Julius Evola was, by any measure, a steaming pile of turd. But his analysis of early Buddhism is quite interesting, sans BS race theories.
Conversation
Replying to
Pet peeves aside, his key point that modern Buddhism (except Zen) has very little in common with the original texts is not well-understood.
1
Replying to
He thinks Zen is the true inheritor? Interesting. The chan guys saw themselves as very distinct from the "lesser vehicle".
2
Replying to
He goes into a long rant about how it supposedly stemmed from spiritual transmission from Gautama to some prince or another, as I recall it.
2
Replying to
Buddhism's pretty minor till Asoka makes it the state religion of all of India.
1
Replying to
The interesting part the text is the analysis of the techniques & ascesis, not his pseudointellectual ramblings on Aryans, class and so on.
1
Replying to
his picture in Wikipedia is screams "straight up fucking evil", even before I read the bio. Buddhism can offer a lot to such folks.
1
1
Replying to
Then you see he was a personal friend of Heinrich Himmler...
That's what makes the analysis interesting. It is amoral; stripped bare.
It becomes apparent that Buddhism doesn't need a moral or religious dimension. The teachings are completely compatible with any value system
5