Old Abrahamic religious mindsets in new IT companies (part 10)
The way Muhammad shaped Islam was to transpose the psychological support of an older woman into the innocent psychological walled garden of a small girl and thus have more free hand at using that mental fluidity while not dealing with the larger complexity of life. The walled garden turned into a base for knowledge as control of the situation, within which things are much more simplified and you can connect easier the dots without necessarily relying on the established roads of the classical human knowledge.
The same as Jesus’ disciples, the results of such a perception of the complexity of the world and of the human “software” that makes sense of it were interpreted in terms of knowledge as control of the situation. This interpretation turned such access to the mental fluidity connecting the dots as “the truth”, with Muhammad as the “seal of the prophets” (the impression of the classical masculinity that knowledge is “obviously” as control of the situation).
This Muslim walled garden is not in the “what you see is what you get” terms of the classical masculinity. It has a genuine awareness of the fluid complexity and of how you need to connect the dots beyond the existing established human paths of knowledge. But the result is treated in classical masculine terms of “truth” as control of the situation and in the end it is still considered in “what you see is what you get” terms (there is no reorganization of the basics of the classical masculine ego to really sense that you really need to immerse in this mental fluidity).
This while the fact that there is awareness of the real life complexity makes very fragile this “truth” obtained beyond the current trodden paths. It turns into a specific doctrine that everyone else has to believe in too, lest you need to face the larger complexity beyond such walled garden. It is in the terms of the good/bad ideological fragility from Toñnuñ daa of the Yakut singer Künney, but the man does not have to deal with all the depth of the mental fluidity that lead to that, he was supported by an woman who cocooned him to not deal with the incumbent abyss.
That woman disappeared from sight and then the man had free way to use that limited fluidity with a small girl. He could create a real life “walled garden” ecosystem where he can experiment his mental fluidity in an limited environment and thus not needing to deal with the issues of truth in such a mental fluidity, he could keep the basic tenets of the classical masculine ego.
Another issue deriving from this limited approach to the mental fluidity is that you run out of useful inspirational material if you think only within such a walled garden as a man looking to make sense of the world. With this approach, the Muslims were initially so inspired in thinking beyond the existing trodden paths and in seeking to understand the world, but in a few centuries they became so ossified with the products of this quest processed in terms of the classical masculine concept of “truth”. And much of the inspiration of that initial quest was based on other people’s dealing with the complexity of real life beyond such a walled garden. To really immerse in the psychological abyss of the creativity, you really need to face the complexity of the world beyond that mental ecosystem.
With this simplified perspective, initially, the Muslims were very good at seeing unexpected valuable angles in other people’s already existing discoveries and increase significantly the added value with such angles. Also valuable connections of dots between disparate discoveries among a variety of cultures they entered in contact with. They had too discoveries of their own, but they were rather spurred by the already existing intellectual breakthroughs in the other cultures. Sometimes they were developing deeper insights than those of the ancient Greek achievements, but they were largely building upon the existing breakthroughs.
They did not have a psychological engine of their own to really face the whole complexity of the world and thus they did not really face the unknown. To face the unknown you must not rely on Muhammad’s ego, it should be something like the psychology of Moses who sensed where he should not perceive the complexity as classical masculine “truth”, to keep his ego in check and just face that mental abyss directly (and thus permit to the future generations to keep innovating as though they were themselves present at the revelation at the Mount Sinai).
The Islamic effect on people is something like in the Hungarian story Stone Soup. A hungry soldier is asking for food and he is refused by everybody. He finds a way to change the perceptions of an old woman to feed him. He starts himself a soup with a stone in it, expressing an authentic vibe of really making a soup, with all the ensuing wonderment of the old woman about such a soup. He tells her that the soup is turning out so good, but it would be even better with a bit of this, then a bit of that, until she brings all the ingredients necessary for a good soup.
With that starting point from an otherwise useless stone and the mystery about how could it make a good soup by itself when boiled, the soldier took the woman out of the trodden paths from her mind. An unexpected soup is getting prepared there by boiling a stone, the mind is getting immersed in all that curiosity and excitement. Each addition of ingredients is seen in a refreshed way by referring to the excitement of the unknown about that stone soup, the mind gets out of the existing trodden paths about each of those specific ingredients.
This is how in the past Islam could make people see existing things in a new light, in a more fluid and flexible way. However, the original human experience around these issues is rather like in the Hungarian story The Little Cockerel and the Hedge. That succession of seemingly unrelated yet consequential events is the way the classical women perceive the larger complexity of the world, due to their historical subordinate status. The classical men tend to have a linear thinking within their bubble of knowledge. This kind of thinking does not follow so easily the butterfly effects, even less to make sense of them and have some sense of organization about them. The increasing accumulation of those apparently disparate occurrences is the desperation of the linear thinking to keep some coherence amid such perceptions.
Something like this chain reaction scene from the 2002 Japanese film Drive of Sabu shows men really paying attention to the causality chain of such unexpected butterfly effects beyond the classical masculine narrow-minded linear thinking. The Little Cockerel and the Hedge is about some awareness around such mind-boggling diachronic perceptions beyond the rather troglodyte organization of the classical human thinking processes, but it is more about the struggle to keep a linear coherence in such a linear thinking process, not so much about the causality chain itself.
In this story, the one who benefits from this classical feminine realization of butterfly effects is a soldier who creates meaning out of all those out-of-the-box non-linear perceptions. This is what usually happens in such situations in the traditional human social life. The meaning he creates is arbitrary (“only when the Moon turns green”), since the classical human knowledge in itself has a strong self-serving element of arbitrariness in it, it is knowledge as control of the situation (more in detail about this at Perceiving complexity series). Those non-linear perceptions were out of the bubble and such men who can create meaning as control of the situation benefit from using the unexpected perspectives in reorganizing the existing structure and/or from simply restoring/keeping a sense of order.
The starting point of the story, as a cockerel determining the series of butterfly effects with his usual activities, can point out to the starting point of such feminine perceptions. Men who feel in control of the situation in their lives act in the environment and affect it because they can and thus they create a self-centered “meaningful world” in what they do. Women, as sideline subordinates with no prerogative of direct action, need to wrap their head around such situation in order to have some agency of their own. They notice unexpected angles beyond such linear thinking focused on direct action, but it is such a steep learning curve to work directly with that as an organization in itself.
Usually, they tend to just apply such unexpected perspectives around the existing masculine organization. If they pay too much attention to such butterfly effect causalities as a sense of simplistic organization in classical masculine manner, they go in such unexpected directions and can determine awareness of psychological angles that are just unsettling, without further ideas around what to do with them. Then men who are more accustomed to plunge into the unknown, like the soldier in the story, create arbitrary meaning to reorganize the situation (maybe with some new refreshing angles) or just restore a sense of order.
Muhammad’s novelty was that his leadership was not only about providing a sense of order, but as an active and ongoing work with the diachronic perspective, connecting the dots in that complexity as honed by generations of women, with an worldview like in the advertisement Disconnected for Maersk. It was though a limited work with the diachronic complexity, with consequences down the line. He was able to conduct it by continuing the classical masculine self-centered sense of organization in control of an innocent feminine walled garden. Instead of a full-blown work with butterfly effects as those from The Little Cockerel and the Hedge, it was something like in Stone Soup.
This inevitably turns stale after a while, as it just gives refreshing angles to existing concepts and just builds upon them. To really immerse in creativity you need to face the worldview from The Little Cockerel and the Hedge. Plus that the specific Jewish monotheistic structure Muhammad built upon is based on this larger worldview (which feels like God able to be in tune with a huge complexity like that around the building of the Babel Tower). This is what made possible in the first place something like Stone Soup turn into a full-blown organization (in the story it is just a desperate momentary solution, with the prospect of that man turning into a con artist).
The Jewish structure provided the organizational basis working with a psychology as in The Little Cockerel and the Hedge, which is the real thing, facing frontally real life. It is not just about restoring a sense of order and entering in a new plateau after creating some new arbitrary meanings. It is a masculine organization for the gist of that diachronic complexity of butterfly effects. As it was initially developed by women, it partly is really equipped to be immersed in that gist in a relevant manner, but it also has lots of blank spaces left for the men to fill in.
If you work with that organization with some proprietary variations of your own that do not really answer that abyssal authenticity in facing the unknown, in time you still need to deal with the underlying immersion in thinking from the perspective of those butterfly effects. In the Christian case, this determined the post-Christian concepts of scientific quest, civil society, modern democracy, which I find valuable and taking in consideration what is important in the original Jewish gist. It is not at all in the idea that non-Jewish people cannot work with this structure, but they need to pay attention to its gist. If they seek easy self-serving shortcuts, they are going to face the music down the line.
The Jewish worldview started from a masculine direct realization of the larger complexity beyond their bubble of knowledge, like in Yuh Yuh of the Turkish band Cemali, which is based on a depth of perceptions like in the story of The Little Cockerel and the Hedge. It was no longer the typical traditional human course of events. The initial innocent period was like in Yuh Yuh by the Turkish singer Haluk Özkan, in the idea of “I can do it, I can face that complexity and keep a sense of morality and organization” (this is what the lyrics are about). It was like the soldier in the story, but not really entering in a self-congratulatory plateau after creating new arbitrary meanings for the realization of the diachronic unexpected directions. It is a new masculinity that is aware of the unexpected diachronic gist and it continued to be immersed in it and a have a sense of organization from its perspective.
The initial concept of the Jewish God, that in time was clarified more and more as monotheistic, is that it creates meaning out of nowhere. The Jewish story of creation is so bereft of filler stories that tend to appear at men who seek to make sense of unexpectedness of real life by expanding their self-centered “meaningful world”. He just says to the first man to give whatever names you want to the animals and that’s about it. It is this feminine impression that classical masculinity can work directly with the diachronicity and develop a righteous meaningful organization by saving the situation and give righteous arbitrary meanings to the unexpected diachronicity these women notice.
I notice that this is the kind of ideal masculinity for women worldwide. They don’t like men who develop new meaning as filler stories continuing their self-centered existing organization. Such a development does not answer to the feminine perception of the diachronic gist. Besides the feeling of self-congratulatory phoniness that does not harbinger any good in a relationship, this likely at times will not be able to answer to feminine perceptions that go into the realm of organizational weirdness, as in The Little Cockerel and the Hedge.
A “decisive” man can step out of his self-centered ecosystem and create arbitrary meaning out of such abyssal perceptions. The initial outward expressivity of the Jewish God is like the ideal masculinity for women. Only that the ideal meets real life, it really is assumed by men and it endures the test of real life. As I said previously, I see as a good thing a feminine opening of the mind to the diachronic gist, but they should be aware that there is no classical masculine core that can deal with that. It is rather about utterly new psychological developments that take the gist in consideration.
In the Jewish case, there was an initial innocent period, in which it looked like they can simply create such arbitrary meaning in the name of the diachronic gist. However, in time, as they got more and more immersed in that complex fluidity and they had to make sense of it, their classical masculine psychological organization progressively melted down until they remained only with the driving wheel like in Oşko of the Kyrgyz singers Totomidin and Surma.
What happens when two or more such men who think they know what they are talking about inevitably end up with divergent perspectives? You get a situation like in Toñnuñ daa of the Yakut singer Künney (coming after Taatta and Çeeke). The men increasingly sense how much of the structure in their bubble of knowledge is arbitrary. They have to face much more directly how the classical human organization is based on arbitrary decisions like “when the Moon turns green” from The Little Cockerel and the Hedge.
How can you sustain a decision that the connection with God is in the Temple from Jerusalem when another branch ended up with the decision that the connection with God is on Mount Gerizim? And this is only the start, further on you realize how much of the human psychological organization is based on such arbitrary decisions considered as “meaningful reality”. They did not know what to do about this and they had the reaction to defend every tiny piece of “knowledge” in their mind from crumbling down.
This is the environment in which Christianity and Islam appeared, as ideologies that find some reactionary ways to keep “belief in my truth” type of worldview when having some awareness of the consequences of the immersion in that mental fluidity. Christianity is about a smart aleck dereliction of leadership from real life, with a focus on the software from the people’s minds. Jesus is God, he has a seamless integration of software and hardware, nobody has any idea of the specific details about how that could work, just wait for him to come back. It sounds like kindergarten stuff, but lots of people really take it seriously, it is so relieving and easy.
Further on, after it sunk in the need to get serious about life and face its complexity, it looks like the post-Christian developments retrace some of the phases the Jewish history went through. The modernity had an initial innocent phase of facing the complexity with an “I can do it” like in the interpretation of Yuh Yuh by Haluk Özkan. Especially after the First World War, it began to creep in more and more what a complexity they got into, making the people weary about their sense of reality and increasingly defensive about the tiniest details of their sense of identity, many ending up like in Oşko. The recently emerging IT environment is way beyond the simplistic linear capabilities of the concept of modern scientific quest, hence the Abrahamic mindsets appear to prosper again there.
There is a problem in the way the modern scientific quest was framed as anti-Christian, thus rejecting the latter’s manipulative approaches to abyssal complexities and making this quest too linear. If someone misuses something it does not mean that that something is compromised. A much more serious scientific quest should be immersed in a fluid psychology like in The Little Cockerel and the Hedge. The IT environment shows the limits of the linear quest.
As for Islam specifically, it is about a masculinity providing some sense of order by being able to embrace the mental fluidity in an ecosystem while keeping the classical masculine control of the situation, which simplifies a lot the level of mental fluidity. It is like the stone of that soldier, a masculine start of meaning as control of the situation, as a limited arbitrary “when the Moon turns green” psychological control of the situation in facing the diachronic unknown that can work with something like Disconnected. It is in the idea that I start organizing something with a focus on a source of mental fluidity modeled around the classical human sense of ego and with care to not believe in anything else as taken for granted, but only through that source of fluidity, which provides some coherence for the way everything else is seen in a fresh light.
However, in this way you don’t really immerse in that fluidity, but only to the level a classical masculine ego can afford without needing to do some necessary psychological reorganizations. This is more about seeing already existing aspects in new angles, as there is no immersion in the psychological abyss of creativity. It is a mental organization based on seeing fresh angles of the existing things like in Stone Soup, not on processing butterfly effect perceptions like in The Little Cockerel and the Hedge.
And, in time, they inevitably end up in The Little Cockerel and the Hedge butterfly effects of the diachronic psychology. This is what the Jewish organization they never weaned off from is about. They have defensive reactions and then even these new Stone Soup angles are processed in terms of classical masculine ego to create an edifice of meaning around that source of fluidity that you need to focus on (and the situation ossifies).
The Muslims had an initial Golden Age that lasted for a few centuries until they run out of other people’s groundbreaking ideas, they ended up in too many of The Little Cockerel and the Hedge perceptions and they ossified the result too much. The current Muslim vibe is something like in Maslahtak of the Egyptian singer Ehab Tawfik with this classical masculine satisfaction that you are in control of the situation even when perceiving such a large array of real life unfoldments that the classical feminine mindset can make the man aware of.
He is experiencing the world as a huge flow of a variety of disparate real life threads, he is aware of that, he is taking in consideration a huge amount of information, he does not just go with classical masculine linear thinking. The original feminine perception of the world is something like in Habeit Ya Leil of the Lebanese singer Nawal El Zoghbi, with a plurality of thought threads that I get into more detail about at Perceiving complexity series. A plurality of thoughts threads of herself that are watching like in cinema seats the unfoldment of a plurality of thought threads of herself in the “meaningful world” created by the classical masculine thinking.
In Ehab Tawfik’s take on such perception, the plurality of cinema seats is replaced by a boss’ single seat in control of the situation. There is a feeling of underlying desperation of continuing to be in control of the situation in all that richness of disparate threads, in all that huge amount of information. This is where you end up with the application in real life of a controlled use of the mental fluidity in the terms of the classical masculine ego. It is like “I have such a rich perception of the world and I need to feel in control of the situation in everything, lest I need to deal with the underlying issues about the classical masculine knowledge revealed by such a richness. Namely that it does not really unfold as the real quest for knowledge such a richness of angles show necessary, but it has a make-believe control of the situation simplifying factor”.
The classical masculine knowledge has a presumption of being in control of the situation, with the man as the center of the world, having the power to affect and change things according to his needs. This reliance on the personal power decreases considerably the attention to the complexity of the world, turning the thinking process into a simplifying linear patternization of the world with the help of lots of self-serving manipulation. And the man has to take charge mentally of anything he notices, he has to bestow his own legitimization upon any novelty he notices and include it in his operating system. (The women too enter in this simplifying linear patternization when thinking from this position of feeling like being in control of the situation, like the young woman from Mini-mini of the Uzbek singer Farruh Komilov, in this case interrupted by a wiser side of herself that did not lose sight of the diachronic complexity.)
Muhammad’s psychological innovation was to find valuable that innocent feminine walled garden as a space where you can think fluidly about the world and see all kinds of unexpected valuable angles, while you still feel in control of the situation. That richness of perception of the world is fluid, but it still has some coherence fitting the classical masculine sense of control of the situation if it is simplified through that innocent view. Normally, a classical man may find difficult to face the psychological abyss of an adult woman, especially when he is much more aware of what is supposes, like in these Asian cultures.
This innovation worked for a while, but in time its psychological expansion done with keeping the classical masculine control of the situation made the men feel like Ehab Tawfik’s unspoken feeling of desperation to be in control of the situation as in the previous Maslahtak, it is too much. And also unable to think deeper about such complexity. The lyrics of that song are about feeling betrayed by the people, about how people don’t care about you and they just go by with their lives. This is about a person who continues the classical human simplified thinking while exposed to such a richness of perceptions.
A group coagulated around an ideology initially on the roll with a psychology like in Stone Soup inevitably ends up after a while thinking from the perspective of The Little Cockerel and the Hedge, which is the real base of this kind of thinking. And then it feels like people going by with their lives and not giving a damn about your petty emperor sense of control of the situation. Gone are the days when Muhammad had a peace of mind about the diachronic fluid psychology by feeling in control of the situation with a small girl.
The make-believe of that simplified thinking works when you are in your own bubble of knowledge as control of the situation. When you are exposed to such an expanded view of the world, you would need to pay more attention to what is really going on, if you want to stay on top of the situation. Otherwise, you start feeling everybody going on with their lives indifferent of your strive to make sense of the world in simplified classical masculine terms of control of the situation.
Compare Maslahtak to the boss seat perspective of the Tatar singer Danir Sabirov in Şoket it, coming after Minem zakonlı hatınım and Danir-Venera (which can in fact open much more effective and wiser leadership horizons). Also with O’yna-o’yna of the Uzbek singer Ziyoda and Kusa of the Kyrgyz singer Guljigit Satıbekov, which are about really taking this complexity in consideration. In the latter, there is a psychological opening about what a deep realism and authenticity have perceptions like in The Little Cockerel and the Hedge. It is not about a desperation to be in control of the situation, the man is immersed in the diachronic gist and thinks himself from that perspective, as it makes sense, only that it is a steep learning curve to do something about it.
So, I see as normal taking all that complexity in consideration, and you may expect some (initial) hard work. In terms of tackling this complexity, Maslahtak is like an ignominious low-energy terminus for an worldview that was under impression it can have it easy while working with the diachronic psychology, Kusa is like a hard work start for really taking it seriously. The latter is more about Altaic psychology, it is not so much as a response to the Islamic situation, but it may give ideas to the others too.
Initially, the Islamic psychological novelty was so stimulating and helped thinking out of the box by connecting the dots beyond the existing trodden paths of those times, while still keeping an overall coherence about the world and thinking in organized self-centered imperial terms. But it reached a point when all this psychological expansion was too much for the classical masculine self-centered perception of the world. The vibe from Maslahtak is the current situation of the Islamic world. There was an initial way to feel a sense of control of the situation regarding that psychological abyss, but it reached a point where the masculine mind, still with a classical worldview, could not cope with all that expansion determined by the Islamic military and intellectual success. It also run out of inspiration from other people, as it did not have a disposition of its own to really face the abyss beyond the control of the situation and it all turned into such a stale and ossified organization, like the stale vibe of Ehab Tawfik in that video.
The Western societies may imagine the current Muslim militants as energetic and disruptive, but it is rather about men who feel envious of the spark of life alive among other people. It is rather a case of “spark envy” of some people who have such a great impression about themselves, they feel they are on top of the world and in control of the situation like Ehab Tawfik and yet in practice they are so stale and powerless. This is why they mutilated the genital organs of the Israeli athletes they massacred in Munich in 1972 or they sought to bring down the phallic Twin Towers in 9/11. Obviously, the Western world is not only about such phallic towers, but this is what draws their attention, this is their own mindset. When they say that the West is haughty, it is rather about their own wounded haughtiness used to be so thoroughly in control of the situation.
Notice a feminine interpretation of this state of affairs in Sheel Oyounak Anni (translation) of the Lebanese singer Nancy Ajram, with this feeling that the man has to sense the control of the situation in whatever is going on with the woman. The man himself is thinking in the terms of that complexity of thought threads the same as the woman, but with a control of the situation twist. The woman is complaining that such male gaze is messing up her creativity, the man is portrayed as a Scarface villain, but at the end of the video there is also the nuance “your looks are dangerous, most dangerous thing about them is that they are beautiful, their charm fascinated me for years”. The man really takes in consideration that psychological abyss that is so important and fascinating for a woman, plus that the woman feels a huge relief that the man is (foolishly) really assuming coherence for all that complexity.
Only if he wouldn’t be so stale and stifling with his approach and with that gaze that “wants and doesn’t know what it wants”. The man here is already not so just with his own thoughts like in the previous case of Ehab Tawfik. He is getting a low level of teasing from the woman to stir him up while not making him feel like she is challenging him. This is to find a way to take him out of that specific way of feeling in control of the situation regarding that complexity, to make him more engaging psychologically with that complexity. She would wish to determine the man throw that monitoring set on his own volition. I should also add that Nancy Ajram is Christian, but the Muslim mindset sets the tone in the society she lives (the same as for the case mentioned in the previous part about a significant increase in consanguineous marriages among Christians who live in the Muslim world).
This is about a woman caught in that Muslim worldview who, on the one hand, kind of likes its simplification and the masculine control of the situation providing coherence, on the other hand, dislikes her own vivacity being stifled. There are also many women who take the men out of that situation. Most of such men still continue to think in simplified Islamic terms, as they do not realize what is going on with them when they are taken out of that stale control, the change is rather surreptitious. The fact that they still continue to think in those simplified terms make them even more unprepared and blind about what it supposes dealing with the full-course complexity of real life unleashed by adult women.
Specifically in the Arab world, officially, the public image is that they are in control of the situation, only that they become a bit too excitable, something like in in Abead Eaniy of the Egyptian singers Hassan El Raddad, Mahmood El Laithi, Amy Samir, Ayten Amer and Mai Selim. It is like those Jewish comedians or religious men, only that the latter have some awareness around what is going on, they face the situation to some extent and thus they still have some background control of the situation.
In Ew3a El Wa7sh of the Egyptian singers Hassan El Kholaey and Johara, you can see a man wondering what is going on with him in this state of mind, under the subterfuge that this is a dream (he does not want to face it directly, as that would suppose facing the organizational issues of the classical masculinity). What in Habeit Ya Leil of Nawal El Zoghbi was a rational view of the complexity of the world like in The Little Cockerel and the Hedge turns into such a satisfying mess for men who have an organized understanding of that complexity in the terms of a simplified walled garden.
The Jewish men have a reorganized sense of self with an abyssal masculinity like in this Shema Yisrael and, in practical life, like for example the vibe from Preserve of The Apples, they think themselves in terms of Habeit Ya Leil and The Little Cockerel and the Hedge, with a diachronic abyss in their minds while seeking to have some organization in their lives that respects the gist. This is the initial source of Abrahamic worldview.
In practice, much of the Jewish psychological life can be immersed in the accumulated cultural experience of the past, like in İstanbul Ağlıyor of the Turkish singer Gülay or in Jononim mani of the Uzbek singer Ziyoda, as the present tense can be too diachronically mind-boggling, like in Hayat Şaşırtır! (“Life surprises!”, translation) of the Turkish singer Aydilge. It is something similar to the Japanese concept of natsukashii, but with some other nuances.
The unfoldment from Hayat Şaşırtır! should not be seen as a rejection of the past either, as that is the already accumulated cultural experience. Something like Ziyoda’s inner balance can give some ideas, about feeling when it is the case to explore that accumulated experience like in the previous video, when to transition to the diachronic mind-boggling present tense, like in Sevadi yorim mani and when to unleash the fluidity, like in Sevaman or in Sevib qol.
Even when you are immersed in that accumulated culture, you are still permeated by the diachronic fluidity, only that it has less of a mind-boggling present tense experience. The middle 20th century dress of Ziyoda in Jononim mani reminded me of the retro dress of Amy Winehouse, yet with such profound diachronic fluidity in a psychological realm like in İstanbul Ağlıyor of Gülay. People like Amy Winehouse or Franz Kafka can be though too much under the European impression that everything is directly knowledgeable as a linear psychological expansion, thus blocking too much the natural Jewish background acceptance of the mind-boggling diachronicity. They fall under the impression that they need to explain this diachronicity in linear terms in order to have some inner coherence, which is excruciatingly difficult, thus messing up their lives.
It is too much blocked the simple psychological framework of realizing how a plurality of diachronic threads and angles makes sense, like in the previous Preserve of The Apples. There are Jews who live most of their lives immersed in the accumulated culture, without much present tense unfoldment of the diachronic potential, but they accept psychologically this concept in itself, they think from its perspective.
As for the more direct gaze of the classical masculinity from the previous Ew3a El Wa7sh into what is going on, that is made possible by not facing the mental abyss of the real life responsibilities and by framing the curiosity as a dream. The expressivity of the woman feels enjoyable and not so disturbing. But when the man faces real life and he is under impression that the organizational structure of Islam is about all the psychological fluidity, most likely he does not have the expertise to fulfill the leadership of all that real life psychological fluidity. Many of them become resentful and they seek to keep the women under control or even to degrade them psychologically. The same Egyptian society that produced the previous videos has also impulses to degrade the women, like for example the degrading treatment of the women in jails.
Around this issue there is also the problem that such women may push the men too much to be the women’s heroes and fulfill the leadership of such a psychological fluidity. Much of this in turn is caused by the male simplistic imposition of knowledge as control of the situation which can degenerate in tyrannical approaches to life, a context that turns into a circular problem and an arms race between genders.
Some of the men who are taken out of the stale Islamic worldview continue the psychological investment in the supremacist success of the Islam from the past, the same as the stale ones (with some practical nuances different from the latter), others just want to live their lives. This is also to remind that not all Muslim men are in the same situation. It also depends on the local cultures, the Altaic populations for example have a strong tradition of some rational thinking not necessarily as direct control of the situation, which made possible in the past shepherding a variety of religions under the umbrella of the same polity. Islam was like just one of the TV sets in Yar Ali Senden Medet of the Turkish singer Yıldız Tilbe. This is an Alevi religious song, but the Ottomans too had initially this mindset, they were thinking the situation from a deeper level and were able to entertain a plurality of ideologies as social organizations, by letting to unfold in the mind a plurality of thought threads like those open TV sets.
Nowadays Turkey is known through its stale narrow-minded president Erdoğan, but I want to remind that only about half of the population is supporting him, usually the less educated and / or those who find difficult to face the complexity of real life and who fall pray to his populism (more details at part 15 of The mindset of the populations of Siberian origin). There is also a problem in the fact that the political alternatives to Erdoğan are of too poor quality, lacking some serious strategy. Still, not everybody is supporting him. And those who are not supporting such modern Islamism should be more pro-active to assume the responsibilities around the burdens of the Islamic mindset in their societies and see what to do about them, there is a serious need for reform.
The Muslims in general, and even more for those who have increased contacts with the rest of the world outside of the Islamic walled garden, increasingly feel the burden of the idiotic approach to life of the modern interpretations of Islam. Some of them double down, stick to a walled ecosystem that is not anymore the relaxed psychological area from the beginnings of Islam, but a poorly fortified territory under the siege of the real life. Others can face real life more directly, but for the moment there is not much interest in ideas for more authentic psychological organizations. In the recent Islamist terrorist attacks in the Western world many times there are Muslims who rush to the scene to help, those Muslims who feel the burden of the messed up state of Islam and don’t know what to do about it.
When I am thinking from a Muslim perspective, like one of the TV sets in my mind as in the previous song of Yıldız Tilbe, and I ponder about the current state of Islam, the salient aspect for me is how the Islamic worldview makes some sense when you are immersed in that walled garden considered as the ultimate operating system about the world, with “fear, uncertainty, doubt” about anything else. It is like in this interpretation of the call to prayer by Sheikh Abdullah Al Zaili. You can notice how he is facing a huge amount of fluid perceptions and he makes sense of them, it all turns so coherent and meaningful and satisfying, like that central waterfall from the Jewel of the Changi Airport that I wrote about by the end of the previous part.
The man’s sense of organization is not so pulverized and reorganized to really think from that diachronic perspective as in the Jewish case, he can still have some simplistic self-centered coherence. Psychologically, it is something similar to Ehab Tawfik’s perceptions in Maslahtak, only that in this case he did not end up in an overextension of leadership, he can stay more fluid mentally and maintain that initial vivacity of Islam.
However, most likely he is something like that sideline indoor garden of the airport, he is not involved in real life Islamic leadership, as that would suppose dealing with the issues of the real life of our times that would soon see him incapable of delivering adequate and authentic answers and would turn his satisfying Islamic psychological immersion into a dejected low-energy vibe like in Maslahtak or in a “Medina period” pedophile vibe. Probably he gives advices, maybe he has some local leadership that does not deal with the broader issues concerning a modern world. There are leaders above him who need to face that and to deal with all the limitations of Islam in this sense and with the necessary psychological manipulations to keep patching the things up.
When I am wondering what is going on with the current state of Islam, as its organization is so decrepit and inhuman, and I wonder what reasons could still be for people to stand by it, the salient aspect I find when I immerse in the Muslim perspective from my mind is the vibe expressed by people like Sheikh Abdullah Al Zaili. These are people who are untouched by the issue of overextension, they are also clueless about what it means to face the real complexity supposed by such a fluid perception of the world. They live so naturally in that mental fluidity and they can express such a sense of authenticity and clarity of the mind. This is more of a “Mecca period” Islam that did not need to deal with leadership issues.
The rest of the Muslim believers who are stuck in the current issues of overextension and in questions about the decrepitude of some Islamic aspects, they get from the former people this sense of ongoing clarity, even though they do not produce it themselves (while, on the other hand, those who produce it do not assume real life leadership). It feels so good in vicarious terms, but ultimately this turns into an overall lack of leadership in facing real life for all Muslims when they need to dig deeper in what that clarity about the fluid complex view of the world supposes.
They need to realize that the good feeling of those Muslims not involved in leadership is only something theoretical, unaffected by the complexities of real life. If taken at face value, it is a cul-de-sac in itself as a result of Muhammad being cocooned by Khadija, as it is not about experiencing that mental abyss necessary for a reorganization of the self, in order to be able to take in consideration a large amount of perceptions.
The other call to prayer I mentioned in the previous part of this series, of Hassen Rasool, is one of a person who expresses that immoral satisfaction of using an innocent walled garden to deal with the real life complexity. He is exuding the inner smirk of a smart aleck who found an easy way to cheat life, there is also a vibe of manipulation and gaslighting in his interpretation. But ultimately, unlike Sheikh Abdullah Al Zaili, he is really taking in consideration the current circumstances of the real life, this is more of a “Medina period” Islam. If it weren’t for those Muslims who really live within the mental fluidity, the current Muslim societies would give too much of a ridiculous “Scientology” vibe.
By the end of Shalom Aleichem mentioned in the previous part, when Idan Yaniv comes out of that house, he has too some similarities of vibe with Hassen Rasool, but only in terms of feeling a success of immersing in something psychologically satisfying and refreshing. Hassen Rasool’s joy is more about being relieved that he found a psychological way to not see his classical masculine sense of control of the situation pulverized by such satisfaction. He realizes what destructive consequences has such satisfaction for the classical masculine structure, he found a way to control it and parades it everywhere in the world to affirm the continuation of the control of that structure, “this is how I continue to have knowledge as control of the situation in everything, despite the challenge of that looming compelling and scary satisfaction”.
You may live an entire life under the impression that this “Medina period” approach to satisfaction is the most profound reality of the world, that this is how things should be done if you don’t know that it can in fact be studied as a world in itself, that it has an unexpected coherence and unexpected depths of humanity, like in Shalom Aleichem. The “broken telephone” path from Roman-era Judaism in struggle to understand itself to Christianity and then to Islam lost the direct connection with the initial source of this psychology (while it still never weaned off from it).
The original Jewish approach, on the other hand, knocks you out a normal classical human life. It pulverizes the classical masculine sense of organization. You don’t see Jews parading their control of the situation in the world. In the first place they don’t have what to parade. As I mentioned before, the Jewish concept of masculine organization is something like the woman’s father from Minem zakonlı hatınım, partly developed, partly imagined by women. When applied in real life with the classical masculine organizational tools, the initial “I can do it” impulse like in Yuh Yuh of Haluk Özkan slid into a plurality of divergent directions of men like in Oşko, each convinced that their specific diachronic unfoldment is the truth.
The disastrous historical consequences increased the practical perceptions of the diachronic complexity beyond one’s bubble, like in Yuh Yuh of Cemali or like in Yuh Yuh of Koray Avcı. When paying more attention to what is that satisfaction about, the complexity beyond the bubble is like at the end of Shalom Aleichem, when Idan Yaniv comes out of the house to immerse in the fluidity of real life beyond his bubble. It is only a glimpse of that, as he does not have psychological tools adequate to show a simplistic coherent line about that.
There is something there like a psychological framework for all that complexity. But it was developed by women as a potential of taking everything in consideration, leaving to the men to fill in the blanks of how this would be possible. After the painful history, the current Jewish perspective is that of a huge unknown out of the house, with some psychological connection with it that kind of needs further insights. The rabbinical Talmudic approach has some valuable openings to study the plurality of perspectives. Hassen Rasool has in this context an inner smirk that he can control that diachronic fluidity in the limits of the classical masculine organization (in the Jewish case, such attempt would promptly make the child-like side remind of complex and terrible things outside of the classical masculine organization).
The call to prayer of Sheikh Abdullah Al Zaili is also around this experience, but it lacks the exuberance of self-expression, it is not about being yourself an agent of action in real life. It is about a man cocooned by a more experienced woman, he can continue the framework of the classical masculine organization in such fluidity, but it is not really his own dive into the fluidity. Muhammad was able to have the exuberance of his own self-expression when he transferred this cocooning framework on Aisha.
Some outsiders sense a serious vibe like that in the interpretation of Sheikh Abdullah Al Zaili, but they need to pay attention to the fact that such psychological experience is theoretical, it is not about people who face the unknown of real life. If they go along with that, they take over Khadija’s role and cocoon a community of people who do not face real life (and there is something in the expressivity of the Muslim militants and activists, when they are not in charge of the situation, asking for being cocooned by the rest of the world to not dissipate their cozy castles in the air, something like in Taram-taram of the Uzbek singer Farruh Komilov; the perception the leftists with petting tendencies fall for is that “I am such a cute and fluffy Islamist, you can push my buttons and do whatever you want with me”).
Some outsiders see too much the theoretical part of Islam and take over Khadija’s role, others see too much the “Scientology” part of Islam that really deals with real life. And there is a link between these two parts, in that initial cocooning there is already a seed for the “Scientology” part that flourished later on when Muhammad found a psychological space to unfold it.