Saktam Apologia

Some musing on Saktam from the Lord Iqwiloespa.

The truth of Umafe is elusive. Like a distant island across a vast ocean, it stands firm amidst weltering waves of tumultuous teachings. Always in flux are the thoughts of men today. We glide along a sea of stars and lose ourselves in the trance of travel.

However, were it not for the fixed island, we would have no point of reference in our journey. We may think ourselves clever in this age, hopping from star to star and planet to planet like children playing games in the street. But lest we forget the great need for navigation, remember that no system gate may reach a folding point without a fixed set of reference coordinates within the galactic plane.

Whether it is sea foam or quantum foam, many possibilities are churned up in the minds of men, and while sometimes it may reveal a god, more often than not it is little more than a foul odor or a bothersome flotsum of energy. And even if it be a god, the gods of the sea in the tales of Laqwat were just as likely to drag one to the depths of a watery death than lead anyone anywhere. Peril awaits all who place their faith in gods.

In truth, we know there are no gods. For to us there is only the One. The Reason of Umafe is revealed unto all men who seek after the Breath. And like the north wind, that Breath blows us along our course. In the quiet recesses of our mind we look within so as to see without and our divided eye awakens us to a vision of truth.

Some in our age would tell us that we and the waters are the same. These would say that it is not right for us to divide the truth. They would have our eye not look within and without, but half-lidded they bid us to see all at once--as though such a feat could be achieved. Whether they think so or not, they would have us divide ourselves before we divide our eye, and in so doing find only destruction.

Whither do we go now? What shape does the truth take? How must one distinguish the shore from the sea? Has the fractal any end? Are they one and the same? Or does the shore and sea never meet, like the man and the suromo in the paradox of Onez?

Of course in the end there is synthesis. At some point the potential and actual part ways, and reality is revealed in the division. Thus through analysis we see synthesis, and through diversity we more clearly see unity.

Does this mean then that we are left only with the whole? That our thoughts have run in circles and we are no closer to the isle than when we began our journey? Would we have fared better to tarry by the shore, quit our longings, and if we drift out to sea so be it?

Even if we must struggle against the current, we fare better to move around than move away. Circumnavigation is the path of greatest circumspection. In circling the perimeter of truth, we gain a greater understanding of its shape and contours. If we cannot tell where the truth lies, at least we can tell where it does not.

Out of many, one. This should be the foundation of our new Galactic Order. May we never forget the importance of that diversity. For by this division, light colors and shapes the cosmos. As the wise Lasanam once said: “Birth divides child from mother; death unites flesh with soil. Life gives branches to the tree; the fire unites it in ash. Unity without division is the essence of darkness.”

So, yes, the truth of Umafe may elude us in its totality. However, it is not for us to drift in despair and embrace the void. Rather, we must journey outward and inward, comparing and contrasting with our divided eye so that we may see the light of Reason. May that light ever guide us through these dark times.

Author's Note

(This is essentially a fictional essay that ties in with Ages & Archons.)

Reviews

[Stefano Segnan]

Well, I have not much to tell, except that it is quite elusive as stated in the last paragraph. It is an interesting "expansion" from Ages & Archons, will it be inserted into a more concrete context?

[Jonathan Lee]

It's pretty high context (somewhat intentionally) and mostly pertains to Saktam's eschewing of Hegelian synthesis and the post-modern paradigm (which while unmentioned explicitly is effectively represented in Oomtam). I've thought about adding it as an another appendix, but it's probably too obscure.