Islamic Converts

[3rdEye]

Originally Posted by Menydh

His initiation into Sufism dates back to that time. But it is my understanding that it is as part of a wider gnosticist, mysticist search so to speak. It is only later that he openly adheres to Islamic Sufism. And even then, could we say in all certainty that this embracing is still not part of a wider Gnostic set of beliefs?

Gnostic in what sense? Openly in what sense? Wider in what sense?

I understood that Guénon converted to Islam because of the lack of good traditional spiritual societies and initiation systems in the West. The freemasons and the guilds were in his view those that came close to offering initiations into a tradition inspired by God, but he criticised them for being decadent.

But most important, even if I was wrong here, your presentation of Guénon as a [lato or strictu] argumento in the question of nazi tendency towards sympathy for Islamism, how does it constitute a revealing answer? At most, a side comment of general interest but not specific.

I think it is the supposedly intrinsic link between nazism and islamic conversion that is the odd trail.

To expand a little further on the issue, in a way which could –perhaps– more realisticly serve us to link Guénon and Sufism to the original question, it is mandatory to mention that under the "Traditionalist"^[1] concept of Guénon and the Sophia Perennis thinkers, Islam as we know it today hardly represents any traditional view. At all. Not in the Islamic World. And arguably through its history except for at precise moments and isolated places.

[1]Universalist tradition

The embracing of Islam through a "mysticism-for-the-masses" channel is not something to celebrate.

You think that Guénon was a proponent of "'mysticism-for-the-masses'"?

About Guénons understanding of tradition, I understood that in addition to what is usually meant by tradition, Guénon stressed that a tradition should be inspired by God. The idea that tradition should be embraced simply because it is tradition, de facto, would be spiritually corrupt and materialistic. What Guénon criticised the freemasons and the guilds for was that they confused the material with the spiritual. The same critique can be appropriated for any other materialist "traditionalism".

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Weltschmerz

Gnostic in what sense? Openly in what sense? Wider in what sense?

Gnostic in an etymological sense of gnosis and of syncretism.

I understood that Guénon converted to Islam because of the lack of good traditional spiritual societies and initiation systems in the West. The freemasons and the guilds were in his view those that came close to offering initiations into a tradition inspired by God, but he criticised them for being decadent.

Whether this is a correct interpretation, I do not know and I am not prepared to argue it.

I think it is the supposedly intrinsic link between nazism and islamic conversion that is the odd trail.

And yet, given the numbers of adepts to nazism –minus the mass of fetishists and other assorted freaks within it– and its ratio to conversion to Islam, there is an indication that is more than merely supposed.

You think that Guénon was a proponent of "'mysticism-for-the-masses'"?

I wasn't referring to Guénon. Obviously.

[3rdEye]

Originally Posted by Menydh

Gnostic in an etymological sense of gnosis and of syncretism.

Whether this is a correct interpretation, I do not know and I am not prepared to argue it.

And yet, given the numbers of adepts to nazism –minus the mass of fetishists and other assorted freaks within it– and its ratio to conversion to Islam, there is an indication that is more than merely supposed.

My point is simply that the conversion of Europeans to Islam can not be understood solely as a silly or otherwise easily discredited phenomenon.

I wasn't referring to Guénon. Obviously.

But what were you referring to?

* * *

What we can be certain of is that Guénon's conversion was not made without prior in depth consideration. I might return to this question when I have read Guénon first hand, but I have no reason to doubt that Almquist's account of Guénon's conversion is correct. The monastic traditions may have something similar to what Sufism has, but solely under certain rather destructive vows, such as that of celibacy.

[Marcus Marulus]

Did Guénon actually convert to Islam or to Sufism? In the first phase it seems that the latter was the case, whilst he later moved to Cairo and lived a life of a truely devout Muslim, observing sharia and marrying an Egyptian Muslim wife.

Of course, it can be argued that Sufism is indivisible from Islam proper, forming an esoteric (bâtin) part thereof, whereas sharia is the exoteric (šâhin) component. It would not be possible to be Sufi without being Muslim, which was also the traditional view on that matter. Nevertheless, inspite of this fundamental premise, it seems that Sufism, owing to its explicit orientation towards the inner life, rather than to the outer forms, has more inherent flexibility and is proner to accept elements from non-Islamic religions.

The conversion of several representatives of the school of Philosophia Perennis or Traditio to Islam (like Guénon, Aguéli, Vâlsan, Titus Burckhardt, Fridtjof Schuon etc) was an elite thing in the first place. I do not see any of this as related to Nazism in any meaningful sense either. The only one among the Traditionalists (taken in this sense) who maintained any sort of relationship with the National Socialist Germany was Julius Evola. He was invited to hold lectures in Germany, even in front of the SS.

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Weltschmerz

My point is simply that the conversion of Europeans to Islam can not be understood solely as a silly or otherwise easily discredited phenomenon.

But you are using the example of one member of an intellectual elite, to compare it with a generic, unelitist type.

But what were you referring to?

The latter right above.

[3rdEye]

Originally Posted by Menydh

But you are using the example of one member of an intellectual elite, to compare it with a generic, unelitist type.

The latter right above.

I see. But I was not really. I used Guénon as an example to show that national socialists were not the first to convert, and that there was even a traditionalist movement of converters who were also against the modern world; furthermore that there seems to have been no such reason as a pact against a common enemy for their conversion. Many movements start with intellectuals. Guénon and the other traditionalists converted for spiritual reasons, and I would assume that they also longed for a more traditional way of life in general. If the spiritual differences are not comprehensible to common people, then the superficial nature of modern life is the more apparent, and a traditional way of life is certainly something that does also appeal to a lot of common people, be it as nothing but an image or in practice.