It may strike the reader as strange, and indeed somewhat ridiculous, to read that Óðinn, the Norse god, is in my family tree, or any family tree for that matter. This was also my initial reaction, and if taken at face value, the idea of supernatural beings mating with humans could be enough to completely discredit paganism as a serious and beneficial spiritual practice. After all, as I have already explained, the gods ought to be considered not as physical beings, but as forces of nature, such as one would consider heat, gravity and electricity among others.

A brief background regarding my ancestry:

My surname (Apap) has enigmatic origins. It was originally De Apapis, which may come from the Dia Papi (through the Father, IE through God) but I can’t be sure of this at the present time. The progenitor of my line, Leonardo De Apapis, was a Notary (essentially a lawyer) who had a son, Salvatore. Salvatore married leonara De Nasi, a member of an old Sicilian aristocratic family that also descends from the Jewish King David (Nasi means “Prince” in Hebrew). Though they undoubtedly had some Jewish ancestry, they were predominantly European.

The De Nasis had genetic ties to the De La Porte family, who were Normans who were Governors of Argos in Greece. The De La Portes descendant from Heinrich VII, King of Sicily, through his bastard son Richard, who was made the Count of Chieti in Italy. Henry VII’s ancestors on his mother’s side were Dukes of Austria, mostly named Leopold.

The first Leopold in this line married Agnes, daughter of Henry IV of the Holy Roman Empire. Henry IV was descended from various Kings and nobles, most notable and historically significant of which was Rollo, first Norman King of France. Many will know of Rollo through the “Vikings” TV  show. Rollo was descended from many petty Kings of the Far North, though I will spare the details here. The pictures of my family tree will be shown below. Some of these Kings are verified historically, some are semi-mythical or unattested archaeologically, but trace back to none other than Oðinn himself.

Lengthy background aside, what does this mean?

Some wish to claim that the presence of Óðinn in such family trees is evidence that a historical Óðinn genuinely existed despite the evidence which suggests that Óðinn, at least in the sense of physical being, is allegorical. Óðinn is present in so many family trees and across such a wide geographical area (all around Scandinavia and Northern Germany) that to suggest Óðinn genuinely conceived of so many physical sons would be to claim he procured an entire harem of women and rotated between them as he traveled around Scandinavia as some kind of promiscuous gypsy.

The supernatural, metaphysical phenomenon which are symbolized by the gods should not be narrowly defined by their physical representation in our folklore and myth, but these motifs and physical ideas about the metaphysical should merely be seen as tools through which to communicate absolute truths. In the case of Óðinn, as I have explained numerous times, we find the concept of an enduring ancestral soul, or mind.

The proto Indo European term “Óð” can be loosely translated as “mind” or consciousness, a “Holy Spirit” if you will. Similar to the Hindu ritual purposes of Soma, the Norse constructed a spiritual drink known as Óðroerir, a drink that inspired great works of poetry and praise, the term being loosely translated to “stirrer of the spirit”.

Ergo, when a family line could be traced back no further, the addition of Óðinn as an ancestor should be thought of as a means of summarizing all of the unknown ancestors that came before; in a sense, they are all Óðinn because they are all of the same spirit and blood, the same Óð.

That’s all for now. Remember to Hail Oðinn!

Ancestry in detail (for those interested)

It’s in reverse order, so I’m sorry for any confusion. Topmost image are more recent ancestors.

“Accordingly, in the original cycle of Aryan civilizations, both Eastern and Western, there is not the smallest trace of divine figures being so concerned with mankind as to come near to pursuing them in order to gain their adherence and to “save” them. An Aryan mind has too much respect for other people, and its sense of its own dignity is too pronounced to allow it to impose its own ideas upon others, even when it knows that its ideas are correct.”


The spiritual doctrine of Buddhism can be traced back to Nepal, circa 5th century BC, pioneered by Gautama Buddha, a man born in the Sātiya caste, an Aryan warrior aristocracy. Buddha’s ancestors were of Indo-European origin and Julius Evola briefly expounds aspects of Buddhist teachings which align the doctrine with the Aryan character. The qualities of Buddhism, apart from merely its creator’s descent, that are identified as Aryan qualities are thus:

1. Spiritual eliteism; unwillingness to convert others, rather to be sought out not to seek disciples as Christians do.

2. The 32 major physical qualities and 80 minor qualities of the Buddha that determine his eligibility for Buddhahood, demonstrating his high-born traits.

3. Appeasement to the warrior instinct. Buddha is described as a “raging bull” and with a mind of a warrior. Buddha belonged to the warrior caste of early Aryan society.

4. Anti-egalitarian, refusal to expound Siddhas (miracles) to ordinary people.

5. Essentially non-theistic; Nietzschean and meritocratic doctrine.

The Aryan-ness of the Doctrine of Awakening, Julius Evola


We have yet to say something of the “Aryan-ness” of the Buddhist doctrine. Our use of the term Aryan in connection with this doctrine is primarily justified by direct reference to the texts. The term ariya (Skt.: ārya), which in fact means “Aryan,” recurs throughout the canon. The path of awakening is called Aryan-ariya magga: the four fundamental truths are Aryan ariya-saccāni; the mode of knowledge is Aryan-ariya-naya; the teaching is called Aryan (particularly that which considers the contingency of the world’) and is, in turn, addressed to the āriyā; the doctrine is spoken of as accessible and intelligible, not to the common crowd, but only to the ariya. The term ariya has sometimes been translated as “saint.” This, however, is an incomplete translation; it is even discordant when we consider the notable divergence between what is concerned and all that “saintliness” means to a Western man. Nor is the translation of ariya as “noble” or “sublime” any more satisfactory. They are all later meanings of the word, and they do not convey the fullness of the original nor the spiritual, aristocratic, and racial significance that, nevertheless, is largely preserved in Buddhism. This is why Orientalists, such as Rhys Davids and Woodward, have maintained that it is better not to translate the term at all, and they have left ariya wherever it occurs in the texts, either as an adjective or as a noun meaning a certain class of individuals. In the texts of the canon the ariya are the Awakened Ones, those who have achieved Liberation and those who are united to them since they understand, accept, and follow the ariya Doctrine of Awakening: It is necessary, however, that we should emphasize the Aryan-ness of the Buddhist doctrine for various reasons, In the first place, we must anticipate those who will put forward the argument of Asiatic exclusiveness, saying that Buddhism is remote from “our” traditions and “our” races. We have to remember that behind the various caprices of modern historical theories, and as a more profound and primordial reality, there stands the unity of blood and spirit of the white races who created the greatest civilizations both of the East and West, the Iranian and Hindu as well as the ancient Greek and Roman and the Germanic. Buddhism has the right to call itself Aryan both because it reflects in great measure the spirit of common origins and since it has preserved important parts of a heritage that, as we have already said, Western man has little by little forgotten, not only by reason of involved processes of intermarriage, but also since he himself-to a far greater extent than the Eastern Aryans-has come under foreign influences. particularly in the religious field. As we have pointed out, Buddhist asceticism, when certain supplementary elements have been removed, is truly “classical” in its clarity, realism, precision, and firm and articulate structure; we may say it reflects the noblest style of the ancient Aryo-Mediterranean world. Furthermore, it is not only a question of form. The ascesis proclaimed by Prince Siddhattha is suffused throughout with an intimate congeniality and with an accentuation of the intellectual and Olympian element that is the mark of Platonism, Neoplatonism, and Roman Stoicism. Other points of contact are to be found where Christianity has been rectified by a transfusion of Aryan blood that had remained comparatively pure-that is to say, in what we know as German mysticism: there is Meister Eckhart’s sermon on detachment, on Abgeschiedenheit, and his theory of the “noble mind,” and we must not forget Tauter and Silesius, To insist here, as in every other field of thought, on the antithesis between East and West is pure dilettantism. The real contrast exists in the first place between concepts of a modern kind and those of a traditional kind, whether the latter are Eastern or Western; and secondly, between the real creations of the Aryan spirit and blood and those which, in East and West alike, have resulted from the admixture of non-Aryan influences. As Dahlke has justly said, “Among the principal ways of thought in ancient times, Buddhism can best claim to be of pure Aryan origin.”‘ This is true also more specifically. Although we can apply the term Aryan as a generalization to the mass of Indo-European races as regards their common origin (the original homeland of such races, the ariyānem-vaējō, according to the memory consciously preserved in the ancient Iranian tradition, was a hyperborean region or, more generally, northwestern),’ yet, later, it became a designation of caste. Ārya stood essentially for an aristocracy opposed, both in mind and body, not only to obscure, bastard, “demoniacal” races among which must be included the Kosalian and Dravidian strains found by the Hyperboreans in the Asiatic lands they conquered, but also, more generally, to that substratum that corresponds to what we would probably call today the proletarian and plebeian masses born in the normal way to serve, and that in India as in Rome were excluded from the bright cults characteristic of the higher patrician, warrior, and priestly castes. Buddhism can claim to be called Aryan in this more particular social sense also, notwithstanding the attitude, of which we shall have more to say later, that it adopted toward the castes of those times. The man who was later known as the Awakened One, that is, the Buddha, was the Prince Siddhattha. According to some, he was the son of a king; according to others, at least of the most ancient warrior nobility of the Sākiya race, proverbial for its pride: there was a saying, “Proud as a Sākiya.”5 This race claimed descent, like the most illustrious and ancient Hindu dynasties, from the so-called solar race-sūrya vamsa-and from the very ancient king Ikśvāku.6 “He, of the solar race,” one reads of the Buddha.’ He says so himself: “I am descended from the solar dynasty and I was born a Sākiya,”8 and by becoming an ascetic who has renounced the world he vindicates his royal dignity, the dignity of an Aryan king.” Tradition has it that his person appeared as “a form adorned with all the signs of beauty and surrounded by a radiant aureole.”10 To a sovereign who meets him and does not know who he is, he immediately gives the impression of an equal: “Thou hast a perfect body, thou art resplendent, well born, of noble aspect, thou hast a golden colour and white teeth, thou art strong. All the signs that thou art of noble birth are in thy form, all the marks of a superior man.”11 The most fearsome bandit, meeting him, asks himself in amazement who might be “this ascetic who comes alone with no companions, like a conqueror.” – And not only do we find in his body and hearing the characteristics of a khattiya, of a noble warrior of high lineage, but tradition has it that he was endowed with the “thirty-two attributes” that according to an ancient brahmanical doc trine were the mark of the “superior man”-mahāpurisa-lakkhana-for whom “exist only two possibilities, without a third”: either, to remain in the world and to become a cakkavatti, that is, a king of kings, a “universal sovereign,” the Aryan prototype of the “Lord of the Earth,” or else to renounce the world and to become perfectly awakened, the Sambuddha, “one who has removed the veil.'” Legend tells us that in a prophetic vision of a whirling wheel an imperial destiny was foretold for Prince Siddhattha; a destiny that, however, he rejected in favor of the other path.14 It is equally significant that, according to tradition, the Buddha directed that his funeral rite should not be that of an ascetic, but of an imperial sovereign, a cakkavatti.15 In spite of the attitude of Buddhism toward the caste problem, it was generally held that the bodhisatta, those who may one day become awakened, are never horn into a peasant or servile caste but into a warrior or Brāhman caste, that is to say, into the two purest and highest of the Aryan castes: indeed, in the conditions then prevailing, the warrior caste, the khattiya, was said to be the more favoured.’ This Aryan nobility and this warrior spirit are reflected in the Doctrine of Awakening itself. Analogies between the Buddhist ascesis and war, between the qualities of an ascetic and the virtues of a warrior and of a hero recur frequently in the canonical texts: “a struggling ascetic with fighting breast,” “an advance with a fighter’s steps,” “hero, victor of the battle,” “supreme triumph of the battle,” “favorable con ditions for the combat,” qualifies of “a warrior becoming to a king, well worthy of a king, attributes of a king,” etc.”-and in such maxims as: “to die in battle is better than to live defeated.” As for “nobility,” it is bound up here with aspiration toward superhumanly inspired liberty. “As a bull, I have broken every bond”-says Prince Siddhattha.19 “Having laid aside the burden, he has destroyed the bonds of existence”: this is a theme that continually recurs in the texts, and refers to one who follows the path they indicate. As “summits hard to climb, like solitary lions” the enlightened are described.2° The Awakened One is “a proud saint who has climbed the most sublime mountain peaks, who has penetrated the remotest forests, who has descended into profound abysses.”21 He himself said, “I serve no man, l have no need to serve any man”;22 an idea that recalls the “autonomous and immaterial race,” the race “without a king” (αβασίλεντος)-being itself kingly-a race that is also mentioned in the West 23 He is “ascetic, pure, the knower, free, sovereign.” These, which are frequent even in the oldest texts, are some of the attributes. not only of the Buddha, but also of those who travel along the same path. The natural exaggeration of some of these attributes does not alter their significance at least as symbols and indications of the nature of the path and ideal indicated by Prince Siddhattha, and of his spiritual race. The Buddha is an outstanding example of a royal ascetic; his natural counterpart in dignity is a sovereign who, like a Caesar, could claim that his race comprehended the majesty of kings as well as the sacred ness of the gods who hold even the rulers of men in their power 2 We have seen that the ancient tradition has this precise significance when it speaks of the essential nature of individuals who can only be either imperial or perfectly awakened. We are close to the summits of the Aryan spiritual world. A particular characteristic of the Aryan-ness of the original Buddhist teaching is the absence of those proselytizing manias that exist, almost without exception, in direct proportion to the plebeian and anti-aristocratic character of a belief. An Aryan mind has too much respect for other people, and its sense of its own dignity is too pronounced to allow it to impose its own ideas upon others, even when it knows that its ideas are correct. Accordingly, in the original cycle of Aryan civilizations, both Eastern and Western, there is not the smallest trace of divine figures being so con cerned with mankind as to come near to pursuing them in order to gain their adherence and to “save” them. The so-called salvationist religions-the Erlösungsreligionen, in German-make their appearance both in Europe and Asia at a later date, together with a lessening of the preceding spiritual tension, with a fall from Olympian consciousness and, not least, with influxes of inferior ethnic and social elements. That the divinities can do little for men, that man is fundamentally the artificer of his own destiny, even of his development beyond this world-this characteristic view held by original Buddhism demonstrates its difference from some later forms, especially of the Mahāyāna schools, into which infiltrated the idea of a power from on high busying itself with mankind in order to lead each individual to salvation. In point of method and teaching, in the original texts we see that the Buddha expounds the truth as he has discovered it, without imposing himself on anyone and without employing outside means to persuade or “convert.” “He who has eyes will see”-is a much repeated saying of the texts. “Let an intelligent man come to me”-we read26-“a man without a tortuous mind, without hypocrisy, an upright man: I will instruct him, I will expound the doctrine. If he follows the instruction, after a short while he himself will recognize, he himself will see, that thus indeed one liberates oneself from the bonds, the bonds, that is, of ignorance.” Here follows a simile of an infant freeing itself gradually from its early limitations; this image exactly corresponds to the Platonic simile of the expert midwife and the art of aiding births. Again: “I will not force you, as the potter his raw clay. By reproving I will instruct, and by urging you. He who is sound will endure.”27′ Besides, the original intention of Prince Siddhattha was, having once achieved his knowledge of truth, to communicate it to no one, not from ill-mindedness, but because he realized its profundity and foresaw that few would understand it. Having then recognized the existence of a few individuals of a nobler nature with clearer vision, he expounded the doctrine out of com passion, maintaining, however, his distance, his detachment, and his dignity. Whether disciples come to him or not, whether or not they follow his ascetic precepts, “always he remains the same.”28 This is his manner: “Know persuasion and know dissuasion; knowing persuasion and knowing dissuasion do not persuade and do not dissuade: expound only reality. “It is wonderful”-says another text30-“it is astonishing that no one exalts his own teaching and no one despises the teaching of another in an order where there are so many guides to show the doctrine.” This, too, is typically Aryan. It is true that the spiritual power that the Buddha possessed could not but show itself sometimes almost automatically, demanding immediate recognition. We read, for example, of the incident described as “the first footprint of the elephant,” where wise men and expert dialecticians wait for the Buddha at a ford seeking an opportunity to defeat him with their arguments, but when they see him they ask only to hear the doctrine;” or of another where, when the Buddha enters a discussion, his words destroy all opposition “like a furious elephant or a blazing fire.”32 There is the account of his former companions who, believing him to have left the road of asceticism, propose among themselves not to greet him, but who when immediately they see him go to meet him; and there is the story of the fierce bandit Angulimāla who is awed by the Buddha’s majestic figure. In any case, it is certain that the Buddha, in his Aryan superiority, always abstained from using indirect methods of persuasion and, in particular, never used any that appealed to the irrational, sentimental, or emotional element in a human being. This rule too is definite: “You must not, 0 disciples, show to laymen the miracle of the super-normal powers. He who does this is guilty of an offence of wrongdoing.” The individual is put on one side: “In truth, the noble sons declare their higher knowledge in such a manner, that they state the truth without any reference whatsoever to their own person.”’34 “Why is this?”-says the Buddha to one who has eagerly waited for a long time to see him–“He who sees the law sees me and he who sees me sees the law. In truth, by seeing the law I am seen and by seeing me the law is seen.”35 Being himself awakened. the Buddha wishes only to encourage an awakening in those who are capable of it: an awakening, in the first place, of a sense of dignity and of vocation, and in the second, of intellectual intuition. A man who is incapable of intuition, it is said, cannot approve.36 The noble miracle “conforming to the Aryan nature” (ariya-iddhi) as opposed to prodigies based on extranormal phenomena, and considered to be non-Aryan (anariya-iddhi) is concerned with this very point. The “miracle of the teaching” stirs the faculty of discernment and furnishes a new and accurate measure of all values;” the most typical of the canonical expressions for this is: ‘”There is this’-he understands-‘There is the common and there is the excellent, and there is a higher escape beyond this perception of the senses. “’38 Here is a characteristic passage describing the awakening of intuition: “His the disciple’s] heart suddenly feels pervaded with sacred enthusiasm and his whole mind is revealed pure, clear, shining as the luminous disc of the moon: and the truth appears to him in its completeness.'” This is the foundation of the only “faith,” of the only “right confidence” considered by the order of the Aryans, “an active confidence, rooted in insight, firm”; a confidence that “no penitent or priest, no god or devil, no angel nor anyone else in the world can destroy.”41’ Perhaps it is worth briefly discussing a final point. The fact that the Buddha, normally, does not appear in the Pāli texts as a supernatural being descended to earth to broadcast a “revelation,” but as a man who expounds a truth that he himself has seen and who indicates a path that he himself has trodden, as a man who, having himself crossed by his own unaided efforts” to the other bank of the river, helps others to cross over42-this fact must not lead us to make the figure of the Buddha too human. Even if we omit the Bodhisatta theory that so often suffers from infiltration of fabulous elements and that only came into being at a later period, the concept in the early texts of what is known as kolankola makes us seek in the Buddha the re-emergence of a luminous principle already kindled in preceding generations: this is an idea that agrees perfectly with what we are about to say on the historical significance of the Buddhist Doctrine of Awakening. In any ease, whatever his antecedents, it is extremely difficult to draw a line between what is human and what is not, when we are dealing with a being who has inwardly attained deathlessness (amata) and who is presented as the living incarnation of a law hound up with that which is transcendental and that can be “confined” by nothing-apariyā-panna. The question of race comes in here, too. If a being feels himself remote from metaphysical reality, then he will imagine any strength that he may acquire as a “grace,” knowledge will appear as “revelation” in its accepted meaning in the West since the time of the Hebrew prophets, and the announcer of a law may assume for him “di-vine” proportions rather than be justly regarded as one who has destroyed ignorance and who has become “awakened.” This separation from metaphysical reality masks the dignity and the spiritual level of a teaching and wraps the person of the teacher himself in an impenetrable fog. One thing is certain: ideas of “revelations” and of men-gods can only sound foreign to an Aryan spirit and to a “noble son” (kula-putta), particularly in periods when the mind of humanity had not yet entirely lost the memory of its own origins. This introduces us to the next chapter, where we shall say some-thing of the meaning and of the function of the doctrine of Prince Siddhattha in the general setting of the ancient Indo-Aryan world.




Hieronymous Bosch (c1450-1516) is a painter who captured my fascination several years ago. His oil paintings are a concoction of pseudo-religous imagery and in some cases disturbing depictions of an unveiled reality.

Many skeptics suggest that the works of Bosch are merely pschadelic-induced nonsense and that no particular attention was paid to any form of esotericism or symbolism when the works were created. I find this difficult to believe, considering Bosch’s prominent status in the secret society known as the Illustrious Brotherhood of Our Blessed Lady, an enigmatic fraternal organisation that I can find little information in regards to except for that the brotherhood existed to glorify the “Mother of God”, perhaps referring to Mary or a mother goddess from mythology; I find it impossible to determine which.

I will focus merely on the central panel of Bosch’s magnus opus, The Garden of Earthly Delights. The Garden of Earthly Delights is split in a triptych, the left panel focusing on creation and Eden, the perfect world before the fall of Man, the centre representing life after the fall and the right hand column representing the consequences of Earthly Delights, damnation.

The Fall of Man is a theme prevalent, to my knowledge, in all world religions in some form or another. Man is believed in all traditions to be a broken and weak creature, destroyed by our gravitation towards sinful behaviour which has become an increasing burden on our will to do good, which has become weakened through the passing of the ages and the movement of the sun into new constellations and the planet into the age of Kali.

Many people believe that chakras are merely a Hindu idea, but this is untrue. As I have meticulously demonstrated in previous article, chakras are referenced in Hermetic and Gnostic Christian traditions as well as Norse pre-Christian religion. Since Bosch was a member of distinguish esoteric society, Bosch would undoubtedly know what chakras were through his study of non-mainstream theology.

To briefly summarise chakras for the uninitiated, the body is full of energy which in Hinduism is known as prana. This prana travels through the body in pathways called nadis, of which there are many thousands. The points at which many nadis cross over one another are termed chakras, areas in which much prana travels. There are 7 bodily chakras.

Each chakra has a colour associated with it. There a few worth mentioning in this article. The root chakra, associate with base urges, is red; the solar plexus chakra, associated with will and passion, is yellow; the third eye, associate with openness and intellectual thought, is blue; the crown chakra, associated with enlightenment and god absorption, is violet.

The central panel of The Garden of Earthly Delights by Bosch prominently features the concept of chakras, symbolised by fruits of various colours.

Although there is far too much in this painting to cover in one short article, let me begin first by drawing attention to a curiosity: the presence of black people in the painting and their significance.

Interestingly and anachronistically, Bosch’s works including images of blacks, which is extremely interesting because exploration of sub-saharan Africa had barely begun in Bosch’s lifetime, and the existence of a Negroid race was not mainstream knowledge. In the painting, Bosch depicts blacks in a unifying, indentifiable fashion, either balancing a red fruit on the top of their head, usually a cherry, or tempting the other people to take one of the red fruits, as Satan is said to have done in the form of a serpent.

The works of Bosch in many ways, prima facie, seem to appease the black supremacist “Black Lives Matter”, Black Hebrew Israelite Messianic negro movement; they prima facie suggest that coloured people were galavanting around in medieval Europe, and that they were, if you will excuse my language, “Kangz n’ shiet”. This is, of course, not the case. It is, however, highly unusual that black people can be found on artwork from the 15th century.

Europeans have, however, known about the existence of black people for thousands of years, as referenced in this fragment by the ancient Greek philosopher Xenophanes, who lived in the 5th and 6th centuries BC:

“Ethiopians say that their gods are snubnosed and blackThracians that they are pale and red-haired.There is one god, greatest among gods and men, similar to mortals neither in shape nor in thought.”

As a learned and distinguished man, Bosch would have been well aware of the presence of blacks in literature from the ancient past, and would know of their theosophical tendencies and implication on European society as detailed in mythology.

The works of Hieronymous Bosch using symbolism acquired through his occult and esoteric study, likely through the Illustrious Brotherhood of Our Blessed Lady, were intended, rightly or wrongly to serve as the advertisement of a perception of what coloured people are and what Bosch believed they would do to society. It is my view that Bosch wishes to portray coloured people as instigators and the creators of a “Garden of Earthly Delights”, a hell on Earth in which sin and the Root Chakra are worshipped.

Allow me to briefly return to the subject of chakras. As I have referenced in earlier articles, coloured people in esotericism are often associated, rightly or wrongly with the root chakra and people “as black as pitch” are said to live in the lowest depth of the world tree, Yggsrasil in Norse religion.

I have picked four small segments of the larger painting to hone in on in detail, starting with this one:

Segment 1: The peacock woman

To reiterate my earlier point that the fruits symbolise chakras, it is my view that the red fruits, as well as being the root chakra, represents Eve’s original sin of eating the apple, the sin of greed.

In most instances in the painting, people are consuming red fruits as Eve did, but the black characters except for this instance are the only ones with apples on their heads, symbolise a mind ridden with avarice.

Notice then that when the black women who on other parts of the painting have root chakra dominated minds, IE those dominated by lust and avarice, hand the root chakra to the white women, a transformative process occurs: they have their root chakra minds replaced with a large blue peacock with yellow feathers. Yellow is the colour of the solar plexus chakra, meaning willpower, and blue represents the Third Eye chakra, symbolising high intellect (but not spirituality, spirituality is violet, more on that later).

The negro women can be seen holding the red fruits symbolising the root chakra for the white women to take and placing these red fruits on the heads of the white women, in my view fortelling the negrification of European culture and inevitable consequence, the worship of the root chakra we are seeing in the modern world as even white women become susceptible to the influence of coloured mannerism and cultural norms.

Segment 2: Yellow Fruits

Let’s move onto the next image. Women huddle around a large yellow fruit with blue petals on it, whilst a black woman stands with her hands on her hips, holding a red apple. Meanwhile, another figure to the right attempts to place a punnet of blue fruits on the head of the black woman.

As I said earlier, the black woman has a materialistic root chakra on her head. She also holds an apple, another red fruit, behind their back at the base of the spine, a blatant reference to the root chakra in its natural position. It is almost as if she is attempting to hide the fruit, a symbol of her primative and carnal instincts which may reflects Bosch’s view of blacks and their mannerisms, though this is a stretch.

Next to the black woman is a white person attempting to place a bunch of blue fruits on the head of the woman. Dark blue is the colour of the Third Eye chakra, symbolising intellect. This perhaps suggests that Bosch viewed the role of whites was to gift blacks with a Third Eye, making them capable of higher thinking and intellectual ideas.

One of the women holds a very large yellow fruit with blue petals that seems to symbolise the solar plexus chakra, associated with willfulness and courage. From the Wikipedia page on Manipura, the SP chakra:

Manipura is represented with a bright yellow circle, with 10 dark-blue or black petals like heavily laden rain clouds.

I believe that the blue bird may also be representative of the Third Eye chakra, though more likely represents the Throat Chakra, which is light blue. The throat chakra is active when we communicate and speak eloquently and truthfully. Setting the bird free may be intended to convey releasing the truth stored in the throat chakra, letting it fly away to new destinations and spreading truth to affect more people.

The black character looks in the direction of the blue bird, but with its hands on its hips, looking rather frustrated or angry.

Segment 3: Attack on the pink fruit

There is a frightening part of the painting in which a woman takes shelter in a large pinkish coloured fruit which I believe symbolises the Crown Chakra, which is represented by pink or light purple, and there is another individual with an enormous strawberry, I believe representing a root chakra on their back trying to break into the fruit by pulling at the stalk. This must symbolise the attack on goodness through the pursuit of sin and “Earthly Delights”. To further reenforce the symbolism, the stalk of the pink fruit has large thorns that indicate it is inaccessible to those who attempt to force entry from the wrong angle, just like religous knowledge is impossible to attain without knowing how to find it.

There are two people inside this pink fruit, and there are several other parts of the painting wherein there are people sitting inside pink fruit in this manner. Only in the pink fruit are there people with glass cylinders to look through, such as at the bottom of this image. On the opposite end of the cylinder to the person is a black rat, though I am unsure what this may mean, though it is repeated in other parts of the painting so must mean something. The cylinder itself symbolises that spiritual people can see others from their knowledge but others cannot see them properly, hence they are misunderstood and incorrectly perceived.

One of the people outside of the pink fruit is attempting to hand the person with the giant strawberry a blue flower, perhaps trying to coerce them into ceasing to attack the pink fruit, IE goodness itself. This could be said to be an attempt to invoke the third eye chakra, which is represented by dark blue and is characterised by spiritual thinking.

On the end of the giant root chakra is a blue flower where the root chakra, the red chakra, should be. Instead of a root chakra there is a throat chakra, this spiritual inversion is a recurring theme in the painting.

Segment 4: White meat on display

There is little original to say in regards to this segment except that the symbolism mirrors that of the other segments. I will reiterate what I said earlier about black people in the painting; here again another black person can be seen with a red fruit, the root chakra, dominating the mind. The presence of a symbol of the root chakra where the crown chakra should be is likely Bosch’s way of communicating a common esoteric idea in regards to the spiritual potential of black people, that there spiritual potential, according to esotericism, is limited.

Further reenforcing the idea that not everything is in its right place, the man is holding two bunches of pink and blue fruits below, another allusion to spiritual inversion as these represent the third Eye and Crown chakras.

I am unsure what it means, but two of the women have black flowers in their hair. It also appears that the women in this segment are attempting to gain the attention of the black man in the painting, who is looking away.

Final Notes:

There is so much left to cover from the works of Bosch that I will certainly reurn to this topic in future. I am also interested to know if you have found anything that I have missed so pleas get in touch. At the end of the day, these are merely suggestions I think are correct, but I could be completely wrong. Piecing an artist like Bosch together when next to nothing is known of his life is incredibly difficult.

Health and happiness!

C.A., author.

Communism kills the body, but liberalism rots the soul.

We cannot have a society in which death has no meaning, because then life has no meaning, and we cannot have a society that bases itself upon the absence of a religious urge, however you define that urge, and whatever system you use because your will end up with a society which has two values beyond subsistence, these two values being summarised in the title of a grubby play produced in London a couple of years ago called Shopping & Fornication.

We have been ruled by liberal ideas for many centuries now, but in the most acute form in the last 50 years. Liberal ideas wish to claim men and women as the same and as interchangeable, that war its morally bad, that all races are the same and should all live together, and that the population that lives within a country are merely existing within a “zone”, just an economic area, that everything is based upon rationalism and materialism and is purely a calculation of economic self interest.

Now, there’ll be many of you reading thinking “what is this bloke talking about? This is all abstraction.” but go out there in the street and you will see an example of a society that is based upon these sorts of ideas.

We face a situation in the West where paradoxically, spiritually, we are in a far worse state than the people that lived under communism, and this is one of the great ironies because the Marxist mania and communism froze things, it froze things glacially for 50 years in many respects, and much of the decay, the voluntary decay which we have imposed upon ourselves because of ideas that successive generations of our leaders have adopted from themselves and from others didn’t occur to the same degree in the East. The ideas of self and racial denigration, that patriotism is the worst evil on Earth, that patriotism is always one stop from genocide, that your own group (if one is even allowed to believe in such a thing) is always the worst group, these ideas haven’t been institutionalized or internalized quite to the same degree.

Its perverse that peace and plenty have produced more decadence and decay than hard-line puritanism, artistic philistinism, queuing and terror, but that’s what’s happened. Most people in Western societies now are so dumbed down and so degraded but almost every aspect of life that nearly any philosophical speculation about life is indeterminate and considered completely meaningless, its a channel which they never turn on.

The society that we have now it’s a result of the fact that every politician, in all of the parties represented in the major assemblies, including most so-called “radical right” parties which are in their essence still of a populist hue, believe in Homo Economicus, they believe that man is an economic integer, and nothing else m
atters.

“Immigration? Its good for the economy, don’t you know?”

But ask yourself, is life really about shopping? Is life really about making more and more money? Is life really about eating yourself to death?

The epitome of modern, Western liberal decadence

I personally believe as Evola did that people are hardwired for faith, maybe one in ten find they have no need of it at all, but for most people it is a requirement. The depth of the belief, the knowledge that goes into the belief, the system one comes out of is slightly incidental, but man needs emotional truths.

George Bernard Shaw once said that one man with belief is worth fifty men that don’t have any, whether this belief be philosophical, religous, semi-religous, philosophical molded into religous or vice versa. Without the belief that there is something above you and before you and beyond you and behind you which leads to that which is above you we seem as a species content to slough down into the lowest common denominator, the lowest possible level.

C.A., author.