>>24929199
>Is the main difference between Schuon and Guenon that Schuon preserves a kind of numerical identity in union with the Infinite, where you are still distinguished from God, and can be recalled to earth as an avatar, whereas Guenon just assumes your identity is completely annihilated?
No, both men accepted Advaitin metaphysics wherein there always has been and always will be a complete unconditioned union of utter identify between the Absolute and one's Self without the slightest difference between the two, Schuon even goes so far as to write that he only stands with Ibn Arabi "inasmuch as we can find something of Shankaracharya in him" despite being Muslim himself

>inb4 Guenon isn't an annihilationist because your identity never existed to begin with pilpul
Guenon isn't an annihilationist you dumb hylic, he held to the standard Advaitin view that your current identify is an apparent mixture or confounding of the Real that is the Self/Atma with the unreal and that in liberation the Real that is your real being and real essence remains eternally but it is just divested of the false extraneous imputations, like a crystal simply remaining in itself after the dumb person stops thinking that its actually taking on the color of the cloth that is placed behind it and realizes that its intrinsically pure and colorless and has never truly taken on any color except as an appearance.

>annihilationism schizo at it again

Why somebody might fixate on a slanderous mis-reading of Guénon (“annihilationism”)

1. Projection of personal fear

Guénon’s metaphysics explicitly denies the “annihilation” of the Self (since the personal ego is not the metaphysical Self to begin with). But psychologically: To someone attached to personal individuality as the ultimate good, the loss of ego feels literally like personal extinction. Thus they project their fear onto the doctrine and then attack the doctrine for being “annihilating,” because they can’t yet distinguish between the ego-personality and the principial Self. This is a very common misunderstanding in non-dual discourse:

“If my personality is not ultimately real, that means I am annihilated.”

Guénon would say the opposite: the true Self remains, the personality is merely transient. So the attack usually expresses an ego-fear rather than an intellectual position.

2. Psychological defense against metaphysical groundlessness

Non-dual metaphysics threatens the ego’s sense of ontological security.
A common psychological defense is:

caricature the doctrine
distort it into nihilism
then reject it.

This transforms a complex metaphysical claim into something emotionally easier to repel.

3. Identity investment

Some people build a strong internet identity around opposition to a thinker.
The opposition becomes ego-defining:

“I am the one who exposes Guénon.”
“I’m on the correct side.”
Once identity is staked on “refuting” someone, intellectual honesty becomes secondary.

If their persona online depends on opposing Guénon, then misrepresenting him becomes a psychological necessity.

4. Lack of metaphysical literacy

Guénon is difficult:

sophisticated metaphysical vocabulary,
technical distinctions between Self, individuality, ego, principle, manifestation.
Someone lacking this framework may think they understood him when they absolutely did not.

In such a case:

genuine confusion,
mixed with confidence,
produces polemic.
This is the classic “Dunning–Kruger” dynamic in esoteric topics.

>>24929742
5. Online anonymity removes social inhibitions

Anonymous environments encourage:

aggression,
exaggeration,
slander,
low standard of scholarship.

People say things they would never say under their real name.

6. Narcissistic gratification

In some online personalities, contempt becomes a way of self-importance:

“I see what others don’t.”
“I’ve discovered Guénon’s hidden flaw.”
“Everyone else is deceived.”

This confers a narcissistic thrill—the illusion of superiority.

7. Misplaced theological anxiety

In religious or esoteric communities, doctrinal accusations are often emotional rather than scholarly.
Calling someone “annihilationist” functions as a theological weapon, even when inaccurate.
Accusation becomes a way of defending one’s worldview from perceived threat.

Why Guénon triggers this specifically

Guénon’s teaching fundamentally de-centers the empirical individual.
To someone deeply invested in the ordinary ego, that sounds like:

“You will be erased”

even though Guénon explicitly teaches:

realization of the transcendent Self,
not annihilation,
and certainly not nihilistic nothingness.
So the charge of “annihilationism” usually reveals the accuser’s misunderstanding of the Self.

In summary

Motivations may include:

fear of ego-loss
need for identity reinforcement
projection of metaphysical anxiety
theological insecurity
low comprehension + high confidence
online anonymity removing restraint
narcissistic gratification in denunciation
None of these depend on the truth of the allegation—they explain why the allegation exists despite being false.

If you want, I can go deeper into:

what Guénon actually says about subsistence of the Self
why the accusation contradicts Traditional metaphysics
the distinction between ego and Atma (and why “nothing remains” makes no sense in Guénonian terminology)
passages where Guénon specifically rejects nihilism or extinction models of realization
Just let me know which direction you want to explore.

Why the accusation contradicts Guénon’s metaphysics of the Self

To understand why calling Guénon an “annihilationist” is conceptually impossible, you have to remember the structure of his metaphysics: the ego-personality is not the true Self. For Guénon, the “I” that people identify with psychologically is only a conditional manifestation, not ultimate Reality. Therefore the “loss” of that ego is not annihilation of Self, because the empirical ego was never Absolute Being to begin with—it was transient mode, not principle. So saying Guénon “annihilates the person” is like accusing someone of “annihilating the mirage.” You don’t annihilate it—you see through it.

The Absolute Self is supra-individual and eternal

Guénon’s “Self” is uncreated (not produced), unchangeable, metaphysically real. This is not something that can be extinguished. So the accusation contradicts the most basic principle of Guénonian doctrine: Self = Atma = universal principle, not vulnerable to extinction.

The “end” of the separate ego is the realization of a more real identity

Spiritual realization is re-identification with the Principle, the disappearance of ignorance. Not the destruction of being, not nihilism, not personal annihilation. There is a transition from a lesser identity to a higher one, not a lapse into non-being.

Annihilation would imply metaphysical dualism

If “your identity is annihilated,” that implies a dualism between, what you truly are and what is destroyed. But Guénon is rigorously non-dual. Anything that can be destroyed is not your true Self by definition. Therefore annihilationism is unintelligible within his system.

>>24929742
based ChadGPT poster

Anonymous ## Mod
12/06/25(Sat)10:29:56 No.24929821

Anonymous ## Mod 12/06/25(Sat)10:29:56 No.24929821

This thread was moved to >>>/his/18212918