
                                ###     ###
                                 ###   ###
                      ###   ####  ### ###  ###   ####
                      ###    ###   #####   ###    ###
                      ###    ###    ###    ###    ###
                      ###    ###   #####   ###    ###
                      ##########  ### ###  ##########
                                 ###   ###
                                ###     ###

                         Underground eXperts United

                                 Presents...

         ####### ## ##      #######     # #   ##   ## ####### #######
         ##      ## ##      ##         #####  ##   ##      ##      ##
         ####    ## ##      ####        # #   ####### #######     ##
         ##      ## ##      ##         #####       ## ##         ##
         ##      ## ####### #######     # #        ## #######   ##

         [  Freudipus  ]                        [  By George Kozma  ]


    ____________________________________________________________________
    ____________________________________________________________________



George Kozma:
FREUDIPUS

It is not up-to-date in a post modern age to speak about the Truth or about
Essentials, but hopefully it will become clear, why I must try it once
again. In the last three thousand years the majority of the civilizations
have relegated to the background of the Jewish component of their origin:
Christians and Moslems deny their Jewish part - as Freud would have put it:
they commit patricide, killing their "father."
Of course, Freud himself writes in an assimilationist mood - denying
himself his Jewish tradition, when he stresses, (in his essay entitled:
"Moses") that the origin of Judaism's unitarian God-belief stems from
Egyptian sources (like Ekhnatons'Aton-religion), so Jews only projected
this central figure to their "mountain demon," called Yahve.

Freud never mentions, that Oedipus - his main hero (whose name, according
to Graves, meaning Big-Foot, derives really from Oedi-phallos - has had an
Eastern ancestor (called Kadmos, meaning Eastern), a descendant of the son
of Noah. Maybe a Jewish family? (Or not quite, if they stem from Noah's
son, Kana'an and Cham, who cut off his father's testicles.) Interestingly,
Freud never mentions the tragic fate of this family's members: Kadmos-
descendant Tantalos, who offers his son, Pelops, to the gods - so that
Poseidon falls in love with him. The son of Pelops is pursued lovingly by
Laios, the father of Oedipus. The other sons of Pelops are also sacrificing
their sons - to give them as a meal to their father... Freud only mentions,
that he is raised in a foreign environment: unwittingly he acts against the
taboo of patricide and incest - which are central in the Jewish Decalogue,
by the way. He never makes it explicit, that his central myth (Oedipus) is
based on a homo-erotic family saga - one of the main taboos of Jewish-based
religions (although there are arguments pointing to the Persian-Iranian
origin of this homophobic asceticism.)

Why is it relevant that for most of the time, no thinker - and among them,
not even Freud, who is one of the few thinkers, who are having an effect on
our everyday lives - mentions the fact, that the God of the Jews has a name
- a Name stemming from the verb "to be" namely. (Even lexicons do know,
that the name Yehove is related to the verb Haya-Hove-Yihye, meaning was -
is being - will be, and the Bible explicitly states it: "I will be who I
will be," says the translation. The Bible does not say "God wants you to be
generous" - it says, that the Make-Be-er tells you to be generous - at
least, in this transliteration the question of legitimacy is clear: the
Lord of Being (or Changing, Transforming for that matter) "has"
jurisdiction about all facets of being (supposing it - or He - exists
somehow independently from the rest of existence - or Creation - itself.)
Because "it" is intertwined with everything else, "it" (the text) stresses
the importance of "signs" (in Hebrew it is "tsioon"), that remind us of
this central existential Being-Name. We are "echoing" "Him" - in Hebrew it
rhymes interestingly to the people1s name: "yehoodi"-Jewish. (Hod means
echo.)
Many philosopher (from Iustinus to Pseudo-Dyonysios, until Schleiermacher
and Sartre, from Augistinus, Duns Scotus, Averroes, Avicenna, until Abu
Bakr, or from Parmenides to Master Eckhardt up until Kierkegaard,
Nietzsche, Sprengler, Jaspers, Heidegger and today Derrida) posits as a
central entity the Ens, the Nought, the Being, Existence or the Sign, the
Symbol, - and many religions also arrive to the concept ot an omni-present
entity (the Creator) : the Khmers in Cambodia use this name in their
language (U-Bley-U-Nongbhu-Nongthau), the Indonesians (Zanaharee) too, the
Greeks' Demiourgos, while the gla-gla signs of South African Ibo-s or the
Finno-Ugrian Shamanic "echoing" and the Chinese Tao's lake-mirror are also
"echoes."

Freud (in his drive to discredit religion as a neurotic, sick self-
delusion, which it can be, of course) - together with his century's
atheistic materialism - wanted to deny the importance of the centrality of
the concept of "Being" (and also of Transformation), because he wanted to
arrive to a real transformation in the phantasy-world of each of us. Trying
to discredit the Judaistic Existence-idol, he operated the same
(neurotically compulsive) way as many religious believers, who think, that
if they use (or do not use) certain words, it can - miraculously in a
wishful way - affect "Reality." Symptomatically, when Freud finds his
surrogate basic myth - the Oedipus mythologeme - he denies and omits the
ominous fact about the homo-erotic family story of his hero.
The main theme - what is a man, what constitutes the human "being" - is
related to the sexual roles' institution: that is, where we experience
every day the challenge of positing "who" we are, the identity-question: "I
Am Who I Am" - which is God's Name.
The main source of anti-Judaistic tendencies (that have different causes)
is the unequivocally homophobic and anti-sexual character of the One-God
religions (and their origin, the Jewish Bible). Freud's omitting
(censuring) his Jewish tradition and also his partial rendering of the
Oedipus myth are two facets of the same coin: the instinctual ambivalence
and deep bisexuality in many humans, or in many of us. It is quite
interesting that Freud comes to this very same conclusion in spite
of his own double denial.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 uXu #427              Underground eXperts United 1998              uXu #427
      Call INTERNATIONAL INFORMATION RETRIEVAL GUILD -> telnet iirg.org
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
