hegel on mysticism

[Anonymous No.10943892]

>still less must this complacency which abjures Science claim that such rapturous haziness is superior to Science. This prophetic talk supposes that it is staying in the centre and in the depths, looks disdainfully at determinateness, and deliberately holds aloof from Notion and Necessity as products of that reflection which is at home only in the finite. But just as there is an empty breadth, so too there is an empty depth; and just as there is an extension of substance that pours forth as a finite multiplicity without the force to hold the multiplicity together, so there is an intensity without content, one that holds itself in as a sheer force without spread, and this is in now way distinguishable from superficiality... Such minds when they give themselves up to the uncontrolled ferment of substance, imagine that, by drawing a veil over self-consciousness and surrendering understanding they become beloved of God to whom He gives wisdom in sleep; and hence what they in fact receive, and bring to birth in their sleep, is nothing but dreams.

ouch

[Anonymous No.10943929]

I circle that part in the preface and draw a picture of Schelling getting ass-fucked and then re-sell the books to used book stores

[Anonymous No.10943945]

Meme quote for a meme position that doesn't even take into account his Bohemian influence. Oh, he was talking about the Romantics. Left Hegelians are quacked

[Anonymous No.10943956]

>>10943892
BTFO
T
F
O

[Anonymous No.10943958]

>>10943945
is bohemian really the word for 'influenced by jakob boehme'?

[Anonymous No.10943963]

>>10943958
Pleb autocorrect

[Anonymous No.10943969]

>>10943892
>Such minds when they give themselves up to the uncontrolled ferment of substance, imagine that, by drawing a veil over self-consciousness and surrendering understanding they become beloved of God to whom He gives wisdom in sleep
that only describes mysticism though, not initiation which is an active path, not a passive/receptive one

either way the preface to the phenomenology is a great read, i like the passage about the acorn and the oak

[Anonymous No.10943980]

>>10943969
>But this new world is perfectly realised just as little as the new-born child; and it is essential to bear this in mind. It comes on the stage to begin with in its immediacy, in its bare generality. A building is not finished when its foundation is laid; and just as little, is the attainment of a general notion of a whole the whole itself. When we want to see an oak with all its vigour of trunk, its spreading branches, and mass of foliage, we are not satisfied to be shown an acorn instead. In the same way science, the crowning glory of a spiritual world, is not found complete in its initial stages. The beginning of the new spirit is the outcome of a widespread revolution in manifold forms of spiritual culture; it is the reward which comes after a chequered and devious course of development, and after much struggle and effort. It is a whole which, after running its course and laying bare all its content, returns again to itself; it is the resultant abstract notion of the whole. But the actual realisation of this abstract whole is only found when those previous shapes and forms, which are now reduced to ideal moments of the whole, are developed anew again, but developed and shaped within this new medium, and with the meaning they have thereby acquired.

[Anonymous No.10943982]

>>10943892
Wasn't Hegel idnto hermeticism?

[Anonymous No.10943997]

>>10943982
Yes. There is a whole book on it.
http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/?GCOI=80140100664050

[Anonymous No.10943998]

>>10943982
no, just some meme interpretations of hegel are like that, there's a book though

[Anonymous No.10944014]

>>10943998
It is not really a meme interpretation. His diaries are full of it.

[Anonymous No.10944018]

>>10944014
that's disappointing

[Anonymous No.10944084]

>>10943969
shut the fuck up you fucking hack retard, stop parroting two authors whose position is totally outside of what western esotericism and religious studies indicate was the case in the countries they discuss I seriously want to fucking gas all of you ants
>>10943982
yes, you cannot even think the way he did without being interested in occult doctrines
>>10944018
suck a fat atheist cock nigger

[Anonymous No.10944093]

>>10944084
calm down, there's no need to be upset when you don't understand things

[Anonymous No.10944103]

>>10943892
>Such minds when they give themselves up to the uncontrolled ferment of substance, imagine that, by drawing a veil over self-consciousness and surrendering understanding they become beloved of God to whom He gives wisdom in sleep; and hence what they in fact receive, and bring to birth in their sleep, is nothing but dreams
Except that’s not even what Guenon and most mystics, in fact, are suggesting. This is more of a criticism of shallow mystics and shallow intepretations of mystics. Ouch.

[Anonymous No.10944106]

Guenon says far harsher things about mysticism than Hegel.

[Anonymous No.10944114]

>>10944103
Guenon was not a mystic, and he had a very low opinion of mysticism.

[Anonymous No.10944115]

>>10943892
>Such minds when they give themselves up to the uncontrolled ferment of substance, imagine that, by drawing a veil over self-consciousness and surrendering understanding they become beloved of God to whom He gives wisdom in sleep; and hence what they in fact receive, and bring to birth in their sleep, is nothing but dreams
Except that’s not even what Guenon and most mystics, in fact, are suggesting. This is more of a criticism of shallow mystics and shallow intepretations of mystics. Not to mention that Hegel was himself interested in occultism and mysticism and his works have a mystical veneer, as others in this thread have pointed out. Ouch

[Anonymous No.10944119]

>>10944114
this is a reply to
>>10944115

[Anonymous No.10944124]

>>10944114
It depends on your definition of mystic. I use it in the broad term the OP probably means it by — anyone interested in what we’d call something like religious and ineffable experiences.

[Anonymous No.10944137]

>>10944124
OP is clearly referencing a passive state of absorption, which Guenon explicitly wrote against

[Anonymous No.10944144]

>>10944093
>when you don't understand things
which anon? Guenon and Evola just made shit up, there is no reason why someone, and its even provided for in nearly all instructional texts on the occult, this includes elitist pseudo-heraclitians like N who even leave room for it, could not possibly break into the occult and esotericism without a living lineage. Since all living lineages are dead, they were wiped out by the necessity of capital and social status, the only option is to self-initiate or to simply not care about initiation. Considering the position of Daoists and Zen masters was that talented people didn't need instruction, there's no reason to listen to Evola or Guenon. Especially Guenon, listening to a Catholic is an insult to your Self

In regards to Hegel? You'd just have to be blind not to see what he is doing is Hermetic, or I suppose if you have no read the Corpus Hermeticum front to back and then paired it with Atkinson's Kybalion you would not understand how Hegelian Dialectic is born from Hermetic logic, which is directly related to Platonic Elenchus
>>10944114
that's because he was a Catholic who was obsessed with the social implications of religion, religious people do not have any contact with noetic or ecstatic experiences and are thus doubtful of their meaning or purpose. He had a vested interest in downplaying them, as they can happen to anyone at any time and negate the necessity for priests, kings and bibles.
>>10944124
the Christian religious experience, the Samadhi of a Vedantic Yogi and the Every Atom Samadhi of a Lankavatara Chan master are not the same thing, neither are they the same as the experience of a Kabbalist or a Hermetic practicioner all different, varying degrees of intensity and purpose. The Christian is basically having an orgasmic experience, they're overwhelmed with oxytocin and seratonin which is why they become drunk off of divine love and speak like women afterwards. Nothing at all like a Tantric or Buddhist mystical experience or any kind of occult mystical union or apotheosis

[Anonymous No.10944165]

>>10944144
>Atkinson's Kybalion
top kek, now i know you are either just throwing words or more retarded than i expected

[Anonymous No.10944190]

>>10944137
i get what you're saying re: initiation. OP's quote doesn't not apply to guenon at all though, even if he wrote against it himself

[Anonymous No.10944192]

>>10943892
>be hegel
>cause both world wars
seriously, its time to commit a final solution upon the (((g*rman))) ""race""".

[Anonymous No.10944201]

>>10944144
> Especially Guenon, listening to a Catholic is an insult to your Self
But he wasn't a Catholic...

[Anonymous No.10944215]

>>10944144
>Guenon
>Catholic
Best timeline is leaking into ours wtf I love pol now.

[Anonymous No.10944218]

>>10944144
>Guenon and Evola just made shit up,
lmao, Guenon and Evola didn't write in a vacuum, they corresponded with and earned the admiration of many highly respected intellectuals, especially in Guenon's case; people like Mircea Eliade, Coomaraswamy, Henry Corbin, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, etc

[Anonymous No.10944229]

>>10944165
the Kybalion is just the Corpus Hermeticum distilled into 7 rules, if you were more than posturing that would be easy to see.
>>10944201
he was
>>10944215
he was a catholic and then switched to being a Sufi

[Anonymous No.10944232]

>>10944215
Catholicism is cringy as hell. White folk are talented at technological and artistic innovation but they are complete cringe when it comes to religion and spirituality.

[Anonymous No.10944237]

>>10944218
what they say contradicts what is written in the source texts they are ostensibly aping. There is absolutely no reason at all to believe initiation is necessary to understand Vedanta or Taoism or Sufism or anything like that at all.

[Anonymous No.10944243]

>>10944229
>the Kybalion is just the Corpus Hermeticum distilled into 7 rules
this is what retarded anglos actually believe

[Anonymous No.10944251]

>>10944232
>le cringe faec

[Anonymous No.10944250]

>>10944229
>he was
He converted to Islam and moved to Egypt where he became a well-known Sufi scholar.

[Anonymous No.10944255]

>>10944243
Its not even debatable, every single principle from the Kybalion is explicitly found in the corpus, you can find all of them there, mentalism to rhythm to polarity to gender to correspondence. All of them are in most of the sermons especially the first few

[Anonymous No.10944258]

>>10944232
Shoot yourself my man.

[Anonymous No.10944259]

>>10944237
Suit yourself. I'm not gonna "refute" your two sentence declarative posts with what can only be established through dedicated study and application.

[Anonymous No.10944265]

>>10944251
>>10944258
Haha you know it's true.

[Anonymous No.10944293]

>>10944259
you don't even have 2 or 3 primary sources available that say anything about the Brahman or Dao not being available to someone who has the latent capacity for it, much less someone who also studies the words of the actual practicioners of the ancient world. Guenon and Evola came up with those ideas or espoused them prominently, they are not within the actual texts themselves. If this were the case then there would never have been disparate outgrowths of Hermeticism in the Renaissance which didn't at all come from unbroken lineages of Hermetic intiation, nor would there have been a transmission of Buddhism to Japan, since none of the Japanese were actually initiated by Indians they just read translated texts and contacted Chinese teachers, and neither would it be possible at all for someone who was not a Tantric Buddhist to even begin to discuss Tantra with others, yet you can do exactly that through academic works. Its preposterous gate keeping nonsense. Metaphysics isn't even remotely the most important aspect of esoteric knowledge or "schools", its merely the rational aspect of mystic thought.

Posturing all of you.

Read your fucking Corpus, read the Agamas, read the Upanishads. Its all already there. If your brain does not know how to reconcile paradoxes then you should not even be involved with this kind of knowledge, its not for you.
>>10944265
fuck off nigger

[Anonymous No.10944310]

>>10944293
are you just memeing? Evola never said self-initiation was not possible

[Anonymous No.10944321]

>>10944293
why would you read primary texts if it doesn't matter if you have a real connection to any tradition? at that point just read whatever any guy you like wrote about initiation

[Anonymous No.10944488]

>>10943892
After finishing the phenomenology, I'm beginning to believe that all the modes of cognition hegel argues against might be true.

[Anonymous No.10945121]

Hegel both criticizes and yet proposes a mystical metaphysics.
Hegel criticizing mysticism: Mysticism is bad in so far as it's disconnected from history(trying to return to the state of sense sensibility)
Hegel advocating mysticism: The realization of history is mysticism, the completion that sense sensibility intuitively knew.

[Anonymous No.10945137]

>>10944232
t. wuz kang

[Anonymous No.10945262]

>>10944310
No, only responding to their critiques of Occultists that do not rely upon attacking their character. The complaints they levy are all mostly flaccid attacks against a lack of initiation, and being pathologically averse to reading between the lines, which is how people with high aptitude self-initiate. Blavatsky's anthropogenesis is attested in Tibetan Cosmology and Indian metaphysics, the Spheres and Rounds are all coherent with Eastern mysticism. The idea of recessed, occulted brotherhoods which transcend the division between Hinduism and Buddhism is also blatantly obvious for anyone who pushes the logical implications of either school far enough, she was a Good adept for seeing that. Crowley's systematized syncretic divination and ritual magic was a healthy hybridization of cthonic "satanist" or pantheist oriented neolithic mysticism and the authentic understanding and metaphysics of the Egyptians, Hermetists and Vedics, his Dao is basically in line with the Dao we can discern now. They had to interpolate, much of the time this came out in a rough form, which is to be expected, yet they still hit the mark often enough to demonstrate skill. You must recognize potency regardless if the vehicle enacting the potency is reprehensible. I don't malign Hitler as a statesman, I malign him as a moral agent, there's no reason for me to pretend he was a weak public speaker or political warrior.
>>10944321
I leave the necessity of primary source texts to the discretion of the neophyte. They would do well to use them as guides, temporary rafts to get to the other shore, they won't need them for long if they have any talent, worthies rarely need more than the vaguest initiative spark to ignite a blaze inside them. I am not certain if they are at all necessary, but it seems they do a good for those who are ready for them. What matters is that there is aptitude and will available. The correct type, the correct spirit, and if both coincide they will be capable of gnosis significantly quicker than those who need a whole school to slowly matriculate into the mysteries. This was protected as an excuse to horde power, and to control the public in past eras. Guenon and Evola were enamored with authority, Blavatsky was too in her own way, this is unwise, unskillful, detrimental to protecting the remaining good stock of wills we have left on Earth.
>>10945121
all geniuses speak in paradoxes, this is blatantly obvious in their personalities and what is present internally will express itself externally at some level of intensity of activity, for Celine, his hatred of Jews and liberalism, yet equally present, his hatred of authority, the State, military hierarchy, colonialism, administrative incompetence, acquisitive greed and Franco-Anglo detached clinical rationalism

[Anonymous No.10946312]

>>10945262
>Blavatsky and Theosophy shill reveals himself again
Just do all of us a favor, and neck yourself already.

[Anonymous No.10946626]

Complete hypocrite

[Anonymous No.10947336]

noice

[Anonymous No.10947773]

>>10945262
so you are just sperging out because they said something nasty about your favorite genre-fiction writer, got it

[Anonymous No.10948068]

Congratulations OP you watched Sadler for an hour and then, apparently, you stopped

[Anonymous No.10948080]

The amount of LARPing itt is amazing. But it's no surprise occulttards find themselves at home here considering that here people live in a hyperreality spawned from their imagination.

[Anonymous No.10948198]

>>10944144
>they can happen to anyone at any time and negate the necessity for priests, kings and bibles.
Your leftism is showing.

[Anonymous No.10948710]

Hegel's on trads

>the idyll, in the modern sense of the word. In this sense it disregards all the deeper general interests of the spiritual and moral life and portrays mankind in its state of innocence. But in this context to live 'innocently' only means to know of nothing except eating and drinking, and indeed of none but very simple foods and drinks, e.g. the milk of goats and sheep, and, at a pinch, cows; vegetables, roots, acorns, fruit, cheese made from milk; bread, I suppose, is really post-idyllic, but meat must be allowed earlier because shepherds and shepherdesses will not have wished to sacrifice their sheep whole to the gods. Their occupation consists in tending their beloved flock the whole livelong day with their faithful dog, providing their food and drink, and all the time nursing and cherishing, with as much sentimentality as possible, such feelings as do not disturb this peaceful and contented life; i.e. in being pious and gentle in their own way, blowing on their shawms, scrannel-pipes, etc., singing in chorus, and especially in making love to one another with the greatest tenderness and innocence.

[Anonymous No.10948760]

>>10948710
what's with this guy and acorns

[Anonymous No.10948767]

>>10948710
Rousseau, not trads

[Anonymous No.10950433]

>>10948710
what's wrong with dogs and flocks?

[Anonymous No.10950480]

>>10946312
you’ve never read any of the works you criticize and would be ashamed if you even vaguely penetrated metaphysics of discriminating against her, her entire intro to volume 2 is metaphysics as is the entirety of book 1 and she painstakingly goes over geometric metaphysics, numerology, the the logic behind platonism and pretty much everything that Evola or Guenon ever said. the idea of lunar and solar dynasties, the role of meditation as contemplation of forms, all of this is in The Secret Doctrine. You’re not impressive for ignoring good work. Ive no interest in Fascism but im still reading Evola and Yockey, you’d do well to be less closed off
>>10947773
she was an occultist, and they didn’t read her works at all. She wrote a 700-1200 page magnum Opus which Guenon crudely summarized in around 200 pages give or take. That’s ignorance at its height. You’d need to spend a year dissecting the first volume of the Secret Doctrine to vaguely comprehend its meaning, just as you would Being and Time, The Ethics, Timaeus, Egyptian Book of the Dead or the Corpus Hermeticum or Phenomenology of Spirit. Im being baited into specifically arguing against Guenon when im arguing something much more important, the idea that you need a living tradition when every author who has a high iq realized that these truths are built into the human neurology and structure of the world itself. which means a careful thinker could easily deduce their own system, with some precautions taken, such as reading Blavatsky, reading Guenon, reading Crowley, reading the primary source texts with care.
>>10948080
there is no difference between samsara and nirvana, there was never a distinction between signs and the signified. you fail to see the tantric truth of Simulacra and Simulation, we’re in the Desert of the Real and always have been, its just now becoming apparent as the mediums of expressing the psychotic nature of human-nature dialectic become higher intensity, permeate the global awareness in a more apparent manner. What was, is, and always will be. The occult showed up in its developed form twice, once in alexandria and again at the dawn of techne in the 19th century. It will subside for a time and then before we make another switch at the end of thise century it will reemerge with idealism, as the distinction between information/energy and matter/force is totally blurred. Object-subject is already leaving the popular discourse. Occultists are always on the right side of history, the spiritualists weren’t wrong, just foolish

[Anonymous No.10950502]

>>10950480
>there is no difference between samsara and nirvana, there was never a distinction between signs and the signified
nibbana is literally defined as outside name and form (namarupa) and even beyond arupadhatu which is the highest realm of theistic religion

[Anonymous No.10950565]

>>10943892
>But just as there is an empty breadth, so too there is an empty depth

NEETzsche all but embodied empty depth.

[Anonymous No.10951463]

>>10950480
>you’ve never read any of the works you criticize and would be ashamed if you even vaguely penetrated metaphysics of discriminating against her [...] You’re not impressive for ignoring good work. Ive no interest in Fascism but im still reading Evola and Yockey, you’d do well to be less closed off.
Maybe, just maybe, I would be more receptive to differing view if you weren't such a disrespective cunt and derail Every. Single. Fucking. Thread. on Evola and Guenon. Claiming to be more open minded while pissing one everybody else doesn't make you a better person than me or anybody else here. If you want to discuss Blavatsky, Theosophy, and Occultism so much, you are more than welcome to make a new thread.