The Gnostic tendency is a traditional remedy against Judaic influence, and that is why

The Gnostic tendency is a traditional remedy against Judaic influence, and that is why
Simone Weil followed Marcion into rejection of the God of Jews and the Old Testament.
Gnostic influence is particularly strong in Islam: Muslims, like Docetist Gnostics, believe that
the Crucifixion was just a vision, and that God brought Christ to Heaven while leaving an image
of a man on the Cross. By excluding the Bible from its Canon, the Muslims saved themselves
from the letter-bound Judaic tendency; by banning usury they blocked the way of the
Mammonite-Jewish alliance. By having neither Pope nor Vatican, they avoided concentration of
spiritual power in one place to the impoverishment of the rest.

The Muslim victory over the Jews was so complete that the Jews ceased to be a threat to
Islam. A small community dealing with the forbidden (interest, loans and magic spells) was up to
a point similar to the Burakumin of Japan, the pariah caste which engaged in animal slaughter,
forbidden by Buddhist law. But only up to a point: the Burakumin could not improve their lot by
strictly adhering to the Buddhist norm, while the Jews in the Muslim world could join the society
by accepting Islam. In The Thousand Nights and a Night tales composed in Abbasid Baghdad, a
rich, mean and nasty Jewish sorcerer, whenever defeated by Muslim hero, is required to forego
his evil creed. Jewish women were easily converted and given in marriage to Muslims.

That is why anti-Judaic ideology in Islam hardly exists at all; the Muslims do not need
and do not understand the anti-Judaic thought of West European or Christian Orthodox society;
and no amount of Protocols in print, not even the Jewish-led anti-Islamic propaganda can change
this fact. For Muslims, the Jews present no ideological danger; and the Jews have to fight them
with tanks and missiles instead of the more subtle means they use against Christendom. Talks of
‘Muslim antisemitism’ are not only misleading, they are simply wrong. But it also means that
Muslim influence is not liable to help besieged Christendom against its oldest enemy.

Attached: 220px-Simone_Weil_1921.jpg (220x203, 10K)

Other urls found in this thread:

aaargh.vho.org/fran/livres2/PardesEng.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Laws_of_Noah
hcef.org/862-st-barbara-of-aboud/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Influence is not liable to help besieged Christendom against its oldest enemy.
Only recently did the Wahabi sect with its rejection of pilgrimages to local shrines
(ziyara) and of venerating saints, with its ‘strict monotheism’ arise, with its turn towards Judaic
tendency. The Wahabis aren’t friends of Jews, but neither were the forerunners of Christian
Zionists.

Within one Christian doctrine, the tension between Jerusalem and Athens, between
Creation and Manifestation, between Judeo-Christianity and Hellene-Christianity found different
solutions East and West. Even before the schism, the Eastern Church preferred the Hellene
tendency with its esoteric features and Christ the God, the Western Church preferred the Judaic
tendency of exoteric cult and Christ the Man. The East preferred Spirit, the West preferred
Matter within the same Orthodoxy. The schism of East and West strengthened these opposing
tendencies, and Western Christendom, disengaged from its spiritual roots in the East, moved
towards greater materialism.

But this was not enough for the Calvinists, who practically re-created Judaism without
Jews. They turned to the Old Testament, legitimised usury, renounced the Virgin, rejected the
Church and sacraments, caused genocides galore and brought forth predatory capitalism. If one
wants to be positive about it, one can identify the Judaic tendency with freedom: freedom from
society restrictions, freedom from morality, freedom for the strong to oppress the weak, and
ultimately, freedom from God. Its kingdom of freedom was but a temporary stage on the way to
enslavement of uprooted man, but freedom-seekers did not understand that. Eventually the
Judaic tendency won the day in the West by creating de-spiritualised, profaned world ready for
the Judaic church of Mammon.

The battle was not over: the Judaic tendency was attacked from the left by Communists
and from the right by National Socialists. We live today in the aftermath of the great victory of
the Judeo-Mammonites over these rebels, but let us look back. Right and Left against Mammon For over a hundred years, right-wingers were certain that Communism is a Jewish plot.
Communism is Judaism, they stated, and stressed Jewish origin of Karl Marx and of the Russian
revolutionaries. But Judaism is a cult of Chosen-ness, of inherent difference between an evil
shard and a good spark. Christianity is the belief in inherent goodness of Man. Ontologically,
Communists are Christians, not Jews.

If Mammonite neo-liberalism is an atheist reading of Jewish attitudes within the Gentile
world, epitomised in ‘Man to Man is a Wolf’, communism is an atheist reading of the Christian
attitude of ‘Love thy Neighbour as Thyself’. The Russian Communists’ slogan was ‘Man to Man
is a Friend, Comrade and Brother’. Indeed, the Communists were traditionally hostile to the
Jews. Not only Marx wrote: “Their God is greed”, Rosa Luxemburg referred to the Gentile
leaders as ‘shabbesgoyim’ (‘Jewish slaves’, a favourite insult of antisemites), Lenin expelled the
Jewish party of Bund from his Bolsheviks, and Simone Weil’s opinions are well known for
being as anti-Jewish as anybody’s. There was a strong anti-Jewish current represented by
Proudhon; Stalin and Trotsky were almost equally anti-Jewish.

Borrowings by Russian Communists from their Orthodox Christian heritage were
common. Joseph Stalin studied theology, and his rhetoric remained Christian; he often used the
anti-Jewish theology of St Paul and quoted the New Testament. This was noted by many
authors. There was a Judaising tendency in Communism, as there is in Christianity. There are no
ideas so vile that can't be turned into goodness; there are no ideas so good that can't be turned
into vileness. The Judaic tendency within communism promoted modernity, uprooting,
homogenisation, centralisation, the Imperial vertical of power and the Church-like qualities of
the Communist Party and many others.

Bertrand Russel noted in 1920: “Bolshevism is …. an aristocracy insolent and
unfeeling, composed of Americanised Jews. Russians are a nation of artists, down to the simplest
peasant; the aim of the Bolsheviks is to make them industrial and as Yankee as possible. Imagine
yourself governed in every detail by a mixture of Sidney Webb and Rufus Isaacs, and you will
have a picture of modern Russia.”

They also fought against the Russian Orthodox Church and caused it much suffering.
This war against the Church was an element of modernity, Communist or not. In nonCommunist France, the churches were robbed of their properties; the beautiful paintings and
utensils were removed and sold to the highest bidder at the beginning of the 20th century. In nonCommunist Norway the unique stavkyrkor (wooden churches) were burned in the 19th century to free the land for other use; in Communist Russia they ruined uncounted medieval churches,
venerated icons, treasures of the spirit accumulated over hundreds of years. In Russia as
elsewhere, the struggle with the Church caused a break with the past and promoted the Nomad
Civilisation of Jacques Attali.

Jacques Attali, the Jewish banker, called for creation of the New Nomad, a man ‘free
from all limitations – free from national roots, cultural traditions, political passions, constant
family ties’ and of Nomad Civilisation of men connected by financial relations only. In the
Soviet Union, there was a tendency to uproot Man, and it was quite successful: a New Soviet
Man was not a commercial animal as that of Attali’s dream, but he lived in a modern high rise,
lost his traditions, never went to church, and he was as alienated from nature as his Western
counterpart.

Thus the critique of Marx by Simone Weil was correct: elimination of commercialism in
the communist society did not solve the problems created by uprooting. Communism helped to
educate people, provided them with security, housing, work, gave them free time to think and
act, but its weak theology was one of the reasons for its undoing. Godless philosophy necessarily
drifts into the Judaic tendency with its Absent God, away from Christian feeling of God Alive.
Without Christ, the idea of brotherly love lost its basis, and the elites were tempted to accept the
‘Man to Man is Wolf’ attitude.

Alienation from Nature was connected to surrender of the traditional cult of Theotokos,
Our Lady, for Her image signified Love of Man to Earth in Christian societies. The capitalist
breakthrough of North Europe was based on elimination of the cult of Our Lady, as it allowed
man to substitute Love to Earth by Domination over Earth. The Western power with its
predatory relationship to Earth, Nature and Man was stronger than its Earth-loving victims, like a
cannibal is strongest in the besieged city. The Russian Communists went the same way, they
gave up their love for Mother Earth in order to succeed in the competition with the US. Without
Christ and His Mother, the Russians survived the armed challenge of the West but eventually
lost the ideological war.

from "Pardes" by Israel Shamir

bump

Eh, I want to reject the Old Testament as much as the next guy, but is the psychotic and pessimistic ways of the gnostics really the only way to do it?

Attached: t'es sérieux.png (500x338, 44K)

This is from a book written by an Israeli Jew who renounced Judaism and converted to eastern orthodox Christianity, he is not advocating Gnosticism.

I am completely ignorant on this topic, though I find it interesting. I fear that the thread is going to go to archive without being seriously engaged.

this is the source, it's pretty good

aaargh.vho.org/fran/livres2/PardesEng.pdf