THE FOLK ETYMOLOGY OF “SATAN.”

The ONA and/or “Anton Long” suffers from acute “occidentalcentricity” when it comes to its folk etymological interpretation of words. One such word is “Satan.”

What happens is the word “satan” as it was originally understood by the illiterate nomads of the Levent was taken by the likes of Anton LaVey and Anton Long, and a subtle a “new” definition was given to the seemingly meaningless word by attaching it to various words from Hebrew or Greek or whatever.

Anton LaVey goes to say that “satan” means ‘accused” or “opposite” or some shit. The ONA or “Anton Long” tries to top this with a superficially more intelligent interpretation by gooing into the Greek language and using a word which doesn’t even resemble the original “satan:”

“Satan means “the accuser” which etymologically has its roots in the Greek word “Aitia” “the accusation“.   The Hebrew word for Satan, for ONA, is a “corrupt form of the Greek word.“  - ONA/Long

Anyways the point of this short blog here isn’t even about the word “satan” and what the fuck it means. Its about ”Satanists” running around the internet like parrots and cyber printing presses repeating and spreading the same bullshit and not understanding the concept of  “sinister dialect” when one is looking right at them.

What most “Satanists” fail to realize with religion is that they are almost always invented by literate or thinking people to manipulate the unthinking. In Buddhism these two classes of people are called “Ariya” – the intelligent, Noble, or “adepts” and the “Anirya” – the stupid herd.

Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is no exception. It must be assumed that these religions were invented by a group of Ariya to control mass of retards for their own benefit. Knowing that the human mind isn’t very creative and works better at innovating pre-existing ideas, we may assume that the Ariya who innovated Judaism, and Proto-christianity looked to a pre-existing source for concepts.

That pre-existing source is the first “revealed” religion: Zoroastrianism which had a very large following across what is now Iran, and which still exists today in parts of India.

Zoroastrianism was the first religious system to innovate the concept of a hevean and a hell, a good guy god – Ahura Mazda, and a bad guy good – Ahriman who were in some sort of eternal conflict. The most important part we want to get at is the language this religion was first written in: Avestan, which is an Indo-Iranian language kindred to Indo-european.

The most sacred and significant language of the Indo-european language family is: Sanskrit. Can we, then find a “satan” in the lexicon of Sanskrit?

The word “SATANa” in Sanskrit exists: “satana [ sât-ana ] a. (î) causing to fall; cutting off, clipping (wings); destroying, wear ing out (the body); n. causing to fall off, clipping, plucking; destruction; means of removing (hair etc.).” – http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/macdonell/ (as a note the final “a” in Satana is an inherent vowel attached to the letter “n” in Sanskrit).

You will notice that the essence or phonetic construct of “satan” remains intact in both Hebrew, Latin, or “Christian English” and Sanskrit (as opposed to the ONA’s Satan=Aitia), and the Sanskrit meaning of its word “Satana” fit’s the mythical essence of the “satan” of Judaism and Christianity- that being the “Fallen.”

IF… this should be the case, meaning that the Ariya who used a natural ’sinister dialect’ to invent a religious system to utilize or prey on a group of stupid nomadic desert Anariya borrowed words from Sanskrit to help construct their new religions should we not also be able to discover other examples? It does… but I’m not going to do the dirty work for you or correct your ‘occidentalcentricity.’ That’s you’re problem.

So what did we learn from this blog? We learned that most Satanists are idiot Anariya.