/lit/ - Literature

>>23354324
There were fascinating AMA threads by a claimed Alawite on /x/ some short time ago in the past few months, suggesting a link to Gnostic Christian beliefs. Here is the last one, including links to all the former ones: https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/37333243/.. It seemed strikingly consistent and like more than just a LARP because:

1.) he kept it up over many threads which mostly reached the bump limit over many days or about a week, answering many questions patiently
2.) He seemed ESL and sometimes it was a little hard to understand, but he was still getting across mostly internally consistent and complex spiritual and philosophical ideas
3.) He very casually used many Arabic terms, mostly derived from those used in Islamic theology and mysticism, but with the Alawite twist
4.) He quickly, intelligently, and knowledgeably answered questions given to him about Syrian history, politics, and current events, especially as it relates to Alawism, a pretty niche topic.
5.) It was way more info than you could just get from the Wikipedia page

From what he described, again, it had some astounding similarities to some early Gnostic Christian beliefs. I may however be a naive retard and it was all a LARP.

E.g.: an idea of something like a “lesser local god” who is a manifestation (or allegorically son) of a higher transcendental source (which he variously calls the idea cloud in English, living conscious world of archetypes, etc., analogous to the Gnostics’ Pleroma), this demiurge also allegorically called the Liom in these inner Alawite teachings, as well as by the name Yaoim. (Early Gnostic iconography depicted the demiurge, named in some of their texts Yaldabaoth, as upper half lion and lower half serpent). He has seven “sultans” or “kings” who manifest his will on Earth (archons). Etc.

Big if true. It’s possible early Gnostic beliefs perhaps splintered off and traveled a little through the Middle and Near East, preserved in strange sects like the Alawites and Druze. Another note is his claims are different from whoever OP is getting it from (if OP didn’t make it up, because why does OP have such a long sourced effortpost essay just from talking to an Alawite ready at hand?), and he said this is because he’d been initiated into a deeper level of the Alawite faith different from what even mainstream Alawites believe, and supposedly this is itself a blind to protect Alawites from violent persecution/execution by other Muslims over heresy. A massive “noble lie”, essentially, created and propagated by some esoteric inner circle of Alawites. According to him, this belief in the trinity of Muhammad, Ali, and Allah, with Muhammad and Ali being miraculously one with Allah or God, would be an exoteric teaching for the Alawite masses, but they look for intelligent and receptive people within the Alawite society who can go through all four levels of imitation to actually get the inner teachings.

Last thread died on me RIGHT as I was finishing my next post to bump it.
Previous >>23354522

/lit/ was supposed to be a slow board edition.

Why not use the text entry feature of /lit/ to write?
/wwoym/ is for /r9k/posting, not writing
/wg/ encourages you to limit excerpts to one post and post high quality edited works
I just want to read and write with anons and I do not care about the format.

ITT, write in the 4chan quick reply box.
If you hit 3000 characters cut off the end or edit it a bit, post it, and finish writing it and reply to the first post.
You can write single posts or long chains of posts.
You can tripfag if you want to make it more clear which posts are yours.
You can write about whatever, poetry, prose, even boring philosophy type stuff. Don't edit. Don't agonize. Don't be insecure.
Simply WRITE, FAGGOT, WRITE!

>>23310818
>>23311974
I don't understand why shitpost culture is valued so low on this board. i got banned the other day for posting a picture of a church mass with the phrase "humiliation ritual". on /tv/ this thread would have reached bump limit.

>spic thread
>hits bump limit
>all in Spanish
This is why the board has been shit for sometime now.

>>23149811
Are you fucking slow or something? Spamming is when you deliberately push a thread to the bump limit by making a large number of low-effort or off-topic posts in quick succession. Flooding is when you rapidly fill the catalog with multiple threads about the same topic, thus killing other threads and negatively impacting discourse on the board. All of the threads in your screencap were posted days or weeks apart. Having a single thread up about a specific topic at any given time does not qualify as spamming/flooding. By your logic, having repeated poetry general threads, or /wg/ threads, or sci-fi/fantasy general threads would also constitute spamming/flooding. If seeing other anons discussing /lit/ projects and /lit/ culture bothers you so much, then consider making use of the 'Hide Thread' feature. That's why it's there.

>>22889208
Look, no serous person lives in such a self-indulgent nothing of a thread, a thread that you will masturbate in until bump limit. You almost certainly don’t read books, I can’t imagine you have much of an attention span, hence why you live in this thread like it’s providing a drip-feed of dopamine. So the longer you do this the more ridiculous it looks and the less amusing it is. It is truly not even slightly funny anymore, and it actually was for the first 20 posts or so. I actually chuckled out loud. Anyway I know you’re a silly person who cannot stay interested in any one thing too long, so I don’t expect you’ll repeat this experiment. You’re too lazy, and the results have not been promising.
The only advice I will give you is to log off for the day and actually read a book because I get the distinct impression you think about books a lot more than you actually read them. These casual name-drops of first-year undergrad authors is just pathetic. It would have been much more interesting had you been name-dropping obscure things but we both know you just don’t possess that knowledge. It’s not a convincing act.

why is it that when i make a thread about an author or a specific book it goes straight to the archive but when i make a thread about trannies it stays up for a week and reaches bump limit?

>>22418581
ChatGPT posts make me unreasonably angry. It’s a combination of the smug tone of chatGPT posts themselves, as well as of the sense of the poster(s) behind them — some “clever” smug zoomer dickhead who posts on /lit/ for the “memes” and has a very smug, wry sense while making posts like these — of themselves as “funny maymay poster” — “Haha, look how funny I am, I made a chatGPT post where I told GPT to take on a casual, informal tone and answer this one of OP’s question or advocate for why XYZ author/thinker/book is good! Let’s see how many people it fools or if it starts a thread that gets to bump limit! XD!!! Funny maymay!!!”

>>21978139
Why dost thou cry so, little moth? Facts don't bother me. My writing doesn't care about your feelings, and neither does McElroy's. We do appreciate your compelling insight, Mr. Pain.
>>21978145
Yes, how eloquent and articulate. Would that every book could be so full of "pew pew" and the like.
>>21978153
Thanks. I'm not published yet. Joyce would probably be the one to check out who writes most similarly to me, along with Newman the pastor. I'll keep you posted.
>>21978177
That was me. The "malignity of his turgidity"? That was me. Hello.
>>21978182
It's too delightful and fun.
>>21978195
It quite is.
>>21978199
I did not make the thread. Parasite as I am, I simply popped in once I realized the other one had hit its bump limit.

>>21975308
If it helps, I don't take you seriously when you talk. I am just joking. But the sunlit paradise thing is still real. You are an unusual case, most women are "fine" and "fine" is more than enough for entry to the sunlit paradise. There are a billion 4's and 5's out there who don't have a hundredth of the interiority or inner life that you have because they simply never needed to. It's like Vilar said
>Why do women not make use of their intellectual potential? For the simple reason that they do not need to. It is not essential for their survival. Theoretically it is possible for a beautiful woman to have less intelligence than a chimpanzee and still be considered an acceptable member of society.
This isn't just a snide remark, it's literally true.

Also, you went from the experience of a 3/10 man (and there are worse) to the experience of an 9/10 man with a few tweaks. Incels can't do that. Plenty of incels are good looking and doing everything right at the surface, and yet they are in that notorious 80% of men that women rate as below average, they are invisible. Hypergamy is currently out of control.

You are only marginally happier because you developed interiority and you can't un-develop it. But most women never develop it to begin with. Most of these women literally do have the minds of children or maybe a really bright chimp. They have nothing in their heads other than consuming. They take every single experience as it comes, like a child does. The world is a bright place for them and it's structured in their favor. It's why almost all women have built-in "just world fallacy," because they have no theory of mind and can't conceive of life being anything other than basically nice.

I remember the first time I told a fairly smart girl that men don't have the same prospects as them. She was telling me something like what you're saying here, that it's tough being on the woman's end too when things don't work out after a date or two. But I told her, no, it's different because he can't just go get another suitor tomorrow, you can. You might have been his only prospect in six months, or even years. I know really cool, good looking, tall successful guys who have gotten laid maybe twice in 6 years, because they just keep falling through the cracks of this sexual economy. Anyway, the girl I was talking to was shocked, but characteristically, it wasn't due to pity for these men, it was because I devalued the dating experience for HER by telling her that men will often try to attain her even if they don't really want her, because hey she's better than nothing. This spooked her.

Either way, she genuinely had simply never thought about how easy or hard or rare it is for men to get matches, get a date. She assumed everyone had the same default experience of life, hers, which is basically carefree, with basically plentiful everything (including matches and attention). That's most women, even if it's not you.

Thread's over bump limit fyi.

>>21568261
>just saying the name evola guarantees seething responses
>could make just a thread with his pic alone and it would hit bump limit faster than any other thread in the catalog
Why do people have such hatred for Mr. Monocle?

>>21476221
>why was it made?
OP is a zoomer who couldn't wrap his mind around using a thread that reached the bump limit, so know this thread will suffer because of it.

>>20960091
>There are other examples but less blatant, the example of dismissing hypotheticals completely beforehand based on our limited ideas of science is another one.
Can you point out where I did this specifically?
>You jumped into the reply chain to say nobody ITT said that.
Dude this point is just completely irrelevant. I've told you several times I don't believe that and the person you're talking about wasn't even replying to you, and we had an aside where he more or less walked it back.
>Why did you jump in with your irrelevant
I asked a question. Are you not going to clarify your meaning when I ask a question? Just ask irrelevant questions that I've already addressed.
>No but you're talking about a discussion you say you weren't even a part of.
I can read the thread. I don't think those two people are even still posting today, and it's still just two posts in a thread that has almost hit the bump limit.
>He says it's purely based on his personal resentment toward specific ideas.
You're placing the motivations of one person onto everyone.
Again:
>I'm responding to posts, not people.
Why are you lying to yourself?

>>20957310
>>20957335
then how about you stop diligently formatting them like the autistic newfag generaltards tell you to, and stop spamming them as soon as the previous thread hits bump limit, or before? just something to consider.
these threads were better and comfier a few years ago, when the only constant was "write what's on your mind" in the OP, the images were varied, sometimes funny, sometimes interesting, sometimes beautiful, no one ever linked to previous threads because why in the fuck would you, and no one ever made a new thread before the old one had 404d, and sometimes it would take 5 days. I don't know where the fuck all the autism came from

>>20942194
how do you have the audacity to think that youre even remotely qualified to criticize someone elses opinions about a book that youve never even read? youre an absolute pseud. the original anon took the time to make a effortpost with interesting observations about scenes in the book that moved him, and you felt entitled to ruin the discussion and shit up the thread with multiple posts containing nothing but masturbatory word vomit. why would your responses please anyone? it sucks that any interesting side convos in these threads get immediately derailed by schizos like you. no one here gives a fuck about your life and backstory. no one wants to talk to you any further. if you want to remedy your gaffe then leave now and stay away from these threads in future. youve now ended the entire thread by making multiple irrelevant posts and starting a pointless one-sentence back and forth thats made us hit the bump limit. do us all a favor and stay out of the new &amp thread if OP makes one. i should never have even wasted my time responding to anything that you said. im only replying now to speak for everyone here as i reiterate what >>20938148 said: fuck off.

>>20926129, you should make a separate american psycho thread and link it here before the thread dies, bc i like the book and i wanna hear more of your thoughts on it. even if itd attract losers, id be at least one person whod respond in earnest, and im sure the other anons here would go and do likewise. and hopefully this moron will have learned his lesson enough to stay out of it.

>>20928338
for /lit/'s board speed, that's fairly decent, especially for a thread that has been reaching bump limit nearly every time recently
it's why it's here among other reasons and not on faster boards

>>20834155
>since the thread can no longer be bumped, they lose interest, hence why the thread zooms when it's under the bump limit but dies instantly after it reaches it.
That could explain it, which just makes their behavior even weirder.

>>20834140
>I also notice that whenever the thread reaches the bump limit, they stop posting suddenly.
I assume since the thread can no longer be bumped, they lose interest, hence why the thread zooms when it's under the bump limit but dies instantly after it reaches it.

>>20539747
What the fuck are tranny jannies doing they let eceleb threads reach the bump limit. Why is a thread about a man in a dress ranting about Jordan Peterson still up

>>20390288
Oh no we’re at the bump limit and the thread’s almost dead, I’ll post a part of my essay on Lucifer since I cannot find the section where I elaborate in depth on the pentagram formula then post quickly concerning the Sufi connection.

Numbers 22:22 is the first use of the term satan.

"And God's anger was kindled because he went: and the angel of the Lord stood in the way for an ADVERSARY against him. Now he was riding upon his ass, and his two servants were with him."

The word Adversary here is lamed shin teth nun, Satan is spelt shin teth nun.

Here YHVH/Jehovah is called Satan.

So in this case, THE "Malak Has-YHVH" stood in the path of Balaam as a "satan" - as the behest of YHVH to tell him to turn back from the orders of his employer.

This term is not a name of a god or an advesary of God, it is a word for someone who keeps you from going down a path - it simply means resistance, opposition, obstacle, advesary - and what ever you call this - you could just as easily call another name. Just as if you are trying to lose weight, pizza may well be your stumbling block, or "satan."

Therefore, a modern word for it is "weakness." As in Kal-el often succombs to his satan, a stone called Kryptonite.

This is why he is portrayed as an exploiter of man's own dark desires and tempting him to stumble from grace.

Now Lucifer/phosphorus.

In 2 Peter 1:19 Jesus is called Phosphorus (in greek) which translates to Lucifer in latin.

The reason for this?

Jerome placed the term lucifer in the vulgate bible, Origen was the first to define it in terms of Christianity.

Before Origen Lucifer was just another word. But let's see how Origen defines Lucifer?

Cont

>>20288230
I was in some other thread where some magician was talking about archetypes and shit and how Jesus was mostly mythical but maybe you can get past that to the impersonal unknowable true divine such and such. I think this is the “other” form of sun worship (Christmas is on the 25th because you are closet pagans is the more obvious take). Super philosophical, super abstracted out and willing to go to any length not to just accept Jesus and get to call the almighty Abba.
Talking about Christ showing some leg here or flashing a titty there and thereby lending legitimacy to an initiatory line is still kind of misguided. If Jesus is the Christ, if He can save you from your fucked up fallen state, if He can give you life, life eternal and in abundance, why would you still need to go looking here and there for some more obfuscated form? I don’t get it. But like I said I’m boring as shit and totally okay with it.
> who would be prone to readily accept Christ as a God-conscious man, a yogi and a sage who had attained conscious Union with Brahman
That’s what I’m talking about. God became a man to fix shit and publicly showed a bunch of witnesses that he was doing it and it still isn’t good enough. I dunno. I could talk all day but I would just be repeating myself and we’re at the bump limit.

Why are university threads deleted when they’ve been on /lit/ for years and reaching bump limit while the thread complaining about lit post quality and the thread on academic tenure stay up.

>>20017324
So you're saying life just kinda sucks after a point
>>20017345
Why fag, we haven't even hit bump limit. Do you have any idea how long it takes a thread to slide off the catalog on this board?

This is OP again. The thread has been very amusing and I have enjoyed reading your opinions a lot, including the criticisms. I have not samefagged at all during the course of this discussion, either - OP may be a faggot, but this faggot still retains a shred of self-respect. For those of you who have enjoyed my writing, I'm very glad.

As I said in the earlier post, I was not expecting this thread to be so polarising. I also completely understand why all the references in that extract grate. It was a poor choice maybe.

Since the thread is almost at bump limit, here is another taste from an earlier draft of what my writing style might look like without those references. It's from the same short story that is being published in a journal in the spring. I look forward to seeing this absolutely decimated by you wonderful bastards as well.

>>19629805
Well, this is a little worrying. I am JH. Are you from the Y?