These interrogations of yours come at the right moment, as we are about to make the final touches to the third part of ‘La liberté: un concept d’esclaves’, to be published – in French - at elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com. It is based on ‘Some phases in the development of the subjective point of view during the post-Aristotelian period’ (http://archive.org/stream/somephasesindeve00sunniala/somephasesindeve00sunniala_djvu.txt), building mainly on it to lay the foundations of a thesis that was implicitly put forward in a post called ‘From Freedom to Feedom’ in this forum : that of the subversive character of philosophy.

Let us note first of all that, when philosophy began its investigations into the underlying principles of ethics, metaphysics, and the special sciences, mathematics furnished the ideal of ‘certainty’ and of ‘method’. Now, the foundations of mathematics in the antiquity in Europe were laid by the Pythagorean school, which derived its knowledge from sources which were not ours. Hermippus, according to Josephus, wrote that Pythagoras “imitated the Jews and Thracians and appropriated their science.” He reportedly added :”It is said that he transferred many Jewish laws in his philosophy.” Whether or not this is the case, “the spread in the ancient world of Jewish traditions and doctrines, the sojourns of the [so-called ‘Greek] philosophers in countries where these doctrines and traditions were widespread, their contact with the Jews and with these doctrines, the influence of these on some parts of their systems seem indubitable. » (V. Hébert-Duperron, Essai sur la polémique et la philosophie de Clément d'Alexandrie, 1865. p. 111) More generally, it makes no doubt that these systems owed a lot to Middle-Eastern doctrines ; besides, most of them were produced by non Greeks. Not only Jews, but Semitic peoples in general, show a “lunar and mathematical spirit, an abstract and, basically, fatalistic contemplativeness, devoid of any interest in the heroic and supernatural affirmation of the personality”, as stated in ‘Three Aspects of the Jewish Problem’ (whose second edition will be available this month) - “this can be considered as the best part of the ancient Semitic heredity”…

To come back to the Pythagorean school, “In Greece Pythagoreanism represented in many ways a return of the Pelasgic spirit. Despite its astral and solar symbols (including a Hyperborean trace), the Pythagorean doctrine was essentially characterized by the Demetrian and pantheistic theme. After all, the lunar spirit of the Chaldean or Mayan priestly science was reflected in its view of the world in terms of numbers and of harmony ; the dark, pessimistic, and fatalistic motif of tellurism was retained in the Pythagorean notion of birth on this earth as a punishment and as a sentence, and also in the teaching concerning reincarnation, which I have previously described as a symptom of spiritual disease. The soul that repeatedly reincarnates is the sould subjected to the chthonic law. The doctrine of reincarnation exemplifies the emphasis Pythagoreanism and Orphism gave to the principle that is tellurically subjected to rebirth, as well as the truth proper to the civilization of the Mother. Pythagoras's nostalgia for ideas of a Demetrian type (after his death his home became a sanctuary for the goddess Demeter) including the dignity that women enjoyed in Pythagorean sects where they presided over initiations and where the ritual cremation of the dead was forbidden, as well as the sect's horror of blood - are features that can easily be explained on this basis. In this kind of context even the escape from the "cycle of rebirths" has a dubious character (it is significant that in Orphism the dwelling of the blessed is not above, as in the Achaean symbol of the Elysian Fields, but rather under the earth, in the company of infernal gods), in comparison to the ideal of immortality that was proper of ‘Zeus's path’ ; at the end of this path there was a heavenly region or a Uranian world dominated by the ‘spiritual virility of the light’ and inhabited by ‘those who are,’ namely, beings who are detached and inaccessible in their perfection and purity." (RATMW) None of the sources used by J. Evola to assess Pythagorianism have been rebuked. One of the invaluable strengths of the thought of the Italian author is to bring back theories, doctrines, and concepts to the racial stocks in which they originate, to the racial forces of which they are an expression, and to acknowledge the intrinsic, organic, relation which exists between race and cultural, intellectual, spiritual, expressions. A mistake made by R. Guénon was to introduce and to stick, in a dualistic fashion, to an opposition between a “traditional spirit” and a “modern spirit”, he could not see that each race has a spirit, a soul, of its own, and that the spirit, or rather the mentality, he called ‘modern’ was already present in the traditional world, and, more precisely, in some stocks.

As for Plato, J. Evola was mainly interested in ‘The Republic’. Is ‘The Republic’ influenced by the Pythagorean doctrine in any way ? There are, from an Aryan standpoint, more than a few serious shortcomings in Plato’s, at any rate.

It is worth noting that the study of the Pythagorean Theorem, and, more generally, of theorems (Euclid's 47th proposition is used as the symbol of a Master Mason), most probably in their most practical applications, is basal to Freemasonry (https://www.grandlodgeofvirginia.org/education/programs/monthly_talks/47th_Problem_of_Euclid.pdf) This is an anecdote which illustrates what we mean here by practical applications: once asked by a student what profit he might gain from studying geometry, Euclid did not reply, but contemptuously ordered his slave to give him a tip so that he could make a profit out of geometry.
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 9:46am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 9:46am
The connexion between racial stocks and spiritual and related psychic tendencies and that of the possible presence of a spirit and/or a soul typical of a given race in a body which does not correspond to this race, are two separate questions, and, in any way, the latter is an historically conditioned one ; historical conditioned, since cases of racial contradiction, or even opposition, within given individuals, between the spirit and/or the soul on one hand and the body on the other hand cannot but date back to times when racial mixing had already occurred. The fact that a spirit or/and soul of a given race incarnates in the body of another race does not change anything to the fact that the influences of which the individual in question is the bearer are to be brought back to the race in which his spirit or/and his soul originates, and not to the race whose physical form this spirit and/or soul takes on to incarnate.

The link between racial stocks and spiritual and psychic tendencies is absolute. What is relative, since the times it was perverted by racial mixing, is the link between a race of the spirit or/and the soul and a race of the body.

It has not escaped your attention that one of the aims of this forum is to present as objectively as possible J. Evola’s views, and then to discuss them. When you state that “he mocked the "purely" nordic people of Scandinavia or Germany as having been and still being among the first to succumb to the modern spirit, even in its quasi-judaic form”, you present his views on the matter objectively – let alone that he did not “mock” them: he only noted that the German(ic) people and the Scandinavians were no longer up to the heroic and solar spirit which, according to him, used to be theirs. If these views of his are to be discussed, evidence has been brought to light in a study posted onto this forum (‘The Jewels of the Papacy’) that shows that those tribes who migrated from Southern Scandinavia to Central Europe from 400 to 800 AD were far from being racially pure, to begin with.

We happen to have "Scienza, razza e scientismo", and not to have made a selective reading of the writings of J. Evola on the matter. For a comprehensive account, see evolaasheis.wordpress.com/. As is made clear to every person who wishes to subscribe to this forum, the reading of the various studies we have published as well as, precisely, that of evolaasheis.wordpress.com/, is a prerequisite for any further discussion of J. Evola’s views on race here.
Last Edit: Oct 28, 2019 at 6:32am by Evola As He Is
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 9:47am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 9:47am
Originality is the last thing on our mind. Besides, we do not feel the need to reword or rewrite what appears to us as being very well expressed.

We were not aware that Gill was a Protestant author, or rather an author with Protestant sympathies. For those interested in digging into this subject, see ‘The Power of the Popes During the Middle Ages’ (1839 ; the original version is available at archive.org/details/a583585502gossuoft), a classic study by the Very Catholic writer M. Gosselin, which proves beyond doubt that the popes exercised temporal power over sovereigns during the Middle Ages. Since we could not get hold of the English translation of this book, we used the closest work to it that has been published in English.

‘The Papal Drama’, it is quite obvious, only provided the historical thread that was needed to make it clear, first; that, as any school boy should be able to gather from the content of a typical Carolingian king’s prayer, Ghibellinism and the Church both had the same point of reference : the Old Testament’s – their ultima ratio was the God of the Old Testament ; the fact that none of those who have studied the relationship between the Church and the Empire have made this simple observation remains a mystery to us: had it already been made explicitly, it would have save us a great deal of time, as we would not have had to write ‘The Jewels of the Papacy’ ; to make it clear, then, that, as a result, there was no way Ghibellinism could have brought about a restoration of the actual Roman Imperium in the way J. Evola understood the latter (M. Weber, C. Schmidt, among others, might have supported your view, in so far as they equated ‘imperium’ with universalism ; it should be noted that the Italian writer almost exclusively focused on the original meaning of the word ‘Imperium’, ‘power’ - ‘sacred power’, since it could not be exercised without the approbation of the gods through ‘auspicia’). J. Evola explained why, historically, this restoration was not possible, without however ever clearly seeing, or at least acknowledging, that the endeavour was doomed from the start for the reason which has just been recalled. Nor does Evolian exegesis.

The issue of the systematic desecration of the State by the Church, which is hardly mentioned outside academic circles, needs to be tackled at a time when the assumption that the Church would be the only bulwark against internationalism and Globalisation resurfaces with increased inanity. Being rooted in the Semitic ideology of the Old Testament, it is not surprising that the Church, to quote you, “can well be… guilty of serious antitraditional deviations. ».

So-called Anti-Catholic historiography means liberal or Communist historiography. It has its own reasons for attacking Catholicism, which are certainly not those of those who oppose as strongly Catholicism, Liberalism and Communism, from a racial standpoint. It has every reason for being thankful to the figure of Philip IV of France. We still stick to what we wrote about him in ‘The Jewels of the Papacy’ :

“It is clear that Philip the Fair cannot possibly be held responsible for initiating such a process, as argued by R. Guenon and, later, by J. Evola, who went so far as to call the French king a "sinister" character and as to apply to him, following indiscriminately in the footsteps of generations of misinformed historians, the nickname of "Counterfeiter" the bishop of Palmiers once saddled him and Boniface VIII echoed, infuriated as the pope was with the anti-papal policy of the French king. Having been debased by Philip, the papacy found nothing better than to accuse him - the fair - of abasement. In substituting clerics for laymen in the French government and administration in order to break the dependence of the kingdom on the clergy for legal and accounting services, he only followed the example of Frederick II, who had founded the University of Naples to train lawyers, accountants, and civil servants for Sicily, following in this a trend set by the Roman Curia during the late twelfth century ; in France, Louis IX was actually the first to introduce legists into the parliament, which he set up as a court of justice. It was jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. The bishops, who were the officials and the counsellors of the Carolingian kings, the clerics, with whom these filled their chancellery, were gradually replaced under the Capetians by subordinates who, if they were laymen, helped nonetheless disseminating more or less consciously a law which was only nominally `Roman', bearing instead the brand mark of a Christian worldview. To Carolingian kings, to impregnate their subjects with Christian morality was the main goal of administration: the so-called revival of classical Roman law in the twelve century was part of the plan to transform and shape society thoroughly and totalistically according to Christian standards. Just as the Holy Roman empire was a caricature of the Augustean empire, grounded as it was on Christian dogmas, so the law that was spread by the legists in western Europe under the label of `Roman law' originated in a Biblical view of law, whose foundations are at odds with the governing principles of classical Roman law. Without going into detail, theology absorbed law in the beginning of the Christian era, degrading it to the level of morality. The ius, as defined by Aristotle as fair sharing, just due, `juste partage', `suum ius cuique tribuere', was boiled down to the Torah's notion of `Law' as a code of conduct, thus opening the door to the notion of `individual rights' in Europe. Given their Christian background, it is not surprising that the doctrine of the early legists focused on the three following points: the emancipation of the individual, the full equality in the family, the liberation of the land.”

Our aim, here, was to put in perspective the part he had in the ‘anti-traditional’ process as well as R. Guénon and J. Evola’s assessment of it. His treatment of the Templars was the main reason he attracted their wrath.

What you found at scribd.com is a short review of Caparelli’s book, and it is the reviewer who points out that, according to Evola, Pythagoreanism marked a reversion to the Pelasgic spirit – not, pending further information, Caparelli. Bachofen’s typology of civilisation is built, not, as incautiously suggested by Guénon, on history, but on myths and symbols. His claim that Pythagoreanism was based on geometry alone is about as serious as the preposterous claim he made in ‘East and West’ that Japanese are “not really a Yellow people” (http://www.wa-pedia.com/history/origins_japanese_people.shtml), and, speaking of ‘pseudo’, the French author should really have used one to write and publish such things. The ‘science of numbers’ is one of the two branches of Pythagoreanism (see, for instance, W. Wynn Westcott, ‘Numbers: Their Occult Power and Mystic Virtues).

The hypothesis of a mathematisation of the ‘West’ through, so to speak, Arabic numbers is not Evola’s. See evolaasheis.proboards.com/thread/4/zero.
Last Edit: Oct 28, 2019 at 5:55am by Evola As He Is
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 9:48am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 9:48am
We had not noticed the dedication, nor had we read the preface. What is it that you find “biased” about it ? He’s quite straightworward : “While striving after strict accuracy in the statement, of facts and perfect fairness in the estimate of character, I lay no claim to the impartiality of religious indifference.” His judgment is balanced : “While in no wise blind, I trust, to intellectual greatness or moral worth in a pope, I look upon the popedom as the supreme corruption of Christianity », a statement which, as far as its last part, you should approve of. Besides, there are tons of Catholic authors, starting with Dante, who were just as critical of Catholicism as Protestant authors were of it.

The Church is an entity which has always carried, right from the start, the most traditional values, that is, traditional Semitic values. What would be so ‘Aryan’ about primitive Christianity, or, for that matter, about the primitive Church ?

In France, Philip II (1165-1223) was the first king to surround himself with advisors of bourgeois, and even of low, extraction, and the transformation of the feudal realm into a modern state was really initiated by him ; he created a bureaucracy and a quite complex administrative system in the process. Louis IX (1220-1270) - for whom, in the words of a current French political schemer, “The East precedes the West because it is the East that spawned the West. The East is the cradle of Christianity, the sacred place of the Incarnation, the dwelling place of the Risen Christ, the first communities of apostles, of the first Pentecost. Eastern Christians are the first Christians. Quite naturally, Saint Louis turns his kingdom to Golgotha, ​​where the Holy Grail is kept. He wants his kingdom to be ‘oriented’” (http://www.libertepolitique.com/Actualite/Decryptage/Philippe-de-Villiers-Saint-Louis-tire-sa-surhumanite-du-plus-profond-de-son-humanite) – continued his work, and so did Philip IV. Yet, R. Guénon and, following in his footsteps, J. Evola made him responsible for all the evils of the time. We simply wondered why ; and it appeared to us that the Templars’s affair must have been the main reason he attracted their wrath. – Ironically enough, Philip IV (admittedly, Gill is quite far from putting him on pedestal, as he writes that “Philip the Fair [was] ever in need of money, and jealous of the prerogatives of his crown”] was the only Capetian king who did something to mitigate the rise of the bourgeoisie (“in 1287 Philip IV issued an ordinance intended to curb abuses and regulate the ‘droit de bourgeoisie’… This ordinance… reduced the attractiveness of letters of bourgeoisie, and they seem not to have become as widespread as some 19th century historians believed” - William W. Kible, Medieval France: An Encyclopedia, p. 264). One does not need to be a Freemason or an occultist to be biased in favour of the Templars against Philip IV. Incidentally, in ‘Scritti sulla Massoneria’, J. Evola mentions – in passing - the fact that Templars were involved in banking.

“And, you say, even if Guénon mentioned the accusations of having counterfeited the money, he viewed it more as a symbol of overstepping of its role from the temporal power.” Well, it is a very poor ‘symbol’, since it has been showed that Philip IV was not a counterfeiter (once again, Col. L. Borelli de Serres, in ‘Les Variations monetaires sous Philippe le Bel et les sources de leur histoire’, Paris, Picard et fils, 1902, the first and the only work to date which examine exhaustively all the available sources on the monetary policy of Philip IV, demonstrates conclusively, with a Swiss precision and the metronomic rigour of a Scottish accountant, that “there is no indication, nor any material evidence, of counterfeiting as such in the documents, quite the opposite.”
members.multimania.nl/Numis10/PDF/Borrelli.pdf). To return to an issue which has just been touched on, of course, Philip IV was “ever in need of money”: on his ascension to the throne, he found the coffers empty. Could the cost of the crusades, to which the Templars, the then armed and ‘speculative’ wing of the Church, were closely tied, possibly have had something to do with this state of affairs ?

While we are at it, it should be noted that the genesis of the modern state, if it meant the (gradual) end of feudalism, which, as has been showed in ‘The Jewels of the Papacy’, was not as pristine as J. Evola would have had it, did not mean a tabula rasa. As a matter of fact, it is through feudalism and religion that Capetian kings secured their supreme authority. The Capetian king is characteristically elected by the archbishop of Reims, with consent of the Church and of the feudal lords. The Capetian king is a sacred character. By the anointing, the king became a religious figure, above other men, king by the will of God, with a divine mission of peace and justice and a miraculous healing power. Let us bear in mind that the vanishing of the concept of ‘primus inter pares’ is contemporary with the emergence of the notion of “king by the will of God”.

Another interesting thing about the genesis of the modern state is that, quite often, ecclesiastics were at the head of the state, especially in England (Stafford, Laud, Wykeham, Wolsey, among many others), but also in France. There was a clear overlap between the Church and the state.

(indeed, we were mistaken about that excerpt)

(despite the few shortcomings and misunderstandings to which we have called attention with respect to the racial issue, ‘The Hour of Decision’ (at archive.org/details/TheHourOfDecision ; this English translation does not always do justice to the original text - there are even a few typos) turns out to be a tremendously potent work, when it comes to the destructive criticism of the various alien twin political, economical, social, cultural ideologies, systems, currents of thought, the exotic influences at work in the modern ‘Western’ world, and of the mindset of so-called ‘Westerners’ - it is simply vitriolic)
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 9:48am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 9:48am
There is some kind of drifting away here – remember, the – well, your - starting point was mathematics -, and there is also the impression that you do not really take into account our observations.

For example, we have already pointed out that the Church has been depicted as an abomination by both Protestant and Catholic authors for centuries, and you keep reminding us that the author of the book is a protestant and that it is because of its protestant background that his work would be biased. At this point, a suggestion would be that you read again, for example, Dante Alighieri. Another suggestion is that you quote excerpts from ‘The Papal Drama’ that would show that the author insists on “the innocence and benevolence of the kings and lord”. Speaking of suggestions, are you suggesting that Canossa came straight out of Gill’s imagination ? While we are at it, what exactly make you think that the Church was not interested exclusively in worldly matters ?

Where did we say that the limitation of the “droit de bourgeoisie” by Philp IV of France was “an anti-bourgeois measure” ? Since you refer to Soviet textbooks – we could not use any of them, since we cannot read Russian – no do we wish to -, you might be aware that the expression “anti-bourgeois” is one that belongs to the Marxist cant, which was unknown to Philip IV - but maybe not to the ‘middle-age’ bourgeois.

www.sacra-moneta.com/Numismatique-medievale/La-politique-monetaire-trouble-de-Philippe-le-Bel.html is an excellent popularising article, whose conclusion is at one with members.multimania.nl/Numis10/PDF/Borrelli.pdf.

P.s : since it was you brought the matter up - once again : What would be so ‘Aryan’ about primitive Christianity, or, for that matter, about the primitive Church ?
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 9:49am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 9:49am
J. Evola’s views on Protestantism are closely akin to R. Guénon’s (to be found in ‘Temporal Power and Spiritual Authority’).

In a nutshell, what they both criticised in Protestantism was its individualistic tendencies and the fact that these would have directly paved the way to egalitarian and democratic conceptions, the emphasis put on the principle of pure faith as opposed to any hierarchical organisation and mediation, the rise against “the traditional, hierarchical, and ritual component that existed within the Catholic compromise.”

None of these arguments are convincing, to say the least. Faith is at the heart of both Catholicism and Protestantism, the only difference between these two Christians sects in this regard being the part faith plays or not in the salvation process. Protestantism did not exactly do away with rituals: it has two sacraments ; Catholicism, seven. Protestants hold that sacraments are signs of something sacred (‘grace’ and ‘faith’ is what they mean by ‘sacred’), while denying that they cause Divine grace – however, Episcopalians and Anglicans hold with Catholics that the sacraments are “effectual signs” of grace, etc. The mediation between the believer and God is a notion that is unknown, not only to Protestantism – except through Jesus-Christ -, but also to a religion both authors, especially R. Guénon, had some sympathies for and whose influence in the Reformation is increasingly acknowledged : Islam. Nor was it known to ancient Romans, ancient Nordics or ancient Greeks, in whose culture, to come back to the previous point, there was nothing sentimental about the rite (https://evolaasheis.wordpress.com/2016/04/14/the-sacred-in-the-roman-tradition/). The hierarchical component of Catholicism, which is closely linked with the mediating role it claimed for itself, does mean anything as such : mafias, banks, are also strongly hierarchical.

In ‘Revolt against the Modern World”, J. Evola writes : “By rigidly upholding the principle of authority and dogma, by defending the transcendent and superrational character of ‘revelation’ in the domain of knowledge and the principle of the transcendence of grace in the domain of action, the Church defended from any heresy - almost desperately - the nonhuman character of its deposit”. Now, “revelation”, “grace”, are concepts which are directly linked to the Semitic conception of the sacred, and have nothing to do with the Aryan experience of the sacred. As already stressed, the Church is a most traditional institution: it’ just that the tradition it upholds is of Semitic origin. As to the principle of authority, the Church was not the only one institution which, together with emperors, claimed to embody and defend it in the ‘Middle-Ages’: Saxons like Widukind, too, fought for it.

“we, J. Evola adds, must acknowledge a certain traditional character to the Church that lifted it above what had been mere Christianity, because it established a system of dogmas, symbols, myths, rituals, and sacred institutions…” Now, in ‘The meaning and Context of Zen’ (http://www.amerika.org/texts/the-meaning-and-context-of-zen-julius-evola/), these turn out to be more or less the elements whose introduction into Buddhism is considered as a drop in level (“So, in a further development of Buddhism, what occurred again, mutatis mutandi, was exactly the situation against which Buddha had reacted; Buddhism became a religion, complete with dogmas, rituals, scholasticism and mythology”).

As to the accusation levelled against Protestantism for having directly paved the way to egalitarianism and democracy, let us quote de Tocqueville: “America is the most democratic country in the world, and it is at the same time (according to reports worthy of belief) the country in which the Roman Catholic religion makes most progress.” “I think that the catholic religion has erroneously been looked upon as the natural enemy of democracy. Among the various sects of Christians, Catholicism seems to me, on the contrary, to be one of those which are most favourable to the equality of conditions. In the Catholic Church, the religious community is composed of only two elements, the priest and the people. The priest alone rises above the rank of his flock, and all below him are equal.

On doctrinal points the catholic faith places all human capacities upon the same level ; it subjects the wise and the ignorant, the man of genius and the vulgar crowd, to the details of the same creed ; it imposes the same observances upon the rich and needy, it inflicts the same austerities upon the strong and the weak, it listens to no compromises with mortal man, but reducing all the human race to the same standard, it confounds all the distinctions of society at the foot of the same altar, even as they are confounded in the sight of God. If Catholicism predisposes the faithful to obedience, it certainly does not prepare them for inequality ; but the contrary may be said of Protestantism, which generally tends to make men independent, more than to render them equal.” To be sure, R. Guénon, Protestantism was not so much a starting point as a point of arrival (see ‘Temporal Power and Spiritual Authority’), and, to J. Evola, a further step towards dissolution. Stripped of their respective dogma and credo, and thus brought back to their fundamentals, Catholicism and Protestantism reveal their common root.

As with any argument, we took account of R. Guénon’s and J. Evola’s arguments on the topic of Catholicism versus Protestantism, and, more particularly, on the assumed traditional character of the former, assessed them against primary and secondary sources of all types and material from various origins, to reach the conclusion that they were not well-grounded, nor quite consistent, while never losing sight of the point of reference, which is constituted by the Aryan spirit in its political, cultic, cultural, economic manifestations. The anti-Aryan character of all the by-products of Christianity makes no doubt to us, and this character, in its main aspects, has been shown in a series of well-documented studies. Each of these aspects could be deepened and expanded upon. The stage of the working hypothesis is long past. From there, what may contribute constructively to our deepening of the question would be your answer to questions such as: in what way was Catholicism “adapted to the aryan mind”?

What would be so ‘Aryan’ about primitive Christianity, or, for that matter, about the primitive Church ?

Petitiones principii are the best recipe to endless polemics.
Last Edit: Oct 28, 2019 at 6:31am by Evola As He Is
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 9:51am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 9:51am
The terminology you use surely indicates that you are quite familiar with R. Guénon’s work, and yet your familiarity with it should not make you fancy that this work – nor its sources - is completely unknown to us, nor to our membership. Do you intend to keep on rehashing for a long time R. Guénon’s and to a certain extent J. Evola’s views on Christianity, which we know perfectly well, without doing what anyone should do, provided one has the ability to do it : without actually examining their validity, both historically and intellectually, against non guénonian and non evolian sources ?

It is truly a shame that none of those who interviewed the Italian author thought of questioning his views on the instrumental role of Christianity, and, later, of Catholicism in the undermining of what was left of the Aryan civilisation in Europe, merely asking him ‘formulaic questions’. Indeed, as we have shown, it does not take much to explode the claim that Christianity was a bulwark against materialism. When understood as a desire for wealth and material possessions with little interest in ethical or spiritual matters, materialism certainly characterises Christianity ; in this, the popes and the high clergy set an example. In ‘Money and the Kingdom of God’, M. A. Fetty seeks to identify the reasons behind the claim of Archbishop William Temple that “Christianity is one of the most materialistic religion”, and he does so quite jejunely. As has already been pointed out, the call to a reign of quantity was launched in Genesis: “Be fruitful, multiply, and populate the earth.” As a doctrine rejecting the existence of a spiritual principle, and reducing all reality to matter and its changes, materialism seems to be foreign to Christianity, until one wonders whether an actual spiritual principle is present in this religion. Wasn’t it R. Guénon who, in ‘The Great Triad’, refused to acknowledge that the theistic God has a spiritual nature ? Obviously, this does not prevent D. Cologne from qualifying Christianity as a religion of transcendence.

There is no mention in our study of anything that would go beyond a struggle for world power in the attitude of the Church in the ‘middle-ages’ because there is no indication whatsoever that the Church had something else than world power on her mind, and, far from lacking references to spirituality, quoting Evola, we point to “the merely religious spirituality of the Church and her hegemonic claims” – that woolly, abstract, conceptual spirituality which the Italian author described, in its purely Semitic form, as being “on other hand, an affirmation of the virile principle that is coarsely material, sensual, or uncouth and ferociously warlike (Assyria), and, on the other hand, an emasculated spirituality, a ‘lunar’ and predominantly sacerdotal relation with the divine, the pathos of sin and expiation, a whole impure and reckless romanticism, combined, as a sort of escapism, with a naturalistic and mathematically-based contemplativeness.” (‘Three Aspects of the Jewish Problem’), not to mention the “devout and imploring servility,” which is found towards the divinity among Semitic peoples, instead of “the rite, conceived, let us repeat, as a pure compelling operation regarding the divine.” (ibid.)

Our perspective is neither ‘exoteric’, nor ‘esoteric’. These terms are not relevant in the Aryan context. This distinction made by Guénon only applies to the non Aryan world of mystery, initiatory, religions, such as that which was practised by the Pythagorean sect. Following in R. Guénon’s footsteps – J. Evola never took position on this - D. Cologne argues that the criterion of religion is the presence of an esoteric legacy and of an initiatory transmission, and again, this applies only to mystery religions. As has already been explained, initiation, in an Aryan context, does not have the ontological meaning R. Guénon and J. Evola ascribed to it, and which it has in other ethnic or racial contexts. Even in an Aryan-like context, in the case of the Dvija (‘twice-born’), it is true that the first birth is considered as physical, and the second birth as ‘spiritual’, but, once again, ‘spiritual’, here, is not to be understood in the way the modern man does. Since we cannot find again the abovementioned message, let us quote wikipedia’s entry on ‘dvija’: ‘The second ‘birth’ occurs when one uptakes fulfilling a role in society, at the time of Upanayanam initiation ceremony. For example, a Brahmin is initiated into the ultimate pursuit of life Brahmopadesam (Preaching/Advising in the matter of the nature of Brahman, the ultimate reality). Traditionally, a Kshatriya would start learning the use of arms, while a Vaishya would start a trade apprenticeship. Only the Dvijas were allowed to perform certain sacred rites and rituals in the traditional Brahmanical society. Dvija Bandhu is the term for a person born to Dvija parents but not formally initiated into the Dvija fold (i.e. someone for whom no sacred thread ceremony was performed).” Exactly when and in what part of the world, whether in Europe or in India, this term acquired the spiritualist content and meaning it is vested with in both author’s work, we do not know. To a surprising degree, the Italian author attached great importance, especially in the years following his encounter with the French author’s work, to this spiritualistic concept of ‘initiation’. How come he did not realise that there was no such thing as exotericism or exotericism in the ancient European cultures of Aryan origin, to which ‘initiation’ in the guénonian sense of the word was also unknown ?

‘The Years of Decision’ had not been published in Germany that it was banned by the Nationalist-Socialist authorities, and rightfully so, owing to the many nonsensical considerations that are developed in it about race, and which could only find an echo in half-breeds and raceless persons ; banned, until people, after having been detoxified from certain Semitic substances, when possible, could taste ithese considerations at their fair value. Had it been published in German at that time, a writing such as ‘Christianity and Initiation’ should have been suppressed in that country - to prevent it from falling into the hands of simple minds - for stating that “If we consider the state of the Western world in the age in question (that is, of the territories comprised in the Roman Empire), it is easy to see that, had Christianity not ‘descended’ into the exoteric domain, this world would soon have been deprived of all tradition, for the traditions that had existed until that time, especially the Greco-Roman tradition, which naturally was predominant, had reached an advanced state of degeneration heralding the imminent end of their cycle of existence. This ‘descent’ therefore, let us insist again, was neither an accident nor a deviation but should on the contrary be regarded as having a truly ‘providential’ character since it prevented the West from falling at that time into a state comparable to that in which it now finds itself.” It should have been suppressed because, in the truly fine tradition of Christian propaganda, R. Guénon tried to redefine the ‘destroyer’ as a ‘saviour’, by conveniently failing to notice that Christianity and its philosophical forerunners (https://elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2013/10/01/la-liberte-un-concept-desclaves-2/ ) were one of the main factors of the fall of the Roman civilisation.

No wonder R. Guénon, according to his personnal secretary, J. Reyor, felt exhilarated by Schuon’s plan to islamise Europe. (cretrg.free.fr/Hp13j5n6/DCI.pdf). Christianity, the first offspring of Judaism, had run its course, it was for Islam, the second offspring of Judaism, to finish the destructive work it had begun. L. Dumont’s ‘Essays on Individualism’ (available at google.books) is quite enlightening when it comes to understanding by what channels both individualism and universalism were introduced in the culture of White peoples.
Last Edit: Oct 28, 2019 at 6:06am by Evola As He Is
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 9:52am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 9:52am
It takes some time before a young man is able to digest a dazzling masterpiece like ‘The Reign of Quantity”, and to regain his sight, and even more time before he is able to start thinking critically about it from a White traditional perspective. No matter one’s spiritual qualities, one’s mental strength, one’s ‘detachment’ towards the environment where one lives, one cannot be completely unaffected by outer influences, the French author and the Italian author are no exception, especially since their time was saturated with spiritualist concepts and orientalist representations of all kinds. Over them, in terms of opportunities of‘deconditionning’, racially aware Whites have a major advantage, which is at the same time a major inconvenient on the material plane: the occupation of our countries by what Yockey called the ‘cultural distorter’ and by the millions of coloured people it has imported on this continent, which, socially, economically, politically, culturally, but also psychically, are a growing threat to what little may be left of its culture : turn the TV on, and you’ll virtually find yourself at the Caliph’s court, and, unless one lives in an ivory tower, the ‘Yellow peril’ is no longer a mere expression out of which it sounded well to make a mockery in the XXth century bourgeoisie. Speaking of ‘immigration’, now a euphemism for ‘invasion’, it would be constructive to dig into some of the aspects of the burning issues which have been raised and considered here, aspects such as the figure of the stranger in the Bible, both in the Old and in the New Testament, since, from what we have gathered from a preliminary examination, the way the stranger is viewed in the Bible, especially in the New testament, is closely akin to the way it is now idealised by more than one European. In the shortened version published at elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com/2012/09/30/les-racines-asiatiques-du-mondialisme/ of a work by an ecclesiastic about the proto-Communist spirit of early and Medieval Christianity, there is a very interesting paragraph about the link between monastic orders and religious congregations, on one hand, and lay communities, on the other hand. It would be constructive to study this link, as a mechanism of communicating vessels. The finishing touches are being put to the third part of ‘La Liberté: un concept d’esclaves’. Freedom as a plebeian concept could hardly have emerged before the subjective standpoint, unknown to ancient Hellenes, developed. The object of this study is precisely to trace the genesis of the subjective standpoint within the context of philosophy, to show that it lies at the basis of most philosophical theories (etymologically, ‘theory’ means ’I see (orao) the divine (masc. theion)’ or ‘divine things’ (fem. theia), and, in fact, the goddess theia, which is not quite the same thing ; Heidegger preferred the second reading, and rightfully linked it to the English word ‘theatre’, from ‘theatron’, ‘theatre ; the people in the theatre ; a show, a spectacle,’ literally ‘place for viewing’ ; in this respect, see also our messages on Shakespeare and ‘An Eye Is Not Always an Eye’, as well as members’ momentous contribution to that thread), that it lies at the very basis of most philosophical theories, that is to say, at the heart of the subversive concepts which were to act, on the political and social plane, as major factors in the undermining of the ancient traditional Greco-Roman world, waiting for Christianity to put the final nail to it. Its object is also to show how the sentient subject, increasingly losing itself in the contemplation of itself, created within itself the so-called “inner kingdom”, whose existence was sensed by the Sophists, conceptualised by the Stoics, ‘exotericised’ by Marcus Aurelius, brought to a new level by Augustine, and into which, since then, it has never ceased to entomb itself.

All the texts published at elementsdeducationraciale.wordpress.com have a more or less direct relation to race. On the whole, all of them express our point of view. Where required, this or that view is corrected in a related foot note. Any constructive contribution to this blog would be most welcome.

Besides ‘The Jewels of the papacy’, messages on Shakespeare and ‘An Eye Is Not Always an Eye’, it is advisable to read ‘A Jewel of the Papacy’, ‘From Freedom to Feedom’, and ‘Zero’. As for a reading list, as far as race is concerned, Evola’s books are a must. You’ll find more at www.histoireebook.com/index.php?tag/Racialisme (please note that we have not read them all).
Last Edit: Oct 28, 2019 at 6:05am by Evola As He Is
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 9:53am
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 9:53am
We have recalled that Protestants have not been the only Christians to criticise vehemently the Church, that some Catholic authors, too, came down strongly against it. Martin McCabe (1867 – 1955), an English writer and a former Roman Catholic, belong to those who exposed the Church for what it is, in particular in 'The Popes and Their Church' (at infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_mccabe/popes_and_church/) Joseph Cesare Baronio (1538 – 1607), an Italian Cardinal and ecclesiastical historian, called the papacy, not without reason, a 'Pornocacry'. He said : "Evil desire, leaning on the arm of the state, raging with ambition and lust of power stretched out her hands to control all things." (in 'History of the Church through the Ages', p. 86)
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 12:32pm
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 12:32pm
A chapter of 'The Road of Cinnabar', to be translated into English with the precious help of Anthony Blackford, will require serious footnoting. I am referring to the chapter dedicated to the author's encounter with the East, where he says, about Tantrism, that « Although it presupposes an adequate psychological and mental training, it takes the body as the basis and instrument: not the body as known by Western anatomy and physiology, but the body in relation to its deepest, transbiological, energies, which are usually not seized by ordinary consciousness - especially by that of the man of today –, and which correspond to the elements and the powers of the universe, studied by that thousand year-old hyperphysical physiology whose development was no less systematic in the East than the study of the human organism was in the West. »

The first attempts at systematic description of the organisaation and working of the body goes back to the VIth century BC, when the Pythagorean Alcmaeon of Croton in South Italy examined and described the internal structure of the eye and of the ear ; in Sicily, in the Vth century BC, Empedocles of Akragas wrote of digestion and respiration ; in the same century, Diogenes of Apollonia, said by Clement of Alexandria ('Strom.') to have visited Persia, Babylonia and Egypt, essayed an account of the vascular system ; Democritus of Abdera (460 – 361) formulated a wide range of medical theories on topics such as conception and embriology (Michael Gagarin, 'The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece and Rome', vol. 7, « Anatomy and Physiology »). From Hippocrates of Cos (460- 370 ) (the medical knowledge of the Hippocratic corpus derived in large part from Egyptian sources, as well as from the beliefs of the priest-healers from the Asklepieion of Cos [Calvin W. Schwabe, 'Cattle, Priests, and Progress in Medicine', p. 119) to Praxagoras of Cos (see Glenn R. Bugh, 'The Cambridge Companion to the Hellenistic World', p. 250), most early 'anatomists' were either greatly influence by Egyptian medicine, or lived in the outer periphery of Greece.

The medical science that developped there under the influence of Eastern knowledge underwent later « a metamorphosis at the hands of the Syriac and Arabic scholars of the East », who, in turn, acquired much from India, (Donald Campbell, 'Arabian Medicine and Its Influence on the Middle Ages', vol. 1, p. 3), and, as is well-known, it is owing to these scholars that Hippocratic and pseudo-Hippocratic writings entered the West in Arabic translations (the originals, once again, have been lost) in the XII/XIIIth centuries, at a time when anatomy was completely unknown to 'Westerners'. Their impact was huge. For example, « the first autopsy performed in Europe (quite ironically enough, it was forbidden in dar-al-Islam) took place as soon as the books of Arab and Greek medicine and philosophy translated into Arabic were made available in Europe — in Bologna between 1266 and 1275. » (see Hidemitsu Kuroki, 'The Influence Of Human Mobility In Muslim Societies'). Some Arab anatomists travelled to Dar-el-Harb, to conduct dissection.

More broadly, the main Islamic discoveries and contributions to the field of medicine include:

« 1) The introduction of new fields of medical research and clinical practice such as maternity, gynecology, embryology, pediatrics, dietary medicine, public health, and psychic medicine.

2) The diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of many new diseases such as smallpox and measles.

3) The qualitative development of the field of pharmacology beyond the comparatively limited earlier state of knowledge (whatever this subjective evaluation means... [Author's Note])

4) In contrast to the Greek tradition which excluded it, Muslims incorporated surgery into the study of medicine, and developed its practice and techniques.
5) The structure and organization of modern hospitals follows patterns established as early as the ninth century. Islamic hospitals had open admission policies for patients of all economic background, and regardless of sex, religion, or ethnicity. They were run by large administrative staff and could accommodate as many as 8,000 patients. They were separated into different wards by sex and nature of illness. Moreover, hospitals had their own pharmacies and facilities in which medicines were prepared, and each hospital had its own apprenticeship program where students obtained practical experience under the guidance of a physician.»

Evola acknowledged straightforwardly in 'The Road of Cinnabar' that some of the views he held on the East in the late 1920's were mere « fisime » (« whims »). What he never realised, convinced as he was, influenced in this by R. Guénon's prejudices, of the validity of the view that science is a typical product of the 'West', of 'Western' minds, was that this very view is also a whim. Admittedly, not much information was available on this influence before, if I am not mistaken, the early 1980's. 10 out of the 11 references given in the note in question concern books published in the 2000's, and that which was available in the early 1900's was scattered.

"Capitalism in Medieval Islam" (The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 29, Issue 1, March 1969, pp. 79-96) by S.Y. Labib is based on secondary sources dating from the XIXth century and the first half of the XXth, as well as on primary ones. Some of the interesting points it raises are that, as also shown by Clement M. Henry ('The Politics of Islamic Finance, 2004', p. 2), despite being 'ḥarām' (« illegal »), « usury and excessive profit played an important role in Islamic capitalism ». Even more importantly, « business activity typical of the modern commodity exchange, i.e. the trading in wares not present at the marketplace but to be delivered later. Dates were legally sold at auction before they were ripe and harvested. Even the wholesaling of many kinds of tuberous vegetables... took place before the products were out of the earth – that is, before the merchant ever saw the harvested product. According to many a jurist this was legal. » In other words, virtual business was widespread in the Arab world centuries before it developped in the 'West'.
Evola As He Is
Administrator
*****

Evola As He Is Avatar

Posts: 189Male

Oct 25, 2019 at 12:51pm
Post Options
Post by Evola As He Is on Oct 25, 2019 at 12:51pm
As recalled in 'The Origins and Role of Same-Sex Relations in Human Societies', some of the cult male prostitutes devoted to the mother goddess are described in ancient texts as being « neither male nor female », that is, as « eunuchs ». There are three words for « eunuchs » in Sumerian : kurgarra, girbadara, and sagursag. It would however appear that much has been lost in translation, as explained somehow clumsily here :

« There are many creatures mentioned in the Sumerian texts which obviously are not human. It is said that they are "neither male or female," that is, they are sexless creatures. Most translations ignore the ramifications and prefer to skirt the issue by calling them "eunuchs." But this term is not satisfactory, for the text clearly says that they take no food or drink, have no emotions, and have no family life. Obviously these creatures possess no human qualities and have the passivity and traits of artificial machines. We will try to summarize available references to these creatures which obviously are not human and have all the characteristics of mechanical devices. Five of them are mentioned in the list of MEs that Ishtar obtained from Enki. The robots are called the KURGARRA, GALATUR, SAGURSAG, GIRBADARA, AND GALLA. These are all Sumerian terms for which there is no English counterpart. They are not usually translated for the simple reason that no one knows what they are or how torender the terms into modern language. Other unknown terms also appear to represent artificial creatures — the LILIS, UB, MESI, and ALA have been called "demons". These demons were apparently quite numerous and harassed and oppressed the citizenry of Mesopotamia.

The "Kurgarra" or Bright Mechanical Man

The KURGARRA was one of the creatures created by Enki to enter the underworld and rescue Ishtar. Called "a creature neither male or female," it was designed to enter the underworld "through cracks in the gates" or, in other words, by surreptitious means. Not being human or godly and not subject to the strict rules imposed by the MEs on entering and leaving the underworld, it could apparently move about at will, unhampered by regulations. This behavior is more characteristic of an artificial creature. The KURGARRA or as it sometimes appear KURGURRA, is also listed as a ME in the list that Ishtar obtained from Enki. A study of the elements which make up the term KUR-GAR-RA or KUR-GUR-RA indicates that it can be translated to mean "bright metallic robot." KUR is often used to mean mighty and it also has a secondary meaning of the underworld; it is often applied to monsters. GUR means to be mobile or to travel about, for example MA-GUR is the runabout that Enki used to tour the canals of Mesopotamia. RA is the term for "bright" in the sense of metallic. It is also possible that GARRA is a form or corruption of GALLA which has been described as a mechanical man. Thus, the KURGARRA or KURGURRA would be a bright metallic-like mechanical creature programmed by Enki to rescue Ishtar from underworld. » (R. A. Boulay, Flying Serpents and Dragons: The Story of Mankind's Reptilian Past)

The chapter continues with an etymological examination of the term "Galatur", another artificial creature fashioned by Enki to rescue Ishtar from the underworld..

But why would R. A. Boulay be right about the etymology of these names, when that, or those, which are offered by scholars would be, if not wrong, superficial ?

Those who are not familiar wih Sumerian clay tablets might want to watch : www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DEAzA6TNR0 (for example,from 01:06.30 on) and www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzANU5iog0Q (33:05)

(The comments are not worthy listening to.)

« … many of the tablets unearthed at Ashurbanipal depict the Annunaki as they soar into the sky above Mesopotamia on plumes of fire and smke. Interestingly enough, the bulk of these tablets seem to focus around a period of a great Annunaki exodus – as if, for some reason, the gods had been emergently summoned back to their distant home… Other tablets depict the Annunaki wearing what appear to be prodigiously capable computer-devices on their faces and bodies, or advanced wristwatches on their arms. Some have … speculated that the Annunaki had successfully integrated their technology into the very fabric of their biology » (Tom Copper: Journey to Mulligan's Peak Raffi Bagdasarian)

Transhumanism is « The belief or theory that the human race can evolve beyond its current physical and mental limitations, especially by means of science and technology », but also by means of hybridism, that is, in the case in point, the coupling, through DNA mixing, of human with animal. So racial mixing is not the end of the dysgenic process, it is a stage in it.

Sex, unsurprinsingly, seems to be key to the successfull integration of technology into the very fabric of people's biology. « Ultra-realistic 'digital sex headsets' will allow you to enjoy a virtual reality romp with your favourite celebrity crush » (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ultra-realistic-digital-sex-headsets-9491515) « Sex will be more popular with ROBOTS than with humans by 2050, claims shocking report »( www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/11898241/By-2050-human-on-robot-sex-will-be-more-common-than-human-on-human-sex-says-report.html). As usual, Japanese are, in a manner of speaking, on top of things (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/virtual-reality-sex-suit-lets-7698685).

www.youtube.com/watch?v=APFUxvw_gQQ, courtesy of G. van den Heide, tends to show that the kind of scientidic knowledge exists that is capable of unleashing the kind of technology required to achieve trrans-species hybridism.

P.-.s. : some motifs in Toltec art should be reassessed in the light of brand new monster machines www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-v-PEi5OaE.