NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
18 A Sacred Marriage That Breaks No Law

When sexuality began to be hyped (paradoxically through repression) and then was used as a money substitute for poorly paid workers, it involved everyone in a culture of amorality or, if you will, the corruption of nature’s morals. A kind of surreptitious state of the jungle became the social norm. Thus, just beneath the naïve newspaper advice columns on sexual matters, there lurked the drool of pornography.

The orgasm, sometimes known as “little death”, lost its powers as a source of spiritual revelation. In short, it no longer caused one to experience a little death. The “fern blossom” of midsummer’s eve (the fern has no blossoms) became—as SPAM e-mail tells it—“a great time in bed”. The sexual act lost its connection to sacred marriage or hieros gamos. http://www.angelfire.com/ct3/ascension/ros5.jpg

Still, hieros gamos is not lost to the unconscious and sometimes shocks someone’s repressed consciousness with a dream that terrifies one’s awake or conscious morals. Here is how the morals of nature once reminded themselves to this author.

It is night. I am walking the streets of a large city. The streets are dimly lit. I have no idea where I am going, but I soon find myself at a street corner and a door leading to a bar. I enter.

The barroom is crowded with men. In front of me is a large crowd of men standing with a mug of beer in their hand. As if having waited for my arrival, the bartender announces that there will be a strip tease, followed by “sex”. Even as he speaks a woman in a black cocktail dress climbs on top of the bar. The men around me fall silent.

I discover that on the counter of the bar stands also a man. The woman goes up to him, pulls down the right side of her dress, and exposes her breast. The man says but one word: “Mother!”

The woman then pulls up her dress, and (surprise of surprises!) she presents herself to the audience with an erect cock. The cock grows from her crotch and presents upward in an unmistakable demand of a caress.

The dream apparently does not wish me to see what comes next, because the audience partially blocks my view. Nevertheless, the attentiveness of the men transmits to me the notion that the man is “sucking her”. After a moment, the woman screams and the act is over. The audience remains silent, but everyone appears to be satisfied in their expectations. The barroom resumes normal activity.

I remain standing near the entrance to the bar. Then I see the woman in the crowd. She is coming toward me. She has a warm smile of recognition for me. She has blonde hair with an orange tint to it. I do not know her, but she comes up to me, and we embrace with great affection. End of dream. I awaken.

What was the dream about? Was the woman a man dressed up as a woman? Or was the woman born with a man’s genitals? Did the sight of her breast, an object made for sucking, translate into an act of fellatio, moreover, by the son of his mother become his lover and father?

The dream clearly features a hermaphrodite, but with an emphasis on the feminine. The male of the hermaphrodite projects as the “son”. Like it or not, this means that the man owes his sex and sexuality to his mother. Thus, the man’s desire is to have sex with his mother even if she comes to him with a male’s genitals.

How does one unravel such a dream and make sense of it? Then I came to read a book, which mentioned the 614th and 615th episode of the Arab “One Thousand and One Nights”. The story reminded me of the terror of breaking the “law” that I experienced after dreaming the dream. It set me free of my guilt. Here I combine the episode with the experiences of Iananna and Ian or John, her son (see Blog 12):

When John had gone through the seven doors, he came before a woman whom he did not recognize. John asked, “Who are you?” “Oh, dear son, I am your mother,” said the woman. John, separated from his mother since childhood, ignored what the woman said and told her: “Take off your clothes.”

The woman refuses to do so, but because John continues to insist, she eventually relents and little by little removes her clothes until she is but her panties.

John insists: “Take off your panties as well.”

The mother protests and tells John that to do so is against the law. At this point John recognizes the woman to be his mother. “Indeed, mother, you are right. Leave your panties on.”

However, no sooner has John spoken that his mother screams: “You have gone back on your demands that so humiliated me! Guards, seize him and give him a whipping.”

John gets a whipping and is let go, but not before his mother tells him that she expects him to come back and see her the next day.

The next day, when John enters his mother’s chamber, she greets him: “Oh, welcome, my son”. To which John replies, “Would a mother so whip her son as you had me whipped yesterday?” He then demands that his mother again take off her clothing.

The mother obliges. When she has removed everything, but her panties, John does not hesitate to order her to take them off too. “Strip for me, completely,” he tells his mother. She does.

John gets an erection. His mother takes his cock in her hands and pulls herself close to him.

This is how John gets to enter through the eighth gate. Once he enters through the gate, he finds a land of rubies and gold without end.

John still has not come back. No doubt, John got all the sex he desired. To put it crudely, he fucks himself to death. The story makes clear that John broke no sacred laws, but a temporal one.

If you copy this or otherwise mention the content of this blog, please credit the author and http://esoschronicles.blogspot.com/

NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
17 Beyond Orgasm

Claiming to be in possession of one of the “great religions”, i.e., Christianity, the politicians of our civilization opened the gates to impermissible freedom (the state of nature) in sexual matters. Not surprisingly, drugs enhanced the sexual “drive”, raised the blood pressure, and sensitized the erectile tissue of sexual organs above normal. Christianity which ought to have checked the drugs and the behavior that resulted from their use, failed to do this, because the servants of the elites, the politicians, had made sure that the inspirational leaders of Christianity, the Johns, were renamed as one name, Jesus, long before all the consequences were obvious. Once the colleges of Johns were sufficiently repressed with burnings and drownings, Jesus was dismissed to Heaven, a non-existent space, whence he could not affect social behavior on Earth.

One of the catastrophes to result from the dismissal of arch-Christianity under John was an increased number of babies, most of who came into the world of our civilization unplanned and unwanted. Neo-Christianity claimed that these births were the result of “an act of God”, and therefore objected to the mother’s (and perhaps the father’s) crude effort to reverse the effects of hyper-sexualization through abortion. The neo-Christian efforts to stop abortion did not (and could not) work, because Jesus, neutralized as a force on Earth by his removal to heaven, could not intervene in the direct ways that the Johns would have.

How would the Johns have intervened? While this is a hypothetical question and, therefore, does not have a sure answer, the search for ways of preventing conception suggest contraceptives, alternate ways of sexual discharge such as hand stroking, and castration and penis removal in extreme cases.

The people endured the catastrophe brought about by hyper-sexualization, because hyper-sexualization (once the sport of princes and princeses) served as a reward for enduring social hypertension. The impermissible freedom, originally secured by the elites for themselves, allowed the elites to act without a conscience when their presumptions to such freedoms was threatened by social upheavals. While reserving for themselves a statistical niche of 5% of the population, they let the rest of the 95% of hyper-energized people to exploit (rape) the Earth without any sense of guilt. This is how in less than a millennium (according to the historian Anatoly Fomenko, the arch-Christian John was burnt and the neo-Christian Jesus sent to heaven in 1184) our planet was turned into a refuse pile and a desert. In other words, the elites—the oligarchs—satisfied their servants less with money, more with hyper-sexualizing their sexual life. Sex as a spiritual experience became something like a sweet potato http://tinyurl.com/clvsna . Paying off the middle and working classes with a payment “hidden” within sex (as permissiveness and by overlooking the damage caused by conception), has resulted in the collapse of our civilization. What was supposed to become a field of wheat, a cornucopia of the good life achieved through intelligence, has turned into a field of tares.

One of the first victims of the catastrophe of our civilization are the small nations, the reservoirs of cultural variety, the seed banks for when hybrid plants fail to adapt to disease that they are not programmed to resist. One such victim is the small nation is Latvia.

Latvia, one of the three Baltic nations, escaped some of the brutal consequences of the rule of elitist theology because of being held in a state of “backwardness” by fifty years of Soviet occupation. However, this backwardness was not the result of self-conscious holding back, but because the Soviet Union—whose aim was to emulate the “developed West”—had to struggle against the West to reach equivalence. The West understood all too well that the planet could not two hyper-populated civilizations and fought the Soviets with a “cold war”. When the Soviet Union failed to reach its economic goals and imploded, the people of “backward” Latvia were on their own.

Predictably, the newly liberated Latvia began to copy the ways of the West. Its political parties became fronts for business groups (led by oligarchs or alliances of oligarchs), and the Latvian people, a people who through their forebears were heirs to an ancient culture, were deprived by their political parties (led by their elites of course) of education, specifically knowledge of their history. Instead of renewing and adapting relevant religious elements from their forebears, the Latvian government subsidized—sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly—neo-Christianity and its theology of Jesus, at the same time as it dispossessed John, the native Latvian “god” and/or symbol of unity, and tried to forget him.

The direct support of neo-Christianity may be seen in the act of the president of Latvia attending neo-Christian prayer meetings and state support for annual catholic pilgrimages to Aglona, a site claimed to be especially blessed for catholics. No such favors or visits are ever made to native Latvian religious groups or Johns Eve celebrations. The indirect methods of facilitating the forgetting of arch-Christianity include the dropping the name of John from the festival altogether. Thus, increasingly the festival is being called by the public media a “summer festival”, a “solstice festival”, “ligo festival” (“ligo” is an ancient refrain to Johns Eve songs, similar to neo-Christian “halleluyah”), “fernleaf blossom festival” (once a reference to the revelation of a spiritual mystery, now become a sexual orgasm), and other.

The Latvian president’s attendance of neo-Christian prayer meetings has now reached the stage of permitting neo-Christians to burn the books of Latvian authors. One neo-Christian priest encouraged his congregation to burn Latvian books in a Johns Eve bonfire and called John and religious folk traditions of Latvians as “an ideology that does it [the congregation?] physical and spiritual evil” (my translation of a citation in Diena, 4.8.09).

Be that as it may, the remnant of John or Johns—once an arch-Christian symbol of communal bonds throughout Europe and beyond—is a phenomenon worthy of the attention of spiritual communities throughout the world. John identifies Christianity (what I call arch-Christianity) not with worship of the supernatural, but as a theology inherent in human nature before it is turned into a theology that serves the oligarchs.

Nearly twenty years after Latvia has regained its independence, the oligarchs and their supporters have turned Latvia into a failed state—both, in terms of confusing Latvians as to their past cultural and spiritual legacy and in terms of bankrupting and pauperizing their country. The de facto bankruptcy of Latvia (it is kept from de jure bankruptcy by accepting a spirit-bankrupting loan from the IMF) is not a result of careful and thrifty planning of how to renew Latvia and its traditions. It is the result of overspending, creating irresponsible debt,and in the words coined by one of Latvia’s oligarchs—“flooring the gas pedal”, no doubt, to drive the nation into a tree or a ditch.

Today the Latvian population (1.4 million), its numbers long held in check through various repressions (war dead, suicides, prostitution, deportations, emigration for political as well as economic reasons), finds itself in a death-spiral. The situation report on Latvia is, as some forebear of the Latvian people might have said it, “Oh John!”

If you copy this or otherwise mention the content of this blog, please credit http://esoschronicles.blogspot.com/

NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
16 How to Immobilize Living Flesh

The peace that sprang into being through violence has begun to break down. However, not everyone sees it that way. After all, the breakdown has not yet affected the upper class skiing down the remains of alpine glaciers and expecting the supersonic train that has run off the tracks http://tinyurl.com/c9rcju to jump back on track.

Neither has the breakdown had much effect on the young and elderly generations, the first as flesh extruded from irresponsible and oversexed parents, the second unable to see that a time comes when the only activity that remains for a body to do is waiting for death. When that time of waiting comes, can one really do no more than wait? The late Picasso, a famous 20th century artist, counts among his last works a self-portrait http://tinyurl.com/mbtdse in which he stares with stark and anxious eyes at death, his face enough to scare any child. Unlike a child, the artist appears to have forgotten that his parent is the universe, and that the spheres of the universe may sing a lullaby.

Though clearly one’s flesh and mind are codependent, the mind may nevertheless transcend the flesh it depends on by instituting a community. Such a community will outlast the individuals it is made of—just like a bee or ant colony may survive a bear come thieving for its honey. However, whereas an individual bee’s consciousness (as surmised by this author) makes the colony be one body of its queen, human consciousness is to each individual. For an individual to become part of a community, he-she has to make a voluntary decision to join one. Moreover, the joining of the community has to be convincing to its already existing members. The deed that convinces consists of two interlocking acts:

1) The individual gives an oath of allegiance to the community that contains the words “I will prove my oath by dying a self-sacrificial death, which I will dedicate to the community”; and

2) Such self-sacrificial death is an on-going practice at the community, which guarantees that the oath of the newcomers is guaranteed by its doability.

Breaking the oath by meeting death through an “act of god” dissolves the community if the majority of individuals decide to go along. On the other hand, once such a community institutes itself through a series of founding acts (a wonder of human perception and will to institute the perceived), it is strongly resistant to dissolution, simply because with the death of the community there must die all the individuals who contributed to its making.

Peace through violence was instituted by neo-Christianity, which usurped arch-Christianity about the time of the 11th century. The founding act of violence was the removal of self-sacrifice (symbolized by Johns of whom Jesus was one) from Earth to heaven. With no active religious act (self-sacrifice) to cause any second thoughts among those serving secular power, the top of the pyramid became the only power on Earth. The original motivation for the founding violence came from the power grab of medieval princes and barons, who then replaced resistant arch-Christianity with a pliable neo-Christianity. The so-called Ponzi or pyramid schemes illustrate the power and wealth grab perfectly.

While great power and wealth came to the princes, demoralization gripped and dumbed-down the populace. The dumbing-down of sexual responsibility is witnessed by the impossibility of stopping SPAM selling a thousand ways to have a sexual orgasm. Those who respond to this are mostly post-pubescents. In spite of having consciousness, self-control (let alone self-sacrifice) has never been taught them. This is not to say there are no exceptions, but the existing situation gives evidence of having been left to its “animal” tracks. As we know, animal communities are unable to transcend themselves for lack of consciousness.

The same may be said about aged flesh. When the neo-Christian church began its drive to oust John from Earth by renaming him Jesus, pushing him up into the clouds, and teaching that Jesus had put an end to further need for sacrifice, not everyone agreed with the “good news”. However, successful resistance at this early time was nigh impossible. Neo-Christianity came equipped with priests-psychologists paid and backed by the sword of princes. The “good news” proselytes soon persuaded all doubters that Jesus had “saved” everyone from further responsibility for having been born a human being. Humankind could relax and leave the job of providing social order to Jesus’ intermediaries, the priests and their supporter, the prince.

To cover the traces of their lies about the “resurrection” (it never happened), neo-Christianity began to distract the attention of the populace by preaching that “at the end of days” everyone was destined to rise from the dead. As if to prove that this was not fantasy, neo-Christian priests preached that material self-sacrifice—that is, death by one’s own will—was against the laws of God (Jesus, Spirit), and punished the relatives of those who took self-sacrifice to the limit by depriving them of the property of the one who had sacrificed him- or herself.

Over a period of time (the so-called middle ages until today) the mind became immobilized and as dead weight as the pound. Such a state of the mind affected the young as much as the old, and while the old bore the responsibility for this state of affairs, the young bore the babies. The wealthy, for their part, bore no burdens but fear. As we have noted, those who incinerated Basil (Johns-Jesus) got over their fears of revenge. After all, since the rulers had no inhibitions to turn their power into violence, they could and did resort to terrorism at their choosing.

There are many examples of state terror. In most cases, the state does not acknowledge any participation in repressions by staying silent. Sometimes the silence is all the greater, because the acts occur in small states whose language is not English and whose connections with the outside world are limited.

One such country with limited outreach is Latvia. It is easy in Latvia to keep things quiet and unknown. For example, one Adolfs Buķis, a Latvian national, who in 1993 took his life in front of the Latvian Freedom Monument in Riga to protest the rising corruption in Latvia. He was quickly declared mentally unbalanced, and the promised investigation of the motives for his self-sacrifice never occurred. Though a number of news articles about Buķis death did appear, these are now all buried in archival stacks (in 1993 the internet was not widely available in Latvia) and unavailable by searching the internet.

Another case of government violence is illustrated by the case of Ken Saro-Wiwa, a writer from Nigeria, who in 1995 was hanged by the Nigerian government for protesting the environmental damage caused by the Shell Company for the financial benefit of Shell and high Nigerian government officials. See http://tinyurl.com/dl6o5o

In 2006, Anna Politkovskaya, a Russian journalist, was killed for her criticism of President Vladimir Putin and his war against the Chechnya people. http://tinyurl.com/cxonx2 There are of course thousands of such cases. http://tinyurl.com/n68fna

Jesus’ death and his removal to heaven makes all self-sacrifices—according to the claims of neo-Christianity—irrelevant. because Jesus was the sacrifice to end all sacrifices.

NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
15 Live Happy, Make Others Happy

After the Johns (innumerable generations of sons of the Sun) had circled their respective communities around the Sun (aka the Big Other of psychologists and philosophers) and secured social stability through the institution of informal self-sacrifice*, there originated a saying that expressed an observation and a sense of accomplishment: “Live happy and you will make others happy”.

The echoes of this saying have many variations. One speaks of smiling and discovering that the whole then world smiles with you. Another finds its way into Jefferson’s phrase in the American Declaration of Independence: “We hold these Truths to be self-evident that all Men are created Equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Nevertheless, we note that these statements about happiness appear to be valid only under conditions of social and political stability, i.e., social control achieved by either charismatic self-sacrifice or by violence. Since the vertical State was constructed by visiting military (and bureaucratic) violence upon its horizontal predecessors, the Johns, the descendants of Johns are gene-** and honor-bound to rediscover such not-violent acts as will deflate and end militarist violence.

Today the survivors or the “children” of Johns are all who understand that the neo-Christian spiritual order is a coo coos egg. If the forebears of Johns Children once fell for the trick of the cynic, who was able to lay his egg in their nest simply by calling out: “Cook-coo! Look! Heaven! Believe it!”, today they have the experience not to fall for the trick. However, it remains an open question as to what tactic they are to use to reclaim for themselves a political position.

One idea that presents itself as doable is to found a settlement of not-voters at the periphery of the corporate “democratic” society, i.e., a settlement that collectively refuses to acknowledge the corporate order as a democratic order. If this community does not vote because it is systematically coherent (though still only an egg waiting to hatch), and at the same time thinks of itself as a community of Johns Children, then it is (implicitly) is a political party

Another doable community may justify itself not only by being not-voters, but define their systematic coherence as one interested in reestablishing authority over death. This community may begin as a community of elderly people. Given the orthodox dogma that calls voluntary death “suicide”, the elderly have a special interest in reestablishing their authority over the young and inexperienced, the neo-Christian priesthood, and regain their authority as peacemakers and facilitators of social cohesion.

In short, waiting for the moment of the final collapse of our dysfunctional orthodoxy does not mean practicing political ennui. Time spent waiting may be used in activating self-conscious inactivity, as the examples mentioned above show—by popularizing the notion of staying away from voting booths at election time, by recognizing death to have a creative social function. One may ad communities of Johns Children that refuse to become obscene consumers (but occasionally practice fasts), ones that practice sexual unions that result in no children, but which propagate themselves as clones. Such communities will precondition society to life in a not-violent society, even as it maintains awe for life that violence has dismissed.

At the level of recent history, the first major crack in the “modern” system occurred with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Though capitalists celebrated the collapse of the Soviet Union as their victory, they forgot that the breakdown of the Soviet order preceded their own. Moreover, the collapse of the Soviets occurred because they could not block their publics from being witness (through their television sets) to the seemy side of the West’s success. The disappointment of the Soviet public over its inability to join the West in consumer binge, i.e., unpunished plunder, set the stage for the collapse of the Soviet bureaucracy that was unwilling to lead by example.

The second crack occurred in the fall of 2008, when the Lehman Brothers Bank, one of the world’s largest, collapsed in the Unites States of America. The collapse sent a wave of panic through the world’s financial systems. Governments ordered their printing presses to grease the banking systems that had locked up their gears as lenders and become savings institutions of and for its investors.

The current economic collapse in the West is not a mere cyclical dip on capitalist charts, but initiates a social meltdown to be replaced by communities of not-violent terror, i.e., terror come to mean but another name for self-sacrifice.*** Of course, we will hear a thousand denials that the system is breaking down, and hear a thousand accusations of fear mongering. Even so, theirs is a militarist presumption of authority and claim that the house they built is the best house ever built. The state (existence) of society no longer can accept this argument as convincing.

The arch-Christians achieved not-violent peace with what psychologists (those raised under the aegis of neo-Christian dogma) call the “death drive”. While the arch-Christians had not heard of quantum mechanics, they understood that the gap (I call it the “possible unknowable”) in our understanding was real and for ever and we had to bridge it by faith. The quantum jump of the arch-Christians was doable through the act of self-sacrifice practiced by Johns and their Children. On the other hand, the neo-Christian act of sending John (as Jesus) to heaven made for a gap that makes 1% of the population oligarchs, 99% poor and worse.

To sum up: the “death drive” stands for a space within which a human being may exercise freedom not determined by choice of mere survival. A human being may say “no” and refuse to do his duty as writ by the laws or demanded by habit. It is true that the same human being may say “yes” to the law and do as ordered, however, it is the “no” that results in the collapse of the house of cards. It is the “no” that offers an opportunity for others to say likewise. It is the refusal to act that is at the root of a community premised on not-violent terror.

*The first most likely routine form of the self-sacrifice to become instituted in society was among the elderly through their refusal to consume food. Evidence of this is seen among the Cathars, re: the “endura”, and statues of Budhist monks http://tinyurl.com/lx52sy .
**“Gene-bound” = an assumption that life is an unrestrainable force, and though it cannot eliminate death, it may outlive it by outwitting it.
***The injunction “Love thy neighbor as thyself” is based on our knowing that at times our selves come as monsters in human dress. This is why self-sacrifice must forgive our monster-like neighbors as did John-Jesus, when he told those who had come to watch him being thrown into the pit of fire: “Brothers and sister, forgive them, for they know not what they do”.

NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
14 The Unmaking of Jesus (cont.)

The once upon a time the sacred king became a mere king. Some call this mere king a “naked king”. Whatever, this “new” king had two fronts to fight on.

The first front was against the people whom the king had abandoned. No longer bound by the charisma of self-sacrifice, the people fragmented into groups, some of which came to believe that the community was an unnecessary bother, except of course as a military group or mafia that has the power to exploit others. To one such group belonged the “new” king, who maintained peace through force of arms.

The king’s bookkeepers and tax collectors, the Jews, were in the forefront of the second front. This front had the advantage in that it not only helped the secular king rule, but allowed him to “divide and rule”. The king was able to deflect the anger of the people from himself to his tax collectors. This is why, when the king’s position became weak for lack of charisma, the king did not stand in the way of the people venting their anger against the Jews.

Nevertheless, no “pogrom ” happened without the king having a hand on the bridle. To escape the people’s wrath, the Jews hid among the wandering Johns, the group that they themselves had once emerged from. The more successful among the latter, having lost their status as perpetual pilgrims and wandering monks, had settled down as innkeepers. The less fortunate had become mercenary soldiers or beggars. Whatever their personal fortunes, the Johns-Jews knew whence their origin. The bond between the John and Jew held for a long time—until the Johns were demoralized to a degree that lost them their self-awareness, and they became converted to neo-Christianity and joined the mob of those demoralized by the secular kings.

Because the Jews knew how to write, they were able to use writing to defend themselves against both the secular king and the people he had demoralized. The Jews began to collect and record customs of the community. The mere recording of them encouraged the observance of respectful conduct. The Jews called the recorded customs “laws”. However, if in the beginning, the “laws” were much like bookkeeping, merely recorded customs, later, these “laws” became refined through a process known as critique. Obviously, some “laws” were critiqued as being more sophisticated than others and were, thus, made amenable to a greater variety of interpretations than other laws.

This is how books came about—the Codex Hanmurabi, for example http://tinyurl.com/led9ez , which displeased the king and his court in the extreme. Given that the king had given up self-sacrifice and by so doing had also given up his exceptional status (his status above the law), the writing of laws into codices meant that he became subject to law as everyone else. Which is why, to maintain his privileged position, the king needed the support of arms, but arms needed the “moral” support of a story different than that of Iananna and Basil. Even so, the new story, while repeating many of the elements present in its old story, needed a notably different ending: it would end not with self-sacrifice, but the end of self-sacrifice—forever if possible.

[John] Basil was thrown into the pit of fire in 1084 or 1185. The latter is the preferable date, because then the raison de etre for the Crusade against Constantinople is better explained. It clears away the lies that claim that the Turks destroyed the city in 1453. Indeed, the crusade of 1204 and destruction of Constantinople at that time cleared the stage and put an end to arch-Christianity. This, in turn, enabled the introduction of a very different, a self-sacrifice denying, theology.

The next two hundred years that followed 1204, were consumed with wars of repression or neo-Christianization: the Albigensian Crusade, Crusade against the Balts, Crusades on other continents, indeed with the brutal persecution of everyone who was associated with arch-Christianity. This period proved violence and brutality to be such successful tools with regard to repression that even dictators of the 20th century continued to exercise it. This is why the terror of Hitlerite, Stalinist, and Maoist states vied with each other in as near a “total” slaughter of their (state created virtual) “enemies”.

However, the logistics, especially the speed of communications, had so changed society, that violence, though not ended, was shown to be failed policy.

In the 12th, 13th, and 14th centuries, state violence was a marvel to behold. Arch-Christendom was eliminated beyond recalling, except as a theoretical shadow in a mathematician’s (Anatoly Fomenko) calculations. The followers of the Sun and her priests, the Johns, were no longer. While for a time the numbers of Jews increased due to the swelling of their ranks by the Johns and their “children” fleeing from neo-Christian attempts to remove them from society and put them into insane asylums, the pogroms caught up with the Jews in the 20th century. With neither kings, dictators, nor democracies needing them as their tax collectors any longer, secularism turned on Jews with such ferocity that only a perverted religion could muster. Of course, by that time the Jews—deprived of history except as myth—had changed their story of origin completely. In fact, those who survived the holocaust adopted a mythical story as objective history, turned to violence to enforce the perception of the myth as reality, and abandoned the universalism of their forebears.

As for neo-Christianity, its leader, the Pope, became all pomp, ceremony, and forgetfulness of self-sacrifice. Most neo-Christian popes die in bed of natural causes. Moreover, Jesus, become John Basil crucified rather than burnt, sits safely in heaven and pontificates over a planet Earth in shambles.

NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
13 The Unmaking of Jesus (cont.)

The story of the murder of the Bogomil leader Basil by the Byzantine Emperor Alexius I is a story well known in the 12th century when it took place. It is not so today. Today many people are likely to be shocked to hear that what happened to Basil is a story that parallels closely to what happened to Jesus. There is a reason and explanation for this.

The story of Jesus was created around the story of Basil. The dreadful events that overtook Basil provided a ready available armature for the story for then emerging neo-Christian church founded by the Byzantine emperor Alexius I. Of course, the new story is reaches us not only inverted in the reasons for it happening, but the main cathartic events were changed from burning to being nailed to a cross. The reasons for these changes, too, are founded on the need to divert the public’s attention from what really happened.

Most likely these events happened under the rule of the Byzantine empire’s Emperor Alexius I. The Emperor felt compelled to change the story and found a new church and a new religion, for two main reasons.

1. The arch-Christian church, what we today derogatorily call the cult of “pagans”—of which Alexius his predecessors and I had been the sacred kings—had for many years felt alienated from their king. The people had once called their kings “the sacred king”. However, something increasingly unacceptable happened. For several consecutive generations the sacred king began to fail to fulfill his sacred function—which was to act the role of the kingdom’s founding father—by reenacting the founding violent moment by self-sacrificing himself. Since time immemorial, the founding moment (of death and miraculous rebirth) was celebrated during the annual solstice festivals. The festivals, one in winter and one in summer, generally went by their local name, but for the most part retained the root name of the sacred being: John, Yan. We see this practice in such names as Ivan Kapusta, John the Baptist, Yannukah, Hunnapu, Yohammad, and so on. Depending on the age of the sacred king (whether young or old), the length of his reign was determined by priests. Usually the agon, the moment of self-sacrifice, came with an obviously old age.

In any event, the sacred king of the Byzantine empire began to act increasingly as merely a king, that is to say, a man with a standing army who could and often did rob his people, his neighbors, aggrandized himself, and dictated what people should or should not do and think. In short, there occurred mutual alienation between the king’s and the people. Eventually, this alienation reached a stage, where it broke out into a civil war. As part of his war effort, the emperor needed to kill not only the Johns, the wandering priests of arch-Christendom, but also to replace their ideas with ideas of his own.

2. It is probable hat the alienation between the sacred king and the people began when the king began to use a number of the priests to the Sun, as not only his bookkeepers, but collectors of the gifts that the people donated to the temple-palace. These priests, were self-castrated devotees of the Sun, and, thus, not attracted to women for sexual reasons. This made them attentive workers and bookkeepers. Unfortunately, since the priests were such competent gift collectors, the sacred king soon discovered a way to have them collect more gifts than was customary. In time, the word “gift” came to mean “tax”.

At first, the tax was used to build grander temples, which then became the sacred king’s palaces, which of course soon no longer pretended to be temples. As the sacred king abandoned the temple for the palace, he became what today we call a temporal or secular man, an atheist as religiously devoted to materialism, as the sacred king had once been devoted to the aura of charisma that held the community under its umbrage. The temple prostitutes (women who wished to make the temple especially attractive as a place for leaving gifts) became part of the king’s harem. The “gifts” paid for a standing army, employed an increasingly large number of artists and artisans, and so on. Indeed, the king abandoned the ancient practice of self-sacrifice and began to seek ways to escape death altogether. This is what is behind the stories where kings and heroes go out on adventures to seek the magic plant (usually guarded by a serpent), the eating of which will give one immortality.

However,

3. The priests of Iananna (the Johns) learned not only how to do bookkeeping and collect taxes, they needed to invent writing to do so. And they did so. With the invention of writing, the castrates learned not only how to record old stories, but invent new ones. Some of the stories, which the priests invented, did not sit well with the king. He began to fear that they would take power away from him. This fear was the cause for discovering various ways by which to bind the priests closer to the palace and alienate them from the temple.

This is how there developed two factions of priests. One faction stayed with the people. These were the wandering preachers, the Johns. The other faction became known as “Jews”, most likely a word that was semantically connected to words for gifts and taxes. The word “jewel” comes to mind. The Jews necessarily became involved in palace intrigue, while the Johns remained of the people.

NOT-VIOLENT TERROR
12 The Unmaking of Jesus (cont.)

Let us continue with the story.

It was midnight when Iananna reached Great Palace below Earth and the door of the room known as The Heart of the Dead. When Ereshkigal saw Iananna, she exclaimed: “Ha, ha! Naked bitch! Just look at you! What a sorry sight!” Her tone was full of obvious shadenfreude.

There was some truth in what Ereshkigal said. Iananna stood not only naked, but also seemingly burnt out. What had been firm and pointed breasts in the morning, were now hanging long and spent. Moreover, Ereshkigal was dressed in Iananna’s attire. Though Ianannas clothes had lost their color and turned grey, Ereshkigal looked like a queen in them. “Did the Earth get you down during your travels, sister? Here, have a glass of Black John wine. You will feel better.”

Iananna drankthe wine and started for her room, but Ereshkigal blocked her way. “If you please, sister, I would like you to sleep in the barn with the geese tonight,” she said. “Tonight I am having a ball in the great hall of your apartment. All the great stars of the night will be there.”

Iananna was about to ask why Ereshkigal had not invited her, too, when she felt faint (the poison in the wine had taken effect) and she fell.

Ereshkigal’s servants dragged Iananna to the barn, tied her jaws shut as if she were dead, cut off her long braids, tied them as a rope around her waist, and then hung her corpse by this belt on the horns of an old moon. “Sweet dreams, sister,” said Erishkigal with a grin on her face. Then she left for Iananna’s apartment to join the revels of the stars.

When the morning came, the Sun did not rise. John, Iananna’s son, awoke in his earthly home, but when he did not see the Sun, he imagined that he had woken up too early and went back to sleep again. Thus, John slept the whole of the next day. Indeed, he had a strange dream. He dreamt that he awoke in a hole in the ground. He and his mother Iananna lay side by side. He lay with his face up and could see the night sky filled with stars. Iananna, his mother, lay (Oh horror of horrors!) beside him and—in an apparent reversal of roles—suckled on his nipple.

John awoke and understood that his mother was in trouble. However, what was he to do? There was not a sliver of light anywhere. John felt about to see if perhaps his mother really lay beside him, but his hands found nothing to touch. Great fear and anxiety overcame him. However, John was smart enough to take a deep breath. This allowed him to get his bearings and understand he should rise up, no matter how dark the hour, and try find his mother. After all, it was Iananna, who, if he, John, died, would rejuvenate him by giving birth to him again.

Meanwhile, in the barn with the sleeping geese, Iananna slid off the horns of the old Moon. She floated as if dead for three days through the abyss before she was then caught on the horns of the new Moon. As the new Moon rose, Iananna was bathed by the dew and came to life again.

Iananna rose into the sky and a song that resembled a roar greeted her. It was a shout of joy. During the three days of Iananna’s absence, her creation had taken fright. Everyone remembered the three days of darkness as days that sent chills to the bone and stuck in the eyes like glue. The was like a flower opening. People drew a knife across their palms, then pressed the palms against their door as a sign of how much the Sun, Iananna, had been missed and how much she was loved.

Iananna rose more quickly to the zenith that day or so it seemed. She was anxious to see her son John. Like him, she had dreamt a strange dream. In it, she had come to the gates of a cemetery and discovered John to be its gatekeeper. When she wanted to enter, he had blocked her way. “This is no place for you, mother,” he had said. “Not for a thousand lives.”

“By what right do you keep me from passing?” she had asked.

“That of my life,” John replied.

“But don’t you want to live?”

“Of course, I want to live, but if you die there will be no sunrises.”

Iananna had not understood and had tried go past John. John had raised his hands, his palms facing her. They were stained with blood.

Iananna awoke from her dream her heart pounding. She raced up the night sky toward the dawn and then higher toward the zenith from where she could overlook everything on Earth. it was too late. John had died. Though Iananna lifted her skirt and touched John’s crotch, John’s rooster did not crow.