Saturday, January 28, 2012

What did Lot's Wife Turn to See? (a poem 24)
© Eso A. B., 2012

What did Lot’s wife  turn to see
Before she turned into a pillar of salt?
What did Kurtz see
Before he screamed “The Horror! The Horror?”
What did Princes Ismene  see
Before she fled Thebes
To write “King Oedipus?”

Oh, dear! for the hindsight of it all!
Who has gone with it into the future?

What if the hindsight of the future is
More of the same in the past:
More pillars of salt, more horrors.
More skull racks?

If the future comes today,
Seven billion skulls will bleach the beaches;
All washed up by the waters of our washing machines
Spilling microplastic debris, not sand
mixed with sea algae and and fishbones
oicked clean by seagulls.

Yes, the bastard did divorce grandmother,
But would not divorce the second time,
Because of the money he stood to lose
to his new mirror of self.
He was a Lot his own fate,
Hands tied and more.

Friday, January 27, 2012

Apostle Obama. (23)
The Moon Goddess.
© Eso A. B., 2012

The separation of religion from secular and state power in Western societies can be traced to secular atrocities against religion, which—to this writer’s mind—had its beginning with the incineration of St. Basil on the Hippodrome in Constantinople-Istanbul.

According to Russian historian and mathematician Anatoly Fomenko, severe critic of the Scaligerian chronology promoted by the Catholic Church, the auto-da-fe (act of faith) of Basil-Christ occured in the 12th century. The last openly Christian human sacrifice occurred in 1802 in Spain.

Closer to our time and, therefore, more familiar is the separation of religion from secular politics in America, stipulated by the 1st Amendment of the Constitution (1787).
As part of a continuing attempt to turn “secularism” into a “religion”, the separation continues to be maintained by the  U.S. Supreme Court, which maintains an “absolute” separation between its “law-making” and those opposed to secular absolutism.
In short, while the courts assert that “religion” today is “free”, the body of separated “religion” itself is kept in a kind of zip-bag the police carry around for dead. The phrase “separation of church and state”, goes back to a letter of Thomas Jefferson, in which he uses the phrase: "wall of separation between church and state".
Given that over two hundred years have passed since church and state
 have been more or less separated, it is clear by now (to those interested in such matters) that the wonder of the secular state (democracy) is none other than a “lawful” secular dictatorship.

Alas, the “new” religion is every bit as gruesome as rolling enemy corpses down the steps of the Aztec Templo Mayor. Of course, in our day the “act” of sacrifice lacks the presence of a priest offering the victim to kiss a crucifix. The death of the sacrifice usually occurs at some distance from the executioner—perhaps a hundred yards from him—by bullet. Sometimes, a pro forma religious ritual may take place afterward in places where “religion” retains its charismatic hold on the common people and they retain a subjectivity individuated by their religion and poverty., when compared to the subjectivity of, say, a “modern artist” who has surrendered his-her subjectivity to the state”, aka a museum. No doubt, there are occasions, when an artist is naïve of the political process by which his and her subjectivity is conjoined to and becomes identical with that of the state, which on a superficial level, they may indeed reject. The tool of this take-over of the subjectivity of the artist and his audience is (did you forget?) money and the status it buys for itself  as a God not yet put in doubt.

The discovery that artistic integrity and subjectivity may be compromised has caused (2012) money and those who have it, to take on projects, which aim to change the “old” subjectivity of humankind utterly. Of course, those who do so have no way of telling what the ultimate consequences will be. The project is provocatively cynical, because it is determined entirely by the interests of money and those behind it.

However, the project is not so well hidden as its perpetrators presume, if only because money is a virus that infects every human brain, even one that that has no idea of the difference between an individual’s subjectivity and the state’s alleged objectivity. The first crack in what the moneyed wish to keep hid, appeared when an establishmentarian news agency, CNN, and its reporter Lou Dobbs, a career journalist, who dared to bring up some of the plans of “The Money Establishment” (ThME, aka banks) during prime time news. The report concerns NAFTA or the North American Free Trade Agreement, an agreement that would link Canada, America, and Mexico into one governmental entity known as North American Union.

Apparently the subjective mind of the majority of Americans is not as receptive to the idea (no doubt, many psychologists and polls helped analyze the nature of America’s subjectivity). Therefore, the individuals who constituted the subjective mind of ThME, said by some to be TheBilderbergGroup, which membership consists of some of the more wealthy and powerful individuals of our time in the Western World, pulled a “white rabbit” out of the hat: Barak Obama, a U.S. senator from the state of Illinois.
At the time, there were many speculations, why it was Obama over Hillary Clinton, the latter a sure shoe in—it it came to Hillary actually running for the U.S. Presidency and people voting, because apparently her subjective orientation was close to that of a majority of Americans.

Instead of Hillary, America was offered a candidate with roots that reached more into the subjectivity of America’s black population, one who was ambitious for himself without commitments to anything that could not be covered by the fogs of advertisement, with a subjectivity cynical in the extreme (as sentimental democrats found out soon after the election was over), and backed by wealthy  Saudi Arabians
While the outward appearance of presidential candidates may be considered froth of cynical politics, a more profound subversion by the ThME forces surfaces in the plot sd told by a Russian television story, which is certainly worth paying attention to.
Most everyone knows that the Money Virus is not new, but has been shaping the World Order in a very direct manner (i.e., with the direct aid of violence) for over two hundred years, at least from early 18th century on. The age of Enlightenment began from about 1700 on and does not yet presume itself to have come to an end—even if its end is envisaged by groups such as the Bilderbergs.

What stands in the way of TheME (The Money Enterprise) are the subjectivities of “old” religions, 1) that of the Israelis; 2) that of the Christians, and 3) last, but not least, that of the Muslims.

I The Israeli nation, under the control of  Zionist politicians, with a strong Zionist led lobby (AIPAC) effecting the interests of American oligarchs, does not serve ThME’s interests in the North American Nation.

II The Christians, under the control of U.S. Fundamentalists, though in fact helpful to the cause of ThME, is, nevertheless, a long-term obstacle, because it hides (now in the deepest part of its closet) the notion (of Jesus Basil) that human kind is essentially an egalitarian entity and, therefore, Christianity will never be sufficiently cynical to suit TheME rule on planet Easrth over the long term.

III The Muslim oligarchs, with their control of Oil Money, have as great an interest in securing for the Muslim world a secure a place on our planet as the Chinese, Russians, and Americans appear to have.

In sum, a cynical individual, a weak Muslim, and an ungrounded American fits the current interests of ThME, the Money Virus, most,  because Obama’s ambition blinds him no less that the ambition of Oedipus once blinded him to the fact that (in the end) he is a patsy and scapegoat of his mother.

Though the interests and power of the moneyed and VIPs are not to be belittled, their goal of attaining for themselves a planet that is “globalized” under their aegis, is full of great risks, not least of which is Armageddon for humankind as a whole. In short, the demand of the Environbmentalists and Greens for an Earth that has no more than a billion or two people, may well be on the reverse side of the ThME coin.

We may speculate that the survivors of the catastrophe that is likely to follow on the heels of a failed WW3, will demand that any future government is led by a self-sacrificial leader, who through committing and conjoining life and service may gains for himself the subjective  authority that will  speak to and for all.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

An Autobiographical Hindsight.  (22)
A Whirlpool Cloud.
© Eso A. B., 2012

I was born in a small country called Latvia. Though I hold dual citizenship, the other being that of the U.S., and lived there fifty-one years, I tend to identify with Latvia more than my adopted country. This is one of the reasons why at the age of sixty-two, several years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, I returned to Latvia and have lived here for more than sixteen years now.

I returned to Latvia in 1995. This coincided with a time when many Latvians begun to be seriously disillusioned with the economy of their country and were emigrating to other European countries. One man had already committed a demonstrative (against government corruption) suicide in front of the Freedom Monument in Riga in 1993. Many more were hanging themselves quietly in their apartments and country sheds. Soon after I arrived, a friend, a doctor, committed suicide  by swallowing barbiturates and downing them with alcohol.

A question often heard from my Latvian neighbors was: “What are you doing here?” The question was questioning, implicitly, my sanity.

A frank answer is: “I am here, because I am of retirement age. I have no family. I inherited some property in Latvia, which when sold, brought  me additional income. I also prefer a rural environment. I find cities (other than museums, theatres, and movie houses) stressful, and my resources of inheritance reinvested in the countryside could help create for me a rural haven. Until the recent economic and financial collapse, I could also afford to buy enough books to create for myself a small English language library. I also enjoy countryside people, especially if I can be of help to them, which is one way of making their acquaintance that is risky.  Hearing of the troubles and problems of people soon gave me an intimate insight of Latvian society—as it had become since I left it when eleven years old. I would not have gained such an insight living in the city.  Not least, as a result of the events that followed the Soviet occupation of Latvia and my experiences during WW2, I had become a sceptic of  modern society—in spite of the claims to the contrary.

My scepticism of society came to possess me, while I was still young, in the immediate aftermath of 1939, when I was only six. Not that I knew anything of politics at that age, however, through the disappearance and imprisonment of most of my close family and sitting and sleeping next to packed suitcases for a week or more, I came to see society with negative emotions and saw it as composed of forces that had little or no interest in communal bonds, which—as far as I could tell— were being replaced by money and guns, and angels had metal wings and dropped bombs.

Though the background of my family was oligarchic in nature and consisted of people who were sympathetic to same, I grew up rejecting liberal economics. Even if  up to the age of seven, I lived a sheltered life in upper bourgeois circumstances, I soon understood the inequality of this and never came to accept arguments which declared equality unnatural.

The bourgeois outlook began to influence my paternal family with the beginning of the 20th century. This was largely based on my grandfather’s and step grandmother’s successful newspaper business (begun 1911). That was a time when Riga, Latvia’s capital city, was still dominated by Baltic Germans. It is probable, even if not with a 100% certainty,that ‘modern’ and ‘progressive’ is also traceable to the aftermath of the Great Northern War (ended 1710), when my forebears from my paternal side arrived in Latvia as Herrnhuters. Their mission was to morally rearm the war devastated Latvian peasantry. Not so many years ago, when I had my DNA analyzed, I was surprised to discover that my closest genetic relatives lived in Bosnia, Herzegovina, northern Italy, and Bulgaria, and that general area of Europe. In effect, my grandfather’s and greatgrandfather’s German orientation was to be traced to the times of the Habsburgs. My connection to “religion” was by way of the Herrnhuters, which explains how after Herrnhutists went out of fashion, my grandfather chose to became a school teacher and a choir conductor in the middle of a kind of no man’s land, the peasantry. Of course, in his days, the countryside contained most of the country’s people.  

From my mother’s side of the family came links to Russian nobility, the knazi Ral and Kugushov families with estates in the Tombova region. My mother was born in Ufa, a Russian city at the foot of the Ural mountains.

Shortly before I turned eight years old, the material circumstances that favored the oligarchic and bourgeois orientation radically collapsed. The Soviets took over the family’s  newspaper business and confiscated our home. Therefore, one day (1940), my father drove all of his family to a farm in Ergli. The farm belonged to the sister of his mother, my aunt Emma. Her family name was “Jurjan”, which I came to associate with Gorgan in Iran. While there is no certainty that my association is correct, I made it on the basis that many in the family had black hair with frizzy and curly sideburns. I also knew that the letter J, pronounced Y in Latvian, could elsewhere appear written as the letter G, as in Yuri and eorge. In any event, this began my acquaintance with life in the Latvian countryside, where the economic norm was not far from that of life in a subsistence economy—in spite of the fact that my aunt’s farm was by no means a small one.

In the space of the year left before the start of WW2, I learned to become a cowherd and shepherd (25 cows and 35 sheep). Within that same period, I also lost eight members of my extended family due to imprisonment by the Soviet government or deportations to Stalin’s gulags. Though three of said eight people survived the war and the gulags, I never  saw any of them again.

My separation from all those who had at one time been part of my “family” was due to my early decision not to commit myself to a “career”, which, again, was largely a result of having no financial back up (the residual wealth was stolen by a distant family member, less of the Latvian than the Habsburg Empire line of family descent) and suffering from war induced psychological trauma that I had to overcome on my own. After arriving in America (I was sixteen years old, which was old enough not to be able to forget the past), I found it difficult to adjust to American indifference to the events in the rest of the world. Indeed, I found this indifference indecent. Such inner haughtiness encouraged me to develop an interest in wanting to learn the causes of what had caused (and what continues to cause) violence.

At the time, the only way that I could imagine to learn all this was by gaining for myself a life of “freedom”, which would allow me uninhibited time to search by reading and study. I did not interpret ‘study’ at this time as academic. Rather, because of the family background in the newspaper business and home tutoring, I imagined that I would do this as a “writer”. I felt a distinct fear from becoming entangled in life through a career. Instead, I felt more comfortable being exposed to society as a  ‘jobber’, that is, if I earned my living by doing various kinds of “jobs”, be they what they may. The latter allowed me—as long as there was a job to be had--to pay my way, bypass a family and a professional career, and allowed me to devote my “freedom”, to try realize my ambition to become a “writer”, which writing, I did not identify with writing novels. In some ways, I was continuing the subsistence economic way of life and the relative freedom this monkish way provided.  This was in sharp contrast to my friends, all of who became more or less successful lawyers, engineers, doctors, chemists, corporation representatives in foreign lands, and so on.

Due to “winging it” and relying on my ability to discipline myself to hold to my idealistic course, I soon abandoned my formal studies at an Northeastern University in Boston. I was enrolled there to stury engineering on my mother’s advice, though I had no interest in engineering whatsoever. When ‘engineering’ became intolerable, because of its failure to hold my interest, I continued my “search” by joining (1953) the U.S. Marine Corps. This was during the time of the Korean War.

Having dropped out of the university (I had no idea what field of study would gain me the information I sought), little by little, I fluffed out my education by reading whatever books came my way and appeared interesting to me.

For many years, my life moved on in roughly five and ten year cycles. I eventually discovered that the greatest hindrance to my self-development was the pietistic orientation of “religion” (the only one I was familiar with from my Latvian background), which kept me for many years from reading books on religious matters that had not yet exhausted their social status and still held my interest. While I remain committed to a  “religious outlook” as opposed to a  “secular outlook”, I am grateful to the circumstances (my self-willed commitment to “learning” managing to stay with me—no doubt with thanks due to my Baltic German nannies in early childhood) that extracted me from the passive sentimentality of modern religious orthodoxy where today’s society continues to be mired.

By the age of sixty-two, I had exhausted my possibilities as a “free man” living out on the limb. By that time, I had discovered myself not to be much of a joiner of groups, rather one who preferred to explore and do things on his own. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990-91 offered me a chance to reconnect to a past that had been torn from me so many decades before.

My interest in becoming a “writer” had by this time morphed into a desire to become “knowledgeable” in the political forces that are or might be necessary to keep society united and not-violent at the same time. This interest led me, in turn, to become knowledgeable in the mythologies of earlier civilizations. As a result of my finding orthodox Christianity to be passive with regard to politics, I had turned to reading ancient mythologies, creation myths holding for me a special interest. My first guide was the English poet Robert Graves through his book “The White Goddess”, which for all of its name, was centred on the concept of  “the sacred king”. Grave’s orientation (the sacred king is a political figure) soon led me to a radically different interpretation of “Oedipus Rex”, the tragedy of Sophocles’, which was left stuck as much with the academia as with the Freudian Pop-cultural interpretation  of mother-son incest. My habit of reading many newspapers also led me to know something about capitalism and the Western markets system and political ideologies. I gained some direct knowledge of capitalist markets from a job as an ‘order clerk’ at a brokerage firm.

My unorthodox approach to living ‘a life’ led me to become a “contrarian thinker”, even as my mind distanced itself and became "free" of the “system’s” desire to direct and control my way of thinking. Such freedom enabled me to release myself from the relentless motor that characterizes the American way of life in our time as “driven”. Unfortunately, this period did not last long, because age and lack of success as a “writer” demanded their dues. The absence of a degree from an institution of “higher learning” presented itself as a great hindrance to credibility. What to do in the future became a pressing issue.

It was about this time that the computer and internet became the focus of my attention. I felt drawn to the internet, because it did not present one with academic barriers, even if it was a medium that seemed dedicated to insulting intelligence as a result of a lack of almost any restraints from stupidity and its propagation. A number of years went into practicing “writing” in this medium. The result was not that I could write better, but that I became habituated to it.

In the years that I had been absent from Latvia, the Soviet “occupation” had preserved something of the “subsistence” economy of an earlier peasantry. The relatively uncompetitive kolhoz and sovhoz systems of Soviet country life—though different from life in farming households of earlier times—retained elements of the subsistence economy nonetheless. Individual garden plots, for example, were common, and helped people to overcome some of the needs for variety not met by the state. Perhaps this was, because the agrarian way of life allows an individual, male or female, to practice an isolated, independent, and “free”, monkish way of life. The urban environment prohibits such ‘independence’.

While in the early years of the Soviet system the kolkhoz apparently were enterprises entered in voluntarily by farmers (still bound to the ways of thinking by “old” and “anarchistic” peasant communities in Russia), this anarchism was broken by the eventual coercion of peasants into a centralized government system of communism as conceived by Stalin. Surprising as it may sound, under Stalin’s communism became wedded to the idea of “money”. Money was the only way the state knew of how to remuneration the farm worker (even if there were few goods to buy with it). The “money” brought with  it great disruptions to the old way of life, especially in matters of individual independence. Money became meaningful as a commodity that would buy luxuries, which Western propaganda told the populace could buy in the West. This introduced a sense of dissatisfaction with the communist system.  In many ways, unbeknownst to itself, Stalinist and post-Stalinist coercion and habituation of the countryside people to money, caused the people to become eager for the Western way of life, where money could buy

As a result, after the collapse of the Soviet economic system and government, the West had no trouble persuading the people to accept and agree to a systematic “crashing” of not only the kolhoz, but of all traditions that had been preserved (granted, willy-nilly) among the country people from their once decentralized history.

The new governments of Eastern Europe (Latvia including) had no economic experts of sufficient learning and knowledge of the economic development of the West. This is one reasons why the governments of Eastern Europe could provide no guidance to their people how to deal with the economic ways of the West and its domineering  Pop culture.

To the contrary, the Latvian government collaborated with the West in “crashing” the economies of the country. It also crashedg the people’s monkish  culture and relative independence, which—in my opinion—is a superior way of individuation than allowed by the individualisms in an urban setting. Instead of fortifying the cultural life of the countryside, the Latvian Culture Ministry denied the countryside support, and, instead, built a glass mountain house to house a literary culture that has few if any Latvian writers left to take part in. Consequently, the American government is planning to set up its Information Agency, which will deprive the Latvians of their democratic traditions to an even greater extent.

This is not to say that there are few or no Latvians to support this process of culture crashing. The supporters this Culture Crashing try make the disasters acceptable  by blaming “backward Russia”. Such receive ample aid from Western scholars tied into a history that has been created by Western “religion” (Catholic), but is taken issue with by such Eastern scholars as Anatoly Fomenko.

With the negative results (outlined above) not personally experienced, I returned to Latvia with enthusiasm. Unfortunately, it did not take long, before I noted that the Latvian elite was a conceit with no substance other than access to vanity and a desire for money to buy itself into the “crashed” emptiness founded over an imported Pop culture.

 It was the gullibility of the local populace (paradoxically created by Stalinist communism) that caused my self-education program to toke a quantum jump in understanding. The jump was essential to persuade me that self-sacrifice is a religio-political tool; and that so-called liberal “democracy” is a political theory that soon become Parliamentary fascism.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

The Orgasm of A Modern Lot (21)

The Eye You See Is Not an Eye Because You See It, but Because It Sees You.
--Antonia Machado
© Eso A. B., 2012

The Man of the Enlightened Age set about destroying God’s creation, for example, the buffalos, the wolves, the wild pigeons.  When some ‘primitive’ men protested, they, too, were destroyed, and the number of “enlightened” men and women multiplied.

If one does not believe in God, or believes that God is a human creation after ‘the fact’ of creation, then creation is subject to intelligence only after the fact. In the beginning, creation simply happens and one learns to live with it as the birds and the bees do to this day.

However, if human beings create God, He-She becomes an outgrowth of not only presumably innate intelligence in matter (energy, subatomic particles, matter, molecules, etc.) or “intelligence and God” are synonyms, and may perhaps be likened to something akin to an “aura” of matter. Like it or not, it then behoves for the aura of intelligence or God to perform divinely and, hopefully, without causing violence, pain, and directed death to bystanders.

Meditation is one way to participate in experiencing the “aura”. The early meditators, Tibetan monks, budhists, and those sympathetic to their experience, called the still-life aura, a mandala. A flower is a mandala created in nature, in and out of itself. The lotus is frequently the flower chosen to represent the unity of being and the universe. When a mandala-aura is accompanied by soothing sound of music, it projects a calming effect on those on the receiving end of the effect.

The Enlightenment arrived and the “enlightened” forbade the creation of God or an all encompassing mandala or hologram. Unleashed to be “creative”, much of humankind became violent when its “creations” did not satisfy. The following seqence of events approximates, sans the sight of death, the modern experience of the “secular spectacle”.

Today we are already bored with the “spectacle (it will suffice if you read only the 1st entry of the link, the sentence by Feuerbach”. Today we have no such problems as the Aztecs had with the sun rising. Today, thanks to ‘innovative technology’ the sun in London may rise early , where a two hours premature sunrise replaces the tense impatience of a fifty-two year delay of sunrise at Teotihuacan.  In the event of the latter, it is not an early sun over Trafalgar Square,  but the blood spattered corpse of the Moon Goddess, Coyolxauhiqu, thrown down the steps of Templo Mayor. 

However, never fear that the opposition “to our freedom, our very way of life” (--G.W. Busch) will last for long and not be updated with an “arab spring”.

The wonders of ‘the modern mind’ have been unleashed and are clearly out of control, and in control of uncreative oligarchs from Ghengis Khan.

In post-Mao Tse Tung’s Beijing, Chinese construction workers fortified by “free” Viagra tablets, may reconstruct the Twin Towers in 60 days or less. A video of how the Chinese construction workers, sans women, have for themselves a 30-story high erection in 15 days: here.  Though the erectile object is square, the result has an amazingly sexual in effect....... : the orgasm is spectacular: simply click here to enjoy it.

And this is what happens after the orgasm is over! The collapse of the organic erectile tissue has metamorphosed into a technical age spectacle.

And then?

If you thought this was the end of it, you will have to think again. The age of spectacle will not be left behind even in sorrow that the Aatec people might have experienced. Here comes the resurrection necrophilia. Note the female necrophiliacs.

When we speak of necrophilia in our time, we tend to imagine males violating female corpses, but that is not how the people of ancient times imagined it. Isis is said to have hovered above the dead Osiris and become pregnant from Osiris coming alive for her. Indeed, it has been a long time since females tried to raise a dead man’s cock.

* * *

The age of spectacle is of course a most awful joke on the people who remain conscious of their time. Nevertheless, behind the ridiculous aspects are camouflaged the most hidden and subjective sorrows of humankind.

We may explore a little of this more serious aspect by looking back to ancient Kush, located near the rift valley where humankind is believed to have first arisen. You may wish to explore the sights of this awesome country by going on a search of your own. Often, we express our feelings of loss best through songs.

O Isis und Osiris, sung by Kurt Moll: 

Funeral Service for Male Choir, Op. 39 (fragment)—St. Petersburg 

Finding Our Lost Voice Again, Nabucco—Chorus of the Hebrew Slaves

An Address to Populists, Don't Cry For Me Argentina.
Let us return to the silencing of the human voice by spectacle (an additive to violence) of our times. Here is how Guy Debord  puts it: “To this list of the triumphs of power, we should add, however, one result which has proved negative: once the running of a state involves a permanent and massive shortage of historical knowledge, that state can no longer be led strategically.”

As the quote is from Retort, “Afflicted Powers”, this is what the book’s authors have to say about Debord’s comment:

“Of course, he [Guy Debord] knew that the past is a ‘construction’; but a construction, he believed, made of obdurate and three-dimensional materials, constantly resisting anyone frame, and which only the machinery of forgetting could make fully tractable to power…. But even Debord sometimes took (cold) comfort from the recognition that the state too lived the nightmare, and would suffer the consequences. For it could no longer learn from the past: it had progressively dismantled the contexts….”

That is our horror. This is what anyone of us sees, if we are not born of the necropolis.

Sunday, January 22, 2012

Jerking the Ring Off the Finger (20)
In the Winter the Sun Takes Three Mornings Rising.
© Eso A. B., 2012

At this point of our long story, we ought to remember that the human sacrifices in Mesoamerica, the Near East, and no doubt elsewhere, began with the killing and sacrifice of women.

Continuing to take advantage of our pareidolia method of deconstructing a story that has, by now, become orthodoxy, we may deduce that one reason why men may have chosen women as their first human sacrificial victims, was the woman’s menstrual period. Blood (“chalchiuh-atl” or precious water)  and the color red had and continue to possess sacral meaning.

One other possible reason may have been that men did not find women to be the mirror image of themselves that they expected them to be the first time they saw a woman. The disappointment led to an attempt to do the Creator God one better by killing one’s own, then stealing one’s neighbor’s wife or daughter.

Once men had learned to live with their guilt of killing women, the practice spread to include children and prisoners, and these slaughters all proved disappointing, the practice spread to self-sacrifice. Even so, though the self-immolation of Nanauatzin was thought of in highest terms, high enough to assure that the Sun rose, even this was not sufficient to send the sun travelling across the entire “sky-mountain”.

After the Sun rose to the eastern rim of the Bosphorus mountain range (the Hippodrome is on the western side of the straight), it rose no more, but stayed where it was and wobbled in place. The Gods of the Aztecs came to the conclusion that in order for them to see the sun move up in the sky, all four hundred of them would have to offer themselves as sacrifices. In effect, the ritual of self-sacrifice would not be sufficient with the crucifixion or auto-da-feing of one man, but would have to include all of human society.

Writes DavidCarrasco: “The cosmic pattern (see blog 15) of massive sacrifices to energize the sun is repeated in …  terrestrial warfare and human sacrifice is created by the Gods to ensure their nourishment. In one version, the god Mixcoatl (Cloud Serpent) creates five human beings and four hundred Chichimec warriors to stir up discord and warfare…. When the masses of warriors pass their time hunting and drinking, the gods send the five individuals to slaughter them…. war among human beings is created to ensure sacrificial victims for the gods.”

We have met the five priests who preside over the slaughter of the sacrifice(s) before (Blog 19). We also have met the four hundred warriors as the 400 children of Coatlicue, Earth Mother (blog 9), who come to kill  their mother, and unloose the God of War, the warrior Huitzilopotchtli. This writer assumes that the significance of the number 400 (children, warriors, and gods) is associated with the four orientations: East, West, North, and South.

After the 400 gods have been sacrificed (by the wind god Ecatl), and after Ecatl has released a mighty blast of air against the sun, the Fifts Sun is started on its way. We, who live today, are part of the 5th sun, which, we may note, is an artificial or virtual entity; therefore, a human creation.

There are even more distant echoes to the story of sacrifice. I have already mentioned the Balts of northeastern Europe. One Latvian folk-song speaks of

Dieva dēli bēdājās,
Asiņaina Saule lec.

Kam vakar novilkāt
Saules meitai gredzeniņu?

The sons of god sorrowed,
The sun rose bloody.
Why did you yesterday
Jerk the ring off the finger
Of the Sun’s daughter?

The poem clearly has sexual overtones and points an accusatory finger at the sons of God, meaning the male of the human species. However, in our own time, the Latvian name for whore is “mauka” or ‘the one who jerks off.’ In other words, male chauvinism in our day has none of the delicate imagery surrounding rape given it by proto-Latvians of yore. Whichever way the sons of God transgressed against the Daughers of the Sun, they did it bloodily.

Trīs rītiņi Saule lēca
Sarkanā kociņā;
Aiziet jauni, aiziet vaci,
To kociņu meklēdami.

For three mornings the sun rose
In the red tree;
Pass away the young and old,
Looking for that tree.

Here the proto-Latvians associate the Tree of Life with the color red, which, in turn, is associated with the rising sun and blood. While there is no direct mention of human sacrifice in Latvian folk-songs, it is implicit in the symbolism of words used. I find it remarkable, that the sun takes three mornings rising, not to mention, that in spite of many generations looking for the blood tree, i.e., sacrifice, it is never (allowed to be) found.

St. Peter The First PTSD Victim of State Terror (19)
The Saw-Cross Saws Upwards!
© Eso A. B., 2012

The morning after Basil’s (aka Christ’s) liquidation by Emperor, Alexius I, the sun rose over the Bosphorus the color of blood. It rose to just above the horizon, more wide on its sides than it was tall. Once the sun had reached the hill top (on the right hand side of the Bosphorus), it remained there and moved no further, though if one looked carefully,  it wobbled from side to side a little.

I am, of course, using the description of the sunrise that followed Nanautzins’s self-immolation as described in David Carrasco’s book, City of Sacrifice, p. 80ff,

Such Basil’s disciples as had dared to stay the night beside the fire pit and witness their master’s charred remains, they spake no words among themselves and acted as if struck dumb.

Years later, when the event came to be rewritten and fitted to the story of Jesus by the monks (likely in the service of the King of France), there rewrite left little of what had actually transpired at the pit of fire at the Hippodrome.  As we read the story, now in the “NewTestament”,  Mark 14:66-72, we discover that:
66 “And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: 67 And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth (Nanauatzin?)
68 “But he [Peter] denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. 69 And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them.
70 “And he [Peter] denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto. 71 But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak.
72 “And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.”
While the cremation pit was apparently soon filled and reduced to (probably) a bonfire outside Pilate’s palace, the horror struck disciples acted precisely as petrified people do; as Lot’s wife did; as refugees from war zones in our own day do. Indeed, who is to define what is a “war zone” in our day? Is ‘a war zone’ not also a slum? Is it not where people pick through rubbish piles?
The commentator (Austin Cline) to the above text explains:
In order to emphasize the faithlessness of Peter, the nature of his three denials increases in intensity each time. First he gives a simple denial to a single maid who claims that he was “with” Jesus. Second he denies to the maid and a group of bystanders that he was “one of them.” Finally, he speaks with a vehement oath to a group of bystanders that he was NOT “one of them.”
This exegesis fits the pattern used by those whom the French kings [later also German kings and others (the last auto-da-fe occurred in 1802 in Spain)] employed to drive out arch-Christianity with a story version that better served the secularist ends of the oligarchs, princes, lords, firsts, barons, and wealthy merchants of the day. Today the story also serves bankers. On the whole, the exegesis stays on track–if it records (even as it does not explain) Peter’s “faithlessness” as a consequence of “mind paralysis”. It is interesting that Alexeus I and Herod, both, are kings/ leaders, who presume for themselves religious authority. This writer remains horror struck by the video clip of a U.S. helicopter crew machine-gunning a group of Iraqi men, including two men working for a news service. While the attackers are not to be equated with religion, their action is justified by the rules of war, i.e., the law of the U.S. government is on their side and their subjective feelings can be disregarded as far as the law is concerned. In other words, in this case the law is criminal.

Strange as it may seem to some readers, butting together a leap into a fire pit at Teotihuacan and pushing a man into a fire pit dug on the Hippodrome in Constantinople, it is not pareidolia beyond possibility.

The internet has done much to break the story patterns created by academics, whose versions of a story are constrained by their piers, whether the established story tells true or not. The internet user, however, has access to much of the same data that an academic has, but has none of the pier pressure to contend with when it comes to finding and telling a story constructed according to a new pattern. Of course, now that a new story of the death of Jesus Basil has been discovered, the scholars are free to do further research and begin an argument for or against or confirm yet another version of the tale I tell.

Are Basil, Christ, Nanauatzin, and Jesus perhaps one and the same person then? Probably not. Nevertheless, just as there is a relationship in the slaying of a sheep by nomads in the Lake Baikal region today and the sacrifice on top of Temple Mayor centuries ago, that is, that it takes five men to better butcher and/ or sacrifice, for all we know, five friendly warriors to one enemy warrior may have served as a rule of thumb to generals in pre-modern days in the Near East and Mesoamerica. Just as the sun did not rise into the skies immediately after the sacrifices at either geographic location, Jesus, taking an example from the Moon Goddess, did not immediately rise from his grave to heaven either.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Was Jesus Basil-Christ Auto-da-fed? (18)
Behind the Distant Tree Line, the Chainsaws buzz from early morning until dusk.
© Eso A. B., 2012

The muting of speech and mind by petrifying the individual with fright is an ancient and primitive tactic, likely discovered by males of the human species. It is possible that the tradition of muting prisoners of war, women and youths, preceded community formation, thus facilitating a negative basis for creating communities through violence world wide. Thus, the positive creation a community is the opposite of victimization—heteronomy (self-sacrifice), which tends to be part of feminine nature.

If one takes into account the experience of soldiers, who survive the killing fields, and subsequent to their participation in war suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), the extreme consequences of the experience are shown by the suicide rate among combat veterans (37% per 100,000 = 37,000). This figure provides evidence of the incredible degree of mental suffering, and leads to the conclusion that the suicide rate only scratches the surface of it. The survivors of PTSD may have decided to forego suicide, but may pay the dues to their pain in many other ways. One of the ways may be to become a failing parent  (father) or a war-mongering community leader. do not necessarily the emotional turmoil and pain facing and dealing in death offers to the survivors of the ordeal in retrospect.
No wonder that at the beginning of modern history, a man called John,  Apostle John, or John of Patmos had a “Revelation” that presented itself as an Apocalypse. Even so, the muted and silent mind of the public in our day is as unaware that assumptions lead to conclusions, and that what awaits it is the same as when unsuspecting unwanted puppies or kittens are put by a farmer into a sack filled with stones.

Yet—given the unstable chronology of Western history—John of Patmos [exiled to the island of Patmos by the Romans (likely those of Byzantium)] may have been a witness to the death (by incineration) of Jesus, at the time he was still known by the name of Basil.

* * *

Briefly, the following is the story of Jesus-Basil-Christ as told by Anna Comnena, the daughter of the Byzantine (Roman) emperor Alexius I (? 1081-1118). The unusual dating, while likely to cause some readers great doubt as to its accuracy, is justified if we remember that the chronology of history as taught in the West was nonexistent until nearly five hundred years later, until after the Council of Trident (1545-1563), which took place during the Reformation.

Writes Anna Comnena (date uncertain):

“Later, in the… year of Alexius reign there arsose an extraordinary ‘cloud of heretics’, a new hostile group, hitherto unknown to the Church. For two doctrines, each known to antiquity and representative of what was most evil, most worthless, now coalesced…, and… were united in the Bogomils, for the dogma of the latter was an amalgam of Manichaean and Massalian teaching.

“Apparently, it was in existence before my father’s time, but was unperceived (for the Bogomil sect is most adebt at feigning virtue)….

“The fame of the Bogomils had by now spread to all parts, for the impious sect was controlled with great cunning by a certain monk called Basil. He had twelve followers, whom he called ‘apostles’ and also dragged along with him certain women disciples, women of bad character, utterly depraved….and when the evil, like some consuming fire devoured many souls, the emperor could no longer bear it.

“Basil, Archisatrap of Satanael, was brought to light dressed in monkish garb, austere of face, with a thin beard, very tall. At once the emperor, wishing to discover from him the man’s innermost thoughts, tried compulsion, but with a show of persuasion: he invited him to the palace on some righteous pretext. He even rose from his seat when Basil came in, made him sit with him and share his own table…. 

“At first Basil was coy; he wrapped close around him the lion skin—he who was in reality an ass—and at the emperor’s words shied away…. He looked askance at our doctrine [most likely the written or rewritten secularized version—Auth.]  of the Divine Nature of Christ and wholly misinterpreted His human nature. He even went so far as to call the holy churches the temples of demons and treated as of little importance what among us is believed to be the consecrated Body and Blood of our First High Priest and Sacrifice.”

When Alexius does not prevail on Basil to change his mind to the emperor’s way of thinking:

“….A huge fire was kindled in the Hippodrome (in Constantinople today). An enormous trench had been dug and a mass of logs, everyone a tall tree,  had piled up to a mountainous hight. Then the pyre was lit….

“There he stood (Basil), despicable, helpless before every threat, every terror, gaping now at the pyre, now at the spectators. Everyone thought he was quite mad, for he neither rushed rushed to the flames, nor did he altogether turn back, but stayed rooted to the spot where he had first entered the arena, motionless.

“So they decided to put him to the test. While he was talking marvels and boasting that he would be seen unharmed in the midst of the flames, they took his woolen cloak and said, ‘Let us see if the fire will catch your clothes! And straighway they hurled it into the center of the pyre.

“So confident was Basil in the Demon that was deluding him that he cried ‘Look! My cloak flies up to the sky! They saw that this was the decisive moment, liften him up and thrust him, clothes, shoes and all, into the fire. The flames, as if in rage against him, so thoroughly devoured the wretch, that there was no odour and nothing unusual in the smoke except one thin smoky line in the centre of the flame.”

As neo-Christians well know, Basil-Christ did not rise as the Aztec God Nanauatzin did, but he rose as Nanauatzin never dreamt of rising—as utter fiction.