/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14497871]

Guénon BTFO by Crowley?

Aleister Crowley called Guénon a fucking ape, 100 years before 4chan.

Text/pic to follow

[Anonymous No.14497873]

[Anonymous No.14497874]

>>14497871
How is being called a monkey an insult?

They're cute.

[Anonymous No.14497878]

holy BASED Crowley

[Anonymous No.14497880]

Seems like the Anglos btfo him after all.

[Anonymous No.14497883]

>>14497871
Fuck (((Crowley))).

[Anonymous No.14497885]

>>14497874
say that to n*ggers

[Anonymous No.14497886]

Goddamn now I'll start writing Guenon without the acute accent

[Anonymous No.14497898]

>>14497886
But anon, everything you do it acute.

[Anonymous No.14498031]

>>14497873
Well boys it's over, Guenon (sans accent) has been defeated. Who do we meme next?

[Anonymous No.14498162]

LOL. Ce tas de merde qu'est crowley me fait de la peine, mais pas autant que les aliénés qui le lisent. Il faut vraiment être demeuré pour apercevoir le visage de ce limon huileux et y allouer ne serait-ce qu'un molard de dégoût.

Les Français ont Guénon, les anglos eux, un espèce de monticule graisseux et puant.

[Anonymous No.14498188]

>>14498162
*croak croak*

[Anonymous No.14498189]

>>14497873
crowley was retroactively refuted by aiwass.

[Anonymous No.14498198]

>>14498162
Both are memes but Crowley is a more pintoresque and interesting one. Guenon represents the failure of modern France.

[Anonymous No.14498199]

>>14498162
Didn't understand it, but saying it with a french accent sounds extremely based frenchanon. Hope it was pro-Guénon.

[Anonymous No.14498230]

>>14498188
I pity you. I ran my post through the best translators modernity has to offer and none of them came close to reproduce the withering tone. English is soft; ephebic.

>>14498198
>pintoresque
From the spanish pintoresco, earliest use: 1960.
So you took a spanish word, put a french ending (-esque), and first used it in the '60s. Kek, what a joke of a language.

[Anonymous No.14498248]

Ok people enough of the fighting.

I created a poll where you can simply answer yes or no

Was Guénon BTFO by Aleister Crowley?
https://www.strawpoll.me/19193385

[Anonymous No.14498761]

>Guénon BTFO by Crowley?
wtf I love magic(k) now!

[Anonymous No.14499269]

>>14497873
OH NO NO NO NO
GUENONBROS WE GOT TOO COCKY

[Anonymous No.14499303]

>>14498248
Considering nobody takes Crowley seriously anymore whereas perennialism is on the rise, I think we know the answer

[Anonymous No.14499393]

>>14497873
Wait a minute... are you saying Guenon got retroactively refuted by Crowley? Yeah, I'm thinking that's based.

[Anonymous No.14499439]

Crowley was based.
>communicated with ayys
>climbed mountains
>had Fernando Pessoa help fake his death

[Anonymous No.14499813]

WOLOLO!

[Anonymous No.14500648]

Was Guénon a monky?

[Anonymous No.14500665]

>>14500648
if you mean a primate homonid, sure.

[Anonymous No.14500710]

>>14498031
All it took was the removal of a singular accent and he has been retroactively refuted. I'm crying please help Allah

[Anonymous No.14500712]

>>14497871

Crowley is a shit

[Anonymous No.14500815]

Reminder:

>Crowley knew the town of Fontainebleau well – in 1924 he had spent a tormented period there in an attempt to cure himself of heroin addiction. The Great Beast was a familiar figure in Paris expatriate circles, and [C.S.] Nott met him in the capital while himself staying at the Prieure. Crowley’s interest was aroused either by a general occult curiosity or by Gurdjieff’s reputation as a specialist in curing drug addiction; and he soon afterward turned up at Fontainebleau, where was the object of some amazement. To one of the inmates, the Wickedest Man in the World seemed overfed and inoffensive – with the exception of his almost colorless eyes, the antipodes to Gurdjieff’s heavy gaze. The published accounts of Crowley at the Prieure speak only of a brief visit and a vaguely sinister impression. Nott records that Crowley spoke to one of the children present about his son whom he was teaching to be a devil. “Gurdjieff got and spoke to the boy, who thereupon took no further notice of Crowley.” But the magician’s visit was extensive, and his confrontation with Gurdjieff of a more epic nature.

>Crowley arrived for a whole weekend and spent the time like any other visitor to the Prieure; being shown the grounds and the activities in progress, listening to Gurdjieff’s music and his oracular conversation. Apart from some circumspection, Gurdjieff treated him like any other guest until the evening of his departure. After dinner on Sunday night, Gurdjieff led the way out of the dining room with Crowley, followed by the body of pupils who had also been at the meal. Crowley made his way toward the door and turned to take his leave of Gurdjieff, who by this time was some way up the stairs to the second floor. “Mister, you go?” Gurdjieff inquired. Crowley assented. “You have been guest?” – a fact which the visitor could hardly deny. “Now you go, you are no longer guest?” Crowley – no doubt wondering whether his host had lost his grip on reality and was wandering in a semantic wilderness – humored his mood by indicating that he was on his way back to Paris. But Gurdjieff, having made the point that he was not violating the canons of hospitality, changed on the instant into the embodiment of righteous anger. “You filthy,” he stormed, “you dirty inside! Never again you set foot in my house!” From his vantage point on the stairs, he worked himself up into a rage which quite transfixed his watching pupils. Crowley was stigmatized as the sewer of creation was taken apart and trodden into the mire. Finally, he was banished in the style of East Lynne by a Gurdjieff in fine histrionic form. Whitefaced and shaking, the Great Beast crept back to Paris with his tail between his legs.

Crowley was a subhuman.

[Anonymous No.14500869]

>>14500815
This has been debunked as a false story, even Crowley accounts this in this diaries and the only thing he has say about Gurdijeff is that he is a tip-top man. No drama, sorry.

[Anonymous No.14500999]

>>14500869
Post the evidences that it is fake.
>even xrowley
Of course the egoist would seek a way to defend himself.

[Anonymous No.14501007]

>>14498230
And yet you spend all on 4channel.org writing in it and probably never even use your own

[Anonymous No.14501013]

>>14500999
Gladly when I get home.

[Anonymous No.14501153]

>>14500815
This is only report by a disciple of Gurdijeff,. Nott's second hand account - and he presents it in the manner to be expected of an 'acolyte who has negative attitude in the passage towards Crowley. The funny thing is, that Nott, who gave a story of that "encounter" between Crowley and The Beast was not even present at the prairie when this supposedly took place.

In the Confessions of Crowley, he does not put much weight to his visit to Gurdijeff. He writes something along the lines that Gurdjieff was ok, not brilliant, but a man who definitely had something going on.

>"There is a persistent legend to the effect that they once met and engaged in some kind of magical contest or some sort of hostile confrontation, but this is almost certainly apocryphal. What is certain is, that during the 1920s, Crowley paid an unsolicited visit to G.'s school at Fountainbleu on Avon, but Gurdijeff was either not there or politely refused to see him, and Crowley was shown around by Major Pindar. Of this visit, Crowley wrote in his Magical Record:

>'Gurdjieff, their prophet, seems a tip-top man. Heard more sense and insight than I've done for years. Pindar dines at 7.30. Oracle for my visit was "There are few men: there are enough". Later, a really wonderful evening with Pindar. Gurdjieff clearly a very advanced adept. My chief quarrels are over sex (I doubt whether Pindar understands Gurdijeff's true position) and their punishments, e.g. depriving the offender of a meal or making him stand half an hour with his arms out. Childish and morally valueless'.

Nott himself has given 3 different type of versions of Crowley and Gurdijeff meeting, not a man who you can trust.

It is still more than a clear, that Crowley did not think much of Gurdijeff and Gurdijeff did not think of much Crowley. There is a high possibility, considering that the prairie of Gurdijeff was a guest-houst of sorts, that two never even met face to face.

Boring stuff, I know.

Even Crowley biographers agree, that no such incident never took place:
>Webb portrays Gurdjieff’s triumph—and Crowley’s putative inner thoughts—with a heavy-handed novelistic touch. If this brutal banishment did occur, then it is remarkable that Crowley, who harbored animus toward so many rival teachers, never did so toward Gurdjieff. (Sutin, 2000)

[Anonymous No.14501159]

>>14500815
>>14501153

There are also stories like this, probably false too by Gurdijeff biographers:
>There are also stories like this:
>Many years ago, Aleister Crowley, who had made a name for himself in England as “magician” and who boasted, among other things, of having hung his pregnant wife by the thumbs in the attempt to give birth to a monstrous being, presented himself at Fontainebleau without being invited. Crowley was clearly convinced that Gurdjieff was a “black magician” and the evident purpose of his visit was to challenge him to a sort of duel of magic. The meeting turned out to be a disappointment since Gurdjieff, although he did not deny knowledge of certain powers that could be called “magical”, refused to make any such demonstration. At his turn, Mr. Crowley also refused to “reveal” his powers; therefore, to the great disappointment of those present, they were not able to witness a supernatural feat. What’s more, Mr. Crowley went away with the impression that Gurdjieff was a charlatan or a mediocre sorcerer. (Gurdjieff Remembered, Samuel Weiser, 1971).

Most academics still agree: Crowley and Gurdjieff may not have had much of a meeting back in 1926 in Fontainebleau. Crowley was present, but most probably the two men never even met face to face.

[Anonymous No.14501209]

>>14501007

That's why he's so mad. The frogs have never been able to get over the collapse of their language's influence after 1945. It's an Anglophone's world and it leaves them seething.

[Anonymous No.14501326]

>>14501209
>This deluded
English language got obliterated far more than French since 1945 ! imao

[Anonymous No.14501344]

>>14501326
le copé

[Anonymous No.14501361]

>>14497871
And bald Crowley looks like a fat Englishman's thumb.

[Anonymous No.14501379]

>>14497873
From this day and now on, every thread related to Guénon on /lit/ I will post a reply:

>Monsieur la Guenon's monkeying around amuses me.

[Anonymous No.14501400]

>>14501153
>>14501159
Indeed, but Crowley is not someone on whom you can easily trust. Perhaps the event didn’t occur in that manner.
Crowley is still an intellectually myopic subhuman.

[Anonymous No.14501471]

>Monsieur la Guenon's monkeying around amuses me.

[Anonymous No.14502244]

>>14497873
>>14497873
How can Monkeynonfags even recover!?

[Anonymous No.14502360]

>>14500815
That account may be false, but Crowley still a degenerate heroin addict toward the end of his life.

[Anonymous No.14502505]

>>14498162
Putain de basé