is in occult terminology called "crossing the abyss". The old self must die and be torn apart , so the new self can be born. This brings us to one of the most misunderstood concepts in Christianity. That of being born again. One does not become born again by praying with some street preacher who is handing out pamphlets on how you are going to Hell. Instead it is like someone who has a life changing accident. The example I will use is having an accident and becoming a quadriplegic (quad). I had a friend who crossed the abyss by passing through the gate of Absolute despair. (When I talk about a friend sometimes I am talking about myself, and sometimes I am talking about a real friend) He could not find any references to the vision of Absolute despair in most literature, so he took up reading autobiographies of quads, anjd he still found no references, The only reference he did find was in Donald Tyson's "Necronomicon". To get back to our discussion. Someone who has had an accident and become a quad experiences his-her self as divided in to two different people. The one before the accident and the one after the accident. Everything they believed or presupposed has been shattered. Their outward and inward life is in ruins. This is the torture chamber Bohme refers to. When one enters the abyss one's outward life crumbles into ruins, as does his-her inward life. Although the inward life takes longer to destroy. A new quad must rebuild their life from the ground up. This is the power of the abyss. I will have a lot more to say about the abyss and the way out in future "Fragments". This is what it means to be born again. That the old self is shattered. and a new self must be created. When I was younger I was baffled by how many people that suffer life changing accidents become Christians. I could not understand how after someone experiences such trauma that they could embrace a god of mercy. (I always had trouble believing in a god of mercy, although I never had much trouble believing in demons and gods of pain and suffering.) The reason that people that have experienced a life changing trauma have a strong need to somehow made sense of what happened to them. Christianity offers them a paradigm to rebuild their self. This also connects to Iamblichus doctrine of exemplarism. I am always surprised when I meet Christians that do not know what exemplarism is. Exemplarism is the opposite of ontologism. Ontologism is the teahing that one can reach the mind of god without the help of a god. Plotinus is good example of ontologism. Exemplarism is the teaching that one must have a god to pull one over the finish line. Christianity of course got rid of every god except for Christ. After shattering ones inward and outward life one must have a paradigm to rebuild ones life. Christ v-becomes the homunculus that directs the rebuilding. Of course, as all Setians know there are other paradigms (gods) that can serve this purpose.

Fragment 31

In this "Fragment" we shall continue the Search for the Self. In my last "Fragment" I used an analytical perspective, for this "Fragment" I shall switch to a historical perspective. The Search for the Self is too big of a topic for only one perspective. And the Self is a historical creation, it is not stable or static. I shall attempt to enlarge our understanding of the Self by interpreting another myth. That of Adam and Eve. Every good myth has many levels of meaning, This is what makes symbols and myths so powerful. Myths and symbols have content, while reason, and abstractions have clarity. So I am not claiming my interpretation of the Adam and Eve myth is the right one or the only one. Most people know the basic storyline of the myth of Adam and Eve. God created Adam and Eve and they live in the Garden of Eden, which is a paradise (Utopia). God has given Adam and Eve one commandment : not to eat of the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The Serpent then enters the Garden and tempts Adam and Eve to eat of the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Adam and Eve succumb to temptation, and God throws them out of the Garden, After which Adam and Eve experience great regret for their crime. So let us begin our interpretation of the myth. The Garden represents a paradise, a Utopia. Adam and Eve have no responsibilities except the one rule of not to eat of the fruit of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The Garden also represents the bicameral paradigm of consciousness. Where people are told what to do by the gods. It should now be clear why disobedience is the primal sin. There were no rebellious subjective selves in the Garden. So what is the knowledge of good and evil? It is the power of judgement, the ability to think for one's self. This makes the punishment the responsibility of thinking for one's self. No longer does the voice of the egregores (gods) seem to come from outside. There is a great longing to return to the bicameral paradigm. This is also the lure of modern Utopian thinking. By giving the Egregore or the State (which is a collection of Egregorers usually with one predominating one controlling the thinking of the people) all power over your life, you give up all your responsibilities. Again the person has only one responsibility or commandment: not to disobey. The modern person acts on the commands of the internalized Egregore. This loss of the bicameral paradigm was a great trauma for humankind. A trauma many are still trying to reverse. Remember in the myth the first thing Adan and Eve realized after eating the fruit is that they were naked and afraid. They had to assume responsibility for their own lives. They had to use their new found power of judgement to think for themselves. They felt helpless in a fallen world.They can now judge for themselves the commands of the gods. As one notices this is also the crime of the Great Set (Lord of the Self) and the Christian devil; wanting to think for one's self. Before continuing with the above conversation I want to take a brief diversion to talk about Original Sin. Original sin is one of Christianites greatist contributions and one of its worst failures. The contribution was that it overthrew the classical Greek ideal that when one knows the good he-she shall follow the good. Instead it acknowledges that one can know the good and not do it. It is to be noticed even in modern Utopian thought there is this child-like faith in education. All the early progressives (like H.G. Wells and G. B. Shaw spent a lot of time trying to deny original sin. Although present day progressives have fallen in love with guilt. They have realized that guilt is one of the greatest mind control devices ever invented. One cannot build a Utopia if the basic building blocks (humans) are flawed.The trouble with original sin is guilt. As my readers know, I regard the end of the world talk and the building of a new Jerusalem (Utopia) as two of the worst things about Chriatianilty. But I think the absolute worst thing about Christianity is guilt. Christanity turned a fundamental insight about human nature into a control mechanism. Back to the discussion. After the bicameral paradigm broke down, humans also noticed that along with the voices of the gods, there were also the voices of demons. There was no overall consent in the conversation that raged in their heads. This is a manifestation of the trauma that humans suffered when the bicameral paradigm collapsed. The hand hold that god provided is now absent. They experience both the pain and the gain of having to decide for themselves. As I said before, humans can now judge for themselves the commands of the gods. This is the transition to the modern paradigm of consciousness. That of a subjective self that must make decisions (even though they are surrounded by the voices of the internalized egregores) for themselves and take responsibility for their decisions. This is the curse of original sin that humans have to make a decision among all the warring voices in their heads. The voices of both gods and demons. The trouble with trying to give back the power of decision to the Egregores is that they may decide to kill or sacrifice their followers for some goal of their own. Examples of this are not hard to find; read the Old Testament. This sacrificing followers still happens in governments that are controlled by collectivist Egregores. Examples would be the absurd agricultural reforms of communist societies that cause mass starvation. Collectivist Egregores will always decide the right thing to do based on their agenda, even if it means killing many of their own followers. Whether you study the actions of modern day Egregores or the actions of ancient Egregores it is the same. Observe how many times the Egregore Yahweh's decisions resulted in mass death of his own. The lack of responsibility is both the lure and the trouble with trying to bring back the bicameral paradigm. One of the lessons we should learn from Adam and Eve is that there is no return to the time before the Fall (the Bicameral collapse). A Cherub guards the gates of Eden with a flaming sword. Next "Fragment" I shall continue the historical perspective, and examine how Christ became the second Adam.

Fragment 30

It is time to get back to the Search for the Self. I have a few preliminaries to get through before resuming the Search for the Self. To begin with I must acknowledge some intellectual debts. Besides the usual cast of characters: Bohme, Paracelsus, Gurdjieff, Crowley. ertc.; I have a special obligation to the philosopher F.W. v. Schelling and the psychologist G.H. Mead for this "Fragment". And I have some practical advice, which shall help us transition into the following discussion. The advice is when you have achieved inspiration go as far as you can with it. I am talking about mentally not doing something stupid. When you get a new theory or insight do not cut it off. Carry the theory or insight as far as you can. Go as far into the weeds as you can, there is always time later to trim back the theory or insight. Most people kill their inspiration in the cradle, that is why most people are not good at practicing Magic. Don't let the voices in your head or the voices of family and friends cut short inspiration. To restart our search for the Self, we must talk about consciousness. What is consciousness? Are higher states of consciousness possible? Can higher states of consciousness reveal hidden knowledge? These are some of the questions that led me to practicing Magic, and studying philosophy. So what is consciousness? The usual answer is awareness, this is undoubtedly true. The trouble is we substituted one vague word for another vague word. So I shall offer an operational definition that can be worked with. A definition that only applies to humans at this particular time. Consciousness is the conversation that goes on in a person's head. Now we can start answering the questions that were posed about higher states of consciousness and whether they can reveal hidden knowledge. We know from talking to people that some conversae divided inottions are better than others. So higher states of consciousness are the better conversations one has in his-her head (the Egregores). Remember Crowley said one of the goals of Magic was to achieve a conversation with one;s Holy Guardian Angel (H.G.A.). I will have more to say on the H.G.A. in future "Fragments". Before discussing the thought entities that dwell in the mental sphere, let me say a few more things about conversations. When we read a book, what are we really doing? We are having a conversation with the author. Books like all our conversations follow the rule that some conversations are better than others. Even when we are studying nature our consciousness still puts the study into the form of a conversation. We ask questions and then try to get an answer. We try to make nature answer our questions. The experiments we devise are questions. Let me take a more common example of looking for a building you have never been to. We look to the street names and numbers for our answers. Our consciousness takes the framework of a conversation. This is why nearly everyone from the ancients says that consciousness implies a duality. To be conscious there must be at least two elements that are interacting. A dialogue is the mark of being conscious. Let us move on to the characters that make up a person's internal dialogue. They are the Egregores. When a person lets in or has an Egregore implanted into his-her consciousness, the Egregore forms a "Me". I must state before moving on that I am using some familiar terminology in an unfamiliar way, but bear with me. I am doing the best I can, like I have said we have not invented the tools or the terminology to properly investigate the Egregores. A "Me" is passiveI response to an Egregore. It is Egregore's beach head into one's mind. "Me"s do what they are told. In the Bronze Age there were "Me"s and only a few proto- "I"s. This is why people were the [ro[erty of the Egregores in the Bronze Age. Usually in the Bronze Age the controlling Egregore could be identified by a person's name. Most names in the Bronze Age were theophoric. The "I" comes about when a person begins to question the Egregore. The resulting "I" can be divided into two types depending on the relation to the Egregore. If the reacting "I" embraces the Egregore, and his-her reaction is to further the reach of the Egregore, this results in a passive "I" or an active "Me". I prefer the term "active Me ", because the person is still under the control to the Egregore, even if she-he thinks that they are controlling the Egregore. We know sometimes rival groups of active "Me"s arise in an Egregore.These internal conflicts in an Egregore manifest as conflicts among the Egregore"s followers. The difference between the active "Me" and what I call the "I" is the active "Me" accepts the Egregore's goals. Religious wars,and conflicts would fit into this paradigm of active "Me"s in conflict. The followers are in conflict about how best to pursue the goals of the Egregore, or about some technical point that is meaningless to any outsiders. When a person accepts the goals and conduct of an Egregore they become active "Me"s, and become the Egregore's collaborators. This active "Me" is the reason most people think theyBronze Age there is now a lot of duplicity. I think it was C.S. Lewis said something like: "The Devil's best trick is to make people think he does not exist." The Egregores have developed an even better trick, they make you think that their voice in your head is your own. Like S. Kierkegaard I miss the honesty of the ancient and medieval worlds.This state of thinking you are free while being controlled by Egregores is what Occultists have called sleep or hypnotism. Most people are sleepwalkers controlled by an Egregore's dreams.The way Egregores control people is by inducing dreams. Egregores also use guilt and flattery to control people. In self loathing the Active "Me" condemns and tortures the "I' that resists. Yes guilt may be the greatest mind control technique ever. This is how self loathing become manifest in an individual. An Egregore may also use flattery to approve when the "I" becomes an active "Me".This also is how an Egregore rewards its followers. It makes them feel like they are better than other people. This should be easy to observe in our virtue signalling society. How an Egrgore puffs up people making them sanctimonious and didactic. To finish this "Fragment" I shall go back to the practical advice I started with. When one calls either a god or a demon they are seeking inspiration. I know the older view is where the god or demon is supposed to fetch the desired object and deliver it to the door. I also know this sometimes happens, but it is usually for small or unimportant things. We can take the example of a love spell. Very seldom does a god or demon act as a pimp. But a god or demon can give the confidence or tools to win the desired love, or show one the desired lover is not really that desirable. This is the gift of inspiration. As the ancients knew and we moderns have forgotten inspiration is th

Fragment 29

Before continuing with the Search for the Self, I have some more material I want to cover. Material that does not fit in anywhere, yet is still important to understanding the Self and Occultism. This "Fragment" shall have two parts. The first part shall be some thoughts on Astrology. The second part is an ontological theory of mine. A theory I have no commitment to, in simple terms I am uncertain of the truth of this theory. I could be talked out of it easier than I could be talked into it.The reason I am passing this theory on, is because my unconscious mind keeps working on the theory, even though my conscious mind seems to reject the theory. A strange if not unIliphas common phenomenon. Showing that our conscious mind is but a small part of the greater Self. I shall start with the thoughts on Astrology, and its place in Occultism. The older attitude was that no one ignorant of Astrology should practice Magic. Thi@s view can be found in Paracelsus, and most of the ancient and medieval writings on Magic. The best example is sublime grimoire "The Picatrix". This state of affairs did not change until the middle of the nineteenth century, and was the work of one man: Eliphas Levi. Levi was the great reformer of Magic. I have written about Eliphas Levi before (see my essay "Kierkegaard and Levi" @processidealism.blogspot.com), but as with most subjects I write about I have come to deeper insights with further study, and reflection. To give a very brief summation of my previous essay I recognized his accomplishments in reforming Occultism. His reform of connecting the Tarot cards with the letters of the ahebrew alphabet, and the Qabalah, and his doctrine of the Astral Light. Although he was not the first to use these two doctrines, he was the first to develop and analyze these doctrinal changes.I am giving Levi the credit. As the legendary Chess Champion said about naming chess openings. That an opening should not be named after the first player that plays the opening, but the first player that analyzes and develops the opening. As I said previously Levi democratized Occultism. Most people do not have the time, and resources to master the complicated mnemonic systems of the Renaissance, but everyone can afford a deck of cards. Even though I discussed and recognized the above insights, I seemed to have missed the big picture. What Levi did was to switch the focus of Occultism from the macrocosm to the microcosm. Levi pulled off a Copenican revolution in Occultism as Kant did in philosophy. The older Occultism was focused on the cosmos, and the external world. Levi flipped the focus to the subjective self by making the Will of the Magos central to Occultism. This is how he democratized Occultism. Like using the mnemonic systems of the older Magic using Astrology to plan your rituals or consecrate tools takes time and work. While relying on the Will of the operator is a short cut. It is the same with substituting the Tarot cards for the mnemonic systems of the past. The cosmic energies are channeled through the Will of the operator, instead of using the configurations of the cosmos. Thus the energies of Magic become accessible to all. Of course the trouble is people do not do the work. If one wants to explore the older Magic there is no better book than the sublime "Picatrix" to understand Astral Magic. I shall take a slight diversion here to discuss some of the influences on Levi's thought that are often overlooked. Levi, like Kierkegaard, was a reaction against German Idealism. A turning to subjectivity against the deification of the objective by Hegel. The switch from the objective macrocosm to the subjective microcosm. Anyone who reads Levi's books can observe the influence of Hegel, Schelling, and Fichte on Levi;s thought. But, it is Schopenhauer that gave Levi his central nsight to make the Will of the operator the supreme power in Magic. Back to Astrology. I guess the first question most people ask; is can Astrology really predict the future? A question I cannot answer. I am far from a competent Astrologer. A similar question could be asked of the Tarot cards. Astrology like all the occult arts differs in quality depending on the operator. Astrology is a continuum that runs from the daily advice column in the newspaper to the esoteric verse of Nostradamus (1503-1566). What I can say like the Tarot cards Astrology is a wonderful key to unlocking the unconscious. The trick is to identify oneself with the entire cosmos, instead of one's individuality. A trick that seemed easier for the ancients, and medievals. Not that it was easy even back then. The reason that this trick was easier for the ancients was the cosmos was considerably smaller back then. The Copernican revolution was one of the greatest shocks to humanity in history. More far reaching than Darwin's evolution. The Copernican revolution is what made Darwin's discoveries possible. Back to trying to identify with the cosmos. To successfully do this trick, one has to take to heart the saying of many mystics, that the space inside your head is identical with the cosmos. As for Astrology's efficacy in Magical rituals, I can commend the practice. As the key to success in Magic is adding content. When one does the work of calculating the proper time to do a ritual it adds importance and content to the working. What I can say with confidence is having some knowledge of Astrology is of great benefit to the Magos. Even if it is just being aware of the phases of the Moon, and knowing the symbolism and meaning of the planets and signs. We have now come to the theory. I first used this theory in my fiction (see the "Monas Stone" @gwenchustories.blogspot.com), and then promptly forgot it. I should say my conscious mind forgot it, but my unconscious mind kept working on the theory. So I have some ontological speculation for the reader. The theory is that Reality is a wave which I shall refer to as the Reality Wave or R,W. Think of the R.W. as an analogy to a F.M wave. A F.M. receiver only picks up the peaks of the wave, that is where the information is that is the broadcast. So the theory is that our reality only exists at the peaks or valleys of the R.W. like the F.M. broadcast only exists at the peaks of the waveform. This means our reality ceases to exist except at the peaks or valleys of the wave form. So our reality phases in and out of existence, and other dimensions of reality may exist at other points on the waveform. Our dimension of reality would alternate with other dimensions of reality. When our dimension phases out another dimension would phase into existence. How long the time it takes for our dimension to phase back in does not matter, since we do not exist during other phases of reality, or at least exist in a different form. It could take a microsecond or a century. Although I have a hunch that in our time perception it is closer to a microsecond than a century. Before turning to what this theory could mean to occultism, let us take a look at some evidence for the theory. According to Einstein solid matter is the result of a low vibratory rate. If vibrations drop below a certain rate the congeal into solid matter. A dimension of a higher vibratory rate would seem immaterial for us, and a dimension of a lower vebratoru rate would be of solid matter to us. like Parmenides's Sphere. Another piece of evidence is when observing electrons they seem to bounce in and out of existence, but in the R.W, theory they would go somewhere.What we view as electrons would be a point of a waveform not discrete particles. This would make the electrons the information part of our dimension of reality like the peaks of the F.M broadcast wave. We are all made of electrons, thus they are the information carriers of our reality. Not much evidence I admit, so let us turn to what this could mean to Occultism. Our brain waves are of a higher frequency than the brain matter, thus being immaterial (at least from our point of view). The psychologist Alfred Adler claimed that the brain is the tool of the mind. (see his book "What Life should Mean to You") Adler's example is that if someone suffers brain damage, they can train other parts of the brain to take over for the damaged parts. Thus the mind changes the brain. Of course it is really a reciprocity instead of one being prior to the other. This could mean the Egregores exist in a higher vibratory dimension of reality, They feed on the vibrations of our emotions and thoughts, thus there would be a reciprocity between our consciousness and the Egregores. As I have said before Egregores are born and they die. They are born when our brain waves reach a certain pitch, and die when the pitch no longer exists. There is also an argument for life after death that accords well with Occult teaching. That when we die, the higher vibrations of our consciousness live on in another dimension on the R.W. Many mystic and Occult traditions have taught existence after death is only possible if someone had done the work to create some sort of vibrational body. Example of this are the Light Body in Occultism,as well as Gurdjieff's teaching about creating an astral body that will survive death. The Greek Orthodox tradition has a similar teaching about reaching deification. That our human substance is replaced by divine substance if we follow the rites and teaching so the Church. Anyone interested in this teaching can consult "The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Tradition" by N. Russell, or if interested in primary sources Maximus the Confessor is a good place to start. I shall probably write more about the R.W. theory, since my unconscious mind is still working on it. Anyway I hope some readers find this theory useful, even if it is just for writing fiction. Failing that I hope at least it was entertaining.

Fragment 28

In this "Fragment" I have some add ons to some previous "Fragments". So in this "Fragment" we shall tade a short break from the Search for the Self. As I have said before, these "Fragments" are not Systematic or to be taken as eternal truths, instead they are meant to be dynamic; to change and be built upon. To start with I have some further thoughts on our first ancestors, and how they evolved. To supplement my theory that humans were originally scavengers. The fact that humans are bipedal and with an upright posture seems to add weight to this theory. Walking on two instead of four legs and sg.. standing upright would be of great benefit to scavengers. To begin with an upright posture would allow individuals to see further ahead which would facilitate looking for food. Having the hands free would also have allowed humans to carry or drag things back to any sort of temporary camp the humans had set up. Another fact that I think supports that early humans were scavengers is that humans to this day have a penchant for collecting. Humans love to have collections. We do not find this trait in predators or in other apes. Like I said before I believe that humans were to the primates as rats are to rodents. Before moving to Jaynes's theory, I have an add on to my interpretation of the Set myth. I just recently finished reading C.G. Jung's book "Aion" where Jung investigates the fish as a symbol. Jung holds that the fish is a symbol of consciousness, or the self. The water is the unconsciousness that consciousness (the fish) swims around in. Thus the fish eating Osiris's phallus would be consciousness destroying the vitality of Egregores in the bicameral paradigm. I also have some add ons to Jaynes's theory of consciousness. When I said the left brain interprets the voices from the right brain, I should have said "messages". It would be the left brain that would add the words to the feelings, emotions, or images from the right brain. l must also state here that I am not convinced of a lot of Jaynes's right-left brain theory.But i shall leave the neuroanatomy to those more qualified than myself. Al I think of the Egregores as having an existence outside of the human brain. The other thought I want to add to Jaynes's theory is Jaynes offers us a solution to the problem of why many ancient and mesoamerican cultures would suddenly desert their cities and civilizations to return to tribal life. It was because the Egregores were condemning them. From reading the Old Testament we find the Egregore Yahweh several times thought of killing Moses. I bring this up to draw a parallel with today. Much the same thing is happening with the demon Egregore Hoggg. Hoggg is the patron demon of the social justice movement. Hogg is using guilt to condemn Western Civilization. This is why we can not solve problems today that were solvable in the past. Thus leading us back to barbarism. I will say a few words on Hogg, since he is so active today. Examples being cancel culture, the suggestion of re-education camps,and some sort of secret police that the Democratic progressives are calling for to monitor and destroy "domestic terrorism", you can be sure they shall not invetigate any violent leftist movements (Antifa, B.L.M. etc,) In simple terms Hoggg wants to destroy all those that are not serving him. Hoggg has had several internal conflicts over his life. Of course, with Egregores internal conflicts are worked out as real conflict between its human followers. One of Hoggg's most important internal conflicts happened in the Weimar Republic in Germany post W.W.1. It was the fight between the Nazis, and the Communists (Marxists). In that conflict the Nazis won, then to be defeated in W.W.2, and never rise again. I know there are several neo-Nazi movements around today, but they are just maggots feeding off the rotting corpse of the Third Reich. What is happening today is that the latent Nazism is resurfacing in Hoggg in the Progressive left. I know Progressives are always calling their opponents Nazis, but this is also a Nazi propoganda techinique of the orginal Nazis of accusing your opponets of doing what you are doing. A good example of this is when the Progresseve Democrats accused President Trump of corruption in the Ukraine, while all the time it was their candidate that was leveraging taxpayer money to help himself and his family. Let me explain. Today's Progressives are not really classical Marxists. The trouble with Marxism is it was based on a stupid economic theory. An economic system that did not work. Today's Progressives have instead turned to a Fascist economic system. Big government controls big business through regulation, instead of nationalizing production. In return the government cushes big business, big tech., and the big bankers competition with laws and regulations. In this way they can keep the population subject to Hoggg. Also because Marxism had an economic system as its heart, the messianic class was factory workers, supposedly the most oppressed class. It was factory workers that were supposed to lead us to Utopia. This absurd theory was dropped, instead today's Progressives have substituted a racial (Nazi) theory in its place. Although, they have inverted it in several ways.Now it is whiteness instead of jewishness that is the problem. (Progressives still hate Jews. The Democratic party is rife with antisemitism from top to bottom.) So instead of "Jewishness" it is "Whiteness" that is the problem. The Nazis used to talk of Jewish science, Jewish history, etc. in a pejorative way, now the Progresseve left speaks of White science, history, civilization in the same way. It should not be hard to observe that Progressive of today owe more intellectual debt to Adof Hitler than Karl Marx. Although Hogg has kept some Marxist traits. The international character of the movement. which is now called globalism. The other prominent trait is that people living under the Progressives of today must keep up a steady stream of affirmations of the Progresseve value system, to constantly confirm their allegiance to Hoggg. When I was young, I was able to meet some people that had lived under both the Nazis and the Communists. I asked them what was the difference? They told me under the Nazis you could keep quiet, and they would not bother you. Under the Communists you had to keep up a steady stream of talk affirming how great Communism was. This is of course, a technique of mind control; to gain control of the voices in your head. Like when a popular song gets stuck in your head; Hoggg wants his voice to get stuck in people's heads. There are many parallels between modern America and the Weimar Republic. But do not lose hope, there are also many differences. The most important difference is the quality of Hoggg's tools.Today's Progressives are weak, stupid, soft cowards, a far cry frome the cunning, battle hardened veterans returning frome W.W.1. I would advise everyone to stay clear of the warring Egregores to today. So in parting I shall relate a story from the life of Gurdjieff. When Gurdjieff was leading his followers out of Revolutionary Russia, he had a piece of paper, on one side was a pass to get through the Red Army checkpoints and on the other side was a pass to get through the White Army checkpoints.

Fragment 27 continued

The box symbolizes the triumph of the subjective over the objective. Set has freed himself from the tyranny of the Egregores. The water of the Nile is also a chthonic symbol of the subjective swallowing up the objective. Then Isis and Nephthys rescue the box and hide Osires's body. When confronted by Set, Nephthys breaks and tells Set the location of the body. Set then cuts the body up into fourteen pieces. Remember Osires is the god of the outside order. The cutting up of the body represents turning the outside order into a number of abstractions, instead of a living whole. It is no longer the voice of the living god that rules people.but a number of dead abstractions. Isis and Nephthys now go on a search for the pieces of the body. They find all the pieces but the phallus (penis) which was eaten by a fish. The fish is another chthonic symbol of the subjective swallowing up the life of the objective order. Isis and Nephthys assemble Osiris and bring him back to life, but Osiris decides to stay dead becoming kthre judge of the dead. Osiris represents the outside order as and experience of abstractions or laws. The law is no longer a living, creative voice guiding people's lives, but a series of laws that people are judged by. To continue the story Isis uses her magic to become pregnant and give birth to Horus. Horus then defears his uncle Set and becomes Pharaoh. Horus rules by following the dead abstract voice of Osiris. This is of course the subjective self suppressing and repressing its own individuality to conform to the laws of the outside collective order. This probably also represents how every new Pharaoh had to suppress his individuality to become Horus. And so again the outside order rules over the land in Horus. I believe we are in an analogous time today of the breakdown of the Bicameral mind of the Bronze age. The R.H.P. paradigm is falling apart. The modern Crisis. It is time to create a left hand paradigm. The Aeon of Set is upon us.

Fragment 27

The last "Fragment" was inspired in part by "The Naked Ape" by Desmond Morris. In this "Fragment" some of the inspiration shall come from Julean Jaynes's book "The Origins of Consciousness in the Break Down of the Bicameral Mind", Do we shall continue with observing the development of consciousness. I will try to give a brief summary of Jaynes's theory of consciousness. Jaynes posits that the humans of the Bronze Age had a far different conscious mind than we do today. That instead of a conscious self reflective thought to guide their actions, that they were grided by audio hallucinations. In simpler terms, instead of thinking about a course of action, a voice identified with a god would tell them what to do. This was an age ruled by the Egrergores. It seems in the early Bronze Age humans and regularly gods conversed face to face. One only has to look at the arts and myths of the age to observe humans and gods talking. This dramatically changed around 1230 B.C. In the year 1230 B.C. the Assyrian King Tukulti-Ninurta had an alter made that is dramatically different than anything that had come before, Jaynes describes it thus: "In the carving on its face Tukulti is shown twice first as he approaches the throne of his god, and as he kneels before it. The very double image fairly shouts aloud this beggarly posture unheard of in a King before in history. As our eyes descend from the standing King to the kneeling King, just in front of him. it is emphatic as a moving picture in itself a quite remarkable artistic discovery. But far more remarkable is the fact that the throne before which this first cruel Assyrian conquers grovels is empty." So what happened to the gods? There are three theories of what happened to the gods. That the gods left gor reasons only known to them: the theological theory. That the gods were ancient alien astronauts, and left for reasons only known by them: The alien theory. And the third theory, that there was a change in human consciousness: Jaynes's theory. Jaynes goes on to describe brain anatomy, and the symptoms of schizophrenia to bolster his theory. Basically what he is saying is that the left brain hemisphere interprets the voices from the right brain hemisphere as the voices of external gods. That instead of consciously thinking humans were directed by the voice of their gods, and this only changed with the introduction of writing and larger and more complex social structures. Some of the evidence Jaynes produces to support this theory is" quite illuminating. Most human thinking to this day is done unconsciously. That is why solutions to problems often come about as inspiration; out of seeming nowhere. Like when suddenly a solution to a problem pops into our heads when we are doing something unrelated to the problem. As I said before most of our thinking is still done unconsciously. What Jaynes is saying is that Bronze Age humanity did not know how to think out their problems consciously. Instead they heard the voice of a god when the unconscious mind had come up with a solution. Another interesting theory of Jaynes's is that for the ancients reading was a psychedelic experience. That they hallucinated as they read. What Jaynes is saying is that by our standards Bronze Age people were unconscious. I do not think Jaynes needed to make his theory as strong as he did. I think most humans act and think unconsciously. The difference is now we have moved the voices we hear from outside to inside our heads. That except in exceptional cases, and mental illness we regard the voices of the Egregores as internal instead of external. And reading is still a hallucinatory experience. A primate staring at a page of printed symbols has nothing to do with the images and thoughts in the primates' mind. Of course, as I have said before our seperation of inside (subjective) and outside (objective) is a construct. All our experience is inside (subjective) experience. The difference is we have developed tools, like the law of noncontradiction to create the outside or the objective world. In the ancients there was only the external world, all emotions,and voices were all thought to be in the external world. As late as Empedocles we can observe that psychology and physics had not yet been separated. As I have said before it was Protagoras that separated inside (subject) from outside (objective).The thing with humans is that they gain competence before comprehension. And sometimes we never gain comprehension. We start doing or believing something long before we understand the 'why' and the 'how' . So humans were using the law of noncontradiction long before Paramenides and Protagoras explained what we were doing. Philosophers are more discovers than inventors. The other key part of Jaynes's theory, that the subjective self or "I" is created I am in total agreement with.The subjective self is a creation, and was first developed in the Bronze Age. Child psychologists tell us that humans develop a "Me" before an "I". The "Me" is when we view ourselves the third person. An example is when the mind's eye I see myself hunched over my desk writhing, as if from above. The "I" is the first person way of looking from the inside out, instead of the "Me" which is looking from the outside in. Ancient humans did not distinguish between inside and outside, emotions, voices, etc. were all thought to have an external source. Ancient humans found the crocodile scary, they were not scared of the crocodile. Scary was an external quality possessed by objects. Of course , they had not consciously, it is the default way that humans experience the world. This can be observed in children. Children often look to adults on how to interpret an experience. I have observed children looking to adults after a joke was told to figure out if they should laugh. During the Bronze Age humans were property of the gods. One can still observe this in Islam. Many muslims still today talk about being owned by Allah. Humans are the tools which the Egregores use to achieve their goals. It is interesting to note that almost all Bronze Age names are theophoric. they contain the name of a god. The names of the Egyptian Pharaohs are good examples. It is also during the Bronze Age that humans developed the quality of treachery. Many animals use deception. Examples would be birds mimicking the calls of other animals to trick them out of their food. Jaynes gives the charming example of a female chimp assuming a seductive pose in order to trick a male out of a banana. Treachery is different, to be treacherous one needs a more sophisticated form of consciousness, namely a subjective "I". A self that can pretend to like someone while plotting against them. One must have a subjective self to make such decisions, instead of a "Me" that is told what to do by the gods. I will have a lot more to say about this in future "Fragments". I know the reader is asking how do I bridge the gap between the last "Fragment" where I discussed our early hominid ancestors and the much more sophisticated consciousness of the Bronze Age. What happened that led to the new state of consciousness? The answer is that early humans started using audio signs to stand for things or actions. So when an instinct or desire called for a course of action. humans would hear the audio sign for the action as if from an external source. So if one felt thirsty the audio sign for drink would be heard. In the early Bronze Age the gods (Egregores) ruled humans undisturbed by the rebellious subjective selfs. The gods were masters and the humans were their slaves and property. Even to this day there is a great longing to recapture this state of affairs, Jaynes calls this state of affairs the Bicameral paradigm. This is of course, the origin of the modern Utopia psychoses. Where everyone would be united by hearing the same voice. There would be no need of a coercive government. No one would have to take any responsibility, everyone would be the collective property of the god. Modern progressives have of course substituted government for god. Progressives are always saying we are all owned by the government. This is why Jung claimed that the consciousness of early humans was held in thrall by the gods. I will have more on this in future "Fragments". I shall try to make this more clear by concluding with a myth that had its first development in the Bronze Age. The Osiris-Set-Isis-Nephthys-Horus myth. I will be following the Plutarch Version of the story. So let us begin with Osiris. In the ancient world Osiris was often identified with Jupitar. Both were Kingsthat ruled over humanity; they were the archetype of the god-king that ruled over a golden age. J. Bohme when discussing astrology says that Jupitar represents the outside order. According to the myth, Osiris and his fabulous wife Isis brought civilization to humans. They taught humans all the arts and sciences from writing to agriculture. Osiris had a younger brother, Set who was jealous of his older brother. So what is Set the god of? What does he represent? Set seems to be the god of many things thunder, the other, the Red lands, etc. His name is often associated with the destroyer,but destroyer of what? Maybe we could call him the god of alienation. This would seem to tie all the other things together. But more accurately Set is the god of the subjective self, or the "I'. Set is the destroyer of the outside order and the domination of the Egregores over humanity. He is also the god of freedom. It is interesting to note Set's connection with the Christian Devil, Both Set and the Devil walked out of Utopia.They refused to renounce their individuality for the collective. To go on with our story, Osiris is seduced by Nephthys (Set's wife) and becomes pregnant with Anubis. This was the last straw for Set. He vows revenge and becomes treacherous. He talks kindly to Osires while plotting against him. Remember to practice treachery one must have a subjective self. To move on with the story Set has a beautiful golden box or casket made, Set brings the box to a party that is being held to honor Osiris.Set tells everyone at the party that he shall give the box to anyone who fits in the box. Of course, Set had the made only to fit Osiris. Everyone at the party tries and fails to fit into the box. Finally Set gets Osiris to try the box, Osiris eits in perfectly. Then Set and his retainers close the box and nail it shut. And throw the box into the Nile. The box represents the distinction between the inside (subjective) and outside (objective) worlds. As I said humans do things and use techniques long before they understand what they are doing. It would not be till centuries later that Greek philosophers would rationally explain the distinctions and techniques. Lood how long Christianity was around until Agustine explained it to us. Myth was the highest form of consciousness at the time. As reasons uses abstractions, myth uses symbols. To be continued