/lit/ - Literature

>>15126401
What's that about crypto-buddhism?

>>15126401
based
>>15126409
cringe hylic

>tfw no primordial tradition where I live

>>15126401
Jacklyn may actually be uglier than Guenon himself.

>>15126457
Perhaps there are transcendental qualities that can be channeled via TikTok?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0zw-oQgrrk

>>15126456
Lmao

>>15126456
He's honestly not even that ugly

>>15126510
Maybe she has a nice personality?

>>15126510
Hopefully it's a Halloween mask.

lmao what is this?

>>15126409
Guenon refuted reincarnation - in l'erreur spirite where he BTFO the "mediums" of Europe - how could he be a buddhist?

>>15126738
Can Guenon refute DEEZ NUTS ?

>>15126409
guenon bases his philosophy on neo-vedantism which is a ripoff of buddhism

>>15126905
Maybe, but unlike you, he had sex.

Quite on-topic, I present to you my analysis of western traditionalism:
Guenon the wholesome guelph nigga
Evola the grrr ghibelline nigga

https://youtube.com/watch?v=NvuhC8IvdSs

>>15126927
>guelph - ghibelline
Can someone explain to me what that whole conflict was about?

>>15126939
long conflict between the emperor and the pope in the clusterfuck that was medieval italy

I think one of the parting differences between Evola and Guenon is that the latter conceived the degradation of Europe to be the betrayal of the Priest by the Warrior, and for Evola it was exactly the contrary.

The Guelph-Ghibelline wars serve pretty well as a before and after event (chain of events) from the perspective of the traditionalist school in the evolution of European history

>>15126987
Why did Evola support Friedrich II though? What was his reasoning?

>>15126939
The empire was always kind of weak in Germany but very weak in Italy and there was always tension between pope and emperor. Very early on, like in Charlemagne's time, popes were basically appointed by emperors and reliant on them for protection, and emperors still regularly crossed the Alps to settle shit in Italy directly. But by the 11th century the papacy was becoming quite powerful in its own right and starting to think of itself as a territorial state rather than a bureaucracy, while at the same time the church bureaucracy was so all-important to Christian states that a conflict naturally arose over what the real power structure of Christendom was, what the nature of pope vs emperor was etc.

This self-assertion of the papacy led to the famous Investiture Controversy in which the pope and emperor feuded over who appointed bishops. Obviously it would give massive power to the pope to have authority over the appointments of all-important bishops who were basically territorial lords within any kingdom, and in a feudal structure you rely heavily on your vassals' active cooperation and friendship so it throws the king's authority in his own state in question. This all led to the famous "going to Canossa" of the emperor, where he was humiliated by having to stand outside the pope's estate in the snow and basically beg to be forgiven, but it was generally just a clusterfuck that ended in the non-solution compromise of the Concordat of Worms in 1122 or thereabout.

In subsequent centuries not only does the pope start to see himself more as a territorial lord with ambitions of being more than a nominal authority in Christendom, not only does he come into conflict with the emperors (who are variously weak at times) over this, but the pope also gains power over calling crusades and can occasionally jerk emperors like Frederick around and use tricky maneuvering to get them in shit, have their enemies declare war on them and their vassals abandon them, etc. The popes really tried to be a territorial state in Italy with the right to call crusades for a good while (although this eventually failed).

Meanwhile in Italy this whole time the cities are going from isolated small cities doing their own thing and trading, almost invisible to history to be honest, to being the familiar states and princedoms of the renaissance. The natural outcome of this is that these states and proto-states and proto-empires in Italy etc. try to play the ongoing, century-spanning, convoluted imperial vs. papal conflict over authority in Italy (and beyond Italy) to their own advantage.

This convoluted realpolitik is the big picture, but of course on smaller scales people had genuine commitments one way or another. The Florentine "whites" and "blacks" of Dante's Inferno were split along guelph/ghibelline lines, people had generations worth of genuine loyalty to one party-slash-ideology-slash-patron, etc.

>>15127002
The question is whether divine charismatic kings should preside over a society with the help of the priestly caste or whether the priestly caste should dominate. From what I understand Evola's position is that the European soul is different from the oriental soul. Guenon wants priestly caste domination, but Evola says this is only right for orientals.

This might help as it touches on related themes though not systematically
https://voegelinview.com/rene-guenon-eric-voegelin-degeneration-right-order-part/
https://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/5081

>>15126401
Guenonfag. A meme. Long faced and repetitive. Pizzaria Currier and murderer of grandmothers. Would still rather see the entire board plastered with his spam than ever see another m*ldbug post let alone thread as long as I live.

>>15127036
>>15127067
Excellent posts!

>>15127002
Hey I'm >>15126987
I'm not saying that their differences came from their regards for the guelph-ghilebbine wars in themselves. On my own assesment of their thinking, Evola's metaphysics are metaphysics of action and he gives primacy to a holy warrior kind of archetype. On the other hand, Guenon's tradition and metaphysics are much more priestly and contemplative. For Guenon (in vedic terms) the coming of the iron age is given way by the betrayal of the Kshatriya against Brahman (Guelph supporting of the Pope), for Evola that was the other way around (Ghibelline).

Evola would have said that the conscration of the Emperor by the Pope made the Emperor effectively as divine as the Pope, quite like when the Father engendrated the Son He gave away his absolute primacy (loss of ontological superiority) to share it with the Son and being equal to each other.

Both Evola and Guenon had this same understanding, but they differed on who it was to fck it up first

>>15127123
Ok actually I wouldn't say Guenon had the same understanding there.
As >>15127067 pointed out, for Guenon it would be a matter of the priestly caste having the supremacy

>>15126401
im about to study sufi shit
give me the top 5 from pic. related

So if I understand the traditionalist school correctly
>Western Europeans want absolute monarchies
>Orientalists want a society run by priests
>Eastern Europeans want some national bolshevism run by priests(?)
The reason for this discrepancy is because the societies should reflect the history and traditions of the land and people. Have any traditionalists from places like the USA, Canada, Australia, etc. come up with a way to adapt this ideology to nations that are basically built on top of enlightenment ideals? Would they try to return it to how the local Natives used to do things?

>>15127968
The Enclosed Garden of Truth - Sanai
The Conference of the Birds - Attar
Miskat al-Anwar - al-Ghazali
Masnavi - Rumi
The Secret Rose Garden - Shabestari
Revelation of the Veiled - al-Hujwiri
Fusus al-Hikam - Ibn Arabi

>>15128005
Returning to native tribes is too impractical, the least impractical solution would seem to be some sort of "Christian monarchy", of course this couldn't be of a Protestant sort though or there would be no point. unless Protestantism revamps itself such that it's no longer Protestantism.