Manticore published another Bhatt. I have read only one of them before this one. The Nath religion is a current that exists within Hinduism, but is so universalistic in approach that also people of other faiths are involved. Nath even claims to have adherence of all castes.
Bhatt’s book is mostly a collection of hagiographies. One big soul after another gets a short biography. This is not entirely uninteresting, but these biographies do not say all too much the Nath religion.
Towards the end there are some “unknown tales of the Nath cult”.
Not a boring read, but I would have liked to read more about the religion itself and not just about the people involved.
It was a bit of a gamble to buy this A History of Esotericism – From the Paleolithic to the Axial Age with an approach somewhere between academic and spiritual. I was not really impressed.
The book is not much about esotericism. Rather it is a history of religion and philosophy. There does not appear anything new in the book, but perhaps on the positive side, neither did I encounter anything really incorrect or one sided. Kazlev presents a fairly down-to-earth history of human thinking. Here and there some of his preferences shine through, but overall the book is not bad.
Kazlev is not entirely dryly academic, but also not too ‘fluffy’. He starts many centuries in the past and ends with the Stoics of Greece. Perhaps there are plans for the second half of the story.
This is weird. I found this book because it is published by Prav Publising, but there is also a book with a similar title (The Return of Myth) available from Manticore Press (2016) which I could have read for that very reason, but apparently missed.
Boris Nad is a Serbian author, born in 1966. This collection of “meditations on Myth” (sometimes) has that ‘Russian tone’ and subjects of other Prav books.
It is a bit of an odd book. The texts vary wildly in subjects and tone. Some texts are well written and interesting, but there is also a lengthy piece of fiction and chapters that I find not very interesting.
The book opens with short chapters about mythology and mythologies. A red thread appears to be myths of Hyperborea. This culminates halfway in a lengthy “tale of Agartha”, a long piece of apparant fiction about a man who has visited the underground realm of the “king of the world”.
The latter is of course a theme that we find with René Guénon and Nad refers to Guénon and other Traditionalists more often. One of the more interesting texts of this book is a critique on Guénon though. Nad goes from comparitive myth, which can be interesting, to more speculative texts. Present is a hard view of modern life and “the crisis of the Western world”.
All in all I have to conclude that the book contains more texts that I found not too interesting and only a few that I did.
I have not followed Primordial Traditions / Numen Books / Manticore Press closely enough. A while ago I noticed that I missed a couple of titles. I got three of them, one of those being this book of the helmslady Taunton.
The subtitle promises: “The Philosopher & the Kingdom: From Ancient Greece to the Arthaśāstra”, but it is more: Ancient Greece and Arthasastra. The book is divided in two parts each with its own conclusion. The first part is about Greece, the other part about the far East. I enjoyed the latter part a lot better.
In the part about Greece you will read about politics before democracy and politics instead of democracy with Socrates and Plato as main thinkers of interest.
The part about the far East has more focus on religion and politics. Here the main thinker is Canakya who formed a massive empire three centuries before our common era and wrote down how he managed to do that. Even though his system fell out of use, it seems to enjoy a growing attention today.
Not entirely my subject, but the second part was a good read.
In Amazon’s Kindle store my eye fell on two titles of Gwendolyn Taunton (formerly Toynton) that I did not know. The Primordial Tradition (2015) and the book presently under review.
That book is presented as an updated version of the publication that acquainted me with Taunton back in the days: Primordial Traditions Compendium(2009) which was a compendium of a periodical that Taunton edited before (2005-2008).
The 230+ page compendium contains texts by various authors. In the new 78 page version, there are only texts of what used to be the editor. New ones too it seems, so the connection between both publications is only the author.
Already in 2009 I concluded that Taunton’s explanation of the term “Primordial Tradition” is not mine. This is still the case. This is emphasized by the opening text about Carl Gustav Jung. What was also apparent over a decade ago is that Taunton appears to be of the opinion that “philosophia perennis” can be reached by study. It is even “an intellectual transmission” (emphasis mine). “Philosophia perennis” is presented as (the result of) the study of comparative myth and religion.
Even though she does refer to Guénon, Schuon and Coomaraswamy, Taunton’s approach is much different.
A prophet, therefor, does not require the bonds of filiation, which René Guénon believed to be the necessary requirement for belonging to tradition.
Guénon has a few things to say about prophets which is in a way similar, but also much different from that statement. Another point Guénon would certainly not agree with is:
Faith in the potency of any specific symbol relies upon the most basic human aspect of belief. Belief in a sentient God is not even required.
As with other publications, Taunton walks a similar mountain as myself, but another path (but closer as many). As usual she does have interesting things to say and diverting opinions force me to question my own. I do wonder about some chapters what the relevancy with the subject is, such as the chapter about the “science of omens”.
There is also a chapter about alchemy in which Taunton suggests that alchemy is a (proto-)Indo-European tradition which has spread with Indo-European culture. This would explain the spread and diversity of alchemy. This is an interesting notion that I do not think I encountered before.
The closing chapter is more political. Apparently some alt-right thinkers have started using the term “Traditionalism” and for that reason Taunton chose to no longer use the term as she wants to prevent being lumped together with such currents. It could be me, but this alt-right is hardly visible (especially possible ‘intellectual’ efforts have all passed by me) and just the fact that they try to hijack a term that has been in use for a century is not immediately a reason for me to start to look for a synonym.
As often with Manticore publications, interesting, somewhat different from my own ideas (which is good). Rather short though.
Manticore has titles that take me (slightly) out of my usual bubble, but I did not expect that when I ordered this book.
The book is about: “Crowley, Evola, Neville, Watts, Colin Wilson and Other Populist Gurus”. A few names that are (relatively) unknown to me, but some ‘Traditionalism’ is promised and of course Crowley and Evola make an odd combination, (well, of course not entirely).
The book proves to be a second edition, the first was published in 2018. It is a compilation of essays, most of them published at “North American New Right” website and publishing house Counter Currents. Other texts have been available before in “Aristokratia“. So indeed, you can expect some politics here too.
The book opens with Alan Watts, somewhat new to me and somewhat interesting, but too much Watts for my liking. Then we have William Burroughs (and a bit of Genesis P. Orridge), Aleister Crowley, Julius Evola, Gnosticism, Neville Goddard and at the end, Donald Trump.
There is some sort of red thread here in the author’s words: “America’s home-made Hermeticism, our native-born Neoplatonism, our own two-fisted Traditionalism, the movement generally known as New Thought.”
New Thought, I heard about that. Positive thinking, the Law of Attraction, the Secret, Will what you Want, that sort of things, right? Right indeed! Even though the author has explained it on a few occasions, I cannot make the step from Traditionalism to New Thought in my mind. Neither do I find the essays about the New Thinkers very interesting.
What is a merit of the book is that the texts are written with some humor, references to pop culture (mostly the “Madmen” series and the “Manhunter” film) which gives a new approach to some ideas. Also O’Meara manages to mix up a massive amount of different sources.
Overall I found the book somewhat amusing in its better parts and not entirely my cup of tea in most.
Strange timing this publication. I recently read three books mostly about the events leading up to the formation of the ‘premier Grand Lodge’ of Freemasons. When I was about the finish the third, this book about Francis Bacon (1561-1626) was published. Bacon is (of course) mentioned in the books of Earnshaw.
Also I started to read a Dutch translation of Frances Yates’ Rosicrucian Enlightenment. I have had the book for many years, but I bought a Dutch translation when it came out eight years ago (probably because of the Monas Hieroglypica on the front) and I felt like taking it out of the plastic. (Of course) Bacon is in there too.
Already clear in Yates’ book is that Bacon had similar ideas to those expressed in the Rosicrucian manifestos of the early 17th century. He was careful to avoid being associated with them though. Shortly after the publications of the manifestos, especially governments were not very enthusiastic about the ideas expressed therein. Still, Bacon is often associated with the current and therefor also with proto-Freemasonry.
Not much of all that in the present title written by Branco in Spanish and translated to English though. Branco is a philosopher who, as the title says, investigated the non-scientific elements in Bacon’s thought. Besides being connected to esoteric currents, Bacon is also often seen as the first of the scientists. His ideas were indeed often rational, materialistic even, but besides an early scientist, he was also a late Renaissance-man and he worked within a religious frame.
Branco portrays Bacon as a much more complex thinker than authors of either side (esoteric or scientific) show him to be. From radical scientific ideas of his predecessors, Bacon knew about mystic, Hermetic and Rosicrucian ideas, was aware of the various branches of Protestantism and with all that tried to create a system of knowing encompassing all. A project for which is was both lauded and loathed, the latter mostly because people thought it was way too complex.
The book is a bit too philosophical and scholarly for me, but it is interesting to see ideas of both ‘camps’ are both confirmed and contradicted. Bacon was -as said- a complex thinker with inner contradictions too.
I do not have good memories about the other book of Svensson that I reviewed, but I see that my review was quite positive.
The new book is presented as a practical perennialist handbook, which probably got me into ordering it. I found the book quite a tiring read and rereading my review of Borderline I see that much of my criticism of it, also applies to Actionism. The difference is that the present title left a less positive impression.
Actionism presents a system, but this might well be just Svensson’s system. The system is some sort of self-help for a Traditionalist man in the contemporary world. The first part of the book is alright, it outlines the author’s ideas, many of which are not mine, but that is alright.
Then texts start to appear of which the purpose is not always clear to me, quite like in Borderline. Lengthy retellings of novels and other books, a massive part with a diary of the author or poems, usually parts that I only skipped through. Then there are again the anoying acronyms, as if “ANOTT-BOTSOTT” makes it easy to remember “Act Not On The Thing, But On The Soul Of The Thing”.
Actionism is about summoning your Will and to lead your Thought, merging the two to Will-Thought and affirming the Inner Light, a spark of the Divine Light. To all this, saying “I AM” is the performative confirmation.
I do like the idea of a handbook for modern living for the conservative, but I am afraid this book does not ‘work’ for me.
“A Study on the Italic Hermetic Tradition: Myth, Magic, and Metamorphosis in the Western Inner Traditions”. That is a title.
The author starts this little book (small size, about 200 pages) with an introduction that suggests a Traditionalist approach. The “Hermetic Tradition” from the title gets the Evola explanation of alchemy, but first we start with Roman myths, Pythagoras, Ovid, Apuleius, Dante, Ficino, Pico, Bruno, etc. You get it, the history of esotericism that has been told a few times in recent decades. What does add to the book is that the author also cites Italian sources that I have not yet seen translated.
Halfway things get more interesting. The Magic Door from the title proves to be an actual alchemical / Rosicrucian door that can still be found in Rome. This is the start of a part with more contemporary Italian esotericists. Some I knew or at least heard of (Cagliostro, Kremmerz, Evola), others were new to me (Vico, Daffi, Giammatria). What is more, Pantano writes about groups that I never heard of (Neapolitan Mysterio, Fraternity of Myriam, Circle of Kronos). It is interesting how such groups sprouted from one another during quite a period. Also here Pantano uses sources that I do not think were available in English before. It also sheds some (to me) new light on Evola.
“The Magic Door” is (as you can gather) mostly interesting for dealing with the period from the 18th century to the present concerning Italian esoteric circles. From (semi-)Masonic to downright magical, also Italy proves to have had it’s share of alchemists. What surprises me a bit is that Reghini is hardly spoken about. He seems to have been a spider in a web as well.
This was a bit of a hard book to read. It starts with mostly philosophical essays. Philosophy, not really my kind of literature.
After a while the texts in this massive book (530 pages) start to varry in subject. Aliens in the philosophy of Kant, filmreviews, Kafka, the Tao of Bruce Lee, Nazi technology. Some texts are fun reads, others less so.
One text is called Against Perennial Philosophy which is more about the term “philosophy” that is used, than about ‘Guénonian current’.
There are 19 essays in this book. As you can see with wildly different subjects. Especially in the first part the author has a ‘there are not many real philosophers, but I am one of them’ air, but it is amusing to see how he goes from conservative to progressive subjects, ‘high’ to ‘low’ culture, heavy and lighter subjects, enough variety. Some texts I mostly skipped through, others were good reads.
It seems that there are already three editions of this book, the last one from another publisher (Arktos).
