En poursuivant votre navigation sur ce site, vous acceptez l'utilisation de cookies. Ces derniers assurent le bon fonctionnement de nos services. En savoir plus.

mercredi, 15 octobre 2014

*Tiwaz, His Antiquity as a Germanic and Aryan Deity


*Tiwaz, His Antiquity as a Germanic and Aryan Deity

Ex: http://aryan-myth-and-metahistory.blogspot.com

If there is one deity present in Germanic mythology which can be traced back to Proto-Indo-European times, not just in type as with *Thunaraz but in name then it is *Tiwaz. Although He does not feature prominently in the Eddas we must remember that by the time of the close of the Viking age He had been pushed very much into the background by both *Thunaraz and *Wodanaz who took over many of His original functions. If it were not for etymology we would be much more in the dark about this enigmatic God than we currently are.

"Tyr (ON). The Old Scandinavian name for the Germanic god of the sky, war and council >*Tiwaz (OHG Ziu), who is the only Germanic god who was already important in Indo-European times: Old Indian Dyaus, Greek Zeus, Latin Jupiter, as well as Old Indian deva, Old Irish dia, Latin dei, ON tivar (plural to Tyr) 'gods' are all closely related etymologically to each other." (Dictionary of Northern Mythology, Rudolf Simek)


"But the name of Zeus is not confined to Greeks and Hindus. The Zeus Pater of the former and the Dyaus-pitar of the latter represent the Jupiter of the Latins, and the Tuisco, Zio, Tyr and Tiw of the German nations. The etymological changes of the word are indeed almost numberless. The brightness of the heaven reappears in the Latin dies, the Sanskrit dyu, and our day: and from the same root spring the Greek Theos, the Latin Deus, and the Lithuanian Diewas." (The Mythology of the Aryan Nations Volume 1, George William Cox)

To the Anglo-Saxons *Tiwaz was Tiw or Tig and He is remembered in the 3rd day of the week, Tuesday from the Anglo-Saxon tiwesdaeg or tiswesdag. Each time we say this day we invoke His name. The ON equivalent for Tuesday is tysdagr and the OHG dingesdag, a variant of His name as Thingsus.

"Some of the variations of the names of the various Germanic languages are also of interest. German Dienstag and Dutch dinsdag, 'Tuesday', are based on an adjective thingsus, 'protector of the thing or assembly', used to describe the war god, and this suggests that the predecessor of Tyr had a connection with lawful assembly that is hardly to be seen in the god as we know him." (Handbook of Norse Mythology, John Lindow)

 He was equated with the Roman God Mars as He became relegated to being a war God from His once lofty position as supreme deity of both the Germanic and Aryan peoples. *Thunaraz and *Tiwaz are in fact older deities than *Wodanaz but the Eddas relegate both of these Gods to being sons of Odin. Thus the role and nature of *Wodanaz may have been much different from the Odin that is left to us in the rather late Eddas.

"We see that Tyr has lost most of the glory implied by the etymology of his name, which derives from the same Indo-European root as the names of Zeus and Jupiter and of our word 'deity' (compare Latis deus), his predecessor may once have been a far greater warrior than Tyr seems to be in the extant mythology.We surmise that the original Odin is seen in his fickle and cunning aspects, not in his role as lord of hosts and ruler of the pantheon. Similarly, we surmise that the predecessor of Thor might possibly once have been the head of the pantheon, and that the predecessor of Frigg may once have been inspired love the way Freyja does in the texts that have come down to us." (Lindow)

The eclipse of the glory of this ancient God is emphasised in Jaan Puhvel's Comparative Mythology:

"In Scandinavia he is a sunken god in the heyday of the Odinic death cult, but his intrinsic eminence is not in question; witness the lingering importance of the Continental Tiw-Saxnot (in a ninth century Old Saxon baptismal vow the convert renounces allegiance to Thunaer, Woden, and Saxnote).

Puhvel draws a comparison with the Irish Nuada who like *Tiwaz was once the leader of the Celtic family of Gods until eclipsed by Lugh, the equivalent of *Wodanaz:

"The ascendancy of Lug over Nuada parallels the eclipsing of Tyr by Odin in Norse tradition."

Like Tyr, Nuada also lost His arm but it was later replaced by a false silver one:

"Their king was Nuada, who lost his arm in the battle against the Fir Bolg." (Puhvel)

After the fitting of His silver arm He became known as Nuada Argatlam (Nuada of the Silver Hand). Shortly after this Nuada loses his sovereignity over the Tuatha De Danann to Lugh. It is conjectured that the reason for this is that He became blemished due to His physical maiming.

In previous articles I have speculated that the God who the Semnones worshipped in their sacred central grove was none other than *Tiwaz. They were also called Ziuwari. Ziu is remembered in many place names and mountain names in Germany and Switzerland. Even plants were named after Him:

"The names of plants also confess the god: ON. Tysfiola, I dare say after the Lat. viola Martis, march-violet; Tyrhialm (aconitum), otherwise Thorhialm, Thorhat (helmet, hat), conf. Germ. sturmhut, eisenhut, Dan. troldhat, a herb endowed with magic power, whose helmet-like shape might suggest either of those warlike gods Tyr and Thorr; Tyvidr, Ty's wood, Dan. Tyved, Tysved (daphne mezereum), in the Helsing. dial. tis, tistbast, the mezereon, a beautiful poison flower." ( Teutonic Mythology Volume 1, Jacob Grimm)

Grimm also points out that the rune Tiwaz is the only rune which specifically names a Germanic deity:

"How comes it that no rune has taken its name from Wuotan or Odinn, the inventor of writing itself? 'R=reid, rad, ' i.e., waggon, may indirectly at least be referred to the god of the Thunder-car; and F according to one interpretation signifies Freyr. Anyhow, T=Tyr appears to have been a supremely honoured symbol, and the name of this god to have been specially sacred: in scratching the runes of victory on the sword, the name of Tyr had to be twice inserted, Saem. 194b. The shape of the rune ᛏ has an obvious resemblance to the old-established symbol of the planet Mars when set upright ♂ , and an AS. poem on the runes expressly says: tir bid tacna sum (tir is one of the tokens, is a certain sign); where again the derivative form tir is employed to explain the simple Tiw or Ti."

Interestingly Grimm goes on to analyse the Anglo-Saxon Ear rune which does resemble the Tir rune. This rune is the final rune of the Anglo-Saxon Futhork but the 29th rune of the 33 rune Northumbrian Futhork. It is taken to signify the grave, dust. However Gimm associates this rune with Tyr/Tiw/Zio and discusses how its name Ear is linked to the Irminsul:

"Evidence as regards Low Germany is found both in the rune Ear occurring in Anglo-Saxon, and in the remarkable name of Eresburg, Aeresburg being given to a notable seat of pagan worship in a district of Westphalia, in the immediate neighbourhood of the Irminsul (v. supra, p 116). That it was strictly Eresberg (as Siegburg was originally Sigberg, p. 198), follows both from the Latin rendering mons Martis, and from its later name Mersberg, whose initial M could be explained by the contraction of the words 'in dem Eresberge, Aresberge', or it may be an imitation of the Latin name. There was a downright Marsberg in another district of Westphalia. This Eresberc then is a Ziesberc, a Sig-tiwes-berg, and yet more closely an Arreopagus, Mars' hill."

This association between *Tiwaz and Irmin (the high God of the Arya, know also as Eremon, Aryaman, Airyaman and Ariomanus amongst the various Aryan peoples) is further demonstrated in the names of the days of the week amongst High German tribes:

"Still more plainly are High German races, especially the Bavarian (Marcomannic) pointed to by that singular name for the third day of the week, Ertag, Iertag, Irtag, Eritag, Erchtag, Erichtag, which answers to the rune Eor, and up to this moment lives to part off the Bavarians, Austrians and Tyrolese from the Swabians and Swiss (who, as former Ziowari, stick to Ziestag); along the boundary line of these races must also have run formerly the frontier between Eor-worship and Zio-worship.

Grimm then goes on to make the bold claim that Eor, who is presumably Irmin is to be regarded as the son of Zio:

" As Zio is identical with Zeus as director of wars, we see at a glance that Eor, Er, Ear, is one with Ares the son of Zeus; and as the Germans had given the rank of Zeus to their Wotan, Tyr and consequently Eor appears as the son of the highest god."

In a previous article I have discussed how the Cheruscans were named after a God Cheru or Heru, a sword God who is none other than Saxnot. http://celto-germanic.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/heru-god-of-cherusci.html

"Another naked sword flashes on the wooded heights  in the land of the Cherusci; it is the weapon of the sword-god Heru, Cheru or Saxnot, who some think is no other than Tyr. Of this weapon Saga tells us that it causes the destruction of its possessor, should he be unworthy of owning it; but that in the hand of a hero  it brings victory and sovereignty."(Asgard and the Gods, Wilhelm Waegner, 1886)

The great legendary hero of the Cherusci was Arminius or Hermann who although historical was in my opinion an Avatar of Irmin sent to rescue and to unite the German Volk. Grimm makes the same connection between the Cherusci and Cheru/Heru:

"The AS. genealogies preserve the name of Saxneat as the son of Woden, and it is in perfect accordance with it, that Tyr was the son of Odinn, and Ares the son of Zeus (see Suppl.). But further, as the Saxons were so called, either because they wielded the sword of stone (saxum), or placed this god at the head of their race, so I think the Cheruscans of Tacitus, a people synonymous, nay identical with them, were named Cheru, Heru=Eor, from whom their name can be derived."

He even draws  a connection with the Gallic deity Esus:

"After this weighty consonance of facts, which open to us the meaning of the old national name, and at the same time teaches us that 'heru' was first of all pronounced 'cheru', and last of all 'eru, er', I think we may also bring in the Gallic war-god Hesus or Esus (Lucan 1 ,440), and state, that the metal iron is indicated by the planetary sign of Mars, the AS. 'tires tacen', and consequently that the name Zio and Eor may be the picture of a sword with its handle, or of a spear. The Scythian and Alanic legends dwell still more emphatically on the god's sword, and their agreement with Teutonic ways of thinking may safely be assumed, as Mars was equally prominent in the faith of the Scythians and that of the Goths.


"The impressive personification of the sword matches well with that of the hammer, and to my way of thinking each confirms the other. Both idea and name of two of the greatest gods pass over into the instrument by which they display their might.


"Herodotis 4, 62 informs us, that the Scythians worshipped Ares under the semblance or symbol of an ancient iron sword, which was elevated on an enormous stack of brushwood ['three furlongs in length and breadth, but less in height'].

Tyr has become a general name for God and examples such as Hangatyr (God of the Hanged) and Hertyr (God of Armies) exist as Odinsheiti or bynames for Odin.  This is just another example of how ancient and revered the name of Tyr is.

00:05 Publié dans Traditions | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : traditions, mythologie, mythologie germanique, tiwaz | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

mardi, 14 octobre 2014

L’uomo come potenza

L’uomo come potenza

Ex: http://romeocastiglione.wordpress.com


Sfoglio con calma le pagine del libro L’uomo come potenza di Julius Evola. Tolgo i petali di una malefica rosa e lascio cadere sul pavimento infiniti aneliti di spasimo. Leggo, rifletto. Dinanzi a me compare una realtà incontaminata: accolgo in silenzio la magia dei Tantra. E soffermo il mio sguardo su un rigo ipnotico. «Evocare una immagine. Fissarvisi, perdersi, per così dire in essa. Bruscamente, sostituirla con un’altra». Chiudo gli occhi e vedo con la mente una ragazza in una stanza. La luce penetra attraverso i buchi delle persiane. È un pomeriggio estivo. Avverto un desiderio di distruzione; l’Inquietudine assale il mio corpo. Così cambio figurazione. Sorge all’improvviso un oceano di ghiaccio. Non si avverte nessun rumore. Il desiderio è atrofizzato. È fuggita la sofferenza.

Resto attonito. Ebbene rileggo il testo altre volte. Sottolineo, scopro. Tra le mani ho un dardo infuocato. E questo idealismo magico è paurosamente meraviglioso: è la vittoria totale dell’individuo. È il superamento dell’idealismo hegeliano. È l’abbraccio mortale del romanticismo tedesco di Novalis e Fichte con il metallico pensiero di Nietzsche. È la negazione della dualità cristiana; conseguenzialmente è il rifiuto del rapporto di dipendenza tra l’Individuo e il Dio trascendente ritenuto fondamentale da Schleiermacher. L’Io è il signore assoluto.

L’uomo come potenza raccoglie nelle pagine l’impetuosa unione della migliore filosofia occidentale con le dottrine orientali. Evola porta all’attenzione del lettore un Oriente remoto e distante dagli stereotipi. Con codesto saggio è stata confutata la distinzione tra i due poli. Non alberga certamente in questo luogo l’Oriente del buddismo arcano e delle primordiali Upanishad. Non occorre fuggire dal mondo; bensì bisogna dominarlo. Proprio per siffatto motivo l’autore ha esaltato il sistema tantrico, in altre parole il sistema orientale con più assonanze con lo spirito del moderno occidente. Nell’età buia, nell’epoca del Kali Yuga non c’è spazio per la conoscenza: soltanto la potenza brutale libera l’individuo.

Quindi è possibile dominare il mondo tramite la potenza liberatrice. L’Io deve diventare un Dio. Propriamente occorre recuperare l’immensa e grandiosa signoria di sé. L’individuo è sovrano ed è una “super monade”. La via dell’azione è salvifica. L’individuo è come un nero cavallo demoniaco libero dai lacci e dalle leggi morali. È il nero cavallo dell’auriga di Platone; è il dionisiaco puledro dalle sembianze tenebrose. È il sole, è la potenza distruttiva. Agire unicamente per l’azione è l’obiettivo. Di conseguenza si oltrepassa la soglia del bene e del male. Non c’è più il bene, non c’è più il male. L’individuo decide ciò che è bene e ciò è male. «Non si tratta cioè – dice Evola – né di violare le leggi, né di conformarvisi, bensì di elevarsi al livello di ciò per cui ogni legge e condizione non ha senso alcuno». Orbene le cupe e ipnotiche parole sembrano vampe immaginifiche. Cerca Dio chi è debole. L’individuo che cerca la libertà diventa Dio.

Proprio con la pratica dei Tantra (precisamente del ҫakti – tantra) l’individuo si libera nel mondo. La potenza divina proietta lungo un avvallamento magico. La naturale realizzazione di sé trova la sua suprema origine nel principio femminile della Shakti. Pertanto lo shaktismo mantiene talune importantissime attinenze con gli antichi culti del mondo mediterraneo pelasgico. Kali è una dea nera e nuda. La sua sagoma sprigiona una mistica sessualità intrisa di disintegrazione; ed è nera anche la Diana d’Efeso. Così come la Madonna Nera del Tindari in Sicilia. Tramite i Tantra è possibile affermare la priorità della potenza sull’esistenza. Al Principio c’è un potere e l’essere è subordinato a esso. Nella scala gerarchica tutti gli esseri vengono dopo e anche Dio viene dopo. Allora la potenza è libera e non è soggetta alle leggi razionali e a quelle morali. In pratica non ha un Dharma, un ordine più su di lei. Con il mondo c’è un rapporto di potenza e la potenza è soltanto la manifestazione. La potenza in azione è la coincidenza del desiderio e della liberazione. Proprio il mondo è il luogo materiale della liberazione. Insomma, bisogna porsi «faccia a faccia con la legge, resisterle e non esserne spezzati ma dominarla e spezzarla; osare di strappar via i veli con la realtà originaria e prudentemente coperta, osare di trascendere la forma per mettersi a contatto con l’atrocità originaria di un mondo in cui bene e male, divino e umano, giusto e ingiusto non hanno alcun senso. […] Ostacoli uno solo: paura. È una lotta terribile. Vi può essere vittoria e vi può essere catastrofe». L’autore individua nei Tantra un titanismo indomito e velato di allusioni nietzschiane. Evola rivendica la possibilità di «poter vivere tragicamente».

Bisogna mantenere la schiena dritta fino al momento di lasciare sé. Per farlo serve la potenza di distrazione, la rinuncia, l’auto crudeltà, la durezza, e la pratica occulta. Per di più bisogna essere coerenti e lineari. Il pentimento è vietato: non esiste alcun rimorso. Una “colpa” voluta non è una reale colpa. È necessario evitare il piacere; in linea di massima la strada maestra è quella della maggior resistenza. Non bisogna giustificare le proprie azioni. Non sussiste la condotta morale: soltanto nel dualismo la morale ha un’importanza. Per il superamento dei paҫa, in altre parole dei legami affettivi è fondamentale mantenere una dura condotta. La pietà, la delusione, il peccato, il disgusto, la famiglia e le convenzioni non hanno alcun valore. È una lotta atroce. Spunta tra i riflessi dell’opera un crepuscolare catastrofismo. Si dipanano le tenebre della perversa realtà. L’Individuo sfida il Dharma, il cosmos. Raccoglie dentro di sé il caos e sprigiona la volontà di potenza. Si arrampica a mani nude sopra una rocciosa parete; il senso di vertigine minaccia la stabilità. Sotto c’è il vuoto. Egli può soltanto andare avanti. Le pietre si sbriciolano intorno a lui. Soltanto in cima c’è la libertà.

In pratica nel volume il tantrismo è spiegato alla stregua di una “scienza positiva”. E l’idealismo magico di Evola è un frullato robusto e ammaliante. Nell’idealismo di Evola, in altre parole nell’idealismo “magico” l’Io si mette in rapporto diretto con le cose. Supera così la conciliazione astratta di spirito e mondo, di soggetto e oggetto figurata da Hegel. Codesto idealismo trae linfa da Novalis: il pensatore romano, in un certo senso, enfatizza ancor di più l’individuo. L’uomo come potenza rientra nel novero delle opere evoliane a carattere filosofico speculativo. L’autore con la successiva Teoria dell’individuo assoluto esaspera ulteriormente la “tragica dimensione dell’esistenza”. Il Superuomo di Nietzsche è oltrepassato sul filo del rasoio. La potentissima “vettura” evoliana percorre una strada stregata. Il singolo sceglie un eccezionalissimo percorso e procede a velocità elevate. Pertanto il poetico “solipsismo” non incute nessun timore. L’individuo assoluto determina ciò che è vero e ciò che è falso. Pare Humpty Dumpty, il personaggio ideato da Lewis Carroll che incontra Alice; Humpty cambia dispoticamente il significato delle parole poiché si sente un padrone. E nell’epoca della dissoluzione, nell’ultima epoca il corpo cerca la sua liberazione. Non è più il tempo della conoscenza. L’ascetismo non alberga fra le righe del libro. Ebbene non subire il fascino distruttivo del volume equivale a non scottarsi i piedi sui carboni ardenti: è impossibile. Di là dai Tantra è possibile scorgere un codice crittografato dal sapore robusto. L’uomo come potenza potrebbe diventare una sorta di nuovo “manuale di sopravvivenza” per gli uomini estranei al proprio tempo. Ma è un manuale algido, rigido, severo. È la vittoria di Dioniso è la consequenziale sconfitta di Apollo; è la vittoria del disordine sull’ordine morale devastatore della potenza dell’individuo. Dopo aver letto L’uomo come potenza il mondo non sarà più lo stesso e i problemi saranno analizzati con distacco. È un libro per pochi eletti. È un libro elegantemente antidemocratico.

E nei nostri giorni esiste l’individuo assoluto. Ad esempio le frange estreme del pianeta ultras corrono lungo una linea invisibile e peccaminosa. Nel cinema ho ritrovato diverse volte tale figura. Il Principe del film Ultrà è un individuo assoluto; così come Jena Plissken di Fuga da New York. È un individuo assoluto Saverio lo skinhead del lungometraggio Teste Rasate. Ebbene anche il generale Kurtz di Apocalypse Now è un individuo assoluto. Chi domina il mondo e chi non riconosce le leggi morali è un Dio. È un Dio chi obbedisce soltanto a sé stesso. Oggi codesti pensieri fanno male. Pesano come frammenti di roccia gravidi di rabbia.

lundi, 13 octobre 2014



Timotheus Lutz
Ex: http://www.hyperion-journal.net

Relatively recently, certain academics with an interest in those who admit a perennial tradition and expound esoteric doctrines have profiled what they call the ‘traditionalist school’. In their characterization, some individuals have been assimilated wrongly to this category, most notably the famous scholar of ‘comparative religion’, Mircea Eliade. Others, who should be aware of the fundamental differences in outlook between Eliade and modern exponents of traditional metaphysics, have seen him as a sort of sympathetic ‘Trojan horse’ who would subtly alter the course of his field of study in academia, by way of a ‘phenomenological’ view of spirituality in human history, contrasted with the sterile, purely analytical outlook that predominates in the universities.  
Eliade’s encounter with the works of René Guénon and Julius Evola certainly had a significant, or perhaps even a primary influence on his methods of research and ways of interpreting what he called ‘archaic’ systems, but, as he himself stated frankly in his journals, he always kept his distance and was apprehensive about endorsing the views of the latter.
It should be made clear that clarifying Eliade’s position is not necessarily a condemnation, as, obviously, one can accept some ideas of a given thinker without accepting all. However, given the importance and the rarity of the ideas of Guénon and Evola, and the incomprehension of some major ones displayed by Eliade, a firm appraisal is called for, since some are eager to assume an identity of substance in the thought of the former and the latter, where it is really only an appearance.
He states his position most directly in a journal entry on 11 November 1966:
What Guénon and the other ‘hermetists’ say of the tradition should not be understood on the level of historical reality (as they claim). These speculations constitute a universe of systematically articulated meanings: they are to be compared to a great poem or a novel. It is the same with Marxist or Freudian ‘explanations’: they are true if they are considered imaginary universes. The ‘proofs’ are few and uncertain – they correspond to the historical, social, psychological ‘realities’ of a novel or of a poem.
All these global and systematic interpretations, in reality, constitute mythological creations, highly useful for understanding the world; but they are not, as their authors think, ‘scientific explanations’. [1]
The classification of Guénon as a ‘hermetist’ is rather strange since, in his writings, he rarely discussed the hermetic doctrines. Since his main focus was metaphysics (a domain not subject to becoming), it is incorrect to classify him with a title pertaining to cosmological doctrines (which pertain to the domain of becoming). Comparing the formulations of Guénon and those similar in outlook to poems and novels is completely wrong: in poetic creations the subjective is primary, while in Guénon’s writings (as in those of Aristotle, Plotinus or Proclus) a precise objectivity is evident. As far as proofs, in this domain there cannot be empirical demonstration, only support by way of logic and analogy on one end, and identifying principles within oneself on the other. One either understands or does not. That this is a major obstacle for many is apparent. We assume the term ‘scientific explanations’ was not taken from Guénon or another’s writing, but used to imply erroneously that they would describe their interpretations as scientific; this is also an error since none of them would claim their interpretations could be explained scientifically.
We can assume this is Eliade’s basic view, since by 1966 his outlook was more or less fully developed, and since he shows similar opinions later on. This was also an opinion he had long held, as shown in an entry from 1947:
Only after you’ve studied Coomaraswamy’s writings in detail do you discover, suddenly, the poverty, the ‘elementarism’ [rom. primarism], of René Guénon’s œuvre. And the insufferable self-importance with which he hides, so often, his ignorance! [2]
We are not sure what he means here by ‘elementarism’, but perhaps it is Guénon’s focus on principial reality, which is the whole point of his works, contrasted with Ananda Coomaraswamy’s much greater emphasis on factual analysis and use of citations and academic sources. Although Coomaraswamy was indeed a (celebrated) academic, he was in agreement with nearly all of Guénon’s fundamental positions. If this is what Eliade means, it is simply another instance of his incomprehension of the primacy of metaphysics over confirming individual facts. We have found that Coomaraswamy’s writings do not reveal any significant ‘poverty’ in Guénon’s works, but instead complement them nicely.
Incomprehension of some major ideas is also apparent much later. In the early 1980s he writes: ‘Like René Guénon, Evola presumed a ‘primordial tradition’, in the existence of which I could not believe; I was suspicious of its artificial, ahistorical character’ [3]. To modern ears, the term ‘primordial tradition’ is likely to evoke visions of some perfect civilization in the sky, but first and foremost it is to be understood as atemporal (and thus, also, correctly described by Eliade as ahistorical) principles on which all genuinely traditional cultures are based. These principles are superior to, but are as immutable, in a similar manner, as the laws of logic or mathematics. To call them artificial is to demand that they be intelligible only as a particular, empirical example, and so displays, again, his incomprehension.
Worth quoting is his admission of a use for these authors:
I try once again, but I don’t succeed: Yeats’ ‘occultism’, over which so much fuss is made, doesn’t interest me. It’s cheap, ‘literary’, suspect – and, ultimately, uninteresting. Out of all the modern occultist authors whom I have read, only R. Guénon and J. Evola are worthy of being taken into consideration. I’m not discussing here to what extent their assertions are ‘true’. But what they write makes sense. [4]
And another, a response to a student of his interested in occultism: ‘. . . if one is truly attracted to hermetism, he ought to read the ‘authorized’, if not Cardanus, at least Coomaraswamy and René Guénon’ [5]. Clearly he still thought highly of some of their formulations, if only as comprehensible reference points for what is often and wrongly passed off as ‘esotericism’.
The critical attitude appears again in his dismissive appraisal of Evola’s intellectual autobiography. Eliade’s instinct to privilege academic authorities and those who have received wide acceptance is revealed clearly here:


I’m reading the intellectual autobiography of J. Evola, Il Cammino del mercurio [the title written is wrong: it is cinabro (cinnabar), not mercurio –ed.], with much melancholy. The chapter in which he presents and discusses the idealistic ‘university philosophy’, represented by Croce and Gentile: he speaks about his two theoretical volumes in which he supposedly destroyed those ‘professors,’ etc. etc. The naïveté (full of resentment) with which he situates himself in the history of contemporary thought – even though he states repeatedly that his volumes have not been reviewed and have not evoked any response . . .
There must be, indeed, several tons of printed paper in Italy alone on which the philosophy of Croce and Gentile has been discussed. Of what use, then, has Evola’s ‘radical criticism’ and ‘destruction’ been? And abroad, poor J. Evola is viewed as an ultra-fascist. The copy of the English translation of his book on Buddhism in Swift Library is disfigured with polemical annotations (written in indelible lead!): they say (even on the cover) that Evola is a fascist and a ‘racist’, that his theories about ‘Aryans’ were borrowed from A. Rosenberg, etc. I remember the brief, harsh review in Journal asiatique written by J. Filliozat in the same vein: J. E. is a racist, ultra-fascist, etc.
Evola tries to appear indifferent to such criticisms, although he prefers them to the ‘conspiracy of silence’ of which he claims he has suffered all his life. And yet, what a melancholic spectacle to see him talking about what he has done, how he has ‘destroyed’ and ‘surpassed’ everyone, even Nietzsche and Heidegger (whom he claims, moreover, to have anticipated . . .). [6]
Eliade does not admit that the soundness and truth of arguments are more important than how widely read, received and reviewed they are. The quantity of inferior and false ideas that are celebrated in the universities, then and now, is very high. Many are unable to comprehend, nevertheless, how curtly and effectively false ideas, however celebrated they are or however voluminously they are presented, can be dismissed. Of the mass of writings discussing the thought of Croce and Gentile, only Evola’s had looked at these philosophies from the traditional perspective, which is of use, simply, because it is the only one not subject to the movement of opinion and history. Mention of the idiotic slurs applied to him by those who have misunderstood his perspective are not relevant; if one does not take the time to adequately understand a given idea or formulation, his opinion does not matter. It is clear that Eliade is displaying a historicist prejudice; because his writings have been ignored (apparently, at least) and since no admission of the soundness of his criticisms has manifested visibly, the value of the writings in themselves, as formulations to be judged solely by their truth-value, is ignored, and Evola’s observation of this is considered a ‘spectacle’, the judgment of the history of ideas being obviously the decisive factor for Eliade. We might also add, like Eliade did when he compared Coomaraswamy and Guénon vis-à-vis other ‘occultists’ above, that, unlike Heidegger’s and much of Nietzsche’s writing, what Evola writes makes sense.
Despite praise of some aspects of his work, on at least one occasion he engaged in rather irresponsible gossip about Evola. In 1958, in a letter to the poet and former Iron Guard member Vasile Posteucă, regarding a request for information about Evola’s encounter with Corneliu Codreanu, Eliade warned him that Evola was a ‘racist’ and a ‘Nazi’, and liable to generate confusion if used as a source [7]. Never mind that he made it clear that his ‘racism’ was of a type quite different from that of the National Socialists, from whom he explicitly distanced himself ideologically, even during the war, and that several mainstream and semi-mainstream publishers in Europe found his works fit to print! A man of Eliade’s sophistication should have known better than to describe Evola so falsely and simplistically. One would not have thought that, being himself the target of similar slurs by certain elements in academia, he would engage in this kind of rumor-mongering. If the account of the exchange is not a fabrication or an exaggeration, then our opinion of Eliade is lowered considerably.
Evola demonstrated quite well the limits of Eliade’s formulations in a review of the latter’s book on Yoga:
Our fundamental opinion of Eliade’s work on Yoga may be expressed by saying that it is the most complete of all those that have been written on this subject in the domain of the history of religions and of Orientalism. One cannot mention another that for wealth of information, for comparisons, for philological accuracy, for the examination and utilization of all previous contributions, stands on the same level. But when once this has been admitted, some reservations have to be made. In the first place it would seem that the material he handles has often got the better of the writer. I mean to say that in his anxiety to make use of all, really all, that is known on the several varieties of Yoga and on what is directly or indirectly connected therewith, he has neglected the need of discriminating and selecting so as to give importance only to those parts of Yoga that are standard and typical, avoiding the danger that the reader lose track of the essential features by confusing them with the mass of information on secondary matters, variations, and side products. Looking at it from this standpoint, we are even led to wonder whether Eliade’s previous book Yoga, essai sur les origines de la mystique indienne (Paris, 1936), is not in some respects superior to this last one, which is a reconstruction of the former. In the first book the essential points of reference were more clearly outlined, they were less smothered by the mass of information brought together, and the references to less-known forms of Yoga, such as the Tantric and others, were more clearly pointed out [ . . . ]
After this glance at the contents of Eliade’s new book we are tempted to inquire of him a somewhat prejudicial question: to whom is the book addressed? As we have openly declared, it is a fundamental work for specialists in the field not only of Oriental research, but also in that of the history of religions. But in his introduction Eliade states that the book is addressed also to a wider public and he speaks of the importance that a knowledge of a doctrine such as that of Yoga may have for the solution of the existential problems of the modern Westerner, confirmed as that doctrine is by immemorial experience.
Here complications arise. To meet such a purpose it would be necessary to follow a different plan and to treat the matter in a different way. A Westerner who reads Eliade’s book may be able to acquire an idea of Yoga as ‘la science intégrale de l’homme [the integral science of man]’, he may acquire knowledge of a teaching that has faced in practice as well as in theory the problem of ‘deconditioning’ man; he will thus add yet one other panorama to the list of the many modern culture has provided him with. His interest will perhaps be more lively than the ‘neutral’ interest of the specialist; he may flirt with the aspects of a ‘spiritualite virante’. But on the existential plane the situation will be pretty much the same as it was before, even if the information available be deeper, more accurate, better documented. The possibility of exercising a more direct influence could only be looked for from a book addressed to those who have shown an interest in Yoga and similar sciences not because they seek for information but because they are seeking for a path; a book that in this special field would remove the misunderstandings, the popular notions, the deviations, and the delusions spread by a certain kind of literature to which we referred at the beginning of this article; a book displaying the accuracy and knowledge that we find in this work of Eliade, in as far as it is an exposition kept within the limits of the history of religions. Such a book has perhaps still to be written. But even so the essential need would not be met, for it is the unanimous opinion of the true masters of Yoga that the key to their science cannot be handed on by the written word. [8]
It could be said figuratively that if one who comprehends and adopts the traditional perspective can be said to have a view from the peaks that allows the most complete survey, then Eliade could be described as not having completed the ascent, his vision being obscured by clouds above or enamored by objects on the path to the summit. If he could see individual rocks on the path more closely, we must remember that the view from summit is still the most important one.
[1] Eliade, Mircea. No Souvenirs: Journal 1957-1969, p. 291.
[2] Eliade. Jurnal, 26 August 1947, M.E.P., box 15/2 (trans. Mac Linscott Ricketts). *
[3] Eliade. Autobiography, Volume II, p. 152.
[4] Eliade. Jurnal, 5 September 1964, M.E.P., box. 16/6 *
[5] Ibid., 4 March 1969, box 15/4 *
[6] Ibid., 20 December 1964, box. 16/6, pp. 2640-2641 *
[7] Posteucă, Vasile. Jurnal, in: Gabriel Stănescu (ed.), Mircea Eliade în conştiinna contemporanilor săi din exil, Norcross: Criterion, [2001], pp. 272-277 (275 – entry of 28 October 1958). *
[8] Evola, Julius. Yoga, Immortality & Freedom. East and West, vol. 6, no. 3, 1955.

* Quotes and citations from: Bordas, Liviu. The difficult encounter in Rome: Mircea Eliade’s post-war relation with Julius Evola – new letters and data. International Journal on Humanistic Ideology, IV, no. 2, Autumn-Winter 2011, pp. 125-158. Retrieved from: Academia.edu

dimanche, 12 octobre 2014

Il sapere tradizionale di Evola e la scienza ermetica di Hegel


Il sapere tradizionale di Evola e la scienza ermetica di Hegel

Il sapere tradizionale di Evola e la scienza ermetica di Hegel

Giandomenico Casalino

Ex: http://www.ereticamente.net

La comparazione di natura filosofica tra Julius Evola e Giorgio F. G. Hegel, pensatori di natura sapienziale tanto lontani nel tempo e, quindi, apparentemente, così differenti, sia nel lessico da loro adottato che in relazione al contesto storico-culturale in cui hanno vissuto ed operato, impone rigorosamente la ricerca di ciò che realmente abbia significato per gli stessi la Cosa del pensiero, l’oggetto di cui e su cui hanno tematizzato, al di là delle modalità e cioè delle divergenze attraverso le quali, tutto ciò, loro malgrado, si è espresso. Quindi il lavoro deve essere caratterizzato da un approccio di natura ermeneutica, che privilegi non tanto la dimensione filologica quanto quella teoretica che, data la sua natura, abbia l’ambizione di varcare i limiti del tempo e delle stagioni culturali e, per dirla con il Kerenyi, entri in Idea nel cuore del Pensiero, che, nella sua inten­zionalità, li ha guidati nel percorso dello Spirito. Quanto dedotto vuol significare che, come intorno ad Evola il discorso deve superare la “vulgata” del suo preteso “abbandono” della Filosofia, con la co­siddetta “chiusura” del periodo ad essa dedicato e l’ “apertura” nei confronti di ciò che tout court si è definito Tradizione, così per lo Hegel è necessario emendare radicalmente quanto certa critica pigra e conformista ha dedotto sulla sua pretesa modernità e sul concetto di razionale confuso e mistifi­cato con quello cristiano e/o moderno di razionalismo individualistico e quindi astratto. At­tesa la complessa vastità del tema, faremo in modo di esaminare e di indicare sinteticamente alcuni nodi essenziali comuni alla prospettiva sia di Evola che di Hegel, al fine di offrire quelli che, secondo noi, pos­sono essere i percorsi di ricerca e di studio relativi alla quaestio sollevata.


L’autentica “svolta” spirituale esperita da Evola alla fine degli anni venti del Novecento non è con­sistita, a ben riflettere, in un “abbandono” della Fi­losofia e del suo orizzonte di ricerca e di visione, del suo oggetto di amore e dei suoi itinerari aristo­telicamente dovuti, ma bensì in un lasciare al suo destino di impotenza gnoseologica e di inefficacia spirituale la Filosofia moderna o meglio il concetto moderno della stessa (che è poi quello cristiano…). La frase di Lagneau sulla Filosofia considerata una sorta di “…riflessione tesa a riconoscere la sua propria insufficienza e la necessità di un’azione assoluta che conduca al di là della medesima…” (Rev. de Met. et de Mor., Mars 1898, p. 127), posta da Evola come “incipit” ai Saggi sull’idealismo ma­gico (1925), in concreto vuol significare che per realizzare il suo logos, la sua ragione, la Filosofia nel momento attuale, deve superare, andare al di là, effettuare un salto di natura ontologica per collo­carsi nel luogo dello spirito che, e qui sta l’autenticità ermeneutica del percorso evoliano, è il luogo di pertinenza da sempre della Filosofia nel suo unico e autentico significato che è quello premo­derno e cioè greco: percorso spirituale, di natura iniziatica, in un télos che è l’omòiosis theò! Ciò è quanto Evola ha compiuto nella sua azione realiz­zativa e di paidéia dei fondamenti della Scienza dello Spirito, sin dalla costituzione del Gruppo di UR, la cui natura, nel significato di essenza e quindi la sua virtus come finalità, è alquanto simile a ciò che è stata l’Accademia Platonica dagli inizi sino a Proclo: palestra rigorosa del Sapere che è ascesi filosofico-rituale e non cerimoniale, la cui finalità, pertanto, è l’assimilazione al Divino. Tutto ciò cosa ha a che fare con il concetto e la prassi moderni della Filo­sofia? Cosa ha a che fare la vera ricerca del sapere che è essere con, al di là di rare eccezioni, un sedicente “insegnamento” di natura sterilmente nozionistica e stupida­mente specialistica, da “dotti ignoranti”, come si esprime lo stesso Evola, vera caricatura mistificante di quanto l’uomo cerca sin dall’alba del suo spirito? Nulla, desolatamente nulla! Tale concetto moderno e quindi degradato di ciò che Aristotele afferma essere l’atteggiamento più naturale per l’uomo, cosa ha in comune con la definizione espressa dallo Hegel sull’essere la Fi­losofia “… la considerazione esoterica di Dio…”? (Enc. Scienze Fil.) e con il principio di Platone che il filosofo è solo colui il quale vede il Tutto, confermato dallo stesso Hegel quando insegna che “il Vero è l’Intero”?Assolutamente niente, ma le affermazioni hegeliane come quella di Platone hanno tutto in comune invece con quanto Evola enuncia in quella autentica e maestosa professione di fede platonica che è l’inizio di Rivolta contro il mondo moderno, quando edifica tutta la sua opera sul Sapere intorno alle due nature del Mondo, la naturale e la sovrannaturale, come medesime dimensioni e dello Spirito e della Phýsis, tanto che, platonicamente, in Evola la Fisica è Teologia in quanto il Mondo “è pieno di Dei!” E la Teologia in quanto Teosofia, Sapere intorno al Divino, è la stessa Logica che ha per oggetto il Nous come intelletto che è il Dio dormiente nell’uomo e quindi nel cosmo: l’intero Logos evoliano ha per fine, in guisa esclusiva, la rimozione attiva di quel “quindi” in quanto impedimento effettuale all’oscuramento dello Spirito; è, pertanto, opera di realizzazione del Sé, perseguita ed indicata come Via iniziatico-solare, di natura platonico­apollinea e non nientificazione orfico-dionisiaca dell’Io che, avendo la natura spirituale del pathèin e non del  mathéin (Aristotele, Perì philosophias, fr. 15), non è conoscenza dell’autentica essenza dello Spirito in quanto realtà Divina trascendentemente immanente che è come dire la realtà dell’Individuo Assoluto, vera sublimazione dell’Io; “…la filosofia ha lo scopo di riconoscere la verità, di conoscere Dio, poiché Dio è la verità assoluta…”, afferma Hegel nelle Lezioni sulla filosofia della religione; (vol. II).  Allora è d’uopo affermare, senza alcun timore, che sia in Evola che in Hegel, riappare, in piena modernità, il senso e il significato greco della Filosofia, stru­mento per il conseguimento del Risveglio, che è la rinascita, dopo la caduta-oblio, in quanto anàmnesi di ciò che si è e lo si è sempre stati pur  non avendone scienza (ignoranza come avidya), quindi riconquista di un Sa­pere che coincide con l’Essere in senso ontologico. Talché la Filosofia, nel suo vero ed unico significato, che è quello platonico-iniziatico (Lettera VII), nocciolo esoterico della stessa esperienza spirituale dei Misteri (Fedone, 69c-d), è quindi  Scienza Sacra in senso eminente e autentica Tradizione, avente ad “oggetto” solo ed esclusivamente il Divino, che è la Verità in quanto essenza e dell’uomo e del Mondo, come Cosmo; è pertanto Sapere per pochi, è gnosi, è Teosofia, conoscenza del Dio che si rivela, nella completezza del percorso rituale-filosofico, come theopoìesis (deificatio) (Platone, Teeteto, 176 b 1; Repubblica, 613 a b; Timeo, 90 d; Leggi, 716 c s; Plotino, Enneadi, I, 2, 6, 25; Proclo, Elementi di Teologia, 127; 112, 31; Corpus Hermeticum, I, 26; 16, 12), significando ciò il rammemo­rare la consapevolezza quale Sapere, aldilà ed oltre sia il Mito che il Simbolo (livelli di conoscenza sa­pientemente riconosciuti, sia da Evola che da Hegel, inefficaci ai fini della Scienza, in relazione allo stato intellettivo-noetico puro che è l’apolli­neo), che il Dio è “oggetto” da superare, da negare,  andando oltre il dualismo soggetto-oggetto per “osare” essere Lui! Tale identificazione, sia in Hegel che in Evola, è la stessa autoconoscenza del Sé quale Assoluto nella sua natura solare, in totale estraneità, pertanto, ad ogni confusione panteistica e ad ogni vedantino acosmismo spirituale. In tale guisa, pertanto, anche se mediante linguaggi diffe­renti e in contesti storico-culturali lontani, Evola ed Hegel dicono il Medesimo e la Filosofia, quindi, nella loro opera non è più quell’insulsa propaggine della teologia dogmatica (cristiana), né quella serva ti­mida delle cosiddette scienze moderne, cioè della concezione parziale, riduttiva e quindi irreale, in quanto galileiana, della natura, ormai desacraliz­zata e ridotta ad oggetto di calcolo matematico e ciò al di là della autentica rivoluzione epistemologica operata nel XX secolo dalla fisica dei quanti e dalla sua meccanica che, invece, ritornando ad una visione platonica del reale (vedi Heisenberg ed il suo concetto della chòra platonica…) non fa che confermare, tutto sommato, il sapere sia di Evola che di Hegel. La Filosofia torna così ad essere ciò che non può non essere, consistendo, secondo Aristotele, nel Destino che gli Dei hanno affidato all’uomo; non “fede”, non “credenza”, ma Sapere che è esposizione del Mondo in quanto Pensiero puro, sono “le idee di Dio prima della “creazione” del mondo e di ogni oggetto finito” (Hegel); è speculazione (da specu­lum) dove il Pensiero si specchia nel Mondo, in senso oggettivo e vede se stesso come Idea e quindi Unità (Hegel); è la realtà dell’Oro ermetico, che è la Cosa più vicina e nel contempo più lontana (Evola), è la certezza sen­sibile, è il concreto esistente che è da sempre Spirito, solo che non lo sa, (medesimo concetto esprime Plotino in riferimento all’esperienza del “toccare”  il Dio [Enneadi, VI, 9, 7]); l’Oro si trova infatti nella più oscura Tenebra o Feccia (Ermetismo) da cui l’uomo fugge, proprio perché non sa che l’Opera deve iniziare da quello stato come riconquista eroica che corporizza lo Spirito e spiritualizza il corpo, ed è la grande fatica del concetto (Hegel). Tutto ciò Evola lo rende manifesto nella sua opera  La Tradizione ermetica che è la summa circolare del viaggio iniziatico (dal Corpo come impietramento del principio Fuoco allo stesso Corpo però rinato come rosso Cinabro, solfuro di mercurio) simile alla circolarità triadica della Scienza della Logica di Hegel: il Logos qui non è una conoscenza astratta e quindi profana cioè falsa ma, come per gli antichi maestri neoplatonici, è l’apertura dell’occhio dello Spirito sul Mondo come è, e quindi come appare, ciò significando che  essenza ed esistenza sono il Medesimo che è l’Essere, nel “momento”, che non è temporale, ma logico cioè ontologico, in quanto riguarda la natura profonda dell’uomo, in cui lo stesso, acquisito il medesimo livello di essere-conoscenza, è nella capacità di vedere, attesa la natura epoptica della filosofia evoliana. La veneranda Tradizione Platonica, a cui appartengono sia Hegel che Evola, è il filone aureo che da Plotino, Proclo ed Eckhart sino a Nicola da Cusa, Giorgio Gemisto Pletone, Marsilio Ficino, Benedetto Spinoza e Jacob Boehme, non è altro che Introduzione alla Scienza dell’ Io, come spirito Universale, come Atto puro, proprio nel significato dell’autoctisi gentiliana che è poi il causa sui di Spinoza, che, nel Sapere Assoluto, che è filosofico, realizza il Sapere del Dio, dove quel “del” è tanto il Sapere che ha il Dio come “oggetto” che il Sapere che appartiene al Dio stesso.


Il situarsi sia di Evola che di Hegel nella Tradizione Platonica, ci conduce in immediato nella evidenza relativa ad una fondamentale verità presente nel loro orizzonte sapienziale: la polare identità tra Pensiero ed Essere, intesi in senso cosmico e quindi oggettivo e non certo nel significato individuale e soggettivo che è come dire cartesiano e quindi moderno; identità che è da costruire, con fatica eroica, in quanto cammino catartico (Feno­menologia dello Spirito in Hegel; Rivolta contro il mondo moderno in Evola) per la riacquisita co­scienza che è poi Inizio dell’altro percorso, avente il Fine della identificazione plotiniana, che è il mònos pros mònon, come mutamento della propria natura (metànoia), principio noetico ormai desto, non più e non mai “esterno” all’Io ma Sé autentico che è al contempo (e da sempre) il Lògos del mondo (Tradizione Ermetica in Evola; Scienza della Logica in Hegel). Il Sapere (Nous) che coin­cide anzi è l’Essere (Phýsis) è ciò che, in guisa auro­rale, afferma la sapienza indoeuropea, ad iniziare da Parmenide e dai Veda (Atman è Brahman). Il Mi­stero di tale verità è l’Inesprimibile del Pensiero che si riconosce nel Tutto come i Molti che è visto nell’Istante- exàiphnes come Uno (Platone, Parmenide, 156, c) ed è il fondamento della conoscenza comune sia ad Evola che ad Hegel: ad uno stadio di consape­volezza, che è un “momento” (“temporale” ma che non si svolge nel tempo…) della coscienza e quindi un essere della stessa, in senso ontologico, corri­sponde uno stadio o livello di conoscenza-sapere che è il vivere-essere lo stadio o livello equiva­lente e corrispondente nel Mondo; tale processo spirituale in Evola è da situare in guisa manifesta dopo la catarsi dialettica che certamente coincide con la fase del suo pensiero preparatoria della teoresi dell’Idealismo magico che è il salto nella gnosi platonica. La realtà dello spirito che, come qui appare evidente, è circolare, e va dall’io al mondo e dal mondo all’io vuol significare che si conosce ciò che si è e si è ciò che si conosce e, quindi, si conosce ciò che si diviene, equivalendo ciò al ritorno anamnestico verso l’Inizio, dove si è sempre stati, nella natura in cui si è sempre consistiti ma della quale si è presa coscienza, solo dopo aver perfezionato l’Opera filosofica. Evola ed Hegel, nel solco del platonismo, ci inducono pertanto a meditare sulla dimensione dello Spirito, nel “momento” in cui il Pensiero, pensando il suo “passato” (l’Anima, il suo sonno…), si riconosce tale ed il Mondo, gli Dei (l’oggetto) appare quello che è sempre stato, cioè il Pen­sato, la dimensione dell’Anima, il movimento, la Vita, la dialettica (essere-non essere; vita-morte; dolore-gioia…). Evola lo afferma in tutta la sua opera: se si è forma, si vede la forma, che è sempre, ma anche colui che “ora” la vede lo è sempre stato solo che lo aveva dimenticato. Secondo Evola ed Hegel, ovviamente, non è questione di ideologie o di modi di vedere il mondo, cioè di stati soggettivi, poiché di soggettivo, nel senso di personale o individuale-psicologistico, qui non è dato parlare, ma di stati molteplici, differentemente gerarchici, dell’Essere (sia in senso microcosmico che macrocosmico, cioè quello che ignorantemente chiamiamo ancora tanto “soggetto” quanto “oggetto”)!

Hegel, infatti, nella Scienza della Logica, quando parla di meccanicismo, chimismo, organicismo, non sta enunciando determinate visioni del mondo o punti di vista, ma sta dicendo che una natura, in senso ontologico, meccanicistica conosce solo il meccanicismo o meglio il livello o “momento” meccanicistico del mondo e quindi sta trattando filosoficamente degli stati della coscienza, come li­velli del pensiero a cui corrispondono gli stessi stati della natura poiché questa è il medesimo Pensiero uscito da sè (proodòs plotiniana); essi sono pertanto il percorso del Sapere come Idea a cui corrispondono stati equivalenti della natura poiché la Verità cioè il Divino è l’Intero cioè l’Uno (e questo non è lo stesso principio di corrispondenza magica tra uomo e Metalli-Mondo cioè Astro-Nume-Metallo tanto in senso microcosmico quanto macrocosmico che è il fondamento della Tradizione sia nella forma Er­metica che in quella Platonica?). Evola dice il medesimo quando afferma che Inferno e Paradiso, esotericamente, sono stati della coscienza nei quali e attraverso i quali si conoscono le tenebre infernali o le luminosità celesti che sono livelli o dimensioni dell’Essere dello stesso mondo o dimensioni del Tutto, il chiuso Athanòr, che una natura corrispondente andrà a co­noscere o tenebroso come assenza di Luce o luminoso. Pertanto un essere che è, come spiritualità autentica, o il primo o il se­condo, può conoscere solo o uno o l’altro, cre­dendo, nel momento ingenuo (mitico, secondo Evola), intellettivo-astratto (direbbe Hegel), del percorso di conoscenza, che si tratti di un “altro” mondo a sé medesimo opposto e definito dualisticamente non-Io. Gli Dei non esistono a priori per fede… se non si cono­scono e si conoscono solo esperimentando e quindi essendo lo stato corrispondente. Se in Evola tutto ciò è definito identificazione iniziatico-­solare in cui è manifesto che Io sono Te, ricono­scendo pertanto l’irrealtà dello stato religioso-devozionale, in Hegel è il percorso dello Spirito che supera l’oggettivazione del Sé (Dio), come Altro e, con la semplificazione filosofica ed il suo Sapere apicale, è l’Assoluto che conosce se stesso, “accadendo” come evento logico, cioè fuori dal tempo, “dopo” lo stato-essere spirituale rappresentativo che è il religioso-dualistico. È la realizzazione della conoscenza che il soggetto è l’oggetto, il Pensiero come Atto puro cosmico è l’Essere che è il Dio, e si ritorna ad Aristotele, al Pensiero di Pensiero, al Pensiero che pensa Se stesso ed è poi l’Autarca di Evola! In sostanza ed in termini filosofici, cioè concettuali, è il Risveglio buddistico (vedi La dottrina del risveglio) che in Evola è la realizzazione della vera natura  dell’uomo, rendendo manifesta quella occulta o incosciente (Aristotele, Etica nicomachea, 1177b 33) idea di origine platonica (Timeo, 90c) che è l’athanatìzein di Proclo, cioè il rendersi immortali in quanto si assume piena consapevolezza e quindi Sapere di esserlo sempre stati. Corollario di tale Tradizione gnosica è, in Evola, La Scienza dell’Io che si riconosce, quale atto magico di anamnesi, come Idea eterna del Sé: “…Io alla seconda persona, alter ego celeste dell’uomo: è ancora l’uomo ma nello stesso tempo non è più solo l’uomo…” (Henry Corbin) ed è l’affermazione che la conoscenza del Dio è l’autoconoscenza del Dio come Divino nell’uomo e dell’uomo: il Dio si conosce e si vede nell’uomo, come l’uomo, nel doversi conoscere, conosce Se medesimo quale il Divino stesso. È il sapere di natura apollinea, di cui enigmaticamente parla Platone nell’Alcibiade Maggiore (133 c)…!


In riferimento a tale Sapere Pavel Alexandrovic Florenski ne Le radici universali dell’Idealismo rileva la natura primordiale dello stesso e trae la conclusione che il Platonismo è la Conoscenza originaria presente nelle Tradizioni religiose e sapienziali di tutti i popoli del Mondo, cioè a dire, nella sue essenza metafisica, la Tradizione Unica di tutte le Civiltà, nella forma tanto mitico-religiosa nei primordi delle stesse, quanto magica ed unitivo-sapienziale al tramonto del ciclo.

Pertanto il Sapere, la Gnosi, di cui non solo parlano o scrivono sia Evola che Hegel, ma che sono e realizzano come mutamento della natura, essendo lo stesso Sapere, è in virtù di “qualcosa” di arcaico, di ancestrale, di originario, di non classificabile nelle e con le comuni categorie dello Spirito non solo di questo tempo ma di ogni tempo; “qualcosa” che è una realtà vivente, un fuoco che brucia nella continuità della loro vita, nel loro athanòr, come fiamma che consuma tutti i residui, le scorie, le impurità tanto che “magicamente” loro appaiono quello che sono in quanto Essere come identità di essenza ed esistenza; dai contemporanei sono infatti veduti come autentici maghi, nel significato arcaico e quindi vero del termine, chiarito, quasi nello stesso periodo di tempo, sia da Florenski che da Evola in questi termini: natura attiva dello Spirito nei confronti delle Forze e dei Numi cosmici e tanto intensa da apparire quasi naturale, come innata identificazione con gli stessi, mediante riconoscimento anamnestico!

Allora il Sapere tradizionale, che equivale a dire metafisico e che stiamo tentando di delineare per brevi cenni, è di natura magico-sacrale!

E non può essere diversamente, atteso il fatto che Evola non è lo scrittore, lo studioso o l’erudito, figlio di una sclerotica civilizzazione ma è frutto di una Kultur che, proprio nel senso spengleriano, è qualcosa di vivente che emerge maestosa e luminosa, vasta e complessa nella sua cosmica valenza, da tutta la sua opera che è principalmente ed in guisa essenziale, la sua stessa presenza e la sua vita come Simbolo e Mito. Non si può negare la presenza della Luce di questa forza magico-sacrale, quasi sciamanica, in uomini, in Sapienti Solfurei, autentiche trasparenze della doxa omerica, cioè della gloria del Pensiero, inteso in senso Vivente e Divino, in tutti coloro i quali, con linguaggi diversi ed in tempi storico-culturali oltremodo differenti,  hanno osato dire, vivere ed essere Verità, autenticamente rivoluzionarie e destabilizzanti per tutte le Chiese, i Dogmi e le Istituzioni dominanti, quasi come Vie della mano destra di ogni epoca, Verità che hanno sempre incusso paura, tremore e financo terrore nell’uomo, inducendo e provocando mistificazione del loro Dire, calunnie sul loro Fare, negazione del loro Essere e tentativi, peraltro vani, di oscuramento della Verità da loro eroicamente difesa. È la vicenda, non solo di un Evola, criminalizzato e mistificato o di un Hegel, incompreso e pertanto trasferito tout court, nonostante la geniale intuizione di un Feuerbach sull’essere il sapiente Svevo “…il Proclo tedesco…”, nel positivismo e nel laicismo immanentista o nel soggettivismo postcartesiano, ma è la storia umana anche di Eckhart, di Giorgio Gemisto Pletone, di Boehme, di Spinoza, cioè è il destino comune, la risposta, la reazione di chi, in buona sostanza, rifiuta, ne ha paura e non comprende insegnamenti come questi di Plotino: “…Il compito non è essere virtuosi o buoni ma essere Dei!…”; “…Non devo andare io agli Dei ma gli Dei venire a me…!”; che equivalgono a ciò che dice Eckhart nei Sermoni: “…Dio ed io siamo una cosa sola…!”; a quanto afferma Hegel: “…Si crede usualmente che l’Assoluto debba trovarsi molto al di là mentre è invece proprio ciò che è del tutto presente e che, in quanto pensanti, anche senza averne espressamente coscienza, portiamo sempre con noi…!” o a ciò che rivela Boehme nel De Signatura rerum: “…tra la Nascita Eterna, la Redenzione dalla Caduta e la scoperta della Pietra dei Filosofi non c’è alcuna differenza…!”.

Si tratta, quindi, di un Sapere primordiale, è la Tradizione iniziatica regale, è la originaria via indoeuropea agli Dei, nel senso spirituale e realizzativo del Risveglio del Re che dorme nel profondo dell’anima, ed è, innanzitutto ed essenzialmente il Rito filosofico quotidiano e costante onde realizzare il Katèchon che, difendendo il principio superiore della coscienza e quello animico ad esso orientato, costituisca invalicabili barriere nei confronti delle potenze tenebrose provenienti dal basso; al fine di “ricostruire” eroicamente la natura autentica dell’uomo: la libertà dello Spirito, nella divinificazione che è l’Eghemonicòn stoico, di cui parla Evola, la liberazione dell’uomo dalle catene invisibili con cui egli stesso si è reso prigioniero di sé medesimo! Tale Conoscenza suprema che è di una semplicità fanciullesca (gli antichi Ermetisti parlano di “gioco di bambini”) mai come nella fase presente, di palese e drammatica decadenza spirituale da fine di un ciclo di civiltà, come rivela Aristotele (Metafisica, XII, 8,1074a, 38-b 14), è di straordinaria ed inattuale attualità, poiché, essendo la Conoscenza della maturità avanzata di un epoca, proprio come precisa Aristotele nel passo su citato, è l’ultima àncora di salvezza sia per coloro che vogliono percorrere tale unica ed ineludibile Via dello Spirito, per tornare ad essere, come precisa Evola, quanto meno e come base di partenza, uomini, sia per la conservazione e la trasmissione dei Fondamenti della stessa da “tràdere” cioè consegnare a coloro i quali saranno i protagonisti del ciclo successivo: non altro concetto ha, infatti, espresso lo stesso Hegel quando ha definito la filosofia il Sapere del meriggio che nasce quando s’invola la nottola di Minerva!

Ci chiediamo, alla fine di questa nostra riflessione, la ragione per cui la Tradizione magico-arcaica, la Sapienza antica, il Platonismo come eterno Idealismo, il Logos di Evola come quello di tutti i Sapienti che nei secoli e nei millenni hanno rivelato sempre e soltanto la medesima Cosa, avente ad “oggetto” il Pensiero pensante che è già e da sempre Pensiero pensato e cioè il Divino come Mondo che ritorna ciclicamente e liberamente, in quanto sapientemente, in se stesso, appaiono tanto irrimediabilmente inattuali da essere invece così indiscutibilmente attuali; la risposta a tale domanda risiede nella natura protervamente materialista e quindi antiumana di questa epoca in cui dello Spirito nulla si sa e si deve sapere, dell’Anima non se ne deve parlare  più, affidando il suo semantema residuo ed umbratile a forme di stregonerie e ciarlatanerie definitesi, molto appropriatamente, “psicoanalisi” (vedi J. Evola, L’infezione psicanalista, Quaderni della Fondazione Evola, Napoli 2012); il corpo  è ignorato in quanto “pensato” come un assemblaggio di pezzi meccanici da riparare e, nel caso, da sostituire; epoca in cui, infine, ci si è fatti convincere che l’uomo non sia e non debba essere altro che un “tubo digerente” avente solo una finalità: il disciplinato e silenzioso consumo planetario, in quanto “naturalmente”  privo di idee, sentimenti e passioni,  che pericolosamente abbiano o conservino qualcosa che ricordi l’umano; nessun Discorso, religioso o filosofico contemporaneo, che può pur apparire radicale e liberatorio lo può mai essere, in verità e nella dimensione universale, così come lo è manifestamente e dall’eternità la Luce della Tradizione, per la semplice ragione che tutti i “discorsi” che non appartengono alla sua Verità, appartengono alla Modernità, come categoria dello Spirito; e non si può nemmeno tentare di superare l’effetto coniugandolo con la sua causa!

Solo la Scienza dello Spirito, l’atto supremo ineludibile di Rivolta contro il mondo moderno, può aprire gli occhi,  prima dell’anima e poi dello Spirito, dell’uomo della presente età, sì da fargli riacquistare la stazione eretta che, come insegna Platone, gli consente di guardare il Cielo e quindi gli Dei!

Di una sola cosa, comunque, siamo certi e serenamente consapevoli e quindi convinti: il potere unico della Chiesa dogmatica tecno-finanziaria del capitalismo mondialista, apparentemente trionfante al crepuscolo del presente ciclo, ha di fronte, alle spalle ed intorno a sé medesimo, una sola ed invincibile nonché semplice e luminosa Verità, espressa da Julius Evola nei termini seguenti: “…Tutto si potrà fare sull’uomo e nell’uomo ma mai strappare dal fondo del suo animo la presenza del Divino!…”.

Giandomenico Casalino



Albanese L., La tradizione platonica, Roma 1993.

Albert K., Sul concetto di filosofia in Platone, Mi­lano 1991.

Beierwaltes W., Platonismo e idealismo, Bologna 1987.

Boutroux E., Jacob Boehme e l’origine dell’idea­lismo tedesco, Milano 2006.

Casalino G., La prospettiva di Hegel, Lecce 2005.

Casalino G., L’origine. Contributi per la filosofia della spiritualità

indoeuropea,Genova 2009.

Casalino G., La conoscenza suprema. Essere la concretezza luminosa

dell’Idea, Genova 2012.

Casalino G., Sul fondamento. Pensare l’Assoluto come Risultato, Genova 2014.

Carbonara C., Hegel platonico e teologo. Quaderni contemporanei, 6, 1971.

Di Vona P., Metafisica e politica in Evola, Padova 2000, pp. 55 ss.

Evola J., (a cura di), Introduzione alla Magia, Roma 1969, volume I, pp. 56 ss.; 364 ss.

Evola J., La tradizione ermetica, Roma 1998.

Hadot P., Esercizi spirituali e filosofia antica, To­rino 1988.

Hegel G.G.F., Scienza della Logica, Bari 2001.

Hegel G.G.F., Fenomenologia dello spirito, Firenze 1960.

Heidegger M., “Hegel e i greci” in Idem, Segna­via, Milano 1987.

Kramer H., Platone e ifondamenti della metafisica, Milano 1989, pp. 285 ss.

Lugarini L., Hegel e la tradizione arcaica, Il Pen­siero, voI. XXXII, 1992.

Magee G.A., Hegel e la Tradizione Ermetica, Roma 2013.

Plotino, Enneadi, VI, 9,40.

Platone, Lettera VII

Platone, Alcibiade Maggiore.

Ponsetto A., L’anima religiosa della filosofia, Lecce 2000.

Proclo, Teologia Platonica.

Ruggenini M., Il Dio assente. La filosofia è l’espe­rienza del Divino, Milano 1997.


The Differentiated Man

The Differentiated Man

Ex: http://aryan-myth-and-metahistory.blogspot.com

10857064-l-39-homme-de-vitruve-sous-les-rayons-x-isole-sur-noir.jpgIn the days when I used to post on white nationalist websites one of the most recurring themes that people would argue about is the declining levels of Aryans vis a vis other races. I argued then as I argue now ratios are not relevant. Lower animals and races of men will breed at a faster rate than higher species or races. Often the reason for this is the higher mortality rate in such species and races. This fact may also be observed amongst the soci-economic classes which are a bastardised and commercialised version of the ancient traditional Aryan caste system (the two are not to be confused or even compared!).  Individuals of lesser education (not merely formal education but general awareness and ability) tend to breed without restraint and with no consideration as to whether they (or the tax payer) can afford such indiscriminate coupling!

Of course I am not here referring to that tiny and select minority of individuals who are spiritually and racially aware who may breed in large numbers with suitable mates for the right reasons. The people I am referring to in the previous paragraph are those who live entirely by instinct and whose days are spent gratifying their every bodily need or desire. Such people are little better than the beasts of the field and I would not expect them to read blogs such as this so forgive me for lecturing to the converted! These belong to von Liebenfels' Affenmenschen (apelings) referred to in his Theozoology. The move from the rural economies of the past to the Industrial Revolution which began in the 18th century in England caused a migration of part of the rural population to the emerging industrial towns and cities to become nothing more than factory wage slaves. The new capitalist bougeoisie needed as many men (and women) as they could find to work in their sweat shops. The same impulse that drove forward the Industrial Revolution was also responsible for the creation of the British Empire which benefitted no one apart from the wealthy (and certainly not the conquered natives!).

The populations of the industrial towns and cities bred like rats but they needed to as the infant mortality rate was extremely high. Their poorly paid labour was needed by the capitalists of the day (nothing much has changed). The problem with having an expanding proletariat is that the individual monetary worth of the worker is reduced proportionately. This is why countries like Britain welcome immigrant labour because their expectations are low and this creates economic competition for British workers. Employers can pick and choose and pay a pittance for a person's toil. For this reason despite the government's protestations they have done abolutely nothing to stem the flow of immigration (legal and otherwise) and indeed the problem has got worse over the last 4 years (if such a thing were possible). Low paid workers and cannon fodder for illegal wars will always be in demand by this corrupt system.

Thus a capitalist economy relies for the production of ever increasing wealth for the 1% on a large mass of labour. Capitalism encourages and fuels population explosions. Babies are born destined to become unimportant cogs in this monstrous and inhuman machine. This and only this is the value of the 'family', much lauded by the government's MPs as women become nothing but battery hens for future workers. Nothing else is of importance. With these thoughts in mind we come to the writings of Julius Evola:

"The differentiated man cannot feel part of a 'society' like the present one, which is formless and has sunk to the level of purely material, economic, 'physical' values, and moreover lives at this level and follows its insane course under the sign of the absurd. Therefore, apoliteia requires the most decided resistance to any social myth. Here it is not just a matter of its extreme, openly collectivist forms, in which the person is not recognised as significant except as a fragment of a class or party or, as in the Marxist-Soviet area, is denied any existence of his own outside the society, so that personal destiny and happiness distinct from those of the collective do not even exist. We must equally reject the more general and bland idea of 'sociability' that today often functions as a slogan even in the so-called free world, after the decline of the ideal of the true state. The differentiated man feels absolutely outside of society, he recognises no moral claim that requires his inclusion in an absurd system; he can understand not only those who are outside, but even those who are against 'society'-meaning against this society." (Ride the Tiger. A Survival Manual for the Aristocrats of the Soul)

vendredi, 10 octobre 2014

Bhagavad-Gîtâ - Le Chant du Bienheureux


Bhagavad-Gîtâ: le Chant du Bienheureux

108 pages. Traduit du sanskrit par Emile Burnouf et présenté par le Pr. Jean Haudry.

Elément central du Mahâbhârata, connu pour être la plus grande épopée de la mythologie hindoue, la Bhagavad-Gîtâ (« Chant du Bienheureux ») est un des écrits fondamentaux de l’Hindouisme qui s’inscrit dans la tradition héroïque indo-européenne.

Il s’agit d’un dialogue dans lequel le Seigneur Krishna, 8e avatar de Vishnou, tend à dissiper le doute chez le kshatriya Arjuna au moment d’une bataille qui risque de faire nombre de morts parmi ceux que ce dernier aime.

Composé de 18 chapitres et vraisemblablement rédigé entre les Ve et IIe siècles av. J.-C., l’intérêt capital de ce texte sacré tient du fait qu’il invite à dépasser le brahmanisme sans le répudier pour autant.

Au-delà de toutes les sensibilités spirituelles, la Bhagavad-Gîtâ nous enseigne avant tout la dévotion et le détachement pour lesquels le verset II.38 semble parfaitement convenir : « Tiens pour égaux plaisir et peine, gain et perte, et sois tout entier à la bataille : ainsi tu éviteras le péché . »

Pour commander auprès des Editions du Lore: http://www.ladiffusiondulore.fr/antiquite/379-bhagavad-gita-le-chant-du-bienheureux.html

mardi, 07 octobre 2014

Pour un paganisme cosmique


Pour un paganisme cosmique

140 pages. Papier glacé 130gr/m2

Véritable compendium, cet ouvrage n’a pas pour objectif de décider à la place du lecteur mais a été conçu dans le but de l’orienter vers divers concepts inhérents à l’idée d’un paganisme cosmique, où tout est mouvement, cette impermanence du Devenir.

Construit à partir de citations rigoureusement classées par thèmes et commentées humblement par Amaury Petitloup, ce compendium regroupe autant la sagesse et le savoir des textes sacrés de l’Antiquité que la pensée d’auteurs plus contemporains dont certains n’étaient jusqu’à présent pas accessibles en langue française.

Un livre unique en son genre que le lecteur aura plaisir à consulter tout au long des différentes étapes de son existence.

Voici quelques-uns des thèmes abordés :

Palimpeste - Religions-racines - Ecriture primordiale - Mémoire ancestrale - Lieu sacrés et Omphalos - L’intuition surhumaniste - Réaction anti-dualiste - Panenthéisme - Monisme - Hiérarchie divine - La Grande Synthèse - Rites - Chaos primordial - Principe créateur - Vers un nouveau paganisme : erreurs à éviter...

Pour commander auprès des Editions du Lore:



17:16 Publié dans Livre, Livre, Traditions | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : paganisme, livre, traditions | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

samedi, 04 octobre 2014

Stonehenge a été construit sur l'axe des solstices



Une découverte récente de Mike Parker Pearson
Jann Lassalle
Ex: http://metamag.fr

D'après les archéologues, l'ancien peuple qui a construit Stonehenge a choisi le site dans le Wiltshire moderne en raison de sa signification solaire.

Dans ce qui est décrit comme une "pièce manquante du puzzle" dans la compréhension du plus grand site préhistorique d'Angleterre, les fouilles confirment la théorie selon laquelle l'ancienne voie processionnelle a été construite le long d'un relief glaciaire qui était naturellement sur l'axe du solstice, selon le professeur Mike Parker Pearson, un des principaux experts sur Stonehenge: «Le but original du monument reste encore auréolé de mystère, mais c'est un indice très important».
La voie, connue sous le nom d'Avenue, fait 2.4km de long depuis le monument. Après la fermeture de la route A344, les archéologues ont pu y faire des fouilles pour la première fois. Le Professeur Parker Pearson a identifié des fissures d'origines naturelles qui se trouvaient entre les bords situés le long de la voie.

Le parcours s'étend sur 2.4km de l'entrée nord-est des menhirs à l'Ouest d'Amesbury. Il a été comparé à l'avenue londonienne The Mall menant à Buckingham Palace.

Après la fermeture de la route A344, qui traversait de la voie, les archéologues ont pu y faire des fouilles pour la première fois. Les fouilles ont été menées par le Wessex Archaeology pour l'English Heritage.

Juste en dessous de la surface de la route actuelle, ils ont mis au jour des fossés creusés par les bâtisseurs préhistoriques.

Le Professeur Parker Pearson a identifié des fissures d'origine naturelle qui se trouvaient entre les talus qui longent le tracé de l'Avenue.

Ces talus ont été créés par l'eau de fonte glaciaire et pointent naturellement, dans un sens, directement sur le coucher du soleil en plein hiver, et dans l'autre sens,  sur le lever du soleil au milieu de l'été.

Le Professeur Parker Pearson est enthousiasmé par cet indice, qu'il décrit comme «extrêmement important»: «cela nous en dit beaucoup sur les raisons pour lesquelles Stonehenge est situé où il est et pourquoi ils étaient si intéressés par les solstices. Cela n'a pas à voir avec l'adoration du soleil, une sorte de calendrier ou d'observatoire astronomique. Ce relief naturel se trouve être sur l'axe du solstice, ce qui relie le ciel et la terre en un tout».

Il a expliqué que Stonehenge à tout à voir avec le thème des solstices et nos ancêtres on pu le voir dans le paysage.
Dans la zone centrale du site, il y a les pierres bleues, avec à l'intérieur des pierres sarsen disposées en forme de fer à cheval. L'élément le plus éloigné du site est l'Avenue qui consiste en deux talus parallèles distants de 12m et des fossés internes. Les flèches rouges montrent comment le solstice s'aligne avec l'Avenue.

Le Dr Heather Sebire, conservateur de Stonehenge de l'English Heritage, a déclaré: «La partie de l'Avenue qui a été coupée par la route a évidemment été détruite pour toujours, mais nous avions bon espoir que l'archéologie en dessous de la route allait survivre. Et ici, nous l'avons: la pièce manquante du puzzle. Il est passionnant de trouver un élément de matériel qui fait officiellement la connexion que nous espérions».

Elle s'attend à ce que les dernières découvertes suscitent un débat académique important, et l'English Heritage n'a pas exprimé une opinion sur les talus formés naturellement, leur interprétation se confinant aux fossés.

La route originale A344 doit être gazonnée au cours de l'année prochaine dans le cadre d'une transformation de ce site du patrimoine mondial, qui attire plus d'un million de visiteurs annuels. Un nouveau centre d'accueil sera ouvert, à 2.4km, pour permettre à Stonehenge de renouer avec le paysage environnant. 

La dernière étude a également permis d'identifier trois trous où les pierres manquantes auraient résidé sur le cercle extérieur du sarsen; preuve, pense-t-on, que le cercle a bien été achevé à un moment donné.

C'est une découverte que même les études les plus sophistiquées n'avaient pas réussi à repérer jusqu'ici. Deux membres du personnel aux yeux d'aigle ont réussi à identifier des surfaces d'herbe sèche.

lundi, 22 septembre 2014

The End of American History

The End of American History

By Alexander Jacob

Lecture delivered at the IV Encontro Internacional Evoliano, Sao Paulo, Brazil, September 10, 2014.

francis-fukuyama-end-history.jpgFrancis Fukuyuma, the Japanese-American intellectual spokesman for the Jewish American Neoconservative movement, proclaimed in his 1992 book The End of History and the Last Man that liberal democracy was the final socio-political form since earlier alternatives such as Fascism and Communism had proven to be ideological failures, and liberty and equality had now been established as universal norms. 

Fukuyama’s view of history moving in progressive political phases was of course first popularized in the nineteenth century by German thinkers like Hegel, Marx, and their followers, who sought to discern historiographical patterns in the vagaries of military and economic fortune and to either celebrate or revolt against the current political status of their own nation, in their case Germany.

To be sure, Hegel was somewhat more elevated than Marx in supposing the course of history to be the varying manifestations of a developing Weltgeist, or world-spirit, whereas Marx’s historiography was ruled by mere economic alterations. Nevertheless, the falsehood of even Hegel’s philosophy of history is made clear to anyone who considers the history of the country which is actually promoting liberal democracy now as a universal norm, America.

In America there has been, from its inception as an independent nation, hardly any deviation from liberal democratic goals, and Communism and Fascism have not only been absent there in their European forms but are, if ever they emerge, quickly absorbed into the unchanging liberal democratic framework of the nation. Actually what American society represents is a sort of ahistoric, shadow-communist utopia, where private individuals strive ever more strenuously to possess the means of production and to resist the interference of the state in public affairs. There is little also to distinguish the Communist ideal of equality from the Liberal.

When Fukuyama suggests that we have come to the “end of history,” therefore, what he means is that the world that has undergone genuine historical changes has now been conquered by a country that began and continues as a utopia that is as little capable of historical change as of real progress, that is, progress understood not in the technological but in the traditional sense of the development of the spiritual, intellectual and social attitudes of a people.

The “end of history” is indeed a phenomenon that is peculiar to America as a British colony that has had tenuous connections with the naturally developing history of the Old World. While most countries founded by colonial settlement manage to maintain and develop the culture of their mother nation to a certain extent — as Australia, for example, has done — America began and developed at a time of Protestant and Puritan revolt against the ancient Catholic monarchical traditions of Britain.

It is important therefore to consider the phenomenon of Puritanism which provoked the English Civil War during which America was settled and to notice also the close connection between Christian Puritanism and Judaism. We may recall in this context that the Jews, who had been officially expelled from England in 1290 by Edward I, were allowed by the Puritan dictator Cromwell in the 1650s to return from Holland, where they had been conducting a flourishing financial business, and throughout the Commonwealth the Jews were held in high esteem by the Puritans.

The similarity of the capitalist ethics developed by the Puritans and that of the Jews was noted already in 1911 by the German sociologist Werner Sombart in his work Die Juden und das Wirtschaftsleben. Sombart maintained that the “Protestant” ethic that Max Weber had focused on in his 1905 work, Die protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus, was indeed to be identified specifically as a Puritan one that should be equated to Judaism. For, as Sombart explained, “In both will be found . . . the close relationship between religion and business, the arithmetical conception of sin, and, above all, the rationalization of life.”

With the American Civil War of 1861-65, the last links with monarchical England that had persisted in the pro-English Confederate South were cut by the victory of the Federalist North. Then, in the aftermath of the Civil War, in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the Christian religious aspect of the original Puritan work-ethic of the Americans was seriously damaged by the large-scale influx of Jews from Central and Eastern Europe who succeeded in modulating the philo-Semitic Puritan character of American capitalism into a fully Jewish one.

As Sombart pointed out, the Jews had indeed been active in American economic life already from the seventeenth century and had gradually come to monopolize many branches of American commerce such as the wheat, tobacco, and cotton trade. But we must note that with the increased immigration of eastern Jews at the end of the nineteenth century and the promotion of Jewish finance capitalism, what remained of the original Puritan work-ethic and concomitant frugality in the American economy was soon dissipated, while the only vestige of the dissident Puritanical religiosity that survived was its stubborn anti-clericalism.

With the replacement of the Puritan veneration of industry by the parasitical reign of finance, the Jewish tendency to economic utopianism which manifested itself in the twentieth century as totalitarian Communism in Russia, Eastern Europe and the Far East was transformed in the new “promised land” of the Jews into the totalitarian liberalism of the “American Dream.” The capitalism promoted by the Jews steadily strengthened the nation’s commitment to individualistic freedom and material aggrandizement rather than to the civilizational aims of the old monarchies and empires. Such a nation could naturally not evolve or even acquire a human history. Instead of producing examples of human greatness it could only boast of a certain number of tycoons and millionaire entertainers, and instead of historical development it could only experience periodic economic booms and recessions.

Fukuyama himself attempts, in his book, to introduce a Nietzschean question into his glorification of liberal democracy by raising the specter of the “last man,” or the average American-like man whose life is materially sated and spiritually meaningless. But with naïve optimism he maintains that such an intolerably vacuous life will certainly be mastered in a liberal democracy by man’s spiritedness, a human characteristic that will inevitably rebel against such a monotonous existence. This spiritedness is the same as what Plato called the middle part of the tripartite soul, between the rational and the animal parts of it. In Fukuyama’s view, in the liberal democratic system, instead of its reappearance in violent strife, as in the case of nationalist or imperialistic states, there will be an absorption of this passionate energy into sports, business and political shows like election campaigns.

Fukuyama’s belief in such social engineering as liberal democracy universally aims at ignores the vast difference between the states of the Old World and the American. Indeed, the Neoconservative enterprise propagated by Fukuyama serves as a timely reminder of the incompatibility of American with genuinely European systems of political thought. The American social values that are being imposed on Europe and the rest of the world through economic and military means are essentially alien ones and are neither likely to take root easily nor endure. For, unlike the American nation, European and other older nations have a historical vitality that cannot be suffocated by American avarice. In order to illustrate this fact I shall survey here the characteristic political traditions of the Indo-Europeans and the contradictory intellectual movements that have distorted these traditions in the course of modern history.

To understand the traditional Indo-European social ethos, I may begin with the paradigmatic Āryan conception of society discernible in ancient India. The famous ‘caste system’ of the Indians is, unlike the modern western ‘class system’, an entirely spiritual one and men are recognized not by their economic status but by their hereditary spiritual capacity. The four Indian social orders are represented symbolically as the head, arms, thighs and feet of the primordial cosmic anthropomorphic form of the divine Soul. This Cosmic Man, or Purusha, was itself formed, first ideally and then manifestly, through the spiritual desire, the Soul, of the godhead, or the One.

The manifestation of the Soul in Indian religious philosophy is said to be due to its three inherent forms of energy, sattva, rajas and tamas, the first  representing pure existence, the second  motion and the third inertia (Brahmānda Purāna I,i,3,12). Since there is an intimate and unavoidable correspondence between the macrocosm and the human microcosm, these three energies appear embodied in differing degrees among humans too, the sattvic element most fully in the brāhmans, the rājasic in the warriors or kshatriyas,  and the tāmasic in the vaisyas and shudras, particularly the latter. This is the original spiritual and psychological basis of all hierarchy. The brāhman owes his preeminent position in society to his superhuman spiritual power. The name “Brahman” of the deity who represents the Intellectual light of the cosmos, itself derives from a word denoting creative power and it is the privilege and duty of the brāhman to represent this creative power while the kshatriyas, or political rulers and warriors, only serve to maintain this creative power both within the land and also in the universe. The brāhman and kshatriya thus constitute the paradigmatic Indo-European polity centered on the dual organs of what in European politics are called Church and State.

If we turn to the Greek philosophers, we find that in Plato and Aristotle the state is again constantly conceived of in terms of the constitution of the universal and individual soul. According to Plato, the soul is “that which moves itself” (Phaedrus 246a) and is naturally prior to body since it “is what governs all the changes and modifications of bodies” (Laws 892a).

Just as in ancient India, the soul, or psyche, in Plato’s Republic, Bk.IV, is divided into three parts, a higher rational or spiritual part (called logistikon) corresponding to the Indian sattva, a middle passionate one (called thymoeides) correspondng to rajas, and a lower sensual part (called epithymetikon) corresponding to tamas. Since society is as organic a phenomenon as the individuals of which it is composed, in a state too the more the rational aspect predominates over the passionate the closer it approximates to the ideal political form. But the discipline of the lower desires by the dictates of reason is to be found only in a few and these are the “best born and the best educated” men (Republic, IV), whereas the untrained and untamed passions are to be found in abundance among children, women and the lower classes, which form the most numerous section of society. The aristocratic “guardians” of Plato’s ideal republic are therefore required to be true philosophers and will not be drawn from the inferior classes.

Aristotle continues Plato’s spiritually oriented political theory in his Ethica Nichomachea, where he declares that the main aim of politics is the attainment of the good of the nation. The higher classes of a nation will comprise the full citizens who will assume the military and administrative, including priestly, offices of the land. The legislators must govern with a clear knowledge of the spiritual constitution of man, that is, the rational and passionate elements that Plato had discerned in the individual soul. And it is the duty of the legislators to ensure the predominance of the higher aspect of the soul over the lower.

Platonic principles reappear in the European Renaissance in the writings of aristocratic thinkers like Francesco Guicciardini and Jean Bodin. According to Guicciardini — who offered a critique of Machiavelli in one of his works, Considerations on the Discourses of Machiavelli – the chief reason of the superiority of a prince and an aristocracy to the people is that they are not subject to pernicious passions, such as, notably, envy. The French Renaissance philosopher, Jean Bodin — who is notable for his championing of monarchical absolutism — also based his defence of the latter on a similar Platonic basis. For genuine monarchy is, according to him, derived from the Divine Law and the monarch is the earthly image of God. Care should be taken that the religious foundation of the state is never brought into doubt and religious leaders must act as censors of the state in order to maintain moral discipline in it.

It is at this juncture in the history of the world that the revolutionary anti-monarchical ideas of the English Civil War, the American Revolution and the French Revolution appear. If we study the American Bill of Rights of 1789 we realise that it was based largely on the English Bill of Rights of 1689 promulgated by the (originally Puritan) English Parliament after the “Glorious” Protestant Revolution of 1688 in order to curb the powers traditionally invested in the formerly Catholic monarchs of England.

One of the most influential English thinkers of the seventeenth century and one generally considered to be the father of liberal democracy, John Locke, was also a Puritan. Locke was a champion of the separation of the Church and State and had a profound influence on the American ‘Founding Fathers’ such as Thomas Jefferson. The American Bill of Rights, based on the British parliamentarian one, is especially notable for its dissociation (in the First Amendment) of the American state from any official religion. What had begun in England as a rejection of Catholicism was thus turned in America into a rejection of all official religion. Combined with this fear of theocracy was the Puritanical devotion to individual freedom and industry which caused the Americans to view citizenship as a status defined primarily by liberty and citizens as economic units of production not unlike those of the later Communist utopia of Marx.

A little later, in the middle of the eighteenth century, Jean-Jacques Rousseau propagated in France the Lockean conception of government as a social “contract” directed  by the “volonté générale” of the people which would reduce the inequalities springing from subservience to the state. However, a robust answer to Rousseau’s doctrine of the “social contract” was offered immediately after the fateful French Revolution by the English political philosopher Edmund Burke in his Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790), where he pointed out that “the state ought not to be considered as nothing better than a partnership agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or tobacco, or some such low concern . . .”

And since the people cannot be relied upon to follow any “general will” towards the attainment of the good of the nation, Burke proposed a natural aristocracy as the only viable government of a nation. A strong nation is also necessarily a religious one for, as Burke said, all politicians indeed act on behalf of “the one great Master, Author and Founder of society,” namely God.

This vital role of religion in the conduct of states was reiterated in post-revolutionary France too by the French monarchist Count Joseph de Maistre who noted in his “Essai sur les principes generateurs des constitutions politiques et des autres institutions humaines” (1809) that “the duration of empires has always been proportionate to the degree of influence the religious element gained in the political constitution.” Indeed, the truly political laws of a land are synonymous with the religious feelings of the people and the “instant [man] separates himself from God to act alone . . . he does not lose power . . . but his activity is negative and leads only to destruction.” To follow the doctrines of Enlightenment thinkers like Rousseau and Voltaire would thus result in a return to a state of anarchy and degeneracy.

In Germany around the same time philosophers like Kant and Fichte were beginning to point to the crucial significance of the ‘State’ as the means of enforcing an enlightened government. Kant took as his point of departure the excellence of Divine Law in relation to Natural Law, so that Reason, or the Moral Law, was elevated far above the mindless workings of Nature. To establish this rule of the Moral Law on earth, Kant proposed a supremely powerful state that would control all religious and commercial offices in the land.

The leader of the state can never be a democratic representative of the people since democracy inevitably results in a despotism. While Kant favored a monarchical republic, Johann Fichte advocated a Platonic philosopher-statesman who is at once a political and religious leader of his nation. Like a Platonic “guardian,” such a statesman, “in his estimate of mankind looks beyond that which they are in the actual world to that which they are in the Divine Idea . . .” (The Nature of the Scholar, Lecture VIII). The monarch will bear the responsibility of the realization of the inner freedom of the individuals within his nation. It is important to note in this context Fichte’s emphasis that the aim of all society is “ever-increasing ennoblement of the human race, that is, to set it more and more at liberty from the bondage of Nature,” just as the aim of all culture is “to subject Nature . . . to Reason.” In order to counteract the spurious freedom that especially the young hanker after, Fichte insists that a new system of education must be developed which “essentially destroys the freedom of will . . . and produces on the contrary strict necessity in the decisions of the will” (Addresses to the German Nation, Address II).

The state continues to be glorified in the Idealistic philosophy of Hegel, for whom the state, and especially the Prussian state, is the “embodiment of rational freedom realizing and recognizing itself in an objective form” (Lectures on the Philosophy of History). And in the Prussian nationalism of Heinrich von Treitschke, the state is glorified to an extent that it becomes a sort of substitute for God. Treitschke takes care to stress that “the consciousness of national unity is dependent on a common bond of religion, for religious sentiment is one of the fundamental forces of the human character.” (Politics, I) Unfortunately the interference of Jewish elements in German politics had disturbed the traditional spiritual ordering of society by encouraging “the coexistence of several religions within one nationality, involving an irreconcilable and ultimately intolerable difference of outlook upon life.”

Directly opposed to these several statist doctrines of the German Idealists and nationalists is the doctrine of Communism which was propounded in the middle of the nineteenth century by the Jewish political economist Karl Marx. The radical difference between the Marxist view of the world and the Indo-European is already evident in the fact that Marx’s system was based on an atheistic materialism that totally denied the existence of any spiritual reality whatsoever, and all metaphysics in general, in favour of a dialectical socio-economics that attempted to understand the transformations of society according to its changing modes of production. Unlike Hegel who had justified history as the changing manifestations of a quasi-divine world-spirit, Marx wished to ‘create’ history by focusing on what he considered its essential economic activities. As he put it in The German Ideology (Ch.1):

Morality, religion, metaphysics, all the rest of ideology and their corresponding forms of consciousness . . . have no history, no development; but men, developing their material production and their material intercourse, alter, along with their real existence, their thinking and the products of their thinking.

However, the Communist system, for all its apparent evolutionary aspirations, is an anti-scientific, utopian construct aiming at an anti-human classless and stateless society based on the common ownership of the means of production. In this delusional sociological experiment Marx focused especially on class-struggle, or the conflict between capital and labor, as the primary instrument of historical change. By granting economic, social and political equality to all citizens Marx believed that the social awareness and discipline of every individual would naturally be increased. And, while he tolerated a representative parliamentary political system as a transitional stage, his Communist utopia aimed at a final dissolution of the state apparatus (which is what induces hierarchy and inequality) at the most advanced state of Communism, when the people would become fully self-governing.

Marxism is thus the fullest expression of a world-view that is diametrically opposed to the traditional Indo-European ordering of society according to spiritual character which we have observed in ancient India, Greece and the rest of Europe until the advent of philo-Judaic Puritanism in the middle of the seventeenth century. Marxism is naturally also opposed to the state structure that supports the religious and warrior aristocracy that founded, constitute and preserve the nation. It may be noted here that although modern liberal democracies pretend to abhor the Communist ideology, the arrogation of political authority in the West by the legislature and its prime ministerial or presidential leader represents a major step towards the same dissolution of the concepts of state and sovereignty that Communism too strives for.

Marx’s political economic theories were strongly criticized at the turn of the century by many notable German thinkers like Eugen Dühring and Oswald Spengler, but I should like to highlight here one of the most metaphysically structured political philosophical responses to Marxism – namely, the system of the Italian Fascist philosopher, Giovanni Gentile. According to Gentile, the basis of evil, exactly as in Plato and Plotinus, is Matter, or Nature, which is opposed to Spirit and represents as it were, “not merely moral and absolute nullity [but] the impenetrable chaos of brute nature, mechanism, spiritual darkness, falsehood and evil, all the things that man is forever fighting against” (Genesis and Structure of Society).

Gentile points out that the economic life focused on by Marx is marked by a utilitarianism akin to the instinctual life of animals and is a life of slavery to matter, whereas politics should be a means to spiritual freedom. While Marxism aimed at the worst sort of social organization, “the utilitarian, materialistic and hence egoistic conception of life understood as a realm of rights to be vindicated, instead of as an arena of duties to be performed by sacrificing oneself to an ideal,” Gentile’s own ideal of Fascism is based on a metaphysical understanding of society as emerging from a Kantian ideal of a “transcendent society” which is produced by the interaction of the ego and its pure object, the alter ego. It is this conception of a ‘transcendent society’ which makes man a ‘political animal’, as Aristotle had earlier suggested. The gradual self-realization of an individual necessarily entails the enlightenment of his objective counterparts, the other members of society, so that the nation as a whole begins to approach the ideal “transcendent society.”

Indeed, for Gentile, as for Fichte, the proper intellectual activity of the enlightened individual is the comprehension of the whole of mankind or of the Idea of it. And the ‘State’ is the objective embodiment of the personality of the individuals constituting it or the “universal common aspect” of their will. True political liberty is therefore possible only when the individuals that constitute the state become free through the realization of the universal aspect of their personality.

The State in its universal aspect is indeed an image of the Divine Will and the laws of the State must ever be in consonance with the Divine Law. Religion naturally is not an external aid to the will of the state but the constitutive element of it. The prime task of the state is to foster the dual development of individuals and of the society. Gentile’s project of state education is therefore governed by a keen awareness of the essentially moral nature of all education. Those concerned with culture as the self-development of the individuals constituting a state must, he says, be “critical of all knowledge that man does not need for the actual realization of his human nature and for the growth and health of his moral character” (Genesis and Structure of Society). In short, they must be critical of all knowledge that is not genuinely human.

Gentile interestingly also distinguishes between two kinds of treatment of political history. True history is not that which observes the “brute fact” but rather “the inward act of the spirit” always considered from the point of view of the “transcendent state,” the “higher ideal that operates as an end in the actual life of the state” (Ibid.). This transcendent state is indeed the divine model of an earthly state and therefore a constant unchanging norm to which the temporal changes of a state approximate in varying degrees throughout its history.

In this Fascist view of history and of the philosophical significance of the state we finally obtain a corrective to the historiographical errors of Hegelians like Fukuyama who raise the political status quo to an ideal after superficially surveying the external changes of a state as also to the errors of the Marxists who conjure up utopias from these same changes. All of these thinkers ignore the transcendent or divine aspect of statecraft, which, as we have observed in our initial survey of ancient Indian and Greek philosophy, starts with the constitution of the psyche or soul itself and aims, through a sacred kingship or an enlightened autocracy, at the psychological improvement of the individuals that comprise the state. Materialistic societies governed by economically oriented political doctrines, whether Puritan or Marxist, are incapable of any real historical development because the spiritual element of man which alone is capable of movement and development is either poorly understood or wholly dismissed.

Fukuyama’s historiographic thesis is thus merely a description of the abortive state of America itself, which has through its history gradually substituted materialistic and economic principles of statecraft for the spiritual ones that originally governed all European monarchies, including the British. In considering this American problem, we cannot afford to ignore the fateful role that Jewry have played in the history of the West, for the re-entry of the Jews into England during the Puritan revolution is linked, psychologically, to the capitalist career of the new American state just as the Jewish economic utopia of Karl Marx lurks behind the liberal democratic dreams of contemporary Americans. Indeed, all modern political theories that aim at a dissolution of the state or of the leading religious institution of a nation — whether these theories are called Libertarian or Anarchist — must be recognized as derivatives of the defective Jewish economic mentality.

This mentality can, and should, be fully replaced by genuinely Indo-European political doctrines that begin not with contractual promises to the masses of liberty and equality and plenty but rather with the obligations of the leaders of a nation and of the State to actually improve the human psychological condition, or culture, of these masses. Both the State and its leading religious institution — in the case of the West, the Church — must therefore be strengthened in their national role and their alliance must be consolidated. This will naturally entail the exclusion of all anti-statist and anti-clerical elements from national government and education. The philosophical guidelines for the urgently required regeneration of nations are clearly available in the long tradition of European conservative philosophy that I have pointed to and particularly in the most recent example of Gentile. Of course, I am aware that Monarchism, Fascism and the Church are all equally abhorrent to those who today follow Judaized America in its various utopian adventures, but it is well to bear in mind that the price of utopianism is the end of history.

Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/09/the-end-of-american-history/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Fukuyama.jpg

dimanche, 14 septembre 2014

Henry Corbin: Eurasia como concepto espiritual

Henry Corbin: Eurasia como concepto espiritual

Ex: http://culturatransversal.wordpress.com 

Por Claudio Mutti*

Desde Irlanda a Japón

corbin.jpg“Subrayar y enfatizar las conexiones, las líneas de fuerza en las que se sustenta la trama del concepto espiritual de Eurasia, desde Irlanda a Japón” (1): a esta preocupación de P. Masson Oursel, que se inspira en un programa esbozado en 1923 en la Philosophie comparée y proseguido en 1948 en La Philosophie en Orient (2), Henry Corbin (1903-1978) le atribuye un “valor especial” (3). Trascendiendo el nivel de las determinaciones geográficas e históricas, el concepto de Eurasia viene a constituir “la metáfora de la unidad espiritual y cultural que recompondrá al final de la era cristiana en vista de la superación de los resultados de ésta” (4). Estas son, al menos, las conclusiones de un estudioso que en la obra corbiniana ha descubierto las indicaciones idóneas para fundar: “aquella gran operación de hermenéutica espiritual comparada, que es la búsqueda de una filosofía – o mejor dicho: de una sabiduría – eurasiática” (5). En otras palabras, la misma categoría geofísica de “Eurasia” no es más que la proyección de una realidad geosófica vinculada a la  Unidad originaria, puesto que “Eurasia” es, en la percepción interior, en el paisaje del alma o Xvarnah (“Luz de Gloria”, en el léxico mazdeo), la Cognitio Angelorum, la operación  autológica del Anthropos Téleios, o incluso, por último, la unidad entre el Lumen Naturae y la Lumen Gloriae.   De aquí la posibilidad de acercar a Eurasia con el conocimiento imaginal de la Tierra como un Ángel” (6).

Es el mismo Henry Corbin quien evoca la experiencia visionaria del filósofo alemán Gustav Theodor Fechner, que identificó con la figura de un Ángel el rostro de la tierra envuelta de luz gloriosa, y para citar el pasaje concordante de un ritual avéstico: “Celebramos esta liturgia en honor de la Tierra, que es un ángel ” (7). De hecho, según la doctrina mazdeísta, a la Tierra se la percibe en la “persona” de su Ángel, cuando el alma, proyectando la imagen de sí misma, crea una Imago Terrae que la refleja. La angelología mazdeísta traduce el misterio de esta proyección de la siguiente manera: Spenta Armaiti, Arcángel femenino de la existencia terrenal, es la madre de Daena, el Ángel femenino que sustancia a la Alma caelestis,  el Cuerpo de Resurrección.  De esta manera, “la formulación misma de la categoría geofísica de “Eurasia” pertenece al proceso de palingenesia, que es la Resurrección a la luz de la Transfiguración ” (8).

La geosofía mazdeísta, íntimamente vinculada con la esencial característica sofiánica de Spenta Armaiti , se refiere principalmente a una Tierra celeste; aplicada al espacio terrestre, se nos presenta un kyklos, un orbis, similar a lo que Homero ha simbolizado en el escudo de Aquiles y Virgilio en el de Eneas (9), es decir, para permanecer en el ámbito iránico, con ese atributo del Hombre Universal (insân-e kâmil) que es la Copa de Jamshid.  En esta representación, la Tierra está rodeada del océano cósmico y dividida en siete zonas (Keshvar) (10); en el centro de la zona central, llamada Xvaniratha (“rueda luminosa”), “se encuentra Airyanem Vaejah (pahlavi Erân-Vêj), la cuna o germen de los Arios (= Iránicos).  Es allí donde se crearon los Kayanidi, los héroes legendarios; es ahí donde fue fundada la religión mazdeísta, desde donde se difunden a los otros Keshvar; es allí donde nacerá el último de los Saoshyant quién reducirá a Ahriman a la impotencia y llevará a cabo la resurrección y la existencia venidera”(11).  Situado al centro de la superficie de la tierra, Irán se nos presenta por lo tanto, como “bisagra, no sólo geográfica, sino también y sobre todo espiritual” (12), de la ecúmene eurasiática.

La representación mazdeísta, posteriormente reelaborada, pasó a formar parte del legado cultural que Irán le trasmitió al Islam.  En el Kitab al-Tafhîm de Abû Rayhân Mohammad ibn Ahmad Bîrûnî (362 / 973 – 421 / 1030) (13) se encuentra un esquema en el cual el círculo central, Irán, está rodeado de otros seis círculos, tangentes entre sí, que corresponden a otras tantas regiones: India, Arabia y Abisinia, Siria y Egipto, la zona bizantino-eslava, el Turquestán, China y el Tíbet.

Oriente y Occidente


Según la perspectiva islámica, el centro del mundo terrestre se encuentra en la Kaaba, el más antiguo de los templos de Dios, inicialmente construido en la época de Adán, después edificado por Abraham en su forma actual. En la planta y la estructura de este santuario primordial y central meditó Qâzî Sa‘îd Qommî (1042/1633 – 1103/1691- 92) en el primer capítulo de la Kitâb asrâr al-Hajj (“El sentido esotérico de la Peregrinación”), que constituye el objeto de un minucioso estudio de Henry Corbin (14). “Siempre entra en juego – dice éste último – el mismo principio: las formas de luz (sowar nûrîya), las figuras superiores se imprimen en las realidades de abajo que son sus espejos (subrayemos que, geométricamente las consideraciones elaboradas aquí seguirían siendo válidas sí se tomara como objeto de meditación la forma del templo griego)” (15). Ahora, en el plano superior de las Realidades-arquetipos […] encontramos cuatro “límites metafísicos” (16), dos de las cuales (la Inteligencia Universal y el Alma Universal) se encuentran al este de la realidad ideal, mientras que las otras dos (la Naturaleza Universal y la Materia Universal) se encuentran hacia el oeste. La ley rigurosa de las correspondencias exige que en el plano de la Ka’ba terrestre, los ángulos estén igualmente dispuestos según el mismo orden de relación: “Dos de estos ángulos están hacia el oriente: el ángulo en el que está encajada la Piedra Negra (el ángulo iraquí) y el ángulo yemenita; los otros dos están al occidente: el ángulo occidental y el ángulo sirio “(17).  Son estos dos orientes (mashriqayni) y los dos occidentes (maghribayni) los que alude el versículo 17 de la sura del Misericordioso, puntualmente citado por Corbin.

El versículo coránico llama a otro, el que comienza con las palabras: “A Dios pertenece el Oriente y el Occidente” (sura de la Vaca, 115).  “Gottes ist der Orient! – Gottes ist der Okzident!”: es la forma en que la reconstruye Wolfgang Goethe, a quien Corbin nos muestra más de una vez la convergencia con la sabiduría islámica.  Pero la pareja “Oriente-Occidente ” retorna en el versículo de la Luz, en parte reportado en el epígrafe al primer capítulo de su estudio sobre El hombre de luz en el sufismo iranio: ”… una lámpara que arde con un aceite de olivo que no es ni de Oriente ni Occidente, inflamándose sin necesidad siquiera de que el fuego la toque… Y es luz sobre luz.

“Entre Oriente y Occidente, como entre Norte y Sur, recorren líneas ideales de las cuales dependen no sólo la orientación geográfica, sino también la categoría antropológica. En la perspectiva del simbolismo espiritual, estas direcciones horizontales asumen un sentido en base al modo en que el ser humano experimenta la dimensión vertical de su presencia en el espacio y en el tiempo; y es una orientación de este género lo que constituirá uno de los principales temas del sufismo iranio: “es la búsqueda de Oriente, pero se nos advierte, por si acaso no lo comprendamos desde el primer momento, que se trata de un Oriente que no se encuentra en nuestros mapas geográficos ni puede ser situado en ellos. Este Oriente no está incluido en ninguno de los siete climas (los keshvar); es, de hecho, el octavo clima. Y la dirección en que este “octavo clima” debe ser buscado no está en la horizontal sino en la vertical. Este Oriente místico suprasensible, lugar del Origen y el Retorno, objeto de la búsqueda eterna, está en el polo celeste; es el Polo, un extremo norte, tan extremo como el umbral de la dimensión del más allá” (18).  La geografía sagrada de Irán hace corresponder a este Polo celeste a la montaña cósmica de Qâf, donde comienza aquel mundo de Hûrqalyâ que es iluminado por el sol de medianoche. Es la tierra de los Hiperbóreos (19), los cuales “simbolizan al hombre cuya alma ha alcanzado tal perfección y armonía que está libre de negatividad y de sombra; no es ni de Oriente ni de Occidente” (20).

Ishraq, nombre verbal, que en árabe significa el irradiar del sol desde el punto del cual surge, es un término peculiar de la sabiduría islámica de Irán.  Ishrâqîyûn o Mashriqîyûn (“Orientales”) son los sabios de la antigua Persia, llamados así “ciertamente no sólo por su ubicación geográfica, sino porque su conocimiento era oriental, en el sentido que se fundamentaba sobre la revelación interior (kashf) y la visión mística (moshâhadat) “(21).  Sin embargo, el significado del Oriente como un Oriente iluminativo, dirección que conduce al Polo espiritual, no es un concepto que caracteriza exclusivamente al pensamiento tradicional iranio. “Esta orientación se daba ya a los mistagogos del orfismo. Se la encuentra en el poema de Parménides donde, guiado por las hijas del sol, el poeta emprende un viaje hacia Oriente. El sentido de las dos direcciones, derecha e izquierda, Oriente y Occidente del cosmos, es fundamental en la gnosis valentiniana. (…) Ibn ‘Arabi (1240) eleva a símbolo su propia partida a Oriente; del viaje que de Andalucía le lleva hacia La Meca y Jerusalén hace su Isra’, homologándolo a un ékstasis que repite la ascensión del Profeta de cielo en cielo hasta el “Loto del límite”. Aquí el Oriente geográfico, “literal”, se convierte en símbolo del Oriente “real”, el polo celeste” (22).

Umbilicus Terrae

En la geografía sagrada resultante de las exploraciones espirituales de Henry Corbin, el extremo occidental de Eurasia está representado por las Islas Británicas. Aquí los fieles de la iglesia celta primitiva fueron designados en irlandés como céle Dé: denominación que equivale a Amici Dei, “se encuentra en la gnosis islámica (Awliyâ’ Allâh) y en la mística renana (Gottesfreunde)” (23).  Estos Coli Dei, “establecidos en York (Inglaterra), en Iona (Escocia), en el país de Gales y en  Irlanda, su símbolo fundamental era la paloma, como símbolo femenino del Espíritu Santo.  Desde esta perspectiva, no resulta extraño encontrar el druidismo mezclado a su tradición y los poemas de Taliesin integrados a sus corpus.  Igualmente, la epopeya de la Mesa Redonda y la Demanda del Santo Graal han sido también interpretadas en relación con los ritos de los Coli Dei” (24). A esta misma hermandad espiritual es reconducida la existencia del santuario de Kilwinning, sobre la montaña de Heredom, desde donde se irradió aquel Orden Real por el cual el rey Robert I Bruce se habría afiliado a los Templarios, realizando la convergencia entre el celtismo y el templarismo.

En la otra extremidad de Eurasia se extiende la China “el límite del mundo humano, del mundo que puede ser explorado por el hombre en las condiciones de la conciencia común” (25).  Por otra parte, influencias taoístas se habrían ejercido sobre la hierocosmologia del sufismo centroasiático y sobre algunas técnicas de recitación del dhikr adoptadas por la escuela de Najm Kobra (26). Entre los templos que se levantan en los confines de China hay uno, descrito en el siglo X por el historiador árabe Mas‘ûdî (27), que en su estructura obedece al paradigma arquitectónico de los templos sabeos; el mismo Mas‘ûdî había visto aquel de Harrán (la antigua Carrhae), y pudo todavía leer en el umbral la inscripción de tenor platónico: “Aquél que se conoce a sí mismo es deificado” (Man ‘arafa nafsahu ta’allaha). “Inscripción de tenor platónico” (28), cierto, en el que “el término técnico árabe es el equivalente de la theosis de los místicos bizantinos” (29), pero también la explicación del precepto délfico, que finalmente será validado en el hadîth qudsî: “Quién se conoce a sí mismo conoce a su Señor ” (Man ‘arafa nafsahu ‘arafa rabbahu). Mientras tanto, los hermetistas sabeos de Harrán aportarán en dote al Islam su herencia, derivada de una antigua sabiduría siríaca o siriobabiloniense reinterpretada a la luz del neoplatonismo.

Equidistante de Escocia y China está Al-Quds, “la ciudad santa” por antonomasia. En el lugar donde inició la Asunción el Mensajero de Dios – según Corbin un verdadero Umbilicus Terrae – “asume ahí una función homóloga a la de la Piedra Negra en el templo de la Ka’ba” (30), la Cúpula de la Roca (Qubbat al-Sakhrat). Este edificio, comúnmente llamado la Mezquita de Omar, “tiene la forma de un octógono regular culminado por una cúpula; fue el prototipo de las iglesias templarias construidas en Europa, y la cúpula fue el símbolo de la Orden y figuraba en el sello del Gran Maestre” (31). Este entrelazamiento de líneas espirituales diferentes hace de Jerusalén el simbólico edificio microcósmico, en el que se refleja la multiplicidad tradicional del macrocosmos eurasiático, aquella multiplicidad de formas que Henry Corbin nos presenta en su unidad esencial.

La oposición radical entre Jerusalén y Atenas, identificadas como polos emblemáticos respectivamente del monoteísmo y el politeísmo, es el punto donde convergen entre ellos los zelotas de las supuestas “raíces judeo-cristianas” de Europa y algunos defensores de un malentendido “paganismo” griego.  Sostener una posición de este tipo, queriendo reducirle a un esquema ideológico a una relación más bien profunda, compleja y articulada de cuanto no se imaginan los “judeo-cristianos” y “neopaganos”, significa ignorar cómo la más rigurosa doctrina metafísica de la Unidad (el Tawhid integral de la metafísica islámica) no excluye de hecho la multiplicidad relacionada a la jerarquía de los Nombres Divinos. Entre los que han entendido perfectamente lo anterior, está justamente Henry Corbin, quien, mediante el establecimiento de una ideal “comparación, por una parte entre Ibn ‘Arabî  (…) y Proclo, por otra” (32) y recordando el comentario del jefe de escuela de Atenas al Parménides platónico, evoca el encuentro de los físicos de la escuela jónica con los metafísicos de la Escuela Itálica, unos y otros se encuentran en la ciudad-símbolo de Atenas para participar en las Panateneas. “Celebrar esta fiesta – él escribe- es encontrar en la escuela ática de Sócrates y Platón la mediación que eleva los dos extremos a un nivel superior” (33).


1. Henry Corbin, L’Iran e la filosofia, Guida, Napoli 1992, p. 62.

2. P. Masson-Oursel, La Philosophie en Orient, in Histoire de la philosophie, a cura di É. Bréhier, Paris 1948, 1° fasc. suppl.

3. Henry Corbin, L’Iran e la filosofia, cit., ibidem.

4. Glauco Giuliano, Nitartha. Saggi per un pensiero eurasiatico, La Finestra, Lavis 2004, p. 14

5. Glauco Giuliano, Nitartha, cit., p. 221

6. Glauco Giuliano, Nitartha, cit., p. 16.

7. Sîrôza, vigésimo octavo día, op. cit.: Henry Corbin, Cuerpo espiritual y Tierra Celeste. Del Irán mazdeísta al Irán chiíta, Ediciones Siruela, Madrid, 1996, p. 37.

8. Glauco Giuliano, Nitartha, cit., p. 16, n. 25.

9. Ilíada, XVIII, 478-608; Eneida, VIII, 626-728.

10. La división septenaria del espacio terrestre que se repite en otras culturas tradicionales: cf. Claudio Mutti, Gentes. Popoli, territori, miti, Effepi, Genova 2010, pp. 19-20.

11. Henry Corbin, Cuerpo espiritual y Tierra Celeste, cit., p. 51.

12. Glauco Giuliano, Nitartha, cit., p. 22.

13. Henry Corbin, Historia de la Filosofía. Del mundo romano al Islam Medieval, vol. 3. Siglo veintiuno editores, México DF, 1990, pp 307-308.

14. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación, Editorial Trotta, Madrid, 2003, pp. 181-257.   Sobre Qâzî Sa’îd Qommî, cf. Henry Corbin, Historia de la Filosofía. La Filosofía en Oriente, vol. 11. Siglo veintiuno editores, México DF, 1990, p. 154-157

15. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación cit., p. 206.

16. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación cit., p. 207.

17. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación, cit., p. 207.

18. Henry Corbin, El hombre de luz en el sufismo iranio, Ediciones Siruela, Madrid, 2000, p. 20.

19. Sobre la Hiperbórea y similares representaciones tradicionales de la septentrional “Tierra de luz”, cf. Claudio Mutti, op. cit., pp 15-23.

20. Henry Corbin, El hombre de luz en el sufismo iranio, cit., p. 56.

21. Henry Corbin, Storia della filosofia islamica, cit., p. 211.

22. Henry Corbin, El hombre de luz en el sufismo iranio, cit., págs. 73-74.

23. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación, cit., p. 342 n. 217.

24. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación, cit., p. 342.

25. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación, cit., p. 132.

26. Henry Corbin, El hombre de luz en el sufismo iranio, cit., pp. 72 y 77 y ss.

27. Mas’ûdî, Les prairies d’or, ed. e trad. Barbier de Maynard, Paris 1914, vol. IV, p. 52.

28. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación,  cit., p. 133.

29. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación, cit., p. 133, n 7.

30. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación, cit., p. 351.

31. Henry Corbin, Templo y contemplación, cit., p. 334.

32. Henry Corbin, La paradoja del monoteísmo, Editorial Losada, Madrid, 2003, p. 22.

33. Henry Corbin, La paradoja del monoteísmo, cit., p. 30.


* Claudio Mutti es licenciado en Filología Finohúngara por la Universidad de Bolonia. Se ha ocupado del área cárpato-danubiana desde un perfil histórico (A oriente di Roma e di Berlino, Effepi, Genova 2003), etnográfico (Storie e leggende della Transilvania, Oscar Mondadori, Milano 1997) y cultural (Le penne dell’Arcangelo. Intellettuali e Guardia di Ferro, Società Editrice Barbarossa, Milano 1994; Eliade, Vâlsan, Geticus e gli altri. La fortuna di Guénon tra i Romeni, Edizioni all’insegna del Veltro, Parma 1999). Entre sus últimas publicaciones están Gentes. Popoli, territori, miti, (Effepi, Genova 2010), L’unità dell’Eurasia (Effepi, Genova 2008), Imperium. Epifanie dell’idea di Impero (Effepi, Genova 2005).

mercredi, 03 septembre 2014

Congreso Internacional “Maestros del tradicionalismo hispánico"

Congreso Internacional “Maestros del tradicionalismo hispánico de la segunda mitad del siglo XX”



El Consejo de Estudios Hispánicos Felipe II tiene el honor de invitar al Congreso Internacional




que tendrá lugar (D.m.) en Madrid el sábado 13 de septiembre de 2014, en su sede de la calle José Abascal (ant. General Sanjurjo), 38, bajo izquierda, con el siguiente programa:


10:00. Introducción.


Presidencia de Miguel Ayuso
Presidente del Consejo de Estudios Hispánicos Felipe II


  • Piedad y desarraigo: una pesquisa sobre los tradicionalismos,
    José Antonio Ullate, Universidad Antonio de Nebrija de Madrid.
  • Libertades concretas y libertad cristiana en el pensamiento de los maestros del tradicionalismo (Francisco Elías de Tejada, Rafael Gambra y Álvaro d’Ors),
    Jacek Bartyzel, Universidad de Toruń.


11:30. Segunda parte: Maestros peninsulares.


Presidencia de Consuelo Martínez-Sicluna
Vicedecana de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid


  • Vegas Latapie (1907-1985) contra el «propagandismo católico»,
    Andrés Gambra, Universidad R. Juan Carlos de Madrid.
  • El «divinismo» de Leopoldo Eulogio Palacios (1912-1981),
    José Miguel Gambra, Universidad Complutense de Madrid.
  • La «hispanidad» en Jesús Evaristo Casariego (1913-1990),
    Luis Infante, Círculo Cultural Juan Vázquez de Mella de Asturias.
  • Schmitt y Álvaro d’Ors (1915-2004): una inspiración ad modum recipientis,
    Juan Fernando Segovia, Universidad de Mendoza.
  • Elías de Tejada (1917-1978) y el tradicionalismo napolitano,
    Maurizio Di Giovine, Congresos Tradicionalistas de Civitella del Tronto.
  • Libertad civil, subsidiariedad y foralismo en Vallet de Goytisolo (1917-2011),
    José Joaquín Jerez, Universidad Pontificia Comillas de Madrid.
  • La comunidad no «comunitarista» de Rafael Gambra (1920-2004),
    Juan Manuel Rozas, Universidad Antonio de Nebrija de Madrid.
  • La teología de la historia de Francisco Canals (1922-2009),
    Javier Barraycoa, Universidad Abad Oliva de Barcelona.


17:00. Tercera parte: Maestros ultramarinos.


Presidencia de Juan Cayón
Secretario General del Consejo de Estudios Hispánicos Felipe II


  • Osvaldo Lira (1904-1996), tradicionalista hispánico,
    José Díaz Nieva, Universidad Santo Tomás de Santiago de Chile.
    Cristián Garay, Universidad de Santiago de Chile.
  • El tradicionalismo político de José Pedro Galvão de Sousa (1912-1992),
    José Albert, Universidad de Córdoba.
  • La teología de la historia de Rubén Calderón Bouchet (1918-2012),
    Luis María De Ruschi, Universidad Católica Argentina de Buenos Aires.
  • Frederick D. Wilhelmsen (1923-1996), un carlista estadounidense,
    Miguel Ayuso, Universidad Pontificia Comillas de Madrid.


19:00. Santa Misa en el aniversario de la muerte de S.M.C. Don Felipe II (+1598).

lundi, 18 août 2014

Miyamoto Musashi’s Dokkodo


Miyamoto Musashi’s Dokkodo

Dokkodo (獨行道), roughly translated means  “The Path of Walking Alone,”  “The Path of Independence,” or “The Lone Path”/  Although the English translation does not give the title much justice, it is should be noted that this refers not to a path of nihilistic abandon, nor a path of misanthropy.  Misanthropes who have crossed beyond a certain point will not be able to adhere to it unless they have the discipline and fortitude for it.  It is a demanding way and requires that the person choosing the path be able to endure its precepts, including those such as being in the world, without being of it in the sense of being drowned in ‘worldliness.’  Such a concept is paralleled the Christian injunctions that “Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God” (James 4:4) and “Denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world” (Titus 2:12).  Similar concepts exist in the Qur’an, namely, “Do not let your wealth or your children distract you from the remembrance of God”.  When the “Eastern” Daoist and Buddhist veneers are stripped away, we find something not at all that different from monotheistic teachings.  It is worth examining this code for relevance to augment understanding of the world.


A woodblock print depicting Miyamoto Musashi (1584-1645) wielding two bokken.

1. Do not go against the traditions that have been handed down from the generations (世々の道をそむく事なし)

The first principle is a bit difficult to translate directly into English.  The phrase 世々 (yoyo) refers roughly to “previous generations,” while 道 (michi) refers to “the way”; そむく (somoku) means “oppose,” and 事なし (kotonashi) is the negation of a verb.  It has variously been translated as, “Accept things as they are” or “Do not go against the way of the world”.

In “accepting things as they are,” one is not asked to tolerate evil or be passive, but is in an active mental struggle to realize our true place in the world and how small we are.  It is a battle against the ego to accept our mistakes, to bury the past, and live in the now instead of in the future.  Often things we resist are in the past: not accepting that someone has died or being angry over events that have occurred previously. These are things we simply can not change and that is why it makes no sense to resist what has happened.

By respecting the traditions, one “traverses time from the past to the future”. According to Imai Masayuki, this sentence indicates a man who is independent, yet, acting freely conforms to a truth of human nature.

71aZweq6IbL__SL1092_.jpg2. Do not seek pleasure for its own sake (身にたのしみをたくます)

The most direct application here is to refrain from engaging in behavior that gives one temporary satisfaction, without understanding the consequences.  For instance, it may be more pleasurable to spend one’s spare time with wine, woman and song, rather than in serious study.  In a hedonistic, decadent, narcissistic world one can get easily distracted in the sights and sounds even though temporary.  It is important to be aware of how harmful these things can be once they become so imbued into our characters as to become a ‘raison d’etre.’  The addiction to flesh, drink, substances, and even music has been studied and found to be folly.  Hence the reasonable parameters imposed by society and The Divine.

3. Do not rely upon any half-hearted prejudices. (よろすに依枯の心なし)

Sometimes, it is necessary to take a step back and make a better assessment of the situation.  A true warrior, sage, or gentleman is not impulsive or hot-headed, and should strive to uphold justice in all situations.  This also means that in dealing with other people, one does not take sides with a certain party without good reason, nor does he harbor indifference towards others.

4. Think humbly of yourself, but deeply of the world (身をあさく思、世をふかく思ふ)

This means to be humble and to think of one’s superficiality.  Musashi is telling us here that one should not overestimate one’s importance in the world.  Such a self-centered view is dominated by egocentricity and selfish desires.  One must evolve beyond such delusions, but at the same time accept that each person has their own limits.

This can also mean to not take excessive pride in one’s own accomplishments and possessions:  Do not think that your entire self-worth is in your job or your possessions, rather than in your character or your good deeds. You are not what you own.  This is difficult when people gauge worth with material success; your car is not you, your house is not you, your Rolex is not your soul, Gucci has no dominion over your heart.

5. Be detached from desire your whole life long (一生の間よくしん思わす)

This ties in with the fourth precept.  Eliminate the driving need for wanting instead of a want for needing.  Then, you will have less fear and be unfettered by worldly cares.  If you are removed from your own desires, then it is easier to follow a path of right conduct.  Eliminate the lusts for material desires, and one already has enough.  The concept of wu wei, or mushin ties into this as your lack of hindrances like too much fear in an endeavor will give you success.

6. Do not regret your past (我事におゐて後悔をせす)

There are times when one has to make decisions.  Decisions, even if weighed carefully, are not always successful.  However, if you tried your best, and you put your best efforts into achieving the right outcome, that is good enough.  Of course, this does not apply to someone who is reckless and stubborn.  However, those who have the right intent need not dwell on the past that they cannot fix.  Instead repent, move on, and become better.

7. Never have bad intentions or envy in your heart (善惡に他をねたむ心なし)

Jealousy clouds the heart with envy; envy poisons the mind with anger and despair.  What seems to be someone else’s treasure may be a great burden.  With selfish desires in the heart, we cannot truly live a fulfilling life or be at peace with ourselves or others.  That lifestyle of those you envy may earn them an early death and debts for generations.  It is nothing to be jealous about.

8. Never let yourself be saddened by a separation (いつれの道にもわかれをかなします)

According to the Buddha, attachment is the source of all suffering.   Meister Eckhart says, “He who would be serene and pure needs but detachment”.  Separation can apply to losing a partner, a pet, money, possessions or anything of the sort.  Things will come and go.  People will enter and leave.  Let them go.  The Divine will is going to decide who is going to be with whom and how. 

4352501395_ef41725cbb_z.jpg9. Complaining and bearing grudges are appropriate neither for oneself or others (自他共にうらみかこつ心なし)

Our selfish desires may lead us to complain about others.  For instance, if a person is unsatisfied with another person, he may spread rumors or complain about the other behind his back.  He may also hold a grudge against such a person.  This is not the behavior of a wise person.  Deal with it, it will make you stronger. 

10. Do not let yourself be guided by the feeling of lust or love (れんほの道思ひよるこゝろなし)

In the context of Buddhism, In Buddhism there are five different kinds of desires based on desire for money, lust, appetite, desire for fame, desire for sleep.  Out of these, lust, being a biological drive, is very hard to avoid.  Control yourself and use logical thought when going down that path.  To be at the whim of emotion is to be a slave and then to be attached to most temporary of material possessions: a mortal body.  It will not even withstand the wind like the mountain, or show the same splendor for aeons like the stars.  These too are material objects which will have their death as The Giver and Taker ordains.

11. In all things, have no preferences (物毎にすきこのむ事なし)

Again, this does not mean to become a nihilist.  On the contrary, it means to not be obsessed over small and inconsequential matters.  Do not be driven or guided by what you cannot control.

12. Be indifferent to where you live (私宅におゐてのそむ心なし)

Where you live is not a matter of importance when you follow this way.  As you are already trying to depart from these cares, you should be able to be steadfast and thrive anywhere.

13. Do not pursue the taste of luxurious food (身ひとつに美食をこのます)

The purpose of eating is to nourish oneself.  Luxurious food does not accomplish this any better than simple food.  In his life, Musashi was a warrior who at times faced levels of extreme privation.  However, in the worldview of the bushi, life itself is preparation for war.  Avoiding that which is unnecessary is better than indulging in it.

14. Do not become attached to old possessions you no longer need (末々代物なる古き道具を所持せす)

Nothing in the world remains ours forever.  Upon death, one’s personal items typically become the property of another.  Removing clutter from your life with generosity allows you to live a more unhindered existence and also be aware that you need little.  You came into the world with nothing, you travel lightly in the world, and you will leave it with nothing.

15. Do not act following customary beliefs (わか身にいたり物いみする事なし)

Although this seems to contradict the first principle, all this is saying is that there are times in which what is popular will not always be right.  For instance, what use is it to worship celebrities, to bury oneself in pursuit of that extolled?  It just wastes time and time is what you will never have enough of.  Walk the way and live guided by what is ever-enduring.  It will be there after this society has faded into the sands of history.

16. Do not collect weapons or practice with weapons beyond what is useful (兵具は格別よの道具たしなます)

What is the utility of engaging in hours practicing or acquiring that which you do not need?  For the warrior, weapons are not merely possessions to be owned and collected in the same manner that a merchant may collect trinkets.  Today we may not need swords, but instead must use other objects for defense of person, loved ones, and property.  Are these tools, worth much pursuit?

17. Don’t spend your entire life being preoccupied with death (道におゐてハ 死を いとわす 思ふ)

Death will happen just as you have been born.  As a warrior, to live without the fear of death is paramount.  For a sage or scholar, one who lives a proper life and death does not need to fear death.  For someone who has lived properly, physical death is not an end, but the hand which will lift the veil of life separating him from The Compassionate Sustainer.  Death is as natural as life; life indeed by its nature is the purchase of death.  What is better? To depart with a good record, or choose a legacy of iniquity?

18. Do not seek to possess either goods or fiefs for your old age (老身に財寳所領もちゆる心なし)

Millions try to save up all their lives for their dreams: to retire wealthy, to have fun, to own a house of their own.  Usually this money goes instead for their care as the world of work has taken its toll.  Have no illusions.

19. Revere the Divine but do not demand assistance (佛神は貴し佛神をたのます)

Although this can be viewed as an atheistic sentiment, it can also be interpreted to mean not to be arrogant in the face of the Divine, by demanding certain things.  One should not have the illusion that one’s own desires are a manifestation of the divine will.  As that immortal essence which transcends everything, God in its own driving of the greater forces which become the laws of reality will determine the necessity of your supplications.  The Divine decides everything and has the best answer for particular petitions.  Nevertheless, without reverence and sincerity, one cannot be in harmony with the Godhead.  Regardless of what is given, it is duty of the believer to believe in, love, and worship.

20. You may discard your own body, but you must preserve your honour (身を捨ても名利はすてす)

There are worse things than dying.  There are situations when dying is the most noble and preferable action to take.

21. Never abandon the Eternal Way (常に兵法の道をはなれす)

The purpose of the Dokkodo is to bring out a form of active asceticism – the warrior’s asceticism of action, as Evola would have put it.  Whatever happens, stay on the path: when the purpose become enlightenment, the Way becomes of paramount of importance.

Regardless of the external trappings of culture and the differences made manifest in it, there are universal ideals and beliefs within religious and martial traditions.  These doctrines give a sense of civility, sophistication, moral understanding, and examples to people and nations who are flawed.  Being flawed is the nature of the human being.  Flawed beings are always in need of Divine Guidance and its implementation.  As above, so below.

dimanche, 10 août 2014

Sao Paulo: IV Encontro Internacional Evoliano


lundi, 28 juillet 2014



de Juan Pablo Vítali


De Pie Sobre las Ruinas

Diseño: Fernando Lutz
Maquetación y correciones: Manuel Q.
Colección: Minnesänger
Papel blanco 90gr.
Páginas: 152
Tamaño: 21 x 15 cm
Edición en rústica (cosido) con solapas de 8 cm
P.V.P.: 15 €
(Gastos de envío no incluidos)
ISBN: 978-84-940846-8-3 
0081 3176 22 0006048819
 “Los poetas no están para interpretar poderes circunstanciales ni superficiales ideologías. Ellos expresan lo sagrado de los mundos auténticos e irrumpen como un rayo para alumbrar fugazmente la edad oscura. El poeta no es un dios, pero suele hablar por los dioses…..”
“El hombre moderno se ha colocado a sí mismo fuera de toda comprensión poética. Esa es acaso, la mejor definición de la edad oscura...”
“Lo poético no reside en el verso ni en la rima, sino en la tensión espiritual y épica del texto, en la sucesión simbólica que crece y se eleva hacia el objetivo, como la flecha de un arquero zen...”
“Los símbolos poéticos convocan a la percepción del hombre lo que está más allá de la percepción material. La poesía es la voluntad de plasmar un lenguaje simbólico no como la excepción, sino como la regla de un Orden Nuevo…..”
“La poesía es un mundo de dioses, que tiene por naturaleza la eternidad de los ciclos, el eterno retorno. Poeta y guerrero abren ciertas puertas a riesgo de sus vidas, para que otros pasen por ellas hacia la eternidad. Tal es su trágico destino…...”
Juan Pablo Vítali

dimanche, 27 juillet 2014

L’écologie selon Hildegarde

L’écologie selon Hildegarde

Écologie. Vous avez dit écologie…

La mode est à l’écologie. Soigner son environnement, protéger sa planète s’impose comme une obligation morale, surtout depuis qu’on interdit aux religions de prononcer ce gros mot. Mais de quoi parle-t-on au juste ? Parler de planète, ce n’est pas la même chose que parler de monde ; parler de la nature ne dit pas ce qu’est cette nature, dans sa… nature profonde, même lorsqu’on l’écrit avec un « N » majuscule. Les anciens vivaient dans un monde ; nous, nous vivons sur une planète, perdus dans une immensité sans frontières…

Sainte Hildegarde appartient au passé, non parce qu’elle aurait aujourd’hui 916 ans ou parce qu’elle ne connaît rien à l’économie, mais parce qu’elle nous parle d’un monde qui ne ressemble plus du tout au nôtre. Tandis que nous construisons des mondes nouveaux, des cieux nouveaux, que nous sautons de progrès en découvertes, elle nous révèle ingénument les secrets d’un univers où les cieux peuplés de créatures chantent la gloire de Dieu, où la terre glorifie le Créateur dans toutes ses fibres, des plantes aux anges, en passant par les astres, le sexe, la vie, la souffrance…

C’est à peine si nous reconnaissons la nature qu’elle nous décrit dans ses visions et dans ses chants, tant le visage qu’elle en montre a changé depuis lors ! Comme si ses visions nous transportaient de l’autre côté de la toile, nous faisant découvrir avec stupeur qu’il y a un envers à ce que nous voyons, et que cet envers est en réalité l’endroit des choses. Nous qui croyions invinciblement et définitivement voir les choses à l’endroit, nous apprenons que cette perception a quelque chose d’illusoire. Elle ne dit pas que nos sens nous trompent, comme le pense M. Descartes, mais qu’ils ne nous disent pas tout, tant s’en faut, que ce qu’ils disent est plutôt vrai, mais à l’envers.

Ce défaut de perception, placé à la racine même de l’homme depuis la chute d’Adam, ne dit lui-même pas tout de l’homme : celui qui en dit tout, c’est le Verbe incarné, nouvel Adam, homme restauré dans sa dignité première, parfaitement à l’endroit, lui. En Lui, le microcosme est renouvelé, et sa vision du macrocosme peut enfin retrouver son vrai sens.

En effet, chez notre visionnaire – comme chez tous les Pères de l’Église d’ailleurs -, l’homme ressemble à l’univers parce qu’il en rassemble tous les règnes : corps, âme et esprit, d’où le terme de microcosme, c’est-à-dire petit-monde. Ainsi, le grand-monde trouve-t-il son sens dans le Verbe fait chair, et l’homme sa vraie place dans ce monde per ipsum et cum ipso et in ipso, par Lui, avec Lui et en Lui. Le Verbe est la clef de lecture du monde.

Le statut ontologique de l’homme fait que tout ce qu’il accomplit sur terre concerne aussi les cieux, qu’il aime, qu’il mange, qu’il dorme ou qu’il marche. S’il ne doit pas faire n’importe quoi, c’est que d’une certaine manière ses actes résonnent dans tout l’univers. Sa conscience est une conscience d’abord religieuse, une conscience qui le relie, via le Verbe, à l’univers créé et au Créateur, la conscience morale n’étant que le reliquat de cette conscience plus vaste.

Le monde hildegardien est un monde de nature symbolique, où ce qui est en bas ressemble à ce qui est en haut, où le supérieur fonde l’inférieur, où les êtres circulent. Et la musique d’Hildegarde ressemble à ce monde, avec ses effets de miroir, ses ascensions fulgurantes, ses résonances multiples. La grâce et la beauté y sont la parure de toutes choses, Marie le miroir où partout se reflète le verbe créateur : « C’est pourquoi tu as été couronnée de la Sagesse de Dieu qui t’a établie comme son miroir ». Chez Hildegarde, nous regardons la nature et c’est Dieu qui paraît, nous tournons nos regards vers Marie, et c’est le Verbe qui se montre…

Si notre monde moderne consentait à regarder sa planète comme un miroir, qui sait, peut-être y verrait-il Dieu ?

La Nef

samedi, 26 juillet 2014

Teoría del Mundo Cúbico

Teoría del Mundo Cúbico  


Diálogo sobre la Teoría del Mundo Cúbico.- EMInves ha publicado una recopilación de artículos, corregidos y aumentados, acompañados de una conclusión, titulada Teoría del Mundo Cúbico. El libro ha aparecido precisamente la misma semana en la que menos de la mitad del electorado acudía a las urnas para elegir sus representantes en Europa y quizás sea este hecho por el que convenga empezar el diálogo con su autor, Ernesto Milá:

– Nuestro pueblo no parece ha estado muy interesado por las elecciones europeas… ¿Cómo sitúan en su libro a la Unión Europea?

– Es simple: la UE podía haberlo sido todo y, sin embargo, ha optado por no ser nada. La UE podía haberse constituido como una de las “patas” de un mundo multipolar, una de las zonas con mejor nivel de vida y bienestar de las poblaciones. Y, sin embargo, ha preferido ser una pieza más de un mundo globalizado y, como tal, una víctima más de esa odiosa concepción económico–política que aspira a homogeneizar el mundo en función de los intereses de la economía financiera y especulativa.

– Así pues, no hay futuro para Europa dentro de la globalización…

– Exacto, desde hace 25 años, Europa viene siendo víctima de un doble fenómeno: de un lado la deslocalización industrial en virtud de la cual, las plantas productoras de manufacturas tienden a abandonar territorio europeo y a trasladarse a zonas del planeta con menos coberturas sociales y, especialmente, salarios más bajos; de otro lado, la inmigración masiva traslada masas ingentes del “tercer mundo” hacia Europa con la finalidad de aumentar la fuerza de trabajo a disposición, logrando así tirar a la baja de los salarios. Ambos procesos –deslocalización industrial e inmigración masiva– tienden a rentabilizar el rendimiento del capital: se produce más barato fuera de Europa y lo que no hay más remedio que se fabrique en Europa, cuesta menos gracias a la inmigración masiva. Eufemísticamente, a este proceso, se le llama “ganar competitividad” y registra en su nómina a una ínfima minoría de beneficiarios y a una gran masa de damnificados. Por eso es rechazable.

– Hablando de “modelos”, en la introducción dices que tu Teoría del Mundo Cúbico es un modelo de interpretación de la modernidad, ¿puedes ampliarnos esta idea?

– Lo esencial de toda teoría política es interpretar el mundo en función de un esquema propio que ayude a explicar la génesis de la coyuntura histórica que se vive y cuál será su evolución futura. Esto es hasta tal punto necesario que, sin esto, puede decirse que ninguna doctrina política, ninguna concepción del mundo, logrará definir los mecanismos estratégicos para modificar aquellos aspectos de la realidad que le resulten rechazables o discordantes. Para que un modelo de interpretación de la realidad sea eficiente, es preciso que integre los aspectos esenciales del fenómeno que analiza. Los modelos geométricos son particularmente interesantes por lo que tienen de “visual”. De entre ellos, el cubo es, sin duda, el que mejor se adapta a la globalización y, por tanto, es el que hemos utilizado para nuestro análisis.

– Así pues, si no se comprende bien lo que es la globalización, ¿más vale no intentar aventuras políticas?

– Exactamente. Cuando emprendes un viaje, una aventura, debes llevar contigo un mapa. El mapa es, en definitiva, el modelo de interpretación que te llevará del lugar en el que te encuentras a aquel otro al que quieres llegar. Nadie sensato se atrevería a iniciar un viaje sin disponer de un plano susceptible de indicarle en cada momento dónde se encuentra y si va por la buena o por la mala dirección. Hoy, el factor dominante de nuestra época es el mundialismo y la globalización; el primero sería de naturaleza ideológica y en el segundo destaca su vertiente económica, especialmente. ¿Qué podríamos proponer a la sociedad si ignorásemos lo que es la globalización? Incluso Cristóbal Colón tenía una idea clara de a dónde quería ir; para él, su modelo de interpretación era la esfera; sabía pues que si partía de una orilla del mar, necesariamente, en algún lugar, llegaría a otra orilla. Desconocer lo que es la globalización y sus procesos supone no asentar la acción política sobre bases falsas y, por supuesto, una imposibilidad para elegir una estrategia de rectificación.

– ¿Qué pretendes transmitir a través de estas páginas?

– En primer lugar la sensación de que la globalización es el factor esencial de nuestro tiempo. Luego, negar cualquier virtud al sistema mundial globalizado, acaso, el peor de todos los sistemas posibles y, desde luego, la última consecuencia del capitalismo que inició su ascenso en Europa a partir del siglo XVII. Tras el capitalismo industrial, tras el capitalismo multinacional, no podía existir una fase posterior que no fuera especulativa y financiera a escala planetaria. Cuando George Soros o cualquier otro de los “señores del dinero” vierten alabanzas sobre la globalización, lo hacen porque forman parte de una ínfima minoría de beneficiarios que precisan de un solo mercado mundial para enriquecerse segundo a segundo, al margen de que la inmensa mayoría del planeta, también segundo a segundo, se vaya empobreciendo simétricamente. En la globalización hay “beneficiarios” y “damnificados”, sus intereses con incompatibles. Finalmente, quería llamar la atención sobre la rapidez de los procesos históricos que han ocurrido desde la Caída del Muro de Berlín. Lejos de haber llegado el tiempo el “fin de la historia”, lo que nos encontramos es con una “aceleración de la historia” en la que e están quemando etapas a velocidad de vértigo. La globalización que emerge a partir de 1989, en apenas un cuarto de siglo, ha entrado en crisis. En 2007, la crisis de las suprime inauguró la serie de crisis en cadena que recorren el planeta desde entonces, crisis inmobiliarias, crisis financieras, crisis bancarias, crisis de deuda, crisis de paro, etc, etc. En cada una de estas crisis, da la sensación de que el sistema mundial se va resquebrajando, pero que se niega a rectificar las posiciones extremas hacia las que camina cada vez de manera más vertiginosa. Con apenas 25 años, la globalización está hoy en crisis permanente. Así pues, lo que pretendo transmitir es por qué no hay salida dentro de la globalización.

– ¿Y por qué no hay salida…?

– La explicación se encuentra precisamente en el modelo interpretativo que propongo: está formado por un cubo de seis caras, opuestas dos a dos; así por ejemplo, tenemos a los beneficiarios de la globalización en la cara superior y a los damnificados por la globalización en la cara inferior; a los actores geopolíticos tradicionales a un lado y a los actores geopolíticos emergentes de otro; al progreso científico que encuentra su oposición en la neodelincuencia que ha aparecido por todas partes. Así pues tenemos un cubo con seis caras, doce aristas en las que confluyen caras contiguas y ocho vértices a donde van a parar tres caras en cada uno. Así pues, del análisis de cada una de estas caras y de sus contradicciones entre sí, de las aristas, que nos indicarán las posibilidades de convivencia o repulsión entre aspectos contiguos y de los vértices que nos dirá si allí se generan fuerzas de atracción o repulsión que mantengan la cohesión del conjunto o tiendan a disgregarlo respectivamente, aparece como conclusión el que las fuerzas centrípetas que indican posibilidades de estallido de la globalización se manifiestan en todos los vértices del cubo, así como las fricciones en las aristas, y hacen, teóricamente imposible, el que pueda sobrevivir durante mucho tiempo la actual estructura del poder mundial globalizado.

– ¿Quiénes son los “amos del mundo”? ¿Los “señores del dinero”…?

– En primer lugar es preciso desembarazarse de teorías conspiranoicas. Si el mundo estuviera dirigido por una “logia secreta” o por unos “sabios de Sión”, al menos sabríamos hacia donde nos pretenden llevar y existiría una “inteligencia secreta”, un “plan preestablecido”. Lo más terrible es que ni siquiera existe eso. El capitalismo financiero y especulador ha dado vida a un sistema que ya es controlado por ninguna persona, ni por ningún colectivo, ni institución. Simplemente, la evolución del capitalismo en su actual fase de desarrollo está completamente fuera de control de cualquier inteligencia humana. De ahí que en nuestro modelo interpretativo, la cara superior del cubo –la que representa a los beneficiarios de la globalización– no sea plana sino que tenga la forma de un tronco de pirámide. En el nivel superior de esta estructura piramidal truncada se encuentran las grandes acumulaciones de capital, lo que solemos llamar “los señores del dinero”… pero no constituyen ni un “sanedrín secreto”, ni siquiera pueden orientar completamente los procesos de la economía mundial. Simplemente, insisto, la economía se ha convertido en un caballo desbocado, que escapa a cualquier control…

– Entonces… ¿quién dirige el mundo?

– … efectivamente, esta es la pregunta que faltaba. En mi modelo, esta pirámide truncada, está coronada por una pieza homogénea que está por encima de todo el conjunto. En los obeliscos antiguos esta pieza era dorada o, simplemente, hecha de oro, y se conocía como “pyramidion”. En la globalización ese “pyramidion” son los valores de los que se nutre el neocapitalismo: afán de lucro, búsqueda insensata del mayor beneficio especulativo, etc, en total veinte principios doctrinales que enuncio en el último capítulo de la obra y que constituyen lo que podemos considerar como “la religión de los señores del dinero”. Esos “principios” son los que verdaderamente “dirigen la globalización”. Los “señores del dinero” no son más que sus “fieles devotos”, pero no tienen ningún control sobre los dogmas de su religión.

¿Hay alternativa a la globalización?

– Sí, claro, ante: la llamada “economía de los grandes espacios”. Reconocer que el mundo es demasiado diverso y que un sistema mundial globalizado es completamente imposible. Reconocer que solamente espacios económicos más o menos homogéneos, con similares PIB, con similar cultura, sin abismos ni brechas antropológicas, pueden constituir “unidades económicas” y que, cada uno de estos espacios, debe estar protegido ante otros en donde existan condiciones diferentes de producción, por barreras arancelarias. Y, por supuesto, que el capital financiero debe estar en primer lugar ligado a una nación y en segundo lugar tributar como actividad parasitaria y no productiva. La migración constante del capital financiero en busca siempre de mayores beneficios es lo que genera, a causa de su movilidad, inestabilidad internacional. Hace falta poner barreras para sus migraciones y disminuir su impacto, no sólo en la economía mundial, sino también en la economía de las naciones. Los Estados deben desincentivar las migraciones del capital especulativo y favorecer la inversión productiva, industrial y científica.

¿Es posible vencer a la globalización?

–  La globalización tiene dos grandes enemigos: en primer lugar, los Estados–Nación que disponen todavía de un arsenal legislativo, institucional y orgánico para defender la independencia y la soberanía nacionales de cualquier asalto, incluido el de los poderes económicos oligárquicos y apátridas; se entiende, que una de las consignas sagradas del neoliberalismo sea “más mercado, menos Estado”, que garantiza que los intereses económicos de los propietarios del capital se impongan con facilidad sobre los derechos de las poblaciones que deberían estar defendidos y protegidos por el Estado, en tanto que encarnación jurídica de la sociedad. El otro, gran enemigo de la globalización es cualquier sistema de “identidades” que desdicen el universalismo que se propone desde los laboratorios ideológicos de la globalización (la UNESCO, ante todo) y son antagónicos con los procesos de homogeneización cultural y antropológica que acompañan a la globalización económica. Así pues está claro: para vencer a la globalización es preciso reivindicar la dignidad superior del Estado (y para ello hace falta crear una nueva clase política digna de gestionarlo) e incluso recuperar la idea de Estado como expresión jurídica de la sociedad, es decir, de todos (con todo lo que ello implica) y, por otra parte, es preciso reafirmar las identidades nacionales, étnicas, regionales. Allí donde haya Estado e Identidad, allí no hay lugar para la globalización.

Datos técnicos:

Tamaño: 15 x 23 cm

Páginas: 258

Pvp: 20,00 euros

Abundante ilustrado con gráficos

pedidos: eminves@gmail.com

The Knightly Spirit


The Knightly Spirit

by Ivan Ilyin (1883-1954)

Ex: http://souloftheeast.org 

Ivan Ilyin (1883-1954), the White emigre philosopher who articulated Russian national renewal, shows an essential requirement for the strength of any culture – a dedicated elite committed to serving God and defending its people. Ilyin knew that only through such leadership could a nation recover and flourish, and his essay written a decade after the Russian Civil War confirms this fact with clarity and force. Translated by Mark Hackard. 


Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. Psalm 51:10

Through all the great discord of our days, amidst catastrophe, tragedy and loss, in disputes and temptations, we must remember one thing and live by it: the maintenance and propagation of a spirit of knightly service. First and foremost within ourselves, and then within our children, our friends and the like-minded. We should protect this spirit as something sacred; we must strengthen it in those who trust us, those who confide in us, and those who seek our direction. This is what we must advocate to our leaders and pastors, insisting and even demanding it. For this spirit is as the air and oxygen of Russian national salvation, and where it would run out, there would immediately set in an atmosphere of rot and decay, overt or hidden Bolshevism.

The decades we have experienced are such that men accustomed to holding indifferent and lukewarm positions, unable or unwilling to fortify themselves and make a decision, have already had their judgment signed in advance. They are condemned humiliation and the mire, and their vital forces will be used by the tempters of this world. Everywhere that there is no will, the will of the sons of perdition shall take the field. Everywhere that the conscience is silent and greed divides the soul in two, Bolshevism already conquers, and everywhere that the crude lust for power of some irritates the insatiable ambition of others, there is prepared seduction, disintegration and the triumph of the enemy. Everywhere that the spirit of chivalry weakens or disappears, disaster awaits us. So it stands now, and so shall it be henceforth.

At whatever post a man may stand, this duty (if only the cause is not in itself shameful) has its idea giving meaning to his cause, consecrating it not as an occupation, but as service, service to God’s Unified Cause on earth. In distinction from the subject himself, having his own personal interests, sympathies and desires, God’s cause has its Transcendent paths of necessity and exaction. And so man’s personal interests and the Transcendent interest of his Cause at any moment can part and place him before the temptation of self-interest. At any moment, a man can find himself in the position of a mercenary, not knowing upon what course to decide, or the position of a traitor who prefers his interest to the Transcendent. The spirit of chivalry is comprised of steadfast loyalty to the Transcendent path.

There are men who do not see the Cause at all and do not comprehend Transcendent requirements. They know only their own business, personal success, and everything else for them is only a means to that end. All their activity proves to be servility and treachery, and from the works of these careerists, flatterers, bribe-takers and time-servers have perished and will perish all human organizations and institutions. Venality is their credo – it matters not for what they sold out the Cause, whether for money, honors or authority, and it matters not what was hidden in their soul behind the betrayal: open nihilism (as among the Bolsheviks) or a sentimental lack of character and justifying sophistry (characteristic of the pre-Bolshevik Philistines).

There are other men who know of the demands of the Cause and the Transcendent, but who treat them with formal indifference, as if they were a heavy and unpleasant duty or a repellent inevitability – without love, inspiration or creativity. Their activity is “service,” but their service is merely carrying out the next “order” or “item”; they work as hirelings, and in the best case do not curse their labor, or as slaves, weighed down by their every effort. The fate of the Cause makes no difference to them. The demands of the Transcendent, however it might be named – the Church, the Motherland, Orthodoxy, the Army, Science, Art – only belabor and burden them. They are not dedicated to God’s Cause on earth. And from the works of these unfeeling machines, these indifferent men and time servers, all human organizations begin to be emptied internally and die away, disenchanting and irritating all who come into contact with them, provoking censure and straining an atmosphere of destructive protest.

Now as never before, Russia needs men capable not of servility or time-serving, but service. Men who not only see the Cause and comprehend the demands of the Transcendent, but who are devoted to God’s Cause on earth. Men not only not indifferent and not unfeeling, but inspired and inspiring others – men who do not concede the interests of the Cause neither for money, honors, and authority, nor over any requests or favors – incorruptible in the fullest and highest meaning of this word. These are men for whom duty is not hard labor and obligation is not repellent, because in their soul, obligation is covered by personal devotion, and duty has been submerged in passionate interest for the cause. These are men who are, of course, gladdened by any personal success, but for them, their own success always remains a means to serving the victory of God’s Cause. These are men who do not fear responsibility precisely because they are wholly invested in the Cause, and not at all do they seek personal good fortune and advancement at whatever cost. These are men of character and civic courage, men of an idea of will, volunteers for the Russian National Cause. Men summoned as organizers of Russia.

The spirit of chivalry comprises first and foremost the voluntary and willed acceptance of hardship and danger in the name of God’s Cause on earth. And we must admit that if life expects this from us always, and even in the most happy time it proposes us such burdens and the responsibilities and danger tied to them at every step – then after Russia’s military collapse in the Great War and her defeat in the Revolution, all of her rebirth and restoration will depend totally on whether there shall be found in our land a cadre of men firm in such a spirit and capable of such service. An incorruptible cadre, and therefore selling out nothing to either foreigners or the internal enemies of Russia; loyal in love and conscience, and therefore capable of gathering around themselves trust and dedication in all hearts faithful to the Motherland; knightly, and therefore called to service and the organization of public salvation.

The essence of knighthood necessary to Russia is first of all not in infringement, but in self-denial. Not one of the contemporary political parties is knightly, for they all infringe upon power and its attendant benefits. What Russia needs is a cadre of men with renewed and ennobled political motivation in their souls. Only new men can create a new regime, “new” not in the sense of age, name or the all-corrupting “revolutionary standing,” but namely in the sense of direction of the will and strength of will: of Transcendent direction and unbreakable strength. He who over these years of disasters, tragedies and losses has been unable to find within his soul new sources of political reason and political activity – sources religious, patriotic and chivalrous – who as before conceives of Russia (regardless of whether from the left or right) as a field for his career and private advancement – such a man is an enemy of Russia, bringing her poison and death from his heart, whatever programs and slogans he would use as cover. Outside of the knightly spirit of national service, all is aimless, harmful and in vain; outside of it, no one will free or restore anything, but will only create new discord, new chaos and a new civil war to Russia’s ruin and the joy of her immemorial adversaries the world over.

Here is why those who stand aside from all foreign and Soviet “policy,” from all of these endless “initiatives” (abroad) and treacherous “compromises” (in the underground), from all the concoctions and squabbling of political parties, are right. However, this distancing should hardly signify the denial of sovereignty; not at all does it coincide with political meaninglessness and a lack of will. To the contrary – its entire meaning is in stockpiling political meaning and political will and in the Transcendent purification of the soul, in the concentration of the soul’s capability for comprehension and its most noble forces. This abstinence from the frivolous and the premature, from the vanity and intrigues of party politics, is imperative precisely to set a beginning for a new ideational and volitional approach to sovereignty in general and to Russian statehood in particular – the knightly way.

For this we must begin from the establishment of an indisputable maxim that holds: Russia’s ruin was brought about and conditioned by the fact that Russian men possessed insufficient chivalry, and henceforth have flowed all the errors and crimes that have despoiled Russia, all these currents of spinelessness, faint-heartedness, greed, cowardice, venality, betrayal and savagery. And these errors and these crimes will be repeated; and the currents of this cravenness and faint-heartedness will pour out – until Russia paves a course to spiritual and religious renewal; until men of knightly style and knightly character arise and close ranks. And when this takes place, it is then they will found and strengthen a new sovereign tradition, for now dispersed and lost, but conceived many centuries prior in the spirit of Russian Orthodoxy, a tradition that endured through ages of struggle for Russian national greatness. This is the tradition of religiously-rooted state voluntarism that was again reborn in the Russian lands ten years ago.

This is what is most elementary and important. If it is not there, then neither shall there be a Russia, but there shall be discord and chaos, shame and disintegration. It is now that we must take this path and begin our renewal, today, without hesitation or delay.

lundi, 21 juillet 2014

Nantes: Samourai


00:05 Publié dans Evénement, Traditions | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : événement, nantes, samourai, japon, traditions | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

dimanche, 20 juillet 2014

The Life & Writings of Julius Evola



The Life & Writings of Julius Evola

If the industrious man, through taking action,
Does not succeed, he should not be blamed for that –
He still perceives the truth.

                        ~The Sauptikaparvan of the Mahābhārata (2,16)

If we could select a single aspect by which to define Julius Evola, it would have been his desire to transcend the ordinary and the world of the profane. It was characterized by a thirst for the Absolute, which the Germans call mehr als leben – “more than living.” This idea of transcending worldly existence colours not only his ideas and philosophy, it is also evident throughout his life which reads like a litany of successes. During the earlier years Evola excelled at whatever he chose to apply himself to: his talents were evident in the field of literature, for which he would be best remembered, and also in the arts and occult circles.

Born in Rome on the 19th of May in 1898, Giulio Cesare Andrea Evola was the son of an aristocratic Sicilian family, and like many children born in Sicily, he had received a stringent Catholic upbringing. As he recalled in his intellectual autobiography, Il cammino del cinabro [1963, 1972, The Cinnabar's Journey], his favourite pastimes consisted of painting, one of his natural talents, and of visiting the library as often as he could in order to read works by Oscar Wilde, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Otto Weininger.[1]  During his youth he also studied engineering, receiving excellent grades but chose to discontinue his studies prior to the completion of his doctorate, because he "did not wish to be bourgeois, like his fellow students." At the age of nineteen Evola joined the army and participated in World War I as a mountain artillery officer. This experience would serve as an inspiration for his use of mountains as metaphors for solitude and ascension above the chthonic forces of the earth. Evola was also a friend of Mircea Eliade, who kept in correspondence with Evola from 1927 until his death. He was also an associate of the Tibetologist Giuseppe Tucci and the Tantric scholar Sir John Woodroffe (Arthur Avalon).
Sir John Woodroffe
During his younger years Evola was briefly involved in art circles, and despite this being only a short lived affair, it was also a time that brought him great rewards. Though he would later denounce Dada as a decadent form of art it was within the field of modern art that Evola first made his name, taking a particular interest in Marinetti and Futurism. His oil painting, Inner Landscape, 10:30 a.m., is hanging today on a wall of the National Gallery of Modern Art in Rome.[2]  He also composed Arte Astratta (Abstract Art) but later, after experiencing a personal crisis, turned to the study of Nietzsche, from which sprang his Teoria dell, individuo assoluto (Theory of the Absolute Individual) in 1925. By 1921 Evola had abandoned the pursuit of art as the means to place his unique mark on the world. The revolutionary attitudes of Marinetti, the Futurist movement and the so-called avant-garde which had once fascinated him, no longer appeared worthwhile to Evola with their juvenile emphasis on shocking the bourgeois. Likewise, despite being a talented poet, Evola (much like another of his inspirations – Arthur Rimbaud) abandoned poetry at the age of twenty four. Evola did not write another poem nor paint another picture for over forty years. Thus, being no longer enamored of the arts, Evola chose instead to pursue another field entirely that he would one day award him even greater acclaim.
To this day, the magical workings of the Ur Group and its successor Krur remain as some of the most sophisticated techniques for the practice of esoteric knowledge laid down in the modern Western era. Based on a variety of primary sources, ranging from Hermetic texts to advanced Yogic techniques, Evola occupied a prominent role in both of these groups. He wrote a number of articles for Ur and edited many of the others. These articles were collected in the book Introduction to Magic: Rituals and Practical Techniques for the Magus, which alongside Evola’s articles, are included the works of Arturo Reghini, Giulio Parese, Ercole Quadrelli and Gustave Meyrink. The original title of this work in Italian, Introduzione alla Magia quale scienza dell’lo, literally translates as Introduction to Magic as a Science of the “I”.[3]  In this sense, the 'I' is best interpreted as the ego, or the manipulation of the will – an idea which is also the found in the work of that other famous magician, Aleister Crowley and his notion of Thelema. The original format of Ur was as a monthly publication, of which the first issue was printed in January 1927.[4]
Contributors to this publication included Count Giovanni di Caesaro, a Steinerian, Emilio Servadio, a distinguished psychoanalyst, and Guido de Giorgio, a well-known adherent of Rudolph Steiner and an author of works on the Hermetic tradition. It was during this period, that he was introduced to Arturo Reghini, whose ideas would leave a lasting impression on Evola. Arturo Reghini (1878-1946), who was interested in speculative Masonry and the anthroposophy of Rudolf Steiner, introduced Evola to Guénon's writings and invited him to join the Ur group. Ur and its successor, Krur, gathered together a number of people interested in Guénon's exposition of the Hermetic tradition and in Vedanta, Taoism, Buddhism, Tantra, and magic.

Arturo Reghini was to be a major influence on Evola, and himself was a representative of the so-called Italian School (Scuola Italica), a secret order which claimed to have survived the downfall of the Roman Empire, to have re-emerged with Emperor Frederic II, and to have inspired the Florentine poets of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, up to Petrarch. Like Evola, Reghini had also written articles, one of which was entitled "Pagan Imperialism." This appeared in Salamandra in 1914, and in it Reghini summed up his anti-Catholic program for a return to a glorious pagan past. This piece had a profound impact on Evola, and it served as the inspiration for his similarly titled Imperialismo pagano. Imperialismo pagano, chronicling the negative effects of Christianity on the world, appeared in 1928. In the context of this work, Evola is the advocate of an anti-Roman Catholic pagan imperialism. According to Evola, Christianity had destroyed the imperial universality of the Roman Empire by insisting on the separation of the secular and the spiritual. It is from this separation that arose the inherent decadence and inward decay of the modern era. Out of Christianity’s implacable opposition to the healthy paganism of the Mediterranean world arose the secularism, democracy, materialism, scientism, socialism, and the "subtle Bolshevism" that heralded the final age of the current cosmic cycle: the age of "obscurity" the Kali-Yuga.[5]  Imperialismo pagano was to be later revised in a German edition as Heidnischer Imperialismus. The changes that occurred in the text of Evola’s Imperialismo pagano in its translation as Heidnischer Imperialismus five years later were not entirely inconsequential. Although the fundamental concepts that comprised the substance of Evola’s thought remained similar, a number of critical elements were altered that would transform a central point in Evola's thinking. The "Mediterranean tradition" of the earlier text is consistently replaced with the "Nordic-solar tradition" in this translation.[6]  In 1930 Evola founded his own periodical, La Torre (The Tower). La Torre, the heir to Krur, differed from the two earlier publications Ur and Krur in the following way, as was announced in an editorial insert:
"Our Activity in 1930 – To the Readers: Krur is transforming. Having fulfilled the tasks relative to the technical mastery of esotericism we proposed for ourselves three years ago, we have accepted the invitation to transfer our action to a vaster, more visible, more immediate field: the very plane of Western 'culture' and the problems that, in this moment of crisis, afflict both individual and mass consciousness […] for all these reasons Krur will be changed to the title La Torre (The Tower), a work of diverse expressions and one Tradition."[7]
La Torre was attacked by official fascist bodies such as L’Impero and Anti-Europa, and publication of La Torre ceased after only ten issues. Evola also contributed an article entitled Fascism as Will to Imperium and Christianity to the review Critica Fascista, edited by Evola's old friend Giuseppi Bottai. Here again he launches vociferous opposition to Christianity and attests to its negative effects, evident in the rise of a pious, hypocritical, and greedy middle class lacking in all superior solar virtues that Evola attributed to ancient Rome. The article did not pass unnoticed and was vigorously attacked in many Italian periodicals. It was also the subject of a long article in the prestigious Revue Internationale des Sociétés Secrètes (Partie Occultiste) for April 1928, under the title Un Sataniste Italien: Jules Evola.
Coupled with the notoriety of Evola's La Torre, was also another, more bizarre incident involving the Ur Group's reputation, and their attempts to form a "magical chain." Although these attempts to exert supernatural influence on others were soon abandoned, a rumour quickly developed that the group had wished to kill Mussolini by these means. Evola describes this event in his autobiography Il Cammino del Cinabro.
"Someone reported this argument [that the death of a head of state might be brought about by magic] and some yarn about our already dissolved 'chain of Ur' may also have been added, all of which led the Duce to think that there was a plot to use magic against him. But when he heard the true facts of the matter, Mussolini ceased all action against us. In reality Mussolini was very open to suggestion and also somewhat superstitious (the reaction of a mentality fundamentally incapable of true spirituality). For example, he had a genuine fear of fortune-tellers and any mention of them was forbidden in his presence."
It was also during this period that Evola also discovered something which was to become a profound influence on many his ideas: the lost science of Hermeticism. Though he undoubtedly came into contact with this branch of mysticism through Reghini and fellow members of Ur, it seems that Evola’s extraordinary knowledge of Hermeticism actually arose from another source. Jacopo da Coreglia writes that it was a priest, Father Francesco Olivia, who had made the most far-reaching progress in Hermetic science and – sensing a prodigious student – granted Evola access to documents that were usually strictly reserved for adepts of the narrow circle. These were concerned primarily with the teachings of the Fraternity of Myriam (Fratellanza Terapeutica Magica di Myriam), founded by Doctor Giuliano Kremmerz, pseudonym of Ciro Formisano (1861-1930). Evola mentions in The Hermetic Tradition that Myriam’s Pamphlet D laid the groundwork for his understanding of the four elements.[8]  Evola’s knowledge of Hermeticism and the alchemical arts was not limited to Western sources either, for he also knew an Indian alchemist by the name of C.S. Narayana Swami Aiyar of Chingleput.[9] During this era of history, Indian alchemy was almost completely unknown to the Western world, and it is only in modern times that it has been studied in relation to the occidental texts.
M is for Mussolini (not Murder)
In 1926 Evola published an article in Ultra (the newspaper of the Theosophical Lodge in Rome) on the cult of Mithras in which he placed major emphasis on the similarities of these mysteries with Hermeticism.[10] During this period he also wrote Saggi sull’idealismo magico (1925; Essays on Magic Idealism), and L’individuo ed il divenire del mondo (1926; The Individual and the Becoming of the World). This article was to be followed by the publication of his treatise on alchemy, La Tradizione ermetica (The Hermetic Tradition). Such was the scope and depth of this work that Karl Jung even quoted Evola to support his own contention that "the alchemical opus deals in the main not just with chemical experiments as such, but also with something resembling psychic processes expressed in pseudo-chemical language."[11] Unfortunately, the support expressed by Jung was not mutual, for Evola did not accept Jung's hypothesis that alchemy was merely a psychic process.
Taking issue with René Guénon's (1886-1951) view that spiritual authority ranks higher than royal power, Evola wrote L’uomo come potenza (Man as power); in the third revised edition (1949), the title was changed to Lo yoga della potenza (The yoga of power).[12] This was Evola's treatise of Hindu Tantra, for which he consulted primary sources on Kaula Tantra, which at the time were largely unknown in the Western world. Decio Calvari, president of the Italian Independent Theosophical League, introduced Evola to the study of Tantrism.[13] Evola was also granted access to authentic Tantric texts directly from the Kaula school of Tantrism via his association with Sir John Woodroofe, who was not only a respected scholar, but was also a Tantric practitioner himself, under the famous pseudonym of Arthur Avalon. A substantial proportion of The Yoga of Power is derived from Sir John Woodroofe's personal notes on Kaula Tantrism. Even today Woodroofe is regarded as a leading pioneer in the early research of Tantrism.
Evola's opinion that the royal or Ksatriya path in Tantrism outranks that of the Brahmanic or priestly path, is readily supported by the Tantric texts themselves, in which the Vira or active mode of practice is exalted above that of the priestly mode in Kaula Tantrism. In this regard, the heroic or solar path of Tantrism represented to Evola, a system based not on theory, but on practice – an active path appropriate to be taught in the degenerate epoch of the Hindu Kali Yuga or Dark Age, in which purely intellectual or contemplative paths to divinity have suffered a great decrease in their effectiveness.
In the words of Evola himself:
"During the last years of the 1930s I devoted myself to working on two of my most important books on Eastern wisdom: I completely revised L’uomo come potenza (Man As Power), which was given a new title, Lo yoga della potenza (The Yoga of Power), and wrote a systematic work concerning primitive Buddhism entitled La dottrina del risveglio (The Doctrine of Awakening)."[14]
Evola's work on the early history of Buddhism was published in 1943. The central theme of this work is not the common view of Buddhism, as a path of spiritual renunciation – instead it focuses on the Buddha's role as a Ksatriya ascetic, for it was to this caste that he belonged, as is found in early Buddhist records.
The historical Siddharta was a prince of the Śakya, a kṣatriya (belonging to the warrior caste), an "ascetic fighter" who opened a path by himself with his own strength. Thus Evola emphasizes the "aristocratic" character of primitive Buddhism, which he defines as having the "presence in it of a virile and warrior strength (the lion's roar is a designation of Buddha’s proclamation) that is applied to a nonmaterial and atemporal plane…since it transcends such a plane, leaving it behind." [15]
Siddharta's warrior youth.
The book considered by many to be Evola’s masterpiece, Revolt Against the Modern World was published in 1934, and was influenced by Oswald Spengler's Decline of the West (1918) and René Guénon's The Crisis of the Modern World (1927), both of which had been previously translated into Italian by Evola. Spengler's contribution in this regard was the plurality of civilizations, which then fell into patterns of birth, growth and decline. This was combined with Guénon's ideas on the "Dark Age" or Hindu Kali Yuga, which similarly portrays a bleak image of civilizations in decline. The work also draws upon the writings of Bachofen in regards to the construction of a mythological grounding for the history of civilizations. The original version of Julius Evola's The Mystery of the Grail formed an appendix to the first edition of Rivolta contra il mondo moderno, and as such is closely related to this work.[16]  Three years later he reworked that appendix into the present book, which first appeared as part of a series of religious and esoteric studies published by the renowned Laterza Publishers in Italy, whose list included works by Sigmund Freud, Richard Wilhelm, and C. G. Jung, among others. In this book Evola writes three main premises concerning the Grail myths: That the Grail is not a Christian Mystery, but a Hyperborean one, that it is a mystery tradition, and that it deals with a restoration of sacred regality. Evola describes his work on the Grail in the epilogue to the first edition (1937).
"To live and understand the symbol of the Grail in its purity would mean today the awakening of powers that could supply a transcendental point of reference for it, an awakening that could show itself tomorrow, after a great crisis, in the form of an “epoch that goes beyond nations.” It would also mean the release of the so-called world revolution from the false myths that poison it and that make possible its subjugation through dark, collectivistic, and irrational powers. In addition, it would mean understanding the way to a true unity that would be genuinely capable of going beyond not only the materialistic – we could say Luciferian and Titanic – forms of power and control but also the lunar forms of the remnants of religious humility and the current neospiritualistic dissipation."[17]
Another of Evola’s books, Eros and the Mysteries of Love, could almost be seen as a continuation of his experimentation with Tantrism. Indeed, the book does not deal with the erotic principle in the normal of sense of the word, but rather approaches the topic as a highly conceptualized interplay of polarities, adopted from the Traditional use of erotic elements in eastern and western mysticism and philosophy. Thus what is described here is the path to sacred sexuality, and the use of the erotic principle to transcend the normal limitations of consciousness. Evola describes his book in the following passage:
"But in this study, metaphysics will also have a second meaning, one that is not unrelated to the world's origin since 'metaphysics' literally means the science of that which goes beyond the physical. In our research, this 'beyond the physical' will not cover abstract concepts or philosophical ideas, but rather that which may evolve from an experience that is not merely physical, but transpsychological and transphysiological. We shall achieve this through the doctrine of the manifold states of being and through an anthropology that is not restricted to the simple soul-body dichotomy, but is aware of 'subtle' and even transcendental modalities of human consciousness. Although foreign to contemporary thought, knowledge of this kind formed an integral part of ancient learning and of the traditions of varied peoples."[18]
Another of Evola's major works is Meditations Among the Peaks, wherein mountaineering is equated to ascension. This idea is found frequently in a number of Traditions, where mountains are often revered as an intermediary between the forces of heaven and earth. Evola was an accomplished mountaineer and completed some difficult climbs such as the north wall of the Eastern Lyskam in 1927. He also requested in his will that after his death the urn containing his ashes be deposited in a glacial crevasse on Mount Rosa.
Evola's main political work was Men Among the Ruins. This was to be the ninth of Evola's books to published in English. Written at the same time as Men Among the Ruins, Evola composed Ride the Tiger which is complementary to this work, even though it was not published until 1961. These books belong together and cannot really be judged separately. Men among the Ruins shows the universal standpoint of ideal politics; Riding the Tiger deals with the practical "existential" perspective for the individual who wants to preserve his "hegomonikon" or inner sovereignty.[19]  Ride the Tiger is essentially a philosophical set of guidelines entwining various strands of his earlier thought into a single work. Underlying the more obvious sources, which Evola cites within the text, such as Nietzsche, Sartre and Heidegger, there are also connections with Hindu thoughts on the collapse of civilization and the Kali Yuga. In many ways, this work is the culmination of Evola's thought on the role of Tradition in the Age of Darkness – that the Traditional approach advocated in the East is to harness the power of the Kali Yuga, by ‘Riding the Tiger’ – which is also a popular Tantric saying. To this extent, it is not an approach of withdrawal from the modern world which Evola advocates, but instead achieving a mastery of the forces of darkness and materialism inherent in the Kali Yuga. Similarly, his attitude to politics alters here from that expressed in Men Among the Ruins, calling instead for a type of individual that is apoliteia.
"[...] this type can only feel disinterested and detached from everything that is 'politics' today. His principle will become apoliteia, as it was called in ancient times. [...] Apoliteia is the distance unassailable by this society and its 'values'; it does not accept being bound by anything spiritual or moral."[20]
In addition to Evola’s main corpus of texts mentioned previously, he also published numerous other works such as The Way of the Samurai, The Path of Enlightenment According to the Mithraic Mysteries, Il Cammino del Cinabro, Taoism: The Magic, The Mysticism and The Bow and the Club. He also translated Oswald Spengler's Decline of the West, as well as the principle works of Bachofen, Guénon, Weininger and Gabriel Marcel.
In 1945 Evola was hit by a stray bomb and paralyzed from the waist downwards. He died on June 11, 1974 in Rome. He had asked to be led from his desk to the window from which one could see the Janiculum (the holy hill sacred to Janus, the two-faced god who gazes into this and the other world), to die in an upright position. After his death the body was cremated and his ashes were scattered in a glacier atop Mount Rosa, in accordance with his wishes.

Gwendolyn Taunton is the editor and sole founder of Primordial Traditions. This article is reprinted from Primordial Traditions (second edition).


[1] Julius Evola, The Yoga of Power, Shakti, and the Secret Way (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1992) ix
[2] ibid., x
[3] Julius Evola, Introduction to Magic: Rituals and Practical Techniques for the Magus (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001) ix
[4] ibid., xvii
[5] A. James Gregor, Mussolini's Intellectuals (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005)
[6] ibid., 201
[7] Julius Evola, Introduction to Magic: Rituals and Practical Techniques for the Magus (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001) xxi
[8] Julius Evola, The Hermetic Tradition: Symbols and Teaching of the Royal Art (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1992) ix
[9] ibid., ix
[10] ibid., viii
[11] Julius Evola, The Yoga of Power, Shakti, and the Secret Way (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1992) xii
[12] ibid., xiv
[13] ibid., xiii
[14] Julius Evola, The Doctrine of the Awakening: The Attainment of Self-Mastery According to the Earliest Buddhist Texts (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1992) xi
[15] ibid., xv
[16] Julius Evola, The Mystery of the Grail: Initiation and Magic in the Quest for the Spirit (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1997) vii
[17] ibid., ix
[18] Julius Evola, Eros and the Mysteries of Love: The Metaphysics of Sex (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1991) 2
[19] Julius Evola, Men Among the Ruins: Post-War Reflections of a Radical Traditionalist (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2003) 89
[20] Julius Evola, Ride the Tiger: A Survival Manual for Aristocrats of the Soul (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2003) 174-175

jeudi, 10 juillet 2014

Conversación sin complejos con el "Último Gibelino"


Tradición y Sabiduría Universal

Conversación sin complejos con el "Último Gibelino":

Julius Evola

entrevista de Enrico de Boccard

Ex: http://paginatransversal.wordpress.com

La Página Transversal recoge este texto, publicado en su día por la ya desaparecida, pero siempre recomendable revista de Fernando Márquez, El Zurdo, "El Corazón del Bosque", en su número doble 16/17 (Otoño 97 - Invierno 98), por su indudable interés. Cuestiones tales como: sexo, psicoanálisis, satanismo, contestación y otras, tratadas desde la particular cosmovisión de Julius Evola (1898-1974).

La presente entrevista, rescatada por nuestro colaborador Gianni Donaudi (que también nos ha facilitado unos datos de introducción), se publicó en la revista erótico/intelectual "PLAYMEN" en enero del 70. "PLAYMEN" era propiedad de la edirtora Adelina Tattilo, políticamente cercana al PSI/PSU, quien, apoyándose en el radicalizante Attilio Battistini como director de la publicación, buscó (al menos en el plano cultural) dar amplio espacio a autores de muy diferente tendencia política e ideológica.

Eran los años de la contestación y, tras el espontaneísmo inicial del 68, donde los enemigos principales eran el capitalismo, el consumismo (según la definición de Marcuse y Fromm) y el dominio americano sobre el planeta, se llegó, a través de infiltrados demoliberales (a veces situados por los mismos americanos) a reducir la lucha contestataria en términos exclusivamente "antifascistas", colocando el anticapitalismo en un segundo plano (como lúcidamente analizaban las publicaciones de signo internacionalista y bordiguista). Una estrategia que dura hasta hoy, sobre todo gracias a la obra de la izquierda chic, virtual, políticamente correcta.

A pesar de esto, Adelina Tattilo, en coherencia con su radicalismo extremo, no sólo aceptó la entrevista con Evola sino que se enorgullecía de la misma, por protagonirala alguien que sabía escribir, sin importar su procedencia.

El periodista que entrevistó a Evola fue Enrico de Boccard (1921-1981)quien, también para "PLAYMEN", había escrito una hermosa semblanza sobre Céline. Boccard era un ex-oficial de la Guardia Nacional Republicana (de Saló) y fue autor del libro, en parte autobiográfico, Donne e mitra (reeditado recientemente con el título Le donne non ci vogliono piu bene. Por cierto,Boccard no fue el único vinculado a la República Social Italiana que colaboró con "PLAYMEN". También lo hicieron Giose Rimanelli, autor de Tiro al piccione (obra adaptada al cine en el 61 por el director filosocialista Giuliano Montaldo -autor, entre otros films, de Sacco e Vanzetti y Giordano Bruno-), que en la postguerra se acercaría a los comunistas y más tarde involucionaría a la derecha; y Mario Gandini, autor de La caduta di Varsavia (obra sobre sus recuerdos de guerra en el Este y la RSI).

Por razones de espacio, hemos seleccionado los fragmentos que consideramos más interesantes y válidos según la perspectiva corazonesca, y como toque metalingüístico quasi felliniano (habida cuenta de buena parte de la temática de la entrevista), resulta procedente señalar la publicidad que la acompañaba: un vibrador ("novitá della Svezia" en dos modelos -con una y dos velocidades-), un catálogo ilustrado de productos estimulantes (escribir a la empresa sueca "Ekberg Int.") y unos potingues vigorizantes (incluido el, por entonces, mítico Gerovital de la doctora rumana Aslan, así como polen -también "della Svezia"- ideal para... los males de próstata-).

En el último piso de un viejo edificio del centro de Roma vive su intensa jornada uno de los últimos hombres verdaderamente libres en un tiempo en que la libertad se ha convertido en un lujo que se paga cada día, personal y colectivamente, siempre más caro. Este hombre, que ha sobrepasado no hace mucho los setenta años de una existencia riquísima en experiencias intelectuales, artísticas y personales, marcado contsantemente por el signo del más declarado y valeroso anticonformismo, tiene un nombre de resonancia mundial, pese a que la llamada "cultura oficial" italiana, tanto en el Ventennio fascista como después, siempre ha procurado por todos los medios de sofocarlo con una impenetrable cortina de silencio. Este hombre es el filósofo y escritor Julius Evola, autor de unos treinta libros nada superfluos, "revolucionario conservador" por temperamento y por trayectoria. Julius Evola: un aristócrata del espíritu más que de la sangre, que gusta definirse a sí mismo como "el Último Gibelino".

Pregunta - Es bien conocido que usted concede raramente entrevistas y le agradecemos, en nombre de nuestros lectores, por el privilegio gentilmente concedido. Por otra parte, usted es un escritor, un estudioso dotado de tal doctrina y preparación, y con tal bagaje de experiencias que nos encontramos un poco embarazados en el momento de plantearle preguntas, las cuales son tantas en nuestra mente como vasto es el campo de sus intereses (metafísica, crítica de la política, historia de las religiones, orentalismo, etc.). Trataremos de restringirnos a los argumentos que consideramos puedan interesar más a los lectores de la revista o que presenten un carácter de actualidad. Empecemos con una obra, recientemente reeditada (y también con dos ediciones francesas y otra alemana), sistemática y sugestiva, Metafísica del sexo (hay edición en castellano). Usted precisa, a propósito del título, haber usado el término "metafísica" en un doble sentido. ¿Puede aclararnos esto? Respuesta - El primer sentido es el corriente en filosofía, donde por metafísica se entiende una búsqueda de los principios o significados últimos. Una metafísica del sexo será, por tanto, el estudio de lo que, desde un punto de vista absoluto, significa el eros y la atracción de los sexos. En segundo lugar, por metafísica se puede entender una exploración en el campo de lo que no es físico, de lo que está más allá de lo físico. Es unpunto esencial de mi búsqueda el sacar a la luz lo que el eros y la experiencia del sexo supone de trascendencia de los aspectos físicos, carnales, biológicos y también pasionales o convencionalmente sentimentales o "ideales" del amor. Esta dimensión más profunda fue considerada en otro tiempo, en múltiples tradiciones, y constituye el presupuesto para un posible uso "sacro", místico, mágico y evocatorio del sexo; pero ello también influye en muchos actos del amor profano, revelándose a través de una variedad de signos que yo he tratado de individuar sistemáticamente. En mi libro señalo también cómo hoy, en una inversió quasidemoníaca, cierto psicoanálisis resalta una primordialidad infrapersonal del sexo, y opongo a esta primordialidad otra, de carácter "metafísico" o trascendente, pero no por esto menos real y elemental, de la que la anterior sería la degradación propia de un tipo humano inferior.

P - Usted también ha afrontado el problema del sexo sobre el terreno de la costumbre y de la ética, y siempre de manera anticonformista. ¿Qué piensa, por tanto, de lo que hoy se denomina "revolución sexual"?

R - A mí, qué cosa significa esta "revolución" no lo veo nada claro. Parece que se busca la absoluta libertad sexual, la completa superación de toda represión social sexófoba y de toda inhibición interna. Pero aquí hay un gravísimo malentendido, debido a las instancias llamadas "democráticas". Una libertad semejante no puede reivindicarse para todos: solamente pocos se la pueden permitir, no por privilegio sino porque, para no ser destructiva, hace falta una personalidad bien formada. En particular, el problema debe ser situado en modo distinto para el hombre y para la mujer, insisto, no por prejuicio sino por el distinto significado que la experiencia erótica, la auténtica e intensa, tiene para la mujer. Justamente Nietzsche había indicado que la "corrupción" (aquí, la "libertad sexual") puede ser un argumento sólo para quien no puede permitírsela, por ejemplo, para quienes no pueden hacer suyo el principio de querer sólo las cosas a las cuales también son capaces de renunciar.

La "revolución sexual" en clave democrática comporta, pues, una consecuencia gravísima, hacer del sexo una especie de género corriente, de consumo de masas, lo que significa necesariamente banalizarlo, superficializarlo, acabando en un insípido "naturalismo". En otro libro mío, "L´Arco e la Clava" ("El Arco y la Clava", existe traducción al castellano), he mostrado cómo las nuevas reivindicaciones sexuales son paralelas a una concepción siempre más primitiva de la sensualidad por parte de sus principales teóricos, a partir de Reich. Un caso particular es la falta de pudor femenina, vinculada con similares propuestas antirepresivas. A fuerza de ver mujeres desnudas o casi en espectáculos teatrales y cinematográficos, en locales porno, en top-less, etc, este desnudo acaba por convertirse en una banalidad que poco a poco dejará de producir efecto, al margen de los directamente dictados por el primitivo impulso biológico. Este impudor debería ser despreciado no desde el punto de vista de la "virtud" sino del exactamente opuesto. Por ese camino se puede llegar a un resultado de "naturalidad" e indiferencia sexual mucho mayor al soñado por cualquier sociedad puritana. (...)

P - De su exposición, parece que su juicio sobre el psicoanálisis sea negativo (...)

R - Evidentemente que no puedo profundizar exhaustivamente en esta argumentación. Pero sí señalaré que ante todo ha de relativizarse la idea de que el psicoanálisis descubre por vez primera la dimensión subterránea del Yo, el subconsciente y el inconsciente psíquico. Ya antes de Freud la psicología occidental, conectada con la fenomenología de la hipnosis y del histerismo, había prestado atención sobre este "subsuelo" del alma. Bastante más profundamente, y en muy diversa amplitud, ello estaba considerado en Oriente desde siglos, gracias al Yoga y técnicas análogas. El psicoanálisis puede ser una psicoterapia, y ofrecer resultados singulares en un plano clínico especializado. Pero no más: en su esncia es una concepción absolutamente desviada y mutilada del ser humano. Al colocar la verdadera fuerza motriz del hombre sobre el plano del inconsciente infrapersonal e instintivo, Freud concretamente bajo el signo de la libido, niega la existencia de un superior principio consciente, autónomo y soberano, porque en su lugar pone cualquier cosa del exterior, el llamado SuperYo, que sería una construcción social y el producto de la asunción de formas inhibitorias creadas por el ambiente o las estructuras sociales. Ello equivale a decir que el psicoanálisis niega en el hombre lo que lo hace verdaderamente tal, y su imagen, la cual querría aplicar al hombre de manera genérica, o es una mixtificación o vale únicamente para un tipo humano dividido, neurótico, espiritualmente inconsistente. Es bien posible que el éxito del psicoanálisis sea debido a la gran difusión que en la época moderna ha tenido este tipo. Como praxis y como tendencia, el psicoanálisis propicia esencialmente aperturas hacia abajo y significa una capitulación más o menos explícita de todo lo que es verdadera personalidad. La posible existencia de un "superconsciente", opuesto al "inconsciente", luminoso frente a lo turbio y "elemental" es ignorada por completo. (...)

P - Ha mencionado antes a Wilhelm Reich. Queremos conocer su opinión sobre su persona y su obra. ¿Reich le parece un estudioso serio o un exaltado? ¿Y qué piensa de las aplicaciones de los principios de él y de sus seguidores en el plano sociológico y político/sociológico, de sus denuncias de los sistemas "autoritarios"?

wilhelmreich.jpgR - Reich me parece afectado por una variedad de paranoia. Su mérito es haber intuido que en el sexo existe algo trascendente, más allá de lo individual. Ello concuerda con las enseñanzas de múltiples tradiciones. pero esta intuición está muy desviada. No debe decirse que el sexo es algo trascendente, sino que en ello se manifiesta (potencialmente y en ciertas circunstancias, incluso hoy día) algo trascendente, que como tal no pertenece al plano físico. Este elemento Reich lo concibe en términos materialistas como una energía natural, como la electricidad o algo así, al punto que, como "energía orgónica", ha buscado dotarla (gastando verdaderos capitales) de sustancia física, construyendo finalmente "condensadores" de la misma. Todo esto no son sino divagaciones. A lo que hemos de añadir una "teoría de la salvación", en cuanto que Reich ve en la obstrucción de dicha energía la cuas de todos los males, individuales y sociales (hasta el mismo cáncer) y, en su completa y desenfrenada explicación, el orgasmo sexual integral como una especie de medicina universal, presupuesto para un orden social sin tensiones, armonioso, pacífico.

Es interesante detenernos un momento sobre el presupuesto de esta concepción, porque así podremos comprender las aplicaciones político/sociales de los reichianos. Freud en su madurez había admitido la existencia, junto al impulso de placer, la libido, de un opuesto, el instinto de destrucción (o "de muerte"). Reich niega esta dualidad y deduce el segundo instinto, el destructivo, del impulso único de placer. Cuando este instinto resulta impedido o "bloqueado", nacería una tensión, una angustia y sobre todo una especie de "rabia", de furia destructiva (en caso de no tomar la vía del "principio del nirvana": una evasión, una fuga de la vida). Este impulso destructivo (y agresivo) cuando se vuelve contra sí, da al hombre la orientación masoquista, y cuando se dirige a los otros, al orientación sádica.

De todo ello resulta en primer lugar que sadismo y masoquismo serían fenómenos patológicos, causados por la represión sexual. Lo que es una estupidez: existen ciertamente formas de sadismo y masoquismo vinculadas a la psicopatología sexual (según el concepto normal, no ya psicoanalítico), pero también existe un sadismo (masculino) y un masoquismo (femenino) como elementos constitucionales intrínsecos y en un cierto modo normales en toda experiencia erótica intensa. De hecho, esta experiencia tiene siempre algo de destructivo y autodestructivo (por las relaciones, múltiplemente demostradas, entre voluntad y muerte, entre la divinidad del amor y la divinidad de la muerte); y es en este aspecto que se piensa cuando, en ciertas escuelas, se cree que el clímax adecuadamente conducido puede tener, en su momento "fulgurante", algo que destruye por un momento los límites de la conciencia mortal individual. Pues bien, con la concepción de Reich, toda esta intensidad desaparece, y la consecuencia es una concepción pálida, blandamente dionisíaca, o idílica (como en Marcuse) de la sexualidad: es una de las paradojas de la llamada "revolución sexual".

No menos absurda es, en particular, la deducción de la agresividad por la inhibición del impulso primordial del sexo a cristalizar en un orgasmo completo, según la cual, cuando la obstrucción remite (en el individuo o en una sociedad "permisiva" y no "represiva" o "patriarcal") no habrá más agresividad, guerra, violencia, etc; lo que viene al mismo tiempo a decir que todo lo que hace referencia a actitudes guerreras, de conquista (en la jerga moderna, de "agresión") tendrñia la represión sexual por causa y origen. Ante esto, sólo puedo reír. La actitud agresiva es en primer lugar comprobada en los animales, evidentemente no sometidos a tabúes sexófobos y "patriarcales". En segundo lugar ya el mito ha indicado el perfecto acuerdo entre Marte y Venus, y la historia nos muestra como todos los más grandes conquistadores carecían de complejos de frustración sexual y hacían un libre y amplío uso del sexo. En la práctica, la consecuencia de la teoría de Reich es un ataque contra elementos fundamentales congénitos en todo tipo "viril" de humanidad o ser humano, que son presentados grotescamente en clave de patología sexual.

En cuanto a las conclusiones político/sociales. Proyectada sobre ese plano, la tendencia masoquista daría lugar al tipo del gregario, de aquel que gusta de servir y obedecer, que se pone al servicio de un jefe, con o sin "culto a la personalidad", y está siempre dispuesto a sacrificarse. La tendencia sádica daría lugar al tipo del dominador, de quien ejercita una autoridad, autoridad evidentemente concebida en los exclusivos términos parasexuales de una libido. De la unión de estas dos tendencias nacerían las estructuras "autoritarias" y "fascistas". Una vez más, se deforman grotescamente los datos reales de la conciencia. Del obedecer y del mandar pueden darse desviaciones. Pero, en general, se trata de disposiciones normales: existe una autoridad que tiene por contrapartida una superioridad, como existe una obediencia debida no a un servilismo masoquista sino al orgullo de seguir libremente a gentes a quienes se reconoce una superioridad. Así, mientras por un parte Reich proclama una mística mesiánica del abandono integral al orgasmo, al mismo tiempo ello actúa como preciosas coartadas para un puro anarquismo.

P - En relación con el asesinato de la actriz Sharon Tate y otros se ha hablado de "satanismo" y en los periódicos hoy se insiste en buscar conexiones entre sexo, magia y satanismo. ¿Nos puede aclarar esto?

R - En principio, existen conexiones posibles entre magia y sexo. Considerando la dimensión "trascendente" del sexo, a la que ya me he referido, se recoge en diversas tradiciones que por medio de la unión sexual conducida de determinado modo y con una orientación particular es posible destilar energías y usarlas mágicamente. La continuidad de estas tradiciones hasta un tiempo relativamente reciente es testimoniada, entre otros, en un libro, Magia sexualis de P. B. Randolph. Un ejemplo ulterior lo constituyen las prácticas mágico/sexuales y orgiásticas de Aleister Crowley, figura interesante que, por desgracia, se suele presentar con los colores más "negros" posibles. Pero en este campo se debe distinguir entre las mixtificaciones y lo que tiene un valor auténtico y una realidad. Ante todo ha de verse, por ejemplo, si se hace el amor para hacer magia o si se hace magia (o pseudomagia) para hacer el amor, o sea, si se usa la magia como un pretexto para montar orgías o para darle al acto un aire más excitante. Es cierto también que existe una tercera posibilidad, la de usar medios siríamos "secretos" con el concurso de fuerzas suprasensibles para dar un particular desarrollo paroxístico a la experiencia del coito, sin forzar por ello la naturaleza: esta vía es algo extremadamente peligroso, por razones que no viene al caso indicar ahora.

En cuanto al "satanismo" señalaré que donde predomina un clima "sexófobo" (como en el cristianismo) es fácil calificar de "diabólico" todo lo que suponga potenciar la experiencia sexual. Más genéricamente, es obvio que un "satán" existe sólo en las religiones donde ello es la contraparte "oscura" de un Dios con características "morales"; cuando como vértice del universo, en vez de Dios, se pone una "Potestad" como tal superior y más allá del bien y del mal, evidentemente un "Satán" a la cristiana no es concebible. Hay lugar sólo para la idea de una fuerza cósmica destructora, presente en el mundo y en la vida, en lo sensible y lo suprasensible, al lado de las fuerzas creadoras y conservadoras, como la "otra mitad" del Absoluto. Y existen tradicones sacras -la más característica es la tántrico/shivaica- que tienen por objeto asumir esa fuerza, diversamente concebida. Característica es la llamada "Vía de la Mano Izquierda", donde, por ejemplo, el uso de la mujer, de sustancias embriagadoras y eventualmente de la orgía, se asocia a una moral del "más allá del bien y del mal" que haría palidecer de envidia al "superhombre" Nietzsche. De dicha vía, que algunos timoratos occidentales han calificado como la "peor de las magias negras" he hablado en mi libro Lo Yoga della Potenza. Pero el punto importante es que en sus formas auténticas tales prácticas están concebidas en los mismos términos del Yoga, y no son elementos disociados, como los hippies americanos, quienes pueden permitírselas. Volvemos aquí, pero aumentadas, a poner las mismas reservas que he hecho acerca de la "revolución sexual" y sus reivindicaciones. En las tradiciones la base para darse a estas prácticas está constituida por una disciplina de autodominio profundo similar a la de los ascetas, tras una regular "iniciación".

P - Pasando a un campo distinto pero en parte relacionado, me llama la atención cómo en algunos libros históricos o pseudohistóricos sobre el III Reich hitleriano se habla de un fondo oculto, mágico/tenebroso, del nacionalsocialismo alemán. ¿Puede decime brevemente qué le parece este argumento?

R - Para quien busque los supuestos trasfondos "ocultos" del III Reich, el argumento me llevaría más allá de los límites en los cuales estoy manteniendo esta entrevista. Me limitaré a decir que, como persona que ha tenido oportunidad de conocer bastante de cerca la situación del III Reich, puedo declarar que se trata de puras fantasías, y así se lo dije a Louis Pauwels, quien en su libro El retorno de los brujos ha contribuido a defender tales rumores; él vino una vez a conocerme, hablamos y en ningún momento me presentó dato alguno mínimamente serio que apoyase su tesis. Se puede hablar no de "iniciático" sino de "demoniaco", en un sentido general, en el caso de todo movimiento que en base a una fanatización de las masas creer cualquier cosa cuyo centro será el jefe demagógico que produce esta especie de hipnosis colectiva usando tal o cual mito. Dicho fenómeno no está relacionado con lo "mágico" o con lo "oculto", aunque tenga un fondo tenebroso. Es un fenómeno recurrente en la Historia, por ejemplo, la Revolución Francesa o (en parte) el maoísmo.

P - Usted es autor de una obra considerada como fundamental por cuantos siguen atentamente su actividad, Revuelta contra el mundo moderno. Se afirma por muchos que usted, con este libro (publicado por vez primera en 1934), anticipó en varios lustros las visiones, hoy tan en boga, expresadas por Marcuse. En otras palabras, desde posiciones absolutamente distintas a la del profesor germano/americano, usted habría sido el primero en tomar postura contra "el sistema". ¿Le parece válida esta comparación con Marcuse? Y, de otra parte, ¿dado el papel que Marcuse tiene en las actuales formas de "contestación" juvenil contra el mundo moderno, qué significado y qué imagen tiene para usted este movimiento contestatario?

R - En verdad, como precedentes de Marcuse, y planteando cosas bastante más interesantes, muchos otros autores deberían ser nombrados: un Tocqueville, un John Stuart Mill, un A. Siegfried, el mismo Donoso Cortés, en parte Ortega y Gasset, sobre todo Nietzsche, y aún más el insigne escritor tradicionalista francés René Guenón, especialmente en su Crisis del mundo moderno que yo traduje al italiano en su momento. A finales del siglo pasado Nietzsche había previsto uno de los rasgos destacados de las tesis de Marcuse, con las breves, incisivas frases dedicadas al "último hombre": "próximo está el tiempo del más despreciable de los hombres, que no sabe más que despreciarse a sí mismo", "el último hombre de la raza pululante y tenaz", "nosotros hemos inventado la felicidad, dicen, satisfechos, los últimos hombres", que han abandonado "la región donde la vida es dura". Y esta es la esencia de la "civilización de masas, del consumo y del bienestar" pero también la única que el mismo Marcuse ve como perspectiva en términos positivos, cuando los desarrollos ulteriores de la técnica unidos a una cultura de transposición y sublimación de los instintos habrán sustraído a los hombres de los "condicionamientos" del actual sistema y de su "principio de prestación". La relación con mi libro no es tal porque, en primer lugar, el contenido de éste no corresponde con el título: no es mi obra de naturaleza polémica, sino una "morfología de la civilización", una interpretación general de la Historia en términos no "progresistas", de evolución, sino más bien de involución, indicando sobre estas premisas el nacimiento y el declive del mundo moderno. Sólo por caminos naturales y consecuentes se propone una "revuelta" a los lectores y, más concretamente, tras un estudio comparado de las más diversas civilizaciones, he procurado indicar lo que en diversos dominios de la existencia puede reivindicar un carácter de norma en sentido ascendente: el Estado, la ley, la acción, la concepción de la vida y de la muerte, lo sagrado, las relaciones sociales, la ética, el sexo, la guerra, etc. Esta es la primera diferencia fundamental respecto a las diversas contestaciones de hoy: no se limita a decir "no", sino que indica en nombre de qué debe decirse "no", aquello que puede verdaderamente justificar el "no". Y un "no" auténticamente radical, que no se restrinja a los aspectos últimos del mundo moderno, a la "sociedad de consumo", a la tecnocracia y demás, sino mucho más profundo, denunciando las causas, considerando los procesos que han ejercido desde hace tanto tiempo una acción destructiva sobre todos los valores, ideales y formas de organización superior de la existencia. Todo esto ni Marcuse ni los "contestatarios" en general lo han hecho: no tienen la capacidad ni el coraje. En particular, la sociología de Marcuse es absolutamente rechazable, determinada por un grosero freudismo con tonalidades reichianas. Así, no resulta extraño que sean tan escuálidos e insípidos los ideales que se proponen para la sociedad que siga a la "contestación" y a la superación del llamado "sistema".

Naturalmente, quien comprenda el orden de ideas expuesto en mi libro no puede permitirse el menor optimismo. Por ahora encuentro solamente posible una acción de defensa individual interior. Es así que en otro libro mío, Cabalgar el tigre, he procurado señalar las orientaciones existenciales que debería seguir un tipo humano diferenciado en una época de disolución como la actual. En él, he dado particular relieve al principo de la "conversión del veneno en medicina", según la medida en que, a partir de una cierta orientación interior, de experiencias y procesos mayormente destructivos se puede extraer cierta forma de liberación y autosuperación. Es una vía peligrosa pero posible. (...)

(entrevista: Enrico de Boccard)
(traducción: Fernando Márquez. Página "Linea de Sombra")

Nota de la Página Transversal:
Existen traducciones al castellano de todas las obras mencionadas en el texto.
Evola, Julius. Metafísica del sexo. Col. Sophia Perennis. José J. de Olañeta, Editor. Palma de Mallorca, 1997.
- El arco y la clava. Ediciones Heracles, Buenos Aires, 1999.
-El yoga tántrico. Un camino para la realización del cuerpo y el espíritu. Madrid, Edaf, 1991.
- Rebelión contra el mundo moderno. Ediciones Heracles, Buenos Aires, 1994.
- Cabalgar el tigre. Ediciones Heracles, Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, 1999.
Guenon, René. La crisis del mundo moderno. Ed. Obelisco, Barcelona, 1987
Pauwels, Louis; Bergier, Jacques. El retorno de los brujos. Plaza & Janés, Barcelona, 1971.

mercredi, 18 juin 2014

Chaliand: le temps des héros

Cette anthologie, sans équivalent par son ampleur, offre un vaste aperçu des épopées, chants et récits les plus célèbres, contés ou écrits à travers les temps. De L’Épopée de Gilgamesh, la plus ancienne de l’histoire de l’humanité, aux Lusiades des avancées maritimes portugaises qui découvrirent des ” étoiles nouvelles “, elle retrace cinq mille ans de légendes et mythes fondateurs des civilisations : œuvres majeures comme Le Livre des rois (Perse) ou le Mahâbhârata (Inde), Le Dit des Heiké (Japon) et d’autres moins connues, issues de Russie, du Caucase, des Balkans, de Chine, du Vietnam, d’Orient ou d’Afrique. Le genre épique, que précèdent seulement les textes sacrés, se trouve à la source de la plupart des grandes littératures universelles. Création presque toujours anonyme, il relate, au sens propre, des faits dignes d’être contés. Conçu à des époques où la force physique et, d’une façon générale, les vertus martiales étaient à la fois hautement prisées et nécessaires, il est centré sur la figure du héros. Gratifié d’une naissance hors du commun, presque toujours doté d’une force surnaturelle ou bénéficiant de vertus magiques, le héros s’affirme à travers une série d’épreuves. Luttant contre le chaos, il restaure l’ordre et succombe de façon tragique. Tel est, si l’on s’en tient aux grandes lignes, le destin du héros épique. Il n’est pas étonnant que Gérard Chaliand, grand reporter, homme d’aventures et d’expériences fortes, se passionne de longue date pour la littérature épique. Son propre itinéraire n’a cessé de l’entraîner sur les grandes routes du monde, où il a croisé quelques-unes de ces figures héroïques dont ses lectures d’enfance lui avaient déjà donné un avant-goût.

Ex: http://zentropaville.tumblr.com

dimanche, 15 juin 2014


L’opposition entre la culture occidentale prônant le libre arbitre et l’obligation de se donner la mort en mission commandée a ouvert la porte à l’irrationalité et au romantisme. Leur dernière nuit était un déchirement, mais tous ont su trouver la force de sourire avant le dernier vol. Kasuga Takeo (86 ans), dans une lettre au docteur Umeazo Shôzô, apporte un témoignage exceptionnel sur les dernières heures des kamikazes : « Dans le hall où se tenait leur soirée d’adieu la nuit précédant leur départ, les jeunes étudiants officiers buvaient du saké froid. Certains avalaient le saké en une gorgée, d’autres en engloutissaient une grande quantité. Ce fut vite le chaos. Il y en avait qui cassaient des ampoules suspendues avec leurs sabres. D’autres qui soulevaient les chaises pour casser les fenêtres et déchiraient les nappes blanches. Un mélange de chansons militaires et de jurons emplissaient l’air. Pendant que certains hurlaient de rage, d’autres pleuraient bruyamment. C’était leur dernière nuit de vie. Ils pensaient à leurs parents et à la femme qu’ils aimaient….Bien qu’ils fussent censés être prêts à sacrifier leur précieuse jeunesse pour l’empire japonais et l’empereur le lendemain matin, ils étaient tiraillés au-delà de toute expression possible…Tous ont décollé au petit matin avec le bandeau du soleil levant autour de la tête. Mais cette scène de profond désespoir a rarement été rapportée. »

Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney, Kamikazes, Fleurs de cerisier et Nationalismes, éditions Hermann, 2013, 580 p., 38 euros.

Ex: http://zentropaville.tumblr.com

jeudi, 12 juin 2014

Qu’est-ce que l’Imperium ?


Qu’est-ce que l’Imperium?

par Charles Mallet

Ex: http://lheurasie.hautetfort.com

Cela fait déjà quelques années que les milieux nationalistes et eurasiens, notamment au sein de la « Nouvelle Droite », se réapproprient la notion d’imperium comme moyen de la restauration/fondation et de la pérennité de l’Europe-Nation ou Europe-Puissance. Cette notion est souvent confondue avec celle d’ « Empire », pour la simple et bonne raison qu’elle en est étymologiquement la racine. Cependant, il conviendrait de clarifier ce qu’est l’imperium, afin d’en appréhender toutes les potentialités, qui dépassent la simple perspective d’un « empire » au sens commun du terme (c’est-à-dire au sens d’une structure politique supranationale).
La notion d’imperium prend corps dans l’Antiquité romaine, plus précisément à l’époque républicaine (schématiquement comprise entre 509 et 31 av. J.-C.). Etymologiquement, il vient d’« ordonner », « préparer pour ». Il s’agit d’un pouvoir souverain délégué aux consuls, préteurs et à certains gouverneurs de province, par les dieux dont la volonté était censée se manifester au travers du peuple dans le vote des assemblées (élisant les magistrats). L’imperium est donc un pouvoir souverain (c’est-à-dire ne reconnaissant pas de supérieur temporel) d’ordonner et de juger, symbolisé par les faisceaux (haches entourées de verges portées par les licteurs).
Le titulaire d’un imperium pouvait être désigné sous le terme d’imperator (chef militaire victorieux –souvent consul-, ayant droit à ce titre à un triomphe à Rome). Sous la République, l’imperium était néanmoins un pouvoir limité dans le temps et dans l’espace. De plus, il subissait la concurrence d’autres pouvoirs comme la puissance tribunicienne (tribunitia potestas rendant sacrosainte la personne des tribuns chargés de représenter et de défendre la Plèbe de Rome). Les guerres civiles de la fin de la République (de 88 à 31 av. J.-C.), voyant différents imperatores se disputer l’exclusivité de l’imperium (Marius, Sylla, César, Pompée, Octave-Auguste, Antoine)débouchent finalement sur l’avènement de l’Etat Impérial (à partir du règne d’Auguste de 27 av. J.-C. à 14 de notre ère) dans lequel tous les pouvoirs sont accolés à un imperium permanent entre les mains d’un seul homme : le césar auguste imperator. Imperator devient un surnom, un nom puis un prénom des empereurs, uniques détenteurs de l’imperium.
A ce stade, un certain nombre d’erreurs ne doivent plus être commises : L’imperium n’est pas l’ « Empire ». Si « Imperium » a bien donné « Empire », les romains n’ont pas eu de mots pour décrire précisément le système impérial en tant que système de gouvernement en soi, ou comme territoire. Rome et son Empire sont restés malgré la fin du système républicain la Res Publica. L’imperium est donc un type de pouvoir, et non un système politique ou un territoire, du moins à l’origine. De même, « imperator » ne désigne la fonction d’empereur que tardivement, l’imperator étant avant tout un chef de guerre victorieux.
L’empire romain : un imperium euro-méditerranéen permanent
imp1.jpgA ce titre, ce concept est à l’image de la culture politique et de la pratique du pouvoir des Empereurs Romains : souple, pragmatique, concrète. Il en va de même de la nature du pouvoir impérial, difficile à appréhender et à définir, puisque construit par empirisme (sa nature monarchique n’est cependant pas contestable). En plus de quatre siècles, le pouvoir impérial a su s’adapter aux situations les plus périlleuses (telle la « crise » du IIIe siècle). Rien de commun en effet entre le principat augustéen, système dans lequel l’empereur est le princeps, le prince, primus inter pares, c’est-à-dire premier entre ses pairs de l’aristocratie sénatoriale ; la tétrarchie de Dioclétien (284-305), partage du pouvoir entre quatre empereurs hiérarchisés et l’empire chrétien de Constantin (306-337), dans lesquels l’empereur est le dominus, le maître.

Le système impérial s’accompagne d’une idéologie confortant la souveraineté suprême de l’Empereur. L’empereur est sacrosaint (il a accaparé la puissance tribunitienne). Il doit assurer la paix (la fameuse pax romana inaugurée par Auguste), assurer le retour à l’âge d’or, il bénéficie de la protection des dieux (ou de Dieu, dont il est le comes, le comte –ou compagnon- sur terre, à partir de Constantin) et d’un charisme divin (c’est là tout le sens du titre d’Augustus). Il doit posséder les vertus de justice, de clémence, de piété, de dévouement à l’Etat. Au-delà de cela, il doit corréler respect des traditions et nécessité de fédérer un empire constitué d’une myriade de cités au passé prestigieux et attachées à leur indépendance. En cela, les empereurs romains n’ont point failli, comme le souligne Lucien Jerphagnon dans sa biographie d’Augustin : « Sur 3 300 000 km2 autour de la Méditerranée […] soixante à soixante-dix millions de gens s’affairent ou se laissent vivre, tous différents, avec leurs langues régionales, leurs dieux bien à eux. S’ils avaient plus ou moins renâclé à passer sous domination romaine, ils se trouvaient dans l’ensemble plutôt bien de la Pax Romana. Bref s’était instauré un universalisme qui n’effaçait rien des identités locales. Depuis Caracalla (212), […] on était citoyen romain tout en restant Africain, Syrien… ».
Si la nature de la fonction impériale a évoluée, son fondement est resté inchangé : un pouvoir souverain, transcendant, à la fois civil, militaire et religieux, soutenu par un charisme divin, un pouvoir surhumain, nivelant par le haut, ayant pour horizon la pax aeterna, écartant les prétentions des forces centrifuges, donnant une orientation commune à toutes les composantes d’une même koiné (communauté culturelle et politique), tout en préservant leurs identités profondes.
Pérennité du concept
La notion d’imperium recèle donc des potentialités multiples, et représente un projet valable pour la France et l’Europe que nous appelons de nos vœux. Elle n’est pas, contrairement à ce que l’on pourrait penser, un pur objet historique limité à l’histoire romaine, et dont le champ d’action concret s’arrêterait en 476 avec la chute de l’Empire d’Occident. En effet, la notion de souveraineté héritée de l’imperium a survécu en Europe sous une infinité de forme : Byzance, survivance de l’Empire d’Orient, de culture chrétienne orthodoxe et gréco-romaine, dont l’Empire russe s’est toujours vécu comme un héritier (« tsar » est un titre dérivé de celui de « césar ») ; Le Saint-Empire, chrétien catholique, germanique, issu de l’Empire Carolingien dont la vision était de faire renaître l’Empire Romain d’Occident, témoigne de la prégnance de l’idée d’Empire, y compris chez les barbares installés sur son territoire dans les dernières années de l’empire d’Occident. Charlemagne (Carolus Magnus) ne s’était-il pas fait couronné par le pape dans la ville même de Rome selon le rituel d’intronisation des empereurs (ou du souvenir qu’il en restait), n’a-t-il pas repris la symbolique impériale, en sommeil depuis la chute de l’Empire (orbe impériale, sceptre, couronne –issu du diadème impérial des empereurs tardifs, lui-même repris des rois helléniques-) ? Enfin, les royaumes « barbares », en premier lieu le royaume franc, ont eux aussi recueilli l’héritage de l’imperium romain et de la culture classique à travers l’Eglise. Les mérovingiens (ainsi que les ostrogoths, les wisigoths ou les burgondes), fascinés par le prestige impérial, ont tenté d’imiter le faste des empereurs (imitatio imperii). C’est cependant la monarchie française issue de l’éclatement de l’empire carolingien (Capétiens, Valois, Bourbons) qui sera –à notre sens- parmi les nations européennes la plus belle héritière de la tradition politique romaine. Les rois de France, notamment à partir des derniers capétiens (deuxième moitié du XIIIe siècle), nourris de la redécouverte du droit romain, vont affirmer le principe de souveraineté contre les puissances cherchant à la subjuguer ou à la faire éclater. Le pouvoir royal français comprend de nombreuses similitudes et d’emprunts à l’imperium romain : son côté surnaturel, total –ou plutôt absolu-, divin, la coexistence d’aspects civils, militaires, et religieux, certaines des regalia (l’orbe, la couronne…).
imp2.jpgAinsi, à l’éclatement politique de l’Europe au Moyen Âge et à l’époque Moderne a correspondu un éclatement du pouvoir souverain, de l’imperium. L’idée d’un pouvoir souverain fédérateur n’en n’a pas pour autant été altérée. Il en va de même de l’idée d’une Europe unie, portée par l’Eglise, porteuse première de l’héritage romain. Le regain d’intérêt que connait la notion d’imperium n’est donc pas le fruit d’une passion romantique pour l’antiquité européenne, mais la preuve qu’en rupture avec la conception moderne positiviste de l’histoire, nous regardons les formes d’organisations politiques passées comme autant d’héritages vivants et qu’il nous appartient de nous les réapproprier (les derniers empires héritiers indirects de la vision impériale issue de Rome ont respectivement disparu en 1917 –Empire Russe- et 1918 –Empire Austro-Hongrois et Empire Allemand-). Si ce court panorama historique ne peut prétendre rendre compte de la complexité du phénomène, de sa profondeur, et des nuances nombreuses que comporte l’histoire de l’idée d’imperium ou même de l’idée d’Empire, nous espérons avant tout avoir pu clarifier son origine et son sens afin d’en tirer pour la réflexion le meilleur usage possible. L’imperium est une forme du pouvoir politique souple et forte à la fois, capable de redonner du sens à l’idée de souveraineté, et d’articuler autorité politique continentale et impériale de l’Eurasisme avec les aspirations à la conservation des autonomies et des identités nationales portées par le Nationalisme ou même le Monarchisme. A l’heure où le démocratisme, les droits de l’homme, et le libéralisme entrent dans leur phase de déclin, il nous revient d’opposer une alternative cohérente et fédératrice et à opposer l’imperium au mondialisme.
Charles Mallet 

dimanche, 01 juin 2014

J. Evola: Metafisica del sesso e idealismo magico


samedi, 31 mai 2014

Tradizione e rivoluzione: intervista con Renato Del Ponte

Tradizione e rivoluzione: intervista con Renato Del Ponte

In occasione della scorsa festa nazionale di CasaPound Italia, il professor Renato del Ponte ci ha gentilmente concesso la presente intervita. Presente alla festa di CPI per presentare in anteprima un libro da lui curato su Adriano Romualdi e il periodo della contestazione negli anni '70: "Lettere ad un amico" Ed. Arya.
Il Professore è tornato per noi sul suo percorso universitario, metapolitico e culturale. Ha trattato del suo rapporto con Julius Evola, della sua visione del mondo, delle vie che l'uomo differenziato può ancora percorrere nella presente epoca di fine ciclo.
Un'intervista introduttiva per chi vuole conoscere il lavoro di chi ha dedicato le proprie energie a vivificare e trasmettere quella fiamma mai assopita nella nostra identità: la Tradizione Romana.
Questo è il nostro primo video in italiano.
Un ringraziamento alle sezioni di CasaPound Liguria e Cuneo per aver reso possibile il presente incontro.
I Non Allineati.
Inizio :
Dalla Tradizione allo studio delle religioni.
4 min 30 : 
L'incontro con Julius Evola. 
7 min 15 :
L'influenza e il ruolo di Evola.
15 min 59 :
Tradizione e politica