In the other words, they were skilfully realizing the tandem principle in their intellectual and entire psychical activity, which were inherited[97] by rabbis of Great Synagogue in ancient times, whose adherence to pairs without any homosexual reasons (the Freudists could probably give that explanation) was rather astonishing and lacking for understanding for A. Reville.
But in the society of almost general literacy, lacking of desire and skills to think, where we, the readers of this piece, live, it’s one of the most easy doings – to write, as well as to read, the words “intellectual activity on the base of tandem principle”. Their practical understanding, and all the more – realizing their true meaning in one’s own life is much harder, than writing or reading the words.
The first image one can have in his head is the remembrance of tandem – the bicycle, where the pedals are to be moved by two bicycle-riders, and co-ordinately. For those, who not only saw the tandem, but rode on it not alone, it can be easy to remember the lightness of flight comparing with the ordinary bicycle, which appears because of the fact that the resistance of tandem is little more than ordinary bicycle has, but the energy of “motor” is twice. Also you can remember, that if your partner on the tandem is hardly moving his legs for only not losing the tempo with which you yourself rolls the pedals as swiftly as possible, you would feel much less comfortable, than having a travelling companion on the ordinary bicycle.
Like in cycling, the matter is the same in the sphere of intellectual activity: if two have found the way for providing the combination[98] of their individual possibilities, then the effectiveness of tandem exceeds the possibilities of each of the partners, and the advantages of tandem principle “two heads are better than one” are obvious and incontestable for those who managed to realize it; but if two, trying to make a tandem, can’t combine, it would be the task of the one with more developed individual spiritual culture to draw on his back through the “strip of life obstacles” both his companion and all the tandem products, and it may appear too hard for him in some cases, even if his individual capacities allow him to go easily enough through the “obstacle strip” by his own.
However, the tandem principle of intellectual activity has one peculiar feature: unlike in cycling, where the tandem, on which one can sit and ride, passing all the ordinary bicycles, is obviously visible and touchable, in the case of intellectual activity all good tandem effects appear and influence only by the condition of combination of the partners. It can arise from the very beginning, and then the tandem is combined “by itself”, without any purposeful efforts from their side, and for that reason it can stay invisible for their consciousness, which is concerned with other problems, and dwell in the sphere of subconscious psychical activity. But if there isn’t a “primordial” combination, and people don’t even guess about the possibility of reaching the tandem effect in their activity, they never undertake any intentional efforts for changing themselves and people around them such way, that the combination in tandem became possible.
These are two reasons by which the tandem principle “two heads are better than one” remained unobserved by different types of psychological schools: if it was realized, nothing can be said about it, because it’s not the aim, but the means for reaching some other aims; and if its realization was unsuccessful, there’s nothing to talk about, for the subject is absent. But we pay much attention to it, because it’s the first goal, which realization represents the way for realizing some other, more significant, goals.
Though Egyptian zhretses were basing on the tandem principle in their activity, the methods of teaching the intellectual activity in the system of initiation in ancient Egypt were either hidden (and it’s more probable, according to our understanding of principles of saving and distributing information in the society[99]); or open methods were destined only for the most superior esotericists (this is less probable, to our opinion, because in that case someone would have left some indications on it, direct or allegorical, but we have no things like that).
In favour of what was said in the previous paragraph there say the historical circumstances of the times, when Egypt was no Egypt any more, and pass from the historical stage “by itself”. It happened, when the structure of Egyptian zhrechestvo “”, standing above the Pharaoh and state power during centuries, conceptually powerful structure, left Egypt in Moses epoch together with Amen priests, who installed into the Jewish surroundings during the time of Egyptian captivity. After that the Egypt of Pharaohs began to decline, and it’s widely known, though the historians don’t connect this declining process with disappearing of zhretses administrative structure “”[100].
I.Katznelson in the postscript to the novel of B.Pruss “Pharaoh”[101] notices, that in ancient Egypt there was real historical Amen’s superior zhrets in Thebes, Kherikhor, who sat on the throne of Egypt, having removed Ramses XII, the real historical last Pharaoh of XX dynasty (and that was the real base for the subject of Pruss’s novel). During this period Egypt split up into two parts, and furthermore became the loot of foreigners, as arbitrariness and ignorance of the “elite” and the zhretses, deteriorating to the level of desiring and greedy znakharstvo, lead to progressing lowering of administrative qualities, which ended few centuries later, under Cleopatra, with entire collapse.
I.Katznelson, like many other people, doesn’t pay much attention to the fact, that the real events of XX dynasty collapse and ruling of a superior quack had their place AFTER JEWISH GOING OFF from Egypt, which is known from the bible. It means, that it happened, when Egypt had yet accepted the doctrine of slave owning on the base of usurious tyranny of Jewish clans, ruled by the heirs of Egyptian Amen hierarchy.
After the beginning of this aggression by methods of “cultural cooperation”, the global znakharstvo, who by the commandments of usury and racism has perverted the Revelation given through Moses, didn’t need Egyptian culture like state form any more. The leaders of the hierarchy broke the principle of making the decision by two parallel and equal branches “”. So, real historical Kherikhor has got an opportunity to become the only bale to function head-hierarch of that level of znakharstvo, which was passed by while working on global plans, for making it sit still in Egypt and not get under the feet of those who strived for the world power.
Perhaps, Kherikhor – individualist by his moral ideals and world view – could act by himself, reaching the individual state power and getting the place of Pharaoh, because he just didn’t understand the essence and effectiveness of tandem principle of making the decision and the necessity of the only ruling centre when the decision was realized (it was the responsibility of Pharaoh and official’s hierarchy), he knew nothing about advisability of the structure of administrative system of Egypt during the change of generations, which was ruling Egypt during several millennia. Kherikhor was allowed to do what he wanted, by zhretses’ unofficial system “”, who aimed for global absolute inner-social power, because they didn’t need Egyptian state power to be stronger than state powers of other countries any more. From the point of view of unofficial structure “”, which has become suprastate and international, all states should succumb to its administrative effectiveness, and their cultures should be standardized in this sense too. The shift to monarchy in Egypt, where the monarch stands higher in the system of public hierarchies than clergymen, still called “zhrechestvo”, was aimed to solve this task. This was the loss of stability of system of public self-governing of Egyptian local crowd-“elitism”, which had been keeping alive Egyptian regional civilization during more than 2000 years, bringing it out of happening military or social catastrophes (administrative catastrophes) without any harm to originality of its culture.