Commentaries for AL III:50-54 (Old & New, there is no published "D" commentary for chapter III)

The Old Comment for this entire section is brief.

Appears to be a plain instruction in theology and ethics. I do not understand “Din.” Bahlasti = 358, and Ompedha, perhaps, 210. [Old Comment III:48-62]

All other commentary is from the new comment.

III:50:Curse them! Curse them! Curse them!
III:51:With my Hawk's head I peck at the eyes of Jesus as he hangs upon the cross.

We are to consider carefully the particular attack of Heru Ra Ha against each of these 'gods' or prophets; for though they be, or represent, the Magi of the past, the curse of their Grade must consume them.

Thus it is the eyes of 'Jesus' – his point of view – that must be destroyed; and this point of view is wrong because of his Magical Gesture of self-sacrifice.

One must not for a moment suppose that this verse supports the historicity of 'Jesus.' 'Jesus' is not, and never was, a man; but he was a 'god,' just as a bundle of old rags and a kerosene tin on a bush may be a 'god.' There is a man-made idea, built of ignorance, fear, and meanness, for the most part, which we call 'Jesus,' and which has been tricked out from time to time with various gauds from Paganism, and Judaism.

The subject of 'Jesus' is, most unfortunately, too extensive for a note; it is treated fully in my book 888.

III:52:I flap my wings in the face of Mohammed & blind him.

Mohammed's point of view is wrong too; but he needs no such sharp correction as 'Jesus.' It is his face – his outward semblance – that is to be covered with His wings. The tenets of Islam, correctly interpreted, are not far from our Way of Life and Light and Love and Liberty. This applies especially to the secret tenets. The external creed is mere nonsense suited to the intelligence of the peoples among whom it was promulgated; but even so, Islam is Magnificent in practice. Its code is that of a man of courage and honour and self-respect; contrasting admirably with the cringing cowardice of the damnation dodging Christians with their unmanly and dishonest acceptance of vicarious sacrifice, and their currish conception of themselves as 'born in sin,' 'miserable sinners' with 'no health in us.'

III:53:With my claws I tear out the flesh of the Indian and the Buddhist, Mongol and Din.

“The Indian.” The religion of Hindustan, metaphysically and mystically comprehensive enough to assure itself the possession of much truth, is in practice almost as superstitious and false as Christianity, a faith of slaves, liars and dastards. The same remarks apply roughly to Buddhism.

“Mongol:” presumably the reference is to Confucianism, whose metaphysical and ethical flawlessness has not saved its adherents from losing those ruder virtues which are proper to a Fighting Animal, and thus yielding at last a civilization coeval with history itself to the barbarous tribes of Europe.

“Din” – 'severity' or 'judgment' may refer to the Jewish Law, rather than to the Faith (ad 'din') of Islam. Assuming this, the six religions whose flesh must be torn out cover the whole globe outside Islam and Christianity.

Why assault their flesh rather than their eyes, as in the other cases? Because the metaphysics, or point of view, is correct – I take Judaism as Qabalistic – but the practice imperfect.

III:54: Bahlasti! Ompehda! I spit on your crapulous creeds.

 By sound Bahlasti suggests “hurling” or “blasting;” Ompehda is not too phantastically onomatopoetic for 'an explosion."

Note: References to the missing Appendix were removed.