Traditionalism discussion

[Anonymous No.11078997]

>Last thread
>>11049573
>First thread
>>11025235

Thread for discussing the ideas and books of thinkers associated with the Traditionalist school, sometimes also known as the Perennialist school. Including but not limited to:
- Rene Guenon
- Martin Lings
- Seyyed Hossein Nasr
- Frithjof Schuon
- Ananda K. Coomaraswamy
- Julius Evola
- Titus Burckhardt
- Philip Sherrard
- Marco Pallis etc
Also thinkers indirectly affiliated, influenced by, or similar to Traditionalism:
- Henry Corbin
- William Chittick
- Mircea Eliade
- Arthur Avalon etc

Here is a short video summary of what Traditionalists believe:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kDtabTufxao

Here's a documentary on Perennialism:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=135s&v=P_CNg4dpU54

An hour long interview with Julius Evola (sorry about the stupid intermission):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=611s&v=QiCtdi5nCoA

And lastly, a talk by the most eminent Traditionalist around today:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fIjW1z-ZAX8

[Anonymous No.11079004]

Here's a short text on the exoteric-esoteric distinction:
http://www.fatuma.net/text/Haqiqa_and_Sharia_in_Islam_by_Rene_Guenon.pdf

Here's an exchange of letters between an Islamic Traditionalist and a Christian critical of traditionalism, specifically debating over the idea of non-dualism (I particularly enjoyed this exchange):
http://www.sacredweb.com/online_articles/sw17_bolton-upton.pdf

pic related is the Guenon chart.

[Anonymous No.11079019]

Copy pasting some posts that people found helpful on advaita. Thanks again to the advaita poster:

Adi Shankara's Prasthanatrayi commentaries (his most important works)

>Commentary on 8 of the Muhkya Upanishads part 1
https://archive.org/details/EightUpanishadsWithSankarabhashyamSwamiGambhiranandaVol11989

>Commentary on 8 of the Muhkya Upanishads part 2
https://archive.org/details/EightUpanishadsWithSankarabhashyamSwamiGambhiranandaVol21966

>Brahma Sutra Bhasya (commentary) of Shankaracharya
https://archive.org/details/BrahmaSutraSankaraBhashyaEngVMApte1960

>The Bhagavad-Gita with commentary of Shankaracharya
https://archive.org/details/Bhagavad-Gita.with.the.Commentary.of.Sri.Shankaracharya


Adi Shankaras non-commentary Prakarana Granthas (philosophical treatises)

>Atma Bodha (Self-knowledge)
http://www.lovebliss.eu/Download/Atma%20Bodha.pdf

>Upadesasahasri (A Thousand Teachings)
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Sri_Shankaracharya-Upadeshasahasri%20-%20Swami%20Jagadananda%20%281949%29%20[Sanskrit-English].pdf

>Aparokshanubhuti (Direct experience)
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.216548

>Vivekachudamani (Crest Jewel of Discrimination)
https://ia800108.us.archive.org/18/items/Vivekacudamani/Vivekacudamani.pdf


Non-Adi Shankara Advaita texts

>Voga Vasistha
https://archive.org/details/VasisthasYoga

>The Ashtavakra Gita
https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html

>The Ribhu Gita
https://archive.org/stream/RibhuGitaRamaMoorthyH./Ribhu%20Gita%20%20Rama%20Moorthy%20H.%20#page/n1/mode/2up

>Avadhuta Gita
https://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Song-of-the-Avadhut-by-Dattatreya.pdf

>Advaita Bodha Deepika (The lamp of non-deal knowledge)
https://selfdefinition.org/ramana/Advaita-Bodha-Deepika.pdf

>Drg-Drsya-Viveka (An inquiry into the Nature of the 'Seer' and the 'Seen')
https://vivekananda.net/PDFBooks/Others/DrgDrsyaViveka1931.pdf

>The Tripura Rahasya (Mystery Beyond the Trinity)
https://www.beezone.com/Ramana/tripura%20rahasya.pdf


Ashtavakra Gita for the TLDR, Adi Shankara's commentaries + Yoga Vasistha can be considered core texts, Shankara's non-commentary works and the other non-Shankara texts complement the core ones

[Anonymous No.11079030]

>>11079019
cont:
>Of the works you've listed, where does one begin?

Read the Ashtavakra Gita for a quick TLDR. After that either read the Yoga Vasistha or read through the core texts of Advaita (Shankara's Prasthanatrayi commentaries, roughly 2,000 pages). After you read one of those read the other. The prasthanatrayi texts that Shankara comments on are earlier than the Yoga Vasistha but the Yoga Vasistha may slightly pre-date Adi Shankara. Reading both Vasistha and his commentaries would round out your understanding exceptionally well. After that really any order.

There are two high quality abbreviations translation of Vasistha, both by the same guy, my other link has the longer one. The original Sanskrit has roughly the same # of verses as the bible and the only full English translation was awful so I'd not recommend it.


>How would you contrast traditional metaphysics in the West with Advaita Vedanta? As for initiation

A. Coomaraswamy wrote an excellent article on that subject titled 'Vedanta and Western Tradition'. I couldn't do it more justice than him.

http://www.worldwisdom.com/public/viewpdf/default.aspx?article-title=The_Vedanta_and_Western_Tradition_by_Ananda_Coomaraswamy.pdf

[Anonymous No.11079040]

For a basic intro to Islam from a traditionalist standpoint (more of a conceptual overview than a practical one):
>"Islam and the Destiny of Man" by Charles Le Gai Eaton (pic related)
>"Islam: Ideals and Reality" by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
Are two great introductions from traditionalists.

Also check out this list by Abdal Hakim Murad (aka Tim Winter):
https://splendidpearls.org/2015/03/30/shaykh-abdal-hakim-murads-book-recommendations/

Another resource you might want to look into are online lectures. Some people to look out for on youtube:
- Hamza Yusuf
- Abdal Hakim Murad (Tim Winter)
- Ali Ataie
- Jonathan AC Brown

Here are some helpful videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60JboffOhaw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no5RCHRbknk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gi1EwbQHTVg&t=1154s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VUwBvJF9vY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VD5hNos1eJM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZlEtV0rDPA
>Foundations of Islam Series by Hamza Yusuf
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7DDC6E4A27E031CC
>Understanding Islam Series by Abdal Hakim Murad
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL85C4200AAB2EDAFB

[Anonymous No.11079052]

Any posters contributing other resources for learning about traditionalism, especially oc, or resources learning about the various world traditions are appreciated.

[Anonymous No.11079136]

Where do i start with Coomaraswamy? I'm interested in his stuff about art and architecture.

[Anonymous No.11079139]

I’m finding these threads extremely helpful thanks OP

[Anonymous No.11079152]

An interesting paper investigating whether the Quran contains the doctrine of non-dualism, to which the author argues yes.

http://www.perennialfoundation.org/resources/Documents/PDFs/Peter%20Samsel%20-%20Islam%20and%20the%20Vision%20of%20Non-Duality%20(1).pdf

Sufism and Taoism by Toshihiko Izutsu (book was praised by Nasr)

https://archive.org/stream/ToshihikoIzutsuSufismAndTaoism/Toshihiko%20Izutsu%20-%20Sufism%20and%20Taoism#page/n1/mode/2up

[Anonymous No.11079161]

>>11072011
Thanks for responding. Any luck? I've found some who wrote about it but in untranslated Russian, which alas I cannot read.

[Anonymous No.11079203]

Guenon's essay on Māyā from 'Studies in Hinduism' is good. Some vedantic texts can be a little confusing insofar as they don't make explicitly clear the exact nature of the relation of the 'illusion' or the phenomenal world to the Supreme Principal; or they explain it through metaphors. Reading this made some of the vedantic texts I've read a little clearer.

[Anonymous No.11079227]

>>11079161
Unfortunately I can't find it. I'll check my bookmarks tab later, inshallah, as I may have saved the page.

[Anonymous No.11079230]

>>11078997
>Here's a documentary on Perennialism:

I'm halfway through this and it's fucking awful so far

[Anonymous No.11079234]

>>11079230
Yeah, it's kind of cheesy, but it's the only documentary of its kind that I know.

[Anonymous No.11079239]

>>11078018 here
thanks OP

[Anonymous No.11079263]

>>11079227
>>11079161
It might be this guy that I read about. Wish I could find that screencap.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Béla_Hamvas

[Anonymous No.11079342]

>>11079019
>>11079030
>Read the Ashtavakra Gita for a quick TLDR.
For those who have already started their journey towards realization of the Self, you should heed the following warning.
>From Swami Chinmayananda's commentary of the Astavakra Gita: "In General Introduction and later in the commentary, it is repeatedly emphasised that Astavakra Gita is meant only for those advanced sadhaka-s who have purified their minds through sadhana and are engaged in meditation. To such committed students alone would this book show light and be a true guide. To the unprepared, unmature students, the subtle thoughts contained in this Gita can be explosively dangerous and result in erasing their faith entirely from the higher reality."

[Anonymous No.11079344]

>>11079263
Even if it's not what you or I were looking for in particular, he looks pretty interesting and worth checking out. Thanks brother.

[Anonymous No.11079379]

>>11079263

http://juliaandpetersherwood.com/bela-hamvas/

This website says the only english translations of his work is his collection of essays 'Trees' and the book 'The Philosophy of Wine' (available on amazon). I tried looking but couldn't find any pdfs online.

[Anonymous No.11079412]

>>11079342
We just talked about this in the last thread. Having an understanding of the principals of Advaita helps, but as long as you don't treat the text as the single infallible authority on Advaita there is really no harm in reading it. A familiarity with Advaita would help someone avoid misunderstanding some of the ambiguous or confusing parts, but if you don't understand it or form a mistaken perception just read the core Advaita texts afterwards which will clear up any confusion.

That warning should be taken more as a precaution that the text holds a lot more than it appears at first (which is true); and that in order to truly understand it you should have familiarity with Advaita and experience practicing it's teachings. Nevertheless, it serves as a great introduction to Advaita thought and presents many aspects of it with great clarity. If people read it as an intro and misunderstand a few parts they can always reread it again later after studying other Advaita texts; it's not a big deal.

[Anonymous No.11079655]

Anyone here read Pope Francis's Laudato Si encyclical? It's an interesting read.

>Patriarch Bartholomew has spoken in particular of the need for each of us to repent of the ways we have harmed the planet, for “inasmuch as we all generate small ecological damage”, we are called to acknowledge “our contribution, smaller or greater, to the disfigurement and destruction of creation”. He has repeatedly stated this firmly and persuasively, challenging us to acknowledge our sins against creation: “For human beings… to destroy the biological diversity of God’s creation; for human beings to degrade the integrity of the earth by causing changes in its climate, by stripping the earth of its natural forests or destroying its wetlands; for human beings to contaminate the earth’s waters, its land, its air, and its life – these are sins”. For “to commit a crime against the natural world is a sin against ourselves and a sin against God".
...
>Some forms of pollution are part of people’s daily experience. Exposure to atmospheric pollutants produces a broad spectrum of health hazards, especially for the poor, and causes millions of premature deaths. People take sick, for example, from breathing high levels of smoke from fuels used in cooking or heating. There is also pollution that affects everyone, caused by transport, industrial fumes, substances which contribute to the acidification of soil and water, fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, herbicides and agrotoxins in general. Technology, which, linked to business interests, is presented as the only way of solving these problems, in fact proves incapable of seeing the mysterious network of relations between things and so sometimes solves one problem only to create others.
>Other indicators of the present situation have to do with the depletion of natural resources. We all know that it is not possible to sustain the present level of consumption in developed countries and wealthier sectors of society, where the habit of wasting and discarding has reached unprecedented levels. The exploitation of the planet has already exceeded acceptable limits and we still have not solved the problem of poverty
...
>It is not enough, however, to think of different species merely as potential “resources” to be exploited, while overlooking the fact that they have value in themselves. Each year sees the disappearance of thousands of plant and animal species which we will never know, which our children will never see, because they have been lost for ever. The great majority become extinct for reasons related to human activity. Because of us, thousands of species will no longer give glory to God by their very existence, nor convey their message to us. We have no such right.

http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html

[Anonymous No.11079730]

what are y'alls thoughts on Survive the Jive/ Thomas Rowsell?

[Anonymous No.11079865]

>>11079730
I like him, generally good commentaries/videos

[Anonymous No.11079907]

>>11079655
Seyyed Hossein Nasr has written a lot on the subject of ecology, preserving nature, etc

[Anonymous No.11079983]

>>11079730
OP here, I enjoy his channel, though it's been a while since I've watched anything from him.

[Anonymous No.11080025]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysD6d8YSfpY

>wagecucks btfo

[Anonymous No.11080073]

>>11079052
>morning of the magicians mixed in with Guenon, Upton, and Fr. Seraphim Rose

Just...no.

Also, what are some of the best resources on Shi'a Islam? I always feel drawn to it. I spend a year or so at a Sunni masjid and it just never clicked. I assume Nasr has some good texts but what else?

[Anonymous No.11080108]

>>11080073
Allama Tabatabai's book (translated by Nasr) is really good. pic related

[Anonymous No.11080117]

so were Rosicrucians and Hermetism the last dying breaths of european paganism?
inb4 freemasonry, no

[Anonymous No.11080124]

>>11080073
Also here's a documentary on a communuty of French Shi'a. It's nice because it shows how Islam can fuse with local culture.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=817s&v=GJyOxkT3APA

Btw I'm not encouraging you to become Shi'a, I personally believe some of their ideas are over the top, but they're still Muslims.

[Anonymous No.11080128]

Daily reminder perennialists aren't real traditionalists

[Anonymous No.11080130]

>>11080117
define "paganism"

[Anonymous No.11080149]

>>11080128
Depends what you mean by either of those terms. If by perennialists you mean the wishy washy relativist varieties with no grounding in metaphysics then you are correct. If by traditionalist you mean the modern deviation ususally known as fundamentalism then you would be correct.

[Anonymous No.11080194]

>>11080130
pre abrahamic traditions within europe and it's continental empires (rome).
I just finished mystery of the grail and he went quite in depth about how most of the symbols for the matter of britain are actually welsh, irish, and norse relics left over. He mentions something about how hermetism is related to greek mysteries and egyptian syncretism, but it was a small bit and I am still yet to read Hermetic Tradition. He mentions Rosicrucians for one chapter but not much more.
Basically last remnants of pre christian symbolism, spirituality, and rites.

[Anonymous No.11080240]

>>11080194
In terms of historical derivation some of the imagery might trace itself to this or that "pagan myth", but the whole point of symbolism is to point toward supra-historical (metaphysical) truths so it seems like a useless excercise to catalogue which symbols come from where, unless you're:
- a student of history and seeking erudition for its own sake
- want to compare the associations of various symbols in different times/places for the sake of clarifying the full scope of their meaning.

[Anonymous No.11080469]

>>11080240
Well the thing is with supra-historical truths is that even now in the Traditionalist community there is a split between them with the Evola side taking the dichotomy of Solar and Lunar vs the Shuon transcendent unity of All religions

[Anonymous No.11080514]

>>11080469
There are different types of traditions, to an extent, but they point to and lead to the same Truth. Check out Guenon's "Symbols of Sacred Science" for a lot of mind blowing material on Solar/Lunar symbolism and priestly/warrior initiations, on the one hand, and polar/axial symbolism on the other, and how they relate.

[Anonymous No.11080519]

>reading the Enneads
>get to this passage
i cry every tiem

[Anonymous No.11080530]

>>11080124
>I personally believe some of their ideas are over the top,
Just curious if you could expand upon this.

[Anonymous No.11080552]

so basically traditionalists only like hinduism and islam?

[Anonymous No.11080567]

>>11080530
Their beliefs on the infallibility of the Imams goes to absurd lengths. They characterize them as ubermenschen that know the future and can never make mistakes ever. They also believe in the perfect infallibility of prophets where the Sunnis have a more nuanced view relating to their infallibility, i.e. they sometimes commit minor sins and seek forgiveness afterward but don't commit major ones. They are also known to curse some of the Prophet's (pbuh) closest companions (may God be pleased with them all) and his favorite wife, Aisha (may God be pleased with her), a wife he was literally told to marry by God in a dream. In the beginning I took in an interest in Shi'a Islam but when I realized that some of the most eminent students of the Imams (may God be pleased with them all) were founders of sunni madhabs (e.g. Maliki) I realized that the best way to follow them would be to just be a sunni. I don't see any reason to believe that the sayings they attribute to the Imams are authentic.

[Anonymous No.11080580]

>>11080567
To add: but Allah (swt) knows best, may he forgive me for my mistakes.

[Anonymous No.11080586]

>>11080567
do you really have to do that extra shit on 4chan bud

[Anonymous No.11080679]

>>11080552
>so basically traditionalists only like hinduism and islam?

No, Traditionalists have written favorably about sects or aspects of almost every major religion but those two feature prominently in Traditionalist writings because (these are simplified TLDRs of the reasons but still basically true)

1) Hinduism has one of the largest bodies of metaphysical texts (and huge amounts of further commentaries on them) that examine the subject from virtually every angle, Advaita Vedanta is regarded as most Traditionalists as being some of the purest exposition of metaphysical doctrine there is. Also because of it's immense antiquity, most regard it as the first established tradition that still survives in the modern world, giving it much authority.

2) Islam is favored because it's seen as the tradition most accessible to westerners, because it's recent appearance in history lends credence to the view that there are unbroken chains of initiation going back to Muhammad and his companions; and lastly because there are immense parallels between Sufism and Daoism, Vedanta etc that allows one to make a credible case that Sufism and Islam by extension teach the same perennial truth or Sanatana Dharma as the other traditions.

[Anonymous No.11080709]

>>11080679
good post. cheers anon

[Anonymous No.11080742]

Does anyone have a chart similar to this for Hellenic or Roman polytheism?

If not, I beg someone to make one.

[Anonymous No.11080763]

>>11080742
Seconding this but for Germanic paganism

[Anonymous No.11080766]

>>11080763
There is already one for Germanic m8

[Anonymous No.11080851]

>>11080766
From what I read, Tyr had some good articles from a metaphysical point of view, one of the authors had a good understanding of Evola and Guenon.
Alos bad translation for the Poetic Edda, they both are missing a book each. The Oxford classics translation is not missing any books. Though I do recommend Crawfords translation of the Volsungs, very comfy

[Anonymous No.11080867]

>>11080552
The Pacific Northwest (Northern BC and Alaska) is a pretty interesting place right now in that many independent nations are currently reviving their traditions, cultural practices, nations, etc. while also standing against the current capitalist destruction of the environment. On an agricultural level, the practices of farming, seasonal migration, clam beds, etc. etc. are in many ways superior to western farming techniques and land ownership ideas.

It's still largely ignored outside of places with a geographic/racial tie to those traditions. That said, any would be traditionalist in the PNW would do good by themselves by learning woodcarving and getting initiated into some living artistic tradition. That's what I hope to do once I finish my studies, it's one of the few living traditions in the Americas. Although it's not an evangelical tradition, there are occasional cases of white people being initiated into different nations, Jordan Peterson being an example of this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZZYMVvZwLQ

It's worth warning that the above documentary is somewhat idealized, the Haida in general are really good at projecting a certain cultural image and dominance, however they were also war loving slave owners that used to raid much more peaceful and decent nations along the coast. In general, there's a tendency among a lot of white people to idealize native groups as some sort of perfect noble savage, and this is far from the truth. Don't be naive. That said, the actions these nations are currently taking to restore traditions are worth looking into, because they stand against a world spirit which seeks to destroy tradition and atomize everyone into ahistorical consumers. There's also a tendency among North Americans to view history as something less than 300 years old, while these nations are keeping alive traditions and histories which are tied to the geography and go back thousands of years.

[Anonymous No.11080895]

>>11080552
Schuon was extremely into Native American stuff.

[Anonymous No.11081015]

going on a 4 hour bus ride morrow and I just finished Mystery of the Grail.
What should I read
-intro to the study of hindu doctrines
-the hermetic tradition
-introduction to magic
I'm leaning towards intro to magic due to similar style to mystery and seems more related compared to hindu or hermetic

[Anonymous No.11081026]

>>11079203
>Some vedantic texts can be a little confusing insofar as they don't make explicitly clear the exact nature of the relation of the 'illusion' or the phenomenal world to the Supreme Principal; or they explain it through metaphors.
Or you can read some books written by French pomos to get the idea.

[Anonymous No.11081045]

>let's just pretend kant and everyone after him didnt exist

[Anonymous No.11081056]

>>11081045
shut up traditional tests are true because they say all roughly the same thing and are old ok?

[Anonymous No.11081125]

>>11081015
>intro to the study of hindu doctrines

Read this, it will prepare you for reading Guenon's other books and will also help you appreciate/understand Evola better (as he was massively influenced by Guenon's early books)

>>11081045
Except that the Traditionalists don't ignore Kant but instead shit all over him and point out exactly why he was wrong, the writings of Guenon and Schuon in particular blow him the fuck out.

[Anonymous No.11081141]

>>11081125
>Schuon in particular blow him the fuck out.
Only thing I've read by Schuon is Understanding Islam. Do any of his books deal with Kant explicitly, and if so which?

[Anonymous No.11081145]

>>11081015
the edgy evola phase version of me wants to tell you "intro to magic", the current mature traditionalist me says listen to this guy
>>11081125

[Anonymous No.11081216]

>>11081141
>Do any of his books deal with Kant explicitly, and if so which?

His book 'Logic and Transcendence' does, pdf link below, I haven't read it but have seen other anons talk about how he BTFO's Kant in it.

http://traditionalhikma.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Logic-and-Transcendence-by-Frithjof-Schuon.pdf

from a review of the above book:

>The chapter “Rationalism, Real and Apparent” shows us the philosophical roots of these
above-mentioned errors through a shattering analysis—in the true sense—of sensationalism and
criticism that should be required reading in all university philosophy courses. Reason functions
by the light of the Intellect, but Kantian critical philosophy in striving to reach an integral
relativism—which is “a contradiction in itself and thus a pure absurdity”—becomes a play of
mirrors that throws everything into subjective doubt and leads inevitably to existentialism. These
philosophers in their “arrogant unconsciousness” would “kill with their petty vitriolic thoughts”
the “great spokesmen of metaphysics”. It totally escapes their atrophied imagination that logic
“is perfectly consistent only when exceeding itself”. Integral rationalism in its turn is a
consequence of the tendency in Aristotelian metaphysics—unlike that of Plato and Plotinus—
towards exteriorization; “the Aristotelian Pandora’s box is scientism coupled with
sensationalism”. The mischief comes from the Church’s having lent an interested ear—a factor
favoring the development of the Renaissance mentality.

http://www.frithjofschuon.info/uploads/pdfs/articles/88.pdf

also pic related is Guenon shitting on Kant in 'Intro to Hindu Doctrines'

[Anonymous No.11081349]

Guenon BTFO

[Anonymous No.11081352]

>>11081216
Some examples of Shuon's points, the chapter is longer than this. Really the whole book deals at length with how modern philosophy is incredibly blinkered when it comes to understanding genuinely transcendent knowledge.

[Anonymous No.11081467]

>>11081349
What a brainlet post. First off Traditionalism is not modern at all, but repeats and is predicated upon virtually all of the same points made by Adi Shankara in the 8th century in addition to various early Chinese and Islamic thinkers.

>divine duty to erase himself and return to god or Oneness
It's actually more like ignorance disappearing and what always was revealing itself for what it always was and is.

>Knowledge, what is to be known, and the knower — these three do not exist in reality. I am the spotless reality in which they appear because of ignorance. 2.15
>Truly dualism is the root of suffering. There is no other remedy for it than the realisation that all this that we see is unreal, and that I am the one stainless reality, consisting of consciousness. 2.16
>I am pure awareness though through ignorance I have imagined myself to have additional attributes. By continually reflecting like this, my dwelling place is in the Unimagined. 2.17

>can never truly know with the faculties given to him as a human being
spoken like a truly ignorant person

>at heart it is veiled nihilism
A key sign of people who fundamentally misunderstand eastern doctrines is that they try to paint Buddhism and sometimes Vedanta as nihilistic when it is anything but; this indicates that they are bound by attachment to the illusionary and contingent and that they experience fear at the thought of losing it and death. True knowledge is boundless, limitless bliss, free from any conditions or bondage.

>fail to see the importance of this world and our duty to our people and nations
The traditional cultures all take this much more importantly than the west, which can be proved among other methods simply by looking at the state of the modern west. The various traditions all contain extensive treatises on how to properly govern, guide and protect a people, nation, kingdom etc. See the works of Confucius, the Laws of Manu, the many dozens of other ancient Sanskrit works on governing, jurisprudence etc. All things are considered in their proper place and according to their Dharma.

Lastly Corbin took a huge interest in Sufism which largely teaches the same metaphysics as Vedanta, Daoism and other traditions so it's silly for that guy to mention him as a foil to Guenon (who became a Sufi btw).

[Anonymous No.11081547]

>>11081349
>>11081467

Also,

>being unable to come up with a coherent critique of Guenon on your own and being forced to rely on 1-star amazon reviews to make your argument for you (lol)

[Anonymous No.11081560]

>>11081352
dumbest sequence of pseudery I've ever read

[Anonymous No.11081576]

>>11081560
Attempting to use the charge of pseudery as a rebuttal in itself without actually responding to or refuting any of the points that were made is itself an example of pseudery

[Anonymous No.11081582]

>>11081467
>>11081547
The fact that you need to make this exact assmad megapost every time someone disagrees with you, in every one of these threads, was funny at first but now I realize you are compelled to do it by your own autism. You are trapped in your autism. It even forces you to make effeminate reddit snarky comments.

Seriously dude, consider getting some help. You miss obvious tongue-in-cheek stuff a lot, you wig out at the drop of a hat, and your vindictiveness comes across as womanish, petty, spiteful etc. You're doing more to turn people away from these texts than toward them.

[Anonymous No.11081606]

>>11081467
I copypasta'd your response as a comment to the reviewer. I hope you don't mind.

[Anonymous No.11081617]

>>11081576
posting half baked arguments from pseuds as a way to justifying not reading and understanding Kant warrants only scorn
Also reasoning is bad and this is self evident metaphysical knowledge because I said so
>>11081582
He's one of the funniest pseuds around here, he clearly spends a lot of time here making these long posts accompanied by formulaic eastern pic while constantly talking about not being attacked to the material lol. My second favorite after the guy who makes those long ass post decrying the state of modern civilization with those "dionisian blast" as he calls it.

[Anonymous No.11081631]

>>11081617
>Also reasoning is bad and this is self evident metaphysical knowledge because I said so

because shankara said so** (so i say)

fixed

[Anonymous No.11081638]

>>11081582
>post lower quality stuff guiz, /lit/ was never good heuheuheuheu

Fuck off

[Anonymous No.11081662]

>>11081582

>The fact that you need to make this exact assmad megapost every time someone disagrees with you,

I'm not mad, I find it amusing when people make half-assed attempts at criticizing Guenon and I enjoy taking them apart when I browse /lit/ and happen to come across them. You have no idea which posts have been mine or not in these threads and others. There are people on /lit/ who have read much more of the Traditionalist/primary texts than me who often make more in-depth reaponses and critiques.

>You are trapped in your autism.
>effeminate reddit snarky comments.
>womanish, petty, spiteful etc.

I especially liked the part where you just threw togather a bunch of ad hominems without making a single point or argument one could respond to.

[Anonymous No.11081670]

>>11081662
>I especially liked the part where you just threw togather a bunch of ad hominems without making a single point or argument one could respond to.
Logic is bad and this is self evident because I said so

[Anonymous No.11081691]

>>11081617
my favorite is the dedicated anti-semite on this board who chimps out the moment a jew's name appears in the catalog, please don't compare me with evola/guenon sperg, totally different and unlike him I have talent

[Anonymous No.11081708]

>>11081691
>my favorite is the dedicated anti-semite on this board who chimps out the moment a jew's name appears in the catalog
Ah you mean the guy who spergs out everytime a Kafka thread is posted and starts blabbering on how Kafka is a writer for teenagers? Yeah he's a funny figure albeit a bit boring since he always repeats the same stuff.
>please don't compare me with evola/guenon sperg, totally different and unlike him I have talent
Don't worry I consider you to be on a whole other level

[Anonymous No.11081715]

>>11081631
>because shankara said so** (so i say)

Literally take any position of Guenon's and he makes 99% of them, the concept that most exterior forms are symbols for the highest metaphysical principal and not to be taken literally, the concept of sanatana dharma, the fact that Vedanta is implicitly aristocratic in that a fairly small percent of people will likely have the capacity to get it right away, the validity and justness of hierarchal forms of organizing society like the caste system, the idea of the highest type of knowledge residing where there is no distinction between being and knowing, etc and so on. If you actually read his writings (see the list of links at the top of the thread) you would quickly see what I'm talking about.

[Anonymous No.11081740]

>>11081670
>because I said so
This is a poor parody of what traditionalists claim. Anything they claim you can confirm for yourself through dedicated study and application. Tradition is not for the lazy.

[Anonymous No.11081745]

>>11081715
If it's self-evident to anybody who simply reads the texts, then why are Guenon and traditionalism considered a fringe cult by mainstream scholars of religion, who read the texts in their original languages?

Why is Guenon's symbolmetaphysik so similar to Schelling's? Is Schelling a vedantist, despite those texts not being available in Germany until a generation after he died?

[Anonymous No.11081753]

>>11081670
>Logic is bad and this is self evident because I said so

You're not actually making any argument but are simply trying to restate the argument made by the other side in a ridiculous and stupid way. You must truly be a brainlet if your only method of debating is repeating badly rephrased examples of the other side. When other people respond to you they would not only have to explain how your simplified parody is incorrect but then also try to understand how you came to that conclusion in order to explain to you why your wrong. It takes no effort on your behalf and is just a substitute for real debate in that you advance no points or ideas and simply leave the onus on your opponent to do all the lifting. It's obnoxious and childish and I'm surprised that you insist on continueing to do so, it does not at all make your side of the argument look good. If you want to be taken seriously at all than you need to actually explain in detail why you think they are wrong without relying on contentless shitposts.

[Anonymous No.11081768]

>>11081745
>a fringe cult by mainstream scholars of religion
Because these "scholars" are not orthodox practitioners of religion, they're just myopic academics who can't see outside their narrow specialization and the methods of their particular field.
>Why is Guenon's symbolmetaphysik so similar to Schelling's?
Never studied Schelling, and I don't intend to in the near future. All I know is that from my point of view, as a practitioner of a particular tradition, and a student of many traditions, the ideas Guenon puts forward are quite ordinary and perfectly in keeping with the claims of many spiritual traditions.

[Anonymous No.11081799]

>>11081768
>Because these "scholars" are not orthodox practitioners of religion,
Many of them are, in fact. You'd be surprised how sincerely someone can be dedicated to a religious and cultural tradition when they spend fifty years studying it.

>they're just myopic academics who can't see outside their narrow specialization and the methods of their particular field.
But your original contention was that reading Guenon and Shankara was sufficient to understand that they are saying the same things, and that Guenon is correct in his disclosure of the perennial philosophy. You have now contradicted yourself by granting that certain readers, apparently even highly trained and dedicated readers, can read both Guenon and Shankara, in the original languages no less, and *not* find the self-evidence of the perennial philosophy that you claimed was there.

So now your claim is: "Read Guenon and Shankara in the way I do, and not in the way of academics who spend decades perfecting their sanskrit and reading every book ever written on Shankara." Which is fair enough, since I'm no fan of academic orthodoxy or arguments from authority either, but that is a very different claim from your original, "Read Guenon and Shankara and all will be clear." Especially when you keep in mind that you are supposed to be talking to an uninitiated, curious person who doesn't have any reason either to trust or distrust you or the academics at first blush.

You accuse people of ad hominems, but insults and character critiques are not ad hominems. "They are academics, so they must be wrong, because academics are myopic/soulless/and so on" is properly an ad hominem, because it is a falsification of the argument by means of an attack on the arguer. Do you have something other than this? Why should a newbie choose your reading of Shankara over anyone else's, specialist or not?

[Anonymous No.11081800]

>>11081638
He's actually saying post better quality stuff, but w/e

[Anonymous No.11081808]

>>11081745
>If it's self-evident to anybody who simply reads the texts, then why are Guenon and traditionalism considered a fringe cult by mainstream scholars of religion, who read the texts in their original languages?

Lmao, Guenon and the traditionalists were massively influential on many of the most major 20th century scholars of religion like Thomas Merton, Huston Smith, Eliade and so on. Nobody of significance in the academic world of religious studies thinks of Guenon as a cultist or fringe. The only really cultish accusations were made by sedgewicks book against Schuons Sufi order that he started late in life which has no bearing upon Guenon or traditionalism itself. Guenon is not a well-known figure simply because he did not at all involve himself in western academia and did not seek recognition and fame in the west; in spite of that he still was a huge influence on mainstream western religious studies. Secondly Nasr teaches at George Washington and is well-regarded in Academia despite being an unapolegetic traditionalist, which goes to show that it's not at all considered fringe or cultish but is more just not widely studied or known about (despite it's large behind-the-scene influence upon the field at large).

[Anonymous No.11081819]

>>11081799
Look to reduce or simplify the arguments and the point of view Guenon puts forward in his work. You're perfectly free to reject it. It's not a universally binding prescription that everyone must subscribe to the traditionalist point of view, but it's point of view upheld by many who have dedicated their time to practicing these spiritual traditions and their practice confirms these views. The reason this argument is going nowhere is because we don't even know what you object to in Guenon's point of view. Why don't you make a list of points in the traditionalist/perennialist perspective that you find objectionable, be specific, and then we'll be able to respond point by point. You're being extremely vague, saying "scholars don't agree with it". Don't agree with what? Be specific. What do you object to?

[Anonymous No.11081825]

>>11081819
>Look to
Look, don't*

[Anonymous No.11081828]

>>11081799
That guy you responded to wasn't me but you are wrong in asserting that these specialists read shankara and come away with different conclusions than Guenon. For those few western academics who specialize in studying Advaita most of them correctly note what Shankara says (in line with what Guenon says). It's not like there is a hidden layer to his writings that only Guenon understood, all these ideas are very clearly set out in his works. If you read any recent book on Advaita published by a western academic who can and has read the texts you won't find much that contradicts what Guenon says. The difference between them is Guenon draws parallels with other traditions while western academics usually specialize in one area and naturally end up not doing so as much.

[Anonymous No.11081830]

>>11081753
>You're not actually making any argument but are simply trying to restate the argument made by the other side in a ridiculous and stupid way.
ARGUING LIKE NORMAL PEOPLE AND LOGIC ARE BAD THESE ARE SELF EVIDENT METAPHYSICAL TEACHINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TRASMITTED TO ME BY CHTULHU'S GRANDSON

[Anonymous No.11081838]

>>11081830
>ARGUING LIKE NORMAL PEOPLE AND LOGIC ARE BAD THESE ARE SELF EVIDENT METAPHYSICAL TEACHINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TRASMITTED TO ME BY CHTULHU'S GRANDSON
Please point out the relevant passages in Guenon's writing that are even remotely analogous to this attempt at parody.

[Anonymous No.11081855]

>>11081838
pointing out is for brainlets. instead I have gathered this self evident metaphysical teaching by following this simple ritual: wake up at 22.31, wash your teeth, take a shit (wipe your ass 3 times) and then spend 8 hours contemplating the night sky up until the sun rises. works btw, it's written in a couple of ancient texts so i know it's true,

[Anonymous No.11081860]

>>11081855
I'll stick to my own practices, thanks, but let us know how wiping your ass at ten at night works for you.

[Anonymous No.11081879]

>>11081808
While I like Huston Smith, anon, you don't seem to know much about the development or current state of the history of religions. I could name dozens of writers offhand who are better qualified for being called major influences or pivotal scholars of religion in the 20th century. Eliade has been the figure everyone loves to hate or rebel from since well before his death, even. See for instance his own institutional successors and students. The trendy thing to do in religious studies since at least the 80s has been pluralism, relativism, and anti-perennialism by a massive margin. The perennialists are a distinct and self-designated camp within the AAR exactly because they are so fringe and well aware of it.

>Nobody of significance in the academic world of religious studies thinks of Guenon as a cultist or fringe.
>large behind-the-scene influence upon the field
Guenon is seen as an oddity at best, and I say that as a fan of Guenon. Nobody really studies him or cares about him. Even during Eliade's heyday, almost noone did in mainstream academia. That qualifies as fringe.

Nasr and his disciples are benign enough in many cases, but they have certainly been called a cult often enough as well. They are only really dominant in a few faculties, and none of the big ones. I don't know how much association you have with these people in real life, or if you're one of the Internet LARPer types of Guenonians, but it's a lot more banal in real life and you will probably get a reality check fast. Though you already have the secret society smugness going on so maybe you'd be a good fit.

[Anonymous No.11081883]

>>11081819
>>11081828
>Why don't you make a list of points in the traditionalist/perennialist perspective that you find objectionable
Because my original point was simply that you are claiming a given reading of certain texts is self-evidently authoritative, which is a useless thing to say to an uninitiated person who has no idea whether you are full of shit or not. "Self-evidence" is a tricky thing when people apparently disagree on what is self-evident.

But fine:
>What do you object to?
I personally don't object to many things about perennialism. But the academy certainly would object strongly to the identification of a core, "real" metaphysic at the root of all religious life, for instance the identification of some recurrent notion of intellectus that is consistently invoked and described across many different cultures. The academy is currently much more like Durkheimians and cultural anthropologists than perennialists, that is they are neo-Kantians with no commitment to metaphysics whatsoever. They would say that humans apparently construct worldviews and systems of meaning, and "religion" exists as special subset of meaning creation, probably only identifiable as a heuristic category and not even as a constant across cultures.

Before even arguing with perennialism's specific metaphysical system, just about every mainstream scholar would leave the room as soon as you said there are transhistorical, universal metaphysical principles or experiences at all. Informally, if you said "Adi Shankara and Guenon are saying the same thing!" they would literally and actually laugh at you and consider you quaint.

Like I said, I think they are wrong. But I am telling you that if you want to convince people to read Guenon seriously, you can't do it by saying that your standpoint is self-evident, something that Eliade also did for 40 years and literally nobody ever agreed with him. Nobody within his own discipline ever took his exposition of supposedly transhistorical primordial symbols seriously. They took his hermeneutic seriously sometimes, in a general way, but nobody cared about his catalog of symbols. Yet Eliade was a great admirer of Guenon, with whom he presumably agreed on everything at least! Actually Guenon said that Eliade was wayward, just like Guenon thought that Evola was wayward (Zolla agreed); and Eliade said Guenon was foolish for thinking that perennialism can't be democratized, or that being an academic rather than real practitioner of a tradition somehow makes the insights of perennial philosophy inaccessible. Eliade admitted many times throughout his life that he was never really religious and that he was much more of a philosopher, yet he claimed to have the same self-evident perennial insights as Guenon.

[Anonymous No.11081885]

>>11081860
i don't know what guenon says about whiping your ass but you should do it anyway or your ass will itch and stink

[Anonymous No.11081886]

>>11081819
>>11081828
>>11081883
My point is this. First, the self-evidence argument evidently isn't enough to contradict all the many tens of thousands of people who would scoff at it, and who have read just as much as you or more than. Second, even the perennialists disagree amongst themselves about just what is self-evident and to whom. None of this is a disproof of perennialism's authenticity, but nor have you given sufficient proof for any earnest and critical thinker to agree with you either. This is the problem with the traditionalist types and this is why so many of them behave as cultists. You are so hopped up on the excitement of being in the secret society, with the direct line to real answers, that you become self-referential and react to even well-meaning inquiry with hostility and smugness. But the smugness you show to those interested outsiders is reflected back at you a hundred times harder by the academy.

[Anonymous No.11081893]

>>11081708
thank you

[Anonymous No.11081913]

>>11081886
>atheistic, critical theorist, neoliberal academics tend to disagree with Guenon

WTF I hate Guenon now, Hillary 2020!

[Anonymous No.11081930]

>>11080117
>inb4 freemasonry, no
Guenon writes on his books that freemasonry and stuff like that were legitimate initiatic paths (for Vaisyas), until they decided to go political instead of centering on the essential

[Anonymous No.11081956]

>>11081547
>not realizing I posted the review as bait to see if some anon would rush to defend guenon well enough to convince my smoothbrain to purchase his books

[Anonymous No.11081989]

>>11081886
Quality post, although academics are generally a sorry lot of people and cultish in their own right.

It seems to me that at a certain point concepts go beyond what can be argued logically, and some concepts need to be approached with faith (or at least the sincere desire for faith) before an experiential conception of them can be reached. This is why an academic studying X religion in a purely intellectual/academic context, no matter how dedicated they are to it, will never be able to truly understand it.

An example of this would be the opinion I occasionally hear stated that certain food restrictions present in various religions are the vestiges of some earlier, primitive time, when all pork was full of diseases and cows were so rare in India that nobody would dream of eating them and so on. For someone who's looking to understand "why" but without any faith, this materialistic explanation makes perfect sense. For a practitioner who's acting in faith, the act of actively restricting your diet under the orders of divine law has nothing to do with history and everything to do with practice.

There's a reason after all why many academics spend their lives studying intellectuals who weren't themselves academics, the whole field promotes a kind of thought and study which is antithetical to certain sorts of knowledge. This is especially the case with experiential knowledge, which can't simply be arrogantly waved away.

[Anonymous No.11082192]

[Anonymous No.11082201]

>>11082192
why does his face look like this
is this after he died

[Anonymous No.11082203]

>>11081956
You should read Guénon

Just ignore almost everyone who claims to like him

[Anonymous No.11082270]

>>11082201
It's a drawing of him

[Anonymous No.11082313]

>>11082201
beautiful elongated face

[Anonymous No.11082463]

>>11081145
>>11081125
alright i'll pick intro to study of hindu doctrines. It's also a more socially acceptable book where I'm going too, where just the term Magic sounds off putting

[Anonymous No.11082525]

>>11078997
Could someone provide a mega file with the major texts mentioned in this thread.
I don't have problems accessing Evola's but Guenon can be quite hard to find.

[Anonymous No.11082540]

>>11082525
I am having difficulty finding many of coomaraswamy's texts personally as well

[Anonymous No.11082557]

>>11082525
>>11082540
libgen

[Anonymous No.11082559]

>>11081883
>the academy certainly would object strongly
I don't care until they can demonstrate that they are correct and Guenon's views are incorrect. Guenon's justification for his views are convincing to me and so I accept them. My own experience with religion confirms what he says, and many others also confirm it. I'm always willing to change views if sufficient reason is given for doing so.
>object strongly to the identification of a core, "real" metaphysic
That's the same as saying they don't believe in an ultimate Truth. If that's the case then by what standard are the things which they claim to be true, true? If you throw out the concept of Truth, in the ultimate sense, relative truths go out the window as well.
>for instance the identification of some recurrent notion of intellectus that is consistently invoked and described across many different cultures
It's absolutely necessary to posit the existence of the intellect. If we don't have a faculty for apprehending truth this casts doubt on all our claims.
>The academy is currently much more like Durkheimians and cultural anthropologists than perennialists, that is they are neo-Kantians
I'm not going to base my views on the latest intellectual fashions. Today they're "Durkheimians", tomorrow something else.
>with no commitment to metaphysics whatsoever
That's a huge problem for them. Not a problem for me.
>if you said "Adi Shankara and Guenon are saying the same thing!" they would literally and actually laugh at you and consider you quaint.
I'm not the Advaita poster, but as I've said: if they cannot demonstrate why they are correct, then I don't care.
>Like I said, I think they are wrong
Well, why are you arguing then?
>But I am telling you that if you want to convince people
But I don't. I just want to discuss these ideas with two kinds of people:
1. those already familiar with them who have a favorable view
2. those open minded and curious about them.
The people I don't want to discuss with are those who stamp their feet on the ground and demand to be convinced. And why should I? I'm not a proselytizer trying to save your soul.
>you can't do it by saying that your standpoint is self-evident
A claim which I have never made.
>Nobody within his own discipline ever took his exposition of supposedly transhistorical primordial symbols seriously
Guenon spends a lot time justifying his views of symbolism and explaining it. You can reject it or accept it, but don't dismiss it as "you just have to believe just because". It's more complicated than that.

[Anonymous No.11082569]

>>11082557
Tried that too, it's not really helping.

Luckily a good anon posted a link in another thread for Guenon's works.

[Anonymous No.11082572]

>>11082569
link it here den famito

[Anonymous No.11082574]

>>11082569
OP here, I assumed most people were familiar with archive.org. I'll include the link in the next OP., inshallah.

[Anonymous No.11082576]

>>11082557
I dled everything off libgen but it's missing a lot

[Anonymous No.11082582]

>>11082572
https://archive.org/details/reneguenon

>>11082574
I only knew it for public domain movies.

[Anonymous No.11082593]

>>11081886
>First, the self-evidence argument
An argument which I haven't made
>all the many tens of thousands of people who would scoff at it
I don't care how many numbers are on my side. If they have sensible objections, rather than mere scoffing, I'd be delighted to hear them.
>and who have read just as much as you or more than
Erudition is not a prerequisite for understanding metaphysics. Metaphysics is equally accessible to the illiterate.
>but nor have you given sufficient proof for any earnest and critical thinker to agree with you either
I can't reproduce the entire corpus of Guenon's thoughts in an imageboard thread. He gives his reasons in his books. I find those reasons convincing. I'd be delighted to hear criticism that isn't merely "the academic consensus is against you".
>You are so hopped up on the excitement of being in the secret society
Stop trying to draw psychological inferences about me from anonymous imageboard posts. You don't know me. Day to day, I'm just an ordinary practicing Muslim, I don't belong to a secret society or have any such pretensions.

[Anonymous No.11082596]

>>11082593
>numbers are on my side
Numbers are on their side*

to be fair, doesn't matter how many numbers are on my side either.

[Anonymous No.11082815]

>>11080679
Imagine telling an Arab Muslim that Islam is like Hinduism...do you have any idea how they'd react to that? Not favourably.

[Anonymous No.11082838]

>>11082815
1. Arabs are a minority of Muslims
2. The phrase "is like Hinduism" is very vague. Like how? Polytheistic? Obviously not. This needs to be clarified.
3. You obviously don't know many Muslims. I'm a convert, and I've discussed this many times with other Muslims of various backgrounds: Arab, Bengali, Afghani etc. None of these Muslims had ever heard of Guenon, and most were not well read. They've all been very open to the idea that there are parallels between Hinduism and Islam, because they believe precisely what the Quran tells them, namely, that all peoples prior to Islam had received genuine prophets.

Instead of pulling ideas out of your rear end about what Muslims believe or don't believe, why don't you visit an actual mosque and broach this question with them. They'd be very open to discuss it with you. You may encounter one or two who will give you a categorical "no" to the question of parallels between Hinduism and Islam, but I haven't even encountered one person like that so I doubt it.

[Anonymous No.11082861]

>>11082838
> I'm a convert, let me tell you about your culture

Never met a Muslim who didn't have contempt for Hinduism and Indians.

[Anonymous No.11082876]

>>11082861
Islam is a religion not a culture. A lot of Muslims don't like Hindus, because of movements like Hindutva, but as far as the ideas of parallels between the religions they are open to the idea. My experience is the opposite of yours, in that regard. How much experience do you have to base that off of? How many Muslims have you discussed it with? I discuss it all the time because Muslims are constantly asking me why I converted and I always say that it was because of my study of other religions like Hinduism.

[Anonymous No.11082933]

daily reminder

[Anonymous No.11083100]

>>11081956
The quality of posts attacking Guenon and traditionalism are usually so low that it's impossible to tell when people are being sarcastic or not. 90% of them tend to be along the lines of what this post describes >>11081753

[Anonymous No.11083451]

bump

[Anonymous No.11083528]

>>11079052

Amazing list. I feel like if I read all those I'd have to become an Orthodox monk

[Anonymous No.11083539]

What is your view on separation of church and state?

Personally, I like the concept of Synphonia where the two are in a balance

[Anonymous No.11083646]

>You believe that every religion leads to the same truth, too? That's great, anon! You should join us at the Unitarian Universalist meetinghouse downtown. We'd love to hear about your spiritual journey at the interfaith vegan Ramadan potluck next week.

What do?

[Anonymous No.11083706]

>>11083646
I would just politely decline. Such things are too closely allied with syncretism, sentimentalism, and humanism.
>>11083539
The State should be subject to the same principles that the Church is subject to, because (I believe), those principles are true and for the state to be founded on something other than truth would obviously be foolish.

[Anonymous No.11084230]

bump

[Anonymous No.11084317]

I suppose I have a few general critiques of this thread:

1) Why so little Hellenism? It's all proto-indo-european, right? I suggest reading Uzdavinys who is a great perennialist who links Greek philosophy to Egyptian mytho-theology. I find the Greek understanding of metaphysics superior, IMO, than the Indians as well. Much more comensurable with the post-Kantian turn.

2) Why the advaita vedanta lingam worship? Vedanta is merely one of several schools. Advaita is merely one of several schools. If you're an advaitist then why not identify that instead of as a traditionalist? The traditionalist label is a bit misleading. I feel like most religions are closer to dvaita anyways insofar as they distinguish man and God. Or Bhedābheda. Or Viśiṣṭādvaita. I do not deny that there is a subjective feeling of oneness with God during peak experiences but this could be the result of neurons misfiring rather than ontological insight. To me, it makes more sense to separate these levels of reality (self, Self, universe, God, etc.) even if there might be an analogical relationship between their constituent parts.

[Anonymous No.11084433]

OP here, I suggest someone copy the links and OP etc. I won't be posting more of these threads from now till after Ramadan, inshallah. Not necessarily promising to come back after Ramadan either, we'll see. Amyways, I'm out for now. It's a little early but....Ramadan mubarak!

[Anonymous No.11084523]

>>11084433
Also, for anyone so inclined, whether to ask questions or engage in discussion feel free to email me at my throwaway email: [e-mail]

[Anonymous No.11084541]

>>11084523
Oh, and you can post the email in future threads if you want. Whoever wants to OP the coming threads should hit me up, I'll send you some random Guenon stuff to use for future threads.

[Anonymous No.11084569]

>>11084433
>>11084523
>>11084541
Mind if I add Dugin to the list of names on the OP? The omission irks me considering his contribution to Traditionalist thought and current political clout. The Fourth Political Theory is a must-read for this thread regardless of whether you agree with its conclusions or not.

[Anonymous No.11084579]

>>11084569
I consider him sketchy, especially in light of his "Metaphysics of Chaos" essay, but he's definitely interesting and worth discussing. That essay leads me to doubt whether traditionalist is the proper appellation for him. I can see him fitting into the "indirectly affiliated or influenced by" category, I guess. Honestly, it's up to you. I'm handing my baby over to you or whoever, do what thou wilt (to quote another sketchy dude).

[Anonymous No.11084583]

>>11084569
>>11084579
Now, I'm really out. Send further questions to my email.

[Anonymous No.11084617]

Alright, I've got a question for any Muslims who are part of the Traditionalist school

How do you guys reconcile the fact that your tradition was started by a man who waged wars and engaged in political killings? I'm not trying to be disrespectful, in fact I find myself drawn a lot to Islamic thought, but I can't get over the fact that it was all started by a man who without a doubt brought a lot of suffering to the world.

[Anonymous No.11085688]

>>11084523
>[e-mail]

quelle surprise

[Anonymous No.11085822]

>>11084317
> Why the advaita vedanta lingam worship?

Because Rene Guenon told them so.

[Anonymous No.11086023]

[Anonymous No.11086028]

>>11078997
sage

[Anonymous No.11086337]

>>11084617
Not a traditionalist, nor connected to any mosque or community, but I pray often and read the Quran.

It's not mans place to know what's right or wrong, very often in my own life, and in the lives of people around me, it seems like the people who consider themselves the most "moral" or "righteous" are in fact those who do the most bad. Besides, God is incomprehensibly beyond the pale of human understanding.

The way I understand Mohamed's campaigns is that he was simply following the command of God. He was a righteous person throughout his battles, this is confirmed in The Expeditions, one of the earliest biographies of him. When his wars are taken in the context of the Islamic Empire he went on to establish, with all its philosophy, art, literature, mathematics, and so on, I think that it's clear that his actions resulted in a net good for humanity, even if on a purely local level the results of his life aren't immediately apparent.

A good book to read on the topic of religious warfare is the Bhagavad Gita. Also the book of Job. The idea that God and your personal conception of moral good go hand in hand is a false but seductive thought. It caused me a lot of inner turmoil to get past myself.

[Anonymous No.11086363]

>>11084317

>Why so little Hellenism? It's all proto-indo-european, right?

Yes but it's not a living tradition (unlike the ones in the East which are still alive) but effectively died out with the Christianization of the Roman Empire, the closing of the Platonic Academy and definitively with the end of the Byzantium (by which time it was arguably long dead). Secondly the metaphysical teachings of the hellenics don't even begin to approach the sophistication of the great eastern traditions. The Greco-Roman religion itself was for the most part devoid of metaphysical teaching and mostly revolved around aesthetics, ancestor worship and paying homage to the gods at the proper and auspicous times. The only genuinely metaphysical teachings found in the Hellenic world were found in the various mystery cults, a few philosophers and a few fringe groups like the Pythagoreans and Neoplatonists. Plotinus's Enneads are great but them or anything else from the Hellenic world don't even come close to the Upanishads and Brahma Sutras, or any of the dozens of other major Hindu texts, to say nothing of Islamic and East Asian.

It was not at all established as part of any tradition but was carried on sporadically in small and relatively inaccessible groups. Well, what does that matter one might ask? Well it matters because when it is not taught as part of a tradition that is central to it's host culture it ends up being lost to time which is exactly what happened. Arguably the reason that the West is so devoid of Metaphysical traditions is because the few instances of it occurring in Western history were in fringe groups. If Neoplatonism was taught and propagated all throughout the Roman Empire than Europe might have a Traditional culture today similar to Eastern ones, but it wasn't. Compare that to India where you have an entire caste of people devoted to studying, teaching and propagating the Vedas and metaphysical knowledge. The result is all these subjects have been dealt with much more extensively in Eastern thought than in Greek thought, where much of the metaphysical groups didn't even produce much writings and those that did produced barely anything compared to the eastern cultures.

>I suggest reading Uzdavinys who is a great perennialist who links Greek philosophy to Egyptian mytho-theology

I agree that he is good but the reason you have to rely on scholars like him to piece together a bunch of fragments of evidence is precisely because Greek culture was so lacking in genuinely metaphysical teachings that there are very few texts that delve into it and instead you are forced to rely on after-the-fact analysis instead of the thousands of texts and there commentaries and the tertiary commentaries on those commentaries that you find in India.

>Much more comensurable with the post-Kantian turn.

lol

[Anonymous No.11086471]

>>11084317
>2) Why the advaita vedanta lingam worship?

Nobody really worships Advaita but anyone who has delved into the writings of the Traditionalists quickly sees why they appreciate it so, which is doubly confirmed by studying the actual texts (I recommend the list at the top of the thread). Advaita is some of the purest expression of metaphysical doctrines that there are, it contains arguably the least cultural and religious baggage and strikes directly at the heart of the matter. It is primarily concerned with the removal of ignorance and a visceral and immediate understanding of the deepest nature of reality and existence. It's texts are beautiful, poetic, illuminating and one feels an incomparable sense of bliss when reading and reflecting on them. There is also the fact that Advaitist doctrines is some of the most similar to the great metaphysical traditions of other traditions like Daoism, to some extent Buddhism and even the esoteric side of ostensibly dualist ones like Islam. Guenon understandably takes the view that both Shankara and Ramanuja are orthodox with the difference being only a matter of emphasis (he comes out in favor of Advaita ultimately) but Advaita cuts to the essence of the common metaphysics described by most traditional teachings.

>Vedanta is merely one of several schools. Advaita is merely one of several schools.

Advaita is the oldest of the Vedanta schools, the most influential and arguably the most accurate. Most of the early Vedas carry a strong non-dualist message and the most important and central passages of these texts tend to be non-dualist. Most of the supposedly dualist- or qualified non-dualism-supporting parts can be understood in the sense of being from the conditioned or relative point of view; i.e. in the same way that Advaita teaches that liberation and bondage only exists in a relative sense because of how once the truth is realized there is in reality no being, no bondage and liberation but simply and only the non-dual truth.

>If you're an advaitist then why not identify that instead of as a traditionalist? The traditionalist label is a bit misleading.

The two are not mutually exclusive, one can be either one or both. As other people have noted Advaita and Islam are particularly popular among traditionalists so you should expect people talk about it alot in Trad threads.

>most religions are closer to dvaita anyways insofar as they distinguish man and God.

Most eastern ones lean more towards Advaita. The exoteric side of the Abrahamic traditions are dualist but the esoteric side of them (especially Islam) tend to lean more non-dualist

[Anonymous No.11086480]

>>11086023

[Anonymous No.11086525]

>>11086480
The fool who made this meme has a very poor intellectual understanding of the two

[Anonymous No.11086543]

>>11086525
elaborate

[Anonymous No.11086592]

>>11086543
Just to give one example, Evola "confused the possible with the unmanifested and the real with the manifested."

The "unmanifested" includes what Rene Guenon calls the states of manifestation in their "principial" mode. In other words, it's just the Platonic realm of Forms, the archai or principles (which is really just Cicero's translation, principium).

As far as Julius Evola was concerned with the principles or archetypes of social organizations, he was doing "metaphysics." And Evola was all about holding to so-called principles.

In other words, I think the person who used those terms excavated that from one of Guenon's books without understanding what he really meant by the "unmanifest is more real than the manifest."

As for the taste of the meme itself, I hate to see Traditionalism subject to the virulence of post-irony.

[Anonymous No.11087220]

What am I in for lads?

[Anonymous No.11087223]

>>11087220
Whoops forgot pic

[Anonymous No.11087514]

>>11087223
The Bhagavata Purana is a good text but that translator is the founder and head of the ISKCON (Hare Krishna) and teaches a modified form of dvaita (dualism) in his translations. I would have advised you to avoid ordering it as non-dualism and to some extent qualified non-dualism are traditionally held to be the orthodox understanding and are regarded as the Traditionalists for being a more complete and accurate metaphysical doctrine (for good reason). You could still read it anyway but be away that the Vedas generally teach 'You are That'. The wiki page says the text incorporates themes from both Advaita and Dvaita so I guess if there was ever a text that it might be permissable to read his translation in it would be that one. If you paid money to order it and are unwilling or unable to return it it's not a huge deal but if you are renting or borrowing it or can return it I would recommend another translator. Also it would be good to have read the Bhagavad-Gita first, I believe the Bhagavata Purana picks up where that ends.

[Anonymous No.11088092]

>>11084569
dugin is a postmodernist or a nietzschean, not really a traditionalist

[Anonymous No.11088243]

Why did Nasr leave Iran during the Revolution if even he admits that Ayatollah Khomeini was an authority on irfan? Nasr's books aren't even banned there. Was it simply because of his financial ties to the Shah?

[Anonymous No.11088542]

>>11088243
In the immediate aftermath many people with close ties to the upper circles of the Shah government were detained, imprisioned and sometimes tortured. He had close ties to a relative of the Shah like the sister or something and I think it was mainly due to her patronage that he got that Traditionalist school established. Because of his links he had reason to think he might be detained. There have also been allegations he had ties to or was an informant/agent of SAVAK, he was known to have met with Kissinger on at least one occasion. After the immediate Guenon-period there was some semi-sketchy stuff that some of the trads got involved in from the 80's and 90's onwards. Supposedly the US & UK deep state and the Gulf monarchies all have ties to certain 'trad' sufi groups full of spooks. It's almost inevitable that at some point people will take something wholesome and try to corrupt it or use it for nefarious/unwholesome ends; I don't think it has much bearing upon the ideas of the school itself and I still respect and appreciate Schuon, Nasr et al but there is always more to things than meets the eye.

This article goes into in it, the author is obviously super biased but if 25% of it is true I would say they made unwholesome decisions.

https://www.opednews.com/articles/Sufism-in-the-service-of-E-by-Wahid-Azal-Classism_Cult_Iran_Muslim-161102-833.html

[Anonymous No.11088740]

>>11088542
That's disappointing to hear. I suppose that the Cold War forced even apolitical trads to choose the "lesser" of the two evils even though both ultimately stood against the very tenets of traditionalism. Even Evola himself backed the Western colonial powers and the Gulf monarchies over the Arab national socialists in the postwar Middle East, and he received a lot of flak from the Italian neofascists for this.

But now that the Cold War is over, this is just a thing with the older generation of traditionalists, right? Is the younger generation more open-minded instead of blindly siding with Western hegemony? I don't see why I should back the late capitalist West over the Houthis, for example, considering the latter is a literal revival of divine kingship as a working principle.

[Anonymous No.11089111]

>>11079052
Good list in that pic, but I would unironically add "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" though.

[Anonymous No.11089172]

>>11078997
Is this the thread where we haven't read Kant?

[Anonymous No.11089960]

>>11088740
There aren't really that many prominent young Traditionalist authors although I presume that most young people reading their stuff would come to the conclusion that the progressive neoliberal world order is not ideal (it would be hard not to come to this conclusion seeing as it goes against almost everything the school stands for).

The middle east is odd in a lot of ways. You have an absolute monarchy in Saudi Arabia which pays lips service to traditional values but the current king is modernizing and westernizing the country, being anti-traditional. The Wahhabism that they sponser is also pretty anti-metaphysical, being almost a form of religous materialism; Wahhabis historically have targeted Sufis in terror attacks and similar stuff.

In Iran you have a westernizng secular ruler who was again anti-traditional, but a bunch of Traditionalists flocked to his country and then fled when Shia Islamists took power. In Iran they actually have some form of limited democracy (anti-traditional) but unlike the Saudis they actually have a religious figure at the head of the gov. and a religious council vets political candidates, coming closer to a theocracy than most other countries.

Probably the most Traditionalist countries as Guenon et al would define them would be the small, virtuous and religous 3rd world monarchies that just mind their own buisness like Oman and Bhutan.

[Anonymous No.11089988]

>>11089172
Kant was a brainlet who exemplifies everything thats wrong with philosophy.

[Anonymous No.11090053]

>>11089988
So the answer is yes, then.

[Anonymous No.11090080]

this was good.

[Anonymous No.11090099]

>>11081349
absolutely based Swedenborg poster

[Anonymous No.11090268]

>>11090053
>implying I haven't read his complete works in German simply for the purpose of knowing how to avoid being unconciously influenced by his retarded thoughts indirectly through other sources

[Anonymous No.11090411]

>>11090080
Nice, I'll have to check it out

[Anonymous No.11090438]

>>11083646
1. Join the local Unitarian Universalists
2. Lower their guard by dazzling them with basic perennialist concepts without completely exposing my powerlevel
3. Look for the more disgruntled or spiritually uncertain members, befriend them and redpill them to Traditionalism
4. Create a secret nucleus of Traditionalists within the Unitarian Universalist congregation, help each other climb up the organizational hierarchy and initiate more acolytes
5. Take regional control, introduce Traditionalism into the organizational creed and weed out the diehard modernists
6. Declare secession when HQ gets wind of the takeover, ditch all remaining traces of Unitarian Universalism and fulfill Guenon's dream of a genuinely Traditionalist lodge.
7. ???
8. Profit!

[Anonymous No.11091156]

Hey OP if you could make a chart of Hindu texts to read that would be awesome

[Anonymous No.11091182]

>>11087514
I purchased it. I think Prabhupada said that Adi Sankacharya was an incarnation of Shiva so I am inclined to have faith in his translations. Although I agree that the Hare Krishna movement is mainly a lot of new age baloney, I still think that Prabupada was an extremely knowledgeable guy and the lectures that I’ve watched of his are quite good and I find them very enlightening.

[Anonymous No.11091625]

>>11091156
Not OP but I am working on a detailed /lit/ guide to Hinduism that includes authors, page numbers, brief descriptions, etc. Should have it ready in a week or two.

[Anonymous No.11091678]

>>11090411
cool. i hope you find it illuminating also. it had an all-time takeaway line in it:

>the final end and ultimate return of the gnostics… is that the Real is identical with them, while they do not exist.

that's an amazing line.

OP mentioned chittick as well and can co-sign on him too. i really enjoyed his lectures on ibn arabi and others.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMERKUVCiQE

[Anonymous No.11091724]

>>11091625
Not that dude but I would definitely get a lot out of a guide to studying Santana Dharma, thanks anon

[Anonymous No.11092395]

[Anonymous No.11092400]

>>11080073
>I always feel drawn to it

Probably because you're into trannies.

[Anonymous No.11093064]

>>11092395
Wow is this OC?? Very nice, very helpful, saved!

[Anonymous No.11093067]

>>11092395
these presentations are written like your average American mass market paperback blurb lol

[Anonymous No.11093079]

>>11092395
>Europe's greatest esoteric philosopher
They're certainly not bringing their best!

[Anonymous No.11093466]

>>11092395
finally!

[Anonymous No.11093660]

>>11093079
What is your list of best esoteric philosophers

[Anonymous No.11094190]

the worst thing about this thread is that most of you guys keep going on about the unbroken line of tradition

[Anonymous No.11094208]

>>11094190
Elaborate.

[Anonymous No.11094229]

>>11092395
No offense but this list is awful. Mystery of the Grail is a "specialized interest", not everyone reading Evola is going to be especially interested in Grail mythology. And the next book in line is Hermetic Tradition? That book is so dense 99% of the people who attempt this list will probably give up (maybe that's what you were aiming for). Intro to Magic should be one of the first books on that list, arguably the very first. There's already an Evola guide and it's better than this one, I would just stick with that one. It's giant block of text, though, so if you want to take your skill at making charts and transfer it to more of this style that would be good.

[Anonymous No.11094233]

>>11086480
Obviously there is a human type which amounts to "thug with a weapon", but I found Evola's argument that Kshatriya's rightful place being above Brahmins compelling. It rang true for me at least. I haven't read a tremendous amount of either author though. Just "The Reign of Quantity and Signs of the Times" and "Ride the Tiger + Revolt Against the Modern World". If someone cares to defend Guenon's position I am certainly interested, RoQ was an absolute masterpiece imo.

[Anonymous No.11094236]

>>11092395
>Starting with holy grail
>Not Revolt Against the Modern World

[Anonymous No.11094246]

>>11094236
I think Intro to Magic is even more basic an overview of his ideas and attitudes that distinguish him from other traditionalists and a better place to start than Revolt, but Revolt isn't a bad place to start and it's the usual one.

[Anonymous No.11094285]

>>11094233
>If someone cares to defend Guenon's position
Sure. Placing Kshatriya over Brahmin is like preferring action over knowledge, but all courses of action take knowledge as a reference point and are dependant on knowledge and seek knowledge as their goal. Plotinus has a great section in his Enneads where he attempts to demonstrate how even the most sensory and vulgar actions are really just a degraded form of contemplation. Furthermore, I'm of the opinion that knowledge is even "more action than action". It's the action of presence, wei wu wei, knowledge is the pole/axis around which all actions revolve. I'm talking about properly intellectual knowledge here, where there is no distinction between subject and object. The problem is the Evol equates the more "lunar" priestly representatives of Brahmins with the Brahmin caste as such, when the properly polar/axial representatives of this caste are the most authentic type of the Brahmin. In Hindu legends even the Gods are terrified of the Rishis.

[Anonymous No.11094294]

>>11094208
You guys focus too much on the exoteric, saying you need rituals and a lineage of such exoteric ways in order for a path to be valid when it is always, as Evola correctly stated, the esoteric matters and symbolism of the myths that make the path open.
>>11094236
Yes you should read a book on his spiritual views before you read his book on political views (which he later regretted writing). That is a shit list though

[Anonymous No.11094317]

>>11094190
Extrapolate.

[Anonymous No.11094342]

>>11094317
did here>>11094294
Again, too much focus on the exoteric which is bound in time rather than the esoteric which is above and against time

[Anonymous No.11094361]

>>11094294
The world is a meaningfully ordered chain of symbols, and symbols in the traditionalist point of view are in a real analogy with the symbolized. Ritual gestures are symbolic, and so are such spiritual lineages. Participation in the symbol is the means of participation in the symbolized, of participation in the reality behind all symbols. In any case, Guenon didn't claim that it was absolutely impossible to acheive spiritual realization without a lineage, he says that it's the difference between going somewhere on foot and taking speedy transportation―who would turn down such an advantage when offered to him, especially given that there are no guarantees he will even arrive, especially while on foot? And the word Tradition does not refer to studying texts or myths, but to passing down, from person to person, the means of real and active knowledge, so if Evola rejects that how can he be a traditionalist? Personally, I consider Evola more of a "post-traditionalist", in the sense that he assents to the validity of traditional methods but rejects participation in them anyway and chooses to go it alone, to risk an attempt at realization without the support of traditional structures. I actually admire his boldness, and he's my favorite traditionalist after Guenon, but I think it's foolish for anyone to follow in his footsteps.

[Anonymous No.11094364]

>>11094294
>>11094342
>You guys focus too much on the exoteric, saying you need rituals and a lineage of such exoteric ways in order for a path to be valid when it is always, as Evola correctly stated, the esoteric matters and symbolism of the myths that make the path open.
that's an understandable point of view and i am partial to Evola's view that personal initiation is possible.

But this is definitely something that most traditionalists didn't believe in, Guenon in particular has a sort of Deus Otiosus point of view where god directly intervenes in the world at the beginning of a cycle, establishing a new Golden Age, and then recedes. From there the world manifests and as it manifests becomes further away from god, more quantitative and less qualitative, all the way to the Kali Yuga, then at the lowest point of the Kali Yuga there is another divine intervention, so the lowest coincides with the highest and a new Golden Age is established.

and the only way to initiate yourself is to attach yourself to a tradition that links you back to that point of supernatural intervention, instead of having direct access to god at any point in time

btw, it is fun to apply Guenon's model (I guess it's the Hindu model, if he stayed true to it) to things like subcultures or imageboards.

[Anonymous No.11094374]

Should I start with the Vedas texts or the Bhagavad Gita?

[Anonymous No.11094386]

>>11094361
>In any case, Guenon didn't claim that it was absolutely impossible to acheive spiritual realization without a lineage
i think he does, for example on one of his books he questions that Jakob Böhme could have initiated himself and argues that he must have had some secret contacts that brought him the spiritual influence, forgot which book, may have been perspectives on initiation

actually just read perspectives on initiation, it's pretty much Guenon drilling into your head chapter after chapter that there's no such thing as personal initiation , he also says that this influence can not be carried by books and only works as an oral tradition

[Anonymous No.11094387]

>>11094364
>personal initiation
Just FYI, "personal initiation" is a contradiction in terms. Initiation opens one up to supra-individua domains, hence supra-personal. There is no initiation outside of attachment to a lineage, but I think there is still the possibility of realization without such an attachment. One of the red-flags to look for when it comes to pseudo-tradition is references to "self initiation".

[Anonymous No.11094391]

>>11094386
There isn't such a thing as initiating yourself, but achieving realization may be possible without initiation. Again, though, why turn down the advantages tradition has to offer?

[Anonymous No.11094408]

>>11094374
Gita is fine.

[Anonymous No.11094412]

>>11094391
there's no living tradition in my culture, and i see attaching myself to a foreign living tradition as changing cultures, i have nothing against doing it if you hear that kind of call, but it's not something i feel myself called to do

[Anonymous No.11094434]

>>11094364
>btw, it is fun to apply Guenon's model (I guess it's the Hindu model, if he stayed true to it) to things like subcultures or imageboards.
>tfw the terrestrial world is an inverted image of the heavens
>tfw chan imagebord culture is an inverted image of the culture and values of the terrestrial world
>tfw chan culture is an inverted image of an inverted image, hence a reproduction of the upright image
>tfw the more degenerated the terrestrial world becomes the more reactionary, conservative and traditional chan culture becomes
>tfw 4chan is mustard seed from which will grow the great tree of tradition of which the birds of the heavens will descend to sit upon
>tfw 4chan is the heart of the world, the center of centers, the place of the world axis on which the Lord of the World will descend to restore the Golden age
>tfw the final avatara could be posting here right now

[Anonymous No.11094440]

>>11094412
Hey man, no one is forcing you. Evola didn't do it, and I respect him for his boldness. Best of luck in your spiritual endeavors.

[Anonymous No.11094447]

>>11094391
same as >>11094412 said,there is no esoteric path that is not foreign to me. Yes I know the irony of me talking about exotericism, but there were many esoteric paths that took exoteric form for my ancestors. Would it be untruthful at all to bring that back? I say no, and no I'm not talking about bringing back paganism, I have read Evola's against the Neo Pagans, but rather just bring back the exoteric symbolism that was common to our esoteric paths

[Anonymous No.11094477]

>>11094447
Ok, so the problem is that tradition means to pass down from person to person not frok books to person, but I had a thought experiment of how to restore old European traditions and I think the method is fully valid (just almost impossibly difficult). Here is what you would have to do:
1. Gather a fairly large group of extremely intelligent, studious, and talented individuals.
2. All of you would then join a regular traditional affiliation, probably Hindu because of the Indo-European link.
3. On top of studying the Hindu tradition indepth, working towards spiritual realization, and eventually achieving it, you would also have to have each person of the group specialize in studying a different aspect of European traditions such as languages, myths, history of religion etc.
3. Using your knowledge gained from Hinduism you would be able to "fill in the blanks" that are missing in European tradition, restore the full meaning of its symbols, and render them active and efficacious again due to your participation in an active spiritual link.

[Anonymous No.11094486]

>>11094477
from book*

[Anonymous No.11094491]

>>11094477
oops, last point should be numbered 4

[Anonymous No.11094503]

>>11094477
That's pretty much what Evola was trying to do with the UR group, and I do see it nowadays with somewhat good works like TYR popping up and with people like Thomas Rowsell around, but for the specific european traditions they will not be as they were and they will change.

[Anonymous No.11094512]

>>11094503
>TYR
>Thomas Roswell
Not familiar with either of those. More info?

[Anonymous No.11094526]

>>11094477
yes, Guenon talked about the only possible path of regeneration of spirituality in the west was one of influence from the east

[Anonymous No.11094536]

>>11094512
>>Thomas Roswell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w07XH_j3L2U

[Anonymous No.11094547]

>>11094536
Ah, survive the jive. Didn't know what his actual name was.

[Anonymous No.11094586]

>>11094503
>>11094512
what's TYR?

[Anonymous No.11094626]

>>11094586
>>11094512
TYR was a little journal or series of books that has "pagan" thought around, which many of the authors being influenced by Evola and Guenon, but it also has other influences in them and again I think is trying too hard to bring back the exoteric forms rather than the higher concepts, but still was pretty nice in my opinion. The main articles I liked were the ones who were authored also by the guy who wrote Summoning the Gods, but that's just a personal preference and this journal doesn't get published near as much as it should if they want a true revival. About a 6/10 if intro to the study of the hindu doctrines was a 9/10.

[Anonymous No.11094655]

>>11094285
But isn't some knowledge only attainable through action?

[Anonymous No.11094662]

>>11094434
I doubt Jesus posts on 4chan breh

[Anonymous No.11094667]

yesterday, the living mourned the dead
today, the dead mourn the living

[Anonymous No.11094676]

>>11090438
>climb up the organizational hierarchy
>of the unitarian universalists
Yeah that's not how that works. UU is a low-church religion. It is entropic and thrives on entropy.

[Anonymous No.11094679]

>>11094662
Jesus dined with prostitutes and tax collectors.

[Anonymous No.11094696]

>>11094655
It seems that way only in external appearances. Our world is an inverted image if the true state of affairs. In reality it was that same knowledge in latent form, which the action attained, that incited that action to begin with through an invisibly felt presence. It was the knowledge that drew the action to itself like a siren call. Look up the chapter "Nature, Contemplation, and the One" from the third Ennead of Plotinus.

[Anonymous No.11094705]

>>11094696
>if the true
of the true*

[Anonymous No.11094721]

>>11094679
For sure, I'm not saying He wouldn't lol. It's an entertaining thought.
>>11094696
With all due respect and no offense intended, I don't find this short discussion to be convincing, though I make no pretense about my ignorance. I will certainly read more about Traditionalism and perhaps I will come to understand your argument and see it your way, but so far I don't.

[Anonymous No.11094860]

>>11094721
>no offense intended
None taken. Another way I might explain it is that knowledge is the principle and action is the application, and a principle is always prior to its application. Action which is fully traditional is an action seeking to return to its root, its source, its pinciple―in other words, it is an action that aims at transcending itself, an action that seeks to return to nonaction.

[Anonymous No.11094867]

>>11094860
That makes more sense to me. But aren't some human types more capable of action than others? I suppose the question is, if Kshatriyas represent action AND contemplation, but Brahmana only contemplation, isn't more knowledge available to Kshatriyas?

[Anonymous No.11094893]

>>11094867
Actually, everyone represents a mix of all qualities (gunas, to use the Hindu term). In Brahmins the contemplative quality predominates over the other qualities (in Kshatriyas the active) but that doens't mean they are devoid of the active quality, and in fact, ritual action is considered to be action par excellece by the Hindu tradition, and it is that type of action over which the Brahmins preside. In fact the word karma (action), means in many contexts, especially in the Vedas, precisley ritual action.

[Anonymous No.11094905]

>>11094893
>>11094867
so to restate: It's a question of which quality is the predominant one, not a question of one quality existing to the exclusion of others. This is why I said that it was mistaken for Evola to conflate lunar priesthood with (i.e. passive and reflective) with polar/axial priesthood which are in no way merely passive.

[Anonymous No.11094910]

>>11094905
I mean to conflate lunar priesthood with priesthood as such, when there exists a polar/axial priesthood.

[Anonymous No.11094949]

>>11094910
One more thing I'll add: earlier I mentioned that knowledge is "more action than action". This refers to the fact that in properly traditional knowledge (intellectual in the sense defined in pic related here >>11082559) there is no object-subject distinction, the two are one. In kshatriya type action there is a split between subject and object since it represents a "heroic" striving of the subject after the object. It's the difference bewteen someone who can accomplish all his goals without lifting a finger, just by his mere lresence alone, and someone who has to struggle and toil to attain his end.

[Anonymous No.11094956]

>>11094949
>lresence
presence*

[Anonymous No.11095005]

>>11078997
this thread is why its good to slaughter priests occassionally, any healthy order arbitrarily overturns the priestarchy for pragmatic purposes and cleansing of diseased blood. Hindus killed brahmins and put buddhists in power. Moslem Indians killed them. Germanics got rid of druids and high priests for Christfaggotry, and then again for scientists and philosophers. You can see how greedy you people are, how you require safe alcoves to whisper together. Look at how they conspire and make idiotic assumptions about fate. Need to bleed certain castes almost to expiration for the sake of the highest.

Imagine being born a priest instead of a warrior. Shameful, pitiful, rage inducing

[Anonymous No.11095026]

>>11095005
What is this "highest" that you are after and why is it that you think the priestly caste prevents you from attaining it rather than facilitating your approach to it?

[Anonymous No.11095055]

>>11095005
>m-might is right, m'lady

[Anonymous No.11095056]

>>11095005
Imagine being this much of a drama queen. Shameful, pitiful, laughter inducing.

[Anonymous No.11095057]

>>11095005
>Hindus killed brahmins and put buddhists in power. Moslem Indians killed them. Germanics got rid of druids and high priests for Christfaggotry, and then again for scientists and philosophers.
You're saying that this is necessary? This is working out well, is it?

[Anonymous No.11095063]

>>11095005
i suggest you watch yourself or my boy parashurama will fuk u up good

[Anonymous No.11095065]

is there any traditonal works that go into gender and sex in relation to religion and society at large?

[Anonymous No.11095070]

>>11095065
metaphysics of sex by evola

[Anonymous No.11095075]

>>11095055
He has a point. If all traditions are essentially the same then there's no reason to object to one being violently overthrown by another.

[Anonymous No.11095096]

>>11095005
Proof that the warrior caste is composed of spiritual manlets

[Anonymous No.11095103]

>>11095075
By your logic, there's no reason for you to object to me raping your underage daughter.

[Anonymous No.11095104]

>>11095096
Don't let that degenerate instigate petty conflict. Any Ksatriya worth their salt would smack him right now were it possible.

[Anonymous No.11095111]

>>11095096
yeah, it's the spiritual equivalent of a guy with a four inch dick buying a giant pickup truck

[Anonymous No.11095118]

>>11095070
>>11095065
any other references?

[Anonymous No.11095145]

>>11095111
>mocking and denigrating one's protectors
I wouldn't call anyone a spiritual manlet if I were you.

[Anonymous No.11095208]

>>11095063
can someone make a meme of parashurama with the flare eyes effect that says "when u see a kshatriya"

[Anonymous No.11095260]

>>11095208
when u have to become a ksatriya to defeat ksatriyas

[Anonymous No.11095269]

>>11095111
>it's penis inspection day at your initiatic organization

[Anonymous No.11095343]

Every One of the Four Castes are degenerated nowadays, we are in the Kali Yuga. Do not expect even those of us to have the Truth

[Anonymous No.11095354]

>>11095005
>Hindus killed brahmins and put buddhists in power.
Literally a fulfilled prophecy of the Kali Yuga.

[Anonymous No.11095387]

What do you guys think of Wolfgang Smith? I've read Cosmos and Transcendence and I'm probably going to check out his book on the process theology of Teilhard de Chardin.

[Anonymous No.11095505]

>>11095387
I've actually never heard of him before, thanks for the namedrop. How was "Cosmos and Transcendence"?

[Anonymous No.11095610]

What's the proper approach to converting to Hinduism? It's not like traditional Hinduism forbids conversion or even proselytism, considering how Hinduism once predominated much of Southeast Asia.

[Anonymous No.11095612]

>>11095387
>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfgang_Smith
>he proposes linking the scientific method—and thus the modern sciences—to a non-bifurcationist, non-reductionist metaphysics in the form of a modified Thomistic ontology, showing how such a move resolves the apparent incoherences of quantum mechanics.[4]
>According to Smith, this interpretation of quantum mechanics allows for the usage of the hylomorphic concepts of potency and act to properly understand quantum superposition. For example, instead of considering that a photon is "simultaneously a wave and a particle" or "a particle in two distinct positions," one may consider that the photon (or any other physical object) at first does not exist in act, but only in potency; i.e., as "matter" in the hylomorphic meaning of the term, having the potential of becoming "a wave or a particle," or "of being here or there." Whether one of these outcomes will happen to this undifferentiated matter is dependent on the determination imposed upon it by the macroscopic corporeal object that provides its actualization. A photon, thus, would be no more strange for having many potentials than, say, an individual who has the "superposed" potentials of learning French and/or Spanish and/or Greek, all the while reading and/or walking and/or stretching his arms. A further consequence of this interpretation is that a corporeal object and its "associated physical object" are not dichotomized or reduced one to the other anymore but, on the contrary, altogether constitute a whole of which different aspects are dealt with depending upon perspective.
His book the Quantum Enigma looks fukken interesting, this guy should be added to the OP

[Anonymous No.11095628]

>>11095610
I asked this last thread and no one answered. Don't expect one

[Anonymous No.11095636]

>>11095610
The key is that you can't really be integrated into a caste, but there are certain groups that are beyond caste, in which category belongs, for example:
- tantrikas
- sannyasins
- practioners of kashmir shaivism (pic related is swami lakshmanjoo)
- yogis
- bhaktas etc

In other words, the best parts of Hinduism are accessible regardless of caste. It's integration into their society at large that requires caste.

[Anonymous No.11095787]

>>11095636
If I start having children and raise them in the Hindu tradition, would they still be outcastes?

[Anonymous No.11095831]

>>11095787
I don't know for certain. In modern India itself a lot of people might have a narrow outlook on who can be a Hindu and who can't, especially Smartas (one of the "sects"). They seem to forget that varna (caste) is fundamentally based on guna (quality) and not on birth, birth-caste is conventional (a good convention when used properly, but still a convention). Some people are trying to change that by teaching Shudras to perform Vedic rites (e.g. Swami Nithyananda), but there is backlash from more conservative sectors. In the U.S. a Shaivist "convert" named Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami (they really need to shorten these names lol) wrote a catechism for Hinduism called "Dancing with Shiva", it's not bad. In general Shaivism is the most accepting "sect" and the one least concerned with caste, since Shiva is the " transformer" (literally trans-form, the one beyond forms). I'm a Muslim btw, not a Hindu.

[Anonymous No.11095859]

Let's be honest here.
How many of you are Larpers?
Talking about Kshatriyas, priestly caste, kali yuga and so on.
How many of you actually follow a religion and try to follow it instead of jacking off to Hinduism (you will never be a Hindu; it's not made for your psychological type no matter how hard you try)

I read pretty much every Guenon books and while he's a very good read most people find themselves trapped into an endless spiral of mental masturbation.

A poor grandma who goes to church every week and believes with all her heart has more spiritual growth than most of you.

[Anonymous No.11095867]

>>11095859
I go to mosque almost every day for maghrib and isha and usually pray all five daily prayers at home, inshallah. Guenon influenced me to accept participation in a genuine orthodox tradition, not to become a LARPer.

[Anonymous No.11095871]

>>11095859
>not having pure atma-jnana and just contemplating your true identity for fun every day

[Anonymous No.11095876]

>>11095859
I have come to have really respect for my grand mothers spirituality anon, i am trying personally to get into buddhism and is trying to do it as honest as possible even though it has been hard lately, but i've not been so active on this thread - i posed some questions and answers to the last thread, but i'm not larping - i am tired of brainfarts, getting sick of them to be honest.

[Anonymous No.11095878]

>>11095867
>all five daily prayers at home
I mean besides maghrib and isha, and jumaa naturally.

[Anonymous No.11095879]

>>11095859
that's why i personally am looking more into the traditions that are related more towards to who i am and where I was born. It's not like there's a true religion in the west that is Traditional, and it gets even worse if you take Evolas view of Christianity.
If you mean by Larper a pseud who doesn't really believe in anything, then that is something else entirely. Metaphysics are real, always are always will be

[Anonymous No.11095887]

>>11095879
Muslim anon, here. I think Orthodox Christianity is legit. Have you gone to check them out before? I've been to their liturgies and they're quite beautiful.

[Anonymous No.11095902]

>>11095867
I'm happy for you then anon.
Guenon did the same for me (I'm Christian however) and I know I sounded harsh but that stupid battle over castes made me think about those people obsessed with their MBTI.

>>11095876
I don't know much about Buddhism to be honest other that one should try to avoid what comes from Tibet. A lot of deviant sects from there. I wish you good luck. It's probably more accessible to a westerner than Hinduism.

>>11095879
The Catholic Church is in a poor state but it's still legit. Especially if you try to follow the church who are still traditional.
Yes. I know it's probably rotten from the inside, but "the spirit" is still here so to speak.
Even protestantism, as shitty as it might be produced saintly types (Jakob Boeme, Bach) so do not despair.
Also this >>11095887

[Anonymous No.11095908]

>>11095902
the churchs that are*

[Anonymous No.11095914]

>>11095902
>that pic
kek saved

[Anonymous No.11095916]

>>11095902
>e honest other that one should try to avoid what comes from Tibet.
wut? i thought traditionalists tend to favor mahayana over hinayana (except evola but he's the black sheep of the trad family)

[Anonymous No.11095958]

>>11095916
I'm not saying one is better than the other.
I've only really read Guenon (and a bit of Schuon) and he didn't speak much about Buddhism.
He did recognize that is was legit as a whole so Mahayana is fine. However, it is well known that Tibetan buddhism has been a catalyzer for a lot of weird stuff in the past decades -especially for curious westerners-
I think some of it might have been co-opted by "the counter initiation"
I don't want to discourage you. Just be careful.

[Anonymous No.11095961]

>>11095887
that's still pretty eastern in my view, not related to any part of the America besides in the Russian, Greek, and Armenian enclaves in New York or Los Angeles, whereas all of my ancestors were British plantation owners in the South or Canadian fishermen in the great lakes.
I agree that they are quite beautiful, but aesthetics aside I can't view it as a path for me as it has never been related to the culture I live in. My ancestors and general folk have been more protties (not all bad, Böhme a good example), rosicrucians, grail folk, and even freemasonry. Hell I bet since my specific line owned a plantation they had friends if not were themselves freemasons, as was common in the old South.
I find it strange when someone converts to a foreign religion, such as Guenon or Schuon did with Islam when there could instead be a revival of the ideals of your country as instead Evola tried many times with Italy and a future greater Rome.

[Anonymous No.11095983]

>>11095961
>I find it strange when someone converts to a foreign religion, such as Guenon or Schuon did with Islam when there could instead be a revival of the ideals of your country

Guenon and Schuon didn't "convert" since they understood (at a core level, not merely on the mind) that all religions are one.
However, they did convert because there was no initiatic organization left in Europe and you cannot create one because it requires a line that dates back from the first times of Christianity.
It probably existed during their times (Fulcanelli) but it was too hidden to be found.

Most people here (and me the first) aren't made for initiation anyway. Being a virtuous human being and reaching paradise is already more than enough and God probably doesn't ask for more.

If you're in america and orthodoxy is really not for you then become Catholic.

[Anonymous No.11096003]

The prophecy of the things that will happen in the Kali age is so creepy. How could those anceint sages get everything just right? I remember reading one source, can't recall which right now, which said that during the Kali age people will judge a persons apperance solely based on their hairstyle. And exactly that is happening today, you can see a really scrawny and ugly person with a super nice haircut and people will say he's handsome. Like, how the hell did they predict that?

[Anonymous No.11096051]

>>11096003
People have been judging others based on hairstyle for ages. Even in stone age (current) Afghanistan men are made or broken based on beards

[Anonymous No.11096061]

>>11096003
If you know the fundamental principles (i.e. metaphysics) everything else is just filling in the blanks. Even Aristotle said that one who knows metaphysics in a certain sense already knows everything.

[Anonymous No.11096083]

>>11096061
Yes this is what i've been thinking about. They must have meditated a lot on the metaphysical principles of life. They knew the metaphysical principles that govern peoples behaviour, so therefore they could predict that in a few thousand years people would judge each other's apperance based on hairstyles. It's quite amazing the knowledge they attained.

They had a knowledge of a truth of a high order (maybe the highest even?) and from there they could derive knowledge of truths of lesser orders.

Also this is annoying because i meet sooo many people today who think that the highest form of knowledge comes from science, which is based on evidence, which is studied with the senses, when it is true that intuitive knowledge is of a higher order than scientific evidence-based knowledge, but try explaining that to a modern, you just get strange looks.

[Anonymous No.11096120]

>>11096003
They had civilizations back then that followed all the same patterns we see today. All they had to do was look at the past and present and see the growth and decline of human societies over time to see that things would probably continue as they were, and get worse and worse until the bubble popped and things went back to equilibrium. There's a reason science and mysticism have always been so closely tied.

[Anonymous No.11096130]

>>11095983
>Most people here (and me the first) aren't made for initiation anyway. Being a virtuous human being and reaching paradise is already more than enough and God probably doesn't ask for more.
I wouldn't say that. I've heard it said somewhere (I think the source was Imam al-Hadad's Book of Assistance) that one should never despair of being one of God's saints (awliya), and that God can take you in one moment and make you one of his close ones in an instant, if He so wills. Ultimately, it does not depend on you.
>7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
>8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

[Anonymous No.11096493]

just going to say it here, I dislike Schuon greatly and hate how he led the traditionalist school of thought

[Anonymous No.11096501]

>>11096493
I don't know his writing at all, but why?

[Anonymous No.11096539]

>>11096501
He lets his politics go into his religious views even more than Evola, whereas atleast Evola decided to keep that to their own separate books and that almost every one of his students end up spouting the same things as he said at the end of his life about political thoughts

[Anonymous No.11096582]

>>11096539
>his politics
please extrapolate

[Anonymous No.11096606]

>>11096493
>>11096539
I'm not familiar woth his politics, only read one of his books. I've always felt a little sketchy about him since reading Sedgewick's books. I hope it's all slander and untrue, but the "vertical wives" thing and the fact that he encouraged his Muslim followers to engage in unorthodox practices (like drinking alcohol) is a huge red-flag, as far as traditionalism goes. I'd love to read attempts to counter these claims by his folowers if anyone knows of any. Like I said, I hope it's slander, but if it isn't wew lad. What do you mean by his politics?

[Anonymous No.11096612]

>>11096606
>Sedgewick's books
I mean book, singular
>woth
with*

[Anonymous No.11096639]

>>11095958
>I think some of it might have been co-opted by "the counter initiation"
what do you mean by this?

[Anonymous No.11096706]

>>11096582
pretty much this>>11096606 plus his sort of gnosticism and he was trying to become a sort of saint, and you can see that with his readers and disciples outright just disavowing all these other authors and thinkers he didn't like

[Anonymous No.11096721]

>>11096606
>"vertical wives" thing
What's that?

[Anonymous No.11096741]

>>11096721
He """married""" some of his followers wives while they where still married to their husbands. He called them "vertical wives" (vertical means spiritual in his lingo). In Islam anyone that would willingly let themselves be cucked like that is known as a "dayooth", it's pretty pathetic.
>>11096639
I think Schuon is the reason some people think traditionalism is a "cult". That reputation seems to come almost entirely from him.

[Anonymous No.11096747]

>>11096741
Oops, second part was meant as a response to
>>11096706

[Anonymous No.11096776]

>>11096741
Yep, in my experience Schuon is the butt of most jokes when philo-Traditionalist people are mocking Traditionalism as being "okay, but still a cult." The rest of the jokes come from the Muslim tendency of slavishly worshiping their guru and obsessing over direct personal connections with gurus/lineages rather than knowledge or insight itself.

Unsurprisingly the two go well together. People who studied with Nasr are often the biggest sycophants, even when they barely know the guy. They can't and won't discuss post-Kantian philosophy, but they will give you a two hour description of how they touched Nasr in a bar one time, and how his great great great great great grandfather knew Muhammad's second cousin.

Meeting Trads in real life can really take the mystique out of all those hours reading Guenon by candlelight. It's like oh it's just a cult, alright then.

[Anonymous No.11096785]

>>11096741
>I think Schuon is the reason some people think traditionalism is a "cult". That reputation seems to come almost entirely from him.
Is Schuon a false flagger implanted by (((them)))?

[Anonymous No.11096796]

>>11096785
Lol, nah, I think he may have just went off the path at some point, but God knows best.

[Anonymous No.11096807]

>>11096741
That's a good summation of what I was trying to get at, I just can't use words well

[Anonymous No.11096899]

>>11096776
>the Muslim tendency of slavishly worshiping their guru
Uh, I don't think that's common at all among Muslims, you probably just know some niche group and are generalizing based on that experience. I know both ordinary Muslims and Muslims associated with sufi tariqa's and they aren't like that. Hindus, for example LITERALLY worship their gurus (pic related), but assuming they take that guru for a symbol and don't worship him in too vulgar a sense I guess you could say it's legitimate within the context of that tradition (still rubs me the wrong way though).
>People who studied with Nasr are often the biggest sycophants
Probably true lol, athough I respect Nasr greatly.
>post-Kantian philosophy
Why should anyone in particular care for the latest trends in specialized subbranches of European philosophy. I personally can't see any relevance in that, for me as a Muslim. Not everyone is going to be interested in your pet favorite philosophy.
>Meeting Trads in real life can really take the mystique out of all those hours reading Guenon by candlelight.
Sorry about your experience with "Trads". I consider myself a traditionalist, but I don't know any others in real life. Most of the people I know are just "ordinary believers" (don't mean to sound snobbish). Almost every day between prayer times I sit with a group of old Bengali men and drink chai tea, most of them hardky speak English. I'm not locked up in some traditionalisy ivory tower, and I don't think Guenon ever was either. Schuon may have started a trend of cliquishness.

[Anonymous No.11096962]

>>11096899
Maybe Bengals are different culturally? Arabs are fucking obsessed with tribalism and with lineages. It's stifling. They've combined the already unhealthy Hindu style guru slavery and "you absolutely need a master, there is no point in self-study," combined it with the sufi pir who in some traditions can tell you to eat rocks if he feels like it and you just have to do it, and combined that with the Arab assumption that anyone who studied under N must have access to eternal wisdom because N studied under N+1, and N+1 studied under N+1+1, etc.

>Why should anyone in particular care for the latest trends in specialized subbranches of European philosophy
In my experience, because they claim to. Lots of Nasr types pretend to understand modern philosophy in order to demonstrate that it was all already there in Traditional philosophy. That's the annoying thing. They will learn a few talking point soundbites about Kant or phenomenology via their cult and then go around spouting them in order to redirect every conversation back to Traditionalism.

I don't pretend to know anything about Sabbatai Zevi but I don't go around talking to Zevi scholars and waiting for an opening to say "Zevi was really just repeating the Christian medievals, so study those instead."

[Anonymous No.11096971]

>>11096962
I don't know any students of Nasr. I don't even know other traditionalists. Sorry if you've had negative experiences with Muslims.

[Anonymous No.11097002]

>>11096606
I've also heard that Schuon fabricated rituals with Islamic and Native American elements. Isn't syncretism a big no-no for Traditionalists?

[Anonymous No.11097013]

>>11096971
I didn't mean to imply that you did. Just that some people who call themselves Trads are annoying. I'm sure the Trads are equally annoyed by all the Evola LARPers these days. (And I like Evola.)

But I don't think it's fair to identify Traditionalists as Muslims or vice versa. Even claiming Traditionalism as a direct subset of Islam is a bit iffy, since there are many fellow travellers who are not Muslims or at least not very good Muslims. I think reading Guenon deeply and being part of your own traditions, actual traditions in the normal sense, is probably the best way to be a "Traditionalist," so you're probably on the right track.

That said, I'm not a fan of Muslims either. I've always been a defender of the "everyone master in his own house" style, so I have no problem with Islam in the Islamic world, but I don't think it's the right destiny for the Christian West. The only outcomes that can result from Islam being present in the West are repression of Islam, repression of Christianity, or one or the other existing in ghettos - like Christians and Jews do under Islam. None of these is a good solution.

[Anonymous No.11097026]

>>11097002
Yes. He practices native American stuff. Allegedly there's a photo of him out there completely naked with a native american feather headdress surrounded by girls in bikinis.

[Anonymous No.11097029]

>>11090438
Why not just start a Traditionalist lodge yourself?

[Anonymous No.11097061]

>>11095354
Which one is that?

[Anonymous No.11097111]

>>11095859
I don't think I'm being too dramatic when I say that Western society in the early 21st century is possibly the most spiritually bankrupt civilization to exist. Whichever avenues for spirituality that *do* exist are either lame and/or corrupt Christian sects, or else milquetoast New Age "feel good" stuff that's essentially just an elaborate coping mechanism for modernity.

In this context, for a true spiritual seeker, especially a young one without many connections or resources, the path ahead seems very obfuscated and demanding. Not that the path has ever been easy, but in this age, it can feel like trying to cut your way through the Amazon with a penknife.

To that end, freely-available resources like the Internet and books act as a small beacon of guidance and illumination, despite the obvious imperfection of such platforms. Yes, they can also lead to a lot of half-baked ideas being promoted, but in lieu of having a genuine lineage, master, temple, etc. to give proper instruction, this is the best thing we have.

I aim to be a grandpa in church who believes with all his heart.

[Anonymous No.11097117]

>>11097061
Gurus will no longer be respected and their students will attempt to injure them. Their teachings will be insulted, and followers of Kama will wrest control of the mind from all human beings.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kali_Yuga

[Anonymous No.11097130]

>>11097117
Are you saying Buddhists follow Kama and manipulate people's minds?

[Anonymous No.11097165]

>>11097130
I didn't mean it as LITERALLY literally.

[Anonymous No.11097175]

>>11097165
.. what?

[Anonymous No.11097252]

>>11097111
If this comforts you, the current state of Western spiritually is best described as bardo, the intermediate stage between death and rebirth. At some point in the near future, there's going to be a Second Religiousness where Faustian civilization, having exhausted even postmodernity, will attempt to return to the religion of its roots (best bets being either Traditional Catholicism or Western Rite Orthodoxy). Also concurrent to the Second Religiousness is Caesarism, where modern political institutions and ideologies are so corroded by late capitalism that they will simply be swept aside by a return to absolute rulership. Being the political counterpart to the Second Religiousness, the future Caesars will be keen to patronize the spiritual renewal (or ossification, depending on which side you take) of the West. Historical parallels would be the Roman Caesars with their Divus cults, the Han Dynasty institutionalizing ancestral rites under a Confucian framework, and the Seljuks sponsoring al-Ghazali and his reinvigoration of Sufism. Not to say that the process of involution has completely ceased overall, but history does a cycle of Tradition decaying and reasserting itself.

[Anonymous No.11097767]

>>11097252
you've been reading too many ironpill comics, my dude

[Anonymous No.11097805]

thread's about to get locked, who's gonna make the next one? op said he was done making them for now
>>11084433 >>11084523 >>11084541

[Anonymous No.11098053]

Only Sufism presents an authentic initiatic path, and that because it is really the descendent of the ancient schools of philosophy that adapted the cloak of Islam to veil its doctrines beneath the darkest of coverings

Minds like Henry Corbin could see the underlying truth in all things, even Shia Islam, but such should be read only with the understanding that comes with crossing the Abyss

All true paths trace back to Greco-Roman alchemy and Hermeticism via the west, as well as Tantra, the only truly practical Eastern path

For Gnosticism, one should read especially the Nassene sermon in Hippolytus' Refutation of All Heresies

[Anonymous No.11098058]

>>11084523
>[e-mail]
Is this a joke, what level of larping are you on ?
Excellent thread nonetheless.

[Anonymous No.11098064]

>>11098053
Correction, Taoist alchemy is also entirely practical

The NoFap people have stumbled upon the first stage of the path of Temperance, to progress further they will need to engage with their concupiscence in order to transform it (igne natura renovatur integra)

[Anonymous No.11098084]

>>11097026
>>11097002
>>11096785
>>11096776
>>11096741
>>11096706
>>11096606
>tfw there is an alternate history where Hitler won WWII, and Evola hijacked the Sophia Perennis after Guenon died, instead of Schuon, which led to the restoration of the Holy Roman Empire in its former pagan glory as the rejuvenated Center of the World along with the return to Tradition in stride, which ended the Kali Yuga, and brought all of humanity to realize the One Absolute Truth.

[Anonymous No.11098342]

>"Rene GOOnon"

[Anonymous No.11098365]

>>11095628
because there isn't one retard

[Anonymous No.11098871]

>>11098084
as much as i would like that, evola himself states that metahistory controls history, so if it is not able for their to be a return to the center, there will not be one.
Id like to reference Spengler for a moment when he said we are going to be headed towards an age of Caesarism here in america. That's probably when the Kalki myth will spring up, whenever that Caesar comes forth

[Anonymous No.11098884]

>>11097029
These obsess over unbroken tradition too much for that.

[Anonymous No.11098899]

>>11098884
>unbroken tradition
what?

[Anonymous No.11098926]

>>11098899
if you don't have a direct descendant of lines of gurus then your lodge will be considered false. except if you're Evola who disagrees with needing that

[Anonymous No.11099279]

the world is my initiation, i am become kalki, destroyer of death.

[Anonymous No.11099446]

>>11098084
'no'

[Anonymous No.11099458]

make a new thread someone

[Anonymous No.11099492]

>>11097805
>>11099458
Be the change you want to see in the world :

>>11099488
>>11099488
>>11099488