/lit/ - Literature

>>21714861
>in its origins Buddhism was essentially a popular doctrine serving as theoretical support for a social movement with egalitarian tendencies.
Amazing how wrong can one sentence be

>>21714913
Shudra

>>21714861
>Furthermore, Buddhism represents something so contrary to the Hindu spirit that it has long disappeared from the country in which it arose
Yeah that’s not why. Buddhists were in Northern India, and they expanded out into the Middle East. Then they all got conquered/genocided by Muslims. That’s why India and Pakistan and Afghanistan aren’t Buddhist anymore.

>>21714861
Absolutely seething lmao. Poos and their orientalist syncophants never recovered from Buddhism it lives rent-free in all Hindu theology

>Christianity and those who wrote the gospels strove to synthesize the warring Gods of Syria, Greece, Chaldea, Rome, and Egypt at the time when the growth of the Roman Empire first made travel possible, and the intercommunication of the priests of Mithras, Adonis, Attis, Osiris, Dionysus, Isis, Astarte, Venus and many scores of others and it was decided to unite all of these myths under the figure of Christ.

>Traces of this recension are still visible in the Mass and in the Calendar of the Saints, all major Gods and Goddesses of universal import receiving the same honour by the same rites as before, while the local Gods were replaced by Saints, virgins, martyrs, or angels, often of the same name, always of the same character of the Christian pantheon.

>Thus on the altar the Solar-phallic Crucifix is surrounded by six lights for the planets, to use one example and Christmas is at the winter solstice, the birth of Christ put for the birth of the Sun".

>The Crucifixion represents the Caduceus; the two thieves, the two serpents; the cliff in the Vision of the Universal Mercury is Golgotha; Maria is simply Maia with the solar R added to her name.

>The controversy about Christ between the Synoptics and John was really a contention between the priests of Bacchus, Sol, and Osiris, also, perhaps, of Adonis and Attis, on the one hand, and those of Hermes on the other, at that period when initiates all over the world found it necessary, owing to the growth of the Roman Empire and the opening up of means of communication, to replace conflicting Polytheisms by a synthetic Faith.

>Compare Christ's descent into hell with the function of Hermes as guide of the Dead. Also Hermes leading up Eurydice, and Christ raising up Jairus' daughter. Christ is said to have risen on the third day, because it takes three days for the Planet Mercury to become visible after separating from the orb of the Sun.In the beginning was the Word, the Logos, who is Mercury; and is therefore to be identified with Christ. Both are messengers; their birth-mysteries are similar; the pranks of their childhood are similar. In the Vision of the Universal Mercury, Hermes is seen descending upon the sea, which refers to Mary. Note also Christ's relations with the money-changers, his frequent parables, and the fact that his first disciple was a publican.

>Note also Mercury as the deliverer of Prometheus.

>One half of the fish symbol is also common to Christ and Mercury; fish are sacred to Mercury, (owing presumably to their quality of movement and cold-bloodedness.) Many of Christ's disciples were fishermen and he was always doing miracles in connection with fish.
-Aleister Crowley , The Gospel According To St. Bernard Shaw

Oh no no Christcucks.. not like this

>>21714861
I don't disagree with this paragraph (aside from the first sentence which is a gratuitous unfalsifiable accusation) but it would be more potent coming from someone that didn't shill advaita, the second least interesting eastern doctrine.

>>21714997
What is the most interesting eastern doctrine anon

>>21714977
Nice, Christianity seems based now.

he just said this because he (like many westerners) misunderstood the buddhist doctrine of no self. he later corrected himself

>>21715006
If we mean India it's Vedanta but outside Sankara autism.

>>21714861
Refuted by Evola

>>21714977
Interesting post
I recently was thinking about the parallels between Hermes/Mercury and Jesus

>>21714977
I see Aleister Crowley read The Golden Bough too.

>>21715200
When/where? People always say this but I never see it cited

>>21715397
the updated edition of introduction to the study of the hindu doctrines

>>21714861
So Buddhism was Maoist from to from class war?

>>21715449
why do you take the gibberish at face value.? Guenonononon was a crank that somehow managed to get memed into relevance on /lit/

>>21715449
>>21715464
the main selling point of buddhism at the time was that it rejected the caste system so he's kinda right even though guenon is fucking crap.

>>21715464
>Guenonononon was a crank
>t. Retard who hasnt even experienced the most introductory states of enlightenment

>>21715487
how do you know this? did you go back in time and ask them?

>>21715464
Do you have a single fact to back that up?

Buddhism started from the Buddha. Enlightenment is still alive and well and coursing through at the very least the Zen tradition.

he changed his views after reading Ananda Coomaraswamy and Marco Pallis

>>21714861
>Furthermore, Buddhism represents something so contrary to the Hindu spirit that it has long disappeared from the country in which it arose
wrong, Buddhism survived in india disguised as Advaita Vedanta

advaita is merely a shit copy of buddhism by performing extensive mental gymnastics to claim that is was all in da vedas all along!

>advaita is merely a shit copy of buddhism by performing extensive mental gymnastics to claim that is was all in da vedas all along!

>>21716441

Is it weird that i've literally never heard of this Buddha guy until I came to /lit/?

>>21714861
>neo-sramanic reform/revivalism, Advaita Vedanta adjacent movement
Yea sorta, and the eristic Shankara posting is a bit disingenuous

>>21714977
Crowley was raised in the Plymouth Bretheren sect (John Nelson Darby) of dispensationalist fundamentalist evangeical Christianity (Cyrus Scofield equivalent for UK). It's difficult to not view his occult peccadilloes in Freudian light of this.

>>21715565
Well I read primary Maoist and workers and peasants under Maoism sources; and, I compared them to secondary sources regarding Buddhism, to the ontological threat Buddhism poses to caste and class systems by having a non-dualist view of consciousness as being present and emergent and of one form (ie: any consciousness may attain enlightenment at any moment.)

Also I masturbated to that one Fujo Monkey Shota comic. You know the one. The Poju one.

>>21716492
Yeah, you were not affected by mass media sponsored by the Anti-Christ.

>>21714952
Do you think a Chinese person invented Buddhism? The Buddha was an Indian

>>21716679
>the buddhist leftist kvetching about caste and class admits to jacking off to shota comics
like pottery

>>21716880
You need to read more Nip buddhism, start with the British manglation of the Gravure model pretending to be the boy priest. Your capacity to read for intent is also fairly low. Why would someone "admit" to your choice of abject or horrific conduct?

You seem to be using the /s4s/ interface.

>>21716753
im orthodox jewish btw

>>21716960
You should talk to Jews in Thailand and Sri Lanka to "get" how your particular strand of Orthodoxy could view Buddha. That and obviously your Rabbi. Buddhists have a variety of books which are different to yours. They generally follow Noahide restrictions, but it is hard to find humans who don't to be honest. Depending on the hysteria to which your local organisations have raised their in-group identification you might understand Buddhism to be an ontology connected to a Religion, which can be disconnected from that religion. Consider Spinoza's reuse of the Platonism in Christianity and how he was fucked up by his community for doing so. You could consider Buddhism to be a cult of idols (a variety of Buddhisms clearly are; a variety of Buddhisms clearly aren't); or you could just read https://chapmanganelo.com/manga-jp97283/chapter-1 and watch https://archive.org/details/monkeymagic1 and https://archive.org/details/monkeymagic2

Now admittedly this is a pretty post-Nip English take fixated on Zen. But both are aimed at "external" audiences such as children so are approachable.

Buddhism aims to oblate the connectedness between thinking and desiring. Oblating the "attachment" to desire doesn't remove desire, but it removes the attachment to the suffering created from attachment to desire. This is not stoic forebearance: one desires, one satiates, but one is not mired.

In this sense Buddhism is answering a radically different question to Rabbinical Judaism's question "How do we best attempt to follow the lord's commands?" Buddhism does not have an ethics, even an arbitrary ethics like Judaism's arbitrary commandments. Ethical action may arise, but it is secondary to the ontological questions around what is thinking and desiring, how is thinking mired in desiring, wow I feel really disconnected oh shit I'm still me, being is really disconnected NICE ARSEHOLE. etc.

Buddha is a fictional dead guy from 500 BCE, about as fictional as the First Temple "histories." Less fictional than Moses. (There is nothing "modernist" about viewing Buddha as a metaphor or allegory; it just wasn't as important as getting at the juicy ontological shit).

I hope this utterly confuses you and upsets you.

>>21714861
wow i hate social movements with egalitarian tendencies, thank you op i am angry at buddhism now

>>21716441
>>21716445
>You will never be a real Vedantist, you have no bhakti, you have no tradition, you have no reality. You are a Mahayana Buddhist twisted by maya and avidya into a crude mockery of Vedic perfection.

Guenon seems to think that Buddhism originated in India and not in Nepal, in a region with no Brahmin caste, but warrior princes and Sramana sages
>>21714861
>>in its origins Buddhism was essentially a popular doctrine serving as theoretical support for a social movement with egalitarian tendencies.
this is why no schoolar on oriental religions ever teach Guenon, he just articulated the most shallow and missguided notion of early Buddhism and Sramana philosophies
>>21714861
>Buddhism represents something so contrary to the Hindu spirit that it has long
if that's the case then Gandara, Nalanda and the whole kingdom of Ashoka shouldn't be possible, and Buddhism is back in india with the Navayana
>it has been modified to the point of becoming completely unrecognizable
again wrong, Nikaya schools remain some of themost wel preserved religion in the world

>>21717298
The Diamond Throne is in Bihar and the Buddha's ministry spanned across the Gangetic Plain. How did Buddhism not develop in India?
>Navayana
Not real Buddhism. It's just Bhakti for Ambedkarites

>>21717477
Hinduism reformed itself in response to Buddhism's social challenges. Buddhism's social offerings weren't significant enough to "recast" "feudalism" in India for the benefits of the infeudators. Buddhism was very slowly outcompeted. Buddhism provided useful ways to allow Tibetan infeudation. Buddhism provided a useful salvation cult for ongoing Chinese class society: Dao was too esoteric, and the Confucianised traditional chinese concept of the heavens lacked a salvation mechanism.

You'll notice that areas of Buddhist cultural success are the ones where Buddhism is less ontological and more a universal salvation cult supporting infeudating monestaries.

>>21717510
>where Buddhism is less ontological and more a universal salvation cult supporting infeudating monestaries
As Buddha intended.
The philosophic larps were deviations.

>>21717528
>intending
Nice one punchy, as if my motorcycle has a vagina in the saddle.

>>21717477
>How did Buddhism not develop in India?
it didn't develop in the idealized india that Guenon is describing, that is, Buddha's Sakya kingdom wasn0t ruled by brahmins, so the idea that buddhism was created just to counter the "Brahmin ruling class" don't make any sense, in the land of the Buddha the dominant religion was a warrior/khsatriya sun worshiping cult
that shows how little Guenon knows about Buddhism and Indian culture

>>21717510
Can you tell me more about these social challenges? The Buddha was anti-ritualism, which was officiated by Brahmins, but he wasn't against Brahmins as a group. He even referred to himself as a Brahmin due to his Budhi. Ritualism never faded in Hinduism and is still present, so I'm not sure how Hinduism changed in response the Buddha's anti-ritualism.
>>21717548
Were the majority of Brahmins even kings? Kshatriyas were the governing caste

>>21714861
Did a freshman highschooler write this?

>>21716873
>The Buddha was an Indian
And they've never forgotten this—even if they've formally abandoned Buddhism it has still scarred their memory.

>>21714861
Not gonna lie. I was a Buddhist antifa and was considering doing feminizing hormone therapy, but now after reading your blessed post, I’ve repudiated my old ways and am considering reading the works of Guénon (pbuh) and Shankara (pbuh).

>>21718549
Alhamdulillah

>>21718549
you will never be a brahmin

>>21718327
Guenon is peak cringe and a forced meme. He is the /lit/ equivalent of Andy sixxx and logposting. Guenonfag will hopefully lose steam eventually and slither back to the shitty discord out if which came

>>21718713
You haven't read and will never read him.

Is his metaphysics of calculus any good?

>>21718713
>Guenon is peak crin
Rene Guenon is the most correct, smartest and most important person of the twentieth century. There was no smarter, deeper, clearer, absolute Guenon and probably could not be. It is no coincidence that the French traditionalist René Allé in one collection dedicated to R. Guenon compared Guenon with Marx. It would seem that there are completely different, opposite figures. Guenon is a conservative hyper-traditionalist. Marx is a revolutionary innovator, a radical overthrower of traditions. But Rene Halle rightly guessed the revolutionary message of each of Guenon's statements, the extreme, cruel noncomformity of his position, which turns everything and everything upside down, the radical nature of his thought.

The fact is that René Guenon is the only author, the only thinker of the twentieth century, and maybe many, many centuries before that, who not only identified and confronted with each other secondary language paradigms, but also put into question the very essence of language. The language of Marxism was methodologically very interesting, subtly reducing the historical existence of mankind to a clear and convincing formula for confronting labor and capital. Being a great paradigmatic success, Marxism was so popular and won the minds of the best intellectuals of the twentieth century. But R. Guenon is an even more fundamental generalization, an even more radical removal of masks, an even broader worldview contestation, putting everything into question.

- Aleksandr Dugin

Guénon undermined and then; with uncompromising intellectual rigour, demolished all the assumptions taken for granted by modern man, that is to say Western or westernised man. Many others had been critical of the direction taken by European civilization since the so-called 'Renaissance', but none had dared to be as radical as he was or to re-assert with such force the principles and values which Western culture had consigned to the rubbish tip of history. His theme was the 'primordial tradition' or Sofia perennis, expressed-so he maintained-both in ancient mythologies and in the metaphysical doctrine at the root of the great religions. The language of this Tradition was the language of symbolism, and he had no equal in his interpretation of this symbolism. Moreover he turned the idea of human progress upside down, replacing it with the belief almost universal before the modern age, that humanity declines in spiritual excellence with the passage of time and that we are now in the Dark Age which precedes the End, an age in which all the possibilities rejected by earlier cultures have been spewed out into the world, quantity replaces quality and decadence approaches its final limit. No one who read him and understood him could ever be quite the same again.

- Gai Eaton

>>21718725
yes

>>21717298
>again wrong, Nikaya schools remain some of themost wel preserved religion in the world
his point though is that even though the nikayas may be preserved in some dusty back corner of some Chinese temple, what they actually spend their time talking about, reading and doing has little to do with the original Buddhism of India anymore

>>21718720
Is OP's greentext a legitimate quote of his or not

>>21718720
I was memed into reading his introduction to the doctrines of Hinduism and it was even more retarded than I expected it to be. I really can't understand what anyone sees in him and whenever I genuinely attempt to get an answer as to what is redeeming about him all I get are contentless memeposts like>>21718726

Either guenonfag is doing it all ironically or he has a personality disorder and logposts compulsively

>>21718726
If Islam didn't have circumcision I would already have converted (I know I know Hanafi and Maliki schools just see it as 'tradition' but I still find it distasteful and off - why modify God's creation?)

>>21714861
At some point Buddhism was the majority religion in India, enjoying royal patronages and the like. It's only after the Bhakti movement (pioneered by Kabir, Meera, etc) in Hinduism that made Hinduism closer to the people than the elite, that Hinduism got its hold again, albeit not in the philosophical form that it existed during the Vedic times.

>>21714913
What's wrong with this?

>>21715565
He's true ffs. Hinduism back then was the religion of the elite. It was Buddha and Mahavir that challenged this and gave their own solutions. Buddha's solution not only gave a way out of suffering, but also challenged the caste system etc. Mahavir's doctrine (Jainism) did the same but was more theological in spirit, and was very challenging for a pleb. So Jainism died out and Buddhism prevailed.
It was slowly that Buddhism diverted from Buddha's words and indulged in philosophical goyslop. Then it even rejected that philosophy and straight up amalgamated with Hindu spirituality and local Gods. They became the thing they sought to destroy.

>>21716342
This is objectively the most retarded thing I've ever read on this board.

>>21718725
his best work, together with 'the Reign of quantity' and 'symbols of sacred science

>>21718765
>If Islam didn't have circumcision I would already have converted
DESU that's also the central reason why I would not become Muslim myself, I don't want to subject my future sons to that, I think it's wrong

>>21718777
>At some point Buddhism was the majority religion in India
I doubt that for the reason that farming peasants in the rural countryside have always been and continue to be the vast majority of India's population, and this group has always been staunchly Hindu.

>>21718777
>Buddha challenged the caste system
The Buddha never sought to dismantle the caste system, he was immensely proud of being a Kshatriya

>>21716873
he was probably dominantly eastern european genetics wise

>>21718826
>source: a bunch of loose speculation based on superficial resemblance of "shakya" to "scythian" even though "shakya" has it's own meaning in Sanskrit and you don't have to go searching thousands of miles away to explain it's provenance

>>21717298
ackshually buddhism is back in india with tibetan exile

>>21718826
I hate you

>>21718713
guenon threads used to be fun

>>21718817
Among the royalty, Buddhism was the majority religion.

> In regard to India’s past, we will argue that the decisive period for the formation of the continuous ‘thread’ of history was the first millennium BCE, and that to a very large degree the thousand years after this represent a civilisation dominated by Buddhism: ancient India was not ‘Hindu India’ but ‘Buddhist India’.
Source: Buddhism in India by Gail Omvedt

>>21718760
>I really can't understand what anyone sees in him
Maybe you should read more than his basic intro book where he mostly just establishes a few definitions and distinguishes his perspective from others without getting into the meat and potatoes of anything, to people who actually read his major works (not just his 1st intro book) it's evident why they are saying such things in quotes like that by Eaton and Dugin et al

>>21718844
what does it mean in sanskrit

>>21718823
His teachings were against it. Him being proud of his Kshatriya past seems unaligned with his teachings, though if what you're saying is true, then it seems his own fallacy than the fallacy of his doctrine.

>>21718859
The quote doesn't demonstrate what you are implying that it does. Various texts from across medieval Indian history describe a patchwork of different kingdoms ruled variously by rulers who promoted Shaivism, Vaishnavism, types of Vedanta, Jainism, Buddhism etc and this was constantly shifting, I'm not aware of any sources saying that all or most of the local kings, rajas, local-governors etc were all Buddhists or even that most were

>>21718862
>what does it mean in sanskrit

https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/shakya

>>21718892
all those definitions seem to come from buddha

>>21718860
>Just keep watching the anime anon I promise it gets good in season seven

>>21718906
>all those definitions seem to come from buddha
Did you give up and stop halfway down the page? kek

Śakya (शक्य).—pot. p.

1) Possible, practicable, capable of being done or effected (usually with an inf.); शक्यो वारयितुं जलेन हुतभुक् (śakyo vārayituṃ jalena hutabhuk) Bhartṛhari 2.11; R.2.49,54.

2) Fit to be effected.

3) Easy to be effected.

4) Directly conveyed or expressed (as the meaning of a word); शक्योऽर्थोऽभि- धया ज्ञेयः (śakyo'rtho'bhi- dhayā jñeyaḥ) S. D.1.

5) Potential.

6) Of agreeable or sweet address; 'शक्यः प्रियंवदः प्रोक्तः (śakyaḥ priyaṃvadaḥ proktaḥ)' इति हलायुधः (iti halāyudhaḥ); शक्यः संविभागशीलः (śakyaḥ saṃvibhāgaśīlaḥ) Daśakumāracarita 2.5. (The form śakyam is sometimes used as a predicative word with an inf. in a passive sense, the real object of the infinitive being in the nom. case; evaṃ hi praṇayavatī sā śakyamupekṣituṃ kupitā M.3. 22; śakyaṃ... aviralamāliṅgituṃ pavanaḥ Ś.3.6; vibhūtayaḥ śakyamavāptu- mūrjitāḥ Subhāś.; na hi dehabhṛtā śakyaṃ tyaktuṃ karmāṇyaśeṣataḥ Bhagavadgītā (Bombay) 18.11.).

Śakyā (शक्या).—indecl. (= Pali, Prakrit sakkā; from Sanskrit root-aor. or precative śakyāt, Pischel 465), it is possible, one can (with inf.): śakyā etam evaṃ kartuṃ, yathā…Mahāvastu i.351.10; asmākaṃ punar naivaṃ śakyā mānsena kāryaṃ kartuṃ ii.213.9, but for us it is impossible thus to do what needs doing with meat; nāpi ca svayaṃkṛtānāṃ karmāṇāṃ phalaṃ (em.; if right, read phala m.c.) palāyituṃ śakyā 224.14 (verse); kiṃ śakyā kartuṃ 448.13, what is it possible to do ? (or pass., what can be done?); same 456.2; 457.5; na śakyā ma eṣāṃ (so read) bhūyo tatra mahānasaṃ visar- jayituṃ Mahāvastu i.363.14, it is impossible for me, after this, to have her sent there to the kitchen; na śakyā sarvam ākhyātuṃ iii.277.19 (or pass.); with passive force (influenced by śakya, adj.?), narakeṣu na mucyituṃ śakyā ii.223.13, in hells one cannot be freed (but, N.B., here the inf. is formed on the passive stem mucyate!). No certain case outside of Mahāvastu; śakyā kartuṃ candrādityau tamatimira…Lalitavistara 337.14 (verse) can better be taken as containing śakyā(ḥ), [Page521-1b+ 56] n. pl. (for dual); personal forms of adj. śakya in adjoining lines.

>>21718910
>HURR DURR WHY ISN"T HIS FIRST INTRO BOOK HIS MAGNUM OPUS

>>21718922
that doesn't convince me that sakya doesn't mean scynthian
if there was a definition referring to a clan that was older than the scynthian attack on india
there could be a superficial resemblance of scynthian with this random sanskrit word that has some arbitrary meaning

>>21718928
There is no reason to relate "Shakya" to "Scythian" at all in the first place if the word has its place in Sanskrit, which it does, as does a modified form of it in Pali and Prakrit.

>>21718928
>words both start with S
>WHOAAA THEY REFER TO THE SAME THING!!
???

>>21718947
isn't that what he is saying

>>21714920
Kanjar

>>21718923
>>21718947
Guenonfag typing in all caps, keep triggering him anons

>>21718957
The Shakya = Scyathian thing is WE WUZZING by Nordicists

>>21718968
>>21718937
maybe the natives who found the actual name unusual to pronounce called him in a localized version which had some resemblance to the words they already know like often happens

>>21718987
Or maybe he was just a native?

>>21718987
>maybe the natives who found the actual name unusual to pronounce called him in a localized version which had some resemblance to the words they already know like often happens
What reason is there a suppose a relation at all in the first place unless it's an a priori hypothesis that one is seeking to prove?

>>21718993
>there is no record of a shakya clan before buddhas clan
>shakyas have their own independent kingdom free from brahminical influence
>there are a certain nomadic tribe called sakas that keep attacking chandragupta mauryas pan idian empire few hundred years before the appearance of buddha
>>21718991
maybe, maybe not

>>21719023
>>there is no record of a shakya clan before buddhas clan
There is no consistent historical record surviving from this era anyways but people only attempt to reconstruct it on the basis of archaeology, inscriptions, textual and geographic references etc, so it's really meaningless to point this out because it's not like there is otherwise a stable record that the shakyas unexpectedly 'pop up' into from out of nowhere in a way that demands explanation, the answer may as well be an absence of records. Hence, this seems to be reading neutral historical facts in favor of an a priori conclusion

>>shakyas have their own independent kingdom free from brahminical influence
Again, this in itself does nothing to suggest any relation with Scythians, the Tamils were also were largely independent of Brahmanical influence/rulers in the 6th century BC, does that mean that Tamils are now Scythians?

>>there are a certain nomadic tribe called sakas that keep attacking chandragupta mauryas pan idian empire few hundred years before the appearance of buddha
Saka isn't the same word as Shakya and when Shakya has it's own meaning in Sanskrit and in related languages like Pali and Prakrti with traceable root words etc then there is no basis to infer that it's related to something outside India or based on Saka since it's appearance as a word in Indian languages is normal and not inexplicable. Source texts of the period describe the Shakyas as engaging in the snake- and nature-worship that people simultaneously also ascribe to Dravidians, nothing about any of the descriptions of Shakya in any Sanskrit writings suggest that they were Scythian

>>21719023
>chandragupta mauryas pan idian empire few hundred years before the appearance of buddha
C. Maurya lived in the 3rd century BC which is after Buddha and not before. Buddha is typically placed around the 6th-5th century BC

>>21719146
*C. Maurya lived in 4th-3rd century BC

>>21719146
Surely he meant the Indo-Scythians and typed before when he meant after?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Scythians

bump

>>21714861
>heresy
>Folk religions
absolute brainlet

>>21720707
Yeah I don’t understand what he means there. He says constantly that eastern religions aren’t religions. How can there be heresy without religion

>>21718327
This is an out of context quote, guenon reviews and praises milarepa's songs of realization, and views tibetan lamaism or tantric buddhism as "traditional"
He knew nothing about chan/zen/chinul/dzogchen
Etc. He was simply limited by the information available at his time, the reality is though, that Guénon does relay the "traditional doctrine" see man and his becoming, he cleanly transmits the way to look at the world, a way which assumes the unity of Knowing and Being, which elevates the Intellectual Intuition, and connects these negative modes of existence to Supernature/Supernatural/Above-Nature, which skips over the empirical-positivistic mental prison, see solovyov aswell, this sort of "magical idealism" is the path to the entry into "altered" states of consciousness, in all cases, but rather in guènons case he does well to clearly seperate the superconsciousness, the absolute from the non-absolute, the eternal from the individual, the suprarational from the subrational, and so on, it is all very logical, and he succinctly explains in a simple to follow way, apophatic mysticism, where the goal is metaphysical realization, of the principle unity and whole oneness of consciousness, of being, of the conscious acquisition of supraindividual states, as he puts it, starting from the point of the human individuality and senses, and also elaborating along these lines the theoretical formulations related to a hierarchy of beings, in a real immanent sense, which is according to the degree of Being,
Just read the ashtavakra gita and all this, what needs to be understood, is that the essential points of this mysticism, the approach of the "metaphysical reality" the ineffable "above-nature" by the revelation of an absolute thusness, beingness, which is the same whilst awake and asleep, in day and night, which transcends the duality of subject and object, and so forth,
Anyway raising your degree, is the way to supernormal powers aswell,

This simple system of explanation, is enough to give one on a relative level insight into history now, folklore, mythology, symbology,
Because once this very subtle point (that knowing and being are one and the same) is fully comprehended, you can intuit that these symbols and so forth are merely externalizations of the inner-nature of the microcosm, and the correspondences, and analogies which naturally flow forward, along with experiences incommunicable,
This knowingness is the only way to truly be "possesed by a symbol" however, with the orthodox traditional understanding, these possesions by nonhuman daemonic and maybe even demonic forces, are all conscious, giving access thereby to supernormal supraphysiological, states which only a select few can TRULY consciously enjoy, for the majority the (sleep walkers) are not conscious.

>>21721022
The point where I diverge from not guenon but rather from the guenonian formulation, is that the mere presence of a discussion or debate on the subject indicates a type of ignorance, and that beneath all the modern impotent traditional forms, is a clear traditional science, a practical psychology, visible for all with ears and eyes to see, that the form in its particularity is merely a transposition of a higher liberated phenomenology, which depends not upon particularization, or form, name or transposition, but rather on the individual consciousness alone, for thats all that there is, so long as the principle of impersonality is respected, there is no reason as to why one given sufficient internalization, cannot draw the traditional symbols himself from his own internal correspondences and symbols, and follow directly his own primordial tradition, without the interpolation of cyclical degeneration and modern transposed traditonal form derivatives, the only question is what being is able to perform such an activity?

>>21714861
Guenon was and is a woke psyop shill to get european children outside of the christian path that grounded the western civilization... worthless woke garbage

>>21721061
The people who read guénon either stop and acknowledge their defeat by him or ignore him, but there is another way, simply recognizing that in guénon as soon as he uses the terms which are undefinable, unexplainable, he loses any validity,
For example the term which gets thrown around
"Metaphysics" is one such term, noone here can give it a sort of positivistic description, rather all they can say, in the same way supernature is above nature, metaphysics is above and negatively ascertained non-discursively
All guénon does for all his books is deconstruct reason, and prime his authors for the eastern route of nondual "depersonalization" I feel in the end, that all the talk about forming an elite, all the talk of civilizations, cycles, was all just a lure, because how else can you deconstruct reason, except by initially affirming it at a point, and then indicating and pointing at its incoherence and absurdity, in the same way, how can you arrive at the superconscious brahman, supraindividual god-nature, without starting from a point where the individual is deconsructed and shown to be superimposition, people with an ego read and are taught, no matter the age.

>>21721140
>"Metaphysics" is one such term, noone here can give it a sort of positivistic description
Metaphysics is what it literally means: the aplication of judgements based on empirical knowledge of nature to the determinations ---or the logical structure--- of empirical natural experience (what the greeks called physics and today people call empirical science). Guenon can't define it because hes was a retard woke shill mystic charlatan.

>>21718726
this is not the own you think it is
>- Aleksandr Dugin
the dumbest alt-right schizo in the west
>- Gai Eaton
a "Literally Who?"

you pretty much have to go to the bottom of the barrel to find someone who thinks Guenon work has any spiritual or intelectual value

Test

>>21718284
>He even referred to himself as a Brahmin due to his Budhi.
not really, Buddha say that the true Brahmin was the "arya" one who practices a true path of awareness and spiritual development, he saw the caste system as inherently anti-meritocratic and one of the many ways he criticized the brahmins and the caste system is by sayign that anyone can be a brahmin, that is a spiritual practicioner, not a priest of a religious institution, and he even said that he can grant anyone the path to brahma(brahmayana) but the path to nirvana is more important
>Were the majority of Brahmins even kings? Kshatriyas were the governing caste
spiritual leaders, the sakya kingdom was spiritually ruled by sun worshiping Khsatriyas, not Brahmins, brahma wasn't all that important in that region

>>21721061
without christianity we’d have no woke

>>21721174
>Guenon can't define it because hes was a retard woke shill mystic charlatan.
>empirical nature, determinations, logical structure
Yeah right, what guénon does is challenge the fact that positive determinations are required in the first place, and he says that true and absolute determination lies in the negation of positive determination, because the absolute cannot be anything other than "unlimited," because it is infinite and since a determination, or any sort of positive description or affirmation is a limitation, in the same way form limits what is formless, the particular limits the universal, and in addition he says, that the formless contains in it all the possibilities of form, silence contains all of speech, the universal the particular, and it is namely this possibility, which is truly affirmative, so he says non-being contains existence, and that being itself corresponds to "universal possibility" which is the Infinite (absolutely unlimited), and that it contains both non-being and its corresponding existence,

From this it follows, that the entire body, the way it collects sense datum, and so forth, the particular nature of an arising thought, these all also correspond to determination, so in the case of the human individual, it is the "merging" with this nondual principle, which is neither attached nor detatched, to anything whatsoever which is the goal, and that it is the only "peace" being absolutely free, and that knowing it, makes it such that the knowers leave their bodies even whilst alive.

>>21718739
>reading and doing has little to do with the original Buddhism of India anymore
and that's just wrong, Nikaya not only survived in china but in thailand and many other countries, and is preserved much more skilfully than hindus with their "Neo-vedanta" and sadhguru schools of pop-yoga, but Guenon wasn't aware of that since he never really studied the east beyond india
not to mention that even the oldest school of Vedanta are far gone from the early form of hindu spirituallity, with every school creating their own interpretation of the sacred texts, so even from the get go Guenon is just wrong, if you think Buddhism is corrupted the by that same deffinition Vedanta is 100 times more corurpted and twisted

>>21721204
>i dont like the authors he's influenced therefor he's not important!
>muh alt right
Idiot detected.

>>21721174
>Guenon can't define it because hes was a retard woke shill mystic charlatan.
Obviously you are incorrect since he defined it better than you did many times.

>>21716441
>>21716445
Advaita vedanta = buddhism is the same as catholicism = paganism. Why should i care buddhism and paganism are based

>>21721232
Brahmins don't worship Brahma. Surya Deva, Sun Worship, is prevalent for Brahmins as well - Sunday mornings have typical worship of Surya Deva. The Buddha's people were of mixed origin, Indo-Aryan and Munda, and worshipped snakes and spirits as well. Surya Deva is an Aryan deity, it makes more sense for those well versed in the Vedic tradition to be Surya, Indra, Rudra, etc. worshippers

>>21721308
>all i can do to support my favorite author is to cite irrelevant schizo nobodies
>the word alt-right triggers me so hard!

incel detected

>>21721319
not that anon but Guenon always used the word wrong, what he calls metaphysics is in reality a weak form of ontotheology

>>21721561
is not the same, all the gods that the Brahmin worship emanate from brahma, Sakya's sun worship is in no way related to the vedantic brahma

>>21718826
just like romans were 'dominantly' new jerseyans genetics wise

>>21717020
(You)

>>21721061
this is a bad take because
>the christian path that grounded the western civilization
is precisely what he proposed as a solution

>>21722832
Bbbut bbutt all emperors were blonde and blue eyed

>>21722832
>romans
>south europeans
>bear similarity to shitalians
>shitalians move to new york and new jersey
>???
>profit

>>21722476
Barely anyone worships Brahma, there are no temples to him. Brahmins perform oblations to the Sun every morning

>>21722832
the name new jersey literally means new ceasars.

is there such a thing as moon worship

>>21721256
>it is the "merging" with this nondual principle, which is neither attached nor detatched, to anything whatsoever which is the goal
Every living being from an ant to an elephant is already wholly and entirely merged with It from the beginning with no possibility of non-merger. The goal is not “merger” (which in fact is already accomplished at this very moment) but rather spiritual discrimination between the eternal and non-eternal, between Self and non-Self.

>and that it is the only "peace" being absolutely free, and that knowing it, makes it such that the knowers leave their bodies even whilst while alive
No, whoever attains this spiritual discrimination remains in the body as its inner awareness until the body dies. Shankara talks about this in his bhasya on Chandogya Up., among other places.

>>21722832
That's Vito Imperatore to you pal

>>21721291
>and that's just wrong, Nikaya not only survived in china but in thailand and many other countries
Again you are missing the point deliberately it seems, yes they have the nikaya in China and Vietnam etc but barely anybody reads it and they practice pure land and other mahayana stuff instead, he isn’t talking about the physical text itself being modified

>>21714861
>in its origins Buddhism was essentially a popular doctrine serving as theoretical support for a social movement with egalitarian tendencies.
>unlike the epic traditions that are 100% authentic
why are idealists so dishonest

>>21723167
“Brahma” without the diacritical mark over the letter ‘a’ actually signifies “Brahman”, but unfortunately there is no way to tell whether the person you are talking to online actually knows this or if they are an idiot confusing Brahman and Brahmā

>>21721140
>All guénon does for all his books is deconstruct reason
He doesn’t deconstruct reason, he emphasizes that like all things, reason has its own proper place in the grand harmony of things, and that some of the deviations of western thought stem from attributing an undue absoluteness or ultimate nature to reason, elevating it beyond what is proper.

>how else can you deconstruct reason, except by initially affirming it at a point, and then indicating and pointing at its incoherence and absurdity, in the same way, how can you arrive at the superconscious brahman, supraindividual god-nature, without starting from a point where the individual is deconsructed and shown to be superimposition, people with an ego read and are taught, no matter the age.
You start from the point that everyone already has knowledge of Brahman as their own immediate pre-conceptual self-awareness, and then you remove peoples misconceptions about this awareness and illustrate for them how they have previously been in a state of confusion by superimposing this awareness onto other things and superimposing other things onto this awareness.