René Guénon's honour is to have been proved right against his times, but also to have not deviated from the meaning of his mission; namely: "to reorient" what could be reoriented in the modern world. The fact that, strictly speaking, modernity is, in fact, "westernization" itself has already been widely debated and, while some, attentive readers of Guénon, may have thought it appropriate to state that the Guénonian vision of the East was too partial, even partial and subjective, it is nonetheless indisputable that what has been "modernist" in Eastern civilizations for the last hundred years or so does indeed originate in the West, in the broadest sense.
Apart from this reservation, it is also a common idea today that each one of those who write about and in connection with Tradition, should include a small "personal" chapter on Guénon's error, i.e. his "analysis" of Christianity and of Christian esotericism in particular. It seems, indeed, that a certain number of readers of René Guénon experience some trouble in their "attempt" to reconcile Christianity and "Guénonism", as if both might have a common measure.
It seems, indeed, that a certain number of readers of René Guénon experience some trouble in their "attempt" to reconcile Christianity and "Guénonism", as if both had something in common.
We would like to recall here, first of all, two essential facts. Firstly, it is the simplest to say and to hear: "guenonism" precisely does not exist and does not even ought to exist. René Guénon "called" those who could to re-establish a living contact with their, or a living tradition. He explained very clearly, and masterfully in our opinion, why and how! Secondly, he has, precisely, exposed and explained this to the particular intention of "Westerners". We have already, and with force of reason, written, and said, that the work of René Guénon is useless, even superfluous, for example, for a monk of Athos, a Sufi or Taoist initiate or a Buddhist lama. On the contrary, is it strictly necessary for Westerners who, logically, are supposed to be Christians...
The problem, if there is one, is precisely here; for, when René Guénon was writing and still living in France, what was it that he encountered in this respect? Christians of course, but on the one hand Freemasons, Gnostics, "hermetists", symbolists or occultists and, on the other hand, neo-thomists... And René Guénon, "witness and bearer of Tradition", wrote for or against these people in a very special way. Negatively in order to oppose to all deleterious influences to the clarity of the sapiential teachings; positively in order to remind energetically the properly essential, therefore eminently vital, aspect of these teachings.
Logically, if this had to be done, then something was missing! The confusion of orders and domains was the result of this cruel lack. And we can affirm with René Guénon that what was missing was, in the final analysis, the sense of Tradition, its presence and the link that unites it. As for knowing where and when this loss came from ... the answer was also lacking!
The East is vast. The Orient to which René Guénon drank was that of India, that of Muslim Humma, of Taoism too ... but it lacked that of Orthodoxy!
To reproach him for it today would be abusive, all the more so since he had, moreover, wisely identified the causes of the problem raised by the understanding of Christian esotericism in the West.
It seems, in fact, that the passage to the "monotheistic" path was not lived as painfully in Greece, then in the Slavic countries, "when Byzantium spread the flame of faith in the Hyperborean space", to use Serge Bulgakov's happy formula; whereas it was so in the West where, moreover, it happened that, later, Christianity was incorporated, more than elsewhere, into Roman legalism. Even before the glorious advent of the Christic way, all the more or less orthodox initiations stood, in Rome, in front of this "politico-religious legalism " and opposed to its ritualism, certainly necessary, all the spiritual paths aiming at nothing less than the internalization, by each initiate, of the most subtle teaching of the Universal Knowledge.
The Church, therefore, by virtue of her "universal", "unifying" vocation, had to find and try to maintain a subtle balance between "political and legalistic religiosity" and a living spiritual path and "interiorizing" doctrine. Two attitudes asserted themselves which soon opposed each other, to the point of rupture ... "the sewless dress was torn"! [1]
In his book, The Roman Grail [2] Nikos Vardhikas, Nikos Vardhikas, captures accurately the myth and legends... of the Holy Grail as a final spark of the undivided Tradition ... The Celtic origin, now recognized, of these legends seems to give reason to this " presentiment ". Indeed, the so-called Celtic Churches, kept, apart from the respect and obedience owed to Rome, a deep relationship with the Eastern Church and its theology. The Greek was, for example, on an equal footing with Latin, the language in which the theology was spread in Ireland (some parishes practised even Liturgies in the Greek language ...)[3] … We know enough about the differences which opposed the supporters of the "Roman" tradition and those of the Irish (or Celtic), about the date of Easter, the Liturgy and even the conception of monasticism ... but it is all too often observed that it is after the acceptance of the "Roman" norms that the Arthurian legends begin to flourish, it is also shortly after the great schism4 ... But we also find in this continuity the origins, admitted by some, of organized Freemasonry5 , which is linked, most often, and without "tangible proof", with the Order of the Temple .... But we won't have time here to go any further down this road. However, we want to draw the attention of our readers to precisely this point, that René Guénon was indeed right to recognize Christian esotericism in the proliferation of these stories... what was missing was the essential, namely the possibility of reviving the teaching they contained. But the choices made by the Church of the West, instead of bringing these precious teachings back to her and in her, distanced them even more from her, and they crystallized in different forms, according to the milieu in which they were encountered, and led to the flagrant opposition of an exotericism and an esotericism, both of which were seen as "absolute and unique " [6] . And that, René Guénon noticed! What some criticize him today is due to the fact of this historical and spiritual reality ... the honor of René Guénon was to have taken into account these realities in the perspective and mission that were his ...
In order to support our point we would like to dwell on the notion of "Spiritual Fatherhood". Indeed, if René Guénon has continually insisted on the importance of the traditional transmission of the purest spirituality, it is not by chance and, if this notion is at the heart of the Arthurian narratives, even if it is sometimes masked by adventurous developments, it is not by chance either ...
Orthodox spirituality, however, has always offered the possibility of the blossoming of this primordial notion.
The counsels of the various hermits to the knights, in the Arthurian accounts, all resemble, closely or remotely, the tradition of perpetual prayer and theosis. These holy characters, in any case, belong to the commonly accepted image of the "Spiritual Father".
Apart from this reservation, it is also a common idea today that each one of those who write about and in connection with Tradition, should include a small "personal" chapter on Guénon's error, i.e. his "analysis" of Christianity and of Christian esotericism in particular. It seems, indeed, that a certain number of readers of René Guénon experience some trouble in their "attempt" to reconcile Christianity and "Guénonism", as if both might have a common measure.
It seems, indeed, that a certain number of readers of René Guénon experience some trouble in their "attempt" to reconcile Christianity and "Guénonism", as if both had something in common.
We would like to recall here, first of all, two essential facts. Firstly, it is the simplest to say and to hear: "guenonism" precisely does not exist and does not even ought to exist. René Guénon "called" those who could to re-establish a living contact with their, or a living tradition. He explained very clearly, and masterfully in our opinion, why and how! Secondly, he has, precisely, exposed and explained this to the particular intention of "Westerners". We have already, and with force of reason, written, and said, that the work of René Guénon is useless, even superfluous, for example, for a monk of Athos, a Sufi or Taoist initiate or a Buddhist lama. On the contrary, is it strictly necessary for Westerners who, logically, are supposed to be Christians...
The problem, if there is one, is precisely here; for, when René Guénon was writing and still living in France, what was it that he encountered in this respect? Christians of course, but on the one hand Freemasons, Gnostics, "hermetists", symbolists or occultists and, on the other hand, neo-thomists... And René Guénon, "witness and bearer of Tradition", wrote for or against these people in a very special way. Negatively in order to oppose to all deleterious influences to the clarity of the sapiential teachings; positively in order to remind energetically the properly essential, therefore eminently vital, aspect of these teachings.
Logically, if this had to be done, then something was missing! The confusion of orders and domains was the result of this cruel lack. And we can affirm with René Guénon that what was missing was, in the final analysis, the sense of Tradition, its presence and the link that unites it. As for knowing where and when this loss came from ... the answer was also lacking!
The East is vast. The Orient to which René Guénon drank was that of India, that of Muslim Humma, of Taoism too ... but it lacked that of Orthodoxy!
To reproach him for it today would be abusive, all the more so since he had, moreover, wisely identified the causes of the problem raised by the understanding of Christian esotericism in the West.
It seems, in fact, that the passage to the "monotheistic" path was not lived as painfully in Greece, then in the Slavic countries, "when Byzantium spread the flame of faith in the Hyperborean space", to use Serge Bulgakov's happy formula; whereas it was so in the West where, moreover, it happened that, later, Christianity was incorporated, more than elsewhere, into Roman legalism. Even before the glorious advent of the Christic way, all the more or less orthodox initiations stood, in Rome, in front of this "politico-religious legalism " and opposed to its ritualism, certainly necessary, all the spiritual paths aiming at nothing less than the internalization, by each initiate, of the most subtle teaching of the Universal Knowledge.
The Church, therefore, by virtue of her "universal", "unifying" vocation, had to find and try to maintain a subtle balance between "political and legalistic religiosity" and a living spiritual path and "interiorizing" doctrine. Two attitudes asserted themselves which soon opposed each other, to the point of rupture ... "the sewless dress was torn"! [1]
In his book, The Roman Grail [2] Nikos Vardhikas, Nikos Vardhikas, captures accurately the myth and legends... of the Holy Grail as a final spark of the undivided Tradition ... The Celtic origin, now recognized, of these legends seems to give reason to this " presentiment ". Indeed, the so-called Celtic Churches, kept, apart from the respect and obedience owed to Rome, a deep relationship with the Eastern Church and its theology. The Greek was, for example, on an equal footing with Latin, the language in which the theology was spread in Ireland (some parishes practised even Liturgies in the Greek language ...)[3] … We know enough about the differences which opposed the supporters of the "Roman" tradition and those of the Irish (or Celtic), about the date of Easter, the Liturgy and even the conception of monasticism ... but it is all too often observed that it is after the acceptance of the "Roman" norms that the Arthurian legends begin to flourish, it is also shortly after the great schism4 ... But we also find in this continuity the origins, admitted by some, of organized Freemasonry5 , which is linked, most often, and without "tangible proof", with the Order of the Temple .... But we won't have time here to go any further down this road. However, we want to draw the attention of our readers to precisely this point, that René Guénon was indeed right to recognize Christian esotericism in the proliferation of these stories... what was missing was the essential, namely the possibility of reviving the teaching they contained. But the choices made by the Church of the West, instead of bringing these precious teachings back to her and in her, distanced them even more from her, and they crystallized in different forms, according to the milieu in which they were encountered, and led to the flagrant opposition of an exotericism and an esotericism, both of which were seen as "absolute and unique " [6] . And that, René Guénon noticed! What some criticize him today is due to the fact of this historical and spiritual reality ... the honor of René Guénon was to have taken into account these realities in the perspective and mission that were his ...
In order to support our point we would like to dwell on the notion of "Spiritual Fatherhood". Indeed, if René Guénon has continually insisted on the importance of the traditional transmission of the purest spirituality, it is not by chance and, if this notion is at the heart of the Arthurian narratives, even if it is sometimes masked by adventurous developments, it is not by chance either ...
Orthodox spirituality, however, has always offered the possibility of the blossoming of this primordial notion.
The counsels of the various hermits to the knights, in the Arthurian accounts, all resemble, closely or remotely, the tradition of perpetual prayer and theosis. These holy characters, in any case, belong to the commonly accepted image of the "Spiritual Father".
Ignatius Brianchaninov calls spiritual fatherhood the "sacrament of filiation". He also specifies, in accordance with Orthodox tradition, that a spiritual Father is not "a master who teaches but a 'father' who begets".
Moreover, the Church recognizes, in her use of the word "father", two distinct traditions: on the one hand the "functional paternity" (which goes back to St. Ignatius of Antioch) which makes one call "father" any Bishop or priest according to his priesthood; on the other hand the "spiritual paternity", properly speaking, which goes back to the Fathers of the desert, monks or laymen (St. Anthony, for example, was a layman). Closer to us in time, Paul Evdokimov will recall, for his part, that the essential condition which legitimizes a spiritual Father is "to have first become pneumatikos himself". Saint Simeon the New Theologian used to say: "To give the Holy Spirit one must have it".
It is thus revealed, through this use of the term "father", two practices which join what René Guénon called, for lack of a better term, in his own admission, exotericism and esotericism, or, functional religion and the spiritual path of interiorization, identification and union, the two being, in this case, in no way in contradiction or opposition to the other [7] .
Moreover, the Church recognizes, in her use of the word "father", two distinct traditions: on the one hand the "functional paternity" (which goes back to St. Ignatius of Antioch) which makes one call "father" any Bishop or priest according to his priesthood; on the other hand the "spiritual paternity", properly speaking, which goes back to the Fathers of the desert, monks or laymen (St. Anthony, for example, was a layman). Closer to us in time, Paul Evdokimov will recall, for his part, that the essential condition which legitimizes a spiritual Father is "to have first become pneumatikos himself". Saint Simeon the New Theologian used to say: "To give the Holy Spirit one must have it".
It is thus revealed, through this use of the term "father", two practices which join what René Guénon called, for lack of a better term, in his own admission, exotericism and esotericism, or, functional religion and the spiritual path of interiorization, identification and union, the two being, in this case, in no way in contradiction or opposition to the other [7] .
Paul Evdokimov also recalled, and very opportunely, that, according to the Fathers: "every believer can become an 'interiorized monk' and find the equivalent of the monastic vows, in exactly the same way, in the personal circumstances of his life, whether he is single or married". This is perfectly affirmed by the Eastern Church in which every baptized person passes, during the sacrament of the chrism anointing, through the rite of tonsure which consecrates him entirely to the Lord. This rite, analogous to the monastic rite, invites each one to rediscover the sense of "interiorized" monasticism which the sacrament teaches to all but which not all can realize ...
These brief reflections will contribute, God willing, to make it appear that, contrary to what a current trend in Western Europe would like to make us believe, the traditional "thinking" revived by René Guénon is in no way opposed to the true Christian tradition, but that, on the contrary, it could, quite opportunely, enlighten the latter (in the Western world) on what it has failed to preserve in the course of its "evolution".
In conclusion, all this, it seems to us, demonstrates to all who knows deeply the message of René Guénon, how perfectly the latter is in full conformity with the "oriental" tradition of Christianity!
In conclusion, all this demonstrates well, it seems to us, to those who know, in depth, the message of René Guénon, to what extent the latter is completely in conformity with the "oriental" tradition of Christianity!
------------
Notes
1 The Sages of a traditional doctrine possess the Spiritual Authority, therefore the Temporal Power, and only when the life cycle of a tradition reaches critical times, is the Temporal Power delegated (to kings), and then it rebels against its legitimate guardianship. External action finds its form of expression and its Justice only in Spirituality. There can be balance between two elements only if they are on the same plane, but since the Temporal Power proceeds from Spiritual Authority there can be no relation of equality between two different dimensions. The line is not comparable to a plane. When these considerations come up there is a sign of degeneration of the normal functioning of a tradition (note by Wou Ming).
2 Nikos Vardhikas, The Holy Grail novel, 1997, Jean Curutchet / Editions Harriet...
3 For example, the Greek literally says "triade" for Trinity ... which was certainly attractive to the early theologians and mystics of the Church of Ireland.
L’honneur de René Guénon et l’Orient Orthodoxe - Thierry Jolif
1 The Sages of a traditional doctrine possess the Spiritual Authority, therefore the Temporal Power, and only when the life cycle of a tradition reaches critical times, is the Temporal Power delegated (to kings), and then it rebels against its legitimate guardianship. External action finds its form of expression and its Justice only in Spirituality. There can be balance between two elements only if they are on the same plane, but since the Temporal Power proceeds from Spiritual Authority there can be no relation of equality between two different dimensions. The line is not comparable to a plane. When these considerations come up there is a sign of degeneration of the normal functioning of a tradition (note by Wou Ming).
2 Nikos Vardhikas, The Holy Grail novel, 1997, Jean Curutchet / Editions Harriet...
3 For example, the Greek literally says "triade" for Trinity ... which was certainly attractive to the early theologians and mystics of the Church of Ireland.
4 The theory of the two Swords and the conception of a holy empire are foreign to the traditional doctrines of the Celts. The Celtic conception of Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power was much closer to that of the Byzantine Empire and the Symphony of Powers. Roman and Germanic traditions, dominated by a kshatriya-oriented spirituality, imposed their perspectives on spiritual and temporal domains. They forged the West!
5 In Scotland, moreover, a country with Celtic origins ...
6 If the Pope does indeed possess the attributes of Janus, god of initiations, why then should these need to be organized outside the Church, looking for an ark other than the Ark? The Orthodox bishops, chosen from among the monks, have kept on their pastoral staffs the Caduceus ... a "hermetic" and, therefore, esoteric symbol if any ...
5 In Scotland, moreover, a country with Celtic origins ...
6 If the Pope does indeed possess the attributes of Janus, god of initiations, why then should these need to be organized outside the Church, looking for an ark other than the Ark? The Orthodox bishops, chosen from among the monks, have kept on their pastoral staffs the Caduceus ... a "hermetic" and, therefore, esoteric symbol if any ...
7 "We shall say that if a mystery is not a secret, it is particularly true for the Christian mystery, continuing the very condition of the Incarnate God, at the same time offered in his plenitude to everyone and invisible for those who cannot see him. One is, essentially, in a different universe than the one of the esoteric doctrine, protecting, by a secret initiation, its “universal truth” against the psychic and the hylic people. The distinction, itself external, between esoteric and exoteric, does not make any sense here, as it is not about a hidden and time-denying continuation of a sacred past, but instead about a continuation of a Presence, at every moment creative and invigorating, - one would say a contemporaneity of the Spirit." Monsignor André Scrima, quoted in "Etudes et documents d'Hésychasme", Michel Valsan, Etudes Traditionnelles.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário