≈≈≈≈
Myths might well be just entertaining, fascinating stories largely meant for children (well, if there is no adult content) or, if taken seriously, for simpletons to believe in. They may contain some lessons meriting the attention of grown-ups, a sort of practical wisdom to go by. There could be yet another dimension to them revealing some deeper processes in the human psyche. For instance, certain myths do appear to metaphorically describe the two major kinds of deviation which had interwoven into the fabric of human life since times immemorial and persist to be there, changing in form but never in essence. But before I make examples of these, coming back to my lingo, there is more to be said about the role of rings and strap with regards to coils and thread in terms of normal, healthy relationships between the two pairs. In other words, before talking about deviations, it is important to establish normality. Besides, apart from deviations supposedly wrapped in mythological garments, there also remains inversion to heed with. Just to remind, inversion is putting the bottom on top, prioritizing grossness. I will talk about this no less important topic and try to find its mythological and religious connotations as well once the deviations are finished with.
Previously, I made it clear that there is nothing inherently wrong with grosser things as long as the hierarchy of selves topple they not. That is, as long as there is no inversion. I had also mentioned that animal, gender, servant/master, creator, and owner selves – the domain of rings and strap – may contribute greatly to the overall Self's stability. That is, before building storeys, there have to be a good foundation. For higher selves – coils and thread – not only are rings and strap the foundation but also the instruments and means of expression. By and large, rings are implicated in subordination, simple pleasures (the fun part of life), some rudimentary creative inspiration and intuitive glimpses. Strap, in its turn, enables to get hand in actually doing something, self-protection, elementary discipline, and some basic albeit a bit too literal and naive ideation. If conditions are right, coils and thread would flourish upon this foundation, at the same time, changing it alongside. That is, coils would impart a whole different quality to rings, that of sublimity and beauty, and thread would ennoble strap with its higher ideation and more self-control. When coils and thread are nicely paired up, the relationship across the four can be summed up as this: thread is in control of strap, its base, with coils having the upper hand with rings; through coils, thread isn't excessively gravitating towards rings, and by way of thread coils are safeguarded from the crudeness of strap. For reaching even higher harmonies, this is an ideal scenario.
Back to real life, ideals become embodied rarely if ever, something I have already pointed out to. Suppose, coils – subtle love along with some of its satellites, e.g. intuition or faith – are there, but thread, that is, a higher ideation and self-control, hasn't sprung up to make them a fine match. Instead, they have to deal with strap, the more ignorant, crude, and aggressive substitute, not being particularly attracted but rather falling prey or becoming susceptible to it. Or, it can happen so that thread is where it belongs in, yet there are no coils around to be paired with. There remain plenty of rings though, and there seems to be no other way for thread but being attracted to the gross sensuality. In either case, there happens a mismatch or, to put it better, misalliance. And now, coming back to the metaphorical underside of myths, these two misalliances seem to be two major motifs played out mythologically.
The first type of misalliance – that between coils and strap – essentially pinpoints keeping subtle love and its satellites within the limits of a rather narrow, naive, literal, and stiff ideation. In the mythological language, that would be represented with a young beautiful maiden being kidnapped by a mighty and, as a rule, unseemly antagonist, a demon, who then confines her in the dungeon or in any other dark place for that matter. Despite all his might and advantageous position to do as he would please, strangely enough, he wouldn't have marital relations with her. At least, not in the myths that I know. In my lingo, that never happens, precisely because the unchecked crude strap, that is, the demon, lacks in subtlety or, should I use another physics term, has too lower a frequency to be paired with coils – these can be 'tuned in' only with thread. Speaking of thread that stands for a higher, broader, more flexible ideation, it seems to be represented by a fine, goodlooking hero who invariably comes to the maiden's rescue. At least, that's how it all can be interpreted. An example of such story would be “Ramayana” wherein prince Rama delivers his wife Sita out of demon Ravana's captivity.
The second misalliance between thread and rings would psychologically represent high ideals divorced from religiosity, a seemingly major satellite of subtle love. As coils cannot duly support thread in this setup, it can't help gravitating towards rings down below, the grosser sensuality, despite all its high aspirations. In the most generalized sense, it is all about going high yet askew which invariably results in falling. A myth exemplifying this situation would be Icarus' crash into the sea as he flies too close to the sun, and his melted wax wings cannot support him in his flight any longer. The scene appears to be riddled with symbolism. Icarus would stand for too deviated a thread, and the seawater as emblemizing the grosser femininity would turn into rings in my lingo. Wax wings may well be coils' imprint in thread that wears off without actual coils there to back it up. At least, that's the way I see it all.
To sum up: the two major deviations can be conceptualized as suppressed love and unchecked idealism. Though the reader might picture quite well at least some of the ramifications of these in the real life – they can be more dire than in myths – a bit later, perhaps, in another chapter, I will share a few of my thoughts on the matter.
In inversion, that is, prioritizing gross things over the subtle, the setup would be predictably as follows: strap would greatly shape the doings of thread with rings barely having any 'sprouts' or glimpses of coils. This way, the dynamics would be largely bound to the mutually attracted strap and rings. An example of such setup could be thinking primarily in terms of one's status in the society as well as having rather unsophisticated emotional life and gross pleasures. In terms of mythology, it must have also got some expression, largely that of being non-heroic rather than heroic or anti-heroic, staying in the backdrop of the drama unfolding. For obvious reasons, there is a problem with finding a mythological prototype for inversion unlike with deviation as those staying aloof are nameless and indistinguishable. There appears to be neither good, nor harm in inversion yet it may take a great toll on people's and other living beings' lives. For one thing, in whatever evil unjustified aggression, or excessively indulging in sensual pleasures, or being 'naively' unconcerned with the greater scheme of things play an instrumental role, inversion might be to blame. In the latter case, inversion may pave the way for a greater evil, and that seems to be its major downside apart from having the individual destiny of rising up the hierarchy of selves unfulfilled. It could be for this reason that the Book of Revelation in the Bible which, in a way, might be put in the same league with myths has the following lines, supposedly about the inverted:
I know your deeds; you are neither cold nor hot. How I wish you were one or the other! So because you are lukewarm – neither hot nor cold – I am about to vomit you out of My mouth! You say, ‘I am rich; I have grown wealthy and need nothing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind, and naked.
Yet, with its flair of naivete, inversion doesn't seem as sinister as its extreme form that can be dubbed as subversion, a conscious, well-thought ideology of prioritizing grossness, materialism being an example or, still darker, satanism that would impart a whole new dimension of perversion to what has been subverted in the first place. By and large, it boils down to sadism as well as sexual and other gross sensual excesses in all shapes and forms, that is, warped, aberrant, sick, foul, abominable doings of strap and rings. At least, as seen by Way.
Curiously enough, in keeping with mythological undertones, Baphomet, a demonic figure who many followers of satanism seem to pay their allegiance to, has a head of a goat. Three distinctive features of it – horns, head, and beard – may symbolize different manifestations and degrees of evil. Horns would stand for the two kinds of deviations done inadvertently by those well-meaning; below is “neither cold, nor hot” head of inversion, an indifference to the top of sorts – evil's breeding ground; still down below hangs beard, inversion in its most complete and corrupted form of subversion, the evil conscious or partly conscious of its evilness and fallen short of Way altogether. To the point, some see in Bathomet's head traces of the inverted pentagram, a figure that in its normal standing would symbolize the upward, idealistic orientation. Whatever seems to be the case, whether this demonic figure is real or mythological, it should be now possible to give a definitive answer to what “good”, “evil”, and “fierce hatred” are. If the reader remembers, I touch on these in the foreword.
In light of all above, good shall now be seen us the upward progression of moon and sun under umbrella of Way and whatever comes out of that; evil varies in degrees, starting from two deviations – unchecked idealism and repressed love – to inversion marked with grossness down to even more entrenched and sinister subversion. Apparently, the latter results in a fierce hatred to what has been toppled. It seems that those subverted can no longer rise to the higher harmonies and all associated joys – the way, or Way for that matter, appears to be impassible. Hence the hatred.
There remains one more motif put forth by the poet – “sacred love”, the seeming object of the hatred, among other things. It merits a separate chapter.