/lit/ - Literature

>>22187355
Faggotry

It's like a D&D lore book without the pictures.

i dont know

>>22187355
Unrelenting buttsex

I don’t know I got filtered. I felt (muh fee fees) like I liked what he was saying but intellectually I had no idea. He makes too man esoteric references. Moby Dick was hard but I persevered by looking up most references. Moby Dick took me half a dozen attempts to finish but was well worth it. This book was too much. Maybe if you have a stronger history/religion/philosophy background tou might have better luck. Evola probably did have real powers of magic IRL.

>>22187355
Autism. Read Guenon instead and then make the same realization he did and move beyond Perennialism.

>>22188125
Guenon is more autistic than Evola

>>22188165
Definitely not, Evola gets into pure autism like Hyperborea that Guenon doesn't touch and he has a distorted understanding of religions even as someone writing back then because of his masculinity issues. Sounds like unfair psychopathologization probably but it's not.
>puts Kshatriyas over Brahmins in his version of the caste system because muh manly warrior virtue
>his worldview basically revolved around an eternal struggle between a solar masculine principle and a lunar feminine one
>UR Group's magic was almost exclusively solar
>wrote in Eros and the Mysteries of Love that the only thing Sade did wrong was not act out what he wrote (it isn't even entirely true, he did sexually assault women and commit sodomy)
>was a fan of neurotic Jewish incel and suicide Otto Weininger, the very sympathetic introductions to the Inner Traditions books say outright that Weininger was a big philosophical influence on him
>wrote (idk where but it was an Italian historian who studies Fascism professionally who told me this) that homosexuality isn't necessarily wrong, just spiritually useless
>absolutely retarded stunts like walking around outside in the middle of bombing raids to prove how manly he is
>lifelong bachelor
Doesn't take a genius to see the pattern. Guenon and some of the other Perennialists are a gateway into actually seriously following a religion for some people (sometimes it's even the true one), Evola is just a gateway into even more retarded autism like Devi and Serrano.

>>22187355
Incel manifesto

>>22187355
- Analysis of past societies/paradigms in order to unveil some common characteristics
- He develops what he calls a solar/olympian and lunar/telluric civilizations/paradigms
- Is very inspired by Roma
- Explains what a good leader is (ie embodies power, virility and so on) and explains the doctrine of castes...
And many more things but you get the idea (that's mainly the first part of his book).
However it's a tough read and you should read some Guenon/Evola gateway books like Mystery of the Grail or Introduction to the Study of Hindu Doctrines to not get filtered too hard.

>>22188125
This. Guenon is more accessible.

>>22188239
>>wrote in Eros and the Mysteries of Love that the only thing Sade did wrong was not act out what he wrote (it isn't even entirely true, he did sexually assault women and commit sodomy)
I may have to read the Brahmin-breaker now.

>>22187355
you have to get through a lot of bullshit in Part 1, but it sets the stage for Part 2, which is his actual critique of modernity. The last few chapters of it are top notch.

>>22187355
The poorman's myth of the XXth century (who is himself the poorman's myth of the XIXth century)

I'd recommend Men Among the Ruins first. If you do read this, just hang on until you get to the second part.

>>22188262
This. Trying to get into Evola without reading the core of Guénon's work is fruitless and leads to the massive filtering of pseuds.

What makes gaynonians so fanatically fan of gay non ? Did they ensorceled his books or something ?

>>22188959
Simple internet contrarianism dialectics. When they were young and looking for an identity they found Guenon, but then they found another group who was looking for an identity and found Evola. They both want to say their newfound internet father figure is the biggest dad at the little league game and could beat up the other dads, and their autism also prevents them from understanding things like "Of course he feels the same way about his dad," so they get into a "No MY dad could beat up YOUR dad" "EXCUSE ME?? Just for saying that, I'm going to say even LOUDER that my dad could beat up your dad!" fight until it's highly personal and they lividly hate every single thing about the other guys, which fuels them in a pointless quest to notice and memorize quirks of the other guys and develop an entire culture around mocking those quirks repetitively, which furthers the hate, which increases the desire to do it more, etc.

I like both Evola and Guenon and am not describing anything peculiar to them or their fans. This is just how anything works online. Autists with identity disorders make a philosophy guru their dad, and then the wars begin.

>>22188239
This.

>>22188239
>pure autism like Hyperborea that Guenon doesn't touch
Guenon was into Hyperboria too though. Sometimes he uses Thule as a synonym:
>"the Atlantean Tula must be distinguished from the Hyperborean Tula, which latter represents the first and supreme centre for the entire current Manvantara and is the archetypal 'sacred Isle'... All other ‘sacred isles’, although everywhere bearing names of equivalent meaning, are still only images of the original. This even applies to the spiritual centre of Atlantean tradition..."
There's a paper called "Thinking in Continents: Hyperborea and Atlantis in René Guénon’s Conception of Tradition" which goes into some detail on this.

>UR Group's magic was almost exclusively solar
I think you're taking this from Greer? He gives one single example, from what was then the only translated volume from a set of three. A much more typical cosmological model for Evola is ascent through the seven planets.

>wrote in Eros and the Mysteries of Love that the only thing Sade did wrong was not act out what he wrote
He says that about Novalis. Then he says that de Sade acting out his fantasies wouldn't have gotten him anywhere because de Sade didn't see any aspect of the sacred in what he was negating.

>wrote (idk where but it was an Italian historian who studies Fascism professionally who told me this) that homosexuality isn't necessarily wrong, just spiritually useless
I have to wonder if they didn't get it from the section of the notorious hatchet-job Wikipedia entry which says so followed by [citation needed].

>>22188125
>West le bad

>>22188967
Very informative post

>>22188975
>A much more typical cosmological model for Evola is ascent through the seven planets.
Then why not hit you with that as the basic instruction for onboarding? Better yet, why did he neglect the other elemental processes that other formal schools contemporary to him thought were vital to success? Which isn't to say you gotta do the LBRP like a GD initiate, but even Tantric Buddhism centers you at the core of an elemental process as introductory (i.e. the Buddha Families).

The critique isn't that he focuses on solar stuff, the critique is that this is probably unwise without sufficient foundation. It should be a red flag for the veracity of Evola's Traditionalism that UR wasn't able to survive more than a couple years. Organizations minting Adepts usually don't close shop that fast.

>>22189005
Here's an excerpt from a letter that Israel Regardie wrote to Lt. Col. Mike Aquino in 1978 that I think about a lot:

>"...as to whether Nietzsche was a genius or a madman...What we do know of him can be described as an inability to reconcile the Apollonian and Dionysian elements within himself so that, even without paresis, he could have succumbed under internal pressure to a whole host of psychic disturbances ... Magic, generally speaking, still does not recognize the ego-inflationary aspect of its own system - which is why there are so many casualties. If it would incorporate Reichian therapy into itself and make it a part of Magic, then it would have some kind of objective system to correct its ways and prevent its students from fouling up their own nests. Mere education in the phenomenon is no answer to this problem. Frater Achad, theoretically, was educated in the notion of “destroying the ego” by crossing the Abyss, so-called, but it did not save him from inflationary activities of the ego such as asserting the equivalence of his own grade of Neophyte (1)=[10] with the supernal grade of Ipsissimus (10)=[1]. This is asinine from the ordinary point of view and doesn’t make sense. It only becomes intelligible from the viewpoint that the very process of Magic puffs up the ego. This may be desirable up to a certain point. But this is where a damned good guru is absolutely essential, so that the necessary psycho-spiritual corrective processes can be set into motion."

incoherent rambling

>>22187355
Squidward whining

>>22188959
Rene Guenon is a top tier scholar who cites his sources and demonstrates with better prose and exactitude than Euclid with the tone and pathos of Schopenhauer if Schopenhauer got kisses from his mom and a hot cooked meal by a brown BBW mamajama LIFE GOALS LEADERSHIP TONY ROBBINS GIGA MOSLEM

>>22189022
Squidward word salad
Revolt Against the Fancyson

>>22189005
Because it was an exploratory group of many different Theosophists and Anthroposophists that came together by chance to write direct experiential records, using whatever traditions and techniques they adhered to in 1925? What kind of question is this? It was a working group, not some summary textbook. Might as well ask why Guenon didn't write more about Tantric Buddhism (his ignorance of Buddhism is a major failing), or a dozen other traditions he didn't have mastery over.

It is dangerous to do any of this on your own. Tantric Buddhism itself shouldn't be approached except through an actual tradition. No offense but I do not think you have read much Evola and I think your knowledge is at that dangerous level where you can posture and show off in satisfying ways. To someone who also knows all the acronyms and all the references and who has actually read the things you're criticizing you come across as a big fish trying to show off in a small pond. Just go out in the ocean, man.

>>22189014
Heya Ape! NTA but Achad was correct to abandon thelema and become catholic. Also: madness such as nietzsche is moreso genetic than le he had wrong metaphysical views. Plenty of people are far more incoherent and far less mad. Reichian therapy is also incredibly pseud. Whatwith transference I don't think massaging patients is good regardless of veracity of body character armoring.

>>22188967
Ahem
I actually read
https://youtu.be/7h7c_PuE2W0

>>22189044
I was just talking about Achad in the other thread and I have a bajillion feelpinions about the guy that I think are utterly irrelevant to the person everyone likes to frame and claim him as. He's both more sympathetic and pathological than either his supporters or detractors acknowledge.

>>22189040
I'm a Nyingma initiate. I find Evola's writings on tantra to be super facile.
W/e tho. Ijs there is a wide tradition out there and to silo yourself off into a Traditional tradition that has failed to get off the ground more spectacularly than some new age witchy groups just because he satisfies your BASED and TRAD political aesthetic might be setting yourself up for some degree of pain down the road. Like, it might help you get your head around some alchemy, sometimes, but if you walk into a discussion with anyone that reads Brill volumes on actual historical initiatory modes armed with Evola you might find yourself wanting for additional firepower.

>>22189040
>What kind of question is this? It was a working group, not some summary textbook.
Just as an aside, I'm a part of a few well known and private Working Groups and the kind of preliminaries I'm talking about are, like, universally mandatory for operating together. I point this out because Evola, like Bardon, seems very disconnected from his contemporaries. I get that some of this is purely ideological, and for earnestly rock solid reasons, but there comes a point where you're not Conserving Tradition you're out in the weeds.

Look, someone could do way worse than Evola, but they could also be doing way way better. We don't need what is decent alongside his thoroughly modern yearnings for an imagined Tradition to access the honest to fuck traditions that history has blessed us with yet so many of these folks ignore (again for understandable and occasionally correct reasons).

>>22189068
Link me to post. I don't look at threads much. I just send ocassional shitposts into aethyr. Would love to hear more detailed thought wrt Achad!

>>22189112
You should become /lit/ regular btw Ape. I no longer use /x/ or discord but miss ya bb :'(((

There's some other frater here named Anselm? I suppose he is not you or the other frater from x either...

>>22189005
Somebody said this already, but I think Ur was a pretty informal group that didn't really offer structured training the way something like the GD did. That's also why there were no grades. I don't think their writing was really intended to be schematic either. It was written ad hoc and published as magazines.

They really hardly give ceremonial rituals at all. There's a long into that talks about general principles and then the one ritual as an example. He even directs the reader to the book he took it from, which would have the whole planetary set and not just the solar one. The idea is more to give people the toolkit to go away and understand how to work with these older books, which is why they spend so much time unpacking alchemical symbolism.

He ("Luce") actually talks about the importance of a triple physical/spiritual/divine world in the intro to that essay too, which I think could fit in with how the Buddha Families are related to the dharmakaya and the 'three bodies' of Buddha? There sometimes seems to be quite a martial, regal quality there too: five victors, steadfastness, sovereignty...

>>22188262
>>22188975
>>22189040
>>22189188
Only decent posts itt. Rest of the thread is redditors. Wtf happened to /lit/?

>>22189130
>You should become /lit/ regular
Do you remember how well that worked on /his/?

>>22189112
Its just over in one of the /x/ schizo threads ranting about the Babalon Working, someone similarly competent rolled up to chat and mentioned Achad being prophesied in Liber L which I found endearing but vertiginous because that's just such a super orthodox answer that causes a variety of discomforts I struggle to articulate.

>>22189188
Totally, I'm not actually disagreeing here, but I am saying those circumstances do actually, like, contribute to the problems I'm trying to highlight.

If I gave you some solar adorations I gleaned from a few source texts plus a pile of alchemical symbols, license to use my superiority complex, and an assurance that the Based and Trad Solar Race-Sovl is going to vanquish the degenerate hooknose Lunar Race-Sovl, I'd expect about the level of discourse on sees on /pol/ about this stuff. Which is...not amazing.

Again, ijs, if you're gonna do this Trad thing at least have the common decency to route through Guenon more than Evola, the man actually appears to have tried and I'd pick him over Evola for my spiritual halfcourt team of someone put a gun to my head and forced me to take one.

>>22189205
You weren’t made for this board, faggot. Go back.

>>22187355
>Thus, what I call "traditional method" is usually characterized by a double principle; ontologically and objectively by the principle of correspondence, which ensures an essential and functional correlation between analogous elements, presenting them as simple homologous forms of the appearance of a central and unitary meaning; and epistemologically and subjectively by the generalized use of the principle of induction, which is here understood as a discursive approximation of a spiritual intuition, in which what is realized is the integration and the unification of the diverse elements encountered in the same one meaning and in the same one principle.

>>22187355
>see a thread asking for opinions on a book
>cringe knowing that regardless of the book it'll be deconstructed by 110iqs with a chip on their shoulder and the resulting parody will get shat all over
i won't be reading this thread

>>22189222
>222
Ope, pardon, are my critiques too gentle and agreeable?
I can start spamming slurs and insults as is customary, if you wish.

I fucking hate what this board has become

>>22189288
We can still talk about Muriel Spark if you want...?

>>22189233
Nigger you've said faggot fake words like "feelpinions". You are gay.

You're smarmy, an arrogant know it all, typical occultist and you don't belong here. Talking like fucking Aquino(!) and Regardie/GD are serious people and not just satanic retard spooks. You have no self awareness.

>>22189302
What are your critiques of the Tablets of Set?
Have you read them?

>>22189306
>>22189302
Actually that's probably a high bar.
What's your critique of their introductory reading list and it including such gems as H. te Velde's "Seth: God of Confusion"?

>>22188239
>pure autism like Hyperborea that Guenon doesn't touch
Guénon writes about that too

>>22187355
a revoltin' experience yuk yuk

>>22189040
>you come across as a big fish trying to show off in a small pond
Of course, see /omg/ on /x/, that's what ape is known for.

>>22187355
I don't even see how this book is fascist or political. It's more spiritual or anti-modern. Anyway, if you're moderately well-read and know a little bit about ancient Greece and Rome and other Traditions, and maybe a bit of philosophical understanding, you should go ahead and read. The ideas were so radically different from anything I'd encountered before, he does a really good job at showing how "Traditional" man understood and experienced life. The critique of modernity is great as well, but you can also get this from Guénon, who has easier books to read on the topic. If you encounter new concepts as you go you can just Google them, so I would say go ahead and read.

I'm not sure if it's Evola's writing style or if it's the translator, or maybe it's the way Italian itself translates into English, but often the writing seemed overly dense/complicated, and some of the sentences are really long.

>>22190326
Btw I read Revolt then Guénon (Crisis of the Modern World, and other easier ones that are less metaphysical), so you can definitely start with Revolt.

>>22190326
>he does a really good job at showing how "Traditional" man understood and experienced life.
How does he do a better job than source texts, or ethnographers, or archaeologists, for showing how the spiritual lives of people through history unfolded?

>>22187361
faggotry
-and schizophrenia

>>22190357
You can read the source texts but still not drop the modern materialist mindset. Ethnographers and archaeologists are academics, so they are trained in this mindset and surrounded by it.

>>22190373
Wait so what special qualification did Evola have to interpret the Traditional historical man that all those other people lack? Why should I hold him above compilations of Hellenic Temple Law? The Greek Magical Papyri? The Kalikapuranas?

>>22190385
He/his school of thought studied all of those and use it to support their worldview. They haven't overlooked any of that. They're aware of all of it and it informs their synthetic worldview. Go read those documents yourself if you want to, many Trads have.

>>22190429
Can you show me the contemporaries to Evola who were reckoning with the aforementioned texts and where I can read their exposition and how they supported that worldview?

I've actually had "Trads" ban me from their spaces for gently asserting that maybe reading compilations of Hellenic Temple Law might be more worthwhile to the contemporary practitioner rather than Evola's secondary materials. Like, that's why I'm asking these questions. Previous experience has shown me that "Trad" folks will mitigate publishers like Brill because they're "modern" or "academic" and it honestly sorta blows my mind when they do.

>>22190447
Not him but as with any movement you have to separate the husk of its followers, especially latter-day ones, from its core. Evola would be the first one to agree with what you're saying but he would also say that you will come around to more or less his position the more you study anyway. Read the first 50-100 pages of Inge's Gifford Lectures on Plotinus and chapters V and VII from Burckhardt's Age of Constantine. Hellenistic paganism was in deep crisis and very decadent. Neoplatonism and Julian's neo-paganism were just as gnosticized/abrahamized as the Gnostic/Abrahamic movements were platonized/paganized. It was a single massive movement "back" to something, so the question is what? You might not agree with everything Evola says, personally I think his metahistory based on the kali yuga idea is his weakest point and one he largely downplays later, but he was saying something authentic with his idea that people were longing for a return to something that even Plato and Platonism themselves were only an emanation of.

>>22190486
>but he would also say that you will come around to more or less his position the more you study anyway
I haven't tho.
He writes like he's making a polemic that's sort of parallel to the actual spiritual practices that he claims to want to represent, but, how in the hell am I going to come to his positions when learning from Lamas that directly contradict his hot takes on Buddhism? Why would I lean more toward him if the morality of a Mayan bloodletting ritual is so orange/purple as to render his positioning of ideals essentially non-relevant to anything in the immediate system of practice?

>Read the first 50-100 pages of Inge's Gifford Lectures on Plotinus and chapters V and VII from Burckhardt's Age of Constantine
Why would I do this if my interest is the folk practices and evokations of cross cultural sorcerers as exemplified in the Magical Papyri? Well, actually, I see high degrees of merit for at least going to Plotinus for some more of the, uh, 'popular' scholarly context that was proliferating at the time but these compilations of Temple Law come from inscriptions and older materials than that Late Classical Julian the Restorer shit. I don't know why I need a guy in 1924 to teach me to be Trad when I can turn to any number of actual extant historical traditions some of which have unblemished roots deeper than much of what he turns to.

Whatever tho.

I just don't understand folks try to gussy up their support of the guy because he's rhetorically useful. You can just say/do that. Fuck's sake at least Crowley handholds you through how to strip out useful material from sources like Coming Forth by Day.

>>22190503
Then go read the original texts for yourself and ignore the Trads. Nobody is saying you have to agree.

>>22190521
It would feel way less weird if it didn't feel like there was a yawning gulf between the capital T trad movement and pretty much the entire edifice of everyone else, scholar, practitioner, actual initiate to historical traditions, etc., and I get that some of that disconnection is intentional, and in some cases warranted, but the longer the Trads go with little more than "okiedoke" in response to actual new developments, the more its going to look like a purely rhetorical exercise.

And shit that's not even me saying I disagree like I have issues with Guenon like I said, dude TRIED, but there comes a point where the intentional isolation from the plebs thing starts actively harming the intent behind the movement.

Imo.

>>22190537
>>22190503
Your style of discourse is the greatest proof that Traditionalists might be onto something that I've ever seen.

>>22190552
It's Ape without his/her trip, i guarantee it.

>>22190537
>It would feel way less weird if it didn't feel like there was a yawning gulf between the capital T trad movement and pretty much the entire edifice of everyone else, scholar, practitioner, actual
Yes, the Traditionalist viewpoint stands at odds with the masses, well done at identifying that.

>>22190537
>>It would feel way less weird if it didn't feel like there was a yawning gulf between the capital T trad movement and pretty much the entire edifice of everyone else, scholar, practitioner, actual initiate to historical traditions
>scholar
99% of scholars are Marxist materialists. Take for instance Haanegraaff, he is fully and openly aligned with the mainstream agenda. Scholars cannot be trusted and have to be read with caution. A good one would be Uzdavinys.
>practitioner
Your average 'practitioner' is an empty-headed normie at a meditation center or a "witch", or a delusional LARPing schizo (like you), unless you pretend to be in contact with true practitioners which I doubt. Evola at least had the decency to admit that one should read about these spiritual practices to broaden one's horizon without expecting much else.
>actual initiate to historical traditions
Go suck the tongue of some old Tibetan 'lama' in the hope of receiving veritable knowledge which probably won't come because they don't have anything.
>but there comes a point where the intentional isolation from the plebs thing starts actively harming the intent behind the movement.
You are directed outward, looking for some scholar, practitioner, or supposed traditional initiate, instead of looking inward. There is no movement except inner movement. There is no intentional isolation from the plebs, it is simply natural isolation and differentiation, like water and oil.

>>22190587
>It's Ape without his/her trip, i guarantee it.
It's embarrassing how obvious it is.

Cheeky bump

>>22188262
>- Is very inspired by Roma
The idea or the historical reality?
and what period, kingdom, republic or empire? Or pre/post Roman Rome?

>>22190726
>Scholars cannot be trusted and have to be read with caution
Just when I thought I was safe. They seemed the least likely to try and brainwash the reader into a cult but I underestimated them.

>>22187355
Is it fun to read?

>>22190503
I think the fact that Greco-Egyptian magic, Mayan sacrifice, Tibetan Buddhism, and whatever else, are all laid out in front of us as consumer choices is exactly why somebody might turn to something like Traditionalism for a meta-analysis. That is, if you want one that doesn't jump through hoops to explain away all mystical experience as the effects of epilepsy, ergot, etc etc. Academic philosophy of religion hasn't been fit to provide that for about 40 years.

Funny how every Evola threads get derailed by people pushing an agenda who haven't read him.
>>22191273
From what I recall mostly all the "games" (= rituals to him), the mythos (he uses alot the planetarian images)...
But he also cites historian from those times, so I guess it's both the idea and the reality of what was Rome.
I'm not sure what you refer to with pre/post Roman Rome?
One should also keep in mind that even though he references alot Europe, he also refers to Islam, Incas, Japan, feodal Europe, Greece and many more, it's not at all "Rome applied to today".

>>22191364
Thank you, that clarifies a lot. I would find the idea of praising the political/imperial might - which while impressive isn't something that hits me as "traditional".
Pre Rome, I'd mean the tribes and city as far back as we can discuss on this topic.
Post, around the vandals sacking it
>>22191364
>One should also keep in mind that even though he references alot Europe, he also refers to Islam, Incas, Japan, feodal Europe, Greece and many more, it's not at all "Rome applied to today".
I think understand, there's something of a universal undercurrent that materialists can't grasp and it's shown in various ways across cultures... Right?

>>22189084
I'm a Ligma initiate.

>>22189306
>>22189323
You are perhaps one of the worst posters on this website--at that should tell you something. Do you simply like to smell your own farts, or what is your problem, faggot? How intellectually dishonest can you possible be to enter into a conversation about an author and then not even discuss the author that is discussed but to instead reference your decrepit, cum-stained books, written by some literal who loser a 1000 years ago as that is somehow a landmark of intellectual prowess? Guess what, faggot? No one fucking cares. Do you want to know why people don't read useless shit? It is because we actually have a life outside of 4chan. We have families, friends, work, kids, wives, etc. What do you have? Some useless knowledge that you can boast about amongst strangers on a Mongolian basket weaving forum? Get a life, loser. Evola disliked the priestly caste because they were just like you: effeminate and cowardly. You hide in your ivory tower behind a vail of wisdom in-order to mask how pathetic you truly are.

Discuss Evola or perhaps Guenon and their works or fuck off. If disagree with their works, then maybe, just maybe, provide a fucking counter-argument to their arguments instead of bitching and whining like an effeminate faggot. You, at least, to be well read judging from the massive library that you have accumulated, but you really have no idea what you have read, have you? Because, if you did, you would at least, at least, be able to provide a counter-argument to Evola's philosophy that you at least seem to disagree with. You could approach it from a Marxist angle--I do not fucking care, just say something of actual value instead of stroking your fragile ego. Did I offend you? Did I perhaps damage the persona that is associated with that name and tripcode? Stop tripfagging, cocksucker.

>>22191401
>I think understand, there's something of a universal undercurrent that materialists can't grasp and it's shown in various ways across cultures... Right?
Only according to Perennialists, not according to any traditional authority from the religions they claim to love so much. What these people will tell is that every religion has an "exoteric" side, which is basically disposable, and an "esoteric" side, which is the inner core of all true religions. That one primordial truth, sophia perennis, is reflected like a beam of light through a crystal, it looks different only because of things like race, time, culture, language and so on, but it's always the same truth.

Except the traditional authorities of the religions they like don't teach this esoteric/exoteric dichotomy they like so much or say that all religions are the same on some hidden inward level, that's (ironically since these people despise modernity) a very modern idea. If you go read the major Sufis, there is never any question of abandoning "exoteric" things like the prayer or fasting, there's no sense that everything besides the mystical union with God stuff is some contingent, relative, ultimately meaningless external shell, just a tool to get you to the perennial truth behind all religions.

And the differences between religions are irreconcilable. We cannot both have only one life and then be judged and exist in a cycle of reincarnation. There is no logical way that tawheed, trinitarianism, and polytheism can all be true simultaneously. God cannot be both some impersonal philosophical Monad like in Platonism or some varieties of Hinduism and a personal God like He clearly is in all 3 "Abrahamic religions". The only way to get around this problem for Perennialists is to say that doctrines as fundamental as the nature of God are irrelevant externals or that all the great authorities of all religions misunderstood everything and humanity only started to open its eyes with Guenon or some similar nonsense.

They aren't actually traditional followers of any religions, they don't bother to engage deeply with religious traditions, and their ideas are a totally incoherent mess. 9 times out of 10 these people are politically/metapolitically motivated and end up moving onto something else, either outright esoteric hitlerist nuttery or an actually traditional understanding and practice of a major religion, i.e. an "exclusivist" understanding and practice.

>>22191351
>are all laid out in front of us as consumer choices
So you have a really fair point on GMP, and to a lesser extent Vajrayana, but I've literally never seen the work I do with K'awiil laid out for anyone as a consumer choice.

>That is, if you want one that doesn't jump through hoops to explain away all mystical experience as the effects of epilepsy, ergot, etc etc.
We're like 40 years past that discussion being taken remotely seriously by actual academics. Like, we're in an era of Pocs and Willby and Ginzburg for a lot of Witchcraft discourse. Please, actually check out what folks in the Academy are doing instead of presuming. Just because we all had That Person in their ethnography class who wanted to write about ergotism and feminism doesn't mean Henningsen is.

>>22191528
>You are perhaps one of the worst posters on this website
Sorry mate, you can always filter me.

>>22190726
>Take for instance Haanegraaff
There is more than Haanegraaff. I've never recommedned the man. This is like me dismissing all biology because Dawkins is a shit philosopher.

>unless you pretend to be in contact with true practitioners which I doubt
Kay.

>>22191351
>the fact that Greco-Egyptian magic, Mayan sacrifice, Tibetan Buddhism, and whatever else, are all laid out in front of us as consumer choices is exactly why somebody might turn to something like Traditionalism
Repeating my post here >>22191616 kinda but how is Traditionalism/Perennialism any different? These people will literally tell you that all religions (all "traditional religions" or "initiatic religions" anyway, and they never give you a methodology for determining which those are that I've seen) are the same on an essential level and that you can pick any one you want. That's just a right wing version of liberal consumer choice "spirituality".

>>22191625
I really just think that's a false argument tho.

Like, if someone could show me where I can get a Nagaraja Empowerment as an on-tap consumer choice I'd be there tomorrow. If someone could show me how to operationalize some of these Mayan cenote/cave sacrifice ritual protocols and gestures as an on-tap consumer choice, I'd be there tomorrow.

If all of this is just a consumer choice show me where I can pay to get initiated through Crowley's Liber ThROA. I'll direct aspirants there instead of handholding them through the script.

>>22191616
>>22191625
Anyone who wants a treatment of this from an Islamic perspective should read this article. Gets into the parapolitical side of Perennialism a little too, which has become more interesting and important since the article was written. King Charles is into these ideas. Whitehall and White House approved imams are into these ideas. These ideas are mirrored in some of their essentials in Theosophy and in the Rockefeller-funded interfaith movement. If Perennialism is some heroic revolt against modernity, why would that be?
https://archive.is/wip/dcLgK

In fact, looking at Perennialism from an Islamic perspective introduces another huge contradiction in Perennialist thought. Perennialism itself is kufr according to most serious sources I've seen, because it's approval of kufr and it's saying that religions besides Islam are acceptable, which is a denial of the Quran, and a denial that kuffar will be in the Hellfire, also a denial of the Quran. So Perennialists like Schuon and Le Gai Eaton (and I'm not saying these people died as Perennialists, Guenon didn't) who claim to be traditionally adhering to Islam are trying to do hold two completely incompatible belief systems at once. I'm sure Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy have similar things, I suspect you'd have a hard time getting through catechesis as an adult if you were open about your position that trinitarianism, the incarnation and so on are just disposable little externals that aren't relevant on the level of higher metaphysics.

And finally (and I'll try to make this my last post, these people are just some of the most absolutely frustratingly retarded people on the planet so it's difficult), here are two serious esoteric scholars discussing why Perennialism makes no sense and going into the pre-Guenon history of the idea. The Modern Hermeticist put out the leading translation of the Picatrix and is some sort of Hermetic Christian so these aren't retards who don't know what they're talking about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4AbPKapl0M

>>22191648
>Modern Hermeticist put out the leading translation of the Picatrix
I haven't been looking since that little vanity press did a partial edition of Shams al Maarif, I'll have to take a look at this edition, its new enough to not be in my library. Maybe I'll add it next update with the Dzogchen and Klipot stuff.

>>22191627
I mean consumer choice in the sense that seeing religions, esoteric schools of thought, metaphysical philosophical systems etc. as a buffet that you can pick and choose from is an application of the liberal view of the market (and the liberal metanarrative in general, democracy operates according to essentially the same dynamic in liberal theory, darwinism is an application of the liberal metanarrative to biology etc. etc.) to religions.

Syncretists like you will mix and match, Perennialists (Schuon aside) will pick one "product" on the marketplace and go with that. But it's fundamentally the same thing, you see religions as interchangeable and you see it as the prerogative of the individual to find and pick the religion that's best for him.

>>22191656
>Syncretists like you will mix and match
I hate to tell you this, but GMP mixed and matched too. So was Chaldean Oracles. So are some tantra sources. Trika symbols might be originally Buddhist.

There's way more interfaith dialogue in history than a lot of folks want to admit.

>you see religions as interchangeable
Not really? I don't see Mayan smoke serpent rituals as compatible with even with similar polytheist protocols because purity strictures get so variant. I won't approach Hermanubis the same way I do Cizin.

>as the prerogative of the individual to find and pick the religion that's best for him.
I'm unsure what other approach there is if the options on the table make you miserable. Unless the only acceptable option is "deal with it, I don't care".

>>22191661
>a bunch of false religions were syncretistic too
Okay.

>Not really? I don't see Mayan smoke serpent rituals as compatible with even with similar polytheist protocols because purity strictures get so variant. I won't approach Hermanubis the same way I do Cizin.
You need to learn how to stop showing off your reading and actually engage in discussion with people.

>I'm unsure what other approach there is if the options on the table make you miserable. Unless the only acceptable option is "deal with it, I don't care".
This kind of emotionalism where religion is there to make you feel good and that should factor into your choice (once again, religion A as a product to be judged against religion B and chosen by an atomized individual according to his preferences - the application of the liberal metanarrative to religion) is also very modern and makes no sense. The truth is the truth whether or not it makes us feel good, whether or not we feel close to God every second of every day that we're trying to follow it, whether or not it's comfortable for us or accords with our desires and preexisting values. Nobody tries to pull this garbage with geology or physics or any materialist "truth" so why pull it with religions? If you wouldn't deny continental drift or general relativity because it makes you feel sad, how much more important is getting to the metaphysical truth, regardless of how it makes you feel?

>>22191672
>false religions were syncretistic too
Wait, I thought Traditionalism accepted and integrated it? See >>22190429. If they're false, why are they part and parcel of Traditionalism?

Why is Egyptian Religion Trad, and Greek Religion Trad, but when they decided to link up godforms its not?

If its your contention that you must practice what you're born to...then why are we even discussing world religion and history? Its either off the table, or it isn't.

>>22191654
>I haven't been looking since that little vanity press did a partial edition of Shams al Maarif, I'll have to take a look at this edition, its new enough to not be in my library. Maybe I'll add it next update with the Dzogchen and Klipot stuff.
See if you can find (or make) a complete PDF edition in English of the Revival of the Religious Sciences and upload that instead, that would actually be something that's not out there for under like $300 and unlike these old grimoires would actually be reflective of "Islamic mysticism" and a good starting place for people curious about that.

>>22191679
>Wait, I thought Traditionalism accepted and integrated it? See >>22190429. If they're false, why are they part and parcel of Traditionalism?
I'm not a Traditionalist, I've posted against Traditionalism like 10 times ITT now.

>Why is Egyptian Religion Trad, and Greek Religion Trad, but when they decided to link up godforms its not?
Good question and the answer is that judging between religions on the basis of some nebulous notion like how "trad" they are is incoherent.

>>22191680
I might do that but you should know that I sympathize, immensely, with the Illuminationists that al-Ghazali was targeting in "Incoherence of the Philosophers". I'm one of the incoherent philosophers who think occasionalism is goofy and Mulla Sadra/Suhrawardi were on to something.

It would, if nothing else, provide counterbalance to how topheavy my Mystical Islam folder is with Illuminationism.

>>22187422
This poster is right. Unless you have a strong background in the traditions from which evola draws, you will get brutally filtered (this is his intention). If you do have the necessary background, it’s an amazing, perspective-changing read.

>>22191689
Oh.
Word.

Well if you feel you have the True Religion, then feel free to expound it. I have zero obligation to accept polemics asserting Supernal Truth, as the actual Supernal Truth though.

>>22191690
>I'm one of the incoherent philosophers who think occasionalism is goofy and Mulla Sadra/Suhrawardi were on to something
You and every other Esoteric Studies orientalist, I'd guess you think Ibn Arabi is representative of Sufism too.

>>22191703
>I'd guess you think Ibn Arabi is representative of Sufism too.
I don't really care or have an evaluation.
I'm not Muslim. I'm not Sufi. I don't practice Islam.

>>22191717
Well just for your information, absolutely nobody considers the Brethren of Purity or Ibn Arabi or occult garbage like the Shams al-Marif or Picatrix Islamic. Some scholars said that Ibn Arabi was a wali so he personally was fine but his books shouldn't be read and anyone who believes in their plain meaning is a kafir, that's as sympathetic as it gets for him. The Brethren of Purity were simply kafirs and the penalty for practicing magic in the sharia is death, always has been and always will be and actual Sufis don't contest that.

>>22191727
>olutely nobody considers the Brethren of Purity or Ibn Arabi or occult garbage like the Shams al-Marif or Picatrix Islamic
Alright. I know the general position of Sunni Islam on this stuff. Its not, like, hard to find.

>penalty for practicing magic in the sharia is death, always has been and always will be and actual Sufis don't contest that.
I don't have a dog in this race, mate. All I can say to this is if anyone wants to try and murder me for sorcery I'll try to murder them back.

>>22191717
Well just for your information, absolutely nobody considers the Brethren of Purity or Ibn Arabi or occult garbage like the Shams al-Marif or Picatrix Islamic. Some scholars said that Ibn Arabi was a wali so he personally was fine but his books shouldn't be read and anyone who believes in their plain meaning is a kafir, that's as sympathetic as it gets for him. The Brethren of Purity were doing extreme bidah at the very very least and are not taken seriously or even commonly mentioned by anyone besides Western orientalists. And the penalty for practicing magic in the sharia is death, always has been and always will be and actual Sufis don't contest that.

>>22191741
see
>>22191734

>>22191619
I take your point that there's some good work being done on specific traditions on an anthropological level. And I'll have a look at Emma Wilby, so thanks for that. My beef is that this increasing specialisation has strongly disprivileged writing on "states of being" as general human capacities.

>>22191625
You and I as individuals can pick the system that works for us, but there's also the issue of the state of the world around us. For all of the archaic cultures we were talking about (Egypt, Greece, Rome, Maya, Tibet), religion provided a hierarchical ordering principle for the society. That's one reason why the exoteric element isn't disposable. It provides cohesion and an access point for people who aren't practicing religious discipline.

>>22191770
>My beef is that this increasing specialisation has strongly disprivileged writing on "states of being" as general human capacities.
I am, perhaps to both of our surprise, 110% with you on this point. That's why I'm a Merleau-Ponty/Levinas phenomenologist. And to be clear, none of the four I referenced above do this.

If you want that, check out "In Sorcery's Shadow" which is written at the level of undergrad ethnography and then the whole of Neil Whitehead's interface with Amazonian assault sorcery exemplified in "Dark Shamans; Kanaima and the Poetics of a Violent Death" and "In Darkness and Secrecy: The Anthropology of Assault Sorcery and Witchcraft in Amazonia".

>>22189101
>Look, someone could do way worse than Evola, but they could also be doing way way better.
Who would you recommend as an introduction besides Evola and Bardon?

>>22191788
The question becomes "for what".
What are your goals, what are your desired outcomes, what are you reaching towards, what resonates with you, etc.

Without any context my baseline is Crowley's Magick in Theory and Practice or Magick without Tears. The former is more theoretical. It positions you in an interstice between the collapse of the old Lodges and their elaborations on ritual formulae and the pile of discoveries/decent translations that would hit the market on Crowley's deathbed (i.e. Wilhelm Baynes Yi King, Nag Hammadhi was discovered the year he died, good fresh Egyptian translations had to wait until after the Tut flap to get published and circulating and even then Massey/Budge were still the order of the day). Like, it should only be a half pivot in either direction to get you to "Rosicrucian/grimoire/ceremonial predecessor lodges" and "whatever fruits you can glean from the actually good work being done in the Academy", i.e. modern texts on shit like Hellenic Dream Incubation or whatever.

What do you make of Kremmerz, Ape? What do you make of Tomberg, Ape? What do you make of Peladan, Ape?

I started with Evola and Bardon and Crowley (and Spare and Carroll and Hine and Grant) but am now more along lines you mention. Kinda a hau and zone and suny and brill guy, classicist/medievalist, etc.

Been reading Hermetc Science of Transformation, Meditations on Tarot, and How to Become a Mage by the priorly mentioned. Bretti basic but comfy/cozy...

>>22191823
>Kremmerz
Sussy.

>Tomberg
With little other context his involvement with Martinism telegraphs that he's ok in my book.

>Peladan
Not familiar enough to comment. I'd have to pick through the dude's materials.

>Spare and Carroll and Hine and Grant
The problem is the last three didn't really seem to understand Spare too well. Understandingable. I didn't until somewhat recently.

>>22191833
I hardly understood anything about occultism/philosophy until five years into study and every five years since I continue to rerealize how lil I know as I continue my studies endlessly.
>grant
He did inspire Chumbley so that's cool. Plus Zos Speaks! makes it seem like he helped Spare have some camraderie and happiness toward the end of life.
>>>hanegraaf
I love this marxist materialist like you wouldn't believe. Or maybe it's stockholm from reading so much of his books...

>>22191770
>You and I as individuals can pick the system that works for us
This is exactly the attitude that I was pointing out though. I don't see how "picking the system that works for you" is fundamentally any different than some New Ager or interfaith person saying their religion is "right for them" and someone else's religion is right for that someone else. You're centering your view of religion on the atomized self and its preferences and choices, which is a liberal way to approach religions. It's not traditional, it's modern.

>there's also the issue of the state of the world around us. For all of the archaic cultures we were talking about (Egypt, Greece, Rome, Maya, Tibet), religion provided a hierarchical ordering principle for the society. That's one reason why the exoteric element isn't disposable
Disposable in the sense that you guys don't see it as fully true. The sophia perennis is the single beam of light flowing into the crystal, the varying social expressions (and, conveniently, the irreconcilable doctrines contained within the major religions) are the refracted rays of that single beam of light. They appear different but essentially they're the same. That is not an attitude towards the social aspect of religion or towards religious doctrine that's acceptable in any so-called Abrahamic religion. In Islam it's kufr according to most of what I've seen, in Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism I assume it's going to get you kicked out of catechesis or auto-excommunicated if you have a lazy catechist or hide your true beliefs like a Frankist. And yet Perennialists seem to overwhelmingly go for Islam and Orthodoxy.

Also I'll say what I said before about this esoteric/exoteric dichotomy you guys have, it's not something you will find in the major religious traditions themselves. Batiniyya is an epithet, you don't want to be that as a Muslim and the Quran even explicitly condemns this attitude of searching after secret wisdom at the expense of the clear truth.
https://quran.com/3/7?translations=27,18,17,95,101,84,21,22,85,20,19

In Catholicism it's the same, there's the beatific vision, there's some apophatic theology, there's ascetic practices, but in none of those writings that I've ever read, and I'd be shocked if you could produce an exception, is there any statement like "once you attain this spiritual grade you can stop believing in the trinity and the Catholic Church, those are exoteric elements that are there to hierarchically correspond to the hierarchical ontological structure of the physical and metaphysical worlds" (or whatever it is you believe that exoteric hierarchy is doing). I know less about EO but again, I'd be shocked if you could find this esoteric/exoteric dichotomy in premodern EO writing.

The traditional religions that "Traditionalists" like are exclusivist and not Perennialist/universalist. You're approaching these issues in an extremely modern way.

>>22191905
>I'd be shocked if you could produce an exception, is there any statement like "once you attain this spiritual grade you can stop believing in the trinity and the Catholic Church, those are exoteric elements that are there to hierarchically correspond to the hierarchical ontological structure of the physical and metaphysical worlds" (or whatever it is you believe that exoteric hierarchy is doing).
Porete -- Mirror of Simple Souls

>>22191913
Hadn't heard of it and this is uncited and on wiki so maybe the truth is a bit more complicated but let's just say this is not the strongest pull.
>Enormously popular when written, it fell foul of the Church authorities, who, detecting elements of the antinomian Heresy of the Free Spirit in its vision, denounced it as "full of errors and heresies", burnt existing copies, banned its circulation, and executed Porete herself

>>22191925
I come from a long tradition of heresy...

>>22187422
>Moby Dick took me half a dozen attempts to finish
Anon, you might be retarded

>>22191925
Looks like she was in fact condemned as a heretic and executed after a theological investigation and her book was even quoted in the Council of Florence to condemn the Free Spirit Movement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marguerite_Porete#Trial_and_death

Idk how Perennialists understand stuff like this btw, trials and executions for heresy. They're extremely blatantly "exclusivist" in their assumptions and they were carried out in premodernity by those hierarchical instantiations of the supposed sophia perennis. If modernity is so awful and inverted and religious hierarchy is great then you don't seem to have much basis for condemning this stuff. But you can't embrace it either because that would mean dropping your universalism.

>>22191905
Esoteric/exoteric can be found in Maimonides to some degree as well. At least if you're Straussian. And also greek mystery religions from whence terms came. Gnostics too. Hermetixs as well according to Fowden.

>>22191929
Well idk what your beliefs are but my point here >>22191905 was directed at mainstream Perennialists. The types who will say it's of paramount importance to pick a traditional/initiatic religion and follow it traditionally but who hold beliefs that prevent them from even entering the religions they tend to like according to the traditional authorities of those religions and the hierarchical structures of those religions which they supposedly adore.

Chronic depression

>>22191934
Not the Ape but I'm not a perennialist/traditionalist. I'm a mirandola oratio style hermetic platonic catholic. Sometimes I dabble in more obscure occultisms by moonlight but pretty rarely...

I think it's tragic that this books serves as an introduction to Evola and traditionalist thought to so many people. It's more a metaphysical survey of History than anything else and requires a solid background to get the most of. It's an incredibly insightful read but really not an ideal starting point at all.

Guénon's big 3 (namely the Introduction to the study of Hindu doctrines, Crisis of the modern world, The reign of quantity and the signs of the times) should be read beforehand. Then one can move on to Evola's big 3 (Revolt, Men among the ruins, Ride the tiger) and the rest. Reading Evola before Guénon doesn't make much sense at all unless you have some background from other perennial authors like Schuon, Nasr and the like

>>22191954
If you've read Eliade or Smith I think it provides more or less same background as Guenon and Evola and Schuon or whoever else. Even Jung and post-Jungians were more or less on to same stuff. This isn't some super secret club. It's an incredibly popular hermeneutic at least with the rabble even if academia has moved onto bigger and better

>>22191942
>At least if you're Straussian
Nobody serious is, Strauss absolutely mangled his sources and read his own ideas onto them and Orthodox Jews will tell you that his reading of Maimonides is totally unreliable, I've had that exact conversation.

>And also greek mystery religions from whence terms came. Gnostics too. Hermetixs as well according to Fowden
This I don't doubt but these are a, dead/interrupted traditions - they have no chain of transmission as a Guenonian would say. And b, they're not representative of the longing that I think most Perennialists have for a hierarchical religion that encompasses the totality of human existence, individual and collective. Islam is, Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy were before modernity, I think it's very arguable today. Where's the Hermetic Roma? The Gnostic one?

The mysteries is as close as you get to a complete representation of Perennialism before modernity probably since they were (probably, from what I've read on the subject and I'm no expert so maybe I'm wrong here) systems of metaphysical philosophy using the "exoteric" figures and events of Greek myth as symbols, at least Eleusis was (probably) that, and were participated in overwhelmingly or exclusively (not sure which) by the social elite. But they were afaik not formalized until the late pagan period when classical paganism in general was trending in a more coherent and exclusivist direction to compete with the growth of Christianity. By the time you get to the Severans or Neoplatonism or Julian (who was a philosemite who wanted to rebuild the Temple btw), you've already (arguably) moved beyond the traditional metaphysical and religious framework of classical antiquity and are dealing with a new framework that's different in some of its essential features, and more different the further along into the christianization of the Empire that you get. And I'm not sure how far you can take it beyond Eleusis anyway, some of the mystery cults were pretty confined to the military from what I understand.

>>22191905
>You're centering your view of religion on the atomized self and its preferences and choices, which is a liberal way to approach religions. It's not traditional, it's modern.
That was exactly my point. That's the problem that Guenon is diagnosing.

>Disposable in the sense that you guys don't see it as fully true.
Why is it an issue that we may not see it as fully true? Again, because we're dealing with arbitrary individual choice. In Islam, this, in Orthodoxy, that. The whole thing is poisoned before we start.

Now, I'm not a member of an Abrahamic religion. But it seems to me that both faith and religious experience are typically felt to transcend logical argument. So obviously some of those people have been able to get beyond the apparent contradiction to their satisfaction in practice. Perhaps they simply suspend judgment.

>At least if you're Straussian
Nobody serious is, Strauss absolutely mangled his sources and read his own ideas onto them and Orthodox Jews will tell you that his reading of Maimonides is totally unreliable, I've had that exact conversation.

>And also greek mystery religions from whence terms came. Gnostics too. Hermetixs as well according to Fowden
This I don't doubt but these are a, dead/interrupted traditions - they have no chain of transmission as a Guenonian would say. And b, they're not representative of the longing that I think most Perennialists have for a hierarchical religion that encompasses the totality of human existence, individual and collective. Islam is, Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy were before modernity, I think it's very arguable today. Where's the Hermetic Roma? The Gnostic one?

The mysteries is as close as you get to a complete representation of Perennialism before modernity probably since they were (probably, from what I've read on the subject and I'm no expert so maybe I'm wrong here) systems of metaphysical philosophy using the "exoteric" figures and events of Greek myth as symbols, at least Eleusis was (probably) that, and were participated in overwhelmingly or exclusively (not sure which) by the social elite. But they were afaik not formalized until the late pagan period when classical paganism in general was trending in a more coherent and exclusivist direction to compete with the growth of Christianity. By the time you get to the Severans or Neoplatonism or Julian (who was a philosemite who wanted to rebuild the Temple btw), you've already (arguably) moved beyond the traditional metaphysical and religious framework of classical antiquity and are dealing with a new framework that's different in some of its essential features, and more different the further along into the christianization of the Empire that you get. And I'm not sure how far you can take it beyond Eleusis anyway, some of the mystery cults were pretty confined to the military from what I understand.

>>22191786
>The Anthropology of Assault Sorcery
Thanks, this seems like an interesting rabbit hole.

>>22191942

>>22191974

>>22191968
Strauss is fun. But ya. Nihilistic as fuck. Rosen is good student tho. Sensitive readers albeit biased too. Seventh letter is worth considering at least wrt Plato. Altho tend to have ya kinda more tubingenish idea of what esoterix and/or unwritten doctrines might be as opposed to it being an illusion or lie or whatever Strauss would say.
>where are hermetixs and gnostix?
All around if you got eyes to see. It's underground tho. As always been.
>>22191972
NTA but Christianity is the exotericization of the esoteric prisca theologia. Hence revealed and natural religion are two sides of same coin.

>>22191975
You're very welcome.

>>22191913
>>22191925
>>22191934
Mirror is amazing.

>>22191972
>That was exactly my point. That's the problem that Guenon is diagnosing.
And my point is that Perennialists are part of that problem. Maybe Guenon did diagnose it, I'm not some Guenon expert, but until he dropped Perennialism and entered Islam he was a part of it nonetheless.

>Why is it an issue that we may not see it as fully true?
Because it prevents you from entering them to begin with. If Perennialism is kufr in Islam and an auto-excommunicable heresy in Catholicism and Orthodoxy, how are you going to become a Muslim or Catholic or Orthodox Christian as a Perennialist in the first place? But you need to to access their "initiations" so you're in an irresolvable bind.

>Again, because we're dealing with arbitrary individual choice. In Islam, this, in Orthodoxy, that. The whole thing is poisoned before we start
How is it necessarily arbitrary and how is comparing and contrasting the various religions representative of arbitrariness even if it's not necessary? I'm bringing up Islam and Orthodoxy so much because those are the two religions that Perennialist honorary Frankists prefer to infest more than any other. I don't believe Catholicism or Orthodoxy are true or are going to lead anyone away from eternal destruction but that's not relevant to the discussion of the contradictory ways Perennialists relate to the "traditional religions" they pretend to admire, it's a different discussion.

>it seems to me that both faith and religious experience are typically felt to transcend logical argument
Yes and no. For Ashariis, Maturidis or Scholastic Catholics, logic is an essential component of faith. Athari vs Asharii vs Maturidi is another completely separate debate that I'm not trying to start by saying this, or trying to have at all, but I will say that we need logic even to read a sacred or supposedly sacred text, we need it to discuss religion in the first place, we need it to evaluate the authenticity of religions when comparing them or to evaluate competing frameworks for looking at religions when comparing those (e.g. Perennialism vs syncretism). We need logic to criticize modernity like every Perennialist I've ever read or encountered online does. Does that mean that you should become a rationalist or that sometimes, very often even, blind obedience and faith is necessary even when we don't understand something, or that every aspect of (the correct) religion should be probed into rationally and theorized about? No it doesn't but religion isn't a totally irrational process either. To even communicate fideism you need to use language, which is a function of logic and rationality so they're linked.

>>22191905
Doesn't the Bible tell you to read it esoterically? Didn't Christ and his followers possess secret knowledge that they could only teach through parable?

>>22191987
>It's underground tho. As always been
Which was my point. To generalize, the premodern religions/philosophies/esoteric schools that best represent Perennialist universalism were not representative of the Perennialist desire for a totalizing, hierarchical religion/philosophy/esoteric school. There was no Gnostic Roma and no Hermetic imperium, like you said they've always been underground.

>>22192001
>But you need to to access their "initiations" so you're in an irresolvable bind
What's funny is that Perennialists often reject the initiatory frameworks of the more esoteric/heretical stuff too, like, Guenon was so unmoved personally by Rosicrucianism and French Gnosticism that he dismissed them wholesale as if just because he didn't get anywhere with it, it is therefore impossible for anyone else to as well. This is, in part, why it feels so siloed off, there's no cross dialogue with the larger edifice of world-religion superstructure or more obscure actually esoteric streams of transmission. Like...just because the man himself was unable to either access or parse ca 450 CE Gnostic seal initiations doesn't mean we can't look at the material and sus out how to reforge that link ourselves.

I'm not even the biggest Guenon/Evola fan but the people critiquing them ITT have not read them. This is a discussion of Wikipedia and video summaries.

>>22192008
Well.
The Winter King ruled for a year. Not that it went fuckin' anywhere at all.

>>22192004
Idk, does it? I highly doubt the Bible refers to itself as a book in the first place in any context at all, although it's been a while since I've read it. But even if you're right, that introduces yet another contradiction of Perennialism. Who should be the ones doing the interpreting?

The way religious authority generally functioned in premodernity was that interpretative freedom (within limits) and religious authority was restricted to a knowledgeable class separate from laypeople. Catholicism and EO have priests, monks, bishops etc., Islam has the ulama, Judaism has the rabbis. The idea that Joe Schmoe can open up his KJV and come to a valid interpretation all on his own with no process of education occurring first, the idea that that should even be allowed, is modern and is reflective of the egalitarianism that Perennialists constantly condemn. If you want religion to be this hierarchical, ordering, totalizing force that reflects the hierarchical nature of metaphysics then why do you give yourself as a layperson the right to decide what Christianity is and isn't?

>>22192023
That's assuming that modern hierarchy is legitimate and isn't just plebes trying to rule over other plebes. Being a Traditionalist doesn't exactly mean respecting authority wherever it is asserted to the point where it makes hierarchy look like a farce.

>>22192004
Also if you're correct about the Bible saying to look for its supposed esoteric meanings then you've got the Bible and the Quran saying diametrically opposed things despite you presumably believing that they're teaching the same sophia perennis on an essential/esoteric level. Same thing I talked about here >>22191616 , once you stop focusing only on the universals you will notice that you're tripping over these fundamental contradictions between the religions all over the place. And I would hope that eventually the circular logic of "religions are essentially the same because they share the same esoteric core and the esoteric core is whatever reflects shared universals and the things that aren't shared universals can't be the esoteric core because they contradict the notion that religions are all the same" would begin to feel dishonest.

>>22192030
Premodern religious hierarchies gave laypeople far, far less freedom to interpret and teach and far, far less religious authority. What do you think would've happened in 1300s France if you as some peasant had gone around telling everyone your esoteric interpretation of the Bible and teaching that all religions are the same? You'd probably be asked to recant and if you didn't you'd probably be executed.

>>22192030
I always find it really odd that you cats are more interested in the Traditionalism of your books, largely written in the modern era, than you are of the actual traditions you could easily access if you put in some degree of care and discernment. Like, you want to be Reformers, where's the Trad John Calvin? Where's the Trad Grey Eminence?

>>22192030
>doesn't exactly mean respecting authority wherever it is asserted
Which isn't what I was saying either btw, in Islam at least there are very explicit rules about what makes a ruler for example legitimate and what to do if the ruler is no longer legitimate.

My point was basically who are you to develop your own novel interpretation and go around teaching and have religious authority (and decide for yourself which existing authorities are legitimate and not)? That's egalitarian, it's individualistic, and it's modern. Not a traditional attitude towards these topics whatsoever.

>>>22192001
I'm not so sure trads are obliged to think all religions are perfectly equal exoteric examplars of metaphysical truth. You can see the same underlying principles in Islam and Christianity while being sad they haven't gotten around to accepting Muhammad or whatever. Also, it's not 1911. On an individual level, there's a lot more access now to Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Taoism...

>traditionalism is when racism, sexism, and autocracy
See this is why I am not a traditionalist. I'm a catholic with heretical tendencies who reads traditional literature from all over the globe and different eras... the only perennialism I will concede is ethics. Karma, bhakti, whatever. Certainly not some metaphysical truth for elites. Christianity is not equally true moreover but more true than other traditions: the main thing I appreciate about other religions is that they at least recognize there is more to reality than atheism and materialism and reductionism and nihilism.

>>22192042
>What do you think would've happened in 1300s France if you as some peasant had gone around telling everyone your esoteric interpretation of the Bible
Catharism

>>22192046
>Which isn't what I was saying either btw,
>That's egalitarian, it's individualistic, and it's modern. Not a traditional attitude towards these topics whatsoever.
It sounds like you're speaking out of both ends of your mouth. And besides, there's nothing egalitarian about it. It wouldn't "my views are equal to yours" but rather "your authority is bankrupt, and my views are superior to yours." In the vacuum of Tradition since the fall, what is exactly the argument against this besides Smuggie-tier concern trolling? If there is no authority worth submitting to, then isn't that a prime argument for creating one?

>>22192087
Yeah and what happened to them lol.

>>22192088
Respecting authority wherever its asserted =/= setting yourself up as an authority and giving yourself cart blanche to develop weird heresies and call the religious authorities of your days plebs who are somehow beneath you.

>>22192067
>there's a lot more access now to Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Taoism...
So that just brings me, at least, back to an early question. If I can go get these traditions on tap, why do we need these secondary authors and their 1910-1930 takes to demonstrate to us what it means to be traditional? Like, I go to secondary sources like Crowley or, what's a good example, Jake Stratton Kent, because they might be able to give me some insight from OUTSIDE that text tradition with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, access to the power of online comparative research, and a bird's eye view of history.

>>22192088
>hen isn't that a prime argument for creating one?
You'd have to demonstrate Truth more than proclaiming it. Like I said, of the goal is the reformation of spiritual authority...why hasn't it been done? We have a handful of relatively isolated authors who don't appear to be in communication with either the academy or external traditions so how is this authority going to be leveraged, exposed, and ultimately accepted?

>>22192088
>If there is no authority worth submitting to
Which is an assumption you're making without having proven it. What methodology do you have for doing this in the first place, what makes an authority legitimate or illegitimate to begin with?

>>22192011
You don't seem to have the slightest clue of Guénon's stance on this matter.

Even Guénon talks there are Adepts who can achieve Gnosis even In Islam/Sufism and they are called solitaries' (hum al-afrad) and even Guénon talks
In this way, although all recorded Knowledge of (initiatic) Gnosis were destroyed, it would be possible for an adept of this secret or oder to restore it. However, by definition, Guénon also argues that truly esoteric society or an organization would never leave any traces or written documents behind. At the very best, their traces can only be found on symbolism and for example how Druids retained certain Hyperborean elements (That is, a tradition transmitted before the Atlantean time as Atlantis is latter supreme center of the original Tula)

This is also dealt with Melchizedek/Khidr symbolism by Guénon in King of the World and it concerns Primordial Tradition, that by definition, any religious tradition is subordinate to. Guénon talks of this in his "Initiation and spiritual realization"

From the point of view of Islamic tasawwuf, what concerns the Afrad is different, whose master is Al Khidr and is considered outside of what one might call "jurisdication of the Pole (al-Qutb)" and Guénon writes they occur only in circumstances which make normal transmission impossible, for example in the absence of any regularly contituted initiatic organization.

Letter from Guénon March 14, 1937
>Al-Khidr is properly the Master of the Afrad, who are independent of the Qutb and may not even be known by him; it is indeed as you say a matter of something more ´direct´ and in a way outside defined and delimited functions no matter how elevated they may be; and this is why the number of the Afrad is indeterminate. This comparison is sometimes used: a prince, even if the exercises no function, is nonetheless higher in himself than a minister (at least if the minister is not himself a prince, something that can happen but which is not all necessary); in the spiritual order of the Afrad are analoguous to princes and the Aqtab to ministers. This is only a comparison, of course, but all the same it helps somewhat in understanding the relation of the ones to the others

And also in letter to Evola, 2 August 1949 Cairo, Egypt:
>Melchizedek corresponds, in Islamic esoterism, to the function of the Qutb, as I have otherwise explained in King of the World. On the other hand, El-Khider is the Master of the Afrad, which are found outside the jurisdiction of the Qutb and is said that they are not even known by it; in this regard, the Koranic story of the meeting between El-Khidr and Moses (Surat El-Kalif) is otherwise very significant. The way of the Afrad is something absolutely exceptional, and no one can choose it on his own initiative.

>>22192112
>However, by definition, Guénon also argues that truly esoteric society or an organization would never leave any traces or written documents behind.
...
Why? That just sounds like him saying stuff to say it. And seems immediately contradicted by archaeohistory. Like, there's a reason I reference Gnostic seal initiations. Unless the argument is now that they don't count either?

>Primordial Tradition, that by definition, any religious tradition is subordinate to.
Fuckin' according to who? Oh that's right Guenons' feelings. Ffs.

>>22192112
>>22192011

And also it should be noted that Guénon was against pseudo-initiatory organizations of his time

Crowley agrees with Guénon in a sense that he found out that the Golden Dawn was indeed pseudo-initiatory organization that led to the Schism to begin with that concerns the Third Order of Golden Dawn and "Secret Chiefs"

However, nowhere in Guénon's letters does Guénon consider Crowley "pseudo-initiate"

Guénon makes a difference between counter-initiation and pseudo-initiation.
>“Counter-initiation,” we must say, cannot be considered a purely human invention,which would be no different from “pseudo-initiation.”

For example. Guénon considered the Hermetic Order of Golden Dawn as a pseudo-initiatory organization in his letters.

Guénon writes:
>The Golden Dawn was a self-styled Hermetic organization that fundamentally did not seem to have a very serious character, because it was from its beginnings an authentic mystification. It is true that this could serve to conceal some rather suspect things. Internally, the principle role was developed by MacGregor and his wife (Bergson’s sister). Only much later was Crowley introduced to it, as he also did in many other things. Even when it was not about rather insignificant pseudo-initiations (perhaps that was not at all the case for the Golden Dawn), his involvement introduced truly sinister influences into it, if only making of it something much more dangerous.

So according to Guénon, even a pseudo-initiatory organization can develop into much more sinister, that is, counter-initiation.

In the case of Crowley, he "attacked" the Golden Dawn inner sanctum under the personage of Ommo Satan: the “Evil Triad” of Satan-Typhon, Apophras, and Besz and thus adopted the monicker "666". At least Guénon considered that Crowley brought some sort of actual counter-initiatory forces into an organization, that before, was a pseudo-initiatory aestheticism. So Crowley quite consciously associated himself with "Counter-initation"

This is however not psedo-initiation like Theosophy. Guénon makes the distinction himself

However, the difference is clear that counter-initiation is real to Guénon, and it is associated with the Typhonian tradition and degraded Shamanism. The Primordial Tradition loses communication from the three worlds and infernal domain is thus disconnected from the Sky in terms of Shamanistic terminology.
As for the degeneration itself in Mongolian shamanistic tradition, we can find some echoes of chapter VI of Genesis. Various legends speak of beings coming from the constellation of the Pleiades with the daughters of men. The inversion takes place precisely how Shamanism degrades into Sorcery, for in regards to the Three Worlds the communication to the 'divine', upper regions is severed and the communication assumes the one coming 'from below', through the cracks

>>22192119
>Why? That just sounds like him saying stuff to say it. And seems immediately contradicted by archaeohistory.

Of course it is disconnected from all history. You don't understand what Primordial Tradition is

In their most simplest terms Hyperborea is vertical, North, Pure spiritual, the immovable centre. Tradition before time. The Top of the World Egg (if shape of Earth is taken as an Egg as Cosmic/Primordial Egg)

The Atlantean has Beginning and End, it is connected to movement. East-West, it has a beginning and End. South is pure materia secunda.

They are associated with Geography, but Hyperborea is before Time, so as to place is it in History would be wrong for the beginning of (linear) Time must have its beginning also in the Atlantean.


I genuinely feel sorry for those 'traditionalists' whose only reference to Perennialism is Abrahamic traditions and their symbolism. Be it Christianity, Islam or Judaism, for even Guénon writes of their subordination to 'Hyperborean Elements' and those who consider the 'Vedic' as being the most closest to Primordial Tradition, when even Guénon reminds that the Vedic tradition had the beginning in:
>The current coming from the West was joined with another current descending from the North and proceeding directly from the primordial tradition, a junction from which was to result the constitution of the different traditional forms proper to the last part of the Manvantara.

And like Guénon reminds us concerning Hinduism and Vedic traditions:
>This is in any case not a matter of reabsorption pure and simple in the primordial tradition of what went forth from it at an earlier epoch; it is a matter of a sort of fusion of forms previously differentiated to give birth to other forms adapted to new circumstances of time and place; and the fact that the two currents then appear in a way to be autonomous can further support the illusion of the independence of the Atlantean tradition.

This is precisely how many do not understand the West-North influence that gave birth to Vedic tradition, and this confusion has led to the ignorance that some people here consider the Hindu traditions (as seen by many posters in this thread) as superior to 'Western', while the Hyperborean element should be the most chief and most dire concern to any perennialist. For even the Vedic ones consider 'historical' periods and subordination to the true 'primordial' center that is Hyperborea and it was in itself most originally from West-to-East with those elements mixed of what was left of the true Hyperborean traditions.

They are always subordinate to North.

>>22192067
>You can see the same underlying principles in Islam and Christianity while being sad they haven't gotten around to accepting Muhammad or whatever
You can but it'd be apophenic to a pretty great extent. Tawheed and the trinity are totally, 100% incompatible. There is no world in which those doctrines can both be fully true, no world where the rules of logic apply at least. The absolute fundamentals of Islam and Christianity are incompatible. Almost all the traditional authorities of Islam have believed that generally speaking (i.e. with exceptions in cases like ignorance and youth and with the caveat that God does what He wills) those who don't accept Islam's fundamentals are going to be in Hell eternity (and the exceptions are a few people who said that they'd only be in Hell temporarily because of God's mercy, not that religions outside of Islam can lead to Paradise, and this opinion is not an acceptable one). Almost all the traditional authorities of Christianity have believed that generally speaking those who don't accept Christian fundamentals are going to be in Hell (Catholicism at least gives you a lot more leeway with the eternal part of things but not so much with exclusivity, even the most radical statements of universalism in post-V2 Catholicism tend to be purgational and still frame Catholicism as the "fullness of the truth", other religions are according to these takes true to the extent that they share the fullness of the truth present in Catholicism).

And even if it was just a matter of believing Muhammad SAW was a prophet, you have to do that to become Muslim and, again, you have to become Muslim to go to Paradise, generally speaking.

>>22192120
>Crowley agrees with Guénon in a sense that he found out that the Golden Dawn was indeed pseudo-initiatory organization that led to the Schism to begin with that concerns the Third Order of Golden Dawn and "Secret Chiefs"
Anon, if this is the case then why is ThROA and Pyramidos rooted in a reconciliation of Neophyte and Adept rites in the GD? Why did he link up with George Cecil Jones, a GD member, to reform the GD along more or less similar lines?

>organization that fundamentally did not seem to have a very serious character
I'd call Westcott many things, but unserious isn't one of them.

>Internally, the principle role was developed by MacGregor and his wife (Bergson’s sister).
So much for Westcott, then.

>Only much later was Crowley introduced to it,
Crowley joined in the same year that Westcott retired. 98. Westcott's shadow of authority loomed so hard over Crowley and the AA that he holds Westcott above Mathers in the Knowledge Lection.

This seems...really fuckin' damning for Guenon's authority on any of this.

>>22192120
>>22192112
Not Ape and not goin into Atlantis stuff but... heretichristianon here:

Solar and lunar are both necessary. LHP and RHP. Olympian and Cthonian. I find Evola and Guenon both unbalanced in favor of the Yang which is perhaps why they are so popular on an edgy incel site like this.

>>22192132

You seem to lack the historical perspective to the origins of the Golden Dawn. Guénon's involvement with Papus and Martinist Order is extremely suspect. Crowley also found out the true nature of the "Secret Chiefs" of the order. Why do you think Guénon was literally hiding in egypt afraid of sorcerers and lived an extremely sheltered later life and blaming his physicai llness on certain magical 'attacks'?

The sinister implications exist with Guénon, simply by reading Les sept tetes du dragon vert (Seven Heads of the Green Dragon) and its connection to Martinist order who Guénon also called a sinister novel. It also mentions Annie Besant.

>S.I.M.P. The Green Dragon. You were absolutely right. Too late.
>To Nobody, the original one is the true testament of the tsarina: drawn on a wall with a pencil, below the swastika is written '17/30 A.u.p. 19-18?' and he claims he can find a way to decipher the message, but for this they need to meet the Patriarch of Constantinople, Basileus III. He also has a surprise for Legrand, walking about in his appartment, holding his arm, wary of any twitch in his muscles which would give away that Legrand would know about it; which he doesn't. So Legrand is genuinely surprised when Nobody takes the icon of Saint Seraphim of Sarov and removes the halo above his head: showing behind it a message carved in silver, obviously by the hand of the Tsarina:

>S.I.M.P stood for Superieur Inconnu, Maitre Philippe, ‘Unknown Superior, Master Philippe’. Was Master Philippe one of the 72 secret masters?

The picture itself bears Svastika (that is associated with the Dragon) and the Geomantic figure of Carcer that means a 'Cell' or 'Prison' thus implicating Qliphoth (see for example Crowley's Liber 231).

Guénon distanced himself from these influences after finding out the true nature of the 'secret chiefs' of these orders. Same could be perhaps said how Crowley discovered what had happened to the Golden Dawn

>Eleven are their classes, yet ten are they called; seven are the heads and yet an eighth head arises. Seven are the infernal palaces, yet do they include ten.

>>22192166
I dunno what any of that has to do with Guenon whiffing it on basic historical data he would have had relatively easy access to in his lifetime if he bothered to look at something like John St. John.

>Crowley also found out the true nature of the "Secret Chiefs" of the order.
...what does this mean?

>thus implicating Qliphoth (see for example Crowley's Liber 231).
I think most folks have gotten the Klipot entirely wrong and Crowley gives zero elaboration on his glyphs.

>Same could be perhaps said how Crowley discovered what had happened to the Golden Dawn
What in the absolute fuck do you mean "discovered"? He was the object of the Paris/London rift and published their papers afterward.

>>22192177
>...what does this mean?

For example, the floor of the vault of Adepti of the Hermetic Order of Golden Dawn was the Seven Headed Dragon and it came from certain Rosicrucian symbolism. Even Blavatsky's personal seal features the Dragon's Head with "Three Point Brothers" symbol.

Of course, anyone understanding the symbolism properly, the Three Point symbol can be constructed to combine the Geomantic figure or Carcer and it stands for CARCERORVM thus Qilphoth.

Of course, Blavatsky was herself unaware of the implications, for as even Crowley tells she was a merely a Magister Templi whose sphere was in Binah:
>For the Black Brothers lift not up their heads thus far into the Holy Chokmah, for they were all drowned in the great flood, which is Binah, before the true vine could be planted upon the holy hill of Zion.

The Three points are also referenced in the name "A∴A∴" who someone have misunderstood as being only a Masonic reference to Three Point Brothers, when it refers to the Supernals.

For the Golden Dawn attributions concerning the Paths issuing forth from their Hermetic Qabalah constitute the Carcerprovum.

Kether (620) + Aleph + Beth + Gimel = 626 = The Number of Qliphoth in Gematria

Even Crowley writes:
>For not until thou art made one with CHAOS canst thou begin that last, that most terrible projection, the three-fold Regimen which alone constitutes the Great Work.

>For Choronzon is as it were the shell or excrement of these three paths, and therefore is his head raised unto Dath, and therefore have the Black Brotherhood declared him to be the child of Wisdom and Understanding, who is but the bastard of the Svastika. And this is that which is written in the Holy Qabalah, concerning the Whirlpool and Leviathan, and the Great Stone

>>22192108
>If I can go get these traditions on tap, why do we need these secondary authors and their 1910-1930 takes
>I go to secondary sources [...] because they might be able to give me some insight from OUTSIDE that text tradition
For me, that's exactly what Evola does. He's not a Buddhist, he's a useful external writer on Buddhism who therefore didn't fall into some of the traps going on in that world at the time. Similarly, Guenon's books on symbols. Whether a more recent book is more useful often depends very much on what you're reading for. Are we trying to understand the esoteric aspect of it, practically, or historical details? I suspect the mileage vs Crowley might depend how much emphasis your personal practice places on ritual magic.

I can understand the sentiment, though, because I know you've Evola's book on Tantra which very much falls between two stools. It relies so heavily on The Serpent Power that he seems to feel constrained by the source material and check himself whenever he starts to bring his own experience into it ("Unfortunately I must follow the stereotypical and somewhat overly schematic description given by the texts.").

And then there's the social commentary aspect about modernity, which might have a different value. People, even religious people, these days do seem to struggle to orient themselves to what's going on.

>>22192193
>93
Anon I am extremely failing to see what this has to do with literally anything I've said.

Crowley speaks freely and regularly on his hot takes on Secret Chiefdom. If you have some kind of challenge to this, make it directly and to him.

>Blavatsky
Meh.

>merely a Magister Templi
Merely? There are only two Ordeals in the A.'.A.'., and a Master of the Temple is held in the same regard as Christ and Buddha, according to Liber 333, and you say "merely"? Fuck's sake my guy.

>when it refers to the Supernals
Given how significant exposition on the Supernals is in the whole of Crowley's corpus I dunno why you're framing this as some kind of Secret Key.

>Gematria
It is extremely annoying to look up other peoples gematria, are you using gematrix? If not, can you give me a breakdown on your source material(s) because I'm turning out fuckall on Heidrick's tables and Torahcalc (I'm getting the proper name Leah before I'm getting anything Klipot related).

>>For Choronzon is as it were the shell or excrement of these three paths, and therefore is his head raised unto Dath, and therefore have the Black Brotherhood declared him to be the child of Wisdom and Understanding, who is but the bastard of the Svastika. And this is that which is written in the Holy Qabalah, concerning the Whirlpool and Leviathan, and the Great Stone
Again I'm super fuckin' lost as to what the intent of bringing up any of this is in response to Guenon whiffing it on simple Crowley biographical info.

>>22192222
First of all, I don't come from occult background nor am I interested in such considerations. We were talking here about the nature of initiations and in terms of perennialism and Guénon there are three possible modes:

Initiation
Pseudo-initiation
Counter-initiation

>Merely? There are only two Ordeals in the A.'.A.'., and a Master of the Temple is held in the same regard as Christ and Buddha, according to Liber 333, and you say "merely"? Fuck's sake my guy.

Again, the combined ∴ ∴ constitute the Geomantic figure of Carcer that in latin means a Cell or Prison.

>Given how significant exposition on the Supernals is in the whole of Crowley's corpus I dunno why you're framing this as some kind of Secret Key.
>It is extremely annoying to look up other peoples gematria

Am I asking you some sort of supreme task? The Golden Dawn attributions show that three paths issuing from Kether are Aleph, Beth and Gimel. Kether is 620 in all traditional Qabalistic treatises or simply open Crowley's Sepher Sephiroth. Aleph is 1, Beth is 2, Gimel is 3. If you add Kether and these three paths you end up with 626 that is the number of the QLIPPOTH spelled as QLIPVTh:
Q=100
L=30
I=10
P=80
V=6
Th=400

But these Golden Dawn attributions are meaningless, especially for an Adept working upwards the tree for the path of Brazen Serpent is not that of the Fallen Universe that are Restriction
>These be they who be unclean and evil, even the distortion and perversion of the Sephiroth:
the fallen Restriction of the universe, the Rays of the coils of the stooping Dragon.

And the Restriction itself is CARCERORUM that is ∴ ∴.

>>22192278
>I don't come from occult background nor am I interested in such considerations
Then...why are you talking to me about them when I do?

>Kether is 620 in all traditional Qabalistic treatises
Yes I get that.

>QLIPVTh
Yeah that's valid. Pardon. Torahcalc SORELY needs an update. Um. I'm not super sure about Bill H. tho. That should really be there and idk that I have the stamina to puzzle out where he put it and why.

>But these Golden Dawn attributions are meaningless, especially for an Adept working upwards the tree for the path of Brazen Serpent is not that of the Fallen Universe that are Restriction
You just said you don't care about this stuff so I'm just going to stop asking you to break down how any of that is relevant to Guenon getting a bunch of simple Crowley biographical stuff wrong. Like, this entire rabbit trail is utterly nontopical to anything other than a point that you're justifying in your own head to someone who is probably less interested in your interpretation of the Klipot than you.

>>22192278
Meds

>>22192301
>You just said you don't care about this stuff so I'm just going to stop asking you to break down how any of that is relevant to Guenon getting a bunch of simple Crowley biographical stuff wrong. Like, this entire rabbit trail is utterly nontopical to anything other than a point that you're justifying in your own head to someone who is probably less interested in your interpretation of the Klipot than you.

What am I exactly getting wrong? Have you read Crowley's Moonchild?
Even it features the reference:
>On the table stood Burmese dragon of dark green bronze.

And the whole novel is also related to the Seven heads of the Green Dragon" ("Les Sept têtes du Dragon Vert) for both deal with certain

Golden Dawn got supposedly their charter from the Continental ´Golden Rose-Cross´ which stopped existing somewhere in the 1700s. It was replcated in 1780 by the "Initiate Brothers of Asia" in Vienna and their superiors were called "Fathers and Brothers of the Seven Unknown Churches of Asia". These should not be confused with some actual adepts living in Asia, but it is an direct reference to the Christian Seven Churches found in book of Revelation.

These are also directly related to "initiating" the Apocalypse of John Dee. Pic related with the word "Antichristus" includes the Seals and John Dee's Monas Hieroglyphica symbol.

In the novel Les sept têtes du dragon vert - la guerre des cerveaux ("The seven heads of the Green Dragon - the War of the Brains") by Teddy Legrand it is heavily implicated that the Swastika was brought from Tibet to Europe. The novel features right facing Swastika.

Look for pictures of the Swastika found in traditional Bön religion, that are all right faced. And as such it has no connection the Dharma wheel. But to something more sinister (Caput Draconis).

There are two forms of magickal energy or power: Internal or Kundalini force-Red Dragon, serpent power, associated with Heat and Sexual Power and internal operations of Alchemy and this concern Vajrayana . Then there is External or Odic force-green dragon that is associated with actual material universe and certain Hermetic theories and even the Chinese Feng-Shui (where certain Dragon/Forces are said to travel on certain paths in sacred geography),

This is for example a typical division of between The Red Dragon and Green Dragon in the outer symbolism. Some people understand Kundalini as a force as something only inside of man, while not understanding that the Great force of Vril or Green Dragon concerns also the Earth and material in a sense of macrocosmically. One cannot produce anything in the microcosm without affecting the macrocosm so to speak.

>People with their imperfect knowledge are unable to understand these great Cosmic Events. Culture that humankind has build in the last few thousand years is Swept away when this Great Cosmic Power of Natures decide to move.
- Karl Maria Wiligut

The Green Dragon.

>>22192301
Wanna place odds on him being a schizo alien conspiracist and/or an antinomian gnostic who is also antisemitic?

>>22192333
>333
^Speaking of the Stooping Dragon.

>Have you read Crowley's Moonchild?
Yeah. You keep spewing more densely packed info that has literally fuckall to do with anything I'm saying.

For the third time, none of what you just posted at me, and I mean absolutely none of it, has anything to do with Guenon utterly failing to accurately capture simple, well known at his time, biographical data. It betrays the fundamental unseriousness he accuses others of.

>>22192335
I don't really care what his deal is. Its staggering that someone would go so deep into left field to avoid acknowledging that, contrary to the assertion at the start of this post >>22192166, it actually appears to be Guenon who is painfully ignorant of Crowley's historical context(s). I dunno what to do if the response to that is a wall of word salad about Klipot and Geomancy and the Aster Argos dots and some weird takes on the Supernal and the Dragon's Head and Kundalini and Vril.

>>22192222
>It is extremely annoying to look up other peoples gematria
Another reason I prefer reading Evola to Crowley!

>>22192364
Crowley was mostly alright with it. A few superfluous Vs but he's no Ken Grant.

The actual problem here is that the most accurate Gematria source online went schizo as fuck about 7-8 years back and took all his tables down because DA JOOZ leaving me with Torahcalc which is fine because it captures diacritics but the cross reference output only gives you ten of ??? hits and clearly Bill H.'s tables have gaps and are set up in a way that's not super fuckin' easy to cross reference.

>>22192363
Kālacakra and Vajrayana empowerments concern internal operations. But all their theory of magick and meditation being a reverbatory, so that their "communing with God", is but a "communing with Self", and all their artifice directed to development of the powers in their own bodies and minds, as opposed to the Western idea of extending those powers to bear sway over others and have a direct power over nature.

However, by the emptying the 'ego', the Bön sorceres noticed that this sort of psychic corpses can become automatons and aid the Cause of their manipulators. Guénon also writes of this. And this is also one of the reasons such practices haver been widly introduced in the West in later years.

>weird takes on the Supernal and the Dragon's Head and Kundalini and Vril.

How are these weird takes? Have you done your homework? Even Abramelin's Forehead Lamen has the word "VRIHL" written on it and it stands for Vrihl that i.e. Magical Force.

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

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

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

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

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

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

And this concerns all Organized Religion that are under the nature of Carcerorum. Even Crowley found out that Mathers 'Secret Chiefs' were nothing else but those of Abramelin demons.

>>22192383
>Even Crowley found out that Mathers 'Secret Chiefs' were nothing else but those of Abramelin demons
Show me none (1) place Crowley says this plainly and unambiguously.
God fuckin' damn, dude.

>>22192383

>>22192396
Yes again, you haven't done your homework

https://www.tarrdaniel.com/documents/Thelemagick/publication/english/The_Temple_of_Solomon_the_King.html
>“He discovered that S.R.M.D., though a scholar of some ability and a magician of remarkable powers, had never attained complete initiation: and further had fallen from his original place, he having imprudently attracted to himself forces of evil too great and terrible for him to withstand.”[18]
>Note [18]
>[18] Presumably Abramelin Demons.

But this is no wonder

Crowley also writes with Mathers meeting with his chiefs:
>Yet strangely, the meetings were a great strain on Mathers' body, resulting in shortness
of breath, and a sense of what it must feel like when struck by lightning, precipitating bouts of nose-bleeds, cold sweats, and bleeding from the ears.

This is because they are associated with radioactivity, that is, extreme Dispersion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_rays

The seventh ray is associated with Radioactivity
>Seventh "Organisation and Ritual"[47] or "Ceremonial organization"[42] or "Ceremonial Magic or Order"[50] "Radioactivity"[42]

These Seven Rays have their beginning in the Seven Ah-Hi of Blavatsky https://theosophy.wiki/en/Ah-hi
>In the Theosophical literature, the Ah-hi are the highest Dhyāni-Chohans that appear on the scale of manifestation, to become the vehicles for the expression of the Universal Mind. They are seen as the seven primordial rays emanated from the Logos, and the source of all differentiated beings as they descend into the more and more material planes. Some synonyms used for them are "Primordial Seven" and "Dhyāni-Buddhas".

The parodical thing is that this is just infra-psychic phantasist projection of Blavatsky or some outright Satanism. Most likely the Theosophian "Ah-hi" are reference to the monstrous Sanskrit Ahi that is also associated with Rahu and the Stooping Dragon

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A4%85%E0%A4%B9%E0%A4%BF
https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/ahi
>Ahi (अहि) (also, Āśī) refers to a “venomous snake”, according to the Śrīmatottara-tantra, an expansion of the Kubjikāmatatantra:
>Ahi (अहि): Means ("snake"), Vritra was also known in the Vedas as Ahi
>Ahi (अहि).—m.
>(-hiḥ) 1. A snake or serpent. 2. The sun. 3. A traveller. 4. Lead. 5. The name of a demon: see vṛtrāsura. 6. A name of Rahu, the ascending node. E. āṅ prefixed to han to hurt, in Unadi affix; injuring all or every thing, the ā of āṅ is made short.

The Seven of course being nothing more than the Seven Heads of the Stooping Dragon, literal Qliphotic manifestation.

>>22192409
>having imprudently attracted to himself forces of evil too great and terrible for him to withstand.
Where does he say these are the secret chiefs?

>>22192409
>symptoms of schizophrenia:
>>inability to understand metaphors

>>22192409
Guénon also came to the conclusion in his book Theosophy: History of a Pseudo-religion concerning Mathers and Golden Dawn:
>The letter ends with these words which confer an official character: ‘Published by order of the Superior Sapere Aude , Cancellarius in Londinense, followed by this
rather enigmatic postscript: ‘Seven adepts who possess the elixir of long life are currently alive and meet every year in a different town.
>Was the Imperator of the G.D. one of these mysterious ‘seven
adepts?

>wonder whether the ‘seven adepts’ of Count MacGregor were their successors. Be that as it may, what is certain is that many of the associations claiming to be related to Rosicrucianism still make their members take an oath of allegiance to the Imperator.

CARCERORUM QLIPHOTHI.

>>22192413

You don't understand the implications that concern the origins of the Golden Dawn.

GD itself stands for Green Dragon

>>22190447
>>22191679
Greek religion is not "trad." Neither Evola nor Guenon assert that to be so. Evola alludes to solar symbolism and heroic ideals present in Greek society, but he is not referring to the "Periclean" period of Greek history when he refers to the Doric/Hyperborean migration. That said, there's no reason not to consult those sources if you feel that it is beneficial. Do you mind me asking what personal benefit you would derive from Hellenic Temple Law?
>>22190486
>but he would also say that you will come around to more or less his position the more you study anyway
I doubt he would say that. Perennialism is not something you "come to" by simply studying historical documents. If you think that's it, you've missed the basic essence.
> personally I think his metahistory based on the kali yuga idea is his weakest point
That's one of the few points which always provide a solid base of reference. It just depends how exactly it's interpreted, but it's genuinely undeniable that humanity is close to entering its phase of complete destruction. The only thing Evola disavowed (correctly) was claiming to know exactly how or when this would come about. History has been building up to greater and greater examples of destruction, and which one of us can see exactly when it will reach its limit.

>>22192417
much trad
very initiation
wow

Anyway, like I said, the shit said might be, technically, like discrete facts and correct, but it's just a jumble.

Anyone can go read the Knowledge Lection or Magick Without Tears or talk to any Enochian practitioner after like 2004 and see what the folks doing this stuff have to say about who or what the Secret Chiefs are.

The idea that this starts with Mathers is very stilted.

Here, https://sacred-texts.com/oto/lib61.htm

>>22192438
>Do you mind me asking what personal benefit you would derive from Hellenic Temple Law?
Seems like the kind of thing I'd like to know if I plan on using the Orphic Hymns or other contemporaneous evokational sources.

>>22192440
Madness is divinest sense
>t.schiz

>>22192458
I'm sorry mate I just struggle to take the man seriously if this is what I can expect. And not even from them, but from him. This is historiography that I wouldn't accept from a blogger or shitposter and I'm supposed to put this guy up there with any "serious" commentator/practitioner if he can't be bothered to spend the few shillings to get a copy of Equinox to see what the dude he heard so many rumors about had to say for himself before saying verifiable bullshit like:
>"Internally, the principle role was developed by MacGregor and his wife (Bergson’s sister). Only much later was Crowley introduced to it".
Why make shit up and posture about Eternal Truth?

>>22192481
The irony is that both Crowley and Guenon agreed on the nature of GD's 'Secret Chiefs'

It is you who has problem with it. Guenon is lucid on the matter

this thread finally convinced me that this shit, magic, perennialism, occult, etc., is the most retarded shit ever. I'll stick to philosophy

>>22192519
So instead of beating around the bush, I'll just ask, are you asserting that the Secret Chiefs are Abramelin and/or Lemegeton demons?

>>22192530
Probably for the best.

>>22192413
>>22192435
>>22192531
>>22192519
Anyhow its real quiet again so since Crowley and Guenon agree on the nature of the Secret Chiefs, you'll surely point me to where Guenon agrees wholesale MWT?

https://hermetic.com/crowley/magick-without-tears/mwt_09

>>22192530
Perennialism from the perspective of an agnostic is based because it can lead you to see religious truth, and religious traditions preserving them. And at best lead you toward believing and practicing the true religion.

Occult and most esoteric stuff is retarded though.

>>22192530
These gays aren't a good representation of it. It's some tripfag grandstanding because ten years of being some local authority namefag on a niche board has rotted his brain and he can't conceptualize conversation as anything but grandstanding and showing off anymore.

>>22192531

You don't seem to have a slightest clue of the nature of the initiation when it comes to Golden Dawn or OTO of Theodor Reuss, which gave was at least nominally connected to Papus, who Guénon was also a student of in the beginning.

What concerns transmission of initiations in these lodges concerns certain secret-ions. For example, the laboratory analysis done on Abramelin talismans of Crowley used by Solar Lodge revealed that the 'gluten' in question was traces of leukorrhea. Now, in the case of Solar Lodge, they used this formula quite effectively, but the thing is that Jean Brayton or "Nanny Goat" was eucorrhoea as the white eagle.

What do you think these 'Astral Masters' are? Why do you think the spiritists used terms such as Ectoplasm or Astral Fluid to describe these in the beginning?

Even Frater Shiva describes these "initiations" happening at Solar Lodge as having "radioactive quality"
https://www.parareligion.ch/sunrise/manson.htm

>I (Shiva) was present during many of the meetings described in the time period cited above. I was never present at an "initiation," but I stood solitary guard in the outer temple as the higher grades were being transmitted in another room. The radiating energy (which "leaked through the veil") had a peculiarly subjective "radioactive" quality. No drugs were ever used — Frater Aquarius warned of their dangers and was firmly set against them. I have repeated what she described to me about certain activities that took place behind that "veil," and it is the same rays and activities that she used when she transmitted this same information to me, and to several others (in the V°)

After the death of Aquarius, there was only Brayton left so she as the "Nanny Goat" had to assume the office of Baphomet and one can only wonder what sort of miasmatic and infra-psychic kalas bacterial vaginosis smegma constituted the physical vessel of these master. Not only that, this "Shiva" lineage still continues today and I think Frater Shiva is quite active in certan Tibetan transmission lineages.

Mathers believed in astral Secret Chiefs through the so-called “Horos incident”. You cannot even deny this.

The fact is that Mathers is on record in a letter to Florece Farr, dated 16 February 1900, says:
>“…that ‘Sapiens dominabitur astris’ [i.e. Fräulein Sprengel] is now in Paris and aiding me with the Isis movement”. This coincided with the time when Laura Horos and her husband Theo were guests at MacGregor Mathers’ home in Paris. Based on “the various letters that Mathers wrote” about Laura Horos Mr. Farrell, without citing any sources, infers that “he did not think Horos was Sprengel, just someone who could channel her” and that “she managed to convince Mathers” that she “was a Secret Chief who was behind the Golden Dawn” (p. 92)

Pic related is the lovely ol' Lady, Madam Horos (Horus?). She kinda reminds of old Jean, but a bit more on the heavy side.

>>22192530
This thread is proof that it is impossible to even discuss Evola on this board because no one except for lurkers have read him. If you want to read Evola, then read "The Hermetic Tradition" and then "Men Among the Ruins". Evola was first and foremost a political commentator whose politics were based in the metaphysical. It's quite surprising to see that some anons don't even seem to understand that he meant by Tradition.

>ctrf+f
>männerbund
>0 results
Why am I not even surprised? What have you retards even discussed? Nothing. Absolutely nothing but empty words in-order to appear well read.

Pic related is what Evola believed

kys, every single one of you, especially ape

>>22192610
>Frater Shiva
C'mon dude.
Answer the fucking question.

>>22192590
If you wanna try good faith interacting with the Great Wall of Schizoposting be my guest.

>>22192616
>Evola was first and foremost a political commentator whose politics were based in the metaphysical.
Amazing insight, thank you for sharing.

>>22192628
You say that, but the word "politc" has only been mentioned 10 times ITT. 2 times by me directly and 2 other times by you quoting me. This is not a thread about Revolt because Revolt is a political commentary. If you want to discuss Revolt, then discuss Revolt.

>>22191528
Holy truthnukerald

Anyone? Does anyone have an actual fucking opinion on Revolt Against the Modern World written by Julius Baron Evola? Have you guys even read it? Do you even understand what Evola sought to argue for in the book? Fucking hell, you guys are absolutely fucking hopeless.

>>22192631
I'll raise you a 'socio-', from Guido Stucco's introduction:
>Regardless of whether one agrees with these views or not, the fact remains that a mere sociopolitical assessment of Revolt would totally miss the essence and the scope of Evola's thought.

>>22192654
You want a gold star?

>>22192659
That'd be nice.

>>22192660

>>22192663
Oy vey :(

>>22192618
>Answer the fucking question.

You are in a perennialist/traditionalist thread, so we are going to use terminology used by Guénon.

You ask:
>are you asserting that the Secret Chiefs are Abramelin and/or Lemegeton demons?

What concerns Mathers concerns those Exempt Adepts, but whose error is too deep rooted to begin with, is that they develop properly to Black Brothers.

Like Guénon also observes:
>In Islamic esoterism it is said that one who presents himself at a certain 'gate', without having reached it by a normal and legitimate way, sees it shut in his face and is obliged to turn back, but not as a mere profane person, for he can never be such again, but as a saher (a sorcerer or a magician working in the domain of subtle possibilities of an inferior order).* It would be impossible to put the position more clearly; it is a question of the 'infernal' way trying to oppose the 'celestial' way, and actually achieving the outward appearances of opposition, although such appearances can only be illusory; and, as was pointed out earlier when speaking of the false spirituality in which some beings, who are engaged in a sort of 'inverted realization', lose themselves, this way can only end at last in the total 'disintegration' of the conscious being and in its final dissolution.

In Crowley's terminology this total disintegration of being is called 'dispersion' and Crowley associates with dispersion of Choronzon, "Demon of Dispersion".


It's eerily close how that above quote Guénon reads like 1:1 of Crowley describing this process.

The Cry of the 18th Aethyr, Which is Called ZEN
>The quotation, accepting annihilation, instantly destroys the myriad of insane images which hastened to occupy the vacuum created by the leap of the Exempt Adept into the Abyss. Had he faltered, he would have become — against his will — a “Black Brother”. But this being involuntary, he would not have attempted to maintain his coherence, as the Black Brothers do. He would therefore, have been destroyed at once; that is, to outward appearance he would have become a demented babbler. Spiritists present this phenomenon, on a much lower plane, and in a diluted form; though, with them as with the average Theosophist, there is usually a certain degree of obsession by pet phantoms — a “Chinese Guide,” or “Koot Hoomi,” or what not — to lend a species of semi-organized structure to the legions of disconnected ideas that throng their disintegrated gray matter.

Notice that "Koot Hoomi" reference of Crowley, an astral master and considered a "Secret Chief" by some. This is exactly what happened to Mathers.

I hope I cannot get anymore clear what sort of "Secret Chiefs" we are talking about here. I've provided you enough material to prove my point. Guénon and Crowley agree with me. You don't.

>>22192690
How does any of that have anything to do with what Crowley says here? >>22192569
>https://hermetic.com/crowley/magick-without-tears/mwt_09

>>22192690
If you knew who they were they wouldn't be secret, silly.

>>22192692

There is a whole chapter by Guénon called "Concerning the Unknown Superiors & the Astral" in his great book Studies in Freemasonry and the Compagnonnage.

I am not going to paste the whole chapter here.

You seem to have very weird ideas about initiation, secret chiefs, astral masters and where orders derive their authority from. Not only that, when I talk of this subject, you seem to have this sort of superficial, encyclopedia type of wikipedia knowledge and your only replies are of the sort:
>Crowley never said that!

And then you are provided quotes that prove again and again that he in fact said that and you change subject

>>22191528
Pavement Ape BTFO!

>>22187422
I read and thoroughly enjoyed Zarathustra. Am I ready for this?

>>22192590
>It's some tripfag grandstanding because ten years of being some local authority namefag on a niche board has rotted his brain and he can't conceptualize conversation as anything but grandstanding and showing off anymore.
Kek

>>22192998
It's not that hard of a read, idk why people say it is. You just need to know some ancient civs and traditions. I read Guénon after the OP and had no trouble. I re-read Revolt and verified that i understood it correctly the first time. It's a great book.

>>22192709
He doesn't know what initiation is, he thinks it means you join a group and they do a "ritual" and you're initiated

This book is excellent. I'm on his chapter on knights right now consider this interesting section

This is not all; there is a deeper aspect of European chivalry worth mentioning. The knights dedicated their heroic deeds to a woman; this devotion assumed such extreme forms in European chivalry that we should regard them as an absurd and aberrant phenomenon, if taken literally. To avow unconditional faithfulness to a woman was one of the most recurrent themes in chivalrous groups; according to the "theology of the castles" there was little doubt that a knight who died for his "woman” shared the same promise of blessed immortality achieved by a crusader who had died to liberate the Temple. In this context, faithfulness to God and to a woman appear to coincide. According to some rituals, the neophyte knight’s "woman” had to undress him and lead him to the water, so that he could be purified before being ordained. On the other hand, the heroes of daring feats involving a "woman,” such as Tristan and Lancelot, are simultaneously knights of King Arthur committed to the quest for the Grail, and members of the same order of "heavenly knights” to which the Hyperborean "Knight of the Swan” belonged.

The truth is that behind all this there were esoteric meanings that were not disclosed to the judges of the Inquisition or to ordinary folks; thus, these meanings were often conveyed in the guise of weird customs and of erotic tales. In a number of instances what has been said about the knight’s "woman” also applies to the "woman” celebrated by the Ghibelline "Love’s Lieges,” which points to a uniform and precise traditional symbolism. The woman to whom a knight swears unconditional faithfulness and to whom even a crusader consecrates himself; the woman who leads to purification, whom the knight considers his reward and who will make him immortal if he ever dies for her—that woman, as it has been documented in the case of the "Worshipers of Love” or "Love’s Lieges,” is essentially a representation of "Holy Wisdom,” or a perceived embodiment, in different degrees, of the "transcendent, divine woman” who represents the power of a transfiguring spirituality and of a life unaffected by death. This motif, in turn, is part of a complete traditional system; ....

yeah I know some guys who worship "transcendent, divine women" today. they are called WEABOOS

>>22191528
faggot got laid out

Le bump

>>22187355
a shit book

>>22193853
Refuted by Guénon