/lit/ - Literature

>>13978504

there was a thread just yesterday asking the same question ffs. if you type guénon chart in google it's the first thing that comes up... fucking zoomers

>>13978504
Can the mods please just ban anyone who creates threads with "Guenon" in the OP?

>>13978725
this isnt soviet russia

>>13978725
>posts chinese meme girl picture
>has thousands of anime pics on his computer
mmmh, à mon avis c'est plutôt les déchèts comme toi qui sont responsable du déclin de /lit/

>>13978932
newfag

>>13978938
been on 4chan since '06, faggot.

>>13978942
prove it

>>13978929
It will be

>>13978932
>>has thousands of anime pics on his computer
I have zero, faggot.

>>13978504
So many guenon threads.... Why not the other traditionalist who wrote far better?

>>13978995
There are only two traditionalist author. guénon and coomaraswamy.

>>13979030
Evola schuon coomaraswarmy

>>13979054
>ebola
Evola is a joke.
>schuon
supposedly on the same level as guénon and coom-araswamy but I am not familiar with his works.

>>13979086
lol evola has put out better info than guenon. his only good work is on infinity

>>13979092
evola didn't understand eastern metaphysics, would make amateur mistakes in his quoting of ideas from them and only did so for thing that could be twisted in favor of supporting his worldview

>>13979201
>evola didn't understand eastern metaphysics,

prove it

>>13979271
Evola puts temporal power before spiritual authority. Inversed hierarchy. In that way he's modern. He can't even get the fundamentals right. Discarded.

>>13979492
Why is that wrong though?

>>13978958
Desudesu

>>13978504
here's the chart

>>13979643
i hate thread comps like this, they're so shrill

>>13979682

>>13978725
>Can the mods please just ban anyone who creates threads with "Guenon" in the OP?
this

>>13979201
>I HAVE NEVER READ EVOLA LET ME SPEEEEERG

>>13978725
We will now open 10 more just to trigger you. When antinatalists were raising the board you We're against cersorship weren't you, you asinine hypocrite.

>>13979271
Evola tried to portray Buddhism as some quasi-Nietzschean elite spiritual-brotherhood of Aryans while downplaying and ignoring the fundamental egalitarian and moralistic tendencies that were in it from the beginning. Evola also did not understand Advaita very well but mostly repeated a bunch of the more basic attempts at proving it illogical which were already anticipated long ago and retroactively refuted by Shankara or later medieval Advaitins. He had some weird love-hate relationship with Hinduism where he obsessed over the anti-egalitarian practices of the caste system and the spiritual warrior ideal but then he rejected some of its older and more central/influential metaphysics connected with that in favor of Tantra. Much of his criticism of Advaita from the perspective of Tantra appears to be based on a surface-level understanding of both and there are often important omissions found as well, he selectively takes things from Tantra to support his preference of action over knowledge while ignoring what contradicts that, I still ultimately like Evola but I view him as flawed in certain areas of his thought. I wouldn't know where to begin as Evola wrote about this in multiple books and essays but here's just a few examples from Evola's book 'Shakti: World as Power' pages 26-27:

>>13979924
>If we uphold Vedanta's Advaita monism, we are thereby forced to conclude that maya, in its irrational and miragelike nature, could mysteriously arise within brahman itself (since nothing exists other than it). This, in turn, would lead us to conclude that brahman itself is subject, in some way, to "ignorance."
As Evola should have known, Shankara comments on and agrees with the Mandukya Karika of Gaudapada, which analyzes the Upanishads to conclude that Maya is a power of Brahman, which it is the very nature (svabhava) of Brahman to effortlessly wield or express like it is the nature of the sun to emit light, this same view of Maya is upheld throughout all of Shankara's works. The notion that Brahman/Atma is subject to ignorance is similarly incorrect, as all the Upanishads state that the Self is unaffected and unattached, that It is not subject to ignorance. Anyone who has read Shankara would find that he affirms this repeatedly, such as in on his commentary on Katha Upanishad 2.2.11.

>The following are some further Tantric criticisms. In a sense we may say that the world is not absolutely "real" and that maya, its source, is not totally unreal. A dream may be said to be unreal, but not the power that generates it. If maya is unreal, whence comes samsara, namely, the finite and ever-changing world? Somebody said: "If maya is unreal, samsara becomes real."
Evola here appears to be unaware that that maya is not independent in Advaita but is a power of Brahman, who is the source of maya. The very nature of maya is to project an illusory world as real, while Brahman alone remains real. So, the notion that if we deny that maya is ultimately real then we have no explanation is nonsensical because samsara is inseparable from maya, maya presents itselfs to us through samsara. Advaita denys both maya/samsara (which are different aspects of the same thing) while maintaining their cause alone as real. Advaita holds to the Vivartavada causation theory that the effect is an appearance of the cause, which alone is real. This criticism appears to be based on a total misunderstanding of what Maya is taught to be in Advaita.

>>13978725
seething

>>13979856
>we
You are just one sad creature.

But I'm not against Guenon, it's just that I don't see a point in creating so many threads without any meaningful content. I have seen so many of these threads but I still don't know what this guy is all about. So you have failed shilling and should be ashamed of yourself.

>>13978504
Whoa I thought Schuon was the pedo of the tradgang

bump

>>13979705
Haha I was in that thread. Hilarious!