Since the end of the Second World War we have been bombarded from all sides with references to the West’s “Judeo-Christian religion,” and “our Judeo-Christian heritage.” Politicians regularly invoke these principles, and even religious leaders trumpet the phrase as if it were a self-evident truth. So sacrosanct is this concept, that even secular leaders make appeals to it. In fact, in America, Judeo-Christianity is nearly secular, and almost always mentioned alongside concepts such as liberty, equality, and democracy – themselves purely concepts which are secular in nature.

In the secular realm, even liberal atheists can make appeals to “the West’s Judeo-Christian roots”.  They can never precisely name what these roots and values are, and in fact some liberals go so far as to say that things which are inherently anti-Christian are a part of that tradition based on a flawed understanding of Christian Scripture.  However, we know that truth is not relative.  It does not change depending on the speaker, and hence there must be something deeply flawed with the way that Judeo-Christianity is presented or how it is implemented by the elites.

There is no such religion as Judeo-Christianity. Judaism is a religion which is wholly independent of Christianity, and was in fact a rejection of Jesus Christ as the Messiah. The Talmud, Judaism’s second holiest book, refers to Jesus and his mother Mary in unequivocally harsh language, calling him a false teacher, and preaching hate against all Christians. Of course, in modern times, there are few Jews, and even fewer Christians who know about the Talmud, but the sentiment of Talmudism is present at the highest levels of Jewish leadership.

It is true that Judaism and Christianity share the “Old Testament”. However, the interpretations of the Old Testament differ greatly between Christians and Jews. Furthermore, according to Justin Martyr, the purpose of Christ’s ministry was to restore true religion and to denounce the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. Consequently, Judaism establishes itself, as being inimical and opposed to Christianity from the very beginning, and diverged in that direction for the subsequent two centuries.

Thomas Aquinas, writing in the 13th century, believed that the moral precepts in the Bible predate Creation, being that they are established by God. Other precepts are ceremonial and judicial, and were established in the time of Moses, for a specific people and a specific time (in this case, the Ancient Hebrews). Accordingly, upon the coming of Christ they were not binding to non-Hebrews who converted to Christianity, because the New Covenant established through Christ is the instrument through which God offers mercy and atonement to mankind.

The anti-Christian nature of modern Judaism is one which Jewish scholars themselves are in agreement on. This very prominent and defining aspect of Judaism, is in fact what defines it as a religion. But it is more than a theological disagreement which defines Judaism as separate, and Judeo-Christianity to be an ahistorical concept.  Joseph Klausner, in his book, “Jesus of Nazareth” expressed the Judaic viewpoint that Christ’s teachings were “…irreconcilable with the spirit of Judaism.” Gershon Mamlak, a Zionist intellectual once claimed that Christianity is “in direct conflict to Judaism’s role as the Chosen people.”  Jewish writer Joshua J. Adler admits that, “The differences between Christianity and Judaism are much more than merely believing in whether the messiah already appeared or is still expected.”

If one takes the view that the religions of the world are in fact separate revelations of the Divine, through which man learns of a higher reality, then it follows that the diabolical attempts to distort, revise or eliminate these unique, ancient and divinely ordained patterns would be a grave error. The constant, politically motivated ideals to the imaginary entity of “Judeo-Christianity” are fully anti-traditional, because of its ultra-modernist theology. The fact is that Judeo-Christianity, given the voluminous history of anti-Christian attitudes by Jewish leaders and lay people alike, would not be viable had it not been secular in the first place.

Since the concept of Judeo-Christianity is invalid religiously speaking, it fulfills other purposes. In a world were political allegiances have replaced confessions of faith, Judeo-Christianity precisely fills the role of a secular cult. The purpose of such a cult is in fact to de-Christianize Christians.  The people who invented the concept predicted that, after the failure of the Soviet Union to enforce atheism, forcibly removing religion would be impossible.  However, by ostensibly appealing to a number of Christian ideas, and slowly inverting them, they could achieve their goal.  The role of Judeo-Christianity as a purely secular motivator is the reflection of the fact that one may be a considered “Jew” by birth even if he is not religious. It then proceeds from this that “secularism” is not, in fact, the enemy of Judeo-Christianity, but its mirror image. After all, if Judeo-Christianity is the kernel of Western civilization, there is no way that any society in the West can properly be identified as belonging to or being governed by Christian doctrines.

For Americans and other Western Europeans, one of the roles of propping up the term “Judeo-Christianity” is to integrate Jews into mainline of society, perhaps in an attempt to mitigate accusations against them of being usurpers of Western work ethic. In some ways, history once again speaks against this. From Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud to Leon Trotsky and the neo-conservatives of today, the politico-social movements which have gnawed away at what was once a Christian Europe were, in a large part, lead and organized by people who identified as Jewish.

The Jewish “core” of “Judeo-Christianity” can be seen through the attitude of modern Protestant churches towards Israel. In return, Christianity, or its secularized, institutionalized form, has become acceptable enough for the Jews to consider Christians (once their enemies) as allies. Under “Judeo-Christian” doctrine, the Jews reclaimed their status as the “chosen people” and so-called “Christian” Zionists began to sing the praises of Israel.  It is this belief which ascribes holiness to the state Israel.  This in itself is perhaps as an outgrowth the other bizarre Judeo-Christian “belief” of Shoahism. For this reason Judeo-Christianity is all to easily used by its by the leaders of Israel, to carry out a political agenda that favours that foreign political state over and ahead of the interests of America, or their fellow Christians. AIPAC and many American businessmen have profit interests in war and campaigned for new wars as a matter of business, but it is the Judeo-Christians who have added fuel to the fire.

Ultimately, the so-called Judeo-Christian values are ultimately another manifestation of modernism and militant secularism. They are an outgrowth of a doctrine which is needed not to improve oneself through the adherence to divine guidance, but a dogma which has created the modern societies.

RidingTheTiger author Hong Kyung-Jin assisted with the writing of this article.

An American university recently enacted a policy which, in practice, would force religious organizations operating on their campus to accept leaders who are not of their faith.  Of course, the policy was not worded in such a fashion.  As with all agenda-driven regulations, the policy was hidden behind a veneer of openness and tolerance: “any student may apply for leadership in any religious group”.  This might sound harmless in theory, but a shocking admission from the university’s dean did admit in a conference that the mere suspicion that members used religious criteria in voting for their leaders was grounds for investigation. Continue Reading

Deus Vult!

It is significant to mention that even though we may be by admission considered to be “reactionary”, it is also important not to be aligned with many movements and individuals which label themselves as such.  While many movements claim that they represent conservatism or even “paleoconservatism,” their actions and actual creed can speak volumes for their true intentions.  Tradition is a perennial set of principles which are eternal and ancient rather than a merely romantic yearning for dead past.  While pride in one’s own past and ancestry is a positive trait, and, indeed, a healthy one, traditional ideologies must show that they are living instead of frozen in time.  The web of espionage and controlled interests is thick, successful, and all too real.  There are many people who wish to wage a heroic, defiant, masculine, and aristocratic struggle only to fail because of idealism.  People of substance imbued with these values are hard to find, rare, and perhaps unreachable as they suffer from similar burdens of apathy, passion, and lack of trust.  It is necessary to bridge the spiritual distance between like-minded souls, but also with care and concern as the shadowy hand of spycraft will be close.  Caveat actor et cave canem.

Divide et impera – to divide and conquer is an ancient and effective strategy, but it is still very effective today.  The divisive natures of unwise men can be easily manipulated to achieve ends that unwittingly serve more Satanic interests.  Sadly, those manipulated are often completely oblivious to the real end of their actions, which are to continue to mental and spiritual slavery of others including themselves.  Those who are aware and yet still side with these foolish parties are committing a grave error.  They can be much more than just useful idiots oblivious: a real threat consuming resources and destroying legitimacy.  In this way, they are a part of the problem, and not a part of the solution to modernity, and become their own worst enemies.  A glimpse of their soul can be seen in actions and character.

There are also reasons beyond puppetry and incompetence that these “regressive” parties must be rejected.  Many of these movements do not only throw nations and regions into chaos, they also focus on ideas which are not all together Traditional in substance, and which in fact, will destroy society from within.  Syncretic, or atavistic, such organs often reject historical truth, spiritual developments, and philosophical thoughts indicative of a Divine Truth.  It is far simpler to deny a static yet adaptable form for something idealized, impossible, and dead.  In the convincing cloak of purity and piety these parties conceal changes to the doctrines of faith and ideology leading them to be erosive, violent, and toxic.  The yearning for wisdom, transcendent greatness, and temporal power leads to visions of a golden age.  Our young are most apt to fall for this image because it appeals to their need for a purpose.  It is important to guide them to the not-so-obvious true form of Truth in order to protect their hearts and souls while also protecting Tradition.  A struggle thus begins with these people to realize a vision impossible not just because of the difference of spirit between the ages, but also because the physical conditions make such goals impossible.  More simply, only time, effort, and perseverance will yield fertile fruits.  Enduring Tradition and Truth will prevail, but only with concerned spirits focused on cultivating it at the expense of those regressive and reactionary movements at once modern spiritually, intellectually contaminated reactions to modern realities.  The fungus and filth must be removed regardless of its seductive form.

The key is a return to the fundamentals.  Those who call themselves “fundamentalists” and who reject the fundamentals are charlatans.  They are a cancer.  Seek the Truth of Light, and find the reality behind the events and shifting formation of politics.  Though it is an optimism of our time to believe that religion and politics live truly in different spheres, the profane presence of the state and physical interests exist to corrupt, to control, and to strangle everything in its quest for a secular dominance.  Novus Ordo Seclorum: The goal to be attained by anti-Traditional forces cannot be withstood merely through political means, but also spiritually and mentally through proper skill.  This means not being led astray by that which is outwardly righteous and inwardly adulterous.  Always move with care and concern.  Remember, do not discount legitimate movements pursuing noble ends, but certain language, practices, and connections should make one wary.

Glória in excélsis Deo.

The life-long, unrepentant Trotskyist polemicist and warmongering atheist known as Christopher Hitchens has died of esophageal cancer.

Hitchens was a man of his time, an insignificant son of a World War Two British war criminal, who was catapulted to fame through his absolute hatred and intolerance of all things religious, while his younger and more conservative brother faded into obscurity.  He blasphemed against God, castigated the Pope, and openly brandished hate against the Catholic Faith (and to a lesser degree Islam), but was a fanatical and follower of modernism down to its last detail, and tolerated no dissent from its orthodoxies and doctrines.  In short, whilst those around him praised him as an unconventional and brave man who “dared to speak out,” nothing could be further from the truth.

Despite his associations with the New Left, his bile-filled invective against everything traditional, against culture, religion and identity, Hitchens found a home among the neoconservative clique of American politics.  FrontPageMag, the online magazine run by his fellow ex-communist, David Horowitz, has praised Hitchens as a defender of Western civilization.  In turn, Hitchens had reciprocated his admiration of neoconservatives.  He admired Paul Wolfowitz, and minced no words about his glowing veneration of the neoconservative movement, saying that ”it [could] turn US power into a revolutionary force”.  Like many neoconservatives (although he himself never used the label), would continue to promote wasteful, internationalist, and globalist wars in the name of “democracy,” but not necessarily because he actually supported the United States or its people, but because as Piatak says, “his entire politics is motivated by his hatred of religion and tradition; he’d be just as happy bombing St. Peter’s as the Taliban”.

To his credit, such an analysis of neoconservatism was an accurate, candid and frank one, even if he did not intend for it to be so.  Moreover, he did not make an effort to hide the reasons for his undying admiration of the neoconservatives, even if he refused to be associated with them in name; at least in this aspect of his life he had been honest and consistent.  Of course, it needs no explanation that the origins of the neoconservative movement, and its outgrowth from the New Left are not in dispute by any objective scholar, and this may have been its appeal to Hitchens.

If anything, in Hitchens and his work is a snapshot of the world we live in.  While Patrick Buchanan, Robert Novak, Joe Sobran, Charley Reese, and Eric Margolis are derided as “unpatriotic conservatives,” the Catholic-hating, leftist Hitchens found himself in good company among his neoconservative friends.  Moreover, whilst being praised as “defender of Western civilization,” he clearly must have known and understood that his writing, speeches, and his attack towards Christianity (the very foundation of Western civilization), were the catalyst for the destruction of the Western world itself.  Perhaps it is because he told people what they wanted to hear.  After all, we can hardly imagine a critic of the Talmud, gaining the same amount of fame – much less being showered with praise.  Even Republicans who dare to step outside the invisible bounds are castigated and shunned, but no matter what ridiculous rhetoric Hitchens comes up with, he remained a poster-boy of both the neoconservatives and the militant, atheistic left.  Indeed, shortly after Hitchens’ passing, the faux-conservative David Frum rushed to write a bleeding-heart eulogy for the late Hitchens.

The views that Hitchens held were undoubtedly repulsive on so many levels, representing everything wrong with not only Britain today, but the modern democratic-liberal system.  But it is no surprise that the world will perhaps remember him as a great man, just as they remember that most prominent of all heretics, Martin Luther.  As Saint Paul once said, “The wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight” (1 Corinthians 3:19).  But even as the world moves ever closer to his twisted and perverted vision, his pyrrhic victory remains one of this world: Sic transit gloria mundi.

As far as world religious leaders go, there are probably who are held in higher esteem by the Western media and Western intellectuals than the Dalai Lama.  His cause is given much sympathy in the West, with numerous Hollywood celebrities and academics joining together to promote the independence of the mountain kingdom.  Having been a former Buddhist, I myself once had a great deal of respect for the man who calls himself Tenzin Gyatso, otherwise known to the world as the Fourteenth Dalai Lama.  Although I was not a Tibetan Buddhist, I had regarded him as a person to look up to, because I viewed him as a person to be respected.

Despite the Dalai Lama having only a few million followers, as compared to the His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, the Dalai Lama has received media coverage which is so overwhelmingly positive, that it would seem that there were many times more Tibetan Buddhists in the world than actually exist (the adherents of Tibetan Buddhism, number some 20 millon, in comparison to the 1.18 billion Roman Catholics worldwide).  For instance, shortly after the election of Pope Benedict XVI, people were quick to deride the Papacy as being a “dictatorship,” and refer derisively to the Pope’s past in the Hitler Youth, despite the fact that the Papacy is in fact an elected position, and that Pope Benedict  had no choice but to join the Hitler Youth.  On the other hand, the media will not tell you about the Dalai Lama’s own connection to the Nazi party.

On the one hand, some people see the Dalai Lama as a a vanguard of tradition for the Tibetan people, who keeps his quaint traditions alive in hectic times, while others see him as someone who has succeeded in harmoniously fusing modernity and tradition.  From our perspective, the former is possible only with a large and unprecedented effort to reject all attempts at the latter.  Any authentic traditionalist movement must fully reject liberal ideas, and be solidly based in hierarchy and order.

Whatever Traditionalist ideas the Dalai Lama might have once held, it seems that he has long since abandoned them for a modern outlook on life.  The fact is, that had the Dalai Lama not adopted his modernist (and globalist) viewpoints, he would not have the outpouring of support from even leftist, atheistic academics who so often rush to criticize Christianity.  In fact, speaking to the National Secular Society, the vice-president of that organization praised the Dalai Lama by saying, that he was, “sensible to say that a [secular] ethic is better than one based on religion”.  Furthermore, in a press conference in Tokyo, the Dalai Lama is reported to have said, “Secularism does not mean rejection of all religions. It means respect for all religions and human beings including non-believers”.  One might then ask how he is applying this idea to his treatment of followers of the very Traditional “Dorje Shugden” sect, but I digress.

The Dalai Lama has gone so far as to refer to himself as a “Marxist” and appoint himself as a critic of capitalism, and in one speech went so far as to say that the Soviet Union and China were not Marxist enough.  In another speech, he clearly articulated his globalist interests by stating that: ”The elected government, sometimes their number one…priority is national interest…That, I think, should change. The global issue should be number one.”  He further stated, “If someone comes to me and asks whether homosexuality is okay or not…then I think I would say…is okay’”.  Another favorite talking point of the Dalai Lama is, not surprisingly, feminism.  The Dalai Lama calls himself a feminist, and claims that women are more prone to compassion (perhaps the Dalai Lama doesn’t read the news very much).  On top of that, if this weren’t enough, the Dalai Lama was  first public visitor to the Holocaust “Shrine” in Washington DC.

Another side to this equation is that, for certain powers that be, he is a usefully asset in the imperialistic strangulation of Russia and China via a concomitant fake “revolution” like the one the world recently in Libya.  Those people do not honestly care about the Tibetan people, but rather wish to bring what yet remains of Tibet “into the fold”.  Perhaps, one might say that the Dalai Lama merely tones down his message for his Western audiences.  In some instances, he seems to do just this: by advocating closed borders for his own country, while condemning the racism of others (for comparison, think of the outrage which would follow if a French Catholic bishop were to condemn immigration into France!).  If this is the case, then he would appear to be more of a media-savvy politician than a religious figure; and one who has perhaps learned a bit too well from his handlers.

In the modern era, there has always been much talk about wars which will “make the world safe for democracy,” or which will bring freedom to people in the far-flung corners of the globe. The art of combat, once the calling of the nobility such as the knights or the ksatriya, has been reduced to the hobby of the lower classes who have failed in all other endeavors, so that their respective governments only see fit to use them as cannon fodder in their next battles. This is naturally a paradoxical situation: men are to required to fight, but think that war is to be shunned, only late to contradict themselves once more when they undemocratically impose a hated democracy upon the conquered, thus reducing the heroic “warrior” archtype to a mere artefact of standardization which the modern army calls a soldier.

The “Heroic Age” of mankind looks upon war in a completely different context. War, while it may have been disliked for political reasons, was not shunned as the ultimate evil, if a just cause was a predicate for war. Furthermore, war and battle was intrinsically tied in with the religious aspects of life, and thus took on a sacred character in which people could recieve a sort of initiation. Indeed, Evola says that war viewed as trial and purification can function in the place of structures of initiation now lost to us, and may even be more suited to the current “Iron Age”.

War and Heroism: A glimpse of the traditional

Here, we will cite some examples of this phenomenon:

In the Vedic texts and the Bhagavad Gitas, the relevance of the ksatriya is expounded, and some hints are shown as to the ideal life of an ascetic warrior. In one epic scene, Krishna tells Arjuna, “the wise grieve for neither the dead nor the living” (Bhagavad Gîtâ 2.11). He also says, “in death you will gain heaven” (Bhagavad Gîtâ 2.37). Such verses explicitly describe ascetic dimension of the warrior. In verse 2.11, Arjuna has been scolded for uttering words of wisdom whilst grieving unwisely. This can be seen as a form of “initiation” into the heroic tradition, for it may be interpreted as a command to leave behind the mundane world. This is confirmed by a later saying, “the man who, giving up all objects of desires, moves about seeking nothing…wins peace” (Bhagavad Gîtâ 2.71).

The Nordic tradition, which is known for its “war-like” character, also incorporates the concept of “holy war”. To this regard, Evola writes:

According to the Nordic races, no sacrifice or cult was more cherished by the supreme god and thought to bear more supernatural fruits than the one celebrated by the hero who falls on the battlefield; from a declaration of war to its bloody conclusion, the religious element permeated the Germanic hosts and inspired the individual warrior as well. Moreover, in these traditions we find the idea that by means of a heroic death the warrior shifted from the plane of the material, earthly war to the plane of struggle of a transcendent and universal character. (Revolt Against the Modern World, p. 116-7).

With respect to Buddhism, it goes without saying that modern Buddhism is an entirely different concept in both theory and practice than traditional Buddhism. Contrary to the “peaceful” image of Buddhism that is promulgated by degenerate new-age adherents in the West, Shakyamuni’s life and teachings reveal a person raised to be a heroic warrior invested in honor. Therefore in Buddhism, there exists, the sacred Aryan concept of battle and the warrior ascetic. Evola was to note this, drawing a parallel between the ascesis of intention and the ascesis of action which is common to the Traditionalist mindset. The Pali texts, which comprise the earliest collection of Buddhist writings still in existence, emphasize the need for determination, sacrifice, and courage for Buddhists to follow the path of Buddha-dharma, to bear up under hardships in order to achieve the highest goal a human being can attain: to conquer death, fear, ignorance, evil, and thereby attain liberation. The qualities of a good warrior are exactly the qualities needed for a serious Buddhist practitioner. In this way, there is a similarity between the concept presented by King David: “He teacheth my hands to war” (Psalm 18:34). Incidentally, the historical character of David, according to Biblical exegesis was that of a warrior-king, who while being a prophet, needed to overcome the limitations of carnality!

Such ideas might be repugnant to modernists and many self-proclaimed Buddhists in the West, but this data should not be necessarily taken as an indictment of Buddhism.  These facts should make it no surprise that Evola emphasizes the “aristocratic” character of primitive Buddhism, which he defines as having the and its “virile and warrior strength”. But even in the first 24 centuries of the development of Buddhism, the warrior aspect could not be divorced from Buddhism in practice. To this end, Brian Victoria, in his book, “Zen at War,” admitted that many Buddhist sects throughout history openly supported national struggles, and ascribed to them a sacred character.  The Knights Templar of medieval Europe had their counterparts in the Sōhei warrior monks of Buddhist Japan. In Japan, in fact, both esoteric Buddhism, in the form of “onmyodo” and “mikkyo” played an important role for the warriors of the Heian period. Later on, in particular, the esoteric sects of Buddhism had a profound influence on the sōhei, and later on the samurai. For instance,  Takuan Sôhô (1573 -1645) was an influential Zen Buddhist monk of the Rinzai sect and had personal relations with Yagyû Munenori (1571 -1646), founder of the Yagyû Shinkage Ryû. Additionally, an analysis of the Tibetan Buddhist texts such as the Kalachakra Tantra, reveals both external and internal levels of battle that could easily be called “holy wars,” paralleling the Islamic duality between jihad al-ashgar and jihad al-akbar (greater and lesser jihad). Furthermore, in both religions, the main emphasis is on the internal spiritual battle against one’s own ignorance and destructive ways.

Most people who are familiar with the giants of the Traditionalist school such as Julius Evola or Rene Guénon understand what is meant by Tradition according to these authors.  In this context, “tradition” has a meaning which is far removed from mere custom or folklore.  Instead, “Tradition” takes on the facets of something which is divine and eternal.  In a word, it calls man back to what Schuon called the ”transcendent unity”.  Tradition contrasts with modernity, whose sight is limited in scope, and concerned with quantity, not quality.  Evola describes the Tradition as embodying that which is “solar,” or “heroic” in nature, while anti-tradition is the direct antithesis of that.

Since Modernity is opposed to Tradition, there are two concepts that can be invoked in the description of modern life: antitradition and countertradition.  These may be perceived as the causes and effects of modernity.  In The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times, René Guénon characterizes the antitradition as a mere negation of Tradition.  In other words, the characteristic symptoms of modernity, such as materialism, democracy, and secular humanism are a denial of Tradition, merely in the sense of failing to recognize it; they are  a deviation without actually becoming openly hostile.  Countertradition, however is a step further along the path of degeneration.  It is the satanic inversion of true spirituality, leading to the regime of Antichrist.

The two may be thought of as cause and effect, and is consistent with the principle of degeneration. The antitradition weakens and dissolves traditional spiritualities, after which the countertradition sets up a counterfeit in their place. Since Guénon’s time, as is well known, anti-traditional forces have greatly advanced worldwide.  The genesis of the anti-tradition, is within humanism, for as Guénon states, humanism “implies a pretension to bring everything down to purely human elements” (p 193). Guénon further goes on to posit that Protestantism and rationalism are further examples of the early antitradition.  Evola though, is more pessimistic and finds traces of the anti-tradition, which he equates with the presence of an ancient “Telluric,” or “southern,” civilization, in even ancient civilizations.  As an example, he cites the disentegration of the Aryan worldview as the concept of atman and brahman degenerating from a “formless, magical force” into a pantheistic concept which denied the existence of spiritual personality.

The Beginning of the End: For Western Europe, antitradition began with the decline of the Catholic Church

The manifestation of antitradition can be seen in all aspects of the Western world today.  Societies are crumbling, having lost direction and having rejected the aspects of a traditional society.  In political terms the system is democracy and secularism.  This system denies the existence of any divine cause, and regresses the castes in such a way that subjects him to be without a characteristic form.  The materialist outlook, whether it is capitalistic or communistic, is a system which is solely concerned with that of quantity.  Art, music, and culture are now the abstract expressions of soul-less individualism.  None of this is concerned with the spiritual betterment of human beings or any real human problems.  In America, the so-called ‘Land of the Free’, through every medium, man is told he has reached a degree of happiness hitherto undreamed of. He forgets who he is, where he came from, and basks in the present.

While antitradition is fully in force in the West, and has begun to spread to other parts of the world, we can already see countertraditional movements rising to the highest echelons of global political, economic, and religious power.  The existence of these movements would never be possible without the denial of tradition (i.e. antitradition).  The formations of such associations are allowing for a near-theological perspective on the tenets of the countertraditional society.  We can see such religious fervor in the way some in the West conduct themselves and view society.  As an example, there are certain groups which are now protected under the laws of the West, and certain histories, events, and concepts which the average person regards as canon.  In contrast to the anti-traditional attitude, which does not recognize Tradition, these new precepts are often diametrically opposed to the religious principles which, even 100 years ago, were at least paid nominal lip service to.

A clever disguise: In the absense of tradition, the countertradition can quickly take on many forms

At this point, antitradition manifests itself as a number of disconnected social movements.  Feminism, homosexuality, democracy, and liberalism are part of the transitional phase from antitradition to countertradition.  However, the countertradition will ultimately masquarade as a fully-fledged religion.  Both Guenon and Evola assert that the forces of “counter-initiation” are primarily occupied with cutting human beings off from the knowledge of anything transcendent, and then when this has been effectively completed, offering up a “parody” or “counterfeit” of the authentic initiatory experience “vitalized” by energies from the sub-human realm.  In the 20th and 21st century, many new religious movements have arisen: some of them are quite obviously draw their energies from chthonic sources, such as the various branches of Satanism or Luciferianism.  Some movements, such as modern Talmudism (which both rejects Christ and which is an inversion of the original principles of the ancient Israelite faith), are less subtle in their origins.  Still others are able to hide their nature as counterfeit spirituality, and are even being used by globalist powers to sow the seeds of conflict, such as Falun Gong or Baha’ism.

It is in the realm of countertradition, from which the prophesied Antichrist or Dajjal is to arise, because the Antichrist will superficially resemble Christ the Messiah, while doing the work of the Devil.  Thus, Tradition is not merely denied, but it is inverted, as per Guenon’s thesis.  This antichrist will seemingly provide for the needs of the people but deny them ultimate salvation.

For those worried about the coming counter-traditional world, Guenon gives us some words of hope, however:

between the fleeting reign of the ‘counter-traditiod and the final moment of the present cycle there can only be the ‘rectification’, which will suddenly put back all things into their normal place at the very moment when subversion seems complete, thus at one stroke preparing for the ‘golden age’ of the future cycle.

In the Name of The Master of Judgment

For those of us fortunate to live in the first world, if we have been blessed enough to have been born in a station where we do not have to struggle greatly simply for survival, it is a time in which much we could desire is at our reach.  Food, drink, entertainment, and music, all of these are easily and can be rather inexpensive.  Other pleasures both legal and illicit add more depth to the understanding of this world.  In these times, we find ourselves bombarded everywhere we go.  We are saturated and chained to the point of having no privacy whatsoever … shattering our intimacy and private moments needed by our family, and wanted by our Lover.  The senses bombarded constantly, especially for those in big metropolises; it takes discipline and periods of refreshment.  How often have we wanted that special time only to be interrupted by a mobile phone call?  Vibrant colors, strong fragrances, loud sound, the clamor of transport, the dust of movement, the heat of corporate clothing, the bright sun seems magnified by the fortresses of metal, glass, stone, and cement.  It is then not difficult to understand how many people simply become automatons until freed from their work.  Masks are worn as we are all in a great human drama which unfortunately is going in a direction that can be life-sapping.  In our quest for certainty and simplicity, it is important to try to set aside time for a healthy solitude.

Life in a Metropolis: Chaotic but Structured

Fall and winter approach.  Both allow us time in their very nature to contemplate life.  As the holiday weekends approach—namely the secular Thanksgiving weekend, and the December holiday season which contains the Christian and Jewish holidays of Christmas and Hannukkah—an opportunity presents itself for a period of contemplation and mild detachment.  For the Muslims, the most sacred month of Ramadan offers this very chance.  This need not be understood as completely separating oneself from the world, but a period of enjoying an increasingly forgotten simplicity.  It is a time to refresh and recharge, but also a time to try to reconnect with that which we must all eventually confront.  Odd is it may seem to “isolate” oneself, it can be necessary at times as it can allow the mind to be in some way restored to a state of clarity and perceptiveness we forget because of the numbness needed for modern life.  To slow down, to feel, to increase our perceptiveness, to increase our clarity, to learn something new beyond our work lives, to rekindle connections with those important to us, and to focus on our spiritual lives.

Reality can be complex, but understanding and appreciating it does not have to be!

This fall and this winter, use whatever free time to you have to genuinely and gently drop-out in order to be refreshed.  For those of us in very important positions it may not be possible to completely separate from our professional lives, but an exercise in judgment can help a lot of us make the most of what free time we have in the season of austerity.  Work to complete the circle and find a healthy medium so needed, so rare in this realm of medication, disorders, self-dosing, and weariness.  The most important aspects of your existence depend on you being at your best; the best will also know their flaws and so will the best for them understand and be merciful.

Bound to the Will of The Most Gracious

            It is not odd to feel alienated today.  In fact, the rates of alienation are increasing.  We are separated more than ever from our surroundings, from the people in our lives, from our work, and in some cases are barred from truly experiencing emotions: we have become detached and not in the way fostered by ascetic religious pathways.  For some of these people—those not mentally ill, or who simply manage to find satisfaction in this way of life—this is not an issue because they are content with their lot.  It is not a stretch of truth to say that there is a supernatural mirror to this physical reality: many of us have become distant from spirituality.  This means a true spirituality—an experience with God in proper form—rather than a shallow lingering at the surface.  It is an eternal quest to rekindle an old friendship with a lover and a friend for God is The Friend and The Lover of those who can open their hearts to Hum.  Like a human relationship, a Divine relationship also takes effort, requires sacrifice, needs understand, and demands acceptance of both good and evil in it.  In our atmosphere of rampant individualism, the necessity of seeking authentic spirituality is paramount.

Life becomes barren when we lack what we need.

What is authentic, you ask?  While a human being may understand spirituality to an extent, they do not always know authenticity, orthodoxy, or a proper understanding of rite.  To be authentic in your spirituality—to truly excel in cultivation—requires the points already addressed, but it also requires the choice of a living religion.  The serious embracing of a religion can be difficult for many, even those who are mentally and emotionally allied with a holistic worldview simply because it requires the lessening of their individuality and the self-denial of their freedoms.  Seekers must also find the correct interpretations in their newfound religions so that they can develop properly by not being stifled by ideas of political or legal extremism.  In the Islamic faith, the example laid down in the ahadeeth of Muhammad stresses the moderate enjoyment of what has been allowed and in constant mild-tempered behavior coupled with good deeds.  One can also find warnings against sectarian behavior for these traditions are very broad even in their conservative forms; most raised in hedonism will not see it, but even they can have change of heart.  Authenticity principally lies in the established religions which for those of us here in the West is the tradition of Abraham: Islam, Christianity, and Judaism.  Cults, “movements,” and new age systems do not offer anything positive with the latter more a form of self-help with spiritual underpinnings meant for cash from corrupt “gurus.”

Why is seeking it so necessary?  To reconnect with the Almighty whose Radiance pervades existence is the priority of many people.  Even those so enamored with materialism in science and mathematics are seeking answers.  That they do so wanting to do good is encouraging, but their materialism is its own folly as it can prevent a wider understanding of Divine reality because of its insistence on solely understanding physical phenomena.  The deductionist model is acceptable in the viewing of the merely physical manifestation of reality as it is rational, simple, logical, and has great yield.  Spirituality is not something with can be reduced to its parts.  It requires a willingness to cultivate a sense of holistic understanding in which everything is properly separate, but also properly interconnected.  This is necessary to re-center humanity in its proper role as guardian, steward, and user instead of predator and exploiter on Earth.  It also reestablishes the guideline for communication with God.  We are subordinate to The Fashioner of what we know.  One cannot simply desire something, but out of fear not act on it, and then expect an improvement or change.  This may seem elementary, but the entrance to an entirely new world—a new facet—can be a daunting task.  Strive, strive, and strive.

Even though barren, we can still find something of worth in the desert.

The individual, the human being, attains a level of completeness in his spiritual development when focused on its way.  Therefore in our zeal to follow our selves’ desires we are neglecting important parts of our very selves which need attention.  Such a message may seem paradoxical to newcomers, but religion is not anti-individual at all; individualism is anti-tradition.  Our full worth rests in our deeds and intentions as these are just husks of flesh and bone which will in turn give way to soil and dust.  Our full worth can be unleashed in understanding, embracing, and cultivating a spiritual love.

In societies which hold the individual as the focus of ideological progress, many people become excited at the idea of becoming “different” or more “original.” Westerners tend to cherish individuality to the point of rebellion, attempting to stand out and draw attention to themselves by their lifestyle, clothing, hairstyles, or adoptive cultural tendencies. In the last few decades, a variety of people – from Christian apostates and atheists, to crypto-Marxists and reform Jews – have been part of an interesting current.  Perhaps, in an attempt to reject the “old clothes” of Christendom, they have decided to take on the “new clothes” of Buddhism.  In America and Europe, the s0-called “progressives” are attracted by the mere idea that it is a an ultra-permissive religion and the antithesis of Western thought.  Those Western individuals find Buddhism “exotic” and are spurred on mostly by the superstitious, secret, and arcane qualities they perceive in this religion.

Such people convert under a spell of delusion, because ultra-permissiveness is not inherently associated with traditional Buddhism, any more that it is associated with Christianity.  In this sense, the when progressives attempt to incorporate Buddhism into their lifestyle, they are in reality attempting to hijack Buddhist ideas for themselves and make them fit into their secularist lifestyle.

Much of Buddhism in the West has been combined, in varying degrees, with the New Age movement.  The New Age movement has little to do with any of the mainstream branches of traditional Buddhism. As the eminent scholar, A. K. Coomaraswamy once stated, Buddhism today is “most famous today for everything it originally never taught.”  In the East, where Buddhism existed under the patronage of the Chinese, Indian, Tibetan, or Japanese cultures, there was a certain regard for tradition, self-cultivation, and  a metaphor for the divergence of heroic spirit from the sentiments of modern people.  According to these versions of Buddhism, a man can, as Evola describes it, “overcome the state of caducity, restlessness, ‘thirst’ and the forgetfulness typical of ordinary people” by his secession from the visible and material world.  In this doctrine, there is a metaphor for the divergence of heroic spirit from the sentiments of modern people. 

‘Western’ Buddhism – if there is even such a thing – is the exact opposite of this.  In fact, it overtly panders to the sentiments of modernity.  Buddhism, as practiced by many people in the West, exists in name only, attracting the most miserable ex-Christian rejects and atheists. It has degenerated into an extremely sick religion inhabited by atheists, agnostics, and at best, pantheists. These people congregate together at ‘dharma-centers’, which are little more than outpatient mental wards for depressed materialists, and engage in idle chatter about attainment of oblivion and the denial of all things spiritual. The crisis of Western Buddhism is therefore characterized only by secularism and its worldly character.  This criticism is supported by clear textual evidence (atthakathas), which can not merely be explained away as a matter of diverging interpretations, or even the product of historical evolution. The modern, revisionist, version of Buddhism lends itself to an unspiritual historical exegesis according to the letter. It is an exegesis which virtually ignores a deeper meaning implied in the Nikayas and explained in the commentaries. As an example, Siddhartha said “the six senses and their world are not the soul” (cf. Chachakha Sutta, MN 3). It seems odd, then, that modern Buddhists should say of the Buddha that he taught the rejection of the soul, because this would mean clinging to the six senses. Rather than denial of the soul, the Buddhism does teach one to distinguish the distinguish predicates of the soul from the very soul itself, and thus transcend base instincts.

Western Buddhism is almost entirely modernist.  Contrary to what its purveyors might believe, it is not ancient or traditional, and certainly not traditionalist.  Western Buddhism has been heavily influenced by the concepts of freethought and secular humanism. It has become a platform for mundane social activists, who incorrectly fancy themselves “experts” on the topic because of their involvement in purchasing all manner of trinkets and implements.  The fact is that Western Buddhists largely ignore any aspect of Buddhism which requires self-discipline, as they have distorted the original message of Buddhism into an amoral doctrine in order to mix politics and religion.

If the modern portrayal of Buddhism is representative of the teaching of the Buddha, then it is certainly an ingenious exposition which can prove war to be peace and freedom to be slavery.  However, if the premises of this portrayal are flawed, then the modern explanation of Buddhism is certainly not worth studying except as a lesson regarding the famous “principle of degeneration” which was already well-discussed by other Traditionalists like Evola. Traditional Buddhists worldwide need to take back the religion from the modernist heretics, and not allow Buddhism to turn into a rubbish-heap of mystical spiritual suicide and nihilism.

The author of this article was raised in a Buddhist family.  He is currently a Roman Catholic.