Thursday, June 21, 2007

initial cosmic rebellion against flesh

warning: another sketch:

now of course from very early in human experience we have that Homo sapiens had thrust upon them this immense 20billion tangled neuron labyrinth of consciousness of his life of his experience and it sent them reeling! they got a tad lost in its immense depths and detours and richness and coupled with their growing horror at DEATH of such a wonderful thing as human experience, REBELLED against their fleshy muddy Earthy iterations of trial and error of lives in time nature. (that is to say, Earth creates the miriad creatues amazin creations by a process of trial and error with children's lives. parents overproduce an abundance of DIFFERENT kids and the ecosystem weeds 'em out. amazingly crafted dragonflies, cauliflowers, people are ALSO just food!) THERE'S the cosmic rebellion for you

so of course WAY before science we've been disconnected from this Earth, Cosmos. but the flipside is that we rebelled from the fact that Earth creates with ACCIDENT! Variation amongst children is due to accidental mutation, and accidental rearrangement of genes. the makeup of ecosystems is due partially to accidental extinctions of whole populations due to the vaguaries of weather volcanoes and meteorites...

we rebelled from the fact that we were an accident, in fact so insecure had we become from our intense consciousness of the fragility and contingency of a human life, of human history (the flood myths) that we infantily DEMANDED that the universe in the form of a FATHER had planned us. not as a MOTHER! mothers' relationships with their kids are too ambivelent, too risky! but fathers! they run no risk in fathering a kid! and when agriculture finally came around, fathers welcomed the idea of having lots of kids around to work the farm while mother's risked DEATH for it.

hmm... delve into this mother father accident think more carefully. recall my idea, that as hunter gatherers children are valuble but risky, and valuble in much smaller numbers than we experience today. so that probably mothers had much control over contraception, and aborting kids if she didn't feel she had enough resources. whether a kid survived WAS CONTINGENT... then with agriculture, if men could wrest enough land from each other, enough cattle from each other, they could afford plenty of kids, even plenty of kids were an asset, and they demanded kids, and mothers lost control. kids became inevitable.

now i'm mostly thinking of Greek, near eastern myth finally feeding into judaism and christianity. is the broader range of myths different? in all agricultural societies men win, become gods. the universe becomes male. the Cosmic story leads up to mankind.

at least in campbell's view all the myths seem to point to some stronger reality BEHIND this Earthy reality. and does that reality always inevitably create mankind in it's image?

so which myths have mankind as the PURPOSE of the cosmos? which ones carry this male fear of paternity, so the story that the kid is inevitable?

anyway by christianity child of classical greece and judaism, the universe is... we are not OF this Earth certainly, and maybe even not of this universe, we are breathed into the cracked rotting female shells of Earthclay by a male space alien god. a god alien to Earth, a God alien to the risky female practice of birth, a god alien to the trial and error creating properties of time. a VERY insecure God. a God born of our insecurity of knowing our contingency.

so eventually we develop the myth that we are children of a space alien father who does not risk death in childbirth, and therefore loves us 100%. who created us as pure spirit beings, who will bring us back to him, creates a rigid system of behavioral rules, that if we follow, it will all work out, bannishes birth/death and it's all very COZY.

somewhere in here we got to explore how this father came to reside in the heavens, in the planets. was it just that he was fleeing from the obviously birthing mother? what did i say the planets represented to us?

what about the Earthy Egyptian horus osiris isis thing. what do you say about them? hmm... i don't know that i know them. i don't know that any of us knows them yet. let me see... certainly they had a very visceral connection to their very special river, Nile. who fed them and created their world? well, on his own the nile is a tad chaotic, their world required some further organising principle in the form of human group effort to build dikes after the flood and save up the seeds to plant the next year...this group effort is tricky for humans, and innevitably leads to male leaders, fighting and conquering, and finally some kind of mutual standoff, with careful rules to hold it together.

it is human politics that ultimately becomes the stronger experience the more day to day matter at hand than the experience of the fertility and rottingness of Earth. so while you got osiris/isis birthing themselves into life each year, you've got ever present horus/chaos threatening the system and thus the need for ... what's the Egyptian image for how it all balances? eventually Re takes over in consciousness, no?

but what about the sense of a stronger reality of spirits behind this osiris/isis rebirthing thing?

ah.. now maybe we get into the jaynesian thing. definitely in Ancient Egypt there was a strong sense of the presence of the dead ancestors. is osiris the MIND of fertility? everything that happens is propelled by MIND, just like the way my hand moves, mind moves it. unless it's a reflex.. pharoah becomes horus after death?

anyway there are these "ba"s and "ka"s. definitely animating principles. so do you recall if ancient Egytptians felt ALIENATED from Earth? on the practical realm they certainly respected him (really Earth was a HE for Egypt? hmmm, well for the Maya, quetzelcoatl -venus - fertility is also a HE. hmmm...) and the Nile, and certainly made no attempts at a concerted massacre of croccodile and hippopotomous... did they feel that their time on Earth was temporary and their proper place was... well, DID they imagine another realm? or merely another TIME, or even, another QUALITY of time?

so could we figure out in these myth views that this realm behind Earthy living dying reality is not another PHYSICAL PLACE but an alternate way of seeing... or is this a very modern notion? didn't you propose that uroboric and apocalyptic were two alternate ways of experiencing time? that post bicameral was a third way of experiencing time... was another form of alienation? you are forgeting all the meditational, mystical ecstatic states... states of experience yes, but AFTER the experience does the practitioner accept it as an alternate experience or does he demand that he's experienced a different OBJECT?

my this is wandering about lazily.
i wish i had my library.

No comments: