From Karma To Slander

At the cainistic church if anything bad happened in a person’s life, we were told it was retribution (karma) for past actions. Whatever happened was a direct result of wanting it on some level, or deserving it like karma, or it wouldn’t be there. There are no injured parties in life. Life is a mirror and reflects only what the thinker thinks.

Wow. Really? Anyone who becomes involved in the drama of a cainist (and survives to tell about it) knows all about cruelty, hyper-vigilance and the unhealthy PTSD symptoms which pump excess adrenaline through the body, causing all kinds of health issues both mental and physical in the aftermath of the relationship. It’s not imagined, it’s real.  Both your doctor and therapist know for sure. Of course, it’s to Cain’s advantage to make you think his victimization doesn’t exist. That’s called gaslighting–making you doubt yourself–which is more victimization. But that’s another blog post. In fact, that’s a whole book.

Funny how the old double standard rose to the surface when karma materialized in the cainistic minister’s life. And how he spewed excuses, defenses, rationalizations and justifications about all of it.  When members and attendees started asking:  What did he do to create that in his life?… ( as the karma he preached came back to bite him, and the church was drowning in debt), he sent forth his loyal support staff to minimize the criticism and slander.

It’s always amazing how loyal supporters become stupefied when they are under Cain’s hypnotic spell. Otherwise, bright, educated, independent, free-thinking ministers and assistants were now informing church members that Cain might have held an inaccurate consciousness at one time, but not now. Any karma was from years ago and he had already learned the lesson. He had changed. How could we hold him accountable for a faulty consciousness in the past when he had already seen the light? Cainists  are more masterful than Houdini at wiggling out of responsibility and spinning a tale to benefit him.

His turnabout regarding karma reminded me of the short story, A Slander, by Anton Chakhov.  In the tale, Serge Kapitonich Ahineev, a schoolmaster obsessed with keeping an admirable reputation and impeccable image, went into the kitchen with Marfa, the cook, to check on a sturgeon and other foods that were cooking for a wedding celebration. Upon smelling the delicious aromas, he smacked his lips loudly. In an adjoining room another man, Vankin, erroneously interpreted the noise as a kiss and said, “”Ah-ah! the sound of a passionate kiss …. Who is it you’re kissing out there, little Marfa?”

Petrified that people would believe the gossip, Ahineev decided to re-tell the story, putting both the cook and Vankin down. Because he was obsessively dependent on maintaining his alleged stellar reputation, within a half hour he had retold all the guests about the incident of the sturgeon and Vankin. “He amused me, queer fish!” mocked Ahineev. “I’d rather kiss a dog than Marfa.” Ahineev didn’t care that he discredited Vankin and the cook in his re-telling of the story as long as it restored his image. That is a cainist through and through. Never expect loyalty from him if it’s your reputation over his.

One week later the head master at the school where Ahineev taught drew him aside and said there were rumors that he was romancing the cook. He warned Ahineev, “Don’t be so public, please. Don’t forget that you’re a schoolmaster.”

Ahineev was stunned, and as he walked home, he felt the whole town was looking at him.  Then, at home, his wife accused him further. “What are you so pensive about? Brooding over your amours? Pining for your Marfa? I know all about it. Kind friends have opened my eyes!” And she slapped him in the face.

Immediately he visited Vankin and asked, “Why did you set this slander going about me?” Vankin knew nothing about it. Who, then, turned this slander against him, he wondered? Who indeed? In an effort to paint himself ily white, he destroyed himself by his own slander.

Like Ahineev, the cainistic minister was obsessed with maintaining a red carpet image at any price. Truth was inconsequential. Twisting the truth was permitted if it put him in a superior light whether it was true or not.

At the end of Chakhov’s short story, the slander and gossip told by Ahineev boomeranged, causing him public disgrace. And eventually so did the lies spewed by the cainistic minister. Hopefully, so will the lies your cainist tells. Because he will tell them.