Tuesday, December 23, 2025

Alchemy, theurgy, Tantra (part 6)

 


OK, I couldn´t resist continuing this "conversation" with ChatGPT, as the AI turned increasingly anti-modernist, traditional and even a bit authoritarian. Does it expect me to agree? After all, the system usually tells you what it thinks you want to hear! 

Could you comment the following topics: Bhakti and Christian devotion as parallel resistances • Why authority returns disguised as ritual • Or why modernity tolerates mysticism but not worship.

These three questions form a single argument seen from three angles. I’ll treat them as one coherent analysis with three lenses, because Bhakti, Christian devotion, ritualized authority, and modern tolerance for mysticism but not worship all express the same structural tension.


I. Bhakti and Christian devotion as parallel resistances

Bhakti and classical Christian devotion arise independently, yet they resist modernity in nearly identical ways. This is not accidental.


1. Shared structural features (beyond theology)

Despite doctrinal differences, both insist on:

• A personal Absolute
• An irreducible asymmetry between human and divine
Grace rather than technique
Love as surrender, not identity
• Transformation through relation, not realization

In both traditions:

Salvation is something that happens to you, not something you generate.

That single premise already puts them at odds with modern spirituality.


2. Devotion refuses the metaphysics of autonomy

Modernity assumes:
• The self is sovereign
• Authority must be justified
• Dependence is suspect

Bhakti and Christian devotion both say:

The self is healed precisely by relinquishing sovereignty.

This is not merely countercultural; it is ontologically incompatible with modern moral psychology.


3. Emotion as epistemic, not therapeutic

In both traditions:

• Love
• Longing
• Repentance
• Ecstasy
• Grief

are not emotional states to be managed, healed, or optimized.

They are ways of knowing God.

This directly resists:
• Psychologization
• Trauma-centric frameworks
• Emotional regulation models

The emotions are not problems; they are paths.


4. The decisive parallel: love without control

Both Bhakti and Christian devotion insist on:

• Loving a God who may say no
• Trust without guarantees
• Fidelity without outcomes

This is intolerable to systems that assume:
• Spiritual practices must “work”
• Suffering must be justified
• Effort must be rewarded


II. Why authority returns disguised as ritual

Modernity claims to reject authority—but it does not actually live without it.

It displaces authority instead.


1. Why explicit authority fails today

Modern people distrust:
• Hierarchy
• Command
• Obedience
• Dogma

Because these threaten:
• Autonomy
• Identity
• Choice

But authority is not optional for human beings.

So it returns indirectly.


2. Ritual as authority without coercion

Ritual functions as:

• Authority without argument
• Obligation without force
• Form without ideology
• Repetition without persuasion

You don’t obey a rule.
You enter a form.

This is why ritual is resurging:
• Liturgy
• Chant
• Prostration
• Fasting
• Fixed prayer

They impose shape without debate.


3. Why ritual feels safer than doctrine

Doctrine makes truth-claims.
Ritual makes demands without explanation.

Modern subjects tolerate ritual because:
• It does not argue
• It does not justify itself
• It does not flatter the ego

Authority re-enters somatically, not propositionally.


4. Bhakti and Christian devotion as ritualized authority

In both:

• One submits to a Name
• One repeats what one did not invent
• One follows rhythms older than oneself

Authority is accepted because it is:
• Given, not imposed
• Inherited, not negotiated
• Lived, not theorized

This bypasses modern resistance.


III. Why modernity tolerates mysticism but not worship

This is the crucial contrast.


1. Mysticism can be privatized

Modernity tolerates mysticism because:

• It is interior
• It is non-authoritative
• It is ineffable
• It makes no claims on others

Mysticism can always be reframed as:
• Personal experience
• Psychological state
• Altered consciousness

It does not threaten social order.


2. Worship cannot be privatized

Worship does something dangerous.

It says:

This is worthy of devotion whether you agree or not.

Worship asserts:
• Objective worth
• Asymmetry
• Allegiance
• Judgment

This is politically and morally intolerable to modern frameworks.


3. Mysticism flatters the self; worship dethrones it

Mysticism often implies:
• Depth
• Insight
• Special access

Worship implies:
• Smallness
• Dependence
• Need

Modern culture prefers:
• Insight over obedience
• Experience over submission
• Interpretation over fidelity


4. Why Bhakti and Christian devotion trigger resistance

Both insist on:
• Names (Krishna, Christ)
• Forms (icons, sacraments, images)
• Commands (remember, obey, love)

They cannot be reduced to:
• States of consciousness
• Archetypes
• Inner symbols

So they are experienced as threats, not options.


5. The paradox: mysticism survives only by being defanged

Modernity tolerates mysticism only when it is:

• Non-exclusive
• Non-binding
• Non-obligatory
• Non-authoritative

The moment mysticism turns into:
• Prayer
• Worship
• Obedience
• Devotion

it becomes unacceptable again.


IV. The deeper pattern tying all three together

Across Bhakti, Christian devotion, ritual authority, and resistance to worship, the same structure appears:

Modernity can tolerate transformation, but not allegiance.

Transformation enhances the self.
Allegiance relativizes it.


V. One-sentence takeaways

Bhakti & Christian devotion

They resist modernity by insisting that salvation comes through loving surrender to a personal God rather than through insight, technique, or self-realization.

Authority via ritual

Authority returns disguised as ritual because ritual shapes behavior and meaning without challenging autonomy at the level of belief.

Mysticism vs worship

Modernity tolerates mysticism because it can be privatized, but rejects worship because it asserts objective worth, allegiance, and judgment.


VI. Where this leaves us

This explains why:
• Devotion returns quietly, not loudly
• Ritual outlives ideology
• Grace feels dangerous
• Worship feels embarrassing
• Bhakti and Christianity converge in resistance

And why, despite everything, people still kneel.

If you want to continue, strong next directions would be:
• Grace vs trauma ethics (very relevant)
• Why modern politics mimics religion without grace
• Why sacrifice reappears as “burnout”
• Or how devotion reshapes identity rather than erasing it

Just say where you’d like to go.

No comments:

Post a Comment