Quote:
Originally Posted by Ljubomir
3. Non-Germanic Odinists need to activate their brains.
|
How about European konfucianists, daoists or buddhists? Where do you draw the line; when can you consider someone to be stupid because he adhers to a religion that is not wholly embraced in the culture that he is a part of? Is it the cultural artifacts themselves, or their presence in a culture, that enables someone in that culture to be addressed by and to adher to the cultural artifact? Or is it the ideas expressed in that artifact, in so far as they are understood and in some sense accepted, that constitute the adherence? How, if it is the latter rather than the former, does (meta-)ethnicity limit the class of religions that one can reasonably adher to?
Is hindu, zoroastrian or buddhist thought available to Europeans because Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Heidegger explored and made it available, and if so, how was the making of them available possible in the first place? How did S., N. and H. get access? Or is it better to think that they did not at all understand and even less adher to anything culturally non-European, and if so, on what grounds?
__________________
While the rest of mankind seeks for the sake of finding and of knowing, the Westerner of today seeks for the sake of seeking; the Gospel saying, 'Seek and ye shall find,' is a dead letter for him, in the full force of this phrase, since he calls 'death' anything and everything that constitutes a definite finality, just as he gives the name 'life' to what is no more than fruitless agitation.
René Guénon, East and West