/lit/ - Literature

>>14748629
>>14748684
>>14748702
>>14748802
Holy based....

>>14732941
Holy based....

>>14730319
>Those who might be tempted to give way to despair should realize that nothing accomplished in this order can ever be lost, that confusion, error and darkness can win the day only apparently and in a purely ephemeral way, that all partial and transitory disequilibrium must perforce contribute towards the greater equilibrium of the whole, and that nothing can ultimately prevail against the power of truth.

>>14724509
Based... I'll repost the previous works of art our brothers have crafted in the other thread.


>I
fuck a trad hoe like im Guenon
(pbuh) supremely based like im Guenon
(pbuh) eternally retroactive refutation
btfo whitehead, (pbuh) the magician

Hylics seething, brothers reading
giga-Guenonchads (pbuh) breeding
Traditionalists in a ranch
All hail Guenon(pbuh), the rightful roi of France

>II
Guénon - the Truth, the Light never-ending,
All things are known to him,
His Word, with eternity blending,
Gnosis passing onto the dim;
Vanquishes He maya as a mere trifle,
Verily, peace be upon Him.

>>14702838
>>14697862
>And now we move to Madhva's refutation of Advaita
>The Central doctrine of Advaita is Atmaikya i.e. Brahman alone is ultimate Reality.
Atmaikya follows from a literal reading of Svetasvatara Up. 6.15: "the Supreme Self alone exists".

>However, we are in the midst of manifold empirical world. The emergence of this manifold world and the jiva has to be explained. How this one brahman is developed into many and what is the status of these has to be explained.
via maya etc.
>Three important concepts which forms the base of advaita are:
>1) Ajnana (ignorance)
>2) Mithyatva (unreality/sublatability)
>3) Upadhi (limiting adjunct)

>It is Ajnana i.e. Avidhya that projects the world over brahman.
Yes, ignorance causes superimposition/projection, although ultimately this ignorance is itself traced back as originating from Brahman's own power of maya

>1. Ajnana (avidya) has no ashraya-Locus, nor Visaya (Topic/subject/Domain) the object to operate upon (Origin/source/base) – According to Advaita there is no second object than brahman. Brahman is Sarvajna. Therefore he cannot be the locus or the object to be affected by Ajnana.
Brahman cannot be the locus and object affected by ignorance. However, through maya; which Svetasvatara Up. 4.9 explicitly states is a power of Brahman, there appears to be a multitude of Jivas who are subject to ignorance. Maya is beginningless just as Brahman is as it is the very nature of Brahman to weild His power of maya at all times forever; within this beginningless maya there are a multitude of Jivas in a beginningless cycle of transmigration, the Jivas are the ones who are ignorant, while the inner Self (Brahman) animating all of them is not subject to their ignorance, bondage, attachment, desire, sin etc and remains at all times in It's actual undifferentiated state "just as the Sun is not tainted by the ocular and external defects, it being transcendental" - Katha Up. 2.2.11. There is really nothing other than Brahman, but Brahman's own power of maya makes it appear as though there is a multitude of ignorant transmigrating beings.

>>14698393
Retroactive refutation of the entirety of modernity (starting from the 1500s).

>"Those who might be tempted to give way to despair should realize that nothing accomplished in this order can ever be lost, that confusion, error and darkness can win the day only apparently and in a purely ephemeral way, that all partial and transitory disequilibrium must perforce contribute towards the greater equilibrium of the whole, and that nothing can ultimately prevail against the power of truth."

>>14666160
This essay predicts and retroactively refutes bugmen, Guénon (pbuh) was blessed with insight of a Vedic sage.

http://www.worldwisdom.com/public/viewpdf/default.aspx?article-title=A_Material_Civilization_by_Rene_Guenon.pdf
>>14666278
Guénon (pbuh), Śaṅkarācārya (pbuh), Lao-tzu (pbuh), Plato (pbuh), Plotinus (pbuh) Sanai (pbuh)
>>14666554
refuted by Guénon (pbuh) and Śaṅkarācārya (pbuh), Knowledge is superior because only knowledge can destroy ignorance whereas action is not mutually opposed to ignorance like knowledge is. The only way to reach the infinite Immortal is via knowledge because an action (like meditation) can only produce limited, non-infinite effects whereas knowledge is capable of ending the ignorance of and non-perception of He who has always existed and been true eternally.
>>14667540
t. hylic
>>14667576
It fills my heart with joy to be able to share the news with you that Guénon's (pbuh) pièce de résistance 'Le Règne de la Quantité et les Signes des Temps' was successively voted onto the unedited original version of the latest /lit/ top 100 books
>>14667848
read this essay by Guénon (pbuh) on metaphysics

http://www.worldwisdom.com/public/viewpdf/default.aspx?article-title=Oriental_Metaphysics_by_Rene_Guenon.pdf
>>14667891
cringe
>>14667935
based
>>14669401
based
>>14669463
supra-based
>>14670326
Wrong, Guénon (pbuh) cites from Plato occasionally and doesn't criticize him, he also wrote that Neoplatonism and Hermeticism are Traditional and align with the eternal metaphysical truth, but he just expressions reservations about Plotinus's (pbuh) works being a fully complete system with their seeming lack of a clear path taught in them to permanent liberation and union, although in the works of later Neoplatonists they go deeper than Plotinus (pbuh).
>>14670415
If you don't want to become an acestic you can still be initiated as a householder and even as a westerner into certain orthodox traditions with long histories and which are practiced by householders such as those within Sufism, Vishishtadvaita, Lingyatism, Kashmir Shaivism, Nath Yogis and (some) Vajrayana. Some other traditions like Neoplatonism, Hermeticism and Daoism are not really active anymore as actual initiatory orders or at least they are super hard to find and not available to most people. Advaita Vedanta and the Hesychasm tradition in Eastern Orthodoxy are really only for the people who pursue the path of monasticism within those religions it seems, although it's still always very illuminating and beneficial to study and read the literature of the various schools that you haven't been or cannot be initiated into, since their essential writings are usually written for their fellow initiated and don't conceal anything.

>>14640061
>The symbolism of the christian temple.
>Sacred art is precisely a supra-human art.
>importance of orientation of churches
Dare I say "Based".

>>14635660
>Libraries might as well stop having his books in stock desu.
That's what I convinced my uni's library to do. Thankfully many of us are Guenonians here and have grasped his masterful retroactive refutation of the entirery of Whitehead in five short paragraphs.

>>14632646
>self-help book: bro just believe in this bugman materialist cope method to obtain this material good! also buy and consoom my book!
> s'عبد الواحد يحي glorious writing: Those who might be tempted to give way to despair should realize that nothing accomplished in this order can ever be lost, that confusion, error and darkness can win the day only apparently and in a purely ephemeral way, that all partial and transitory disequilibrium must perforce contribute towards the greater equilibrium of the whole, and that nothing can ultimately prevail against the power of truth.
Wherein lies the similarity?

>>14632108
>108

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/108_(number)

A truly blessed and divine number with boundless auspiciousness, your journey has been marked by the very gods themselves. I wish you luck on your journey, I bid you farewell with an ode from Pindar

Creatures of a day! What is anyone?
What is anyone not? A dream of a shadow
Is our mortal being. But when there comes to men
A gleam of splendour given of heaven,
Then rests on them a light of glory
And blessed are their days.

>>14237158
>No one "sane" ever said anything wort-

>From rationalism, religion was bound to sink into sentimentalism, and it is in the Anglo-Saxon countries that the most striking examples of this are to be found. What remains is therefore no longer even a dwindling and deformed religion, but simply ‘religiosity’, that is to say vague and sentimental aspirations unjustified by any real knowledge: to this final stage correspond theories such as that of the ‘religious experience’ of William James, which goes to the point of finding in the ‘subconscious’ man’s means of entering into communication with the divine. At this stage the final products of religious and of philosophical decline mingle together and ‘religious experience’ becomes merged in pragmatism, in the name of which a limited God is stipulated as being more ‘advantageous’ than an infinite God, insofar as one can feel for him sentiments comparable to those one would feel for a higher man. At the same time, the appeal to the ‘subconscious’ joins hands with modern spiritualism and all those ‘pseudo-reli-gions’ characteristic of our age. In another direction, Protestant moralism, having gradually eliminated all doctrinal basis, has ended

>This also makes it possible to explain quite naturally a fact which is noticeable in England and still more so in America, and which at first sight might appear rather surprising, namely the association of an exaggerated development of the practical outlook with the almost unlimited dissemination of all sorts of follies of a would-be religious nature, in which both the experimentalism and the false mysticism of the Anglo-Saxons are simultaneously pandered to ; this goes to prove that, despite appearances, the most “practical” mentality is not always the best balanced.

>it has recently led to the formulation of a so-called “ esoteric Christianity,” which is no less fanciful. This organisation of American origin, while posing as international, has become purely Anglo-Saxon in its leadership, with the exception of a few dissident branches of little importance ; in spite of all its efforts, supplemented by a protection that it owes to certain political considerations which we not examine here

you are God

What would a pre-Guenon reading list look like? I see a lot of people throwing around accusations that others misunderstand him, so I want to make sure that I can understand him correctly when I start to read through him soon.

>*completes metaphysics*

"An altogether extraordinary fact is the rapidity with which Medieval civilization was completely forgotten; already in the seventeenth century, men had lost all idea of what it had been, and its surviving monuments no longer had any meaning for them, either intellectually or even aesthetically; all this is proof enough of how far the general mentality had changed. We shall not here investigate the factors - and they are certainly complex - that contributed to bringing about a change so radical that it seems difficult to admit that it can have occurred spontaneously, without the intervention of some directing will whose exact nature must remain rather enigmatic. In this connection, one may note some very strange circumstances, such as the popularization at a certain moment, under the form of new discoveries, of things that had in reality been known for a very long time, but not generally disclosed, since the disadvantages of so doing ran the risk of outweighing the advantages. It is also improbable that the legend alleging that the Middle Ages were a time of gloom, ignorance, and barbarism could have arisen and become accepted, or that the veritable falsification of history in which the moderns have indulged, could have been accomplished in the absence of some preconceived idea..."

What exactly is Rene Guenon referring to here?

>>11671634
>was a gifted STEM student and taught college philosophy before moving onto higher domains of thought
>could read and speak Greek, Latin, English, Italian, German, Spanish, Sanskrit, Hebraic, Arabic and multiple Chinese languages.
>BTFO Bergon in multiple of his books

>>11644931

Listen kid, I get that because you're Catholic and because you read a De Maistre book that you think that gives you the right to pontificate every time you see the word 'tradition' but Traditionalism in the sense that OP is talking about specifically refers what is known as the 'Traditionalist School' which was started by Guenon (although he rejected that term and never claimed to be the head of anything) and includes Evola, Coomaraswamy, Schuon, Nasr, Lings, Pallis etc.

The Traditionalist writers specifically rejected following custom (or tradition in the sense of a cultural or religious tradition specific to one country/people) for it's own sake. What they refer to as the Tradition is teaching of the Sanatana Dharma (eternal truth), the unchanging eternal reality or highest metaphysical truth which has eternally existed on it's own before mankind and will continue to after them. This truth is reflected in most of the major religions, although in some of them it's cloaked in esoterism and only found in certain sects while in other it's taught openly. If you actually read the primary texts instead of relying on wikipedia descriptions you'll find (if you have the intellectual capacity to pick up on it) that Vedanta, Tantra, Daoism, Sufism, Zoroastrianism, select types of Mahayana Buddhism and even certain kinds of Jewish teachings etc all converge around a similar set of ideas pointing back towards a common truth, this is what the Traditionalists refer to as the Tradition. Tradition in the sense of simply being a cultural or religious custom has nothing to do with this.

You can disagree with this or think it's stupid but you should at least know that's what people are talking about when they refer to Guenon et al so that you don't make an ass of yourself by thinking that they are referring to tradition in the common usage of the word. Some of them disagree over to what extent this is found in various types of Christianity, but that's a whole separate conversion