Now that I reflect on how the new-agers ruined Buddhism just as they did Sufism I remember there’s at least ONE trustable book on Buddhism on the market

What, he actually said that somewhere? As if Evola himself couldn’t be described as being all about mafia and church, yeah right. We need to do something about these goombas in the country, they cause all these problems.

Anyway, this text on Buddhism is abnormally interesting in that it was published in 1943. Evola didn’t publish another one until 1949, that one on Yoga.

Evola can be interpreted as a hermetic type of Luther. All the Catholicism around him was something alien to him. This drove him to both the western and eastern mystery traditions. I don’t know about the legitimacy of someone like Evola who uses such harmful ethnic stereotypes though – how callous and jaded can you get? Macaroni-eating? Italians really are like Jews though in the sense that they tend to be particularist and hostile to assimilation, so I don’t blame NW Euros for giving them the stinkeye. Sorry I’m not going to embrace your Saxon serf equality culture, that’s Moloch.

Isn’t it counter-intuitive though, that a self-described “superfascist”, near the end of WWII, published a book on… Buddhism?

Yes, exactly!

I was guilty of that at one time – (see my thoughts on Hesse here).

Evola turns the popular conception of the Buddha on its head. He drew from the earliest texts of Buddhism to get an idea of what the real guy was like. Siddhartha was a Ksatriya, i.e. member of the warrior-caste. “No, he was fat and jolly and sat around, in other words, the Buddha was American!”

Keep in mind the background here- Evola was one of the greatest practitioners of Nietzsche’s Revaluation of All Values

[its interpretation] as a mere moral code based on compassion, humanitarianism, and escape from life because life is ‘suffering,’ is absolutely extrinsic, profane, and superficial.

I WILL help free the World Religions from the liberal stranglehold.

Ooh this intro reminds me that this interpretation of Buddhism can be traced back to Schopenhauer. Eastern texts being in the west is more recent than people think. Schopenhauer had access only to a fragment of the Buddhist canon, and to top it off the translations were botched.

Wow, I never thought someone could make Buddhism seem cool to me again

The corresponding Indo-Aryan term [for asceticism] is tapas (tapa or tapo in Pāli)…from the root tap, which means “to be hot” or “to glow,” it also contains the idea of an intensive concentration, of glowing, almost of fire.
With the development of Western civilization, however, the term ascesis (or its derivatives) has, as we know, taken on a particular meaning that differs from the original. Not only has it assumed an exclusively religious sense, but from the general tone of the faith that has come to predominate among Western peoples, asceticism is bound up with ideas of mortification of the flesh and of painful renunciation of the world

Recall my post on Evola and asceticism here.

From the earliest beginnings of Christianity “asceticism” meant self-flagellation. Makes sense doesn’t it, Mr. Masoch?

Anyway, you won’t hear it from an academic so I always feel obliged to tell you for instance that the book in question is more or less a meditation on Nietzsche’s On the Genealogy of Morals, and many of Evola’s books are meditations on Nietzsche’s books, and in my opinion could be included as supplementary appendices in Nietzsche’s books and they’d clarify them 100x better than any postwar boilerplate that’s usually included. Evola isn’t a mere scholar either, he isn’t dogmatic about neech, he’s constantly tweaking him, attempting to enhance him.

Ah I feel like a jerk since it’s Easter and I’m talking about this. If you’re in a similar mood to me though, this is the best book I know of that shows profoundly striking resonances between Jesus and Siddhartha.

“Wasn’t Jaspers Esther’d though?” You’re not supposed to be a jerk on a holiday. His treatment of comparative religion is a lot less narcissistic than the typical leftist of today’s at least. “Wow I see my mainstream progressive views in Buddha, awesome! How could he have predicted the future that I was right about everything?”

Speaking of this narcissism, that’s why I don’t mind talking about the Buddha on Easter, because to progs “He is Risen” only means that corporate leftism can be crucified and it will be resurrected. “See, you rolled away the boulder and my rotting carcass wasn’t in there! We despicable levelers and minions of the devil are immortal!” Yes, your rotting carcass indeed was found in there, sorry.

I’m not going to knock Jesus on Easter! There’s a way of seeing him that’s similar to the Buddha here

There’s a subtlety here about the castes- to fight the pseudo-brahmana one must be a ksatriya-brahmin hybrid.

The narcissist lib interprets Siddhartha as dissolving the Hindu caste-system, when the earliest extant texts indicate that he was rearranging it to place the brahmana back on top.

Evola saw Siddhartha as belonging to the same part of the historical cycle as modern-day humanity (the Kali Yuga) and that we can thus learn from his Way.

If you recall this post about Myanmar Buddhism, Evola’s reading of Siddhartha as a warrior seems to be the only interpretation that reflects concrete contemporary reality.

How I choose to spend Easter

Iran- sovereign. Myanmar- sovereign. The Christian West- crucified. Perhaps Jesus can only be resurrected with some advice from his friends?

This is what they want the Buddha to be

Laugh about the Easter Bunny- most people’s interpretation of Jesus might as well have him in a bunny suit.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: