If
we view the universe from a strictly materialistic perspective, we will
confront uncomfortable realizations. Beyond such a universe is nothingness, and
within it is also nothingness. At the extreme points of opposition between the
infinitely large and the infinitely small, there lies nothingness. Nothingness
is both the starting point and the end point of the entire universe. The
universe is an arena of fatal change and exists due to its inherent dynamics,
which are rooted in the eternal play of two poles of nothingness: the
infinitesimal and the infinite. From the perspective of space itself, the
infinity of metacosmic nothingness, the universe is a wholly insignificant
phenomenon, a point of light destined to shatter into infinity, to be absorbed
into the void of emptiness. The only light in the darkness is doomed to
extinguish through dispersion. Light energy irreversibly dissipates into the
depths of space. Expanding and conquering boundless expanses, the universe
loses itself in its grandeur.
Nothingness
is the cause of the universe's dynamics. Not only does it surround everything,
but it also permeates everything that exists. Nothingness is like a demiurge,
the primal mover, active in its passivity, deus otiosus. All matter in the
universe can be converted into energy, and all energy can be depleted,
radiating through the cosmos. This does not explain the origin of light or
energy, but it leaves room for considering light as an intruder in the endless
realm of nothingness and darkness. Light is an intruder, which, unless it finds
a way to leave the world permeated by nothingness within some indeterminate time
frame, can only expect its own dissolution, death, and transformation into
darkness. How and where light can go without falling within the reach of death
and darkness is another question. Therefore, the universe is like a
kaleidoscopic play, a mimicry of light, in an attempt to escape the deadly trap
it was cast into from a source that is practically unfathomable.
Existence
implies a mechanism of decomposition. This mechanism is inherent in the very
nature of the universe, in its internal oppositions. We see how the origin of
the universe is its self-dissolution and disappearance. Its fundamental
elements tend toward disintegration and the dissolution of the whole they
collectively form. Matter strives to return to its initial state of inactivity,
to the timelessness of primordial non-action, to eternal peace. Temporarily
imprisoned within the structure of the universe, its fundamental elements seek
freedom, which, in relation to the whole, represents a destructive act and the
self-destruction of each individual entity. The liberating tendency of the
fundamental substances of the universe is entropy. Entropy affirms nothingness
as an immanent force, as essence, as the source and outcome, as the beginning
and end. Entropy confirms nothingness as a fateful and determining presence or
absence, as the starting point and end. Entropy is a measure of disorder or
randomness in a system.
The
second law of thermodynamics states that entropy tends to increase over time,
meaning that the universe is constantly moving towards a state of greater
disorder. As the universe expands, matter and energy become more dispersed,
leading to an increase in entropy. The universe is moving towards a state of
maximum entropy, in which all matter is evenly distributed and there is no more
potential for energy utilization. The universe's inertia towards nothingness is
the cause of universal entropy and decadence on all lower and smaller levels.
Conversely, it would also be correct to assert that entropy processes on
smaller levels are the cause of universal entropy and decadence on a general
level. The logic of this statement finds its analogy in the famous Hermetic
law: as above, so below, which masterfully connects two spatial and value
perspectives that are lost in two opposing infinities.
The
process of decay begins simultaneously with the beginning of the universe
itself. In the human world, decay starts with the creation of that very world.
The world exists to be destroyed by the force of its own nature. This means
that existence is a decadent and fatal process in which something comes into
being, grows and develops, reaches its peak, then stagnates, declines, and
ultimately dies and disappears. Existence is not merely decadent in the sense
that decadence is one of its characteristics; existence itself is decadence.
This finds its parallel in the philosophy of Saint Augustine, who says: "I
am sinful because I exist," or "sinful" is everything that
exists. If it were not sinful, it would not exist. In existence, there is a
built-in flaw intended to destroy it through its own actualization. This leads
us to the biblical myth of the expulsion of the first human couple from the
Garden of Eden. By eating the fruit from the forbidden tree of knowledge of
good and evil, they transitioned from a state of perfection into a state of
imperfection, that is, from a state into the process of mortal life. Their
reason was awakened, and their eyes were opened. Their sudden realization that
they were naked, and the covering of their sexual organs with an apron, points
to the essential consequences of moving from a state of perfection into the
process of imperfection. They lost the so-called cloak of incorruption, or the
light that adorned them in their state of perfection, and that
"switch" is located in the region of the sexual organs, which became
the subject of shame, various taboos, and symbols of perversion up to the
present day. It is precisely the loss of this primordial light that is the
cause or indicator of all decadence and the "sinfulness" of the human
being, primarily its mortality, since, according to biblical teaching, the
punishment for sin is death.
Since
it leads to ultimate destruction, the fundamental principle of the universe is
not order, but disorder. The cosmic creator designed chaos that operates
according to certain principles. The cosmos is subordinated to chaos; it
functions within the framework of chaos. In the universe, every form of order
is relative, limited, and serves the purpose of eventual destruction. Every
advancement and creation are in the service of general decadence and
destruction. The price of progress is destruction. This rule is also evident 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,
as is the destruction that accompanies it. Regardless, everything will be
destroyed eventually, with or without progress, due to the action of the
fundamental forces of the universe. Progress is a tool of chaos, but above
that, progress is also a small island of the cosmos and consciousness, a piece
of solid ground underfoot, and a landmark of reason.
As
human beings, we are accustomed to treating light and darkness, or day and
night, as equal givens of nature, as if they were some kind of equal phenomena
or entities. We get this impression due to the roughly equal proportions of
both phenomena, which structure the rhythm of life on Earth. And this seems
normal to us. However, if we look more closely, we see that light is a far
inferior component of this duality. In the universe, as clearly illustrated by
the night, light is present in far smaller quantities compared to darkness. The
dominance of light is an illusion, a consequence of the close presence of a
massive source of light and heat, the Sun. Darkness is the alpha and omega.
Light represents the facade of existence, the basic reference for the projection
of space and time. The quantitative superiority of darkness over light, and our
perception of this superiority, which in turn reveals a truer picture of the
world, is reflected in our fear. We are always more afraid at night than during
the day. We always feel a sense of relief when dawn comes. It is not
necessarily the case that darkness implies or hides some evil, nor does light
imply goodness. In this universe, there are no exalted principles at work, only
the most brutal Darwinian food chain.
One
of the prevalent beliefs is that antiquity and darkness are attributed to the
female element, while light, and what is historically or mythologically
younger, is attributed to the male. Bachofen argues that femininity stands at
the forefront, while the male figure appears only later, in the second line.
The woman is the given, while the man is a creation. According to Bachofen,
women and men do not appear simultaneously. They are not of the same order. The
woman is what is given, the man is what emerges from her. He belongs to the
visible, but constantly changing creation. As such, he enters the world only in
a mortal form. From the beginning, there exists only the woman, given,
unchanging. The man, having become, is therefore exposed to constant decay. In
the realm of physical life, the male principle is secondary, subordinated to
the female principle. This is the root of the ancient conception of the
connection between the immortal mother and the mortal father. The mother is
always the same, while the male side builds an endless line of generations. One
primal mother is always paired with new men. Naturally, these statements should
not be understood literally.
After this paraphrase of Bachofen, I would recall the moment in Carlos Castaneda's work when his teacher, the sorcerer Don Juan, speaks about the quantitative superiority of female consciousness compared to the male, which exists in traces in the universe. Julius Evola, in his book The Metaphysics of Sex, states that the question of whether women are inferior, equal, or superior to men is meaningless because it presupposes comparability. According to Evola, there is a difference between men and women that excludes any usual measure, as even abilities and virtues that seem "neutral" and "common" have different functionality and characteristics depending on whether they are present in men or women. To ask whether the "woman," or the female principle, is superior or inferior to the "man," or the male principle, is akin to asking whether water is superior or inferior to fire. Thus, as Evola puts it, the criterion of measure for both sexes 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 how closely she approaches female typicality, the pure or absolute woman, which is equally valid for men. Therefore, the question of the inferiority or superiority of one principle relative to another is only regarding the quantitative presence in nature or in a being or phenomenon. Of course, determining the properties of typicality of the pure or absolute gender nature is a separate matter, as this nature never fully manifests in any individual human being but always in some proportion. There is no "pure" or complete man, nor is there a complete or "pure" woman. These are abstract metaphysical ideals. In nature, something is always missing, and everyone deviates to some extent from the ideal.
Take a piece of coal, mud, excrement, anything that might seem disgusting and dark, in fact, anything at all, pleasant or unpleasant. All of it was once pure light. However, how does something, by nature passive, unmanifested, suddenly become manifested, active, and thus creative and life-giving light? Where does the primordial cosmic egg of pure energy come from amid the void? The answer points to some incomprehensible active force that creates energetic forms by mixing its own with the unmanifested energy of the void. These resulting forms, being of dual nature and composed of two types of energy, tend toward disintegration. Each type of energy seeks to free itself from its imposed, unnatural state and return to its normal state, that is, to its primordial, timeless environment. This means that everything around us is made up of these two types of energy. What is uncreated and of single-energy nature cannot die or live in a way that is familiar and known to us. On the other hand, everything that comes into being, lives, and dies is of dual-energy origin.
