Evola consistently rejects both the claims of faith and of science to explain the origins of civilization. Instead, Evola makes note of “extra-scientific intuitions” and his methodology is not the study of genetics, or even of arechology, but rather “very laborious philological, anthropo-geological, mythological, and symbolic methods”. In our post-Christian era, in rejecting the claims of faith, may assume that they are therfore committed to the claims of science, without even considerting the spiritual alternative profferred by Evola.

In his time, the common theory, as he pointed out, was that civilization arose from the East, moving Westward and Northward. All other considerations aside, there is not even any scientific or historic evidence to support that. Where are the waves of Babylonians or Dravidians bringing civilization to all parts of Europe? The record shows just the opposite.

First of all, there is what is now called the “Aryan invasion theory”, that northerners conquered India, carrying their civilization to that subcontinent. This is not such a popular theory nowadays, not because of new evidence, but because it is “politically incorrect’. But as for Evola’s claim that the ancient civilization of Greece and Rome were really Nordic, we have this:

In recorded history the Nordics first appear in the West as Achaeans. They came from the North from the Dacian Plains and conquered Greece and Phrygia about 1400 or 1500 BC.

About 1200 or 1300 BC a Noridc people, the Osco-Umbrians, sweeping down from the northeast, entered Italy. They were kindred to the Achaeans and were the ancestors of the Latin tribes, including the early Romans.

(Conquest of a Continent, by Madison Grant)

Unfortunately, Grant suffers from the same mistaken belief that to be hard-headed and rational, you must follow the fashions of science. Since Grant wrote that book, science now postulates that the human species originated in Africa! Grant also believed that the different races actually constitute different animal species. Such biological theories of race are so easily refutable, that they end up discrediting his entire work. Grant wants to hang onto notions of which race is “higher” or “lower”. Unfortunately, such distinctions have absolutely no meaning in science. Instead, science can only speak of fitness … that is, whether or not a species or race can thrive and reproduce itself. By that standard, it would appear — if current trends continue indefinitely — that European man is “unfit”, no matter what can be said about IQ tests or the glories of past civilizations.

Only a spiritual transformation — not improved genetics — can halt this trend. Unfortunately, everywhere you look, there is no such transformation, but rather its evasion with a pretense to be such a transformation … thus the competing claims that decadent sensuality, or the recovery of ancient superstitions, or a new “order”, or the next trendy Asian guru will save us.

Only a god can save us.

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press

“The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.” ~ William Blake

Several would-be esoterists have tried to convince me that sex magick, particularly the Crowleyian version, is the fast track to enlightenment. They do so apparently on the grounds that since their social life already revolves around sex and drugs, that therefore it would be a natural fit for them. If it were that simple, then any American inner city would be a centre of spiritual enlightenment. Even an experienced Mason has told me that the search for the Grail is really chercher la femme, on the grounds that the shape of the cup reminds him of a vagina. I could only conclude that we travel in different circles.

Although there are reasons for limiting the male orgasm–and not out of prudery or some Victorian moral code–there is no doubt sexual energy has been used as a tool for self-realisation. Since Crowley has left records of his experiences, it seems useful to pay attention. First of all, Crowley’s “method of science” means that the sexual experience–even one’s own–must be treated with detachment and objectivity. Any one who has attempted this will notice regarding a sex act as merely physiological significantly changes the experience itself; he will also notice how much of the sexual experience is controlled by the imagination and not the biology.

Crowley’s essay Liber DCCCXI: Energized Enthusiasm describes his experiences. He points out that the ceremonial use of sex has restrictions that don’t apply to the natural physical purpose of sex. “If the act in itself is to be the sacrament in a religious ceremony, this act must be accomplished solely for the love of God. All personal considerations must be banished utterly.” And again, “I need hardly emphasize the necessity for the strictest self-control and concentration on their [the celebrant’s] part. As it would be blasphemy to enjoy the gross taste of the wine of the sacrament, so must the celebrant suppress even the minutest manifestation of animal pleasure.”

Crowley notes, “It is, indeed, of the first importance for the celebrant in any phallic rite to be able to complete the act without even once allowing a sexual or sensual thought to invade his mind. The mind must be as absolutely detached from one’s own body as it is from another person’s.”

Nowadays, Tibetan Buddhism is a rival for the sex magick crowd. Its appeal to its Western adherents is that it is cooler than their parents’ religion and compatible with science. Then there are all the thangkas depicting the yabyum, again depicting something they fancy themselves to be skilled at when those interminable meditation sessions become fatiguing. Never mind that Tibetan Buddhist sexual morality is identical to that of the despised Roman church, that is a mere detail that arises from the culture of Tibet and not fundamental to Buddhism.

Nevertheless, the Dalai Lama asserts that initiation into Buddhist Tantra is reserved to those who have achieved total indifference to experience. He gives the example that if you don’t care whether you are served an elegant meal or a serving of faeces with a glass full of pus, then you are ready for Tantra. It seems that Crowley may have taken this dictum quite literally.

In his book Carnal Alchemy, Stephen Flowers notes that on one particular sex magick session, Crowley was “forced into an act of caprophagy as a kind of Holy Eucharist.” (p. 20) Now Dr. Flowers is a brilliant linguist, a promoter of Germanic languages, and somewhat kinky himself. Nevertheless, he prefers the clinically sounding Latin word, rather than the more colourful Anglo-Saxon equivalent. I myself would prefer the elegant French—manger la merde d’amour—since it sounds as though it deserves a glossy monthly magazine with scratch-off sniffers.

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press

A “Myth” is what other people believe.

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press

Morality is for other people. I always have a perfectly good excuse for whatever I do.

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press

Let us face ourselves. We are Hyperboreans; we know very well how far off we live. “Neither by land nor by sea will you find the way to the Hyperboreans” … Beyond the north, ice, and death — our life, our happiness. We have discovered happiness, we know the way, we have found the exit out of the labyrinth of thousands of years. Who else has found it? Modern man perhaps? “I have got lost; I am everything that has got lost,” sighs modern man.

This modernity was our sickness: lazy peace, cowardly compromise, the whole virtuous uncleanliness of the modern Yes and No. This tolerance and largeur of the heart, which “forgives” all because it “understands” all, is sirocco for us. Rather live in the ice than among modern virtues and other south winds!

We were intrepid enough, we spared neither ourselves nor others; but for a long time we did not know where to turn with our intrepidity. We became gloomy, we were called fatalists. Our fatum — the abundance, the tension, the damming of strength. We thirsted for lightning and deeds and were most remote from the happiness of the weakling, “resignation.” In our atmosphere was a thunderstorm; the nature we are became dark — for we saw no way. Formula for our happiness: a Yes, a No, a straight line, a goal.

Friedrich Nietzsche

Copyright © 2009, 2010 Gornahoor Press