/lit/ - Literature

>>20337686
fear not brother I am a chandala

Who was right?
Does the Kshatriya caste hold prominence over the Brahmin caste? or vice versa?

Are Westerners more oriented towards Karma Yoga? Towards ACTION?

>>20332109
>finally guenonfag's efforts pay off
Yes.

>>20332053
>stop being such a fanboy of guenonfag
hell no, guenonfag got me into guenon and I will be eternally thankful. if it weren't for his spicy memes I would likely be shilling cringe shit on this board.
now after some years of /trad/ studies, I have finally come around to studying Shankara and guenonfag is the most knowledgeable man on the subject. naturally im going to pay attention to his Shankara related threads.

>>20324729
>what exactly were his thoughts on Buddhism?
originally thought Buddhism was heterodox and heresy
>Is Buddhism a legitimate tradition?
yes
>Does he talk about it in any of his books?
it's in a footnote in one of his books how he changed his mind on the subject

Marco Pallis talks about how he (with the help of AKC) convinced Guenon that Buddhism was a legit tradition in his book 'A Buddhist Spectrum' and also in the intro the 'The Essential AK Coomaraswamy'

I would type it up for you but am too tired rn

>>20322669
based
>>20325165
I would recommend 'Against the Modern World' by Mark Sedgwick
it provides an overview of Guenon's life, core ideas, and the Traditionalist authors he influenced ranging from Schuon to Evola to Dugin and others

>>20327168
>>20327209
based

>>20327683
I feel pretty inadequate after reading this thread though...
I was ready to read Shankara over the coming months and then return to the TradCath path, but now I feel like I have to spend the next 5-10 years studying Eastern Traditions at a much deeper level.

>>20327601
tis is in fact my /trad/ book collection - I made a b8 thread last year saying something like "Kneel before your master" kek
>Have you read all those?
All except Guenon's book on calculus and Evola's intro to magic
There are some that I kinda just skimmed bc I wasn't that interested or got filtered. Evola can be boring at times and Schuon can be tough.
>Favorite one?
If i could only pick one it would be Martin Lings' Muhammad book but that's kind of cheating because it's unlike the other books
favs:
Evola's Metaphysics of War (t. soon to be armyfag)
Reign of Quantity + System of the Antichrist (absolutely based combo)
Path of Cinnabar

Would also recommend reading Ossendowski's 'Beasts, Men And Gods" then reading Guenon's 'King of the World'

>>20322587
redpill me on Upadesasahasri
>>20327361
kek I remember that pic from last summer

>>20312472
>>20312434
>"Arsha Bodha Center" on YouTube
very good channel. consooomed like 20 hours worth of vids over past few days and the goy breaks it down real well

How to Read a Book
unironically

>>20317198

luv dat book

>>20315297
it is probably best if mongrels like him don't read

kys lumfag
/lit/ is a sakura board

>this thread has been blessed by the presence of of Frater Asemlen

based

>>20312872
when Rama Coomaraswamy taught at the SSPX seminary he used to teach Guenon. iirc 'Reign of Quantity' was mandatory reading

>>20312854
I shall repost Rama's quote

>Now one thing is clear. If we as Catholics believe we have an obligation of obey the pope, then we face a dilemma. If we obey these popes we must give up our Catholic Faith. Hence it is that all sorts of solutions are considered – solutions that avoid recognizing the real issue. The bottom line is one cannot obey these individuals and remain Catholic. Hence it is that one must declare that they have no authority – that they do not speak as one hierarchical person with Christ. It matters little how one labels them – anti-popes, usurpers, materialiter popes, or no popes at all. The bottom line is that they have no authority to speak in Christ’s name.

>>20312784
http://www.the-pope.com/wvat2tec.html

>>20312730
no

LOOK AT HIM SSEEEEEEEETTTHHHEEEEEEEE

MMHMMMMMMMMM IT TASTES SOOOO GOOOOOOOOOOODDDDDDDDDD

You've been done
Any person who has actually read Evola can confirm each bit listed
Clearly not (You)