"One must here come to a transformed knowing, and this unknowing [unwizzen] must not come from ignorance [unwizzenne]; rather, from knowing one must come into an unknowing. Then, we will become knowing with divine knowing and then our unknowing will be ennobled and clothed with supernatural knowing. And here, in that we are in a [state of] receiving, we are more perfect than if we were active."

Meister Eckhart

In the inner realm it is a question of knowing what “blows to one’s own self” may result from certain behaviors, and of acting accordingly, with the same objectivity. The “sin” complex is a pathological formation born under the sign of the personal God, the “God of morality.”

- Julius Evola

The idea of sin / being in a state of sin is adharmic (not dharmic in nature). There are only the actions that have utility towards our freedom from ignorance, or those that deepen our ignorance. Nietzsche was right in affirming the death of God. That is, the "God of morality", and more, the God of petty bourgeois morality.

The meditation for today is regarding my own relationship with sin. Do I consider myself to be in a state of sin, to have sinned, or to merely be at fault? Can I detach myself from my actions and the fruits thereof? Can I retain complete calm in all situations, even where I have done something comepletely at fault? Do my actions spring from a central, transcendent and completely unified Self - my atman?

In short, do I have the will of the Samurai to draw my sword and cut down my enemy with sudden violence, and once sheathed, leave no remaining mark of "myself" on the act, no idea of having sinned or acted justly, since the act sprung fourth from that deep well of Self?

Transcendence, like freedom, ought to furnish existence with a foundation of calm and incomparable security, with a purity, a wholeness, and an absolute decisiveness in action. Instead, it feeds all the emotional complexes of the man in crisis: angst, nausea, disquiet, finding his own being problematical, the feeling of an obscure guilt or fall, deracination, a feeling of the absurd and the irrational, an unadmitted solitude (though some, like Marcel, fully admit it), an invocation of the “incarnate spirit,” the weight of an incomprehensible responsibility—incomprehensible, because he cannot resort to overtly religious (and hence coherent) positions like those of Kierkegaard or Barth, where angst refers to the sentiment of the soul that is alone, fallen, and abandoned to itself in the presence of God. In all of this, feelings appear like those that Nietzsche warned about in the case of a man who has made himself free without having the necessary stature: feelings that kill and shatter a man—modern man—if he is incapable of killing them.

On Nature: Apart from that position, which leads to the “animal ideal” and modern naturalism, I deplore the general confusion of a “return to origins” with a return to Mother Earth and even to Nature. Although it has often been misapplied, that theological doctrine that holds that a purely natural state for man has never existed is still legitimate; at the beginning he was placed in a supranatural state from which he has now fallen. In fact, for the true type of man, it can never be a question of those origins and that “mother” wherein the individual cannot differentiate himself from his fellow men, or even from the animals. Every return to nature is a regressive phenomenon, including any protest in the name of instinctual rights, the unconscious, the flesh, life uninhibited by the intellect, and so forth. The man who becomes “natural” in this way has in reality become denatured.

As for the “sentiment of nature,” in general, the human type that concerns us must consider nature as part of a larger and more objective whole: nature for him includes countrysides, mountains, forests, and seacoasts, but also dams, turbines, and foundries, the tentacular system of ladders and cranes of a great modern port or a complex of functional skyscrapers. This is the space for a higher freedom. He remains free and self-aware before both types of nature—being no less secure in the middle of a steppe or on an alpine peak than amid Western city nightlife.

The ancient Aryan world was ordered by natural hierarchy. The very top of this hierarchy was the Aryan seer. The seer was a higher order of being, whose consciousness extended throughout the many realms of cosmic existence. Having reached heaven, they were able to purely enjoy the pleasures of the earth. Their creative powers manifested, yet they remained humble, impartially providing their knowledge for the benefit of all. These seers were our spiritual fathers, the builders of civilization, they were the Brahamanas, Druids, and Magi, and the castes whose dharma it was (and still is) to traverse the spiritual roads towards enlightenment and self-realization. Upholding their inner spiritual values, which were embodied in the Solar Religion, harmony and Truth could reign on earth.

To the ancient seers, all life was good and all creation was beneficent. The ignorance and darkness we experience in materiality was viewed as a daring adventure for the spirit. The atman's assumption of a form in materiality was not just a covering, but a free expression of the formless being.

We can, and must, re-capture the spirit of the Solar religion and become those seers who lived in a time when the gods were present and manifested both externally and internally, to live in a time when the first day of creation is an eternal moment, where creation itself puts to rest the doubt of illusion.

We tirelessly and uncompromisingly oppose the decline in the spiritual level, which has become a habit of modern man. We resist the loss of all higher meaning in life, materialization, socialization and standardization, to which everything is subordinated. We want to be a threat, a challenge and an accusation to everything that is weak, compromises and enslaved by public opinion and petty adaptations to the current moment. We express our unshakable protest against the tyranny of everything economic and social, which impudently permeates everything around and against the relegation of any lofty worldview to the level of an insignificant humanism.

Julius Evola. Tower magazine (1929).

”We only have one life, and youth is brief. To be healthy without trying to run faster and longer, or harden one’s muscles, is to squander a chance to be more than one is; to miss the unique joy of striving, however painful.”

— Xenophon.

To be healthy without trying to contemplate deeper depths and greater abstractions, or to sharpen one's focus, is to squander a chance to be more than one is; to miss the unique joy of thinking, however painful.

This is a reminder to not get tied to ideology, and associate with it only when and where it is a practical means to our higher end. This is a positive end; it is not reactionary except that it happens to be diametrically opposed in form to the current paradigm; it is not a negative and base 'traditionalism' that only tries to revive dead and irrelevant ideologies or mimic idealized appearances of specific historical times and places. Always stay focused on what is true and eternal and do not get distracted by fleeting illusions.

"In a dramatic ritual action, Squin de Florian, the alleged accuser of the Templars, is made to say as his justification: "The Church is above freedom!" This is countered by the Master of the Great Lodge, who says: "Freedom is above the Church!" Obviously, the first statement is correct if we are dealing with the claim to freedom on the part of any individual; the second statement is true if we are dealing with a person who has the required qualification to put himself beyond the inevitable limitations proper of a particular historical form of spiritual authority." — Julius C. Evola, The Mystery of the Grail.