Minggu, 15 Januari 2017

BLACK MAGIC WHITE SOLDIER PART 11

The Wahhabis PART 2




  The British thus sought to exacerbate the  Ottoman Empire ’s growing weaknesses. The typical strategy was that of   Divide and Conquer. Much of the Ottoman Empire consisted of numerous ethnicities, united in their allegiance to  Islam and to the  Caliphate as its guardian. By dividing the  Ottoman territories into numerous independent and competing states, separated mainly along ethnic lines, they could be more easily challenged. The goal of the British was to weaken the  Ottoman Empire by pitting Muslim against Muslim, in this case, Arab against Turk.

  However, in  Islam, Muslims fighting Muslims is of course considered an enormity. Therefore, the            only way to convince the Arab Muslims to fight their fellow Muslims was to suggest that they were not Muslims after all, that they had apostatized and become “unbelievers.” What makes  Abdul Wahhab’s mission so suspicious, then, is that his teachings provided precisely this pretext. Instead of addressing where true reforms were needed in the  Ottoman Empire , he instead chose to fixate      on a far more trivial issue, where he found the means to propose         the absurdity that the  Ottoman Turks were not true Muslims. Ultimately, he chose to combat the Empire from without rather than assisting it from within. In particular, despite the more critical issues facing the  Ottoman Empire, Wahhab chose to address certain  Sufi practices which he characterized as Shirk, or polytheism, and therefore amounting to Kufr, or apostasy. His interpretation then suggested that any at fault should be fought and killed, contrary to the basic tenet of  Islam, which prescribed Naseeha, or “sincere advice.”

  It is true that the practice of  Islam had in many places become polluted with certain questionable practices,      of ten through Sufi            influence.    The particular practice that  Abdul Wahhab condemned was known as Tawassul, where  Sufis  would ask intercession from God through their Saints, or Walis. This,  Abdul Wahhab characterized as Shirk, or idolatry, because he believed it to involve indirectly attributing divinity to the Saint. In other words, it treated these saints as gods. It therefore, in his mind, constituted an act of apostasy which supposedly         justified the            perpetrator  being  killed. While the practice  of Tawassul is certainly suspect, to suggest that asking intercession with God by way of some other person is actually offering worship to that person is a stretch. In fact,  Abdul Wahhab was criticized on the matter by his own brother Sulayman, a judge in Huraymila, according to whom the consensus of the scholars regarded such violations as “lesser idolatry” and not qualifying as apostasy.8 As notes Madawi al-Rasheed, in Contesting the  Saudi State, “even if tomb visiting, saint veneration or tree worship was practiced in Arabian society, it cannot be taken for granted that al members of their society indulged in such practices. It is possible that they only existed among a minority of the population.” 9

  It is one thing to denounce corruptive innovations in the religion, but quite another to declare the entire community of Muslims to have fallen into apostasy for     the errors of  a few, and  to then fight   and kill them! Adbul Wahhab claimed ignorantly that this corruption had infected the Ummah since the earliest generations, known as the Salaf, and that all Muslims since that time had effectively been unbelievers (Kuffar, plural of  Kafir ). In   Islam, the act of declaring another Muslim an unbeliever (Kafir) is considered repugnant, and tantamount to apostasy itself if committed in error. There is a well-known Hadith where in the Prophet Mohammed declared: “if a Muslim calls another Kafir, then if he is a Kafir let it be so; otherwise, he [the accuser] is himself a  ka fir.’’10 A man said to the Prophet: “I have a neighbor who bears witness against me that I commit Shirk(idolatry).” The Prophet replied: “Say: ‘La Ilaha illa Allah,’ (there is no god but God) you will make him a liar.”11 Abdul Wahhab holds a striking resemblance to a man condemned in a prophecy of the Prophet Mohammed:

  Verily, I fear about a man from you who will read the  Quran so much that his face will become enlightened and he will come to personify   Islam. This will continue until God desires. Then these things will be taken away from him when he will disregard them by putting them all behind his back and will attack his neighbor with the sword accusing him of Shirk.” The Prophet was asked, “Which of the two will be deserving of such an accusation? The attacker or the attacked?” The Prophet replied, “The attacker (the one accusing the other of Shirk).12

  Abdul Wahhab’s claims are not only clearly contradicted by the  Quran , but by the most fundamental expectations of the community of believers (Ummah). According to the  Quran: “You are the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind.” 13 On the preservation of  Islam, the  Quranreveals: “We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).”14 According to  an authentic narration, the Prophet Mohammed said: “By God, I am not afraid that you will worship others along with God (commit Shirk) after my death, but I am afraid that you will fight one another         for worldly   things.” 15 There could be exceptions of course, but on the whole as the Prophet said: “verily my Ummah would not agree upon error and God’s hand is over the majority and whoever  dissents from them departs to Hell.” 16 Based on this Hadith, the consensus or the majority opinion of the Muslim scholars, known as “Ijma,” has been equated with divine sanction. In Sunni  Islam, Ijmais therefore regarded as the third fundamental source of  Shar iah law after the  Quranand  Sunnah . This was the basis  of the broad acceptance of the many principles developed by the  Madhhabs and the practice of   Taqlid. The Prophet Mohammed forewarned, “There will come a time when my Ummahwill splinter into seventy two sects all of which will be in Hellfire,      save    those  who stick to the Jammah (majority).” 17

  Adbul Wahhab nevertheless declared “ Jihad” against the Ummah, that is,  against all except those who followed his prescriptions for “purifying” his
version of monotheism (Tawhid). The unusual nature of Wahhab’s declaration  is remarked upon by David Commins in The  Wahhabi Mission and  Saudi Arabia:

  Since early Islamic history, Muslims have differed on the essential point of what constitutes correct belief, but at most times, such differences  did not result           in military conflict  or the            adoption of coercive measures  as in an inquisition. 18

  Given the sanctity of the role of the Caliph in  Islam, it is considered unlawful to rebel against his authority. As the Prophet Mohammed commanded, “If someone comes to you and you have already agreed on  the leadership of    a particular man and  there by have become unified, and he wants to create disunity in your group, you should kill him.”19 Instead of open  rebellion, unless  it is clearly        justified, the  Muslims’ duty is to reform the leader and the state through advice. As the Prophet Mohammed said, “The Religion is Naseeha (sincere advice).” He was asked, “To whom?” He replied, “To God, His Book, His Messenger, and to the leaders of the Muslims and the people in general.” 20 The meaning of this Hadithwas explained by Imam Nawawi  in  Sharh Sahih Muslim:

Advice to the leaders is to help them upon the truth.
To obey them in it.
To order them with it.
To remind and advise them with kindness and gentleness.
To remind them of that which they are heedless and neglectful of.
To help them fulfill those rights of the Muslims that has not reached them yet. Not to rebel against them.
To enamor the hearts of the people with obedience to them. Imam al Khattabi says, “From sincerity to them is prayer behind them,  Jihad along with them, to give the Zakat(alms) to them, and not to rebel against them with the sword when injustice or bad treatment appears from them. And that they are not praised with false praises, and that Dua (supplication) is made for their righteousness.“ 21

  In a work written in 1659, by Imam Ala al Din al Haskafi , long-standing Grand Mufti of Damascus, titled Durr  al-Mukhtar  fi  sharh  Tanweer  al  Absaar, widely considered as the central reference for Fatwa in the Hanafi         Madhhab , is explained the ruling on rebellion against the Caliph. He lists three types of rebels, the third which he equated  Kharijites. The  Kharijites were a sect from the late   seventh century AD who contributed  to one of the first great    controversies among the Muslims. They were noted for adopting a radical approach to Takfir whereby they declared other Muslims to be unbelievers who had committed major sins, whereas the Sunnis understood that a Muslim was nevertheless prone to error and was not an apostate as long as he didn’t deny the illegality of his actions.            The legal ruling for rebels such  as these         is, according     to al Haskafi :

  …and  Kharijites, meaning men with military force who revolt against the Imam(Caliph) because of a mistaken scriptural interpretation (Tawil), believing that he is upon a falsehood of unbelief (Kufr) or disobedience to God (Masiya) that necessitates their fighting            him,    according to their mistaken scriptural interpretation, and who consider it lawful to take our lives, our property, and take our women as slaves, and who consider the Companions of our Prophet (God bless him and give him peace) to be disbelievers. Their ruling is the same as that of rebels (Bughat) against the  caliphate by unanimous consensus of Fiqhscholars. [i.e. they are fought with as much force as needed to put down the insurrection.] 22

  Also, setting the precedent for the unusually cruel interpretation of  Islam which has come to characterize perceptions of the  Shar iah ,  Abdul Wahhab ordered the stoning of an adulteress. Contemporary reactions indicate the punishment was quite rare. As David Commins’ explains, “In the chronicles, there is something of a ‘Yes, it is hard to believe, but it is true’ tone to the account of the stoning.” 23 Refutations of   Abdul Wahhab began with his own brother and father. During  Abdul Wahhab’s early studies in the Hijaz his teachers Mohammed Hayet Sindi and Mohammed Suleiman Kurdi had suspected him of atheism. In Najd itself,  Abdul Wahhab’s native region, the campaign of criticism was led by a  Hanbali scholar named Mohammed bin Abdarahman Afaleq. Refutations spread rapidly to Iraq, Yemen and to North Africa. In 1743 Ahmad ibn Barkat Tandatawi, a Shafi scholar in Mecca    wrote a refutation,            which was endorsed by ten scholars, including the Muftisof the four  Madhhabs. But the most important refutation was            that of Ahmad ibn Zayni  Dahlan, the  Shafi Mufti   of Mecca, who wrote Fitnatul Wahhabiya (“The  Wahhabi Controversy”). 24

  Despite all his posturing as a reviver of “pure” Islamic tradition,  Abdul Wahhab also then endorsed one of the greatest corruptive innovations ( Biddah) in recent times, the establishment of Ibn Saud as “king,” not Caliph, thus incepting the  Saudi dynasty. It was agreed between  Abdul Wahhab and Ibn Saud that from then on power would be held among their descendants, with the descendants of the   Saudis maintaining political authority, and the descendants of  Abdul Wahhab, known as al Sheikh, administering the  Wahhabi cult. With the support  of al      Saud            and fired by Abdul Wahhab’s “Fatwas,” the Wahhabis went on a rampage, killing thousands of Muslims, taking their women and children as slaves, confiscating        their   property, and destroying numerous Islamic shrines       and relics. They destroyed as many tombs of the Prophet’s Companions as they could   find and in    Medina plundered the treasury of the Prophet’s mosque.            But, in the words of one nineteenth century English writer, they were notorious for “preferring slaughter to booty” in their conquests.25

  Finally, the Caliph in Istanbul sent an army headed by Mohammed Ali Pasha in 1811,      to fight and     annihilate the  Wahhabi rebellion. Following their defeat, the  Wahhabi leaders, Uthman ul Mudayiqi and  Mubarak ibn Maghyan, were sent to Istanbul, and paraded through the streets until they were executed. Ali Pasha also sent troops under his second son, Ibrahim Pasha, to root the Wahhabis out of  Syria, Iraq and Kuwait. Those Arabs that had suffered at the hands of the Wahhabis rose in revolt joining Ali Pasha’s forces. In 1818, the Wahhabi stronghold of Diriyah was taken and destroyed, though some of the Saudis received protection from the British in Jeddah. Their leader, Abdullah ibn Saud, was sent to Istanbul where he was executed along with other captured Wahhabis by order of Mustafa Asim Efendi, the Sheikh al  Islamof the day. The rest of the  Wahhabi clan was held in captivity in Cairo.

  It was in  India, where    British influence was most heavily focused,   where the Revivalism inspired by  Abdul Wahhab contributed to numerous seething sectarian controversies. Prior to the British occupation, much of  India had been nder the rule of the  Mughal Empire, which was effectively a province of the Ottomans. The  Mughal emperors were descendants of the Mongols, through Genghis Khan. The  Mughal Empire, which began in 1526, at the height of their power in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, controlled most of the Indian Subcontinent. The Mughals created an impressive civilization, whose most memorable legacies are its architecture, especially that of the reign Of Shah Jahan (1592–1666)  who    created the  Taj Mahal. The Mughal Empire reached the zenith of its territorial expansion during the reign of Aurangzeb (1618   –1707), who           may    have   been   the richest and most powerful man            alive.

  The  Mughal Empire was one the wealthiest empires ever, and certainly the wealthiest in the world at that time. But the splendor of the Mughals attracted the envy of the British who in 1600 established the East  India Company, which would open the door to their colonization of the country and so robbed the country of its wealth that   India is now ranked among the poorer countries of the world. The East  India Company, which traded mainly  in cotton, silk, indigo dye, salt, saltpeter, tea and  opium, also came to rule large areas of   India, exercising military power and assuming administrative functions. Company rule in   India effectively began in 1757 after the Battle of Plassey, and lasted until the Indian Mutiny of 1857, also known as the Sepoy Rebellion. Following the 1857 Rebellion, the Company’s remaining powers were transferred to the Crown, initiating the direct rule by the British Empire, known as the British Raj.

  The   first reformer identified   as a  Revivalist in  India was Shah  Waliullah  (1703 –1762), born during the Mughal reign of Aurangzeb. During a time of waning Muslim power, he worked for the revival of Muslim rule and intellectual learning in South Asia.  Waliullah travelled to Mecca for the Hajj pilgrimage in 1730, and studied under Sheikh al Madani, a renowned teacher of Hadith, in whose library he discovered the works of Ibn Taymiyyah . On his return to India,  Waliullah, much like  Abdul    Wahhab, preached the supposed purification of Islamic monotheism, and as Ibn Taymiyyah  had      done, he defied custom by setting himself up as a Mujtahid.

  Wahhabi  influence in India resulted more directly in the emergence of groups like the  Deobandis and the  Ahlul Hadith. The  Deobandi movement was founded in 1866 at Darul Uloom Deoband in Deoband,  India. The  Ahlul Hadith emerged in         the 1860s,    through the influence of two personalities,           Nazir Husayn in Delhi and Siddiq Hasan Khan in Bhopal. Like the Wahhabis, they were     fiercely opposed to the  Sufis and the  Shia, and ardent adherents of Ibn Taymiyyah . The two groups merged following a pilgrimage to Mecca, and some Wahhabi scholars went to Bhopal and Delhi to study with them. However, the Ahlul Hadith were more radical with regard to   Taqlid, which they rejected entirely, dismissing the value of the  Madhhabs, in favor of relying exclusively on the  Quranand  Sunnah . This emphasis on the exclusive importance of Hadithhad long been the position of the medieval  Ahlul Hadith, which the Indian movement  tried to identify themselves with. 26 In 1857, a Fatwawas issued in  India against  Wahhabism, the  Deobandis and  Ahlul Hadith, leading to the formation of the Sufi    - b a s e d      Barelvi movement, founded by Sayyid Ahmad   Barelvi, a disciple and successor of Shah  Waliullah’s son.

  To this day, Muslims of  India, probably more than any other Muslim community in the world, are the most unfortunate victims of this British strategy of  Divide and Conquer, where, because of the continuing controversies between these groups, they are continually mired in incessant bickering and acrimony. 27 Similarly, out of the  Arab Bureau headquartered in Cairo Egypt , the British controlled a dozen different Muslim   Revivalist movements. In North Africa, British intrigue was headed by the  Sanussi Brotherhood, founded in Mecca in 1837 by an Algerian named Ali al  Sanussi, who had come under the influence of the Wahhabis. The  Sanussi Brotherhood remained only a minor facet of British intelligence until 1897, when Wilfred Scawen   Blunt, a primary agent of the Oxford Movement , took an active role. (By  World War I, the brotherhood  was formally appropriated as an asset of the  Arab Bureau. Eventually, the head of the order became the first king of  Libya after independence).









Shambhala & Agartha Part 1


  In a poem first published in 1889, English author and original member of Rhodes’ Round Table, Rudyard Kipling, who also wrote “The White Man’s Burden,”  declared, “Oh, East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.”  The context of Kipling’s expression was the Great Game. Also known as the Tournament of Shadows in Russia, the Great Game refers to the strategic rivalry and conflict for      supremacy in Central Asia, between the British Empire and the Russian Empire in the eighteenth century. The classic Great Game period is generally regarded as running from the Russo-Persian Treaty of 1813 to the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907. The term was introduced into mainstream consciousness by Kipling in his novel Kim(1901), about a boy orphaned from his Masonic father, who eventually works for the secret service in India.

  Central Asia is not only the legendary home of the Lost Tribes of Israel, but also the purported location of the mystical city of Shambhala, which pervades modern occult myth. Not to say that the rival Empires battled for control of a shibboleth, but rather that occult myth seems to have been nurtured to serve imperial ambitions. Shambhala is also the legendary home of the Aryan race who have been used in constructing the myth of “Western Civilization.”  While normally associated with the Nazis, the notion of an Aryan race was created from the racist tendencies of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, particularly among the German Romantics. The theory is also closely associated with the pre-Adamite hypothesis of millenarian Isaac La Peyrère as well as British-Israelism.   But the theory was  further influenced by the notion First  proposed  by            Emanuel  Swedenborg and popularized by Scottish Rite Mason, Chevalier Ramsay, of the Hindu Tantra as an expression of an “Asian Kabbalah,” which provided the opportunity to propose an origin of the occult tradition in a people other than the Jews, and to identify them as the purported ancestors of the Europeans.

  These ideas influenced   the emerging European scholarship of the eighteenth century to seek an account of human history distinct from that of the Jews, and to locate the origin of their civilization, not in the Middle East but in Asia, and to combine their theories with the popular occult legend of Atlantis, firstmentioned by Plato. Although the occult tradition is founded on the Kabbalah developed in Babylon in the sixth century BC, European occultists relied on the legendary account of its origin, borrowing from the story of the Book of Genesis in the Bible:

  When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said,           “My Spirit shall not abide in        man    forever, for  he is flesh:    his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilimwere on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown [Anakim].1

  Occultists followed a Luciferian doctrine and therefore equated the creation of the Aryan race with the Anakim, offspring of these so-called Nephilim, or “ Sons of God,” and human beings. Although Christians have struggled to interpret the passage, usually referring to them as giants, according to the apocryphal Book of  Enoch, written between the fourth and first century BC, these  “ Sons of God” were the devil and his “ Fallen Angels” expelled from Heaven. They interbred with the female descendants of Cain, to whom they taught  magic, and so corrupted the Earth that God determined to destroy them by the Flood. However, to European occultists, following a Gnostic interpretation, the devil is the true god, and the forbidden knowledge he and his  Fallen Angels imparted to early humanity was the  Kabbalah. Thus, borrowing from the story of Noah,  it was suggested that the  Aryans were a race of semi “divine” beings, offspring of the   Sons of God and, having survived the sinking of Atlantis, landed in the mountains of Asia, from where they spread, bringing with them their “ Ancient Wisdom” everywhere they went.

  For example, in 1779, Jean Bailly, a prominent occultist and member of the Masonic lodge called Neuf Soeursin Paris, in his Histoire de l’astronomie ancienne, concluded that  Atlantis was Spitsbergen in the Arctic Ocean, which in ancient times had a warm climate, but its subsequent cooling made the Atlanteans migrate south to Mongolia. Later, this race of giants dwelt in the Caucasus and laid the foundations for all the ancient civilizations of Asia. In 1803, Bory de Saint-Vincent published his Essai sur les iles fortunees et l’antique Atlantidein which he set forth the conventional  Atlantis story. Saint-Vincent assumed that  Atlantis was the original home of civilization and when subjected to a cataclysm its inhabitants were forced to conquer the known world in search of new territories. 1 In 1805, Francis Wilford advanced a hypothesis according to which, in order to account for the occult teachings of the Celtic  Druids, the British Isles must have been a remnant of a former Atlantic continent where the events of the Old Testament took place.

   When an affinity was discovered between Sanskrit, the language of ancient India, and the languages of Greek, German and other European languages, it was proposed that these several languages all originated from a single common ancestor who were called Indo-Europeans. The term  Aryan was later borrowed by European scholars from   Herodotus who referred to the Persians and  Medes as “Arian,” from the Persian word, from which is derived the word “Iranian.” According to  Herodotus, “These  Medes were called anciently by all people Arian [Iranian or  Aryan]; but when Medea, the  Colchian, came to them from Athens, they changed their name. Such is the account which they themselves give.” 2

  Therefore,  while  it was intended to  refer   to a specifically European race, and often, in opposition to a “Semitic” one, the notion of an  Aryan race was also connected to the legend of the  Lost Tribes of  Israel who, according to the Bible, were dispersed among the  Medes and in Central Asia. These connections were  asserted by  the British-Israelists, who            exercised a            broad influence outside the realm of academia. British-Israelism is a sectarian religious movement which regarded the Anglo-Saxon people as the descendants of the  Lost Tribes of  Israel. Although  British-Israelism originated in nineteenth-century England, it had its roots in the millenarians of the seventieth century, such as John Sadler, a British Member of Parliament and private secretary to Oliver   Cromwell, as well as member of the  Hartlib Circle and friend to  Menasseh Ben  Israel.  Sadler produced one of the founding documents of  British-Israelism, The Rights of the Kingdom (1649), which proposed that the Anglo- Saxons were descended from the northern kingdom of  Israel, and the  Jews from the two tribes in the southern kingdom of Judah. The reuniting of All- Israel, a prerequisite of the Last Days, required that the  Lost Tribes of  Israel should again join the descendants of the Jews in the Holy Land.

  For the theorists of the  Aryan origin of European origins, it was the approximate location of the  Scythians in the Caucasus Mountains that was the purported location for their sudden emergence, eventually referring to them as Caucasians. Some etymologies proposed that the word  Scythians, from “Sacae,” in turn is derived from “Isaac Sons” or “Sons of Isaac.” The   Saxons were supposedly descended from the  Scythians,  who    first appeared in Europe in the seventh century BC when they crossed the Araxes River and passed out of Asia. Strabo asserts that the most ancient Greek historians knew the Sacaea as a people who lived beyond the Caspian Sea. Ptolemy finds the  Saxons in a race of  Scythians, called Sakai, who came from Media.  Pliny said: “The Sakai were among the most distinguished people of Scythia, who settled in  Armenia, and were called Sacae-Sani.” Albinus, the learned tutor of  Charlemagne, maintained that: “The  Saxons were descended from the ancient Sacae of Asia.”3

  The Jewish Encyclopedia, although it did not support the British Israel hypothesis,            noticed: “The identification of        the Sacae, or Scythians, with the Ten Tribes because they appear in history at the same time, and very nearly in the same place, as the Israelites removed by Shalmanesar, is one of the chief supports  of            the theory   which identifies  the  English people,          and indeed  the whole Teutonic race, with the Ten tribes.”4 Several Medieval Rabbis and Jewish Torah scholars began to locate the ten lost tribes, but the location greatly varied. Maimonides wrote: “…I believe the Ten Tribes to be in various parts of Europe.”5 Moses ben Isaac Edrehi            (1774 –1842), a  Moroccan-born Rabbi          and Kabbalist, also believed the lost tribes of  Israel were located in Europe, writing in his Historical Account Of The Ten Tribes (1836):


…Orteleus, that great geographer, giving the description of Tartary,  notices the kingdom of Arsareth, where the Ten Tribes, retiring, succeeded [other]  Scythian inhabitants, and took the name Gauther [Goths], because they were very jealous for the glory of God. In another place, he found the Naphtalites, who had their hordes there. He also discovered the tribe of Dan in the north, which has preserved its name… They further add, that the remains of ancient  Israel were more numerous  here than in Muscovy and Poland—from which it was concluded, that their  habitation     was  fixed in  Tartary  [i.e.,Scythia]      from  whence  they passed into neighbouring  places…         it is no wonder to find the Ten Tribes dispersed there; since it was no great way to go from Assyria, whither they were transplanted, having only  Armenia betwixt them.6

  The term “ Aryan” gained widespread usage due to Freemason Friedrich Schlegel, justified       by zconnecting the      Vedic  word  Ariwith the German word Ehre, or “honor.”  Schlegel supposed that as a result of mingling a new people had formed itself in northern  India and that this people, motivated “by some impulse higher than the spur of necessity,” had swarmed towards the West. Wishing to trace the origin of this people back to Cain, he then theorizes, “Must not this unknown anxiety of which I speak have pursued fugitive man, as is told of the    first    murderer whom the Lord  marked with a bloody sign, and have flung him to the ends of the earth?” 7 To  Schlegel, “Everything, absolutely everything,  is of Indian origin.” He carried his conviction a step further, suggesting that even the Egyptians were educated by Indian missionaries. In turn, Egyptians founded a colony in Judea, though, the  Jews were only partially indoctrinated  with the Indian truths             since   they seemed to have been ignorant of a significant doctrine of the occult tradition, the theory of reincarnation, and especially, of the immortality of the soul. 8

  In the early nineteenth century, the Romantic movement emerged largely as a German   Protestant nationalistic response against the perceived excesses of the Enlightenment, which they            saw as a tragic consequence of Latin influence, and from which they were saved because of their Frankish heritage. They considered that the racial superiority of the German people, or Volk, was embedded in its  language and      culture, its    “folklore.”    Among the   most influential promoters of           this new nationalism was Jacob Grimm. Thus, Jacob Grimm and his brother compiled the famous Grimm’s Fairy Tales, a collection folktales thought to represent the “folk” lore of the German people, and included Cinderella, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and Hansel and Gretel. However, recent evidence has shown that while the content of the tales was collected, the Grimms enhanced and inserted their own expressions into them. In the History of the German Language, Jacob Grimm claimed that:

  All the people of Europe and, to begin with, those which were originally related and which gained supremacy at the cost of many wanderings and dangers, emigrated from Asia in the remote past. They were propelled from East to West by an irresistible instinct (unhemmbarer Trieb), the real cause of which is unknown to us. The vocation and courage of those peoples, which were originally related and destined to rise to such heights, is shown by the fact that European history was almost entirely made by them.9

  Such ideas  finally caught on in the rest of Europe.  In his History of Rome, Jules  Michelet, a French nationalist historian, who was interested in the occult and wrote the classic  Satanism and Magic, stated: “Follow the migrations of mankind from East to West along the Sun’s course and along the track of the world’s magnetic currents; observe its long voyage from Asia to Europe, from  India to   France… At its starting point, in   India, the birthplace of races and of religions, the womb of the world…” 10

  The chief propagandist of the Aryan myth in  France was Ernest Renan, philosopher, historian, scholar of religion, leader of the school of critical philosophy in   France, and Freemason, who began training for the priesthood but eventually left the Catholic church after reading Faustby  Illuminati member  Goethe. According to Renan:

  We salute those sacred summits, where the great races, which carried the future  of humanity in their hearts, contemplated         infinity for the first            time and introduced two categories which changed the face of the world, morality and reason. When the  Aryan race, after thousands of years of striving, shall have become masters of the planet which they inhabit,  their      first duty will be to explore that       mysterious   region… No  place  in the world has had a comparable role to that of the nameless mountain or valley where mankind  first           attained self-consciousness. Let us be proud…   of the old patriarchs who, at the foot of Imaus [Himalayan mountain], laid the foundations of what we are and of what we shall become. 11

  Joseph Arthur Comte de  Gobineau, credited as being the father of modern racial demography, became famous for developing the theory of the  Aryan master race in his book An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races (1853–  1855 ).   Gobineau came to believe that race created culture, arguing that distinctions between the three races—“black,” “white,” and “yellow”—were natural barriers, and that “race-mixing” breaks those barriers and leads to chaos.  Gobineau believed the white race was superior to the other races in the creation of civilized culture and in maintaining ordered government. He believed European civilization represented the best of what remained of ancient civilizations and held the most superior attributes capable for continued survival. His primary thesis, in regards tothis theory,         was     that European civilizational  flowering from Greece to Rome zzand Germanic to contemporary sprang from, and corresponded to the ancient Indo-European culture, also known as “ Aryan.”
z
  Though England was not fond of the notion of an ancestral relationship with its colonial subjects in   India, the   Aryan  myth was  finally  popularized largely through the efforts of German Orientalist and language scholar Max Mueller, who was one of the most renowned scholars of the nineteenth century. A student of comparative religion, Mueller’s principal achievement was the editing of The Sacred Books of the East, translations of major Oriental scriptures. He was appointed deputy professor of modern languages at Oxford in 1850, and professor of comparative philology in 1868. He wrote:


  The  Aryan nations, who pursued a northwesterly direction, stand before us in history as the principal nations of northwestern Asia and Europe. They have been the prominent actors in the great drama of history, and have carried to their fullest growth all the elements of active life with which our nature is endowed. They have perfected society and morals; and we learn from their literature and works of art the elements of science, the laws of art, and the principles of philosophy. In continual struggle with each other and with Semitic and Turanian races, these Aryan nations have become the rulers of history, and it seems to be their mission to link all parts of the world together by the chains of civilization, commerce and religion. 12

  But it was Russian mystic and spy Helena P.  Blavatsky, considered the “god-mother” of the twentieth century  New Age movement, who would formulate the more outlandish theories that would become the basis of the occult version of the  Aryan myth, and which would later be adopted by the Nazis with devastating consequences.   Blavatsky was born in the Ukraine to Russian nobility. Endowed with extrasensory powers, she traveled the world in search of occult teachings and spent many years on the Indian subcontinent. After writing monumental works such as  Isis Unveiledand The Secret Doctrine, considered the bibles of   Freemasonry, the  Theosophical Society was formed in 1875, to spread her teachings worldwide. 13

  A circular issued by the founders of the  Theosophical Society stated that their goal was: “to oppose the materialism of science and every form of dogmatic theology, especially the Christian, which the Chiefs of the Society regard as particularly pernicious.” The  Theosophical Society quickly gained wide popularity. Albert Pike was a member for a short time. The poet W. B. Yeats, artists Wassily Kandinsky and Piet Mondrian, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and inventor Thomas Edison, were all devoted members. However, in his 1885 report to the  Society for Psychical Research (SPR), Richard Hodgson concluded that  Blavatsky was a fraud. And as is common with leading occultists, Hodgson also reported that   Blavatsky was a spy, having reportedly worked for the Russian  Okhrana.

   Blavatsky was also a member of the  Carbonari. Referring to the role of secret societies and occult organizations behind the numerous political upheavals leading up to her time, beginning with the  French Revolution, which she says was predicted by  St. Germain,  Blavatsky adds, “Of all these degenerated children of Chaldean Occultism, including the numerous societies of  in relation to Occultism, namely, the ‘ Carbonari’.” 14 According to René  Guénon, “she frequented… Spiritualist circles and revolutionary milieux; she allied herself notably with Mazzini and, around 1856, affiliated with the Carbonarist association ‘Young Europe’.”15 Blavatsky had also volunteered with the forces of  Garibaldi at the battle of Mentena in 1867, during which she claims to have received two bullet wounds. Garibaldi was at the time Grand Master the Italian Grand Orient.

  From 1867 to 1870,   Blavatsky studied Tibetan Buddhism with Indian masters, purportedly at a monastery in  Tibet.  Blavatsky encountered Tibetan Buddhism at a time when European scholarship was still in its infancy, and she did much to awaken interest in the subject, though, through the confused version of her teachings. In 1871,  Blavatsky arrived in Cairo where she founded a Spiritualistic society aimed at studying of mental phenomena. However, soon the      society became  the  locus  of  a  financial  scandal  and    was  disbanded.  In 1872, after leaving Cairo,   Blavatsky came to Odessa through Syria, Palestine and Constantinople where she lived for nine months. In 1873, she moved from Odessa to Bucharest, and in 1873, to Paris and on to the US where she met colonel Henry Steel Olcott, who had been part of the commission to investigate the assassination of  Abraham Lincoln, and with whom she founded the  Theosophical Society.

 The  Theosophical Society was among the leading proponents of a period in the late eighteenth century known as the  Occult Revival. The Occult Revival represented a reaction to the secularizing trends that preceded it, and was an attempt to reaffirm the        “spiritual”     aspects of the universe.       However, zthe interests of the  Occult Revival confused spiritualism with  spiritism. The foundation of the spiritualist practices of the Occult Revival were set by Swedenborg and his communication      with    angels and    spirits, and   Franz Anton Mesmer (1734–1815), who heavily influenced Blavatsky and many others. A German Freemason and physician,         Mesmer became widely popular for artificially inducing trance-like states, where subjects tended to report time travel and spirit contacts. With an interest in astronomy, Mesmer theorized that there was a natural energetic transference that occurred between all things, that he called “animal magnetism,” A magnetic fluid in the body was supposed to         connect humanity,            the earth and the stars. Mesmer’s name is the root of the English verb “mesmerize.”

  The craze for  spiritism is said to have begun when mysterious rappings of spirits were reported by the Fox family in their home in Hydesville, New York, which attained international attention, igniting widespread interest in spirit channeling. Séances became the vogue in Europe where mediums were in demand to entertain guests with physical and mental phenomena at private parties. After the news of the Fox affair came to France, people became interested in what was sometimes termed the “Spiritual Telegraph.” A table would be spun by the energy from the spirits, and later the “talking board” was also devised, where baskets were attached to a pointed object that spun under the hands of the mediums, to point at letters printed on cards scattered around, or engraved on, the table. These were the precursor of the Ouija boards that also later became popular.

  The fad was brought to England by Mrs. Hayden, whose séances were attended by Edward  Bulwer-Lytton, a close friend of the man considered the founder of the Occult Revival, French occultist Eliphas  Lévi, known as the     “Professorz of Transcendental  Magic,” and            who   was heavily  influenced by the Frankist  Hoene-Wronski. In Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, which was translated into English by noted  Masonic author Arthur Edward Waite as Transcendental Magic, its Doctrine and Ritualin 1910, he outlined the essential premise of occultism:



  Behind the veil of all the hieratic and mystical allegories of ancient doctrines, behind the darkness and strange ordeals of all initiations, under the seal of all sacred writings, in the ruins of Nineveh or Thebes, on the crumbling stones of old temples and on the blackened visage of the Assyrian or Egyptian sphinx, in the monstrous or marvelous paintings which interpret to the faithful of  India the inspired pages of the  Ved a s, in the cryptic emblems of our old books on  alchemy, in the ceremonies practiced at reception by all secret societies, there are found indications of a doctrine which is everywhere the same and everywhere carefully concealed. 16

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar