/lit/ - Literature

>>11100729
>>11100773
I'm dead serious. Now I understand I sounded like a cunt. But really. Evola is the blacksheep of this whole movement. Wasn't it a big enough redflag when Guenon personaly disawoved him?
I can't quote him because I don't have the english text on me. But basically there's to ways to be "without religion". Either you do it the modern way, being a "free-spirit" or you actually understand they're all one. But -and he explicitely insist on this - it's an understanding that is beyond the mind and theory. A very, very high spiritual level and even when you've reached this understanding those people still follow the tradition of the country they're in.

So, of course, and please forgive me, someone who lives in a degenerate country and has no idea of what a religion is can still "know God" or have an intuitive knowledge of the sacred.
But we both know that wasn't the case of Evola. He knew about it and choose not to do it because he sees everything through the prism of his own ego. That's what makes it a fraud to me. And really. I've only ever saw him quoted or considered in the anglo-saxon world.


Now I'm going to stop "derailling" this thread. But please, think about it. Look at the names on the OP >>11099488
And ask yourselves why he is the only one without a tradition.
Have a nice day everyone.

Let's be honest here.
How many of you are Larpers?
Talking about Kshatriyas, priestly caste, kali yuga and so on.
How many of you actually follow a religion and try to follow it instead of jacking off to Hinduism (you will never be a Hindu; it's not made for your psychological type no matter how hard you try)

I read pretty much every Guenon books and while he's a very good read most people find themselves trapped into an endless spiral of mental masturbation.

A poor grandma who goes to church every week and believes with all her heart has more spiritual growth than most of you.