Title: The Solar and Heroic Element of the Ancient Aryan Race
Tags: #AryanRace #SolarRace #HeroicTradition #HyperboreanCivilization #SpiritualHierarchy #Traditionalism #MetaphysicalStruggle #SacredKingship #RitualPower #Evola

1. Aryan Dual Condition: The Aryan race embodies a dual condition—latent supernatural heredity and the need for individual awakening. This potential must be actualized through personal effort, aligning with the “solar race” and heroic traits.
   
2. Solar Race and Heroic Archetype: The apex of Aryan hierarchy reflects the “solar race,” characterized by luminous, divine natures. These individuals are not mere mediators but divine beings themselves, embodying transcendent power and sacred knowledge.
   
3. Spiritual Leaders vs. Priestly Supremacy: The highest Aryan caste, the “spiritual leaders,” should not be confused with priestly dominance. In ancient Hyperborean societies, the priestly and warrior castes were originally unified, reflecting the solar race's regal and spiritual unity.
   
4. Blood and Heredity: Unlike modern religious systems, the Aryan elite's spiritual authority was rooted in blood and heredity. This contrasts sharply with the celibacy and lack of racial basis in contemporary priesthoods.
   
5. Divine Nature of Aryan Leaders: Aryan leaders were seen as divine, ruling over both men and gods. They possessed sacred science, transcending dogmas and embodying a transcendent, Olympian superhumanity.
   
6. Ritual as Command: The rite in Aryan tradition was not a superstitious practice but a divine technique of command over supra-sensible forces. It reflected a virile, dominating attitude toward the metaphysical realm.
   
7. Pontifical Function: The brahman, as a spiritual leader, served as a “pontiff,” bridging the human and superhuman worlds. This function was central to the Aryan hierarchy, embodying supreme authority and legitimacy.
   
8. Hyperborean Origins: The Hyperborean civilization, with its solar and regal spirituality, represents the purest expression of Aryan tradition. This legacy persisted through heroic restorations in later periods.
   
9. Aryan Ideal: The Aryan ideal encompasses both biological purity and spiritual nobility, forming a race of super-men opposed to modern materialistic and Promethean concepts.
   
10. Modern Relevance: Reawakening the Aryan spirit today requires overcoming historical distortions and reconnecting with the ancient metaphysical struggle. This involves both practical racial consciousness and a return to the sacred, heroic ethos of the solar race.

The Solar and Heroic Essence of the Ancient Aryan Race

The dual nature of Aryan identity reveals that ancient civilizations recognized a latent, supernatural heredity within the Aryan bloodline—a potential that required awakening and actualization on an individual basis. This was the profound purpose of the highest forms of Aryan sacraments. At the pinnacle of the Aryan hierarchy, this latent quality aligns with the essence of the “solar race,” making the Aryan individual one who must reclaim or restore this heroic and solar nature. Thus, the Aryan embodies the traits of what is technically termed the “heroic race.”

The Aryan caste system was divided into three tiers, with the highest referred to as “spiritual leaders.” This term avoids the complexities surrounding the relationship between the priestly (brahman) and warrior (kshatram) castes in ancient Hyperborean societies. Contrary to common misconceptions, the priestly caste did not represent a mere religious supremacy. Early evidence suggests that the priestly and warrior-regal castes were originally unified, reflecting the primordial function of the “solar race.” Moreover, the brahman, as Aryan leaders, did not govern a society dominated by “priests” or enslaved to “religious” ideas in the European sense.

Two key distinctions set the ancient Aryan elite apart. First, their status was rooted in blood and heredity, unlike the celibate clergy of the Church, which severed the racial basis of priestly dignity. Second, the Aryan elite, as the “solar race,” rejected the metaphysical separation between Creator and creation. They were not mediators of the divine but divine natures themselves, ruling over both men and invisible powers. Described as luminous beings of “radiant fiery substance,” they were worshipped even by the gods. They possessed sacred knowledge, not faith, and their authority was direct, with no need for dogmas or a “church.” Each legitimate member of their caste was a “pontiff” in the original sense—a bridge between the human and the superhuman.

The rite, a royal prerogative, served as the supreme “pontifical” instrument. Unlike prayer, which is a request, the rite was a command—a “divine technique” that influenced supra-sensible causes. Its effectiveness depended on the objective force of those performing it. Modern misinterpretations often reduce rites to superstition, but they are, in truth, degenerate remnants of a higher tradition.

The unity of the brahman and kshatram in ancient Hyperborean civilization reflects its solar and Olympian spirituality. This tradition persisted through subsequent periods of obscuration, preserved by heroic restorations within the elite. Early Greek and Roman civilizations echo this solar and regal element, emphasizing a shared origin and life with divine entities.

In summary, the term “Aryan” refers to a “race of the spirit” of Hyperborean origin, engaged in a metaphysical struggle and embodying an ideal of Imperium. It signifies both biological purity and a spiritual nobility of the “solar” type—a race of true supermen, distinct from modern materialistic and evolutionary concepts. Reconnecting with this ancient Aryan spirit requires overcoming millennia of historical obscuration, a task that must align with practical efforts to restore racial integrity.

Today, the term “Aryan” must not be diluted, it must evoke the highest ideals and summit lines of development, inspiring creative tension and the awakening of latent possibilities in those capable of perceiving its profound significance.

Metaphysical part:

If we assume that a being has achieved a high degree of inner unification, any form of “inner sanction” can be understood in similar terms—positive emotions arise when aligning with a particular course of action, while negative emotions emerge when opposing it. These emotions align with societal notions of “good” or “evil,” which are contingent on specific social, cultural, and historical contexts. Beyond external and social reactions, an individual may experience remorse, guilt, or shame when acting against the dominant tendency within their deeper self—often shaped by hereditary and subconscious conditioning—even if this tendency has been temporarily suppressed by other influences or the demands of the “physical I.” Conversely, obeying this deeper tendency brings satisfaction and comfort. In cases where one deviates from their authentic vocation or ideal, a negative “inner sanction” may lead to internal dissociation, reflecting the conflict between competing tendencies.

These emotional reactions are purely psychological and lack transcendent or moral significance. They are natural phenomena, unrelated to the intrinsic quality of actions, and should not be mythologized with moral interpretations if one has attained true inner freedom. Thinkers like Guyau and Nietzsche have approached such phenomena of “moral conscience” realistically, cautioning against conflating psychological facts with ethical values. This perspective dissolves when a being achieves unity, and their actions flow from that unified state. Unity is not obligatory; it is a choice, and even among superior types, some may consciously embrace non-unity, allowing their deeper unity to exist invisibly on a more profound plane.

In traditions such as those associated with karma, it is possible to transcend these emotional reactions through “impeccability” or inner neutrality toward good and evil. A being who has transcended their naturalistic aspect can even neutralize karmic reactions magically, achieving a state of de-individualization. This underscores how the “moral” plane can be transcended impersonally by understanding the law of cause and effect in its fullest scope. Internally, this involves recognizing the consequences of certain behaviors and acting with objectivity, free from the pathological “sin” complex tied to the personal God of morality. Instead, metaphysical traditions emphasize awareness of error rather than sin, a perspective the superior individual should adopt, moving beyond religious residues.

As Frithjof Schuon observes, Eastern traditions lack the Semitic concept of sin, focusing instead on the opportuneness of actions in relation to cosmic, spiritual, or social utility. They distinguish actions based on their practical effects rather than moral classifications, prioritizing spiritual interests without ethical moralizing. This approach aligns with the dissolution of moral projections and the return to pure being.

In summary, the individual who achieves this new freedom—whether through an inherent structure or an existential rupture that reconnects with the higher dimension of being—gains a vision of reality stripped of human and moral elements, free from subjective projections and theistic superstructures. This reduction to pure reality is mirrored by the individual's return to pure being, where freedom is confirmed through the naked assumption of their own nature, which becomes their guiding law. This law is relevant to the extent that secondary tendencies or external influences persist.

In practical terms, this involves a two-fold experimental regime: first, understanding oneself as a determined being, and second, recognizing the transcendent dimension within as the ultimate basis of one's law. In a world of dissolution, the only unconditioned meaning lies in the direct assumption of one's naked being as a function of transcendence. Behavior toward the world should be characterized by intrepid openness, detachment, and engagement in every act with pure, impersonal action, “without desire” or attachment. This orientation shares traits with Nietzsche's “Dionysian state,” but its integration suggests a more fitting term: “Dionysian Apollonism.”