I've studied Evola's metaphysics extensively and feel like some sharing some...

Emberfire
Emberfire

I've studied Evola's metaphysics extensively and feel like some sharing some knowledge. AMA

Attached: evola-3-0.jpg (21 KB, 348x480)

Other urls found in this thread:

iapsop.com/ssoc/1913__crowley___liber_cccxxxiii_the_book_of_lies.pdf
hermetic.com/caduceus/qabalah/kabbalah
hermetic.com/texts/Chaldean
i.imgur.com/YpeA2KZ.jpg?1
cakravartin.com/virtual-library
youtube.com/watch?v=yuJC784mzeE
lumineboreali.net/

RavySnake
RavySnake

Have you read any other works on metaphysics?

BlogWobbles
BlogWobbles

What’s up with black people?

VisualMaster
VisualMaster

What led you to be interested in him?

ZeroReborn
ZeroReborn

knowledge of yours-----------mine

and so forth

a class of people made redundandt by the advances of another, which make increasingly the independence of this class into the dependence of THIS class

Playboyize
Playboyize

Plenty, I've got a working knowledge of both Eastern and Western metaphysical traditions, exoteric and esoteric.

Evola was pretty unambiguous about his dislike of inferior, negroid races. He believed they were of a denser, darker metaphysical stock than the ariyan-type.

However, that said, and the last thing I want to do here is sanitize Evola for the PC reddit crowd, but he knew, at best, this was only a general description of the spiritual condition of negroids. Just like an absolute woman is superior to the mechanical man, so does it all come down to the quality of one's self. Appeals to racial identities or the collective are, ultimately, a fiction. You are alone with your soul and responsible for it.

He has an acute understanding of the human condition that is ontological as opposed to economic, social, political, or "merely" existential and religious. He knows what's up. He knows suffering is a problem of reality and not a problem of contingent social circumstances, though the latter definitely contributes.

He's able to step outside the ring of desire and (un)fulfillment and diagnose the world from a perspective that understands matter as the cyclic, self-propelled (and therefore senseless arbitrary) movement of energy. There is no all-abiding cosmic harmony: the universe is agon, eternal conflict, the boil of unconscious forces.

The ego of the human being is that through/by which these forces legitimate themselves in the human. My ego tells me to fuck, eat, sleep, kill (if I have to), because the system that I am has been engineered by eons of evolution to fuck, eat, sleep, kill, etc.

Carnalpleasure
Carnalpleasure

the planet is warming. dark skin is a warm climate adaptation. dark skinned people are moving north, displacing the cold adapters.

literally BTFO every type of evola idea about race, tradition or ethnic superiority.

climate > western civilisation.

Snarelure
Snarelure

Does Evola have much to say about Taoism?

I don't remember him talking about it, but I haven't read Evola in some time.

DeathDog
DeathDog

the spiritual condition of negroids

He seem to me to speak almost mythically at times.
This thought came to me while I was reading his Revolt.

Lunatick
Lunatick

There is no all-abiding cosmic harmony: the universe is agon, eternal conflict, the boil of unconscious forces.

How could you assume there isnt a cosmic harmony ie cosmological idealism when your intellect is premised off the very causality that it comes to understand in nature in and of the understanding itself. How do you indiscriminately form reason/consequent cause and effect without this harmony

Attached: 1521200618416.jpg (347 KB, 571x540)

Evil_kitten
Evil_kitten

the universe is agon, eternal conflict, the boil of unconscious forces

There is harmony in eternal strife. Evola understood this.

Also, read some Heraclitus.

iluvmen
iluvmen

He admired the Taoist ideal of wu-wei, and the coinciding of immanence and transcendence in its philosophy.

That is, the identification of the self not with its aggregate but with the fertility of the void, that reality is fundamentally change and as such is always-already beyond itself, always-already dissolving the forms it creates. This flux is peace because suffering, unease, restlessness is only ever identification with determinate facticity. Life is this balancing act between the determinate and the unmanifest. An immanent-transcendence: I struggle with the Law of the world in full recognition of its groundlessness, its irreality.

As Lacan puts it, there is no meta-language for being, it just is, analytical thought is only an articulation of the "is" (generally programmatic, in the form of the "ought" of ethics), and as the Tao abides the froth of manifestation, so does the initiate abide the tantrums of the false self, because he (as subject) is fundamentally the void of his identity with himself, A = A (which Evola calls the I-that-is-I).

Let me know if this is a bit over your head. I'm trying not to dumb this down.

Poker_Star
Poker_Star

How do I get laid?

(I know this sounds toungue in cheek but Evola wrote a lot about sex, curious how he thinks female attraction works)

Flameblow
Flameblow

How does Evola think a state should function? Like how do we collectively move forward as a society. The common trope these days seems to be put more in science and tech and we move on, but we have seen all that does is reward a culture of flashiness and creates vacuous imbeciles with no interest in what’s around them.

How should we then move forward on the bigger questions like morality, labour and course art.

TechHater
TechHater

From what I skimmed from Revolt Against the Modern World, Evola seems to be invested in some strain of Platonism, as in the first chapter he states,
"In order to understand both the spirit of Tradition and its anithesis, modern civilization, it is necessary to begin with the fundamental doctrines of the two natures.
According to this there is a physical order of things and a metaphysical one ... a mortal nature and an immortal one ... a superior realm of 'being' and the inferior one
of 'becoming'."

If this is the case, i.e. the division of finite and infinite, how do you defend this from traditional attacks on Platonism, say for example, the problem of how there is causality
between two kinds which are different in a radical sense. Or, do you not agree with Evola on this point, or do you think I am misinformed?
I ask this as I feel the question of how a person deals with being qua being in their greater systems is an important cornerstone.

Attached: 1518141189616.png (34 KB, 545x443)

PurpleCharger
PurpleCharger

He explicitly rejected naive, exoteric ideas of harmony (the "stain" of evil contributes to the harmony of the whole, etc.)

No, there is no default harmony, this harmony is only achieved in the self as the integrality of the self. I've already read Heraclitus. Heraclitus and Eckhart and Evola are saying the same thing: all is fluxion, but the fact of change is itself eternal and immutable, and so can serve as the basis for stability-within-flux. This is the peace of the wheel, not a peace beyond the wheel.

Of course at the basic level he assumes a correlation between thought and world, but 1) this distinction breaks down at higher levels of self-realization and 2) of course there is (temporary) equilibrium within flux or else there would be no basis for our thematizing agon /as/ agon. Like Schelling's point: meaning can only exist as meaning in a background of non-meaning. Or Deleuze: sense emerges, is gauranteed, validated, by non-sense.

Your point actually touches on his larger idea of nature as a "purposeless purposiveness", but that's another story

Ignoramus
Ignoramus

What are his metaphysical beliefs

Soft_member
Soft_member

This is the peace of the wheel, not a peace beyond the wheel.

Classical metaphysics is a lot more monistic than you seem to realize and, like it or not, Evola is an heir to classical metaphysics.

SomethingNew
SomethingNew

It's actually funny because a lot of what initiatic literature has to (indirectly) say about this topic is just an occult formulation of shit like "don't be thirsty" and "do not show need".

Well, first, Evola distinguishes between the phallic male (what we're seeing in a society inundated with porn and sexualized imagery that holds up the surface masculinity of sexual conquests as the paragon of manhood) and the male of the ariyan-type. There's also another type of male, the kind /pol/ calls "soyboys", that are fascinated with femininity/the image, but that's another story for another day.

Very simply put: the phallic male covers up his insufficiency and need with a woman, the ariyan requires nothing outside of himself to complete him. To move towards something outside of oneself is to testify to your need for this thing, and hence your lack. He has a very Plotinian idea of desire: I create my lack in the desire, my lack does not pre-exist my desire. Like Orpheus resisting the urge to look back: only when you refuse the narrative of lack can you truly transcend it. Or, in other words, only when you stop checking to see if the Thing is with you (the object of longing, striving, etc.), is it actually with you.

The proper male spirituality involves self-integration, self-consolidation. The becoming of: a center, a monad, a pole star, as the sun exerts its "will" on the planets without it itself becoming involved in the annular movement of matter. Like Nietzsche says through Zarathustra, "wisdom loves a warrior".

Become your own principle, do not look for it in others. But this is just a platitude you're reading on Veeky Forums, which is why Evola says the self has to encounter the void to be violently purified of attachment, there is no other way.

likme
likme

Political solutions are phantoms, strive after your soul. The individual goes into death as the individual, be involved in the world, sure, but be individuated.

There is no way these teachings will resonate with the masses. "We" don't move forward, you do.

Poker_Star
Poker_Star

did he actually support rape or is that a wikipedia meme?

SniperWish
SniperWish

Tell me Evolas views of the decline of western civilization

RumChicken
RumChicken

How does Buddhism tie in with his philosophy?

eGremlin
eGremlin

He doesn't reify the Forms. He is mum about the metaphysical status of his "ontology of layers": whether or not the initiate "goes" somewhere or simply experiences another dimension of consciousness is, at the end of the day, the difference that makes no difference.

I believe he subscribes to something like Eckhart's univocal causality: the just man does not "participate" in justice, he actualizes justice in his being just. Justice "participates" in him as much as embodies a justice to "participate" in. Or, as Alan Moore puts it, "God is just the idea of God [in the void]". That last bit is mine.

Analogical correspondences are legitimate; different things reflect the same ontological principles, but principles that are immanent to a universe of space-and-time.

There is no going "anywhere", the initiate simply learns to stop experiencing the universe as the correlate of his ego. He describes this as the "signless" void-state, signless because objects no longer appear as they appear in the dimension of "for-me".

GoogleCat
GoogleCat

Fairly complex, but if I had to sum it up: the spirit must evolve into the Sun of the system that one is. Notions of centrality, polarity, peace, detachment, and superiority abound.

Evola isn't a dualist. More a dual-aspect monism. One primal, undifferentiated force that either descends, or ascends.

viagrandad
viagrandad

No, he didn't support rape, dude. I guarantee you if you post the passage in question I can give you a reasonable explanation.

Quality degenerating into the worship of quantity. Depth and intensity of consciousness being slowly replaced by breadth of worldly power and influence.

He thought modern society's collapse was as unavoidable as a falling object hitting the ground, that the forces that are precipitating its collapse are as objective, contingent, and mechanical as any other. The Western delusion is believing they are not.

He offers one of the best expositions on Buddhist doctrine out there imo.

happy_sad
happy_sad

Not OP, but I believe he alluded the act of rape is a result of degeneration of the self.

Inmate
Inmate

consciousness being slowly replaced by breadth of worldly power and influence.

How do I liberate myself from these vile powers?

Playboyize
Playboyize

Realtalk? Exercise, meditation, eating clean, mindfulness, solitude.

RavySnake
RavySnake

ok I clicked on the link in the wiki article and it just links to some liberal article clearly misrepresenting his beliefs. his wiki has always been an inside joke to me and a couple of friends fro how radical and crazy it makes him seem right out of the gate, altho after having read revolt against the modern world his ideas are very well put and poetic. how much does his metaphysics of history differ from spenglers? im nearly done with decline of the west and I notice a lot of similarities. thanks for your help, user!

CouchChiller
CouchChiller

Methods for meditation? There are so many.

I crave liberation beyond all else. It's all it think about.

New_Cliche
New_Cliche

Where does one start in understanding metaphysics?

Stark_Naked
Stark_Naked

Someone posted pic related in regards to Evola's thoughts on rape.

If you look at the same (((wiki))) page from three years ago, he sounds a lot more reasonable, and his flirtation with fascism is portrayed much more fairly.

Attached: evola-rape.jpg (236 KB, 1852x359)

Need_TLC
Need_TLC

I believe him and Spengler are in good agreement, this idea of a central, spiritual nucleus gradually dissipating itself into mechanized, bureaucratized collectivity through time (culture -> civilization in Spengler's system).

Lord_Tryzalot
Lord_Tryzalot

Simple breathing meditation is a good start. Follow your breath, learn to observe thoughts instead of reacting to them.

happy_sad
happy_sad

Lots of study, suffering, and solitude.

Yeah I don't understand how anyone can read this and assume he's supporting rape. It makes perfect sense.

5mileys
5mileys

my last question, not trying to waste ur time but very curious

how hegelian would you call evola?

likme
likme

I forgot to mention, the user clarified later he was quoting Evola from his perspective why a man would justify rape. Evola actually condemns the act itself.

Firespawn
Firespawn

oh, that makes a lot more sense. surprised no ones deleted it yet.

BinaryMan
BinaryMan

I just want to say I appreciate your reply. You are the first person I have seen to not only give a substantive response on this
point, but to also to not shy away from using determinate terminology in you explanation versus the usual misdirecting mysticism
and toothless aestheticism.

Though I am uncertain whether I agree with the possibility of the 'signless' void-state, a concept which strikes me as something akin to 'the night in which all cows are black' and losing sight
of the necessary rungs of the ladder of consciousness, I do find the notion of univocal causality plausible, and as it ostensibly 'leads to' the void-state or the completion of the circle of sorts it does at least show
as far as I am concerned there is actual concrete work in place.

I would like to congratulate you for single-handedly reforming Evola's reputation as a serious metaphysician in my mind.

Supergrass
Supergrass

I'm liking this. Go nuts.

A very good question.

If we take the standard historicist reading of Hegel, Evola's is an inverted teleology: the Spirit doesn't evolve from unconsciousness into consciousness as orthodox Hegel would put it, it degenerates from its primal condition of identity with the noumenal (another way of saying, ancient man's immersion/coalescence with the immediacy of being) into the morass of thought.

However, the more Zizekian, unorthodox Hegel is more in line with Evola's views. The universe is contingent, agonic, without ontological gaurantee? Check. Spirit is not some transcendent oversoul but immanent, processual, a phenomenon of reality and reality alone? Check. Necessity is only narrativized contingency ("everything happens for a reason...")? Check. Essence is only appearance qua appearance, ie objects appear only as the appearing of themselves and don't participate in some transcendent platonic Form? Check. The subject is nothing but the infinite power to say "no", which paradoxically doubles as the infinite "yes"? Check.

However, where Evola and Hegel somewhat diverge: for Hegel, the self-mediation of reality is all there is, and is fulfilled by Absolute Knowledge (which is the knowledge that all there is /is/ this eternal arising and passing away of shapes of consciousness, which kinda takes away the sting of negative a bit since we're no longer in denial of this fact), while for Evola the negative /itself/ must be negated. In other words, the circle of the dialectic is only fulfilled by its cutting, while for Hegel the closure of the circle is fulfilled/"soothed" by our recognition that it is a circle, and there's no other reality to go "to". Hegel kinda comes close, but he's not a big mystic.

Fried_Sushi
Fried_Sushi

What would Evola think of Arnold Schwarzenegger's life?

Lord_Tryzalot
Lord_Tryzalot

Thank you! one of the best threads ive seen on this board. I’m going to revisit this thread after some sleep over a cup of coffee, it’s very informative

massdebater
massdebater

Though I am uncertain whether I agree with the possibility of the 'signless' void-state, a concept which strikes me as something akin to 'the night in which all cows are black'

You've described the fundamnetal obstacle to the Path: how to let go of a universe that is a correlate of, and thus fascinating for, the ego. How do I conduct myself in a universe divested of the libidinal charge I used to give it?

Evola puts the 'signless' void state another way: everything becomes the extreme case of itself. A return to the "is" or "that-ness" of reality that is not muddied by an "ought", and yet obviously not a pre-reflective, unconscious "that-ness". Instead of all the cows being black, every cow becomes vividly, irreplaceably itself, and yet in such a way that this multiplicity doesn't look like a banquet for the desirous ego.

I've experienced fleeting glimpses of this state. it is as beautiful and profound as all these guys say, but it really is like trying to hold rainwater in your lap.

Poker_Star
Poker_Star

He would admire his dedication to bodybuilding (and probably have some really great insights as to how weightlifting has become something of an ersatz substitute for transcendence on the battlefield, etc.) but probably not be too stoked about his political career. Not that he's a finger wager, though.

MPmaster
MPmaster

Pro-tip: Read Guenon if you want to understand the traditional metaphysics taught by eastern Traditions. Evola's are heavily influenced by his own opinions and biases and are more a personal philosophy rather than an impersonal exposition of timeless metaphysics like Guenon's.

I'm not saying he isn't worth reading but it's an important distiction to make.

askme
askme

The rest of the perennialists don't resonate with me as deeply as Evola for some reason. Though they are all definitely on the money, no question.

TalkBomber
TalkBomber

wouldn’t evolas ideas about desire be the opposite of nietzsches?

SniperWish
SniperWish

A lot of these so-called metaphysical questions are close to being solved by physics. Do we live in a universe where tome is circles, spirals, a straight line into infinity, a spiraling line, etc.? These are ultimately speculative physics at this point but they trouble me regardless insofar as they relate to metaphysics. Eliade's eternal return is best explained by astrology, IMO. Nietzsche is an inspiring thought experiment. And yet it seems the ancients imply there is an epistemological validity to certain experiences that do not, despite traditional claims otherwise, line up all the time. I have had such experiences as well, but idk if I believe my immortal soul is preparing for an afterlife journey... maybe there was a common source for the belief, doesn't mean it's true.
Pic related is a good exposition of similarities and differences between ancient metaphysical systems. Does not reduce things to "true tradition" and "false tradition".

Attached: A1AA20AF-30EB-494C-93EE-FD7350001023.jpg (43 KB, 341x499)

WebTool
WebTool

Hey I'm starting my spiritual journey for the first time and need general advice for someone who is brand new to these topics. I have "The Hermetic Tradition" book, since a Evola chart recommended reading it first, but have a hard time understanding many of the topics since I'm not well read. Any advice you can give me on this topic would be greatly appreciated.

Stark_Naked
Stark_Naked

Their respective philosophies are different but, no, Nietzsche understood the will-to-power as the strife of different "wills"/centers of experience that is uniform across the universe. That consciousness and culture is an epiphenomenon of this unconscious will. The will doesn't create forms for these forms, it creates them only so it can know the joy of overcoming them. Evola admired Carlo Michelstaedter (a brutal, underrated thinker) for saying precisely the same thing: "man is enriched by negation". The No is the true Yes because the No is the No to the inhibiting Yes of the world (the Yes to determinate structures, a determinate self-image, way of being, doing the same shit day after day and being unable to think yourself out of your rut).

Here's, really, the fundamental, fundamental understanding behind all this, and all the Path really involves you learning: the freedom from x is always greater than x itself. Mull that over.

Lord_Tryzalot
Lord_Tryzalot

I do not believe physics has anything to say about the dilemmas in the post you quoted, but I get you.

What are you having trouble with? You have to develop a feeling for these truths that really only comes with a lot of self-awareness and study. Are you completely new to this stuff? I'd start with some Zen, really, to snap you out of the circle of thought and the need to conceptualize.

Techpill
Techpill

I guess I am confused about how far to take the doctrine of eternal return. We know the sun is gonna burn out and kill everyone on earth... but we're supposed to feel better because the universe recreates itself billions of years from now (which may or may not happen depending on which cosmological theory is confirmed by astrophysics)?

I mean, I get generational cycles and organism life cycles and astrological cycles but idk it kinda bums me out to think I have to live again. Also, this is relevant to the questions of colonizing other worlds and technological immortality, no? I would rather have a more teleological universe where it is not so flat and deterministic but freely choosen and willed and utterly unique.

Carnalpleasure
Carnalpleasure

I'm completely knew to these subjects completely. I've watched a few videos on youtube from "The Modern Hermeticist" but that is far as my knowledge extends. What I have trouble is figuring out what to start reading and places I can discuss these topics with. I honestly don't know anything on philosophy, metaphysics, and everything else brought up in this thread.

SniperGod
SniperGod

This is more a Nietzschean thing. Evola himself doesn't buy it. Objective, "clock time" keeps on ticking after your death, propelling you to the appropriate afterlife state. What if you do live again? What if I'm wrong? Then stand on infinity and know that you do, and that all eternity is affirmed in this moment, repeated eternally.

Stupidasole
Stupidasole

You're diving in pretty deep if Evola is your absolute first introduction to not only metaphysics but philosophy in general.

I don't want to give you a reading list, but start with some of Crowley's basic stuff:

www.sacred-texts.com/oto/aba/aba1.htm

If you're feeling ballsy, read maybe the first quarter of the Book of Lies. /Don't/ try to understand all of Crowley's references and correspondences, just focus on the text and try to absorb the philosophy

iapsop.com/ssoc/1913__crowley___liber_cccxxxiii_the_book_of_lies.pdf

Also, Colin Low's introduction to Kabbalah:

hermetic.com/caduceus/qabalah/kabbalah

Finally, the Chaldaean Oracles and Corpus Hermeticum (they're beautiful):

hermetic.com/texts/Chaldean
www.sacred-texts.com/chr/herm/index.htm

Gigastrength
Gigastrength

What philosophers are most antithetical to Evola?

Also, what 21st century phenomenons do you think he would consider most destructive or poor for the soul?

SniperGod
SniperGod

Bataille, Land, Zizek all explicitly reject transcendence and are thoroughly pessimistic, and yet Evola is no stranger to any of their premises.

As for your second question: identitarianism, mindless consumption, the mocking of any and all spiritual pursuits, and the watering down of mindfulness into some corny Buzzfeed one weird trick!! when it's foundational to ascesis and spirituality

RavySnake
RavySnake

Also, what 21st century phenomenons do you think he would consider most destructive or poor for the soul?
Just take a look around you. A better question is, what would Evola not think is destructive to the soul in the 21st century?

ZeroReborn
ZeroReborn

Agreed with your second point. I would also add
"This hit me right in the feelz"/melodrama/consumerist tourism/non-spiritual competition(sports)/narcissism.

CodeBuns
CodeBuns

I should have added the general quality of diet, a sedentary lifestyle, and an over-fascination with the image (people can only talk about pop culture/sports/he-said-she-said).

However that said I personally really try to not think of myself as a True Man of Tradition in these Dark Times Heh *tips fedora*. I just gotta do me

Fuzzy_Logic
Fuzzy_Logic

Did he said something on Tarot?
There are concrete rules on the spiritual way or is something strictly personal?

I'm reading all your answers, thanks for the info.

whereismyname
whereismyname

Did he promote Occult Buttsex or any homo crap whatsoever?

Spazyfool
Spazyfool

Can you explain Evola's critique of Christianity, especially monastic Christianity (probably the closest to his ideal)?

Dreamworx
Dreamworx

Unfortunately, he didn't. I'd kill for an Evola book on the tarot of Tree of Life, but what're ya gonna do? However, I have no doubt in my mind he'd understand the Major Arcana as the states of consciousness they are meant to represent (the Fool is the unmanifest, the Magus is the first stirring in the Ain, etc.)

There are concrete rules and it is personal. You are the singularity of you, only you can know what is fullness and vacuity in you. But the rules to understand this are universal: mind-fullness, self-consciousness at all times. What fills you with life and love? What raises you up out of the ontological rat race? Go to it.

Attached: ToL.jpg (346 KB, 1826x2483)

Crazy_Nice
Crazy_Nice

nice bait

Inmate
Inmate

I believe Evola does say homosexuality is a perversion, but also recognizes the classical ideal of a kind of conjugal spirituality between men, that, who knows, could probably lead to the carnal. He's not crazy about this though, there's no mention of homosexuality or sex stuff anywhere outside of the works dedicated to it.

He believes Christianity represents a degeneration of the active, ariyan spiritual element where the initiate identifies himself /as/ his patron deity instead of supplicating himself before it.

Also he considered Christianity a more sentimentalized, devotional, and hence feminine/lunar religion. Especially the emphasis on the suffering-God, Christ as the patron deity of Being's lowly and downtrodden.

However, like all great spiritual traditions, it does hit on its own truths, and I sense a deep respect in Evola for Meister Eckhart's mysticism (which is itself some of the most potent Christian spirituality around; Eckhart knew what was up).

Attached: ToFToD.jpg (63 KB, 492x750)

kizzmybutt
kizzmybutt

he didn't
Isn't that strange?
I have no doubt in my mind he'd understand the Major Arcana as the states of consciousness they are meant to represent
Can you elaborate on this? Or provide me some links (I know I can look it up myself, but maybe you know reliable sources).
There are concrete rules and it is personal...
Is there an specific text where he talks about this?

Playboyize
Playboyize

I would also add scientism, neo-spirituality (New Age), lustful behavior (sexual or otherwise), homosexuality, modern forms of music, and material attachment.

Carnalpleasure
Carnalpleasure

neo-spirituality (New Age)
Why tho? I'm not baiting, but New Age is such a large group, do you think is all crap?

TurtleCat
TurtleCat

Why didn’t he like porn?

RumChicken
RumChicken

Can you elaborate on this? Or provide me some links (I know I can look it up myself, but maybe you know reliable sources).

Tarot resources are the ones most notoriously filled with new age goop. However, with a background in esotericism, it's pretty clear what the major arcana represent.

i.imgur.com/YpeA2KZ.jpg?1

This is Crowley's take on the tarot.

There was another site that I unfortunately can't find right now.

Is there any specific text where he talks about this?

Introduction to Magic is fantastic. But if you want it quick and easy:

cakravartin.com/virtual-library

Go there, open "Doctrine of Awakening", read the chapter on Zen, where he goes over the principles that make Zen an authentic tradition, that also doubles as more or less a summary of not only the entire book but probably his whole ouvre on praxis.

No doubt about it.

CouchChiller
CouchChiller

terrific thread, thanks OP

ZeroReborn
ZeroReborn

What were his thoughts on the use of art?seeing as he was involved with dada for a while.

eGremlin
eGremlin

Not philosophically rigorous enough, no grit or edge or any real willingness to face the darkness of experience. Evola's views on death and the self for example are very sobering.

CodeBuns
CodeBuns

Because they are modern spiritual movements which have no roots in an unbroken chain of tradition. Evola and the Traditionalists as a whole were very critical of New Ageism.

Stupidasole
Stupidasole

What kinds of music and why?
What’s wrong with the gay sex?

Stark_Naked
Stark_Naked

However, with a background in esotericism, it's pretty clear what the major arcana represent.
So, it's basically a rehashed explanation of the Hero's Journey or path to initiation?

Nude_Bikergirl
Nude_Bikergirl

not OP, but imho it's not something that you can easily learn how to do. sorry for "dude acid lmao" but for me at least it did take tripping to be able to abstract enough away from everyday physicalist reality to actually comprehend what metaphysics is about. It was necessary but not sufficient of course, you actually have to study and dedicate yourself afterwards

Booteefool
Booteefool

You're stimulating your sexual organ to the image. To literal non-being. You're offering your essence on the altar of form, of matter put in a pleasing shape. Nothing wrong with sex. Sex is beautiful. Women are beautiful. He understands the sexual need, it is as biological as hunger. But he understands also the need for sexual purity. Masturbation is almost always a reaction against boredom. An extreme expression of desire for the Other, because you yourself are not complete without it.

It is also the submission to a force inside you that is not you. Being horny is only what your dick's biological imperative feels like in consciousness. Learn to disassociate yourself from the complexes of your body, each thirsting for its gratification.

He had a distaste for the insipidity of bourgeoisie art, especially at the turn of the century, where the traumatized modern is sent reeling into the narcissistic free-for-all of modern subjectivity.

He liked art, but he wanted art to represent something objective. Not realism, mind you, but a communication of principial realities, the universe, the truths of self and being, and not this ho-hum puttering around in the minimalist trough. Neither self-fascinated subjectivity or dry objectivity, but a wedding of the two, as spirituality properly is.

Attached: tzimtzum.jpg (75 KB, 628x628)

Sir_Gallonhead
Sir_Gallonhead

OP, you're not the guy studying Nietzsche for his phd in flordia, are you? The way you write is similar

Boy_vs_Girl
Boy_vs_Girl

Or Campbell's Hero's Journey is a rehash of initation.

Yes. You got it, though. What is the Path? The bildungsroman of the Absolute.

girlDog
girlDog

I'm not. Does he write good stuff?

Evil_kitten
Evil_kitten

what would evola say about my life quest of integrating metaphysics with science/technique through study of dynamic systems and their relation to qualia? Also just want to know your opinions since you're a smart guy

haveahappyday
haveahappyday

Tarot resources are the ones most notoriously filled with new age goop
That's the problem I've always had.
Nice content there, thanks. Gonna delve in Crowley so, it's all pointing to him (But: what's the relation between Crowley and Evola?).
Introduction to Magic is fantastic. But if you want it quick and easy
Thanks!

Sounds about right, well stated.

SomethingNew
SomethingNew

I guess I was asking more specifically for literature. I've been trying to pin down a concrete understanding of exactly what extramundane knowledge might look like but I've only found peices of it from a few different authors.

cum2soon
cum2soon

How do you think we would go about responding to the gender spectrum?

askme
askme

the freedom from x is always greater than x itself

Isn't this essentially a form of asceticism? I.e. being free of wants is better than reaching your want and continuing the cycle of 'wanting'

massdebater
massdebater

Posts on here occasionally, he writes in a style similar to you, also very interested in pedagogy

Do you read on your own or academically trained?

likme
likme

OP here. Not gonna lie to you bro, a lot of this stuff was very accessible for me because I'd smoke blunts to the head while reading Evola.

You really need to get some meditation under your belt, because none of this makes any sense without an experience of what your mind is like beyond thought, even if it's just for a few seconds (like me). Once that clicks the rest falls into place, because the rest of esotericism (literally everything) is an articulation of this awareness, how to achieve it again, its hypostatization, what it says about the self, what it says about reality, etc.

Sounds interesting m8, he only had a problem with science worship, everything else was killer. In fact I find science to be the number one supporter of all this stuff he's talking about. The idea that the self, for example, is nothing but the dynamism of its parts is supported by modern neuroscience, Aquinas, and motherfuckin' Hume (besides Evola and the rest of 'em, of course).

Specialization is for insects. Don't fall for the "you have to think in boxes" meme. Weininger said genius is the microcosm's perfect mirroring of macrocosm.

TalkBomber
TalkBomber

What is recommended reading for a further look into this phenomenon?

LuckyDusty
LuckyDusty

He says we possess both the masculine and the feminine within ourselves in varying ratios, and a transgendersim is a collapse of the dominant sexual trait (masculinity in men and femininity in females).

StonedTime
StonedTime

Here's what I'd think Evola would say: there is a spectrum, there is a continuity of gender, but the poles remain male and female. What's going on with these kids now is they think every gradation femininity and masculinity is its own gender.

Basically, men are born with a transcendental slant of soul (which is being thoroughly repressed and demonized nowadays), and women exist to devote themselves to a noetic, male principle. There is no sexism in this (couldn't care less about feminism, but when it's distasteful it's distasteful), because if the male is up to snuff, the woman would never experience this as a compulsion.

This is why women today scoff at the idea of an unconditional devotion to a man: because they, rightly, don't see a man who merits it.

Essentially, yes. Well put.

I read on my own.

Attached: 1.gif (2 KB, 240x228)

JunkTop
JunkTop

Have you completed the instructions given in Knowledge of the Waters, in Introduction to Magic? Have you accomplished much with the information in that book?

CodeBuns
CodeBuns

Doctrine of Awakening, near the end, is where he talks about. Outside of Evola, any and all Zen scriptures. It won't be as philosophical but it's on the money.

GoogleCat
GoogleCat

Music has degenerated to "pure musicality" or a science of harmonies. As a result, music possesses a Dionysian quality. To him, this has become very pronounced in jazz and it's successors, Rock and Rap music, and their offshoots. For your second question, see

StrangeWizard
StrangeWizard

Evola's Traditional vs. Modern Man
youtube.com/watch?v=yuJC784mzeE

Fuzzy_Logic
Fuzzy_Logic

Great question. I drove up into the mountains this past weekend, threw the lights off in my car and just sat there and soaked in the night, telling myself these are the Waters, that I am alone in the world and I have nothing but my soul.

I can't really say what counts as experiencing it or not. I've had realizations of its truth all the time, but what officially counts as experiencing it? You know what I've learned about these spiritual truths? There's grades to them, they repeat themselves at higher and higher potencies the more knowledge and experience you attain.

farquit
farquit

2 min. in
he hasn't said anything

What is this, a guy smoking and driving?

SniperGod
SniperGod

Only 3 chapters in RAtMW
Addicted to the tobacco jew
Makes a video while driving
Soyface

Attached: 1522206122679.jpg (51 KB, 415x392)

Spazyfool
Spazyfool

What about in Hegel? Did you tackle Hegel head on?

Lunatick
Lunatick

but what officially counts as experiencing it
I suppose if you go through this:

If this knowledge leads you back to yourself,
and, as you experience a sense of deadly cold, you feel an abyss yawning beneath you: "I exist in this"—then you have achieved the KNOWLEDGE OF THE "WATERS."

The instructions at the end of the chapter seem pretty hardcore, I'd be surprised if any westerner would be able to complete them nowadays. It's one of my favourite essays though. Too bad the second and third part of the book will likely never be published in english.

Harmless_Venom
Harmless_Venom

My Hegel I get from Zizek, who most say is a very astute interpreter of Hegel, and god knows how many are floating out there in the ether

Hegel's sharp as a tack but I wouldn't go to him for esoteric insight. However, there's a good deal to say about a hermetic Hegel, but also just as much to say about an (incipiently) nihilistic Hegel, since for him (as Connor Cunningham describes it) reality is just a "vanishing show". Reality is the event of its own nullity, much like Heidegger.

Spamalot
Spamalot

Same bro, I love Introduction to Magic. I can't tell you how many times I've re-read that essay, it's so fantastic and evocative and fucking so alive, man, so much realer than half the shit out there. I also love the Problem of Immortality near the end, and the essay on the "serpentine wisdom" of the Taoist masters.

girlDog
girlDog

god knows how many articles floating out there in the ether*

Gigastrength
Gigastrength

Thanks for the thread OP.. been reading all of your responses. I haven’t read any of his works yet, so what should I start with? I have a read some Guenon before hand..
Also, could you elaborate on his views on race, did he really think that biological race didn’t play a part in determining an individual’s characteristics? Did he think that race was only a spiritual thing i.e, an Aryan can have a Jewish soul and vice versa?

Attached: 70D3C3ED-EABD-4D7B-A4AF-10D5DE1B1EA3.gif (3.59 MB, 500x500)

SniperWish
SniperWish

Just go with what I read. Ride the Tiger -> Doctrine of Awakening -> Hermetic Tradition -> Introduction to Magic -> Yoga of Power -> Mithras essay. Those aren't all his works, either, so go nuts.

And there's definitely an element of biological determinism, no question. But you break the spell of that determinism to the degree you know it. That's what I love about Evola: of course my self is the correlate of my physical system, but I am more than this correlation to the extent I have a concept of it.

Does that mean someone at the bottom of the totem pole can raise themselves up by their bootstraps with this knowledge? Yeah, theoretically, but if they're at the bottom by definition they would not have this knowledge. It works out kinda beautifully, actually: you don't know what you're spiritually missing unless you know it. And if you don't know it, there isn't enough consciousness in you to suffer when that it dissolves upon death. Those who have the intrinsic resources to walk the Path, walk. Those who don't, aren't even "here" enough for it to matter. This is what John Calvin meant by predestination: some men are inherently predisposed to the experience of higher truths, others aren't, and that's that. To deny that would be to deny that the fundamental differences in dispositions between human beings.

Spazyfool
Spazyfool

Of O understand correctly, he seems to believe that all of life is in a constant state of flux. If this is the case, why sign on with a strong ideological movement like the SS and then become the godfather to Italian neofascists. Working with the Nazis, who were both materialist and possessed of the belief they could revitalize the already dead west, seems rather counter to his written beliefs. Can you elaborate?

Stark_Naked
Stark_Naked

*If I

Nude_Bikergirl
Nude_Bikergirl

He believed there was a Traditionalist undercurrent in fascism that he could have helped stoke, but that didn't pan out. Even from the beginning he believed fascism was as much a product of its time as communism. It's sad. The guy really wanted Europe to find its light again, and here we are.

Booteefool
Booteefool

National Socialist
materialist
You have to pick one I’m afraid.

Carnalpleasure
Carnalpleasure

Thanks for the reply user, I'll check out all of these book recommendations. So once I've studied these texts and gain a basic understanding of philosophy I should be ready for Evola? Also beside's Veeky Forums where can I discuss these topics with other people?

Emberfire
Emberfire

Before he wrote anything, he wanted to make a Magical Idealism system influenced very much by Hegel. But by then Hegel was already out of favor in philosophical circles, especially in right-wing ones.

TurtleCat
TurtleCat

I'd read Evola, slowly, alongside them.

There are virtually no places on the internet to discuss these ideas at a high level without hoping for the rare thread on Veeky Forums that attracts the magi and luminaries.

Only these 3:

knowthyself.forumotion.net/
www.gornahoor.net/
lumineboreali.net/

fantastic resources, but any discussion is slow and steady.

Nojokur
Nojokur

I have also studied Evola very deeply. I wish there were a way we could get in touch. As far as that won't happen, here are some themes that still are obscure to me:

What do you make of his phenomenology regarding numina? According to Julius Evola, prior to the 'solidification' of the world, men experienced the world in a kind of 'public imagination.' I haven't been able to find any information about this outside of Evola himself.

Similar in nature to this, Evola appears to be an atheist and, at the cost of anachronism, a chaos magician. That is, Evola believes Brahma (neuter), God, Tao, etc. to be borderline infernal energy that the king, theurgist, warrior and magician know how to wield. He even considered the metaphysics of the Vedanta to be a kind of degeneracy, which shows how far his conception of Tradition is with the Guenonian school. The offshoot of this rectification is making a glorious or solar power out of the infernal, promiscuous and elemental energy. The method as such is obscure, but has something to do with traumatic evocations of infernal energies that are saturated in a substance and then subsequently slayed. Compare this with his chapter in Hermetic Tradition about the fabrication of gold. This acquired 'virtue' then begins with and ends with man, in a sense. He even clarifies that the king isn't an emanation of the Sun in the sense of imago dei but the only emanation is that same virtue that is present in him.

This is also something I can't find any information about outside of Evola, that is, it seems to disagree with the traditions he draws upon, e.g. the Neoplatonist doctrines he draws upon, such as his citations of Julian who based his 'reformation' on Iamblichean metaphysics, a system founded on the traditions of societies Evola would regard as "lunar" and theistic-devotional. It seems to be Evola's work is very important for its historical references to Guenon, but disagrees highly with that school of thought and is plagued too much with a kind of Nietzscheanism than Traditionalism.

What do you make of all this?

King_Martha
King_Martha

You are alone with your soul and responsible for it.
This is very nicely put. Do you mind if I use it in the future? I'll quote you as "anonymous."

Carnalpleasure
Carnalpleasure

What's happenin' bud, good shit. Let's see.

What do you make of his phenomenology regarding numina? According to Julius Evola, prior to the 'solidification' of the world, men experienced the world in a kind of 'public imagination.' I haven't been able to find any information about this outside of Evola himself.

I don't specifically remember this phrase, but as far as I can understand it: I believe right when consciousness was on the cusp of its differentiation from its prima materia that man was in the golden age. As in, before the Greeks had a concept of "man", was man most fully himself, since he was in concord with metaphysical powers without any idea of himself as differentiated from these powers. Something like Hegelian immediacy: in coalescence with my environment, I am more attuned to the powers that structure it. But obviously that's not how Hegel understood immediacy. Immediacy exists to be negated, consciousness as such can only negate immediacy, and so estrange itself from it. It's like gravity, it can't help itself.

Similar in nature to this, Evola appears to be an atheist and, at the cost of anachronism, a chaos magician. That is, Evola believes Brahma (neuter), God, Tao, etc. to be borderline infernal energy that the king, theurgist, warrior and magician know how to wield.

Yes, very true. It seems for Evola there is a monistic substance that is either bent to nature's self-perpetuation or self-transcendence. As for the imago dei: it seems man only actualizes the light as he can actualize it, as such he himself is not its heir in time somehow, but reflects the light only insofar as his consciousness is something that can reflect it. Hm. It's like there's nothing intrinsically "destined" about the initiatic path in any sense, the man chooses to embark on it because the light is the light, is the light. There is no teleology in Evola: there's even hints in Revolt that there's no a guarantee a new cycle will resume at the close of this one. Contingency rules. At times Evola sounds like a more aristocratic, esoteric Zizek.

but disagrees highly with that school of thought and is plagued too much with a kind of Nietzscheanism than Traditionalism.

Something I've noticed myself. Evola's primacy of the self and will is almost like unconscious concession to the liberal primacy of the self. Radical Orthodoxists had something to say about this: that for the modern, the self coincides only with itself, and does not occupy a transcendental space, and nothing compels it towards some telos outside of itself. Evola accepts there is only the self, but still bends the self towards a more-than-human telos. It's interesting. But at the same time, he flat out admits praxis is only the condition of properly waiting for a transcendental break-through, so any straining towards some spiritual goal nips it in the bud.

Cont.

Attached: 220px-RWS-Tarot-00-Fool.jpg (37 KB, 220x384)

eGremlin
eGremlin

At the end of Introduction of Magic they warn to not associate the initiatic self with any profane notion of self. I believe Evola and Nietzsche agree on the status of the Self as "unknown lord and sage" but disagree on how far this Self extends into the noumenal.

That said, I haven't read much of Guenon. But I do recognize a curiously modern slant in Evola's thought that belies his support of Tradition. It's interesting. Never said I was a fanboy. For example, I still can't make heads or tails of Evola's conflicting ideas of the soul, whether it pre-exists the body or coincides with it.

Attached: The-Star.jpg (12 KB, 236x393)

Nude_Bikergirl
Nude_Bikergirl

is this a new copypasta?

Garbage Can Lid
Garbage Can Lid

aristocratic, esoteric Zizek.
You're thinking of Sloterdijk.
praxis is the only condition
That part too
waiting on a transcendental breakthrough
This implies the breakthrough comes from a dual motion above and below (as is the case in theurgy, whilst the magician raises himself up so does his daimon lower himself down). At least that makes more sense to me.
the soul
I do not think these two views are contradictory. Especially in light of his discussion of the branches and the waters.

SomethingNew
SomethingNew

they don’t do Souls and Unconscious forces in Zen evola user, there is no metaphysics

Bidwell
Bidwell

You're thinking of Sloterdijk.

Fuck I really need to read Sloterdijk. Based.

This implies the breakthrough comes from a dual motion above and below (as is the case in theurgy, whilst the magician raises himself up so does his daimon lower himself down). At least that makes more sense to me.

It does, you know for Crowley (I believe) magick is essentially feminine, as the man makes himself receptive to a divine influence in/through the exercise of his masculinity. Or, in Buddhism, the moral precepts are only tools to cultivate this receptivity in the practitioner.

I do not think these two views are contradictory. Especially in light of his discussion of the branches and the waters.

I'm torn between the soul as the dynamism of the body and the soul as the eternal character of the self (as Schelling puts it) that, through its intrinsic identity with itself, pre-exists the corporeal envelope. Probably a little bit of both, isn't it? But where does my essence end and the contingency of the body begin? Shouldn't the kernel of my self correspond the body in which it incarnates? If it doesn't, then what? You're telling me it's all arbitrary, and bodies are determinative of what, biological predispositions? But how do I separate a biological predisposition from a transcendental one? Go figure.

Playboyize
Playboyize

Zen is silent on these matters because Zen is nothing but initiatic detachment honed to a knife-edge. Does Zen deny the existence of a biological substratum that is determinative of character? No. It just prefers not to say anything about it. Mu.

Methnerd
Methnerd

Really? What do Zen masters say when people ask them about Brahman and Atman?

Sharpcharm
Sharpcharm

That they are words, and hence fabrications, and hence obstacles on the path to attainment. Zen cuts out all the bullshit. Us Westerners just like to gawk at a Tree of Life before we hit Kether.

Emberburn
Emberburn

There is no is no Kether in Zen, no zen master ever spoke about Kether

Huineng says there’s no mirror for any dust to alight upon

Lin-Chi says Buddhas and Atmans are evil obstacles and you’d better not take them seriously

Bodhidharma says there is no mind or Buddha or Dharma

where is there room for Kether and other metaphysical objects or principles?

You think just seeing is Kether?

BlogWobbles
BlogWobbles

feminine receptive influence
Ya. I have been picking up a lot of that in Christian mysticism. I think Jung makes that connection. The man has an anima as its double. Women an animus. It is curious. Always thought of Crowley more as a solar-phallic guy, or a solar-anus tho :p

It's been a long journey backward but I am enjoying the greeks now.
tfw didn't start with the greeks...

LuckyDusty
LuckyDusty

1.What are Evola's view on racial souls? Does he think its possible for a Westerner to have a soul with similar characteristics to a non white soul or vice versa?
2. In regards to communities does Evola recommended that we leave in communities of people who are also interested in these subjects? If that isn't possible, where you live, what are some alternatives?

DeathDog
DeathDog

What's the meaning of the phrase "we will always be the men in ruins", I often see that /pol/ uses it.

whereismyname
whereismyname

There isn't, Westerners just like to reify stages on the Path as Sephira, or whatever. Zen enlightenment would correspond to the Kabbalistic experience of Ain, anyways. Of course, relative to the unmanifest, there is no manifest, but for the sake of expediency we have to talk about the manifest to go beyond it.

it's weird, it's like a solar masculinity that doubles as a lunar receptivity. the hermetic androgyne: the solar self is consummated as a feminine receptivity to the absolute. or, to put it more bluntly, only a receptivity to the absolute can be solar. everything else is lunar, through and through.

1. Yes, if the West were entirely ariyan souls there wouldn't be a decline. It's not so much negroid or jewish souls incarnating as a Westerner as much as it is every soul has a potential vector for degeneration (outside of the purity of golden age souls, but good luck with that one.)

2. No, no communities. Only the individual. The spiritual is apolitical. Get together, study, support each other in your spiritual endeavors, but there is no communal solution to a fundamentally ontological problem.

Spazyfool
Spazyfool

Zen doesn’t teach enlightenment or attainment, they explicitly castigate people for asking about enlightenment at all and deny having anything to teach, what do you think they were talking about when they asked what the red haired blue eyed barbarian came to China to say?

Garbage Can Lid
Garbage Can Lid

/pol/ likes to believe their own experience is comparable to the soul wandering the initiatic desert. in a way, it is, but the average /pol/ poster isn't really interested in the unconditioned, so any spiritual gravitas this phrase carries immediately evaporates when it's spoken by some loli-addicted stormfaggot. No, I don't post on /pol/, but I don't fundamentally disagree with them either. But they're as deaf to these truths as the left. And left, in regards to spirituality: *inhales* oh no no no no hahahahahhahah

Booteefool
Booteefool

I know, I studied Zen long before I studied Evola.

Harmless_Venom
Harmless_Venom

where should i get started with reading his work?

MPmaster
MPmaster

So how does Kether and Enlightenment have anything to do with Zen? If you know what they talked about, then why even relate them unless its to insert ideas you fancy into their mouths? Does what you believe not stand on its own?

King_Martha
King_Martha

only way to be solar is lunar
Posing as the Source is what a real antichrist would have done.

Attached: 06A10CC0-CE9B-4386-90D8-AF84248ACF7B.jpg (89 KB, 701x343)

cum2soon
cum2soon

Zen is embarassing for westerners. Qabalah is what your ancestors studied. Not this chink shit.

iluvmen
iluvmen

More like, the only way to be lunar is solar.

It doesn't, like I said, Westerner needs the crutch of linear progress typified by the Tree of Life.

Doctrine of Awakening or Introduction to Magic. Honestly, Ride the Tiger is best as an introduction but there's a lot of preliminary btfo'ing of modern philosophers that might wear on you, but ymmv

Poker_Star
Poker_Star

Interesting responses. If you have enjoyed Evola you definitely should approach Guenon. Evola is very in-your-face and he indiscriminately draws on resources to paint a picture of a world where the good life is synonymous with the higher life. Contrarily, Guenon is much more careful with his writing and never seems to waste space. You don't need any prerequisites, but he sort of supposes a grasp of Aristotelian-Thomist philosophy. Essential reads are the Introduction, East and West, Crisis and then Symbolism of the Cross.

I do not follow your logic for the rest of your post. I cannot comment. I can say there is a end in initiation, however. I recommend Guenon's Perspectives on Initiation. It really is the most comprehensive dealing with initiation one can find.

Skullbone
Skullbone

reverse polarity
I want a girl with a strong animus. I like when my esotericism gets all degenerate and psychoanalytic like that....

Attached: F3189F19-B218-4464-888D-2502912750AA.jpg (67 KB, 480x506)

Emberburn
Emberburn

Your ancestors studied the words of forest Druids and Bibles. Kabbala was limited to a small number of Christian mystics and then the Jewish community. Before that it was found among the Semites as a race and relates to probably proto-numerology from the 3 great civilizations (non-Aryan all of them)
whites can see, anyone can see, they didn’t discriminate, Bodhidharma was indeed a White Iranic Prince or Brahmin. He had fiery hair and light eyes like a Scythian or Indo-Aryan. Zen ostensibly traveled to at least some Rinzai practicing Japanese along with a small number of Tibetans (quite early) and the Koreans. Those aren’t the same race, and the Tibetans have a totally unique culture from the others. What good is a theo-architectonic labryinth like Kabbalah when Zen takes everything all at once and is effortless?

My ancestors used it, what a fucking waste. They’re a degenerated people now. The moment they came into contact with it they lost their souls. You think you can just play around with spirit and nothing happens if you fail or misinterpret dead-end, looping, parasitic signs like whatever Neo-fascist hermetic qaballah it is you’ve learned?

Evilember
Evilember

Why do you like wasting your time?

SniperWish
SniperWish

See

VisualMaster
VisualMaster

Did your father abandon you before or after you turned out to be an autistic loser?

BunnyJinx
BunnyJinx

I was wondering when the Veeky Forums hipsters would arrive.

Because the Western likes to take the scenic route up the mountain, so sue us.

Ignoramus
Ignoramus

confusing insane meandering with freedom is what people who haven’t seen anything talk about

Illusionz
Illusionz

so... why do you like wasting your time?

Supergrass
Supergrass

zen
simple shitty life
meditate barely any cause you always have chores
hardly read or understand current culture
master whacks you on back with stick for no reason
can't have sex cause of vows
hermetic qabalah
complex and interesting life
meditate a lot cause you have a successful business
read lots and immerse yourself in pop cultre
the real master (God) will encourage you instead of hitting you
it's literally a sin not to get your wife preggo
Tough choice... not

Lord_Tryzalot
Lord_Tryzalot

LARPing as a Howard-style Ubermensch is the only thing that keeps that sweet yet cold blade from slitting his wrists.

muh ancestors
Were illiterate barbaric credulous retards that lived in filth and died in their early 40s. I hope OP does too.

SomethingNew
SomethingNew

doing what feels right is what is right
zen is about doing chores and taking beatings
Usually when I see this kind of false dilemma I roll with it because the implication that you're a slothful spiritual hedonist bound to the earth like a lamprey on a salmon amuses me, but its better to cut the knot.

What do you think you'll get when you hear encouragement from your real master?

takes2long
takes2long

You're so predictable, right down to the "dying in middle age" stock reddit burn for anyone you think romanticizes the past. You're out of your depth.

Unfortunately we can play this game until I pretty much can accuse you of not being authentically Zen because you don't meditate staring the wall 24 hours a day. You've been bitten by the Zen bug and it won't let go. Breathe.

askme
askme

You know what's best for other people then? Especially spiritually? Do you have students?

likme
likme

Ascetics LARPers on Veeky Forums
This will never not be funny

hairygrape
hairygrape

I don't actually, I'm just answering questions about Evola. Relax, bud.

Gigastrength
Gigastrength

you find most things amusing or just things you wouldn't do?

Burnblaze
Burnblaze

You're a LARPer, the only deep thing about you is your affection for eating inordinate ammounts of food.

Flameblow
Flameblow

just answering questions about a spiritual teaching, then pretending you're not, then talking about Zen and relating it with Jewish-Christian mysticism
(You)

StonedTime
StonedTime

I don't think in boxes.

VisualMaster
VisualMaster

You just know he's a trap and furry masturbating afficionado

Flameblow
Flameblow

In which country do you live, OP? Here in Australia, there is a tight-knit Traditionalist current that has organised itself in one vicinity, out of the remnants of a university. I've become rather involved with them as of late, and hope to introduce more of Evola's concepts, which some of them are either hesitant to face, or somewhat flirt with.

Attached: main-qimg-0a7712b158437315aac8b061926bebe0-c.jpg (113 KB, 602x803)

massdebater
massdebater

Quality degenerating into the worship of quantity
Isn't this the Guénon idea?

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Confirm your age

This website may contain content of an adult nature. If you are under the age of 18, if such content offends you or if it is illegal to view such content in your community, please EXIT.

Enter Exit

About Privacy

We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners.

Accept Exit