In this foundational opening chapter, we explore the ontology of a universe governed by entropy, decay, and the ultimate primacy of darkness over light
At the extreme points of opposition between the infinitely large and the infinitely small lies nothingness. Nothingness is the point of origin and the final destination of the entire universe. The universe is an arena of fatal change, existing thanks to an inherent dynamic whose cause lies precisely in the eternal play between the two poles of nothingness: the infinitesimal and the infinitive. From the perspective of space itself—the boundless expanse of metacosmic nothingness—the universe is a thoroughly insignificant phenomenon, a point of light whose destiny is to burst in infinity, to be sucked into the endless void. The solitary beam of light in the darkness is condemned to extinction through dispersion. Luminous energy is irrevocably dissipated into the depths of space. Expanding and conquering endless realms, the universe loses itself in its own vastness. This does not explain the origin of light or energy, but it leaves room to consider light as an intruder in the infinite kingdom of nothingness and darkness.
Light is an intruder which, unless it finds a way to leave this world imbued with nothingness within some indefinite timeframe, can expect nothing other than its own dissolution, death, and conversion into darkness. How and where light might depart without being within the reach of death and darkness is another question entirely. The universe is therefore like a kaleidoscopic game, a mimicry of light attempting to escape the deadly trap into which it was cast from a source that is practically unfathomable.
Existence implies a mechanism of decomposition. This mechanism resides within the very nature of the universe, in its internal contradictions. We see that the destination of the universe is its self-dismantling and eventual disappearance. Its constituent elements tend toward the disintegration and dissolution of the whole they jointly form. Matter strives to return to its initial inactive state, to the inactivity of timeless primordiality, to eternal peace. Temporarily imprisoned within the structure of the universe, its constituent elements long for freedom—the realization of which, relative to the whole, constitutes a destructive act, but also the self-destruction of every individual entity. The liberating impulse of the universe's constituent matter is entropy. Entropy is the affirmation of nothingness as an immanent force, as the essence, as the source and destination, the beginning and the end. Entropy confirms nothingness as a fateful and defining presence or absence, as both starting point and end. Entropy is the measure of disorder or randomness within a system.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that entropy tends to increase over time, meaning the universe is constantly moving toward a state of greater disorder. As the universe expands, matter and energy become increasingly dispersed, leading to an increase in entropy. The universe advances toward a state of maximum entropy, in which all matter is uniformly distributed and no further energy potential remains to be utilized. The inertia of the universe toward nothingness is the cause of universal entropy and decadence on all lower and smaller levels. Conversely, the opposite assertion would be equally valid: that entropic processes on smaller levels are the cause of universal entropy and decadence on the macrocosmic level. The logic of this statement finds its analogy in the famous Hermetic law: as above, so below—a law that masterfully connects two spatial and value-based perspectives that lose themselves in two opposing infinities.
Decomposition begins simultaneously with the very inception of the universe’s duration. In the human realm, decay begins with the emergence of that very realm. The world exists in order to be destroyed by the force of its own nature. This means that existence is a decadent and fatal process through which something comes into being, grows and develops, reaches its peak, stagnates, declines, and ultimately dies and vanishes. Existence is not merely decadent in the sense that decadence is just one of its features; existence, in and of itself, is decadence. This finds its parallel in the philosophy of Saint Augustine, who states: "I am sinful because I exist"—or rather, everything that exists is "sinful." Were it not sinful, it would not exist at all. An error has been built into existence so that, through its own actualization, it may destroy itself.
This brings us to the Biblical myth of the expulsion of the first human pair from the Garden of Eden. By tasting the fruit from the forbidden tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they transitioned from a state of perfection into an imperfect state. That is, they passed from a state into the process of mortal life. Their intellect was awakened; their eyes were opened. Their sudden realization that they were naked and their covering of their genitalia with aprons indicates the essential consequences of transitioning from a state of perfection into a process of imperfection. They lost the so-called garment of incorruptibility—the light that adorned them in their state of perfection—and that "switch" is located in the region of the sexual organs, which became objects of shame, various taboos, and symbols of perversion down to the present day. It is precisely the loss of this primordial light that is the cause or indicator of all decadence and "sinfulness" in the human being, primarily its mortality, since according to Biblical teaching, the wages of sin is death.
Because it leads to ultimate destruction, the fundamental principle of the universe is not order, but disorder. The Cosmocrator designed a chaos that operates according to specific principles. The cosmos is subordinate to chaos; it exists in service to chaos. Within the universe, all order is relative and limited, serving the ultimate purpose of subsequent destruction. All progress and all creation exist in service to general decadence and destruction. The price of progress is destruction. This rule is equally observable in human behavior. Without progress there would be no destruction, but then there would be no progress either. Although it seems unnatural, progress is natural, just as the destruction that progress drags along with it is also natural. In any case, with or without progress, everything will sooner or later be destroyed due to the action of the fundamental forces of the universe. Progress is an instrument of chaos, but above and beyond that, progress is also a small island of cosmos and consciousness, a piece of firm ground beneath one's feet, an orientation point for reason.
As human beings, we are accustomed to treating light and darkness, or day and night, as equal givens of nature—as equivalent phenomena or subjects. We gain this impression due to the roughly equal proportions of both phenomena upon which the rhythm of life on Earth is built. And for us, this is normal. However, if we examine things a bit more closely, we will see that light is by far the inferior component of this given duality. In the universe—as is clearly demonstrated to us at night—light exists in vastly smaller quantities compared to darkness. The dominance of light is an illusion, the consequence of the close presence of a massive source of light and heat: the Sun. Darkness is the alpha and omega. Light represents the duplicity of existence, the basic reference point for the projection of space and time.
The quantitative superiority of darkness over light—or rather, the human perception of that superiority, which reflects a truer picture of the world—finds its mirror in our fear. We are always more afraid at night than during the day. We always feel a sense of relief when dawn breaks. Darkness does not necessarily presuppose or conceal evil, nor does light imply good. In this universe, no lofty principles are at work—only the most brutal Darwinian food chain.
One widespread concept is that which attributes antiquity and darkness to the feminine element, and light—along with that which is historically or mythologically younger—to the masculine. Bachofen notes that womanhood stands at the forefront, while the male figure appears only afterward, in the second line. Woman is a given; man comes into being. According to Bachofen, woman and man do not appear simultaneously. They are not of the same order. Woman is that which is given; man is merely that which has arisen from her. He belongs to visible, yet constantly changing creation. As such, he enters the world only in mortal form. From the beginning, only woman exists, is given, and remains immutable. Having come into being—and therefore exposed to constant decay—is man. On the plane of physical life, the male principle holds second place, subordinate to the female principle. Here lies the root of that ancient notion connecting the immortal mother to the mortal father. She remains ever the same, while on the male side an endless succession of generations is built. With ever-new men, the one primordial mother mates. Naturally, these statements should not be understood literally.
Following this paraphrase of Bachofen, I would recall that moment in Carlos Castaneda's work when his sorcerer-teacher Don Juan speaks of the quantitative superiority of female consciousness compared to male consciousness, which exists in the universe merely in traces. Julius Evola, in his book Metaphysics of Sex, states that the question of the inferiority, equality, or superiority of woman in relation to man is devoid of meaning, because it presupposes comparability. According to Evola, a difference exists between man and woman that excludes every conventional standard, for both capabilities and virtues that are seemingly ordinary and "neutral" possess different functionalities and traits depending on whether they are present in a man or a woman. Asking whether "woman"—or the female principle—is superior or inferior to "man"—the male principle—is the same as asking whether water is superior or inferior to fire. Therefore, as Evola puts it, the criterion of measurement for either sex cannot be provided by the opposite sex, but only by the "idea" of one's own sex. What can be done in this regard is to determine the superiority or inferiority of a specific woman based on whether she approaches female typicality—the pure or absolute woman—to a greater or lesser degree, which applies fully to man as well. Thus, the question of the inferiority or superiority of one principle over another pertains solely to its quantitative representation in nature, or in a specific being or phenomenon. Naturally, determining the characteristics of the typicality of pure or absolute gender nature is an entirely different matter, for as such, that nature is never fully manifested in every individual human being, but always in some proportion. There is no "pure" or complete man, nor a complete or "pure" woman. These are fundamental metaphysical ideals. In nature, everyone lacks something, and everyone deviates from the ideal to a certain extent.
Take a piece of coal, take mud, feces, anything that might seem disgusting and dark—indeed, any object, pleasant or unpleasant. All of it was once pure light. However, how does something that is by nature passive and unmanifested suddenly become manifested, active, a creative and life-giving light? Whence came the primordial cosmic egg of pure energy in the midst of nothingness? The answer to this question points to some difficult-to-fathom active force that creates energetic forms by mixing its own energy with the unmanifested energy of nothingness. The forms thus created, being dual in nature—composed of two kinds of energy—tend toward decomposition. Each type of energy strives to liberate itself from this imposed, unnatural state and to return to its normal state, to its original, timeless environment. This means that everything surrounding us is constructed from these two types of energy. That which is uncreated is mono-energetic in nature; it can neither die nor live in the sense familiar to us. On the other hand, everything that arises, lives, and dies is of dual-energetic origin.
Now that we have acquainted ourselves with basic cosmological principles, we can take a step further in uncovering the premises of a radically nihilistic, yet essentially liberating doctrine that I have named the Divine Revolution of Catastrophe.
No comments:
Post a Comment