by Heydar A. Aslanov

Abstract

At which extend can we admit the gender neutrality? Is ultimate gender equality

This study is aimed to reveal ultimate, psychological prepositions for gender determination of Abrahamic religious concept. In this research, I have proved that, with exception of Christian paradigm where God definitely connotes with patriarchal tradition, gender articulation of Absolute is vailed but immanent and essential to Abrahamic system. Moreover, gender neutrality of transcendental God can not be ever questioned if we stay on the grand of psychoanalysis. The point is that God is associated with the Desire. And the Desire is always refers to primary object — the instance of Mother or Father. But in case of transcendental instance, we deal with suppressed Oedipus complex. In other words, transcendental status of God has its defined psychoanalytical origination as subjectivism of mother’s desire of the Other.

The research represents psychoanalytical development, based mostly on K.-G. Jung studies, J. Lacan’s analysis, and J. Baudrillard’s concepts of reality. The work contains of three chapters. In the first one, the gender belonginess of God is being determined from theological point of view. The creation of Adam and Eve is being reviewed and analyzed to conclude, that God has rather displays itself a dominated mother. While father is eventually shadowed under the image of Serpent-tempter.

The Second chapter presents anthropocentric point paradigm. A real role of Eve is being explained. And the emergence of and idea of transcendental God is being explained as objectivation of mother’s desire.

The Third chapter analyses the concept of elimination of the instance of father in Abrahamic religiose system. The emergence of “Mother’s law” to replace Freud’s “Father’s law” is being explained? As well as the mystery of Sephora’s circumcision made to her son being reviled.

In general, the research is not aimed to wide public audience. Publicism destroys mystery. A conventional text, taken out of its actual content, always says one thing — there is no more secret, and you, the reader, know the secret because you agree with the publicist, you agree on what he tells you. And the publicist always delivers one message — that your understanding is presumably correct. This is the trade agreement between the publicist and the masses.

For this reason, my book is not publicist in nature. It does not expect consensus. An attentive reader will find here the clue to the symbolism of the American flag. A thoughtful reader will advance in disclosure of more serious secrets. And the reader to whom this book is addressed will feel a mystery, the solution of which to be sought by himself.

Heydar Aslanov

20.03.23