Hid Behind A False Name and Chronology. (16)

The forest and winter behind my house.

© Eso A. B., 2012

To tie men to a T was once common punishment. Thus tied, men and women were often killed by stoning, arrows, spears, fire, or garrot.

When the time arrived that T or Tau became an instrument of death not only for common men and women, but to which VIPs were tied also, it necessitated that it become an symbol elevated above the mundane, and was therefore embelished with an overhead inscription. The more titled the victim, the more the words on the inscription. This was the time when the T was extended along its vertical axis. The most important inscription of which we know is Jesus’s INRI, or “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews”.

Whether the King of the Jews was Jezus of Nazareth is not as sure a certainty as orethodox believers would like everyone to think. There remain many questions where Jesus came from and wherefrom his name. Could the name have come by way of a pareidolic intercession from the name Basil? That is, from Basil to Vasil< Vazil< Yazil< Yezu? It may be that the bloodshed that was to come later as if on Basil’s behalf, was a consequence of an attempt to impose on the public mind another name, the original of which name may have been John or one of John’s innumerable cognates, such as Yan, Ian, Ivan, Van (Vanyka). Jon, Johann, Hans, Huan, Wotan (Yon-tan/ Jonathan), etc.

Readers who are not committed to standarticized and  ethicized orthodox beliefs may not find it so strange to discover that John, also known as John the Baptist or John the Anointer (Healer, because once in Egypt an Embalmer of corpses), not only may have preceded Jesus, but may have been displaced by Jesus. The latter would have happened because the numinosity of Jesus’s  name may have given him a great hold over the imagination of the people. Since Jesus is said to have been a carpenter, the name—by way of anomatopeia—may have triggered  an association with a saw, such as Jee-zus, Jee-zus. Since the name of John is also associated with rejuvenation, as in the winter and suummer solstice of January (according to the old 13 month calendar) and June, a replacement of his name with that of another, was enough to replace the name of the arch-Christian John  altogether.

The reader may by now recognize the method by which the absurd is imposed on the public as a sociaty-wide belief.

In this blog series, we began with the men of the Ona tribe of Fierro del Fuego, who forced their fantasy of themselves as Gods on their entire tribe by murdering their women (and possibly children). Death is not happily met with if dying is presented as a gruesome, and painful event forced on humankind in order to cause it to accept something normally percieved as absurd. Worse, once fear forces the door open and seeps into our brain matter, it may spread like a virus not only through our  organism, but mind-memes may distribute it throughout our entire society.

Such a development serves a ruling elite to keep its wealth and priviledges to itself through pseudo “laws”, which, among other things, inhibits subjective and private thoughts.

The 18^th, 19^th, and 20^th centuries are examples of times when humankind finds itself under the influence of fear and terror. Such a state of mind causes unreason to be dominant at all social levels, the scientific and scholarly including. Though scientific achievements at this time may have been significant, the timidity of scholars and scientists in the face of fear and terror is unlikely to be more forthright with the governing bodies of the state than ordinary citizenss.

If repression of the mind in MesoAmerica began with the murder of women in Tierro del Fuego, we must also ask where and how it began on the Euro-Asian landmass? There is no easy answer, of course. However, the reason for this may not be because of difficulties of logic, but because the chronology of history of the so-called West is arbitrary and cannot be depended on.

The question of chronology of history as presented by the historians of the West is suspect not only because of the rule of fear and terror in the West, but because interests of the terrorizers have prevailed to our own time. At least, some knowledgeable minds, ever since Newton have expressed considerable doubts about the accuracy of historical chronology. We will see possibilities for alternative chronologies reflected in the subject matter of upcoming blogs.

A Force for “Stability” (12)

An Oak  with Its Limbs Sawn Off.

Copyright Eso A. B.

When it comes to mythology, there is nothing new about men killing women. Among other things, we have the image (familiar to almost everyone) of Perseus holding the head of Medusa Gorgon by her hair in his hand.

The ancient Greeks are famous for justifying killing women by telling tales that the women they had killed deserved death, because they were or are ugly. The story about Scythian women warriors may be an invention to justify public murder of war prisoners or innocent inhabitants of a city. The women portrayed in the link look more like street demonstrators today throwing rocks, while the truly lethal arms (bow and arrows) are in the possession of men.
Where does this desire to kill women arise from?
One answer may be provided by the failure of mimesis of one sex to project itself onto the other, because of the failure by nature or social circumstances to separate the sexes in sufficiently polarized entities. In other words, a young male, home from his first kill during a hunt of reindeer or wild boar, may imagine that if he can kill a deer and boar, he can also impose on a woman himself through an unwelcome (to her) sexual act, in other words, rape. A woman may, on the other hand, extend a successful and undiscovered lie, to realize an unfulfilled desire and do violence to trust by puting the fruit of her license in her lover’s or husband’s care.

Dislike of the other sex, may be a matter of dysfunctional genes—as in homosexual men and/or women. The image projected by the mind eye of a male does not attach itself to a woman, but a man. In other words, to use poet’s (Machado) words (blog 5): “The eye you see is not an eye because you see it; it is an eye because it sees you.” The homosexual’s eye fails to be seen back by the biological eye of the other sex, but by the secreted sex. Yet again, if a woman is not desirable to a man, he may imagine her as ugly, whereas a woman may reject an impotent man as the king of her clan or tribe.

This is a good place to remember that Sigmund Freud said that: “Male and female is the first distinction that you make when you meet another human being, and you are accustomed to making this distinction with unquestioned certainty”, Hirschfeld , a famous sexologists of the 20^th century “posits (as per link) that a human being is neither man nor woman, but at the same time man and woman in unique and therefore unrepeatable proportions.” In other words, the “unrepeatable proportion” has to find a match, which may not in all circumstances be an easy thing to do.

The failure of the mind’s eye to attach itself to the opposite sex, may, if met by social disapproval, find an escape through “racial” or some other social discrimination. That is: a woman smells bad, menstruates, looks ugly, is unfriendly, is poor, is black, is white, is red, has slanted eyes, etc. The reasons for rejection may be nthed to an unnatural degree if it has support from the leaders of society.

The same projections may be used to achieve attachment rather than rejection. For example, one may persuade the mind of someone yet biologically immature (generally young children) to attach itself to an object as determinedly as a gosling may attach its affections to a bathtub. In the West, this phenomenon was exploited by the Church to instil in small children a belief in Santa Claus. To make Santa ever more compelling, a whole series of stories about Christmas evolved. The stories are made all the more acceptable by connecting them with gift giving, followed by yet another story about Santa’s gift factory on the North Pole, which gifts are produced by dwarfs disguising child labor.

It is no news, that today even the Pope is complaining about the extent that the “gift” has been commodified and turned into money.

The knowledge of how to infect and contaminate a child (and humankind) did not arrive to humankind quickly. It had not yet become conscious knowledge among the natives of Tierra del Fuego in the days of Charles Darwin or Aztecs of Mexico in the days of Cortez.

Anthropologist notes and history show that primitives or arch-humankind tended to live in a social setting, where persuasion was a result of direct violence. If one escape becoming a sacrifice him- or herself, one was nevertheless compelled to go to the public square and watch the public murders of someone having their heart torn from his-her chest cavity or (if living in Europe) to hear the screams of one burnt to a crisp on a pile of wood.

It was in Tierra del Fuego that men of the Selk=nam tribe persuaded women and children that the masked men masquerading before them on certain Festival days were Gods. To disbelieve the men’s performance and call out “There’s Uncle Charlie!”, got one his-her brains bashed. Before the arrival of the written word and written law, violence was a way to freeze the subjective mind and reduce an individual’s thought processes to a repetition of banalities.

Aztec sacrificial violence was got used to and accepted, and became a social ritual. As nightmarish as miming violence may be, and as insecure the society it creates is, once violence is learned and becomes a tradition, society becomes dependent on it. Insecurity and nightmares do not hinder the social animal, but become a force for its “stability”, one that compels it to continue its violent behavior.