/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14382696]

What did Rene Guenon say about Gnosticism, Neoplatonism and Hermeticism? Ive recently started reading Guenon and really like his work, he's basically saying everything I have been thinking for ages.

Although he shills eastern esoterism pretty hard, Western Neoplatonism and Gnosticism seem strangely absent from his work.
I have heard someone here say that he was critical both of Neoplatonism and Gnosticism, although Guenon himself had never read the Enneads and the Nag Hammadi texts hadn't been translated during his lifetime.

What specifically did he say about these esoteric schools of thought? are they reconcilable with the Guenonian worldview?

[Anonymous No.14382738]

why is this guy being spammed?

[Anonymous No.14382739]

He never read Plotinus

[Anonymous No.14382762]

>>14382739
Did he ever speak about him? its a shame that he didnt

[Anonymous No.14382775]

>>14382738
Because he is the best Philosopher of all time. And he pretty much destroyed all of modern western thought.

People don't realise it yet but his thought is going to cause a traditionalist revolution

[Anonymous No.14382831]

>>14382775
that doesn't explain why you are spamming him? you are making people annoyed, not encouraging them to read him

[Anonymous No.14382837]

>>14382831
this. i know im fucking annoying when i post osho.........

[Anonymous No.14382844]

>>14382831
That's exactly what he wants though. He doesn't really like guenon, he justs wants to discredit him

[Anonymous No.14382850]

>>14382831
>why you are spamming him?
guenonposting is a decentralized positive feedback loop.

[Anonymous No.14382860]

>>14382844
That would be a pretty clever tactic if you think about it. Even the Whitehead spammer was never this bad.

[Anonymous No.14382866]

>>14382844
Well, he converted at least me to full-blown guenonism, so I can't say that it has been working too well.

[Anonymous No.14382868]

>>14382866
stop falseflagging. I know it's you, anti guenonposter

[Anonymous No.14382869]

>>14382831
OP here, This is the only Guenon thread I have made. I genuinely want to know the connection between Guenon and Gnostic/Neoplatonism.

Because my only criticism of Guenon so far is that he seems to ignore western esoterism. Although I agree with his criticisms of Theosophy

[Anonymous No.14382875]

>>14382869
>OP here, This is the only Guenon thread I have made.
sure it is seguro

[Anonymous No.14382878]

>>14382875
ok guénonposter.

[Anonymous No.14382887]

>>14382869
>>14382875
>>14382878
>>14382868
>>14382866
based guenonposter hivemind

[Anonymous No.14382888]

>>14382868
You seem to be deeply poisoned by modernity if you can't tell that I'm being genuine. Take a break from the board, friend.

[Anonymous No.14382889]

>>14382738
russian trolls spamming dugin related ‘thinkers’

[Anonymous No.14382890]

>>14382888
>>14382878

[Anonymous No.14382893]

>>14382887

[Anonymous No.14382948]

>>14382878
>>14382887
remember lads, whenever he uses 'guenonposter' you know its him.

[Anonymous No.14382960]

>>14382948
ok seguro

[Anonymous No.14382963]

>>14382960
>still afraid to say guenonfag

[Anonymous No.14382965]

>>14382696
the more you spam this homo the more people are gonna hate on him and the less likely it is for them to go read him. Everybody knows him already. Create 1 or 2 threads, not 9, fagget.

I think you are doing this for attention.

[Anonymous No.14382973]

>>14382965
lol. No, I'm not going to read this irrelevant 19th century orientalist muslim jihadi.

[Anonymous No.14382974]

>>14382963
ok antiguneonfag

[Anonymous No.14382987]

>>14382974
>>14382984
>still afraid to say guenonfag

[Anonymous No.14382998]

>>14382987
Why would I call you guenonfag when it's obvious that it is I who is the notorious guenonfag?

[Anonymous No.14383002]

>>14382696
He emphasized the need to be initiated into a living tradition (something pure gnosticism and Neoplatonism isn't) as a vehicle for for spiritual realization. On a interesting note he was ordained a gnostic bishop before he turned his back on the French occult scene.

[Anonymous No.14383009]

>>14383002
I can agree with that. All the modern "Gnostic" orders (Crowley, Samael Aun Weor, Ecclesia Gnostica, Neo-gnostic churches, Rosicrucian, etc.)
are just pale imitations of the original Gnostic movement. You're better off just being a Sufi Muslim.

There is still good content in the original Gnostic texts and the Enneads though

[Anonymous No.14383013]

>>14383002
the guy was into all kinds of crap. That's why you shouldn't care about his opinion. He was clearly somebody with a very low-IQ, being attracted to whatever new rite or cult he discovered as he lived.

[Anonymous No.14383030]

>>14383013
He wasn't a brainlet, he studied mathematics and philosophy and taught them at a university level and knew a dozen of languages, I think he was aware and dissatisfied with the limits of rationalism and exoteric religion and his sojourn in occultism was a manifestation of his search for truth, even if misplaced you cannot blame him.

[Anonymous No.14383329]

>>14382762
He spoke of him only in second hand, in a letter confessed to never having studied him (he might have read a treatise or two). Guenon was a pseud when it came to anything outside Indian thought or Sufism.

[Anonymous No.14383395]

>>14383329
He was a pseud within Indian thought and Sufism as well, so it fits.

[Guenonfag No.14383404]

>>14383395
How so? He was taught in person by Hindus and then by Sufis.

[Anonymous No.14383549]

>>14383404
who cares if he was taught in person

[Guenonfag No.14383557]

>>14383549
So tell me then what did he get wrong about Hinduism and Sufism?

[Anonymous No.14383574]

>>14382696
Well, he started as a member of the Gnostic Church of France, and wrote for the journal La Gnose. You might want to read his early essay "The Demiurge" (in Miscellanea).

[Anonymous No.14383585]

>>14383574
Ill look into it. Did he ever retract/change his views on the Gnostic Cosmology?

[Anonymous No.14383645]

>>14382696
>What did Rene Guenon say about
>Gnosticism
He said (Sethian) Gnosticism was wrong for viewing the creator/world as malevolent
>Neoplatonism
He notes in some of his works that Neoplatonism was traditionalism and in line with Vedanta but correctly notes that it was incomplete and doesn't reach the sublime heights of eastern doctrines, as Plotinus failed to acheive a permanent union with the One and map out a praxis for others to follow in his lead as say Shankara or Sufis like Ibn Arabi and Jami did
"I never wrote anything on Plotinus, and admit that I never had the time to study him closely; but I know that there are many similarities to be made with oriental doctrines...Only there is one thing that has always shocked me: this history of states that Plotinus would have attained a certain number of times in his life, and, from which, seem to have left nothing permanent, which is poorly understood from the point of view of initiation; there would have been, in any case, something very incomplete in relation to his realization." - Rene Guenon, letter to Dr.Duby, 14 December 1936, Cairo
>Hermeticism
He wrote that it was traditional and occasionally draws parallels in his books between it and eastern doctrines

[Anonymous No.14383810]

>>14382775
kek
There are five or six threads up and not one has any substance.

[Anonymous No.14384227]

>>14383557
nobody ever has a good answer to that because he didn't get anything wrong about them

[Anonymous No.14384778]

>>14382775
this but unironically

[Anonymous No.14384798]

STOP SPAMMING GUENON. YOU HAVE FOREVER SULLIED HIS NAME ON THIS BOARD BY SPAMMING HIM INTO OBLIVION. USE THE CATALOG YOU ABSOLUTE TROGLODYTE. THERE ARE ALREADY MULTIPLE THREADS ON HIM. THERE ARE COUNTLESS THREADS ON HIM IN THE ARCHIVE.

[Anonymous No.14385509]

>>14384798
more like you got retroactively refuted by Guenon and are resorting to manipulative tricks to stop people from talking about the man who did so

[Anonymous No.14385588]

>>14383574
>>14383585
>>14383645
ok 50 replies in and nobody has given a clear answer other than these.

Guenon thought that gnosticism was useless because it's incomplete, we only have one text. One must look into traditions which have not been lost to time and history. So hinduism, islam etc... He mentions this in east & west.

>>14384798
the man behind the majority of guenonthreads is the schizo trying to bait 'guenonfag' (his own paranoid delusion) into replying for some reason. so basically this schizo antagonizes himself. he thinks I'm 'guenonfag' because apparently my posts have a distinct style because I'm ESL (french) but I'm not even the original guenon poster.

>>14382775
>traditionalist revolution
the "traditionalist revolution" will be counter-traditional, it will follow the reign of quantity and will be lead by the antichrist. The coming 'traditionalist revolution' is but a mere parody of tradition. If you account for figures like Dugin, they are part of this so called revolution, since they welcome everything 'traditional' but reject the concept of 'counter-tradition', basically they are usurpers leading you astray.

[Anonymous No.14385608]

>>14382696
Read Guerin not Guenon.

[Anonymous No.14385667]

>>14385588
>The coming 'traditionalist revolution' is but a mere parody of tradition.
So how would the real traditional revolution look like and how do we detect its coming?

[Anonymous No.14385715]

>>14385588
Seems pretty brainlet. What if the good does not win? Then we are stuck with the degenerate form of tradition which either survived or was itself a subversion of the old traditions.
As a recent example, we should simply abandon all German history because it has been lost. The very method justifies humanism as the ultimate tradition.
Is there a quote for his position on this?

[Anonymous No.14386181]

Has anyone read Frances Yates books on Giordano Bruno and Hermeticism? I hear they are pretty based. Would someone recommend please some traditionalist takes on the hermetic corpus?

[Anonymous No.14386196]

>>14382869
>>14382696
He did not like dualistic cosmology, and he criticized ditheistic variants of Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism, and Catharism. I forgot the name of the essay, but I remember it was pretty explicit. I remember he liked monotheistic or monist versions of these traditions I listed though like Zurvanism and Valentinianism.

[Anonymous No.14386284]

>>14386196
Dualism has some nice myths and traditions associated with it but it is essentially confused monism anyway.

[Anonymous No.14386289]

>>14386284
I disagree. I am a dualist, but I dislike monism even though I can respect it.

[Anonymous No.14386313]

>>14386289
You of course can disagree, but that doesn't stop dualism from being an essentially refuted position. Most traditions have been monism because monism is the logical solution to the inherent paradoxes of dualism.

[Anonymous No.14386320]

>>14386313
>inherent paradoxes of dualism
Such as?

[Anonymous No.14386336]

>>14386313
I wrote a paper, which I shared with you.
>that doesn't stop dualism from being an essentially refuted position
It's not refuted. There are still endless metaphysical debates going on.
>Most traditions have been monism b
There was more religious diversity in the past. What's funny is there was also more biodiversity too.
>inherent paradoxes of dualism.
Is that why a lot of monist mystics utilize paradox or koan manner of speaking? You see it in both Sufis and Zen Buddhists. If anything, monism has more inherent paradoxes. In fact, most monist metaphysical systems utilized paraconsistent forms of logic.

[Anonymous No.14386389]

>>14382831

I never read im but now im gonna.
Im gonna piss in your death mouth you dusgusting communist

[Anonymous No.14386395]

>>14386389
this. all the antiguenonfag schizo rants have made me want to read him, Where should I start?

[Anonymous No.14386400]

>>14382998

Why, yes, I am collogially known as Guénonfag, how could you tell?

[Anonymous No.14386410]

>>14386395

I dont know, WHERE DO I START?
I got Arthur Powell on my wishlist for Christmass but I have become quite keen on this Guénon.

Also, fuck muslims and fuck jews and fuck yazidis, give me that real God manuscripts

[Anonymous No.14386416]

>>14386410
>fuck muslims

Never gonna make it anon, Guénon was a Muslim

[Anonymous No.14386500]

>>14386416

I dont give a shit muslims are submitted by Lat-Allat and the kabaa allah

Legion of God only sorry, satanist and heretics needn't apply

[Anonymous No.14387015]

>>14386416
guenon converted back to catholicism later in life

[Anonymous No.14387109]

>>14387015
I really feel sorry for the Guenonfags who get trolled into replying to your shitty bait posts, I've seen you do this a lot, lie and post fake guenon/evola quotes and hope that people are too stupid to actually read the original sources

[Anonymous No.14387120]

>>14387015
He didn't convert back but he was very heretical by muslim standards

[Anonymous No.14387126]

>>14387120
Salafi* standards.

[Anonymous No.14387129]

>>14387126
>Islam is whatever my white Islamist convert larper friends say it is
>t. larps as muslim hindu in France

Cringe

[Anonymous No.14387150]

>>14387129
>Islam is whatever my Atheist interpretation of it should be


Fucking cringe

[Anonymous No.14387165]

>>14387150
You are the atheist and heretic, "Hindu Muslim" living in France. Pathetic larper. Never even read the Quran.

[Anonymous No.14387172]

>>14387165
I am a Sunni Muslim living Saudi Arabia, and I have no problem with Guenon. Stop speaking on our behalf thx

[Anonymous No.14387175]

>>14387172
Whatever does it for you larper. Keep pretending to be a muslim, at least on line nobody can tell you're a cringe westernized hinduboo.

[Anonymous No.14387181]

>>14387172
>Saudi Arabia
You are a Takfiri.

[Anonymous No.14387310]

>>14385588
>the "traditionalist revolution" will be counter-traditional, it will follow the reign of quantity and will be lead by the antichrist. The coming 'traditionalist revolution' is but a mere parody of tradition. If you account for figures like Dugin, they are part of this so called revolution, since they welcome everything 'traditional' but reject the concept of 'counter-tradition', basically they are usurpers leading you astray.

this anon speaks the truth and the utmost redpill

[Anonymous No.14387317]

>>14385588
>>14387310
samefag

[Anonymous No.14387324]

>>14383810
its almost like that's a pattern with the schizotypal retards that shill bad pop-philosophy.

[Anonymous No.14387384]

>>14387324
So whiteheadfags?

[Anonymous No.14387397]

>>14387384
Who? No, the people who post 5,000 threads a day shilling for glue-sniffer.

[Anonymous No.14387416]

>>14387397
So... whiteheadfag then. OK got it.

Btw, there are several guenonfriends, no one is shilling. The only shill threads are made by the whitehead guy who admits he is from Facebook, with quotes of Whitehead as the OP. Also the dualist zoroastrian pseud who says he wants to debate but then never responds because he "finds philosophy boring".

[Anonymous No.14387459]

>>14385715
That's why initiation was so important for Guenon. There are still a handful of traditions lead by gurus, monks, priests, shamans, magicians, etc who have succeeded their predecessors from a long unbroken chain of transmission. It's all a matter of finding one that is legit who will initiate you. Evola saw it differently because these traditions are fading away too, and the only option left for the "differentiated man" is to ride the tiger.

[Anonymous No.14387491]

>>14385588
>we only have one Gnostic text

This might have been true in Guenons time, when Psitis Sophia was the only surviving Gnostic text. But a heap more have been discovered since then in the Nag Hammadi library, Dead Sea Scrolls and other random findings like the Gospel of Judas.

It's enough to get a good picture of both the Valentinian and Sethian worldviews, not many contemporary philosophers have written about them yet, but I can see Gnosticism making a comeback in the near future. It was only in the 80s that we got our first English translations of the Gnostic texts

[Anonymous No.14387552]

>>14387310
is monster a traditionalist beverage? i have seen many irl traditionalists and anime girls drinking it.

[Anonymous No.14387580]

>>14387491
>Gospel of Judas
Wasn't it faked? Or is that what the usual parties want us to believe?

[Anonymous No.14387635]

>>14387580
What do you mean by "faked"?

According to the Church, all Gnostic Gospels are fake.
But Scholars pretty much unanimously believe that the Gospel of Judas was written by Sethian Gnostics, although it is a fairly late text.

In my own opinion, some of the earlier Gnostic Gospels do contain legitimate oral teachings passed on by Jesus and his disciples (The Gospel of Thomas is the best example, and the most "authentic" gnostic Gospel that can be traced back to Jesus).
Many of the other ones are probably Pseudepigrapha, but were written by Gnostic sages who had achieved some form of enlightenment. You gotta read them for yourself to make your own decisions I guess

[Anonymous No.14387770]

>>14387552
Which energy drink would Guenon approve of?

[Anonymous No.14387781]

>>14387416
>Also the dualist zoroastrian pseud who says he wants to debate but then never responds because he "finds philosophy boring".
I am no pseud. I always respond and even gave a 2000+ word paper criticizing nondualism.

[Anonymous No.14387803]

>>14387416
>>14387781
Also, I never said I find philosophy boring, and I do always respond. It's more than an impasse is reached and my positions are not challenged any further.

[Anonymous No.14387960]

>>14387803
You respond with the same tired dualist talking points and never argue in good faith, it's tedious and exhausting, that's why the guenonian crowd never bothers replying to you. To be fair they are mostly discussing amongst themselves.

[Anonymous No.14387985]

>>14382775
Inshallah brother, God willing.

[Anonymous No.14388017]

>>14387960
>same tired dualist talking points
I mean, there's not that much repetition in what I have to say, but given the nature of philosophical debate, there is bound to be repeating of key points.
>never argue in good faith
How can you determine that? That's quite the insinuation that undoubtedly reveals bad faith on your part rather than mine.
>it's tedious and exhausting
All metaphysical debate tends to be tedious and exhausting. I mean, algorithmic analysis of computer code is tedious and exhausting too, but it kind of needs to be done. It has to be approached with impartiality and the willingness to endure rigorous conceptual thinking.
>that's why the guenonian crowd never bothers replying to you
That doesn't bother me in the least. They can continue to be full of themselves for all that I care. It's not my problem.
>To be fair they are mostly discussing amongst themselves.
Yes, discussion is less tedious and exhausting when one creates echo chambers or hive minds. Seems more up your ally. You can become one with the hive mind of nonduality if that's what you want. Become one with The Many...

[Anonymous No.14388042]

>>14388017
The last sentence was a reference to this. This is pretty much equivalent to what you monists are promoting:

https://youtu.be/f-1hbJyOBWU

I think the VA could work well with a lot of Mahayana or Advaita nondualist sutras too. Some of the documents describing the nature of the mass or Many resembles some Advaita and Mahayana sutras.

[Anonymous No.14388201]

>>14388042
why would you pretend to understand advaita when you clearly don't? cringe

[Anonymous No.14388222]

>>14388201
Monist and nondual rhetoric are honestly not that hard to understand. I've read a lot of nondual texts (e.g., Mahayana sutras, Sri Ramana Maharshi, etc.) It just comes down to the use of paraconsistent forms of logic to break down the discursive, conceptualizing mind, which leads to a kind of absorptive experience with the All or "Infinite". It is quite simple-minded in a way that loses all ontological nuances and intricacies. You can call it "suchness", "Brahman", "one mind", "Dharmakaya", or whatever, it's all unsatisfactory and a poor attempt of describing the true nature of reality. In fact, there is an element of subversion here, which you are ignoring.

[Anonymous No.14388886]

>>14388222
If you call thousands of years of consistent meditation in order to discover these truths "simple mined" then okay. The only subverter is you.

[Anonymous No.14389379]

>>14382762
>>14382739
>>14382696
From his letters.

> Je n’ai jamais rien écrit sur Plotin, et même j’avoue que je n’ai jamais eu le temps de l’étudier de près ; mais je sais qu’il y a là en effet bien des rapprochements à faire avec les doctrines orientales, de sorte que je ne suis nullement surpris de ceux que vous avez relevés, et qui me paraissent tout à fait justifiés. Seulement, il y a une chose qui m’a toujours étonné : c’est cette histoire d’états que Plotin aurait atteint un certain nombre de fois dans sa vie, et qui, par là même, semblent n’avoir rien eu de permanent, ce qui se comprend mal au point de vue initiatique ; il y aurait eu là, en tout cas, quelque chose de très incomplet sous le rapport de la réalisation.

Dans les extraits de Plotin que vous avez joints à votre lettre, il y a en effet des passages qui sont très remarquables ; mais, d’un autre côté, cela confirme encore ce que j’ai toujours pensé du caractère incomplet de sa réalisation. Ce qu’il dit de l’« obstacle du corps » exprime en somme ses propres limitations, mais il est étonnant qu’il n’ait pas pu concevoir au moins théoriquement l’état de « jîvan-mukti » ; en tout cas, il paraît assez clair qu’il n’a jamais réalisé que des états transitoires et qu’il n’a pas pu les transformer en états permanents. Vous avez sans doute raison en ce qui concerne la métaphysique « négative » ; mais alors le terme d’« Un » qu’il emploie est impropre, car, n’étant pas négatif, il ne devrait pas s’appliquer au delà de l’Être ; il paraît y avoir là une imperfection de langage. Quant à la contradiction au moins apparente que vous avez relevée, je ne vois qu’un moyen de l’expliquer : c’est qu’il transpose là le mot « pensée » pour le prendre dans le sens de principe des êtres pensants ; autrement, comment pourrait-il dire que « la pensée ne pense pas elle-même », mais « est cause qu’un autre être pense » ?

Merci des nouveaux textes de Plotin, qui en effet, au sujet de l’« Un », semblent bien pouvoir s’interpréter dans le sens que vous dites ; il est certain que l’absence du zéro chez les Grecs constitue à cet égard une imperfection dont il y a lieu de tenir compte. D’un autre côté, du fait que les lettres ont une valeur numérique, comme en hébreu et en arabe, l’alphabet grec a, au point de vue des sciences traditionnelles, une grande supériorité sur l’alphabet latin ; mais ceci, bien entendu, est une question toute différente, Pour ce qui est du μή ὄν appliqué à la ὕλη) , je pense que, au fond, il doit s’entendre au sens de la potentialité pure ; en tout cas, il est évident que ce n’est aucunement du « Non-Être » métaphysique qu’il s’agit.

[Anonymous No.14389641]

>>14387397
the man posting the guenonthreads en masse hates guenon, if you had a modicum of common sense you would have realized this 6months ago

[Anonymous No.14389675]

>>14389641
the "posting guenon threads discredits guenon and is done by people who dislike him" is just a shitty reverse-psychology psyop made in hopes of getting people to stop talking about him, I see right through your tricks hylic

[Anonymous No.14389688]

>>14389641
>>14389675
kek

[Anonymous No.14389696]

>>14389675
The schizo poster is powerful and he is turning all of us into schizos, watch out. Fact is he is behind the majority of threads, no reverse psychology here - I am one of the regular guenon posters. His obsession is borderline demonic.

[Anonymous No.14389701]

>>14383013

>knowing more than several languages, some of them long dead
>developed a system of comparative religion to find universal truths
>low iq

reminder that every time a retard calls you low IQ, he just is really saying that you lack "virtue", for whatever idiotic reason they can come up with

[Anonymous No.14389703]

>>14389688
I know, it's kinda funny that some schizo dude was able to mindfuck the entire board into complete chaos.

[Anonymous No.14389715]

>>14389703
there are at least two people involved here, the original guenonfag, and the guy who accuses everyone talking about guenon of beng the guenonfag. Then there are a lot of people muddying the waters further for lulz. I have no idea but it's entertaining

[Anonymous No.14389776]

>>14389715
This, Guenon is just popular and the local buddhists can't stand it for some reason

[Anonymous No.14390552]

Bumping the real guenonposter discussions to drown out the schizo buddhist troll threads

[Anonymous No.14390635]

>>14382831
>>14385588
>>14382837
Guenon is a mathematician and taught western philosophy for years kek. Open any of his books and he dismantles western philosophy with actual arguments, examples, quotes etc... what more do you want? Oh, you've never read him. Far worse, you started reading philosophy late/ after high school so you feel to need to clinge to 'notorious' philosophers because of your own lack of experience in philosophy. you need intellectual credit; you are a pseud. Contrary to myself, I've been reading the canon since I'm 8 so I can read Kant then Guenon then whomever I wish because I actually read according to my own intellectual inclinations, not for external factors. Too bad you are dumb.

[Anonymous No.14390641]

>>14390635
>even using the same picture he used to post when he copypasted this

kek, nice touch but i think you might be driving the dude nuts

[Anonymous No.14391029]

>>14390635
>since I'm

[Anonymous No.14391144]

>>14388886
If you read my 2000-word essay I shared with you, then you would be able to tell the issue is one of interpretation. One can have a mystical experience, sure, but there is nothing about it that necessarily points to monism/nondualism.

[Anonymous No.14391157]

>>14391144
Except it has done so for most traditions for all of history and dualism has always been an aberration or degeneration.

[Anonymous No.14391863]

>>14391029
What?

[Anonymous No.14392323]

>>14382696

[Anonymous No.14392328]

>>14382696
yo yo rene

[Anonymous No.14392340]

What did he even write?

[Anonymous No.14392358]

Dunno, he I know what your mom said when I plowed her ass

[Anonymous No.14392359]

>>14392340
He is most known for writing self-help books for autistic children who don't understand religion.

[Anonymous No.14392381]

>>14392340
>Crisis of the Modern World
>The Reign of Quantity
>Man and his becoming
>>14392359
That's evola

[Anonymous No.14392393]

>>14391157
>all of these assertions without any backing
>>14391157
>Except it has done so for most traditions for all of history
No. There was a lot more ideological diversity back then.
>dualism has always been an aberration or degeneration.
Nope, that's nondualism.

[Anonymous No.14392909]

>>14389776
this, they are absolutely seething

[Anonymous No.14393254]

>>14387310
>>14385588

[Anonymous No.14393606]

>>14393254
I'm going to read this, thank you fren :D

[Anonymous No.14394327]

>>14392393
nice cope

[Anonymous No.14394732]

>>14393254
Can you give us a quick TL;DR? I don't want to support amazon by buying the book.

[Anonymous No.14394790]

>>14394327
There's no cope.

[Anonymous No.14394895]

>>14388222
>It just comes down to the use of paraconsistent forms of logic to break down the discursive, conceptualizing mind, which leads to a kind of absorptive experience with the All or "Infinite"
Henosis is an innate human experience and the basis for all religion and mysticism. You can use pretty much any of the traditional frameworks to interpret the experience, or make up your own esoteric interpretation, although you'll probably sound like a schizo. Neoplatonism I think has the least unnecessary fluff associated and is the most straightforward as it isn't the direct result of some tribal caveman tradition.
>a poor attempt of describing the true nature of reality
It describes phenomena in the mind, whether that experience is a reflection of the material world is certainly doubtful. But the implications on morality are pretty easy to deduce from the experience itself.

[Anonymous No.14394927]

>>14394895
There can be a henosis with a myriad of conflicting planes, substances, conglomeration of processes, or whatever you want to call it. For example, one can have a union with love or a union with hatred, and they are both qualitatively different from one another, even during states of extreme absorption. What you are claiming is there is a union with a "source" that sublates all oppositions, but this involves additional interpretations or assumptions, which ultimately comes down to faith. This would take awhile to further analyze.
At most you can say there is phenomenologically an experience of oneness. Okay, but it does not follow that monism, nondualism, or monotheism are true from this. There is still a possibility one is united with x at the expense of y, and that it is possible to experience oneness with a duality or even plurality.

[Anonymous No.14395067]

>>14394927
>At most you can say there is phenomenologically an experience of oneness. Okay, but it does not follow that monism, nondualism, or monotheism are true from this.
Correct, as I said I don't believe henosis allows us to make claims about the nature of the material world.
You make a good point though. I wouldn't say that you become 'one' with a quality like love, the quality you give it follows as interpretation from the unity with the One. The One itself is absolute, perfect, and indeterminate.
I like to think henosis is a left over experience from before consciousness organized as a self-referential subject 'I', ego if you will, as what is necessarily lost in the unity experience is the mental construct that makes you an atomic individual.

[Anonymous No.14395117]

>>14395067
It's not just a matter of henosis with one's own isolated qualities, but a henosis with the salient qualities that also define one's immediate surroundings. Think "extended mind hypothesis". To be more precise, let's say something like panexperientialism were true, then the intentional state, qualia of beings surrounding oneself, and etc. all participate, in that moment, in henosis. Therefore, it becomes a matter of henosis in relation to a duality or plurality and not some indeterminate, neutral Oneness. Even before the I, there were salient feelings and rudimentary intentions.
Therefore, there are henoses (pl?) of varying types, and these varying types point to a myriad of realities, conflicting planes, substances, conglomeration of processes, or whatever you want to call it. This world can thus be seen as an intersection of preternatural realities conflicting with one another during specific events, intentional states, and so forth. This would point more to a hierarchy and structure of a non-"naturalistic" kind, value as a modality of the real and having an epistemic function, practice of various kinds penetrating various kinds and degrees/altering oneself in various kinds and degrees.
Sorry if I sounded unclear. A bit tired.

[Anonymous No.14395146]

>>14395067
It's not just a matter of henosis with one's own isolated qualities, but a henosis with the salient qualities that also define one's immediate surroundings. Think "extended mind hypothesis". To be more precise, let's say something like panpsychism were true, then the intentional state, qualia of beings surrounding oneself, and etc. all participate, in that moment, in henosis. Therefore, it becomes a matter of henosis in relation to a duality or plurality and not some indeterminate, neutral Oneness. Even before the I, there were salient feelings and rudimentary intentions.
Therefore, there are henoses (pl?) of varying types, and these varying types point to a myriad of realities, conflicting planes, substances, conglomeration of processes, or whatever you want to call it. This world can thus be seen as an intersection of preternatural realities conflicting with one another during specific events, intentional states, and so forth. This would point more to a hierarchy and structure of a non-"naturalistic" kind, value as a modality of the real and having an epistemic function, practice of various kinds penetrating various kinds and degrees/altering oneself in various kinds and degrees.
Sorry if I sounded unclear. A bit tired.

[Anonymous No.14395162]

>>14395067
It's not just a matter of henosis with one's own isolated qualities, but a henosis with the salient qualities that also define one's immediate surroundings. Think "extended mind hypothesis". To be more precise, let's say something like panpsychism were true, then the intentional state, qualia of beings surrounding oneself, and etc. all participate, in that moment, in henosis Therefore, it becomes a matter of henosis in relation to a duality or plurality and not some indeterminate, neutral Oneness. Even before the I, there were salient feelings and rudimentary intentions.
Therefore, there are henoses (pl?) of varying types, and these varying types point to a myriad of realities, conflicting planes, substances, conglomeration of processes, or whatever you want to call it. This world can thus be seen as an intersection of preternatural emanating realities conflicting with one another during specific events, intentional states, and so forth. This would point more to a hierarchy and structure of a non-"naturalistic" kind, value as a modality of the real and having an epistemic function, practice of various kinds penetrating various kinds and degrees/altering oneself in various kinds and degrees.
Sorry if I sounded unclear. A bit tired.

[Anonymous No.14395750]

bump

[Anonymous No.14395868]

>>14395162
You seem to have thought this through more than I have. Let me try to explain how I experienced it: the boundaries of the self gradually expand and in the process the 'I' dissolves into an infinite, non-local 'consciousness' without subject/object distinction. Maybe the metaphor of the One as a singularity is misleading here, as it is really more of a Oneness with everything, a sort of plain Being, indeterminate ever present existence, unity of everything 'alive'. When the experience faded, there was a moment of realization that 'this is me' as the 'I' is reformed; maybe you know the Louis CK bit about how he came online as a child as a result of a massive shit, and that's exactly it. 'You' die and then 'you' are reborn.
It was a long time ago and thinking about it now I don't know how to incorporate the innate warmth, bright glowing love quality it had for me, and there are some who experience it as an empty cold dysphoric experience, but I think any qualities are secondary or surrounding the state, not inherent to the 'Oneness'.

[Anonymous No.14395980]

>>14390635
>Guenon is a mathematician
Calculus is shit used by economists and engineers, not something studied by true mathematicians.

[Anonymous No.14396295]

idc

[Anonymous No.14396333]

>>14387552
It's Satanic and counter-traditional.

[Anonymous No.14396340]

He looks like Scott Ackerman

[Anonymous No.14396752]

>>14382696
He said based

[Anonymous No.14397038]

>>14382696
>What did Rene Guenon say about Gnosticism, Neoplatonism and Hermeticism?
idk, what did he said?

[Anonymous No.14397737]

>>14396333
oh shit

[Anonymous No.14397861]

>>14395868
>there are some who experience it as an empty cold dysphoric experience
Check out the film Beyond the Black Rainbow.
>I think any qualities are secondary or surrounding the state, not inherent to the 'Oneness'.
This is our main difference. I think the qualities are inherent to the "Oneness", which thereby leads to a dualistic cosmology. A oneness of "warmth, bright glowing love quality" is obviously different from "empty cold dysphoric [oneness]"

[Anonymous No.14398802]

>>14397861
Thanks looks like an interesting film.
If you think the number of henoses is unlimited, or limited by the number of possible qualities to unite with, how come some are seemingly occur more than others? Does it mirror the distribution of qualities we experience? Or would you disagree that there's a strong bias towards the 'bright glowing love' experience?

[Anonymous No.14398858]

>>14398802
Read the Gathas and Cologne Mani Codex.
>If you think the number of henoses is unlimited, or limited by the number of possible qualities to unite with, how come some are seemingly occur more than others?
I think they are limited to two primary types, one of good and the other of evil.
>Does it mirror the distribution of qualities we experience?
Well, even in Buddhism, the two main qualities are associated with either antidotes (i.e., generosity, loving-kindness, and wisdom) and poisons (i.e., greed, hatred, and delusion). One can experience a unity that is either defined by antidotes or poisons, and I believe this points more to a kind of ditheism.
Many black nobility and magick practitioners try to become one with pure evil.
>Or would you disagree that there's a strong bias towards the 'bright glowing love' experience?
Maybe you, yourself, as a person are not that bad, hence why you experienced the "bright glowing love", which is Spenta Mainyu, the spirit of Ahura Mazda. There is also Angra Mainyu, the spirit of Ahriman. That is more like a "black abyssal hatred/despair/ambition". Those two are in combat, not a complementary nondual relation.

[Anonymous No.14399411]

>>14398858
More stuff for me to read.
Wouldn't being able to think of the positive and negative henotic? target-qualities as polar opposites imply a dyad from which these qualities result, and you're saying henosis must have a quality as target, therefore that's where it ends, right? No henosis with the dyad, which is indeterminate.
The more I try to remember the details of my experiences, I'm tempted to say the "bright glowing love" monad is entirely tangible without experiencing unity at all.

[Anonymous No.14399469]

>>14399411
I do not believe in indeterminacy between the two qualities of the dyad.