René Guénon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Western & Eastern philosophies & esotericisms 20th century philosophy
A 1925 studio photo portrait (age 38).
Name	René Jean Marie Joseph Guénon (Abd al-Wahid Yahya)
Birth	November 15, 1886(1886-11-15) Blois, Loir-et-Cher, France
Death	January 7, 1951 (aged 64) Cairo, Egypt
School/tradition	Advaita Vedanta, Sufism, Nondualism, Platonism
Main interests	Metaphysics, Esotericism, Symbolism, Mythology, Gnosis, Religious texts, Freemasonry, Mathematics, History, Society, Social criticism, Comparative religion
Notable ideas	Critique of modernity from the perspective of ancient wisdom traditions; refounding of western esotericism based on the still living eastern ones
Influenced by	Adi Shankara, Ibn Arabi, Ivan Aguéli, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, Lao Tse, Plato, Plotinus,Meister Eckhart
Influenced	Frithjof Schuon, Michel Valsan, Titus Burckhardt, Julius Evola, Marco Pallis, Huston Smith, Ananda Coomaraswamy and many others

René Guénon (November 15, 1886 – January 7, 1951) was a French author and intellectual who remains an influential figure in the domain of metaphysics, having written on topics ranging from metaphysics, sacred science^[1] and traditional studies ^[2] to symbolism and initiation.

In his opus, he proposes either "to expose directly some aspects of Eastern metaphysical doctrines",^[3] these doctrines being defined by him as of "universal character"^[4] or "to adapt these same doctrines [for western readers] while keeping strictly faithful to their spirit";^[5] he only endorsed the function of "handing down" those Eastern doctrines, while stating their "non-individual character".^[6]

His works, written and first published in French, have been translated into more than twenty languages. He also wrote two articles in Arabic for El Maarifâ ("knowledge").

1 Biography
2 Introduction to René Guénon’s work
- 2.1 Overview
3 René Guénon's work: detailed exposition
4 Open questions
5 Criticism
6 Bibliography
7 See also
8 External links
9 Notes and References

[edit] Biography

René Guénon was born in Blois, France, on November 15, 1986, into a French Catholic family. His father was an architect. In 1904 he lived in Paris, where he studied mathematics and philosophy. He was a brilliant student, notably in mathematics, in spite of his poor health.

As a young student in Paris, he observed and entered some occultist Parisian milieux (which were, at that time, under the supervision of Papus). He also entered Jules Doinel's Gnostic Church, in which he was promptly consecrated bishop, under the name "Tau Palingenius", a signature he used in some of his early articles. Under that name he became the main contributor of a review he founded, La Gnose ("Gnosis"), henceforth writing articles for La Gnose until 1922. From these incursions into the French occultist and pseudo-masonic orders, he drew a conclusion about the impossibility of gathering these ill-assorted doctrines to shape a "stable edifice".^[7] In his book The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times he also pointed out the intellectual vacuity of the French occultist movement, which, he wrote, was utterly insignificant, and most importantly, was terminally infiltrated by some individuals of a different, darker nature.^[8]

At this time, according to indications coming from André Préau reproduced by his editor and biographer P. Chacornac,^[9] it is very likely that René Guénon was initiated into Hinduism (in an initiatic lineage of Shankarâchârya) and Taoism. He was also initiated in 1911^[10] into Islamic esoterism (Taçawuff) and his name in Islam became "Sheikh 'Abd al-Wahid Yahya". His initiation into Islamic esoterism was effected by Ivan Aguéli (Abdul Hadi) and performed in accordance with Sheikh Abder Rahman Elish El-Kebir, a quite important representative of Islam in Egypt at that time, in both its exoteric and esoteric aspects. In particular, from the exoteric point of view, Sheikh Abder Rahman Elish El-Kebir was the head of mâleki madhab at Al-Azhar University. René Guénon later dedicated his book The Symbolism of the Cross to him.

In 1917, he made a one-year stay at Setif, Algeria, teaching philosophy to college students. After World War I, he left teaching to dedicate his time to his writings, with his first book Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines being published in 1921. From 1925 René Guénon became a contributor to the review edited by P. Chacornac Le Voile d’Isis ("The Veil of Isis") which became known, after 1935 and under his influence, under the name Les Etudes Traditionnelles ("Traditional Studies").

Although the exposition of Hindu doctrines had already been tackled at that time by many orientalists, René Guénon’s Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines contemplates its subject in a completely different manner,^[11] by referring to the concepts of metaphysics and Tradition in their most general sense, which are precisely defined in the first part of the book, along with the necessary distinctions and definitions of words such as religion, tradition, exoterism, esoterism and theology. René Guénon explained that his purpose was not to describe all aspects of Hinduism, but to give the necessary intellectual foundation for a proper understanding of its spirit.^[12] The book is also a severe condemnation of the works presented by the orientalists about Hinduism and Tradition in general (according to René Guénon, they had presented neither any deep understanding of the subject, nor any of its implications), along with a precise analysis of the political intrusions of the British Empire through Madame Blavatsky’s theosophism.^[13]

During that same year, 1921, he debuted a series of articles in the French Revue de Philosophie, which, along with some supplements, led to the book Theosophism: History of a Pseudo-Religion. During the decade 1920-1930, René Guénon was remarked by numerous intellectual and artistics in the Parisian milieux, and at that time were published some of his books explaining the "intellectual divide" between the East and West, and the peculiar nature, according to him, of the modern civilization: Crisis of the Modern World, East and West. In 1927 was published the second major doctrinal book of his opus: Man and His Becoming according to the Vedânta, and in 1929, Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power, which delivers a general explanation of the fundamental differences between "sacerdotal" and "royal" powers, along with the consequences of the usurpation of the prerogatives of the latter with regard to the former. From these considerations, René Guénon traces to its source the origin of the modern deviation, which, according to him, is to be found in the destruction of the Templar order in 1314.

In 1930, he left Paris for Cairo, Egypt, with the project of gathering and translating written documents in taçawuff. The project was abruptly abandoned after a decision of his editor. Left alone in Cairo, he declined any propositions of coming back to France from his western friends; despite his declining material condition, he relentlessly kept on writing and corresponding with his counterparts from many countries in the world, sometimes at his own cost. The reasons for his refusal to come back to the West, even at the cost of his comfort and daily life, remain unknown. In 1949, he obtained Egyptian nationality, and met Sheikh Mohammad Ibrahim, whose daughter he later married. From this marriage, he had four children, the last (Abdel Wahed) being born in 1951. In Egypt, René Guénon carried on an austere and simple life, entirely dedicated to his writings and spiritual life.^[14]

Urged by some of his collaborators, he gave his agreement to the creation in France of a Masonic lodge of traditional nature, whose name La Grande triade ("The Great Triad") comes from the title of one of his books. The first founders of the lodge, however, separated a few years after its inception.^[15] This lodge, belonging to the Grande Loge de France, is still active.

He died on January 7, 1951, after having said his last words "El nafass khalass!" ("the soul is going away") and "Allah! Allah!"

[edit] Introduction to René Guénon’s work

René Guénon's writings contemplate quite an important number of metaphysical themes, and his opus, as whole, displays a unity and an almost organic coherence, making each topic integrally related to many others. For that reason, we subdivide this presentation into two parts: an overview, made of the ongoing subsection below, followed by a detailed exposition.

René Guénon's opus makes use of words and terms, of fundamental signification, which will receive a precise definition in his work. These terms and words, although receiving a usual meaning and being used in many branches of human sciences, have substantially lost their original and exact signification (e.g. words such as "metaphysics", "initiation", "mysticism", "personality", "form", "matter").^[16] He insisted notably on the danger represented by the perversion of the signification of words seen by him as essential for the study of metaphysics; for that reason, we will recall, in the "detailed exposition" section, the definition given by René Guénon to some of the words used extensively in his opus.

[edit] Overview

In 1921, René Guénon published an Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines. His goal, as he writes it, is an attempt at presenting to westerners eastern metaphysics and spirituality as they are understood and thought by easterners themselves, while pointing at what René Guénon describes as all the erroneous interpretations and misunderstandings of western orientalism and "neospiritualism" (for the latter, notably the proponents of Madame Blavatsky’s theosophism). Right from that time, he presents a rigorous understanding, not only of Hindu doctrines, but also of eastern metaphysics in general.^[17] He managed to expose these doctrines to a western public viewed by him as quite unprepared and unreceptive as a whole.^[18] He departed from standard scholarship (Orientalist) terminology and methods and preferred to expose the doctrines as a simple "easterner", devoid of what he called "western prejudices".^[19] For one of the most famous aspects of René Guénon's work is the irreducible difference he describes between the East and the West.^[20] René Guénon defines eastern metaphysics and intellectuality as of "universal nature", that "opens possibilities of conception which are truly beyond any limitation". His work comprises :

An exposition of fundamental metaphysical principles: Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines which contains the general definition of the term "tradition" as René Guénon defines it, Man and His Becoming according to the Vedânta, The Symbolism of the Cross, The Multiple States of Being, The Metaphysical Principles of the Infinitesimal Calculus, Oriental Metaphysics.
Studies in symbolism (comprising many articles he wrote for the journal Le Voile d’Isis which became later known under the name Etudes Traditionnelles). These studies in symbolism were later compiled by Michel Valsan in the posthumous book Symbols of Sacred Science. The studies The Great Triad, Traditional Forms & Cosmic Cycles, Insights into Islamic Esoterism & Taoism and The King of the World are also mostly about symbolism.
Fundamental studies related to Initiation, a subject completely re-exposited by Guenon from the traditional perspective: Perspectives on Initiation, Initiation and Spiritual Realization, The Esoterism of Dante.
Criticism of the modern world and of "neospiritualism": East and West, The Crisis of the Modern World, Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power, Theosophy: History of a Pseudo-Religion, The Spiritist Fallacy and The Reign of Quantity & the Signs of the Times, the latter book being often considered as his masterpiece as an explanation of the modern world from the traditional perspective.
Various studies in esoterism: Saint Bernard, Insights into Christian Esoterism, Studies in Freemasonry and Compagnonnage, Studies in Hinduism etc.

This partition is not strict and, as we noted earlier, René Guénon's works display a coherence and unity making each book integrally related to the others.^[21] From that perspective, and according to René Guénon's own words,^[22] his work is completely unrelated to any particular philosophical system.^[23]

René Guénon defines the modern world as being a degeneration of what he calls "the traditional world". According to him, the real separation between the East and West comes from this degeneration; in other words, it comes from an intellectual standpoint, and is not related to any geographical distinction, but to a doctrinal divergence.^[24] Amidst the global period of intellectual confusion and disorder that characterizes modernity according to René Guénon, the East has maintained alive, through uninterrupted spiritual lineages, an intellectual (possibly hidden) elite fully conscious of the original wisdom transmitted to humanity from time immemorial. In some of his books, he states that the present condition of humanity can be explained by the traditional doctrine of "cosmic cycles", as it is described in Hinduism.

He produced a series of articles and books aimed at explaining the modern civilization according to traditional data and, more generally, to the "traditional standpoint".^[25] He therein denounces what he calls the "pseudo-initiation", which was, according to him, spreading since the end of the XIX century. He intends to denounce, through a careful examination of the historical origin, the ideological evolution taken by what he calls their "pseudo-doctrines", some "pseudo-spiritual" organisations which, according to him, expose to the West false eastern doctrines or which are counterfeits of regular initiatic traditions (among these "pseudo-spiritual associations" he makes a particular mention of the Theosophical Society founded by Madame Blavatsky in the wake of the modern pseudo-Rosicrucian organisations of the late XIXth century).^[26]

René Guénon exposits a view of Metaphysics which can, according to him "by no means be reduced to scientific or philosophical conceptions"^[27] but which is instead "the knowledge (…) of the principles of universal order" ; being "absolutely illimited", Metaphysics "cannot be defined".^[28] Metaphysics is seen, according to him, in its etymological sense,^[29] while recalling that sense in his books.^[30] Such a metaphysics, being by essence beyond any contingency, is necessarily at the source of all orthodox traditions, these latter being considered as direct derivations of the great "primordial tradition" (corresponding to the Hindu notion of Sanātana Dharma, or Manu law).

Metaphysics is not introduced by René Guénon as a branch of philosophy, as it is in western studies. Traditional metaphysics, which is, according to Guénon, beyond any contingency (knowledge of universal principles^[31]), lies at the very source of all orthodox and legitimate traditions, making a connection between the heart of these traditions and a unique spiritual origin, the "Primordial Tradition"^[32]. The study of traditional metaphysics and its relationship with our state of existence, i.e. our world, clears the path inwardly towards the center common and shared by each authentic religion: exoterism bounds an "outside" accessible to everyone, its purpose is to maintain the link with Supreme Principle^[33].

However, the current state of the West, characterized by its voluntary and gradual detachment from his own tradition, Christianity, and the degeneration of major branches of one of his last initiatic organization, freemasonry, makes a restoration somewhat unlikely feasible given that this situation is the result of a long evolution through Western history, which according Guénon, follows even a predetermined plan^[34]. Incidentally, in the esoteric domain, René Guénon says that two dates mark historically the fundamental spiritual degeneration of the West: first, the destruction of the Order of the Knight Templars in 1314, which defines precisely what René Guénon called "modern deviation"^[35], and the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 which severed, in the historical and "outer realm", the link between West and what René Guénon defined as the "Supreme Centre"^[36].

At multiple occasions in his books, René Guénon insisted that the most important, in metaphysics, was properly inexpressible^[37]:

[...] it should be agreed, for not altering the truth by a partial, restrictive or systematized exposition, to keep always the part of the inexpressible, ie the part which cannot be emprisonned in any form, and which, metaphysically, is really what matters most, we can even say that represents the most essential part [...]

According to the doctrine exposed by René Guénon, the "spiritual realisation" leads to the effective identification with the states of being that are superior to our transitory human state, and ultimately to the "Supreme Identity" with the Supreme Principle or Absolute Reality. He firmly states the necessity of being fastened to an authentic and living tradition which has kept alive and made available the initiations that were existing in that tradition since its inception. Such living traditions (such as Hinduism, Islam, or Taoism) are characterized by an inspiration (ex. the the Vedas), or a revelation (ex. the Qur'an). He insists on the notion of "intellectual intuition" (supra-rational or spiritual), "awakened" by concentration and meditation on symbols, either in visual form (yantras) or auditive (mantras or, in Islam, dhikr).

[edit] René Guénon's work: detailed exposition

In paragraphs of this section are presented, from one part, the books devoted to the exposition of the core metaphysical doctrines in the work of René Guénon, and, secondly, an overview of the other thematics also exposed.

For reasons recalled above, we begin by reviewing some fundamental terms used throughout his books.

[edit] Some fundamental terms and notions

Metaphysics^[38]

It may now be stated that metaphysics [...] is essentially the knowledge of the Universal, or, if preferred, the knowledge of the principles belonging to the universal order, which moreover alone can validly lay claim to the name of principles; but in making this statement, we are not really trying to propose a definition of metaphysics, for such a thing is a sheer impossibility by reason of that very universality which we look upon as the foremost of its characteristics, the one from which all the over are derived. In reality, only something that is limited is capable of definition, wheras by definition metaphysics is on the contrary by its very nature absolutely unlimited, and this plainly does not allow our enclosing it in a more or less narrow formula [...]

Identity of the knowing and being^[39]

Metaphysics affirms the fundamental identity of knowing and being [...] and since this identity is essentially implied of the very nature of intellectual intuition, it not merely affirms it but realizes it as well.

Initiation and mysticism^[40]

Today the esoteric or initiatic domain and the mystical domain, - or, if one prefers, their respective points of view - are often confused [...]. it is currently the fashion so to speak among those with limited horizons to construe all Eastern doctrines as 'mystical', including those that lack even a semblance of the outward aspects that could justify such an attribution [...]. [...] in everything pertaining to initiation there is really nothing vague or nebulous, for on the contrary it is as precise and 'positive' as can be, so that initiation by its very nature is in fact incompatible with mysticism.

Initiation^[41]

[...] initiation is essentially the transmission of a spiritual influence, a transmission that can only take place through a regular, traditionnal organization, so that one cannot speak of initiation outside of an affiliation with an organization of this kind. We have explained that 'regularity' must be understood to exclude all pseudo-initiatic organizations, which, regardless of pretention and outward appearance, in no way possess any spiritual influence and thus are incapable of transmitting anything.

The Self^[42]

The 'Self' is the transcendant and permanent principle of which the manifested being, the human being, for example, is only a transient and contingent modification, a modification which, moreover, can in no way affect the principle [...] The 'Self', as such, is never individualized and cannot become so, for since it must always be considered under the aspect of the eternity and immutability which are the necessary attributes of pure Being, it is obviously not susceptible of any particularization, which would cause it to be 'other that itself'. Immutable in its own nature, it develops the indefinite possibilities which it contains within itself, by a relative passing from potency to act through an indefinite series of degrees. Its essential permanence is not thereby affected, precisely because this process is only relative, and because this development is, strictly speaking, not a development at all, except from the point of view of manifestation, outside of which there is no question of succession, but only of perfect simultaneity, so that even what is virtual under one aspect, is found nevertheless to be realized in the 'eternal present'.

Paramâtmâ, individuality, personality^[43]

[...] Previously, on the contrary [i.e. prior to the theosphists], even in the West, whenever any distinction has been made between these two terms ['individuality' or 'ego' and 'personality'] the personality has always been regarded as superior to individuality [...] The 'Self' [...] considered in relation to a being, is properly speaking the personnality; it is true that one might restrict the use of this latter word to the 'Self' as principle of the manifested states, just as the 'Divine Personality', Ishwara, is the Principle of universal Manifestation; but one can also extend it analogically to the 'Self' as principle of all states of the being, both manifested and unmanifested. The personality is an immediate determination, primordial and non-particularized, of the principle which in Sanskrit is called Atmâ or Paramâtmâ, and which, in default of a better term, we may call the 'Universal Spirit', on the clear understanding, however, that in this use of the word 'spirit', nothing is implied that might recall Western philosophical conceptions, and, in particular, that is not turned into a correlative of 'matter', as the modern mind is inclined to do, being subject in this respect, even though unconsciously, to the influence of Cartesian dualism.

Universal and individual^[44]

The 'Self', in relation to any being whatsoever, is in reality identical with Atmâ, since it is essentially beyond all distinction and all particularization; and that is why, in Sanskrit, the same word âtman, in cases other than the nominative, replaces the reflexive pronoun 'itself'. The 'Self is not therefore really distinct from Atmâ, except when one considers it [...] in relation to a certain definite state of being, such as the human state [...]. In this case, moreover, the 'Self' does not really become distinct from Atmâ in any way, since [...] it [...} cannot be affected by the point of view from which we regard it [...]. What should be noted is that to the extent that we make this distinction, we are departing from the direct consideration of the 'Self' in order to consider its reflection in human individuality [...]. The reflection in question determines what may be called the center of this individuality; but if isolated from its principle, that is, from the 'Self', it can only enjoy a purely illusory existence, for it is from that principle that it derives all its reality, and it effectually possesses this reality only through participation in the nature of the 'Self', that is, insofar as it is identified therewith by universalization.
The personality [...] belongs essentially to the order of principles in the strictest sense of the word, that is, to the universal order [...]. [The] following table [...] sets forth the essential distinctions in this connection [...]: