/esog/

[Anonymous No.13745352]

This thread is for the discussion of texts related to Hermetism, Neoplatonism (in its mystic manifestations), Gnosticism, Kabbalah, Cabala, Angel Magic, Alchemy, Paracelsianism, Boehmeian Theosophy, Rosicrucianism, Freemasonry, Illuminism, Swedenborgianism, Mesmerism, as well as the more recent branches of the esoteric tree (Golden Dawn, Traditionalism, Blavatskian Theosophy, e.t.c.).

Recommend books, ask for recommendations, post nice excerpts, ask burning questions, e.t.c.

[Anonymous No.13745366]

So-called mystic and secretive initiations of neoplatonism are not rooted in platonism at all and hence are not neoplatonic sans their concurrent affiliations; they are inherently anti-truth. Plotinus would have destroyed the free masons and blinded them for their evil deeds. You are misled. Turn back before it's too late.

[Anonymous No.13745457]

>>13745366
The Church is anti-truth, that is why truth seekers must meet and speak in secret.

[Anonymous No.13745469]

>>13745366
>Plotinus would have destroyed the free masons

then why did guenon love them so much and considered them a valid form of initiation?

guenon confirmed for controlled opposition?

[Anonymous No.13745518]

>>13745469
there is every type of freemason lodge from neoplatonic/rosicrucian esotericists to virulent secular athiests

[Anonymous No.13745654]

GNOSIS GANG REPORTING IN

[Bishop "the inquisition didn't(...) No.13745681]

Nothing fills me with so much disgust and rage as seeing this symbol. I see it plastered on vehicles, nay, even graves. Masons deserve hell and a thousand hells. They love darkness rather than the light, because their deeds are evil. This is why they operate in the shadows—they blaspheme, practice sodomy, witchcraft and do unspeakable horrors. Free masonry should be rooted out. Secularization was a mistake. The Inquisition should be return from it's two century hiatus, and ramped up more than ever and dedicated to eradicating freemasonry once and for all. The Church is gonna bring back the rack and a whole lot worse, that I can tell you.

[Anonymous No.13745693]

Do you guys actually do any practices or are you all a bunch of LARPers?

[Anonymous No.13745700]

>>13745681

>IM TRIGGERED REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>THIS IS LIKE ANODDA CRUCIFIXION REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Don't you have some altar boys to rape?

[Anonymous No.13745702]

>>13745693
Hermetism and Neoplatonism (the roots of most of these traditions) do not involve 'practices' beyond meditation and understanding

[Anonymous No.13745707]

>>13745366
>You are misled. Turn back before it's too late.
gnostics are in it for spiritual and social vanity, sensual experiences, magical powers, and to appear wiser and deeper than they actually are. And I suspect many of them turn to these fringe ideologies because traditional systems disallow homosexuality/fornication/pride or whatever sin they happen to be addicted to. sad.

[Anonymous No.13745712]

>>13745693
I opened my third eye accidentally. It was too powerful and I stay away from occult now

[Anonymous No.13745748]

>>13745700
www.reddit.com

[Anonymous No.13745752]

>>13745707
its actually because most major religions are bloated exoteric corpses that barely resemble any form of spiritual truth. the revelations that serve as the foundation for abrahamism have been almost completely eroded by centuries and centuries of fucking idiots gradually reconfinguring their religion into a reflection of logical principles or linguistic structures

[Anonymous No.13745755]

>>13745700
https://www.reddit.com/r/freemasonry/

[Anonymous No.13745762]

>>13745700
>>IM TRIGGERED
Boomer-thought process.
>>THIS IS LIKE ANODDA CRUCIFIXION
Not an argument
>Don't you have some altar boys to rape?
Reddit comment.

You need to go back.

[Anonymous No.13745814]

>>13745712
You can't open your third eye accidentaly. It's a process that takes actual effort, or at least years of practicing things like scrying or evocation.

[Anonymous No.13745844]

>>13745814
It happend in deep meditative absorption, maybe it wasn't full opening but I definitely overclocked it and the third ete area started vibrating, pulsating and I went into a semi manic state. Pretty exciting.

[Anonymous No.13745952]

Based OP for making this a regular thing.

[Anonymous No.13746014]

>>13745681
But, like, if you understand Platonism, don't you think this is how the system should run? People advance through philosophy and if they achieve what they need to achieve, they can experience a different type of consciousness that allows them to have the understanding of the perfect ruler, the philosopher king, and so they are responsible for steering the world soul (not actually) as best they can. I've got a strong natural tendency to go against authority whenever I can, but as long as they know more about Platonism than I do (and they must, with access to millennia of philosophers' work that I don't have access to, assuming there's good stuff unpublished), then I would be ridiculous not to trust them. If there were one group of people you could trust more than any other, wouldn't it be the group of philosophers that have perfected themselves as far as it is possible through philosophy? I might be wrong

[Anonymous No.13746073]

>>13745752
Curious about your beliefs, morals and practices, what happens after we die? How do people overcome their sins, lusts, and vain strivings? Who do you day God is and what is salvation or enlightenment for you?
And how do you know? What's your objective standard and scripture?

[Anonymous No.13746122]

Plotinus thought an enlightened philosopher could calmly experience being burned alive inside a molten bull without disturbing his peace of mind.
This is retarded. The implication is you can eventually identify with the soul so strongly as to not be bothered by the material circumstances you are in....This assumes a radical dualism that is delusional and discounts the reality of matter and the union of body and spirit that is fundamental to man

[Anonymous No.13746194]

>>13746122
I've always felt that Plotinus comes dangerously close to dualism and people just ignore it.

[Anonymous No.13746210]

>>13746194
Iamblichus saw that too and tried to fix it

[Anonymous No.13746237]

>>13746073
>what happens after we die?
the question really depends on what we view as our "self". my body will decompose when i die and the aspects of "me" that rely on my individual physicality would no longer exist (this includes not just things like my identity as a "tall person" but also also the other ways i define myself relative to other people such as my identity as an "intelligent person" or a "person with good music taste", anything that we tend to use as a basis for self understanding in the western world such as our tastes, our opinions or our beliefs are entirely predicated on the perceived existence of our bodies as individual, atomic things). there definitely seems to be an element of "what we are" beyond these definitions that we might refer to as "consciousness", "atman(?)", "nous(?)" that isnt predicated on body and that without our bodies we could truly Be after our deaths.
>How do people overcome their sins, lusts, and vain strivings?
Once you understand that this concept of "consciousness" is identical for everyone else and that we are all part of one thing that is being experienced through multiple individualized perspectives at once you begin to see how abhorrent it is to wilfully harm others (you are LITERALLY harming yourself) and you also understand that mutually positive interactions arent a zero sum game (happiness is an infinite well and you dont have to make someone else miserable to be happy). Not all Christian sins are inherently harmful, not all things the bible and its interpreters permit are actually generative. Perfecting your treatment of others and resisting negative impulses that arise from the base animal within is a lifelong task and never fully complete, and plenty of Christian texts offer practical advice when its not too tied up in the completely wrong metaphysical underpinnings of Abrahamism.
>Who do you day God is and what is salvation or enlightenment for you?
I'm not too sure, maybe God is identical with the sum total of consciousness, maybe God is the creator of the sum total of consciousness. Maybe God created the thing that created the sum total of consciousness? His exact position is frankly irrelevant from a human perspective.
>And how do you know? What's your objective standard and scripture?
Personal experiences resulting from deep investigation of myself and validated by the absolute wealth of texts from other people who embarked on the same journey and reached the same conclusion.

[Anonymous No.13746248]

Recommended books:

>Hermetism
Corpus Hermetica -- Copenhaver
Hermetica II -- Litwa
The Egyptian Hermes -- Fowden
The Eternal Hermes -- Faivre
>Neoplatonism (in its mystic manifestations)
The Golden Chain -- Uzdavinys
Neoplatonism -- Remes
Neoplatonism -- Wallis
Neoplatonic Readings -- Dillon
Enneads -- Plotinus
Elements of Theology -- Proclus
De mysteriis -- Iamblichus
Commentary on the Dream of Scipio -- Macrobius
Chaldean Oracles - Majercik
The Orphic Hymns -- Athanassakis
Theurgy and the Soul -- Shaw
Philosophy and Theurgy in Late Antiquity -- Uzdavinys
Philosophy as a Rite of Rebirth -- Uzdavinys
Orpheus and the Roots of Platonism -- Uzdavinys
Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and Magic -- Kingsley
The Shape of Ancient Thought -- McEvilley
>Gnosticism
Seven Sermons to the Dead
Nag hammadi library
The Gnostic World
VALIS -- Dick
>Kabbalah
Inner Space -- Kaplan
Jewish Meditation -- Kaplan
Meditation and Kabbalah -- Kaplan
Sefer Yetzirah
Bahir
Zohar
>Cabala
900 Theses -- Mirandola
Oedipus Aegyptiacus -- Kircher
>Angel Magic
The Essential Enochian Grimoire -- Leitch
Five Books of Magic -- John Dee
>Alchemy
Psychology and Alchemy -- Jung
The Hermetic Tradition -- Evola
Alchemical Traditions -- Cheak
>Paracelsianism
The Alchemical Writings of Paracelsus
>Boehmeian Theosophy
Aurora
>Rosicrucianism
The Rosicrucian Enlightenment -- Yates
Rosicrucian Trilogy -- Godwin
>Freemasonry
Morals and Dogma... -- Pike
>Illuminism
The Secret School of Wisdom -- Wages
>Swedenborgianism
Heaven and Hell
>Blavatskian Theosophy
Isis Unveiled
The Secret Doctrine
The Mystic Qabalah -- Fortune
>Golden Dawn
The Golden Dawn -- Regardie
>Thelema
Magick: Book 4, Liber ABA -- Crowley
>Typhonian
The Magickal Revival -- Grant
>Traditionalism
The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Time -- Guenon

[Anonymous No.13746260]

>>13746122
ahahaaha oh no no no no

[Anonymous No.13746263]

>>13746237
>>13746073
and i suppose enlightenment is the realization that this is true in a manner that goes beyond just parroting a piece of language but actually EXPERIENCING the internal act or understanding this - hence the term 'esotericism' (though i dont think its a destination you can ever FULLY reach, certainly not in a western context)

[Anonymous No.13746278]

>>13746263
act of*

[Anonymous No.13746326]

>>13746248
great list but the absence of ficino and agrippa stands out, though i suppose they dont fit easily under any of those headings. perhaps we should have "syncretism" as a loose category

[Anonymous No.13746330]

>>13746248
Anyone else have suggestions? I was trying to brainstorm a list for the thread

[Anonymous No.13746342]

>>13746330
I just read Prometheus and Atlas, and it should definitely be included there somewhere. Maybe under a paranormal category, it's also semi-gnostic.

[Anonymous No.13746357]

>>13746326
I thought of Agrippa. Levi too.

Ficino could perhaps fit under Neoplatonism... Never read him. Recommend any books?

The renaissance is fascinating. I desire greatly to read Nova de Universis Philosophia actually but I can't find any modern translations. Might have to attempt it myself one day.

[Anonymous No.13746360]

>>13746342
i dont think books like that are 'essential' to the esoteric tradition in the same sense the corpus or the enneads or the zohar are. worth making a 'further reading' list of books like that which are generally agreed to be worth your time at some point though.

[Anonymous No.13746369]

>>13746360
You're right, but neither is Philip K. Dick, so I thought it would be worth a shot to make a suggestion

[Anonymous No.13746376]

>>13746342
I'm reluctant to add a paranormal category as it may open the gates to wide but I think it would fit in nicely in a historical overview category which could include Hanegraaf and Hall as well.

[Anonymous No.13746380]

>>13746357
>Ficino could perhaps fit under Neoplatonism... Never read him. Recommend any books?
the really important one is "Theologia platonica de immortalitate animorum" (The Platonic Theology). It is kind of a syncretic mix of de-Aristotelianized Christianity and Neoplatonism (with some definite Hermetic influences). He COULD go under neoplatonism but I think its quite good that the list as it stands doesn't tend to mix together the foundations of a tradition with the later reception of a tradition in another context (people mixing the two together is how you end up with Crowley listed as 'essential Hermetic literature')

[Anonymous No.13746396]

>>13746369
I slipped y'all the dick as a joke. Also added a Thelema and Typhonian category cause I am a naughty boy. Think there may be too much secondary lit in the neoplatonic category too. Oh well. It's all anonymous and y'all can do what thou wilt with it.

[Anonymous No.13746403]

>>13746376
We should open the gates, open them all the way wide. But whatev.

[Anonymous No.13746416]

>>13746403
i agree with the sentiment but also think emphasizing words like paranormal too much attracts weewooposting

[Anonymous No.13746437]

>>13746416
well, i won't say that you're wrong, cause you're not, unfortunately

[Anonymous No.13746441]

>>13746380
Indeed.
>>13746403
The path is wide and the gate is narrow.
>>13746416
Agreed.

[Anonymous No.13746467]

from Hermetica II, excerpts from Cyril of Alexandria who is trying to assert the superiority of Christianity. The passages he quotes are up there with the corpus in terms of quality.

[Anonymous No.13746509]

[Anonymous No.13746518]

sorry about the rotation, doesnt seem like I can do anything about it

[Anonymous No.13746529]

>>13746248
Superb list with little to no faggotry from what I can see. For Pythagoreanism, you can add The Pythagorean Sourcebook by Guthrie & Fideler to the list.

[Anonymous No.13746555]

>>13746330
I like your list. Just in terms of modern books, I'd suggest a few: for Typhon/Qlippoth I'd add Grant's Nightside of Eden, and for a Greek-derived ritual magick the Mysteria Magica is good. Nigel Pennick's Practical Magic in the Northern Tradition and rune books are decent for Asatru-styles, and Waite's Book of Ritual Magic is about the best primer for Western-tradition/GD style.

[Anonymous No.13747434]

>>13746529
>>13746555
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.13747853]

Jorjani is a genius and synthesizes Strauss and Guenon and Hanegraaf.

[Anonymous No.13747878]

When you play fortnite all day lol xd

[Anonymous No.13747887]

>>13747853
I thought I was the only one on this site who has read Jorjani. Can you explain what you mean? There weren’t any references to Guenon or Hanegraaf in Prometheus and Atlas. I think Strauss was briefly mentioned, but my first read through was a doozy. I was really overwhelmed. A lot of perspective changing thing. I’m definitely going to have to read it again.

[Anonymous No.13748413]

>>13747887
Theories of esotericism

[Anonymous No.13748418]

>>13748413
>Theories of esotericism
huh?

[Anonymous No.13748440]

>>13748418
Read more

[Anonymous No.13748447]

>>13748440
could you be more helpful ?

[Anonymous No.13748497]

>>13748447
Cast not your pearls before swine

[Anonymous No.13748504]

>>13748497
well, fuck you too then

[Anonymous No.13748538]

>>13748504
Smoke deems and chill, brah

[Anonymous No.13748586]

be honest is this shit just a meme? also what are some good books on gnosticism

[Anonymous No.13748654]

>>13748586
pros:
>pathway to many abilities some might consider unnatural
cons:
>normies think you're crazy

[Anonymous No.13748722]

>>13746237
>>13746263
>>13746278
Good posts

[Anonymous No.13748793]

>>13748654
ok nice. what are good gnostic books then

[Anonymous No.13748802]

New list!


>Hermetism
Corpus Hermetica -- Copenhaver
Hermetica II -- Litwa
The Egyptian Hermes -- Fowden
The Eternal Hermes -- Faivre
Thrice-Greatest Hermes -- Mead
>Neoplatonism (in its mystic manifestations)
The Shape of Ancient Thought -- McEvilley
The First Philosophers -- Waterfield
The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library -- Guthrie
Complete Works -- Plato
Complete Works -- Aristotle
Enneads -- Plotinus
Elements of Theology -- Proclus
De mysteriis -- Iamblichus
Commentary on the Dream of Scipio -- Macrobius
Chaldean Oracles - Majercik
The Orphic Hymns -- Athanassakis
Theurgy and the Soul -- Shaw
Philosophy and Theurgy in Late Antiquity -- Uzdavinys
Philosophy as a Rite of Rebirth -- Uzdavinys
Orpheus and the Roots of Platonism -- Uzdavinys
>Occult Philosophy:
Western Esotericism -- Hanegraaf
Secret Teaching of All Ages -- Hall
Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and Magic -- Kingsley
The Occult Philosophy -- Agrippa
Transcendental Magic -- Levi
History of Magic -- Levi
Prometheus and Atlas -- Jorjani
>Gnosticism
Seven Sermons to the Dead
Nag hammadi library
The Gnostic World
>Kabbalah
Inner Space -- Kaplan
Jewish Meditation -- Kaplan
Meditation and Kabbalah -- Kaplan
Sefer Yetzirah
Bahir
Zohar
Etz Chayim
>Cabala
900 Theses -- Mirandola
Oedipus Aegyptiacus -- Kircher
>Angel Magic:
The Essential Enochian Grimoire -- Leitch
Five Books of Magic -- John Dee
>Grimoire tradition
Techniques of Graeco-Egyptian(/Solomonic) Magic -- Skinner
Encyclopedia Goetica -- Stratton-Kent
>Alchemy:
Psychology and Alchemy -- Jung
The Hermetic Tradition -- Evola
Alchemical Traditions -- Cheak
>Paracelsianism:
The Alchemical Writings of Paracelsus
>Boehmeian Theosophy:
Aurora -- Boehme
>Rosicrucianism:
The Rosicrucian Enlightenment -- Yates
Rosicrucian Trilogy -- Godwin
>Freemasonry:
Morals and Dogma of etc... -- Pike
>Illuminism:
The Secret School of Wisdom -- Wages
>Swedenborgianism:
Heaven and Hell -- Swedenborg
>Blavatskian Theosophy:
Isis Unveiled -- Blavatsky
The Secret Doctrine -- Blavatsky
The Mystic Qabalah -- Fortune
>Golden Dawn:
The Golden Dawn -- Regardie
>Thelema:
Magick: Book 4, Liber ABA -- Crowley
>Typhonian:
The Magickal Revival -- Grant
>Traditionalism:
The Crisis of the Modern World -- Guenon

[Anonymous No.13748809]

>>13748793
>>Gnosticism
>Seven Sermons to the Dead
>Nag hammadi library
>The Gnostic World

[Anonymous No.13748813]

>>13748802
>>Blavatskian Theosophy:
should definitely include mead's echoes from the gnosis

[Anonymous No.13748963]

>>13748813
I need to read more Mead but I feel modern scholars mostly supplant him

[Anonymous No.13749206]

>>13745366
Plotinus was a freemason. Hell, Jesus was a mason.
>>13745457
Truth.
>>13745469
Guenon may not be reliable but he is correct on the validity of masonry (self selected meritocracy).
>>13745518
Half-true...
>>13745654
Gang weed!
>>13745681
I was turned down from Masonry for being born into Catholicism :(
>also, implying those things are done by them
>>13745693
I am a minor academic :^) (platon started the academy)

[Anonymous No.13749295]

can someone rec me any fiction besides Valis?

[Anonymous No.13749309]

>>13749295
Gustav Meyrink

[Anonymous No.13749314]

>>13749295
Foucault's Pendulum
Illuminatus!
Gravity's Rainbow

[Anonymous No.13749412]

>>13749295
Raymond Abellio

[Anonymous No.13749421]

>>13749206
>Plotinus was a freemason. Hell, Jesus was a mason.
*strikes you with death rays for uttering lies*
nothing personal, kid.

[Anonymous No.13749457]

>>13749421
>he thinks jesus was a carpenter and not a builder
Uh oh

Plotinus was a mystery cultist fo sho

[Anonymous No.13749469]

>>13749457
there is no strong continuity between the egyptian mystery tradition and the freemasons

[Anonymous No.13749471]

>>13749457
the mystery cults of antiquity were extremely plebeian and pretty much open to anyone, they weren’t exclusive clubs for muh spayshul initiates

[Anonymous No.13749472]

>>13749457
He was a man of the truth and did his business in the light. As was Christ. You are a liar and deceiver.

[Anonymous No.13749477]

Christ is a Greek/Roman psyop thoughtvirus to neutralize and kill Jews that backfired and consumed the host.

[Anonymous No.13749486]

>>13749477
platonic philosophy was also a psyop. plato was secretly a heraclitean

[Anonymous No.13749498]

Amidst the
>>13749469
>continuity
of omments made by the
>>13749471
>spayshul
I shall deign to spread the
>>13749472
>light
with you as I
>>13749477
>host
it within myself.

Read more!

[Anonymous No.13749501]

>>13749498
kind of based but youre still wrong

[Anonymous No.13749502]

>>13749498
*comments

[Anonymous No.13749587]

Ψυχή: christ is a psyop
νοῦς: plato is a psyop
γνῶθι σεαυτόν: language is a psyop

[Anonymous No.13749614]

>>13749587
liek, what if enlightenment is a psyop? serious question. how do we know that enlightenment is something to be desired?

[Anonymous No.13749641]

>>13749614
i think even bringing the word desire into the equation is quite an individualistic and western way of thinking about it. its essentially just something that happens in the absence of anything pulling you away from it.

[Anonymous No.13749661]

>>13749641
ok but why shouldn’t you strive against it? away from it? ramakrishna describes enlightenment as a salt doll melting into the sea. how is that good? isn’t that just the opposite of what makes the West great as a culture? not merging into the All, but setting apart, making limits, measure and individuality etc

[Anonymous No.13749706]

>>13745366
Shut the fuck up faggot, you clearly know nothing about the freemasons. How about go to a lodge and actually talk to some of us?

[Anonymous No.13749732]

>>13749614
Hinduism is a psyop but Buddhism is not

[Anonymous No.13749797]

>>13749732
shunyata is a legit concept, i don’t know about nirvana

[Anonymous No.13749871]

>>13749797
I like to believe in horizons but anything is possible either way.

[Anonymous No.13749906]

>>13745457
we no longer live in the medieval age anon

[Anonymous No.13750096]

>>13746237
You’re unfortunately sheltered from the reality of life. Life is not predicated on “peace” and “we’re all one”. If we’re to follow your logical underpinnings of life, then you’re clearly an anti-darwinist.

The law of life is survival of the fittest. All life, be it plants, cats, and dogs; they are all vampiric in nature and only seek their own survival. Peace and love has never been the mantra of a dominating civilization. Rather, it’s only a placating ideal for a culture that is undergoing an existential stress. If we are to continue on with the society we’ve built heretofore, then we’ve best to abandon a tolerance of the average, the mediocre, the ungainly. What occupies the majority of our human civilizations is pure filth, and not worth considering as anything more than a parasite on your own life. If you’ve got family, cherish them. They’re about the only people you can truly trust in this world.

[Anonymous No.13750265]

>>13746237
You are misunderstanding 'not-self'. Firstly, your body wil decompose but the aspects of You will not because who You think You are is an illusion, not the You itself. You do not 'posess' a soul, you are inside it. If you are interested reading more to correct your view, check out Plotinus.

[Anonymous No.13750517]

Anons, how do we find each other? Interacting with normies too much causes them to discover how whacked out I am and idk what to do about it

[Anonymous No.13750527]

It's a curse that I can't get rid of, because there is no regressive persona that I can put on without a clear inability to engage in the world

[Anonymous No.13750530]

It is also the way that is to come, but must I travel it alone before I can adapt my ego to the present conditions?

[Anonymous No.13751020]

I want to get into Kabbalah, but I think I need to brush up on my Sacred Geometry first.
Where do I start with both?

[Anonymous No.13751023]

>>13746248
I would also add Kenneth grant's a practicle guide to qabalistic symbolism to the list, but otherwise superb choices.

[Anonymous No.13751031]

>>13745352
3sphere is accurate representation of spacetime.

[Anonymous No.13751036]

>>13745352
why is this book nowhere to be found?

[Anonymous No.13751258]

>>13750096
>The law of life is survival of the fittest. All life, be it plants, cats, and dogs; they are all vampiric in nature and only seek their own survival.
most / all scientists currently accept that evolution is more driven by mutualistic than "vampiric" factors. all the individual organisms participate in the whole you pseud.

[Anonymous No.13751275]

Stop Being Gnostic.

[Anonymous No.13751277]

>>13751258
>most / all scientists currently accept that evolution is more driven by mutualistic than "vampiric" factors.
>"""most""""
>"""scientists"""

[Anonymous No.13751325]

>>13750265
>Firstly, your body wil decompose but the aspects of You will not because who You think You are is an illusion, not the You itself.
"You" is constructed from a combination of cultural factors (the metaphysical assumptions we tend to labour under) along with the presumption of a singular, atomic body. We construct our identity in terms of "the self contained section of reality that is me is fatter than most people i have encountered", "the thing that is me is angrier than most people", its made up of comparisons between what MY body looks like and does and what OTHER bodies look like and do. When you are dead and decomposed such a perspective cannot be held because the concept of an atomic body is no longer viable when your material self is no longer unified.
>You do not 'posess' a soul, you are inside it.
I'm not sure where I contradicted this assertion or why it's even relevant. The important thing is that there is an element of "what we are" that is unrelated to our bodies.
>If you are interested reading more to correct your view, check out Plotinus.
I have read him and I think accepting everything he says is foolish. Whether God is Soul, God created Soul or God created Intellect that created Soul is irrelevant and unknowable for humans. Can you explain the difference between Intellect and Soul in human terms? Because Plotinus definitely can't do it consistently.

[Anonymous No.13751344]

>>13749661
I don't see the point of viewing one as good and the other bad. Westernism allows you to make ridiculous material advancements but the tradeoff is that you will lack understanding of yourself and spend most of your life following your basic animal instincts without realizing it or knowing why. Its not as if you cant participate in the illusion while recognizing it either.

[Anonymous No.13751387]

Gnosticism was confusing and disjointed for me. No objectivity, no objective morality, no understanding of how man relates to God. No clear understanding of the fall of man and existence of evil and imperfection. It felt like an incoherent, syncretic form of Buddhism and new age spiritualism for atheists. Just look at this post >>13746237

If you want real esoteric truth go with Christianity imo. Christ is all you need.

[Anonymous No.13751734]

>If you want real esoteric truth go with Christianity imo

[Anonymous No.13751755]

>>13751387
>truth value is based on how comforting and reassuring a statement is to me
>christianity claims to answer questions that we cant answer so its true
>the completely aspiritual systems of christian doctrine are somehow 'esoteric truth' rather than the definition of exoteric faux-spirituality
>my culturally dependent religious beliefs that literally DO NOT exist in any society that didn't follow our path of increasingly autistic attempts to wring unified meanings out of an arbitrary set of texts written HUNDREDS of years apart are somehow MORE TRUE than the beliefs that people manage to conclude without doctrinal influence across historical and cultural boundaries

[Anonymous No.13751778]

>>13749206
>Jesus was a mason
Actual FM here. WTF do you mean?

[Anonymous No.13751785]

>>13751755
seething incoherent babble

[Anonymous No.13751794]

>>13751785
im sure you hate atheists coming in your thread and espousing their template opinions. be a good christian and do unto others. xoxo

[Anonymous No.13751859]

>>13751794
don't hate anyone, and I used to be an atheist so I know some are honest seekers wrestling with God.
But that last response was gibberish green-text. Calling a spade a spade.

[Anonymous No.13751913]

>>13749206

>I was turned down from Masonry for being born into Catholicism :(

That's odd, it's usually the other way around. Source: My granddad was a Mason.

[Anonymous No.13751943]

>>13745693

I've read stuff but didn't believe until I encountered what I can only describe as my HGA. Now I'm about half convinced but don't know where to go next.

[Anonymous No.13752010]

>>13751859
-You seem to believe Christianity is true because it includes "objectivity" and "objective morality" - can you explain why you believe these make Christianity truer than other religions? It appears you think that the truth of a belief is based on how reassuring you find it. On what basis do you claim Christianity provides these things?

-Do you think that questions like "how man relates to God" can be answered by humans? Is Christianity true because it provides answers to questions that we can't answer?

-You describe Christianity as 'real esoteric truth' when esoteric truth is an 'inner tradition' of knowledge. Christianity bases its claims to truth on external structures - societal institutions, military power, authoritative texts.

-You argue that Christianity is true, but if that is the case why did Christian belief only develop once? Why weren't people who lived on isolated islands for centuries developing similar religious beliefs? Why did God only give Christianity to one set of people? Why do these isolated cultures tend to have religions that more closely resemble the esoteric? Shouldn't religious truth be something that can be understood by everyone? Why would it be dependent on access to a specific special book that not everyone has access to?

[Anonymous No.13752030]

>be "perennialist" (>implying)
>ignores the wealth of christian mysticism
>but gets neck deep in kabbalah (an medieval invention
>read Kybalion unironically
fuck off charlatans

[Anonymous No.13752037]

remember to put Theosophy in the trash where it belongs

[Anonymous No.13752040]

>be an idiot
>be unaware that the Zohar is a writing based on an oral tradition that predates Christ
>be unaware that 90% of Christian Mysticism is just people who didn't do their homework re-extracting the neoplatonism that earlier thinkers mixed with Christianity

makes u think

[Anonymous No.13752098]

>>13752040
>thinks the neoplatonists have an issue with plagiarism
we are idea communists
the whole essence of it is that it can be known by all, the fact that we find 'mysticism' (theoria, henosis, moksha . . .) is written and spoken by so many is the proof of his reality.

[Anonymous No.13752110]

>>13752098
i agree with everything you are saying, but what is the benefit of reading christians separating out the neoplatonism that was already mixed with christianity when you can just read neoplatonic texts and gain a more informed understanding

[Anonymous No.13752139]

>>13751778
https://leadership.lifeway.com/2017/04/04/the-forgotten-jesus-part-2-was-jesus-a-carpenter-or-a-stonemason/

[Anonymous No.13752146]

>>13752037
Thank you master

[Anonymous No.13752185]

>>13752010
>-You seem to believe Christianity is true because it includes "objectivity" and "objective morality" - can you explain why you believe these make Christianity truer than other religions?
No other religion has the true, living God who incarnated in the flesh, communicated his message personally and subsumed human nature into himself. Who wrote his laws onto man's hearts and made man in his image. When you understand that Christ is the Logos then all other religions fade away. The God of islam is fully transcendent, so man has no existential connection to him, and as such has no access to the most fundamental truth and justification for the objectivity of logic, morality or freedom of the will. With Christ not only do we have a justification for our beliefs, but we also have an epistemic connection.

>-Do you think that questions like "how man relates to God" can be answered by humans? Is Christianity true because it provides answers to questions that we can't answer?
Of course it can be answered because we are made in His image and the truth dwells within us, albeit in a clouded form, obstructed by sin.

>-You argue that Christianity is true, but if that is the case why did Christian belief only develop once? Why weren't people who lived on isolated islands for centuries developing similar religious beliefs? Why did God only give Christianity to one set of people? Why do these isolated cultures tend to have religions that more closely resemble the esoteric? Shouldn't religious truth be something that can be understood by everyone? Why would it be dependent on access to a specific special book that not everyone has access to?
Paul already pointed out that when men have no direct revelation/prophets they have a law written in their conscience and if they follow that law they will be walking the good path, but if they reject that law then they are sinners and guilty. So no man has an excuse.
The prophets and patriarchs in the bible were not all hebrews, Adam and Eve were not hebrews, Noah and Seth and Enoch were not hebrews. Abraham was a chaldaen who formed a covenant with God and became the 'first' hebrew.
God's prophets tend to speak truths that the masses find unfavorable so prophets meet untimely deaths quite often. We don't know the fate of all prophets in the world.
But what Christians believe has always been the truth. Albeit we have more of it now post-incarnation since Christ gave us more details about his nature.
Christianity is meant to save everyone, down to the last fisherman, but it also has enough depth and metaphysics to keep the most erudite thinkers occupied forever...So there's no need to fumble in the dark mixing-and-matching plotinus with shankara and the emerald tablets, or whatever the heck people in this thread are trying to do jumbling disparate thought systems together.

Flee from all this gnostic prelest. Find a real center. Christ is the center of all.

[Anonymous No.13752201]

>>13745702
The Chaldean Neoplatonism of Iamblichus to Proclus+ did involve basic hellenic practices & Egyptian/Chaldean theurgy.

[Anonymous No.13752261]

>>13752185
>No other religion has the true, living God who incarnated in the flesh
plenty of the systems in this list >>13748802 in fact claim that some or all humans are God made flesh
>The God of islam is fully transcendent, so man has no existential connection to him, and as such has no access to the most fundamental truth and justification for the objectivity of logic, morality or freedom of the will.
this is an explanation for why you find Christianity more comforting (because you feel that the faith based presumptions give you access to the things you want), not an explanation for why Christianity is true.
>Of course it can be answered because we are made in His image and the truth dwells within us
So why are the specific teachings of Christ necessary if we already have access to the truth?
>Paul already pointed out that when men have no direct revelation/prophets they have a law written in their conscience and if they follow that law they will be walking the good path
Why do people who follow this path not construct beliefs resembling Christianity? Where are the isolated belief systems that express Christian teachings? They don't exist because Christianity as a whole is a cultural product with its esoteric roots mostly eroded.
>God's prophets tend to speak truths that the masses find unfavorable so prophets meet untimely deaths quite often.
Christianity is currently the world's largest religion by population. It would in fact be correct to say that the prophets classed as Christian promote the most popular ideas about God.

[Anonymous No.13752268]

>>13752110
because even if the church's main doctrines of the divine are flawed, the bible itself and wise men's commentary on it is still gratifying, as shown by Philo and Numenius (like Gregory of Nyssa, Justin Martyr, Clements, Eriugena, Saint John of the Cross; there's also Pseudo-Dionysus who, thanks to him, have infused permanently true wisdom into church doctrine).
I'd rather dine with a Christian Orthodox than a so called perennial man or theo-Sophist.

[Anonymous No.13752279]

>>13752185
>what Christians believe has always been the truth
please elaborate on what Christians actually believe interdenominationally beyond the idea that "Christ had a special relationship with God"

[Anonymous No.13752291]

>>13752185
>there's no need to fumble in the dark mixing-and-matching plotinus with shankara and the emerald tablets, or whatever the heck people in this thread are trying to do jumbling disparate thought systems together.
its quite apparent from this section of your post that you are only interested in easy pre-packaged McChristian answers to some of the most difficult questions we can ask.

[Anonymous No.13752310]

>>13745352
https://discord.gg/AJE8uZh

[Anonymous No.13752311]

>>13745352
>Hermetism
Cringe

[Anonymous No.13752323]

>>13752311
why

[Anonymous No.13752458]

>>13752268
Agree to disagree

[Anonymous No.13752518]

One Zeus,
one Hades,
one Helios,
one Dionysius,
One god in all.

[Anonymous No.13752625]

>>13749309
this

[Anonymous No.13752649]

>>13751036
I’ve got a copy :P
>>13751258
Go hug nature and see how long you last. You’ve been sheltered and insulated, the world does not have a mutual pact with yours and it’s survival. A tiger will not hesitate to hunt you
down, a cat will not stay if you fail to provide food and shelter, extreme weather, unpredictability everywhere. Maybe you should spend some time in the ghetto with all the nig nogs and see how loving and peaceful it is. Check out a trailer park sometime.

[Anonymous No.13752693]

>>13752649
>evola poster
So edgy brah

[Anonymous No.13752713]

>>13752649
you're arguing with an abstract version of what i was saying that i never actually said. its a bit embarrassing.

[Anonymous No.13752718]

>>13752693
>You read things I don’t like

[Anonymous No.13752720]

>>13752649
>>13752713
also why do you think it is appropriate for humans to conform our higher ability to reason to the instincts of a tiger.

[Anonymous No.13752727]

>>13752718
>i'm not edgy, i just read edgelords

[Anonymous No.13752751]

>>13752713
>you're arguing with an abstract version of what i was saying
Not really. I gave concrete analogies of things that are not mutually beneficial for your existence based off the criteria of “life has evolved in a mutualistic fashion”
Might makes right is the dominant mantra of all existential being. If you want to provide some further elaboration on why life should be considered evolved through “mutuality” instead of “vampiricism”, then be my guest. Otherwise I will simply extrapolate your argument to its logical conclusion.

[Anonymous No.13752773]

nice pseudoscience general you fucking larping fags

[Anonymous No.13752789]

>>13752727
>his opinions and life view isn’t consistent with my vision of reality
Do you only read authors you agree with?
>>13752720
>humans to conform our higher ability to reason to the instincts of a tiger
Ego gives you the illusion that we’re far separated from the animalistic world with which we arose. You’ve never witnessed the cruelty of survival first hand due to the obsessive human desire for peace and safety. We’ve had to quite literally separate ourselves from nature in order to live in a lifestyle free of death from causes outside of our own.

[Anonymous No.13752795]

>>13752751
>“life has evolved in a mutualistic fashion”
not an actual quote from me, the real thing I said was "most / all scientists currently accept that evolution is more driven by mutualistic than "vampiric" factors" which is a different statement. you are clearly a pseud and im not sure why youre in this thread. YOU are arguing the absolutist position that ALL organisms exist primarily through domination and competition with others, I am claiming that the scientific consensus is that evolution of organisms is more informed by mutual coevolutions than 'survival of the fittest' competition. I am not denying that an animal like a tiger predominantly survives through predatory 'vampiric' interactions (you seem to be unable to understand that not everyone who disagrees with you is arguing the opposite absolute), I am pointing to the wealth of animals and plants that have evolved around mechanisms of mutual benefit. For someone who likes to use Darwin to justify their edgy retard worldview you don't seem to have read many of his works. Pick up a copy of "On the Various Contrivances by Which British and Foreign Orchids Are Fertilised by Insects, and On the Good Effects of Intercrossing" and grow up.

[Anonymous No.13752803]

>>13752795
>I am claiming that the scientific consensus is that evolution of organisms is more informed by mutual coevolutions than 'survival of the fittest' competition

not him but can I have sauce on that claim? even a wikipedia article will suffice

[Anonymous No.13752806]

>>13752803
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_(biology)

"Mutualism is thought to be the most common type of ecological interaction, and it is often dominant in most communities worldwide"

[Anonymous No.13752809]

look at this DEATH BEAKED CUNT brvtally murdering this flower

FIGHT OR DIE
FIGHT OR DIE

[Anonymous No.13752815]

>>13752773
Ancient history, mystical philosophy, and alternative religion is pseudo-science?

[Anonymous No.13752822]

>>13752789
The fact that you have a "rare" Evola book and are preaching this bullshit means you are a special sort of retard. I've read Evola and he is more interesting than you.

[Anonymous No.13752832]

>>13752809
it’s a real bird-eat-flower world, kid. nothin personal, but you’re the flower and i’m the bird *engages in mutually advantageous behavior* see ya later punk *drives off into the distance, tires screeching*

[Anonymous No.13752835]

>>13752773
You’re an example of an individual who lives in such a highly atomized and fully topologized world that you can’t see the proverbial “big picture”, the metaphysics of something over nothing.
>>13752795
>I am claiming that the scientific consensus is that evolution of organisms is more informed by mutual coevolutions
Of which I understand. My argument is that while the superficial layer of existence may be viewed in that sense, all beings in existence desire their own existence over others. Does the marijuana plant really exist in a mutual benefit with humans, or is it parasitic in the sense that the intoxication provided by the plant reinforces its own survival? What I’m trying to establish is that organism may appear mutually beneficial, but it’s only for the benefit of their own continued survival as a being. Existence without selfishness could never exist. Mutuality is a dumbed down saying of “Id kill you, but my species survival isn’t hindered by you”.

Once again I reiterate my point that humans have removed themselves from the contingencies that once reinforced natural selection. Now we try to justify our man-made world with that of the natural world, and it really doesn’t work.

[Anonymous No.13752849]

>>13750096
EXHIBIT A:
>You’re unfortunately sheltered from the reality of life. Life is not predicated on “peace” and “we’re all one”. If we’re to follow your logical underpinnings of life, then you’re clearly an anti-darwinist.
>
>The law of life is survival of the fittest. All life, be it plants, cats, and dogs; they are all vampiric in nature and only seek their own survival.

EXHIBIT B:
>Once again I reiterate my point that humans have removed themselves from the contingencies that once reinforced natural selection. Now we try to justify our man-made world with that of the natural world, and it really doesn’t work.

ONE OF THESE ARGUMENTS IS NOT LIKE THE OTHER

[Anonymous No.13752864]

>>13752822
You haven’t read more than the first few chapters of revolt against the modern world, of which you probably torrented. You’ve got no stake in this game

[Anonymous No.13752878]

>>13752849
Not really, you’re just stupid. Otherwise please do me the favor and explain how in your mind my arguments have no correlative effect within what you deem “one of these is not like the others”.

[Anonymous No.13752895]

>>13752878
first argument: life conforms to nature, human religions are false if they do not reflect nature
second argument: human life doesn't conform to nature, applying observations about the natural world to humans doesn't work

[Anonymous No.13752904]

Does the marijuana plant really exist in a mutual benefit with humans, or is it parasitic in the sense that the intoxication provided by the plant reinforces its own survival?

[Anonymous No.13752911]

>>13752895
>life conforms to nature
might makes right
>human religions are false if they do not reflect nature
human religion applies to humans, not a universality of nature
>human life doesn't conform to nature, applying observations about the natural world to humans doesn't work
21st and 20th century human thought/culture/lifestyle does not conform to nature. Are you getting lost in my arguments? Or have you never contemplated existence outside of modernity?

[Anonymous No.13752926]

>>13752864
I've actually read his main trilogy as well as his books on yoga, buddhism, hermeticism, and his first book on magic. Try again, sweatie

[Anonymous No.13752932]

>>13752904
Mushrooms are crosses from space

[Anonymous No.13752954]

>>13752911
>might makes right
not an accurate assessment of nature, as already shown
>human religion applies to humans, not a universality of nature
so why is a view about humans that emphasizes oneness wrong?
>have you never contemplated existence outside of modernity
were people slaying the weak for their inferiority in the 1800s? why didnt any greek olympians beat socrates to death?

[Anonymous No.13752974]

>>13752911
>Are you getting lost in my arguments?
-naturally might makes right, which is also how it is for humans really outside of modernity
-except for when nature doesnt conform to that view, in which case observations about nature aren't valid for humans now because it makes my argument wrong
-to conclude, if we interpret 'darwinism' in a way not consistent with darwin's own writings or modern scientific consensus, we can see that life is about dominance and any religion that promotes an alternative viewpoint is cushioned from reality (but the aspects of reality it is consistent with don't count because i dont like them as much).

[Anonymous No.13752986]

>>13752954
>as already shown
You’ve shown nothing.
>so why is a view about humans that emphasizes oneness wrong?
Because humanity is forever condemned to sin and the low-brow masses are nothing more then a means of production for the greater than life forces.
>were people slaying the weak for their inferiority in the 1800s?
Yes. It’s called war you dolt

[Anonymous No.13752994]

>>13752649
Cool. Now, can you please scan it and upload it?

[Anonymous No.13753000]

>>13752974
>except for when nature doesnt conform to that view
And this is where you are intellectually “hung up”. Modern humanity falsely interprets nature as being “mutualistic”. In a much wider perspective, one devoid of human ego, one can see that mutuality better translates into temperament.

[Anonymous No.13753045]

>>13752986
>You’ve shown nothing.
your argument ended up being something fucking retarded about weed that wasnt worth responding to
>It’s called war you dolt
wars are not just people asserting dominance on a battlefield you fucking moron. the act of a soldier killing another is one vampiric interaction supported by a web of mutualisms. the soldier's equipment is not made by him, he didn't educate himself, he didn't grow his own food, these things were provided for him in exchange for his protection against an enemy or his conquering of an enemy and the resources that brings to his people.
>>13753000
>In a much wider perspective, one devoid of human ego, one can see that mutuality better translates into temperament.
I assume you mean 'temperance'? Organisms need other organisms to survive. If an organism completed THE STRUGGLE TO SURVIVE and killed every other organism it would have nothing left to eat and it would die.

[Anonymous No.13753054]

>>13753045
>Organisms need other organisms to survive
I rest my case.

[Anonymous No.13753071]

>>13753054
please explain why the majority of interspecies interactions are mutualisms

[Anonymous No.13753080]

>>13753045
>your argument ended up being something fucking retarded about weed that wasnt worth responding to
Do understand what the metaphysical concept of a demon is? If not, it makes sense why you believe nature evolved mutually and why you employ such language.

[Anonymous No.13753333]

>>13750517
If only there was some form of club that vets it's members...

[Anonymous No.13753398]

>>13753333
a society of some kind..

[Anonymous No.13753770]

>>13745457

Even though I think it is everyone's prerogative to be an Atheist, I thought about what I would do if I wanted to impose Atheism, the miserable wordly kind, on as many people as possible. Truly I can think of no better instrument than the Church.

[Anonymous No.13753814]

>>13745352
>Paracelsianism, Boehmeian Theosophy, Rosicrucianism, Freemasonry, Illuminism, Swedenborgianism, Mesmerism, as well as the more recent branches of the esoteric tree (Golden Dawn, Traditionalism, Blavatskian Theosophy, e.t.c.).
Absolute garbage.

[Anonymous No.13753936]

>>13746122
>>13746194
>>13746210

The body as somatically redundant to yourself is not Dualism, the body as a thing in and of itself on even footing with you, THAT is Dualism.

[Anonymous No.13753966]

Does anybody here know of a good translation of Jacob Boehme's Aurora?

[Anonymous No.13754631]

>>13746194
I completely agree, essentially a dualist in denial

[Anonymous No.13755106]

Is the secret teachings of all ages a good intro overview to esoterica ? Is there a better one?

[Anonymous No.13755110]

>>13755106
Hanegraaf

[Anonymous No.13755152]

>>13755106
Secret Teachings is okay. Kinda wide and shallow. Lots of good rabbit holes tho.
>>13755110
This one has better historiography and scholarship. It has its own blindspots as well tho. Faivre and Godwin and Versluis have intros as well. I've read a lot.

[Anonymous No.13755184]

>>13745352
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gsun5J1jSSk ebin

[Anonymous No.13755189]

>>13753966
No good scholarly translations are out there unfortunately. Try an older free one. Lots of good websites for stuff like that. Don't bother with anything published by createspace.

[Anonymous No.13755193]

>>13755184
Looks like the kkk :/

This is based:
https://youtu.be/QBJlZgObDAI

[Anonymous No.13755210]

Has anyone read or even heard of this? I saw this on an esoteric reading list and I've never seen it before so I'm curious

[Anonymous No.13755299]

>>13755210
Basic pulp grimoire

[Anonymous No.13755354]

>>13755106
The Western Esoteric Traditions: A Historical Introduction is the one to read.

[Anonymous No.13755917]

>>13754631
Thats why Shankara is better desu

[Anonymous No.13756528]

>>13753333
>>13753398
fucking say it to me i'm noused up and saturated

[Anonymous No.13756676]

>>13752323
Theres nothing wrong with it. Youre just replying to 4chan autism

[Anonymous No.13756679]

>>13752773
Eat a dick Neil Degrasse fanboy, pseudointellectual cattle doomed to his surroundings. Fucking die in a ditch already

[Anonymous No.13756684]

>>13754631
>>13755917
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T BELIEVE IN DUALISM IT'S NOT ALLOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWEEED

[Anonymous No.13756720]

>>13754631
>in denial
Plotinus is quite open about it.
I'm happy to see that you understand Neoplatonism has nothing to do with Advaita.

[Anonymous No.13757717]

>>13751036
I am wondering the same, was it purged by some sect? lmao

[Anonymous No.13757820]

>>13745681
Ave Christus Rex!

[Anonymous No.13757825]

>>13756720
>nothing to do
That's incorrect, they do have many similarities and agree on many points but they just don't come to agreement vis-a-vis their final conclusion

[Anonymous No.13758151]

>>13756684
we're not saying that, we're just saying Plotinus has a lot of passages where he's essentially speaking dualistically but then brings his thought back to monism awkwardly

[Anonymous No.13758236]

>>13758151
I think part of the confusion is that people who have read different philosophies and metaphysics sometimes interpret the meaning of dualism and monism/non-dualism differently. Some systems which are classified as being ontologically non-dualist/monist in the grand scheme of things still include an element of substance dualism insofar as they often separate the soul/consciousnesses/spirit from the body. Similarly, people sometimes assume that non-dualism includes a denial of all distinctions and hierarchies when in fact different types of non-dualism often include a gradient or hierarchy of different factors and levels of existence that ultimately culminate in and are subsumed into the non-dual absolute/reality/truth. Plotinus system was about returning to the One, some people point to this and say that because everything comes indirectly from the One and because we are supposed to return to it that it's like a form of qualified monism whereas other people point to the hierarchy of One, Nous, soul etc and say he is dualist because of that.

[Anonymous No.13758258]

>>13758236
The point I am making is that while he asserts an Absolute Monism, there are a lot of sections where his thought makes a lot more sense in an Absolute Dualist framework and he has to do some mental gymnastics to make it work in a Monist way. He never gives a good explanation for how matter comes from the One (generally he speaks about Matter as a thing with no magnitude that receives shape and form from Soul, but this raises the question of where the thing that is receiving the form comes from - it makes a lot more sense as a product of an opposite to the One than to something the One creates)

[Anonymous No.13758260]

>>13758258
then as*, not 'than to'

[Anonymous No.13758384]

>>13757717
some black magician got to the Arktos guys lmao, they stopped doing podcasts too

[Anonymous No.13758484]

>>13758258
Can you elaborate on why you think Plotinus asserts an Absolute Monism? I have only read a little bit of him but I've seen this one poster strongly insist that he is a dualist, I'm curious what your reasoning on that is

[Anonymous No.13758504]

>>13758484
his system is built down from a transcendent unitary being called the One so in that sense he is a Monist, but a lot of his arguments actually imply two such beings (though he doesn't want to follow them to their conclusion)

[Anonymous No.13759263]

>>13758484