/lit/ - Literature

I don't judge a book by its cover.
I judge a book by its readers.

>As it's wont to do

>yes, I incorporate Nietzsche's ideas into my christianity.

>why yes, I did buy my physical copies of the The Turner Diaries, Hunter and Siege with a credit card, yes, I do want to be on every watch list so that a cute female FBI agent tasked with monitoring me, how could you tell?

>>15909290
>Myth of Sissypuss? Well I do partake in the boipucci from time to time, how could you tell?

>>14249963

>"why no, i don't care about whitehead or guenon, how did you know?"

>Well, it's like this kid, Whitehead failed to address the Parmenidean observation of the simultaneity of thought and being. In light of this observation the infinite procession of actual occasions that characterizes Whiteheadian existence collapses in on itself forming an evenemential zero-point (for lack of better term) i.e. existence is *an* event; an eternal, motionless, directionless, now-ness.

>One copy of Plutarch's 'Parallel Lives', please.

>Land, Heidegger, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche? Hah! You must take me for a fool, I only read stuff that Guénon praised as Traditional, everything else is a waste of time. I'll just take my Ibn Arabi, Taoism, Shankara and Platonism

>>13956870
>effectually maintain its truth as someone like Hegel and Heidegger had.
both of them brainlets compared to Plotinus

>"retroactively refuted by Guenon, Negarestani is the only latest in a long-line of pseudo-thinkers who insist on ignoring the eternal truths that the ancients knew all along"

>>13906479
OP, I'm inferring from the obviously emotionally-laden content of your post that you are seething, most likely as a result of letting Guenon live rent-free in your mind. I advise you to have sex to help dissipate some that tension that's got you so wound up

>>13787083
>Ride the Tiger
>Culture of Critique
>The Bell Curve
>The Reign of Quantity and the Sign of the Times
>Pardes
>dwarf fortress

>>13779824
>why yes, i read books in their original language, without first learning that language. How could you tell?

>Why yes, I do spend time thinking up increasingly elaborate troll threads to post that shoehorn /pol/ talking points into something book-related so as to generate maximum butthurt replies while evading 404's

>>13380791
>In the beginning, this (universe) was but the self (Viraj) of a human form.
This line refers to how in the beginning there was only Prajapati (referred to here as Viraj)
>He reflected and found nothing else but himself. He first uttered 'I am he'. There he was called Aham (I). Hence, to this day, when a person is addressed, he first says, 'It is I,' and then says the other name that he may have.
These lines are referring to how at the beginning of this (or every) cycle there was Prajapati alone and about he was the first "I" (the unconditioned Brahman being infinitely beyond such distinctions as thinking "I am". The part about "to this day when a person is addressed he first says "It is I" is essentially a reference to how as everything is produced from or emanates from Prajapati, that we are all Prajapati ourselves and as such partake of his characteristics, with the specific example being that like him we regard ourselves as "I". The keys to understanding this passage are the other passage where Prajapati is described as sacrificing himself to create the universe, the atma-yajna, this is described in (Br. 1.2.7.), and also a few passages after the one you quoted (which is Br. 1.4.1.) in the same chapter, when it says "He (Viraj) realized: "Indeed, I am the creation, for I produced all this." Therefore He became the creation. He who knows this becomes a creator in this creation of Viraj." (Br. 1.4.5.) The part in that passage I just quoted about He who knows this becomes a creator in this creation of Viraj is just confirming the point I just mentioned above, that both man is a creation of Viraj and that Viraj became his creation, so naturally the man who understands this becomes Viraj himself, this line having the same import (except with reference to Viraj) as “He who knows that supreme Brahman becomes Brahman indeed“ (Mundaka U. 3.2.9).

>comes to /lit/
>skips over all /lit/ threads
>only posts in threads about SJW's and black people

>>13294077
Sorry to here that you let that happen bro. Maybe if you weren't so hellbent on guzzling down soi and nigger semen you wouldn't be so easily mind-broken like a fag when he sees a Switch.

>Hey asshole, if I ever see you bully anon again I will personally beat your ass into next century. I'm willing to tank the suspension to stand up for my friends
>Are you OK anon? Don't mind that asshole, he's a loser. You can always count on me to have your back.

One set of Joseph Conrad's complete works, please.