/lit/ - Literature

>>19321925
You would fare better reading about the esoteric nature of existing mainstream religions instead of syncretic new age folly.

Is there any woman which is part of the Traditionalist school or at least related?

I don't read liberals

BasedGod tier
>Rene Guenon (pbuh)

mega-cringe tier
>Ricoeur
>Gadamer
>Merleau-Ponty
>Montaigne
>Marx
>Hegel
>Foucault
>William James
>Deleuze
>Blanchot
>Levinas
>Bachelard
>Adorno
>Benjamin
>Bloch
>Lukacs
>Gramsci
>Novalis
>Schelling
>Spinoza
>Leibniz
>Husserl
>Bergson
>Bataille
>Kierkegaard
>Hobbes
>Voltaire
>Epicureans
>Fichte
>Heraclitus
>Augustine
>Derrida
>Althusser
>Schopenhauer
>Cioran
>Pascal
>Kant
>Peirce
>Dewey
>Jameson
>Lyotard
>Sellars
>Agamben
>Berkeley
>Aristotle
>Habermas
>Feuerbach
>Heidegger
>Wittgenstein
>Nietzsche
>Emerson
>Arendt
>Aquinas
>Hume
>Pyrrhonian Skeptics
>Camus
>Plato
>Quine
>Locke
>Zizek
>Baudrillard
>Rousseau
>Bakunin
>Cynics
>Stoics
>Sartre
>Russell
>Land
>OOO
>Stirner
>Lacan
>Descartes
>Scruton
>Rand
>Badiou
>Rorty
>Evola

>>14768286
>the author then says it's the profane world's fault that the young man is suffering but not his own
He actually does not teach this.
Were you not a seething hylic deluded by maya, you would've known this.
Read the texts before spouting non-sense, I beg you.

How do Guenonians cope with the fact that Guenon didn't believe in the Aryan invasion?

>>14615006
Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times.

>>14516602
>Nietzsche, Stirner, Hume, Spinoza, Kant, Schopenhauer, and more.
>Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud
>meditations by Rene Descartes
All retroactively refuted by Rene Guenon.

>>14484199
You forgot The Metaphysical Principles of the Infinitesimal Calculus by our memest dear.

How did a man with such a short lifetime, 65, accomplishment so much? Namely, refuting the entirety of Western philosophy, ending the process philosophical tradition, refuting Buddhism, proving perennialism, refuting modernity, and making an entire board seethe from beyond the grave.

>>14393222
Guénon perfectly synthesizes all of these philosophers.

>when the opium hits

>tfw Guenon clicks

>tfw Guenon clicks

The problem with Guenon and Neo-Advaitans is they explain a false conception of monism, one which is stagnant and reminiscent of a featureless blob. This because they treat the imagination and even processes as illusory. Let me begin explaining through the use of a powerful metaphor.

Let me begin with the true genuine kind of monism. This was experienced by a few like Heraclitus, Dharmakirti, Hui Neng, Joshu, some Daoists, Bergson, and J. Krishnamurti:

"The whole universe is one body that breathes in fractal complexity, which includes the unreal, the imaginative and fantastic since the total is all, and you cannot separate the motion of breathing from the body, since there is only the motion occurring. The imaginative in identity with Infinity is more real than the real."

As you can see, this is pointing to how real creativity, true novelty, has its source in the primordial Infinite. This monism has no "bottom turtle", underlying ground, and instead points to a kind of Heraclitean flux.

Now, let's see what Adi Shankara, Guenon, and other Neo-Advaitans argue.

"The whole universe is one body that excludes distinctions, the imaginative, and fantastic since they are illusory, and the Absolute is an aspatiotemporal oneness."

This is a kind of "lobotomized" vision of the Universe. One where novelty, MIND, and imagination are not important being seen as ultimately illusory in a world of One gray substance.

This fundamental distinction between monisms among the world's traditions has been ignored by the Traditionalists like Guenon, Evola, and more. I think this is because they did not spend time studying thoroughly or talking to enlightened figures, thereby losing all nuance. Even when the mind is pacified, contemplative, wise, and so forth, there is still a kind of singular flow of novelty, a moment-to-moment Oneness where the flower simultaneously flourishes and wilts. To claim there is no flower, no motion, and just a featureless blob is, quite frankly, retarded.

I, as the founder of Neo-Zurvanism, am already a better thinker of Guenon, but since I lack there connections he has, I will never gain the fame or recognition he did

one of the most underrated thinkers of the twentieth centurty

>>13991127
Rolling

Does reading Guenon induce psychosis?

What is the best critique of Guenon? He gets a lot of things right about modernity but something seems wrong about perennialism, especially if you're gonna get blown up by orthodox Sunnis for being a Sufi.