Practical application of Traditionalism

Ok, where's the source for such a claim

eh, correspondence and diaries, you illiterate twat.
no, I won't quote chapter and verse so bugger off. judicious use of the search function will toss up examples (try Evola).

You are claiming me illiterate and you can't even cite your outrageous claims. If anything, Evola copied Coomaraswamy since he began writing decades before Evola.

Guenon was the first of all, Coomaraswamy and Evola both came after him, both read his books and were hugely influenced by them and it's primarily due to Guenon that they both began to write about "Traditionalist" ideas. The difference between Eliade and them is that they openly admitted the influence of Guenon on them and often corresponded with him; while Eliade presented it all as his own thought without even mentioning or referencing any of them in his early works. Eliade's eventual emergence as a respected mainstream religious historian was largely but not entirely built on the backs on his earlier works on religious symbolism, sacredness, etc that in some sense was crypto-traditionalism but that never mentioned Guenon's or Evola's names once despite the obvious influence, although he did publish one or two reviews of some of their works in obscure Romanian journals.

>Julius Evola first met the young Mircea Eliade during a trip to Bucharest to meet Corneliu Codreanu. Evola refers to that meeting decades later in his spiritual autobiography, the Cinnabar Path. By that time, Eliade had become a widely respected historian of religions in the West and kept his early affiliations a secret. Henceforth, Eliade cut off contact with Evola, which they had maintained sporadically until the 1960s.
gornahoor.net/?p=4808

On multiple occasions Eliade described Guenon as "The most interesting man alive today", and at other times attacked him and Evola, regardless of what he thought, his early works are indebted to the earlier work done by Guenon and the post-Guenon people like Evola and Coomaraswamy; and in repeating all their main ideas without citations or even casual mention in his early works Eliade was being deceitful. He even mentions in one diary entry that he had Traditionalist views but didn't have the courage to say them publicly (quoted below)

>Mircea Eliade’s The Portugal Journal, trans. Mac Linscott Ricketts (Albany, N.Y.: SUNY Press, 2010) covers the years 1941 to 1945 when Eliade was a Romanian diplomat in Portugal. It is thus a prequel to Eliade’s four-volume Journal (Vol. 1: 1945–1955, Vol. 2: 1957–1969, Vol. 3: 1970–1978, and Vol. 4: 1979–1985), which begins with his arrival in Paris in September of 1945 and continues for the rest of his life. Eliade’s journals are not mere diaries of events, although they do chronicle and comment on the major events of his life and times. Their primary focus, instead, is Eliade’s intellectual life. I will review The Portugal Journal later at length. Here I wish to share a few entries revealing surprising connections between Eliade, Carl Schmitt, and René Guénon. The material in square brackets was added by Eliade himself at a later date.

>1942, Berlin
>Gorneanu [a member of the Legation] takes me today to Carl Schmitt, who has wanted for a long time to know the true story about Nae Ionescu’s philosophy. A house in Dahlem, with very un-Germanic furniture, several modern paintings, and a library rich in old books. Carl Schmitt is a small man with a face not very impressive but luminous, animated. He speaks fluent French. .... He offers us a bottle of Rhine wine. He is delighted to have met me and he regrets that I’m leaving tomorrow for Madrid. He says the most interesting man alive today is René Guénon [and he is happy that I agree]. He escorts us as far as the metro station, talking about aviation as a “terrestrial” symbol.

>February 17, 1943
>At the German Press Counselor Klein’s place, I met a very interesting man: Dr. Mario, correspondent at Paris for the Kolnische Zeitung. .... we talked a long time. He has just come from Paris. He doesn’t seem to be much of a fan of Hitler. He believes René Guénon is the most interesting person of our time. (I don’t believe this always, but often I do. Although I believe Aurobindo Ghose more “perfected.”) Very well-read, speaking perfect French.

>July 27, 1941
>I absolutely must return to Tuliu, in a special chapter, where I explain his philosophy, lest the reader think that he’s nothing but a simple sideshow “occultist.” Actually, his theories are not entirely foreign to me. Tuliu will say things that, for various reasons (there isn’t space to elaborate here), I’ve never had the courage to express publicly. I have just, at times, confessed to a few friends my “Traditionalist” views (to use René Guénon’s term). Sidenote by user: this is funny because Guenon never actually used this term

counter-currents.com/2013/07/mircea-eliade-carl-schmitt-and-rene-guenon/

Were any of these "traditionalists" kind? Did they help the people around them? Did they treat others with compassion?

Or were they just LARPing as
>muh spiritual, me so ascended

there are a bunch of articles, in many languages, including your no doubt native Romanian, examining the topic. e.g. hyperion-journal.net/mircea-eliades-traditionalism.html

By definition, the only way to properly apply traditionalism is to join a valid tradition.

There are three possible spiritual paths, you fag - the paths of knowledge, action or devotion/love/compassion.

Attached: ung.jpg (620x412, 65K)

Schuon, despite bandying the word compassion about, was an awful arsehole, manipulative, egotistic, proud, and quite full of it.
Guenon appears to have been a kind man, judging from his personal letters and some biographical reminiscences. Cold and autistic, sometimes, but a nice man nonetheless.
Evola surprisingly comes across as a nice gentleman too, you can look at the videos of him on youtube in his later years and he seems quite affable.
Coomaraswamy was an awful cuck - quite literally. He pretended all his life to want to return to the Brahmin lifestyle, and even become a sannyasi, but he enjoyed British style hunting and fishing way too much (his own words, I'm not even making this up).

It's difficult to judge anyone from their writings alone, especially those who write so impersonally as our traditionalist buds.

Guenon was a quiet, family man. Maximum comfy.

Attached: IMG_6773.jpg (417x604, 28K)

anti-mythes.blogspot.com/2015/11/julius-evola-et-mircea-eliade-une.html
anti-mythes.blogspot.com/2015/11/julius-evola-et-mircea-eliade-une_2.html

you do know that that was his second family, right?
his first wife and himself raised his niece. When his wife died, he went full retard and the girl got taken away by social services or something. His letters from that time are maximum paranoia. Not "comfy" at all, as you say.

Not the guy you are arguing with, but here is an article by a student of Eliade.
jstor.org/stable/10.1525/nr.1999.3.1.147?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

>he went full retard and the girl got taken away by social services or something
No. The girl's school teacher didn't think it was appropriate for a young girl to live alone with an older man. This was early 20th century in a village in France. Different social mores than we have today.

Not exactly. Read the correspondence (with Di Giorgio or Charbonneau, iirc). and quit blaming the rural French.

I see you in literally every thread that discusses religion or spirituality. I can identify you at this point. Every time you say this same thing over and over again about kindness. I'd like to think you are baiting, but it does not seem that way.

b&r

You miss the entire purpose of the traditionalist school by trying to dig up biographical information on its authors. The cult of the author is exactly what they were fighting against.

Tell me about him, /tradlit/.

So far I have read "The Sacred and The Profane" and "The Quest: History and Meaning in Religion".
I have "Patterns in comparative religion", but I saved it for later.

Attached: Mircea.eliade.jpg (248x321, 12K)

>The cult of the author is exactly what they were fighting
Do we have to interpret and read traditionalists on their own terms? I don't mind biographical interpretations of a text.

where is Guenonfag when we need him?

>b&r
what is "b&r"

>Coomaraswamy was an awful cuck - quite literally. He pretended all his life to want to return to the Brahmin lifestyle, and even become a sannyasi, but he enjoyed British style hunting and fishing way too much (his own words, I'm not even making this up).

Coomaraswamy as a cuckold, quite literally indeed.
>"When Coomaraswamy met Crowley in 1917 Coomaraswamy was then married to the second of his four wives, a musician and singer from Yorkshire with the stage name Ratan Devi. The letters exchanged between Crowley and Ratan Devi indicates signs of romance among them and even at one point Crowley insisted Ratan Devi to divorce Coomaraswamy.

Coomaraswamy's wife also was pregnant to Aleister Crowley, but had a miscarriage, all the while still being married to Coomaraswamy.

>Coomaraswamy asked Crowley to help promote his wife Alice Ethel's performances in 1916. Crowley wrote reviews of her in Vanity Fair and offered letters of introduction for her. She and Crowley quickly became lovers and magical partners, engaging in sexual magic by April of 1916. Alice became pregnant.

Crowley, in his own system of Magick & Mysticism, described Coomaraswamy a "Black Brother" >Black Brothers being individuals who have failed to cross the Abyss, and fallen to the illusions of Choronzon (Ego) and are essentially empty husks and mere elemental forces controlled by demons of the Goetia unconsciously.

Crowley also nicknames Comaraswamy as "The Worm" in his own magical diaries
>Jan. 13 [1917 e.v. ].
>A letter (arrived) from Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy (the Worm) in re: The Path. Replied to it.
>P.S. This correspondence ended in the discovery of the Worm as a Black Brother; it has been very useful to have the type to study.

Attached: Aleister Crowley smoking a pipe.jpg (400x395, 29K)

exactly

baiter, one suspects.
but that is a valid point.
so-called "traditionalism" is ultimately sterile.

The entire point of the traditionalists is that they are not trying to push their own narrative. They are trying to explain to the west the traditions of the east in a form in contrary to the typical ideological lens of western academics. Textual criticism is nothing but vanity and trying to attribute an idea to solely one particular author (in the same way that western academia hopelessly searches for the "true authors" of traditional texts) will serve only to gain an accumulation of quantitative data, not truth regarding the tradition.

this is so stupidly naive I have a hard time believing you are unironically typing this shit out with a straight face.

Keep obsessing over biographical info and see where it gets you. You are the truly naive one for trying to base an idea's validity on its author's character.

Attached: 12678337.jpg (1784x706, 213K)

not I.
You ought to join a real tradition - with no inverted commas, and forget this 19th century occultist rubbish, seriously.

>base an idea's validity on its author's character
I wouldn't ever try to do this. Biographical information lends context to a work, beyond "quantitative data" in plenty of cases. For instance, in Beowuld, we can't know who actually wrote it, but the knowledge that the writer was probably a Christian monk, tasked with re-telling a pagan story, helps to guide meaningful interpretations of the text and the ideological motives that went into making it.

Now you are just projecting. I am a member of a real tradition and am a religious man. If you think traditionalism is synonymous with occultism you clearly haven't even gone so far as to even read a wikipedia article on it. Traditionalism and occultism are diametrically opposed, hence why Guenon was so critical of Masonry, Theosophy after once having been exposed to it.

>Guenon was so critical of Masonry,
>what is La Grande Triade?

Where do you draw the line between "traditionalism" and "primitivism"?

I agree with you, but it depends what sort of information you want to get from a text. For metaphysics, if we assume that metaphysical doctrines are not just subjective abstractions and actually correspond to reality, biography is something irrelevant. Of course, that depends on the degree of reality we accord metaphysics. If you consider it just abstractions conditioned by an author's subjective mentality, that is a different case.

Why should anyone care about what a retard like Crowley thought about Coomaraswamy? Crowley was the one making up hocus pocus occultist nonsense while Coomaraswamy could actually read the half dozen ancient languages all the ancient texts are found in. Coomaraswamy's books are extremely insightful and erudite while Crowley is wiccan-tier bullshit (lmao dude I traveled to the Pyramids and like a demon spoke to me wowww lolsorandum :DDD). I've seen you in these threads before, it's hilarious how you simply repeat Crowley's thoughts without adding anything as if by the fact that Crowley said them that they should be taken seriously when it's rather the opposite.

samefag

>12702179
define primitivism and I will tell you where to draw a line.

Sentimental attachment to past, adherence to customs/traditions and perennial philosophy or philosophia perennis are all different subjects.

Guénon, more than anything, was a perennial philosopher. Same could be said of Evola and many other "traditionalists". It is an extremely misleading term.

It also depends on the degree to which you might disavow relatavism, which I'm not sure I would do. I also think engaging with tradition is near impossible without at least some subjective interpretation of it. By oneself, any individual is going to come up with a lot of conclusions skewed by differences in time or place if they analyse a particular tradition.

I agree with your estimation of Crowley, but the fact Coomaraswamy let himself get cucked is pretty scandalous.

pedestrian analysis of Crowley. anti-crowleyfags always out themselves as pseuds

Metaphysical realization, as opposed to mere theorizing, as Guenon conceives it, means literally transcending individual and subjective points of view. So it really becomes a question of whether that is possible or not. But assuming that it is possible, that would still make you correct in 99% of case, since most of us inhabit entirely individual points of view.

To add on to what you said, his son, Rama Coomaraswamy said that his father Ananda was said to be able to read nearly 30 languages, all the way from Persian to Classical Chinese to Icelandic.
youtube.com/watch?v=K-IFdz1Gp7A
Interestingly enough, his son was active in SSPX traditionalist Catholicism

Put a finger up your ass to active your root chakra (muladhara)

>Crowley was the one making up hocus pocus occultist nonsense while Coomaraswamy could actually read the half dozen ancient languages all the ancient texts are found in

Crowley dissolved the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn while in his 20s. If anything, he was more hostile to Theosophy and "Occultism" than Guénon himself and was one of the pioneers of translating and making available Eastern texts such as Tao Teh King, I Ching to westerners. Crowley's mentor Allan Bennett was also the first to establish Buddhist mission to England and was the 2nd Englishman to convert into Buddhism.

>Crowley is wiccan-tier bullshit (lmao dude I traveled to the Pyramids and like a demon spoke to me wowww lolsorandum :DDD)

Aleister Crowley was a systematic writer of the European hermetic tradition and to any neutral observer he completed the Enochian tradition started by Dr. John Dee. Crowley was the last Magus and refomer to come out of Europe since Cagliostro.

The A∴A∴ curriculum and Equinox is perhaps the most comprehensive list of texts on the subject of magic, mysticism and meditation to ever have been published in the English language.

Stay mad :)

Attached: 51dZVFYYKUL._SX349_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (351x499, 38K)

I find applying a hand operated drill made by traditional artisans to the area of the sacrum to be a more effective method.

>so-called "traditionalism" is ultimately sterile.
It's really never anything but a straw-man. Aside from Evola who was sort of off to the side and did his own thing, most of them just more or less said that one should earnestly join and practice a traditional religious teaching, but that one can still study and appreciate other doctrines while doing so. Some of them wrote about how if more people especially near the upper echelons of society could develop an understanding of these matters then they could possibly help avert or work on solving some of the issues with modern society but that's just speculation about possibilities. Guenon and Coomaraswamy never wrote about how there is a system of "Traditionalism" that one was supposed to follow, most of the time when people attack it they haven't read much of the books and assume that the point is to form some reactionary syncretic order which is not what they said.

Not all primitive peoples and hunter-gatherer tribes have metaphysical teachings they pass down to every generation on the level of the same stuff that the Traditionalists wrote about, and it's this which is considered to be the most important.

I'm just a typical kindposter. I'm the same one posting this in every type of thread - asking which writers, philosophers, politicians and otherwise, were of a compassionate disposition. I'm just curious of it for my own sake. I need heroes in my life, and I'd prefer to intellectually follow figures I can also relate to as a person.

It's not like he knew and was okay with his wife cheating on him. That just reflects that some women are devious whores capable of deceiving brilliant men.

Why is "affable" such a cute word, guys? It reminds of a duck. And why are ducklings so cute? Easily among the cutest of animals. But why? What makes them so special?

m.youtube.com/watch?v=iZD6h8E5A-I
two ducklings meeting a parrot

If you already have such strict and well defined criteria for what your "heroes" need to be like then why do you even need heroes for? You arleady """know""" what makes a """good person""", so all you need to do is be that sort of person. I think all this searching for "heroes" is probably just a psychological mechanism to deflect the onus from yourself, so you don't have to make any personal effort, and project all you longing and faith onto some other person who you can idolize from a distance instead of fixing yourself.

>It's not like he knew and was okay with his wife cheating on him.
I was pretty sure he did, but I wouldn't bet any money on it.

>Sheikh al-Amin Wallahi
>Wallahi

Attached: 1537570343398.jpg (1860x862, 609K)

>reactionary syncretic order
Regardless of intentions, they created a sterile intellectualization of exactly that nature. Nothing wrong with syncretism tho, comparative religion is interesting, and even a materialist like myself can appreciate mystic metaphysics as metapsychology. The reactionary element is the gay part.

It has no relation to me and my own behaviors, at all. I always try to be kind in my real life. But just as a fan of music would prefer to be a fan of artists who are not enwrapped in terrible scandals in their personal life, even if it didn't affect their musical output, I similarly want to find literary figures (and people of other occupations) who I not only appreciate the work of, but the character of as well. Like Marcus Aurelius. It's not serious, just a personal quest of mine. I still read into people across the spectrum, but I would ideally like to locate ones who I feel close to as a "fan".

t. Alain Danielou

I'm the hero you need, I'm not the hero you wanted.

Attached: batman-yelling-700x300.jpg (700x300, 13K)

>one should earnestly join and practice a traditional religious teaching,
and look at the results: Schuon and all the other assorted weirdos and misfits forming sex cults, secret societies and what not.
>B-B-But muh initiation!
Yeah, whatever. Engaging properly with one's tradition, instead of filtering everything through the lens of a 19th century occultist (note the form) will be infinitely more fruitful.

Based.

Wow, how did I not catch this before? That user was clearly joking. "Wallahi" means "I swear to God" in Arabic. It's a fairly common expression, used by vulgar people excessively. If you know people like that they say "Wallahi" before everything, like"Bro, the other day, wallahi!, I saw Bruce Willis in line at the grocery store! Wallahi, bro!". Al-Amin means "the honest". So user is basically saying, "honestly, I swear to God, I know this guy in real life". Kek. That is some intricate trolling. I mean, there is literally no way that there is an actual Shaykh named "al-Amin Wallahi".

based and batpilled

It's not even clear what you are arguing. You are against secret societies, but also against traditional religion. There is no tradition outside of the authentic initiatory organization. If the metaphysical symbols cannot be properly interpreted and your practice cannot be guided by an elder, you are doing nothing but deluding yourself.
If you want traditional religion in addition to the traditionalist school, I would suggest Jean Borella for Catholic traditionalism and Seyyed Nasr for Islamic traditionalism.

>If the metaphysical symbols cannot be properly interpreted and your practice cannot be guided by an elder, you are doing nothing but deluding yourself.

There exist initiation outside the traditional initiatory chain and traditional initiation even according to Guénon. Tgere are "exceptions" to this rule of studying under a spiritual master or a guru.

Guénon talks of this in his book "Initiation and spiritual realization"

From the point of view of Islamic tasawwuf, what concerns the Afrad is different, whose master is Al Khidr and is considered outsie of what one might call "jurisdication of the Pole (al-Qutb)

Guénon writes they occur only in circumstances which make normal transmission impossible, for example in the absence of any regularly contituted initiatic organization.

Letter from Guénon March 14, 1937
>Al-Khidr is properly the Master of the Afrad, who are independent of the Qutb and may not even be known by him; it is indeed as you say a matter of something more ´direct´ and in a way outside defined and delimited functions no matter how elevated they may be; and this is why the number of the Afrad is indeterminate. This comparison is sometimes used: a prince, even if the excercises no function, is nonetheless higher in himself than a minister (at least if the minister is not himself a prince, something that can happen but which is not all necessary); in the spiritual order of the Afrad are analoguous to princes and the Aqtab to ministers. This is only a comparison, of course, but all the same it helps somewhat in understanding the relation of the ones to the others

yeah, but he also says in the same book that such cases are so rare it would have been better for him not to mention them because delusional people will inevitably convince themselves that this applies to them, that they are special and don't need ordinary initiation, etc

>used by vulgar people excessively.
i.e. Maghrebin scum.

I was not aware of that. I think my point still stands though that there is huge risk for metaphysical delusion without traditional framework. Humility is a virtue that is sorely lacking in society as a whole, never mind the arrogant solipsism that breeds within esoteric circles.

It's used by pakis too, and I know an Egyptian guy who says it every other sentence. I haven't noticed any particular ethnic associations for abusing that expression. I am Maghrebi, though, by the way, so fuck you.

there's another user responding to you too, and you have us confused, or perhaps you are just confused in general. I myself am also a member of a real tradition and am a religious man too and have no need for further recommendations along the lines you suggest - I have wasted enough time with that line of inquiry.

du calme, mon bougnoule.

Such cases may be rare, but "the number of the Afrad is indeterminate"

If we take the case of Al-Khidr and Moses, how could you even distinguish those who are of the Afrad if even Moses could not understand the actions of Khidr who appeared immoral and evil to someone who was literally the head of Qutb?

It's better to be safe and not delude yourself. But sure, you could be initiated into the Afrad, in theory.

Okay, so then why are you even posting. I was not the person you originally responded to. I just added a secondary remark. I am curious regarding to what religion you adhere though.

Even though I do agree in metaphysical delusion without traditional framework, the story of Khidr and Afrad in general is to remind the axiom "Still waters run deep".

I would be more worried of spiritual and fundamentalist arrogance rather than metaphysical delusion, it was the arrogance of Moses that he could not see the brilliance of Khidr.

No Muslims would attribute arrogance to Moses. I think it's more of a matter of the Quranic dictum (paraphrasing from memory): "Over every one that has knowledge we have place another who knows more". Khidr is of "those that know more", that's all. From an Islamic point of view, God imposes limits on whom he will, so it isn't arrogant for Moses to misunderstand what exceeds the limits God has placed on him. I'm personally quite fascinated with the Afrad as well, and I'm not a tedious hairsplitter when it comes to Orthodoxy, but I just think it's better not to kid yourself about such obscure things. You'll end up like those occultists who think they are in touch with "hidden masters of the astral plane" or such nonsense.

There are other stories of this caliber, relating to Moses, then again they might be of folkore and I cannot recall their origin. ie. Moses encountering a man who worships a wooden idol and Moses condemns him for such childish portrayal of the one true God, only later at night to receive a revelation that the man who worshipped the idol was a righteous servant of God, but his simple understanding was that of a farmer (or something like that) and the only way he could worship anything was that in a form of a wooden idol limited by his worldview.

Of course this story does not originate from Quran, but you get the point.

Certainly, I agree with the lesson contained in that story.

>sterile intellectualization
How are their works in any way a "sterile intellectualization", this seems to be the realm of subjective opinion and empty rhetoric and not an objective fact which a neutral 3rd observer would undoubtedly agree with. "Sterile" is completely subjective and "intellectualization" is just a meaningless pejorative that can be thrown at anything which is even moderately complex.
>The reactionary element is the gay part.
It depends on what you are talking about, a lot of what Evola gets into can be kinda larpy, but at the same time these people are generally correct that at the very core, these teachings (to say nothing of the tradition and cultural milieu in which they develop) often have implications which are anti-democratic, anti-egalitarian, anti-materialist, pro-tradition, pro-morality and so on.

>and look at the results: Schuon and all the other assorted weirdo
Schuon was the only one who did that, Guenon assimilated into Egyptian culture and was well-received in traditional Egyptian Sufi circles, others became traditional Catholics, some were practicing Buddhists. Moreover, your silly generalization ignores the vast amounts of peoples who read and agreed with the works of the Traditionalists and then went on to join various religions (or who were already members of them) and live private lives not captured by the media or recorded on the internet.
>Engaging properly with one's tradition,
That's exactly what Guenon and the others said though, you are strawmanning him by saying otherwise, Guenon was not coming up with his own unique interpretation of it but just wrote about how in Hinduism, Sufism and various other teachings that it's usually held that in order to fully understand a doctrine you need to be personally taught it (initiated into it) by an experienced master of it (aside from the rare exceptions which he mentions but those in themselves shouldn't be taken as undermining the importance of studying under a master)

>Schuon was the only one who did that,
and he certainly dragged practically all of Rene's buds along with him, except for the die-hard freemasons and a handful of oddball Catholics.
Buddhist? Little Marco "Mister Tradition" Pallis? The Tibetans certainly thought he was another LARPing Inji.
Hindu? Alain "the Paedo" Danielou? Ok.

Look, the fact of the matter is that the bulk, if not all (and I really am being charitable here) of these so-called traditionalists are a bad farce. To leave aside these woolly, half-baked theories, and to accept one's traditions on its own grounds alone is the only thing to do. anything else is a mockery.

Schuon's books are trash.

Evola was brilliant.

Guénon was brilliant writer: his personal life was a disaster with his relocation to Egypt and he exhibited extreme paranoia of sorcerers giving him Arthritis and Jewish boogeymen in Paris launching psychic attacks on meditating on his pictures with malicious intent.

Evola was the sanest of the bunch in his personal life and dealings, even though he had his questionable spermo-gnosis Tantra emphasis going on sometimes.

>and he certainly dragged practically all of Rene's buds along with him, except for the die-hard freemasons and a handful of oddball Catholics.
Lings and Nasr were part of Schuon's group but Burckhart did his own thing and was not a disciple of his. Yes obviously Schuon was a wacko who some of the others fell for, but Guenon, Coomaraswamy, Burckhart, Pallis and Borella were all without the weird scandals and syncretic stuff that plagued Schuon and his close associates. You are being intellectually dishonest and putting forth bad-faith arguments trying to attack the school because of the actions of a few, primarily one, of its members, despite that Guenon condemned what Schuon was doing; clearly distancing it from the ideas of the school itself. All 5 of the above people mentioned are examples of people who were members of the school who don't provide a bad example or cast aspersions on the school through their actions but you are trying to sweep them all under the rug because you have some sort of childish animus.
>The Tibetans certainly thought he was another LARPing Inji.
Do you have any sources for that or are you just pulling that out of your ass? As far as I'm aware he studied under various Tibetian spiritual teachers and met with representatives of all the major schools, I've never seen anything saying any Tibetians thought he was not genuine or that he was "larping", that seems like more bad-faith posturing
>Alain "the Paedo" Danielou? Ok.
Danielou is usually not considered a member of the Traditionalist school, but again do you even have a source for this? I've seen you claim this before and never provide any sources.

Alright, this is the last post I'll leave here on this subject, and only leave here now because this thread's subject is tangentially-related.

I'm that pretentious loser mysticanon who has in other threads mentioned a book I'm trying to write that teaches certain spiritual realities to readers of any background. I want to give you guys a concrete example of one of the realities I came to learn of, and want to teach people of now, and get your feedback on how to teach it. I consider it very profound, yet very simple. Essentially, I learnt that the usual state of subject-object distinction that we live under is an illusion, and that in reality we are entirely one with all phenomena around us. Visual, aural, textural, and everything else - we are all of these, but in our ordinary state we live identified with ourselves as an identity and a body, and thereby see everything beyond these - other objects, the sounds we hear, etc, as being "other". When you lessen your identification with your body and personhood (which I will teach of), this distinction dissolves, and you now LITERALLY see things around you as yourself - staring at an object in front of you, while identifying it as you. Observe picture attached. When you look at that flower in real life, you'd normally view it as separate to you. In reality, the way the camera shows it there is what it would really be. But only when you've left your usual identifications behind you, would you be able to personally see it in front of you like you do in that photograph.

I want to teach this simple principle, which we could call "phenomena monism", to as many people I can. Not only would it reveal to them the true non-dual nature of themselves and the reality they live in, but it would help make them more moral too, since people would be far less likely to harm other people when they literally see the other as "them". I personally live within this non-dual state now, it's really surreal and also very comfy.

My question that I was recently asking people here is whether there's something wrong in trying to explain these concepts to a lay audience, meaning, anyone of any intellectual/spiritual background. My desire was to reach as wide an audience as possible. I'm not an elitist, or even an intellectual. Much philosophy I've read goes over my head. But these realities I'm trying to teach of are in my grasp, and I want them to be in the grasp of others. I never always understood these things, and believe anyone could grasp and experience them.

However, people here have told me that writing for accessibility may damage the quality of concepts I'm touching upon, and therefore do more harm to me than good. But I am unsure if they are correct, and am now at an impasse as to what I should do. Taking the above as a concrete example of one concept I'd like to explain (and I have several more), can you tell me your views on how it could be conveyed? Despite its depth, could it not be communicated to anyone?

Attached: photo-1533467915241-eac02e856653.jpg (1000x667, 103K)

also i am really sensitive so p-pls no bully, if u can

Based schizo poster

Guénon certainly had some unhealthy paranoid thoughts going on in his latter days

>As for Leon de Poncins, it is a matter of a rather unpleasant story: shortly before the war, a certain Eve Louguet was his secretary who took part in a group of dangerous sorcerers. He himself was a victim of these people and concerning the people who by chance saw him again around 1940, they reported to me that he seemed to have undergone a true collapse. I never knew what became of him since, but, in such conditions, I have many doubts that he can still be alive. [He actually outlived both Guenon and Evola. ~ ed.]
>What is strange is that in the same period, one of the individuals in question tried to start a correspondence with me for some reason. At that time I did not know what it was about, but very soon the affair appeared suspicious to me, so that I immediately gave him a clean break.
- Letter from Guénon to Evola

He then later goes to say Aleister Crowley was secret advisor to Adolf Hitler (despite Crowley's close associates like Karl Germer ended up in concentration camps for even being associates of the "High ranking freemason Aleister Crowley")

>It is interesting to note that when I questioned Guénon concerning his accident (his case of pseudo-arthritis), and asked him whether an individual who has attained a certain spiritual level might not be safe from all attacks of 'magic' and wizardry, Guénon replied by reminding me that, according to tradition, the Prophet Mohammed himself was not invulnerable in this regard. Apparently, the reason for this is that 'subtle', 'psychic' processes operate in a deterministic fashion, not unlike physical processes (a knife stab, for instance, causes damage regardless of the kind of person it hits). (Actually, I have some further reservations on the matter: for I believe that the process of materialization of the individual - what contributes to distance him from the subtle forces of nature - can actually act as a protection against occult attacks of the kind I have just been discussing. Such attacks, therefore, would have little power over modern man, an intellectual type and city-dweller, whereas they would prove effective against more 'backward' and 'primitive' human groups.)
>It is rather odd, however, that René Guénon himself favored a similar interpretation at first. For when I got in touch with Guénon after the war, and informed him of my accident (in the secret hope that Guénon might help me to 'understand' the event), I was asked whether I suspected that someone might have acted against me by occult means. Guénon added that he himself had been confined to his bed for several months, apparently on account of arthritis, but actually as a consequence of an outside attack; and that he had recovered from his illness once the person responsible had been discovered and neutralized.
-Julius Evola

>his personal life was a disaster with his relocation to Egypt
How is that a disaster? If he felt more fulfilled living in a culture where things like Sufism were more common and if he felt happier there than in France is that really a failure? He had an active life in Egypt writing books, going to Sufi meetings, he was an associate of the head of Al-Ahzar at the time and would meet with him for conversations, effectively one of the (if not the single) most important authority in Sunni Islam. He remarried and raised a family, in all of the photos of him with his family he seems happy and contented. He seems more happy than Evola tbqh who became pretty black-pilled.

>Jewish boogeymen in Paris launching psychic attacks on meditating on his pictures with malicious intent.
Jewish ritual murder is unironically real and was commonplace in the middle ages (as documented in a masterly study by the son of the chief Rabbi of Rome, see below sources), it still probably goes on in certain Orthodox or Sabbatean circles today. From a culture with such a long history of secret occult and magic rituals, especially those of a malicious or taboo nature, is it really so far-fetched that certain Jews might wished to have harmed Rene? We know for a fact as demonstrated by the modern day that Jews monitor with laser-like precision anyone with incise critiques of those guiding western society and the popular media, it's quite natural that they would have seen his critiques in "the crisis of the modern world" and "reign of quantity" as veiled anti-semitism that needed to be countered through the elimination of the author.

unz.com/ishamir/the-bloody-passovers-of-dr-toaff/
unz.com/runz/american-pravda-oddities-of-the-jewish-religion/

> is it really so far-fetched that certain Jews might wished to have harmed Rene?

If you actually study history, Jews who want to get rid of people do not have to resort some sort of Voodoo fetishism.

They outright murder you with physical weapons.

I sugges you to read Julius Evola's brilliant article "The Secret Causes of History & The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion"
juliusevola.net/excerpts/The_Secret_Causes_of_History_and_The_Protocols_of_the_Learned_Elders_of_Zion.html

Even Evola comes to a conclusion:
>But then again, as far as the general radical Jewish-Masonic conspiracy thesis upheld in some milieus is concerned, the actual situation shows its inconsistency. It would be a real abandonment to fantasy to suppose that the leaders of the great conflicting powers — the United States, the USSR, and Red China — receive orders from an international center of Jews and Masons (almost nonexistent in China), and act accordingly in view of the same goal. Again, it is necessary to refer to a wider horizon of influences and to look elsewhere.

And drop your blood libel paranoia hysteria, that is just embarassing.

Magic is unironically real and if you don't realize this you are a complete brainlet, although the vast majority of practitioners in the modern world are charlatans or improvised larpers not actually doing it right, nevertheless the possibility that harm could be cause through it is very real. It was not at all paranoid for Rene to comment on that possibility. Just look up what Carl Sagan of all people had to say on the reputable areas of ESP and parapsychology research. The Nazis were into all sorts of larpy occult nonsense (The Thule society etc) and so Crowley would be a natural fit for them, it was hardly a far-fetched speculation for Guenon to make. Rather than confirming his paranoia you've just revealed yourself as a brainlet without the least knowledge of these matters.

Evola is much more correct in observing:
>Apparently, the reason for this is that 'subtle', 'psychic' processes operate in a deterministic fashion, not unlike physical processes (a knife stab, for instance, causes damage regardless of the kind of person it hits). (Actually, I have some further reservations on the matter: for I believe that the process of materialization of the individual - what contributes to distance him from the subtle forces of nature - can actually act as a protection against occult attacks of the kind I have just been discussing. Such attacks, therefore, would have little power over modern man, an intellectual type and city-dweller, whereas they would prove effective against more 'backward' and 'primitive' human groups.)

Voodoo only affects those tainted by the Negro pscyhe, the best psychic self-defense is the illuminating Eye in the Triangle of Fiat Lux.

Attached: Reason.jpg (275x183, 13K)

>Jews who want to get rid of people do not have to resort some sort of Voodoo fetishism.
>They outright murder you with physical weapons.
That's not mutually exclusive, they can do both, furthermore in the cases where occult magic was used people would obviously not know this had happened because it was cause death via some means that could be explained away like an illness or a fall etc and so there may be many many instances of this occurring that we don't know about

>And drop your blood libel paranoia hysteria, that is just embarassing.
Blood libel is just a useless pejorative designed to distract from the very real phenomena of Jewish ritual murder, which has been confirmed as real. Why are you asking that I stop mentioning it? Are you by any chance Jewish yourself? Does your silly animus for and fixation on Guenon stem from your Jewish identity? :^)

unz.com/runz/american-pravda-oddities-of-the-jewish-religion/

>one of the world’s foremost scholars in that field is Ariel Toaff, professor of Jewish Renaissance and Medieval Studies at Bar-Ilan University near Tel Aviv, and himself the son of the Chief Rabbi of Rome.

>In 2007, he published the Italian edition of his academic study Blood Passovers, based on many years of diligent research, assisted by his graduate students and guided by the suggestions of his various academic colleagues, with the initial print run of 1,000 copies selling out on the first day. Given Toaff’s international eminence and such enormous interest, further international distribution, including an English edition by a prestigious American academic press would normally have followed. But the ADL and various other Jewish-activist groups regarded such a possibility with extreme disfavor, and although these activists lacked any scholarly credentials, they apparently applied sufficient pressure to cancel all additional publication. Although Prof. Toaff initially attempted to stand his ground in stubborn fashion, he soon took the same course as Galileo, and his apologies naturally became the basis of the always-unreliable Wikipedia entry on the topic.

>Eventually, an English translation of his text turned up on the Internet in a PDF format and was also placed for sale on Amazon.com, where I purchased a copy and eventually read it. Given those difficult circumstances, this work of 500 pages is hardly in ideal form, with most of the hundreds of footnotes disconnected from the text, but it still provides a reasonable means of evaluating Toaff’s controversial thesis, at least from a layman’s perspective. He certainly seems an extremely erudite scholar, drawing heavily upon the secondary literature in English, French, German, and Italian, as well as the original documentary sources in Latin, Medieval Latin, Hebrew, and Yiddish. Indeed, despite the shocking nature of the subject matter, this scholarly work is actually rather dry and somewhat dull, with very long digressions regarding the particular intrigues of various obscure Medieval Jews. My own total lack of expertise in these areas must be emphasized, but overall I thought Toaff made a quite persuasive case.

>It appears that a considerable number of Ashkenazi Jews traditionally regarded Christian blood as having powerful magical properties and considered it a very valuable component of certain important ritual observances at particular religious holidays. Obviously, obtaining such blood in large amounts was fraught with considerable risk, which greatly enhanced its monetary value, and the trade in the vials of this commodity seems to have been widely practiced. Toaff notes that since the detailed descriptions of the Jewish ritualistic murder practices are very similarly described in locations widely separated by geography, language, culture, and time period, they are almost certainly independent observations of the same rite.

>Furthermore, he notes that when accused Jews were caught and questioned, they often correctly described obscure religious rituals which could not possibly have been known to their Gentile interrogators, who often garbled minor details. Thus, these confessions were very unlikely to have been concocted by the authorities. Furthermore, as extensively discussed by Shahak, the world-view of traditional Judaism did involve a very widespread emphasis on magical rituals, spells, charms, and similar things, providing a context in which ritualistic murder and human sacrifice would hardly be totally unexpected.

There are many kinds of magic found in all sorts of cultures throughout the world, including those without the least taint of negroidness such as magic being practiced by Northern European bards/shamans/druids in ancient times and also in north-east Asia. Any sort of broad generalization like that is bound to be incorrect.

Not them, but as someone more knowledgable, what are your views on the legitimate magical realities? I recently became an /x/ user, but am still very uninformed on this front. I've cursorily learnt of a few areas though, like the Fae Folk who live in forests and kidnap people who step into their stone circle (anytime I see a stone circle I'm literally leaving right away, running out of that damn shrub), broom-riding brujas/witches in Mexico with real freaky powers and the ability to harm people, Native American skinwalkers who are really humans but can shapeshift into dog-like beasts and need to lead a person into the woods with their consent, and then they steal their face/body I think? I'm not sure. It's too creepy to even think about. I also believe in Voodoo from African traditions, and you touched on that kind of "targeted energy magic" in your comment here.

Can someone explain Free Will to me? It's a central law from what I glean, but I'm not entirely certain how it works. We all have FW, and no one else can violate it without consequences. But if we willingly give it up, we ourselves are to blame. But basically Free Will is a law that all agents must adhere to, and without so, cannot perform much of their magic. Demons seemingly can't do anything to you without your consent, except I've heard stories of people being attacked by demons without having allowed them to. So I don't know. Maybe they generally follow it, but not absolutely.

Also is the Christian God, the Heavenly Father, real lol? If demons are real, and the Bible speaks of this, does that validate Christ and many other Biblical concepts? Are Demons the same as Asuras over in the East? Are Devas the same as Angels? I'm just tryna strip away the cultural aspects here and get to the realities at the bottom of them.

Also I think there's a hidden spiritual war right now, which our species is at the center of, and is unaware to. What do we do, bros? How do we help get ourselves out of the Kali Yuga? Will we die before it reaches it's lowest point, or will we see extraordinary events in our lifetime?

First of all, the Black Mass or this Passover sacrifice is a misunderstood superstition. It baffles me how everyone could take it literally in a sense children were kidnapped and killed. Are you perhaps familiar with the pic related? "Night Hag Visiting the Lapland Witches" by Henry Fuseli? The murdered (christian) child on the altar etc. It has origins in the catholic mass in a sense that the Priest therefore having made the bread into the Body of Christ (as he could theoretically do by virtue of his Apostolic power) did, as he thought, defile that Body by using it as the object and vehicle of lust.

>The Chassidim whose practice is the sacrifice of man. Thus preferably a child, but also an adult, is taken
from among the entiles, and ceremonially slain so that not a drop of blood is lost, lest the spirit of the victim, taking refuge in that drop, escape the Exorcist. This blood is then consumed as a sacrament, or employed for talismanic purposes. For once the spirit of the slain one is sealed up
into the spilt and gathered blood, it is multiplied in every part thereof, even as in the Mass the Body of Christ is said to be equally in all the myriad consecrated hosts, and His Blood in every drop of consecrated wine, everywhere and for all efficacious.

The problem is that you just like the bread you are served at the church is not actual Body of Christ:
the innocent and perfect male child victim is a metaphor for Semen.

Now back to the Night Hag or Lilith of pic related: All other sexual acts involving emission of semen therefore attract or other spirits, incomplete and therefore evil. Thus nocturnal pollutions bring succubi, which are capable of separate existence, and of vampirising their creator.

>Among the Jews are certain instructed Initiates of their Qabalah who hold, as We understand, the view that in the Zraa or Semen itself lies a creative force inherent which cannot be baulked. Thus they say that before Eve was made, the dreams of Adam produced Lilith, a demon, and that from his intercourse with her sprang evil races.

But voluntary sterile acts create demons, and (if done with concentration and magical intention), such demons as may subserve that intention. Thus, as Levi testifieth, to graft a tree successfully, the graft is fixed by a woman while the man copulateth with her per vas nefandum.

Attached: Night Hag Visiting the Lapland Witches.jpg (252x200, 7K)

bump

What a sweet man. Adorable little family.

Cosmic cycle are not able to stopped given by an individual given the fact they are of a supra-individual metaphysical order. There is no stopping of the Kali Yuga at least according to Guenon. I don't think it is unreasonable for us to see an antichrist in our lifetime. What that constitutes and how it manifests itself, who knows. Just continue to be a good person, cultivate your mind, and have humility in doing all such things.

>whether there's something wrong in trying to explain these concepts to a lay audience
Read the first chapter of "Initiation and Spiritual Realization" by Guenon. It will answer your question.

>Not them, but as someone more knowledgable, what are your views on the legitimate magical realities?
>It's too creepy to even think about.
Look up the "missing 411" books by the former police officer David Paulides or listen to his interviews, over the past century many hundreds (he says like ~1,400) people have vanished under very specific and weird circumstances in and around America's national parks and wilderness areas. It'd take too long to go into detail but in many of these cases they vanish after leaving the sight of other people for only a few minutes, there is no trace of them, and they are either never found or are found dead months and years later. There are a very specific set of patterns linking most of these (the books and interviews he gives on youtube explain them) that almost certainly suggest something /x/ is involved (like dogs not picking up any scent, the bodies appearing dead way later in areas already searched a dozen times, 3 year old kids vanishing and being found near the top of a mountain 15 miles away, the shoes are always gone, there always being freak rain/snow storms that start right when they vanish, members of a group always being lured away by lights/sounds/their dog running away as if something was trying to isolate the person who eventually vanishes when they are alone, it often happens around boulder fields and berry bushes etc and so on). I'm pretty confident there is some sort of supernatural entity/monster like skinwalkers or the wendigo abducting and killing these people (or its aliens).

I have also seen paranormal activity firsthand when living in buildings that people have died in within ~10 years of me living there, in multiple locations I've seen doors open and slam themselves shut right in front of me. As for the free-will question I think there could very well be entities that "infiltrate" into a person only after that person has given them some level of access and there could also be entities that could harm people without their consent (like above), but as long as you live a good life, act virtuously, and don't try to explore dark magic the chances of this are very low.

As for the different cultural interpretations of angels, demons etc I kind of see it all as different mechanisms/parts of the One, and that these may appear variously to different cultures and seem different because the experience of them is filtered through that cultures history, religious beliefs, customs and culture etc. I also agree about the spiritual war, one can always write books and join organizations but in the end the only failsafe way to make an impact is just to have kids and raise them the right way, and by that I don't mean regal them with a bunch of stories about magic and monsters but rather to instill good morals and a good character, and to teach them the beauty of spirituality/religion and the ultimate emptiness of things like hedonism, materialism, electronic entertainment and so on.

I can't find it online. Will a local library be likely to have it? Any key points you could drop as bullets for me here?

Attached: AVT_Rene-Guenon_5177.jpg (186x227, 20K)

Maybe in a university library, but even then that specific work isn't his most popular. Look for a pdf online. Also you should read Introduction to the Hindu Doctrines by Guenon if you haven't already

Attached: guenon.png (6161x5009, 3.81M)

Iia801305.us.archive.org/30/items/reneguenon/1952 - Initiation and Spiritual Realization.pdf

French people are so unique-looking. Are they related to Persians? They look like them to me. Seem like some of the most unique people among the Europeans.

Well, his kids are half Egyptian.

Why not just read him chronologically and then add some Ebola at the end?

Attached: Untitled.png (476x424, 17K)

>how everyone could take it literally in a sense children were kidnapped and killed
You interpreting that in a symbolic sense doesn't change and has little to do with the fact that hundreds of primary sources in Latin, Yiddish, German and other languages throughout the middle ages (extensively cited in the book by the son of the Rabbi of Rome that the article discusses); mention Christian children being found dead, drained of blood and/or mutilated near Jewish areas, and that in many of these instances Jews were caught and eventually confessed, and that many of the details of these confessions are very consistent even when separated by large distances in time and geography, suggesting that they were not all induced by beating but reflect a very real Jewish-specific dark-magic ritual involving murder they were caught doing. The primary sources were not written by people with knowledge of the symbolism you allege is behind it, but were often written by the secular authorities who carried out the investigation of the incidents, these were all real incidents and some of them were even the basis for why kings banished the Jews from certain European countries. Jewish ritual murder is a very real thing, although it's probably declined a lot in the modern world; I can believe it still goes on though, there was one infamous case in the last few decades involving the Donmeh in Turkey.

Attached: munkacsy_genny (1).jpg (1300x744, 158K)

this link works but before you put it into your browser you need to delete the "l" right before the https

oops, sorry

I'll respond to these comments properly a bit later, and thank you for the replies, but do you mind telling me what you think of my specific comment from earlier, with the flower-picture attached? I'll look into Guenon's comments pertaining to my inquiry, but I'd really appreciate a specific addressal of what I expounded on in that flower-comment. I don't have any people in my own life who can give me feedback on these matters, anonymous strangers are all I have.

What about the path of devotion ? more in my kind

The thing is, you seem to say that the essence of an object (in the philosophical sense) is based only on perspective, and try to prove this by changing perspective, the very thing that you claim to be relative. I'm not great at philosophy myself, but I think there is some circular logic in it. Either way, I think some notion of subject-object dichotomy is important for spiritual realization so that the uninitiated don't begin to identify with levels of spirituality they have not yet attained (i.e. Sainthood)

>into spirituality
>still racist
yikes

Bhakti marga (devotional path) is perfectly valid, and is especially suitable for people of a Kshatriya (warrior) character.

It seemed like it was just one of many figurative examples which can be used to get someone to intuitively grasp the idea of non-dualism (of which there are multiple shades of); I've seen some stuff like that before in some Hindu literature, although there are many other metaphors and figurative concepts used to explain it also. You shouldn't feel the need to validate that you can communicate these ideas to others, that you yourself learned them from reading texts means by default that they are communicable. In the end, of all the people that are guided by chance to read your book (if you write and publish it) only a subset will understand it on the level you intend anyway, it's best to not let worrying about such things impede the process of writing it; and also I'd agree with others who say that if you dumb it down and simplify it too much then people who otherwise might have been able to appreciate the more abstract and higher-level stuff might find the book to be more shallow and not as good.

I thought you said you were tryna quit this site m8? maybe install a website blocker

im not really a warrior, i was thinking of a path for someone peaceful, who just want to pray and likes ascetic teachings. I know quite well Evola but he seems way too rude and unsensitive according to me

Is there a copy of that pdf floating around anywhere? Now, I'm very curious.

Based and redpilled

I don't fully follow you, sorry. What I was claiming in that flower-post is that one's identifications are a modality that directly shapes one's perception of reality in every waking moment. And if one can understand this, and learn to not identify with their limited body and personhood, they can reach states of non-dual living wherein the distinction between them and their environment are dissolved - the sensation of the chair you're sitting on becomes you, the sights in front of you are similarly you, as are the sounds, and everything else. I'm not sure where it fits into "philosophy", really, only that we ordinarily live under a state of relative illusion, perceiving a subject-object distinction that isn't actually there, and that a person needs to realize this in order to realize reality's true nature. Which is that you are only awareness, and everything within that awareness is you. We normally identify as a self, and a body, and so these items are what we consider us. You stare at the hands in front of you, for example, and see them as you. But in reality, any object you grasp with them is equally you, and you'll be able to directly and literally experience this when you no longer attach yourself to the hands, and recognize everything in your awareness to be equally yourself. The photograph I showed above is a literal depiction of what you would see, once you've learnt to enter this state. I'm not saying the object disappears when you're not looking at it or any similar kind of assertion, I'm speaking on the nature of one's Self, and how it's typically extended only to one's immediate body and identity, but is in reality everything in reality without distinction, and can be realized as such when you realize the principles behind this. No subject and no object, everything in reality is in a state of eternal union, only perceivable once the ego, or identity, has been dissolved enough to see it. If this clarifies anything, let me know.

Mahavir, founder of the most peaceful religion ever, Jainism, was of warrior caste by birth, and his name means "Great Hero". I'm not sure how devotional Jainism is, though.

Racialism is fundamentally a competent of spiritualism either way you cut it.

well im not clear, i mean i don't to be a priest like guénon or a warrior like evola, im just a kind of medieval peasant who enjoys stuff of life but knows this isn't enough...

Then find any exoteric tradition which you find comfy and devotional, and don't trouble yourself over esoteric stuff. That's the best thing for you to do. Ideally, just stick with whatever traditional religion you were born into, or whichever is closest, and find a devotional element in that religion to attach yourself to with special fervor. If you are from a Christian background embrace Catholicism or Orthodoxy, and dedicate yourself especially to veneration of Mary and your patron saints.

this answer fits more to what i was looking for, thanks user

Your welcome, user. We all have to find the niche that we fit into, and fulfill the tasks that are most appropriate to us. In the end, we all reach the same place, in fact, there is no other Place to which we could go but the one Source of All.

Yes, that makes sense. I suppose I am trying to say that one runs the risk of metaphysical reductionism in trying to reduce all metaphysics down to only "the one." I don't know enough to give a refutation though. I'm pretty sure Plato's Parmenides dialogue gives a discussion about Monism vs Dualism. That might give you more ideas to ponder, regardless if you agree with it.

Living a simple life of prayer is certainly "enough." While everyone should learn the most they can, there is absolutely nothing wrong with living a simple life. I think there is a great beauty in the Saints of the Catholic tradition like St. Therese who simply loved Jesus Christ with all her heart, even though she was rather quiet and unsophisticated.

racialism, to me, is antithetical to any form of universalism, which I find to have more developed and sophisticated forms of spirituality. A racialism locates a void in others, and seeks to destroy this void by ultimately destroying others. It is a terror of the same against a true conversation with an Other. It is pitifully simple and a spiritual dead end.

Ok, which one of you fucks posted this

Attached: hand-emoji-clipart-discord-632612-7990528.png (1000x1000, 109K)

>that one guy who often shows up in Traditionalism/Guenon threads to poison the well by trying to claim it's all tainted by Schuon and who always says a bunch of crap about Guenon being paranoid stops posting as soon as someone asks if he's Jewish and starts posting about how Jewish ritual murder is actually very well-documented and fully supported by the evidence

really activates my matzah balls

I gotchu senpai, the entire book in pdf form is available here:

israelshamir.net/BLOODPASSOVER.pdf

re: Lings, see his disbelief at being confronted with evidence of Schuon's misbehaviour. Burckhardt: ditto.
re: Pallis, yes, see Sangharaksita's memoirs, iirc.
re: Danielou, you must be kidding, but then again you don't seem likely to consider anything that runs counter your well-entrenched views. Research your idols more closely user.
and younger days too, cf: business with his niece. lifelong paranoia, in fact.

They were probably kind people who were mostly reserved. However their adherents are mostly fanatical LARPers (like that deranged schizo Guenonfag). It's always the 'traditionalists' that utilities modern technology to shitpost about their ancient ideology.

Utilises*

I haven't so far read any of the major scriptures of the world properly, and realized the earlier point on my own one day, when I stared at an object relaxed-ly enough to realize it wasn't "separate" or "different" from me. I'm not sure, therefore, which of the world's non-dualistic scriptures speak exactly of what I'm here describing. You mentioned the term "figurative", but what I described there isn't theoretical at all, it's not any sort of formal philosophical opining. The picture of the flower above is literally what I see a flower (or anything else) in front of me as being, because I've learnt how to reach this state of expanded awareness. It's tough to describe in words, hence why I used that photograph. The way that there's no distinction between the frame and the subject within it, unlike in our normal perception wherein we, the frame, see everything in front of us as being "other" to us. The oneness of that photograph is what you will literally experience should you dissolve your limited-identifications, wherein there's less of any "you" perceiving a "flower", only the "perception" itself. A camera, with an open shutter. Every object you see in front of you right now, in your environment, is literally that flower, and looks like that, but you won't see it as such while you identify as "me" and "that", because your awareness has been constricted by said identification. People who do psychedelics, and experience "ego-deaths", have this identification chemically collapsed for them, wherein they initially see reality as people normally do and then instantly transition into seeing it like that flower photograph, or the picture attached.

I don't even know what all schools of non-dualism exist, or which one I myself would be of, save for my basic agreement with Advaita. I'm not thinking about that anymore, only trying to teach myself of as many of these realities as possible. I probably won't subscribe to any school of thought entirely, if I end up reading into it and realizing it to disagree with what I've learnt in myself. I mentioned earlier that I'm not an "intellectual" and philosophy is not something I'm proficient at, whatever I philosophically align with, mainly non-dualism, is by my practical experiences relating to it.

I will surely leave this site real soon. These posts here are among the last I'll make, since I needed advice and have nobody in my own life to provide me any.

I appreciate the feedback though. I do agree with your points regarding only some people being able to understand it in the end. I guess I shouldn't try to scrape the absolute floor of the ocean, but cast the net low enough that, for a general audience, most could grasp some, and some would grasp most.

Attached: raindrop-leaf-flower-plain.jpg (1650x1070, 133K)

You might enjoy reading Huxley's Doors of Perception. It isn't necessarily the same non-dualism necessarily, but Huxley had a similar epiphany related to visual stimulus similar to you. You might enjoy the work and it's pretty short.

find a Dzogchen master, and leave the crap behind you. good luck!

>spiritual semite spotted

if this isn't master-b8r level b8ing, then I don't know what is. Effing brilliant, Effendi.

What can you tell us about Guenon's homosex relationship with Agueli? And what about the merry widow Madame Dina?

This post brought to you by 100IQ

Where does one go to find a spiritual master? Other than living in some far eastern country and completely changing my living circumstances it seems like something out of a myth, and not even a truly attainable thing in the west anymore. The only thing I could see as being similar in the west would be finding a spiritual father in the eastern Catholic/Orthodox tradition. But that's not even easy either.

There are a lot of monasteries in the West you can visit. You don't need to see your spiritual father every day. Even a few times in a lifetime can be sufficient if you really put into practice the wisdom he gives you.

I am not a semite. What are you insinuating with this post?

well the good news is that it is not necessary to go East, as many masters either live or visit the West often enough. But you'll have better luck checking out dedicated forums than this shitfest.

no insinuation, just a plain statement that you are in effect a semite on an inner level, regardless of your DNA. your espousal of universalism is proof enough of that.

universalism is a characteristically european doctrine, i.e. utter non-traditional nonsense.

if you aren't going to offer anything of substance, might as well just end this discussion now.
Enjoy your super secret club, dude.

this is a supreme amount of bad faith. you are very clearly non-european.

"liberté égalité fraternité " is the catchphrase of a European revolutionary ethos, not a quote from the Talmud Bavli

and you are also unacquainted with the hidden undercurrents which have affected European history too I see. Rather embarrassing for a "traditionalist". And again, that semitic bad faith.
Good bye.

>Good bye.
ok see you later fren

>Guénon was brilliant writer: his personal life was a disaster with his relocation to Egypt and he exhibited extreme paranoia of sorcerers giving him Arthritis and Jewish boogeymen in Paris launching psychic attacks on meditating on his pictures with malicious intent.
pic related

Attached: guenon-schuon.jpg (604x383, 73K)

>Sangharaksita's memoirs,
You mean Dennis Philip Edward Lingwood? You mean some Buddhist Anglo claims that "oh those Tibetians didn't actually think Lings was legit", and we are supposed to take his words as verbatim truth without supposing that this might just be the regular posturing and infighting that goes on between western gurus? (assuming that he even says this and that you aren't just pulling this out of your ass). Of course he would have an incentive to say that someone whose views he disagreed with wasn't actually well-received by the easterners he idolizes. The point is that there are not actual sources of quotes or writings from the Tibetans themselves saying as much. Guenon himself was well received by both Muslims and by Hindu sages like Ramana Maharshi.

>Danielou, you must be kidding,
Again, he wasn't a Traditionalist, and with no source your claim can be dismissed as bullshit, the last stratagem of someone with no good argument left

>see his disbelief at being confronted with evidence of Schuon's misbehaviour. Burckhardt: ditto.
It's hardly surprising that they would be inclined to not believe it at first, that sort of literature and subjects is usually antithetical to sexual exploitation etc, that they were deceived by Schuon and initially skeptical about reports of him doing bad things does not mean that Burckhardt himself was wacko or in any way bad though, simply being initiated into a spiritual order does not give you an infallible ability to see through deception and instantly judge people's souls.

> business with his niece. lifelong paranoia, in fact.
You haven't provided any sources for these that we can verify, only unsubstantiated accusations. Guenon's thoughts about possible threats that you've already cited were very well founded, as demonstrated by the occultist and magic circles extremely active at the time and given the long history of Jewish ritual murder and harmful spells.

>Dzogchen
>other crap

Why waste time with a slapdash syncretic assembly of an assortment of earlier Hindu, early Mahayana and Hindu-Tantric teachings when the doctrines contained in the originals are so much more profound? Dzogchen isn't even the best form of Buddhism.

sure, you know what, practically everything I mentioned should be available online, bar Schuon's n00dz, you'll be disappointed to hear, after his buds in Bloomington got some lawyers on the case. Some digging around could turn them up I guess, if you were interested.
Lingwood is another problematic figure, but his anecdotes - again, available online in his memoirs, if memory serves, have no ulterior motive, except perhaps for gratuitous slander, something all these guys were well into, impersonality notwithstanding.
Danielou, there's a whole book on his misdeeds, if you read French.
And you know what user, I'm disappointed in you. You do know that all of Guenon's works, letters and articles are online on a searchable website, don't you? You could go and read the letters I mentioned and see for yourself the state of mind of your idol, instead of accusing others of unsubstantiated accusations etc etc. The material's there, I ain't going to quote it chapter and verse. If you can't read French, you have no business chiming in.
PS: your Jewish blood libel stuff is a great addition to the arsenal, this is better than parody.

Why do you guys personally read into these Traditionalist fellows? What personal benefit or insights have you gained from their work?

I'm no friend of yours.

A standpoint outside of the narrow confines of modernity, and an appreciation of what it means to be human, a sense of the universal metaphysical context of all things, an appreciation of the true place of art and religion in human life and history, a profound insight into myth and symbol, etc

>reading theravada/Vedic Brahminist material because its the ‘original’ source
Cringe and bluepilled

the inside scoop on Monsieur Rene: his private secretary's private memoirs (French only):
dossierschuonguenonislam.blogspirit.com/files/Dossier confidentiel inedit.pdf

>PS: your Jewish blood libel stuff is a great addition to the arsenal, this is better than parody.

So are you claiming to know better on this subject than Ariel Toaff the professor of Jewish Renaissance and Medieval Studies at Bar-Ilan University, the son of the Chief Rabbi of Rome?? Even though he extensively documents conclusive evidence that Jewish ritual murder is real spanning throughout the centuries in hundreds of secondary and primary sources from the medieval era in French, German, Italian, Latin, Medieval Latin, Hebrew and Yiddish? Are you telling me that perhaps the single most qualified scholar to investigate this subject spent years doing so with his grad students, concluded that it was real, but that you actually know better?!?! How presumptuous.... I can't help but think maybe you have a 'personal motive' for downplaying the conclusive evidence amassed by Toaff.

Attached: vlcsnap-2016-02-23-22h11m02s118.png (480x360, 173K)

oh man, I didn't think it could get better - but it just did, thanks. No , I don't doubt your dear professor Toaff. But I do doubt your sanity and good faith.
You are still a semite, since Arabs are also semites, isn't that right?

Are any of you guys into magic yourselves? Have you or do you try to use magic for certain purposes?

Are any of you wokepilled on elite satanism and illuminati, pedogate (including pizzagate), antarctica,

How do stop the elites, bros? They're hurting our children in unimaginable manners and unbelievable numbers. This is a serious question. To those who believe in and know of all this /x/ stuff, how do we stop the shadowy figures who presently rule our world and keep it in this depraved state?

By not doing anything.

Attached: 6a00d83451c0aa69e201bb082ab9db970d-800wi.jpg (500x378, 78K)

>Arabs are also semites, isn't that right?
Not that guy, but this is only kinda-sorta true. Lebanese Arabs who were decended from the Phoenecians are Semitic, but otherwise Arabs are Caucasoid.

>Lebanese Arabs who were decended from the Phoenecians are Semitic,
nassimnicholastaleblenseflare.jpeg

It's true tho.

>thinking that because he attached himself to a meme like Dzogchen that he can cast aside all the previous doctrines that Dzogchen was largely built on as "crap"
>not realizing that what Buddha taught during his life was almost entirely already found in the pre-Buddhist Upanishads and that he was just a new spinoff iteration of the same principles with a new twist
>not realizing that Tantra existed co-extensively with Upanishadic (Vedantic) teachings before Buddha ever lived and that Tantra was primarily Hindu long before Buddhist Tantra began
>not realizing that "Vedic Brahmanism" is a strawman concocted by Buddhists to obscure the source of Buddha's ideas
>not being aware of Shankaracharya's critiques which BTFO the types of Indian Buddhism that he interacted with in his time and that Buddhism's only recourse is that these were flawed understandings of what Buddha actually taught which was best preserved by other schools that Shankaracharya was unaware of
>not knowing that Tibetian Buddhism if you go back far enough cites Hindu-Tantric Shaivite yogis as part of their spiritual lineages
>not knowing that Nagarjuna didn't prove anything and was btfo by literally who college professors in the 20th century who showed how he relied on strawmanning, pigeonholing and otherwise flawed logic in his arguments,
>not knowing that Nagarjuna didn't even know about the Tathagatagarbha Sutras
>not realizing that Dzogchen is a syncretic assemblage of earlier teachings which all (with the exception of Bon which is a meme) if you go back far enough stem from non-Buddhist sources, and that Dzogchen isn't even the best of these as it views the 2nd turning of the wheel as absolute and the 3rd turning as conditional, when actually it's the reverse and schools like Jonang and certain areas of Ch'an are correct about this and their ideas more reflect what Buddha actually taught.
>being so ignorant of the history and intellectual antecedents of Dzogchen that you refer to everything it's based on and without which it would be nothing as 'crap'

yikes

Attached: Buddha-Weekly-dalai-lama-laughing-Buddhism.jpg (650x432, 38K)

I am solely of European descent

a semite is what you are inwardly. this is why you have converted to a semitic belief.

You seem extremely knowledgeable. How do I quickly update myself on the history of this side of Eastern philosophy like you have? Is there a single or couple resources that can summarize it all for me?

For one situated in the Universal (in the metaphysical sense) there can be no question of conversion, only that of adopting whichever outward forms circumstances make conducive to one's contemplative ends, and then abandoning those forms when they no longer suit one.

great display of modesty there, bud.
just remember that you have a lot to be modest about.

I refer to your constant shilling, misrepresentation, ignorance and lies as 'crap', like most of the rest of the nonsense spouted ITT. and not the doctrines themselves, debatable as they may be.

One who is conscious of his own metaphysical nothingness as an individual being is literally incapable of pride.

whatever you say, Monsieur Rene.

>/x/tier thread devolves in a /pol/thread
Interesting

I have read the first chapter, and personally don't think it addresses someone in my situation. But thanks for leaving it here.

True, I should definitely read into more, proper philosophy before I start to synthesize my own based on my limited experiences. I haven't read Parmenides yet - I'll get to it in future, thanks for reminding me. I also find this a pretty comfy thread, to see people of all kinds of creeds here. Yourself presumably Christian, others Buddhists and Sufis and whatever else. Not often do we get such threads. Do you know if the concept of the One was in Plato's own dialogues, or is that only Plotonus's later addition? Do we have any idea what Plato's "God" was, save for the Realm of Forms?

It's on my list now, thanks.

Not sure what this means, sorry. I'm not familiar with Doggy-chan.

God, I wish that was me.

Thanks for the detailed response. I have heard about Missing 411 before, but haven't looked into it. I really, really wonder what could be behind it. "Supernatural" leaves so many possibilities, but assuming there's only one, what could it be? Especially in the cases where a person is seemingly transported, without any injuries or death to their person?

Not personally into raising kids, but I agree with the rest.

True, true. Who knows what this lifetime will have in store for us inhabitants of it. I really wish we didn't have to be here, now of all times. Did we choose to be reborn here and now, a realm presently in the Kali Yuga? Or did we just get unlucky, incarnating into a bad realm and era by the chance of our position within the soul-system? I presume there are many other realms already existent, other Earths perhaps, and they are not in such a rough period. I wonder if there's any benefit to being here now, like an easier trampoline to enlightenment? A karma multiplier for those who retain virtue amid such depravity? Perhaps some of us are here for the very purpose of uplifting others during such a degenerate age? I wish I knew how all this pre-birth stuff worked, and the nature of different realms and all that. I guess few of us do, though. I just know that I wish I weren't living during this period, of all periods one could live in.

bump

do any of you spiritualbros have traditions or techniques that aim to alleviate depression?

t. depressed and unfamiliar with spiritual doctrines

similar request from me, desu

Wish I could help you friend, sorry.

You have to identify the deeper sources of your depression. Is it anguish? Is it unfulfilled longing? Is it feeling out of place? tradition would have things to say about these various maladies. Actually in the book linked here
ia801305.us.archive.org/30/items/reneguenon/1952 - Initiation and Spiritual Realization.pdf
There is a chapter on anguish and its sources (fundamentally a form of fear, which is a form of ignorance). Buddha's thought on dukkha (often translated as "suffering" but it involves more than that) might also be helpful to you.

thanks a lot kind user, i'll try and read it when i get time. i was hoping there were specific techniques for alleviating it. but philosophy is good too. i don't know what the nature or source of mine is, just that i've been carrying it around for quite some time now

How the fuck can people believe in the metaphysical in 2019? It baffles me that people, especially first worlders, aren’t rational human beings who have dropped this bullshit by this point.
>inb4 idiot
Prove to me the metaphysical with the scientific method

Everyone believes in metaphysics either explicitly or implicitly. There is no belief that doesn't have underlying metaphysical assumptions.

prove to me the scientific method with the scientific method.

*blocks your path*

Attached: jew.jpg (485x482, 39K)

>being this afraid of anatta
yikes

>Prove to me the metaphysical with the scientific method
this is your brain on STEM

You can't practice "traditionalism" you fucking moron.

how the fuck is this non literature thread still up...

Traditionalism is the ultimate cuck. You basically let dead dudes from the past fuck your women and society. lmao @ ur life.

the fuck does this even mean, holy shit lol

that you're a submissive beta onions creature

Op here. Look some of you guys are alright, and i appreciate some of the lengthy replies and others not so much.

However i have yet to come across a response that seems to fulfil the criteria to which i am asking, and I may be closer to the truth than any of you fucktards would dare to admit.

There is something PRACTICAL, that we can engage in. I did not read a single PRACTICAL suggestion to help direct oneself into this mode of being. Not only this, but some suggestions are beneficial in a pure reality sense albeit a metaphysical sense. Some acts can kill two birds with one stone, i.e

Through my own subjective experience is the act of "lowering ones gaze”. When I am surround with borderline nakedness, I can do 1 of 2 things:

1. Lower ones gaze or 2. Allow my desires to consume me

With 1, I gain two benefits. I strengthen my will from a pure reality sense, also I am elevated, in every given moment of its occurance which I resist, my power grows. With 2, my will is weakend and I have allowed desire to be my god, although I get to see a brief moment of beauty the tradeoff is not equivalent as to the beauty I have observed has of nothing to benefit me.

There is obviously a middle way, however thats part of the reason I started this thread which alas, has not been of much use.

repentance, seriously.