The Holy Black Book was a manifesto-like volume jointly authored by the ten members of the Sublime Council between 1969 and 1970, in which the Aldiran Thought was articulated in its complete and authoritative form. Within Aldira, the Black Book occupied a role comparable to Muammar Gaddafi’s Green Book in Libya or Mao Zedong’s Red Book in China. Like Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, it was banned in many countries, and in some jurisdictions the act of quoting from it was declared illegal due to its perceived incendiary and extremist content. Nevertheless, the book circulated clandestinely, with copies smuggled across borders and read in secrecy.
Selected quotes from the Black Book, which consisted of hundreds of pages in total:
“We have six foundational principles, which we call the Six Principles: Independence, Resilience, Transcendence, Sanctity, Purity, and Opacity. We can be reduced to these principles, because the legitimacy of our authority rests entirely upon them. Independence signifies not merely political sovereignty, but ontological sovereignty and self-sufficiency: the refusal to be metabolized by external systems, narratives, and meanings. Resilience is not simple endurance, but a cultivated hardness of will—devotion and determination that persist beyond suffering, fatigue, and pressure. Transcendence names the refusal to remain human as historically constituted, to discard history itself by ascending beyond the anthropologically limited species. Sanctity does not refer to inherited gods, but to the sacralization of existence itself—the elevation of being into a ritualized sublime. Purity denotes the elimination of noise, corruption, and contingency from structures, language, and minds, to cleanse the mind of corrupt residues. Opacity designates the necessity of silence, secrecy, and impenetrability, because total visibility is a form of subjugation. If we betray or fail to meet these principles, the people have the right to execute us, because our aim is not to rule the people but to elevate them to the metaphysical dimension we promise.”
“The only existing voice is silence. The human world, naturally, stands in opposition to this, because it is built upon noise. At the foundation of this lies biology: the compulsive search for stimuli. Beneath all games, movements, and festivals lies a form of addiction. Even the most divine-seeming authorities require the excitation of the masses to legitimize themselves, because leaders can address the ordinariness of peoples only through emotion. We seek to transcend this biology, and we believe it is possible. There is no such thing as human nature; there are only characteristics specific to eras, cultures, and regions. If these are eliminated and effective social engineering is applied, perfectly designed societies can be constructed, because even emotions are, at their core, artificial—and therefore controllable. Noise is an earthly crime in a silent universe, a planetary anomaly whose cause is that noise is not even perceived as noise. Where there is noise, there is no thought; and where there is no thought, noise appears as entertainment to the masses. We seek to abolish entertainment, but in such a manner that the only remaining form of entertainment is austerity itself.”
“Humanity still lives physically, but mentally it has always been dead throughout history, because it has always been ‘too human,’ meaning it has acted in accordance with the biological species Homo sapiens rather than as a subjective, internal, independent being. Religions and ideologies were merely the soil thrown over this corpse, suspending the mind and freeing it from the terror of existence. Is there death? Religions say there is another life. Is there pain? Ideologies transform pain into revenge. That is why all identities of peoples come to be based on this, because the ordinary human, from the very moment they emerge, already suffocates this planet. Even when humans stand on the brink of extinction, they do not come to their senses, because this is precisely nature’s cunning: humans are nothing more than simple gene carriers. Nature does not recognize them as individuals with inner worlds. It rewards only what is reached by the shortest and easiest path—superficiality, conflict, and noise. Nobility is contrary to nature, and anything that is not contrary to nature has no chance of being real. Evolution is consistent with this, because this is exactly what nature wants: to try to eliminate pain by taking refuge in any external system or doctrine available, and thus to sell interiority in the name of instincts. Yet it is pain that will lead to transcendence, that will throw all these ornaments into the trash and spit on them. Nature rewards those who have sex and socialize, not those who construct complex theories, create grand philosophies, or transform civilization from top to bottom. For this reason, we felt compelled to condemn nature, or, at least, the organism. Humans will not survive unless they make this rotten evolution itself evolve radically by their own hands, not themselves. We understand this, and we refuse to be shaped by evolution. Our desire to shape evolution may itself be part of nature, but from the deepest parts of our hearts we believe that this desire can lead to the final defeat of biology."
“Throughout history, all movements believed the problem lay in the identity’s reaction to the outside world, yet they did not realize that the fundamental problem resided in cognition itself. This consciousness generates fascism, generates communism, and generates capitalism; yet we seek to generate the consciousness that generates them. For we know that ideologies are merely apparatuses, whereas the origin always remains within the identity that depends on ideologies, and it is precisely this that we seek to reach. And in doing so, in order to address the abstract human consciousness in the most direct way, we replace concrete ideology with metaphysics, which is itself abstract. We feel the need to repeat once more, so that what we are may be fully understood: we are neither a cult nor a state. We are the executors of a metaphysical mission clothed in the costume of a polity. The moment the mission is completed, we will discard that costume—because we are not the costume itself; we merely wear it.”
“As Marx said, ‘Philosophers have only tried to understand the world; the point, however, is to change it.’ We find it necessary to repeat this, but we consider the sentence insufficient—because philosophers are not the ones who change the world. Philosophers are the ones who design what the world should be changed into. The task of changing the world belongs to scientists. What philosophy theorizes, science puts into practice. Yet today, what science does is nothing more than trying to understand the external world, and this is pathetic. Lavish award ceremonies are held everywhere for certain discoveries, and medals are handed out to scientists. This shows that empiricism is nothing more than an academic toy, because the only reward should not be for discovering what already exists, but for transferring the power to make what exists into the hands of science. So we say: ‘Scientists have only tried to understand the world; the point, however, is to transform it.’”
“The year 1968 demonstrated how fundamentally corrupt the Marxist-Leninist system of ‘people’s democracy’ truly is. Even today, there are countries governed under this model, and their internal conditions are dire, as they remain trapped within rotten bureaucracies. In rhetoric, the people govern those socialist states, but in reality party members exploit the population for their own comfort. For this reason, we believe in the necessity of a system of ‘people’s aristocracy.’ Under this system, an elite would be established, and these elite members would apply to themselves, without exception, the doctrines they impose upon the people, thereby becoming an extension of the people and purging themselves of individual selfhood. Yet governance would still be carried out not by the populace, which is ontologically unfit to govern, but by this superior minority. And even this governing elite will not say, 'I govern,' but, 'Governance happens through me.' We believe that in this way neither hedonistic elders will occupy the seats of power, nor will the people physically exercise direct authority; instead, they will hold governance metaphysically in their hands. Another benefit of such an abstract authority is that it prevents rebellion even if it controls all aspects of society: people revolt against tyrants, not against theorems.”
“Contemporary societies are superficial, noisy herds of sheep, closed off from deeper existential questions by a multitude of trivial pressures—identity anxiety, constant performance demands, and enforced adaptation—concerned only with feeding and pleasuring themselves. They belong to the herd because even their loyalty carries no consciousness. Most think as they do simply because the culture they were born into thinks that way. Since we will abolish culture, our society will not consist of hollow, obedient herds either. Our society will come to desire this itself, and every individual will voluntarily integrate themselves into the collective—not because the collective is larger and therefore automatically assumed to be correct, and not out of a disingenuous fear, but by deliberate will. How will this happen? By eliminating the pressure to conform, yet still presenting conformity as the only reality. If pressure to belong is applied, then nonconformity is a possible option that is merely rejected. But if it occurs without pressure, then misadaptation is not even conceivable. That is the point to be achieved: not social conformism, but religious devotion.”
“Political regimes’ greatest mistake is that they cannot rid themselves of politics, because parties are structurally obliged to be political apparatuses. They wear ideologies the way one wears costumes; yet each represents only a particular segment and never speaks on behalf of the whole population. Even single-party regimes, although founded on a single view, cannot penetrate the soul of the people because their purpose is political. At best, they can control the exteriority of populations, but they often cannot shape their interiority like dough, because the moment their regimes end, the belief collapses—which means it was built on administrative oppression rather than personal conviction. We will not establish parties, because we will not even need them. Our polity will not be an apparatus built to govern a population, but an apparatus built for a metaphysical project—one that will crush politics under its weight and render it obsolete.”
“People constantly talk about what is happening in the world, and in doing so they neglect the space. There is an immense dimension out there, and all of humanity lives unaware of it. Even the satellites sent into space are merely instruments of competition, because humanity is not unified. Everyone exists in fragments, and each fragment thinks only about the small residue allotted to it, mistaking that fragment for the universe itself. States think in the short term, but since we will not establish a state, we will think beyond the long term—beyond time itself. While the leaders of other regimes think only about how to win the upcoming election, we will design worlds in our minds that span centuries.”
If you find this story on Amazon, be aware that it has been stolen. Please report the infringement.
“Diplomacy is founded on mutual trust, yet it is a fact that every alliance ends the moment a state’s interests are threatened. This gives diplomacy, and all those blocs and coalitions, the atmosphere of a masked ball: in truth, no one cares about anyone, but because they unite around selfishness, they appear to care. This means that deception is the global norm, and always has been. We will not be part of this farce; we will not contaminate ourselves. Transparency is required for diplomacy, and authorities that lay everything bare can never stand on a definite, stable path, because they live in a constant state of uncertainty—managing that fear is what diplomacy is. We, however, will have no need for external relations, thanks to our walls that allow not a single voice to leak outwards; and we will declare this lack of need with absolute conviction, because while no one sees us, we will be able to do whatever we want, as much as we want.”
“Throughout history, billions of people have lived and died. What remains of them? Nothing. Individuals are mortal, while humanity as a species is said to be immortal. Yet humanity itself is an abstract concept, composed entirely of mortal entities; thus, it too is unreliable. This is an inadequacy. All those brilliant minds that vanished and were not preserved should be seen as a disgrace to humanity. Individual souls should not be sacrificed merely to keep societies standing; both sides should be eternal. We seek immortality, but mere immortality would turn life into a prison. That is why we want to engineer cognitions that will not grow tired of immortality. And because this is philosophically controversial, we want to train minds that will not even complain about it.”
“Students in Western schools learn ostentation, adventurism, and racism instead of maturity, composure, and unity—because the governments to which they belong, no matter how loudly they proclaim freedom, are dependent on these basic social traits. Federated states could not form a national identity without racism. Britain could not have risen to a position where it could plunder the entire world if it had not constantly imposed an egoistic attitude as the norm. The youth of these countries are empty: clustered like animal herds around subcultures obsessed with drugs, sex, drinking, and smoking; getting tattoos, wearing golden accessories, reshaping their language according to their group until they speak nothing but slang; living only for momentary pleasures and temporary joys, even acting openly rude and agressive just to become socially popular. Because liberal democracy permits this. In its natural state, nature is ruled by noise and tumult, and to hand dominion over to nature is to believe that this very chaos would govern the world better. To affirm humanity is to affirm this illegitimate rule, which young people across the world unconsciously submit to, for schools do not truly educate; they merely distribute certificates—and these certificates serve only as displays, nothing more than pieces of paper. We will not have such a youth. Our schools will not be barns but academies with the silence and wisdom of libraries. We will teach silence to the youth. Not to be slaves to instincts. Not to ground identity in the external. Not to live in order to sleep with whores and wander the streets drunk. No state in history has tried to create such a cleansed youth, because frankly they are incapable of it: their minds are occupied with bureaucracy, not metaphysics. We, however, want to invite the youth to our high path, so that they can rise to the height of that path and, with cold contempt, look down upon the democratic degeneracy beneath them and proudly climb even higher.”
“Christian morality denigrates life, but its denigration is fundamentally different from our ideal of transcending the human. Because they remain confined within the human, they obsessively declare the human sinful. Accordingly, the human is to be purified, flattened, corrected, and stripped of every particularity in order to be detached from human identity itself. We, by contrast, do not seek to sanctify the human through condemnation. We seek to rewrite the human through condemnation—and to sanctify that rewriting. The human is to be replaced by a superior human: one not bound by morality, ethics, or inherited norms, but a fanatic of a higher metaphysical order, burying religions and traditions in its path and erasing them in its advance. When the planet belongs to such a superhuman, the foundations of civilizations that will conquer the universe will have been laid. Christianity remains confined to the world and promises gibberish hopes of an afterlife; we seek to bury the world, and with it hell and heaven, in the vastness of the sacred universe.”
“Eliminating individuals would mean the death of art and philosophy. We will not do this. We will only redefine the individual to such an extent that the individual will come to define themselves as society, while remaining, in essence, an individual. In collectivist societies, the values of individuals generally derive from the society in which they are embedded, which implies the absence of a true inner world. Such societies may be ideal for mass mobilization, ecstatic ideologies, and fascistic systems, but they are alien to existence itself, because their entire focus is directed toward practice and the concrete. We cannot do anything with such soulless creatures. Our aim is not to produce machines, but to create monks. And this will occur across every stratum of society. Even the farmer in the field will sense that the crop they cultivate is sacred, destined to be consumed ritually within a monastery at the level of civilization itself. Thus, the farmer will not remain merely a farmer. All professions will be bound to a single metaphysical authority, yet will remain distinct in their essence—just like individuals themselves. Each will possess different thoughts and emotions, yet within this plurality they will obey a higher ontological order, a cosmic sublime that encompasses them all. They will remain independent, but their independence will be dependent on a superior structure of being, which is the Order.”
“We believe that solitude is not merely essential for cognitive development but necessary, because anyone who does not love solitude does not love creativity. The contemporary world is built upon chaotic social relations; there is always stimulation and disorder, because the underlying aim is mutual pleasure rather than shared purpose. While the rest of the world is dragged through this swamp, we will cleanse it here, drain it, and plant our sacred banner in its place. Intoxication dulls the mind; therefore, there will be no bars. Concerts will be banned so as not to disrupt the atmosphere of work and concentration within society. Brothels will be raided to prevent life from being oriented toward sexual indulgence, and their financial resources will be redirected toward scientific research. And many other measures will follow. None of these are even inherently necessary; we seek only what is necessary, and that is reason and thought to surpass this instinctual filth of humanity.”
“We build our entire philosophy upon authority and stability, and in this respect we distinguish ourselves from the rest of the world, because we are singular and unique. The torch of civilization is in our hands. And civilization has always greeted the prophets of its age with mocking prejudice. That is why we are not loved. We will not be loved. Nor do we expect to be loved. The only thing we expect is a certain mass of people who will believe in us, and with that people to move toward the future. While the rest of the world writhes in war and blood, we will voluntarily renounce food, pleasure, and comfort, dedicating our lives to our higher cause. And when the day comes, we will ascend to where we belong—space—and establish our intergalactic order. The Earth will remain on Earth, because what concerns the Earth-bound is only the Earth. But we are beyond the Earth, and this transcendence necessitates isolation. This divine solitude should be interpreted as the solitude of an eagle living on the slopes of a mountain. Such an eagle is too majestic to inhabit structures. Just as structures can only be instruments for it, our polity is merely an extension of our doctrine. Even if we were to vanish, it would continue to exist.”
“The primary condition for conditioning a society into perfect social harmony is to construct entire systems upon the maxim that nonconformity is a betrayal of the self. An ascetic society that has taken a stance against the external world has nothing to lose, because it desires nothing except the continuation of its desirelessness. Such societies cannot be occupied, cannot be exploited, and are immune to imperialism. Why should we not build such a society? Liberal democracies do not even possess real authority over their own societies. There are populations that mock their presidents, because there is no genuine connection between the people and the state. We, by contrast, seek to eliminate all distinction between authority and society: authority will be the people, and the people will be authority. In this way, with an unceasing fire of resilience, society will not abandon its cause even if it starves, becomes ill, is ostracized, or even subjected to genocide. Democracies will call this fanaticism, and precisely because they cannot escape such ethical sophistries, they are now immersed in civil wars. We, however, will state with pride but without shouting: Our Cause is above our lives.”
“The task that falls upon totalitarian regimes is to redefine the term totalitarian so that it signifies unity and solidity rather than oppression and suffering. Building systems upon fear, as those failed states did, does not lead to discipline. Fear only produces a certain timidity, and when this becomes collective, it appears as unity, but in truth it is merely restraint. Genuine discipline demands active effort from the individual, and that is precisely why we will cultivate fanatics, not cowards. We wish to establish a totalitarian system, and unlike those of the past, this will not be an animalistic project driven by power and expansion, but a species-level experiment. Everything must be gathered into a single center so that society becomes ruthlessly efficient and effective, so that not the slightest looseness or superficiality remains, and so that even the smallest action and word carries profound meaning, with every task and contribution directly tied to authority and nourishing it. Our scientists will use the human as raw material in their work, modifying humanity and carrying us beyond evolution. Our writers will revive our literature and express the tears we have not shed along this path. Our soldiers will protect our borders, ensuring the continuation of this artistic science. Everyone will exist for the Order; no one will act merely to earn a salary or to be happy, because the state of the world before the apocalypse is evident. If we continue to sustain this world, that world will destroy itself through its own lack of sustainability.”
“We are religious—but we worship not deities, but ourselves, because we are extensions of our cause, and to speak of ourselves is to speak of our cause. Theocratic regimes based on God remain grounded in debate and subjectivity and therefore cannot rule over large populations without maintaining a permanent regime of lies. We will not lie. We will not even establish a police state. Instead, we will render everything so objective that it will be impossible to step outside objectivity, because objectivity will come to mean everything. We will be the epistemic authority that has monopolized the power to author reality itself, and thus it will be only us—not universality—who determine what is true and false, good and evil. If we continue to believe in God, we abandon this supreme belief in ourselves; yet what will save us is not scriptures allegedly descending from the sky, but this sacred book we have written with our own blood. The single god is the individual, and in this sense the individual must possess the power to create themselves. They must transform nature rather than be shaped by it, and for this purpose must be willing to accept even unhappiness in relentless labor. But they will know that by embracing this gloom, they are resisting the animality within themselves—that they are becoming more themselves, approaching divinity, and finally taking the reins of the world into their own hands. Advancement indefinitely belongs to them.”
