/lit/ - Literature

Is he though? Evola was a bore for me, Guenon was quite entertaining in comparison to other philosophers

>>13431982
There is a reason the Brahma Sutras say that the study of the Vedanta is for the intellectually qualified, and not others

>>13431993
It’s not difficult, Guenon is just terribly boring to read. I’m reading another study of the Vedanta and it’s not nearly as obfuscated by shitty articulation.

See, the thing OP is, you should only read an author's magnum opus. Because most writers are shit. Of the good writers, most only manage to publish 1 good book in their lifetimes, the others being shit too. A writer that manages to write several good books belongs on the 0.01% of writers.

I love Guenon's writing style. He is clear, to the point, and doesn't equivocate with flowery bourgeois rhetoric.
If you are reading this book first though, you are making a mistake. Much of the terminology and the thought behind it is found in Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines and the Reign of Quantity. Without having read those books, you will get very little out of Guenon's metaphysical works.

>>13431991
Evola read like I’d imagine a brilliant ranting teenage conspiracy theorist would sound during moments of clarity. It was an adventure. Guenon just ties himself into knots trying to make sense of what he’s thinking. It’s a pain in the dick to decode when it doesn’t need to be nearly this difficult. At least Evola can string coherent thoughts together in a logical manner. I’m growing convinced that Guenon actually doesn’t actually believe what he’s saying.

>>13432031
I was reading this as a primer to Shankara. Do you have any alternative suggestions?

>>13432003
I've read multiple intro books to Vedanta and found Guenon's work to be helpful in understanding some of Shankara's ideas, but I can understand how his way of writing may some throw people off. Nevertheless, it'd be prudent to wait until you've read a lot of Shankara before denouncing Guenon's book on Vedanta.

>>13432053
There are three other good intro books to Shankara that I'd recommend besides Guenon's. The Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy by Sharma, The Essential Vedanta by Deutsch and Vedanta Heart of Hinduism by Torsten. They each have different pros and cons. All three are free online.

The Advaita Tradition is one of my favorites, the author covers Madhyamaka and Vijnanavada Buddhism along with Advaita Vedanta and Kashmir Shaivism. The author takes the unconventional position that Buddha, Nagarjuna, early Vijnanavada and Shankara were all more or less just pointing at the same truth in different ways, he has good and bad things to say about tantra. He has some very lucid writing on Shankara's ideas which explain them with great clarity, pic related is an example of some of his writing. The only downside is the Advaita section is maybe only a 1/3 of the book, but within that is a very good review of his ideas (and you could just read this without reading the whole book if you wanted)

https://archive.org/details/TheAdvaitaTraditionInIndianPhilosophyChandradharSharma

The Essential Vedanta is a long book consisting of long quotations from the Prasthanatrayi texts accompanied by large swathes of Shankara's commentaries, and also has many passages from works of post-Shankara Advaita thinkers. They do a good job of selecting some of Shankara's more important writings where he reviews and explains key concepts, there is minimal explanations by the authors between each selection of texts, although in the intro they explain enough of the terminology that if you pay attention you should get most of it. One thing to consider about this though is that if you plan on reading a lot of Shankara's works then you'd end up rereading hundreds of pages of stuff you'd already read here, in other words if you want to read a lot of Shankara it may be better just to read another intro book that explains his ideas and terminology and then just dive right into his works. Only the different thinkers of traditional Advaita are covered in this book

https://archive.org/details/EssentialVedanta.TheANewSourceBookOfAdvaitaVedantaSeeAdvaitaVedantaAPhilosophica_201701

Vedanta Heart of Hinduism is another good primer that focuses mostly on Shankara, with additional chapters on Ramanuja et al, and later 18th-19th century figures on Ramana Maharshi, Vivekananda etc. Like 'The Advaita Tradition' this book is consists of the author's explanations of their ideas and not long passages of Shankara's etc works. It's translated from German, but still good.

https://archive.org/details/VedantaHeartOfHinduismHansTorwesten/page/n7

>>13432285
This is a very good post. Thanks anon.

On the bore to entertaining scale where does Crisis of the Modern World fall?

>>13432318
It's one of the most accessible works of Guenon and is pretty short. It's a pretty influential book among traditionalists in politics (Evola references it a ton) so I think you would at least find it interesting.

>>13432285
>denouncing Guenon's book on Vedanta
I’m steadily working through it. Truthfully, I just don’t have enough things to complain about and Guenon has a stupid face.

I’m going to forgo The Essential Vedanta for the reason you mentioned, but I’ll give the other two a read right after I defeat Guenon. Thanks for the helpful post anon

>>13432031
>>13432285
Really? I have read Guenon's Intro to the Hindu Doctrines and I thought it was rather the opposite, that in order to read the Reign of Quantity you should be well acquainted to the Vedanta metaphysics.
I am about to start Man and His Becoming because I think it would be of a great help to face his other works and mainly the Upanishads and Shankara's works.

>>13431982
The Reign of Quantity is incredibly boring as well. I'm about 75% of the way through and can't make myself continue. I will finish eventually though, gotta make myself do it.

bump

Where to start with Guenon?

>>13432285
You’re a pretty recognizable poster. Have you ever read up on Zen? As well as the Sufi teaching stories of Idries Shah? As well as the (admittedly somewhat lurid) book “The People of the Secret” by Edward Campbell, which, in one part, presents a case for a historical connection between Zen and Sufi teachings (as Idries Shah also does in his book “The Sufis”)? Zen and Sufism both approach non-duality from their own angles which perhaps complement the more intellectual approach to be found in Advaita etc. One of the similarities is shock-teaching: waking a student up to the Absolute by means of provoking bafflement, boredom, frustration, shock, offense, etc. Another is using the absolutely ordinary as a gateway to enlightenment. Instead of being attached to traditionalistic forms, candles, robes, chanting, etc., both teachings (in their authentic forms) criticize this and claim one can realize the Absolute while living an absolutely ordinary life. Research Zen-Sufism!

>>13434348
>Idries Shah
Counter traditional. Very shady character, avoid his writing. Strong connections to new age hippy nonsense, and weird occult streams (JG Bennett)

>>13434357
What is tradition? Who or what determines what is traditional or valid?

>>13434348
I havn't studied Zen but I have read about Sufism and read some Sufi texts, I especially enjoyed Hakim Sanai's 'The Enclosed Garden of Truth'. I too find that the ways that other schools and traditions approach non-dualism can be illuminating especially when contrasted with Hindu teachings.

>>13434287
pic related

>>13434500
thank you my friend

>>13434500
Zen is wonderful. Someone recommended Charles Luk’s 3 volume Series on Ch’an and Zen Teachings to me and I haven’t regretted it a bit so far. Also the British philosopher Terence Grey who published under the name Wei Wu Wei has excellent books on the idea of non-duality from Zen and Taoist perspectives. Back to Sufism, Rumi’s Masnavi is a good one (I’d suggest EH Whinfield’s abridgment unless you’re trying to read a few thousand pages). Attar’s Conference of the Birds is also a great one.