A thought, after reading a description of Schuon’s “Maryamiyya”.<\/p>\n
There are two forms of “traditionalism” in the sense of Gu\u00e9nonian anti-modernism; the metaphysical reactionaries, who consider Gu\u00e9non and Evola as two representatives of a large class of those with some understanding (a class that might include anyone from A. Dugin to C.S. Lewis), and the religious perennialists, who consider Gu\u00e9non and Schuon as modern-day prophets. The religious perennialists frown upon Evola as a dangerous and overly political deviant. Certainly Evola dared his readers to “revolt” against modernity, while Schuon busied himself building a “refuge” from modernity. But as a point of fact<\/em>, Schuon’s teachings were more deviant and dangerous in his own lifetime than Evola’s. It may at least be said of Evola that he never rubbed his naked body against female devotees. If Evola has a political influence in the future, it is only because more people find his work relevant.<\/p>\n Update<\/strong>: Rather than making a new post, I will update this post with a heartwarming account of Gu\u00e9non’s strict orthodoxy and the loving devotion of his wife.<\/p>\n In July 1949, the beginning of Ramadan, I was invited to break the fast. I found him lying on the couch, and he explained that fasting tired him to the point that he could not work at night, the day being set aside for prayer and rest. As soon as she heard the cannon announcing the sunset, Hajja Fatima brought us a cup of Turkish coffee, which was drunk at the same time we lit a cigarette. After which, Sheikh Abdel [Gu\u00e9non] conducted the prayer of Maghreb, and I followed the movements behind him. After an excellent Egyptian meal and a peaceful vigil, I took my leave of the Sheikh and his family.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n