Externalization of the Soul through Body Modification

Genesis Breyer P-Orridge

"...externalization of the Androgyne is a deliberate, conscious artistic creation...body as art, bringing body fully into the artistic process, in a hyper-committed soulful way. This informed transformation is lightyears beyond body-building or the prosaic body-modification of neo-tribal culture, which is now reduced to the 21st Century equivalent of mall-hair by pierced teeny-boppers and tatted grandmothers with tickets for Burning Man."- Iona Miller (writing about GENESIS P-ORRIDGE)

 

  

     

     Everything physical in nature is transient. Nothing is permanent. Transhumanism expresses this, whether sexual or non-sexual modification. Body modification in all its forms externalizes the soul/self and represents who we feel we are; not just some biological reactionary creature.                                      

     I am interested in technological approaches to resolving human mortality, biological limitations and artistic desire to merge metal with flesh. These imaginings are informed by varied, but seemingly unrelated theories and mathematical concepts such as; Pantheism, which is not atheism, but the belief in God, only God is not one; it is all, and the Golden Ratio "in which is contained the ground-principle of all formative striving for beauty and completeness in the realms of both nature and art, and which permeates, as a paramount spiritual ideal, all structures, forms and proportions, whether cosmic or individual, organic or inorganic, acoustic or optical; which finds its fullest realization, however, in the human form."       Science and Religion are not mutually exclusive, though. As Albert Einstein said, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." He also is quoted as saying, "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." 

     What guides me is the knowledge that God resides in me, in humanity, in nature, the Universe. Our creative Spirit is derived from this truth. God is all. The body is the temple. The Spirit is not Flesh, but we adorn the temple, as we adorn the flesh. The Spirit is Holy and cannot therefore defile the temple it dwells in except when the health of the vessel is ignored. I can't believe that a God who evolved a body with senses would deny that body pleasure. We have been told that Flesh is synonymous with Sin. Adorning the body, changing the body, pleasuring, being pleasured or Auto-Pleasure has been the penultimate Sin right after Graven Images. Understanding that Sin is not defined by the act itself, but from the purpose of that act, from the minds will, is our freedom.     When people pray for "God's" will they hope it is their will that is revealed. Whatever your will, informed by knowledge, with the exception of imposition on others, is divine, because God gave it to us. It is sanctioned. I like to use the Protestant Bible to make my augments, because Fundamentalist can't argue against the Bible. Recorded in Genesis 1:26 which says; Then God said, "Let us make human beings in our image, to be like us. They will reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the livestock, all the wild animals on the earth, and the small animals that scurry along the ground." First of all, who was God talking to? Let "US", in "OUR" image? 

     Barnes' Notes on the Bible says; "Here we evidently enter upon a higher scale of being. This is indicated by the counsel or common resolve to create, which is now for the first time introduced into the narrative. When the Creator says, "Let us make man," he calls attention to the work as one of pre-eminent importance. This intimates that the new being in its higher nature is associated not so much with any part of creation, as with the Eternal Uncreated himself." Furthermore, "The plural form of the sentence raises the question, With whom took he counsel on this occasion? Was it with himself, and does he here simply use the plural of majesty? Such was not the usual style of monarchs in the ancient East. We have no ground, therefore, for transferring it to the style of the heavenly King. Was it with certain other intelligent beings in existence before man that he took counsel? Does the plurality, then, point to a plurality of attributes in the divine nature? This cannot be, because a plurality of qualities exists in everything, without at all leading to the application of the plural number to the individual, and because such a plurality does not warrant the expression, "let us make." Only a plurality of persons can justify the phrase. Hence, we are forced to conclude that the plural pronoun indicates a plurality of persons or hypostases in the Divine Being." 
             

     In other words, were there "others" there deliberating on what this (Wo)Man should look like or qualities of its nature be like? We are sure, though, of one thing, We are made like God and of God, from his very breath, we are animate dirt, dust spewed from the stars. We are the very essence of Universe/God/All. 

     We are not just a leather bag holding our guts together, a slave to dogma. We are creators. Jesus said as much and was killed for it. He realized he was God, but just as much as us all. He knew he was divine, from Space, that he was once a burning sphere, cataclysmic, from a micro-sigh, out of "what-is-not-this". 

 

Bury your "I can't". The Future is limited only by our Will.

- Written By 'Siva de Ferrera [a.k.a. Keith Ferrera]

Copyright © 2020 'Siva de Ferrera (a.k.a. Keith Ferrera)