/lit/ - Literature

>>19760776
Ok I will read this today. Thanks for your contribution.

>>19760776
>fatiha on the cover

>>19760991
shahada i meant

>>19760940
good

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

>>19760776
This is one of the only books I've read where I frequently highlighted paragraphs to re-read later. I like to open it and flip through them once in a while, maybe I'll drop some of my favorite quotes later today.

>>19762166
>>19762215
Apart from his masterful critique of modernity, I find the passages concerning the future (possible) elite to be very interesting, even though is almost impossible today, I like how he puts it with the agreement on principles

>>19762215
Yeah,

he unironically firmly changed how I view a lot of things, i guess im a 4chan meme lord faggot for taking his words to heart, but they do hit hard sometimes.

>>19762321
not that anon but is funny that for me it was Guenon first and /lit/ afterwards, I knew of 4chan but I never posted on it until I was searching images of Guenon and I came through some guenonfag memes from warosu kek

>>19762129
I just finished it. It's interesting but I thought his obsessive criticism of anything scientific and rational was a bit excessive and repetitive. I know he is against scientism more than science, but still his claim than any technological 'progress' is an illusion of the western world and of little importance next to metaphysical knowledge is at best weak. He writes that the reason the East is not as advanced technology than the West is that they were too focused on metaphysical knowledge to care about material knowledge. I found this a bit laughable and very simplistic. He was also plain wrong about his prediction that China will reject communism because they're according to him 'above materialism'
And too much repetition, he could have written the book in 30 pages and convey the same basic ideas.

>>19762843
>advanced technology
technologically*

>>19762843
>his claim than any technological 'progress' is an illusion of the western world and of little importance next to metaphysical knowledge is at best weak
if you will understand his whole worldview you will see why
>He was also plain wrong about his prediction that China will reject communism
he was less "optimist" in the preface of a later edition, in his other books he doesn't completely reject this possibility that the majority of non-westerners will become westernized

>>19762321
What do you see differently, and what is your new outlook?

>>19760776
bump

found it a bit too prolix, especially in the end, almost turboautistically so, could've been shorter imho

>>19760776
elaborate

>>19764242
read it

>>19762346
Fascinating, love that you came to him on your own.

>>19762912
Well of course he was a good dive into the absolute debauchery of the modern world, for a while I went a little haywire with wanting to "go back". But thanks to him I find Tradition to be extremely important, it actually inspired me in its own way to return to my Catholic faith and stop fucking around with protestantism (which he lampoons a bunch) and stuff like that. Perennialism also fascinates me and has been incredibly hard to "shake" in terms of trying to get rid of the way it shapes my view of religion.

>>19764460
do you aspire to an initiatic path or just stick to (exoteric) catholicism?

>>19764460
I'm interested in walking that path but one thing I'm really afraid is that it turns out to be the final trap just as you're trying to escape the initial trap of modernity.

>>19764511
so what would be the thing which is not trap?

>>19764486
I am most certainly interested in initiatic paths, actually (once again) Guenon turned me on to Islam as well for years hahaha, or made me favor it in a much different light, im only recently getting away from it again.

I will most certainly be a good Catholic, if I can.. but I plan on taking things deeper if I can.. just a lot of reading, prayer, and meditation to go through. How about you ?

>>19764511
in what way do you mean, friend?

>>19764574
why are you getting away from Islam?

>>19764669
Maybe it's just not part of the tradition he's born into. No sentimental being-into, that kind of stuff. At least that's what it was to me. I still very much appreciate the religion, though.

>>19764686
>>19764669
Yeah its what the anon says, I found it fascinating, and I actually REALLY admire certain scholars within, and love Islamic metaphysics, Abdal Hakim Murad for instance is such a wonderful man, modern Christians dont really have someone like him, or not readily available on youtube (lol).

>>19764686
>>19764768
so you think religion is a cultural thing rather than metaphysical?

Anybody seeking initiation properly understood or just interested in esoteric Traditionalism from a theoretical standpoint join this discord to talk about it, plebs will be banned.

eXBDV8Wp

>>19762321
Just because his works have found a niche among autists online, doesn't mean he's a meme. His works are some of, if not the most, important spiritual works in recent times.

pbuh

>>19762843
Perhaps had he been a bit more discerning when it came to race, as Evola was, he would have realised that the Chinese are essentially a race of workers/slaves.

>>19765296
based

>>19764796
Well, I think one of the things Perrenialists in the vein of Guenon think is that many of the esoteric sides of the major spiritual practices are getting at a similar truth, and that you need just pick a solid Tradition and go with that. Guenon picked Islam because he did believe that Christianity wasnt quite as.. spiritual, I guess I cant remember the specifics of that. He loathed protestants for examples as people who reduced the sacred part of Christianity to a profane version. I think he liked Catholicism somewhat, but still believed it fallen in a sense. I still go with it for a bunch of reasons.

>>19765264
True! true, good call hahah.

>>19765750
In the book he makes a distinction between tradition and religion. In his view European tradition has disappeared and what's left is only a religion, ie a spirituality without the true metaphysical knowledge of the 'principles'. For him religion is below tradition, it is a cultural object deriving from tradition, which in its core remains the same whatever the specific culture.
So I doubt he puts Islam above Christianity, unless his thoughts changed drastically in later life.

>>19760776
Are you filtered by Jung? That’s my impression of Guenon posters.

>>19765850
So in order for him to participate in Tradition, he had to leave European society right?

>>19764574
Islam (sufism) is not the only initiatic path available but you should take it into consideration. If you are a catholic there is also the possibility of Freemasonry (added to catholicism itself) but you will have to see how to reconcile it with your catholic church, the catholic freemasons of which I knew of were quiet about it at the church.
As for me, I am still very young so I don't want to take decisions too fast but I do plan to travel to some places and see what doors will open for me on this path.
>>19765850
The distinction is between metaphysical traditions and religious traditions. In Introduction to the study of the hindu doctrines he considered Sufism to be part of the metaphysical domain so Islam as a whole is both religious and metaphysical. On the other hand he considered catholic scholasticism to be an incomplete metaphysics (even though there was more than that in the Middle Ages). From the first time Guénon published until the end of his life, he never made any revision to his views, only a change of terminology/presentation and some added details.
>>19766057
no

>>19766394
Honestly I think you don't need eastern traditions nowadays.
DMT/LSD is enough to reach the same point.

>>19767143
bait

>>19766394
Freemasonry is for deists or, at best, Protestants.
Catholic Freemasons were automatically excommunicated from the Church for 200 years. Less than forty years ago it was downgraded from that to permanently being in a state of grave sin until you get out, which still precludes you from receiving the sacraments. There have been proclamations that the Masons are immoral and subversive almost as long as the organization has existed. You cannot be both a Mason and a practicing Catholic.

>>19767230
> You cannot be both a Mason and a practicing Catho-

>>19767233
Anon, it isn't really a matter of opinion. It's very explicitly banned in papal law.

>>19767230
The protestant infiltration into freemasonry dates back to 1717 but the organization is older than that. It is indeed "degenerated" but it still has initiatic possibilities which the outward catholic church no longer has. In fact, certain monastic vows which ceased to have a ritual character in the exoteric church, are still preserved in freemasonry. As for excommunications, I don't believe that they are infallible considering the decadence through which the Church went after the Middle Ages. Rituals remained valid because of their uninterrupted transmission and truth is above dogma.

>>19767233
based
>Christopher Wren, the last Grand-Master of the old English Masonry, died in 1702. The fifteen years that elapsed between this date and the foundation of the new Grand Lodge of England (1717) were turned to good account by the Protestants who engaged in a labor of misrepresentation leading to the writing of these Constitutions, disposed of all the old documents (Old Charges) on which they could lay their hands, so that the innovations that they introduced were unnoticed, and also because these documents contained phrases they considered very embarrassing, such as the obligation of faithfulness 'to God, to the Holy Church, and to the King' an incontestable sign of the Catholic origin of Masonry. This is why Joseph de Maistre wrote in his Report to the Duke of Brunswick (1782): 'Everything points to common Freemasonry being a detached and perhaps corrupted branch of an ancient and respectable stock'.

>>19765750
>>19766394
>>19767286
The 'outward catholic church' never had any 'initiatic possibilities', it has always been an exoteric organization; the miracles, saints and all of that are mysticism (as explained by Guénon). Initiation was possible in the monasteries until the eleventh century when the monasteries became secularized and subjected to the clergy (before that they were independent, like the orthodox monasteries; have you wondered why the desert fathers weren't priests or anything like that?). Freemasonry is dying and even if it wasn't I doubt you'll gonna achieve something there (this organization was extremely overestimated by Guénon, just because they have knowledge of symbolism it doesn't mean any type of realization).
the basic options are:
hesychasm (if you can find a true one, which i doubt);
sufism (which has degenerated, most sufis today are mystics, so good luck finding an Ibn Arabi);
advaita (yeah, you can be initiated in advaita but you'll probably have to go to India to find a guru);
buddhism (their only goal is Enlightenment so they're not affected by mysticism; authentic ch'an(zen) monks are everywhere, for example)

>>19767379
By outward catholic church I meant including monasticism.
What you say seems copied from veda vyasa mandala. I read those articles but wasn't impressed, too incoherent and too much disdain towards post medieval western traditions. He based his opinion on the rose croix based on dubious modern sources and the so called rosicrucian texts which are also dubious (see what Guenon had to say about this topic). The attacks against Fabre d'Olivet and Saint Yves were also unjustified, their work stands alone from their lives. When it comes to sufism I find it unacceptable to call it "non-supreme", as Guénon said, the supreme identity (of which the universal man is just the means) is the same as moksha.
Back to what you wrote, what the author of that blog considered to be the hesychast initiation is really just "initiation"(like baptism, not what Guénon considered to be so) into orthodox monasticism which is independent from hesychasm, the later being just a series of techniques. If there is an initiation within hesychasm it should be something else, much less known and it would be better to say that is among the hesychast monks rather than what is generally known as hesychasm.

>>19767447
i'm speaking in a practical sense, if you really think all sufis have this 'supreme identity' and 'universal man' in mind, I'm sorry to say but you're wrong, as I said most sufis today are just mystics and you can't escape dualism in Islam;
Guénon put much effort in initiation and forgot the different degrees of realization, just because you got initiated in something doesn't mean you're gonna achieve anything, do you think a mason ever achieved moksa? they had hermetic and symbolical knowledge (they build the gothic cathedrals) and transmitted this knowledge.
as for hesychasts, if they exist, they're hidden and probably don't even accept disciples; and they too cannot escape dualism.
i read some articles from the veda vyasa site, but i consider buddhism(Mahayana) a better option and don't think of advaita as the only path to the 'Supreme' (actually buddhism is superior doctrinally, see Nagarjuna and the madhyamaka school)

>>19765958
Jung is psychology, Guenon is spirituality.

>>19767615
You give too much importance to what the sufis think. If you can find a serious tariqah which can give you the initiation and help you with the practices is enough, the path is an inner one, you just need the tools. Ofc a shaykh who is also a sage can help you on the path but the potential is still there, only with the initiation and practices.
I don't know what to say about buddhism.

>>19762843
But China did reject communism. During the late stages of the cultural revolution there was an enormous quantity of black markets, the government gave up trying to close them because it was the only way for the people to not starve to death. After the death of Mao, Deng Xiaoping opened the economy up.
China today is capitalist in disguise.

>>19767655
my only problem is with this reductionism and simplification

>>19767704
>that wasn't real communism
You're an idiot. Also China isn't capitalist, since capitalism implies competition, you fucking dumb nigger.

>>19767704
one of the greatest spiritual figures of the last century (if not the greatest) appeared in China, Xu Yun

>>19767760
Was he in possession of the Arcana Arcanorum?

>>19767740
>>19767704
Laughable to say China isnt communist. But even so, they have rejected materialist communism for materialist capitalism.
The CCP's only mandate to power is economic growth.

>>19767807
is communist*

>>19767807
>central government control of the economy is capitalist
You're a retard.
>The CCP's only mandate to power is economic growth.
No it isn't.

>>19767847
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
You're out of your depth.

>>19767847
>>19767704
Not him but I will just note that you don't understand that Guénon's point was that China was not interested in materialistic ideas and that's why they would reject communism. Whether they're communist or capitalist in the end doesn't matter, those systems are two side of the materialist coin, both a product of western civilization, hence why Guénon is wrong in both cases.

>>19767793
he just inherited all the Five schools of ch'an, revived buddhism despite the troubles of constant wars, lived 120 years and was Enlightened.

>>19767890
>You're out of your depth.
>t. dude hiding behind wikipedia articles
Thanks for the laugh, subhuman tranny communist.

>>19767903
I don't care about Guenon. I'm just remarking that China is not communist.

>>19767931
>I don't care about Guenon. I'm just remarking that China is not communist.
And that's the issue, you intervening in a discussion with an out of topic remark, and that only shows your lack of understanding of what is being discussed in this thread.
'Is China communist of capitalist' is a meme question that nobody ever ask but that keep being answered by individuals that find an opportunity to spread the little culture they possess, whenever the right keywords are identified by them.

>>19767971
the anon I was answering to said:
> He was also plain wrong about his prediction that China will reject communism because they're according to him 'above materialism'
How is my remark off-topic? China did reject communism, therefor the anon is wrong on the first part of his statement.
> 'Is China communist of capitalist' is a meme question that nobody ever ask
If that's the case then how are you supposed to prove a man ,who predicted the rejection of communism by china, is wrong?

>>19767903
>>19767971
>>19768032
its interesting that despite all this shit in the political/economic/social structure, china is still more spiritual/traditional than the west, at least there you can find true initiation, both in traditional sciences (i ching, medicine, arts, divinatory practices) and in the metaphysical path (daoism and ch'an buddhism are well alive)

>>19768093
Communism kills the body; capitalism kills the soul.

>>19768093
Although I'm inclined to disagree simply because their political system seems to be based purely on technocracy (that is, ability to manage the chinese economic machine), this interesting article corroborates what you are saying:
https://supchina.com/2022/01/13/china-looks-to-the-western-classics/
It's safe to say that I don't understand China.

Judeo-capitalism and judeo-communism kill both body and soul. China is run by Chinese not a foreign cabal.

>>19767447
> When it comes to sufism I find it unacceptable to call it "non-supreme", as Guénon said, the supreme identity (of which the universal man is just the means) is the same as moksha.
Apparently some of the texts Guenon cited as by Ibn Arabi were actually by Ibn Sab'in. I need to research this topic more so I can verify it myself but I believe that some of the positions held by Ibn Arabi are closer to Bhedabheda Vedanta and its a few more obscure figures like Ibn Sa’bin (who were less influential) that are closer to Advaita. Zhaener in “Hindu and Muslim Mysticism” calls al-Ghazali, Abu Yazid al-Bistani and al-Hallaj non-dualists as well but I dont remember him calling Ibn Arabi one.

>>19767615
> actually buddhism is superior doctrinally, see Nagarjuna and the madhyamaka school)
top kek

Can someone give me a list of all essential Traditionalist works (by Guenon and anyone else) and the approximate time needed to read them? Thanks

>every time I return to the summary of this book it just blows my mind

>>19765195
Join niggers

>>19768347
> Can someone give me a list of all essential Traditionalist works (by Guenon and anyone else) and the approximate time needed to read them?

Start with Guenon’s first book “Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines” (can be read in a week or less)

Then, there are Guenon’s essential works on modernity (read in this order):
1) East and West
2) Crisis of the Modern World
3 Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times

you can read all of the above in 2-4 weeks maybe

His essential works on metaphysics are (read in this order):
1) Man and His Becoming According to the Vedanta
2) The Symbolism of the Cross
3) The Multiple States of the Being
4) Metaphysical Principles of the Infinitesimal Calculus

You can read the above 4 books in maybe 3-6 weeks

None of the other Traditionalists are essential to read to understand the Traditionalist school, but if you enjoy reading Guenon its worth checking them out, they all have their own unique style of engaging with the same subject.

>>19769217
Thanks anon, I'm saving this. I'm interested in Traditionalism's relations to Islam, so I suppose I should also read Schuon and Nasr.

>>19769096
it didnt work

>>19769235
In that case you may also want to check out Michel Valsan and Titus Burkhart after reading Guenon, they were Traditionalists who focused mainly on Islam whereas Schuon was all over the place.

>>19769265
discordDOTgg/eXBDV8Wp

>>19765750
Islam is the most purest form of monotheism there is (in 21st century)

Most religion have to be impure over the ages to accomodate the changing time, Islam remain pretty much the same

Old/New Testament have a lot of unknown writers/editers

Hindu/Buddhist tradition can't even find people who wrote them

But Quran had remained authentic

>>19768280
Please, stop believing the trolls of 4chan. Guénon didn't cite that text but he approved it. The text is attributed to Ibn Arabi by sufis, Ivan Agueli is the guy who translated it and his sufi masters approved it. These people who say that it was actually Ibn Sab'in's writing are revisionist academics. Honestly I am really tired of hylics and these type of conversations but Ibn Arabi's doctrine is the same as Advaita. Read what Ramana Maharshi had to say about Christ and you will see how is related to this differences of approach even though the reality is the same. Actually, I will quote it here:

Major A. W. Chadwick, an ardent English devotee, asked, “Why did Jesus call out ‘My God! My God!’ while being crucified?”

Ramana Maharshi : It might have been an intercession on behalf of the two thieves who were crucified with Him. Again a Jnani has attained liberation even while alive, here and now. It is immaterial as to how, where and when he leaves his body. Some jnanis may appear to suffer, others may be in samadhi, still others may disappear from sight before death. But that makes no difference to their jnana. Such suffering is apparent only to the onlooker and not to the Jnani, for he has already transcended the mistaken identity of the Self with the body.

>>19770408
too bad it’s full of muslims

Does gaudya vaishnavism (Hare Krishna movement) provide an authentic initiation? It is very prevalent in the west.

>>19770408
You are basing too much on a text, the Christian/Hindu/Buddhist Traditions remain pretttty much intact through their respective institutions and other things.

>>19770408
cool bro but that is not what Guenon believed

Does Guenon ever elaborate about how marriage and relationships fit in with his metaphysics? If so, where? He was married twice so must have seen something in it.

>>19771382
In the metaphysics Guenon was into, there are both direct and indirect paths to God or Brahman or the Tao or what have you. Marriage is typically not included in the "direct path" route and in some views is incompatible with it, however it's fully compatible with what are considered the "indirect paths", which are what the majority of people follow. These indirect paths instead of leading to the summit of spiritual perfection and the highest aim of living beings in this very life will instead typically lead after death to an in-between stage above normal mundane human life that is roughly analogous to 'heaven' where you have extended time to 'clean your room' in Petersonian terms, after which you can get off the ride forever and enjoy eternal freedom. People who don't follow either path or who fail badly at one will return to a similar-quality or inferior existence after death.

>>19771478
Yeah I read about the 3 paths, which differs from Evola's 2 paths. But yeah, my main question is how something contingent like marriage that further attaches you to manifestation is compatible with effective initiation. Given Guenon attempted both, just wanted his justification.

>>19771512
>But yeah, my main question is how something contingent like marriage that further attaches you to manifestation is compatible with effective initiation
Someone already initiated on the direct path and pursuing it seriously would have no inclination for sex and no need for companionship in general. If you have an effective initiation into one of the indirect paths, you can be taught ways to engage in the world and sensual matters with a spiritual mindset always, helping one not be tainted in the way that people usually are. A very general example of this is the karma-yoga prescribed in the Bhagavad-Gita, where people surrender their attachment to the fruits of their actions and dedicate the fruits of them as an offering to God instead of craving them. A more specific example would be the various sex practices/rituals taught by certain Tantrics, Taoists and also written about by Ibn Arabi.

>>19771478
It isn't like this in Islam though. All prominent Sufis as well as Prophet Muhammad himself were married.

>>19771908
Yes, its common to be married in Sufism though. Regardless, if you have been liberated and risen above individuality to supraindividuality, you are not impelled by desire anymore and you dont pursue sex or even have any inclination to remain in one place over another, the bodies inclinations are not yours because you aren’t the body. If you still have any desire to engage in sexual activity and are impelled by desire generally, it means you are still at a non-final stage, from the perspective of the metaphysics Guenon was into. When it came to the reconciliation of different traditions Guenon always deferred to Advaita and says its the full truth, he doesn’t ever say that something in Advaita is just an approximation of something else which is the full story; I dont see any reason to assume why he would break this trend to make a special exception for sexual matters.

Also, there have been examples of Sufis who lived more ascetic lives before, like the Sufis who would take vows of poverty and roam around, its not unheard of. Shankara mentions in his works the rare cases of people who become enlightened and continue for a limited while in their worldly roles performing Vedic rites and such so as to set a good example for the common man, and so you can certainly have these rare examples of people seemingly immersed in worldly lives while remaining on a totally whole other level, still, in my opinion when you really get into a deep firsthand study of the meat and potatoes of the metaphysics involved it really starts to seem totally ludicrous that someone who had reached the final summit of perfection would be like “damn, I’m horny, I want to go bang my wife right now”. The idea that you can reach the very highest spiritual station possible and still want to indulge in all worldly things and cravings I think is misguided. This isn’t to say that anything aside from reaching the highest station is worthless though, the levels below it are still incomparable vistas that lead after death to the highest summit or an easy opportunity to gain it.

>>19772083
The Prophet actually forbid this style of never getting married because of asceticism. Ali and other Shia Imams also heavily reprimanded it, and Ali was known to be the peak of spiritual perfection. As a narration from Muhammad goes, Ali was a 'dead man walking among the living', and he got married to Muhammad's daughter when he was 25. I think in a marriage, sex is only an elementary concern. The union of man and woman in marriage seems to affect their souls and cause growth in a way not possible in unmarried people. I don't think marriage hinders spiritual development at all, but in fact seems to help it greatly.

>>19772083
what about the prophet Muhammad? he had sex with his wife and certainly desire for sexual pleasure (is recorded in the hadiths), yet sufis believe that he reached the highest degree of spiritual realization

>>19770408
Why are muslims like that? You fool nobody

>>19772205
> I don't think marriage hinders spiritual development at all, but in fact seems to help it greatly.
I agree that marriage is good and can help up to a certain point, but beyond that level to which it enables one to reach I think its a burden that obstructs one from reaching the very highest level. I don’t feel any qualms about reducing levels of spiritual understanding where one is still pursuing desires to a rank below the level one reaches when desire itself is uprooted and transcended. If that means most Sufis stay at a non-final stage while ensconced in the body on earth, then so be it. I don’t care about reconciling the perennialism of it to neatly have everyone at the same level so everyone can get their trophy and feel good.

>>19772207
If he was still impelled by desire in any fashion, then I would disagree that he reached the highest level. In the case of any married Sufi throughout history however any of them without our knowledge could have turned away from all desires and not engaged in sex anymore near the end of their life even while being married earlier, and we would have no way of knowing if they did so.

>>19770484
Anyone?

>>19772876
is at least dubious, I would't trust it, just move from the west

>>19772205
>>19772772
Also, I would add, although Guenon refers to Vishishtadvaita as orthodox and as another type of road leading to the same eternal metaphysical truth as other traditions, Guenon doesn’t mention to my knowledge that Vishishtadvaita denies that there can be any liberation or moksha while the body is still alive, they say it can only happen after the death of the body; so the notion that a final extirpation of oneself from the limits of individuality being something that only happens after death is a notion already present in other traditions that Guenon cites, and so it makes sense that certain kinds of Sufi teaching would correspond with this too instead of all of them uniformly granting access to something equivalent to moksha while the body is still alive.

>>19772772
>>19772982
I know perennialists don't like Jung but you should read this article by him (starting from page 163). As I said, marriage is not reducible to sexual desire.
https://archive.org/details/ThePortableJung/page/n205/mode/2up