/lit/ - Literature

>>19270001
>Guenon
He is of the demon.

>>19270025
"It sometimes so happens that people who imagine that they are fighting the devil, whatever their particular notion of the devil may be, are thus turned, without any suspicion of the fact on their part, into his best servants!"

>>19270050
Very true, it's a shame Guenon fell into the spirit of the Antichrist when he thought himself to be the one exposing it. I wonder what would happen if Guenon went past the surface level like pic related and became Orthodox. His fear of demons and magicians constantly harming him would be dealt with too, so maybe he would write many good books and letters for us. Maybe he would even become a priest?

>>19270061
>no bro you don't get it, this 2000 year old carpenter cult is the ONLY true religion!!! nothing that ever came before or after has any validity and all religious thought and feeling taken generally is completely meaningless, hollow or even demonic, but THIS ONE CULT is the correct one bro! trust me bro this is it!

The Knights Hospitallers survived and became the Order of Malta, so I don't think that the Templars would have been up to anything good in the modern world.

>>19270061
Maybe you inverted the persons...

>>19270069
The guy is right. See, I loved Guénon some two years ago, really vouched for everything he said, but indeed, that is VERY surface level. Beneath every assertion of his concerning developed metaphysical conceptions that determine the whole sequence of his thought underlies a will, a will to power. This is most clear with the political reality present in his writings. What is thought to be a consequence is in fact the cause.

>>19270102
>"he's just bad okay?!? BECAUSE I SAY SO!"
Guenon wasn't even anti-Christian lol, he wanted to reintegrate Catholicism. You people are hopeless.

>>19270115
No idea how you got it from my post. I’m not referring to his superficial understanding of christian theology/theosophy/metaphysics, nor to his likewise poor grasp of platonism, but I’m implying that he (and his followers) refuses to understand how his conception of the Sacred is a product of a political involvement, just a pathos.

>>19270138
>his conception of the Sacred is a product of a political involvement
I'm interested, could you expand on that?

>>19270069
>2000 year old
More like ~7500 year old, beginning with creation of the world and being the original revelation of God to Adam. Everything else is a perversion and distorted view of this original truth Christ is the fulfillment of. He is not a "spiritual teacher" like the other religions think.

>>19270138
he had nothing to do with politics

>>19270160
A religion which has a single event as its foundation, indeed wishes to make the turning point of the world and all existence out of this one event that happened in a specific place and time, has such a weak foundation that it cannot possibly survive once a bit of reflection descends on the people. How wise on the other hand is the assumption in Buddhism of a thousand Buddhas! This way it does not look like Christianity, in which Jesus Christ has redeemed the world and no salvation is possible except through him — but four thousand years whose monuments stand great and magnificent in Egypt, Asia and Europe could know nothing of him, and those periods with all their magnificence went unseen to the devil! The numerous Buddhas are necessary because at the end of each kalpa the world perishes and the teaching along with it, therefore a new world requires a new Buddha. Salvation is always there.
>Schopenhauer, Parerga & Paralipomena

>>19270138
No, I understood your post correctly, I am just pointing out that you are completely retarded for holding the opinions that you do.
>>19270160
Actually anon, the true religion is Talmudic Judaism and unless you're a Hebrew you're going to hell. Sorry, shouldn't have disregarded the word of G-d for the word of a random carpenter! Nice job completely sidestepping my point btw. Christians deny the dimension of the sacred everyone - in other religions, in the world, in their personal life etc. - everything other than Christianity is "demonic". If literally every religious tradition is wrong, though, what's the problem with adding one more? We can chalk it all up to dumb superstition and we're set! And it gets better! This "demonic" polemical idiocy applies even WITHIN Christianity! Think of the Gnostics! The Cathars! All of the heresies! And even better, Christians themselves! Catholics are idolatrous demon worshippers! Prots are pagans! The Orthodox are schismatics! This isn't a new view, you know - just last century plenty of Prots were explaining how Catholics all go to hell. There are still such people today. Yet who compiled the Bible - the true materialistic god of the Prots? Who did the Orthodox break communion with? What is the absolute state of the Catholic church today? Day by day, Christianity degenerates and weakens, yet the divisions don't go away, they just get dumber! Well, I say, God bless this idiotic Christian particularism! May the great beast continue to eat itself!

>>19270069
>>19270212
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrBIm1zKhW4

>>19270229
Funny thing is Mormon Christianity has an esoteric dimension that unironically puts it above other Christian denominations lol.

>>19270196
>Schopenhauer
Stopped reading right there.

>>19270190
If you can’t see how the metaphysical and the political are intertwined, then you ignore all the books Guénon wrote on temporal power and spiritual authority, worse: you ignore how the egyptians and then platonists conceived their State/community, which was basically the way every community establishes itself, from the most primitive tribes to the Brahmin government. This is even the case with gnostics. You know why? Because this is the natural anthropological development of human beings and its consciousness, easily harmonized with a phenomenological explanation.

>>19270146
I think you can get the idea from the above.

>>19270212
Lol you have no idea about what I’m talking about.

>>19270275
I thought you were talking about modern politics
>anthropological development
>phenomenological explanation
cringe ideology

>>19270196
>kalpa
Literal fairy tales invented by Satan to lead you away from awaiting the Messiah. It is similar to evolutionism in its attempt to make the world seem self-operating without divine providence, existing for trillions of years without a need or telos.
Also, there were people in pagan nations, before Israel even existed, who knew about Christ and were waiting for Him and were worshippers of the One God, see Job and Melchizedek for example. This is obvious because the knowledge was given to all nations, some just forgot it almost completely with their plunge into idolatry and worshipping creation.
>a bit of reflection
You mean prideful reliance on debunked "scientific" criticism?
>Salvation is always there.
Yes, it is in Christ and He is always ready to accept you. No other way is possible because of what salvation is by nature, it is becoming what Christ is by His grace. Christ taught it to us Himself and we just follow Him without inventing our own notions in cooperation with demons and being confused crypto-protestant men larping as hindus. You are just following the spirit of the age with whatever new "spiritual discovery" you make, perpetually seeking and never uncovering truth because it is always changing to you.

>>19270212
>the word of a random carpenter
The rest of your post is worthless because it is based entirely on this blasphemy, that Jesus Christ was not who He said He was. It's a tired notion someone who has seen even a glimpse of the light can only pity you for believing, truly. I pray for your conversion.

>>19270285
And how does it not relate to modern politics?

>>19270237
>esoteric dimension
Recycled gnosticism is not "esoteric" or "deep".

>>19270275
>Lol you have no idea about what I’m talking about.
If you pay attention you will notice that this is the only "argument" you make in this thread. "I know what I am talking about but you people do not!" In your view, making a statement is apparently sufficient to demonstrate its truthfulness. Cope and seethe.
There is also a great and funny irony in you affirming Guenon's account on the relationship between metaphysics and spiritual and temporal power on the one hand in order to bolster your argument but then at the same time having your argument be that this very same account is empty and hollow because it is allegedly conditioned by considerations about temporal power. Whether this issue at all is applicable to Guenon as you claim it is, is another story, but your paradoxical position is self-contradictory in either case.
>>19270296
>The rest of your post is worthless because it is based entirely on this blasphemy, that Jesus Christ was not who He said He was. It's a tired notion someone who has seen even a glimpse of the light can only pity you for believing, truly. I pray for your conversion.
It is very convenient for you to dismiss exactly the point in my post where I force you to confront the same argument you sidestepped earlier. If I say that I am Christ the Saviour and that Jesus was an impostor, would you believe me? Is me saying that sufficient proof that I am the Saviour of the world on its own? According to the logic of your words, it would be, and you would be condemned to hell for believing in a random carpenter instead of the true god.
I am already converted, by the way. Ironically it was Christian particularism that pushed me away from dogmatic religion and into the embrace of perennialism. I suppose even idiotic bigotry can lead to some good every now and again, eh?

>>19270311
>Recycled gnosticism is not "esoteric" or "deep".
Assuming that the implementation of the principles is authentic, then yes, it is both "esoteric" and "deep". Tradition and spirit have zero relation to novelty or originality.

>>19270328
Isn't this sort of the problem with Guenon as well though? "Initiates know how things work from direct experience and it can't be communicated exoterically"?
You can't explain to a hylic, you just have to set them back to work doing something useful like sweeping the streets.

>>19270296

17 And when he was gone forth into the way, a certain man running up and kneeling before him, asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may receive life everlasting?
18 And Jesus said to him, Why callest thou me good? None is good but one, that is God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments: Do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, bear not false witness, do no fraud, honour thy father and mother.
20 But he answering, said to him: Master, all these things I have observed from my youth.
21 And Jesus looking on him, loved him, and said to him: One thing is wanting unto thee: go, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.
22 Who being struck sad at that saying, went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

There's something more than "salvation"

>>19270341
It's still possible to orient yourself without being an initiate if you are observant, at least in terms of profane knowledge. I was certainly persuaded in the authenticity and power of initiation without experiencing first hand. Naturally, profane discussion about sacred knowledge is a waste of time given that you could just skip to pursuing sacred knowledge yourself, but if hylics want to insult things that they do not understand then I think it's perfectly appropriate to give them a fitting refutation. A retroactive refutation, if you will.

>>19270328
>would you believe me?
You would not be able to demonstrate it with the same actions Christ does, so no.
The demons in other religions cannot do the same works Christ does even today in His Church.

>away from dogmatic religion
>into the embrace of perennialism
That is a common problem nowadays. The spirit of the age is individualistic and having to humble yourself and conform to revealed truth is not something that comes easily for the modern man. The undiluted truth of Christ has the quality of pushing away into delusion those who reject it.

>>19270352
Salvation is precisely receiving life everlasting and the experience of resurrection being a joy to you.
>For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

>>19270328
So you didn’t even read the posts I made where I literally cited the concomitance of social organization and numinous consciousness. Care to actually address this? For example, how did platonists and egyptians conceived their community?

There is no contradiction when Power is the determinant here. See, you STILL can’t understand what I’m saying and all it implies.
Go read books.

>>19270368
>You would not be able to demonstrate it with the same actions Christ does, so no.
Did Christ demonstrate his godhood with actions *to you*? I somehow doubt that.
>b-but I had like a mystical vision experience or something!
Let's say it's authentic, this is still much better explained by the Traditionalist framework. Besides, many, many people from various traditions undergo mystical and inexplicable experiences.
>That is a common problem nowadays. The spirit of the age is individualistic and having to humble yourself and conform to revealed truth is not something that comes easily for the modern man. The undiluted truth of Christ has the quality of pushing away into delusion those who reject it.
On the contrary, I think the vast majority of people have finally become retarded enough to be perfectly suited to "revealed truth", since the general passivity and effeminacy of the masses today is the perfect medium for "revealed truth" imposed from the outside. Unfortunately, these same people have also stopped giving a shit about religion precisely because of these base traits that make them well suited for proselytising mass religions. I would be willing to submit to greatly unpleasant ideas if these ideas are indeed truthful, but I do not see how particularist petty bigotry is a representation of true knowledge.

>>19270389
That's some pretty desperate damage control anon. If you are that eager to cope and seethe, can you go do so in another thread? Your intellectual pretensions are tiresome, as I am sure you are aware deep in your heart.

>>19270368
I know what salvation is, but there's something more.

"My Father’s house has many rooms;"

>>19270296
>Literal fairy tales
Christians are the original neckbeards

>>19270050
Where is this quote from?

>>19270430
The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times, page 207 (The Inversion of Symbols)

>>19270420
>still hasn’t addressed a single thing I said in five different posts and needs to resort to ‘seethe’, ‘cope’, ‘damage control’ expressions
No wonder you like guenon. I think it best suits your intellectual width. Stay there, ignore my advice about reading actual books.

>>19270303
Because there is no feudal society today, we live in "democracies". Guenon considered feudalism to be the ideal society structure for Europe.

>>19270368
>having to humble yourself and conform to revealed truth is not something that comes easily for the modern man
Christians can't do it either. The idea that every human personality ever born is immortal, having never existed until conception by their parents and then continuing to exist until the end of a linear, finite reality, is a Christian innovation that is obviously ego-boosting, to say nothing of Luther and Calvin who later emphasized the idea of predestination in all that (the Catholics and Orthodoxes who later corrected their thinking through Augustine's Platonism deserve a shred of credit). It is a striking contrast to the perennial doctrines that all agree (despite immense separations across epochs and continents) that one's personality is impermanent, and that the immortal soul persists among many personalities in cyclical eternity through the mechanism of death-and-rebirth.
Tell me, what is more humbling: to await a reawakening after death, with one's same personality as this very moment, at Judgment Day to be rewarded in the luxurious City of God, or to realize the emptiness of one's mortal persona and from there conquer the cravings and passions through discipline and contemplation?

>>19270467
There is nothing to address because you are just a pseud incapable of comprehending the very words you parrot. As I observed in a previous reply, you still seem to be under the impression that to make a claim is the same thing as to demonstrate it. It is not. You have no arguments. What you have is empty rhetoric and polemic. Now, let me assume for a second that you have a modicum of intelligence. Let me assume that your clumsy use of language, utter lack of arguments and reliance on open ended questions is accidental rather than an intentional, if embarrassing attempt at masking your own illiteracy and idiocy. What does your position actually boil down to?
You have "cited the concomitance of social organization and numinous consciousness". Okay. The Traditionalists study the way profane society overlaps and is inspired by the sacred as well - this is, in effect what you are saying here with your slightly overcooked vocabulary. What is there to address here? The implication of this is that those who deal with the sacred are inherently politicised and therefore unreliable? If we axiomatically exclude the possibility that the sacred exists, that the sacred can have an ideally unidirectional relationship with the profane and that the profane can be legitimately directed and organised by sacred principles, then yes, that would be the inevitable conclusion, but to axiomatically assume all of these exceptions is the same as idiotically dismissing the entire Traditionalist perspective out of hand, on a whim without any reasoning or investigation.
Does your "argument" go any farther than this? Not much farther, no.
1/2

>>19270467
Essentially, you take a reductionist position and lamely try to make some Nietzschean naturalist argument here, but of course when I say "argument" what I really mean is that you drop a bunch of terms without bothering to explain why or how they are relevant and applicable, so you speak of "will to power" and "power determinants". This in itself is not worthy of a response because it is a non-argument, but let's give you the most charitable interpretation possible anyway. So you're basically saying that what the Traditionalist describe in terms of transcendental influence on profane society is really just a deliberately mystified and obscurantist perspective on nature taking its course, with notions of the sacred being a form of propaganda to enshrine the power of a priestly elite. A very, very tired 17th century, if not 15th century trope. Very well, let's pretend it hasn't been refuted a thousand times. Again, you have no proof or argumentation for this. There is only the mere assertion that everything operates according to a sort of Nietzschean naturalistic logic with will to power, everything else being a vehicle for power. Except the Traditionalists have written dozens of works on hunting down the similarities and the identical nature of various spiritual traditions, which can only be owed to them having positive spiritual content which can be compared. The Traditionalists also offer an infinitely more sensible explanation for the enduring presence, validity and timelessness of such values as selflessness, piety and idealism. In a Nietzschean naturalistic world, the governing logic and all permissible actions would be those of the war of all against all, waged through every conceivable tool and method. Yet, Tradition acknowledges a free and materially "purposeless" ascesis which cannot be explained or contained within this Nietzschean logic. How do we explain that? Traditionalism can explain it very easily, although it takes a given amount of articulation to paint a convincing picture. You, on the other hand, and the logic you are using, cannot explain the sacred or even its merely material consequences in the world. So there you go, here's the total refutation that you wanted and more. Of course, it was a waste of my time and it is certainly wasted on you, but here it is nevertheless. Now go shit up another thread.
2/2

>>19270554
Ironic how your own words reflect only what you do. You accuse me of employing mere rhetorical mechanisms only to avoid answering the questions made to you. Why? Because you can’t understand my point. This is obvious because:

> The Traditionalists study the way profane society overlaps and is inspired by the sacred as well - this is, in effect what you are saying here with your slightly overcooked vocabulary
That you fail to make a distinction and define what the profane and sacred are and what they mean - explicitly implicated in my posts - is enough to show how retarded you are and still after ten posts can’t understand the point.

> The implication of this is that those who deal with the sacred are inherently politicised
It is not an uncaused politicization. Again, try forcing your microbrain to understand the relatiom between the social and the numinous.

>>19270556
> Except the Traditionalists have written dozens of works on hunting down the similarities and the identical nature of various spiritual traditions, which can only be owed to them having positive spiritual content which can be compared
See. It is precisely here that lies your botched conception of the sacred, the social and the natural and their interrelation. This is the same humanistic mentality changing the order of things, the effect becomes the cause and the cause the effect: stability of consciousness preceding any step of reduction.

>>19270554
>>19270556
>>19270702
Ah I’d love to add, since you cited Nietzsche, how the traditionalistic mentality fits perfect the gregarious mentality denounced by him: they are the exact same. The herd-like inclination to agree and find positive everything that comes from the mob. Perennialism is really a poison.

>>19270717
>the mob
The 'intellectual elite' which Guenon aimed to create with his books is the furthest thing from the mob.

>>19270702
>You accuse me of employing mere rhetorical mechanisms
That is indeed exactly what you are doing. I assume you know what rhetoric is?
>That you fail to make a distinction and define what the profane and sacred are and what they mean - explicitly implicated in my posts - is enough to show how retarded you are and still after ten posts can’t understand the point.
Cute. What's wrong bro I thought you were the big Guenon understander here, you're supposed to know what we are referring to when we speak of sacred and profane, right? This is another beautiful technique here where you are pretending to be retarded, i.e. harassing me for not defining the meaning of terms that undergird the entire conversation and without which nothing we have said thus far has any meaning. If you did not think the meaning of these fundamental key terms was obvious why did you not raise that question at the start, or, assuming that you are approaching this from a critical perspective, why did you not present your own? The answer is because you're now retroactively cooking up some excuse like a definition problem that can serve as some sort of emergency exit from the hole you've dug yourself and that allows you to project your incoherence onto me. Again, this is achieved through pure rhetoric.
>It is not an uncaused politicization. Again, try forcing your microbrain to understand the relatiom between the social and the numinous.
This is a non-argument. There is no intellectual content behind these empty words you're throwing. "It's not an uncaused politicisation!" Yes, retard, if there is a relationship between temporal and sacred then the sacred is the very source of the politicisation. What follows from this, what is your argument? You don't have one, because you are retarded and don't know what an argument is. Your statement is just that - a statement. It does not advance or refute a position and you're too dumb to see it.
>See. It is precisely here that lies your botched conception of the sacred, the social and the natural and their interrelation. This is the same humanistic mentality changing the order of things, the effect becomes the cause and the cause the effect: stability of consciousness preceding any step of reduction.
Okay anon here's a question. What is the quote above?
A) An argument.
B) An assertion.
Pick the correct option then ponder what that means for our discussion (and for your mental capacity). You are not refuting the Traditionalist analysis here. You are not even attempting to do so. You are merely dismissing it.
>Ah I’d love to add, since you cited Nietzsche, how the traditionalistic mentality fits perfect the gregarious mentality denounced by him: they are the exact same. The herd-like inclination to agree and find positive everything that comes from the mob. Perennialism is really a poison.
Capital T Traditionalism is hyper-elitist and anti-popular, it is also an exclusive current and utterly nonconformist in the modern environment

>>19270773
So your cope is “THIS IS NOT ARGUMENT!!” ad nauseam. How can I go in depth about what I have exposed if you yourself lack any intellectual depth? You fail to recognize very simple things.

Anyway it was worth it, you seethed and coped from the beginning.

>>19270839
Anon. If you have no argument, what am I supposed to do? For God's sake. I've spent way more time and energy explaining to you exactly why you're retarded and by the looks of it, it was completely pointless, too. What do you want me to do to refute your... utter non-argument? Write 20 books like Guenon did, which you will again proceed to not read and then dismiss out of hand? You accuse me of lacking the depth to understand your genius thought, but you yourself have not so much as dipped your toes in the proverbial waters of reason. Making assertions over and over does not constitute an argument. You cannot gauge my intelligence by just making assertions, either. In order to actually have a discussion, you need to present a position, and a position involves more than just a claim, it involves argumentation that explains, expounds and develops that claim. You offer absolutely no such thing. The equivalent to what you are doing would be me trying to convince you that the moon is cuboid. "What do you mean retard, it's spherical!" No. It's cuboid. No matter what you say, I will just continue to assert it's cuboid, naturally, without providing any reasons why it should be considered such, and in that way prevent any possible resolution from being reached. Do you see the problem with this anon?

>>19270050
Literally just
>Be careful you do not become the monster you are fighting against.

After seeing the light of Christ I cringe even at the idea of worshiping something else.

>>19270885
Didn’t I tell you I loved Guénon some years ago? I read almost all of his books, probably more than you.
See: I presented some basic questions you failed to answer, everything I said presupposed the minimum of knowledge and you showed not to have even this minimum. See for example how I’m all the time trying to show you how you lack the basic connection between the social development and the numinous one. You probably stop already at the word itself. How can I discuss anything with someone like this? I showed how the priestly elite is not the determinant of the traditional paradigm for the elite is established and determined by the paradigm itselt. Before establishing the priestly forms in the institutions the very institutions must be already settled. You can’t have the authority of an order, which presupposes that very authority, outside this order.

>>19270540
>conquer the cravings and passions through discipline and contemplation
Pride and prelest.

>>19270915
>seeing the light
If that was true, you wouldn't be here. Keep larping.

>>19270991
This isn't an argument. Even Christ Himself came to the tax collectors and sinners.

>>19270954
>Didn’t I tell you I loved Guénon some years ago? I read almost all of his books, probably more than you.
It does not show. If you have read him, I am forced to conclude that you have failed to understand.
>See: I presented some basic questions you failed to answer, everything I said presupposed the minimum of knowledge and you showed not to have even this minimum.
If we were engaged in a genuine conversation that made use of analogy and example within the context of clear positions backed up by arguments, this would be a very damning thing to say, but I am quite convinced that in the context of your vague and formless posts the open ended questions serve only as a type of sinkhole to draw any midwit retards away from the main issue, which is that you have no argument.
>How can I discuss anything with someone like this?
Presumably, making a point would be a good start.
>I showed how the priestly elite is not the determinant of the traditional paradigm for the elite is established and determined by the paradigm itselt.
This is something resembling an actual point, but you did not show (read: demonstrate through reasoning) any such thing. Nor is your conclusion necessarily the correct one, nor are its implications necessarily a refutation of Traditionalism. If you examine your statement carefully you will inevitable reach the same conclusion. In order to advance this point, you need to support it with further reasoning and demonstrate why and how your interpretation works, as well as what its implications on the Traditionalist worldview are.
>Before establishing the priestly forms in the institutions the very institutions must be already settled. You can’t have the authority of an order, which presupposes that very authority, outside this order.
This is a very ambiguous statement with unclear meaning, it would serve you well to be more concrete.

>>19271000
Ok mr Christ.

>>19270362
Based.

>>19271014
>If I can't understand you therefore you are the one failing at comprehending things.

Anyway, you repeat the same ''non argument'' rhetoric incessantly, thus you avoid answering basic questions posited by me. You are just another retard who failed for Guénon's superficial understanding of the Sacred without any phenomenological and anthropological investigation. And you demand rigour from others, lmao. You are irredeemable.

>>19270977
Alright then. The One True Way says:
>Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised him to them that love him. (James 1:12)
>Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. (Romans 6:12)
>For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. (Romans 8:5-6)

But now the words of prideful sinners:
>Only the man who is unmoved by any sensations, the wise man indifferent to pleasure, to pain, is fit for becoming deathless. (Bhagavad Gita 2.15)
>Driven by insatiable lusts, drunk on the arrogance of power, hypocritical, deluded, their actions foul with self-seeking, tormented by a vast anxiety that continues until their death,
convinced that the gratification of desire is life’s sole aim, bound by a hundred shackles of hope, enslaved by their greed, they squander their time dishonestly piling up mountains of wealth. (Bhagavad Gita 16.9-12)
>Whoever avoids objects of desire, as with one’s foot the head of a snake, He, being mindful, transcends this attachment in the world. (Atthakavagga 1.3)

>>19271062
>Anyway, you repeat the same ''non argument'' rhetoric incessantly, thus you avoid answering basic questions posited by me.
Bro what is this gaslighting? Have I not been extremely, maximally clear in my objections to your approach to this conversation? You indeed do not make arguments. I have very clearly suggested what you would need to do in order to have an argument, yet you seem content to just continue making the same assertions over and over again without any reasoning. I have even clearly and in detail explained why these assertions on their own are insufficient and what you need to examine in order to create actual arguments from them, yet you seem to be completely ignoring this.
>And you demand rigour from others, lmao. You are irredeemable.
I do not know if this idea has ever dawned on you before or not, but in order for us to have a disagreement in any meaningful sense of the word and to be able to argue for opposite sides and make progress with our reasoning, you indeed need to present your exact position and demonstrate - if not rigorously, then at least sensibly - how your position is a threat to the Traditionalist framework. You haven't even attempted to do this. Without actually drawing the borders of our actual disagreement, all you will be able to do is make stupid assertions and all that I will be able to do is say "you are not making arguments, you are just making assertions". I cannot disagree with you or your interpretations in an absolute sense until you actually define what these interpretations are.

>>19271112
>"Only the man who is unmoved by any sensations, the wise man indifferent to pleasure, to pain, is fit for becoming deathless."
>tfw partial to pain, pleasure and the sensations
feelsbad bros...

>>19271121
>Have I not been extremely, maximally clear in my objections to your approach to this conversation?
Objections to what? Show me a single objection of yours that was not your average ''NON-ARGUMENT'' retardation.
This was the closest you got to addressing for the first time any thing raised by me:
>This is something resembling an actual point,
hm, finally he'll address a point of mine!
> but you did not show any such thing, you need to how your interpretation works
See? Can you see how much of a disingenuous retard you are?

>how your position is a threat to the Traditionalist framework
See how you go in circles. I literally made it clear about the interrelation of the social/political and the religious, the will to power.

Can you tell me the phenomenological implications of the Sacred or you need to resort to the traditionalist confusion between cause and effect?

I thought you were just dumb but you are also dishonest.

>>19271149
The other guy is right, you have not made any arguments.

> Can you tell me the phenomenological implications of the Sacred?

What are those implications?

>>19271112
The AmaZen buddhist thinks it is in his own power to do this, while we rely only on Christ. That is the difference.
Why does the buddhist feel the need to quote the New Testament when he does not understand that all of these things are properly impossible without faith in Jesus Christ according to the people who wrote the verses you quote?
You can quote any number of vaguely similar sounding verses, but without knowing the framework they are situated in and understood from, it is all meaningless. This really is all of the depth of "perennialism". It is reduced to surface-level cherry picking of vaguely similar language and then disregarding all the substantial differences as merely "exoteric".

>>19271149
>Objections to what? Show me a single objection of yours that was not your average ''NON-ARGUMENT'' retardation.
That's a pretty major fucking problem anon, because if you have no argument there is literally nothing else to object to other than the lack of argument.
>See? Can you see how much of a disingenuous retard you are?
What is disingenuous about that? Can you not see the glaring problem with what you are saying? There is a difference between assertion and argument. The latter incorporates assertions, but is also accompanied with reasoning and evidence.
>See how you go in circles. I literally made it clear about the interrelation of the social/political and the religious, the will to power.
This is not a proper critique at all, it is a (very vague) assertion. You could literally use that quote verbatim to make some strained polemic against Marxism, it is utterly non-specific and bare.
>Can you tell me the phenomenological implications of the Sacred or you need to resort to the traditionalist confusion between cause and effect?
This is also a vague question. Are you asking me about how spirit interacts with matter? Are you asking me about the effects of the Sacred in some specific field (which you have not named)? Or are you unironically asking me to give you an exhaustive list of every way in which the Sacred can manifest in human life? Because that last question is completely unanswerable, except perhaps with "the Sacred manifests in whatever way it is made to manifest by the observer". Do you see the issue with your ridiculous style of posting now?

>>19270069
Christ is King, faggot

>Buddhism
Cringe.

>>19271230
Too bad his reign seems to be coming to an end at the hands of the lamest possible crowd of people to ever draw breath, anon. I am sure you'll find a way to cope, though.

>>19271258
>reign seems to be coming to an end
Christ's reign has no end, anon.
We await the resurrection of the dead and then Christ's glory will be apparent even to the atheist and the bugmen and the pagan.

>>19271062
>Guénon's superficial understanding of the Sacred
Guénon’s (PBUH) understanding was and is unimpeachable

>>19271169
>complains about cherrypicking
>points to amazen as buddhism
Anyway, the citations from NT were meant to show your hypocrisy in saying that overcoming the passions are prideful. Apparently the criteria for austere discipline's being "pride" is whether it's done in submission to one particular adept from history. And I'm not a perennialist; I recognize that Christianity is a uniquely prideful religion that rebuffs all perennial truths in favor of whimsical, sentimental fantasies about a permanent afterlife, a sentimentally-motivated Creator, time-dependent Providence, and deliverance coming sola fide and solus christus. It is only in the hopes of material rewards that Christians worship crosses and images of Christ; it is for a good reason that the one man who argued for salvation in the form of gambling-probability was Pascal, a Christian. It's also worth pointing out that atheism appeared in Christendom first, precisely because of the materially-oriented, egoistic attitudes Christianity fosters.

>>19271295
You're free to think that bro, personally I plan to put my efforts into purifying my soul so that it does not dissolve on death as is normal, because "naturally immortal" souls are a new and total fiction despite what you might think. Hope whatever you do ends up working out for you.

>>19271340
>purifying my soul
How will you do this without Christ's life-giving grace? You are a walking spiritual corpse if you do not have Christ's life in you. Also the deepest stains of your soul (corrupted free will because of original sin) is not cleansable no matter how holy your actions are.
>does not dissolve on death
That is a misconception. Your soul lives on and descends into hell to await the Day of Judgement if you are unbaptized or did not repent of your sins.

>>19271340
>because "naturally immortal" souls are a new and total fiction
All ancient cultures know about the soul living on after the bodily death.

>>19271220
>Have I not been clear in my objections?
>show me a single objection
>I HAVE NONE BECAUSE YOU ARE NON-ARGUMENT! IT'S ALL VAGUE IT'S ALL THINGS I DON'T UNDERSTAND THEREFORE MUST BE WRONG!!!!

lmao you are insane, good bye

>>19271390
If you are genuinely this blind to detail then you're beyond retarded, I am sorry. I very generously outlined various areas which someone who was serious about making an argument on this topic (in other words, not you) would necessarily need to look at. Here are some examples: >>19271014 >>19271220
The fact that you literally just responded to the second post and seem to have utterly glossed over the last couple of lines, for example, carries some extremely dreadful implications about your intelligence.

>>19271340 (not the guy you were responding to)
>I plan to put my efforts into purifying my soul
That must be why you're on a laotian waterskiing forum!
>so that it does not dissolve on death
Nitpick: the personality ("spirit" in some systems, "psyche" is most descriptive) is what dissolves, but your soul goes on to other personality-complexes until you liberate it via purification. Nonetheless I respect your endeavors and wish you well, it seems we are on similar paths.

>>19271372
>How will you do this without Christ's life-giving grace?
The same way literally every normative religion in the world does, i.e. with intelligent ascetic practice.
>Also the deepest stains of your soul (corrupted free will because of original sin) is not cleansable no matter how holy your actions are.
For you.
>That is a misconception. Your soul lives on and descends into hell to await the Day of Judgement if you are unbaptized or did not repent of your sins.
That's what Christianity claims, but is that really the truth?
>>19271379
Not in the way you think. Dark and ephemeral Hades is for the meek souls, where they endure only as shadows. Olympus - the afterlife of a divine soul - belongs only to the heroes who can earn their way in, like Hercules.

>>19271421
>That must be why you're on a laotian waterskiing forum!
Point taken, but it's a long term process, you know? Assuming I become enlightened I will probably still visit /lit/, Twitter etc from time to time, but only very rarely when I need something.
>Nitpick: the personality ("spirit" in some systems, "psyche" is most descriptive) is what dissolves, but your soul goes on to other personality-complexes until you liberate it via purification. Nonetheless I respect your endeavors and wish you well, it seems we are on similar paths.
In the system I follow, the spirit-principle (which is the core of the personality) is considered the true you and the Unconditioned at the same time. You can help it survive the death of the body through an operation which I believe is referred to as the "repolarisation of the double". The Samsaric soul which is continually reborn over and over again is not identified with the person because it's basically an abstract force that only carries parts of you forward into the future as a result of cause and effect and not because it is the source of your Being.

>>19271372
Do you think that Christ was just some guy that lived 2000 years ago and it's in the sky?
Christ is the Eternal and Universal Logos, the Divine Word; not bound to any spatial-temporal limits.
He's symbolised by the Dragon in Daoism.

>>19271471
Narayana: "He who walks on the Waters"

>>19271453
I'm curious to know what this metaphysics you follow is called. Anyway, if the spirit-principle is the Unconditioned, it must be absolutely simple and perfect, and therefore singular. Since dissolution implies the separation of constituent parts, it makes sense that the body (being made of many components) can dissolve, but how can the spirit-principle dissolve if it is singular? Perhaps there is another word for the phenomenon you're describing.

>>19271554
>I'm curious to know what this metaphysics you follow is called.
I subscribe to Evola's esoteric worldview. To a large extent it is rooted in Hermeticism.
>Since dissolution implies the separation of constituent parts, it makes sense that the body (being made of many components) can dissolve, but how can the spirit-principle dissolve if it is singular?
It does not dissolve, but it is freed. To sum things up, your true self is the Monad, but in order for the Monad to manifest in conditioned form, it needs to limit and tie itself to that form. Consequently, when the form dissolves on death, its constituent parts including the "soul" are recycled into the manifest universe and the spirit-principle, now without form to tie it down, is passively reabsorbed into the unmanifest Monad and loses its personality. In order to avoid this fate, the spirit-principle has to be freed in life, while it still has a form to attach to. Then it can work directly on the form and prepare the immaterial parts of it for survival after death so that it does not lose its identity. Of course, I may be making some mistakes here since I am just interpreting what I have read. Things will be a lot clearer if and when I can actually achieve this.

>>19271000
Cope. You are suffering everyday and only survive by coming here to seek external validation.

>>19271652
Ah, I have read a fair bit of Evola, though I admit that his book on the Hermetic Tradition was a little obscure for me.
My main bone of contention with you is "the spirit-principle has to be freed in life, while it still has a form to attach to". You seem to think that each spirit-principle has precisely one shot at liberation (Hermetic Red Work, Buddhist nibbāna), and if this is not achieved by the end of the allotted lifespan, it just reintegrates to the Monad from whence it came, which to me sounds like you think the White Work (= henosis) just automatically transpires for all who die, even those who die in ordinary, impure states of consciousness, and that the only distinct cases would be of those who so pure that they surpass the Monad into total liberation. If this is the case, it sounds to me like there is an implicit "end of the world" in your interpretation: an equilibrium at which point all souls have either reintegrated into the Monad (never to fall back out into the material world) or attained freedom outside it, all while the material and psychic elements of samsara just continue dying and rebirthing all through eternity, without any souls. This is an interesting interpretation, but I imagine I've misunderstood, since the traditions I'm familiar with do not posit any permanent afterlife other than that achieved by liberation.
I'm curious if you've read Evola's Yoga of Power, and if you haven't I would strongly recommend that, particularly the appendix on the Bardos, which precisely lays out the fate of the spirit-principle after the breakup of the body. Briefly: depending on the degree to which it was purified in its previous lifetime, it can reach liberation, otherwise one of three immediately lower stages, otherwise merely rebirth into another body (though a womb-door, as the Tibetans put it). There is no permanent afterlife other than liberation, only continued passage through the womb-doors and the stages closer to liberation. The closest I could link this to your explanation is that, in order to even face the higher bardos or, failing that, choose the next womb-door, one must be able to overcome the swooning of death and maintain the spirit-principle without bodily support, which I imagine is what you mean when you say you want to avoid the "loss of personality".
Anyway I've poured over and rewritten this post for almost an hour now, I'll just put it up. Nice to have someone intelligent to talk to instead of christfags seeting about solus christus and calling traditional doctrines satanic.

>>19270296
>The rest of your post is worthless because it is based entirely on this blasphemy, that Jesus Christ was not who He said He was
jesus never said he was god himself or his son. he insinuated that he was the messiah, but of course contradicted himself in the different gospels

>>19272047
>but of course contradicted himself in the different gospels
Jesus is innocent of these contradiction because these gospels were corrupted and written over and over by jews and power hungry priests.
I can only imagine his anger at the people who led billions astray in his name.
This is what Swedenborg had to say about the council of Chalcedon
>Swedenborg said that it was revealed to him in a heavenly vision that "those who had the greatest influence in the council, and who were superior to the rest in rank and authority, came together in a dark room and there concluded that both a Divine and a human nature should be attributed to the Lord; principally for the reason, that otherwise the papal sway could not be maintained. For if they had acknowledged the Lord to be one with the Father, as He Himself says, no one could have been recognized as His vicar on earth; and schisms were arising at that time, by which the papal power might have fallen and been dissipated, if they had not made this distinction. Then to give their decision strength, they sought out confirmations from the Word, and persuaded the rest."[103] Although most other churches maintain that Jesus has two natures, the New Church believes that his human nature was made divine.

>>19270001
>The destruction of the Order of the Temple and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Why? Didn't they worship a demon named Baphomet?

>>19271927
>If this is the case, it sounds to me like there is an implicit "end of the world" in your interpretation: an equilibrium at which point all souls have either reintegrated into the Monad (never to fall back out into the material world)
In this view "souls" do not belong to the plane of the Monad, they are instead interpreted as almost physical objects. The soul is viewed as the emotional-psychological complex, not as an independent principle in itself. The spirit-principle is a form of Monad consciousness the manifestation of which is not restricted and cannot "run out", so to speak, but from our point of view we still absolutely cannot afford to have this principle abruptly and passively return to the unmanifest Monad at death.
>I'm curious if you've read Evola's Yoga of Power, and if you haven't I would strongly recommend that, particularly the appendix on the Bardos
I am currently reading through Yoga of Power after skimming it maybe a dozen times. The Bardo chapter is the one bit of the book that I read first, though, and I have read it multiple times. The way I understand it is that the Bardo refers to the shifting of states - with the body dissolved, the rest of the person which has survived as a result of purification practices now needs to "re-learn" or "remember" how to act without a body, if you will. You are correct that there is no permanent afterlife other than liberation, but liberation is also the only afterlife as far as I am concerned. What is reborn through the Samsaric soul or the "daemon of Life", to use Evola's words, has no relation to the differentiated personality other than through being made up of the same "atoms". The spirit-principle that would inhabit a "reincarnated soul" would be individuated in a completely different way from its previous iteration.

>>19270001
Stfu nigger

bump

why do christians still pretend that their religion is simply a belief and not a total political system

>>19270025
>He is of the demon.
How so?

>>19271652
>I subscribe to Evola's esoteric worldview. To a large extent it is rooted in Hermeticism.

>>19270001
>the Order of the Temple
what was that

>>19274089
Some epic roleplaying masonic group probably.

>>19274089
The Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon (Latin: Pauperes commilitones Christi Templique Salomonici), also known as the Order of Solomon's Temple

>>19270237
where can i learn more about this?

>>19274322
>mormonism
"In 1825, an Israelite of Portuguese origin, Mordecai Manuel Noah, former United States consul in Tunis, purchased an island called Grand Island, located in the Niagara River, and issued a proclamation urging all his co-religionists to come and settle in this island, to which he gave the name of Ararat. On September 2 of the same year, the founding of the new city was celebrated with great fanfare; however, and this is what we wanted to point out, Indians had been invited to send representatives to this ceremony, as descendants of the lost tribes of Israel, and they were also to find refuge in the new Ararat. This project had no follow-up, and the city was never built; Twenty years later, Noah wrote a book in which he advocated the reestablishment of the Jewish nation in Palestine, and although his name is rather forgotten today, he must be regarded as the true promoter of Zionism."

Guenon - The Origins of Mormonism

>>19274378
"Among the religious or pseudo-religious sects widespread in America, the Mormon sect is assuredly one of the oldest and most important, and we believe that it would not be without some interest to look at its origins."

>>19270080
>>19270001

Guénon viered the Templars preserving the communication between with the East and West, at least this was the case with Templars. After the Templar Order was destroyed, according to Guénon, it was revived by the Brothers of the Rose Cross. It also relates to Graal in a certain sense. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266558138_A_Journal_of_Contemporary_Shamanism

In the 1700s, "Masters" of the Rose-Cross left for "India" and none of them were left in Europe, 1714 effectively ceasing communication between East and West. Masonry was infiltrated by "counter-initiation" and pseudo-Rosicrucian organizations adopted the symbols of true Rose Cross that later developed into Hermetic revival orders such as the AMORC, Golden Dawn. Now case can be made, that Golden Dawn was perhaps genuine magical order because of the obscurity of Sprengel and her continental Rosicrucian order.

But indeed, pseudo-initiation has infiltrated, according to Guénon, these later organizations and just adopted the symbols of these once-genuine intiatory structures.

The problem is that Guénon himself was a disciple of Papus, who itself was perhaps a counter-initiatory himself. Sadly there are not much English articles available, but this is a good start: http://maybelogic.blogspot.com/2011/01/seven-heads-of-green-dragon.html and it also deals with certain Siberian-East-Mongolian-Tibet consideration.

The Seven Headed Dragon, or the Stooping Dragon, being also a huge part of the Golden Dawn system and their doctrine of Fall.

>>19274075
Your Lord and Savior learned Hermetism while he grew up in Egypt (as did Moses, which Acts 7:22 confirms). That is how he was able to accomplish his miracles and undergo resurrection (White Work), not to mention it explains the imagery he shows to John in the Revelations (Four Beasts, Seven Angels, a Stone with an Unknown Name, etc). Jesus was merely an egotist who used his powers and a Jewish prophecy to form a very successful cult around himself; but nothing he did could prove him the lone "Son of God" compared to any other adept.

>>19273972
Based post.
>>19274075
>"noooooo you're going to go to hell, please don't achieve immortality please nooooooooooo"
>>19274089
The Templars. They restored primordial Tradition through their mastery of spirit and body. They were a legitimate initiatic organisation that protected, pooled and transmitted spiritual power in Europe.
>>19274322
No idea anon, I was never into Mormonism. Sorry. Their conception of the afterlife is notable though.

>>19275040
>They were a legitimate initiatic organisation that protected, pooled and transmitted spiritual power in Europe.

The thing is that Guénon implies and assumes if this theory is correct, some Crusaders may have come to the Holy Land as Christian conquerors and, after coming across the Covenants of the Prophet at the Dome of the Rock, were so moved by the protections that the Prophet granted Christians that they embraced Islām and certain mystical tendencies, The Knights Templar would thus have become the Keepers of the Covenants of the Prophet, committed to protecting the true teachings of the Messenger of Allāh until the end of ages.

But the problem arises that Guénon also did not take out the more sinister element of of the equation. That is, what concerns the Templar idol Baphomet, Mithraic cults (This is because the Mithraic cults used Caverns for their initiations, consider also the Dome of the Rock's 'underground' bedrock/cavern. That is, Bafomet as Arimanius/Chnoubis/Xnoubis and Baphomet not as corruption of Mahomet/Muhammad, but that of Baphometr (Baphomithras), The Baptism of Wisdom.

This concerns Templars and the tête Baphometique Templier - the true Baphometic head of the Templars.

>>19274992
>The problem is that Guénon himself was a disciple of Papus, who itself was perhaps a counter-initiatory himself.
Guenon left the organization of Papus and in one of his letters, he stated that he joined these irregular organizations in his youth, only to verify them and to see if there is something of value. Some of this people, like Papus, didn't seem to be part of the counter-initiation, until they unmasked themselves. Guenon was quite shocked when he heard Papus supporting the theory of reincarnation. The meaning of these researches in western organizations was to find the intellectual elite which could get western civilization back on track.

>>19275090
DESU personally I follow Evola's line from Myth of the Grail of the Templars either continuing or accidentally reviving a pagan wisdom with Christian aesthetics. The whole Baphomet thing is just an invention of that greedy bastard Philip the Fair who was always thirsty for blood and money.

>>19275194
>The whole Baphomet thing is just an invention of that greedy bastard Philip the Fair who was always thirsty for blood and money.

It probably isn't. Read René Guénon and Seven Towers of Satan" ((René Guénon et les Sept Tours du Diable))

It is possible that the Typhonian element was contained in the Templar cult in a more veiled manner, or not.

>>19275194
>>19275208
from Guenon regarding Baphomet:

Studies on Freemasonry and Companionship, volume 1, CR in VI feb.1932:"Let us point out a strange hypothesis according to which the Baphomet, whose name" resembles Mahomet "(we forget that this one is only the deformation of Mohammed), would have been" the representation of the god himself of the Egyptians, Serapis-Hélios (see Larousse), a man's body with a bull's head ”…”

>>19275032
Has white magic been used to resurrect anyone else or was it just Jesus?

>>19275259
So guenon is a demon worshiper, woah, who would have thought!

>>19275319
How do you cope with the fact that one of your emperors wanted to convert to Islam?

Letter to PG, Cairo, September 2, 1936:“... In the Arabic version of the Gospels, the designation of the Paraclete is Ahmed, which is the celestial name of the Prophet (Mohammed being his earthly name, and Mahmûd his paradisiacal name) .Because of this, the Emperor Heraclius came very close to recognizing the mission of the Prophet;it was only hijacked by certain members of the Greek clergy who claimed that there was an error of interpretation."

>>19275259
Like I said in here >>19275090 Guénon assumes the Templar Bafömet being a corruption of Muhammad/Mahomet/Mahmut

The thing is that the cavernous existence of 'Dome of the Rock' and Mithraic Cults. The fact of the matter is that it is Baphometr as "Baptism of Wisdom" and "Bapho Mithras" is the most correct etymology.

The Baphomet's is a symbol which not only carries Grail and Templar associations, but also the head of St John the Baptist.

>>19275387
So there is nothing evil about it.

>>19275407
That's not the case if you view it from Gnostic/Ophite viewpoint for it is also the The Demiurge in the Apocryphon of John

>For he is wisdom, and by wisdom hath he made the Worlds, and from that wisdom issue judgements 70 by 4, that are the 4 eyes of the double-headed one; that are the 4 devils, Satan, Lucifer, Leviathan, Belial, that are the great princes of the evil of the world

>And Satan is worshipped by men under the name of Jesus; and Lucifer is worshipped by men under the name of Brahma; and Leviathan is worshipped by men under the name of Allah; and Belial is worshipped by men under the name of Buddha.

This Double-Headed Eagle (Chaos of Thaumiel and its Qliphoth) is associated with the 33rd/32nd Degree of the Scottish Rite and the 33rd degree is also associated with that of Baphomet.

Even in the Systems of Abramelin, The Task of the Magician is to invoke the Four Evil Princes so as to negate and subjugate their influence under one's control. Otherwise the three Delusions that proceed from the Crown will deceive one and one mistakes Kether proceeding from itself, when it is truly a Light manifest from the Negatives of Ain, Ain Soph, Ain Soph Aur.

>For he is wisdom, and by wisdom hath he made the Worlds, and from that wisdom issue judgements 70 by 4, that are the 4 eyes of the double-headed one; that are the 4 devils, Satan, Lucifer, Leviathan, Belial, that are the great princes of the evil of the world

The apparent Trinity must be ultimately reduced to Unity (that is Kether), but if one fails to do so, He will regard the apparent of Duality of Kether, God and Satan, The Kether's Shell is Thaumiel that means Duality of God.

>This is the magical theory, that the first departure from the Infinite must be equilibrated and so corrected. So the “great magician,” Mayan, the maker of Illusion, the Creator, must be met in combat. Then “if Satan be divided against Satan, how shall his kingdom stand?” Both vanish: the illusion is no more.

Chapter 33:
>BAPHOMET

>A black two-headed Eagle is GOD; even a Black Triangle is He. In His claws He beareth a sword; yea, a sharp sword is held therein.

>This Eagle is burnt up in the Great Fire; yet not a feather is scorched. This Eagle is swallowed up in the Great Sea; yet not a feather is wetted. so flieth He in the air, and lighteth upon the earth at His pleasure.

>So spake IACOBUS BURGUNDUS MOLENSIS the Grand Master of the Temple; and of the GOD that is Ass-headed did he dare not speak.

>>19275363
He was not my emperor because I am not a byzantine citizen. If you wanted to find something more "epic" you could find heretical patriarchs or something.
>literally claiming that Mohammad is the Holy Spirit
I don't know if it is possible to recover from such evil blasphemy.

>literal baphomet worshipper
Pereniallism is pure evil. I don't know how people seriously believe that worshipping a hidden esoterice "core" in every religion is anything but demonic. It is a vile and brutish mixing together of ideas the author thought cool and included into the "sacred initiatic tradition". Literally protestantism but with every religion mixes together. It's only dependent on the given perennialist writer on whether something is true or "traditional".

>>19275436
It makes sense that something from the templars passed on to the freemasons. Idk what to say about your hypotheses, there are many symbols which are evil in a tradition and good in another or even both evil and good in the same tradition. I don't see how the "enemies" of Philip the Fair could be the bad guys. Even the Pope had huge regrets after the death of the templars. From a historical point of view, that event coincided with the decadence of the West.

>>19275305
In Greece we know of Asclepius and Achilles who were resurrected (as well as Er, though apparently he was really Armenian) all by theurgical means. Similarly, the demigod Orpheus and the ascetic Pythagoras both descended to Hades and returned alive by their own powers, something accomplished by the Akkadian Gilgamesh and the Trojan-Roman Aeneas as well.

I always thought baphomet was just a myth made later to make it look as if the templars went native

>>19276161

There are two "schools of thought" when it comes to the Templar Baphomet

Guénon maintains that Templars retained the communication between East & West through the Templars presence at the Dome of the Rock and thus communication between Islamic mystical schools like that of Sufism and the like and thus 'initiation'. Guénon writes:
>'If the Templars 'were not initiates' simply because it is unlikely they had received initiation from the Ismailis, as if they could not have had their own initiation, especially if it is admitted that they were 'Johannites'? It is also said that they had 'a profound knowledge of the symbolism of Near-Eastern and Mediterranean esoterism', which scarcely accords with an absence of initiation'

The truth about what the templar's found under the dome of the rock the families behind the initial templar presence in palestine may have had much more 'sinister' aspect to it as the Serpentine cults and certain Ophite considerations and Mithraic Mysteries (that are also connected to the Mediterranean esoterism and which templar symbolism quite prominently features)

Some of the Yazidi peacock symbolism features similar cross that of the Templars and this also contains certain Ahrimanic connections. Namely those initiatic centres connected with the Seven Towers of Shaytan and the Big Dipper

>>19276279
>>19275436
>>19275387
>>19275090

Fascinating but this is all speculation. Using pseudoetymologies and unvalidated "sicret caverns with mithraic cults in Israel" is really about as plausible as saying the Templars inherited Islamili druze/Al Hallaj satanism or teachings from the spirit of Arius. So all of this is a null hypothesis

What is really documented is the things Guenon (a man most influenced and knowledgeable in Freemasonry and Vedanta) wrote about counter initiation and how Freemasonry and various Templar-emulating societies got filled with utopia-worshipping apocryphal judeophile protestants angry for being stampped for centuries by the Pope and the Monarchs of Europe.

ANYWAY

>>19275443

There is some truth to the Islam-Christian-Templar-Freemasonry link: The fact that most of them are a chain of transmision of gnostic and - most importantly - monophyisite views on Christ and on spirituality. There are strong evidences that Mohammed was validated as a Prophet by two Christian Syrian-Manichean monks and that he largely developed the doctrine of Islam from the basis of Manicheism (Mani also recognized himself as the "Phophet of the Nations/Paraclete", as did Mohammed) and of various judaizing gnostic-christian apocalypse cults from Syria and Western Mesopotamia.

So it's funny but the Church heresiologies actually speak accurately about the manichean danger spanning well into the Middle Ages. I recommend anyone interested in this seriously to read "The Medieval Manichean" by Steve Runciman (an oldschool scholar who had accces to many unique manuscripts that Prince Obolesnky had in his private collection) and I.P. Culianu's Tree of Gnosis

If anybody has any questions I'm here. I am an academic scholar of Gnosticism and have very strong knowledge on Freemasonry and Early Christianity.

very interesting have a bump

>>19276644
This might not be related to freemasonry but can you redpill me on the Qliphoth? is it true that oil is the closest thing to it or is it something that has no material existence?
I have been reading on the Abiogenic petroleum theory in the book "The deep hot biosphere" by Thomas Gold and it makes the case that oil moves up from the earth's core to the crust through certain fractures and is not decomposed plants or animals like the mainstream theory states.
Why is it that oil and gas are found in places near the so called "towers of satan" like iraq, russia, southern sudan, etc?
Also could there be a tower in Venezuela? Or did Guenon only speak about the old world?
I only have a surface understanding of this subject.but the influence of oil on the formation of the modern world tells me there's more to it when it comes to the occult world.
https://toysondor.blog/2021/05/08/les-7-tours-du-diable-geopolitique-de-satan/

>>19270362

>The retroactive refutation

Holy kek, nearly got me.

>>19278168
Why nearly, anon? It got me properly lol.

>>19270025
Christcuck. Go read John 4:22

>>19275524
>It makes sense that something from the templars passed on to the freemasons
Ram of Mendes was already in the masonic mix via the Memphis Rite, the Ba of Ra in its cthonic form (as opposed to the benu bird, or falcon) and the 4 headed Banebdjed as both the solar and nocturnal Ra unified, together with the cardinal directions, especially east & west (phenomenal world and the unmanifest, materium and the afterlife of the Nightlands).

>>19276279
>much more 'sinister' aspect to it as the Serpentine cults and certain Ophite considerations
Thomas Vincente's The Faceless God goes into just this. Apophis/Apep - evil - is born out the navel of Osirus in the khemetic cosmogeny . . . Ra on the solar barque hunting the serpent/crocodile in the waters of chaos . . . Horus' blinding by Set

>>19276279
>Yazidi peacock symbolism, certain Ahrimanic connections
melek taus

>>19278387
It is our book, not yours. You can't understand it as an outsider to the covenant.

>>19275460
Wrong

>>19276644
>(((I am an academic scholar of Gnosticism and have very strong knowledge on Freemasonry and Early Christianity.)))
But jokes aside, as an Orthodox Christian I would agree that Mohammad was indeed confused by heretical Christians from Syria and does indeed inherit their weird heretical Christology. It is them who told him we was receiving prophecies from the Archangel Gabriel, not an original idea given to Mohammad by the evil spirit he communed with. This is not something the Modern Muslim even is able to comprehend.

>>19276644
>very strong knowledge on Early Christianity
Sorry, but modern "scholarly" opinions like it being a gnostic cult where Jesus Christ is just an epic sage whose teaching got corrupted is not a true knowledge of Christianity.

>>19276644
your thoughts on the picrelated?

>>19278246
I didn't realize what was going on until I read the part about Whitehead.
I even googled the arabic title of the book kek.

>>19275460
Your brain on christcuckery makes you falsely see demons everywhere. All that talk of Christ and Satan, Lucifer and Baphometiteral has made you a schizo in the worst sense

>>19277801
that's a somewhat difficult question and not really within my grasp. I would say that it has more to do with a peculiar perception of humours and of some mystical schools interdicts on oily foods (such as in pytagoreism or certain ascetic hindu schools); mixed with a contemporary conception that vegetable oils are actually bad for the body (can cause cancer). Aside from that I can tell you that within the Christian framework the Messiah actually means the "Annointed One" - oil has in judeochristianity a very sacred purpose, it is a vehicle that can be sanctified and used for high practices. Also, I feel your question mixes occultism with geopolitical realism: we live in a world governed still by petro-industries, and the world is bad == ergo, oil is a indicator of cosmic evil/decay (Qlipoth). I would not go further than this in forming a valid opinion.

>>19279855
sory, English is not my first language and I boasted a little too much. I don't know that much, I'm just making some connections and have the luck of being in contact with multiple scholars who harbor very different views. I am also Orthodox Christian. Also yes, it's very hard to disclocate the classical view muslims have on their own religions and try to properly illuminate their apocrycal and heretical (historical) roots.

>>19279866
I don't subscribe to those view personally nor academically. I believe gnosticism was correctly seen as a heresy by the main Church and I believe that negating either the Divinity or the Humanity or Christ leads to the implosion of Christianity and the path to atheism/entropy (see protestantism>marxism). The fact that Gnosticism and heretical Christologies did indeed have a big impact on history and events remains a valid, yet understudied point. So I'm not saying the "bad guys" are right, I'm saying they mostly won history. That does not make it the end of the road; faith will overcome.


>>19279920
mostly bullshit. in the field of gnostic studies I can tell you that even the chief coptic (late egyptian language, in which most gnostic manuscripts were written) professor of Oxford did NOT KNOW an ounce of Coptic. Can you imagine? Leading research translations and not knowing the source language of what you are studying? It was later proven that the infamous "Gospel of Mary" or whatever they called it was a fake forged in Cairo and that the Oxford team willingly closed their eyes to produce shock culture results with their research.

I can you not from a personal but from an academic pov that Gnosticism was very politically charged by protofeminist and liberal/atheist interest to dislocate classical Christian narratives (which guess what, are more documented and proven archeologically that most imagine).

(cont.)

>>19279920
>>19280504
(cont.)

the fact that Mary Magdalene may have had a big influence in the early apostolic movement is one thing; but fabulating on marriages based from fake texts forged will mal intent is another. If you want another example: The famous team lead by Meyer than translated the Gnostic Gospels back in the day had to deal with many passages having empty spaces (torn/degraded parchment sections). Thus, profesionally you leave them with [...] OR if you fill them for context/ease of reading, then you specify what you filled and WHY

In the so called Gospel of Philip there is a well known passage that reads: "And Jesus kissed Mary Magdalene on the (.....)" There the manuscript was decayed. So guess what Mayer's team did? They filled (...) with "mouth", without mentioning that they did so or why. Their first translation was full of these types of self inserts.

Of course, even if it was "mouth", the action itself cannot be read as romantical as back in the day even men frequently kissed on the mouth as a way of communion/transmission/respect/authority. But even that was left unexplained by them.

The real reason why they did this was that they were payed by some people and also became part of the wide anticatholic campaign lead by neoprotestant factions in the US and by National Geographic media trust. Also, most of them openly became founders of different LARP-gnostic churches, Meyer himself.

So yea, both academically AND religiously studying these subject is a mine field.

>>19280504
>it's very hard to disclocate the classical view muslims have on their own religions and try to properly illuminate their apocrycal and heretical (historical) roots.

Could you explain how you think Islam came about then, step by step?
I'm not an academic and don't know enough to be able to challenge what you say, so it would be good if you could give sources that I can look up myself as well (without having to read multiple books end to end ideally).

>>19280525
What do you think of sufism? Did the prophet of islam have some secret teachings which he showed only to his close companions which transmited them forward and this is sufism, or was it made up and taken from other religions like hinduism or eastern christianity?

>>19280572
I will try to. Mind you, I am not an expert on Islamic history; I specialize in Manicheism and early christianity, so all of this is from that point of view.

In the time of Mohammed there was a very high degree of religios osmosis - meaning new religious movements, mostly judeo-christian, mixing things with pagan, egyptian and hermetic philosophies. All of Syria, Palestine, Egypt and Mesopotamia were filled with Manichean, Gnostic, Apocalyptic jewish cults, all professing their own views. At that time the "Orthodox" Christanity (mostly in Constantinopole) was somewhat a minority.

Mohammed was a trader, and it is written in the Coran that he was reassured by two Christian Syrian monks that his revelations were indeed divine and that he is the "Paraclete", the figure spoken about by Jesus in the Gospel of John 14:16-17: "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever. This is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, because he abides with you, and he will be in you."

This figure was identified by Orthodox Christians as the Holy Spirit. But (problem 1:) Not all Christian churches (syrian, gnostics, etc) understood Christ as the "Messiah"; so thus these Paraclete was seen as a following human figure that would enrich the teachings of Christ. This first happened with Mani, the Prophet of the Nations, who founded Manicheism, a widely spread Church that mixed Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Buddhism in the attempt of establishing "a world religion" and perfecting previous revelations via translations and intercultural workings. (Problem 2:) These adepts of Mani identified themsevles as fully christian, which made them blend with other christians and exchange ideas very easily.

In the context of the Arab world, most of arabs were either pagan (such as the nomands and Meccans before Mohammed), jewish (most of Medina) or Christian (mostly in the North and West or Arabia, being of the syrian/monophysite kind - those that believe Christ was a Spirit sent by God).

In this context, Mohammed saw the opportunity of fusing the jewish and christian worlds with a third, dialectical revelation - Islam - which aimed to bridge them and form a one-state one-creed world, based on the apocalyptic views of his Syrian Gnostic neighbours (which teached him most of what later became Islamic eschatology). He inforced three things: The Unity of God, The Final Judgment and The Ressurection of the Dead. He and most of the three Califs strongly lived by ascetic tendencies, valuying each muslim as equal in front of God and thus equal amongst themselves.

>>19280572
>>19280636
(.cont)

I won't reiterate the "known" history of Islam (how Mohammed spread his message). What happened after his death and that of his followers (Abu Bark, Oman, Uthman) was that the Ummayad family, the earlier keepers of Meccan Paganism, became Califs and conquered most of the middle east (militarily). This lead to an adoption of persian monarchal rule, the idea of a rich military elite that rules as kings. Amongts other offences, this was totally un-islamic, which is why two other factions (Shia and the Khardjit) broke off from that time.

Thus, most of what Islam initially was (a apocalyptic, unifying, manichean-influenced end-of-time religion with a focus on neoplatonism and with a high christology incoporated) was ironically kept in the Shia branch (that also went it's own way in further engaging esoteric concepts). The idea that Islam is a fixed, literal tradition is a VERY late concept, mostly retroactivelly infused by the salafites.

Islam was the major place where philosophy, magic, science, poetry, mysticism, alchemy and astrology was practices (officially at times) at a time when Europe ate rocks and was roflstopmed by asian nomadic tribes (huns, bulgars, avars, goths, etc).

I guess the main thing I spoke about here is the comparison between Manicheism (or some gnosticoid branch of Christianity, which is kept in the Coranic sayings about Christ and other traditions) and Islam, and how Islam initially was formed as a kind of second shot of what Mani inteded. Historically, they could have almost succeded, if not for the Ummayad steer into military prowess and wealth (a thing unthinkable to early muslims).

>>19280589
I'm not really a muslim so I don't feel entitled to provide a competent anwers. from my limited knowledge, I believe the idea of an esoteric meaning behind a physical text is a fundamental concept in any given spirituality; after all, the human language is limited, thus a religious text (considered a Revelation) is bound to act as symbolically, not only literally. If you study the history of early Islam you will see that Islam looked more at the beginning (I'm talking here about philosophic texts, mystical poems, hadiths, etc) like sufism, and less like what classical sunni schools practice today.

However, what I wrote here and in >>19280636 is that Islam was by definition a syncretic movement. It even recognized the existence of Prophets in other religions; so Islam was inteded more like a meta-religion /syncresy, and less than a "new one". Mohammed frequently praises other prophets of Allah such as Jesus (Gospels) Moses (Torah), Adam (Book of Adam, an imporant book for Manicheism and other cults) and refers that no one can call another figure as a "false prophet" as only Allah knows best what that prophet intended. Only the interpretation of the followers is taken into question.

>>19280636
So you want to say that it was made up by him? What about the archangel Gabriel and the revelation?

>>19280677
>The idea of an esoteric meaning behind a physical text is a fundamental concept in any given spirituality; after all, the human language is limited, thus a religious text (considered a Revelation) is bound to act as symbolically, not only literally.

I agree. For a someone as myself, I personally cannot call myself a Christian, Muslim or a Jew, but I've found a rich inner dimension in these myths through writings of Hermetic Qabalah and the Zohar, especially European hermetic writers (and revivalists of the 20th century), but also the old Zohar authors and Kabbalists of early second and those authors around 12th century who have dealt especially with the more obscure Qliphoth of the Tree of Life etc and the 'Left Side' Emanation. That being said, I feel like a total weird ball for that I agree with the Guénonian understanding of the Yugas, Kali Yugas, but at the same time I also can see the Zeitgeist of Aleister Crowley's "Aeon of Horus" manifesting as some sort of Western, Tantric path remiscient of 'heroic' considerations of Evola and 'Ride the Tiger'. I still have extreme dislike for all new agey stuff, but even Crowley kept quite traditional in terms of Kabbalah, The Edomite Kings and such.

When I was younger, I personally found KJV Bible, Quran etc. absolutely devoid of any meaning and some sort of desert beduin epileptic incest stories without any sort of refinement, but after studying concepts found in the Zohar, Kabbalah/Qabalah, I've come to find a very rich inner dimension with multiple layers of meaning I could not have possibly dreamed of when I was younger.

>>19280815
Christfags will read this and unironically say
>That's great but I'm pretty sure that you go to Hell if you don't worship this one particular Jewish sorcerer, sorry pal them's the rules

>>19280945
>Jewish sorcerer

>>19280815
>Hermetic Qabalah
>Zohar
>European hermetic writers
>Kabbalists
>obscure Qliphoth of the Tree of Life
>'Left Side' Emanation
>Guénonian
>Yugas
>Kali Yugas
>Aleister Crowley
>Aeon of Horus
>Western Tantric Path
> 'heroic' considerations of Evola and 'Ride the Tiger'
>The Edomite Kings and such

Such concentration of demonism in one post.
I truly pray that you turn to Christ, anon, and drop all this nonsense.

>>19281086
I spit the spaghetti out of my mouth when I read this comment. Your simple presence on this threads is hilarious, I start to think that you are a troll.

>>19280684
sorry for the late reply. No, that's now what I'm saying. I'm saying that Mohammed integrated his revelations into an existing judeo-christian framework that largely tilted towards the gnostic-manichean (read: docetist) interpretation.

Mohammed was instructed to recognize the voice as the Archangel Gabriel by two Christian Syrian-gnostic monks; so from an Orthodox-Christian perspective, the inspiration was not authentic.

From a perrenial or even ecumenic point of view, the flow of revelation is not firmly fixed so many continuations of christianity may be implied -- but again -- of GNOSTIC christianity. Orthodoxy and Islam only meet in the apophatic schools of hesychasm and shia mysticism via their common source/school: neoplatonism and negative theology. Ibn Arabi, sunnism and other monist schools better couple with scolasticism (catholic christianity).

>>19280636
>>19280677

Thanks, this is really interesting stuff.
I've read a few books about early islamic history and there seems to be an acknowledgement that there is a large overlap between these religions due to them all having what is essentially the same message, i.e of monotheism. I don't think this is considered a problem by Islamic scholars since Islam is considered a continuation of the monotheistic tradition and it's final unalterable form. I think its finality refers to its dogma though, rather than its doctrine, something that is often confused. So its syncretic nature is at least internally consistent, at least to my admittedly superficial understanding.

As far as the revelation goes, its proofs seem to go beyond the affirmations by the Syrian monks, at least within islam itself. The revelation itself is considered a proof, which I suppose doesn't really count for much outside islam. But I can see why Orthodox christians would regard this revelation as heretical. Out of curiosity, is there any point where orthodox christianity can reach conciliation with islam or is it just not possible?

> If you study the history of early Islam you will see that Islam looked more at the beginning (I'm talking here about philosophic texts, mystical poems, hadiths, etc) like sufism, and less like what classical sunni schools practice today.
Most classical sunni schools had their founders and adherents engage in some form of esoteric practices. It was noted by various scholars that particularly strict schools like the Hanbalis had a disproportionate number of "sufis" and mystics. I'm not quite sure at what point this duality fell out of fashion though. It's easy to blame the wahabbis but I imagined it happened far eariler.

>>19281086
>Father Seraphim Rose
The embodiment of the antichrist. Just look at his face. He also worked for the KGB in Alaska.

>>19280636
>>19280677
Interesting posts. Although I think you have too dim a view of Christianity even during early Islam. Western Rome definitely contracted but Byzantium continued to have a robust classical tradition, many of the sources we now rely on are encyclopaedias and commentaries on classical philosophy written by Byzantines in the centuries of Islam's golden age. Also even western Christendom could still produce an Eriugena in the 800s.

>>19281119
How can he be trolling? Read the Gospels some time, it's made extremely clear that salvation is only possible through Christ, and that any other doctrine is evil. The apostles explicitly tell early churchmen to avoid greek philosophers and wisemen of other religions, with no better reason than what seraphim-rose-anon has been giving us. Anyone who rejects solus-christus might be sane and intelligent, but would not be a good Christian.

>>19282368
>salvation is only possible through Christ
I am the Christ, the God-Man, I achieved liberation.

>>19280050
Oh lol yeah fair enough, I thought you meant that it almost got you to laugh. I recognised the quote as a modified story from the Bible so for me it was instantly funny.

I feel Pereniallism is final redpill material. I tried reaching closer to my Christian roots by getting closer to Orthodoxy. However, I can't help but contemplate:

- Individuals living pre-christ.
- Individual living in lands that never had access to christ.
- The rejection of self-illumination (if someone were isolated from society).

The general religious framework is for control, and the mysteries of this life are a self pursuit... fundies are not gonna like to hear that (when I was/am in a snarky mood I might too)... but it is what it is. I didn't make this reality. It just is what it is nigga. God is conspiring with me though. #hunnidemoji

>>19284293
read the Christology of Fr. Romano Guardini and Fr. Jean Daniélou. The latter has an entire chapter on Guénon. Read R. C. Zaehner as well. Everything comes down to the historical fact of the incarnation. Nothing else matters, the indian myths or the fact Buddha and Confucius were righteous. Daniélou mentions Guardini saying:

>The tragedy of the religions, as [[Romano Guardini]] so clearly Christianity and the Non-Christian Religions saw, is wishing to persist once revelation has arrived. This is what Guardini called "the tragedy of the precursor.” We may say that there was a time when [[Buddha]] was right, and Guardini dares affirm that [[Buddha]] was perhaps a great precursor of Christ. That is to say that there was a moment when Buddha, through his experience, in his natural mysticism, interpreted that which was accessible of God through His revelation in the world. But from the moment when this God whom Buddha was seeking manifested Himself, the precursor, whose very mission was to prepare, had to efface himself. This is why Guardini says that [[Buddha]] was perhaps a great precursor of Christ, and that he will unquestionably be His final enemy. There is a moment when the precursor becomes the enemy.

and Guardini himself says:

>What interests the Christian is quite a different matter—namely, how the actual world is to be redeemed, and what is to become, in eternity, of the person and of the events of his life. Christianity is not a metaphysics; it is the witness to Himself of the true God. It is the proclamation that God has seized upon earthly existence and will carry it on to a new state in which the old is not lost, but rather will receive its ultimate meaning.

>>19284293
and for R. C. Zaehner all the paths of the sophia perennis only lead to what can naturally be reached WITHOUT God. After such stage only His grace can bring one to illumination and finally union.

the more one studies comparative religion the more it is realized that no religion is as sublime as christianity in which God Himself becomes present in the form of the Holy Eucharist. how can other religions even compete? they can't. Revelation and God acting in history is on a whole new level

>>19284313
You see, I really appreciate that narrative view of the world. It just doesn't fulfill my existential threshold for what is unequivocally true. I was brought up in the Christian tradition, and I want(ed) it to be true.

More things I ponder:

- How Asians, Ameri-Indians, and Aborigines are essentially left out of the Christian History until comparatively long after his death. It would seem to me the peoples living outside of this knowledge of Christ didn't need it to traverse this Earth. Would their afterlife be determined by their acceptance of Christ? Why did Christ not mention them?
- If I were to accept the Christian doctrine fully, I would feel that universalism has merits because of this.

When I think honestly, I just don't feel or think God (omnipresent, potent, -scient) would allow these type of inconsistencies and judge his creation harshly for it. I feel the rebuttals to a singular way to God are potent. This is not to say I don't believe in a creator, because I do. I even believe we can communicate with it. I think it is fair to believe God would account for someone's distrust for religious institutions and dogma out of distrust for the general deceitful and self-serving nature of humanity.

>>19284339
I agree that Christianity seems to be the strongest pointer to the mystery of God. I won't venture to say it is the only pointer.

>>19284373
>>19284377
Christ said nobody goes to the Father except through Him. now we have no reason to doubt his words do we? The fact natives still will go to the Father through Christ is a mystery that is not for us to explain or understand --- we have no obligation to understand this. A similar view is held by James Cutsinger who says that even people of other religion WILL have to pass through Jesus Christ even if they do not know Him.

>>19270025
I close my eyes and seize it
I clench my fists and beat it
I light my torch and burn it
I am the beast Jeets worship

>>19270069
Ye Olde EULA and Cancel Culture
Masses are feminine and dissimulate all barks not in sync to song and dance bribed to truthy value as ruled over them by the punishing and rewarding sovereign. Xstainity is Plato for dumb asses da masses. Its force into serious academic discussion is the fearful superstion and peer pressure after shock of having internalized a life submerged into the poverty of this bureacratic and relentlessly invasive mental yoke.

>>19282368
Any other doctrine you call evil because of biblical authority or church authority itself is reason to throw your case and all allegations out the window because the the source is evil. If you are European it is in your best interest to consider the Jews wrote it to corrupt Europeans. If you are Jewish it is your best interest to consider the Jews have suffered terrible antisemitism out of this European corruption of Hebrew law. If you are any other race it is in your best interest to play along sheepishly and commit barely just to be a rice Christian who ceases piety when reward and networked effect ceases. Either way your allegation cannot hold its own weight under any degree of self interested investigation. Christianity and the masses do not consider their best interest under any investigation and it is these priceless qualities necessary for intelligent life that Christianity villifies. Not even Islam is this corrosive. Islam strongly defends the in group against the outgroup and each Muslim must consider his self interest.

>>19281698
>sentially the same message
I don't know how anyone with a basic understanding of the Gospel can even consider such an idea.

>>19284435
>because the the source is evil
"And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. "
Christ didn't lie. I trust Him more than you.
The Jew does not have any power in the world not given to them by Satan and not allowed to them by Christ. They cannot corrupt Christ's words. Nothing can, because the Holy Spirit, who is the God we pray to, spoke through the apostles and preserved their writing. Christ promised us that He would descend and lead us into all truth, which is happening to this day and will until the end of times.

>>19284339
>how can other religions even compete?
By being true

>>19284395
>natives still will go to the Father through Christ
Where is this in Holy Scripture or Holy Tradition?
>WILL have to pass through Jesus Christ
Yes, at the Last Judgement when as per Christ's words those who did not believe in Him and did not get baptized will be judged.

>>19284373
>fulfill my existential threshold
You are trying to find something which conforms to you, but God is a person, not an abstraction we mold to fit our needs. We should ask God Himself what is true and how He created the world.
>are essentially left out of the Christian History until comparatively long after his death
Because they were not ready for salvation. God is sovereign and provident over history, He would have sent apostles to the Americas if they were ready to receive Christ. It is perfectly within God's control where and when you are born, because that is independent of your will. The only thing God does not break is your will to choose or reject Him, and God told us that anyone truly seeking Him would find Him. If an aboriginee does not find Christ (there are many who do find Him), God is not to blame for this, because He calls everyone but few respond because they do not love truth. Remember the Ethiopian eunuch the apostle Phillip was transported to. It is also worthy to remember that before Christ there were worshipers of the True God outside of Israel as well, they just lost this knowledge gradually because of a degeneration into idolatry and did not care anymore about God.

>>19284339>>19284377

ha yes the jews and their goys can't get enough of judaism

>>19284293
>- Individuals living pre-christ.
All who seeked God and did not engage in idolatry and repented from their sins were saved when Christ preached to the dead in Hades. This is also why Christ gave time for the world to repent in the flood by making it last long, there were people in there who repented in their final moments. Also there were many God-believers pre-Israel even, notable examples from scripture are Job and Melchizedek, and obviously Abraham. Knowledge of God was extremely common in the early days of humanity because all of us stem from a single family (Adam and then Noah after the flood).
>- Individual living in lands that never had access to christ.
Someone who did not know Christ will be judged by the natural law written on their hearts. Since they did not know Christ (this can only happen if his heart truly did not seek Him), they can have no salvation. The best outcome is a painless state in Hades.
>The rejection of self-illumination
Self-illumination is an absurd contradiction in terms. Someone with a fallen soul cannot illumine "himself" outside of God's grace, because that is what illumination is, your intellect being interpenetrated by God's grace. Salvation is a synergy with Christ's will and Christ's righteousness, not a "self-improvement" where you earn enough points to get into heaven and be enlightened. It requires explicit consent and cooperation of your will.

>>19280945
It's the only way to cope with their dying religion. They don't understand the greatness and vastness of God and limit him only to three forms one of which no one knows anything about.
It was a jewish deception from the very beginning to the end, jews are very elaborate planners and managed to make christians their advocates same as satan flipping on all people who followed him and abandoning them in the end.
The same will happen with the christians when they see that jesus is powerless against God and can't do anything for them.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/AGqrli7cdC3Y/

>>19285329
>They don't understand the greatness and vastness of God and limit him only to three forms
So what is God then? Is he in every church, are all of the world religions somewhat right like what's the alternative?

>>19285329
>jesus is powerless against God
>The Kabbalah Secrets of Jesus
>The Serpent Jesus
>Deconstructing the Jesus Myth, ((Dr. Robert Price)))

I feel sorry for this man. Being so deluded by demonry. It is rather interesting that the ocultists never ignore Jesus Christ but rather make him out to be a mere teacher of their own perennial faction, which He blatantly taught against, or if they are more sinister just outright make Him out to be a form of demon. You unironically trust the Jewish Kabbalah to teach you the truth about Christ. You are trusting the Jewish sources and the Jewish scholarship. You act as the Jews who said Christ was demon-possessed and banished demons with the power of Beelzebub. This is nothing more than shabbos-goy behaviour.
It takes a special kind of evil to say that the Good Shepherd who laid His life down for you is actually an "evil kabbalistic serpent".

>"The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?” “I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.”"
>"Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own; but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; but if you do not, then believe me because of the works themselves."

>>19285411
Probably some epic monadic force who wears different masks and who secretly is that anon himself, of course.

>>19285329
>christians when they see that jesus is powerless against God
What kind of absurd cosmology is this? How is Jesus Christ against "God"?

>>19285426
You didn't even listen to the video so shut the fuck up and shove a cross up your stupid ass.
I can't believe how someone can be this deluded, you have no ground to stand on other than what some jews said 2000 years ago that got used and abused for power and politics.
>You unironically trust the Jewish Kabbalah to teach you the truth about Christ.
Yet you unironically believe in a jew and his jewish prophet Paul who killed all christians who opposed him and wrote half of your bible and you still have the audacity to talk about muh kabbalah is demonic.
They gave you a shit religion and slave morality and left real theology and salvation to themselves.
I am the one who feels sorry for you because you will all be sacrificed in the war for the coming of the jewish messiah. I want nothing to do with you or your jewish rabbi. If he's your god then he's not the same as mine.

>>19285473
>Paul who killed all christians who opposed him and wrote half of your bible
Yes, because I believe in repentance. The Roman soldier Longinus who engaged in Christ's crucifixion also repented and was saved. Christ is for the salvation of all people, both Jew and gentile. There is no pettiness in Christ and He will accept anyone truly turning to Him. You are not the judge of St. Paul's repentance, but the fruits of His works in preaching Christ and persecution by the Jewish elites tell us all we need to know.
>you still have the audacity to talk about muh kabbalah is demonic.
>left real theology and salvation to themselves.
You worship the cringe gnostic distortions of the true Biblical theology pushed by Kabbalists and you call Christians Jew-worshippers? Kabbalah did not exist before Christ by the way and was not part of the traditional Jewish religion, which was the temple sacrifice system and following God's will by direct personal communication with Him. I don't know how the irony is lost on you when you call Kabbalah (a Jewish invention tainted by polytheism and reincarnation) the truth and real theology. What is salvation in your understanding, Hindu-like self-worship using a Jewish invented system? Then yes, the Jews did leave it to themselves, but it is a path to damnation and not salvation. Are you even halachikally a Jew? Because if you aren't, then in their "true theology" of the Talmud, you as a goy will be an eternal servant of the Jews when the "Messiah" comes.
>all be sacrificed in the war for the coming of the jewish messiah
I am not afraid of the Jews killing me because I know Christ will raise me up on the last day when He returns and destroys the false-messiah Jews will worship as God. Only thing I am afraid of is betraying and disappointing Christ.
>If he's your god then he's not the same as mine.
Of course, you worship the father of lies, Satan. As did your spiritual predecessors the Pharisees. What actual arguments do you have against Christ as portrayed in the Gospel? You cannot find any blame against Him, even the Jews could not do it with all of their trickery and had to convict Christ for telling the truth that He is the Son of God. The only thing you have to rely on is debunked Jewish argumentation and biased scholarship against Him.

is a waste of time to debate with christians, just leave them in ignorance

>>19285329
>https://www.bitchute.com/video/AGqrli7cdC3Y/
lol at the guy acting as some kind of revolutionary thinker on his patreon. he's just pushing the accepted global jewish agenda of Jesus Christ being a false teacher and just a regular mystic. there is nothing more socially acceptable than doubting the full truth of Orthodox Christianity.

>worshiping someone who the Jews create nasty stories about in their Talmud and are afraid to even mention His name is somehow Jewish
I do not understand why people believe this.
The Jew is afraid of Christ more than anything else.

>>19285551
That's part of the OP bro. They create a religion that barely tolerates them, bans them from doing what they do best (usary) until the 1500s. Which only then do they begin the long-march of subverting the subversion they created because they have a deep hatred for something they created. Makes sense

>>19285523
>muh repentance
Can you imagine yourself after being born a christian repenting from the great sin of associating other gods with HaShem and converting to judaism and authoring books which will be taught along with the Tanakh?
A true person who repents spends his time in pain and regret and doesn't start his own church. A person who wants to destroy something he hates with his whole being on the other hand teaches the goy to be weak and to be always subordinate to a jew.

>Christ is for the salvation of all people, both Jew and gentile
He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” Matthew 15:24
>Kabbalah did not exist before Christ
False. Plato himself was a Kabbalist.

>Hindu-like self-worship using a Jewish invented system?
You have no authority to speak about the great traditions of the Hindus which predate you and your entire "chosen people" by thousands of year.
>I am not afraid of the Jews killing
Yes goy keep dying and sacrificing yourself to me as I spit on you and your kind and enslave you with usury and debt till the day you die. Have fun dying and being extinct because you can't comprehend God being bigger than your little jewish fantasy.

>What actual arguments do you have against Christ as portrayed in the Gospel?
Your "gospels" have no authority and no one even knows who wrote them. Apart from a jew named Paul who wrote some letters and designed his oun cult.

>Of course, you worship the father of lies, Satan. As did your spiritual predecessors the Pharisees. What actual arguments do you have against Christ as portrayed in the Gospel? You cannot find any blame against Him, even the Jews could not do it with all of their trickery and had to convict Christ for telling the truth that He is the Son of God. The only thing you have to rely on is debunked Jewish argumentation and biased scholarship against Him.
My God is the one who created your christ and satan and everything else that exists and will ever exist.

Christians keep licking the jews' boots after being humiliated over and over, all because of what some other jews said thousands of years ago. Perfect slave goyim.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZW-NKGXFGg

>>19285523
>muh repentance
Can you imagine yourself after being born a christian repenting from the great sin of associating other gods with HaShem and converting to judaism and authoring books which will be taught along with the Tanakh?
A true person who repents spends his time in pain and regret and doesn't start his own church. A person who wants to destroy something he hates with his whole being on the other hand teaches the goy to be weak and to be always subordinate to a jew.
>Christ is for the salvation of all people, both Jew and gentile
He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” Matthew 15:24
>Kabbalah did not exist before Christ
False. Plato himself was a Kabbalist.
>Hindu-like self-worship using a Jewish invented system?
You have no authority to speak about the great traditions of the Hindus which predate you and your entire "chosen people" by thousands of year.
>I am not afraid of the Jews killing
Yes goy keep dying and sacrificing yourself to me as I spit on you and your kind and enslave you with usury and debt till the day you die. Have fun dying and being extinct because you can't comprehend God being bigger than your little jewish fantasy.
>What actual arguments do you have against Christ as portrayed in the Gospel?
Your "gospels" have no authority and no one even knows who wrote them. Apart from a jew named Paul who wrote some letters and designed his oun cult.
>Of course, you worship the father of lies, Satan. As did your spiritual predecessors the Pharisees. What actual arguments do you have against Christ as portrayed in the Gospel? You cannot find any blame against Him, even the Jews could not do it with all of their trickery and had to convict Christ for telling the truth that He is the Son of God. The only thing you have to rely on is debunked Jewish argumentation and biased scholarship against Him.
My God is the one who created your christ and satan and everything else that exists and will ever exist.
Christians keep licking the jews' boots after being humiliated over and over, all because of what some other jews said thousands of years ago. Perfect slave goyim.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZW-NKGXFGg [Embed]

>>19285666
>666
You couldn't even make it up

>>19284293
That's what pushed me to perennialism too, anon. It's the only position which makes sense. I can see a bunch of people replied to you to drag you into Christianity (didn't read what they said though). You can disregard them since the Christian apologists got utterly refuted and BTFO earlier on in this thread, gave up on actually addressing the arguments of their opponents and simply pretended that they didn't see them.

>>19285544
What's a "truth" found in orthodoxy that isn't found in catholicism?
You are the other side of the same jewish golem that keeps millions away from reaching true gnosis and is used as a tool for the jews and their goal of enslaving the world.

>He deleted the original post
What's your belief system anyway anon? Are you a Pagan? Do you believe in Meta-religion? Who's your god?

>>19285710
>gave up on actually addressing the arguments of their opponents and simply pretended that they didn't see them.
wow... just like you huh

>>19285713
>What's a "truth" found in orthodoxy that isn't found in catholicism?
Undistorted original spirituality of the desert fathers and early monastic saints and holy fathers. Roman catholicism invented a bunch of stuff (not just false doctrines like filioque and immaculate conception) after they split which placed them in a discontinuity with the earlier church.
>true gnosis
True gnosis is what Christ offers us in theosis. All else is a demonic deception designed to inflate your pride and make you think you are god by nature or can become god by using some meditation technique. It is what the snake offered in Eden to Adam, a false theosis leading to spiritual death. If you want gnosis, there is only one way and that is by following Christ.

>>19285717
>>19285702
What was in it?

>>19285710
>It's the only position which makes sense.
It is nothing but an emotional position someone adopts when they do not want to accept God's providence and power. It is too much to change yourself and be humble and conform to Christ so the fallen mind invents false ideas to comfort itself.

>>19285735
He deleted the 666 trip and re-posted it here (>>19285676) without reddit spacing. Here's a pic

>>19285741
Absolutely humiliated.

>>19285329
I don't care if christianity is true or not but Jesus was not like what the ((kabbalists)) say. Repent.

>>19285722
Nah.
>>19285737
>It is nothing but an emotional position someone adopts when they do not want to accept God's providence and power.
I do want to do that, hence why I accept perennialism - nothing else makes any sense, after all.

>>19286794
I suppose this is a position only reserved for the intelligentsia to know since you can't tell the masses that all religions are true and equal before God because then there would be chaos.
That's also the difference between the exoteric and esoteric teachings which is only revealed to the initiated and isn't free for the masses to know about. However, in our age everything seems to be revealed and only a few clicks away to access which further contributes to the chaos and rise of theosophy and new age "buddhism" which we see today. It's then the task of this intelligentsia to preserve the exoteric teachings of their respective chosen tradition.
I don't think Guenon ever expected all his writing to be found with a simple search on the internet.
Many people on this board shouldn't be reading him in the first place.

>>19286873
>I suppose this is a position only reserved for the intelligentsia to know

>>19286894
Nice selfie you got there but this is a holy thread and we don't need you or your hylic belongings here.

>"""refutes"""" criticisms of his beliefs by shoehorning quotes from (likely apocryphal) scripture and Fr. Faggot and Fr. Dummy

woah...so this...is orthodox xianity....

>>19286873
>I suppose this is a position only reserved for the intelligentsia to know since you can't tell the masses that all religions are true and equal before God because then there would be chaos.
Technically you could and it's sort of been done before, it's a matter of letting people decide how far they want to go with their spirituality. In the Gita it's also mentioned that some pursue the Unconditioned directly, without any form at all, so clearly the gods can be dispensed with without losing the divine element. But of course, most people wouldn't do that.
>Many people on this board shouldn't be reading him in the first place.
I actually agree with you, but I am honestly starting to believe the whole Age of Aquarius stuff. In a period of dissolution, secret knowledge comes into the light and new beginnings take place. Admittedly, all of this occurs in a climate of dissolution and is all the more difficult to truly get a hang of, but such are our conditions.

>>19285257
>>19285235
>>19284395

A common lynchpin of these discussions boil down to you having you to reject what is plausible to believe in the implausible (which I am not opposed to... fundamentally existence is absurd when given thought). Christology, as you all present, wants me to deny my rationality and believe that one instance ~2000 years ago a man was born of a virgin (women dont lie) and is God (which could be blasphemous to assert, especially since 2000 years later we still have major pressing questions -- shouldn't God anticipate our desire)? In my core, I'd like it to be true for satisfactions sake; it just dont add up.

I believe there is a soul, I do "feel" this. I believe there is a God, and I feel it to be intuitively true. Any assertions added on top of that require sharp scrutiny -- as surely God, who knows our generally rational human mine, would want us to do. Therefore, I won't accept one doctrine to be true above all others. Each tradition is pointing you towards God in some manner -- Logos Gramatikos (if you want to use this to describe it).

>>19286873
I don't write this only for you so don't tell me that you already knew it.
All traditions are true in the sense that they start from the same principle and lead back to it. Now there is also a difference of mentality and acknowledging this will make it easier to deal with abrahamic traditions, namely that between the religious and the metaphysical point of view, the later being devoided of any sentimentality, therefore the indifference in 'converting' others. What makes abrahamic traditions valid is their esoteric and initiatic core, which takes as support the exoteric side of the tradition, but only as a means to an end. For more info, read the first half of the 'Introduction to the study of the hindu doctrines'. Having this notions in mind will keep you safe from going astray into some sort of religious sentimentalist nonsense.

People who have read Guenon, could you please tell me where is a good place to start? Assume that I'm a big dumb-dumb who doesn't know anything.

Ok but how have orthodox anons become even more annoying that protestants lately.
Is it just one huge fucking autist or did we get a group of them.
Seriously you guys used to be the best on 4chan up until the last three months.

Counter-traditionalists go to hell
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4etNvoc-c_E

>>19287225
Introduction to the study of the hindu doctrines and after The crisis of the modern world

>>19287236
they like to talk about demons but never saw a demon in their whole life, pleb larpers

>>19287225
I would suggest starting with Against the Modern World, which is an overview of the entire Traditionalist school. It'll give you a bigger picture understanding. Then read something like 'The Essential Guenon'.
Then >>19287259 and pic rel

Once you have finished your Guenon Studies, many possible paths open up and follow whatever interests you. Good luck, and enjoy!

Have any Guenon Chads read this? If so what are your thoughts on it?

>>19287269
Yes. It's a good point that actual demons are always the most concerned about the schizo traditionalist god-loving /lit/ poster.

>>19287259
>>19287287

Thank you old chaps!

>>19287259
I would suggest reading East and West prior to the Crisis, as it goes over all his main issues with the west in contrast to the east, and expounds on this more specifically with regards to the west in The Crisis.