/lit/ - Literature

Zero replies? What happened to all those Trad posters on /lit/?

>>20855992
None of them are American.

You don't have to leave the West to become initiated into an esoteric religious order now. I can't speak for other religions but I know that there are Orthodox Christian monasteries in North America where you can learn the Hesychasm. There are also legit Tibetan Buddhist temples but there are many fake cults so you'd have to use your discernment there.
Also, joining a group doesn't make you an enlightened being, obviously.

>>20855999
And? I'm not asking about opinions on New York. I'm asking about Sufism in Islamic countries.
>>20856001
I'm more interested in Sufism. I know that there are Sufi orders in the West now but I am concerned about their legitimacy.

>>20855828
>>20855992
they were destroyed by the guy who pointed out the stark contradiction between Advaita and Sufism, Shankara and Ibn Arabi, which once noted totally legitimizes most of Guenons pseudo-perennial rhetoric, now that they have caught on that their infallible teacher never even read primary source material, they've either gone into denial mode, or have just left the "/trad/" discussion for good, either way, they it would be stupid for them to continue proselytizing the opium-addled frenchman.

>>20856015
>which once noted totally legitimizes most of Guenons pseudo-perennial rhetoric
*totally deligitimizes*

>>20856015
>they were destroyed by the guy who pointed out the stark contradiction between Advaita and Sufism, Shankara and Ibn Arabi
???? according to Guenon's worldview if you aren't a Brahmin Indian you are not supposed to and cannot properly pratice Advaita anyway and you are suppose to practice other paths which sometimes are lesser and indirect ones

>>20856008
>And? I'm not asking about opinions on New York. I'm asking about Sufism in Islamic countries.
You're free to do whatever you want retard, if you need 4chans advice to point you in a spiritual direction, then you're off to a bad start.
>>20856030
>???? according to Guenon's worldview if you aren't a Brahmin Indian you are not supposed to and cannot properly pratice Advaita anyway and you are suppose to practice other paths which sometimes are lesser and indirect ones
this is false and is rejected by traditional advaita authorities today, and the reason for this rejection is not unrelated to the writings of shankara himself.
such a false statement by guenon only further delegitimizes his opinions.

>>20855828
You can be initiated into Sufi orders in many countries like Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Pakistan etc although it will likely be a more authentic and traditional initiation and spiritual connection if you stay there longer and learn the language and study in that language under a native teacher etc. One anon on /lit/ did this in Yemen and thought there was no real 'esoteric' teaching at the place he was studying and he left Islam and sometimes posts about his experiences although of course this is not automatically the case with every teacher or center of Sufism

>>20856042
>this is false and is rejected by traditional advaita authorities today,
That sounds like a new-age modernist spin, do you have a source for this? Shankara upholds caste distinctions in his writings and in his Brahma Sutra Bhasya he says that Shudras are supposed to be prohibited from studying the Vedas (as do Ramanuja, Madhva etc) and that they can study the Smriti texts instead if they so desire

>>20856060
Also I have read through portions of a scholarly study of the practices of the Dashnami Sampradaya before which documented that with the exception of the wilder, more antinomian ash-wearing Naga Advaitins that practically all the traditional Advaita sub-orders rarely initiate anyone into sannyasin who is not a Brahmin and when rare exceptions occur they are typically kshatriyas or high-level inbetween castes and the like

>>20856082
>>20856060
I never said it was easy but it is not impossible, just like moving to morroco or tunisia, learning arabic etc. is not easy, I certainly don't think the average 4chan /trad/ is cut out for it. But I do know of cases of Europeans who have been initiated at the Dakṣināmnāya Śrī Śāradā Pītham following the Daśanāmi Sampradaya said to have been founded by Shankara, for example, so how can you explain that, it seems that these cases of europeans if what you were saying were the truth should have been totally disqualified based on birth, yet somehow they managed.

>>20856060
>modernist new-age spin
well even amongst eminent personalities who have belonged to the same paramparā as shankara - founded by him, may make errors in doctrine, even amongst them there are disagreements.

>>20856030
>???? according to Guenon's worldview if you aren't a Brahmin Indian you are not supposed to and cannot properly pratice Advaita anyway
why do people assume all of this bullshit which was never written by Guenon?

>>20855828
>>20856048
Hello anons I'm from Egypt and I live in Cairo. You don't really see Sufi activity in day to day life, but you can join a Sufi order if you want to. The thing is, 99% of it will be in Arabic so don't expect anything else. Also right now Egypt is going through a shit ton of inflation so living here is hell, you'll probably be fine as a foreigner though but I thought I'd warn you anyway

>>20856048
>>20856291
Interesting and realistic. These are both what I figured more or less.

>>20856234
Its a copout from people who have been mislead, this sort of propaganda began after guenon died, and various people have tried their best to push generations of guenonians away from hinduism, and instead into islam, that is the narrative goes
"too bad you're not a brahmin... your only option is Islam then - it can't be helped!"

>>20856060
look at this video I found
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FXNUBzYPpQ
some guy can approval from the current head or "shankarachrya" of the "Govardhan Math" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govardhan_Math which is one of the 4 mathas of the 4 cardinal directions tracing their parampara back to shankara, to establish an "advaita vedanta ashram" in europe, these are the sorts of organisations guenonfag is referring back to, and if the current "shankacharya" of one of the traditional 4 mathas, is a modernist new-ager, then its over I guess.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nischalananda_Saraswati

all the 4 mathas have websites, temple locations around india etc. and even youtube channels, its not some hidden thing closed to brahmins only, of course if you want to rise up the ranks of the organizations themselves of course there will be obvious barriers just by virtue of you being from a different cultural background etc.

but the proposition that these gurus etc. dont see through caste, and all this is just a cope from guenonfag who will never actually visit any of these temples, or really try take the traditional aspects seriously, because he is just a larper who reads Gambhirananda's (who was a vivekenandan albeit a great scholar) shankara translations from his home in the USA, who doesn't realize that advaita is predominately something oral, whilst also larping here with his advaita syllogisms and arguments about "muh reflexive awareness" for over a decade...
lets be real do you think someone who spends decades on /lit/ still shilling the same introductory author to advaita (guenon) is going to be a good source of advice on the matter, he has to tell himself that its impossible otherwise he can't justify this habit of elarping from his home in the USA."

>>20856365
here is a video of one of the heads (current shankacharyas) of the mutts the Dwarka Sharada Peetham one hitting a reporter kek on indian television
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOsOkL3cD4U

>>20855828
Where do you live, OP? There's options in a lot of places in the west too.

>>20856365
>from his home in the USA
bro USA is the new center of Tradition

>inb4 Europoor envy

guenonbros... screw advaita and islam, we're going full buddhist

>>20856586
I looked into this one shingon sect(?) pretty hard all last week and it seemed like it was Shaivaism with Taoist and Shinto influences sprinkled in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acala

idk tho im still an Eastern newfag

what side does guenonfag take in the Mula ̄vidya controversy? https://who.rocq.inria.fr/Ramakrishna.Upadrasta/Advaita/PHIL_PAPERS/Arun_Murthi_Mulavidya_Controversy.pdf

>>20855828
Guenon was an overhyped idiot, but I heard that based trades are now going to Mauritania to study the Quran. Egypt and other advanced Muslim countries are probably too globalized for you.
>>20856015
>their infallible teacher never even read primary source material
I wonder why so many people are obsessed with this jerk who hasn't even read the books he wrote about.

>>20856626

>Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati issued an appeal (Vijn ̃ apti) to all scholars in 1961and called for a
debate on this issue. Doherty refers to this Vijn ̃ apti (2005; p. 212, fn. 9) and gives the names of scholars for
and against the views of SS (ibid, p. 213, fn. 10) in that debate. She, in the same paper, makes a reference to
another debate initiated by Sr: ngerıfl S· aflradafl Pıflt:ha in 1976 to settle the issue of mufl laflvidyafl (p. 223). It is clear
from Doherty that Sringeri Pıflt:ha was against the views of SS on mufl laflvidyafl. But D. B. Gangoli whom she
also cites in some other context in the same paper mentions that the Sr: ngerıfl Jagadguru had visited SS and got
clarified SS’s view and was fully satisfied with it (1997; p. 30). Then what was the need for organizing a
debate by Sr: ngerıfl Pıflt:ha after the passing away of SS? It appears there is some apparent contradiction here.
>This debate continues till date on a low key in private circles and only restricted to scholars of older
generation within the state of Karnataka (erstwhile Mysore state). The main followers of this view of SS
were Vedaflnta s·iroman: i S. Vittala Sastri, Veda Brahma Sri H.S. Laksminarasimhamurthy, Sri Devarao
Kulkarni and D.B. Gangolli. However his followers did not seriously pursue with vigour on this issue
though they were committed to such a view. When the author of this paper in his personal talk with
Laxminarasimhamurthy had raised the issue of mufl laflvidyafl, he said that the fight which ensued in the
debate between the two sides was so bitter that he does not want to rake up the issue any more. The
monastic institutions like Sringeri, considered to be the centre of Advaitic learning use all their power and
influence to suppress such intellectual debates

>>20856129
>But I do know of cases of Europeans who have been initiated at the Dakṣināmnāya Śrī Śāradā Pītham
Were they actually initiated into sannyasin monkhood with all that this entails and subsequently lived as a monk or were they simply initiated into the Sri Vidya upasana or initiated into meditating on some mantra or other? Because there is a huge difference between the two and Sri Vidya is also taught and practiced there
>>20856365
The video says he gave then a "shiva mantra" which he says he could then teach his disciples but that isn't the same thing as qualifying someone to initiate others into sannyasin and isn't the same thing as making that person a member or qualified representative of the Dashnami Sampradaya ; (eg transcendental meditation originally stems on mantras that Advaitins originally taught to householders but without initiating then into sannyasin); I wonder if this is a case like Schuon who got some written document from his Sufi teacher simply allowing Schuon to propagate in favor of Islam and Schuon puffed up the paper to portray it as proof he was a Sufi master who was ready to form his own order etc when that wasn't what said paper actually said
>and arguments about "muh reflexive awareness" for over a decade...
Wait, are you saying that someone has been talking about and defending the details of the contents of his writing showing how he refutes opposing positions!??!!? Good heavens!
>>20856342
>"too bad you're not a brahmin... your only option is Islam then - it can't be helped!"
I agree that saying that about Hinduism generally is a false narrative pushed by Schuon etc after Guenon died; but there is a crucial difference between saying this, which ignores that the Agama/Tantra-based schools of Hinduism are traditionally open to outsiders and on the other hand admitting the truth that initiation into Advaita sannyasin has been traditionally closed to outsiders and also lower-caste people in India (there are academic studies that document this); In fact it's a fairly common and traditional opinion that you can find in multiple medieval Sanskrit writers of multiple schools including both Advaitins and non-Advaitins like Shaiva Siddhantins that while the Vedas are reserved only for the twice-born that the Agamas/Tantras are explicitly available to be practiced by everyone including women and shudras etc

>>20855992
>Trad posters on /lit/
you mean /pol/ immigrants

>>20856626
I have not read the whole essay yet but I agree with SS Saraswati at least to the extent that maya was never a "positive force" in Shankara's works but he always place it in the category of the mithya/false which is neither the Absolute existence of Brahman nor nothingness

>>20856816

>>20856015
>the guy who pointed out the stark contradiction between Advaita and Sufism
You mean the exoteric differences between Hinduism in general and Islam in general?

>>20855992
In all seriousness, I realized Traditionalism was wrong.

>>20856813
>The video says he gave then a "shiva mantra"
this is what constitutes a guenonian initiation anyway, you know sufi sheykhs just give you a blessing and guide you through dhikr? from the perspective of advaita this is just "theoretical preparation," which doesn't even demand "initiation" per say to achieve results, the rite of these sorts of mantric recitations serve as the prior mental purification, anything which engages body, speech and mind is seen as being prior as being a mean to the "primordial state" which is the beginning point of Advaita.
>Advaita sannyasin
Of course these things are difficult, its like saying an indian can just fly to europe and take up residence on mt. athos permanently, reality is not so convenient usually, especially if you want to go by the traditional monastic standard, taking up permanent residence as a total renunciate by lifestyle in some monastic institution in a foreign culture (if you really want to do what you are saying, you would have to integrate into indian culture, something hard to do, you'd have to be fluent in hindi or whatever local dialect, its just not really something realistic, its like telling someone to go become a fakir in the middle east, guenon himself in egypt lived in a house gifted to him buy some rich jew) it is not all something so easy, and there are various inevitable material considerations, its very easy for such a thing to remain as a typical fantasy, and its not something easy for anyone, be it a muslim, christian, hindu etc. If anything it'd be best to just try to secure the most peaceful lifestyle with no consideration of the soil you're on, with minimum worldy responsibilities etc. and this could be done by whatever means, and then maintain a more indirect association with a traditional organization, only in terms of an affiliation which is unbinded by these sorts of conditions - moving countries, learning new languages, all that comes with opening yourself up to all sorts of exploitation, being at the complete mercy to this or that "spiritual teacher" who does not even speak the same language as you, literally throwing yourself at their feet and so on, in a foreign environment - fantasy.
>>20856845
I have read in the archives you yourself perpetuating, "root ignorance" and avidya as a sort of material cause root prakriti, and so on. Anyway this is a topic I am going to go into in depth,
here is also a link to many writings (in english) of SS Saraswati etc. http://www.adhyatmaprakasha.org/php/english_books.php
there is also this comprehensive survey of the debate "A Contemporary Debate in Advaita Vedanta: Avidya and the Views of Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, Martha J. Doherty" online.
>>20856900
>exoteric differences between Hinduism in general and Islam in general?
No I mean real insurmountable differences which lead to different outcomes and which destroy the "regularity" of it all, annihilating guenons "initiation vs. mysticism" theories with it.

>>20856956
>. Anyway this is a topic I am going to go into in depth,
*Anyway this is a topic I am not going to go into depth on here,
I am just pointing it out, that there are some inconsistencies even inside of advaita, raised by the "traditional advaitins"

>>20856956
>No I mean real insurmountable differences
They don't exist. And yes, I've read both Ibn Arabi (not every single writing, though, there is quite a lot) and Shankara. I have his Tree of Life sitting with me right now, along with
Vivekachudamani.

>>20856900
>>20856956
Real ESOTERIC differences. That is between the "metaphysics" of the two traditions themselves, and their "approaches to liberation" and spiritual outcomes.the "Jivanmukta" is not something comparable to the "Universal Man" tried to make out, and neither are the 4 padas of Atman comparable to the maqamats. There is no proper and explicit formulation of turiya in sufism especially nothing actively taught in "sufi orders," nor are all the avasthas there in an analogous way. guenons theories when exaggerated turn into a crypto-vivekenandan reductionism which just says,
"well we all end up at the peak of the mountain bro!" and does not actually look into the nuances of the initiatic methods themselves transmitted by these lineages.

>>20856997
>They don't exist. And yes, I've read both Ibn Arabi (not every single writing, though, there is quite a lot) and Shankara. I have his Tree of Life sitting with me right now, along with
Where does the sufic conception of the maqamats fit in with shankara? if you think so, or the "immutable essence" of the akbarians, theophanies etc.?

>>20855828
Who

>>20857039
nobody serious.

>>20856956
>this is what constitutes a guenonian initiation anyway
This is not what constitutes an initiation into sannyasin; initiation into Advaita sannyasin goes beyond simply receiving a mantra although they are included in this and are basic feature of most kinds of initiation; but if all you have received is a mantra to recite than you are still a layperson and you are not really different from any random person on the street; there is no traditional initiation into Advaita outside of doing so as a sannyasin
>taking up permanent residence as a total renunciate by lifestyle in some monastic institution in a foreign culture (if you really want to do what you are saying, you would have to integrate into indian culture, something hard to do
Where there is a will there is a way and westerners have become monks in India before in various sampradayas; however this whole paragraph is kinda besides the point since traditionally the Dashnami sampradaya doesn't admit non high-caste Hindus into sannyasin except for the traveling nagas who don't live at the 4 temples. and I have yet to see proof of the contrary being true (actually initiation into sannyasin and not simply a mantra) Other people have different perspectives but I prefer to face the truth about this instead of ignoring it and coming up with some cope where I pretend to follow traditional Advaita according to various rationalizations but without actually doing so in the way its supposed to be followed. I would rather just be honest that I just like studying it as a layperson and have a great appreciation for it without being a full sannyasin-practitioner of it and I have no desire to become a monk right now or in the foreseeable future anyway. If I really want to practice a spiritual path in a fully traditional manner there are other Hindu schools and non-Hindu schools of teachings where I am fully eligible to join them and do that; either with or without personally believing Advaita is correct
>I have read in the archives you yourself perpetuating, "root ignorance" and avidya as a sort of material cause root prakriti
I have never purposely maintained that maya/avidya is anything other than the false indefinite that is neither Brahman nor nothing; when I first started posting about Vedanta on /lit/ my understanding of it wasn't as developed as it was now and occasionally I misstated a few things but I don't believe that I have ever argued that maya is a positive ontological entity since Shankara clearly rejects that; I would only consent to saying that maya is "positive" "in a certain sense" insofar as anything that's not nothingness can be considered as being "positive" in a certain relative sense. I have always maintained that prakriti is simply a part of maya; Shankara does speak about mulaprakriti in his gita bhasya which I have noted on /lit/ before but this just refers to the differentiated vs undifferentiated maya which are both of same status insofar as both are mithya

>>20857096
>This is not what constitutes an initiation into sannyasin; initiation into Advaita sannyasin goes beyond simply receiving a mantra although they are included in this and are basic feature of most kinds of initiation; but if all you have received is a mantra to recite than you are still a layperson and you are not really different from any random person on the street; there is no traditional initiation into Advaita outside of doing so as a sannyasin
That was my point really, I was being ironic to undermine the "guenonian initiation" - if you didn't realize that.

>>20857147
>That was my point really, I was being ironic to undermine the "guenonian initiation" - if you didn't realize that.

You said that after you cited the video of someone receiving a mantra from one of the Shankarachaya's and after you implied it was evidence that foreigners were being initiated into Advaita (it wasn't as far as I can tell since he wasn't joining sannyasin); so that led me to think you were under that misconception otherwise you wouldn't have originally claimed that I was wrong to say that the 4 mathas generally don't initiate people into Advaita who are not high-caste. At the end of the day I think the attitude of "hurr durr this one or two generalizations an author made that I hyperfocus on are kinda wrong therefore you should discount everything this author wrote or said" is puerile. I agree with Shankara over Guenon and I know the latter has his own obscure and idiosyncratic way of explaining things that can paper over nuances but that doesn't prevent me from still seeing the immense value in Guenon's writings or from seeing that some of his generalizations are understandable or they are an acceptable way of of simplifying things for the reader for the time being until they get to fully explore the nuances of the primary sources themselves later on.

>>20857184
>You said that after you cited the video of someone receiving a mantra from one of the Shankarachaya's and after you implied it was evidence that foreigners were being initiated into Advaita (it wasn't as far as I can tell since he wasn't joining sannyasin); so that led me to think you were under that misconception otherwise you wouldn't have originally claimed that I was wrong to say that the 4 mathas generally don't initiate people into Advaita who are not high-caste.
Well I didn't mean a monastic/sanyasin, that is that I knew of europeans who had become ascetics in india, maybe there are some. Guenon when he spoke of initiation did not mean becoming permanent renunciates or ascetics, so I don't see the problem.

>>20857184
>
You said that after you cited the video of someone receiving a mantra from one of the Shankarachaya's and after you implied it was evidence that foreigners were being initiated into Advaita (it wasn't as far as I can tell since he wasn't joining sannyasin)
Do you consider initiation to only be "joining sannyasin" that is not what Guenon meant by it, and neither did I, that guy even if he was initiated into a mantra, "diksha," and stayed in india for many years, under a guru, received the spiritual influence and initiation according to guenon, which is the subject of the thread, so yes he did receive initiation from a traditional advaita associated mutt. according to the criterion, you have turned this subject around with the assumption that sannyasin (permanent renunciate ascetic) = initiation, which is an error.

>>20857184
>You said that after you cited the video of someone receiving a mantra from one of theShankarachaya's and after you implied it was evidence that foreigners were being initiated into Advaita (it wasn't as far as I can tell since he wasn't joining sannyasin)
Do you consider initiation to only be "joining sannyasin" that is not what Guenon meant by it, and neither did I, that guy even if he was initiated into a mantra, "diksha," and stayed in india for many years, under a guru, received the spiritual influence and initiation according to guenon, which is the subject of the thread, so yes he did receive initiation from a traditional advaita associated mutt. according to the criterion, you have turned this subject around with the assumption that sannyasin (permanent renunciate ascetic) = initiation, which is an error. It does serve as evidence. Where did Guenon say initiation = Monk?
Rather its just instruction from a traditional lineage guru (parampara) that guy received shishya and diksha from or whatever else. So it does qualify as an initiation guenonfag.

>>20857184
>At the end of the day I think the attitude of "hurr durr this one or two generalizations an author made that I hyperfocus on are kinda wrong therefore you should discount everything this author wrote or said" is puerile.
I think "hurr durr its all the same ... but not really when you look into primary source... (which I pretend I have already and pretend to represent)" qualifies as puerile reductionism, it is misleading and deceptive.
> I agree with Shankara over Guenon and I know the latter has his own obscure and idiosyncratic way of explaining things that can paper over nuances but that doesn't prevent me from still seeing the immense value in Guenon's writings or from seeing that some of his generalizations are understandable or they are an acceptable way of of simplifying things for the reader for the time being until they get to fully explore the nuances of the primary sources themselves later on.
I agree, but Guenons "sankhya-yoga" advaita is an incomplete picture, there is no point in pretending it is not.

>>20857229
>ou have turned this subject around with the assumption that sannyasin (permanent renunciate ascetic) = initiation, which is an error.
I know that all initiation does not equal becoming a permanent sannyasin however for Advaita the only formal initiation in Advaita is precisely this very process and there is no formal initiation procedure outside of this and anything aside from this is not actually being traditionally initiated "into Advaita" but is just an innovation that's not endorsed or mentioned by Shankara anywhere so insofar as we are speaking about traditional Advaita this is correct. Someone who had closely studied Shankara and researched India like Guenon was surely aware of this

>>20857251
>I know that all initiation does not equal becoming a permanent sannyasin however for Advaita the only formal initiation in Advaita is precisely this very process and there is no formal initiation procedure outside of this and anything aside from this is not actually being traditionally initiated "into Advaita" but is just an innovation that's not endorsed or mentioned by Shankara anywhere so insofar as we are speaking about traditional Advaita this is correct.
Yes I agree then according to the traditional advaita doctrine, but this is a different type of initiation in itself, and if this is the only type of initiation you acknowledge then you cannot acknowledge Guenons initiation as initiation for example, which was not something exclusively for sannyasins.
and secondly, you cannot even say sri vidya initiation is initiation, or that the sufi baya constitutes an initiation, because it is not exclusively for sannyasins in the same way

for example according to this answer on a site
>In Shankara sampradaya deeksha is given by acharyas to deserving candidates. Sringeri periyava and mahaperiyava both have initited devotees into mantras of different devatas including sri vidya deeksha. Even to grihastas acharyals have given upadeshams of various mantras . We come across many stories of such initiations in their biographies. Especially in the biography of Abhinava vidya tirtha swami of sringeri i have come across them. Moreover even acharyas do sri vidya japam, acharyas perform sri chakra/maha meru puja. Also acharyas have always stressed upon receiving devatha anugraham for atma sakshatkaram. People do sadhana of deities with form to attain chitta shuddhi which will lead to atma sakshatkaram which is the ultimate goal of advaitha siddhanta
So "initiation" into mantras and so on is done in the Shankara sampradayas - on exception I guess.

>>20857250
>I think "hurr durr its all the same ... but not really when you look into primary source... (which I pretend I have already and pretend to represent)" qualifies as puerile reductionism, it is misleading and deceptive.
He doesn't claim the explication of the metaphysics are all exactly the same but rather that they are different ways of conceiving and approaching truth that are suitable to specific cultures and their mentalities; he also acknowledges that Vishishtadvaita leads to the same end-goal of Advaita which is a defensible claim insofar as following Vishishtadvaita can reasonably be seen from an Advaita POV as something that would lead to the Brahmaloka and possibility subsequent moksha through this intermediary stage as an avenue (and hence a perfectly suitable path for householders who may be ineligible for sannyasin for whatever reason like reasons of birth or their personal disposition or having other obligations etc) and you could say the same about Ibn Arabi too. Guenon's works don't stand or fall solely on Ibn Arabi in any sense; he mentions other Sufis in his works and you can find other Sufis who are even closer metaphysically to Advaita (to say nothing of Vajrayana or Taoism or Sikhism etc); Guenon's whole point is not that you have to find an Advaita-copy somewhere in the world and join it (a huge strawman) but that rather that there are all these streams flowing either faster or slower towards God and that people should join a stream that fits them including slow and indirect ones (which are perfect for certain types) and that any stream is better than none stream regardless of how indirect it is.
>I agree, but Guenons "sankhya-yoga" advaita is an incomplete picture, there is no point in pretending it is not.
What specifically about Guenon's exposition of Advaita has any resemblance to Sankhya-Yoga over traditional Advaita? Are you just repeating that claim from that VedaVyasa website? (who curiously enough say Ibn Arabi isn't ABSOLUTE while ignoring that the exact same could be said of the Sri Vidya doctrine that they promote on said website) I'm genuinely curious what you mean

>>20856365
>YouTube video
Opinion discarded.

>>20857316
>ignoring that the exact same could be said of the Sri Vidya
This is not true, they do acknowledge this, just by nature of Sri Vidya relying on symbolic meditation etc. and method, multiple authors also contribute to this site, so this is just a blatantly false accusation.
>What specifically about Guenon's exposition of Advaita has any resemblance to Sankhya-Yoga over traditional Advaita? Are you just repeating that claim from that VedaVyasa website
Yes I am and I don't see why this would constitute a problem.

>>20857299
>and if this is the only type of initiation you acknowledge
I have never said that or implied that this is the only kind I acknowledge; I was just specifying what is the norm in Advaita. I personally think there is a whole spectrum of different kinds of initiations with different intents and purposes and effects even though they all converge on common themes. What is said in your quote seems to be as I expected that they offer mantras like from Sri Vidya etc to people who want them and these are held as having spiritual/purifying value but these people are still not considered as formally initiated into Advaita and nor is there the expectation that they will become fully enlightened through chanting mantras in their house

>>20857316
For example just to point it out, Guenon makes a point in "Man and his Becoming"
when he goes of "purusha and prakriti" he says, something along the lines of "if the Samkyha has appeared dualistic to our readers" etc. then this is only because of their incomprehension, and he dedicates a couple paragraphs explaining why the "orientalists are wrong" in considering Samkhya dualistic, whereas Shankara himself says Samkya is dualistic. lol

>>20857346
>This is not true, they do acknowledge this, just by nature of Sri Vidya relying on symbolic meditation etc. and method, multiple authors also contribute to this site, so this is just a blatantly false accusation.
I had read some of the articles but not every one on the website but I never saw anyone mention this in the articles I read so that was just my honest but incomplete impression. But this begs the question why do you have such a seeming hostility to Guenon's promotion of Ibn Arabi when all the claims that are used to justify Sri Vidya could theoretically be used to endorse indirect or Apara Sufi teachings as well? I you seen you post in multiple threads where you are like THIS WEBSITE LE DESTORYED IBN ARABI FOR BEING NON-SUPREME and then two seconds later you are like "bro Sri Vidya and its realism and parinamavada transformation of the Absolute is all good bro because its all symbolic bro"; can't you say the same about following Sufi teachings with an Advaita POV as Guenon did?
>>What specifically about Guenon's exposition of Advaita has any resemblance to Sankhya-Yoga over traditional Advaita? Are you just repeating that claim from that VedaVyasa website
>Yes I am and I don't see why this would constitute a problem.
I never said it was a problem but I wanted to know specifically why you said that. From what I recalled in the article where that claim is made they just say that as a throwaway comment without ever specifically pointing out what exactly about his exposition is too Sankhya- or too Yoga-like (im not even ruling out that this is true but I just want to know why they say so). I wanted to see if you had any real examples eg if you knew what you were talking about or if you found the essay where they reveal these details (which I could not find) or basically repeating hearsay; Im not trying to come across as rude but those are just the facts of the matter. If you can point me to a source I'll happily check out the details

>>20857355
>when he goes of "purusha and prakriti" he says, something along the lines of "if the Samkyha has appeared dualistic to our readers" etc. then this is only because of their incomprehension
This is literally not what Guenon says, what Guenon says (pic related) is that the Purusha-Prakriti pair is not automatically dualistic insofar as it's a concept taught by the Upanishads (which teach non-dualism) and which as a concept predates the Samkhya school which sources its teachings from the Upanishads just like Vedanta does. What Guenon is saying there is fully in agreement with Shankara insofar as Shankara also claims that the Samkhya school misunderstood the Upanishads and he claims that the Purusha-Prakriti distinction taught by the Upanishads is subordinated to non-dualism as just part of the conditional distinctions used to explain the cosmology etc and is not a real dualism. In that chapter Guenon is talking about what the pair means to Vedanta and not what it means for Samkhya

Do you have another example?

>>20857435
I will recommend two books, you can read them if you want as they capture the essence of my criticisms
and Alātaśānti by Carlo Rocchi
René Guénon et la tradition hindoue by Renaud Fabbri
How about Guenons "supra-individuality of the intellect" or theory of "descending realization," or his Millenarianism veiled as "Kali Yuga?"
I will not exert the effort in making long exhaustive refutations, but I have pointed out two books which are not easily available, especially the first one which go through the issues.
>>20857398
>THIS WEBSITE LE DESTROYED
no its no such thing, the problem comes down to - and you will be able to recognize this if you read sufi even "metaphysical" texts, the intention to found non-duality through duality, or the intention to find unity through multiplicity, this is not just LE NON-SUPREME because the website says so, but because IT IS so. This is no "small error" and is at odds with cutting through illusion at the very beginning, all Guenons writtings about there being "multiple degrees or states of being" manifestation even if contingent, steps and stages, "superior states to be conquered," when it is firstly justified as real and as a stage to overcome, even if theoretically and intellectually postured to be subordinated to what is supposedly "really real," is something redundant, and misleading, and if he gets such a thing wrong, I can't recommend him or take or appeal to his pompous charlatan writings at all, thats why I am taking the position of the anti-guenonfag.

>>20857613
>through duality or even in duality which is even more problematic*

>>20857613
>theory of "descending realization"
based buddhist Guenon BTFOing advaitins

>>20857613
it is such a subtle point, that is ignored completely, and if realized at the very beginning, there was no reason to go through guenon for it, so I am just warning people thas all, you can larp as a guenon defender all you want, in fact I won't even bother in these threads anymore, but all the shit he constructs out of literally nothing is something which is in the end meaningless, and all his writings are a waste of time, they are all not "more correct" than something else, or "philosophically superior" to this or that, that is just all posturing, its all built on Nothing at all, and insofar as that is not understood, and its all pretended to be Something of high intellectual value, that Nothing will never be understood, so I am here to reinforce to utter worthlessness of his pseudo-metaphysical writings devoid of any Real content.

>>20856384
>OOOH OOH LOOK AT THIS OLD GUY LARPING AS A RELIGIOUS PERSON BUT HE GOT ANGRY. HOW CAN HE GET ANGRY AND HIT SOMEONE IF HE CLAIMS TO BE A RELIGIOUS HEAD. VIOLENCE FROM A RELIGIOUS HEAD THAT CAN'T BE GOOD FOR THE SOUL!!
>shankara: i was told by doctors to not let anyone get near my face that is why i moved him away (literally playing into their hands by being ironic)
indians eat this clown shit up like no tomorrow

>>20857398
here from an article on their site:
>We must add an important detail that can be understood through a careful reading of the text in question: the meditation on Śrī Yantra occupies a central point in the first two levels of Śrī Vidyā because, being a science of the non-Supreme ( Apara vidyā ) , the doctrine is then expressed by means of the detailed explanation of the yantra-mantra method .
https://vedavyasamandala.com/en/la-bhavana-upani%e1%b9%a3ad-1/
they are not inconsistent

>>20857613
>I will recommend two books, you can read them if you want as they capture the essence of my criticisms
Are either book translated to English? I cannot find copies by searching but if they are translated and you can provide a link I would probably read them
>How about Guenons "supra-individuality of the intellect" or theory of "descending realization," or his Millenarianism veiled as "Kali Yuga?"
The first is not a Sankhya-Yoga idea (their buddhi is also individual) so saying that doesn't make his exposition of Vedanta Sankya-like and he clarifies that he only means supra-individual in a relative sense anyway (which I agree with you was likely a poor error of vocab choosing); neither is the 2nd notion a Sankhya-Yoga idea. There is no metaphysical purpose to a descending realization once liberated but it can be read figuratively as the liberated mind settling into how it will behave until physical death and what actions the body will engage like whether to roam around and engage in any particular debate or not and whether to write texts or not etc which in Advaita the mind of the liberated man still makes decisions about regardless anyway (because all thought does not permanently stop in a lobotomy-like state but rather you always discern the presence of your Atman's non-discursive self-awareness even when the mind is engaged in logical thought); there is no greater metaphysical realization to be had but the Yogi still knows his mind engaging with the world and can thus describe the ways of thinking and behaving of a liberated man as some texts do; I have not studied his research on the Kali Yuga closely yet but it seems irrelevant to expounding Vedanta which is another topic
>Guenons writtings about there being "multiple degrees or states of being" manifestation even if contingent, steps and stages, "superior states to be conquered," when it is firstly justified as real and as a stage to overcome, even if theoretically and intellectually postured to be subordinated to what is supposedly "really real," is something redundant, and misleading, and if he gets such a thing wrong
I don't recall him saying the lesser states are necessary though (If he says they are necessary as separate realizations you have to go through first I would disagree with Guenon on that) and so these are largely comparable to all the lesser/indirect optional paths within Hinduism that someone can engage in before being qualified to directly seek liberation and reach it; even Shankara defends the fundamental validity of Vedic rituals throughout his works

>>20857613
>the intention to found non-duality through duality, or the intention to find unity through multiplicity
Do you think Sri Vidya is very different? They also posit what is basically a 'qualified non-dual' emanationism and you can even argue Ibn Arabi undermines the ontological status of the world to a greater extant than they do. I don't see how there is a fundamental difference between thinking Advaita is true and following Sri Vidya vs thinking Advaita is true and following various Sufi philosophies and it makes no sense to me why you seemingly have no problem with the former while acting like the latter is intellectually dishonest and an outrage that Guenon should be condemned for

>>20855828
Reading the Quran and pondering the spirituality of every verse is probably better than joining a group of sufis but you do you.

>>20858101
>Sri Vidya is very different? They also posit what is basically a 'qualified non-dual' emanationism and you can even argue Ibn Arabi undermines the ontological status of the world to a greater extant than they do. I don't see how there is a fundamental difference between thinking Advaita is true and following Sri Vidya vs thinking Advaita is true and following
I don't think they are independently different, But guenon never equated Tantra with Advaita, Sri Vidya itself is more integrated into Advaita, that is in many cases it actually ends with Advaita... and the Guru will be acquainted, but of course it is still "aparabrahma vidya"
The difference is simple, Guenon says Sufism = Advaita, and it is not like this was built on some hearsay, he was fully acquainted with Sufism enough to know that this could not be the case except by his own interpolations, secondly, this whole thing compromises his theories on the "regularity" of a traditional organization, the majority of sufi sheikhs will reinforce the Opposite of Advaita, that is "temporary states," "stations" etc. and on a "metaphysical" basis, guenon used this whole "regularity" of the traditional organization and "initiation" as the criterion which separates "mysticism" from "initiation," and also what he built his whole theory about distinguishing, the absence of the "western" organizations, which he said had devolved into mysticism and the "eastern," unless we put Sufism onto the side of the western tradition devolved into mysticism, because as you are saying, you will individually or irregularly have to deviate, from the aparabrahma vidya yourself.

This error whilst you think it is only a small irrelevant error is in actuality a domino, guenon also generalized all "initiations" as the SAME, he wrote, Sufi initiation, Freemason initiation, Hindu initiation, it all opens you up to one and the same "Universal esoterism" he only went so far as talking about the "primordial state" in these cases, he was talking about stages of a mere mental purification, which is what these traditions, in steps and stages are for, and this is something which "initiation" is not even acknowledged as being necessary for, as it amounts to in these cases a theoretical preparation, such an error cannot be overlooked at all, and indicates a deviation.

>>20856001
Well said. I think the 21st century, within serious esoterism, is the century for syncretism and individuality. Enlightenment will be distributed at higher levels than before. That isn't to say that we all, or any of us, will ascend and become energy beings. Easily found information on esoterism via the internet is leading to an explosion of satisfied seekers. You don't have to settle for some retards in robes that live near you.

>>20855828
Man, I haven't been to lIt in maybe two years, and someone is still making a post about Guenon? Back then I thought it was me but now I have to ask, who the fuck talks about Guenon, anywhere? In what university? Who is studying Guenon? Where? And why would any group of people be studying Guenon? I remember that chinese kid living in australia used to shill his books here along with the call of the crocodile dude and everyone else but really, what is it with people in lit and Guenon?

>>20858182
such a "theoretical preparation" of mental purification, through the repetitive exertions of body, speech and mind, cannot fit with Guenons theory of "initiation" as constituted by "regularity" devoid of "mysticism" and so on, which he individually claimed was existent in sufism, whereas this sort of strictly purely intellectual "initiation" is only there in Advaita, and cannot be said to be found at the end of this process of traversing through "stations" and "tasting" states, to end up "fused but not confused" with the "Lord," not to mention there is a conception of causality in this all which does not just simply "perennially" align with Advaita.

the "initiations" of sufism then if they are not what Advaita is transmitting, is on par with regular initiation up to a certain point of irregular mysticism, making it equal and part of the western traditions as a whole, that is degenerated to a certain extent.
Logically from guenons whole thesis, if you truly think it through, he does not clearly go over the intricacies of why this may be the case, whilst I'll admit that it is of course inferrable from what he wrote, how many people who have missed this subtle point of discrimination then gone off and chased these fantasy "hermetic" or "sufi" initiations, etc. deluding themselves in expectations of this or that?

Whilst I'll admit I am only exaggerating, there is content in Guenon which does obviously align with the truth of the matter, I have dealt with people trying to reinforce the absurdities of the relative "degrees" etc. and traversing this or that, so his work has mislead many,.

And think about all the "european "sufi" sheikhs" which have come about claiming influence by guenon, founding "tariqas" and organizations in his name, "schuon" larping as "jnanic" whilst he is advocating "za canonical prayer" and all this sort of stuff, of course I am not bothered by it, but guenon is the cause of all these "effects."

>>20858101
I will not continue the discussion, and will leave it with what I have said above for the foreseeable future, the only reason I expend such effort, is that I have dealt with these "guenonians" who try to push what amounts to doctrines of avidya, larping as "kali yuga metaphysicians" and they probably frequent these threads, so I am just making a point that they are themselves deluded and are obscuring the very subtle and yet simple eternal negation of advaita,

>>20858229
Look up S.H. Nasr. He is a major academic in the field of Islamic studies and he talks a lot about Guénon. That's where I learned about him first.

>>20858229
Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad.

Dzogchen anon's power level has risen so quickly over the past 6 months it's scary (yeah I only recently figured out it was you kohai...)
I re-read Intro to Hindu Doctrines while travelling last week and Guenon did say that the practice of Buddhism makes more sense outside of India.

>>20855828
Morocco is a good bet. That country is crawling with Sufis, and Schuon was initiated in a Sufi order there.

>>20858229
>nd why would any group of people be studying Guenon?
Because he is insightful and very broadly knowledgeable about so many things. I don't see how this is confusing to you, unless you conflate personal interests with objective value.
>In what university? Who is studying Guenon?
As the anons below pointed out, there are quite a few serious Muslim scholars who study him. There is also a mostly hidden current of non-Muslim scholars who are either acquainted with him or study him quite seriously. Wolfgang Smith for example.

>>20856528
>>20856609
>>20859984
Based Dago is a real human being and a real pawo.

Anybody into the Rosicrucian Hermetic-Alchemical Tradition? I mean pre-kabalah, the coded initiatic texts.

Even a completely IRONIC embrace of Islam would destroy woketard culture, but those who spend years seething about woketard culture on 4chan are invariably too stupid, too unimaginative, too Christfaggotted insecure, or too caught up in intellectually compensatory "MUH 4D CHESS" / "MUH NEVER INTERRUPT YOUR ENEMY WHEN HE'S MAKING A MISTAKE" drivel to do it.

>>20861289

>>20861358
I can link you to a good effortpost from last year by an anon who seriously studied the tradition if you like. I won't post unless you ask.

>>20861736
I want to see that