Past
WordPress has released a statistical summary for Gornahoor in 2012, for those interested in taking a look. 170,000 page views are not very many in the grand scheme of things, yet for a blog that has no real identity, it is probably significant. The trend has been gradually increasing, but quality, not quantity, is the real goal. Note that three of the most frequent commenters are now missing, which is fine since they were the most disruptive and showed the least understanding. Recent comments, i.e., over the past several months, have been much more useful.
What is less interesting, and actually disappointing, is the quality of the search terms, which overwhelmingly come via Google. Despite having such extensive original material and new translations, Gornahoor shows up almost nowhere for the search on “Evola”. However, we come up high for “hermit crabs” and periodically we get several hits for that; I always assume it is from a science assignment at some school somewhere. “African ass” comes up every now and then; I assume they are really disappointed. Keep this in mind next time you rely on Google to do your research for you.
Present
The experience has been personally fruitful. Over the past year, I have heard from several readers via email or telephone about their own spiritual paths. Obviously, I cannot and do not tell them what to do, since Gornahoor is not evangelizing for any particular exoteric path. However, if our interaction has helped anyone achieve clarity, I am happy. Interestingly enough, everyone seems to choose a valid Western path with relatively recent ties to the Middle Ages; specifically, no Druids or Wiccans trust my judgment. I have had one disappointing failure, a revert back to neo-paganism. He pesters me with nonsense missives that prove nothing; he should use the comments or the forums to get better feedback.
Future
I have written 638 posts and I am committed to 1001 before shutting Gornahoor down. That comes to several hundred thousand words, since I try to keep posts around 1000 words. At 3 or 4 posts per week, if I can maintain that, we will be done in around two years. One of the posts is usually a translation, although I am finding fewer interesting pieces to translate. Those by Charles Maurras and Guido di Giorgio are not very popular. Evola is getting stale. There is some old material, plus the large volumes of his philosophical system; these would not be worth the trouble to translate and it is difficult to pull passages out of context. Then, of course, there are the books on race. A year or so ago, I translated his book Synthesis of Racial Doctrine for private subscription. I could not get 50 people worldwide to sign up for a free translation, so I stopped. Perhaps I will start again, but charge for it this time; let me know.
There is a toll for this on my life and on my health, since each post takes effort; they are never mindless commentaries on the daily news. In addition, I am taking on commitments to write blogs for commercial enterprises, anonymously of course. These tasks are preventing me from some projects I have in mind which would require a sustained book length theme. Even worse, it is affecting my spiritual life and the time I have for my own contemplative reading. I have been using up capital accumulated earlier and that may be running dry.
Another contributor or two to share the load would be helpful. I can suggest topics. For example, someone may want to do a meditation on the labors of Hercules or the Romance of the Rose. We can be so limited to theory.
Initiation
It is impossible to find a discussion of Tradition that is not obsessed with the notion of initiation. Is the issue of sacerdotal initiation vis-à-vis royal initiation truly a burning existential issue for anyone? If so, I would like to hear from the readers who are priests and kings to get their take on it.
I believe I have mentioned that I myself have been initiated into Mahayana Buddhism, since that option was available to me, plus the reasons I have mentioned several times already. I have recited the Heart Sutra, repeated the mantra endlessly, engaged in yantra meditation, and sat zazen. I know the sound of one hand clapping. Does that make me more reputable to anyone beyond the actual texts? Does anyone think to himself, ‘wow, that was written by a real initiate’? Yet it was, for what it’s worth. If I bore you, then you could listen to the Beastie Boys instead; they are also initiates. Does anyone get the point or do I need to spell it all out?
Preparation
That brings me to the real point, to wit, what is important is not initiation, but rather preparation for initiation. Otherwise, you will most likely end up with the spiritual equivalent of drinking wine out of a box. Obviously, being familiar with sound doctrine is necessary. Is your preparation including the following points, at a minimum?
- The World is Intelligible
- The World is ordered
- There are multiple states of being beyond the physical world
- Man is a unity, yet composed of multiple sheaths or souls
- And so on
Of course, this must be “carnal knowledge”, that is, ideas you live out in the flesh. Your whole life centers around sound doctrine and you are not deluded by the snares of ordinary life. You remember you have chosen all that happens in your life or else it is the Will of God; better if you cannot tell them apart.
When you read religious and spiritual texts, you understand the symbolic meaning behind them (which does not necessarily deny their factual meaning.) You understand that esoteric teachings are not opposed to the exoteric and, most especially, they do not represent a competing set of beliefs. Rather, they indicate different states of consciousness (not necessarily states of being). Efforts must be made to recognize these states.
In other words, you cannot wait for an elusive initiation. It is a struggle, a search, and adventure; even if and when you find a good initiator, he will not show you everything. No, he will still make you struggle and search. There is no one right way for everyone; that is why the hero has 1000 faces.
Winding Down
Although some few men (I hear from no women) have benefited, I am at this point not sure what else needs to be done. The original task was to serve as the catalyst for an elite who would go into the world. I have heard from students, and I pray they will someday be in an academic position where they can spread the ideals of Tradition. Others hope to influence youth education; still others plan to form a healthy family in today’s unsound environment.
On the other hand, there is no shortage of ideas, if we know how to think, how to have patience, how to mind fast. The idea creates the thought which creates the word that leads to action. That is a law and it reveals the importance of good ideas.
Hence, in the time left, I want to make sure that Gornahoor actually exhibits, and not just documents, the principles. Probably no one has noticed that. For example, it should demonstrate organic rather than mechanical thinking. It should be about principles, not limited to opinions or facts. When the thought becomes the external word, it should adhere to the rules of grammar, the laws of logic, with the art of rhetoric.
Hence, the topics need to arise from intuitive awareness, not from technical planning. That is the way it will be, for those who continue to visit.
Your last comment in the forum was well said.
Vincit Omnia Veritas
There is a difference between being “derived from God” and being “delivered by God”.
I’m just pointing this out. I don’t necessarily agree with JasonAdam’s formulation.
But the idea that God would ‘hand-deliver’ polytheistic religions is surely less tenable. See the first Commandment.
Cassiodorus, all things visible and invisible, were created through the Logos, obviously including different Traditions in some way. Guenon repeatedly claimed that all theological dogmas can be reframed in metaphysical terms; hence, discussions along these lines are well worth the effort. Now, Solovyov attempted to explain dogmas such as the Incarnation and the Trinity in terms of his metaphysical system, as well as those influenced by him. That should be worth a few studies at some time. Meanwhile, you could refer to Rama Coomaraswamy who tried to deal with this issue of exclusivity vis-a-vis perennialism. For example, what he writes about the Baptism of Desire is of interest.
It seems to me that the question of Christianity and its “compatibility” with the Perennial Philosophy revolves around how we interpret the Incarnation, the Word Made Flesh. As I understand it, the Perennialist would draw a very important distinction between the statements “Jesus is God ” and ” God is Jesus.” Speaking for the Traditionalist School, the Perennialist Orthodox theologian, James Cutsinger, states the following:.
“Christian Perennialists conclude that it is a mistake to confuse the uniqueness of the only-begotten and eternal Son of God with the alleged singularity of his historical manifestation in fist-century Palestine. Without denying that there is only one Son of God, or that he alone is the author of salvation, or that Jesus Christ is that Son, they contend that there are no Biblical or dogmatic grounds for supposing that this one Son has limited his saving work to his incarnate presence as Jesus. On the contrary, as St Athanasius and other fathers insisted, though the Word “became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14), he was not confined by his body even during his earthly ministry.”
Inclusivist Christians hold to the view that the the Third Person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, can be and is present in other world religions, rendering them salvific, but indirectly. The Perennialist position seems to be saying that it is Christ , the Logos, that is manifesting in different ways in other Traditions, in addition to Jesus of Nazareth . Can this view truly be reconciled with Christian orthodoxy?
The fullness of Truth can/could be ready for certain stages of humanity, if the makeup of the receiver determines (partially) the form and content of what is revealed; isn’t this the whole point of the Old Testament? However, it is also true that “not one jot or tittle shall pass away till all is fulfilled” – so that there is a paradox. A revelation can be (if the OT is any guide) fully complete, and totally the truth, containing within it the splendor of truth and fullness of beauty, and yet the fulfillment be such as to make it seem (if possible) lacking. I realize this analogy may not hold for other revelations, but the paradox exists. I think it has something to do with the “double oath”, once by earth, once by heaven.
“Thus it is not contradictory for me to say all religions are derived from the one God but only the Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth.”
For you it may not be contradictory, but for God it surely is.
What you just said implies that God, who is Truth, has been delivering to humanity something less than the truth. And anything less than the truth contains a degree of falsehood. Which is to say God is the author of falsehood around the globe.
Such explanations are not going to do.
Mihai, please see my response in the public forum to your very interesting questions regarding Christian exclusivity.
In a response to F. G. Galvao’s claim that “Schuon had realized Guenon’s dreams”, Rene Guenon wrote back (2 December 1948):
[My translation]
That is a rather strong endorsement, but perhaps something changed subsequently.
Boris Mouravieff explained the matter quite clearly – the other forms of the tradition were revelead to one group of humanity in particular whereas Christianity is universal and given to all men as a completion of the Tradition. Thus it is not contradictory for me to say all religions are derived from the one God but only the Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth.
This is something interesting. it seems that many people who started from Guenon and ended up embracing a Christian path have become skeptical of the unity of traditions. Borella and Fr. Seraphim Rose are perhaps the best known examples, but I see here other people too.
I don’t know the cause of this. Is it indeed a matter of an inner superiority of the Christian revelation ? Or maybe the exclusivist spirit of the Church Fathers that is overwhelming in the long run ?
It would be interesting to hear Cutsinger’s point on this, since he did not come to embrace this view.
Borella is a latecomer : that is, the Church has belatedly “woke up” to the perennial tradition, so there are problems with this situation that need to be kept in mind. As far as I know, even F. Rose was cautious in his critique of Guenon. He limited himself to saying that they were a waysign on the path of Truth, but not its fullness. But no one here, as far as I know, would want to commit to the same ecclesiastical views held (in their particular entirety) that F. Rose had, although I certainly wouldn’t mind him praying for me. Cassiodorus, thanks, I did find it.
This debate is immensely interesting, but we should be careful that we “find what we seek” : that is, if we approach the subject expecting to find deviations, then we shall find them. Jesus addresses this, when he tells the Pharisees that they have an evil eye. So, I think we should humbly approach Schuon and Guenon and even Borella’s differences (they may simply be ill put) with an eye to discovering the unity. By their fruit, you will know them, and Guenon and Schuon need no defending on this score. I just started an article on the Marian roots of Schuon’s spiritual lineage, which looks good:
http://www.cutsinger.net/pdf/colorless_light_and_pure_air.pdf
Cutsinger says right out that the article is “not for anyone”, not for the skeptic.
Hi Logres,
You can just google that essay by Jean Borella- it can be found at sacredweb.com. Another essay of note that I think would be of great interest was posted recently by Charles Upton entitled, “Were Rene Guenon and Frithjof Schuon Biased Against Love?” in response to a charge made referring to Guenon as an “eye without a body”.
Cassiodorus, I haven’t found the article yet, but here are some editorial remarks upon it:
http://religioperennis.org/documents/Editorial/Issue5/editorialIII1.pdf
Borella is certainly right to think that Christianity may be a “revealer of revelation”, yet I don’t know enough about Guenon to say whether or not he would have rejected this – certainly Tomberg talks about the new religion as a hallower and purifier of what had already come.
Schuon, a Guenonian deviation? I wouldn’t sign my name to that. You can go to online articles at Sacred Web.
I’m struggling to create a link. Mihai, if you are so inclined, take a look at the essay, “The Problematic of the Unity of Religions” by the Perennialist Catholic, Jean Borella. I’d be curious to hear your reaction.
Best,
Cassiodorus
Agreed. The search for purity of thought in others seems to be a stumbling block on the spiritual path. In the modern world, everything is mixed and confused and it must be enough to know and recognize counter traditional ideas as they arise without throwing the baby out with the bath water so to speak. We must learn to be discerning when it comes to ideas and not fall into the trap of the “true believers” of Guenon, Evola, Schuon, etc…
Wasn’t the division of those who seek to uphold tradition delineated as a tactic of the counter initiation in a recent post?
“but I think Frithjof Schuon and his followers have deviated from Guenon’s teachings. ”
This is quite a strong statement. What makes you say that ? Do you say that he deviated completely, in the essentials, or in some particular respects ? And if Schuon “deviated” why hasn’t Evola done that too, for example ?
Also, I find it a bit disturbing to say that Schuon deviated from Guenon, as if Guenon founded some new religion or cult, or something.
The only concern for me is who deviated and who conformed to the truth, not to another individual.
I am asking this (and I am waiting for your answer on this) because I am tired to see that even in this field, things have deviated to partisanship, skirmishes between followers of this or that writer and so on.
Dear Cassiodorus,
I looked at the list of the contributors to sacredweb.com. Guenon was not listed and there was no mention Evola. This is enough (for me) to prove that this journal is run by “Counter Initiation” or at least has been co-opted by It. Bunch of safe academics, psudo-sufis, and “scholarly oxen” (with a few notable exceptions).
This may be heretical to some here but I think Frithjof Schuon and his followers have deviated from Guenon’s teachings. This is a proof that “Counter Tradition” is very much attentive and extremely aggressive in frist identifying and then co-opting any resistance to Modernism!
You count as a conduit for male chromosomes and that is significant enough. You are the “matter”, mother, the feminine lunar archetype that is the reflection of the mans genius and light. Men shape you, mold you, decide your fate and will, you do not and never owned yourself. This is the cosmic law weather you believe this rule or not and any deviance from it leads to chaos and hell. Just what women want unless they are tamed appropriately in their place.
Now listen up woman, you have no choice but to make way for the solar masculine light that is the cosmic law of the universe by divine right and holy imperial justice. It is what exists eternally within the metaphysical heavens as absolute and will by divine right return to manifest again on earth by divine rule of order. If the world crumbles, if priestesses rise from the bowl of modern puss to rule over the emasculated west, it will be a fleeting moment of extreme corruption against natural law, to which it in the end of time and beginning of a golden cycle it will be hammered down with divine justice. Gold outshines silver.
“The reason for the endless debate on priestly vs kingly intiation is the Evolian substitution of political activity for spiritual enlightenment.”
Excellent analysis. An angry nationalist will achieve more (against modernism) by physically pushing basic conservative principles while upholding the faith within a dogmatic manner. The internet has killed genuine action in many ways.
If one has learned over many years of struggle to develop a coherent character then action is inevitable and must be be taken as course of fighting dark forces in the name of Tradition. Since the noose narrows around the few who care it is of urgency that there are those to stand against the external crisis we find ourselves in.
“Too many people, especially from the Dugin camp today, think being a traditionalist means marching down the streets screaming death to the West and support for third world atheist socialist regimes rather than trying to spiritually leave the world and know oneself.”
Dugin is not a traditionalist and certainly given too much attention by European nationalists for his own worth. He is a Slavic national bolshevik at the root and never holds back his distaste for the “West”. If his political theory (or scheming) was simply a cause of modern reaction then we could take a more favorable view but there are deeper layers of his native soul at work here. Basically his political theory is not for export.
“Your reference to a certain American rap musical group whose deceased lead singer was a Tibetan Buddhist initiate was made to illustrate I believe the need for study to make said initiation real, otherwise it remains virtual and of no benefit. Too many people today think initiation is like a magic formula that suddenly makes a person into an angel, they forget it requires hard work……….”
This is the new age spiritualist fallacy, there is a magic pill for anybody to become whatever they want from Brooklyn Jew to Buddhist (in the BB’s sense)
at least nominally. Interior they are the at the will of the counter-initiation.
“I apologise if I go off course, but may I ask you, as a Buddhist, what your opinion is of Evola’s Doctrine of Awakening ? I dont believe I’ve seen you comment much on it before and would like to know your thought on his hypothesis of Buddhism being an Aryan warrior anti-religious path that was later made into a devotional faith by the non-Aryan Asiatics……..I find Evola’s interpretation problematic but would like to know your thoughts.”
Evola’s interpretation is more than reasonable as it goes to the original source. Some scholars have backed this analysis. Buddhism is suddenly appealing when stripped down from all the layers of sentimental muck endowed by profane explication. The eight-fold path is harsh and therefore will rarely be answered but by a few.
I have found that those who become influential within a particular tradition, like Seraphim Rose, credit traditionalism with awakening them to the reality of metaphysics, but only as a conduit to eventually finding higher truth as a member of an order.
Mihai,
I appreciate your thoughts on this matter. I totally resonate with your pole metaphor and it represents the view that I have always upheld. However, the problem that I have been wrestling with, of late, is the difficulty in reconciling Trinitarian theology with the central claim of the Perennial Philosophy. According to Frithjof Schuon, the Christian Trinity must be on the level of the “relative Absolute”- the first determination of the Supreme Principle. But, to my lights, this runs contrary to the fundamental Christian claim that the Trinity tells us something of the Absolute at the highest degree of beyond being. If you are interested, an excellent debate/exchange on this subject between the Christian platonist Robert Bolton and the Traditionalist Jose Segura can be found at sacredweb.com.
I don’t know, Cassiodorus.
You really have to put yourself in the position of someone at the other end of the world. For them, Christianity is just some abstract religion practiced in a far away land. Just like for the common Christian man of the West, Taoism is some abstract asiatic philosophy and Hinduism is some weird practice of sitting cross-legged with a minimum of clothes on.
Of course, this is all after the advent of globalism, when contacts between different parts of the world became open to large masses of people, not only to some merchants and wanderers as was the case before. In those days, knowledge of far-away religions was non-existent.
CS Lewis wrote somewhere that “the pole you’re sitting next to seems a lot bigger than the other ones further down the road”. Of course, it wasn’t in any context concerning the unity of religions, but it is a good metaphor for this case as well. The further geographically and mentally we are from a pole – which in this case is a certain religions form- the smaller and more insignificant it seems to us. A reversal of perspectives also applies.
Though I do agree that for western man, Christianity is the most suitable.
As I have mentioned, your writings have been extremely helpful to me as well. I was raised in Catholicism and have made the journey from progressivism, to radical environmentalism, to Heidegger and Nietzsche, to tradition. When I first stumbled upon this site I was but a “traditionalist without a tradition,” as most become after reading Evola. But little by little, I have come to see my native Catholicism in a newer (and older) light.
“And the end of all our exploring. Will be to arrive where we started. And know the place for the first time.”
This site has been a light in a darkening world, opening a way beyond the darkness. It would be selfish to ask you to continue your efforts further than you are able. As I seem to have come upon this site near the end, I hope that I can contribute in any small way that I am able.
My skepticism and scientism was effectively smashed to pieces by the writings of the Perennialist school. Taking their lead, Tradition brought be “back” to Catholic Christianity. Since then, I have invested myself in the works of the Church Father, but recently I have focused on the Angelic Doctor, Thomas Aquinas.
The more that I have learned about the Great Tradition , the more that I have come to doubt the transcedent unity of relgions. Is it not possible that the Christian revelation is something of a “ground zero” of the Divine descent and that the Trinity does, in fact, tell us something about the Divine on the level of the pure Absolute?
Not sure if I count as a man, though.
As for shutting own, does that include deletion as well?
Shocking to hear no register for Evola, especially considering the quality and background width of material presented. But again, we live in a paradise of roses, or do we?
The reason for the endless debate on priestly vs kingly intiation is the Evolian substitution of political activity for spiritual enlightenment. Too many people, especially from the Dugin camp today, think being a traditionalist means marching down the streets screaming death to the West and support for third world atheist socialist regimes rather than trying to spiritually leave the world and know oneself.
Your reference to a certain American rap musical group whose deceased lead singer was a Tibetan Buddhist initiate was made to illustrate I believe the need for study to make said initiation real, otherwise it remains virtual and of no benefit. Too many people today think initiation is like a magic formula that suddenly makes a person into an angel, they forget it requires hard work……….
I apologise if I go off course, but may I ask you, as a Buddhist, what your opinion is of Evola’s Doctrine of Awakening ? I dont believe I’ve seen you comment much on it before and would like to know your thought on his hypothesis of Buddhism being an Aryan warrior anti-religious path that was later made into a devotional faith by the non-Aryan Asiatics……..I find Evola’s interpretation problematic but would like to know your thoughts.