Origination of Evil
Doom of Sin
As a concept discharged onto perception by scripture—and from that very reason, sprung into existence for the first time in the history of consciousness—positive evil only rears its head in the book of genesis of the bible, and entirely so by an explicit movement of the consciousness of the true author of that book.
The relevant text directly quotes expressions of concepts underivedly operating in, and issuing from, the consciousness of jehovah, alias Lucifer, alias jesus, concepts that both originate and beget positive evil. The text is indexed as 4-7, appropriately the first entry for sin in the book of sin’s lone father. 
The words therein at once produce and rebelliously, if futilely in the final event, serve to man, straight from Lucifer’s consciousness, the very emanation of sin only-begotten in the self same consciousness. And appropriately again, it is served by and in the bible, that book being, once again, the sole maker, container and carrier of the same sin.
The words are uttered by, and occur solely and exclusively in, the consciousness of jehovah. And therefore, there has not been at all any origin nor movement of sin heretofore in any consciousness other than this one.
And the words recording in the consciousness of jehovah—unrebelliously for the first time—and captured by Moses, do accord with the above, as also with independent reality, as he concedes to man, eminently typified at this point by Cain, an inertia of sin: “sin is crouching.” And thereby, there is not an inheritance of sin allegedly from Adam, as historical christianity rebelliously claims from words terminally inscribed by Paul. 
The alleged disobedience charged by Paul will not make any kind of sin since the primary condition of disobedience, expressed refusal to obey, is not satisfied,  pre-cast as Adam is in a muted role as of then in Lucifer’s consciousness. As for the aspect of disobedience, viz., neglect, the charge is disproved under “discovery,”  the same protagonist having withheld by malidentification the pertinent data of the existence of the serpent. 
And immediately, in the very next movement of consciousness in Lucifer, and again captured by Moses by these words, “For you is its craving,” the sin is released by the being from its inertial and exclusive existence therein in that very consciousness, but hitherto confined to the netherworld, in the direction of consciousness as a whole, and that through and by incipient and historical christianity—although futilely, as we do see in the light of the identity.
Apart from the above, the actual author did project before, in accord with his malignant consciousness, the auto-compassion of Sivan by the symbol of the snake instead of his ornament of serpent.
The genes of murder, war-making, adultery and theft are all genes latterly interpolated into consciousness and then deliberately brought within the sphere of the attributed acts of man described in the book—attributed to man by rebellious commandments proffered after the event, turning the human psyche in the process into a battlefield between the genes thus implanted therein with all their automotive drives and the commandments subsequently planted against the selfsame genes, both being done by the same being, viz., jehovah, alias Lucifer, alias jesus, whom Moses in his goodness as man takes to be “God,” the perfection of goodness, as continuedly professed by that being in execution of his rebellion.
(For example, the gene of theft is so far alien in man that the so-called jehovah is disabled from implanting it in his genesis book. This is accomplished, as far as he is concerned, in exodus. Interpolatively even, he introversively plots out the design for implantation of theft gene, through a message at once inducing  and forcing  the admittedly unbiased Moses and followers to rob the Egyptians.  In the chapter following, Moses and all his followers are expressly inscribed by Lucifer, characteristically, as “plunderers of the Egyptians.” The text reads: “As instructed, the people of Israel had asked the Egyptians the loan of gold and silver ornaments and garments. Since the lord had made the Egyptians respect the Israelites, the Egyptians gave everything that was asked for. Thus they plundered the Egyptians.“—Malayalam bible, p. 79.
(The new commodity of garments included in the actual plunder at ch. 12 above helplessly outgrows from the motive force of the theft gene that had been already input from outside at ch. 11 by suggestion fortified by positive inducement through modulated environmental factors. The final impeachment of Moses and his people is characteristic of Lucifer in his classic mode of especial betrayal of those who remarkably serve him.)
Signalled and inescapably inherent in the whole account is this one suggestion that a positive—although as yet invisible—being is inducing the crimes, whereas, chronologically, crimes were hitherto related to have been caused by vacuity of righteousness or dharma. This is documented in prior scripture, the Hindu scripture, where the concept of dharma exclusive to the Hindu races—in fact their gift to mankind—is ubiquitous by positively emerging diffusion, and “sin” conspicuous for its total doom. The bible originated at a latter moment in history from the Vedas. Therefore, if one were to probe realistically into the origin of positive evil, indifferently analysing up and down from the focal point of its first and earliest manifestations as a positively appearing phenomenon in scripture, one will have to trace it at last to the consciousness of the true bible writer, who by traditional belief is at the same time the protagonist of the book.
Scholars justly sensitised over Evil but unaware of the above formula of its engineered history seek its incorporation in systems of enquiry into religious consciousness in order to make them competent and totally relevant. It is also affirmed by the selfsame christianity, speciously in this context, that buddhism and christianity are superior for per se incorporation of the phenomenon.  Nevertheless, evil as a positive entity only originated in and from the ominous being that is totally self-expressed in the bible book and that structured the same, through Peter and Paul, according to agenda, into an active component in the existential consciousness. It is important that this singular source of positive evil be apprehended by correct identification in any system that would outgrow Evil. It is also important that there occur no misidentification or despondency as to outcome. 
In buddhism, a rebel offspring of the Vedas (Knowledge), evil has its source and expression in death, and disillusionment arises from death’s stark negation of the human instinct. In christianity, the objective originator of evil is himself the source and object of salvation. The buddhist pessimism has its origin in neglect of the regenerative aspect of death, while the christian obscurantism, however concealed as “faith,” has its origin in christianity’s pseudo-salvation and belief in the original sin of man, in the place of transposition of original sin on man by itself.
But sadly, religion is understood as faith by the man in the street. Where faith dwells, reason vanishes, since faith is but the midwife of superstition. For the man-in-the-street christian, moreover, verification from experience is primevally foreclosed. But he would still be bent on an argument or two in behalf of Lucifer without so much as having even touched his book!
The identity re-established in the pages of this work, and further to follow in subsequent works, might appear formidable to certain ranks in both believers and non-believers. Ultimately speaking, the bafflement is due to the Fear gene that abides either dominant or dormant in individuals, and that is traceable alone to Lucifer’s scripture in the matter of the origin  Paradoxically, it is cognition of the same identity that will redeem them from this Fear.
On the opposite track are those who altogether deny the existence of Lucifer and the standing of his self-delineational book.
The fabric of man’s mind designs itself upon the past, since past genes do continue in operation, as we know from Lucifer’s supervening gene history—culminating as it does in the indented gene of jesus at the end of 77 operations related at Luke 3:23-38. If man has become generally civilised, it is on account of the Self, which impelled improvisation of the genetic process. By the same token, the alien concepts of sin and guilt discharged into the environment by the bible book have today become in 2000 years a surcharge, as manifested in the complex melancholia characterising some of the most representative types of the race. 
On the one side are the sick people who put themselves to torture stricken by guilt or motivated by a venerated afterlife—the unwitting martyrs of Lucifer—and on the other those chained by their own intellect. They refuse to accept that the gene of evil has been transmitted from one genetic unit to another, each with its own assured improvisation, and that it is intentionally planted in the system by the bible book by its alien and subterranean actual author. 
Through all the super-tech and ithyphallic pornography overflowing from the mind of “jehovah” and made directly sensible as such at the point of its calculated projection onto man  one can also perceive a drive for utter humiliation of man, and in general the worst kind of misology, besides the fabrication of a genealogy for a pre-calculated end. This is the creation of the ultimate schizophrenia, whose underived gene type is jesus, the “son of man,” as misanthropically self-designated by him in his self-awareness of his own identity at that point in time as son of Lucifer. This even transcends the pseudo-transformation he acquired from the human female Mary by way of parthenogenesis. The son of man whose iterational  father is still in the heavens!