Magick Equipment Part I

In all forms of Buddhism, there are said to be four or five Dhyanas, or meditational states. Each of these meditational states corresponds with one of the four primordial elements of earth, water, fire and air. First Dhyana is characterized by meditating on earth, and the solid parts of the body. The formless meditational state, the abstract attainment is said to be “infinite space”. The second Dhyana is characterized by meditation on water and the liquid elements of the body, like blood. The abstract meditational insight is usually referred to as “infinite consciousness”—the flow of thoughts like water in a river. The third Dhyana is fire, and naturally heat the body emits is the meditation subject. The formless attainment is nothingness, probably referring to clearing the mind of thought. The fourth Dhyana is air and thus, the wind in the body, the air in the lungs is meditated upon. The spiritual fruit of such an endeavor is the state of “perception or not perception”, a slight out of body experience where psychic powers are said to develop. The fifth Dhyana refers to enlightenment in Buddhism or where the elements begin and simultaneously cease to be.
In Chinese metaphysics the fifth element is metal, whereas in western astrology and alchemy it is often lightning. These tokens for the connective structure between the elements, indicates energy as an element that is grounded in enlightenment. It is this energy of lightening or metal which is symbolic for Li and Qi, principle and material force in Confucian cosmology. Likewise, this energy is the manifestation of Kundalini serpent power is Indian metaphysics. It is the soul in Western religions, this force of energy that is a manifestation of power and wisdom in the East. The soul is perhaps the Western equivalent for the chakra, the qi, and the vital spirit which is referred to in many different ways in most religions across the world.

Beelzebul(US) - Hell is Earth

In Defense of Religion - Part IV Judaism

Of all the Abrahamic religions, Judaism is the oldest surviving tradition. It bears with it a very powerful mystical tradition and many elements of power and self-fulfillment. Of all the Western traditions, Judaism is the smallest, but also the wisest. Judaism hardly needs defense against its own dogmas—it needs to be defended from other groups. This article will expose the hypocrisy laden within modern day Christian anti-Semitism, Islamic anti-Semitism requires another article and will be addressed later.
In many forms of the Christian tradition, Judaism is misunderstood completely. The Jews are sometimes blamed for the alleged crucifixion of Jesus, and much controversy arises regarding this aspect of theology. I am attempting to sway Christians against this form of anti-Semitism. If Jesus was truly crucified (readers of my Gnostic articles will recall that I do not believe that he died on the cross) scriptures indicate that he was set up for this fate by the Pharisees. True, the Pharisees were a Jewish sect at the time, but they were not the only Jews around. There were Sadducees the believers in an eschatological doctrine dissimilar from the Pharisees hedonism, there were Zealots the religious activists there were Samaritans who possessed a creed of helping those in need, and there were the Essenes the mystical sect from the deserts. John the Baptist and Jesus were believed to be Essenes. Virtually all the sects other than perhaps the money lenders, the Pharisees, avoided misuse of the material realms in order to satisfy their spiritual impetus. The Essenes especially, were primarily focused on spiritual salvation. My first refutation of Christian anti-Semitism: how can we pigeonhole all Jews as like these Pharisees, when there were so many other sects of Judaism around? How can we blindly assume that Jews today are anything like the biblical Pharisees? How can a whole people in the first place be blamed for something that only one small community of Jews did in the first place?
My second basis for the refutation of anti-Semitism is simple: Jesus never abandoned Judaism, nor did he abandon his Essene mysticism. Christianity in its pure form should be considered a form of the Essene doctrine, and Christians should be consulting these texts for proof of my claims—see the Dead Sea Scrolls or any compilation of Gnostic scriptures. Thus, to hate a Jew as a Christian is truly to hate oneself!

http://www.beelzebul.net/antinihilistT.pdf MY TAROT DECK

In Defense of Religion - Part III Christianity

St. Paul, or rather Saul was a persecutor of Christians and Christianity, who after an alleged vision, turned full circle and became Christian. One problem, he created his own form of Christianity in the process, defiled it, and disseminated on a large scale. While Christ was teaching select groups of Gnostics and other Essene (mystical Jewish sect) inspired groups, Saul, was playing double agent with the Pharisees and concocted a curse and a disease which we should call Pauline Christianity. Saul never quit being a persecutor, he created false doctrines which polluted the sea of Gnostic, Ethiopian and other scriptures. These scriptures—mainly Paul’s letters—established false dogmas of: 1) salvation through faith and 2) anthropomorphic zombie God, i.e. a version of Jesus which would have had to sleep with its mother in order to create itself, create itself to kill itself and kill itself to resurrect itself, if, of course this anthropomorphic deity was truly omniscient, omnipresent and omnibenevolent so-to-speak. What about the first error? I will briefly refute salvation through faith; if all one has to do in order to be saved, is to believe in the necromancy myth of Jesus, than I can do whatever I want, like possess all the uncontrollable emotions that the evangelical right possesses in their forums attempting to refute me. Thus, Christianity has been transformed into something other than what it was intended to be.
This article is still a defense of Christianity, it’s a defense from both the Pauline branches and the Atheists. Gnosticism means true Christianity in my critical religious lexicon. It should mean the same to you. The Gnostic texts outnumber those of the Canonized scripture, and follow a Buddhistic and Animistic course of nature. The mystical method employed in these scriptures paints a portrait of Jesus, a heroic healer of psychological problems caused by the Pharisees, a bringer of unparalleled wisdom, and a master of disguise who reappeared after his crucifixion, by no miracle other than Simon, the man who according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke “bore the cross for a while”, and according to several Gnostic texts, got crucified in his stead. Lithargoel was one of Jesus’ disguises in the Acts of Peter and the Twelve apostles. Peter could not even recognize him. I doubt the Extreme Pauline Christians can even comprehend this—Jesus was a man? Impossible! If only they could recognize their own savior!
http://www.beelzebul.net

In Defense of Religion - Part I Islam

As a part skeptic and part believer (agnostic), I see the arguments from both sides and believe a little from each. The first part of this series will be a defense of Islam, from a primarily political and historical perspective. In my last few articles I endeavored to write about the US and its relations with Islamic nations. I explained that from the fundamentalist perspective in any religion, much harm can be caused. I also mentioned that when the fundamentalist sect of Islamic Wahhabism took to power it caused a change in Islam. This change, ushered in war. In later parts of this series I will criticize Christian and Western extremism, but in this article I will flesh out this critique and defense of religion.
The fundamentalist Wahhabism sect originated within Sunni Islam in Saudi Arabia in the 19th century. Although some scholars attribute the origins of Osama bin Laden’s extremism to be the Egyptian Sayyid Qutb, I disagree. Although, I certainly think that figures like Qutb, the artist and intellectual who was executed by the Egyptian government certainly did not hurt the inspiration of the extremism of today, I believe it grounded more in Wahhabism. The Wahhabi sect brings to Islam a new approach. Strict exegesis is employed and the methods used to perform these interpretations are primarily literal. When fundamentalist Christians read the Bible they often come to violent conclusions, and the same holds true for Islam. Completely ignoring Mohammad’s clear disposition on his respect for Judaism, the Patriarchs and Christ, extremist sects have waged war against them. Naturally it does not help, that the Quran expresses love for the Gnostic Christ that most Christians have forgotten, but it does do Abrahamic religion justice with its metaphorical, spiritual, and religious message.
Yet, there is a problem here. People are dying in the name of Islam the wrong way. While it’s true many Muslims are clearly being punished unfairly by their enemies, I’m afraid this has only facilitated the spread of a more and more literal interpretation of the “Chastisement by Fire”. Revenge is certainly not what Mohammad taught, he taught peace and righteousness, and he only acted out of self-defense. Mohammad the man, is the least opaque of all Abrahamic religious figures, we should have the best idea of who he was. Mohammad was the messenger who through beautiful words, and incredible knowledge of battle defended his people and created a religion of submission to God, the ninety-nine names that describe the universe, being, and the ineffable knowledge that requires so many names in the first place. I also fear that sectarian strife has eliminated our collective unconscious to the extent where extremist sects of Islam have submitted themselves to politics, revenge and emotion and not God. In addition, the arrogance of the West has only facilitated this by so much generalizing, and assuming that Islam has always been a violent religion. In closing, if you are to be angry with these views, please respond to them, but at least wait until I go throughout the globe and discuss how religions have deteriorated elsewhere.

http://www.beelzebul.net/Blog/blog.php

Mainstream Religion a Unifying Thread: Part VI Zoroastrianism

In the last part of the series we discussed Hinduism. Although, the beautiful representations of the universe must be respected, the futility of asceticism cannot be ignored. Today, we will be moving the lens forward in time again—towards Zoroastrianism. Zoroastrianism must be regarded as an important world religion, despite its small numbers and isolated influence. The reason: Zoroastrianism had a huge impact on Abrahamic tradition most notably Christianity.
The concept of a moral and a metaphysical dualism are imports from Zoroastrianism. Yes, the concepts of ‘Good’, ‘ Evil’, ‘Heaven’ and ‘Hell’ manifest themselves in Christianity through Zoroastrian ontology. In Zoroastrianism the dualism between Ahura Mazda and Ahriman, the evil force, are taught. Zoroaster created this dichotomy to better edify his people, but as time progressed, the metaphorical distinction became confusing. When Christianity appeared, these concepts were eventually taken to mean that there exists an anthropomorphic ‘God’ and an anthropomorphic ‘Satan’ who rule over separate and distinct worlds, apart from Earth and our universe. This dualism became deleterious for the religious minded psychology.
Evidence of Zoroastrian influence on Christianity is clear. Scholars point out that the three Magi of the Nativity in Christianity are possibly Zoroastrian. The reason being is that Magi are not of Jewish origin, nor of Greek or Roman—they only appear in Persian and Zoroastrian culture. Furthermore, take a look at the gifts they brought. Frankincense and Myrrh are distinctively Persian. Frankincense comes from a tree that would have only been available on the Arabian peninsula and Persia at the time. In addition, the moral and metaphysical dualism of Christianity are highly evident in both the Canonical and Apocryphal scriptures—even the Gnostic and Essene scriptures. Thus, the connection between the two religions is clear.
The problem: Zoroastrianism and the moral and metaphysical dualism it initiated are very old. Zoroaster is said to have lived in the first century B.C.E. This makes this artistic rendition of the universe and its dark and light qualities nearly three thousand years old! How can the modern religious minded theist, who most likely does not even understand the roots of their tradition, understand the moral and metaphysical dualistic ontology that has been re-done, and re-created over the course of 3000 years?

Mainstream Religion a Unifying Thread: Part V Hinduism

Existing at least two or three thousand years (if not much more) before the existence of Buddha, approximately 2500 years ago, Hinduism is really old. In the last segments of the series one problem that came up in regards to Abrahamic religion, was the notion of a mystical tradition being lost in translation and understanding today. Hinduism, if I may be permitted to call it that does not suffer from this problem.
Hinduism is not a monolithic entity as is the case for many mainstream religions. Hinduism is not one codified set of practices and beliefs. It is a name given to common threads in Indian religion. One of these threads is the division in scripture from what is heard and what is read. Much like the oral and written versions of the Torah, a tenet of Hinduism is the primordial Aum existing before the creation of the universe like the primordial Torah. With that said, Hinduism is overtly mystical and does not share the same problems as Judaism and Christianity as far as theology is concerned. The mystical tradition in most of Hinduism is strong. Astrology is permissible and a distinctively Indian system of Astrology exists, which bears similarities to Western Astrology. Whether it’s the six or seven chakras and their many meanings, or the 100,000,000 gods, or the energies of the universe depicted in the Trimurti—Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Hinduism retains its mystical autonomy. Thus, despite not being a codified and monolithic thing, Hinduism preserves what is truly spiritual in the tradition.
The problem with Hinduism still has to do with its age. In this case it is a slight reluctance to change. The ascetic path can bring some spiritual experiences so-to-speak. Yet, these experiences pale in comparison to the middle paths offered in Buddhism and even Confucian and Daoist renditions of similar mystical tenets as Hinduism. I will not discuss the ontological differences between Atman (Self) and Anatman (No-self) here, but I will qualify my point with the following: When the Buddha appeared and died, he was later adopted by Hinduism as the ninth avatar of Vishnu. He was said to have come to deceive the people into believing that there was no immortal atman, or self, or soul. In this way, the religion displayed a reluctance to change and adapt its ontological understandings to some key advancements in philosophy such as those of the Buddha. This is not to say that all of Hinduism thinks this way. Hinduism is not a static and unified set of beliefs. Personally, the Hindu system of Astrology and pantheon of Gods provides me with everything mainstream Buddhism seems to lack. Yet, Hinduism is still old—really old. And with that, comes the problem of application. Asceticism for one, is difficult for Westerners to choose as a lifestyle, and even more difficult to understand.

Mainstream Religion a Unifying Thread: Part IV Islam

In the last part of the series, we discussed Judaism and how its mystical tenets are often completely lost in the mainstream manifestations of religion. Islam shares the same problem. Not only is it old, approx 1400 years old, it is a successor to the Abrahamic tradition of Christianity and Judaism. With that said, it shares similar problems as the rest of the mainstream Abrahamic tradition.
Islam does honor the fact that Jesus most likely escaped crucifixion. The Maulana Muhammad translation of the Quran indicates:And for their saying: We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah, and they killed him not, nor did they cause his death on the cross, but he was made to appear to them as such. And certainly those who differ therein are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge about it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for certain. ....
This sheds some light on Islamic-Christian theological disagreement. ....Despite this amazing quality of the Quran’s revelation, Islam has I believed deteriorated from the Messenger’s intent, at least in the mainstream form. In the Quran the mystical tenets are very clear, and the metaphoric “Chastisement by Fire” should not be interpreted to be a brutal terrorist assault, but rather a description of the non-believer’s psychological state. It is partially understandable why the mainstream deterioration has been known to be so violent. Muhammad himself led an example of war, although his was just war, just cause, his followers could not live up to his example. Strife broke out immediately after the Messenger’s death, with who the successor should be. The modern Sunni and Shi’a sects were based on division between whether Abu Bakr Muhammad’s companion, or Ali ibn Abi Talib Muhammad son in law, should be the successor—civil war broke out.

Mainstream Religion a Unifying Thread: Part III Judaism

In Judaism much of worship is mystical in nature. In Christianity, only Christ could perform miracles and in the literal reading of the bible Christ alone, redeemed mankind from sin through his death. Although, the true mystical roots of Christianity, and true Christianity for that matter are really derivations of the mystical Essene Judaism, the Christianity that survives today is a different sort of beast. Christians of today are following the Pharisee form of the religion created by Paul/Saul. In contrast, Jews preserve the mystical tradition of the Torah. The problem with the Torah is the same as with other religious texts擁t is old. Like the primordial aum of the Rg Veda, the Torah in its spiritual form is said to have existed prior to the creation of the world. What this means for our science minded day and age, is that the truth of these words, is consistent with the nature of the universe, it is a voice piece for the universe. Nevertheless, the Torah is old and many do not understand the mystical roots underlying everything. Regardless of how old the Pentateuch is, or how many authors other than Moses it truly had, the epic tales it depicts are hiding the mystical tradition therein. The mysticism becomes clearer in the books of the Prophets, where books like Ezekiel depict astrological constellations and ritual incantations. Yet, because of the gross misunderstanding by the majority (Christians) the true conception of Judaism is lost, by many save for Jews themselves, who do not have nearly the numbers as Christian followers. Jewish organizations which teach the mystical tradition in addition to the rituals and worship that is associated with Judaism, are often secretive, and do not publically disseminate the mystical message.

---

Mainstream Religion a Unifying Thread: Part II Christianity

n our last installment, I concluded that all religions are essentially old in nature. Buddhism was our first case study. The findings indicated that Buddhist scripture have arrived to us today in more textual accuracy due to their large numbers. However, some of the higher level tenets, such as the reincarnation of Dalai Lamas were deemed misleading. Furthermore, due to the vast nature of Buddhism and Buddhisms I concluded that, although Buddhism bears a warm place in my heart, it is simply quite difficult to become a true Buddhist. In much the same manner, it is difficult to be a trueChristian.
Christianity suffers the opposite in problems as Buddhism when regarding scripture. There is simply a lack of authoritative text with Christianity. As opposed to the vast and well-preserved immensity of Buddhist scripture, most Christian scripture is spurious and limited to just the Holy Bible. The Holy Bible is not only over 1600 years old, and thus old and out-dated to begin with, it is not a true product of Christ and the Essene Judaism in which Jesus taught. As many of my readers know, I have found the Bible to be a hodgepodge of Roman and Pharisaical beliefs constructed to manipulate the people of Rome via the Council of Nicaea. Setting that aside, even the Gnostic and Arian conclusions of the deceptive nature of Christ only survive in small pockets of secret societies and fraternal organizations. These Gnostic and Arian sources indicate that Christ escaped crucifixion and appeared later as Lithargoel, according to the Second Treatise of the Great Seth and the Acts of Peter. Ask any mainstream Christian who Jesus was and they will surely have a different story. As Nietzsche righteously indicates, it was St. Paul who began the process of perverting Christianity (or at least Essene Judaism). St. Paul promulgated the resurrection myth and subsequent perversions of ontology. St. Paul Created the fictional afterlife, and the notion that Christ died for our sins. Well, Christ did not die, he escaped crucifixion. Even the synoptic Gospels admit that Simon of Cyrene bore the cross from Jesus for awhile. Christ was a magician who faked his own death—it is that simple. This Pauline/Gnostic dichotomy has caused an infinite mess of psychological problems, and logical contradictions. It is obvious that only one view is compatible with physics. In any event, because of deliberate perversions of Christ’s teaching and life, Christianity in its true form is only truly enjoyed by “non-religious” organizations such as the Freemasons.
Accepting the above claims, Christianity, even if is in a pure Gnostic form, is still old and outdated. The message is completely lost and only given to a select few. With this exclusive nature of true wisdom, how can humanity rectify its inner nature?

Mainstream Religion a Unifying Thread: Part I Buddhism

All mainstream religions are in some way old. Even the newest religions, such as the Baha’I and the Church of Satan, are tied to older and larger traditions. In today’s day and age, and occasional fanatical cult leader, or science fiction author will create a cult and call it religion. This type of thing is not really religion. Scientology for example, is too spurious of a doctrine to be considered a true religion and if readers demand this I will write a separate article for charlatans and cults. But for now Scientology aside, the vast majority of all religions are old or bear their roots in old traditions. This edition will focus on Buddhism.
I shall give Buddhism this credit, although it has been approximately 2400-2500 since the Buddha’s death, his teachings survive today in a very plentiful form. The Buddhist “Canon” would stretch from wall to every wall in a mid-sized house. Where, the Bible is simply the Bible (though there are many different types of Bibles and translations), the Buddhist literature vastly out numbers the Western tradition in terms of authoritative text. With that said, Buddhism still has a huge defect—it is old.
In the Buddha’s day, the suffering of men, women and the civilization of mankind in general was much smaller. Buddha only had access to one hemisphere of the world, and it was so greatly smaller than it is today. India and Asia today, make up most of the world’s population. In the Buddha’s day, even if myths that he traveled to China are true, there were simply far less people. Buddha designed the eightfold path as a means to correct the individual and merge them with the ultimate truths. However, his system is unrealistic for today’s society. Suffering is simply too wide spread. Unless, one goes into a monastery it is nearly impossible for the follower of Buddhism to adequately take upon themselves the many duties and rules of the Vinaya, the canonical scripture regarding monkhood.
The higher level meditational descriptions and detailed associations like the Abhidharma, are hard to decipher without learning Pali, Sanskrit or Chinese (For the various canonical translations of such material). Much of Buddhism is ingrained in Indian culture and much of the Mahayana and Vajrayana sects of Buddhism are ingrained in their respective cultures. It seems that many practitioners and students of Buddhism have to understand these cultures in order to understand much but not all of Buddhism.
In the case of Buddhist metaphysics, much of these have been ruled out by contemporary science and philosophy. In Consciousness at the Crossroads, contemporary neuroscientists, and philosophers of mind were given the opportunity to critique the Dalai Lama’s view of the mind. The results indicated that the Buddhist view that their exists some type of “subtle body” separate from contemporary ontology that can be reincarnated is discordant with science. The neuro-philosophers and neuroscientists of the book, tended to side with a monism that ruled out realms external to the physical world.
In defense of Buddhism, I do recognize the gifts it provides the religious world. There have been neuroscientists who, sympathetic with Buddhism, have found that brain scans on the brains of monks displayed a completely different pattern of brain activity. In my personal life, Buddhist meditation makes up the majority of my personal meditation regime. Yet, I stick to my claim—it’s too old. It does not make it easy enough for the people of today to follow.

http://www.beelzebul.net/antinihilistM.pdf -MY E-BOOK

Pratyeka Buddhas

Throughout time great messianic leaders have appeared to help and heal the suffering multitude. Zoroaster, Jesus and Mohammad are but a few of the most powerful of these figures. This article will attempt to show how all these figures are actually Buddhas, but not completely successful ones.
A Prayeka Buddha is an enlightened being who due to uncontrollable circumstances, failed to enlighten society as a whole in a permanent fashion. When Gautama Buddha arrived in India in approximately 2400-2500 b.c.e. the time and place of his arrival was ideal for the awakening of an extremely large number of people. The Buddha's retinue was an overall success as the Buddha managed to teach the Dharma and spread it successfully. Although elsewhere I have argued that the Buddha's world was so much different than our own that it makes it nearly impossible for the run-of-the mill wisdom seeker of today find enlightenment, Buddha's work was a success for a while.
Jesus Christ was of course a master of disguise and magician. Why is this so? Well this is most likely due to the political turmoil of multiple early governments and many different religious sects all competing for power. Because of this Jesus was not able to accurately spread his dharma without resorting to guile and crafty magick. While he was probably successful in awakening a large amount of people, he did not reach a critical mass large enough to make his dharma semi-permanent in the least. Saul the persecutor of Christians was able to manipulate more people and capitalize on Jesus' rules of Ahimsa and peace making Christianity today a wisdom-less mess of myths and superstitions. Hence, Jesus failed to enlighten enough to be called a true Buddha.
Mohammad had a similar problem only the defilers of his tradition were much closer to him. Failing to produce a male offspring, or proper successor, war broke out amongst his impassioned followers over who was this proper heir to the throne so-to-speak. This was a fatal and uncontrollable error which causes Islam to suffer to the present day.
A Prayeka Buddha is still a fully enlightened being with all the required powers and prowess needed to show a proper example to the earth. In the Lotus Sutra Prayeka beings are said to gather along with Maitreya (The future buddha) for Gautama Buddha's sermons. The Prayeka Buddhas tried with their maximum strength of will to fight for the demonstration of proper example, yet they were stopped by uncontrollable circumstances. It would be no surprise to me if the clever tricks of Jesus and the physical dexterity of Mohammad were in some way more advanced than Gautama's. Yet, this does not matter. Gautama accomplished his goal.

My E-BOOKs available here...

Nietzsche: Fascist or Freedom Fighter? Part V; Heidegger’s Blunder and the Buddhist Doctrine of Change

This article will assess the issues Heidegger raises regarding Nietzsche’s philosophy. In so doing we will uncover the reason why Heidegger, member of the Nazi party, perverted the philosophy. Although later Nietzsche-influenced existentialists, such as Sartre and Jaspers would have differing views towards the Germans, and Nietzsche, part of the reason for the confusion in misinterpreting Nietzsche’s philosophy stems from Heidegger’s use of Nietzsche and Hitler.
Heidegger misinterprets Nietzsche’s philosophy on two main fronts and they are: 1) Heidegger’s understanding of the will to power as a concept, and 2) Heidegger’s failure to fully understand the refutation of Platonism. But these two are the same. Heidegger, follows an interpretation of Nietzsche based upon a statement of Nietzsche’s only explained in one rare notebook—“The Eternal Recurrence of the Same”. What Heidegger believes this to mean is a constantly reoccurring universe that is exactly the same every time the universe is born again. Based on this philosophy, the universe is an eternal stasis, total eternal nature of being. Its persuasive, but it’s also Platonic. This is of the greatest significance, Nietzsche’s philosophy, as Heidegger himself explains was an “inverted Platonism”.
Heidegger’s faith in an eternal recurrence of the same universe is probably not what Nietzsche intended, otherwise he would have published it that way. In any event, Nietzsche’s critique of Plato forbids this. Plato according to Heidegger, reversed the values of Being and Becoming, placing Becoming (the everyday world of constantly changing nature) below the valued concept of Being (that which is eternal). Heidegger believes this is the error with Plato, thus enabling him to believe that an eternal world was still in some way true. Heidegger, simply switches the placement in the distinction between Being and Becoming. It is this distinction is the point of Heidegger’s error. Before we elaborate on the consequences of this error, let us return to the concepts themselves, they can be confusing. Being and Becoming according to Nietzsche can be classified in this manner: The “real world” and the “apparent world.” The apparent world is what Plato has devalued. This devaluation to Nietzsche means that the world that we see has been relegated in importance below another world, a false world, that Nietzsche sarcastically calls the “real world”. Nietzsche’s goal is to edify his readers against the idea. Nietzsche states on page 20 of the Twilight of the Idols that: “the Real world—an idea with no further use, no longer an obligation—an idea become useless, superfluous—therefore a refuted idea: let us do away with it!” He goes on to state that we will get rid of the “apparent world” as well. This is where Heidegger messed up, he assumed that this inversion was a clear reversal of the apparent and real worlds in importance. But, no, they are both fallacious.
Being and Becoming to Nietzsche were understood differently because of his influence from Buddhism and the doctrine of change. Nietzsche believed that Being was our eternal nature eternally recurring but not the same way. On the contrary, because Becoming, the “apparent world”, is also obliterated by Nietzsche I believe that he meant that Becoming and Being were really two sides of the same coin. For example, if the world of Being and the world of Becoming are to be invalidated, then there can be no “world” of either at all. Since these realms do not actually exist, the concepts return to what they are—concepts. They are two aspects of everything we see and experience and they persist and shape our existence simultaneously. Plato’s separation of the two concepts is a metaphysical dualism in Philosophy. It is easy to see how Heidegger misinterpreted Nietzsche’s inversion of Plato. Heidegger did not consider this to mean a refutation, and an antithetical method as I do, but rather a metaphysical reversal, being and becoming still exist in the sense, that the eternal realm to Heidegger meant the eternal existence of our beings based on the concept that they will never die, forever, they will simply be born, live and die, forever and ever in the same way. This is Heidegger and the Nazi’s hell. The Nazi Swastika is tilted at a 45 degree angle and means reincarnation for the state, or in this case the same state over and over again. This is still then, a bit Platonic, in the sense that the apparent world and real worlds are then still tangible, the apparent world is this one, and the real one, the one before and the one after as they are the same, and thus eternal. I believe that what Nietzsche meant, was that Being the nature that is eternal, is the same as Becoming the nature of change. This can be better phrased as “the nature of change is eternal” and now the strong influence this Buddhist doctrine had on Nietzsche is clear. As this is the meaning behind all suffering, birth, life and death are suffering because they are constantly changing and occurring.

Nietzsche: Fascist or Freedom Fighter? Part IV

Now that we have assessed Nietzsche’s doctrine of power, and have seen that it is neither race restrictive, nor malevolent in intention, it is time to assess the Nietzschean conception of morality. Morality to Nietzsche is beyond good and evil, and only rests in one’s conscience whether guilty or not. In the second section of the Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche concludes that guilt is the true result of all bad actions. However, as for the conceptions of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ themselves, they are too hollow and restrictive. This article will explain Nietzschean morality.
In the first article I wrote for theSOP I presented the question; whether or not there exist flexible moral truths in religions? The conclusion that I came to was generated from Buddhism—namely skillful means, the art of bending morals for a greater good. As eloquently stated in the Lotus Sutra, morals must sometimes give way for even higher ideals, such as an instance of lying to save a life or many lives. This is what Nietzsche meant by the term amoral, not some kind of sociopathic moral nihilism, where no actions could bring with them guilt and suffering. But rather an instinctive value system based on human nature.
‘Good’ and ‘evil’ are fictions. According to Nietzsche, there is really only good and bad action, not some kind supernatural presence dictating and judging one’s deeds based on a simple law book. In this manner, mankind must ignore the rigid rules and hypocrisies laden in the ethics of Abrahamic religion, and follow their instincts, their will-to-power and their freedom. Nietzsche knew much more about Christianity than he did about Buddhism. However, it appears he knew enough about Buddhism to generate a sharpened ethical theory—suited for humanity.

Nietzsche: Fascist or Freedom Fighter? Part III

On a another note, it must be regarded as good, what is meant by power in Nietzsche`s philosophy. Although many readers of Nietzsche find a strong Machiavellian influence of cold, ruthless authority, this conception is flawed. I will show how Nietzsche`s arguments are valid and correct as regarding the feelings of power and overcoming.
In Twilight of the Idols there is a reference to Cesare Borgia: "compared with us, a Cesare Borgia is by no means to be represented after my manner as a "higher man,` a kind of overman. "(Twilight of the Idols, p. 63) Here Nietzsche separates himself from cruelty and the suffering of the Borgia family, while playing with the Borgia`s family`s conception of Christ. The Medici were a crime family within the Church that made Nietzsche laugh! Cesare Borgia, a student of Machiavelli`s work, was as cold and ruthless as they come, Nietzsche mainly admired the hypocrisy of such an individual appearing.
Nietzsche`s true intentions with power and enlightenment had to do with overcoming, not overcoming others necessarily, but overcoming oneself and one`s suffering. In order to do this Nietzsche wrote for us, genealogies, guides, and polemics for us to see the true history of religion and especially Abrahamic religion. The failed mission of German Christianity was a huge motivational factor for Nietzsche`s work.
These were the very Germans who would go on to commit unspeakable atrocities at the hands of a thoroughly diabolical politician. Nietzsche`s Overman, was not Protestant or Catholic, but something more Buddhist and less nihilist. The selections regarding Buddhism in Nietzsche`s writings are nearly entirely positive, (save for a criticism similar to the Confucians, that they withdrew from society too much. See my article "Nietzsche`s problem in Buddhism) Nietzsche`s philosophy reflects the Buddhist system of belief in accordance with their shared belief in life affirmation.
Clearly Wagner, Hitler, and the Nazi`s beliefs were in accordance with death and vengeance and not life affirmation. Nietzsche states in Thus Spake Zarathustra For man to be redeemed from revenge "that for me is the bridge to the highest hope, and a rainbow after long storms. Otherwise, however the tarantulas would have it. "( Thus Spake Zarathustra, p. 161) Nietzsche associates the metaphor tarantula " for the typical German Protestant plebeian who was anti-Semitic, wrathful and vengeful even in Nietzsche`s time.

Nietzsche: Fascist or Freedom Fighter? Part II

With the racial theory misconceptions dealt with in Part I of this series, we can now ask the question; what of the ‘philosophy of power’ itself? Could not the pursuit of power have awakened Hitler to a world of manipulation? Unfortunately the answer is yes, but with an objection—namely, that the philosophy of power was meant for every man capable of it, regardless of, race or religion. With that said, this article will delve deeper into the puzzle that is National Socialism when pit against Nietzsche’s life affirming philosophy.

“A great potentate might arise, an artful prodigy, who with approval and disapproval could strain and constrain all the past, until it became for him a bridge, a harbinger, a herald, and a cock-crowing.”(Thus Spake Zarathustra 141)

From the quote above, it can be derived that Nietzsche foresaw the coming of National Socialism and a “potentate” like Hitler. Perhaps this is through his early association with Wagner, Hitler’s favorite composer. Whatever the case, Nietzsche offers this premonition as a warning, not as something he inherently supports. Nietzsche’s goal was to free mankind of the valueless basis within Pauline Christianity. He saw the work of Paul, as an attack from the Pharisees and as a sublime vengeance for the Jewish people. Judaism itself is good in many aspects when following Nietzsche’s philosophy. However, Christianity in its German form was a great mistake, a curse from the very Jews that the Germans were fearful. In Beyond Good and Evil and Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche traces the roots of Pauline Christianity to a sublime curse from the oppressed Jews, not as the “crucifiers of Jesus” like the Germans believed. Rather, the Jews to Nietzsche were an incredibly intelligent people who produced Jesus a great deceiver (it should be noted, that Nietzsche recognized these traits of Judaism sixty years prior to the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Gnostic and Dead Sea Scrolls which prove them).
Nietzsche points out this hypocrisy in German theology of anti-Semitic behavior as stupid and arrogant. German Protestantism was created by Luther, who by simply wishing to free himself of the Catholic Church attempted to free others through a new theology built on textual exegesis. By arrogantly using the very Catholic bible of the Catholic Church he detested, he created a religion that just fueled the Pauline curse more. For these reasons, German Protestantism became an equally violent and self-destructive religion as the Catholic variety of Pauline Christianity. Thus, Hitler acting more as an Agent of Chaos than as a statesman, was able to rationalize to himself as a politician of a land filled with Pauline Christians who already possessed an anti-Semitic bent. Why was the Holocaust possible? He perverted the power philosophy of Nietzsche, while spreading an active nihilism throughout all of Europe, capitalizing on the spurious race philosophy and pre-existing theological hatred for Judaism.

Nietzsche: Fascist or Freedom Fighter?

There is an oft assumed fallacy in philosophy and historical studies from the last hundred years. This fallacy is the idea that Nietzsche caused fascism in Germany. The reason being is obvious—Hitler’s public speeches involving misquoted Nietzsche text. Scholars today still argue over the issue. This short article will redeem Nietzsche of these charges.
Walter Kaufmann, a leading Jewish Nietzsche scholar of the 20th century was the leading Nietzsche scholar who went against this fascism charge. In his Nietzsche he states that “Hitler knew ten times as much about Wagner as he did about Nietzsche.”(Nietzsche 290-308) Kaufmann explains that Wagner was the true Anti-Semite and this racism is part of the cause of the well-known split between the former friends Wagner and Nietzsche. Nietzsche ended his friendship with Wagner and pursued a path inimical to the Nazi’s. In multiple places in Nietzsche’s writings he explains himself as an anti-anti-Semite, with discussions on Judaism. For example, “The dignity of death and a kind of consecration of passion has perhaps never yet been presented so beautifully…than by certain Jews of the Old Testament: to these even the Greeks could have gone to school!”(Nietzsche notebooks 301) This statement is certainly not that of an anti-Semite’s!
As for Hitler’s speeches and references to Nietzsche, it was all an attempt to scapegoat his crimes on someone prior. Nietzsche’s works were mostly recognized posthumously. After Nietzsche’s death, Elisabeth Forster (Nietzsche’s sister), likely edited some of the works of anti-Germanic, and pro-Jewish statements. She is regarded as the one who spread Nietzsche’s work, but she also was known to have a right-winged husband in the political party. Even then, Hitler’s references to Nietzsche were taken out of context and bastardized.
I had a professor during my undergraduate philosophy degree who once told the class, that Nietzsche was clearly a racist. The professor’s proof was the statement “Blond Beast” in Genealogy of Morals and other “racial” statements. This professor had no idea what these metaphors mean. In the same passage as “Blond Beast” Nietzsche goes on to explain that he is referring to “Roman, Arabian, Germanic, Japanese nobility, Homeric heroes, Scandinavian Vikings…”(Genealogy 41). If my professor had really read this passage carefully enough, he would have realized Nietzsche’s “Blond Beast” was a metaphor for the Lion, and these peoples he has listed are like all like a “Beast of Prey”. The metaphor is not racial, it is cultural. It is unfortunate that my professor considered Nietzsche’s statement racial and not cultural, for this is how these misconceptions get spread in the first place.