Collective Fields of Consciousness in the Golden Age

Collective Fields of Consciousness in the Golden Age

World Futures, The Journal of General Evolution, 2000, Vol. 55, pp. 357-379




Collective Fields of Consciousness in the Golden Age


by Endre K. Grandpierre
























Endre K. Grandpierre


The present essay is a concise form of results obtained during many decades of research in the primeval foundations of collective, both social and consciousness fields. We point out that a yet unknown type of forces existed in the Golden Age, which we termed collective force. In the Golden Age mankind lived in communities which had a full unity. The communal life developed its collective forms, of which the most significant are the development of human speech, of language, share of work and the development of the communal fests. The law determining the primeval origins of mind is the cosmic law of interactions. It defines the substance of the Universe and the ways of its existence and activity. A detailed analysis is presented on the nature of the interaction there. One consequence of this fundamental principle is the general prevalence of the principle of mutuality, which plays a basic role in the understanding of the unfolding and degeneration of consciousness. The principle of mutuality determines the changes of every level of life. The laws of the generation of consciousness in the ages of evolution toward Homo and the Golden Age are analysed. Evidences were found proving the historical reality of the Golden Age, surviving in the traditions of mankind in every part of the world, and its overthrow before the Flood, which resulted in the dethronement of the primeval mind, the human consciousness of the Golden Age and the subsequent – and necessary – emergence of the superficial, rational mind.

Starting from the consideration that our mind is the imprint of history, we have recognised the phenomenon of the dual mind, the somewhat antagonistic duality of human consciousness. We think we have succeeded in solving the riddle of the dual mind and determining its substance. Our dual mind, consisting of the ‘upper’ or rational mind and the ‘underlying mind’, is the product of the two fundamental ages of mankind, that of the Golden Age and that of power domination. Therefore it reflects the duality of our history.

We attempted to explore the heritage of the Golden Age embedded into our world of instincts, sexuality, emotional and sensual world, and the expressions of this heritage according to the different periods of our lives. If we will succeed in enlightening the deep-mind it may make it possible to give back the long-forgotten collective fields of forces to mankind, unavailable to the surface mind at present, and would expand the all-pervasive power of the conscious mind significantly. Hopefully, our results open up new vistas for the research of the collective fields and the double nature of the human mind, and may enable us to know and complete ourselves more deeply and thoroughly.

KEYWORDS: collective fields of force, Golden Age, consciousness, dual mind

„In the human world there are plenty of miserable things which deaden thinking (…) since you should know that everything has the ability of insight

and participates in the process of thinking.”



The aim of this paper is to survey the community factors acting in the deep ranges of the human mind and in our world of instincts, to explore the origin of the collective forces and the way they are connected to our physical and biological existence. Our topic has a historical character, and therefore a systematic well-founded exploration is necessary to go back to the historical origins, to the ancient times of mankind, to the Golden Age, the development and building-up of the collective human fields of force in the Golden Age. We should go even further, reaching down to the onset of biological and physical existence, in order to demonstrate, in their ultimate roots, the existence and functioning of any possible collective factors in the ancient era of mankind and their possible presence in today’s societies.

The research, carried on for many decades, has led to surprising results. One of them is the discovery that the elementary mind, which we consider a form of perception, extends over the whole Universe. We present arguments defining the elementary mind and give the evidence proving this fundamental thesis. One of the most fundamental theses is the one stating that consciousness is on the same scale as perception and extends over the whole Universe. Another is that through the analysis of the conditions of the creation of micro‑particles, we have been able to uncover a new world-principle, a cosmic law of general validity, namely the principle of interactions, the fundamental law of the creation and maintenance of cosmic, physical and biological existence.

The drama of the ancient world and the evolution to Homo cannot be understood without an authentic mapping of the elementary mental states. The essential contents of our basic nature are given by the elementary mental states. We identify these mental states at the most elementary level with perception, since it is not possible to deny the presence of an elementary form of consciousness in any kind of perception. We point out that everything that exists is necessarily endowed with a specific form of perception, because even the most elementary things that exist perceive their environment in a certain way, perceive the environmental stimuli and also respond to them, which is a phenomenon without which the whole world would disintegrate and be annihilated. But this elementary fact necessarily implies that in this sense even the most elementary particles possess a perceptive ability, therefore they have an elementary form of consciousness. Thus the elementary particles are the end points of the cosmic systems of consciousness, in other words, they are the end points of spirit. Spirit and mind are inseparable entities and they cannot do without each other. Everything possesses consciousness.

This thesis was approximated in the presentiment of Empedocles two and a half thousand years ago, when he stated that everything that exists possesses the abilities of ‘sensation’ (perception) and ‘thinking’ (consciousness manifested in self-perception). We do not think we are far from the truth in assuming that in this insight the traditions preserved from the Golden Age, which were much more alive in her/his time than today, must have played a role. The magic world-view saw the elements of nature and objects as being able to perceive, having a kind of consciousness, an ability to act by themselves and have their own will. For example, in the Hungarian folk ballad JÚLIA SZÉP LEÁNY (Fair Maiden Julia), which has preserved many remnants of the ancient world-view, the hillock becomes round by itself, the footpath descends at an easy pace from the sky, the heavenly door opens without anybody opening it, the bells sound without anybody ringing them. In our ‘regős songs’ (a special kind of winter-solstice wassailing) the lights at the tips of the deer’s antlers go on without being lighted, and go out without being extinguished. Strange but true, that this ancient conception still survives within us: we quarrel with the objects which disobey our will, and we occasionally even punish them. „We wonder if the real task of metaphysics is not to go up the hill which physics runs down, to take back matter to its origin and gradually construct a cosmology which could be termed, as it were, a kind of psychology inverted?” (Bergson, 1907/1981).


We consider the existence or non-existence of collective fields of force from the very beginning. While Empedocles (444 BC, see Wright, 1981) speaks about the “feelings” of the atoms, a different notion of the interactions is worked out here. It is based on the observation that energy cannot exist separately, as independent from all the existents. The fundamental nature of energy is that it is counteracting with something. Although the content of the notions “something” and “nothing” and “nothingness” is not well clarified, for the present purpose they serve well to shed some light of the energy itself. Any something cannot exist withoutnothingness. They are defining each other, being a mutual pair-relation mutually creating each other. In my conception energy is a kind of perception. Perception cannot exist without an observer and the observed existent. Even in its most elementary form the absence of interactions is impossible. But how can we introduce an apparently psychological concept into a cosmological, therefore apparently physical context? The clarification of this question leads to a consideration of the relation of matter and energy. Although these two forms are related to each other, they represent basically different existents. Matter is a concept of a rigid, inert, passive, inanimate form of existence. In contrast, energy is a dynamical activity, of oscillation. But how is this oscillation generated? It is generated as a re-action to something. The most elementary degree of perception: an effect, to which a counter-effect is elicited. This activity is energy itself. Energy is, therefore perception of some counter-acting existent. Energy is created on this fundament. Perception is also a re-action to an action, a counter-effect to an effect.

The question of the primacy of matter or energy leads to the following consideration. If I regard energy, and interaction, as primal, I have to clarify, if this interaction assumes already material existents as preceding the interaction or not. In this point I do not want to enter into the analysis of  “something” and “nothingness”. So in this point it is enough to assume that we start from a state in which there is no existent at all. In the very first moment in this nothingness when any change occurs, any kind of oscillation, or effect, in the same instant the whole world unfolds explosively. Therefore, it is the effect, which has to be regarded in this manner as primary. Of course, the effect cannot exist without countereffect. In this context the notions of effect and countereffect becomes circularly involved in each other. So the very fist sign of existence already involves a counter-effect as well as an effect, in which the effect is the counter-effect to the counter-effect. In this way the most elementary and primal energy, the most elementary oscillation of reality is a counter-effect to the preceding state that is nothingness. Energy appears when it counter-acted to its counter-factor that is nothingness. In this process the interactions will grow and spread as the gigantic thread of the world of existents, in which process energy generates its own counter-factor which will be determined as matter. The character of matter will be determined and postulated by the nature of energy as the counter-factor of the dynamic and active energy itself. Between energy and matter a complete opposition stretches. Energy is immaterial, it does not have any solid counterpart, and, in contrary, matter is a passive, non-dynamic existent. Matter is a side-effect, a by-product of the main activity of energy, a certain conserved and hidden form of energy. Matter in itself is not an ultimate substance, only in a certain sense in the case when regarded in the context of its dynamism and all-pervading interaction fields, which is its energetic aspect. The real ultimate ‘substance’ is energy, or, more properly, interactions.

We have to recognise that the law of interactions is the real fundamental law of material existence in the universe. The whole cosmic existence is the gigantic thread of interactions pervading and sustaining all kinds of existents. The material of the universe – from the microparticles to the celestial bodies, metagalaxies as well as the biosphere – was born of interactions and is a gigantic network of interactions. The real nature of matter consists of transient units of dynamic interactions. The Cosmos is a field of not only known interactions, but also of yet unknown forms of interactions. These interactions are the ones elevating the Universe to higher and higher organisational levels. Any action is already an action to another action, therefore any action is a reaction to its precedent actions. Effect cannot be elicited without a countereffect. All kinds of influences elicit counter-influences. We could formulate the law of interactions in another way: nothing can exist without interactions. Interaction belongs to the very ultimate nature of energy. Matter can not exist without interactions, so it is a secondary existent. Since interactions expresses a reaction to something, therefore it is an idea referring to a collectivity. Interaction expresses a relation between a manifold of existents. Therefore interaction has a fundamental collective character. Since the manifesting effect and countereffect do not isolate themselves from their environment, they generate newer and newer actions and counter-actions in an expanding chain of events. Therefore, interactions have a creative collective character. As it is revealed here, this fundamental law of the universe is the strongest proof of the existence of collective fields. These arguments refer to the field of physics. If we now enter in the field of biological organisation, and if we consider the more complex interconnectedness of the human sphere of life, comparing it to the sphere of the inorganic matter, we can recognise that in the organisation of energy into higher forms of organisation, such as biological existence and human society, the law of interactions has to be manifested at a much higher rate.

          One has to conclude from the above arguments that the Cosmos is not a mere aggregate of particles. But the question arises: why the Universe had to evolve in a way that atoms grouped to form stars and systems of celestial bodies showing high forms of organisation, to form galaxies and metagalaxies, in a hierarchical articulation? What was that force that organised organic molecules from the atoms, and later on, consistently, cells from the molecules? This force creates systems spontaneously self-active, alive organisms, and, later on, the brains’ network of neuron0s. What is the relation or principle that connects all of these phenomena from the smallest to the highest scales? How can we shed light on any question regarding the details if we do not know this fundamental principle?

          I found this still hidden fundamental principle of interactions, which uncovers the elementary law present in the generation of reality, maintaining and developing the cosmic energy, in the ‘principle of elementary interactive perception’, or ‘principle of elementary interactive consciousness’. We have to recognise that nothing can exist without a form of perception. In this respect we do not necessarily relate the notion of perception to the presence of a nervous system. On the contrary, we state that interactive perception, as a more general conception, is present already in the most initial forms of material interactions and forces, in the interaction of microparticles. The concept of perception is extended in a way that includes the wide range of phenomena from perception in the interactions of microparticles to the interactions present in the highest organisational levels of existence. Energy is a countereffect to an outer effect, as expressed in interactions, the expression and function of interactions which generates additional interactive fields around itself. Therefore this concept of interactions, which is necessary to enlighten the real role of perception present in the cosmic organisation, giving preference to interactions over matter, opens the way to the vast range of phenomena of the universe, the continuous ‘upward organisation’.

          In consequence, if energy, as well as the universe and biological existence, humans and human organisations were created by interactions, then our principle sheds a new light on the fundamental nature of the human societies, especially on the significance of the roles of collective fields in the character and basic working mechanisms of societies. The cosmic law of interactions expresses a co-operation, an elementary and natural mutuality. Mutuality is a pronounced balanced bilaterality, with a relative equality and fairness of the related factors. Therefore, we do not have to imagine the Universe as a kind of gigantic pyramid, whose upper layers deform and torture the layers below by their immense weights, – despite of the well observed fact that the present state of our societies apparently sharply contradicts this universal principle. We have to recognise the Universe as a self-active organisation, which was founded on the basis of free grouping, none of the members of this cosmic organisation suffer disadvantages, but, on the contrary, complete their own nature and individual characteristics, prevailing their own substance. Expanding the range of consciousness, we identify consciousness with a generalised perception and realise that perception, and with it the frontiers of elementary consciousness, go far beyond the boundaries of the biological existence, far beyond so-called ‘organic matter’.

One can not deny consciousness from all kinds of existents that react to environmental influences with activity, whatever is their actual material state and organic structure. Consciousness is present not only in humans but – in other forms – in every living being, and generally in every material existent. Energy is born in interactions, and it is the expression of these interactions and their further vibration. Therefore in the great act of creation the main role belongs to consciousness and perception realised in interactions. Universe is based on interactions. The energy of the Universe explodes to existence – from nothingness – through interactions. The substantial nature of energy, its form of existence as perception, is expressed in interactions. Energy is an interaction that creates the primeval energy known as the microworld (and its apparent ‘particles’), and the whole building up of the world. Interaction is perception, perception is an interactive, therefore collective consciousness. Collective consciousness generated the world, the principle of perception that is born in interaction.

Interactions are the basis of cosmic, physical, historic and social life. This fact is the primeval physical and social cause of the collective fields of forces acting in human life. During the evolution to Homo, and the development of human nature in the Golden Age, the most powerful driving factors of human society, the inevitable cohesive force of the social evolution, were the mutuality, the dynamism of interactions rooted in the cosmic existence. The violation of this primeval principle – or even its transient weakening or deformation – is a sign of the decay and atrophy of society. On the other hand, when this principle unfolds to its full scale it leads to social elevation, an enhancement of social harmony, to the unfolding of collective fields of force.

It is easy to see that the principles of interactions and mutuality are of enormous importance, they pervade the whole Universe and with their crystal-clear elementary primeval foundations they show the way out of the present chaos of the world. It was this law of existence that generated biological existence after the physical one had been formed. This law gave the rules for the formation of the first germs of life, for their organisation, the grouping of the first cells as well as the establishment of giant, widespread biological systems on Earth. The primeval era of mankind, the Golden Age is also based on the same principles, on the prevalence of collective fields of force. On the other hand, in the societies of today huge masses of people are losers due to the violation of the principle of mutuality.

Our arguments are based on the law of interactions, as this law determines the functioning of not only biological but also social existence. This law became prevalent in the Golden Age. Unfortunately, the Golden Age suffered a decline, and the Great Break soon took its place. From that time on the working of the basic law of interactions has suffered from disturbances, and this fact is the ultimate cause, the actual background for the continuing aggravation of society’s problems. We must face this fact. If this lies at the background of our problems, then having recognised the real cause of our illness we may have the possibility to fend off the threatening consequences or at least to improve the situation to a certain degree.

We must realise that in the world of the Golden Age, in the magic world-view a far-reaching mutuality prevails all. (since mutuality is the basic principle of existence. Mutuality is an expression of the partnership between physical world and human existence, in the whole biosphere, in the flora and in the fauna. Mutuality prevails in all forms of natural existence. In societies which deviate from natural existence the principle of mutuality is violated on the surface.)

The Golden Age perceived mutuality as involving, besides the living world, the cosmic world. It is difficult to understand this world-view from the position of a presumed ‘modern’ dominance over the whole nature, from which even partnership seems to be an instance of subordination. The Homo of the magic era did not believe that she/he was the centre of the Universe, neither did she/he imagine that she/he had unlimited, ruling power over nature and that she/he had the right to regard all other forms of life without any respect. On the contrary, in the Golden Age Homo was an organic part of nature in a brotherly equality, she/he was a co-operating agent respecting all other forms of life.


Taking into account the circumstance, that in this work we had to touch yet unexplored territories, we had to be careful and try to explore to most complete possible ranges of evidence available for us.

It is true that all the statements had to be proven, even in the case when the available factual materials are scarce and seems to be incomplete. Therefore, in such cases we have to make use the classical evidentiary theories (modus probandi), the all-embracing, i.e. the possibly full-ranged proof, although we have to see that sometimes it will be inevitable to bridge the gaps in the knowledge since we have to deal with vast ranges of time and many important data seems to be unavailable (saltus in probando). In these cases it is even more important to give a proper role to the reveal the facts important for the proofs and to present well-based foundation for the proof (vis probandi), completing with the historical facts, with the classical and ancient sources, as well as with the biological-genetical facts, and, last but not least, with the logical proof carried out in a consistent way.

In order to make an attempt to develop such a logical argument, at first we will need to clarify the cohesion forces between the peoples.


The problem of the origin of the cohesive forces of communities is reminiscent of the problem of the ‘part’ and the ‘whole’. Can any part exist without the whole? It should be evident that the more highly developed and the more complex an organism is, the more it is sensitive to its external relations. In the case of humans, apart from transient periods of tyranny and violence, neither the individual nor the society can exist without collective cohesive forces. Collective cohesive forces are the most human parts in our integral sphere of actions, this is the framework in which our whole life takes place. Therefore a comprehensive, all-embracing force must exist and give a character to peoples, to millions and millions of individuals, in order that society could exercise its proper functions. This cohesive force must evidently exist in the minds of people. We have to take these active forces of community into account when considering human consciousness. This force is in a permanent dynamic equilibrium with individual interests and can be viewed as a subtractive polarity. In the process of personal alienation, collective forces are pushed into the background, become dimmed and obscured both at the level of individuals and of society. Because this progression of decay is a major characteristic of our age, it is an urgent necessity to thoroughly explore the basis of this problem.

  It is a rather established view that, as compared to biological evolution, human society is a relatively late development. It is a widespread opinion that Homo like other animals had to fight alone against a hostile Nature, with the predators threatening her/him. Brutal necessities forced humans to form hordes, smaller and larger groups. Again the problem of part versus whole arises. Science regards human communities as products of a lengthy evolution, and the community is constituted from the elements of the communal life. „As if the cells of the human organism had developed separately, later compound groups formed, and then, by finding out the proper order, they had combined themselves into the living being” (Hamvas, 1943).

The views about primitive Homo, about its wild nature, sinful, superstitious views are frequently repeated in an era in which violence has lost its chains and has become more widespread than ever, in which lies and mind-bending mysticism are rapidly growing as an epidemic of plague.

  It is a commonly held view that prehistoric Homo was superstitious, while we are free from any deformed views. Therefore the ancient concept that animals, plants, all members of the family of living beings, and what is more, inorganic objects are the embodiments of supernatural, cosmic forces is dismissed as superstition. This ‘barbarous, primitive’ view endowed objects, celestial bodies, stars and planets with sensations. These views had preceded by thousands of years the ideas of the Greek Empedocles, who was also far ahead of his time with his ideas. His theory concerning sensation in atoms and materials was widely considered nonsense, even though this is a level of knowledge to which modern science has been unable to rise after two and half thousand years of ‘progress’, even after the discovery of the atomic world. Such were the ‘preposterous views’ held by ‘primitive’ people.

  The holders of the ancient natural-magical world-view had an affinity to identify themselves with environment, with the world. Through this identification they attempted to enter internal worlds, the substances of the objects and phenomena. They were led in this way to a high degree of comprehension which was unattainable from an arrogant view coming from above or outside. This was the way our predecessors approached, through identification and in the form of intuitions, the deeper ranges of reality. This alternative form of knowledge was what is now called their ‘superstition’.

The Homo of the Golden Age knew that plants and animals are not inferior to her/him. Everything that exists, alive or not, is the carrier of mysterious, secret cosmic, therefore “supernatural” forces. Every phenomenon of the natural world, the earth, water, fire, sky, air, the natural world as a whole, the Sun, the Moon, the stars are all manifestations of the creative power of Nature, therefore, they are all expressions of the magic cosmic power. Ancient man had the feeling that all these factors exerted a decisive influence on her/his life and the whole terrestrial world. But of all these the primary agent it was the Sun whose omnipotence  and heavenly radiation flooded the terrestrial world and whose supernatural strength sustained life on earth. This primitive man, nicknamed ‘ignorant savage’ was able to grasp with her/his uncorrupted senses and empathic abilities what we, so-called educated and civilized people, hardly know, namely that the whole terrestrial biosphere is pervaded by internal and external ‘supernatural’, i.e. cosmic powers.

Is this all nonsense? Is it superstition or true insight into reality? These images are not constructed by the artificial efforts of a narrow mind but with a knowledge of life much wider and deeper than ours. The most important difference is that ancient Homo looked at the whole world, the plants and animals as brothers, regarded them as companions of life, life-partners with whom she/he lived in brotherly friendship (except for the satiation of her/his hunger and for the predators attacking her/him). It was clear to her/him that without her/his natural environment she/he could not exist either. Therefore she/he did her/his best to protect and take care of her/his friendly life-partners.

The cutting edge of the nickname ‘savage’ is directed at her/his wild nature, her/his alienation from her/his fellow‑people. The Homo of the Golden Age lived in an unbroken unity, freedom and harmony with her/his fellows and with Nature and Cosmos. Its collective community-forming spiritual forces extended over society and to mankind as a whole (on which all traditions agree), and what is more, over the biosphere and the stars as well. Therefore these facts show just the opposite of what is stated by those propagating spiritual disintegration and individual separation. Homo as a newly-born descendant of the fresh organising forces of the Cosmos was pervaded with the collective fields of force of humans, of Nature and Cosmos in a much higher degree than in its later development. The Golden Age was the  culminating point of the society-forming forces, which were in full blossom at the time.

Life itself would not have born through individual separation. Organisms are built of billions and trillions of cells organised by their spontaneous, voluntary grouping and based on mutuality. Collective co-operation of all social members during tens of thousands of years of rhythmical collective activities have created the most amazing intellectual compositions, articulated human speech and language, compared to which the pyramids and the most impressive structures of the megalithic era seem to be unimportant remains left by Lilliputian dwarfs. Modern society itself, even in its present, much debated form,  still capable of providing a scene for community life, is a relic of ancient society. The survival of human society demonstrates pronouncedly the falseness of views regarding individuals and communities as antagonistic factors in opposition. Inordinate individualism and anti-social tendencies are the decomposition products of social life.

What is needed is not the disintegration of society but the correction of its more serious distortions. The possibility to do this is given by the fact that Homo lived for millions of years (the length of this period is beyond the scope of the present essay) in a society in which collective fields of force prevailed without limitations. What is more, ancient society favoured the realization of collective tendencies, which were exactly what were needed for the unfolding of individual abilities, never again attained since that time. Human minds as well as human culture are also products of collective fields of force. Human societies are built on the will to form communities. This is an ancient heritage which we have to preserve by care and attention.

Questions that arise: when did human’s collective fields of force form, and what were the main factors of their formation? What kind of relations exist between collective feelings and the law of interactions? How do these factors relate to the conditions of life during the evolution into Homo, in the Golden Age, and in the following era? In which era of our historical existence, in which direction, and where in our layers of consciousness did the ancient foundations of social cohesion lie? How were these factors modified during the changes of history? What kind of role did collective fields of force play in the process of becoming Homo and in the Golden Age?

  To answer these questions, we have to study the most ancient layers of human history and of human mind.


Looking back to the origins of Homo, we see gigantic ages, the monuments of which have been destroyed, their stone tablets crushed, their written traditions clamped and burnt to ashes. There are few remaining traces and the data are scarce. The Golden Age stands at the dawn of the times of Homo, which may be preceded only by the era of the biological, corporeal development of Homo, the era of becoming Homo, if it proves separable at all from the Golden Age. In regard to the social and spiritual aspects the Golden Age is undoubtedly the beginning of the beginnings. It is clear that the origins, the genetic factors, the onset conditions play a significant role in determining the development of a certain process, although it is also true, that the formative and modifying effect of the events, developments, and previously lateral processes occurring later on also may exert a decisive role on the evolution of the process considered.

All human values germinated in the ancient past, in the very beginnings, in the era which formed Homo by giving her/him a face, first as a biological, then as a communal, social being capable of abstract thinking. Despite its fundamental significance, it is just the ancient era which we know the least of, and it is not because the heritage of our ancestors was not passed on to the following generations, but because all the accessible traces of this era have been artificially and forcefully erased. The picture preserved of the Golden Age fades from centuries to centuries, the obscurity increases, as it can be observed as early as the ancient authors. For example, writing about the people of the Golden Age Hesiod says that their bodies were made of gold, and that is why decay had no power over them. The following two and a half thousand years have led to an almost complete extinguishing of the memory of the Golden Age, so that now even outstanding authors regard it as a belief without validity, created by mere imagination, from the attempt to make our past look nicer than it was in reality.

„We have already noted in general how one should conceive of the beginning of the history of spirit: people simply imagine a natural state, in which freedom and law are said to prevail or have prevailed in a perfect manner. But this is merely an assumption born in the twilight of conditional reflection on a historical existence” – writes Hegel. -„Nature is imagined as a clear reflection of the nature of God, appearing openly and transparently to the uncorrupted eyes of Man, and the divine truth was just as evident for him” (Hegel, 1978).

Conflicting views are not lacking, nor are they without a real basis. It would seem suspicious to the rational mind that once upon a time everything used to be nice and good. And then – the thought may arise –  where is the fruit of all human efforts, of civilisation and human progress? What are we to do with the idea of permanent progress? The doubts apparently seem to be justified. But why could not the beginning have been nicer than the unfolding? Especially if the realisation – as the overwhelming majority of facts seem to support – is very, very far from being perfect? Why cannot the traditions be right, as well as the view that the foundations determine what is to be built on them? Biological evolution provides for our bodily existence to the same degree as the Golden Era provides for the development of consciousness. Interestingly, the traditions preserved from this ancient era are homogeneous to a surprising extent. Almost all the peoples of the world conserve traditions from this ancient era. The Golden Age was Eden itself, from where for some unknown and fearful reason Homo was exiled. The duration of the Golden Age was immeasurably long, and human mind became rooted in it.

After the overthrow of this era, however, only around ten thousand years have passed, a relatively short time, and this period should be set against the millions of years of the Golden Age. Regarding the existence and nature of the Golden Age, there is significant confusion since official history seems to reject the relevant statements in ancient chronicles and traditions. Different facts and opinions collide and thus it seems that we do not know our own origins and history. What happened in the everyday life of ancient times is rather obscure and disputed. The era of the evolution into Homo is also covered by haze. We do not know where we came from, how we lived and what happened to us. Getting rid of the beliefs of legends, we interpret the Golden Age as the ancient era of Homo, to be exact, we regard it as the period of the spiritual and social accomplishment, merging with the era of evolution into Homo. In this sense we divide the history of Homo into two unequal parts, the many million years of the Golden Age and the Iron Age or era of power lasting for a few tens of thousands of years.

We have referred to the fact that the judgement of ancient times is far from being uniform, in fact it is full of the sharpest possible contradictions. By dominant opinions the ancient era was a tough era of painful misery, the era of savagery and dark barbarism, of darkness and ignorance, of psychical inferiority and amorality. According to both the materialistic and the religious views, man spent her/his days in permanent horror and used most of her/his vitality for the mere maintenance of her/his life. On the contrary, written and other sources tell about heavenly conditions, the Eden, the joyful era of people in the ancient Egyptian, Hindu, Mesopotamian, Scythian, Frankish, German and other traditions. In the legend of the Fall in the Old Testament, Man lived in the Garden of Eden and was exiled from there into the cruel and wild world of nature.

There are also some hard facts that contradict these general opinions. The facts of history and anthropology are corroborated consistently by decisive evidence from Nature itself:

1.)                   The part of the living world which is unaffected by modern man and its destructive influence still reflects conditions of Paradise

2.)                   Animals living in nature gather their food and satisfy their needs in an incomparably shorter time and with much less effort than humans do in societies

3.)                   In the secluded regions of the world there are ‘wild races’, ‘primitive tribes’, peoples far behind civilisation still surviving without showing any sign of atrophying physically or degenerating psychically. It suffices here to refer to the Pacific Islands and Hawaii, not too long ago generally referred to as an earthly paradise, or to the pre-Columbian culture and richness of Indians before they were massacred by the conquistadors.

        Our conclusions are supported by ethnographic research. Geertz (1975) remarks that the human brain is not capable of survival in the absence of human community. Melville Herskovits (1952) stated that the Australian aborigines were the classical example of peoples whose economical resources are minimal. Therefore they could only survive with the most intense utilisation of these resources. Marshall Sahlins (1962) says that „it is an almost unequivocally accepted statement that life was tough and difficult in the Palaeolithic era. The books of our experts rival one another in depicting a scene of chilly fate, and the reader is wondering how these hunters succeeded surviving, and whether the term life is proper to theirs at all. Death by starvation haunts on these pages. It is pointed out that because of the lack of technology they had to labour continuously in order to survive. They did not have the chance to take a break, nor to rest or produce surplus which is needed for establishing a culture. In their writings dealing with economic development this era is shown as a bad example, it is referred to as ‘subsistence-level economy’.”

        When however the Canadian anthropologist Richard Lee faced these theories after having done 18-month-long research of the Kung San (Bushman) tribe living in the north-western part of the Kalahari desert, in a semi-desert area which regularly suffers from drought, he obtained some shocking results. The mixed menu of the Kungs contains 10 percent more calories and 50% more proteins than the average daily amount prescribed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the United States. The most shocking was the amount of effort used to obtain the food. On average, the Kungs worked two and half days a week. (A modern working day lasts for six hours, the number of working hours per week is fifteen.) And this amount of work is enough to obtain a kind of diet which is better than the one suggested by western standards. What is more, young people begin to work only in their twenties, and old people retire in their sixties. Ten percent of the tribe consists of retired people over the age of sixty. This existence, which is not unique among the gathering and hunting peoples living world-wide, cannot be described as ‘dirty, cruel and short’” (Lewin, 1980).

  Now it has been proven that the opinions concerning the inferior state of prehistoric peoples are unsound. Nevertheless, the highly respected writer L. H. Morgan in his book on ancient society distinguishes the following periods of savagery and barbarism:

I.        Lower degree of savagery

II.  Intermediate degree of savagery

III.  Upper degree of savagery

IV.        Lower degree of barbarism

V.        Intermediate degree of barbarism

VI.        Upper degree of barbarism

VII.        Stage of civilised people

All these stages seem to build up in a linear sequence towards the highest, from the deepest darkness to the era of glory. However we think that a more adequate division would be the following one:

I.        The beginnings of the magical civilisation of the Golden Age

II.        The blossoming of the magical world-view

III.        The overthrow of the Golden Age, the fall of the magical world-view

IV.        The lower, initial degree of primitive rationalism

V.                             The continuing decline and barbarisation of spiritual culture

VI.                          The spiritual fall of the age of power

In the hope of a better future, we may wish another era to come:

VII  The renewal of collective society

Following ancient sources the Zend-Avesta of Zarathustra describes the periods of history in terms of tree symbols. In these visions four mythical trees (Tree of Life or Tree of the World) appear. The first tree has golden branches, the second silver, the third copper, and the fourth iron branches (Zend-Avesta, 1888).

In the Hindu teachings of Yuga, which considers the lifetime of Homo to be 4,320,000 years, four ages are mentioned again such as the golden, silver, copper and iron ages. This division seems to be general in the traditions of most peoples.

The myths of the Greeks on the Golden Age were preserved e.g. at the time of Hesiod, in his poem Works and Days: „first humans were formed of gold by the Gods,…far away from sufferings and pains…their life was full of joy and well-being”. In the Old-Scandinavian sagas the Golden Age shows up too: „In the North, on the land of the Night, the tribe of the Fire Dwarfs is living in halls made of gold” (Edda, 1602). „By the views of the Tibetan people the state of Paradise was the state of the most perfect completion of the psyche. But the consumption of a certain kind of drug deprived man of this state. In this way the feeling of shame entered their life, and from that time on they covered their bodies with clothes. After that the necessities drove them to cultivate the soil, and their morality changed to killing and cheating.” (Doane, 1882)

„The Egyptians always thought of the Golden Age with longing, remembering the earthly land of the god Ra, where he consecrated earth and human life. They said this era would never come back again.”

„African black tribes also think that the origins of agriculture go back to the fall of mankind to sin. The Malabar legend of creation describes events remarkably similar to those in the Bible. The first couple of mankind was called to the heaven by the sound of a bell, to eat with Abasi. The forbidden tree (tree of Knowledge) was substituted here by economy and proliferation, since this was what Abasi forbid the first human couple to enjoy.”

„Sir Leonard Woolley describes the excavations in the city of Ur where they found 74 human skeletons, and a golden tree, which a ram is shown to mount”.

„The Chinese traditions recall the Age of Virtue, when Nature poured its fruits abundantly and humans lived in peace with animals. The sacred Chinese books write about a mysterious garden in which the Tree of Immortality bears its fruit. This tree is guarded by a snake with wings, called a dragon. The sacred writings describe an era of joy yielding plenty of blessed fruits without any human effort. The seasons did not bring winds and hurricanes. Anxiety, illness and death were unknown at that time.”

„The legend of the peoples of Madagascar says: „The first man was created out of the dust of earth and was placed in a garden, where nothing was found that the mortals of today suffer from. He was free from any bodily needs, was surrounded by fine fruits and crystal-clear springs, but he did not wish to eat of the fruits and drink of the water. The Creator had forbidden him strictly to eat or drink, but somehow the great enemy came and described in colourful words the sweetness of the apple and the taste of date and orange. He first resisted but later on ate of the fruit and this caused his destiny.” (Doane, 1882)


We have to regard as widely accepted view (Received View) that the human organism gained its present constitution and capacities on the process of natural evolution. We would like to call the attention to the circumstance that the central nervous system is not an exception from below this rule. This means that our brain/mind is also a product of the historical evolution, and so it shows a historical character as well as all the organs of our organism. We have to add to this that the evolutionary pathway of our consciousness is largely modified by the social forces, especially by the influences of the social factors of the last ten thousand years.

The most direct and important task of our rational mind is practical control over our organism, its needs and everyday elementary activities, orientation in the real world, the assessment of the circumstances, immediate possibilities and all things related to the needs, requirements, and sustenance of life, including the storing of sensations and experiences in our memory. For all this the rational mind has to judge and make decisions, which also involves practical thinking, and abstract thinking to a certain degree.

All of these activities are none other than a particular kind of mental automatism, the execution of inevitable mechanical activities. This automatism is a far cry from the self-contained, independent thinking and from the creative activity of the deeper mental layers. Therefore the light of the rational mind is not strong enough to shed light on the vast empires of the deeper mental layers.

This is why we know so surprisingly little of our deeper mental layers. The laws of their functioning, their origin, the ways of their development are merely guessed at. The speculations about them are mere subjective opinions. Psychology is still in its infancy. The term ‘deep or underlying mind’ was invented recently by A. Grandpierre (1983, 1991) because previous terms, e.g. the unconscious, are misleading as they suggest a lack of organisational ability. Then we ask the main questions: why do we have a mind with a dual nature? Why is this duality necessary? Why is one mind not enough, as vast and as differentiated as it could be? What causes the development of this duality, what kind of outer or inner forces, what kind of influence, or perhaps tragedy? What kind of world is it that has sunk into and got rooted in our underlying mind? And what are its real contents, what is the source of these contents, and what kind of instincts, urges, impressions, intuitions, ancient memories are stored in it?


The origin of the underlying mind can be explained by the elimination of the single, wide-ranging, magical mind. The duality of mind expresses a schism, therefore its origin is not caused by Nature but by the artificial deformation and degeneration of human society. A fearful turn, a radical change, a drastic shift in the whole attitude to the world and ourselves set in the remote past around ten thousand years ago, which swept away a whole world and created an artificial new one. At this turning point the old mind was pushed aside, it became unnecessary. It also became the inhibitor of the oncoming changes, therefore it had to be eliminated, and its place given to a new type of consciousness. This change of worlds must have been the only reason for the existence of the duality of our mind, the overthrow of the old mind, its suppression into darkness, and the dominance of the new mind replacing the old one.

There is a real spiritual catastrophe lying behind the dual character of our mind. In consequence, the investigation of our ‘deep-mind’ or underlying mind may reveal whole unknown ages of history and human evolution. This may give important information to know ourselves more deeply and thoroughly. On the other hand, we should realise that the elevation of this ‘underlying mind’ to our easy-to-access mind, its amplification or surfacing, the removal of permanent confrontation of the two minds may make it possible the exploration of the vast ages of our past.

The emergence of the underlying mind to the surface, to the light of awareness may make it possible to lead mankind back to the long-forgotten collective fields of force, which are unavailable to the surface mind at present. We have to build bridges between our polarised minds in order that our underlying mind may get closer and more conscious for us. In this way we may reach again the collective fields and stop the process of alienation. The antagonism, the opposition of our dual mind is the reason for burying the underlying mind. If we could find a way to cease the opposition then the empire of the conscious mind, its all-pervasive power would expand more than thousandfold.

Accepting the point of view that our mind is a product of biological development and social history, we should realise that the gradual nature of biological and social evolution makes a layered structure in the mind.


The organisation of cells, groups of cells, organs, systems of hormones, elementary life functions assumes a certain kind of consciousness. Its investigation lies out of the scope of the present essay. We will concentrate on the main problem, the antagonistic duality of our mind. Each of us has a mind with two components, two separate governing centres. One of them is subordinated to the other, is in a suppressed, subordinated state, pushed so far into the background  that most of us do not even know about its existence. Two minds in one brain, they seem to be just too many. Their investigation shows that their characteristics are sharply different and definitely confront each other. The stronger of the two is naturally the one above.

One up, one down. The question may arise which is the richer spiritually, which possesses mental stores of greater value, the upper or the lower? Who has the courage to decide, seeing that both of them perform vital tasks? Nevertheless the upper one seems to have all the dominance in most of our moments – and strangely enough, the lower mind seems to have control over our life-long nature. When we look at them more closely, it becomes clear that the two minds are in a permanent conflict with each other. One of them shows a brilliant, sparkling world, the other shows strategic, withdrawal, clever compromises. One wants all the wonders of life, love and heavenly fires, the other sees the immediate interests, anxiety and compromise, driving us into unconditioned submission to orders from above, to restrict our inclinations and give up ourselves. When the upper mind is at the helm we listen for orders, submitting ourselves as well-disciplined soldiers. When the other one sweeps forward, we laugh freely, a joyful world emerges, empathy and human fulfilment become the laws of life.

How are we to understand this apparent irrationality, this futile conflict? The way to approach the answer is at the very foundations of our mind, i.e. the history of mankind. Our deduction is that mind is the product of history, therefore the duality of our mind must be the product of the duality of our history. In this way we are led to the inference that the upper and lower minds are formed by the two fundamental epochs of mankind, the matriarchal magical world, i.e. the Golden Age, and the subsequent period of power. These two ages shaped our two minds, the superficial and the underlying, in their likeness, according to their historical and communal conditions. We preserve in our dual consciousness the impressions of the two main ages of our history.




Bergson, Henry, 1907/1981,  Evolution Creatrice, p. 191

Doane T.W., 1882/1971, Bible Myths, 4th edition, University Books, New Hyde Park, New York, 39

Edda. Codex Regius. Bryniolf Sveinsson, 1662.

Geertz, C. 1975, The Interpretation of Cultures, Hutchinson, London.

Gothic Eddas, 1891, Codex Regius collotype. F. Wimmer and Johnson.

Grandpierre, A. 1983, Punk-music as a rebirth of shamanic music, Jó Világ, Bölcsész Antológia (in Hungarian)

Grandpierre, A. 1991, Kozmikus mozgatóerőnk: a világösztön. (Our Cosmic Drive: The World-Instinct). Harmadik Szem, No. 3 (in Hungarian).

Grandpierre, E. K. 1992, Eltemetett világkorszak: a mágikus kor. (The Buried World-Age: The Magic Era). Harmadik Szem, No. 8 (in Hungarian).

Hegel, G. W. F. 1978, Lectures on the Philosophy of the History of the World.

Lewin, K. 1980, Introduction to the Well-Being, in Not Work Alone, eds. J. Cherfas, K. Lewin.Temple Smith, London.

Sahlins, M. 1974, Stone Age Economics, Tavistoek, London.

Wright, M. R., 1981, Empedocles: the Extant Fragments. Yale University Press, New Haven and London.

The Zend-Avesta, 1888-1895, Vols. I-II-III, transl. By James Darmesteter and L. H. Mille, Oxford, Clarendon Press.


/ Grandpierre K. Endre, Könyvei