Natella Speranskaja

The Radical Self and the beginning of the eschatological gnosis. On the approaches of New Metaphysics

Abstracts

1. During an epoch of paradigm shift, in the conditions of total desacralization and deontologization, we can not talk about sacred-centrical reality. The historical process came to a point where Nietzsche’s words “God is dead” became the verdict to the whole era. Prerequisites of European nihilism, predicted by Nietzsche, have arisen from rupture of the ontologic character which destroyed all human communication with the transcendent world. There was a real triumph of  “human, all too human”.
2. In the postmodern era man was the victim of relentless destructio. The existential crisis that he faced, revealed through a traumatic experience, what typeof people struggling in the prison of the last century. Passed the examination of the "death of God", those that remained in the world without any support - “andivine”, “Godless”, “uncharmed” & desert world - Julius Evola referred to as people of separated “special type”, “differentiated” people which power of will was so strong that enabled them to withstand life in a world that has no sense. They managed to radically change their ontological status.
3. Whether there is a speech about the overman? Evola was making a distinction between the concepts of “overman”and “initiate”. The first is described by him as “extremely and problematic increase in power of a ‘man’ species”. In contrast, initiate isn’t a human at all. It’s the Radical Self, whose will to power or, using concepts of New Metaphysics, the Postsacral Will, confirms its transcendence, not forming any communications with the being as such.
4. All of modern Western civilization is a world where the Nietzschean verdict expresses itself in the symbol of the crucifixion without the Crucified. We stand at the empty cross, from which no one appeals to the Father.
5. But why does God let himself be killed, why the First Principle retired, giving way to the nightmare of Kali Yuga, which we have the misfortune to observe? These questions are put New Metaphysics. Two ways lie before us, and we must make a choice: either we are talking about a New Metaphysics, or not utter a word. Silence - the only way for a human who is unable to or unwilling to overcome his limitations. Talk about the New Metaphysics may only the “God and nothing's winner”. About whom there is a speech? About the new actor of a postmodern. About initiated in the end of the world, about the Radical Self.
6. Necessary to raise the question about the possibility of initiation in the modern world. A huge number of organizations are scattered around the world have in their arsenal initiation rituals, which in any case is not an indication of their direct connection with Tradition. No matter where we go, we meet pitiful simulacrum. But Evola made an exception, pointing to the existence of closed structures (for example, groups of initiate gnostics) who have not lost the chain of succession.
7. Initiate to becoming an initiate through “level’s rupture”, that Julius Evola designated as la rottura del livello. It is of fundamental importance. Past this terrible and defining experience, man becomes “differentiated”, separate person who is “over” existential realm and human laws and principles reigning in it (Yevgeny Golovin was an example of such person). A man who has endured the “gap experience” is, strictly speaking, ceases to be human.
8. Paradoxically, only with the disappearance of the Sacred becomes probable occurrence of the “God and nothing's winner”. The Radical Self declares itself by means of Postsacral Will as «absolute assertion of his own transcendence» and generates the Impossible Reality as manifestation of his Kingdom.
9. With the appearance of Radical Self starts eschatological gnosis, the reduction of total cycles to the point of Absolute Ends.
10. Philosopher Gaydar Jamal attaches fundamental importance to the struggle between being and consciousness. In his view, all that, one way or another, supports and shapes being as such, is related to Satan, who opposes the New Intellectual. Going through ordeal of  “the five renunciations” (from the human, from a society as Shades of a Satan, from the power, from being, from the blessing), he must overcome, throw away or, saying tougher, to kill a man as an intrinsic value.
11. During present time we should call in question the concept “the political soldier”, unconditionally accepted in the twentieth century. After 45th year we are dealing exclusively with a simulacrum of the political soldier, losing a solid foothold in the political sphere.
12. In the postmodern era we should talk not about politics but about post-politics and transition from the political theology of Carl Schmitt to the political angelology of Alexander Dugin and his concept of “Angelopolis” (from the greek. Polis - the city-state) or “City of Angels”.
13. While the being (as well as "good") is not perceived in opposition to consciousness, while the concept is not recognized as false and totally anti-spiritual, yet far coming to the crucial theological antihumanism, we will deal with “man” as a superfluous appendage, with a “corpse”, which we dragging instead of throw in the nearest ditch. Without this act of liberation serving to pure consciousness is impossible.
14. But what serves pure consciousness? And what is a very pure consciousness? Whether these uneasy questions rest against one not less difficult, namely: what is I?
15. Yuri Mamleev in his book “The Destiny of Being” writes about the internal reality of religion, called it “the I-Utrism”, in which the object of worship is “I” of man itself (with necessary difference between “I – given” from the “I - future” where the first – an essence possibility, a step, the bridge to the second). The concept of “reality” relates for Yuri Vitalievitch solely to the single object of worship and belief, that is, the “I”, so the whole world, that there is no “I” is defined as “the existence of nonexistence”.
16. How to solve the problem of reality Gaydar Jamal? Whether has a reality the absolute status? Answering in the affirmative, we inevitably come to a conclusion about the ephemerality of the Spirit. But the denial would mean that the spirit is eternal and opposed to reality, which, no doubt, is not absolute. According to Gaydar Jamal: “... the very position of independence of the spirit from the reality already pointed out that reality is not absolute”. By Jamal, spirit is absolute, the reality – is relative.
17. Absolut is the Wholly Other, in no way connected with reality, absorbed in a profane sleep. The following choices raises to living beings: ordinary dissolution, provided further dilution in the element of uncertainty of being, or gaining experience of “unmotivated wind, as its true cause”, ie, release from substantia and, of course, finding true immortality. But neither immortality nor, especially, natural death, have no relation to wakefulness, as noted by Gaydar Jamal. Life itself is not interested in the perspective of waking, tending to the more profound form of hypnosis, “Maya’s sleep”.
18. Latin-American mystic Nimrod De Rosario points to the cause of impossibility of awakening that consists in synchronization of internal movements of the microcosm with the macrocosm movements (ie, nuclear, biological and physiological clock of microcosm strictly synchronized with the cosmic clock, regulating the movement of things as universal laws of reason) and the only way out is their complete desynchronization and total break with the transcendent time, in which remains a microcosm.
19. It is clear that a conceptual understanding of “Reality” and “Absolute” of Gaydar Jamal is not the same of Yuri Mamleev’s understanding. For the second reality is absolute, while the first is convinced in its relativity.
20. A man must find a point of opposition. Such a point could be the North, which is traditionally associated with the idea of ​​the Centre, which acts as a symbol of the Swastika, and the idea of ​​Light, but we find the opposite view in “Orientation-North” by Gaydar Jamal. According to the philosopher, “The idea of ​​the North opposed the idea of ​​the center”because the latter represents the “center of all the possibilities”, whereas the north is the “pole of the impossible”. Book ends with an unexpected statement: “In the north heaven there is no light”. Jamal denies navigation, for him there is no direction - the path to the north is a blindly way.
21. St. Maximus the Confessor in the “Puzzling questions to Falassy about Holy Scripture” insisted on "good silence" about the doctrine of apocatastasis, as the crowd is not able to comprehend all its depth of thought. We appeal to the theological concept of “apocatastasis” (greek.άποκατάστασις - returning in a former condition, restoration) as containing an allusion to the concept of Radical Self; here and now we are interested in “final salvation” of gnostic devil, which “consists in a radicalisation and transcendentalisation of absolute evil, and not waived, as the fruit of one’s hands, lying in wickedness”. Whether we can admit, what it is necessary to speak about the manifestation of a gnostic devil, his "human incarnation" to return to a state of pre-fall, pre-curse? Whether the Satan himself will enter in “prison” of the human mortal flesh to make darkness darker, presented as “evil Absolute” before the advent of a Radical Self and his Kingdom, an Impossible Reality?
22. Need to forget about any restoration of the sacred and even hints at it - the emergence of the Radical Self is possible only under condition of absolute disappearance of the sacred as it is. Postsacral Will which is awakening the Radical Self, arises only there where all sacral rivers have dried up, and the desert has extended to the sizes of the Universe.