Spengler: about Modern Man, Traditional Man and the Historical Destiny of Woman and Man

“Instead of a world a city, a single point, in which is gathered the whole life of vast regions, while the rest becomes sterile; instead of a formed people, tied to its land, a new nomad, a parasite, the inhabitant of the big cities, the pure practical man without tradition, taken up in a formless and fluctuant mass, the irreligious, intelligent, sterile man, deeply adverse to the peasant and the landed gentry, that of the peasant is the highest form – this represents a giant step towards the inorganic, towards the end”.

“The metropolis means the cosmopolitanism in place of the <<homeland>>, the cold practical sense in place of the respect for what has been handed down and is matured, the scientistic irreligiosity as dissolution of the previous religious fervour, the <<society>> in place of the State, the natural rights in place of those acquired”.

“The last man of the metropolises doesn’t want to live anymore: as a type, as a mass, not as an individual; in this collective being the fear of death fades. What fills with a deep and inexplicable anguish the true peasant, that is the idea of the extinction of the family and the loss of the name, ceases now to have a meaning. The continuation of one’s own blood in the visible world is no longer felt as a duty for this blood, the destiny of being the last of a lineage is no longer felt as a tragedy. Not that today the possibility to beget children has vanished; if the offspring is missing is above all because the intelligence, come to an extreme strenghtening, no longer finds a reason for it. Transpose yourselves in the soul of the peasant that from primordial times lives in the same piece of land, namely that he bought it to unite himself to it with his blood. In such a land, he has roots as the grandson of his ancestors, and as the ancestor of the future grandsons. His home, his property: this here doesn’t mean a fleeting relation between the body and the goods for a brief period of time, but rather a lasting and inner relation between the eternal land and the eternal blood: only with this, only with the sedentarity in a spiritual sense the great seasons of the cycle of existence, the generation, the birth and death, obtain that metaphysical aura which symbolically fixes itself in the customs and in the religion of all the non-nomadic populations of the countryside”.

“The eternal policy of the woman is the conquest of the man, thanks to which she can become the mother of his children and thus be history, destiny and future. Instead the man, belonging essentially to the other history, wants to have a son as heir, as bearer of his blood and of his historical tradition”.

“However the eternal and secret policy of the woman, that brings us back at the beginnings of the animal kingdom, aspires to distract the man from his mission to bind him completely to the chain of generations, that is like saying to herself. Yet all that happens in the other history, in the male history, has the purpose of protecting and preserving this eternal history of generating and dying, call it what you want: fighting for the house and the hearth, for the woman and the son, for the ancestry, for the nation, for the future”.

spengler

Related posts: Spengler: about Cosmic Anguish and the Religious Sentiment of the WorldSpengler: about Time, History and Destiny

Advertisements

Lost Wisdom

The only video interview at our disposal – with English subtitles – where Julius Evola, for about an hour, discusses a wide range of subjects from him already deepened in his most important books. A precious and valid record that I wish to share with my readers:

Related posts: Evola: about Work, Economy and LifeEvola: about Christianism, Chivalry and the Nordic-Germanic vision of LifeEvola: about Initiation, Immortality, Death and Rebirth

Evola: about Initiation, Immortality, Death and Rebirth

“To be clear, is necessary to refer to a fundamental traditional teaching, after all already mentioned: to the one concerning the two natures. There is the nature of the immortals and there is the nature of the mortals; there is the superior region of <<those-who-are>> and there is the inferior region of the <<becoming>>”.

“The passage from the one to the other was considered possible, but on an exceptional basis and under the condition of an essential and effective, positive, transformation from a way of being to another way of being. Such transformation was achieved by means of the initiation in the strictest sense of the term. Through the initiation some men escaped from one nature and conquered the other, thus ceasing of being men. Their appearance in the other form of existence constituted, in the order of this last, a rigorously equivalent event to that of the generation and of the physical birth. They were therefore re-born, they were re-generated”.

“To the eternal sleep, to the larval existence in Hades, to the dissolution thinked as destiny of all those for whom the forms of this human life have constituted the beginning and the end – would escape therefore only those who already alive have been able to orient their consciousness towards the superior world. The Initiated, the Adepts are at the limit of such path. Obtained the <<remembrance>>, according to the expressions of Plutarch they become free, they go without constraints, crowned they celebrate the <<mysteries>> and see on the earth the crowd of those who are not initiated and who are not <<pure>> pressing and pushing themselves in mud and darkness”.

“To tell the truth, the traditional teaching about the postmortem has always stressed the existing difference between survival and immortality. Can be conceived various modalities, more or less contingents, of survival for this or that principle or complex of the human being. But this has nothing to do with immortality, which can only be thinked as <<olympic immortality>>, as a <<becoming gods>>. Such a conception lasted in the West until the hellenic antiquity. From the doctrine indeed of the <<two natures>> proceeded the knowledge of the destiny of a death, or of a precarious, larval survival for the ones, of a conditioned immortality (conditioned by the initiation) for the others”.

“It was the vulgarization and the abusive generalization of the truth exclusively valid for the initiates – vulgarization that began in some degenerate forms of orphism and had then broad development with christianism – to give birth to the strange idea of the <<immortality of the soul>>, extended to any soul and distanced from every condition. Since then until today, the illusion continues in the various forms of the religious and <<spiritualistic>> thought: the soul of a mortal is immortal – immortality is a certainty, not a problematic possibility. Thus established the misunderstanding, thus perverted the truth, the initiation could no longer appear necessary: its value of real and effective operation could no longer be understood. Every really transcendent possibility was little by little abolished. And by continuing to talk of <<rebirth>>, the whole thing, by and large, ran out in a matter of sentiment, in a moral and religious meaning, in a more or less indeterminated and <<mystical>> state”.

-Julius Evola

julius1

Related posts: Evola: about Work, Economy and LifeEvola: about Christianism, Chivalry and the Nordic-Germanic vision of Life

Words of Wisdom #52 & #53

“The body dies, the person disappears, nothing alive remains on the earth, except the memory of the virtue and actions of the deceased”.

-Erwin Rohde

“To die but not be forgotten is longevity.”

-Tao Te Ching

One of the ways to conquer immortality is to live your life in such a way that your descendants and/or your people will remember you as an example of honourable man or woman. In this way you will become a role model and surely someone will try to live following your footsteps and imitating your deeds. Your name will live on and you’ll have surmounted death!

Guénon: about the Materialist Man, the subversion of the Traditional Order and the destructive Western diffusion

“Wanting to trace back everything to man’s measure, taken as an end in itself, we have ended up falling, step by step, until the level of what there is of most inferior, and by seeking only the satisfaction of the needs inherent to the material side of human nature; pursuit, after all, really illusory, since it creates more and more artificial needs, that it can’t satisfy…after all, more a man has needs, more he risks of lacking something and then of being unhappy. The modern civilization aims to multiply the artificial needs and, as we said a moment ago, it will create many more needs than it can satisfy, because, once taken this path, it’s difficult to stop there, and there is not even a reason to stop at a certain point. Men couldn’t suffer for not having things to which they had never thought; they instead suffer out necessarily if these things comes to lack after they have known them, since they have become accustomed to consider these as necessary and since these have become really necessary for them. Hence they try by every means to get what can provide them all the material satisfactions, the only ones that they are able to appreciate. It is only a matter of “earning money”, being money what allows them to obtain such things, and the more you have, the more you want, because new needs are uninterruptedly discovered; and this passion becomes the only purpose of life”.

***

“But in the world of modern decadence where could still be found the concept of a true hierarchy? There is no thing or person that is in the place where it should normally be. Men doesn’t recognize anymore any effective authority in the spiritual order, any legitimate power in the higher and sacred sense in the temporal order. The “profane” allow themselves to discuss about sacred things, of them disavowing the character if not even the existence. It’s the inferior that judges the superior, it’s ignorance that imposes limits to wisdom, it’s the error that undermines the truth, it’s the human that replaces the divine, it’s the earth that goes to predominate on the sky, the individual that makes of himself the measure of all things and who insists to dictate to the universe laws all taken from his relative and defeasible reason…today can indeed be seen everywhere blind people who guide other blind people and who will drag them fatally into the abyss, in a common end, if they will not be stopped in time”.

***

“Very singular epoch, this one, in which many allow themselves to be persuaded that the happiness of a people is done by enslaving it, by taking away from it what it has of most precious, that is its own civilization, by forcing it to adapt to customs and institutions made for another race and by forcing it to the most painful works to make it buy things that for it are completely useless! It’s like this: the modern West can’t tolerate that some men may prefer to work less and be content with little to live. Since only quantity counts, and since what doesn’t fall under the senses is considered as inexistent, it is believed that he who isn’t stressed out and who doesn’t produce materially is a “slacker”. In such a world, there is no place for intelligence, and so not even for all that is really internal, because these are not things that can be seen and touched, that can be weighed and measured. There is only place for the external action in all its forms, including the most meaningless ones”.

-Réne Guénon

Note: These quotes are taken from a work of the author dated 1927. The last quote refers to the westernization of the peoples of the Far East (India, China, Japan, etc.). Personally I consider the ongoing westernization of the world a consequence of Capitalism and of the Christian “tradition” (i.e. obsession) to invade and convert: whereby it is certainly appropriate to define this process as a result of the Judeo-Christian modus operandi.

guenon-author-pg-image-1

Evola: about Christianism, Chivalry and the Nordic-Germanic vision of Life

“The power of the tradition that gave its character to Rome revealed itself, towards Christianism, in the fact, that if the new faith managed to subvert the ancient civilization, it couldn’t really conquer the western world as pure Christianism; that where it attained some greatness, it was able to do so by betraying, to a certain extent itself: it was able to do so more thanks to elements taken from the opposite tradition – thanks to roman and classical pre-christian elements – than thanks to the christian element in its original form. De facto, Christianism <<converted>> the western man only externally; it constituted its <<faith>> in the most abstract sense, while the effective life of this one continued to obey to forms, more or less materialized, of the opposite tradition of action and, later, in the Middle Ages, to an ethos that again had to be marked essentially by the aryan-nordic spirit. Theoretically, the west accepted Christianism, – and that Europe could accommodate, in this way, many themes related to the jewish and levantine conception of life is something that always renews the wonder of the historian – practically, it remained pagan. The result was therefore a hybridism. Even in its attenuated and romanized catholic form the christian faith represented an obstruction, which took from the western man the possibility to integrate his authentic, insuppressible way of being by means of a conception to him congenial of the sacred and of the relationships with the sacred”.

“Catholicism took shape through the rectification of various extremist aspects of the Christianism of the origins, the organization of a ritual, dogmatic and symbolic corpus beyond of the simple mystical-soteriological element, the absorption and the adaptation of both doctrinal and organizational elements taken from the romanity and the classical civilization in general. That’s how Catholicism presents sometimes <<traditional>> traits, which however must not induce to misunderstanding: what in Catholicism has a truly traditional nature is very little christian and what in it is christian is very little traditional”.

***

“By having as model the hero more than the saint, the winner more than the martyr; by placing the sum of all values in fidelity and in honour more than in the <<caritas>> and in humility; by seeing in cowardice and in shame an evil worse than sin; by knowing very little of resisting evil and of repaying evil with goodness – intending much more to punish the unjust and the wicked, excluding from its ranks those who literally followed the christian precept of the <<don’t kill>>; by having as principle not to love the enemy, but to fight him and to be magnanimous only after having won it – in all this the chivalry affirmed almost without alteration an aryan ethic within a world only nominally christian”.

***

“The life of the ancient nordic-germanic societies was based on three principles of personality, freedom and fidelity. To it was totally alien both the promiscuous communitary sense and the inability of the individual to valorize itself if not in the context of a given abstract institution. Here being free is, for the individual, the measure of nobility. But this freedom is not anarchic and individualistic, it is capable of a dedication beyond the person, it knows the transfiguring value proper to the principle of the fidelity in front of who is worthy of recognition and to whom one subordinates oneself voluntarily. Thus were formed groups of faithful around leaders to which could well be applied the old saying: <<The supreme nobility of a roman Emperor is of being not a master of slaves but a lord of free men, who loves freedom also in those who serve him>>; and the State, almost according to the ancient roman aristocratic precept, had as center the council of chiefs, each one free, lord of his land and in his land, leader of the group of his faithful. Beyond this council, the unity of the State and, in a certain way, the superpolitical aspect of it was embodied by the King, since this one belonged – unlike the simple military leaders – to one of the lineages of divine origin: Amals, the <<heavenly>>, the <<pure>>, was a name of the kings among the Goths. No impersonal <<duty>> and <<service>> existed, everywhere there were free, strongly personalized relationships of command and obedience, of understanding and fidelity. In this way the idea of the free personality remained the foundation of each unity and each hierarchy”.

-Julius Evola

evola

Related post: Evola: about Work, Economy and Life