https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=Hf_85dwVMsg
You know, the big thing that, you know, postmodernism looks to destroy in a sense is ideologies, but it ends up kind of repeating them. So how do you know, how do we know that this type of symbolism isn’t just one of many ideologies out there? Yeah. Well, I think that the way that we can understand that this symbolism isn’t an ideology, first of all, that it’s not it’s not moral in the first place. There’s morality down line from it, but it’s not moral. It’s structural. It really is a pattern. And so what you can see, for example, in the pattern that there are it’s it’s almost like, you know, in the in Ecclesiastes or in Cohelot, the idea that everything has its place and if things are in their place in the proper way, then they’re good. But that if they’re out of place, then they become a problem. And so you can understand how there can be excesses of any aspect of the pattern. And so and so because of that, what it does is it creates a balanced a kind of balanced view where you you have a role for that, which is the margin. You have a role for that, which is outside. And you have a kind of non duality, even ultimately, where the images of the of the furthest outside, you could say, actually strangely meet up with the or with the images of the highest. And so you you have this total system that that kind of encompasses everything, but is also also has it has hierarchy, but it also has something with trans-sense hierarchy at the same time. All of that. And also because it’s just it’s just the the symbolic system is not just Christian. And that’s the one of the things that I’ve been trying to maybe emphasize a little more recently that I believe that Christianity offers a very, very, let’s say, a key in the symbolic pattern. I think it offers a disclosure that is that that makes it the truest or the most revealed, you could say, version of it. But the structure that we’re talking about is there in Vedanta Hinduism, it’s there in Buddhism, it’s there in Taoism, it’s it’s the same structure as you find in Greek mythology. It’s just basically a condensation of the experience of reality. So because of that, I don’t see how it can be an ideology, because it’s also not telling you it’s all it’s really not telling you what to do in a specific sense. It’s it’s trying to have this this perception of where things should fit in the puzzle, rather. But some people will see it. Maybe some people won’t like it because a lot of people don’t like. Some people don’t like reality. I understand it. Reality is hard, but a lot of people don’t like reality. And so people will not like some of the patterns that it shows because they want to to upend those patterns, they want to destroy them or or they want to act as revolutionary agents within this system, within the pattern, let’s say.