I have been pondering this for two or three days and it seems like a fairly stable flight of fancy, so to speak. You don’t have to believe it, but for me, in my psychotic way, it represents the next logical step along the gangplank of actuality. You recall that our takeaway from the mysterious Tishby’s officially untranslated “Doctrine of Evil” was that the entire root of the problem is this cursed castration or, as they call it, circumcision. I argued that the trauma on the unprotected neonate is such as to invite the demons into the poor little mite’s very soul on a permanent basis, so naturally all Jewish males are soulless monsters. This is an appalling and probably illegal thing to say, but it’s rather obvious if you allow yourself to consider it objectively. Now, as you can easily imagine, there are beings of various sorts which exist upon different planes of consciousness. The kabbalists distinguish four planes. The entities in the four levels are (working from the bottom up):
- material bodies such as our own, with purely animal consciousness extinguished at death;
- minds such as our own, themselves also mortal but which act as the bases for the attraction of
- souls… for want of a convenient better word… and these souls are definitely above us, be they angels, devils, root-souls in the kabbalistic sense, or what C S Lewis in “That Hideous Strength” (a masterpiece of 1950s catholic science fiction, recommended), called “macrobes”. My personal belief is that it is only by being taken up into one of these macrobes that the (mind of the) human individual attains to immortality, but that they are non-moral, much more so than we are. They have no particular concepts of “good & evil,” in my view. Some of them have become addicted in a sort of a vampiric way to the continuous sacrifices of flesh, blood and agony that we call circumcisions. In return they provide supernatural aid to the Jews.
- Finally, which is somewhat of a stretch, some sort of over-mind perhaps. Not AFAIAC ‘God’. An over-mind would be more or less the same as ‘God’ in the sense of ‘process theology’, which is something cooked up by masons & you-guessed-it. I would think of it as Hegelian in the sense that Hegelian logic would determine its evolution, if anything did, but there might be as it were factions within it as it evolves. And for Hegel it would have a consummation, an end point, but not for me. And I think this is the mirror image of the bottommost world, which is the world of the shells, or material universe, for which the Marxian logic is more appropriate than the Hegelian – RB