Buddha had 32 Characteristics of a great man. What was characteristic number 29? "Eyes deep blue"
Buddha was a member of the Shakya tribe which was descended from the Indo-Scythians. What does this mean? Buddhism is something Aryans should like into more as well as Hinduism.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
>what is a metaphor
Sage wrong board
have a bump
We wuz Buddhist and sheit
Based Arya
Indeed. It blows my mind how back the chink worshipping of whites goes, now they just portray him as if he was a chink himself. LMAO.
>Literally explain how his tribe is aryan
>Aryans existed up to the Tarim Basin
buttblasted African
yeah
The Kālacakra Tantra contains passages that refer to Islam, calling Muslims as mleccha (barbarians). It contains the prophecy of a holy war between Buddhists led by the twenty fifth warrior-king Chakravartin Kalki and the barbarians. The Buddhists who composed the Kalacakra Tantra likely borrowed the Hindu concept of Kalki and adapted the concept. They combined their idea of Shambhala with Kalki to reflect the theo-political situation they faced after the arrival of Islam in Central Asia and western Tibet. The text prophecies a war fought by an army of Buddhists and the destruction of the Muslim persecutors of dhamma; then after the victory of good over evil and attainment of religious freedoms, Kalki ushers in a new era.
One of the most important Buddhist commentaries on Kalachakra Tantra, named Vimalaprabha and dated to the 11th-century, provides further details of this holy war.The Vimalaprabha mentions an event in the year "403" in Tibetan number symbols stating it to be the "year of the lord of the barbarians". This combined by the text's statement that "Muhammad is the incarnation of al-Rahman" and the teacher of the barbarian dharma, states Newman, suggests that the 403 year must be in the era of Hijra, or equal 1012-1013 CE. The many Tibetan translations of the Kalachakra tantra and the commentaries therein, according to Alexander Berzin, mention practices such as the barbarians slaughtering cattle while reciting the name of its god, the veiling of women, circumcision, and five daily prayers facing their holy land, all of which leaves little doubt that the prophecy part of the text is referring to Islam. This supports the dating of this Kalachakra tradition text to the 11th-century by Tibetan and Western scholars, and linking it to the history of Buddhism of that period.[19] The Kalachakra was introduced into Tibet in 1027 CE according to Tibetan records and per the rabjung calculations of the Tibetan astronomical calendrical calculations.
...
...
It's fairly known. Original Buddhists wear Iranic, with redhair and blue eyes.
We wuz buddha and shiet.
...
Sorry but Vedic Hinduism is the true religion of the Aryan
Good pic. Asians(all of them) are our slaves.
>Buddha was Aryan
No shit the Aryan spirit lives in many peoples across the globe.
>everyone I like in history is white!!!
Just because he had blue eyes and came from that tribe doesn't make him white. Many African Americans have blue eyes. For all you know he was mixed race
it means the original aryans arent pale
He was a prince and the highest caste in India has been Aryan since the migration.
How? He literally referred to dark skinned subhumans as "demons".
>religion all about making beautiful stuff and promptly destroying it
>best
African Americans have blue eyes through miscegenation.
sauce?
le 56%
Everything ends eventually.
Dark skinned most likely referring to black skinned Dravidians, the "Aryans" of the past have little in common with Hitler's aryan race or anything like that, its rather foolish to assume that Siddhartha had europoid features when we have a good idea of what people from that region typically look like. There are several accounts that indicate he had a golden complexion with long black hair, his eyes may have been "deep blue" certainly, but that alone does not make Siddhartha a white man in any way shape or form.
India, the caste system, and Hinduism are the last remaining remenents of the OG Aryan race, show us poos some respect.
That's the biggest blackpill of all.
But does that give us a meaning? To fight against this? It is virtually the only certainty there is - either death, or the increasing entropy of the Universe.
What is the point of living a good life if you die?
What is the point of creation if destruction is later inevitable?
These are the biggest and most relevant questions to existence.
I rest my case.
Blavatsky knew her shit and the Thule are bastards. Neo-nazis are dumb
He was white. Indians, not even northern ones have blue eyes. And northern Indians are dark too, just less dark than the Dravidian scum you are referring too.
Indians are not Aryan btw.
Stop with this we wuz kangz shit. It's no less ridiculous than when niggers do it.
It is likely partially true though. He wouldn't have looked like a Swede though - far from it. But blue eyes is a real possibility, especially as Buddha was a Prince (i.e. High Caste). It was the Aryans after all who installed the Caste system.
The blond, horse-riding, Indo-European-speaking ancestors of the Indians and the Europeans were from the same place and were the same people.
Ancient Romans always depicted Jupiter as blond. Why? Most Italians weren't blond. They didn't have a blond fetish. Jupiter was blond because he was the deity of the blond Indo-European peoples who invaded Italy and became the Latins.
>He was white. Indians, not even northern ones have blue eyes
Rare, but it can happen
Would have been more common when the gene pool was less mixed (i.e., when the caste system was younger)
>too
to
He had a white ancestor. Those eyes are a result of recessive genes. He's clearly dark skinned btw, Buddha would refer to him as a demon.
Why do you Indians have such a hard time accepting the Aryan invasion? There's so much evidence for it. We whites created every single good thing that came out of India. Every single thing.
The Aryans conquered your ancestors equally as much as they conquered India. The Indians get pissed off (and rightfully so) when you claim on the one hand India was "conquered" by Indo-Europeans while Europe was "inhabited" by them. No, both lands were overrun and conquered by the same people; Indians have as much claim to the Indo-European heritage as you do.
this is why the poos need to embrace NatSoc. It will bring them back to having somewhat good genetics.
Impermanence, I know, but it still hurts to watch.
The history behind Siddartha is so shoddy that it is likely the man didn't exist at all. In fact the earliest records don't even call the person Siddartha let alone give the biographical details commonly touted... those were actually all a much later invention.
Most likely it was a myth euhemerized into history based on the "yogic hero" ideal type that was extremely prominent at the time. This particular story is likely just a variant on the older Jainist tale of Mahavira.
If you look into the details of Mahavira's life, it is basically the same structure used for the Buddha myth.
-Born into royal family
-At the age of 30 he renounces worldliness and seeks an ascetic life
-After years of retreat practicing meditation and austerity, becomes awakened
-Spends the remaining decades of his life teaching to his disciples
When getting into the nitty gritty, there are too many overlapping details and when there are changes, they seem to be innovations on the original story. In fact, there is an irony in that in the initial story Mahavira's main disciple that compiles his teachings after Mahavira's death is named Gautama.
Keep in mind that the cultural consciousness at the time in that area didn't have a literalist emphasis on history, in fact few cultures did and the modern concept of "history" is fairly new. This was especially true of that area, hence it producing the vedic epics.
Blavatsky just made a bunch of shit up, taking anyone in that domain literally is missing the point. That includes the more esoteric/mythological variants of neo-nazism.
the Indians have absolutely garbage records for everything though. They barely even had anything we would recognize as being 'history'
Buddhism's answer is a kind of radical nominalism.
More generally to your questions, there are two approaches across all religions and philosophies:
- one that seeks to face reality as it actually is in all its apparent disenchantment.
&
- one that seeks some kind of re-enchantment with the world to arbitrarily explain away or repress how the universe actually appears.
Though one is more concerned with truth, insofar as humans are concerned it isn't actually clear which is superior and best suited for us. Are we brave enough, whether as a species or as individuals, to face disenchantment? Or are we brave enough to do what is necessary and cleverly re-enchant ourselves into a kind of artificial innocence to thrive?
Exactly, which reflects the cultural consciousness I'm talking about. A general disinterest in what we understand as modern history.
Just another reason to not take the Siddartha Gautama mythos seriously or literally true, even though Buddhism as a wisdom tradition still retains a ton of wisdom and utility. This is hardly a problem for Buddhists since none of their claims are predicated on the literal existence of a particular man, their claims are naturalistic and self-standing in nature.
Theosophy is not a variant of neo-nazism. And I never said anything about taking Blavatsky literally. When I said she knew her shit I was actually using that statement as a sort of figurative motif to make the point that neo nazis are stupid for using her work to benefit their superiority complex. Furthermore, I really don't give a fuck, because I am not part of any race I am a thing in a thing on a thing using things to do things; so you can eat a thing and go do a thing. REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>Theosophy is not a variant of neo-nazism.
I didn't claim it was.
By the way .... uhh... Flat Earth.
>Blavatsky just made a bunch of shit up, taking anyone in that domain literally is missing the point. That includes the more esoteric/mythological variants of neo-nazism.
Well it kind of seems like you did, regardless I never said you claimed anything, I just said a thing.
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
I'm the juggernaut bitch and my white skin and blue eyes andd blonde hair means I'm jupiter faggots
That domain meaning people that basically engage in speculative mythology in a fashion parallel to history qua history.
WE WUZ BUDDHA N SHIET
delete this, not even for blasphemy, but just for how disgusting it is
Mythology IS parallel to history and both subjects are something you can only 100% speculate on.
Check my trips I speak truth KEK
>basically
>literally
you sound like a valley girl
Theosophy has similar roots to Nazism in that they both resulted from 19th century science challenging the empirical authority of the bible and Christianity.
>Mythology IS parallel to history
Except when it is mistaken to not be, something plenty of humans do. This includes mistaking Blavatsky's writings etc.
> both subjects are something you can only 100% speculate on
Only if you equivocate on speculation. One is a wholly creative pursuit, the other is only speculative insofar as one logically extrapolates from empirical reference points.
I agree that both are fundamentally modernist in nature.
life is like a song it can be played different ways, but one thing is certain, the song will eventually come to an end and another one will begin
Communists are always incredibly asshurt with NatSoc more than the other are asshurt with them. I suspect this is why National Socialism and Fascism are the only active revolutionary ideology left in the 21st century they want to get shit done while communists just clutch their holes in agony.
>As a student I love grammarly
>Come here hun; does this sound like me
BAHAHAHAHAHHAHA there's no way anyone is really this dumb
>Communists
KEK
Revolution is just starting over
We want evolution ayyyyyyy
chaos and order, the dual precepts of this holographic complexity generator that our souls are embedded within, without one the other would be a tyrant.
I'm not into politics or economics but i'm pretty sure socialism is a stepping stone for communism
anarchy->theocracy->monarchy->democracy->capitalism->socialism->communism->anarchy rinse and repeat
Before the Renaissance, Europe was suffering from diseases, poverty, and lack of employment, education, health care, a stable home, and basic necessities of life. Rome conquered and unified Europe. Once Rome fell Europe became independent within.Renaissance started around 14th century and humanism (what they call) rose up, Europe saw difference in science and religion but the church had its control. Romans and Greek arts, sculpture and writings flourished in Europe. Italy was the industrial power house and $$$ money bank for Europe which funded the renaissance. Life was still not easy due to civil conflict, Religious Conflicts.
Problem: Germany was facing Identity Crisis & Europe was facing religious complexity in modern world.
During the late 17th and early 18th century France was seen as renaissance nation and successor of Greece and Rome. British had its past as great conqueror, Italians had trade. Spain and Portugal had their colonies in LA.
Germany had nothing and was perceived as BARBARIAN TRIBES who destroyed the Civilization.
Meanwhile race science was used and from the word ARYA, a race ARYAN was formed and Euro Aryans were seen racially pure and superior in Christianity and North Indian Aryans were mixed breed and interpreted by Euro Aryans mixing with inferior natives and this resulted in Idolatry, polytheism & racial impurity.
Master ARYAN Race was created by German Think Tanks. Aryan Christ was made popular in Europe.
German scholars to accepted Sanskrit as mother of all indo-euro languages initially. Indians migrated to Germany and Germans have purer form of civilization.
This is beautiful.
Makes me want to burn every item that I hold meaningful
You realize the Kurgan theory is a fact now, linguistically and genetically?
Stoicism is the proper Western route
>WE
Brown people from the indus sarasvati civilisation built the 'The Swastika City of Arkaim'
>blue eyes
>aryan
the earth would be a better place if all whites became buddhist
AYOOOO WE WUZ KANGZ US MUTHAFUCKIN WHITEYZ RULED DA WORLD N SHIEEET AYYY WE WUZ FUKIN EVERYTHANG
All dharmic religions are non-white and created by non-whites
>Dad has crystal blue eyes
>Get mom's weird color-shifting bullshit hazel eyes
I lost the lottery lads.
>not even knowing who Peter Ruckman is.
Fake no spastica
>Tyrone&Tyrell
He was Indian.
He was white. Indians don't have blue eyes or white skin(he had both). One thing we both can agree on though is that he certainly was no gook.
Your defining socialism as Marx would, how many times does it have to be stated. National socialism and socialism-communism are not the same thing. They are diametrically opposed ideologies which is why one seeks to eliminate the other by nature
>WE
Buddha had brown skin and brown eyes
Buddhist here
Chaos you say
...
>we were buddhists and such, uh hyuk hyuk, golly gee wilikers, would ya look at that?
what a fucking retard.
The Yamna people, or the "proto-Indo-Europeans" would not have been predominantly blonde. Also, they didn't ride horses, they rode in wagons and chariots pulled by horses.
>WE
Did you read the OP?
buddha's message was to transcend the body. don't be mad he was white.
they were predominantly ashy/dirty blonde with light curls and thick hair
you can see this in all the mummies of aryans
>WE
Eyes deep blue[8]
[8]*(((Epstein))), Ronald (2003), Buddhist Text Translation Society's Buddhism A to Z (illustrated ed.), Burlingame, CA: Buddhist Text Translation Society, p. 200
*The surname (((Epstein))) is one of the oldest Ashkenazi Jewish family names
everyone knows that buddha was infact jesus christ who went into hiding after his "execution"
Gautama Buddha was born in 566 B.C.
don't forget that our calender was also moved 300 years into the future in the early middle ages which is ignored by "scientists".