What do you think?
Rate this book
Eros and the Mysteries of Love: The Metaphysics of Sex
A comprehensive work on the metaphysical aspects of sexuality. Julius Evola sheds new light on the mystical and spiritual expression of sexual love. This in-depth study explores the sexual rites of sacred traditions, and shows how religion, mysticism, folklore, and mythology all contain erotic forms in which the deep potentialities of human beings are recognized.
336 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1958
125 people are currently reading
2935 people want to read
About the author
Julius Evola
210 books1,015 followersJulius Evola (19 May 1898 – 11 June 1974), born Giulio Cesare Andrea Evola, was an Italian philosopher and esoteric scholar. Born in Rome to a family of the Sicilian landed gentry, Evola was raised a strict Catholic. Despite this, his life was characterised by 'an anti-bourgeois approach' hostile to both 'the dominant tradition of the West—Christianity and Catholicism—and to contemporary civilization—the 'modern world' of democracy and materialism'.
By turns 'engineering student, artillery officer, Dadaist poet and painter, journalist, alpinist, scholar, linguist, Orientalist, and political commentator', he has been described as a 'rare example of universality in an age of specialization'. Yet behind it all lay a singular emphasis on, and pursuit of, a 'direct relationship to the Absolute'. For Evola, 'the center of all things was not man, but rather the Transcendent.' This metaphysical conviction can be seen to have determined both Evola's stance on socio-political issues, and his antipathetic attitude towards 'all professional, sentimental and family routines'.
The author of many books on esoteric, political and religious topics (including The Hermetic Tradition, The Doctrine of Awakening and Eros and the Mysteries of Love), his best-known work remains Revolt Against the Modern World, a trenchant critique of modern civilisation that has been described as 'the gateway to his thought'. Since his death, also in Rome, his writings have influenced right-wing, reactionary and conservative political thought not only in his native Italy, but throughout continental Europe and, increasingly, the English-speaking world. Nevertheless, he should not be considered primarily as a political thinker, but rather as an exponent of the wider Traditionalist School that encompasses the work of such individuals as René Guénon, Titus Burckhardt and Frithjof Schuon.
By turns 'engineering student, artillery officer, Dadaist poet and painter, journalist, alpinist, scholar, linguist, Orientalist, and political commentator', he has been described as a 'rare example of universality in an age of specialization'. Yet behind it all lay a singular emphasis on, and pursuit of, a 'direct relationship to the Absolute'. For Evola, 'the center of all things was not man, but rather the Transcendent.' This metaphysical conviction can be seen to have determined both Evola's stance on socio-political issues, and his antipathetic attitude towards 'all professional, sentimental and family routines'.
The author of many books on esoteric, political and religious topics (including The Hermetic Tradition, The Doctrine of Awakening and Eros and the Mysteries of Love), his best-known work remains Revolt Against the Modern World, a trenchant critique of modern civilisation that has been described as 'the gateway to his thought'. Since his death, also in Rome, his writings have influenced right-wing, reactionary and conservative political thought not only in his native Italy, but throughout continental Europe and, increasingly, the English-speaking world. Nevertheless, he should not be considered primarily as a political thinker, but rather as an exponent of the wider Traditionalist School that encompasses the work of such individuals as René Guénon, Titus Burckhardt and Frithjof Schuon.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews
September 25, 2018
‘In Indo-Aryan morals, a lie was only allowed for the purpose of saving a human life, or in love…’
Evola’s sex book is ‘a search for the first principles and fundamental meaning of what is signified by the sexes and their interaction.’ Does he penetrate this seemingly bottomless mystery? Well, he does throw some light into the abyss.
Evola believes that only metaphysics can illuminate sex, not psychology or biology (‘eros cannot be explained by biology’); and the metaphysics of sex, he maintains, is bound up with the polarity of the two sexes.
The sexual instinct is not the instinct for reproduction, as shown by primitive peoples who don’t associate birth with coitus. As Klages put it: ‘Reproduction is a possible outcome of sexual activity but is not in any way included in the actual experience of sexual excitement.’
Schopenhauer’s idea of the ‘Genius of the Species’ is dismissed, for often the strongest attraction is between those who shouldn’t breed. Also, primitive races breed more prolifically than refined ones. In a rare moment of humour, Evola suggests that the ‘Genius of the Species’ is in need of an education…
Evola believes in involution (the opposite of evolution) and holds that sexuality in animals is merely ‘the fall and regression of an impulse that does not belong to biology.’ (Additionally, many lifeforms reproduce asexually).
‘Before and besides existing in the body, sex exists in the soul and, to a certain extent, in the spirit itself.’ As sex precedes the physical, thus the division of divinity into gods and goddesses is not mere anthropomorphism.
Females can’t be regarded as either inferior or superior (in a general sense) because ‘water and fire have no common measure’. Feminism degenerates women by forcing them to measure against a false standard, against a nature which is not proper or genuine to them.
The energy of the deeper plane undermines antipathies of character; as the Joker says to Batman (in a non-sexual context): ‘You complete me…’ This is the Hermaphrodite of Plato’s Symposium, the Cosmic Egg of Miguel Serrano. What we call sexual love is the longing for this unity, but how does this differ from lower Hermaphrodites like molluscs? Was the Flood necessary?
Evola differs from Aristophanes in Plato’s Symposium, because he doesn’t recognise homosexualism as a valid reflection of the cosmic egg. He contends that homosexualism is mere mutual masturbation rather than ‘true union based on the magnetism of their polarly differentiated beings’. (The climax of masturbation is often followed by a depressed state, unlike true coitus).
The male reflects form, the female reflects matter (Evola uses the Greek term for ‘matter’, which means something like ‘potentiality’); under the Seven Veils, the naked woman represents substance freed of all form in its virgin and ultimate state.
‘It is true that the fascination of woman’s nakedness has a dizzying aspect like that caused by emptiness and the bottomless, the raw material of creation, and the ambiguity of its nonbeing. This characteristic belongs to female nakedness alone. The effect of the naked male on woman is not only small in comparison but […] essentially physical and phallic.’
Although the greatest reserves of fresh sexual energy are present in the morning, the night is most common for coupling because profane love contains transcendent phenomena.
Yet the real woman, possessed by the man, fails to yield the absolute.
Consider the case of Don Juan, possessing woman after woman in an endless tormented search for that which will always elude him (in the oldest versions of the legend, he isn’t damned but withdraws to a monastery).
Medieval chivalry, on the other hand (as Evola shows somewhat convincingly) dealt with the imaginal inner woman, not flesh and blood woman.
Man’s truest end purpose, according to Evola, is to ‘surpass in his inner being the form and limit of the individual.’ This is the mystical wedding. ‘Love arises from and dwells in the sky of Mars, not of Venus (who comes from and dwells with Mars).’
Thus the number of love is the male number 3, and its perfect derivatives 9 and 81 recur again and again in the literature of love.
On modern ‘gynocracy’, he notes that ‘modern women is both exhibitionist and frigid,’ and that ‘a universal interest in sex and woman is the mark of every twilight period.’
But, dawn is coming.
Evola’s sex book is ‘a search for the first principles and fundamental meaning of what is signified by the sexes and their interaction.’ Does he penetrate this seemingly bottomless mystery? Well, he does throw some light into the abyss.
Evola believes that only metaphysics can illuminate sex, not psychology or biology (‘eros cannot be explained by biology’); and the metaphysics of sex, he maintains, is bound up with the polarity of the two sexes.
The sexual instinct is not the instinct for reproduction, as shown by primitive peoples who don’t associate birth with coitus. As Klages put it: ‘Reproduction is a possible outcome of sexual activity but is not in any way included in the actual experience of sexual excitement.’
Schopenhauer’s idea of the ‘Genius of the Species’ is dismissed, for often the strongest attraction is between those who shouldn’t breed. Also, primitive races breed more prolifically than refined ones. In a rare moment of humour, Evola suggests that the ‘Genius of the Species’ is in need of an education…
Evola believes in involution (the opposite of evolution) and holds that sexuality in animals is merely ‘the fall and regression of an impulse that does not belong to biology.’ (Additionally, many lifeforms reproduce asexually).
‘Before and besides existing in the body, sex exists in the soul and, to a certain extent, in the spirit itself.’ As sex precedes the physical, thus the division of divinity into gods and goddesses is not mere anthropomorphism.
Females can’t be regarded as either inferior or superior (in a general sense) because ‘water and fire have no common measure’. Feminism degenerates women by forcing them to measure against a false standard, against a nature which is not proper or genuine to them.
The energy of the deeper plane undermines antipathies of character; as the Joker says to Batman (in a non-sexual context): ‘You complete me…’ This is the Hermaphrodite of Plato’s Symposium, the Cosmic Egg of Miguel Serrano. What we call sexual love is the longing for this unity, but how does this differ from lower Hermaphrodites like molluscs? Was the Flood necessary?
Evola differs from Aristophanes in Plato’s Symposium, because he doesn’t recognise homosexualism as a valid reflection of the cosmic egg. He contends that homosexualism is mere mutual masturbation rather than ‘true union based on the magnetism of their polarly differentiated beings’. (The climax of masturbation is often followed by a depressed state, unlike true coitus).
The male reflects form, the female reflects matter (Evola uses the Greek term for ‘matter’, which means something like ‘potentiality’); under the Seven Veils, the naked woman represents substance freed of all form in its virgin and ultimate state.
‘It is true that the fascination of woman’s nakedness has a dizzying aspect like that caused by emptiness and the bottomless, the raw material of creation, and the ambiguity of its nonbeing. This characteristic belongs to female nakedness alone. The effect of the naked male on woman is not only small in comparison but […] essentially physical and phallic.’
Although the greatest reserves of fresh sexual energy are present in the morning, the night is most common for coupling because profane love contains transcendent phenomena.
Yet the real woman, possessed by the man, fails to yield the absolute.
Consider the case of Don Juan, possessing woman after woman in an endless tormented search for that which will always elude him (in the oldest versions of the legend, he isn’t damned but withdraws to a monastery).
Medieval chivalry, on the other hand (as Evola shows somewhat convincingly) dealt with the imaginal inner woman, not flesh and blood woman.
Man’s truest end purpose, according to Evola, is to ‘surpass in his inner being the form and limit of the individual.’ This is the mystical wedding. ‘Love arises from and dwells in the sky of Mars, not of Venus (who comes from and dwells with Mars).’
Thus the number of love is the male number 3, and its perfect derivatives 9 and 81 recur again and again in the literature of love.
On modern ‘gynocracy’, he notes that ‘modern women is both exhibitionist and frigid,’ and that ‘a universal interest in sex and woman is the mark of every twilight period.’
But, dawn is coming.
March 23, 2021
Ideea fundamentală a acestei cărți ciudate (cel puțin în opinia mea) ar fi următoarea:
„Sexul este ‘cea mai mare forţă magică a naturii’; în el acţionează un impuls care prefigurează misterul Unului, chiar dacă aproape totul, în relaţiile dintre bărbat şi femeie, se degradează…, se descompune şi se rispeşte în sentimentalisme fade…. Şi totuşi, dacă în existenţa obişnuită se manifestă involuntar un reflex al unei transcendenţe trăite, asta se întîmplă prin sex şi, cînd e vorba de omul comun, se întîmplă numai prin sex… numai cei ce se ridică pînă la o experienţă eroică sau ascetică merg, în această privinţă, mai departe” (p.409).
Iubirea are un model divin, întrevăzut de Platon și de urmașii lui. Ea nu este atît o atracție fizică (iubirea nu are o finalitate biologică, p.49), cît o chimie psihică (și spirituală). Iubirea a rămas singura modalitate a omului de a se întoarce la principul divin și la starea lui originară. Regăsim în cartea lui Evola ideea platoniciană că erosul este o formă de energie, singura, care poate ridica sufletul pînă în tărîmul Formelor. Numai prin eros sufletul accede la Frumos.
Julius Evola analizează și practicile erotice colective, sărbătorile grecești și romane, misterele, prostituția sacră și hierogamiile (pp.279-286), cultele orgiastice orientale, sabatul medieval și așa-numitele „liturghii negre” (ultimele două îndoielnice) etc.
„Sexul este ‘cea mai mare forţă magică a naturii’; în el acţionează un impuls care prefigurează misterul Unului, chiar dacă aproape totul, în relaţiile dintre bărbat şi femeie, se degradează…, se descompune şi se rispeşte în sentimentalisme fade…. Şi totuşi, dacă în existenţa obişnuită se manifestă involuntar un reflex al unei transcendenţe trăite, asta se întîmplă prin sex şi, cînd e vorba de omul comun, se întîmplă numai prin sex… numai cei ce se ridică pînă la o experienţă eroică sau ascetică merg, în această privinţă, mai departe” (p.409).
Iubirea are un model divin, întrevăzut de Platon și de urmașii lui. Ea nu este atît o atracție fizică (iubirea nu are o finalitate biologică, p.49), cît o chimie psihică (și spirituală). Iubirea a rămas singura modalitate a omului de a se întoarce la principul divin și la starea lui originară. Regăsim în cartea lui Evola ideea platoniciană că erosul este o formă de energie, singura, care poate ridica sufletul pînă în tărîmul Formelor. Numai prin eros sufletul accede la Frumos.
Julius Evola analizează și practicile erotice colective, sărbătorile grecești și romane, misterele, prostituția sacră și hierogamiile (pp.279-286), cultele orgiastice orientale, sabatul medieval și așa-numitele „liturghii negre” (ultimele două îndoielnice) etc.
March 10, 2018
This is my virgin full finish of a book by Evola (I read essays and parts of books before this, particularly different parts of Revolt), and needless to say, I did not plan to finish Eros first but I happened to do so anyway because I couldn't put it away after I first peaked in it.
The first pages of this book outline why the evolutionary theory is false, coming from the perspective of involution. The idea is that the lower comes from the higher and not the higher from the lower, taking on the perspectives of the Traditonalist school. Evola offers plenty of convincing evidence as to why this seems to be the case. I was sceptical at first but after a while materialist science gradually faded in front of my eyes as a fraud, and in retrospect, I don't think I will ever see the world in the same way I did prior to reading about involution.
The second big chapter in this book is called "Phenomena of Transcendency In Profane Love" and is by far some of the most beautiful and true lines I have ever read on paper. If anyone has had experiences in this context that gave the impression of exceeding mere primitive or mundane experience, everything in this chapter will be intuitive to you. It holds that the union in love by man and woman is an attempt to go back to the primordial state of the hermaphrodite, before the Fall of Man from God. What modern people call this is simply "romantic love," giving the impression that it is just an mad, degenerate fantasy or illusion with no deeper, metaphysical meaning. The author also disawoves intimacy which is only based on material pleasure and indulgence, which is a very soothing read for a spiritual person who fails to understand the mindsets of most people in the modern world. I have always held that everything in this world has to be done in Spirit, nothing can be done in and for itself - everything has to be done for a higher purpose, lest it feels disgusting or intuitively wrong. If you are this kind of person too, religious writers like the Traditionalists are the only ones who will ever satisfy you.
That being said, I also have criticisms and objections towards the author. The review would get too long if I were to list all of them, so I will only mention the most annoying ones. Evola is an advocate for polygamy, deeming it superior to 'Christian, bourgeois, narrow minded monogamy.' His reasoning for this preference appears in part like an attempt to be a hipster and edgelord always disagreeing with the trends or values of our times and civilisaiton. The man seems to suffer from a personality complex where he needs to stand out in every situation, as is evident with his constant elitist remarking towards everything else as 'profane.' That being said, he does draw most of his views from pre-Abrahamic civilisations, where a form of polygamy or extra-martial relations were praticed by men most of the time. It is not so much that this view of his that bugs me or the fact that these practices were common, rather, that he tries to pretend there is or was any metaphysical meaning behind it. There can be no doubt that men have a strong drive, but it should be evident that this drive belongs to the animal sphere, and tolerance and accomodation for this fact must rise from a preference to keep harmony and cohesion within a community. Then, if we take Evolas earlier arguement in the book that reproduction is merely primitive and non-metaphysical, the arguement for polygamy from a perspective of reproduction is not very convincing, even if he does not espouse this view. Rather, this is a common arguement for the practice. There can be no metaphysics in a polygamous marriage based on reproduction.
Another point to be made is that arranged marriages were common and often loveness, and to keep the revolt from this family system from happening, extramartial connections were allowed. This is sensible and rational, and when we look at the material facts of history adultery happened on both the male and female side in these systems, however, in Antiquity, it was only considered adultery on the wifes part. This arose from the need to protect the fatherhood of the children and to keep the wife a safe guardian at home. Disheartening and true it must be then, that in a lawful and ideal sense, where the husband could experience love with other women, a dutiful and loyal wife was constricted to suffering, and her experience of love would be only for her children. The women who were courtesans or concubines in these civilisations, were conversely not allowed the status of wife, and this can't have been a fair arrangement free of suffering for either of the parts involved. One could of course take the arguement that Evola favors the complete surrender and submission of women into some kind of "saintly heroism," where she turns the other cheek to whatever her husband is up to, based on temporal law from the Vedic civilisation. Yet this does not resonate anywhere deeply within, rather, it sounds like the perverse preferences of men who have a need to stroke their own ego and fulfill their own primitive needs. (I'm not even going to mention the stomach-turning sex magic ritual practices of self-worshipping high status men in historic civilisations...) While loyality is a honorable virtue, and his observance (from Revolt) of Nanna going on the pyre with Balder in Norse mythos and its unmistakable similarity to the ancient Vedic practice of burning wives with their husbands is a stark one, at least to a modern mind, it sounds counterintuitve that this level of loyality should only be expected from the wife. I of course get his point though, (oh we Westerners are so narrow-minded and feeble!) even if I disagree with it. If we go back to the chapter about love unions, we know that in both history and chivalric literature both lovers killed themselves to save the union. Any form of martyrdom is deemed insane to modern eyes in any case, since a world set with the eyes on survival (and thus only on the material world) has no concept of true transcendence.
Along with all of this is the view of authority in the traditonal world is challenging to modern eyes, since it comes off as often blaming the people lower in the hierarchy, rather than the decline from above. If men are to be loved, followed and respected by dutiful wives, it is their responsibility to deserve it. I am sure that any woman would love like Nanna did if they had a husband like Balder, who was in fact loved by all the worlds creatures with the exception of the envious and unwise ettin who killed him.
Evola outlines that the propagation of the family in Tradition is religious in nature, to extend ones own stock is a duty. Still he comes back to arguements that are vulgar and hard to take seriously. The strangest view in the book would be that prostitutes are more noble than mothers. The statement he makes is that since motherhood is also an animal instinct, motherhood belongs purely to nature and has no place in metaphysics. Apparently, wives who have given birth are not religious. There can be no doubt that religion has had its fears and practices surrounding anything relating to the female reproductive system as demonic and impure, yet to claim that mothers themselves are animals is quite the appalment. Then he makes the statement that Germanic women, for instance, are more noble because they were willing to go through with infanticide. It gets even worse and unserious when he writes that the male wish to have children comes from a place of duty (whereas the female wish is purely animal), as if whatever men do is automatically noble and right. These self-masturbatory and narcissistic views are also mirrored where he in one line proclaims that anything in woman undesirable to man, is non-metaphysical in nature.
In conclusion, Evola is both a heartening and frustrating author to read, heartening because he dispells materialism and nihilism, frustrating for other reasons. The first and most obvious reason is the manner in which he writes. It is more than obvious that he was a well-read academic, that is apparent insofar as his points of reference are endless. However, he falls into the habit of doing what many academics do; write stuff just to sound interesting and intelligent, making up countless ways to say something which is in fact, very simple. The result is having to do mental gymnastics just to get the point. It's also sometimes a way sound like he is saying something when he is in fact not saying anything at all, only writing long sentences and fancy words. It comes off as not only pretentious but even unserious and I'm sure it is enough to turn many readers off from continuing. I can't help but receive the impression that Evolas motives for writing were not just noble truth searching but also an ignoble need to demonstrate how 'special' he was. Had he only written in a more humble manner...
"Phenomena of Transcencency In Profane Love" was the best chapter in this book, and is without a shadow of a doubt one I will reread in the future. I am not satisfied with this review, but it will suffice. I will give it five stars, however, because I don't believe there is any other writing like it out there.
The first pages of this book outline why the evolutionary theory is false, coming from the perspective of involution. The idea is that the lower comes from the higher and not the higher from the lower, taking on the perspectives of the Traditonalist school. Evola offers plenty of convincing evidence as to why this seems to be the case. I was sceptical at first but after a while materialist science gradually faded in front of my eyes as a fraud, and in retrospect, I don't think I will ever see the world in the same way I did prior to reading about involution.
The second big chapter in this book is called "Phenomena of Transcendency In Profane Love" and is by far some of the most beautiful and true lines I have ever read on paper. If anyone has had experiences in this context that gave the impression of exceeding mere primitive or mundane experience, everything in this chapter will be intuitive to you. It holds that the union in love by man and woman is an attempt to go back to the primordial state of the hermaphrodite, before the Fall of Man from God. What modern people call this is simply "romantic love," giving the impression that it is just an mad, degenerate fantasy or illusion with no deeper, metaphysical meaning. The author also disawoves intimacy which is only based on material pleasure and indulgence, which is a very soothing read for a spiritual person who fails to understand the mindsets of most people in the modern world. I have always held that everything in this world has to be done in Spirit, nothing can be done in and for itself - everything has to be done for a higher purpose, lest it feels disgusting or intuitively wrong. If you are this kind of person too, religious writers like the Traditionalists are the only ones who will ever satisfy you.
That being said, I also have criticisms and objections towards the author. The review would get too long if I were to list all of them, so I will only mention the most annoying ones. Evola is an advocate for polygamy, deeming it superior to 'Christian, bourgeois, narrow minded monogamy.' His reasoning for this preference appears in part like an attempt to be a hipster and edgelord always disagreeing with the trends or values of our times and civilisaiton. The man seems to suffer from a personality complex where he needs to stand out in every situation, as is evident with his constant elitist remarking towards everything else as 'profane.' That being said, he does draw most of his views from pre-Abrahamic civilisations, where a form of polygamy or extra-martial relations were praticed by men most of the time. It is not so much that this view of his that bugs me or the fact that these practices were common, rather, that he tries to pretend there is or was any metaphysical meaning behind it. There can be no doubt that men have a strong drive, but it should be evident that this drive belongs to the animal sphere, and tolerance and accomodation for this fact must rise from a preference to keep harmony and cohesion within a community. Then, if we take Evolas earlier arguement in the book that reproduction is merely primitive and non-metaphysical, the arguement for polygamy from a perspective of reproduction is not very convincing, even if he does not espouse this view. Rather, this is a common arguement for the practice. There can be no metaphysics in a polygamous marriage based on reproduction.
Another point to be made is that arranged marriages were common and often loveness, and to keep the revolt from this family system from happening, extramartial connections were allowed. This is sensible and rational, and when we look at the material facts of history adultery happened on both the male and female side in these systems, however, in Antiquity, it was only considered adultery on the wifes part. This arose from the need to protect the fatherhood of the children and to keep the wife a safe guardian at home. Disheartening and true it must be then, that in a lawful and ideal sense, where the husband could experience love with other women, a dutiful and loyal wife was constricted to suffering, and her experience of love would be only for her children. The women who were courtesans or concubines in these civilisations, were conversely not allowed the status of wife, and this can't have been a fair arrangement free of suffering for either of the parts involved. One could of course take the arguement that Evola favors the complete surrender and submission of women into some kind of "saintly heroism," where she turns the other cheek to whatever her husband is up to, based on temporal law from the Vedic civilisation. Yet this does not resonate anywhere deeply within, rather, it sounds like the perverse preferences of men who have a need to stroke their own ego and fulfill their own primitive needs. (I'm not even going to mention the stomach-turning sex magic ritual practices of self-worshipping high status men in historic civilisations...) While loyality is a honorable virtue, and his observance (from Revolt) of Nanna going on the pyre with Balder in Norse mythos and its unmistakable similarity to the ancient Vedic practice of burning wives with their husbands is a stark one, at least to a modern mind, it sounds counterintuitve that this level of loyality should only be expected from the wife. I of course get his point though, (oh we Westerners are so narrow-minded and feeble!) even if I disagree with it. If we go back to the chapter about love unions, we know that in both history and chivalric literature both lovers killed themselves to save the union. Any form of martyrdom is deemed insane to modern eyes in any case, since a world set with the eyes on survival (and thus only on the material world) has no concept of true transcendence.
Along with all of this is the view of authority in the traditonal world is challenging to modern eyes, since it comes off as often blaming the people lower in the hierarchy, rather than the decline from above. If men are to be loved, followed and respected by dutiful wives, it is their responsibility to deserve it. I am sure that any woman would love like Nanna did if they had a husband like Balder, who was in fact loved by all the worlds creatures with the exception of the envious and unwise ettin who killed him.
Evola outlines that the propagation of the family in Tradition is religious in nature, to extend ones own stock is a duty. Still he comes back to arguements that are vulgar and hard to take seriously. The strangest view in the book would be that prostitutes are more noble than mothers. The statement he makes is that since motherhood is also an animal instinct, motherhood belongs purely to nature and has no place in metaphysics. Apparently, wives who have given birth are not religious. There can be no doubt that religion has had its fears and practices surrounding anything relating to the female reproductive system as demonic and impure, yet to claim that mothers themselves are animals is quite the appalment. Then he makes the statement that Germanic women, for instance, are more noble because they were willing to go through with infanticide. It gets even worse and unserious when he writes that the male wish to have children comes from a place of duty (whereas the female wish is purely animal), as if whatever men do is automatically noble and right. These self-masturbatory and narcissistic views are also mirrored where he in one line proclaims that anything in woman undesirable to man, is non-metaphysical in nature.
In conclusion, Evola is both a heartening and frustrating author to read, heartening because he dispells materialism and nihilism, frustrating for other reasons. The first and most obvious reason is the manner in which he writes. It is more than obvious that he was a well-read academic, that is apparent insofar as his points of reference are endless. However, he falls into the habit of doing what many academics do; write stuff just to sound interesting and intelligent, making up countless ways to say something which is in fact, very simple. The result is having to do mental gymnastics just to get the point. It's also sometimes a way sound like he is saying something when he is in fact not saying anything at all, only writing long sentences and fancy words. It comes off as not only pretentious but even unserious and I'm sure it is enough to turn many readers off from continuing. I can't help but receive the impression that Evolas motives for writing were not just noble truth searching but also an ignoble need to demonstrate how 'special' he was. Had he only written in a more humble manner...
"Phenomena of Transcencency In Profane Love" was the best chapter in this book, and is without a shadow of a doubt one I will reread in the future. I am not satisfied with this review, but it will suffice. I will give it five stars, however, because I don't believe there is any other writing like it out there.
May 14, 2020
Fine, Julius! I'll give NoFap another try.
February 20, 2014
One of the greatest thinkers in modern times, often mis-interpreted , but probably rarely understood such is the conditioned prejudice of many of todays so called intellectuals
February 14, 2022
Short Review:
This is the best book on Sex and Romantic Love I have ever read, even if it is a bit abstruse. It covers everything and deeper than any other work. He shows, as Gurdjieff did, the worst thing you can do with sex is attaching any sort of negativity to it (like the Protestants do) or any sort of abusive power trip interfering with other wills through it (Evola has been misunderstood on this because he went too in depth into this matter and people found half sentences to misquote him on).
He shows Sex, like romantic love, is not only chemistry but alchemy of metaphysical realities, finer cosmic energy in us, and is a divine elixir that leads to higher psychological transformation of being - and yet can turn into a poison when handled incorrectly also.
No one is saying this today. Yet every non-possessor of hemorrhoids intuits it. It is for far more than reproduction which is not even its main point. It is for inner reproduction (development of the astral body, without which no eternal upper soul is possible to form on this plane aright, as such in us needs the astral as its vehicle in our solar destiny to lead us beyond the confines of this solar system).
I agree with Plotinus (whom I believe he quotes) that nature tends to now let us use sex and romantic love in wrong ways to keep us ever more asleep. So, often, chastity, holding of the seed, is a central method to one developing inside oneself which Evola also goes into. He talks of the virtues of chastity as all the Hindu’s did, but not in some prurient way as though sex is automatically sinful, rather in a: “transformative way or don’t try it.”
One goes away sensing everything in the universe is a delicate artform, and this not the least.
Long Review
I think I’ll do this long review by holding in mind all Evola teaches in this book while in answer here to someone’s more than vital question to life: “What is the most important principle to keep in regards to Sexual Energy?”
This will fully display the powerful, multi-dimensionality to Evola’s gnosis teachings the most pragmatically by using them here to answer such question.
What is the most important principle to Sex Energy?
A. Procreation & enjoyment in moderation, en perPETua! (Life with a little “L” lover idiot answer).
B. Develop astral body as exodus vehicle for upper part of psyche (i.e. the solar body trapped in this system here) to bloom out finally and then escape at death with.
C. Mostly be celibate, we’ve seen the derangement it causes otherwise.
D. No negative emotion should ever be attached to it, it brings one to higher states, it’s too fluid to try to over control it (maybe Atman could eventually even mentally manifest it magically to liberate all with; but those who force people to use theirs with them, *against their will,* should be put to death on the spot, it is more sacred than mortal limbs as some occultists into sex magic have rightly noticed).
E. Expression of romantic love.
F. Just don’t now or ever eventually become a sexless “it” in one’s many incarnations or your long soul will extinguish, let it evolve you psychologically inside into an impartial harmonious spirit being (kinda new age answer).
My answer with a sprinkling of Gurdjieff mixed in but almost solely Evolan viewpoint:
F. Is right but a broad goal hard to navigate and I seldom believe any got it sessed out yet except Avatars or we would all be light Buddha’s here. Something is not evolving right, our centers are always stealing from or being stolen from in relation to Sex Center. One will never understand the inner torment Buddha went through with his chief nemesis “Mara” (means lower part of nature in female and his own energy) to become liberated, never. Also people can become reverse crystallized hasnamus hellions if this energy is attached to power in wrong ways, many are dangerous shells walking around already, see Radiohead’s Push/Pulk on this, very sad.
E. Is a pipe dream & trap unless you got lottery winner fortune - still a trap: as Pythagoras said: Have sex as often as you wish to be less than yourself. It is now being used to laterally descend the species out via some low demiurgic force on we fallen angels through the bs of romance…see the “monster offstage killing sons” in Elliot Smith’s Stickman Song. That said, there are romantic feelings that come from a higher dimension and good idealization that is higher or/er der worship, ErOs, Eroticism Evola mentions here (as does Ouspensky and the Dadaists), which is different, opposite, from Puerno (which means making less of it). But usually this in the more sacred, finer, romantic emotions sense, is just in men for awhile in any real way and only faintly but more prolonged in women, then it fades again in both, and they never remember they had it because both sexes are mostly evil (as in hypnotized, asleep, main part of Mara). Were they not then yes we might, as Evola mentions, synergize, self remembered and disidentified, back into some Nirminkaya Vallhallic (above nebishvana-Nirvanic) pre-incarnate whole, syzegy that is upper sex full, not lower sexless. For there is heavenly and earthly pandora Aphrodite Hermaphroditic possibilities. For male energy can increase and must first and female same, both up to Manas Djinn if wish Aphrodite Ourania through potency. For male: more masculine than bio, and female more female than biome (more djinn miraculous, telepathic), before this synergy can be powerful enough to activate in both; and usually the opposite happens as Hermes Trismegistus warns of when the syzegy interchanges (for this reason Spartans stayed separate most the year lest the men become women and women men in psyche and energy and resulting bios and both fall into flacid sexual energy impossibilities millennia later. For this is what ended the 4th house of Man before we the 5th in this Human-Form Being World (#5) we are now beginning sixth house, sexo, soon in.
D. Is the most right but can delude you into Crowley’s error & usually does. And death penalty is right for those who force on others but also for those who try to entrap others in their sexual energy use and then blackmail or control them, which is what more and more moderns love to spectate and participate in, especially matchmakers and divorce lawyers. There is a dangerous prurience coming soon not meant for earth because it is cosmic law “no negative emotion should ever be attached to sexuality” (but all kinds are, which keeps man and woman asleep).
C. is the main Way yes, ver ver good, if done right, but see F.. Also Gurdjieff said ancient cults noticed male monks would become effete, guileful smilers into onanism or so fat they would die in their disuse, one polarity or another, so slight use at some times was understandable. Never harm another’s destiny or dreams though! This is their child like essence and I notice when men fail in their sex life (hurting women’s dreams and stability dharma path) their spirit path becomes antagonistic toward spiritual possibilities and realities and it creates the same hopelessness in women, which is cosmic travesty.
B. is the destiny.
A. Is for breeders auto incarnating others souls into here, souls that regret it the second they arrive (because around unconscious breeders..the first of four hells is already roling on earth’s film in proper cosmology). Evola speaks of a time when breeding was able to be done to fulfill a larger cosmic destiny like laying a pattern from the higher worlds down to here, birthing a son or daughter would then have the possibility of heroically fullfilling as a role in such schema toward transcendence manifest in their life, conscious intentioned (not “formatory, rationally, analytically, bs planned prnthd” but using higher conscious seery): lineage…not hell roled as standard but royale. Castaneda also spoke of this and that now since this is lost and people honestly usually accidentally have babies it carries further such psyche imprint action into us from birth as being mere accidents and so prevents shamanic energy (Manas/Djinn) from developing until this is intentionally overcome in us. We are accidens (means starry fallout) waiting to happen usually, but planetary fate is possible in us (astral initiatism), Solar Heroic Male(k) (not malific) or FaeMai (not Fell/deadly) Manas destiny above that, then Buddhin light body of all compassion predestiny above that crystallization where Si12 sex energy resides amid our higher centers and transdimensional in sexuality coming from the uncreated light that creates there, then Atman Aurora infinite able to materialize or dematerialize at will in finer within even that as final causal self cause - including mastery of mulaprakriti that allows you to create vehicles in any of the dimensions where others can be - if they are wishing too - summoned into existence too on that plane, by your presence and holy desire (not hellish desire body that makes ghosts rather than angels of many in the four below here, no, the opposite; not the baser where lies the murky, passive unconscious imagination and low power, rather the divine evolving supraconscious imagination desire of impartial harmony and good power, these two must be distinguished in one as both are very re-all).
“Why should you want any other? When you’re a World within a world.” - Elliott Smith
Sorry to be blunt, I do hope this helps though and I, in gentlemanly like fashion, challenge anyone to show me that, in essence, I am fairly wrong anywhere in this not being Evola or the 12 Archaic Culture’s essential teaching (including *esoteric, true* Christianity’s) on Sexual Energy and its goals, possibilities and awakening of the buddhin light body so far from us all still. Much conscious love.
This is the best book on Sex and Romantic Love I have ever read, even if it is a bit abstruse. It covers everything and deeper than any other work. He shows, as Gurdjieff did, the worst thing you can do with sex is attaching any sort of negativity to it (like the Protestants do) or any sort of abusive power trip interfering with other wills through it (Evola has been misunderstood on this because he went too in depth into this matter and people found half sentences to misquote him on).
He shows Sex, like romantic love, is not only chemistry but alchemy of metaphysical realities, finer cosmic energy in us, and is a divine elixir that leads to higher psychological transformation of being - and yet can turn into a poison when handled incorrectly also.
No one is saying this today. Yet every non-possessor of hemorrhoids intuits it. It is for far more than reproduction which is not even its main point. It is for inner reproduction (development of the astral body, without which no eternal upper soul is possible to form on this plane aright, as such in us needs the astral as its vehicle in our solar destiny to lead us beyond the confines of this solar system).
I agree with Plotinus (whom I believe he quotes) that nature tends to now let us use sex and romantic love in wrong ways to keep us ever more asleep. So, often, chastity, holding of the seed, is a central method to one developing inside oneself which Evola also goes into. He talks of the virtues of chastity as all the Hindu’s did, but not in some prurient way as though sex is automatically sinful, rather in a: “transformative way or don’t try it.”
One goes away sensing everything in the universe is a delicate artform, and this not the least.
Long Review
I think I’ll do this long review by holding in mind all Evola teaches in this book while in answer here to someone’s more than vital question to life: “What is the most important principle to keep in regards to Sexual Energy?”
This will fully display the powerful, multi-dimensionality to Evola’s gnosis teachings the most pragmatically by using them here to answer such question.
What is the most important principle to Sex Energy?
A. Procreation & enjoyment in moderation, en perPETua! (Life with a little “L” lover idiot answer).
B. Develop astral body as exodus vehicle for upper part of psyche (i.e. the solar body trapped in this system here) to bloom out finally and then escape at death with.
C. Mostly be celibate, we’ve seen the derangement it causes otherwise.
D. No negative emotion should ever be attached to it, it brings one to higher states, it’s too fluid to try to over control it (maybe Atman could eventually even mentally manifest it magically to liberate all with; but those who force people to use theirs with them, *against their will,* should be put to death on the spot, it is more sacred than mortal limbs as some occultists into sex magic have rightly noticed).
E. Expression of romantic love.
F. Just don’t now or ever eventually become a sexless “it” in one’s many incarnations or your long soul will extinguish, let it evolve you psychologically inside into an impartial harmonious spirit being (kinda new age answer).
My answer with a sprinkling of Gurdjieff mixed in but almost solely Evolan viewpoint:
F. Is right but a broad goal hard to navigate and I seldom believe any got it sessed out yet except Avatars or we would all be light Buddha’s here. Something is not evolving right, our centers are always stealing from or being stolen from in relation to Sex Center. One will never understand the inner torment Buddha went through with his chief nemesis “Mara” (means lower part of nature in female and his own energy) to become liberated, never. Also people can become reverse crystallized hasnamus hellions if this energy is attached to power in wrong ways, many are dangerous shells walking around already, see Radiohead’s Push/Pulk on this, very sad.
E. Is a pipe dream & trap unless you got lottery winner fortune - still a trap: as Pythagoras said: Have sex as often as you wish to be less than yourself. It is now being used to laterally descend the species out via some low demiurgic force on we fallen angels through the bs of romance…see the “monster offstage killing sons” in Elliot Smith’s Stickman Song. That said, there are romantic feelings that come from a higher dimension and good idealization that is higher or/er der worship, ErOs, Eroticism Evola mentions here (as does Ouspensky and the Dadaists), which is different, opposite, from Puerno (which means making less of it). But usually this in the more sacred, finer, romantic emotions sense, is just in men for awhile in any real way and only faintly but more prolonged in women, then it fades again in both, and they never remember they had it because both sexes are mostly evil (as in hypnotized, asleep, main part of Mara). Were they not then yes we might, as Evola mentions, synergize, self remembered and disidentified, back into some Nirminkaya Vallhallic (above nebishvana-Nirvanic) pre-incarnate whole, syzegy that is upper sex full, not lower sexless. For there is heavenly and earthly pandora Aphrodite Hermaphroditic possibilities. For male energy can increase and must first and female same, both up to Manas Djinn if wish Aphrodite Ourania through potency. For male: more masculine than bio, and female more female than biome (more djinn miraculous, telepathic), before this synergy can be powerful enough to activate in both; and usually the opposite happens as Hermes Trismegistus warns of when the syzegy interchanges (for this reason Spartans stayed separate most the year lest the men become women and women men in psyche and energy and resulting bios and both fall into flacid sexual energy impossibilities millennia later. For this is what ended the 4th house of Man before we the 5th in this Human-Form Being World (#5) we are now beginning sixth house, sexo, soon in.
D. Is the most right but can delude you into Crowley’s error & usually does. And death penalty is right for those who force on others but also for those who try to entrap others in their sexual energy use and then blackmail or control them, which is what more and more moderns love to spectate and participate in, especially matchmakers and divorce lawyers. There is a dangerous prurience coming soon not meant for earth because it is cosmic law “no negative emotion should ever be attached to sexuality” (but all kinds are, which keeps man and woman asleep).
C. is the main Way yes, ver ver good, if done right, but see F.. Also Gurdjieff said ancient cults noticed male monks would become effete, guileful smilers into onanism or so fat they would die in their disuse, one polarity or another, so slight use at some times was understandable. Never harm another’s destiny or dreams though! This is their child like essence and I notice when men fail in their sex life (hurting women’s dreams and stability dharma path) their spirit path becomes antagonistic toward spiritual possibilities and realities and it creates the same hopelessness in women, which is cosmic travesty.
B. is the destiny.
A. Is for breeders auto incarnating others souls into here, souls that regret it the second they arrive (because around unconscious breeders..the first of four hells is already roling on earth’s film in proper cosmology). Evola speaks of a time when breeding was able to be done to fulfill a larger cosmic destiny like laying a pattern from the higher worlds down to here, birthing a son or daughter would then have the possibility of heroically fullfilling as a role in such schema toward transcendence manifest in their life, conscious intentioned (not “formatory, rationally, analytically, bs planned prnthd” but using higher conscious seery): lineage…not hell roled as standard but royale. Castaneda also spoke of this and that now since this is lost and people honestly usually accidentally have babies it carries further such psyche imprint action into us from birth as being mere accidents and so prevents shamanic energy (Manas/Djinn) from developing until this is intentionally overcome in us. We are accidens (means starry fallout) waiting to happen usually, but planetary fate is possible in us (astral initiatism), Solar Heroic Male(k) (not malific) or FaeMai (not Fell/deadly) Manas destiny above that, then Buddhin light body of all compassion predestiny above that crystallization where Si12 sex energy resides amid our higher centers and transdimensional in sexuality coming from the uncreated light that creates there, then Atman Aurora infinite able to materialize or dematerialize at will in finer within even that as final causal self cause - including mastery of mulaprakriti that allows you to create vehicles in any of the dimensions where others can be - if they are wishing too - summoned into existence too on that plane, by your presence and holy desire (not hellish desire body that makes ghosts rather than angels of many in the four below here, no, the opposite; not the baser where lies the murky, passive unconscious imagination and low power, rather the divine evolving supraconscious imagination desire of impartial harmony and good power, these two must be distinguished in one as both are very re-all).
“Why should you want any other? When you’re a World within a world.” - Elliott Smith
Sorry to be blunt, I do hope this helps though and I, in gentlemanly like fashion, challenge anyone to show me that, in essence, I am fairly wrong anywhere in this not being Evola or the 12 Archaic Culture’s essential teaching (including *esoteric, true* Christianity’s) on Sexual Energy and its goals, possibilities and awakening of the buddhin light body so far from us all still. Much conscious love.
October 20, 2017
Caution.1: this book will change the way you think of sex and love, the way you used to think of your sexuality and may affect your current commitment status!
Caution.2: if you started reading these books about traditions and perennial philosophy, most probably you won't be able to read anything else; simply because anything else will look as pseudo knowledge after touching the light of these truth seekers as Evola and Guenon.
I read this book after i was mesmerized by the chapter of " Man and woman" in Evola's claimed masterpiece "Revolt against modern world" and this book displaced Evola's Revolt and stood as Evola's masterpiece to me.
The one deducted star is because of the long time i spent on this book (same with any traditionalist book) which i don't blame Evola for but i blame my "quantitative" modern aged mentality for this hardship that i meet to grasp the echo coming from such primordial "qualitative" light.
Caution.2: if you started reading these books about traditions and perennial philosophy, most probably you won't be able to read anything else; simply because anything else will look as pseudo knowledge after touching the light of these truth seekers as Evola and Guenon.
I read this book after i was mesmerized by the chapter of " Man and woman" in Evola's claimed masterpiece "Revolt against modern world" and this book displaced Evola's Revolt and stood as Evola's masterpiece to me.
The one deducted star is because of the long time i spent on this book (same with any traditionalist book) which i don't blame Evola for but i blame my "quantitative" modern aged mentality for this hardship that i meet to grasp the echo coming from such primordial "qualitative" light.
May 4, 2019
În excelentul său eseu, Iubirea și Occidentul (despre care am scris aici), Denis de Rougemont face distincția între iubirea-pasiune și căsătorie (Eros versus Agape), declarîndu-le incompatibile din cauza faptului că sînt guvernate de legi diferite, prima ascultînd de legi emoționale și estetice care duc adesea la idealizarea sentimentului și la valorizarea absenței femeii, cealaltă de legi sociale și biologice, care au ca scop perpetuarea speciei, dînd ca exemple pentru prima iubirea cavalerească în care „Doamna” e adesea doar o noțiune abstractă, reflectînd nostalgia spre absolut, și pentru a doua contractele de căsătorie, bazate pe constrîngeri sociale și religioase. Totodată el urmărește laicizarea și vulgarizarea ambelor mituri atît în planul ficțiunii cît și în cel real.
Julius Evola, într-un eseu la fel de incitant, Metafizica sexului, analizează mai ales aspectul sexual al celor două tipuri de iubire, demonstrînd că la baza a ceea ce el numește „dragoste sexuală” nu stă o necesitate fizică, ci o dorință psihică. Trei idei importante se desprind din studiul lui: că erosul nu coboară omul la un nivel inferior, de animalitate, cum s-a crezut, ba dimpotrivă îl poate apropia de infinit; că egalitatea între bărbat și femeie este imposibilă pentru că țin de principii diferite (ceea ce mi-a întărit o convingere mai veche și anume că feminismul izvorăște nu atît dintr-o dorință de echitate socială, cît dintr-o încercare de escamotare a propriului sex, de care subconștientul feminin se jenează); în fine, că iubirea sexuală chiar între indivizi obisnuiți are potențialul de a reitera hieros gamos-ul primordial, întorcînd ființa limitată cu fața spre gura peșterii platoniciene.
După ce enumeră trei dintre teoriile care au încercat fără succes să explice sexualitatea: finalismul biologic („prejudecata evoluționistă” darwinistă care consideră sexul doar un instinct animalic), impulsul genezic schopenhauerian (care presupune că un „geniu al speciei��� alege si unește indivizii fără știrea lor în scopul procreației unor ființe cît mai aproape de perfecțiune) și plăcerea ca scop în sine (care pune la baza instinctului sexual tendința către voluptate a omului), Evola le opune teoria „magnetică" a iubirii (termen împrumutat de la Camille Mauclair) care explică erosul prin polaritatea sexelor ce se atrag ca într-un cîmp magnetic, idee inspirată de altfel de învățătura tradițiilor antice: de exemplu, doctrina tradițională extrem-orientală vorbește despre o energie specială sau un „fluid" imaterial, numit tsing, care ar crește proporțional cu gradul de yin și yang (esența feminină și cea masculină) care sînt prezente atît în bărbat cît și în femeie.
Plecînd de la mitul androginului din care, conform Banchetului lui Platon, s-ar fi creat Diada primordială, eseul va urmări sexualitatea atît în planul sacru cît și în cel profan (ca să folosesc bine-cunoscuta dihotomie a lui Eliade, pe ale cărui cercetări Evola îşi sprijină de altfel numeroase afirmații): pe de o parte experiența erotico-sexuală în viața obișnuită (așa cum reiese din relațiile unui Ion cu o Maria sau din literatură), pe de alta experiența „magică, sacră, rituală sau mistică a unirii sexuale și a înseși orgiei, deseori chiar sub forme colective și instituționale (sărbători sezoniere, prostituție sacră, hierogamii etc)”.
Ca și de Rougement, Evola atrage atenția asupra degradării relațiilor interumane în lumea modernă, deplîngînd caracterul cerebral al pandemiei moderne a sexului: în locul impulsurilor violente din trecut, manifestate doar la nivel fizic, astăzi erotismul s-a transformat într-o excitație psihică difuză aproape fără legătură cu satisfacția fizică concretă (tocmai pentru că ne gîndim prea mult la sex), care duce la acea varietate autistică a libidoului despre care vorbește psihanaliza, caracterizată prin anestezie sexuală și castitate coruptă. El pune această degradare pe seama faptului că trăim într-o eră crepusculară, care nu mai e interesată de manifestările superioare ale afectivității, ci de „acela, sub-personal, determinat de pîntece și sex: drept care amenință să se adeverească vorbele nefericite ale unui mare poet, și anume că foamea și dragostea vor modela forma istoriei.”
Pentru a demonstra proveniența „magiei naturale” a iubirii, eseul aduce numeroase exemple de Diade luate din filosofie și din mitologie, arătînd că a existat în aproape toate credințele lumii o pereche primordială, simbolizînd principiile masculin și feminin: Focul și Apele la romani, Cerul („perfecțiunea activă") și Glia („perfecțiunea pasivă") sau yang și yin în tradiția extrem-orientală, purusha (bărbatul primordial) și prakrti (principiul „naturii", substanță sau energie primordială a tuturor devenirilor și mișcărilor) în tradiția indiană, în timp ce la greci, Aristotel a rezumat concepțiile filozofiei grecești antice cînd a afirmat că masculinul este forma care determină, principiul activ, în timp ce femininul este materia, principiul pasiv, iar Plotin a văzut în Logos principiul intelectual masculin, și în psyche - forța-viață feminină.
Pe baza acestor exemple introduce autorul conceptele de bărbat absolut și femeie absolută (un fel de arhetipuri ori „idei platoniciene" ale masculinului și ale femininului), concepte absolut necesare pentru înțelegerea afirmației că sexul este un dat fundamental, nu secundar, în viața omenească, modelîndu-ne atît partea interioară a ființei (esențială) cît și pe cea exterioară (artificială, dobîndită în viața de relație). Cînd partea exterioară, spune Evola, se dezvoltă în detrimentul celei interioare, raportul cu ființa profundă și esențială devine foarte fragil, viața sexuală e anesteziată, iar faptul că ești bărbat sau femeie devine mai puțin important. Egalizarea femeii cu bărbatul a născut monstruozitatea numită feminism în care ființa umană nu mai ascultă de legea sexului, deși în realitate nu există nici o măsură comună între cele două sexe care ar putea crea egalitate sau superioritate între ele:
Mai mult, orice femeie care se apropie de femeia absolută va fi superioară unui bărbat care e departe de arhetipul masculin și viceversa.
Trecînd la manifestările erotice propriu-zise, în planul profan fundamentul metafizic al dragostei umane este dat de transcendența în raport cu ființa individuală, avînd puterea de a schimba regulile sociale, sfidînd castele și tradiția; învrăjbind familii, creînd biserici (se știe că Luther s-a desprins de catolicism tocmai pentru că nu suporta abstinența sexuală), declanșînd războaie etc. Nu e de mirare că ea este subiectul artistic inepuizabil al artei, stimulînd facultățile umane cele mai înalte, find un „semn al impulsului incoercibil în om de a trece cu orice chip dincolo de limitele individului finit”.
În plan sacru, lumea tradițională, cu sistemul ei de corespondențe între realitate și simboluri, între acțiuni și mituri, nu numai că oferă cheia pentru descifrarea misterului sexualității umane, dar stabilește și principii normative pentru relațiile între bărbat și femeie, de vreme ce microcosmul reiterează macrocosmul.
Pe baza mitologiei va stabili studiul cele trei tipuri fundamentale ale femeii: afroditic (iubita), demetric (mama) și amazonic (fecioara). Tipul demetric apare încă din paleoliticul superior (idolii informi ai fecundității). Tipul afroditic se regăsește în epifaniile indiene ale Marii Zeițe — în Kali, „ca forță dizolvantă, răvășitoare, extatică și abisală a sexului: ca opus al feminității demetrice”. Divinitățile feminine de tip amazonic sînt hibride, devenind doar mai tîrziu caste și virgine, inițial fiind zeițe mame de tipul menționat mai înainte. Dar chiar Ishtar și Afrodita erau în același timp divinități ale războiului și ale victoriei, lucrul explicabil prin faptul ca războiul e o acțiune de distrugere și ucidere.
Ca „replici la lumea Mamelor telurice, a zeițelor demetrice și, în fine, a „Fecioarelor" ambigue, abisale, amazonice și distructive” avem în sfera masculinului virilitatea falico-telurică, cea dionisiacă și cea apolinică sau olimpică.
Aceste structuri mitologice ajută la stabilirea trăsăturilor fundamentale psihologice ale celor două sexe, pe marginea cărora s-a polemizat atîta vreme: să nu uităm că teologii catolici s-au întrebat chiar la un moment-dat dacă femeia are suflet (Augustin credea că ea nu e creată după chipul și asemănarea Domnului) și au avansat teza (regăsită și în Islam) că femeile aparțin altei specii, nefiind adevărate ființe umane, iar în Extremul-Orient se credea că în Paradis nu există femei căci înainte de a ajunge acolo ele s-ar fi născut din nou ca bărbați.
De fapt, diferențele dintre sexe provin din faptul că femeia, ca întrupare a eternului feminin, este „sufletul” (principiul vieții), în timp ce bărbatul este „spiritul” (principiul supranatural), superior și anterior Diadei.”
Psihologia feminină s-ar baza asadar pe Simbolismul Apelor și al variabilității lunare (autorul ține să precizeze că nu e vorba aici de „calități ale caracterului" sau „calități morale", ci de „elemente obiective care acționează în indivizi aproape la fel de impersonal ca proprietățile chimice prezen¬tate de o substanță dată”), concretizate în sugestionabilitate, adaptabilitate si disponibilitatea de a accepta și asimila idei și forme ce-i vin din exterior, lipsa gîndirii logice în sensul absolut si impersonal, ignorarea imperativului etic și predilecția pentru minciună (pentru un portret detaliat al femeii absolute evoliene, e interesant de citit articolul Amandei Bradley, Absolute Woman: A Clarification of Evola’s Thoughts on Women ).
Principiul masculin e pe de o parte complementar celui feminin (tipurilor virilității pure, războinicul și ascetul, le corespund tipurile feminității pure, iubita și mama), dar pe de alta reflectă caracterul a ceea ce este anterior și superior Diadei. De aceea, raporturile bazate pe diadă sînt esențiale pentru femeie (femeia absolută e numai sexualitate) dar nu pentru bărbat (care e sexualitate și ceva în plus). Femininul pur îşi caută propriul principiu în altcineva, pe cînd cel masculin în sine (de unde, la femeie, vanitatea, nevoia de a fi recunoscută, remarcată, adulată, admirată, dorită), cu consecințe asupra celor două tipuri fundamentale feminine care corespund arhetipurilor afroditic si demetric: tipul matern se va concentra asupra finalităților speciei, cel al iubitei va avea o atitudine oarecum opusă primului, „datorită conținutului virtual de transcendență propriu desfășurării absolute a erosului”
Căsătoria apare, în acest context, ca „Mister" al tipului demetric în lumea tradiției, dat fiind că, după cum se stie, familia antică era o instituție cu bază religioasă, ceea ce a influențat atît relațiile intime dintre cele două sexe cît și uzul conjugal al sexualității. Uniunea nu era influențată de sentimente, ci de descendența gentilică. Chiar în frecventarea soției, apărea distincția între scopul pur erotic și cel procreator, cel din urmă respectînd un ritual special de purificare și de îmbunare a zeilor. Procrearea însemna „conservarea și transmiterea în timp a forței mistice a propriului sînge, a propriei gens, și mai cu seamă cea a strămoșului primordial, imanentă sub forma de genius al neamului și reprezentată în Antichitatea clasică de focul sacru peren al casei.”
Căsătoria s-ar înscrie deci în prima dintre cele două legi recunoscute de toate religiile tradiționale, cu excepția catolicismului (care face confuzie între ele): cea a sacralizării vieții în lume pe ideea că lumea e creată de Dumnezeu în opoziție cu calea detașării, a transcendenței, pentru cei cu vocație ascetică.
Tot aici se înscriu și hierogamiile și orgiile cu scopul actualizării prezenței reale a unui zeu într-un anumit mediu, practicate de tipul afroditic. De exemplu, în cadrul Misterelor Marii Zeițe, se oficia prostituția sacră, în două moduri: fie în obiceiul ca fiecare fată să-și ofere virginitatea înainte de măritiș în incinta sacră a templului unui străin care să facă o ofrandă simbolică și să o invoce în ea pe Zeiță; fie în celebrarea misterului dragostei trupești, tot în templu, de către un număr fix de preotese, numite fecioare, dar nu în mod formalist și simbolic, ci ca pe un rit magic operativ, „pentru a alimenta curentul de psihism ce servea drept substrat al prezenței zeiței și, totodată, pentru a le transmite celor ce se împreunau cu ele, ca într-un sacra¬ment eficace, înrîurirea sau puterea acestei zeițe.”
Dacă mariajul este o formă de sacralizare instituțională a uniunii sexuale, iar hierogamiile și orgiile sînt forme cultice evocatoare și sacramentale ale acesteia, există alte două căi de rezolvare a a acestei probleme: fie prin distanțare (ascetismul, care se rupe de Diadă, activînd forța sexuală din interior, fără ajutorul femeii), fie printr-un regim special de unire sexuală „în scopul unei rupturi existențiale — extatică sau inițiatică — de nivel.” Ultimul capitol se va ocupa tocmai de această a patra soluție care a fost dată problemei sexului în planul sacru, prezentînd cîte ceva din practicile sexuale tantrice și arabe, din kundalini-yoga și din daoism, din Kabbala și din Misterele Eleusine.
Studiul se încheie cu observația că în ciuda devalorizării și a vulgarizării sexului în societatea contemporană, în care diferentele dintre bărbat si femeie amenință să se șteargă, metafizica lui subzistă fie și numai prin simplul fapt că oferă omului comun o deschidere spre transcendent, „mîngîierea iluzorie, obscură, disperată pentru dezgustul și angoasa existențială ale aceluia care s-a înfundat pe un drum fără ieșire”:
Julius Evola, într-un eseu la fel de incitant, Metafizica sexului, analizează mai ales aspectul sexual al celor două tipuri de iubire, demonstrînd că la baza a ceea ce el numește „dragoste sexuală” nu stă o necesitate fizică, ci o dorință psihică. Trei idei importante se desprind din studiul lui: că erosul nu coboară omul la un nivel inferior, de animalitate, cum s-a crezut, ba dimpotrivă îl poate apropia de infinit; că egalitatea între bărbat și femeie este imposibilă pentru că țin de principii diferite (ceea ce mi-a întărit o convingere mai veche și anume că feminismul izvorăște nu atît dintr-o dorință de echitate socială, cît dintr-o încercare de escamotare a propriului sex, de care subconștientul feminin se jenează); în fine, că iubirea sexuală chiar între indivizi obisnuiți are potențialul de a reitera hieros gamos-ul primordial, întorcînd ființa limitată cu fața spre gura peșterii platoniciene.
După ce enumeră trei dintre teoriile care au încercat fără succes să explice sexualitatea: finalismul biologic („prejudecata evoluționistă” darwinistă care consideră sexul doar un instinct animalic), impulsul genezic schopenhauerian (care presupune că un „geniu al speciei��� alege si unește indivizii fără știrea lor în scopul procreației unor ființe cît mai aproape de perfecțiune) și plăcerea ca scop în sine (care pune la baza instinctului sexual tendința către voluptate a omului), Evola le opune teoria „magnetică" a iubirii (termen împrumutat de la Camille Mauclair) care explică erosul prin polaritatea sexelor ce se atrag ca într-un cîmp magnetic, idee inspirată de altfel de învățătura tradițiilor antice: de exemplu, doctrina tradițională extrem-orientală vorbește despre o energie specială sau un „fluid" imaterial, numit tsing, care ar crește proporțional cu gradul de yin și yang (esența feminină și cea masculină) care sînt prezente atît în bărbat cît și în femeie.
...putem vorbi despre o magie naturală a dragostei, fapt hiperfizic absolut pozitiv, care intervine și în viața oamenii celor mai comuni, celor mai materialiști sau mai primitivi. (s.a.)
Plecînd de la mitul androginului din care, conform Banchetului lui Platon, s-ar fi creat Diada primordială, eseul va urmări sexualitatea atît în planul sacru cît și în cel profan (ca să folosesc bine-cunoscuta dihotomie a lui Eliade, pe ale cărui cercetări Evola îşi sprijină de altfel numeroase afirmații): pe de o parte experiența erotico-sexuală în viața obișnuită (așa cum reiese din relațiile unui Ion cu o Maria sau din literatură), pe de alta experiența „magică, sacră, rituală sau mistică a unirii sexuale și a înseși orgiei, deseori chiar sub forme colective și instituționale (sărbători sezoniere, prostituție sacră, hierogamii etc)”.
Ca și de Rougement, Evola atrage atenția asupra degradării relațiilor interumane în lumea modernă, deplîngînd caracterul cerebral al pandemiei moderne a sexului: în locul impulsurilor violente din trecut, manifestate doar la nivel fizic, astăzi erotismul s-a transformat într-o excitație psihică difuză aproape fără legătură cu satisfacția fizică concretă (tocmai pentru că ne gîndim prea mult la sex), care duce la acea varietate autistică a libidoului despre care vorbește psihanaliza, caracterizată prin anestezie sexuală și castitate coruptă. El pune această degradare pe seama faptului că trăim într-o eră crepusculară, care nu mai e interesată de manifestările superioare ale afectivității, ci de „acela, sub-personal, determinat de pîntece și sex: drept care amenință să se adeverească vorbele nefericite ale unui mare poet, și anume că foamea și dragostea vor modela forma istoriei.”
Pentru a demonstra proveniența „magiei naturale” a iubirii, eseul aduce numeroase exemple de Diade luate din filosofie și din mitologie, arătînd că a existat în aproape toate credințele lumii o pereche primordială, simbolizînd principiile masculin și feminin: Focul și Apele la romani, Cerul („perfecțiunea activă") și Glia („perfecțiunea pasivă") sau yang și yin în tradiția extrem-orientală, purusha (bărbatul primordial) și prakrti (principiul „naturii", substanță sau energie primordială a tuturor devenirilor și mișcărilor) în tradiția indiană, în timp ce la greci, Aristotel a rezumat concepțiile filozofiei grecești antice cînd a afirmat că masculinul este forma care determină, principiul activ, în timp ce femininul este materia, principiul pasiv, iar Plotin a văzut în Logos principiul intelectual masculin, și în psyche - forța-viață feminină.
Pe baza acestor exemple introduce autorul conceptele de bărbat absolut și femeie absolută (un fel de arhetipuri ori „idei platoniciene" ale masculinului și ale femininului), concepte absolut necesare pentru înțelegerea afirmației că sexul este un dat fundamental, nu secundar, în viața omenească, modelîndu-ne atît partea interioară a ființei (esențială) cît și pe cea exterioară (artificială, dobîndită în viața de relație). Cînd partea exterioară, spune Evola, se dezvoltă în detrimentul celei interioare, raportul cu ființa profundă și esențială devine foarte fragil, viața sexuală e anesteziată, iar faptul că ești bărbat sau femeie devine mai puțin important. Egalizarea femeii cu bărbatul a născut monstruozitatea numită feminism în care ființa umană nu mai ascultă de legea sexului, deși în realitate nu există nici o măsură comună între cele două sexe care ar putea crea egalitate sau superioritate între ele:
Întrebarea dacă „femeia" este superioară sau inferioară „bărbatului" e la fel de inutilă ca și întrebarea dacă apa e superioară sau inferioară focului. De aceea, criteriul de măsură pentru fiecare dintre sexe nu poate fi dat de către sexul opus, ci exclusiv de „ideea" propriului sex.
Mai mult, orice femeie care se apropie de femeia absolută va fi superioară unui bărbat care e departe de arhetipul masculin și viceversa.
Trecînd la manifestările erotice propriu-zise, în planul profan fundamentul metafizic al dragostei umane este dat de transcendența în raport cu ființa individuală, avînd puterea de a schimba regulile sociale, sfidînd castele și tradiția; învrăjbind familii, creînd biserici (se știe că Luther s-a desprins de catolicism tocmai pentru că nu suporta abstinența sexuală), declanșînd războaie etc. Nu e de mirare că ea este subiectul artistic inepuizabil al artei, stimulînd facultățile umane cele mai înalte, find un „semn al impulsului incoercibil în om de a trece cu orice chip dincolo de limitele individului finit”.
Mirajul pe care însăși dragostea profană îl oferă ca reflex sau presimțire a ceea ce poate da erosul trecînd pe un plan superior — fericirea supremă scontată în unirea cu un anumit individ de sex opus — e atît de puternic, încît, dacă e refuzat sau anihilat, însăși viața își pierde orice atracție, devine goală și lipsită de sens, astfel încît dezgustul îi face pe unii chiar să și-o ia. Din același motiv, pierderea ființei iubite din pricina morții sau trădării sale poate fi o durere mai puternică decît oricare alta.
În plan sacru, lumea tradițională, cu sistemul ei de corespondențe între realitate și simboluri, între acțiuni și mituri, nu numai că oferă cheia pentru descifrarea misterului sexualității umane, dar stabilește și principii normative pentru relațiile între bărbat și femeie, de vreme ce microcosmul reiterează macrocosmul.
Pe baza mitologiei va stabili studiul cele trei tipuri fundamentale ale femeii: afroditic (iubita), demetric (mama) și amazonic (fecioara). Tipul demetric apare încă din paleoliticul superior (idolii informi ai fecundității). Tipul afroditic se regăsește în epifaniile indiene ale Marii Zeițe — în Kali, „ca forță dizolvantă, răvășitoare, extatică și abisală a sexului: ca opus al feminității demetrice”. Divinitățile feminine de tip amazonic sînt hibride, devenind doar mai tîrziu caste și virgine, inițial fiind zeițe mame de tipul menționat mai înainte. Dar chiar Ishtar și Afrodita erau în același timp divinități ale războiului și ale victoriei, lucrul explicabil prin faptul ca războiul e o acțiune de distrugere și ucidere.
Ca „replici la lumea Mamelor telurice, a zeițelor demetrice și, în fine, a „Fecioarelor" ambigue, abisale, amazonice și distructive” avem în sfera masculinului virilitatea falico-telurică, cea dionisiacă și cea apolinică sau olimpică.
Aceste structuri mitologice ajută la stabilirea trăsăturilor fundamentale psihologice ale celor două sexe, pe marginea cărora s-a polemizat atîta vreme: să nu uităm că teologii catolici s-au întrebat chiar la un moment-dat dacă femeia are suflet (Augustin credea că ea nu e creată după chipul și asemănarea Domnului) și au avansat teza (regăsită și în Islam) că femeile aparțin altei specii, nefiind adevărate ființe umane, iar în Extremul-Orient se credea că în Paradis nu există femei căci înainte de a ajunge acolo ele s-ar fi născut din nou ca bărbați.
De fapt, diferențele dintre sexe provin din faptul că femeia, ca întrupare a eternului feminin, este „sufletul” (principiul vieții), în timp ce bărbatul este „spiritul” (principiul supranatural), superior și anterior Diadei.”
Psihologia feminină s-ar baza asadar pe Simbolismul Apelor și al variabilității lunare (autorul ține să precizeze că nu e vorba aici de „calități ale caracterului" sau „calități morale", ci de „elemente obiective care acționează în indivizi aproape la fel de impersonal ca proprietățile chimice prezen¬tate de o substanță dată”), concretizate în sugestionabilitate, adaptabilitate si disponibilitatea de a accepta și asimila idei și forme ce-i vin din exterior, lipsa gîndirii logice în sensul absolut si impersonal, ignorarea imperativului etic și predilecția pentru minciună (pentru un portret detaliat al femeii absolute evoliene, e interesant de citit articolul Amandei Bradley, Absolute Woman: A Clarification of Evola’s Thoughts on Women ).
Principiul masculin e pe de o parte complementar celui feminin (tipurilor virilității pure, războinicul și ascetul, le corespund tipurile feminității pure, iubita și mama), dar pe de alta reflectă caracterul a ceea ce este anterior și superior Diadei. De aceea, raporturile bazate pe diadă sînt esențiale pentru femeie (femeia absolută e numai sexualitate) dar nu pentru bărbat (care e sexualitate și ceva în plus). Femininul pur îşi caută propriul principiu în altcineva, pe cînd cel masculin în sine (de unde, la femeie, vanitatea, nevoia de a fi recunoscută, remarcată, adulată, admirată, dorită), cu consecințe asupra celor două tipuri fundamentale feminine care corespund arhetipurilor afroditic si demetric: tipul matern se va concentra asupra finalităților speciei, cel al iubitei va avea o atitudine oarecum opusă primului, „datorită conținutului virtual de transcendență propriu desfășurării absolute a erosului”
Căsătoria apare, în acest context, ca „Mister" al tipului demetric în lumea tradiției, dat fiind că, după cum se stie, familia antică era o instituție cu bază religioasă, ceea ce a influențat atît relațiile intime dintre cele două sexe cît și uzul conjugal al sexualității. Uniunea nu era influențată de sentimente, ci de descendența gentilică. Chiar în frecventarea soției, apărea distincția între scopul pur erotic și cel procreator, cel din urmă respectînd un ritual special de purificare și de îmbunare a zeilor. Procrearea însemna „conservarea și transmiterea în timp a forței mistice a propriului sînge, a propriei gens, și mai cu seamă cea a strămoșului primordial, imanentă sub forma de genius al neamului și reprezentată în Antichitatea clasică de focul sacru peren al casei.”
Căsătoria s-ar înscrie deci în prima dintre cele două legi recunoscute de toate religiile tradiționale, cu excepția catolicismului (care face confuzie între ele): cea a sacralizării vieții în lume pe ideea că lumea e creată de Dumnezeu în opoziție cu calea detașării, a transcendenței, pentru cei cu vocație ascetică.
Tot aici se înscriu și hierogamiile și orgiile cu scopul actualizării prezenței reale a unui zeu într-un anumit mediu, practicate de tipul afroditic. De exemplu, în cadrul Misterelor Marii Zeițe, se oficia prostituția sacră, în două moduri: fie în obiceiul ca fiecare fată să-și ofere virginitatea înainte de măritiș în incinta sacră a templului unui străin care să facă o ofrandă simbolică și să o invoce în ea pe Zeiță; fie în celebrarea misterului dragostei trupești, tot în templu, de către un număr fix de preotese, numite fecioare, dar nu în mod formalist și simbolic, ci ca pe un rit magic operativ, „pentru a alimenta curentul de psihism ce servea drept substrat al prezenței zeiței și, totodată, pentru a le transmite celor ce se împreunau cu ele, ca într-un sacra¬ment eficace, înrîurirea sau puterea acestei zeițe.”
Dacă mariajul este o formă de sacralizare instituțională a uniunii sexuale, iar hierogamiile și orgiile sînt forme cultice evocatoare și sacramentale ale acesteia, există alte două căi de rezolvare a a acestei probleme: fie prin distanțare (ascetismul, care se rupe de Diadă, activînd forța sexuală din interior, fără ajutorul femeii), fie printr-un regim special de unire sexuală „în scopul unei rupturi existențiale — extatică sau inițiatică — de nivel.” Ultimul capitol se va ocupa tocmai de această a patra soluție care a fost dată problemei sexului în planul sacru, prezentînd cîte ceva din practicile sexuale tantrice și arabe, din kundalini-yoga și din daoism, din Kabbala și din Misterele Eleusine.
Studiul se încheie cu observația că în ciuda devalorizării și a vulgarizării sexului în societatea contemporană, în care diferentele dintre bărbat si femeie amenință să se șteargă, metafizica lui subzistă fie și numai prin simplul fapt că oferă omului comun o deschidere spre transcendent, „mîngîierea iluzorie, obscură, disperată pentru dezgustul și angoasa existențială ale aceluia care s-a înfundat pe un drum fără ieșire”:
Pentru omenirea comună... doar sexul procură, fie și doar în extazul, în mirajul sau în trauma obscură de o clipă, deschideri dincolo de condiționările existenței pur individuale. Acesta e adevăratul fundament al însemnătății, neegalată de nici un alt impuls, pe care dragostea și sexul au avut-o și o vor avea totdeauna în viața umană.
August 17, 2020
Pretty dense. Evola sure knew a lot about esoteric sexual practises. Basically boils down to 'modern man is a degenerate' which I already knew, but I guess it's nice to have the reasons for that laid bare. Lots of interesting facts and quotes. He's not the most entertaining writer, but damn you'll learn something.
August 26, 2015
The perfect read for those seeking the metaphysical meaning of love.
October 26, 2017
Will forever be torn over ranting school books, because should I rate it based on my own personal experience reading it or what it means for its field of study?
May 25, 2018
A magnificent book, which I own and part of my collection, regarding all the metaphysical symbolic meaning behind the myths and traditions regarding love and sex. (The aspects of Eros...) Whether Evola is covering Hindu or Shinto traditions, or Kabbalistic practices, he provides an abundance of knowledge and meaning which comes with all these various examples. It is with this anthropological and cultural experience that he also provides a counter to the scientific materialism which accompanies biological functionality regarding sex. Evola presents a detailed and prevalent case that love/sex should not be reduced in such a manner. Or ultimately not to be extinguished by a powerful attack from cultural marxism which deems such traditionalists as reactionary and irrelevant. The opposite seems to be true to the extent that the ancients had a more imaginative and enriching approach to what we now call psychology meeting physicality that came alive during passion, and that deeper connection that comes with attachment/union. It is in this regard that it manifests upon the higher realm of meaning and thought which emulates immortal beings. Involution from a sacred point deems humanity is in danger of gravitating away from such origins.
EROS AND PSYCHE
Psyche was a Greek princess who was so beautiful that Aphrodite, the goddess of love and beauty, grew jealous of her. The goddess sent her son, the winged god of love Eros, to strike the young princess with one of his arrows, making her fall unhappily in love. But when Eros saw Psyche, he fell in love with her himself and could not obey his mother. As a gentle breeze he lifted Psyche and carried her to a secluded palace. Eros would come to his beloved every night, after dark; he was very kind and loving and she soon returned his feelings, although she was never allowed to see her lover. The god warned her that he would have to leave her for ever if she sees his face. Later on, Psyche’s sisters came to visit and convinced her that she must see her lover, as he might turn out to be a dangerous monster. So Psyche saw Eros’ face by the light of a candle, while he was sleeping, and discovered that he was not the monster she feared but a magnificent god. After that Eros left her and she was very unhappy. Desperate to bring him back, Psyche went to Aphrodite to ask for her help, but the goddess remained indifferent to her suffering and gave her impossible tasks to fulfil. However, Psyche succeeded in all of them, as Eros was secretly watching over her and helping her. In the end, Zeus decided that the lovers proved their devotion for each other and united them for eternity, granting Psyche immortality. They lived happily ever after and a beautiful child was born to them, whose name was Voluptas (Pleasure).
This is an alegorical tale with many levels of meaning. It is about the union between Eros (masculine principle, erotic passion) and Psyche (feminine principle, the soul), that at the end engenders bliss.
There is also a lot of truth about relationships in it. While they love each other and defend their love, Eros and Psyche grow and develop, becoming more forgiving (Eros), and stronger (Psyche). Thus, through their relationship they overcome their own weaknesses, evolving into better and complete personalities. Although Greeks emphasised physical beauty, as a symbol and quintessence of all virtue, the story shows that true love goes beyond the superficiality of physical attraction (Psyche falls in love with Eros without seeing him). Love requires trust (Psyche is forbidden to see Eros) and once the trust is broken it is difficult to get it back. In relationships, one should not let other people interfere (such as Psyche’s sisters) but make one’s own decisions. Where there is love, there is forgiveness also (Eros is still watching over Psyche, after she disobeyed him). Joint effort can create strength to solve even insurmountable problems (the impossible tasks set by Aphrodite). To Greeks, romantic love was the single most important ingredient of human happiness - let us remember the choice of Paris, from another myth, who preferred the love of Helena over fame and power. In their view, true love should be rewarded, so at the end of the story the union of Eros and Psyche is blessed and protected by the gods for eternity.
''According to Plato a primordial race existed "whose essence is now extinct," a race of beings who contained in themselves both principles, male and female. This hermaphroditic race "was extraordinarily strong and brave, and they nourished in their hearts very arrogant designs, even unto an attack upon the god
themselves...."
According to Plato the gods did not strike the hermaphrodites with
lightning...but paralyzed their power and broke them in two.
Thenceforth there arouse beings of one sex or the other, male or female; they were, however, beings who retained the memory of their earlier state and in whom the impulse to reconstitute the primordial unity was kindled. According to Plato, in that impulse should be sought the ultimate metaphysical and everlasting meaning of eros: "From such an ancient time has love goaded human beings one toward the other; it is inborn and seeks to renew our ancient nature in an endeavour to unite in one single being two distinct
beings...."
"It is really the burning longing for this unity which bears the
name of love."
— Julius Evola (Eros and the Mysteries of Love: The Metaphysics of Sex, p.42)
EROS AND PSYCHE
Psyche was a Greek princess who was so beautiful that Aphrodite, the goddess of love and beauty, grew jealous of her. The goddess sent her son, the winged god of love Eros, to strike the young princess with one of his arrows, making her fall unhappily in love. But when Eros saw Psyche, he fell in love with her himself and could not obey his mother. As a gentle breeze he lifted Psyche and carried her to a secluded palace. Eros would come to his beloved every night, after dark; he was very kind and loving and she soon returned his feelings, although she was never allowed to see her lover. The god warned her that he would have to leave her for ever if she sees his face. Later on, Psyche’s sisters came to visit and convinced her that she must see her lover, as he might turn out to be a dangerous monster. So Psyche saw Eros’ face by the light of a candle, while he was sleeping, and discovered that he was not the monster she feared but a magnificent god. After that Eros left her and she was very unhappy. Desperate to bring him back, Psyche went to Aphrodite to ask for her help, but the goddess remained indifferent to her suffering and gave her impossible tasks to fulfil. However, Psyche succeeded in all of them, as Eros was secretly watching over her and helping her. In the end, Zeus decided that the lovers proved their devotion for each other and united them for eternity, granting Psyche immortality. They lived happily ever after and a beautiful child was born to them, whose name was Voluptas (Pleasure).
This is an alegorical tale with many levels of meaning. It is about the union between Eros (masculine principle, erotic passion) and Psyche (feminine principle, the soul), that at the end engenders bliss.
There is also a lot of truth about relationships in it. While they love each other and defend their love, Eros and Psyche grow and develop, becoming more forgiving (Eros), and stronger (Psyche). Thus, through their relationship they overcome their own weaknesses, evolving into better and complete personalities. Although Greeks emphasised physical beauty, as a symbol and quintessence of all virtue, the story shows that true love goes beyond the superficiality of physical attraction (Psyche falls in love with Eros without seeing him). Love requires trust (Psyche is forbidden to see Eros) and once the trust is broken it is difficult to get it back. In relationships, one should not let other people interfere (such as Psyche’s sisters) but make one’s own decisions. Where there is love, there is forgiveness also (Eros is still watching over Psyche, after she disobeyed him). Joint effort can create strength to solve even insurmountable problems (the impossible tasks set by Aphrodite). To Greeks, romantic love was the single most important ingredient of human happiness - let us remember the choice of Paris, from another myth, who preferred the love of Helena over fame and power. In their view, true love should be rewarded, so at the end of the story the union of Eros and Psyche is blessed and protected by the gods for eternity.
''According to Plato a primordial race existed "whose essence is now extinct," a race of beings who contained in themselves both principles, male and female. This hermaphroditic race "was extraordinarily strong and brave, and they nourished in their hearts very arrogant designs, even unto an attack upon the god
themselves...."
According to Plato the gods did not strike the hermaphrodites with
lightning...but paralyzed their power and broke them in two.
Thenceforth there arouse beings of one sex or the other, male or female; they were, however, beings who retained the memory of their earlier state and in whom the impulse to reconstitute the primordial unity was kindled. According to Plato, in that impulse should be sought the ultimate metaphysical and everlasting meaning of eros: "From such an ancient time has love goaded human beings one toward the other; it is inborn and seeks to renew our ancient nature in an endeavour to unite in one single being two distinct
beings...."
"It is really the burning longing for this unity which bears the
name of love."
— Julius Evola (Eros and the Mysteries of Love: The Metaphysics of Sex, p.42)
March 8, 2025
Once again, Julius Evola delivers one of the most interesting and thought-provoking explorations into a crucial topic I have ever seen. There is so much here that has really grabbed my interest and certain chapters just stay with you for so long, as it really feels like Evola gets to the core of a lot of sexual discourse, which is of course the primary aim of the book. In many ways, I feel like this is a must-read for virtually everyone as its focus on sex, is something totally universal and important to all humans, and the conclusions it reaches and information it provides seems priceless. I almost get the feeling that I had next to zero understanding of the true nature of sex before reading, and now feel much more enlightened in this field. I cannot recommend it enough, Evola doesn't mince words or waste time, he is an amazing writer that accurately (and often prophetically) hits the nail on the head with everything he endeavours to write about.
November 16, 2025
Good reminder of the ontological and unbridgeable difference between men and women - despite every single media outlet’s never-ending attempts at propagandising us to believe otherwise.
‘Anyone who can make you believe in absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.’ Big facts Voltaire.
‘Anyone who can make you believe in absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.’ Big facts Voltaire.
May 30, 2021
A story of sex and a phenomenology of phucking. That is what Evola set out to create with this book.
While I can't say Evola didn't succeed in his goal, I'm just left kinda empty by how he achieved his goal. There's a lot of interesting ideas and a parallels drawn up in these pages, but a good chunk of those are also lifted, in whole or in part, from other writers and theorists, like Georges Bataille, Claude Lévi-Strauss and Sigmund Freud.
Although, to Evola's credit, he does draw conclusions that are different from the three aforementioned authors. Evola is nothing if not consistent in his eternal strife towards a mystical epistemology and ontology. An eternal strife to dispute the materialistic and psychoanalytical explanations of human phenomenon.
But, that also means it sticks out all the more when Evola uses material and/or psychoanalytical explanations within his analysis to prove his point.
If your purpose is to demonstrate the lacking explanatory power of the scientific world view, it's strange how you would use scientific data to bolster your argument.
While I can't say Evola didn't succeed in his goal, I'm just left kinda empty by how he achieved his goal. There's a lot of interesting ideas and a parallels drawn up in these pages, but a good chunk of those are also lifted, in whole or in part, from other writers and theorists, like Georges Bataille, Claude Lévi-Strauss and Sigmund Freud.
Although, to Evola's credit, he does draw conclusions that are different from the three aforementioned authors. Evola is nothing if not consistent in his eternal strife towards a mystical epistemology and ontology. An eternal strife to dispute the materialistic and psychoanalytical explanations of human phenomenon.
But, that also means it sticks out all the more when Evola uses material and/or psychoanalytical explanations within his analysis to prove his point.
If your purpose is to demonstrate the lacking explanatory power of the scientific world view, it's strange how you would use scientific data to bolster your argument.
December 6, 2019
A brilliant must-read for students in gender studies.
April 13, 2020
Fascist antics passed off as sexual insight. The ideas of this book are that of it's author, traditionalist and outdated.
Frankly shocking that we allow works by Evola to be published.
Frankly shocking that we allow works by Evola to be published.
June 9, 2024
I did not finish and will not. This is Evola at his lowest, trying to revive dead paganism with notions completely absurd to any person with contemporary western roots, it's not a coincidence that he was a dadaist artist.
Now when he’s when speaking of the spirituality of warfare and of the warrior, he can write beautifully.
Now when he’s when speaking of the spirituality of warfare and of the warrior, he can write beautifully.
January 25, 2025
Evola afirmaba que este era su libro más importante de la postguerra y puedo entender por qué. Un estudio fascinante del misterio del eros, llegando a desentrañar sus secretos como no podría hacerlo el materialismo de decenas de autores contemporáneos.
July 3, 2021
“... como prueba a posteriori, Platón pregunta a los amantes por boca de Hefesto: “¿Es de esto de lo que sentís deseo? ¿De fundiros lo más posible el uno con el otro de manera que no os abandonéis el uno al otro ni de noche ni de día? Si es eso, en efecto, lo que deseáis, yo no pido otra cosa que fundiros en uno y, con mi fuelle de herrero, hacer de vosotros una aleación de tal modo que, de dos seres que sois, seáis uno solo y, mientras viváis, viváis los dos juntos una existencia común como si fueseis un solo ser. Luego, tras vuestra muerte, allá abajo en el Hades, en vez de ser dos, seguiréis siendo uno solo [...]. Venga, mirad a ver si es eso lo que anheláis y si estaréis satisfechos de haber obtenido que se realice.”
"Había dos cuerpos, luego hubo un solo cuerpo; un cuerpo en el interior del otro, una vida en el interior de otra vida. No había más que una necesidad, un buscar, una penetración cada vez más profunda a través de la carne, a través de la blanda y ardiente niebla que se hinchaba, ilimitada, sin duración."
"Había dos cuerpos, luego hubo un solo cuerpo; un cuerpo en el interior del otro, una vida en el interior de otra vida. No había más que una necesidad, un buscar, una penetración cada vez más profunda a través de la carne, a través de la blanda y ardiente niebla que se hinchaba, ilimitada, sin duración."
April 12, 2020
O carte greoaie, dar cu un subiect interesant. Te plimbă prin toate mitologiile importante, încercând să explice prin prisma lor comportamentul sexual și tot ce ține de sfera sexului. Ca un filosof respectat, Julius Evola a trebuit să facă un act lung de „gimnastică mentală", să-i zicem. Ce vreau să spun e că a spus puține în cuvinte multe. Nu vreau să zic că nu am deprins nicio concluzie, deoarece nu știu dacă e un subiect din care poți trage o concluzie definitivă, dar este necesar să o mai recitesc.
Totuși, această fixație împotriva biologiei și psihologiei, mai ales a psihanalizei, mi s-a părut destul de nefondată și inutilă. În rest, ideile au fost bine dezvoltate, iar informațiile au fost chiar interesante.
Recomand pentru interesații de mitologie; cine caută un text serios din punct de vedere științific, nu este aceasta cartea. Dar merită citită.
Totuși, această fixație împotriva biologiei și psihologiei, mai ales a psihanalizei, mi s-a părut destul de nefondată și inutilă. În rest, ideile au fost bine dezvoltate, iar informațiile au fost chiar interesante.
Recomand pentru interesații de mitologie; cine caută un text serios din punct de vedere științific, nu este aceasta cartea. Dar merită citită.
July 24, 2022
Mediocre, repetitive, and overrated, even among Evola's more "niche works." I can appreciate the body of references he puts forth in order to develop his "traditional science" of eros, but it fails to shake my impression of it as reductive to the point of absurdity coupled with schizophrenic tedium. His book on the Grail is much better in every way imo, while EatMoL fails to come off as anything other than a haphazard commentary on Plato.
(also btfo by Galatians 3:28)
(also btfo by Galatians 3:28)
May 15, 2022
Giulio (Julius) Evola, bekend als filosoof en esotericus schetst in dit werk de verschillende manifestaties van de liefde, de seksen, de lusten, … die een rol spelen binnen het menselijk, cross-cultureel, geschiedkundig, psychologisch, religieus en spiritueel kader.
Zijn filosofie benoemt hij als traditie wat in wezen een syncretisch amalgaam lijkt te zijn ontsproten aan verschillende occulte en metafysische invloeden afgeleid van oude mythen dat ontsproot uit esoterische geschriften zoals bijv. het werk van Aleister Crowley e.a. Doch beperkte hij zich hier niet toe en haalt hij eveneens een verzameling mythen aan uit bijv. verschillende Griekse en hindoeïstische tradities.
Hij kadert de term metafysica m.b.t. tot seksualiteit gedeeltelijk als de 'eerste principes' van menselijke seksualiteit en onderscheidt deze van de biologische instincten (primaire reproductie van de soort), die hij duidelijk beschouwd als één van de laagste en minst betekenisvolle aspecten van seks.
Opvallend in dit werk is het herhaaldelijk voorkomen van de term ‘eenheid’ dat prominent naar voren komt. Dit vertelt ons dat Evola’s kijk op seksualiteit inhoudt dat de seksuele daad een poging is die tot de hereniging van het mannelijke en het vrouwelijke tussen de seksen leidt. Zou dit een poging zijn om het fysieke element van de mens te herenigen met het spirituele?
Voorts benadrukt zijn visie op het thema kenmerken van zowel romantische liefde en/of esthetische schoonheid, terwijl de christelijke sacralisatie van seksualiteit het fysieke aspect degradeert naar het niveau van het profane. Evola verwerpt de notie van een profane dimensie van seksualiteit niet, maar maakt een duidelijk onderscheid tussen het profane en het metafysische. Deze laatsten, kunnen zowel het hedonistische najagen van seksueel genot als een doel op zich omvatten, maar het omvat ook seksuele handelingen met romantische liefde als doel.
Zijn filosofie benoemt hij als traditie wat in wezen een syncretisch amalgaam lijkt te zijn ontsproten aan verschillende occulte en metafysische invloeden afgeleid van oude mythen dat ontsproot uit esoterische geschriften zoals bijv. het werk van Aleister Crowley e.a. Doch beperkte hij zich hier niet toe en haalt hij eveneens een verzameling mythen aan uit bijv. verschillende Griekse en hindoeïstische tradities.
Hij kadert de term metafysica m.b.t. tot seksualiteit gedeeltelijk als de 'eerste principes' van menselijke seksualiteit en onderscheidt deze van de biologische instincten (primaire reproductie van de soort), die hij duidelijk beschouwd als één van de laagste en minst betekenisvolle aspecten van seks.
Opvallend in dit werk is het herhaaldelijk voorkomen van de term ‘eenheid’ dat prominent naar voren komt. Dit vertelt ons dat Evola’s kijk op seksualiteit inhoudt dat de seksuele daad een poging is die tot de hereniging van het mannelijke en het vrouwelijke tussen de seksen leidt. Zou dit een poging zijn om het fysieke element van de mens te herenigen met het spirituele?
Voorts benadrukt zijn visie op het thema kenmerken van zowel romantische liefde en/of esthetische schoonheid, terwijl de christelijke sacralisatie van seksualiteit het fysieke aspect degradeert naar het niveau van het profane. Evola verwerpt de notie van een profane dimensie van seksualiteit niet, maar maakt een duidelijk onderscheid tussen het profane en het metafysische. Deze laatsten, kunnen zowel het hedonistische najagen van seksueel genot als een doel op zich omvatten, maar het omvat ook seksuele handelingen met romantische liefde als doel.
October 9, 2018
"These, therefore, are the perspectives that this treatise wishes to open up by simply proposing a broadening of knowledge. Our purpose here was to show that what we are accustomed to seeing and what, almost without exception, are to be found around us so often that they seem to be normal and evident are not the whole story, and that the present sexological theories, especially those influenced by evolutionistic biology or fixed psychoanalytical ideas, do not even much upon the most important matters. It would already be a great step forward if the mention of the metaphysics of sex no longer seemed to a reader to be eccentric."
A goldmine of information, difficult to read at times. One can easily get lost in the big amount of details too sometimes.
"Furthermore, papers on sexological research with scientific pretension are in general ludicrously incompetent; for here firsthand understanding of the experience is the sine qua non. Havelock Ellis rightly remarked that “the women who write books about these [sexual] problems in all seriousness and sincerity are often the very last persons to whom one should turn as representatives of their sex; those who know most are those who write least .” We should say furthermore that they are those who have not written anything at all, and the same applies, of course, to a great extent in the case of men."
A goldmine of information, difficult to read at times. One can easily get lost in the big amount of details too sometimes.
"Furthermore, papers on sexological research with scientific pretension are in general ludicrously incompetent; for here firsthand understanding of the experience is the sine qua non. Havelock Ellis rightly remarked that “the women who write books about these [sexual] problems in all seriousness and sincerity are often the very last persons to whom one should turn as representatives of their sex; those who know most are those who write least .” We should say furthermore that they are those who have not written anything at all, and the same applies, of course, to a great extent in the case of men."
November 24, 2025
An admirable attempt at an underexplored subject, it casts a very wide net similarly to Spengler's Decline of the West, laying groundwork that others could focus and build upon, but I don't know that anyone has on this subject.
Many describe it as dense, which is true, but I'd also call it slow, and I had to be very dedicated to finish this. Evola will say something interesting and explain it, then explain it 4 other ways and go on a bit of a tangent, I become incredibly bored and nearly give up, only for him to draw me back in in a strange kind of ebb and flow.
There was much unsavory subject matter that I suppose could not be avoided, including hermaphroditism, homosexuality, puberty, Kabballah and other non-European philosophies, and I did not enjoy most of the book, but the parts I did enjoy were incredibly enlightening.
Metaphysical ideas are incredibly difficult to debate, but it is my opinion that followers of Evola take too much of his every word as truth and that texts like this, fascinating and sweetly-written as they are, still need to be read very critically.
Many describe it as dense, which is true, but I'd also call it slow, and I had to be very dedicated to finish this. Evola will say something interesting and explain it, then explain it 4 other ways and go on a bit of a tangent, I become incredibly bored and nearly give up, only for him to draw me back in in a strange kind of ebb and flow.
There was much unsavory subject matter that I suppose could not be avoided, including hermaphroditism, homosexuality, puberty, Kabballah and other non-European philosophies, and I did not enjoy most of the book, but the parts I did enjoy were incredibly enlightening.
Metaphysical ideas are incredibly difficult to debate, but it is my opinion that followers of Evola take too much of his every word as truth and that texts like this, fascinating and sweetly-written as they are, still need to be read very critically.
December 14, 2020
Julius Evola, often misunderstood, not only by right- and left-winged, can be read differently today after scrutinizing his sublime Greco-Roman metaphysics, rethinking his remarkable statement that "woman not only has a soul but is eminently soul".
Today we can say that the masculine principle - and here I do not only mean male humans, but emancipated women as well - went beyond nature, lost his soul, and wonders that no abstraction or social construct can compensate that.
Evola could have envisioned this inevitable development and its solution - the complete embodiment of soul - considering the farreaching alchymical approach of his Ur-group, and some hints in his voluminous and almost epic work "Revolt against the Modern World". But there he was too much caught in the futurism of the pre-fascist era.
Today we can say that the masculine principle - and here I do not only mean male humans, but emancipated women as well - went beyond nature, lost his soul, and wonders that no abstraction or social construct can compensate that.
Evola could have envisioned this inevitable development and its solution - the complete embodiment of soul - considering the farreaching alchymical approach of his Ur-group, and some hints in his voluminous and almost epic work "Revolt against the Modern World". But there he was too much caught in the futurism of the pre-fascist era.
December 14, 2021
This book by itself is proof enough that Traditionalism is anything but a philosophy for the prude.
If I could take anything away from Evola's view on sex it is this; sex must be something primal, arguably with a sense of danger attached to it, in order for the experience to be authentic and transcendent for the participants. Metaphysics views sex as something more than just a biological urge to procreate.
Evola also issues his criticism on how modernity all but views sex as a financial transaction (how it is used in an erotic fashion to excite the senses in advertising, for example) and the way that feminism has degenerated women by forcing them to measure up against a false standard that is neither proper nor genuine for them, the argument being that ‘water and fire have no common measure’ making man and woman neither superior nor inferior to one another.
My only criticism would be that parts of the book repeats itself when it gets to the sections on certain left-hand tantric practices talked about in Yoga of Power.
If I could take anything away from Evola's view on sex it is this; sex must be something primal, arguably with a sense of danger attached to it, in order for the experience to be authentic and transcendent for the participants. Metaphysics views sex as something more than just a biological urge to procreate.
Evola also issues his criticism on how modernity all but views sex as a financial transaction (how it is used in an erotic fashion to excite the senses in advertising, for example) and the way that feminism has degenerated women by forcing them to measure up against a false standard that is neither proper nor genuine for them, the argument being that ‘water and fire have no common measure’ making man and woman neither superior nor inferior to one another.
My only criticism would be that parts of the book repeats itself when it gets to the sections on certain left-hand tantric practices talked about in Yoga of Power.
January 17, 2024
Evola crearly lacks the sexual background to approach the subject. He is a very good intellectual, but i suppose he never quite had a sex life worthy of a man who seeks to write a book on Eros. What i mean by that is although i respect the fuck outta Evola, he is not qualified to write about sex. One easily gets the impression the magician himself never had a good fuck at all in his life. His traditionalism blinds him when he condemns "profane love" as being of an inferior kind. My own experience taught me the opposite of his thesis, that sex in the sanctity of marriage fucking sucks compared to sex with a prostitute who knows what she is doing.
Nevertheless he does a very intriguing overview of many sexual traditions around the world thorughout the centuries, and for that part alone this book is worth 3/5.
Nevertheless he does a very intriguing overview of many sexual traditions around the world thorughout the centuries, and for that part alone this book is worth 3/5.
February 5, 2024
Evola knocked this book out of the park. For anyone that is spiritual and/or believes in and relies on the metaphysical aspects of life first and foremost over the biological and physical in life needs to read this book! Evola gives a view into why men and women commit the act of copulation and intercourse on the plane of metaphysicality and what draws us as humans to fall in love, completely outside of the realm of simple procreation, pleasure, and hormonal drive. This is a deep dive into the world of human connection through spiritual force and the need to transcend through the act intimacy and sexual intercourse. Highly recommend reading this if you feel any type of connection like this with your partner or in general in your life!
Read
October 22, 2022Me da la impresión que Evola al querer una unificación entre oriente y occidente incorporando diversos mitos (occidentales) y ritos (orientales), logra una divulgación deficiente, superficial, no por falta de conocimiento sino tal vez por una ambición en lo expuesto.
Al ser tan basto lo que plantea, no incorpora ni desarrolla solo relaciona puntos en común, tal vez, ese sea el objetivo y me expulse por no estar iniciado en la tradición.
En lo favorable, hay interpretaciones profundas e incitaciones a búsquedas fecundas. Pero no termino de aclarar este borbotón de información, es un esquema, una divulgación, una recopilación, un desarrollo, parte de una investigación. No lo sé.
Al ser tan basto lo que plantea, no incorpora ni desarrolla solo relaciona puntos en común, tal vez, ese sea el objetivo y me expulse por no estar iniciado en la tradición.
En lo favorable, hay interpretaciones profundas e incitaciones a búsquedas fecundas. Pero no termino de aclarar este borbotón de información, es un esquema, una divulgación, una recopilación, un desarrollo, parte de una investigación. No lo sé.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews