Freedom vs. Antidisestablishmentarianism
Sign up for your free 10-day trial of our Members Section LEARN MORE
We’re living in extreme times when the big Other is practicing a very radical form of antidisestablishmentarianism—I never thought I’d be able to use that word actually in a discourse—but what it means is that the “Deep State” and its puppet media and talking heads of the official party line have established a church, and it’s the church of pseudoscience, and anyone who is against that establishment, they are against, and they will censor and eliminate, sometimes with extreme prejudice.
So, you are not allowed to have perspectives different from those which are accepted by the church as its dogma—whether that concerns the value of masks, of lockdowns, of the safe and effective injections, or going even deeper into germ theory, virology, and the whole question of medical science in its allopathic form—none of that can be questioned without suffering consequences of excommunication—literally, they won’t be able to communicate via the media—or worse.
But the party line is now expanded beyond simply the church of pseudoscience, and now it’s the church of Russophobia. And so, you know, you have to be against everything and everyone Russian—whether it’s Russian novels or Russian films or Russian music, it doesn’t matter—they are now the villains who have been demonized, and you’re not allowed to have any other opinion.
So, in a way, this is how a system extends its functioning in the face of massive contradictions: it represses the contradictions; it attempts to make them unseeable, unknowable, by being ridiculed, or completely eliminated, marginalized by the power of the hive mind to deter you from even being curious about other positions, because that would clearly put you in the camp of an enemy of the state. And so there is a very hard line that is faced by everyone who begins to approach perspectives that are outside of the mainstream, and a kind of fear, a paranoid fear, not an entirely irrational one, that comes up for many people, because you’re stepping outside the bounds of what is permitted to know.
Well, the same thing that happens now in the external world happens also in the internal world, right? As above, so below; as without, so within. And so the ego today, in its current most, let’s say, savagely self-fragmented form, cannot stand its own contradictions. And so it must repress them, and it must assert to itself a sense of certainty, even when it’s completely not certain and could not be certain about its course of action—but that feeling of not knowing is so unbearable, so horrifying, so dreadful, that one has to pretend one knows. And so that state of being, the sujet supposé savoir, right, the one who is assumed to know, is the position that the ego takes, which is what we call “Master’s Discourse”—or what Lacan called “Master’s Discourse”.
This state is one in which you can question everything except your own perspective. You can question everything except the belief system, which is the basis of your point of view. But you are not allowed to question your own point of view, because if you do, then the ego begins to shatter. It can’t handle that kind of interrogation that makes it realize that its beliefs are imagined, that they have no basis in the Real. And it’s because every ego, in its current form, is based in the imaginary, and it’s riddled with contradictions; it cannot piece those contradictions without the fear of shattering, the fear of coming apart in a way that it could never put itself together, because there isn’t a fragment that’s free of contradictions that can integrate all of those. And so the ego becomes more and more hardened and defended against the truth, and against the Real. And its pseudo-reality tunnel becomes reinforced against any light coming in that would threaten its illusory certainty.
We can see this in the way that the dharmas have unfolded in time. So we have the Adi Sanatanan Dharma, which means “ancient, original dharma”—right, of the gods and goddesses of Sat Yuga—and in that time, there were no egos, and so the dharma there was without contradiction, because there were literally no egos interrupting the dream that was the Mind of God in its purity. And in Treta Yuga, you had a minor glitch of a differential between the Real and the soul, but very minor, because the soul is still, as the moon is to the sun, capable of capturing the reflection of the light—even though it’s no longer the light itself, it’s able to reflect it in a way that provides a unified field of consciousness that can grasp and work through the unfoldment of the phenomenal plane, with a whole mind that’s not yet split.
And then in the later yuga, you get the arrival of the ego—Dwapar, that means “two powers”—now the soul and the ego are on separate platforms. And in Kali Yuga, the ego gains total dominance, and the soul is repressed, as is the Real, beyond the soul, and the ego, then, as Kali Yuga develops, splits itself more, it fractures more and more, becoming more complex, and in its complexity, more capable of understanding complexity, which allows the development of technology; because technology requires that ability to analyze the complexity. But what it loses is the real meaning of science, real meaning of knowledge, because it can no longer integrate its own consciousness in with the focus upon the objectivity of phenomena. The subject is repressed, and the focus is on substance—but substance only as in the form of matter, not the real sub-stance, what is under matter, which is consciousness itself.
And so we get a pseudoscience that cannot understand either consciousness or matter, ultimately, because it doesn’t understand the true nature of matter, but it can understand the particular interactions that happen within the field of consciousness that is a tiny sliver of the whole that is made up of the “Higgs Field”, so-called, and the quantum unified field which produces the illusion of a cosmos. However, as the ego fragments more and more, so does that cosmos. Things make less and less sense as the ego fractures more and more, and its own internal contradictions become more and more visible.
We actually see that in the history of philosophy itself in the West. If we start with one of the early modern philosophers, Emmanuel Kant, his whole magnum opus, The Critique of Pure Reason, was about how do we deal with what he called the “antinomies of reason”, which he discovered that when you try to think about anything and think it all the way through—“How was the world created? What is consciousness? What’s the relationship of mind to matter?”, and all of that—that you end up with a mass of contradictions, antinomies, paradoxes, but things do not make sense.
And so the antinomies of reason become a real irritant in Western thought, and it’s ultimately what destroys the whole philosophical tradition which reaches a dead end in the twentieth century. But first it has to go through Hegel, and Hegel comes to the conclusion that, given the state of consciousness, there is no way to resolve contradictions—the contradictions will continue to come because that is the nature of the world. Reality, as a world is inherently contradictory. You can’t get beyond it. Kant was hoping that there was a way. Hegel said, “No, there is actually no way. We have to accept that there are contradictions that are irresolvable in the world.” But he did say there is one option, one possibility, which is the realization of what he called “Absolute Spirit”. And in Absolute Spirit, when that manifests, when your consciousness gains the intelligence of the Absolute, all contradictions will be resolved, and that will be the end of history. OK? And that was his prediction, his prophecy.
But then you get to Kurt Gödel, who discovers the same fact, the same truth is present in mathematics—any mathematical system, any system of thought, will reach a point of failure, of either inconsistency or incompleteness, or both—a point where you will not be able to answer a question, you will not be able to find any response except one that will be contradictory, that will make the whole system not make sense. And that’s true of arithmetic, or it’s true of trigonometry, or it’s true of mathematics as a whole—and it’s true of logic, the Logos itself. And this is an extremely important development in the history of thought.
However, there is one possibility which is, again, the realization of the Intelligence that is always beyond any system that it produces. It cannot be systematized, because as soon as it is reduced to a definite system, that defining of the infinite will create an inadequacy. You cannot have completeness in any system, and that includes the system of language. So our own thoughts are subject to the same principle of contradiction.
So we talked about the Four Dharmas…