/lit/ - Literature

If you're interested more in his thought than his literary writings then Visions of Excess is a good starter collection you can read quickly, then you can pretty much move chronologically forward. If you want to read his College de Sociologie writings there are a couple collections, one in English called The Sacred Conspiracy, and a good secondary source by Falasca-Zamponi.

>>18788747
He was also a memetic terrorist or so.

>>18788747
Made a guide in another thread, it was made quite in a rush so some of the spelling is off, but the essays recommended are in Visions of Excess: >>>18706242 >>>18749176

First have a knowledge of Marx and Freud

Read some essays by Bataille in this order
The Sacred Conspieracy
Notion Of Expenditure
Solar Anus
The Language of flowers
The old mole
The Jesuve
The Pineal Eye
deviations of nature
Solar Anus again now that it makes sense
His text on Sade
The Psychology of fascism

They can be found in Visions of Excess or at marxists.org and anarchist library.

When that is done read the rest of the essays in visions of excess

After this Bataille's work splits up in two complimentary parts: The Spiritual and the economical/sociological.

To start with the top down economical the accursed share is great, it's just more of notion of expenditure.

For the spiritual you can read Inner Experience and work through Summa Atheologica.

Have fun :)

>>18788812
How are his literary writings? I've heard by many that his Story of the Eye and whatever are really good, but do they scratch the same itch as his philosophical stuff, or are they more just fun to read?

>>18788747
>>18788833
His writing are access energy, I don't give shit

Start with La notion de dépense (short essay, sort of an intro to La part maudite), Madame Edwarda, and Histoire de l’œil.
Then La part maudite, Le bleu du ciel, and L'érotisme.
Then L'expérience intérieure.
(I haven't read the rest of his stuff desu)

so this is what Guenonfags are shilling now huh?

When should I read the Inner Experience? Before or after reading most of his works? Also I'm mostly interested in his non-fictional works, but does reading them help to understand and appreciate better his fiction?

>>18788833
I would say Nietzsche is far more important to reading Bataille than Marx or Freud. There's also Mauss and Kojeve's Hegel if you really want to dig into influences.

>>18788850

Good.

>>18788833
Thank you! :)

>>18788850
/lit/ will become a Bataillean board. Guenonfags cannot stop it, for they are retroactively potlatched
>>18788868
I was just about to post this. Our share grows.

>>18788896
>/lit/ will become a Bataillean board.
Not if Weil fags can stop it.

>>18788909
Well if things get too intense we can have your parents come pick you up.

>>18788896
Based

>>18788864
It depends on what you want to read by him desu
Freuds beyond the pleasure principle and this chapter in capital is really important https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch07.htm

>>18788921
We are talking about Bataille, so things won't ever get too intense. It's the same thing as a lotr larp

>>18788896
Next we will potlatch the bourgeoisie

>>18788747
Does he have something to do with sexual revolution

>>18788947
Indirectly yes, but the sexual revolution is Marcuse and Reich.

there's no such thing as "potlatch." it's about as real an anthropological concept as ether is in physics.

>>18788933
>be batille
>start secret society
>have all your secret bros refuse to decapitate you
>be eternally remembered as larper as a result
oof

>>18788990
Some other dude was the one that was going to be the sacrifice, but no one would kill him, not even Bataille, so they didn't do it.

>>18788847
>yeah dude just read a very complex philosophical book in the middle of a trilogy without actual context
It shows that you didn't read him, especially with your insistence to call his books by their French titles in an English board, in an English thread, in your English post.

I no longer believe that this board is real. I start reading The Accursed Share last week, and lo and behold Bataille starts getting shilled hard right as I finish it. Same shit happened with Schelling and Holderlin a couple months ago.

>>18789021
schelling and holderlin has never been shilled on here. you're schizophrenic.

>>18789001
Oh. Well I can't say I'm not super disappointed to hear that.

Guénonfags still seething

>>18789021
I've been shilling this shit forever

>>18788933
>>18788990
>>18789001
He was the original "kys" poster, the spiritual ancestor of imageboard culture

I love how Bataille's project gives a spiritual aspect to marxism that allows us to be whole and rounded human beings.

Can any bataillefag answer this >>18788852

>>18788843
no one asked you

>>18788850
people who read bataille have brains, even if they want to fuck them off. People who read guenon have not brain, nor soul, they are the epitome of being a npc.

I am confused about base materialism.

Could someone break it down and how it relates to for example Marxist materialism or Spinozist materialism?

>>18789053
in what way did he do that though? I don't think you're wrong I am just genuinely curious.

Bataille himself was an atheist and rejected Catholicism and Christianity after being a devout believer and student of theology, in what way did he bring out spirituality when rejecting it in one sense?

What was his endgame?

>>18789062
base materialism?
more like, BASED materialism! HAHAHAHA
Just kidding, we do jokes around here. If you want a small book that touches upon the topic of Bataille's relation to Marx in the first few chapters I'd reccommend 'Saints of the impossible : Bataille, Weil, and the politics of the sacred' by Alexander Irwin

>>18789059
My recommendation is here >>18788833

>>18788864
>>18788930

He is quite good at summarizing Mauss in Accursed Share, but yeah Hegel and especially Kojeve's Hegel and Hegel's lectures on aesthetics is useful: Hegel is just quite hard and a lack of Hegel isn't a deal breaker so I didn't want to discourage people from reading Bataille by recommending him, Hegel is good but not necessary.

>>18788852
>>18789059
I'd say to read it last. Even if it was published before most of his other books. It's a bit out-there.

>>18789082
Sacrifice.

>>18789062
Benjamin Noys has a good essay, I can recommend that.

>>18789092
But why? Why not suicide? Nonetheless everyone die eventually.

>>18789099
Imagine being as fucking stupid as you. Sacrifice and suicide are two very different things, you absolute nigger. The point is not that we'll eventually die, you retard. Go and read a book, faggot.

Guys how can he have so much of Nietzsche and Marx, who are totally opposed to each other? I personally cannot take anything seriously by marxism due to the blatant resentment in there, how it is this that fuels it up. From Nietzsche I do get a feeling of Sade, and this was more or less what I would expect from Bataille, not a crypto moralistic political stance.

>>18789111
>Sacrifice and suicide are two very different things
How?
Mainländer suicide was a sacrifice and an endpoint of his philosophy.

>>18789119
why do you believe Nietzsche and Marx are totally opposed to each other? The majority of philosophers in the 20th century were heavily influenced by both.

>>18789128
You can try telling me how they are not opposed. But you know, recall what Nietzsche said about resentment, reaction, virtue and moral, equality.

>>18789071
Very complicated matter, hard to answer, I simply recommend reading him. He addresses this in the last chapter of accursed share vol. 1 quite well, Inner experience is also all about what he calls "inner experience" which is a form of materialist spirituality. But start with the essay sacred conspiracy which I recommend here >>18788833

>>18789119
A non-bullshit marxism is a non-moralist anti-humanist marx: Althusser is a good example. The Nietzsche x Marx synthesis allows us to have a class consciousness without resentment, an intellectually rigorous politic that isn't self-defeating like so much leftist bullshit is these days.

>>18789082
pussy eating

>>18789128
>why do you believe Nietzsche and Marx are totally opposed to each other?
Marx=Humanist
Nietzsche=Anti-Humanist
From this they take very different paths (of which, I'm most fond of Nietzsche's).

>>18789178
An Anti-humanist reading of Marx is usually always better, read some Althusser.

>>18789193
This doesn't take away that Marx is a Humanist, as one of his foundations.

I think an interesting "synthesis" would be Giovanni Gentile + Bataille + Nietzsche; is it possible?

>>18789220
No, I don't think so.

>>18789220
If you need the strongest punch of anti-humanism then read Cioran, Zapffe, Ligotti and Ulrich Horstmann.

>>18789220
Wouldn't those just cancel out and get you Hegel?

>>18789122
You see this chin?

>>18789233
Yes, I think Bataille could work well with the pessimists.

Bataille is radically anti-fascist so i don't think he's useful for the perverse shit >>18789220 wants desu.

>>18789229
Why, would you argue?
>>18789233
And Bill Hopkins, I suppose (though he didn't write much). But it wasn't an Anti-Humanist list.
>>18789236
A part of the synthetic process is contradiction. But, in all sincerity, I don't know: Gentile is a neo-fichtean who prioritizes nation and a collectivist mindset, while Nietzsche is an individualist. But you could get the "will to power" and the "maximization of the individual through the collective" by combining the two; with some Bataillian economics.
This is pure conjecture, I'm just throwing out ideas

>>18789236
Take anything and you get Hegel.
Only after I started reading him (after a lot of preparation, don't worry) did I realize that he's not like anything I've ever read. His system is alive and one whole being. Nobody did something like he did.

>>18789272
>another lookism faggot who thinks looks triumph over intellect
Eat the dust where supermodels of fashion industry walk on because they are the greatest philosophers of the world according to your braindead subhuman point of view.

>>18789313
post jawline and body

>>18789305
>But it wasn't an Anti-Humanist list.
Bro, have you read A Short History of Decay by Cioran and The Last Messiah by Zapffe?

>>18789317
Why don't you fuck off back to >>>/tv/ or >>>/fit/ or >>>/fa/ to worship meat plastered on skeleton

>>18789305
>you could get the "will to power" and the "maximization of the individual through the collective" by combining the two
That's just hitlerism with extra steps

>>18789122
>Mainländer
You are a fucking retard.
Go and read Bataille and look at how he uses sacrifice and suicide, nigger.

>>18789335
>Why don't you fuck off back to >>>/tv/ or >>>/fit/ or >>>/fa/ to worship meat plastered on skeleton
Chinlet chubby fuck, go and cry faggot.

>>18789340
What is the point of this thread then? Just keep spamming go read x and be done with the whole thing.

>>18789345
(You)

>>18789305
Trying to make Bataille into a fascist is silly, at best you can do what Mouffe did with Carl Schmitt and extract some concepts from him but admit that you use them against his own project.

>>18789349
>What is the point of this thread then? Just keep spamming go read x
Yes, that is how the average poster writes

>>18789157
It seems just the old marxist-leninist, stalinist, maoist takes. The class is a collective, it already mobilizes and homogenizes the different wills, Nietzsche didn’t even think the strong/healthy should cure the weak/sick.

>>18789364
Strange, I haven't seen many average replies.

>>18789122
Suicide and sacrifice is two different things, but distinguishing them is hard, so good question: I don't have time to write that essay, but good question.

>>18789325
You seem to have misunderstood me: I wasn't creating an Anti-Humanist synthesis. But I do agree that those you have put are the ones I'd choose as well.
>>18789336
kek
>>18789361
Not really a fascist, but a suprafascist (in a somewhat Evolian way).

I’ll merge Evola and Bataille and there is nothing you guys can do.

>>18789157
>what he calls "inner experience" which is a form of materialist spirituality.
this is fucking incredible. you are a completely retard, an unnecesary liar or... i dont know, im genuinely freaking out how someone can misread like this. the inner experience materialist spirituality?... is a fucking frontal rejection of materialism and the material in general. seriously, how you can come up with something like this?. i know im sound like an schizo but its really a delicate matter.

>>18789401
Through "Eros and Love", it should be pretty easy to do.

>>18789413
Unironically hylic hands typed the post you were replying to, it's the only explanation. Keep moving hylic, this is a Dionysaical board

>>18789014
Which book is the hard one?
You didn't get filtered by L'érotisme, did you? If so, try to read it in French, maybe the translation you read wasn't very good

>>18789433
Uh-oh, ummm... Platochads, I thought this was an Apollinian board... We got too cocky...

>>18789433
how can you read bataille inner experience and thinking he is refering to a materialist spirituality?. i think its impossible. or maybe he understand just little bits so he invent the rest.
i mean, even if he is a materialist he cant come up with the idea that "the inner experience" is materialist if he know how to read. its incredible the biased people can be. kids, be aware of what you believe.

>>18789383
>Not really a fascist, but a suprafascist (in a somewhat Evolian way).
Still not gonna work, see Bataille's quote on Guenon? The best you can do is still appropriate some concepts and make heretical readings that you must admit that Bataille would disagree with.

Bataille is a good alternative to Evola though.

>>18789449
Apollonians can't handle the Big Orphic Cithara.

>>18789459
Wasn't that even a point of contention from the other french leftists at the time, that a book about mysticism was contextually inappropriate?

>>18789468
No, Bataille keeps with the slave mentality common to marxists/materialists. That is why he’ll always be a failed larper of the great beast Sade.

>>18789468
I don't really think Bataille's quote on Guénon works for Evola as well. Bataille criticised Guénon for not "being up with the times" and reading modern(ist) literature. Evola, e.g., critiques Sartre in one of his books (I don't know which right now).

>>18789504
didnt know about that, but sounds pretty plausible.

>>18789442
I said trilogy, troglodyte. Inner Experience obviously.

>>18789547
How i read Bataille's critique was that Guenon's critique of modern philosophy was based on an ignorance of modern philosophy - That Guenon didn't know what he was talking about and could therefore justify traditionalism's existence to himself through ignorance. Even though Evola may refer to modern philosophy, I really doubt that he has a good grasp of it.

Can someone give me a quick rundown on Bataille's philosophy? Is he another run of the mill 20th century nihilist?

>>18789655
>I really doubt that he has a good grasp of it.
Evola, besides reading Sartre, had read Nietzsche and Jünger (among other moderns, which I can't recollect right now); point being, he had read a fair amount of his contemporaries.

>>18789696
This Notion of Expenditure summarizes a lot of his ideas, that's why I put it second on the list above. Here's a podcast about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zUXYHrXa8g

>>18789697
That doesn't mean he understands them.

>>18788833
Acid Horizon has discussions and audiobooks of some of these texts btw: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqzFQr1LCC8xrr0fMcRctYg/videos

>>18789638
you also said in the middle. Inner Experience is the first book of the Somme athéologique.

>>18788852
One thing about the Somme athéologique (Inner Exp., Guilty, On Nietzsche) is that their form is part philosophical essay and fragments, part diary and part poetry. Which also adds to the difficulty of it, as everything is always expressed the clearest, or a lot of it is simply quite personal and you don't know what to focus on (in contrast to the relatively clear, sociological *elaboration* of Accursed Share: Consumation, which, in the preface, he said actually went against the ideas of his book). As it happens, there is a quite close proximity with his literary writings of the time (not The Eye, but) especially The Impossible, which contains similar fragmentary narrative and poetry, but also L'Abbé C. or Madame Edwarda. He was basically writing many of these books at the same time (also Le petit, La scissiparité), so, more than one explaining the other, there is a definite closeness. Other ideas from his other books, like expenditure and general economy, also return (or appear before), but in a slightly different, more personal spiritual way.

>>18788909
/lit/ will be a Laure board!

>>18788947
He was against it. It was not the kind of transgression he envisioned; indeed, with liberation and breaking taboos there is no more transgression.

>>18789088
I keked hard.
Also, thanks for the recommendation.

Does anyone know a good book on Bataille and Catholicism?

>>18790198
Hollier's Against Architecture does deal with Bataille's early Catholic phase quite a bit. Not sure of a more explicit 'confrontation' between the two.

>dude let's larp as gilles de raise to own the libs i mean demiurge
lol

the french are diseased

>>18790210
Thank you :)

I am considering doing a hardcore study of Bataille some time soon that will give me PhD level expertise in him (not an actual PhD): So I will first read all his translated works, then read all the academic articles I can find about him and then I'll read all the best secondary lit books: So I'm kinda collecting a list of must read books. I hope I'll survive and stick to it.

>>18789805
love that podcast

Where does Bataille talk about personal discipline?

>>18789178

> Marx=Humanist

are you saying that because you believe Marx actually himself walked around and identified as a humanist? Or just saying it because you read some retarded pseudo-scholar call him that?

Quite weird to say Marx is a humanist when he lived before humanism really become a thing as a philosophy.

>>18792208
I'm not the one you're responding to:
Yeah, Althusser in his very famous study of Marx makes a distinction between early and late Marx: Where early Marx matches a humanist narrative with his notion of alienation, later Marx becomes anti-humanist in his analysis focusing on the process of capital rather than some human essence which the outdated term alienation gestured towards.

>>18789178
>Marx=Humanist
i get where you're coming from but things are a bit more complex. 1848 Marx was very differently from the "Speech for Free Trade" Marx with the general progression being a decrease in humanism.
Also there are situations like his position on the french invasion of Algeria. In the beginning he was all for ending the mediterranian slave trade and berber barbary and he supported the french attempt at integration and civilization, but later he decried the Invasion as a brutal and inhumane massacre. It's very much a conflict of what he personally considers nice and what would be best in a structural long term sense, although by the time of Kapital 3 the intrinsic value of humans has completly disintegrated in favor of unleashing capital

>>18788896
Yes

>>18789119
It's not that crazy. He thought that for a Nietszchian reevaluation of values you can't just hide in a cabin like how he did. Bataille thought that the easiest way to do this was from a proletariat revolution.

>>18793419
>proletarian revolution
Weak plebeians gathering together because they are resentful weaklings. That’s the least Nietzsche would say.

Bataille is kinda the father of the french leftist Nietzsche practiced by Klossowski, Deleuze Foucault etc.

>>18793552
That's the most Nietzsche would do.

>>18788833
>Summa Atheologica.
A title like this is enough to instantly prevent me from reading it.

>>18793677
>I will not read these books!
Ok that's fine sugartits, want me to give you a medal or something?

>>18793419
Nietzsche directly criticized the French Revolution because it overthrew the French aristocracy. The proletarian revolution is the final victory of the last man.

>>18793694
Maybe read the two first essays on the list above, Notion of Expenditure gives a kind of aristocratic (in the Nietzschean sense) justification of a proletarian revolution.

>>18792208
Humanism existed as far back as the Renaissance, my dude.

>>18793419
In the earlier writings from Bataille sure, but later he concludes revolutions have really only succeeded against feudal regimes, not the bourgeoisie. Seems like an admission that to be a formal communist in a western democracy is more or less a sham. Perhaps the origin of post-structuralism/post-modernism and the turn away from Marx to Nietzsche begins with Bataille in that sense. If you read Bataille and your only takeaway is marxist boilerplate you didn't need Bataille for that.

>>18793747
Even when he stops considering ML communism as a viable solution he still holds on to Marxism in some sense he seems to become more like a marxian anarchist.

>>18793701
No thanks. I'll keep reading Nietzsche and not bother with pseudointellectual eclectics who try to force two entirely different philosophies into the same mold, for seemingly no reason other than to participate in "popular philosophy." Take one or the other, don't try to pretend a proletarian revolution would EVER be compatible with Nietzsche's expressly stated ideals. It simply does not work.

>It is probable that the manufacturers and great magnates of commerce have hitherto lacked too much all those forms and attributes of a superior race, which alone make persons interesting; if they had had the nobility of the nobly born in their looks and bearing, there would perhaps have been no socialism in the masses of the people. For these are really ready for slavery of every kind, provided that the superior class above them constantly shows itself legitimately superior, and born to command - by its noble presence! The commonest man feels that nobility is not to be improvised, and that it is his part to honour it as the fruit of protracted race-culture.
Gay Science, Book One, 40.
>Work. How closely work and the workers now stand even to the most leisurely of us! The royal courtesy in the words: "we are all workers", would have been a cynicism and an indecency even under Louis XIV.
Book Three, 188

And Nietzsche's direct word against hacks like Bataille:
>Against Mediators: He who attempts to mediate between two decided thinkers is rightly called mediocre: he has not an eye for seeing the unique; similarising and equalising are signs of weak eyes.
Book Three, 228

>>18793770 continued
though a very nihilistic one and with a big hatred for communist belief as a replacement for religion (see blue of noon)

>>18793770
I feel like it was the only way to be read. If everyone in your circle is a marxist and you won't be taken seriously if you don't pay the reigning scholasticism lip service, you have to find a way to say what you want on someone else's terms. It's like what Deleuze does to Bergson, or rather what he says he does. The introduction to Bergsonism is pretty funny in that regard, he basically describes philosophy like a forced pregnancy. An inversion of Plato's sense of being a midwife, here you have violence done to the target to produce your own progeny. Marxism becomes impregnated with Nietzcheanism. Not quite a Hegelian movement since rather than a synthesis you are putting someone else's body of work to your end, but as if they said what you wanted to say. It's subversive but also creative. You're allowed to act like you agreed with the host all along, because you've made him speak on your behalf.

Danilo Kiš was really inspired by Bataille, all of you ITT that care about Bataille should also read Kiš.

>>18788747
start with the Notion of Expenditure, it's about 10 pages

>>18793803
Arh i agree that both Nietzsche and Marx become quite mutated in Bataille: An aristocratic Marx, a class conscious Nietzsche, an atheistic St. Teresa de Avila.

I must also point out the distinction between proletariat and working class: Whereas the working class has some level of positive homogeneity, the proletariat is a completely negative non-class which signifies the otherized heterogeneity, that which has been deemed excretion from society, and that which molecularly exists in all of us (more some than others).

>>18793827
I put it number 2 here >>18788833
because Sacred Conspiracy is more suited to hype you up as a first read, where you can ride that energy into notion of expenditure which is a more technical text that puts you in the heart of Bataille's system.

>>18793814
any recs?

>>18793867
The Encyclopedia of the Dead or The Tomb for Boris Davidovich.

>>18793839
I think that's a fair distinction and that's also how you end up with a aristocratic marx chiding the capitalist for having neither myth or possibility of gainless expenditure or pure action, because the sovereign as an overman and the proleterian are both heterogenous to humanity.

>>18793814
Pročitao sam samo dio Enciklopedije, ne sjećam se čak ni koji tačno dio.
Šta bi rekao da najviše pokazuje njegove inspiracije?

>>18793913
His rejection and disdain for both the communists and fascists for one, the second most obvious thing is that he includes a quote by Bataille in the introduction of The Encyclopedia of the Dead. And the more you read of him and how he examines death camps of the 20th century, all the more apparent the Bataille's influence on his works becomes.

>>18793876
Exactly, it's a very strange and interesting position that takes part in the leftist project but purely based on his own conditions.
In old mole Bataille problematizes the word "sur" as idealism and through much of his work he endevours to find the most base and materialist conception of the world, he also problematizes fascism as a great homogenization and his greatest foe. Thus surfascism is the perfect antonym for Bataille's position which he calls base materialism: That's why i get so angry at the Evolafags who call Bataille surfascist, it's like calling Marx a monological idealist.

>>18793940
>Evolafags who call Bataille surfascist
Based wikipedia skimmers

ok its been a day, stop responding, let this thread archive

>>18789031
love you anon

>>18793986

> actually discourse on /lit/

THIS IS UNHEARD OF!!! ARCHIVE THIS THREAD!!!! WHERE IS THE GUENON SPAM!!!

Anyone read Surya's biography? It's quite good.

>>18794028
My takeaway from it was that if you really want to be a writer you should be involved in different circles of people. It's as much about Bataille as it is about the people he knew at different phases of his career.

>>18794028
Considering getting it, thoughts?

very cool bataille thanks for sharing

>>18794138
new wojak material

>>18794152
It's been a while since we got new wojaks

>>18794119
It's really engaging, written in a kind of essay/biography hybrid (not too dissimilar from Bataille or Klossowski). Not your typical straightforward bio.

>>18794157
No it hasn't.

>>18788835
Story of the Eye unironically gets me hard

>>18794251
/lit/ isn't very innovative on the visual arts front

>>18789021
someone just made a video game inspired by bataille

>>18794138
where is this from?

>>18794276
Which one?

>>18794258
It is written in a way where you just have enough time to get hard but then just after feel really uncomfortable about being hard, it is the peak of what you can do with eroticism and literature constantly enticing and horrifying you at the same time.

>>18794281
An essay in The Cradle of Humanity

>>18794285
cruelty squad
it doesn't matter all that much to the game.

>>18794306
Thank you cradle of humanity poster, very cool!

>>18794316
I think I've seen it somewhere. Might play it.
What does it have to do with Bataille though?

>>18793940
Surfascism visavis Bataille was a term first coined by one of Bataille's associates in Contre-attaque (Pierre Andler I believe), and then used by the surrealists as an attack on Bataille and his friends as Contre-attaque was breaking up: the term is used mostly as pejorative, as an excessive fascism, or some kind of fascism anyway (Benjamin, according to Klossowski, saw Bataille falling into a *pre*fascist aestheticism), when it was initially devised as a surpassing of fascism. (While Evola might also mean the latter, albeit from the right instead of the left, it is also easily misinterpreted as an edgy statement - a statement, by the way, I haven't been able to source: supposedly he said it before his trial or 'Autodifesa' but it is not in the text itself and trying to follow the references in 2ndary sources had led me nowhither. I'm no supporter of Evola, but it's interesting that the same term has been associated with both of them, while perhaps neither of them actually used it.) A surpassing of fascism, or an attack of fascism with its own weapons and means: this last Bataille had explicitly mentioned in Contre-attaque, as well as within Acéphale (this is in the book The Sacred Conspiracy, collecting texts from the secret society), though it's probably telling Bataille himself never latched on to the term surfascism. Perhaps indeed because of the prefix sur-, his own prefix being more an a- anyway (but! in the prefix sur- essay, Bataille also criticizes Nietzsche's overman, while soon after of course he will rehabilitate Nietzsche, while in On Nietzsche he speaks positively of the 'summit', which is the position of sovereignty (itself derived from the prefix super-), in contrast to the position of 'decline'; in that sense, at least lexically, he did not hold on to base materialism [a lot of the terms of Documents have been blown up in terms of their fame, partly by October, imo]; while fascism, in the mid thirties, Bataille saw not simply as homogeneity, he saw it as an emerging heterogeneous force - in that sense Bataille was interested in it, since here was something violent, with its männerbünde, emerging after the nihilism of authorityless liberal democracy - but the problem was that it was monocephalic, and indeed ultimately ended in or reproduced an homogeneity). But say, in the late thirties, on the eve of the war, what is he? Not a sur-, not an anti- (in its precise meaning; but not at all pro- either), perhaps an a-fascist (I don't want to coin this unused term however) - Acéphale had dissolved, its members displaced by the onset of war and refusing to sacrifice him, the College of Sociology likewise, the mystical Bataille neither taking on more objective sociological study nor more conspiratorial action (Caillois), he was communityless, and yet "joyful in the face of death"...
(digression not really going anywhere)

>>18794335
a quote in the ending and everyone being obsess with sacrifices despite being unable to kill.

More like CHADtaille

>>18794405
Good elaboration, my main point was just to reject the evolafags' bullcrap but you went further with a quality post.

Maybe it's worth furthermore pointing out how bullshit the surrealists' critique of Bataille and Artaud were: quite like twitter shittery. A lot of the fascism accusations come from that shitshow.

>>18793783
>not bother with pseudointellectual eclectics
>I'll keep reading >Nietzsche
Anon, I...

>>18794475
Haven't seen that pic before, was this when he was catholic?

quality thread

>>18794947
That was a bit earlier. By 1925 he had graduated from archival studies and had befriended surrealists like Michel Leiris and writing numismatic papers.

>>18794413
That screenshot alone is a complete eyesore, holy fuck. Videogames are for children.

>>18795328
So this is before or after he was psychoanalysed? And while he was active in the socialist mass movement of the time?

>>18795342
Before that. He wanted to found an anti-Dada movement with Leiris at the time or something, and wrote the erotic fiction W.C., which he later destroyed. In 26/27 I believe, he went under psychoanalysis, from which Story of the Eye resulted.

So I've been a fan of Bataille-inspired band Deathspell Omega for years and studied their work off and on for some time. I have a PDF of Erotism, but what other Bataille should I read to get a better understanding of DSO?

Pics are from Surya's book btw.
This one's from 1920, year of his supposed loss of faith and start of his studies.

>>18795429
I don't know about your band but I wrote a guide above to some of his early essays that can help you get into him.

>>18795406
so this is the time he was cruel in the most literal sense?

Is there anything left from the anti-dada days?

Why did Deleuze ignore Bataille (pbuh)? Was he afraid of him or something? He almost never mentions him as compared to Foucault.

>>18795763
In the French version of anti-oedipus there's a huge footnote to the first chapter explaining Bataille's influence.

>>18795763
Deleuze said he never liked Bataille's fiction, it was too "French," he preferred anglos kek

>>18795763
What do you mean? I only came across Bataille in the first place because of Deleuze.

>>18795949
??? Where and when does Deleuze ever explicitly mention Bataille. I cannot find anything, nor is there much work on combining the two online. I was surprised myself since I figured that Bataille would be a major influence, but he really isn't. I will admit that I'm more into Deleuze's solo stuff, so idk if Guattari brings in elements from Bataille but pre DnG Deleuze has almost 0 relation to him.

>>18796023
They mention the solar anus as one of the first things in anti oedipus, i remember from the register that Bataille was mentioned, i think, once in 1000 plateaus and then the huge french footnote that explains that they are yeeting the expenditure from bataille in the first section of anti-oedipus

>>18795895
>Deleuze said he never liked Bataille's fiction, it was too "French," he preferred anglos
the only based thing about Deleuze desu

>>18795438
He has that rebel teen thing going

bump

>>18795340
its so consistent during that game that you are the children

>>18788835
Bro. They are iconic and fundamental.

Like just read Story of the Eye.

>>18789021
There were always threads. You just didn't detect them since your brain wasn't used to remembering the author name and photo/painting.

>>18789082
There is a Hoi4 mod where he is the ideological leader of France and the society becomes a libertarian dream of erotic aristocrats.

There is an event where you can choose if you allow woman to sell fetuses for soup.

>Bataille
>Guenon
>Peladan
Why are the French so into schizophrenic occultism?

>>18797719
Eating frogs is equivalent to microdosing LSD

>>18795429
Based. It's the peak of music. Nothing comes even close.

>>18789053
>marxist
>human being

>>18797711
lmao link

>>18797693
Thanks, it seems short so will check it out quick

>>18798939
Red flood mod is the name

>>18795429
Diabolous Absconditus is influenced by Madam Edwarda
The phrase "God of terror, very low dost thou bring us, very low hast thou brought us" (a quote from Georges Bataille's My Mother) is the first sentence of "The Shrine of Mad Laughter" and the final sentence of "A Chore for the Lost".

>onto-ethics of excess
>doesn't eat to excess and become obese
Can someone defend this? Surely the paramount moral good from Bataille's ethics would be gluttony? How could eating in moderation ever be justified while the energy of the sun pours down on food crops?

>>18799700
Didn't Baudrillard write a general economic analysis of obesity in America? I remember a thread about it not long ago.

>>18797719
Catholcism preserved the Greek mystery religion sovl of Christianity that Prots replaced with going to work 9 to 5.

>>18799700
>consuming instead of expending
bulimia is actually the most Bataillean

>>18799710
>a general economic analysis of obesity in America?
no, he wrote some vague, spur of the moment generalizations that amount to like 4 pages.

>>18799710
I'm sure it would be good but in a sense any particular historically conditioned example of abundence causing gluttony aren't as interesting as a universal onto-ethics of gluttony, that is an ethics derived from an ontological ground of excess (plenitude after the death of god).

Did he ever deal with Aquinas or Catholic moral philosophy on gluttony or concupiscence considering the intimate link to excess and a DoG plenitude, and the Catholic background/grounding to much of his thought?

>>18799746
Shitting seems the more thorough expending. He uses digestive analogies like "Solar Anus".

>>18799764
American hands pregnant with modernity typed this post

bump

>>18788843
what

Has any Catholic apologetics or other theologians tackled Bataille and his critique of religion, more closely Catholicism?

I am interested in Bataille, but also Catholicism. Not a convert or anything, but would be interesting to see who comes up on top in that debate.

>>18801745
I don't think the Catholic chuch has won a debate since the 16th century

>>18788909
Weil seems dope where should one start?

>>18802709
wrong thread.
discuss weil all you want she seems pretty cool to me but make your own thread. i might make it myself even.

Does anyone know if Bataille apostatized because or after reading Nietzsche?

>>18801745
Where does Bataille address Christianity/Catholicism?

>>18799714
Out of the 3 authors listed one was an apostate commie, one was a muslim, and othe last was a "Catholic" who also believed a bunch of insane heretical esoteric shit that would probably qualified as heretical by the Church if he wasn't also perceived by the normies of his day as just a Chris-Chan-tier autist.

Catholicism is a part of it but can't explain it all. 20th century France is the land where every ridiculous excess is written and theorized but hardly ever implemented.

>>18801745
I may be wrong, but in the part of Bataille I've read the athiesm is assumed, and if recourse is given it's to Nietzsche. Bataille is more carrying through the consequences of what the death of God, once given, now means.

Bataille makes specific critques of Christianity's celibate anti-sexual eroticism in Inner Experience, which might be expected of a pornographer who founds his ideas on excess. In a way this is the old debate where Plato/Diotima begins the erotic assent to God with love of sensual bodies, but only as a rung on the ladder that quickly uplifts the eros to abstract ideas and to God, that represses or transcends sensual sexuality. But if the eros of the sensual is effective and good, and of the same superabundant nature that causes the universe to be ("God so loved the world," "life is excess energy"), why deny it? Especially for someone post-Nietzsche who depreciates the abstract.

The Christian could read this as a useful moral foil, an insight into what happens to the system if you unplug the "God" puzzle piece; everthing becomes rather dark and nihilistic. The challenge is that a lot of the system may work without the God puzzle piece, perhaps instead of superabundant love that makes and powers the universe, it's just the dissapation of excess energy; perhaps the erotic drive instead of being a teleology towards God in the highest, is instead just sumptuary waste expenditure of the same nature as creation.

The cosmic drama of Christian life is, on reflection, a little bizarre, what's the point of creating the universe to stage a love show? That rather the world is just waste energy pouring out in superabundant plenitude is perhaps more compelling in that it doesn't attempt to force a "why" onto the world but recognises the fact there is no good "why" answer, only the fact of energy and its expenditure.

For some reason I always wish george would have converted back to Catholicism right before his death.
It would have been funny.

>>18803946
France has never felt itself mastered by Catholicism, but since Charlemagne as the master of it. Catholicism wouldn't exist if not for "the first daughter of the Church" defeating Islam in Spain, the Lombard advance in Italy, and keeping the Byzantines at bay. Catholicism in France is a ground to spring forth from, not a limit that contains.

>>18804078
Beautiful.

>>18789335
just say you're a fat neckbeard and move on nigga

This nigga is such a schizo.
>hhmmmm yes, toes and eyes, delicious
Like, boo stfu

>>18805941
so true

>>18801745
The 'Discussion on Sin' is interesting if you haven't read it yet: it's a debate between Bataille, Sartre, Klossowski, some priests and religious philosophers, among others.

>>18803922
Supposedly it happened kind of concurrently. As he himself recounts, he lost his faith ca. 1920, while staying with the monks on the Isle of Wight. About a year later he was reading Nietzsche (he had read a little bit of him in high school, but it didn't leave much of an impression) and befriended Shestov, who acted as something of a mentor to him. However, it is suggested his loss of faith was not an abrupt event but something still gradually taking effect these years, with which Nietzsche must certainly have helped.

>>18804078
Very clearly explained. Thanks, made a lot of things click.

>>18788868

This had a chance of being remotely funny if you bothered to actually correct the original french above. Fucking idiot, Guenonfags doesn't even understand basic french.

>>18806969
seethe

>>18806241
That’s interesting. Thank you!

>>18806202
Where can I find it, please?

>>18807030
In The Unfinished System of Nonknowledge

>>18788747
>not guenon
lame

>>18807054
Many thanks!!

it's been 3 days now

>>18807182
Go watch some TikToks you attention span lacking animal.

>>18806969
Well that's the joke right? They have no grasp of the material they claim is as ultimate metaphysical truth. They read English translations of French commentaries on Sanskrit literature, which is probably why they think "god did it" is such a compelling and original argument.

>>18806954
I don't get it, this pleb thinks Geunon didn't know about Hegel or Nietzsche?

If you are trying to understand Guenon through a profane philosophical perspective you are going about it wrong. How long has this board been obsessed with Guenon? I didn't notice it 2 years ago when I briefly browsed, and but I see a lot of him now, which is a pleasant surprise.

>>18789655
"Modern philosophy" becomes irrelevant and smallminded when you can leave your body at night, see people's subtle centers, have precognition etc.

>>18807318
>If you are trying to understand Guenon through a profane philosophical perspective you are going about it wrong
Then he probably shouldn't have hitched his proverbial wagon to profane problems like caste systems, you know, like the one where metaphysics is determined by a priesthood conducting exegesis of revelationary texts, who we just have to trust are based and redpilled because they're just so heckin' valid

>>18806954
Fake meme quote, but Bataille clearly understood traditional thought: Dude was an expert in the middle ages.

>i gotta coom because its like, really sunny out bro
What a hack

>>18807182
And what three good days it has been :)

>>18807566
Clearly you don't get outside enough

>>18807577
i-is that a beautiful day?? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA I GOTTA COOM AAAAAAAAAAA HELP ME GILLES DE RAIS

>>18807508
>to profane problems like caste systems,
It depends on your approach. If you are of the lower caste, you will approach it from the profane perspective; if you are of the higher caste, you approach from a spiritual perspective.

>>18807823
It's a profane, material question. And if not are we then to say the spirit merely parallels the material? What's the point of that? And if it does not parallel it, then you have spiritual priests who are materially merchants and warriors who are slaves and slaves who are priest. So for all his claims to be doing "real" metaphysics guenon ends up telling you venus is in gatorade

>>18807295
>>18788747
>>18808166
How does one do the meditations that Bataille makes?

>>18808180
>This is a meditation text. You must shut yourself away somewhere as quiet as possible, empty yourself of everything and completely let go; remain seated but do not let your body slouch, empty your mind and to begin with breathe deeply whilst attempting to let yourself fall under the spell of silence.You may fall into an actual stupor. You must not read the text but slowly recall it from memory.
>There should be a long period of time between the first three sentences and the rest. And also a little time between each sentence in the second part.

THE STAR ALCOHOL
>I take Acéphalefor violence.
>I take its sulphur fire for violence.
>I take the tree and the wind of death for violence.

I AM JOY IN THE FACE OF DEATH
>The depths of space are joy in the face of death.
>I imagine — until it nauseates me — that the Earth is spinning in the heavens at a dizzying rate.
>I imagine the sky itself turning and exploding.
>Sun, flame, alcohol, blinding light all turning eyes closed and so dazzling that you lose your breath.
>The whole depth of the sky like an orgy of frozen light, fading, fleeing.
>Everything that is real destroying itself, consuming itself and dying like a glowing fire.
>I am destroying myself consuming myself and cutting my throat with my own hunger like the fire.
>Laughing and dying like everything that turns, wavers, burns and flashes.
>I imagine the ice-cold moment of my death in an icy and perfectly bright sky, in the glow of the star Alcohol revealing itself as suddenly as a flash of lightning and hugely intoxicating.

>>18808280
where is this from?

>>18808307
"The Star Alcohol", an Acéphale (society) text from The Sacred Conspiracy/L'apprenti sorcier

>>18806954
>>18807566
Based

I-is that? A man being sentenced to lingchi???? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA I'M GOING ACEPHALIC AAAAAAAAAAAA HELP ME JEWS

>>18808009
Not the same poster, I appreciate people like Nietzsche, but either address the crux of the issue that is metaphysical and epistemological or just shut up

>>18809083
>address the crux of the issue
You first. The other guy says one cannot understand Guenon from a profane perspective, which I suppose excuses him from being considered a philosopher in the first place. He's priest of his own brand of islamo-vedantic theosophy. There's no debate or discussion with the priest or guru; you take it or leave it. But the joke is that he's a priest of a religion that doesn't exist.

>>18809344
>>18809083
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA IS THAT A SUNBURN AAAAAAAAAAAA IM A SOLAR ANUS HELP ME MOMMY

>>18808280
>THE STAR ALCOHOL
what is star alcohol, does he make any indication?

>>18809344
>which I suppose excuses him from being considered a philosopher in the first place
You really think philosophy was separated from religion/mysticism? Holy shit dude come the fuck on, read Plato at least.

>>18809568
The kind of philosophy guenon likes is the kind that was domesticated in the service of monotheistic state religions. Not all philosophy has served such a sniveling purpose. Mysticism does not have to be granted permission through a framework of the residues of imperialism. Why don't you read Nietzsche at least?

>>18809635
Guénon wrote much more on non-monotheistic (abrahamic) religions.
>Not all philosophy has served such a sniveling purpose
Not all MODERN philosophy. Do I need to tell you to read Pythagoras, Parmenides, Plato (and the platonists) again?
>Why don't you read Nietzsche at least?
Excuse me but I fail to see how he is relevant here.

>>18809710
Guenon's final word on the matter of religion was to become a Muslim, the state-formative religion par excellence. You really don't see any relevance of Nietzsche to criticism of religious philosophy? Must be a true believer!

>>18809744
Why does it matter that he became a muslim? His point about the primacy of a religious and metaphysical/theological foundation in every tradition is right. And this is the origin of philosophy. End of discussion.
Nietzsche breaks with philosophy because he goes against an idealized intellectualism. And yes, I agree with Nietzsche, these things were all fruits of Will, including civilization, culture itself.

>>18809804
It matters because if your entire philosophy pivots around a magical event that took place in ancient times then it is a meaningless exercise in the first place to have philosophy. All there is, is a test of faith in the particular event. Anything produced subsequently by intellection is a bad faith rationalization to convince yourself to believe in the event.

>>18809011
that pic is so fucking interesting though

>>18809831
>if your entire philosophy pivots around a magical event that took place in ancient times then it is a meaningless exercise in the first place to have philosophy.
No, the philosophy pivots around an epistemological necessity: intuition, the original primordial premiss. Aristotle literally writes about this, Plato with the Good/Unity, Plotinus, Parmenides, Pythagoras.
>All there is, is a test of faith in the particular event
You could be more honest and say simply: all there is, is a test of faith.
>Anything produced subsequently by intellection is a bad faith rationalization to convince yourself to believe in the event.
No, anything subsequent to that primordial, intuitive premiss is scientific knowledge (literally the Posterior Analytics).

>>18809879
Yes yes i'm sure you have some rigorous architectonic explanation to plaster over being embarassed by Guenon's affirmation of angels of the One True God™ speaking to some random caravan bandit.

>>18802871
Dumb nigger.

>>18809916
Guénon will even write about the nature of angels in a metaphysical understanding. I think I agree more with Nietzsche than Guénon and yet you are here making a fool of yourself. Do you like Bataille?

>>18809947
>Guénon will even write about the nature of angels in a metaphysical understanding
Right, because he doesn't want to formally admit that the philosophy is a performance to self-justify his religious belief. The only fool here is not-priest carrying water for the priest.

>>18810026
>Right, because he doesn't want to formally admit that the philosophy is a performance to self-justify his religious belief.
Either you accept the epistemological conditions upon which any belief can be secure or you can't have a say on anything.
I told you the epistemological condition sustains itself on an intuitive premiss, here there is a bifurcation: an intelligible axiom or a voluntarist, for some will differ on how they establish their own beliefs, for example: Platonism affirms a purely intellectualist philosophy, the premiss being the One/Good which is beyond and determines Intellect.

You are just repeating the same dumb things without even trying to understand that which you are attacking. You are doing exactly what you are averse to, you are not addressing the issue on its own terms, but merely affirming a self-justified belief..

>>18809419
idk

>>18810091
You're doing the thing again where we pretend you're not making shit up because you followed the ritual formulas of presenting it.

>>18810158
You are a boring troll.

>>18807054
Love the pessimistic title - other philosophy books claim to have it figured out, not this one.

>>18810288
Do we really need palaeothomist arguments for god? In a Bataille thread?

>>18794138
The T pose boi is dope
I really like the one riding a beetle and the face in the top right.

>>18810624
You literally can't respond. Invoking Bataille is even worse, larper scum who will never be Sade because he is a crypto-moralist weakling,.

>>18810624
Thomism has never been refuted in any meaningful sense. "Modern philosophy" progressed by simply ignoring it and condemning it, without engaging with it.

>>18810975
>>18811175
What is the response you are asking for, that since I cannot demonstrate to you on your own terms that the skytranny you've imagined shouldn't be identified as God that it must be accepted as real absolute being? Go ahead, call the pope, see what happens.

>>18809744
>You really don't see any relevance of Nietzsche to criticism of religious philosophy?
Nietzsche's criticism of "religious philosophy" came down to a critique of Christian sentimentalism and its (justifiably nihilistic) obsession with truth in the mundane sphere (which, Nietzsche claimed, was caused by a removal of God(s) from the world and the placing of Him in an unreachable place, "the transcendent"), not religious philosophy per se. The only other meaningful critique was his critique of "asceticism", which was again misguided and mainly based on the Christian variant of asceticism, which was indeed somewhat sickly and sentimental compared to the superior variants which still remained in, eg, India and China, and Islam to an extent. He seemed to think that all asceticism was a type of will to power, which even if we grant that as true (which is questionable), somehow nullifies the actual higher meaning behind the practice in its true sense.
The sad thing about modern philosophy, Nietzsche and I'm guessing Bataille as well, is that its disdain for Christianity, a very unique religion in general, has allowed it to extend that disdain to every "religion" (which, as Guenon explains, is not even a valid term outside of the West) in existence. Not only is it a confusion in terms, but it's simply wrong at the most fundamental level of a misjudgment of qualities of the "philosophies" that are put under consideration. I hardly need to remark about Nietzsche's extremely poor understanding of Buddhism and Hinduism (the latter of which seemed to be entirely based on a poor reading of the Laws of Manu).

bump

>>18811175
That's how philosophy deals with most stuff desu.

>>18811226
Your post is misguided regarding Christianity and Nietzsche’s critiques.
Nietzsche criticized and regarded as nihilistic any tradition/philosophy based on idealist metaphysics and rationalism. The transcendent is obviously therefore a the basis of it (even if there is a distinctive and pertinent immanent character as is the case with Platonism, Christianity).
I have no idea why you would think traditions such as advaita vedanta, buddhism (or at least most of its schools), when they face life as a quasi-gnostic alien thing could have sympathy from Nietzsche.
The ascetic ideal is rightly criticized by Nietzsche insofar as he rejects the transcendent, metaphysics and epistemological considerations.
Christianity posits both transcendent and immanent realms as real, the sentimentalism is of course present because it is present in all religions (what is bhakti after all).

>>18813365
>based on idealist metaphysics and rationalism
Only because the Christian type was the only one he knew, as I already said. Idealism and rationalism, as we know them, have only ever existed in the Christian West (and you can perhaps extend this to the pagans, Greeks, etc., if you want, even though they never knew these terms nor did they take shape in the same way).
>when they face life as a quasi-gnostic alien thing could have sympathy from Nietzsche.
See, this is what I mean. You've already, a priori, taken Nietzsche's critique of these doctrines as truth, when I doubt you've read a single original text from any of them. Nietzsche, by the way, even praised the Laws of Manu, but as I said, this praise was somewhat misguided (he did also criticize to a lesser degree). Eastern doctrines are not "life denying" in general; and in fact they are the origin of what Nietzsche considered to be a healthy and virile caste system. However, they include elements of asceticism, which have never been the life-denying type, but merely a means to higher control and an exercise in discipline and self-control over the organism. This is the first type of asceticism. There are more extreme types, which are not as commonly employed and are used to achieve higher states and realizations. It has nothing to do with sentimentalism or the denial of life; life can even resume as usual after the period of asceticism.
>The ascetic ideal is rightly criticized by Nietzsche insofar as he rejects the transcendent, metaphysics and epistemological considerations.
It's not rightly criticized, because he makes no valid critique against transcendent states of consciousness or realizations, which is my entire point. He, again a priori, assumes that all asceticism is of the stale Christian type, which is cutting oneself off from the world and quite literally struggling with the desires that present themselves, when Eastern asceticism would consider it a failed endeavor the moment the initiate becomes emotionally off center due to these same impulses. And I don't even mean to insult Christians by insinuating that their asceticism is necessarily in vain, just that the system by which it is employed is faulty and has probably hurt the Church more in general than helped it, in the political sphere.
>the sentimentalism is of course present because it is present in all religions
Bhakti is one specific and isolated type of yoga for a specific kind of person, who requires the sentimentality. Sentimentalism is absolutely not present in general (again, ignoring the fact that Hinduism cannot even be classed as a religion as such); Christianity made it into a core element. Nietzsche, in Will to Power, even criticizes Christianity for it and states that Islam was a "masculine reaction" to the sentimentality of Christianity. If you absolutely need a page number for this I can take a look for it.

>>18813365 Not the previous anon
Nietzsche makes positive comments about Buddhism though, fx. In antichrist.

>>18788747
some explain B-mans worldview to me in 30 words or less.

>>18813453
>Nietzsche never read Plato, Kant, Aristotle
Are you for real? He criticizes platonism all the time.
>Idealism and rationalism have only existed in the Christian West
Holy shit, lmao. Do I need to answer this? Like what the hell is pythagoreanism, who is Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Zeno.

>You have already taken Nietzsche’s critique as truth
No, I’m literally just telling you why he thought they were nihilistic. If you want to know my opinion I tel you now: I agree with Nietzsche to some extent. Will you deny ajativada? That (most) buddhists dedicate themselves to escaping samsara? That there is a suppression of will is common to all religions, platonism, stoicism (here my opinion is a bit more subtle but I’ll not extend)?

>Nietzsche praised Law of Manu
He also praised Jesus, Pascal, the Old Testament…

>caste system
Which Nietzsche ignored were founded and governed by the priestly caste. Have you read the Genealogy of Morals?

>b-but asceticism is like just control
Yeah, I agree, but this is not Nietzsche’s opinion. Read the Genealogy for fucks sake.

>The ascetic critiques is not rightly criticized by Nietzsche
Did you come to proselitize your beliefs or post about Nietzsche? See what I told you about the epistemological critiques.

>Christian type of asceticism
You are so biased, lol. You probably never read about ascetic practices of aghoris, gymnosophists. Do you think there is no gnostic element in these eastern religions when gnosticism was influenced by them since it is an eastern movement itself?

>Bhakti is a specific
No, lol holy ficking shit dude. It is the most widespread form of faith and practice. It is even present in some forms of nondual intellectualism (Dnyaneshwar).

You are completely deluded and don’t know what you’re talking about, not even on religious/traditional matters.

good thread ruined by guénonfags

>>18813576
I think there's a slight misunderstanding. You seem to think that I don't know Nietzsche's opinions generally speaking, which I do, most of my post was stating that his opinions were wrong, I was not trying to misstate his opinions. What Nietzsche believes is not particularly relevant, what was important was whether or not his critiques are valid, which is what I was addressing.
>Will you deny ajativada? That (most) buddhists dedicate themselves to escaping samsara?
Yes. The ultimate truth in the genuine schools of Buddhism is that Samsara and Nirvana are one (although this lends itself to its own misinterpretations by naturalists). Ajativada is subject to similar misinterpretations, I recall Nietzsche erroneously stating that it was equivalent to Kant's splitting of phenomena and noumena. In non-dualism, this is fundamentally rejected, the assertion is that mere perception is not reality in its totality, it is merely a constituent (but not an illusion) of what is truly real.
>You are so biased
I am somewhat biased in this respect, but I put a disclaimer in there for certain Christians, like the ones you mentioned. Look at the modern Catholic Church. It probably isn't a good way to view Christianity throughout history, but it gives you an idea of what its asceticism amounts to generally speaking.
>No, lol holy ficking shit dude. It is the most widespread form of faith and practice
That doesn't contradict what I stated. Of course it's most widespread among the common people (who are naturally the least intellectual and most sentimental); this does not mean it represents Hinduism. With Christianity, the same sentimental aspect was pervasive at every level without exception, not just the commoners.
> See what I told you about the epistemological critiques.
I'm still waiting for a critique that's worth its salt. My original post still stands, as far as I can tell, because there is no sufficiently meaningful critique to be found.
>He also praised Jesus, Pascal, the Old Testament…
Not Jesus, he didn't like him much (except, of course, as the "great man" archetype who managed to influence history through a strong will). He did praise the Old Testament, and called it the Semitic positivity in contrast to the Aryan positivity (Laws of Manu) in WzM.

He had a massive backlog of hot girlfriends, had a coom seizure looking at a monkeys arse and influenced based Baudrillard

>>18814208
It doesn't seem so for you ignore most of his points as I showed he points out in the Genealogy of Morals.
>What Nietzsche believes is not particularly relevant, what was important was whether or not his critiques are valid, which is what I was addressing.
I get what you mean but being a bit pedantic here I'd say that if you want to scrutinize whether or not his critiques are valid, then Nietzsche's beliefs are not irrelevant and you'd need to be deeply familiar with them.

>in genuine schools of buddhism samsara and nirvana are one
I know and this is even expressed in some forms of gnosticism, Christianity, the aghoris, tantriks, etc., thus there is no denial of life, we agree on this. The point is that these are all fringe currents in their traditions (the case with aghoris, gnostic borborites) and even in society. And this is not the case even with non-dominant doctrines like the case with Gaudapadan Advaita. The main problem is excising the direct connection of the world with the reality of the transcendent (Brahman not willing the world to come to existence for example).

>this is fundamentally rejected, the assertion is that mere perception is not reality in its totality, it is merely a constituent (but not an illusion) of what is truly real.
Don't be so dishonest, many advaita and buddhist scholars literally call the world illusion. Removing any autonomy of will as deeply illusory, which occurs in the Upanishads even. And their problem is always this: intellectualism. For if they conceded, instead of the one Self (Atma), but a one Will, then there could be much more reconciliation with Nietzsche, however this would turn the world into something Willed.
Gaudapada writes in his karika: ''It is not the nature of the Lord to involve Himself in creation, it is the nature of maya to project illusion of creation and the nature of the Lord is uninvolved.''
Sharma writes ''The objects seen in a dream are known to be false on waking. But the world objects experienced in waking life are also false when the non dual experience is attained''.
This is a more or less sophisticated form of dualism and not even passive only of a nitzschean critique but metaphysical too.

So what you said ''the assertion is that mere perception is not reality in its totality, it is merely a constituent (but not an illusion) of what is truly real.'' is a distortion insofar as it is not constituent at all. There is nothing to be added to the Nature of Brahman and this is completely separated from the world.

>look at modern Catholic Church
First, all religions are facing degeneration and corruption in the modern world, look at India too, look at China (where even is Daoism, etc?), look at Islam and muslism leaving the east and living and adapting their ways of life to the modern western ways.

I'll be back soon to answer the rest.

>>18814208
>>18814696
Continuing...
>who are naturally the least intellectual and most sentimental; this does not mean it represents Hinduism.
No? Three main schools of Vedanta (the most intellectual and metaphysical Darshana): Advaita, Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita. Dvaita and Vishishtadvaita make Bhakti the essential element of their schools. Have you read Shankara? He himself wrote devotional poems to the gods. Also what is the Upanishads? The bhakti element abounds there as well (after all the Vedanta schools are all established on the upanishads and draw elements of it into their schools).

>With Christianity, the same sentimental aspect was pervasive at every level without exception, not just the commoners.
We are talking about Nietzsche, why do you keep posting your ignorance about Christianity? But briefly: where is sentimentalism in fricking Scholasticism? You are deluded.

>I'm still waiting for a critique
A critique of what? If you know epistemology you know it requires an intuitive premiss.

Also, if you are repeating that Nietzsche criticized aryan religions/priestly current wrongly, why do you think his praising a side of it is not also done in a defective way (which is)?

>>18814154
>good thread ruined by guénonfags
It's okay we had about 200 potlatch posts before thomistic orientalists showed up and started pretending it was the year 1100.

>>18813542
this picture right here >>18795429

>>18807557
>middle ages
>traditional
lmao

>>18816075
I think youre retarded