You are here:  Home  >  ESOTERIC  >  Current Article

Alexander Romanov’s 666 The Anti Christ (Ch.3) Mind

By   /  January 1, 2011  /  No Comments

    Print       Email

Alexander Romanov


666 The Anti Christ

Chapter III: MIND

The Revealed God

So, 14 billion years ago, the divine moment came. ” Let there be LIFE ” ….. said God.

He self-immolated in the greatest explosion of all time, the creation of the universe of matter from the universe of mind in one single apocalyptic event. From physical nothingness – the pure mind of God – came all the ” stuff ” of the physical universe. The moment of God’s death was the moment of Creation. It was the ” Alpha Point.”

The physical universe is teleological, it has a purpose, a desired end, an ” Omega Point.” That end-point is the regenerated God. The physical universe that was born of God seeks to become God anew ….. not the old God of pure Mind ….. but a new God of Mind and Matter.

God knew that the creation of matter would not mean the elimination of mind. Rather, just as matter is a form of energy ( as demonstrated by Einstein ) it is also a form of mind because it originated from mind. It is mind with physical dimensions rather than pure, dimensionless mind.

The universe is alive. It is an organism. It thinks. It seeks. It strives. It has a soul. The universe is forever trying to find its way back to its divine origin. It is traveling dialectically from Alpha to Omega.

We human beings contain the divine spark. We are all fragments of God. We will be complete only when we have reassembled as God.
That is the fulfillment of our divine human mission.

The True God is the Deus Absconditus …… the Hidden God. One day he will be the Deus Manifestus …… the Revealed God.

We are all part of the revelation. We are hidden gods in a universe that as yet does not know it is God but is evolving towards being God.

Just as humanity was born of a primordial chemical soup on a ” lifeless ” rock in space, so God will be born of stardust in a seemingly lifeless universe. We are all glittering stars and one day we will come together in the brightest star of all – God.

This is humanity’s destiny. Is that not an inspiring vision of humanity ? We are not mere humans … we are divine beings, a community of gods en route to becoming God himself, God Reincarnated, God Resurrected, God Reborn.



“ Dialectics gives expression to a law which is felt in all grades of consciousness and in general experience. Everything that surrounds us may be viewed as an instance of dialectic. We are aware that everything finite, instead of being inflexible, is rather changeable and transient ………….. and this is exactly what we mean by the dialectic of the finite, by which the finite, as implicitly other than it is, is forced to surrender its own immediate or natural being, and turn suddenly into its opposite.”

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

Hegel was a proponent of the ” dialectic “. The dialectical process works like this. Step 1) We discover a ” thing ” in need of explanation and we make some

statement about it. e.g. ” Something exists.” We call this the thesis.

Step 2) Further discovery and consideration reveals a contradiction, something that opposes the thesis. We call this the antithesis.
The antithesis of ” Something exists ” is ” Nothing exists “.

Step 3) The third step is called the synthesis, and it attempts to reconcile the thesis and antithesis. Hegel uses the word ” aufheben ” to describe this melding of thesis and antithesis. It is a difficult word to translate into English since it simultaneously contains meanings of ” preserving ” ….” canceling ” and …. ” lifting up “.

So, the synthesis retains what is most true in the thesis and antithesis, removes what is most false, and raises up what is left into a higher truth.

Step 4) The process does not end with this synthesis, which simply becomes a new thesis, and with which we start the process all over again. With each iteration of this dialectical cycle, we move forward, reduce contradiction, refine our concepts and get closer to what might be called absolute truth.

i.e. the truth that contains no self-contradiction and cannot be challenged.

To an extent, the dialectic resembles the scientific method upon which so much of the world’s most solid knowledge now stands. The scientific method creates provisional truths, which are rendered stronger and stronger by continual testing and refinement. Eventually, scientific hypotheses become scientific theories ….. which are effectively the laws of science.

A clear connection also exists between the dialectic and the medieval art of Alchemy – the secret art first introduced by the illuminati. Alchemy is about turning lead into gold. Not in a physical sense ( though some alchemists certainly thought it was possible ), but in a metaphorical sense. To reach gold ( the perfect purity in symbolic terms ) from the starting point of lead ( base, impure, corruptible material symbolically ) requires constant distillation, refining and removal of the impurities.

This is the same as the dialectic – a continual refining to remove errors. As we reach higher and higher levels of synthesis, we ascend the scale of truth – we move from dirty, muddied, confused and confusing partial truths to incorruptible golden truths by which we can lead our lives. Truth, too, must be distilled and refined.

Hegel analyzed Being and Nothing in the following way …. 1) Being – the existence of things – is the thesis.

2) Non-being – the existence of nothing – is the antithesis.

Using the ancient wisdom of the Illuminati, Hegel supplied the only concept that can stand as a valid synthesis of Being and Nothing …….. ” Becoming.”

Something and nothing are just aspects of a higher truth.
They do not have mutually independent reality. They are perpetual twins, locked in a dance of eternal becoming. The universe is never-ending becoming. As will be shown ” Becoming ” answers every enigma, everything that is nonsensical about the old religions of ” Being “.

The philosopher Nietzsche used a different but related word for ” aufheben.”
His word – ” sublimieren ” – comes from the Latin word sublimare …. ” to sublimate “. In German, sublimieren and aufheben are synonymous.
Sublimation is the English word for sublimieren.

Sublimation, in human terms, involves taking a primitive urge such as violence and turning it into something nobler. The ” good ” aspects of violence are retained
( for example, will to win, forcefulness, pride, ambition, competitiveness ),
while the bad aspects are removed ( e.g. destruction, cruelty, injury, callousness ).

What emerges is something in which everyone can take pride. Sport, for example, is often regarded as the sublimation of war.

Can’t we sublimate all of the ills of our society ?

The dialectic is all about sublimation, refining everything to take it to a higher, nobler level – to turn lead into gold all over the universe. Can we start from a universe of unpromising lead and make it into one of sublime gold ?

Dialectical logic is usually contrasted with Aristotelian logic ….. which is analytical rather than synthetic and is based on highlighting and emphasizing contradictions.

Aristotelian logic is centered on two key concepts :
the Principle of Non-Contradiction and the Principle of Excluded Middle.

Bertrand Russell asserted that there are three ” Laws of Thought ” 1. Law of Identity : ‘ Whatever is …. is.’
2. Law of Non-Contradiction : ‘ Nothing can both be and not be.’
( For example ….. it cannot both be raining and not raining. )

3. Law of Excluded Middle : ‘ Everything must either be or not be.’ ( For example …… it is either raining or it is not. )

Simple-minded people are fixated on such Laws, but these laws are in fact the ” Laws of Being ” and are themselves contradicted by the ” Laws of Becoming.”

Aristotelian logic, the bedrock of Western thinking, lends itself to reductive and analytical thinking, in breaking everything down and separating it from everything

else. But this is merely an illusion. The universe, as Eastern thinking has always emphasized, is an interconnected whole. The type of logic that best deals with

” becoming ” rather than ” being ” is dialectical logic.

Dialectical thinking is about synthesis, about unifying opposites and the key idea of dialectics is that everything contains a fundamental inner, implicit contradiction that will lead to the contradiction eventually being explicitly expressed.

Therefore, when it is raining, the implicit contradiction that it will stop raining is already starting to manifest itself and in due course …. indeed the rain will stop.

There will be a time during the transition period between raining and not raining when the distinction between the two states cannot be clearly drawn. Aristotelian logic emphasizes the separate phases of the whole process, while dialectical logic emphasizes the interconnectedness of the apparent contradictions … they are part of an ongoing process of ” becoming ” rather than separate types of ” being.”

People who can’t see beyond Aristotelian logic will never understand the true nature of the universe. In the world of dialectics – of ” becoming ” – none of Bertrand Russell’s three laws of thought truly apply. They are black and white limits whereas ” becoming ” is concerned with shades of grey.



Existence cannot come from non-existence and nor can non-existence come from existence. Non-existence does not exist, by definition. The ‘stuff’ of which everyone is made has always existed, and always will exist. We were not non-existent before we were born, rather the ‘stuff’ which became us had not yet been brought together.

After we die, the stuff of which we are made does not become non-existent, rather it disperses and finds its way into new entities. The future does not yet exist, but all of the seeds for it are already present.

The future does not spring into existence from the non-existent but rather it evolves from what already exists ……. it is an evolution …… an extrapolation of the present.

New existence arises from what already exists, the thoughts you will have ten seconds from now do not yet exist ….. but they will not come of non-existence. They will arise from what is already there.

From ” old ” existence comes ” new ” existence in a never-ending flow.
Nothing truly new i.e. with no precedent, no ” ancestor ” ever comes into existence.

Existence is perpetual becoming. New existence is always a modified form …… an evolution …… a transformation …… of what already exists.

Existence is Becoming … not Being. Its intrinsic nature is to contain movement, and also an ordering principle. Movement and order are the basis of dialectics because new, higher states of order can be built from earlier, less ordered states.

The universe is dialectical. The universe is eternal becoming. It cannot logically be any other way. It has always existed and it will always exist. The underlying logic of the universe is eternally the same. But the way in which the universe physically evolves from the core logic is not fixed.

Anything that can happen ( that is not logically impossible ) will definitely happen in an eternal logical universe. Anything that is not forbidden by the core logic is compulsory. This is the starting point for discussion on the nature of the universe.

The question is does the core logic of the eternal logical universe imply a logical apex ………. a maximum expression of the underlying logic ? Can logic become self-aware ? Can a logic based on a few simple rules lead to something as astonishingly complex as God ?

The optimal universe is the one that can create the most diverse phenomena from the smallest set of core principles and properties. It is also the one that can create the highest summit of actualization. Existence begets God. It has no choice.

God is compulsory, the maximum expression of the latent potential of the universe ………….. the ultimate becoming.

” The universe was brought into being in a less than fully formed state …….. but was gifted to transform itself from unformed matter into a truly marvelous array of structure and life forms.” ….. St Augustine.

Here is the truth. God does not create the universe ….. Precisely the reverse is true. The universe creates God.

This is perhaps the profoundest statement of all. God is not the First Cause or the Prime Mover. He might instead be regarded as the Last Effect .. that for which the whole universe moved. God is part of evolution, he is what evolution is striving to achieve, its logical endpoint.

But once the God of Evolution has come into existence then he controls evolution, just as human beings now regularly alter the course of evolution on earth. Billions of humans are alive today who would certainly be dead had not humanity become intelligent enough to understand and then to exploit agriculture, science, medicine, civilization etc etc. Humans are increasingly the masters of evolution, and have certainly ceased to be its helpless servants and victims ( as ordinary animals are ).

God is the end of the chain of evolution, and the start of a new chain of existence thats his to define. God, the culmination of evolution, thereby transcends evolution. He is transcendence itself.

God, once he stands outside of evolution, is the master of creation. The universe created him, but now he can reverse the process and create the universe anew. This is the essence of ‘God’s Suicide’. God creates the new universe from himself.

God can be in the paradoxical position of being both the creation of the universe and its creator ( just as humans, who are the creations of evolution, can create future evolution via genetic engineering ) and so we have a mechanism for the universe to cycle on forever. In one phase, it is in the process of creating God. Having succeeded, in the second phase, it is ruled by God until he chooses to start creation all over again, using himself as the raw material. And thus we return to the first phase, and again the universe strives to reach its maximum actualization, God. And the beat goes on …… for eternity.

The Plenitude Principle states that everything that can happen will happen. No possibilities that remain eternally possible will go unrealized. Nature will become as complete and perfect as it possibly can. That is not just desirable, it is inevitable in an infinite system. If there is one state of existence …. an Omega Point …… that is superior to all other states then it will eventually and inevitably be attained.

From the ‘beginning’, all things that can happen are already implicit in the universe. If God is possible then he was always possible and simply waiting for his potential to be turned into actuality. Is evolution ever maximized or does it keep going round in futile circles, never actually getting any better ?

If human beings are vastly superior to dinosaurs ( previous masters of our world ) and if all forms are more highly evolved than their preceding forms, isn’t it clear that evolution, on the whole, is advancing rather than regressing ….. is getting ” better “. Can it ever reach ” best ” ?

Imagine the human race as a single person i.e. all of the talents and intelligence of humanity combined in a single personality. Wouldn’t that be vastly superior to any individual human being ? Would any problem resist the collective intelligence of all humanity ? If a few geniuses have made breathtaking leaps in our understanding of the universe, imagine the intelligence of all the geniuses merged into one single, sublime intelligence. Would that not be an entity which might have some of the characteristics of what we call God ?

That scenario would be achieved simply by allowing the consciousnesses of individual human beings to evolve into a collective consciousness of humanity.

But is it likely that humans are the summit of universal evolution? Can’t we imagine vastly more intelligent beings than ourselves ? Then imagine combining all of their intelligences. Imagine combining all of the intelligences that exist in the universe.

The r = 0 domain is where all ” mind ” in the universe exists. it all exists in a single ” place “. If all the minds linked to the r = 0 domain combined then they would form Absolute Mind ….. and that would be none other than God.

Each of us is a ” cell ” of the Absolute Mind. If we can expand our minds, we can

tune into Absolute Mind …….. the Mind of God. We ourselves, if we can harness Absolute Mind, can become God. It is no empty claim. It is the logical opportunity afforded by the r = 0 domain. But, to harness Absolute Mind, we need to infinitely expand our limited human minds …….. and this we call the process of Evolution.



How was the universe created ? ……… It was created by a non-physical energy
( the mind and spirit of God ) which was transformed into physical energy ( matter ) but still fundamentally imbued with the mind and spirit of God.

How did life come into existence ? The universe was created from life ( God’s ) and is everywhere infused with God’s life, it was there from the very beginning.

Why are we conscious beings ?

Because we reflect the implicit consciousness of God that pervades the universe.

Why do we have a sense of a soul and immortality, of a future paradise, and why has humanity always spoken of gods and God ?
Because we are evolving towards God. It gives a precise meaning to our lives.

Conversely, if this was not the case then why would evolution create in us this inclination towards illusion and self-deception, of God, the afterlife, a paradise ? It would be an extraordinary situation for a scientific, godless universe devoid of paranormal phenomena to create a delusion in human minds that there is a God and that there are paranormal phenomena.

How could such a delusion ever actually arise ? What would its basis be ?
It would be on a par with saying that lifeless atoms can gather together in order to create the delusion that life exists, but that very ” delusion ” would itself be proof of life because only a living entity could be subject to mental delusions.
Why would ” godless ” atoms create the impression that there is a God ?

Why would ” scientific ” atoms create the impression that there are phenomena beyond scientific comprehension ? At the every least, we would have to conclude that these godless, scientific and lifeless atoms have the most remarkable qualities that of their very own account, have to be considered quasi-religious, hinting at the greatest of mysteries.

These remarks are attributed to theoretical physicist David Bohm ….

” ( The growth of a living plant ) starts from a seed, but the seed contributes little or nothing to the actual material substance of the plant or to the energy needed to

make it grow. This latter comes almost entirely from the soil, the water, the air and the sunlight. According to modern theories the seed contains information, in the form of DNA, and this information somehow ” directs ” the environment to form
a corresponding plant. ”

The even more remarkable way in which an egg and a sperm cell from a human mother and father combine to make a blueprint for creating a potential Leonardo da Vinci from the food and drink consumed by the mother during her pregnancy.

If that is not a supreme miracle that transcends scientific knowledge then what is ? If that does not point to a realm of divine wonders ….. then what does ?



DNA provides a blueprint for how to build a human body. The DNA instructions are a product of natural selection. This sums up the evolutionary approach to humanity.

Where is the human mind in this theory ? It is not there. Evolutionists are forced to argue that human minds somehow emerge from the cellular operations controlled by our DNA. That is not to underplay DNA …………. It is the key to all life on earth.

DNA chains can be subdivided into chromosomes and then further subdivided into genes. Carl Jung proposed that the human mind has its equivalent of genes. He called these ” archetypes ” and he argued they are located in what he labelled the ” collective unconscious “.

Many people fail to see the implications of what Jung’s theory amounts to, and he himself never spelt it out with perfect clarity although he hinted at it strongly.

DNA, he is saying …. is both a biological and psychological blueprint for human beings. it has physical and mental aspects. By studying only the physical side of DNA, scientists miss the crucial mental component. It is this component that has truly driven evolution and separated humans from apes. It’s because DNA has a mental aspect that so many intermediate forms are missing from the fossil record.

DNA is teleological ……. it directs its own evolution.
It does not have a precise idea of its destination, but it intuits how to get there.

How long would it take to get from single-cell organism in a primordial chemical soup to creatures which can contemplate the nature of the universe ? How long would it take a monkey to randomly type a Shakespearean play ? If it would take

longer than the age of the Big Bang universe for a monkey, an animal with some degree of intelligence, to randomly type Hamlet – one play by one human being – how long would it take inanimate atoms to randomly come together to create one human being ?

It is not actually possible unless factors to which science is currently oblivious come into play. Assuming no external interference, only one thing can overcome randomness and massively accelerate evolution ….. teleology. If molecules have a vague ” idea ” of how to make themselves more complex, how to increase their functionality …. they can make leaps that would take forever if left to chance.

It must be emphasized here that genes do not have ” intelligence “.
What they do have is a kind of primitive mind that obeys rudimentary rules of a mathematical nature, and it is from these building-block rules that the complexity of humanity arises. When Pythagoras said that everything is made of numbers, it was to this that he was referring. Mathematical rules are the basis of ” mind “.

If all matter has mind then all matter is mathematical. Is that not exactly what is observed ? Mathematics is part of the fabric of the cosmos, which is why science can describe it with such success and make so much sense of it. Mathematics is called ‘ the queen of the sciences ‘. Physics is applied mathematics. The whole of chemistry can be derived from quantum mechanics. Biology … is the chemistry of living organisms, and hence is also ultimately derived from quantum mechanics.

If mathematics underlies consciousness then it means that humans will one day create artificial intelligence based on mathematical rules. Even our emotions are traceable to mathematics.

Jung introduced the concept of the “psychoid ” archetype ( i.e. ” mind-like ” ) to describe this basic mental aspect of matter. This concept excited the Nobel Prize winning quantum physicist Wolfgang Pauli who saw it as a bridge between physics and psychology ……” matter and mind “. The psychoid archetype underlay Jung’s alchemical concept of the unus mundus ( ” one world ” ) where mind and matter interpenetrate each other.

Since genes are composed of molecules and molecules in turn composed of atoms ( atoms being the basic, stable building blocks of our material world ), it would have been much more helpful had Jung had created matching concepts. He ought to have described atoms as being psychoid i.e. having rudimentary qualities of mind.

As atoms combine to form molecules, so atomic psychoid qualities become more complex molecular psychoid qualities. A molecule is more “minded” than an atom, a gene more “minded” than a simple molecule, a chromosome more minded than a gene. Eventually we arrive at human beings with fully-fledged psyches built up from more elementary psychoid components.

As Wolfgang Pauli realized, if the psychoid nature of an atom could be discerned, then the mental nature of molecules, genes, chromosomes, DNA and lastly human beings themselves ….. could be determined and calculated. Psychology would be physics from a different perspective, its laws every bit as comprehensible. This, of

course, is a revolutionary concept and most scientists flee from it in horror. Yet this is the true nature of existence. Mind and matter are inseparable twins, two sides of one coin. Scientists have been highly successful dealing with only the matter side.

Jung was the first prominent psychologist to attempt to put the mental side on the same footing. Unfortunately, few have followed his example.

Just as a human being’s physical nature affects his mental nature …. so does his mental nature affect his physical nature. Humans are both ” psychosomatic ” ( mind influencing body ) and ” somapsychic ” ( body influencing mind ).
This applies equally to everything else in the physical world.

Conventional science – the belief system that matter has no mental aspect – is highly successful in the inanimate world because there the ” mind ” is little more than a set of mathematical operations that do not look mind-like at all. However, as soon as life enters the picture, science starts to struggle. Evolutionary theory is incomplete in the absence of a way for treating the increasing mental complexity, and resulting teleology, of biological systems as they evolve. Science has proved hopeless at defining human consciousness, the very center-piece of existence … without which science would not exist in the first place.

The problem of the ” observer ” is a well-known one in quantum mechanics.
Most scientists are baffled by how observation appears to affect the outcome of experiments. Of course, if they realized that all matter has mind then “observation” is automatically built into the universe. Everything both observes and is observed.

The strength of the observation is proportional to the power of the mind doing the observing. ” Weak ” minds may have minimal affect, but stronger minds will have commensurately stronger effects.

The current scientific paradigm, despite its successes ….. has huge flaws.
It is an approximation of reality, not reality itself. Newtonian mechanics was highly successful for centuries and even now, after being superseded by the Einsteinian Relativity theory, is still frequently used in many areas. In other words, a theory can be massively successful despite being wrong. Even when it is replaced by a more successful theory it can continue to find numerous applications. That’s how people should view the current scientific paradigm, highly successful but ultimately wrong. Useful ………. but Incomplete.


Science and Spirituality

” Both science and spirituality are the search for truth. One is the search for the

truths of the physical world. The other is the search for the truth of the nature of consciousness. As such there is no conflict between them.

For the same reason, there is currently little meeting between the two either. The current scientific paradigm does not include consciousness or mind as a fundamental reality, but seeks to explain everything in physical terms.

Western science has now looked out to the edges of the Universe, back in time to the beginning of creation, and down into the sub-atomic structure of matter and it finds no place or need for God. But this is because it has not yet included the inner realm of mind in its scope. When science explores mind as fully as it has explored space, time and matter, it will create a new worldview, one that includes spirituality.

Spirituality, on the other hand …… is often very unscientific in its approach to self- liberation. People believe things simply because someone has said it or written it.

But this is hardly the best way to arrive at truth. The Buddha warned against this 2,500 years ago when he said ” Do not believe anything because I have told you it is so ….. Only believe it when you have tested it for yourself. ”

In this respect spiritual growth can, and should, be very scientific. We can form a hypothesis — that certain meditation practices enhance awareness. For example, set up a personal experiment in meditation practice, and see what the results are.

This is important not only to make sure that we do not deceive ourselves ……. but also to ensure that our spiritual progress is as rapid as possible.

And rapid spiritual growth is something the world today needs very badly.” Peter Russell.

Many people are perplexed by the concept that God is within them. One book that could radically alter their view of this possibility is ….

The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes. This book is written from a scientific, atheistic, materialistic viewpoint, and treats God as a product of neuroscience ….. our religious beliefs derive ultimately from the way the brain is wired. But is an entirely different interpretation possible ? One that furnishes potential evidence for existence of the soul and reincarnation ?

The Voice of God

The human brain consists of two hemispheres linked by a thick band of connective tissue called the ” corpus callosum. ” The brain’s two hemispheres are not identical.

In right-handed people, the left hemisphere is dominant and controls the right side of the body, while the right hemisphere controls the generally weaker left side of the body. Bicameral means ” two chambered ” and provides a very good way of describing the human brain with its two distinct but connected hemispheres.

The left hemisphere is normally considered the seat of language and logic while the right hemisphere is the province of art, mathematics and music. Autistic savants can show bewildering technical expertise in art, mathematics and music while often being regarded as backward in relation to language, logic and empathy.

It has been speculated that these individuals suffered left-brain trauma in the womb due to an abnormal response to testosterone ….. leading to right-brain dominance. Also, some people who have suffered strokes in the left brain have been known to undergo remarkable transformations and discover high-level artistic, musical or mathematical skills that were not in any way evident previous to the stroke.

The left brain is characterized as selective, focused, methodical.
It filters information to allow the ” big picture ” to be seen. The right brain, on the other hand, deals with all of the detail ignored and filtered by the left brain. Ours is a left brain ” big picture ” society, but that doesn’t mean it was always that way.

Julian Jaynes’s radical hypothesis is that what we consider modern consciousness is intimately connected to the evolving dominance of the left brain and, particularly, to the development of language and writing.

Before that, the right brain was in charge and what we regard as consciousness simply did not exist. In fact, Jaynes speculates that human consciousness as we now understand it has existed for only about 3,000 years.

What existed before consciousness was the ” bicameral mind “.
Jaynes argues that human beings, as they started to learn rudimentary language, began to undergo a form of auditory hallucination when they were stressed. They would hear a voice in their head commanding them what to do …. ” fight “, ” run “, ” drink “, ” rest “, ” hunt “,” shelter ” etc. The hallucinated voice was that of the tribal chief or an authority figure. The person carried out the command unquestioningly. No consciousness existed to allow the command to be pondered, challenged or contemplated …… it was simply executed robotically.

Even when the tribal chief died, his hallucinated voice would still be heard for a long time after. In this way, it would seem that he was not actually dead. Was the tribal chief promoted to the status of ” god ” at this time ?
( Jaynes suggests this was the origin of the belief in life-after-death and therefore the human religious sensibility. ) As society grew more complex, additional voices arose to reflect additional chiefs and gods.

The bicameral human mind had an inbuilt master-slave structure …. one part of the brain barked orders, and another part carried them out immediately. This permitted a rapid and decisive response in crisis situations. It is a more sophisticated form of animal behavior, most of which is pre-programmed and instinctual.

Animals do not reflect on their behavior and do not take time to decide what to do …… and nor did the bicameral mind.

According to Jaynes, the hallucinated voice(s) arose in the right hemisphere of the brain and was heard in the left hemisphere. The right brain was the master issuing executive commands and the left brain was the slave that dutifully followed them. From this originated the human propensity for master-slave relationships.

Jaynes thought his model provided an insight into how hypnosis works.
The authoritative voice of the hypnotist becomes that of the right-brain master that once spoke to human beings. The left brain reverts to its old slavish instinct and mindlessly obeys the master’s commands.

In a TV show featuring British illusionist Derren Brown, he rang a public call box and waited for someone to answer. As soon as a person picked up, he shouted,
” Go to sleep !! ” Amazingly, many of those who answered the phone were filmed immediately slumping to the ground in a deep sleep. Brown’s explanation was that these people were extremely suggestible. He pointed out that most people would ignore a ringing phone in a public call box, assuming it was a wrong number and knowing it definitely was not for them. Those who do answer are almost Pavlovian in their behavior – they feel compelled to pick up a phone if it rings, no matter what the situation is, as if they have been conditioned since birth to do so and have no conscious choice ……… is ” suggestibility ” a vestige of the old bicameral mind ?

( In the 1960s, it was rumored that the CIA carried out research on ” voice control ” as part of their top secret MK-Ultra project. The idea was to use a form of auditory hypnosis via the telephone to gain control over the person at the other end of the line. An agent would use subtle vocal commands and specific acoustic tones to bring the listener under his influence and then manipulate him for the desired purpose. It was hypothesized that the right hemisphere of the brain was more impressionable than the left and could be targeted. Once it had been brought under control, it could be used to direct the left brain. Afterwards, the subject would be made to forget what had happened. )

This procedure is entirely consistent with Jaynes’s theory.

Is schizophrenia, where people hear voices ordering them to do things, a reversion to the old bicameral mind ? Are ” imaginary friends ” that some children create also a product of the ancient bicameral mind ?

Are young children conscious ? How many of us can remember even one detail of our earliest years ? Yet we clearly did things …….. despite not being conscious in any way that we can recall. Perhaps we were guided by a bicameral mind in our childhoods, with our parents’ voices the ones we hallucinated in our heads to tell us what to do when our parents weren’t physically around. We can’t remember this phase of our lives because we had no consciousness to organize memories for us.

Children in infancy exhibit similar traits to autistics …… they do not understand concepts such as deceit and empathy. Nor would people with bicameral minds have understood these concepts. Are autistics operating according to a form of bicameral mentality ?

Is a charismatic leader with hypnotic language skills …… someone like Hitler, Mussolini, Martin Luther King, Billy Graham – taking the role of the hallucinated voice of the tribal leader or god of bicameral times ? Is that why they inspire such devotion and can command vast crowds ? At huge election rallies …. are human beings reverting to their vestigial bicameral selves ? Is that why they love strong leaders, why they love authority, why they love celebrities and the super-rich ?

Have they placed these people on a par with the old bicameral gods ? Is a lynch mob a manifestation of a collective bicameral mentality kicking in ? …. a leader commands and the mob mindlessly obeys. Is the office hierarchy where people feel compelled to obey their inept managers a throwback to bicameral thinking ? People say they are scared to lose their job if they disobey …….

They are obviously much less scared of losing their self-respect.

When Moses went up to the summit of Mount Sinai and encountered Yahweh, when Mohammed went into a mountain cave and encountered the Angel Gabriel, when Jesus spoke with his heavenly Father, were they all exhibiting ” bicameral episodes ” ? Such episodes are thought to be more frequent if people have been fasting, meditating, isolating themselves from others. In short, if you go into the wilderness for forty days, you markedly raise the chances of having a bicameral episode. Are such episodes the basis for the ” divine revelations ” of Judaism, Christianity and Islam ? Is the ” Word of God ” the same as the ” Voice of God ” ?

In a famous experiment by Benjamin Libet, strong evidence was provided that consciousness may often consist of retrospective rationalizations of events that have already been decided by the brain i.e. free will might well be illusory.

But another explanation is possible.
Perhaps the older bicameral mind acts before the conscious mind, except that the hallucinated voice is silent. The conscious mind then rationalizes the event as its own work.

Did empathy – our ability to put ourselves in someone else’s shoes and imagine what they would feel and think – evolve from the old bicameral mind and the new conscious mind trying to understand each other and seek some mode of mutual understanding and cooperation ? In other words, empathy was, according to this view, originally internal before being extended to others, and may derive from our twin-chambered brain.

We can run a simulation of the person with whom we are empathizing in our right brain, while comparing and contrasting with our ” selves “, located in the left brain.

This is a capacity that evolved from the older bicameral mind.
Whereas in the past, the right brain issued the ” voice of god “, and the left brain obeyed, the left brain can now create any voice in the right brain and treat it as if it were a separate individual. The simulation can become so powerful and vivid that the created voice might eventually seem real.

Some novelists claim that their fictional characters take them over and write the

book on their own, without the author’s conscious involvement. These novelists say they could imagine placing the character in any situation out-with the context of the novel, and know exactly how the character would behave. This is consistent with a bicameral mentality, with a created character taking on a voice and life of its own.

Is our love of acting and role play, of story-telling and fantasy, of impersonating others, of assuming an identity for computer games, of having an avatar in a virtual reality world like Second Life, related to the inbuilt existence of a twin nature arising from the left and right brain, and from the modern conscious mind and the old bicameral mind ? Studies have shown differences between how men and women use their right and left brains. Are women more prone to submissive and compliant behavior because they are more bicameral then men ?

Is the human obsession with opposites, with binary logic, related to bicameralism ? Are the ” double ” and the ” shadow ” both intimately connected to bicameralism ? Does the ultimate root of good and evil lie in bicameralism ? There is virtually no arena of the human condition which couldn’t be considered as some kind of bicameral phenomenon.

Is the human race as a species prone to individual and mass hallucinations because of bicameralism ? Can humans create such powerful simulations of other ” voices ” that they effectively conjure gods, ghosts, spirits, vampires, werewolves and a whole gallery of supernatural beings out of their imaginations and then believe they are real ?

Are mediums ( those ones who aren’t outright charlatans ) so skilled at simulating the thoughts of a dead person about whom they have collected a few details that they can accurately describe how that person might have behaved when he was alive ? Is that why they appear so convincing ? Are people who have uncannily accurate intuitions about other people running incredibly powerful simulations

of those others in their mind ? ….. Or is something else going on ?

Some patients suffering from a hallucinated personality claim that the hallucination knows more than they do. What does that imply ? It could be argued that the right brain, with access to all of the detail that the left brain filters out, may well seem to have greater knowledge. It retains the facts which the left brain has long forgotten.

Some people have had ” split brain ” operations involving the severing of the corpus callosum. Could that result in a person developing two ” selves ” ?
Not nearly enough scientific research has been conducted on split brain patients. They could hold the key to persuading the world about the reality of the bicameral mind.

The word ” paranoia ” literally means having another mind alongside one’s own. That is exactly what bicameralism is.

Does multiple personality syndrome ( MPD ) ….. when one personality seemingly divides into two or more …… derive from bicameralism ? Regarding those people who can provide vivid details of past lives when they are under hypnosis …… are memory traces of buried ” voices ” being accessed ?

( If someone living in America who had never left the country were able, under hypnosis, to successfully reveal the location of an ancient artifact that had been buried in France for hundreds of years and state that he himself had hidden this object in a previous life, how could any mainstream hypothesis account for this ? )

Is ” speaking in tongues ” a bicameral phenomenon ?
( If someone were to speak fluently in an ancient and ” dead ” language which they had never previously encountered and of which they could have no possible knowledge in conventional terms, how could any mainstream hypothesis possibly account for this ? )

The Muses who are said to guide poets, writers and artists …. are they actually bicameral voices ? Tourette’s Syndrome ………. is that an inner bicameral voice suddenly erupting uncontrollably ? Being ” possessed ” …… is that a description of an old bicameral voice coming to the surface ? In an exorcism, is a bicameral ” demon ” being expelled ? The famous ancient Greek Oracle at Delphi ……….. was the priestess vocalizing the thoughts of a hallucinated god ?

In ancient Rome ….. an individual’s ” genius ” was his guardian and guiding spirit. This ” genius ” could easily be interpreted as an echo of the bicameral voice of old.

Socrates, when he was on trial for his life, spoke of a daemon that helped him in difficult times. He described it as “…… a sort of voice which comes to me and has done so since my childhood, and when it comes it always dissuades me from what i am proposing to do, and never urges me on.” John Milton referred to a ” Celestial Patroness ” who guided his poetry. William Blake seemed to live his life amongst a plethora of visions and auditory hallucinations. Wagner reached his creative peak when he searched inside himself for his musical ideas rather than looking to the outside world. Mathematician Françoise Chatelin heard a voice which, he claimed, instructed him in a new way of understanding numbers.

Is the condition of bipolar disorder ( manic depression ), from which many artists suffer …… connected with bicameralism ? During the manic phase, the person is consumed with activity, passion and creativity. Is that when he is being guided by an inner voice, silent but still directing his actions …. reminiscent of the bicameral voice ? The depressive phase would kick in when the ” voice ” or inner conviction vanished and the person was left to his own devices once more.

He would feel bereft without the certainty and direction provided by the inner voice.

Some people might speculate that the vestigial bicameral ” voice ” could be equated with the Jungian ” Shadow ” aspect of the personality …. or with the Freudian ” id “. What is referred to as the ” unconscious ” may actually be the interplay between the modern conscious mind and the ancient bicameral mind. In certain situations, particularly stressful ones, the bicameral mind may come to the fore since it is far more decisive and quick-acting than the conscious mind.

When intoxicated people find that they can get home from a bar yet not have any conscious recollection of a single part of their homeward journey, they sometimes say they were on ” autopilot “, but perhaps it was their old bicameral mind that took

over and guided them safely home. What about sleepwalkers ? Have they been taken over by their old bicameral voice and then remember nothing about it when they wake up ? As for dreams, human beings really have no idea what takes place in the dreamscape. People are woken up in order to report what they have been dreaming about. However, that involves their normal conscious mind kicking in and then trying to rationalize the few fragmentary images it can remember.

It is possible that the dreamscape is where the old bicameral mind has much more say than normal ….. and tries to communicate messages to our consciousness ….. most of which are promptly forgotten unless they are particularly vivid ?

Jaynes thought that bicameral humans did not really dream at all. Since they had no sense of ” self ” they could never imagine themselves in other times, places and situations, as modern, conscious humans do when they are dreaming.
Rather, a bicameral person continued to experience the same sort of hallucinations in sleep as when awake i.e. voices speaking to them, accompanied perhaps ……… by images of dead tribal chiefs, gods, heroes etc.

Jaynes also speculated that the sexual encounters of bicameral people were boring and infrequent since they had no fantasy space to go to in their minds to spice things up. In many ways, bicameral humans are as far from modern human beings as Neanderthal Man.

There is a group called the ” Hearing Voices Movement ” which claims that between 2% and 4% of the population regularly hear voices, but only about one third become mental patients. In other words, there are people who hear voices and yet manage to cope with them and function normally. John Nash, the Nobel Prize winning economist, eventually managed to control the voices that had tormented him all his life.

There is a phenomenon known as the ” Third Man ” derived from T.S. Eliot’s poem Waste Land ……..

Who is the third who walks always beside you ? When i count, there are only you and I together. But when I look up the white road
There is always another one walking beside you.

The idea is that in times of extreme stress, a presence can manifest itself and guide a person out of danger. Many people in life-threatening situations have described such a presence giving them direct instructions.

Frequently … they attribute it to divine intervention. Many mountaineers, marathon runners and people doing extreme endurance sports have reported this Third Man encounter. Scientists typically assert that oxygen deprivation leads to deterioration in brain function, leading to hallucinations. However, the people undergoing these experiences seem not to be going into a chaotic, unfocused, disconnected state that will lead to their death … but the precise opposite. Why would a hallucination be so helpful and so specific in its advice ? According to Julian Jaynes’s theory … what is happening is that the left brain is surrendering control to the right brain and

the old bicameral mode is being restored during the crisis.

Jaynes’s theory is massively speculative but it seems to convincingly address many issues that are inexplicable within the parameters of alternative and more conventional hypotheses.

There is no mystical element in Jaynes’s thinking.
He is rationalizing a wide range of phenomena according to specific differences between the left and right hemispheres of the human brain, leading, he thinks, to hallucinated voices ( and perhaps hallucinated bodies too ). These hallucinations are, he proposes, the basis of humanity’s religious beliefs.

Jaynes’s hypothesis, as it stands, is one that should speak loudly and persuasively to atheists. Even though they reject the concept of God, they may see the possibility of ” expanding their consciousness ” via getting in touch with the strange landscape of the right brain, full of creativity, mathematical, artistic and musical potential, and vast resources of unfiltered data which … if it could all be accessed under certain conditions … might provide amazing insights and extra capabilities.

Wouldn’t we all want access to an inner voice that could help us in times of danger, or that could revolutionize our perception of reality ? Just as humanity underwent a remarkable transformation when it evolved from the bicameral mind to modern consciousness ( in Jaynes’s theory ), so it could take another radical leap if modern consciousness could selectively tap the old bicameral mind.

But there is another possibility that Jaynes never considers. What if the bicameral hallucinated voices are not hallucinations ? What if they are real ? What if the voice is that of the divine spark ? What if it was the divine spark which guided humanity from its ape ancestry to its modern consciousness ? That would be one way of accounting for the staggering difference between humans and all other animals.

What if the divine spark has full memory of all of its previous incarnations ……. and these memories can be accessed under hypnosis ?

( Plato, an advocate of reincarnation …… argued that all true knowledge involves recollection. We are not discovering anything new … we are simply remembering what our soul knew when it was part of the divine order. )

What if glossolalia – speaking in tongues – is actually a manifestation of the native tongues of previous incarnations ? What if some incarnations go back to the very dawn of humanity and know exactly what happened back then ?

What if they know the truth of the ” Garden of Eden ” and all of the other Biblical events ? What if they know the identities of the archons ? What if they deliberately became silent, as part of a greater plan …. until they had brought humanity to full consciousness ? The combination of reincarnation and a hidden voice that can be accessed in certain circumstances is nothing short of a way to bring the whole of human history alive, to reveal all of the moments once thought lost in time.

And what if the divine spark also offered glimpses of the divine order …..

and the uttermost secrets of the universe ?

Julian Jaynes’s proposal could be treated as a mystical theory providing direct evidence of the divine spark. Located, in effect, as a separate personality in the right hemisphere of the human brain – divinity inside man – or as a rationalist’s account of how we might think the divine exists even though it is only a sophisticated hallucination produced by brain wiring.

Jaynes’s theory permits the religious to glimpse the divine spark ….. and atheists a higher self. In that way, it can unite both factions in the pursuit of a higher humanity with massively expanded possibilities.

Those who speculate that the illuminati’s path to enlightenment is concerned with gaining reliable and consistent access to the inner voice of wisdom, command and revelation that features in Julian Jaynes’s theory … are on the right track.

” There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come.” ……. Victor Hugo.

” All truth passes through three stages. First ……. it is ridiculed. Second ……. it is violently opposed. Third …. it is accepted as being self-evident. ” Schopenhauer.


The Great Beyond

All paranormal activity, everything out of the ordinary, everything that transcends our everyday experiences, everything that is uncanny and spine tingling, comes from the unconscious. Our contact with the divine originates there.

Our ancestors, who possessed a primitive consciousness in comparison with ourselves, were much closer to the ” gods ” and felt their presence in a direct way every day thanks to the ” bicameral mind ” that placed the voices and images of the gods within their immediate awareness.

As humanity evolved, it switched from the bicameral mind that was in touch with the immortal gods to the modern conscious mind of mortal men, our sense of the divine

has shrunk spectacularly. But the bicameral mind is still with us. It is locked within our unconscious, the layer immediately beneath consciousness, and from time to time it breaks through, particularly in times of high stress.

Our unconscious mind is a repository of astonishing gifts and knowledge that mostly stay just beyond our grasp, forever tantalizing us. Putting it simply, the unconscious is the realm of the divine while consciousness is the arena of our petty, trivial, daily lives.

The conscious mind is tiny in comparison with the unconscious.
It is nothing more than a filtering and focusing mechanism to convert the vast, unwieldy and potentially overwhelming unconscious into a sharp, practical tool.

The problem is we now regard consciousness as primary and the unconscious as a mere oddity. It is like an alien entity that we ignore as much as possible because it would be too disturbing to really think about what it is and how it influences us.

The truth is though that the unconscious is primary and consciousness merely a useful device that allows us to engage more successfully with the material world.

All religiously minded people agree that this material world is not our destiny, consciousness is therefore of little use in defining the true meaning of our lives. Only the unconscious can help us. All transcendent states are connected with the unconscious. In order to make contact with the divine order, nothing is more critical than escaping normal conscious mind states.

Fasting, meditation, drugs, extreme exertion, extreme isolation, extreme pain, extreme tiredness, extreme prayer – they are all designed to bring us to a state where we can break free of the grip of our consciousness in order to release our unconscious. That is no accident. Consciousness is a restriction, a barrier, and an obstacle. It holds us back from becoming who we truly are, Its evolutionary purpose is to help us navigate the material world ….. not the spiritual one.

Consciousness lends itself to materialism, consumerism and the pursuit of petty comforts and joys that we see all around us. It is strongly connected to the Jungian category of extraverted sensing while the unconscious is concerned with introverted intuition.

Carl Gustav Jung ( 1875 – 1961 ) consistently contrasted the Ego with the Self.

The Ego is the centre of consciousness and gives the individual his sense of identity and purpose. The Ego is what we imagine ourselves to be, yet we are entirely mistaken. The Self is the centre of our psyche. It is where our true self resides. The Ego is turned towards materialism and the ordinary world while the Self is turned towards spirituality and the divine realm.

In comparison with the Self, the Ego is extraverted while the Self is introverted.


The Hero

No one is ever hailed as a hero for selfishly and relentlessly pursuing his own self-interest. It is extraordinary that celebrities and the super rich are treated as human gods when, judged by their greed and narcissism, they do not have one single altruistic quality. These are people who have tirelessly worked to glorify themselves, to win the adulation of the masses, to show that they are ” superior ” to ordinary men and women. These are in fact the worst type of anti-heroes …… those who are in it absolutely for themselves.

The quest for the holy grail is the search for the hero who resides within each and every one of us. We must reach into the heart of darkness, our unconscious mind to find out who we really are …… No task is more difficult.

” The treasure which the hero fetches from the dark cavern is life ….. it is himself. ”


” The sense of mystery, of a real danger to be faced, of an overwhelming Spiritual gain to be won, were of the essential nature of the tale. It was the very mystery of Life which lay beneath the picturesque wrappings, small wonder that the Quest of the Grail became the synonym for the highest achievement that could be set before men, and that when the romantic evolution of the Arthurian tradition reached its term, this supreme adventure was swept within the magic circle. The knowledge of the Grail was the utmost man could achieve, Arthur’s knights were the very flower of manhood, it was fitting that to them the supreme test be offered. That the man who first told the story, and boldly, as befitted a born teller of tales, wedded to Arthurian legend, was himself connected by descent with the ancient Faith, himself actually held the Secret of the Grail, and told, in purposely romantic form, that of which he knew, i am firmly convinced, nor do i think that the time is far distant when the missing links will be in our hand, and we shall be able to weld once more the golden chain which connects Ancient Ritual with Medieval Romance.”

Jessie L. Weston

” If man hasn’t discovered something to die for ….. he isn’t fit to live.” Martin Luther King


666 The Anti Christ

Alexander Romanov


    Print       Email

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You might also like...

On the Source of Authority -Salinas

Read More →