/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15918715]

Start With the Egyptians, then the Greeks.
Ignore Out of India schizos.

[Anonymous No.15918746]

>The story of the Dionysiaca begins with Zeus, leader of the Greek gods, ordering Dionysus to travel to India, whose inhabitants refuse to worship him. The Indians stubbornly prefer their ancestral gods of fire and water. Worse still, they refuse to drink wine, Dionysus’s “care-forgetting vintage”. Dionysus gathers an enormous army. As it marches across the ancient world to India, he also collects a number of lovers. His foe is Deriades, ruler of India and son of the Jhelum river (where Alexander had fought Porus centuries before). Deriades, being half river himself, drinks only water. He scorns Dionysus’s beverage, insisting that “my wine is the spear”. Helped by Brahmins versed in sorcery, Deriades fights several battles with Dionysus before finally succumbing to the god’s power. Like Alexander, Dionysus then returns home after his victory, with several more love affairs along the way.

Here in this summary we see how the ancient faith together with the Indo-Europeans was brought to India. Likely being the basis of much in the importance-inflated Mahabharata.

[Anonymous No.15918760]

>>15918715
I've been recommending this book for a while here. It is probably the best book ever written on the subject of Western philosophy and esotericism

[Anonymous No.15918765]

>>15918760
On the history, I mean

[Anonymous No.15918869]

His right Eye is the day,
His left Eye is the night,
It is He who guides the faces on all the ways.
His body is the primeval Water,
His entrails are the Inundation
That creates everything that is and keeps all that exists alive.
His breathing is the breath in every nose,
His are destiny and fortune for everyone

[Anonymous No.15918895]

>>15918715
Neoplatonist anon, why are you also seething about Hindu philosophy? Does it make you feel insecure or something that there are well-developed schools of philosophy and metaphysics which arose independently of the Greeks and which at times make Greek thought look rudimentary?

[Anonymous No.15918897]

>>15918715
>Ignore Out of India schizos.
Best advice on lit so far

[Anonymous No.15918930]

>>15918895
Not OP.
>at times make Greek thought look rudimentary
There are no schools of Hindu philosophy which cover ideas not already in schools of Greek thought. They cover pretty much all the same bases from Polytheism to Monism. The better of Hindu schools being Monistic, in Vedanta, and Platonism, though Hinduism is itself visibly rudimentary by comparison to the fact that Platonism basically began the seed of science which fueled both the Islamic Golden Age and the Renaissance, two of the most significant human intellectual periods between the now and antiquity.

Hindu philosophy is a bit romanticized for its exotic and foreign appeal, and because of this is definitely overrated. We can really see this manifest itself by the kind of people drawn to yoga in the West- and the appropriation by newage spiritualists nonsense concepts like kundalini and chakras.

I don't actually have anything against Hinduism, or any of its particular schools, but rather pseudointellectual western Hindu fetishists that generally understand actually very little about real Hinduism and the many different forms of religion in it.

Probably the best among these Western types has been Alan Watts, and he is pretty much a con-man, just like all the other Western yoga gurus.

[Anonymous No.15918950]

>>15918930
>though Hinduism is itself visibly rudimentary by comparison to the fact that Platonism basically began the seed of science which fueled both the Islamic Golden Age and the Renaissance

>judging the sophistication of spiritual schools quantitatively using the exterior impact of them upon material developments instead of judging them qualitatively using their inner spiritual content
>OH NO NO NO NO

[Anonymous No.15918953]

>>15918930
>and the appropriation by newage spiritualists nonsense concepts like kundalini and chakras.
Not any less nonsense than Western esotericism and hermeticism like the tarot/astrology ...

[Anonymous No.15918963]

>>15918895
>seething about substance/existence monists and buddhists (not necessarily the buddhist scriptures just buddhists)
=/=
>seething about Hindu philosophy
Bhedabheda is the correct and blessed view.
I'd rather join some tantric "guru" than shamkara,
PRAISE RUDRA
BROMIUS
THE GREAT HONK HONKER

[Anonymous No.15918992]

>>15918950
Neoplatonism has both, because science itself is simultaneously part of its religious system. If a system is to ever be considered one that is superior, it must meet this qualification - the reconciliation between science and faith.
>>15918953
Pythagoreanism/Platonism is far more akin to astronomy than astrology. They used the metaphorical religious icons as symbols for the planets, but this is more of a result of necessity and convenience. On one hand, for the culture they were in it makes such scientific studies as the orbits of the planets digestible, on the other - because astronomy is itself a product of divine faculty - it is religious in and of itself. The pantheons are as much a part of that in the sense they represented forces of nature that exist and may be seen, monism needn't struggle to reconcile with deities and pantheons. Astrology in the sense of Platonic tradition is nothing like horoscopes or fortune telling. This is why it was one of the primary influences for figures like Kepler and Copernicus, who identified as Pythagoras reborn.

There is no Tarot in either Pythagoreanism or Platonism.

[Anonymous No.15919021]

>>15918992
How is this less nonsense than chakars?

[Anonymous No.15919025]

>>15919021
count the types of sub-atomic "particles"

[Anonymous No.15919035]

>>15919021
>he is unaware of the practical usage and existence of platonic solids
>he thinks the usage of platonic solids is the same as a third eye inside your ass
Yikes. No wonder you chose newage spirituality.

[Anonymous No.15919043]

>>15919021
also you'd have to be quite retarded to retroactively project modern definitions of these terms to the ancient, "water" didn't refer to H2O; fire referred energy/power in general; earth refered to any and all solidity/structuralism and Mass/weight, friction; air is Soul and Life (also what Anaximenes meant with the arche being air); the aether is the divine substance/Nous or Spirit.
dumb cunt

[Anonymous No.15919077]

>>15919035
>I associate an Octahedron with the element of air
>That makes me highly rational and much better than those that associate elements with points in the body.

[Anonymous No.15919084]

>>15919043
It is still nonsense though.
What is "divine substance" and how is it related to a dodecahedron?

[Anonymous No.15919151]

>>15919084
>>15919077
Instead of a yogi you need a 4th grade geometry teacher, so you can learn about the platonic solids, euclidian geometry, and why it isn't comparable to reading tea leaves.

[Anonymous No.15919183]

>>15919084
Aether.
Alternatively one can be even more rightfully superstitious and see it as a prophecy of >>15919025 and/or the 5 states of matter.
>Solids, liquids, gases, plasma and the Bose-Einstein condensates.
Where the latter is a propertiy brought forth through extreme temperatures; and this would then be true Aether given embodiment (something 'beyond' clinging to matter at extreme temperatures giving it otherworldly properties).

[Anonymous No.15919259]

>>15919151
And you need to learn how not to dodge a fucking question.
The "Platonic" forms were discovered before Plato existed. He just did the colossal intellectual effort of associating them arbitrarily with elements.
>The fifth Platonic Solid, the dodecahedron, Plato obscurely remarks, ...the god used for arranging the constellations on the whole heaven (Timaeus 55)
Incredible. So tell me, please, how is it better than having the earth element in your ass?

[Anonymous No.15919273]

>>15919183
Interesting but probably quite a stretch.
And how does this relate to the forms?

[Anonymous No.15919300]

>>15919259
>colossal intellectual effort
>arbitrarily
huh

[Anonymous No.15919367]

>>15919259
Thanks for proving that Western hinduists are dumber than 4th graders.
The big bang model is constructed on a purely geometrical notion of symmetry which Platonic solids were an instrumental part of teaching.
Maybe go finger your kundalini and go to bed. You've embarrassed yourself pretty hard here.

[Anonymous No.15919391]

>>15919273
>And how does this relate to the forms?
the solids/elements have nothing if little to do with the forms directly, at most you can call them lowest forms; they're "merely" the building blocks the cosmos being a much more refined Atomism and even the concept of 'molecules' and modern elements: where the forms are the possibility of every modern element (like gold or iron) and the platonic solids are the sub atomic particles and atoms that sub-stand these forms, this being the basis for Aristotelian Hylomorphism.

[Anonymous No.15919445]

>>15919259
>>15919391
>at most you can call them lowest forms
Not the "guru" anon, but the other guy, and I'd interject primarily they are the highest forms. The FORMS are the realm of ideality from which we derive the concepts we perceive in nature. It is the idea of the circle before you put it down to paper.

What these ideas represent, is indeed everything you are saying - and this is what Plato taught, that everything material is constructed from these geometric patterns but that they imperfect duplicates of the immaterial realm of ideality from which is the blueprint for their construction.

This theoretical view of apprehending knowledge based on its relation to sensory inspection marks the major divide between Plato and Aristotle, but both ontological positions still have a lot of value in the realm of quantum physics.

[Anonymous No.15919468]

>>15918715
Just ordered this bad boy. What am I in for....?

[Anonymous No.15919518]

>>15919468
Completely depends on your knowledge surrounding it. For instance, in my perspective, the Book of the Dead is an ugly and inappropriate name.
Going Forth Into the Light and Book of Living and Dying are much more appropriate and accurate names.

If you are not acquainted with philosophy, read the book listed in OP first. With a bit of googling definitions you'll get up to speed for comprehending the actual texts. Without appropriate context needed, it may simply appear to be some romantically worded funerary rites, but in fact, they are purely philosophy. They are religious philosophical views meant for the living, not the dead, and by adhering them and understanding is intended to produce the metaphorical and initiatory death and rebirth of the person.
Here's a copy of the book.
https://mega.nz/file/y0FVXABb#vUNrCInULm_89ckWAJ6Ua8sMLrFoDwppQ9Bgmu1JwXE

[Anonymous No.15919525]

>>15919518
>Book of Living and Dying
This one, I meant to add, is the more appropriate name for the "Tibetan Book of the Dead"

[Anonymous No.15919558]

>>15919518
Thanks anon. The only philosophy of life and death I've really read is Plato, but I did have a minor in philosophy. So I'll download the book.

[Anonymous No.15919620]

>>15918930
>>15918992
Oh yeah.... greeks were so original, anon. Hahahahahahahahha you are an idiot

[Anonymous No.15919628]

>>15919367
>The big bang model is constructed on a purely geometrical notion of symmetry which Platonic solids were an instrumental part of teaching.
Almost every single metaphysical view associates symmetry with perfection and perfection with the divine. Nothing incredible here.
Also, i said it before, but it seems that you need it again, Platonic forms existed before Plato and are not from Plato.
The ONLY thing he did was associate them with elements. And the ONLY thing i ask of you is to provide an explanation to the following:
WHY FIRE - TETRAHIDRON AND NOT FIRE - HEART CHAKRA ??????
Why does one make more sense than the other you retarded idealist dumbass?

[Anonymous No.15919633]

>>15919620
Typical brainlet cope. Masking your pain with ridicule. Unable to state anything of substance.

[Anonymous No.15919634]

>>15919445
The highest forms in the most generic way are the Perion/Monad Aperion/Dyad and the Mixed/Harmony, these are the highest Arches.
And the Circle (or rather sphere), Line, and Dot/Point, are also not among the Solids and do not exist in the cosmos---at least not in actuality, you can of course phenomenologically imply a straight line between any two imaginary points, but you can't actually find any straight lines empirically, likewise there are no perfect circles and the point has by definition zero-dimensions so it can literally not exist in space; before you say photons, they travel in lines but they don't make any physical lines).
And the forms aren't "patterns", at least not the "form-forms" wich are ineffable in-themselves, you can nly grasp them through their Mixture which produces the lower forms; and the at-least-five greatest kinds have nothing to do with patterns, the very idea of pattern is a form. Also the world of forms isn't truly immaterial since the Dyad is Matter to the One which produces Intellect and the Forms...

[Anonymous No.15919640]

>>15919628
>Nothing incredible here.
Well, if you don't think things like truth and knowledge are incredible then that's fine, its your perspective. They obviously hold more inherent value both spiritually and intellectually than your kundalinis.

[Anonymous No.15919645]

>>15919628
>The ONLY thing he did was associate them with elements
Maybe you should try reading Plato before trying to comment on it.

[Anonymous No.15919657]

>>15919633
Plato was cool but he literally translated egyptian shit into rational expositions, he was already corrupting the purity of profoundly arcane cosmo-theo-logical doctrines. You are a dumb idolater, not much need to be said to someone like you. Go study more.

[Anonymous No.15919698]

>>15919634
>And the Circle (or rather sphere), Line, and Dot/Point, are also not among the Solids and do not exist in the cosmos---at least not in actuality
The circle/monad represents the Universe in its totality, it is the father to all geometry and everything in existence. One cannot form a perfect circle without a point in the middle from which to center it.

But the real point and center to the circle is not real and doesn't exist except only in ideality - because as you view the point in its materiality it is 3 dimensional. Yet nothing at all exists whatsoever without its center around which it revolves, so the true geometric constructions that the purpose of our study are necessarily immaterial.
>Also the world of forms isn't truly immaterial since the Dyad
It absolutely is. The theory of Forms is a pretty modern name for it, historically it had always been called the theory of Ideas. We do not exist in the world of forms/ideas, which are eternal and unchanging, we live in the world of Flux.

[Anonymous No.15919702]

>>15919657
>that sad brainlet cope
Stay seething mental midget.

[Anonymous No.15919708]

>>15919698
>the true geometric constructions that the purpose of our study
is involved*

[Anonymous No.15919727]

>>15919657
Illiterate detected

[Anonymous No.15919785]

>>15919657
truly filtered, you probably thing Thales and the Milesians were rationalizers, or that the Pythagoreans were like modern mathematicians
...through the similitude of mortal to divine concerns, exhibit to us in images, the progressions, orders, and fabrications of divine natures. And such are the modes of theologic doctrine employed by Plato.
It is evident however, from what has been already said, that they are necessarily so many in number. For those who treat of divine concerns in an indicative manner, either speak symbolically and fabulously, or through images. But of those who openly announce their conceptions, some frame their discourses according to science, but others according to inspiration from the Gods. And he who desires to signify divine concerns through symbols is Orphic, and in short, accords with those who write fables concerning the Gods. But he who does this through images is Pythagoric. For the mathematical disciplines were invented by the Pythagoreans, in order to a reminiscence of divine concerns, at which, through these as images they endeavour to arrive. For they refer both numbers and figures to the Gods, according to the testimony of their historians. But the entheastic character, or he who is under the influence of divine inspiration, unfolding the truth itself by itself concerning the Gods, most perspicuously ranks among the highest initiators. For these do not think proper to unfold the divine orders, or their peculiarities to their familiars, through certain veils, but announce their powers and their numbers, in consequence of being moved by the Gods themselves. But the tradition of divine concerns according to science, is the illustrious prerogative of the philosophy of Plato.
For Plato alone, as it appears to me, of all those who are known to us, has attempted methodically to divide and reduce into order, the regular progression of the divine genera, their mutual difference, the common peculiarities of the total orders, and the distributed peculiarities in each. But the truth of this will be evident when we frame precedaneous demonstrations about the Parmenides, and all the divisions which it contains.

Elements of Plato can be found all over, but he is the first to flawlessly reveal the harmony of them, through myth, exegesis, speech, hymn, prayer, parable, discourse, history... He put process philosophy into paper instead of mere rambling of conclusions like all before and after; he invented dialectics and meta-dialectics, the basis for all science: that being the correct ordering of all things, the hierarchy of being. And so he made text alive intentionally, the dialogue doesn't end with the text, but wants you to answer every question not just go along, he doesn't demand dogmatic obedience. And rather become dogma through your own concession from truly studying the text. and this is the sole reason why it has survived, unlike all other scripture that has enforced its penetration into the mind of man.

[Anonymous No.15919804]

>>15919698
>The circle/monad represents the Universe in its totality
Nope that's the One-Being, the Mixed.
>One cannot form a perfect circle without a point in the middle from which to center it.
Exactly, the Monad, Being is the Circle. Where the Dyad is the principle of the lines and extension (but not extension itself) and the Monad as Point is the principle of the Sphere[s] of Being.
You think that picture is ineresting do you?
BEHOLD

[Anonymous No.15919831]

>>15919804
>You think that picture is ineresting do you?
No. I made it because the Divided Line is the keystone for understanding Platos whole system, and it is one of the most neglected and misunderstood analogies he used.
Demonstrating their metaphysical influences and meaning is a necessary subject, unfortunately, because of the prevalence of its misunderstanding. Coming to common terms in understanding the divided line is prerequisite to any earnest discussion about Platonic metaphysics.

[Anonymous No.15919844]

>>15919698
>>15919804
The mysterious irradiation from the One constitutes die different levels of existence: those which stand close to the super-abandant centre and those which are far removed from it (although distance is not spatial or temporal, but rather ontological and epistemological, regarded as a veil of ignorance which conceals the real divine identity of things) and resemble reflections, copies, or shadows of their intelligible models. The realm of real beings (ta onta) is a mixture of peras and apeira, two transcendent metaphysical principles. This domain of reak beings is interpreted as the first level of noetic Being, followed by noetic Life and Intellect. The intelligible triad of Being-Life-Intellect determines the inner structure and order within the diacosm of Being.
Every level of the noetic domain has a similar triadic structure which emphasizes one or another element of the triad, and such triads are multiplied in the course of irradiation. The triadic structure of all noetic entities mirrors the primal triad of Limit (peras), Unlimited (apeiron) and Mixture (mikton). The entire manifestation is ordered by descending chain of triads arranged according to the triadic structure of abiding (Mone), procession (proodos), and reversion (epistrophe).

[Anonymous No.15919893]

>>15919785
>Thales
Guess what? Initiated in egyptian theology. I know his waters are basically Nun.

>Pythagoras
Also initiated in egyptian mysteries. Ogdoad and the Enneads echo in his tectractys.

>Plato invented dialectics
Lmao, you are really lost, arent you? The guy also lived in egypt seeking instruction, his two main influences were initiated in egyptian mysteries (orpheus and puthagoras), explicitly says in his dialogues how greeks copied everything from egyptians and how they are far superior to the greeks. Egyptians had well established sacred science that lasted for MILLENIA.
Seriously, go study more.

[Anonymous No.15919933]

>>15919893
Not him, but lets go.
>Also initiated in egyptian mysteries
This wasn't the only school he was initiated in.
>explicitly says in his dialogues how greeks copied everything from egyptians and how they are far superior to the greeks
We can neither attest the validity of Plato's initiation, but even for the sake of agreement - it also wasn't the only school he was initiated in. Plato repeatedly mentions the Eleusinians and the effect of its Mystery tradition, also attested by Aristotle. Beside this, Plato incorporates many influences who are neither Egyptian nor working from Egyptian tradition. The synthesis of Parmenides and Heraclitis mentioned earlier is a wholly original concept that can be objectively marked as having its origin in Plato.
>Seriously, go study more.
You say this, but you don't live it - if you lived it, you'd have recognized the massive excerpt from Proclus within his post.
If you lived it, you'd reference the works to read from and provide them in this thread.
If you lived it, you'd have had the god damn common decency to have looked up the book that is the topic of the OP and is given for free IN PDF in this fucking thread to know the topic of the book is explicitly about the Egyptian tradition and how it influenced and is preserved through Plato. Philosophy - in itself - as initiatic death and rebirth mystery tradition.

You really are a fucking dumb dumb.

[Anonymous No.15919995]

>>15919933
He forgot to line up his chakras with his ravaged anus and now his kundalini is all out of order.

[Anonymous No.15920011]

>>15919893
that's the point you dumb cunt, you just proved the Greeks are legitimate by saying they were all literally INITIATED by Egyptian sages
Perhaps read the book title in OP, and the book.
It's one chain of tradition, the Greeks aren't a break or branch of the Egyptians; nor did revelation begin and end 2700 BC with the Pyramid text on Unas; it was rather continually offered inspiration and even some revelations (like Plato's myths) and exegetically explored all the way up to Damascius.
By the time of the middle Platonists there was no categorical distinction between Greek myth and Egyptian myth or with Philosophers and Divine Egyptian Scribes: as proven by Plutarch recounting of Osiris matching hieroglyphic that he couldn't read dating 1500+ years older than him.

[Anonymous No.15920022]

>>15919933
>t-this wasnt he only “”””””school”””””” he was initiated in!
Oh yeah, you mean the phoenicians also? Those people who literally had their aphabet derived from egyptian hierogylphs? Who helped to influence greece with egyptian culture?

>we can’t attest Plato’s initiation.
Yes surely all ancient biographers of his couldn’t, and even himself was mistaken in doing so.

>Eleusinians
Sure. Demeter-Persephone myth cult has no relation to the Isis-Osiris mythopoesis.

>Parmenides
Literally responsible for the degeneration of “philosophy”. Thanks to his disciple Zeno rationalistic, atomist and mechanistic degeneration creeped into sacred sciences!

>Heraclitean fire
Oh heraclitus was so original right?? No relation with the other eastern sumboliques right?????

I didnt even bother reading all of that post. I have read Uzdavinys and people in this shithole never reads what they post about or they dont unserstand anything. Idolatry of greeks as intellectual summit is the most superficial, academician thing there is. This is a board dedicated to literature and people simply don’t read or don’t bother to study things properly. You deserve greek “philosophy”, you deserve modern “philosophy”, you are all the same.

[Anonymous No.15920062]

>>15920022
>you mean the phoenicians also
LMFAO what a retard.
Pythagoras was also initiated in Chaldea, possibly by Persian Magi.
Fucking dumbass.
>Yes surely all ancient biographers of his couldn’t
Yeah I bet you believe Pythagoras had a Golden Thigh and was the Hyperborean Apollo too. Fucking moron.
>Sure. Demeter-Persephone myth cult has no relation to the Isis-Osiris mythopoesis.
There are some similarities, some original developments. If you studied Plato you'd know first thing that you are a fool for saying you know what you do not know, by implying that their mysteries are simply a carbon copy of the Egyptian ones.
>degeneration
Only degenerate here is you, too much of a fucking retard to read the description of a book in a thread about it.

Stay mad and dumb you illiterate fucking faggot. You don't even know why you are arguing, except only to work out your latent retard anger.

[Anonymous No.15920097]

>>15920022
Two did Apollo bring forth, Asclepius and Plato, The one to keep our soul healthy, the other our body.

go and sacrifice a cock to asclepius, you need some healing my fren

[Anonymous No.15920157]

>>15920022
>people in this shithole never reads what they post about or they dont unserstand anything.
Yeah boy way too break the mold, to much of an utter retard to even read the summary paragraph of a book. Those of us who actually read books were clearly discussing with each other about it, but you though had to come and make the topic about your mental inadequacy

[Anonymous No.15920269]

>>15920022
>I have read Uzdavinys
Then how did you manage to fuck up so immensely in understanding the basic fundamental premise of his best work? You sure are embarrassing, coming into a thread just to yell at people and tell them to read books you yourself clearly haven't.

[Anonymous No.15920364]

>>15920011
>>15920062
>>15920097
>>15920157
>>15920269
>people misreading the very book in the OP and uttering absurdities like “Plato invented dialectics”
>shows how platonism (pythagoreanism, orphism included in the term) is egyptian theology clothed in rational exposition and greek mythopoesis, science and culture were super influenced by egyptian ones.
Even Uzdavinys himself wrote about Plato’s corrupting the legitimate egyptian theology with subtle rationalism.
Uzdavinys is right in saying Platonism is the middle point in the Golden Chain. People saying Greeks were original in intellectual/scientific pursuits are teemed with ideology and ethnocentric bias, they can’t accept how those things are of eastern origins.
Platonism is the only way through which those doctrines could survive until they attained their end (Christianity - Alpha and Omega, Osiris and Horus, Egypt and Vatican) the rest of pseudophilosophical production is what resulted in our modern science, mechanics and physicalism. None of the replies to my posts had any substantial contestation.

[Anonymous No.15920391]

>>15920364
>they can’t accept how those things are of eastern origins.
This has nothing to do with Hinduism. Obviously from the very first post itt people accepted Greek philosophy had some of its roots in Egyptian religion, since that is the very fundamental premise of the book in question.
Nice try coping with the seething rage of getting blown the fuck out of this thread as illiterate and gay.

[Anonymous No.15920410]

>>15918746
>Here in this summary we see how the ancient faith together with the Indo-Europeans was brought to India.
Are you retarded? Dionysiaca was written in the 4th-5th century AD more than 1,500 years after the Indo-Europeans came to India, how could that poem possibly contain any reliable information about something from so long ago about a totally different culture on the other side of the known world?

>Likely being the basis of much in the importance-inflated Mahabharata
The Mahabharata is much better than Homer

[Anonymous No.15920496]

>>15920391
I’m not the Hindu guy you fucking retarded piece of shit.
Look at what I had to read in this shithole of a thread:
>>>15918930
>Platonism basically began the seed of science
>Islamic Golden Age and Renaissance were two of the most significant human intellectual periods.
(Yet they couldnt even discern the date of Hermetic writings and Hermes figure, leading into a bunch of mistaken conclusions).

>>15918992
>using religious sumbola as convenience
>makes such scientific studies digestible
>Platonism is nothing like horoscopes or fortune telling
>this is why it was one of the primary influences for modern science

>>15919445
>Plato taught the theory of Forms
LMAO

Not to mention the guy saying Plato invented dialectics. Someone like this partaking of intellectual pursuits should be lynched in the least.

[Anonymous No.15920571]

>>15920496
In terms of the written works, all of those things you are autistically buttmad about are true, these are the works that people had been historically reading in order to inherit its influence.
They weren't reading streetshitter lit or Egyptian books.
>I’m not the Hindu guy you fucking retarded piece of shit.
Clearly you are, you undervalue the historical importance of Homer because you are a little third world gremlin.
Homers works were only like half the contents of the Library of Alexandria, rewritten hundreds of times. You are salty because you are stupid.

[Anonymous No.15920603]

>>15920571
Youd be mad too if your parents ditched you as a baby to drown in a shit river that is the ganges. Hinduism does great things.

[Anonymous No.15920621]

>>15920571
>if people are reading modern translations of ancient greek writers who were taught egyptian doctrines therefore people are indebted to greek writers solely, not to their translators or to their source of knowledge

>Homer
What does it have to do with what we have been discussing? He was a greek version of Vyasa.

[Anonymous No.15920630]

>>15920603
I don't even dislike Hinduism, but I agree that its respect paid to it in America as some kind of super-religion is overrated.(and also fundamentally false since Hinduism isn't even one religion)

[Anonymous No.15920658]

>>15920621
>people are indebted to greek writers solely, not to their translators or to their source of knowledge
I know you are supermad about getting exposed as a low IQ illiterate who doesn't even read the books he tries to discuss but misrepresenting somebodies opinion to salvage yourself from being viewed as an idiot is a petty hill to die on.
Clearly respect is given to Egypt, by the very fundamental fact that we are talking about this book in particular - and that pretty much the entire Western literary canon mythologizes about Egypt as a source of knowledge and wisdom.

We don't even have the Egyptian mystery tradition on paper to truly study it - the closest you get is...
Can the intellectual handicap answer that question?

[Anonymous No.15920754]

>>15920658
What part of this post of mine (>>15920496) did you fail to understand? People in this very thread are eclipsing egyptian theology and sciences in favor of greek rationalism and secularized sciences. They who misread and ignore the kernel of Uzdavinys are accusing me of having not read the book, cant you see how absurd it is? None, absolutely none, of my claims were contested, still they all attacked me personally. Respect is not given to Egypt in any of those posts in this thread and your dismissing of it (yeah yeah egyptians were nice but see Plato invented dialectics!!!!) is an offense to anyone swriously dedicated to studying these traditions.

>we don’t have egyptian mystery tradition on paper
Pyramids Texts, abbott, amherst papyrus and other thousands of papyruses, stellas, writings and symbols on temples are nothing to you or are you just a genuine ignoramus?

[Anonymous No.15920801]

>>15920754
>doesn't answer question
>wHaT dIdNt U uNdErStAnD
Let it out little guy.
>Pyramids Texts, abbott, amherst papyrus and other thousands of papyruses, stellas, writings and symbols on temples are nothing to you or are you just a genuine ignoramus?
I know you are functionally illiterate and mentally retarded but, when do you think people actually started having access to read these? Please tell me because I really want to know.

[Anonymous No.15920810]

Why so much posturing and bickering in this thread? I thought studying spirituality is supposed to make one more kind and slower to anger?

[Anonymous No.15920814]

>>15920754
>Pyramids Texts, abbott, amherst papyrus and other thousands of papyruses, stellas, writings and symbols on temples are nothing to you or are you just a genuine ignoramus?
None of these reveal the initiations, btw. Neither does Platonism.

[Anonymous No.15920815]

>>15920810
Fuck you. Kill yourself fag.

[Anonymous No.15920833]

>>15920810
Dudes kundalinus is all out of whack.

[Anonymous No.15920868]

>>15920833
He should meditate on the dubs and he will see enlightenment.

[Anonymous No.15920889]

>>15920801
What question?

>access to the texts
Who is Horapollo? What is his hieroglyphica? Who is Bolzani? What is Rosetta Stone? Who is Athanasius Kircher?
Again offending personally without contesting anything of what I say.

>>15920814
Don’t know what you mean by reveal, but most of egyptian writings were integrated in cults and represented their own theology. Same thing could be said of pythagorean texts.

[Anonymous No.15920916]

>>15920889
So tell me this... in your little retard brain you think that Galileo, Copernicus, Giordano Bruno, that the Romans and the Muslims and theologians that have pioneered thousands of years of philosophic tradition...
That they were translating and reading Egyptian texts to learn the sciences?
Are you for fucking real dude? Are you like 15? You have to be.
That's too much.

[Anonymous No.15920931]

>>15918715
Cringe, you start with the Mesopotamians then the Greeks. Egyptians were gay furries.

[Anonymous No.15920959]

>>15918715
>Egyptians first
lolno, start at the beginning:
Sumerians > Egyptians > Babylonians > Canaanites > Israelites = Greeks = Chinese = Indians > Romans

[Anonymous No.15920985]

>>15920959
correction:
Sumerians > Egyptians = Babylonians > Canaanites > Israelites = Greeks = Chinese = Indians > Romans

[Anonymous No.15920989]

>>15920931
>>15920959
>he doesnt start with the neanderthals

[Anonymous No.15920998]

>>15920985
Israelites weren’t real it was all written after the fact. There is no mention of them in any sources until until around the first century bc.

[Anonymous No.15921007]

>>15920985
Start with the Sumerians
Enter with the Egyptians
Begin with the Babylonians
Commence with the Canaanites
Instigate with the Israelites
Go forth with the Greeks
Initiate with the Indians
Continue with the Chinese
Resume with the Romans

[Anonymous No.15921014]

>>15920998
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesha_Stele
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_stele
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurkh_Monoliths

[Anonymous No.15921015]

>>15920889
>most of egyptian writings
I guess you've never heard of the Rosetta Stone, huh? This is like some luke-warm basic bitch trivia questions from "are you smarter than a 3rd grader" shit.
>Same thing could be said of pythagorean texts.
Such as

[Anonymous No.15921017]

[Anonymous No.15921020]

>>15920989
>not starting with the Australopithecus fossil record

[Anonymous No.15921106]

>>15921014
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesha_Stele
SRene legit but pretty pathetic they’d consider themselves the chosen people if they can’t hold down such a small area.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele
>Alternative translations have been advanced but are not widely accepted.[3]
I’m suspect because this is the earliest one and academics are biased Christ Cucks and Jews.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_stele
>Two biblical scholars, Cryer and Lemche, analyzed the cracks and chisel marks around the fragment and also the lettering towards the edges of the fragments. From this they concluded that the text was in fact a modern forgery.[22] Most scholars have ignored or rejected these judgments because the artifacts were recovered during controlled excavations.[10][11][12]

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurkh_Monoliths
Seems legit

[Anonymous No.15921231]

>>15920916
>philosophic tradition
What even is this? There is no such thing as philosophic tradition.

Bruno was deeply influenced by Hermeticism. Egyptian sciences were transmitted through a myriad of texts, having direct translations, anecdotes, teachings clothed in different ways. Not all modern scientists were aware of their origins and their essence (like copernicus and galileo). What is even the point you’re trying to make you subhuman retard? You have not make a single pertinent post so far.

>>15921015
The point of my citing the rosetta stone was to show hieroglyphs translations were already a thing in ancient times.

Pythagoreans didn’t reveal their initiations. Egyptian ones were not even a thing among the common people from those times. Again why people in this thread is so fucking retarded jesus christ, just stop pursuing any intellectual activity.

[Anonymous No.15921574]

>>15921231
>he still doesnt know what the rosetta stone is or what it meant to world history
lmao
You are so dumb anon.
Look up the Corpus Hermeticum.
Look who brought it to Latin Europe.
Look who translated it to Latin, and what else he did. Who he was, what he was, and who he was in circles with.
Come back to me with your homework and then tell me who was keeping the hieratic rites alive.

[Anonymous No.15921705]

>>15921574
What is your fucking point you subhuman piece of shit?
Do I need to repeat why I cited the Rosetta stone?
Hermetica were not even genuine egyptian texts, retarded renaissance intellectuals had no information about Hermes and thought he was a figure contemporaneous with Moses. This has nothing to do with the point of my first post in this shithole and it still stands.

[Anonymous No.15921899]

>>15921705
Because you're an underage basketball American I'll give you some free education.

Marcilio Ficino, Renaissance Neoplatonist, translated the Corpus Hermeticum, that was brought to Europe by Neoplatonists, into Latin, and interpreted it under the counsel of George Gemistus Pletho, a Neoplatonist.

Hermetic texts, as the name might imply were written by the time Egypt had already been Hellenized, and into Greek. Initial estimates on the antiquity were faulted, and when it was revealed to be so by Isaac Causobon, who showed they were from around the 2nd century AD - the trend of Hermeticism fell apart.

It is still unverifiable to scholars on the subject on how diluted it is by Greek culture in representing the real Pharaonic priests practices, and if and to what degree it influenced Platonism and the other way around. It is clearly and undeniably syncretic, and though they both share some common roots is is impossible to definitively say it is as ancient as some people may say it is.
Regardless, it is clearly still an evolution detached from its line of tradition as evidenced by its very name - notwithstanding this the debate on its purity will rage on.
It was in Plato, and with Neoplatonists, that some of the scientific intricacies that probably and may have existed in Egypt are possibly expounded, which Hermeticism teaches nothing on, and from the Platonic line that the chief amount of influence that hieratic views on the soul were shared.

The Rosetta Stone, marked the first point in over a thousand years knowably anyone could even decipher hieroglyphics, so they were unavailable for study for just as long to even be able to steer the intellectual course of human history. It was in the preserved writings of Plato that these significant periods were able to still yet be able to savor some of the meaning in their lessons - and that was always the intention of Plato and the Neoplatonists; regardless of the minutiae of mythology and some differing perspectives.

All of this is pretty much the point of the book...
if... like, you knew how to read.

[Anonymous No.15921922]

OP is an anger fueled pagan larper

[Anonymous No.15922136]

>>15921899
I swear I'm not talking to a real person. Are you even a human being?
What is the need of all this common knowledge post? You spouted what literally anyone interested in Platonism, Hermeticism and or in late antiquity theology knows.

The hieroglyphics were not unavailable for study you midwit, the due knowledge to interpret them were always in possession of obscure, peripheral groups and the access to them was only through literally an initiation (see the pythagoreans, orphics, some gnostic sects and even the Platonist themselves). Plato, Plotinus and Iamblichus explictly expose this, Plotinus says how unoriginal their doctrines are. Still today the access to precise hieroglyphic interpretation is restricted and almost impossible, that is why we see many aberrations from scholars. I sincerely don't know why the issue here was diverted to this. A few people (like Plato himself!) had direct access to some of the egyptian mysteries, theology and sciences and they were continually transmited in secret, but modern readers can't understand this. They think Plato was original, they think Plato invented dialectics!
There is simply no contestation to nothing that I said in this thread:
>>15920022
>>15919893
>>15919657
>>15920496
>>15921705
>>15921231

People here are simply ignoring the fact that only a few ancient greeks had proper understanding of metaphysics and theology (Platonists) and the rest helped to lead philosophy to its current state, even though Plato already helped to corrupt it (even Uzdavinys himself says this but you are just a subhuman hylic with no capacity to understand anything you process in your npc processor you call mind).

[Anonymous No.15922155]

greeks learned from the persians

[Anonymous No.15922156]

>>15922136
>What is the need of all this common knowledge post?
Clearly it was uncommon to you and you needed to be taught about it, considering you keep saying things that are fundamentally incorrect, while being unable to answer what should have been simple questions.
>hylic
Oh you are a mentally ill LARPer. I see. No wonder you're such a 60 IQ sperg.

[Anonymous No.15922173]

>>15922136
>get destroyed for the 50th time this thread
>make no argument at all and just insult because he is an insecure brainlet

[Anonymous No.15922190]

>>15922156
If he had even a trace of decency or integrity he'd have thanked me for sharing knowledge with him despite him being a stupid little asshole.

[Anonymous No.15922192]

>praises scientific accomplishment of platonic sciences
>calls other people hylics
uhhh

[Anonymous No.15922201]

>>15922190
meant for, >>15922173

>>15922155
The Myth of Er certainly indicates certain Persian influences.

[Anonymous No.15922237]

>>15922136
>There is simply no contestation to nothing that I said in this thread:
>>he thinks Pythagoras was initiated by Phoenicians
Stopped reading there. What a retard.
No wonder other people have been riding your ass.

[Anonymous No.15922248]

>>15922156
>you keep saying things that are fundamentally incorrect.
I ask AGAIN: cite a single one. I mentioned all my posts there, point a single one.

>unable to answer what should have been simple questions.
I asked this before and I will ask again: WHAT QUESTION?

>>15922173
Point anything I was wrong about.

[Anonymous No.15922258]

>>15922237
>pythagoras was initiated by phoenicians
not only phoenicians, but yes he traveled to phoenicia this is basic knowledge. have you even read anything uzdavinys wrote?

[Anonymous No.15922303]

>>15922258
>"this is basic knowledge"
>he thinks myths are evident facts
Get a load of this retard. Bet you think he went to study Qabbalah too.

[Anonymous No.15922412]

>>15922303
I know it is impossible to talk to a wall but try to answer this >>15922248

[Anonymous No.15922469]

>>15922248
>Point anything I was wrong about.
Here,
>Oh yeah, you mean the phoenicians also?
Unverifiable.
>Literally responsible for the degeneration of “philosophy”.
Probably one of the most retarded statements in the entire thread.
>Oh heraclitus was so original right?? No relation with the other eastern sumboliques right?????
Didn't like the mysteries, you can't even attribute a source for said influence.
>The guy also lived in egypt seeking instruction
Possible, unverifiable. One of the first guys to say so was outright wrong about the details of the claim.
>he was already corrupting the purity of profoundly arcane cosmo-theo-logical doctrines.
This is so fucking retarded it's almost offensive.
Disagreeing with:
>Platonism basically began the seed of science
Which is pretty much true since he was kind of a textbook on it. Archimedes and Euclid are great, but Plato created the foundation for the university system.

[Anonymous No.15922592]

>>15922469
>Unverifiable.
>>15922412

>Literally responsible for the degeneration of “philosophy”.
Zeno begot Leucippus and Democritus you illiterate retard. Read what I wrote after that statement. Parmenides was responsible for Zeno's radical rationalism and even he himself employed it even though still retaining some of metaphysical mystique.

>Didn't like the mysteries, you can't even attribute a source for said influence.
Fire as all-devouring, Logoic function?

>Plato living in egypt is unverifiable
Read his epistles, read diogenes laertius, read proclus, read olympiodorus.

>this is fucking retarded
yeah when I have nothing to say against something i don't agree i just say it is fucking retarded then suddenly i have reason!

>Platonism basically began the seed of science.
If by science you understand science as in MODERN (profane, rationalistic) science, then maybe, but the egyptians already had true (sacred) science developed for millenia.

>Euclid
the geometry of planes and solids, of plane figures, theories of proportions and the five polyhedrons were all derived from pythagorean doctrines.

[Anonymous No.15922644]

>>15922592
>Zeno begot Leucippus and Democritus you illiterate retard.
>radical rationalism
What a sperg.
Ho-ly shit. Take your meds. You really are a historical retard. Nobody cares about your faggot feelings Timmy.

[Anonymous No.15922664]

>>15922592
>egyptians already had true (sacred) science developed for millenia.
Pretty much worthless if nobody passes it on, huh? Kill yourself, retarded trannyfaggot. You are worthless.

[Anonymous No.15922705]

>>15922644
>>15922664
seething this hard for being taught and having access to true knowledge is inconceivable. well if you want to live a lie, thats your choice, good luck wretched hylics.

[Anonymous No.15922738]

>>15922705
>If by science you understand science as in MODERN (profane, rationalistic) science
>>seething this hard
Lmfao you are an embarrassing clown. Let it out little man.
>wretched hylics
The little desert golems you are LARPing as literally read Plato to educate themselves, he was an idealist, not a materialist, you'd know this if you weren't a subhuman garbage baby.
Once again, basic bitch trivia "are you smarter than a 3rd grader" knowledge you don't seem to grasp.

[Anonymous No.15922755]

>>15922738
ok materialist scum

[Anonymous No.15922766]

>>15922755
>"ok materialist scum"
>the 15 year old said with smug satisfaction as he sipped the last of his mountain dew and booted up a video game

[Anonymous No.15922781]

>>15922755
For someone who claims to be enlightened you sure are an angry little bitch.

[Anonymous No.15922808]

>>15922766
>>15922781
t. hyperhylics

[Anonymous No.15924174]

>>15918715
>Start With the Egyptians
Sorry anon, I only understand book charts

[Anonymous No.15924292]

Now this has been an interesting thread to read

[Anonymous No.15924298]

>>15918715
Uzdavinys is beyond based

[Anonymous No.15924441]

the real red pill on esoteric history

[Anonymous No.15924687]

Too many posts since I, OP, vallen fren to pray to Asclepius.
Anyway, as I said about Plutarch who lived in Late first century, can be said about Iamblichus.
They couldn't read late or even middle Egyptian. Yet their depiction of Egyptian myth has a 1 to 1 correspondence to to those 4000 year old texts we NOW can read in our true age of enlightenment (as opposed to the false one).
Iamblichus De Mysteriis clearly show Iamblichus was Initiated into Egyptian Mysteries since he himself could probably not read the hieratic Egyptian that was dying out thanks to Christian prosecution, that the same core theosophy (real one) that we now read in THOUSANDS of walls and papyri was still being practiced in 300 AD.
Plato did not teach any initiation nor did Plotinus. For therm the hieratic contemplation if you reach the peak of many false Arches, then you will be a new root of your own. Like they were. And there are many extatic moments in the ladder of love, most who think themselves enlightenment merely have beheld the Soul of the World, a beautiful goddess, Isis, but still "only" an echo, and being a woman she confounds to believe we found the One and become monists.
That we now have all these texts dating a millennia older than the oldest Veda, is a merely a blessing. And if course if actually are offered initiation into a legitimate hindu school that's of course a bonus, but again not necessary, the true initiation is the to attain the grasping of the Good. The true triune God.

[Anonymous No.15924704]

>>15918930
Based, look how mad you made the orientalists.

[Anonymous No.15924739]

>>15920931
Atum, Shu, Nefertum.
Three primordial Gods, all anthropos.

[Anonymous No.15924768]

>>15919021
It's a mnemonic device / teaching aid.

[Anonymous No.15924883]

OP, again.
I believe "Neoplatonists" survived but not just through kabbalah, monks, and sufism, technically the Druze are a legitimate branch of those exiles into Syria, but those guys have closed the doors so hard that they loose their legitimacy, temporarily anyway, becoming a non-entity—if those doors are open but a little might even be bad for us true traditionalists (frog was a brainlet). But they're still a sign of the ancient Harranians who created sufism and probably informed kabbala, and though them the Renaissance.
I do think Pletho was the Scholarch of an ancient school, but what became of it certainly wasn't Masonry or Rosicrucianism, and definitely not the "Whore of Babylon" Blavatsky.
As the point in my last post, Plotinus taught no physical rites or lower practices, only One, it was Iamblichus who reintroduced full Theurgy, andyes it is sad we only have the descriptions of how to perform some of those imitator rites.
But if you legitimately reach the Ineffable One, the Daemons will guide you to perform the thurgic rites we a have left, and the Flower of Intellect will guide you away from illusory spiritual experience that is too common.

[Anonymous No.15924926]

im gonna ignore everything going on in this thread and just ask: has anyone found a good ebook of this one? libgen and z library are just pdfs and i need something i can convert into .mobi

[Anonymous No.15926184]

The 5000 year exegetical tradition.

>Thus the One Origin produces contiguous to itself many origins, many simplicities, and many goodnesses. For all of the beings, which are differentiated from one another and are pluralised by their own proper differentia, are referred back each to their own single origin. (For instance, all beautiful things, whether in intellects, souls or bodies, are referred back to one fountain of beauty. Likewise for the many symmetrical things and the many true things.) And all the origins, insofar as they are origins and fountains and goodnesses, are in a way of the same nature as the First Origin, in the degree appropriate to their level of descent. Just as the One Origin stands to all beings, so too each origin stands to the plurality contained by its particularity. For each plurality distinguished by some differentia cannot but stretch up towards its proper origin, which illuminates the oneness in all of it with respect to this same form. The one leads every plurality, and every particularity shared by many things comes to the many from one. So all of the partial origins are situated in the Whole and are contained by it, not dimensionally or spatially, but as the parts in a whole, or the plurality in the one, or number in the monad. For it is all things before all things, and around the One Origin the many origins are pluralised, and in the One Goodness the many goodnesses take their foundation. And this is not just an origin like each of the other origins (one of them being the origin of beauty, another of truth, a third of symmetry, or something else). Rather, it is simply Origin – not the origin simply of beings, but rather the Origin of origins. For this quality of being an origin, just like the rest, must not take its origin from a plurality, but instead must be brought to a head in a single monad, the Origin of origins.

[Anonymous No.15926199]

BUUUUT MUH KALIACC TWITTER CLIQUE

[Anonymous No.15926262]

>>15926184
>monism
cringe

[Anonymous No.15926285]

>>15926184
Provide yourself with the Great of Magic (or Demiurgic and Theurgic Ability, Heka). Cast off your impurity for Atum in On (Heliopolis) and go down with him: assign the needs of the Lower Sky and succeed to the thrones of the Abyss (Niau or Nu) ... Go up, open your ways by means of the bones of Shu. The embrace of your mother Nut which enfold you...
Ascend and descend: descend with Ra sink into darkness with Ndi
Ascend and descend: ascend with Ra, rise with he Great Float-user.
Ascend and descend; descend with Nepthys, sink into darkness with the Night-barque.
Ascend and descend: ascend with Isis, rise with the Day-barque
O Atum, raise this Pharaoh up to you, enclose him with your embrace, for he is your son and your body for ever...

>>15924926
For converting files into any format
>online-convert
>.com
>/result/71ec6e99-590e-4a51-987b-27edb27d3833

[Anonymous No.15926329]

>>15926262
>>15926285
>>monism
>>15918963
Both and Neither

>Within the multi-dimensional hierarchy of theophanies, inside the differentiated body of Ptah (to say it in accordance with the Egyptian Ramesside concept of divine transcendence and immanence, the declaration that ‘All is One’), Dionysus is both the cause of individual life and the cause of deliverance. He appoints the term of the imprisonment for
as long as it is better for embodied souls to be under restraint, in view of the final goal, which is deliverance by Dionysus (Damascius In Phaed. I.12.1–3).
>The final goal for the contemplative philosopher is to remember and rediscover Dionysus in himself, the Monad united with the superior principles. Through this monadic purity one hopes to touch the purity of the transcendent One, of the unspeakable and hidden Amun, deus ineffabilis. The supreme Amun of the late The-ban theology surpasses all human and divine knowledge, veiling himself even before the gods, so that his essence is not known. This ineffable One, however, ‘makes himself into millions’, thus playing the dialectical game of unity and diversity. According to J. Assmann:
This god transcended the world not only with respect to the mysterious hiddenness of his ‘ba-ness’, in which no name could name him and no representation could depict him, but also with respect to the human heart, which was filled with him. He was the hidden god who ‘came from afar’ yet was always present to the individual in the omniscience and omnipotence of his all-encompassing essence. He was not only the cosmos—in Egyptian, the totality of the ‘millions’, and also neheh and djet, ‘plenitude of time’ and ‘unalterable duration’ into which he unfolded himself—but also history.
>Ultimately, the searcher for God and lover of Wisdom is God himself, secretly involved both into 1) a self-disclosure (which actually appears as a magical self-veiling), creative irradiation, manifestation, descent of the soul, and 2) reintegration, redemption, deconstructive unveiling, liberation. As Damascius relates:
When Dionysus had projected his reflection into the mirror, he followed it and was thus scattered over the universe. Apollo gathers him and brings him back to heaven, for he is the purifying God and truly the savior of Dionysus (kathartikos on theos kai tou Dionusou soter hos alethos: In Phaed. I.129.1–4).
>However, the soul is never united with the gods as an individual: through awareness and recollection it moves from particularity to universality, from plurality to unity, and, strictly speaking, this is not the individual’s journey but the journey of Dionysus, the cosmic drama of Osiris, imitated at all levels of being.

>CHRISTIAN HACKS

[Anonymous No.15926345]

>>15918715
I just looked this up -- it's expensive.

[Anonymous No.15926355]

>>15926329
>qualified monism
double yikes

[Anonymous No.15926362]

>>15926345
Follow sticky
Or here on prometheustrust
.co.uk
/html/other_books.html#rite1
around 20 euros, depending on where you are

[Anonymous No.15926416]

>>15926355
>qualified
implying it isn't qualitative monism
>but that's impossibruh
For you.
The fact of the difference is what is the Absolute One is, these absolute opposite is the Ineffable. If we weren't different there wuld be no One, for it isn't the cause of sameness but Uniqueness, Henads: He is every uniqueness but what defines uniqueness if not difference, thus the One is beyond Aameness and Difference, yet both. This is the Triad.

[Anonymous No.15926436]

>>15918930
you guys realize its kinda like apples and oranges because the greeks wrote philosophy and the hindus wrote religion? they are attempting to solve different problems, its like thinking that a shovel and a pickax are pretty similar and then you have to fill a wheelbarrow with a pickax and break rocks with a shovel

[Anonymous No.15926466]

>>15926416
qualitative monism as in the monism is the plurality of uniquenesses, I realise I meant the opposite of what "qualitative monism" usually imply.
heh

>Therefore, the intermediate reality is neither One nor Being but One-Being as a unique nature [that subsists] as the Unified and anticipates both One and Being, as they are differentiated in later [stages]. Neither should one say that this intermediary is simply substance nor is it simply the One, but rather the midway point with respect to either of them that appears to be the other of the two, or One that is simultaneously Being and Being as simultaneously One, or the combination One-Being in a kind of mixture that is prior to the elements discriminated by means of division, so that it is substance and one simultaneously. We do not possess a single name unless one should say “unified One,” and [under this sobriquet] the One and the Unified (which was the trace of Being) arise together. But neither is the One in this as participating nor is Being in this as subsisting. That which is prior to the Unified was neither [One nor Being], but the Unified itself is both together in a unique simplicity that belongs to both. And so each of them anticipates the Unified and also derives from it, the One and Being, the one leading and the other following, remaining separate from each other through a certain otherness, just as all things proceed from the demiurgic intellect simultaneously, that is, every bodily form as well as the soul for whom it becomes the vehicle, and even the intellect that accompanies the soul. If these three are in the demiurge causally, why cannot the one and being be in the Unified, not because of causes that serve to define them (for there was no definition there) but in a unique causal aspect of the Unified as their true subsistence? And so I will venture, summarizing, that that which is called One by indication is not in fact One in truth, and the many that are spoken of, by indication, after the One are intermediate and, as it were, a development of the One toward the Unified and a descent of the first principle into the hypostasis of the third principle, whereas the highest stage of the Unified is this third principle, since it is the Unified of the entire Unified order. After it, [the third principle] is the differentiated aspect that is a trace manifestation of the Unified, both as a whole as well as of its parts, as if someone were to call it the birth pang of the Unified, or as the preparation for it. But after this intermediate there is the basis of the intelligible, which is also that which is perfectly differentiated from the nature of the Unified. And so those unifi ed realities that are there, to whatever degree they are differentiated, those are also unified, since neither the One nor Being is absent from any of the divisions, as Plato’s Parmenides says.

Read Damascius. Get 30 new IQs.

[Anonymous No.15926478]

>>15926184
>>15926285
>>15926329
holy FUCK anon you need to TAKE your schizo meds FUCK

[Anonymous No.15926500]

>>15926478
I have indeed chanced upon some who are outwardly splendid philosophers in their rich memory of a multitude of theories; in the shrewd flexibility of their countless syllogisms; in the constant power of their extraordinary perceptiveness. Yet within they are poor in matters of the soul and destitute of true knowledge.

[Anonymous No.15926522]

>>15926500
i skimmed this thread for like a good 15 mins and all it is is people strawmanning for the sake of dropping some c o o l vocab and using q u i r k y terms they read for i n t e r n e t c l o u t. why read the upanishads if your not going to let yourself be impacted by it? just to cynically read it and then dust it off, reading with a bias? if anyone here understood the hindus they wouldnt post anything, similarly with any of these religions

[Anonymous No.15926596]

>>15926522
>>15924687
>>15924883
I, didn't really participate in the sperged dialogue between those two posters, I'm only annoyed by the out of india folks and shankarist, and buddhists are the stoics (not really a good thing) of the east.
All other vedists are fine.

[Anonymous No.15926658]

>>15926522
Hindufaggots are like Jews and can't cope with people not thinking they did everything first. That one psychotic sperg didn't even seem to be a hindu, but some kind of gnostic pretender.

[Anonymous No.15926671]

>>15926436
Philosophy was religion.
Have you never read anything by Plato, Neoplatonists, or from the book?

[Anonymous No.15926688]

>>15924441
No red pills there, just schizophrenia

[Anonymous No.15927705]

>>15926329
>Ultimately, the searcher for God and lover of Wisdom is God himself, secretly involved both into 1) a self-disclosure (which actually appears as a magical self-veiling), creative irradiation, manifestation, descent of the soul, and 2) reintegration, redemption, deconstructive unveiling, liberation.
this is basically the same premise as Advaita Vedanta, Vishishtadvaita Vedanta, Kashmir Shaivism etc

[Anonymous No.15928155]

>>15927705
Liberation as DIONYSUS
not as some abstract lifeless sleep of inaction

[all these dubs are overbearing No.15928248]

>>15927705
>>15928155
NON-DISCURSIVE DIVINE PRESENCE AND RELATIONAL TRANSCENDENCE
>According to Proclus, both ancient Hellenic theology and Pythagorean philosophy stem from the Orphic mystagogy. Consequently, the doctrines of Plato may be regarded as the revelations of Apollo translated into the discursive language of rational dialectic. Since the One is exempt from all things (exeremenon panton), it is ineffable. But if everything (ta panta) is a manifestation or revelation of the Ineffable, this means that, in a certain fundamental respect, being itself is ineffable, in spite of its noetic articulation, sensible crystallization, and visibility. The inevitable conclusion is that the entire hierarchy of being (which includes the graded hierarchy of transcendence and immanence), when regarded as a display of the One, is equivalent to a kind of miraculous divine ‘myth’. This ‘myth’, revealed in the form of the all-embracing and dynamic cosmic agalma (hieratic statue, image, shrine) is analogous to the obscuring power of maya which (in the Trika philosophy of Kashmir), though being an aspect of Parama Shiva, acts as a veil thrown over the supreme ineffable Principle.
>Thereby the Parama Shiva presumably does not ‘experience’ (to use this rather misleading term) the whole of the manifested universe (vishva) as the transcendent oneness, but as the noetic multiplicity. This multiplicity shows itself as the Dionysian fragmentation reflected in the countless mirrors of divine Imagination. The entire hierarchy of paradigms and images shines within the unspeakable unity of the One, this hierarchy itself being nothing but a single unity, unified by Apollo whose full multitude of powers is ‘incomprehensible to us and indescribable’ (aperilepton hemin kai aperiegeton: Proclus In Crat. 97.2–3).5 As Proclus says: Indeed, how could human reason ever become able to grasp all the properties together, not only of Apollo, but of any God at all? (ibid., 97.4–6)

again >>15926416 The One is the principle of Uniqueness, being every uniqueness, the fragmentation of Dionysus isn't a bundle of infinite copies but each are divinely unique and divinely different).
We, Zeus (Helios), are not A-pollo only.

[Anonymous No.15928537]

>>15928155
coomer

[Anonymous No.15928736]

>>15926596
i feel like thats probably a gross simplification of both stoicism and buddhism, which is slightly intellectually dishonest. one could even make the point that, where the stoics disvalued all things by descending it to mere materials, the buddhists used the spirit as a means of devalueing the world