Too brainlet for smart literature?

[Anonymous No.19939239]

I just started reading Evola's The Holy Grail because I was going to follow this guide. However, I think I am too dumb to get it. I understand half of it and the other half just reads like gobblydigook. Like I literally can't make sense of it. I was really excited to read some esoteric shit too. Am I too dumb for this kind of literature or if I keep reading will I pick it up? In the case that I am too dumb, what should I be reading?

[Anonymous No.19939246]

If you read Evola you're denouncing God. You aren't smart, you are not enlightened. You are a sheep controlled by the government and you will be burned by hellfire.

[Anonymous No.19939248]

That's a good thing, it means you're being challenged. Encountering no issues when reading is much worse

[Anonymous No.19939326]

>>19939248
this

[Anonymous No.19939330]

>>19939239
It is literally gobbledigook

[Anonymous No.19939390]

>>19939239
This chart is horrible. Start with Revolt and if you don't get it, wait a bit before reading the Baron. There's basically no need for most people to read HT either.

[Anonymous No.19939410]

>>19939239
Start from his essays rather than this. The chart was made by someone who at least had understanding of classical philosophy and some practice with approaching philosophy of some sort(rather than reading secondary literature on it) and for that kind of person this is a very good chart. If you are however like most people not used to it it will filter you hard. Evola was rather consistent so he carried his thought into most of his opinions so by reading the essays, you'll be eased into his mindset as you can relate to at least some of the things he's talking about(jazz, sexual revolution etc.), and then when you encounter the deduction from which this position came from it'll click.

[Anonymous No.19939446]

>>19939410
Which essays should I read?

[Anonymous No.19940034]

>>19939410
But why would he make people start with Mystery of the Grail followed by Hermetic Tradition? Grail was originally an appendix to Revolt in the first place.

[Anonymous No.19940131]

>>19939246
Stick it up your ass kike worshipper

[Anonymous No.19940140]

>>19939239
>Smart literature
>Evola

[Anonymous No.19940371]

>>19940140
Which books did you read of his? Why isn't he smart? Are you aware that you posted a fake quote?

[Anonymous No.19940413]

>>19939246
Christcuck NPCs are so boring. Please neck yourself.

[Anonymous No.19940785]

>>19940413
Pretty sure it's a falseflagging lefturd.

[Anonymous No.19940890]

>>19939239
imagine thinking evola is smart literature lmao. reading pol threads might be your alley

[Anonymous No.19940896]

>>19940140
Fake quote

[Anonymous No.19940900]

>>19940890
Which books did you read of his? Why isn't he smart?

[Anonymous No.19940905]

>>19940140
The quote that destroyed Evolatrannies

[Anonymous No.19940915]

>>19940896
To be fair, the discord trannies don't have much else. What are they gonna do, refute Evola? They're too stupid to read it, and if they read it they would realise that they can't refute it. Instead they will keep spiraling, try not to let them drag you down with them, they are unironically doing the bidding of dark occult forces, knowingly or unknowingly.

[Anonymous No.19940922]

>>19940905
Trannies destroy themselves, idiot.

[Anonymous No.19940932]

>>19940900
none i dont waste time with garbage counter initiation people like evola dugin etc. i read some brief parts and his letters to guénon. he was a charlatan. by guénon's standard someone that was anti-traditional

if you want to know tradition why not read guénon instead of a magick larper like evola? why settle for the worst?

[Anonymous No.19940968]

"The American negroid confronts the European woman, even now in Italy, as the supreme being, unconsciously dominating her libido owing to the perceived phallus popularized by film."

[Anonymous No.19940977]

nasr remarks that when he visited evola he was intrigued by the lack of traditional arts and how dark the place was. if you can't tell he was not traditional you should simply abstain from reading

[Anonymous No.19940979]

"The Doctrine of Awakening" is the best introduction to Evola. Whoever made this guide should be hung from the gallows.

[Anonymous No.19940995]

>>19940932
>none
Then you can't have an informed opinion on if he was smart or not. I've read Guenon (unlike you, who are pretending) and both are good. Evola writes more from the viewpoint of heroic action, Guenon from a more cerebral or contemplative one, owing to their different natures, both Traditionally valid. You have no authority to say whether or not Evola was a larper (he had very little interest in "magick" - you wouldn't know though), and it sounds more like you dislike him because he had ties to fascism. You're an idiot and I won't even bother replying to your next post unless you can prove you're worth the time and not some communist mental patient attempting to "fight the nazis" or whatever delusional ends such swine strive towards.

[Anonymous No.19941005]

>>19940977
>p-please stop reading Evola, goys
>h-he's problematic and fascist- oops I mean he wasn't Traditional (trust me goyim)
Kill yourself, semi-literate tranny shitskin.

[Anonymous No.19941014]

>>19940932
Evola was devoted more to a practical sphere of knowledge, Guenon to a theoretical. This is the reason he was political for a time.

[Anonymous No.19941052]

>>19940995
ok so i'm pretending i've read 5 or 6 books by guénon

>you have to eat poop to know it's bad!!!

>heroic action
action means nothing if you don't know the principles first. #1 lesson in metaphysics. actions will also cease in the end of history and not a single action will remain.

>>19941005
>>19941014
keep seething pol shitters. you are a bunch of edgy larpers interested in LE OCCULT. nothing more. only a brainlet would put evola on the same rank as schuon, guénon and ananda.

if you apply guénon's measure for counter intiation he puts forth in reign of quantity evola falls exactly into that.

[Anonymous No.19941076]

>>19941005
>>19940995
evolians always think the critique is political. they cannot think outside of politics. this is how deranged they are. they want to do metaphysics with politics, not knowing the metaphysician is above politics. sad.

you were never looking for truth. you look for a cult leader.

[Anonymous No.19941105]

in fact, you look for a cult leader to validate your angry incel copes. i have never met an evolian that wasn't a frustrated individual. they are pol version of the dark academia girls

don't @ with politics bs. im as much anti-democratic as one can be. fascism is just a pseudo religion.

[Anonymous No.19941121]

Stop reading that, go read Evola's Orientations essay and Guenon's Crisis of the Modern World first.

[Anonymous No.19941189]

>>19939239
I have the same issue but I think I actually have ADD. I'll be able to focus for short bits but my mind wanders and I have to go back a paragraph or two and start over.

Also, is Pagan Imperialism worth reading?

[Anonymous No.19941200]

>>19941105
>>19941076
>>19941052
I can tell by the way you type that you're pretty stupid and not enlightened. Do you actually know what the goal of the primordial tradition is, in practical and technical terms? If you studied Evola you might find a way. And only 5 or 6 Guenon books? That really is not a lot, you know little about Traditionalism and even less about Evola. And on the contrary it really does seem like you are just butthurt about fascism, given how you characterise anybody who disgrees with you as "edgy larpers" and "pol shitters". You sound pretty mad tbqh. Take your hormones (yes, I can tell).

[Anonymous No.19941210]

>>19941189
It's worth reading for a raw and unadulterated intro to Evola's thought, he became more refined and less hostile to Christianity later on.

[Anonymous No.19941224]

Start with this its a collection of accessible essays written by Evola mainly in the 50's

[Anonymous No.19941225]

>>19941200
>And on the contrary it really does seem like you are just butthurt about fascism
i couldn't care less about fascism or politics in general. again why do you drag the conversation to this sphere?

[Anonymous No.19941231]

>>19941200
>Traditionalism and even less about Evola.
my main point is that evola is not traditional if you apply the optics of any other tradionalist (guénon, schuon, ananda, nasr and so on)

[Anonymous No.19941247]

>>19941231
The best introduction to Evola is the first chapter, "The Beginning", of his magnum opus "Revolt Against the Modern World". Make sure to fully understand the doctrine of polarity present within this chapter before continuing. Secondly, is to read Evola's personal autobiograpghy, "The Path of Cinnebar", however this work will only be listed here as "optional" but "highly recommened". However, you could instead jump straight into "The Doctrine of Awakening", which provides an easy-to-understand introduction to the esoteric teachings of the world of tradition. After which, read "The Yoga of Power", which will serve as an addendum to the preivious book. Read thereon-after "The Hermetic Tradition", which is arguable the most difficult work of Evola (re-reads are encouraged). Finally, you can pick up the rest of "Revolt Against the Modern World". Lastly, read "Men Among the Ruins" and "Ride the Tiger".

[Anonymous No.19941253]

"evola is not traditional, but in a counter initiation agent"

>kike!
>you are a commie
>you just hate nazism
>you are butthurt against fascism
evolians in a nutshell.

[Anonymous No.19941283]

>>19941225
>again why do you drag the conversation to this sphere?
This was stated explicitly.

>>19941231
If you're being pedantic (possibly for lack of broader understanding), you could argue that. But in terms of pragmatic reality he is a Traditionalist, and widely recognised as one. You could argue that Schuon and others weren't really Traditionalists since they didn't follow Guenon's guidelines exactly either. You really don't know enough about Evola to know if he was a charlatan or not. Do you honestly think Guenon would spend so much time writing over decades, talking to him talking about supernatural attacks, reviewing his books before and after publication, if he was a fake? You are overly emotional.

[Anonymous No.19941295]

>>19941210
How is it for learning about actual Paganism?

[Anonymous No.19941300]

>>19941253
In all fairness your claim is really fucking stupid and you haven't backed it up at all, you even admit to not having read any of his books. You are also whining about pol like a butthurt tranny for no apparent reason other than an author being posted on a literature board.

[Anonymous No.19941311]

>>19941295
Good if you need to learn more about the philosophy/inner attitude for Paganism. But in that case Revolt is probably better, along with the Intro to Magic trilogy and other works of his. Pagan Imperialism isn't that important.

[Anonymous No.19941314]

>>19941283
>he is a Traditionalist, and widely recognised as one
by whom? only mark sedgwick (...) and maybe dugin (another counter initiation agent)

name a single traditionalist who would consider evola a traditionalist. world wisdom and sophia perennis don't even publish him. he's not in the sacred web and studies in comparative religion etc. i challenge you to name a single traditionalist that takes evola into consideration

i think it's guénon's letters to gido where he tells how evola didn't get his points.

[Anonymous No.19941507]

>>19941314
>i think it's guénon's letters to gido where he tells how evola didn't get his points.
You mean Guido? Yes, the ones when Evola was 27. You're a clown buddy, not worth the time. I doubt it's just the language barrier. Bye bye.

[Anonymous No.19941518]

>>19941507
>he is a Traditionalist, and widely recognised as one

name one please anon come on... if he is widely recognised you could at least name one right???? lmao

[Anonymous No.19941555]

>>19941295
Not great and I love Evola. For that look at things like Jaeger's Paideia, E.R. Dodds' Greeks and the Irrational, etc. I don't know how well Walter Burkert holds up or is regarded but could be a good place to start. Five Stages of Greek Religion is also interesting and short but obviously comes from a Bloomsbury group mindset of secular rationalism, favors pragmatic and empirical stoicism and epicureanism over mystery religions etc., but still an ok intro.

[Anonymous No.19941556]

>>19941283
>>19941507
>>19941200
>>19940995
>you are an idiot
>you are pretty stupid and not enlightened
>you are a clown buddy
>you are pedantic
>you are overly emotional
>you really don't know enough

here's an evolian having a meltdown since i attacked their cult leader saying he is not traditional. it is worth seeing one of the attacks is "you are overly emotional". now the latest claim was that evola was "widely reconised as one (tradionalist(" and the shitter can't even name a single source.

you are full of crap

[Anonymous No.19941575]

i have dealt with evolians for a long time. it's always the same behavior. they drag the conversation to politics (a topic not a single trad would waste his time on) and cheap insults while they pose as holier than thou internet aritocrats. that's why i rightly call them pol shitters and larpers.

[Anonymous No.19941687]

>>19939239
is there a chart like this for guenon?

[Anonymous No.19941710]

>>19939239
>I understand half of it and the other half just reads like gobblydigook
That sounds like your typical experience reading right*id "philosophy".

[Anonymous No.19941872]

>>19941556
>it is worth seeing one of the attacks is "you are overly emotional"
>*replies 3 times becoming progressively more belligerent and illegible*
Are you a nigger?

[Anonymous No.19941877]

>>19941710
>too low-IQ for RAtMW

[Anonymous No.19941894]

>>19941872
can you name a single traditionalist who considers evola to be one of them? you (?) said he was "widely recognised" as one

[Anonymous No.19941912]

>>19941894
me

[Anonymous No.19941986]

>>19941894
Kek, read any bio about him, you fucking retard. Read his books which espouse Traditionalist thought. It's common knowledge. Your questions are small-minded.

[Anonymous No.19942019]

>>19941986
>you fucking retard
amazing. another cheap insult. getting nervous bro? still can't name a single source...

"widely recognised as one", "it's common knowledge"... hmmm... ok, fellow wikipedia reader.

i pointed above there's no traditionalist publisher or journal that publishes evola, and he is not mentioned in traditionalist gatherings.

[Anonymous No.19942167]

>>19942019
A source for what? It is common knowledge that he is a Trad thinker, his ideas are Trad, any bio will tell you this. All you have is a petty question which I don't even care enough to look into, while you deny/ignore everything else, which is why one must laugh and call you names, since you're like a dirty, dark-skinned shudra.

[Anonymous No.19942179]

>>19942019
>"widely recognised as one", "it's common knowledge"... hmmm... ok, fellow wikipedia reader
not an argument.

[Anonymous No.19942202]

>>19942167
>It is common knowledge that he is a Trad thinker, his ideas are Trad,
no he is not and they are not. you haven't read traditionalists.

>since you're like a dirty, dark-skinned shudra.
resorting to politics and skin color... typical. *yawn*

[Anonymous No.19942231]

>>19942167
funny that if it's another calling you a pol shitter you consider it "belligerent" but if it's you calling names it's justifiable. absolute state of self consciousness of evolians

[Anonymous No.19942322]

>>19942202
>no he is not and they are not. you haven't read traditionalists.
But this is your low-info opinion and is contrary to common knowledge, and is seemingly the best you have to offer. I've read most of Guenon's books, most of Evola's and some random other authors but after the first two I don't need the 2nd rate Trads. You dirty, dark shudra, don't you know that you will never be a woman?

>>19942231
>so mad "she" replies more than once
Take your meds, you unironically sound mentally ill and are all over the place. You clearly just hate Evola and people who like him because ypu associate it with /pol/, which obviously triggers you.

[Anonymous No.19942358]

>>19942202
>no he is not and they are not.
Nice opinion

[Anonymous No.19942422]

>>19942322
it was clear from that start you are a pseud who has no clue about what tradition is, and ever since i called you a pol shitter you began acting like a textbook caricature of a pol shitter.

if you have read guénon you have not understood a single point. no traditionalist quotes evola or consider him one of them since he simply goes against everything guénon et al stood for.

im probably whiter than you but still. this fetish pol shitters have for politics and skin color is sad. you have blacks in your head rent free. you think more about blacks on a daily basis than i'll ever will in my entire life. it shows a lot about how 'trad' evola and his followers are.

i won't reply again. read more guénon until you understand evola was a hack

[Anonymous No.19942483]

>>19942422
>more unsubstantiated opinion that goes against obvious reality
>/pol/ lives in your head rent free
>I'm not even the guy you were arguing with
>I'm 50-50 English-Scottish and you're a delusional tranny
Lel. Keep reading 2nd rate Trad authors, dark-skinned shudra dog. Guenon and Evola are the OGs, Schuon seem alright too. Everything else is fluff. Take your hormones, freak.

[Anonymous No.19942701]

>>19939239
You need to start at the beginning.

The Epic of Gilgamesh, the Iliad, the odyssey, the Argonautica, and so on.
Get through the old and new testament.
Read accompanying texts from people like Augustine.
Work your way through the entirety of western philosophy from pre-Socratics to Camus, and read Russell or Coplestone to support those texts, then read secondary literature if some parts still seem illusive since most philosophers are fucking stupid and cannot write effectively or have purposefully written like a knob to hide the fact that they are talking from their bottom.
Read so much myth that you become invigorated by the heroic narrative to such an extent you don't need to read a hero with a thousand faces. This will undoubtedly include Beowulf and Arthurian legend, though if you are a true Englishman like me you know that Arthur will return in our hour of need.
Eventually you'll get to the 20th century, and everything will make sense. This should only take a couple years.

The most important thing you must do is do 5 push ups and 5 sit ups for every page you read.

[Anonymous No.19942837]

>>19942483
evola is not og. guénon, schuon, ananda and titus are

[Anonymous No.19942880]

>>19942701
Based

[Anonymous No.19942915]

>>19940034
The entire chart was ripped from pic related.

[Anonymous No.19942918]

>>19942422
It's clear you just hate Evola and others who you associate with /pol/. You don't have any substance to your of text, and you write like a black child on a literature board. Do you think the systems of government in Traditional societies would have been all hand-holdy and friendly or do you think they would have been more of the sort that the far right is in favour of?

[Anonymous No.19942972]

>>19942918
Another with blacks in his head rent free. No. Modern politics is far from being traditional since in traditional societies power was theocentric until it devolved to the power of holy men, then virtuous men and so on - even absolute monarchy is a degeneration of traditional power. If you think circle jerking about fascism is traditional you know nothing about tradition. And if you had read Guénon you would have known any political attempt is anti traditional posing as tradition.

[Anonymous No.19942999]

>>19942483
The fact you think Guénon and Evola are the OGs means you really don't know about the traditionalist movement. The OGs are Ananda, Guénon, Titus and Schuon.

[Anonymous No.19943043]

Tiresome to read all this /pol/ tier shitposting. If you say something bad about their cult leader they immediately come screaming:
>kike! tranny! anti-nazist! anti-fascist! you are black!
and so on. Like a broken record.

It is curious how Eliade distanced himself from Evola (it was Eliade who introduced Evola to Codreanu) and attacked fascism as on the same level as bolshevism in his books. Eliade said they are the "two sides of the same coin" and "false religions" for modern people.

This position by Eliade would be held by other traditionalists. Only /pol/ incels think Evola and fascism are 'traditional'. The metaphysician abhors politics. Of course the modern world is on its way to complete decay but these politics are mere reactions to the inevitable end. They are products of the modern decay.

[Anonymous No.19944714]

>>19941189
It's his most polemical and unrestrained critique of Christianity, but Evola was younger when he wrote and distanced himself from it. So do whatever.