Perhaps Dan will indulge me one last post in my series of 3, the power of 3 is something.
He’s gonna like this post.
I’m going to talk about the Apocalypse, but not as the literalists do, they don’t know.
“Apocalypse” comes from Greek, the original language of the Book of Revelation. It means “uncover, disclose, reveal.” In late 14th century Church Latin, it became “revelation.” In Middle English, its general sense was “insight” or “vision.” Its usage as “a cataclysmic event” is modern.
Moderns are lunkheads.
If you read OMF correctly, it is like a Tarot deck, it really is.
I’ve used it for years.
When Dan mentioned Hegel, it was a synchronicity for me.
Dan loves Hegel because he said history was at an end.
The soul is exhausted.
I don’t agree exactly.
It’s just changing.
Everything changes that we can know.
Hegel didn’t think there could be any further growth or development from his time on, there would be a contraction.
I agree there.
Hegel became maybe the first non-dual modern western philosopher, but I would say Heraclitus and his time started western philosophy from a non-dual perspective, it was just warped by Christianity.
This is why most moderns can’t make heads or tails really of the pre-socratics.
Hegel was not non-dual like Buddhism.
He achieved Neti Neti, thesis and negation, negation of the ego, “not this, not that.”
Taoism says doing not doing, wei wu wei.
This is how you get around ego.
This is how psychedelics work.
This is why we had the beats and the hippies.
Hegel saw the world was paradoxical, but the egoic mind sees this as self contradiction.
You have to use contradiction to unify what doesn’t make sense to the ego.
This is the unfortunate state of conservatives.
They are hopelessly lost in their duality.
Well, nothing is really hopeless.
But they won’t give up their guns until you take them from their dead hands.
That’s actually good.
Because I’m talking about god as death.
They are half right.
How can nirvana be samsara, doesn’t make sense to the modern mind.
I’ve spent the last 10 years baptizing myself in contradiction.
I’ve become quite comfortable and adept with it.
That’s really the only out you have.
People like scarz and GSB have no idea what I mean.
Maybe Dan does or maybe not.
Shrug.
Death is life.
This is how you hear what Jesus really meant.
To live, you must die and be born again.
He demonstrated this to the lunkheads, but they are blinded to it.
We are dead and alive simultaneously at this very moment.
Think about that long enough and your brain will shut off.
That’s a great outcome.
Because the ego is dead to the soul.
Those are abstractions for very complex processes.
You only glimpse the soul in the egos negation or sunset.
Fundamentalist religion is a religion of the ego.
It would sooner destroy the earth than be negated.
The Dark Night of the Soul shows the ego, it never really had any life.
God I remember that night, it was one night for me.
It was a literal journey through fire
and into death.
The ego lacks real being.
The ego realizes it’s already dead because it was never born.
It was a mask you put on.
That dark death is deathlessness though.
This is what Jesus I think meant.
When this happens, bam
the Absolute just appears!
It is always here, but you were masking it.
So the ego is not really destroyed, it’s reabsorbed, or integrated into a whole.
This is moving from hell to heaven you could say.
I’d say Eden, psychologically at least.
This is what Eden has always been, psychological.
Any good Rabbi would say the same.
They laugh at the Christian.
The lunkheads made it literal.
Being alive and dead is quite a feat, but what a revelation.
It’s balancing on the head of a pin.
This is what is revealed by Apocalypse.
Everything at once, just clicks!
The key is turned.
The door
is opened.
You want to open this door.
This is the portal.
This is the pearl.
Your life does change from being grounded in fear to security.
It’s a beautiful event and time in a life.
A wondrous, and at times, painful experience.
There is a massive influx of information the ego had been blocking.
For the world will spit you out.
Freedom from anxiety is a sign.
A cessation of conspiracy obsession is the proof of it.
Conspiracy theorists are really fearing what is behind every conspiracy, the reality of being alive and dead at the same time.
They are terrified, who is, the ghost is, the mirage.
U is a living mirage, a good case study.
He has no real substance.
But this state allows spontaneous action.
This is the great secret of the Taoists and martial arts.
Fear and desire united.
BOOM 🤯
Hegel achieved this philosophically.
He points the mind to non-duality.
Heidegger was a nihilist and atheist most of his life, but he became a Taoist.
He saw the problem of the post-modern ego very very well and spoke a lot about this existential shipwreck we are thrust into.
He saw we would become enslaved by technology to fill this void.
At the end of his life, he said only a god can save us.
Hegel say there was a confection coming.
He saw the lower death drive would trigger the higher death drive.
Die to be born again.
I’m not saying I agree completely with any of this, I experienced this higher death, or reintegration.
I can’t deny that.
Then I knew what Jesus meant.
I had thought I was born again, but I had not even begun to crack myself open.
This is the death of death.
Another way to see what we are going through now collectively.
They will try to destroy it all to justify their egoic desire for heaven.
Let’s hope the destruction is limited.
But if one has done as Jesus pointed to, it doesn’t matter really what happens to them.
You can’t kill the “All Always.”
Only the ghosts will be dissolved.
They created a false idol.
Humans can’t seem to help creating idols.
Enter Owen Barfield.
The first and last Inkling.
People show up to talk to Dan, but really, they should be talking to themselves.
I did.
But I was just comparing Dan to what I was telling myself.
I was negating myself.
The Inkling’s project revolved around the relation and tension between rationality and imagination. The Inkling’s were reacting against the hyper-rationality in England in their time, as exemplified through World War I and II, and taking cues from the Romantics to argue for the value of imagination. However, the argument was never for imagination instead of rationality, but the inter-relational dance between both rational faculties and imaginative faculties as two avenues in pursuit of truth.
In Saving the Appearances, Barfield argues consciousness has evolved along with the evolution of physical phenomena. Barfield says, “I do not perceive any thing with my sense-organs alone, but with a great part of my whole human being.” Representation then requires an embodied being situated in a context, and the context is a pre-requisite for transforming the unrepresented into the represented. If the other humans corroborating a collective representation are different in some way — Barfield points to myopia, dullness, or insanity — the representation of the intelligent individual may become the collective representation. He also claims the presumed intelligent, fully-abled human can determine a representation to be collective without the support of others through experience.
Now pay attention.
Much of what we take as reality actually consists of representations that are handed to us by those in power. They are not in fact collectively created, only collectively received. While we all receive collective representations as a consequence of growing up, learning to question or critically choose the collective representations is a hard-won skill and often relegated to those labeled academics, visionaries, or revolutionaries.
Your freedom must be won.
Collective representation, as he explains it, leads to Barfield’s articulation of participation, a term he borrows from philosopher Lucien Lévy-Bruhl and sociologist Émile Durkheim. He traces the arc of Western consciousness over the past 3000 years as a move from original participation into idolization and, hopefully, into final participation. But participation is often operating without our conscious input, and he claims, “it is characteristic of our phenomena…that our participation in them, and therefore also their representational nature, is excluded from our immediate awareness.” This is true for all participation except final participation, which by definition requires consciously engaging our representations.
Barfield further explains, “a representation, which is collectively mistaken for an ultimate — ought not to be called a representation. It is an idol. Thus the phenomena themselves are idols, when they are imagined as enjoying that independence of human perception which can in fact only pertain to the unrepresented.” In creating idols, we build objects which have their own independent existence and relate to us as humans in a very particular way which is completely constrained by our representation of them as objects. In our representations as idols, we cut ourselves off from participation because we set up phenomena as other than ourselves.
The antidote to idolatry is what Barfield calls final participation — what Gebser would call integral consciousness. Final participation requires a conscious experience of our participation with phenomena to point towards truth.
Revolutionaries must become creators.
I do think we are experiencing this shift.
It was the collective that woke me up and freed me from the manufactured reality.
We can’t go back, straight on into final conscious participation with the collective.
. 
️ from time to time. 
know? 
. 
and squawks like a chicken…
……. 
to be the One. 
. 
. 
by 
» Why are we here?
» The scariest character in all fiction
» WRATH OF THE GODS/TITANS
» Uanon's Majikal Misery Tour "it's all smiles on the magic school bus"
» What Music Are You Listening To ?
» Livin Your Best Life
» OMF STATE OF THE UNION
» Baudrillardian hauntology - what are some haunting truths to our reality?