1. FALSEHOOD AS A PRINCIPLE. Gumilev writes on Anti-System
I propose ancient life-negating religions are still active today, or that their principles have been adopted somewhere. Under the guise of freedom of religion, freedom of speech the world is in Chaos.
If you don’t think in the terms of “system”, it may appear that there are a few “bad people” out there, and they gravitate toward running the show. Apart from them, everything is OK. I am proposing that the search for “Evil Men” obfuscates the real problem, which is a cultural stereo-type that uses violence as a tool. Maybe the main tool, or at least the tool of last resort. Within that system, so-called evil men will always pop-up. The problem will never be resolved.
If I were to tell you that world leaders are members of some cult religion you would only see conspiracy propaganda. I am not saying that, but I am giving a background on powerful philosophies, that were active for centuries. Why weren’t we taught anything about them, and consequently led to believe that they never existed? But it is right on the internet: “Manichaeism is a formerly major world religion, founded in the 3rd century CE by the Parthian prophet Mani, in the Sasanian Empire. Manichaeism teaches an elaborate dualistic cosmology describing the struggle between a good, spiritual world of light, and an evil, material world of darkness.” It got its strongest foothold in Italy, when moving throughout Europe, and was instrumental in the Inquisitions, (as both the persecuted and the persecutor).
What do Ismailism, Karmatianism, Marionite Pavlikianism, Manichaeism, Gnosticism, Bogomilism, Albigensianism, the Cathars and other similar ancient systems have in common? Here we are finding out where truth and falsehood are not opposed, but equated to each other. (Does it ring a bell?) There is one feature that is common to these systems . . . life-negation, (they are all anti-systems), which is expressed in the fact that the truth and falsehood are not opposed, but equated to each other.
Their teachings boiled down to the following:
Evil is eternal. This is all of the material world, including you and me, and only animated by the spirit, but enveloping it with the material. The evil of the world is the torment of the spirit in the tenets of matter; therefore, all material things are a source of evil. And if so, then evil is all things, including temples and icons, crosses; and the bodies of people. And all this is subject to destruction.
________________
Words have many interpretations, and the meaning of a word depends on the context in which it is being used. Interpreting texts outside of the historical setting of their time is rather meaningless.
Worse if you are sincere in doing so but uninformed, because the fundamental error of analysis remains, and stupidity is as much a source of human misfortune as evil willfulness. Stupidity is even worse, because it demands for itself the right of irresponsibility: "I thought so, - so I am not to blame”. And this is where the evil willfulness gets the space it needs. It cannot act directly, which always has its share of risk, but indirectly, through deceived fools who are sure of their right NOT to think about what they do, but to act according to the orders of others. This is the motivation for “Proxy Wars”.
Is it necessary in a political treatise to deal with the history of forgotten fantastic doctrines? Yes, it is, because their formulation of the problem attitudes to life on Earth contains implicitly, a solution to the problem posed: who, (how and why) destroys the biocenoses, in which they themselves live, including other people.
In essence, we have found the plus and minus, which, like in algebra, can be swapped. This exchange will change our subjective qualitative assessment, but not the objective opposition itself. If we take as positive the affirmation of the biosphere with its regularities, which include the killing of living beings, then the opposite position would be negative, even if it were associated with the preaching of non-resistance to evil.
At the individual level, lying is not only an unsympathetic stereotype of behavior, but also a way of influencing the environment, ethnic and landscape. At the population level, it is already a massive disinformation in the anti-systems, affecting the environment social and cultural. But at the biospheric level there are simplification processes that lead to replacement of higher animals with microorganisms (rotting of corpses): transformation of living matter into indirect matter; disintegration of indirect matter into molecules, molecules into atoms, real atomic particles into virtual ones, and transfer of photons into the "Abyss", i.e. radiating into the vacuum of space. But to begin with, seems to be a trivial thing.
But what is the truth against lies? It is not necessary to make a mystery and to mystify the reader, as well as oneself. Let's call as truth the judgment adequate to the given sum of the observed facts, where the error does not exceed the legal tolerance. When superimposed on the coordinate axis, true judgments will be positive values and false ones will be negative values, and that’s on a global scale.
And the genesis of positive and negative values is different: the former is direct generation of the biosphere's living substance energy, the latter are reflections from the vacuum, i.e. hollow concepts and thoughts. We're just defining the anti-system, those groups that exist by sucking the blood out of the constructive part of society. A cancerous tumor can grow to the limits of the organism, but no further, and it lives only at the expense of the host organism.
The positive axis will include life-affirming impulses, including those that might even sacrifice an individual's life, often their own, to maintain the existence of the species, and the negative axis will include those that lead to saving the individual from the burdens of the world by rejecting grief and joy, rejecting caring for loved ones and those far away, rejecting loving the truth and rejecting the denial of lies. This list, far from complete, characterizes the anti-system.
Out of this grows a program of manslaughter, because since there is no real life, which is seen either as illusion (Tantrism), or as a mirage in a mirror image (Ismailism), or as the creation of Satan (Manichaeism), there is no one to pity - because there is no object of pity; and there is no reason to pity - God is not recognized, so there is no one to be held accountable to, and there cannot be pity, because this would prolong the imagined, but painful suffering of a being who is in fact a specter, (a haunting experience). And if so, in the absence of an object, the lie is equal to the truth, and one can use both to one's advantage.
___________
Medieval reality was sometimes so terrible that people were ready to "throw themselves" into any illusion, especially one as logical, rigorous and elegant as this one, and allowing you to do whatever you could imagine. After all, by entering the world of phantasmagoria and spells, they became masters of that world, or more accurately, they were sincerely convinced of it. And the fact that they had to spit on the cross, like the Templars, or smash a Kaaba meteorite into pieces, like the Karmatians, (break all symbols of culture), for the sake of freedom and power over others, did not embarrass them at all.
True, when they took this path, they did NOT gain any personal freedom. On the contrary, they lost even that which they had to that very limited extent in normal society, in one or another positive system. There, was some law and custom, that guaranteed them some rights commensurate with their incumbent duties. But here they had no rights. Strict discipline subjected them to an invisible leader, an elder, a teacher, but it enabled them to do maximum harm to their neighbors. And they found that so pleasant, so joyful, that it was possible to sacrifice one's life for it.
And it was not only distress and resentment that drove the neophytes to the anti-systems. People often lived badly, but not everywhere and not always. Stormy periods were replaced by quiet ones, but the philistine mustiness of peaceful rural life acted dialectically (logically) and created consequences opposite to its prerequisites. When the passionate young man was fed to his heart's content, but forbidden to do anything or to think logically, he sought the use of his hidden powers. And he found them in the preaching of denial, disregarding the fact that the goal set before him was a fantasy. Fairy tale and myth were born every day.
Against them the strict conclusions of science in practical predictions of reality were powerless. In the 1st millennium they fascinated people of all countries except Russia and Siberia, where the anti-systems had not been formed.
The latter can be easily explained. Two parameters are necessary for the emergence of an ongoing anti-system: decline, for example, the moment of transition from one phase to another phase of local ethnogenesis, and the introduction of an alien ethnos. Even if both systems are positive and creative before the beginning of the process, both in terms of ecology and in terms of culture. By combining, they CAN give rise to an anti-system, a side phenomenon arising apart from the will of the participants.
When two different rhythms overlap, a kind of cacophony emerges, which people perceive as something unnatural, which is generally correct. But then people begin to dislike the geographical environment that accommodates them, looking for a way out with strict logic and justifying their hatred of a world arranged so inconveniently.
Since Siberia and Ancient Russia were shielded from extraneous, undesirable influences until the 13th century, ideas alien to the worldview of their inhabitants, if they got into the northern forests of Eurasia, they could not take root there.
An equally passionate push of the turn of our era gave birth to the original positive system - Christianity, which overlapped the Gnostic phantasmagoria, and a new push of the 6th-7th centuries, which created Islam as a worldview, and Islam stopped the existence of Iranian anti-systems – the zindiks.
In Byzantium, the anti-system developed in the 9th century in Asia Minor, on the border with the "Muslim world". From there it spread to the Balkans, where the Bulgarians and Slavs, who accepted the Greek education, created their own chimera - the Bulgarian kingdom. Here the anti-system was called Bogomilism and disappeared only after the passionate push of the 13th century, it was displaced by the Ottomans.
But the fate of the Manicheans of Provençe was much more complicated. They died in the XIII century, but infected Western Europe with their worldview, where a disgusting social institution - the Inquisition - appeared. It is worth telling more about this.
____________
Manichaeism and Christianity equally recognize in the world the combination of two elements: Light and Darkness. But the Manicheans consider "darkness" as all "matter" and especially the flesh, while Christians see the material world as the creation of God and bless the pure joys of the flesh, marriage, fun, love for the motherland... The incompatibility of the two worldviews is obvious, and the struggle between them is not over to this day. Western Manichaeism had been in competition with Christianity since the late third century and was persecuted in the same way as Christianity under Diocletian.
Christian emperors continued these persecutions. Theodosius defined the death penalty for belonging to Manichaeism. Honorius classified the confession of Manichaeism as a state crime. The Vandal king Gunnerich exterminated the Manichaeans in North Africa; only those who managed to flee to Italy escaped. In the sixth century Ravenna became the center of Manicheanism, for the inhabitants of Lombardy, the Arians, forced to fight against Rome, gave them shelter.
In the 10th century Manichaeism spread to Languedoc and merged with similar teachings in Bulgaria. Manichean preachers in southern France and even in Italy so electrified the masses that at times even the pope was afraid to leave the fortified castle in order to avoid being insulted in the city streets by the excited crowd, among whom there were also knights, especially since the feudal lords affected by the propaganda refused to subdue them.
In the second half of the eleventh century the Manichean doctrine spread to Lombardy, where the vices of the higher clergy caused legitimate indignation among the laity. In 1062 the priest Ariald spoke out in Milan against the marriage of priests, but met with the resistance of Archbishop Guido and was killed
The struggle continued, with the archbishop and his successor supported by Emperor Henry IV, the secret Satanist, and the reformers by Popes Alexander II and Gregory VII. Apparently, both popes and emperors were not interested in the essence of the problem, but were simply looking for supporters. The people of Milan paid the price for the rivalry of the chieftains, who burned during street fights in 1075.
In the twelfth century the Manicheans, called Patarenes in Italy, spread throughout all the cities as far as Rome, with the peasants being the least inclined to heresy and the nobles and priests, i.e. the most passionate part of the population of the time, being the most active heretics.
In Languedoc, which was under the shadowy patronage of the kings of Germany, the city of Albi became the center of Manicheanism, and because of this the French Manicheans became known as Albigensians, along with their Greek name of Cathars, which means "pure". Their community was divided into "perfect," "faithful," and laity. The "perfect" lived in celibacy and fasting, teaching the "faithful" and guiding the dying, who on their deathbed accepted initiation into the "perfect" in order to be saved from the bonds of the material world. The laity, sympathetic to the Cathars, translated the books of the Old Testament into popular languages as heroic tales, thus gradually changing the ideals of chivalry and thus the stereotype of their readers. The rest was completed by the antipathy of the Provençal people to the French, as an alien and aggressive ethnic group. By 1176 most of the nobility and clergy of Languedoc had become Cathars, while a smaller portion, and the peasants preferred to remain silent and not protest.
Disappointed in the possibilities of scholasticism, which in the tenth century suffered another decline, medieval theologians tried to find a solution outside the schools and received answers from Manicheans who came from the East (from the Balkan Peninsula), whose teachings boiled down to the following:
Evil is eternal. This is all of the material world, animated by the spirit, but enveloping it with itself. The evil of the world is the torment of the spirit in the tenets of matter; therefore, all material things are a source of evil. And if so, then evil is all things, including temples and icons, crosses; and the bodies of people. And all this is subject to destruction.
Manicheans introduced into their teaching the doctrine of the transmigration of souls. This means that death plunges the suicidal person into a new birth, with all the trouble that comes with it. Therefore, for the salvation of souls another was suggested: the exhaustion of the flesh either by ascesis, or by frenzied debauchery, collective debauchery, after which the weakened matter should release the soul from its clutches. Only this goal was recognized as worthy by the Manicheans, and as far as earthly affairs were concerned, morality was naturally abolished. For if matter is evil, then any extermination at any cost is good, be it murder, lying, betrayal... all made no difference. With respect to the objects of the material world, everything was permitted.
Such a concept frightened and infuriated the medieval French. In 1022 ten Cathars, betrayed by their disciples, were burned in Orleans; among them were King Robert I's clergyman Etienne, the scholastic Lisieux and the chaplain Heribert. As human beings they were very pitiable. They were honest, sincere, inquisitive. At a terrible time of Catholicism's crisis, when insolent prelates were given pulpits like feudal lords and semi-literate priests could not explain basic Christian ethics to their parishioners, these men sought a consistent, logical solution to the painful problems that reality posed to them. Their conclusions had some logic but were unnatural. This is why the healthy intuition of the medieval French rebelled against their logic. The system collided with this anti-system during the transition from the ascendant phase to the acmatic phase and left the ashes of the executed, on Earth.
A similar attitude to Manichaeism is always and everywhere. That is why the Manichean communities of the 1st millennium were secret, as a consequence of which lies became a stereotype of their behavior. Once in Italy and France, the Manichean emissaries called themselves "weavers" in order to be able to move freely from city to city to propagate their doctrine. In reality, they were as much "weavers" as the Freemasons were "masons”.
In fact, the Albigensian war was by no means akin to the Jacqueria, (a popular revolt in 1358 France), nor was it a feudal skirmish between Toulouse and Paris, nor was it a national war between the Provençalians and the French. And here's why. Unlike many patriarchal and plebeian anti-church movements, the Cathars were socially diverse, belonging to no single class, which contributed to the successful spread of the doctrine, not constrained by social and ethnic boundaries.
Albigensian Crusade, the Papal States and France vs. Cathar States (anti-system) 1208- 1229 (I think often call the peasant wars, but peasants were not the driving principle, and it was not a class war), up to one million killed.
The class struggle of peasants and townspeople against the dominant feudal lords never ceased. However, it followed two unrelated lines. The serfs resented the arbitrariness of the barons. But their program was clearly formulated: "Our good liege lords protect us from wicked enemies and evildoers. Reasonable, but after all, it had nothing to do with the doctrine that everything material is a manifestation of world evil and as such must be destroyed. On the contrary, the class nature of the peasantry pushed them to cultivate land, build houses, raise children, and accumulate fortunes, rather than abandon it all for illusions, even if it was somehow made attractive.
The second line is the struggle of urban communities (communes) in alliance with royalty against the dukes and earls. Again, the nascent bourgeoisie sought wealth, luxury, power, not asceticism and poverty. In the West, cities supported the pope or the emperor; in the East, the Sunni caliph; in Byzantium, the cities were a bulwark of Orthodoxy. The well-being of city dwellers depended on strengthening order in the world, not on destroying the world order for the sake of otherworldly ideals that were foreign and inarticulate.
And it is unlikely that the preaching of salvific poverty can be considered a social program. After all, Christian monks and Muslim marabouts and Sufis advocated the poverty of the clergy. The bishops' opulence, nepotism and simony were stigmatized from the pulpits by popes and councils, but they did not attract suspicion of heresy. Occasionally, too restless of denouncers have been killed around the corners, or executed on fictitious charges, but in those cruel times it was easy to end up on the scaffold, especially when the enthusiastic person did not notice that he was standing in the way of the crown prince. Executions were carried out without ideological censure. Indeed, how could a mystical anti-system doctrine reflect class interests? After all, in order to do so it would have to become widely accessible, but then the guiding principle of secret initiation and blind obedience would be lost.
Well, what was the behavior of the heretics themselves? The last thing they wanted was peace. They killed the feudal lords, of course, but they were just as ruthless in dealing with the peasants and townspeople, taking their possessions and selling their wives and children into slavery. The social composition of the Manichaean and Ishmaelite communities, (Arab tribes), was extremely variegated. They included racial priests, poor artisans and rich merchants, peasants and vagabonds who were adventurers, and finally professional warriors, i.e., feudal lords, without whom a long and successful war was impossible in those days. The army had to have people who could build soldiers into a fighting order, strengthen the castle, and organize a siege. And in X-XIII, only feudal lords were able to do this.
**There may be a misconception that Catholics were better, kinder, more honest, nobler than Cathars (Albigensians). This view is just as wrong as the other way around. People remain themselves, no matter what ethical doctrines are preached to them. And why is the concept that one can buy absolution with money donated for a crusade, better than the call to fight against the material world? And if one doctrine is better than the other, for whom is it better? So, to pose the question of qualitative evaluation is meaningless and as antiscientific as the question of which is better: acid or alkali? They both burn the skin!**
But if so, then why exactly this feud is given so much attention, when at the same time social conflicts between the feudal class and the enslaved peasants were exacerbated, the rivalry of growing kingdoms for territories and trading cities for markets developed? How did the semi-concealed war, which we have taken as our starting point, differ from them?
In contrast to the struggle for political domination within one large ethno-social system and even clashes between different cultural-systemic units, this was a war of extermination. The French Manicheans were too similar to the French Catholics to coexist in the same arena, for both favored the development of the system in opposite directions. As they clashed, they caused the annihilation of the very matter they considered not God's creation, but only destroying the world's evil. And just so, they behaved everywhere: in Byzantium, Iran, Central Asia, and even in faith-tolerant China. Their persecution was therefore ubiquitous, and their resistance, often very active, gave the early Middle Ages the coloring that shines through the visible history of the clash of states and the formation of ethnic groups. The presence of two incompatible behavioral and psychological structures was a global phenomenon at that time. This is why so few monuments of art remain from that era.
The fact that the Manicheans mostly disappeared from the face of the Earth by the end of the fourteenth century is not surprising, for they, in fact, aspired to it. Hating the material world and its joys, they had to hate life itself; consequently, they did not even have to affirm death, for death is only a moment of change of states, but anti-life and anti-world and anti-system. This is where they moved, clearing the earth for the Renaissance. Their failure was only that they could not destroy all men by leading them through martyrdom, not always voluntary. How hard they tried! And it is not their fault that the life-affirming principle of the human psyche withstood their onslaught, so that the history of nations did not cease to flow.
______________
Against this background arose the first Inquisition, founded by the Spanish monk Dominic and directed against the heretics Cathars, or Albigensians. Of course, no one would want to endorse, much less defend, the principle of the Inquisition: condemnation without charge, based on personal confession.
Confessions are forced by torture, denunciations are false, judges are biased and uncontrolled, but the motive for the introduction of such proceedings is clear. The Inquisitors were guarding their agents against the vengeance of the Cathars, who in the thirteenth century had infiltrated every stratum of French and Italian society. The war was not fought only in Languedoc. It was waged in all courts, in all workshops, in ecclesiastical communities and even in bazaars. It was a merciless massacre without a front line, and its victims were all the defenseless, innocent people slandered by the Cathars and the agents of the Inquisition.
The Cathars made extensive use of the right to lie, as allowed by their confession (religion), which recommended treachery to the fight against matter. "The former Cathars who converted to Catholicism, Robert Le Bugre, Peter of Verona and Rainier Sacconi, were the most formidable inquisitors in the thirteenth century”. Robert Le Bugre, who had been a Cathar in Milan for 20 years and was well acquainted with the manners and customs of the sect, was appointed in 1233 by Pope Gregory IX as an inquisitor, after which he applied his extensive knowledge. For example, in 1239 he burned 182 cathars in Mont-Éme, near Chalons on the Marne. And later it was the same: Jacques Molay, grandmaster of the Templar order, and other knights were burned earlier in Paris in 1214 after a trial conducted by Chancellor Guillaume Nogare, grandson of the burnt Cathars. The secret court was a double-edged weapon.
Dying dualism found a way to reincarnate into another, this time monistic concept. After all, for the anti-system such trifles as fidelity to principles are irrelevant, what matters is the goal - getting rid of matter and the flesh. The doctrine of Blessed Augustine was adopted, a talented thinker of the fifth century, who began his way as a member of a secret Manichean community, and ended his days as bishop of Hippo (in Africa) and after his death was recognized as the father of the church. He was the author of one of the three strands of scholasticism, the doctrine of the eternal predestination of men to either heaven or hell. There were reservations, of course, but that was the point.
Blessed Augustine's reasoning was that Adam sinned and passed on sin to all his descendants genetically as "original sin”. Therefore, all men are scoundrels and belong only in hell. God has eternally and unconditionally decreed that some shall be saved and all the rest shall perish. And any merits and deeds of sinners are irrelevant, as well as the wickedness of the elect. There is no place for the devil in such a system, for God does everything for himself.
We must do justice to the theologians of the time: that they did not accept Augustine's teachings. The supporters of Augustine's concept were condemned: the monk Gottschalk was even imprisoned for life for preaching the idea of predestination, i.e. which is the responsibility of God for the sins of men. But the Middle Ages passed, the Reformation came, and Jean Calvin resurrected the ideas of Augustine. The theory of the Second Inquisition was built on these ideas. Vog's reconciliation with Satan suited all the evildoers of Europe.
CONCORDAT WITH SATAN
The Second Inquisition, which operated in the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries, (Martin Luther was in 1517), was worse than the first. To justify as well as to regulate the crimes committed, the inquisitors created a theory based on the ideas of Blessed Augustine. According to this theory, "God is so compassionate that he would not allow evil in his creatures if he were not so all-powerful and good as to turn evil into good" (see Book Hammer of Witches, p. 147). From this it followed that "by the persecution from tyrants the patience of martyrs was strengthened, and by the opposition to the enchantments of witches the perfection of the faith of the righteous. Therefore, “God need not prevent evil" (ibid.). One could argue that God is unjustly unfair to tyrants and sorcerers, forcing them to torment the righteous and thereby condemning them to the torments of hell, but there is an answer to that as well. The sinner is worse than the devil, for "Satan was estranged from God, who allowed him to sin and did not guard him with love... Satan abides in wickedness because God has rejected him and does not give him his mercy" (ibid., p. 159).
More than that, God wishes the devil good, and the poor "devil is in great agony, seeing how the evil done through witches is transformed into good" (ibid., p. 161). In general, the devil is not to blame, as he "cannot do anything without God's allowance," and "God cannot want evil, but He can allow evil" (ibid.).
The theory proposed by the inquisitors is an apologia not only for themselves, but also for the devil, with whom they supposedly fought. In their view, only God is to be blamed for all the atrocities of history, (Augustine), and worse, atrocities must be welcomed, for out of evil comes good. This devilish dialectic is essentially philistine subservience, elevated to the level of metaphysics, and to think how much blood has been shed because of this schizophrenic delirium!
And how could it be otherwise? The doctrine of predestination took from its adherents man’s only one freedom, the freedom to choose between Good and Evil, but in return it gave them the right to be irresponsible with respect to their own conscience. Once the final outcome was predetermined, one could do as one wished. And then the inverse came into force.
Complete irresponsibility of the individual is contraindicated in a society which enforces a law based not on conscience, but on an order from superiors. It is more profitable to reckon with such a law, but it is by no means immoral to circumvent it. He succeeded and he won! He beat the system. So, it was quite logical and not even unconscionable to exterminate the Indians in North America, the slave trade, the robbery of India, the sale of opium to China ... (all Manichaenism). After all, the prohibition of these enterprises was not, and could not have been, for God turns evil into good, and the devil serves for this before his throne.
But if so, why NOT make contact with the devil, especially since he is even willing to pay for this service with very real benefits. He demands little - the sale of an immortal soul, the existence of which one must still believe in, and participation in the "black masses”. These Masses were necessarily served by an apostate priest, and consisted in the glorification of Satan, the good master, who does not forbid anything. The holy gifts were illuminated on the belly of a naked woman and then defiled. Sometimes it seemed to the participants of these mysteries that Satan himself appeared and allowed himself to be kissed on the ass. It happened that infants stolen from their mothers were sacrificed to him. The mysteries took place at midnight, secretly, but very many people knew about them.
Henry IV, Holy Roman Emperor of the German Empire was a Satanist. He remained on the throne until 1105 and was deprived of power not for his Satanism, but for the treacherous murders of his vassals. But even then, the citizens of Liege, Cologne, Bonn and the Jewish community, continued to support him. It turned out that Satanism shocked very few people.
"Black Masses" were celebrated in Paris as early as the 19th century. Only invitees were allowed to take part in them, except members of the sect, but it was easy to get an invitation. Details can be read in Huysmans' book The Abyss, where the author vacillates between acknowledging the seriousness of the orgy he observed and wanting to be deceived. For the skeptical positivist, the personification of any principle is unacceptable; it simply disgusts him.
If we abandon personification, which had already become superfluous in the thirteenth century, we are left with the theory of the Absolute, the moral law within itself. It is impossible to pray to such a law. This becomes evident in the nineteenth century, and with the successive development of the concept emerges as existentialism. Such systems had arisen even before our era, but overlooking the fact that they always perished, taking with them the lives of many thousands of people who trusted the philosophers.
Finally, the last important consequence of the theory of strict monism is that the attitude toward the biosphere as a whole, as well as toward individual beings and their creations, it becomes negative. In order to protect defenseless nature from unscrupulous people, we need to explain the benefits of biocenology to them, and this is super complicated.
Their teaching that there are "useful and harmful" animals and plants, and that the latter should be extinguished, is much closer to the mind of the philistine than the concept of the harmony of life on planet Earth. The philistine prefers to think of himself as the king of nature, not as part of it. That's why strict monism (Christianity) in practice merges with Manichaean dualism, the only difference being that everything unpleasant, (disturbing a given person, the Christian in this case), but not the objective element of "Darkness", is considered evil. This means that the guiding principle for the distinction between good and evil, light and darkness, progress and regress becomes arbitrariness. (It’s my feeling for today). The distinction, although insignificant, is not logically in favor of monism.
But why could not monistic and dualistic doctrines supplant Christianity, especially in the Middle Ages, when popes were at war with emperors, and scholastics were wasting their energy in fruitless disputes with each other? Perhaps because monism and Manichaeism were opposed by an unconscious worldview, the essence of which can be formulated as follows: God created the earth, but the devil is the prince of this world; on earth the devil is stronger than God, but that is why the noble knight and the monk-monk must stand up for the weak and fight the strong enemy to the last drop of blood. For God is not in strength, but in truth; and his creation, the Earth, is beautiful; and Evil comes from without, from the gates of Hell, and the simplest and most dignified thing is to drive it back. And that God did not create the devil is clear without proof; to suggest such a thing is blasphemy.
The concept was uncontroversial, easy to grasp, and consistent, if not with the practiced mores of the time, with its spoken ideals. And since the ideal is a distant prediction, perceived intuitively, it was justified. The biosphere continues to exist.
THE WAY OUT OF HOPELESSNESS
We people of the twentieth century know that there is no such thing as a trait. And yet, when you look back at the history of anti-systems, it gets very creepy. There are vampire concepts with the qualities of werewolves and a purposefulness truly diabolical. Neither the mighty intellect, nor the iron will, nor the pure conscience of men can resist these phantoms.
Where an overlap of ethnic fields of different rhythms, anti-systems can appear. And since during the existence of man on Earth all the ethnic groups a long time ago came into contact with each other, it would seem that the anti-systems had to displace the ethnic groups, replace them with themselves, destroy all life in their areas and turn their real impulses into virtual ones, so they can mutually annihilate. But nothing of the kind has happened for some reason.
It means that there is some powerful impulse in the world, counteracting the spread of anti-systems, and perhaps cleansing the face of the Earth from them. However, as we have seen, anti-systems appear again and again, so this impulse must act if not constantly, then often enough. And it must not be in the realm of human consciousness, because this realm is open to deception or incomplete understanding of the subject, i.e., to delusion. And it is not commanded to us from above, because anti-systems can be theistic, and the ideals of ethnic cultures are atheistic. And it does not add up in the process of evolution, for in the time required for addition in evolution, it would have died. Do we know an impulse with such properties? Yes we do! It is the passionate impulse.
No, not the heroism of passionate individuals, personalities, sacrificing themselves, but the impulse, the mutation that generates the sign of passionarity and informing the newly emerging ethnic groups of the original rhythm of the biofield - that's what destroys chimeras and the anti-systems nesting in them. Passionate impulse gives a kind of high heat, in which chimeras "melt" and turn into ethnoses, harmoniously combined with landscapes, as a link of geobiocenoses. Anti-systems cannot exist at such a high intensity. But further goes the already described process of ethnogenesis, in which sometimes, due to the created conditions, impulses with negative values appear.
Thus, passionarial impulses are not only a hindrance in human evolution, but also a purification force without which evolution couldn't proceed at all. With this force nature maintains the balance of the biosphere, including the bodies of those very people who believe that their thoughts, no matter how fantastic, are of the greatest value to planet Earth. We now know that all philosophical teachings and prophetic speeches are only biospheric impulses, reflected by some facet of the great vacuum that awaits Life at every turn. And for the sake of this there are black holes punched from the Abyss into the World, each of which is called a "personal consciousness. It would be a good idea to put a damper on them, called "conscience".
For the sake of this thesis, a treatise was written, which is now finished. I dedicate it to the great cause of protecting the natural environment from anti-systems.
.