Sacred Web 1

SACREDWEB

A JOURNAL OF TRADITION AND MODERNITY 1

Robert Bolton: Modern Culture ond Rising Entropy

Ananda K. Coomoraswamy: On the Pertinence of Philosophy

Ramo P. Coomoraswamy: The Search for Authenticity

James S. Cutsinger: On Earth as it is in Heaven

Roger lipsey: The Great Work is the Small Work

Seyyed Hossein Nasr: Frithjof Schuon (1907-1998)

Kenneth Old meadow: Metaphysics, Theology and Philosophy

William W. Quinn: On Revelation, Initiation and Culture

Frithjof Schuon: Tradition and Modernity

SACRED WEB

Cover graphi c by Susan Point, TbeShaper, 1992, acrylic on canvas , detail

Susan Poin t, The Shape,., 1992 , acrylic on canvas

"lhis Painting is an adaptation of a traditional spindle whorl design. "111e spindle whorl is a disc tha t acts as a flywheel on the spinning device used for making woo l yarn. The spindle whorl has been tr..Ldit ionally used by Coast Salish women 10 spin and ply mountain goat wool into yarn for weaving.

111is work shows a human figure holding up the earth. 'J11e thunde rbirds (represent ing wildlife) support tbe human figure , whose hands they shape. 111e earth , in tum , has a body that supports both Ihe thunderbirds and the human figure. Ins ide the earth art:' two Ihunder lizards. (3olh thu n derbirds contain hum:m faces.

"[his painting is meant to convey the notion tbat all life is inter-re lated and that man, being the shaper of this world , must always be guided by this fact if he is 10 be a good caretake r of the planet .

SACREDWEB

A JOURNAL OF TRADITION AND MODERNITY

Publisher & Editor:

M. Ali Lakhani

ISSN: 1480-6584

Publication:

Sacred l17eb is a bi-annual p ublicat io n devoted to the study of Tradition and mod ern ity The views expressed in the journal a re th ose of th e respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.

Subscriptions:

To subscribe, pl ease mail cheque or money order to Sacred Web, 1750- 111 1 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, British Columb ia, Ca nad a, V6E 4M3: Canadian subscriptions: 515.00 per issue or S30.00 annua lly ; US subscriptio ns: S12.50 (US) per issue or 525.00 (US) annually; outside No rth America, and ins ti tu ti o nal su bscriptions: SI5.00 (US) pe r issue or S30 (US) annua ll y. Postage prepa id for all subscriptions

Subnrissions:

The editor invi tes submissions, induding articles, re views and letters. Unso licited submissions will nor be returned unless accompan ied by a se lf-addressed, stamped envelope. TIle editor reserve s the right to ed it lette rs Submissions should bemailedtotheedito r. M.AliLakhani . Sacred Web, 1750- 1111 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6E 4M3, or sen t bye-mai l to "Iakha l1i@Ul1iseroe.com".

Copyright:

© July, 1998. Unl ess indicated otherwise, all materials published in this issue a re copyrighted by Sacred Web and the respective contributors . The name Sacred We b and the Sac r ed Web logo a re copyrigh te d by the publisher.

Acknowledgements:

Th e publisher gratefully acknowledges each of rhe contributions in thi s issue, and, in particular, permission to reprint the follow in g: the article by Schuon and the quotati on (a t p age 14) from Stations o/Wisdom appear b y p e rmi ssio n of the author; the article by Ana nd a K. Coomaraswamy appears by perm iss io n of Rama P. CoomaraswamYi an C'Jrlie r version of t he art icle by CutSinge r was published in Dialogue & Affiance, and appear s by thei r permiss ion and that of the author; the article by Oldmeadow is excerpted from h is forthcoming book and appea rs by permission of the auth or. The artwork by Susan Point (The Sbape r) is co p yrighted by her. The graphics by Michae l Be nder (the Sacred w eb logo a nd the illustration accompanying the quotation from Schuon) were conceived by the publisher and rendered by Mic hael Bender. The publisher also thanks th e many individuals who have h elped to launch thi s journa l by donating their time and resour ces, and, in panicu la r, James We tm ore for his invaluable adv ice.

Table of Contents

Editorial

by M. Ali Lakhal1i

In this introduction 10 "SacrtXI Web", the Editor conLrasts the out looks of Tradition and mod<..-rniIY, and outlines the raison d'etTe of the journal.

The Great Work is the SmaU Work

by Roger Lipsey

In a coO\' ivia l 5('1[in8 beneath an open lea lent not far from Marrakcsh, Dr Lipsey rcO"::C1S upon Ihe objl.'Clivcs of the journal.

Frithjof Schuo" (1907·1998)

by Si.yyed l/osseill Nas r

A tribule by Dr. Nasr 10 one oflhc great expositors of Tradition

Tradition and Modernity

by Flilbjo/Sc/m on

"In the f;ICC of lhe perils o f the modern world , we ask ourselves: What mu st we do? " '!11is pape r was p reviously published under the tiLle "No Activity wilhout Truth ",

Metaphysics Theology and Philosophy

by KellIw/b Oldllleadow

What is meant by "metaphy sks" within TrJdition? Dr. Oldmeadow's lucid analysis from his fonhcorning book on Tradition expl ores this issue by contrasting mctaphysks with theOlogy and philosophy _

On the Pertinence of PhJlosophy

by A"a"da K Coomamswamy

CoomarJs"'amy's essay dis t inguishes between the different meanings of "philosophy', deBm_os the " First Philosophy· of Tr:tditional metaphysil.-s, :lnd considers the problem of -immonality"

Ancient Be liefs or Modern Superstitio ns : The Se arch for Authenticity

by Rmna P. Coo m araswa my

By what criteria can wc discern Tru t h? Arc these cri teria ob jective or subjedive' The author examines the "belief systems " of Tradition and modern ity in this p.1ssionatc plea for recourse to thc "Ancientlc-Jchings" of the great religiOUS lrJditions.

On Earth as it is in Heaven

by james S. Cu tSi nger

This article tackles the ' cvolutionist controversy' and proposcs a basis for the reconciliation of cmanation, creation and evolution. 111C author aims "10 present an account of an cllolving world ' per ascen$unf fully consistent with thc principles presupposed 'per dcsccnsum' by mCI:tphysics and th c ology".

On Revelation , Initiation and Culture

by William n;': Qui ml

To what exlcm is it necessary 10 particiJxuc within a ' Traditionll organilation " for the purposes of spiritual initiltion , and can s uch participa tion even occur within the conditions of modernity? The author examines these issues and contrasts Inc views of Guenon and Coomara!iWamy on this suhject.

Modern Culture and Rislng Entropy

by Robert Bo lr o1/

The scienlific concep t of 'entropy' has parallels in an older a n d u n iversal metaphysical conccpt. In this essay , the author applies that concept to modern cullure In Its various manifestations ranging from the domains of economics and politiCS to art and science, and t he inrli\'iduallife

Editorial

by M. Ali Lakhani

Tradition a nd modernity a re two separate outlooks by which to judge th e s tat e of the conte mporary world. By "Tradition " we mean soph ia perennis o r prim ordial wisdom , wh ich is not limited to any specific c ultura l or religious tradi ti on. Tradi ti onalist w rit ers have di stingui shed betwee n the te rm s "contempo rary" and "modern", t he fo rm er designating thal whi ch is of th e present age, be it traditi o nal o r modern , and the latt e r, in con trast to Tradition , designat ing "that w hi ch is cu t off from th e Transcendent , from the immut a ble principles wh ic h in rea lity govern all things and whic h are made known to man through revelation in it s most uni ve rsa l se nse" (Nasr).

To spea k of the co nt emporary world is to evoke a certa in amb ivale nce. On the one h and, we are the "c reatur es of our lim e" and so we celeb rate it s o utward accom pli shments, whi ch for th e most part are scientific and te chn olog ical. These range from the ac hievement s of medica l scie nce, lO co mputer technology, lO spa ce trav el and ot her marve ls, that almos t make us b e li eve that we are gods cap able of anything. And we ce lebrat e our apparenl maturity ev ident in ou r respect for basic ri ghts an d freedoms , and in our socia l conscie nces w hich manifest in a var iety of movements rang ing fro m mu lt icultura l and feminist to ecologica l and co nsu me rwadvocacy. On the other hand , despite the grea t p rivileges of our era-whic h , arguab ly, co nfer upon us lhe equall y great responsibility to mak e use of our gi ft s respec tfull y and for th e be tt er ment of the world and o urse lves-we ex peri ence a p ro fo u nd malaise that has bee n te rm ed "th e malaise of modernity. n

From thi s per spective, w herever mankind turn s its gaze, it no longe r

SACRED WEB 1 7

witnesses "the coun tenance of the Divine." Instead, it is confronted by a world of increasing fragmentation and spirit ual poverty; a world accultured by the hubris of science and the materialistic creed of economic exploitation undertaken in the name of "Progress", which leaves in it s wake a myriad of divisions: broken families, a n alienated and apathetic society, a pitting of man aga inst nature, and a self divided from Spiril and Intellect. Ve iled thu s from its ce lestial origin, mankind in the grip of modernity is without anchor or rudder, buffeted by the storms of its passions. Decentered man, e nslaved by hi s passions, lives in a world assaulted by th e seduct ion of hi s senses, a world of promi scu ity , consumerism, crime, corruption, bigotry, exploitat ion, disease, overpop ulation, famine , envi ronmen tal degradation, the arrogance of power, the poverty of declining va lu es, a world of increasing comp lexity and globalization, of augmented alienation and dimin ished humanity, a universe charac terized by the cog nitive and ethica l r elat ivism of postmodernism, the sclerotic dogmatism of secular and religious fundamentalism, and-what may be termed the defining feature of modernity -a loss of the sense of the sacred.

By contrast, to speak of Tradition is to admit of the Transcendent and th ereby to evoke the sacred. A centra l premi se of Traditional metaphysics is the ultimate integrity of Reality. The goa l of Traditional practices is therefore to realise Reality by d iscern ing it and concentrating upon it. It is through th e faculty of th e Intellect (whic h alone is recept ive to th e "flrst principles" of Tradition) that we can discern (or "divi ne ") that which is Real; it is through the subm ission of the lesse r (human) passions to the greater (spirit ual ) Will that we can hope to merit ultimate peace an d freedom; and it is by rediscovering our sp iritual foundation and the trust of sac redness which is our primordial herit age tha t we can begin to prop erly address the malaise of modernity.

Sacred Web h as been conceived as a journal whose aims will b e to id entify Traditi onal "first principles" and their application to the cont ingent circumstances of modernity, and to expose the false premises o f modernity from the perspective of Tradition. The journal w ill encourage and invite legitimate debate in this area and will seek to examine the interaction b etween Tradition and modernity. It is hoped th at the journal w ill be of interest to the Tradilionalist and gene ral reader alike, concerned about issues of modernity.

The Great Work is the Small Work: A Response to this Journal's Mission Statement

Roger Lipsey

At th e kind invitatio n o f Mr. Ali Lakhani, the enterprising founder and edito r of thi s new jo urnal , I respond here to the mi ss ion stat e ment (pp. 7- 8), un de r which h o miletic sign the journal goes forth. r ca nn o t promi se to respo nd syste maticall y; ha ve alway s preferred co nversat ion to o th er forms of exc hange , and p referred literature , however formal , tha t re tain s so me undercurrent of the spoken word. And so, Mr. Lakhani, c an we s it tog e th e r?-for example benea th an open te a tent at a village market not far from Marrakes h.

I remember the scene vividly even now: the worn but welcoming ca rpets and cushi ons, the tumblers filled with mint l ea and sunlight , the rich sounds, s ights, and sce nts of traditional pea sa nt Mu s lim soci ety all around-s mall vendo rs of handcrafted household goods, of herbs and of carpets and buttons, camels and donk eys; these fin e weathered face s b e neath turban s and shawls , each implying a life that had not been eas y, and had been worthwhile. Perhaps in U1e evening and through th e night we ca n att e nd a village ce remony, half religious, half conviv ial. I re memb e r a dance with magical drumming: the vi ll agers gath e red into a line, linked arms and hands , and somehow lifted and folded rhythmica lly. It w as of that very time and place , yet raised us. I was so happ y; you will be, too. All of this was and is the common fa ce o f Tradition , w hi c h s upp o rt s and warms eve n the most refined things of th e sp irit. Let us sit in such a pla ce.

They ca n be found e ven today in nearly all parts of th e world. And I think one can affirm , without being sentimen tal or "Orienta list" in th e invidious sense, that as an urban person of East or West one experiences

in suc h sett ings both a deep sense o r well b eing and a stabb in g sense of loss, f o r thi s is not how one lives , nor is the thrust of the modern wo rld leading toward preservation of such things. On the contrary, such timeless environments are burning away , like the vast acreages recently reduced to ash in Indonesia , Borneo , Mexico. You have taken note of this tendency to loss in your mission state me nt.

If that is th e common face o f Tradil ion, s houldn ' t we also remember the uncommon face of il , the sc hools and tea ching/l ea rning circles in which doctr ine and practice a re pa ssed "from mouth to ear, " by sa ges who in th e ir turn s tudied with sages and so on, through the co rridors of time. Some at leas t of these lin eages lea d back to eras of Revelation or to great re novat ors by whom whole traditions were res to red to their original fres hn ess and s h arp c ut. This is a lso the realm of texts-I would willingly cap ita lize to Texts, for th e sc ripture, commentary, practice guides, reco rded myths, histories and tales, the seekers ' jou rn a ls and saints' biographi es th at make up th e library of Tradition are sac red to anyone wh o experiences the ache to be and to know , to unc o ver the Imperishabl e in the obvious fragility of our lives.

As yo u s ur e ly see, r s hare th e regard for Tradition to which you bear w it nes..<;. And ye t ... I have n eve r quite und e rstood why the vo ice ofTradition in our tim e- I su ppose I mean th e voices of Traditio nali s ts- is so often, at limes so lu xuriantly, tha t of prophetic wrath. The Traditionalist jeremiad re ca ll s its grand origina l in sc ripture associated with the prop het Jeremiah , whom th e Lord shaped into a fi e rc e, ever- renewed re minder to the people,

For, beho ld, I have made thee this day a defenced city, and an iron pillar, and brasen walls again st the whole land, again st the kings o f Judah , aga inst the princes the reo r, aga in st the priests th ereof, and against th e people of the land . fjeremiah 1.18)

Blended with the Biblical voice of wrath against the wayward people, does on e no t also hea r in our co nt em porary lamentation th e Quran ic voice:

How many generations have We d es troyed s in ce Noah's time! You r Lord is well aware of His serva n ts' s ins; He observes th e m a ll.

(Quran XV I1.17)

How best to understand th e "defenced city," the "iro n pillar" of 20'h_ ce ntury Traditionalism' It is fully voiced in the third paragraph of the mission s ta tement: " ... a wo rl d of in creasin g fragmentation and spiritual poverty; a world accultured by the hubris of science and the materialistic creed of economic expioilati o n , ... a world of promiscuity , consumerism, crime, corruption, bigotry, exploitation, disease, " and so on. One can say of this passage, I think justly , that it is to be understood as a summary of observat ions made in extenso in the writings of Rene Guonon, Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, Frithjof Schuon, Seyyed I-Iossein Nasf, and o th e r primary expo nents of the Traditional perspective. For many readers of this journal, their writings are magisterial illuminations, the greatest of which o ne will never forget; their thought and pulse enter one.

But is there no danger here--<langer perhaps of a certain self-satisfaction, of pride in knowing the names of the devil? Is there no momentum here , by which one adds insult to injury with a cer tain relish-as if each term further distanced one from the dreadful reality to which it refers?

Practical redemptive wo rk is relentlessly day-to-day , w he th er one seeks at least a littl e to redeem and dignify one 's poor self, or to co ntribute to the lives of othe rs, or to con front resourcefully some cha ll enge on th e larger scales of society and planet. We live under what one wi se tea c her ca lled "the law of sma ll increments, " by which we gain or Jose a littl e eac h day. I am saying, then, that to inventory th e fearful s in s and stupidities o f modernity must never give pleasure, and that the Great Work is the sma ll work, th e day-to-day work. This need not-a lthough it canforce a narrow perspective. One need not-although one doe,s-.lose one's awareness of th e unutterabl e grandeur of Creation and of its Divine Author as one altends to the innumerable details of any sma ll redemptive work. O n the contrary, every reading from a sac red book, every meditation, every communal effort can be a step toward Reality in the sense conveyed as a prayer in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.3.28:

From the unreal lead me to th e real!

From darkness lead me to light!

From death lead me to immortality!

I wonder w hether modern history is merely, and ahjec tl y, a d ivers ion from whatever course events might have taken , had we been wiser. I SACRED

wonder whether scie nce and technology are essentially si nful , in that they ca nn Ol bur d ivert u s from what th e mi ss ion statement properly ca lls a sense of th e sacred. In its second paragraph , the sta teme nt see ks to deal fairl y with the contempo rary wo rld by remembering some of o ur achievements-medical scie nce, for example, and s p ace tr ave l w h ich has g iven us ou r first good look at our p lanetary home. But those acknowledgments are drained by a s hort and te ll ing ph rase to the effec t tha t these thin gs provoke an ev il : they "almost make us believe that we are gods capab le of any th ing. " Is th is rea ll y so? Admitte dly , the phrase "maste rs of the universe" has been co in ed, by wits in o u r own c ulture , to describe young financial wizards who ha ve made quick fortunes and fee l on top of the world. But abou t that very com muni ty, a witty novel was written a nd wid ely read , Tom Wolfe's Bon/ireo/the Vanities , w h ic h rath er puts the m in th eir p lace. I do no t th ink that m any o f u s const rue this dangerous world as good proof t h a t "ye sh all be as gods" (Genesis 3.5) or that we are anything lik e gods. Too much AID S, too mu c h ca nce r, too mu c h war, too much poverty, too many frightening eco logica l porte nts , too much socia l d is location, too much violence and noise in th e popu la r arts, too man y se lf-serving po lit ica l leaders. Thi s is my own li st.

But th ere a re more se ri o us questions to as k of modern history and o f our c u rren t cu llUre: i f they are not a diversion into utt er da rkness-if the y are, as a lmost a lways in human affairs, a chiaroscuro throug h which we must of n eces..o:;; ity find our way-t h e n what genera l pe rspec tive might make se n se? And h ow can love and knowledge of Tradition co ntribute to human welfare?

I can n o t a ltogether aband o n the Jud aeo-Ch ristian conviction o f an unfold ing na rrati ve, suffu sed w it h Divine love and intent but offe re d entire ly into our hands by the Good Lord, and b y His will s ubj ec l to ou r ind ividual and co ll ective choices. In thi s li gh t , I do not perceive scie n ce and tec hn o logy as monstrous- h ow cou ld I do so as I write on a firstrate comp ut e r, com muni cate hy e-mail w ith the editor of thi s jou rnal , answer the te lep h one from tim e to t ime, and e xpect eas il y to join friends this eve ning who live at 15 miles' distance across the river? If we c hoose poor ly, science and technology w ill indee d p rove to ha ve bee n mons trou s-not intrinsically so, but In ou r hands. This is, of course, a cl ic he; that does no t mea n it is untrue

We have reache d a s ta ge of cu lture in whic h qua ntit at ive scientific

observation has at last ca ught up with Pasca l's premon itory ver ti go as he co nt e mplate d the "two infinitudes, " t he infinitely s ma ll and th e infinit ely g rea t. This stag e is, lik e all prior stages of c ulture , a fi e ld of choice in which mu ch if not all depends on th e w isdom of ou r choices. What , th en, is th e role of Tradition? Each of us who cares w ill perhap s answer this question a liul e differently. The mission stat eme nt of this promising new jou rnal speaks of th e need "to id entify Traditional 'first principl es' and th ei r applicat ion to the co ntingent of modernity, and to exp ose th e fa lse premises of modernity ... ." Thi s is surely sensib le. But do it with love, by which I mean do it pati ently , with an eye not only to th e Truth but 10 peop le here and now , and n ot on ly to "p eo pl e h e re and n ow" but to thi s very p e rson whom you address and whom you might al so feel and kn ow. Do not permit th e awesome beauty o f sc ripture, and eve n of reli gious practice, to lure you away from co nt act with thi s thinking, feeling flesh that we are.

So mew here in his writings, Coomaraswa my reca ll ed the title of Oliver Go ldsmith 's late 18m-ce ntury play , She SlOOps 10 Conque r He c ited it , as you ca n imag in e, not as a matter of theater history but to mak e a larger point. The s toop into the real tex ture of life that he adv ised remains binding on all who h ave been to u ched and cha nged by our enco unt e rs with Tradition. That "descent, " as you well know , ushers us int o a realm of sac red paradox where the way up is th e way down (Heracle itus), where th e fulfillment of th e highest is consummated through its con ta ct and poss ibl e union with o rdinary things.

Well, Mr. Lakhani, we have occupied this breezy tent through mu ch of th e day and co ns um e d ou r fair share of mint tea. It is s ur e ly tim e to ta ke leave. I value our fra ternal co ntact and tru st that thi s wi ll not have been ou r only o ppo rtunity to exc hange. We can me et later, as I suggested, in th e vill age-but on second th ought , I mu st return to the city where I ho p e to find a pia no to wo rk further o n th e four-voice fu g u e by).S. Bach that has lately give n me no sleep.

SACRED WEB 1

"W hat separates man from divine Reality is the s light est of barriers. God is infinitely close to man , but man is infinitely far from God. This barrier, for man , is a m ounta in , which he must remove w ith his own hands He digs away the earth, but in vain, the mountain remains; man however goes on d igging in the Name of God. And the mountain vanis h es. It was never there."

Frith)o! Schuon from "S tations of Wisdom "

Frlthjof Schuon (1907 -1998)

Frith jof Schuon (1907-1998)

by Seyyed Ho ssein Nasr

On May 5, 1998 , Frithjof Sc hu on breathed h is last in hi s home in Bl oo mington ) Indiana after a protracted illness and was buried in a forest n ear hi s home. He died in the ea rl y hOllrs of the morning in great peace, conscio us to almost the last moments of his life, moments spen t in an arm chair nea r his bed while invoking the Divine Name to which he had d e di cated hi s whole being since his yo uth . SellUo n was born in Ba ste, Sw itz erland of German parents in a family of musicians. Af(er his early educat ion in Ba sle where instruction was carri ed out in German, his fam il y moved to Mu lh o u se where he rece ived a French educa tion , thereby ga ining perfect mas tery of bo t h languages which became t he main vehicles for the ex press ion of his teachings in lat er life.

Afte r serv ing in the Fren ch he moved to Paris where he embra ce d Is lam and lea rn e d Arabic. H e then journeyed to Nort h Afri ca to mee t the great Alger ian Sufi mas ter, Sh aykh Ahma d al-'Alawi a nd later went to Cairo to meet Rene Guenon whose works had con firmed his own ea rl iest intui ti ons and God-given knowledge abou t metaphysics, tradition, the unity of tmditio nal truth and the nature or th e modern world. After adverse experiences du ring the Second World War, Sc hu on sett le d in Lausanne where for forty years he expounded the tMhs of tradition and pres ided ove r th e spi ritu al orde r or Sufi larfqah which he h ad founded as a branch of th e Shiidhi li yyah Order into which h e had been initiated by Shayk h al- ' Alawi. In the 60s , afte r v isio ns of the Holy Virgin, he added the name or Maryamiyya h to the sun Order which he had founded in Europe in the 1930s. Sha ykh ' IsiiAhmad NOr ai - Din al -S hiidhili al -Da rqawi al-'Alawi al-Maryarni , as he was known to the circle o f hi s

discip les, received see ke rs from not o nl y Eu ro pe a nd America but also fro m throughout th e Islamic wo rld a nd he also had C hri sti an discip les and followe rs as we ll as Buddh ist a nd Hindu ones. Attracted strongly to th e b eauty of the primord i al tradit ion of th e Native Ameri ca ns, he sojourned twice in th e 1960s to America before leavi ng Europ e pe n nanently for the American Mid west in 198 1, whe re h e was to se ttl e. He passed the res t of his days in Bloomington , Ind iana, w he re d es pit e so me turm oil around him h e con ti n ued wi th sere n ity a nd d etachmen t to w rite major wo rks and to guide num ero us m en and wo m e n from near and far s piritually .

Throug hout his lo ng life, Schuo n kept away from the limel ight and always e mph asized t he primary of hi s message over everyt hin g e lse. But hi s numerous works , bo th books and art icles written (exce pt for som e poems, an ea rl y treatise and his autobiography) in Frenc h , soon mad e him a celebrated nam e among tho se inte res ted in gaining a d eepe r un de rsta nding of metaphysicS, the esoteric sign ifica nce of re li gion and th e co nditi ons for an au th entic spi ritual life. H is exposi ti on of the "tr a nsce ndent unity of religions n , auth entic metaphysics, tr aditi o n al ant h ropology, t he traditional do ctr in es o f art, esoterism a nd spiritu ali ty, and th e profo und est c riti cism of th e mo d e rn world mad e a deep impact upon numerous people in both Ea s t a nd West, and far beyond t he ci rcl e of hi s immediate di scip les.

Schuon was not on ly a peerless metaphysician and pill ar of uni ve rsal ort ho doxy and trad it ion, but also a remarkable artist, both painter and p oe t. Endowed wi th the innate gift o f percei ving th e "metaphysica l transp arency of forms" , he produced a large numb er o f p aintings o f an iconic nature a nd also many d epi cti ng tr adi ti o n al Na ti ve American themes. He also wrote two vo l umes of poetry in Ge rman in h is youth and a vo luminous co ll ect ion in the las t part of hi s life which summari ze in poetic form his teac hin gs on both th e m e taphy sical and o p e rative pl anes. H e also composed some English poe try and a numb e r of poems in Arabic in the tradition o f classica l Su fi sm.

Schuo n was wi th out doubt th e foremost expositor in th e latte r half of this cent u ry of the philosophia perennis as we ll as t he soph ia perennis, esote rism and tr aditi o nal metaphysics and ex po und ed th e inner meaning o f diverse religious forms and their transcendent unity in a unique and ma tc hl ess manner w hile always emp ha siz ing the necessity of pre-

serving orthodoxy and following a single orthodox tradition. While the major expositors of traditional teaching s before him , Guenon and Coomaraswamy , emp ha sized doctrine , Schuon never cease d to emphasize in addition to doctrinal matters the importance of sp iritual practice and the cen tral significance of the attainment of spi ritu al virtu es. One cannot in fact read his works and understand them fully w ith out being driven by an inner categorical imperative to choose an authentic sp iritual path and to follow it faithfully. His writings are in reality not only the fmit of theoretica l metaphysical knowledge but also and p rim ar ily of realization of the highest order.

His death marks the departure from this world o f a light of exce ptiona l glow and dazzling brilliance . He leaves behind, however, after sixty-five years of intellectua l and spiritual activity , not o nl y a sp iritua l order, but also a vast corpus of writings which are peerle ss in their depth as well as universality . a corp us con taining tea chings which are at once universal , essenti al, ortho dox and of the greatest practica l sp iritual import. Hi s inHu ence in lands as far apart as Malaysia and Sweden, Ameri ca and Sou th Afri ca is great and his writings have been If"'dnslated already into many l anguages. The light of his presence here on earth is bound to shi ne in land s near and far, and perhaps to an even greater extent than when he was a li ve , long aft e r he had left thi s lowly plan e for th e exalted height s of the Divine Empyrean.

raQi Allahu 'anhu wa 'a nn a bihi.

Tradition and Modernity

by Frilhjoj Schuon

The purpose of this congress l is of the most extreme importance, since it conce rn s, direc tly o r indi rectly , the des tiny o f mankind. In th e fac e of perils of the mod em wo rld, we ask ourselves: Wbalmust we d o? This is an empty quest io n if it be not founded upon antecedent ce rtainties , for ac tion co unts for not h ing unle ss it be the ex press io n of a knowing and also a manner of being. Before it is possibl e to e nvisage any kind of remedia l activity , it is ne cessary to see thing s as they are , even if, as th ings turn ou t, it costs us much to do so; o n e must be conscious o f those fundamen ta l t ru th s th at revea l to us the va lues o f proportions of things. If one 's aim is to save mankind , one mu st first know w hat it means to be a man ; if one wishes to defend the s pirit, o ne must kn ow what is s pirit. "Before doing , one must be, " says the proverb; but without kn owi ng , it is imposs ibl e to d o. "The soul is all that it knows, "as Aris totle said.

In o ur lime one h as ofte n h ea rd it sa id that in order to fight against male ri a li srn--o r mat e riali s t pseudoide ali sm-a n ew id eo logy is ne e ded , one capable of stand in g up to a ll seductions and assaults. Now, the need for an ideo logy or t he wish to oppose one ideo logy to anothe r is already an adm iss ion of weakness, and a nything und e rt ake n on this basis is false a n d doomed to defeat. What mus t be done is to oppose truth purely and

I. This paper was originally wri{{en by SeilUon for a co ngr ess conve ned in Japan in 1961, which dealt with the crisis of modernity. The text was subseque ntly published under the title "No A ct l vlly wllbolll in the l'l:nguin antbology titled "!beSwo ,.d O/G l IOsis" (edited by Ja cob Ncedh!m an ). A version of Ihis paper formed th e text of Sc h uon 's message to th e Hothk o Co ll oqu ium on and Actioll H, held a t Ru thko Ch apd , in Ilus lon, Texas, in July 1973, and wa s read to th e parti c ip,lIl lS by Scyyed Il osscin Nasr

SACRED WEB 1

simp ly to the false ideologies , that same tnlth that has always been and that we cou ld never invent for the reason that it exists outside us and above us, The wo rld is obsessed w ith "dynamism" as if this consti tuted a "categorical imperative" and a uni ve rsa l remedy and as if dyn amism had any meaning or positive efficacy outside truth.

No man in his senses can have th e intention of merely subs tituting one error for another, whethe r "dynamic " or otherw ise; before speaking of force and effec ti veness one must th erefore speak of truth and nothing else. A truth is powerful in measure as we assimilate it; if the truth does n ot confe r on us the strength of which we stand in need, this only goes to prove that we have not re ally grasped it. It is not for truth to be dynamic, but for ourselves to be dynamic in function of a true co n victio n . That whic h is lac kin g in the prese nt world is a profound knowledge of the nature of things; the fundamenta l truths are always there, but they d o not impose themselves in actual prac tice because th ey cannot impose themselves on those who are unwilling to accept them.

It is obvious that here we are concerned, not wi th the quile ex ternal data with which experimental s c ience ca n possibly provide u s , but with realities which that science does not and indeed cannot handle and which are transmitted through quite a different channe l , that of myth o logical and metaphysical symbol ism. The symbo lica l language of th e great traditions of mankind may indeed seem arduous and baffiing to some minds, but it is nevertheless perfectly intelligib le in th e li ght of th e orthodox commentaries; symbolism-thi s point must be stresse d-i s a rea l and rigorous science, and nothing can be more naiv e th an to suppose that its apparent naivety springs from an immature and "pre logical " mentality. This science , whi c h can properly be described as "sac red ," quite plainly does not have to adjust itself to the modern experimental approach; the realm of revelation, of symbolism, of purse and direct intell ec tion , stands in fact above both t he physical and th e psychol og ica l realm s, a nd consequently, it lies beyond the scope of so-called scient ifi c methods. If we feel we cannot accept the language of t raditi ona l symbolism because to us it seem') fanciful and arbitrary . this s ho ws we have not yet understood that language, and certainly not that we have adva nc ed beyond it.

Not hing is more mis lead in g than to pretend, as is so glibly done in our day , th at th e re ligi ons have compromised themse lves hopel ess ly in the course of centuries or that they are now pla yed out. If one knows what

a religion really consis ts of, one also knows that the religio ns cannot compromise themselves and that they are ind ependent of human doings; in fa c t , nothing men do is able to affect th e lraditi on<l l doctrines , symbols, or rit es. The fact that a man may exploit religion in orde r to bolster up nationa l or private interests in no wise affects religion as such. In Japan, Shinto , for examp le , was latterly made to serve political ends, but it was in no wise compromised in its e lf by thi s fact , nor co uld it be. Its symbols, rites, traditions, moral code, and doctrine remain what they always were, from th e "Divine Epoch" down to our ow n times; and as for an ex hau sti ng of th e religions, one might speak of thi s if all men by now be co me saints or Buddhas. In that case only co uld it b e adm itted that th e re ligi ons were ex h a usted , at least as regards th eir forms.

Tradition s p eaks to each man the language he can comp re hend, provided he wishes to li ste n The latter pro viso is crucial, for tradition , let it be re peated, ca nn o t "become bankrupt"; rather is it of th e bankruptcy of man th at one shou ld speak, for it is he that has lost all intuiti on of th e s up e rn at ur al. It is man who ha s let himself be deceived by th e dis cove ries and inven ti ons of a falsely tota lit arian science; that is to say, a science th at d oes not recogn ize its own proper limits and for tha t same reason misses w hat ever lies beyond those limits.

Fascinated alike by scie ntifi c phen omena and by th e erroneous conclu s ions h e draw s from th e, man has ended by being submerged by hi s own c rea tion s; h e will not realize that a traditional message is s ituat ed on quite a different plane or how much more real that p lane is, and h e allows himself to be dazzled all the more readily since sc ienti sm provides him w ith all th e exc us es he wants in order to ju s tify hi s own atta c hm e ntt o th e world of appea rance and to hi s ego an d his conseq u e nt flight from th e presence of the Absolute.

People spea k of a duty to make oneself usefu l to SOCiety, but they neglect to ask th e question whether that society does or does not in itse lf possess the usefulness that a human soc iety normall y shou ld exhibit , for if th e individual must be usef ul to th e collec tivity , the latter for its pan mu st be usefullO the individual , and one must never lose sigh t of th e fa c llh at th ere ex is ts no higher u sefu lness than that wh ic h e nvisages the final ends of man. By its divorce from traditional truth-as primarily perceivable in that "flowering fonh " that is revelation-society forfeits its own ju stification, doubtless not in a perfun c tor il y an imal sense, but

in the human se nse. This human quality impli es t hat the collectivity . as suc h , ca nnot be t he ai m and purp ose of the individua l but th at, on th e cont rary, it is t he indi vid ual who , in his "solitary sta nd " before th e Absolute and in the exercise of hi s s upreme functi o n, is the aim of purpose of co llect ivity. Man , w h e ther he be co nce ived in th e plural o r th e s ingular, o r whet h er hi s func tion be direc t o r indirect , s ta nd s like "a fragment o f absoluteness" and is made fo r th e Abso lut e; he h as no other cho ice before him. In a ny case, o n e ca n de fin e the socia l in terms of truth , but o ne c annot define truth in terms of the soci al.

Refere n ce is o ft e n made to th e "se lfis hn ess" of those who busy th e mse lv es wi th sal vation, and it is s aid that in stead of s aving onesel f one oug ht to save ot hers; but this is a n absurd kind o f argume nt , s ince e ither it is impossibl e to save others, or e lse it is poss ib le to s a ve them but o nly in v irtue of our own sa lvati on o r o f our own e ffort towa rd sa lva t ion. No man has ever d one a se rvi ce to anyone else whatsoever by remain ing "a ltru is ti c all y" attac h ed to hi s own d efec ts. He who is capable of be ing a sa int bu t fail s to beco me such cert ainly will save no o ne e lse; it is s heer hypoc risy to conceal one 's ow n weakness and s p iritual luk ewarmness behind a screen o f goo d wo rks be li eved to be indi s p e nsabl e and of abso lute va lu e.

Another erro r, closely re lated to the o n e ju s t po in ted o ut , consis ts in s upposing that con te mplative spi ritua li ty is opposed to a ction o r renders a man incapab le of ac tin g , a bel ie f that is beli e d by a ll the sacred sc riptu res and especially by the Bhagavad-gita. InJapan the exa mpl e of sain ts s uc h as Shotoku Tais hi , Hojo To kimun e, Shinran Shan in , and Nich iren prov es-if proof is needed-that s piritu a lit y is neit he r oppo se d to action no r dep e nd e nt up o n it , and a lso that sp irituality le ads to t he mos t perfec t ac tion w h eneve r circ um s ta n ces require it , ju st as it c an al so, if ne cessa ry, turn away from th e urg e to action when no immediate aim im poses the nee d for it.

To c ut off man from th e Abso lute a nd reduce him to a co ll e c ti ve p henom e non is to d e pri ve him of a U rig h t to exis te nce qua man If man deserves t hat so man y efforts s ho u ld be spen t on hi s beha lf, th is c annot be s imply becau se he exists, ea ts, and s leeps o r because he likes w hat is pl easa nt a nd h ates what is unpl easant , fo r th e lowes t of the anima ls are in s imil ar c ase wilhout bei ng considered for thi s reaso n our e qu a ls and treate d ac cordingly. To th e objection that man is di stingu ish ed from t he

animal by hi s intelligence , we will answer that it is precisely thi s intellec· tual superi ority that the social egalitarianism of the mod ern s fails to tak e into account, so mu ch so that an argument that is not appli ed consist· ently to men cannot then be turned against the animals. To th e objection that man is distinguished from animals by his we will answer that th e complete ly profane and worldly "c ulture " in qu es tion is nothing more than a specifically dated pastime of the human anima l; that is to say , thi s culture can be anything you plea se, while wa iting for th e human animal to s uppress it altoge t her. The capacity for absoluteness that characterizes human inte ll ige nce is th e only thi ng conferring on man a right of primacy; it is only this capacity that gives hi m the right 1O harness a horse to a ca rt. Tradition, by its above -worldly chara cter, manife sts the rea l super iority of man; tradition alone is a "human ism" in th e positive se nse of the word. Antitraditional culture, by th e very fact that it is without th e se nse of the Ab solute and even the se nse of truth-for these two things hang together---cou ld never confer on man that unconditional value and those indisputable right s that mod ern humanitarian ism attributes to him a priori and without any logical justification.

The sa me co u ld a lso be expressed in another way: When p eo ple s p ea k of "c uiture," th ey generally think of a host of contingencies, of a thousand ways of use less ly agitating the mind and disp ers ing o ne's attention , but th ey d o no t think of that prinCipl e that a lone co nfe rs lawfuln ess on human work s; this principle is the transcendent tmth, whence springs all genuine culture. It is impossible to defend a culture effectively-such as t he tradit ional cu lt ure of Japan , which is one of t he mo st precious in the world-without referring it back to its spiritual princip le and without seeking ther e in the sap th at keeps li fe going. Agr ee ment as b etwee n cultures mean s agreement on sp iritual principles; for truth , despite great differences of expression, remains one.

Many p eo pl e of our time reason along the foll ow ing lin es: The religions--or the differing spir itua l perspectives within a given religi oncontrJ.dict one ano ther, therefo re they cannot aU be right ; co nsequently none is tru e. Thi s is exactly as if one said: Every indivi dual claims to be " I," thus th ey ca nnot all be right ; consequently non e is " I. " Thi s examp le show s up th e absurdity o f the antireligiou s argument, by re ca lling th e real analogy betw ee n the inevitable external limitation o f reli giou s languag e an the no less inevitable limita tion of the human ego. To reac h

this conclusion, as do the rationalists who use the above argument, amounts in practice to denying th e diversity of the knowing subjects as also the div e rs ity of aspects in the objec t to be known . It amounts to pretending that there are neither pOints of view nor aspects; th a t is to s ay , that there is but a s ingle man to see a mountain and th at th e mountain has but a si ngle side to be see n. The error of the subjectivist and relativist philosophers is a contrary o n e. According to them, th e mo untain would alter its nature according to whoever viewed it; at one time it might be a tr ee and at another a stream. Only traditional me taph ysics does justice both to the rigour of o bjectivity an d to th e rights of subjectivity ; it alone is able to explain the unanimity of the sacred doctrines as well as the meaning of th e ir formal divergencies.

In so und logic, to o bserve the diversity of re ligions s hould give rise to the opposite co nclu s ion , nam e ly: Si nce at all periods and among all p eoples religion s are to b e found that unanimously affirm one absolu te and transcendent reality, as also a b eyo nd that receives u s a cco rding to our merit or kn ow le dg e-or according to our demerit and ignorance-t here is reason to co nclud e that every re ligio n is right , and all th e more so s ince the g rea test me n ha ve walked the ea rth have bo rn e witness to s piritual tnahs. Il is possible to admit that a ll the mat eriali sts ha ve been mistake n , but it is not poss ible to admit th a t all the fo und ers of re li g ions, all the sa in ts a nd sages, have been in e rror and h ave le d ot h e rs into error ; for one had to admit that error lay with them and not w ith th os e who contradi cted them , mankind itse lf would cease to offe r any interest, so that a belief in progress or in th e possibility of progress would become doubly absurd. If th e Buddh a or Christ or a Plotinu s or a Kobo Dai sh i were not inte lligent , th e n n o one is intelligent, a nd there is no s uch thing as human intelligence.

The di vers ity of re li gions , far from proving the falsen ess of al the do ctrines concerning the s upernatur a l, s hows o n the con trary th e suprafo rm al character or reve lation and the fo rm a l c haracter of ordinary human understanding ; the essence of rev e lation-or enlig ht enme nt-is o ne , but human nature requires d iversity Dogmas or other symbols may co ntradict one anther ex te rnall y, but they conc ur internally .

Howbe it , it is easy to fo re see the following objecti o n : Even if it be admitted that there is a pro vide ntial and ine sca pable cause underl y ing th e di vers ity of re li gions and even th ei r exote ric in co mpatibilit y in ce r-

tain cases, ought we not then to try to get beyond these differences by creating a sing le universal religion? To this it mllst be answered first that these differences have at all times been transcended in the various tericism and second that a religion is not something one can create for the asking. Every attempt of this kind would be an error and a failure, and this is all the more certain inasmuch as the age of the great revelations had closed centuries ago. No new religion can see the light of day in our lime for the s imple reason that time itselfl far from being a sort of un iform abs t raction, on the contrary alters its value according to eveIY phase of its development. What was still possible a thollsand years ago is so no l onger, for we are now liv ing in the age known to Budd hi st tradi tion as "t he laner limes." Howeve r, what we are able to do and must do is to respect a ll of the religions-but without any confusing of forms and without ask ing to be fully understood by every believer-whi le waiting till heaven itse lf wills to unite those things that now are scattered. For we find ourselves on the thresho ld of great upheavals, and what man himse lf has neither the power no r the right to rea lize will be realized in heaven, when the time for it shaH be ripe.

The world is full of people who comp lain that they have been seeking but have not found; this is because they have not known how to seek and have only looked for sentimentalities of an individualistic kind. One often hears it said that the priests of such and such a religion are no good or that they have brought relig ion itself to naught, as jf this were possible or as if a man who selVes his relig ion badly did not be tray himself exclusively; men qu it e forgel the timeless va lue of symbols and of the graces they veh icle. The saints have a t all times suffered from the inadequacy of certa in priests; but far from think ing of rejecting tr adition itself for that reason, they have by thei r own sanctity compensated for whatever was lacking in the contemporary priesthood. The only means of "reforming" a religion is to reform oneself. It is indispensable to grasp the fact that a rite vehicles a far greater value than a personal virtue. A persona l initiative that takes a religious form amounts to nothing in the absence of a traditiona l framework such as alone can justify that ini tiative and turn it to advantage , whereas a rite at least will always keep fresh Ole sap of the whole tradition and hence also its principal efficacy-even if men do not know how to profit thereby.

If things were otherwise or if spiritual values were to be found ou tside

the sac red trad iti o ns, the function of th e sai n ts would ha ve been, not to en li ve n their religion , but rather to abolish it , and there would no longer be any reli gio n left on ea rth , o r e lse on the con trary there would be re li gions b y the million , which amo unts to th e same thing s; and th ese milli ons of p e rso nal p se udorelig ions would th emse lves be ch a ng ing at every minute. The re ligi o ns an d th eir orthodox deve lop m en ts-suc h as the various traditiona l sc hoo ls of Buddhism-are inalienab le an d irreplaceable legacies to which nothing essent ial ca n be added and from whi c h noth i ng essen ti al can be subtra ct ed. We a re here, not in ord er to ch a nge th ese things, but in o rd er to understan d th em and reali ze th e m in o ursel ves.

Today two da ngers are threatening religion: from the outside, its destruc ti o n-were it o nl y as a result of its genera l desertion-an d from the in sid e, its fal sificat ion. The latte r, wit h its pseudointellectual pretensions and its fallacious professions of "refo rm ," is immeas urably more harmfu l than all th e "s uperstit io n" and "co rrupti on" of whic h , rightly or wrongly , th e re prese nta ti ves o f the tr aditional patrimonies have been accused ; thi s herit age is absolutely irrepl aceab le, and in th e face o f it men as such are of n o account. T radition is abando ned, no t because peop le are n o longer ca pabl e o f understanding its language, but because they do not wish to unders tand it, for thi s la nguage is made to be understood till th e end of the world; tra diti on is falsified b y reducing it to flatness on the plea of making it more acceptable to "our time," as if one co uld-or s h ou ld-a ccommodate truth to error. Admittedly, a need to rep ly to new qu es tions and new forms of ign ora nce can always arise. One ca n a nd must exp l ain the sac re d doctrine , but not at th e expense of that w hich gives it its reason for existing , th at is to say, not at the expense of its truth a nd e ffectiveness. There could be no question , for i nstance, of adding to th e Mahayana or of replacing it b e a new vehicle, su c h as would n ecess arily be o f pure ly human invention ; for the Mahayana-or s ha ll we say Buddhi sm'-is infinite ly su ffi cie nt for th ose who will give th emse lves the trouble to loo k high er th an their ow n heads.

One point that has been already mentioned is worth recalling no w beca use of its ext reme imp ortance. It is quite ou t of the question that a "r eve lation, " in th e full sense of th e word 1 should arise in our tim e, o ne comparab le , th at is to say , to the imparting of one o f the great sutra s or any o th er primary scripture; the d ay of revelations is past on thi s globe

and was so already long ago. The inspirations of th e sa int s are of another order, but these cou ld in any case never falsify or invalidate tradition or intrinsic orthodoxy by claiming to improve on it or even rep lace it, as some people ha ve sugg es ted. "Our own time " possesses no quality that makes it the measure or the criterion of values in regard to that which is timeless. It is th e timeless that, by it very nature, is the measure of our time, as indeed of all other times; and if our time has no place for authentic tradition, then it is se lf-condemne d by that very facl. The Buddha's message, like every other form of the one and only truth , offers itse lf to every period with an imperishable freshness. It is as true and as urgent in our day as it was two thousand years ago; the fa ct that mank ind finds itself in the "latter days," the days of forgetfulness and decline, only mak es that urgency more actua l than ever. In fact, th ere is nothing more urgent, more actual, or more real than metaphysica l truth and its demands. It alo ne can of it5 own right fill the vacuum left in the co ntemporary mentality-especially where young people are co nce rn ed-by soc ial and political disappointments on th e one hand and by the bewildering and indigestibl e discoveries of modern science on the other. At th e risk of re pe tition let the following point be s tressed, for to doubt it would be fata l: To search for an "ideology" in the h o pes of filling up that vacuum-as if it were simply a maller of plugging a hole-is truly a case of "pulling the cart before the horse ." It is a case of subordinating truth and sa lvation to narrowly utilitarian and in any case quite externa l ends, as if th e sufficient cause of truth cou ld be found somewhere below truth. The suffic ien t cause of man is to know the truth, which exist5 outside and above him; the truth cannot depend for its meaning and ex istence on the w ishes of man. The very wo rd "ide ology" shows that truth is not the principal aim people have in mind; to use that word shows that one is scarcely concerned with the difference between true and false and that what one is primarily seek ing is a mental deception that will be comforta ble and workable , or utilizab le for purposes of one 's own choosing, whic h is tantamount to abolishing both truth and intelligen ce.

Outside tradition th ere can assuredly be found some relative truths or views of partial realities, but outside tradition th ere does not ex ist a doctri ne that catalyses absolute trut h and transmits liberating notions concerning lota l reality. Modern science is not a wisdom but an accumula-

tion of physical expe rim e n ts coup led w ith many unwarrantable conclusions; it can neither add nor subtrac t anything in respect of the total truth or of mythological or othe r symbolism or in respect of the principles and experiences of the s p ir iLU allife.

One of the most insidious and destruct ive illu sions is the belief that depth psychology (o r in other words psychoanalysis) has the slightest connection wi th spi ritual life, wh ich these teachings persistently fa lsify by confusing infe ri or elements with supe rior. We cannot be too wary of all these attempts to reduce the values vehided by tradition to the level o f phenomena su pposed to be sCientifi ca lly controll able. The spirit escapes the hold of profane science in an absol ute fashion. It is not the positive results of experimental science that one is out to deny (a lways assuming that th ey really are positive in definite sense) by the absurd daim of science to cover everything possib le, the whole of truth, th e whole of the real; this quasi-relig ious claim to totality moreover proves the falseness of the point of departure. If one takes into account the very limited realm within which science moves , the least one can say is that nothing justifies the so-ca lled scientific denials of the beyond and of the Absolute.

If it be essentia l to distinguish between th e realm of religion or traditional wisdom and that of experimen tal science, it is also essentia l to di st inguish betw ee n the intellect, wh ich is intuitive, and reason , which is discursive ; reason is a limited faculty, w hereas intellect opens out upon th e Universal and the Divine. For metaphysical wisdom, reason only possesses a d iale ctical, not an illuminative, usefulness; reason is not capable of grasping in a concrete way that which lies beyond the wo rld of forms , though reason is able to reach further th an imagination . A ll ratiocination condemns itself to ignorance from th e moment it claims to d ea l with the roots o f our existence and of our sp irit.

We all know that the need to accou nt for things in terms of ca u sality, as felt by modern man, is apt to remain unsatisfied in the face of the ancient mythol og ies; but the fa ct is that attempts to explain the m y thologica l order w ith the aid of rea son ings that are necess arily arb itrary and vitiated by all sort of prejudices are bound to fail in any case. Symbol isms reveal their tru e meaning only in the light of the contem plative inte lle ct , which is analogi ca lly represented in man by th e heart and not by the brain . Pure inlellecl-or intuition and suprarat iona l intelligence--ca

flo we r o nl y in t he framework of a traditiona l orthodoxy, by reason of the co mpl e men tary and th e refore necessary re la tion sh ip between intellectio n and re ve lati on.

The fundam en ta l int e ntion of every religion or wisdom is the fo ll owing: first , d isce rnm ent betwee n the real an th e unreal , an d th e n conce ntration up o n th e rea l. One could also render this inte nti o n otherwise: truth and th e way, prajna an d upaya , do c trin e and its corres p ond ing me th od. One must kn ow that the Absolut e or th e Infinite-wh at ever may b e th e na mes given it by respec tiv e tradition s-is what gives se nse to our existence, just as onc must know that the essen ti al co nt e nt of life is the co nsc iOll sness of th is supreme reality , a fa ct that expla in s th e parl LO be played by co ntinual prayer; in a word we live to rea liz e th e Absolute. To rea li ze th e Absolute is to think of it , und e r one fo rm o r anot he r as indicated by revelation and tradition , by a fo rm s uch as th e Japanese nembutsu o r th e Tibetan Om man; padm e hum or the Hin du japa-yoga, n o t forgetting th e Christian a nd Islami c invocatio ns , s uc h as the J esus Praye r a nd the dhikr of the derv is he s. Here one will find some very diffe ren t mod a lities, not only as betwee n on e religio n a nd another bu t also w ithin th e fold of eac h re ligion , as can be s hown , for instance , by th e differe n ce b e twee n Jo d o Shins hu and Ze n . Howeve r thi s m ay be, it is on ly on th e basis of a ge nuin e spiritual life that we can e n visage any kind of exte rn a l action with a view to defendin g truth and sp iritu a lity in the world.

All th e traditi o nal e10c trine s agree in this: From a s tri c tl y s piritu a l po int of vi ew, th o ugh not nec essa rily from other much more re lative a nd th e refore less important points of view , mank ind is becoming more and more co rrupt ed; th e id eas o f "evo lution ," o r "progress, " and o f a s ingl e "civ iliza ti o n " are in effec t the most pern icious pseudodogmas th e world has ever produ ced, for there is no newfound e rror that does n o t eage rl y attach its ow n cl a ims to the abo ve beli efs. We say not that evolution is no ne xi s te nt , but that it ha s a partial and mo s t ofte n a q uit e ex ternal app licability; if th ere be evo lutio n on the o n e h a nd , th ere are dege neration s on th e ot he r, a nd it is in any c ase rad ica ll y false to s upp ose th a t ou r ancesto rs were intellectually , s pirituall y, o r mo ra Uy our infe rio rs. To su ppose thi s is the mos t c hildish of "optica l delusions "; hum an wea kn ess ahers it s style in the co ur se of history , but not its nature. A question th at n OW arises is as follows: See ing that humanity is decaying in escapa bl y SACRED WEB I

and seei ng that th e final crisis with its cosmic consumma tion as fo retol d in t he sacred b oo ks is ine vitab le, what then can we do? Does an exte rnal activity still have a ny meaning?

To this it mu s t be a nswe red that an affirmation o f the truth , or any effort o n behalf oftm th , is never in va in, even if we cannot from beforehand meas ure the value of the outcome of suc h an activity. Moreove r we have no c ho ice in the ma tte r. Once we know the tmth , we must li ve in it and fight for it; but what we mu st avoid at any price is t o let ou rse lves bask in illu sio ns. Even if, at thi s moment , the horizon see ms as d ark as pos sibl e, o ne must not forge t that in a p e rhaps unavoidabl y distant future the victory is ours and ca nnot but be ours. Tmth by its very n atu re conque rs all o b sta cle s: Vincit omnia ve ri/as

There fore , every initiative taken w ith a view to harm o n y be tw een th e differe nt cultures and for the defense of spir itua l values is good, if it has as its basis a recog nition of th e great principa l of truths and consequently also a recognition of tradition or of the traditions.

"Wben tbe inferior man bealS talk about Tao, be only laugbs a t iI; it would not be Tao if be did notlaugb as iI tbe self-evidence of Tao is taken for a darkness. " These words o f Lao-tse were never more t imely than now. Errors can not but be , as long as their qu ite relati ve possibility h as not reach ed its ter m; but for the Absolute errors ha ve nev e r been and neve r sha ll be. On their own p la ne they are wha t they are , but it is the Chang e less that sha ll ha ve t he final say.

Metaphysics, Theology and Philosophy*

by Kennetb S. Oldmeadow

, .. {nllb is tbe ultimate goal oj the whole universe and the con/emplalion oj Imlh is the esselllial activity of wisdom

5t Thomas Aquina s!

7be proof of the Still is the sun: if tbou require the proof, do nOI avert thy face

Rumi t

71)e possession of ail tbe sciences, if unaccompallied by the know/edge of tb e best, Will more often than not frljure tbe possessor

Plato 1

The In/inite is what it is; one may understand II or nol lilldersiand iI . Metaphysics cannot be tClugb/LO everyone bill, if it could be, there would be no albetsm

Frithjof

"Me taphysics is th e finding of bad reasons for what we believe upon inst inct.'" This Bradleian formulation , perhaps o nly half-se rious , s ignp os ts a modern conception of metaphys ics shared by a good many peo-

111i s article is a revised excerpt from a forthcoming book , provisionally titled "Traditi onalism

I. 51. Thomas Aquinas , quoted in Selmon's Undersland(Ilg Islam (Allen & Unwin, Londo n , 1976) p133fn2.

2. Iturni in Whitall Perry 's A Treasury ojTraditiOl/a/ Wisdom (A ll en & Unwin, London , 1971 ) 1'750.

3. Plato in Perry's A Treasury oj Tmdillonal Wisd om, Ibid. p731.

1 . Selmo n , Spiri tual PerspeClives and Human Facts (Perennial Books, London, 1%7) p50.

5. From F.H Bradley Appeanm ce and Reality quoted by S Hadhakri shnan: "Reply to My Critics" in P.A . Sc hUpp (cd) The Philosophy ojSarvepallf RadhakrishllmJ (Tudor, New York , 1952) p791.

SACRED WEB 1 31

pie, philosophers and oth erw ise. Th ere is, of course, no single modern philosop hica l posture on the natu re and significan ce of metaphysics. Some see it as a kind of residual b li ght on the tr ee of p hil osop hy, a feeding-ground for obsc urantists and love rs of mumbo -jumbo. Others grant it a more d ignified s tatu s' It is one o f those words, like "dog ma " or "mystical ," whic h h as been pejora te d by ca reless and ignorant usage. The word "metap hysics " is s o fraught wit h hazards, so h edged about wit h phil osophical disputation , and so s ulli e d by popular u sage that we shall have to take so me ca re if the prop er se nse in which th e tr aditionalists use the word is to become cl ea r. So me ope rationa l definitions of seve ral cru cia l terms w ill provide th e starting-point. Th e elu cidatio n of the traditionali st conce ption of metaphysics will be structu red around three questions: Wha t is metaphysics? What is its relations hip , in terms of procedu res, c riteria and ends , to ph ilosophy? And to th eology' Su bsequently a sub ordinate question wi ll come into foc us: Why have th e traditionalists see n fit to expose to the publi c ga ze certain metaphysical principles and esoteric insights previously the exclus ive preselVe of th ose s piritu all y qualified to understand th e m'

Witho ut a cl ea r definition of terms certai n misunderstandings will be more or less inevitab le. T he foll owing words in th e traditi onali st vocab ul ary mu st be understood precise ly: Tradition and tradition, Revelation,/ntellect, gnosis, metaphYSiCS, and mystical.

Tradition: T he pri mordia l wis dom, or Truth , immut ab le and unform ed. tradit ion: A forma l embodim ent of Truth under a particu lar mytho logical or re ligious gu ise w hich is transmitted through time; or th e ve hi cle for the transmission of this fo rmal embodiment; or the process of transmiss ion itse lf.

Revelation: A prov iden ti al Message from the Divine which, entering the world of tim e and space, must take on a ce rt ain form , and from whic h issues a mythologica l or religiou s trad ition.

Intellect : When ever the traditio nali sts use th is word or its derivatives it is not to b e un derstood in its modern a nd popular sense of "me nt al power. " Rath er, it is a precise technica l term taken from the Latin intellectus and from mediae va l sc holasticism: that fa c ulty whi c h perceives the trJnscend-

6. For some d isc ussion of this term by a modern ph il osop her sec J. I lospcrs An Inlroductfon 10 Philosophical Analysts (Routledge and Kegan Pa ul , London, 1956) pp21 Iff.

ent. 7 Th e Inlellect re ce ives intuition s and apprehends realiti es of a s uperph enomena l orde r We remember Me ister Eckhart 's s tat ement: "There is some thin g in th e sou l wh ich is uncreate d and un c reata bl e thi s is th e ln te llec t. "ij It is, in Sel1Uo n 's wor d s, "a recept ive faculty a nd not a productive power: it does not 'c rea te'; it receives an d tran s mits. It is a mir ror."9 The In te ll ect is an imp erso n al, unconditioned, receptive faculty, wh e nce the ob jectivity o f intell ect io n . It is "that w hich participates in th e divine Sub jec t. ,," Marco Pallis remind s u s that the belief in this transcendent fa c u lty , capable of a dir ect c onta ct wit h Reality, is to be found in all traditi o n s under var ious name s. II

Gnash;: "The wo rd g no s is . .. refers to supra-rational and thu s pure ly inte ll ective , knowledge of metacosmic realitie s. " 12 It must not be confu sed with th e hi sto ri c al phenomenon of gn os tici s m , th e G ra eco-O ri e nt a l s yncretism of la tt e r classical time s. 13 Its San s krit e quival e nt is jiian a , knowle d ge in its full es t se nse , what Eckhart calls "divine knowledge .'

Metaphysic: We s hall turn to thi s term in some d etai l prese nt ly bu t fo r th e moment the fo ll owing caps ul e definition from Nas r wi Usuffice: "Metaph ys ics, w hi ch in fa c t is one and s hou ld be n amed me tap hys ic ... is th e scie nce of the Rea l, of the o rigin and end of thing s, of the Absolute and in its li ght , th e re lati ve. " 14 Si milarl y metaphysical: "concerni ng univ ersa l realities co n s idered ob jec tively. "ls

Mystical: "co ncerning th e sa me realities considered subje c ti vely, that is, in re lation to the conte mplative so ul , in sofar as th ey e nt e r int o co nta c t with it. "16

As Guenon obseIVe d more than once m e taphy sics cannot prope rly a nd stri ctl y be defined, for to define is to limit , whil e th e d oma in of me taph ysics is the Real and thu s limitle ss. Consequently, me tap hy sics

7. Sec M. Lings What fs Sufism' ( Allen & Unwi n, London , 1975) p18.

8. Qu oted in M. Lings A Sufi Saini oj the Twclllielh Cen llllY (Unive rsi ty of Ca lifornia Press, Berkeley , 1971) p 27

9 Schuon , SUI/ fOIlS oj Wisdo m ( Perennial Books , London , n d .; reprin t John Murray , Lond o n , 1961) p 2 !.

10 ibfd. ; p88.

11. M. Palli s q uoted in Perry 's A Treasury oj Tmdflfolllll Wisdom , Op.cil. p733

12. Sc h uo n , Understandillg I slam, op.cfl. pI!).

13. See Sc huon , To /la ve a Center pp67-68. See al so Schuo n , Roots of the 1·luman Condit ion (World Wisdom Books, Bl oo mington , 1991) pplO- ll .

11. 5. \1 Nas r Mall (II/d Nature (Allen & Unwin, London , 1976) pSI.

15 Selmon, Logfc (lmi Transcendence (Harper & Row , New York , 1975) p204fn9.

"is truly a nd absolutely unlirrtited and canno t be confined to any formul a or any system."l7 Its subjec t , in th e words of J o hn Taule r, is "that pure knowledge th at knows no form or c rea turely way."IH This must always be kept in rrtind in any attempt at a "definition " which must needs be prov is ional and incomplete. Let us return to th e passage in wh ich Nasr expla ins the nature of metaphysics:

It is a science as strict and as exact as mathematics and with the same clarity and certitude, but one which can only be: attained through intellectual intuition and not s impl y through ratiocination. It thus from philosophy as il is uSlwlly understood. Rather, it is a theorfa of reality whose realisation means sanctity and spiritual perfection, and therefore can only Ix: achieved within the cadre of a revealed tradition. Metaphysical intuition can occur everywhe re-for the "spirit bloweth where it listeth"-but the effective realisation of metaphysical truth and its application to human life ca n only be achieved within a revealed tradition which gives efficacy to certain symbo ls and rites upon which mClaphysics must rely for its realisation.

This supreme science of the ReaL.is the only science that can distinguish between the Absolute and the relative, appearance and reality Moreovcr, this sc ience cxiSL'I, a s the esoteric dimension within every orthodox and integral tradition and is united with a spiritual method derived totally from the trddition in question. I?

This view of metaphysics accords w ith the traditional but not modern conception of p hil osophy-of philo-sophia, love of w isdom as a practical concern. In India, for example, philosophy was never only a matter of epistemo logy but an ali-embraCing sc ience of fi rst principles and of the true nature of Reality, and one wedded to the spi ritual diSciplines provided by relig ion. The ultimate reality of metaphysics is the Supreme Identity in which a ll oppositions and dualities are resolved, those of subject and objec t , knower and known, being and non- beingi t hu s a Scrip tur al formu lat ion s u ch as "The th ings of God knoweth no man , but

16 ihid. Schuon is, of co urs e, not unaware of the linguistic and connotative ambig uilcs surrounding thi s term. See Schuon 's SPfrlllltd Perspeclives, op.cfl. p86fn See also S.H. Nasr 5ufi Essays (Allen & Unwin , London, 1972) p26 fn5. For an exte nd ed traditionalist discussion sec W Stoddart: in Ranjit Fernando (cd) 7beUnalllmous Tradflfoll (Sri Lanka Institute ofTmditional Studies, Colombo, 1990pp89-95.

17. R. Gucnon: "Orienta l Metaphysics · in Jacob Needleman (cd) 7beSwordof>Gnosts (Pengu in Books, Baltimore, 1974) pptl3-41.

18. Quoted in C. F. Kelley Meisler Eckhart on Divine KI/Ow/edge (Yale University Press, New tla ven, 1977) p-i.

19. S.H. Nasr, Man (md Nature pp81-82. See ,llso Coomaraswamy's undated letter to Selecled le/lers oj Ana/Ida K. Coomaraswamy (cds: Rama Coomardswamy an d Alvin Moorc , jnr.) pIO: - tra ditional Me taphysics is as much a Single and inva riable science as mathematics."

the Spirit of God.' w As Coomaraswamy remarks , th e philosophy , o r metaphysics, provided the vis ion , and religion th e way to its effective verificat ion and actualisation in direct experience. 21 Th e cleavage berween metaphys ics and philosophy on ly appears in modern limes.

The nature of metaphys ics is more easily gras ped through a cont rast with philosophy and theology However, severa l genera l p o in ts ne e d to be estab li s h e d b e fore we procee d. Because the metaphysical realm lies "beyond " the phenom e nal plane the validity of a metaphys ical prin c iple can be ne ith e r proved nor disproved by any kind o f e mpirical d e monstra ti on, by refe rence to material realities. 22 The aim of metaphysics is not to prove anything whatsoever but to make doctrin es in le lligibl e a nd to demonstrat e their conSist e ncy.

Secondly , metaphysics is concerned with a dire c t apprehens ion of reality or, to put it different ly, with a recognition of th e Absolute and o ur relati o ns hip to it. It thus takes on an imp erative c haracter for tho se capable of me taphy s ical di sce rnment.

l11e re quir ement for us to recognise th e Absolute is its elf an :Ibsolu te o nei it co nce rn s man as suc h and not man under s uc h and suc h co nditi ons. It is a fundamental aspect o f human dig nit y, and especially of that intelligen ce which denote d state of man hard 10 obtain ," that we accept TrUlh becau se it is tr ue an d for no ot her reason .l.I

Furth ermore, because metaphysics is attuned to the sacred and the divine , it dem a nds so me thing of those who wou ld unlock it s mysteries:

If metaphysicS is a sac red thing , that means it could not be limited to the frJmework of the play of the mind. It is illogical and dangerous to talk of mctaphysics wit ho ut being pr eoccu pied with the moral concomitances it req uir es, the criteria o f which arc, for man, his behaviour in relation to God and to his neighbour. <1

Thirdly , metaphysics assumes man 's capacity for abso lut e and ce rtain

knowledg e :

20. 1 CoriTltbltms 11.11. '[he Absolute may be called God, the Godhead, nirgun a Brahman , the Tao, and so on, accord in g to the voca bulary at hand See Schuon, Light 011 the All cle' ll Worlds (Peren ni al Books, Lo ndon, 1966) pp96-9fnl for a co mm e nt ary on the use o f - and Selmon, Log ic and Trans cendence, op.cl f for a si milar discussion of "Allah " .

21. A.K. Coomaraswamy : "A Le cture o n Co mp ara ti ve Religion " q uo ted in Roge r Lip sey (cd) Coo maraswamy: Ilis Life and Work ( Bo lling cn, Princeton, 19n) p275. Also see an d We stern in Lipsey (ed) Coomaroswomy 2: Selected PCljJers, Me taphysfcs ( BoHinge n, PrinceLO n , 1977)

22. Sec R. Guc no n : op.c lt p53

23. Sc h uon, In /be Tracks o[ Buddbism (Allen & Unw in , Lond o n , 1968) p33 .

24. Schuon, Sp iritual PerspecUues, op .cit pI73.

SACRED WEB 1

111e capaci ty for objec tivity and for absoluteness is an anti cipated and existential refutation of al! th e ide o logies of d o ubt: if man is able to doubt, thi s is because certitude exists; likewise the very notion of illu s ion proves that man ha s access to reality ... lf doubt co nfo rmed to the rea l, hum:!n intelligence w ou ld be d eprived of its sufficient reason and man would be less than an a nimal , s in ce the intelligence o f animals docs not expe rience doubt concerning the reality to which it is proportioned. lS

Metaphys ics, therefore , is immutabl e and inexorab le, and the "infallible standard by which not only religions, but stiJI more ' philoso phies' and 'sci e nces' mu s t be 'corrected ' " .a nd inte rpreted. ,, 26 Metaphysics ca n be ignored or forgotten but not refuted "precisely b ecause it is immutable and not re lated to change qua c hange. "" Metaphysica l p rin c ipl es a re tm e and va li d once and for all and not for thi s parti c ular age or men ta lity , and co uld not, in any sense, "evolve ." They can be val ida ted dire c tl y in the p le nary and unitive ex peri ence of the mysti c. Thus Martin Lings can write of Sufism-and one co uld say the same of any intrinsica ll y orthodox tradi ti onal esoterici s m- that it has the right to be inexorabl e because it is based on certainties and not o n o pinion s. It bas the obligation to be inexor-dble because mysticism is the so le reposit ory of Truth, in the fullest sense, being a bove a ll concerned with the Absolute, the In fini te and the Et erna l; and - If the salt have lost its savour, wherewith shall it be salted? " Witbout mystic ism, Reality would have no vo ice in the world . There would be no record of t he true hierarchy , and no witness th a t it is continually be in g violate d 21

One might eas ily substitute th e word "meta physics" fo r "mys ticism " in this passage, th e fo rm er being th e fo rm a l and "objective" aspect of the "subjective " expe rience Howeve r, thi s is not to lose sight of th e fa ct that any and every me taphysical doctrine will take it as axiomatic that every fonnulati o n is "but e rror in the face of th e Divine Reali ty itselfj a provisi o nal , indispensa bl e, sa lutary 'error' which, howeve r, contains a nd comm unicat es the virtu a lity of th e Truth."29 With th ese considera tion s to th e fo refro nt we

25. Selmon, Logicand Transcendence, op.ctt. pl3. See also Selmon Esolerism as Principle and as \Vay ( Perennia l Books, inndon, 1981 ) ppl5ff.

26. LeIter to ).H. Muirhead, Augu st 1935, in Se lected Lellers of AKe; Op.ci l p37.

27. S. J I. Nasr Sufi F.ssays p86. See Sctmon, S/a/iolls oj Wisdom , op.c il . p1\2.

28. M. Lings What iSSlIfrsm ' p93.

29. Selmon , Spiritua l Perspectives, op.cit. ppI62- 163. Cf. AX Coomarasw am y: "".a nd every belief is a heresy if it be regarded as the truth, and nol simply as a s ignpost o f the truth. W Sri Ramak ri sh na and Religious Tolera nce in Cooma raswamy 2: Selected Papers, op.clt. p38. See also Sc h uon, SufISm: Veil and Qutnlessence(Wo rld Wi sd om Books, 1981) p2

can turn to a comparison , firstly , of metaphysics and philosophy .

In a di sc u ss ion of Sh an kar a's Advaita Vedanta, Coomara swa my exposed so me of th e crucia l d ifferences between metaphysics and modern phi losop hy:

The Vedanta is not a in the current sense of the word , but only as the wo rd is used in the phrase Pbilosophia Perenflis Modcm phi losop hies arc closed syste ms , employ ing th e method of dia lectics, and taking fo r granted that oppos ites ar e mutually exclusive In mode rn phil osophy things arc either so or not SO; in eterna l philosophy th is d e pends upon our point of view. Metap h ysics is not a syste m , but a consistent doctrine; it is not merel y concerned with conditioned and quantitativI: experie n ce but with universal possib ility ,.IO

Modern European philosophy is diale c tica l, which is to say analytical and rational in its m odes. From a traditi o nali st poinr of view it mi g ht be sa id that modernist philosophy is anchored in a mis understanding of th e nature and rol e of reason ; indeed, the ido latry of reason could hardly have ot herwise ari se n . Sc hu on spo tlights some of t he streng th s a nd deficien cies o f t he ra ti ona l mode in these terms:

Reason is formal by it s nature and formalistic in its operati o ns; it proceeds by by alternatives and by exclusions-or, it can be said, by pallial truths. It is not, like pure intellec t, form less and fluid "light"; true, it der ives its impla cab ility, o r its validity in general , from the inlellect , but it tou c hes on essences on ly through draw in g co nclu sio ns, not by dire ct vi sio n ; it is indispensable for verbal fo rmulati ons but it does nO I involve immediate know le d geY

T itll s Burckhardt lik ens reason to "a convex le ns whic h steers the inte lligence in a p articu la r d irec ti on and onto a limit ed field. "l2 Like a ny ot her in strument it can be abused. Much Europea n philosophy , adrift from it s religious moorings , ha s surrendered to a kind of totalitarian rationalism, to what Blake ca ll e d "S ing le Vision. ")] In so d oi ng it ha s v iola ted a principle which wa s respected wherever a metaphysical tradition a nd a re li gi ou s framewor k for the pursuit of w is dom remained intac t- th e princip le of adequation, articulated thus by Aquinas: "It is a sin aga ins t in tellige nce to want to p rocee d in an iden ti c al manner in Iypically different domain s-physical , mathemati ca l , metaphysical-of spec u lative knowledge. "34 T hi s, it wou ld see m , is precise ly what mod -

7 7

30. A.K. Coomaraswamy: and Western Tradition" 1'6.

3 1. Sch uon, Unders/(mdil1g Islam , op.cll. p24. See also Schuon , S/alions o/Wisdom, op.cll. ppl8ff.

32 . 1'. Burckh a rd t Alchemy ( Peng uin , 197 1) p36fn1.

33. a di scussion of Blake 's c ri tique of rationalism see 1'. Kos zak Wbere /be Was/eland EI/cis (Doub led ay, New York , 1972) ppI 4 2-1

ern philosophers a re bent on . No less pertinent in this context is Plotinus's well -known maxim "kn ow ing demands th e organ fitted to the ob ject."35 The grotesqueries of modern philosophy spring, in large measur e, from an indifference to this principle. Th e s ituation is exacerbated further by the fact that many philosophers have been duped by the claims of a totalitarian scien ti s m and thus suffer from a drastically impoveri s hed view of reality and of the avenues by which it might be apprehended. The words of the Moravian alchemist, Michael Sendivog iu s, see m more apposite than ever: "philosophers are men whom too much (profane) learning and thought have made mad. ""

The place of reason, of logic and d ialectic, in metaphysics is altogether more subordinate as the following samp le of quotes make clear. It is worth mobilising severa l quotations as thi s issue is so often misunderstood, often w ith bizarre results. From Sc huon:

In the intellectual order logical proof is only a quite provisional crystallisation of intuition, tbe modes ofwhicb are incalculable. Metaphysic-JI truths arc by no means accepted because they are merely logically clear, hut because they arc onlo logica lly clear and their logical clarity is only a trace of thi s imprinted on the mind Y

Or again:

Metaphysics is not held to be true-by those who under stand it-bccausc it is expressed in a logical manner, but it can be expressed in a logical manner because it is true , without-obviously- its truth ever being comp romi sed by th e poss ibl e shortcomings of human reason. l8

Simil arly Guenon:

... for metaphysics, the use of rational argument never represent s more than a mode of external e xpression and in no way affects metaphysical knowledge itself, for th e latter must always be kept essentially distinct from its formulation

Metaphysical discernment proceeds more through contemp lat ive intelligence than through ratiocination. Metaphysical formulations depend more on symbol and on analogy than on logical demon s tration , though it is a grave e rror to suppose that metaphysics has any right to irrationality 'o What many modern philosophers apparently fail to understand is

34. Quot ed in S. H. Nasr Man and Nature p35 .

35. Quoted in E.F. Schu macher A Gllide /01· tbe Perplexed (jonathan Cape, London, 1977)p19.

36. Perry's A Treasuryo/Tradilional Wisdom , op.cil. p735.

37. Schuon, Spfrttual Perspectives, op.cil. piO .

38. Schuon, Esolerlsm as Principle and as Way, op.c il p28.

39. R. Guenon quoted in Sc huon , Slal/onso/Wlsdom, op.cfl. p29fnl.

that thought can become in creas ingly subtle and complex without approaching any nearer to the truth. An idea can be subdivided into a th ousa nd ramifications, fenced about with every conceivable qualification and supported w ith the most intricate and rigorous logic but, for all thal, remain purely externa l and quanti tative for "no v irtuosity of the poner will tra nsfo rm clay into gold. ,,41 Furthermore , that a reaso ning might simply be the logical and provisional description o f an intellectual evidence, and Iha! its function might be the actu::disation of this evidence, in itself supra iogical, 3pparendy never crosses the minds of pure ]ogician s .u

Analyti c al rationality, no matter how usefu l a tool, will never, in it se lf, generate metap h ysical unders tanding. Metaphysicians of a ll ages have sai d nothing di rfere nt. Shanka ra , for ins tance: " ... the pure t ruth of Alman can be rea ched by med itation , contemplation and other sp iritual disc ipl ines suc h as a knower of Brahman may prescribe-but never by s ubtl e The Prome th ean arrogance of much modernist thought, often bred by scien lis lic ideologies , is revealed in the refusal to acknow ledge the boundaries beyond which reason has no competence or utility . This has , of co urse, prompted some quite ludicrous claims about relig ion and re ligious phenomena. As Schuon remark s,

The equating of the superna turdl with the irrJtional is characteristic .il amoun ts to claiming Ihal the unknown or the incomprehensible is the same as the absurd. The rationali sm of a frog Hving at the bottom of the well is to deny the existence of mountain s : Ihis is logic of a kind but it has nothing 10 do with

The intelligibility of a metaphysica l doctrine may depend upon a measure of faith in the traditional Christian sense of "asse nt to a credible proposition." As Coomaraswamy observes

One muSI believe in order to understand and understand in order to believe. '111esc are not successive, however, but simultaneous aCIS of the mind. In other wo rds, there c,m be no knowledge of anything to which the will refuses its consent ... 4S

This mode of apprehension is somet hi ng quite othe r than the philosop hi cal thought that

40. See Schuon, Esolerism as Principle and as Way , op.cit. p28.

41 Selmon, Understanding/slam, op.cif. p149.

42. Schuon, Logic and Trans cen dence, op.cil. p37 .

43. Shallkara's Crest Jewel of DiscriminaliOll tr & cd. Swami Pmbhavananda & c. Ishe rw ood, (Mento r, New York , 1970) p73.

44. Selmon, Logic and Tremscel1dellce, op.cil p42.

45. A.K. Coomaraswamy: "Ved anta and Western Tradition " p8. See also S. 1'1 Nasr, Kllowledge and the Sacred (Crossroad, New York, 1981) p6.

SACRED WEB 1

believes it can attain to an absolute contact with ncality by means of analyses , syntheses, arrangements , filtration s and po li s hings-t houg ht that is mundan e by the very fact o f this ign ora nce and because it is a vicious c ircle which not merely provides no escape from illusion , but even reinfor ces it thr oug h the lure of a progressive knowledge which in fact is

It is in this context tha t we can s peak of modern philosophy as "the codificat ion of an acquired infirmity ."" Unlike mod e rn philosophy , metaphys ics has nothing to do with personal opinion , or iginality or crea tivity-qu ite the contrary. It is dire cte d towards those realities which lie outside menta l perimeters and which are unchanging. The most a metaphysician w ill e ver want to do is to reformu late some timeless trut h so that it becomes more intelligible in the prevailing climate. 48 A p rofane syste m of thought, on the othe r hand , is nev e r more than a portrait of the person who c rea les it, an "invo luntary memoi r" as Nietzsche put

The metaphysician does not seek to invent or d iscover or prove a new system of thought b ut rat her to crysta ll ize d irec t appre h ensions of Rea li ty insofar as this is possibl e within the limited resources of human language, making use not only of logic but of sy mbol and analogy. Furthermore, the sci e nce of metaphysics must always proceed in the context of a revealed religion, prot ec ted by the tradition in question which also suppl ies the necessary supports for the fu ll rea lisa tion or act u alisalion of metaphysica l doctrines. The me taphysician seeks not only to formulate immutable principles and doctrines but to live by them , to confonn his or her being to th e truths they convey. In other words, there is nothing of U1e "a rt for art's sake" type of thinking about the pursuit of metaphys ics, it engages the who le person or it is as nothi ng. 5O As Schuon remarks

111e moral exigency of metaphysical discernment means that virtue is part of wisdom; a wisdom without virtue is in fact imposture and hypocrisy ... plenary kn ow ledge of Divin e Reality presupposes o r demands moral con formity to this Reality, as the eye necessarily co nform s to light; s in ce the object to be known is the sove reign

16. Sc huon , Logic alld Transcendence, op.c ll. p3"i.

47 Schuo n , 71Je Transfiguration of Man (Wo rld Wisdom Books, Bloomingto n , 1995) p1.

48 . Here we are at the opposite end of the spectru m not o n ly from the philosophical relativists but from those who hold a · personalist " or "exis tent ialist " view of truth

49 Friedric h Nie l;r.sc he in Beyond Good and Evil , taken from A Nietzsche Reader Penguin 1977 , cd n.). lI ollingda le ; Extrdct 13. See also Schuon, Logtc and Tran sce ndence, op.cil p31 and Schuon, The Tran sfig uration aJMan, op.cfl. ]>4. (For an illuminating passage on both th e grandeur and the "dementia" of Nietzsche's work sec Schuon, To Have a Center p 15 )

SO. See A.K. Coomaraswamy: Vedan t.1 and Western p9.

Good, the knowing subject must correspond to it analogically s1

A point often overlooked: metaphysics does not of necessity find its expressio n o n ly in verbal forms. Metaphysics can be expressed visually and ritually as well as verbally. The Chinese and Red Indian traditions furnish pre-eminent examples of these possibiHties. Moreover,

... tbe criterion of metaphysical truth or of its depth li es not in the complex ity or diffi culty of its expression, having regard \0 a particular capacity of understanding or sty le of thinking. Wisdom does not lie in any complication of words but in the profundity of the intention; assuredly the expression may according to the circumstances be subt le and diffi cu lt , or equally it may not be soY

One is irres istibly reminded of the Buddha's Flower Sermon. By way of a digression it might be noted that because t he fundamental distin c t ion between reason and Intellect has been obscured in recent Europea n thought, then similarly, "... the basi c distin c ti o n betwee n metaphysics as a sciellia sacra or Divine Knowledge and philosop hy as a purely human form of mental activity has been blurred or forgotten. "53 In the field of comparative religion this has le d to a good deal of confusion. As S. H. Nas r has no ted , to speak of Hindu or Chinese philosop hy and rationalistic European philosophy in the same breath is a comra di ction in terms unle ss the word "p hilosophy n is used in two quite different senses. A failure to draw the necessa ry distin c ti ons ha s

.. mad e a slum of many studie s of com parati ve philosophy and has helped to reduce to nil\he real sig nifi cance of Oriental metaphysics To say that this or that s tatem ent of Hegel resembles the Upanisads or that Hume presents ideas similar to Nagarjuna's is to fall into the worst form of error, onc which prevents any type of profound understanding from being achievt:d, dther for Westerners wanting to understa nd the East or vice versa.s.j

Let us s ummari se the most significant d ifferences between metaphy sics and modern philosophy. The latter is, generally speaking, analytical , ration a listic and quantitative; it is concerned with relation s hips and co nting e nci es accessible to rational inquiry , or at lea st to the workings of the normal mind , these including imagination which is no less a mental process than ratio ci nation ; European philosophers tend to see th e development or philosophy as progressive, driven forward by the work of

51 Sch u o n , Roolsojlbellumall CO lldili on, op.cil. pSG.

52. Sel m on , Understandlllg Islam , op cil. pll1.

53. S. H Nasr: for a meaningful companHivc philosophy " Pbflosopby East and Wesl XXII , i , 1972; p54

54. ibid. ; p55 and p58 SACRED

this or that phil osop her who crea tes or discovers new insights, fresh perceptions , a diffe rent vocabulary of discourse, and so on; philosophy is us ually seen as se lf-validating, not requiring any justification outside itse lf. Metaphysics , by contrast, is concerned wit h supra-mundane, transcendent and unconditioned realities; it is qualitative, sym b o li ca l and synthetic in its modes and is roo ted in certain immutable principles j it is indifferent to the question of "p roofs " and the metaphysician's purpose is n ot the resolution of some "problem " but the demonstration of something already intellectually ev id entj it does not evolve or progressj it is intimately link ed with spi rit ual disciplines and depends for its rea lisation on the presen ce of elements which could only be drawn from an integral tradition; it is a practical pursuit which has as its end gnosis, tran sfo rmation and sa nctification.

The relationship between metaphysics and theology is more subt le, complex and problematic. Under the t raditionalist view, a Divine Reve lation is always the fountainhead of any orthodox religion while metaphys ical in sight derives from intellection. The dich o tomy here is more apparent than real, Revelati on taking the plac e of intellection for the human collect ivity in question. This is a principle not easily grasped but without it the apparent antagonisms of theology and metaphysics ca nnot be resolved. Sc huon define s the relationship between Revelation and intellection in this way,

.in normal times we learn a priori of divine things tbrough Revel ati on, which provides (or us the symbo ls and the indispensable data, and we have access a posteriori to the truth of these things through Intell ection, which reveals to us their essence beyond received formulati ons, but not opposing them Rcvelati on is an Int e llection in the macrocosm, while Intellection is a Revelation in the micr ocosm; the Avatam is the outward Intellect , and the Intellect is the inward Avatara. ss

It might be said, then , tha t intell ec tion appears in a more "s ubjective " mode, but on ly w ith this qualification:

It is subjective because empirically it is within us. The term "subjective," as 'Ipplied to the intellect, is as improper as the epithet in both cases the terms are used simply in orde r to define the way of

The tradit ionalists, always a le rt to the dangers of a reduc tionist psychologism, in s ist lhat the truth to which intellec tion gives access is

55. Selmo n, Bo/arism as PlillcipleaJld as Il't'ay, op.cit. p10. Sec also S. I-I. Nas r, Kllow/edge and IbeSacred, op.cfl. pJll8-149.

56. Schuon, Understand ing I s/am, up ciI. p57fn2.

beyond all spatia- te mporal detenninations. As Schuon points out, Biblical formulations suc h as "the Kingdom of Heaven is within you " certainly do not mean that heaven , God or Truth are of a psychological order but s imply that access to the se realities is to be found through th e centre of our Religion itself, nowing from the Divine, must contain within itself principial or metaphysical knowledge but this will be veiled by the forms in question. For instance,

Thc I11C SS;lgC o f Chr is t, like that of the Bible, is not a priOri a tC;lching of metaphysical science ; it is ahove all a message of salvation, but one that ne cessarily contains, in an indirect way and under cover of an ;lppropriatc symbolism, metaphysics in it s entirety.S!!

The metaphysical emphasis varies from one tradition to another. Buddhism, for example, is primarily a spiritual therapy rather than a metaphysical system but one which of necessity requires a metaphysics while Hindui sm is , in the first place, a metaphysics which implies , und er th e same necessity, a spi ritual therapy. S? Doubtless there are th ose who will be qui c k to asseverate that Buddhism is indifferent to me taphysics, pOinting to the Buddha 's refusal to answer the indeterminate questions. The traditionali sts wou ld s imply remind us o f Naga rjuna 's statement that the Buddha taught two levels of truth and that an understanding of the distinction , not p oss ible without a metaphysical doctrine , is preconditional to a full understanding of the dharma. "' "There is no science of the soul ," says Schuon, "wi th o ut a metaphysical basis to it and without spiritual remedies at its disposal. ,, 61

The relationship of theology to metaphysics is that of exotericism to eSOlericislTI. EXOlericism is "unable of itself to take cognisance of the relationship s whereby, at one and the same time, it is ju st ified in its claims and limited in its scope. ,,62 Theological dogmatism is c haracteri sed by its insistence on elevating a particular point of view , or aspect of reality under a spec ific formal guise , to an absolute value with exclusive claims.

57. Schuon, MKcy s to the Bibl e in Nee dleman (cd), 7be Sword o/Gnosis, op cit. p356. 358.

58 Schuon, Log iCand Transcendence, op .cil. pSG.

59. See Sc huon , Spiritual Perspe ctives, op.cit. p55.

60. ibid

61. Schuon, Log ic and Transcendence, op.c it . p14.

62. Selmon , III the Tracks oj Buddblsm, op.cit. p46.

As w e hav e see n already, what characte ri ses a metaphys ical eso te ricism , on the ot he r h a nd , is its discernment of the universal in the particular, of the essence in the form. This di stin c ti o n ca n b e hinged o n th e te rms "be lie f" a nd "g n os is," o r s imil arly, "fa ith " and "ce rtitud e." Th e difference betwe e n th ese, w rit es Schuon , is ... co mparable to the differen ce between a d esc ription o f a mountain an d d irec t vis ion o f il ; the seco nd no more PUi S us o n lOp of the mounta in than the first but it docs inform us about the properties of the mountain and rhe route to follow; leI us not however forget that the blind man who walks without stopping advances more quickly than a normal man who stops at each step.63

El se where Sch uo n refers to th e th eologies as ta kin g up o n th emse lves th e contradiction of being "sent ime nt a l meta ph ysics":

be ing ignorant o f the d ifferent iat io n of things into aspec ts and s tandpoints, they have therefore to operate on th e ba s is of arb itrari ly rigid data, th e antinomies of which can only be solved by going beyond their a rt ificial rigi d ity; thei r working has mo reove r a sentimen tal slant and th is is described as pio usly.oo64 Such re mark s s h o uld not be cons tru ed as an attack on th e th eo logica l pers pective b ut o nly as a caution ab o ut th e limits of dogmati s m and the dan gers of a th eo logical totalitariani s m whe n it enters a n arena w he re it is inad equate. As Marco Palli s so nea tl y puts it ,

What o ne always needs to remember is that traditio na l fo rm s, including those bearing t he now unpopu lar name of dogma s, are keys (Q un lock the gate o f Un it ive Truthi but they are a lso (since a key can close, as well as open a gate) pOSSib le obs tacles to its profoundest know ledge ... M

In a fe li c itous metaphor Schuon co mpar es the religi ons to th e beads of ro sal}' , gnosis be in g the cord on which th ey are st run g. In o ther words, the reli gious o rth o d o xies , or mo re specifica ll y theologie s, are o nly able to fu lfil th e ir func ti o n w hen the y re m a in attached to th e prin c ipial knowle dg e which is preserved in th e esoteric dim e ns io n o f eac h traditi on.

The hi erarc hi c s up e ri ority of gnos is to all other form s o f know le d ge and o f me taph ysica l doct rin e to a ll o th e r k inds o f fo rmulati o ns s hould n o t be a ll owed to o bsc ure th e int e r-d epe nd e nt re lationship of th e esoteric and the exoteric, of th e metaph ysica l d o main and th e rest o f any religiou s tradition. Three gen e ral poin ts n eed to b e mad e in thi s co nt ex t. The y concern t he ineffectiven ess of inte llec tion outside a trad iti onal framework , th e dist inc tion b etwee n d oc trin al understan din g an d reali -

63. Sch uon, U'lderstalldillglslam, op.clt. p148

61. Schuon, Islam and lbe Pemmia/ Philosophy (Wo rl d of Islam Festival, london, lCJ76) p39.

65 M. Pallis; to Whi la ll Perry's A Treasury o/Traditional \Vtsdom, op.cil. p 10.

sa tion , and th e relationship between metaphysical di sce rnm e nt and th e sp iritual life in ge n e ral. There are, writes Schuon , no metaphy sica l o r cos mo log ical reasons why , in excepti o nal cases, dire c t inte lle c tion s hould nO I a ri se in men w ho have no link at all w ith revealed wis d om, bu t an exceplion, if iI proves the rule, assuredly could not constitute the rule. 66

In more normal cases

Int e llectio n ha s need of tradition , of a Revelation fixed in tim e and adapted to a SOciety, if it is 10 be awak e ned in us and not go astI'"ay ... tbe imp o rtanc e of orthodoxy , of tradition, o f Revelation is that tbe means of realising th e Ab so lut e must come "o bj ec tively " from the Abso lute ; knowledg e ca nn o t sp rin g up except witbin th l! framew o rk of an "objectiv e divine formulati o n of KnowJedge, 67 Thus , although int e ll ect ion can occur as "an iso lated miracl e" anywhere, it w ill ha ve n e ither authority nor effi cacy outside tradition . 68 (In thi s contex t th e case of Ramana Maharishi is no t w ith out inte rest, remembering how the sage had to cast his own mystical in s ight into th e mo uld s of cl assica l Vedanta in order to be abl e to com muni ca te il. W) The di s tin ctio n between do ct rina l understanding a nd even intellection itse lf on the o ne ha nd , a nd realisation on th e o th e r, is a c rucial o ne. Contemplative int e lli ge nce and met a ph ysica l in sig ht do no t , in th e mse lves, save, "do not preve nt Titans from fallin g. "10 There must be a p articipation of th e will in the inte llig e nce , or as o ne sc h o la r g lossed Me iste r Eck hart, "The intellective ce nter is not trul y known without involving th e volitive circ umfe rence."71 He re the will can be defined as "a prolongati o n o r a comp le ment of th e intelligence "n while int e llige nc e itse lf refe rs to a co nt e mplat ive receptivity ra ther than any mental cleverness, an inte lligence which "d iffe rs as much from men tal virtuos ity as th e soaring nigh t of an eagle d iffers from the p lay of a mo nk ey."" Morality and

66. Sch uo n , Spiril ual Perspeclives, op.cll. p15

67. 5chu on, Ullde rsia lldlllg [slam , op.cil. p13 0.

68. Sc hu on, Stati ons of Wisd o m , op. cil. p57.

69. The best introductory account of the life of [he sage is T. M.P. Mahadcvan R(lIntllla Mab(lrS bi, 71JcSage ofA nllJ(lca la (A ll en & Unwin , London, 1977). Sec a lso Sc huon , Sp iritual Perspectives, op.cil. pI22.

70. Selmon, Spiri tlUlI Perspeclives, op .c fl. pl38

71. c. F. Kelley: op.ctt. (Ke ll ey's book d e arly owes a great deal to Schuon w hose ap hori sms arc repealed alm ost word for word but now he re in the book C'Jn we find an y acknowl e d g me nt o f Scimon or any of the othlC! lra dit iona lisls.)

72. Schuo n , lIgbl O il Allcie/Il Worlds, op cil p136. See a lso Sc ilu on, Logic and Tra l lScc lldell cc, Op.cfl. p 199,

the virtu es, love , faith-these must be integrated with metaphys ical ins ight if full rea li sation is to occ ur, which is to say t he re mu st be a merging of intell ec tual and volitive e le me nt s in a harmoniz ed unit y. It s ho uld also be remembered that although th e Intell ec t is situatc...'d beyo nd sentiment , imagi n:J.l ion , memory a nd reason , ... it can a t the same time en li ghten and d ete rm ine all o f these s ince they arc like its ind iv idualized ram ifica li o ns , o rdained as receptacles to re ceive the light from on h igh and to Ir'dn slate it according to th eir respective

The spiritual life, which can o nl y be liv ed in conformity with a way provided by tr adition, forms both a preco ndition and a c ompl e me n t to intell ec ti o n . As Aquinas put it , " By th e ir very nature the v irtues d o not necessaril y form part of co nt e mpla t io n but they a re an indis p e nsa bl e condition for it. "75 Mo reover, san ct it y itself ma yo r ma y n ot be accompani e d by metaphysical disc e rnm e nt: one may be a saint but no me taph ysician, as hi story repeatedly demonstrates. To ex p ect, as a n ecess ity , me taph YSica l wisdom of th e sa int is to co nfu se diffe re nt modes o f s pi ritual p erfect io n. As Sch uon rem inds us,

To say "man " is to say bhakta , and to sa y sp irit is to say jt/auill; hum a n n ature is so to speak woven of these two neighbouring but incommensurable dimensions 111ere is ce rtain ly a bhaktl withoutjli(llla , but there is no jiian(l without bbaktl. 76

The p e rs p ec tiv es of Ramanuja and Shank a ra might be cited as an illu st ra ti ve exa mpl e of this prin ci pl e n

If metaphysical dis ce rnment is to tran s form one's being then intell ect ion alone is in sufficient for "Hum an nature contains dark e le ments which no intell ec tual ce rtainty could, ipso fa cto , e liminate ."" Here th e ro le of faith is of c ritical importance:

A man may possess metaphy sical ce rtainty without possess in g Ufa ith " But , if metaphysical certainty s uffi ces on the d oc trinal groun d , it is far from b e ing dent on the spiritual level where it must be completed and enlivened by faith. Faith is nothing o th e r than our who le being clinging to Trut h, whether we have of lruth a direct intui t ion o r an indirect idea. It is an abuse of la ng ua ge to red uce "faith " to th e level o f - bc li ef."79

73 . S. H. Nas r Ideals a nd Realities of Islam (Allen & Unwin, London, 1966) p21.

74. Sc hu on, tbe Tmnsftgllralfon of Mall , op.cfl p25.

75. Qu oted in Sc hu on, Ullderst and ing Islam , op.cfl. p 133 fn2.

76. Sclmo n , Esoler{sm as Prillclple and as \.flay, op.cil. p2 2.

77. See Sc h uon, Spirilua l Perspectives, op cll. pp103ff For a European example of "bbakti withoutjil(ma - one might cite St Theresa of Li sie u x - but the hist ory of C hristianity fu rnishes many examples.

78. Sc h uon , Ibid p139

In anoUler co nt ext Sc hu o n e mpha s ises this paint in even more unequivocal terms. The following pa ss age is, in my view, one of th e mos t arresting in the whole Sc huonian corpus , o ne mad e all the more so by th e uncharacteristic persona l reference:

O ne Cdn meditate o r s pl."Culalt' inde finite ly on transcenden t tru ths a nd th eir applicati o ns ( tha t is moreover what the author of this book docs , b ut he has valid reasons for doing it , nor d oes he do it for himself). One can spend a whole lifetime speculating on the supra senso ria l and th e transcendent, but all thaI matters is le a p into th e void" whi c h is tbe fixation of spirit and soul in an unt h inkable dime nsio n o f th e Ika l thi s "leap into th e void" we c<ln call "faith" 1!0

The plan es o n wh ic h philosophy, th eology and me taphy s ics are s ituated ca n be ide ntified by comparing their respective approaches to "God. " For the phi losopher "God" is a "problem" to be reso lved and Hi s ex is tence o r no n -ex is te nce a qu es ti on to be approa c h ed rationally , as if human reason cou ld prove no matter what!; the theologian will be le ss conce rn e d wi th proofs , the existence and reality of God being a revea led and thu s axiomat ic datum , than w ith belief and its mor a l co ncomi tancesj

t he me taph ys ician is co nce rn e d n e ither with ra ti o nal argumen t nor with b e li e f but w ith a n In tellectual Evidence which brings a n abso lute cert itude. To put it a nother way one might say that philosop hy tr a de s in o pini ons and id eas, th eo logy fo c u ses on beliefs and m o ra lities, and metaphysics form ulat es do c trin es which are the fruit of in tellection. Or, again , one might say that the philosopher is intent o n const ru c tin g a me ntal sys te m , th e theologian on discovering and living by th e "w ill of heave n ," and [h e metaphysi cian on a gnos is and transfo rm ation which will c onform hi s being to Realiry unqualified.

We ca n reca pitulate some of the ce ntral poi nt s made in ou r d isc ussion of the re la tion s hips b e tween philosophy, theology and me taphysi cs through a pa ssage from Selmon's The Transcendent Un ity of Religio n s: intellec tual or metaphysical know ledge transcends the specifically theologica l point o f view, which is itself incomparably super ior to the philosop hi cal point o f view, s ince, like me ta p h ysical knowledge , it em ana tes from God <lnd not from man ; bu t w he reas metaphysics pr oceeds wholly from in tellectua l intui t ion, religion p roceeds from Rcvclalion ... in the Cdse of intellectua l intuition, kn owledge is not possessed by the ind ivi du a l insofar as he is an individual , b ut insofar as in hi s inm ost esse n ce he is nOI di st inct from th e Divine Prin cip le ... the th eo log ica l point of v iew,

79. ib id .; p 127. On th e relationship of intellection and rC'dlisation see also Nasr, Kn owl edge and the Sacred, op.cit. pp3IOff

80. Schuon, Logi c u1/d Transcelldellce, op.cil. p202.

because it is based in the minds of believcrs on a Hevelation and not on a knowledge that is accessible to each one of them will of necessity confuse the sy mbol or form with the naked and supraformal Truth whilc metaphysics will be able to make use of the same symbol or form as a means of expression while at the s ame time being aware of its relativity ... religion translates metaphysical or universal truths into dogmatic language ... What essentially di stinguishes the metaphy sical from th e philosophical proposition is that the former is sy mbolical and descriptive ... whereas philosophy is never anything more than what it exp ressc.'i When philosophy uses reason to re so lve a doubt, this proves precisely that its sraning point is a doubt it is striving to overcome, whereas the starting point of a metaphysical formulation is always something intellectually evident or cl.!na in , which is communic:lted to those able to receive it, by symbolical or dialectical mea ns designed to awaken in them the latent knowledge that they bear uncon scious ly, and it may even be s;li<l, eternally within

Our d isc ussion of these inter-relationships has necessarily had to gloss over some iss ues , ski rt round othe rs. Some fundamentally important princ iples and distinctions had to be expounded within a short compass. Before closing this discussion it will be as well to offer so me qualifications to the argument e laborated above which has drawn heavily on Schuon's tbe Transcendent UnilyofReligions. As Selm on points out in a more recent work

In our first book we adopted the point of vicw of Ghazali regarding philosoph y-; that is to say, bearing in mind the great impoverishment of modern ph y, we s implified t he problem , as others have done before us , by making "philosophy" sy nonymous with "ra ti o nali sm."S2

We have followed more or less the same procedure here and will only modify it with two very brief points. Firstly, the term "philosophy" in itself "ha s nothing restrictive about it "; the restrictions which we have imposed on it in this discussion hav e been exped ient rather than essential. Sch uo n has laid bare some of the issues raised by both th e ancient and modern lise of th e term in an essay en titl ed "Tracing the Notion of Philosophy ."" Secondly, it must also be admi tt ed that our dis c us s ion o f the relationships of philosophy, theology and metaphysics has been governed by so me necessary overs implifications. From certain points of view the distinctions we have established a re not as clear- c ut nor as rigid as our discussion has suggested. As Schuon hims elf wri tes

In a certai n respect, the difference betwee n philosophy, theology and gnosis is

81. Schuon, tbe Tr(l/lsce"den/ U'lily of Religions (Ha rper & Row, New York, 1975) ppxxviii -xxx.

82. Sc huon , Sujlsm: Veil and Quin/essence , o p .c it. p123fnlO.

83. ibid. ; p115-128 Sce a lso Schuon, 11Je Transfiguration oJ Man , op .e ft p3.

total ; in an o ther re s pe c t, it is relative It is total when one unders tand s by - philosoonly rati o nali s m; by only the exp lanation of religi o us tea c hings; and by "gno sis,M only intuitive and inlCllecrive , and thus supra-rati o nal , know le dge; but the differen ce is only re lative when one understands by the fact of thinking , by th e fael of speak in g dogmaticdlly o f God and religi o us things , and by Mgn os is · the fa c t of presenting pure metaphysics , for th e n th e ge nre s interpcnctrate 1H

We live in anomalous times. Now here is thi s more graphically demonstrated than in the fact that in the mos t irreligiOU S and impiou s period in human history th e esoteric wisdoms preserved by the religious tradition s are more widely and easily ac cess ible than ever before. Sap ien lial truths which prev iou s ly had remained extrinsically inexpress ible and whi ch had been protected by those few capable of understanding them are now on publi c display, as it were. The traditionalists th e mselves have played a sign ificant role in br inging esoteric wisdoms within the purview of a greater number of people. This calls for some explanation.

The eros ion of the protective barriers which previously enclosed traditions ha s , in part, been caused by historical factors which , in a sense , are "acc idental. " One migh[ cite the exposure of the Upa ni sadic Scriptures as a case in point; here certa in historical factors, such as th e introduction into India of cheap printing presses , combined wi th a degree of imprudence on the part of some of the "reformers " of Hinduism to subvert the esoter ic sta tu s of these Scri ptures whic h became available to anyone and everyone. There are also innumerable cases where a garbled ve rs ion of half-understood secret doctrines has been thoughtlessly and care lessly put into public circulation. The Biblical verse "For there is nothin g covered, that s hall not be revealed " has sometimes been taken as a licence for all man ner of excesses in th e popularising of esote ric doctrines. The warnings about false prophets might often be more to the point.

In the case of the traditi ona lists the unveiling of some esoteric teachings h as been conside red and prudent. What sorts of factors have a llowed this developme nt ? Firstly, there are certain cosmic and cycl ic conditions now obtain ing whic h make for an unprecedented si tu ation. In discussing t he fact tha t what was once hid in [h e darkness is now being brought into the light, Schu on wri te s

the re is illd c (.-d so mcthing abnormal in this , but it lies , not in thc fact of th e e xpo -

sition of these truths, but in the gener;!1 conditions of our age, whi c h marks the end of a great cyclic period of terrestria l humanity - tile end of a ma ba-y uga according to Hindu so must rccapitul,ne or manifest again in one way or another everythi ng that is included in th e cycle, in conformity with the adage "extremes meet "; thus things that arc in themselves abnormal may become necessary by reason of the cond iti o ns just referred Secondly, from a more expedient pOint of view,

it must be admitt<.-d that the spi ritual confusion of ou r times has reached suc h a pitch that the harm that might in principle befall ce rtain peopl e from co ntact with the truths in question is compe nsated by the ad\' antages that others wi!! d crivt: from tbe self-same truths. 86

Sch uon rem inds us of the Kabbalist ic adage that "it is better to divulge Wisdom than to forge t it. "8) And thi rd ly there is the fact al rea dy mentioned: esote ric doctrines have , in recent tim es, been so frequently "plagia rised and deformed " that those who are in a position to speak with authority on these matters ar e obliged to give some accoun t of w h a t "tru e esoterism is and wha t it is not. "88

From a n other perspective it can be sai d that the preserva tion, indeed the very surviva l , of the formal exoteric isms may depen d on the rev iv ifying effects of an eso tericism more w idely understood:

exotcrism is a precarious tbing by reason of its limits or its exclus ions: there arrives a moment in history when a ll kinds of exper iences o blige it to modify its claims to exclusiveness, and it is then driven to a choice: escape from these limitations by the upward path , in esoterism , or by the d ownward path , in a worldly and suicida lliberdlism.1I9

At a tim e when "t he outward a nd readily exaggera ted incom patibi li ty of the different religions grea tl y d iscredits, in the minds of most of our contemporaries , a ll religion, "W the exposure of the underlying uni ty of the religions takes on a d ee p urgency. This task ca n only be ac hi eved through esotericism. The open co nfrontation of diffe rent exotericisms, the extirpation of traditional civi li sations, and the tyranny of secula r and profane ideologies al l playa part in determining the pecu li ar circumsta nces in which the most imperiou s needs of the age can only be answered by a recourse to traditiona l esotericisms. There is perhaps some sma U hope th at in this climate

85. Schuon, Tbe Transcendent Unity of Relig/om, op.cf l. pxxxi.

86. ibid .

87 Schuon, 71Je TralJSfigllralfOlI of Mml piO

88 . Ibid.

89. Sc huon , Esoterism as Principle and a$ \flay, op.cll p19.

90. Sc hu on, The Transcendent Ullity of ReliglOlls , op.cit. pxxxi.

and given a pro pe rly constituted metaphys ica l fram ewo rk in which to affirm th e "profound and ete rnal solidarity o f aU s piritu a l forms,"" th e different re li gions might ye t "prese nt a singular front against th e floodtid e of mate rialis m and pse udo -s piritu alism ."9Z

The h aza rd s and am biguities attending the exposure o f eso teric d octrin es to an audience in many respects ill-equipp e d to und e rst a nd th e m have po se d the sa me problems for representativ es of traditi o nal esotericisms the world over. J oseph Epes Brown write s of th e discl os ure of traditi onal Siou x wisdom, to choose one exampl e, in te rm s ve ry si milar to th ose use d by Selmon:

".in th cse days th ose few o ld wise men still living among them S:ly that at th e approach of th e cnd of a cycle, when men everywhere have become unfit to understa nd a nd still more \0 rC<lli sc th e truths revealed to them at th e o rigin il is then permissible and cvcn desir.tblc to bring this knowledg e out into the li ght or day, ror by its ow n nature truth protects itse lf agai nst bein g prorancd and in thi s way it is possible it may reach those qualified to pen etrate it

It is no ac cident th a t the few remaining holy men amongst the Sio ux and t raditiona li s ts like Schuon should see thi s matter in th e same terms.

91. ibid.

92. Sch uon, Gnosis: Divi n e Wisdom ( Perennial I30oks, Lon don, 1979) p 12. See also Whi ta ll Per ry, / 1 Treasury oJ Tmdilfonal Wisdom , o p .cit. p22rn.

93. Joseph Epes Brown, 7beSacred Pipe (Un iversity o r Okl ah oma Press , 1953) pxi i. (' Ill is passa gt: wa s omiuc tl rr o m th e Peng uin ed ition.) Sec also Sc h uon 's Prem ises or a Relig ious Di lc mma H in Sujis m : Veil and Quill/essellce , op.cll. pp97-1 13.

On the Pertinence of Philosophy

by Ananda K. Coomaraswamy

"Wisdom u'lcreale, the same now as il ever was, and the same 10 be Jar evermore . '!.- SI. Augustine, Confessions, ix.1O.

"Plimordial and preselll lVi/ness ''- PrakiiSlinanda, Siddhantamuktavali, 44.

I. Definition and Status of Philosophy, or Wisdom

To discuss the 'problems of philosophy' presupposes a definition of 'p hilosop hy'. It will not b e contested that 'p hil osop hy ' implies rather the love of wisdom than th e love of knowledge , nor seco ndaril y that from the ' love o f w is dom ', philosophy has come by a natural transition to mean the doctrine of tho se who love wisdom and are called philosophers. '

Now knowledge as suc h is not the mere report of the senses (the re fl ec tion of any thin g in the retinal mirror may be p e rfect, in an animal or idiot , and yet is not knowledge), nor the mere act of recognition (names being merely a means of alluding to the aforesaid repons), but is an abstractio n from these reports , in which abstmction the names of the things are used as conve ni ent substitutes for th e things themselves. Knowledge is not then of individual prese ntati ons, but of types of presen tati o n ; in other words, of things in th eir int e lli g ible aspect, i.e. o f the being tha t things have in the mind of the knower, as principles, genera and s p ecies. In so far as knowledge is direc ted to the attainment of ends it it; ca ll ed practical ; in so far as it remains in the knower, theoretica l or specu lative. Finally , we cannot say that a man knows wisely. but that he

I . It is not pretended to lay down a final definition of philosophy.

know s we ll ; w isdom takes kn owledge ro r granted and gove rn s the moveme nt of th e w ill w ith res p ect to thin gs known ; or we m ay say that w isdom is the c riterio n of va lu e, accord ing to wh ic h a d ec is ion is mad e to act or not to act in any given case or univ e rsa ll y. Whic h will app ly no t merely to external acts , but a lso to co nt e mplati ve or th eoret ical a c ts. Phi losophy, accordi n gly, is a wisdo m abo ut kn owledge , a correc tion dusa vo ir-pense r. In general, "Ph il oso ph y 1I"2 has been held to e mbra ce what we have referred to ab ove as theoretical or s p ec ulati ve kn ow ledge, for e xampl e, log ic, e thic s, psyc h o logy , aesthetic , th eo logy, onto logy ; and in thi s se nse the pro b le ms of ph il osop hy are ev iden tl y tho se of rati o nali salio n , the purpose of phil osop hy being so to co rrelate the data of empirical experience as to ' make se nse' o f th e m , whic h is acco mplis he d for t he most part b y a red u ct io n of pa rt icu lars to univ ersa ls ( d educt ion). And thu s defined , th e fun c t io n of p hiloso ph y co ntra sts wi th t ha t of prac ti cal science, of wh ic h the p ro p er function is that of predicting th e parti c ular from the un ive rsa l (induction). Beyond t hi s, h oweve r, "Philoso phy I" has b ee n he ld to mea n a wisdom not so mu c h about parti c ul ar kind s of th ought, as a wisdom abo ut thinkin g, a nd an a na lysis of w h at it mea ns to think , and an enquiry as to what may b e the nature of t he ultim ate reference of th oug ht. In thi s se n se the probl e ms of p hilosophy are wi th res pect to t he ultimate na ture of real ity , act ua li ty or experience; meaning b y re ality w ha teve r is in act and not mere ly p ote ntial. We may ask, fo r exa mpl e, what are truth, goodness and bea uty (co ns idere d as concepts ab stracted from ex p e ri e nce), or we may ask whether the se or a ny other concepts ab stra cted fro m expe ri e nce ha ve ac tu a ll y any being of th e ir ow n ; which is th e matter in d ebate as b e tw ee n nominali sts on th e one hand and rea li sts, or idealists, on the other. ' It m ay be n o te d that, s ince in a ll the se app li ca ti o ns phi loso ph y means 'w isdom ', if or w h en we s p eak o f phil osop h ies in th e p lural , we s h a ll mean not d iffe rent kind s of wisdom , but w isdom wi th res p ect to di fferent kind s of

2. Our numbering of the in inverse order as II and I is because Aristotle's firSl Ph ilosophy, viz. Me taphysics, is actua ll y prior in logical order of thought , which proceeds from w ithin outw ards.

3. TIlis is, for example, the matter in de bate as between Bu dd hi st and Brahmanical philoso phers. For the nominalist , the: ultimate forms, ideas , images Of reasons are merely names or the counte rs of thought and valid o nly as means or communicatio n; for the realist (idealist) th e ul timate forms are ' re alities' depe ndent upon and in herent in being, i.e. real in thei r being and nom inal only in the se nse 'o nly logica ll y di stingu ishable '.

things. The wisdom may be more or less , but still one and the same order of wisdom.

As to this orde r, if knowledge is by abstraction, and wisdom about knowledge , it follows that this wisdom, pertaining to things known or knowable , and attained by a process of reasoning or dialectic from experimental data , and neither being n or claiming to be revea led or gnostic doc trin e, in no way transcends thought , but is rather the best kind of thought , or, let us say, the tru est science. It is, indeed, an excellent wisdom , and assumi ng a good will, one of great value to man. 4 But let us not forget that because of its experi men tal , that is to say statistical basis, a nd even s upp osing a n infallible operation of the reason s uc h as may be granted to mathematics, thi s wisdom ca n never es tabli sh absolute ce rtainties , and ca n predict only with veIY great probability of success; th e ' laws' of science, however useful, do nothing more than resume past exper ience. Furthermore, philosophy in the second of th e above senses, or human wisdom about things known or knowab le, mus t be systema ti c, s ince it is required by hypothesis tha t its pe rfec ti on will consist in an account in g for every th ing, in a perfect fining together of a ll parts of the puzzl e to make one logical whole; and the system must be a closed system, one namely limited to the field of time and space, cause and effect, for it is by hypothesis about knowable and determinate things, all of which are presented to the cognitive faculty in the guise of effects, for which ca uses a re so ught. s For example, space being of indefinite and not infinite ex te nt ,6 the w isdom about determinate things can not have any appli ca tion to whatever "rea lity " th ere mayor may not belong to non -s patial, or immaterial, modes, or Similarly, to a non -temporal mode, for if th ere be a 'now\ we ha ve no se nsibl e expe ri ence of any suc h thing, nor can we conceive it in terms of logic. If it we re attempted by means

4. Common sense is an admimblc ching, as is also instinct, but neither of these is the saml.: as reason, nor the same as the wisdom that is not about human affairs, but 's pec ula t ive' , i.l.:. known in the mirror of the pure intellect.

5. When a cause is discovered, thi s is C"Jllcd an explanation. Uut each C"JUSC was once an effec l, and so on indefinitel y, so that o ur pic ture of re-JlilY takes the ronn of a series of C"JUS(.!S extending backward into the past , and o f effects CXp(!clcd in thc future , but we ha ve no empiriC"JI experiencc of a now , nor C"JIl we explain <:mpiricdUy how C"Juses produce effects, the assumption post hoc propter hoc being always an a CI of faith.

6. As is very e legantly dcmonstrJ tcd by S1. Thomas , Sum . 7boo/. I, q .7, a.3, cf.q . 11, a.12, ad.); his ' relatively infinite' being our 'indefinite' (anan/a), in calculable (asaJ/lkbY(I) but not pla ce kss (adaSa) nor wholly timeless (akala).

of the human wisdom to overstep the natural limits of its operation , the most that cou ld b e sai d wou ld be th a t the reference 'indefi nit e magnitude ' (ma th ematica l infinity) presents a certai n analogy to the reference 'essential infinity ' as postulated in relig ion and metaphysics , but nothing could be affirmed o r denied w ith respect to the 'isness' (esse) of this infinite in esse nce.

If the human wisdom, d e pending upon itself alone (,rationalism'), propose s a religion, thi s will be what is called a ' natural re ligion ', having for its d e ity that referent of which the ope ratio n is seen everyw here, and yet is most refractory to ana lysis, viz. 'life' or 'energy ' . And this natural religion will be a pantheism or monis m , post ulatin g a soul (anima, 'animation') of the universe , everywhere known by its effects percept ibl e in the move ments of things; amongst which things any distinction of animate and inanimate will be out of place, inasmuch as animation can be defined rati o nally only as 't hat which is expressed in, or is th e cause of, motion '. Or if not a pantheism, then a polytheism or plurali s m , in which a varie ty of animations ('forces') is postulated as underlying and 'explaining ' a corresponding variety of motions. 7 But nothing can be affirm ed or denied as regards the proposilion that such animation or animations may be merely determinate and contingent aspect o f a ' reality' indeterminate in its elf. Expressed more technically, panth eis m and polytheism are essent ia ll y profane co n ce ptions, and if recogni sa ble in a given religi o us or metaphysical d oc trine , are there interpolations of the reason , not essent ial to the religious or metaphysical doctrine in itself.8

On the ot her hand, the human wisdom, not re lying on itself a lone , may be applied to a partial , viz. analogical, exposition of the re ligious or metaphysi ca l Wisdoms, these being taken as prior to itself. For although the two wisdoms (Philosophy II and Philoso phy I) are different in kind , there ca n be a formal coincidence , and in this sense what is called a

7. Science diffcrs from animism only in this respect, that while science assumes forces in the sense o f blind Wills, animism (which is also a kind of philosophy) personifies these forces and endows them with a free will,

8. Pantheism is more commonly predicatcd of a given doctrine merely by imputation, either with unconsciously dishonest intention o r by customary usage uncritically perpetuated. In every case the observer presumed to be impartial should co nsid e r the doctrine itself, and not what is sa id of it by hostile critics. On the general impropricty of the term pant he ism ' in connection with the Vedanta , see Lacombc , Avant-propos to Rene Grousset , Les Philosophies Illdfelllles , p. x iv, note 1, and Whitby, Preface to Rene Guenon , Mml and his Becomfl/g a ccording 10 the Vediillla , 19-15 , p ix.

' reconciliation of science and religion '. Each is then dependent on the ot her, ahhough in different ways; the sciences depending on re vea led truth for their formal correction, and revealed truth re lying upon the sciences for its demonstra tion by analogy , ' not as though it stood in need of them , but only to make its leaching clearer'.

In ei th er case, th e final end of human wisdom is a good or happiness that sha ll a cc rue e ith er to the philosopher himself, or to his neighbours, or to humanity at large, but necessarily in terms of material

Th e kind of good env isaged mayor m ay not be a moral good. 9 For example, if we ass ume a good will, i.e. a natura l sense of justice, th e ra l re li g ion will be expressed in elhics in a sanction of such laws of du c t as mos t conduce to the common good, and he may be admired who sac rifi ces even life for the sake of this. In aesthetic (a rt being circa IacUbilia) the natural religion , given a good will, will justify the manufacture of s uch goods as are apt for human well-being, whether as physica l necess iti es or as so urces of sensible pleasure. All this belongs to ' humanis m ' and is very far from despicab le. But in case th ere is not a good will, th e natural religion may equally be employed to ju s tify the proposition ' might is right ' or 'de vil lake the hindmost ', and in manufa ct ure th e production of goods either by methods which are injurious to the co mm o n good, or which in themselves are immediately adapted to e nds injurious to th e co mmon good; as in the cases of c hild -labour and th e manufa c tu re of poison gas. Revealed truth, on the contrary, demands a good wi ll a priori, adding that the aid of the rational philosophy, as science or art, is required in order th at the good wi ll may be made effective. 10

There is then another kind of Philosoph y I, viz. that to whi c h we have alluded as ' revealed truth', which though it covers the whole ground of Philosophy II, does so in another way , while beyond this it treats co nfidently of ' realities ' wh ich may indeed be immanent in time and s pace tissue , and are not wholly incapable of rational demon s tration , but are nevertheless sa id to be tran sce ndent with re spec t to thi s tissue, i.e . by no mean s wholly conta in e d within it nor given b y it, nor wholly amenable to demonstrat io n The "Firs t Philosoph y," for e xample , affinns th e actuality o f a ' n ow' indepe ndent of the flux of time ; while e xperience is

9. St. '!llomas, Sum. Tbeol. l , q.l, a.6, ad.2. 10 Pruden ce is defined as recJa ratioagibilium, art as r ecta ralio!acubilfllm.

on ly of a past and future, Aga in, the pro cedure of the First Ph il osophy is no longer in the first p lace ded uctive and seco nd ari ly ind u ctive , but inductive from firs t to last , its logic procee ding invariably from the t ranscendental to th e universa l, and thence as before to the pa rticu lar. T hi s First Philoso phy , indeed , taking for granted the p rincip le 'as above, so below' and vice-versa,1\ is ab le to find in every microcos mi c fact the trac e o r sy mb o l of a macrocos mic actuality, and according ly resorts to ' prooF by analogy; but this apparently deductive procedure is here emp loyed by way of demonstrat ion, and not by w a y of proof, wh e re log ica l proof is o u t o f the questio n , and it s p lace is taken e ither b y faith (Augustine's cre d o tit inlelliga m) o r by th e evidence of imm e diat e e xperience (a lattkika-pratyakea },12

Our fir s t p ro ble m in connection wit h th e highest wisdom, co ns idered as a do c trin e known by revelation (w hether th rough ear or sy mbolic transmission), consistent but un systema tic, and intelligibl e in itself a lthough it treats in part of unintellig ible things, is to distinguis h withou t dividi n g re li gion from metaphy s ics , Philosophy II from Ph iloso p hy l. This is a d is t inc ti o n w ithout a d iffe re nce, li ke t h at of attribute f rom ess ence, and ye t a di s tincti o n of fund a me ntal importan ce if we are to grasp the true meaning of any given s pi ritual ac£.

We proceed therefore first to e mpha s ize the di st in c tion s that can be drawn as be twee n relig ion and me taphysic s with re s p ec t to a wisdom that is o ne in itse lf a nd in any case p rimarily directed Lo immaterial , or ralionally speaking, ' unrea l ' things .'3 Broad ly speaking, th e di s tinclion is th a t of Christianity from Gnost icism , SunnT from Sh i'a do c trine, Ra.manuja from Sankaracatya, of t he wi ll from the intellect , participati o n ( bhakti)

11. E.g Allareya Brdbmallo , vi ii 2.

12 'Me ta ph ysics can d isp ute with one who de ni es its prin ciples, if only the oppone nt will make some co ncession; but if he concede nOlhing , it ca n ha ve no d ispute with h im .... lf ou r oppo nent belie ves nothing o f d iv ine revel ati on, th e re is no longer any means of proving the articles of faith by reasoni ng ' Sl. Thomas , Sum 71)00/. I, q .l , a.8c.) ; and Ibid. q.46 , a.2 : 'T he articles of faith can no t be proved demonstratively'. Similarly in India it is repeatedly and explici tly asserted that tb e truth () rVedic d oct rine cannot be demonstrJted but only e xperi enced. ' By what should one know the Knower of knowing' (Brhaddrall.yaka Up. iv .5. 15)

13. 'lhroughout the present essay it is assumed that sens ibility means the perception of thi ngs by the senses, not a cogn ili on bu t a reaction; reason , the activity o f the intelligen ce w ith respect [0 th e causal series of acci de nts , so me tim es called the c hain o f fate, or in othe r words an intelligen ce wit h respec t to things phenomenally know n in time a nd space and called 'm alerial '; and int e ll ec l, t he habit o f first principles.

from gnosis (jrldna), or knowledge-of (avidyii) from knowledge-as (v idyii). As regards the Way, th e distinction is one o f co nsecration from initiation l and of passive from active integration; and as regards the End, of assimilation (tadakcirata) from identification (tadbhava). Religion requires of its adherents to be perfected; metaphys ics that they realise their ow n perfection that ha s nev er been infringed (eve n Satan is still virtually Lu cife r, being fallen in grace and not in nature). Sin, from the stand p o int of religion, is moral, from that of metaphysics, intellectual (mortal sin in m e taphysics being convic tion o r assertion of independent self-subsistence, as in Satan's case, or e nvy of the spiritual anainments of others, as in Indra 's).

Religion, in general , proceeds from the being in act (kiiryiiv asthci) of the First Principle, without regard to its being in potentiality (kiira/pvas tha) ," a while metaphysics treats of the Sup reme Identity as an indi ssevera ble unity of potentiality and act , darkness and light , holding that th ese can also and must also be considered apart when we attempt to understand their operation in identity in II or Him. And so re ligion assumes an aspect of duality, IS viz. when it po s tulates 'primary maller', ' potentiality ' or 'non- being ' far removed from the actuality of God, and does not take account of the principal presence of this 'primary matter' in , or rather 'o r the First, as it s ' nature ']6

Religions may and must be many , each being an ' arrangement of God ',

l-i Thus Chil/u/ogya up. vi.2 l asserts a religious point of view, as distinct from the metaphysical point of view that prevails in the Upanishads generally, e .g Tailtiriya Up. ii.7. Christian philosopby maintains that God is 'wbolly in act'. Metaphysics concurs in the definition of perfection as a realisation of all the possibiHties of being, but would rather say of God tbat 'lie does not proceed from pot e ntiality to act' [han that He is without potentiality.

15. Duality, as of 'spirit and maner ', ',Jet and potentiality', ' form and substance', 'good ilnd ev il '. This is avoided in Christian ity metilphysically, when it is s hown th at evil is not a self-subsistent natur e, but merely a privatio n, and can be known to Ihe Firs t [ntdlect only as a goodness or perfection ill potentia. [I is avoid<."(] in Sufi metaphy sic by conSidering good and evil as merely reflections in time and space of I lis essential attributes of Mercy and Majesty.

16. 'Maner' here must not be confused with the 'solid matter' of everyday parlance; in Chr isti;m philosophy, 'primary matter' is precisely that 'nothing' with respect to which it is said ex IlihiloJil. Such 'm,lller' is sa id to be ' insatiable for form', and the same is implied when in theJaimtntya Up. BrahmalJa, i.56 , it is said that 'In the beginning, the woman (; Urvas!, Aps3ras) went 3boul in the flood see king a master' (tcchalltl salile palim).

and sty list ica ll y differen tiat ed, inasmu c h as the thing known ca n o nly be in the knower according to th e mod e of the know e r, an d he n ce as we say in India , ' He takes the forms that are im ag in e d by Hi s worsh ippers', or as Eckhart exp resses it , ' I am th e ca use that God is GOd .'17 And this is why religious belie fs, as mu ch as t hey have united me n , have a lso v ided me n agains t eac h othe r, as Chris tian or heath en, o rth odox O f heretica1. 18 So that if we are to consider wha t may be th e m ost urg e nt practical prob le m to be resol ve d by the philoso pher, we ca n o nly a nswe r th at this is to be rec ognised in a co ntrol and rev isi o n o f t h e p rin c iple s of comparative re li g ion, the tru e e nd of w hi c h scie n ce, judged by th e best wisdom (a nd judg ment is th e prope r fun ctio n of applied wi sdo m), sho uld be to demo ns lnil e t he common metap hys ical ba s is of a ll re li gio n s a nd th a t di verse cu lt u res a re fundamen ta lly re la ted to one another as being th e d ia lec ts of a co mmon spi rit u a l a nd intellectual language; for whoever recognises thi s, will no lo nger wish to ass e rt th at 'My re li g io n is best \ but o nl y th at jtis the 'best fo r me '.1 9 In other words , th e purpose of religiou s co nt roversy s hould be, n o1 to 'co nv e rt ' th e oppon e nt , but to persuade him that his religion is esse nlially the sa me as o ur ow n . To c ite

17 Th e physical analogy is represented in the asse rt ion of th e anthrop o logist that 'God is man -made '; a proposition perfectl y va lid wi th in the con d it ions of its own level o f refe rence.

18. That is main ly, of course, in Europe fr o m the thirteenth cen tu ry o nw ard In I lindui sm, a man is rcgardcd a s a tr ue teacher w ho gives to any individual a bcner access to that individual's own sc ripture s; fo r 't he pat h that men take from every side is Mine ' (Bhag a vad Gfld, iv. II ) Clement of Ale xandria allo w s that 'There was a lw ays a natural manifes tati o n of the One Almight y God am ongs t a ll right -thi nkin g men' (Misc., v); Eckhart says a lm os t in the wo rd s of t he Bbagavad Gfld cited ab ove, ' In whatever way yo u find God best , that way pu rsue; Dante will not exclude a ll thc pagan p hil osophe rs from He aven; in th e Grail tradition, Malory s ay s that 'Merly n made the round table in tokeny ng of the roun d e nc s of the world fo r by the round table is th e world sygni fyed by ryghte. For a ll the world crysten an d he th en re pay ren voto the roun d ta bl e' (Mort d 'Arthll r, xiv.2); th ese ma y be contrasted with th e pos it ion taken in the Song of Holand where , when Saragossa h as bee n taken, 'A thousand Franks ente r the synagogues and mosques , whose every wall with mallet and a xe they shatter. the heathen folk are driven in crowds to the baptismal fonl, to take Christ's yoke up on them' .

19. The 'bes t for me ' need not be 't ru est abso lut e ly ' a s judged by absolute metaphysical s tanda rd s. Nevertheless, the metaphysician will not s ug gest that th e followe r of a 'second best ' religion sh ould aban d on it for anot h er (cf. Bbagavad Gild, iii.26 , lla buddhibbedamjallayed ajmillam) , b ut rather that he goJarth er III where he already is , and thu s veri fy as ·true' his own images, nOI by those of a nother pattern, b ut rat her by the prior for m that is common to bo th .

a case in point , it is not long s in ce we received a communication from a Catholic friend in which he said ' I've been ashamed for years at the superficiality and c heapness of my attempt to state a diffe rence between Chr ist ians and Hindus ' . It is noteworthy that a pronounce ment such as this will assured ly strik e a majority of European readers wit h a sense of horror. We recognize in fact that religious controversy has still generally in view to convince the opponent of error rather than of correctness in our eyes; a nd one even detects in modern propagandist writ ing an undertone of fear, as th ough it would be a disaster that might upset o ur own faith, were we to discover essential truth in th e opponen t; a fear which is occasioned by the very fact that with increasing knowledge and und erstanding, it is becoming more and more d ifficult to estab li sh fundamental differences as between one religion and another. It is one of the functions of the First Philosophy to dissipate such fears. Nor is there any other ground whatever upon which all men can be in absolute agreement, excepting that of metaphysics , which we assert is the basis and the norm of all religious formulations. Once such a common ground is recognised, it becomes a simple matter to agree to disagree in matter of details, for it will be seen that the various dogmatic formu lations are no more than paraphrases of one and the same p rin c ipl e. 20

Few w ill deny that a t th e present day Western civilisation is fa ced with the imminent possibilily of total functional failure nor that at the same lime thi s civilisation has long acted and still cont inu es to act as a powerful agent of disorder and oppression throughout th e rest of th e world. We dare say that both of these conditions are referable in the la st analysis to that impot e nc e and arrogance which have found a perfect exp ression in th e dict.um 'East is East and West is West, and never th e twain s hall meet ', a proposition to which only the most abysmal ignorance and deepest discou ragement could have given rise. On the o th er hand, we recognize that the only possible ground upon which an effective entente of East and West can be accomplished is that of the purely intellectual wisdom that is one and the same at all times and for a ll men , and is independent of all environmen tal idiosyncrasy.21

20. ' Diverse d ogma tic formulations' , i,c. dbarma parydya as thi s expression is em plo ye d in the Saddbarma PllI!l1arlka 21. In this context , the reader is recommended to Rene Guenon, L 'Orlent et I'Occfdell/, 1932.

We had intended to dis c u ss at g reater le ngth th e differe ntia of relig io n and metap hysics, but sha ll rather conclu de the presen t sect io n by an as ser ti o n o f th e ir ultimate identity . Bo th , co n sid ered as Ways, or praxis, are means of accomplishi ng the re c tifi ca tion , regenerati on and reintegration o f th e aber ran t and fragmented individual co nsciousness , both conceive of ma n 's last e nd (puru¥irtha) as co ns is tin g in a rea li sa tion by the individual of a ll the possibilities inh e ren t in h is own being, or may go farther, a nd see in a rea lisatio n o f a ll th e possibi lit ies of b e ing in any mod e and al so in p oss ibiliti es of non-b e ing, a fin al goal. For th e Ne oPlatoni sts and Augustine, and agai n fo r Erige na , Eckhart an d Dante , and for s uc h as Rlimi , Ibn 'Arabi , Sal)karacarya, a nd m a n y o th e rs in ASia , religious and inte llec tu al experience ar e too close ly interwoven eve r to be w ho ll y d ivided;" w ho fo r exa mpl e wo uld ha ve s uspected th a t the words ' How ca n That, w hi c h th e Compre he nding call th e Eye o f a ll things, the Intellect o f intellects, the Ligh t of lights, and numin o us Omnip resence , be ot he r than man 's las t e nd ', an d '11lOU has b ee n touc hed and taken! lo ng ha s Thou dwelt apart from me, but n ow that I have found T hee, I s hall never let Th ee go ' , a re taken, not from a 't he istic ' so ur ce, but from pure ly Vedan ti c hym n s addressed to the Essence (a lm an) and to th e "impersona l" Brahman?!

ll. How Divers Wisdoms Have Considered Immortality

Let us n ow co ns ider the app li ca ti on o f different kinds of w is dom to a parti cu lar p ro bl e m of general s ign ifi ca nce . Th e pertin e n ce of p h ilosophy to th e prob le m of immorta li ty is ev ident , ina s mu c h as w isdom is primarily co ncerned with imm a teria l thi ngs , and it is ev id ent t ha t ma teri a l things are not immortal as s u c h (in esse per se), nor eve n from one moment to anothe r, bu t are co n ti nually in flux , and thi s is undeniable , rega rdl ess of w he the r there may o r may not be in s uc h perpetually b ecomi ng thin gs so me immortal principle. Or to regard th e ma He r from

22. Cf. Erigena, De di u. nat urae, i, 66, Ambo slq utdem ex Ima JOllie, dlvi ll a s etli ce l saptel1lta , IIltmare dubiurn 110 11 est , and Bbagavad Gfta, vA -5, 'i t is the c hil dren of this world , and not th e men of le arning wh o think o f gnosis and works as d ifferent ... He sees in truth who sees that gnosis and works are one' (fo r Siirilkhya a nd Yoga as meaning gnosis and works respectively, sec ibid, iii.3). 111at th e Way o f Gnosis a nd the Way of Participation have o ne and the sa me e nd becomes ev ide n t when we cons id e r that love and know ledge can on ly be conce ived of as perfected in a n ide ntit y of lover and be loved, kno we r a nd kn ow n

another ang le , we may say that whatever, if anything , there may be immorta l in phenomenal things must have been so since time began, for to speak of an immortal principle as having become mortal is th e same thing as to say it was always mortal.

It needs no argument to demonstrate that human wisdom, rationalism, our Philosophy II, will understand by 'immortality', not an everlas ting life on earth, but an after-death persistence of individual consciousness and memory and character, such as in our experience survives from day to day across the nightly intervals of death-like sleep. Rationa l wisdom then will take up e ither one o f two positions. It may in th e first place argue th at we hav e no experie nce o f nor can conceive of the functioning of co nsc io u sness apart from the actual physical bases on which the fun ction ing seems to rest, if indeed consciousness be in itself anything whatever more than a function of matter in motion, that is to say of physical existence; and will not therefore conceive the possibility of any other than an immortality in history , viz. in the memories of other mortal bei n gs. In this sense there can also be postulated the possibility of a kind of resurrection , as when memory is refreshed by the discovery of documentary proofs of the existence of some individual or people whose very names had been forgotten , it may be for millennia. Or human wisdom may maintain, rightly or wrongly, that ev id ences have been found of the 's urvival of personality', viz. in communications from the 'o ther world ', of such sor t as to prove either by reference to facts unknown [Q the observer, but which a re afteIWards verified, or by 'manifestations' of one sort or anOlher, a co ntinuity of memory and persistence of individual cha rac ter in th e deceased who is assume d to be in comm unication with the observer. If it is then attempted to rationalise th e evidence thus accepted, it is argued that there may be kinds of matter other and subtle r than those perceptible to our present physical senses, and that these other modalities of matter may very well serve as the suppositum of consciousness functioning on other planes of being.

It will be readily seen th a t no spiritual or intellectual dist in ction can be drawn between the two rationalistic interpretations, the only differe nce between th em being as regards the amount or kind of time in which the continuity of individual character and consc iousness ca n be maintained in a dim e nsioned space and on a material basis , theories of ;fourth dimensions' or of 's ubtle matter' changing nothing in principle Both of

the rationalistic interpretations are re jected in toto, equally by religion and metaphysics.

Not that the possibility of an indefinite perdurance of individual co nsciousness upon indefinit ely num erous or various platforms of being and in va ri ous tempora l modes is by any means denied in religion or in metaphysics (it being rather assum e d th a t individual consc iousness eve n now functions on other levels than those of our present ter restria l experience),Z 3 but that a persistenc e in such modes of being is not, strictly speaking, an immortality, this being taken to mean an immutability of be ing without deve lopment or c hange and wholly uneventful; while that which is thu s presumed to subs ist apart from contingency , viz , the soul, form or noumenal principl e (nama) of the individual , by which it is what it is, must be distinguished alike from the subtle and the gross bodies and sthtiiasan-ra) which are equally phenomenal (nipa), as being wholly intellectual and immaterial."

For example, 'th ings belonging to th e s tat e of glory are not under the sun' (St. Thomas, Sum. Tbeol., iii., Sup. , q.l, a.I), i.e . not in any mode of time or space; rather, ' it is through the midst of the Sun that o ne esca p es altogether' (alimucya te) , Oaiminfya Up. Brahmana, i.3. ), where the sun is the 'gateway o f th e worlds ' Ooka-dvara), (Chand. Up. , viii.6.6) , Eckhart 's 'gate through which all things return perfectly free to th eir s upreme felic ity (piinulnanda). . .free as the Godhead in its non- ex is tence ' (asal), the ' Door' of J o hn X, ' Heaven's-gate that Agni opens' (sva.-gasya lokasya dvaram aVl"not), (Aitareya Brahmana, iii. 42).zS It is true that here again we shall inevitably meet with a certain and by no means negligibl e distinction of the rel igious from the metaphysical fo rmulation. The religious concept of supreme felicity culminates as we have already seen in the assimilation of the soul to Deity in act; the sou l's own act being one of adoration rath e r than o f uni o n. Likew ise, and without

23. ' Even we ourselves as mentally tasting so mething eternal, are not in this world ' : St. Augustin e , De Trin. iv.20.

21t. 111crefore in c apable of 'proof', whether th e phenomena adduced be 'scientific' Of 'spiritual isti c'.

25. While it is shown here how Ihe formulation s of different religion s may express the same conceptions in almost ver bal agreement, it must not be supposed that we therefo re advocate any kind of e cclecticis m , or conce ive the possibility o f a new religion compounded of all exis ting religions. Ec clecticism in religion results o nly in confusion and caricature , of which a good example can be cited in '·!1l cosophy'.

in co n s iste n cy, s in ce it is assumed that the individual so ul rema ins numerically dis tinct a li ke from God and from ot he r substances, religion offers to mortal c onsc iousness the conso latory promise of finding there in Heaven, not on ly God , but those whom illoved on earth , an d may remember and recognize.

Nor will metaphys ics deny even in a ' Heaven ', on th e farth e r s ide of time , there may be , a t lea st until the 'Last Judgment ' , a know le dg e-of (av idya) rath e r t h an a knowledge-as (vidyii), though it will not think of him whose mod ality is s till in know ledge-o f as who ll y Comprehend ing (vidvcill) n or as abso lut e ly Enlarged (alimukta). Metaphysics wi ll a llo w, and he re in formal agreeme nt with re ligion , that ther e may o r even must be states of b e ing by no means wholly in time , nor yet in e te rnity (the ti meless now) , but aev iterna l, 'aeviternity ' ( Vedi c amrtatva) being defined as a mean between etern ity and time; 26 the Angels , fo r example, as conscio us int e ll ect u a l s ub s tan ces, partaking of e ternity as 10 their immutabl e nature and un derstanding , but o f time as regard s their acci d e nt a l aware ness of before and after, t he changeab ility of thei r affections (lia bilit y to fall from grace , etc.) and inasmuch as the angel ic independence of local moti o n (because of which Angels are represen te d as winged , and spo ke n of as ' birds') ," whereby they can be anywhere, is other than the immanence of th e Firs t, which imp lies an equal presence everyw he re. Nor is it denied by religion that 'Certain men eve n in thi s sta te of life are

26. St. 'Ih omas, Sum 7b eo l i, q.IO , a.5 He says 'states of being ' in the plural delib e rately (cf I{Cnt! Gue non, Les Elals mulliples de L 'Etre, 1932) , although fo r purposes o f ge nerdlization it ha s been necessary to speak of on ly thr ee, viz. the human, angelic and div ine , that is to those which the liter a l , metaphori c al and ana logic al und e rstandi ng s p e rtain respectively With the Christian 'aevitc rnity ', Indian amrlalva , and the traditional con ce pt of 'humanity' and Pe rfec t Man (e g Islamic insall III-ka lil /I), cf jung , M od em Man Itl Search oj a SOlil, p . 215: ' If it were permissible to perso nify tb e un co nscio us, we mi g ht call it a co ll ec ti ve human being combining the chara cteri stics o f both sexes, transcending yout h and age, binh and death , and from ha ving a t its comman d a hu man exper ie nc e o f o ne or two million years, almo st imm ortal. If suc h a being ex isted, he would be exal ted above a ll temporal change he would have li ve d cou ntk-ss tim es over the liCe of the ind iVidua l, o r th e family , tri be and pe ople, and he wou ld possess Ihe li ving se nse of rhythm of growth , flowering and d ecay. It wo u ld be pos iti vely grotesque of us to ca ll this immense system of the expe rien ce of th e unco nscious psyc he an illusion'. Here it may be noted that 'u nco nscio us' prese nts an analogy with ' Deep -Sleep ' (susllp li • samtidbi = e.xcessus or rap/lts)i on th e other hand , the usc of lh e word 'colle ctive' be trays a purely SCientific, and no t a meta phys ical conce ption.

greater th an certa in angels, not ac tu a ll y, but virt ually ' (St. Thomas, Sum. Theol., i, q .l1 7, a.2, ad.3), whence it nat urally follo ws th at 'Some men are taken up into the high es t angelic o rd ers' (G regoT)', Hom. in Ev. xxxiv), th us p artaki ng of an aev it erna l being ; a ll of w hi c h corresponds to what is implied by the familiar Hindu expressio n devo bbl1tva, equ iva len t to 'dead and go ne to Heaven '. Preci se ly this pOint of v iew is more technically expressed in the critica l text, BrbadararJyaka up. , iii.2.12 , 'W h en a man d ies, w h at does not forsake (na jabat;) him is hi s 'so ul' (nama)," the sou l is w ith ou t end (ananta, 'aev itemal'), w ithout end is what th e Seve ral Ange ls are, so th e n h e wins th e world everlas ti ng' (an a n tam lokam). Cf, Rilini (xii in Nic holson's Sbams-i-Tabr'-z), 'Eve ry shape yo u see has its archetype in th e p lace less world, and if th e s hape perished , no matter, si nce its o ri gi nal is everias Li ng ' (Idmkan-asl)j and Sl. Thomas, Sum. Theol., ji - i, q.67, 3.2c , 'as regards t he in te lli gible species, wh ich a re in the possible inte ll ect, the intellectual virtues remain ', v iz. whe n the b ody is corrupted. TI,is was also ex p o u nded by Philo, for whom ' Le lieu de ce tte vie immo rt e lle es t Ie monde inle lli g ib le',29 that is to say th at the same as the ' In te ll ect u a l Realm ' of PIOli ntl s, passim. If we n ow co nsider the impli ca tions of these d icta in con nection w ith B6hme 's a nswer to the sc holar who enqu ires, 'Wither gaeth the so ul when the body dieth", viz. (h at 'There is no necessity for it togo anywither ... For ... whichsoeve r of t he two (that is eithe r heaven o r hell) is manifes ted in it (now), in tha t the soul standeth (t h en) th e judgment is, in deed, imm edia tely at the d eparture of the body ','" and in th e light o f Brbadaranyaka Up., iv.4.5-

6, 'As is his will 5 0 is hi s lot' (y at kcilllam Iat samp adya te) and ' He whose mind is attached (to mundane things) re turn s again to this

27. 'Intellec t is the swiftest of birds ' (manah palayalStl altab, Rg Veda, vi.9.5). It is as birds that the Angels 'ce lebrate in th e Tree of Life their s ha re of 3eviterni ty ' (yatra supamd amartasya bbdgam abhf svaran ti, ibid i.164.21). The traditional expression 'language o f bird ' (w h ich survives in ' a little bird told me ') refers to angelic communicatio ns.

28. Nama is the correlative of nipa, being the noumenal or intelligible part and efficient "IUSC ofthc integration Ilama-nipa , viz. the individual as he is in him self; and therefore to be rend ered not by 'name' (for this is not a nominalist but a realist doctrine), but by 'idea', 'archetype', 'form' or 'soul' (as when it is said 't he soul is the form of the body'); a/mall on the othe r hand being 'essence' rath er than 'sou l' (essentia, that by which a substance has esse in whatever mode)

29. Brehier, Les Idees pbllosophiques e/ religlellses de Pbi/oll d 'lIlexandrle , 1925 , p .240.

30. Boehme, On Heaven and Hell (in Everyman 's Library, volume cntitled Signa/11m Remm, CIC .).

world but he whose desire is the Essence (iilman), his life (pralJiih) does no t leave him , but he goes as Brahm an unto Brahman ', it will be apparent that a lth ough the sou l or intellect (Ved ic manas) is immortal by n ature (i.e. an indiv idu al potentiality that cannO l be annihilated , w hatever ils 'fa te '), nevertheless the actual 'fate ' of an indi vidual conscio usness, whet her it be d esti ned to be 'saved ' or ' liberated' (devayiina), or to enter into lime aga in (pilryiina), or to be ' lost' (nin1ha), depends upon itself. And therefo re we are to ld to 'Lay up tr easure in Heaven, where neither moth nor rust corrupt'; for evidently, if th e conscious life of th e in divi du al be eve n now established intell ec tu ally (o r in relig iou s phra seo logy, 's piri tually'), a nd the int e ll ect ua l or sp iritual world be ae viternal (as follows from the consideration tha t ideas have neither place nor date), this consc ious Ijfe ca nnot be infringed by the death of th e body , wh ich changes no thing in this respecl. Or if th e consciousness be st ill attached to and involved in ends (w het her good or ev il ) such as ca n only be accomplished in time and space, but have not yet been accomp li shed when th e body dies, then evidentl y such a consciousness w ill find its way back into those co ndition s, viz. of space and time, in which th e desired ends can be accomplishe dY Or finally , if conscious life has been led altogether in the nesh , it must be th ought of as cu t off w hen its so le support is destroyed; that is , it must be th ought of as ' ba cks li ding' into a mere potentia lit y or hell.

Space w ill not permit us to discuss th e theol)' of 'reincarnation ' at any lengt h. The fun damenta ls are give n in the Rg. Veda, where it i s pr imar il y a matter of recurring manifes tati on, in thi s sense for examp le, Mi tra Jayate punah (x.8;. 19 ) an d U:;as ispunahpunarjiiyam iina (i.92.10) An indivi dual app li cat ion in the spiri t of 'Thy will be done ' is found in v.46. 1, 'As a comprehend ing (v ic/viin) horse [ yoke myself unto the pole (of th e chariot of the year) ... seek ing neit her a release nor to come back again (na asydh vimucam. na dvr lt am punah), may He (Agni) as Compre hende r (v ic/van) and ou r Waywise Guide lead liS aright'. The indi vidua l, indeed, 'is born according to th e measure of his understanding ' (Ailareya Aranyaka, ii.3.2) , and just as 'th e wo rl d itse lf is pregnant with th e causes of unborn things' (Augusti ne , De Trin., iii. 9), so is th e individual pregna nt with the acciden ts that mu st befall him ; as St. Tho31. It is the good purpose, for example, which operat es in the return of a Bodhisattva, who is otherwise rit for Nirvana. SACRED WEB 1

mas expresses it l 'fate is in the created causes themselves l (Su.m ?heal, i, q .l16, 2), or Plo tinus, 't h e law is g iven in the entities upon whom it falls ... it prevails because it is within them ... and sets up in them a painful longing to enter the realm to wh ich they are bidden from within' (Enneads , iv.3.15) ; and similarly Ibn ' Arabi, who says that wh il e being is from God, modality is not directly from Him , 'for He only wills what they have it in them to become ' (Nicholson, Studies inlslam-ic Mysticism, 1921, p.151). On the other hand , it may be taken as certain that the Buddhist and still more the modern Theosophical interpretations of ca usality (karma) or fate (adr$.!a )1 wh ich assert the necess it y of a return (except for one who is mukta or has ' reached' nirodna) to the very same conditions that have been left behind at deat h , involve a metaphysical antinomy ; 'Yo u would not step twice into the same wa ters, for other waters are ever flowing in upon you' (Heracleitus). What is rea ll y contemplated in Vedic and other traditional doctrines is the necess ity of a recurrent manifestation in aeon after aeon, though not again within one and the same tempo ral cycle, 3l of all those individua l potentialities or forces in which the desire to 'pro long their line' is still effective; every Patriarch (pitr) being, like Prajiipati hi mse lf,praja-klimya, and th erefore w illingl y committed to the ' Patriarchal Way' (pitryana).

What is th e n from the standpo in t of metaphysics the who le course of an individual potentiality , from the ' time ' that it first awakens in the primordial ocean of universal possibility until the 'time' it reaches the last harbour' It is a return into the source and well-spring of life, from which life originates, and thus a passage from o ne 'drown ing ' to another; but w ith a dist inction, valid from th e sta ndp o int of the individual in himself so long as he is a Wayfarer and not a Compre h ender, for, seen as a process , it is a passage from a merely possib le perfection throu gh actua l imperfection to an actual perfectio n , from potentiality to act, from s lumber (abodbya) to a full awakening (sambodbi). Ignoring now the Patriarchal Way as being a 'round about' course, and considering on ly the s trai g ht Angelic Way (devayana), with which the Rg. Veda is primaril y

32. In BhagaIJ(ld Gilil, viAl, for example, SdsafJIfsamii is very far from implying 'fo rthwith' .

We doubt very much whether any Upani sbad passage could be c ited as implying a re-embodiment otherwise (han at the dawn of a new cycle, and then o nly as the growth o f a seed sow n in the previ ous aeon, or as a tendency with which the new age ca n be said to be pregnant.

and the individual 1nLUnuk$u specifically concerned, we may say that thi s Way is one at first of a dimi nishing and aftelWards of an in creas ing reali sa tion of all the possi bilities intrinsic to the fac t of being in a given mod e (t he human, for examp le) , and ultimatel y lea ds to th e rea li sa tion of all th e possibilities of bei ng in an y o r every mode, and ove r and beyond thi s of th ose of being not in any mod e whatever. We ca nn ot do more t han a ll ude here to the p art that is tak en by what is call ed ' initiation ' in thi s co nn ec ti on j on ly saying that the inten ti on of initiati on is to cO llliTIuni cate from one to anot he r a spi rit ual or rath er intell ec tual impulse that has bee n continu ously tran smitted in guru-parampara-krama from th e b eg inning a nd is ultim a te ly o f non-human origin , a nd whe reby th e co ntr act e d and di s integrated indi vi dual is awakened to th e poss ibility of a re integration (sa mskarana)," and th at metaphysical rit es, o r ' mysteries ' (w hich are in imitation of the means emp loyed by the Fath er to accomp li sh Hi s ow n reintegration, the necess ity for w hic h is occasioned by th e in cont in ence of the creat ive act) , are , like the ana logous traditional sc riptures, int ended to provi de the individu al with th e necessary preparatory educat ion in and means of intellect ual operat ion; but th e 'Great Work ', th at of accomplishing th e reunion of essence w it h Essence , mu st b e d o ne him se lf wi th in himself.

We hav e so far fo ll owed the Wayfarer 'S course by th e Ang e li c Way to the s piritual or int e ll ec tual rea lm ; and here , from the re ligio us point of view , li es his immorta lity, for indeed 'the du ration of aevitern ity is in finit e' (St. Thomas , Sum 7b ea l., i, q .lO, a.5, ad.4 .) But it w ill b e maintained in metaphy sics, or eve n in a religion or by an in divi du al mystic such as Eck har t (in so fa r as th e religiou s exper ience is both devotional and intelle ctual in the de epes t se nse of both wo rd s) that an aeviterna l stati on (pada), such as is impli ed in th e concept of bein g in a heave n, is no t the e nd , nor by a ny means a full return (n ivrt tl) , but only a res ting pl ace (viSrama)" And likewise, it will b e maintained that to co nce ive of the intellectua l realm itse lf as a p lace o f mem ories would be a deroga-

33. S(.'C Aflare)'a Am1/Y(lka , ii i.2.6; Ailareya BraiJmana , vi.27; Satapalba Brtihmana , vii.!.2. ! and passim. cr. also Guenon , 'L' l nitiation ct les Meti ers', Le Voi le d '/ sis, No. 172, 1934.

34. Saddbarllla PUfldarika, v.74. Sim ilarl y, the true end of the ritual acts and appoi nt ed sacrifi ces of the Ve da is not the atr ainme nt of a tcmpor.!.ry heaven, bu t an awakening of a des ire to know the Essence ( iiJmall) (SiddbdnlamkICivaIf, xxxiii, wit h Ven is' note 'Paradi se is as it wer e but th e half- way house ').

tion, for as Plotinus says of its natives, 'if they neith er seek nor doubt , and n ever learn, nothing being at any time absent from their knowledge ... what reasonings, what processes of rational investigation , can take place them' In other words, they have seen God and they do not recollect? Ah , no ... suc h reminiscen ce is only for sou ls that have forgotten ' (Enneads , ivA.6); " and still more must we say re specting mundane memories (vci.sana) that ' when the soul's act is directed to another order, it must uuerly reject the memory of such things, over and done with now ' (ibid, iv.4.4.8).

The metaphys ic al concept of Perfection, inde ed, envisages a s tate of being that is, not inhuman since it is maintained that s uch a state is always and everywhere accessible to whoeve r will press inwards to the centra l point of consciousness and being on any ground or p lane of being , nor ' heartless ' unless we mean by ' heart ' the seat of sou lfuln ess and sentimenta lit y; but assu redly non-human. For examp le , in Chdndogya Up . v .lO .2 it is precise ly as amiinava punlSa, ' n on- human person', that the Son and aevit erna l avatdra, Agni,36 is sa id to lead onward the Comprehe nding one who h as found his way through the Supernal Sun to the farther side of the worlds, and this is the ' pathway of the Angels ' (devayiina) as contras ted with that o f the Patriarchs (pilryiina) w hi ch does not lead beyond the Sun but to re-embodiment in a human mode of being. And it is forese e n that this devaydna must lead , w hethe r sooner or later, to what is expressed in doctrinal mysticism as a 'final death of the soul', or 'drowni ng ', th e Sufi al:fanii' an al:fanii; by wh ich is implied a passage beyond eve n conscious ness in deity as act, to a Supreme (Skl. para , pariitpara) beyond a ll trace of even an exemp lary multiplicity, nor in any way ' intelligib le'. And there , so far that is from any possib le ' re miniscence ' of any that ha ve been known or loved in otherness, in the wo rd s of Eckhart , 'No one will ask me whence I came

35. Similarly in Dante, ParadiSO, xxix , 79-81, 'there sight is never intercepted by any new perception, and so there is no need of m e mory, for thought has not been cleft. '

36. Agni(-PrJjapati), who in the Vedas is th e llerdsman of the Spheres (gopd bbulJ(masya), Waywise Leader (vldvall pa/bab purac/a), Messenger and I-Jerald (di Na, aralt) , and stands as the Pillar of Life at the Parting of the Ways (dyor ba skambba pa/bam vlsa r ge, Rg Veda, x.5.6) in cosmic cruc ifi xion slhllah, Ihld.) , corresponding to the 'dogmati c' Buddha , Chri st as d ist inguished from Jesus, and to the ' Id ea of Muhammad '.

37. Nicholson, Shams-I-Tahriz,p.61.

or w hith e r I we nt ', or in RDrni 's, 'No ne h as knowledge of eac h who enters that he is so-and-so o r so-and-so. '37

If thi s appears to be a denial of ultimate significance to human love, the position has been altogether misunderstood. For a ll metaphysical formulations , assumi ng t h at an infallible analogy relates every plane of being to every o th er, have seen in human love an image of divine fe licil y (ptunananda), imagined not as a contradiction of but as transformation (pardv/ttl) of sensua l ex peri ence. This is th e the ory o f 'Platonic love ' , according to which, as Ibn Fa rid exp re sses it , 'the charm of every rair youth or love ly g irl is len t to th em from Her Beauty'; a p oin t o f view implicitluo in Erigena 's conception of th e world as a th eop hany, and in th e Scholastic d oc trin e of th e ves tigium pedis , the tr ace o r footp rint of divinity in time, w h ic h ha s its equ ivalent in Vedic and Zen symboli sms. What this means in ac tu a l traditi on is that the beloved o n earth is to be rea lised there not as she is in herself but as she is in God,3tI so it is in the case of Dante and Beatrice, Ibn 'Arabi and an -N izam,j? a nd in that of Ch a ndjd iis and Ramj. " The beauty of th e Beloved there is no longer as it is here contingent and merely a participation or reflection , but that of the Superna l Wisdom , that of th e One Madonna, th at of the in tr ins ic being of th e Bride, w h ich ' rains down flames of fire' (Collviuio) and as ciarilasilluminates and gu id es the pure intellect. In that last and hidden station (guhyam padam), nature and essence, Apsaras and Gandharva, are one and indivisible, knowing nothing of a wi thin or a witho u t (na bdhyam kimcana veda nantaram, Brhadriraflyaka, Up., iv.321), and that is their s upr e m e felicity, and that of every libe rated consciousness.

All this ca n on ly be d escribe d in terms of negation, in terms of what it is n o t , a nd therefore we say again that metaphysics ca n in no way be thought of as a doctrine o ffering consolations to a su ffer in g humanity. What me tap h ysics understands by immortality and by e ternity implies and demands of every man a total and uncompromising denial of himself and a fi na l mortification , to be dead and buried in the Godhead.

'W hoever rea li ses this, avoids cont ingent dea th (punar mrtyuJ, death

38 cr. Tarjumdll af*lI sbwclq, x1.2 , 'She was exalted in majesty above time' and ROm i , "Tis love and the lover th at live to all e ternity ' (xiii, in Nic ho lso n , Sbams-I-Tabriz).

Another examp le could be cited in the Shepherd of llermas.

39. Whom Ibn ' Arabi met at Mecca in 1201 , sec Nicholson ,Tarjllmiin ai-Ashwdq, 191 1

40. cr. 'S ahaja ' in Ananda Coom araswamy 's Dance of !iva, 1917 SACRED WEB 1

gets him no t, for Death becom es his esse n ce, and of all these Angels he becomes the One' (Brbaddra);zyaka Up., i.2 .7). For the Supreme Identity is no less a Death and a Darkness than a Life and a Light , no less Asura than Deva: 'H is overs hadowing is both Aeviternity and Death' (yasya chtiyd amrla, yasya mrlyub, Rg. Veda, x.121.2)'1 And this is w hat we understand to be the final purpo rt of th e First Philosoph y.

41. Similarly, Salapalha Brdhmana, xA.3.1 - 3 Esa Imi mrlyur yat samvalsarah prajdpalih, 'He , the Father, who is the Year and likewise Death'. '111e Darkness and Lighl, belonging to !-lis astlratva and devalva respectively, remain in Ilim , who is both asura and deva, Titan and angel, smpa and ddilyo; at the same time thai from the Wayfarer's point of view their rene clions in lime and space are evil and good. In Hinduism, 'the Darkness in Him is called I{udra ' (Mailri Up. vi.2), and is represented in lhe names and hues of Kali and Krishna; in Ch ri stian yoga, the Dark Ray or Divine Darkness , Eckhart 's 'sable s t illness ' and 'motionless dark that no one knows but He in whom it reigns ' (cf. the 'Clouds and thick darkness ' of DeuL4: II ) , is spoken of already in the Codex Bracianus and by Dionysius , an d becomes the sub jec t of the cOIliemplatio {n caligille. Regarding the propriety of the expression 'Christ ian yoga ' , we need only point out that S1. Bern:lrd's conslderalio, contemplalfo, and excesStls or raptus corresponds exactly to dhiiralla, dbyalla and samddhf.

Ancient Beliefs or Modern SuperstitionsThe Search for Authenticity'

by Rama P. Cooma raswa my I

The greatest problem facing th ose w ho beli eve in th e possibi li ty of truth and w ho se t o ut to seek it seri ou s ly, is th e absence-o r s up posed absence-of any cr it er ia by w hi ch to b e certain that w h at we find is the rea l th in g. Wi th severa l major re ligions and b etwee n 5 to 20,000 cults all o ffe rin g us va ri ous a nd ofte n e xclus ive opt io n s, how are we to c h oose , or more p recise ly, di scern? Caug ht as w e are in th e to il s of maya-or as a Cat ho li c wou ld put it , w ith o ur intellects wounde d and O Uf w ill s weake ned by t he Fa ll of Adam , how ca n we, by o urselves an d wit hout externa l he lp, ever be s ure th at we are avo iding delusion? We ca n of co urse embrace the scep ti cs' pos iti o n and give up th e s tru ggle . But as an o ld g loss o f Plato says, "scepticism is easy, unb e lief is fo r the mob." But for tho se who are n o t yet intell ec tually dead , the question s lill re ma ins : by what aut hor ity d o we liv e and die? Are ther e authen ti c well -s prings of truth , or is trut h s imply a matte r of our own personal g ut fee lin gs, our psyc ho logica l expe ri e n ces, a nd what works for u s?

Th e fi rs t prob lem to b e fa ce d is w hether truth is an objec ti ve or a s ubj ec ti ve e ntity. Is there s ll c h a thin g as objective truth- truth which has always bee n an d always w ill be the same-u nchang ing a n d cons ta nt-h e nce a truth w hi c h is abso lute? Now , e it he r words have meaning o r t hey d o n ' t. If truth is o nl y a ma tte r o f perso n al tas te , if one is conv in ced t hat a ll rea li ty is re lative, th e re is h ard ly any p oi nt in co ntinuing e ith er discussion o r searc h. One is caught in the vicio us circle of

lhis is a revised ve rsion of a talk given by the autho r to The Himalayan Int ernational Insti tut e of Yoga Science an d Philosophy of the USA in June 1988

proclaiming that the only truth is that there is no tmth.

In the la s t analysis we have only three possible so urce s for authenticity. We have the Ancient Teachings which are-Qr so I assume--embodie d in the grea t religious traditions of the world. I We have our ow n gut feelings or psychological experience as to what is true. And we ha ve some mixture of th ese two extremes. Either we accept objective cr it er ia , or we accept sub jec tiv e criteria , or we create a mixture thal for so me reason or another we find persona ll y satisfact ory. The latter is also, needless to say subjective.

Il is only when we accept the pos sib ility of objective truth that we ca n look to the Ancient Teachings as a possible authentic so urce . Unfortunately, we live in a very superstilious age. The so-called "age of enlig htenment "-a phrase which certainly a ppeals to man 's egoity-is more approp riately described by the Ancient Teachings as the Kali Yuga, the age of darkness, or in Catholic terminology, "the lalter days, " This brings liS to two o f the most powerful s uperstitions which we accept- indeed they cou ld almost be ca lled the 'dogmas' of modernity-namely evol uti on and progress . Mos[ of us are co nvinced that mankind has evo lved over th e centuries , and continues to evo lve with eac h generation. Do we not consider our ancestors as somew hat primitive, bad:ward and superstitious? The very word makes us think of a medieva l European peasant fingering her beads before some miraculous sh rin e of the Madonna, or of a Hindu Brahman refusing untouchab les access to the temple prec incts. The last person we would think of as superstitious is a Halvard professor or a prominent scie ntist.

The problem with being superstitious is tha t it tends to blind us to the truth. If we are conv in ced someth ing false is true, we are hardly likely to seek beyond its co nfin es for a source of authenticity. If we are to look to Ancient Teachings as embodied in the great religious traditions o f the world as a possible so urce of authentic and objective truth, the fir st thing we must do is abandon our modern supers titi ous be li ef in progress and evo lu tion. As we shall see, th ere are a host of other su perstiti ous beliefs that may also have to be abandoned. Among these are included our modern view of the nature of man , our false egalitarian concepts, our socialist and utopian ideals , our familial attitudes, our moral or rather o ur

1. 'n1e author would like to make it dear that it is not his intent to advocate any kind of syncret ism in religion.

unmoral codes, our belief in science and our attitude towards re ligion.

I we ll remember how my college fri ends-and later, how some of my professional colleagues-looked upon my being Ca th ol ic I was accused of no longer thinking for myself. Now the idea that it is a good thing to think for oneself is another modern superstition. To put the matter into clearer [oelis l I would ask you to imagine a classroom of mathematical stude nt s tell in g th e teacher th at they d isagreed with his answers because th ey were doing mathematics 'for themselves'. No, thinking for oneself is not a hea lth y thing to d o . Wh at we must do is learn, not to think for o urse lves, but to thi nk cor re ctly. It is the funct ion of th e Ancient Teac hings to help us do jllst that, but it takes bot h work and discipline. We do of course have the freedom to think for ourselves-we can think any way we wanl. But we do not have a right to do so, for er ror never has rights. Like murder: we are free to murder anyone we want, but we certainly do not h ave a ri gh t to do so.

We no longer accuse religious adherents of failing to think for themse lves. The curren t allegation is tha t they have allowed themse lves to be brainwashed. Bra in washing implies that one's thoughts and attitudes ca n be in nu enced, if not controlled , by ex terna l forces. Both religions and cults ·1O say nothing of poli tica l sys tems--are accused of using various techniques to bring this about. Have those individua ls who adhere to the Ancient Teac hings as embod ied in th e great re li gio us traditions in th eir integri ty all owed th emse lv es to be brain washed? Befo re answering th is q uest ion, allow me to point out that we are all to some degree brainwashed Every d ay our minds are bombarded by the news media, by television wh ich the ave rag e American watches for over 60 hours a week, by po pul a r novels and by those wi th whom we are in daily contac t. There is no doubt in my mind bu t that most if not all of th ese e ntiti es embrace an anti·religious, liberal-humanistic, socialist and more or less sceptica l-atheistic viewpoint. Moreover, the stresses of modern life are such th at , in w hat lilli e free time we have left, most of us expose our· se lves to the media in a comple tely passive and non·critical manner. We in essence le t the newscaster and politicians and w ri ters of Book·of-themonth Clu b nove ls te ll us how to think , and pride ourse l ves that we are thinking for ou rse lves. If we do not see this as brainwashing, it is because these sources pander to our egos and we find the offered pablum both acceptab le and pleasant. On the other hand, a mother who teaches

her ancestral fairh to her children a nd th e Bra hman who in s is ts o n ritual purity and cas te res trictions ar e also gUilty of brainwashing. But here many find th e pro cess highly obj ec ti o n ab le.

Let us fo r a mome nt conside r o ur ow n e ducational backgro und s. What formation did we bring with us fro m o ur home s? Most parents tod ay ha ve bee n so effec tiv e ly brainwashed by the liberal and agnostic e th os of ou r times , th a t th ey no longe r ha ve, a nd hence ca nn o t convey, any va lue sys te m o r set of fixed b e li e fs, to th e ir o ffspring-unl ess of CO llrse you consider mater ial s ucce ss a b e li e f system. And 50 it is that mos t ch ildren le av e the home with a so rt of labula rasa ---{)r worse, a belief in [he world of the tel ev is ion sc reen . Ac co rding to published s tati sti cs, every Satu rda y 16 '(, million c hildren spe nd an hOllr and a h a lf wa tc hing Graystone or the Mutant Ninja Turtles. Soc io log is ts ca ll telev isio n th e "third parent. " Unfo rtun ately, it is often th e o nJ y parenl.

And so, it is w ith considera ble re li ef that c hil d ren are se nt o ff to sc hool. He re formal brainwashing is initiated. The process s tarts in k indergarten where b o ys ar e made to play with dolls and girls wilh swo rd s-thi s in order, to u se the jargon of mod e rn psyc h o logy , " t o te ach th e m 1O avoid stereotypes. " Through a variety o f tec hniques such as ' va lu es cla rifi cation' th ey are taught to reje ct their parents ' values-assuming th ey were inc ulcat ed w ith some-under the gu ise of developing th eir own, usually tho se of t he teache r or those bei ng pro mo ted by va rious governmental age n cie s. This process is ca ll e d "d esa tili za li on. " Th ro ug hout th e next ten yea rs th ey ar e taught to be good little evoluti on ists, SOcia li sts , and h ow to u se th e gi ft of sex with o ut res pons ibility. And th e n th e y go to college , whic h is the sine qua non for ent ran ce into a modicum of e co n o mic success. Once again , th ey pay a s teep price -th e price being paid is more than fees for tuition-it is th e s ubjecting of ou r minds to ye t anoth er process of indoctrination. As my father' once sa id-and thi s is the forties-it is a lm os t impossible fo r so meone to graduate fro m college w ithout a seve re deg ree of inte ll ecLUal impairment.

And so to th e q ues ti on: are re ligi ous adh e re nts brainwas he d ? I think th e answ e r to thi s qu es tion must b e phra sed in terms of ' thinkin g correc tly' and of e mbracing 'correct valu es'. {fthe Ancient Te ac hing s ar e an a uthentic so urce of truth , and if w e mak e them our o wn, th e n we ar e

2. Ananda K Coom ar.l sw amy

like th e stud e nt of math e m atic s who le arn s to calculate correc tl y. Su ch a stud en t is not brainwashed, beca use he kn ows how to do his sums co rrectly. The truth , our submi ssion to the truth and o ur making it 'our ow n ' , is in th e l ast a n alys is is o ur only protecti on against bot h brai n was h i ng and se lf-delusion.

II

Man d oes no llive in a vacuum. Everyone-ev en the co nvinced ath eist- h as what w e can ca ll a "belief system," that i s to say, a se ri es o f co nvictions that dete rmine h ow he live s his life. Now every belief system ca n b e ch arac te ri zed by three things: by its 'c reed' or what is b elieved, by its 'c ult' or manner of worship, and by the 'cod e' or ru les for b e havi our which it pra cti ces or advocates.

Le t u s co ns id e r the beli ef syste m-the c re e d , c ult a nd code of the average co ll ege graduate. What does he b e lie ve? I think it fair to say that he is co nvin ced that th ere is no suc h thing as a bso lute truth-that all truth is sub jec ti ve, and he nce relat ive. Hen ce it is that , in commo n parla n ce, he no lo nger says "I know ," but o nly that "I feel " some thin g to be true . He b e li eves that evo lutio n is a law of na ture applicable to a ll realms of expe ri ence. Everyth ing evolves, not only man , but know led ge, society, and even God! I re m e mb er m y six year old so n coming h o m e o ne afternoon from sc ho o l and announc ing w ith pride tha t he no lo nge r believed in God ! I asked h im wha t he believ e d in th e n and he answered "E ... o h , h ow do y ou say that word? " Fortunately I wa s able to convince him o th e rwi se . But evo luti on is in culcated in our children's minds fro m th e crad le. Hav e you e ver looked at a nature show o n tele vi sion? Th e pictures are matve ll ous but th e message is driven hom e repeatedly. Everyt hin g from th e ti ge r's s tripes to the giraffe 's neck evo lved. Every c hild know s who Darwin is. How many have heard of Gautama th e Buddha o r Jo hn th e Bapti st?

Evo lution is of co urse quit e absurd from both th e scie nti fic a nd philosop hi cal v iewpo int. From the scientifi c v iew p oint : not o nl y is th e re abso lute ly no p roof in favour of evolution; all th e evi d e nce is against it. Geology , biolog y, genetics and all other scie nti fic di sci p lines speak to the fi x ity of th e sp ecies and to th e impossibility o f transformism No inte rmedi ary fo rm s between species have been found . There is mu ch talk of "mi ss ing link s." The problem with missing links is that th ey are

SACRED WEB 1

missing! To be lieve in evo lution is to believe that the greater can come out of the less; it is to believe that energy can be created in. sui generisJ it is to believe thallhings happen by 'c hance ' in the sense that chance is a random possibility. Probability theoI)' te ll s us that the chance of one evolut ionaI)' s tep occur ring is so remote as to be impossible. Yet evo lution ists tell us many such steps have occurred. The most amazing thing about evolut ion is that scientists who admit all this continue to believe in evolution--they are truly men of deep but blind faith. Il is not bus hman , but rather modern man who beli eves in the blind forces of nature and who should be labelled an anim ist!

Philosophically , evolution is also absurd. If it were true, it wou ld be as impossible for man to step outside the evolutionary stream in order to examine the process that 'developed ' him as it would be for a computer to examine the creator. As the OxFord philosopher, Sir Karl Popper, points out: "If Darwinism is right, then any theory is held because of a certain physica l structure in the ho lder-perhaps of his brain. Accordingly we are deceiving ourselves and are phys ically so determined as to deceive ourselves whenever we believe that there are such things as arguments or reasons for anything. Purely phys ica l conditions, including our physical environment, make us say or accept whatever we say or accepl."

Implicit in evolutionary theory is the denial of Free will. As Hux ley says, "the fundamental proposition of evolution" is that "the who le world, living and not living , is the result of the mutual interact ion, according to definite laws, of the Forces possessed by the molecules of which the primitive nebulosity of the universe was composed." After all, how can 'something'-no tice, I did not say 'someone', which is the product of rigid laws, laws which control its future deve lopment and which has no fre e dom to step outside the evolutionary p rocess - how can thi s 'something' act independently of these laws? How can this thing have a free will for which it is responsible? Evolutionist Jonas Salk admits as much. He openly admi ts that his polio vaccine works against the evolulionary process of natural selection. The only way he can exp lain his drive to develop this vaccine is that he was genetically programmed to do so. Here one comes upon another conundrum, and one interestingly e no ugh shared by socialisls for whom evolution takes the form of historical determinism. If man 's li fe is determined by evo lut ion o r by history, how can he be 'free ? Yet bOlh evolulionists and hi sLOrica l determinists pro-

claim man is free to help th e p rocess o n its way towards perfection and an eart hl y ut o p ia. Socia li s ts go eve n furth er. T hey puni s h man for his failure to do so, and in th e nam e o f their socialist ideation have kill ed milli ons more than a ll th e wars of the last three centur ies. To thin k thi s way, as th e psychiatrist Karl Stern h as sa id, "is c razy" in th e sense th at decompe nsated sc hizoph renics are crazy. I have called evoluti on a su p e rstition-in deed, it is the grand-da dd y of all modern s up erst it.i o n s. Allow me to give you a definition of "superstition " tak e n from an olde r ed iti on o f Webs te r'S New Intern at io nal Dict io na ry:

"An irr::l\ional abject s tat e of mind proceeding from ignorance, unre.lsoning fear of the unknown or mysterious morbid scrupulosity, a belief in magi c or cha nce. or the like, misdirected or unenlightened religion or interpreta ti on of nature a fixed irmt ional idea, a notion maintained in spite of evidence to the comrJry H Who are some of th e more dominant 'g urus ' of the modern wo rl d, and what do they b e li eve' Freud, Adler, Fromm , Maslow, Rogers and Jung-are or were, a ll of th em, evo lutio ni s ts and co nsequently athe ists. They te ll us th a t whal is ca ll e d 'inte lligence' consists of'reaso n ', th e abi lity to deal with abst ract io ns, th e ca p ac ity to learn a nd th e abil ity to h andl e new situa tion s. Now reason apart-and eno rm ous amoun ts of e ne rgy a nd exten d ed in a n attemp t to p rove that an imal s reason-all th ese ab ilities a re to be found in lower fo rm s of life. Hence it is not s urprising to fin d Darwin telling u s that "a nim a ls have an intellect of different proportions," and that "man 's intell ec tual fac ulti es h ave been mainly and gradua ll y p e rfected through natural selection .. ." Simil arly, we a re told that man 's motivations a nd be li e fs have their origin in hi s 's ub consc io us', a te rm for whi c h th e re are innumerable d efinition s and which is bes t defined as a kind of "cess- p oo l of evolutionary memory." Agai n, we are told that man's ultimate motives are a search for secu ri ty, pl eas ur e or what th ey ca ll 'se lf ac ti vatio n ' th roug h the meeting of 'meta-needs'. Truth is w h a t is true [or the individual ; beauty is w h a t gives pleasure ; love the fulfilling of ' biologica l urges '. At th e cos t o f denyi ng bot h logic and exp erie nce, all that is qualitative in man is d eclared to be genetically determined-that is, d ete rmin ed by evolu tion-and he nce is reduced to th e measurable and t hu s to matte r Everythi ng falls under this aegis. Rousseau he ld that savage man p rogressed to "civilized " man. Huxl ey gave th is progreSSion hi s scie ntifi c blessing. "Na ture 's great progression is from th e fo rml ess to th e formed-from the inorganiC to t he o rganic-from

blind force to conscious intellect and wil l." If one can accept these premises it is easy to be persuaded tha t man is but a higher form of matter and that Superman is on the way. Those who think otherwise are dismissed as 'dreamers'-as if matte r cou ld dream-who for a ll their efforts p roduce no th ing materially benefic ial.

Let one thing be quite clear. One cannot logically believe in evolu tion and also believe in God. Every scientist and every theologian worthy of his hire will admit to this. You will hear much ta lk about theistic or mit igated evolution-the idea the God works through evolution. If such were t he case, then God wo ul d be very u pse t w ith a nyone who in terfered with natu ral selection. How dare we t rea t t he s ick child or feed the poor and hungry? These are bu t nature 's way of weed ing out the weak. How dare we stop wars when they are so high ly successful in controlling the popu lation explosion? Let's face it. It wou ld be stupid to pray to a God whose only a nswer to prayer wou ld have to be "let natura l selection or t he 'punctured equilibrium' solve your problem." No scientist ever came up with the idea that God worked through evolution. Theologians did so. And why' Because they wanted to appear to be up to da te and 'scientific' .

Now, I have spent a long time on the credal issue of evolut ion because we wi ll never look to t he Ancient Teac h ings as a source of authentic truth un less we abandon our su p erstitious belief in evolution and progress. By definition, no evolutionary process can prov ide us with authenticity-and surely th is is reasonable. After all , an evo lut ionary process is a changing process and anything that is spiritually authentic cannot change.

No wo nder the Ancient Teachings are u n a n imous in declar ing that a ll creation is the result of God's activity and not of evo lut ion. The Church insists on a creaUo exnihilo , and the Vedas teach that "being is engendered from non-being. " And they are even more clear in specify ing that man l socie ty and above all truth, are not subject to any evolutionary process.

Let us return to our college graduate w h o sees himself-i n so far as he troubles to look at himself at aU-as made in the image of an amoeba. Having dealt with his fundamental credal premises, wha t can we say of his manner of worship? For modern man no 'cu lt'-no form of worshipis possible un less it be the worsh ip of materialism or of [hat lesser "selr' whic h we refe r to w hen we ca ll someone selfish. What besides the evolu ti onary process or man , which is its highest product , is t here to wor-

Ship ' As Karl Marx sai d: "H umanism is the denial of God and the total affirmation of man." Thi s then is the foundation of modern humanis m .

Finally, we come to 'cod e'. Here the rul e of thumb is ex p ed ie ncy. Everything is allowed providing it doe sn' t hurt the other-bul in point of fact, se lf int erest usually takes pre ce den ce. Consider adultery-and certainly adultery is not a rare phenomenon in OUf sOcie ty When we s leep with our n eig hb o ur 's wife we loudly proclaim that s u c h activities b e tw ee n consen ti ng adults hurt no one. But what of the offended party? Or aga in, we claim that abortion hurts no one-and rapidly proclaim that th e fetus is no one.

Thi s th e n is th e ' uncreed', the ' uncult ' and th e ' uncode ' of mod e rn man . We can summarize it as being progressive, evo lutioni st, anthropocent ric or man-centered and void of metaphysica l p rinc iples. What is of interes t is th at so many major religious bodies have adopted this weltanscbauung o r world view. At the risk of offending certain Catholi cs, let me say th a t the se are precisel y the principl es which Vatican II emb races a nd which form the foundation o n which th e post-Conciliar Church rests. The Ancient Teach ings-what the Hindu s call Sanatana Dharma, what Sl. Augustine called "Wisdom un c reate, th e same now as it eve r was and ever will be," are un animous in being diametrically opposed to s uc h a ttitud es. They are not progressive, but rather static, beca u se while si n may c hange its style, it can never a lter its nat ure. In deed, they are anti-progress ive, because they hold that man has fallen from hi s form e r high esta te . Born to a Golden Age, a Garden o f Eden, me n living in th e Kali Yuga or "latter days" are d egenera te . Again, th e great traditi o ns are unanimous in declaring that all creation is th e res ult o f God's dir ec t action-ex nihilo, a s the Catholics put it: "be ing e ngendered from no n being," as the Vedas put it ; and th e y are unanimous in proclaiming that ma n is c reate d , not in the image of an amoeba, but in th e image of God. All are theocentric rather th a n anthropocentric. All teac h that man qua man can ne ver be a s ure so urce of trut h , that man 's dignity do es no t li e in hi s sel f-va lidating abilities, but rather from hi s adherence to God 's truth. Finally, all claim a nd can demonstrate that they are based on so lid metaph ysic al principl e:;-w hi ch is to say, a cons istent d oct rin e d ea lin g, not onl y with c onditione d and quant ita ti ve exp e ri ence, but a lso with uni versa l possibility. The two extre mes are like oil and water. They can no t be mixed. To accept the one is to rejec t the olher. In

which fundamental se t of ideas are we to fmd truth and authe ntic ity?

Turning to th e A ncie nt Tea chings, we find that th e most strik ing thi ng that all the reli g io ns have in co mm o n is their claim- ri ght or wrong- to be ba se d on a Reve lation-what the Hindu s ca ll Sruti At some time God-an AVatar-or a Messe nger appea re d on earth an d gave man a spec ifi c 'creed ', 'c uil ' and 'code '-o r to use ori e ntal terminology , a doctrin e and a m e th od. Moreove r, they all hold this Revelation to b e fixed, comp lete and un ail e rab le. Th e Veda s are fi xe d once and for all. New in sights into th e teac hings of th e Buddha ma y occ ur, but the Buddha is n ot providing hi s fo ll owers with a con ti nuo us reve l atio n-o ne that evo lves and p rogr esses w ith the course of time . Mohammed is ca ll ed th e "Sea l of th e Proph ets," by which is und erstood tha t he ha s provided th e l as t and fin al revelation in th e Abra hami c lin e. Mus lims do not ho ld that the Archan gel Gab riel is still revealing pas sages in the Quran. Th e Torah ca n be int erp reted , b u t Moses is not current ly send in g us an y me ssages In p assing il sho uld b e noted that none of th e grea t founder s of religio ns claimed to be discovering or revealing new truth s. Jesus spoke of fulfilling , not c han g ing th e law a nd proclaim ed that he taught, no t hi s ow n , but hi s Fat h e r's d oc trin e. Th e Buddha sa id that he himself o nl y "fo llowed th e a ncie nt pa th ," and added that "w h oeve r pre tend s t ha t I p reac h a doct ri ne wrought by my own reasoning and argumentation s hall be cast out." Mo h ammed claime d to be re turni ng to th e religion of Abraham. And do es not Krishna tell us in th e Bha gava d Gita that he co mes down to earth when dharma grows co ld ?

Re ligions h ave another crit eri on in common . Their revelati o ns are often so mewh a t e ll ipti cal-or appear to be s u c h to o ur dar ke ne d a nd kali yuga i n tell ects. H ence it is that re li gions pro v ide offi cial in te rpr e tersb e th ey saints or sages. The Hin dus have what is ca ll ed smrW as w e ll as th e writings of s uch indi v idual s as Sa nkaracllaly a- to say nothing o f th e Kanch i Guru w ho is his living descenda nt. Th e Mus lims hav e the co mmentaries on th e Quran such as those of Ibn Ar:,bi a nd al-G h azal i Th e Jews have the Haftora s as we ll their Rebb es-th ose authoriz ed to give current interpretatio ns. The Christ ians have Church Fathers, Doctor s, and what is called th e 'Teac hing Magisterium ' . And what chara cterizes authenticity in all th ese li ving so urces is that th eir teac hi ngs in no way

depart from that of their predecessors and , ultimate ly, in no way depart from the origina l Revelation.

Yet another aspect of fixed Reve lation is 'cu lt', Forms of worship in a religion are never man-made. They are determined by God or Hi s representative. Cons ider the agllihotra or vedic fire sacrifice, Do you think this was mad e up by some old men in the forest-what today would be ca ll ed a consi li um of theologian&-wishing to dupe the poor p easa nts out of t he ir hard -ea rned money, or to placate the lightning' And the same is true of the prayers use d by the Muslims and of th e true and ancient Ca tho lic Mass.

Simi larly with regard to 'code'. It is Chr ist Himse lf who determ ined that divorce was forbidden to hi s followers though permitted to the Jews. The practi ce of Mohammed and his jud icia l decision s along with Quran provide the ba sis for Muslim law. The laws of Man were not put tog ether by a conference of businessmen, lawyers and politicians.

The very word ' re lig io n ' means that which 'binds ', Lhat which ties u s to the Origin and Cen ter. That is why an intact religion is always traditional , for tradition means to hand on or hand down . And what is hande d down other than the orig ina l revelation' Thus all religion s s peak of 'o rthodoxy ' and ' h e resy'-{) h, how we moderns hate those words! 'Ort hodoxy' is defined as pure faith and sound belief-that which is in co nformity with the origina l revelation. Heresy is a departure from this as a resu lt of pick ing and choos ing what we w i ll or will not believe. Heresy, as the Buddh ists say, is li k e "a worm in the h ea rt of a lion."

A nother importan t fact is thal th ere are no sec rel doclrines in re ligions. The re are teachings which are no t readily ava il ab le, or which are phrased in obscure fashions so as to avoid 'casting pearls before swine', but they are not secret as such. A ll the sacred texts of the Hindus have been pub lis he d-you might have to learn Sanskrit, but they are not hidden. Of cou rse one has need of certain things to acces s these sources: one has to hav e certain intellectual and mora l qualificatio ns; one needs guidance and hence a guru; and one needs initiation which is a ritual act that tie s one to th e Ava/ar or founder of the religion and ultimately to God. Now if thi s offends our egalitarian prejudices, allow me to ask you if you would allow a person who had not trained under a skilled teach e r to perform surgery on you. I rather doubt it. Certain ly, ther e are anatomical texts and descrip ti ons of operations published in the medical

SACRED

literature, but one still needs cer tain qualifications, guida nc e and training to access t hem . Why should religion be different?

It shou ld be abunda ntl y clear by now thaI religions provide us wid l objective criteria. Gurus and sp iritual directors are not judged on the basis of their charismatic person a liti es, but on the degree to which they conform to the truth of the religion in question, on the degree tha I th ey themselves are perfect conduits or vehi cles for the tru th. Every ritua l act on th e part of th e Ca th o lic priest is persona Christi. We confess, not to Father Bob, but to Chris t. It is Christ who in the person of the priest e ffec ts the consecration in Mass.

Religions not only provide us w it h objective c rit e ri a, but even more, they a ll share a view of man which is vastly d ifferent from that of the modern psychologist. The prernises that reason uses can be derived from four possible sources: measurable phenomena (science), feelings, Inte llection or Revelati on. These sources then are both internal and externa l, both su perior and inferior-Inte ll ectio n and Revelation being of a higher order than reason. Judgement or discernment is part of Intell ectio n and hence can look at a reasoned conclusion to de termine whe ther or not it is true. However, ou r Intellects are darkened because of th e Fall, and hence we stand in need of Revelation.

Modern psycho logists tell us Ihat reason is the highest product of the evolu tion ary process . Now, clearly , truth do es not depend on reason. We do not say some thing is tru e because it is logica l, but rather that it is logical because it is true. This presupposes a s till higher facu lty of judging or, to use the te r m of 51. Thomas Aquinas, "discernment." Modern philosophers attempt to get around this problem by speaking of "rationa l principles, " but forget that principles can never be derived from d iscursive logic . Reason cannot prove its own validity , for princip les must be grasped intuitively and sup rarationall y. As Aristo tle said, "one does not demonstrate pr inciples, but one perceives d irec tly the truth thereof. .. " To make use of scholast ic t e rminology , it is the pure Int e ll ec t which is the habitus principiolum , while reason is only the habitus conclusionttm. Man then possesses reason and with it language, only because, unlike animals, he has access in prin cip le to suprarat ional vis ion. It is this supra rational vis ion, Intellec ti on or ins ight that gives man, not only discernment, but cert itude: certi tude in h is own existence as a being , confidence in the functional ca p acity of reason, the ability to dis-

criminate between what is real and what is unreal, what is true and what is fa lse. Intellec ti on is a kind of 'seeing', a see ing with the 'Third Eye', and not a conclusion, and it is this that opens to man the possibility of metaphysical certitude.

It should be clear th at intellection has nothing to do with mental agi lity . This is we ll evidenced by what psychiatrists call 'i diot savants 'people who can function like a computer, but who are incapable of thinking , much less intellection. But if all men are endowed with an Intellect , why is it that all men do not see clearly? The various religion s answer this differently. Ch ri stianity and th e semitic religions see the Intellect as 'clouded ' and the wi ll as 'weakened' by the Fall. This does not mean that man is deprived of them , but only that they don't work as well as they shou ld. Hind u ism explains the same situation by what is called maya and portrays sin in terms of ignorance. This is precisely why a Revelation is required . Adam , or man living in th e Go lden Age, required no Revelation as his Intellect was clear and he uwal ked and talked w ith God." We, however, especia ll y as we approach the end of the kali yuga, are desperately in need o f a guidance, which is precise ly why there is Revelation.

If the religions provide man with objective c riteria , they also hold that man is capab le of objectivity. Man is capab le of usi ng his Intell ect to det ermine what is objectively real and of di sc riminating between this and what is illUSOry. This requires on his part a ce rtain act of the will. Man must choose to accep t these objective crit eria or reject them , and mllst suffer th e consequences which flow from this choice. With freedom comes responsibility. This ability to exe rcise the Intellect and the will are qua li ties man shares with God and hence man is said to be made in the Ui mage of God." By exercising them co rr ectly, we participate in the div ine life. Modern man, seeing himse l f as made in the "i mage of an amoeba, " does not believe it is possible to know Truth, or God who is the essence of Truth, much less desire Him. H ence he does not believe he is responsible to any thin g ot h er Ulan his fellow amoebas And thi s brings us to another principle that all religions hav e in common: man is responsible and hence when he dies he will be rewarded or punished in accord with how he us es both his Intellect and hi s free will. Th is prin ciple is inculcated in a variety of ways. The se mitic religions speak of hell and heaven. Hinduism speaks of transmigration of th e soul , of the need

to be bo rn again myriads of tim es in myriads of worlds prior to being o nce again given that ce ntral o p portunity w hi!.:h is man 's to ac hi eve-moksha or liberation. Buddhism d escribes thi s as th e "round of exis ten ce."

Aga in , all the relig io ns a re ag reed that in man there is a hierarchy in which what is high e r mu s t rul e over w hat is lower, in w hi c h ultim ate ly the Alman mu s t rul e ove r th e ego and th e various p ass ions . As th e Bhaga va d Gi ta teaches, it is Krish n a who must con trol and drive th e c hariot lest t he passiona te horses, being left unbridl e d , s hould run amuck. Putt ing this in other terms, all th e religions advocat e a s piritual life whose goal is the sa n c ti fication of th e ind ividu a l. All thi s speaks to the fa c t that the re li g ions in c ulcate a s tri c t moral code, not as an e nd in itse lf, bu t as p re di s positive towards the true and proper ends of man.

Now clearly the religions are agreed o n th e need o f p raye r to s anctify o ur lives. No t on ly individual prayer whose purpose is to obta in parti c uJar fa vours and to purify the sou l, but also prayers that exp ress man's grat itud e, re sig na ti on, regret , resolution and praise. Ma n always has grounds fo r grat it ude. Resignati o n is th e acceptance in advance of the non-fu lfilment of some request. Regret or con tri t ion: the a sking of pardon, a nd th e desire to remedy so me transgression. Praise sig nifi es no t on ly that we re late eve ry va lu e to its ultimate Sou rce, but a lso that we see every tria l in te rms of its necess ity and usefulness.

Ano the r mode of prayer is m ed itation w h ere th e con tac t betwee n man and God becomes one between Intelligence and Trut h . Whe re prayer is subjective and vo lit ive, meditation is objective a nd in te ll ectual-in th e lang u age ofYed anta it is ca ll ed uichara OJ' 'investigation ' leading to viueka or th e discrimination between w h at is Real and w h a t is unreal. BUl th e individual w h o follows a path of medi ta tion d oes so within the cultural milieu of a given t ra dition w h ich provides him w ith canonical prayers and presum es a ll th e att it udes thar volitive prayer implies as a so rt of sub st ratum,japayoga o r the Invocatio n of the Div in e Name, emb ra cing a ll t hese a ttitud es.

All re li gions relat e back to th e Cente r or Origin , a Golden Age when t he Fo u nder "walked upon ear th ," a sort of Ram Raj , and hence see the prese m era as one of a falling away o r d ege neracy . Now in view of thi s, it is not surpris ing that none of the re li gions are utopian. One must howe ver m ake distinctions, for all th e relig ions envision ma n' s life on earth a s one to b e paltern e d after a div in e mode l- t h is precisely in order that

our sojourn or ex il e here be low can be one which directs us and leads us to a life above . He re we co me to another important point: modern man and th e 'culLie e thos'- if I can utilize suc h a phrase--dream of c reating a perfect society on earth, a society that is , as T.S. Eliot says, "so perfect that no o n e will ever n eed to be good. n Modern man has, so to speak , re-oriented himself and, instead of looking 'above', he loo ks 'a h ead'. The religions know that an earthly utopia is an absurd dream. Even in the Garden of Eden a s nake existed-or, as Scr ipture tell s us, "God alone is good." The fundamental error of those imbued with the utopian imperative is their mechanistic belief th at if one c hang es th e nature o f soc iety it w ill change the nature of man. But eve lY man is a k ingdom unto himse lf and mu st make the choice of whether o r not he wishes to conform to that image in which he is crea ted. Yet a ll thi s does not mean that man s h ould not , in conformity with his n ature and with si mpl e good sense , a tt empt to overcome the ev il s he encounte rs in the co urse of life-this requ ires no injunctions , either divine or human.

Putting it simp ly , one do es not ha ve to be a sage to know enoug h to come in ou t of the rain. But (0 attemp t ( 0 es tablis h a certa in state of we llbeing with God in view is one thing , and to seek to institute a perfect state of happiness o n ea rth apart from God is quite another. In any eve nt , the latter aim is foredoomed to failur e precisely because the lasling e limination of our miser ies is dependent not on ourselves, but on our conforming to the Divine Equil ibriu m and upon our estab lishing th e Kingdom of God with in our own so uls. As long as men hav e not realized a sanc ti fying 'inwardness', the abol ition of earth ly tr ials is impossib le , for, as t he Buddha taught, we can never e limin ate , sor row, s ic kn ess, old age and d eat h. It is no t on ly impossible, it is not eve n desirable , because the si nn er-exte ri o ri zed man-has need of suffering in orde r to expiate his faults and tea r himse lf away from sin; in order to esca pe th at very 'outwardness ' from which s in d erives. From the sp iritual poi nt of view , which a lone takes account of the true cause of our ca lami ti es, a society 'perfect' in the world ly se nse , a soc iety with the maximum of comfort and so-ca lled ' justice ' , would , if the final ends of man were frustrated, be one o f th e most ev il societies conceivable . Those who dream of li berating man from his age old fruslrations are in fa ct the ones who are imposing o n him the most radical and irreparable of a ll frustrations. The Civitas Dei and world ly Progress as envisaged by mcx:lem man can never merge.

What kind s of soc ial order d o th e re ligions advocate' Ba sica ll y, one patterned after the Gods--Thy Kingdom co me - Ram Raj jaya. Such is not cap it alism and cer ta inly not soc iali sm. On the contrary, all the tradition s envision one wh ic h mod e rn eco nomists would describe as 'distribulisrn' or what I like to ca ll 'su fficienl is m '-th at is, th e widest poss ible d ist ribu tion of private prop e rty p rovi ding pe o ple w ith enoug h to live in di g nity suc h as is appropr iate to th e ir sta tion in life. Withou t private prope rt y there ca n be no fr ee dom Usury, which is at th e h ea rt of modern economics , is forbidd en by every religious traditi o n. h also e nv isions a non -i ndustrial society, one in which "th e artist is not so me s pecia l kind of man , but eac h p erso n is a special kind of arti st." Peo ple in s uch socie ti es were organized into guilds wh ic h function e d not o nl y t o protec t their m e mbers, but also to in s is t o n a high standa rd of produ ction. Th e ter m "masterpiece " was thu s ap plied to th e wo rk th a t an apprentice produced at the end of hi s p e ri o d of training and w hi ch, w hen so judg e d b y the guild, gave h im the li ce n se to open his own s ho p.

Now, re li gions are further agr ee d o n severa l ot h er matt e rs. All are agreed in co ns id e ring the family a s th e ba sic st m cture of sOcie ty. Catholics env isio n it as a mini-C hu rch where th e Fat her ha s as hi s exe mplar God. As Arjuna says in the Gila , "in th e destl1lclion of a fam il y, the immemorial fa mil y traditions peris h ; in the pe ri s hin g of traditions , lawlessn ess overcomes th e w hole famil y the abode of t h e men w hose family c u s to ms are extingu is hed is everlas ting ly in h el l. " T his is one of th e reaso n s the vario us tr adit io n s su rround th e sex ua l act with so many taboos or restricti o ns. This is nol the only reaso n , b ec ause fundam e nt a ll y, th e sexua l act is see n as a sac re d act , o n e p e rfo rmed in th e imit a ti o n o f the Gods. All th e An cie nt Teachings ins is t upon a strict mora li ty-not as an end in itself, but as pred isposi ti ve to t he prope r ends of man. Just as he ha s th e 'fr eedo m ' to think for hi mse lf, so also, he ha s the fre edo m to ac t for himself. But he has no ' right ' to misbehave, and whe n he does, he loses his dignity. Man is onl y dignified when he conforms to the Divine Image. Lac kin g this he behaves like an a nimal. Religion s di s play a nother feature. Th e y are exclusive. Th ey all claim to provid e ma nkind w ith e verything that is needed to save hi s so ul and know his true nature . Howe ver much they ma y apprecia te or adm it that ot her reli gio ns h ave elements of tmth , they clearly are a nti -sy n cre ti c. No ne of th em advoca tes th e c reation o f a si ngle world religion. And

there is good reaso n for this. In evita bly anyone who a lte mp ts to sy ncretize religions aban don s objectiv ity and indu lges his pe rso nal fee lin gs and b ecomes his own judge of truth. If we are to le t sy n c retism ha ve it free p lay, we wi ll a ll e nd up d rinking wine like Chr ist ian s and hav ing four wives like Muslims. There is n o divine or heaven ly mandate for such an app roac h . AJong with this anti-syncretic a ttitud e is anot h e r o f equal im portance. One is required to accep t the to tality of a ny given re li gion. O ne ca nn o t b e h a lf a Muslim-one cannot acce pt t he I-Iadiths of th e Pro phe t Mo hamm e d and reject the Quran. Simil arly, Cat ho li cism teaches that to reject one dot of revealed truth is to re jec t th e whol e body o f Reve lation. One ca nnot pick and c hoose.

One la st question: are there Ancient Teac hings available to li S ou tsi d e th e great religions? The answer is both "yes" and "no." "Ye s" in t he sense t ha t one might turn , for examp le, to the ancient Egypti an re ligi on. But "no " in th e se nse that o n e w ould no t hav e access to th e to ta li ty of th at religi o n , and "no " beca use every religion dem a nd s ritu a l participation as a pre-requ is ite fo r parti c ipation in th e Truth .

And so we are brought back to our o riginal th esis: And e n t Teac hin gs or Modern Su perstitions-the Search for Auth en ticity . We ha ve demonst rate d th at th e reve la tions provide us w ith ob jective criteria and that m an is capab le of objectivity. We have ba sica ll y three alternative open to us. Eith e r there is an abso lut e obje c ti ve truth o u ts id e ourselves, or a re lativi sti c s ubj ect ive truth drawn from w ithin us , or some mi xtu re of th e tw o. If we accept objective truth and use our innate ability to d isce rn b etween what is rea l and what is unreal , we are for ced (Q turn to the Ancient Teac hin gs a s incorpo rate d in th e great re ligi o u s traditions. There s imply is no o th e r objective so urce . If we d e clare o ur se lves to be th e so urce of what is true for us, or pi c k and c ho ose be tween this a nd the form er alte rnativ e, to acce pting on ly th ose Ancient Teac hi ngs w hi ch we lik e, we are placed in th e positio n of a ph ysi cian who t rea ts himse lf or a lawyer w ho is hi s ow n ad vocate. However, since we are dea ling neithe r with o u r ph ys ica l healt h nor ou r mo ne y, but rather w ilh o ur so ul , we a re in essence declaring that we w ill be o ur own sp iritual g ui des. There is an ancient orien ta l say ing that "h e wh o takes hims e lf as hi s sp iri tua l g uid e, takes Sa tan as hi s guru. " The latter alterna tive is, as Ca th olic a p o log iSts were prone to say, a s ituation in which "eve!)' man becomes hi s own Po pe. "

SACRED WEB I B9

A final caveat: when we look to th e Ancient Teachings , we musl be absolutely sure that it is the Ancient Teachings we access. Thus with regard to Hindui sm, translations by academi cs trained in the sceptical and positivistic views of the modern West , and unfamiliar with Chris ti an theology, can hardly be expected to produce metaphysically accurate works that can be trusted. The comment also applies to many Hindu translators who der ive their training from the same Western sources. The same app li es to Catholic ism and every ot her religion. One can no more find tru e Hindu doctrine in the writings of KrishnamUl1i and Aurobindo than one ca n find true Catholic doctrine in the writings of H ans Kung and Karl Rahner.

Now, from the point of view of the Ancien! Teachings man is placed in this world so that he can know (jllalla) , love (bhakta) and serve (karma) God and thereby save his sou l (moksha), The unfolding of human potential can only follow two alternate courses. Either man conforms to the image in which he is created, and as the ea rl y Church Fathers said, 'divin izes' himself-and thi s is what the Ancient Teachings and methods help him to dQ-{Jr he makes himself the source o f both doctrine and method , remains attached to hi s prideful ego and se lf-validating psychological experience, and condemns himself to a perpetual migration through int ermin able samsa ric hells. Our human potential can be summed up in two simple alternatives, 'sanctity ' or 'damnalion\ moksha or the interminable round of existence. Heaven or Hell. In the last analysis , nothing else matters.

aevam jayali- Veri-tas vinca omnia

On Earth as It Is In Heaven

jam es S. Cutsinge r

"It is l he Spirit thai qUickeneth; lhe flesh profileth 'lOl!Jing. "-jo Jm 6:63

';71Je forces do n ol work upward from below, bUI downward from above."

- Hermes

It is often s upp ose d that e manation , c reation , and evol ut ion ca nn o t be reconciled. Eith er th e world proceeds of necessity out of God Himsel f, o r God free ly c hooses to make the world from no thi ng , o r th e world contains its c au se w ithin itse lf; its source is e ith er t ran s p e rso nal , p e rsona l, o r infrapersonal. Th e following considerations ! are d es ign e d to show th at a reconcil iation o f these p oints of view is permi ssib le if it is underst oo d th a t th e cosmogonies in question reflec t va ri o us ang les of approa c h. T hi s is no t to sa y, however, that ea c h o f th ese pers p ective s is equally a d eq uate. If the "infraperso nal " explanation s o f physical sci e nce are to h ave any worth, th e ir dependence upon th e "p e rso na l" acco unt of th eo logy mu s t be fully acknowledged, even a s th e p e rso n a l must in turn a dmit th e prio rity o f the "tran s perso na l" truths of pure metap hys ics. What eve r va lu e th ere may be in the id ea o f evo lu ti o n beco mes apparent only in li g ht o f c reation , a nd th e n only to th e mea sure th a t th e doc trin e of c realio n is itself illum ined b y ema nation.

T he primary aim o f thi s art icle is to present an account of a n evo lving wo rld p er asce nsum full y cons iste nt with th e prin Cip les pres uppo sed perdesce nsum by meta ph ys ics a nd the o logy. Not all Pla to ni slS have bee n Ch ristians , of co urse, no r h ave all Chri stia ns been Platoni slS, but th e re is

1. This is a revi sed vers ion o f an article first publi shed by DIalogue and Allimlce, VO!'1, No.1, Winte r 1990-91. Pe rmission to reprint is gratefully acknowledged.

such a thing as Christian Platonism This shou ld be sufficient to s how thal doctrinal positions whkh include creation within th e perspective of emanation, whether widely persuas ive or not , are a lready a maHer of record, and that it is therefore not illegitimate to speak of the metaphysician and theologian as sha rin g ce rtain common "principles." The quesli on remains, however, whether these princip les might serve to inform an evolutionary understanding of the physica l world. In its tran s fonnist o r Darwinian versions, the theory of biological evolution ha s be e n for good reason thoroughly rejected , not only by orthodox theologians , but more importantly by those among ou r con temporaries who have most forc efully propounded an integral metaphysics , and who have done the mos t to promote in th a t light an esoteric interpre ta ti o n o f the doctrine of creat io n ex nibi/o. 2 It is therefor e essentia l that the reasons for this rej ecti o n be carefully consi dered before presenting a truly prin c ip ia l th eory of evolu tion , one which is fully consistent with t he "degrees of Reality " and which acknowledges the prerogatives of a scienlia sacra. We aim in thi s way to avoid the absu rdities which usually accompany mode rn sc ientific cosmogon ies while a t th e sa me lime "sav in g the appeamnces" in th e sequence of certain natural forms.

But before pro ceeding to an evolu tionary explana tion of thing s, we would do well to be reminded first of the distinguishing feature s of a fully metaphysical theology and of the account of the cosmos provided by an "emanation al c reation. "

•••

Either the world proceeds of ne cess ity o ut of Go d Himse lf, it was said , or God freely chooses to mak e that world from nothing: Tel1ium non datur. Or so at lea st it has seemed to those w hose eage rness [Q protect th e freedom, and hence the sovereignty, of God has caused them to neg lect no! on ly the meaning of "n o thing " in th e c nJ c ia l phrase ex nihilo, but a lso the absoluteness and infinit y of God Himself. "Nothing" mllst here s ignify either one of two things: that the world is fashioned from no

2. We arc referring to the authors aflhe or "pcrcnnialisl " school, especi ally Fritl1jof Schuon, whose influence will be noticed thr o ugh o ut Ihese observations. For an introduction to Sc h uo n 's work , sec our Advice 10 th e Se rious Seeker: /II e(/ ilalivlls on the Teachin g oj Frllbjo/Schlto1l (A lb any, New York: State Univl:r sity o f New York Press , 1997) .

"thing"I from no already determinate entity or entities, and of course it is not , for to speak of a cosmos is to s peak of limHation, and the or igin of limit ed "thing s" must of ne cessity be unlimited j or that th e world is made ex nibilo prae ter Deum, from nothing other than God, for the Sou rce of the being by which ex ist ing thing s are is quite evidently nOI an abso lute vacuum, nor is s uch a conception even possibl e: Ex nihilo nihil/it. But if when one says that the world is created from nothing, it is according ly meant that the source of the world is supraformal and Divine, then th e expression is clearly not a negation , but s impl y th e transposi ti on into theological terms, of e manation. The conception of "nothing " is far from a luxury , of cou rse It serves to remind us o f th e impotence and cont ingency of crea tures, of their di stance from the God whence th ey come, and of the "p resence of absence" in their make-up; and it can provide in thi s way a useful cor rect ive for metaphysical expositions in which the di sco ntinu ous character of emanation ha s not been sufficiently st ressed, and which therefore ri sk th e error of pantheism. But this e rror is by no mean s an in evitable feature of every tran spersona l cos mog ony.

Nor apart from the transpersonal and metaphysical is the persona l or c reation is t perspec ti ve free from certain ri sks of its own, for it tends not to consider with due care th e implications, and even more so the Iimils, of the Divine Qualities or Names, of which freedom is on ly one. Theologians who mistrust metaphysicians for fear that the necess ity of manifestation, unlike th e gift of creation, will compromise th e absoluteness of God, and thu s His freedom from determination, seem not to have re cognized that absoluteness imposes its own limits, not extrinsic to b e s ure , but intrinsi c and p roceeding from the essence of the Div in e Rea lity Itse lf. To ca ll God omnipotent is not to say that He can do anything, le st th e goodness of sovereig nty be marred by a purely arbitrary deployment. It is to say instead that He cannot be constrained "from th e outside in." But God may, and indeed must, be constrained by His essence, which He cannot negate, any more than a man can lift himself off the ground. Obviously God ca nnot lie, because He is the truth, and to lie wou ld be to undo the truth of His Wond-that Word which He not only speaks, but which, "being of o ne subs tan ce with the Father", He himself is. Though perhaps somew hat less obvious, it is equa ll y ce rtain that God cannot but manifest Him se lf, whether we call the result of this Sel f-express ion an emanation or a c realion. Again the necessity flows from the essence.

If abso lu te, God is "loosened " or free d from a ll limits ; He is unbound e d and infinite . But having no bounds, noth in g b ei ng able to co nt ain or enclose Him, God can not but pass "o utside " of Himself and into th e nothing, from whic h , as it w ere by d isplacement, He makes Hi s creatures come into b e in g. "None is good but God ", a n d it is the ve lY nature of the on ly Good to "commun icate itse lf' (St Augustine).

Alth ough we are using a "persona l" language in order to s how that the e manational perspec tive need no t be op posed to th eological cons iderations of God and "His U Essence or " His n c reatures, it s h o uld be clear that if th e th eo logia n took Div ine Sove re ign ty wit h complete seriousness, as he claims to be doing in rejectin g t he id ea of cosmic necess it y, he would be obliged to admit th e p rio rity of th e tra nspe rso na l, and hence th e legitimacy (to say the least) of metaphysi cs. For a Reality tru ly sove re ign and tru ly free is nOl precisely a being a t all, let al one a perso n , for these, like all ca tegor ie s, mll st impose th e ir ow n determina ti ons. Freedom a nd necess ity are thus seen to be one, and their ap parent o p position may be resolved. The world is able to proce ed of necessity from out of the Divine so as to se lVe as a manifestation o f it s Sou rce preci se ly because God is free from all th e const raints that migh t otherwise co nditi o n Hi s nature and interfere wi th H is being tru e to Him sel f, or wil h His wi s h to ex press Himse lf through hi s Word. The in ev itab ili ty of th e wo rld is in t h is se n se inte nd ed.'

A few remarks sho u ld perhaps be ad de d co nce rning the "te nse" o f emanation and c rea tion. T h e th eo log ica l account o f the origination of thing s is for vario us reasons less like ly th a n th e metaphysical to a dmit that God is "a lwa ys" making th e wo rld , even th o ugh the e terna li ty of c rea tu res in divinis is nece ssar il y imp li e d by thei r inevitabilit y, just as th e ir inevitabil ity is by Di v ine powe r, fo r "it is a li ke im p ious and a b s urd to su ppose that there was a time whe n Goodne ss d id no t do good and o mnipotenc e did not e xercise Its powe r" (O rig e n). The theologian ofte n

3. "1111S synops iS is meant to refle ct a perspective much mOfe tho rough ly developed by Sc h uon in "Dialogue Between Hellenists and Chris tians n , Ligh/ 011 theAl/de"t Worlds , trans. Lord Northbourne ( Bloomi ngton, Indiana: World Wisd o m Books, 198-1); "Creatio n as a Div ine Quality", Survey alld Esole riSIII (Bloomington, Indiana: World Wisdom Books, 1986); "Ex Nihilo, III 71Je Play of Masks ( Bl oo mingt on, Indiana: World Wisdom Books, 1992); and "Theological and Metaphysical Ambiguity of the Word £:t:", 1be Eye oj the IleCll1 : Metaphysi cs, Cos mology. Spiritual Life (Bloomington , Indiana: World Wisdom Books , 1997).

objeclS, no t in thi s case that God has suffered demoti on, be in g constrained to act in a way He would otheIW ise not , but that th e creatio n has benefi ted from an unju stifi ed, and bl as phemous, pro motion , be ing accounted "as old as" God. But thi s is to neglect the fact that not all on to logica l dependence ex hibit s itself in chronologic al success ion, as th e filiation and process ion of th e second two Pe rson s of the Holy Tr inity sho uld be e n o ugh to esta bli s h Whenever there is a mind th ere is thought, and when ever a sun th ere is li ght , and yet the relati ons hip remains in both in stances ca usa l and asymmetr ical. And so, despite its ete rn ality, "t he universe was crea ted by God, and there is no substance which ha s not re ce ived its ex istence from Him " (Origen). What ever their di sp utes as to whether th e world ha s "a lways " existed, the metaphysician and theologian are ag reed that "as long as" there has bee n a cosmos, God ha s "always" been responsible for it. The universe is neve r a/ail accompli. I t is in each instant , or bett er betwee n every insta nt , being brought forthby Go d , the theo log ian w ill say,fro m God , in metaphysical te rm s; or as above , and accord ing to a ce rt ain fu sio n of perspectives , by God/rom no thing o th er than God. Th e perso nal and trans pe rso nal exp lanatio ns a re thus al ik e in insisting th a t the co ntin ge n cy of a ll th at is other than the Supreme Reality is such that th e cosmos cannot stand on its own, howeve r briefly , but requ ires , in order to be , th e co nt inuous infusion of un crea ted powe r Whether one think s of the world as an ema nati on or a crea ti on, th e tense of th e process is pre se nt: it is streamin g forth; it is being made.

• ••

Th e world as a whole, an orde red whole , and not success iv ely or piece b y p iece , is a contin u o u s production of God or (one might say) eduction/rom God , acco rding to one's angle of vision-with the "process " in eith er case being a move ment "from above to be low. " Altogether differen t o f course is the exp lanati on of the world provided by the transformist or Darwinian acco unt of evoluti on, which rests upon a total negation of Go d , th e t ru e So urc e of all c reatures, and which purp orts to accou nt for th e variety o f natu ra l forms by means of stri ctl y natura l processes, "upward from below ." Six reasons for rejecting the theory may be a ddu ced.

If th ese reasons a re only briefly considered here, it is because the c hi ef p oin t of thi s article is no t to exam ine in full all the many p rob le ms with

th e transformisl theory , but to present a very d iffe rent view of evo lution, o n e w h ich takes these cri ti cisms se ri ous ly, w hich builds up on lh e m, and w hich conforms to the metaphysic a l p e rspec tive the y in part reflect.

In th e firs t p lace, th e exp lanation of order by "natural se lec tion ", as even its mo re honest proponents adm it , is no mo re than a th eory , and one moreov e r whic h can ne ve r be tes ted, let alone pro ve d. 4 Lik e a ll scie ntific theories , it is inevitab ly te ntativ e and probabili sti c, bei ng no t even so solid or certa in as the e mpiri cal data it is mea nt to ex plain , th emselves of course always subje ct, if not to doubt or deni al, th e n to co ntinual re inte rp re tation. Ha vi ng th e re for e on ly provisional fo rce, because an o ri gin s trictly induc ti ve, t he Darwini an doctrine s im p ly ca nn ot co mp ete at th e sa me level of truth w ith e ithe r metaphysics o r th eo logy. Of these, th e fo rm e r p rocee d s from noesis or in te ll ect ion , wh ic h involves the direc t apprehens io n of the Real as Objec t by virtu e of th e Rea l as Su bject ; it is a matter of lheoria , not theory , an d rests upon the knowle dge of lik e by like , when What truly is so b ecomes aware of Itse lf. The latter, th eo logy, th oug h nOl eq u a ll y ce rtai n w ith re s pe c t to its mode o f reception, is equall y true in its co nt en t; for theolog ica l thinking-o n e mus t add, in its o rthodo x form s- is dependent on Rev e lati o n, and Revelation is inte ll ec tion quenched as it were in the form of re s ult: no t know ledge , as Plato wou ld say, but tru e o p ini o n , ort h odoxy. Op ini o n pe r se, however-w hatever so -and-so happens to think at thi s mo ment abo ut his more or less regular con tacts wit h th e more or less fluid d o main of so-called phys ical "thi ngs "- is co mparable to neither ; and a th o ugh t depend e nt on th e dat a o f se n se cann o t but be an opinion.

The second reason is this. Lik e all scie ntifi c theories, lransformis l evo-

4. Of cou rse the th eory has been accept(.-d as indi sputable facl by a majority o f tile cducated d o ubtle ss to the de li ght of those like Richa rd Dawk ins (7be Blind Watcbmaker: Wby Jbe Evidenceo!Evo!ulfon Reveals a Un i verse w ilb oul Design INe w York: W. W. Nono n , 1986]) whose exp licit and u na bashed intent ion is to deth ronc the Di vinity of tr ad iti ona l th eism. One hopes that boo ks like Michael De nt on, EVO/uli o ll : A 7beOly in Crisis (Be the sda, Mary land: Adler and Adl er, 1986), Phillip E. Johns o n, Omwlll on Trial (Dow ners Gro ve, Illinoi s: InterVars it y Press, 1993), and Michael Be ll e, Darwin's nlack Box: tbe Biochem i ca l Challenge lu Evo llllf ofl (Ne w Yo rk : Th e Free Press, 1996) will help in exposi ng the common fallacy that trJnsfonn ism cannot be sc ie ntifi ca lly challenged. Thei r d e tail ed examina ti ons of the physical evidence agains t evo luti o n , drawn among others from me di Sciplin es of paleonto lo gy, com p arative an atomy , and molecu lar bio logy , migh t be use fully stud ied as an empirica l comple ment to the strictl y m e tap h ysica l argumenLS pr ese nted here

luti on (even supposi ng its validity) is limited to th e strictly material or terrestrial plane, wh ich is only a pan of the cosmos, the least real and acco rdingl y th e least intelligible. As he attempts to explain what he sees, the Darwinian theorist neglects to rem embe r that what can be physically sensed is not only much less than the whole , but less real than the "parts " of the whole which it is n ot, as the images of a dream are less real than the objects of waking perception. And yet this quite partial character of his hypothesi&-and by "partial" I mean both "biased" and "inco mpl ete"- is se ldom if ever cons idered. Ju st th e reverse: it is often as· sumed instead, not that a ll that is said about fossils applies in addition all the way up to the angels, though this would b e more absurd enough, but that th ere is no "up" in the fir st place, nothing besides matter at all. De non apparentibus et non existentibus eadem est ratio. The indefen· sibl e presumption of this materialism should be obvious.

A third observatio n naturally follows , and it concerns the reductionism implicit in the transformist cosmogony, its attempt to exp lain the more by th e less. I have said that th e scie ntifi c evolutionist often assumes that matter is all that ex ists, or mauer-energy if a greater sub tl ety is requ ired. But even when he does not so assume, or says he does not , the th eory invariably leads its proponent to think that if th ere is somet hing more o r higher th an physical substa nce, it can be approached on ly by way of the lower, and only as th e product, result, or extension of processes and forces first apprehended, or inferred, at the empirical level. But if th e lower explains the hi g her, th en the lowest will explain most of all, and one is left to concl ude , however preposterously , t hat something is derived from nothing, quod absit. It is as though the evolutionist h ad transferred the crea ti oni st cosmogo ny , uninformed by metaphysics, onto th e material plane, together with the problems already conSidere d, but without the th eolog ian's God, and th e resu lt is doubly absurd: the creation of somet hing /rom nothing by nothing. Logic itself compels one to see tl1at "eve ry productive cause is supe rior to that which it produces \ and that Uwhatever is produced by secondary beings is in a grea ter measure produced from tho se prior and more determin ative principles from whic h the secondary were themselves derived" (P roclus).

The fourth problem with the transformist pOSition is that it mistakes temporal or chron ological success ion for ontologica l causatio n and so falls prey to the soph ism post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Ne ith er the meta -

physician nor th e theologian denies , or needs to deny , that th e fos s ilized vestiges of various species of organic life appear in the geological record in an order of increasing comp lex ity . Nor must he potiit some ex tr aordinary act of God by virtue of which that record was made to appear as it does by a miraculous "pre- fabrication ", after the fas hi o n of certain "scientific creation ist n sc hemes. In stead he accepLS the fact, though a priori and not by indu c tion , th at the va riou s kinds of plants and animals have appeared s u ccessively over time , with th e sensib le manifestation of humanity com ing near th e end of the process. But appearance is one thing, and Rea li ty quite another. To admit that reptiles roamed th e earth before th e appearance of mammals , or more prec isely that they entered into th e substance of physical bodies in advance of the mamma ls, does not entail the admission that the lauer, by whatever temporal and biological channels one might wish to propose , therefore cameJrom the former, though they may in a se nse have come through th e m , as I shaH lat er suggest. TI,e metaphysician teaches instead, and quite the reverse, that th e order in which the various s pecies have b ee n dep loyed over time, and thu s the evolutionary seq ue nce of their disclosure in malter as physica l organ isms, is just the oppos ite of their "origina l" o rd er as archetypes or Divine ideas. Inasmuch as the world is th e reflection of God , and in asmuc h as reflections invert , thi s is precise ly w hat one shou ld expect-a kind of chiastic redupli catio n of th e higher in th e lower. It is essential of cou rse to remember that the procession of the world out of God is eternal, hence in temporal terms both continuous and instantaneous. When it is sa id that rnan 's appearance on ea rth toward the end of the cosmological "process" is the invert ed reflection of hi s th eo logical and rnetaphysical primacy in the Divine Logos, it should be understood that thi s prima cy refers to the "s patial " supe r-ordination of human beings over animals in a purely ontological , s tatic , and vertical se nse, and not to their being an init ial effect in a ser ie s of seq uenti al c reational acts. Man's primacy is that of the microcosm , of a "container" with respect to its "con tents."

Fifthly, the Darwinian conception of evo lution is utterly blind to the essential d istinc tion of form from s hape By the word "s peci es" it means to signify what many individual organ isms hav e in comrnon: a notional abst raction derived by generalization from part icular facts and serv ing as a linguistic 1001 for classification. But th ese facts are all of an emp iri -

cal, material kind and have to do solely with stru ctura l resemblances and other physical fea tures susce ptible to measurement and quantification. A species thu s considered , ab extra ad intra and as it were by dissec tion , is therefore dependent on shape , even as shape is a function of surfa ce. Dy "s urfa ce" we do not mean only the most outwardly ex ternal p lane of a n organism 's solidity, the place where its skin (or so me similar feature) meets th e air, but also whatever relative ly inw ard part of its physica l substa nc e co uld be exposed to the air, in fact o r in principle, if our techniques were su fficiently refined. In this se nse, what can be see n even th rough the most powerful of elec tron microsco pes, or read on the sc re en of some other highly soph isticated dete ct ion apparatus, is still only "surface", and still therefore a matter of shap e. Form is quite different. 13y "form" th e metaphysic ian means to refer to th at quality by virtue of which a physical object, whether li ving or not , tr ansfers the attention o f tho se who perce ive it through itself and along a kind of ontological corridor up and into its ce lestial archetype. Form is liquid where shape is so lid , though so lids of course nonethe less display th e various forms; form is tran sparent or diaphanous whereas shape is opaque ; fo rm insists that it not be confused with a surface. As shape is the pla ce where empirical apprehension must necessarily SlO p on its way in th e direction of being, form is the place where being willingly pau ses on its way in the direction of knowledge. Form is on the "other side" of th e existence of things from species and sha pe. Not at all derived from those thing s or dependent upon them, they are rather derived from it. It is w hat accounts for th e qualitative existence of the anima ls or plants that possess it in conunon-whose commona lity or similarity, however, far from being the measure or the standard of form, is as mu ch an indi cation of the fragmentation and incompleteness of th ese particular creatures as it is a reminder of that which is whole, and which th ey seek to emu late, wh ich is, once again, their form . A truly adequate cosmologica l explana ti on of the world is an ex pl anation of forms and their hi erarch ical o rd er, and of That which they wish to express. But all this , fo r obviolls reasons , is quite beyond the expectations of a strictly empirical scien tifi c method , the kind of method that has generated th e transformisl doctrine.

Th e sixth and final problem with this theory, th e most fatal of all, is its failure t.o account for the mind of the theorist himself, and thus its sui -

cidal self-contradic tion. If the Darwinian is correct that the body of man, his brain included, like the bodies of the o th er animals, is the resu lt of the operation of certain subordinate forces, whether physical, chemical , or biological; and if he is correct to assume that the mind is in some way a function of organic tissue and that thoughts are the result of electrica l transmissions in the ce rebrum: then prec isely because of hi s claims he is not correc t, nor could he b e "co rrect" whatever he said. For from thi s point of v iew, no idea, including the theory o f evolution , is true; none is conformed or adequate to the actual nature of thing s in a way that its competi tors are not. If the transformist is right, all idea s, including his own, and thus a ll possible theories, are already equally co nfo rm ed to the real , because t he y are all equa lly determined to be what they are by their respective biochemical histories. And so to repeat, ifhe is right he is nOlo Truth , like the mind which thinks it , requires a freedom from all conditioning , hence a freed om from all "honzontality ", all physical process, and thus from the whole of nature, which is by definition a concatenation of effected causes and caused effects. Nothing is lrueincluding the stat eme nt that "nothing is tnJ e"-uruess the power of knowing within us "came down from H eaven", having proc eeded out of the only completely unconditioned Reality: the Source of emanation and the God of c reation. "In Him was life, and the life was the li ght of men. "

In sum, the Darwinian theory of evol ution refl ects in various ways , and as considered in its seve r al particulars, each of th e more or less typical tendencies of modern critica l thinking: it is by turns empiricistic , materiali stic , reductionistic, historici stic, nominalistic, and relativistic. It is a veritab le "hydra of heresies. " And it is for this reason that th e th eory has been the object of so severe a reproach on the part of both th e metaph ysician and the orth odox th eolog ian. Let us be clear. The evolutionism which mu st be repudiared is in no se nse the claim that th ere has been a sequence in the appearance of th e forms of life on this planet , nor that changes have occurred and continue to occur in the physical constitution of the various species of plants and animals, for these facts, to the degree that the data of sense ca n provide us with "facts", are amply attested by the geo logical record, by the techniqu es o f radiomet ric dating , and by the o b servations of breeders. s What must be rejec ted instead is the attempt to explain such changes in strictly physica l terms as if that explanation accounted not on ly for in tra-specific differences be-

tween individual organisms, but for the exis te n ce and variety of species as s u c h, and as if those species had deve loped ex n;hilo from the s imple to th e comp lex, w ith the inanimate giving rise to th e animate, the mate to the sentient, and the sentient to the last of which must clearly be firs t in any intelligibl e causalionai series. Efforts to d escribe physical phenomena at th e level of empirica ll y observable ca u ses alone are one thing , and are as useful in ce rtain limited cases as they are unobjectionabl e. But it is quite another to in s ist , as the more hyperbo li c of DaIWinians often do , that an empirica l exp lanation renders all other accounts of th e same phenomena imposs ible, or that it can account in addition for the origin of non-empirica l realities, or (worst of a ll ) (hat it somehow prove s that only such things ex is t as can be empirica lly measured. Herein li e the absurdities menti o ned earlier.

• • •

The question remains , how e ver, whether it is possible to formulate a view o f th e cosmos from an infrapersonal angle that is free from these severa l defects. Can the major forms of life in this world b e describ e d accord ing to the temporal ord e r in which their appearance occurs per ascensum, but so as to protect the metaphysical and theological truths of their "original Origin "-from and by God per descenswn' Is it possib le to envisio n th e c hron o logica l o rd er among the kingdoms on earth in s llch a way as to see, by a kind of noetic tran spos it ion, their ontological order in God'

In order for this qu estio n to be answered in th e affirmative, it is essential that one first understand the purpose o f cos mologies in generalperhaps we shou ld say of traditional cosmologies or "natural sciences", les t they be confused with fi e lds of stud y like astrophys ics, which though it may purport to cons ide r the cosmos as a w hole s uffers in obvious ways from the same limitati o ns as the o th e r empirica l sciences. The traditional intention is basically this. Whatever shape il takes , and wha teve r th e symbols or language it might employ , a true cosmology, by

5. "Modern sc ience is right when it describes the s ucce ss io n of geological periods, but not when it tries to descrihe the origins of life o r o f intelligence. Modem cosmo logy cannot be something other than geology, paleon tology, and astronomy; and there exists not the least difficult y in combi ning them either with Se mitic creationism or with Indo-Greek emanat io n ism , for the s imple reaso n that facts arc always co mpatibl e with (Sc h uon, unpubli s hed letter to t he autho r).

virtue of its conform ity with metaphy s ica l and theological principles, must be such as to make the natural a mea ns of support for our awarene ss of the supernatural, whenc e nature proceeds and upon which it is permanently and perpetually dependent. A vision of the world wh ich is not conducive to this intellection, and hence to the actualiz a tion of what is highest in man , s imply cannot be admitted as valid. The strictly utilitarian tend enc ies of our age notwithstanding , the on ly good reason for an infrapersonal approach to th e cosmos is that it might serve as an aid on the sp iri tual path toward the trarupersonal If it fails to do this , it has lost its very reason for being. Indeed thi s is the most fundamental d anger with Darwinian evolutionism, that it c auses a man to forg e l where he came from, thus abolishing his n obi lity .

Nevertheless, provided that this danger is kept in full view , the metaphysician and theologian need not in principle be opposed to the idea that th e world is evolving. There is after all nothing etymologically wrong with the word "evolution", nor anything intrinsically ab su rd about eve!), activity or pro cess which it might b e used to signify 6 As we have see n, the transp erso nal e xplanation is agreed that the cosmos be co me s what it is through an "unwin ding " or ex pli ca tion of What is already inside, which is "turn ed out " or evolved into what It is inirially not but can then be seen in. As long as th e true nature of this original "i nw ard ne ss", which is of course God in H is immanent presence-Uthe dearest freshness deep down things "-is not debased by co nfu sio n with something crea te d or re lative; as long as we recognize that ir matter can be said to evolve, it is on ly becau se of the prese nce within it of the Supreme Rea lity, which it expresses and see ks to return to; and as long as we realize that the world is not what the materialist think s, but at once a symbol, a veil, and a channel: th en an evolutionary cosmogony can be legitimately entertained , nO[ s imply as an acce ptable thea!)' , but as a genuine IheOlia , a v is ion

6. The term obviollsly had a prc- Oanvinian hi s tory The ea rli es t English uses re corded in the Oxford English Dictiollary are by two of the Cambridge Platoni sts, Henry More and Ralph Cudworth, whose understanding of Ihe world and its creatures was quite far from tr ansforrnist. And when Dr Samuel Johnson lat e r wrote Ihal "he whose task is to reap and thr esh will not be contented without examining the evo luti on of the seed", it is clear hI: was speaking of h ow oaks come from acorns, and not men from the "lower primates ". On the other hand, these philological dat:L should not blind us to the fact that the connota ti on of the term has certainly changed sinCe thl: eighteenth century, and that its user today must be extremely cau tiou s lest he be Ihought a Darwinian

opening up into me taphysical insight. If it is the case that th e cosmos is a message se nt by God from Himself to Himself, then we ma y ex p ec t the me taphy sical tr u th of emanat ion, which considers the world as proceedingJrom God, a nd the theologica l truth of creation , w h ic h ex plains the world as fashi oned by God, to be open to a co rre s p ond ing sc ie ntific "truth "! according to which the wo rl d is envisioned on its way ba ck to God; and we w ou ld not be wrong in ca ll ing thi s last process an "evoluti on."

The di sti nctive feat ure s of an evolution consistent wit h God and conformed 10 H is nature h ave a lready been anticipated indirectly, a nd by cont rast, in OUf treatment above of the six Darwinian errors. The ta sk now is largely one of organization and synthesis as we present a sket ch, not of course of transformism , but of what might be called an "e manational evo lution. " The word sketch should be st re ssed. What fo llow are no more than leading thoughts , provocati ons and pictu res, designed to sugges t a possible li ne of reflection. There is ce rtainly no intention of exhausting the topic , nor do we aim to anticipate all the conceivable objections. It should be emphas i zed in any case lhallh e tempora l lerminology wi th which we are obliged to s peak is not to he taken lit era ll y , for o bvi o usly God is not Himself subject to the d eve lopme nts here envi sioned; only in seeming does the depl oyment of creat ures "tak e time ." Th e diffi culty , of course, is that our discursive thought must by defin jli on do it s work in that seenting and with the material s thus afforded. He nce "s tag e and seq uence are transferred, for clarity o f ex position, to th ings whose being and definite form are eterna l" (Plotinus).

T his caveat must be kept in min d throug hout.

By "e manationa l evolution" we mean two things: the deploym en t of form in matter as shape and the explication in the substance de sc ribed by that shape of ce rta in qua li ties or attributes. The total process may be ca ll ed emanat ional since both of its "s tages ", both th e deployment and the exp lication , proceed in th e fi rst place per descensum from hi ghe r, immateria l pl anes. Th e cosmogony here presented , though it o ffers a reason for the cos mos "from be neath ", thu s begins "from above ", in accordance with the stipulati ons alread y es tabli shed . More precisely, it begin s by anal ogy and, for the sake of ",aieusis , with the act of knowing , whi c h itself proceeds also from the higher to lowe r, "for everyt h ing that is kn ow n is known not accord ing to i ts own powe r, but rather ac-

cording to th e capac it y of the kn ower" ( Boethiu s). And it begin s by implication with that One whi c h is th e principi a l Knower, and kn ow ing Prin c iple, whe reve r th e knowl e dg e o f being a ri ses. The metaphysical scien ti st o r cosmo log ist begins in thi s way with th e Self as Subjec l. i

Th e Se lf is tru ly Subject only in it s recogniti on of ILse lf as suc h , and only in knowing Itse lf as the Kn o w e r It is, hence o nl y to th e extent that It an object as we ll . One says "as we ll " , but of cou rse the Prin c iple from which we a re starting , and which th ese altoget her inadequate words are meant to evoke, is not an object as well a s or in addition to Subject. Rather than both It is neither, though within this "no ndu a l" tr ans p e rsona l primacy , It is n o n e th e less ra th er morc lik e w hat is meant by a subj ect than by an objecl. If we allow as a provisional mea ns th e language of c h ange a nd tran s fo rm a ti on in th e case o f the s tr ict ly c h angeless and impa ss ible , it ca n b e s aid that what was "once" purely Su bj ect "becomes" Its ow n object in th e "mid st" of Its act o f knowin g , fo r we are speaking o f so mething w h ose very nature is s uch that It ca nnot but ra dia te outside of Itself, o utside Its "initia l" subjec ti vity, thu s taking the fo rm of "whateve r is left " - lh at is, th e objec t , in w hate ve r modality one might wish to imagi ne . Of co ur se, to s p eak in these temporal te rm s is o nl y sy mboli c, as we have a lready noted. What are here being pi ct ure d as the stages o f a process in tim e are in fact the mu ltipl e s ta tes of a Single, non-temporal Essence. 8 T he s tages are no more than superimposed "transluc e ncies" of vary ing colors thro ug h w h ic h o n e is inte nd ed to glimpse , as "through a glass dark ly " , th e infinity of that Esse n ce

It may prov e h e lpful to mak e u se of an image . Co nsider a point. The geomet rical point is after all the closes t of a ll mathematical fo rm s to th e nature of th e Subject and to the roo t o f inte ll ec ti on. Altog e th e r ind ependent from objec ts, eve n fr o m th e dot th a t se rves as its representa-

7 No attempt is hcre made to defend the Platonism and Vcdantism implied by these asse rtions, th o ugh th e s ub stance of Ihal defense is impli c il in Ollr reference above to the sixth of the Darwinian mistakes. An explicit and exte nd e d cons id eration o f t he primacy of conscio usne ss can b e found in our book 111e Form of Trans fo rmed Visio n : Coler idg e and the Kn ow le dge or God (Maco n , Ge org ia ; Mercer Univ ers it y Pr ess, 1987).

8. ''The co ncep t of multiple s tate s permits us to enviS<lge all these sta tes a s ex is ting si multaneous ly in one and the sa me being , and no t a s only able to be traversed succeSS ively in the course of a ' de scent ' which supposedly passed not on ly from one being to a nother, but eve n from one speci es to another" (He ne Guenon , ·111e Multiple States of Being , tran s. Joscelyn Godwin [Burdett , Ne w York; Larson Publicati o ns, 1981 1 , 73).

tion, but whic h is al rea d y more extended than an actual punctum, th e point is pure inwa rdn ess, uncompromised by any equ ivalent externality to w hich it might o Lh elw ise be th ought t o correspond. It is "a n inside witho ut because pri or to an outside. n9 And yet agai n li ke the Subjec t , the point tends to search for itself, to sp ill over the e d ges of its in visib le and dim ens ionless essence into the dimensions of the thin gs that are seen. In seek in g it se lf, it produces in the first place a lin e, a fi gure we may mistake for a co ll ec ti o n of di sco ntinuou s "points", blll w h ich (as Zeno implied) is more like an e ffort or energy su spended between them , or belter e).pended by o ne s uch point-s tretch e d as it were b e tw ee n itself in the form of s ubje ct a nd itse lf as found in th e object. This lin e, o ne mi g ht say, is th e line of kn owledge , co nne c ting th e Se lf or Prin ciple w ith eac h o f Us innumerab le ob jec tifications.

But th e point is n ot "sa tisfied " with the line, which actualizes its possibilities in but a si ngle direction. It se arches for b readth in addition to le ng th, p ro jecti ng itse lf a t right angles to its o rigi n al motion. In this way, t he plane is "evo lve d ", which in metaphysical terms is th e demarcat ion of a particular level of being-in this case, below th e Divine but above t he visib ly human-a plane whic h provides for the "clothing " o f the asye t-imm ate rial e ntiti es that dw e ll upon it. No longer quite pure in its initial inwardness, the point as exp re ssed in this dimension is nevertheless s Ull int angib le, in v isib le, and unreSi st ing-s tili fluid because having no depth o r ph ysica l s ub sta nce, containing as yet nothing external in any material se nse. Here is th e fie ld, in traditi o nal cosmo logica l language, of th e s ubtl e body a nd its w o rld , the mundus imaginalis.

And yet , s till unqu e nched in it s thirst , the Subje c t as p o int b ecome lin e and th e n plane must "exp lode " once again, in thi s case into the so lid 10 It is now for th e first time that the energy of o nto logi c al knowing becomes coag ul ated or fixed, as what was before a "g as " and th en a "liquid " now becomes "so lid ", possessed of three d ime ns ions. What ha d

9. 111is loc ution is bo rrowed from Co ler idge, as is the point as image o f the Subj ect. Sugges tion s for several ad d itional features of our C'dn be found in Coleridge , Blograpbla lIterarla, ed. James Engell and W. Jackson Bate (Princeton : PrinCC10n Univer si t)' Press, 1983) , Ch 12 ; and in Toward the Formation of a More Comprehensive 11lCory of Selected Poetry and Prose of Colelidge, c d Donald A. Sta uITer(Ncw York: Random I louse, 1951). of the geomet rical point can be found in St Clemen t of Alexandria, and Gucnon m3kes use of tile image throughout his Sy mbolis m oftbe Cross, trans. Angus MacNab (london: Luzac, 1975).

SACRED WEB 1

been a n id ea in the "ce lestial" wo rl d, an on to logical ray projected by the Supreme Knower, and what then was conde nsed on th e "int er mediate" plan e, is now frozen by th e dimension of depth as it e nt e rs the "te rre strial " orde r, which is the familiar wo rl d of material objects a n d empirica l perceptions , the wo rld stud ied by th e physical scientist and Darwinian.

It is of course here, a t the le vel of mauer, that t he evolution of species is usua ll y assumed to begin , by wh ic h "evo lution " is n orma ll y meant: first th e production of li fe from in o rganic substances, and the n t he developmen t of the var io u s living s p ec ies from s imp le to co mpl ex, c uitninaling in man . Fro m the point of vi e w of pure metaphysics, however, th e tru e deve lo pm ent mu s t be un derstood very differe ntly : not to the exclus ion o f all t h at exceeds the material orde r, but in fu ll view of the "higher", an d as an exte ns io n or prolongati on of the ea nh 's pre-materia l his tory.lI

Th is "history " , th e emanationa l se quen ce by v irtu e of w hi c h th e physica l pl ane p roceeds by way of the sub tl e or a nimi c order from o ut of its principial Source, is so metimes re ferred to as an "involution \ a word which ca ll s a llen ti on less to the metaphysical movement in divinis from within to o ut s id e-to evolutionperse-and more to th e cosmic receptacle into w hi ch t he movement en te rs, into which the Subject is in carnated or emp tied , "W ho being in the form of God made Himse lf of no

10. The word "ex p lo d e is d elibe ratel y use d , and it cou ld in fac t be repeated be low with respect to each of the "slages R and forms of ex istence env isioned , in orde r to d eno te the discontinuity between various levels and the sud denne ss with which they ari se. Martin Lings has pointt:d out that th e tcaching of Jalal ad-Din concerning rebirth "from vegetable to animal and from animal to man", ana log ous in cer tain respects to the sequence we are about to discuss, ha s so metimes been mi s int erpreted as an anticipation ofDarvvinian in sp it e ufthe fact that in Humi '· there is no gradual development but a series of sudden and even though "the mineral , vegetable, animal, and human s tatc.:s arc env isaged"-bol.h in Rumi and here--already existing and fully d ev el oped . Th e evolution in question is thaI of a single being, fro m the lowest to the hi ghest Slates, from th e periphery to the centre (Lings , 11Je Eleventb llour: 11Je Spiritual Cris iS o/tbe M ode m World in tbe Ligbl o/Tradition lind Prophecy [Cambridge, England: Quinta Essentia, 19871 , 28n).

1]. minus always presupposes <In initial plus, so that <I seeming evolu ti on is no more than the quite provisional unfolding of a pre-existing result; the human embryo becomes a man because thaI is what it already is; no 'evolu t ion' will produce a man from an animal embryo. In the same way the whole cosmos can only spring from an embryonic state which contains the virtuality of all its pOSSible deployment a nd simply makes manifest on the plane of contingencies an infinitely higher and t ",n scendcnt prototype " (Sch uo n , Vllders/lInding Islam , tr'IIlS. D. M. Ma theson ILondon: Unwin, 19631,108-109n) .

reputation , and took the form of a servant, and was mad e in the liken ess of man. " From another point of view, howeve r, the one which is here being stressed, th e en tir e process , whether in its invo lu tionary or evo lutionary "stage s", and whether outside or inside the mat erial plane -deployment or explica ti o n- is a ll of one piece: it is an evolution or "o p e ning out " of none other than God throughout its entire e xt e nt. For it is one and the same Subject-or, to make use of o ur image again, th e very same p oint-whic h accounts for the whole, for a ll of th e degrees of Reality and all of their innumerable contents. Of co ur se to see that Ihi s is so require s a method of invest igation and a perceptual sens itivity quite different from the o rdinary empirica l orientation. Things must be a pproache d from within, with a view to their forms, not to their shapes. We hav e said that one of th e problems with tran s formist evolution is its inadequacy to th e full range of the cosmos, that it looks a t only a part of th e whole. But the problem is also that it looks Ollly at a part of Ihe whole. Its approach to the world is therefore bound to e clipse the metaphys ic al tran s parency of natural forms, which are inte nd e d by God to be Hi s se lf-e xpression , the express ion of "even his eternal powe r and Godh ead ", but whic h can be seen as such only if me n loo k nol at but along or p e rhap s even through the creatures around them.

If they were so to look , what they would see is that the produ c tion of so lids fr o m th e ir source in the point is not the end of the s tory. The radiantly explosive energy of the Subject is not yet exhausted, nor ca n it be. But h avi n g as it were no more room to expand, all [h e dimen s ions being filled with Its presence, It cannot but turn in Its movement toward the center o f th e things it has made. This center mu s t certainly not be confused with some sort of spatial position, half-way betwe e n th e front and the back, or the top a nd th e bottom , o f a particular solid ent it y. It is rather the "in s ide without because prior to an outside" o f the po int itself, into which , as into Itself, th e Subj ect now proceeds . The result ing intros u scep ti o n marks the beginning of an act of return , of remanation and recapitulation . And ye t it is also "more of the sa me"-sim p ly another m a nifest ation of the SeWs unfathomable plenitude

Having th e n , to re peat , no more room fo r itself, in "ne ed" of expans ion but Ja c king an adequate space, the point undert akes something "new " and b e gins to move along a novel course. It begins to di s play in the solids once made a range of qualities or attribut es, unv e iling it se lf in

th e how not the what, in th e kind n o t th e fact, of th e al ready ex isting material objects. Thus no sooner are the solids crysta llized than , by virtue of the same p re- material e m anat io nal ene rgy that first produ ce d th e m , there b egins to burgeon inside a se rie s of "high er dimensions." An int e riorizing action is initiated , according to which the manifestations of the Subj ec t become in cre asing ly ce nlral to the cre atures in qu es ti o n. At first th e point , having just co mpl e ted it s t hird and final "spatial " deployment, presents its elf in a uniform way throu gh o ut a p artic ula r ob ject, equally in lengt h, in breadth , and in d e pth , an d in the form o f a specia l property, as for exa mpl e in th e attra ct ive powe r o f the lodes tone or th e crys talline st ru ct ure of the diamond. Suc h a property is everywhere all th at it is, as much in th e p arts as in th e whole , a p iece o f a given substa nce having "as much " of th e qua li ty-to use the useless ness o f s uch language-as any ot h er. The Sou rce o f the s ub s tan ce, for those who h ave e ye s to see, is thu s writt en upon its very su rfac e .

But th e s urface of things is far too confining for the Subject. It ne eds t he a mplitud e afforded by Its ow n infinity , a n d soo n becomes "d iscontent n , diving b elow the surface o f p hys ica l objects , going "indoors", and the re presenting it se lf in the guise of a process. Here is th e beginning o f life in its organ iC ex pre ssio n and as unfolded o n th e insid e o f m atter. What one immed iately notices in look ing along suc h a process, howeve r-a lo ng a vit al or p h ysiologica l fun ction-i s that a certa in specialization among the pans o f th e whole has been introduced. Unlik e a mine r ai, not all of a li ving being is all that it i s all the way through Certa in aspec ts, even when th ey are not as clea rly di stin ct as th e indivi d ual organs o f the high er sp ec ies, assume a ce rtain pri o rit y as p rov idin g th e ch a nnels or openings through whic h life m ay ent er the e nli re being. T hese aspec ts are to the substance o f a li v ing crea tur e w hat the plane is to th e so lid ; th ey a re its condUio s ine qua non- in it , but no t of it Q uite the cont ra!)', it is depend e nt o n them. But mo re to th e pu rpose, where min e ral prop e rti es h ad been tou resl ri cl ive , th e more inward c ha racte r of biological process provides the Subject w ith add iti onal o ppo nun iti es for expans ion, as is evi d ent in growt h . Al thou gh the manifes tation of th e Subjec t in organi c life has b ecome in a se n se itse lf res tri cte d to certai n more o r less sp ecia li zed aspects of a n en tity , in a way that th e propert ies o f a diamond are n o t, th ese aspects are actua ll y ope n along a m e taphysical passageway to far wider possibilities th an inorg an ic m atter pe r

se ca n allow for, and it is thu s th a t th e re e nter into th e being th e uun c reated e ne rgies" th at a re necessary for the unfo lding o f its life. It is in thi s se nse that the p lan l kingdom, th o ugh emerging later in Ihe temporal seque nce, may be said to be higher than the mineral , for the plant prov ides a g reate r d egree o f ope nn ess to its so ur ce. 12

Now we enco unt e r yet anothe r de velopment, a furth e r "evo lution " of t h e point. Althou g h the plant is able to grow and b lossom in a way Ih at th e min era l c annot, it rema in s s ubje ct to limitati o ns, which the Sub ject mu s t sti ll overco me, limitations viSib ly expressed in its attachment 10 the ea rth . If unrest ri cted e man a ti o n is to continu e, therefore , a n altogether diffe rent access mu s t be prov ided through which the p o int might be e nabl ed to p ass int o an e ve n more re s pl e nd e nt qu a litativ e exp ress ion. He re, it wou ld seem, is t he metap hysica l ex plan a ti on for th e birt h of sen ti e nce and the power of locomotion, the two most telling features of th e kingdom next to deve lo p , t h at of th e anima ls. An even mo re prono un ced inten'orization has he re taken place, for w hit e an an imal's movement is a lrea d y a sig n of deeper capa citi es ev ide nt eve n to a pu re ly empirical o utl ook, th e power of co nsc io us response w hi c h gives rise to t hi s movement , and w hi ch ca n be seen (o nce again) o nl y by "looking along" the locomo ti on, is eve n furth er within th an t he power of life, and ye t , precise ly because it is fu n her ins ide, it is correspo ndingl y close r to an exter io ri za ti o n or evo lu tion on the othe r side of the creatu re, t he s id e opposed to the fa ce t discerned by the p ure ly sensory eye-even as form is on th e furth er, but sha p e on the hither, side o f mat eria l objects. As th e point strives to mak e room for itse lf in a s pace that is already ex h a usted, c hann e ls a re es t ab li s hed t h roug h w hi ch there can fl ow the g rea ter inte n s ity of se nti e n ce. It is in thi s way that the flower is o p ene d to the butte rfl y, a blossom re leased from its stem. 13 Neverthe less, thi s release o r lib eratio n co uld not have been accomplished by the plant on it s ow n

12. A qualificat io n to tbis principle is in order, however, si nce the "mctaphysical (Se lmon) of a given crca ture depends not o nly upon the plane of being it occu pies , but upo n its relative "centra lit yDon that plane-its proximity to the point at which that plane is intersected by the axis mUlldi-not to mention other imponderables. Wh il e pla nts may in gene ral be "high er" than minerals, becau se o f th e o rgan iC life that is in them , a precious gem rem:lins a more lucid theophany than a weed l11e same qualification mus t be applied (0 the rdative pos iti ons in the great c hain of being o r p lants and an imals, and of animals a nd man. A nob le animal, like an eagle or a li on, is "more Divine " than a h uman being who lives below himself. We do not in any case mean to propos e a rig id system.

The flower ha s se rved as a portal for creative l causative Power, but is not itself that cause. Even as apart from th e plane the line wou ld remain invisible , in proportion as the plane apart from the solid wou ld be gible l so in the abse nce of life would consciousness be hidden from the organs of sense, On the other hand , the plane could not exist a t all apart from the lin e, nor the solid without the plane I nor any dimen s ion were it not for th e point ; and were it not for the Subjec t, neither matler, nor life , nor sentience would ever have been deployed o r explicated-Subject through matter as life, and Subject thr o ugh life as se nti e n ce.

It is worth pausing to emphasize the radical differenc e belween this view of the seq uence of form s and that of the DaIWinian or transformist theory. The metaphysician is not saying that matter evolves into life , or life into sentience. NorIan a smaller sca le, do amphibians evolve into reptiles I or reptiles into birds ; Ga lapagos finches are always fin ches, and peppered moth s are always m o ths. 14 The on ly evolution is that of the point , which is the Divine Self as Subject. The fo rms of existence through which It "pa sses", in a stric tly non -temporal and instantan eous way I do not th emse lve s change, for th ey are th e unalterable imag es of celestial ideas-the dist inct and immutable s h adows cas t by the Divine Slin as It shines up on t he e te rnal archetypes of Its myriad crealures. 15

There is obvious ly a final ch a pter, a final s tage to be sketched, and thi s is th e case of man himself, and hence of the mind which theorizes w ith a v iew to t he truth : man , in whose various levels o f being th e re is uniquely exhibite d l emerging throllgh the senlience he shar es with the animals, the life he s hares with the plants l and the body h e s hares with the rninerai s l an incomparably different quality, his consciousness-one s hould perhaps say "potential l ' or "v irtual" consciousness-of Se lf. 16 Here

13. "The insect world, taken at large , appears as an intenser life, that has sl'tU ggJc d itsel f loose and tx.>come ema ncipated from vege tati on We might imagine the life of insects a n apotheosis o f th e petals, s ta mina , and nec taries round which th ey flutter, or of the ste ms and pcdiclcs, to which they adhere " (Co le rid ge, ·'nlcory of Life ", 594).

14, TIle variati ons within certain p o pulati ons of fin c he s, first noted by Darwin in Ihe Galapagos Island s during his 1831 -36 vO}"Jges on the HM.5 Beagle, arc we ll known. As for this part ic ular species of moth, "Ke ttlew e ll 's obse rvation of indu strial melanism in Ihe p eppered moth (Biston betularia ) ha s been cited in countless textbooks and popular treatises as proof that natural se lec ti o n ha s {he kind o f generative power need e d 10 produce new kinds o f co mpl ex o rgan s and organisms ·, even though in this case th ere was never any change o f the kind a ll ege d b y tr,lIlsformiSls (Jo hn son, Danviu 011 Trial , 176).

the in tropulsive, and inte riorizing tendency of th e point ha s "a t la st " caugh t up to having step by step provided ever more e xt e nded poss ibil itie s for irradiation , "unt il" th e leve l is reached where it "beco mes " the field o f its very own moti o n and expression. The circl e ha s bee n closed ; the goa l is attained . Intellection h as ful fill ed its reason for be ing and has re aliz ed in the only fully adeq uate way th e pl e nitud e of its unco nditioned freedom, within th e limi tl ess "space " of its very Se lf. Fo r to say man, the last o f th e s pecies to appear o n th e is to say capa c ity for the Abso lut e and the In fi nite , for th e Supreme Reality, s ince it is o nly in man , of a ll c reatur es, t h at the Su bj ec t is able to find a sufficie nt accom mo dati on fo r Its full inte ns ity . No me re bodil y, three dim e ns io nal e ntity as suc h ca n ho pe to co ntain the fans et origo of a ll nor do the udime ns ion al" qualities , wh e ther property (as a lion o f the so lid ), life (as a recap itul ation of th e plane), or se nt ience (as a recapitulation o f th e lin e) eve r more than approac h It. Its ene rgy is suc h th a t It ca n be fully manifest only in a mode which is equ ally infinite an d t herefore equa ll y w ithout dim e nsion-equa lly lik e a point. But th is is precisely what Se lf-co nsciou s ness is, what int e llec ti o n and noesis ar e : an unbounded insta ntaneou s inwardness , which, like th e att ri butes of life a nd is nOl at all of th e hum an body, but which unlike th ese lowe r qualiti es is not eve n in it , because n ot exp ressed eve n as it

15 is the unfO ld ing of a given virtuality and not the passage of a give n possibi li ty to a qu ite differen t possib ilit yn (Schuon , unpublished leiter to the author). "The form o f a peripheral b ei ng , wh et h e r it be an im al, vegetab le, o r min er al , reveals ;tllthatlhe being kn ows, a nd is as it were itself identified with thi s knowledge; it can be said, therefor e, that the form o f s uch a being gives a true indicati on of its contemp lative s tate or dream Nee dle ss to say , the object of knowledge or o f intelligence is always and by defini tion the Divine Prin c ipl e and cannot be anything else , s ince It is metaphy s ically th e only Reality; b ut thi s o bjec t o r content can vary in form in confo rmity with the indefinite diver s it y of the modes and degree s o f Intellig e nce renected in crea tures " (Schuon , tbe Trall sce ,u Jen l lhlity of Religi o lls [Wheaton , Illinois: T h e l11 eos ophical P ubl ishing Ho us e, 19841 , 56) .

16. Not ice the emphasis on the prepos iti on lh rollgb , n ot "from ", Man 's consciousness of himself, hi s p ower of self- refl ec ti on, ca n obviously comc o nl y from the Self, on p ain o f the co ntradicti o n referred to ea rli e r in considering th e sixt h of the Darwinian e rrors. Fa ilure to attend to thi s crucial "prepos iti o nal " diffe rence can result in a kind of "o pti cal illusion" , whi ch is pe rhaps at the root o f that impossible co mprom ise popularly known as evolutionism " , whose proponents contend that God some how manages to crea te the wo rld by means of the process described by Darwi n . It s h oul d be clear by now that th e mel aphysfca/or eman aliolla f gcvolution M here envisioned ha s nOthing in com mo n with th is ab s u rdity

were on its "edge", as the p lane and th e lin e ca n be seen o n th e s id es and th e corne rs of soli ds. "Word as He was, so far from be ing co nt aine d by anything, He ra ther contained all thing s Himself' (St Alh a na s ius).17 The act of onlOlogica l knowing iss ues from a ce ntral a nd hidden point so concentrated as to exceed altoget h er th e reach of the body and, hence, the all too limited means of empirical resea rc h . Although as t hi s sketc h has been intended to s how man 's int e lligence can be sa id to evolve through what is beneat h it in th e o rd er of being, it evolves even so, and can only evo lve, Jrom th e hi g her and indeed as the Hi ghest. What is length, bread th , and then d e pth o n th e way "down" to th e eart h b ecomes triply and in ve rsely di sp layed o n its way "in ", and in a ce rtain sense "up", as th e qualities of physica l subs tance-in property , process, and sentie n ce-the premateria l co ns tru c ti o n of matter being mirrored in the s u ccess ion of crea lUres. And yet none of the dimensio ns wo uld be w ha t it is, nor wo uld th e dimensional quali ties be recognized for what they a re , if it were not fo r the point, the sovere ign Subjec t, w hich is b o th beginning and end."

As announced at the outset, the aim of thi s art icl e has been to provide an acco unt of the worl d per ascensum whic h is in full conformity w it h the v iew per "escens"", propounded by metaphysics and th eology ; a nd we have th erefore been obliged to insist throughout that none "hath cended up to Heaven, but He that came down from Heaven, even the Son of Man which is in Heave n "-hence that no infrap erso n al o r evo lut ionaIY exp lanation of the world ca n have th e s li g ht est va lu e unless it

17. 'ne saint adds tbat "man , enclosed on every side by the works of c re ation and everywhere beh o lding the utlfo/ded Co dhe(ld of the Word, is no longer de ceived concerning God - (our ita lics).

18. · When all is sa id and done , there are o n ly thre e miracles: existence , life, int elligence; with intelligen ce , the c urve springing from God closes on itself, like a ring which in reality ha s never Ix'en parted from the Infinite " (Selmon , light OIl/he Anclellt lVorlck , 42). "As re gard s manife station , i1 may be said that the 'Self' develop s lis manifold possibilitie s , indefinite in their multiwde , through a multiplicity o f modalities of realization, amounti ng , for the int egral being"-represented here by the point- "to so many differe nt states , of which state s one alone , limited by the spc c i:ll conditions of existenc e whi c h define it , l: o n s titutes the portion or r:llher (hI.! particular determinati o n of that being which is c alled human indiVid uality · (R e ne Guenon , Mall and llis Becomillg Acco rdillg/o Ihe Vedanta , tran s Richard C. Nich olson INc w York : 111 C Noo nda y Press, 19581, 29-30).

acknowledges, and repeated ly stresses, the absolu te supre macy of God, our ultimate Source. 19 Nonet he less we have also assumed that the sequ e nce in the terrestria l appearance of certa in forms of ex istence is not without a symbolic message , and that reading that message in the li g ht provided by traditional authorities might he lp to point certain of our contemporaries, who w ish to make so much o f the "facts" and who often false ly su ppose them to be incompatib le with a Divine explanation, back and up to princip les. For truths are always consistent with Truth.

Whateve r th e b ene fit s of this reading, and quite a part from th e question of whether it might prov e as convincing to the theologian as to the metaphysician, it is wo rth emp h asizing once again that the picture prese nte d here is preci se ly a "pict ure "-no more th an a ske tch, a possible darsbana. Simply because a certai n vocabula.ry and p articu lar images hav e b ee n used as mai e utic means , no one s hould imag ine that all others have been th ereby exclu d ed. We read ily admit that thi s cosmogony do es not, can no t, and n eed not sta nd opposed to ot her equally effective "impersonal" visions, provided of co urse that they a re equally subjec t to

19. 'l1lOUgh far less ha s been said of a spccifkally nature or in dogmatic terms, and far more along metaphysical lines, the theological bases for an acceptable interpretation of evolution should be deducible from this and other tmuitional Christian teachings a llu ded to at vario us points throughout this :lrtide. Further support can be found in the dogma of the early Church regarding th e Blessed Virgin as the 71Jeotokos o r "Mothe r of and in th e metaphysical insigh t it affords concerning the substance of materia prima, a sub stan ce which is not unconnected (when rightly considered) to that "material maner" through which the "message sent by God from Himself passes on its way of return. Even as that Man was born of Mary in Whom was "recapit ulated the ancient making of Adam n (St lrena eus)-t hat is, the e terna l emanation of primordial man in dlvinfs-the Virgin being the earth ly expression of the "fecundation latent in eternity" (Eckhart): so there proceed out of matter, and by virtue of th e "dimensional n elaborations described above , the forms of the minerals, p lants, and anima ls , which we re Hk(."wise "already· etern:llly made, and tbrougb the material coagu lations " of which the idea of Man is enab led to move in its tow. m ls full d isclosure on earth, As 5t Anselm writes , "11, e Iioly Ghost and 'the powe r of the Mos t High ' wonderfully begal a Man from a Virgin MOthe r. Thus with respect to the others it tay in Adam, that is, in his power, that they should have being from him, but with respect to this Man it did not lie in Adam that lie should exist in any way, any more than it lay in the slime tbat the first m:ln, who was made from it, shou ld corne from it in a wonderful way, or in th e man, thai Eve should be of him, as in facl she was made. But it did not lie in any o f them, in whom! Ie was from Adam to Mary , that He should exist. Konetheless, He was in them , because that from which I Ie was to be laken was in them, just as Ihat from which the fi rst man was made was in the slime , and that from which Eve was made in him. He was in them, however, not by the creature 's will or strength, but by the Divine Power

the irrefragable truths of pure metaphysics, co ncerning w hi ch there can be no compromise. It is to be understood in a ny case tha t the suffic ient rea son for havi ng a view of the cosmos is not that it might correspond in some more or less mathematical way to the world as it is in itse lf, which is as far beyond perfect comprehens ion as it is below perfect being. The aim instead is to provide va riou s keys or supports for intellection, that uncreated power of knowing What is and being What knows by w hich we are enabled to trJnscen d this world altoget her-t hough then only in seei n g, through a prayerful loo kin g along it , tha t th is same world is "a lready" the kingdom of God Adveniat ,'egnum tuum , fiat vo/unlas lua, sicut in caelo el in terra.

On Revelation, Initiation, and Culture

William W. Quinn

One cannot adequately in co rporate all that Rene Guenon wrote o n the subject of initiation into a brief article. Two of his principal books, Apelfus sur "initiation and Initiation el realisation spirituelle were en tir ely devoted to the lOpic It is, however, sufficient for our purposes to itlentify the se minal points of th e in iti atic process as Guenon hims elf described t hem at th e e nd of c h apter four of ApeYfus sur [ 'initiation: namely, the need for (1) a basic apti tu de of the initiate to undertake the work of initiation, (2) the transmission of a sp ir itual influence e ffe cting an illumination, significan tly by means of participation in a traditiona l orga nization ("par Ie moyen du rattachement a une organisation lraditionnelle"), and (3) an indispensab le in ward journey ("travail interieur") leading grad u a ll y to deliverance or "Sup reme Identity. " The se sa me points of initiation as Gue non ha s descri bed here, it s hould be noted, are encountered from time to time w ithin the recorded texts and anna ls of the Primordia l Tradition in its various manifestations, and correspond rough ly to the Masonic construclion of discovery, assimilation, and propagation of th e Light of which he wrote elsewhere.

What inte rests u s here is the second of these pOints; mor e particularly the notions of "a s piritual influ e nc e" and of a "Traditional o rganizati o n ," and whether assoc iation w ith the latter is indi spe nsabl e for achieving Supreme Id ent ity. Upo n reflection , the qu es ti on of what co nst itut es a "Traditional organization" in modernity engenders more questions than suggests answers. This is especially true when o n e co nsid e rs th e concept of revela ti on and the notion of "u nbroken tran smissio n " of a spi ritual influence that const itutes one o f Guenon's definit iona l elements of

Traditional organization. Moreover, Guenon spoke of the "regular" initi at ion-as di stinc t from "irregu lar"-a nd ne cessarily implied thereby that, like the initiations offered, o rganizations offering initiation were either "regular," e.g., Traditional, or "irregu lar," e.g., pseudo-esoteric, th e latter be ing perfectly illustrative of the cris is of the modern world and the signs of the times. Among our principal objectives here is to examine what is, in fact , a "Traditional o rganizati on, " w hat gives one its authenticiry, and whe ther it is a sine qua non for such an organization to ha ve link s to an orthodox branch of one of the major world re ligions in which some form of succession or transmission may exist.

Ananda Coomaraswamy was a good deal more circumspect about initiation than was Gue non. Most of Coomaraswamy 's wri ting s on initiation, like his article titl ed "The ' E' at Delphi," conce rned the initialic aspeclS of what surv ives to us of ancient and mediaeval Traditional cultures in scriptura l or iconographic form. To say this is not to suggest that initiation to Coomaraswamy was not an in tegral part of the spiritual quest or not an endem ic principle of the ph ilosophia perennis. Rather, it is to say that the emphasis placed on it by Cooma ra swamy was both less and differe nt than that placed on it by Guenon for whom, as Gabriel Asfar comme nted , initiati o n was a "sac ram e nt. " Furth er, to observe this differe n ce in the ways these two men approached th e su bject of iniliati on is not to suggest th eir views were in co nflict or di.s...<;imilar. This difference of emp h asis , in stead, provides a useful heuristic device for purposes of exami ning the broad topic of the relationship between initiation and cu lture , and all related considerations implicated by this topic

h is necessary, at this point, to define two terms that are used throughout. The first is "Traditional culture," by which we mean a society in which th e first principles of the Trad ilion hav e an overt and preeminent role in the life a nd morphology of the cu lture; where the s tat e religion, as it were, reflects in its scripture and sy mboli s m those first principles; where the social order is hierarchica lly arranged with the spiritual-metaphysical-component (Guenon 's "spiritual elecl ") at the top; where all vocation a t every level reflects the Tradition and provides an opportunity for tho se who merit to access truth an d undergo initiation; and where these cult ural e le ments are unanimous, wholly sys temic , and consequently it"ving. Th e seco nd term n eeding definiti o n is "orthodoxy," a concept having spec ial meaning in Traditional literature and which of-

ten leads t hose n ewly co me to Traditional sou rces int o some confusion and ambiguity. The prescr ip tive usage is easy enough to comprehend, fro m the Gree k ol1b os, mea nin g "s traight " or "reg ul ar," (from th e IndoEuropea n root werdh "to grow " (st raight) , from w hence th e Sans krit vardhati) , combi ne d with doxa ("o pini o n ") from t he verb dokein ("to think "), resu lti ng in "s tr aigh t thinking ," or "to think strai g h t." The d esc riptiv e usage, on th e other hand , aligns orthodoxy with eccl es ia stica l a u t hority and d og ma, so that whether a requir e d belief is true (straight) or not , one mu s t accept it as s u c h or risk the consequences. In thi s definition , th e antonym to o rth o doxy is "he resy" or as often "h e terodox," as against "un o rthod o x ." The obvious problem with the definition of o rth odoxy as it applies to Traditiona l lite rature is that, ove r time, establi s hed eccles ias tical d oc trin e and dogma frequently ca me to serve a nd preserve th e exclu s ive ly sec ul ar e nds of established churches a nd churc h leaders. Sim p ly put , in thi s usage orthodoxy and dogma further the goals of the O ut e r Man among ecclesiastical bureau c ra ts, and no t th e Inn er Man among the ge nuin e s p iritu a l aspirants of t he es tab li s he d c hurc h Anyone famili a r with th e profo und eso te ri c imparl of t he tex ts of 3rd and 4th -ce ntury Med iterra nea n Gnosticism , a "heresy" exp ress ly ta rgeted by th e esta bli s he d c hurch, w ill at once recognize th e problem. W hat is at times unclear a nd thus problematic in the w ritin gs o f ce rt a in Traditional authors, includ in g Gu e non , is whether "o rthodoxy " is being use d in the prescripti ve or d escrip tiv e se nse or in so me o th e r se nse a ltoget her in discussing t ransmission, s uc cess ion , and initiatio n in Traditi o nal organizations. 1

External Revelation

The Prim o rdi a l Tradition, which is the so ur ce of a ll traditions, is time-

1. Con founding this i<;sue even mo re is Guenon's use of the term ort hod oxy" in c hapter 13 of Flmdmnenlal Symbols (Quinta Essentia 1995), which we use in p refe re nce to Ed itions Gallimard 1962 beca use of the ed itor's footnote 13 "Tt'aditional as used h ere by Guenon means-assuming it is not e tymolog ically redundant -a com munication &between and participati o n in the attributes of th e Centre of the World & and a given Traditional religion / culture. lnc editor's extenuat ion of Gucnon's s ta tement both (1) confirms th e view that a cessation o f the maintenance o f thiS dir<-"t co mmu nication results in the demise o f its o rth od oxy and, in the process, (2) blurs the distinctio n be tween usage and meaning of the term s "o rthodoxy" and "spiritual innuc nce (and the transmi ssion thereof), by making them pr:lclically interchangeable.

less and immemorial and uncond iti oned. The s pecifi c traditions, however, which are a lways associated with cu ltures-or "soc ielies" if o ne prefers--come and go like sen ti e nt beings. Eac h has a paint of orig in in history, usually associated with an externa lly manifested revelation, and lives a cycle of growth, maturity , decrepitude, and death. This process occurs both in tandem with, and regardless of, th e larger cycles at work in th e cosmos associated with the Ind ic notion of yugas. Leaving aside triba l or "primitive " soc ie tie s, which typically are every bit as trad iti onal as tho se most fam iliar to us, like the India of Sankara for examp le, one can trace this process as among c ultur es informed by th e major world religions quite easily simp ly by referring to the lists of former Tradit io nal cultures publisheJ by both Coomaraswamy and Guenon. Those listed cultures no longer exist in the late twenrieth century--each li ved its life and died , as it were. Today, in the wake of the ravages and viciss itudes of modernity, one cannot point to a single unspoiled and tndy li ving Traditional culture informed by a major world religion anywhere on the planet, and perhaps on ly to a handfu l of surviving pri stine, triba l societies in the remotest regions of the Earth.

It is critica l in making such observations to di stinguis h unanimous and living Traditiona l cultures roote d in the sacred Primordial Tradition-whether th ey were Christian or Islamic or Hindu or Buddhistand cultures that may be predominantly Ch ri stia n or Islamic or Hindu or Buddhist in modernity. The latter a re now all modern nations and creatures of modernity. Though the re li gious dimensions may be more or less infu sed into the fabr ic of their polities, one does not find among them any genuine Traditional cult ures fitt ing the definition set forth supra. As to the former, however, one can identify in each a period of maturity-by which we mean a spiritual maturity-where unanimity and the exp licit assimi lation of th e firs t pr incip les of the Tradition were predominant charac teristics. Conversely, in modern times th e critical unanimity of formerly Tradi tional cu ltures has g iven way to a confusion of languages, ethnicilies, global socialization, p olitica l rivalries, secularization, industriali za tion and pollution, sectarian and fundamenta li st re li gious tendenci es, and ot her simi lar constituents of d isintegration, th ereby precluding any possible reinstatement of Tra ditional cultu re .

The typica l pOint of origin o f any developed Traditional culture was a public and external revelation , more or less encapsulated by the San-

skrit term Sruti. This may be sa id of Moses for Judaism, Lao-tzu for Taoism, th e Buddha for Buddhism, Jesus for Christianity, and Muhammad for Islam. While agree ing with Coomaraswamy that each ought to be afforded the higher d ignity of a mythical rea lity, there is nonetheless some historicity involved wi th these prophets-these avatalS-who came to humanity with the purpose of bringing Light , literally a revelation in a world of darkness. So , it ca n be said, for examp le , that in 569 C.E., a year before the birth of Muhammad, there were no Islami c Traditional c ultures. Such cu lture s that were later to be developed owed their ex istence to the external rev e lati o n brought by the Prophet, who by his existence c hang ed ent ire ly the landscape of polytheistic western Arabia , ju s t as the existing Jewi s h c ulture of Hellenisti c Pal est ine was changed by Jesus , and the existi ng Brahmanic culture of nonhern India was c hanged by the Buddha , and so on.

Each of these revelation s, which necessarily co ntain e d muhival e ncies of meaning ab initio , including the Primordial Tradition in essential form, resulted in creating an es tablished "religion." Reve la ti on an d the tradit ion that derives from it, as Frithjof Schuon has noted , b elong to the fo rmal order. More often than not , these revelat io ns c reated more than one re ligion , so at the outset major rifts and divi s ions occurred. One need look no further th an Mahayana and Hinayana , Eastern Orthodox and Wes tern Catholic , Sunni and Shi 'a, and so on. Funhennore, virtually all s uch public and e xt e rnal reve lations , within several centuries of their diss e mination, engendered numerous "heresi es," which were typically no more than hermeneutical differences on th e same, basic themes . Often th ese heresies were exterminated b y the dominant "orthodox" surv ivor of the early religiou s fo rmation wars, and so began what came to b e accepted by consensus as the orthodox re ligi o n . Thi s, in turn , became the acknow ledged keeper of th e line of "tran s mi ssio n " for regular initiation into holy orde rs or some mo nastic line d evoted to co ntemplation and active processes of spi ritual development We ha s ten to add here, how eve r, that regard less of the orthodoxy or pedigree of any such relig iOllS order, where true s piritual influence has cease d an d only dogma and empty ritual remain, no regular initiation c an be had, for in suc h c ircumstances the "transmission " or success io n becomes a parody , a holl ow gestu re , owing to th e d es uetude of spiritual influence While th e sta rting point of any such tra nsmiss ion was th e Prophet 's revelation , th e

efficacy of the transmission depends on the surv ival of a spiritual in fluence, without which there exists on ly I;t lifeless form. The sp iritual influence of which we speak is , of course, ,[ loya l and reciproca l re lations hi p to the esoter ic or symbolic application of the re li gion-or revelationin question and , moreover, to those guardia ns of whom Guenon speaks in Le mi du monde as defenders of ce rtain sp iritu al centers that proximate the ex Jonte source of the Primordial Tradition. Where orthodoxy, as it too often does, takes the form of ecclesiastical bureaucracy, suc h spiritual influence itse lf is regard ed as heresy, as the case of Meister Eckhardt pe rfectly illu stra tes.

Relig ions, per se, tend to focu s o n a cu ltural communitas, which may be either con templative orders o r the active clergy and lai ty. Both are directly resultan t from the origina l and public revelation which gave them life. Each necessarily in volves interact ion with others, as against th e life of a cenobite, for example. In doing so, however, one inev itable res ult is the constant man ifesta tion of human foibles where people interact: competition, jealousy, power, required conformity, and the like. These a re , as Coomaraswamy would have sa id , man ifesta tion s of th e Outer Man. Contemplative orders and s piritual communities are b y no means e xempt from such problems. Moreover these foibles, while occas iona ll y evident in Traditional cultures, are as Michel Fou ca ult ha s amply shown exace rbat ed in th e religious in s tituti ons of modernity, where compet ition over contro l of both peop le and resources in the quest for power lead to cons tant and unremitting schisms of and splinter groups from larger denominations. Often, though not a lways, th e catalys t for such problems is the downfall or demise of a powerful and/or c hari s mati c leader revered by the sp iritu al community The communal c haos that derives from such an incident is an ind icium or even the measure of the absence of w hat was earlier referred to as "s piritua l influ ence." Whe re the laller exists, the former cannot.

In ternal Revelation

Internal revelation is that which occurs as an interna l process o f the spi ritual aspirant , where the mind and h eart intersect- refe rred to by both Coomaraswamy and Guenon as "intellection. " It is brought abou t by differing spiritual practices and techniques adapted to suit the individual cand id ate, but always involves the process of meditation . There are,

moreover, varying degrees of internal revelation, ranging from basic intuiti ve insights into corres pondences to the state referred to by the Sa nskrit term samadhi. It is an achievement of th e seeke r alone , through his own so litary e fforts of practice and perseverence, and ha s nothing directl y to do with co mmunit as.

Certainly internal revelation can, and often does, occ ur within the milieu of some contemplative spiritual order in the physical realm under the long -term gu idance of a regularly initiated spi ritual teacher, but it ca n also occur in the life of an individual aspirant, living in phys ica l isolation from suc h an order, who by virtue of hi s daily practices and way of li fe routine ly accesses the li vi ng stream of reve l atory truth by w hich he guides hi s actions. The isolate may nm a greater ri sk of veering off co urse, so to speak, from the true sp iritual path than does the aspirant living within a bona fide spi rit ua l community, but so extens ive are th e reliable resources available today for the so litary aspirant's stud y and refl ec ti on for th e process of what Coomaraswamy refers to as "selfnaughting ," that this risk can be great ly minimized. Direction can also be had from the connectio ns made b y meditation and the process of internal revela tion . We do not assert here that such resources are an equal replacement for a bona fide teacherj rather, that where a person for w hatever reasons ca nnot avai l himself physically of life in a spiritual community , his cou rse ca n be chec ked ancl corrected by Traditional and oth er simil ar literat ure in addition to the daily sp iritual practices undertak en. Where no reasonable al te rn ative exists, it is undoubted ly better to tread the s piritua l path alone (ostensibl y) than not to tread it at all, despite w hatever risks may be attendant to th e quest. Neither sho uld one overlook, co nversely , the risk o f damage that could b e ca used by associating wilh what one believes in good faith to be a bona fide spiritu al commun ity and / or teacher, which / who in truth exists to serve and pre serve exclusively secu l ar ends by means of fraud or dominarion of the wi ll , and of which there appear to be so many in these days.

To repea t, int erna l reve lation occurs quite independent of o rth odox, cu lturally o riented re li gious communit ies based on some pr ior, historica l exte rnal reve lati on. It is an individual and not a collective phenomenon. It constitutes a direct apprehension of the first principles of the Tradition and all that is implicated thereby , without need of the manifest do ctrin es and teachings arising from the historical externa l reve lation,

or established religion. It is the process of "re -coll ection" of what has been rem e mbered (Sanskrit smrti, i.e. "Tradition"), related to what in the Platonic context is refe rred to as anamnesis. The exte nt to which any aspirant in the process of internal revelation utili zes the exoteric symbolism and scriptural di sco urse of some world religion , some historical external reve lation, depends upon the experiences , backg round, and predilection of the aspirant. While the lise of such exoteric revelation via religious symbolism and sc ripture may be quite helpful to someparticularly to th ose born into and raised in that religi on-it is not an absolute and indispensable pre-condilion for direct apprehension of the first principles of the Tradition by those who possess the requisite ca pabilities. This points to perhaps the most salient practical difference between the exoteric and the esoteric, beyond simp ly th e exegesis of scripture based in any of the various historic revelations of the Word. It is not the phys ica l tea c her in this world that provides the pupil with th e w herewithal to achieve direct apprehension of the first prin ciples-internal revelation-via the deve loped gnosis (Sans krit prajiid ) or intellectual intuition. Rather, it is the pupil himself who inherently possesses this capability, and who alone can exercise it at will.

Co-operation of External and Internal Revelation

Both as phenomena and as processes, external and internal revelatio n are neith e r exclusive nor interdependen t. To repeat , one can ce rtainly utilize the exoter ic or external symbo li s m and sc riptur e of a major world religion as a prin Cipal means of ac cess ing the underlying eso teric or interna l immemo rial truths which the former reveals, e.g., crucifixion, resurrection, and transformation. This establis h es that external and internal revelation a re not exclusive. One can also point to numerous if not a majority of th e world's religious who accept only a narrow literalism based upon the history found in scripture, in the revealed Word, as external revelation , and who passionately reject any notion of eso tericism or interna l revelation that inheres in the external revelation. Many of thes e people can also be described as "o rthodox " in the descriplive usage, in add ili on to being fundamentalisls. Thi s estab li shes thal external and internal reve lation are not interdepe nd ent.

External revelations of which we have record have always generate d established religions. Established re ligio ns are always integraled into

cultures, or soc ie ti esj they d o no t-cannot-exi s t ind e p e nd e ntl y o f c ultures. Co nsequ e ntl y. ex ternal re ve lation t hrou g h th e media o f estab lished religion s a re m ajoritaria n in the se nse that, with th e poss ibl e excep ti on of Buddhi s m , most mem bers or followers of a ce rtain re li gion- t he mass-base their pra c tice o f the religion almost excl usive ly o n the exte rnal revelat io n , and reject an y poss ibility of a n inte rnal revelation as anath e ma or heresy. This we would de sc ribe as th e normati ve concepti o n of external reve lati on vis a vis established, orthod o x religion.

The normativ e co n ce ption of Tradition is a synthesis of externa l and interna l revelation , the former serv ing as th e vehicle for th e latte r and se t within a c ultural expression that we hav e defined above as a Traditional c ultur e. A normative co nc e ption here, how e ve r, ha s neve r excluded th e possibility of an un affiliated cenob ite outs ide th e cu ltura l! o rth odox mainstream s u ccessfull y achie ving internal reve lation and initiation. (O ne wonders whether thi s no rmative c once pti on ca n exist at all in mod e rnity .) It is tru e , though , that all th e esse nti a l in gred ie nt s for facility o f revelation and initiation are institutionalized , as it were , in Traditional c uilur es, since any spiritual order-or voca ti o n a l guild, fo r th a t matte r--exis lin g in suc h a c ulture wou ld utili ze the existi ng relig io u s sy mb o li sm, sc ripture , and so forth as a basis of its liturgy and to c arry its worthy ca ndidat es thro ugh the initiation process. Il is important to e mpha size he re, as well, that thi s no rma ti ve co ncept ion of Traditi o n concern in g th e re lation o f ex ternal and internal rev ela ti o n must pres uppose for its efficacy a living Trad ition al c ulture in whi c h th e re li g io n find s expression, and not mere remnants of religi o n s existing within the setting of mo d e rn cu ltures and in which th e external reve latio n , if not th e s piritual influ e nce, ha s b ee n effective ly secularized.

Finally , w e co ns id e r the remaining alternative to (1) th e p ractice of an exclusive exte rn a l revelation, and (2) the practice o f a synt hes is of exte rn a l a nd interna l reve lation: namely , the practice of an exclus ive internal rev e lation. We are ce rt a inl y aware that so me in th e Traditional p e rs p ect ive refuse to acknowledge , as a matter of d og m a, that int e rnal reve lation and initiati o n (i.e., "sa lvation ") ca n exist o ut s ide an ort hod ox ex press io n o f one o f th e world's established religions. But we as k : g iven the age and breadth o f humanity , was there not interna l reve lati on and regular initiati o n on Earth in other plac e s and prior to the adv e nt of Muhammad' Then prior to Jesus' Then pri o r to the Buddha ' Th e n prior

to Moses or Lao-1Zu or Zoroaste r? Then pri o r to any b earer of Light and revealer o f the Word? And wha t of th e huge p e rcenta ge o f hum a nity never exposed to any of the se ex te rn a l reve lations? To the first question posed we a n swer: if so, was not this interna l revelation and initiati on ultimately by direct an d unadorned access to th e s ui generis a n d immemorial first princip les of th e Tradition? And , if suc h was possible at any t ime before o r beyo nd or in betwee n these grea t movements of th e revea le d Word , is it nOl s imilarly possible today when everywhere we li ve w ith out benefit of access to sp iritu al orders in the physical world that are th e mse lves e le ments or constituents of living Traditi ona l c uhures? Th e s ho rt answe r must be th at it cannot be ot h erw ise: th e so urce of all external revelat io n is the Primordial Tradition, a nd where one has di rect access to th at so ur ce, w heth er ac hi eved w ith or w ith out the ai d of a te a che r in th is physical realm , th e ex ternal manifestations of the revea led Wo rd d o not const itute a requirement for eit her enlig ht enment o r initiation. Indeed, in th e modern world thi s may be th e only available path for a significant population of spi rit ual seekers who ha ve a ttain e d a co ns id e rabl e d eg ree of in sig ht and metaphysical acu ity.

Cycle of Revelation and Orthodoxy

Every end has a beginn ing , and th e e nd of some thing th a t began is often itself the beginning of someth ing else tha t, in its turn , will end. So is it wi th Traditiona l cultures. Where the worl d was p o pul ous wit h Traditio n al cult u res on ly seve ral centuries past , there is no identifiable Traditional cu lt ure as we hav e defined il exis tin g in th e last deca d e of the twentieth ce ntu ry. We ourselves are a t presen t e ith e r at th e prec ipi ce of a nnihil atio n or a new b eg innin g. Th ere are no other alternatives. It is p rec isely because of both the inexorabilty o f thi s cyclic p rocess and the inextricability a nd symbios is of religion and cu lture in a Traditiona l society during it s flower, w h ere c ul tural fusion inheres, t ha l any "reinstatement " or resur rec ti on of a forme r Traditional o r orth odox relig ion in mod e rnit y cou ld never occ ur. This cyclic p rocess can be traced, as follows below. It m us t fir st be understood, howeve r, that th e cycle of w hi c h we speak he re o p erates without any effect upon the fir st prin cip les of th e Primordial Trad iti o n. They are, as we ha ve sta ted , a priori and immemorial and the source of a ll Trad it ions tha t can be properly so ca ll ed.

In th e beg in n in g , th en , is a public a nd v is ible hierophany or theop ha ny ,

or revela ti on, th a t occ urs in history and is of the ty p e d esc ri bed supra in which Pro ph ets bring to humanity a sta te ment of tru t h This truth is typ ica ll y co mmilled to sc ri pt u re a lmost immediat e ly, but normally con ta ins a n accompany in g ora l or myt hi c tradition as well. This revelation from an avatar begins th e direct lin e of t ran s mission, co nta ining an esoteric component, that is passed from teacher to teacher in thi s Trad ition and w hi c h survives as long as its stewards are meritor io us. This revelation, however, never tak es place in a cult ural va c uum , but rather comes to di s pla ce th e pri o r, prevailing religious world vi ew o f the reg ion an d era with o ne of its ow n

The seco nd pha se of thi s process is the gradu al d eve lo pme nt of o rthodoxy by means o f compe tition b etwee n th e num e ro us factions , sects , and groups of believe rs. This occurs at the sam e p ace as the me nt of t he cu ltura l wo rld view discussed in t he first phase. The process most familiar to wes te rn readers is early Chris ti anity and the me nt of Tra di t io nal Christia n c ultur es. It is diffi cult to mark the spot, hi sto ri ca ll y, for any o f th ese phases, but for thi s t he Rome of 51. Peter in th e fourth century C.E. o r the Byzantium of Co ns ta ntin e would be reaso nabl e cand id a tes. In th e Levant and the wider Me dit erra n ea n wo rld of p re-Nice ne Chri s tianity , mystery sc hools, Gn ost icism, an d "heresies n of a ll k inds abounded. Th is pa tt e rn is not too dissimHar from th e me nt of o th er wo rl d re li g io ns. From the fray , one-pe rh a p s th odoxies emerge, beco ming the "true" reli g ion. In th e Chri stia n setti ng , it w as Ro man an d Eastern Ch ristianity t h at cou ld arguab ly be ca lled orth odox in thi s se nse. And , in th e proce ss , t he other "co mp e t ito rs" were affirmative ly driven to extinction. In this regard , o ne wonders about th e s piritu a l d eve lopme nt , a d vanc e ment, and initiati o n of th ose p ropo ne nt s of un o rth odox G nos ti c is m , fo r exam ple , wh o in th eir s piritu a l prac ti ces used s uch para d oxo logica J texts as found at Nag Hammadi like tbe Thunder/ Per/ec t Mind , whose eso te ric meaning is both profound and ove rtl y clear. In deed, it is believed to be I renaeus , Bishop of Lyons in the 2nd cen tu ry C.E., w ho first u sed th e term "o rth o d ox" for h is ju xta p os iti on of th e " tru e religion ve rs us Gnosti cism and other contem p ora neo us esies in his prolifi c attac ks of their beliefs.

The third phase , fo ll ow in g the deve lo pme n t of an identifiable orthodo xy from th e initial revelatio n , is the s ub sequ e nt development of a Tradition a l c ultu re, as ha s bee n defined, built upon the un animous be li efs

of the n ew o rthod oxy. Typica ll y, anel iro nically , a new to lera nce emerges with th e Traditional c ultur e In process, th e actual deve lopme nt of a Traditional c uit ure is more lik e ly to be a c h a ng e in an existing sacre d o r religious paradigm than an actua l c hange in the mater ia l culture of a region per se. For exam ple, lan guage and ma terial cu lture of those p laces into w hi c h Ch ri s tianity or Is lam o r Buddhi sm we re in troduced did not change overnight, but rather c hang e d g radua ll y with the infu s ion of th e symbols, a rt , and scriptu re of th e n ew re li g io n into th e existi ng cultural morphology. At firs t , an d without any centra l eccle siastica l co ntro l , the relig io n is ca rri ed into new location s a nd assumes th e n avor o f th e regio n . In th e case of Chri stia ni ty, fo r examp le, thi s is seen in th e Ethiopians, the Egypt ian Copts, the Sy ri a ns, th e Nesloria ns, and the Iri sh or Celtic Chri s ti ans , all of w hom , depending upon the poi nt in t im e be ing discussed , cou ld be defined as Tradition a l-as liv ing Traditional cu ltu res. T his, of co urse, raises an intere sting que s ti o n regarding o rth o doxy. Being all different s trains of Chri stianity , wou ld some or a ll of thes e be "orthodox " in the presc riptive sense, or is that a term reserved for Roman Catholicism and the Eastern c hurc h in th e de sc ripti ve se ns e? This would make for an in teresting study, bu t it is beyond the scope of the present ar ticle O ur p Oint is simply to identify the process whe re by co mplete fusion of t he ele ments of Trad itiona l c ulture occurs , wit h the most s igni ficant bei ng the in fus ion of th e sacred or religiou s e1eme m tha t , in it<; doctrin e, con tai ns th e first principl es of Trad it ion

The fourth pha se of th e cycle, purs uant to our description here, is the flower or maturity of the Traditi ona l culture, where regular initiation is an incident of bot h (I) sp iritu a l o rd ers o f the religiou s orthodoxy and ( 2) vocat io n w it hin a u n a nimou s SOcie ty. It is a time in th e ex is tence of s uch a cu lt ure w he re the channels o f s p ir itu a l influen ce are o pen w ides t , and where 10ierance to a ll expressio ns of truth pre va il s. Cooma r aswamy s pent his adult life ex p lain in g the artifacts from s uch periods o f Tradit iona l cu ltur es, and thereby necessarily ex pl aini ng the philosophiaperennis. In such a sett in g does the te rm "reg ul ar" initiation have its d eares t mean ing , since bo th th e s piri tu al orders and th e vocation s derive the ir regularity , as it were, from the first principl es of Tradition w hi c h infor m and define t hem. By log ical necessity, this would also serve as th e s tandard o r measure o f regularity aga in st which to co mp a re a ll organiza ti ons, re ligious or otherwise , offe ri ng ini ti at io n

The fi ft h p hase marks the process o f d ecay and dyi ng. This ca n happen , as Gueno n and Coomaraswamy h ave shown , over a span of ce nturies in the West , o r virtually ove rnight as w ith th e A n asazi emp i re o f th e American Sou th west. Th e sy mpt oms of this degeneralion are, a mo ng others , a loss of th e "s piritu al influ ence d isc ussed above, and consequ ently the l oss of any ef ficacio u s line of tran smissio n of that i n flu ence and , a/01tiori, a cessat io n of any re g ularity in th e process of initi ation. On a more mund a ne leve l , th ese sym ptoms also typica ll y in clu d e the replacement of dogma for tru th ( Copernicu s b e ing a good example) a nd an eccles iastical in s titu tionalization of powe r (the post-R e fo rmati o n inquis ition being a good exam pl e) masquerading as ort h o d oxy. One dear irony appears in the e nd e av o r to clarify the use and mea ning of ort hodoxy in Traditio nal lit e rature: if orthodoxy is really stra ig ht thinking in its presc riptiv e usage, th e n it is orthodox to excoriate the abuses of "ort hodox " re li g io ns a nd religious institutions th at p lace dogma a nd blind authority above truth In a ny case, w he n, in th e life o f a religion an d th e c ult ure it dominates , d ogma a nd blind authority ha ve re pl aced the truth and/or th e searc h ro r truth , then d ecay is metastas ize d and death is immine nt.

\Ve n ow as k the imp o rtant qu estio n : what has survived of Traditional cu ltures a nd th e ir orthodox relig ions a n d religious institutions in the d ecade prior to th e adven t of the mill en n ium ? Do rea l ones co-exist in modernity along w ith c ul ts a nd fraternities of suicide and new "re li g ions " b ased o n ext ra te r res tr ial beings and cybe rn etics? Is regu la r initi a ti o n st ill ava il ab le th ro ugh th e media of organ izations, sp iritual o rd e rs, a nd s imilar bodies? Can a "traditi o nal o rganiza tion ," as Guenon writes, truly ex is t inde p e nd e ntly o f a living , brea thing Traditional cu lture o f which the mod e rn world ha s n o n e?

Revelat ion and Initiation Beyond Orthodoxy

Modern ity is defined b y pandemic de s piritu a lization , b y in versions of value an d th e social oreler, by a loss of fusion that cha racte ri zes Traditional c ullures , and by th e loss of vocatio n m a t th e reby precludes a Sig nificant means of iniliati o n . Together with th ese in vers io ns a nd losses are th e worldwi d e d ege nera tion o f re ligion and of o rthodoxy where s uc h equates to Traditi ona l re li g ion. 11,i s degradation of religion has a furth er effect in the loss of transmission of spiri tual infl ue nce within certain relig ious institutions , which in turn must result in a loss of opportunity for regular in it iation.

SACRED WEB 1 12

Occurring simultaneously with all this is an undeniable and tremendous influx of esotericism, both of the pseudo-esoteric variety and, more significantly, of the bona fide variety. Of thi s latter, unparall eled numbers of people in the West, if not on a global scale, are demonstrably intuitive and esoterically sensitive. By this we mean that they are students of metaphysics , students of Traditional texts of all types, active in the disciplines of genuine yoga and medilation, and conscious, del iberate aspirants on the via contemplaliva. In short, there are considerab le numbers of these spiritual aspirants knocking on the gates of heaven, prep aring themselves for more li ght by means of initiat ion - regular initiation. In s heer numbers alone, together with its global scale, thi s is an undeniable fact that has seen no parallel in recorded history. While this may appear incongruous , we refer to Paul Ricoeur's observat ion that incongruity gives rise to thought. This thought is: It cannot be otherwise that means exist-means beyond those offered by remnant or th odox religious or spiritual orders no longe r connec ted with Traditional cultures-by which these aspirants can undergo regular initiation.

At the outset, we spoke of Guenon's use of the term "spi ritual influence." This term was used to describe sllch an influence emanating from a spiritual cenler and existing within "traditional organizations ," and preserved by mean s of transmission from teacher to teacher in these organizations . However, it should be remembered that sp iritual influences are not confined to organizations in this world, Traditional or othelWise, nor dispensed exclusively by spiritual teachers in the physical realm. Such spiritua l influences are available evel)'Where to anyone who, by virtue of his sacrificial strife on the inward journey, has won the right to ass imil ate them. Palmam qUi meruit feral. Whether this inward journey takes place under the guidance of a physical teacher in a residential , spiritual order, or whether it takes place independently of such a teacher or order by following the path on one 's own, the destinat ion is the same.

We have stated that the path of initi ation tread under the tutelage of a qualified teacher at the physical level is the easie r one, compared with the journey made alone. One must add to this that such qualified teachers, as rare as th ey arc, are of in estimable aid in this journey of th e initiate, but they are not indispensable. Such aid is available through another type of "Traditional o rganization " without campuses , and differing from the Traditional organ izations of which Guenon wrote and wh ich

might be d esc ribed as physical brick-and-mortar Tibetan lama se ri es, or Chri sti an monaste ri es, or Hindu ashrams , or Sufi tariqas, w ith their l ama s, abbots, gurus, and s heikhs, and which may o r m ay not retain any s piritual inHu e nce. The "Traditional o rganization " of which we spea k h e re , if thi s is a prop e r description , is the source and not the recipi e nt of s piritual in flu ence and not bound to any particular c ulture o r external reve lat io n , Le., revealed religion. We have a lready identifj e d above Guenon's two major works on initiation. However, in so m e ways, Le roi du monde contains so me considerab ly more profound in sights into initiati o n and th e the ses proposed here than e ith er of them. Fo r exa mple , in d isc uss in g the re lationship between the Christian p ri es tho o d and the Orde r of M e1c hiz ede k , Guenon on page 51 of that boo k (E diti o n s Ga llim ard, 1958) states that "la participation a la tradition pe llt n 'et re pas toujours co nsc iente " ("participatio n in the Traditio n ma y not always b e conscious"). While Gu e non was describing th e s piritual influ e nce associat e d w ith Chri s tian pries ts celeb ratin g th e Eucharist, it mu s t necessaril y be tru e b y ex te ns ion t h at in o th e r circumstances o ne may part icipa te in the Traditi o n and not b e fully conscious o f it, regard less of c usto mary ritual exe rci ses. In fa c t, this phe nom enon app e ars to be cons id era bl y more widespread th an most would imagine as regard s th ose num e ro us s piritual aspirants, n o l direc tl y associated with any physical te ac h er o r o rd e r, who hav e made s ub s tantial progress despite the v ic iss itu des o f mod e rnity-o r mayb e because of the inner hi eros gamos through se lf-naughting and affirmative application o f the me an s to reac hing th e primordial state.

Co ns istent with thi s view, Coomaraswamy wrote in his essay e ntitl e d Manas that th e sec re t of initiation, or "de-mentation," ca n only be rea li zed by eac h o n e for himselfj a ll that can b e effected by initiatio n is th e communication of an impu ls e and an awakenin g of laten t possib iliti es ; the work Intls t be done by the initiate himself. .. " (e mpha s is added). Coomaraswamy did no t te ll us her e whether this work ne cessar il y had to b e don e und e r th e dire c t tu telage and in the phys ica l prese nce of a s piritual teac he r We belie ve he did not need to. Today we are mill e nnia from the la s t of th e great s piritual Prophets and th ei r o ri gi nal revelation s; we li ve in a mod e rn world where Traditional c ultures and va lu es no longer ex ist, and where orthodoxy in re vea le d religion divorced from Traditi o n ha s co me to mean secularized dogma. Traditional organ iza-

tions or spiritua l orde rs no longer hav e any relation to Traditional cultures from whence they originated, and are themselves remnant s and iso lates where they still exist as bona fid e entities. The living streams of spiritual influence for which they once served as channels of transmission have , in the wake o f th e destruction of Hving Traditional c ultures, all but dried up. At the same time , we witness a virtual ex plosion of eSOlericism at the end of the twentieth ce ntury , a significant portion of which concerns il se lf with the higher metaphysics and the firs t principles of the primordial Tra dition . Taken together, one cannot but conclude that wherever one may find o ne se lf in life, and whenever the impulse manifests to follow the sp iritu a l path, o ne must go forth. To hesitate is to languish. In modernity there is no requirement to abandon one's situation to seek out a physical teacher in a residential , spiri tual order for th e purpose of undergoing initiation as was the customary cu ltural fo rm of a ll Tra ditional cultures, especia lly in light of the fact that under pre sent circums tances it is vai n to searc h for a teacher. For the se purposes, the truth is found within. Once found, and this co nn ect io n is established, the teacher will find the pupil and spiritual infllJenCe w ill flow , and regular initiation may follow.

Modern Culture and Rising Ent ropy

by Robelt Bolton

The app li cat ion of a concep t from theoretical science to something as humanly complex and ill -defined as c ivilisat ion may seem strange at fi rst sight , perhaps even a confusing of categories , but in fact entropy de notes an older and more universal idea than that of its function in physics. The idea of rising entropy implies above all that there is an inbuilt tendency in n atu re for barrie rs between distinct properties to collapse and to allow mergences to take place in ways which are irreversible. For example, quantities of hot and cold fluids do not naturally remain apart , let alone separate themselves; their mingling is in its way as inevitable as the fa ll of objects under gravity.

Other examples include such things as the running down of a clock after it has been wound up, to a point at w hi ch there is no longer any di ffe rence between the energy in the spring and that in the gear whee ls. Si mil arl y, a bane." gives electric current unt il the voltage diffe rence between its positive and nega tive te rminals tends to zero. Natura l processes of this kind are analogous to the rolling of a ball down a slope and, what is not so evident, irreversible.

In cases where it seems that reversibility is possible, the energy required for this is obtainab le only through yet another entropic run-down of energy and order. Th is is a property which appl ies specifica ll y to the physical processes in nature, whereas the life and deve lopment of civilisations is on ly partly physical, since it is a lso made up of the psychical activities of thought, w il l, imagination and emotion which do not belong in the categories o f physical science. This fact would imply a restric tion on the extent to wh ich entropy could be used to explain cul-

tural changes, as far as most periods in hi s tory are concerned. How ever, in today 's world, this restriction on th e theory is much reduced because of the fact that modern civilisation is now so largely based on the manipulation of matter and energy by science and techn o log y. Thus the more one ca n reasonably speak of a "material " civili sa tion , the more scope there will be for a concept lik e that of entropy when an acco unt of its changes ha s to be given.

Before going into any examples which could reveal rising entropy at work, I would first like to s how that ou r word "en tropy " s tand s for a reality which was understood intuitively by philosophers and theologians long before a name was coined fo r it. Reference to it can be seen in many places in Plato's writings , for examp le in the Phaedrus dialogue, where th e function of th e soul as the se lf-mo tiv e prin c iple in the world is discu ssed. Every[hing else in [he world, it is sa id , moves only because it is acted on by other natural entiti es lik e itself, as th ose with more motion impart motion to those wi th less. This universal dependence on external sources of motion can mean o nly one thing, it is asserted: left to themselves, all natural forms of motion dissipate thems e lve s irrev e rsibly. This is why Plato stltes that wilhollt the sel f- moved sou l, "the whole universe , the whole of that which comes to be , would co llapse into immobility , and never find another source of motion to bring it back into being. " (245e)

The se lf-moved would therefore be the only source of regen eration of natural motion. The o perative id ea in this appears even more ex plicitly in the Stalesman dialogue, with its mythical history of th e world:

"A t certain times, God himself guides the progress of this world and presides over its revolution. At o th e r times He leave s it a lone; and then , of its own accord , it begins to tr avel on its circular course in the oppoSite direction. " (269c)

Th e exp lanati on given for this is that the ability to endu re unchanged is a spiritual or divine quality which does not belong as such to the physical world. Thus the world always declines from its divinely - imposed order into di sord er. When this d esce nt is in danger of going as far as the primal chaos, God intervenes again and restores things to a new s tate of order, so that the next world-cycle can begin.

This shows that it was practically se lf-e vident to Plato that order in nature , left to itself, can only decline into di sorder. ell cou ld be argued

that the Christian belief in man 's dependence on grace was the same thing in microcosm). It is further amp lified by U l e Platonic idea that natural order is owing to the imposition of the Forms on an origina l chaos by God's crea ti ve action. Despite this reception of the Forms, the original ma terial chaos remain s what it always was , and so constantly tends to re-assert i tself, never ceas ing to res ist the informing power, even while accommodating it. For this reason alone , the act of crea tion must always be periodically renewed.

This entropic cosmology was a part of Platoni sm which was not accepted by Aristo tl e, w ho w e nt to th e ex treme of making the world so uniformly perfect that it cou ld be cons idered an immortal divinity itself. (In later neo-Platonism , this Ar istotelian position was adopted for the sake of polemics aga inst the Christ ian bel ief in the end of the world, at the expense of consistent Platonism). To sustain the conception that there co uld be neither crea tion nor end of the world, not even so much as to prepare the way for another one, Aristotle had to find a reason for discounting the obvious corruptib il ity of nature. Consequently, he erected an alternat ive rea li ty in the least accessible parts of the world, that is, in all that lies above it, starting w ith the Moon. H e taught that the Moon , Sun, planets and stars were all borne around the earth by being incorporated in ho ll ow spheres of a perfectly incormpt ible crystalline matter. As these spheres all enclosed the earth, they were able to exert an innuence which counteracted the corruption of the sublunary sphere.

There is no justification, either logical or emp irical, for these spheres, and ne ither do they h ave the interest of a genuine myt h. In short, they are an example of a premise w hi ch is posited simply because it points to a co nclusion whkh has already been decid ed on as a matter of dogma, in this case, the perpetuity of the mate rial world. This idea of a perpetual, "steady-state " cosmos had certain politica l uses, however, because its ethos of invinc ible normality was good for th e stability of autocratic systems, which was a reason fo r the success of Aristotelianism in Middle Ages, and indeed tip to the Seventeenth Century. Both Platonism and Christia ni ty contain a "revo lutio na ry" id ea of the cosmos w hich has often been found socia ll y uncomfortable or even subverSive, and which has therefore been suppressed, even at the price of orthodoxy. Fortunate ly, any need to dispute aga inst Aristotle on this subject is obvi ated today by the fact that science co nfirms th e idea of a beginning of the

univ e rse, and by th e ecologica l dangers to th e future of civili sa ti o n ca used by industry. Cha nge on a catastrophi c sca le is LOday a possibility too real to b e s hut out by ve rb al cont ri va nces.

Th ese ideas take us a long way from id eas of entrop y whic h wo uld co nfin e it to theo re ti cal ex pl a nation s as to why h eat e ng in es do useful wo rk . But while it is not difficult to ge n e rali se about a pervasive te ndency to irrevers ihl e loss of o rd er in n a tur e an d civilisatio n , it is har de r to ide nti fy its action in particular cases. Entropic c han ges may incl ude many c hang es which see m b e neficial from a s hort-term point of view , a t lea st, as lo ng as o n e can ignore what is los t a t th e sa me tim e. Thi s is particularly th e case where some ki nds of ba rrie rs are broke n down , a pp arently add ing to indi vidual freedom and increas ing the range o f options wh ic h a re ope n . Na tion a l, soc ial, and cultu ral barrie rs are a mong th ese kinds , but the question thei r reduction ra ises is not to do with their effec t on individual preferences, b ut with the n a ture of the c h anges whic h broug h t th is about.

If I am right in su pp os ing th at ris in g e ntropy is th e main fa c to r involved h e re , th e re wou ld ne cessa rily b e a ge n e ral imp ove ri s hm e nt in the rea lms which we re made open to o ne another. Th e idea of us ing th e re mov a l of b a rri ers or o f d ist in c ti ons as a n ind ica tor of risi ng e nt ro py is p erfectly tme to the na ture of w h a t is involved. The removal of a barrier be twee n two rea lms wou ld be futil e as lo n g as th e ir differences we re d eep a nd meani ngfu l; in this case they a re se lf-separatin g. Co nversely, if culhlres or classes undergo chang es which leve l down th e ir differences, th ey can o nly b e kept separate by increas in g ly artifi c ia l b a rri e rs, and when th is is rea li sed, so ciety demands t he ir remova l in th e inte res ts of the "Open Sociely," as Popp er ca ll s it. One co uld say w ith o ut much exaggeration that the history of modernity h as been one of prog ress ive leve llin g in nearly a ll rea lm s. Al th e sa me time there ha s bee n a correspo nd ing increase in th e quantita tive as pec t o f every thing , as expressed in indust ri a l mass-production and official standardisation. The re is hardly anything that can avo id being iden tifi ed in n umer ical o r modu la r fo rm , and the now u n iversal compu ter is b o th a n agen t and a sy mb o l of thi s qu antitat ive un ificatio n of everything. All thi s is p e rfectly in li ne w ith w h at is con tain e d in the idea of rising e ntrop y in civilisation, tha t is, in a w ider context than that envisaged by th e exact sc iences.

Some of the typical features of modern life can be shown to result from the breakdown of distinctions, some of which had been uphe ld for ce nturie s. The phenomenon of terrorism is a case in point here , appearing as a n ew thing under th e sun during World War II It resulted from a deliberate sup press ion of the distinctions between soldier and assass in, and hero and criminal. Beca use of these unheard-of combinations , society finds terrorism very hard to judge or unders tand; moral judgement being particularly dependent on the ability to see things in clear categori es. While resulting from the breakdown of one set of dist inctions, terrorism brings about th e b reakdow n of another o ne, that between war and p eace. Cland esti ne warfare ha s put an end to t he time when nation s were either at waf or peace , and the resulting disorder is one which has paralle ls only at times of th e barbarian inva s io ns o f the Fifth and Ninth Cen turi es.

The bar ri ers between nation s h ave crumble d because of a number of factors , including the s pread of similar industrial and eco nomic systems, and high -speed transport. The application of quantitat ive techniques has a lso play e d its p art in the cu ltural levelling. Besides this, nearly a ll modern nat ions have lost the distinction between politics a nd economics , becau se on the one hand making money has taken an ever-increas ing p la ce in the national c ultu re, wh il e the s heer sca le of modern economic activ it y gives it an impac t far beyond its own s phere . Another phenome non which is both a cause and an effect of thi s merger lies in monetaIY inflation , si n ce it results from the manipu lation of economics for politica l purp oses, typically such that governments can appear to spend more money than they rea ll y hav e.

Another factor h ere lies in the dominance of eco nomic activity , which is s uc h that th e same aims are pursued in different ways by nearly all politica l p arties, whose differ e nces are near ly always about means , not ends. Whether co ntinual economic expansion is either desirable or poss ible is a question which ca nnot be rai sed e ffective ly under th ese conditi ons because th e sub jection of politicS to materia l forces means that the essentia l process is beyond human control in anything beyond ma tte rs of detail. Inflation is a clear and precise example of rising entropy in th e realm of money. The continual devaluation of money by inflation both reflects the d issipation of national resource s and accele ra te s this diss ipation , s in ce a nation 's money is a quantitati ve index of its level of activ-

ity. This presents a parallel with the way in which physica l energy breaks down into ever s maller and less useful quantities, as th e Secon d Law of Thermodyn a mi cs implies. The increas ing burden of taxation during the pa st century is also a vital part o f the merging o f politics and eco no mi cs, and its effects a re very s imil a r, and the se thin gs become causes o f levelling i n other realms.

T h e distinction between the realms o f pure science a n d techno logy is a lso becoming increasingly hard to maintain. Because of th e g reat expense of modern scie ntific researc h , the fi e ld s which are ope n to it a re nearly a lways di c lated by the n eeds of tec hnology and indu stry which provide the money. At the same tim e, sc ie ntific research is n ow co nducted almost wholly by mea ns o f produc ts of ad va nced tec hn o logy. This dependence on techno logy mea ns lhat pheno mena increas ing ly re mote from th e experimente r are s tu d ied , while the di s tin c ti on between the p h enomena a nd t he results of sc ientific in trus io n up on th e m gets harder to d ra w. In ot h e r words , the di stinc tion b e tween wha t natur a lly happ e ns a nd what human activity c an ca use to happ e n is co ntinually eroded. Th e difference b e tween na ture and w hat man ca n d o with nature, once so clear, is n ow almost unw or kabl e, the mor e so as scie n ce is obliged to st ud y thin gs w h ic h resu lt from the wo rking of sc ientific equi pment more than subsis ten t realities. Besides thi s , the mo re science knows about nature , the more s ubLle will be its means of acting on nature, so that th e results w ill be increasing ly hard to distinguish from the naturaL Not o nl y is the st rictly natural becoming obscu red, therefore , but a g rea t deal of spec ifi ca ll y human creative ac ti vity is lost at th e sa me tim e, since techno -sc ie ntifi c activity is d ominated by the co nditions of nat ural forces. The re s ult is a hybrid activity whi c h is neither rea ll y natural nor human. Without go in g in to much detail , the above c han ge is closely connec ted w ith a c h ange in the prevailing idea of tnuh. Trdditi o nall y , tnlth was d e fin e d as Utha t whic h is ," whereas today it is very often conce ived as a bl e nd with the work ing of the minds of those who exp ress it . This g ives rise to a bre a kdown of th e di s tin c tion be twe e n fact and fiction which th e Americans ca ll "fa c tion " where its products appear a s lit era ture. This deviation from t radition is particularly ex tr e me in view of th e e ffo rt s that were once made to preve nt th e pu b lication of the untru e or the mis leading. In earli er times it was instinctively realised that the sub jec ti ve trea tment of truth was bound to convert p eop le to a belief in re la tivism, eve n

when th ey had no knowledge of it as a philosophy.

The present subjec t may call for frequent returns to th e s ubj ec t of p o liti cs, b eca use politics is by definition concerned with th e realm of common human conce rns in the outside world, so that it is a natural melting pot in w hi c h other realms can become confounded when they lose th e ir se parate iden titi es. This unfortunately is becoming the case with popular religion, because of a decline in th e numb e r of people whose faith move s them to works which are of an "interior" kind . This mean s that a ll the e mphasis ha s to be transferred to the kind of a c tiviti es which can b e undertaken in the public realm by believers and eve n unbe lievers with goodwill. A loss of distinction b etween religion and politics is th e lypical res ult of this, si nce social action of all kind s i s on the same ground as that of government policy and allo c ation of resources. Religion s ar e bes ides concerned with things which motivat e large numbe rs of people, and that fa c t alone gives religion a bigger poli t ica l role in an age of democracy than it could have ha d in autocrati c times. No t least a mong th e dangers of hi storicall y-re veal e d religion is that il is open to being un co nscio us ly parodied as a form of socia l be ha vio ur, which is what its confus io n w ith politics implies.

Wh ere e ntropi c c h a nges affect th e individual life as s u c h , o n e notable result of it can b e see n in the success achieved by femini s m ove r th e pa st thirty years, a s ucc ess comp lete enough to call to mind the fall of a fortress no o ne was both e ring to defend. Thi s implies a loss of distinction betw ee n the socia l and vocational roles of men and wom e n , and as in all cases where barriers are broken down s u ccessfull y , th e re ha d previously b ee n a long period during which both men and women were growing le ss assured a s to the co nsequ e nces of th eir gender identiti es.

Thu s th e id ea o f e ith er sex ha ving a specific nature which s hould dictate th e ir voc ati o ns appears increaS ingly lacking in ju s tific a tion from observab le fact s. This is a case where a state of new freedom s and po ss ibililie s res ult s from a n impove ri s hm ent at a deeper leve l. One co nsequ e nce of the equalisa ti on b e twe e n men and w o me n is a loss of d is tin c tion between c hildh ood and adu lthood. In proporti o n as wome n no longer h ave a realm of th eir ow n , distinct from the publi c realm , so ne ith e r can c hildren , who are und e r press ure to mature in creasingl y ea rl y. The in creased im portance of ad o lesce nce is a manifes tation of thi s, with i ts co nfu s io n of the di s tin c ti o n betw ee n ch ildhood and adulthood. This si tu a tion is

thought to be acceptable by peopl e who hav e no idea of how Child and Adult, Man and Woman , cou ld be archetypal realities which mllst be realised on ea rth if life is to fulfil it s purpose. To feel comfortab le with the actual situ at ion calls for a cel1ain la ck of se lf-awareness, the ca uses of which ca nn ot be examined here. Nevertheless , common se nse might realise that thi s human change ca nn o t be viable in the long term .

This only too frJg mentary se le ction of examples o f the e ffe cts of entropic ch a nge could not be even n ea rly complete without re ference to the ways in which it is manifest in human artifacts, the most prominent of which are towns and buildings. Architecture, more than any other art, creates the olltward and visib le form of a civilisation, and since this is one where quantity predominates , for this reason all architectura l forms can be see n to conve rge in th e cuboid. The cube and th e cuboid give the maximum cubic capacity in relation to cos t, because they express spa tial quantity more directly than any o th er so lid . Th ei r sides are not differentiated in relation to the dimensions of space, but form an exact match with tho se dimensions. For this reaso n, their volumes have the special property of being calcu lable in te rms of whole numbers, re s ulting simp ly from th e product of their le ngths, breadths and heights. All other regular anel semi-regular forms have a qualitative distinction in relation to space, which is shown mathematically by the fact that th eir volumes are products of their dimen sions with irrational numbers , such as 1t , or the sq uare roots of two and three. The irrational number represents the qualitative element, as it might appear in the gabled roof, the dome , the con ica l roof, and the circ ular or polygonal groundplan. The modern style of architecture repre::; enls nOl merely a loss of distinctio n between spatial fonn and space, but between art, technology and eco nomics , besides which it is clearly emblematic o f th e reduction to quantity and uniformity abo ut which Guenon wrote in The Reign ofQuanlily.

Such are some of the more obvious examples of the effects of en lropic change , as it ha s in creasingly been affecting humanity and nature equally . Nevertheless, thi s is not meant to s ugge s t that God has le ft mankind at the mercy of cosmic forces, but rathe r that th ere is an answer to reductive change which modern humanity mostly chooses to ignore because it would divert e nerg ies from application to the physical world.

A Note on the Contributors

Robert Bolton

Educated in th e sc ie nces, Robert Bolton developed a strong int erest in Traditiona l metaphysics, obtaining from Exeter University the degrees of M.Phii and Ph.D, w ith a specia l interest in the areas of free will , and personal iden tity and the sou l. He is th e author of two books , Person, So,,1 and Identity and tbe Logic a/Spiritual Values. A th ird book on the cyclic nature of tim e i s forthcoming.

Ananda K. Coomaraswamy (1877-1947)

Born in Ceylon o f a Tamil father (Sir Mutu Coomaraswamy) and an Engli s h mother, Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy received hi s early formal educa tion in England, study ing botany and geology at London University. Afte r g raduating with a doctoral d egree in min e r a logy, Coomaraswamy moved between Ceylon, Ind ia and England, during which time he s tudied the traditional arts and crafts of Ceylo n , and founded the Ceylon Social Reform Society , aimed at reviving traditional values and expressio ns in Ceylonese culture and coun tering the nega· tive e ffects of Brili s h colonia lism. In India, he formed close ties w ith the Tagore famil y and was influ en tial in the literary renaissance and the in · d ependence movement. Moving to th e USA, he became a professor at Ha lVa rd and Cura to r at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. Scho lar, linguist, socia l think e r and prolific writer, Coomaraswamy has claim to be o n e of the intellectual giants of the modern era and is one of th e fo remost exponents (along with Rene Guenon and Frit hj of Schuon) of Traditiona l metaphysics this ce ntury

Rama P. Coomaraswamy

Born in Massachusetts in 1932, Rama P. Coomaraswamy is the son of the late Ananda K. Coo maraswamy. H e st udied in England and later in I ndia, where he received a trad itional educat ion in Hindi and Sa nsk rit. After his father 's d eath, he returned to the USA where he stu died medicine and laler practiced as a surgeon. H e is a writer of works on theology and on Trad iti on, incl udin g The DestnlCtion of the ChrisUan Tradition (Perennial Books, 1981).

James

S. Cutsinger

Professor of Theo logy and Religiou s Thought at the University of South Carolina , and secretary of the Foundation for Tradit io nal Studies in the USA, Cutsinger is the author of The Form oj Transformed Vision: Coleridge and the Knowledge oj God (Me rcer, 1987) and Advice to the Serious Meditations on the Teaching oj FrithjoJ Schuon (SUNY, 199 7).

Roger Lipsey

Roger Lipsey, Ph.D (a rt history), entered the area of Trad iti ona l studies through hi s work as an editor and biographer of Ananda K. Coomaraswamy (see the tril ogy published by Princeton in the Boll ingen Se rie s, 1977). His fo rthcoming book , Ha ve You Been to Delphi? Tal es oj the Ancient OracleJorModemMinds, will be published by SUNY.

Seyyed Hossein Nasr

Born in Iran in 1933, Nasr studied physics and mathemati cs at the Massachusetts Ins titute of Technology, and geology and geophysics at Harvard , obtaining a Ph.D from Harvard in the history of science and philosophy, wi th em phasis on Islamic scie nce. He is an emi nent Isla micist and a leading aut hority on Is lami c phi losop hy , scie n ce and Sufism. He has taught science and philosophy at Tehran University, ha s occ upied the first Aga Khan Chair of Is lami c St udi es at the American Un ivers ity at Beirut, was th e fir st Chancellor of Aryamehr Univers ity , and was the founding presiden t of the Im perial Iranian Academy of Philosop hy , which published the traditionalist journal , Soph ia Perennis. After moving to the USA from Iran , Nasr taught at Temple University, and was a vis iting lecturer at Harvard and Ch icago. Cu rrenli y, he is the Uni vers ity Profes-

sor of Islamic Studi es at George Was hin gton University. He has lectured ex tensively worldwid e, and in 1981 was the fir st Muslim in vited by Edinburgh Un ive rsity to deliver the pres tigiou s G iffo rd Lectures in Na tural Theology , s ub se qu en tl y published as Know/edge and th e Sacred (Crossroad, 1981). He is the a uth or of num erous books and art icl es o n Islamic scie nce , phil osop hy and mysticism , and on issues of Tradition a nd mo d e rnity . NasI" is also th e president of th e Fo un dat io n for Trad itional Stu d ies in th e USA, w h ich pu bl ishes th e jo urn a l, Sophia.

Kenneth Oldmeadow

Curre ntly th e Coordinator o f Philosophy and Re li g io us Studi es at La Trobe Unive rsity, Bendi go, Australia , Kenneth ( Ha rry) Old meadow earned an M.A . from Syd ney in re li g io us stu di es, fo r w hich he wro te a thesi s titled "Frith jof Schuon , the Perennial Philoso ph y and th e Meaning o f Trad ition " . He obtained a Ph.D from La Trobe in ci nema s tudi es. He is the a uth or of numero us publications in t h e fields of literature and religiO US s tu d ies , including hi s fo rth com ing book on Tradition, from w hich th e a rticl e in thi s journal is excerpted.

Willlam W. Quinn

Introduced to t he w ritings of Cooma ra swamy a nd G ue non w hi le studying under th e late Mircea Eli ade, Quinn receiv e d an M.A. and a Ph.D for religious s tu dies from Chicago. The text of his M.A. th es is h as been revised and published under th e titl e "Anand a K. Coomaraswamy o n th e Philosophia Perenni s" (Re-V isio n 2, No. 2, 1979), and the text of hi s Ph .D th es is formed th e b as is fo r his rece nt boo k , The On ly Tradition (SUNY, 1997). Quinn p ra ctices law in Phoen ix , Arizona.

Frithjof Schuon (1907-1998)

Born in Sw itzerla nd of German parents, Schuon re ce ived his early educat io n in French a nd Ge rm an. From his youth, Sc hu on devoted him sel f to a searc h for metaphysica ll ruth , stud y ing the clas s ics of Western p hilosop hy a nd the sac re d lite ratures of the East. Mov ing to France, Sc hu on became influen ce d by the writings of Rene Guenon, w hich confirmed his own intell ectua l intuitions. A student of Arabic and o f Is lam , Sc h uon travelled se veral tim es to Nort h Africa , where he me t Guonon and the Algerian Su fi Sh ayk h Ahmad a l-'A law]. Impri soned by the Germans dur-

ing the Second World Wa r, he was even tua ll y released and gr:mted asylum by Switzerland, which became home until 1980, when he em igrated to th e USA. Metaphysician, and painter, Schuon's writings have been compared to those of Plato and Shanka racha ,ya. A sa mpling of his oeuvre is avai lable in The Essential Writings of Fritbjof Scbuon (Amity Hou se, 1986), edited by Seyyed Hosse in Nas!. Of his first publication in Eng li sh, The Transcendent Unity oj Religions (1953), T.S. Eli ot remark ed , "I ha ve met w ith no more impressive work on th e co mparative study of Oriental and Occiden tal religion " .

A Note on the Artists

Michael Bender

A resident of Vancouver, British Columbia , Michael Bender is a painter, lamp-maker and book illustrator. Many of hi s ill ustrations are reminiscent of Persi an miniatures and depict sce nes from children 's literature . especially th e fairy tales and myths of the Middle East and Ce ntral As ia.

Susan Point

Susan Point is a Coast Salish prinlmaker and jeweller fmm th e Musqueam Reserve in Vancouver, British Columbia. She is one of a handful of contemporary artists engaged in reviving the ancient principles of Coas t Salish two-dimensional design. Born in 1952, she was 29 when she began to stu dy Salish arl, creating her first pi eces in silve r and gold. She has si nce become best known for her work in serigraphy. Her work is hou sed in many publi c and private collections , and graces many prominent si tes in Vancouver, in cluding the Vancouver International Airport and the University of British Columbia Museum of Anthropology .

The text typeface is Garamond, first c ut about 1621 by Jannon de Seda. '111e hC:ldlines arc in Futura cut first by Paul Renner in 1928. '[1,C text paper is Classic lin en and the cover is Voice.

Des igne d by David Cliffo rd Design.

Primed in Canada by Samco Printers Ltd.