This art thou, to use older translation, this you are, older pseudo-Shakespearean translation, this art thou, tat tvam asi, translation you of slogan, you can say, or condensation of the Hindu Upanishads. And it refers to the secret unity of all things, so that in your dealings with all people, animals and even so-called inanimate things, which are in fact not inanimate, but you are in fundamental sense the same as them. It is the same soul or will or the thing in itself that is behind all the differences you see in waking life. Or is it life asleep, like Heraclitus says? And there is some veil of illusion that you don't see the world as it is, and all things Things really are fire underneath, imminently. Things are both what you see, but also they have a secret unity in fire.

Well, before I talk this, it's a legitimate ask. Everything I say to you now, doesn't it sound like shit liberty? Everything is one, and you must love, and notice I did not say you must love, but everything is one and all this. I mean, it's what the most advanced forms of leftism do, where they try to deny the the differences between people and where they proceed from assumption of a radical, absolute equalism, and then they claim that any difference in outcome must be as a result of convoluted conspiracies of oppression to overturn a primal equality, that therefore all histories, all traditions, all borders, no borders, no genders, as a very important Twitter account said, no borders, no genders. And ultimately, you can see visions to erase boundaries also between man and animal, and

man and thing. Isn't this the result of what I say at the beginning of the show now, which in any case sound very much like hippie gibbering, nonsense from drugged out 1960s generation. Isn't this what turned the mind of the boomer into tikka masala? It reduced the mind of the boomer to sag paneer, curry spinach slap. But if this were so, you wonder then why the Upanishads, where such ideas originate, why this view in fact gave rise to most unrelenting hierarchical and conservative social political system, the ancient Hindu caste system, which some speculate is a root also of Egyptian caste system. And then you wonder why even the modern attempts to reinvigorate Hindu thought or Hindu sensibility, Why these are almost all as far right as you can be in modern world?

For example, let's just begin with obvious example in India itself. Many people among our friends love Narendra Modi, who, by the way, is the leader of India. He's a handsome man. Hakan exposed Narendra Modi. There is photo I will post again. He has a retractable claw. I'm sorry, but it's the truth. Modi has this. He is descended from ancient Naga reptiloid super beings of India. But anyway, I mean to say that we like him and Obama hates him as supposedly a far-rightist. But in fact, in India, I know that Hindu nationalists, Brahman nationalists, many who are my friends, they don't like Modi. They think he's too soft and weak. And it's basically almost exactly what Wignats think of Trump in America, that he's a cuck

and these are also by the way what the Russo nationalists think in Russia of putler. They call Putin they used to be a guy on forums a while ago go by name of a zero zero zero very funny poster he spoke in broken English very much like Vahan and constantly he was attacking the Zionist Putin Russia talking about how Russia women were being whored out by Asian men in st. Petersburg and how Putin was getting in the back of the Escalade with the Zionists. He would post articles about Chinese men seen holding hands with Russian women on Moscow streets and this kind of thing. Zero, zero, zero. I don't know if still possible to find his post. But in any case, I mean to say, Hindu nationalism in its strongest form today, the group Hindutva.

Actually I'm not supposed to say this, but the very first online engagement I had with anything very far right was on the Hindutva website, that and I role played also as Ismaili nationalist, Ismaili radical rather. But I don't think the Hindutva, this is a radical Hindu nationalist organization, Hindutva.org, I don't think it exists anymore, but I was told it's not so good to talk about this, but I very much supported them and their vision. And anyway, look at other modern attempts to revive Hinduism in the West, which I will talk about in later segment, second half of this show. Why did Heinrich Himmler, the crazy Nazi and leader of SS, by the way, I am a strong suspicious of his physiognomy, the face of Himmler. Look at his face. He and Leo Strauss look Japanese for some reason.

Why he always carry copy of Bhagavad Gita with him? He did this. He carried Hindu texts always with him. Why was this hippie? Is this true? Then also, why Nazis chose the swastika? Obvious question. Now, my friend Thomas 777, who is Orthodox National Socialist, he dismissed all such questions. He's saying that the swastika was chosen because it's visually compelling and only that. to say that all such concerns by a few top Nazis like Himmler or Rudolf Hess, and there were a few others, but this was just a result of occultism, interest in oriental philosophies and religions, and the theances, you could say, they held thesians, they had spiritualism. I mentioned Eric Jan Hansen in my book and this kind of thing, but that all of this was

very popular in Europe in general, not just among Nazis. It was a fashion or a fad starting as early as 1890s, so it would be inevitable that some among the Nazis would have these habits as much as any other urban educated European from the cities and so forth. And I think there's much to this view, you shouldn't go too far in direction of thinking Nazism was some kind of occult conspiracy of this which is being pushed by History Channel, or excuse me, is it called the Hitler Channel, and sensationalist books pushed the same, people want to sell books so they make these claims, the Nazis were in touch with UFOs, but on the other hand, fed or not, fashion or not, it did have enough of an effect on non-Nazi leadership in choice of aesthetics in favorite books, of actual engagement with

India and Tibet and Japan, and some of that, to be fair, is a desire to derail English colonialism and to link up with militant Buddhist Japan and India, as was supposedly one of the plans. So there was a merely political reason for it, but regardless, such views as my point were not seen as contradictory to far-right racialism or hierarchy but or if you want to use this phrase to authoritarian organic state but they were seen as completely compatible and it wasn't just the Nazis again it was actually a very European and actually very German thing since the 19th century this concern with Hinduism and Buddhism. Schopenhauer who I will discuss on this show at some length too, he is someone else who his right wing, although in his case he was not in any way Nazi or something like that.

He was a Hobbesian monarchist liberal, you can say. A liberal in the old sense, monarchist libertarian even, but believed strong monarch who lived somewhat outside the constitution to preserve order. He believed in something called natural right of man, but that it could only be preserved by arbitrary power concentrated in the monarch who could protect the individual against the group. You are well acquainted with such views from libertarian friends and followers of Hans Hermann Hoppe. But in any case, Schopenhauer was, whatever he may have been, whether he was liberal or monarchistic, he was in any case vehemently opposed to leftism, to progressive socialist agenda. very much opposed to Hegelian leftism. And it's very funny when he attacks the Galians,

that the wrath of his rhetoric is overwhelming. Nietzsche say he has the eloquence of wrath. But he's one of the first and strongest initiators of Hindu and Buddhist thought into the West. He say, ex orientis, looks out of the East comes the light of knowledge. And he points out how little success Christian missionaries had in India, which in his view is the source ultimately of Christian thought. He believed that Jesus studied in India. But he believed that Christian missionaries were rejected primarily because of their Semitic conception of animals, their degrading view of life where it is a machine, where animals exist merely for human use, so that Hindus instantly upon hearing this reject Christian teachings despite as a moral doctrine of the two religions being ultimately the same.

And yet Schopenhauer, he considers the Hindu version more profound. He says trying to convert India to Anglicanism is like shooting a bullet at a hill. But again, he never saw these views I see at the beginning, and the phrase tat dvam asi, which he repeats, this art thou, you are this, indicating the fundamental unity and identity of all things. He did not see this as compatible in any way with leftism, which was already exhibiting itself in its time almost the same as in ours, in almost the same form. In other words, the left Hegelians are almost indistinguishable at bottom from the liberal materialists and the Marxists in their conception of what is good for men and what is the end of men. You read Schopenhauer's attacks on the Hegelians, it reads very much as reactionary attacks

on the left today. I may read them out for you on future show. But then in 20th century also, you see this one of my favorite figures, she's totally insane but I love her, Savitri Devi, a Greek-English woman, quite pretty, very spiritual, you know, like one of these girls who told me she saw bubbles of energy at Yasukuni Shrine in Japan, but possibly quite deranged, who she converted to Hinduism and she was the one who saw Hitler as an avatar of Vishnu, the Sea of Sophists. This means a follower of the thought of Madame Blavatsky. Many Buddhists, Hinduists, both Western and Eastern, very profoundly influenced by Blavatsky theosophism, it's called. Again, big topic, too long for this show. End of 19th century, beginning of 20th, a kind of spiritualism.

But Savitri Devi was a follower of this cult, you could say, and she went to India to fight against whatever success the Christian missionaries were having at the time. She went to fight against that. She arranged public debates with the pastors and such before the Indian people. She organized villages and came before them, and she tried to convince the Indians, the Hindus, to cleave to or to return to their native religion. She hated Christianity as a Jewish innovation. You know the thought. It's a very old idea, but some people in our time believe this. And you can add this to many other names for sure that believe similar. Guénon, who saw Catholicism as esoteric Hinduism, or maybe he wanted it to become so, I don't know. And there is some guy, I do not agree with this,

but you can see how it's easy to make the case. Some guy said that Nazism was Guénon with tank divisions. I don't agree with this, but, you know, you want to go back to antiquity. There is Heraclitus, who I mentioned just at the beginning, and he believed in fundamental identity of all things in fire, fundamental unity of all things, and yet he is condemned, for example, by midwest carpopper of originator of open society idea, around who these midwest ideas are a rallying point for the modern left, of the most aggressive variety, this why Soros, named Open Society Institute, but Karl Popper condemns Heraclitus as a defender of heroic aristocratic military order. And so how is possible if such views lead to shit liberty in belief in the fundamental unity of all

things and so forth that Heraclitus, you can say he shares this with Buddhism and Hinduism, but Most amusing is what I will read for you now at the end of this show, not show segment, excuse me. I will read for you a quote from a Zen master, Zen Buddhism, being of course maybe the most popular form Buddhism in the West. California, you know, they love it. And this is one of the most important Zen masters, the Japanese man, Hakun Yesutani, and he say this, I quote him now, We must be aware of the existence of the demonic teachings of the Jews who assert things like the existence of equality in the phenomenal world, thereby distorting public order in our nation's society and destroying government control.

Not only this, these demonic conspirators hold the deep-seated delusion and blind belief that they alone own, have been chosen by God, and are therefore an exceptionally superior people. The result of all this is a treacherous design to usurp control and dominate the entire world, thus provoking the great upheavals of today. That's Japanese Zen master Hakun Yasutani in 1943 broadcast, a man who after the war had a huge following in the West, arguably founder of Zen traditions in the West, in California how make you feel hippie California not just to attacks but the reasons for which he attacks them people who assert the existence of equality in phenomenal world he denies this of what means how make you feel how does we are to from Burma make you feel I will be right back thank you

yes I am back I had the Mars bar for the first time I think many years I don't even remember last time I had Mars bar I did this this what I do for you the sacrifices undertake because for four days here there has been storm and I forget to eat I don't know it puts me I thought I heard voices last night by the way I do not hear voices I know schizophrenia nothing but last night in middle of very intense wind I was sure I heard a high pitch and low pitch kind of of a conversation coming from rocks and forest, and this may have been elves, but it put me in such strange mood, this unexpected four-day storm. I eat once a day, then I forget to eat, and I did the same today, and so I had to take break now to have, I had sugar law, so I need to have Mars Bar, this is what I do for you,

to inspire manic into my mania, into myself, so that I can do show for you. And you never appreciate this. You never appreciate the sacrifice. But I talk this segment Schopenhauer because I think for a Westerner is really the only fully accessible version of Buddhism. And you can understand this from Western point of view, in other words, as opposed to reading Eastern texts where you do not understand the traditions they come out of, and the translations are often very bad. But you know, Michel Wellebeck, his book about Schopenhauer coming out this summer, and I look forward to this, is not surprised that he would like Schopenhauer enough to write a book on him, because Schopenhauer, maybe more than any other writer, maybe even more

than Nietzsche's fountain of art, fountain of literature for so many great things, 1880s and after. This is the truth. But one second, I want to give a shout out for a moment to my friend Ben Braddock, many of you know him from Twitter, and to his beautiful mother. And Ben, I tell she will be remembered and I see videos of her. She was very powerful woman, full of love for animal. And I see she knows many animal back to health, this very important, very noble quality. She was also a strong Christian, a Christian of a truer and stronger kind. Christianity is generous, but that was buttress also to American way of life, a buttress to it, a support for it, which of course is very different from what I talk on this show with

European Buddhism and Hinduism, but I want to just take a disclaimer at this point to remind the audience that I strongly support an alliance with Christianity and those who are, let's say, either secular right or Nietzschean right should lie with Christianity. There are very few such, by the way, so-called Nietzschean right, or those attracted to ideas of Buddhism or what gets badly called at other times neo-paganism. You should not, if you believe in these things, not be manipulated into a fight against Christianity This is the way that glow jigs, various infiltrators and entries, they try to manipulate people this way into sectarian conflict, to draw attention away from war against the occupational class and their fake regime.

Christianity need not be a religion of weakness and is a big mistake, especially in American context to let the left claim that it owns Christianity. Once American men can retake their churches, maybe through, I don't know, maybe through vehicle of a new denomination or in some way through the churches as they are, but once this happens, once they reassert control over the churches, the overthrow of this tranny security state will be assured. And on the other hand, believing Christians should not attack so-called neo-pagans is very few, you know, attack George Floyd instead if you have courage. That is a much more serious assault on religion, but I don't want to spend this show too much on political matter of this kind.

I will talk the dirty games of the glow in the dark some other time, but on origin of this idea, European Buddhism, which this episode can only be introduction. I will have to go back to this many times because, for example, the loon Savitri Devi, beautiful loon, but she's worthy of an entire segment just herself, as are the SS expeditions to Tibet and other such things. But you must understand Schopenhauer, its beginning, and not only Schopenhauer philosophy in its content and what it says, but what it means in context of European history, what it means in world history, or more precisely in the cycle of civilization. Because I think when you see philosophy of Schopenhauer believed with intensity by so So many artists and writers at end of 19th century and then 1900s.

You see amazing things. You see Tolstoy, for example, he say Schopenhauer is the final philosophy. And D.H. Lawrence, I believe, similar. And Joseph Conrad, something to say. And now Willoughbeck, I'm not surprised that is the same. He come out with book of Wagner, late operas are, at least Wagner claims, a monument to Schopenhauer philosophy. So actually, Wagner sent Schopenhauer a copy of the Ring cycle and Schopenhauer said something like, oh, he has more talent as a poet than a musician, something like this, which I love Wagner music, by the way, is not attack. But Schopenhauer worked in obscurity his whole life. His philosophy was suppressed by the filthy lying Hegelian leftist sect, who were the

establishment at the time in the universities and some publishing house and they were nothing but lickspittles for the state and for political interests, and it was artists and writers in France, I think, who first started to discover Schopenhauer toward the end of his life. But anyway, so why I say this? Because Nietzsche at one point, he mentioned Schopenhauer, his event in European history that could almost be predicted, like clockwork, he uses this phrase, it could be predicted like clockwork, because Schopenhauer coming is event in life cycle of civilizations. You know, and I think that Schopenhauer is the end of European philosophical schools. Something ends with him. What comes after, at least in terms of theory or of philosophy, is never the same.

There is a break with Schopenhauer. Now, of course, many theory cells, people among you even who are addicted to abstraction, You will disagree with this, you know, and actually Schopenhauer was never much liked by academics and by intellectuals, who are, such types tend to be in love with abstruse, where he was just too clear. Schopenhauer was clear English pragmatist, matter-of-fact man in fact, so you know, you cannot turn that into academic gibberish, or to use it to confound people the way you can use Hegel or Kant or Heidegger, not to speak of the way that windbags of 20th century are used. People love to use many words and they drop names of dreadful eggheads that no one reads to hide a lack of ideas or any historical knowledge.

But in any case, yes, something ends with Schopenhauer, this is what I say in the same way that something ends with the Buddha, this is my point. Not from point of view of religion, because Schopenhauer was not founder of new religion as such, maybe, but in a sense of philosophy, because there were Indian schools of disputation before the Buddha, they were very powerful, they took over, you could say, Indian culture, call it theology if you want, but there was long tradition of abstract reasoning about what looked to be philosophical concepts having to do with character of matter, of reality, of the nature of man. This is in India before Buddha now. Many philosophical disputations about the soul and such things, perhaps from Hindu theology religion point of view or with

some religious trappings, but certainly they qualify as philosophical schools. And like all philosophical schools, they were often at each other's throats. And this happened too, by the way, in Greece and Rome, Greek or Roman culture, civilization, even late Rome where the Greek philosophical schools continued into late antiquity until the coming of Christianity. And they would do such things as actually they would fight in the streets, the Epicureans versus the Stoics and so forth, and that is what real philosophy looks like, living philosophy. When you become Stoic, for example, and dedicate your life to the Stoa, it is entire commitment to way of life of those principles and to your guru and this way I can never even talk

philosophy by the way because nobody in modern world nobody at all in 20th century don't listen to there's nobody has even small hint of what philosophy is this way you must in general reject all theory all theory sells all criticism is that philosophizing abstraction all logorrhea, all logocentrism must die, logocentrism must die. But this isn't part of what I'm getting at, because with the Buddha comes the end of the previous era of Indian philosophy, and maybe of Indian philosophy as such, in the Buddha's teachings. The late fruits of an ancient civilization, already ancient by that time, its philosophical doctrines are simultaneously synthesized and rejected, they are seen through. And with this, seeing through of all philosophy is born a practice, a way of life that, in

the popular version, is propagated as a religion, and for the highest initiates, on the other hand, it becomes a way or practice to achieve status of super-man, super-human, which is to say, a condition of freedom from the delusions of abstractions and words, freedom from so called reason, which is the most recent feature of the human animal and therefore the weakest and most misleading. And with Buddhism, as also with Schopenhauer, I add Schopenhauer rightly understood, because Schopenhauer exactly the same thing is recapturing of man's true path, which can only happen on path of his animal innocence, meaning innocence from the original sin of logorea, logocentrism, of being caught in the maze of words and abstractions, all of which are sterile.

I say death to philosophy, death to intellectuals, death to the law, I say death to all legalism. Such things take men away from the path of nature, which, however, is not simple to find again once you are lost, because we are not born in nature like animals. We are born in a hot house, we are born in a kind of hot house. is obscured from us, nature is hidden as it was from the men of Buddha's time, is hidden by the accumulated detritus of poisonous philosophical traditions, poisonous and false religions, and all of which in some ways even bred a kind of creature that is particularly susceptible to this, whose mind is as it were born to spin those kinds of webs or to love to be caught in them, to love to be deluded by abstractions. I say to you at the end of this segment,

such creatures must be put in their place. I will be right back. To tell you, so I go outside to take a breath of fresh air and I love especially the way the native birch trees smell. Sometimes they emit fragrance and it's frightening outside. There's a kind of huge cloud has moved in over the mountain, dark underside, but bright top. It looks like there is an Anunnaki spaceship inside, but let me continue with the talk of Schopenhauer that you may better understand how Buddhism was received in Europe. It's not a whole story because there are other strains also besides Schopenhauer and of course many of his followers embraced actual Buddhism which took on a quite different face in the West than in the East, or so people think.

But in any case, I was saying end of last segment that for the Buddha, the path to man's natural purity is not so simple, because Buddha was not surrounded by healthy, paleolithic man in nature, and this what I seek return by the way of the heroic stone age. But in our time also, you do not have access to powerful specimen, paleolithic era. But it requires rather a discipline or practice, a practice, not philosophy, a practice where you learn to see through and to discard all abstractions, all rationalizations, intellectualism, all the evil intellectual practices of domestication. It is the re-savaging of man, and this is very hard. In fact, average man cannot do it, which is why the popular version of this movement must

be a religion to mobilize the mass of men on the side of truth and save mankind from corruption of its own fallen reason gone awry. But the path back to the fullness of nature, back to the way of power, which the lion in the wilderness finds with ease by birth. By the way, think again of analogy to lion. Because lion in state of nature would be harmed by its reason, right? This very obvious, same as the famous image of the carrier pigeon, who if you presented it with a map or had to think about his path in flight would get lost. He knows it in his blood somehow by instinct. So when people speak of men who lack purpose or this, or who talk about purpose in life, and some seem to think that this will be found in the right thoughts or the right beliefs

of the intellect, but what is it that motivates the lion or other animal in nature? What motivates the vehemence of its willing and purpose? It's not anything they have to think about or to learn, right? So then it follows that in man, when he seems to lack purpose or to fall into depression or depressive-like states, into anomie or what gets called nihilism, this does not actually come from intellectual nihilism in the full sense, because that is actually the condition of the lion or the eagle. They believe in no philosophy, no ideology, no ideas. It is only a question of if they have more of ligaments of life force, of will or less, in a state of nature for animal, I mean. So obviously if it is anything that causes men's brokenness, so to speak, it is reason

reason gone awry that corrupts men, reason gone wrong. False philosophies, false religions, and so forth. Or if we should see men act listless or seem corrupted in body and mind, an analogy to an animal would be, well, when does this happen to animal? When is it trapped or domesticated or somehow is removed from its natural domain or its ability to act in it? So a condition that, by the way, for an animal would be made far worse if they had reason because then they could justify to themselves why domestication and denaturing was a good thing or even to lose sight of the way of nature altogether in the labyrinth of empty thoughts to lose sight that they've even been domesticated. And this is condition of men. So you cannot just simply think your way out of it.

So you see what I say is that for men this is difficult because you're not only born and bondage, but after maybe hundreds or thousands of years of domestication and bondage, you are also surrounded by partisans of domestication. You can think of a matrix analogy. So the stage of purification, what in the tradition of alchemy, alchemical hermetic tradition gets called negrito, or is symbolized by the black sun. This intermediate path of purification of the will is quite difficult, and this is what Buddhism as an anti-philosophical, post-philosophical, anti-logocentric practice, this is what it means. This is what Schopenhauer understood also, the right way, what it means. It means a practice of liberation of the will to nature.

Both Buddhism and Schopenhauer mean the same thing, which is why Nietzsche calls Schopenhauer the end of one European cycle of civilization. And listen also, by the way, to how he describes Schopenhauer followers in a European context, because in general he does not have very nice words for them, for Schopenhauer followers. And I direct you, I'm reading from The Gay Science, one Nietzsche book, The Gay Science, Ephorism 99, The Followers of Schopenhauer, I won't read it very long, but I'm quoting Nietzsche now. One sees as the contact of civilized people with barbarians, namely that the lower civilization regularly accepts in the first place the vices, the weaknesses and excesses of the higher, and then from that point onward feels the influence of a charm, and finally, by means

of the appropriate vices and weaknesses, also allows something of the valuable influence of the higher culture to leaven it. One can also see this close at hand and without journeys to barbarian peoples. You can see the same phenomenon he's saying in the German followers of Schopenhauer, who Nietzsche says in this passage are seduced by Schopenhauer's mysticism, by his sort of mystical pomp, his extravagance, where he talks such things as the magical effects emanating from corpses, other strange ideas, and even the idea of the one unifying will behind all existence, by which he means to unriddle all existence. Nietzsche dismisses this idea from Schopenhauer as a kind of vice and excess that merely seduced barbaric lower intellect followers.

But to get to what we are talking about, Buddhism in Europe, listen to what Nietzsche continued now talking about how Wagner, a great musician, opera writer who influenced a generation of German culture, you could say much more so than Woodstock influenced American culture. And I'm not a source of this comparison, Alan Bloom who I generally do not like at all, But he is right when he points out that the mania for Wagner music, very similar you can think to hippie mania for rock music and so forth. So I'm reading now again from this passage where Nietzsche talks about what means, what we're talking about on this show, European Buddhism. Nietzsche makes the case that it was the Wagnerians and Wagner who introduced Buddhism into Europe via the thought of Schopenhauer.

She's talking here about how Wagner was so in awe of Schopenhauer's philosophy that she started to conceive of his own art as a companion piece to Schopenhauer books. Okay, so now I'm reading from this passage. From Schopenhauer comes Wagner's hatred of the Jews to whom he cannot do justice even in their greatest exploit. Are not the Jews the inventors of Christianity? This from Nietzsche. this idea and you don't have to believe it, but listen to what he's saying next. The attempt of Wagner to construe Christianity as a seed blown away from Buddhism and his endeavor to initiate a Buddhistic era in Europe under a contemporary approximation to Catholic Christian formulas and sentiments are both Schopenhauerian. Wagner's preaching in favor of pity dealing with animals is Schopenhauerian.

He continues there. compares Wagner and his love for animals to Voltaire. It's a very interesting passage, I encourage you to read it, but basically he says this attempt to initiate a Buddhistic era in Europe and to understand Christianity as a seed from India that has flowed into Europe, this Wagner borrow from Schopenhauer and then from Wagner it explodes into Germany and into all of Europe. So now, of course, Nietzsche here is attacking Schopenhauer's apes and his followers because Nietzsche rejects pessimism of this kind, nihilism, pacifism, and this, which is also the way Buddhism is popularly understood in the West today. That wasn't clear, by the way, from passage I read, but it is if you read other parts of Nietzsche.

What Nietzsche did not approve of was the way that Wagner abandoned the Teutonic, you could say ancient Norse vitalism of his Norse heroes like Siegfried, and instead promoted heroes like Parsifal – Wagner has an opera Parsifal – where he preaches this kind of Buddhist pseudo-Christian renunciation of the soul, which Schopenhauer also apparently thought it is thought, although I have a different idea of this, but this is why Nietzsche disapproved of Schopenhauer's influence on Wagner and so forth. But it is important to understand something in this connection, that renunciation of life or of the will, renunciation of the will, or what Schopenhauer says is akin to nirvana from Buddhism or the moksha of the Hindus, the release from the struggles of reincarnation,

the struggle, the cycle of birth and rebirth. When you get released from that, that's called moksha for Hindus, nirvana is equivalent for Buddhists. It's somewhat different, but you can understand it as somewhat similar, but this is in no way a necessary consequence of anything I've said so far, or of Schopenhauer's or of the Buddha's teachings. This is what I'm trying to get at on this show. It goes without saying that at the end of a civilization, when all religions and philosophies go through the process I discuss, that they become a kind of heavy weight that has to be discarded and civilization, the arts in general, reach maybe the same conditions, so then there is a kind of exhaustion with everything.

And the man of such a late civilization feels his existence to be a kind of confused, difficult burden very often. So many times there really seems to be how to escape from this, how to achieve serenity, Total calmness, peace of mind, or what Greek philosophy at a similar point in development of Greek civilization, it's called ataraxia, it means total calmness, freedom from care, how to achieve this condition, to be distressed by nothing, to need nothing, reprieve from the pressures of the stream of existence. So in popular mind, sorry, I'm having a kind of a, that was a kind of attack from, I think Venus sent me a thunderbolt, you see, I have this attack. Venus sent a thunderbolt, I'm already halfway to Tourette syndrome.

But to be distressed by nothing, I mean, I'm talking now about Greek ataraxia, which you can understand as a kind of analogue of same condition that Buddhism tries to reach through nirvana. Again, freedom from pressure. But in the popular mind, this easily gets represented as renunciation, as rejection of existence, as nihilism and so forth. I'm not saying it gets distorted to that because Schopenhauer and probably the Buddha himself, this is how they presented their thought to the people themselves and in some part they believed it too. But I repeat to you that the supposedly nihilistic or self-renunciation parts of these ways of life or call it what you will is not necessary from the fundamental realizations or fundamental

positions regarding nature of life or unity of the will or how I began the show with the Hindu unity of life. What they realize, if I can condense it for you, this isn't a philosophy show and you You should read Schopenhauer yourselves if you want fully to understand, especially since by the way, again, Buddhist texts are not really available to you in any good translation usually. But what is fundamental realization from Schopenhauer is not this conclusion that leads to renunciation of life and so forth. What is fundamental realization of Buddhism saying is not those things, is a few, let Let me list them for you. The perceptive part of the brain is itself full of intelligence. This is to say, it's not the reasoning part that moves from proposition to conclusion

and such, but the immediate perceptions that you have of time, of space, of causality and so forth, these senses, you could say, are themselves full of intelligence, an intelligence even greater than that of reason when it is very high, which can only be the case if the world has a kind of hidden structure within it. Second, I tell you that these are, as a consequence, systems of silence. Both Buddhism and Schopenhauerianism are systems of silence because they realize men's being lies in his inborn ways of willing and inborn character, determined by blood in fact, even inborn ways of perceiving the world, and that this cannot be changed in any fundamental way by the content of your intellect, in other words, by thoughts, by words, by beliefs.

Third thing they share, you could say, is that this primordial will, or soul, call it what you will, but this primordial will, is the same thing behind yourself and also all other things, all other phenomena, hence the saying with which I began the show, this art thou, you are this, and so forth. That it has morphed into all of these species, this will has entered the stream of existence. It has morphed into all these species and forms in the phenomenal world. It has entered the stream of time. It has entered becoming for mysterious reasons. Or maybe it was always changing like this, like fire. But that once it has entered, its existence is necessarily full of strife and full of war and even of cannibalism because in being one it must feed on itself in other forms.

It must continually destroy and reform itself. And now, finally, what unites these two, Buddhism and Schopenhauer thought, is that the fundamental decision then comes upon a being that has realized this condition, that has awakened, and that this decision is whether to affirm or to deny existence. So that by a series of awakenings, Schopenhauer comes to the shocking idea that the only two events in the world that have any metaphysical reality are nirvana as the paradoxical self-abolition of the will, and at the other end orgasm as its affirmation of the will again. Does this sound crude to you, does it sound bad and crude for me to say this? It should not, because the management of this letter of sexual energy and relations, of

breeding and child-making, this is the foundation of all civilization and all the laws and everything else. I will not talk of Nirvana now, I am only telling you this, that Schopenhauer, although So he says the path of nirvana and denial of the will to life is superior. He himself realizes this does not necessarily follow from his observation about life and nature which I try to briefly, perhaps in a clumsy way, list for you just now. But I would say that it is similar for Buddhism, their moral conclusions do not follow by necessity from what they realize about the world. Both are in the end only ways, practices to wipe out the accumulated dross, accumulated detritus of philosophical disputation, the overgrowth of religious and other doctrines

and their shattered remains that are left behind, which weigh down the main of late civilization, weigh him down, corrupt him. And to this end, I will even add for you that the latest and most advanced forms of Buddhism, the Vajrayana, or the Diamond Vehicle Buddhism, or what you know as Tibetan Buddhism, which is also the Buddhism of Mongolia, by the way, and of the Japanese imperial family, esoteric Shingon sect. For these latest, most advanced forms of Buddhism, the manipulation of erotic energy is central to all practice. Furthermore, I remind you that these are religions and visions of power and conquest, and not like you have been made to think of peacenik self-renunciation. And many of Schopenhauer's followers, Nietzsche especially, although she follows his own way

and he understands from Schopenhauer's example that you must be your own man and not follow blindly somebody, but many of Schopenhauer's students call them what you will, they went into a direction very different than their master, who also hints at this, by the way, when he says that, I'm talking about Schopenhauer, that the conclusion of his doctrine need not be this kind of pessimistic renunciation or self-denier. He hints at this when he says that the esoteric doctrine of Christianity, of Hinduism and of Sufi Islam are all the same. In other words, these three religions share fundamentally same secret teaching and that they consist roughly in what I've said so far, but that for Christianity, the pain of renunciation of daily life is seen as very hard, is seen as difficult.

means the gloomy character of medieval Christianity, whereas for Sufism, Sufi Islam, very different from mainstream Islam, but for Sufism, this renunciation of the will is full of joy and full of happiness, he says. So that's how it is seen, which leads to character of that religion of Sufism, despite having the same inner aim as Christianity, it's nevertheless very joyful religion. While for Hinduism, it is a correct medium between the two. It is a balanced view, he claims, in Hinduism, where the renunciation is neither very difficult nor very hard. And so he believes Hinduism is the original and more correct superior practices, but that the three religions teach the same thing. He also says, Schopenhauer, that Jesus must have surely traveled to India and learned with the yogis.

or as some say, that he himself was a Galilean Celtic yogi. Well, I will discuss on the next segment some examples of direct European engagement with actual Buddhism. I'll be right back. Telling stories that no one believes Stories of love to you Jinji If I only had words I would have the beautiful things that I see You're with me Song of this day Yes, I took you Seen what is the danger of European Buddhism A kind of nihilism, you could say A lassitude of the spirit that can result from an embrace of Schopenhauer's philosophy. Some of his 19th century followers did commit suicide. But the importation of Buddhist passive or Quietist, as it's sometimes called, Quietist thought from the East can have similar effect.

This kind of, you must love everyone as yourself, cliché Zen California version of Buddhism. But if, as I tell you, there is a side of Buddhism that doesn't need necessarily to lead to passive renunciation or to pacifism. But what could be called a vitalist, that its essence in fact is to free man's wild spirit from accumulated practices of domestication, thoughts of domestication, including philosophy and the detritus or garbage left behind by philosophy and various religions, belief in various abstract concepts, in historical forces or such, for example, these kinds of things. normies, despite being too low IQ to approach philosophy, nevertheless their minds are inhabited by ghosts of concepts and by dead words.

And it's really this rule of words, this lugocentrism that is the mark of the mid-weight intellectual. And that is one of the worst corruptions of human nature by domestication and civilization. But what if Buddhism has this side I say, that is to recover men's fullness of energy in nature and the right path to walk with the will in nature and on its secret intention of nature. Then you see in European history, in 20th century, especially two great thinkers who are not at all studied in the Anglo world, not even translated in English, I think. But these are Karl Haushofer and Ludwig Klages. And you know, the first review of my book that came out was in Swedish, and I think think it's still up online somewhere, and they said my position in book is very much

like Claggis, which I was happy to find out, although I had never studied Claggis myself at the time. He had a Nietzschean vitalist philosophy, but Frend says he is the only man in the West who truly understood Buddhism, beyond Schopenhauer, who focused over much on its negative and life-denying aspects, but Claggis understood that it doesn't need to lead to that, understood it in its innocent originality when in fact it's something very different from what you think. And you see this also in sort of Karl Haushofer, a very interesting man, again very much not studied in Anglosphere, not translated in English, and I don't pretend to be expert on him in any sense, but in many ways Karl Haushofer is founder of Science of Geopolitics

and supposedly he was the one who came up with idea of Lebensraum or living space, which again I never fully studied from him myself, but because like Klages we proceed from very similar sources, much of what I say in book, again similar to what he says regarding the necessities of people for fullness of natural expansion. And he was assigned as a diplomat to Japan before World War I, I think, and then served in the war and after Germany lost, he tried to work for a revival not only of Germany but idea of German-led Europe that would be able to preserve its sovereignty, a sovereignty of European civilization against the twin dangers of America and Russia. So maybe I discuss his geopolitical ideas as well as his life in more detail another

time because he was largely responsible for many important things, for example, Japan-Germany alliance. Very interesting man. But the reason I bring him up now is because while in Japan, House Hoffer, excuse me, you see how they try to trip me up just as I tell you something, a great secret, but he was inducted into secret society whose name I do not want to say even in this portion of the show that's not public, out of respect to them. I will not say their name, but it's not a huge secret, in other words, you can look it up online. It will take some looking but look up Carl House offer Japan and societies he may have joined there, but I refuse to say their name You can't just talk about such things and so he joined this secret Buddhist so to speak societies that is supposedly Japanese

But actually was not it was actually a Tibetan and they had people in Hong Kong as well Who I may have mentioned to you at one time or another who serve their point man and who was transferred to Berlin and coordinated with Tibetan lamas some of who were apparently brought to Berlin during the war So that Russians found 100 monks who had committed a ritual suicide of what were they doing in Berlin during the war in any case house offer cattle house offer and his wife Committed ritual seppuku don't read by the way the lies about how they died He committed ritual seppuku with his wife right after the war ended, even though he would not have been tried for war crimes or anything. The occupying authorities, the allies, were not going to try him.

But he nevertheless committed seppuku, having failed in his mission for this group. But in any case, you know, it's interesting, I speak with Frog from Upper Midwest, and that's one of the few places where such things are studied still. Nobody knows, but let's say you go to a library in Minnesota or similar, and you find books from early 20th century, many in German, or commentaries in English on German original, and whether it is on people like Ludwig Klages, or Stefan Goerge, or Hess, this exists as a kind of organic tradition in that part of America, whether it's because of the background of the immigrants there, or my friend I think had another explanation, but this exists in and speeches that you can find, but Wilhelm Landing is a sort of fun kind of, you know,

he wrote novels, okay, he wrote fiction, but it's a kind of fun remnant of the axis after World War II. So if you want to see what axis after World War II look like, what they say, you read these two, De Grel and Wilhelm Landing. But so Landing write novels that inspired so-called esoteric Hitlerism. So you can think Haunebu flying saucers, think Antarctica bases, Atlantis, Al-Bebaran emissaries, this kind of thing. But a big part of these books is relationship to Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism. From here, from the roofs of the world in Tibet, the roof of the world was supposed to come the racial purity knowledge as a holdover from great floods of remote antiquities. cycle of human civilization ended when the remnants of far superior men found a refuge

on the roofs of the mountains of Tibet that remained above a flooded earth and they preserved ancient knowledge. And this is where this whole very bizarre but for me very entertaining strain of Nazi esoteric lore in Europe comes from. And if you knew him before he disappeared, user Neiman made amazing YouTubes about this. He deleted them. I wish he would return. I know who he is and where he is. He's a great man. He lived presently in a tropical country and he does expeditions into ancient ruins for real. He lives a kind of Indiana Jones way of life. But somewhat of a hermit, I wish he would return to internet to bring his knowledge and gospel to all of us again. The videos of username which he made I think with simple windows media player or whatever

editing very simple editing program but they were some of them work work of art amazing I posted one of them about kamikaze that I was able to find but it is represented as this so-called esoteric Hitlerism Savitri Devi Miguel Serrano Wilhelm Landing people like this some others. So now I bring all this up and Ludwig Klages, who is not like these people, but much more philosophical man, but I ask why this happened, why such people would have been interested in Buddhism or Hinduism, besides, well, okay, they found it to be true. Still I ask why because I don't think the reasons are those I describe when I talk about Schopenhauer or his followers. Let's say you take philosophical men like Klages. On one hand, they would have Schopenhauerian, Nietzschean philosophical concerns.

I talked before about why this may have been. But why someone like crazy person Savitri Devi or Miguel Serrano? Why someone like Himmler? Why so interested in Buddhism and Hinduism? What big reason might be that European Buddhism is, what is it not? It is not Christianity. The introduction of explicit Buddhist or Hindu doctrine in this view is intended to separate Europe from its Christian past, which parts of the right – this is what I'm trying to tell you – parts of the right wing political movement, they would have had a political motivation to want to separate Europe from its Christian heritage, much like parts of the left had same political interest. For example, why Southern Spain turns so communist and anti-clerical in Spanish Civil War?

Is it merely because they believe in philosophical Marxism and this? No, I will tell you. Do you see four-foot-tall campesinos when you go to Home Depot? They're waiting for day's job and wage in this. Well, this actually is very old Spanish tradition. If you go Southern Spain, and there it's above all other parts of Spain, the Roman tradition of latifundia, just gigantic estates with a few landowners having all the land. This Roman tradition in that part of Spain. And most of the men are reduced to being day laborers. So the day laborer thing, that's very old Spanish reality. So you can imagine why communism became so attractive in that part of Spain where you had so many disenfranchised men who were especially eager to kill priests and nuns.

again, not out of theological conviction or genuine Marxist hatred of religion, but simply because the priests were very much part of the old regime and allied with landowners and so forth. So this was motivation for the anti-Christianity or anti-clericalism of the typical Spanish communist. Well, for the North European fascists, who was distinct from the conservative old guard, There may have been similar political reasons, not the same I'm saying, it's not the same as the left in any case, but roughly analogous for the right wing progressive intellectual as opposed to the right wing reactionary, there may have been a political reason to embrace explicitly an oriental spiritualism that was not Christian, not beholden to the story told in the Bible about the world and about men.

It was not, by the way, a class thing like the communist embrace of anti-religion was, because in this case many European aristocrats actually embraced these esoteric oriental doctrines and orientation, founded many of the lodges that tried to import Buddhist or Hindu thought into Europe. And I'm not just referring to Evola, many of you know Evola, and Evola is sort of guru of Wilhelm Landing, the novelist I just mentioned, but they were major members of German royal houses and such and there was, I am saying, an attempt both to distance oneself from political Christianity and also to distance oneself from the atheism and the materialism of the communists and what they saw as the Americanists or the finance capitalists.

Second, what other reason could you have for such people to embrace Buddhism and Hinduism? Then I'm drawing distinction between, on one hand, men like Schopenhauer, his philosophical followers, people like Ludwig Klages, who had the reasons why they embraced Orientalism if you want to call it that, or Buddhism, I described already in previous part of show. It was a kind of deconstructionist project, a real one, not a fake one like Foucault and Derrida. But for many other people who had political motivation, again I mentioned them, Savitri Sevi, Miguel Serrano, many people you haven't heard of from early 20th century Europe who embraced this kind of faddish Buddhism, why they do it? What other reason could there be?

One could consider if it is maybe the racial theories that motivated this attraction to Hinduism especially. By the way, the so-called father of racism, Gobinol, he wrote a very good book, The Religions and philosophies of Central Asia, which I highly recommend, but again, I do not know if it is at all translated into English. It might be. Gobino, a very interesting man. He was ambassador to Iran and also to Brazil, to Rio de Janeiro, I don't know a full ambassador, but a diplomat there, and that where he get his like of mulatto women's. He praises mulatto beauty in his book on racism, but he's very typically French in that under unfortunately. It's very funny. He says Russian women are ugly and mulatta women, he go crazy

for them. Gabinodas. But let's leave that for another time. But this could be as a reason. Maybe the racial theories, you could say this why they love Hinduism because Himmler has also Savitri Devi. And apparently Savitri Devi, I forget her birth name, but this woman lived during the war and after the war. And she apparently said at one point, or it was alleged that she said that she did not actually believe in Hinduism, but that she went to India to support Hinduism because she thought this religion was a buttress of racial hierarchy and she thought that the introduction of Christianity in India would lead to complete racial confusion. The end of whatever vestiges of Aryans were left in India, there and through miscegenation that Christianity would bring about in that subcontinent.

By extension then, Hinduism or a Western revision of it could be maybe used to support racial hierarchy in Europe or in the world at large under European Aryan leadership as a colonial or post-colonial global ideology that would have rivaled liberalism, I don't know. But certainly if you read Nietzsche in Twilight of the Idols, he has passaged the improvers of mankind, and he considers Hinduism and Brahmanism to be entirely this, what I just told you. A cruel and ruthless, which is not to say, by the way, a bad, but a cruel and ruthless system for preserving Aryan blood, an Aryan supremacy in a place where the Aryan was vastly outnumbered. And the latest genetic results from India seem to bear this out completely.

blood from the steppe very high, Yamnaya in the Brahmin case, and the Buddha was a blonde man, blue-eyed, who grew up in a gated compound in apartheid era India, this completely true. But regardless, I am just considering reasons for why such oriental religion might have had attraction to certain parts of Europe. And I don't talk in this episode of other very important and older strains of Buddhism in Europe or of pseudo-Buddhism in Europe. For example, Meister Eckhart, the medieval Christian mystic, or the Christian legend of Barlaam and Josephat, which is a Christian adaptation of the story of the Buddha, which is very old and it entered Europe through Middle Eastern Christian sects, and then in

the Middle Ages it entered Europe and is celebrated in a supposedly very beautiful medieval German epic. I have not read it myself, but it is written by a knight named Rudolf von Enz. He was attached to the court of the heir of Frederick II Hohenstaufen and died in military campaign with him to try to retake Rome. I've talked about this a few times. Nietzsche believed this man, Frederick II Hohenstaufen, was prototype of modern European Superman. You see, these connections are not random. There is a reason for all of this. But that alone deserves its own episode. In closing, I would like to bring attention to a book Hakan told me that actually discusses very openly everything I've told you in this segment.

How Tibetan Buddhism, Vajrayana Buddhism in particular, how it is a misogynistic, racial supremacist, authoritarian, and violent religion, yes, violent religion, vitalist religion, And how the Dalai Lama hides all of this while always ironically alluding to it to throw it in the people's faces, to throw it in the faces of those in the know. How he and many other Tibetan lamas and authorities have long kept contact with the axis and whose their remnants in Europe. So of course the two authors of this book, a German husband and wife team, presents this in a very negative light as a great terror and this and all this kind. But of course, for me, it's very good. And here are a few of the things they say. By the way, you can find this book completely online.

It's called, what is it called, let me see, The Shadow of the Dalai Lama by Victor and Victoria Trimondi, translated into English. It is on their website, first chapter, Buddhism and Misogyny. Buddhism isn't that great? Buddhism and Misogyny, very nice. Then they have a whole chapter, let me find it here, on foundations of Tibetan Buddhocracy. They get all bothered that the Dalai Lama is not a liberal Democrat, that he follows oracles instead of following, let's say, the council of Cechi Schumer and of Ruth Bader Ginsburg telling Tibetan boys that they have a vagina. I don't know. They're upset about that. They also have chapter on fascist occultism and its close relationship to Buddhist Tantrism. Buddhism, which is not just in this case, they actually have a case because it's not

just guilt by association, they kept operational and social ties going back very far. But let me read you just brief from their book, beginning chapter on misogyny and Buddhism. Our core statement is as follows, they say, the mystery of tantric Buddhism consists in as a sacrifice of the feminine principle and the manipulation of erotic love in order to attain universal androcentric power. Yes, I like that. What is wrong with that? And they go through it. They give a short sketch. They say history of Buddhism is divided into four phases, all of which had their full development in India. The first known as Theravada Buddhism is what you find in Sri Lanka, in Thailand, in Burma. And then you have Mahayana Buddhism or Great Vehicle Buddhism, which is you find, I think

Vietnam but you find certainly this China Buddhism mainly. And then you have Vajrayana or Diamond Vehicle, which is the last or most progressive form of Buddhism, the final synthesis of all Buddhism, which you have, excuse me, you see how they attack me, you see how they attack me straight from Mecca with Ray, they don't want me to tell you this. But Diamond Vehicle or Vajrayana Buddhism is the Buddhism of Tibet, of Mongolia, and again there are some very unusual holdouts in Japan and a few other places. But they try to describe how Buddhism of all these different forms attempts to co-opt or deal with feminine aspects of life. So they say, number one, in Theravada Buddhism, the sacrifice of the feminine is carried out with the help of meditation.

The Hinayana monk, this is the Theravada monk, fears and dreads women and attempts to escape them. He also makes use of meditative exercises to destroy and transcend life, nature, and the soul. So this is what you might consider the meaning of renunciation or of asceticism for the Buddhist. I think they misunderstand it, but I like the way they put it. What is wrong with this? Then they try to say in Mahayana Buddhism, through the Bodhisattva, they have some kind of attempt to save women through compassion. And now in Tantrism, or Vajrayana, or Tibetan Buddhism, the Tantric master, the yogi, exchanges compassion with the woman for absolute control over the feminine. With sexual magic rites, he elevates the woman to the status of a goddess in order to subsequently

offer her up as a real or symbolic sacrifice. The beneficiary of this sacrifice is not some god, but the yogi himself, since he absorbs within himself the complete life energy of the sacrifice. This radical Vajrayana method ends an apocalyptic firestorm which consumes the entire universe within its flames. In this phase, the bearer of androcentric power is called the Grand Master or Mahasiddha. You see what they say? They say that the logic of development pertains between various stages of Buddhism. It begins with a passive origin, switches to an active or ethical intermediary stage in Mahayana Buddhism and ends in an aggressive, destructive final phase, the Tantrayana or the Tibetan Buddhism. So you see, they make this whole case that it's a kind of masculine whatever, masculine

supremacy. I agree with this. I agree completely. But I just agree with certain revisions in practice, this all. But yes, Vajrayana is the right path and it has effects in political positions too, which are hardly pacifists or hardly defeatists, as you've been led to think. I mean, this should be clear even from examples of Wiratu and the monks in Sri Lanka, who are Theravada Buddhists, though they may be, but in any case, Buddhists are not lying down and they are not letting Global Homo use its Islamic militias to bully them into submission. So anyway, here are, as I tell you, some other highlights from this book. I don't know if you want to read, there is a lot of sensationalism in the book, but also a lot of knowledge you can't find anywhere else.

So they say the Kalachakra Tantra, this is one that I have mentioned before, as a root of so-called Buddhist vitalism, which is what this show is about, Buddhist militant vitalism. And the foundation of that is this text, the Kalachakra Tantra, the final text of Buddhism. So they say the Kalachakra Tantra invokes a global war between Islamic and non-Islamic world in which the followers of Mohammed are presented as the principal enemies of the Buddhists. The original text refers to Mecca, where the mighty, merciless idol of the barbarians lives as a demonic incarnation, and, you know, they say that to you as if, oh, no, we have to stop this, it's the war of religions, you know, you can't oppose Islam.

So they continue, the secret rites of the Kalachakra Tantra may not under pain of medieval punishment for body and soul, they may not be discussed with the uninitiated. The head and heart of whoever reveals its occult secrets will burst asunder and they will burn in the deepest hell. There are good reasons for this, then in the eight highest initiations there is talk of things that stand in complete contradiction to a humanist system of values. That's right. In other words, the secret teaching of this Buddhism I talk about is completely opposed to so-called humanist system of values. The Kalachakra Tantra is anything but pacifist, rather it prophesies and promotes a bloody religious war for world domination between Buddhists and non-Buddhists, the Shambhala myth.

The text explicitly names the leaders of the three monotheistic religions – Judaism, Christianity, Islam, as opponents of Buddhism, Adam, Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, the white-clad one, Mani of Manichaeanism, I discussed on previous show, Mohammed and Mahtani, the Mahdi, the Kalachakra Tantra describes them as the family of the demonic snakes, yes, thus the Kalachakra Tantra, I agree with all of that by the way, the Kalachakra Tantra is opposed to all religions of Semitic origin, and for this reason has been pressed into service by right-wing, radical, and anti-Semitic circles for the races, blah, blah, blah. Fuck off! So what? This is what these people say. You're supposed to read this and go, oh my, you know, you're supposed to say, you know who this text is directed at.

I'm continuing with this book now. I find this book amusing the way it tries to shock people. All the participants in Kalachakra initiation have questionable privilege of being reborn as Shambhala warriors in order to be able to participate in the prophesied apocalyptic battle as either infantry or officers dependent on rank. High lamas of particular lineages have already been assigned to commanding positions. According to a vision of the Tibetan Lama, Kamtrul Rinpoche, it is the reincarnated Dalai Lama himself who as a wrathful field marshal will lead the Buddhist army into the Shambhala battle, to conquer all evil in the universe, propagandists for the Kalachakra Tantra, peddle a primitive martyr cult that resembles that of the Muslim Jihad warriors.

He who falls in the Shambhala war is rewarded with guaranteed entry into Shambhala paradise. You know, they're trying to signal, to counter terror establishment, to sic them on this. You know these kinds of people who write the book. Pay attention to the content and not to their hysterical sensationalism. But they say some interesting things. The Kalachakra Tantra contains a Buddhocratic doctrine of state, which is even more theocratic than the fundamentalist Islam concept of theocracy. The Buddhist Chakravartin, the world ruler, is seen as a direct incarnation or emanation of the Supreme Buddha, Adi Buddha, as a walking god-man on earth. That's right. So what? What do you think about this? I do. You know what I think about this? I say yes!

To all this, I say yes, and it's backed up in the Bible, by the way. Hakan pointed out to me that the tribe of Dan in the Bible and in Talmudic commentary is admitted by the rabbis to be a tribe of snakes. means but I agree with everything that was said and I hope a mighty army will come from summits of Tibet to all of this I say yes the Chakravartin will once again walk the earth like a god you will see and one day you may discover something about me one day there may be some unusual things you will discover about me back out until next time