05.01.2013 Views

glossary of terms used by frithjof schuon - Sophia Perennis

glossary of terms used by frithjof schuon - Sophia Perennis

glossary of terms used by frithjof schuon - Sophia Perennis

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Philosophy (pr<strong>of</strong>ane): Pr<strong>of</strong>ane philosophy is ignorant not only <strong>of</strong> the value <strong>of</strong> truth and<br />

universality in Revelation, but also <strong>of</strong> the transcendence <strong>of</strong> the pure Intellect; it entails<br />

therefore no guarantee <strong>of</strong> truth on any level, for the quite human faculty which reason is,<br />

ins<strong>of</strong>ar as it is cut <strong>of</strong>f from the Absolute, is readily mistaken even on the level <strong>of</strong> the<br />

relative. The efficacy <strong>of</strong> reasoning is essentially conditional. [SW, The Nature and<br />

Arguments <strong>of</strong> Faith]<br />

Philosophy / Reason: In the opinion <strong>of</strong> all pr<strong>of</strong>ane thinkers, philosophy means to think<br />

“freely,” as far as possible without presupposition, which precisely is impossible; on the<br />

other hand, gnosis, or philosophy in the proper and primitive sense <strong>of</strong> the word, is to<br />

think in accordance with the immanent Intellect and not <strong>by</strong> means <strong>of</strong> reason alone. What<br />

favors confusion is the fact that in both cases the intelligence operates independently <strong>of</strong><br />

outward prescriptions, although for diametrically opposed reasons; that the rationalist if<br />

need be draws his inspiration from a pre-existing system does not prevent him from<br />

thinking in a way that he deems to be “free” – falsely, since true freedom coincides with<br />

truth – likewise, mutatis mutandis: that the gnostic – in the orthodox sense <strong>of</strong> the term –<br />

bases himself extrinsically on a given sacred Scripture or on some other gnostic cannot<br />

prevent him from thinking in an intrinsically free manner <strong>by</strong> virtue <strong>of</strong> the freedom proper<br />

to the immanent Truth, or proper to the Essence which <strong>by</strong> definition escapes formal<br />

constraints. Or again: whether the gnostic “thinks” what he has “seen” with the “eye <strong>of</strong><br />

the heart,” or whether on the contrary he obtains his “vision” thanks to the intervention –<br />

preliminary and provisional and in no wise efficient – <strong>of</strong> a thought which then takes on<br />

the role <strong>of</strong> occasional cause, is a matter <strong>of</strong> indifference with regard to the truth, or with<br />

regard to its almost supernatural springing forth in the spirit. [SVQ, Tracing the Notion <strong>of</strong><br />

Philosophy]<br />

Philosophy (modern) / Wisdom (genuine): No sooner does one thinker believe he has<br />

found the cause <strong>of</strong> phenomena than another philosopher comes forward to accuse him <strong>of</strong><br />

failing to find the cause <strong>of</strong> the cause, and so on ad infinitum. This shows that when<br />

philosophy has become “art for art’s sake” it is no more than a search for the cause <strong>of</strong> the<br />

cause <strong>of</strong> the cause, carried on in a state <strong>of</strong> utter mental deception and without the least<br />

possibility <strong>of</strong> arriving at a conclusion; in the case <strong>of</strong> genuine wisdom, on the other hand,<br />

one knows before hand that the complete truth can and must spring forth from any<br />

adequate formulation like a spark from a flint, but that it will always remain<br />

incommunicable as far as its intrinsic infinitude is concerned. To search, as do modern<br />

thinkers and as did certain ancient writers, for completely adequate formulations capable<br />

<strong>of</strong> satisfying all causal needs, the most artificial and the least intelligent included, is<br />

assuredly the most contradictory and the most fruitless <strong>of</strong> occupations; the “quest” <strong>of</strong><br />

philosophers, therefore, has nothing in common with that <strong>of</strong> contemplatives, since its<br />

basic principle <strong>of</strong> exhaustive verbal adequacy is opposed to any liberating finality, to any<br />

transcending <strong>of</strong> the sphere <strong>of</strong> words. It is not to be wondered at that after centuries <strong>of</strong><br />

unsatisfied ratiocination – unsatisfied because in principle not capable <strong>of</strong> satisfaction –<br />

people should have become weary <strong>of</strong> what is looked upon, rightly or wrongly, as<br />

“abstract,” and that they should turn, alas, not to the “concrete” reality that lies within and<br />

which the sages <strong>of</strong> old and the saints always knew, but, on the contrary, to an outward<br />

counterfeit, at one and the same time hardening and dispersive in its effects, and totally<br />

110

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!