/lit/ - Literature

>>20564029
Also to add to the thread:
>One of the myriad problems surrounding many contemporary attitudes to “spirituality” is that the doctrine of an Ultimate Reality (by whatever name--the Absolute, God, Allah, Atman-Brahman, Nirvana/Sunyata, the Tao, WakanTanka) and the elaboration of a spiritual method attuned to our relationship therewith, are left out of the picture altogether! What we are offered instead is a notion of “spirituality” as some kind of subjective inner state, a kind of “warm fuzzy glow,” sometimes harnessed to formulations such as “the kingdom of Heaven is within you”--as if by these words Christ meant that the kingdom of Heaven is of a psychological order! This is all of a piece with the notion that “spirituality” is a private affair, and that the spiritual life can be fashioned out of the subjective resources of the individual in question. Some of the factors which, over several centuries, have conspired to create a climate in which such ideas could take root include the rebellion against all authority, the cult of the individual, the humanistic prejudice that “man is the measure of all things,” the triumph--even in the religious domain itself--of sentimentalism over intellectuality, the shibboleths of “egalitarianism” and “democracy,” and the emergence of a rampant psychologism which usurps functions which properly belong to religion.

>In recent times we have seen many attempts to assimilate spirituality into the domain of psychology, a move which fails to distinguish between the contingent plane of the psyche and the inviolate Self, or Spirit--this failure generating confusions of all kinds, on full display in “occultist,” “New Age” and purportedly “Eastern” movements which lay claim to some kind of spirituality but which scorn traditional religious forms and practices. The same confusion can easily be discerned in the works of many modernistic writers on religious subjects, even when their general disposition towards religion is sympathetic. It might also be observed in passing that it is also quite possible to be “religious” in some externalist sense--punctilious in the observation of ritual obligations and so on--yet remain quite “unspiritual”; this is the phenomenon of an empty religiosity wherein the true goals of the path have been forgotten, and all that remains is an empty husk. (Such folk might usefully remember Martin Buber’s remark that “it is far more comfortable to have to do with religion than to have to do with God.” ) However, even such an attenuated form of religious practice is preferable to a so-called “spirituality” which has been stripped of all sense of the Transcendent. There remains some chance that the practices which are performed only to the letter might yet re-ignite embers which seem to have died.

>>20537399
>wagnerfag?
close, but no cigar

>>20292323

>>19760776
It's one of his underappreciated works IMO, also the source of this quote

>>19504045

>“In a world increasingly rife with heresy and pseudo-religion, Guénon had to remind twentieth century man of the need for orthodoxy, which presupposes firstly a Divine Revelation and secondly a Tradition that has handed down with fidelity what Heaven has revealed. He thus restores to orthodoxy its true meaning, rectitude of opinion which compels the intelligent man not only to reject heresy but also to recognize the validity of faiths other than his own if they also are based on the same two principles, Revelation and Tradition.”
—Martin Lings, author of Ancient Beliefs and Modern Superstitions

>“If during the last century or so there has been even some slight revival of awareness in the Western world of what is meant by metaphysics and metaphysical tradition, the credit for it must go above all to Guénon. At a time when the confusion into which modern Western thought had fallen was such that it threatened to obliterate the few remaining traces of genuine spiritual knowledge from the minds and hearts of his contemporaries, Guénon, virtually single-handed, took it upon himself to reaffirm the values and principles which, he recognized, constitute the only sound basis for the living of a human life with dignity and purpose or for the formation of a civilization worthy of the name.”
—Philip Sherrard, author of Christianity: Lineaments of a Sacred Tradition

>“Apart from his amazing flair for expounding pure metaphysical doctrine and his critical acuteness when dealing with the errors of the modern world, Guénon displayed a remarkable insight into things of a cosmological order. . . . He all along stressed the need, side by side with a theoretical grasp of any given doctrine, for its concrete—one can also say its ontological—realization failing which one cannot properly speak of knowledge.”
—Marco Pallis, author of A Buddhist Spectrum

>“Guénon’s mission was two-fold: to reveal the metaphysical roots of the ‘crisis of the modern world’ and to explain the ideas behind the authentic and esoteric teachings that still [remain] alive.”
—Harry Oldmeadow, author of Traditionalism: Religion in the Light of the Perennial Philosophy

>>19496996

>>19319816
Not OP, but its the source of this quote

>>19123044

>>15035347
holy based...

>>14768598
Holy based...
I will memorize this quote.

It is inspiring how one can refute all of modernity just by picking out Guénon quotes from any of his books.

>>14731704
>Jordan B Peterson, Brett Weinstein, Eric Weinstein, Joe Rogan, Ben Shapiro, and Sam Harris
Retroactively refuted by the Ineffable One (pbuh) himself.

>>14730387

Can how people still take Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson seriously when both of them were exposed?

Can someone explain what Rene is talking about here? I saw this posted on another board and I'm stumped

based

>>14582758
you've been duped by the kali yuga

I gotchu nigga

>>14026957
seething

>>13975161
Say, what's more important, IQ or a culture in which labour, morality and reason is being nurtured?
The IQ question can only take you so far and one last thing, keep this yo yourself and don't tell anyone, but jews really like to lie. Don't know, could just be a stereotype!

>Guénon didn't delineate exactly what's wrong with the modern worl-

>nobody has posted it

aestheticism and abstractions are both symptoms of degeneration

>>13365111

>>13280450
I memed Guenon into common parlance on /lit/ starting about 5 years ago and a bunch of people read and ended up partially or fully agreeing with him and as a result of this many of them began to adopt more positions that can be painted as right-wing or reactionary and they slowly gained widespread traction over the years across /lit/ and the other boards. To the other anons who also contributed, I offer you my thanks.