Sat–Cit–Ānanda as priestly tokenisation

How a monist insight was distorted into a dualist theology

By Victor Langheld

1. The Original Monist Insight (Stripped of Priestcraft)

At its cleanest, the (druid) monist insight is:

There is one generative field/process; every emergent that exists is a full instance of it.
Therefore:
Every identifiable reality qualifies equally as “God-experience.”

Finn’s formulation:

“I am the God experience.”

is not narcissistic theology. It is a procedural claim:

· “God” is not an entity.

· “God” is the experience of being an identifiable reality at all.

· Every emergent that exists is, by definition, a full instantiation of the generative constraints that produced it.

· Therefore, no emergent is metaphysically privileged.

This is strict monism:

· no remainder,

· no transcendence,

· no hierarchy of being,

· no priestly access rights.

2. Sat (Being): The First Selection Error

Vedānta begins with:

sat = being / existence

This is unobjectionable in isolation.
Every emergent that exists qualifies as sat.
A stone is sat.
A virus is sat.
A human is sat.
A thought is sat.

So far, the monist insight is intact.

But the moment sat is elevated into a defining property of Brahman, an error is already forming:

· Sat is no longer a trivial fact of existence.

· It is being tokenised as a sacred attribute.

This is the first instance of placeholder selection:

Being is selected out of the total field of emergents and mythologised as “divine being.”

Yet nothing has changed in reality.
Only the narrative packaging has changed.

3. Cit (Consciousness): The Dualist (Dvaita)Break

The decisive distortion occurs with:

cit = consciousness

Now selection becomes exclusion.

From a monist (Ekatva) standpoint:

· consciousness is just one class of emergent behaviour among many,

· no more metaphysically privileged than magnetism, digestion, erosion, or radiation.

By selecting cit as a defining attribute of Brahman, Vedānta introduces:

a hierarchy of emergents.

Now:

· stones exist but are “less divine,”

· animals may or may not qualify,

· humans become privileged exemplars of Brahman.

This is not monism.
This is dualistic stratification of reality by trait-selection.

Formally:

· Monism:

All emergents are equal instantiations of the generative field.

· Vedānta:

Only conscious emergents instantiate the generative field “properly.”

This is a category error:

· confusing a local property of some emergents with a defining property of the whole generative field.

It is identical in structure to:

· “God must be personal,”

· “Substance must be thinking,”

· “Nature must be rational.”

In all cases, a local phenotype is mistaken for a universal ground.

4. Ānanda (Bliss): The Moral–Affective Corruption

The final distortion is:

ānanda = bliss

This is not merely metaphysical; it is normative manipulation.

Now the selection becomes:

· not just which beings qualify,

· but which states qualify.

Under sat–cit–ānanda, Brahman/God is no longer:

· the generative field as such,
but:

· being + consciousness + a preferred affective tone.

This implies:

· pain, terror, hunger, decay, predation, disease
are less divine,

· suffering is metaphysically downgraded,

· bliss is smuggled in as the “true” signature of reality.

This is a theodicy hack:

· it cosmetically cleans reality by selecting a pleasant affect as “ultimate.”

Structurally, this is priestly (later everyday) optimisation of doctrine:

If God is bliss, then suffering becomes a mistake, illusion, or moral failure of the experiencer.

Reality is rewritten to protect theology.

5. The Full Distortion Pattern (Formally)

The original monist (ekatva) insight:

Every emergent that exists is equally a full instance of the generative field.

Vedāntic (dvaita and advaita) distortion:

1. Select sat → being is sacralised

2. Further select cit → only conscious beings count

3. Further select ānanda → only blissful consciousness counts

4. Forget that these were human selections

5. Reify the resulting triple as Brahman’s “true nature”

Formally:

Brahman = Placeholder + Selection (being) + Selection (consciousness) + Selection (preferred affect) + Amnesia of selection

This is a textbook instance of the Law of Forgotten Selection.

6. Why This Is Priestly (G&C) Deception (Not Mere Error)

This is not an innocent mistake.
It has structural social consequences:

· It creates spiritual hierarchy

· It privileges contemplatives over labourers

· It turns affect regulation into metaphysics

· It sells inner mood control as cosmic truth

· It authorises a class of “experts in bliss”

The doctrine:

Only sat–cit–ānanda is Brahman

functions as:

· a filter on who counts as spiritually real,

· a normative weapon against pain, anger, dissent, and resistance,

· a theological deodorant sprayed over a violent universe.

This is not monism.
It is dualism plus moral cosmetics.

7. Monist Correction (the druid’s version)

Finn’s monist axiom:

“I am the God experience.”

means:

· God is not blissful consciousness.

· God is not conscious at all.

· God is not good.

· God is not a subject.

· God is the fact of any emergent being an identifiable reality at all.

Therefore:

· the stone is a God-experience,

· the starving child is a God-experience,

· the parasite is a God-experience,

· the predator is a God-experience,

· the murderer is a God-experience,

· the saint is a God-experience.

Not morally equal.
Not ethically endorsed.
But ontologically equal.

This is the cost of honesty.

8. Final Compressions

Sat–cit–ānanda is not a description of reality.
It is a priestly mood-filter imposed on reality.

Harder:

Vedānta took a monist insight and turned it into a three-condition membership card for God.

Hardest:

If God requires bliss, then reality has already been lied about.

Home