Author’s Note: I was shown a far-right propaganda post online which attempts to project modern notions of ‘White Supremacy’ backwards thousands of years into cultures that have no association with such ahistorical and pseudoscientific concepts! The far-right has become ‘efficient’ at issuing sound bites which are simple, straightforward, compelling and which remove the requirement for their intended audience to ‘think’. My article below replaces that need to ‘think’ by providing in depth and accurate academic knowledge. The far-right ‘lies’ to its audience. This stems from Adolf Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ - within which he advocates ‘lying’ about everything as a means to leverage political advantage, control and influence. The Sanskrit terms ‘Shakya’, ‘Buddha’ and ‘Aryan’, etc, have absolutely NOTHING to do with the modern notions underpinning the ideology of ‘White Supremacy’! As the average person lacks the specialist knowledge required to navigate this complex territory in the West – the far-right ideologues deceitfully take advantage of this fact and attempt to fill the vacuum with inaccurate, misunderstood or misleading information! As the saying goes - ‘The price of freedom is eternal vigilance!’ ACW (25.6.2023) Shakya (Sanskrit-Pali) = शाक्य Shakya (Chinese) = 释迦 (Shi Jia) Shakya is the Sanskrit name of the high-ranking clan of the historical Buddha who lived in Northeast India. The historical Buddha was of the ‘Warrior and King’ (Kshatri) Caste – which was (in the era he was born) the highest of the various Hindu castes. Eventually, five Hindu castes would formulate with the ‘Brahmins’ being the highest caste and the ‘Warriors and Kings’ being the second highest. Far-right (anti-intellectual) ideologues attempt to subordinate material fact to their own ‘inverted’ (ideological) machinations – in support of ‘White Supremacist’ mythology. For instance, such attempts often perpetuate the false assertion that the Sanskrit name ‘Shakya’ equates to non-Indian designation of ‘Scythia’ or ‘Scythian’. This is an attempt to superimpose an imagined ‘Greek’ racial identity into North India and thus claim that ‘Europe’ (rather than ethnic Indians) are responsible for the development of Indian thought. This myth is easily dispelled through a brief moment of research: Hindi term for ‘Scythia’ = सीथिया Sanskrit term ‘Shakya’ = शाक No structural connection between these two (written) Indian terms. Chinese term for ‘Shakya’ = 释迦 (Shi Jia) Chinese term for ‘Scythia’ = 斯基泰 (Si Ji Tai) No structural connection between these two (written) Chinese terms. If there was some ‘hidden’ conceptual unifier between these two terms (i.e., ‘Shakya’ - ‘Scythia’) – then it is logical to assume that this identity would be transmitted through the word structures formed within the same language development. Furthermore, as the early Chinese scholars would be looking for a ‘connection’ between these foreign terms should such a connection exist (as a means to generate ‘clarity’ of translation and transliteration) - it also follows that the Chinese ideograms chosen would indicate this supposed ‘connection’ - but the chosen Chinese ideograms clearly do NOT record any such connectivity. Therefore, simply based upon the objective assessment of Sanskrit, Hindi and Chinese word structure (and meaning transmission) – there is NO connection between the non-Indian name ‘Scythia’ and the Indian designation of ‘Shakya’. In other words, the historical Buddha was NOT ‘Greek’, was not ‘White’ and his ideology was NOT simply a version of Greek thought! Other far right myths involve the following terms: Aryan (Hindi-Sanskrit) = आर्य Aryan (Chinese) = 雅利安人 (Ya Li An Ren) Indeed, the Chinese transliteration literally means the ‘People whose culture imposes ‘Refinement, Benefit and Peace’ upon society! This alludes to those Indians who followed the teachings of the Vedas – and more to the point - could understand the language these teachings were recorded within. The Scriptures could be understood, verbally (or inwardly) recited, and could be read by the Brahmin Priests (although originally these texts were transmitted only by word of mouth and were ‘remembered’ only by a chosen few from one generation to the next – at a time when reading and writing was very rare)! As this meditative and reflective culture disciplined the mind and body – society was externally and inwardly ‘well-ordered’. Those who applied these teachings were renowned for their great, accumulated wisdom which made them ‘noble’ in the eyes of their peers. Those who followed the ‘Vedas’ were ennobled by these teachings (as opposed to those who did NOT follow these teachings) and were further ‘ennobled’ when a personal wisdom was accrued (above and beyond the Scriptures) through self-cultivation. Although the Buddha rejected the Vedas – he made use of the term ‘Aryan’ to refer to his followers of the Dharma who had achieved a similar understanding as his own (as the Buddha was illiterate – his teachings were passed on only through the agency of ‘memory’ and public ‘recital’). This term was applied freely to any member of the Indian caste system and broader society (including ‘Untouchables’) and therefore had NO association with skin colour or ‘Whiteness’. Strictly speaking, within its narrow Hindu usage – the term ‘Aryan’ – refers to someone who can ‘speak’ and ‘understand’ the language of the Vedas. Those who could not understand this language were excluded from this thought community and were referred to as ‘Anaryan’. As there were people with a light skin tone who were referred to as ‘Anaryan’ - this proves that the term ‘Aryan’ did not (and does not) refer to a ‘White’ skin colour. Buddha (Sanskrit-Pali) = बुद्ध Buddha (Chinese) = 佛 (Fo) The left-hand particle of the Chinese ideogram is ‘亻’ (ren2) which refers to a ‘person’. The right-hand particle is ‘弗’ (fu2) - which breaks down into the following three elements: 1) 弓 (gong1) = A bow – an arched (stringed) weapon used in hunting and warfare. 2) 丨(gun3) = To pass through – travel up and down – a unifier as in ‘number one’. 3) 丿(pie3) = To raise one’s head – to move from right to left (as in a ‘dropping’ stroke) - to abandon and discard that which is not needed. As the ancient scholars of China had to translate the unfamiliar Indian Buddhist terms very carefully – they often sought the guidance of visiting Indian Buddhist monks. This was a process of transmission that developed from the 1st century CE onward – and was still ongoing during the 5th and 6th centuries CE and beyond. These scholars were told EXACTLY what Buddhist terms meant and if they did not know – they would wait patiently for guidance. Eventually correct knowledge would arrive. This is why the original ‘meaning’ of the Sanskrit terms used within Buddhist ideology is clearly retained within the body of traditional Chinese ideograms. In the case of ‘Buddha’ (佛) is defined as someone (亻) who has mastered a complex art (such as ‘archery’ [弓] - which the Buddhist Suttas state the Buddha did study as a youth) - through which an ‘arrow’ (丨) is skilfully affixed. Then an appropriate effort is applied so that the two ends of the bow are drawn (taut) down toward the centre - and the ‘arrow’ is let fly so that it directly ‘hits’ (丿) the intended target. In the Buddhist Suttas – the Buddha describes self-cultivation as being similar to stringing an instrument. If the strings are too loose – the correct note cannot be produced. If the strings are too ‘tight’ - then the strings might ‘snap’ when played! Self-cultivation, therefore, requires the ‘correct’ amount of effort so that the required result is achieved. As the Buddha ‘knows’ this is the objective – and ‘knows’ how to achieve this objective – this correct ‘knowing’ is two-fold. There is the ‘knowing’ of the correct path and its methodology – and there is the ‘knowing’ that the following of this correct path bestows upon the earnest seeker. Although the Sanskrit term ‘बुद्’ (Aryan) is ‘phonetical’ - like the Western alphabet - no real internal structure regarding inherent (or historical) meaning can be gleamed from the dissecting of its constituent parts. For that meaning it is the corresponding Chinese ideogram that is used. As can be seen, basic dictionary definitions do not convey the full or intended meaning of the Sanskrit term ‘Buddha’ (बुद्). This word is said to be derived from the Sanskrit term ‘बुत’ (But) doubled – whilst also being related to the doubled term ‘बुद्ध’ (Buddh): a) बुत (But) = Idol and mistress. This implies a correct spiritual positioning (such as that implied through a religious icon or statue) and the corresponding social influence such an inner orientation generates in the outer world (similar as the power a strong woman accrues through her scheming and planning). b) बुद्ध (Buddh) = The ability to ‘understand’ - and to apply that understanding in the outer world. This suggests a perfect integration of ‘methodology’ and ‘application’ - of ‘theory’ and ‘objective’. The Sanskrit term ‘Buddha’ (बुद्) is generally taken to mean: i) Consciously ‘aware’. ii) Wise. iii) Intelligent. iv) Transcendentally ‘awake’. The Chinese ideogram 佛 (Fo) also suggests that a ‘bent’ arrow’ (丿) must be made ‘straight’ by tightly binding it with an already correct arrow (丨) - until the task is completed. There is a peculiar negative connotation associated with the Chinese term suggesting the term ‘no’ is being implied. This is not surprising as the Buddha taught exclusively by explaining what enlightenment ‘is NOT’ - and not what enlightenment IS’! Nirvana, therefore, is the state of mind, body and environment generated when greed, hatred and delusion is no longer present in the mind and body of the practitioner. Although the far-right ideologues cherry-pick to attempt to make material reality match their deficient academic model – the spurious ‘linguistic’ associations that may (or may not) exist between ancient Indian words and words deriving from other cultures – does NOT automatically correspond to those different ethnic groupings sharing any systemic cultural link with India or its spiritual practices. Apparent linguistic associations can be found throughout the different and diverse cultures of the world – but this fact in itself does NOT mean that Yoga, Hinduism, Jainism or Buddhism or any cultural construct - existed (or originated) in these non-Indian places. What this phenomenon might suggest is that humanity once possessed a common (unified) culture before it diversified into the ethnic-specific variations observable today.
0 Comments
The 14th Dalai Lama was brought up in a Potala Palace (in Lhasa) that deliberately harboured Nazi German War Criminals. He was at the top of a ruthless 'Lamaist' hierarchy that raped, tortured and murdered the oppressed Serf population! These Nazi War Criminals had escaped from British POW Camps in India and had taken refuge in a Tibet that had been 'friendly' to these racists from Hitler's Germany! In return for their compliance in 'lying' about a forceful takeover of Tibet by the fabled 'Chinese' (the remit was that the 'Chinese' behaved like 'Nazi Germans') these Nazi German 'War Criminals' would be granted 'Immunity' from Prosecution! Indeed, they would write books (in English) and would receive immediate US Citizenship for their assistance in this grand scheme of deception! Part of this façade has involved the 14th Dalai Lama being presented to the West as a ‘Christ-like’ figure worthy of respect and worship! India has been part and parcel of this process of ‘lying’ and ‘misrepresenting’ China, its culture and its religious traditions! The US anti-intellectualism employed by the CIA was that 'China' had 'invaded' an integral part of its 'own' territory! By the time of the 1949 Socialist Revolution in China – and the 1959 'Liberation' of the Tibetan region - Tibet had been a part of geographical China for over a thousand years - with millions of Tibetans living throughout Southwest China after expanding into China proper! When the capitalist-friendly 'Nationalist' government ruled China between 1912-1949 - the US was absolutely fine with Tibet being an integral part of China! It was only when the anti-capitalist 'Socialist' government was brought to power in 1949 that a right-wing US (Truman) government had a problem with the new arrangement. This was when the myth-making machine chugged into action! When the ethnic Han (Chinese) Buddhist Master - Xu Yun (1840-1959) - visited the Tibetan region during the late 1880s - he was shocked and appalled by the 'decadence' he encountered! Many 'apologists' for Western imperialism tried to suggest that this movement away from the Vinaya Discipline (as laid down by the Buddha) was a necessary part of the Buddhist adaptation to the Tibetan environment, but the problem with this thinking is the 'Lamaism' is NOT Buddhism per se, but rather a ruthless manifestation of a system of Buddhist totalitarianism! These so-called 'High Lamas' were nothing but militarised Landlords who possessed numerous wives and concubines and passed on their vast estates to their children! Anyone who dared to question or challenge their authority often ended up having their eyeballs publicly 'gouged out' with a spoon! This was the corrupt system that Adolf Hitler was very interested in - as he was obsessed with the bizarre idea that the racially pure 'Aryans' had originated within Tibet - and that the naturally 'racist' high Lamas were somehow 'descendants' of these racially pure ancestors who had spread to Germany! This explains why numerous Nazi German archaeological expeditions were sent to the region - and why the young 14th Dalai Lama was ingratiated with Hitler's emissaries! These 'Aryan' representatives would soon be replaced by their CIA equivalents - as the Americans spirited the Dalai Lama away to India and a fabricated story of a 'Chinese invasion' was concocted! This falsehood is now masquerading as the 'norm' in the West - with only people across China (including the Tibetan region) - truly understanding the reality of the situation! The corruption of the 14th Dalai Lama is well-known – but the US follows a policy of never presenting his image in a negative light! He has been friends with mass murderers, has been involved with the hacking of US defence computers and has been caught demanding that everyone follows a vegetarian diet – whilst being caught ordering plates of ham sandwiches at the various five-star hotels he and his entourage frequents! Although he is supposed to be an impoverished Buddhist monk – it has been revealed that he receives a yearly allowance of $200,000 from the US govement! This maverick behaviour all fits in with the ‘Bourgeois’ (‘Christianised’) Buddhism he peddles in the West! Anyone can access the Buddhist Vinaya Discipline – even the far more liberal ‘Tibetan’ version – and see that the 14th Dalai Lama does NOT adhere to this very strict psychological and physical discipline that involves the upholding of hundreds of rules! Yet again his hypocrisy and corruption has been displayed in his ‘amorous’ behaviour (forbidden by the Vinaya Discipline) which involves him insisting upon ‘kissing’ those he meets – but only involving the touching of tongues!
Author’s Note: The book entitled ‘The German Ideology’ was written by Marx and Engels around 1846 – but could not be published at that time (despite attempting to do so) for various reasons (indeed, it is remarkable to consider that this text was not eventually published until 1930). As history unfolded - and world events took shape - this manuscript became forgotten and was even gnawed by mice! Forty years later in 1886 (and three-years after the death of Marx in 1883) - Engels rediscovered this very important manuscript and penned a mature overview of it entitled ‘Feuerbach and End of Classic German Philosophy’ (from which two quotes are extracted in this essay). As ‘Buddhism’ and ‘Ancient India’ are mentioned – this material can be added to the ever-growing body of research data related to Marx and Engels regarding this subject. Although during the 1800s the ‘Theosophy’ movement was busy reinventing Eastern religious thinking and practice in its own (Eurocentric) image, it is important to remember that Buddhist Enlightenment is not ‘god’, the Buddha was not ‘Jesus’ and the ‘mind’ does not (and cannot) generate the material world through the power of its thought! Within the Buddhist teachings the mind is impermanent and only (temporarily) exists whilst a living (human) body is in-touch with the material environment it inhabits – via the six sense-organs perceiving the corresponding six sense-objects. When this interaction is broken, the mind ceases to exist and therefore does not (and cannot) pre-exist the physical conception of the individual body - or post-exist the death of that body, etc. Probably through the correct influence of Karl Koppen, Marx and Engels appear never to have fallen into the ‘Theosophy’ trap which has done so much to re-shape Asian Buddhism into its Western (Bourgeois) equivalent! The historical (Indian) Buddha placed the physical universe as the basis from which all existence evolves. It is only in the Bourgeois appropriation of Buddhism that the ‘mind’ becomes an all-knowing and all-conquering ‘god’ that creates the material world upon a whim! This is nothing but an ‘inverted’ myth which millions of people in the West dedicate themselves to following generation after generation – as it has become a very lucrative aspect of consumer capitalism! Marx and Engels, whilst recognising the existence and importance of Buddhism, nevertheless, never quite manage to include it in the same subject as theological religion. Of course, although NOT a religion in the conventional sense, Buddhism does sometimes serve that function for individuals and communities, and so whilst being distinctive and useful to the ideology of Marx and Engels, its religious associations can never quite be fully ignored either! ACW (20.1.2023) ‘If Feuerbach wishes to establish a true religion upon the basis of an essentially materialist conception of nature, that is the same as regarding modern chemistry as true alchemy. If religion can exist without its god, alchemy can exist without its philosopher’s stone. By the way, there exists a very close connection between alchemy and religion. The philosopher’s stone has many godlike properties and the Egyptian-Greek alchemists of the first two centuries of our era had a hand in the development of Christian doctrines, as the data given by Kopp and Berthelot have proved. Feuerbach’s assertion that “the periods of humanity are distinguished only by religious changes” is decidedly false. Great historical turning-points have been accomplished by religious changes only so far as the three world religions which have existed up to the present – Buddhism, Christianity and Islam – are concerned. The old tribal and national religions which arose spontaneously, did not proselytise and lost all their power of resistance as soon as the independence of the tribe or people was lost.’ Friedrich Engels: Feuerbach and End of Classical German Philosophy (1886), Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels Selected Works (In One Volume), Lawrence and Wishart, Third Edition, (1973), Page 602 - (Entire Article Pages 584-622) - First Edition (Progress Publishers) 1968 – USSR ‘We will now in addition deal only briefly with religion, since the latter stands furthest away from material life and seems to be most alien to it. Religion arose in very primitive times from erroneous, primitive conceptions of men about their own nature and external nature surrounding them. Every ideology, however, once it has arisen, develops in connection with the given concept-material, and develops this material further; otherwise, it would not be an ideology, that is, occupation with thoughts as with independent entities, developing independently and subject only to their own laws. That the material life conditions of the persons inside whose heads this thought process goes on in the last resort determine the course of this process remains of necessity unknown to these persons, for otherwise there would be an end to all ideology. These original religious nations, therefore, which in the main are common to each group of kindred peoples, develop, after the group separates, in a manner peculiar to each people, according to conditions of life falling to their lot. For a number of groups of peoples, and particularly for the Aryans (so-called Indo-Europeans), this process has been shown in detail by comparative mythology. The gods thus fashioned within each people were national gods, whose domain extended no farther than the national territory which they were to protect; on the other side of its boundaries other gods held undisputed sway. They could continue to exist, in imagination, only as long as the nation existed; they fell with its fall. The Roman world empire, the economic conditions of whose origin we do not need to examine here, brought about this downfall of the old nationalities. The old national gods decayed, even those of the Romans, which also were patterned to suit only narrow confines of the city of Rome. The need to complement the world empire by means of a world religion was clearly revealed in the attempts made to provide in Rome recognition and altars for all the foreign gods to the slightest degree respectable alongside of the indigenous ones. But a new world religion is not to be made in this fashion, by imperial decree. The new world religion, Christianity, had already quietly come into being, out of a mixture of generalised Oriental, particularly Jewish, theology, and vulgarised Greek, particularly Stoic philosophy.’
Friedrich Engels: Feuerbach and End of Classical German Philosophy (1886), Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels Selected Works (In One Volume), Lawrence and Wishart, Third Edition, (1973), Page 618 - (Entire Article Pages 584-622) - First Edition (Progress Publishers) 1968 – USSR |
AuthorAdrian Chan-Wyles PhD - Political Commissar and BMA (UK) Historian & Researcher. Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
|