/fascist/ - Surf the Kali Yuga

Fascist and Third Position Discussion

[Post a Reply]
[Hide]
Posting Mode: Reply
Säge:
Name
Subject
Message

Max message length: 5000

Files
E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

  • Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more
  • Max files: 5
  • Max file size: 50.00 MB
  • Read the global rules before you post, as well as the board rules found in the sticky.

08/28/20 Come and join our Matrix/IRC servers, the info can be found here.
[Index] [Catalog] [Archive] [Bottom] [Refresh]

All-Purpose Dharmic Philsophy Thread Blackshirt 03/23/2021 (Tue) 00:26:25 ID:930088 No. 447
About time we had one. I'll begin with an interesting tweet thread going over how proper Buddhism has nothing in it that encourages social justice: https://twitter.com/gesarofbling/status/1070566104089583618
(201.93 KB 217x339 ClipboardImage.png)
(2.00 MB 2000x1411 bhagavad gita race mixing pic.png)
Anyone looking for a good commentary on the Bhagavad Gita should check out the pic I attached with commentary by Ramanuja. Prabhupada's commentary is pretty solid in itself, but what I like about Ramanuja's commentary so far (I'm not done with it) is that he is much more terse and elaborates on the meaning of a verse in very interesting ways, or links them with other verses that have just been discussed recently. I was going to give a PDF of this but I cannot find it.
Reposting from the QTDDTOT a book on Buddhism and masculinity.
A good article about Buddhism and Free Will, like the Greeks and Romans, the Buddha found the freedom of the will to be a non-issue, pretty interesting. https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/budfree.htm
>>998 Really fucking interesting. >Normally we assume that there has to be a self or an agent in order for there to be freedom, but this is just the presumption Nagarjuna questions. If we cannot call the web of causal relations free since it lacks a self, by the same token we cannot call it determined, since nothing outside of it is causing it. >To the extent that people identify a self, that self is determined by causes outside of it. So, the correlation in the Christian tradition of self and freedom is reversed: rather than correlates, self and freedom are antitheses. And Buddhism is neutral monism, like all Aryan religions and philosophies.
>>1001 Various kinds of robots and artificial intelligences were definitely known in the past and put to use in Dharmic civilizations. The relics of the Buddha, of course, were known to be guarded by automatons called ‘bhūtavāhana-yanta’. Yanta is the Pali word that comes from Sanskrit Yantra, or a machine. Apollonius of Tyana was also said to have observed various forms of advanced technology in India as well, such as automatons who served as cupbearers for a king. There is another text from the 11th century written in Pali which mentions how machines are constructed in a kingdom called Roma (!): >Roma, according to the story, was filled with makers of automata—what the text calls literally “machines that were the vehicles of spirits,” bhūtavāhana-yanta, or mechanical beings animated by a kind of life force. In Roma, these machines carried out many functions, like commerce (buying and selling), agriculture, and protection. The secrets of this technology were fiercely guarded, and the machine-makers (yantakāras) of Roma were expected to report periodically to the royal court. If there was any prolonged absence, an automaton was sent to hunt down and kill the errant artisan, preventing the knowledge from spreading to other realms. https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/roma#kavya The Greeks of course talk of Talos, an automaton who protected the island of Crete. In Dharmic texts we can find almost every form of technology and concept imaginable—ranging from flying saucers, pressurized space-suits, time dilation, etc. In fact most modern technology today is basically a kiked version of what Aryans had already harnessed and mastered millennia ago, perfectly integrated into a far more spiritually advanced society. Technology was not allowed to run rampant. The type of AI / robots that the kikes are going force onto society is the epitome of adharma and evil, however—another way for the jews to keep people enslaved, to exterminate Whites and to keep humans trapped in their soul prison for Yahweh
(409.88 KB 1280x1512 c2f60dd9c113797237c2ba4ceb7ea331.jpg)
>>1005 >Time dilation in Dharmic texts Sounds interesting, where can i read more about it?
>>1007 One example I know off the top of my head is in the Bhagavata Purana, Canto 9, chapter 4— >“Taking his daughter Revati with him, Kakudmi went to Brahma’s world, the doors to which were open then. He wished to ask the lord about an excellent groom for his daughter. At that time, a performance by the gandharvas was going on and he did not get an opportunity. When it ended, he told the original being about his intention. Hearing this, the illustrious Brahma laughed and told him, “O king! Those you thought of have been swallowed by time a long time ago. We no longer hear about their sons, grandsons, great grandsons and gotras. Twenty-seven cycles of the four yugas have passed in the intervening period. Leave this place. O king! There “is the immensely strong Baladeva, a gem among men and born as a portion of the god of the gods. Bestow this gem of a daughter on him.” There’s another example in the 10th canto, chapter 13 involving Krishna and Brahma but its less readily quotable. Basically Brahma vanished for what seem to be a single Earth year but was for him a single truti, or 0.30 microseconds. So with that in mind Kakudmi stayed in Brahmaloka for about 3,456 seconds, or just under an hour, which corresponded to 27 x 4,320,000 Earth years or 116,640,000 years.
(28.29 KB 320x239 nuristani children 2.jpg)
(46.49 KB 320x240 nuristani children.jpg)
(22.85 KB 406x480 nuristan man blue eyes.jpg)
(107.25 KB 1024x685 Nuristan child blue eyes.jpg)
The people of Nuristan (in Eastern Afghanistan) were practitioners of their native religion until the late 19th century, when they were forcibly converted to Islam. They worshiped gods such as Imra (from 'Yamaraja'). This isn't as interesting as the paper linked here >>46 but it's important to fill in the gaps regarding the spread and persistence of Aryan religion until quite recently, practiced by people with rather Aryan-esque phenotypes.
>>1137 Are they start to heavily race-mix with arabs, after islam conversion ?
(345.92 KB 405x304 afghanistan red hair.png)
(77.14 KB 960x639 pashtun girl.jpg)
>>1139 I don't think so. Since they converted at the end of the 19th century, it's clear that they haven't been totally mixed out of existence given the fact that all of the photos I'm posting are modern. Afghanistan isn't an Arab country anyone, it's composed of Indo-European speakers for the most part, particularly Iranian ethnic groups. On top of that, the groups in Afghanistan are extremely clannish and tight-knit, I don't know how much they'd mix with others.
>>1141 >anyone *anyway
Realistically, what is his power-level in truth?
>>1398 Considering what another Anon revealed about him it varies from subject to subject, on women for example, he is shit.
>>1139 Yes, they are disappearing.
>>1545 It's strange how on that topic he drops the ball so hard. If one reads his Dharma Manifesto he literally does things like divide up regions into categories and outright declares that a huge swathe of non-White countries incapable of sustaining civilization long-term. He doesn't outright say "non-Whites" but the countries he points out (African ones, Haiti, etc) make it extremely clear what he's saying here. And he also quotes from the Talmud saying that the best goy is a dead goy. One would think he would be extremely redpilled on women
>>1139 >>1547 Just like Whites all over the globe. It's horrific really.
(13.91 KB 640x360 JY2DwfZTJ4s_640x360.jpg)
>>1582 Whites aren't mixing with people all over the globe niggerpiller. Whites aren't breeding at all, most of the Whites you see with niggers are usually jewish or some form of mutt themselves. Local Whites are more likely to fuck their cousin than a non-White.
>>1909 >Venerable Paññobhāsa Mahathera, Based? Highly. I was just reading another essay on this blog in the last hour or two, so I was quite surprised to see you post this. It's very clear that basic Buddhist teachings simply just don't align with the Cultural Marxist worldview, which is built on victimhood, resentment, indulging desires and in emotions. It's very, very unfortunate that in the minds of many so-called 'Eastern religions' have been tainted with in the minds of Westerners with leftist politics and political correctness. It is similar in Sanatana Dharma. With Western Buddhism in particular though, it has been veritably colonized by jews to such an extent that we now see terms like "jewBu".
(89.35 KB 600x800 zazen meditation.jpg)
One thing I like about Dharmic paths is how they focus so centrally on self-control over desire and the emotions. Far too much attention today is put on validating emotions and feelings. I don't think that 'repressing' is a real thing with negative effects. What the guy in the Buddhist article posted above says about guilt and regret is also very true as well. There's no point in crying and fussing over what has been done and cannot be changed. Same goes with future events too like dying. Most of what people fly into a rage over is a waste. I've seen people flip their shit over someone forgetting to turn on the dishwasher, or a dog throwing up on the carpet, etc. If we read suttas we see Arahats who experience physical pain, but feel zero anguish or aversion to it. They're that disciplined and control. Modern people are fags. Don't be a fag, be an Aryan sage
>>1912 >Local Whites are more likely to fuck their cousin than a non-White. You're retarded if you think local Whites would choose incest over miscengenation.
>>1931 I would marry a first cousin before I would ever racemix
>>1931 >You're retarded if you think local Whites would choose incest over miscengenation. You're retarded thinking that Southern America doesn't exist. You're even more retarded making shit about muh Huh Whites fucking niggers. You have a cuck mentality fuck off somewhere else.
>>1996 >Southern America I meant the Southern states specifically speaking.
>>1931 Marrying a cousin = very slightly higher chance of a birth defect Marrying a non-White = guaranteed drop your child's IQ and they won't look like you
>>1933 >>1996 >>2002 OK, yes incest is technically less harmful for the White race than race-mixing, but to the AVERAGE White person who probably was taught Hitler was evil and rednecks are scary inbred rapists or some shit, most Whites would rather fuck a nigger than their cousin.
>>2030 Probably true, sad enough
>>1928 >but feel zero anguish or aversion to it I mean that's a pretty low bar to set, it mostly comes down to mental control than anything. I'd also expect every anon here to already be at that point, seeing how we'll likely have to deal with a lot of physical pain and discomfort in the future.
>>2037 Building up that sort of discipline is extremely important. I could still probably get much better with pain tolerance myself, but once you realize that sperging out over the pain makes it twice as bad one really can get a grip on it. I’m not sure how one would become totally self-controlled in that regard though. I would need to research. Same with the cold. For the last year or two I’ve walked around outside during the winter even when its well below freezing in shorts. People think I’m insane but it’s really just a matter of being habituated to the cold and taking freezing showers Wim Hof-style. Now is definitely the time to learn these things
>>2030 Again still none of the shit you've said is true, you're retarded and a gigantic cuck. Unironically neck yourself.
>incest >racemixing Both of them are wrong. End of story.
>>2030 >but to the AVERAGE White person who probably was taught Hitler was evil and rednecks are scary inbred rapists Liberals and jews aren't the average White person moron. Not even most liberals are willing enough to be with niggers, because most of them are either single or dating someone of the same race or closely related. jews although have a fetish for blacks. You're conflating too different peoples.
>>990 This book does not only seems really legit, but it indirectly argues that Buddhism is inherently fascist, or fascism being nothing more but Buddhism without the teachings. I really see how Evola was such a proud Buddhist. >>2033 No it isn't true, he's retarded.
(102.53 KB 749x936 kamikaze.jpg)
>>3129 The interesting counter-view here is from how some Japanese nationalists viewed Buddhism, i.e. as a subversive universalist force. People like Hozumi Yatsuka seemed to believe that Japan was able to assimilate and sublimate the religion though and got rid of its worst aspects. Another interesting thing is that in Mishima's Runaway Horses there is a part where at some nationalist's training camp there is a diatribe given against Buddhism, saying how the Buddha reduced everything to nihilism and destroyed the manliness of men. I'm wondering though if this Mishima sneaking some of his Nietzschean views into a character in the book on the topic of Buddhism though. The whole tetralogy of Mishima has Buddhist influences which seem to be part of the main character's degeneration along with the rest of Japan too. I think true Buddhism is more like you say though - Japan was able to reconcile it with Shinto to great success. The war machine of the 1930s and 40s was influenced by Buddhism and Shinto alike. I know Evola says in his 'Metaphysics of War' that there might have been an influence of Zen in the dedication and fearlessness of the kamikaze pilots.
>>3133 Buddhism of itself was never against manliness and the thought it being non-caring for masculinity is an idea that came from the West. Theravada and the others sects can definitely be argued that it subverted and ruined Gautama Buddha's teaching ( Zen probably sticks more to the original teachings than the others), although I wouldn't say these ruined Japan and made it unmanly, but just the worst that is Western philosophy and values and how it made post-war Japan turn away from their manliness and dying with purpose. It could of also been some chink philosophies/teachings, because I think one Korean anon argued that China had its fair share of submissive teachings that ruined China and Korea.
>>3136 >although I wouldn't say these ruined Japan and made it unmanly, but just the worst that is Western philosophy and values and how it made post-war Japan turn away from their manliness and dying with purpose. This is very true. Like I touched on briefly, some Japanese thinkers were arguing that Buddhism had, by and large, been successfully sublimated in the Japanese kokutai / national polity. I think I would agree with this analysis as well, and it's actually essentially the analysis put forward in Kokutai no Hongi - an official work put out by the government on the core principles of Japan. There were many interpretations done by Japanese that successfully integrated Shinto and Buddhism to such an extent that many people would hardly know a difference between them in Japan. The period Japan from the beginning of the Meiji Era to 1945 was extremely masculine. Perhaps even the most masculine of the Axis Powers (and I say that with no disrespect to the Third Reich). The problem they were identifying themselves was Western ideologies that preached individualism and societal disharmony The sort of self-discipline and asceticism put forth in Buddhism is in my mind the pinnacle of masculine virtues, at least in its original forms. Mishima's analysis is seriously flawed, though exact usage of Buddhism put forth in his tetralogy works rather well, as it has reduced the character Honda to passivity, weakness and degeneracy compared to incarnations of the young men he came in contact with reached greatness. It might be a certain interpretation of some kinds of Buddhists, rather than the teachings themselves.
>>3144 >There were many interpretations done by Japanese that successfully integrated Shinto and Buddhism to such an extent that many people would hardly know a difference between them in Japan. No surprise from me that it was successful, considering that Shinto shares core values and principles that align with Buddha's teachings. We see something similar when the Greeks created a synthesis for their culture and religion with Buddha without any contradictions or conflicts. The only thing I can say that Buddhism is incompatible with would have to be Western philosophy and values. >The period Japan from the beginning of the Meiji Era to 1945 was extremely masculine. Perhaps even the most masculine of the Axis Powers (and I say that with no disrespect to the Third Reich) You are definitely correct to say that Japan was a very masculine and discipline country, which even surpassed NatSoc, I mean hell even Hitler thought that Japan had a much higher culture to his own, which is why he admired them so much. I believe that if Hitler had been much more radical and revolutionary to eliminate the weakness that are Abrahamic traditions and values within German culture and minds, then Germany could of been as disciplined or more-so than Japan and the soldiers and command needed to defeat the (((Bolsheviks))).
>>3150 >I believe that if Hitler had been much more radical and revolutionary to eliminate the weakness that are Abrahamic traditions and values within German culture and minds, then Germany could of been as disciplined or more-so than Japan and the soldiers and command needed to defeat the (((Bolsheviks))) It’s definitely quite unfortunate that Hitler only had the time between 1933 and 1939 to really reshape his people without the issue of the war floating above all of their heads. Even then the strides that Hitler made in reshaping his Volk were quite impressive. If only we could have seen an entire generation raised entirely under NS values. It would have meant a complete transformation and regeneration of Germany, if not Europe. Abrahamism would have been sidelined, and the new elite of the SS would have been like a caste of kshatriyas in the Reich. Hitler definitely saw the strengths of Japan and their extreme loyalty to their race and emperor and admired them. The longer National Socialism had permeated the minds of Germans, and the more Abrahamism had been destroyed, the more and more in spirit Germany would have resembled Imperial Japan. Hindsight is everything though, I guess. We know exactly what will need done and quickly in the future regarding Abrahamism and other false, anti-Nature religions. The same is true of filling the spiritual void with something suitable, whatever that may be.
I've noticed a lot of Indians on YouTube videos begging devas, buddhas and even God to give them money and materialistic success - are the religions there really that degenerated or is that just what the average shitskin cares about nowadays more than actual spiritual growth?
>>1139 There are some shitskins in Nuristan now but perhaps they'd been there for a while. It's the Kalash it seems that seem to be dying off.
(25.04 KB 699x195 purity kalash.PNG)
>>4970 I feel for the pagans of South Asia. The Kalash in particular have been targeted by the violence of radical Muslims and proselytizers for some time now. It is no wonder that they view the Muslim world as spiritually impure according to their religion. Mudshits ruin everything. A lot of this is recent too. There were literally hundreds and thousands of Hindus in Afghanistan in the 1970s, now it's a complete Islamic shithole.
>>4971 >the pagans of South Asia You're saying that there are White pagans in South Asia? Or you mean brown? Race is important too. >muzzlims Honestly I have no issues with them if they stick to their desert countries or whatever.
>>4967 It's just a prayer. Don't see the issue.
>>4972 Islam destroys cultures and turns them into cookie-cutter Arabized mudshitters. Regardless of the race it’s somewhat of a tragedy when a group gets assimilated into the Abrahamic hivemind. With groups like the Kalash being terrorized and persecuted it’s of course especially tragic since many of them quite literally look White, and to this day worship gods like Indra. >>4973 I guess one could criticize it as a form of what Evola would call “lunar spirituality”, i.e. spirituality that is materialistic, sensuous, a bit decadent perhaps—based on the metaphysically feminine. I don’t know if I can call it inherently “bad” though. Hinduism traditionally has four goals for humans–dharma, artha, kama and moksha. The middle two are wealth and pleasure (within the proper contexts). Though I wouldn’t praise this sort of stuff, not everyone is a yogi.
(131.06 KB 1024x681 Chinese-Dragon-Art-02-1024x681.jpg)
I don't know if Daoism is Dharmic in nature, but I like what I'm reading. >Unlike traditional Western religions, which portrays nature as something evil or immortal which man has to overcome, Taoism encourages its followers to act in "harmony with the order of nature" and view life as a "series of transformations, procreation and re-creations." In Taoist thought the path to heaven is through nature and the terms "heaven” and "nature" are often used interchangeably.
>>5084 Spot-on. That is the best way to think about the Laws of Nature, dharma or whatever one wants to call it. One either works in harmony with this and among themselves and the world around them, or they work against it, and bring about their own ruin. Modern ideologies do not encourage this. They encourage working against Nature, and celebrate conflict, not harmony.
>>5084 >Unlike traditional Western religions Why is it that all these Asian cultures seem to be more "dharmic" than mainstream Western culture, when it was Aryans who supposedly coined the very term dharma?
>>5084 Do you have a good source or sources on the subject? I've been looking into Daoism/Taoism myself a bit more. While I am aware of some of it's teachings that can be beneficial to promote a healthier society (your given quote for example), some of the practices I've read bring up concerns (in particular the "sexual practices"). This may be due to the sources I've read so far, and much of it may be influenced by westerners and modern Chinese teachings. However, If there are sources similar to what we have in the Aryan religion thread, it would be appreciated to help compare and see if Daoism suffers similarly to other non-Abrahamic religions in how they are taught today.
>>5091 Asian cultures haven't been raped as hard by modernity for the last few hundred years like the West has. The West has been diverging from the other cultures since the so-called "Enlightenment" and scientific revolutions which paved the way for materialism, atheism and the like. Before then we were much closer spiritually speaking to these cultures, even when Christianized more or less. This is not to downplay the transition between pre-Abrahamism and Abrahamism, of course. The transition was gradual. The entire Aryan world was 'dharmic' prior to Abrahamism basically, and even then it persisted in some places longer than others. Lithuania remained pagan until like the 1500s if I am recalling correctly, and Persians remained Zoroastrian long after Europe had been Abrahamized in large parts. In other parts race-mixing destroyed the racial stock but they remained at least somewhat dharmic.
(143.17 KB 195x300 ClipboardImage.png)
>>5092 I'd start with the main source for Taoism, first of all. That anon might be able to recommend you more though.
(260.71 KB 685x442 hjuy777.jpg)
>>5092 Maybe the Zhuangzi, it talks about spontaneity in action, non-attachment and following the natural order of nature while showing what the Taoist sage looks like. It's also pretty entertaining, with a lot of short stories, allegories, and fables. >in particular the sexual practices I don't know much about Taoist sexual practices but as far as I know it's about avoiding ejaculation during sex so that you can preserve "the life-giving semen" which in turn mixes with breath and nourishes the body and the brain.
Somehow the Nilamat Purana speaks of the fact that the Kashmir Valley used to be completely underwater. In the Purana a demon named Jalodbhava (“arisen from water”) made residence at the lake and began devastating the surrounding areas from time-to-time. Vishnu is asked to help, and to do this he and the devas had the entire valley drained, defeating the demon, deprived of its natural habitat where he was invulnerable, making the valley into its present form. https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-nilamata-purana/d/doc81735.html >It is now generally agreed that the present-day topography of the Kashmir Valley originated from draining of a huge lake similar to those of the Kathmandu and Pokhara Val- leys. The lake was most likely drained through an outlet west of Baramula, giving rise to the present gorge https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-94-017-8029-2_11 >Although the sequences suggest changes in water depth may have occurred, lacustrine conditions were otherwise largely unchanged over the period represented by the section, up until the demise of the lake during the early part of the Late Pleistocene https://jm.copernicus.org/articles/28/25/2009/jm-28-25-2009.pdf (PDF) Radiocarbon dating has suggested that this took place rougly 31,000 years ago. It is things such as this, the existence of Rama’s Bridge—said to be man-made by some, and it certainly looks artificial—that make me question the timeline we are presented with by mainstream history. There are also things that appear occasionally such as the fact that Zoroaster was said by the Greeks to have lived 6,000 years before Socrates.
>>5084 >In pursuit of naturalism some Taoists in the old days let their hair grow as long as possible, refused to talk and expressed themselves by whistling. >Others took off their clothes and lay on the ground, in part to thumb their noses at Confucian manners and codes. Literally Diogenes.
>>5117 That's exactly what I was thinking. I sympathize with the whole living in accordance with Nature thing, but I feel like people who go as far as these Cynics such as Diogenes and the Taoists mentioned in that anon's post take it too far. I fail to see how it is 'against Nature' to cut one's hair for example. Even cats and dogs groom themselves, as do monkeys and all sorts of other creatures.
>>5118 Upon looking into the philosophy of Taoism further, I've found Taoism to be very passive and individualistic, while providing little that would help sustain and grow a community (much less a nation of your own people). While many of it's teachings can improve the health and lifestyle of a person, it also leaves itself open to more negative aspects that can ruin a person as well (some of which >>5117 mentioned). It promotes detachment from desires that would destroy a person over time, but also detachment from the troubles of this world to the point of ignoring matters that need to be addressed or stopped. It goes out of it's way to be against violence and aggressive behaviors (promoting nonaction or "action/effort without action"), as well as ignoring political troubles while providing no better alternative (other than trying to have everyone follow the teachings in order to obtain a peaceful existence). Some of the practices are also concerning (as others mentioned earlier). While it promotes keeping one healthy in order to keep the spirit pure, it also promotes things that could potentially be harmful to the body, such as mixtures containing harmful materials if ingested or applied, as well as degenerative sexual practices that supposedly help with acquiring more Qi or life force found in ourselves and the universe. Looking at it's history, Taoism could be seen as a counter-culture to Confucianism at the time (which as promoting a more structured, hierarchical (but still passive) society), and could be compared to the Hippie movement in many ways (which, given how similar the ideals are in retrospect, makes sense). The combination between the 2 ideologies would be a factor in how Communism was able to take hold of the country (having similar philosophies as the 2 ideologies that made it favorite-able to the common man in China). Ultimately, while it does teach a more natural look on life, it does little to promote a strong nation and healthy societies within it. Compare this to Japan's Shintoism, that had similar philosophies as Taoism, but didn't sacrifice the needs of the nation and people in this world in favor of trying to ready one's self for the next life (or immortality/heaven in Taoism's case), and promoted practices that kept the nation strong.
>>5162 >promoting nonaction No, this is not correct, Wuwei (無為) is usually translated as non-action,but it really means non-striving: the absence of all motivation in one's action. >Therefore the sage accomplishes things by doing Wuwei. Furthering a teaching that is without words. All things arise, and he does not leave them. He gives them life but without possessing them. He acts but without relying on his own ability. He succeeds but without dwelling on his success. And because he does not dwell on it, it does not leave him. But the rest is correct, I think. It's not a philosophy that would be helpful if you want to promote a healthy nation, that's why it was mostly practiced by hermits, poets and artists. But maybe I'm wrong, I'll have to read more Taoists texts, the canon is like a thousand volumes.
>>5170 So single manmade philosophy is perfect. Taoism was able to benefit China with its good parts because the bad parts were kept in check by the other competing philosophies, and vice versa.
(243.47 KB 1440x900 Taoist inmmortals.jpg)
I wanted to clarify some things about Daoism, I have these things written down but I know I copied them from somewhere else. >what is Dao? It's the flow of the universe, the natural order in which the spontaneity of the universe can be perceived. Taoist sages saw the artificial social structures that Confucianists imposed on the world as attempts of man to try to control nature, so they developed a philosophy that advocates for man to return to nature. >There is a thing formed from confusion and born before heaven and earth. Silent, solitary, alone and unchanging. It revolves everywhere and is never in danger. It can be the mother of all under heaven. I do not know its name, but I style it “the Dao." >What is Wuwei Translated as action without action it means to go with the spontaneous flow of the universe as a whole. It means to allow man to grow as nature intended. If not, they will lose their inherent naturalness and suffer for it by giving into desires, attachments, and hedonistic drives. Modern man is raised to believe that he is separated from nature, but he is part of its rhythms and harmonies with each of us being a microcosm of the universe. (As above, so below, as the universe, so the soul) >>5171 >the bad parts were kept in check by the other competing philosophies, and vice versa That's true too, the main philosophies in ancient China (Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism) waxed and waned in importance with the different dynasties and rulers.
>>5178 >Silent, solitary, alone and unchanging. It revolves everywhere and is never in danger Extremely similar to how Melissus of Samos and Parmenides described 'What-Is' (i.e. Reality). I guess the major difference would be here how they seem to deny that there is any change at all and that the senses are deceiving us. They kind of lose me there. Seems like the Dao is a bit more realistic here.
>>5188 Thinking a bit more though I think these philosophers were talking more about existence itself. To what extent is the Dao separate from existence? Or is it a principle that informs all of existence and the change and multiplicity within it? I.e. is it possible to coherently speak of existence without reference to the Dao? I feel like there is little dualism here, since it is as said "the mother of all under heaven"
>>5189 The Dao is pretty much the same as The One in Neoplatonism, with the Dao being called "The Great Oneness" >An utterly simple, ineffable, unknowable subsistence which is the creative source of the Universe
(165.45 KB 880x640 krishna arjuna.jpg)
>>5211 The Dao is described as being something impersonal, right? I.e. it's not a 'person' in the sense that it is something that can have intentions, do actions, etc. That's the one thing I am not sure about. I don't know if the logic follows, but since we have conscious beings like humans on Earth, and since consciousness in a sense seems to be something 'higher' or 'above' matter (even if it is not a dualistic scheme we're talking about here), it would seem to me that it would be far more logical to conclude that 'the Dao' or 'the One' would in some sense be something that can know and act. It seems strange that ultimate Reality should be inert and mindless, and for conscious beings to arise out of it in some way. Now saying that is one thing but I can't pretend to know the nature of this if it is how I intuit here. The Laws of Nature themselves are a good pointer in the right direction.
(285.95 KB 1600x1200 147369c2e34be911a2e07bf3f8674f88.jpg)
>>5226 Is the Brahman in "Hinduism" something personal? Not as far as I know, it's an ontological neccesity for the universe. >inert and mindless Simple does not mean inert, the Taiji (The Dao from which Yin and Yang originate) means "Absolute and Infinite Potential", so it can't be static, it's an ontological neccesity for movement. In the Daoist creation myth, at the beggining of the Universe, Yin and Yang moved and circulated constantly, generating the 8 trigrams, these divided into the 64 hexagrams and then into everything else in the Universe. I don't know how consciousness is created (if at all, personally I believe in pan-psychism), but if the Daoist theory of creation is correct, then consciousness comes from Yin and Yang, so these must be consciouss at least in some way. >How was the first man created? Through the transformation of the forces. When the essence of yin and yang and the five agents are united, man's corporeal form is established. This is what the Buddhist call production by transformation.
>>5162 Taoism and other chink inventions should not be the main drive of the White man. Chinks are dirty bug people. Remember your heritage! There is much sublime wisdom to be found in Indo Aryan Dharma and Western philosophers like Plato, not to mention the rare few unkiked parts of Christian theology.
>>5227 >Is the Brahman in "Hinduism" something personal? Not as far as I know, it's an ontological neccesity for the universe. Brahman is both personal and necessary. Brahman is the Absolute, i.e. God. Unfortunately Advaitins have been shilling their brand of nondualism hard in the West to such an extent that many people think that it is representative of Hinduism in general. Ramanuja's Vishishtadvaita, in my opinion, is much better supported in the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita. The Shvetashvatara Upanishad, for example, states that the one God rules over both the perishable and the self (atman) (1.10). Later in this same work it is said on "the Supreme Lord of the gods" is the one on which the worlds rest (4.13). This God is the creator of all, the knower of all, the architect of time, the lord of the individual souls (6.16) The Mandukya Upanishad describes first the syllable "Aum" as the whole world (1), saying that "everything here is Brahman; this self is Brahman" (2) and "This is the lord of all. This is the all-knowing. This is the inner controller. This is the source of all, for this is the origin and the end of beings" (6). Notice the overlaps with the Shvetashvatara Upanishad too. Over Upanishads describe Brahman as the origin of everything from the imperishable Brahman (Mundaka 1.1.7). All things issue forth from Brahman like sparks from a great fire and back into them they will return (2.1.1). Later in the Mundaka Upanishad (3.1.1-3) we see the famous story of the two birds. Two birds are sitting on the same tree. One is deluded by materiality, grieving, while the other watches on in silence. The silent bird is called "the Lord". When the grieving bird sees that the Lord is there, his grief disappears.' Katha Upanishad says "He who is awake in those that sleep, the Person who fashions desire after desire - That indeed is the Pure. That is Brahman. That indeed is called the Immortal. One it all the worlds do rest; And no one soever goes beyond it" (5.8). Katha also describes Brahman as "The Inner Self of all things" and the "One Controller" (5.12). Verse 2.23 is also interesting in that it says that Brahman cannot be grasped by teachings of intelligence, but instead "He is to be obtained only by the one whom he chooses; To such a one that Self reveals his own person." This is interesting because it seems to indicate an element of divine grace. And finally, Katha 3.9 says that the highest step of Vishnu is the end of the road, the final goal. For a last reference, the Taittiriya Upanishad 2.1.1 is famous for its description of Brahman as real / truth (uses the same word in Sanskrit), knowledge and infinity (ananta). Some scholars have suggested emending ananta here to ananda though, bliss, to make it line up with the famous sat-chit-ananda (truth, consciousness, bliss) of Brahman. The word used here for 'knowledge' is Jñāna which can be diversely translated as 'knowledge', 'consciousness', etc. We also see Arjuna say in the Bhagavad Gita to Krishna that "You are the consummate Brahman, matchless abode and purifier, the eternal sacred person, god unborn and all-pervading" (10.12). Slightly before that Krishna is saying that he is the source of all things from which everything proceeds as well, which matches up with descriptions of Brahman in the Upanishads (10.8). >personally I believe in pan-psychism Pretty based, however cosmopsychism is the final redpill when it comes to panpsychism. I'd elaborate but I've been working on this post way too long now
(120.99 KB 1024x768 Aw5cha.jpg)
>>5233 Thanks for all this info anon, I'll be sure to read the Upanishads soon. >cosmopsychism This sounds interesting, the universe being imbued with a ubiquitous field of consciousness instead of classic pan-psychism where consciousness is an inherently property of matter and energy.
>>5236 Yeah until I learned about this type of sort of cosmopsychism I adhered to panpsychism for a while. There's a few reasons why I decided that the former was more plausible than the latter - mainly, I started to think that the whole of the universe was more basic than the parts, i.e. it is more akin to an organism than it is to an aggregate like a heap of sand. Part of my reasoning is kind of intuitive, in that it just feels right (as faggy as that can sound), and because the whole of things, even if billions of light-years as far as we know, are informed and subject to the exact same Laws of Nature. So while panpsychism is a reductionistic view of reality, cosmopsychism is more holistic. Consciousness has a general character which everything exists within and partakes in, but also a specific character that is unique to the individual. >Thanks for all this info anon, I'll be sure to read the Upanishads soon. No problem. They're definitely worth it.
No one gave a shit about what >>5230 had to say and just kept talking about Taoism LMAO
>>5241 I thought about responding then I decided not too. Personally I'm secure enough in my National Socialism to look into whatever interests me, regardless of the source.
>>5241 Just because it's being discussed, doesn't mean that everyone here is going to suddenly become Taoists. It is a topic that is looked into in order to have a better understanding of what it is and how it works. As other anons mentioned, this is not a religion or philosophy that is good for the health and improvement of a nation and it's people as a whole. It is a very individualistic religion that is better suited for those that believe they have no other place in their community or their homeland. That being said, discussions such as these help us understand the viewpoints of those that do follow in it's teachings, and be better prepared should it become a threat to our people. Ignorance will only leave oneself vulnerable to an invading influence when it comes to spiritual matters. The anon in >>5230 is not wrong about not using Taoism or Chink philosophies as a "main drive of the White man", seeing as how it's teachings were a factor in how China ended up, but the post comes off as ignorant in how discussions and arguments work. He assumes that since anons are discussing and looking into it, they must be considering it as something to follow. The post he's replying to even says that Taoism is not an ideal religion to use to help our people. The post comes off as being overzealous (and a bit weird as to why one would consider Christian theology when said "unkiked parts" were more than likely taken from Indo-European religions), Given the choice, anons would more than likely consider either the Indo-European religions of old or the Dharmic teachings of the Bhagavad Gita over Taoism.
>>5236 ahh, a truly aesthetic image. it's nice to see things like this in a society filled with ugliness.
(597.81 KB 967x945 chad meditating.jpg)
How close to enlightenment is /fascist/?
>>5371 /fascist/ is far from enlightenment.
>>5371 /fascist/ is closer to enlightenment that the average population, at the very least, especially those who frequent these threads.
>debunks evolution >debunks history as shilled by academia >debunks mechanistic science >affirms the historical accuracy of the Vedic scriptures and much of European pagan beliefs >suggests that the Vedas and other scriptures are often speaking of higher dimensional realities inacessible to the senses of modern people Richard L. Thompson is worth looking into, I think, for anyone who wants to get a more authentic worldview true to that of ancient pagans. He’s coming from a Vedic perspective, but often draws comparisons with comparable things in European traditions and folklore to strengthen his case. Both his lectures and books are very good, I would recommend people check out some of the following: <Parallels: Ancient Insights into Modern UFO Phenomena <Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race <The Cosmology of the Bhagavata Purana: Mysteries of the Sacred Universe <Vedic Cosmography and Astronomy Youtube lectures (best listened to at x1.5 speed): <Scientism is Atheism https://youtu.be/_09HvrduG08 <The Archeology Scam https://youtu.be/TLl6QO-vqUI <UFOs and the Vedic Worldview https://youtu.be/NZjFq1x6gcI A channel of a ton more: https://youtube.com/c/SadaputaChannel
Amazon Introduces Tiny ‘ZenBooths’ for Stressed-Out Warehouse Workers >The AmaZen meditation booth is a small room where employees can watch company videos about mindfulness while a small fan moves the air around. >The "ZenBooth'' or "Mindful Practice Room," as it's called, is part of the WorkingWell program Amazon announced on May 17. According to an Amazon press release, WorkingWell is a mix of "physical and mental activities, wellness exercises, and healthy eating support” meant to “help them recharge and reenergize." One of the WorkingWell initiatives is AmaZen, which “guides employees through mindfulness practices in individual interactive kiosks at buildings,” according to a press release. https://www.vice.com/en/article/wx5nmw/amazon-introduces-tiny-zenbooths-for-stressed-out-warehouse-workers It’s clear that Buddhist elements in the West have been appropriated by the jews to further the enslavement of the goyim at this point. Buddhism has been stripped to a form of materialistic, nihilistic secular humanism. Now you can become a bhikkhu in your AmaZen™ cuckbox
(236.73 KB 750x883 1621318953737.jpg)
>>5706 You will watch the videos in the portable toilet and be happy goyim.
>>5706 >It’s clear that Buddhist elements in the West have been appropriated by the jews to further the enslavement of the goyim at this point. Buddhism has been stripped to a form of materialistic, nihilistic secular humanism. Now you can become a bhikkhu in your AmaZen™ cuckbox I've studied Buddhism, and this is accurate. they borrow elements from it to use as a sedative, without any of the philosophy, utilitarian ethics, karma, etc that defy their agenda. no critical, independent thought for the cattle.
(301.67 KB 811x538 ClipboardImage.png)
>>5717 I've noticed that they've done the exact same thing with Stoicism. See pic related, a few of the authors have suspicious names too. Needless to say, the original and real Stoics attempted to conform individual and political life to the orderly, logos-driven cosmos. God / Zeus was identified with this order, giving us a pantheistic and cyclical model of the cosmos. I can hardly say what this modern day pseudo-Stoicism even is. It's just another control mechanism founded on the idea that some things are under our control, and other things are not, not consenting to impressions, etc (therefore accept your slave job, goy!). Buddhist modernism is particularly weird because it seems to have become some sort of New Age-tinged psychotherapy or self-help. jews are all over it. There's no awakening, just control.
>>5724 there's been a rise of 'pop philosophy' in general, which strips out all the substance of the ideas, leaving an empty shell designed to inveigle and sedate the reader. it's definitely a control mechanism. I posted before on Stoicism and Epicureanism, and how there's little understanding of these philosophies aside from a pale reflection. like many other things from the ancient world, they were submerged by the Abrahamic tide. Stoicism is about leading a virtuous life, even if that requires hardship and sacrifice. Epicureanism is often described as seeking "pleasure", but it's not hedonism at all -- it's about peace of mind and living contentedly. as always, it's the nature of evil to degrade, corrupt, and create mockeries of all that it touches.
(1.23 MB 770x960 pagan meme.png)
>>5764 This is basically the same thing that with see with 'New Age' stuff in general. These seem to be notorious for pulling ideas from Hinduism, Buddhism and similar traditions and then twisting them until they are amenable with individualism, consumerism and various sorts of hippie ideas. This is the main reason, really, why reincarnation, karma, meditation and other ideas are even circulating in the West more in the first place, unfortunately. ISKCON might be another reason, as well. Though their leader was absolutely /pol/-tier, the group itself is pozzed as far as I'm concerned. It's actually quite frustrating how there is nothing really good out there at the moment that doesn't fall into New Age pozz, LARPing or Abrahamism in the West. If I was a complete gigachad I'd probably do pic related Epicureanism is a good example. It is quite surprising how the meaning of that philosophy in general has been so twisted. Though it is described as a type of 'hedonism', like you say, it's actually very much about not indulging in those desires which are unnecessary and harmful, and impediments to achieving tranquility. Everything must be assimilated to modernity and bastardized.
>>5783 >ISKCON might be another reason, as well. Though their leader was absolutely /pol/-tier I'm confused. Ancient Hinduism (Vedicism) has inscribed that when Indra (I think?) comes back, she'll exterminate all the dark skinned indians. So why is the leader of such beliefs (ISCKON) have to be a Dravidian? On that note, how come indians worship a religion that would put them as low as dogs? Shouldn't a religion uplift its own race?
>>5764 >Epicureanism Can you give me an explanation of what this philosophy is all about?
(1.86 MB 640x480 -KG1vakQPDpV3CFP.mp4)
Based Raj.
>>5788 >she'll exterminate He. Indra is a masculine God. >So why is the leader of such beliefs (ISCKON) have to be a Dravidian? Cultural and racial collapse. >On that note, how come indians worship a religion that would put them as low as dogs? Modern Indians have a twisted view of their own writings, interpreting Aryan as purely a spiritual concept. I.E, just meaning "noble" or something.
>>5788 >Ancient Hinduism (Vedicism) has inscribed that when Indra (I think?) comes back, she'll exterminate all the dark skinned indians I don’t think you are thinking of Indra. You are probably thinking of Vishnu’s coming tenth avatar, who is Kalki, and who will exterminate evil of all kinds and false kings, beginning a new time-cycle. Indra is the king of the devas (gods), wielder of the thunderbolt. One of his many names for Indra is ‘Purandara’—The Destroyer of Cities. He destroyed legions of dark-skinned Dasyus for the Aryans long ago. Even today Indra remains the king of the gods in the heavenly realm of this universe. >So why is the leader of such beliefs (ISCKON) have to be a Dravidian? The interesting thing about Prabhupada is that his teacher specifically ordered him to go and bring his religion to the West immediately prior to his death, which he did. And if it had to be a Dravidian doung this, there was no better person than a theocratic Hitler-loving, anti-feminist swami who believed that Aryans were White and that blacks were non-Aryans who needed to be controlled. Now the problem is that his followers generally aren’t like that today. I like some Hare Krishnas like Richard L. Thompson, but in general I wouldn’t say to join them or anything. >On that note, how come indians worship a religion that would put them as low as dogs? Shouldn't a religion uplift its own race? Strictly speaking if they were honest to themselves their karma would dictate that they are the servants of the true biological and spiritual Aryan race, but like the other anon again said they have coped hard in this regard but redefining terms and the like. >Shouldn't a religion uplift its own race? Not necessarily. If there are true aspects to the pagan worldview as present in Hinduism, it would imply a universal hierarchy of beings, and Aryan humans would be above non-Aryan humans. That doesn’t mean we’d treat them like literal cattle, but they would exist to serve Aryans and to perform servant, labor and other roles for us of various kinds. They would just have to accept the truth of it, and that this is their place in life. They can still their ancestors, spirits and other deities though, and maybe they will derive some benefits from it. >>5791 Kek, I never knew he actually said some based things despite being a degenerate >>5789 Basically it was a type of ancient atomism. It is often called a form of hedonism as well. But Epicurus’ hedonism was aimed at achieving ataraxia, or tranquility. He also divided pleasures up into several kinds, including natural and necessary desires (needing to eat, needing shelter, etc.), natural and unneccessary and vain desires (desire for wealth, luxury, fame, etc). The latter have no natural limit. There’s no natural limit to the amount of wealth that someone may want. It’s endless, same with fame and the like, so Epicurus rejects it as not conducive to this state of ataraxia he says life is aimed towards. The natural and necessary are to be focused on. We can see how it’s very different from hedonism as popularly conceived. He also had some beliefs about how gods lived blissful, peaceful lives and did not do much, and that there was nothing after death. You just dispersed
>>5789 >>5793 to add on, Epicureanism sees excessive pleasure-seeking/hedonism/coomerism as ultimately harmful, like drinking heavily and being hungover the next day. the goal is to achieve peace of mind (ataraxia) and live without stress and craving. it encourages the virtuous life, insofar as virtuous living is conducive to ataraxia, while evil and excess lead away from it. this differs from Stoicism, which emphasizes virtue above all else. come to think of it, there are some interesting parallels with Buddhism.
>>5793 >He also had some beliefs about how gods lived blissful, peaceful lives and did not do much, and that there was nothing after death >there was nothing after death This idea that nothing happens after death is pozzed, but I agree with some other things.
(49.26 KB 640x413 race reincarnation.jpg)
>>5814 Yeah I think being so sure about there being absolutely nothing is slightly naive. The idea that just because you do not remember anything from before you were born does not mean that you didn't exist. It's just like how you can't remember things from when you're asleep, or even when you are a smile child, even though you objectively exist then. Even from ideas that are not too far from physicalism like panpsychism (which is really just physicalism + physical things have mental properties), it's likely that after some period of shuffling these would be incorporated into new organisms. And even that is weird, because it is not clear that our conscious, subjective experience is any sort of composite in the first place. Either way anyone confident of what happens after death is deluded, especially if they have not considered anything like pics related. Epicurus is fairly solid though. Probably not absolute truth but he's got some right intuitions about some things, especially moderation and distinctions in pleasures.
Everyone should check out this channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCl4l2tOcEw3oNmjcy6zDPjw Her recitation of the Bhagavad Gita is top-tier as well. Vid related is from the 11th chapter where Krishna reveals his true form to Arjuna
Is Platonic philosophy dharmic? There seem to be a lot of very general parallels to Christianity and other monotheistic philosophies in Plato's work. Unlike Christianity, Platonism and Neoplatonism originated entirely in the preexisting traditions of the west, with no clear connection to the Jews. I'm surprised these teachings aren't discussed more given their intellectual sophistication and direct connection to Western pagan thought.
>>6483 Yes, Platonic philosophy absolutely has a place in pagan thought. It is something that needs to be studied more in order to give paganism a good intellectual foundation in the West again. We must remember that outward ritualism and practices are only a single aspect of spirituality, needless to say. In fact, this is one big criticism of Christianity against the Judaism it was separating itself from at the time, that Judaism had become overly legalistic and spiritually dead. This often seems to be a criticism made towards certain ritualists in Hindu scriptures as well, as the Upanishads are full of derision towards those who think that the ultimate goal is just earning heaven / svarga through sacrifices. Instead there has to be both an intellectual backdrop and an internalization of aspects of the outward displays of spirituality. That doesn't mean the outward dimensions are unimportant though, that is a major mistake. Recently in the main pagan thread there was some interesting discussion on the need for good hermeneutics towards pagan texts. It's not all metaphor, and it's not all literal. Both are mistakes. Neoplatonism in particular seems as if it would be extremely fruitful for paganism if properly understood. Unfortunately from the little digging I have done it is extremely dense. The idea that all of reality is emanated from the single principle of the One / the Good is one that ought to be explored more, as this seems to be getting near to the Brahman of the East. The concept of the immortal soul in Neoplatonism too is highly interesting, and how this ties into reincarnation and how the soul may return again to the One. Tying in ideas such as how Plato proposes a system of castes in the Republic again shows how many parallels there are between Dharma and pre-Abrahamic philosophy.
An Early Greco-Bhuddist statue of Bhudda. Note the Caucasianoid eyes and brow. The second is a Greco-Hindu bracelet of Brahma/Indra.
>>6494 Plato was definitely inspired by Zoroastranism, and the concept of Ahuramazda and Asha. He and Herodotus wrote a lot on Persian theology and culture.
>>6509 It's so bizarre from a modern standpoint to see depictions of Indra and Brahmā in Afghanistan of all places. The more I look into it the more it seems like Indra in particular was particularly widespread. We have mentions of Indra in Northern Syria (Mitanni) in Vedic times, and even in the Rigveda are mentioned Afghan tribes that still exist today such as the Pashtuns. It's a shame that Muslims have destroyed and obscured all of these interesting facets of their culture. >>6510 I had never really thought of this, but I just came across a big paper on this topic. I will have to look over it very soon. Here's the link: http://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/52062
Kashmiri Shaivism is interesting. I sort of already believed this, so it's always cool to see that it has already been said.
>>6527 >Indra and Brahmā in Afghanistan of all places It's not so weird when you think that's the exact migration route Indo-Aryans took to get into India. Indra and other Hindu Gods were worshipped all around the Hindu Kush and Bactria. Scythians- I'm sure spread their common Indo-Iranic worship even to Ukraine and Kazakhstan. >It's a shame that Muslims have destroyed and obscured all of these interesting facets of their culture. Totally. What's even more tragic is European destruction by hands of the Christians. Welcome to the Kali Yuga
(1.13 MB 1080x2140 indra and indrani.jpg)
>>6667 >What's even more tragic is European destruction by hands of the Christians. No doubt. In many ways we have gotten the opposite of what has happened in the East. They got mutted up and kept their ancestral religions in some places like India, Nepal and the like, but in Europe we have remained very pure until recently while having lost our ancestral traditions.
(68.12 KB 368x569 krishna arjuna 2.jpg)
Why is Yahweh a jealous god? What is he afraid of losing? Shouldn't he be perfect (i.e. complete) in himself? Yahweh is fearful of losing followers, it is possible that they could slip from his fingers, depriving him of his steady supply of foreskins. Compare God in the Bhagavad Gita. He is literally everything. He cannot lose anything. He has no jealousy and infinite patient. Everything will return to him, it's inevitable.
(1.88 MB stevenson1977.pdf)
Paper on reincarnation.
>>6754 Yahweh is just a jewish volcano demon.
>>6955 Indeed. This raises the question though of how we shake off his influence in his society though. Yahweh is evidently empowered by the spread of his religion. He is not self-sufficient. He is 'jealous'. Every person we wake up to Abrahamism is a blow against Yahweh and his chosen rats. It almost makes me wonder whether the gods of our people are hungering for sacrifices right now, just read >>5590. Sacrifice to the gods is 100% necessary for the well being of humans and gods. For the last few millennia until recently in some places, Yahweh has been getting a steady supply of foreskins and sacrifices, while the gods of the Aryan people have been neglected. It is the Dark Age, so this is not entirely unexpected, but they still exist as much as they did in the past.
>>6955 Dragon, he's just an evil dragon.
>>6969 Any interesting evidence for this?
>>6970 The bible itself look at the descriptions that Yhwh uses for himself throughout the old testament, he hoards gold, and has scaly skin, it's not difficult to make the connection. It's mostly a meme I found on telegram though it's got some backing as follows. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XogaHpV5oUs >Yahweh the Created >Are two of the most common names of the patriarch deity of the Bible, Yahweh and El (also head of the Canaanitic pantheon), in fact referring to separate deities? >El from which the term Israel derives is mentioned many times in the Hebrew scriptures as well as in other texts written by levantine and semitic peoples. Elohim which is plural of El and refers to a multitude of Creator Gods and is used in verses such as Genesis 1:1 "In the Beginning Elohim (Gods) created the heavens and earth." >Select key verses of the bible imply a difference between the two Gods of El and Yahweh such as Deuteronomy 32:8-9 which says: >"When El (The God Most High) divided the nations, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the boundaries of the nations according to the number of God's sons. For Yahweh's portion was his people, Jacob (Israel) was the lot of his inheritance." >From closer inspection of the original Hebrew it appears that Yahweh is not the Supreme Godhead but rather a created and finite being, among many others. Not the God of all men, he is only given dominion over one tribe of the nations of earth, which happened to be the Jews; presiding over the sons of Jacob/Israel alone. >This conflation of El and Yahweh has lead to much confusion in interpreting the Bible in its correct relationship with its polytheistic past. >There is also significant evidence that the God Yahweh was not human as a surface level look at Genesis and 'man being made in El's image' may imply: but rather Yahweh is a Volcanic Dragon and lesser deity which over time has usurped the Absolute and has taken on the traits of the Godhead. By taking a deeper look at the original Hebrew texts the likeness of Yahweh may be closer the fiery copper serpent idol of Nehushtan. The only idol of which Yahweh allows and even commands worship of in Numbers 20-21. >Aptly illustrated in the following video and well substantiated is an explanation for the theory of Ancient Dragons and its role in the creation of modern Abrahamism.
(113.86 KB 543x800 demiurge.jpg)
(526.52 KB 1200x1600 smashing the serpent statue.jpg)
>>6977 Wew, this is quite the redpill, and it sheds new light on the gnostic idea of the lion-faced, serpent-bodied Yaldabaoth / Demiurge. I wonder what implications this has for the many Indo-European stories of the Aryan gods slaying a serpent. Indra, of course, is known as the slayer of Vritra, who is variously described as a dragon or a serpent of some kind. Perhaps tellingly, Vritra is also described as a personification of drought. The rise of Abrahamism in the Middle East has been concurrent with a drying up of the Middle East into dusty deserts. Literal and spiritual droughts follow in the dragon's wake. In other parallels, the storm god Tarhunt slays the serpentine dragon Illuyanka. Thor slays Jörmungandr, etc. This is not to say that Yahweh is necessarily the serpent slain by the storm god, but perhaps closely related.
>>6965 >Sacrificing to the gods is 100% necessary for the well being of human and gods. The idea of gods being nourished by humans never really sat right with me because it would seem to imply that said gods are dependent upon human beings to exist and not the other way around.
>>6989 Yeah it's hard to know what exactly is going on with sacrifice. I think that cultures which have stressed some sort of absolute dependence on the gods for sacrifice are off the mark a bit. Just think, are we to assume that a class of celestial beings able to change their forms, appear and disappear to certain individuals, control the elements and seemingly use all sorts of mystical powers, are unable to feed themselves without human help? This is ridiculous. I think a good interpretation of sacrifice is like throwing a big feast for an honored guest. Indo-European sacrifices were joined with much food, hymns and other similar elements. This was both for the community and the god(s) invoked. Just as an honored guest at a meal could easily get food elsewhere, so could a god, but it will come to the sacrifice any way (or at least did so in earlier times). The stress put on sacrifice and harmony between devas and men in the Gita is one of the best explanations, along with what was said above (and they are of course not contradictory)
(290.38 KB 815x832 Ouroboros.jpg)
(73.78 KB 411x550 saturn ouroboros.jpg)
(1.03 MB 500x500 saturn worship.gif)
(6.81 KB 326x209 saturn cube cross.jpg)
>>6981 >>6977 It's all coming together.
>>1139 I wouldn't say so. Having brown eyes or dark hair doesn't make you an Arab. It seems some Iranic groups had light featrures such as the Scythians (who were described as having red hair and grey eyes) but they have mixed with the Slavic people and are now extinct. I can't find any sources that suggest Persian people had light features, and depictions of ancient Persian people hasn't shown me otherwise. While we can appreciate the 'Nordic-like' beauty of blue eyed and light-haired Afghans, it should be noted that just because an Iranian has brown eyes or dark hair doesn't make him a non-Aryan. Nordicism is not a requirement to Aryanism. Nor is the presence of Islam proof of 'race-mixing', because the mountainous border between Iran and the Arabian nation meant that Arabs had difficulty migrating in the first place. (I believe Persia was undergoing a civil war at the time, which allowed a few pesky Arabs to slip in past a weak border and Islamify a couple of Persians and with the Arab's assistance, they took over). Memes (in this case, Islam) are easier to spread than genetics, because you only need to Islamify a few Persians and they can then spread the word. Not even the Arabic language was able to be imposed on the Persians. I hope that the Iranian people (the Kurds, Persians, Pashtuns, Tajiks, the Balochis, etc) convert to Zoroastrianism or an ancient Iranian paganistic religion soon. It will be better for their mindset.
>>1139 >>6996 I should also mention that the National Socialists of Germany considered Iranic people to be Aryans (albeit, non-Europeans so they were out of interest) and this was the popular thought among European genealogists up prior to the outright elimination of discussions regarding racial science. In this case, we can see that the idea of 'Iranians now mixed with Arabs' is a very new idea not supported by the science of the past and present.
>>6996 >>6997 While I do indeed believe that Nordics were more common in the past (particularly in Europe), I definitely think you're right that Nordicism isn't necessary for Aryanism. It's light skin and an Aryan phenotype which matters the most, I think. However there is a piece of artwork from Susa that I have seen that shows four archers, some of which seem to have a sandy color to their hair, but I can't conclude for sure whether it is just faded paint or what. Some of the archers are depicted with dark hair. For me it's pretty easy to look at someone and pretty easily conclude whether they are Aryan or not, just like it is easy to spot a Jew once one has a trained eye. While almost across the board members of the former Vedic civilization of the Indian subcontinent have forfeited their Aryanhood due to mixing with their Dravidian slave castes, Iran appears to be much purer than average, and even following Abrahamization, a study supply of very beautiful forms of art and high-tier philosophy were still being put out even despite Islam.
>>7001 The National Socialists were inclusive of all Aryan types. Heinrich Himmler had brown/hazel eyes and brown hair, advocated to increase the population of Nordic Aryans (he himself was more of a Dinaric Aryan, rather than a Nordic Aryan). Liberals will claim that Himmler must've been a self-hater, yet I'm sure they would have no objection if he had chosen to race-mix... The whole "bhut dey Natsees worsheep bloo eyes and blond hair!" is just propaganda, nowhere in NS laws were brown-eyed dark haired Germans discriminated against. Everyone had to prove they were of Aryan stock, regardless if they had blue eyes and blond hair. Panjeets working in tech support love to tell the world "We Indians are Aryans! Look at our Bollywood actors! We look just like them!" and then they proceed to show actors such as Shahrukh Khan (who is Pashtun, therefore he is actually Iranian and not ethnically Indian) or Kareena Kapoor (who is 3/4 Northern Indian and 1/4 English). Thank you for your kind words regarding Persia. The "Islamic" Golden Age was in fact Arabs stealing Persian art and books, enriching their own culture. No wonder Muslims love multiculturalism!
>>7001 I've also found out, in relation to another discussion here, that the Americans considered the Persians to be 'White' and therefore eligible for citizenship all the way back to 1875. They also believed the Persians to be part of the 'Aryan race'. Indians weren't included, as they were considered Asians (and therefore ineligible). However, Parsis, who are a Zoroastrian minority in India who had escaped the Islamic invasion of Persia, were also deemed Persian and therefore 'White'. Some Indians in the 1920s would later try to justify being eligible for citizenship because "Well, Persians are White, and uh my next door neighbor is a Parsi- and Parsis are White so uh, fuck it I'm White too! Teehee!" And they lost. Up until 1965 when the USA turned upside down with The Immigration Act...now black Sudanese people born in North Africa are considered 'White'... I guess before cherrypicking "Indian" celebrities of Iranian or mixed-European blood, this was how Panjeets would try to justify "we wuz Aryans n Shieeet!" I think it is interesting that Europeans and Iranians got along well so well before everything went to hell. I knew about the National Socialists cooperated with Iran on the basis of blood, but I hadn't known about the pre-Judaism/Islamic America being friendly with Iranians too.
(263.00 B 17x11 SUMKA.png)
>>7004 T.I.L >Americans considered the Persians to be 'White' and therefore eligible for citizenship all the way back to 1875 Also here's a flag for BO to add so you can stop namefagging
>>7005 Thanks for the new flag
>>6996 >>6997 >>7003 >>7004 Are you Iranian?
>>7005 Wow thanks that's really cool. I can't seem to find the SUMKA flag in the options yet. >>7008 Yes, Persian with a bit of Tajik blood in me (so Iranian overall).
>>7008 Silly me. Just had to refresh it.
(93.90 KB 736x970 red hair blue eyes girl.jpg)
(74.48 KB 778x581 red hair blue eyes man.jpg)
>>7003 The way they teach it in American schools you'd think that they were trying to shove everyone without blond hair and blue eyes into a gas chamber. I'm being a bit hyperbolic, of course, but it might as well have been that from what they were teaching us. It's especially ironic in the light of the fact that I do not think a single prominent member of the upper echelons of the Third Reich was blond. Even looking through my fairly sizeable collection of Third Reich posters and propaganda that I have, there is a diversity of hair colors depicted. Blond hair and blue eyes might have been shown as an Aryan ideal, but no citizen was condemned for lacking it. Interestingly if we look back at the ancient sources, it seems like more often it is red hair and blue eyes that is the most common combo rather than blond (though it does occur). > The "Islamic" Golden Age was in fact Arabs stealing Persian art and books, enriching their own culture. This was definitely quite the redpill for me. Let's look at some of the facts here just to demonstrate: >Mulla Sadra: Ṣadr ad-Dīn Muḥammad Shīrāzī, also called Mullā Ṣadrā [...], was a Persian Twelver Shi'i Islamic mystic, philosopher, theologian, and ‘Ālim who led the Iranian cultural renaissance in the 17th century. According to Oliver Leaman, Mulla Sadra is arguably the single most important and influential philosopher in the Muslim world in the last four hundred years. >Rumi: Jalāl ad-Dīn Mohammad Rūmī [...] more popularly simply as Rumi [...] was a 13th-century Persian poet, Hanafi faqih, Islamic scholar, Maturidi theologian, and Sufi mystic originally from Greater Khorasan in Greater Iran. Rumi's influence transcends national borders and ethnic divisions: Iranians, Tajiks, Turks, Greeks, Pashtuns, other Central Asian Muslims, and the Muslims of the Indian subcontinent have greatly appreciated his spiritual legacy for the past seven centuries >Al-Ghazali Al-Ghazali [...] was a Persian polymath, who was one of the most prominent and influential philosophers, theologians, jurists, logicians and mystics of Islam >Avicenna Ibn Sina [...] often known in the West as Avicenna [...] was a Persian polymath who is regarded as one of the most significant physicians, astronomers, thinkers and writers of the Islamic Golden Age,and the father of early modern medicine. Sajjad H. Rizvi has called Avicenna "arguably the most influential philosopher of the pre-modern era". >Rhazes / Rasis Abū Bakr Muhammad Zakariyyā Rāzī [...] also known by his Latinized name Rhazes (/ˈrɑːziːz/) or Rasis; 854–925 CE), was a Persian polymath, physician, alchemist, philosopher, and important figure in the history of medicine. He also wrote on logic, astronomy and grammar Edward Granville Browne considers him as probably the greatest and most original of all the Muslim physicians, and one of the most prolific as an author".[13] Additionally, he has been described as the father of pediatrics,[14][15] and a pioneer of obstetrics and ophthalmology. - It seems like Muslims would be almost nowhere without Aryan influences to their philosophy, science and mysticism.
(860.87 KB 1024x1024 1619846146547.png)
evening, fellas. Where the fuck do I start? The dharmic recommended reading charts in the archives are inaccessible and reverse image searching turns up nothing, but it's completely possible that i'm simply retarded. I hate to be a needy bitch, but can someone spoonfeed me please? I really like what I've seen from lurking on this board but idk howto into dharma and which editions are pozzed and whatnot
>>7025 The reading list here will give you a decent start. The Bhagavad Gita is a must-read and a good starting point. The version listed there is translated by a guy named Gavid Flood. It has a good introduction and a lot of essays following the actual text. I've also attached a PDF which talks about Dharma in Vedic society and its role and stuff that I found to be a good read. Another PDF after that is an introduction to Hinduism that has some interesting discussions about the concept of Dharma and various important traditions. The last PDF is a sourcebook in Indian philosophy which includes some excerpts from the Vedas, the entire Bhagavad Gita, lots of stuff from the Upanishads, excerpts from Jain and Buddhist literature (Dhammapada is especially worth reading) and a lot of other stuff, some interesting, some not). This channel has a ton of content that I have learned a lot from. I wouldn't consider him perfect but it's worth watching: https://www.youtube.com/c/DharmaNation/videos
>>7023 >The way they teach it in American schools you'd think that they were trying to shove everyone without blond hair and blue eyes into a gas chamber. I'm being a bit hyperbolic, of course, but it might as well have been that from what they were teaching us It's what they exactly teach us in Western Europe! I don't know where these history teachers get their learning from. They over-exaggerate how the NatSocs worshipped blue-eyed blond hair people and wanted to kill dark-featured people. Then, some kid will ask "But teacher! Didn't *insert NatSoc politician* have dark features?" to which the teacher would reply "YUP! Darn, those Nazis were sure silly! Didn't they take a look at themselves in the mirror? Golly! Silly Nazis!" Then, these students become journalists and write up stupid articles repeating this myth, then history uni/college students read these pop articles and then when they become teachers...the cycle continues! Where does it say in NatSoc laws that brown-eyed dark haired people are to be discriminated against? You can't ask that, because then it's how dare you try to make the NatSocs seem reasonable! Yes, NatSoc Germany did often depict blue-eyed blond hair people in the arts, but not all the time. This wasn't different from how other European countries and America would depict people too. > It seems like Muslims would be almost nowhere without Aryan influences to their philosophy, science and mysticism. Either they completely take over countries with cultures different from theres, such as the Bzyantine Empire, Egypt, Persia, etc OR they will rip a state apart as they had done with India.
(93.09 KB 600x592 bhagavad gita race mixing 2.jpg)
>>7080 It's sad that so many people just mindlessly swallow what they are told about the Third Reich. Part of the reason may just be that they do not want to get backlash for questioning it, as it is of course extremely taboo to do. It's even worse in Europe, needless to say. The upside to this, however, is that they teach it so badly that anyone with any interest in this subject and with a higher IQ may be led to look into the truth about the Third Reich. For me, I was never understand why the Third Reich just randomly decided to gas the jews one day. It made no sense, and they never attempt to explain this in school outside of some vague 'muh hatred' and 'muh prejudice'. It's the same thing they do with civil rights history in school here in America. They just talk about 'muh hatred' and 'muh prejudice' and hope everyone mindlessly accepts it all. I know for a time I did, but it was my direct experiences with non-Whites that gradually deprogrammed me. In no small part I was redpilled on Hitler and the Third Reich as a result of poor teaching in school, and now I firmly believe that Hitler was one of the greatest men to walk to this earth. >OR they will rip a state apart as they had done with India. I'm hoping they'll get their comeuppance in India before long. There is a long history of Muslim terror against non-Abrahamics in this region, and in recent years Hindutva is growing stronger. They need to start putting intense pressure on the Muslims. Unfortunately though many of these people seem to have fallen for the false dichotomy set up by the Jews and landed themselves in full-blown Zionism. And also they will fail to understand their own religion so long as they do not realize who the Aryans are / were, i.e. not the brown people there today.
>>7081 > they teach it so badly that anyone with any interest in this subject and with a higher IQ may be led to look into the truth about the Third Reich. Same here. Though, I cheated a bit becuase my Persian dad told me that Hitler had nice things to say about Iranian people so that also sparked my curiosity. > it was my direct experiences with non-Whites that gradually deprogrammed me. Same. I've had nice experience with English people, the few that live here anyway, and horrible experience with non-Whites (usually blacks, Muslims and dark-skinned Indians) who are rude and act as if they're the salt of the earth. > I'm hoping they'll get their comeuppance in India before long. Pakistan should be split, with the "Indian" parts such as Kashmir and Punjab being given to India and the "Iranian" such as the Pashtun regions and Balochistan being given to a hypothetical Iranian union consisting of Kurdistan, Persia, Afghanistan and Tajikistan.
>>7095 I've heard some others say that Pakistan should be split as well. It's not that I disagree, I guess the main problem is what to do with 220 million some Muslims. They are quite hard to deprogram compared to some religions.
>>7098 I have something in mind...but we'll keep it in the back of my head for now...
>>3133 >The interesting counter-view here is from how some Japanese nationalists viewed Buddhism, i.e. as a subversive universalist force. They're not completely wrong either. Both modern and herectical Buddhist sects are garbage that have changed and revisioned what Gautama actually taught and said to his fellow Aryans. Some of them can be nihilistic with their teachings, such as their sayings that there is no such thing as a soul nor self, while OG Buddha emphasizes the importance of self-control and how the soul reflects the self. Evola and this blog hampers down on how Buddhism was ruined by non-Aryans or fools.
(130.46 KB 442x569 buddha.jpg)
>>7237 >>7238 What a shame that so many of these links on this page are dead, it looks like it was once full of many great PDFs and links. I might have to try to dig up some and to post them here if anyone is interested. Looking through the page briefly it sure seems to support more or less what I think of Buddhism. The Buddha was teaching a stripped down version of Sanatana Dharma. Not that he denied major tenets of it, he simply did not spend time on them because he was concerned with the arising of suffering and the solution to suffering. This is shown in the parable of the poisoned arrow. One does not ask where an arrow comes from or who shot it if they are hit with it, they simply work to get it removed. And as the page says, anatta is merely an apophatic way of speaking about the essence of the self. Not merely is anatta in the sense of 'I have no self' philosophically untenable, it is indeed directly in line with modern nihilistic materialism. The term 'anatman' is frequently used by Vedic writers who do not lapse into the error peddled by Buddhists. I can't stress how big of a philosophical blunder has been committed here. It's misunderstanding a basic doctrine.
Ramanuja-pill incoming! Quick rundown on Ramanuja's philosophy: >Brahman is one substance, the Supreme Person (Purushottama), possessing infinite auspicious attributes >Brahman is qualified by sentient and insentient modes (the individual selves and insentient matter, respectively) >the modes are contingent upon Brahman as the Lord, i.e. Ishvara and are referred to as his 'body'. The highest Brahman is best seen as a Universal Soul of the universe which constitutes his body Ramanuja's philosophy stands in contrast to that of Advaitins, or non-dualists, who somehow believe that the Brahman is capable of falling under illusion, and indeed that the world itself is merely an illusion. Ramanuja affirms the reality of the differences between individuals and the existence of the world. Also important is that he refuses to ultimately negate Ishvara as a sort of lower form of knowledge as do Advaitins, who believe that the highest reality is absolutely one and without distinction, and that even Ishvara is a lower form of knowledge as opposed to being the Ultimate Reality of Ramanuja's system. It is no surprise that Advaitins are often shilled for hard by New Agers.
>In Norse mythology, Búri is the father and genitor of all gods: the first god, the creator (Old Norse 'producer, father'),[1] an early ancestor of the Æsir. Búri was licked free from salty rime stones by the primeval cow Auðumbla over the course of three days >over the course of three days she licked away the salty rime rocks and revealed Búri, grandfather of the gods and brothers Odin, Vili and Vé. Búri = Brahmā Brahmā himself is known as Svayambhu, the self-born, the first god, who emerges from the navel of Vishnu. Brahmā is also known as the 'grandfather' just like Búri, as the gods were the progeny of his mind-born sons, the Prajapatis. Brahmā creates from his mental powers the devas, the asuras, humans and all other forms of life. I wonder if it is too much of a stretch to try to draw connections between Auðumbla and Vishnu / Krishna, who of course has the name Gopati 'lord of cattle'. Auðumbla cannot of course be directly correlated, but even an individual material universe is generated from a particularly expansion of Vishnu
Can someone explain to me why so many Dharmic works have both main or supporters male characters as Bishōnen/ androgynous pretty boys? Did this hold some secret meaning or were Buddhists just hypocritically perverted? Is there something powerful and unique about looking bisexual?
>>7358 I see this more as some sort of East Asian aesthetic or erotic preference more than anything that has to do with Buddhism. For example we don’t see anything comparable to Bishōnen stuff in Tibet, India, Burma, Cambodia, Thailand, etc. One could point to ladyboy shit in Thailand, but that’s more tenuous and there’s no proof that that is in any way tied to Buddhism. It’s also important to point out that Buddhism seems to have tended to easily syncretize with local beliefs and customs that existed pre-Buddhism. It’s different from Abrahamic religions in that it’s not too concerned typically with other traditions. Also most people aren’t monks obviously, and are probably practicing and living in an environment where they are influenced by both folk religions and focusing on getting a better rebirth as laymen (i.e. not liberation).
>>7358 Bishounen more-so has to do with union of man and woman. Buddhist priests did not fetishize the idea that men could be girly, because in many works where a male character has androgynous beauty are still depicted as masculine and powerful. Minamoto No Yoshitune and the Gao Changgong are examples of two great warriors and leaders who lead armies and inspires men are said to be femininely beautiful. This may have been the case for Vishnu as well, who's regarded as the ideal man and is said to be androgynous. I think Plato, Evola, and Buddha also talks of the extent of how being androgynous is ideal. If you think about it we are all androgynous in a way and it's not doesn't have to come in appearance either, for we all have our opposite sexes' energy and personalities within us. The belief that terms such as bishounen are a branch and result of homosexuality is a modern and peverted lie.
>>7335 An interesting note is Odin and Varuna are both considered to bring forth order (rta) through religious rite and magic.
(66.63 KB 902x675 dsagdsg_5e170bb765b5e.jpeg)
What do you guys think about Ramakrishna, Vivekananda? Is the Vedanta Society worth associating with?
>>7382 I think they are important figures for sure. I can't deny that Ramakrishna seems to have had some very deep mystical experiences, but I'm definitely always skeptical of the sorts of claims that all religions are true and different paths to the One. I think in a qualified sense this can be partially true, but this seems to imply that all religions are equally as good or equally as full of wisdom. Even if the Truth is like a mountain and there are different paths to the top, not all paths are as easy to climb, and some paths might not even reach the mountain. For Vivekananda, I definitely can't deny that he was very important for the spread of Hindu ideas in the West. One red flag though is that Vivekananda was a Freemason at one point and associated himself with the Brahmo Samaj. The Brahmo Samaj was modelled on Christian reform movements. This movement was founded by Ram Mohan Roy. He hated 'idol worship' and rejected ideas such as karma and reincarnation because they didn't align with human reason. The Arya Samaj is the better one, to an extent. Dayananda Saraswati advocated for a return to pure Vedic religion and a return to eternal law / sanatana dharma and had a slightly different metaphysics from the 'all religions are perfectly one' and 'we are all God' stuff of other groups. The Arya Samaj was very important in turning Hinduism into an aggressive political force against Christianity and Islam. They were also responsible for the development of Hindu nationalist politics and the intolerance of Abrahamism. In the Punjab many converts to Christianity and Islam were re-converted into Hindus under their tutelage. Unfortunately all of these members of the Hindu reform movement are imperfect in my mind. My favorite modern figure is Prabhupada. Prabhupada was as blunt as could be. He condemned communists and atheists, he affirmed the teachings about women and caste in the scriptures, and condemned much of what is taken for granted in modernity today. He also said that blacks are shudras that need to be controlled and that Hitler, through Subash Chandra Bose, was the true liberator of India, not Gandhi. He also had nice words to say regarding how Europeans were true Aryans and that we were descended from Kshatriyas. Even this guy made some mistakes though, unfortunately. ISCKON is pozzed today from what I can see. Regarding your question about the Vedanta Society though, I doubt that it is worth it to associate with. That is just my intuition though. Though the ideas they put forth that I typed out above are not inherently pozzed, under the wrong tutelage they quickly devolve into trite New Age hippy nonsense. I could be totally wrong though. I love much of Hinduism, but I have never seen anything worth joining unfortunately. There is always a problem somewhere.
(496.75 KB 337x515 ClipboardImage.png)
(144.21 KB 234x360 ClipboardImage.png)
(255.08 KB 237x360 ClipboardImage.png)
More Vedic / Dharmic science books which I have been reading lately and have found interesting and worth recommending to anons. Human Devolution is a highly interesting book for all pagans, because it is directly in accord with the view that our pagan ancestors had of the world. Humans are not progressing as modernity says, but they are degenerating from a level of pure spirit and consciousness into grosser and grosser, more and more degenerate forms. It's basically the opposite of Darwinism, which of course starts from less complex and primitive forms and builds up from there somehow. This book is also similar to the second book in that it argues that humans have lived on earth for millions of years prior to present from evidence of various archeological finds and datings. The second book does this over like 300 pages though, and it itself is an abridged version of a 900 page treatment of this issue. The final book is a short collection of essays on the topic of consciousness. There is a short dialogue between Prabhupada and a science on the nature of science and consciousness, and then there are several essays from Dr. Richard L. Thompson in which he argues for a form of mind-body dualism, explores the phenomenon of inspiration and similar ideas. The final essay is about whether life can be explained solely in materialistic, chemical and physical terms, arguing no.
>>2039 There's truth to this. Even as a child I noticed that if I stopped shivering and stuff and instead "acted warm" on a cold day, I would tolerate much lower temperatures.
>>6416 As a child I saw the Hindu gods as quite ridiculous. The idea of having 50 heads, arms, legs, or whatever. I'd see the art and think, these guys are idiots, they just drew extra parts emerging from behind them rather than considering that a creature with so many extra limbs would need an entirely different skeletal structure. When I was at college studying physics, I read about theories regarding extra dimensions, talking about how lesser dimensional creatures might perceive us. Then I tried to think what an extra dimensional creatures might look like to my 3 dimensional, lineal vision. An image of Shiva appeared in my head immediately.
(235.91 KB 1440x1080 Brahma.jpg)
>>8527 And that way of talking about extra dimensions of higher dimensions is exactly how I've seen more sophisticated Hindus talking about things. What we can find in various forms of so-called 'mythology' is many things that seem to resemble parallel universes somehow connected to our own, and different, higher-dimensional 'planes', some like our own, and some just incomprehensible from our standpoint. I believe there is a statement somewhere in the Srimad Bhagavatam that says that the world of Brahmā (the highest level of this material universe) is completely indescribable, at least using the languages we are equipped with here on Earth, a much lower and grosser level of materiality. And then there is the fact that time passes differently in realms like this: >>1008. Interesting stuff
Did the OG Buddha support war?
>>8582 The great thing about Buddhism is that the Buddha’s teachings were never meant to be a Talmudic lawcode for all of mankind to follow. Liberals and materialists, who pervert the teachings of the Buddha, project their Abrahamic mindset onto Buddhism. He merely taught the truth about desire and suffering, and how to end it. The Buddha’s teachings are instrumental. We can learn this in the parable of the raft, where the Buddha talks about a person making a raft to cross a river. When one gets to the other side, they know longer need the raft, so they don’t just drag it around afterwards even though it was been useful for completing some task. This is analogous to the Dhamma, he says. If one is wanting to attain nirvana and conquer suffering and its cause in desire, the eightfold path is a great way to do it. If one is trying to focus on something more mundane like keeping invaders out of your lands, it’s suicidal. A person’s actions will mould their consequences and future nature according to the results of their karma, though. I’m not in-the-know enough to know how that would be overcome. Sanatana Dharma is superior in some respects to this because bad karma can be washed away very easily, and the warrior tradition is integral to its divinely-ordained social system. though of course what matters is what is really true at the end of the day I don’t think you’d say him leading an army or anything, though.
(534.86 KB 416x566 ClipboardImage.png)
Avoid Defying Natural Creation by Venerable Master Hsuan Hua <Homosexuals exist due in part to the influence of a certain religion. This religion used to be underground and did not dare to promote homosexuality openly, but now that we're in an age where Dharma is on the decline, all kinds of strange phenomenon are happening. Consequently, these people protest, join parades, and lobby for legalizing homosexuality. This is essentially an omen for doomsday. http://www.gbm-online.com/online/dharma/avoid.html What could he mean by this?
>>5783 Can you post art from top middle please?
(52.18 KB 459x646 hitler vishu.jpg)
>>9512 Here you go, anon.
(9.29 KB 420x420 pepe think.png)
Give me one good reason to deny the atman, Buddhabros. It seems almost axiomatic and intuitively obvious to me.
https://www.learnreligions.com/buddhism-and-morality-449726 >Karma Lekshe Tsomo, a professor of theology and a nun in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, explains, "There are no moral absolutes in Buddhism and it is recognized that ethical decision-making involves a complex nexus of causes and conditions. 'Buddhism' encompasses a wide spectrum of beliefs and practices, and the canonical scriptures leave room for a range of interpretations. All of these are grounded in a theory of intentionality, and individuals are encouraged to analyze issues carefully for themselves. ... When making moral choices, individuals are advised to examine their motivation--whether aversion, attachment, ignorance, wisdom, or compassion--and to weigh the consequences of their actions in light of the Buddha's teachings." >In his book, The Mind of Clover: Essays in Zen Buddhist Ethics, Robert Aitken Roshi said (p.17), "The absolute position, when isolated, omits human details completely. Doctrines, including Buddhism, are meant to be used. Beware of them taking a life of their own, for then they use us." >The notion that there are only two approaches to morality -- you either follow the rules or you are a hedonist with no moral compass -- is a false one. There are many approaches to morality, and these approaches should be judged by their fruits -- whether their overall effect is beneficial or harmful. >A strictly dogmatic approach applied without conscience, humanity, or compassion often is harmful. Is all of this true or just nu-male Westerns making shit up?
>>10207 From my own understanding this is basically true. I’m not entirely sure what they mean by ‘no moral absolutes’ though—I would guess that some stuff would always be seen as antithetical to achieving enlightenment and practicing Buddhism, and would thus be judged as morally wrong. Maybe I am wrong though. The Buddha did compare his teachings to a raft to help one cross a river. They are of instrumental value, first and foremost. They even have the concept of upaya or ‘skillful means’ where lies and other half-truths can be taught if they are expedient to helping people reach enlightenment, this has led to a proliferation of different ways and means that claim to be the best ‘raft’. What they are saying about judging by the fruits is basically talking about karmic consequences of actions and how these should be judged in accordance with the teachings. Stuff like this is why I don’t like Buddhism completely. It gets some stuff right but this idea of no real morality of any kind is just opening things up for subversion.
>>6993 so based
>>6981 >>6993 Would you say that the Roman god, Saturn is a serpent or has serpent qualities?
>>10209 >I’m not entirely sure what they mean by ‘no moral absolutes’ though I think what he is trying to say is that Buddhism does not believe in the idea that morality is absolute, an action will be wrong or right regardless of the outcome. You can look at the Ten Commandants as example of morality being absolute.
(8.70 KB 300x277 hexagon saturn.jpg)
>>10314 I am not aware of any serpentine qualities in the Roman god Saturn. It's hard to say what is going on here, actually. We have obviously the associations between the god Saturn and the planet Saturn in Greek and Roman religion alike, as well as the association with the same day of the week (Saturday), as well as time itself, but it is when we start to look at the Jews and their connection to Saturn that things start to go crazy. By that I mean that astrologically, Saturday (and by extension Saturn) was the most maleficent period of the week. Jews are commanded to observe the sabbath and keep it holy. They even call Saturn the planet 'the star of the sabbath' - Shabbetai. This isn't even to get into the insanity surrounding cubes and snakes. Romans and Greeks knew a few things about Saturn, but the Jews took it and ran with it.
(34.57 KB 640x211 saturn cube.jpg)
>>10324 I forgot to post the sounds of the planet Saturn too - very forboding: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nxLXvqLp50
>>10323 You are right. Abrahamic ethics traditionally are deontological. It's all about following the rules regardless of outcome. Maybe it could be said that Buddhism in a sense is more based on consequentialism. For example, there is a famous tale where a boat was traveling full of people and for whatever reason a man on board wanted to sink the ship and make off with some of the goods, killing everyone on board. A bodhisattva on the boat intuited this, and realized that this man's action would bring him eons of torment in the hell realms. The bodhisattva, acting from compassion, killed the man, taking the consequences of such action on himself rather than letting it fall onto him and bringing about many more deaths. Vedic spirituality too, rather than being strictly deontological, is itself more like virtue ethics than Talmudic legalism. The truth is within, it's not imposed externally by a desert god.
>>10324 What I find interesting is that Saturn aka Cronus, is said to have been a power-hungry titan or god who ate and killed his own children because he feared of being overthrown. I wonder if there are many similarities with him and Yahweh.
>>10334 It's definitely right in line with Yahweh's jealous and paranoid behavior
>>6993 Saturn is not the god of the jews, quit insulting the Hellenes and romans over your insane theories and the Cross was not a christain symbol originally, the Chi Rho is the earliest example we have of theirs and even that was coopted.
>>10347 Saturn the Greco-Roman deity is not Yahweh, but there is an undeniable link between Saturnine symbolism and the Jews. >and the Cross was not a christain symbol originally Doesn't matter, cube-worshipers have clearly re-interpreted existing symbols to suit their ends. Every Abrahamic religion does this. Christianity has the cross, Islam has the Kaaba, Jews have the Star of David, the sabbath, the tefillin, etc. You're doubtlessly aware that the Star of David itself is stolen from ancient symbolism for the Heart Chakra, but the Jews have repurposed it for their Shebbatai / Saturnine symbolism. It sounds insane, but the Saturn meme is real. It's undeniable. Saturn = 6th planet from the Sun Saturday = 6th day of the week Shabbetai = Star of the Sabbath = Saturn Cube = Six faces Cross = unfolded cube Kaaba = giant cube Hexagon at the center of the Star of David = Cube seen from an angle Saturn's northern storm = hexagon in the star of David Surely it's all a coincidence!
Most esoteric jews connect Saturn to El, in which El (Elyon) is connected to Yahweh as the highest in heaven. This is because Baal Adad, the King of the Gods and king of lightning and storm was son of El in Ugaric/Caananite culture. Naturally, Zeus/Jupiter was connected to Baal, and Baal's father was connected to Zeus's father.qw It's just a weird Greco-Roman viewpoint that some occultists have taken and ran with it.
>>10327 Here’s that story: >Then the Lord [Buddha] again addressed the Bodhisattva Jnanottara: “Son of the family: Once a upon a time, long before the Thus-come-one, the Worthy, the fully perfected Buddha Dipamkara, there were five hundred merchants who set sail on the high seas in search of wealth. Among the company was a doer of dark deeds, a doer of evil deeds, a robber well-trained in the art of weaponry, who had come on board that very ship to attack them. He thought, “I will kill all these merchants when they have achieved their aims and done what they set out to do, take all possessions and go to Jambu Continent.” >“Son of the family: then the merchants achieved their aims and set about to depart. No sooner had they done so, than that deceitful person thought: “Now I will kill all these merchants, take all their possessions and go to Jambu Continent. The time has come.” At the same time, among the company on board was a captain named Great Compassionate. While Captain Great Compassionate slept on one occasion, the deities who dwelt in that ocean showed him in a dream: ‘’’Among this ship’s company is a person named so and so, of such and such sort of physique, of such and such, garb, complex, and shape—a robber mischievous, a thief of others’ property. He is thinking,” I will kill all these merchants, take all their possessions and go to Jambu Continent.” >To kill these merchants would create formidable evil karma for that person. Why so? These five hundred merchants are all progressing toward supreme, right and full awakening; they are each irreversible from awakening. If he should kill these Bodhisattvas, the fault—the obstacle caused by the deed—would cause him to burn in the great hells for as long as it take each one of these Bodhisattva to achieve supreme, right and full awakening, consecutively. Therefore, Captain, think of some skill in means to prevent this person from killing the five hundred merchants and going to the great hells because of the deed.’ >“Son of the family: Then the captain Great Compassionate awoke. He considered what means there might be to prevent that person from killing the five hundred merchants and going to the great hells. Seven days passed with a wind averse to sailing to Jambu Continent. Without wind during those seven days he plunged deep into thought, not speaking to anyone. “He thought, ‘There is no means to prevent this from slaying the merchants and going to the great hells but to kill him.’ “And he thought, ‘if I were to report this to the merchants, they would kill and slay him with angry thoughts and all go to the great hells themselves.’ “And he thought, ‘if I were to kill this person, I would likewise burn in the great hells for one hundred-thousand eons because of it. Yet I can bear to experience the pain of the great hells, that this person not slay these five hundred merchants and develop so much evil karma. I will kill this person myself. >“Son of the family: Accordingly, the captain Great Compassionate protected those five hundred merchants and protected that person from going to the great hells, by deliberately stabbing and slaying that person who was a robber with a spear, with great compassion and skill in means. And all among the company achieved their aims and each went to his own city. Son of the family. At that time, in that life I was none other than the Captain Great Compassionate. Have no second thought or doubt on this point. The five hundred merchants on board the five hundred Bodhisattvas who are to niranize to supreme, right and full awakening in this auspicious eon. >“Son of the family: For me, Samsara was curtailed for one hundred-thousand eons because of that skill in means and great compassion. And the robber died to be reborn in a world of paradise. The five hundred merchants on board are the hundred future Buddhas of the auspicious eon. Son of the family, what do you think of this? Can curtailing birth and death for one hundred-thousand eons with that skill in means and that great compassion with gnosis of skill in means be regarded as the Bodhisattva’s obstacle caused by past deeds? Do not view it in that way. That should be regarded as his very skill in means.”
BUDDHIST HOLY WAR AGAINST ISLAM >The Kālachakra literature uniformly refers to Muslims as mlecchas – barbarians, and Islam is called the mleccha-dharma, the barbarian religion. [...] In brahmanical usage the Sanskrit word mleccha commonly denotes any foreigner who does not follow Indian customs, but the Kālachakra texts seem to only apply it to Muslims. >We now turn to the history of the barbarian religion. In a verse of Śrī Kālachakra the Buddha prophesies the origin and the development of the mlecchadharma: >Ādam (arda), Nūḥ (nogha), and Ibrāhīm (varāhī) [are the first barbarian teachers]; there are also five others who nature is tamas in the family of demonic snakes: Mūsā (Mūṣa), ʿĪsā (īśa), the White-Clad One (śvetavastrin), Muḥammad (madhupati), and the Madhī (mathanī), who will be the eighth. The seventh will be bord in the city of Baghdad (vāgadā), in the land of Makka (makha), where the demonic incarnation – the mighty merciless idol of the barbarians – lives in the world. Allah is understood in the text to be a mighty, merciless demonic death-deity known as Ar-Rahman (a name of Allah in Islam). Allah is compared to a god of darkness like the demon Rāhu who devours the sun and moon. The Buddhist view of Islam in the text is that it is demonic and perverse, a sort of anti-religion, the antithesis of Buddhism (daitya-dharma, asura-dharma, adharma). It is further described as hiṃsā-dharma, a religion of violence. The text then prophesies that in the future, in the last phase of the Kali Yuga, barbarians will dominate Southeast Asia. All true religion will die out. Mleccha-dharma will dominate the region. At the end of the age Kalkin Chakrin will annihilate the barbarian horde and re-establish Buddha Dharma. Islam will be utterly destroyed in a Buddhist holy war, the gods and the forces of Shambala on one side, and demons and barbarians on the other. PDF: https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jiabs/article/download/8878/2785
>>10324 >serpentine qualities of Saturn Perhaps this and >>10336 are related. My postulation is the "consumer of his own" and the "tail-eating serpent" are the nature of time and Chronos taking back all things taken form in time back to the timeless. The only permissible thing that would not be reclaimed or eaten by their preceptor would be pure ageless things yet contained within the realm of time (or the material realm). In this it is more like a spiritual pressure cooker to catalyze the evolution of our spirits into more, lest we stagnate lost in the realms of matter as the wheel of time turns and we do not (within). Anything untrue will eventually fall away, or be taken you may say, by Saturn. By the negative image we are left with what is perpetually or perennially true. By the flip of the coin we are re-warded, or buffered again, a holy ward of truth, the blessing of Saturn's benefic aspect if we first sowed ourselves, presence & action, in devotion to truth over time -- persistence yields fruits. Saturn's name is Satur-deva in Sanskrit. Sat is truth for you novices, satnam a common mantra, though more solar in nature as the truth is radiantly liberating, and it's more than half of Saturn's name. By the truth we are set free, but only so as we sow shall we reap. >>10347 >Saturn is not the god of the jews [...] and the Cross was not a christain symbol originally [...] and even that was coopted. This. >>10348 >Every Abrahamic religion does this. Ever heard the theory that Abraham was an apostate Brahman? >cube-worshipers have clearly re-interpreted existing symbols to suit their ends. In (self imposed?) exile and sedition (a) brahman wandered west from the Asiatic steeps whee the Proto-Aryans ruled and created a contrary-to-nature cult based upon stolen foundations of any scrap of power and aimed at inverting nature itself. >Saturn-Cube-666 The 6 (geo-spatial cartesian) directions, each must be saluted to and accounted for, within and without to hold the form in balance. If you do not bring tidal flows in all ways then you lose your vitality as you flow it out but not in, or in but not out, or left but not right, or so on an so on. The cube could also be considered a cross if thought of as a hypercube. >>10357 >EL El could be called the "bounded light" in contra-distinction to the radiant light of Ra. But more on that latter. This inner twisting to compel one's own light into a certain shape, by act, by art, by discipline, creates a inner foundation form, upon which the other bodies come to rest and rise from. >connect Saturn to El With enough discipline over time to (self) severity Saturn's domain is now reminiscently invoked. >Yahweh As an aspect of imbalanced severity this has some quasi-related subdomains of Saturn & El though I have to personally wonder if this is yet not also appropriated. >Ra & IS-RA-EL Ra as the radiance, El as the self-control, and then Is(is) as the pure presence, the feminie mystery to balance the masculine, Ra, and held together by El. Together the nation of those who knew the living secret, the mystery of Isis, Ra & El came to be known as Israel. To these peoples where charged the duty to keep the knowledge of the Anahata or the true Flame of Israel. >Abrahamic Israel Having the perversion of the natural law, the heart is the most diseased thing of the modern Jew. This results primly in autoimmine diseases and not being heart centered in consciousness. Alchemically this is the Fire-Water of the Merkaba (which is the 3D shape that the Star of David represents) is in imbalance. Passions creating unhealthy emotions, or emotional manipulation resulting in lawless passions.
https://politicallyincorrectdharma.blogspot.com/2019/05/buddhism-on-homo-and-transsexuality.html?m=1 >Homosexuality and some forms of transsexuality have existed pretty much everywhere in the world, always, which includes traditional Buddhist societies. There are homosexuals and transsexuals alive today in rural Buddhist Burmese villages, for example. Such aberrations from the heterosexual biological norm are not glorified, or considered to be just as good as heterosexuality, but they are tolerated, and to some degree even respected in a compassionate sort of way. >This latter is especially true of transgender people—that is, people who identify as members of the opposite sex from their own body. It’s not extremely uncommon to see a man dressed as a woman and acting like one, or a woman dressed as a man and acting like one, more or less, even in remote, unsophisticated villages. For the most part they are allowed to do their thing, and I do not recall hearing of any of them being harassed, although I suppose it does happen occasionally. > There is some social stigma in Buddhist Burma against gayness in men, however, especially if they are of the “flaming” variety—you know, the ones who don’t walk exactly, but rather sashay, and who affect a feminine lilting tone of voice, possibly even punctuating their sentences with a momentary protrusion of the tongue. It seems to be universal throughout human societies, with few exceptions, that effeminate men are viewed as weak, timid, and inferior; and in more traditional societies in which toughness may be necessary in a man this stigma is more prevalent than in more modern, progressive, and “decadent” urban environments.
http://www.juliusevola.net/excerpts/On_Homosexuality,_Platos_Inappropriateness_%26_Sex_at_the_Level_of_%22Mutual_Masturbation%22.html >It is inappropriate to apply, as Plato does, the metaphysical meaning made evident by the myth of the hermaphrodite to homosexual love or to love as practiced between pederasts or lesbians. In fact, in the case of such love, it is no longer allowable to speak of the impulse of the male or female principle, as present in the primordial being, to be reunited. The mythical being of our origin would, in such a case,have to be not hermaphroditic but homogeneous and of one sex only,either all man (in the case of pederasts) or all woman (in the case of lesbians), and the two lovers would seek to unite themselves as simple parts of one and the same substance. Thus the essential,which gives each myth its whole value, loses its meaning, namely, the idea of the polarity and the complementary nature of the two sexes asthe basis of the magnetism of love and of a "transcendency" in eros,and of the blinding and destructive revelation of the One. >To find an explanation it is necessary to descend to a lower level and examine various empirical possibilities. Normally two forms of homosexuality are distinguished in sexology: One has an inborn,natural character, whereas the other has an acquired character and is conditioned by psychological and sociological factors influenced by a person's environment. But in the second of these forms it is necessary to give a proper value to the distinction between forms having a vicious nature and forms that presuppose a latent predisposition which is aroused under given circumstances. It is necessary to set forth this condition because, given the same situation, different types behave in different ways and may not become homosexual. It is important, however, not to consider the inborn form of homosexuality in a rigid way but to allow a certain possibility of variation. >In natural homosexuality or in the predisposition to it, the most straightforward explanation is provided by what we said earlier about the differing levels of sexual development and about the fact that the process of sexual development in its physical and, even more so, in its psychic aspects can be incomplete. In that way, the original bisexual nature is surpassed to a lesser extent than in a "normal" human being, the characteristics of one sex not being predominant over those of the other sex to the same extent (see chapter 1). Next we must deal with what M. Hirschfeld called the "intermediate sexual forms." In cases of this kind (for instance, when a person who is nominally a man is only 60 percent male), it is impossible that the erotic attraction based on the polarity of the sexes in heterosexuality -which is much stronger the more the man is male and the woman is female- can also be born between individuals who,according to the birth registry and as regards only the so-called primary sexual characteristics, belong to the same sex, because in actual fact they are "intermediate forms." In the case of pederasts, Ulrichs said rightly that it is possible to find "the soul of a woman born in the body of a man." How is it that these two claim to be traditional buddhist and not realize how contradictory it is to support transexuality and "natural homosexuality" and not realize that they go against nature? Can someone explain to me how did the both of them come to the idea that these are normal and aren't phenomenons created from the sins of man. What reason would there need to exist an idea as sodomy and for it to be natural?
>>10637 >>10638 What the guy in the first blogpost is doing is less egregious than Evola is doing here, I think, as we can see him say that "their very state may very well be a kind of karmic retribution from misdeeds performed in some previous existence, and it is certainly nothing to be celebrated or paraded in the streets." This is certainly possible. I really don't have compassion for homosexuals though, or trannies. Those who are literal hermaphrodites of some variety I may sympathize with a bit because that is a genuine issue with their physical body, and not just a phantasm of the mind is like it is for the modern day transexual movement. These people are a tiny, tiny slither of the population though, and of course, as I understand it, the term 'hermaphrodite' is a misnomer anyway, since sex is defined by whether one produces sperm or eggs, and no human can do both. It's impossible. That aside, even if some of this stuff is some sort of fruit of past actions, I see no reason why it ought to be indulged. As far as I see it, it is just another vice to be overcome in that case. Those who pursue such things are in open rebellion to Nature as far as I'm concerned, and they will reap what they sow in time. Seeing Evola quote (((Hirschfeld))) here is telling in itself. Part of this might have something to do with the nature of Buddhism. We ought to compare it here to Vaishnava traditions of Hinduism. Dharma, the Natural Law, is a manifestation of God and the path of gradual spiritual elevation. Acts of good and evil are punished according to the actions of individuals, giving them bodies according to the quality of their soul at a given time. God is the creator of the four castes, and scriptural injunctions in the shastras are the product of enlightened sages who have seen the truth and put it into scriptural form, teaching us about Dharma, what to do, and what to refrain from (Laws of Manu is one example of this). All living entities are created on the behalf of God by Brahmā and his mind-born children, the Prajapatis. The purpose of this is to show that we have a very purposeful universe in the Vedic system, governed by Supreme Intelligence. Everything is purposeful, meaningful and spiritual. In Buddhism, I'm not so sure. Is there any sort of Cosmic Order? Access to Insight has a definition of 'Dhamma' / 'Dharma' as 'principles of behavior that human beings ought to follow so as to fit in with the right natural order of things' - but when a human being or other form of life in Buddhism appears to be nothing more than a fluxing aggregate of elements, which are themselves devoid of any inherent nature themselves, it's hard to see what enforces such a Natural Order, or how such a thing would function without Intelligence behind it. This might be why Buddhists are so willing to snake around certain things and accept certain behaviors that are routinely recognized as contrary to Nature by other traditions. I'm not even sure if humans or other creatures are even specifically designed or created in Buddhism, and if they were, it doesn't even probably matter to them, because it wouldn't be any sort of Supreme Being or being acting on the behalf of said Supreme Being, because such a being doesn't even exist in Buddhism, which would make the fact that there were certain design principles or natural inclinations more or less irrelevant as far as I can see.
>>7966 Could you please upload pdf of conciousness the missing link?
>>10669 I am unable to find a PDF of it online. However, the work is so short that I may be able to scan it and have it uploaded within an hour or two. It's only one hundred pages long, anyway.
>>10669 >>10670 Alright, I didn't manage to scan my copy, but I managed to piece one together and put it into a PDF. Enjoy.
>>10673 Thanks
White and black are themselves dualistic concepts. If you have not transcended them you can't say you have accomplished the way.
>>10832 Black and White in what sense?
>>10832 I don't know what you mean by "transcending" them.
(174.44 KB 1280x720 maxresdefault.jpeg)
Is Vaishnavism the only acceptable 'denomination' in Hinduism? Are there any redeeming qualities to Shaivism or Shaktism? As I read more about Hinduism I have come to find that Shaivism/Shaktism is from Dravidian and should therefore be avoided. On the other hand Vaishnavism is Aryan. Am I correct in this assumption?
(61.59 KB 418x960 vishnu npc.jpg)
>>11028 You are basically correct in this assumption from my own readings and experience. Vaishnavism is by far the most orthodox and traditional form of Vedic spirituality there is, and is essentially, as far as I'm concerned, really the only one of any enduring value. That is why aside from pro-Buddhist and pro-Asatru posting that we see here on /fascist/, everything else is Vaishnava of some variety. A lot of the stuff that people find really weird about Hinduism comes straight from Shaktism and Shaivism. A lot of these incorporate non-Vedic tantric ideas, which incorporate sex rituals, alcohol and ignore the orthodox Vedic prescriptions of purity, impurity, caste differences, etc. This is where the term 'left-hand path' comes from (Vamachara). To no one's surprise, groups like the Aghori who eat flesh from dead bodies, smear themselves with cremation ashes and meditate on top of corpses, are tantric Shaivas (not to say that this is typical behavior *at all*, but you'll never see this from Vaishnavas who follow the scriptural injunctions). A lot of these peoples' texts are of a lot later date too. Worth pointing out that it's notable how the non-Vedic traditions such as Jainism and Buddhism aren't degenerate like this, and this is almost surely because they were founded by kshatriyas (i.e. twice-born Aryan men)
>>11028 >>11077 i am a little confused about this since evola advocated for shaktism is his book,
(235.91 KB 1440x1080 Brahma.jpg)
(3.24 MB 1440x967 1607900138437.png)
(3.80 MB 1500x1946 1606778685783.png)
(141.68 KB 500x713 1608181887521.jpg)
(59.68 KB 375x438 1427328574371.jpg)
Personally I am Devout primly to Brahma, though much of Kali yuga requires aptitude in Shivaism. Practically this comes out as Thoth and Athena-Pallas worship in my life. >>11028 >Is Vaishnavism the only acceptable 'denomination' in Hinduism? <Different sects of Hinduism Do yee not know (h)Induism is merely the Dravidian concept of Aryan law? More properly, in a historic context the proto-religion would be more like a form of ancient Buddhism when it was magical af and much more like Vajrayana and Tibetan sorcery. Even this pick 1 of 3 false dichotomy is a result of lower souls attempting to apply higher knowledge. >Are there any redeeming qualities to Shaivism or Shaktism? Only if you are already on the path of absolute individuation (from your ancestral oversoul) can you avoid the pitfalls of tempestuous embodiment of temporal power as a demigod and continue onto the realms beyond and eventually back to pure unconditioned consciousness. However to accomplish this one needs to be an actualizing Aryan Brahamin. Or in other words, requires knowing of the archetypes that give form (Vaishyas) and the personal power-dedication-selfsacrafice to purify the forms keeping them (Kshatriyas). With this one can walk in the light of the black sun, Asgard, or to become your own godspark realized and not a "mere" High-Priest-Avatar of a principle. >Brahma Is one of the least worshiped of the "Hindu" trinity, Allegedly by less than 1%, with Vishnu making up around 66-75% and Shiva the remaining 25-33%. To properly appreciate the domain of the creator and lord of wisdom one needs to first have had the experiences of all the cycles of from (Vishnu) and the strifes/transcendence from form (Shiva) or else devotion to it shall unsatisfactory to the pallet of spiritual desire. So only a properly ascetic spirit who having seen through the illusions of from and the trials therein, being their master, yet being also disatisfied by those passions turns to scholastic and satsang directed activities. This renders understanding or wisdom, which may bore or tempt the lower caste soul, though by the contextualization of all the experience a proper Aryan Brahmin has accumulated it serves and does not divert one's path. >>11077 >twice-born Once you become thrice-born you become the 'above caste' or God caste, which could be considered to be the Celestial Aryans of the Satya yuga or the Divine that walked terrestrially the Hyperboreans of the Treta yuga. Semirelatedly later yet in the Dwapara yuga one of the titans, Atlas, founded an empire of 12 sons who became the priest-kings of Atlantis. Though by that time they where semidivines who had lost much of their individuation only few from Atlantis are worthy of mention, Thoth is one, a God of wisdom, creator of magic, yet Isis was the caster of magic. The thrice-born, the gods inspire their unique domain or spiritual essence in an awe inspiring way. Not infrequently they where associated with planets (which means 'wanderer' in Greek, and encompasses all moving luminaries but not the 'background stars' or now-a-days also comets, asteroids, and other astronomical points of significant charge-flow) >>11165 I hope this provides some clarity.
>>11165 I would have to read the book to see what exactly Evola is saying here, but it's definitely strange to see him do something like that. From what I have read. the Tantras seem to have originated among ascetic groups living in cremation grounds. They were probably not of brahmanical origin, but they were not necessarily of the lowest castes. They were definitely beyond the pale of Vedic orthodoxy though. These sorts of ascetics would be found entering into ecstatic states and imitating deities like Bhairava and Kali with non-vegetarian offerings, alcohol and sexual substances. These ascetics were supported by low caste individuals who lived by the cremation grounds. Eventually though Tantric ideas began to influence the mainstream religion more in some areas, especially in Kashmir. Abhinavagupta's Kashmir Shaivism is one good example, and it was made slightly more respectable through that. By purely orthodox Vaishnava standards though it's wrongheaded though.
>>11186 >Is one of the least worshiped of the "Hindu" trinity There is no 'trinity' in the Vedic scriptures. This is the real redpill. See >>5233. Shiva and Brahma are Narayana, in the sense that he is the substrative cause and ground of their existence, but the said can be said about Indra, individual atman, the entire universe, etc.
An article on just war and violence in the Ramayana. Here are a few greentexted sections to give you an idea of the content: >Born into the kshatriya (ruler-warrior) caste as the son of King Dasharatha, Rama is authorized to wield violent force in order to combat evil and protect righteousness. Violent means is the privilege, and indeed the duty, of the kshatriya class, to whom, among the four castes, social governance is entrusted. Both protection and punishment are deemed equally vital to social welfare, without which society would decay. Both are accepted as noble causes for violence, as exemplified at several junctures throughout the text. >Even the ideal kingdom requires arms. In Book II, Valmiki portrays a Utopia in Ayodhya, the capital city of the idyllic kingdom of Kosala; yet it is described as well armed. Though Ayodhya is prosperous, refined, and peaceful, we are told that it contained every implement and weapon (1.5.10) and its king, Dasharatha, had thousands of great chariot warriors with great fighting skills. Even a Utopia must be protected from external threat; similarly, internal threats must be met with punishment, but in a reasonable and humane manner. We are told that in Ayodhya, the king's administrators would, "if the occasion demanded, punish their own sons" (1.7.7) and that they "were constant protectors of all honest inhabitants of the realm" (1.7.9). The Valmiki Ramayana asserts that protection and punishment, when alloyed with reason, represent sanctioned and necessary expressions of violence. >At the very onset of the epic, Valmiki questions the great sage Narada about the ideal man, i.e., one "who is benevolent to all creatures" (1.1.3), yet "who when his fury is aroused in battle is feared even by the gods" (1.1.4). Narada responds with a glowing description of Rama, whom he describes as "the protector of all living things and the guardian of righteousness [and] versed in the science of arms" (1.1.13). Rama is extolled as a great warrior, a champion of the underprivileged, and a defender of the devout, yet he is also described as "always even-tempered and kind-spoken, [and as one who] would ignore a hundred injuries, so great was his self-control" (II.1.15-16). Yet the text unambiguously states that Rama's martial prowess is unequalled: indeed, we are told that "in his wrath he resembles the fire [of destruc tion] at the end of time" (1.1.17). He conquers many foes throughout his legendary career. Yet he advocates passivity on several important occasions, subverting his social duty in favor of the doctrine of nonviolence. The Valmiki Ramayana extols sagacious equanimity in tandem with martial prowess. Thus, the formidable prince-regent is content to live in the forest in ascetic garb for fourteen years. The Valmiki Ramayana celebrates Ayodhya as the ideal state and Rama as the ideal warrior who engages in combat for a righteous cause, in a righteous fashion. However, Rama is well-endowed with moral ideals of nonviolence, tolerance, equanimity, self-restraint, forgiveness, etc., thereby rendering our hero an intriguing champion of peace. The Valmiki Ramayana engages the tension between legitimizing and reproaching the use of force.
>>11193 >There is no 'trinity' in the Vedic scriptures. Hence the quotes and the opening about this being a misframed prospective, the result of preservation without truth as the highest ideal. >Shiva and Brahma are Narayana Rudra was formed from Brahma's 5th head. Ergo this is why Shiva is worshiped as a god of freewill as well. Before Rudra/Shiva there was no death or decay, and according to legend there was, after a time, a superfluous surplusity of forms came to be, and after a while of growing tensions the 5th head lept from it's neck with such ferocity that the impure fell before him and thus he was called Rudra (the fierce one) and much time later he came to be more commonly known as Shiva, the auspicious one, as more accomplishments where preformed and titles/names earned.
>start meditating >begin to cultivate compassion >help insects out of my house instead of crushing them like I used to >no changes with niggers or Jews Literally lower than insects. I guess that bugs really don't harm anyone though, while Jews are evil and niggers have no place in civilized society. All is right in the world.
>>11480 >help insects out of my house instead of crushing them like I used to Did meditaion lead to that? I'm the same, especially spiders and moths. They are useful never did anything wrong. I don't meditate though. >Literally lower than insects. I guess that bugs really don't harm anyone though, while Jews are evil and niggers have no place in civilized society. All is right in the world. Add (((politicians))) to that list, they are lower than any animal. I do a lot of fishing and well, I have more infinitely compassion for the animals I kill to eat than I will ever have for any of this evil scum. If any of the scum died tomorrow it's still hold more compassion for the fish i killed yesterday and their last moments.
>>11482 Not entirely due to meditation, most likely, but I think it might be a contributing factor. Once I got redpilled on the question of consciousness and stopped viewing them as soulless annoyances it sort of changed my view a bit and I felt bad about killing them. I think true Aryans naturally have this sort of attitude to a greater or lesser extent within them. And yes, evil humans are lower than the lowest of animals. I am not an Abrahamist obviously, but I have heard a saying before that man can either be higher than the angels or lower than a beast depending on their behavior. This is very true in its purport, I think. Just think of some of the most depraved and sick people on this planet, they are far more disturbed and subhuman than any animal. This is why they are rooted out of society traditionally and made public examples of.
>>11201 >Rama Isn't he a shitskin?
(1.57 MB 1000x667 ClipboardImage.png)
>>11482 >moths >never did anything wrong In what world do you live in
>>11715 It's said he has the skin-color of a blue lotus and has coppery red eyes, i.e. he's literally described as blue like he appears in art. I wouldn't try to put any realism into his descriptions.
(99.36 KB 450x735 knowledge.jpg)
The earliest Aryans weren't monists who worshiped Brahman, they were magicians who commanded and shaped it and who held Atman (the transcendent Self) as the highest/ultimate principle. Monism is the original bluepill and lunar silver age corruption spread by Atlantinean (((priesthood))), which got very popular among the cucks and mud races with slave mentality that continued to proliferate it. Monist philosophy is essentially globohomo without all the hypocrisy and excessive evil/kikery, it was the philosophical and metaphysical foundation of French revolution and other egalitarian movements. It's also the source of all the compounding corruption which eventually led to Kali Yuga, Abrahamism, modernism, etc. Going few steps back doesn't change anything, it's no different from christcucks who claim how their religion is based just because it's less degenerate than modern soypoz, without realizing that Christianity was very degenerate to begin with. Some go further to Zoroastrianism or later beliefs of ancient Egypt, some go to later Vedic period, but it's necessary to go to as far as the scarce remnants of the golden age philosophy if one is ever to have a chance to overcome the forces of disintegration. >>6483 Plato's works are quite reflective of the original Indo-European beliefs, but Neoplatonism is garbage. >>6993 Time, entropy, decay, recycling, imprisonment in the material world ... >>10347 Just because ancient Greeks and Romans recognized the influence of this principle doesn't make it inherently European, it was recognized across many other cultures, and Jews decided to choose it as their guiding principle. It's most likely the entity which appeared to Abraham and asked him to kill his own son to show loyalty. It's the same archetype however you look at it. The "golden age" of Saturn is a dream of a perfect cattle farm, where goyim are well fed and taken care of (on the surface at least), but have zero freedoms or free will, until their essence is absorbed/recycled by this demon. Any similarity with modern western countries is purely coincidental :>)
>>11758 Depends which sort of monism you're talking about. I for one can't stand hippies who regurgitate half-baked understandings of Advaita / Non-dualism. They are unfortunately all over places like /x/. The truly pozzed form of monism is the one that takes statements like 'atman is Brahman' as 1:1 identity statements. From this we get the 'we're all one maaaan' bullshit, and where people are striving for annihilation into the One. This is essentially Advaita Vedanta, and what 5-me0-DMT users shill for. The types that posit a sort of oneness, but qualify it with plurality, and differences between individual selves, selves and matter, and selves and Brahman in one sense or another, are fine as far as I'm concerned. Here there is no annihilationism and other weird stuff. Jews shill for annihilationist ideas quite often. >>11730 You just have to guide moth bros back outside. Or just get a cat and he'll eat them
>>11761 It's Kabbalistic disintegration, literal Jewish black magic that fools eat up as some kind of enlightenment. There were many shills promoting those ideas (and various drugs) on chans a while ago, I kind of miss arguing with them. >The types that posit a sort of oneness, but qualify it with plurality, and differences between individual selves, selves and matter, and selves and Brahman in one sense or another, are fine as far as I'm concerned. I don't really mind those, but this position can be a slippery slope towards to what you described previously. Knowledge of Atman was reserved for the spiritual elite of the elite anyway, it was never meant to be proliferated.
>>11773 Jews like to slip this sort of annihilationist 'oneness' ideas into popular media as well I've noticed, I'm sure it all comes from Kabbalah. Evangelion is one key example with its Human Instrumentality, and we can even see this sort of stuff in Dead Space where the Unitologists believe that all life will be converged and made 'whole' or some shit (I haven't played it, but I've heard of this). It's presented as bad, but it's probably some form of predictive programming, because they simultaneously push these sorts of ideas as well. Lurianic Kabbalah in particular revolves around the shattering of the vessels of light and the origin of chaos and evil. Tikkun Olam, of course, is the process of reintegrating the 'light' and returning the creation to the original (((divine plan))), back into the original oneness. >Knowledge of Atman was reserved for the spiritual elite of the elite anyway, it was never meant to be proliferated. Exactly. Things quickly go south when the plebs are allowed to dictate things.
>>11775 Kabbalah is mostly a collection of ideas that they got from elsewhere (the sources are not originally theirs, only the interpretation is), and the idea of "oneness" got mostly popularized by the followers of Pythagoras and other Monists in Europe, while Pythagoras himself got initiated by the Chaldean magi, who were of a lunar, and not solar/Hyperborean type. He did recognize differences between individual selves however, but only as different reflections of the singular overmind. Tikkun Olam is a twisted reinterpretation of these ideas. In effect, it restarts the physical universe while using the 'annihilated' blank state souls as the building material/energy/fuel for another cycle. It's the great harvest of Saturn/Demiurge/Yehowa/Brahma, for he does eat his children. >Things quickly go south when the plebs are allowed to dictate things We live in an age where shudras and candalas are the so called elites, the current state of the world being reflective of their natures/dharma. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dd6CQCbk2ro This guy has a bit of a liberal bias but he explains very well how the more successful you are from the (Darwinian) evolutionary perspective (superbacteria beat 'humans' in that regard), the more ignorant of the nature of reality/Truth you become. In this context, it becomes clear how Jews became an organic lie to win in this world, and why Lucifer is the god of the "losers".
>>11787 I have to disagree with Hoffmann for the simple reason that his theory is built on a foundation of sand, since evolution is one of the biggest psyops in human history. It's all about levels of consciousness. The higher and purer the consciousness, the more we have the ability to make free choices, and to either follow dharma, or to rebel against it and become subhumans lower than animals. Jews are certainly the best example of this.
>>11793 redpill me on evolution. Where can I get good info on its psyop nature? Is any aspect of evolution true?
>>11793 I came to understand that it's a matter of perspective and context. Ultimately, it comes down to transformation and passing through various states of existence and consciousness. Time, rather than being a straight line, is cyclical, but these cycles can go both ways simultaneously. While Darwinian evolution is false since the chance of it randomly occurring is close to zero and falls within the category of absurdism, teleological evolution is not. Everything strives to reach it's Form/nature, however, not all Forms are equal. And this inequality exists at the most fundamental, root level. Meaning that some essences can never mix or transform one into another, at least upwardly. Have in mind that I'm talking about spiritual essences here, which may, and may not correspond to temporal physical forms, depending on circumstances. For an NPC whose "spiritual center" lies in the matter which generated it (breaths of Brahman, primordial sea of potentialities), evolution is real, so is "oneness". It follows the survival/competition principle, min-maxing the traits which increase it's reproductive and survival success and it's competitive aptitude. This makes it more and more "blind" to truth, as well as less and less interested in abstract values like beauty, honor, higher knowledge etc. Any species that begin allocating resources to more abstract pursuits risk being out-competed, and ultimately, going physically extinct, of which we see countless examples in history. This was the greatest weakness of the White race, as would be of any other race against time. It could also explain the gradual degeneration as we passed through the silver, bronze and iron ages to ultimately reach the age of the lead where pretty much everyone is a golem. On another hand, the Jew, being a race entirely in time, became an apex predator and won this world, but at the expense of degenerating into a pure elemental force with no Self, free will or genuine individuality. This is also curious, as most other species and races kind of reach natural equilibrium at one point. So far, it seems that the Aryans and Jews (and the forces behind them) are the only "destabilizing" factors in this world. Jews might as well be our shadows. And I'm referring to generating principles here, as alternatively we might have seen a race with a different history, language, looks etc. that embodies the same anti-values and shares the same traits/archetypes. But I digress, as I touched on a very esoteric theme. For an immortal whose spiritual center is transcendent and a man against time, it would all be seen as devolution/degeneration, which is also true, but from a different perspective. I've noticed that some anons reject egalitarian religions but keep the same mindset, presuming that all souls are equal, and that any differences are merely contextual. >and to either follow dharma, or to rebel against it and become subhumans That's not really a choice. Subhumans follow their dharma as well, just like locusts do. Aryans had a system which allowed them to attain success in the physical world while simultaneously resisting the elemental forces trying to devour and degenerate them, a principle of embodied perfection and the golden Law, but we can only uncover remote traces of this in early Vedic literature.
>>11821 >esoteric themes That explains why you're retarded.
>>11819 >Is any aspect of evolution true? It depends how we are defining evolution. I am strictly speaking of (Neo-)Darwinian evolution. I know you and readers of this post likely know this, but for clarity's sake, I will give the gist of Darwin's theory and critique off of that— Darwin's theory essentially holds that every species has variations. Some varieties turn out to be advantageous for competition in survival, breeding more, etc., while other varieties are not. Creatures with advantageous traits live longer, reproduce more and pass on the useful traits. This natural selection caused by environmental pressures causes species to develop in particular directions and, in time, to lead to the development of radically different species. All life is descended from a few primordial forms in a gradually branching and diversifying 'tree of life'. Some of this is true, some of this is not. This is why evolution is deceptively believable at first glance until one looks into it deeper. Yes, every species has variation within its bounds. This is true, and it can be readily confirmed by the diversity of human beings on this planet, and the diversity of different types of dog breeds, ranging from a Great Dane to a Chihuahua. Darwin believed that changes could be extended without limit. What evolutionists do is rely on an extrapolation that varieties within the species can, over huge periods of time, become separate species in their own right. The question is whether this is true. Many qualified people have denied this: Luther Burbank (American botanist and horticulturalist responsible for developing more than 800 strains and varieties of plants): <I know from experience that I can develop a plum half an inch long or two-and-a-half inches long, with every possible length in between, but I am willing to admit that it is hopeless to try to get a plum the size of a small pea, or one as big as a grapefruit, I have roses that bloom pretty steadily for six months of the year, but I have none that will bloom twelve, and I will not have. In short, there are limits to the development possible. (from Norman Macbeth's Darwin Retried) Pierre Grassé (French zoologist and author of over 300 publications): <In spite of the intense pressure generated by artificial selection (eliminating any parent not answering the criteria of choice) over whole millennia, no new species are born. A comparative study of sera, hemoglobins, blood proteins, interfertility, etc., proves that the strains remain within the same specific definition. This is not a matter of opinion or subjective classification, but a measurable reality. The fact is that selection gives tangible form to and gathers together all the varieties a genome is capable of producing, but does not constitute an innovative evolutionary process. (quoted from Philip Johnson's Darwin on Trial) Francis Hitching (British author): <It is now absolutely clear that there are firm natural limits to what can be done. Remarkable achievements can be made by crossbreeding and selection inside the species barrier, or within a larger circle of closely related species, such as wheats. But wheat is still wheat, and not, for instance, grapefruit. Between 1800 and 1878, the sugar content of beets was raised from 6 to 17 per cent. A half century of further breeding failed to make any difference.” (quoted from Francis Hitching's The Neck of the Giraffe) Things like bacteria and fruit flies are also ideal for this sort of study in trying to extrapolate varieties into entirely new kinds of organisms, since they reproduce so quickly. Despite cycling through thousands and thousands of generations of these organisms, there has never been any evidence of speciation among them from normal bacteria or normal fruit flies. Sometimes they come out and announce that they have done so, but invariably it is a variety that they selected for and nothing else (the same thing dog breeders do). One would think in a scientific, highly-controlled setting like this, that they would be able to make radical changes quickly. Evidence doesn't support this. It's also important to point out that instead of natural selection being seen as an innovative force as Darwin had postulated, some biologists, such as proponent of design Edward Blyth (who comes before Darwin, notably), wrote of natural selection as a conservative force, not an innovative one. Natural selection maintained the stability of the species within its environment, it functioned as a sort of quality control, removing defective varieties, while healthier and more well-adapted creatures would survive and reproduce. Essentially, Natural selection helps a species flourish by favoring gene combinations that allow it to adapt to new and changing conditions. CONT.
>>11819 PART 2 It's also important to point out that Darwin, like Lamarck, believed in the inheritance of acquired characteristics. This is of course the idea that a creature will pass on useful adaptations that it made during its own lifetime, often demonstrated in the example of the giraffe stretching its neck to reach leaves, and then having children with slightly longer necks as a result. The inheritance of acquired characteristics was the driving force of Darwin's evolutionary theory. He proposed a theory called pangenesis in order to explain how this worked. External influences from the environment would affect the body, which would pass on influences to the reproductive elements, and the acquired traits would then be passed onto the offspring. The inheritance of acquired characteristics has of course been shown to be false time and time again, and so Darwin has lost the mechanism of innovation in his theory. Darwin had no knowledge of genetics either, which is in many ways not very amenable to his theory. Modern evolutionists of course reject ideas like pangenesis and the inheritance of acquired characteristics, and instead adhere to a modern synthesis of Darwinian evolution and Mendelian genetics, what is called Neo-Darwinism. Neo-Darwinism is a much weaker theory that Darwin's. Darwin's evolutionary mechanism is almost deterministic. Creatures adapt for needed traits and pass them on. In Neo-Darwinism, the mechanism of innovation is random mutations in genes. Since they are random, they may or may not happen, and if they do occur, they probably won't happen when needed. If there is a drought, a hypothetical short-necked ancestor of the giraffe probably won't have the slightly longer neck needed to let it survive at that time (to give one example). To jump back a bit, Mendel worked out the laws of inheritance. The laws of Mendel are basically the opposite of Darwin's. To compare the difference between the two of them, Mendel's theory is like shuffling a deck of cards. There is a large amount of combinations that can be created, but there are no new cards or information being added. Darwin's theory is that new cards can arise through shuffling them around. This of course is not observed. The 'beneficial mutations' of relied upon as an evolutionary mechanism are elusive as well. Most observed mutations are manifestly harmful or neutral at minimum, or examples like a bacterium becoming resistant to antibiotics, or how the mutation that creates sickle-cell anemia provides some resistance to malaria (but with the offset of chronic health issues and high mortality). The Fossil Record The issue with the fossil record not supporting evolutionists claims is well-known as well, in that there are no transitional forms as one would expect. Darwin himself said that this is 'the most serious objection which can be urged against the theory'. In Darwin's time geological layers outside of Europe and North America were still largely unexplored. Today paleontologists have carried out excavations from all geological time periods and in all parts of the globe, uncovering thousands of extinct species. Not a single intermediate species or chain of intermediates has ever been found though. In his 'Origin of Species', Darwin realized that the fossil record was the weakest part of his theory, writing: >Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory. Swedish botanist Nils Heribert Nilsson summed the issue up in the following way: >It may be firmly maintained that it is not even possi­ble to make a caricature out of paleobiological facts. The fossil material is now so complete that it has been possible to construct new classes, and the lack of transitional series cannot be explained as due to the scarcity of material. De­ficiencies are real. They will never be filled ... The idea of an evolution rests on pure belief. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nils_Heribert-Nilsson Paleotologist and Evolutionist Niles Eldredge said: >No wonder paleontologists shied away from evolution for so long. It never seemed to happen. Assiduous collecting from cliff faces yields zigzags, minor oscillations, and the very occasional slight accumulation of change - over millions of years, at a rate far too slow to account for all the prodigious change that has occurred in evolutionary history. When we do see the introduction of evolutionary novelty, it usually shows up with a bang, and often no firm evidence that the fossils did not evolve elsewhere! Evolution cannot forever be going on somewhere else. Yet that's how the fossil record has struck many a forlorn paleontologist looking to learn something about evolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niles_Eldredge CONT.
>>11819 PART 3 (Fossil record cont.) Paleontologist David Raup said: >[W]e are about 120 years after Darwin, and knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded ... ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_M._Raup So what is expected to be seen in the fossil record of millions of years of Earth's history just is not there. Evolutionists are actually a bit concerned why they can't find the sort of gradual but constant change they expect to see in animals. It just isn't there, leading scientists like (((Stephen Jay Gould))) to posit even more unscientific and unobservable theories such as punctuated equilibrium, where most species over the duration of their existence exist in stasis with little to no change, and where there is occasional rapid change in isolated groups, or we have (((Richard Goldschmidt))) and his 'hopeful monster' monster theory where one species can just magically give birth to a new one all of the sudden. This is used to explain away the gaps in the record, it just happens so fast you'll never find any evidence! The Cambrian Explosion The Cambrian explosion IS inconsistent with Darwin's idea of a gradually diversifying tree of life from a few different types of initial life-forms. The Cambrian explosion took place 541 million years ago. In the span of some 5-10 million years, literally 95% of all animal phyla today appeared abruptly in the fossil record. For clarity's sake, a phylum is a major group of life forms that are distinguished by large differences in morphology, body plans, etc. There exist no transitional forms between these phyla, either, unsurprisingly. As time goes, the appearance of new classes (the level below phyla) also dramatically drops off, to the extent where new ones stop appearing for the remaining 500 million years of life history. We started with amazing diversity already. Complexity From the very start Darwinian theory has been hard-pressed to explain the formation of complex organs such as eyes, or the brain. The general idea is that these organs develop by series of tiny, almost imperceptible steps. With the eye, they push the idea that it began as a tiny light-sensitive spot, but even this depends on a complex nervous system and inexplicable existence of a region of light sensitive cells. So basically they're starting with a simpler eye, but not explaining how it came to be in the first place, not to mention that diagrams trying to explain quietly slip in entirely new features like magic - now there is a cornea and lens! Now there is a retina and an iris! We must keep in mind that this has to be entirely undirected and blind according to Darwinian theory and that every change in series of changes has to be beneficial to the organism according the doctrine of natural selection. But how often do we see mutations that are beneficial? Oftentimes we see abominations and freaks created by random mutations, not helpful new traits. When is the last time you saw a baby with a birth defect having a useful adaptation? These are unscientific theories that can be be verified in the same way that Newton's theories of planetary orbits can. We can just look at see if actually follows according to what he proposed. Not so with evolution. One must accept it on faith. I imagine that the odds of random interactions of chemicals even forming a single cell are astronomically implausible, given that cells themselves are extremely complex organisms, a far cry from the 'protoplasm' of Darwin's day. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is really the tip of the iceberg, but I was trying to do a quick summary and didn't even mean to make three posts like this in the first place. Let me justify bringing this up in this thread though. Dharma is a theory of Natural Law. If humans are the product of random, meaningless chance, and descended from amoebas swimming in a primordial ooze, there is no meaning or purpose in our forms. We cannot appeal to our forms to draw principles for ethical conduct, or to say that some things ought not to changed or tampered with. If it is ceaselessly changing, why could we not change it? Also, materialism is a Jewish scam also meant to demoralize, and it is a whole rabbit-hole in itself. CONSCIOUSNESS CAN'T BE EXPLAINED BY MATERIALISM. And in case someone asks, niggers and Jews are still subhumans and not equal to Whites, you can be racist and see that evolution is hoax. READING http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32.html https://back2godhead.com/science/ https://archive.org/details/WilliamA.DembskiJonathanWellsTheDesignOfLifeDiscoveringSignsOfIntelligenceInBiol/mode/2up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaVoGfSSSV8 https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22530041-200-how-fudged-embryo-illustrations-led-to-drawn-out-lies/
>>11823 t. hylic >>11821 >Subhumans follow their dharma as well, just like locusts do. I guess it depends how we are defining dharma here. Shitskins certainly act in accordance with their nature when they cause chaos in our lands. The Jews who import them know what they are doing, and that they are docile and easily controllable. But if we were to think of dharma for a moment in sense that subhumans having duties towards others, they are neglecting to follow their dharma today. They are essentially shudras. Their duty is to serve Whites. They are like living instruments for us. Whether we use them or not is another question, though. They certainly should not be allowed in our lands. Locusts on the other hand are helpless to follow their nature. Non-Whites do this more than not, but in being more human than a locust, they are more unpredictable and are able to exercise a degree of free-will. Now we know that this is not that impressive in reality. Don't let these words be taken as praise towards subhumans. The idea that shitskins just need education and civilization and they will become like Whites is a massive failure. The White man's burden is one of the most destructive ideas of the last few thousand years.
>>11827 bro thanks for the effortpost I've instinctively douted evolution for years now despite not giving a shit about the abrahamic creation myth but you really do make it seem like a materialist conspiracy haha I have definitely grown tired of hanging out with new atheists who constantly disparage my religious beliefs but then treat me like a luddite for questioning evolution or vaccines
>>11830 >I have definitely grown tired of hanging out with new atheists who constantly disparage my religious beliefs but then treat me like a luddite for questioning evolution or vaccines One must understand that such atheists, whether they are aware of it or not, are no different than the ones that believe or follow a religious path (specifically an Abrahamic one). They claim to not be ignorant dogmatic bigots, nor believe in anything that can't be proven by (modern) science. Despite this, they will accept and never question what is given to them by accepted (((scientists))) (any scientist going against the narrative will be demonized or silenced). They will do whatever it takes to destroy opposition against said scientists and their teachings without truly understanding why (just look at how Fauci has been treated since the Covid bullshit). They are made this way during their more vulnerable years by their masters to push the masses further away from the teachings and faiths more attuned to Nature and Natural Law (and ensure that there is no resistance or threat to their power and plans, as said teachings would tell us what to do when faced with a foreign threat).
>>11830 >bro thanks for the effortpost No problem, anon. I only got redpilled on this particular topic in the last year or so, and it is honestly horrible that so many people have unquestioningly accepted this idea so uncritically and so wholeheartedly. That's why I've been posting about it more lately to try to get people onto a firmer foundation. Once I realized that all of the life around us in the world was not the product of blind, purposeless material forces, I began to value it even more, and see the intelligence and beauty at work even within the smallest insects. And when it comes to this sort of atheist, >>11832 is 100% right on the mark. These people don't even investigate or question what they are told. They are golems who just want to obey and be told what is true. They don't have a skeptical bone in their body, nor do they have any truly scientific attitudes at all. Sometimes I've felt like a contrarian, but it just so happens that every aspect of the modern worldview I dig into and research, it turns out to be just completely baseless and false, or founded on half-truths at most. Some people just don't want to put in the effort, and trust in the benevolence of men in White labcoats to think for them. The methods of science can certainly be valuable, but I do not think that they are ones that should dictate every aspect of human existence, or that they are a means to reaching ultimate Truth.
>>11829 >If you don't believe in "esoteric" nonsense, then you're a hylic! What?
>>11829 >I guess it depends how we are defining dharma here. I prefer to define it in a wider context, threads like this one usually focus on the higher states and forms of dharma while disregarding the low and the ugly, but those are equally real. Not everything has to fit into some kind of grand plan or supreme order, that's Talmudic thinking/Tikkun Olam. Ancient Aryans respected plurality and didn't obsessive-compulsively and psychotically try to conform everything in existence to their dharma like the chosen of a certain cthonic demon are trying to do, they merely taught some lesser races out of pity. >Their duty is to serve Whites This line of thinking is how every White Empire in history got poz'd. Whites have enough thralls of their own, whose dharma is to serve and not to think, and who do so willingly without any coercion. Slavery is a Jewish phenomenon, something incompatible with Aryan values and spirit. It not only brings corruption through introduction of lesser races, but incites the lower castes to decadence and degeneracy as they are deprived of their dharmic purpose. >>11836 You should look into morphic resonance.
(33.60 KB 1000x736 mariobackward.jpg)
>>11827 I was expecting a schizo rant but that was actually a great post. I burst out laughing when I saw the pattern the fish made in the video on the newgeology.us page. Even fish worship the sun wheel. I study computer science and one field that is interesting to me is neural networks. Neural networks are basically a computer simulation of a brain's neurons, which allows for computers to react to some stimulus like an artificial intelligence. The problem is, any remotely complex neural network is far to complicated for any person to invent. For instance, a modern computer chip might have billions of transistors. You might think this is too complicated for a person or team to design, but chips are very regular and compartimentalized. You can imagine a chip being broken into blocks with different functions, then the blocks are made out of smaller blocks, the smaller blocks are made out of logic gates, and the logic gates are made out of a few transistors. Thus different teams can work on separate sections of the chip and parallelize the work. Not so with artificial neural networks. All the different neurons have a separate, unique function, and they all have to connect to each other in order to work in a very precise way. Even figuring out what function you want the neurons to do in the first place is difficult for people, let alone how to arrange them in the first place. So how are neural networks created? They are randomly generated. Here's a video of an AI learning to complete a Super Mario level. https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv6UVOQ0F44 Essentially networks are randomly generated from scratch. Each network is given some "fitness", which in Mario can be how far into the level he gets, with the AI wanting to get as far as possible. The inputs for the network are the surrounding stage and enemies, and the outputs are the buttons pressed. The randomly generated networks usually do nothing, but eventually by chance one of them happens to press the right button and gets a higher fitness. So the next networks are based on random modifications of that network. Eventually mario comes up to a wall he needs to jump over. Again, it would need to by chance press the A button when it detects a wall in front of it, but this eventually happens. You can imagine after a long time and 1000s of generations the AI is smart enough to complete a level. Imagine this technique being used for abiogenesis, essentially a self-metabolizing, self-reproducing organism arising from basic materials around it. Achieving self-metabolization would be like Mario jumping over the wall, and achieving self-reproduction would be like Mario reaching the goal. Unlike in Mario, where you can have millions of new neural networks generated out of nothing in a short time, a cell has to be made from something. And unlike Mario, it only gets one chance. If the neural network doesn't work, it's just thrown away and a new one is made. But we've established that even the most fervent evolutionists see that as extremely unlikely. Ie, even if it did happen, it would not happen often. So this spontaneously created self-metabolizing cell would also have to happen to be able to self-reproduce, to reach the goal, for it to work, because it doesn't get another chance. You see the problem here? There's another big problem: the problem of going backwards. What if the mario neural network needs to go backwards in order to complete the level like pic related? The AI that bases fitness on how far to the right Mario gets would never be able to figure it out, period. But this is also a problem with evolution, because a series of random changes that would be required for a really cool new trait will probably not be helpful in the short run, so only selecting for survival wouldn't result in it. Evolutionists acknowledge this is a problem.
>>11843 >But we've established that even the most fervent evolutionists see that as extremely unlikely By which I mean the evolutionists see chemicals in water forming a cell as unlikely.
>>11841 >Not everything has to fit into some kind of grand plan or supreme order, that's Talmudic thinking/Tikkun Olam I'd have to disagree. The ancient Aryans quite commonly spoke of unifying principles in Nature. In the Vedic tradition this was of course Ṛta, often used synonymous with the term dharma (though dharma more specifically refers to proper action or duty, or the essential nature of something, while Ṛta is the cosmic order itself. The Zoroastrians had an etymologically-identical term Asha referring to the same thing. There are numerous examples among the Greeks as well, when they talk about ideas like Physis being the law of the gods, and how Physis was often opposed to the customary laws (Nomoi) of men, to our detriment. The difference between this type of meaningful, integrated cosmic order, and the Jewish view, is that right now this order exists'. It never goes away, it was never 'shattered' like the Jews say the vessels of the sephirot were after Ein Sof retracted itself in the beginning. We ourselves, however, fall under the influence of periods of virtue, and periods of depravity and excess as the different ages cycle on from the Golden, to the Dark, and back again. Dharma remains Dharma, Asha remains Asha as a unifying cosmic principal of Natural Law. And why? Because Dharma is the opposite of arbitrary. Dharma is equated with the Truth, and in the Vishnu Sahasranāma, Dharma is said to be one of the thousands of names of God. Everything is bound by this order, but there is the choice to act against it and pursue one's drive to annihilation and bondage if they so choose, or to act in harmony with the Natural Order and find peace, fulfillment, satisfaction and everything else one needs. A thing's dharma is essentially it's natural way of being. It doesn't need to be psychotically and neurotically lorded over to be as it is meant to be. Not to say that authority and hierarchy aren't necessary though, these exist to remove kikes and others who try to subvert us and lead us away from this natural state. >Whites have enough thralls of their own, whose dharma is to serve and not to think, and who do so willingly without any coercion. Yeah, you are right about this. >Slavery is a Jewish phenomenon, something incompatible with Aryan values and spirit. I would have to disagree with this statement, but slavery is certainly not a necessary institution. What exists today is de facto slavery though. Modern day nations are devoid of any Völkisch foundation. They are economic zones ran by Jews and other capitalists, while the slaves who live within them prostitute themselves out to one corporation or another, not even being provided food and a house like slaves in the past were. >You should look into morphic resonance. I will have to look into more. I'm familiar with Rupert Sheldrake and some of the work he's done, and some of the ideas he's talked about (like the sun being alive and stuff) but I've yet to look into the evidence for Morphic Resonance yet.
>>11845 This was meant for >>11842
>>11825 >>11826 >>11827 thanks for the high IQ posts
(66.56 KB 720x644 APU.png)
>>11847 No problem, anon. This is really only the tip of the iceberg on this topic and related ones, some of it has already been covered in the Aryan science thread though.
>>11848 the only thing thats still keeping me sceptical is the question of how various species come into existence? Did every creature exist since the beginning of time? Who created them? I'm sorry if these are dumb questions but I guess the attraction of evolution is that it gives a simple explanation for why we have these species (not that this is a good reason to believe it). What is the alternate explanation for the origins of each species?
>>11823 What specifically about that post do you find wrong, and why? I know that the idea of (fundamental) and unbridgeable inequality of souls gets the certain types literally shaking, but let's be constructive here. Also, try finding those ideas elaborated anywhere else, and tell me how it's not esoteric, although occult would be a more proper term. Do you think that Jews came up with the idea of "goyim"? Wrong, they incorporated it into their mess of a religion from other sources, just like most other ideas. >>11845 >while Ṛta is the cosmic order itself Recognizing that there is order in cosmos and that it operates according to certain principles is not the same as thinking that every byproduct of it's function has some kind of inherent value, purpose or meaningful place within it. Unifying and differentiating forces are both essential for Nature, it's their proper ratio and application that was the sacred science of the Aryans. >Zoroastrians They got corrupted by lunar priesthood which caused a schism and a conflict that compelled them to move into different lands. And that was before (((reformation))) >The difference between this type of meaningful, integrated cosmic order, and the Jewish view, is that right now this order exists' That's true, some principles are eternal and unchanging. Their manifestations however, can get so distorted to become quintessentially absurd without any chance of 'reintegration'. This distortion can be caused by several factors, be it the 'distance' from it's spiritual center or interference of other principles. I'd coin the term "Dharmaless", but they still possess a certain essential nature (into itself). This nature however, being completely detached from the Divine (plural). This universe is FAR from perfect, but it still functions according to certain mechanistic laws and generative force. Nature, when we remove the romantic sentiment, makes a lot of nightmarish blunders as well, but it still unconsciously strives towards certain Forms. I think that Dharma, when interpreted as a proper action or duty means that one is acting in accordance with one of the Divine principles. A willful, conscious action. That's the solar path. Passive submission to "cosmic order" is lunar and feminine. >A thing's dharma is essentially it's natural way of being Exactly. But recognizing the multitude of natures is important as well. What's natural for you might not be natural for someone else, etc. >What exists today is de facto slavery though True, and it has the same driving forces behind it. Many IE Empires have used slaves, but those were mostly Bronze age and Kali Yuga empires. >but I've yet to look into the evidence for Morphic Resonance yet. I remember reading about a similar term, where it was observed that two types of birds have developed the same traits in the same period despite living on different sides of the world and never interacting with each other. They also mentioned certain earth's EM frequencies/spectrum affecting the development of organisms, but I'd need to do some digging to remember the specifics. I think this is where Sheldrake got his ideas from.
>>11841 Hylic is a term for someone who is not spiritually awakened. You are not spiritually awakened, and therefore a hylic.
(33.54 KB 236x472 evolution hoyle.jpg)
>>11850 The best alternative to Darwinism is Intelligent Design (ID). The Jews have done a great deal of well-poisoning against the movement, so first I probably have to clear up some basic issues surrounding it. Of course, Intelligent Design has nothing to do with Young Earth Creationism and other nonsense. As you saw in my other posts above, I am perfectly comfortable with the idea that the Earth has, as far as I'm aware, existed for hundreds of millions of years. And I am of course not a Christian either, and neither is the theory of ID inherently a Christian theory. The next question we're faced with though, is whether ID is even scientific in the first place. Many scientists will claim that it is not, and they artificially gatekeep any notions of design coming back into biology. Of course, there are many branches of science which employ concepts of design and rely on being able to detect design and intelligence to do the work they do, and to distinguish the works of intelligence from the working of blind material forces. Forensic science is one example, as is cryptography, archeology, and programs such as SETI which looks for signs of intelligence from radio signals from outer space. The assumption is of course that we will be able to sift out naturally what radio signals are just random noise and are natural, and those which are specifically designed. So it is completely valid to look for signs of intelligence in biology if, especially if the Darwinian account is (as we have seen) full of holes. There is no reason to deny it a priori. We also have to ask what is the criteria for telling if something is a product of intelligence or not. One possible answer for this is specified complexity. Basically, an object, event or structure exhibits specified complexity if it is both complex (I.e. not easily reproducible by chance) and specified (i.e. displays an independently given pattern). By themselves neither of these are enough to necessarily implicate intelligence. The term comes from origin-of-life researcher Leslie Orgel, who wrote: >Living organisms are distinguished by their specified complexity. Crystals such as granite fail to qualify as living because they lack complexity; mixtures of random polymers fail to qualify because they lack specificity. ID theorists have formulated this as statistical criterion for identifying the effects of intelligence. Specified complexity incorporates three main elements (1) a probabilistic version of complexity applicable to events, (2) a descriptive version of complexity applicable to patterns, and (3) a probabilistic gauge on the opportunities available for producing events by chance. A lot of this shit comes down to mathematics I don't even think I fully grasp, but we are even naturally guided by our intuitions even to think that it is highly unlikely that biological systems are not just the product of random, blind material forces. That is why it is funny to read Richard Dawkins say things such as: >Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose. Or Francis Crick: >Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved. Of course, this would be less compelling if evolutionary theory actually had the evidence that it claimed to, but it doesn't, and in this case intuition does not seem to be a bad thing to trust, especially when we more often than not are readily able to discern the workings of intelligence in nature that are done by other human beings (even if we do not see the agent of the action), or even other animals, who of course are capable of designing things such as beaver dams or bird nests, to name two. > Did every creature exist since the beginning of time? Most likely not, at least there is no compelling fossil evidence of this. If we were to get really /x/-tier though, there is actually evidence that anatomically-modern humans have possibly existed for much longer than mainstream scientists except today. Occasionally there are human bones and artifacts found in rock strata which are millions of years old, but these are most often ignored and stored away in the back of museums and research institutes and not shown to the public. It's a sort of process of knowledge filtration, where evidence that doesn't fit the theory of evolution is ignored or brushed aside. Richard L. Thompson and Michael Cremo have written a lot about this. Important to point out too that though new species may have appeared at certain points, that doesn't mean they were necessarily created totally ex nihilo. Animals are classified according to nested hierarchies of phylum, class, family, species, etc, and when new creatures appear in the fossil record (all at once, never in a fine gradation as evolutionists like to see), they are never a completely new phylum, or kingdom, they are invariably variations on existing themes that have existed in the pas
>>11863 >>11850 PART 2 spoiler it cut off the end of my post even though I was at 4997 characters, wtf. The last word was 'past' >Who created them? The most like answer is God, or gods on the behalf of God, or some other intelligence species not from this Earth. The last answer is the least compelling, because it just pushes the explanation back a step, and we can of course ask who designed the aliens, and who designed the designers of the aliens, ad infinitum. It's passing the buck. The other examples at least go back to something ultimate, eventually. At this point we begin to leave the domain of science in the modern sense (i.e. empiricism, naturalism, etc.) and get into more esoteric theological questions. This isn't to say they are necessarily unanswerable though.
>>11850 In Traditionalist circles, there is an idea that physical life began by immortal, perfect beings needing a limited, dimensional universe to express themselves and experience embodied life. The more their frequencies got filtered within it and the more they "crystallized" into a purely physical form, the less perfect they became. Eventually they became mortal, then their life-spans decreased, they lost their godlike abilities, became smaller, weaker, less intelligent, eventually leading to the man of today. But the degeneration doesn't stop there, it goes further to animal, plant, etc. species until you become amoeba tier or a rock. In a sense, every creature is a 'trickling down' or an echo of these divine progenitors of life, it's form being shaped by the environment and circumstances. And it's not linear but rather a series of overlapping waves/cycles, which explains more and less complex organisms existing simultaneously. This is actually mathematically more likely than the theory of evolution where everything has randomly assembled itself, but true redpill is that it goes both ways. Sea of potentialities gets excited by the "submerging" of the gods, generating imperfect forms striving to resemble them and reach their condition, while gods are on a downward path towards disintegration in the sea of potential. It's merely a chain of mathematical transformations, which goes both ways due to the law of reciprocity, but does not transform finite numbers into transcendental or vice versa, it merely matches their mutual portions to enable interaction. That's why physical actualization is often considered to be an inferior copy/reflection of the eternal Forms. >>11856 According to early Gnostics, Hylics are the ones without any capacity for awakening (NPC's), while psychics have the potential but are not awakened yet.
>>11853 >They got corrupted by lunar priesthood which caused a schism and a conflict that compelled them to move into different lands. And that was before (((reformation))) How were they lunar? Reading some of the yashts and related texts paints a quite martial picture of some of the Zoroastrian deities, such as Mithra and Wərəthragna, to name two. > Their manifestations however, can get so distorted to become quintessentially absurd without any chance of 'reintegration'. Oh, certainly. Not everything has inherent value, even if it was meant to have it or had it at one point. Some things are beyond fixing. The Jews are an example of this, as I'm sure you had in mind as well. Extermination to the last man is the only option at this point concerning them. The struggle against the Jews has raged on for the entirety of recorded history at this point, and it would not surprise me if it went even deeper than that. >I think that Dharma, when interpreted as a proper action or duty means that one is acting in accordance with one of the Divine principles. A willful, conscious action. That's the solar path. Passive submission to "cosmic order" is lunar and feminine. It's more of an active submission, if that makes sense. This is essentially what we see in the Bhagavad Gita. Arjuna is going to flee from the battlefield and shirk his duty as a warrior, but he asks Krishna to instruct him on what to do. Krishna goes ahead and explains what is dharma, and tells Arjuna to take refuge and surrender himself to Krishna, but to do this as part of the path of action, which is the path which will lead him to victory, worldly and otherwordly rewards. Though he is told that the outcome of the battle is already settled in a sense, he is asked to become an instrument in battle, and ultimately is given the choice - act or not to act. And he acts. I think this is a good example of what you are talking about as the solar path.
>>11856 No shit? I know what the word means, but not being a le" esoteric" sperg is not makes you a hylic. Your entire post is /x/ stupidity.
>>11874 Esotericism has a pretty central place in this thread, I’m not sure why you are so bothered by it.
>>11868 >According to early Gnostics, Hylics are the ones without any capacity for awakening (NPC's), while psychics have the potential but are not awakened yet. My bad >>11874 I'm not the anon you originally responded to. If you refuse to recognize the spiritual aspects of the world, you are a hylic. I don't know what to tell you. Where does plausible spiritually end and "le epic esoterism" begin?
>>11864 thank you. This makes sense to me
>>11863 >The Jews have done a great deal of well-poisoning against the movement Christians too, by association. Yet Id is known by all Mystery schools, its geometry found in absolutely everything, and again demonstrated in the materialistically impossible adaptation of life forms to their environment or predators. Natural and complex camouflage is most revealing when you really start to think how those beings, seen as simpler, could even manage to realize the nature of their problem, then come up with a solution akin to hiding, and then even finding how to apply this to themselves.
>>11843 >Here's a video of an AI learning to complete a Super Mario level. https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv6UVOQ0F44 Essentially networks are randomly generated from scratch. Each network is given some "fitness", which in Mario can be how far into the level he gets, with the AI wanting to get as far as possible. The inputs for the network are the surrounding stage and enemies, and the outputs are the buttons pressed. The randomly generated networks usually do nothing, but eventually by chance one of them happens to press the right button and gets a higher fitness. So the next networks are based on random modifications of that network. Eventually mario comes up to a wall he needs to jump over. Again, it would need to by chance press the A button when it detects a wall in front of it, but this eventually happens. You can imagine after a long time and 1000s of generations the AI is smart enough to complete a level. That's evolution, dear to atheists who would be quick to forget who created those logical artificial neurons to begin with, and what created us too. Atheists only care about one fundamental thing: doing everything possible in their existence to never having to acknowledge the Divine once. >So this spontaneously created self-metabolizing cell would also have to happen to be able to self-reproduce, to reach the goal, for it to work, because it doesn't get another chance. You see the problem here? It would have to be able to think and plan ahead, but since this biocomputing power is not available to the cell itself in one single batch, its structure must rest on something else. This does not change the fact that the original blueprint has to be one that works from start. That is, life has to be sufficiently smart and already self perpetuating to be able to introduce changes to new conditions and eventually adapt to them. So whether one is looking at the start or at the whole process of existence, analytical, logical and creative intelligence is found everywhere.
(310.34 KB 876x979 Rvlt.png)
(779.65 KB 1513x1152 Angiras 1.PNG)
(621.20 KB 1027x1140 Angiras 2.PNG)
(800.80 KB 1132x1212 Angiras 3.PNG)
(527.79 KB 955x1218 Angiras 4.PNG)
>>11863 You can look into Orthogenesis >Orthogenesis, also known as orthogenetic evolution, progressive evolution, evolutionary progress, or progressionism, is the biological hypothesis that organisms have an innate tendency to evolve in a definite direction towards some goal (teleology) due to some internal mechanism or "driving force".[2][3][4] According to the theory, the largest-scale trends in evolution have an absolute goal such as increasing biological complexity. Prominent historical figures who have championed some form of evolutionary progress include Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, and Henri Bergson. >The mediaeval chain, as in Ramon Lull's Ladder of Ascent and Descent of the Mind, 1305, added steps or levels above humans, with orders of angels reaching up to God at the top This is pretty much Dharmic philosophy, and a third position compared to the idea that some magical Jew created everything in existence and the idea that the universe is a purposeless, random (and somehow simultaneously deterministic?) machine devoid of any inherent goals. >>11869 >How were they lunar? They were very solar, but the lunar corruption had already took it's sway. >The struggle against the Jews has raged on for the entirety of recorded history Even if the current iteration of the 'Jew' disappeared, elemental forces would re-generate and spawn another version. Which might look differently, have a different language and invented history, but would share all the same characteristics and adharma. They are a symptom rather than a cause. A lot of non-Jews are "spiritual" Jews in this age, in fact, a majority of the world population is. They accept their mindset, their values, their "god". How can they complain then? Golden age had no knowledge of them, for it's qualities and conditions made it impossible for them to spawn in the first place. >Bhagavad Gita Did you consider that Krishna might have been a higher aspect of Arjuna's soul? His divine essence imparting wisdom in a critical moment. >>11874 >Complains about spergs <Spergs out because someone used the word "esoteric", without addressing any of the points made in the post kek
>>11825 >Luther Burbank >Pierre Grassé >Francis Hitching >bacteria and fruit flies Unless their methods had the capacity to emulate reproduction and alterations brought over the course of hundreds of thousands of years, or millions of them, I find these experiments inconclusive to the highest. There is simply a too vast array of conditions and influencing factors that cannot be reproduced by even the most zealous doctors and biologists in the temporally and geometrically limited confines of their laboratories, culture fields or any of the other spaces used for their experiments. Anything from panspermia to radiations or earth frequencies are but a few of the many rearranging components in a long chain of biological events that could not be emulated unless you could rebuild a whole corner or space and accelerate time many thousand folds. At best these people have merely demonstrated that no life form can significantly beget a new and radically different offspring in a short time span. I am also in the agreement of the idea wherein natural selection is a conservative force, pruning the weak for the maintaining of the stock's quality. >>11826 >The inheritance of acquired characteristics has of course been shown to be false time and time again, and so Darwin has lost the mechanism of innovation in his theory. This could happen only after the observation of either two types of material: 1) an entire species which has barely changed throughout the whole course of its existence on earth, having left in its wake copious amounts of skeletons and perhaps even fossilized specimens. None of which would prove useful because of the precisely absent acquisition of new traits. 2) a species which can be observed within the scope of a human's lifetime or perhaps a bit longer, and for which sudden changes are noticed. Then, yet, is observed the absence of transmission of these changes, whether they were bringing something minutely positive to species or not, or even proving detrimental. The neutral effect of a change would not be worthy of the specimen's survival so would be neglected, according to Darwin's theory. The negative changes would logically lower the species' chances of survival but unless these changes would be extremely negative, say debilitating, there would be nothing ultimately threatening the specimens' survival and reproduction rate. Only the positive changes would, according to Darwin's theory, increase the survival rate of these specific specimens imbued with it, and thus allow them, overall, to reproduce more. The problem here is that I don't see what kind of species on earth has ever demonstrated a tendency to effectuate such drastic changes of its essence as if some designed were putting them through a constant process of trial, error and recombination. Likely the changes would be so small in reality that I seldom see how they could prove consequential and supportive of Darwin's theory. The fact that Darwin had no conception of genetics even puzzles the observer more as to what Darwin could have exactly thought might be the prime agent and medium responsible of these beneficial changes he built his theory around. However, a lack of deeper explanation of the mechanism couldn't be held against Darwin, this is not the real issue. >Neo-Darwinism Is all about freak accidents in genetics. They are Chaos cultists, hating to admit to any form of determinism, thus Order, which would obviously precede the question of what or who wrote the blueprint then? Even if the whole process of even natural comparison of attributes, trial and error, is a design in itself and begs for a source to this ordered logic. >Laws of Mendel They're not without merit but the predominance of randomness hurts them badly. It would dismiss any possibility of a greater organized and collective intelligence within the species contributing to tests and choices made over large periods of time. Otherwise, it would open the door to ID and therefore Mendel's concepts would need to be subservient to the idea of a Will and an organized idea of necessary evolution perfectly understood by an unseen intelligence of the species being observed, where the multiple recombinations would not be arbitrary but would on the contrary follow a sensible pattern to achieve a given goal made some parallel conscious mind shared by all the creatures of the given species.
>>11826 >When we do see the introduction of evolutionary novelty, it usually shows up with a bang Definitely this. There are forces that inject those changes into the genomes of the species. What needs to be identified is what those forces are and how they proceed, this sort of ethereal CRISPR music at play. Who or what decides of these changes, with what amplitude from the base model these modifications are built upon? >punctuated equilibrium This is just running away from the issue. What effectuates these then magistral changes? How are they validated by the biological imperatives yet limitations of the concerned species? >monster theory As above it only shoves an amusing and curious theory, freakier than before, as the solution. The sudden changes, these jumps, shunts, surges, short-circuits, require an explanation but to me it looks like they reject the idea of some consciousness, particular to a species, willing such changes. Jews hate Nature and therefore would hate being proved that Nature had terrible a plan for them too and why it made them what they are. I will post something to this effect because it is chimes into this very deep hatred they share collectively. >The Cambrian explosion took place 541 million years ago. In the span of some 5-10 million years, literally 95% of all animal phyla today appeared abruptly in the fossil record. An average of 7.5 million years is still a long amount of time to allow for mutations to occur. The question is what triggered this bloom, what seeded the world with such generous amounts of genetic strands. >From the very start Darwinian theory has been hard-pressed to explain the formation of complex organs such as eyes, or the brain. Because like all materialist ideas out there, they couldn't even explain why the IDEA of an apparatus capable of collecting light for further analysis by a complex secondary and analytical system would even exist. They simply cannot explain the whole of life or its point. With their logic, absolutely nothing should even exist because there's no point to it, no reason for it to happen at all. They simply do not want to say: Ok, God made it and he had a Plan. But then, when you accept God(s), then what is the point of all these sciences any longer? Their entire purpose, and reason for massive amounts of ceaseless funding, is to discover the ultimate explanation all while refusing the true ultimate explanation. It's a self perpetuating fraud.
>>11893 No problem, glad it was interesting for you. >>11899 >Christians too, by association. That's very true. They have pushed an idea into the minds of the masses (with the help of Jewish propaganda reinforcing this notion) that if you don't believe in the materialist myths of modern science, you necessarily believe that Yahweh created the world in 6 days, 6,000 thousand years ago. A classic false dichotomy. >>11901 I actually adhered to ideas like progressive / teleological evolution for some time before I felt that I couldn't justify that either, or that there were problems with the narrative it worked under. This is basically William Luther Pierce's Cosmotheism, in which there is a driving urge in the Whole towards its self-realization and self-perfection. I thought this was a very interesting idea, but I eventually ran across a passage from Nietzsche that dashed my confidence in it, and later had it further undermined by anons here who played devil's advocate against Cosmotheism and similar views. I later dropped it when I looked into the scientific evidence behind the theory of evolution in general, and came away with much distaste in my mouth. Basically Nietzsche was critiquing the idea of the universe having an end or terminal state, saying that it would have long ago reached its final state if there was a infinity of past time. This basically leads him to eternal change and eternal return. >This is pretty much Dharmic philosophy, and a third position compared to the idea that some magical Jew created everything in existence and the idea that the universe is a purposeless, random (and somehow simultaneously deterministic?) machine devoid of any inherent goals. It's closer to Dharmic, but the idea of a sort of directed, purposeful and linear time scheme is actually quite Abrahamic when one thinks about it. It sort of straddles between Abrahamic thinking, Romantic ideas of Nature and materialism at the same time (usually - de Chardin is basically a panpsychist despite the mystical guise over his ideas, for example) >Did you consider that Krishna might have been a higher aspect of Arjuna's soul? His divine essence imparting wisdom in a critical moment. That's basically what Krishna is, really. If the essence of Arjuna is his individual atman, Krishna is the Paramatman, or the supreme, highest atman. But of course strictly based on the text, he is even more than that, but essentially you're correct.
(904.96 KB 777x2777 Part1.png)
(923.54 KB 1222x3222 Part2.png)
(1.41 MB 1222x3555 Part3.png)
(1.23 MB 777x4444 Part4.png)
(1.47 MB 1222x4777 Part5.png)
>>11905 >unless you could rebuild a whole corner or space and accelerate time many thousand folds Well noted, one of the main issues with transhumanism is that it will hardly ever manage to account for all the variables, especially hidden variables (which is a very deep rabbit hole), creating an inferior copy/golem instead of the actual life. 'Life' can never be fully generated artificially within the confines of time-space due to certain mathematical limitations, as you already seem to grasp intuitively. It's rather entertaining how we are getting quite close to empirically proving the beliefs of the Gnostics. >They are Chaos cultists, hating to admit to any form of determinism It's not black and White, the existence of order does not exclude random chance and dissonance. "Chaos" is probably one of the most misunderstood concepts in history, Chaos cannot exist by definition, except as formless potential. It's particularly funny when someone says "a being of Chaos" which is complete contradiction. There might however, be forms of order which are quite 'alien' to our perception and framework of reality (Whatever stance you take, you can hardly deny that our senses, neural pathways, and basic logic are hard coded for interacting with this particular, 3-dimensional world) and that understanding the truth on a more abstract level is extremely difficult for most people. >what seeded the world with such generous amounts of genetic strands There is a theory that genetic material arrived by comets/meteors Another question to consider is why some organisms kept changing continuously while others remained relatively unchanged for millions of years. From the materialist perspective, some life-forms were actually "smarter" for remaining relatively simple while more complex forms of life were exposed to increasing suffering, eventually including the existential/psychological suffering unique for sapient species, plus actually increasing the risk of going extinct (according to mainstream evolutionary theory, the development of a human brain was a HUGE gamble). Species devolve too, how come we didn't say fuck it, let's be sea-lizards again if exposed to so much evolutionary pressure to continuously keep evolving? If there is no telos, no purpose, then decreasing pain and discomfort would also be imperative. Some kind of driving force is plainly evident. Although judging by how the modern last men are practically becoming beast tier, I wouldn't consider this driving force unique to all life. >Basically Nietzsche was critiquing the idea of the universe having an end or terminal state, saying that it would have long ago reached its final state if there was a infinity of past time This is absolutely true, but time is also a very misunderstood phenomenon. Cyclical concept of time and atemporal domain (Think Ether) resolve this. You can also read some of the Plato's works to understand that Forms are eternal and unchanging, while their reflections continuously strive to reach them. His philosophy is very similar to Vedic teachings. >It sort of straddles between Abrahamic thinking, Romantic ideas of Nature and materialism I wouldn't reject any of them a-priori, a lot of those ideas perfectly fit when interpreted within the proper context. In the end, it's perspective that matters the most. I'm not a mathematician, but starting to observe everything in terms of pure mathematics has helped me a lot when it comes to understanding reality and immaterial forces which shape it. >Krishna is the Paramatman, or the supreme, highest atman A thought experiment, imagine reaching that state, imagine that you are Krishna. Would you still retain your individuality or not? Would it be solipsism or complete depersonalization? Neither?
>>11950 >You can also read some of the Plato's works to understand that Forms are eternal and unchanging, while their reflections continuously strive to reach them. His philosophy is very similar to Vedic teachings. Yeah, it's surprising how much overlap there seems to be sometimes from the few dialogues I've read over time. >A thought experiment, imagine reaching that state, imagine that you are Krishna. Would you still retain your individuality or not? Would it be solipsism or complete depersonalization? Neither? It depends on who one asks. In the Advaita or Non-Dualism school, the only thing that exists is the Absolute (Brahman) and any difference, change, plurality, and subject-objection distinction is an illusion and sign of ignorance. According to such schools, enlightenment consists in reaching such a non-dual state and abiding in this static state of eternal bliss. I guess this would be some sort of cosmic solipsism? If one really looks at the scriptures such ideas are based off of though, this sort of purely non-dual interpretation can't be supported though. According to philosophies like Ramanuja's, there are primarily three 'reals' - individual selves, insentient matter and Brahman. The first two are dependent for their existence on Brahman, and there is no ex nihilo creation as in Abrahamism, but in this philosophy the individuality of a person is eternal. There is no annihilation of the self into Brahman. Brahman is the substrate and fundamental aspect of reality, but the idea of the plurality of things, and souls and a sort unity are both present simultaneously. There is no solipsism or depersonalization here, from my understanding. The consciousness at the root of existence in this philosophy is more dynamic, and is described as an actual personality, rather than the static bliss voidism of the other tradition that I described. We'll often see terms like 'Purushottama' or 'Supreme Person' to describe the highest reality. This part of a recitation of the Bhagavad Gita is a good example - it is the part where Krishna reveals his universal form, and is basically revealed to be everything in existence, but even still Arjuna retains his individuality in describing the experience.
>>11917 >I actually adhered to ideas like progressive / teleological evolution for some time before I felt that I couldn't justify that either, or that there were problems with the narrative it worked under. This is basically William Luther Pierce's Cosmotheism, in which there is a driving urge in the Whole towards its self-realization and self-perfection. I thought this was a very interesting idea, but I eventually ran across a passage from Nietzsche that dashed my confidence in it, and later had it further undermined by anons here who played devil's advocate against Cosmotheism and similar views. I later dropped it when I looked into the scientific evidence behind the theory of evolution in general, and came away with much distaste in my mouth. Basically Nietzsche was critiquing the idea of the universe having an end or terminal state, saying that it would have long ago reached its final state if there was a infinity of past time. This basically leads him to eternal change and eternal return I'd gladly read more about your evolution (no pun intended) on this thought process. I found some positive intellectual value in Cosmotheism although it's rather limited in content and stands more like an overall outlook. Universes growing and dying would not oppose Cosmotheism I think.
>>11972 I actually made a thread on this a few months ago. Maybe the OP of that thread >>3860 will give you a bit more of an idea of what I was thinking four or so months ago.
>>11950 >Well noted, one of the main issues with transhumanism is that it will hardly ever manage to account for all the variables, especially hidden variables (which is a very deep rabbit hole), creating an inferior copy/golem instead of the actual life. 'Life' can never be fully generated artificially within the confines of time-space due to certain mathematical limitations, as you already seem to grasp intuitively. It's rather entertaining how we are getting quite close to empirically proving the beliefs of the Gnostics. With near limitless time and resources, they might in their craziest dreams manage to create something convincing enough, but they cannot make Create without being the Creator. For a fake universe, a pocket one, some kind of simulation to work, they would need to know everything about how the universe works and somehow hope that this could even be achieved without knowing the whole of said universe. >It's not black and White, the existence of order does not exclude random chance and dissonance. Yes and their opposition is all the more absurd since they too depend on order for anything to proceed logically. But because of their blind hatred of anything godlike, they think that something like pure randomness is the true and only source of everything. It cannot logically work. >"Chaos" is probably one of the most misunderstood concepts in history, Chaos cannot exist by definition, except as formless potential. And Order taps into this. It's the way it works. Order alone isn't worth anything too, it's not going to get anywhere. Both need to combine. >It's particularly funny when someone says "a being of Chaos" which is complete contradiction. Yes, like a being of emptiness. Ah ok so that makes it a bag of void? What about the membrane holding this then? Boom, there goes their logic. >There is a theory that genetic material arrived by comets/meteors Yes, panspermia among others, but that just shifts the origin of multitude into space.
>>11901 >Spergs out because someone used the word "esoteric", I didn't sperg out, but thanks for confirming you're an idiot again. Esotericism is a meme that is infiltrated by morons who think too hard about supposed secrets that aren't secretive nor truthful.
>>11992 >>11992 Dharmic/pagan esotericism is not the same as the Abrahamic boomers who think that Saturn is Satan (Yahweh) and other nonsense. So you don't have to fear the word esoteric nor will hear about the tribes of Israel invading and creating European cultures, because no one here believes in that other than the shills and christcucks who lurk here. Calm down.
(56.17 KB 592x562 fedora pro.jpg)
Is there a way to undo baptism?
>>12039 some pedophile sprinkling water over your head one time a long time ago doesn't actually change you.
>>12040 I thought it was some ritual that bounds your soul to Yahweh or something.
>>12039 1 Peter 3:21 says that baptism is symbolic. I think you will be okay.
>>12039 Take a bath in a river and call upon the gods and the spirits of nature to cleanse it from your soul and free you from the ritual binding. >>12047 Never believe the lies of the jew or the followers of the jew god, it is not symbolic, it is a ritual, and it does bind your soul to Yahweh the Asura.
>>12084 Baptism was supposedly practiced by ancient Jews because they considered themselves impure and had a need to ritually cleanse themselves before approaching "God". It's feminine af. >and it does bind your soul to Yahweh the Asura No matter what they do, it has to happen consciously and under free will for it to count. Assuming a Semitic mindset binds it more than some mechanic rituals, done by people who are not very instructed even in the original meanings of their own faith.
>>12089 Purity and impurity is actually a super strong dichotomy also present in ancient Aryan religions. The opposite of spiritual purity in Greece was miasma or spiritual pollution (which also most often correlated with physical purity and pollution, respectively). Some of the creators of pollution were sexual intercourse, birth, death and murder. The execution of Socrates was also delayed for a time because killing him during the time of a certain religious festival would have brought ritual impurity to the Athenian people. Many cults in the ancient world included virgins and rituals were temple priests and servers would cultivate ritual purity in preparation for festivals, by avoiding sexual intercourse, contact with women, fasting, etc. Some of these are quite sensible. Semen retention, avoiding contact with women, cleanliness and fasting lead to one's spiritual power-level going through the roof within a matter of days. One can feel the purity and power.
>>12091 Greeks have adopted a lot of lunar, Semitic practices due to cultural exchange and it being more appealing to aboriginals compared to the solar cults of the Aryans who migrated there. >Some of these are quite sensible Some, yes. But the general idea that you are somehow impure by design/nature is Semitic af. I found a promising book on Vedic culture, didn't get to read it yet, but Albert Pike seems much more based than he was given credit for. It's too large to upload so here is an archive link https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.58802/page/n13/mode/2up
>>12084 >Take a bath in a river and call upon the gods and the spirits of nature to cleanse it from your soul and free you from the ritual binding. I'm a different anon than the one who asked initially, but I went out at sunrise to a rather deep and wide stream in the forest and bathed in it while naked. I made a point to submerge the top of my head. Mosquitoes, those damned bloodsucking jew parasites, must be agents of the demiurge as they made it very difficult to concentrate. I even brought with me a citronella candle but it did no good. Despite this, I managed to focus and afterwards I felt a great weightlessness and refreshing clarity afterwards, as if the grasp of the demiurge on my soul loosened.
>>12224 Interesting experience, anon. Maybe it was true that baptism does do more than just create a symbolic tie. It sounds like you have been freed. You are no longer bound by Yahweh. >>12223 I think there are varying levels of purity. The type of purity described in the post above is for special occasions. While they would obviously try to not pollute themselves with miasma in their day-to-day lives, there’s a certain base level of purity people have if they just stay clean and away from degeneracy that is relatively easy to maintain. Staying sattvic, keeping away from tamasic influences. I think it is different from “you’re helplessly filthy, goy!”
>>12089 It was practiced by John the Baptists sect of jews who survive today as Mandaeans, and it is believed he took the idea from Mithraian cults in Rome who sacrificed bulls to be baptized in their blood. >>12224 Yahweh is not the Demiurge, I don't think such a thing even exists, he is an Asura or "Demon" the jews, specifically their priesthood, at some point of desperation bound their race to it, without using a true name, a mutual pact. Yahweh, a middling Asura once bound to some volcanic location, now was bound to a people and as he changed them, they changed him but the pact has always been in his favor though, and he is now most probably the single most powerful Asura that currently exists thanks to three separate Abrahamic Religions giving him power and sacrifice on the regular. As for the mosquitoes, they are simply one more part of the Natural order, think of the blood they took as a small sacrifce to the nature spirits you were calling upon.
>>12224 Thanks for sharing your experience. I'll try this but with the ocean.
>>12351 The ocean might be a good choice for something like this. I believe I have read before that in Shinto salt and salt water are both viewed as very good purifying agents. >>12346 I think you’re right about Yahweh. It’s hard to view the entire world as made by some sort of evil deity. It can be pretty shitty here at times, but I can’t call it all-around bad or evil at all. Asura theory is the best theory.
>>12355 It's funny what kind of symbolic meaning you can gather from baptismal water being stagnant and disconnected from it's source. Goes to show how Jewish Christianity truly is.
>>12358 I hadn’t thought of it like that, but from what I know of almost all modern baptisms, that seems to be true. Almost surely not a coincidence. Most of these things aren’t
>>12355 The Ocean is a good choice, and salt has always been thought of as purifying and cleansing, one if doing it properly, uses coarse salt to clean a cast iron skillet for example and it is one substance which kills almost every bacterium and even most living things in large enough quantities. One of the reasons i dislike certain kinds of Esoterics is directly the idea of the demiurge and how almost all of them give the jewish gid credit for creation of the universe, Serrano does this, and claims we are descended from said jewish gods brightest son Lucifer, and those Angels who followed him, plainly fucking ridiculous.
>>12381 >One of the reasons i dislike certain kinds of Esoterics is directly the idea of the demiurge and how almost all of them give the jewish gid credit for creation of the universe Yeah, I agree. /x/ is full of these sort of people, they are a real annoyance That whole board is garbage, let's be real. The idea that the Demiurge is some sort of evil being is not even supported by actual Aryan philosophical or religious doctrines, either, it's important to point out. That doctrine is a product of Jewish-influenced Gnostic ideologies. The idea of gnosis itself is purely Aryan, but I of course mean the offshoots of Judaism and Christianity which adapt ideas like archons, the Demiurge, etc. It's even more interesting in the light of statements from Socrates and similar figures that the body is some sort of flesh prison and that what we call life is actually death compared to the life after death. One would think that he would find the universe evil and ruled by an evil god in light of how we usually perceive such views, but from the dialogues I have read that seems entirely absent in Plato's work. There's little reason to believe the claims of the Old Testament in what they say about Yahweh creating the world. Many other non-Jewish texts say the same thing about various other deities - in light of compelling evidence to believe that Yahweh created the world, it should not be believed.
>>12346 > he is an Asura or "Demon" the jews, specifically their priesthood, at some point of desperation bound their race to it, without using a true name, a mutual pact He did give their priesthood an eugenic blueprint for creating the eternal Jew and the knowledge on how to eventually take over the world. I would not discount it as some kind of lesser/regional demon. And what he asks of them is far from the whims of a lesser deity, it's a very intelligent, very malicious and very powerful entity. There is a chance that they ditched Yahweh at some point and made a pact with something more sinister as well. >but the pact has always been in his favor though Exactly, they become a mere instrument of his will, they won the material world but lost their souls. >As for the mosquitoes, they are simply one more part of the Natural order That's why universalist philosophy belongs in the trash, mosquitoes serve no purpose other to be annoying. They are part of nature, but not everything in nature has value. Who sees value in everything holds no values, thus being a nihilist. >>12355 >It’s hard to view the entire world as made by some sort of evil deity Shaped, rather than being created ex nihilo. >>12381 >and claims we are descended from said jewish gods brightest son Lucifer Jews demonizing Indo-European deities and turning them into "rebellious children" of their god, since in monotheism there can be no plural sources and theirs had to be elevated as the absolute. Are you now going to pretend that Christianity, or even Judaism didn't incorporate any elements of the Aryan religions?
>>It’s hard to view the entire world as made by some sort of evil deity. My belief is that God made the world and he intended only White people to live in it. Because the presence of White people is the signature of God. And the shitskins were made by some retarded evil deity. Hence the never ending battle. Don't fucking delete my post, BO. You did so for the past few days. What, you can't handle the fact that shitskins are a liability too (besides likes)? Other people talk about it in similar ways but apparently my posts should be deleted. I could be confusing you for /pol/ BO. If I am wrong, I'm apologizing beforehand.
>>12391 >mosquitoes serve no purpose other to be annoying. Bluepilled. Mosquitoes are a vital part of the ecosystem. Bats, birds, fish and frogs (to mention a few) eat lots of mosquitoes and would suffer without them. Everything serves a purpose. >Who sees value in everything holds no values, thus being a nihilist. Nonsense. >Shaped, rather than being created ex nihilo. Even believing this seems to be untenable. There is no evidence that an evil entity shaped the world. >>12393 I noticed a lot of low-quality garbage deleted yesterday, that must have been you. Make better posts
>>12399 I wish I had the drawing skills to picture a soyak getting bitten by mosquitoes and wasps, being shat on by the pigeons, beaten by shitskins, convulsing from some disease etc. while he says how nature is wonderful, how all creatures have value and a purpose and so on. >Nonsense It makes perfect sense, if you can't discriminate it means that you value nothing in particular, and are thus a nihilist. I value not being bitten by mosquitoes and other pointless creatures of this world but that makes me racist or something I guess. As for the ecosystem, it has a tendency of finding alternatives. >There is no evidence that an evil entity shaped the world. Written by someone living in an artificial bubble of comfort created by the technological society. Your spoiled perspective does not make this world any less brutal and hellish.
(205.68 KB 850x400 nietzsche value of life.png)
(875.17 KB 1620x1832 trollge life god nature hylics.jpg)
>>12406 >how all creatures have value and a purpose and so on. They do, it's quite self-evident even from investigations of the nature of our ecosystem and the importance of balance and harmony within the ecosystem. All life on Earth is in a complex and synergistic system. Just because everything may have some base degree of value doesn't mean that all things are equally valuable just on the basis of them existing. It's not like I don't slap a mosquito that lands on my arm, or weep over the microorganisms I am massacring as I type this post on my keyboard. Yet these things serve a purpose of some kind, even if it is not necessarily amenable to human comforts and desires. To think that it would necessarily is of course Abrahamic. The soyjak would be right though. To say that everything is in some sense meaningful, does not imply that everything is equally valuable unless one is to make the tacit (and unclaimed) statement that everything having meaning of some kind implies that everything is equally meaningful and interchangeable. This is false. >I value not being bitten by mosquitoes Nor should you. >As for the ecosystem, it has a tendency of finding alternatives. Ecosystems suffer when deprived of their biodiversity of native species since they are interdependent. Anything added or lost can be catastrophic. >Written by someone living in an artificial bubble of comfort created by the technological society. Ironically enough, most of the people have who said what I have said have been those who were far more in touch with Nature than certainly I am. Celsus lived nearly two millennia ago and echoed such views: <They hold that God made all things for the sake of men, whereas our philosophy maintains that the world was made as much for the benefit of the irrational animals as for men —I mean, why should things have been created more for man's nourishment than for the benefit of the plants and trees, the grass and the thorns? <all things have not been made for man—any more than for the lion, the eagle, or the dolphin—but rather all has been made by God so that the world itself may be complete and perfect in all its parts. Things have indeed been proportioned, but not for the sake of man—rather for the good of the universe as a whole. God takes care of the universe; that is to say, providence never abandons it, and it does not become more evil. The Christians are silly to say, therefore, that God turns the world back to himself after a period of neglect, nor does he become angry because man "sins"—any more than he is angry with monkeys and mice for doing what they do naturally. For each has his allotted place in the scheme of things. Similar statements can be found all throughout the philosophy of the ancients. It is perhaps ironic to refer to Nietzsche in a thread on Dharma, but he really comes into play here. It's all about perspective and interpretation. As he himself said, judgements on the value or nature of life can ultimately never be true, they have value only as symptoms, what they say about (you) more than Nature itself, which one could say is truly beyond good and evil. Hitting enlightenment is realizing that everything is perfect
>>12346 >Yahweh, a middling Asura once bound to some volcanic location, Seems to be the most accurate case. >YHWH he is now most probably the single most powerful Asura that currently exists On Midgard. <Asuras (Sanskrit: असुर) are a class of beings in Indian religions. They are described as power-seeking clans related to the more benevolent Devas (also known as Suras) in Hinduism. In its Buddhist context, the word is sometimes translated "titan", "demigod", or "antigod".[1] <According to Hindu scriptures, the asuras are in constant battle with the. Asuras are described in Indian texts as powerful superhuman demigods with good or bad qualities. In early Vedic literature, the good Asuras are called Adityas and are led by Varuna, while the malevolent ones are called Danavas and are led by Vritra. In the earliest layer of Vedic texts Agni, Indra and other gods are also called Asuras, in the sense of their being "lords" of their respective domains, knowledge and abilities. In later Vedic and post-Vedic texts, the benevolent gods are called Devas, while malevolent Asuras compete against these Devas and are considered "enemy of the gods" <Some scholars, like Serrano, suggest that the word Asura may be related to proto-Uralic and proto-Germanic history, with the Aesir-Asura correspondence is the relation between Vedic Sanskrit Asura and Old Norse Æsir and Proto-Uralic *asera, all of which mean 'lord, powerful spirit, god'. The correspondence extends beyond Asera-Asura, and extends to a host of parallels such as Inmar-Indra, Sampas-Stambha and other aspects of respective mythologies. So that said, Venus, otherwise known as Freya or alternatively Lucifer in an astronomic sense of the morning and evening star, is one of the Asura as told by Serrano, and in the above light it makes sense. Though that would also put the Hosts of YHWH on similar grounds to the Aryan Asura's Wartribe. Furthermore Serrano goes on to write about how the magnetism of Venus attracted the spirit of the noble warrior, and through the union of Odin & Freya, the Alfather & Almother, "vitality rode upon green lightning through the lens of Venus to the Earth" and then on about to do battle with the unholy, unwholesome, and base and to be a living example of higher principles. I don't disagree with much of his thoughts rather sometimes just the concept can be lost on the lower level initiates.
>>12423 Who cares how powerful he is? Does he have freedom from outflows? If not, then what good are his myriad spiritual penetrations? Eventually he too will reap the result of his karma and continue along the wheel of rebirth.
>>12430 >Eventually he too will reap the result of his karma and continue along the wheel of rebirth. No time soon though. We don't really have anyway of knowing how long Yahweh has existed, unfortunately. Beings of his nature, from what I have heard, can live anywhere from ten million to a hundred million years (if not longer) before dying. Who knows exactly how powerful he is, but he's powerful enough to have some billion or more followers worldwide. He's not to be reckoned with. For example, I'm not sure if I'd go out and go looking for Yahweh if I had the ability to. That would probably be well beyond the capacity of anyone here, otherwise it would have already been done long ago.
>>12432 Forgot to mention that Yahweh probably thinks himself eternal though. Buddhist suttas record gods who think this - https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.049.than.html Also attached an animated adaptation of that link for fun. Just think of Yahweh if you watch it, it fits perfect.
(332.29 KB 1024x1300 1602791471426.jpg)
>>12433 Breddy good animation on that short there. And a fantastic read too. Thanks anon.
>>12438 Glad to have helped, anon. Apparently the animation is from a Thai movie, which is why the voices sound a bit awkward at times and the lip movement doesn't match perfectly. I just found a playlist of what seems to be most of it on Jewtube when I went to download it for that post: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eOj5m2PSi0&list=PLpPVg6BY5of1jWHs-fC7Wl1rfPdPk0hr2
(73.76 KB 396x600 allat.jpg)
I asked this question in the anti-abrahamism thread but I might get better answers here. How do y'all feel about traditionalism a la Guenon? It seems like thinly disguised abrahamic imperialism to me. I had a couple muslim friends who were into it but they weren't able to satisfactorily explain how all the shit about smashing idols and killing polytheists in the qur'an was compatible with recognising the validity of monotheism in a vedic context. after all the muslim profession of faith is "there is no god but allah," i.e. the supreme deity of the canaanite pantheon. but since muslims follow most of the mosaic law they're basically worshipping yahweh. it's the same sort of mistake laurent guyenot talks about in from yahweh to zion, where gentiles mistake the tribal god of the jews for their own "god of heaven and earth" islamic mysticism is supposedly compatible with islamic law but I don't see how that can be extended to any kind of pluralism except with jews maybe >>12381 yeah I got disillusioned with gnosticism pretty quickly because of this. there's too much good in the world for it to be created by the god of abraham haha. most of the bad comes from christians and muslims working on behalf of the jews >>12346 the mandeans are interesting. they think abraham was a demon worshipper and don't follow the mosaic law including circumcision
May all beings everywhere plagued with sufferings of body and mind quickly be freed from their illnesses. May those frightened cease to be afraid, and may those bound be free. May the powerless find power, and may people think of befriending one another. May those who find themselves in trackless, fearful wildernesses, the children, the aged, the unprotected, be guarded by beneficient celestials, and may they swiftly attain Buddhahood. Namo Buddha. Namo Dharma. Namo Sangha.
>>12407 >and the importance of balance and harmony within the ecosystem Most systems tend towards an equilibrium, this doesn't imply some kind of divine harmony any more than filling a bucket of water and watching it eventually go flat. >All life on Earth is in a complex and synergistic system Didn't claim otherwise, but it's constitutional parts could have been different without changing the end result. Imagine needing a ladder to climb somewhere, and picking one material of equal strength over another. Even fleas are quite impressive in 'design' , but a flea lacks the capacity to know itself so it's irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. It's you, as a (presumably self-)conscious agent, who can appreciate it as a very fine tuned, and very efficient mechanism. But you are not appreciating the flea as a manifestation, but rather, the unconscious intelligence which has spawned it. We can see traces of this passive intelligence in all things. On another hand, you (presumably) also have the rational capacity to realize that it's ugly, annoying and that it will spoil your food. >To think that it would necessarily is of course Abrahamic To think that things are specifically created to serve you is Abrahamic, to conquer, understand and shape your environment without corrupting it is Aryan. >Anything added or lost can be catastrophic Ecosystems usually balance themselves in the end. There were instances of entire species going extinct and it didn't end life. >and it does not become more evil From it's own, inherently amoral and unconscious (feminine) perspective, it does not >what they say about (you) more than Nature itself Indeed, for my essence is not generic, but transcendental. While I am perfectly capable of understanding nature from it's own perspective (I've been through a phase where I appreciated all life as well), I see no reason to adopt it in place of my own. What you worship as God is merely a mold to be imprinted. Due to it's inherent properties, the higher and the more divine a manifestation is, the greater the resistance will be. >realizing that everything is perfect That's a bold statement, does that include the actions of 'humans' as well? It could have a lot of implications ... >>12432 I have identified this deity as one of manifestations of Saturn, what he asks of his followers and what he turns them into closely matches this principle. It's probably an individuated manifestation of it on earth. In either case, it's antithetical to free will and freedom.
>>12391 >I would not discount it as some kind of lesser/regional demon I was not doing that, I was explaining his origins, and no they did not "ditch yahweh" the pact was mutual and if it were broken I think that they would suffer consequences worse than anything they have yet seen, everything that has happened to them has only made them better at what Yahweh wanted from them and what they wanted from him, it is possible they entered into other pacts that were not in conflict with their highest one, but I don't think so. >Jews demonizing ... Aryan religions? I don't care what they did, it was false from the word go, and whatever elements that either stole are not recoverable whatsoever nest to leave them behind entirely and reconstruct the way the religions and practices were originally constructed, by intuition and Gnosis, aka meditation for the Gnosis, and just feeling what is right for you in your ritual. >>12406 You sound like an edgy faggot. The Natural Order is quite clear and obvious, Mosquitoes are a part of it and yes are annoying and itchy and a pest but they have their place, just as we humans do, acknowledging that doesn't mean we do not discriminate or lack discrimination, it means we have a more nuanced view of life than you. If you wish to live in accord with the natural order you must acknowledge the above and act accordingly, knowing that all things have their place and that all things live in conflict with one another are the same view. As part of the cleansing ritual nature exacted a price from him in blood this is not wrong even if it is annoying. >>12423 Not just on midgard And I have various other issues with Serrano that have nothing to do with his definitions, The gods, our gods, are not Asuras, they are Suras, this includes Freya, Baldr, Othinn, Tyr, Thor, Heimdall, etc., any thought to the contrary is caused by, intentional meddling, or misunderstandings caused by either the deterioration of all things as time marches ever onwards or translation errors.
(57.09 KB 640x645 1c8.jpg)
>>12406 >I value not being bitten by mosquitoes and other pointless creatures of this world but that makes me racist or something I guess. >Written by someone living in an artificial bubble of comfort created by the technological society.
>>12470 >Most systems tend towards an equilibrium, this doesn't imply some kind of divine harmony any more than filling a bucket of water and watching it eventually go flat. Your bucket example doesn’t work. You’re talking about a stagnate homogenous substance. Nature isn’t like that. Nature has both struggle and interdependence together in a great synergy. Nature is dynamic and diverse. Balance =/= Stagnation. >Imagine needing a ladder to climb somewhere, and picking one material of equal strength over another. So you’re viewing this from a utilitarian perspective of ‘how useful is this for me’. Again, this is Abrahamic. It reminds me of a park near me where some of the big trees have little signs next to them showing how much money these trees save us every year, and how efficient they are. This is peak modernity here, as if the tree is not self-justifying. >On another hand, you (presumably) also have the rational capacity to realize that it's ugly, annoying and that it will spoil your food. This was never denied. Just because I don’t have some sort of anthropocentric view of Nature doesn’t mean I want to be ridden with fleas and constantly offering my blood to mosquitoes. Just like how it’s natural for them to do what they do, it’s natural for me to keep them off of me. Doesn’t make me hate Nature though. >To think that things are specifically created to serve you is Abrahamic, to conquer, understand and shape your environment without corrupting it is Aryan. You clearly have an Abrahamic view of Nature, regardless, as you view the value of things like mosquitoes and fleas from an entirely anthropocentric viewpoint. ‘If it bothers me and doesn’t contribute to my comfort, it’s worthless!’ >Ecosystems usually balance themselves in the end. Not a revelation. Something horribly unbalanced will eventually rebalance itself out in a new and different way, usually for the worst. The less biodiversity in an ecosystem the less healthy it is. >What you worship as God is merely a mold to be imprinted. Nature is essentially the body of God, not his essence, much like the body-soul relationship in humans and other organisms. The soul is the essence the body qua body is dependent on the soul. Basically what Ramanuja said. >does that include the actions of 'humans' as well? No, I was being a bit hyperbolic in that last line. I meant in a broad scope, but if one strictly considered that in the domain of behaviors in accordance with Nature (or at least not against it), then yes it would be true.
>>12491 >and if it were broken I think that they would suffer consequences worse than anything they have yet seen Didn't they develop an entire rabbinical school just to pilpul their way out of this pact while formally following it? Aren't some branches of Judaism all about jewing yahweh? But you are right, they end up being his instruments regardless if they support or oppose him. They don't really stand much chances resisting him (as a group, with the exception of few individuals), as it's too powerful and intelligent. Regardless of it being a lesser or greater deity to begin with, it's aligned with certain dark principles that it draws a lot of it's powers from. It's not merely the followers, since most of his followers (including the atheist/secular ones) are spiritually dead. It wields this amorphous mass of golems quite effectively against those with higher qualities though. >I don't care what they did You will hardly find a religion, philosophy or metaphysical school that's not heavily corrupted by the Jews at this point. You might as well start from the scratch and rely on incorruptible archetypes alone. >by intuition and Gnosis, aka meditation for the Gnosis, and just feeling what is right for you in your ritual I'm not telling you what to do, I'm merely expressing my opinions. Feel free to share what you came up. >The gods, our gods, are not Asuras, they are Suras Conflicts over such matters between different White groups/tribes, while not as emphasized, as common, or as bloody as those incited by Abrahamic divisions, did happen in ancient times. We don't necessarily need to follow the same gods, as long as they are within the same racial sphere. >>12494 >laughing niggers mocking something they don't understand.gif >Implying those contradict each other in any way
>>12443 It's less Abrahamic imperialism than Advaita imperialism.
>>12498 >You’re talking about a stagnate homogenous substance Atoms, how do they work. Nothing in this universe is absolutely stagnate and homogeneous, everything is dynamic. One thing being (mathematically) more complex than another doesn't make their natures fundamentally different, as far as unconscious and non-sapient things go. It's conscious agents, and ultimately, the quality/nature of consciousness that matter in the great scheme of things. That's why mosquitoes just do what they got conditioned to do while you and me are discussing their behavior and purpose. >So you’re viewing this from a utilitarian perspective of ‘how useful is this for me’ Utilitarian as far as it's creating conditions for (self-)conscious and higher agents to manifest. Not utilitarian in a degenerate, modernist, or even general sense since utilitarian philosophies are dysgenic and involutive due to their lowest common denominator root. >anthropocentric view of Nature You can hardly hold certain political views without being anthropocentric. Anthropocentrism not meaning that you ought to hate and/or ruthlessly exploit nature, but rather, that you ought to preserve and appreciate it's beneficial and beautiful aspects. >The less biodiversity in an ecosystem the less healthy it is Then it will eventually increase biodiversity like it did the first time, no? You seem to underestimate just how resilient life is. >Nature is essentially the body of God If you view God as some kind of planetary or cosmic super-sentience, then yes. >but if one strictly considered that in the domain of behaviors in accordance with Nature (or at least not against it), then yes it would be true Which gets us back to my original point, that not everything is perfect or serves some higher purpose by default, some things do, some don't. If it's true for conscious behaviors, it's only logical for it to be true for unconscious ones as well.
>>12517 >>laughing niggers mocking something they don't understand.gif Hello reddit. >Implying those contradict each other in any way They do you retard, mosquitoes and wasps both have a purpose and serve to bring variety and diversity within this world no matter what humanity thinks of them. Your complaints of them is something only a technological soyfreak would say. Hell it's something that Jews want as well, no joke.
>>12522 I guess that's fair. You can only really equate sufism and hinduism if you ignore all the polytheists or dismiss them as "unenlightened." I don't really know much about the subtilties though; what would be an example of a non-advaitic strain within sanatana dharma? like jainism? At the end of the day though traditionalism seems more like a (White convert) muslim endeavour than anything else. Not sure how I feel about evola now that I've met some of these people irl
>>11971 Got a source on that video?
>>12534 it's gaeia sanskrit on youtube I believe
>>12517 >Didn't they develop an entire rabbinical school just to pilpul their way out of this pact while formally following it? Yes, and notice how doing that only made them more into what the pact with the entity that stole their wargods name began the process of? The priesthood of the jewish people bound their peoples souls to it, out of desperation, either ignorant of what it really was or not caring. As the blood follows the soul, so too were their behaviors and genetics warped over time to make them into accordance with the will behind the pact, both of their own people and the Asura. Spiritually dead or not, their souls still feed it, it was not, and truthfully still is not, powerful enough on it's own to draw the kind of power it now has without that fuel, which is why the only angle of attack aside from discovering it's True Name and banishing it which is too dangerous as of yet, is to cut it's followers out of the world and ensure that when the souls return they do not feed it. >You will hardly find a religion, philosophy or metaphysical school that's not heavily corrupted by the Jews at this point. You might as well start from the scratch and rely on incorruptible archetypes alone. This is what we MUST do, such is the state of the world, there are things we can take form the old but mostly names and certain concepts that are as blatantly true now as they were for those practicing the religions, but much has to be rediscivered through Spiritual Gnosis, and intuition, it is the hardest path we can take and the only path remaining to us now. >Feel free to share what you came up. I will, when I begin writing it all down, as much as I think that might be in error as of right now, it is the only way to communicate the ideas to others at present. We don't necessarily need to follow the same gods, as long as they are within the same racial sphere. The point is that despite many different names and some fudging of the Heirarchy, we do all follow the same Gods.
>>12534 Like >>12539 said, it's Gaiea Sanskrit. Her channel is really great. Here's the direct link where I got that clip from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiLduVH8PGQ She's doing the whole Gita right now.
>>12530 >what would be an example of a non-advaitic strain within sanatana dharma? Many people in the West don't know this, but Advaita is actually pretty marginal within Sanatana Dharma. Due to the fact that many people in the West were first exposed to Sanatana Dharma via Advaitins like Vivekananda, many people have taken it to be sort of the purest expression of Sanatana Dharma. I'd disagree with this though. More prominent strains in Sanatana Dharma include Vishishtadvaita and Dvaita (and even more, actually, but I don't know as much about them). Vishishtadvaita is Qualified Non-Dualism. Basically non-dualism qualified with real plurality. There are three 'reals' or tattvas, and that is Brahman (God), cit (souls) and acit (matter). Consciousness and matter are completely dependent on Brahman and are its energies ultimately, and Brahman is in the end the only substance. Meanwhile in Advaita, all perception of plurality, subject-object distinctions, change, etc. is all just maya / illusion. It's a result of ignorance that these things are perceived. They are called 'adhyasa' or false superimposition of properties onto something that does not really have those properties. For example, someone will mistake a rope across the path as a snake and react accordingly, but it was just a result of ignorance that they saw it as a snake. It was just a rope. Just like that, everything is just Brahman, which is characterized by unadultered consciousness, neverending being, bliss and all that (sat-chit-ananda). Where it gets incoherent for Advaita is how they simultaneously say that (1) Brahman is perfect, self-sufficient, unconditioned, transcending both time and space and not subject to any illusion, (2) the individual self (atman) is 1:1 identical with Brahman, and (3) the Atman is unaware that it non-different from Brahman and has fallen under illusion. It should be clear how this is just retarded. If Brahman is perfect and not subject to illusion by its very nature, how does it fall under illusion in the first place. Is illusion superior to Brahman? Vishishtadvaita can answer all of these. Shankaracharya, the main figure of Advaita Vedanta, was also known to have coped hard in interpreting the Bhagavad Gita and Upanishads by saying that these scriptures talked with two different levels of truth, so anything that was theistic or talked about plurality was just a lower level of truth, while the other ones were the higher truth. This is of course bogus. >like jainism? Jainism is definitely pluralistic, but it falls outside of the fold of Sanatana Dharma because it rejects the Vedas, the Upanishads, the idea of Brahman, etc. Not to say that there aren't a lot of overlap in concepts and terms. >At the end of the day though traditionalism seems more like a (White convert) muslim endeavour than anything else. Not sure how I feel about evola now that I've met some of these people irl Yeah I don't really care about Evola and Guenon very much, really. I just read texts myself and draw conclusions for myself. One doesn't need a Traditionalist™ label.
>>12523 >Then it will eventually increase biodiversity like it did the first time Where will this new life come? If a several major parts of the ecosystem are wiped out into extinction, it's not like some new thing will just emerge of its own accord. >That not everything is perfect or serves some higher purpose by default, some things do, some don't. If it's true for conscious behaviors, it's only logical for it to be true for unconscious ones as well. A higher purpose? Maybe not - but I think the main contention is purpose in a bare sense. Animals don't really serve a higher purpose in the way that humans and other more advanced beings can, but they have purposes and niches nonetheless that are essential to the functioning of the Whole. Nothing was made in vain. Once one wakes up to the fact that evolution is a hoax, it is impossible to avoid this conclusion.
>>12569 >The priesthood of the jewish people bound their peoples souls to it, out of desperation Yes, if you read their stories, you realize it's an obvious "pact with the devil" trope. They were a rag-tag group of mutt bandits, cutthroats and mercenaries who lived in poverty and struggled to survive, and in the moments of crisis this entity has approached their leaders and offered them riches and power if they become his "chosen". At a few occasions some of them tried to break free but he had punished them severely to set the example for the rest. Abraham was a guy who went around pimping out his sister (who was also his wife) to foreign rulers so that he could jew them hard and take their wealth later. He also offered his own son as a sacrifice to YHWH. This is canon kek. Clearly, not a very reputable character. Now what kind of benevolent entity would approach a guy like that and make him it's champion ... >Spiritually dead or not, their souls still feed it They don't, that's why he demands sacrifices of non-Jews. This entity is relatively weak on higher planes of existence, which is why he instructs his minions to have absolute control of the material world. He is morphing all other nations to become like Jews the more they come under his influence and lose their connection to their own gods. Most people that I see around me are essentially kikes at this point. They, apart from their original role, are not really that special or relevant in the grand scheme of things. Any other group in similar circumstances could do the job. They are neither the first, nor the last "Jews" in history. >but much has to be rediscivered through Spiritual Gnosis, and intuition It's impossible to reach certain truths without that. There is too much written material, most of it worthless (a lot of it intentionally), to be analyzed for one to reach them through standard deduction and comparison. Even a supercomputer wouldn't be up to the task. Something within you must resonate with certain ideas, which leads you on a path of discovering other ideas and refining them. >>12592 There was some acharya dude giving lessons on Sanatana Dharma and his followers posted on /fascist/ a lot a year or so ago (I'm pretty sure he posted himself as well), I wonder what happened with them. You should definitively read some of Evola's works btw, even if you disagree with some ideas. >>12597 >If a several major parts of the ecosystem are wiped out into extinction It happened many times due to natural disasters. Look up ice worms, that's how tough nature is. TL;DR: Things vibrate, these vibrations affect each other and become more complex and mutually referential when the conditions allow it, this leads to greater complexity and higher forms of life. It was not created, nor did it evolve by pure chance. It had inherent potential to gradually become what it is, and it will re-generate itself as soon as the conditions allow it. This potential is encoded in rocks as much as in people.
>>12630 >It was not created, nor did it evolve by pure chance. It had inherent potential to gradually become what it is, and it will re-generate itself as soon as the conditions allow it. This potential is encoded in rocks as much as in people. Until we get actual evidence of species of life magically regenerating after themselves as soon as conditions to allow it, there is zero reason to believe this. All evidence points to them being created at one time or another. This doesn't necessarily imply 100% static species, of course. >There was some acharya dude giving lessons on Sanatana Dharma and his followers posted on /fascist/ a lot a year or so ago Sri Dharma Pravartaka Acharya is great. I love his channel, lots of great lectures and stuff over there. His books are pretty good too. Here's a PDF of one.
>>12631 >Sri Dharma Pravartaka Acharya Lmao I learnt that Indians hate this man (at least from what I heard from r/hinduism, since his name popped up there as a search result.)
>>12663 They're probably butthurt because in his book 'The Dharma Manifesto' he classifies India as a 'Secondary Nation', saying <Secondary Nations are capable of carrying on from one generation to the next the rudiments of civilization that are adopted from the creativity of Primary Nations, but not of originating these rudimentary elements themselves to any significant extent. For 'Primary Nations' he lists 'All of Europe from Iceland to the Ural Mountains' , The US and Canada and Argentina, Uruguay and Chile. Must we point out the common denominator in these countries? For 'Secondary Nations' he lists India, Iran, China, the Arab world and Southeast Asia. The third category is places like Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, which he says are incapable of maintaining civilization and just exploit, consume and destroy. On top of this, the man produces better lectures on Vedic material than anyone else I've ever seen. He does Sanatana Dharma better living in Omaha Nebraska and teaching out of his house than do the vast majority of Indian 'Hindus'.
>>8854 Wild exposé of these key core kabbalah beliefs by christopher jon bjerknes interviewed by adam green https://odysee.com/@KnowMoreNews:1/Rabbis-Reveal-Kabbalah-Secrets:7
>>12817 The same christopher jon bjerknes that claims Uncle Adolf was an undercover communist plant and zionist shill that was working for the kikes to bring about the return to the promise land? That christopher jon bjerknes?
>>12823 Adam (((Green))) seems to host people with such beliefs quite often. I have not watched him much, but he gives me a weird vibe. I would steer clear.
>>12842 He's a good man. A bit on the conspiracy kook side though.
>>12630 >Now what kind of benevolent entity would approach a guy people like that and make him it its champion favorite ... Benevolence is overrated though, it's all relative to one's kin.
>>12423 > In the earliest layer of Vedic texts Agni, Indra and other gods are also called Asuras, in the sense of their being "lords" of their respective domains, knowledge and abilities. In later Vedic and post-Vedic texts, the benevolent gods are called Devas, while malevolent Asuras compete against these Devas and are considered "enemy of the gods" If that isn't a blatant case of demonizing fine gods to assuage POCs, I would not know what is. If true, I would then again advise local anons to beware non-super-early Vedic material. Now this is very interesting because we would therefore have to consider that what we consider an inversion in Avestic material was actually staying true to the early core, that Asuras were and still are the good guys. Honestly I'd beg for a solid source on the claim in pink because it's akin to saying that between the Old Testament and Islam, God and the angels became the demons and masters of Evil whereas Satan got promoted to Good Guy. Which, outside of expected "actually..." replies, in a simple forward way, would be mind boggling.
>>12407 ><They hold that God made all things for the sake of men, whereas our philosophy maintains that the world was made as much for the benefit of the irrational animals as for men —I mean, why should things have been created more for man's nourishment than for the benefit of the plants and trees, the grass and the thorns? It's not for man's nourishment only, it's on the point of creating a universe to begin with. Because looking at grass growing is fun for a couple minutes but human drama and the expression of free will interjected with godly influences, now that is something worth creating a universe for and having fun with. It is then simple to understand why Abrahamism gained grounds from this premise, but the major blunder was pulling man out of Nature by making him superior to it and Nature subservient, when our religions stated that man, and White man at that, was the epitome yet a part of Nature, or as ironically Bernhardt Klassen put it without perhaps realizing the full spiritual and ontological extent of his maxim, Nature's Finest (creation).
(897.42 KB 1522x871 1.PNG)
(1.08 MB 1496x1095 2.PNG)
(728.03 KB 1003x973 3.PNG)
>>12855 See >>11901 . There was a religious schism because some Whites were casting black magic on shitskins, which was very racist and triggered another group of Whites. So old priests and aristocracy became the devil of the new, universalist SJW religion (Later Vedic accounts, Zoroastrianism, etc.) Not long after that, Whites gradually went extinct in India, which of course, was a pure coincidence and had nothing to do with the presence of mysterious merchants (pics related) there. Gee, it's as if the history keeps repeating itself over and over again. TL;DR: Angra-manyu was /ourguy/ , just like Lucifer and others that got demonized in a similar way.
>>12854 Other creatures deserve benevolence as too. All non-Jewish religions emphasize this. Hitler practiced it, as well. >>12855 No, it's just a shift of terms to make them more precise. The exact opinions held about specific beings was mostly static. No total inversions. The opposite change happened in Zoroastrianism. Yes, Indra and other gods are called 'asuras' occasionally in the earliest layers of the Rigveda, but Indra and other gods are literally still worshiped. They have never been seen as evil. Varuna is another asura as well. There is a differentiation between good and bad asuras. Bad asuras are Daityas (children of Diti), good ones are Adityas (Children of Aditi). Vedic religion actually goes less far than Zoroastrianism. The Daevas are just evil across the board from what I understand, and Indra gets included in a later list of demons iirc. It's just another retelling of the Titan v. Olympian war, or the Vanir v. Æsir. Gods do not always get along.
>>12873 >There was a religious schism because some Whites were casting black magic on shitskins Why cast curses on different peoples who are just different from them? Now it looks like "the Whites shot first" and the indians can use that as leverage.
>>12877 It clearly states that they were powerless against it, whatever it actually was. Indians have eventually genocided Whites in north India regardless of Whites cucking to their Dravidian religions and including them in their societies. The only exception being the loyalists symbolized by the god Hanuman, who fought on the side of Whites.
>>12877 Do not respond to this retard. He's a newfag who unironically using the term SJW and is a satanic shill.
>>12901 I don't get why some people want us to embrace Satan so much. I don't see any positive attributes of this being no matter from which perspective one looks at it from.
>>12901 >Stop using words which I don't like REEEEEEEE >HURR everything that's not my beliefs is satanisms >Retard retard retard retard Are you literally shaking right now? >>12913 I'm not a satanist, I merely cited sources showing that whenever some Whites stood for themselves and their interests, they got demonized in the popular religions, and that the universalist interpretation of White religions almost always coincided with the presence of various (((Chaldean))) types.
>>12915 >Utter sayings of a child >quotes posting nothing I've done nor implied >Using literally shaking in 2020 You're a retarded liberal. >I'm not a satanist, I merely cited sources showing that whenever some Whites stood for themselves and their interests, they got demonized in the popular religions Lucifer is not pagan you dumbass. Using dark arts is not ever a good thing.
>>12922 >Lucifer is not pagan you dumbass. Satan is an invention of Adamites. Lucifer != Satan. Prometheus/Lucifer, the morning star, is most certainly pagan.
>>12915 You're implying that Satan is 'demonized' by Abrahamics though, implying that he is (1) real and (2) being purposely misrepresented.
(48.64 KB 353x357 Literal Hitler.jpg)
>>12922 >Lucifer is not pagan you dumbass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belenus <Belenus (also Belenos, Belinus, Bel, Beli Mawr) is a sun god from Celtic mythology and, in the 3rd century, the patron deity of the Italian city of Aquileia. Called the [b] "Fair Shining One" (or "The Shining God") [/b], he was one of the most ancient and most-widely worshiped Celtic deities and is associated with the ancient fire festival and modern Sabbat Beltane.[1] He was associated with the horse (as shown by the clay horse figurine offerings at Belenos's Sainte-Sabine shrine in Burgundy) and also the wheel. Perhaps like Apollo, with whom he became identified in the Augustan History,[2] Belenos was thought to ride the Sun across the sky in a horse-drawn chariot. Lucifer = Lucibel = Lux Belenus >Using dark arts is not ever a good thing Usually not, but saying never is like saying that there should be no wars and that we should turn the other cheek etc. >>12929 Satan means an enemy or adversary, the Jewish authors of the bible (and earlier cuck religions) saw Aryans and their heroes, aristocracy and gods as an enemy so they portrayed them as the devil. Belenus, Apollo, Prometheus and other gods of fire and light/wisdom got turned upside down. >>12931 You are the ones who mentioned Satan from a Judeo-Christian (Or Zoroastrian?) perspective, I have merely shown that Angra Manyu (Angiras) was actually fighting for Aryan interests against the (((merchants))) which is most likely why he got demonized in later Vedas and Zoroastrianism, which, I'd like to remind you, eventually spawned the greatest Jew enabler Cyrus "the great" and ultimately led to Persians being overrun by Islamic shitskins.
>>12939 Satan has always been an agent of Yahweh working at his disposal. This sort of dualistic idea of Abrahamism is actually a perversion. Go and look at the Wikipedia page even, it goes over this, and more importantly gives Biblical citations for this fact. Even many Christians forget this. >Angra Manyu (Angiras) Is there really a connection? It wouldn't even make sense. On one hand we have a principle of evil that was begotten in the beginning, and the other is just some Vedic sage.
>>12945 Satan is Yahweh is the Demiurge. It's one thing, one all-encompassing illusion. That's the true trinity. Power is all that there is.
>>12945 Lucifer is not Satan, he is the light principle, just minus the slave morality. I know that he is supposedly an agent of "god" in most Abrahamic denominations. But he also appears to Abraham to tell him not to sacrifice his own son to Yahweh, which is somehow a temptation. Not going to use biblical sources though. There were various gods throughout the world associated with Aryan overseas settlers that tried to convince the natives to stop with human sacrifices. >>12945 >On one hand we have a principle of evil that was begotten in the beginning But associating this principle with bad goyim throughout history is a different story. For example, people like Hitler are practically the Devil of modernism, mention him to most normies and they will get a mental image of a principle of evil. If you read the excerpts which I posted here >>12873, you will see that he helped Aryans to defeat the proto-Jews, so it makes perfect sense that they will use their subversives to demonize him and to religiously (memetically) condition his people to shun leaders like him, those who are ready to do what it takes to promote the interests of their nation/race. It's all so archetypal, so cyclical, that I'm surprised that more people don't notice these patterns.
>>12950 > Yahweh is the Demiurge. Objectively false. Jews want you to think that their god is the Demiurge. As has been pointed out before, the Demiurge is benevolent in every Aryan tradition of value, whether in Europe or India. It was only with Jewish-influenced traditions of Gnosticism that the idea of Yahweh as the creator of the world entered the scene. Even Julian the Apostate though that Yahweh was just some desert god.
>>12961 Interesting point of view, thank you for the education. Only tangentially related, but have you ever read VALIS or the Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch by Phillip K. Dick? I was very interested in his conception of the "black iron prison" of early Christians.
>>12939 >the greatest Jew enabler Cyrus "the great" and ultimately led to Persians being overrun by Islamic shitskins What did he do?
>>12964 Cyrus is the one who released the Jews from captivity in Babylon.
>>12965 All the jewish stories of captivity are lies.
>>12968 Why would they like Cyrus then?
>>12968 If that's the case, then why are they claiming Cyrus to be so great? The Zoroastrians were likely fooled into believing that they were freeing them for their oppressors. They had this whole liberate men from evil kings type of thing I think.
>>12939 >Lucifer = Lucibel = Lux Belenus Lucifer is not Belenus, they do not even represent the same symbols and meanings for Lucifer is not similar to the sun God at all. You're making this claim, because his name is similar and did not go into further explanation on how they're both the same which is beyond retarded. It makes more sense to claim that he is Venus, but overexaggerated and lied by Christians. *Sigh* this board is getting dumber.
>>12984 Yeah from what I understand Lucifer as a name for the devil is the product of some sort of weird translation of a Bible passage into a different language. It was just ‘light-bringer’ standing for Venus in the original and was said in context of a specific king, but it was eventually taken as a proper name of a being and applied to the figure Satan. Really, Lucifer has nothing to do with Satan.
>>12963 >VALIS or the Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch by Phillip K. Dick There go my hopes to reduce my reading list by the end of September.
>>12961 Demiurge, as an idea of a conscious creator/architect of the universe, was almost completely alien to most early Aryan traditions. They were not creationists in the biblical sense, they simply saw signs of higher intelligence in the ebb and flow of existence. Demiurge, when properly interpreted, is an artificier/craftsman able to shape and control Brahman. In that sense, Jewish god IS the Demiurge, but he has no power over all of existence, only over what he manages to shape. Otherwise Jews wouldn't be so hellbent of jewing every subatomic particle in the world. See, everything makes much more sense when you abandon universalist/monotheist position. Zoroastrianism and many Greek traditions are not as valuable due to semitic Chaldeans exercising great influence on them over time. >>12964 He was such a good goy that Israel made commemorative shekels with his image. His empire was very reminiscent of many other proto-Aryan empires in the phase of metastasis, marked by great conquests (especially of nations which might be hostile to the "chosen"), spread of egalitarian and progressive ideas (for those times), emancipation of the Jews, etc. After a while, this empire collapsed and got overrun by mudslimes, which was the terminal stage. Modern USA is following the similar model for example, so was the British Empire and many others. Book of Esther, while fictional, is probably based on some real events. >>12984 Ok, what symbols and meanings does he represent according to you? Which accounts do you base these descriptions on? Inb4 some red guy with horns and pitchfork boiling people in lava kek
>>12964 He, most certainly like many "great" conquerors who have been on the Jews' payroll over the last twenty-six centuries, he marched on Babylon. Then with more money and the riches of this city-state, he proceeded to expand his all new Persian empire. >>12968 Quite interestingly, not so long ago a Middle-Eastern man brought for the claim that the Jews had actually been moved from Yemen and taken into Babylon as refugees. >>12979 >>12981 Lies, propaganda, appealing to cultural hubris, rewriting history, what do you know? Jews love to play the victim card because they're liars and a weak people who can't fight for themselves. Even today some of their JIDF soldiers wear diapers because they tend to wet themselves when Palestinians throw rocks and stadium-ranged mud-rockets at them. They're the worst aspect of the feminine and urban natures made flesh, almost like transsexuals. They could have already brewed a hatred for Babylon's elite and planned a coup with the help of an external agent. It might be around that time that the story of Esther might have started growing in the back of their minds, although some argue that some kind of infiltrated agents, perhaps or even likely sages at the service of the former elite, then offered their kind services to their new masters in helping them write a new chapter in their mythology, as they might be behind this story that acts as a very convincing warning against typical Jewish treachery. Such people, or perhaps just one single influential individual, might have pretended being converted to proto-Judaism (conversions this way did happen multiple times throughout history), with the sole intent of trying to put as much warnings as possible in the book that was being assembled. This might have happened right after Cyrus' victory like it could have happened a century or two later. It is hard to know for sure. The strong possibility that the king named in this Book of Esther might be Xerxes I casts an intriguing light over this. With Xerxes I being the fourth king of this Achaemenid empire created by Cyrus (Cyrus II), it might be possible that although defeated, a strong resentment existed within the Babylonian population. As usual, Jews cried victims and were probably on the lookout for signs of antisemitism from the populace that had been vanquished and dominated. We can see this happening before our own very eyes in the ZOG's domain which was once a collection of free White lands. In other words, in most likely a matter of decades the Jews had managed to become powerful enough to once again be able to threaten the locals through the power of their favorite shabbo goyim. Jews being what they are, no true noble leader would ever think about obtaining the graces of these parasites and bestow them with any form of reward and power. Captivity, exile or destruction would be the only acceptable solutions. Did the Jews had some secret stashes of money hidden somewhere, or did they know how to get access to the Babylonian riches but were unable to move in further because of the Babylonian chiefs being suspicious of these tribe men, that the Jews needed someone from outside to allow to achieve what might have been a coup made achievable by the inner and treacherous action of the Jews? Read more there while being careful about the source, for obvious reasons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Esther Of other interest, Cyrus was a kind of the former and more eastwards Median empire that he defeated whereas his own family was formerly subject to the Median dominion. Little traces of such an empire are left for perusal. Isn't it strange? Cyrus obtained some notable praise from the Jews in their early religious writings regarding ending their captivity in the Neo-Babylonian empire and for having established some useful and respectable laws. Whatever happened and the Jews' condition truly was, there is no doubt that they developed enmity around that age towards the Babylonian people and its culture. Their history is some kind of a mess anyway but is best summarized as others were evil and we were nice and victims, always. The exile concerned a fraction of the population of Jerusalem, perhaps the remaining men who didn't die in the siege, assault and sacking.
>>12873 First of all, I must inquire about the author. What is that book you pick pages from and are its claims corroborated by other sources and substantiated? I can see the numerous footer notes and refs to the RigVeda but are we sure the original material is not spun according to a biased mind? >Bala Baal('a) -- I can see the cognate similarity here with Semitic deities and also the Lord and Prince title. Do we know more about this one? Other notes below; >Pani = thieves, chiefly of cattle >Angirasas bullying Aryans and non-Aryans, raiding steak houses and stealing their beef too But aren't the Angirasas supposed to be the followers of Angiras? What happened here? How come we find these Angirasa being described in such terrible manner and being a nuisance to Aryans? It's almost if the author made a mistake here because the paragraph could enjoy a greater coherence if "Panis" were written in place of "Angirasas". That's particularly true because if we do this swapping, really much in need, we find that it would be Panis who kept stealing the cattle, attacking houses, burning them too sometimes, against farmers and herders. Now, if the text is won't such change, then we can see that the Angisaras were enjoying a role of some kind of tax collectors who didn't hesitate to use violence when tithes were not conceded. >Divine spy Sarama Another figure that remains intriguing, if by pure curiosity as to why he was considered divine. >Bala's temple destroyed, new flab/banner put in place. History seems to keep repeating itself but these victories always seem short lived: Aryans and other noble peoples always vanish. >So old priests and aristocracy became the devil of the new, universalist SJW religion (Later Vedic accounts, Zoroastrianism, etc.) So your opinion is that Zoroastrianism, or at least what we got on account of what this religion was, belongs to the wrong group? But isn't Zoroastrianism the religion to have put the Asuras as the good ones? On the other hand, Devas being nefarious strikes me as strange if we go with the etymological root of this word and relate it to PIE languages. Devas are definitely on the positive side of things in Buddhism too. Now, going back to Angiras, the description, exceptional skills, abilities and political engagement of this wise man seem to echo Hermes and Apollo in different ways. In >>11901 you spoke of lunar corruption, but in most Mysteries and other cults, lunar forces are not negative but complementary, sometimes even given masculine attributes even if in all references made to them, they are found to be more passive and feminine. Evola barely had anything really good to say about lunar forces and you are obviously quoting from him. There are pros and cons to his views, but I would argue that the less the political and religious offices to be handled by women, the better. I have no qualms with any deification of maternal figures as long as they're constrained to such purposes. What should we think of the stronk Pellas Athena or even the not-dykes Valkyries? Or were the Latin cultures overcompensating the manliness? I have many disagreements with Evola, who was way too influenced by Perennialist literature. His stubborn issues with pantheism or even underground forces would have really need much more nuance. His logic is far from convincing when he claims that assuming a singular Source of all, then it would fundamentally make all things equal. As for reincarnation as through the Samsara concept, it appears indeed that it conveys two general ideas: first, one of a democratic condition where all men and women find equality of destiny, second, one of negative judgement of the world. It seems, according to ancient Egyptian principles, that the reincarnation was limited to a few, exceptional individuals, godly Kings, whereas the rest was just meant to come and go and then be judged for the afterlife with bliss or destruction, which is not too different from the concept of Paradise. Gnostics and Jews put a sadistic twist on the negative path that became one of eternal torture instead of a simple destruction through devouring by a creature, which is much more humane than the never ending torments promised by the cultists of the God of Love, who assuredly would only preach love because of an absolute fear of being put under indescribable pain for unlimited eons. A foregone choice. They are all but theological theories, regardless of the excuse you put forth to scare people about a future terrible life, either on Earth or in some kind of nondescript realm, and this happens only because most people must walk through a life with a faith to relate to. Otherwise it would just be a story of YOLO and to be careful otherwise you'd get hurt, end in jail or worse and screw with your only one lively experience.
>>12873 >Angiras (Angramanyu) gets a bad rap in the Avesta I'm missing the context provided in the preceding page because the author refers to two cults, one of Asura, the other of Indra which the Aryans were into. So were those into the Asura cult and what was it about? I wouldn't pass judgement on the cult dedicated to the Asura (gods) because all of this might just have been a struggle related to power, which religion was glued to. The same happened in Ireland and the opposition between Catholics and Protestants was actually due to the territorial agency of clans that had sided with one version of Christianity or the other and were mainly fighting for power, where the religious opposition became an almost unavoidable added value mirroring the more earthly concerns. >some portions of the Atharvaveda are considered older than the Rigveda Most interesting. >Prometheus ~= Matarisvan Good point there too, worth looking into. All these bringers of the fire of knowledge, shared with humans, are so often and quickly put under scrutiny and made rebels, disturbing elements and sometimes downright evil. The same thing happens in the texts of Enoch but it's hard to know if it's related to jealousy, if the Watchers who taught things to humans were good guys and Enoch was just like a mad man because them Watchers got da pussy, or if the group that refused to share the sciences was actually merely conforming to a Klassenian mindset and represented supremacists whereas another bunch of boomers wanted to share the secrets with sort of non-Aryan people. >black magic Now, earlier on I mentioned how I found that some of Angiras' attributes reminded me of Hermes and Apollo. This also could be used to establish a similarity to a Thot-like figure. But then the use of black magic against enemies (we presume) is so similar to what a figure like Odin would do, who seemed to be living beyond Good and Evil as far as the acquisition of knowledge and the protection of his domain went. Nevertheless, I wish to understand more about how the Avesta and early Vedic texts relate to each other and what was the nature of the oppositions we find. In the latter, the Asuras weren't necessarily evil, but the Devas seem to have won a battle of morals and virtues. As a matter of fact, only the pajeeted writings needed to simplify things and pushed the Devas into the bad boy category, whereas it was far from being so clearly cut in the Vedas. >Deva-worshippers, of which Angiras was a preceptor So, we could ask, did both Hinduism and Zoroastrianism force a manichean separation? >Panis, again The negativity attached to them looks to have been inverted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pani Now, if we go with the idea that the true early Panis were kikels of some kind, then it would make sense that perhaps the name pani would suddenly become one of moral superiority as the original Aryans lost most of their prestige and power as long as their racial presence in India. The rabbis Panis got their revenge and their priests become the figures of virtuous authority and scholarship.
>>12991 A relatable problem. It never shrinks. >>12996 >The negativity attached to them looks to have been inverted On a further look this name seems to have more than one use, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panis Some interesting things in this article too: >The Panis (Sanskrit: पणि : ) are a clan in the Rigveda, from paṇi-, a term for "bargainer, miser," especially applied to one who is sparing of sacrificial oblations. The Panis appear in RV 10.108 as watchers over stolen cows. >Graeco-Roman authors equated the Parthians with a Scythian tribe called the Parni (i.e. Greek Parnoi), which has been equated by some with the Panis.[2][3] Strabo (11.9.2) mentions that the Parnoi belonged to the Dahas ("Dahae") and lived in Margiana and that they founded the Arsacid empire of Parthia >According to Srimati Akshaya Kumari Devi the Panis were descendants of the Punis (Punics) or Phoenicians, who traditionally established sea trading connections with Iran and India and mingled with the Persians and Scythians. The Panis may have become the Vani (Vanika) caste of traders and merchants (Rigveda 1.56.2, 5.44.7, 8.66.10, 10.108.7, 10.151.8; Atharvaveda 3.15.1). The Vani / Vanika link goes to a page on Vaishyas, the merchant farmer class. Even if they were Punic however, I am not sure I would be convinced that this would make them proto-kikes, because Phoenician settlements had coins and statues that made them appear very White, see: >>5169, >>5167.
>>12996 >Nevertheless, I wish to understand more about how the Avesta and early Vedic texts relate to each other and what was the nature of the oppositions we find. The introduction to this >>3353 book my satisfy what you are looking for to an extent, though it is mainly Iranian / Zoroaster-focused. After reading that and the rest of the book I was left with the impression that the change really wasn’t as huge between pre- and post-Zoroastrian religion, and that it was more a reformulation of certain ideas.
>>12995 >I must inquire about the author Journal Of The Bihar And Orissa Research Society 1940 Vol Xxvi. The publishing authority and most authors are Indians, so it's hardly biased to be pro-White. Jews have been destroying any accounts of genuine Aryan history for centuries while gradually editing more popular texts to be increasingly more kosher, so you'd need to dig very deep in order to uncover any traces left. >Baal('a) -- I can see the cognate similarity here with Semitic deities Based on the descriptions of Pani in that text, they were most likely Phoenicians or some similar Semitic seafaring nation. Meaning that the region was very likely settled by some kind of Jew, who always followed the commercial routes. >How come we find these Angirasa being described in such terrible manner and being a nuisance to Aryans? They were the royal advisers and priests serving the Aryan aristocracy. An ancient equivalent of the secret service. Naturally, this made them a prime target for any subversive forces. >It's almost if the author made a mistake here because the paragraph could enjoy a greater coherence if "Panis" were written in place of "Angirasas". You can have your natural aristocracy coming to collect some taxes in order to sustain the country (obviously they were providing protection and help to other Aryans whenever needed), or, you can have some Jew take everything that you own while humiliating you in the process and giving nothing back. It's similar to the animosity that the "oppressed" Bolsheviks had against the Russian royal family. >as to why he was considered divine He likely had some knowledge and/or abilities which made him appear more than human. >History seems to keep repeating itself but these victories always seem short lived: Aryans and other noble peoples always vanish. My point exactly. But when you see the same pattern repeating over and over again, you begin looking for the prima causa of the downfall, no matter how insignificant it may appear initially. A tiny snowflake which triggers the avalanche. It might roll for a long time before it becomes noticeable. >So your opinion is that Zoroastrianism, or at least what we got on account of what this religion was, belongs to the wrong group? I am not certain about the details, but the signs of decay were present from the beginning. It still contained a lot of Aryan wisdom and was light years ahead of Abrahamism, but it contained certain elements which made it susceptible to various (((reformations))) until it got weakened enough to perish. The same happened with the ancient Egyptian religion. >But isn't Zoroastrianism the religion to have put the Asuras as the good ones? My guess is that those terms were used interchangeably at some periods (or got confused), but there was obviously a power struggle, schism, and separation at one point since the followers of what was to become Zoroastrianism (and Advaita Vedas) got defeated by the more traditional followers of Indra and the fire cult of early Vedas. A Pyrrhic victory as this likely made them lose enough population to become a target for much more numerous Dasyu/Dravidians. >Now, going back to Angiras, the description, exceptional skills, abilities and political engagement of this wise man seem to echo Hermes and Apollo in different ways. Precisely. While more modern accounts intentionally confuse those sages with various Chaldean magi types, they were in fact completely opposed. Hence why the demonization found in most universalist religions. >but in most Mysteries and other cults, lunar forces are not negative but complementary Most is the key word here. Would you say that most people in the world today know and understand the truth, especially pertaining to various mysteries? Lunar forces are not bad as long as they are dominated by solar forces >Valkyries When White men lose their solar character and adopt lunar philosophies, their women turn into civilization-destroying Valkyries, which is evident in most majority White countries today. Evola made some interesting points about ancient Greece though, such as that what's mostly praised by moderns as the peak of their civilization was actually a degenerate phase inspired by aboriginal, lunar beliefs instead of those held by Aryan colonists who settled there. Coincidentally, ancient Greece suffered the same fate as Persia, Egypt, Vedic India ...
(146.39 KB 998x319 kek.PNG)
>>12996 By the way, Sarama first offered the proto-kikes to return the cattle peacefully, before sons of Indra have mounted an attack on them. But seeing how they were practically holocausted (for real kek), this idea is likely much older than whatever has allegedly happened in the region of Levant. There is really so much about history that we have no clue about. >His logic is far from convincing when he claims that assuming a singular Source of all, then it would fundamentally make all things equal. At the root level they are. The source doesn't stop existing once manifested in a myriad of forms. According to Hermeticism, the Law is universal, the frame of existence shared, but there are many sources of causation. >It seems, according to ancient Egyptian principles, that the reincarnation was limited to a few, exceptional individuals This is true, but not in the sense that others don't reincarnate, they merely spawn as random manifestations without memory of past lives and there is no link between their incarnations. This is what separates those with Atman from those who are mere instances generated by Brahman. There is a reason why you won't find this idea in any religion, as it was usually reserved for the highest initiates of certain mystery schools. >the cultists of the God of Love Those who claim to love everything, love nothing. But the fact that certain nations had to be scared with eternal hellfire in order to behave tells you enough about them ... >I wouldn't pass judgement on the cult dedicated to the Asura (gods) because all of this might just have been a struggle related to power That's why I don't give much importance to the differences of Devas and Asuras, unfortunately it's not uncommon for Whites to fight over petty issues. My original point was that it was a political and ideological conflict rather than some battle between good and evil. But like most conflicts, it was likely further fueled by a third party. >if the Watchers who taught things to humans were good guys and Enoch was just like a mad man because them Watchers got da pussy Pic related. Jokes aside, Enoch was likely one of rare decent Jews. > or if the group that refused to share the sciences was actually merely conforming to a Klassenian mindset and represented supremacists whereas another bunch of boomers wanted to share the secrets with sort of non-Aryan people It more or less came to this, except that those who saw non-Aryans as equals were only being exploited by another, hostile nation in order to subvert White/Aryan nations and bring them to ruin. It was no different than today. >But then the use of black magic against enemies (we presume) is so similar to what a figure like Odin would do, who seemed to be living beyond Good and Evil as far as the acquisition of knowledge and the protection of his domain went Exactly. Aryans had a system of honor, which is not compatible with semitic slave morality. We are talking about entirely different conceptions of ethics. >a battle of morals and virtues Virtue signalling more likely. And we know how that ends ... >The rabbis Panis got their revenge and their priests become the figures of virtuous authority and scholarship This seems to be the most likely scenario, but I'd need to research more. The influence of various "magi" whenever Aryan empires shifted towards universalism should not be overlooked. Jews love to praise themselves as being the ones who brought monotheism to the world. >>13001 Phoenicians might have been very mixed, with royalty resembling Whites, who have settled there much earlier, sharing their knowledge and becoming the aristocracy. Jews were mostly the underclass, mercenaries and herders. One does not exclude another. A group of them might have been sent as mercenaries and hired laborers to India, or might have been there to trade.
>>13034 >Jews love to praise themselves as being the ones who brought monotheism to the world. Even this is of course, a lie. The Jew never invents.
>>13001 From the article: >They could be related to Panis who were an important tribe of present Pakistan-Afghanistan region lasting to the time of Sikandar Lodi. Sounds like they might have been not-Muslim-yet sandniggers who, as usual, prove most excellent in thievery. However, these people are not overall very clever. I don't see them building walled cities and efficient cruise boats for sailing around the world. This is above their observed current level of competence. >The Vani / Vanika link goes to a page on Vaishyas, the merchant farmer class. Even if they were Punic however, I am not sure I would be convinced that this would make them proto-kikes, because Phoenician settlements had coins and statues that made them appear very White Yes, there was a long held "tradition" of representing Phoenicians as oily merchants but these days, it seems it might have been at worse a fraction of the population in its latest eras, although when you look at the influence of Phoenicia on Etruscan art (there's a period), some of the faces are more Asiatic looking, with slanted eyes. And I'm not even delving into the tales of Phoenicians settling in Basque territory or even Ireland! Yet I feel that we will have to solve the Phoenician riddle conclusively one day or another. There might have been mischlings at some point. I think any people without a clear racial and antisemitic sense of preservation ends like that, being a host eaten from the inside for the kikes to spread further. Now, I don't think there's much to be found following the Vani trail, the claim seems fairly theoretical. However, the fact that the Panis were pushed south into the Western Deccan, it might be of use to look into the Chettiar title. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chettiar >Chettiar (also spelt as Chetti & Chetty) is a title used by many traders, weaving, agricultural and land owning castes in South India, especially in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Telangana. >The title word Chettiar/Shetty is used by many merchant and trading groups who were classified as high-ranking Shudras Oh, shudras. >and sometimes they claim Vaishyas status in the south-indian states. Self pimping maybe? Like Rothschild buying his pretentious baron title. Maybe there's a link between chettiar and some Jewish family names? It might not be so easy. However, if some proto-(((tribe))) went through this area, it might have left some cultural imprint. From the Chettiar page there is this other one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagarathar >The Nagarathar (also known as Nattukottai Chettiar) is a Tamil caste found native in Tamil Nadu, India. They are a mercantile community who are traditionally involved in commerce, banking and money lending. Admittedly this doesn't take us any further. The Cochin Jewish groups are way too recent to be of use, even if it were shown that they would have resettled in an area where some type of Jews might have once lived more than 2000-1500 years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochin_Jews >Cochin Jews (also known as Malabar Jews or Kochinim, from Hebrew: יהודי קוצ'ין‎ Yehudey Kochin) are the oldest group of Jews in India, with roots that are claimed to date back to the time of King Solomon. The Cochin Jews settled in the Kingdom of Cochin in South India, now part of the state of Kerala. As early as the 12th century, mention is made of the Jews in southern India. The Jewish traveler Benjamin of Tudela, speaking of Kollam (Quilon) on the Malabar Coast, writes in his Itinerary: >> "...throughout the island, including all the towns thereof, live several thousand Israelites. The inhabitants are all black, and the Jews also. The latter are good and benevolent. They know the law of Moses and the prophets, and to a small extent the Talmud and Halacha." This is only useful in the sense that it's a spot that's very attractive to merchants and it's surprising that Jews wouldn't have attempted to settle earlier.
>>13040 >>13001 Continuing this, here are other results of some quick searches. https://www.booksfact.com/religions/pre-jewish-canaanite-religion-vedic-gods-names.html >Jewish Canaanite Religion has Vedic Gods & Names >Child sacrifices were done by Canaanites in those era, and the goddess’s picture above looks similar to a vedic god carrying weapons in four hands and suppressing a head under her feet. >In tantric tradition, Goddess Kaali is shown with four hands carring weapons, wearing garland of skulls around her neck and suppressing a male head below her feet. >An under-world diety, worshipped by the Phoenicians and Canaanites, and had associations with a particular kind of propitiatory child sacrifice by parents. Child sacrifice. Keeping this in the back of my mind. Looking into a tie to Moloch might prove useful too after all, without going too much into A. Jonesy tier false claims. There are several cases to look at but this one is perhaps more revealing: >Canaanite Goddess of Fertility – Lachama has name similar to Goddess Lakshmi (लक्ष्मी), the goddess of wealth and prosperity in vedic tradition. >Near Zion (Jerusalem), Canaanites build a temple for Lachama thousands of years before hebrews arrived there. >The town of Beit Lachama (house of Lachama), became Bethlehem. >Lakshmi is referred to as Lachmi or Lachamma in local Indian languages of south. >Canaan is referred to in Amarna Letters as ‘Kinahhu‘, while other sources of the Egyptian New Kingdom mention numerous military campaigns conducted in a place called ‘Ka-na-na‘. All these ancient names are cognates to the name ‘Kanha’ (कान्हा), which is other name of Lord Krishna. >Jewish Encyclopedia, referring to the writing of Clearchus of Soli, who was the disciple of Aristotle and wrote extensively around 320 BCE on eastern cultures, states that Aristotle was of the view that the Hebrews were descendants of the Indian philosophers. It keeps going in so many directions and although I appreciate any form of mutual or one way influence being highlighted between India and Mesopotamia, and that the Canaanite religion might have shared elements with late Vedic and post Vedic myths, this is taking more on the form of a satisfaction of my personal curiosity than really unearthing any of considerable importance, since Hebrew/Habiru/pre-Jew or not, the Aryans were already living alongside indigenous people probably racially closer to either Dravidians or even people from the 'stan countries. Their hegemony was not meant to last. There is of course much more to this, including stories related to Aristotle and Josephus and other later Jewish writers making perhaps some of the wildest yet expected claims ever.
>>13026 >Journal Of The Bihar And Orissa Research Society 1940 Vol Xxvi. Thank you. >Jews jewing old texts As always. These bastards know that the Oral law is the best by far. As long as the priests are not hunted down. At some point we will have to ponder the fact that all cults of somehow Aryan origin practiced in territories where Hebrews/Jews finally settled are gone. The only enduring one is, barring a constant evolution, the Torah-line and the forced Christianity. It is becoming too obvious. I'm not even counting the kingdoms and empires, Aryan or not but certainly rich and powerful at a point in their existence, have vanished without a trace. >Meaning that the region was very likely settled by some kind of Jew, who always followed the commercial routes. Indeed there is suck a high probability. I suppose that they were more of the Turko-Semitic type. >Naturally, this made them a prime target for any subversive forces. Perhaps but the book doesn't dedicate even a whole long paragraph but instead dumps a rather lapidary mention of the wrongdoing of the Agirasas against Aryans and non-Aryans, then quickly goes back to the main topic. It's disturbing. If there is no error there, then unfortunately a lack of details by the author needs to be compensated for by further reading of this part of the Vedic texts he was referencing in the footnotes. Perhaps at some point there might have been a subversion that brought the Angirasas, or some of them, to adopt a shady CIA style type of activity, or simply acting like the rogue knights of Europe, but I find it surprising. Nevertheless, Angiras promptly decided to put an end to the Panis' activities. The fact that blatant stealing is mentioned makes me thing the Panis were not necessarily homogeneous, and that the city Panis were not the same as the plain ones whole stole oxen. >You can have your natural aristocracy ... or ... have some Jew There's perhaps something like that, people who having reached such a level of authority, simply abused it in the name of the organization they supposedly worked for. >The same happened with the ancient Egyptian religion. Yes and on this Evola also had something to say about the cult of Isis. >Would you say that most people in the world today know and understand the truth, especially pertaining to various mysteries? I wouldn't say they do it less than before. Mysteries were some elitist thing after all. >Lunar forces are not bad as long as they are dominated by solar forces When the solar element remains the prime, the first importer of life and knowledge, then the lunar acts as a guardian when the solar is absent. I can see from this point of view how an isolated lunar order could assert being the protectors and watchers of the solar light, as the moon reflects at time the sun's light, as a candle maintains light in darkness. The corruption would happen if the lunar element started pretending being the true source, as when Yahweh does. Or as in Islam where an abundance of violence seems to be there to mask the fact that it's essentially a sand dune cult tied to obvious lunar undertones and yet spectacularly devoid of blatant "solarism". >When White men lose their solar character and adopt lunar philosophies, their women turn into civilization-destroying Valkyries, which is evident in most majority White countries today. Actually this is something we would have to disagree on because Valkyries are not destroyers of civilization in any sense of the word. In reality they are related to slain warriors but are not always directly associated to combat themselves and merely act as feminine psychopomps, taking a portion of the culling. >Evola on Greeks William Pierce hammered this rather bluntly, lamenting on the fact that the North-Eastern (solar) invaders had not taken harsher measures to remove more of the local inhabitants. Nietzsche would have agreed too I suppose. >same fate If any religion needs to be created (why say if, it has to be created), there are so many failsaves that absolutely need to be integrated, coded, hidden or blatant, and repeated twice or thrice, or even more.
>>13034 >pic "Maybe you should tone done the semen retention thing for a year or two, waddayathink?" >At the root level they are. Yes but only at that level, because it's the Source. Beyond there, variety, diversity and meddling by varying agents establish countless hierarchies. His logic amounts of sperging about equality of all races and individuals because we're all made of cells after all. I wish he had been more open to variants of Deism for example. >This is true, but not in the sense that others don't reincarnate, they merely spawn as random manifestations without memory of past lives and there is no link between their incarnations. No karma, no causation. If there is no link at all, they're complete reboots in a sense, so there is no "former lives" because they're complete new. >This is what separates those with Atman from those who are mere instances generated by Brahman. There is a reason why you won't find this idea in any religion, as it was usually reserved for the highest initiates of certain mystery schools. I suppose we should specify what reincarnation is really and how it affects people. There are usually two forms, one strangely enough more popular and a bit childish in the way it's generally approached, in that a person will literally rebirth almost as he or she were, but some time later. Cue the numerous articles on internet of lookalikes, time travelers, etc. But the truth would be that such an ability to retain so much of oneself should actually be eschewed upon exceptional individuals, true masters of their arts. And that they could chose to be totally different too if they wanted. I suspect that the wish to be ignorant of the origin is also an option at that level of the hierarchy. Then the other reincarnation type, more literal, is just a return of a changed soul (that still retains something from before) into a body of flesh where the person has no memories of past lives, although the knowledge exists, and is somehow stored, might be explored under proper guidance, and previous lives do have an influence on the premises that defined the current one. This imbues a very strong metaphysical sense of responsibility and opens one's mind to a grander scale of time, towards eternity although not reaching it. And so the real meat and potato of all this is to become a master of the "Self" to control all of this and truly have fun beyond measure, and therefore have access to even greater godlike opportunities. >The influence of various "magi" whenever Aryan empires shifted towards universalism should not be overlooked. Not all of them would be bad. What specific attributes and actions are you looking for?
>>13045 Right folks, who invited the bot?
>>13054 Don’t give bots (you)s, it gives them a signal to post more. Report on site
>>13054 For once I'd wanna know what the bot said.
>>13039 Another possible scenario being that it was a group of Whites who came up with something stupid and self-destructive like Atonism so Jews have just used their network of agents to promote it while attacking and demonizing any conflicting ideas and individuals that might prove troublesome for their plans. If we take into the account that people thousands of years ago were not any dumber than the people of today (they might as well have been smarter), we can safely assume that the same events which have transpired in recent history have transpired back then as well. >>13040 >Like Rothschild buying his pretentious baron title. No money in the world can elevate them from their shudra/candala status. Even if we disregard the lack of regal element, their behavior is gypsy tier, a very antithesis of the aristocrats of the soul. Speaking of gypsies (Roma), they might be another key element in identifying Jews in ancient India. According to some accounts, gypsies got exiled from India by some Indian king because they kept behaving like kikes no matter how much the king tried to integrate them. They have been roaming various areas and Europe ever since, along with the Jews, with whom they share a lot of characteristics and beliefs. While they did spend a lot of time together in various ghettos, their connection might be much older than that. I'm inclined to believe that the whole story of Judea is just a red herring or a relatively recent development and that the eternal Jew is much older than that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romani_society_and_culture (Wikipedia is actually a bad source for obvious reasons, anons should only use it as a starting point)
>>13059 It’s the same over-the-top Jewish stereotype ‘Hollywood Nazi’ bullshit that a mysterious Tor poster spews in several threads a day
(383.06 KB 1011x690 Proto-Templars.PNG)
(345.75 KB 808x1126 Reds.PNG)
(421.98 KB 1024x1240 Reds 2.PNG)
>>13050 >These bastards know that the Oral law is the best by far Written accounts are good as long as they can be preserved in their original form. Tibetan Bonpos had a system of preserving their texts in inaccessible locations until they reincarnate with a precognition of their location and recover them. As for Oral traditions, there is a reason why (((ISIS))) was targeting Yezidis so much. >At some point we will have to ponder the fact that all cults of somehow Aryan origin practiced in territories where Hebrews/Jews finally settled are gone Not only cults, they have been gradually pozzing all religions, philosophies and sciences until they became reflective of their agenda, while destroying the evidence of, twisting/corrupting or demonizing anything that proved anything contrary to it. That's how they maintain an illusion of their "truth" being the ultimate/universal one. >or simply acting like the rogue knights of Europe It goes deeper than that (pic related). >Nevertheless, Angiras promptly decided to put an end to the Panis' activities Guess what, Hitler did the same. Voila, he is now a modern equivalent of Satan. Any bad rep that Angirasas got was no different from kikes inciting the unwashed masses against their aristocracies throughout most of the history. >Mysteries were some elitist thing after all. Of course, my point was that what the majority is doing should never be taken as a good reference. >then the lunar acts as a guardian when the solar is absent It degenerates as soon as the source of light, that's giving it form and essence, is removed. >as the moon reflects at time the sun's light You can't compare moonlight to sunlight though. Although Evola meant lunar more as in cthonic, formless, feminine, not a literal moon. Islam is a very lunar religion, despite it's warlike aspects. Although Iranians have preserved some Aryan aspects in the form of Madhi and some other Shia doctrines, but that's still a very long way from the original. >The corruption would happen if the lunar element started pretending being the true source, as when Yahweh does You might be onto something here. >and merely act as feminine psychopomps, taking a portion of the culling Turning against their men when they don't get what they want >lamenting on the fact that the North-Eastern (solar) invaders had not taken harsher measures to remove more of the local inhabitants. A lesson to be learned for another cycle >there are so many failsaves that absolutely need to be integrated, coded, hidden or blatant, and repeated twice or thrice, or even more Exactly
(1.07 MB 1125x622 Sarama.PNG)
So, I began looking further into the ancient Aryan-Punic war, and found a short essay written by some Bengali. While he raises a few interesting points, his work seems a bit contradictory and quite biased in favor of the Phoenicians. What really caught my attention was the following passage, where a certain Professor Kuhan is mentioned, which turns out to be a German Indologist Ernst Wilhelm Adalbert Kuhn. His works seem to be mostly memoryholed and hard to find in English, so I'd appreciate it if the German anon can find the referenced part, where he equates Sarama with Greek herme (Hermes). Seeing how the Angirasas were magicians, I wouldn't be surprised if they were the ones who carried the Hermetic tradition.
>>13053 >Yes but only at that level, because it's the Source Does the source disappear when it gets manifested? >I wish he had been more open to variants of Deism for example Then he could be a Freemason, no? The central tenet of Freemasonry is the root of all corruption. >they're complete reboots in a sense, so there is no "former lives" because they're complete new Yes. The force which generates and animates them doesn't die, but they do, for all intents and purposes. >in that a person will literally rebirth almost as he or she were, but some time later That's maybe popular among the new agey internet circles, but it's quite rare among the historically established beliefs. Usually it comes down to people becoming alive and experiencing things again, but with no connection to their previous lives whatsoever and with no specific order (they could incarnate as pretty much anything living, anywhere), and to a theory that one's actions and knowledge in one life affect their future incarnations (which then branches into several different theories). Theory of reincarnation, and that of eternal return are based on different logical and metaphysical concepts however, despite a lot of overlapping. >Cue the numerous articles on internet of lookalikes It has more to do with specific generative "models" so to speak, not much different of having a limited number of NPC templates in a video game. You will keep seeing people with similar "type" of looks, similar behavior, characteristics etc. Although those don't need to match. >But the truth would be that such an ability to retain so much of oneself should actually be eschewed upon exceptional individuals, true masters of their arts And that their "human" manifestation may only be a small fraction of their true personality, due to limitations of this existence. >Not all of them would be bad. What specific attributes and actions are you looking for? Not all of course, but their egalitarian metaphysics, which more often than not turns into a zero-sum eat or be eaten game.
>>13204 Deism isn’t explicitly Masonic, but you’re right that there is a deal of overlap. Even today it is a requirement to believe in a generic ‘Supreme Being’ in order to be a Freemason. The idea itself stems mainly from 17th and 18th century rationalism and mechanistic science. They may say some interesting things about the Laws of Nature and stuff like Nature being the greatest revelation of God, but the real question is whether their ideas of a mechanistic universe and a Being who is only really knowable through rational faculties alone is really actually true. Even from a Vedic perspective, reason is seen only to work within the domain of intelligibles—inferences, mathematical reasoning, logic, etc, but it wouldn’t be near enough to really grasp the Source / God or whatever you want to name it. In many ways Deism is essentially the last stop before atheism.
>>13170 >Ernst Wilhelm Adalbert Kuhn Dang, I was looking about him something like three weeks ago because of his works that were indeed hard to find. The fact that he equated Sarama with Hermes compares positively with the divine nature attributed to him in the Journal quoted earlier on. The Ahnenerbe would have certainly found about it. It is a pity that many such German works were pushed into the shadows or simply never translated. Another example >>10820 >Sarama, storm, to go quickly, messenger, Hermes I must really bring under doubt the idea of Kuh(a)n's attributed meaning being incorrect.This will have to be verified in depth. I must also say that at this point, only bad faith would have one not see a strong echo of Wotan and his Wild Hunt. That Kuhn wrote on the Etruscans' language (right to left runes) and Iranian's lore, religions, language and culture is bridging all of this in rather enchanting ways, firstly because of the aforementioned Phoenician influence period, secondly because of the linguistic similarities with PIE words (ais, eis = god; aisar, eisar = gods) and also because, as a minor third point, the Romans took some of their most impressive technology from this people. If it diverges too much from this topic I'll put this into the other Aryan history thread.
>>12992 >Ok, what symbols and meanings does he represent according to you? Lucifer represents the morning star, a fainting light that fails to shine as brightly as any solar God and represents is considered evil to Abraham, while Lux Belenus' symbol is the Sun or rays of light, the horse and wheel. He's likely Apollo and represents everything he affilates with as well or at-least more similar to him. If You're going to say something /x/-tier at-least make sure it makes sense.
>>13129 what does the mahdi have to do with aryans? the imamate is like the levitical priesthood, and endtimes eschatology (as in things just end rather than being cyclical) is decidedly anti-dharmic
>>13063 I think the egyptian origin of jewry is plausible tbh. they probably got kicked out for disrespecting other people's gods a la manetho, settled in judea, and then wrote exodus to paint themselves as the real victims of the story. it would be weird for them to come all the way from india before causing trouble in the historical record but I mean it's plausible. they hyksos were supposedly semiticised aryans
>>13063 >Atonism What do they believe in?
>>13228 Why would they then go out of their way to trace their origins back to Mesopotamia in their holy book?
>>13230 It was the religion of the pharaoh Akhenaten which worshipped one God represented by the disc of the sun. I think he eventually tried to shut down a lot of the other temples and mess with the priesthood as well. They didn’t take too kindly towards that. There is a whole section on him in Savitri Devi’s The Lightning and the Sun.
(10.36 MB Angiras.pdf)
>>13208 >Even today it is a requirement to believe in a generic ‘Supreme Being’ in order to be a Freemason. This erroneous assumption of totality and everything within it being a cog of a singular, external overmind is one of the roots of philosophical and metaphysical subversion. It's practically Advaita Vedanta or Atonism. It also preaches the ideas like brotherhood of man (races), and you have to favor a tranny nog over your own brother as long as the former is a Freemason and the latter is not. Not to mention it's focus on the lowest common denominator. It has many valuable (basic) lessons as long as you disregard the philosemitism however. >Being who is only really knowable through rational faculties I see no problem with this, but rather with their dogmatic rejection of higher reason. I don't see why any sort of deity or higher reality couldn't be knowable through rational faculties, at least as far as it's objectively possible to do so. To think that "God" is something ultimately unknowable, is to completely separate yourself from it and it's qualities. This is a mistake that religiously minded people often make. >>13224 I found some of his works on archive.org, but most were in German, you may try looking there. >The Ahnenerbe would have certainly found about it Indeed. Germans have discovered something that was supposed to remain buried deep in the mists of ancient history. I'll keep searching for clues. >I must really bring under doubt the idea of Kuh(a)n's attributed meaning being incorrect. >I must also say that at this point, only bad faith would have one not see a strong echo of Wotan and his Wild Hunt The author has some Anne Frank tier theory how Sarama was kidnapped by le evil Aryans to do their bidding, while praising Phoenicians as civilization bringers, despite agreeing with their description of being the typical kikes. Very contradictory. I've attached a copy for the reference. He even gets criticized by other Pajeets how a lot of his claims are unfounded. This publication is only worthy in terms of potential hints what to look for since we will hardly find any references in newer publications.
>>13238 Akhenaten attempted to establish a non-Abrahamic monotheistic faith, which was a direct challenge to the power of the priesthood. the priests won, and they tried to erase him from history.
>>13248 >It also preaches the ideas like brotherhood of man (races), and you have to favor a tranny nog over your own brother as long as the former is a Freemason and the latter is not This sort of idea wouldn't necessarily fall into such a trap. Not to say that it doesn't more often than not. Just think of Pierce's idea of Cosmotheism, which is a form of holistic pantheism driven by an urge for self-realization (which reads like some sort of mind to me, at least), and yet we have no such thing as this sort of subversion within the philosophy. >don't see why any sort of deity or higher reality couldn't be knowable through rational faculties, at least as far as it's objectively possible to do so It depends what you mean by 'know', ultimately. There are many arguments out there that purport to prove that God exists - cosmological arguments, ontological arguments, etc. The most these rational arguments can do is to bring us to the idea of a sort of extremely vague 'Creator'. But do these really inspire any sort of spiritual or religious devotion or wisdom? Not really. It can be a decent auxiliary argument though, but ultimately reason is limited within its bounds - i.e. in the domain of intelligible. In the same way our five senses are limited to gaining knowledge of physical things (and, even so, imperfectly). We can't reason our way to the smell of a particular flower, just in the same way we can't use our five senses to solve a math problem. The question is whether any finite instrument is capable of grasping what is by definition infinite. The intellect is extremely powerful in its domain, but when it comes to something like God, I think that our reason will ultimately fail us. There is also the other problem, in that God is in many traditions quite often seen as a sort of disembodied infinite mind. The contents and nature of a mind are another thing inscrutable to reason. For these reasons and more I think that a solely rational approaches to these matters is always going to fail, because the object that is sought is something necessarily transrational / suprarational in character. This is essentially why many forms of Vedic philosophy recognized a third epistemological mechanism alongside empiricism and intellect, i.e. unmediated experience of the divine via consciousness (basically mystical experiences). Even trying to imagine things like the size of universe or what is outside of the universe (if such a thing is intelligible), or what the universe is expanding into (assuming this for sake of point) are completely mindfucks, especially even more fundamental questions like 'why does anything exist at all?' That is the ultimate ineffable question, and this is why I think that even if one can gain enlightenment or whatever or great knowledge of the divine, that ultimately there is a deep level of mystery and incomprehensibility. Not that there is nothing to be known though, or that it is a waste trying. I think stuff like the latter question even stand even if we don't view any sort of massive separation like you talked about. I am sure that anyone with an IQ above room temperature has stopped at points and has just become baffled about what the fuck is going on, or how strange things really are. I can't even imagine the root of it all.
>>13251 >I can't even imagine the root of it all. The only thing that makes sense to me is that the root of each timeline or history or age is what happened when the last one ended. It doesn’t really make sense for there to be a beginning because there would be no cause for everything to start existing, because you can’t create something from nothing.
(1020.72 KB 1027x1154 Angiras 5.PNG)
(1014.60 KB 1160x1244 Brhaspati.PNG)
>>13238 >>13249 He decided to worship the generative vital force instead of it's manifestations, appreciating all life for what it is, which of course, led his empire to ruin and his people to death at the hands of invaders. He betrayed his gods and his people, abandoning his kingly duties in favor of the false sun of egalitarianism. Sounds familiar? The sun which he worshiped did not have any heroic, mythical, masculine connotations typical for the Aryans and higher peoples, but was merely something which generates and sustains life. A superficial, demetrian outlook common to all other races throughout the world. >>13251 Cosmotheism has strong (advanced) Masonic influences but it seems acceptable at the first glance. I didn't analyze it to a greater degree so that I could detect more subtle signs of subversion however. >This is essentially why many forms of Vedic philosophy recognized a third epistemological mechanism alongside empiricism and intellect, i.e. unmediated experience of the divine via consciousness (basically mystical experiences) You figured it out yourself. All three are necessary and compliment each other. Reason is something like a bridge between the physical and the metaphysical. Pure mathematics can explain a lot. >especially even more fundamental questions like 'why does anything exist at all? Well, you can simply say "God lmao" and go on without further thinking, or, you can try to find the answers, as difficult as they may be. And yes, some literal geniuses went insane when encountering certain advanced problems, but it won't stop me from trying, for that is my Dharma. Posting some other interesting finds btw.
(91.41 KB 407x550 azathoth.jpeg)
>>12381 Serrano states Yahweh and Yaldabaoth are two different entities, regardless the Demiurge made a shitty knock-off replica, inferior reflection of the actual and real immaterial reality, everything you see good in nature is already perfected in the immaterial world in fact. That's not to say he's malicious through, he's simply arrogrant and ignorant. He is the blind retard god after all and he was born due to a fuck-up. Needless to say Serrano was influenced by an earlier argentinan man named Nimrod de Rosario, an article was done if you want to learn more about Rosario. https://archive.vn/SKRJE
>>13258 The solution - worship Alpha Gods who reigned supreme of the whole universe and not stupid objects like the sun that's too common for lowlife scum. Can you picture a White man worshipping an entity who is also worshipped by a stinking lowlife in Africa or India? There must be no chance of equalization of the White man to some swarthy mold. Ever. Every angle must observed. You did a good job on this.
>>13170 >so I'd appreciate it if the German anon can find the referenced part... Does the Bengali guy reference in which book Prof. Kuhn wrote that? I found almost all of his works in German on the internet, but he wrote a shittone of books and I don't have the time to go through all of that.
How do I choose between Buddhism or Hinduism? Which path/denomination can be pursued as a solitary practitioner?
>>13312 I think that Vaishnava traditions of Hinduism end up being a lot more comprehensive and all-encompassing than Buddhist things. I cannot think of any super satisfying way to answer you except to say that at a beginning stage you should think of whether you believe you have a 'self' or not. Buddhism just denies this, and has texts where they make an analogy between a chariot and a person, saying that there is no essence of 'chariot' and it is just a useful name for an assemblage of parts called a 'chariot'. They say it's the exact same for a human being. There's no essence of the individual that is the self - at least in any mainstream interpretation. That raises a lot of questions in itself, of course, and there just being a self is the simpler and more intuitive hypothesis. I would probably just dabble in both, read texts from both, and see which one you think makes more sense and is more in line with the truth. I think that either one could be practiced more or less solitary, especially when we're talking about stuff like meditations.
>>13312 >what best between >life denial philosofeel >and >pajeet multiculti gods? None. Go for WOTANISM. It's pro White, it goes back to the roots, it's fit for our current times and it's growing.
>>13334 >duude follow some shit made up thirty years ago in America, ignore millennia of philosophy and wisdom
>>13264 >Serrano states Yahweh and Yaldabaoth are two different entities, regardless the Demiurge made a shitty knock-off replica, inferior reflection of the actual and real immaterial reality, everything you see good in nature is already perfected in the immaterial world in fact. No wonder why this refreshed blackpilling gnosticism does not take off. Not only an immaterial reality is almost a contradiction in terms, but it certainly prevents any meaningful comparison. Claiming the world as is to be defective and inferior to a greater manifestation, that also reeks off of Tikkun Olam. His master was also into Sufism, a sort of elitist Islam that still rejects the world. As for the archive, it's on the same level all with literal interpretation about the existence of mythological figures and even glaring mistakes, such as for example thinking the Kronos to be that of time. It also way off the mark in its examples of tellurocratic unions. It also sells us the Eurasianism as the way of the future. >>3362
>>13335 >>duude follow some shit made up thirty years ago in America, ignore millennia of philosophy and wisdom <pointless dross: the post
>>13264 Nice article, are there some works of Nimrod de Rosario in English? I just dislike how they put a Duginist spin on it, like Russia is not ruled by the Jewish mafia as well. >>13297 He didn't seem to quote many sources, try searching for certain terms if they are digital books. You can also look manually based on the table of contents. >>13337 >reeks off of Tikkun Olam It's quite the opposite actually.
>>13338 You can't even rebut the point. What reason do we have for believing in Wotanism over millennia of traditions?
(656.42 KB 986x441 Kuhn.PNG)
So far I found Sarama being interpreted as the hound of the Gods, personification of the Dawn or even equated with the Helen of Troy, but not much luck regarding Hermes, other than some authors pointing out similarities. I did find the source for prof. Kuhn though (pic related), screenshot is from Max Muller's book. It's interesting how Angirasas are described as singers, could they be the precursors of the Minnesanger, or descendants of those mythical megalith builders, for whom some hypothesize to have been using the magical power of the sound/vibration for various purposes ...
>>13345 > I did find the source for prof. Kuhn though (pic related), screenshot is from Max Muller's book. Things are getting strange. Ernst Wilhelm Adalbert Kuhn was born 1946. Volume 6 of Zeitschrift für Deutsches Altertum was released in 1848, at least the first run of the magazine. There is a second run for the magazine with a volume 6 from 1975, but I can't find it there either. I found another source in a book called "Geschichte der Sanskrit-Philologie und Indischen Altertumskunde" that also says Kuhn made the comparison in volume 6, but on site 117. The title of his work should be "Särameyas and Hermeias". Here are all the Volumes of Zeitschrift für Deutsches Altertum for somebody who wants to search for it: https://www.digizeitschriften.de/dms/toc/?PID=PPN345204107_0012
>>13353 Wiki article says that he was born in 1846, but his father was also named Adalbert Kuhn (Franz Felix), it could be the father that was referenced. >But it is on Kuhn's researches into the language and history of the Indo-Germanic peoples as a whole that his reputation is founded. His chief works in this connection are Zur ältesten Geschichte der Indogermanischen Völker (1845), in which he endeavoured to give an account of the earliest civilization of the Indo-Germanic peoples before their separation into different families, by comparing and analysing the original meaning of the words and stems common to the different languages;
Does Dharma hold any beliefs that being strong and well-bred is a virtue, while being weak and ugly is a adharmic?
>>13355 Bhagavata Purana 11.17 (don’t know exact verses here)— >“The natural attributes of brahmanas are control over the mind, control over the senses, austerities, purity, contentment, fortitude, uprightness, devotion towards me, compassion and truthfulness. >The natural attributes of kshatriyas are energy, strength, perseverance, valour, tolerance, generosity, enterprise, steadiness, prosperity and devotion towards brahmanas. >The natural attributes of vaishyas are faith, devotion to donating, lack of hypocrisy, dissatisfaction towards wealth and service towards brahmanas. >The natural attributes of shudras are lack of duplicity in serving brahmanas, cattle and gods and satisfaction with whatever has been obtained. >“The natural attributes of those who are outside the varna system are lack of cleanliness, dishonesty, theft, hereticism, pointless quarrelling, lust, anger and avarice. For all the varnas, dharma consists of non-violence, truth, honesty, lack of desire, anger and greed and a desire to ensure the pleasure and welfare of all beings.” Might give you a decent idea of some virtuous behaviors. I’ve never seen weakness praised outright as good or virtuous. Krishna even chides Arjuna for being weak when he doesn’t fight in the battle at first. Not sure about being ugly though. Never heard anything about that.
>>13354 Found it. His text starts at page 117 "Zur Mythology" in which he talks about Wodan and how he is always accompanied by dogs and then he starts talking on page 119 about Sarama. After much explanation, he comes to Hermes on page 128. http://www.digizeitschriften.de/dms/img/?PID=GDZPPN001668102&physid=phys130#navi
>>13334 You claim it's life denial because your life is a whirlwind of chaotic emotions that ride you like a horse. To understand and control these emotions is the beginning of enlightenment.
>>13360 I have trouble opening it, can you post screencaps? It would be nice if you could translate the relevant portions since I'm assuming it's in German. Or at least copy the text so that I can try machine translation. Danke.
>>13373 I’m beginning to wonder whether the term life-denial is even meaningful in 99% of the cases that it is used.
>>13382 In the case of Buddhism it is true, it's monks like Christian monk sequester away from the world to reach enlightenment and break free of the cycle, and thus the world, and suffering, which is not possible. Read Devi, she goes over it pretty well but sparsely in Lightning and the Sun.
>>13338 If you think following Ođinn and our gods, was created in America, you are a truly ignirant moron, get off this board right now
>>13264 He also calls the Demiurge Jehovah, one of several names for the jewish "God".
>>13258 Nigger go reread your Devi, Ahkenaten, was not an egalitarian, he was dedicated to principles above Time, out of this world. Such things and beliefs always have an element of Harmony between all living things but if they are in accordance with the Truth, they account for a heirarchy of the Races and his did.
>>13385 I think the claim was more than Wotanism *as formulated by David Lane* was invented in America in recent decades rather than Odin himself and other gods. That makes more sense than your interpretation. >>13384 This can be found really in any religion and any culture at some point or another, really. Outside of some sort of Nietzschean framework the term doesn’t really say anything of value. Because we can ask the question ‘Well what is life, really?’ or ‘is there an inherent purpose to life?’ or ‘Is there a realm beyond our realm?’ A lot of these, if answered affirmatively (and I think there are grounds for doing so), have so-called ‘life-denying’ conclusions. >and break free of the cycle, and thus the world, and suffering, which is not possible But how did you gain knowledge that this is *not* possible? It seems like almost every sage of history has said that there is a way ‘out’—or perhaps to word this differently, a way to transcend the limitations of this current world to one that is somehow ‘higher’ or more ‘perfect’. This doesn’t mean, of course, that Earth is horrible, everything is shit, endless suffering, etc— that’s just hyperbole and oversensitivity. There are hellish realms as well and they are far, far worse than Earth. Nightmare levels
>>13382 Self-denial would be a more accurate term. Buddhism (with some exceptions) is even more disintegrating than Christianity, at least Christians and other Abrahamists might eventually realize that they were being jewed and start looking for answers, with Buddhism it's all about self-annihilation. Which is the very opposite from attaining liberation. And no, it was not the original teaching of Buddha. As for a religion being life-denying, it depends on the context. Even if you understand the nature of this world, you already got born in it, so might as well do something about it, as long as you don't get lost. >>13387 I did read that book, and I kept thinking how she found a wrong example. There was nothing out-worldly about the religion of the sun disc. It was a more earthly form of vitalism.
>>13412 >Self-denial would be a more accurate term Yeah I agree - though at that point I think the lovers of the term 'life-denying' might falter a bit, because it doesn't sound like as hard-hitting of a criticism when one accuses a tradition of a degree of self-denial kek. >I did read that book, and I kept thinking how she found a wrong example. There was nothing out-worldly about the religion of the sun disc. It was a more earthly form of vitalism. It would have been interesting for her to write a whole section on someone more undoubtedly otherworldly, such as the Buddha or Jesus or anyone along those lines. I do think you have a point when you say it often seemed like Akhenaten wasn't the best otherworldly example. One cannot really be otherworldly when they are charged with leading a kingdom, for one. The hymn itself is filled with praise for how Aten provides and creates. It is very 'life-affirmative', really. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Great_Hymn_to_Aten
>>13389 David Lane wasn't all that bad, but yes he made many mistakes, Serrano is the one most of them talk of now. Aside form the 88 precepts, Lane's work is of varying quailty, and most of his works after prison are more like boomer tier conspiracy shit moxed with Kabbalh concepts and bible quotes and numerology. Most honestly don't really seem to read or understand anything from the old being either unwilling or unable to see the truth of what is there. Having heavenly realms be a component of all religions does not imply or mean life denying inherently. Valhalla for instance, did not cause any man to deny this world to seek haven in it, it's very existence forced men to act in the world for their own people, for their betterment and power, by going to war, so there we have an example of a "heaven" causing one to live a full life, a complete life. It is all in how one looks at the world truly and Nietzsche is a prophet of how our ancestors looked at the world, and while he liked buddhism more than Christianity he put buddhism in the same camp. Hel as a realm isn't punishing nor does its goddess appreciate being associated with endless torture, despite that those cursed by the gods do end up there in parts designed for that even they eventually return to the cycle. I gained this knowledge through Gnosis, it has never been possible to "escape" our world or the cycle of souls flowing in and out at all times, yes you can reach and stay in a heavenly realm for a very long time as measured by us in the living realms, but always your soul will return, one day, and yes you can end up in places far from heavenly, but that is mostly self inflicted, and rare outside of being cursed. The point of being against philosophies that say there is an escape from this is that they all, almost invariably, fail to account for race, fail to uphold the virtues that are struggle, and war, they fail to push people to live in this world dedicated to the Truth. Yes, many followers of Christianity and Buddhism alike live perfectly normal lives but both priesthoods take the best of the best and sequester them away from life, procreation, and the world, to seek enlightenent and penance, respectively. The two differ greatly in many ways, Buddhism is largely harmless outside of the monastuc practices, whereas Christianity is not, but both deny the primacy of this world for another and thus are life-denying.
>>13412 I don't think it was a wrong example insofar as your example, that is him acknowledging the truth of the beauty of this world how he comes into being Above Time is in his actions dedicated to principles out of this world but not being willing or capable of taking the kind, or level, of action to make what he believed shine through into this world, though he did not neglect this world entirely. Had he been more of a warrior the world would probably still be under the sway of his religion.
(11.07 MB 6388x3320 Zur Mythology.png)
>>13378 Sadly I have no time for translation. Here is the whole text. Yes it's in German and not in a clean present day High German.
>>13419 >and Nietzsche is a prophet of how our ancestors looked at the world Top kek. Nietzsche is an extremely modern figure. People who acted him like only appear as stock characters to refute in Socratic dialogues like Gorgias or The Republic, or as a demonstration of how power-hungry an empire has gotten in the case of the Melian Dialogue in Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War. Ancient Aryans believed in a divine cosmic moral order (note that this is quite different from the idea of 'laws of nature) and saw the world as being quite meaningful and purposeful in design. There is ample evidence for this. Nietzsche, for better or for worse, probably would have been an outcast in ancient Aryan societies, if not sentenced to death for asebeia (impeity). The amount of venom that Nietzsche spits at people like Plato and Socrates, who are in many respects the progenitors of higher European philosophy with its focus on reason, objectivity, logic and truth. Nietzsche is a very modern figure. >The point of being against philosophies that say there is an escape from this is that they all, almost invariably, fail to account for race, fail to uphold the virtues that are struggle, and war, they fail to push people to live in this world dedicated to the Truth. I don't see this as a good reason to reject certain philosophies. The key point here is whether the philosophy is true, not whether we like what it claims or not due to certain implications it may or may not have. I question whether 'struggle' and 'war' are virtues in themselves though. >but both priesthoods take the best of the best and sequester them away from life, procreation, and the world, to seek enlightenent and penance, respectively Let's be real - the numbers of people doing this are miniscule. Probably less than 1% of the followers. A 2017 press release from the Catholic Church said that worldwide the Church had 466,215 clerics. In all there are roughly some 1.345 billion Catholics. So viewing these numbers alone for a moment, 0.03% of Catholics would be celibate. This isn't counting monks, but most monks today are priests as well and not laymen, so I doubt that would get us past 0.04 or 0.05 if we are being generous. https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2017/04/06/170406e.html For Jains, I believe (can't remember the source) there are something like 1500 to 2000 full-fledged Jain monks in the entire religion who wander around with no possessions, some of them naked, begging for food, etc. Jainism has roughly 3.9 million followers. This would mean that 0.05% of Jains do this. I even wonder whether it is a coincidence that that the number is so close to the Catholic one. It may only be that in religions with some following that 0.03-0.05% of followers will become full-fledged ascetics. What this seems to show is that it's really not a problem.
>>13446 >Nietzsche spits at people like Plato and Socrates, who are in many respects the progenitors of higher European philosophy with its focus on reason, objectivity, logic and truth. Nietzsche is a very modern figure. >Socrates >good Are you retarded?
>>13450 If you dislike Socrates you probably should also hate all of the figures mentioned in this thread.
>>13415 >of a degree of self-denial A near absolute degree in the best case though. It's a harder criticism from most perspectives except the materialistic one, where life would be an end into itself. >It would have been interesting for her to write a whole section on someone more undoubtedly otherworldly, such as the Buddha or Jesus or anyone along those lines Someone less popular and less worldly. Gautama never fully rejected material life, he simply saw it as illusory and sought balance. He was originally a warrior-prince. Neither did Jesus, since he obviously had a great deal of plans for this world. >It is very 'life-affirmative', really. His beliefs actually prevented him from waging war against the invaders. He worshiped the elan vital, or generative force, as a singular God in the same manner as Freemasons do. Only in a more profane sense since he focused on the literal sun as the object. Those beliefs are the essence of corruption of every Aryan religion, that have brought every Aryan empire to ruin, with no exceptions. >>13419 >and most of his works after prison are more like boomer tier conspiracy shit moxed with Kabbalh concepts and bible quotes and numerology Maybe he got blackmailed to discontinue his previous ideas. I mean, people were killed for much less throughout history. >The point of being against philosophies that say there is an escape from this is that they all, almost invariably, fail to account for race Unless race is a fundamental component for liberation. The less White you are, the lower your chances of attaining wisdom are. >>13421 He lacked any higher principles which he would seek to attain either in this world or the one "above". He literally worshiped the material world and it's animating forces, to the point that he refused to take any action which would impact it in any way. Atonism is 100% Demetrian, it's as in-time as it gets, only as a passive principle. Savitri Devi had some good ideas but unfortunately got overly influenced with Advaita garbage. >>13422 Thanks. >>13446 >Ancient Aryans believed in a divine cosmic moral order There were broadly two groups of Aryans that believed in different things, we have already established this. Someone in the future can quote various "Aryan" "thinkers" from various liberal universities of today and conclude that they believed in a divine cosmic moral order.
>>13456 >If you dislike Socrates you probably should also hate all of the figures mentioned in this thread. If you like Socrates you might as well start sticking rainbow dildos up your ass, because he was an anti-Greek faggot.
>>13457 >Gautama never fully rejected material life, He didn't reject material life at all, he was against material pleasures and distractions that prevented us from becoming all-knowing or enlightened. >Neither did Jesus, since he obviously had a great deal of plans for this world BS, because his entire theology was about doing good deeds to go to heaven and that should be the only primary goal within your life. We followed this guy for years and nothing has come good out of his religion for the White race. If you want to shill Jesus, do it on /pol/.
>>13458 >Because he was an anti-Greek faggot. I don't see how one could say this.
>>13464 Are you serious right now? Socrates was a subversive Phoenician who hated and was envious of Hellas. It is clearly shown when he constantly shat on everything the Greeks did and done, from culture to government. To further extrapolate that he was a fag, he tried to corrupt the Athenian youth and instead of teaching to act against democracy he had have them act against their parents and question their traditional ways. Because of this he is also a big influencer of the anarchists and neo-liberal types who want to do the same. Nietschze was an Aryan in mind, his lack of piety doesn't negate what he says, Hitler liked him for a reason. His philosophy is arugably worse than Nietschze's. Socrates was a nigger.
>>13446 See what you're doing here with Nietzsche is attacking the man and not the idea. Like people like you always do and always did and always shall do and blaming him for people misinterpreting his works when he quite clearly state he is not writing for your average man, but the type he hopes will come to power again and who after many generations would be greater still. Nietzsche believed in Natural Law which is Dharma/Physis/National Socialism, Etc. Etc., this is absolutely clear, he did not believe in perspectivism, he attacked only the objectivity of Moral Value Judgements, which are not, in any sense, objective. If, like I think you are, the guy I've sparred with many times over this fail to see how Nietzschean thought and the Will to Power was rife always in those "Barbarians": the early Romans, the early Hellenes, the Norse and all other Germanic tribes from Ireland to Finland to Germany itself. Prior to Christianity and it's near absolute destruction of everything our people were, Will to Power, to Domination, was a central point after Natural Order and Law, of the entire worldview of our ancestors, this is absolutely clear from any reading of history whatsoever. Nietzsche criticizes the progenitors of rationalist thought for a reason, despite being quite the rationalist himself he viewed Art and Artistry as the clear winner and driver of innovation and power, and laments that rationalism won over the more creative, intuitive aspects of our race and it's thought because what it allowed was the subversion and destruction of christianity and many other still existing subversive traditions. Nietzsche doesn't spit at Aristotle with as much venom as he does others as Logic is a tool he uses to great effect, and Aristotle is the founder of much of Logic as we know it, even today. What they might have done to him had he lived in their time is immaterial and purely conjecture, he may have gotten along with them quite finely, but who knows? not you or I. >The key point here is whether the philosophy is true, not whether we like what it claims or not due to certain implications it may or may not have. The key point is that any "philosophy" that denies the primacy of this world is not Truth, period. Struggle and War are virtues. War is one of the highest virtues of our people, as the Bhagavad Gita alone testifies. Struggle is an aspect of war, but still a virtue in and of itself, it is the personal war of yourself against nature, yourself, and your enemies, if you win you gain great power and a genetic legacy if you lose, well, you die. >Let's be real - ... Lets be real that proportion was MUCH higher even 100 years ago, and that counts only Catholics, Orthodox monks also do that, being merely slightly older shards of Catholicism essentially. Though they have a branch of clergy that can marry they're usually chosen from among a community rather than assigning a Priest from somewhere else. Monks have always been priests, they just dedicate themselves to ascetic pursuits. IT may not be as much of a problem today but scale those numbers down not the number of clergy, which was probably similar or greater stretching back and back to the very origins of Catholicism but the number of people alive in general and suddenly those numbers don't look like a non-issue, now do they? priests were about 4% of the population of England at one point and it being the prime way to learn anything means it would attract the intelligent as it did.
>>13457 We have very little information on the full breadth of what he actually believed we only have the remnants his actions left on the world, and that weren't destroyed by the Priesthood of Amon.
>>13464 read the republic
>>13204 >Does the source disappear when it gets manifested? Disappear from what or where? It precedes manifestation, logically, and then the debate expands over where this manifestation happens and if it's separate, equal to or contained within the Source. The subtlety between pandeism and pantheism would probably amount to direct interference in a way that mirror many religions or a complete laissez-faire approach, which brings us to the notion of affecting and moving without being active, or more precise proactive. It just is. Many ancient religions had something akin to this primeval force which then engendered intermediary "workers" to conceptualize and organize Creation. >Then he could be a Freemason, no? The central tenet of Freemasonry is the root of all corruption. Deism does not explicitly require a basis in Freemasonry but then Freemasonry is a big topic where we would arrive at a point we'd force to acknowledge that it is based on laws that govern the universe, but reaches them through a warped understanding thereof. To keep things simple, he would have not needed to be one, but he would have then probably recognized what a Freemasonry was or could have been. >Theory of reincarnation, and that of eternal return are based on different logical and metaphysical concepts however, despite a lot of overlapping. Yes but that's due to how in mainstream view reincarnation is understood, which is not necessarily obvious to us, people into this specific type of science and spirituality so as to post here for example, because of the way we think now, but I have seen the meme of "I come back as me but in future times" to be the general idea people seem to understand. Seeing reincarnation as what is really means etymologically speaking, back into a meat bag that acts as an instrument to a higher part of "you" (avatara, but for the lesser ones) is quite an alien concept to most people it seems, although some movies in the last two or three decades, most of them in the science fiction genre, do cover that topic in ways that might implant in the general population a clearer and more accurate idea of what it is to exist in this world, a stage for players. In due time I think it will become possible to open more and more minds to this idea. >It has more to do with specific generative "models" so to speak Absolutely, for the same reason that the Aryan beauty canon narrows onto a specific ideal form that's the sum of geometric phenotypical values. There definitely are archetypes for the types of people, including the untermensch. >You can't compare moonlight to sunlight though. Exactly, the moon relays the light. It has its own purpose but even the moon isn't always active, as if to make the point that not only it reflects a fraction of the true source, but it seems to need to rest. >Although Evola meant lunar more as in cthonic, formless, feminine, not a literal moon. Mmm well not so sure of that, he's repeatedly specific in his opposition and really likes to tie the moon to underground forces. He follows a logic that has merits in that elevation can only come from a superior help, in position and hierarchy. But he missed the point of the underground forces having their usefulness, notably in times of rejuvenation and resistance, especially in times of pure darkness where even the struggling moon is then absent. In many religious systems, which I'm sure Evola would have abundantly criticized, the underworld was a place of terrible judgement but just an end point onto another state, sometimes even a purifying "intermedium". Sometimes even Solar/light archetypes were to emerge from this realm, which is exactly what we see today. The Truth comes from above but it cannot reach us directly without subverting the ultimate subverting structure, certainly exemplified in the chans against the ZOG that used ridicule, sarcasm and humor in a way into the minds of people and which is why the left cannot meme.
>>13343 >You can't even rebut the point. What reason do we have for believing in Wotanism over millennia of traditions? Wotanism is conceived as being pro-White and is certainly not stranger to ancient Aryan wisdom. It is certainly not some "shit" and Jews hate it much more than any other religions I rejected. So follow a simple rule: If non-Whites can have access to the religion, then ditch it. Your religion might be old and based on Aryan wisdom, but that's all there is to it as it became mitigated over time. When it is not exclusive, it is not separatist enough. Buddhim is universalist, Hinduism is degenerate Vedism enlarged for admission of non-Whites. Wotanism may look young on the surface and be found lacking in scriptures for obvious reasons, but it is based on Natural Law and the most ancient pro-White, virile and solid philosophy there is, working from basically what the Third Reich went for, then purified of any hazardous and dubious racial slag. >>>/library/114 Simply put, it would be very hard for Jews to subvert it like they manage to subvert Buddhism for example.
>>13509 >Simply put, it would be very hard for Jews to subvert it like they manage to subvert Buddhism for example. Jews didn't subvert Buddhism, they build an entire fake Buddhism in the West that has few things in common with Buddhism in the East.
>>13355 As a side note, all European cultures had something of that order. The very idea that you were good, virtuous, smart, strong, beautiful, seemed to indicate you had the gods on your side. Which let one guess rather quickly the meaning of lacking in these attributes. >>13358 >Not sure about being ugly though. Never heard anything about that. Ugliness in one's physique is the result of a lack of manifestation of harmony. There should be something about that somewhere. >>13373 >You claim it's life denial because your life is a whirlwind of chaotic emotions that ride you like a horse. To understand and control these emotions is the beginning of enlightenment. If you think mere control is the end goal of that doctrine, you're very wrong. Besides, a relentless discipline is just going to lead you missing out on a great many things in life. There is a time for control as there is a time for folly. It's all about balance, a fine blending of both. >>13385 >If you think following Ođinn and our gods, was created in America, you are a truly ignirant moron, get off this board right now I would suggest you reread the post from its beginning and take some time before replying. The Buddhism-or-Hinduism anon reacted to Wotanism as being "some shit" written in America and basically based on nothing, contrary to bucket loads of text. The very reason Wotanism exists today is because we need a religion, and we need one that defends us properly to steer away from millennia of blatant failure doing so. Right now it's growing like one of the early Christian sects, safe that while moving towards Christianity and especially Juedo-Christianity was going into oblivion, going into Wotanism is doing the exact opposite. Seeing how the seething Jews painfully bleed in wordy laments about it, I think it really must have something good going for it, while they absolutely do not feel threatened at all by either Buddhism or Hinduism. In fact it's quite a popular opinion to read today that Jews always had a good life in India as far as they can remember, starting from about -500, give or take a couple decades. This is also why, on a different course, the fate of pre-Jews in India was of interest, so it seems clearer now that back to a time of which they have the slimmest memory and most likely none, some group behaving just like them got beaten and chased out. Cue the current parallel work done ITT about the Angirasas, Sarama and the Panis. Exploration in greater depth of the Vedic-Canaanite links will possibly be bountiful on that area of inquiry.
>>13510 >Jews didn't subvert Buddhism, they build an entire fake Buddhism in the West that has few things in common with Buddhism in the East. Why, hello! This is precisely the method they apply to anything they subvert: replace the true version by their version and then proceed to do their best to destroy traces of the original one while spamming at large the bastardized form they have belabored to bring to light. It's all the easier if there's little opposition presented by the source material against such subversion. The JewBu functions so well today despite the original version being available precisely because of its inherent weakness: it's inclusive, not antisemitic and not racist. Say you follow strict prime Pali-based Zen Buddhism across several published books and you won't get into any trouble. Now be in Europe and publicly offer a 1488 euros gift to anyone and you'll land in jail before you even finished shaking hands. That does not mean there aren't good ideas to recycle from Buddhism, but there are also good parables in Christianity.
>>13389 Let's expand on that. Would it make sense to create a vast system where the point of life is to deny life? That's silly. Yet that's practically the core of most religions today. The hair splitting over life/self denial is fag af imho since life asks you to affirm your self and fulfill your purpose as a human, not to deny your humanity and its function in life. When you look at it, a Buddhist could literally have his brain put into a jar interfaced with a computer, it would greatly cut the load of stimuli and emotions (solar plexus rushing energies and gut feelings included) and make the "thinking" easier. This example is not meant to be perfect at all but I hope you see the point. >It seems like almost every sage of history has said that there is a way ‘out’—or perhaps to word this differently, a way to transcend the limitations of this current world to one that is somehow ‘higher’ or more ‘perfect’. Their respective wordings greatly differed as much as the proposed methods. <Buddhism: be an empty box, no feels <literally any piece of furniture in my office is more enlightened than any human on this planet >There are hellish realms as well and they are far, far worse than Earth. Nightmare levels Got pictures? Just asking.
>>13415 The whole point of life is: Be You Christianity is like a watered down version of this, also made faster, because of its intrinsic YOLO tenet.
>>13419 >David Lane wasn't all that bad, but yes he made many mistakes, Serrano is the one most of them talk of now. Most = who? Serrano is pessimistic Gnosticism repackaged with more nazi this and UFO that. Plus a big mistake on the ultimate avatar which is baffling when you consider for a moment the degree of erudition he's supposed to have had. What are the mistakes Lane did aside from miscalculating the Whites' readiness to go into war? For a man who worked from prison and likely didn't have access to internet I presume, and he had been moved several times from one maximum security prison to another. >Lane's work is of varying quailty Why so? >and most of his works after prison are more like boomer tier conspiracy shit Oh right we're talking to a kike here. The only conspiracies he talked about are: 1) who created the United States, which is now easily confirmed 2) Jews planning our extermination. 3) Shakespeare being a front man. He died in 2007 in jail. There's nothing such "after prison". Even if all he wrote only got published all at once in 2007, where were you at that time? The fact that some of what he talks has somehow transpired in conspiracy circles is a positive thing, but since most people don't go any further because they don't want to be called racists and antisemites, they hit a glass roof. Yet the understanding of symbolism and numbers mixed to our fight for survival calls for further exploration. A Fascist who hasn't even begun to understand the importance of numbers and symbols has no chance whatsoever to belong to our own elite. >moxed with Kabbalh concepts and bible quotes and numerology But everything he lays down is verified if you take time to read it and compare. So what's your issue with this exactly? >Most honestly don't really seem to read or understand anything from the old being either unwilling or unable to see the truth of what is there. May you please rephrase that? >Having heavenly realms be a component of all religions does not imply or mean life denying inherently. That wasn't the claim though. We were talking about the conditions for salvation, elevation, walking out, etc. >Valhalla for instance, did not cause any man to deny this world to seek haven in it, it's very existence forced men to act in the world for their own people, for their betterment and power, by going to war, so there we have an example of a "heaven" causing one to live a full life, a complete life. Yes. The rest of what you wrote is addressed at length in Lane's works. You have not read them, that is for sure. You probably limited yourself to "oh the star of david on the dollar bill", skimmed the numerology and concluded that it was boomer tier garbage for the most part. May I suggest you give it another chance?
(123.56 KB 600x616 Norns.jpg)
>>13507 >Disappear from what or where? Cease to exist, either from it's own perspective, or the perspective of the manifest. If it remains existent in either aspect (which it does), then the singular interconnection/superimposition and the original, total equality at the rest state don't go away. Ergo, no matter how many intermediary states and different manifestations there are, single source guarantees equality at the ultimate and quintessential level (whether it be a beginning or the end, which are one and the same). That's the logic of monism from which monotheism (and subsequently all of it's variants) got derived. It only allows for a single God. Even if you argue that the manifestation is entirely separate from the source, what would then be the logical conclusion of such manifestation? The only options would be to see it as some kind of unending illusion (hence inferior to the egalitarian source) or as something which would eventually converge back into the singular source that manifested it (Tikkun Olam). Alternatively, that it would form multiple new sources, but that would break the logical chain since it would imply the existence of multiple sources to begin with. Therefore, any philosophy, religion or metaphysics that have a single source as their logical underpinning and metaphysical foundation will inevitably conclude as some form of globohomo as it's eschatology. A lot of processes that anons see as gradual subversion are merely the equation solving itself. The poisonous equation that was planted a long time ago by the most learned of subversives. >which brings us to the notion of affecting and moving without being active, or more precise proactive. It just is The unmoved mover. And the only way to master the Ouroboros is to understand that there is not One, but Many Sources of causation, and that they are fundamentally different at the root level and mutually non-equatable in their ultimate manifestation. As well as that there is no such thing as the universal Absolute or totality. This is the Heathen/Polytheist worldview, and the only logical position which allows the existence of multiple genuine Gods (sources of manifestation), as well as the only one that allows genuine individuality, which coincidentally, Whites used to appreciate much more than the other races. Unfortunately, this view got gradually eliminated by the agentur of the "One god" so you'd need to go to very ancient times in order to recover traces of such philosophy/logic, and what Aryans (the ones that conquered most of the known world) actually believed.
>>13481 We can know for sure that he pissed off the entire clergy of his time with his major shift in spirituality. Perhaps the priests were too idolatrous too.
>>13518 >Cease to exist, either from it's own perspective The Source that ceases to exist from its own perspective, what does that even mean? >or the perspective of the manifest Then it would mean there's no Source anymore and the manifest is final too. Where does it go from there? >the singular interconnection/superimposition and the original > total equality at the rest state What does that mean? >single source guarantees equality I'm yet to see why or read anything from you that proves this. >something which would eventually converge back into the singular source that manifested it (Tikkun Olam) Not sure TO is about rebooting the whole universe at all. >understand that there is not One, but Many Sources of causation, and that they are fundamentally different at the root level and mutually non-equatable in their ultimate manifestation Please provide a few examples of those Many but mutually non-equatable Sources. You're sounding like someone saying the God of Logic and the God of Dumbz cannot proceed from the same initial Source that would actually engulf all possible concepts.
>>13517 Spend a little time looking through most of the non-christcuck shit on telegram, and you will understand who most is,that I am referring to, too many think Serrano was a prophet or a sage, who had some kind of shamanic/priestly/magical power and I have spent a good bit of time astral projecting to see what truths I can discover about him and have come up with nothing, he was no sage he seems to have been writing by the seat of his pants. One mistake, is that Lane was associated with Serrano in some way but thats fine. Lanes mistakes are chiefly his pyramid shit with Numerology, a thing of jewish origin, and rife with corruption from Christian/Jewish sources and something Aryans only really touched once Christianity had infected them. He also seemed to have had too much of a focus on finding hidden messages in the bible which he used numerology to "discover", his philosophy and writings of pratical merit are fine, perhaps even, vitally important. He missed, very understandably, with the overfocus on Germans that National Socialists seem to have, that Ođinn prefers his Norse name, anglicized either Odhinn or Othinn. I perfectly understand the importance of numbers and Symbols, I just disagree with using Gematria, and Numerology and Kabbalist conncepts, which as far as I can discern have helped us not at all. My issue with his use of Kaballah and many other pieces of jewish originating concepts, is that it is based on jewish work, everybody seems to think jews cannot create, that is preposterous. They could not have the domination they now hold without a whole lot of creativity, yes turned towards destructive purposes but they create none the less. >May you please rephrase that Sure most people seem to miss a lot of the knowledge that is in the Eddas, and many of the sagas, corruoted by Christians as they are, there is much to be regained there, but beyond that they are a little sparse esoterically what can be regained is mostly exoteric, but people have missed that the clues to how our esoterics, those that were lost entirely, were constructed wasn't from books or hidden in Christian scriptures, by greeks or romans. They were constructed first from dedication in service to the gods, deep daily meditational practice, and direct divine inspiration and contact, and so much more, we need to let go of the most of the esoteric shut from the past from Hermeticism Gnosticism, Kabbalism, and recreate our religion from essentially scratch. My issues with Lane's work is mostly on the esoteric/religious side of things which I should have made clearer and on the waste of time that repurposing and trying to subvert what is created by the subverters, it's maybe entertaining but it serves no practical purpose to us.
>>13446 >note that this is quite different from the idea of 'laws of nature Such incorrectness. Laws of Nature include the laws of physics, like many other laws. >I don't see this as a good reason to reject certain philosophies. The key point here is whether the philosophy is true, not whether we like what it claims or not due to certain implications it may or may not have. Ultimately, a philosophy that claims to be perfect and complete but does not provide the most basic truths about blood and combat are in fact to be found leaky. >I question whether 'struggle' and 'war' are virtues in themselves though. They are at the very least necessities, rules one cannot evade. And therefore rejecting them is perhaps not being virtuous at all. I know it sounds very grimdark but there's no real other choice. Accept the challenge and fight. Whether you win or lose is almost anecdotal as long as you fight with everything you've got. No room for pussyfooting. If our entire race loses, the judgement is final and needs no superfluous dissertation. >What this seems to show is that it's really not a problem. That a few people follow broken principles doesn't change a thing over their brokenness. Klassen laughed at Christians since 99% of them would never reach paraside for failing doing what the Bible expected from them. Arguing that most people are moderates in the following of their religion is a red herring. 25% shit is still shit, less smelly. >>13457 >Gautama never fully rejected material life Aside from having to breathe and eat, pretty much his whole stance was materialism = shit because life and the world were sources of suffering. Gautama was the Schopenhauer of his time, taken more seriously because not a Western philosopher. >Neither did Jesus, since he obviously had a great deal of plans for this world. The plan sounds lame tbh. >Maybe he got blackmailed to discontinue his previous ideas. I mean, people were killed for much less throughout history. He was to do 190 years in jail and nothing could be used against him, not even his family of which he wrote he remained rather silent for obvious reasons when it didn't concern him directly. His writing are coherent through and throughout. >>13461 >He didn't reject material life at all, he was against material pleasures and distractions that prevented us from becoming all-knowing or enlightened. (It's not clear if you're defending him or not.) Life without pleasures is like a dead husk. Why bother then?
>>13522 >Lanes mistakes are chiefly his pyramid shit with Numerology, a thing of jewish origin, and rife with corruption from Christian/Jewish sources and something Aryans only really touched once Christianity had infected them. A sacred language has to be in tune with Natural Law and the principles of construction of the universe. It has to contain truths in its very constituent parts. There is no corruption in this. If you think it's Jewish it is mainly because Jews always keep for themselves the best tools while debilitating the opposition. >He also seemed to have had too much of a focus on finding hidden messages in the bible which he used numerology to "discover", his philosophy and writings of pratical merit are fine, perhaps even, vitally important. Why the ""? The real message was definitely hidden through a most intricate way. I think I should rather cite him rather than go on indefinitely. This will be taken from the Prophecy of the Pyramid document. >This is a perfect example of why I have taught that men who desire freedom must learn >how to think. 'How' means always ask 'why.' Out of the millions of people who know that >Hebrew and other alphabets have numerical values, almost none pursue the reason. Ask a >Judeo-Christian preacher why and he will either plead ignorance or brush you off with >the standard religious tactic of demanding blind faith in the myths. When the thoughtful >person who knows how to think is confronted with repetitive or striking phenomena he >immediately desires to investigate. >The bible is in fact a huge Hermetic parable from end to end, and attempts to read it >literally will only drive men insane or lead to division into hundreds or even thousands of >competing sects, and ultimately religious warfare. Next we will dig into the meat of the >secret teachings and >ancient science. Let me begin by quoting some Hermetic philosophers, >both ancient and >modern. From John Mitchell, author of the New View Over Atlantis, >"Traditional creation myths state that the Creator of the Universe first laid out patterns >of number from which all else proceeded. Sacred geometry and number were used in the design of >ancient temples in order to attract the creative powers unique to a pattern, and because the >effect of ritual words, songs, bells, gongs and so on, when sounded within the confines of >a building so constructed had irresistible effects on the human "mind."
>>13522 >From the book Nature God and Man by William Temple, Macmillan Press 1934, page >149, "We discover that the universe shows evidence of a designing or controlling power >that has something in common with our individual minds." Plato and Pythagoras, both >initiates, (at least one of whom was initiated inside the Great Pyramid), in response to >questions about the source of all true knowledge repeatedly answered, "All is number." >John Anthony West, author of The Serpent in the Sky, has stated, "In ancient civilizations >a class of initiates had precise knowledge of harmonic laws. They knew how to >manipulate them to create the precise effect they wanted. They wrote this knowledge into >architecture, art, music, paintings and ritual. It is evidenced in Gothic cathedrals, vast >Hindu temples, the marvels of Egypt, the seven wonders of the ancient world and other >sacred works. They had a powerful effect on men because they knew exactly what they >were doing; it was control and power through complex sensory manipulation." >It takes no genius to conceive of the same knowledge being put to use by the >unscrupulous. Dances, chants, buildings, music and all manner of sensory stimulation >could be devised that would reduce targeted individuals or populations to helplessness. >There are indications that this is when the first Jews came into being. Somewhere around >BCE 400-500 in old Babylon a renegade and unprincipled group of initiates into the >secrets of the ancients hatched up a conspiracy to rule the world using the Hermetic >wisdom, usury and the basest instincts of man. The Jews, however, were not the >originators of the mythologies of either the Old or New Testaments. They and the church >have, however, added to, perhaps subtracted from, and even changed or perverted the >original writings of both Testaments. The nonsense about circumcision is an example. >Exhorting love of one's enemies and hatred of women and sex are New Testament >insertions. We could debate endlessly whether the stories of Joseph and of Esther were >inserted by Jews to brag of their blueprint for world conquest, or by Aryans in order to >expose the Jewish conspiracy. When attempting to judge the bible writings without >knowledge of Hermetic coding devices, one simply has to acknowledge that the content >has been in the hands of Jews and Judeo-Romans for many centuries. >Decoding and comparison of the myths is a fascinating occupation and we could fill >many volumes, but this is not the place for endless detail. Lest the reader get the mistaken >idea that the mystery schools were Semitic or Oriental rather than Aryan, let me conclude >this chapter with a quotation from Clement of Alexandria, circa 150-215 CE. Clement >was a theologian of the early Christian Church prior to the formation of Judeo- >Christianity under Constantine. Clement wrote, "The Pythagoreans took their philosophy >from the Gauls and other barbarians." Pythagoras, of course, lived more than 500 years >before the Christian era began and the Gauls were from central Europe. So, we see that >the ancient wisdom was indeed Aryan.
(251.98 KB 755x1152 shambala.jpg)
(166.47 KB 790x707 1608505781362.jpg)
>>13264 >HYPERBOREAN WISDOM OF NIMROD DE ROSARIO AND GNOSTIC GEOPOLITICS >ttps://archive.vn/SKRJE This is divide and conquer disinformation.In the article it aligns Shambala with the Theosophical socialite's "White Brotherhood" and Agartha with "liberator Gods". And sets them in opposed stance >“Agharta” and “Shamballah”, are absolutely different and diametrically opposed concepts, even if many misinformed persons think they are analogous This is false and a reversal. Agartha was (re)written about by Blavatsky and conflated with their twisted concepts, which this writer (NImrod de Rosario) seems to follow. From a Tibetan perspective, Shambala and Agartha are both the domain of their noble gods, the one's who taught them how to meditate, whom live under the Earth, one is the kingdom (Agartha), one is the capital (Shambala). The real reason for the DUMBs and the underground war is to try exterminate the gods o the ironic hubris of the mortals and (((they))) need a narrative that would question the literal timeless stories of hidden gods so they may deceive.
>>13522 >He missed, very understandably, with the overfocus on Germans that National Socialists seem to have, that Oðinn prefers his Norse name, anglicized either Odhinn or Othinn. It is extremely doubtful he would have missed such a thing considering who guided him. He wouldn't overfocus on Germanism because his very legitimacy hangs on the Anglo-Saxon variant too. Look into the origin of his alias and everything about his birth and very early life. He also uses Odin several times in his writings. On top of this, he explains why he picked Wotan. Finally, considering it's the Germans, not the Swedes, Norwegians or Danes, who best channeled this God's spirit and energy, there's definitely a legitimacy in using this name. Overall, Odin had so many names which he played with that the very idea He would be offended by being called Wotan is really just that absurd. You really should read his writings and remember that even if for you, a lot of what he wrote will not be of a revealing nature, you're probably smarter than a vast majority of Whites and would gain a lot from even reading and accepting a tenth of his work. >I just disagree with using Gematria, and Numerology and Kabbalist conncepts Are you going to stop breathing because Jews do it too? >which as far as I can discern have helped us not at all. Because we never used them properly, or never were allowed to, and modern Freemasons employ this knowledge in all the worst ways possibly imaginable. In many places through Lane's writings (which you should really read) he reminds us of why /ourguys/ had to be very careful about their Work and were walking on most fragile eggs. >They could not have the domination they now hold without a whole lot of creativity, yes turned towards destructive purposes but they create none the less. But only insofar as to beget truly horrible collages from the pure initial elements. Everything they do looks like a satire. They don't exactly create, they synthesize in warped ways. >they are a little sparse esoterically It's because it's not blatant, but once you study numerology and other esoteric principles, they're literally all over the place in the Eddas. Just as with the KJV Bible, the Church was simply not clever enough to spot the counter-subversion. >They were constructed first from dedication in service to the gods, deep daily meditational practice, and direct divine inspiration and contact, and so much more, we need to let go of the most of the esoteric shut from the past from Hermeticism Gnosticism, Kabbalism, and recreate our religion from essentially scratch. The "scratch" is the ancient Aryan wisdom which is found across all these works, whether it was concealed, blatant or plain stolen. In a way there's a lot of that in Lane's work too. >My issues with Lane's work is mostly on the esoteric/religious side of things which I should have made clearer and on the waste of time that repurposing and trying to subvert what is created by the subverters, it's maybe entertaining but it serves no practical purpose to us. Yet the Fourteen Words and Eighty Eight Precepts are most efficacious in repeling the woke culture and similar degeneracy. They are also extremely concise. Start sharing them and spreading them across a small town and you'll soon see Jews calling for the bombing of this place on CNN.
>>13523 >Such incorrectness. Laws of Nature: <Laws of Nature are to be distinguished both from Scientific Laws and from Natural Laws. < On one account, the Regularity Theory, Laws of Nature are statements of the uniformities or regularities in the world; they are mere descriptions of the way the world is. On the other account, the Necessitarian Theory, Laws of Nature are the “principles” which govern the natural phenomena of the world. That is, the natural world “obeys” the Laws of Nature. https://iep.utm.edu/lawofnat/ Natural Law: <[Natural law] refers to a type of moral theory, as well as to a type of legal theory, but the core claims of the two kinds of theory are logically independent. It does not refer to the laws of nature, the laws that science aims to describe. According to natural law moral theory, the moral standards that govern human behavior are, in some sense, objectively derived from the nature of human beings and the nature of the world. https://iep.utm.edu/natlaw/ >Life without pleasures is like a dead husk Only if you live a life dependent on endless pleasures to see value in it.
>>13519 >materialism = shit because life and the world were sources of suffering There is a world of difference between realizing that materialism is ultimately pointless (as an end into itself) and that it often brings much more suffering than joy, and to completely abandon physical existence. Gautama was much more moderate than portrayed in various sources >Schopenhauer of his time Kek, close enough >>13521 Cont'd >Freemasonry is a big topic where we would arrive at a point we'd force to acknowledge that it is based on laws that govern the universe Their lowest common denominator. My point was that Evola's ideas were not really compatible with certain philosophies (that both Deism and Freemasonry adhere to) >how in mainstream view reincarnation is understood NPC's can't conceptualize the higher/transcendental Self because most of them lack one. It's a step away from believing in literal resurrection of your physical corpse. Their view is not impossible though, but the mechanisms for it to happen are something else entirely. >Aryan beauty canon narrows onto a specific ideal form that's the sum of geometric phenotypical values Correct. But what gets to appreciate those geometric values, and why? Could it be that it's tied to a specific unmanifest pole, a certain source, whose emanations recognize that form as an ideal. >Solar/light archetypes were to emerge from this realm, which is exactly what we see today It has more to do with the holographic principle than terms of light and darkness. As for Evola, he used a lot of terms as a matter of context rather than specific semantic meaning, as his target audience was not the general populace. It's about certain people "getting" certain concepts without them being overly specific. >>13521 >what does that even mean? Not relevant for this discussion, it would make the subject too broad. Focus on the point. >Then it would mean there's no Source anymore and the manifest is final too. We are discussing what happens when the Source remains, in either interpretation. Otherwise it would be entirely redundant >Not sure TO is about rebooting the whole universe at all. It would be it's effect nonetheless >What does that mean? With all due respect, lecturing you on monism and singularity would be too time consuming >Please provide a few examples of those Many but mutually non-equatable Sources. Non-commensurate Transcendental numbers vs finite numbers >that would actually engulf all possible concepts It cannot engulf all possible interpretations, and it's questionable even when it comes to neutral configurations.
>>13522 Don Serrano never intended to be seen as some kind of religious figure, he was just a very knowledgeable /ourguy/ and a mystic. >>13525 Just because the underlying framework of reality is mathematical, doesn't mean that arbitrary letters correspond to arbitrary numbers. Some languages/alphabets expressing certain mathematical rules/formulas is as far as it goes. Gematria is a huge red herring and a waste of time. >>13529 >NImrod de Rosario I'm reading a translation of his works and it seems quite good so far, even if he goes off the tracks regarding certain subjects. The Swarthy Atlantineans that he references are resembling the Vril-Ya from the novel The coming race, who did seem quite globohomo-ish, with the exception that they killed anyone who racemixed. It would go in line with two groups of Aryans allying with two different underground/celestial centers. It's no more D&C than WW2 was, it's a fact that a lot of Whites are traitors to their race and serve the Jews and their god. The author is spot on when it comes to many other subjects, such as describing the pact of the blood as walled warrior societies while those of the cultural pact as settlers and traders. Of course, anything should be taken with a grain of salt when it comes to these subjects.
>>13471 There is no evidence that Socrates was a 'subversive Phoenician'. The elite in Athens got mad at him because he went around making them look foolish by just asking them simple questions, just like he does in the dialogues. So what they did is trump up a bunch of ridiculous charges about him not believing in the gods of the state and introducing new gods of his own. Not to mention the fact that since he advocated for an abolition of democracy and a system of philosopher kings, he was a direct threat to democratic Athens. It was essentially a judicial murder that they perpetrated against him. >because of this he is also a big influencer of the anarchists and neo-liberal types who want to do the same. Anarchism and neo-liberalism has nothing to do with Socrates. Nietzschean retardation, this whole post.
>>13535 The Laws of Nature definitionis written from an atheist point of view. Both definitions are only centered on modern science or man. >Only if you live a life dependent on endless pleasures to see value in it. Who spoke of endless pleasures? Everything must come in balance. >>13536 >There is a world of difference between realizing that materialism is ultimately pointless (as an end into itself) and that it often brings much more suffering than joy, and to completely abandon physical existence. Gautama was much more moderate than portrayed in various sources Physical existence contains suffering and joys. Joys and pleasures too make you attached to the world. >Their lowest common denominator. Whether what Freemasons use is done for the betterment of our existence or not, they certainly do not use anything that could be called a lowest common denominator. That's a weird thing to reply honestly. We agree on Evola diverging from deism or pantheism. >It has more to do with the holographic principle than terms of light and darkness. There is no need to make this more confusing. >As for Evola, he used a lot of terms as a matter of context rather than specific semantic meaning, as his target audience was not the general populace. On the contrary he was very clear about the lunar and feminine aspects, but rarely had anything good to say about them. >Not relevant for this discussion, it would make the subject too broad. Focus on the point. The point is that I ask for a clarification of an element you used in your reply. Now if you want to say that your reply wasn't relevant, that's something else entirely. >We are discussing what happens when the Source remains, in either interpretation. Otherwise it would be entirely redundant The "Source remaining" is equally redundant since it's already there. >It would be it's effect nonetheless I doubt it because I don't see how TO could even be achieved since it flies against natural order of things. Jews would have, at best, the illusion of having achieved something but it would only come crashing hard on them. >With all due respect, lecturing you on monism and singularity would be too time consuming A pity, I'd have hoped a few summaries might have sufficed. >Non-commensurate Transcendental numbers vs finite numbers How does these two types imply the impossibility of originating from one single Source of infinite knowledge? >It cannot engulf all possible interpretations Why not? That's the point of infinite and total knowledge. What, are you saying the Source cannot exist because red is not blue is not green so there must be a God of red, one of blue and one of green? >it's questionable even when it comes to neutral configurations. >neutral configurations. Are you even trying to have a meaningful discussion here or just throwing words to sound smart or something?
>>13545 >Just because the underlying framework of reality is mathematical, doesn't mean that arbitrary letters correspond to arbitrary numbers. These letters are made to correspond on purpose, that is literally the point of their design, and romanized alphabets are even poor in comparison to other alphabets. Not to say anything of the fact that they're glyphs in themselves. >Some languages/alphabets expressing certain mathematical rules/formulas is as far as it goes. Is what? >Gematria is a huge red herring and a waste of time. Believe what you want. It has been at the very least useful to hide codes, and that's really the most pavement grazing level of reading of it one can get into. >Of course, anything should be taken with a grain of salt when it comes to these subjects. Not if it were the truth and correct. That's like preparing yourself for pilpulling your way out of a discussion by pointing out how you said that anything could be wrong anyway.
>>13576 Then what would you define as the true definition of the Laws of Nature?
>>13576 >How does these two types imply the impossibility of originating from one single Source of infinite knowledge? See Godel's incompleteness theorems. Even if we disregard mathematics, if such a single Source existed, no originating would be necessary (or possible). A single source can neither account for the different perspectives, which might as well be "larger" than any supposed sum of manifestation. That concept is paradoxical. >>13577 >It has been at the very least useful to hide codes It's a scrying tool, you see what your subconsciousness projects onto it, not what it objectively means. >Not if it were the truth and correct So any book is either 100% absolute truth or shouldn't be read? >That's like preparing yourself for pilpulling your way out of a discussion Your cynicism hardly contributes to a constructive discussion
>>13525 >A sacred language has to be in tune with Natural Law and the principles of construction of the universe. It has to contain truths in its very constituent parts. Then collect every letter of the Elder Futhark and any of the variations or ones we have not or cannot rediscover and tell me their numerical values and then you can feel free to show me how Nordic Numerology and Gematria(a Hebrew word) works, even though we have no evidence such a thing existed prior to interaction with christianity. Sure we have evidence they used their letters to represent numbers like the Greeks and romans did but this is standard practice that all cultures used in the absence of a separate number system >There is no corruption in this. If you think it's Jewish it is mainly because Jews always keep for themselves the best tools while debilitating the opposition. It's jewish because, it's first recorded use is with jews, Nobody else looked for messages in scripture that are "hidden" because NOBODY ELSE HAD SCRIPTURES, Our beliefs, our traditions even in Greece and Rome were usually transmitted via oral tradition, which is why nearly everything has been lost, save for the superficial moral stories and legendary sagas of the likes of the Eddas, the many other Nordic Sagas and the Iliad and Odyssey, etc,. I used the quotes because there is no possible way there were things hidden in the bible of any merit. Especially not when it has been written, rewritten, translated, and retranslated, seventy-five thousand times. It could not possibly have been done by hidden Aryan priests preserving knowledge each and every time, making sure everything was perfectly, in exactly the right order it should be in to convey the proper message when decoded and Quintuply so when translated into the modern English he used which has a radically different syntax and grammar than nearly any other language on earth.. >>13526 Even if Clement(himself already a Judeo-Christian and traitor to his race) isn't lying through his teeth like the jews whose beliefs he held. We have no evidence of any of this apart from his claims. and the claims of any Christian even the early ones don't hold any water with me, nor should they with any Aryan, whatever hidden messages there are in the bible, they aren't for Aryans.
>>13545 And yet we have whole hosts of Esoteric Hitlerists who treat his shit as if it were the Word of the Gods directly, it's kind of ironic, in a sense.
>>13624 I've read most of his works and he kept stressing out how he's just a man, and that the ideas which he reveals are not "his" in any temporal sense. He was merely expressing what his spirit and blood were conductive to. He was an initiate of a very high degree, and a very powerful presence nonetheless. His works left a great impression on me mostly because I had very similar experiences, and came up with similar ideas/realization on my own long before I read anything about it, anywhere. >whole hosts of Esoteric Hitlerists Where do you encounter these?
>>13725 I’ve heard people say there are a lot on Telegram, but I’ve never used that
>>13725 Telegram, most of them are originally from Iron March and still use discord to discuss Fascist shit and whatnot, call themselves Futurists, moatly european tbh.
>>13727 >>13732 How much are those groups glowing on average? Would it be risky to join some?
>>13750 Exclusively pagan / esoteric chat groups would probably be safer than any sort of stuff dedicated to figures like Tarrant and the others, I'll say that much. Telegram glows pretty hard in my experience though.
>>13753 I agree, everyone on telegram is either a big egoist who thinks they're always right, or someone following or trying to wrangle those people in. It feels like people who just want to hang out are few and far between. There's some really good people there, but you have to look hard.
>>13757 >everyone on telegram is either a big egoist who thinks they're always right Holy shit, tell me about it. It's all ME ME ME. Have an opinion that would upset the group chat? Banned. But that would be hypocritical as a /fascist/ board-based telegram group would've done the exact same thing. So I'd close one eye on that. But you know who I hate a lot. The Fascifist. This poo dalit fuck thinks he's Mr Right. He thinks that he has the right to literally fuck a German woman, marry her and (probably) have kids with her. And he laughs at White nationalists who are angry at him for defiling the idea of White demographic survival And then there's another Telegram dude. Goes by the name of "Mr. Mass Deportation". On the surface it seems like it's a White dude who reposts how shitskins are irredeemable idiots. Guess what? It's a fucking paki. Can you believe it? One shitskin, overthrowing other shitskins, to save his ass. And when some chad Whites confront him, he claims that he accepts his position or whatever. How pathetic. There's another case with a group of channels under a mega channel called The Hate Network. So it hosts channels like chink hate, poo hate, etc. And this is hilarious - shitskins are over there either arguing or siding with Whites ("oohhh poor me"). Here's the tip - either don't use Telegram or if you really need to, find groups that are privated. They'll vet and make sure only Whites get in. If you're using a public group, make sure to see that you do checks on the ethnicity of those who are members/admins/owners of the groups. Make sure they're all White.
Isn't all the internet like that.
>>13763 /fascist/ has it's share of shitskins as well, but they tend to be more polite
>>13763 >On the surface it seems like it's a White dude who reposts how shitskins are irredeemable idiots. Guess what? It's a fucking paki. Can you believe it? One shitskin, overthrowing other shitskins, to save his ass. There's a poster here who often seems a little too over the top, I bet he is a non-White. It would make a lot of sense.
>>13554 Socrates tried to corrupt you moron he wasn't arreated for merely asking stupid questions it was because he worked against the Athenian state and Greeks. All because they didn't want to LARP the way he wanted. Socrates was a literal nigger and the fact you refuse to read The Republic and his trial is proof you are indeed a cocksucker. >muh philosopher king >muh anti-democracy He had a moronic imgaination of what a philospher king should be and him detesting democracy doesn't meaning anything when he tried work against the Athenian family, because they disagreed with your ideals. A Phoenician has no right to teach Aryans.
>>13780 Once again you provide no proof that Socrates was a Phoenician. None of the available evidence gives any proof that the charges put against him by Athens had anything to do with some of the aspects of the Republic that you are referring to. Read the Apology.
I was trying to meditate but I just ended up thinking about the nature of Buddhism. Despite some of its great insights about reality and the human condition, it constantly disparages certain human qualities like greed, selfishness and desire without ever trying to redeem them in any way. They are called ignorance, selfishness, delusion, unskilled. And yet, these qualities are so widespread among the human population. If they weren't useful they wouldn't be. These qualities motivate people to achieve goals and acquire power over others. Power over others is a very useful thing. It allows you to not become a province of China unlike Tibet which will inevitably become one. It allows you to stop barbaric muslims from invading your home town and destroying the local culture. It allows you to stop the Vietnamese regime from burning your pagoda. We can see that all the compassion, understanding and wisdom in the world cannot stop others from committing great atrocities against you. And perhaps you understand the nature of impermanence and decide that the best course of action once that happens is to sit down in the lotus position and set yourself on fire in the middle of the street. But that just comes off to me as very weak, powerless and unskilled. I can't help but think that, for all the veneration that's thrust upon Siddhārtha Gautama, he was in fact a very sheltered and autistic prince who never experienced certain aspects of reality such as warfare, and his wisdom is therefore very partial and limited. I can think of many situations where I would rather have the Art of War instead of his insights about reality.
>>13839 Your mistake is taking the teaching of a religion and compare it to it's current status in the whole world. Looking at it like it is some unified whole. But the truth is that not a single religion in the world is a truly unified movement, with a unified understanding of the religious text. You think that if a religion has become predominant in a culture it should be able to direct and change the path a culture takes, but that isn't completely true. Buddhism had it's origin in India, but actually died out in India for several hundreds of years. Today's Buddhism in India goes back to a revival movement from the 19th century. However after dieing out in India Buddhism moved from South Asia into East Asia and this caused massive religious wars in East Asia, which the Buddhists were able to mostly win for themselves. Buddhism build monasteries like fortresses and started to become martial training camps. There was a time when Tibet had it's own Buddhist Empire, which made the western half of China it's bitch. All over Asia Buddhists Kingdoms were successful against their Asian Pagan adversaries. So what has changed? Why isn't Buddhism the Gigachad of today's world when it was so badass that it conquered most of East Asia? The truth is that religion all over the world is in decline and you cannot compare current year religions with how they had been in the past for centuries. Go look at the Self Mastery General thread and look for the 4th The Rational Male book about religion. Even if you don't share his views, it is a good read into one reason why religion is decaying. For the last hundred to two hundred years, every religion has been compromised to deal with the liberal world order we are currently living under. These changes were made by weak men, not by the teaching of the religion. Also think about it. What does greed, selfishness and desire look like in today's society? How did it look like 200 years ago? How would it look like in the medieval age? And how in antiquity? Depending on the age and the circumstances of a society, these words take on another meaning, are used from a different perspective. You cannot compare the greed, selfishness and desire of an Onlyfan Whore from the 21th century to a greedy, selfish and lustfull king from antiquity.The consequences for society from these two people are also different.
>>13763 e21dde here, Id changed for some reason. I don't get why so many people can't accept who they are and just marry someone of their race to uphold their values and traditions. I personally don't put much emphasis on race when dealing with individuals, but holy shit some people are intent on making jackasses of themselves and everyone who would vouch for them. As a National Socialist and disciple of Krishna, just love your race and preserve it, and even other races and hope the best for them until it becomes expedient to your own race's survival or cohesion. Even still it is regrettable that kikes get largely lower caste races to try and be something they can't, rulers or keepers of Sanatana Dharma, just look at Africa. They whip them up into frenzies against us and one another; it's sickening.
>>13839 Ashoka would be a better example, he was a ruthless Asian warlord until he eventually discovered Buddhism and started enforcing it as state religion. >it constantly disparages certain human qualities It's about checks and balances, not the absolutes. >If they weren't useful they wouldn't be Guiding yourself entirely by what's useful in materialistic sense turns you into a kike. >>13844 >Why isn't Buddhism the Gigachad of today's world when it was so badass that it conquered most of East Asia? The truth is that religion all over the world is in decline It's in decline by design. Buddhism introduced certain degenerative elements in previously virile population, which did not manifest immediately but eventually turned them into obedient, self-denying nihilists. It's role was similar to that of Christianity in the West.
(1.00 MB 628x631 iassureyou.png)
>>13839 Anon I know some Buddhists will disagree because it's the nature of online forums, but look to Hinduism instead. In my mind religion is all perennial, eternal truth springing up and being diluted as time goes along in our Kali Yuga here. Buddhism, originally to my knowledge, was more a philosophy like Stoicism before the 2nd century AD. Maybe that's why it's not sitting with you. In Hinduism we have Vedic alchemy concerning energy, gunas, Sattvic (knowledge), Rajasic (passion), and Tamasic (ignorance), which are derived from Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, or the creator, operator, and destroyer respectively. Tamas guna isn't considered bad per se, it is worldly which impedes spiritual progress, but if you didn't have these things you wouldn't know the meaning of spiritual things. Everything has its time, and we are in the time of darkness, worldliness, and entropy. Could you imagine if all time was composed of the Satya yuga where we're all 30ft tall Blond Aryans made of silicon who feed off of vril/prana energy and just ascend to Brahma Loka in 5 years. It would be boring to say the least, not to mention imagine creation without destruction, such concepts can't exist without one another, and so nothing would exist. You talk of power over others and war and such, I do not know how Buddhism views these beyond guessing, but I know how HInduism views it. Power over others is natural, the caste system establishes as much, and hierarchy is echoed throughout nature. All castes have earned their birth. The Brahmins deal with spiritual matters and advance higher through analytical study, devotional service, the Kshatriyas rule over the nation whilst leading armies and fighting and dying in battles to attain higher planes of existence. Vaishyas advance spiritually by performing prescribed fruitive work, faster without attachment to results, and Shudras the same, but their work is more menial. The word is, do your prescribed duties and not other peoples', work is considered a form of yoga among many other things. If you read the Bhagavad Gita or listen to it wherever else it will answer more of your questions. https://youtu.be/CAwP0U8Ghu4 https://youtu.be/kbyskVU_SUA
(629.46 KB 997x740 1393349683001.png)
<Aryan conquerors praising their divine ancestors and transcedental gods >Psst, hey goyim, what if all your silly pagan gods are actually just different (lesser) aspects of the same universal God, YHWH Saba-, err, Brahman, the One source of everything...? >Don't worry, you can keep your customs, culture and way of life, it's just an insignificant theological detail not impacting you in any practical sense, but it does make you more progressive and enlightened compared to those evil anti-semite bigots among you who want their cows back, they are literal demons who want to lead you astray from the Universal Love (TM). <Hmm, what could possibly go wrong. We are good people after all. Thank you merchant, you are truly my greatest ally. I will reform my religion and declare a crusade against the followers of Angra Manyu Some time and several population-decimating, brother wars later... >Hey there goyim, remember your greatest ally and his fellow illuminated priests? I heard you are having some troubles with the dark Dasyu who keep outbreeding you. How about this, you create a system where you teach them your culture and incorporate them in your society, but as slaves/laborers, while you get to sit like effendi and eat? According to YHW-, err, "Natural Law", we are all of the same substance, but some nations are of higher mental and spiritual development (With, us, his Chosen people being the highest of course he he he) and it's only natural to live in mixed societies with a caste system <Hmm, sounds tempting. >Listen here you brown shi-, err, I mean proud and noble opressed chocolate people. How long will you take the abuse of the White demons? It's time to rise up and kill them all so that you can reclaim your lands and "restore" your culture. Dasyu lives matter! ~3000 years later >Meet Mgumbe Lopez, the transexual preacher of the Universal church of Christ, funded by the Rothschild Foundation. Wotan: It keeps happening. I tried to warn you bros, why didn't you listen. You could have prevented this.
>>13854 This post is retarded on multiple levels. For one, the Vedas have always affirmed Brahman as the Absolute, also identified with the personality of Vishnu, as can be seen in the Rigveda (the same Rigveda where Indra is seen smiting swarthy dasyus). These texts were written down thousands of years before the Jewish covenants with Yahweh, and who knows how much earlier they were actually composed orally before that. The fact that you don't even know that the gods actually exist as much as you and I' shows that you are illiterate when it comes to Vedic religion too.
(671.45 KB 1240x1754 krishna and radha.jpg)
>>13839 It's important to realize that Buddhism itself is a falling away from Sanatana Dharma - and it's important here, of course, to understand the term Sanatana Dharma not as just another time-bounded 'ism' but as the Eternal Natural Way transcending the idea of various denominations and innovations made on top of its foundations. Buddhism incorporates a lot of truth, but ultimately it is flawed for reasons that have already been discussed ITT, and some of them that you mention in your post here. Only Sanatana Dharma truly embraces all aspects of life. This anon here >>13849 gives a great overview. And I myself have posted about the four life-stages in another thread here >>10817. As I mention in this post, there are four goals in life - liberation (moksha), pleasure (kama), economic prosperity (artha) and dharma (behavior in accordance with natural law). A truly Dharmic state would have a large standing-army of kshatriyas reading to defend their people at all costs, and it would also have well-defined rules for the different divisions of labor within the society. Sages and ascetics would be allowed to practice their spiritual disciplines, merchants would be placed in a subordinate position to the larger state and would procure and sell their wares, and the shudras would work diligently to keep the society running. It all works together harmoniously.
>>13884 >For one, the Vedas have always affirmed Brahman as the Absolute Only in the later Vedic period >also identified with the personality of Vishnu Vishnu is a later invention as well >These texts were written down thousands of years before the Jewish covenants with Yahweh Implying their concept of god didn't exist long before them and that no similar (shared root) nations existed before them. Yahweh was modeled after Brahma, but incorporating the whole Brahman as well. Only the earliest Vedic period is relevant for White people, any advaita garbage and toilet witches that came after that are entertaining but meaningless. >Shituf (Hebrew: שִׁתּוּף‎; also transliterated as shittuf or schituf; literally "association") is a term used in Jewish sources for the worship of God in a manner which Judaism does not deem to be purely monotheistic. The term connotes a theology that is not outright polytheistic, but also should not be seen as purely monotheistic. The term is primarily used in reference to the Christian Trinity by Jewish legal authorities who wish to distinguish Christianity from full-blown polytheism. Though a Jew would be forbidden from maintaining a shituf theology, non-Jews would, in some form, be permitted such a theology without being regarded as idolaters by Jews. That said, whether Christianity is shituf or formal polytheism remains a debate in Jewish philosophy Hindu trinity where Vishnu is the preserver and Shiva the destroyer aspect of the single absolute God is perfectly kosher, or rather, in accordance with the Noahide Laws. Which is what gets sold in here under the guise of the "Natural Law" and "Dharma" . The 7 Noahide Laws are rules that all of us must keep, regardless of who we are or from where we come. Without these seven things, it would be impossible for humanity to live together in harmony. 1. Do not profane G‑d’s Oneness in any way. Acknowledge that there is a single G‑d who cares about what we are doing and desires that we take care of His world. 2. Do not curse your Creator. No matter how angry you may be, do not take it out verbally against your Creator. 3. Do not murder. The value of human life cannot be measured. To destroy a single human life is to destroy the entire world—because, for that person, the world has ceased to exist. It follows that by sustaining a single human life, you are sustaining an entire universe. 4. Do not eat a limb of a living animal. Respect the life of all G‑d’s creatures. As intelligent beings, we have a duty not to cause undue pain to other creatures. 5. Do not steal. Whatever benefits you receive in this world, make sure that none of them are at the unfair expense of someone else. 6. Harness and channel the human libido. Incest, adultery, rape and homosexual relations are forbidden. The family unit is the foundation of human society. Sexuality is the fountain of life and so nothing is more holy than the sexual act. So, too, when abused, nothing can be more debasing and destructive to the human being. 7. Establish courts of law and ensure justice in our world. With every small act of justice, we are restoring harmony to our world, synchronizing it with a supernal order. That is why we must keep the laws established by our government for the country’s stability and harmony.
>>13854 The only thing keeping the dasyus as bay was the damn kikes as usual. No kikes = no dasyus. India could've been the Aryan stronghold it promised to be. Also, tell me this - why is it that the caste system must include dasyus? In the past and in future too. Why didn't Aryans, you know, just get rid of them? "Working together in harmony" my ass. The Aryan and the dasyu hated each other. Or, only the dasyu hated the Aryan as the Aryan is clearly superior. Why pretend to "work together in harmony" when both parties had very negative views of each other? Seems a bit like Diversity-Lite. The same mistake all over again. Except it's deemed Dharmic or some gay shit. It's literally diversity but in a reduced form. If Vedicism rises again, get rid of all dasyus. All of em, don't work "with them". I don't know what kind of crack you guys smoke when you say that.
The Encyclopedia Talmudit, edited by rabbi Shlomo Yosef Zevin, states that after the giving of the Torah, the Jewish people were no longer included in the category of the sons of Noah; however, Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot M'lakhim 9:1) indicates that the seven commandments are also part of the Torah, and the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 59a, see also Tosafot ad. loc.) states that Jews are obligated in all things that gentiles are obligated in, albeit with some differences in the details.[6] According to the Encyclopedia Talmudit, most medieval Jewish authorities considered that all the seven commandments were given to Adam, although Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot M'lakhim 9:1) considered the dietary law to have been given to Noah.[6] Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, published and spoke about the Seven Laws of Noah many times. According to Schneerson's view, based on a detailed reading of Maimonides' Hilkhot M'lakhim, the Talmud, and the Hebrew Bible, the seven laws originally given to Noah were given yet again, through Moses at Sinai, and it's exclusively through the giving of the Torah that the seven laws derive their current force.[21] What has changed with the giving of the Torah is that now, it is the duty of the Jewish people to bring the rest of the world to fulfill the Seven Laws of Noah.[22]
>>13899 >India could've been the Aryan stronghold it promised to be If Indo-Europeans remained united and kept smiting the Dasyus instead of a sizable group of them adopting the universalist morality promoted by subversive cultural pact priesthood (no different from Marxists of today), waging war on those who didn't, the whole India might have been White at one point. This was the red channel of miscegenation >why is it that the caste system must include dasyus? It doesn't. It was originally Whites only, but they either had to accept darkies because they got surrounded by their much larger population, or, they got lured with the idea of having slaves/cheap labor. This was the blue channel of miscegenation. After a while, proto-kikes have managed to rile up the brown underclass to revolt and send the Aryans in exile or kill them. >Why pretend to "work together in harmony" when both parties had very negative views of each other? Seems a bit like Diversity-Lite. The same mistake all over again Exactly, but it was likely a forced move and an attempt to survive, so they shouldn't be judged too harshly. >Except it's deemed Dharmic or some gay shit Not if you interpret Dharma as "proper conduct" . It's definition and purpose is a subject of debate among anons.
>>13899 >>13908 I'm torn anons, on two things, but this is something I hadn't considered--the idea that proto-kikes had subverted Indian society at some point to allow casteless people to be made Shudras. I really don't take stock in historical consensus, and I'm sure India was never invaded by Aryans but we were always there, all of Bhu Loka in-fact. It doesn't feel right to have basically animal-men roving around most of the world doing nothing but destroying Aryan bloodlines when given the chance. Their aptitude should dictate their purpose as their natural traits would be the will of god. By and large, they can't make a nation, they can't think tactically for battles, they can't even be in a managerial position without vying for their in-group, be it race, tribe, or family and every bit of authority seems to turn into just that at any level if they have the autonomy. They can work and that's about it for most of them. They're still people, maybe a degraded form because of the Kali Yuga, but still able to comprehend the truth if given it in earnest. I know for a fact they aren't always resentful, it's a phenomenon that occurs when a kike riles them up, so unnatural, but of course us living together might not be natural either. What is natural is hierarchy and the ecology and symbiosis of compatible things. You can't really fight the effects of the Kali Yuga in its time, likewise, you can't fight the effects of the Satya Yuga in its time. Thus, in the Kali Yuga it would make sense to expel these lower people from society as was allegedly done with Somalis, but at the same time it causes economical problems in any case, and Whites are prone to schism of ideas, lust for power, and justice because we are meant to be arbiters of such things. The whole affair upsets the natural order assuming shudras are darkskinned or otherwise non-White people, but it is certainly better than browning out the world immediately or giving the mouse some cheese. So much is an X factor in working all of it out, and speculation like this is derided for a reason in our literature. I tend to go with whatever feels right from intuition, but I'm no Rishi yet, ha.
>>13896 >Only in the later Vedic period <accepting the chronology made by Christians to literally try to destroy Vedic religion ISHYGDDT. >Vishnu is a later invention as well Demonstrating your ignorance again. Rigveda HYMN XXII <18 Visnu, the Guardian, he whom none deceiveth, made three steps; thenceforth Establishing his high decrees. <19 Look ye on Visnu's works, whereby the Friend of Indra, close−allied, Hath let his holy ways be seen. <20 The princes evermore behold that loftiest place where Visnu is, Laid as it were an eye in heaven. <21 This, Vishnu's station most sublime, the singers, ever vigilant, Lovers of holy song, light up Samaveda Decade II Indra <9. Through all this world strode Vishnu: thrice his foot he planted, and the whole Was gathered in his footstep's dust. There are even more mentions of him, but I won't make this post a TL;DR. The fact that the first quote gives Vishnu the loftiest place and the most sublime station is very telling. In the second quotation, the story of the three strides of Vishnu is mentioned, which appears in later Puranic texts as well. This refers to the fact that in one story, Vishnu takes three strides which encompass the entirety of the universe. >Hindu trinity Christian hoax. Does not exist. This shit about the Noahide Laws you are quoting is classic bad faith arguing.
>>13908 >It's definition and purpose is a subject of debate among anons. No, it's not. It's as clear as day but kikes ITT try to muddy the waters. Proper epistemology is essential to this whole endeavor and it is extremely clear on how we know these things. Dharma is Natural Law, and Dharma is another name for God (as seen in texts such as the Vishnu Sahasranāma, etc). When we ask how we can know Dharma, we also need to be asking how do we know God at all. Vedic epistemology teaches us that the intellect and sense-organs alone are insufficient for this task, so this also not the way to know Dharma. Dharma is communicated primarily through the medium of an enlightened rishi, who has can put the contents of his mystical experience and knowledge into śastra (texts), which is the literary form of Śabda, or the Divine Word experienced by rishis at the grace of God. This is completely scientific too. The declarations of the rishis can be considered as hypotheses, and the method for testing said hypotheses is sadhana or spiritual practice, while the ultimate realizations that they themselves experienced would be the conclusion allowing us to verify the claims. This is the ultimate proof the validity of śastra as a proper epistemic mechanism for knowing Dharma and God. From a lower level of realization, this is exactly how Dharma is known, through scriptural revelations handed down to us from tradition. It is of course not wholly divorced from our own natures, but without an idea of what Dharma is, intellect and empirical methods will not teach us what Natural Law is, and the failure of this is seen in the Enlightenment and modernity in general, which has gradually abandoned revelation as a valid epistemic mechanism at all through rationalism, textual criticism, materialism and the like. >>13917 Yeah, shudras are basically just meant to work and serve the three highest castes. Them becoming this uppity is essentially a product of kike influence and propaganda. Their minds have been poisoned by Marxist and liberal ideas of equality, class war, privilege, oppression and all of that. It's important to realize that there are White shudras as well. We don't need to fill our lands with non-Whites, especially in the Kali Yuga when Shudras are already becoming a problem and society is being ruled by quantity over quality and other radical egalitarian ideas. I don't really have any desire to kill them all like some people do here, but I don't want them in my neighborhood, I don't want them mixing with my community and I don't want to be forced to integrate with them if I don't choose to.
>>13917 >the idea that proto-kikes had subverted Indian society at some point to allow casteless people to be made Shudras Gypsies got exiled, but after several attempts of the Indian king to integrate them. He even gave them land, which was indicative of them being promoted to a caste. It would be nice if some Pajeet anon could share some local accounts of them, as most western sources are useless. I know from direct sources that they have their own court (similar to Jews), that they don't recognize any state authority, and that they consider anyone doing honest work to be a subhuman. They are also rather inclusive, despite their seemingly open character. They were known to steal White babies so they can raise them as gypsies and mix with them. I think they might be a key lead for investigating what happened in India in ancient times. They might as well be the proto-jews of some kind, seeing how the kikes put them on pedestal today. >and I'm sure India was never invaded by Aryans I don't find this likely, as Aryans were constantly migrating, it's as if they were constantly trying to move away from something ... But they could be there in a much older period of history, many thousands of years ago. Which raises the question of fossil records. While they do show a presence, it was never a majority of population. >I know for a fact they aren't always resentful Their natural state would be friendly, as I assume we would be if we encountered some alien ubermensch bringing advanced science and technology, but there could be many factors contributing to their resentment towards Whites. It's not that either side was at fault, it was simply inevitable due to differences. Whites can be exceedingly arrogant without having much to back it up with, but non-Whites also find it hard to know their place. >but at the same time it causes economical problems Only in jew-minded economies. 3rd Reich achieved an economic miracle by using mostly their own people. >and Whites are prone to schism of ideas, lust for power, and justice because we are meant to be arbiters of such things Exactly, with the exception of some east Asians, Whites are the only race that was often split according to purely ideological factors, others just merely exist and go with the flow, or use ideologies solely in sophist sense, in order to gain advantage over another group of their own people.
>>13936 The main argument against the idea of the Aryan invasion comes down to various sorts of astronomical and hydrological references in the earliest stratum of Vedic scriptures. For example, there is apparently some evidence that several rivers mentioned in the Rigveda would push back the date of the work significantly. The invasion / migration is alleged to have happened ~1,500 BCE but several of the rivers mentioned and identified are said to have dried up in ~1,900 BCE (Sarasvati River) and ~2,600 BCE (Dṛṣtadvati River), respectively, and the astronomical references in the Rigveda are apparently of a significantly older date (ca. ~2,500 BCE) if accurate than what scholars have theorized. It is also strange that such a migration or invasion was not in cultural memory in the same way Abraham's migration was in the Bible. What we do see, of course, is a race war against dark-skinned people and the destruction of forts and cities. Genetic data (as unreliable as it may be in our current controlled science and academia) also lends support to White admixture in the highest castes even today. All of this might lend to the theory that Aryans have been indigenous to this area, as well as Europe, the Iranian plateau, etc. Combined with data collected in the thread here on the history of the Aryan race all over the world, this does not seem extremely far-fetched, at least.
>>13934 How many times was Vishnu mentioned in The Upanishads, especially the earlier ones? Implying most of the texts weren't edited countless times to reflect the Dravidian beliefs, that are essentially Poodaism (Judaism for poos). So according to you, all western scholars who have studied those texts were Christians that wanted to destroy the Vedic religion? >>13935 >and Dharma is another name for God In the beginning there was Word, and Word was God .... >or the Divine Word experienced by rishis at the grace of God Like Moses on Mt. Sinai, amirite? >From a lower level of realization, this is exactly how Dharma is known, through scriptural revelations handed down to us from tradition And interpreted by the learned rabbis? But instead of pointing out the similarities, to avoid arguing in the bad faith, I'll let you point out how is your epistemology different from the one utilized by various forms of Judaism, or how much it diverges from a religious framework permitted for the "righteous gentiles" .
>>13935 Exactly, Rhodesia comes to mind. I didn't mean to say we should cohabitate during the Kali Yuga, but that during prior yugas they would end up in our lands as laborers or people on the path of spiritual enlightenment to earn higher birth. I'm not sure how familiar you are with this, but there are paintings dated in the early 1600s of native Whites in America and some American Whites contain a haplogroup not found in any Europeans. Mix that with Sanskrit substrate being present in Navajo, Zuni, Hopi, and other adjacent tribes, along with caucasian mummies being found from Florida to (((Kali)))fornia, and giant mummies with red hair found in Incan, Aztec, and Mayan dig sites. High grade steel tools being found in the mountain ranges of Alaska supposedly from old Korean-Japanese wars drifting over. What really went on? >>13936 Thanks anon, I always forget gypsies are around there; intuitively, they are a piece of the puzzle, I'll follow up on this with some people and see what's to see. I do want to clarify though >I don't find this likely, as Aryans were constantly migrating I just don't trust the academia bro, at least a section of us were always migrating at some point, the mongols used to be quite different, not White, but not as we know them phenotypically now. >Only in jew-minded economies. 3rd Reich achieved an economic miracle by using mostly their own people. I just meant the sudden expulsion of a large labor force, it takes time to recover from that. All for the better in the Kali Yuga though--look at Oman and Yemen. >>13960 I guess all the European folk religions are Judaic in nature too. Judaism used to be Dharmic as well as Christianity--before the Council of Nicaea Christians believed in reincarnation, and many people referred to Christ as Jesus Krishna. This knowledge predates Christianity's supposed inception and bastardization. No amount of you pointing out disciplic succession being present in a religion will make it Jewish. If a religion stood up for it's race is that Jewish? certainly not because it's reaching. Pointing out similarities between religions and their etymology won't turn heads either. Look up perennialism, then understand that the Canaanite religion, along with every purportedly known folk religion, has a mountain (or tree) where the gods live and new people descend from at the end of time (an era). >In the beginning there was Word, and Word was God .... this is lifted directly from our religious texts. The idea is, O and m, are the sound all other sounds are based upon, making any other letter's noise with your lips, it's breath, and you can't make any other without it. Om, is a name for god because breath itself is life, and that would not exist without Brahma. I don't trust academia at all, nor the (((consensus))) on modern history or science that takes huge skeletons and destroys them to weave a narrative and ignores entire sunken cities at it its integrity's zenith. All of it is at best half-true, and at worst fabrication. It takes one generation to believe something happened, it takes another to make it history. Undeniably have kikes tried to make Sanatana Dharma inaccessible; some obscure texts have been destroyed on purpose and extant ones largely translated horribly.
>>13974 >some American Whites contain a haplogroup not found in any Europeans >Sanskrit substrate being present in Navajo, Zuni, Hopi, and other adjacent tribes >caucasian mummies being found from Florida to (((Kali)))fornia >giant mummies with red hair found in Incan, Aztec, and Mayan dig sites. Wait, what? That sounds fascinating, but I've never heard of any of this before. Were are you getting this info? >before the Council of Nicaea Christians believed in reincarnation >many people referred to Christ as Jesus Krishna Pretty curious about this too.
>>13975 Robert Sepehr has good documentation on most of it, but if you look up most of what you greentexted--look up his videos and it's like a springboard. Allegedly Justinian, along with the 4th or 5th council of Nicaea got rid of reincarnation in the Bible I think it was earlier than this, but there's no way to tell. This is the etymology of the two words. Prabhupada was based, ISKON has been fucked by jews since his death (assassination) https://krishna.org/christ-and-krishna-the-name-is-the-same/
>>13978 >>13975 yeah, there are books from the 17th century that talk about "blonde eskimos". and, they talk about there having been an advanced civilization in north america pre 1400's.
>>13937 I've seen hypotheses that Aryans were present there in several different periods, which is likely where most of the confusion stems from. Especially if we extend the history of 'humans' to go tens of thousands of years in the past. Since the transmission was mostly oral without strict temporal references, and since history is cyclical, it would be hard to draw the lines. >>13974 >native Whites in America and some American Whites contain a haplogroup not found in any Europeans You should check this book out regardless of what you think of the author >I'll follow up on this with some people and see what's to see Good, there must be something in the archives of India regarding them, and some groups of them still live in India. >I just don't trust the academia bro, at least a section of us were always migrating at some point Me neither, but it shouldn't be completely disregarded either, even if most of the history taught today is grossly misinterpreted or outright falsified. But there does seem to be a trend of constant movement, exploration and conquest are common traits for non-domesticated Whites. >I just meant the sudden expulsion of a large labor force Why would they need a disproportionally large labor force in the first place? >I guess all the European folk religions are Judaic in nature too They did get influenced by those elements to a lesser or greater degree at certain periods of history. The corruption goes a long way back, the appearance of Judaism was only one of it's milestones. Worship of the creator and the individual forms (or assumed totality) of creation are signs of spiritual blindness, characteristic for the lesser races. What set Whites apart was the knowledge of Atman, the transcendent Self, that's higher than any Brahman. That's one of main reasons why various proto-kikes (and modern kikes) have been trying to destroy, degenerate and spiritually confuse the White race. You observe Abrahamism as a symptom while failing to observe the forces which spawned it in the first place. >Om, is a name for god because breath itself is life, and that would not exist without Brahma Breath is movement, or vibration. Voice is what gives vibration a certain mathematical form. There is no creation without vibration (science confirms this as well). Brahma is merely a god (one of) who commands Brahman to generate phenomena (Maya), but neither him nor Brahman are God, nor does the universal God exist. That doesn't mean that there are no cosmic archetypes and natural laws, since any creation has to abide by some in order to work out.
>>13980 God is not impersonal. I've seen through my eyelids in greyscaled fisheye-lens effect after doing Oms and had a tree fall down feet in front of the car after asking Krishna questions. Your appeal to historical authority while denouncing it does not confuse anyone. You point to migratory and characteristic trends while rejecting religious ones. I am not interested in your regurgitated babbling. Anything flawed from foundation is not worth my notice, go sit under a tree or in your bed and perform Bhakti yoga and theurgic meditation. Thank you for another Serrano book.
>>13989 >God is not impersonal Gods take interest in those addressing them with sufficient devotion or otherwise warranting or earning their attention. >I've seen through my eyelids in greyscaled fisheye-lens effect after doing Oms and had a tree fall down feet in front of the car after asking Krishna questions Om is a powerful tool, it's not wise to wield it without the proper training. And how can you be sure that "Krishna" was not an aspect of your own mind, or some impostor deity trying to incite you to do it's will? What did it communicate to you by the way? I am certain that Moses was equally impressed by the burning bush. >Your appeal to historical authority while denouncing it does not confuse anyone I am denouncing the false narratives that were carefully shaped by certain priesthoods over the course of history >You point to migratory and characteristic trends while rejecting religious ones I am pointing to inherent tendencies and urges of Aryans to explore and conquer new lands (in both physical and metaphysical sense), in contrast to the animal-men who only do what religions and cultural projections tell them. What other 'unusual' things have happened to you? I am genuinely curious. As for my "babbling", take of it as you want. It's your own choice ultimately.
>>13960 >How many times was Vishnu mentioned in The Upanishads, especially the earlier ones? Usually the term used is 'Brahman' referring to the Absolute. This is because 'Brahman' is a philosophical term above all, and the Upanishads were / are philosophical and esoteric texts. This said, some Upanishads do not refrain from explicitly giving an actual name to the concept of Brahman. For example in the Katha Upanishad, one of the most important and oldest Upanishads, considered part of the Black Yajurveda. In the canon of the 108 most authoritative Upanishads, the Katha Upanishad is listed as #3. Dating these texts is borderline impossible, but scholars list it at around 600 to 500 BCE. Not sure what their evidence or methodology is though. In the ninth verse of the third chapter of the Katha Upanishad, the following is stated: <When a man's mind is his reigns, intellect, his charioteer; He reaches the end of the road, the highest step of Viṣṇu Notice how much overlap we have with the statements in the Rigveda shown here: >>13934 >Implying most of the texts weren't edited countless times to reflect the Dravidian beliefs There's no proof of this. Also especially with the Vedas, these are written in a poetic meter. They are hymns. It's very difficult to edit the language of these hymns - we have gayatri (3 verses of 8 syllables), anushtubh (4×8), trishtubh (4×11) and jagati (4×12). If the syllables and vowel lengths don't work out, you can't just stuff whatever words you want in there without the whole composition becoming untangled. >that are essentially Poodaism (Judaism for poos). The caste system as interpreted by modern Brahmins today isn't even supported in their own texts. >So according to you, all western scholars who have studied those texts were Christians that wanted to destroy the Vedic religion? Many of them have been. Max Müller, one of the founders of modern Indology and Orientalism comes to mind: <India is much riper for Christianity than Rome or Greece were at the time of St. Paul. The rotten tree has for some time had artificial supports, because its fall would have been inconvenient for the government. But if the Englishman comes to see that the tree must fall, sooner or later, then the thing is done... I should like to lay down my life, or at least to lend my hand to bring about this struggle... I do not at all like to go to India as a missionary, that makes one dependent on the parsons... I should like to live for ten years quite quietly and learn the language, try to make friends, and see whether I was fit to take part in a work, by means of which the old mischief of Indian priestcraft could be overthrown and the way opened for the entrance of simple Christian teaching... <The translation of the Veda will hereafter tell to a great extent on the fate of India, and on the growth of millions of souls in that country. It is the root of their religion, and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, is the only way of uprooting all that has sprung from it during the last 3,000 years... one ought to be up and doing what may be God's work. Many modern Indologists are Jews too. (((Wendy Doniger))) is a good example.
>>13960 >In the beginning there was Word, and Word was God .... The Logos of Christianity was taken from Greek philosophy. Heraclitus, etc. I hope you don't think this is some sort of grand BTFO. Plus, the Logos in Christianity is a particular hypostasis of the Trinity that is begotten by the Father and creates the world. Vedic traditions have nothing like that. Dharma is Natural Law, a transcendent ordering principle of reality, and one could probably say God in his role as the final cause of all reality. Dharma isn't some sort of hypostasis either. >Like Moses on Mt. Sinai, amirite? >And interpreted by the learned rabbis? <YOU CAN'T JUST HAVE SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY IN YOUR RELIGION Let me guess how I know that you almost surely live in a Protestant-influenced milieu. Every traditional Aryan society has a class with spiritual authority. Brahmanas, Druids, Flamines, etc. Spirituality is not a free-for-all. >I'll let you point out how is your epistemology different from the one utilized by various forms of Judaism, or how much it diverges from a religious framework permitted for the "righteous gentiles" . Tell me what the fuck 'Jewish epistemology' is and maybe we'll talk.
>>13978 >Prabhupada was based Oh god another niggerlover. I swear the hinduism covert shilling is to incorporate poos or something. Now I get that vedicisim is what is apparent here and vedicism is not followed by poos. But some other anons have been veering off to hinduism in general and that's starting to annoy me. I'm sure Tarrant would've not wanted to know about the beliefs of pooniggers. So what are we doing here?
>>14022 >So what are we doing here? What are (you) doing here? This board has talked about this stuff for years now. Prabhupada is based and you can cry more. > I'm sure Tarrant would've not wanted to know <muh Tarrant
>>14026 <<muh Tarrant Holy shit you outed yourself.
>>14027 I was thinking the same exact thing about you. Your completely out-of-the-blue appeal to Tarrant was just bizarre. He's irrelevant to any discussion going on in this thread and certainly no sort of authority for any views that I hold, even if I have no problems per se with his attack.
>>14008 >Usually the term used is 'Brahman' referring to the Absolute. Atman was also referred to as the Absolute, in the sense of absolute (higher, absolutely individualized) Self (microcosm), that's the synergic totality of your own temporal egos and their divine quintessence (if you have one), NOT some kind of universal, singular Self. Brahman was the similar idea applied to the external existence (universe, macrocosm), and these two eventually got erroneously (or purposefully) confused to be one and the same in order to present monism as the final conclusion of the Vedic philosophy. Alternatively, it can be interpreted that your individual Atman (that's wholly and ultimately separate from other Atmans, unless you are an NPC, in which case you truly do partake of a "mind of god" that has spawned you as an instance) also contains within it the whole potential of Brahman (finite forms, sets and archetypes of creation) which allows it to partake of external creations, create, and communicate with other unique Atmans. This is no way implies any kind of universalist totality, quintessential oneness, monotheism, singular pantheism, materialistic atomism and other subversive doctrines of self-annihilation that were the cornerstone of every egalitarian, anti-White and Judaized movement in history (What Christianity, Judaism, Islam, various sorts of profane nature worshiping subhuman "pagan" priesthoods, Freemasonry, Marxism, Buddhism, Judaism, Secular humanism, "enlightened Greek paganism" etc. all have in common, because they are all products of the same (((universal priesthood))) that predates Judaism, but works towards the immanetization of it's (esoteric) eschaton by ensuring that only the false alternatives (or rather, illusions of alternatives/choice) are given to non-Jews, where the god of Abraham gets fully equalized with the "God of One", giving him absolute metaphysical control over all the slaves who accept any of the aforementioned beliefs and philosophies. In other words, if you are not your own Atman (as the highest principle), partaking in the collective, transcendent (Aryan, twice born) racial soul without which there is no metaphysical differentiation, you will be someone else's Brahman (recyclable building material). >B-but it refers to a single Atman Can you experience multiple Atmans at once? Ironically, the highest step mentioned in your quote relates to a limit of individual (mental) perception, not absolute truth or totality. You then proceed to superimpose this limit on everything, but there is no such thing. Vishnu is one of the guardians of threshold, hence the title "preserver". >It's very difficult to edit the language of these hymns Perhaps, but not impossible if you know the structure. As for interpretations, I can pick random quotes and interpret them in various ways as well. >Max Müller He likely had to justify his works among the Christian-minded academia of the time. His symbolic interpretation of the Vedas doesn't give Christianity much credit either, bible would be debunked for the most part if he applied the same criteria to it. Either way, those texts on a whole are not particularly useful for Whites, nor should be considered as a religion. We can only consult them to try to reconstruct some gems of wisdom lost over the course of history and find some historical references.
>>14014 >a transcendent ordering principle of reality It's a mathematical function of time applied to probabilistic configurations. Some functions are universal, some are variable. True Dharma reflects immanent metaphysical principles, which do get implied in Vedic texts, but require proper interpretation. Hermeticism is one of them, although not the best. >Let me guess how I know that you almost surely live in a Protestant-influenced milieu Nope, mostly materialistic crypto-commies and Orthodox christcucks Led by priests appointed by communist gov agencies >Every traditional Aryan society has a class with spiritual authority They were more of a "wise men" and consultants to kings than some kind of organized clergy with scriptural traditions (which is antithetical to the regal function of Aryan aristocracy). If you are Aryan, spiritual authority is IMMANENT in your very blood, the only question is will you remember it or not and will there be someone more "awake" to help you with it. >Spirituality is not a free-for-all. Of course not, the great majority of people (especially non-Whites) don't have a spirit to begin with. If you do, no priesthood is necessary. If you don't, no priesthood in the world will help you to obtain one. >Tell me what the fuck 'Jewish epistemology' is and maybe we'll talk. Plenty of resources for that on the internet. Maybe we should invite some rabbi to post on /fascist/ for the lulz?
>>14022 >I swear the hinduism covert shilling is to incorporate poos or something. A large number of hindu-tards here are either shitskins who pretend to be White on here or are just Dharmic LARPers who clearly have never read nor do what they preach other from their Vedic PDFs and quotes. So many anons here prove that all of what they discuss is a mere joke, because most of us here are very egoistical and proceed to insult anyone who disagrees with them. The warlord nerd in the wahmen thread is an example of what I'm talking about. The state of modern hinduism is not that different from catholicism.
>>14033 I think you're arguing against a strawman and don't even grasp the meanings of half the terms you are using here. I am arguing from a framework that admits no sort of 'self-annihilation' or 'absolute oneness monism' or other nonsense.
>>13616 >See Godel's incompleteness theorems. And aside from hiding behind big words and theorems, what have you as a relevant answer to my question? I grow tired of your pretentious shit. >Even if we disregard mathematics, if such a single Source existed, no originating would be necessary (or possible) And yet you do not explain why. By definition a source implies a movement into an expanse, a destination. >A single source can neither account for the different perspectives, which might as well be "larger" than any supposed sum of manifestation. Some trying to sound smart and get to the point. >That concept is paradoxical. As if paradoxes were an issue. >It's a scrying tool, you see what your subconsciousness projects onto it, not what it objectively means. You're a complete moron. The encoding is plainly practical and has been widely used for eons now. Stop pretending knowing what you do not know. Post a reply when you'll actually be capable and willing to contribute to this topic.
>>13623 >Then collect every letter of the Elder Futhark and any of the variations or ones we have not or cannot rediscover and tell me their numerical values and then you can feel free to show me how Nordic Numerology and Gematria(a Hebrew word) works, even though we have no evidence such a thing existed prior to interaction with christianity. Sure we have evidence they used their letters to represent numbers like the Greeks and romans did but this is standard practice that all cultures used in the absence of a separate number system So essentially all you want is a nigger tier atheist alphabet that cannot even contain any deep meaning and value even before using it to build up words. >It's jewish because, it's first recorded use is with jews, Letters are symbols themselves, and like all symbols must come to resonate with harmonics, geometry and numbers one way or another. If it seems that Jews have done it first, it tells a lot about how low we have fallen. But this state of affairs you think you're observing is only an illusion. >Nobody else looked for messages in scripture that are "hidden" because NOBODY ELSE HAD SCRIPTURES There were scriptures in India and Egypt too, even before Jews became something in their neighborhood. Jews were not ignorant of the oral law either. >I used the quotes because there is no possible way there were things hidden in the bible of any merit. Especially not when it has been written, rewritten, translated, and retranslated, seventy-five thousand times. > It could not possibly have been done by hidden Aryan priests preserving knowledge each and every time, making sure everything was perfectly, in exactly the right order it should be in to convey the proper message when decoded and Quintuply so when translated into the modern English he used which has a radically different syntax and grammar than nearly any other language on earth.. This perfectly proves that you haven't read anything, otherwise you would know why this doesn't matter at all. You merely skimmed a few of his works at best. Again, read his works and then come back to me commenting on them. The rebuttal to your point is contained in them.
>>13766 I think they've gone elsewhere due to this board strong turn into WN during the last twelve months. >>13768 >There's a poster here who often seems a little too over the top, I bet he is a non-White. It would make a lot of sense. Lemme guess. Redtextanon? >>13839 But Gautama was into MGTOW, he was a 'VOLCEL. >>13844 >For the last hundred to two hundred years, every religion has been compromised to deal with the liberal world order we are currently living under. These changes were made by weak men, not by the teaching of the religion. Weak men have a first class ticket to paradise. They didn't really have to work hard to subvert anything.
>>13908 >It doesn't. It was originally Whites only, but they either had to accept darkies because they got surrounded by their much larger population, or, they got lured with the idea of having slaves/cheap labor. This was the blue channel of miscegenation. After a while, proto-kikes have managed to rile up the brown underclass to revolt and send the Aryans in exile or kill them. Same shit happened in Rome. "they be taking our jobs!" laughing in Sanskrit >Not if you interpret Dharma as "proper conduct" . It's definition and purpose is a subject of debate among anons. Proper conduct in a White ethnostate is a foregone conclusion.
>>13935 Many would object that it fails the scientific principles because it entirely escapes our five senses and thus cannot be observed and analyzed, predicted and repeated. Shudras need guidance, true freedom is almost alien to them. Their minds become poisoned and they drunk with elusive ideas of power and unattainable freedom. Yet all they seek is bliss, with the most basic needs satiated and little to no hardship to be met in their way towards this goal. But the shudras would not get anywhere if not for the vaishnas thinking too highly of themselves too. Then again this would not happen if the kshatriyas were true to their responsibilities. However these must be dictated by higher minds in observance of Dharma. It is of interest to note that the Jews hardly reach above the level of vaishnas had such a caste existed in their nation. Their soldiers for the most part are a joke, so much that would they happen to be of the essence of their own caste which would present the codes of military powers, we would see them to be subservient to the vaishnas animated with the vilest and grossest mind that could be nurtured in the most heinous specimens of the shudras caste. >>13936 There are strong links between certain European gypsies customs and ancient Eastern Semitic practices almost entirely preserved in Jewish books. This said, the gypsies would most likely not have moved out of an India during the early Vedic times, unless I get it wrong, them walking out seems a relatively more recent endeavor. Not to bundle all types of roaming nomadic people together while failing to notice strong cultural differences, I know for a fact that to steal is considered normal, good and necessary by all members of their endogamous groups. >>13937 >The main argument against the idea of the Aryan invasion comes down to various sorts of astronomical and hydrological references in the earliest stratum of Vedic scriptures. For example, there is apparently some evidence that several rivers mentioned in the Rigveda would push back the date of the work significantly. Working from memory, I seem to recall that the Indus is never mentioned. In fact the entire topic of geographical referencing in the early scriptures is of utmost importance for the valuable mapping to be extracted. But I would agree with the former anon about Whites migrating significantly. Former times have been harsh for the whole of humanity for many thousands of years.
>>13975 Some Amerindian tribes retain forms of knowledge and respect for stellar compounds, and even the swastika, which denote a clear influence that was not limited to the northern American continent. One tribe remembers tall Whites teaching them, a long long time ago, in their distant past, how to build fishnets. There is another easily found history of a war against a tribe of Whites, which the red Asians describe as having been hostile cannibals (this account could be totally biased) and tells of their final demise as they got smocked out of a cave they had taken refuge in, before being killed any time one of these Whites came out of said cave. As for Nicaea it's totally confirmed, it was a massive event that lasted the better part of a year during which many sources were gathered and compared. Those that didn't make the cut most certainly got slated for destruction. I'm not so hot on the "giant" mummies, but there have been definitive traces of some White migrations covering the Azores, Canaries, central America (even observed during the colonization, it's absolutely mind boggling when one thinks of it!) and Peru, the latter case still allowing for some very White mischlings living as isolated pockets in isolated areas. They built their stone houses as cylinders capped with conical roofs.
>>13980 >Why would they need a disproportionally large labor force in the first place? - rebuild cities - farm food after an ecological disaster* - grand architectural projects - hedonism * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRcu-ysocX4 http://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/p10185.pdf >>13980 >The corruption goes a long way back, the appearance of Judaism was only one of it's milestones. Worship of the creator and the individual forms (or assumed totality) of creation are signs of spiritual blindness, characteristic for the lesser races. What set Whites apart was the knowledge of Atman, the transcendent Self, that's higher than any Brahman. That's one of main reasons why various proto-kikes (and modern kikes) have been trying to destroy, degenerate and spiritually confuse the White race. You observe Abrahamism as a symptom while failing to observe the forces which spawned it in the first place. The idea that this form of worship would be a corruption is unsubstantiated. It does make sense to worship the being, the intermediary agent that is responsible of what is and moves, perhaps for the same reason we praise rock stars and not the science of music itself. It is also understandable how for the sake of simplicity and because, too, of a sound logic, many people would have rolled everything one practical super god that knows all and can do everything. A significant problem would arise the moment an excessive focus would be put onto the creating force as an organizer while forgetting about the greater whole.
>>14008 >There's no proof of this. Also especially with the Vedas, these are written in a poetic meter. They are hymns. It's very difficult to edit the language of these hymns - we have gayatri (3 verses of 8 syllables), anushtubh (4×8), trishtubh (4×11) and jagati (4×12). If the syllables and vowel lengths don't work out, you can't just stuff whatever words you want in there without the whole composition becoming untangled. Sure there is that but let's not pretend they are totally tempering-proof too. A good knowledge of the works, the language and its lexicon could be enough to fool many people. Then, a considerable promotion of the new version would finish to make it more well known. Eventually a destruction of the older material would be exercized when possible too. >The caste system as interpreted by modern Brahmins today isn't even supported in their own texts. The caste system today is ridiculous, it's massively fragmentary, they just made up entire strata as some part of social appeal to any whimsical group of people who thought they deserved this or that and made enough noise about it. >>14014 >Let me guess how I know that you almost surely live in a Protestant-influenced milieu. Every traditional Aryan society has a class with spiritual authority. Brahmanas, Druids, Flamines, etc. Spirituality is not a free-for-all. The idea that anyone could become a priest after reading a book is absolute contrary to the very idea of a true spiritual lineage, but it's been one of the democratic staples of Protestantism.
>>14022 >I'm sure Tarrant would've not wanted to know about the beliefs of pooniggers. Who cares about this punk and why bring him in this discussion? He wasn't a spiritual authority in the slightest, his opinion would not matter at all, and for your information, he was still curious enough about alien faith so as to go Pakland and pray in a mosque once there. On the other hand I concur that the Hinduism shilling is downright unacceptable.
>>14120 >Sure there is that but let's not pretend they are totally tempering-proof too. A good knowledge of the works, the language and its lexicon could be enough to fool many people. Then, a considerable promotion of the new version would finish to make it more well known. Eventually a destruction of the older material would be exercized when possible too. You're not entirely wrong here, it could be done, but it would be very difficult. On top of the fact that they are hymns composed in a certain meter, traditionally they were also oral and memorized, which would make things even more difficult. It would be like trying to change the Qur'an. There are at least several million Muslims who allegedly have the entire work memorized, all 114 or so chapters, so at least in the Arabic, the Qur'an will not be subverted any time soon. If we were to allege that the Vedas have been tampered with substantially we'd of course need evidence too, such as multiple diverging versions and competing versions of the Vedas. I am not aware of any such thing existing, personally. It would be rather difficult, I imagine, to tamper with orally-memorized hymns across a subcontinent larger than Europe in an era with bad transportation, communication and the like. >The caste system today is ridiculous, it's massively fragmentary, they just made up entire strata as some part of social appeal to any whimsical group of people who thought they deserved this or that and made enough noise about it. Yes, the caste system supported by the Vedic scriptures is much more meritocratic. You aren't a Brahmin because you're born a Brahmin, traditionally. We can also see examples of people such as Vishvamitra, a kshatriya, gradually honing his spiritual abilities until he is initiated as a Brahmin by the gods. It's a fossilized degenerate social system today.
>>14037 >They were more of a "wise men" and consultants to kings Not really, they didn't just serve kings/leaders and educate the aristocracy and/or masses. Aryan priests were also judges/law-makers, handled sarcifices, rituals and rites. They were uptmost important and seen as a nescessity to a functional Indo-European society. Although you are correct, they did not accept or appoint just anyone as a spiritual leader because they knew what a bunch of scriptures said. Institutions are antithetical to the natural law and Dharma.
>>14118 >One tribe remembers tall Whites teaching them, a long long time ago, in their distant past, how to build fishnets. And what a mistake that was. Next time, no questions asked; pure massacre on these swarthy creatures. And other kinds of swarthy creatures like the spics etc. Besides what good did natives bring? Their chiefs have stupid names and their whole religion involves demonic sacrifice. They should not be existing on this timeline but somehow they do. You know why? Because WE LET THEM. Our ancestors made an obvious mistake.
>>14092 >hiding behind big words and theorems A lazy answer, true. But we would gradually arrive there anyway. >By definition a source implies a movement into an expanse, a destination. If the source contains everything (totality), it has no reason to expand because any possible expansion/manifestation would already be manifest within it, and all of it's possibilities would be already concluded. Secondly, there would be no room for it to manifest/expand into, due to it already containing everything (including all of space, physical or abstract). In other words, it would have neither the will or compulsion to move, nor the ability for it. It would be an eternal stasis, and since this source would already contain all the perspectives as well (of you, me, an ant or a tree), there would be no individuation or reflection and thus no ability for any such source to know itself (contradicting the claim of it containing absolute knowledge and wisdom). Any such whole cannot be greater than the sum of it's parts. Further, if such source contains ALL THERE IS, then any phenomena must be a part of it a-priori, including the illusion of posterior existence. Which further means that everything is connected and inseparable at the ultimate level, that there is no true individuality, freedom of choice or point to existence. From there, you can arrive either to total nihilism or some kind of universal love where you love everything that exists. Which is exactly the false-dichotomy pushed by kikes today, through their atheistic materialism and universalist religions. If you have something other on mind, then explain it instead of acting like you have PMS. >The encoding is plainly practical and has been widely used for eons now Practical as a divination tool. But feel free to elaborate why you think it's anything more than that.
>>14101 >Same shit happened in Rome. And every other White ethnostate. Half of them got poz'd with egalitarian religions, philosophies etc. which exploited their pathological altruism, the other half got poz'd through short term economic interests, greed and petty interests. It was no different than today. The few politicians who are not crypto-kikes import shitskins because they are either looking for future voters or cheap labor. Why voters? Because they can keep being extremely corrupt with no repercussions until their countries become Pakistan or Somalia tier. Likewise, the (((priests))) of later Vedic period had similar interests, just like (((Christians))) and other universal priesthoods do. They care not for the quality of their followers, as long as the tithes keep coming. >>14117 >There are strong links between certain European gypsies customs and ancient Eastern Semitic practices almost entirely preserved in Jewish books. Which ones? >them walking out seems a relatively more recent endeavor That's my guess as well, they didn't walk out on their own, they got exiled by some Dravidian (or mixed) ruler of India. It would be nice to find more sources though. >It is of interest to note that the Jews hardly reach above the level of vaishnas I've seen theories that they were a shudra caste of Phoenicians, which got riled up by their or neighboring chandalas (raiders and cutthroats that Abraham belonged to) to rebel and found their own kingdom, which eventually ended up genociding Phoenicians and practically destroying their own aristocracy. Many of early Jews were mercenaries in Egypt and other neighboring lands, so they had a warrior caste as well, which likely got eliminated over time due to the dysgenic practices imposed by their newfound god. >>14119 >hedonism So, degeneracy. My point was that a sufficiently large White population never needed others to rebuild cities or perform other forms of labor for them. My other point was that since their numbers got massively reduced due to wars and migrations caused by the religious schism inspired by the (((Panis))), they had to rely on shitskins more, sealing their doom just like modern Whites are doing. >It is also understandable how for the sake of simplicity and because, too, of a sound logic, many people would have rolled everything one practical super god that knows all and can do everything. Of course, but this simplification caused a lot of issues. It was the duty of the wise men to prevent normies from falling into such errors, instead of promoting them. Imagine you have a boat with a very small hole in the bottom hull, in the beginning it will look harmless, but eventually it will cause you to sink. That's what happened with all Aryan religions over countless centuries.
>>14130 >There are at least several million Muslims who allegedly have the entire work memorized You are oblivious to language itself changing over time, not to mention the Jews controlling the population by manipulating the language in modern times. Many words that have one meaning today, had different or several meanings in the past. Oral transmission is equally, if not more susceptible to this. >such as multiple diverging versions and competing versions of the Vedas What are the sources of the current ones? >>14134 In pure Aryan society the regal function was above the priestly function, whenever you see a priestly function take the leading role rest assured that there is some kikery abound. This also applies to priestly institutions. Kings had to be initiated in the esoteric knowledge, same applied to aristocracy, and "priests" were more like court magicians and wise men than religious preachers and officials. Purely technical nature of the rites is another sign of corruption, their role was to command certain forces and impart wisdom. Yes, they were also the lawgivers, but it was not their main function.
>>14134 >Institutions are antithetical to the natural law and Dharma. Say again?
>>14130 >You're not entirely wrong here, it could be done, but it would be very difficult. On top of the fact that they are hymns composed in a certain meter, traditionally they were also oral and memorized, which would make things even more difficult. It would be like trying to change the Qur'an. There are at least several million Muslims who allegedly have the entire work memorized, all 114 or so chapters, so at least in the Arabic, the Qur'an will not be subverted any time soon. If we were to allege that the Vedas have been tampered with substantially we'd of course need evidence too, such as multiple diverging versions and competing versions of the Vedas. I am not aware of any such thing existing, personally. It would be rather difficult, I imagine, to tamper with orally-memorized hymns across a subcontinent larger than Europe in an era with bad transportation, communication and the like. My fren, your lack of faith in the shekelizer is disturbing. Observe what they can do to a Christian Bible that has been edited in billions of books and present across countless computers and databases all over the world. Yet the Zionists are rewriting it and major Christian authorities are moving towards these new PC versions. At the scale of a large land mass like a subcontinent or several large countries, the same happened in Europe. Kill the people who know. I also largely doubt the claims of millions Muslims knowing their shit by the line. Even if it were true, all you would need is a more centralized Muslim system, a new umma with its neocaliphate, to publish over two or three generations a new Quran. I do not deny the difficulty, but considering what I wrote above, would you think Christians living back in 1660 wouldn't have scoffed at that very idea too? Obviously a most extensive evidence of tampering would be required but we need to be aware of this risk. Besides, they wouldn't even need to change the texts, modifying the interpretations and publishing tons of books on these new interpretations, making them the mainstream way to look at the old texts, and having newly appointed priests to cherry pick quotes and then only use them as support for the new exegesis would be more than sufficient. Most people follow and need figures of authority, they do not look for facts, as we've seen again for Covid.
>>14172 >You are oblivious to language itself changing over time The Qur’an Muslims memorize is the same as people memorized 1400 years ago. Now some of them probably understand every word, others probably just memorize the words without learning any of the semantic content. I have had interactions with Muslims where I overheard them saying that they were made to learn the Qur’an but didn’t know any Arabic. But the fact that as far as I know that there is only one Qur’an today across a large swath of the world, speaks in favor of the efficacy of oral transmission. >What are the sources of the current ones? Not well-versed on this matter, admittedly. Pretty sure traditionally it was just oral transmission from guru to students generation after generation with written versions as supplement. From skimming the Wiki page on the Vedas, this seems to be the general process here. The fact that there is much overlap with general IE mythology speaks in favor of its preservation, I’d say
>>14162 >If the source contains everything (totality)... Your logic is sound but who made this claim? Of the defenders of the source as a concept relative to cosmo/theogony and such, it is always detached from manifestation and then the discussion always lands on the question of this latter part being in the what also contains the source, or not. Some of these people are absolutely not pantheists/deists in the slightest, but even in such a pan-something structure, the source function is what its name implies, nothing more, but under other approaches it can be understood as one of the attributes in a way not too different from the various trinities that are effusions of the same primal force. If the source is all then it it's a misnomer. >Practical as a divination tool. Not only and I already explained why, but that does not make divination bunk in the slightest. That would have been obvious too if you had truly read the texts you pretended being able to criticize.
>>14212 >Observe what they can do to a Christian Bible that has been edited in billions of books and present across countless computers and databases all over the world. Yes, but we have ample evidence of this. Who was ever memorizing the entire Bible from front to back too? This isn’t a practice I am familiar with, personally. The corruption of aspects of the Bible wasn’t even hidden. Protestants tore out entire books that made them butthurt, and there are several examples in the New Testament of possible interpolations such as in 1 John regarding the trinity and the story of Jesus and the adulterous woman. Even this isn’t a massive corruption of the text. Bibles are like 90% the same, and even more if one overlooks the books the Protestants removed. We don’t see anything like this in Islam or in the Vedic tradition. >I also largely doubt the claims of millions Muslims knowing their shit by the line. I have no reason to doubt it. The premodern attention-span is capable of these things. The Homeric epics were originally oral, for example, and they are much longer than the Qur’an. Vedic epics too are massive, but originate from an oral tradition. As I said in my recent post though, with Muslims there is the question of how much they understand the semantic content of the words they have memorized. >would you think Christians living back in 1660 wouldn't have scoffed at that very idea too? They probably never opened a Bible in their life and knew everything they knew about Christianity from art in churches or what some priest told them.
>>14215 >Yes, but we have ample evidence of this. True, although it seems to be of no importance. Earlier on it would have been harder to have such evidence. And we thought what goes on internet stays on internet but it's false, many elements got scrubbed. > We don’t see anything like this in Islam or in the Vedic tradition. I would leave the Vedas aside for the moment. On the Quran, this statement is inaccurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Quran#Extant_copies_prior_to_Uthman_version The Quran is open to such modifications. There is a controversy that's been going on for decades, dealing with the diacritical marks for example but it's not limited to this. The Shia argue that key elements were removed. We also have the Sana'a manuscript. >Another way to explain these variations is that San'aa manuscript may have been part of a surviving copy of Quranic Mus'haf which escaped the 3rd caliph Uthman's attempt to destroy all the dialects (Ahruf) of Quran except the Quraishi one (in order to unite the Muslims of that time). The contradictions are very real too so what are these Muslims doing in remembering that particular version of the Quran orally, if not simply gorging on material that would be a collection of various and contradictory sources, which could very well be leftovers that would have slipped through the sloppy editing process that could have likely removed a great many more, proving beyond doubt the deep modifications brought to this book? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Quran And format differences introduced during the caliph Uthman's rule prove that changes in form happened too. The final form depends on the intent. If for the Vedas, such intent was in accord with a need of a cohesive, all encompassing cosmopolitan view of the original texts, it's possible that modifications could have been introduced and perhaps other fragments removed.
>>14215 >I have no reason to doubt it. The premodern attention-span is capable of these things. The Homeric epics were originally oral, for example, and they are much longer than the Qur’an. Vedic epics too are massive, but originate from an oral tradition. As I said in my recent post though, with Muslims there is the question of how much they understand the semantic content of the words they have memorized. I am in no way denying the memorization capabilities of men but the idea that millions of Muslims have memorized the entirety of the Quran, without a fault. Usually these dedicated Muslims, few in between, are limited to specialized Islamic schools.
>>14215 >>14217 >We don’t see anything like this in the Vedic tradition. >I would leave the Vedas aside for the moment. Why do you both think it's impossible to corrupt the Vedics? I mean sure they are kind of difficult to pervert, because it talks about so much, but isn't it still a possibility to edit certain text or subvert the oral itself?
>>14213 >The Qur’an Muslims memorize is the same as people memorized 1400 years ago Memory of average man is far more flawed than you think. You can find many studies confirming that. Language is cultural and changes over time. Every scholar who studied the Vedas confirmed this. Even if the words did not change much, their interpretation did. German for example, used to have triple meaning for many words, where a word can mean radically different things depending on the context. Same can be found in most languages to a lesser extent today. For example: Definition of terrific 1: unusually fine : MAGNIFICENT terrific weather 2: EXTRAORDINARY terrific speed 3a: exciting or fit to excite fear or awe a terrific thunderstorm b: very bad : FRIGHTFUL How would then "What a terrific god" be interpreted? >Pretty sure traditionally it was just oral transmission from guru to students generation after generation One or several generations of "bad students" would be enough to corrupt it. Not completely, but sufficient to lead it in the opposite direction (see modern Hinduism). >The fact that there is much overlap with general IE mythology speaks in favor of its preservation, I’d say A lot of elements did get preserved (that's why I'm considering Vedas in the first place instead of outright rejecting them), but there is still considerable corruption and we don't really have any original sources, that might actually be way older than the available texts. Besides, Abrahamism contains a lot of IE concepts as well, and I began to realize that a lot of IE mythology got corrupted too, mostly due to contact with pagan semitic or aboriginal priesthoods and cultures. Some of the key elements of corruption are belief in one supreme god (whether lesser gods are recognized or not), human sacrifices, rites involving sex and orgies, need to convert others and racial inclusiveness, worship of "great mother" type of deities, worship of phallic objects, etc.
>>14214 >Your logic is sound but who made this claim? Most "authorities" on the Vedas, Buddhism and most monotheistic religions. Freemasonry and it's derivatives as well. Even the secular philosophy (although it's just atomism). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mo_(religion) It looks like they are going after Chinks as well lol >Of the defenders of the source as a concept relative to cosmo/theogony and such, it is always detached from manifestation The problem is that this position is not logical. As I've explained, you cannot have an absolute and all-knowing source and then have it manifest as something detached from itself (or inside something detached from itself). If there existed anything outside of it, it would imply it not being absolute or all-knowing, and would also imply the existence of multiple unique and qualitatively different sources. Monism is the only logical conclusion of such a concept (single and absolute God/source), even if no one explicitly makes such a claim. It doesn't matter what specific form it takes, how many intermediate categories get introduced or what are it's cultural attributes. Ultimately, 8+8= , 4+4+4+4= and 32/2= are the same thing. Why do you think that almost every religion and philosophy ended up reflecting the same principles today? Because the same were implanted a very long time ago and you are merely witnessing their final resolution. The reason why I mentioned Godel's theorems is because he figured out, mathematically, that the absolute doesn't exist, nor can it know all of it's sets. There is a reason why Gnostics called Demiurge a "blind god" and a "fool". >the source function is what its name implies, nothing more, but under other approaches it can be understood as one of the attributes in a way not too different from the various trinities that are effusions of the same primal force Generative function maybe, but such function does not imply a single God or mutual source. Nor is there a function which can generate the spirit. The shared archetypes, functions, sets (space, time etc.) are only a common/shared framework that's contained within all of our essences independently. You can possess a body, or even a soul that was spawned/generated by a single generative source (Will and breath of a single God/Architect), but those are not necessarily (you). The reason why I put so much emphasis on this seemingly negligible detail is because it ultimately leads to either fully subjugating yourself to the "One God" (which equals total self-annihilation and irreversible NPC-fication) or finding a God within yourself (which was the highest wisdom of the philosophy that originally inspired the Vedas). Not some external or shared/universal God, but your own, inner, unique highest Self. So yes, our bodies do share a mutual source, but our essences do not. You either understand this at some point, or get devoured. There is no third choice. And there is little time left before the grand harvest. >That would have been obvious too if you had truly read the texts you pretended being able to criticize I'm not an expert on Kaballah or gematria, but I'm yet to find the correspondence between the gematric symbols/words and numbers that are not entirely arbitrary. For example, I can devise an entire system around the proposition that K = 2. What does K have to do with 2 from any universal standpoint? Or why is one number more important than another outside of specific contextual relations? If you know some good texts that show the contrary, feel free to share them, I'll gladly look into it.
>>14224 Possible but hard. What corruption are we looking for, what would be the methodology to define the type of proof to look for, where to find it, and how to assert its reliability? It might be fundamentally unimportant as we're in need of a cleaner and purer model today, so we would weave our ways through the old works and take what we like of them and need to reword perhaps names of gods, people and places, but the ideas and principles if fit for our purposes would remain unchanged. Considering the repeated cycle of civilization and destruction by miscegenation we observed, a truly racially aware spiritual and scientific minded practical doctrine could very well be the first project of that type to ever be begun for as far as we know. This is notwithstanding the few and discrete attempts made in the past and ensconced in ancient texts that do seem to argue in favor of separation of bloods, too subtle rulings against any racial mixing, but which have not survived in any meaningful form throughout the ages by the meddling of unscrupulous men. Such commandments, they have been so weak and diluted that nothing of them remain as clear cut statements but on the contrary, we are left with questionable prose and vagueness, perhaps only worthy of feeding endless quibbles between very few scholars and academics foolish enough to venture on securing a few racially weighted statements lifted off from the old Aryan texts; statements rare and complicated to salvage. What needs to be done must result in the production of texts which will endure for countless generations.
>>14230 You have never properly explained, even less proved, why all things coming from the same source must essentially be equal and result in this oneness you ramble against. Do you consider yourself the equal of worms because they too are made of carbon? It is as faulty as saying that two radically different books are in fact equal because they both use the same alphabet. Etc. It looks like you're fighting against windmills or trying to settle a score after having gone through some painful experience in your life related to monotheism. I will respond in detail later on.
>>14217 With the first link you posted, even though I did not look at it (I am aware of what it says about the various codices, the fact that alternate readings were destroyed, the fact that Abdallah ibn Mas'ud, a companion of Mohammad, refused to destroy his variant in Kufa, etc), you are 100% on the mark. Unfortunately I am not sure how much the Qur'an actually diverges from the 'original', assuming that one existed. Enough to cause controversy, it seems though. In my post though, I was mainly referring to the post-Uthmanic Codex more than anything. >We also have the Sana'a manuscript. I will have to read up on this. I was not familiar with it, but it seems like it might be worth the research. >>14218 I am sure you are correct. This is what I would respect, honestly. From what I have seen, there are Muslims who memorize the shorter Surahs at the end of the Qur'an for their daily prayers, but don't do much more. >>14224 >Why do you both think it's impossible to corrupt the Vedics? It's not impossible to, the question is if evidence exists of tampering or perversion over time. Unfortunately texts in the Indian climate aren't well-preserved in ancient manuscripts from what I understand. The good thing about Abrahamic texts is that they are written in dry climates, and we can stumble upon ancient manuscripts from basically in the time period they were written. Not so in India. The main arguments for any sort of preservation in India of the Vedic texts is oral tradition, the close fit with known IE mythology and concepts and the lack (as far as we know - if anyone has evidence please share!) of significant variants.
>>14247 I did. Since the source contains all, nothing can exist outside of it and be truly separate from it, meaning that it's a guarantee of all things being connected at the root (and ultimate) level, in other words, that you and a worm are just different aspects and configurations of the same (mind of god). No matter how phenomenally different you turn out to be, the connection at the source never goes away. Your physical body is more complex than worm's, and your mental body (soul) is as well, but you are both of the FUNDAMENTALLY same essence and nature. If we assume that an infinitely long line is a circle, then all phenomena eventually return to their default (rest) state, the one of non-differentiation. The Ouroboros devours itself. Further, if you assume this singular source to be God, then for any such god, the distinction between you and a worm would be like a distinction that you make between your eyes and your elbows, which are clearly not the same nor do they serve the same function. It's not hard to see how this can be further interpreted to support egalitarian ideas. It's a matter of perspective, and you seem to struggle with abstract concepts that go beyond your temporal perception. I suggest that you read the remainder of the thread. Besides, there are countless religions and philosophies that preach this oneness so it's not really necessary for me to explain it to you. >It looks like you're fighting against windmills Not at all, I have identified the root of corruption in IE beliefs, which always eventually led to the sort of belief that I've described above (see the historical development of derivative religions that turned out to be universalist, no exceptions), meaning that such beliefs were IMPLICIT in the very concepts of a "single source" and "the Absolute", otherwise it would not be possible for those religions to evolve in such manner. The only way to prevent the cyclical ruin of Europeans and total slavery to the "one god" and his "chosen people" is to eliminate these concepts entirely. Not only are they ultimately false and subversive at a very sublime level, but are also entirely unnecessary from the practical standpoint. >>14268 >and the lack (as far as we know - if anyone has evidence please share!) of significant variants Consider the burning of the library of Alexandria and how far the kikes go to destroy or edit non-kosher texts today, and how are they neuro-linguistically programming the population in order to control the semantics. Why assume it was any different in the past? If this trend continues, people in the future won't be able to reference even the materials that we are quoting today, even in it's current, debased form. >>14246 The only way to figure out the truth is to recognize the patterns, even the most subtle ones, and apply them to whatever sources are available. It's literal alchemy (of mind) and extraction/refinement of lost data through application of metaphysical principles. Anything else is bound to fail.
>>14291 >Why assume it was any different in the past? Because the Jews today are only able to do this to us today via a massive technological apparatus that they have constructed within the last century or so. Today we have state of the art subversion, and even that is clearly imperfect, given the fact that places like this board and this site exist, and that we are able to access texts which have not been subverted by Jews. Jews are powerful but not wholly omnipotent.
>>14293 Their modus operandi didn't change much for centuries (if at all), today they use technology as a huge force multiplier but in the past it wasn't so easy for the people from different sides of the world to communicate either. They had their methods for every era, preachers, press, TV, internet etc. >given the fact that places like this board and this site exist It's not like anything posted here gets to leave the containment.
>>14291 >It's not hard to see how this can be further interpreted to support egalitarian ideas. Egalitarian ideas would say we're all the same, worm and human, eyebrows and elbows. They're in large part a corruption. Yet it clearly does not need to be. Even if you wish to make the source a sort of gigantic and limitless container of all, including ideas and their numerous applications such as all possible degrees of manifestation, tangible or not, this would not make the both of us equal. We would not be of the same fundamental essence and nature and only, at best, of the same very first thing found at the primary and pure root of all, the wisdom, the science of all. Even if I were to grant you the idea of all things being of the same pure and primary essence, while natures would really be too specific to be considered shared by two entities, it would not prevent two opposites from being in conflict, as there could easily be a plan, a design, for many things in the whole made universe to act against each other. i have seen the people who misuse the concept of a common source to argue for rejection of the world, the differences and divisions. Perennialists are such people, they even use the word individualism to mean lack of of division ('undividualism), pushing the envelope as far as possible so that as long as any separation exists, it must be repelled. Again my analogies about common building blocks are very relevant. >I have identified the root of corruption in IE beliefs, which always eventually led to the sort of belief that I've described above (see the historical development of derivative religions that turned out to be universalist, no exceptions), meaning that such beliefs were IMPLICIT in the very concepts of a "single source" and "the Absolute", otherwise it would not be possible for those religions to evolve in such manner. You appear confused. You cannot see that all these religions you attack are corruptions, using the excuse of the Absolute as a reason for denying differences. >Not only are they ultimately false and subversive at a very sublime level, but are also entirely unnecessary from the practical standpoint. That is just you repeating the claim without making it any truer though. I think you are too in love with your theory and cannot let it go. >>14331 >It's not like anything posted here gets to leave the containment. This is not true and this chan is but one part of a whole I use to redpill people IRL.
>>14335 >this would not make the both of us equal What would set us apart? How would we not be just the two different aspects of the same thing, like two different thoughts of the same, singular Supreme Being, unable to perceive our unity in it's totality because of limits of our perception (ignorance)? As universalists like to say, "God split himself in countless different parts so that he could get to experience himself" (Which is false, but you get the idea). We are obviously not equal from our limited, individualized perspectives, there is obviously a plethora of phenomena, physical and mental alike, of varying quality and utility. You can even say how there are plethora of 'uniquely' differentiated races, gods, higher beings etc. But all of these would be just particularized aspects of the universal One, inseparable from it and subservient to it. From the perspective of any such singular source or Supreme Being, NOT your or mine (which are inferior to it and can never transcend it, according to such philosophy, and any logic that derives from it) >We would not be of the same fundamental essence Anything proceeding from the same source is of the same fundamental essence, as long as there is a causal link/chain and as long as there are no other sources. No matter how much it changes while manifesting, the original impulse and it's maximum potential (that can never be greater than the source if such source is totality) remain unchanged. >of the same very first thing found at the primary and pure root of all, the wisdom, the science of all Any limited manifestation of such a source would be less than it's totality and hierarchically inferior to it. In other words, it would be less wise and scientific. Therefore, as long as you hold concepts such as the Absolute and Singular source, someone will always be able to make a perfectly logical argument that the more inclusive your perspective becomes and the closer you get to this supposed ultimate wisdom (perspective), the more egalitarian you become. Perhaps not necessarily egalitarian in a communist sense, but egalitarian nonetheless. Corporations not caring whom they hire as long as they are sufficiently exploitable in a hierarchy of usury is egalitarianism as well, just of a more structured kind. It doesn't recognize different essential qualities either. >They're in large part a corruption. Yet it clearly does not need to be Can a diamond rot? No, because it doesn't have the organic components required for the rot to appear. Meat does not need to rot either, but it will if you leave it outside for long. Instead of waging an uphill battle against corruption, why not remove elements which make it possible in the first place? >That is just you repeating the claim without making it any truer though My mistake was not bringing certain concepts to their logical conclusion before arguing against them. I guess I'll have to initiate you in the highest degrees of Freemasonry (minus the oaths to unconditionally serve the Jews and help them fulfill their covenant) so that you ma