Remarkable synthesis of comparative eschatology! The semiotic analysis of traditions as distinct "languages" with irreducible denotata is incredibly powerfull, especially when paired with the Sapir-Whorf nod. What's facinating is how the framework implicitly argues that ontological pluralism doesn't collapse into relativism precisely becasue the Primordial Tradition acts as a meta-semiotic anchor. I dunno if the radical denotatum of Antikeimenos fully escapes the measurement problem (observation effects from within concrete traditions), but the attempt to ground counter-initiation as more than analogy is genuinely ambitious.
The anti-christ can be considered an eschatological problem in Christianity, but in Judaism this actually becomes an ontological element, where there are even active attempts to invoke it. The concept of anti-christ is not based on traditions, but on morality, so it can be universally identified as the personification of evil.
On the subject/object topic should be useful a contextual interpretation on the two birds story found on the Mundaka Upanishad, but also present in other vedic works.
Regarding the nameless figure nicknamed "al-Khidr"... it is simply Jethro, Moses' father-in-law (Jethro/Yethro). That's why God doesn't name him in the Quran; it's all already in the Bible. Muslims only need to refer to the Bible to unravel the mystery... it's quite simple. Guénon already suggested this hypothesis, suggesting that Khidr might be Jethro. Everything is in my article on Substack: https://open.substack.com/pub/mehdimahi/p/chapitre-2-khidr-et-yitro-une-identite?r=6htr7r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Exactly. The end of the article leads to the correct methodology to follow: "On the other hand, it allows us to distance ourselves from the concreteness of the Christian teaching on the last times and to operate freely in dialogues with representatives of other religious traditions, for whom it will be far easier to accept a neutral term, investing in it their own content. Instead of such syncretic formulas as “Dajjāl/Antichrist” – and even more cumbersome ones – we can refer to Antikeimenos."
As a researcher immersed in the intersections of postcolonial narratives, Islamic humanism, and the metaphysical undercurrents of global history, I was profoundly struck by your recent article, "Ontology and Experience of the Radical Antichrist" (Multipolar Press, 2025). Your unflinching exegesis of the Antichrist as a primordial ontological adversary—a "dark double" that parodies the sacred across traditions—resonates deeply with the core thesis of my own work, prompting me to share this comparative analysis as a gesture of intellectual solidarity in our shared quest to unmask the subversive forces shaping our era.
In your piece, you universalize the Radical Antichrist (Antikeimenos) as an eternal counter-pole, manifesting through counter-initiation and parodying sacred hierarchies—from the Titans in Hellenism to the Dajjāl in Islam—culminating in modernity's technological apostasy and the Kali-Yuga's chaotic simulacra. This diagnosis of history's "end" as a de-historicized vortex of lawlessness, post-Katechon, aligns strikingly with my book's framing of a "Judaic code" as an algorithmic driver of perpetual disequilibrium, rooted in Kabbalistic shevirah (shattering of vessels) and qliphothic captivity.
Both visions converge on eschatology as inversion: your Great Parody forging false redemptions mirrors my code's insidious solvent, corroding equilibria not for reconstruction but for illusory messianic dawns that dissolve into nuclear prelude. Thematically, our works entwine in profound ways. Your ontological root of subversion—preceding concrete forms and operating via internal corrosion (‘erev rav, tohu-bohu)—echoes my metaphysical "sap" from Torah and Talmud, an essence that infiltrates épistémès (Foucauldian knowledge paradigms) to render every order provisional. We both critique technology as the Antichrist/code's zenith: your "mechanical marvels" enabling one-eyed deception parallel my "theological detonators" (cobalt bombs as holy light for false tikkun), with modernity's liberalism/progress as parody of sacred cycles akin to my Enlightenment "poisoning" and Rothschild "switchboards."
The shared motif of perpetual non-equilibrium—your lawlessness swinging between false calms and tempests, my accursed pendulum refusing repose—positions the nuclear age as eschaton's harbinger, where sacred sparks remain captive in qliphothic shells. Yet, divergences enrich the dialogue: Your pan-traditional scope (Indo-European to Abrahamic) offers cyclical renewal (Mahdi/Kalki resisting apostasy), while my Abrahamic-centric lens (with Shiite forks like Nizari "proto-Mossad") yields a terminal implosion, historicized through 2,000-year cycles from Himyarite deceptions to Gaza's iron rain. Methodologically, your vertical ontology and experiential resistance complement my horizontal archaeology and dialectical refutations, together forging a multipolar critique against sanitized progress.
Professor Dugin, your article illuminates the abyss like a primordial torch; my book descends its coiled stair. In this age of inverted dawns, our analyses stand as complementary beacons, urging vigilant unmasking of the vortex. I would be honored to send the full manuscript for your review or discuss potential collaboration—perhaps a joint exploration of these themes in a multipolar context.
The notion that there is an "Antichrist" who will appear at some point in time to plague mankind is a myth - an exciting myth which provides ample opportunity for speculation as to who it might be (King Charles?, the Pope?, etc.). Nevertheless, it's a myth which somebody made up; and others repeated.
John's first two letters tell us that "antichrists" are those who deny that Jesus is the Messiah. That's it! - it's that simple. John further tells us that already in his time were many antichrists - and today, we are flooded with them.
John's letters are short. Read them straight thru.
Thank you, Dr. Dugin for your insightful article. Another aspect to consider is that the true Christ, Jesus has a Second Coming. The Antichrist had a first coming, and was most likely Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany. Before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, the Antichrist will appear and set up his demonic kingdom. His identity is still a mystery, but he will be defeated by Jesus Christ.
The anti-christ is here in America now, he likes the Zionists in my opinion
Zionism is the Jews giving up on their wandering antichrist traditions for sedentary life of Christ.
The antichrist lacks any sense of center which is why it's antithetical to civilization
Remarkable synthesis of comparative eschatology! The semiotic analysis of traditions as distinct "languages" with irreducible denotata is incredibly powerfull, especially when paired with the Sapir-Whorf nod. What's facinating is how the framework implicitly argues that ontological pluralism doesn't collapse into relativism precisely becasue the Primordial Tradition acts as a meta-semiotic anchor. I dunno if the radical denotatum of Antikeimenos fully escapes the measurement problem (observation effects from within concrete traditions), but the attempt to ground counter-initiation as more than analogy is genuinely ambitious.
The anti-christ can be considered an eschatological problem in Christianity, but in Judaism this actually becomes an ontological element, where there are even active attempts to invoke it. The concept of anti-christ is not based on traditions, but on morality, so it can be universally identified as the personification of evil.
On the subject/object topic should be useful a contextual interpretation on the two birds story found on the Mundaka Upanishad, but also present in other vedic works.
Regarding the nameless figure nicknamed "al-Khidr"... it is simply Jethro, Moses' father-in-law (Jethro/Yethro). That's why God doesn't name him in the Quran; it's all already in the Bible. Muslims only need to refer to the Bible to unravel the mystery... it's quite simple. Guénon already suggested this hypothesis, suggesting that Khidr might be Jethro. Everything is in my article on Substack: https://open.substack.com/pub/mehdimahi/p/chapitre-2-khidr-et-yitro-une-identite?r=6htr7r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Exactly. The end of the article leads to the correct methodology to follow: "On the other hand, it allows us to distance ourselves from the concreteness of the Christian teaching on the last times and to operate freely in dialogues with representatives of other religious traditions, for whom it will be far easier to accept a neutral term, investing in it their own content. Instead of such syncretic formulas as “Dajjāl/Antichrist” – and even more cumbersome ones – we can refer to Antikeimenos."
I did that, Monsieur Duguine : https://open.substack.com/pub/mehdimahi/p/obama-the-dajjal?r=6htr7r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Here is the original article in French, my native language: https://open.substack.com/pub/mehdimahi/p/chapitre-8-obama-lantechrist?r=6htr7r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
As a researcher immersed in the intersections of postcolonial narratives, Islamic humanism, and the metaphysical undercurrents of global history, I was profoundly struck by your recent article, "Ontology and Experience of the Radical Antichrist" (Multipolar Press, 2025). Your unflinching exegesis of the Antichrist as a primordial ontological adversary—a "dark double" that parodies the sacred across traditions—resonates deeply with the core thesis of my own work, prompting me to share this comparative analysis as a gesture of intellectual solidarity in our shared quest to unmask the subversive forces shaping our era.
In your piece, you universalize the Radical Antichrist (Antikeimenos) as an eternal counter-pole, manifesting through counter-initiation and parodying sacred hierarchies—from the Titans in Hellenism to the Dajjāl in Islam—culminating in modernity's technological apostasy and the Kali-Yuga's chaotic simulacra. This diagnosis of history's "end" as a de-historicized vortex of lawlessness, post-Katechon, aligns strikingly with my book's framing of a "Judaic code" as an algorithmic driver of perpetual disequilibrium, rooted in Kabbalistic shevirah (shattering of vessels) and qliphothic captivity.
Both visions converge on eschatology as inversion: your Great Parody forging false redemptions mirrors my code's insidious solvent, corroding equilibria not for reconstruction but for illusory messianic dawns that dissolve into nuclear prelude. Thematically, our works entwine in profound ways. Your ontological root of subversion—preceding concrete forms and operating via internal corrosion (‘erev rav, tohu-bohu)—echoes my metaphysical "sap" from Torah and Talmud, an essence that infiltrates épistémès (Foucauldian knowledge paradigms) to render every order provisional. We both critique technology as the Antichrist/code's zenith: your "mechanical marvels" enabling one-eyed deception parallel my "theological detonators" (cobalt bombs as holy light for false tikkun), with modernity's liberalism/progress as parody of sacred cycles akin to my Enlightenment "poisoning" and Rothschild "switchboards."
The shared motif of perpetual non-equilibrium—your lawlessness swinging between false calms and tempests, my accursed pendulum refusing repose—positions the nuclear age as eschaton's harbinger, where sacred sparks remain captive in qliphothic shells. Yet, divergences enrich the dialogue: Your pan-traditional scope (Indo-European to Abrahamic) offers cyclical renewal (Mahdi/Kalki resisting apostasy), while my Abrahamic-centric lens (with Shiite forks like Nizari "proto-Mossad") yields a terminal implosion, historicized through 2,000-year cycles from Himyarite deceptions to Gaza's iron rain. Methodologically, your vertical ontology and experiential resistance complement my horizontal archaeology and dialectical refutations, together forging a multipolar critique against sanitized progress.
Professor Dugin, your article illuminates the abyss like a primordial torch; my book descends its coiled stair. In this age of inverted dawns, our analyses stand as complementary beacons, urging vigilant unmasking of the vortex. I would be honored to send the full manuscript for your review or discuss potential collaboration—perhaps a joint exploration of these themes in a multipolar context.
With deepest respect and admiration,
Khaled Boulaziz
Chief Editor, lanation.net
The notion that there is an "Antichrist" who will appear at some point in time to plague mankind is a myth - an exciting myth which provides ample opportunity for speculation as to who it might be (King Charles?, the Pope?, etc.). Nevertheless, it's a myth which somebody made up; and others repeated.
John's first two letters tell us that "antichrists" are those who deny that Jesus is the Messiah. That's it! - it's that simple. John further tells us that already in his time were many antichrists - and today, we are flooded with them.
John's letters are short. Read them straight thru.
Thank you, Dr. Dugin for your insightful article. Another aspect to consider is that the true Christ, Jesus has a Second Coming. The Antichrist had a first coming, and was most likely Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany. Before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, the Antichrist will appear and set up his demonic kingdom. His identity is still a mystery, but he will be defeated by Jesus Christ.