/lit/ - Literature

Here's a cool story about Guenon.

Here's a story about a visit to Guenon's apartment in Cairo.

Where do I start with Guenon?

>>11025291
"Introduction to the Study of Hindu Doctrines". The first 118 pages are an introduction to the Traditionalist world view, and after that he delves into Hinduism (if you are interested innthat specifically). There's a recommendation chart around somewhere, another anon might have it.

https://archive.org/details/reneguenon

A bunch of books by Guenon. Most of his translated material, I think a few might be missing.

OP I think these threads might be best accompanied by a small list of texts from the different traditions. That gives people an immediate example of some stuff to check out in addition to traditionalist writers. e.g. some advaita stuff, links to pdfs of daoist and some of the better buddhist and sufi texts.

>LARPing this hard

>>11025716
no lie the traditionalists and particularly guenon turned me into a muslim.

enter at your own risk

Henry Corbin seems pretty cool. First french translator of Heidegger, possibly first translator in any language. Realized Shi'ism is the logical conclusion of Heidegger's thought and became a 12er Muslim.

Can anyone here tell me if the Yusuf Ali translated Quran is a better purchase than The Study Quran?

>>11025723
Have you followed them through the khyber while the pashtun laugh at you yet?

>>11026354
The Study Quran is by some accused of being "too perennialist", but I haven't read it so I don't know. I've been reading from the Yusuf Ali translation and I personally don't always find his commentary all that insightful. It's perhaps good for a basic level reading.
>>11025723
Mashalla, brother. I became Muslim about a month ago.
>>11025356
Good point. I don't have the Guenon chart on my phone otherwise I would post it. Here's a short text on the exoteric-esoteric distinction:
http://www.fatuma.net/text/Haqiqa_and_Sharia_in_Islam_by_Rene_Guenon.pdf
Here's an exchange of letters between an Islamic Traditionalist and a Christian critical of traditionalism, specifically debating over the idea of non-dualism (I particularly enjoyed this exchange):
http://www.sacredweb.com/online_articles/sw17_bolton-upton.pdf
I'll try to find more texts to include next time. For now, people should just google some of the authors I've lister and read whatever interests them.

>>11025235
HP Blavatsky was a perrenialist, as was Manly P Hall

>>11027116
HP Blavatsky was more of a syncretist who mixed traditions, and while I respect Hall's massive knowledge he seems more like an occultist. You could perhaps call him a perennialist, I don't know, but not a traditionalist since afaik he wasn't participant in a mainline tradition. Granted, he was a mason, but I wouldn't consider his writing similar to the above authors. From the little I've read I would say it could nicely supplement it though. In any case, I have to admit I don't know much about him.

>>11025235
as always, thanks for this wonderful containment thread
polite sage+hide

>>11027151
>+hide
Very appropriate, given the esoteric nature of the subject matter. Thanks to you as well, friend.

>>11027143
Hall seemed like he was a traditionalist from his strong emphasis on constructive hereditary theosophical hierarchies and i suppose i’ll grant Blavatsky erred towards syncretism seeing as she wanted to install a global RHP theocracy with socialist undertones that would hsve necessarily abolished the existing orders. His praise for the mystery schools always struck me as resonating with Evola’s same attitude and he bemoaned Darwinian and Capitalist morality.

>>11027169
>constructive hereditary theosophical hierarchies
What do you mean by this?

>>11025356
>>11027113
Oh, oops I misread your post. You specifically wanted texts from the traditions. A few of the top of my head:
- Plato and the Neoplatonists
- Aristotle's metaphysics
- Aquinas (Edward Feser is a good resource for understanding him)
- Gregory Palamas was a major defender of traditional monastic practices at a time when they were under attack by rationalists.
- Macarius of Egypt
- John of the Ladder
- Desert Fathers
- The Way Of Sufi Chivalry by ibn al-Husayn al-Sulami is an accessible one from the Islamic tradition, and is a nice mix of moral guidance and sufi doctrines

These are a few that I thought off the top of my head. I'll make a better list for the next thread, or later on for this one. I've mainly read Christian stuff.

>>11025235
The very essence of the western civilization is its lust for progress. The main reason why we are now at the top is that a bunch of people were not content with just following the norms imposed by their elders and society slowly started to accept and encourage them. There is more diversity across 50 years of European art than there is in a millennium of Asian art. Writers like Guenon or Eliade were heavily influenced by oriental thought and did not hold western values in high regard (in comparison).

What do you guys think about this? Not trying to be insulting, I really am interested to hear your arguments.

>>11027231
Some presocratics wouldn't be a bad recommendation. Parmenides, Empedocles, Heraclitus, Pythagorean pseudepigraphia.

>>11027169
Agreed.

>>11027333
Firstly, I would say that the essence of anything can't be ceaseless change because an essence is by definition unchanging. Secondly, the lust for progress only really took off in the Renaissance, to a lesser extent, and in the Enlightenment era, to a greater extent. Thirdly, tradition does not preclude diversity or changes with respect to outward form. Compare ancient European art with Medieval art. Both are European, both are traditional. Outward forms can be adapted in conformity with tradition. What you define as "Western values" only became so at a relatively late date, so as a matter of fact, Guenon and Eliade both uphold the earlier "Western values" which are much more similar to "Eastern Values" then they are to the ideals of Enlightenment era Europe. It's true that the Western lust for progress has led to a lot of technological advancements, but Tradition, while it does not emphasize a focus on practical applications to the same extent as modernity, is not in principal opposed to development along those lines. Traditionalists are at bottom concerned with Truth, in an ultimate and metaphysical sense, and so Truth always has priority over Utility for them. It really all depends on where your priorities are, or if you even admit of the possibility of such a Truth (which some deny outright).

There isn't anything insulting about your post. Personally, what I find annoying are posters who are vague in their criticisms and do more insinuating than explicating. Your post was clear, and as such, is appreciated.

>>11027333
Where did this lust come from, do you think? What is it a manifestation of? Why is it only in the West?

>>11027512
Part of what makes our manifestation possible at all is the existence of contrast and duality. If there is knowledge there must also be ignorance, if there is self-control there must all be lust, if there is the angelic there must also be the demonic. One kf the interesting ideas Guenon develops in the "Reign Of Quantity" is the idea that different periods of time are qualitatively different from one another. Today we tend to ignore qualitive differences and focus exclusively on anything which can be quantified. From the traditionalist point of view time is cyclical and it represents a meaningful movement through different qualitative phases. Now we're deep into a period of ignorance and darkness with respect to metaphysical knowledge and fideity to those traditions that enshrine it. Why did it start in the West? I don't know a satisfactory answer, but it had to start somewhere, and the West, symbolically, is the region where the sun sets.

Where do you think Rene Guenon got all of his ideas from? For example, reading Symbolism of the Cross, it is astonishing that someone could extract so much information out of a seemingly simple emblem. He says symbols are the best initiatic language because of their polysemy. However, due to their polysemy, how does one know what the "right" meanings are? What I don't understand is, how does he know *his* demonstration is the "metaphysical" one? Aren't all principles metaphysical/universal? How does a traditional authority maintain orthodoxy if any interpretations of the symbol can be extracted? And how does someone render that interpretation to be "effective" and not just "virtual" or theoretical? I understand crafts and theater are more "practical," but is merely drawing out symbols or writing a play enough to effect a realization?

Also, does anyone have any recommendations for studying traditional astrology that isn't from New Age sources and the like?

>>11027596
Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos is the Bible of Western Astrology.

I think the inherent contradictions of polysemic symbols alllows one to transcend duality when understood intuitively. No dualistic interpretation is correct.

>>11027469
Not the person you're responding to but...
>Firstly, I would say that the essence of anything can't be ceaseless change because an essence is by definition unchanging.
Doesn't Buddhism claim the opposite? As does Heraclitean fire when understood as the logos?

>>11027627
I don't think Heraclitian fire = Heraclitian logos. They're two distinct things, but his writing is fragmentary and we can't really know for sure. And as for Buddhism, I'm no expert, but I doubt it. The nature of the world is ceaseless change, samsara, but that's precisely insofar as it is divorced from the ultimate immutable reality. It's the result of a lack not the positive identification with an essence. Again, though, I'm not a Buddhist.

>>11027613
Thanks for the recommendation of Ptolemy. Is there a version you'd recommend? There's a Loeb Classical Library version but I have Aristotle's Metaphysics from them and it's extremely small across several volumes.

Without being antagonistic, I don't find your answer about symbols to be satisfying. As for intuition, I have inquired a lot from Traditionalist readers about the so-called intellectual intuition and all they ever offer is recapitulations of what Guenon has said, itself dissatisfactory. I even talked to an author who publishes as a Traditionalist that admitted to me that a lot of what Guenon has said remains obscure to them

>>11027665
Not the anon you're responding to, but I would look into Jyotish as well. Funny story, the guy who runs Inner Traditions publishing met his wife through astrology.

>>11027653
I always heard that fire was a symbol of the logos for being both ever-changing and unchanging like the essence of a flickering flame.

Insofar as Buddhism goes, it is a classic criticism. If all things are impermanent, then how is the dharma permanent? A bit contradictory. I have heard it described as the center of a wheel, everything arounds it swirls in motion and it moves to while maintaining the same relative position.

Both philosophies are usually presented as anti-essentialist as well so unsure what you mean by "positive identification with an essence". Neti, neti, no?

>>11027669
Thanks friend. Where do you think one might begin? I have wanted to devote time to understanding the material of the various Vedangas, the Chandas as well. Do you know of any resources that demonstrate the continuity of the various limbs with the principles of the Vedas? Rene Guenon's material obviously helps a lot but isn't as specialized as needed

>>11027665
Intuition = intellect in the "classical" sense of that term. Also known as buddhi in India, and Aql in Islamic contexts. It's a faculty we possess, but rarely excericise, that knows by bexoming identified to the object of knowledge. There is no separation between the knower and the known when it comes to intellect, no object-subject distinction. In a certain sense a knowing being is what we are essentially so it's more like remembering (e.g. Plato's theory of anamnesis) than learning something novel. Symbolism is a whole language in itself and it takes time to get acquainted to it. In a sense there is no right interpretation of a symbol in itself. There is Truth in the final sense, which is formlessnand unmanifest. If your interpretation of a manifest symbol corresponds with the immutable unmanifest principles than it is a correct reading. Symbols are an aid. If you give them a value in themselves apart from that which is the Symbolized than it beomes "idolatry".

>>11027665
I am not as well-versed in traditionalism as others so forgive me if my answer was insufficient.

Alternative take: Jung gets criticized for psychologizing tradition but his thoughts on symbols as archetypes and Campbell's idea of man as story-telling animal are an interesting complement to one another. The duality of the symbol represents the duality of man. Insofar as one acts in accordance with an archetype, one continues the eternal story of the dance of masks. By playing multiple roles and transcending them, one escapes the narrative-driven experience and experiences true freedom (moksha, nirvana, whatever).

>>11027683
Neti neti is a discipline to negate all ourward forms. The idea is to idenutify with the immutable and unmanifest. It's bascially the same as apophatic theology. Correct me if I'm wrong.

One could debate whether change constitutes some kind of essence in itself, but that idea doesn't seem to be coherent to me. It could be an interesting discussion. I don't know the resolution to all philosophical dilemmas, unfortunately, but I hold to the positions that mane the most sense to me.

By positive identification with an essence I mean that insofar as anything participates in an essence it is unchanging and insofar as it is separate from it is is changing, so change is the result of a lack of essence. There are substantial and essential sides of manifestation. Plotinus develops these ideas in the Enneads, but I don't know how applicable they would be to a Buddhist context. I appreciate your comments, and I'm enjoying this conversation.
>>11027701
I've only read basic books on Jyotish. The proper way to do it is in the traditional guru-disciple format. One is supposed to study under a qualified teacher.

>>11027716
Jung and Campbell are psychological and sociologica thinker, the traditionalists are metaphysical. It's a big difference.

>>11027704
This kind of demonstrates what I just said. No doubt, all of what you say can be directly tied back to Rene Guenon's writings. Buddhi is the Cosmic Intelligence, the macrocosm and active intellect, also the totality of degrees of universal Existence. One degree of universal Existence is properly the 'ray' that unifies the being, the microcosm, in all of its states that are developed and realized in the degrees of universal Existence. Therefore, through the 'ray' or the al-Aql the being realizes a state. The being realizes itself through knowledge, therefore to realize a metaphysical state is to have effective knowledge of this state, etc. However, it doesn't tell me a lot about what the faculty is or how it is exercised, and ultimately what it means to have knowledge of a state. How does someone "perceive" immutable principles?

If the answer is lying right in front of me feel free to beat me over the head with it.

>>11027716
This is an interesting take. I recommend to you James Hillman:
>Our lives are the enactments of our dreams; our case histories are from the very beginning, archetypally, dramas; we masks (personae) through which the sounds sound (personare)

From page 3 of Blue Fire, a collection of his essays.

>>11027716
>>11027761
uhh wow I misquoted that hard

>*we are masks
>*the gods sound

>>11027704
Listen to this guy. Not me (>>11027716) his answer is probably more in line with traditionalism.

I have heard intuition describes as a sort of second sight and can confirm that while in certain states, the imagination is capable of discerning hidden meanings and symbolism that is not apparent to ordinary consciousness. Then again, I was on drugs.

>>11027730
You are correct to identify neti neti with apophatic theology.

The idea of essence as change appeals to me somewhat. Especially insofar as eternal truth seems different from age to age and even individual to individual. But I prefer the idea of a void from early flirtations with Buddhism. The eternal essence is, IMO, most likely nothingness, no-thingness, the formless mother of all form.

>>11027742
Fair enough though I do not think they should necessarily be opposed.
>>11027761
I've been meaning to get into Hillman. Is that the best book to start with?


Also curious from previous threads, do any traditionalists respond to the post-Kantian critical turn shared by both analytic and continental philosophy. It seems as though "tradition" would be susceptible to being criticized as pre-Kantian metaphysic.

>>11027761
That faculty is there, it is part of what we innately are. The main thing is to get rid of anything preventing its full normal functioning to take place. I'm sure you've heard the metaphor of the mind as a dirty mirror that needs to be wiped clean of foreign accretions. Tradition gives us tools to do this. Turning our mind away from worldly things . Not necessarily turning away from the world, just turning our heart which is the seat of the intellect away from it. Like the God of the Old Testament says, the heart is where He will build his temple. Our mind is like the moon which reflects the light of the sun of knowledge. In traditional symbolism the moon represents the rational-emotiona mind, and the sun represents the intellect in the heart. Effective knowledge is when the knower-known distinction dissapears with respect to some particular piece of traditional data. Perception of immutable principles is an unclouded perception of the Self. Like an Islamic hadith, "he who knows himself knows his Lord". I hope this amswers your questions. More criticism and questions is always welcome.

>>11027787
>The idea of essence as change appeals to me somewhat. Especially insofar as eternal truth seems different from age to age and even individual to individual. But I prefer the idea of a void from early flirtations with Buddhism. The eternal essence is, IMO, most likely nothingness, no-thingness, the formless mother of all form.
I would say that the forms change but the essence does not change. If by nothingness you mean the unmanifest then I basically agree with you.

>>11027814
Though our forms of speech differ, our beliefs are essentially the same :^)

>>11027787
I'm unsure. I have only this book from Hillman. It's very interesting nonetheless.

As for the post-Kantian critical turn, I am not too well versed on standard philosophy, but from my understanding what characterizes the post-Kantian tradition is the turning of Kant's transcendental deduction of the categories, still in the domain of an epistemological critique, into a genuine historical progression of the structure of the world unfolding, commonly known as the world as concept i.e. "what is rational is real and the real is rational." The ultimate ending of this Hegelian project is what has produced the two conflicting schools of contemporary philosophy.

As for analytical philosophy, I am in line with thinkers like Stanley Rosen that they have still inherited the desire to turn the world into a concept and consequently end by obfuscating philosophical problems by "reifying" them onto a logical apparatus. I think that Traditionalists would uphold that there are things that exist that escape the conceptual tools of the logical analyst. Even an Aristotelian metaphysic can be maintained to combat these issues. This is Rosen's choice.

To give an example of what is being said to make it clearer: I can give you an exhaustive analysis of the predicates that belong to Rene Guenon. Frenchman, tall, mustache, metaphysician, etc.This is properly analysis. My assertions are either true or false. The analytical philosopher, such as Quine, holds a behaviorist interpretation of the truth of my assertion, effectively that the truth depends on the syntactic structure that acts as truth-conditions for the assertion. So my assertion in whatever manner can be transformed into a type of meta-language and proceeding logic calculus.

The issue with this is that it assumes the semantics of assertion can be given in the analysis itself: it begs the question. The procedure that guides our analysis is itself not recursively definable. Another way of saying this is that to see if my assertion of predicates is applicable to Rene Guenon, you have to *see* that they apply, and this *seeing* is itself not amenable to analysis. An even further way of saying this is that logical analysis can create the map for the territory, but there can be no map of us seeing the map as adequate for the territory. The "territory," in this sense, or what you see that guides your analysis, is the Aristotelian substance (essence, or ousia), that is directly *perceived* and not constructed. This is called noesis in Aristotle. cont.

>>11027787
>>11027947
cont.

Another way of putting this in Rene Guenon's words is that all we ever confront are symbols. From an empirical or analytical perspective, the words I utter are mere physical vibrations, sonorous ripples, that can be analyzed and divided in so many different ways and even transformed (in the case of physics). However, the essence or idea of what I hear when someone speaks is immediate, intelligible, unextended and simple. As such, it is not amenable to analysis. According to the so-called "reign of quantity," this is relegated to the realm of illusion and mere fantasy. But it nonetheless is an essential aspect of all communication and our world in general.

"If material extension were in itself the ground of beauty, then the creating principle, being without extension, could not be beautiful: but beauty cannot be made to depend upon magnitude since, whether in a large object or small, the one Idea equally moves and forms the mind by its inherent power. A further indication is that as long as the object remains outside us we know nothing of it; it affects us by entry; but only as an Idea can it enter through the eyes which are not of scope to an extended mass: we are, no doubt, simultaneously possessed of the magnitude which, however, we take in not as mass but by an elaboration upon the presented form." Plotinus V.8.2

I hope this makes where traditional metaphysics are coming from with their thought. I don't want you to think this rather small post is enough to handwaive genuine philosophical problems away, but I recommend you to read Stanley Rosen's The Limits of Analysis, whose words are more subtle and informed than my own, and other men who uphold traditional metaphysics as answers to philosophical issues, like Oderberg's Real Essentialism.

Honestly, I think Rene Guenon's works are/were directed at a neo-Thomistic audience anyways.

>>11027966
Thanks for the reccomendations, they sound interesting.

Adi Shankara's Prasthanatrayi commentaries (his most important works):

>Commentary on 8 of the Muhkya Upanishads part 1
https://archive.org/details/EightUpanishadsWithSankarabhashyamSwamiGambhiranandaVol11989

>Commentary on 8 of the Muhkya Upanishads part 2
https://archive.org/details/EightUpanishadsWithSankarabhashyamSwamiGambhiranandaVol21966

>Brahma Sutra Bhasya (commentary) of Shankaracharya
https://archive.org/details/BrahmaSutraSankaraBhashyaEngVMApte1960

>The Bhagavad-Gita with commentary of Shankaracharya
https://archive.org/details/Bhagavad-Gita.with.the.Commentary.of.Sri.Shankaracharya
Adi Shankara's non-commentary Prakarana Granthas (philosophical treatises)

>Atma Bodha (Self-knowledge)
http://www.lovebliss.eu/Download/Atma%20Bodha.pdf

>Upadesasahasri (A Thousand Teachings)
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Sri_Shankaracharya-Upadeshasahasri%20-%20Swami%20Jagadananda%20%281949%29%20[Sanskrit-English].pdf

>Aparokshanubhuti (Direct experience)
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.216548

>Vivekachudamani (Crest Jewel of Discrimination)
https://ia800108.us.archive.org/18/items/Vivekacudamani/Vivekacudamani.pdf
Non-Adi Shankara Advaita texts

>The Ashtavakra Gita
https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html

>Voga Vasistha
https://archive.org/details/VasisthasYoga

>Advaita Bodha Deepika (The lamp of non-deal knowledge)
https://selfdefinition.org/ramana/Advaita-Bodha-Deepika.pdf

>Dŗg-Dŗśya-Viveka
(An inquiry into the Nature of the 'Seer' and the 'Seen')
https://vivekananda.net/PDFBooks/Others/DrgDrsyaViveka1931.pdf

>The Ribhu Gita
https://archive.org/stream/RibhuGitaRamaMoorthyH./Ribhu%20Gita%20%20Rama%20Moorthy%20H.%20#page/n1/mode/2up

Deleted and reposted because of some fucked up spacing

Advaita Vedanta reading list with links:

Adi Shankara's Prasthanatrayi commentaries (his most important works)

>Commentary on 8 of the Muhkya Upanishads part 1
https://archive.org/details/EightUpanishadsWithSankarabhashyamSwamiGambhiranandaVol11989

>Commentary on 8 of the Muhkya Upanishads part 2
https://archive.org/details/EightUpanishadsWithSankarabhashyamSwamiGambhiranandaVol21966

>Brahma Sutra Bhasya (commentary) of Shankaracharya
https://archive.org/details/BrahmaSutraSankaraBhashyaEngVMApte1960

>The Bhagavad-Gita with commentary of Shankaracharya
https://archive.org/details/Bhagavad-Gita.with.the.Commentary.of.Sri.Shankaracharya


Adi Shankaras non-commentary Prakanaran Granthas (philosophical treatises)

>Atma Bodha (Self-knowledge)
http://www.lovebliss.eu/Download/Atma%20Bodha.pdf

>Upadesasahasri (A Thousand Teachings)
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Sri_Shankaracharya-Upadeshasahasri%20-%20Swami%20Jagadananda%20%281949%29%20[Sanskrit-English].pdf

>Aparokshanubhuti (Direct experience)
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.216548

>Vivekachudamani (Crest Jewel of Discrimination)
https://ia800108.us.archive.org/18/items/Vivekacudamani/Vivekacudamani.pdf


Non-Shankaracarya Advaita texts

>The Ashtavakra Gita
https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html

>Voga Vasistha
https://archive.org/details/VasisthasYoga

>Advaita Bodha Deepika (The lamp of non-deal knowledge)
https://selfdefinition.org/ramana/Advaita-Bodha-Deepika.pdf

>Dŗg-Dŗśya-Viveka (An inquiry into the Nature of the 'Seer' and the 'Seen')
https://vivekananda.net/PDFBooks/Others/DrgDrsyaViveka1931.pdf

>The Ribhu Gita
https://archive.org/stream/RibhuGitaRamaMoorthyH./Ribhu%20Gita%20%20Rama%20Moorthy%20H.%20#page/n1/mode/2up

Adi Shankara's Prasthanatrayi commentaries (his most important works)

>Commentary on 8 of the Muhkya Upanishads part 1
https://archive.org/details/EightUpanishadsWithSankarabhashyamSwamiGambhiranandaVol11989

>Commentary on 8 of the Muhkya Upanishads part 2
https://archive.org/details/EightUpanishadsWithSankarabhashyamSwamiGambhiranandaVol21966

>Brahma Sutra Bhasya (commentary) of Shankaracharya
https://archive.org/details/BrahmaSutraSankaraBhashyaEngVMApte1960

>The Bhagavad-Gita with commentary of Shankaracharya
https://archive.org/details/Bhagavad-Gita.with.the.Commentary.of.Sri.Shankaracharya


Adi Shankaras non-commentary Prakarana Granthas (philosophical treatises)

>Atma Bodha (Self-knowledge)
http://www.lovebliss.eu/Download/Atma%20Bodha.pdf

>Upadesasahasri (A Thousand Teachings)
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Sri_Shankaracharya-Upadeshasahasri%20-%20Swami%20Jagadananda%20%281949%29%20[Sanskrit-English].pdf

>Aparokshanubhuti (Direct experience)
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.216548

>Vivekachudamani (Crest Jewel of Discrimination)
https://ia800108.us.archive.org/18/items/Vivekacudamani/Vivekacudamani.pdf


Non-Adi Shankara Advaita texts

>The Ashtavakra Gita
https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html

>Voga Vasistha
https://archive.org/details/VasisthasYoga

>Advaita Bodha Deepika (The lamp of non-deal knowledge)
https://selfdefinition.org/ramana/Advaita-Bodha-Deepika.pdf

>Dŗg-Dŗśya-Viveka (An inquiry into the Nature of the 'Seer' and the 'Seen')
https://vivekananda.net/PDFBooks/Others/DrgDrsyaViveka1931.pdf

>The Ribhu Gita
https://archive.org/stream/RibhuGitaRamaMoorthyH./Ribhu%20Gita%20%20Rama%20Moorthy%20H.%20#page/n1/mode/2up

>>11028239
>>11028269
Are you a practicing Hindu? Tell us a little about yourself, if you don't mind.

>>11027801
lol there is no mirror for dust to alight, for fuck’s sake this is exactly the kind of entanglement that someone who has done more than read books would not fall for. even Evola vaguely understood this in Yoga of Power, and all good LHP mystics get this. No mirror, no dust, wiping with nothing. That anything appears to be is its own mystery, is the Maya as play, is the great Work. No need for all the rest, useless speculation

>>11028283
I was raised in non-Hindu culture, after reading several Guenon works I became interested in the Advaita primary texts and started to study them. I want to read both more of Guenon and the primary texts but I've read enough of the later to know that I agree with them and they are the closest thing I've ever found that gets close to describing the fundamental nature of reality and existence.

There is a Vedanta center in my city and I may drop by sometime to test their knowledge and inquire about initiation but it's less important to me than simply studying the texts and developing my understanding of it at this point. I agree with Guenon in that there is a common 'perennial' essence also described by Daoism, Sufism, to a lesser degree Buddhism and certain Christian mystic and so on.

>>11028331

Of the works you've listed, where does one begin? How would you contrast traditional metaphysics in the West with Advaita Vedanta? As for initiation, Rene Guenon says that initiation is impossible without being part of a living tradition and organization. What do you make of this?

>>11028345
>Of the works you've listed, where does one begin?

Read the Ashtavakra Gita for a quick TLDR. After that either read the Yoga Vasistha or read through the core texts of Advaita (Shankara's Prasthanatrayi commentaries, roughly 2,000 pages). After you read one of those read the other. The prasthanatrayi texts that Shankara comments on are earlier than the Yoga Vasistha but the Yoga Vasistha may slightly pre-date Adi Shankara. Reading both Vasistha and his commentaries would round out your understanding exceptionally well. After that really any order.

There are two high quality abbreviations translation of Vasistha, both by the same guy, my other link has the longer one. The original Sanskrit has roughly the same # of verses as the bible and the only full English translation was awful so I'd not recommend it.


>How would you contrast traditional metaphysics in the West with Advaita Vedanta? As for initiation

A. Coomaraswamy wrote an excellent article on that subject titled 'Vedanta and Western Tradition'. I couldn't do it more justice than him.

http://www.worldwisdom.com/public/viewpdf/default.aspx?article-title=The_Vedanta_and_Western_Tradition_by_Ananda_Coomaraswamy.pdf


>Rene Guenon says that initiation is impossible without being part of a living tradition and organization. What do you make of this?

A true initiation in the sense of receiving a generally complete understanding of the doctrine to the extent that you are a 'carrier' of it so to speak and capable of passing it down accurately to others, that would most certainly require initiation by a living and real group. However first off it's important to understand that a key element of the Guenon's Tradition/the Hindu Santatana Dharma is that it exists on it's own in perpetuity and with the right concentration people are capable of picking up on it and tuning into it like a ration station. This is how it's regarded as having been started the first place when the first people did this when the sruti was revealed. I'm not claiming that that I myself specifically am doing this but it's not like the Truth exists only insofar as it's continues being taught by people.

More importantly, studying the primary texts yourself carefully, especially with the advice of people like Guenon or Coomaraswamy will still help you get a lot out of it, even if it's not the same as initiation and guidance by a teacher. Adi Shankara referred to Gaudapada as 'the highest teacher' despite probably never having met him. To a large degree the texts themselves especially with the commentaries are the teacher. I accept that I may not get it as I would with initiation, but I'm open to doing that in the future and I'm learning and benefiting massively from studying the texts now so I'm not too worried.

>>11028458
What's the tradition of your birth, if any, if you don't mind me asking? Any prticular reason you don't embrace it? One can still study Vedanta in terms of book learning but practice another tradition. These are not incompatible.

>>11028458
I appreciate your careful responses. I am just now starting to read Coomaraswamy's material and find it just as illuminating as Rene Guenon's. I am also coming to the understanding that I need to carefully study Eastern philosophy and that their works will only get me so far.

Reading Coomaraswamy's paper on Self-Sacrifice was very informative for me, that it is through comprehension that the escape from karma is obtained, a comprehension of what has been done. I see this as directly related to Guenon's account of realization of the being through knowledge, whereby the initiate captures a state that effectively becomes a part of himself and contrapositively being assimilated into the object as well. This is realized through intellectual intuition. However, he establishes a strict distinction between effective knowledge and virtual or theoretical knowledge. Though theoretical knowledge participates in true knowledge, or else it would be illusory, it nonetheless does not effectively capture a state like, for example, sense knowledge does. Have you read much about this in the texts you have studied? Can you explain to me your understanding of the process of realization? This is one of the biggest obstacles to me in understanding the material.

Thanks for your replies.

>>11028521
The reason I didn't include him in the OP is that the attitude he takes up in that book is "experimental" rather than traditional or metaphysical. It's a nice book, though, but quite different from the traditionalist point of view. Evola sometimes comes closer to Huxley than other traditionalists.

>>11028483
I live in the West, my parents were raised Christian but didn't like being forced to go to church, were not serious believers themselves and my family was not religious growing up except in the sense we celebrated easter and christmas. Basically an agnostic family environment.

I became interested in eastern philosophy as a young teenger, began to educate myself about the different types of it, eventually ran into Guenon when I was older, through him realized I should be studying Advaita texts if I wanted to find what was at the heart of things. Experience with Yoga and Meditation has been conducive to my interest in and the studying of these things but just taking the time to read the primary texts was the most important factor. I'm not even opposed to eventually being initiated into another tradition like Sufism or Catholicism/Eastern Orthodoxy etc but I'm mostly just interested in studying Advaita presently.

>>11028541
Good luck with your studies.

>>11028520
> Though theoretical knowledge participates in true knowledge, or else it would be illusory, it nonetheless does not effectively capture a state like, for example, sense knowledge does. Have you read much about this in the texts you have studied?

Yes, this point is revisited again and again in most Advaita primary texts from multiple angles.

As the Atma Bodha says:

>Just as the fire is the direct cause for cooking, so without Knowledge no emancipation can be had. Compared with all other forms of discipline Knowledge of the Self is the one direct means for liberation.
>Action cannot destroy ignorance, for it is not in conflict with or opposed to ignorance. Knowledge does verily destroy ignorance as light destroys deep darkness.

>Can you explain to me your understanding of the process of realization? This is one of the biggest obstacles to me in understanding the material.

If you are just attempting realization based on conceptualizing summaries of the teachings in the writings of Traditionalists it will be hard to get far. I would recommend trying reading the various primary texts, which give practical steps one can take towards self-knowledge and liberation but which also give many poetic metaphors that illustrate the ideas in helpful ways. The Ashtavakra Gita is a great example of this, from the first chapter:

>You do not consist of any of the elements — earth, water, fire, air, or even ether. To be liberated, know yourself as consisting of consciousness, the witness of these. 1.3
>If only you will remain resting in consciousness, seeing yourself as distinct from the body, then even now you will become happy, peaceful and free from bonds. 1.4
>You are unconditioned and changeless, formless and immovable, unfathomable awareness, unperturbable: so hold to nothing but consciousness. 1.17
>Recognise that the apparent is unreal, while the unmanifest is abiding. Through this initiation into truth you will escape falling into unreality again. 1.18

Adi Shankara's commentary on the Bhagavad-Gita is an incredibly detailed guide to attaining liberation with copious notes and explanations on every step of the process. I would recommend it highly. He sites from the Brahma Sutras and Upanishads but it's just to note that they back up his conclusions, it's not really needed to read those before understanding his Bhagavad-Gita commentary. He will often go out of his way to play the devil's advocate and mention multiple. hypothetical opposing views one could take only to refute those in turn, just to preemptively prevent any misconceptions along those lines arising in the reader.

Here is an example of some of his commentary on it. It's 500-something pages of a huge wealth of information and advice, on attaining knowledge.

>>11028520
Are you widely read in Coomaraswamy? Would a appreciate a chart for how to get into his stuff like the Guenon chart.

>>11028269
>>11028458
I would actually amend this reading list for anyone who intends to read some of them to note that many of Adi Shankara's non-commentary works are fairly short (~less than 100 pages) and that if you going to read through the large body of writings on the prasthanatrayi it may be worth it to check out some of the shorter works, so you have some working knowledge of it beforehand. They are no substitution to the prasthanatrayi writings themselves and it will be hard to fully understand Advaita just going by the non-commentary works but they do complement the core commentaries.

>>11028868
What do you think about Ramakrishna? What's your opinion on Bhakti traditions? Interesting thing about Ramakrishna is that he mastered the path of vedanta (realization of the formless impersonal brahman), Bhakti (realization of personal brahman), and Tantra.

Whats that symbol in the background?

Hu?

I know it's Sufi, but what is its origin/meaning?

>>11029043
It's a combination of different symbols. Notably the Swastika, "Arkan" (gammadia), and Octagon. See chapters:
- The Idea of the Center in Traditional Antiquity
- The Octagon
- Al Arkan
https://ia801305.us.archive.org/30/items/reneguenon/1962%20-%20Symbols%20of%20Sacred%20Science%20-%20Fundamental%20Symbols%20-%20The%20universal%20language%20of%20sacred%20science.pdf

>>11028893
>What do you think about Ramakrishna?
I like him and he seems legit but I have not got around to reading the gospel of his yet.

>What's your opinion on Bhakti traditions?
A legitimate path although I agree with Guenon when he writes that Vedanta is the peak of Hindu thought and the core from which all the others ultimately derive their meaning.

>>11029107
>It's a combination of different symbols. Notably the Swastika, "Arkan" (gammadia), and Octagon.
So...you would say it's a Swastarkgon?

>>11029195
And that's not even his final form.

Can't help but feel some of these guys are homosexual cucks dreaming about dominant (Aristocratic) men leading society. Or even worse jacking it to their own reflection in the mirror.

>>11029221
>Can't help but feel some of these guys are homosexual cucks dreaming about dominant (Aristocratic) men leading society. Or even worse jacking it to their own reflection in the mirror.

You couldn't be more wrong anon. Getting deep into this these ideas necessarily entails understanding that all is the One and that individual differences and all other contingencies are illusionary. With some of the more political ones like Evola maybe they lost sight of it sometimes but he is the exception rather than the rule.

>>11029221
>homosexual cucks
say that to my face fucker not online and see what happens

here's the chart, finally

>>11027178
Hall believed that an enlightened elite, like the Masons, or the Rosicrucians, existed behind all major political and religious movements, and helped to guide human history and that they were inheritors of the Atlantean race who he saw as theurgic monarchists and educators of the primitive races of the species. For him, order was centered around love of wisdom and gnosis together with a traditional upright society of moral people. He wanted Plato's philosopher King but, probably closer in kind to a theocratic or theosophical (philosophy, religion and science harmonized) ruling caste, rather than a supreme leader. He laces nearly all of his discussion of ancient societies and his views on modernity with this color of thought. For him, the ancient mages of the inner circles invented language, divined mathematics and put forward the laws of the society, he took Hermes to be some kind of King or high priest and viewed the Priestarchy as being superior to the Warrior caste, who he viewed as necessary, hence not opposed to tradition, but as subordinate to divine workers. He admired the Church fathers, the Platonic school, Pythagoras, Hermes and the Masons/Rosicrucians above all others and seemed rather enamored with the idea of a White Lodge, from the 19th and 18th century literature about the rosicrucians and Blavatsky's thoughts about the same school of peoples, which acted as a gardener for the species. In fact the concept has its roots in the Baconian and Renaissance mysticism of the English and Germanic philosophers. Browne, Dee, Bacon, and some of the Italians all either thought this was how history was determined or that it was the duty of enlightened men to rule as a beneficent horticulturalist over-caste.

>>11029504
>esoteric burgerism

>>11029549
the idea comes from the English, Germans and French, and of course its Burgerism, America was an occult alchemical experiment created by English Hermeticists and Freemasons. Our entire nation is dotted with endless Masonic symbols and monuments, our Capitol and the whole of the NE is basically a Masonic temple. Most of the major figures in the early colonies were Alchemists and Masons. Read Prospero's America.

>>11029504
Any books to recommend about this? The idea interests me greatly. I've read Hall's Secret Destiny of America.

>>11029614
i got u senpai

>>11027469
>Traditionalists are at bottom concerned with Truth, in an ultimate and metaphysical sense
So you deny that truth can depend on the times and culture? How general is this statement? For example, you probably know that homosexuality and pederasty were accepted and perhaps even encouraged in Ancient Greece, while in later European history they were the complete opposite. How can a traditionalist make the appeal to Truth in the present debates about such a case? Does it demand religious belief of some kind? Maybe you can recommend some books about truth in the traditionalist sense.

Also, is traditionalism opposed to individuality? Because it seems to me that progressive movements have historically done much more for the individual, like Renaissance with the independent, respected artist and the Enlightenment with education and challenge to authority. Nowadays however I get the sensation that neither progressives nor traditionalists hold the manifestation of the individual in high regard.

bump

>>11027627
Buddhism rarely uses positive affirmations of the non-transient reality (instead it's all about apophatic descriptions), but I wouldn't say it's opposed to the concept *on principle.*

>>11031335
The Truth that Traditionalists strive towards has very little care for the ephemeral "truths" of society and culture. The Truth they wish to understand would be true no matter whether you're a pauper in ancient India, a celebrity in modern America, a grasshopper 100,000 years ago or a microbe on an asteroid 100,000,000 years from now. It's universal, all-encompassing, not limited by ideology or belief, and exists entirely within itself.

>Also, is traditionalism opposed to individuality?
That depends what you mean by "individuality." If you're talking about opposing coercive methods of social control or pressure, they'd broadly be against such ideas, since those would deny the inherent divinity of each being. However, if you're talking about promoting things like saying whatever you like, indulging in your limited sense-desires and championing an ever-increasing series of "rights", they'd probably find those ideas very problematic and not conductive to the sort of mentality required for an individual to come into deeper contact with their own inner nature.

this thread is a fantastic resource, just wanted to say thanks, particularly to >>11028458 for recommending the ashtavakra gita and other works.

>>11031335
>So you deny that truth can depend on the times and culture?
Yes. It is rather everything which is dependant on the Truth, and the Truth dependant on nothing but itself.
>Homosexuality
This is an activity not a metaphysical principle. It's perfectly legitimate for different traditions to have divergences on contingent matters such as practices, the point is that when it comes to metaphysical principles they don't and can't have any differences because the Truth is one. Take a look at pic related. Let's say you want to get to the center of the circle from the circumference. Which way do you travel? That depends entirely on where you are positioned on the circumference. If you are positioned at the bottom I would instruct you to travel upwards, but if someone else asked for instructions I could not just blindly give him the same instructions, I would have to inquire as to his position on the circumference. In this analogy, the various world Traditions (e.g. Islam, Hinduism, Taoism etc) are points on the circumference. Each necessarily has it's own unique path and methodology for reaching the center (i.e. the Truth), but the closer to the center they get the closer to each other they get, which is why we find such a remarkable convergence of symbolism across time and space in different Traditions, even when two traditions are far apart in time and space which rules out the possibility of direct influence. As for whether homosexuality is compatible with any of the various paths, I don't know. It's possible that some paths assimilate it in some way, but most don't. The myth of the androgyn from the Symposium suggests it as a possibility.
>Individuality
Individualism is a means of closing us off to the Truth because the Truth is necessarily supra-individual, to put it briefly. But let's distinguish between the ideology of Individualism and individuality as such. Individuality pure and simple is simply a descriptive characteristic. It's true that everything about the manifested world is unique, no to instances of anything are entirely alike (which shows the inexhaustible creativity of the Divine "Architect" of the universe). Tradition acknowledges this and strives to give each thing its proper place in the "Great Chain of Being" (a concept from Stoic philosophy iirc that was also used by Plotinus). Individualism does not merely claim that individual differences exist, it attempts to reduce everything to these differences, and to deny the dependance of the individual order on the supra-individual. See the chapter entitled "Individualism":
https://dinghal.com/bibliotheek/The_Crisis_of_the_Modern_World.pdf

>>11031868
oops, pic related

>>11031868
So would a Traditionalist support gay marriage? Why or why not?

>>11031882
Again, it depends which tradition they belong to. I've never heard of a tradition which allows gay marriage, so I doubt it. There might be traditionalists who are ok with homosexuality, but marriage seems unlikely. Most would see the contemporary hysteria over "gay rights" to be a nonissue, a distraction from more important concerns. Traditionalism deals with a totally different order of ideas, principally metaphysical, sonasking if a traditionalist would be oo with gay marriage is like asking if a car mechanic would be ok with gay marriage. They're unrelated domains. It would be more to the point to ask whether a Catholic would be ok with gay marriage, or a Muslim, or a Hindu, etc. Traditionalism, as expressed in the authors mentioned in the OP, is a doctrine concerned with metaphysics, its symbolism, transmission, and character.

>>11031904
>oo
ok*
>sonasking
so asking*

>>11031882
Way to miss the point of the post, lol

>>11031912
I'm a practical person. The garrulous are those who hide the reality in a package of obscurity. His real answer is "I don't know"

>>11032029
Let me ask you a question - why should a Traditionalist (or anyone, for that matter) be concerned about gay marriage?

>>11032029
The answer was pretty clear, Traditionalism, as such, has no more to say on the issue than the art of basket weaving does. This or that particular traditionalist will have their own opinion on the matter, probably as a result of the particulr tradition they belong to, just as this or that particular basket weaver will have their own opinion on the matter.

>>11032045
Because a traditionalist is concerned with metaphysics, knowledge of the universal, and the universal is nothing but the order of principles. If a society does not derive its legitimacy from principles it can hardly be called a society.

What a good answer would look like is that the fundamental principle in the relations of the sexes is the dyad, a principle that is much more comprehensive than sexual differentiation, but is nonetheless the primary cause in it; that proceeding from this principle sexual polarity is the absolute foundation of copulation and any deviation from that polarity is a deviation from principle.

The answer given on the other hand was not an answer at all but an evasion, a relinquishing of any objective application of the principles the poster purports to have knowledge of with his pretensions. Tradition to him just means that different strokes suit different folks, that it has no limiting factor over behavior because there are "many ways to the center"

>>11032174
Read the Symposium. A dyad can be composed of two members of the same gender, *theoretically*. And again, we have to differentiate between homosexual acts and homosexual marriage. I know no examples of the latter in any tradition, and the former is either tolerated to one extent or another or totally forbidden depending on the tradition. I never advocated "different strokes for different folks". On the contrary, I'm advocating strict compliance with one's Tradition. If that Tradition tolerates homosexual acts than one would also probably tolerate them, and if it forbids them one would be expected to adopt the same attitude.

>>11032174
>If a society does not derive its legitimacy from principles it can hardly be called a society.
A society by definition will always be in a state of mild rebellion from the ordering principles of reality. If "society" truly wanted to live in harmony with Nature, we would essentially be a species of wandering hermits, who only come together for the occasional teaching session or to procreate.

Now, this is not to defend gay marriage - nor is it to oppose it - but rather, it is to bring up into the question that a "truthful" society is even possible or desirable. Perhaps it is - and perhaps you are right that it should be based on these cosmic axioms - but unfortunately I find such an outlook to have many weaknesses.

>>11032206
a family is generative, two dyads of the same gender can only generate asspain

>>11032232
Sex is not only for reproduction. Sexual polarity does not need to terminate in generation of offspring. Many traditions testify to this fact. See Evola's "Metaphysics of Sex". Sexual polarity happens between masculine and femine poles. A masculine male and a feminine male could *theoretically* have sexua polarity.

>>11032214
A society deriving from principles, or in "harmony with Nature," is not anarcho-primitivism.

>>11032240
feminine*
sexual*

>>11032241
How could it not be? Any sense of hierarchy, division of labor, religious institutions, hell even something as basic as spoken language are, by definition, illusionary and opposed to the Natural state of Being.

Now, that is not to say that a society can't perhaps be more or less in tune with these things - I'd argue that ancient Indian society had a much greater grasp of the cosmic principles than modern industrial society does. But society is still society, and no matter how much you try to base its values, ideas, rituals around being in harmony with the universe, it can never *actually* be in harmony with the universe, by virtue of being a society.

>>11032264
You have a distorted understanding of metaphysics. I suggest you survey this thread and read the works suggested in it.

>>11032264
>How could it not be? Any sense of hierarchy, division of labor, religious institutions, hell even something as basic as spoken language are, by definition, illusionary and opposed to the Natural state of Being.
They are not opposed to it, they are symbols of it. From the traditionalist point of view an authentic symbol (and all Traditions are symbolic in nature) is in a REAL analogy to the ultimate reality it expresses, not merely a conventional signifier of it. In other words, language, particularly "revealed" languages (e.g. Quranic arabic, sanskrit, etc). The same goes for traditional structures of society, these are revealed symbols of Reality. A gesture, an action can be as much of a symbol as an artistic representation on canvas.

>>11032240
i said nothing about sex, i said families and the question was about marriage, which is how a family is started

>>11032288
My posts earlier addressed that by making a distinction between marriage and sexual acts, see:
>>11032206
>>11031904

>>11032284
Ok, perhaps "opposed" was too strong a word, but the point remains, they themselves, no matter how subtle and well-crafted their representations of Ultimate Reality may be, can *never actually be that reality itself.*

Like has been mentioned before, Truth presents itself in all moments, from the mightiest splendor of a deeply conscious civilization, to the utter chaos of an industrial battlefield. No amount of Sanskrit articulation or geometrically sublime temples can ever give Truth to you; they can only point the way.

>>11032320
>may be, can *never actually be that reality itself.*
That goes without saying, but the point of them being in a real analogy to it, and not merely conventional signifiers, is really crucial and a lot of people miss this point. Turning down the advantages that symbolism offers, whether in the form of ritual action, social structure, language, or mythos, is foolish. It's the difference between walking somewhere on foot or taking speedy transportation. There is no sense in turning down such advantages, which is precisely what symbolism affords one.

No matter how much traditional literature I read, I still don't have the ability to get any friends or a girlfriend, what's the point of it all bros?

>>11032370
Well sure, I never said otherwise. But there's also not just one single way of representing the higher principles, as the other anon was getting at. While no one would argue that walking is preferable to taking a vehicle to travel long distances, what's less concrete is which vehicle is most suitable for the journey.

>>11032398
If your goals are simply to find a social circle and a mating partner, traditionalist literature isn't really going to help.

You're probably be better served by going outside and meeting people.

>>11032400
I probably am that "other anon" lol. As was said earlier there is a remarkable convergence of symbolism between traditions, and the closer one gets to the center, to return to the analogy from earlier, the more those symbols converge. There are differences to be sure, depending on which point on the circumference a tradition occupies, but often the differences are exaggerated. They represent different applications of the same principles.

>>11032398
>Once detachment, viveka, is interpreted mainly in this internal sense, it appears perhaps easier to achieve it today than in a more normal and traditional civilization. One who is still an "Aryan" spirit in a large European or American city, with its skyscrapers and asphalt, with its politics and sport, with its crowds who dance and shout, with its exponents of secular culture and of soulless science and so on —among all this he may feel himself more alone and detached and nomad than he would have done in the time of the Buddha, in conditions of physical isolation and of actual wandering. The greatest difficulty, in this respect, lies in giving this sense of internal isolation, which today may occur to many almost spontaneously, a positive, full, simple, and transparent character, with elimination of all traces of aridity, melancholy, discord, or anxiety. Solitude should not be a burden, something that is suffered, that is borne involuntarily, or in which refuge is taken by force of circumstances, but rather, a natural, simple, and free disposition. In a text we read: "Solitude is called wisdom [fekattam monam akkhātam] he who is alone will find that he is happy";" It is an accentuated version of "beata solitudo, sola beatitudo, "

>>11032398
sorry, only Chad can be a real traditionalist

>>11032431
Well sure, and this is when one grasps that knowing Truth will always be a journey, not a destination, lol

In which case, the question of gay marriage becomes so utterly irrelevant as to whether it's conducive to Truth or not. For some, in a certain place, at a certain time, it certainly will be, for a while, but could then very easily be discarded once the seeker has grasped a truth deeper than the conditional truth afforded to them by having a same-sex partner.

>>11032447
>knowing Truth will always be a journey, not a destination, lol
not sure what you mean by this. To my understanding it is definitely a destination. There is a final end goal of initiation, a final realization, moksha, fanaa, deliverance, gnosis, the supreme Identity etc. Samsara is a journey without a destination. No offense, but that sounds like a New Age platitude.

>>11032463
>There is a final end goal of initiation, a final realization, moksha, fanaa, deliverance, gnosis, the supreme Identity
In relative terms, perhaps, but as I'm sure your aware Ultimate Truth does not operate on, well, relative terms.

That's why you get things like Mahayana texts saying "There is no attainment, no non-attainment," etc.

I am not awakened, so I cannot speak as someone who knows these things from experience, but it's clear to me from the teachings I've read that there is no "thing" to get to, as much as that doesn't make sense to the egoic mind.

>>11029313
>literally converted in order to get a wife
Lmao can you be lamer than Guénon ?

>>11032478
I don't see what's "relative" about what I said. It doesn't sound "relative" to me. And certainly it's not a "thing" since metaphysical realization is supra-individual and "things" belong to the indivdual order. There is definitely, from everything I've studied, a final limit to our journey. Saying there is "only the journey" sounds like something out "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance", not traditional spirituality. We may mean the same thing, perhaps we're speaking past each other.

>>11032240
>A masculine male and a feminine male could *theoretically* have sexua polarity.
A feminine male is shunned in most cultures I can think of (even contemporary). So your only alternative is to pretend you belong to the Greek tradition if you care about traditionalist orthodoxy and want to be (a bit) effeminate. Otherwise the only "acceptable" homosexual person is the masculine one like in Germanic paganism, and then homosexual intercourse becomes metaphysically impossible because of a lack of polarity, unless the effeminate partner is shamed again.

>>11032482
He was already married before he converted. When his wife passed away he moved to Cairo and married a Muslim woman. Nice meme.

>>11032495
Perhaps. I come from a strong Buddhist background, and I tend to be suspicious of any concept of an "Absolute" or "Highest Reality," even though I'm sure others find them very helpful.

>>11032478
>That's why you get things like Mahayana texts saying "There is no attainment, no non-attainment," etc.
wasn't those kind of points written for over-ritualistic societies which means they are basically meaningless in our spiritually dead society?

>>11032496
>feminine male
There are degrees of femininity and masculinity. No male is 100% masculine. See Otto Weininger's Sex and Character. Your highest polarity would be with the partner who is inverse to you. In any case, I'm not advocating homosexual behavior. It's not accepted in Islam, which is the tradition I belong to. I'm just pointing out the facts as I see them.

>>11032504
I don't find Buddhism all that appealing, but maybe I'll dedicate some time to study it in the future.

>>11032511
Well, they were intended for monastics who had dedicated themselves to the pursuit of Nibbana, and I suspected as a tool to help let go of egoic conceptions of "becoming a more enlightened ego" or what have you.

Make no mistake I feel a lot of us on /lit/ have quite a solid grasp of mysticism and consciousness, but so long as you're sitting here, shitposting on a Manchu funerary music website, odds are you're still bonded to samsaric ways of thinking, and have much development to do in terms of letting go of conceptions.

>>11032519
>Your highest polarity would be with the partner who is inverse to you.
Yeah we agree, I'm just thinking out loud. The masculine homosexual isn't usually shunned in paganism. The issue is the feminine homosexual isn't really acceptable in most cultures, if someone knows of any such traditions feel free to mention them.
>In any case, I'm not advocating homosexual behavior.
No worries, I'm the one doing that.

>>11032535
Buddhism can be off-putting to the Western mindset in many ways, however, I believe if you can look past the iffy terminology it can have a lot to offer the seeker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbOgXfMcLoQ

>>11032447
You are so incorrect. Like I said before, you think Tradition is different strokes for different folks. You'll be utterly incapable of grasping anything with that ridiculous mindset of yours. Drop the New Age propaganda and check your own pretensions, prejudices and inadequacies.

>>11032569
>>11032569
I haven't studied those questions in detail, so I really have no clue. I remember vague references somewhere to male prostitues impersonating females being devotees of some deity or another in the ancient world. Not much to go on, I know.

>>11032600
the center and circumference analogy is not equivalent to "different strokes for different folks".

bump

>>11027333
The West is chattering without a deeper essence. Superficially more impressive but internally nothing. The East is greater wisdom cloaked in an unimpressive and sometimes even baffling form/lack of form.

bump

>>11034299
We have to distinguish between the pre-Enlightenment West and the post-Enlightenment West. Also I don't really buy the idea that the East "lacks form".

>>11032600
Please don't take this the wrong way, but you sound a little too attached to the "Traditionalist" label, to be honest

>>11034705
No offense taken. One of the eternal problems with the school of thought is that it attracts dilettantes, aesthetes and dabblers. These people often have no genuine interest in the material or in the way of life that it behooves. They often serve to misguide others.

It's interesting that Traditionalism has itself become subject to this and it has a lot to do with the force of personality figures like Julius Evola and Rene Guenon exert over young far-right men. On the other hand, it also is magnetic for occultists and new agers.

I would say I just do not like seeing the school of thought misrepresented.

>>11034901
perennialism is a better and less charged label anyway

>>11029504

bump

>>11029504
wow i had no idea manly p hall was this cringe

>>11035832
>>11037231
you see whatever you want
>>11034901
the Occult is older than traditionalism and was practiced by most of the traditions written about

>>11037250
>the Occult is older than traditionalism
Man, you're really gonna have to define your terms here. Traditionalism itself is a probelmatic term since Guenon and other thinkers belonging to this school precisely tried to demonstrate universal metaphysical unity between the world's traditiona, not start a new movement of their own. And please define "Occult" so we know exactly what you're referring to.

>>11037250
yes, Guenon acknowledges magic and says it is lower than true spirituality. He also unironically believes that ancient Egypt collapsed because they developed magic too much

>>11037681
>He also unironically believes that ancient Egypt collapsed because they developed magic too much
By which he means that they got more interested in secondary applications than fundamental principles, which is a sure fire way to ensure instability.

bump

bump

bump

any works or general musings on the greek hindu and buddhist mix after alexander the great? your thoughts or one of these lads' thoughts

>>11041743
not quite what you're looking for but i think Evola has a book on Mithraism, which is similarly "syncretic"

>>11041749
I've read that one, it's not that syncretic but much more just general his Solar concept put into the death of Rome.

Would it be wrong to just read Guenon in order of when his works came out? Or should I follow the >>11029459
chart

>>11041779
i think the chart would be better, but the traditionalist police aren't gonna bust into your house and arrest you if you don't stick to the chart or whatever

>>11041788
alright checked and I was just wondering cause I already got Theosophy for when I finish Hindu Doctrines

Tradition is for fags
Futurism is the way to go

>>11041816
>not being both
Pagan Imperialism would be up your alley

>>11027787
Schuon btfo Kant in Logic and Transcendence

>>11042798
Oh, I haven't read that book yet, but I heard it's essential traditionalist. can you give the tl;dr?

>he's not Orthodox Christian

baka

>>11043101
James Cutsinger is an Orthodox Christian traditionalist. I'm not that big of a fan, though. Additionally, Seraphim Rose (pic related) was massively influenced by Guenon, though, once he became Orthodox, he set Guenon and traditionalist ideas aside.

>>11043125
>>11043101
Oh, and on top of that, I suspect that Kallistos Ware is influenced by Guenon and traditionalism. I don't have proof, but he just gives off those kinds of "vibes".

>>11043101
>>11043125
>>11043139
Oh, oops. Forgot the most important one: Philip Sherrard. Check him out. For a Catholic traditionalist look up Rama Coomaraswamy, son of Ananda K. Coomaraswamy.

pic related, it's Sherrard, an Orhodox Christian traditionalist.

>>11043154
>>11043139
>>11043125
But what about Dugin?

>>11044173
He was exposed to traditionalist literature, and was influenced by it, but radically departs from it. He has an open distate for traditionalists. His book, Fourth Political Theory, I think, has an appendix called Metaphysics of Chaos where he basically posits a worldview the polar opposite of traditionalism. He's subversive and sketchy as fug.

>>11044189
For the record, though, it's a fascinating essay and he's an interesting thinker. I just don't buy his worldview and he's definitely not a traditionalist. His alliance with religion in Russia is basically cynical and opportunist.

>>11044283
https://www.google.com/amp/s/openrevolt.info/2011/12/07/the-metaphysics-of-chaos/amp/

Here's the essay in case people want to discuss it.

>>11044189
>>11044283
Is he really an opportunist though? I mean, it's pretty difficult to continue to endorse Christianity if you take Guenon's critique of Christianity seriously. Which is why I don't really get "Orthodox" traditionalists. IMO it's either Islam or Hinduism. Maybe you can LARP as a neo-Platonist.

I'm not a traditionalist btw.

>>11044356
There are traditionalists who depart from Guenon's views of Christianity like Jean Borella. Schuon, though he considered the Trinity to be a "relative" doctrine, departs from Guenon in favor of Christianity in at least one significant way: he considers the Christian sacraments to be fully initiatic (which I don't think really makes any sense, but ok). And I'm no expert on Dugin but I've heard he is notorious for being two-faced, basically tells each group what they want to hear. The essay I posted goes to show just how much he is incompatible both with traditionalism and with Christianity. It's literally and anti-Logos essay.

Is this a good encyclopedia of perennial wisdom?

>>11046455
Never heard of it, but all the authors are affiliated with traditionalism. I've read a scathing critique of Gurdjieff by Whitall Perry before, Perry was a student of Schuon's, Marco Pallis is a buddhist afaik, and Huston Smith is well known. Looks like a solid book.

>>11044189
You are wrong, it's just that his works on traditionalism and Orthodox esotericism has not been translated into English.

>>11046499
Ok, like I said, I don't know much about him. What are some of his views regarding traditionalism?

I'm working on a "Exposing the Counter-Tradition" book list. Any reccs from people of books to add to it? I would post the work in progress but I'm not at my PC. Basically any books that expose counter-traditional forces and influences historically or contemporaneously.

>>11046542
I mean a book chart

>>11046542
False Dawn - Lee Penn
The System of the Antichrist - Charles Upton
Studies in Freemasonry and the Compagnonnage - Guenon
The Spiritist Fallacy - Guenon
Theosophy: History of a Pseudo-Religion - Guenon
Men Among the Ruins - Evola
[spoilers]Protocols of the Elders of Zion[/spoiler[

>>11046542
The Globalization of Poverty
Programmed to Kill

>>11025242
So he basically just misremembered the guy's face?

>>11027512
It's simply the result of near-endless competition between European peoples/countries to outdo each other. If the continent of Europe was as big and scarcely populated as Australia we would be aboriginal level. This "lust for progress" is nothing but a manifestation of the most base need of man, to procreate and then ensure the survival of your children. No magical "Faustian spirit" nonsense, and certainly no Hyperborean origins like we wuz gods n shiet.

>>11046761
>this level of brainlet
>this level of reading comprehension

classic lit