Showing posts with label Sacred. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sacred. Show all posts

Saturday 6 November 2021

Whatever You Believe Imprisons You.





Jim Garrison and the Illuminati 

Discordianism is in direct contradiction of the monotheory- mono theist foundations of Western religion, Western logic and Western law, all of which assume that there is one correct model that is true in all cases. People who are religious in the dogmatic Judaeo-Christian sense, logicians who haven't gotten to Godel's Proof yet, and lawyers of all sorts are the last persons on Earth to be able to appreciate the Discordian philosophy. 

Nonetheless, in a totally Quixotic way, Kerry Thornley, dragging his Discordian history behind him, insisted on getting himself involved in the Kennedy Assassination Mania of the '60s, and went straight to a lawyer — New Orleans D.A. Jim "The Jolly Green Giant" Garrison. He might as well have gone to a Thomist theologian. 

Kerry decided in 1967, after reading Mark Lane's Rush to Judgment and a few other of the Kennedy assassination books, that perhaps his old friend Lee Harvey Oswald hadn't killed the President after all; maybe there really was a conspiracy. Kerry naively went back to New Orleans and had several long talks with District Attorney Garrison, who had opened a new investigation which seemed to be uncovering such a conspiracy. 

Thornley and Jim Garrison did not make a good team together, to put it mildly. In fact, at their last interview, each told the other to go to hell. Discordianism and law do not mix. Kerry left New Orleans and angrily informed all his friends and correspondents that Garrison was an unscrupulous demagogue who was organizing a witch-hunt to excite the gullible and advance his own political career. Garrison's aides struck back with a series of ridiculous charges against Thornley. 

Naturally, I got drawn into the controversy. 

That was when I really began to understand how arbitrary are the reality-constructs of the average human nervous system. The establishment press was 100% anti-Garrison and denied all of his charges. The underground press was 100% pro-Garrison and supported all of his charges. In Leary's language, all the signals that could be organized into a "good" Garrison Gestalt were transmitted freely and omnidirectionally in the underground press game, while all signals suggestive of a "bad" Garrison, or inconsistent with a "good" Garrison, were smoothly, efficiently reserved for the Establishment press game. 

"My God," the Libertarian said to himself one day in early 1968, when this had become clear, "the left wing is as robotic as the right wing." (We apologize for our naivete in taking until 1968 to figure that out.) 

It certainly illustrated the first law of Discordianism: "Convictions cause convicts." Whatever you believe imprisons you. 

Thornley, as I had gotten to know him through the mails and then through visits, was a humorous, agnostic, libertarian person who was dogmatic about only two things: anarchism and pacifism. It was against his personal ethic to destroy life in any form. It was impossible for one to consider him seriously as a participant in a conspiracy to murder anybody. 

And yet, in the underground press, Thornley and the other Garrison suspects were pictured as a weird gang of homosexual Satanic C.I.A. Nazi fanatics. It was the McCarthyism of the '50s all over again, coming from the left this time. 

("There seem to be a lot of different realities going around these days," Abbie Hoffman said during the Democratic Convention horrors of 1968; that may well be the only intelligent thing he ever said.) 

From that time to this the Skeptic has made it a point to read one or two periodicals every month put out by some political or religious group he despises, just to see what sort of signals are being screened out by his habitual reality-maps. It is most educational. 

(Aleister Crowley and Bertrand Russell, respectively the outstanding mystic and the outstanding rationalist of the 20th Century, have also recommended this practice. It is one of the best ways to discover how Nasrudin's donkey—the self-metaprogrammer—works.) 


Meanwhile, Thornley discovered that Allan Chapman, of Texas, one of Garrison's aides, believed the JFK assassination was the work of the Bavarian Illuminati. Of course, I had been an expert on that subject (I thought) for a number of years, and Garrison's involvement in it encouraged me to enter the belief system that Garrison was a paranoid or a demagogue or both. There simply were no real Illuminati; it was all a rightwing fantasy-a sanitized version of the tired old Elders-of- Zion mythology. Although the underground press was absolutely fundamentalist in its allegiance to the Garrison Revelations, it was also intensely gullible and eager to believe all manner of additional conspiracy theories, the weirder the better. Most Discord ians, at this time, were contributors to underground newspapers all over the country. We began surfacing the Discordian Society, issuing position papers offering non-violent anarchist techniques to mutate our robot-society. One was our "PURSE" plan (Permanent Universal Rent Strike Exchange) in which everybody simply stops paying rent forever. (Can they dispossess us all into the Atlantic and Pacific?) Another was our "PUTZ" plan (Permanent Universal Tax Zap), in which everybody stops paying taxes. Along with this we planted numerous stories about the Discordian Society's aeon-old war against the sinister Illuminati. We accused everybody of being in the Illuminati— Nixon, Johnson, William Buckley, Jr., ourselves, Martian invaders, all the conspiracy buffs, everybody. We did not regard this as a hoax or prank in the ordinary sense. We still considered it guerrilla ontology. My personal attitude was that if the New Left wanted to live in the particular tunnel-reality of the hard-core paranoid, they had an absolute right to that neurological choice. I saw Discordianism as the Cosmic Giggle Factor, introducing so many alternative paranoias that everybody could pick a favorite, if they were inclined that way. I also hoped that some less gullible souls, overwhelmed by this embarrassment of riches, might see through the whole paranoia game and decide to mutate to a wider, funnier, more hopeful reality-map. The distinguished poet Ed Sanders, author of Fuck God Up The Ass and other immortal works, once sent me an urgent message, warning, "There's nothing funny about the Illuminati. They're real!" I laughed immoderately, as the Fool always does before the doors of Chapel Perilous swing shut behind him. The Discordian revelations seem to have pressed a magick button. New exposes of the Illuminati began to appear everywhere, in journals ranging from the extreme Right to the ultra-Left. Some of this was definitely not coming from us Discordians. In fact, one article in the Los Angeles Free Press in 1969 consisted of a taped interview with a black phone-caller who claimed to represent the "Black Mass," an Afro-Discordian conspiracy we had never heard of. He took credit, on behalf of the Black Mass and the Discordians, for all the bombings elsewhere attributed to the Weather Underground. 

Other articles claimed the Illuminati definitely were a Jesuit conspiracy, a Zionist conspiracy, a bankers' conspiracy, etc., and accused such worthies as FDR, J. Edgar Hoover, Lenin, Aleister Crowley, Jefferson and even Charlemagne of being members of it, whatever it was. All this inspired Bob Shea and me to start work on the gigantic novel which finally emerged as the Illuminatus trilogy. We made The Discordians The Good Guys and The Illuminati The Bad Guys in an epic of convoluted treachery that satirized all conspiracy theories of Left and Right. 

A good omen early in the writing cheered us vastly. A search through the Discordian Archives revealed that the earliest of Discordian holy books—How the West Was Lost, by Maladypse the Younger (Greg Hill)—was originally printed, after office hours, on the Xerox machine of D.A. Jim Garrison, in summer 1963. (Greg's girlfriend was Garrison's secretary.) That would be about the time when Oswald was ordering the Carcano rifle and I was having my experience with the green man in the cornfield, and by this time we were all too sophisticated to dismiss such a pattern as "mere coincidence." Synchronicity, by Goddess, was afoot. . . and the weirdness was increasing. For instance, we Discordians had a mystic sign, like the Masons and everybody else. Ours was blandly lifted from good old Tory warmonger Winston Churchill; it was the V-for-Victory Winnie had used all through World War II. Of course, to us, it had special Discordian meanings: theV, being the Roman numeral for 5, illustrated the Law of Fives. The way the sign is made, with 2 fingers up and 3 bent down, exemplifies the hidden 23 within the Law of Fives. The fact that this sign is also used by Catholic priests in blessing and by Satanists in invoking the devil illustrates the essential ambiguity of all symbolism, or the Cosmic Giggle Factor. Between the first edition of the Principia Discordia, run off on Jim Garrison's Xerox machine in 1963, and the fourth edition, published by Rip-Off Press in Berkeley in 1969, only 3,125 copies of that basic Discordian text were ever distributed. Nonetheless, the V sign, somehow, got accepted by the whole counter-culture, especially circa 1966-70. One saw hundreds of thousands of protesters using it at the Pentagon demonstration in October 1967 and again at the Democratic convention of 1968. The odd part was that virtually nobody using it was aware that we Discordians had revived i t . . . The Pentagon itself, of course, is a sacred Discordian shrine, both because it is five-sided* and because the Byzantine bureaucracy there enshrined illustrates so wonderfully the basic Discordian sociological law enunciated by Kerry Thornley in The Gospel According to Fred: "Imposition of Order = Escalation of Chaos." I attended the Pentagon protest in October 1967—where the Yippies attempted to expel the Demon, Yog-Sothoth, by chanting, "Out, demon, out!" -and all of it, especially the V signs, seemed as if the Discordian version of surrealism was becoming a new political reality. The next year the Yippies ran a pig for President. A psychologist named Richard Ryan, in New Jersey, read some of the Discordian literature and wrote to tell me another 23 mindfuck. Ryan had overheard a psychiatrist, in a mental hospital where they both worked, giving a royal asschewing to a nurse who'd made a mistake. "When I say 23 c c , " the psychiatrist had shouted, "I want 23 cc.-not 24 cc." Ryan heard this on his way to visit a ward with chronic schizophrenics. When he entered the ward, one of the schizzies said to him, in a tone of anxiety, "Yes, yes, 23 cc."

Sunday 1 July 2018

Sacred and Untouchable




When coming into contact with image of The Ideal, even those of your enemies, The Foreign Gods, from the perspective of any visitor to the Temples, Sacred Groves and other such consecrated ground --

When approaching  
Usual Vault Rules Apply :

When in ThePressence  or Approaching The Divinity,

TOUCH-NOT, Lest Thee Be TOUCHED


 But what the story was designed to indicate, in my opinion, is that  

There are certain things that 
you touch at your peril 
regardless of your intentions. 

LIKE STAR WARS



And those things that you touch at your peril, regardless of your intentions, most cultures regard as 

Sacred

and

Untouchable.



Saturday 12 May 2018

Ballacks to the Latta Ye






" So I want to start with a story from the Old Testament. 

There’s a scene in the Old Testament when the ancient Hebrews are moving the Ark of the Covenant. 

The Ark of the Covenant was a device that was manufactured in order to contain 

The Word of God. 

OR
"A Radio for Talking to God"
(if you're into that)

LIKE STAR WARS



And there was a rule among the ancient Hebrews which was :


You are not to touch the Ark of the Covenant. 

No matter what.” 

LIKE STAR WARS

And there’s a story in the Old Testament where the bearers of the Ark of the Covenant (they used to carry it), the bearers of the Ark of the Covenant trip and a man reaches out to steady it and when he touches it, 



** SMITE !! **

God strikes him DEAD. 

And modern people look at a story like that and the first thing they think is  :

“That seems a little bit harsh on the part of God, given that the man was attempting to do something that he believed was good.”

Don't Judge GOD !!!!



 But what the story was designed to indicate, in my opinion, is that  

There are certain things that 
you touch at your peril 
regardless of your intentions. 

LIKE STAR WARS



And those things that you touch at your peril, regardless of your intentions, most cultures regard as sacred, as untouchable.



I want to make a case for you today that those things exist and also why they exist and why it’s necessary for you to know that they exist. 

I would also say that if you’re educated  educated in a university, especially with regards to The Humanities 
(which are in some conceptual trouble at the moment)
what essentially happens to you is that you are introduced in a relatively secular way to the concept of the sacred. 



You are here, in The University, to learn about 

The Eternal Values of Humankind.  

And I think that people who tell you that  those values  

Do Not Exist 

or that 

They’re Endlessly Debatable

do you an unbelievable disservice. "


***?!•57!?*** ?!?!?!?!?!? ***?!•57?!*** 


KAOS + DISORDER = The Bleeding Edge of Yesterday's News

SOLVE ET COAGULA 

L7

***?!•57!?*** ?!?!?!?!?!? ***?!•57?!*** 

Friday 11 May 2018

There Are Certain Things You Touch AT YOUR PERIL





" So I want to start with a story from the Old Testament. 

There’s a scene in the Old Testament when the ancient Hebrews are moving the Ark of the Covenant. 

The Ark of the Covenant was a device that was manufactured in order to contain 

The Word of God. 

OR

"A Radio for Talking to God"

(if you're into that)

LIKE STAR WARS

And there was a rule among the ancient Hebrews which was 

You are not to touch the Ark of the Covenant. 

No matter what.” 

LIKE STAR WARS

And there’s a story in the Old Testament where the bearers of the Ark of the Covenant (they used to carry it), the bearers of the Ark of the Covenant trip and a man reaches out to steady it and when he touches it, 

** SMITE !! **

God strikes him DEAD. 

And modern people look at a story like that and the first thing they think is  

“That seems a little bit harsh on the part of God given that the man was attempting to do something that he believed was good.”

 Don't Judge GOD !!!!

But what the story was designed to indicate, in my opinion, is that 

There are certain things that you touch 
at your peril
 regardless of your intentions. 

LIKE STAR WARS

And those things that you touch at your peril, regardless of your intentions, most cultures regard as sacred, as untouchable.

I want to make a case for you today  

That those things exist 

and also 

Why they exist 

and 

Why it’s necessary for you to know that they exist. 

I would also say that if you’re educated  educated in a university, especially with regards to The Humanities 

(which are in some conceptual trouble at the moment)

what essentially happens to you is that you are introduced in a relatively secular way to the concept of the sacred. 

You are here, in the university, to learn about the eternal values of humankind.  

And I think that 

People who tell you that those values 

do not exist 

or that 

They’re Endlessly Debatable

do you an unbelievable disservice."

Tuesday 8 May 2018

Betrayer - The Princess of Lies








"So I want to start with a story from the Old Testament. 

There’s a scene in the Old Testament when the ancient Hebrews are moving the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the Covenant was a device that was manufactured in order to contain the word of God. And there was a rule among the ancient Hebrews which was 



“You are not to touch the Ark of the Covenant. 

No matter what.” 



And from the Bible (King James Version):

1 Samuel 6:19: 
And he smote the men of Bethshemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the Lord, even he smote of the people fifty thousand and threescore and ten men...



2 Samuel 6:6-7 
And when they came to Nachon's threshingfloor, Uzzah put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it; for the oxen shook it. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God.



And there’s a story in the Old Testament where the bearers of the Ark of the Covenant (they used to carry it), the bearers of the Ark of the Covenant trip and a man reaches out to steady it and when he touches it, God strikes him dead. And modern people look at a story like that and the first thing they think is “That seems a little bit harsh on the part of God given that the man was attempting to do something that he believed was good.” But what the story was designed to indicate, in my opinion, is that there are certain things that you touch at your peril, regardless of your intentions. And those things that you touch at your peril, regardless of your intentions, most cultures regard as sacred, as untouchable.

I want to make a case for you today that those things exist and also why they exist and why it’s necessary for you to know that they exist. I would also say that if you’re properly educated in a university, especially with regards to the humanities (which are in some conceptual trouble at the moment), what essentially happens to you is that you are introduced in a relatively secular way to the concept of the sacred. You are here, in the university, to learn about the eternal values of humankind.  

And I think that people who tell you that those values do not exist or that they’re endlessly debatable, do you an unbelievable disservice."
Do Not Ever Allow Yourself Ever to Forget -

As of/Since 2012,

The Human Race,
Nature, and Everything in It,
Mother Earth Herself

Have Swiftly but Firmly Become Engergetically Aligned  in Such a Way as to Be Now Tied or Skewed to Favouur a Female-First, Women on Top (so to speak) order of reality, at least on Earth,at part to the natural 3200 cycke of the Procession of the Equinoxes as a consequence of Axial Precssion


You only need look around you to see that this is now True: -


There are imagines and pictures (not to mention, filmed fucking) of women all over the place now, whereever you look and it eery directions - they now blanket almost the entire suface of the Earth, regardless of where or not you are actually abel to see them, they're there, filling the very air  itself with digitally encoded picrures of the women that we like - anywhere there is WiFI, or 4G, ant where under a satellite,

We have encircled the Earth with the eternal repetition of Stories. Fuelled by Buttfucking.

Wednesday 25 April 2018

Dark Masculinity


 I am Passion, The Libido. 

I am The Anarchy of Lust, 
The Romantic and The Lover. 

I am also The Warrior, 
The Perfect Line which never wavers. 

Dialog with my Shadow

Dark Man of my soul,

It is you I honor, you from whom all the energy of manhood originates and resides. 

I value the honesty of your feelings, rooted in the earth and in battle and in the hunt. 

Your anger is profound. 

Your need for action true. 

I applaud your sense of outrage and need for justice. 

Without them, where would we be? 

The dragons of our existence thrive without you to combat them. 

You embolden me to walk free, and live by my own code. 

You are my father and brother and truest friend.

This sword symbolizes who you are—what you mean to me and to the world. 

Strength. Action. Defense. 

The ability to cut away illusion. 

It represents the history of Men, blood spilt on the battlefield, which connects us all together.


Stay with me. 

Take your honored place in my soul and in my life.
Strengthen me with your power, and guide me with your earthy wisdom.


HERE IS A LIST OF THE TOP 25 ATTRIBUTES OF THE SHADOW MASCULINE:


Fear of surrendering to the feminine
Rigidity
Controlling tendencies
Hatred (of self, other, an organization, of God/dess)
Entitlement issues (especially when insecurities arise)
Narcissism
Anger
Jealousy
Insecurity
Competition (coming from separation)
Greed
Taking what he wants without consent
Not listening to the feminine
Judgment
Harshness–in language, touch, energy, etc
Mistrust and abuse of the feminine
Suppressing emotions/not expressing vulnerability
Neglecting the inner child/children
Underlying codependence issues with women
Denying the value of the feminine while taking advantage of her
Suppressed sexuality and sensuality/sexual shame
Inability to receive pleasure or abundance
Fear of abandonment, but not willing to admit it (even to self)
Tantrums/outbursts of rage
Acting out from the inner child while doing everything he can to look like a powerful leader


The Shadow-side of Male Virtue

Knightly confrontation.



There is a wild side to man's nature. Unpredictable. Savage. Easily frustrated and angered. We are taught from an early age to repress this part of us as something uncivilized and undesirable. Those of us who respect the law discipline ourselves to reject it. We go on with life ignoring what tendencies remain, channeling the overflow of aggression into "appropriate" conduits, such as ruthless competition in sports or business. 

     But in truth, the dark side of masculinity is never really gone or completely subdued. It follows us like a "shadow" (which C.G. Jung labeled it), dark and indescribable. Like a real shadow, it projects and distorts who we are.

     This is our personal darkness, filled with savagery we try not to recognize.

     It haunts us when we least suspect it—an angry phantom from our primitive core, maligned by moral propaganda, marginalized by repression.

     This frustrated shadow can subvert our best intentions—not because it is evil, but because we continually thwart its existence. 
We deny its proper role in our lives, and view it as uncivilized, something "bad." In effect, we provoke its rebellious discontent by shaping it into a monster when it might have been shaped into something different.

     This shadow is part of who we are as men. Without it, the chivalry we embrace becomes salt that has lost its flavor, an empty shell of moral dictates devoid of essence.

     Our shadow provides male virtue with the tension of having one foot in heaven and the other not in hell but here on earth. Its wildness defines our core. Without it, our personal self-discipline is meaningless, our strength inauthentic, our connection to the earth, which is our Mother, broken. We become the disappointment of heaven's grand design, severed from our roots, sapped of our virility.

     The shadow is an essential element to our every thought and deed as men. As such, it either substantiates or perverts our best intentions, depending on how we relate to it. It is that unrefined edge that distinguishes us from women, no matter how refined we shape ourselves. It connects us to nature. Without it, we are limpid, emasculated, not really alive. To the other extreme, when we fail to give it its proper role, we become discontent, brazen, uncontrollable, perverting the virtues we are meant to honor.

     When we deny our shadow, we urge it to wreck havoc with our lives. We wrestle with it, try to subdue it, only to learn that the struggle never ends. In this respect, the shadow always wins, but only as a dark influence rather than something that completes us. We cannot suppress it without losing the very heart of who we are.

     Chivalry, despite its refining virtues, directs us to embrace the wild center of who we are, recognize its intrinsic value, honor it not as an aberration, but as a natural source of male energy which borders (as all things of nature do) on amorality. It is here where the ideal warrior is fashioned in our hearts.

     Chivalry cannot eliminate or tame this wild excess of spontaneity, and does not try. Instead, it channels it throughout every fiber of our being, melds it to everything we do—and in the processing of doing so makes us whole.

     The wildness is self-destructive only when we reject it or hold it at arm's length. By infusing it into our lives, it nourishes the soul like nothing else can. Our shadow is not a thing of evil and perversion— although untended, it can produce both. We need this shadow to be complete, and it needs us as well. 

     It is imperative for us to find our shadows and integrate them into our lives. We might not be pleased what we find but remember, this is result of pure neglect. 

     Embrace him. Rescue him. And he will rescue you.

     There are several ways to do this. The simplest is through ritual, whereby we recognize and honor the wild man as a valuable part of who we are. Jung tells us that ritual is enough to heal the rift—the turbulence of the unconscious mind really asks for nothing more. We can add this ritual to our embrace of chivalry.

     The following is a short ritual to illustrate what I mean. Although it involves a sword as a ritual object, which is meaningful to me, you can and should build your own ritual as it best applies to you.

Dialog with my Shadow

Dark Man of my soul,

It is you I honor, you from whom all the energy of manhood originates and resides. I value the honesty of your feelings, rooted in the earth and in battle and in the hunt. Your anger is profound. Your need for action true. I applaud your sense of outrage and need for justice. Without them, where would we be? The dragons of our existence thrive without you to combat them. You embolden me to walk free, and live by my own code. You are my father and brother and truest friend.

This sword symbolizes who you are—what you mean to me and to the world. Strength. Action. Defense. The ability to cut away illusion. It represents the history of men, blood spilt on the battlefield, which connects us all together.

Stay with me. Take your honored place in my soul and in my life. Strengthen me with your power, and guide me with your earthy wisdom.




The Dark King: Archetype of an Emerging Masculinity
December 5, 2014

Our current culture has more opportunities for increased consciousness, personal growth, and collective healing than ever before imaginable.  This makes the 21st century a potent time for actualizing a shared vision of healing for both men and women so that violence and traumas from the past need not be repeated but repaired on both local and global levels.  In order for men to rise and meet their female counterparts as equals, however, I believe that many men must first make a necessary personal and collective  "descent" - away from "acting out" of places of shadow power and dominance, or "acting in" through impotence and castration - and into the origins of these deep and aching wounds.  This is the path that Robert Bly refers to as "the road of grief and ashes," and that I feel leads to a shared re-imagining of what it means to be in power with others, rather than under or over.

An archetype has emerged for me that speaks to such an integration and deepening of the shared capacities of the masculine soul.  I envision him as a "Dark King," an image with archetypal roots planted deep in the mythic soil of East and West, and that represents to me the possiblity of an emerging masculine consciousness that acknowledges and respects the differences of others while remaining deeply sourced in his own integrated life force.  This "dark masculine," or "Lunar King" is a re-imaging of the "Solar King" that we have known for centures:  a king of light who supposedly casts no shadow, a savior, a religious leader or political figure-as-god, who wounds others unknowingly because he does not touch his own darkness, believing that he casts no shadow, and unconscious of his own life's wounds.  This is a figure that we have all known too well, both culturally and historically, as well as in our own families, communities, and religious or spiritual organizations.

A "Dark King" represents a man who is master of his energetic and emotional domain. He knows his shadow because he has been re-born from within its dark, fertile womb. He respects women and honors the sacredness of the feminine because he has touched his own feminine essence and knows it as good.  He is neither a "soft" nor a "hard" man, but a man who works toward integration:  light and shadow, solar and lunar, masculine and feminine.  He is a man deeply sourced in himself who can be of service and good to his family, his friends, and the world around him.  

Archetypally, the resurrection and birth of a "dark masculine" King is foreshadowed in multiple mythologies.  Osiris, a central Egyptian male deity, is killed and dismembered by his evil counterpart and brother, Seth, the god of the desert, only for his parts to be retrieved and "re-membered" by Osiris' goddess-lover, Isis.  Their reunion results in the birth of a divine son, Horus, the bird-headed god, representing the Spirit of a new masculinity born from the union of a consciously re-membered masculinity and the healing capacities of dark feminine awareness. 

Similarly, in the imagery of the Black Madonna of Eastern and Western European consciousness, a black son, the Christ-child, is presented on the lap of his Dark Mother.  Here the union that births the divine child occurs between the Black Virgin, representing matter, embodiment, and the chthonic earth elements, and the masculine Spirit, who impregnates the fertile vessel of the dark feminine goddess, giving birth to a new masculine awareness represented by the black, or dark son. 

In both instances, a son, manifesting as a young king, emerges from the union or re-membering of masculine and feminine, and represents new possiblities of what it means to be a man in relation to his "darker" aspects - embodiment, sexuality, and emotionality - rather than opposed to or repressing these fundamental aspects of life.  This is a fertile masculinity born from the union of a man's conscious relationship to the dark aspects of the feminine as both Goddess and Mother, and his own archetypal relationship with Spirit.  It is this constant interplay between matter and spirit, human and divine, masculine and feminine, that births a new and conscious masculinity in the souls of both women and men.