The Cloak of Religious Zeal

Many a times I thought how can one explain to the critics of religion that what lies at the heart of religion, the inward truth of which religion is only an outward expression, has nothing to do with the heinous acts done under a cloak of religious zeal, that such acts are of men oblivious to the principle and not of the principle itself. Never I found a response better than one offered by William Law:

“Would you know whence it is that so many false spirits have appeared in the world, who have deceived themselves and others with false fire and false light, laying claim to information, illumination, and openings of the divine Life, particularly to do wonders under extraordinary calls from God? It is this: They have turned to God without turning from themselves; would be alive to God before they are dead to their own nature. Now religion in the hands of self, or corrupt nature, serves only to discover vices of a worse kind than in nature left to itself. Hence are all the disorderly passions of religious men, which burn in a worse flame than passions only employed about worldly matters; pride, self-exaltation, hatred and persecution, under a cloak of religious zeal, will sanctify actions which nature, left to itself, would be ashamed to own.”

William Law 

The Inverted World

Dated September 26th, 2013

It has appeared to me that all things have undergone a reversal of meaning. Morality is not the only case of this reversal. Meanings of all things have been inverted. I am very much curious to know about the cause of this reversal of all meanings.

Reality has precedence and is absolute, while consciousness is antecedent and emergent. While things are the other way around, consciousness being the absolute and reality being the emergent phenomenon.

Our world is not in need of more philanthropists; our world is not in need of more human and environmental activists. Our world needs no more stitching of this dysfunctional whole with loose fibers of an old rationality. Our world needs no more UNGAs, for the cost of flushing the shit of world leaders can still feed an innumerous unfed. And our world needs no more empathy of its West for its East or of anyone else for that matter. We need no more reporters of people’s misery and misfortune; we need no more analysts and readers and pseudo-intellectuals who consume our timelines like crawling worms feeding their inverted egos.

Our world is inverted because the men and women of our age all of sudden have become concerned about the rest of the world, forgetting their own decaying minds and thoughts: An age in which the grand reversal of values, the machines for the mass production of images and profiles, made every so-called educated person into an accountant of pains and poverties of the rest of the world rather than an active agent dismissing of a time wasted on rotting chairs.

Everything of our world is inverted in its meaning; its good and evil, its better and worse, its rich and poor, and above all its thinking. The reversal of its morals shook the insight of Nietzsche; but in our world the world itself, too, is inverted. It is in such a world that our empathy is more dangerous than our apathy, for it can exceed the latter in its power of destruction. Our world is a world of speculative thinkers: But how did the rational core of true thinking transform into the erotic speculations of those who think that they think, and worst of all rationally?!

Our world is in need of a new rationality, a rationality grounded in and capable of respecting the absolute given: The human consciousness. Our world is in need of a new rationality standing on the absolute truth of human intuition, on the strict relevancy and subordination of our sciences and philosophies to the needs of human existence. Our world is in need of a new rationality which was born by that philosopher of change but hijacked by the accelerating pace of our positive sciences, by Reformation and the French revolution, by the careless polarization of the world into the West and the East.

A rationality incapable of filling the gap between the axioms of pure mathematics and the positive facts of that inverted rationality is no rationality at all. A rationality in which the world is the ground and consciousness its emergent property is no rationality at all. A rationality that can’t validate itself on its own grounds is no rationality at all.

Our world is way past the point of making possible the project of the Genealogy of Morals: Our world is in need of a genealogy of our suspicious rationality.

This world is both upside down and inside out; no wonder we cannot find our way back to the ground.

“Don’t invest in people; people are broke. Invest in yourself; you are not people.”

Truth & Madness

Dated August 21st, 2013

The question rose, in spite of my instinctual optimism, whether humanity and its civilization was essentially masochistic and self-destructive! Aside from its limitless consumption of its own limited resources, which is just a soft touch compared to what follows, I find above all most destructive the pursuit of knowledge. The destructive element here is that this whole pursuit of knowledge, starting from antiquity, is motivated by this prejudice, that certainty is essentially better and superior to uncertainty. How is this prejudice and preference justified I don’t know! What is clear is that the systematic pursuit of knowledge for its own sake and not necessarily for human practical purposes is charged with this preference for certainty over uncertainty. And such preference is sought to its highest degree such that we’re not even content to some relative or practical level of certainty; rather, truth, the real truth, ought to be that which enjoys APODICTIC certainty. The achievement of this APODICTIC certainty is the ultimate goal of any true science or philosophy if it’s to be firmly grounded in evidence. Now, the very fact that it’s a pursuit implies that the truth is not yet known; even if we have some vague idea of our orientation and methodology, we never know beforehand the exact nature of the truth we’re going to attain, for otherwise the pursuit would not be necessary at all.

Now the problem is this: We, as stubborn scientists and philosophers, are after some apodictic truth and we never know beforehand what it will turn out to be. What if, just assuming, and what if we come upon such apodictic truth and know it apodictically such that there is no way to turn away from it or to ignore it, and what if it turns out that the truth is that it’s all bullshit, that it was all from the very beginning our own constructs, intellectual traps, that really the whole world and everything in it, including the questions, truths, doubts, certainties and uncertainties, cosmos, god, and everything that can possibly exist or not exist, was put there by ourselves! Let’s just assume; we then see as truth that it was all just a carrot on a stick and we were the stick, and even our stickness was put there by ourselves. We come to see apodictically that we were nothing from the beginning but a constituting thing, which cannot itself be or become anything because it is itself the origin and condition of thingness, and we realize that our being is in fact our constantly constituting nature and nothing else; and part of what we have constituted, namely showing up as our human selves, has immersed itself in the rest of our constitutions as if we were really out there in the world!

What if we come to see and grasp all this apodictically?! There is no way of turning back; there is no way of unseeing and unlearning what we’ve seen and learnt. What if our pursuit of certain and apodictic knowledge leads to the point I just mentioned?! We don’t know if it won’t, but if it does then we’re fucked in the strictest sense of the word. Would we then rather not know anything with absolute certainty, wishing we had never initiated that masochistic and irreversible journey which consisted in undermining the certainties we had in search of those we didn’t! It’s too late now, for apodictic certainty by its nature can’t be erased or undone. Then are we ready to embrace this new species of madness and psychosis, to forget that we now know that it’s all nonsense, especially that we now know that it was all things of our own making and doing! So you insatiable mankind, beware of what you ask for, or else the real, terminal psychosis could be your next and last moment.

Hypnotised by The Intricate Play of Consciousness

Where We Are Wrong

We have come to believe that there actually exists a real work in which we actually exist. We call it the external world; we experience and know this world through our senses. This external world exists independently of our experience of it. Experience is subjective while the world is objective. The world has independent existence; we and our consciousness have emerged as a result of the natural processes inside this world. We see ourselves as this species called humans. We find existence a peculiar thing and struggle to make sense of it. Religion, science, and philosophy are the three traditions that have arisen in order to address this existential dilemma.

Where we are wrong is where we misunderstand consciousness and experience:

We think that the world exists independently of our experience of it; but this thought itself is part of our experience of the world.

We think consciousness is a product of nature; but nature is something always already known through consciousness.

We think we are beings inside an external world; but we derived the notion of external world from inside the contents of our consciousness.

The world that we think contains consciousness is a world itself always already contained and known in and through consciousness.

That we are human beings having an experience of a world is itself part of what is experienced. That there is a cosmos extending beyond the scope of human consciousness is itself the content of consciousness.

It doesn’t matter what acts of cognition are involved, whether theorizing, experimenting, speculating, inferring, etc. There is nothing but experience; even the very idea that this experience is a human experience inside a world is itself part of the experience. That a real world exists external to our consciousness is itself something known in and through consciousness.

There is nothing outside consciousness. If we claim that there is something outside consciousness we must see that the very knowledge “there is something outside consciousness” is something inside consciousness. The whole of human existence and its external reality are contents of consciousness.

Consciousness is not a human consciousness; humanity and its world are only contents of this consciousness. It is in principle, both theoretically and empirically, impossible to posit that something exists, or can exist, outside or independently of consciousness, for only a consciousness can know and say such a thing which entails it to be a content of consciousness, and hence immanent.

From this perspective there is no existential problem; there is no human dilemma; there is only experience; and we are in reality the absolute subject and not a human person, for to say that we are not the absolute subject entails that we are the absolute subject; only an absolute subject can say absolutely that it is not an absolute subject; how else could we possibly know that we are not! Only an absolute subject can deny itself; only god can be an atheist. All arguments, evidence, etc. are things experienced; it is pointless to use them to account for experience or its origin. Experience has no origin, for origin is itself a notion experienced. We are all that there is.

Existence as Misunderstanding

How we perceive the world tells something about us and not the world.

World is essentially nothing other that the outward reflection of inward perception as I am myself nothing other than the inward reflection of outward perception.

To overcome the infinite regress implied by the apparent bipolarity of experience we can only posit a non-dual substratum. This substance as experience has two modes of Being: Immanence and Transcendence, Identity and Ecstasy, Inwardness and Outwardness.

Experience when objectifies itself into itself is the self, the empirical ego. Experience when objectifies itself out of itself is the world, the empirical reality. Thus, self and world are the two modes of Being, or excitation, of one and the same thing: I am the Yin and World is the Yang, or something like that.

The unity and identity of the two aspects of experience becomes obvious upon my reflection on experience: I see that I can never truly isolate myself from the world; I can’t put a well-defined boundary between myself and the world. The world that I perceive and know is the world that always already contains me in it. I also perceive myself as something already embedded in the world. World is always world as I see it. I am always what I am in the world, as something that is in the world. Thus if we resist the temptation to name names we can see that “I am nothing other than the world and the world is nothing other than me. It is always concepts that give us the illusion of distinction and separation. Pre-reflective experience is always a whole; it can’t be reduced to part and still be experience.

World is always my world; if I experience the world to be something shared with others it is still my world that is shared with others. When I am not neither is the world nor are the others.

This “I” however is not the personal “I.” “I” is essentially nothing; it has no character, no personality, no identity, no career and no resume, no income and no outcome; it is itself unemployed, yet without it no employment can ever be; it is itself nobody, yet without it no one can ever be.

This “I” is the not a thing but rather a verb: It is the experiencing. It is never anything that is experienced; it can’t be known since it is itself the very act of knowing. What is known is always other than the “I,” for the what is known is always something know by that which is other than itself. The “I” is only that for which world can be. Thus, there exists only one “I.” We are only different ways that this “I” pronounces itself. We are only utterances, existing briefly, some heard some not, but we are all the same in that we are all always on our way toward oblivion. Only the utterer is, indifferently staring into the withdrawal of the utterance into thin air.

Existence is just a misunderstanding.

Addiction to the World

Man is addicted to the world. Modernism was the last enabler. Postmodernism is the leading cause of man’s overdose on world.

Postmodernism is man’s rock bottom; it is the lowest we could ever go; it is the ultimate demise of the intellect whose worst symptom is the now fashionable atheism. Postmodernism is where man would do whatever it takes to get a fix; values are so low that Justin Bieber has more followers than you do and I have more followers than god does.

It is only in such a rotted state of affairs that an idiot like Richard Dawkins has as many fans as Kardashians. Let this tell you something about these hypocrite fans of science who have found the elixir to transform their insecurity into pride, inward ignorance into outward arrogance, misunderstanding into understanding, atheism into fact.

Soon man is going to overdose on world, thus opening the way for the coming of the overman, one who neither affirms nor denies but asserts and makes it so, for he is none other than truth itself.

Bondage is the New Fashion

The world we see is the way we see the world.

In reality there is no world-in-itself; there is only worldview:

In every historical era power institutions run by self-proclaimed elites rise and pronounce their worldviews to coincide with the world-in-itself. But they don’t conform to what is; they make what is to conform to them. They come to dominate the ideology, and hence the identity of the masses by a sedating advertisement of new lures and values; they are the producers of intellectual fashions. By the law of inertia, the highest interest of a power institution is self-interest.

No method of domination and social control is more effective than dominating the self-perception and the world-perception of people. Once the power center takes control of determining the world picture, then it has taken control of the world itself.

By advertising their methods and theses to be in the interest of the mass these institutions make their worldviews to stand for the world-in-itself. These institutions are world-impersonators; they are monstrous impostors representing righteous modes of thought and conduct. By determining from above what should and what shouldn’t be thought they determine what is seen and what is not seen.

So far there have been two major historical eras each dominated by one such power institution: First came religion and its churches, and now has come science and its academia. Ironically, neither of them had to enforce their rules and regulations. Instead, they presented themselves in society with so honest and caring a face that their unquestionable authority crept into the subconscious of the masses. Their brilliant method actually made every man and woman to choose to freely advertise for their masters and to propagate the new ideology into the remotest corners.

In each era the dominant ideology was intentionally advertised to represent literacy and to stand for class and intelligence. This turned the new ideology into a new social-intellectual fashion. As a result, people were by nature, for the sake of self-interest and self-image, inclined toward a blind acceptance and obedience of the dominant ideology. Then was religion; now is science; and the mass is doing a great job sleepwalking the new worldview until it breaks down in favor of another.