Boreas wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 8:55 pmisn't Hatha Yoga as a whole a sort of "preparatory practice"?
No. Like I said, the whole idea of yoga in India is so vast that to give it one orthodox meaning is doomed to fail. Some schools might consider some hatha yoga as preparatory practices, some might forbid it, some might focus solely on it, & cetera, & cetera.
Boreas wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 8:55 pmI think one should be wary of generalizing too much since there is great variation on which principles different traditional authors refer to or emphasize.
Do you think it a bit strange to say this when you stop to consider what you are defending here? (A form of criticism that uses generalizing in an extremely problematic way, as just shown.)
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
Nefastos wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 9:22 pm
Do you think it a bit strange to say this when you stop to consider what you are defending here?
Not really. I only wished to say that one should avoid too much generalizing in principle and there is no something like a traditionalist credo against love and a generalisation like "The focus of a traditionalist is will and reason" or that "traditionalist leave out love" does not do justice for the whole. I think no one here would be pleased to see a generalisation of Satanism as a juvenile rebellion or as an ideology of violent drug addicts, for example.
I also said earlier that I have thus far said little to nothing what I think myself of these issues - honestly I'm not sure what to think of it all - and I am not defending the traditionalist ideas - I have only expounded them as I have witnessed them myself, since I really have no ideology to defend here. As a principle I try to follow the unification of hands in this also.
Okay. It would actually be great to know more about those Traditionalist authors who have this emphasis on universal principle of Love I thought they are lacking. Can you name some author(s) and book(s) I can start with, please? It would really be a victory for the unification process of the Star of Azazel if that gap too could be bridged.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
Nefastos wrote: ↑Sun Jun 28, 2020 8:34 amIt would actually be great to know more about those Traditionalist authors who have this emphasis on universal principle of Love I thought they are lacking. Can you name some author(s) and book(s) I can start with, please?
I can't really pinpoint any single author or book that would deal especially with Love. It can be said that authors of the traditional school don't emphasize Love but at the same time it is wrong to say that it is lacking; from what I have studied it is scattered here and there. There is certainly a lot of talk about buddhi in the more metaphysical texts but I guess traditionalists would oppose the SoA use of the term as Love since they wish to retain the original meaning of Intellect.
Nefastos wrote: ↑Sun Jun 28, 2020 8:34 amIt would really be a victory for the unification process of the Star of Azazel if that gap too could be bridged.
That is very true, and I consider the bridging of the gap between traditionalism/theosophy being one of the most important areas of my personal work.
Boreas wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 8:55 pmisn't Hatha Yoga as a whole a sort of "preparatory practice"?
No. Like I said, the whole idea of yoga in India is so vast that to give it one orthodox meaning is doomed to fail.
I browsed through Guénon's thoughts on the matter from 'Introduction to the Hindu Doctrines' and it seems to me that he is meaning with his definition of Yoga to the fact that it is one of the six orthodox schools of Hinduism, or what are held to be orthodox. You can read his thoughts on the matter here if interested: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dl ... 9/mode/2up
Nefastos wrote: ↑Sun Jun 28, 2020 8:34 amOkay. It would actually be great to know more about those Traditionalist authors who have this emphasis on universal principle of Love I thought they are lacking. Can you name some author(s) and book(s) I can start with, please? It would really be a victory for the unification process of the Star of Azazel if that gap too could be bridged.
I glanced briefly through some of my library and in Schuon's 'Roots of the Human Condition' there seems to be a chapter devoted to Love. From the back text: "To know, to will, to love; this is man's whole nature and consequently it is his whole vocation and duty. To know totally, to will freely, to love nobly; or in other words: to know the absolute, and ipso facto its relationships with the relateive; to will what is demanded of us by virtue of this knowledge; and to love both the true and the good, and that which manifests them here below; then to love the beautiful which leads to them." (These kind of sentiments I have found dispersed throughout the literature. I think it describes quite well the so called threefold key.)
I have also had four years Evola's "Metaphysics of Sex" waiting at arm's length from where I sit, I think I'll start reading it soon. In it he talks much also about love, even though that love is most likely different to the universal principle of love as empathy that is the one third of our Triple Key.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
Nefastos wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:57 amI have also had four years Evola's "Metaphysics of Sex" waiting at arm's length from where I sit, I think I'll start reading it soon. In it he talks much also about love, even though that love is most likely different to the universal principle of love as empathy that is the one third of our Triple Key.
Although stamped with Evola's metaphysical dualism - where all his errors and problems arise IMHO - that is still a valuable treatise on the nature of erotic love and the spiritual possibilities of sex, but I doubt you'll find much (stressed) compassion from A-love.
I think I have accidentally found one interesting approach that could help to pacify Traditionalists' angst against depth psychology. I have before me a book called The Dove that Returns, The Dove that Vanishes: Paradox and creativity in psychoanalysis (by Michael Parsons, The New Library of Psychoanalysis vol 39, ed. Elizabeth Bott Spillius). I am right in the beginning, but he says something that could help to build a bridge for the traditionalist "warrior" temperaments:
Parsons wrote:Psychoanalysis began as a medical treatment but immediately showed itself to be, in the same activity, an instrument of personal growth as well. (...) It might seem surprising to turn, for illumination about the nature of psychoanalysis, to the Chinese and Japanese martial arts. But the question of how something can be, at the same time, a technical procedure to be correctly performed, and a mode of being that expresses and develops a person's inmost nature, has been much though and written about in those traditions. T'ai Chi, archery, swordmanship and karate all have examples to offer.
Of course I do not mean this as some kind of a counter argument; like I said, in case one is already certain of his own very strictly formulated ideas, arguments are futile. But in cases there is a wish for more holistic a view, this might be one great chance for that.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
Damned be this log in problem again! I wrote a long post that vanished into the digital mire (what a coincidence since I just wrote also bout how Guénon's critic for the Freudian school accused it sending people "to fall into the mire").
I'll get back to the issue later on, but now I'll just link this article from Gornahoor - which is a very strict traditional site - because I think it shows the wish for a more holistic approach is not hopeless.
