The argument that “it's complicated” is absurd. “Never again” was meant universally—Israel does not get to justify its actions based on past suffering.
Me: The idea of a “Jewish people” is a deception. Judaism is a religion, not an ethnicity.
There is no such thing as an “Abrahamic people”—whether Jewish, Christian, or Muslim. No one speaks of “Buddhist peoples” or “Hindu peoples.” A people is never defined by religion; the spiritual individual stands above material identifications.
Metaphysical part:
THE LIMITS OF INITIATIC REGULARITY.
Among the few Western writers who—not through mere scholarship but by virtue of effective knowledge grounded in initiation—have contributed to the clarification of esoteric sciences and traditional spirituality, René Guénon holds a prominent position. Generally, we recommend Guénon’s works to our readers, as they are unparalleled in their kind and value, and they can serve as a complement to much of what we have expounded, at least in terms of essentials.
However, concerning certain particular aspects, we must express reservations, as Guénon’s orientation often reflects a line of thought divergent from the basis of our own formulations. Moreover, Guénon’s approach is essentially theoretical, whereas ours is fundamentally practical. It will therefore be useful to briefly clarify the distinctions in this domain, so that our followers may discern how to properly utilize Guénon’s contributions.
As for doctrinal divergences, we will only allude to them without elaboration. We do not share Guénon’s views on the relationship between royal and sacerdotal initiation, his framework concerning the Lesser and Greater Mysteries, or his restrictive and pejorative use of the term “Magic.” These three points are, to some extent, interconnected. But our primary focus here is the general problem of initiation.
The Guénonian Schema of Initiatic Regularity
In René Guénon’s view, initiation entails transcending the human condition and realizing higher states of being—an impossibility through individual means alone. In the present age, this requires external intervention: the ritual transmission of a “spiritual influence” to the aspirant by a regular initiatic organization. Without this condition, initiation is merely a parody (“pseudo-initiation”).
A regular organization must be connected—directly or through intermediaries—to a supreme and unique center, maintaining an unbroken chain (silsila) traceable to the Primordial Tradition. The efficacy of transmission depends solely on the correct performance of rites by a duly authorized representative, regardless of his personal understanding or belief. Even if an organization consists only of “virtual initiates,” its regularity—and thus its capacity to confer initiation—remains intact.
The candidate must possess certain qualifications: physical integrity, mental preparation, and a genuine aspiration (or “vocation”). Disharmony or imbalance disqualifies one. Upon receiving the spiritual influence, the aspirant becomes a “virtual initiate,” marked by an indelible inner transformation. However, effective initiation demands active, personal labor (“operative” realization) across successive degrees—a process no master can undertake in the aspirant’s stead.
Guénon sharply distinguishes initiation from mysticism: the mystic, lacking connection to a living “center” and “chain,” remains passive and isolated. He also rejects any “ideal” (non-ritual) link to tradition, insisting on tangible transmission through authorized living representatives. “Spontaneous initiation” is impossible—analogous to a birth without a progenitor or a plant without a seed.
This is the essence of Guénon’s framework.
CRITIQUE OF THE GUÉNONIAN SCHEMA
The abstract nature of Guénon’s schema is not inherently objectionable, but it remains purely theoretical for most Western seekers. While one may assent to its principles, Guénon provides no practical guidance on how to attain initiation. He explicitly avoids addressing the crucial question of where to find authentic initiatic organizations, claiming it lies beyond his scope.
For the Western man, this poses a serious dilemma. Guénon speaks of “initiatic organizations” as if they were readily accessible, yet in reality, they are either nonexistent or exist only in degraded forms. Even if one were to seek initiation in the East—within Islamic or Far Eastern traditions—the obstacles would be insurmountable for most. Racial, cultural, and linguistic barriers, along with the necessity of integrating into an entirely foreign spiritual milieu, make such an endeavor impractical.
Turning to the dominant Western tradition—Christianity—offers no solution, as it is a mutilated tradition, devoid of an intact esoteric hierarchy. Catholicism, for instance, permits only mystical (not initiatic) developments, with rare exceptions of individuals attaining metaphysical realization purely through personal effort.
Guénon admits that no legitimate initiatic organizations exist in the modern West. The few he acknowledges—namely, Compagnonnage and Freemasonry—are either insignificant remnants or largely pseudoinitiatic. Compagnonnage is an obscure, corporative organization with limited reach, while Freemasonry, in its current form, is a syncretic and artificial system, often serving as a vehicle for subversive or even dark forces. Guénon’s insistence on the possibility of “virtual initiation” through these corrupted structures is unconvincing.
Evola diverges sharply from Guénon on two key points:
1. Degraded organizations cannot transmit true initiation—When a tradition’s representatives are unworthy or unconscious of its meaning, the spiritual influences withdraw, leaving only a hollow and potentially dangerous psichic residue.
2. The exclusivity of Guénon’s criteria—There is evidence of individuals in the West possessing genuine initiatic knowledge outside of Compagnonnage and Freemasonry, a possibility Guénon dismisses.
Given this bleak assessment, the Western seeker must look beyond Guénon’s rigid framework. Alternative, legitimate paths must be considered—ones that acknowledge the unique challenges of the modern era without clinging to an illusory “regularity.”
INITIATION AND EXCEPTIONAL PATHS
The current state of Western civilization reflects a profound spiritual decline, where traditional initiatory paths have become nearly inaccessible due to the collective degeneration of modern man. While René Guénon rightly emphasizes the necessity of formal initiation through legitimate chains of transmission, his rigid adherence to “regularity” overlooks the possibility of exceptional paths suited to the unique conditions of our age.
In this era of dissolution, where authentic spiritual forces have withdrawn, the individual cannot rely solely on external rites or institutional structures, which have largely lost their efficacy. Instead, exceptional cases must be considered—those in which a qualified individual, through disciplined self-preparation and active will, imposes his own initiation. Symbolic examples, such as Jacob wrestling the angel or Parsifal forcing his way to the Grail, illustrate this principle: initiation is not merely received but can be taken by those capable of spiritual violence.
Guénon acknowledges that spiritual centers may intervene beyond formal transmission, particularly for isolated individuals of exceptional qualification. However, he maintains that even such cases imply a hidden connection to an existing chain. Yet this perspective risks conflating the contingent (external organization) with the essential (the transcendent principle itself). If “spiritual influences” obey their own laws, why should a direct, vertical connection—bypassing degraded horizontal structures—be impossible?
A crucial distinction must be made between mere theoretical adherence to a tradition and the effective magical invocation of its principles. The “actual existence” of a tradition does not depend solely on its visible representatives but on its metaphysical reality, which transcends time and space. A true elite, through correct intention (nyyah) and active discipline, can reawaken dormant influences, even in the absence of formal lineages.
Guénon’s rejection of “astral initiation” is justified when addressing occultist distortions, yet he fails to account for the possibility of active ascent to higher states of consciousness—such as the Islamic shath—where direct contact with transcendent principles (e.g., the enigmatic Khidr) becomes possible. Here, the initiate’s will, properly directed, serves as the catalyst.
Likewise, while the theory of reincarnation is rightly dismissed, the concept of a “transcendental heredity” must not be ignored. Certain individuals carry within them an innate predisposition for awakening, bypassing the need for external seeding. To deny this is to reduce all beings to a uniform mediocrity, contradicting the hierarchical and heroic essence of true initiation.
In summary, the modern initiate must recognize that the “regular” paths are largely defunct. His task is to forge his own way, combining disciplined self-mastery with the will to transcendence—imposing his own election where the structures of tradition have failed.
Current Conditions for Initiation
We have already outlined the essential elements that must be asserted against the unilateral framework of initiatic “regularity.” While we must acknowledge the validity of this framework to some degree, we should not exaggerate its importance or lose sight of the abnormal conditions in which even the best-qualified Western seekers find themselves today.
Who would not eagerly join a properly structured initiatic organization, as René Guénon envisioned it—even one with an almost bureaucratic system of formal “legitimacy”? Who would not seek such an order, submitting willingly to judgment and testing? Yet, this is not the reality. The reader of Guénon is like a man told of a beautiful maiden’s existence but given no means to find her—met only with silence or the dismissive reply, “That is not our concern.” As for Guénon’s own indications on surviving Western initiatic organizations, we have already expressed the necessary reservations.
The deeper issue—one we should have addressed from the outset—is that the very concept of ritual initiation, as Guénon presents it, appears severely weakened. A transmission of vaguely defined “spiritual influences,” possibly imperceptible, amounting to little more than a “virtual initiation”—one susceptible to every error and deviation—is ultimately insufficient. True initiation, as known from authentic traditions (including the ancient mysteries), resembles a surgical operation, producing an intensely lived experience that leaves, as one text states, “the eternal mark of a fracture.”
Finding one capable of conferring initiation in these terms is neither easy nor solely dependent on qualification. Given the current state of the West, even the principle “when the disciple is ready, the Master appears” requires significant qualification. Those capable of such transmission are rare, almost like “detached” military units—encountered by chance, if at all. One cannot expect a formal “school” with systematic safeguards and controls. Any Western group claiming to be such—flaunting “initiates” who advertise their status—is a vulgar fraud. Guénon’s merit lies precisely in his ruthless critique of these deceptions.
As for those who, bound by the karma of the civilization in which they were born yet driven by true vocation, seek to advance alone—relying on direct vertical (metaphysical) contacts rather than horizontal (organizational) ties—they tread a perilous path. It is as if venturing into wild terrain without map or credentials. Yet, just as a nobleman in the profane world risks his life for a worthy cause, so too must the modern seeker, deprived of alternatives, embrace the danger of self-conquest and the rupture of human bonds. Allāhu akbar!—as the Arabs say: God is great. And as Plato declared: All great things are perilous.
There is no jewish people