Manes was a Babylonian theologian, a Persian sage. He founded a sect called "Manichaeism". Today, apparently, the doctrine of Manes is not a historical and doctrinal vestige but a unconsciousness enameled in the reason of men; Homeric fatalism that degrades us to the rank of moral interpreters, namely, performers incarnating, allegorically, in a cystic figure, almost as a figure of regulatory and normative blindness, almost like a paradigmatic reform of itself that becomes moral tradition , in itself a cyst that, as the word suggests, envelops to "isolate" and as such, then it is objectively rational the suffocation and panting that are suspected in we, the interpreters. This cystic system for reason, this excrescence that seems to be marrow and moral quixote, is a dualism, that is, doctrine based on the affirmation of the existence of two irreducible principles, independent, not received, not delivered —uncreated—, coeternal and supremes; namely, these two principles are about "Good" and "Evil," light and darkness. The vision of man is entrenched right there; in that clash where there is not an opposition but a cohabitation of simultaneous forces, where man, that simple annelid, can only be a moral spectator and interpreter.
The basis of Manichaeism is, in addition to theory and doctrinal seed, a tare. Thus they described the religion of Manichaeism:
"They believed that there was an eternal struggle between two opposing and irreducible principles, Good and Evil, which were associated with the Light (Zurván) and the Darkness (Ahriman) and, therefore, considered that the spirit of man is of God but the The body of man is of the devil. This was explained through a set of anthropogenic myths, of Gnostic and Zoroastrian influence. In man, the spirit or light is captive because of corporal matter; therefore, they believe that it is necessary to practice strict asceticism to initiate the process of liberation of the trapped Light. So they despise matter, even the body. The "listeners" aspired to reincarnate as "chosen", which would no longer need to reincarnate more".
The flesh and spirit, faced in man. One is the meaning of light and the other, of darkness. The spirit is possible because the will affirms with the flesh its certainty. But, that does not matter. It is important to highlight the object of Manichaean contempt: the flesh. Everything related to the flesh represents, within the Manichaeism, a brusqueness that enhances the impudity of the brute nature, naturally coveted of itself. Matter and ridicule. In itself, an individuated nuance of the supreme existence of Evil. In itself, every sound of the heart is a whisper of Evil, hatching brought to the rank of representativeness. But the flesh is the only truly sensory, animal, in man. The only thing that gives us a grip on the world of things, despite the fact that such a world has the weight of the lightness of the flesh.
This is the consona: if the flesh is the only somatic configuration that allows us to feel what surrounds us, why despise it? Why abstract it in a dualism? Is it perhaps the sensory ramification that places flesh and spirit in a disagreement? Does feel suppose a schism between matter and spirit? If the sensory capacity is immanent to the flesh, why does the awareness that we have of it make it impossible to feel without further foundation what the only feeling? Bastard fragility that is only intelligible in the weakness of thought. And besides, since the flesh is an extension, so to speak, of weakness and darkness, everything that emanates from it will be seen, correlatively, to those two foundations. This is the sensory capacity of the flesh: pleasure and pain. Each one is a dimension; the first, weakness; the second, the fragility. What is the phonetic expression of each one? pleasure is heard with moans. The pain is heard with complaints. The latter is the object of these lines.
What is the complaint? Strike violently and shake a grief, a pain, an anguish; literally. We do not hit it with any muscle; one unthinkable: the diaphragmatic muscle, muscle of air, favorite muscle that gives echo and resonance to the voice.
A fragment about the semantics of ressonare:
"In the theater in Greece there was, of course, no microphones and the voice was not powerful enough to reach all the spectators. Then masks were used, each of them expressed a feeling through a grimace, sadness, joy... These masks were called "per sona", to sound. We can continue pulling the thread and analyze «personality», a word, often misunderstood. Personality could be our mask, something we use to make ourselves heard. Surely those Greek masks did not reflect in their entirety the essence of the work. Why, instead of polishing our masks, do we get closer to the stage?"
The flesh is weak because it is a individuality «per sona», besides that it is not a robliza thing like the solid bark of an oak, but it is an echo, it has the phonetic capacity to resonate with voice and, in turn, with body language. A projection instrument. Only through the flesh do we know that there is an anguish that demands to be shaken from the belly. A complainer is not a cryer, quite the contrary. It is a painexpressor. The querulous is a certainty of how deeply painful it is for his flesh the becoming that stings him. However, this is not the signal you receive. He is marked as a pessimist, but is this bad, really penumbrous? But it is the plaintive one who identifies the chimeras of light living under the gigantic darkness! What do not all and every one of the pessimists of the world do? Express the odious passivity of the impassive.
However, we must liberate the light of the flesh. The pessimism that is intelligible matter, since it is possible only through the sensory arrangement configured peripherally, is antagonized as a shadow faced with light. False from all falsehood. The light is projected, liberated, resonated, thanks to the complaint of the pessimist who dissected the chaotic and painful becoming of a certain state of affairs, to prevent the continuity of that vitriol for the entrails. Pessimism is the sudden obscurity that makes every object overshadowed, transparent and transparent. With which, pessimism remains nothing to prevent such continuity. However, this "nothingness" of pessimism is not nihilistic but clinical; that sudden complaint that clarifies, is the starting point of other things.