Muslim rené guénon the topgun french philosopher of 20th century
1. www.Muhammad.com
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%C3%A9_Gu%C3%A9non
René Guénon
Muslim René Guénon the Top-Gun
French Philosopher of 20th Century
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
René-Jean-Marie-Joseph Guénon
(ʿAbd al-Wāḥid Yaḥyá, al-Mālikī,
al-Ḥāmidī ash-Shādhilī)
Guénon aged 38 (1925 studio photo).
Born
November 15,
1886
Blois, Loir-et-Cher,
France
Died
January 7, 1951
(aged 64)
Cairo, Egypt
Era
20th-century
philosophy
Region
Western
philosophy
Eastern
2. philosophy
Esotericism
School
Advaita
Vedanta
Sufism
Nondualism
Platonism
Main
interests
Metaphysics
Esoterism
Initiation
Symbolism
Mythology
Gnosis
Religious texts
History
Freemasonry
Mathematics
Society
Social criticism
Comparative
religion
Notable
ideas
Critique of
modernity from
the
perspective of
ancient
wisdom
traditions
Refounding
Western
esotericism
using Eastern
ideas
Influences[show]
Influenced[show]
René-Jean-Marie-Joseph Guénon[2]
(November 15, 1886 – January
7, 1951), also known as ʿAbd al-Wāḥid Yaḥyá [al-Mālikī, al-Ḥāmidī
3. ash-Shādhilī], was a French author and intellectual who remains an
influential figure in the domain of metaphysics, having written on topics
ranging from metaphysics, "sacred science"[3]
and traditional studies[4]
to symbolism and initiation.
In his writings, he proposes either "to expose directly some aspects of
Eastern metaphysical doctrines",[5]
these doctrines being defined by
him as of "universal character",[6]
or "to adapt these same doctrines for
Western readers[7]
while keeping strictly faithful to their spirit";[5]
he only
endorsed the act of "handing down" these Eastern doctrines, while
reiterating their "non-individual character".[8]
He wrote and published in French and his works have been translated
into more than twenty languages.
Contents
1 Biography
2 Writings
3 Some key terms and ideas
4 Metaphysical core
o 4.1 Introduction to the Study of the Hindu doctrines
o 4.2 Man and his Becoming according to the Vêdantâ
o 4.3 The Symbolism of the Cross
o 4.4 The Multiple States of the Being
5 On "initiation"
6 Other writings in metaphysics, hermeticism and cosmological
sciences
o 6.1 Lesser and greater mysteries
o 6.2 Hindu doctrine of cosmic cycles
o 6.3 Science of letters in Islam
o 6.4 Conditions of corporeal existence
o 6.5 Classical atomism and the continuum
7 Symbolism
o 7.1 Symbolism and analogy
o 7.2 Symbolism and unity of traditional forms
o 7.3 Symbolism and the primordial tradition
8 Attempts to subvert tradition in the modern world
o 8.1 General laws of cyclic manifestation
o 8.2 Contemporary "neo-spiritualism"
o 8.3 Counter-initiation and subversion
o 8.4 Advent of a "counter-tradition"
9 Reception
4. 10 Bibliography
o 10.1 In English
10.1.1 Collected works
o 10.2 In French
11 Notes and references
12 Further reading
13 External links
Biography
René Guénon was born in Blois, a city in central France approximately
100 miles (≈160 km) from Paris. Guénon, like most Frenchmen of the
time, was born into a Roman Catholic family. Little is known of his
family, although it appears that his father was an architect. By 1904,
Guénon was living as a student in Paris, where his studies focused on
mathematics and philosophy. He was known as a brilliant student,
notably in mathematics, in spite of his poor health.
As a young student in Paris, Guénon observed and became involved
with some students who were, at that time, under the supervision of
Papus.[1]
Under the name "Tau Palingenius" Guénon became the
founder and main contributor of a periodical review, La Gnose
("Gnosis"), writing articles for it until 1922. From his incursions into the
French occultist and pseudo-masonic orders, he despaired of the
possibility of ever gathering these diverse and often ill-assorted
doctrines into a "stable edifice".[9]
In his book The Reign of Quantity and
the Signs of the Times he also pointed out what he saw as the
intellectual vacuity of the French occultist movement, which, he wrote,
was utterly insignificant, and more importantly, had been compromised
by the infiltration of certain individuals of questionable motives and
integrity.[10]
Around this time (according to indications reproduced by his biographer
Paul Chacornac),[11]
it is likely that René Guénon became acquainted
with Hinduism, specifically via the initiatic lineage of Shankarâchârya,
and with Taoism. He was also initiated in 1910[12]
into Islamic
esoterism, where he obtained the name "ʿAbd al-Wāḥid Yaḥyá". His
initiation into Taṣaw‧wuf, or Islamic esoterism, was effected by Ivan
Aguéli (ʿAbd al-Hādī ʿAqīlī al-Mālikī ash-Shādhilī, 1869–1917) and
performed in accordance with ash-Shaykh ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān ʿIl‧līsh al-
Kabīr al-Mālikī ( الكبير عليش الرحمن عبدالمالكي , d. 1930), an important
representative of ʾIslām in Egypt at that time, in both its exoteric and
5. esoteric aspects. ash-Shaykh ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān ʿIl‧līsh al-Kabīr was the
head of the Mālikī Madhhab (one of the five major schools of ʾIslāmic
law and jurisprudence) at al-ʾAzhar University in Cairo. Guénon later
dedicated his book The Symbolism of the Cross to him.
In 1917, Guénon began a one-year stay at Sétif, Algeria, teaching
philosophy to college students. After World War I, he left teaching to
dedicate his energies to writing; his first book, Introduction to the Study
of the Hindu Doctrines, was published in 1921. From 1925 Guénon
became a contributor to a review edited by P. Chacornac, Le Voile
d'Isis ("The Veil of Isis"); after 1935 and under Guénon's influence, this
periodical became known as Les Etudes Traditionnelles ("Traditional
Studies").
Although the exposition of Hindu doctrines to European audiences had
already been attempted in piecemeal fashion at that time by many
orientalists, Guénon's Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines
advanced its subject in a uniquely insightful manner,[13]
by referring to
the concepts of metaphysics and Tradition in their most general sense,
which Guénon precisely defined, along with the necessary distinctions
and definitions of seemingly unambiguous terms such as religion,
tradition, exoterism, esoterism and theology. Guénon explained that his
purpose was not to describe all aspects of Hinduism, but to give the
necessary intellectual foundation for a proper understanding of its
spirit.[14]
The book also stands as a harsh condemnation of works
presented by certain other European writers about Hinduism and
Tradition in general; according to Guénon, such writers had lacked any
profound understanding of their subject matter and of its implications.
The book also contains a critical analysis of the political intrusions of
the British Empire into the subject of Hinduism (and India itself) through
Madame Blavatsky's Theosophism.[15]
Also in 1921, Guénon debuted a series of articles in the French Revue
de Philosophie, which, along with some supplements, led to the book
Theosophism: History of a Pseudo-Religion. During the decade 1920–
1930, Guénon began to acquire a broader public reputation, and his
work was noted by various intellectual and artistic figures both within
and outside of Paris. At this time also were published some of his
books explaining the "intellectual divide" between the East and West,
and the peculiar nature, according to him, of modern civilization: Crisis
of the Modern World, and East and West. In 1927 was published the
second major doctrinal book of his works: Man and His Becoming
6. according to the Vedânta, and in 1929, Spiritual Authority and
Temporal Power. The last book listed offers a general explanation of
what Guénon saw as the fundamental differences between "sacerdotal"
(priestly or sacred) and "royal" (governmental) powers, along with the
negative consequences arising from the usurpation of the prerogatives
of the latter with regard to the former. From these considerations, René
Guénon traces to its source the origin of the modern deviation, which,
according to him, is to be found in the destruction of the Templar order
in 1314.
In 1930, Guénon left Paris for Cairo, with the aim of gathering and
translating written documents of ʾIslāmic Esoterism. This project was
abruptly abandoned after a decision of his editor. Left alone in Cairo,
Guénon declined all propositions by his friends that he return to France.
Despite his declining financial condition, he relentlessly corresponded
with his counterparts from many countries around the world as well as
continuing his own writing projects. Although remaining in Egypt
certainly exposed Guénon to traditional ambience for which he had
already demonstrated a strong affinity, his refusal to return to Europe
created undoubted hardship for him. As if in compensation for this
hardship, Guénon was fortunate enough to meet ash-Shaykh as-Say‧
yid Salāmaħ ʾibn Ḥasan ar-Rāḍī al-Ḥasanī al-Ḥusaynī, al-Mālikī ash-
Shādhilī (1284‒1357 ʜ / 1867‒1939 ᴄᴇ), founder of the Ḥāmidīyaħ
Shādhilīyaħ (الشاذلية )الحامدية Ṣūfī Order (Ṭarīqaħ ,طريقة lit. “Spiritual-
Track”), which he soon joined. Guénon accompanied his Shaykh until
the latter’s death in 1939. Around the same time, Guénon also met
another Ṣūfī, ash-Shaykh Muḥam‧mad ʾIbrāhīm, whose daughter he
married in 1934. This marriage resulted in four children, the last, a son
(ʿAbd al-Wāḥid الواحد )عبد was born in 1951. During his lengthy sojourn in
Egypt, René Guénon carried on an austere and simple life, entirely
dedicated to his writings and spiritual development.[16]
In 1949, he
obtained Egyptian citizenship.
Urged on by some of his friends and collaborators, Guénon agreed to
establish a new Masonic Lodge in France founded upon his
"Traditional" ideals, purified of what he saw as the inauthentic
accretions which so bedeviled other lodges he had encountered during
his early years in Paris. This lodge was called La Grande Triade ("The
Great Triad"), a name inspired by the title of one of Guénon's books.
The first founders of the lodge, however, separated a few years after its
inception.[17]
Nevertheless, this lodge, belonging to the Grande Loge de
France, remains active today.
7. René Guénon (ʿAbd al-Wāḥid Yaḥyá) died on Sunday, January 7th
,
1951 (28th
Rabīʿ al-ʾAw‧wal, 1370 ʜ); his final word was "Al‧lāh" (هللا
"[The] God", in Arabic).[18]
Writings
Guénon's writings encompass a wide range of metaphysical themes,
yet these works as whole evince a unity and organic coherence which
Guénon always saw as a critical part of his work. As a result, each topic
is integrally related to many others.
In 1921, Guénon published an Introduction to the Study of the Hindu
Doctrines. His goal, as he writes it, is an attempt at presenting to
westerners eastern metaphysics and spirituality as they are understood
and thought by easterners themselves, while pointing at what René
Guénon describes as all the erroneous interpretations and
misunderstandings of western orientalism and "neospiritualism" (for the
latter, notably the proponents of Madame Blavatsky's Theosophism).
Right from that time, he presents a rigorous understanding, not only of
Hindu doctrines, but also of eastern metaphysics in general.[19]
He
managed to expose these doctrines to a western public viewed by him
as quite unprepared and unreceptive as a whole.[20]
He departed from
standard scholarship (orientalist) terminology and methods and
preferred to expose the doctrines as a simple "easterner", devoid of
what he called "western prejudices".[21]
For one of the most famous
aspects of René Guénon's work is the irreducible difference he
describes between the East and the West.[22]
René Guénon defines
eastern metaphysics and intellectuality as of "universal nature", that
"opens possibilities of conception which are truly beyond any
limitation". His work comprises:
An exposition of fundamental metaphysical principles: Introduction
to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines which contains the general
definition of the term "tradition" as Guénon defines it, Man and His
Becoming according to the Vedânta, The Symbolism of the Cross,
The Multiple States of Being, The Metaphysical Principles of the
Infinitesimal Calculus, Oriental Metaphysics.
Studies in symbolism (comprising many articles he wrote for the
journal Le Voile d'Isis which became later known under the name
Etudes Traditionnelles). These studies in symbolism were later
compiled by Michel Valsan in the posthumous book Symbols of
Sacred Science. The studies The Great Triad, Traditional Forms &
Cosmic Cycles, Insights into Islamic Esoterism & Taoism and The
8. King of the World (alternately translated as Lord of the World) are
also mostly about symbolism.
Fundamental studies related to Initiation, a subject completely re-
exposited by Guénon from the traditional perspective: Perspectives
on Initiation, Initiation and Spiritual Realisation, The Esoterism of
Dante.
Criticism of the modern world and of "neospiritualism": East and
West, The Crisis of the Modern World, Spiritual Authority and
Temporal Power, Theosophy: History of a Pseudo-Religion, The
Spiritist Fallacy and The Reign of Quantity & the Signs of the
Times, the latter book being often considered as his masterpiece as
an explanation of the modern world from the traditional perspective.
Various studies in esoterism: Saint Bernard, Insights into Christian
Esoterism, Studies in Freemasonry and Compagnonnage, Studies
in Hinduism, &c.
This partition is not strict and Guénon's works display a coherence and
unity making each book integrally related to the others.[23]
From that
perspective, and according to René Guénon's own words,[24]
his work is
completely unrelated to any particular philosophical system.[25]
He
identifies the main difference between profane and sacred knowledge:
the former ignores the notion of realisation ("moksha" or "delivrance" in
the Hindu doctrines), while the latter provides effective means for
realizing the Supreme Principle (through initiation, mantra or dhikr
recitation, orthodox spiritual lineages).
Guénon defines the modern world as being a degeneration of what he
calls "the traditional world". According to him, the real separation
between the East and West comes from this degeneration; in other
words, it comes from an intellectual standpoint, and is not related to
any geographical distinction, but to a doctrinal divergence.[26]
Amidst
the global period of intellectual confusion and disorder that
characterizes modernity according to René Guénon, the East has
maintained alive, through uninterrupted spiritual lineages, an
intellectual (possibly hidden) elite fully conscious of the original wisdom
transmitted to humanity from time immemorial. In some of his books, he
states that the present condition of humanity can be explained by the
traditional doctrine of "cosmic cycles", as it is described in Hindu
doctrines.
He produced a series of articles and books aimed at explaining the
modern civilization according to traditional data and, more generally, to
9. the "traditional standpoint".[27]
He therein denounces what he calls the
"pseudo-initiation", which was, according to him, spreading since the
end of the 19th century. He intends to denounce, through a careful
examination of the historical origin, the ideological evolution taken by
what he calls their "pseudo-doctrines", some "pseudo-spiritual"
organisations which, according to him, expose to the West false
eastern doctrines or which are counterfeits of regular initiatic traditions
(among these "pseudo-spiritual associations" he makes a particular
mention of the Theosophical Society founded by Madame Blavatsky in
the wake of the modern pseudo-Rosicrucian organisations of the late
19th century).[28]
Guénon exposits a view of Metaphysics which can, according to him
"by no means be reduced to scientific or philosophical conceptions"[29]
but which is instead "the knowledge ... of the principles of universal
order" ; being "absolutely illimited", Metaphysics "cannot be defined".[30]
Metaphysics is seen, according to him, in its etymological sense,[31]
while recalling that sense in his books.[32]
Such a metaphysics, being by
essence beyond any contingency, is necessarily at the source of all
orthodox traditions, these latter being considered as direct derivations
of the great "primordial tradition" (corresponding to the Hindu notion of
Sanātana Dharma, or the Laws of Manu).
Metaphysics is not introduced by René Guénon as a branch of
philosophy, as it is in western studies. Traditional metaphysics, which
is, according to Guénon, beyond any contingency (knowledge of
universal principles[33]
), lies at the very source of all orthodox and
legitimate traditions, making a connection between the heart of these
traditions and a unique spiritual origin, the "Primordial Tradition".[34]
The
study of traditional metaphysics and its relationship with our state of
existence, i.e. our world, clears the path inwardly towards the center
common and shared by each authentic religion: exoterism bounds an
"outside" accessible to everyone, its purpose is to maintain the link with
Supreme Principle.[35]
However, the current state of the West, characterized by its voluntary
and gradual detachment from his own tradition, Christianity, and the
degeneration of major branches of one of his last initiatic organization,
freemasonry, makes a restoration somewhat unlikely feasible given that
this situation is the result of a long evolution through Western history,
which according to Guénon, follows even a predetermined plan.[36]
Incidentally, in the esoteric domain, René Guénon says that two dates
10. mark historically the fundamental spiritual degeneration of the West:
first, the destruction of the Order of the Knights Templar in 1314, which
defines precisely what René Guénon called "modern deviation",[37]
and
the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 which severed, in the historical and
"outer realm", the link between West and what René Guénon defined
as the "Supreme Centre".[38]
At multiple occasions in his books, René Guénon insisted that the most
important, in metaphysics, was properly inexpressible:[39]
it should be agreed, for not altering the truth by a partial, restrictive or
systematized exposition, to keep always the part of the inexpressible, ie
the part which cannot be emprisonned in any form, and which,
metaphysically, is really what matters most, we can even say that
represents the most essential part
According to the doctrine exposed by Guénon, the "spiritual realisation"
leads to the effective identification with the states of being that are
superior to our transitory human state, and ultimately to the "Supreme
Identity" with the Supreme Principle or Absolute Reality. He firmly
states the necessity of being fastened to an authentic and living
tradition which has kept alive and made available the initiations that
were existing in that tradition since its inception. Such living traditions
(such as Hinduism, ʾIslām, or Dàoism) are characterized by an
inspiration (e.g. the Vedas), or a revelation (e.g. the Qurʾãn). He insists
on the notion of "intellectual intuition" (supra-rational or spiritual),
"awakened" by concentration and meditation on symbols, either in
visual form (yantras) or auditive (mantras or, in ʾIslām, dhikr).
Some key terms and ideas
Main article: Metaphysical terms in the works of René Guénon
Guénon's writings make use of words and terms, of fundamental
signification, which receive a precise definition throughout his books.
These terms and words, although receiving a usual meaning and being
used in many branches of human sciences, have, according to René
Guénon, lost substantially their original signification (e.g. words such as
"metaphysics", "initiation", "mysticism", "personality", "form",
"matter").[40]
He insisted notably on the danger represented by the
perversion of the signification of words seen by him as essential for the
study of metaphysics; please refer to the main article for the definition
given by René Guénon to some of the words used extensively in his
works.
11. Metaphysical core
The exposition of metaphysical doctrines, which forms the cornerstone
of Guénon's work, consists of the following books:[41]
Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines,
Man and His Becoming according to the Vedânta,
The Multiple States of the Being,
Symbolism of the Cross,
Oriental Metaphysics.
Introduction to the Study of the Hindu doctrines
The book, published in 1921, on topics which were later included in the
lecture he gave at the Sorbonne on December 17, 1925 ("Oriental
Metaphysics"), consists of four parts.
The first part ("preliminary questions") exposes the hurdles that
prevented classical orientalism from a deep understanding of eastern
doctrines (without forgetting that René Guénon had of course in view
the orientalism of his time): the "classical prejudice" which "consists
essentially in a predisposition to attribute the origin of all civilization to
the Greeks and Romans", the ignorance of certain types of
relationships between the ancient peoples, linguistic difficulties, and the
confusions arising about certain questions related to chronology, these
confusions being made possible through the ignorance of the
importance of oral transmission which can precede, to a considerable
and indeterminate extent, the written formulation. A fundamental
example of that latter mistake being found in the orientalist's attempts
at providing a precise birth date to the Vedas sacred scriptures.
The "general characters of eastern thought" part focuses on the
principles of unity of the eastern civilizations, on the definition of the
notions of "tradition" and "metaphysics". Guénon also proposes a
rigorous definition of the term "religion", and states the proper
differences between "tradition", "religion", "metaphysics" and
"philosophical system". The relations between "metaphysics" and
"theology" are also explored, and the fundamental terms of "esoterism"
and "exoterism" are introduced. A chapter is devoted to the idea of
"metaphysical realization". The first two parts state, according to René
Guénon, the necessary doctrinal foundations for a correct
understanding of Hindu doctrines.
12. The third part: "the Hindu doctrines" introduces some of the most
fundamental ideas in Hindu doctrines: the traditional signification of the
word "hindu", the notions of orthodoxy and heterodoxy contemplated
from the metaphysical perspective (in comparison with their religious or
theological counterparts), an exposition of the main sacred texts in
Hinduism, the notions of "darshana", Manu law, Sanâtana Dharma,[42]
the Vêdantâ, the Upanishads etc.
The fourth and last part exposes what René Guénon calls the
erroneous western interpretations. He describes some currents born in
India under the conjugated influence of the British Empire, Anglo-Saxon
missionary protestantism and H. P. Blavatsky's theosophism: the Arya
Samâj, the doctrines of Dayânanda Saraswatî and Vivekananda etc.
Man and his Becoming according to the Vêdantâ
Ganeshâ, "Lord of meditation and mantras", "Lord of Knowledge", "Lord
of Categories", will be displayed in the front page cover of the
Symbolism of the cross's original edition
The Introduction to the study of the Hindu doctrines had, among its
objectives, the purpose of giving the proper intellectual basis to
promote openness to the study of eastern intellectuality. The study of
Hindu doctrines is continued in his book Man and his Becoming
according to the Vêdantâ by taking the specific viewpoint of the human
being's constitution according to the Vêdantâ: René Guénon states that
his goal is not to present a synthetic exposition of all vedic doctrines
"which would be quite an impossible task", but to consider "a particular
point of that doctrine", in that case the definition of the human being, in
order to contemplate afterwards other aspects of metaphysics.
The book begins in precising the nature of the Vêdantâ, its profound
signification as the "end of the Vedas", and the traditional signification
of Shruti and Smriti scriptures:
13. the distinction between shruti and smriti is, fundamentally, equivalent to
that between immediate intellectual intuition and reflective
consciousness; if the first is described by a word bearing the primitive
meaning of 'hearing', this is precisely in order to indicate its intuitive
character, and because according to the Hindu cosmological doctrine,
sound holds the primordial rank among sensible qualities.
The fundamental texts called Mimânsa (Pûrva-Mimânsa, Uttara-
Mimânsa), the Upanishads, the Brahmâ-Sûtras, along with Hindu
cosmological texts are listed, and the notion of "intellectual function"
associated to their origin is proposed, as opposed to the profane notion
of "author".
The general considerations of the "Self", the "Unmanifested" and the
universal "Manifestation" are then introduced: the "universal
Manifestation" is all that exists and its development is constantly being
in progress, towards destiny. The "Unmanifested" is all that is beyond
universal Manifestation, so that it can only be designated by negation.
The second chapter also establishes the fundamental distinctions
between the "Self" and the ego, or "personality" and "individuality", the
first being the only One that is "absolutely real". These ideas are
declined in different denominations depending, for a first part, on the
different degrees of reality considered, and also from the
"transcendent" and "immanent" point of views that can be
contemplated: Ishwara is the "Divine personality" or the Principle of
universal Manifestation. It is unmanifested, for the Principle of
Manifestation cannot be Itself manifested (this is in relation to the
symbolism of "black heads": Ishwara has Its head in "darkness"). Atmâ,
Paramâtmâ, Brahmâ: the realization that the Self, "in relation to any
being whatsoever, is in reality identical to Atmâ", constitutes the heart
of the Hindu doctrine of "delivrance" or "moksha", and that doctrine is
absolutely identical to what Islamic esoterism calls the "Supreme
Identity" (that is to say, expressed in Hindu terms, the identity of Atmâ
and Brahmâ):
"the 'Supreme Identity', according to an expression borrowed from
Islamic esoterism, where the doctrine on this and on many other points
is fundamentally the same as in the Hindu tradition, in spite of great
differences in form."
If the "Supreme Identity" (or "moksha" or "delivrance"), is made
possible, through realization, it is because at the very heart of the
14. human being (not to be confused with the heart organ of the corporeal
envelope) is found what is called Brahmâ 's journey, or Brahmâ-pura.
"What resides at the center of the human state is Purusha, or Brahmâ
considered "inside" (or "at the center" of) the human being. Purusha, in
order that manifestation may be produced, must enter into correlation
with another principle, although such a correlation is really non-existent
in relation to the highest (uttama) aspect of Purusha, for there cannot in
truth be any other principle than the Supreme Principle, except in a
relative sense. The correlative of Purusha is then Prakriti, the
undifferentiated primordial substance, a passive principle represented
as feminine, while Purusha, also called Pumas, is the active principle,
represented as masculine; and these two are the poles of all
manifestation, though remaining unmanifested themselves. It is the
union of these complementary principles which produces the integral
development of the human individual state, and that applies relatively to
each individual."
Man and his Becoming according to the Vedânta, p. 39.
From there, all different degrees of individual manifestation can be
described and named, and in particular the tanmatras, the mind or
manas in its role of coordinator of internal and external faculties, the
five vayus, the different prânas, and the distinctions between the
waking state, the dream state, and the deep sleep state.
The book ends with a description of the reabsorption of the individual
faculties, either in the posthumous conditions, or in the spiritual process
of realization, up to the "final delivrance" or "Supreme Identity", which is
the ultimate goal of any true spiritual path.
The Symbolism of the Cross
The Symbolism of the Cross is a book "dedicated to the venerated
memory of Esh-Sheikh Abder-Rahman Elish El-Kebir". Its goal, as
Guénon states it, "is to explain a symbol that is common to almost all
traditions, a fact that would seem to indicate its direct attachment to the
great primordial tradition". To alleviate the hurdles bound to the
interpretations of a symbol belonging to different traditions, Guénon
distinguishes synthesis from syncretism: syncretism consists in
assembling from the outside a number of more or less incongruous
elements which, when so regarded, can never be truly unified.
Syncretism is something outward: the elements taken from any of its
quarters and put together in this way can never amount to anything
15. more than borrowings that are effectively incapable of being integrated
into a doctrine "worthy of that name". To apply these criteria to the
present context of the symbolism of the cross:
syncretism can be recognized wherever one finds elements borrowed
from different traditional forms and assembled together without any
awareness that there is only one single doctrine of which these forms
are so many different expressions or so many adaptations related to
particular conditions related to given circumstances of time and place.
A notable example of syncretism can be found, according to Guénon, in
the "doctrines" and symbols of the Theosophical society. Synthesis on
the other hand is carried essentially from within, by which it properly
consists in envisaging things in the unity of their principle. Synthesis will
exist when one starts from unity itself and never loses sight of it
throughout the multiplicity of its manifestations; this moreover implies
the ability to see beyond forms and an awareness of the principal truth.
Given such awareness, one is at liberty to make use of one or another
of those forms, something that certain traditions symbolically denote as
"the gift of tongues". The concordance between all traditional forms
may be said to represent genuine "synonymies". In particular, René
Guénon writes that the cross is a symbol that in its various forms is met
with almost everywhere, and from the most remotes times. It is
therefore far from belonging peculiarly to the Christian tradition, and the
cross, like any other traditional symbol, can be regarded according to
manifold senses.
Far from being an absolute and complete unity in himself, the individual
in reality constitutes but a relative and fragmentary unity. The
multiplicity of the states of the being, "which is a fundamental
metaphysical truth", implies the effective realization of the being's
multiple states and is related to the conception that various traditional
doctrines, including Islamic esoterism, denote by the term 'Universal
Man': in Arabic al-Insân-al-kâmil is at the same time 'Primordial man'
(al-Insân-al-qâdim); it is the Adam Qadmon of the Hebrew Kabbalah; it
is also the 'King' (Wang) of the Far-Eastern tradition (Tao Te King chap.
25). The conception of the 'Universal Man' establishes a constitutive
analogy between universal manifestation and its individual human
modality, or, to use the language of Western Hermeticism, between the
'macrocosm' and the 'microcosm'.
From these considerations, the geometrical symbolism of the cross, in
its most universal signification, can be contemplated: most traditional
16. doctrines symbolize the realization of 'Universal Man' by a sign that is
everywhere the same because, according to Guénon, it is one of those
directly attached to the primordial tradition. That sign is the sign of the
cross, which very clearly represents the manner of achievement of this
realization by the perfect communion of all states of the being,
harmoniously and conformably ranked, in integral expansion, in the
double sense of "amplitude" and "exaltation". In fact, this double
expansion of the being may be regarded as taking place horizontally on
the one hand, that is, at a certain level or degree of existence, and
vertically at the other, that is, in the hierarchical superimposition of all
the degrees. Thus, the horizontal direction represents "amplitude", or
integral extension of the individuality taken as basis for realization, and
the vertical direction represents the hierarchy, likewise and a fortiori
indefinite, of the multiples states. Furthermore, the symbol of the cross
can also be considered in two basic ways, so-called horizontal and
vertical, as it appears in the double consideration of a first cross
obtained, in the ecliptic plane by joining the equinoctial and solstice
points, and a second cross, orthogonal to the first, defined by the
equator and the line going through the poles.
The tridimensional cross obtained that way is linked to the six directions
of space and the centre of the cross, through a symbolism that appears
notably in the Hebraic kabbalah in relation to the "mystery of unity", and
also in Clement of Alexandria, and the Hindu doctrines as well. Then,
the symbol of the cross may develop according to different points of
view: "union of the complements", with the vertical line representing the
active principle and the horizontal line the passive principle, hence
establishing an application of the general consideration of Purusha-
Prakriti; "resolution of the opposites", symbolized by the central point
which corresponds to what Islamic esoterism calls the "Divine station",
namely "that which combines contrasts and antinomies" (al-mâqam
lillahi huwa mâqam ijtima 'al-diddâin): this station (mâqam), or degree
of the being's effective realization, is attained by al-fanâ', that is, by the
"extinction" of the ego in the return to the "primordial state"; such
"extinction", writes René Guénon, even as regards the literal meaning
of the term denoting it, is not without analogy to the Nirvâna of the
Buddhist doctrine. Beyond al-fanâ', there is still fanâ al-fanâ', the
"extinction of the extinction", which similarly corresponds to
"Parinirvâna". In the Far-Eastern tradition, the central point is called the
"Invariable Middle" (Ching-Yin) which is the place of perfect equilibrium,
represented as the center of the 'cosmic wheel', and is also, at the
17. same time, the point where the 'Activity of Heaven' is directly
manifested. This center directs all things by its "actionless activity" (wei
wu wei), which although unmanifested, or rather because it is
unmanifested, is in reality the plenitude of activity, since it is the activity
of the Principle whence all activities are derived; Guénon notes that this
has been expressed by Lao Tzu as follows: "The Principle is always
actionless, yet everything is done by It". This "Invariable Middle" is also
the locus of "Peace in the void", corresponding to what Islamic
esoterism calls the "Great Peace".
That 'peace' that dwells at the central point, brings to another
symbolism, namely that of war, and a well-known example of that
symbolism, writes René Guénon, is found in the Bhagavad-Gitâ. The
same conception, writes René Guénon, is not specific to the Hindu
doctrine, but is also found in the Islamic, for this is the real meaning of
the 'holy war' (jihâd): "war represents a cosmic process whereby what
is manifested is reintegrated into the principal unity; that is why, from
the viewpoint of manifestation itself, this reintegration appears as a
destruction, and this emerges very clearly from certain aspects of the
symbolism of Shiva in the Hindu doctrine".[43]
Another aspect of the
symbolism of the cross identifies it with what various traditions identifies
as "The tree in the Midst", one of the numerous symbols of the "World
Axis". This tree stands at the center of the world, or rather of a world,
that is a domain in which a state of existence, such as the human state,
is developed. In the biblical symbolim, for example, the 'Tree of life',
planted in the midst of the terrestrial paradise, represents the center of
our world, and René Guénon studies its relationships with another
biblical tree, the 'Tree of Knowledge of good and evil'. Besides, the
horizontal cross is directly in relation with the "polar symbolism" of the
swastika, "a truly universal symbol" which represents, particularly in
India, the action of the Principle on the manifestation, and which is in
no way related to "the artificial and even anti-traditional use of the
swastika by the German 'racialists' who have given it the fantastic and
somewhat ridiculous title of hakenkreuz or 'hanked cross' and quite
arbitrarily made it a symbol of antisemitism".[44]
Then René Guénon
goes "as deeply as possible into the geometrical symbolism which
applies equally both to the degrees of universal Existence and to the
states of each being, that is, both from the 'macrocosmic' and the
'microcosmic'standpoint".
These considerations lead to an interpretation of the symbolism of the
weaving: in Sanskrit sûtra means "thread" and it is "a least curious to
18. note that the Arabic word sûrat, which denotes the chapters of the
Koran, is composed of exactly the same elements as the Sanskrit
sûtra; this word has in addition the kindred sense of 'row' or 'line' and its
derivation is unknown".[45]
René Guénon then contemplates many
aspects related to the geometrical representation of the states of the
Being: the representation of the continuity of the modalities of one and
the same state of the being, the relationship between point and space
(a question related to the infinitesimals), the ontology of the burning
bush in the old testament, the universal spherical vortex, the Far-
Eastern symbol of the Yin-Yang, the tree and the serpent etc.
The Multiple States of the Being
Narayana is one of the names of Vishnu in the Hindu tradition, signifies
literally "He who walks on the Waters", with an evident parallel with the
Gospel tradition. The "surface of the Waters", or their plane of
separation, is described as the plane of reflection of the "Celestial Ray".
It marks the state in which the passage from the individual to the
universal is operative, and the well-known symbol of "walking on the
Waters" represents emancipation from form, or liberation from the
individual condition (René Guénon, The multiples states of the Being,
chapter 12, "The two chaoses").
This book expands on the multiple states of the Being, a doctrine
already tackled in The Symbolism of the Cross, leaving aside the
geometrical representation exposed in that book "to bring out the full
range of this altogether fundamental theory".[46]
First and foremost is
asserted the necessity of the "metaphysical Infinity", envisaged in its
relationship with "universal Possibility". "The Infinite, according to the
etymology of the term which designates it, is that which has no limits",
so it can only be applied to what has absolutely no limit, and not to
what is exempted from certain limitations while being subjected to
others like space, time, quantity, in other words all countless other
things that fall within the indefinite, fate and nature. There is no
distinction between the Infinite and universal Possibility, simply the
19. correlation between these terms indicates that in the case of the
Infinite, it is contemplated in its active aspect, while the universal
Possibility refers to its passive aspect: these are the two aspects of
Brahma and its Shakti in the Hindu doctrines. From this results that "the
distinction between the possible and the real [...] has no metaphysical
validity, for every possible is real in its way, according to the mode
befitting its own nature".[47]
This leads to the metaphysical consideration
of the "Being" and "Non-Being":
If we [...] define Being in the universal sense as the principle of
manifestation, and at the same time as comprising in itself the totality of
possibilities of all manifestation, we must say that Being is not infinite
because it does not coincide with total Possibility; and all the more so
because Being, as the principle of manifestation, although it does
indeed comprise all the possibilities of manifestation, does so only
insofar as they are actually manifested. Outside of Being, therefore, are
all the rest, that is all the possibilities of non-manifestation, as well as
the possibilities of manifestation themselves insofar as they are in the
unmanifested state; and included among these is Being itself, which
cannot belong to manifestation since it is the principle thereof, and in
consequence is itself unmanifested. For want of any other term, we are
obliged to designate all that is thus outside and beyond Being as "Non-
Being", but for us this negative term is in no way synonym for
'nothingness'.[48]
For instance, our present state, in its corporeal modality, is defined by
five conditions: space, time, "matter" (i.e. quantity), "form", and life, and
these five conditions enter into correlation with the five corporeal
elements (bhutas of the Hindu doctrine, see below) to create all living
forms (including us in our corporeal modalities) in our world and state of
existence. But the universal Manifestation is incommensurably more
vast, including all the states of existence that correspond to other
conditions or possibilities, yet Being Itself is the principle of universal
Manifestation.
This involves the foundation of the theory of multiple states and the
metaphysical notion of the "Unicity of the Existence" (wahdatul-wujûd)
as it is for instance developed in Islamic esoterism by Mohyddin Ibn
Arabi. The relationships of unity and multiplicity lead to a more accurate
"description" of the Non-Being: in it, there can be no question of a
multiplicity of states, since this domain is essentially that of the
undifferentiated and even of the unconditionned: "the undifferentiated
20. cannot exist in a distinctive mode", although we still speak analogously
of the states of the non-manifestation: Non-Being is "Metaphysical
Zero" and is logically anterior to unity; that is why Hindu doctrine
speaks in this regard only of "non duality" (advaita). Analogous
considerations drawn from the study of dream state help understand
the relationships of unity and multiplicity: in dream state, which is one of
the modalities of the manifestation of the human being corresponding
to the subtle (that is, non-corporeal) part of its individuality, "the being
produces a world that proceeds entirely from itself, and the objects
therein consist exclusively of mental images (as opposed to the
sensory perceptions of the waking state), that is to say of combinations
of ideas clothed in subtle forms that depend substantially of the subtle
form of the individual himself, moreover, of which the imaginal objects
of a dream are nothing but accidental and secondary modifications".
Then, René Guénon studies the possibilities of individual
consciousness and the mental ("mind") as the characteristic element of
the human individuality. In chapter X ("Limits of the Indefinite"), he
comes back to the notion of metaphysical realization (moksha, or
"Suprême identity"). A superior signification of the notion of "darkness"
is then introduced, most notably in the chapter entitled "The two
chaoses", which describes what is happening during the course of
spiritual realization when a disciple leaves the domain of "formal
possibilities". The multiples states of the Being is essentially related to
the notion of "spiritual hierarchies", which is found in all traditions.
Hence is described the universal process of the "realization of the
Being through Knowledge".
On "initiation"
Hermes' caduceus: example of a symbol associated to the possession
of lesser mysteries, and showing an example of horizontal duality (the
two snakes' heads are placed in the horizontal dual position, hence
referring to apparent dualities such as life and death). In Studies in
21. Hinduism, Guénon mentions a relation between the symbol and the
Kundalini shakti.
Perspectives on Initiation, first published at the close of World War II in
1946, extends a series of articles on the central subject of initiation
originally written between 1932 and 1938 for Le Voile d'Isis (later
renamed Etudes Traditionnelles). Initiation is introduced as the
transmission, by the appropriate rites of a given tradition, of a "spiritual
influence".[49]
Related articles were later published, in 1952, in the
posthumous collection Initiation and Spiritual Realization. While the
notion of initiation is introduced in the most general setting, it is
impossible, writes Guénon, to write a complete and comprehensive
book on the subject "for an indefinite number of questions could be
raised – the very nature of the subject resisting any set limit".[50]
However, the subject of initiation being contemplated from a general
point of view, the goal of Guénon goes beyond an introduction to the
subject and, doing so, to make clear distinctions between what is
relevant to initiation and what is not, according to Guénon. First, in
particular, he insists on clarifying his position on the essential
differences between "mysticism" and initiation so that, to him, initiation
is, by its very nature, incompatible with mysticism:[51]
In the case of mysticism the individual simply limits himself to what is
presented to him and to the manner in which it is presented, having
himself no say in the matter [...] In the case of initiation, on the contrary,
the individual is the source of initiative towards 'realization', pursued
methodically under rigorous and unremitting control, and normally
reaching beyond the very possibilities of the individual as such.
Other writings in metaphysics, hermeticism and cosmological
sciences
Lesser and greater mysteries
Main article: Perspectives on initiation
Hindu doctrine of cosmic cycles
Guénon introduces some preliminary aspects of a particular (and
extremely complex) cosmological science: the Hindu doctrine of cosmic
cycles, for instance in the article "Some remarks on the doctrine of
cosmic cycles".[52]
He writes that giving an overview of this theory and
its equivalents in different traditional forms is merely an impossible task
"not only because the question is very complex in itself, but specially
22. owing to the extreme difficulty of expressing these things in a European
language, and in a way that is intelligible to the present-day Western
mentality, which has had no practice whatsoever with this kind of
thinking". All that is possible in this respect is to clarify a few points with
remarks "which can only raise suggestions about the meaning of the
doctrine in question rather than really explaining it".[53]
In the most general sense of the term, a cycle must be considered as
"representing the process of development of some state of
manifestation, or, in the case of minor cycles, of one of the more or less
restricted and specialized modalities of that state".[54]
Moreover, in
virtue "of the law of correspondence which links all things in universal
Existence, there is necessarily and always a certain analogy, either
among the different cycles of the same order or among the principal
cycles and their secondary divisions".[54]
This allows to use one and the
same mode of expression when speaking about the cycles, although
this must often be understood only symbolically, and this allude here
especially to the 'chronological' form under which the doctrine of cycles
is presented: since a Kalpa represents the total development of a
world, that is to say of a state or degree of universal existence, "it is
obvious that one cannot speak literally about its duration, computed
according to some temporal measure, unless this duration relates to a
state of which time is one of the determination, as in our world".
Everywhere else, this duration is only purely symbolic and must be
transposed analogically, for temporal succession is only an image both
logical and ontological, of 'extra-temporal' series of causes and effects.
Inside a Kalpa, the Manvantaras, or eras of successive Manus, are 14
in number, forming two septenary series of which the first includes both
past Manvantaras and the present one, and the second future
Manvantaras: the present humanity is in the seventh Manvantara of the
Kalpa. These two series can be linked with those of the seven Svargas
and the seven Patalas, "which, from the point of view of the hierarchy of
the degrees of existence or of universal manifestation, represent the
states respectively higher and lower than the human state". Another
correspondence concerns the seven dvīpa (devnagari: वीप) or 'regions'
into which the world is divided. Although according to the proper
meaning of the word that designates them these are represented as
islands or continents distributed in a certain way in space, one must be
careful not to take this literally and to regard them simply as different
parts of present-day earth: Guénon writes that they 'emerge' in turns
23. and not simultaneously, and only one of them is manifested in the
sensible domain over the course of a certain period. If that period is a
Manvantara, one will have to conclude that each dvīpa will have to
appear twice in the Kalpa or once in each of the just mentioned
septenary series, which correspond to one another inversely as do all
similar cases, particularly the Svargas and the Patalas, one can deduce
that the order of appearance for the dvīpa will likewise have to be, in
the second series, the inverse of what it was in the first: this is matter of
different 'states' of the terrestrial world rather than 'regions' properly
speaking. The Jambudvīpa really represents the entire earth in is
present state (not only in its corporeal modality), and if it is said to
extend to the south of Meru, the 'axial' mountain around which our
world revolves,
"this is because Meru is identified symbolically with the North Pole, so
that the whole earth is really situated to the south with respect to it. To
explain this more completely it would be necessary to develop the
symbolism of the directions of space according to which the Dvīpas are
distributed, as well as correspondences existing between this spatial
symbolism and the temporal symbolism on which the whole doctrine of
cycles rest".[53]
This way of envisaging the dvīpas, writes René Guénon, is also
confirmed by concordant data from other traditions which also speak of
'seven lands' particularly Islamic esoterism and Hebrew Kabbalah.
Thus in the latter, even while these 'seven lands' are outwardly
represented by as many divisions of the land of Canaan, they are
related to the reigns of the 'seven kings of Edom' which clearly
correspond to the seven Manus of the first series; and all are included
in the 'Land of the Living' which represents the complete development
of our world considered as realized permanently in its principal state.
"We can note here the coexistence of two points of view, one of
succession, which refers to the manifestation in itself, and the other of
simultaneity, which refers to its principle or to what one could call its
'archetype'; and at root the correspondence between these two points
of view is in a certain way equivalent to that between temporal
symbolism and spatial symbolism to which we just alluded in
connection with the Dvīpas of the Hindu tradition".
"In Islamic esoterism, the 'seven lands' appear, perhaps even more
explicitly, as so many tabaqāt or 'categories' of terrestrial existence,
which coexist and in a way interpenetrate, but only one of which is
24. presently accessible to the senses while the others are in a latent state
and can only be perceived exceptionally and under special
conditions";[54]
these too are manifested outwardly in turn, during the
different periods that succeed one another in the course of the total
duration of this world. On the other hand, each of the 'seven lands' is
governed by a Qutb or 'pole', which thus corresponds very clearly to the
Manu of the period during which the land is manifested; and these
seven Aktab are subordinated to the supreme 'pole' just as the different
Manus are subordinate to the Adi-Manu or primordial Manu; but
because these 'seven lands' coexist, they also in a certain respect
exercise their functions in a permanent and simultaneous way. "It is
hardly necessary", writes Guénon, "to point out that the designation of
'Pole' is closely related to the polar symbolism of Meru. Meru itself has
in any case its exact equivalent in the Mountain of Qāf in Islamic
tradition. And the seven terrestrial 'Poles' are considered to be
reflections of the seven celestial 'poles' which preside respectively over
the seven planetary heavens; "and this naturally evokes the
correspondence with the Svargas in Hindu doctrine, which shows in
sum the perfect concordance in this regard between the two
traditions".[53]
The Yugas are the divisions of the Manvantara, and they are four in
number, which correspond, in the spatial symbolism, to the four
cardinal points. There is an obvious equivalence with the four Yugas
and the four ages of gold, silver, bronze and iron of the Greco-Latin
antiquity. Guénon writes that the figures given as durations of the
Yugas in various Indian texts are to be taken symbolically, their actual
exact determination needs in-depth and specific knowledge as these
numbers are often written, for various traditional reasons, with an
undetermined number of zeros added to their transcription. Guénon
gives indications for the determination of the Yuga's durations:[54]
if the
total duration of the Manvantara is represented by 10, then the
durations of the four Yugas are:
Krita Yuga or Satya Yuga: 4, corresponding to 25920 years.
Treta Yuga: 3, (19440 years).
Dvapara Yuga: 2, (12960 years).
Kali Yuga: 1, (6480 years).
so that the division of the Manvantara is carried out by the formula: 10
= 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 which is, in reverse, that of the Pythagorean Tetraktys.
This last formula corresponds to what the language of Western
25. Hermeticism calls 'the circling of the square' and the other to the
opposite problem of 'squaring of the circle' which expresses precisely
the relation of the end of a cycle to its beginning, that is, the integration
of its total development. Guénon writes: "We are presently in an
advanced phase of the Kali Yuga".[55]
Science of letters in Islam
Name of Allāh. Arabic calligraphy.
The numerical value of the word Allāh is:
1 + 30 + 30 + 5 = 66.
The effective totalization of the being is called 'Moksha' (or 'delivrance')
in the Hindu doctrines, and 'Universal Man' in Islamic esoterism, where
in the latter he is represented by the couple 'Adam-Eve' (Adam wa
Hawwa) and has the same number 66 as Allāh, which may be taken as
a means of expressing the 'Supreme Identity' (The Symbolism of the
Cross, chapter 3).
Distribution of letters and names around al-Arsh al-Muhit.
Guénon writes that while the science of nirukta unveils inner meanings
in Vedic sacred scriptures,[56]
in Islam, the science of letters is central in
islamic esoterism, where exoterism and esoterism are often compared
to the 'shell' (qishr) and the 'kernel' (lubb) or to the circonference and its
center.[57]
On the subject of esoterism, and its relations with the Islamic
doctrine, he refers to the Arabic words tariqah and haqiqah (means and
end), and notes that the general meaning of "esoterism" is designated
by the term taṣawwūf. According to Guénon, that latter term can only
be translated precisely as 'initiation'. And while 'taṣawwūf' refers to any
26. esoteric and initiatic doctrine, he questions the [derivative] term 'sufism'
to designate Islamic esoterism. Guénon writes that this term
"has the unfortunate disadvantage of inevitably suggesting by its 'ism'
suffix, the idea of a doctrine proper to a particular school, whereas this
is not the case in reality, the only schools in question being the turuq,
which basically represent the different methods, without there being
any possibility of a fundamental difference of doctrine, for 'the doctrine
of Unity is unique' (at-tawhidu wahid)".[57]
· [58]
According to Guénon, the derivation of the word sūfi is undoubtedly
unsolvable, "the word having too many proposed etymologies, of equal
plausibility, for only one to be true". For him, the word is a purely
symbolic name, which, as such, requires no linguistic derivation strictly
speaking: "The so-called etymologies are basically only phonetic
resemblances, which, moreover, according to the laws of a certain
symbolism, effectively correspond to relationships between various
ideas which have come to be grouped more or less as accessories
around the word in question."[57]
But, given the character of the Arabic language (a character which it
shares with Hebrew) the primary and fundamental meaning a of word is
to be found in the numerical values of the letters; and in fact, what is
particularly remarkable is that the sum of the numerical values of the
letters which form the word sūfi has the same number as al-Hikmatu'l-
ilahiya, 'Divine Wisdom'. The true sūfi is therefore the one who
possesses this Wisdom, or, in other words, he is al-'arif bi' Llah that is
to say 'he who knows through God', for God cannot be known except
by Himself, and this is the supreme or 'total' degree of knowledge or
haqiqah.[57]
Guénon then introduces the symbolism used in taṣawwūf about the
numerical significaton of Arabic letters:[57]
The divine 'Throne' which surrounds all worlds (al-Arsh al-Muhit) is
represented by the figure of a circle. In the center is ar-Rūh [the Spirit],
and the 'Throne' is supported by eight angels positionned on the
circumference, the first four at the four cardinal points and the other
four at four intermediary points. The names of these angels are formed
by various groups of letters arranged according to their numeric values
in such a way that , taken together, the names comprise all the letters
of the alphabet. The alphabet in question has 28 letters, but it is said
that at the very beginning the Arabic alphabet had only 22 letters,
27. corresponding exactly to those of the Hebrew alphabet; in doing so, the
distinction is made between the lesser jafr, which uses only 22 letters,
and the greater jafr, which uses 28 and conceives of them all with
distinct numerical values. Moreover, it can be said that 28 (2 + 8 = 10)
is contained in 22 (2 + 2 = 4) as 10 is contained in 4, according to
Pythagorean Tetraktys: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10, and, in fact, the six
supplementary letters are only modifications of the original six letters
from which they are formed by a simple addition of a dot, and to which
they are restored immediately by the suppression of this same dot.
ā/' ا 1
y/ī
ي
10
q
ق
100
b ب 2
k
ك
20 r ر 200
j ج 3 l ل 30
sh
ش
300
d د 4
m
م
40
t
ت
400
h ه 5
n
ن
50
th
ث
500
w/ū
و
6
s
س
60
kh
خ
600
z ز 7 ' ع 70
dh
ذ
700
H
ح
8
f
ف
80
D
ض
800
T ط 9
S
ص
90
Z
ظ
900
gh
غ
1000
It will be noticed that each of the two groups of four names contains
exactly half of the alphabet, or 14 letters, which are distributed
respectively in the following fashion (when considering the first four
angels at cardinal points, and the second group of angels at
intermediary points):
In the first half: 4 + 3 + 3 + 4 = 14
28. In the second half: 4 + 4 + 3 + 3 = 14
The numeric values of the eight names formed from the sum of those of
their letters are, taking them naturally in order:
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10
5 + 6 + 7 = 18
8 + 9 + 10 = 27
20 + 30 + 40 + 50 = 140
60 + 70 + 80 + 90 = 300
100 + 200 + 300 + 400 = 1000
500 + 600 + 700 = 1800
800 + 900 + 1000 = 2700
The values of the last three names are equal to those of the first three
multiplied by 100, which is clear enough if one notices that the first
three contain the numbers from 1 to 10, and the last three the hundred
from 100 to 1000, both groups being equally distributed into 4 + 3 + 3.
The value of the first half of the alphabet is the sum of those of the first
four names: 10 + 18 + 27 + 140 = 195. Similarly, that of the second half
is the sum of the last four names: 300 + 1000 + 1800 + 2700 = 5800.
Finally, the total value of the entire alphabet is 195 + 5800 = 5995.
"This number 5995 is remarkable for its symmetry: its central part is 99,
the number of the 'attributes' of Allah; the outside numbers form 55, the
sum of the first ten numbers, the denary being in turn divisible into two
halves (5 + 5 = 10); besides, 5 + 5 = 10 and 9 + 9 = 18 is the numerical
value of the first two names".[57]
Connections with the general symbolism of al-Qutb al Ghawth [the
Supreme Pole] are then contemplated.[57]
Conditions of corporeal existence
The doctrine of five elements, which plays an important role in some
Vedic texts, in Advaita Vedanta, Islamic esotericism, the Hebrew
Kabbalah, in Christian Hermeticism, and other traditions, is partially
exposed by René Guénon in two articles: one entitled The conditions of
corporeal existence, published in 1912 in the journal La Gnose
(Gnosis) (reprinted in the book Miscellanea) and another, published
much later, in 1935: The Hindu doctrine of five elements (reprinted in
the book Studies in Hinduism). A missing part of the first article was
never published but René Guénon announced several times (The
29. symbolism of the cross, The multiple states of the being) his intention to
write a more complete study on this issue. Some aspects of the
doctrine of five elements and conditions are used at many occurrences
in all his work: in The symbolism of the cross, The principles of
infinitesimal calculus, The Great Triad (on the vital condition), in the first
two chapters of The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times (on
the notion of form) etc. However Guénon never wrote a comprehensive
introduction to the subject, something that prompted comments from
some authors.[59]
Hellenic Physics
philosophy
Classical elements; ether
(not present in Hellenic
Physics), would be
located at the centre: the
other bhutas originate
from it.
fire · earth · air ·
water
In these two articles, he exposits the doctrine of elements and "the
conditions of corporeal existence", starting from the considerations
taken from Samkhya of Kapila. The five elements or bhutas are the
elementary substances of the corporeal world. The names given to
them in the Latin language ("fire", "air", "water" etc.) are purely symbolic
and they should not be confused with the things they designate: "we
could consider the elements as different vibratory modalities of physical
matter, modalities under which it makes itself perceptible successively
(in purely logical succession, naturally) to each of the senses of our
corporeal modality".[60]
The five bhutas are, in their order of production
30. (which is the reverse of their order of resorption or return to the
undifferentiated state[61]
):
1. âkâsha: ether,
2. vâyu: air,
3. têjas: fire,
4. ap: water,
5. prithvî, earth.
Due to the manifestation in our world of the duality "essence-
substance", these five bhutas are in correspondence with five
"elementary essences" "which are given the names tanmatras [...]
signifying literally a 'measure' or an 'assignment' delimiting the proper
domain of a certain quality or 'quiddity' in the universal Existence. [...]
these tanmatras, by the very fact that they are of subtle order, are in no
way perceptibles to the senses, unlike the corporeal elements and their
combinations; they are only conceivable 'ideally'".[62]
These five
essences are associated with the elementary sense qualities, as well
as some organic faculties: auditive or sonorous quality shabda (शब्द),
tangible sparśa (स्पशश), visible rūpa (रूप) ("with the double meaning of
form and color" ), sapid rasa (रस), olfactive gandha (गन्ध). There is a
correspondence between the five elements and the five senses: to
ether corresponds hearing (śrotra); to air, touch (tvak); to fire, sight
(cakṣus); to water, taste (rasana); to earth, smell (ghrāṇa).
"Each bhuta, with the tanmatra to which it corresponds, and the
faculties of sensation and action that proceed from the latter, is
resorbed in the one immediately preceding it in the order of production
in such a way that the order of resorption is as follows: first, earth
(prithvî) with the olfactory quality (ghanda), the sense of smell (ghrāṇa),
and the faculty of locomotion (pada); second, water (ap) with the sapid
quality, the sense of taste (rasana), and the faculty of prehension
(pani); third, fire (têjas) with the visual quality (rūpa), the sense of sight
(cakṣus), and the faculty of excretion (payu); fourth, air (vâyu) with the
tactile quality (sparśa), the sense of touch (tvak), and the faculty of
generation (upashta); fifth, ether (âkâsha), with the sonorous quality
(shabda), the sense of hearing (śrotra), and the faculty of speech
(vach); and finally, at the last stage, the whole is resorbed in the 'inner
sense' (manas)".[63]
31. The five bhutas combine with the five conditions of corporeal existence
which are:
1. space (linked to Vishnu in its expansion and "stabilisation"
aspects),
2. time (linked to Shiva in its "transformation" aspect -'the current
of forms'-),
3. matter (materia secunda i.e. quantity),[64]
4. form,
5. life.
In the article "The conditions of corporeal existence" he develops, for
the first two bhutas, how they are related to the measurement of time
and space, and in "The Hindu theory of the five elements", the
predominance of the three gunas or essential qualities coextensive with
the universal manifestation in each of them serves to define the
geometric representation of the "sphere of the elements".
Classical atomism and the continuum
'Naturalistic' tendencies never developed and took an extension in India
as they did in Greece under the influence of physical philosophers.[65]
In
particular, atomism (not in the modern sense of "atoms" and
"elementary particles", but in the classical signification related to the
existence of indivisible items from which the entire corporeal world is
supposedly built) is a conception formally opposed to the Veda, notably
in connection with the theory of five elements. Classical atomism states
that "an atom, or anu, partakes, potentially at least, the nature of one or
other of the elements, and it is from the grouping together of atoms of
various kinds, under the action of a force said to be 'non perceptible' or
adrishta that all bodies are supposed to be formed".[66]
The error of
atomism comes from the fact that these atoms are supposed to exist
within the corporeal order whereas all that is bodily is necessarily
composite "being always divisible by the fact that it is extended, that is
to say subject to the spatial condition"[67]
(although in the corporeal
domain, divisibility has necessarily its limits).
in order to find something simple or indivisible it is necessary to pass
outside space, and therefore outside that special modality of
manifestation which constitutes corporeal existence.[67]
32. Devanagari Aum.
In its true sense of 'indivisible' writes Guénon, an atom, having no
parts, must be without extension, and "the sum of elements devoid of
extension can never form an extension",[67]
so that "atoms" cannot
make up bodies. Guénon also reproduces an argument coming from
Shankaracharya for the refutation of atomism:
two things can come into contact with one another either by a part of
themselves or by the whole; for atoms, devoid as they are of parts, the
first hypothesis is inadmissible; thus only the second hypothesis
remains which amounts to saying that the aggregation of two atoms
can only be realized by their coincidence [...] when it clearly follows that
two atoms when joined occupy no more space than a single atom and
so forth indefinitely.[67]
The issue will be included in The principles of the infinitesimal calculus
in relation to the concept of a whole understood as "logically prior to its
parts" as well as in the conditions of corporeal existence and The
symbolism of the cross. In that latter book, he speaks of "the
elementary distance between two points" and in The principles of
infinitesimal calculus he states that the ends of a segment are no
longer in the domain of extension. Applied to the corporeal world, this
leads to introduce the "limits of spatial possibility by which divisibility is
conditioned" and to consider the "atoms" not in the corporeal world
(which is properly the concept designated as classical atomism). The
process of "quintuplication" of the elements being universal and
coextensive to the whole manifestation,[68]
a universalization is
contemplated in The conditions of corporeal existence:
"the point in itself is not contained in space and cannot in anyway be
conditionned by it, because on the contrary it is the point that creates
out of its own 'ipseity' redoubled or polarized into essence and
substance, which amounts to saying that it contains space potentially. It
is space that proceeds from the point, and not the point that is
determined by space; but secondarily (all manifestation or exterior
modification being only contingent and accidental in relation to its
'intimate nature'), the point determines itself in space in order to realize
33. the actual extension of its potentialities of unlimited multiplication (of
itself by itself) [...] [so that] extension already exists in the potential
state in the point itself; it starts to exists in the actual state only when
this point, in its first manifestation, is in a way doubled in order to stand
face to face with itself, for one can then speak of the elementary
distance between two points [...]. However one must point out that the
elementary distance is only what corresponds to this doubling in the
domain of spatial or geometric representation (which only has the
character of symbol for us). Metaphysically, the point is considered to
represent Being in its unity and its principal identity, that is to say Ātma
outside of any special condition (or determination) and all
differentiation; this point itself, its exteriorization [...] and the distance
that joins them while at the same time separating them (a relationship
that implies causality [...]) corresponds respectively to the three terms
of the ternary that we have distinguished in Being considered as
knowing itself (that is to say in Buddhi) [...], terms which [...] are
perfectly identical among themselves, and which are designated Sat,
Chit, and Ananda."
The conditions of corporeal existence, in Miscellanea, pp. 97,98.
In particular and in relation to these matters, The Reign of Quantity and
the Signs of the Times develops against the theories of Descartes
about the nature of time.
Symbolism
Han dynasty coin, with the square hole in the center, in application to
analogy symbolism (see text)
While it is acknowledged that symbolism refers to something very
different from a mere 'code', an artificial or arbitrary meaning, and that
"it holds an essential and spontaneous echoing power",[69]
for René
Guénon, this 'echoing power' goes immensely farther than the
psychological realm: symbolism is "the metaphysical language at its
highest",[70]
capable of relating all degrees of universal Manifestation,
and all the components of the Being as well: symbolism is the means
34. by which man is capable of "assenting" orders of reality that escape, by
their very nature, any description by ordinary language. This
understanding of the profound nature of symbolism, writes René
Guénon, has never been lost by an intellectual (i.e. spiritual) elite in the
East.[71]
It is inherent in the transmission of initiation which, he says,
gives the real key to man to penetrate the deeper meaning of the
symbols; in this perspective, meditation on symbols (visual or heard,
dhikr, repetition of the Divine Names) is an integral part both of initiation
and of spiritual realization.[72]
Symbolism and analogy
The Labarum, symbol based on the figure of chrism.
For René Guénon art is above all knowledge and understanding, rather
than merely a matter of sensitivity.[73]
Similarly, the symbolism has a
conceptual vastness "not exclusive to a mathematical rigor":[74]
symbolism is before all a science, and it is based, in its most general
signification on "connections that exist between different levels of reality
".[75]
And, in particular, the analogy itself, understood following a
formula used in Hermeticism as the "relation of what is down with what
is above" is likely to be symbolized: there are symbols of the analogy
(but every symbol is not necessarily the expression of an analogy,
because there are correspondences that are not analogical). The
analogical relation essentially involves the consideration of an "inverse
direction of its two terms", and symbols of the analogy, which are
generally built on the consideration of the primitive six-spoke wheel,
also called the chrism in the Christian iconography, indicate clearly the
consideration of these "inverse directions"; in the symbol of the
Solomon's seal, the two triangles in opposition represent two opposing
ternaries, "one of which is like a reflection or mirror image the other"[76]
and "this is where this symbol is an exact representation of analogy".[77]
35. The circular snake of the Ouroboros is a symbol of Anima Mundi. Note
the two colors associated with the dorsal and ventral parts of the snake.
Drawing by Theodoros Pelecanos, dated 1478, from a treatise on
alchemy entitled Synosius.
This consideration of a "reverse meaning" allows René Guénon to
propose an explanation of some artistic depictions, such as that
reported by Ananda Coomaraswamy in his study "The inverted tree":
some images of the "World Tree", a symbol of universal Manifestation,
represent the tree with its roots up and its branches down: the
corresponding positions correspond to two complementary points of
view that can be contemplated: point of view of the manifestation and of
the Principle. This consideration of "reverse meaning" is one of the
elements of a "science of symbolism" in which Guénon refers to, and
used by him in many occasions. Thus, in his book The Great Triad,
mainly dedicated to the explanation of some symbols belonging to Far
Eastern tradition, the general symbols of Sky and Earth are linked, from
the point of view of cyclical development, with the "sphere" and the
"cube", while their meeting point is identified with the skyline because
"it is on their periphery, or their most remote confines, that is to say, the
horizon, that Sky and Earth are joining according to sensitive
appearances";[78]
the consideration of the "reverse meaning " surfaces
here in the reality symbolized by these appearances because "following
that reality, they unite on the contrary by the center".[79]
From there
comes, according to Guénon, an explanation of the symbolism of the
"ventral side" that Heaven presents to the "cosmos", and
correspondingly of the "backbone" side shown by the Earth. This
symbolism explains the shape of the ancient Chinese currency, which
are drilled in the center by the figure of a square (see picture). Similarly,
among the symbols of Anima Mundi, one of the most common is the
snake, which is often figured in the circular shape of the Ouroboros:
"this form is appropriate for the animic principle inasmuch as it is on the
side of essence with respect to the corporeal world; but of course it is
on the contrary on the side of substance with respect of the spiritual
36. world, so that, depending on the point of view from which it is
considered, it can take the attributes of essence or of substance, which
gives it so to speak the appearance of a double nature".[80]
Symbolism and unity of traditional forms
The importance of symbolism in the works of René Guénon arises
because symbolism is, in his own words, "the metaphysical language at
its highest"; it may be used to link concepts with different formulations
in different traditions. Among many other examples found in his works,
symbolism is used in The Great Triad to connect the "Operation of the
Holy Spirit" in the generation of Jesus Christ to the "non-acting" activity
of Purusha or "Heaven", and Prakriti or the "Universal Substance" to
Mary of Nazareth, Christ henceforth becoming identical, according to
this symbolism, to the "Universal Man". His book The Symbolism of the
Cross also connects the symbol of the Cross with the data of Islamic
esotericism.
Guénon was critical of modern interpretations regarding symbolism
which often rested on naturalistic interpretations of the symbol in
question which Guénon regarded as a case of the symbol of the thing
being mistaken for the thing itself. He was also critical of the
psychological interpretations found in the likes of Carl Jung.[81]
Symbolism and the primordial tradition
In the East, writes René Guénon, symbolism is above all a matter of
knowledge. He therefore devotes a substantial number of writings in an
exhibition of traditional symbols. Most of these articles have been
collected by Michel Valsan in the posthumous work Fundamentals
symbols of Sacred Science which proposes, in a remarkable synthesis,
numerous keys aimed at interpreting a considerable number of
symbols, especially prehistoric symbols of the "Center of the World",
the Baetylus, the axial symbols, symbols of the heart, of cyclic
manifestation etc. According to Guénon, the existence of identical
symbols in different traditional forms, remote in time or space, would be
a clue to a common intellectual and spiritual source whose origins
dating back to the "primordial Tradition".
Attempts to subvert tradition in the modern world
General laws of cyclic manifestation
37. René Guénon exposits, in several of his books and articles, what he
calls the "spiritual degeneration of the West", and proposes an
explanation on the one hand by placing it in a general cyclical and
natural process of "postponement from the principles", which applies to
the entire human world without distinction, and which is an inevitable
"estrangement" proper to any process of manifestation, and on another
hand partly in response to specific influences, which he specifies the
nature, designed to induce an "action of dissolution" in the same
human environment and which, for historical circumstantial reasons,
first manifested themselves in the West during the last two cycles of
this manvantara. (The Crisis of the Modern World, East and West,
Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power,The Reign of Quantity and the
Signs of the Times, Initiation and counter-initiation, The Wild Boar and
The Bear etc.).
Paraśurāma fighting King Kartavirya Arjuna
In his book Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power, he introduces the
"functions of the priesthood and royalty", and the respective powers
(resp. sacerdotal and royal powers) involved by both functions, bound
by him in a more general manner to "knowledge" and "action". These
two powers appear sometimes in opposition "in one form or another
among almost all peoples", because such an opposition "corresponds
to a general law of human history, relating moreover to the system of
'cyclical laws' that we have frequently alluded to ".[82]
In particular, such
an opposition is not peculiar to the West, as it can also be found for
instance in India, in cycles anterior to our present Kali Yuga, in the form
of the revolt of Kshatriyas against Brahmins, "to which, according to the
Hindu tradition, Parashu-Rama put an end",[83]
referring to the sixth
avatara of Vishnu, that is to say to a period anterior to the beginning of
the present Kali Yuga, as reported by the Hindu tradition in the puranas
(among other Hindu sacred texts).
38. But, in the chapter "The Revolt of Kshatriyas" from his book "Spiritual
Authority and Temporal Power," René Guénon writes:
Almong almost all peoples and throughout diverse epochs – and with
mounting frequency as we approach our times – the wielders of
temporal power have tried [...] to free themselves from all superior
authority, claiming to hold their power from themselves alone[84]
This revolt, writes René Guénon, is manifested by an inability to know
all the implications of pure transcendence, a knowledge specific to the
spiritual authority; it marks the birth of particular naturalistic tendencies
to varying degrees, by the inability to recognize superior principles to
the natural laws of manifestation.[85]
This gives rise to a deviated
doctrine and an attitude "- condemnable though it may be as regards
the truth – not altogether devoid of a certain grandeur"[86]
and
[which] could be characterized quite exactly by the designation
'Luciferianism', which must not be confused with 'Satanism', although
there is doubtless a certain connection between the two: 'Luciferianism'
is the refusal to recognize a superior authority whereas 'Satanism' is
the reversal of normal relationships and of the hierarchical order, the
latter being often a consequence of the former, just as after his fall
Lucifer became Satan.
In the West, the birth of what Guénon designates, strictly speaking, as
"the modern deviation", is manifested historically by the occurring event
of the destruction of the Templar Order in 1314[87]
"starting point of the
modern era", which resulted, due to the importance of the Order in the
initiatic geography of the West, a more complete and hidden
reorganization of the initiatic lineages in the West, closely with Islamic
initiatic organizations;[88]
"the true Rosicrucians were the actual
instigators of this reorganization".[89]
But there came a time where
"because of other historical events, the traditional link ... was finally
broken for the western world, what happened during the seventeenth
century".[90]
Contemporary "neo-spiritualism"
Guénon denounced the Theosophical Society, many pseudo-Masonic
orders in the French or Anglo-Saxon Occult scene and the Spiritist
movement as devoid of any worth or knowledge. They formed the topic
of two of his major books written in the 1920s, Theosophy: History of a
Pseudo-Religion and The Spiritist Fallacy. He denounced the syncretic
tendencies of many of these groups, along with the common
39. Eurocentric misconceptions that accompanied their attempts to
interpret Eastern doctrines along with what he saw as sheer
charlatanism on behalf of central figures in the scene such as Madame
Blavatsky, whom he regarded as having compromised any potential
worth it might have had in order to further their own agendas.
René Guénon especially develops some aspects of what he refers to
as the manifestation of "antitraditional" currents in the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries. His first book on that subject is devoted to a
detailed historical examination of Madame Blavatsky's "theosophism":
Theosophy: History of a Pseudo-Religion. Guénon examines the role
and intervention that played in that movement organizations that are
described in more detail in "The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the
Times", as under what he called the "pseudo-initiation"; in particular
what he calls "pseudo-Rosicrucian" organizations holding no affiliation
with the real authentic Rosicrucians: Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia
founded in 1867 by Robert Wentworth Little, the "Order of the esoteric
Rose-Cross" of Dr. Franz Hartmann etc. He also studied the role
played by "the question of "Mahatmas", which holds an important place
in the history of the Theosophical Society [...] Indeed, this question is
more complex than one would normally think". He denounces the
syncretic nature of theosophism, its connection with the theory of
evolution in "The Secret Doctrine" (Madame Blavastky's main work); he
also examines the role and relationship that the Theosophical Society
had with multitude of "pseudo-initiatic" organizations among others, the
O.T.O. founded in 1895 by Carl Kellner and propagated in 1905 by
Theodor Reuss, the Golden Dawn, to which belong large number of
key figures of Anglo-Saxon's "neo-spiritualism" of the early twentieth
century etc.
Sometimes there will be, writes Guénon, collusion with political action
related to "British imperialism" and Protestant Anglo-Saxon's
missionarism. In India in particular, he studied the marked connections
that theosophical organizations have had during in the nineteenth
century in the creation of movements such as the Arya Samaj. He also
examines the role played by Annie Besant, who succeeded H. P.
Blavatsky at the head of the organization after the death of the latter, in
the Krishnamurti affair (chapter 21: "The trials of Alcyone"). René
Guénon concludes that theosophism can not claim spiritual linkage to
any authentic oriental organization, contrary to its pretensions, and in
particular what theosophists call "The Great White Lodge" is just "a
parody of an initiatic center", a mere production of modern Western
40. neo-spiritualism. In the article "F.-Ch. Barlet and the initiatic societies"
(F.-Ch. Barlet was a notable figure of late nineteenth century Parisian
occultist milieux), an article that originally appeared in 1925 in The Veil
of Isis, René Guénon reproduced the opinion Peter Davidson has had
with respect to the Theosophical Society, and it relates that opinion with
the departure of F.-Ch. Barlet from the Theosophical Society to join
another organization of a more secret nature: the H.B. of L. or Hermetic
Brotherhood of Luxor.
These are precisely some members of the "inner circle" of the H.B. of
L., to which belonged Emma Hardinge Britten, who would have
produced the phenomena giving rise to spiritist movement[91]
that is to
say, another "antitraditional" current born in 1848. To support this
assertion, he relies on statements from Emma Hardinge Britten herself,
which will be confirmed much later, in 1985, by the publication from
French publishing house Editions Archè of the documents the H.B. of L.
This organization would have received in part the legacy of other secret
societies, including the "Eulis Brotherhood", to which belonged Paschal
Beverly Randolph, a character designated by René Guénon as "very
enigmatic"[92]
who died in 1875.
He seeks to dismantle all aspects of spiritism, including the theory of
reincarnation, whose foundations are false because, he said, involving
"a limitation of the universal possibility",[93]
similar to Nietzsche's theory
of the "eternal return". In other words, there is no repetition in the
universal manifestation, and a being never returns twice the same
state. He distinguishes the theory of reincarnation from ancient
doctrines about "metempsychosis", and opposes the possibility of
"communicating with the dead", by introducing an explanation of the
phenomena totally independent of any spiritist interpretation; he also
explores the relationship of the latter with French occultism (a word
introduced after Alphonse-Louis Constant alias Eliphas Levi), and
warns against the dangers of spiritism.
He denounces "the confusion of the psychic and the spiritual"[94]
and
especially the psychoanalytic interpretation of symbols, including the
Jungian branch of it, which he condemned with the greatest firmness,
seeing in it the beginnings of a reversed – or at least distorted –
interpretation of symbols.[95]
This aspect is reflected in some studies,[96]
Especially in a book published in 1999 by Richard Noll[97]
who
incidentally speaks of the role played by the Theosophical Society in
Carl Gustav Jung.[98]
41. Counter-initiation and subversion
In his book The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times, as well
as in some other articles, René Guénon describes in what sense one
can identify a "source" to the influences of dissolution that must be
exercised to the maximum in the human realm before the onset of a
new cycle. This "source", which he describes as "the most redoutable
of all the possibilities" included in the cyclic manifestation, is related to
the Koranic nomenclature of "awliyâ esh-Shaytân" (literally "Satan's
saints"), most notably explained by Mohyddin Ibn Arabi; it refers to the
existence of a counter-hierarchy "apparently opposite" to the true
spiritual hierarchy (called "awliyâ er-Rahman"). Guénon introduces the
term 'counter-initiation' to describe it:[99]
'counter-initiation' [...] cannot be regarded as a purely human invention,
such as would be in no way distinguishable by its nature from plain
'pseudo-initiation'; in fact it is much more than that, and, in order that it
may really be so, it must in a certain sense, so far as its actual origin is
concerned, proceed from the unique source to which all initiation is
attached, the very source from which, speaking more generally,
anything in our world that manifests a 'non-human' element proceeds;
but the 'counter-initiation' proceeds from that source by a degeneration
carried to its extreme limits, and that limit is represented by the
'inversion' that constitutes 'satanism' properly so-called.
About the historical origin of counter-initiation, he carries on writing:[100]
however obscure the question of its origin may be, there is some
plausibility in the idea that it may be connected with the perversion of
one of the ancient civilizations belonging to one or another of the
continents that have disappeared in cataclysms occurring in the course
of the present Manvantara.
while making the precision in a note: "The sixth chapter of Genesis
might perhaps provide, in a symbolical form, some indications relating
to the distant origins of the 'counter-initiation'". In order that the imitation
by inverted reflection may be as complete as possible, centers are
likely to be established to which the organizations appertaining to the
'counter-initiation' will be attached. Guénon writes that these centers
will be "of course purely 'psychic', like the influences they use and
transmit, and in no sense spiritual, like the centers of initiation and of
true tradition, but they will be able [...] to assume up to a point the
outward appearance of spiritual centers, thus producing the illusion
42. characteristic of 'inverted spirituality'".[101]
These centers are depicted,
in symbolical form, in ancient eastern legends such as the legend of
"the seven towers of the devil". The awliyâ esh-Shaytân, by the
constitution of these seven centers, claim to oppose the influence of the
seven Aqtâb or "Poles" subordinate to the "Supreme Pole", although
such an opposition "is illusory, the spiritual realm is necessarily closed
to the 'counter-initiation'".[102]
Guénon gave some indications about the
geographical localization of some of these "towers", "the distribution of
which is certainly no matter of chance".[103]
Advent of a "counter-tradition"
Dhul-Qarnayn with the help of jinn, building the Iron Wall to keep Gog
and Magog from human realm. In The Reign of Quantity and the Signs
of the Times Guénon relates "Gog and Magog" to their Hindu
counterpart called Koka and Vikoka "whose names are obviously
similar". (16th century Persian miniature, Chester Beatty Library,
Dublin).
Guénon distinguishes two phases in the action of 'counter-initiation', the
first being purely negative and devoted to the destruction of everything
authentically traditional in the human realm, a phase that culminated in
the kind of materialism that could be called 'integral'.[104]
But that latter
phase is only a preparatory one, destined to be followed toward the
setting up of something that can more appropriately be called a
'counter-tradition', which is yet to come before the end of the Kali-Yuga.
These two phases are contemplated by Guénon using the symbolism
of "solve & coagula" taken from alchemy. In the 'counter-tradition', the
role to be played by the 'counter-initiation' is referred to by Guénon in
the following terms: "after having worked in the shadows to inspire and
direct invisibly all modern movements, it will in the end contrive to
'exteriorize', if that is the right word, something that will be as it were
the counterpart of a true tradition, at least as completely and as exactly
as it can be so within the limitations necessarily inherent in all possible
43. counterfeits as such".[105]
About "false spirituality", the term refers also
to beings involved in the 'counter-initiation' and engaged in 'inverted
realization' and who lose themselves in a way that can only end, in the
extreme cases, at last in the total 'disintegration' of the conscious being
and in its final dissolution, "thus realizing the inverse of the effacement
of the 'ego' before the 'Self', or, in others words, realizing confusion in
'chaos' as against fusion in principal Unity".[106]
A finality so conclusive
represents only an exceptional case, which is that of awliyâ esh-
Shaytân, but the goal of 'counter-tradition' will be to divert as many as
possible from true spiritual path. 'Neo-spiritualism' and the 'pseudo-
initiation' proceeding from it were only, writes Guénon, "a partial
'prefiguration' of the 'counter-tradition'", notably in their utilization of
elements authentically traditional in their origin, "perverted from their
true meaning".[107]
But this perversion "is only a move in the direction of
the complete reversal that must characterize the 'counter-tradition'".[107]
This "false spirituality" should be expressed, according to René
Guénon, even in the social field through the establishment of a
"counter-order" opposed to the traditional notion of "Sanctum Regnum"
(whose motto is "Ordo ab Chao"), and run at unprecedented scale in
human history according to traditional data. When such a counter-order
will be about to appear, Guénon writes that modern social concepts for
human organization inherited from the first phase of the antitraditional
action such as "egalitarism" and other similar ideals will be abandoned
in favor of the setting up of a "counter-elite" and the reintroduction of
"counter-values" which will form the social basis for the 'counter-
tradition'. Symbolism itself will be subverted by the counter-initiation
through subversion of inherent double meanings of its constitutive
elements, according to a complex notion exposited in chapter 30 of The
Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times.[108]
He identified, in some
undercurrents manifested from the seventeenth century and continued
throughout nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the premises of this final
phase of dissolution. The reign of the 'counter-tradition', writes Guénon,
is identical to the traditional notion designated by the 'reign of the
Antichrist', whichever way this latter symbol is understood, either as an
individual or a collectivity. In a certain sense it could be both, as there
will be a collectivity that will appear as the 'exteriorization' of the
'counter-initiatic' organization itself when it finally appears in the light of
day, "and there must also be a person who will be at the head of the
collectivity, and as such be the most complete expression and even the
very 'incarnation' of what it will represent, if only in the capacity of