6th of March 2019
Dear Mr. N.,
Your letter of 28.2.2019 reached me on the 5th of the month. I was pleased and wanted to answer with niceties. But that would not be fair.
We still have no basis for a meaningful conversation.
You want to enjoy the world and you think that people should be better off. But for what purpose should man exist? (Nietzsche): “Everything that arises, is worth that it decay – it would be better if nothing were created.”
(Similar words used by Mephisto in Goethe’s Faust)
You mean to speak of God and gods, but you say nothing.
Fyodor Dostoyevsky toyed with the idea of cursing God for so long a single innocent child suffers.
“The Church says: The God of the Old Testament is the God of the New Testament”
But what do we mean when we say “God”?
Can we take a final translation of the prologue of the Gospel of St. John as a basis?
“In the beginning there was THOUGHT and THOUGHT was with God and God was THOUGHT. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.”
This is the philosophical name of God. So, all that is, is ONE. God is the ONE. God is THOUGHT, LIFE, SPIRIT – everything – everything in simple invisibility, that becomes visible.
The DARKNESS is the chaos that has as yet not been organized by Thought.
“Odin” was a specific figure of what had already become visible; but what else does he have left to tell us?
* * *
At first, that sounds like “pantheism” – the oriental form of God. With John the Evangelist THOUGHT is already recognized as LIFE. The specific forms of Thought that can be shown by Thought, are determinations of the Moments of the Concept, and thus stand in a relationship of Organicity. This is the central philosophical perspective that Hegel first discovered. The Self-Consciousness1 of God, the Concept, is truly free in this form for the first time: i.e. it is no longer conditioned by pictures, ideas and opinions. It is pure thought that finds itself in every spiritual, i.e. self-aware, individual and as a logical certainty appears as such to itself.
Your tabular “comparison” of the Abrahamic world religions allows us to demonstrate the complete unsuitability of this “science” for the knowledge of its object by means of one concrete example: in your table the key to “victory” over Judaism is hidden – and you did not notice this. In the table line “Feasts in the Course of Life” you mention the circumcision ritual for both Judaism and Islam.
Last year, the weekly DIE ZEIT resumed the debate on ritual circumcision.
In the issue no. 12 from 15 March 2018, Jochen Bittner presents an article under the heading:
The subheading outlines the item as follows:
“The law passed by the Bundestag 5 years ago places religious commandments over the Basic Law. It should be reformed. ”
If there were no difference in meaning of the ritual within the two religions one would probably expect a response from a Jewish religious teacher, and find nothing wrong with the fact that it was a Muslim who was sent forward as a defender.
In Issue No. 13 of March 22, 2018, the Muslim Mohamed Amjahid replies to Jochen Bittner with an article under the main heading
For a “scientific” consideration and comparison of the circumcision ritual and its importance to Judaism and Islam, it is essential to draw on the different deeds of foundation and to reflect upon the religious practice derived from them.
The circumcision of Jewish boys is due to Genesis 17:10-14:
“This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, … and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.”
Regarding the circumcision of Muslims, Muhamed Amjahid states:
“From my circumcision celebration there exists an old VHS cassette. I am seen to be a little exhausted on the shoulder of my father. When the cameraman zooms in, I decide, being scarce 2 years old, to be the biggest diva at the party: I command the Guests around, ask for a drink and sweets, finally wave my aunt to approached, because I wanted to dance with her.”
From Jochen Bittner we learn:
“In the Koran circumcision is not prescribed, but in the Hadith, that is, in the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad it is mentioned that he had been circumcised, which is why circumcision is also considered a religious duty among Muslims.”
Who notices that within this difference, the secular realization of the negation as such – the “No to the life of the peoples” (Martin Buber) – appears in the form of Jewry?
The conceptual formulation (Logic) of the meaning of the word “GOD” is developed by Hegel in the first volume of his Science of Logic with the expression “Identity of Identity and non-Identity”.
Goethe ends his “Faust” with the “Chorus Mysticus”:
“Everything transient is only a parable …”
Human birth is the parable of the logical definition of “God” as Identity of Identity and non-Identity: In the womb, the mind2 experiences the satisfaction of all needs of life (Identity under exclusion of privation). This abstract Identity is abruptly interrupted by the “birth shock”, which in reality is the absolute privation following the separation of the umbilical cord before breathing has set in. Within this privation the newborn being experiences absolute non-Identity. It would die, would not the mother by her loving care negate non-Identity (privation) by satisfying all needs of the newborn.
This restored Identity differs from the original one in that it preserves the memory of the catastrophe as sublated3 non-Identity. This experience creates a basic trust as the ability to trust oneself and the surrounding world. The non-Identity is stored as the non-permanent in the treasure trove of experience.
As a result of this unsublated and unresolved primal trauma, Jewry lacks the ability to trust.
It is important for the interrelation of these circumstance that the circumcision take place no later than the 8th day after birth. In this development stage, the infant has neither the slightest capability to “process” the shock of birth, nor can he form any interpretation of the circumcision trauma as “being part of life”. Owing to the primal mistrust that has been established in the infant, what he will later be told about this will be like water off a duck’s back to him.
Hegel had not yet continued the logical representation of the ABSOLUTE (God) up to the logical representation of Satan, the servant of God. Neither had he a reason to do so. He lived in the happy time, when the German folk-spirit was not yet challenged by the Holocaust narrative.
The concept of “counter-history” (Oberlercher) was not yet timely. In the theorem that every Moment of the Concept is by itself also the very opposite of itself, it was only included but not yet set forth. That this is now the case is a significant step forward in the consciousness of freedom. The temptation to locate the reason of Jewish malice in their genes finally no longer works. The Jew now appears as the result of his religious devotion to Satan before us and is in this role now to be overcome with the “satanic verses of Mosaism”.
Jesus had already pointed out the connection between the satanic nature of Jewry and the work of the rabbinate as follows:
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” (Matthew 23:15)
When I wrote down my thoughts on Gilad Atzmon, I was not yet aware of the true reason for the source of the real-worldly Satan. As a result, I still kept close to a racialist interpretation of Jewry. I am very sorry for that, because by doing so I wronged the Jews, the victims of Yahweh.
I wrote (2012):
“The deepest root of Jewish self-hatred, we must probably see in the act of their becoming Jews as such. This act justifies a self-perception of the Jewish people, which still generates feelings of violent disgust accompanied by furious contempt at the very attempt to understand it: the curse threats mentioned (Deuteronomy 28:15-69) contain for themselves the greatest conceivable degradation of the addressees, i.e. of the Jews, the acceptance of which signifies greatest shame in the eyes of the Peoples. Every iota of pride is taken from the Jews with it.”
All this I explained to myself with a supposedly Jewish tendency to venality. Properly thought through, you end up with the “Jewish genes”, i.e. in racism.
Traumatology and developmental psychology grant us a very different perspective, which is already mentioned in my book The End of Wandering – Thoughts on Gilad Atzmon and Jewry. Concerning “child abuse” I get very close to the truth:
“With some justification, it can be said of the Jews that YAHWEH has atrophied half of their brain …
And the part affected is that of spirituality where the ethical competence of humans resides. This is the only explanation why this “little nation” (Völkchen) has been around for millennia allowing itself to be conditioned to evil, whose program is enshrined in the Talmud and in the Shulchan Aruch by means of “divine” Authority.”
But the necessity – better: the Reason – of this development was not yet shown. This is now accomplished, and thus the place where to break through the enemy lines is determined more precisely (“key to victory”).
As a program the Yahweh project can only enter dehumanised soul, afloat in the waters of a nameless fear.
The truth of psychic trauma is not the pain. As a signal of is physical danger it is only temporary. It is anxiety in the sense of a psychosocial perception which permanently links pain to a cognitive event.
Thus, the trauma becomes a Moment of the worldview (Weltanschauung). Gilad Atzmon calls this Moment “pre-traumatic stress syndrome.” It is a self-sustaining complex with the nature of a “detection dog”, who searches the inner and outer world for signals that seem to confirm the justifications of its fear.
Mosaism in the sense of a religious doctrine requires a specific structure of the perception complex. The structuring begins with the image that the infant receives with the circumcision ceremony. The following components are of particular importance:
1. The boy is delivered by the mother to uniformed old men, who the person will regularly meet throughout his life in the synagogue as religious authorities – an environment where the mother is excluded.
2. In the perceived culturally standardized environment, the person experiences the feeling of absolute helplessness. Even his screams of fear do not show the desired effect. The Mother remains missing.
3. The added sensory impressions – especially the men involved in the ceremony – yield first building blocks for shaping the idea of a higher power as presence of an absolute ruling power.
Against the background of this original ritual scene, the way is clear for further shaping.
By means of the all-pervading fear, the generated mistrust becomes merged with a neurotic “Conqueror of Fear” (Angstbewältiger) – becomes merged with YAHWEH.
The teachings of Moses primarily bring about a primitive form of division of humanity – that is, God: in that humanity whom Yahweh loves and that hated by him.
Fear is overcome by unconditional obedience to laws whose purpose it is, to “redeem” the mind from the natural order – that is, the instinctively acting Reason.
The “unnatural ethics” of Judaism, which fills Christians with disgust, is in this regard “progress of the Spirit in the consciousness of freedom”. But this ethic is simultaneously “counter-history”, in that it does not recognize the Reason in Nature as such, but instead subjects Nature to the Spirit (materialism).
The moment of progress, on the other hand, asserts itself in Germanism, whose “polytheism” is to be read as a presentation of the Concept (of Reason) in distributed roles (of its Moments).
In between stands the Catholic Church. She takes the side of Jewish rationalism, which results in the persecution of Germanic “mysticism”.
With this “choice of sides” she had very early on paved the way for the “homecoming of Christianity into Judaism “, which found a certain conclusion with “Vatican 2”. This created the situation in which Judaism came to the conclusion of completely annihilating the Catholic Church by means of the “abuse campaign”. The Dialectics of the situation is however, that with the “abuse theme” we can beat far more powerful against the cultural hegemony of Judaism.
What are several thousand sexual offenses of priests to ministrants and choirboys against the mental mutilation of all Jewish men for the purpose of their Satanization, i.e. their training for the “No to the life of the Peoples” (Martin Buber)?
The impact of the attack stems from the fact that it was a war for the rescue of the Jewish boys as human beings against which there can be no objection. He who today takes to the streets to combat the cropping of the beaks of chicks for the adaptation to mass animal husbandry, will tomorrow protest even more violently against the amputation of the foreskin of Jewish infants.
Jewry will vigorously defend itself against this campaign, and so it is almost certain that circumcision opponents will plunder the arsenals of traumatology and developmental psychology and will loot the German-philosophically interpreted “satanic verses”. This will make the world realize that YAHWEH, or the failure to criticize this religious fossil, is the problem.
The criticism is now being submitted. The turmoil that it causes in the “educated world” works like a wake-up call to the gods cast down by the “European Enlightenment” and will assemble these on the marketplaces of “public opinion”. The time for the answers of German Idealistic philosophy has come. These answers too will be heard and understood in the marketplace.
The power of Yahweh passes over to the God recognized in Thought – the truth of the God of the Christians – in many guises will lead humanity out from the “economy that kills” (Francis). This economy was Mosaism as an economy (capitalism).
The report of the Muslim Mohamed Amjahid is the contrasting image. Painful foreskin amputation at the more appropriate age of his 2 years, after having been prepared for it, has the positive effect of an initiation ritual. Its execution increases the pride “for oneself” of the person concerned and the experience of belonging to a group is accentuated. It is obvious, too, that the ritual is not misused as an introduction to a misanthropic socialization, as is the case in Mosaism.
In case of doubt, the initiation does not cause traumatization since the event is prepared “in real time” with a positive connotation.
The religious foundation idea is obviously the succession in the work of the Prophet Muhammad in the sense of “guidance” for the faithful.
The Muslim circumcision ritual thus serves the refinement of a people.
To perceive this essential difference and make it generally known is of utmost importance to prevent Muslim solidarity with the Jews.
PEGIDA and others are prepared, to bring pugnacious Islam to the side of Jewry in case of a worsening of the fight against the cultural hegemony of Judaism, with their policy of lumping everything together. That must be avoided at all costs!