[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 58 KB, 525x300, Plotinus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16849906 No.16849906 [Reply] [Original]

How did Guenon (pbuh) manage to get into metaphysic but ignore some of the West's most enlightened mystics like Plotinus and others of the late Platonic school?

Did he even read Plato?

>> No.16849916

He was busy being a Buddhist and not realizing it since Shankara is a cryptobuddhist

>> No.16849982

>>16849906
Because he thinks Aristotle and Aquinas > Plato, Plotinus

He said in a letter that despite apparent similarities between Shankara and Plotinus, the latter had a failed initiation because he only said he achieved union with the one a few times, rather than permanently.

>> No.16850045

i also would be careful about reading shankara

>> No.16850055

>>16849982
Can someone who's read Guénon tell me in which books he discusses St. Thomas Aquinas (PBUH)?

>> No.16850065

>>16850055
from what ive read he never "discusses" st. thomas but he does mention some of his notions in reign of quantity. if he were a strict thomist he would not have apostatized

>> No.16850220
File: 173 KB, 1000x500, plotinus-quote.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16850220

>>16849982
Strange, you would of thought he would be extremely fond of Plotinus

>> No.16850310

>>16850220
Can Plotinus make up his mind on whether the One is God or not?

>> No.16850322

Guenon admits in his letters that he did not really study them and that he did not feel educated enough on them to really comment. I imagine he was not very interested because there was no explicitly Plotinusian initiation lineage.

>> No.16850327

>>16850310
I imagine that is just the translator at work.

>> No.16850711
File: 16 KB, 300x400, 1597556842943.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16850711

>>16849906
Guenon spent less time vouching for Platonism over the eastern traditions because the original was wiped out, there is no longer any intact line of transmission of original Platonism, and Christian (Neo)Platonism was too fragmentary, and to busy having to dodge periodic accusations of heresy to effectively constitute a great living metaphysical tradition within Christianity, or at least to the same degree as Sufi brotherhoods within Islam or sampradayas within Hinduism. He still obviously considered it important but not on par with the eastern traditions. Hopefully there can be a figurative renaissance within Christian Neoplatonism in the future that actually makes it relevant to the lives of most Christians in the west who are largely ignorant of it.
>Did he even read Plato?
Yes, he could read Greek and he cites Plato and Aristotle throughout his books, although he cites the latter more.
>>16849916
Shankara refuted the sophism known as Buddhism
>>16850045
Shankara should be read carefully
>>16850055
Aquinas gets periodically mentioned in his books on metaphysics like in Man and His Becoming According to the Vedanta, The Symbolism of the Cross, and The Multiple States of the Being, try going to those books on the archive.org page of all of Guenon's books and you can check their indexes for the many references to Thomism, Aristotle, Scholasticism and Aquinas
>>16850220
Coomaraswamy in his books, articles and essays advances the same thesis that Neoplatonism aligns with Advaita Vedanta and Vishishtadvaita Vedanta; which Guenon hints at but never forcefully argued for.

>> No.16850928

>>16850220
Guenon was a retard.

>> No.16850986
File: 22 KB, 235x346, 1585931966544.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16850986

>>16850928

>Guénon was a retar-
He was proficient at Greek, Latin, English, Italian, German, Spanish, Sanskrit, Hebraic, Arabic and Chinese, was trained in mathematics and was extremely well-read in both eastern and western philosophy
>Guénon was a stupid posing larpe-
He was initiated into both a Vietnamese Taoist Triad as well as the al-'Arabiyya Shadhiliyya Sufi order, furthermore in all his writings he stressed the need for personal and genuine participation in whatever Traditions one aspired to follow. His acquaintances both Egyptian and western observed that he scrupulously followed Islamic observances during his life in Egypt
>Guénon was a literal nobody, he was not influenti-
Among the many western philosophers, artists and authors who were influenced by him or who heaped praise on him include Carl Schmitt, Georges Bataille, Aleksander Dugin, Antonin Artaud, Olavo de Carvalho, André Breton, Mircea Eliade, Alain Danielou, Julius Evola, André Malraux, Albert Gleizes, René Daumal, Raymond Queneau, Paul Ackerman, Huston Smith, William Chittick, Steve Bannon, Harry Oldmeadow, James Cutsinger and Hossein Nasr. Furthermore as Nasr notes in his article 'The Influence of Rene Guenon in the Islamic World', Guénon is well-known and influential among the intelligentsia including traditional Islamic scholars in certain Islamic countries such in Turkey, Iran, Pakistan and Malaysia.
>Guénon just made a bunch of stupid and unjustified comparisons between religio-
To the contrary over the course of some twenty odd books he painstakingly and patiently elucidated the fundamental agreement between the metaphysics of Advaita Vedanta, Taoism, Sufism, Hermeticism and Christian esoterism, work that Coomaraswamy built on and further confirmed

>> No.16851016

>>16850986
based...

>> No.16851028

>>16850986
Cringe

>> No.16851037

>>16850986
basado

>> No.16851370

What did Guenon (pbuh) think of Oriental Orthodoxy?

>> No.16851519

>>16850711
>Shankara refuted the sophism known as Buddhism
Tell me more

>> No.16851612

>>16850986
Imagine if this man got into the sciences instaid of spooky woo, he could have created so much, similar to Crowley who also wasted his genius, so sad.

>> No.16851766
File: 2.33 MB, 5118x1210, shankara buddhism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16851766

>>16851519
See pic related for Shankara's refutation of Sarvasitvada and Sautrantika Buddhism (basically proto-Theravada, the Theravada fall prey to many of the same critiques), as well as Yogachara Buddhism. Shankara dismisses Madhyamika Buddhism as nihilism and as not even worth critiquing, the author of the book in this image (Chandradhar Sharma) disputes that Madhyamika is nihilism, but Sharma himself takes a fairly fringe position on Madhyamika which would be dismissed by most current Buddhist scholarship as ascribing Hindu doctrines to Madhyamika. Under the more mainstream interpretation of Nagarjuna held by most scholars I do think that it qualifies as nihilism and that Shankara was right to dismiss it. If you are curious about that topic the book "Emptiness Appraised" by Richard Burton explains how Madhyamika actually does entail nihilism and how its main thinker Nagarjuna uses common sophist tactics in his works.

>> No.16851789
File: 27 KB, 192x255, 1605990983237.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16851789

>>16851612

>> No.16851807

>>16850986
sounds like a shyster

>> No.16851824

>>16851612
yeah bro he like could have made a fully sick auto translator app
stfu

>> No.16851882

>>16850986
>Guénon was a literal nobody, he was not influenti-
René Guénon’s influence on the literary and intellectual life of his time has been recently documented in an impressive 1,200-page book by Xavier Accart, Guénon ou le renversement des clartés, which spans fifty years of French history and demonstrates the pervasive, if sometimes subterranean and implicit, impact of the works of the French metaphysician on personalities as diverse as André Gide, Simone Weil, Pierre Drieu la Rochelle, and Henri Bosco. Upon going through the pages of Accart’s impressive volume, one is literally astounded by the breadth, and sometimes the depth, of Guénon’s presence in the intellectual landscape of France between 1920 and 1970, a presence that a cursory, conventional consideration of the French intellectual history of the time would not betray. Who would suspect prima facie that Guénon’s works have been known and appreciated by personalities as diverse as André Breton and Charles de Gaulle?

someone should translate this book

>> No.16851891

>>16851882
>Xavier Accart
Literally who?
Your threads are shit. Trad is just consoom and marketing for YA novels for your faggot ass.

>> No.16851893

>>16851882

HOLY BASED...

maybe we could crowd-fund it

>> No.16851894

>>16849906
Where do I get started with Guenon?

>> No.16851901

Fuck off guenonfag

>> No.16851903
File: 18 KB, 236x325, acd40b27bdd9960d9071a05093cc6999.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16851903

>>16851891
>Trad is just consoom
it's the opposite you stupid hylic, spirituality is antithetical to consumerism

"Matter is essentially multiplicity and division; and this, be it said in passing, is why all that proceeds from matter can beget only strife and all manner of conflicts between peoples and between individuals." - Rene Guenon (pbuh)

>> No.16851905

>>16851894
>Where do I get started with Guenon?
With his first book 'Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines"

It's free here along with his other books

https://archive.org/details/reneguenon/

>> No.16851907

>>16851903
>can't even read
Pathetic retard

>> No.16851909

>>16851905
Thanks mate

>> No.16851916

>>16851905
>>16851909
Also is there any prior reading I should do before delving into his works?

>> No.16851920

>>16851916
Wow holy pbuh basado guenon so basado hyperpbuh

>> No.16851921

>>16851907
If I can't read then how would I be able to post on 4chan?

Hylics are such morons

>> No.16851930

>>16851921
Retard
Stop spamming the board if you can read.

>> No.16851939

>>16851916
No, it helps to have read some Greek philosophy first and some of the entry level eastern stuff like the Tao Te Ching or the Gita so you have an inkling of what eastern philosophy is like but neither are really necessary, you can always get deep into them after reading Guenon

>> No.16851952

>>16851930
I'm not spamming, I'm not OP, I have been posting on-topic posts and you're the one throwing a bitch fit, if you don't like then go post about Steven Pinker and Whitehead tranny garbage or whatever it is that you like

>> No.16851958

Because he was an advanced pseud.

>> No.16851961

>>16851939
Guess I'm golden then, I'm familiar enough with all of that. Thanks heaps.

>> No.16852001

>>16851958
>Guenon was a psu-
see >>16850986

>> No.16852053

>>16852001
The purpose of initiation is to bypass the need for contemplative introspection by having a priest theurgically send a lower deity to carry where you can't lift yourself—because you're a pseud.
And one of those isn't even something to be proud for him about.

>> No.16852087

>>16852053
That's incorrect. The purpose of initiation is that so someone who is already established in Brahman and who knows Brahman can transmit that understanding to a qualified pupil. Without this transmission there is no complete realization of Brahman. You cannot teach yourself the way to complete spiritual illumination from reading books or from self-experimentation with meditation.

>> No.16852140

>>16852087
That's incorrect. Because that's literally what Plato's Complete Works and Plotinus Enneads are. They aren't "Self"-help to contemplation they're initatory rites from the grave; because at least regarding Plato, and through Plato—Plotinus, his work is living. The endless condition of discourse isn't merely a truth of dialectics as a whole but the Dialogues themselves are. Their extraordinary if not impossible PERFECT preservation in spite of being contrary to the zeitgeist for 1500 years shows this as well.
As well the fact that there are no complete living traditions (only half seeing ones from the far east who are pre-platonic) is proof of this necessary power of the dialogues read as a harmonious whole.
Likewise true poets and artists in general need no initiation to create Beauty that by a mere glance or minute of sound can show you God. Ritualistic initiation through the elements and sight and smell and song, are for all and beneficial for all—but not necessary for he who has gone down willingly, smiling, he brings the song.

>> No.16852212

>>16852140
>they're initiatory rites from the grave
That they are from the grave saps them of the power that a living initiation possesses. You have no way of knowing whether you are interpreting anything correctly as you have no living teacher with their own lineage going back to the founding of the tradition, only the successive accumulation of various subjective interpretations by various scholars and amateurs over the centuries. This is not to say that reading them does not possess a transformative spiritual power, as is the case with many other philosophical and mystical texts, but this is not the same as being initiated into the path to the undecaying.
>As well the fact that there are no complete living traditions
Hinduism and Islam are complete living traditions
>Likewise true poets and artists in general need no initiation to create Beauty that by a mere glance or minute of sound can show you God.
To equivocate the artists creative impulsive with the intuitive realization of God is a mistake. The former proceeds from the artists mind, the latter descends upon the spiritual aspirant from above.
>Ritualistic initiation through the elements and sight and smell and song, are for all and beneficial for all—but not necessary for he who has gone down willingly, smiling, he brings the song.
Initiation is indeed necessary, the association of initiation with various physical accessories is of tangential importance, the essential element in initiation is a spiritual awareness or knowledge which is conveyed independently of the individual components of the initiation ceremony.

>> No.16852241

>>16852212
>Initiation is indeed necessary
You say this without proving it. Hindu and Islamic creeds as a whole are uneccessary, why would they be so when there's Plato, Plotinus, Iamblichus etcetera? There's more substantial knowledge within the Sophist alone than there is in a thousand of Advaita treatises.

>> No.16852247
File: 30 KB, 370x241, neo-traditionalism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16852247

>>16851903
holy fuck guenonfag really is accfag.

>> No.16852257

>>16850310
It's a Neoplatonic axiom that a higher cause exists within the things it causes, and the more powerful the cause the stronger it is within the things it causes. The One is God but also exists within all things as the absolute cause of all being.

>The relation of cause to its effect. The relation between a cause and its effect is characterized by both similarity and dissimilarity. For every cause produces something that is similar to it, and every effect thus resembles its cause, though in a secondary and less perfect way. But in so far as the effect is really distinguished from its cause, it acquires its own characteristic form of being, which was not yet developed on the level of its cause. For this reason each thing can be said to exist in three manners (Elem. Theol. § 65). First, it is in itself as expressing formally its own character (kath’ hyparxin). Second, it exists in a causal manner (kat’ aitian) being anticipated in its cause. Finally, it exists as being participated (kata methexin) by the next level of being, which is its effect. Thus life is a property of a living organism as being participated by it. Life characterizes the soul formally. Life also exists qua Form in the divine mind. Finally, Proclus stresses that the higher a cause, the more comprehensive it is, and the further its effects reach (Elem. Theol. § 57). All things, including matter, which has in itself, apart from the forms existing in it, no ‘being’, participate in the One; all beings participate in Being; all plants and animals participate in Life; all rational souls participate in Intellect.

>> No.16852297
File: 722 KB, 1080x2036, Screenshot_20201123-095800~2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16852297

>>16852212
There are over 20000 pages of ancient exegesis of Plato and Aristotle (read Platonically, as is proper). You don't even grasp my words so clearly you speak from collected knowledge and not understanding. Plato's work is midwifery, the text is alive by the fact that it needs interpretation it interprets itself affirms and denies itself, turning returning and overturning.

>> No.16852306

>>16852241
>You say this without proving it. Hindu and Islamic creeds as a whole are uneccessary, why would they be so when there's Plato, Plotinus, Iamblichus etcetera?
Because there is nobody living on earth now who personally knows how to reach the states that those men reached, and who can instruct others in how to do so. And merely reading their writings and contemplating on them is insufficient to permanently attain non-duality/union with God or Brahman or the One. If this was so you would have a lot more scholars of Platonism who've read every bit of every Platonism text inside and out leaving Academia upon their ensuing union with the One to become mystics or metaphysical teachers or whatever outside the domain of academia, but they almost never do this, because you can't attain union with the One permanently just through reading Plato and the Platonists and contemplating on those texts. There is no evidence to suggest that anyone has ever done this, and it goes against the teachings of the actually revealed scripture the Upanishads, which say that initiation by a Guru is necessary and which give a guru parampa going back to Brahman.
>There's more substantial knowledge within the Sophist alone than there is in a thousand of Advaita treatises.
I disagree

>> No.16852317

>>16852297
>There are over 20000 pages of ancient exegesis of Plato and Aristotle
this is but a tiny fraction of the combined Hindu writings within Sanskrit alone, without even counting all the other Hindu writings written in other Indian languages
> it interprets itself affirms and denies itself, turning returning and overturning.
The Hindu and even some of the Islamic writings are the same way, but all the same this can only get you so far without a real initiation, you won't be able to go all the way

>> No.16852320

>>16850711
>>16850986
Ok tranny.

>> No.16852335

>>16849906
Please do not say Plotinus (pbuh) without the due respect. Thank you.

>> No.16852355

>>16850711
>Neoplatonism in the future that actually makes it relevant to the lives of most Christians in the west who are largely ignorant of it.
I'm a neoplatonist but I'm not a christian, please keep these midwits away from the divine Plotinus.

>> No.16852401
File: 59 KB, 419x1024, 1599472654579.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16852401

Anon doesn't deserve direct addressing.
Through these things therefore, Socrates also shortly after says, that the souls that are elevated together with the twelve Gods, to intelligible beauty, are initiated [viz. rendered perfect] in the most blessed of the mysteries, and through this initiation receive the mysteries with a pure soul, and become established in, and spectators of things ineffable. Hence the initiation of the Gods is there; the first mysteries are there. Nor is it at all wonderful, if Plato also tolerates us in calling the Gods [of this order] Teletarchs since he says, that the souls that are there are initiated, the Gods themselves indeed initiating them. But how is it possible otherwise to denominate those who are the primary sources of telete or initiation, than Teletarchs?

>> No.16853099
File: 1.22 MB, 1312x984, 1482199440525.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16853099

>>16850711
>Coomaraswamy in his books, articles and essays advances the same thesis that Neoplatonism aligns with Advaita Vedanta and Vishishtadvaita Vedanta; which Guenon hints at but never forcefully argued for
Which books did Coomaraswamy argue this out of curiosity?

>> No.16853110
File: 60 KB, 600x785, 1280.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16853110

>>16850986
Based

>> No.16853111

>>16850711
Shut up pseud

>> No.16853118
File: 776 KB, 966x734, GUENONGUENONGUENON.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16853118

OH MY GOD GUYYYYSSS!!!!

LOOOK WHO IT ISSSSSS!!!!!

ITS HECKIN GUENONNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!

>> No.16853120

Guenonfag has been here for years, literal years. I can't imagine giving a shit about Guenon for more than a week. Imagine wasting your life on some second rate 'philosopher' not taken seriously at all.

>> No.16853125
File: 332 KB, 632x542, guenontranny.png.png.png.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16853125

I LOVE TO READ GUENON WHILE I DILATE

SO HECKIN GOOD

>> No.16853129
File: 138 KB, 1044x900, 1appear2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16853129

When is the second Renaissance happening?

>> No.16853642

>>16850986
>He was proficient at Greek, Latin, English, Italian, German, Spanish, Sanskrit, Hebraic, Arabic and Chinese

Of course you will be an absolute retard, if your head is a pile of dictionaries, which hinder your coherent thinking even in your native language.

>> No.16853666

>>16851824
kek

>> No.16853677

>>16853129
when technology gets wiped out and we have to climb back up.

>> No.16853688

>>16853677
Based

>> No.16853859

>>16852257
>>16850327
That doesn't answer the question, brainlet. This is a known ambivalence in Plotinus. Proclus is explicit in uniting them, but Proclus' metaphysics is retarded and a downgrade after Plotinus.

>> No.16853873

>>16853859
As far as i'm concerned the One is God, but in the end, these are just different names for the same phenomenon

>> No.16854022

>>16853099
>>16850711
>Coomaraswamy in his books, articles and essays advances the same thesis that Neoplatonism aligns with Advaita Vedanta and Vishishtadvaita Vedanta; which Guenon hints at but never forcefully argued for.

Guenonfag is being dishonest here but trying to play up affinities with Vishishtadvaita Vedanta. Both Guenon and Coomaraswamy denigrated modified non-dualism and Ramanuja and considered it lesser than Shankara and his "pure metaphysics."

>> No.16854028

>>16851891
>Your threads are shit. Trad is just consoom and marketing for YA novels for your faggot ass.

This.

>> No.16854032

>>16854022
Well are there any books that compare Vishishtadvaita to Neoplatonism?

>> No.16854194

>>16853099
>Which books did Coomaraswamy argue this out of curiosity?
In his collections of works titled "metaphysics" volume 1 & 2, as well as in Time and Eternity I think, you can also just go on google scholar and type in Coomaraswamy and Buddhism and punch the resulting articles into scihub
>>16853120
Guenon destroyed "philosophy"
>>16854022
They """denigrate it""" by stating that it is a different approach to the same truth as Advaita. Vishishdadvaita cared more about popularizing and democratizing the teaching, anything which does this inevitably changes in the course of accommodating itself to the masses that it caters to; so it's no surprise they would say this.
>>16854032
The Shape of Ancient Thought by Thomas McEvilly does

>> No.16854203

>>16850220
Platonism is qualified monism. Why he didn't wake up to the fact that the primordial tradition is qualified monism, I don't know.

>> No.16854210

>>16854194
>They """denigrate it""" by stating that it is a different approach to the same truth as Advaita.

They say it's a lesser approach that isn't purely metaphysical. If you understand Guenon's metaphysics, it's not Ramanuja and cannot accept Ramanuja, which is why Guenon was being dishonest when he dismissed the opposition of Shankara and Ramanuja, and then goes on to say that Shankara saw much further so he doesn't care about Ramanuja.

>> No.16854217

>>16854203
This

>> No.16854218

>>16854194
>Guenon destroyed "philosophy"

lol alright zoomer

>> No.16854229
File: 1.77 MB, 1080x1082, 1605572678792.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16854229

All you had to do was read Evola.

>> No.16854246

it's such a shame /lit/ has a schizo retard who pushes guenon, he doesn't know anything about guenon or advaita but now those two things are impossible to talk about here because he either shows up or people assume you are him

>> No.16854248

>>16854210
>If you understand Guenon's metaphysics, it's not Ramanuja and cannot accept Ramanuja,
False, they can be reconciled easily. Someone following Ramanuja's form of Vedanta would qualify under Advaita as someone who devotes themselves to meditating upon the qualified form of Brahman, which Advaita says still can lead one to Brahmaloka anyway, which is a place people can obtain moksha while residing there. So even though they disagree they can be reconciled as both leading to Brahman in ways that befit different people. Ramanuja and Shankara agree in their Brahma Sutra commentaries on the meaning of about 90% of the verses.

>> No.16854281

Every time I read about some scholor from the turn of the century I see how they all knew every fucking language to ever exist how the fuck does someone do this? Is it even possible for someone to learn this many languages today? I feel like I'm wasting all my time not spent learning a language I'm fucking dying guys help HOW THE FUCK DO I LEARN SANSKRIT

>> No.16854286

>>16854248
>it can be reconciled because Guenon says they'll just be subsumed by advaita anyway

Cringe...I don't like Evola but he was right about Guenon fan boys. They are mentally ill idol worshippers.

>> No.16854300

>>16854281
Guenon was a dilettante and didn't know all those languages his followers claim he did. Anybody knows a handful of philosophical terms or historical symbols from other languages, ancient or dead. Big deal.

Polyglots exist, but there's no evidence that Guenon was one.

>> No.16854316

>>16854203
>Why he didn't wake up to the fact that the primordial tradition is qualified monism, I don't know.
Because Shankara points out the numerous contradictions in it and its explanation of how the universe comes about

>> No.16854330

>>16854316
Great. So now you admit they're not compatible.

>> No.16854342

>>16853677
why? what would've been the point in that?

>> No.16854344

>>16854281
>HOW THE FUCK DO I LEARN SANSKRIT

Do what Guenonfag does, spend 5 years copying and pasting wikipedia articles but never actually learn the language you claim to have a mystical devotion to.

>>16854248
>trying to reconcile shankara's cryptobuddhist nihilist monism with hinduism
There's a reason Hindus call you a heretic. In the last few threads several actual Hindus have criticized your understanding. Why don't you ever listen?

>> No.16854351

>>16854330
No, because Advaita is a less contradictory (or rather it is contradiction-free) type of non-dual Vedanta then Vishishdadvaita is, but they still share enough doctrines and overlying structure to be reconciled, but this reconciliation would be to the favor of Advaita, but it can still be done in a way that leaves Vishishtadvaita intact.

>> No.16854370

>>16854300
>and didn't know all those languages his followers claim he did
proof?

>> No.16854373

>>16854316
>Because Shankara points out the numerous contradictions in it and its explanation of how the universe comes about

Shankara is the absolute worst for this. He shouldn't be giving anyone lessons on how to formulate creation/emanation etc.

>> No.16854378

>>16854194
>Guenon destroyed "philosophy"
How

>> No.16854383

>>16854351
>but it can still be done in a way that leaves Vishishtadvaita intact.

Prove it. You just said it made no sense, yet now it will be left intact?

>> No.16854386

>>16854373
>Shankara is the absolute best for this.
fixed
>He should be giving lessons to everyone on how to formulate creation/emanation etc.
fixed

>> No.16854402
File: 928 KB, 1336x2792, 1604783144144.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16854402

Reminder that guenonfag's favorite scholar patrick olivelle thinks that advaita is not the philosophy of the upanishads lmao

>> No.16854404

>>16854370
Prove that he knew classical Arabic. Prove that his knowledge of Islam and Arabic isn't lifted entirely from friends and acquaintances, rather than reading untranslated primary sources.

>> No.16854409
File: 25 KB, 700x500, 1556155345108.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16854409

We will never get a decent thread about Advaita and Vishishdadvaita will we?

>> No.16854410

>>16854378
In one of his books he talks about how philosophy cannot be a goal in itself and is only a prerequisite for aquiring true knowledge. Philosophy is not knowledge but a love of knowledge.

>> No.16854413

>>16854386
Jerking off on your own face again? Get a life and stop posting.

>> No.16854418
File: 949 KB, 1372x1538, 1597294211554.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16854418

>>16854409

>> No.16854422

>>16854409
Guenonfag insists on his lame shilling and arguing in bad faith. Nothing interesting is ever said by him, and no concessions to critiques of advaita are ever accepted.

>> No.16854426
File: 843 KB, 1630x1328, shankara.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16854426

>> No.16854428

>>16854383
>yet now it will be left intact?
Because the entire doctrine, practices and structure of Vishishtadvaita, together constitute a type of spiritual pursuit, which according to Advaita still leads the soul to Brahman as the whole Vishishtadvaita practice revolves around a continuous mediation on Saguna Brahman as Narayana, and Advaita says that mediating on the Saguna Brahman is the indirect path which leads people to Brahman through Brahmaloka. You can have the whole Vishishtadvaita and Advaita traditions existing alongside one another, with one being the indirect and and the other being the direct path to Brahman for those who are willing to take up monasticism.

>> No.16854429

>>16854410
Yeah, and?

>> No.16854432

>>16854418
We need a final solution to the Guenonfag question.

>> No.16854441

>>16854432
Tripcodes for both Guenonfag and his rival so we can filter them

>> No.16854462

>>16854409
never. everyone should very careful about reading advaita

>>16854229
no

>>16853129
you mean the third.

>>16854402
oh no we got too cocky larper bros!!

>> No.16854468

>>16854422
And yet you are his constant hangeron, breathlessly waiting to reply to his every post, scarcely a minute going by without you talking to yourself about him for the millionth time, how amusing.
>>16854409
I have never encountered anyone on /lit/ who has demonstrated enough knowledge about Vishishtadvaita that would make me think they had read Ramanuja's works. Maybe more people could start reading Ramanuja's works and then we can have discussions from there. If someone who knew the metaphysics of Vishishtadvaita well came into this thread, they could have jumped into the discussion about Ramanuja's Anupapatti mentioned at the top of thread, and in the previous thread. But it seems that nobody here knows Vishishdadvaita metaphysics well enough to substantively debate these topics

>> No.16854488

>>16854429
I'm not guenonfriend so idk if that's what he was talking about so maybe I shouldn't have answered.

>> No.16854493

>>16854488
The reason it doesn't make sense to say that philosophy as a praxis involves a lack of knowledge doesn't mean a destruction of philosophy but its vindication as a kind of practice that leads to knowledge. BAKA.

>> No.16854504

>>16854468
>And yet you are his constant hangeron, breathlessly waiting to reply to his every post, scarcely a minute going by without you talking to yourself about him for the millionth time, how amusing.

Get real, loser. Peak egoism from the Shankarist, of course.

>> No.16854528

>>16854493
Well yeah I think he just meant that it "destroys" philosophy in the sense that it refuses to accept philosophy as it's understood in the modern sense, that being philosophy as a way of life and a doctrine to adhere to daily that exists apart from any metaphysical doctrine. Philosophy isn't a goal to strive for but just something to do anyways. It's like saying learning to walk isn't a goal to strive for it's just something you have to learn to do before anything else.

>> No.16854579

>>16854468
vishishtadvaita fags have argued with you, and just like the other anon said you avoided getting into real conversation with them

more lies from the dickhead, big surprise

>> No.16854603

>>16854528
Well really Guénon is just taking a specific definition of philosophy, a unique enough one at that even in an ancient and medieval context, and then saying that all the modern philosophers get it wrong/don't understand this and only his doctrine (which isn't compatible with Aristotelianism btw) upholds the truth of prior philosophy. It's bizarre.

>> No.16854668

>>16854603
Idk man it's more just him saying atheistic philosophies are bad rather than every modern philosophy besides his. The definition he uses for philosophy isn't that odd I mean you can see just by looking at the etymology of the word. Unless I'm retarded and wrong about the etymology since I didn't bother to look it up before saying that.

>> No.16854669

>>16854579
>vishishtadvaita fags have argued with you, and just like the other anon said you avoided getting into real conversation with them
Not true. I already wrote out explanations of why I though Ramanuja's 7 charges or Anupapatti were wrong in the previous thread linked here ,

>>/lit/thread/S16777277#p16778473

I gave the OP who made the other thread on Vishishtadvaita many chances to respond to those arguments or otherwise engage me in a debate about the veracity of Ramanuja's arguments, but they chose not to do so. Despite not being able to engage in a debate about Ramanuja's arguments, they still felt compelled to make another thread arguing Ramanuja is better.

It is my sincere hope that the OP of those two threads eventually reads through Ramanuja so that he can participate in a debate with me or others about Vishishtadvaita metaphysics, a debate which has not been able to fully take place so far, due to an absence or paucity on /lit/ of people who have actually read through Ramanuja's works.

>> No.16854711

>>16850220
Someone spoonfeed me as to whether Plotinus is more similar to Shankara, Ramanuja or Madhva

>> No.16854743

>>16854711
Ramanuja since Plotinus is qualified monism through emanationism. Advaita is more like Mahayana non-dualism, but Mahayana is an epistemological exercise designed to negate apparent realities as preparation for Buddhist exercise, while Advaita assumes that the Brahman of the Upanishads is the single undifferentiated reality, creating a nihilistic monism like guenonfag promotes when it suits him. Then he switches to being a Ramanujan when it suits him better. The guy is hopelessly confused.

Don't listen to guenonfag, read the sources.

>> No.16854760

>>16854668
Your etymology is somewhat correct, but it's important to note that philosophy as a term that people positively identified with came about as a result of a rejection of wise men like for example heraclitus who claimed to have wisdom. In this sense philosophy since Plato and Aristotle is antithetical to Guenon's project.

>> No.16854778

>>16854743
Why Ramanuja when he says that Bhakti is the only way to attain Moksha? Plotinus emphasised self-knowledge

>> No.16854794

>/lit/ still hasn't moved on from its 2018 trad phase into high level gnosticism yet
>the same pictures of shankara and guenon, day in and day out and day in and day out

it's all so tiresome

>> No.16854866

>>16854794
How to I become gnoscitim plox?

>> No.16854871
File: 14 KB, 112x112, 1579547357937.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16854871

>>16854794
>high level gnosticism

>> No.16855103

To what extent did Guénon (PBUH) continue to believe Catholicism? He referred to St. Thomas Aquinas as a saint - was this simply out of respect or did he believe that St. Thomas was in Heaven? Did Guénon believe in the Resurrection as a historical event?

>> No.16855200

>>16854794
It seems to me that part of the reason Gnostics don't get discussed as much is that there is no surviving vast commentarial tradition with its own major philosophers which has been preserved from Gnosticism in the same way that it has for eastern religions. And without this you are left largely with the original scriptures themselves which function through symbolism instead of the secondary writing which become philosophically relevant through the many extensive discussions and intra-school debates about the nature of causation, existence, time, consciousness etc.

>> No.16855265
File: 524 KB, 548x553, 1603674550784.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16855265

>>16854794
>mfw /lit/ still hasnt graduated to actual occult literature and continues to emphasize theory over practice

>> No.16855279

>>16855103
>To what extent did Guénon (PBUH) continue to believe Catholicism?
Guenon thought that Christian theologians/metaphysicians who are revered within both the Catholic and Eastern Churchs like Eirugena, Bonaventure, Nicholas of Cusa, Clement of Alexandria and some others had reached a metaphysical understanding of Christianity that was more or less something that agreed with Hinduism, Sufism, Taoism etc on the essential points of metaphysics. He cites all of those three above in his books on metaphysics, among other figures. He cites Aquinas on occasion, but its fully not clear to me if he considered Aquinas to be someone who had reached the metaphysical truth in the same manner as the Christian theologians such as above, although he obviously respected Aquinas as a thinker and cites him often in relation to pointing out how Hinduism etc often has similar conceptions to Thomism regarding certain matters.

>Resurrection as a historical event?
In one book, I forget which maybe East and West or Crisis of the Modern World he chastises modern Christians who don't believe the Resurrection took place, so that would imply he likely believe it took place and possibly even continue to do so after he converted to Islam, given that he had a perennialist view about the whole endeavor.

>> No.16855659

>>16855265
name one (1) benefit that practicing the occult has brought you, no bullshitting

>> No.16856017
File: 32 KB, 378x500, 41oSZ75dd2L.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16856017

>>16855659
>Enhanced understanding of myself, the world, and the nature of perception.
>Increased mental and emotional control; I'm no longer floating rudderless on the currents of desire.
>My overall outlook on life is much more positive, hopeful, and proactive than I could have ever imagined, thanks to my experiences and study, and I can only ever grow more effective in my technique.

Oh sorry, you asked for one.

>> No.16856676

>>16856017
Isn't all of that just things which are the natural fruit of spiritual practice though, and don't need to be obtained through the occult but can be the result of spiritual practice, mysticism and introspection in most religions?

>> No.16857145

>>16854743
>while Advaita assumes that the Brahman of the Upanishads is the single undifferentiated reality, creating a nihilistic monism like guenonfag promotes when it suits him. Then he switches to being a Ramanujan when it suits him better.

Yeah, Guenon does this frequently and it's always with the impression of speaking from a great authority but he's simply contradicting himself or moving from univocity to analogy when it's convenient, while attacking other metaphysicians for not using the right language (see his pseud commentary on calculus) or for not emphasizing what he thinks is important. See his tepid little critique of Aquinas when he says that he needed to focus more on non-being, and then Guenon goes on to say that non-being doesn't mean nothing.

>> No.16857549

Meditations on Tarot is better than anything Guenon ever wrote. I wish Guenon emphasized the Compagnonnage more. It's incredibly based and clearly the most accessible way forward for Europe and the west.

>> No.16857561
File: 462 KB, 1400x1723, 81kHNTWYc3L.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16857561

>>16854743
>Advaita is more like Mahayana non-dualism, but Mahayana is an epistemological exercise designed to negate apparent realities as preparation for Buddhist exercise, while Advaita assumes that the Brahman of the Upanishads is the single undifferentiated reality, creating a nihilistic monism
Advaita is not nihilism because it says that there is an absolutely real true existence which is our own self and consciousness. Mahayana non-dualist generally is nihilistic because it denies this and says that there are no entities which arise which are anything more then conceptually constructed, it results in nothing more then a foolish solipsism in which everyone you interact with is not a real entity but just your own conceptual conduction like a dream-figure.

Advaita is also not monism because it recognizes a fundamental and irreducible difference between the formless Atman and gross matter. Advaita non-dualism is its own unique category which is neither monism nor dualism.

>read the sources.
Shankara makes most of the above points in his works

>> No.16857735

>>16857549
>I wish Guenon emphasized the Compagnonnage more. It's incredibly based and clearly the most accessible way forward for Europe and the west.
Does it survive in Europe though or is it just people trying to bring it back alive from the reading of older texts which they have no connection to?

>> No.16857827

>>16857735
It survives and Guenon thought the same. It involves an actual skill, and is far less degenerate than freemasonry at this point.

>> No.16857878

>>16854428
>Ce qui est exact en ce qui concerne Râmânuja, c’est qu’il y a chez lui une prédominance de la voie « bhakti » ; mais on ne peut dire en aucun cas que cette voie mène au même but que celle de « jnâna » ou de la connaissance : Îshwara n’est pas le suprême Brahma, mais seulement le Non-Suprême.

Yeah, they don't lead to the same thing. Imbecile Guenonfag moving the goal posts to try to reel people into his cult.

>> No.16858141

>>16857878
Guenon says in his first book that Advaita and Vishishdadvaita are both strictly orthodox

>> No.16858179

>>16857561
Not at all. Mahayana doesn't deny the existence of things, it just rejects the idea that the more a thing changes the less real it is. All Buddhism is getting at is how things exist. The Buddha literally goes over this, it's (one of the many) reasons that Buddhism is the "Middle Way": because it's a middle ground between nihilism (which is a translation for a view that "nothing is real", not "nothing matters") and eternalism (the idea that things have an independent existence that does not change). The conceptual construct is in your head, but that doesn't mean that cats and cars don't exist, it just means that the conceptual construct of "cat" and "car" don't do them justice.

You should probably do some basic reading before having an opinion on these things. Your gross misunderstanding of what "non-dualism" means is a pretty big indicator that you need to stop getting your philosophy from 4chan and start reading books.

>> No.16858187

>>16858179
inb4 a seven paragraph essay not even tangentially related to your post

>> No.16858203

>>16858179
>Mahayana doesn't deny the existence of things, it just rejects the idea that the more a thing changes the less real it is.
false, Richard Burton refuted all of this in his book Emptiness Appraised, Nagarjuna denies that entities arise independent of false conceptual constructions which obscures the truth, which lands him in a quasi-solipsism

>And this reasoning has the peculiar consequence that, if one came to know and perceive that all entities are in fact without svabhava, i.e. are conceptual constructs, then the false belief and perception which enables one to participate in an (apparently) public world would be destroyed. The enlightened Madhyamika would see not only that all objects of the supposedly public world are conceptual constructs but also that the very people with whom he might share the publicly accessible world are themselves his own conceptual constructs. There are in fact no other people who have similar karmavipaka to oneself and with whom one might therefore participate in a commonly acknowledged conceptually constructed world! The enlightened Madhyamika must surely be a solipsist (which seems to me to be a peculiar sort of enlightenment).

>It is difficult to see how, in this condition, the bodhisattva ideal - which is a fundamental pillar of Mahayana (and hence Madhyamaka) spirituality - could be enacted. It does, after all, seem to be a real paradox (and by this. I mean a non-sensical statement, a contradiction) that the bodhisattva saves all sentient beings yet there are no sentient beings to be saved (for they are all the bodhisattva's own conceptual constructs). The realization of emptiness - i.e. of the conceptually constructed nature of everything, including all sentient beings - would seem to be incompatible with the ideal of compassion. The bodhisattva who holds together knowledge of emptiness and compassion is not so much extraordinary as deeply puzzling.

>> No.16858212

>>16858179
What should I read if I am interested in this kind of buddhism but I also want to explore metaphysical reality and meet angels? I don't want nirvana I want angels. But I also don't want stupid ocean of brahman where everything is the same.

Are there buddhists that accept and even explore reality? Or do they ignore all the jinns and daevas they see on the way there, and just want nirvana.

>>16858187
Kek

>> No.16858375
File: 47 KB, 386x350, 7af72cb161d759db01c24bb5f58cf862.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16858375

>>16856676
>Isn't all of that just things which are the natural fruit of spiritual practice though, and don't need to be obtained through the occult but can be the result of spiritual practice, mysticism and introspection in most religions?

The occult IS spiritual practice, anon. It's the ultimate cross section of philosophy, religion and science. What is your idea of "occult" for you to approach it with such suspicion?

>> No.16858588

>>16854351
>contradiction-free
Who is in illusion, what got into illusion?

>> No.16858632
File: 20 KB, 420x629, 9781472501035.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16858632

>>16854794
>high level gnosticism

>> No.16858638

>>16850310
Stop thinking in Aristotelianism.

>> No.16858701

I was rather disappointed with the latter chapters of Guenon's Man and His Becoming According to Vedanta. He's not as strong a metaphysician as he thinks he is, but nonetheless remains a great expositor of Vedanta, and an interesting writer of comparative religion (albeit far from perfect).

Guenon is actually quite bad at arguing in favour of the superiority of advaita. The arguments, when they're not thinly veiled opinions, regularly assume univocity of being when arguing againsttanother metaphysics, but then when teasing out nuances of his own system he resorts to analogy. IWhen he's not uncharitably denigrating modified non-dualism, Guenon is sperging out about his peculiar way of defining things and how his way is so much better than that of everyone around him.

Intellectual pride is a major fault for a guy who failed early university math but thinks he understands calculus better than did Leibniz. This would go a long way to explain his frequent digressions where he has to remind the reader that modernity and modern people are bad and he's not one of them. Not only was he unable to advance in math, but he was also unable to have his thesis accepted by his teacher of Sanskrit, the thesis of a primordial Hinduism (advaita), of course.

>> No.16858707

>>16858638
This has nothing to do with me. Plotinus literally contradicts himself on this point.

>> No.16859120

>>16858707
I am truly different from the one and this not merely illusion, but the one is not different from me and that's why I am different from him.

>> No.16860096

>>16858588
the jiva is within the illusion, the atman is the substratum or basis of the illusion

>> No.16860145

>>16853129
Hopefully never. Leaders and rich people larping around wouldn't improve anything.

>> No.16860934

Guenon offers no arguments for why the west would benefit from advaita in particular. India had advaita and they degenerated into dvaita and shit in their holy river.

Plus when you realize advaita is Shankara's innovation (responding to the threat of Buddhism) there's no more reason to reify it and try to see it as the clearest form of primordial, pure metaphysics.

>> No.16860944

>>16860096
so there's real difference?

>> No.16860955

>>16860944
no, not in the final analysis

>> No.16860990

>>16860955
so there's no illusion?

>> No.16861129

>>16860990
Yes, there is no illusion on the level of the non-dual absolute reality, the illusion at the lesser level of conditional reality is entirely contingent upon Brahman and only has a seeming existence to the jiva

>> No.16861171

>>16861129
You gave a very shitty response in >>16860096 >>16861129

Can't believe this overrated metaphysics is taken to be the pinnacle of universal knowledge.

>> No.16861527

>>16861129
so how does absolute reality change into something that doesn't exist?

>> No.16861599

>>16854281
not having cellphones and internet helps

>> No.16861626

Really wonder to whom Guenonfag is shilling his philosophy of non-dualism...I hope by constantly samefagging here he's not actually contradicting himself without knowing it and affirming a modernist cartesian dualism.

Would be a shame if /lit/ found out Shankara was just Buddhist Descartes.

>> No.16861882

>>16860145
that wouldnt be a real renaissance... EVERYONE is going to be happy in the new one

>> No.16862686

>>16854203
>Why he didn't wake up to the fact that the primordial tradition is qualified monism, I don't know.
Because the primordial tradition includes a direct path to God, consisting of unqualified non-dualism, as well as an indirect path to God, consisting of qualified non-dualism or qualified monism
>>16858701
That Guenon switches between univocal and analogical descriptions has no significant consequences for the veracity of the metaphysics which he writes about
> guy who failed early university math but thinks he understands calculus better than did Leibniz.
Do you have any examples of where his critiques of the ideas of Leibniz are incorrect? Not even trying to attack you here but I’m genuinely curious.
>>16860934
>Guenon offers no arguments for why the west would benefit from advaita in particular.
Guenon clearly attacks as ridiculous the idea of uprooting and transplanting eastern traditions into the west, he is not recommending that the west import Advaita, which is inseparable from Hinduism.
>India had advaita and they degenerated into dvaita and shit in their holy river.
That Dvaita was allowed to exist despite it being speaks to the remarkable tolerance within Hinduism, if Christianity had the same tolerance then they might have had a better-developed surviving metaphysical tradition, instead of killing off and suppressing many of the figures who might have played a role in this.
> there's no more reason to reify it and try to see it as the clearest form of primordial, pure metaphysics.
Except for that the Upanishads speak of a non-difference between the Atman and Brahman without any qualifications or reservations, and Advaita is a more logically-consistent exegesis of this than the other Vedanta schools
> Plus when you realize advaita is Shankara's innovation
It’s not, Gaudapada, The Brahma Sutras and countless other texts talk about Advaitic ideas before Shankara, the Brahman described in the Brahman Sutras is an impersonal and uncaring God, it doesn’t talk about devotional worship in the Brahma Sutras.
>>16861171
How was it shitty? It was a brief summary of what the Advaita answer is, you didn’t even explain what if anything was wrong with what I said. If you want me to I can go more in depth but you seem to me to be someone who just has a bone to pick with Advaita and who is not actually interested in hearing the answers to these questions, so I don’t see why I should waste time writing elaborate explanations for someone who is not truly interested in what I have to say.

>> No.16862698

>>16861527
It doesn’t change into it, that’s the whole point of the Vivartavada causation model which is taught by Advaita. There is only one unchanging unborn Absolute, and via Its omnipotent power or energy of maya which it possesses there is engendered a beginningless appearance, the sun is always surrounded by its light so to speak. It is nature of Brahman to always wield this power without any change. The unchanging eternal never transforms into the changing and mortal, but it always remains the same and without expending any effort allows Its power to sustain a virtual world which is not unreal but rather anirvachaniya. Dreams are an example of this 3rd category between real and completely unreal. They are experienced unlike completely non-existent things, but at the same time they are not reality and they are sublated in the waking state. In the same way maya is not pure non-existence or nothingness because it is experienced, but it is also not reality and it is sublated in enlightenment just as dreams are sublated by the waking state. The emanationist Parinamavada causation model followed by other Vedantists runs into contradiction because they want to affirm that the Absolute is immutable and eternal but that It also has parts of Itself which transform into various transient modifications.

>> No.16862989

>>16851766
gigabased

>> No.16863057

>>16862698
>there is engendered a beginningless appearance
To who?

>> No.16863282

>>16863057
These “to who” questions only work for Buddhism, since Advaita admits that there is an eternal witnessing consciousness or Atman who animates the Jiva and witness everything that it does and all the things which appear in the Jivas mind, while remaining unaffected by those things

>> No.16863927

>>16862698
>>16863282
Then I am not in illusion right now and nor is there anything I should do or not do because there's no change, whether energetic or substantial.

>> No.16864655

>>16863927
>Then I am not in illusion right now and nor is there anything I should do or not do because there's no change, whether energetic or substantial.
That depends on what you mean by “I”, if when you use “I” your are correctly referring to the Atman-Brahman of witness-consciousness which observes your mind and body, then yes, the Atman Brahman is not in illusion and It is already liberated. There is nothing Brahman (you) should do or should not do, because as the Infinite, there is nothing else existing apart from Brahman with which It could enter into some sort of relation with. When you are an Infinite entity, the very concept of “doing” which involves the separate factors of agent, action and means becomes meaningless. What you posit as being an absurd implication is actually something which is realized as being true by people who have reached the heights of spiritual realization

> All this wells up like waves in the sea. Recognizing, “I am That,” why run around like someone in need? 3.3

>You are not bound by anything. What does a pure person like you need to renounce? Putting the complex organism to rest, you can find peace. 5.1

>All this arises out of you, like a bubble out of the sea. Knowing yourself like this to be but one, you can find peace. 5.2

>In spite of being in front of your eyes, all this, being insubstantial, does not exist in you, spotless as you are. It is an appearance like the snake in a rope, so you can find peace. 5.3

- Ashtavakra Gita

>> No.16864927

>>16862686
>Because the primordial tradition includes a direct path to God, consisting of unqualified non-dualism, as well as an indirect path to God, consisting of qualified non-dualism or qualified monism

The point is that there's no basis for his claim that the primordial tradition privileges non-dualism, it's not even the primordial Hinduism.

>> No.16864942

>>16863282
>These “to who” questions only work for Buddhism

lol pure cope...Advaita is Buddhism, dress it up however you want. You always avoid addressing the hard problem and try to make it go away by addressing the small problem.

>> No.16864945

>>16864655
peak cheesey writing

>> No.16864996

>>16864927
>The point is that there's no basis for his claim that the primordial tradition privileges non-dualism
Yes, there is, trying reading Guenon's books where he shows how all the various traditions agree with it on so many fundamental points
>it's not even the primordial Hinduism.
Yes it is, see Coomaraswamy's book "Perception of the Vedas"

>> No.16865039

>>16864996
>>16862686
Would Guenon categorize Eastern Orthodox mystical practices and doctrine under "Christian Esotericism"? I don't know if you're familliar with Fr. Seraphim Rose or Hieromonk Damascene but apparently Guenon was big influence for the former before ultimately rejecting perrenialism.

https://files.catbox.moe/2o69aa.pdf
Here's the book written by the latter which uses the work of the former

>> No.16865138

>>16864996
>Yes, there is, trying reading Guenon's books where he shows how all the various traditions agree with it on so many fundamental points

Yes but in those books he doesn't present solid argumentation, or even evidence. That is modernist and despicable for Guenon. What Guenon does in all of his books is take a tiny quote or a small symbol and say, see, Advaita.

>Yes it is, see Coomaraswamy's book "Perception of the Vedas"

No it's not. Coomaraswamy was another pseud Anglo who just happened to be brown. Genuine scholars with no axe to grind show that the Upanishads are not = Shankara's metaphysics. Guenon does not present arguments, he says things are either obviously the case or obviously not.

>> No.16865148

>>16865138
>Genuine scholars with no axe to grind show that the Upanishads are not = Shankara's metaphysics.
Genuine scholars with no axe to grind show that the Upanishads are = Shankara's metaphysics

>> No.16865159

>>16865148
Is non-dualist depersonalization the reason why you act like a child on 4chan?

>> No.16865201

>>16865148
Olivelle disagrees, and guenonfag has recommended Olivelle consistently for several years, see >>16854402

Not even poos say the upanishads are advaita, because advaita is only for western larpers

>> No.16865222

>>16852087
how does a tradition begin?

>> No.16865295

>>16865222
In most cases, with a revealed text which descends from God

>> No.16865319

>>16865295
yawn...lotta imbeciles on /lit/ lately

>> No.16865485
File: 159 KB, 966x854, 3548fm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16865485

>"yawn...lotta imbeciles on /lit/ lately"