Search Results

This chapter examines the early development and basic features of Traditionalist theology and its possible influence on black theodicy in the U.S. Traditionalism developed in opposition to the universe of interpretive presuppositions via which Rationalism insisted that scripture be understood and vindicated. The Traditionalists are committed to the principle that as the All-Knowing, God is unquestionably most knowledgeable of God. They believe that the primary means of knowing God is through human beings’ natural, instinctual ability, a medium that renders rational proofs largely superfluous, except for those whose natural disposition has been corrupted.

This chapter sums up the key findings of this study on the influence of classical Sunni theological tradition on black theodicy in the U.S. It concludes that despite their emphatic and explicit endorsement of divine omnipotence, none of the schools of classical Muslim theology embraces as their going opinion the denial of human choice. It explains that Mu’tazilism virtually removes God altogether from the process via which humans commit evil, while Ash’arism insists that God provides agency but only at the request of human beings. Maturidism and Traditionalism hold that humans basically have enough inherent agency to carry out their will to commit good or evil without any additional grants from God.

This article re-assesses the view that the Roman jurists were particularly strong traditionalists as argued by Schulz and others but challenged by Nṏrr. Other explanations can be found for retention of institutions and slow change in the law, such as the absence of easy procedures to make changes. Apparently static rules, such as the ceremony of mancipatio, may have been avoided in practice by the use of documents alleging performance of it. There is in any case a good deal to be said for gradual and considered change as opposed to rapid legislative change, an approach praised by Stair. The important point is to adhere to sound tradition but avoid being thirled to that tradition for its own sake.

This chapter discusses nostalgia as the theoretical concept central to understanding the cultural transformations of this period. It teases out the meaning and nuances of the concept by referring to the scholarship on nostalgia itself and on its political implications in Iran. This concept, in its various forms, has prompted three other discourses pertinent to cultural production, namely, authenticity, civilization, and tradition. While addressing the Iranian context, the chapter notes that all these concepts were informed by and conveyed a global currency. It elaborates the meaning and formations of these concepts while referring to historical contexts that sustained them. Thus, while elaborating on manifestations of nostalgic authenticity, it also engages with notions of civilizational discourse and anti-Westernism that were on the rise in the 1970s. It also critically engages with ideas of tradition, which range from Traditionalism, expounded by Seyyed Hossein Nasr, to critiques of the invention of the traditions thesis. These are significant for developing a critical understanding of the nexus between development, design, and heritage in Iran. In the end, the chapter illustrates the concepts at work by referring to an example from the architect Nader Ardalan in the design of the Iran Centre for Management Studies (ICMS).

The Republican Party’s shift towards the far-right since the 1980s paved the way for Trump’s neo-fascist campaign. Trump’s agenda and rhetoric were not drastically different from the Republican establishment, which largely embraced winner-take-all economics, anti-intellectualism, disinformation, conspiracy-mongering, authoritarianism, racist dog-whistle messages, and torturing Muslims suspected of terrorism. Trumpism was an intensification of this ideology, not a departure from it. But America’s decline after little more than a century as a superpower still seems far from inevitable. It remains the world’s strongest economy. It is a leader in technology and many other fields. Its universities are widely recognized as the best in the world. It has great thinkers and innovators. In sum, there is much to admire about contemporary America and it is not too late to address the aspects of American exceptionalism that may precipitate its decline.

The chapter opens with a historical overview on Benito Mussolini’s rise to power in the early 1920s and then proceeds to analyze the Fascist phenomenon, comparing it to Traditionalism, and trying to highlight its modern and anti-modern aspects. A section of Chapter 6 is dedicated to the scrutiny of the relationship between Fascism and occult fringes, and the author tries to conclude whether there were any overlaps as may be found in the Nazism-occultism pairing. The latter part of the chapter is entirely dedicated to the birth of the Traditionalist school and to its founder, René Guénon. Through the use of hitherto unpublished correspondence between Guénon and Reghini, the author seeks to shed more light on the influence that Guénon had on the Italian Traditionalist contingent but also theorizes an influence on Guénon exerted by Reghini and other members of the Schola.

Discusses Traditionalism, René Guénon, and Frithjof Schuon as a reference point for understanding (and critiquing) American religious immediatism. Discusses the history of Schuon and his work, as well as the history of his community in Bloomington, Indiana.

The opening chapter seeks to familiarize the reader with the technical terms that are used throughout the text: the reader will become acquainted with the working definitions and meanings of anti-modernity, occultism, Western esotericism, and Traditionalism. The three main methodological frameworks used by the author are also introduced: the idea of anti-modernity put forth by Peter King, the idea of multiple modernities developed by S. N. Eisenstadt, and Eric Hobsbawm’s invention of sacred traditions. The chapter is further fleshed out by a review of the existing scholarship on the topic of the intersection between occultism and modernity, and by an overview of the work’s remaining chapters.

Chapter 4 introduces the figure of Amedeo Rocco Armentano, who would become Reghini’s teacher in all things occult. After a brief history of Italian Freemasonry, Reghini’s affiliation to Florentine lodges is documented as representing the main cause for the occultist’s anti-clericalism, nationalism, and irredentist sympathies. This section of the book enunciates the core tenets of Roman Traditionalism, as taught by Armentano to Reghini, and chronicles Reghini’s initiation into the occult order of the Schola Italica, or Italic School, a neo-Pagan, neo-Pythagorean coterie that Reghini will be proud to represent until the year of his death in 1946. Henrik Bogdan’s and Mircea Eliade’s theories on initiation are used to provide a theoretical framework for Reghini’s enrollment into the Schola, while the school’s main ideas and its mnemohistory are explained through the works on the invention of tradition as an epistemological strategy, developed by Eric Hobsbawm and Olav Hammer.

After a bird’s-eye view of the historical period, depicting Italy’s sociopolitical climate in the prewar years, the chapter seeks to focus on what the First Conflict meant for the members of the Schola: the reannexation of the eastern regions then under Austrian rule was considered fundamental for an occult rise of Italy as a modern superpower. The majority of the chapter is dedicated to the textual analysis of Reghini’s arguably most important article, “Imperialismo Pagano” (Pagan Imperialism), where his ideas on Pagan Rome, anti-clericalism, reactionary politics, and the magical significance of a unified Italy all coagulate into a strong portrayal of the most important ideals of Roman Traditionalism. Figures like Virgil, Dante, and Mazzini are introduced as precursors to Reghini’s “great Pagan ideal” for the rebirth of a new Italy.

This chapter discusses the life and work of the Italian philosopher Julius Evola, who started his career in Futurism and Dadaism. Philosophic studies followed. After serving in the First World War he turned to mountaineering, experimented with ether, and nearly committed suicide. Far Eastern religions and esoteric currents became his next interest. He was introduced to René Guénon’s idea of tradition, which became the source of his political and racial ideas. He met Mussolini and members of the SS, who remained skeptical. After the Second World War, Evola wrote and translated. His elitist, antidemocratic political tracts based on transcendent ideas at first brought him only a few followers, some of whom turned to terrorist acts. He died lonely and frustrated in Rome. His revival started only in the 1980s; since then he has become one of the most widely read thinkers of the radical Right.

This chapter argues that proponents of progressive Islamic discourses straddle the dichotomy or binary between traditionalist and modernist interpretations of the Islam. Their ability to work in the interstices of different strands creates a kind of liminality and even marginality requiring a degree of cultural hybridity. It includes a survey of clusters of academics constituting schools of thought gravitating around institutions of Islamic higher education; activists involved in NGOs such as the Liberal Islam Network; as well as new generations of religious scholars or ulama and cadres associated with the traditional Islamic mass organization Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) who have formulated the new discourse of Islamic Post-Traditionalism, and their modernist counterparts in the modernist Muhammadiyah. The reactionary detractors of these progressive intellectuals are associated with Islamist organizations such as the Dewan Dakwah Islamiya Indonesia (DDII) and the Tarbiyah student movement which dominates ‘Campus Islam’ at secular universities.

This chapter examines two interwar movements that link Theosophy and Western Sufism: the Traditionalism of René Guénon, and the teaching of George Gurdjieff. Although Guénon publicly rejected both Theosophy and emanationism, he was still influenced by both, as well as by perennialism and anti-exotericism on the model of John Toland. The Gurdjieff teaching owes less than is thought to Sufism and much more than is though to Peter Ouspensky and, through him, to the psychology of William James. Ouspensky and Gurdjieff were early promoters of the transformation of emanationism from its original focus on the soul and the One to a focus on consciousness and the expansion of consciousness. To this end they used novel practices, including asceticism and “discomfiture.” The chapter also introduces the two men who would later apply Traditionalism and the Gurdjieff teaching to Western Sufism: Frithjof Schuon, and John G. Bennett .