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
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
integral personality and that <strong>of</strong> the human collectivity; this sense <strong>of</strong> sin is a counterpart <strong>of</strong><br />
the sense <strong>of</strong> the sacred, the instinct for that which surpasses us and which, for that very<br />
reason, must not be touched <strong>by</strong> ignorant and iconoclastic hands. [LT, The Contradiction<br />
<strong>of</strong> Relativism]<br />
Reforming Man: Reforming man means binding him again to Heaven, reestablishing the<br />
broken link; it means tearing him away from the reign <strong>of</strong> the passions, from the cult <strong>of</strong><br />
matter, quantity and cunning, and reintegrating him into the world <strong>of</strong> the spirit and<br />
serenity, we would even say: into the world <strong>of</strong> sufficient reason. [UI, Islam]<br />
Relatively Absolute: We have alluded more than once to the seemingly contradictory,<br />
but metaphysically useful and even indispensable, idea <strong>of</strong> the “relatively absolute,” which<br />
is absolute in relation to what it rules, while pertaining to relativity in relation to the<br />
“Pure Absolute.” [IFA, Islam and Consciousness <strong>of</strong> the Absolute]<br />
There could never be any symmetry between the relative and the Absolute; as a result, if<br />
there is clearly no such thing as the absolutely relative, there is nonetheless a “relatively<br />
absolute”, and this is Being as creator, revealer, and savior, who is absolute for the world,<br />
but not for the Essence: “Beyond-Being” or “Non-Being”. If God were the Absolute in<br />
every respect and without any hypostatic restriction, there could be no contact between<br />
Him and the world, and the world would not even exist; for in order to be able to create,<br />
speak, and act, it is necessary that God Himself make Himself “world” in some fashion,<br />
and He does so through the ontological self-limitation that gives rise to the “personal<br />
God”, the world itself being the most extreme and hence the most relative <strong>of</strong> selflimitations.<br />
[FSR, The Two Paradises]<br />
. . . in the sense – paradoxical but real – <strong>of</strong> the ‘relatively absolute’; hypostases are<br />
relative in respect <strong>of</strong> the Essence, but they are principial – hence in practice absolute – in<br />
respect <strong>of</strong> cosmic Manifestation. [FDH, Transcendence Is Not Contrary to Sense]<br />
The Vedanta distinguishes between the ‘non-supreme’ Principle (Apara-Brahma) and the<br />
‘supreme’ Principle (Para-Brahma); the first is not, as is the second, the Absolute in<br />
itself, but it is ‘practically’ the Absolute in relation to the world; it is thus ‘relatively<br />
absolute’. The personal God is ‘absolute’ without being intrinsically ‘the Absolute’.<br />
[SME, The Mystery <strong>of</strong> the Hypostatic Face]<br />
Relativism: Relativism sets out to reduce every element <strong>of</strong> absoluteness to a relativity,<br />
while making a quite illogical exception in favor <strong>of</strong> this reduction itself. In effect,<br />
relativism consists in declaring it to be true that there is no such thing as truth, or in<br />
declaring it to be absolutely true that nothing but the relatively true exists; one might just<br />
as well say that language does not exist, or write that there is no such thing as writing. In<br />
short, every idea is reduced to a relativity <strong>of</strong> some sort, whether psychological, historical,<br />
or social; but the assertion nullifies itself <strong>by</strong> the fact that it too presents itself as a<br />
psychological, historical, or social relativity. The assertion nullifies itself if it is true, and<br />
<strong>by</strong> nullifying itself logically proves there<strong>by</strong> that it is false; its initial absurdity lies in the<br />
implicit claim to be unique in escaping, as if <strong>by</strong> enchantment, from a relativity that is<br />
declared alone to be possible. [LT, The Contradiction <strong>of</strong> Relativism]<br />
Relativism, even when it makes a show <strong>of</strong> admitting the interventions <strong>of</strong> an absolute in<br />
the relative, gives them such a quantitative air as to take away precisely their<br />
120