Islam vs Aryan religions

[Jack]

I have a serious question. I've been a member here for a while, though I haven't posted very often. I've become very interested in Aryan spirituality, and consequently I've learned a bit about Hinduism (I'm developing my own personal religion, but I do like Hinduism a lot). I don't want to discuss Christianity because IMO Christianity is a semetic construct.

The question I have is the difference between the Arab spirit and the Aryan spirit. The reason I'm having a bit of trouble is that I recognise what Oswald Spengler called the Faustian spirit is essentially inborn into whites/Aryans, but how do I draw a spiritual line between Islam and traditional Aryan religion/spirituality?

For instance, its the basic drive of Aryans to conquer everything in our way. Meanwhile, Arabs have a Faustian spirit that they throw behind Jihad. Perhaps this is more about Nietzscheanism than Hinduism, but because Hinduism is a undistorted Aryan religion, I thought maybe someone here like Rahul might have some answers. I'm interested in knowing if there's spiritual differences between the Arabs and Aryans.

I know the Jews are heavily orientated towards unlimited abstraction, and that they're semites too, but that doesn't explain the Arab drive to conquer the world in the name of God. We did the same thing (the various European empires) in the name of King and Country, Kaiser and Fatherland, etc.

Are the Arabs spiritually Aryans with a different skin color?

I'm not talking about biological differences (race specific diseases, etc.), but racial character. I know the Arabs beat up their women and stuff, and Aryans have an inborn moral abhorrance for doing this, so I'm not talking about the sense of honour. I mean what drives their minds - are there any differences between the Faustian spirit of the Aryans and the Jihad spirit of the Arabs?

Thanks for ANYONE who can help me.

[Moody]

1.
I am trying to read the Koran at the moment, and I am reading about Sufi Islam; I am also looking at the brilliant web sites of David Myatt [a National Socialist convert to Islam who has synthesised the two].

The more I read of Islam, the more I think it compatible with National Socialism, and find the Koran comparable to Mein Kampf.

This is a very timely question, for obvious reasons.
Myatt quotes bin Laden;

"We tell the Americans as a people, and we tell the mothers of soldiers - and American mothers in general - if they value their lives and those of their children, find a Nationalistic government that will look after THEIR interests, and not the interests of the Jews".
[Usama bin Laden, May 28th 1998]

2.
To answer some your questions, I will often refer to Nietzsche, whose work I have studied closely.

To Spengler, Islam was Magian as opposed to Faustian.
But remember that Faustian is not a synonym for Aryan in Spengler.
Another Aryan culture, that of the Classical [Greco-Roman] was not Faustian; so Spengler made important subdivisions within Aryan culture, and the Faustian begins in the Early Middle Ages.

Nietzsche, as you are probably aware, recognises a connection of Spirit between the Aryans, the Japanese and the Arabs.
The Arabs are a warrior slave-owning race, who, once united by Mohammed's Monotheism became a Master Race.

So while there is not a blood-line from Aryan to Arab [although having said that, the Arabs are derived, like Nordics from the Early Mediterranean race], there is certainly a spiritual one.
Also, Islam was influenced by early Christianity which in itself would have had many heretical Aryan components at the time of Mohammed, so there is much cross-fertilisation of ideas here.

I would not say that Hinduism is "undistorted" Aryanism [although it may have been in the time of the Rig Veda], as it has become baroque by the addition of many non-Aryan accretions.
Also, Sufi Islam was the result of Islam conquering Aryan Persia - thereby making a synthesis of Aryan/Islamic features.
Zoroastrianism was the religion of Aryan, pre-Islamic Persia of course.

Nietzsche put religions in the following DESCENDING order;

1) Zarathustra/Dionysos

2) Manu

3) Islam

4) Buddhism

5) Christianity.

All these make something of a synthesis, aiming at 1), by a kind of loop.

Nietzsche's Zarathustra is a sort of radical Aryanism, incorporating the features of Greek paganism and a Wotanish interpretation of Zarathustra.

The Laws of Manu [under - 2)], are the Aryan Hindu laws of the Caste System - to Nietzsche this was the greatest religious book of all.

Now we come to Islam; to Nietzsche this was an "ascending Semitic religion".
It is its ascending character that commends it to Nietzsche - it is, as he says, a "religion for men".
Nietzsche clearly respected the militant Islamic movements which were beginning in his time.
So we see that Nietzsche places a Semitic religion [Islam] above an Aryan one [Buddhism].

To Nietzsche Buddhism exhibits degeneration of the instincts - it is a decadent Aryan religion.

Lowest of the low is Christianity which is a "decadent Semitic religion" to Nietzsche.

BUT, Nietzsche talked of the Uebermensch [Superhuman] as a "Christ-Souled Roman Caesar", and so recognised the NECESSITY for a synthesis of all these.
I say Necessary simply because we all [Nietzsche included, as he recognised] have some Christian decadence within us because we are living through this cycle.

So, we evaluate on the basis of Asending or Descending Instincts.
Islam is ascending [even more so today] ...

[Ederico]

Is Buddhism Aryan? I do not recall that.

[Jack]

To Spengler, Islam was Magian as opposed to Faustian.

If I can find a copy of Decline of the West here in Melbourne, I'll buy it - but what exactly is Magian?

Nazzjonalist - I'm Anarch from Micetrap forums Buddhism is as Aryan as original Hinduism is. Buddha was an Aryan prince who left society and formed Buddhism as an undistorted version of hindu metaphysics and ethics without the gods involved. Its actually ok. Asceticism in itself is useless - as a means to elevating a race higher than it already is, its almost invaluable. In this sense, Buddhism for itself is useless. As a means to something else its quite good.

[Ederico]

Originally posted by Sepp-Übermensch
Nazzjonalist - I'm Anarch from Micetrap forums Buddhism is as Aryan as original Hinduism is. Buddha was an Aryan prince who left society and formed Buddhism as an undistorted version of hindu metaphysics and ethics without the gods involved. Its actually ok. Asceticism in itself is useless - as a means to elevating a race higher than it already is, its almost invaluable. In this sense, Buddhism for itself is useless. As a means to something else its quite good.

I never heard he was Aryan, actually in all his statues he looks quite Asian, are you sure this is not some form of Aryo-Centrism (if that word actually exists)?

P.S. I am glad you post at AD as well, you show intelligence.

[Jack]

Originally posted by Nazzjonalist
I never heard he was Aryan, actually in all his statues he looks quite Asian, are you sure this is not some form of Aryo-Centrism (if that word actually exists)?

P.S. I am glad you post at AD as well, you show intelligence.

In ancient Buddhist texts referred to by Julius Evola in "Doctrine of Awakening - the Doctrine of self mastery according to the earliest buddhist texts", Buddha is described as an Aryan with blonde hair and clear eyes. He's Aryan. The statues were made by Asians, and they don't like idolating things that don't resemble them. Buddha wasn't mean to be an idol anyway, he is just someone who showed the path of Aryan Asceticism.

Thanks. I've been a member here for a while, and looked around and made posts occasionally, but I haven't posted that often - I spent most of my time at the Phora before it collapsed.

[Moody]

Spengler coined 'Magian' from 'Magi' - you may know that term from the 'Three Magi' who are fabled to have visited the new-born Jesus.
So, do some digging, and draw your conclusions form there [I believe that one of the Magi was a Zoroastrian, i.e., a Persian].

I enjoyed your remarks on Buddhism, and find them to be 100% correct.

Nietzsche felt that the White world was experiencing a "European Buddhism" in the 19th century, a will to self-annihilation.

[Rahul]

Islam, if seen, as a product of Arab, and mere Arab spirituality, is true to its soil. And here we speak of the deeply fanatical jihadi which is highly motivated by what appears to it as the highest and the greatest ideal. There are some liberal perverse elements in this religiousity, such as the utterly sentimentalist universal brotherhood concept. The motive behind this concept is to establish a commonality which judeo-chritsianity has not been able to suggest as clearly as is suggested by Judeo-Marxist Communist/Leftism. Its not an ideal, not only for the Aryans, but for any given racial religiousity, which is the true spirituality of every people. It can be found in the pre-creedal Semites, Africans, Mongol, Khmer and Polynesian. The obvious result of such a forceful Islam is a verfolschung of many multicultural societies who share a common monotheistic spirituality-the imlicit chosen people of that Allah being the Arab. Just the way Christianity is Jewish Expansionism, Islam is Arab Expansionism. To understand Islam completely, we'll also come across the "Shaheed" or the martyr which will appear like the Eineherjer to many who know the Norse. Then we also come across the honest, dedicated & undoubtful faith of the Moslem Jihadi as the purest which a character can aspire to. The spirituality here is full of faith. There is no place or tolerance for the skeptic. And why must there be or perhaps why not allow doubt its expression with repressing our varied senses? One single ideal and a complete belief in it actually represses any true undercurrents of multiplicity of gods as they exist within the Aryan volk.

Another serious problem with Islam is its zeal for furthering miscegenation through an open support for interbreeding among its believers. It is repressive of the true desires and taints them with a view that is downright semitic in tastes and orientations. I am obviously talking about sex and homosexuality, natural desires and dogmatic approval of perverse paedophilia etc. The Islamic theodicy is free to perpetrate its whims to supress the former and propagate the latter of the two sets of senses. If we think of some countries which has resisted for a long time now the Arab-centric Islamic spirituality, we ought to look at Iran and India. Both are mischling societies. Both have a very strong semitic impression upon their native faiths, since these have had an Arab perpetration of Islam. and while many will argue for a racially pure Iranian state with Islam as its central theme, it is ignorance or simply denial of the reality which the Aryan Pars nationalists fight today. There religion, which they want to go back to , is not Zoroastrianism or Even the oldest flavour of Shiite Islam, but it is the spirituality of Mithra and Atharvan. And that binds them to the Vedic Aryans.

Islam displays a lot of promise for the Aryan in that it is highly spiritual with an open admiration for piousness acheived through its own dogmatic conceptions of truthfulness and honesty, but then it falls too short of a conscious racialist spirituality which is the wealth of all Aryan traditions. To my thought, an overriding Arab influence over this Islam has made it a hypocritic creed which has borrowed its own monotheistic concepts from outsiders and to some degree it has borrowed from Aryan ethical models of Pars and Bharat. But it has only resulted in a mindless bastardisation of the Arab's own spirituality.

The jihadi zeal looks a lot better and more thoroughly Aryan in the Eineherjer and the Karmas of Arjun and all our great ones in the Mahabharat.

As for my idea of an Aryan religion, I see Ramayana and I feel in Odin a parallel to that. and there is a lot more. Perhaps in our Vedas and Upanishads, we have a cosmic journey of thought which makes a lot of sense and meaningful existence when we go to our Germanic/Norse gods, and we feel them as a part of our own being.

[Rahul]

I don't quite think that FWN understood the original Manu at all. The book is rather flimsy in its furthering of a caste, and by the time those major additions were done to the rules, there were non-Aryan elements within the priestly classes as well. And even today there is an acceptance of distinction between difference castes. One kind is originally from the Aryaverta and others from the Magadh-like states and regions.

Gautam infact heralded a fashion of ascetism and nihilism which is difficult to justify to this date for it denies any basis for existence and race itself. It was early Aryan skepticism and shows signs of its gradual merger with the perverse liberal development of thought in Bharat.

But the true buddhist ideal is thousand times more honest than a dogmatic approach to spirituality.

[Rahul]

Originally posted by Moody Lawless

Also, Sufi Islam was the result of Islam conquering Aryan Persia - thereby making a synthesis of Aryan/Islamic features.
Zoroastrianism was the religion of Aryan, pre-Islamic Persia of course.

Sufi Islam started out as a mystical faith among Arabs. But its actual Aryan development can be accredited to Al Hallaj and its soaring appeal took place when Mevlana, born in Aria/Batria (Afghanistan), expressed for the Iranians, the same philosophy of the Upanishads or Vedanta, and it blended quite well with the then Islam of Iran and it also managed to avoid a complete repression by the Semitic colonialist Islam.

But again, it is a dubious claim that Zoroastrianism was the religion of Aryan Pars. Whereas the Mithraic truth is otherwise. Perhaps it is easy to view a monotheistic religion developed around an Aryan people for a monotheistic Christian. But it is hardly Aryan in that it vilifies and turns upside down the entire Aryan cosmology. It treats Asuras as the greatest singular God and Devas as deevs or the paramount evil.

The great representative Aryamaan is Zoroaster's Ahriman-the evil. This is grossly despicable for an Aryan. And it is hardly Aryan. It looks exactly as a parallel to the zionist vilification of the Swastika.

Same is the case with judeo-christianity in its vile treatment of the Aryan Skaldic traditions.