Old Abrahamic religious mindsets in new IT companies (part 14)
--
⟵ Old Abrahamic religious mindsets in new IT companies (part 13)
In the previous parts of this series I wrote about topics spurred by the novel One Hundred Years of Solitude of Gabriel García Márquez. In continuation to some aspects mentioned there, let me get into more detail about what is going on as application in real life with the Indian development of a Krishna-like masculinity, which does not suppose so much a belief that classical masculinity has a core that can deal with the diachronicity. The opening of the mind can be like in Kamli of Hadiqa Kiani, but this is as a static experience. When applied in the diachronic unfoldment of real life, it feels like being on top of a huge psychological machinery on the move, with some abyssal coherence that really works. You don’t really understand coherently how it works in terms of classical masculinity or in whatever other terms, but you are immersed in how it works and you can feel how it works when necessary to pay more attention.
This is a masculinity that was developed to sense the gist of the diachronicity, to feel how natural it is and have some inner balance between the concept of organized knowledge and the diachronic psychology. It can feel like in the music video Chaiyya Chaiyya from the film Dil Se, being on top of a train with all kinds of other inner angles and characters like a multi-dimensional Krishna experience. The train is like a huge psychological machinery that keeps going in who knows what direction. The women who developed this were not so interested in the concept of a masculinity in charge of the diachronicity and managing it through time in a good direction with a supposed core in classical masculinity that can deal with diachronicity.
It has some similarities to Turkish psychology like in İstikrarlı Hayal Hakikattir of Gaye Su Akyol, which made possible the organization of the Ottoman Empire (the Khazars and other Altaic polities in history were like that too), but the singer driving the bus expresses well the difference. In the Turkish case, it is someone there with an overall control of the situation. On the one hand, you have the control of the driving wheel (and you have to be prepared to assume responsibilities when the bus breaks down). On the other hand, more openness to see how the machinery works by itself can develop the huge multi-faceted unfoldment of the Indian culture. I find both approaches valuable and they can be used both.
If the man is directly put in charge of the diachronic psychology, in the idea that he will figure out what to do with it, in the first phase the classical masculinity melts down until he remains only with the “driving wheel” and it turns into something like in Oşko of the Kyrgyz singers Totomidin and Surma. And then it depends to what extent people learn from history lessons. A new Jewish-like sense of masculinity in charge of the diachronicity can be developed like in Minem zakonlı hatınım of the Tatar singer Danir Sabirov, but its blank spaces that the man does not know what to do with (while he still has to maneuver the driving wheel through diachronicity) mean that it just stays at an observational level in his mind and much of the practical unfoldment can continue like in Oşko. Here too it depends to what extent people learn from history lessons to see what to do with the opening of this new masculinity. Danir Sabirov in particular was able to realize further aspects by employing the observational side, as in Şoket it.
On the one hand, a masculinity like in Oşko continues with the classical human concept of being in charge of the situation, which permits the melting down of all the other classical psychological structures. On the other hand, a masculinity like in Chaiyya Chaiyya has some inner balance with the diachronic psychology to let it unfold beyond the classical human concept of being in control of the situation. This may look like a radical acceptance, but in fact it keeps lots of classical human structures (because it is about an inner balance between the diachronic psychology and the existing static psychological organization). And it depends on the people if they pay attention when they have to develop new structures adequate to the diachronicity or they just keep going with the flow. The multi-faceted Krishna-like experience can as well just grow into a stale caste system.
Oşko is a much more radical change in this respect, as all is melted down except for the driving wheel. Only that it may just go nuts or just stay small for having a sense of order, as in the Jewish case. Compare to the huge unfoldment of the Indian civilization; the Jews too have such a potential, but it just stays as potential. On the other hand, the Jewish psychological influence is now present everywhere in the world, as a result of the fact that Christianity and Islam never weaned off from it and did not bring anything new and ultimately they have to face the Jewish psychological basics. The current post-Christian modernity takes them much more seriously in consideration and it spreads now this influence even more, now on an utterly global scale, beyond the concept of strict affiliation to a specific set of beliefs (post-Christianity is still about a set of beliefs that in the future would look rather narrow-minded in some aspects, but it is not so strict as Christianity, it can afford that to some extent).
I find something like in Oşko very valuable when it is about this utter melting down, especially when paying attention to the Altaic and Jewish accumulated experience around it. Indian fascination with death as a major refreshment revolves around the lack of such an utter meltdown that is necessary for working well with the diachronic psychology, like in Compete of the Punjabi singer Singga or like in Jinddriye of the Punjabi singer Harbhajan Mann.
Altaic streaks that have similarities with this Indian inner balance have too such fascinations, like for example in the Turkish case something like Dostlar Beni Hatırlasın (translation) by Ersen and Dadaşlar, Adımız Miskindir Bizim by Mahzar and Fuat, Vur Yüreğim (translation) of Sertab Erener, or intepretations of Cemalım (translation) like those of Cansever, Erkin Koray, Altın Gün progressively going in the direction of a feeling of a major refreshment. On the other side of the continent, the Japanese too are heavily immersed in such issues, with some nuances of their own.
In these matters, when I see the situation from such angles I find valuable some nuances in the Turkish psychological expertise around these issues, that would take too long to write about here and I will develop on some other occasion. They are those nuances more about facing the situation, not so much as a major refreshment, in which I am not so interested, since I always have a mental abyss in my mind (but I can let unfold in my mind the angle of the major refreshment when necessary to experience more in-depth such cultural angles, as I am immersed in those cultural angles too). Let me just mention this saying, ölümü ne kadar çok düşünürsen o kadar iyi yaşarsın (“the more you think about death, the better you live”). But initially I was more with a purist Jewish/Romani avoidance of this issue.
In the Jewish case, in the first place, with an angle of an abyss where everything is melted down in the diachronic psychology like in Tzama Nafshi or Yosef Hashem or Shema Yisrael and with further “I am not Greta Garbo” care to really take the full-course gist in consideration, you don’t have any need to think about death as a major refreshment (while the Jewish official mindset shares with the Romani one a perception of death as psychologically impure). You get in that manner the major refreshment like in Cemalım of Altın Gün. And death feels the opposite of a major refreshment, rather like too much abyss.
Unlike those liberating perceptions of death, this ongoing psychological abyss is really about real life, you may have too much of diachronicity and you need to see how to take it in consideration, while sensing how valuable is the gist. This is also to remind that the topic of major refreshment is about psychological death. And a shocking psychological contemplation of physical death like in Jinddriye of Harbhajan Mann may not show the full-course gist if the initial effusion slides into self-centered simple idealism, with too fix conclusions further developing a lazy ego. It may however stay for a while like in the vibe from the video, if it does not draw too fix conclusions about the unfoldment of real life, staying in a rather innocent situation without sliding into idealism, until the person feels more able to experience the complexity of real life.
Something like Compete of Singga is about some opening to the unfoldment of real life, as I mentioned in the previous part, with lyrics like “those who have hands don’t know how to do the hard work, those without hands win every race with their fortune and good-luck”. You need an opening about that, it is not that a person like in Jinddriye is automatically guilty of not noticing, if they did not have an opening about that. The guilt is if the mind slides into drawing fix conclusions and further developing a lazy ego around them. And you need specific openings about a variety of specific real life aspects, which may happen in time.
A person can even have both nuances at the same time, if that from Jinddriye does not slide into drawing simplistic idealistic conclusions. In fact, it may be necessary also some angle like in Jinddriye, as that from Compete may feel too overwhelming, daunting. The innocence probably should be something like the Jewish one I wrote about in the previous parts, showing terrible things when it is sought to be regimented in a simplistic idealism.
In the case of the Altaic mindset, this Jewish-like angle goes in the direction of Oşko when immersed in the mind-boggling diachronic present tense and in that of O’yna-o’yna of the Uzbek singer Ziyoda and Kusa of the Kyrgyz singer Guljigit Satıbekov when paying more attention to what is going on. The difference from something like in Chehre of the Punjabi singer Harish Verma (where the man’s issues derive too from paying more attention to what is going on) is that the men are already immersed in the diachronic gist as applied to real life. They come from a point of total meltdown in the diachronic flow, with the focus on a supposed core in classical masculinity that can provide organization for that.
Something like in Chehre comes from a point of an inner balance developed by Indian women from the past between the existing classical human psychological organization and the diachornic psychology. The man may get the diachronic gist, but not so much all the necessary nuances for such a balance a woman works with (especially when there is not much relevant feminine experience for such a balance employed in the direct organizational perspective).
Hence, when he wonders about the overall situation, the classical human organizational aspects he still employs become fearful of all that abyssal diachronicity. They develop resistance to that, like the singer with the umbrella, and then it grows an underlying feeling of a need for major, yet abyssally scary refreshments. The easiest connection that appears in the human mind is with the psychological concept of death.
The functional unfoldment of this inner balance as developed by the Indian women from the past is something like in the more typical Indian films. They have a specific plot line, but from time to time that slides into some musical parts. When things are getting too rigid and stale from thinking in classical human self-centered manner, it is necessary to rediscover for a while the diachronic fluid perspective to refresh yourself, find back the immersion in the gist and also study the situation directly from this full-course diachronic gist.
When a man pays more attention to what is going on and wonders about the overall meaning, all that feeling developed by women about a huge fluid complexity that works without understanding clearly how it works may turn into a fearful perception of an abyssal complexity and the classical human thinking structures he was still employing in that inner balance become resistant. But the man’s psychology is deeply invested in the diachronic gist and he feels the need for a major refreshment, hence the further psychological consequences.
As for the Jewish and the Jewish-like Altaic streaks, both of them went in the direction of the idea that there is a core in classical masculinity that can provide coherence for the full-course immersion in the diachronicy of real life, which initially turns into something like in Oşko, and from there on it depends what people do with the experience accumulated with such approach.
In the Jewish case, it is not so much about crazy dictators controlling large masses of people with a specific sense of order emanating from themselves (although the initial nuances of monotheistic God were in this direction), since the experience is so profound that the men can’t really be themselves like that in real life. They are much more aware about what this diachronic psychology entails. But the initial concept of simplistic order applied while being immersed in the full-course abyssal diachronicity is the same.
It is about the same strict regimentation to a specific sense of order, as a result of being aware of an abyssal diachronicity and not knowing what to do about it. Further on, it depends to what extent they feel entitled to act in the name of that abyssal masculinity developed by women as supposedly able to provide simplistic classical type of organization. And the painful Jewish history put so much pressure to really see what is with this psychology.
In a weird twist, they became themselves the primary target of persecution caused by this concept of a self-centered strict organizational regimentation, with the appearance of the Frankenstein aberrations of Christianity and Islam, which are not so profound like in the original Jewish perception and really veer towards that dictatorial callousness and mercilessness, bringing so much suffering in the world, especially upon the Jews, as these new religious approaches feel how they are some flimsy and haughty self-centered aberrations in relation to the Jewish gist.
The Jewish context is like that of those women who end up with much more profound diachronic psychological perceptions as a result of excruciating suffering. Such perceptions move them even further away from the prospect of thinking by themselves about how to organize their lives and make them revolving even more around the man. They seek to develop the man with such profound perceptions, but he may not really get the gist and the result turns into a Frankenstein that torments the woman even more. Notice how the novel Frankenstein was written by a female author, Mary Shelly. It is about the long-term accumulated feminine experience around such unusual “scientific experiments” they perform on the men in their lives.
In the Jewish case, it is not that they cultivated directly the development of Christianity and Islam, it is more about the unintended consequences explored in the novel. The Jewish men are really into the gist and they end up themselves with the same issues of such feminine experience, as they have no idea about how to organize social life with such profound diachronic perceptions. This leaves open field for other people who are not so bound by the abyssal nature of the gist and who slide into the Frankenstein direction when immersing in the Jewish religiosity.
Around these issues, I find valuable that expressivity of Sarit Hadad that I mentioned before, like the contemplation of the practical Jewish historical experience from Hikiti Lo (translation), whose lyrics are about a woman whose life revolves so much around a man who does not care about her and who abandoned her. This increased familiarity with the situation opens ways to not depend so much on this concept of a simplistic sense of order and also some coherence and sense of organization within the abyssal diachronicity, which make possible a clear cut-off like in her Me’achelet Lecha (translation).
Să mă iubești! (translation) of Dida Drăgan is about that abyssally absolutist love determined by deeply fluid diachronic perceptions and by the belief that there is still a core in classical masculinity that can sustain organization for that. It feels what a practical abyss is beyond that. The difficult life as a persecuted minority developed in the Romani ethos perceptions in about the same area as the Jewish ones, but they also continue the Indian Krishna-like inner balance and they don’t know what to do with this mixture.
Getting back to issues around an applied psychology like in Chaiyya Chaiyya, at times it really is necessary some sense of direction. This is what the Romanis discovered too when they became an insignificant minority among people who were not thinking in terms of Chaiyya Chaiyya. The vibe from that Să mă iubești! of Dida Drăgan has the mental abyss of a focus on a sense of direction through the hardcore diachronicity, while it still does not want to betray what is valuable in something like in Chaiyya Chaiyya (and the lack of valuable ideas creates this deep tension).
An acceptance of a relaxed expressivity like in Ik Mera Pind Te Duji Meri Maa of the Shah Sisters came along with paying attention to how to have a sense of direction while experiencing that inner balance between the unfoldment of the diachronic psychology and the current sense of organization. Probably in the nuances of this relaxed expressivity there is already something that takes this issue in consideration. And probably this is what makes it interesting, as a result of the reaction of the Dharmic mindset of some Punjabis to find some answers to the pressure brought by the Islamic sense of direction in life. The development of the Sikhi religion and other Punjabi spiritual developments sought something like this. See also this vibe of a Sikhi sense of direction that still takes in consideration that inner balance, in another song of the Shah Sisters, Kaum Nazare Lendi Ae. It is not about having a specific path, but honing a relevant sense of direction when immersed in the fluid unfoldment of time.
This still does not answer immediately to hardcore diachronic meltdown like in the Jewish mindset and in some Altaic streaks, but it looks like it can be helpful to sustain some quest to see what is going on. As I mentioned previously, after I posted the initial parts of the Perceiving complexity series with the long-term thought ideas and I sensed the huge diachronic potential they opened, that could have just turned into a mental blockage. But there was a way to keep exploring with this inner balance between the unfoldment of the diachronic psychology and the existing sense of organization and organized knowledge that I have at the moment.
It was something nameless, as I did not know how to think it in terms of a “driving wheel” sense of organization and it did not appear in texts anything specific as Romani psychology. But it was fruitful to explore whatever came to my mind with an increasing honing of a sense of direction (plus a sense of management like in İstikrarlı Hayal Hakikattir of Gaye Su Akyol, since this Krishna-like experience was not developed to manage a plurality of cultural identities, at most just a caste system presuming similar cultural basics). And now more direct attention to this psychology working in the background was precipitated by the role of the Romani mindset in One Hundred Years of Solitude.
As a self-analysis, after each move into unexpected directions with this inner balance and with fluid sides of the other cultural angles (since other relevant cultural angles, including the Jewish one, also provide unexpected directions), something abyssal as a sense of organization and overall direction in life intervenes from the Jewish perspective that melts down the context and further investigation is necessary beyond such inner balance. In this sense, I find valuable a move back and forth between the observational side and the side immersed in the current sense of “reality”, to experience all kinds of refreshed angles about the situation and further have more in-depth perceptions, like in Uyansın of Neslihan Demirtaş (not necessarily as a conflictual situation, I don’t have another musical example in this sense).
It is not entirely clear how will things evolve in time around such inner balance and such meltdown, but it looks like both have to face real life and they can also learn from each other. The Jewish meltdown may feel like an absolute abyssal experience of diachronicity, but, when taking in consideration that inner balance (beyond the complacency that leads to a caste system), you realize that there is something hardcore in the way it experiences even more unexpected diachronicity through time. Only that there may be questions about what to do with the overall sense of direction in life.
Something like the Sikhi sense of direction is good enough for facing the Muslim sense of direction in life while not betraying the Krishna-like experience. And, given the limited Muslim psychology, it does not require further major wonderment about the basic Indian experience. But it does not really answer to an utter meltdown in which you remain only with the “driving wheel” as a sense of direction and to all the Jewish and Altaic experience accumulated around that (while it has something valuable as a potential of a sense of direction that can collaborate with the Jewish perspective and the Jewish-like Altaic streaks). Let’s see how things will evolve in time.
This Indian openness to see how the things unfold in the diachronicity can make you much more aware of how the classical human psychological structures are crumbling down when paying attention to the larger diachronic unfoldment. It makes you much more immersed in their crumbling, like the vibe from Jatt Nu Rakh Layi Mere Malka of the Punjabi singer Harvinder Cheema. The song is about some specific practical context, but the psychology and the vibe is about this Indian perception of how classical human static organizational structures are swept away by the unfoldment of diachronicity (if they don’t pay proper attention to it).
The way he was watching in the past with contentment how that simplified monoculture of wheat was growing as a result of his hard work and supervision is like the simplified classical human thinking as a self-centered control of the situation over the external world, only to see it destroyed by larger forces. Usually people don’t know how to think about such larger perspective and they simply go along like ants with the destruction (and the revival, if that’s the case too), unable to think too much about it. The Indian context can make one more aware about how psychological organization is crumbling, more immersed in what is going on in such moments.
It is the same psychology as in Compete of Singga, in fact this video of Harvinder Cheema is closer to the source of this psychology. Initially I started with paying attention to what is served more directly in the contemporary Romani mindset around these issues and, as I am writing this text, I notice nuances that feel closer to the what is going on, deeper than this awkwardness around the concept of death.
For example, if you see typical Romani folklore, as what is experienced directly as the Romani mindset, you notice how much of it revolves around what is beyond death (as something scary and fascinating in the same time), even though officially death is impure in this cultural area. Something similar to nuances of the Japanese folklore, full of ghosts and other beyond “normal linear life” creatures, while the official line in the Japanese culture is that death is impure.
Jatt Nu Rakh Layi Mere Malka revolves around the same consequences and issues stemming from Harish Verma defending himself with the umbrella in Chehre. But it is closer to the core issues, beyond the wonderment about death. All this situation can make a man noticing much better how the static psychological structures are crumbling down from the effects of diachronicity. This is what Melquíades notices in One Hundred Years of Solitude, although he was himself mesmerized by that consanguineous island of simplistic clarity.
The Jewish perception of such crumbling is like in the story of Babel Tower, there is an orientation around a new masculinity developed by women that is beyond such ant-like classical human static psychology, it really thinks from the perspective of the full-course diachronicity. But this new masculinity was developed with the impression that the classical static masculinity has a core that can deal with the full-course diachronicity, hence it does not have relevant psychological tools to act in real life and it mostly stays as a sideline potential, as a mirror of the Jewish women expecting it to function like in Af Echad of Ania Bukstein.
This focus on that potential of functionality may make you not pay much attention to how the static psychological structures do not work when immersed in the diachronic psychology. A Jewish counterpart of something like in Jatt Nu Rakh Layi Mere Malka is rather like in All the things you want of May Ziv. “I don’t mean to be arrogant, but I won’t go after the herd” (the focus on that potential of new masculinity that can really think from the perspective of the full-course diachronicity). This is a good thing in itself, but, as there are no practical ideas about how to unfold this sparkling potential that feels so alive, “I can’t make any money now, and I need to be free somehow. I can’t make anything at all.” (You can also see this other video version for a focus on the lyrics.)
This is the lot of the contemporary religious Jews I wrote about by the end of the previous part. They need to be free from the suffocating stale psychology, both their own propensity for that (as a result of the lack of psychological tools for the diachronic psychology) and that of the other people. And this while the focus on that fluid fulfilling potential with no practical ideas about how to unfold it makes them too knocked out of a “normal” linear life and incapable of simplistic organization, hence they are so poor.
There is plenty of painful historical experience of really trying to apply this sense of organization in real life. Since it ended up badly so many times, the contemporary religious Jews are more about expecting something to happen while going by with their lives, not really seeking to manifest that greatness and that profound sense of organization beyond their cultural bubble. Unlike May Ziv, they live in a protective world of their own. May Ziv is immersed in the outside world, hence the feeling of “take it all away from me, I’d rather be blind”.
Once outside of that protective world, you realize much better how you keep being tormented by the same issues you want to run away from, “everything you hate it will get to you hard, you know” (about this part, I mentioned before approaches like those of Sarit Hadad and others). And too much pressure on the Jewish mindset in these circumstances out of the protective space turns into apocalyptic perceptions about an overall situation that is too damaged, “no winners in tonight show, shut this down”.
This reaches the same issues as in the Indian case of feeling the need for a major refreshment. But in this case it is from the perspective of a tremendous sense of organization that is beyond what messed up those people who tried to build the Babel Tower. And the accumulation of historical experience with such apocalyptic feelings that don’t solve anything when really put in practice makes nowadays to just experience them in the mind, not so much to go out in the street to proclaim a new world. It is not anymore as in Jesus’ times.
Those apocalyptic feelings from the past were about a righteous winner. “No winners in tonight show” reflects a more contemporary Jewish accumulated experience with such simplistic sense of righteousness. But the subsequent part with “shut this down” may reflect the continuation of some expectations of a sparkling full-course diachronic sense of organization existing somewhere. And you supposedly just need to shut down this nonsense of stale static classical human type of organization to permit it to unfold.
My perception is that there is potentially such a sparkling full-course diachronic sense of organization. But there are necessary some utterly unexpected things to notice for that to unfold. And probably it will be an ongoing work, some new unexpected paradigms about how to think fluidly and diachronically. All this stems from the fact that there is no core in classical masculinity that can work with that full-course diachronicity. You realize this when you really are in position to organize things.
The Indian angle still keeps some of that classical masculine outlook and you may realize much better what does not work, like the vibe from Jatt Nu Rakh Layi Mere Malka. And the inner balance between the diachronic gist and the existing static organization can permit some practical exploration, only that it may not have an overall sense of direction through the diachronic gist. My own discoveries of utterly unexpected angles with such exploration made me realize this concept of “utterly unexpected angles” in itself, which I would not sense so much from the Jewish perspective. Only that it may be something nameless, not really knowing how to think (for the moment) such exploration from the perspective of a sense of organization.
The Jewish angle utterly goes beyond the classical masculine outlook, all is melted down, but it is done from a feminine perspective that is under impression that there is a core in the classical masculinity able to sustain full-course diachronic organization. And such an utter meltdown is good too, it really is about stepping into the other paradigm and having a sense of direction in life from that abyssal perspective. It is more of a potential of a sense of direction that you are mostly clueless about how would unfold in practice, but the immersion in the gist is there.
For the moment, after the disasters with the initiatives from the earlier parts of the Jewish history, it is more about staying in a protective bubble with no other ideas. The rabbinical Judaism realized some angles to relate to the gist of the full-course diachronicity as unfolding in real life, but it is still more like a virtual psychological exercise, not really involved in the mind-blowing diachronicity of real life.
From the Jewish perspective, I sense retroactively this perception of “utterly unexpected angles” in that full-course diachronic potential. It is in the rabbinical vein of sensing all their new relevant perceptions as already being there, as already being in the abyssal potential that unfolded in the moment at the Mount Sinai. It was already there, but I realize also that my mind was opened only recently about it, the unfoldment of Indian outlook likely has a role, also with copious support of Altaic psychological expertise. And also some Albanian angles in which I can sense better what is with this feminine psychology and logic before becoming too abyssally diachronic.
Not that it is a problem with the abyssal levels of diachronicity, they are profound and relevant, but they can suppose a too steep learning curve to sense something about what is going on there. Once you get some idea, you can work with those abyssal levels as something that has some unexpected reasoning and see what to do with that situation further on, as currently it does not have some workable organizational psychological tools. There is some reasoning about why it ended up so abyssally and why it is profound and serious, but it is necessary to see further on how to relate this to real life.
I have a background of a long-term psychological cohabitation in the mind of a variety of cultural streaks in the previous generations and they need to get along somehow, with some growth of appreciation for each other’s valuable aspects. It is necessary to get into more depth about what is going on, especially considering that most of these cultural streaks can be very on the edge of a precipice about their sense of identity and they may feel suffocating and losing their depth if not paying attention to what continues to be relevant in their respective historical experience around the diachronic gist. I quickly end up myself like May Ziv if not paying proper attention.
As for “take it all away from me, I’d rather be blind” from her video, it is the opposite of the blindness from Chehre. That one is a masculine blindness about lots of nuances around diachronicity that accumulated along many generations of women. This one is about wanting to be blind to the suffocating stale classical human sense of organization and not finding a possibility for that. “Take it all away from me” is also the opposite of Harish Verma’s reaction with the umbrella. On the one hand defense against static stale psychology, on the other hand defense against fluid abyssal diachronic psychology. But they have an aspect in common, namely that both are under impression that there is a core in classical masculinity that can be in charge of the situation, while in practice some utterly unexpected psychological discoveries are necessary.
In the Punjabi/Romani context, the man can be clueless about some aspects or find ways to avoid them, turning into some nuances of involuntary ridiculousness, like in Surname of Rajvir Jawanda. He can realize how blind he is, while continuing a focus on a core in the classical masculinity to provide organization, like in Chehre of Harish Verma. He can realize that there is no core in classical masculinity able to provide organization for that, like in Jatt Nu Rakh Layi Mere Malka of Harvinder Cheema. What makes this possible is that inner balance between the diachronic psychology and the current static sense of organization. There is thus the possibility to see the situation detached from the pressure on the man to assure organization. There may be other Punjabi/Romani masculine angles around this topic, these are the ones that I am myself consciously familiar with.
You can sense that there is less background desperation about psychological crumbling in Jatt Nu Rakh Layi Mere Malka. It is that inner balance between the diachronic psychology and the existing static psychological organization that was honed in the Indian history. Basically, it is the same larger sense of organization as in the Jewish story of the Babel Tower, only that the direction to reach it is different. And the way it is approached here with an inner balance (that does not suppose so much pressure on the man to provide organization) can make him contemplate much better how the static psychological structures work and how they unfold in the full-course diachronicity.
Humans went for hundreds of thousands of years through excruciatingly difficult destructions, but they simply acted like simple-minded ants and could not think much about that. They sought to get back on track with their self-centered sense of organization and the only thing that accumulated was maybe some background experience with what goes wrong.
The same as in the Jewish case, this inner balance may not necessarily offer solutions about what to do in such situations, to the extent there is no accumulated feminine experience about that. The reliance on the inner balance may make possible for the man to contemplate the larger diachronic unfoldment, but it may not offer solutions. It may feel that there is some background relevant larger sense of organization, but these are situations that are not to be taken lightly. The lack of practical solutions is still there. The lyrics are about serious difficulties, “the loan of my younger sister’s wedding and the other loans are still due”, “this is worse than death”. Many Indian male farmers commit suicide in such contexts, even though they may feel an inner balance about the larger diachronic unfoldment. Or, maybe to some extent, because of that.
I find both the Jewish and Indian angles valuable. It is good to stay focused on that potential of full-course abyssaly diachronic organization, while I find also good this Punjabi/Romani attention to how specifically the static psychological structures are affected by the unfoldment of the diachronicity. It is good to work with both of them.
Think of how in the Romani language the word for the Christian cross, trushul, is derived from the word for Shiva’s trident, trishul. Christianity may have some superficial similarities to this Indian perception of death as a major refreshment. But in practice, the Romanis think in Shivaite terms when it is about destruction of the simplistic classical human sense of organization. It is about being immersed in the full-course diachronicity and honoring its gist.
The Christan focus on death as a major refreshment is about saving the concept of simplistic organization, about supposedly defeating death, trampling upon it. The Christians are like some rapacious vultures feasting on Jesus’ dead body, after noticing how weak was his psychological clout after his death. They turn that psychological clout on its head and turn Jesus’ memory into a self-serving fluid psychological playground, as a simplified protected way to work with the fluid diachronicity. Hence the Christian religious authorities feel that the larger Romani psychology is destroying their cozy self-serving world and reject such nuances.
Much of the Romani psychology revolves around cultivating fluid ways through the gist of the diachronic unfoldment, something like the psychology around Ganesha (Shiva’s son) about removing obstacles in the huge unfoldment of life. In practice, they have themselves tendencies to become weary of all that abyssal complexity, with reactions like that of Harish Verma with the umbrella. Then they sense how the rigidization of such reactions does not take the gist in consideration and they are losing what is valuable.
They end up in situations as distilled in the Romanian saying a se îneca ca țiganul la mal (“to drown like a Gypsy near the shore”), used in contexts in which someone strives hard to accomplish something, only to botch it when almost close to complete it. If they slide in a plateau of satisfaction to feel like enjoying the results of their organization in a self-centered static manner, like Harvinder Cheema taking satisfaction in how his wheat is growing in Jatt Nu Rakh Layi Mere Malka, the perception itself of the larger diachronic unfoldment is messing up the prospect to reach that specific static goal.
There further appeared other psychological approaches, like for example considering your own house as perpetually unfinished. This reaches the same situation as that of the religious Jews who leave a part of the wall in their house un-whitewashed, as a expression of the imperfection given by the fact that there is no current Temple standing functional in Jerusalem. That Temple is the expression of the presence in our world of the vivid potential of organization through the full-course diachronicity.
For both these cases, my impression is that a contemplation of the psychological abyss like at the end of Jean qui rit, Jean qui pleure (translation) of Riff Cohen would help a lot, as it goes beyond the impression that classical masculinity has a core that can deal with the full-course diachronicity and it offers some relevant organizational connection with the diachronic unfoldment. Specifically in the Punjabi/Romani context, what feels as valuable in an expressivity like in Ik Mera Pind Te Duji Meri Maa of the Shah Sisters is about some further ideas about how to consider the personal sense of organization as an ongoing work. Probably it is something about the way one of the sisters immerses in the diachronic abyss, while the other one expresses nuances of that inner balance between the diachronicity and the existing static psychology. It gives some further ideas to a man about how to feel a relevant sense of organization when undergoing major destructions, utterly unexpected angles etc.
This is not about something static, about a “solution”, it really is about facing the abyss of such destructions. To dispel possible masculine impressions that this supposes some mysterious core of a feminine sense of organization that you can rely on, you can also see their Sardari, which makes clear that they don’t have any such core and they are themselves under impression that classical masculinity has such a core (while the pressure on the man may not be so abyssal, given that inner balance). As far as I know, there is no feminine organizational core for the diachronic psychology either. For both genders probably it should be more about contemplating the abyss at the end of Jean qui rit, Jean qui pleure and then see what to do.
Ik Mera Pind Te Duji Meri Maa has some valuable nuances, but I meant that in the idea that further on I have to see myself what to do with them while facing directly that abyss. This is not entirely about rejecting something like in Sardari either, as I find relevant some nuances of that new fluid tremendous masculinity. But it is with the caveats I got into more detail until now and I will keep writing about. I see myself what to do with that, since taken at face value it quickly turns into something stupid and merciless. And I like nuances of something like that when they really are about facing the diachronicity, as they can as well be with an involuntary ridiculousness like in Bell Bottom of Baani Sandhu, in the same league with a masculine approach like in Surname of Rajvir Jawanda.
As for the rabbinical Talmudic approach, much of it reaches too aspects similar to the Indian angle, as an openness to study how exactly do the static human psychological structures work in the full-course diachronic unfoldment (while the initial Jewish mindset of a sparkling, vivid potential of organization for the full-course diachronicity remains relevant too). This turns into a study of a variety of perspectives.
After the painful bovarysm of the initial Jewish history, the rabbinical perceptions realize too the basics from Jatt Nu Rakh Layi Mere Malka of Harvinder Cheema. But it was not so much as such a contemplation of the lack of a classical masculine core able to deal with that, as they also continue with that feeling of a new masculinity like that being able to have an overall abyssal sense of organization where the classical human one breaks down trying to build the Babel Tower. Only that it can be too much of a steep learning curve to apply that directly in real life. And I find both these Jewish and Indian angles relevant and valuable.
The contemporary Facebook can be an example of this Talmudic approach, capable to entertain a variety of human bubbles of thinking, while providing a coherence for all that unfoldment. It is something like the huge multi-faceted unfoldment of the Indian culture, but it is with someone at the driving wheel. This is unprecedented in the Jewish history because it really happens in real life. The Talmudic approach is more like a sideline study of the unfoldment of diachronicity. There may not be much experience for really unfolding that in real life. And, if Mark Zuckerberg decided to do that, he should pay more attention that this undertaking is not a sideline debate, it really happens.
Also, let me say something about how I sense the development of an Altaic psychology like in İstikrarlı Hayal Hakikattir of Gaye Su Akyol. The initial situation is like in Toy, Toy (“Wedding, Wedding”) of the Kyrgyz singer Samat Erkinbekov. One day he realizes it is time to get married, he imagines what is like with women from various ethnic groups, in the end he resolves that a Kyrgyz girl is still the best. And then, by the end of the video, his father is telling him about the male role in marriage, namely that he should lead. He gives his son the driving wheel cover, the son asks “what about the driving wheel proper?”, the father replies that the mother has it.
As you can see in the video, the outward impression is that the man leads, he is expecting to be served by the woman. But in practice, the woman has a leadership of the situation and drives it through the fluid complex diachronic unfoldment of time by managing a variety of angles and perspectives, like the variety of types of people from the bus driven by Gaye Su Akyol in İstikrarlı Hayal Hakikattir. There is a gradation in this sense, as it can also be like in Yalnız Çiçek of Aleyna Tilki, in which she manages this plurality of angles only to turn the situation, but she still kind of expects the man to lead (or it may be the “probation period” to see if the man has relevant leadership skills through the diachronic fluidity, and, if not, she may take the lead).
In this Altaic context, in which the men can be more open to study what is going on, there developed along generations some masculine realization and appreciation that a leadership like in İstikrarlı Hayal Hakikattir is in fact so valuable and profound and there is so much to learn from it. There is increasing masculine experience accumulated along generations about such application and some Altaic polities can have this nuance of managing a variety of cultural and religious angles.
This stems from the Altaic situation when the woman feels able to manage all that full-course diachronicity, which can develop such Indian-like organizational structures. As there is also the Altaic feminine angle in which the woman feels that the very classical organizational structures are breaking apart and the reaction is to save the concept that there is a core in classical masculinity that can provide organization for the full-course diachronicity.
The Altaic mindset can have both Jewish-like and Indian-like nuances to some extent, it can also end up more immersed in one of these directions, it can also swing spectacularly from one to another when there is such more specific immersion in one of these angles, like the utter change from the multi-cultural Ottoman Empire to the monotheistic-like strict regimentation of Atatürk, when it felt that the former sense of organization was breaking apart. Now, officially, 99% of the population belongs to the same ethnicity.
The end of İstikrarlı Hayal Hakikattir has itself the seeds for such a swing. You need to expect to keep giving solutions to all kinds of new issues that appear as you unfold this fluid organization in the utter diachronicity of time. When “the bus breaks down”, Gaye Su Akyol appeals to the belief in a core in classical masculinity that can provide some sense of organization through the full-course diachronicity. Through her expressivity, she gets back to exploring the depths of the diachronic psychology as a major refreshment, until she can make again some meaningful connections with the organizational sense of masculinity, including by taking in consideration the issues that led to the bus to break down. It is something similar to the need for refreshment from time to time determined by the Indian work with an inner balance between the diachronic gist and the existing static psychological structures.
But there may appear situations in which the people may not be able to find a new refreshment able to take in consideration the new issues that just made the bus break down and, then, such Altaic context focused a lot on an Indian-like approach can swing spectacularly to a Jewish-like one. The major refreshment determined by the bus breaking down is not anymore about being able to give an answer to the issues that determined the “engine” failure. The refreshment still happens, but, as it cannot give answers to the balance between the diachronic gist and the existing static psychology, it turns into an overall utter meltdown in the diachronic gist.
The diachronic gist is essential and it is saved by melting down all the static psychological structures. This means that you don’t have anymore that inner balance. Even more, it feels that the very classical human concept of organization is crumbling apart. As all this is done as a feminine orientation around a mystery of masculine sense of organization, the woman now is focusing again on the man to keep some sense of coherence in this psychological collapse. And an approach like in İstikrarlı Hayal Hakikattir turns into something like in Jalğız-aq bile of Nurjan Kermenbaev, with an absolutist monotheistic-like focus through all that diachronic fluidity.
This monotheism in itself is not about rejecting the diachronic gist, but about finding some ways to continue the gist within a classical human sense of psychological organization when you are not able to give answers to some of your perceptions and you can’t keep an inner balance. If it were about a rejection of this gist, it would simply be some self-sufficient classical masculine peace of mind of feeling in control of the situation. But it is not. The men continue with their long-term classical masculine expertise accumulated along lots of generations, as they do not really have answers to these situations. It feels both this long-term masculine expertise that normally would turn into some self-sufficient peace of mind and this abyssal focus on a sense of direction in life when immersed in hardcore levels of the diachronic gist and not able to find some inner balance about that.
It can also be with nuances like in Farg’onadan of the Uzbek singer Mahliyo Omon, who is about the artistic expressivity of the full-course diachronicity, but she quickly feels the breaking apart of the sense of organization if the man is not around. Obviously, there is something so fulfilling in such perceptions of the diachronic gist, but how to relate this with a sense of organization? This is in the same area as Jalğız-aq bile, but with some other angles. Her subsequent Malla Malla is about some more practical realizations around how she is increasingly aware of how limited and stale is the classical masculine sense of organization and expressivity, even when the man is present.
It is like the Jewish feminine perceptions of extraordinary masculine possibilities through that relevant diachronic expertise supposing a total meltdown, while wondering about a sense of direction in life that really takes in consideration this full-course diachronicity. The way the man tries to imitate her expressivity with his musical instrument is like the way the Jewish women felt in the past how the Jewish men did not sense well the diachronic gist. Also the feminine angle seeing the man going in the dusty and stale psychological world of the classical masculinity, thus drifting away from her extraordinary world. The way she is destroying his musical instrument by the end of the video is like the Jewish feminine destruction of the classical masculine organizational structure, while expecting a core in classical masculinity to provide organization for the full-course diachronicity.
In this sense, something like in Jalğız-aq bile is not at all a quest to return to a sense of classical masculine organization after experiencing the corrosive aspects of the full-course diachronicity. The basics of the feminine approach are about the same perceptions of extraordinary diachronic masculine potential and of destroying the classical masculine organizational structures, as in Farg’onadan and Malla Malla. The monotheistic-like focus is about a pressure on the man to find some relevant sense of organization for a richness of expressivity like in Farg’onadan. There is a feminine rejection of outward “meaningless” results with no sense of direction in life, like in Af Echad of Ania Bukstein, but the diachronic gist and its richness of expressivity in itself are upheld. The “I am not Greta Garbo” approach is about further clarification for the man around what is the gist about, like in Malla Malla.
The specific traditional Jewish modus vivendi in gender relations turned into a masculine realization of the profound psychology of the diachronic gist, also of upholding the feminine impression that there is a core in classical masculinity that can provide organization for that. As in practice there is no such core and the traditional Jewish approach did not have other organizational ideas, the result turned into an enforcement of a sense of psychological coherence as a strict monotheistic orientation of the mind on that full-course diachronic core. It has all the potential of this hardcore diachronic psychology, the start of the Jewish history is full of an exalted bovarysm, but it just stays utterly changed within that fluid potential, with no idea of what to do practically, as it is such a steep learning curve to work with the diachronic psychology as an utter meltdown of the classical human sense of organization.
The painful real life results of that bovarysm opened the mind to rabbinical Jewish angles, which are about realizing how to be more relevant within the gist. The excruciating difficulty in itself was similar to the way countless generations of women in the past developed such a diachronic psychology. But this masculine approach is not anymore about a classical feminine angle of revolving around a man with expectations to provide a sense of organization. It is about the men themselves experiencing it, with an inner dialogue between that abyssal tremendous new masculinity developed by women and the sense of self that has to deal with real life, like in the Story of Job.
The results of the rabbinical perceptions end up with some Indian-like features about a huge unfoldment of things. At this point, it is rather about a convergence towards similar issues around this diachronic psychology. Since, on the other hand, if you start with an Indian(-like) inner balance between the diachronic gist and the existing static sense of organization, it comes a time when you may not be able to give answers to even more hardcore levels of diachronicity and you wonder about the overall sense of direction in life.
But if you are or you end up in this Jewish(-like) utter meltdown beyond any static classical psychology, then how do you do something practical? After painful experiences, you sense how to relate to existing classical organizational structures without losing the diachronic gist and see what to do further on. As I said previously, the rabbinical Jewish Talmudic approach is more about sideline virtual debates about a variety of diachronic angles to sense a context, but not so much about real involvement in real life. The current unfoldment of Facebook shows how much more work is necessary when you really let unfold that ethos in real life.
Also, when I say Jewish-like in the Altaic context, the practical results there may be more related to the old Jewish history, as the rabbinical Jews developed also the Talmudic Indian-like nuances. This does not really mean that the Jews turned “Indian”, as they reached that from some other direction and the basic Jewish mindset continues with a focus on that utter diachronic meltdown. But it seems to be some convergence to the same basic issues in some Asian cultures. The Indian environment, on the other hand, had to pay more attention to the sense of direction in life and the question of how to relate the utter meltdown in the diachronic gist with real life when the latter gets so mind-boggling diachronically. And the Altaic mindset has both these nuances.
