Текст книги "The Matrix and “The Matrix” — two opposites. (On the recipe of obtaining “freedom” in the movie “The Matrix”)"

6. Freedom is in the Transformation of contents, and not in the change of appearances

From all other kinds of animals in the Earth’s biosphere, humans differ, besides having articulate speech, by the following:

● humans have a mind, which is free in the sense, that it defines the limits of what is possible (including morally and ethically acceptable) for itself[12]12
  Minds of all other highly developed animals cannot escape the limits, set from Above in the matrix, that predetermines life of the current biosphere.


[Закрыть];

● humans have will, which always acts from the conscious level, and which can control behaviour to satisfy certain requirements and limits, produced by the mind (intellect) or intuition.

But will is not entirely free, since a human is compelled in some situations to use willpower in order to overcome obstacles in behaviour, imposed by instincts, habits, cultural norms, and so on. If the willpower is not strong enough in some situations, then people are not capable of realising their intentions, as their behaviour is subdued by factors, that their will cannot overcome.

In the film, however, a “normal” human being from the authors’ point of view, born free in the “real world” outside of the bad “Matrix”, is characterised by other qualities: “To deny our own impulses is to deny the very thing that makes us human”. Declarations of this sort are either a stupidity said thoughtlessly, or a malicious attempt to embed a false understanding of human psyche into the subconscious of the audience (primarily youth audience) under the cover of a thriller plot. Basic software, embedded into microchips (like BIOS of contemporary computers), is in essence like “inherited instincts” of machines, regardless of the complexity of machines or their software.

In fact, the human – God’s creation – differs and will always differ from the most complex machines by:

● firstly, the freedom of the mind in setting aims and defining limits of possible, morally and ethically acceptable for itself;

● secondly, the willpower, with which he can overcome many obstacles, limiting his freedom of will.

In the entire technosphere, in all machines, their software, and in everything else created by people, manifests the true morality and ethics of people, as well as their psyche type. Therefore, if artificial intelligence appears to be anti-human, like it is in the movie, then it is an expression of the anti-humaneness of the psyche of its creators and developers.

Strictly speaking, as a result of the freedom of mind in setting aims and conscious willpower, which overcomes various limits, the culture of contemporary civilization has been developed. However, as a consequence of the dominance of the animal psychetype, achievements of the culture are still under control of the instinctual behaviour programs, which create inter-species and intra-species competition for the better place under the sun in the natural conditions of the biosphere. Сorrelating with the psychetype of the vast majority, an animal armed with a mind that is free in setting aims and defining what is possible and morally-ethically acceptable, armed with technology and magic, is unnatural. Such kind of animal is not provided for by God’s providence, and consequently this kind does not belong in the all-enclosing universal matrix.

Restoration of the natural order of things in the Universe is possible in two versions of the future destiny of mankind:

● either rollback of the human-like biomass into fauna, with close to total nullification of its culture and memory, by means characteristic to higher-order matrices of life;

● or the transition of society to the dominance of the humane psychetype and a respective culture, by means of mind and will, that allow free aim-setting and limit-setting of what is possible and morally-ethically acceptable.

All of the above is within bounds of basic school courses of biology and psychology. Unfortunately, school courses of biology, psychology, history and other subjects are scattered and are not interrelated contextually, creating a kaleidoscopic worldview in school children, in which every known fact exists on its own, being torn away from the facts known from other subjects, and from real life. Possibly that is precisely why the youth, which has yet to live independently in the adult world, in an unconscious effort to create a holistic picture of the world’s interrelations, responds much faster than older generations to “The Matrix”, which brings up these problems in a non-lexical form of the figurative-allegorical narrative, bypassing the conscious of its audience.

The attitude of the film creators to the system of “connections”, analogous to the one pictured on the wall of an african cave, is ambiguous and inconsistent:

● on one hand, in the process of transfer of the conscious of the protagonist from the “Matrix” reality into the reality of supposed freedom, it was not shown, although the American cinema, as mentioned earlier, is not known to exercise delicacy in demonstrating naked human body and various acts, directly or indirectly concerning genitalias of men and women;

● on the other hand, the topic of the “woman in red” (who transforms into an “agent” of the “Matrix” in one of the training programs) is raised repeatedly, attracting attention to the problem of liberation of the individual and society from the dictatorship of instincts and their cultural shells in the algorithms of the unconscious levels of psyche.

In this ambivalent attitude of film authors towards the problem of normal human psychetype, manifested the mostly unconscious battle between two mutually exclusive tendencies in the biblical culture.

According to one of them, everything related to the sexual sphere should not be subject to openness in the society, neither in flesh, nor word, nor artistic imagery or figurative narration. But since there is no escape from nature, the civilization creates many cultural shells, elevating animality in its essence to the level of “eternal values” of humanity. As a consequence of this, the culture, idealising the cultural shells in which instincts are hidden, supports inhumane psychetype in the society, obstructing transformation of civilization into the Humanity.

According to the second tendency, the cultural shells are worthless, but the animality, uncovered under pressure from the porno-industry, is portrayed as the true essence of humanity, is therefore nothing to be ashamed of, and its manifestations should be given full freedom in the “safe sex”. This, in essence, is a direct refusal to become Human.

Both of these tendencies together in the culture of the present civilization are inseparably linked. The victory of either one of them would be victory of one of the forms of the same content. Precisely because of the unity of their content, the struggle between the two tendencies represents one of the ways of retaining humanity under the power of the “Matrix”.

The creators of the film, although they have shown this duality, have left in the defaults the battle between these two formal tendencies, therefore supporting the culture that would express animality in the future as well.

Since the system of “connections”, similar to the one pictured inside the african cave, was not shown clearly, then it was done not without reasons and not without aims:

● either because the “extrasenses-clairvoyants”, involved in the creation of the film, are themselves are so cocooned by this “connection”, that cannot see the light of day from their cocoons, nevermind the “thin worlds” where these “connections” are visible;

● or with the aim of saving the “connection” and cultivating it henceforth.

Pendency of this conflict between forms of one and the same animal origin was expressed by the creators of the film in the development of its plot. As seen from the film, in the reality of alleged freedom, where the main hero finds himself, there is no freedom from the unbearable pressure of instincts onto the psyche. In the reality of alleged freedom of the “real world”, the chracters’ lives are under the control of the very same “Matrix” of human enslavement. The happy end was inches away from the abyss, because the local “Judas”-Cypher craved for sexual intercourse with Trinity, and Trinity herself, while being cold-hearted to Cypher, lives awaiting Anderson-Neo’s love. So, in the reality of allegedly unlimited freedom, in which the crew of the “Nebuchadnezzar” lives free from the dictate of programs of neuro-interactive model of the “Matrix”, a typical “love triangle” has formed, which is inevitable in all cultures that reproduce inhumane psychetypes in the succession of generations.

It can be noted, that the local “Judas”, who betrayed Morpheus the “Baptist”, is the sole character of the “Matrix”, whose appearance can be identified as slavonic. It is as if his image was purposely made based the known appearance of the last non-orthodox all-Russian ruler Svyatoslav, the father of Vladimir, who became the Christian baptizer of Russia. The only difference – instead of a lock of hair on a shaved head he wears a narrow beard above his chin. In other words, the image of the “Judas”-Cypher has been purposely constructed so, that with promotion of the film in the global cinema, image of slavonic countries, specifically – Russia, as an enemy would be formed in the public’s unconscious. In particular, Cypher is the only character who likes to drink, and the stereotype “Russians – the first drunks in the world” is well known.

Concluding from the above, the film does not show real freedom. After the destruction of one reality – the Earth’s biosphere – by the “humanity”-virus, “the cancer of this planet”, the same virus, after recovering in custody of the machine system called the “Matrix”, attempts to break out of its control and create a new reality in order to continue parasitizing without transforming itself. Precisely parasitizing, since it cannot do and will not be able to learn anything else, until it frees itself from the system of “connections”, shown earlier.

Besides that, all characters in the allegedly free “real world”, receive a new “connection” that is inserted into the back of their heads. Without this “connection” they cannot enter the world of the former “Matrix”-reality. Is the new “connection”, inserted in the back of the head, better than the old set of “connections” to the “Matrix” machine? – the question is up for discussion. In our opinion, both connections are of a similar nature.

Some, after reading the above, may understand it in the sense that we support total emasculation of both genders. Not at all: it should be understood that with the humane psychetype, an emotional self-sufficiency of an individual of any gender or age is achieved, thus removing any oppression of their psyche by instincts; and the individual’s behaviour ceases to be dependant on more and more sophisticated and perverted, by “progress” of culture, ways of satisfaction of lust of both men and women. Originality of both genders, uniqueness of every individual is preserved with the transition to the humane psychetype, but relations between men and women acquire a new quality and become uncomparable with relations between males and females of any animal species in the Earth’s biosphere. Consequently, transition to a domination of the humane psychetype leads to the transformation of the entire culture.

When biofield structures are visualised, the interaction between men and women, with humane psychetype of both and their union, have nothing in common with the the system of “connections”, shown on the cave drawing above. In reality of biofields (matrices-predeterminations), it can be seen how a “luminous shell” of an egg (border of one’s aura) of an individual, overlaps with the “luminous shell” of another individual’s egg. Both of them grow in size and enclose both bodies, if the two match each other. All mismatches are expressed as either inability of the individual fields to create an aura common to both of them, or as its various defects: the common aura is stable, but cannot cover both, leaving different parts of one of them uncovered (for example, two heads, connected to various inconsistent egregores, stick out from the common aura); an aura that is unable to cover both, constantly trembles, exposing various parts of the two bodies; holes in the common aura that lead to conflicting chakras of either individual, or protrusions that extend from conflicting chakras towards auras of other people or egregores, and so on. Defects either vanish after a certain amount of time, or the common aura, under pressure from the defects, loses stability and individuals’ auras separate and stay apart. Creation by a man and a woman of a common mutually covering aura happens in accordance with matrices of predetermination, that define life, in which generation of a fully-enclosing aura is depicted by an image, widely known as the symbol “Yin-Yang”.

Nothing similar to the cave drawing shown above exists in the reality of biofields of matrices-predeterminations when spouses are both carriers of the humane psychetype.

A Lithuanian painter M.K. Ciurlionis on his work “Fairytale Kings” in images of the material world shows one of the versions of relations between a man and a woman in the reality of matrices – relations impossible with animal psychetype. The opportunity, shown by Ciurlionis, however, is not realized in relations of the majority of people, who prefer to stay in the “stone age”, like it shown in the cave drawing above.

It should also be noted that majority of characters’ names are associated with the biblical project: “Trinity”; Neo – New (who, Christ?); Morpheus – Sleepy, although he lives in the reality allegedly free from dreams fabricated by the machine-“Matrix”; Dozer – Dormant; “Judas”-Cypher – Cipher, protection. As it can be understood from the plot, the matrix-predetermination, alternative to the machine one, is held by the modest, inconspicuous “Oracle”, who controls the world by accessible to her means of forming matrices of transitions from one state to others, within limits imposed by higher order matrices-predeterminations in the order of their mutual nesting, bypassing all democratic procedures, directly from her kitchen.

The Earth has many kitchens... And there is not one such “Oracle” in the real world, and each one of them wants to control the world and fates of other people from their kitchens in their own way, and most of the time, without agreeing with other “Oracles” or common people... It is appropriate to remember Lenin’s notorious phrase about the housewife who SHOULD LEARN how to control a state. Is not the essence of true democracy (people’s power) in the autocracy of conceptual power, accessible to everyone?

The peculiarity of the film is that the clairvoyant Oracle, who “knows it all”, by consulting the crew of the “Nebuchadnezzar” (Morpheus, Trinity and Neo) in questions of their probable future, carries out matrix control in relation to them, while being a part of the neuro-interactive model of the world fabricated by the “Matrix”, against the oppression of which heroes of the film fight. But the question about what is coming from the Oracle herself, and what is being translated through the Oracle by the “Matrix”, is not asked by the heroes. This peculiarity of the plot introduces a possibility that the “Matrix”, with which Morpheus and the “Nebuchadnezzar’s” crew fight, in relation to supporters of “Zion” is an enclosing matrix of higher order, which means that:

The film shows not the people’s fight for freedom against the almighty bad “Matrix”, but a transition of the bad “Matrix” into a different state of self-control, where the same old power will be wrapped in new forms. In other words, the film shows mutual overlapping of individual matrices with mutually antagonistic conceptions of control, even though both of these matrices remain within an enclosing matrix of higher order.

At the end of the film, Trinity says to Anderson-Neo: “the Oracle said, that I will fall in love (from the context: with the chosen one, the Savior), but my chosen one is you. So you can’t be dead”. And he actually did not die, but the question is who did Neo become after he was killed by the “Matrix” “agent” Smith? By jumping into Smith after his “Resurrection” did he not himself become a new “super agent” of the same “Matrix”, which is shifting control into another mode? In this context, Morpheus’ explanation about the purpose of “agents” in “Matrix” should be remembered: “Sentient programs. They can move in and out of any software still hard-wired to their system”. Or are Anderson and the Oracle agents of the enclosing matrix-predetermination, where the bad “Matrix” exists? – this question could not be answered within the film’s plot, since its authors do not distinguish the “Matrix”, created by self-possessiveness of the civilization with dominant inhumane psychetypes, from the all-enclosing matrix – God’s Predetermination.

Apart from meaningful names in the “Matrix” plot, there are other parallels with the Bible: functionally Neo – Thomas Anderson – shows a caricature similarity to Christ; Morpheus does the same as John the Baptist – waits, looks for, and finds the “Savior of the world”, reveals him to people and clears the way for him. A warrant of the eventual rescue of humanity and of its freedom from the oppression of the “Matrix” in the film is the stable and protected existence of the system, although not shown directly, but called “Zion”: “Sion”, “Cion”, “Zion” are different pronunciations in different languages of the same word, related to the well known fact in the real history of the current global civilization.

It should be recalled, that the fighters against the “Matrix” in numerous stress situations curse calling hell and devil, which brings the audience to an idea that they are fighting against God’s Predetermination, disguised as a fight against the “Matrix” machine: “The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us... It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth...Unfortunately, no one can be...told what the Matrix is...” In the perverted by “I-centrism” worldview of an individual, living his life out of tune with God, the same word could be characterised as the all-enclosing matrix of God’s Predetermination of life.

What if the truth is that the matrix, which is so disliked by authors of the film, is nothing but God’s Predetermination of life in its completeness and variety, in relation to which they are attempting to make a forgery, replacing it by their own self-possessiveness, inspired by narcotic delirium, what then?

It is much better to address directly, without any middlemen, Almighty God, who knows for sure what is the “Matrix” of self-possessiveness and what is His Predetermination. God answers to everyone who wills to hear His answer. But not everyone, after hearing the answer given to them from Above in the “Language” of significant life circumstances, or directly in his innermost world through conscience, agrees to put his will into his own transformation and follow the lead of God... When living in humanity, from all possible and actually working matrices, the human closes his psyche directly onto the All-Enclosing Matrix – God’s Predetermination – avoiding all matrices-intermediates created by other subjects within the Predetermination by the direct kindness of God or His degree of allowance.

All this says that neither the creators of the film “Matrix”, nor its heroes, have managed to break free from the oppression of the biblical project’s matrix, although an attentive thinking spectator watching the film can be brought closer to discovering the meaning of the allegorical narrative. After that, his own life will cease being a thriller, where he is the slave and victim of a matrix. Then he will attain harmony with God and will live in His Providence.

1st July – 18th August 2000

Clarifications: 7 – 8th October 2001