/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18553347]

what exactly are the necessary qualifications for initiation? guenon keeps saying it's "a certain aptitude towards spirituality", but wtf does that even mean? i get the whole intellectual horizon thing, but these terms are so vague and don't actually explain anything. what is the make-up of an initiable person?

[Anonymous No.18553356]

>>18553347
You must first drop something heavy onto your head. Then proceed.

[Anonymous No.18553380]

Initiation is just philosophy talk for what the sort of thing that Western Christians would consider the sacraments or “rites” and his only implication is that these are more powerful, or more effective, when the initiate has the appropriate disposition.

[Anonymous No.18553383]

Initiation, taken in the strict and legitimate sense, means a real ontological and existential change οf man's state, an opening to the fact οf the transcendental dimension.

Evola, in my opinion, gives three types possible, and I personally agree with these:
>The first case is where one already naturally possesses this power and convinction. This is truly exceptional and what could be likened to a "natural dignity," not derived from simple human birth; it is comparable to what in the religious domain is called election or in the case of Sufis, a man would be part of Afrad.

>The other cases concern an "acquired dignity." The second case is the possibility οί the power ίη question appearing in cases οί profound crises, spiritual traumas, or desperate actions, with the consequence οί a violent breakthrough οί the existential and ontological plane.

>The third and last case concerns the grafting οί the power ίη question onto the individual by virtue οί the action οί a representative οί a preexistent initiatic organization who is duly qualified to do so. It is the equivalent οί priestly ordination ίη the religious field, which ίη theory imprints οη the person an "indelible character," qualifying him for the efficacious performance οί the rites. The author already cited here, Rene Guenon-who ίη modern times has been almost alone ίη treating such arguments with authority and seriousness, not without denouncing, too, the deviations, errors, and mystifications οί neospiritualism considers this third case almost to the exclusion οί the others. For my part, Ι think that ίη our time this case is virtually excluded ίη practical terms, because οί the almost complete nonexistence οί the organizations ίη question. If organizations οί the kind have always had a more or less underground character ίη the West, because οί the nature οί the religion that has come to predominate there, with its repressions and persecutions, ίη recent times they have virtually disappeared.

[Anonymous No.18553538]

>>18553380
>Initiation
wrong, because there is no communication of esoteric knowledge in the rites and sacraments that the common person undergoes