Tout dans la Tradition, rien contre la Tradition, rien en dehors de la Tradition

par Thierry DUROLLE

Ex: http://www.europemaxima.com

« Fascisme » et « fasciste » sont aujourd’hui des termes de novlangue relevant de l’insulte. Ils servent, à l’instar du mot « nazi », à disqualifier toute personne qui tient un discours non conforme. Pour autant, le sens initial de ces mots résonne encore dans la tête d’un bon nombre de personnes, du militant politique jusqu’à l’historien.

En effet, les fascismes – non pas uniquement le fascisme italien – en tant que phénomènes politiques, doivent d’être étudiés et leurs résultats longuement médités. En 1977, Georges Gondinet et Daniel Cologne se prononcent sur cette épineuse question avec leur fascicule Pour en finir avec le fascisme. Essai de critique traditionaliste-révolutionnaire (1). L’objectif de ce roboratif essai au titre provocateur consiste tout d’abord à mettre dos à dos les deux « mythologisations » du fascisme : la première positive, émanant des milieux dit d’extrême droite; la seconde provenant des ennemis du fascisme, soit le libéralisme et le marxisme. Les auteurs se posent en « héritiers partiels et lucides ». Leur critique du phénomène fasciste s’inscrit donc dans une troisième voie où dominent l’influence de la Tradition Primordiale et le recul historique.

Les critiques du condominium libéralo-marxiste (les auteurs parlent de « critique externe ») n’ont guère évoluées en quarante ans et ne méritent pas que l’on s’y attarde. La « critique interne », c’est-à-dire celle de la Droite radicale, est quant à elle « surtout l’œuvre de nostalgiques, des gens qui ont vécu et apprécié cette époque, de sentimentaux attachés à l’image qu’ils se font de leur passé (p. 11) ». Maurice Bardèche et sa conception rêvée du fascisme n’est pas de leur goût, car selon eux elle ne « débouche pas sur une critique interne, sur une proposition politique nouvelle, sur un fascisme purifié (p. 12) ». Ceci n’enlève rien à l’une des facettes du phénomène fasciste, soit sa proportion à renouer vers un nouvel âge d’or, dans une tentative de restauration de nature héroïque, en plein âge du loup. « Le fascisme nous apparaît comme l’effort révolutionnaire pour retrouver, en plein cœur de la modernité décadente, un monde où la puissance sociale et la supériorité naturelle soit fondées sur des critères spirituels plutôt que matériels (p. 13). » Rebondissant sur deux critiques professées par les libéraux, celles de l’impérialisme et du racisme, Daniel Cologne et Georges Gondinet, en bons défenseurs de l’idée traditionnelle, affirment que « le monde traditionnel connut l’idée impériale et la race, nullement l’impérialisme et le racisme (p. 13) ».

Néanmoins le phénomène fascisme atteint sa limite malgré la tentative de restauration de type héroïque qu’il prétend incarner. En effet, son vitalisme est avant tout perçu comme une dégradation d’un élément autrefois supérieur : « son défaut fut de considérer l’héroïsme comme l’expression de la “ volonté de puissance ”, l’affirmation brutale de la vie, l’exaltation dionysiaque de l’être subintellectuel, le culte de l’action pour l’action, la libération des forces instinctives délivrées de tout interdit moral ou religieux et de toute préconception de l’esprit (p. 16) ». En clair, et les auteurs reprennent d’ailleurs volontiers le terme de Spengler, l’homme façonné par le fascisme est l’incarnation typique de l’« homme faustien ». L’influence de la philosophie typiquement naturaliste de Nietzsche n’échappe donc pas à la critique. « En prônant le naturalisme nietzschéen, le fascisme a voulu renouer avec la grande tradition de l’Europe. En cela, il se trompait. En effet, pour saisir l’essence de la tradition européenne, il faut avoir recours à la conception de la “ spiritualité primordiale ” (Evola) (p. 17). » Ainsi pour renouer avec un idéal à la fois européenne et traditionnelle, la nécessité de se tourner vers un type ascético-militaire comme ce fut le cas avec l’Ordre du Temple par exemple. À l’époque contemporaine et à l’instar de Julius Evola, Georges Gondinet et Daniel Cologne se tournent vers la Garde de Fer du Roumain Codreanu et la Phalange de l’Espagnol Primo de Rivera plutôt que vers le régime du Duce.

La question du matérialisme biologique, c’est-à-dire de la race, figure parmi les sujets évoqués dans cet essai. En bon évoliens, les auteurs condamnent le racisme biologique national-socialiste et adoptent sans réelle surprise les positions de Julius Evola exprimées dans Synthèse de doctrine de la race (2). « La pureté de la race ainsi comprise résulte de l’équilibre entre les trois niveaux existentiels : l’esprit, l’âme, et le corps. Il n’y a pas de pureté raciale sans une totalité de l’être, un parfait accord entre ses traits somatiques, ses dispositions psychiques et ses tendances spirituelles (p. 24). » Les auteurs en arrivent à la conclusion que la race de l’esprit, qu’ils nomment « générisme » est « la condition sine qua non du dépassement du fascisme, du retour à un traditionalisme véritable, de l’effort vers une révolution authentique (p. 25) ».

Après avoir mentionné la distinction entre totalitarisme et « totalitisme », terme que l’on pourrait remplacer par les concepts de holisme ou d’« organicité », Daniel Cologne et Georges Gondinet s’attardent sur l’aspect socialiste du phénomène fasciste. Bien que « le socialisme est une des concessions du fascisme à la modernité (p. 38) », son principal intérêt réside dans la sublimation du prolétariat et de la bourgeoisie car « il débourgeoise le nationalisme en l’unissant au socialisme et déprolétarise le socialisme en lui adjoignant le nationalisme (p. 31) ». Ce dernier découle d’une vision du monde, il n’est pas une technique ou un moyen pour arriver à une fin; les auteurs citent Moeller van den Bruck pour appuyer leurs propos. « Le socialisme, c’est pour nous : l’enracinement, la hiérarchie, l’organisation (p. 32). » Enfin, d’un point de vue social, les auteurs, sans jamais utiliser le terme, insinuent l’idée de caste. « Dans le monde apollinien, la solidarité primordiale est ressentie au niveau de catégories éthiques supranationales, entre des classes d’hommes dont les critères transcendaient le plan naturaliste ou racial. […] Le paysan français attaché à sa terre est plus lié au paysan allemand ou italien partageant sa mystique du sol qu’à l’ouvrier embourgeoisé et déraciné de la banlieue parisienne (p. 34). »

En guise de conclusion à cet essai, Georges Gondinet et Daniel Cologne font un rappel salutaire quant à l’idée, mais surtout au fait, que « le fascisme n’a de sens que dans le contexte de la culture albo-européenne (p. 37) ». Ils rappellent aussi que le fascisme ne se résume pas simplement à une troisième voie politique; cela consisterait à réduire la portée du phénomène fasciste, chose qui « conduit à de graves erreurs (p. 37) ». Ces propos visent clairement certains au sein de la mouvance nationale-révolutionnaire, adeptes du « tiers-mondisme de droite », et qui encensaient à l’époque les divers mouvements de « libération nationale » franchement hostiles au monde blanc. À ce sujet, Philippe Baillet, ancien collaborateur de la revue Totalité où écrivaient aussi Gondinet et Cologne, a fait le tour de la question dans son livre L’Autre Tiers-mondisme. Des origines à l’islamisme radical (3). Enfin, les auteurs énumèrent les concepts-clé de la pensée traditionaliste-révolutionnaire : la volonté de valeur, l’idée impériale, le « générisme », l’État organique, le « totalisme ». « Tels sont les grands axes de la pensée traditionaliste-révolutionnaire permettant d’en finir avec le fascisme, ses erreurs passées et sa déformation présente (p. 40). »

Bien que cet essai fut écrit en 1977, certains propos n’ont pas vieilli, là où d’autres ne sont peut-être plus ou alors moins d’actualité. Nous pensons bien sûr aux attaques à peine dissimulées à l’encontre de la Nouvelle Droite qui à l’époque, et comparé à aujourd’hui, méritait bien son épithète de Droite. Daniel Cologne a toujours été critique envers le nietzschéisme. Nous ne pouvons pas le lui en vouloir. Remettons toutefois les choses à leur place. Comparé à l’involution de la philosophie et de l’éthique du monde moderne, comparé à la subversion galopante des sociétés humaines, notamment celle en cours au sein de la société occidentale, le recours à la philosophie éthique et vitaliste de Nietzsche est définitivement un pas en avant de nature anagogique, comparable au « cycle héroïque » d’Hésiode. Toutefois, il ne doit pas être une finalité, mais une étape vers l’idéal défendu par Georges Gondinet et Daniel Cologne dans ce cas de figure, et par celui de Julius Evola avant eux. La nature de la philosophie nietzschéenne est naturaliste, dionysiaque, c’est-à-dire qu’elle prend source dans l’immanence, alors que la Tradition ou plus exactement l’Âge d’Or, d’essence apollinienne, prend sa source dans la transcendance ou la « transcendance immanente » chère à Evola. Nieztsche a cependant le mérite de focaliser sa philosophie sur l’européanité (5) là où certains éveilleurs de la Tradition, Frithjof Schuon en tête, négligent totalement les voies « européennes » de la philosphia perennis…

Cet opuscule que l’on peut aisément comparer au Fascisme vu de Droite (4) synthétise en partie ce dernier. Cependant, sa nature est différente car la prise de distance toute évolienne du premier cède la place, dans le deuxième, à un volontarisme politique assumé. Court dans le format, direct dans le propos, sa place est naturellement entre les mains de militants. Il est également appréciable que les auteurs ne tombent jamais dans le battage de coulpe, chose qui aurait été surprenante.

« Messagère d’une nouvelle aurore (p. 14) », la Tradition et son incarnation politique, le traditionalisme-révolutionnaire, constitue l’étape d’après dans le perfectionnement d’un mouvement politique d’envergure européen. Le traditionalisme-révolutionnaire est d’autant plus d’actualité dans notre Europe de l’Ouest enlisée dans le laïcisme et le matérialisme. La critique de Daniel Cologne et Georges Gondinet ne plaira sans doute pas aux fascistes orthodoxes, tandis que les militants néo-fascistes, sur lesquels l’influence de Julius Evola est souvent prépondérante, devraient y être plus réceptifs. Certains traditionalistes, ceux qui se tiennent strictement à l’écart de tout engagement politique, ne doivent pas non plus bouder ce fascicule. Pour en finir avec le fascisme. Essai de critique traditionaliste-révolutionnaire mériterait d’être réédité, tout comme Éléments pour un nouveau nationalisme (6), opuscule doctrinal paru dans un format identique dont l’auteur est Daniel Cologne. Nous espérons que des éditeurs à contre-courant entendrons notre appel…

Thierry Durolle

Notes

1 : Georges Gondinet et Daniel Cologne, Pour en finir avec le fascisme. Essai de critique traditionaliste-révolutionnaire, Cercle Culture et Liberté, 1977.

2 : Julius Evola, Synthèse de doctrine de la race, Éditions de L’Homme Libre, 2002.

3 : Philippe Baillet, L’autre tiers-mondisme. Des origines à l’islamisme radical, Akribeia, 2016.

4 : Julius Evola, Le Fascisme vu de Droite, Pardès, 1981.

5 : Friedrich Nietzsche, « Regardons-nous en face. Nous sommes des Hyperboréens », dans L’Antéchrist, 1894.

6 : Daniel Cologne, Éléments pour un nouveau nationalisme, Cercle Culture et Liberté, 1977.

«El católico gibelino», de Attilio Mordini

Ex: http://www.hiperbolajanus.com

Desde Hipérbola Janus siempre hemos considerado la espiritualidad, en un amplio sentido, como el leivmotiv y guía fundamental en cada una de nuestras publicaciones. Comenzamos con una compilación de artículos tradicionales en torno a la figura de Julius Evola, continuamos con algunas corrientes esotéricas vinculadas a una cierta herencia decimonónica con Giuliano Kremmerz, y en lo posterior Moeller Van den Bruck, más cercano a una concepción tradicional, aristocrática y orgánica dentro del ámbito de la política, y menos orientada a la metafísica. Sucesivamente De Maistre y Malynski se convirtieron en motivo de poderosas críticas al mundo moderno; desde la defensa de la contrarrevolución antiliberal en el caso del primero, y desde la teoría de la conspiración en el del segundo. Tras este compendio de obras fundamentales con las que abrimos nuestra actividad editorial, nos adentramos en la geopolítica, y dentro de ésta en una perspectiva muy particular de ésta, tal y como es el Eurasianismo con sus figuras más destacadas, y tal es el caso de Aleksandr Duguin y Leonid Savin, dentro de esta corriente de la ciencia política hemos profundizado recientemente con dos obras más dedicadas al Islam, las cuales trataban sobre la figura de Mahmud Ahmadineyad y ciertos equívocos en torno a conceptos concretos de la fe islámica.

 

En toda esta trayectoria hemos percibido la necesidad de seguir profundizando en la vía de la espiritualidad, y si en su momento hemos querido mostrar perspectivas muy concretas del mundo islámico, ahora, en estos tiempos en los que la religiosidad y las grandes verdades del Espíritu se han visto erosionadas de forma irreversible, consideramos que cierta visión tradicional del Catolicismo se integraba perfectamente en los propósitos y finalidades que, desde nuestros inicios, hemos proyectado. Dentro de las corrientes del tradicionalismo católico podríamos incluir al propio Joseph De Maistre, uno de los iconos fundamentales de la contrarrevolución liberal, testigo directo de la Revolución Francesa y uno de los primeros, y más feroces, críticos de la Modernidad. No obstante, no han faltado las visiones críticas en relación a esa Modernidad dentro de las trincheras católicas, es evidente que desde la perspectiva de un cristianismo preconciliar, más cercanas en el tiempo, que como es el caso del autor que nos ocupa, reviste un carácter muy particular.

 

Attilio Mordini, autor de la presente obra, fue un autor muy especial, tanto a nivel literario, como pensador, así como en su propia vida personal. Su paso por este mundo fue relativamente corto y accidentado. De origen florentino, vivió unos años dramáticos, los más trascendentales del pasado siglo, y acabó participando como voluntario en el Frente del Este durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Durante los últimos años de guerra se adhirió a la República Social Italiana, y cuando ésta cayó acabó vagando por Italia, camino de Roma. Finalmente, como ocurrió con muchos combatientes italianos que apoyaron el régimen precedente, Mordini acabó siendo detenido por los partisanos y sometido a un juicio del que finalmente sería absuelto. Durante su estancia en la cárcel sufrió todo tipo de penalidades y maltratos, que a muy temprana edad le hicieron contraer tuberculosis, una enfermedad que le acompañaría hasta el fin de sus días. Nuestro autor, nacido en 1923, vivió todos los dramáticos acontecimientos de su época a una temprana edad, tal es así que su formación y desarrollo intelectual sólo pudo completarse una vez terminada la guerra. Se licenció en lengua y literatura por la Universidad de Florencia, en la facultad de Magisterio, para finalmente convertirse en profesor de la Universidad de Kiel en los años que precedieron a su muerte, la cual acontecería, desgraciadamente, en 1966, a la temprana edad de 43 años. No obstante, y pese a lo prematuro de su desaparición, dejó una obra amplia y variada sobre diversos temas relacionados con la Tradición, y además se convirtió en uno de los principales revulsivos de la escena tradicionalista italiana de los años 60. Fue el promotor de algunos congresos tradicionalistas como el que tuvo lugar en mayo de 1962 en la ciudad de Nápoles, y en el que, a través de una serie de ponencias, desarrolló los principales elementos de su doctrina.

 

Cuando hablamos de Attilio Mordini es preciso hablar de catolicismo, pero debemos hacerlo desde una perspectiva muy particular. El lector que se adentre en «El católico gibelino» no hallará un catecismo de doctrina católica estándar, ni un compendio de sermones desarrollados única y exclusivamente desde las fuentes bíblicas. Leer a Attilio Mordini es descubrir una visión católico-cristiana totalmente diferente, de una amplitud y un valor inestimable, capaz de unir, bajo una voluntad inequívocamente ecuménica, a corrientes de pensamiento, fuentes y autores diversos. Bajo una concepción providencial de la historia, y tomando como referencia el ejemplo del Sacro Imperio Romano Germánico, como encarnación ideal del «Imperio Universal», Mordini nos muestra la ortodoxia de un cristianismo que es la culminación de su idea de Tradición, de la Redención del hombre en el Verbo Divino, en una especie de reintegración en la Tradición Primordial.

Se trata de un conjunto de escritos recopilados por Fabrizio Carli en la edición original italiana, los cuales nos remiten a revistas tradicionalistas y ponencias de congresos en los que nuestro autor florentino participó activamente durante los últimos años de su vida. Como bien se apunta en el título, que es especialmente sugerente, el «católico gibelino» de Mordini es un católico que aspira a un ecumene universal, a restaurar los vínculos primordiales entre lo sagrado, entre la función sacerdotal que ejerce de consagrador necesario de todas las acciones humanas, y la función política, asociada a la voluntad de Imperio, que es capaz de reunir en la persona del emperador las dos cualidades fundamentales, aquella del Rex Pontifex, capaz de restaurar esa doble función en una única persona eliminando cualquier dicotomía y contraste negativo entre el poder espiritual y aquel temporal. El «Conflicto de las Investiduras» entre gibelinos y güelfos adquiere la categoría de lucha universal, de enfrentamiento metahistórico más allá de la cronología del Medievo. Los gibelinos, como baluarte de la Tradición y promotores del Imperio Universal frente a los güelfos, representantes de las corrientes disgregadoras de la Modernidad, mantienen una pugna atemporal, que desde el ocaso del Medievo y la fundación de las naciones modernas, naturalmente opuestas a la misión gibelina del Imperio, han ido ganando terreno a medida que hemos ido cayendo en el abismo del desarrollo científico e industrial, con el creciente papel de la razón y el prejuicio frente a los dogmas católicos y el edificio cristiano, ya bimilenario, cimentado sobre un hecho único en la historia de la espiritualidad y las religiones, como es la Encarnación del Verbo, la idea de Cristo como realidad divina encarnada en hombre, como figura universal cuya cruz, símbolo de martirio y Salvación, se proyecta sobre la oscuridad de un mundo que ya ha entrado en una dinámica de caídas y autodestrucción que parece irreversible. Además, tal y como se concibe en los tiempos presentes, la estricta separación entre esos poderes, espiritual y temporal, no deja de ser una señal inequívoca de esa decadencia, para Mordini es la sociedad que ha perdido ese vínculo fundamental con la Revelación Divina y la misión Redentora de Jesús. En este sentido hay una frase muy reveladora que Attilio Mordini que nos remite a esa misma acción disgregadora de la modernidad, que vemos en su obra Verità del Linguaggio:

Si la jerarquía es unidad, no es concentración de poder. La igualdad de todos bajo un solo jefe, como la nivelación de los órdenes y las clases auspiciado por las varias ideologías socialistas son dos aspectos del mismo materialismo, la mayor parte de las veces inconsciente el primero, querido y ambicionado por los hombres mediocres el segundo. No existe concepción verdaderamente espiritual de la vida y del mundo que no ame manifestarse en órdenes, justo como la ley armónica de los nueve coros angélicos.

La obra de Attilio Mordini permanece inédita en parte, como ha ocurrido con otros autores de la Tradición, bien por prejuicio o por olvido intencionado, han acabado siendo condenadas al ostracismo, cuando al margen de los grandes autores de la Tradición, como puedan ser René Guénon o Julius Evola entre los más conocidos, el ámbito de la Tradición Perenne comprende un mosaico de autores con suficiente amplitud y doctrinas como para revalorizar continuamente las corrientes críticas frente a la modernidad y el fondo sapiencial que las nutre. 

 

El libro ya se encuentra disponible en formato papel con encuadernación de tapa blanda a través de Amazon, como también es posible adquirirlo a través de email.

Lovers of Sophia

Jason Reza Jorjani

Ex: https://manticorepress.net

Introduction to Lovers of Sophia

This mammoth volume is a collection of twenty distinct philosophical reflections written over the course of a decade. Most of them are essays, some almost of book length. Others would be better described as papers. A few are well structured notes. There is also one lecture. A magnum opus like Prometheus and Atlas does not emerge from out of a vacuum, and an alternative title to these collected works could have been “The Path to Prometheus and Atlas.” While there are a few pieces that postdate not only that book but also World State of Emergency, most of the texts included here represent the formative phase of my thought. Consequently, concepts such as “the spectral revolution” and “mercurial hermeneutics” are originally developed in these essays.

In addition to revealing the context for the genesis of specific concepts that I have developed, these reflections also have certain stylistic features and central concerns that, when taken together with my two published books, make it possible to discern the key characteristics of my philosophical standpoint. For example, I reject any subdivision of Philosophy into distinct and specialized fields such as Ontology, Epistemology, Aesthetics, Ethics, and Politics. The main reason that I have included “An Introductory Lecture on Ethics” is because it exemplifies my integral conception of what it means to philosophize. From the essay, “Philosophy, Science, and Art” it becomes clear that beyond a rejection of specialization within Philosophy, I go so far as to argue against any fundamental differentiation of Philosophy from the arts and sciences. It is my contention that philosophers (such as Aristotle and Descartes) determine the deep structure of successive scientific paradigms, at least at their inception, and that philosophical thought can take place in an artistic and literary medium. This is why several of the pieces here are interpretations of literary or cinematic works, such as The Trial of Franz Kafka, or two films based on the writings of Philip K. Dick. In my view, aesthetic intuition is a necessary (but not a sufficient) condition for being a philosopher.

While on the subject of what it means to be a philosopher, let me point out that it is only with the publication of these essays that I reconcile myself to making the claim that I am one. Thus far I have described myself only as “an aspiring philosopher”. In addition to the aforementioned “Introductory Lecture on Ethics” and reflection on the relationship between “Philosophy, Science, and Art”, my diatribe “Against Perennial Philosophy” makes it quite clear that I do not recognize the majority of academics in the field of Philosophy as “philosophers” even though they disrespect the great thinkers of the past by referring to themselves as that. “Against Perennial Philosophy” actually disqualifies the majority of so-called “philosophers” in the Canon as well, and it suggests that there has hardly been any philosophy worthy of the name outside of the Indo-European civilizations (including Buddhist Asia).

A philosopher is someone whose thought engages with fundamental questions concerning Truth, Beauty, and Justice, in a way that leads to the discovery of concepts with a potential to catalyze scientific and political revolutions. The philosopher’s ethics and politics must be grounded on his ontology and epistemology, and, as I have already suggested, this integral thought has to be guided by an aesthetic intuition comparable to that of the most extraordinary geniuses in literature and the arts. This is a definition that disqualifies scientists as innovative as Khayyam, Galileo, and Newton, political theorists like Cicero, Rousseau, and Strauss, or artists such as Ferdowsi, Dostoyevsky, and Kubrick. That I reflect philosophically on the brilliant works of Franz Kafka and Philip K. Dick, does not mean that I consider them philosophers. On this definition, there are probably not many more than two dozen philosophers known to recorded history. (This qualifier “recorded history” is important since I am certain that we have lost a great deal of legitimate philosophy to vicissitudes such as the burning of the Library of Alexandria or the Islamic Conquests of Iran and India.) On account of the development of at least four original concepts thus far, namely the “spectral revolution” and “mercurial hermeneutics” in Prometheus and Atlas, the concept of a “world state of emergency” in the book by that name, and the terrifying idea of a “destructive departure in worldview warfare” from the essay “Black Sunrise” that appears in this volume, I now see myself as (just barely) having joined the ranks of these fellow lovers of Sophia.

The backbone of this collection is constituted of critical, and in some cases iconoclastic, contemplation of the work of my predecessors in the Canon: Plato, Aristotle, Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, James, and Wittgenstein. The interpretation of Plato ventured in “The Pharmakon Artist” and that of Aristotle in “Building the Theater of Being” are totally original and extremely destabilizing to received tradition. The essay on Hegel’s “Paranormal Phenomenology”, which also adopts and adapts certain ideas from Maurice Merleau-Ponty, is the point of origin for the concept of “mercurial hermeneutics” further developed in Prometheus and Atlas.

But it is by no means the case that these philosophical reflections are limited to the Western Canon. Rather, one of the distinguishing characteristics of Prometheus and Atlas as well as World State of Emergency is the cosmopolitan scope of my thought. My “Critique of Shiite Esotericism” and exegesis of “Verse 4:34” from the Quran, are incisive philosophical critiques of Islam. They were instrumental scholarly exercises on the way to the anti-Islamic argument of World State of Emergency. Essays like “Serpent Power of the Superman”, where I argue that Hindu Tantra is more Nietzschean than Nietzsche, reaffirm that I recognize no distinction between ‘Western’ and ‘Eastern’ philosophy. Although most of what could be called philosophical thought in the East is Indo-European or Aryan in origin, my “Notes on the Tao of Bruce Lee” suggest that Aryan traditions like Buddhism can be augmented by assimilating elements of non-Aryan traditions such as Taoism. As I argued in both Prometheus and Atlas and World State of Emergency, I see this innovatively evolving cosmopolitan humanism as one of the most distinctive qualities of the Indo-European community. Bruce Lee is Aryan, not Chinese – and I say that mainly on account of the form of his thought, rather than his half-German genetic inheritance or his upbringing in the British colonial culture of Hong Kong.

By the way, as “Trial Goddess” strongly suggests, I also consider Franz Kafka to be an Aryan. Fragmentary as his writings may be, in my view Kafka is the peak of German literature – or rather the cathedral gloom of its most horrifyingly abyssal depth. How integral Jews have been to defining the most Aryan of attitudes and ideas in the Western Canon is also clear from the overwhelming influence of Baruch Spinoza on the development of the core structure of Nietzsche’s thought, which I trace in the essay, “Spinoza, the Untimely One.” Nietzsche, the progenitor of the Aryan Superman, himself recognized the Jews as a world-historical community who, as compared to their small numbers, have demonstrated an incomparable genius in every field of human endeavor, producing some of the most brilliant philosophers, scientists, artists, and mystics.

To the horror of those who consider cosmopolitan Jews to be nothing other than crafters of corrupting golem, in the essay “Prisoners of Property and Propriety” I argue that Karl Marx was a devotee of Prometheus – the most Aryan of all divinities. Moreover, it is in this essay on Marx and other radical Marxists that I first developed the concept of the “spectral revolution” as early as 2010. I synthesized Prometheus and Atlas from this essay with Deleuze’s idea of conceptual personae in “Philosophy, Science, and Art” and Merleau-Ponty’s understanding of spectrality as I interpret it in “Paranormal Phenomenology”, in order to produce the core structure of my magnum opus. Reflecting on Ludwig Wittgenstein’s concept of language games was also instrumental to arriving at the idea of “worlds at war over Earth” in Prometheus and Atlas.

My thinking defies all binaries. More than that – it mocks them. Those who know how to read esoterically, as I know how to write esoterically, ought to have discerned that in Prometheus and Atlas. Hermes or Mercury, the Trickster, is not the book’s villain. Like the figure of The Joker in the essay “Gotham Guardian”, he (or she, another false binary) is an agent of chaos and a de-structuring force required for any new world order. This is what the Alt-Right never understood about Pepe, the incarnation of the ancient Egyptian god Kek. Of all the figures in the leadership of the Alt-Right, I was Kek’s most faithful emissary. Richard Spencer and Daniel Friberg are just the devil’s playthings.

This brings me to “Black Sunrise”, which is by far the most disturbing essay in this collection and the only one in which I develop a new concept beyond those of my first two books. While a superficial reading might leave one with the impression that this is a Fascist manifesto, those who are attentive will find no explicit endorsement. Even more thoughtful people would recognize that the text carries out what occultists call “revelation of the method.” The method in question is the means whereby a global Fascist state could be established on this planet, well within this century. I conceptualize this method as “destructive departure in worldview warfare” – a loose translation from the much more evocative German phrase that I coined to express this idea: Abbauende Aufbruch ins Weltanschauungskrieg. This is not a hypothetical idea.

It is, in practice, the most radical form of psychological warfare imaginable. It presupposes an anarchical existential ontology on the basis of which one can captivate entire societies through the manipulation of false binaries that form the fabric of their weltanschauung. The societies are broken down and then re-conquered by a breakaway civilization, in comparison to which the target societies are simulacra with programmable mytho-poetic variables. I disclose the modus operandi of this occulted Fascist breakaway civilization. But what is more interesting, from a philosophical standpoint, is the way in which this disclosure serves as the context for an exploration of some radical ideas about the nature of space-time and the possible non-linearity of human history reaching all the way back to the antediluvian civilization of Atlantis.

These questions about Time, and specifically whether it is possible for the future to re-write the past, are at the heart of the debate over free will and determinism. One of the oldest philosophical debates, it is central to at least four of the pieces in this book: “Free Will vs. Logical Determinism”, “Rewriting God’s Plan”, “Changing Destiny”, and “An Introductory Lecture on Ethics.” Readers who are familiar with Prometheus and Atlas will know that my argument for Free Will, which draws heavily on the metaphysics of William James, also featured prominently in that text. Consequently, this concern with the metaphysical preconditions of human freedom, conscientious action, and genuine creativity can rightly be seen as one of the most defining characteristics of my thought. These four essays on free will should leave no doubt that I am, above all, a freedom fighter. It is because, like Zarathustra and Buddha before me, I recognize that superhuman gods are real but unjust and deceptively manipulative that I reject democracy as a political form that is capable of protecting the creative power of the precious individual genius. Democracies will always be instruments of these master manipulators, whether through their direct power over the psyche of the ignorant mob or through their dealings with oligarchs who hide behind the façade of democracy in order to outlast other more forthright forms of tyranny.

My philosophical project ultimately represents a rebellion against all forms of tyranny, including the tyranny of the majority. Its goal is the highest human self-consciousness and the most creative self-determination. One reason that this has not been understood is that my detractors, and those who have defamed me, are not capable of seeing past their own noses. At its deepest and most esoteric level, my thought, like that of Plato or Nietzsche, is scaled to thousands of years of human and post-human evolution. People who think that John Rawls is a philosopher and waste their time writing about him are ants laboring in the shadow of my obelisk. What is written in these pages is not for them. It is for you, lovers of Sophia – all of you, across the ages into the distant future, into the lighthouses of a galactic Alexandria. From Zarathustra onwards, we are all flames of the same undying cosmic fire. We are the glowing forge of futures past.

The Youth, Evola and the rise of a true Right

The Youth, Evola and the rise of a true Right

by Thierry Durolle

As traditionalists (1), we believe in the doctrine of cosmic cycles (2) and therefore we know that our present time matches with the last cycle, the one which is known by the name of Kali-Yuga (3). This particular cycle is the darkest one of all four cycles and affects every aspects of life in general. Thus human beings, civilizations and politics cannot escape its corrupting power. This is an important fact to keep in mind.

However, the cycle ends only to start up again with the first one, the Golden age or Krita-Yuga, the dark days leaves room for a new era. Yet in the meantime some of us, the youth, feels the urge for political action but need a strong formation to face the abominations of our post-modern societies. Right-wing is a wide concept after all, as it is the same for the Left. In France – we give this example because we know the situation of this country very well – the Right means ‘Economic Right’, even if it appears sometimes more progressive, sometimes more conservative. Within its scale of principals, the economic principle is always the highest and all the others are subordinated to it. Here is a clear example of a final stage of involution.

The definition of what should be considered the real Right is an imperative task. Among the numerous topics he dealt with through his writings, Julius Evola wrote numerous articles about that question. The Italian philosopher, often reduced to an ‘esoteric fascist’, embodies himself the man of the Right. His writings but especially his deeds made him a living example of the uprightness one would try to attain. The neo-fascist youth of post WW2 Italy was not wrong to seek all the gems herein Evola’s books in order to build its doctrine.

Originally published in Hungarian at the end of 2012 as an anthology of Evola’s articles about the youth and the Right, A Handbook For Right-Wing Youth is now available thanks to Arktos in English. We hope that a french version will see the day sooner or later. Indeed, Evola’s influence on the now famous french Nouvelle Droite and all its heirs (from identitarians to national-revolutionary and traditionalist-revolutionary militants), not to mention the founder of this website Georges Feltin-Tracol (4), contributors Daniel Cologne (5) and ourselves, is simply huge.

A Handbook For Right-Wing Youth contains seventeen texts, mostly press articles but also some excerpts from books like The Bow and the Club and the entire essay Orientations. It includes a foreword by Gabor Vona who is the Chairman of Jobbik and bibliographical notes by Robert Horvath. We also must stress the numerous footnotes and the quality of their explanations. The reader ends up with a handbook intended for militants but also for anyone yearning to discover Julius Evola.

As the title suggests, the two main subjects are the Right and the Youth. The first one was a common topic developed by the author along his writings. In fact the Right follows the Italian writer like his shadow. Julius Evola remains the most political awakener of the Tradition. He always considered himself a man of the Right, he wrote about the Right and his critics and stances outlined a doctrine, even better, a view of the world from the Right:

‘Yet it is also possible to leave all institutional assumptions aside and speak of the Right as a spiritual orientation and worldview. Aside from opposing democracy and all ‘socialists’ myths, belonging to the Right means upholding the values of Tradition as spiritual, aristocratic, and warrior values (possibly with references to a strict military tradition, as in the case of Prussianism, for instance). Moreover, it means harboring a certain contempt for intellectualism and for the bourgeois fetishism of the ‘cultured man’ [...]’ (p.50.).  

Throughout the different texts herein the book, Julius Evola stresses how the real Right is: anti-egalitarian, anti-materialistic, anti-democratic but spiritual and heroic. In one word traditionalist: ‘In this sense, the concept of Tradition applies to a system in which ‘all activities are in principle ordered from above and have an upward direction’ (p.37.). In addition, Julius Evola aims at the main sources of infection which must be fought according to him (Marxism, Psychoanalysis, existentialism and Darwinism) and give some clues on the cultural domains that the Right should focus on, one of them being the historiography.

About the second subject Robert Harvath points out ‘that the subject of youth was not among Evola’s central concerns; it’s a thin, but visible, line that runs throughout his entire oeuvre’ (p.150.). When writing about the Youth, Julius Evola either encourages an autre jeunesse or, on the contrary, criticizes it. The latter belongs to the average youth so to speak and Evola focused especially his critics on students and beatniks like in Against the Youth or Some Observations on the Student Movement, both featuring in this handbook.

Julius Evola wrote his first post WW2 writings for the young Italian neo-fascist militants. He does not write about what has to be done but how to be:

‘Not letting oneself go is what is crucial today. In this society gone astray, one must be capable of the luxury of having a character. One ought to be such that, even before being recognized as the champion of a political idea, one will display a certain conduct of life, an inner coherence, and a style consisting of uprightness and intellectual courage in every human relationship’(p.1).

‘As spirit there exists something that can serve as an outline for the forces of resistance: it is the legionary spirit. It is the attitude of one who knows how to choose the hardest life, to fight even when he knows that the battle is substantially lost, and to confirm the words of the ancient saga: ‘loyalty is stronger than fire’. Through him the traditional idea is affirmed’(p.7).

‘Inner action must precede all other actions’(p.3).

We believe that these advice are of first-hand importance even if Evola wrote about more strictly political themes like the imperial idea, corporatism, occult war or the ‘demonic possession of the economy’. Some people like Claudio Mutti hastily made Evola an admirer of islam since he positively showed to his readers the warlike mentality of this particular religion and its concept of greater jihad. What he wanted to show (and mostly liked) is this ascetic process, this almost alchemical transformation of oneself to reach something higher. His interests for magic, which he explored in company of Arturo Reghini (6) in the Ur-group, his interest for vamachara tantra or mountaineering are facts that tend to prove our point.

Concerning this collection of texts, we could have appreciated if the last parts of Evola’s Ride the Tiger (6) which consist in a bunch of precepts to be and become in this dark age of Kali-Yuga could have been added. Also, and this would have been a necessary addition according to us, some texts or excerpts from his writings about race, which would have been an excellent correcting concerning racialism.

To conclude, A Handbook For Right-Wing Youth is definitely a must have for any political and metapolitical militants, for every men of the Right in its true essence. We strongly believe that Western societies need a renewal of the Right, not to say a revolution. Gabor Vona pointed out a real problem in nowadays ‘real right’:

‘The tragedy of this situation is that the tools of the Left are infectious. This creates a political catastrophe, which is extremely common nowadays: the landscape of the so-called Right is in reality becoming more and more filled with Leftist ideas, and allows the Left’s borders to approach closer and closer, displaying and mainstreaming the pseudo- or fake Rightism. Of course, this results in total confusion, schizophrenia, and a chaos of ideas’ (p.11. Of the foreword).

This is the greater danger the real Right faces now. National-Bolshevism and nazi-maoism left aside (even if their Third-Worldism was ideologically harmful), we clearly identify a strong ‘leftisation’ of the French Nouvelle Droite (especially of one of its prominent figure Alain de Benoist) and what the mass media names Far-Right. The prevalence of the social and economic question, the critics of liberalism from a marxist perspective and worse, the abandonment of the defense of our people’s race – the number one emergency for most of western European countries – and the will to even avoid such words and topics are true signs of degeneracy. We do not have the time and should not bother analyzing the causes; the fruit is too far rotten. The time to rebuild a true Right is now. Julius Evola’s books and A Handbook For Right-Wing Youth are more than necessary readings in order to set les idées à l’endroit!

Thierry Durolle

Footnotes:

(1) By ‘traditionalist’ we mean someone who refers to the meaning of the word explained by René Guénon.

(2) The doctrine of cosmic cycles is often understood as Hindu concept, yet it corresponds to Hesiod’s ages of Man as well.

(3) It is the same than Hesiod’s age of iron or Nordic age of the wolf.

(4) Born in 1970, Georges Feltin-Tracol is the editor-in-chief of the Europe Maxima website as well as the author of numerous books and articles. Being a long time militant for the Greater Europe, he always claimed Julius Evola’s influence on his work.

(5) Born in 1946, Daniel Cologne is a journalist and essayist. He wrote several books about Tradition and worked with the traditionalist magazine Totalité.

(6) Born in 1878, Arturo Reghini was an Italian free-mason and was considered as the most famous Italian Pythagorean.

(7) Julius Evola, Ride the Tiger: A Survival Manual for the Aristocrats of the Soul, Inner Traditions, 2003, 256 pages.

L’épée de l’archange saint Michel : ces sept sanctuaires unis par un fil invisible

 

L’épée de l’archange saint Michel : ces sept sanctuaires unis par un fil invisible

 

Gelsomino Del Guercio 

Ex: https://fr.aleteia.org 

 

Selon la légende, la ligne sacrée représente le coup d’épée que l'archange asséna au diable pour le renvoyer en enfer.

Une mystérieuse ligne imaginaire unit entre eux sept monastères, de l’Irlande jusqu’en Israël. Simple coïncidence ? Ces sanctuaires sont très éloignés les uns des autres, mais parfaitement alignés. La ligne sacrée de saint Michel archange serait, selon la légende, le coup d’épée que le saint asséna sur le diable pour le renvoyer en enfer.

Quoi qu’il en soit, le parfait alignement de ces sanctuaires est surprenant : les trois sites les plus importants – le Mont-Saint-Michel en France, l’abbaye Saint-Michel–de-la-Cluse et le sanctuaire du Mont-Gargan en Italie – sont équidistants. Un avertissement du saint afin que les lois de Dieu soient toujours respectées et que les fidèles restent sur le droit chemin. Par ailleurs, cette ligne sacrée s’aligne parfaitement avec le soleil levant du solstice d’été.

1) SKELLING MICHAEL

La ligne commence en Irlande, sur une île déserte, là où l’archange Michel serait apparu à saint Patrice pour l’aider à délivrer son pays du démon. C’est ici que se trouve le premier monastère, celui de Skelling Michael (« Le Rocher de l’archange Michel »).

2) SAINT MICHEAL’S MOUNT

La ligne se dirige ensuite vers le Sud et s’arrête en Angleterre, au St. Michael’s Mount (« Mont Saint-Michel »), une petite île dans les Cornouailles, accessible à marée basse. À cet endroit-même saint Michel aurait parlé à un groupe de pécheurs.

3) LE MONT-SAINT-MICHEL

Puis la ligne sacrée se poursuit en France, sur une autre île célèbre, le Mont-Saint-Michel, où l’archange Michel serait également apparu. La beauté de son sanctuaire et de l’immense baie qui l’entoure sur la côte normande, en fait l’un des sites touristiques les plus visités de toute la France. Il est inscrit au patrimoine de l’Humanité de l’Unesco depuis 1979. Déjà au temps des Gaules, ce lieu était imprégné d’un fort mysticisme, puis en 709 l’archange apparut à l’évêque d’Avranches, saint Aubert, à qui il demanda de construire une église dans le rocher. Les travaux commencèrent mais ce n’est qu’en 900, avec les moines bénédictins, que l’abbaye fut construite.

4) L’ABBAYE SAINT-MICHEL-DE-LA-CLUSE

À 1000 kms de distance, à l’entrée du Val de Suze, dans le Piémont (Italie), se dresse le quatrième sanctuaire: L’abbaye Saint-Michel-de-la-Cluse (en italien Sacra di San Michele). La ligne droite unit ce lieu sacré au reste des monastères dédiés à saint Michel. La construction de l’abbaye commence vers l’an 1000, mais lui seront ajoutées de nouvelles structures au fil des siècles. Les moines bénédictins l’ont développée en lui ajoutant aussi une dépendance pour loger les pèlerins parcourant la voie Francigena, réseau de routes et chemins empruntés par les pèlerins venant de France.

5) SANCTUAIRE DE SAINT-MICHEL-ARCHANGE

Mille kilomètres plus loin, la ligne franchit les Pouilles et l’on tombe sur le Gargan, où une caverne inaccessible est devenue un lieu sacré : le Sanctuaire de Saint-Michel-Archange. La construction du site remonte à l’an 490, année de la première apparition de saint Michel à saint Laurent Maiorano, l’évêque local.

Lire aussi : Pourquoi ne récite-t-on plus la prière à saint Michel archange ?

6) MONASTERE DE SYMI

Puis de l’Italie, la ligne sacrée de saint Michel arrive au sixième sanctuaire, en Grèce, sur l’île de Symi: le monastère orthodoxe de l’archange Michel « Mixalis » abrite une effigie du saint de 3 mètres de haut, une des plus grandes au monde.

7) MONASTERE DU CARMEL

La ligne sacrée se termine en Israël, au Monastère du Mont-Carmel à Haïfa. Ce lieu est vénéré depuis l’Antiquité et sa construction, comme sanctuaire chrétien et catholique, remonte au XII^e siècle.

Article traduit de l’italien par Isabelle Cousturié.

Renaissance des Konfuzianismus oder warum die Chinesen weltweit so erfolgreich sind

PTGFrankfurt

Dr. Manfred Osten
Ehem. Generalsekretär der Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung, langjähriger Mitarbeiter im Auswärtigen Amt und Kenner der fernöstlichen Kultur

Chinas Expansionsdrang zeigt sich inzwischen auch in der Kultur- und Wissenschaftspolitik. Der unter Mao verfemte Philosoph Konfuzius erfährt eine staatlich getragene Renaissance, die sich besonders deutlich auf die Bereiche Erziehung, Bildung und Forschung auswirkt. Was folgt aus dem politisch verordneten Konfuzius-Programm der „harmonischen Gesellschaft“ für das Reich der Mitte und für seine Wettbewerbsrolle im Prozess der Globalisierung? Welche Zielsetzungen verfolgt die chinesische Industrie-, Wirtschafts- und Wachstumspolitik im Namen des Konfuzius und wie kann der Westen sich ggf. darauf einstellen?

L'alchimie spirituelle de Julius Evola et la tradition hermétique

Lux Mundi

Conférence de Jean Vaquié : L'alchimie spirituelle de Julius Évola et la tradition hermétique.

The Power of Myth:
Remembering Joseph Campbell

(March 26, 1904 - October 30, 1987)

By John Morgan

Ex: http://www.counter-currents.com 

Joseph Campbell, the famed teacher of comparative mythology, was born on this day in 1904. For many people, including yours truly, he has served as a “gateway drug” into not only a new way of looking at myths, but into a non-materialistic way of viewing the world. And although as a public figure, Campbell mostly remained apolitical, evidence from his private life indicates that he was at least nominally a “man of the Right.”

Campbell was born into an Irish Catholic family in White Plains, New York. He attended Dartmouth College, and then later, Columbia University, where he studied English and medieval literature. He was not strictly a bookish type, either, being an accomplished athlete, and in fact during his time at Dartmouth he was considered to be among the fastest half-mile runners in the world.

It was during his travels to Europe and Asia during the 1920s and ‘30s, as well as a great deal of wide reading while living in a shack in Woodstock, New York, that Campbell developed his interest in world mythology. He also discovered the ideas of C. G. Jung, which were to profoundly influence all of his work. Indeed, he participated in many of the early and historic Eranos conferences in Switzerland alongside not only Jung himself, but such luminaries as Mircea Eliade, Karl Kerényi, and Henry Corbin, among many others. In 1934 Campbell was hired as a professor at Sarah Lawrence College in New York, a position he was to hold until his retirement in 1972, after which he and his wife moved to Honolulu, Hawaii.

Interestingly, in regards to the Second World War, Campbell was a fervent non-interventionist (like his friend, the poet Robinson Jeffers ^[2]), even in the wake of the Pearl Harbor attack, and in fact gave a public lecture at Sarah Lawrence three days afterwards in which he urged his students not to get caught up in war hysteria and to pursue their educations instead of joining the military. He felt passionately enough about this matter to send a copy of his lecture to the German novelist Thomas Mann, who at the time was working to convince Americans to join the fight against the Third Reich as an exile in California. (Mann sent him a quite angry reply.) And according to Campbell’s biographer, Stephen Larsen, in his journals he comes across as an early Pearl Harbor conspiracy theorist, pointing out that the Roosevelt administration had been trying to goad the Japanese into war for years and discussing the fact that the US Navy had received indications that the Japanese were about to attack in the days prior, but that these warnings were ignored – perhaps deliberately.

While Campbell gave frequent public lectures and published many books, including The Hero with a Thousand Faces ^[3] in 1949, which was the most thorough overview of his essential ideas, and his four-volume The Masks of God ^[4] opus, which appeared between 1959 and 1968, in which he attempted to summarize all of the world’s mythologies, he remained relatively obscure outside academic circles until late in his life. His later fame is largely attributable to the endorsements he received from two of his biggest fans. One is Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead, who invited Campbell to observe a concert ^[5] they gave in Berkeley, California in February 1985. (Campbell reported that he was impressed by the event, comparing it to the ancient Dionysian festivals and Russian Easter celebrations.) In November 1986, Campbell and Garcia shared a stage at a conference ^[6] at UC Berkeley. The other is George Lucas, who frequently cited ^[7] Campbell’s conception of myth in interviews as being one of his primary inspirations in his writing of the Star Wars films. Indeed, in the 1980s Lucas invited Campbell to come to his Skywalker Ranch to view the entire trilogy (Campbell gave it somewhat guarded praise), and also helped to arrange the most crucial factor in securing Campbell’s late fame: Bill Moyers’ The Power of Myth ^[8] series.

Moyers, a well-respected figure in broadcasting, filmed a series of interviews with Campbell during the mid-1980s, mostly at Skywalker Ranch, that were edited into six one-hour episodes and broadcast on PBS in 1988, along with an accompanying book of the same name ^[9]. The series introduces and details Campbell’s ideas in a very accessible and entertaining way. It proved to be very popular, both during its original airing as well as in reruns and on video, and cemented Campbell’s reputation as an influential and respected intellectual in the American popular consciousness. Sales of Campbell’s books began to skyrocket as well. Unfortunately, he himself didn’t live to see any of this, as he had passed away the previous year, but he left behind a large body of work in which he had already presented his fully-articulated worldview.

As is frequently the case with prominent white men who don’t pay the proper lip service to political correctness, it wasn’t until after Campbell’s death that some of his former colleagues and acquaintances began to come forward with accusations of racism and anti-Semitism. This charge first appeared in an article by Brendan Gill in the September 28, 1989 issue of The New York Review of Books entitled “The Faces of Joseph Campbell ^[10],” in which he cited purely anecdotal evidence to support his claim that Campbell had been an anti-Semite, including Campbell’s stance on the war as well as the fact that he had praised the Germanic Jung while disdaining the Jewish Freud, and the fact that he had evinced a love of German culture as well as a general dislike of the Abrahamic religions in his work – all of which is undeniably true.

In the letters ^[11] that were printed in response, some came to Campbell’s defense while others pressed the attack, including a Sarah Lawrence colleague who claimed that Campbell had reacted to the racial integration of the school with horror. (Although again, no evidence for this was ever produced.) His sympathetic friends indicated that Campbell never tried to hide his conservative sympathies, and pointed out that the fact that Campbell was sympathetic to German and “pagan” cultures while disdaining Judaism and Christianity was hardly evidence that he had been a racist. Nevertheless, these charges have overshadowed Campbell’s work ever since, even if they have had no noticeable impact on the popularity of his work. (I first became aware of the controversy shortly after discovering Campbell, sitting at a restaurant in Ann Arbor, Michigan in 1995, when a passing waiter noticed that I was reading The Hero with a Thousand Faces and felt compelled to ask me, “Reading Joseph Campbell, the ol’ anti-Semite, huh?” I later learned that the waiter was a grad student at the University of Michigan.)

Regardless of whether these accusations are true or not, they follow a pattern that is typical for any artist or scholar who refuses to tow the party line. If Campbell had been engaged in “deconstructing” mythology, and showing that the Mahabharata or the Arthurian legends were nothing more than “narratives” expressing patriarchy and sexual repression for example, his personal failings in the eyes of academia would have been ignored. Surely what really bothers academics about Campbell, as well as about scholars with a similar worldview such as Jung, Mircea Eliade, or René Guénon, is that they dared to assert that there is an essential meaning to things, which of course then implies that there may actually be such a thing as values and traditions that are worth preserving.

I first discovered The Power of Myth series on video at my local library in 1995, during a period when I was looking for a new sense of direction and meaning in my life. I was 22, and like most Americans I had been educated in a strictly materialist way of understanding things. For the previous few years I had regarded myself as a Nietzschean, existentialist atheist (in spite of the fact that I only half-understood either Nietzsche or the existentialists). But I soon found this stance to be insufficient as I grew into adulthood and began to better understand the complexities of the human condition. It was my discovery of Colin Wilson, who I have written about elsewhere ^[12], and Campbell at this time (and through the latter, his own guru, Jung) which persuaded me that there is more to reality and living than what can be known through the five senses. Although I later moved on to other teachers and interests who in some ways surpass them, I will always owe a debt of gratitude to these two figures for “converting” me to something other than a model of a modern major materialist.

The Power of Myth struck me as a revelation, and it caused me to seek out Campbell’s books as well. Like most of us these days, I had always thought of myths as nothing more than quaint stories with some sort of simple moral lesson to be gleaned. Campbell contended that these myths are in fact reflections of a much deeper reality, one that is both metaphysical and which is reflective of deep psychological processes in our unconscious that transcend the individual and are connected to our racial memory. Even more importantly, Campbell first showed me that meaning was in fact anchored in something outside of ourselves, which was certainly very different from what I was being taught in most of my literature classes at the University. I soon began to see everything from a Campbellesque perspective, and I doubt I could have mustered the enthusiasm to finish my degree were it not for the inspiration I derived from him.

The center of Campbell’s worldview is the idea of what he termed the “monomyth.” It posits that underneath all of the world’s mythologies, there is a single structure which they all more or less follow. This structure is timeless, as it is embedded within our consciousness, and can be found in the best modern art and literature – Campbell himself was particularly fond of James Joyce, and in fact the term monomyth itself is derived from Finnegan’s Wake ^[13] – as much as in the ancient myths. Campbell believed that this monomyth was the expression of the single metaphysical reality which lies hidden behind the mere appearance of things, and that each culture and era develops its own stories to express this unchanging reality. In this sense, he shares some commonality with the traditionalists such as Guénon and Julius Evola. I don’t know of any place where the traditionalists have commented on Campbell directly, but surely they would criticize him along the same lines for which they criticized Jung: namely, that he understood myths as merely containing psychological symbols and “archetypes,” and as depictions of psychic processes, rather than as expressions of an objective reality (this is a complaint that a “true believer” in any religion could make against the Jungian conception of myth).

Surely a large part of the success of The Power of Myth, as it certainly was in my case, was due to the fact that Campbell comes across in his recorded interviews and lectures as an extremely likeable man with a gift for communicating complex ideas and stories in simple language. He was the very embodiment of your favorite teacher, who (hopefully) turned you on to the wonders of the world of ideas and filled you with the fiery passion to learn more about a particular subject. Like the very best teachers, what you learned from him only marked the starting point in a long odyssey that ended up leading you to other ideas and other destinations in life.

There are certainly many criticisms one can make of Campbell’s conception of things. In addition to the traditionalist objections already mentioned, some scholars have said that not just Campbell’s, but all efforts in the fields of comparative mythology and comparative religion, are flawed in that they emphasize the commonalities between all of the world’s traditions at the expense of the particularities which distinguish them, thus positing a false universalism. There may be some truth in this, but at the same time it seems to me to be symptomatic of the general postmodern disregard for anything which asserts that there is an essential meaning to things. After all, how can a three-thousand-year-old story from ancient Greece teach a present-day American anything more than a Toni Morrison novel can? In fact, those old stories may actually be detrimental, given that they posit a way of life that reinforces old social orders rather than emphasizing the need for racial equality or the fluidity of gender.

At his post-war trial on the charge of promoting Fascism, Evola said about his beliefs, “My principles are only those that, before the French Revolution, every well-born person considered sane and normal.” I suspect that Campbell believed something similar, even if he never couched it in language that was quite so incendiary. When we look at the ancient stories, whether they are European, Indian, Chinese, Native American, or whatever, there is certainly a common outlook there which directly challenges the norms and values which we have come to accept as normal in the modern world.

And this, perhaps, is Campbell’s ultimate value from our point of view. There are certainly greater scholars of myth and religion to read. But especially for newcomers, he can open up the world of primordial, timeless, pre- and anti-modern wisdom that still lurks deep within our souls and continues to shape our lives, whether we are consciously aware of it are not. We are all part of a story that began long before we were born and which will continue long after we die. Campbell brings this story, and our place in it, to light like few others can. And this, in the end, is what the “true Right” is really about.

Related

Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2017/03/the-power-of-myth/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: https://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/3-26-17-1.jpg

[2] Robinson Jeffers: http://www.counter-currents.com/tag/robinson-jeffers/

[3] The Hero with a Thousand Faces: http://amzn.to/2nTNC8K

[4] The Masks of God: http://amzn.to/2n5LIO1

[5] observe a concert: http://www.tekgnostics.com/DEAD2.HTM

[6] shared a stage at a conference: http://www.dead.net/features/blog/documenting-dead-joseph-campbell-and-grateful-dead

[7] frequently cited: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSyyqctan2c

[8] The Power of Myth: http://amzn.to/2mEbDAI

[9] book of the same name: http://amzn.to/2n5u3WM

[10] The Faces of Joseph Campbell: http://archive.is/LzQM1

[11] letters: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1989/11/09/joseph-campbell-an-exchange/

[12] written about elsewhere: http://www.counter-currents.com/2013/12/a-heroic-vision-for-our-time/

[13] Finnegan’s Wake: http://amzn.to/2nppj1A

 

«René Guénon entre Tradition et Révolution»

Entretien avec David Bisson:

«René Guénon entre Tradition et Révolution»

Ex: http://frontdelacontre-subversion.hautetfort.com 

Docteur en sciences politiques et historien des idées, David Bisson est chercheur associé à l’Institut du Droit Public et de la Science Politique de l’Université Rennes 1 et chargé de cours à l’Institut Catholique de Rennes.

Spécialiste des courants ésotériques occidentaux, il cherche à analyser les liens qui se tissent entre le champ politique et le champ religieux, et travaille en particulier sur la notion de « métapolitique ». Après avoir réalisé une thèse de doctorat sur René Guénon et le concept de Tradition, il consacre une étude passionnante sur sa pensée politique.

R/ Comment avez-vous découvert l’œuvre de René Guénon ?

J’ai commencé à travailler sur la pensée de Julius Evola dans le cadre d’une maîtrise en science politique. Ce qui m’a naturellement amené à lire Guénon, tout de même quelques années après, le temps de la « décantation » ésotéro-politique pourrait-on dire. Et j’ai alors découvert – ce qui m’a troublé au départ – que l’œuvre de Guénon n’était pas moins politique que celle de son « disciple » italien, même s’il s’agissait d’une autre politique, d’une haute politique. Ce que j’ai finalement tenté de cerner comme une politique de l’esprit.

R/ Vous développez dans votre livre une analyse très fine des étapes du parcours intellectuel de l’auteur du Roi du Monde. Quels furent les jalons marquants de son existence ?

Je crois qu’il est possible, et assez juste, de scinder l’itinéraire de Guénon en trois périodes inégales. La première court de 1906 à 1920 et correspond à la période de formation intellectuelle. Issu d’une famille de la petite bourgeoisie provinciale, et entouré de femmes très pieuses (sa mère et sa tante), il s’installe à Paris à l’âge de vingt ans et intègre plusieurs groupes occultistes avec une facilité déconcertante. Ceci est d’autant plus étonnant que ce mouvement très en vogue fait la part belle aux personnalités flamboyantes (Papus, Ivan Aguéli, Sar Péladan, etc.) et aux polémiques cocasses (« guerre des initiés »). En tous les cas, Guénon y forge ses premières armes conceptuelles et affermit son intuition première, celle de la possibilité d’une gnose comprise comme une connaissance universelle.

La seconde période s’échelonne de 1921 à 1930 et correspond à la notoriété de Guénon dans les milieux intellectuels français. Il se fait d’abord connaître comme un bon connaisseur des doctrines hindoues puis comme un historien très critique à l’endroit de ce qu’il nomme déjà le « néo-spiritualisme » (théosophisme et spiritisme) et, enfin, comme le contempteur implacable du monde moderne. On le devine, ces trois « spécialités » ne s’accordent pas naturellement et renvoient, chacune, à un public bien particulier : les orientalistes, les intellectuels catholiques (liés au néo-thomisme de Maritain) et les milieux proches de l’Action française. Guénon n’est pourtant pas un touche-à-tout, loin de là, puisqu’il possède déjà sa synthèse doctrinale, laquelle s’articule autour de la notion de « Tradition » (fond commun à toutes les religions) et se décline sous une série d’oppositions : Orient spirituel contre Occident matérialiste, Tradition contre Modernité, Essence contre Substance, etc. Cette synthèse est cependant trop originale pour titiller les canons idéologiques de l’époque, et tenter d’enrayer ainsi la marche à la guerre. Finalement, Guénon est relégué dans les marges du monde intellectuel.

La troisième période, la plus longue, s’étire de 1930 à 1951 et correspond à l’accomplissement doctrinal. Retiré dans la ville du Caire, et bientôt marié à une égyptienne, Guénon a tout le loisir d’affiner les éléments de son système et de préciser plusieurs notions importantes, telles que l’initiation, la réalisation métaphysique, le sens du symbolisme, etc. Tout ce travail aurait peut-être été vain s’il ne s’était constitué autour de lui une petite équipe entièrement dévouée à sa pensée, une revue (Le Voile d’Isis, Études Traditionnelles) qui lui servait de relais avec le monde dit « traditionnel » et, bientôt, des groupes initiatiques qui vont constituer le principal lieu de résonance du système guénonien, aussi bien en théorie qu’en pratique. A ce titre, il faut bien avouer que Guénon a écrit un nouveau chapitre des modalités de la réception des idées, celui de réussir à concilier engagement spirituel et combat (méta)politique.

R/ Vous définissez la personnalité de René Guénon comme gnostique. Que recouvre ce terme pour vous ?

Dans son (excellent) ouvrage, Philosophie philosophique, Julien Freund précise que la mystique se distingue de la gnose dans le sens où tout un chacun peut avoir accès à la contemplation pourvu qu’il accepte la discipline du corps et l’ascèse. A l’inverse, la gnose postule d’emblée la distinction entre ésotérisme et exotérisme, entre ceux qui savent (les parfaits ou les initiés) et ceux qui ne savent pas (les hyliques ou les profanes). Sur quoi se fonde cette distinction ? Sur la connaissance illuminante, la connaissance qui éclaire les principes de l’être et les réverbère jusqu’à l’extinction de cette même connaissance. Guénon, qui peut être considéré comme le plus grand ésotériste du XXè siècle, appartient naturellement à la catégorie des « gnostiques », ceux qui approchent Dieu par la connaissance au moyen de « l’intellect pur » (la « supra-rationalité ») ; avec le risque, disons-le, de pécher par orgueil (se prendre pour le « roi du monde ») et la grâce, toujours recommencée, d’épuiser la connaissance par son propre excès de connaissance. La gnose, comme il lui est souvent reproché, est une voie de réalisation réservée aux intellectuels. D’où son danger.

R/ Quel sens donner à l’idée de Tradition dans l’œuvre de René Guénon ? En quoi est-elle une Tradition « réinventée» ? Se rattache t-elle à une Tradition primordiale ?

Pour le dire simplement, la Tradition (écrite avec un « t » majuscule) est l’essence de toutes les grandes traditions religieuses de l’humanité, ce qui en fait un concept universel – c’est à mon sens le « génie » de Guénon – puisqu’il serait possible de retrouver cette essence, autrement dit le noyau spirituel de l’humanité, dans le corps substantiel des autres religions (textes sacrés, symbolisme, rites, etc.). Dès lors, l’homme traditionnel, dans le sens guénonien du terme, est en quelque sorte l’homme qui a creusé sa propre religion jusqu’à y découvrir la sève première, la lumière originelle, qui est partout la même. Ce que Frithjof Schuon appellera « l’unité transcendante des religions ». Cette tradition est « réinventée » en fonction des lieux et des époques où vivent les hommes ; elle est réinventée, bien sûr, dans la façon dont les hommes l’appréhendent, et en témoignent dans leur vécu, mais demeure immobile au regard de la roue du temps qui tourne. L’expression « tradition primordiale » me semble plus problématique dans la mesure où elle permet à Guénon de resituer, tout du moins tenter de le faire, cette tradition dans le cours de l’histoire : il existerait donc une souche primordiale de laquelle partiraient les différentes branches religieuses au cours de l’humanité. Avec un début, l’hindouisme, et une fin, l’islam, soit un processus linéaire, voire téléologique, qui relève davantage de la science moderne que des sagesses traditionnelles. Ce n’est d’ailleurs pas le sujet sur lequel Guénon est le plus à l’aise.

R/ Vous montrez de manière admirable que pour lui la Tradition est aussi un projet métapolitique. Y a t il une vision politique guénonienne ?

Il n’y a pas de politique guénonienne à strictement parler même si Guénon a tenté d’opérer certaines actions d’influence au cours des années vingt pour abandonner cette perspective après son installation au Caire. En revanche, il existe une métapolitique traditionnelle qui joue, me semble-t-il, à trois niveaux. Au niveau des principes, elle consiste à rappeler que le politique se fonde sur la métaphysique, et vise à mettre en harmonie la cité avec les fins dernières qui la constituent, soit permettre à chacun, en fonction de sa nature propre, de se connaître soi-même et par là même de participer à l’œuvre commune. Ce que Platon a développé dans son projet utopique : La République. Au niveau historique, la politique est un moyen (et non une fin) de résoudre les contradictions internes à la vie des sociétés avec le souci, jamais intégralement atteint, d’équilibrer les forces en présence dans le monde. D’où la dimension fuyante, et tragique, de toute action politique. Au niveau existentiel, et c’est là je crois la dimension la plus « moderne » de Guénon, la métapolitique est aussi un projet que chacun porte en soi et qu’il lui appartient de mener à terme, quels que soient les lieux et les époques, à travers un cheminement dit initiatique. Précisons que ces trois entrées restent éminemment politique dans le sens où elles se posent et s’opposent à tous les critères de la modernité.

R/ Quel est le sens véritable des notions d’Orient et d’Occident dans l’œuvre de Guénon ?

A travers les notions (et non pas les espaces) d’Orient et d’Occident, Guénon dresse une grille d’analyse paradigmatique qui lui permet d’articuler sa principale opposition : la Tradition contre la Modernité. Cette lecture qui pouvait se comprendre au moment de la publication d’Orient et Occident (1924), puis deLa crise du monde moderne (1927), est beaucoup plus contestable aujourd’hui puisque l’on assiste à l’occidentalisation générale du monde. Sur ce point, il faut mentionner les travaux de Henry Corbin qui comprenait ces deux notions à partir de leur sens imaginal : chacun quittant « son » Occident pour monter vers « son » Orient et découvrir, au cours de ce chemin, la lumière aurorale du septième climat.

R/ « C’est dans le christianisme seul, disons plus précisément encore dans le catholicisme, que se trouvent, en Occident, les restes d’esprits traditionnels qui survivent encore ». Ce passage de la Crise du Monde Moderne réveille le rapport complexe de l’auteur avec le christianisme. Comment envisageait-il son intégration dans sa vision de la Tradition ?

On peut effectivement dire que l’équation personnelle de Guénon ne correspondait pas à la démarche croyante du catholicisme, et ce, malgré une enfance bercée par cette religion et un rapport très régulier avec l’abbé Gombault jusqu’à son départ pour Le Caire en 1930. De même, son tempérament gnostique s’accordait mal avec la dimension égalitariste du christianisme. D’où son interprétation partielle et figée de la tradition chrétienne, comprise comme une tradition, certes orthodoxe, mais amoindrie par la perte de son ésotérisme. Sur ce sujet précis, il me semble que Frithjof Schuon a développé une analyse plus fine quoique discutable également. Il a fallu attendre les années 1990 pour qu’un lecteur averti de Guénon, Jean Borella, mette les choses au clair dans Esotérisme guénonien et mystère chrétien, et révise de fond en comble le rapport de la Tradition et de la Révélation. Ce qui n’est pas sans soulever des questions importantes pour certains milieux guénoniens – je pense ici à ceux qui veulent enfermer le texte guénonien dans une dogmatique rigide.

R/ Bien qu’issu des milieux occultistes du début de XXè siècle, il a combattu de manière acharnée les « masques de spiritualités contemporaines » que furent le Spiritisme ou la Théosophie. Est-ce paradoxal ?

On peut effectivement dire que cela est paradoxal mais d’une toute autre manière. En effet, cela ne l’est pas au regard du positionnement de Guénon par rapport à l’occultisme puisqu’il s’en est détaché très tôt, comprenant que ce mouvement à la mode n’était qu’une sorte de matérialisme spiritualiste davantage marqué par les théories modernes que par les sagesses ancestrales. Sous un autre angle, cela est plus ambivalent car Guénon a toujours conservé certains invariants occultistes dans sa façon de penser : culte du secret, sentiment conspirationniste, sûreté de son savoir, etc. Et puis il est le « grand codificateur de l’ésotérisme pour le XXè siècle » ; en cela, il a peut-être mené à bien la mission qu’il s’était donné : séparer le bon grain de l’ivraie dans le monde foisonnant et parfois délirant de l’occultisme.

R/ Les rapports de René Guénon avec la franc-maçonnerie ont fait coulé beaucoup d’encre parmi ses « disciples ». Quelle fut sa réelle opinion sur ce sujet ?

Cela est effectivement surprenant puisque Guénon a toujours été très clair sur la question, que l’on soit d’accord ou non avec ces interprétations. En l’occurrence, il avait une grande estime pour la franc-maçonnerie, considérée comme une tradition initiatique à part entière même si cette dernière a subi, selon lui, une dégénérescence au XVIIIè siècle. C’est d’ailleurs pourquoi il n’a jamais abandonné l’espoir de voir renaître une franc-maçonnerie dite traditionnelle, et qu’il s’est toujours intéressé de très près à tout ce qui se faisait en la matière. La création de la loge La Grande Triade, sous les auspices de la Tradition, en 1946 correspond à ce projet « restaurationiste ». Cela fut en grande partie un échec. Et on peut conjecturer sans grands risques que Guénon aurait été abasourdi par le niveau des francs-maçons aujourd’hui (sauf exception), comme de beaucoup d’autres groupes soit disant initiatiques.

R/ Le départ pour le Caire constitue un tournant décisif dans l’existence de René Guenon. Quelle fut le sens de sa « conversion » à l’Islam ?

Selon ses propres termes, Guénon ne s’est jamais « converti » mais tout simplement « installé » dans l’islam ; la nuance peut paraître mince mais elle signifie que l’auteur d’Orient et Occident n’a jamais abandonné sa lecture universaliste des traditions religieuses. Comme le rappelle d’ailleurs la citation suivante : « Quiconque a conscience de l’unité des traditions […] est nécessairement, par là même, “inconvertissable” » (Guénon). Après, on peut effectivement signaler que Guénon, sans doute soucieux d’orienter ses lecteurs-disciples vers une voie initiatique viable, a privilégié l’islam soufi, notamment au travers des groupes formés par Frithjof Schuon et Michel Vâlsan.

R/ Comment interprétez-vous les rapports entre René Guenon et Julius Evola ? Existe t-il une synthèse de leurs deux approches ?

Guénon et Evola entretiennent effectivement des rapports singuliers qui tiennent, pour une part, à leurs tempéraments et, pour une autre, à leurs visions du monde. S’il est vrai que les deux hommes ont entretenu une correspondance cordiale jusqu’en 1951 (décès de Guénon), ils n’ont jamais été associés à un projet précis. Guénon refusant d’intégrer la signature d’Evola dans sa revue alors même que ce dernier se démenait pour diffuser sa pensée en Italie. Une synthèse est-elle possible ? Cela dépend de quel côté nous nous situons. Du côté d’Evola, la synthèse est effectivement possible puisqu’elle est contenue dans son maître ouvrage Révolte contre le monde moderne. Du côté de Guénon, elle n’est pas même envisageable puisque le système traditionnel se suffit à lui-même. Autrement dit, les lecteurs d’Evola trouveront sûrement un approfondissement dans la pensée de Guénon tandis que les lecteurs de Guénon ne s’enrichiront pas forcément au contact de la pensée évolienne.

R/ A la lecture de votre livre, on croise deux auteurs particulièrement important dans la réception « universitaire » des idées traditionnelles : Mircea Eliade et Henry Corbin. Quels furent leurs rapports exacts avec la Tradition ?

Mircea Eliade entretiendra des rapports ambigus avec la pensée de Guénon tout au long de sa vie. Ambigu dans le sens où il ne révèlera jamais sa dette à l’égard de la pensée traditionnelle, et ce, pour mener à bien sa carrière universitaire. Le passage d’une lettre d’Evola (qui lui est adressé en 1951) est à cet égard symptomatique : le penseur italien lui demande, de façon presque nonchalante, pourquoi il s’évertue à camoufler ses principales références (Guénon, Coomaraswamy, etc.) pour ne mettre en avant que des ouvrages universitaires le plus souvent très insipides. Et finit par s’interroger : est-ce que « le jeu en vaut la chandelle » ? Et Eliade de lui répondre, gêné, qu’il n’a pas d’autres choix que d’entretenir de bons rapports avec la « maçonnerie académique » !

Quant à l’influence intellectuelle de Guénon sur le penseur roumain, elle est effectivement beaucoup plus sinueuse. On peut, en un mot, dire que Mircea Eliade reprend certaines catégorisations établies par Guénon pour les transposer, d’abord, dans son nationalisme archaïque et, ensuite, dans son approche philosophique du religieux.

Quant à Henry Corbin, ses liens personnels avec la pensée de Guénon sont beaucoup plus distendus. Il parvient, cependant, à des conclusions voisines en partant d’un tout autre terrain de recherche : la philosophie iranienne. En cela, on peut dire que Corbin apporte du « grain à moudre » à la pensée guénonienne, quitte à la prendre de biais, et contribue à étoffer ce vaste territoire qu’est le mode visionnaire (par opposition à la raison ratiocinante). C’est pourquoi on peut le considérer, me semble-t-il, comme l’un des philosophes les plus importants du XXè siècle.

R/ Après la mort de René Guenon, son œuvre connaît une diffusion mondiale et de nombreuses interprétations. Quels sont les courants qui ont été influencés par son travail?

Sans revenir sur les nombreuses occurrences dont fait l’objet le nom de Guénon aujourd’hui dans des domaines aussi inattendus que la musique, les arts et la littérature – quoiqu’il faille rappeler l’intérêt que les surréalistes lui ont porté dès les années vingt –, on peut établir trois grands pôles de réfraction de la pensée traditionnelle. Le premier se situe naturellement dans la mouvance initiatique telle que Guénon a tentée de la mettre en place de son vivant. Étrangement, c’est peut-être la plus fragile tant les groupes initiatiques, une fois leurs leaders disparus (Schuon et Vâlsan principalement), tendent à péricliter. En revanche, la reprise des idées guénoniennes dans des cercles spiritualistes plus larges (soufisme, hindouisme, franc-maçonnerie, etc.) est de plus en plus fréquentes.

Le second pôle se situe dans l’orbite du monde universitaire en général et des sciences religieuses en particulier. Il est assez vivace aux États-Unis avec des intellectuels comme Seyyed Hossein Nasr et John Gordon Melton qui propose une version à la fois étoffée et « édulcorée » du traditionalisme (dans le sillage de Schuon). Ce pôle reste, en revanche, très fragmentaire en Europe où seuls quelques chercheurs osent briser l’oukase qui entoure encore le nom de Guénon, tout particulièrement en France…

Le troisième pôle s’inscrit dans le sillage de Guénon et d’Evola pour continuer à développer l’idée d’une politique d’inspiration traditionnelle face à l’accélération de la dissolution du monde moderne. Les groupes à s’y référer sont nombreux sans que l’on sache toujours exactement quelle est la frontière entre la militance politique et l’engagement religieux. Aujourd’hui, le groupe se réclamant volontiers de Guénon (et d’Evola) le plus influent est sans contestation possible celui mené par le philosophe russe Alexandre Douguine.

Entretien paru dans le numéro 61 de la revue Rébellion.

The Buddha as Spiritual Lawgiver

Posted By Guillaume Durocher

Ex: http://www.counter-currents.com 

Sayings of the Buddha ^[2]
Rupert Gethin, translator
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008

Anyone who wishes to promote certain values is faced with the challenge of how to maintain those values over time: throughout one’s life, from one generation to the next, and across the centuries. A people’s adherence to values is likely to wane over time, overcome by lower drives, such as the desires for material comfort and personal self-indulgence. We know this well in our own era: the collapse of traditional values has given way to a general slouching into consumerism and individualism. In good times especially, the inner child and the bottomless belly take charge of the soul. The maintenance of values in the face of decadence is no easy thing.

I believe we have much to learn in this respect from the sole ideological systems and spiritual communities which have survived for millennia: the religions. I have personally become convinced that piety, or the religious instinct, plays the critical role in maintaining adherence to values above other impulses. Piety is the only impulse which can be rationally educated. Indeed, that is why I believe the religious instinct – if well-educated – is more valuable than the strictly ethnocentric one: an ethnocentric Frenchman may defend his people, but enter into petty conflicts with genetically very similar neighboring Europeans, whereas a pious European identitarian defends both the French nation and the great European family of nations of which she is a part.

The creed of Siddhartha Gautama, better known as the Buddha, has largely died out in his native India, and yet over five hundred million souls claim to follow his way of life today, mostly in East and Southeast Asia, but increasingly also in the West, where Buddhism has growing appeal to generations of Europeans lost in in an increasingly materialist, relativist, and nihilistic age, looking for spiritual comfort and transcendence.

I am not here judging the content of Buddhist doctrine. What is perhaps the fundamental insight – that one must let go of senses, feelings, the world, all things, indeed the mind itself, for all is flux and vanity – may well be true. But one could also deem this nihilism, and indeed Gautama was accused of this during his own lifetime. What is clear is that Buddhism is evolutionarily maladaptive for its ascetics: the Buddhist monk rejects family life and goes childless. Furthermore, the Buddha explicitly rejected the caste divisions which the Hindus had established to preserve their Aryan blood.[1]

Savitri Devi classes Gautama among the “men above Time” who embody timeless values only by withdrawing from this fallen world, rather than the superior “men against Time” who seek to impose them in this world. Those who wish to see the perpetuation of their people are more likely to be touched by the spirit of the Hindus’ Bhagavad Gita ^[3], where in the face of the same cosmic oblivion, the Lord commands Prince Arjuna to embrace his duty as a warrior: “Therefore go to it, grasp fame! And having conquered your enemies, enjoy a thriving kingship.”[2]

What I examine here, and what I think is relevant to all who seek to make lasting cultural change, is the Buddha’s practice and advice for sustaining a spiritual community which can survive the ages. (By “the Buddha,” I mean the figure portrayed in the Pali Cannon, which are our earliest records of Gautama’s teachings, as edited by Buddhist disciples generations later. As with other spiritual leaders who left no writings of their own, such as Socrates and Jesus, we are unsure to what extent the Buddha of the scriptures is faithful to the historical Gautama. I will not deal with that question here: I am interested in what the mythical “Buddha” of the scriptures, as established by Buddhist leaders, has to say on what has proved to be a very successful religion.)

I cannot read about Gautama without sensing a certain kinship with our own Western tradition. He was said to have blue eyes and dark hair. He spoke an Indo-European language, descended from the same Aryan conquerors who gave we Europeans most of our languages. Furthermore, though this might appear superficial, I see innumerable parallels between Buddhist insights and practices and those of the Greek philosophical tradition, which began at around the same time. Buddhism and Greek philosophy often wrestle with the very same issues. The early Buddhists debated and bickered about ideas, as one might in a philosophical school. But the parallel between Buddhism and Greek philosophy is most apparent if, like Pierre Hadot ^[4], we understand that philosophy not as simply a series of ideas or doctrines, but as a way of life cultivating the soul through spiritual exercises.

Like Socrates, the Buddha is more concerned with ethics than metaphysics, and both practiced prolonged meditation (which in Zen Buddhism becomes the central component) and trained themselves in self-control. Like Plato’s Socrates, a fundamental part of the Buddha’s meditation is the contemplation of death, and the Buddhist, like the philosopher, does not fear death.[3] Like Plato, the Buddha is concerned only with the eternal; he polices his own senses and withdraws from this world to the spiritual one. (A difference: Plato’s philosopher-king is reluctantly dragged back into the political world, whereas the Buddha’s seems to withdraw completely.[4]) Like Diogenes, the Buddhist ascetic lives as a homeless beggar, surviving on self-discipline and alms, teaching morals to the people by his example. But whereas Diogenes did so alone and only had isolated followers, the Buddha established not just a philosophical school but a monastic community: the Sangha. Plato’s praise for Pythagoras, the mathematician-mystic who also established a way of life as part of a kind of monastic community, could well be applied to Gautama:

Is there any evidence that, during his lifetime, [Homer] was a mentor to people, and that they used to value him for his teaching and the handed down to their successors a particular Homeric way of life? This is what happened to Pythagoras: he wasn’t only held in extremely high regard for his teaching during his lifetime, but his successors even now call their way of life Pythagorean and somehow seem to stand out from all other people.[5]

For his part, Gautama became, according to the Pali Canon, “a perfect buddha, accomplished in knowledge and conduct, happy, one who understands the world, an unsurpassed charioteer of men to be tamed, teach of gods and men, a blessed buddha.”[6]

Like the Stoics, the Buddha preaches a studious indifference to that which is in flux, a reconciliation with the nature of existence. The philosophers wish to learn about nature, the world, in order to align their ideas and lives with it. For Buddhists, “Dharma” means at once the teachings of the Buddha, the nature of existence, and the Buddhist way of life. Pierre Hadot writes that “despite my reticence against the use of comparativism in philosophy” he cannot resist highlighting the similarities between a Buddhist sutra’s description of the ideal sage and the sage of the Socratic tradition:

Overcoming all
knowing all,
wise.
With regard to all things:
unsmeared. Abandoning all,
in the ending of craving,
released:
The enlightened call him a sage. . . .

The wandering solitary sage,
uncomplacent, unshaken by praise or blame. . . .
Leader of others, by others unled:
The enlightened call him a sage.[7]

The ancient Greeks and Indians did not have the opportunity to interact much in our history. However, it is striking that when Alexander the Great conquered Persia and the two civilizations came into contact, Greco-Indian cultural cross-fertilization proved quite fruitful. The Greeks identified the Indian brahmans (and possibly the Buddhist ascetics) with their own philosophers, calling them “gymnosophists” or “naked sophists.” Evidently, the Greeks were impressed by the yogis’ physical-spiritual exercises. Greek kings ruled parts of India and Afghanistan for only about two centuries after Alexander’s death. And yet, during that time, many of these Greeks embraced Buddhism and created some of that tradition’s finest art with the brief and insufficiently known flowering of Greco-Buddhist culture ^[5].

All spiritual traditions are confronted with the problem of whether their followers should be householders or ascetics. When should a gifted man dedicate himself to the “distractions” of working and family life, and when should he dedicate himself completely to spiritual exercises? Different traditions give different answers.[8] The Buddha perfected a tradition of young men leaving their household and going childless in order to dedicate their lives as wandering mendicants to meditation. He says in favor of becoming a family-free monk: “It is not easy to practice the spiritual life in all its fullness and purity, like a polished shell, while living in a house.”[9] The monk learns to live with nothing but his ocher robe and his alms bowl, meditating by roots of trees or in deserted houses. That is enough. The monk has nothing he may lose, he is content, having “no desire for joy,” he “applies and directs his mind toward creating a body made of mind.”[10]  He is not a parasitic NEET however, for he is constantly training himself, and serves a useful social purpose: “[H]e brings together those who are divided and encourages those who are united . . . he speaks words that will bring about harmony.”[11]

Much of the appeal of Buddhism is that it requires almost nothing to practice and is far less dependent on speculative metaphysics and fanciful stories than other religions. Buddhism, unlike the long-dead philosophical schools of Antiquity, succeeded in institutionalizing its philosophy and spiritual practice as a religion which endures still today. (I pass over the fact that, obviously, Greco-Roman philosophy was preserved in other senses, e.g. being crystalized in certain Christian practices and doctrines, in inspiring much of the Enlightenment, etc.)

The Buddha created the spiritual community of monks, the Sangha. The state may provide for the Sangha (e.g. alms, donation of parks). However, the spiritual community is independent of the state, the monks ever cultivating their own inner purity. If anything, the state should be informed by the Sangha. The monks honor and revere the great sages who came before them and inspire themselves from their example. The Sangha then moralizes the people towards self-discipline and educates them towards higher truths. One can think of analogous institutions in other traditions.

The Buddha gives prescriptions not only on how the Sangha may be maintained, but also has advice for householders and statesmen. These precepts are generally conservative and sound. In one sutra, the Buddha describes “the householder’s discipline” in terms which would resonate in all traditional societies. He says there are “six ways of losing one’s belongings” which the householder should not pursue:

1. being devoted to the recklessness of strong drink and spirits
2. wandering in the streets at unseemly hours
3. frequenting fairs” (where one encounters music and spectacle)
4. being devoted to the recklessness of gambling
5. being devoted to bad friends
6. being habitually idle[12]

The Buddha is then obviously, like all true spiritual leaders, hostile to the “spirit of ‘68.” Each way of losing one’s belongings is accompanied by six dangers, a typical Buddhist mnemonic device. The Buddha also advises against friendship with “one who is all talk.”[13]

The Buddha says that the householder’s piety is not expressed through adherence to sacrificial rituals – apparently an attack against Hindu practice – but through one’s way of life. Hindus symbolically sacrifice in six directions during their rituals, in contrast to the Buddhist householder:

These six directions should be seen as follows: the east should be seen as one’s mother and father, the south as one’s teachers, the west as one’s wife and children, the north as one’s friends and companions, the direction below as servants and workers, the direction above ascetics and brahmans.[14]

Furthermore, Buddhist householders are expected to be good family men with the usual adaptive traditional values: parents must educate their children morally, train them for a trade, find them a wife, and give them an inheritance. If one is good to one’s friends, they will “honor one’s descendants.”[15] Without kindness and justice “then neither mothers nor fathers / Win the respect and worship owed them by their sons.”[16]  If Buddhism can be considered maladaptive for ascetics, its precepts for householders are quite healthy. Furthermore, to kill one’s father or mother is considered one of the supreme crimes in Buddhism, akin to wounding a buddha or dividing the Sanhga.[17] Even in Buddhism, as in so many traditional worldviews, one finds a pairing of blood and spirit in the supreme moral rules.

The Buddha’s political advice is similarly traditional. Just prior to his death and his attainment of final nirvana, he is said to have given political and religious advice which may perhaps be taken to be his testament. He describes “seven principles for avoiding decline” which, if maintained, would allow a people (in this case, the Vajji Republic) to “be expected to prosper, not to decline.”[18] These seven principles are:

1. to meet together frequently and regularly
2. to sit down together in concord, to get up together in concord, and to conduct their business in concord
3. not to make pronouncements that have not been agreed, not to revoke pronouncements that have been agreed, but to proceed in accordance with the ancient laws of the Vajjis that are agreed pronouncements
4. to respect honor, revere, and worship those among them who are their elders, and to listen to what they say
5. not to abduct and force women and girls of good family into sexual relations
6. to respect, honor, revere, and worship their ancestral shrines, both those that are central those that are outlying, and not to neglect the appropriate offerings that were given and made in the past
7. to provide holy men with proper care, protection, and guard, such that those who have not come to their realm are encouraged to come, and those that have come live easily

The Buddha then expresses advice which many would consider sensible: cultivate a spirit of concord and consensus, honor tradition and elders, and respect women and religion.

In this and other sutras, the Buddha and his disciples gives advice on how to have a happy and cohesive Sangha. Some of these are rather amusing, evoking as they do the typical bickering one finds among intellectuals and ideological disciples. The Buddha observes, “[S]ome ascetics and brahmans consume the food offered by the faithful while still addicted to quarrelsome talk.”[19]  Furthermore, the monks must not abuse their position as spiritual leaders by charging fees from superstitious laymen for magic tricks and other “childish arts.”

For a Buddhist monk, excessive talking is a sign of restlessness and of not living the way. One of the Buddha’s disciples calmed monks who were “agitated, uncontrolled, restless, talkative, conversing about this and that; with their minds astray, they were not fully aware, not concentrated; their thoughts wandered and their senses were uncontrolled.”[20]

There was also evidently conflict between monks who specialized in erudition and those who specialized in practice, as a certain Mahacunda said:

Monks who are specialists in the teachings disparage monks who are meditators: “Those meditators, they meditate and meditate, always saying, ‘We are the ones who meditate!’ But what do they meditate for? Why do they meditate? How exactly do they meditate?” . . .

On the other hand, monks who are meditators disparage monks who are specialists in the teachings: “Those specialists in the teachings, who are always saying, ‘We are the ones who are specialists in the teachings!’ – they are agitated, uncontrolled, restless, talkative, conversing about this and their; with their minds astray, they are not fully aware, not concentrated; their thoughts wander and their senses are uncontrolled. But what are they specialists in the teachings for? Why are they specialists in the teachings? How exactly are they specialists in the teaching?” . . .

So, friends, you should train yourselves to think: “As monks who are specialists in the teachings we will speaking in praise of monks who are meditators.” Why must you train yourselves this way? They are remarkable and difficult to find in this world, these people who live having experienced the deathless directly.

So, friends, you should train yourselves to think: “As monks who are meditators we will speak in praise of monks who are specialists in the teachings.” Why must you train yourselves in this way? They are remarkable and difficult to find in this world, these people who reach insight, having penetrated the deep significance of a term by their understanding.[21]

Any spiritual movement will then tend to be divided between scholars and practitioners, and the two must respect each other.

The Buddha also condemned those monks who learn only to better assert themselves in argument, rather than to live better. He likened such “learning” to grabbing a snake without knowing how to hold it properly, and so getting bitten:

Monks, some foolish men learn the teaching – the sayings, chants, analyses, verses, utterances, traditions, birth stories, marvels, and dialogues. Yet after they have learned the teaching they do not use wisdom to consider the purpose of those teachings. And when they do not use wisdom to consider their purpose the teachings don’t succeed in bearing deep reflection: the only benefit those people get from learning the teaching is the ability to argue and counter criticism; the point of their learning the teaching is missed by them.[22]

The Buddha’s most detailed advice for the Sangha, at least in this volume, is to be found in the sutra on his final nirvana, beside his political advice to the Vajjis. Again, the Buddha says that if the Sangha continuously follows these precepts, it can “be expected to prosper, not to decline.”[23] The first seven principles for avoiding decline are:

1. meet together frequently and regularly
2. sit down together in concord, to get up together in concord, and to conduct the business of the community in concord
3. not to make pronouncements that have not been agreed, not to revoke pronouncements that have been agreed, but to proceed in accordance with the precepts that are agreed pronouncements
4. respect, honor, revere, and worship those monks who are elders, possess the pearls of wisdom, went forth into the religious life long ago, are the fathers and leaders of the community, and to listen to what they say
5. to not be overcome by the kind of craving that leads to rebirth
6. to have regard for living in the forest”
7. individually continue to establish mindfulness, such that well-behaved companions in the spiritual life who have not come are encouraged to come, and that have come live easily

There must then be frequent gatherings of the faithful, respect for consensus, respect for elders, and sticking to the practice (including pride in the austerity of “life in the forest”). This is similar in some respects to the Buddha’s political advice. He provides other advice for monks to preserve the Sangha; among these I highlight:  to not become enamored with pleasure, to avoid bad associates, to “not give up halfway with some inferior achievement,” to maintain the spiritual practices (e.g. mindfulness) and doctrines (e.g. notions of impermanence and illusion of the self), “to show friendliness to their companions in the spiritual life in their acts of body . . . in their acts of speech . . . in their acts of thoughts both in their presence and in private,” to only rightfully own possessions, and to maintain good conduct.[24]

The religious instinct’s power is pervasive in human affairs. This can be so consciously, as with organized religions and certain ideologies, or it can be unconsciously so, as with the hatred of liberal bigots against those who think differently. But that power cannot be denied. I believe more generally that the religious impulse has evolved among humans both as an emotional mechanism to give meaning to their individual lives and as a social mechanism to enforce group norms. Today, the cost of publishing and of spreading memes, at least on a Website, is almost reduced to zero by the wonders of technology. In past ages, the most ancient texts and memes that have survived are typically religious ones, precisely because the religious sentiment is such a powerful drive in ordering human societies and giving meaning to a human life. Only the religions have been able to maintain adherence to certain texts, doctrines, and symbols throughout the millennia.

We may differ with the Buddha’s apparent contempt for the blood and his withdrawal from the household and the world. Jeremy Turner tells me that with the technology and high standards of living of the modern era, one does not need to reject household life to be a good European activist. But the Buddha’s lessons for how to create and maintain a spiritual community, both within ourselves and as a group, strike me as having enduring relevance. For whatever happens politically, we will need something like a “European identitarian Sangha” independent of the state, training ourselves and perfecting our principles, enlightening the people, and ensuring the prince’s action is righteous. For we all hope for a new spiritual law among the European peoples.

Notes

1. In one story, two disciples report to the Buddha their encounter with high-caste Hindus:

“The Brahman class,” they say, “is the best; the other classes are inferior. The brahman class is fair, the other classes are dark. Only brahmans can be pure, not non-brahmans. Only brahmas are true sons of Brahmá, born from his mouth, coming from Brahmá, created by Brahmá, heirs of Brahmá. You have given up the best class and joined an inferior class, that of those pathetic, shaven-headed, extravagant ascetics, the dark descendants of our ancestor’s feet.” (Gethin, Sayings of the Buddha, Aggañña Sutta [The Origin of Things], pp. 117-8)

The Buddha then rebuts the Hindus.

2. W. J. Johnson (trans.), The Bhagavad Gita (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), Chapter 11, paragraph 33.

3. Nine of the fourteen stages of the Buddha’s meditation for “establishing mindfulness” in the Satipatṭhāna Sutta involve contemplating one’s own body as a corpse in various stages of putrefaction. This grisly embrace of death is something Western Buddhists (and popular yoga practitioners) tend to gloss over.

4. I am thinking of the ideal Buddhist king’s withdrawal from the world into the “Palace of Dharma” in the Mahāsudassana Sutta.

5. Plato (trans. Robin Waterfield), The Republic ^[6] (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 600b.

6. Gethin, Sayings, Bodhirajakumara Sutta (Dialogue with Prince Body), pp. 192-193.

7. English translation of the Muni Sutta ^[7] by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Pierre Hadot, Qu’est-ce que la philosophie antique? (English: What is Ancient Philsophy? ^[8]) (Paris: Gallimard, 1995), p. 351.

8. To name only a few: Socrates was a good soldier and a father, albeit a negligent one, ultimately choosing death and abandoning his family in the name of philosophy; the Emperor Julian argued that Cynicism was meant for true asceticism and the easier Stoicism was meant for householders; Catholic priests do not marry, whereas Protestant and Orthodox ones may; good National Socialists are with few exceptions (mostly notably Hitler himself) expected to beget children.

9. Gethin, Sayings, Samaññaphala Sutta (the Fruits of the Ascetic Life), p. 19.

10. Ibid., pp. 29-30.

11. Ibid., p. 20.

12. Ibid., Mahāparinibbāṇa Sutta (the Buddha’s Final Nirvana), p. 131.

13. Ibid., p. 133.

14. Ibid., p. 135.

15. Ibid., p. 136.

16. Ibid., p. 138.

17. Ibid., p. 276.

18. Ibid., Mahāparinibbāṇa Sutta (The Buddha’s Final Nirvana), pp. 39-40.

19. Ibid., Samaññaphala Sutta (The Fruits of the Ascetic Life),  p. 22.

20. Ibid., Moggallāna, p. 239.

21. Ibid., Mahācunda , pp. 260-1.

22. Ibid., Alagaddūpama Sutta (The Simile of the Snake), pp. 159-160.

23. Ibid., Mahāparinibbāṇa Sutta (The Buddha’s Final Nirvana), p. 42.

24. Ibid., p. 44.

Related

Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2017/03/the-buddha-as-spiritual-lawgiver/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: https://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/3-20-17-1.jpg

[2] Sayings of the Buddha: http://amzn.to/2mIx6DQ

[3] Bhagavad Gita: http://amzn.to/2n10eYS

[4] Pierre Hadot: http://www.counter-currents.com/tag/pierre-hadot/

[5] Greco-Buddhist culture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism

[6] The Republic: http://amzn.to/2neNQ9V

[7] Muni Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.12.than.html

[8] What is Ancient Philsophy?: http://amzn.to/2nDB59W

 

Click here to print.

Copyright © 2015 Counter-Currents Publishing. All rights reserved.

Gianfranco De Turris: “Se Evola (critico degli Usa) viene apprezzato anche alla Casa Bianca”

da Michele De Feudis

Ex: http://www.barbadillo.it 

 

Gianfranco de Turris, segretario della Fondazione Evola. Il filosofo di “Cavalcare la tigre” è negli ultimi giorni tornato d’attualità per una citazione di un consigliere del neopresidente Usa Donald Trump, Steve Bannon. In che contesto Bannon ha citato Evola?

“In realtà non è proprio così, anche se il “New York Times” ha lasciato credere questo… Il quotidiano ha tirato fuori solo ora una cosa del 2014, quando Trump non era nessuno, solo per metterlo in difficoltà con quello che è ora il suo consigliere principale. Ma la coincidenza ancora più interessante è che la dichiarazione di Bannon è uscita il 10 febbraio, guarda caso esattamente dieci giorni dopo la sua nomina nel National Security Council! Se due indizi fanno una prova… L’autore dell’articolo sul NYT, Jason Horowitz, che mi ha intervistato per mettere tre righe su mezz’ora di conversazione, è il vaticanista del giornale ed è stato volutamente generico nel riferimento a tre anni fa. Ma in Rete non si perde nulla e si è trovata la fonte primaria della notizia. Bannon in realtà non parla direttamente di Evola ma lo cita en passant, rispondendo ad una domanda, dunque uno spunto occasionale, non programmato. E citando invece esplicitamente Dugin, consigliere, si dice, di Putin. Tutto qui. Una cosa ridicola e strumentale, che comunque ha permesso a “Repubblica” un titolo epocale in prima pagina (!) da incorniciare: “Evola e il Fascismo ispirano Bannon la mente di Trump”. Il titolo dell’articolo è nel classico stile-Repubblica, allarmistico e pomposo: “Il cuore nero della destra americana”. E cioè: Sun Tsu, Spengler, D’Annunzio, Evola e Mussolini! Ah, anche Dart Fener, il cattivo di “Guerre stellari”… Insomma, una “trama nera”, che va dalla Rivoluzione Conservatrice a Star Wars…. Risun teneatis! Incredibile ma vero. A questo giunge la stampa italiana, senza senso del ridicolo. Ma questo ci fa gioco.
Insomma, all’inizio c’è una bufala strumentalizzata ad uso interno statunitense, anche se è perfettamente vero, come mi avevamo detto tempo fa amici americani, che Stephen Bannon è un conoscitore del tradizionalismo e legge e studia non solo Evola, ma anche Guénon, Dugin e de Benoist, che un vero tradizionalista certo non è, ma che comunque collabora anche al sito Breitbart News, cuore della cosiddetta Alt-Right statunitense”.

Ma che cosa interessa a Bannon del tradizionalismo?

“Se ci si deve basare sulla conferenza in Vaticano dove i riferimenti sono generici, si deve pensare che Bannon in realtà riprende piuttosto alcuni concetti della Rivoluzione Conservatrice, condivisi spesso parzialmente e con riserve (vedi il caso del principio di autodeterminazione dei popoli) dal pensiero tradizionale. È ad ogni modo la critica alla modernità che interessa a Bannon del pensiero tradizionale, le accuse al mondialismo, alla globalizzazione mercantilista, ecc. Una forma di anticapitalismo di Destra, insomma, assai diffuso anche al di fuori del pensiero tradizionale. Con risvolti ultrapopulisti che però riprendono più la tradizione americana che quella europea e che di sicuro Evola non avrebbe mai sottoscritto considerando il tipo di critiche che rivolgeva a fascismo e nazismo su questo punto”.

Evola negli Usa: è studiato dalle élite americane o nelle accademie oltreoceano?

“Macché! La cosa paradossale è proprio questa. Nonostante che tutti i suoi libri maggiori siano tradotti in inglese soprattutto dalla americana Inner Traditions, che io sappia non viene non dico letto dalle élites, ma neppure studiato nelle università, a parte alcuni singoli docenti che se ne sono occupati per aspetti particolari come Richard Drake per l’aspetto politico, Joscelyn Godwin per l’esoterismo o Jeffrey Schnapps per l’arte. Forse questo inaspettato parlarne sui grandi giornali americani potrebbe accendere un vero e serio interesse per la sua opera multiforme, al di là delle sciocchezze che sono state scritte…”.

Il barone dedicò saggi e studi agli Stati Uniti e all’americanismo. Con che orientamento?

“Evola ha scritto sugli Stati Uniti sin dagli anni Trenta con il famoso saggio “Americanismo e bolscevismo” che poi divenne la conclusione di “Rivolta contro il mondo moderno” già nella prima edizione del 1934. Sono le due facce della stessa medaglia, cioè il materialismo, che alla fine stritoleranno l’Europa, in quanto particolare tipo di civiltà. Caduta l’URSS però sono rimasti solo gli USA. Dopo quasi trent’anni adesso a capo degli USA c’è un singolare personaggio, del tutto imprevisto e imprevedibile, gli sviluppi della cui politica non è possibile immaginare, e le cui posizioni potrebbero essere influenzate da Bannon.
Certo è paradossale, una beffa se non una nemesi della Storia che un pensatore che ha visto nell’americanismo un nemico più pericoloso del comunismo in quanto subdolo, e che contro gli USA ne ha scritte di tutti i colori (basti leggere gli articoli riunti da Alberto Lombardo in “Civiltà americana”, quaderno della Fondazione Evola) abbia improvvisamente un accesso al pensiero di un consigliere di un presidente americano! Chi lo avrebbe mai potuto immaginare? La Storia non è già stata scritta e non va in un’unica direzione come pensano i progressisti oggi in grandi ambasce. Non so pensare a come andrà a finire, sempre che si consenta a Trump di arrivare a fine mandato (i casi Kennedy e Nixon insegnano). Mah!”.

L’attualità del pensiero evoliano: resta concretamente spendibile per comprendere gli scenari internazionali?

“Il pensiero di Evola non è un pensiero politico ma metapolitico, non è pratico ma si preoccupa di formare le menti e lo spirito per affrontare la politica-politicante, voleva creare “una destra spirituale” come scrisse ne “Gli uomini e le rovine” nella edizione del 1967. E ciò vale sia nella politica interna che in quella internazionale. Sono i grandi principi, i valori base che contano, il riferimento al sacro, una forma mentis antimoderna e antimaterialistica. E oggi che è tutto impregnato di materialismo, laicismo, dove tutto è secolarizzato soprattutto in USA, è difficile pensare secondo le sue indicazioni. Ma non impossibile. La classe dirigente è stata allevata in base a ben altri criteri. I riferimenti, che hanno fatto alcuni giornali italiani al “predominio della razza bianca” sono ridicoli, se non demenziali”.

Tiriamo le somme: molto rumore per nulla?

“Penso di sì. Non dimentichiamoci che, da quando è stato eletto Trump la grande stampa progressista internazionale è coalizzata contro di lui: il NYT, e qui da noi i grandi quotidiani, dedicano letteralmente un servizio al giorno per screditare lui e i suoi collaboratori. Nel nostro caso è una strumentalizzazione anti Trump di un fatto lontano e tangenziale, indiretto, ripescato nella memoria di un giornalista. Tanto per poter dire, fornendo un’immagine forzata e inventata delle idee di Evola, che gli Stati Uniti potrebbero diventare una nazione autoritaria, se non dittatoriale e fascista, e magari giustificare un golpe bianco contro Trump o il suo assassinio da parte di qualche esaltato che uccide ill tiranno in nome della democrazia. Io credo proprio che Evola se la ridirebbe di gusto… Anche se, considerando le imprevedibilità della Storia recente, non si sa proprio quel che potrebbe accadere”.

@barbadilloit

@waldganger2000

Di Michele De Feudis

Lo sagrado como fuente de poder

Pedro Bustamante

Ex: http://www.elespiadigital.com 

Extracto de la obra Sacrificios y hierogamias: La violencia y el goce en el escenario del poder (dos tomos, Amazon, 2016). 

"Pues bien, el mundo de lo sagrado entre otras características, se opone al mundo de lo profano como un mundo de energías a un mundo de sustancias. De un lado, fuerzas; del otro, cosas". [1]

Todo lo que decimos supone que no se pueden separar religión y poder. Que son dos instituciones independientes, que están en conflicto, no es más que parte de la ficción que el poder-religión pone en escena para enmascarar su verdadera esencia. De nuevo, una cortina de humo más para esconder su obscenidad. Los más santos lo son porque han sido o son también los más criminales. La bondad es siempre sublimación de la maldad. El poder, como la religión, se ejerce en última instancia a través de la máquina hierogámico-sacrificial. El poder es inseparable de la religión, es solo un momento del poder-religión. [2]

Hemos mostrado que en la captura de la energía libidinoso-agresiva natural excesiva juegan un papel fundamental los bíoi sagrados, como intermediarios, canalizadores, acumuladores, emanadores, de estas energías. Que después estos bíoi sagrados se van sustituyendo progresivamente por otros bíoi o por pseudo-objetos, en los que sigue presente esta dimensión sagrada. Se suele decir y se suele experimentar que dichos bíoi o pseudo-objetos sagrados "tienen poder". [3] Pues bien, esto confirma de una forma muy evidente nuestra tesis: que el poder y la religión forman un complejo inseparable, que es lo que denominamos poder-religión, y que este poder-religión se ejerce a través de la máquina hierogámico-sacrificial.

De ahí que en la mayoría de las culturas y épocas poder y religión hayan conformado una unidad. La distinción entre poder y religión es relativamente reciente, está particularmente vinculada a la cultura occidental. Más que una generalidad, es una anomalía, una excepción, una situación que, insistimos, pretende enmascarar la verdadera esencia del poder-religión. Una estrategia de poli bueno y poli malo. Así, incluso cuando estas dos facetas del poder-religión se han disociado, en general han tendido a operar de manera complementaria, a establecer pactos, a dividirse las tareas, en suma, a seguir operando en la práctica como una entidad, más allá de las apariencias y de las tensiones relativas. Pero además de todo esto, la clave para entender la separación aparente de poder y de religión, es que todo ello ha sido promovido por sociedades secretas que han seguido operando como poder-religión en la sombra, pero que han visto en esta separación una estrategia eficaz para enmascararse y al mismo tiempo debilitar y controlar al poder y a la religión aparentes.

Como hemos mostrado, el cometido central de la máquina hierogámico-sacrificial es sacralizar ciertos elementos de la realidad y profanizar otros, distinguirlos netamente, establecer su separación. Pero lo que está en el trasfondo de esta mecánica es, una vez más, la captura de la energía social excesiva. Digamos que en un principio toda la naturaleza está encantada, las fuentes de lo sagrado surgen por doquier, en los fenómenos meteorológicos, en las fuerzas de los astros, en los efectos de los mares y las aguas, en las transformaciones estacionales de la naturaleza. También la naturaleza interior está encantada, el hombre siente lo sagrado dentro de sí. Esta intimidad con lo sagrado se experimenta sobre todo en los momentos en que la comunidad se abandona al éxtasis de la violencia y del goce, de la ingesta caníbal, del incesto y de la orgía.

La máquina hierogámico-sacrificial no hace otra cosa que ordenar este exceso libidinoso-agresivo, de manera que se ponga al servicio de la cultura en lugar de amenazarla. Es en este contexto en el que los bíoi sagrados canalizan dichas energías excesivas, que se transforman en el proceso en energías culturales. Si estos bíoi son sagrados es porque son sacralizados en el marco de esta mecánica, al mismo tiempo que, recíprocamente, los bíoi profanos lo son porque son profanizados. De manera que se crea una suerte de diferencial energético entre lo sagrado y lo profano, que tensa todo el campo social. El modo de orden se puede sostener en la medida en que en el modo de crisis se canaliza, se cataliza, se almacena, este diferencial energético, en la medida en que los vórtices hierogámico y sacrificial tensan la superficie social, le dan relieve.

Todo esto es, insistimos, al mismo tiempo del orden de lo religioso y de lo político. Porque de hecho los bíoi sagrados lo son en la medida en que ostentan poder, en la medida en que se les otorga ese poder, en que se cree que lo tienen, que lo absorben, que lo desprenden, que lo contagian. Como nos ha mostrado René Girard, la clave del mecanismo sacrificial es que la víctima, al ser sacrificada, absorbe las fuerzas del mal y las devuelve transformadas en fuerzas del bien, transmuta las energías maléficas, desintegradoras, destructivas, en energías benéficas, integradoras, constructivas. [4] Esto es el poder catártico, pero también anártico, que no es tanto de los bíoi sagrados en sí como del conjunto de la máquina hierogámico-sacrificial, aunque la tendencia es a creer que ellos ostentan este poder. La creencia religiosa se reduce en última instancia a esto.

El desconocimiento de este mecanismo, la dificultad para comprender cómo opera la máquina hierogámico-sacrificial, implica que se haga responsable a la víctima o a su sublimación, la divinidad, de sus efectos. Tanto para bien como para mal. Que se la demonice o se la divinice. En definitiva, que se la considere la fuente de lo sagrado, la fuente del poder. De ahí que hayamos dicho que es la propia máquina hierogámico-sacrificial la que produce todas las nociones trascendentes, que además se proyectan en determinados bíoi o pseudo-objetos, a los que se considera encarnación del mal o del bien, de la divinidad maléfica o benéfica. No se sacrifican víctimas al dios, sino que, antes que nada, se sacrifica el dios mismo. O mejor, el dios se crea precisamente sacrificando a la víctima, haciéndola sagrada. [5] Pero este proceso hay que entenderlo en el contexto de largas tradiciones rituales. No sucede de la noche a la mañana. Se trata de procesos progresivos de disyunciones y conjunciones, de separaciones y fusiones de lo inmanente y de lo trascendente, del cuerpo y el alma-espíritu. De ahí que no solo el ritual hierogámico-sacrificial y los seres inmanentes que lo protagonizan adquieran poder, sino también sus emanaciones trascendentes, que como decimos son una y otra vez separadas y reintegradas en sus referentes inmanentes.

Pues bien, hay que ver en esta distinción entre lo inmanente y lo trascendente uno de los motivos de la disociación entre el poder religioso y el político. No es una casualidad que esta separación entre poder y religión haya tendido a producirse en ámbitos culturales en los que ha predominado la idea de un dios trascendente, abstracto, desencarnado. Esta forma de entender lo sagrado ha sentado las bases para la separación de un poder terrenal y un poder celestial, de un poder inmanente y un poder trascendente, de la política y la religión. Pero, como sabemos, inmanencia y trascendencia no son más que dos caras de la misma moneda, como realismo o materialismo e idealismo. Las religiones monoteístas con nociones de divinidad trascendentes son aquellas en las que más fácilmente se ha podido disociar el poder inmanente y el poder trascendente, y así ha podido distinguirse más netamente el poder político y el poder religioso. [6] Pero esta separación es, insistimos, artificial. Es disyunción sin conjunción, y por lo tanto parte de la estrategia de la máquina hierogámico-sacrificial. En realidad poder y religión siguen operando de manera conjunta. La religión sigue teniendo poder y el poder sigue siendo religioso. [7] Pero detrás de las bambalinas. Y de forma no declarada. Pero sigue siendo en realidad lo que mueve a las sociedades, se quiera o no, se reconozca o no.

Solo hay que observar la estrecha vinculación entre poder e inmortalidad para entender hasta qué punto el poder-religión es unitario. Hemos mostrado cómo el juicio póstumo es una forma sustitutoria de ritual hierogámico-sacrificial, cómo ambos son vórtices en los que confluyen lo religioso, lo político, lo moral y lo económico. Nos extenderemos sobre este tema cuando hablemos del autosacrificio, pero ahora solo queremos apuntar la íntima vinculación entre el poder y la religión, y cómo esta vinculación se pone especialmente de manifiesto en el fenómeno de la inmortalidad. En efecto, la creencia en la vida después de la muerte ha sido uno de los mecanismos de sometimiento político-religioso más poderosos. La vida del alma recompensaría los sufrimientos de la vida terrenal, hasta el punto de que solo la merecerían aquellos que se sacrificasen en esta vida. Vemos cómo está aquí implícita la idea del intercambio entre la vida y la muerte, la idea de que es necesario dar en esta vida para tener derecho a recibir en la otra. Es evidente que esta ha sido desde hace milenios una de las estrategias centrales del sometimiento político y religioso. Pero también en buena medida económico, como hemos visto al tratar del juicio de los muertos. Toda la actividad productiva, económica, laboral, está impregnada de lo sacrificial, de las nociones de sacrificio y autosacrificio, ofrenda, tributo, acumulación de un excedente que nos sobrevive, intercambio simbólico, etc.

La noción de inmortalidad es una de las claves de bóveda que sostiene todo el sistema de poder-religión. Como sabemos, el Antiguo Egipto ha jugado un papel importante en esto, retomado por la tradición judeocristiana. En general lo que se puede observar en la tradición occidental, por lo menos hasta el Renacimiento, es una suerte de asimetría fundamental en la que la vida está supeditada a la muerte, o si se quiere, a la vida después de la muerte. Lo que no es otra cosa que la supeditación de la mortalidad de los bíoi a la inmortalidad relativa de las zoés. Esta profunda vinculación entre inmortalidad y poder seguirá dominando todo el pensamiento occidental hasta la Ilustración. Y lo sigue haciendo ahora, aunque de una manera menos explícita. Ahora la muerte se ha fusionado con la vida de tal manera que entre ambas apenas hay distinción. A fuerza de querer negar la muerte la cultura moderna ha hecho que la muerte se adhiera a la vida como un doble fondo que la acompaña en todo momento. La vida moderna apesta a muerte por sus cuatro costados.

NOTAS

Pedro Bustamante es investigador independiente, arquitecto y artista. Es autor también de El imperio de la ficción: Capitalismo y sacrificios hollywoodenses (Ediciones Libertarias, 2015). Colabora habitualmente en diversos medios alternativos como El Robot Pescador, El Espía Digital, Katehon, La Caja de Pandora y Csijuan. deliriousheterotopias.blogspot.com

1Roger Caillois, El hombre y lo sagrado, México D. F., Fondo de Cultura Económica, p. 27.

2Cf. Elias Canetti, Masa y poder, Barcelona, Muchnik, 1977, pp. 512 y ss.

3Mircea Eliade, Lo sagrado y lo profano, Barcelona, Paidós, 1998, pp. 15-16.

4René Girard, La violencia y lo sagrado, Barcelona, Anagrama, 2005, pp. 122-123; cf. pp. 313-317.

5Walter Burkert, Homo Necans: Interpretaciones de ritos sacrificiales y mitos de la antigua Grecia, Barcelona, Acantilado, 2013, p. 130; Jean-Pierre Dupuy, La Marque du sacré, París, Flammarion, 2010, p. 141.

6Agamben, El Reino y la Gloria: Una genealogía teológica de la economía y del gobierno, Buenos Aires, Adriana Hidalgo, 2008.

7Cf. René Guénon, El Rey del mundo, s. l., Luis Cárcamo, 1987, p. 19.

Donoso Cortes, Carl Schmitt, Julius Evola

PAR DAVID B.

DANS GORNAHOOR.NET & https://nouvellefrancecontrerevolutionnaire.net 

De nos jours, la « discussion » est devenue une marchandise, le produit vendable des nouvelles par câble et des revues d’opinion; il n’y a plus même le prétexte d’une « recherche de la vérité ».

Je ne crois pas que la monographie de Carl Schmitt sur Donoso Cortés, mentionnée par Julius Evola, ait été traduite. Cependant, le dernier chapitre de la Théologie politique de Schmitt est intitulé Sur la philosophie contrerévolutionnaire de l’État (de Maistre, Bonald, Donoso Cortes), de sorte qu’il peut servir de résumé à la compréhension par Schmitt de Donoso.

Mais d’abord, il faut signaler une anomalie intéressante. Le Schmitt catholique, ainsi que les trois contre-révolutionnaires catholiques, n’ont eut absolument aucun impact sur l’église contemporaine. Leurs idées sur la Tradition, l’autorité et l’opposition au monde libéral moderne ont été rejetées par l’église modernisante Vatican II. Alors, pourquoi l’Evola anti-chrétien était-il si enchantée par la figure de Donoso Cortés? Comme l’indique Evola dans sa revue de la monographie de Schmitt sur Thomas Hobbes, ce qui compte, c’est la « manifestation d’un principe et d’un ordre supérieur » et la mise en place d’un « type d’organisation véritablement spirituelle et hiérarchique traditionnelle ». Puisqu’il n’y a plus de soutien institutionnel à de telles idées, il incombe aux rares de les comprendre et de les développer. 

Comme nous l’avons vu, Evola rejette la revendication de Hobbes du contrat social comme la base de l’état du Leviathan, car cela pourrait servir à lui fournir un vernis de légitimité. C’est plutôt la dévolution de l’Etat traditionnel, résultat de la perte du sens d’une vérité transcendante, tout en conservant son autorité, qui donne notre situation. Un tel Etat, laissé à ses propres moyens sous l’influence de « courants plus profonds, toujours capables de s’infiltrer là où elles ne trouvent pas la voie barrée par la présence de principes authentiques et d’une vérité ferme et durable », va continuer de permettre la « dissolution individualiste de l’Etat ». Alors, qu’est-ce que Donoso nous raconte de ce choc libéral et de son contraire?

L’idéal libéral est la « libre enquête », le « marché des idées », la « conversation éternelle ». Schmitt écrit:

Les philosophes politiques catholiques comme de Maistre, Bonald et Donoso […] auraient considéré la conversation éternelle comme le produit d’un fantasme horriblement comique, car ce qui caractérisait leur philosophie politique contre-révolutionnaire, c’était la reconnaissance que leur époque nécessitait des décisions.

Car la Tradition de Bonald offrait la seule possibilité d’acquérir ce que l’homme était capable d’accepter métaphysiquement, parce que l’intellect individuel était considéré comme trop faible et misérable pour pouvoir reconnaître la vérité par elle-même.

Les antithèses et les distinctions que Bonald a tant aimé contiennent en vérité des disjonctions morales … De telles disjonctions morales représentent des contrastes entre le bien et le mal, Dieu et le diable; entre eux existe un « les deux/ou » dans le sens d’une lutte de vie ou de mort qui ne reconnaît pas une synthèse et un « tiers supérieur ».

Nous voyons que les contre-révolutionnaires rejettent l’idéal libéral que l’opinion de chaque homme compte. « L’erreur n’a pas de droits », et peu d’hommes sont capables de surmonter l’erreur intellectuelle. Donoso était encore plus emphatique. Selon Schmitt, Donoso Cortés avait un

mépris pour l’homme ne connaissait pas de limites: la raison aveugle de l’homme, sa faiblesse et la ridicule vitalité de ses désirs charnels lui paraissaient si pitoyables que toutes les paroles de tout langage humain ne suffisent pas à exprimer toute la bassesse de cette créature. […] La stupidité des masses devait être aussi évidente pour lui que la vanité idiote de leurs chefs.

En somme, Donoso décrit les hommes comme étant à l’étape qu’Evola appelait la première[1] qui est définie « par des forces, des idées et des objets en dehors de lui-même. Manquant de volonté, l’homme de la première étape ne peut rien faire sans être dirigé par des forces extérieures ». De même, comme Evola, Donoso méprise la société bourgeoise. Schmitt écrit:

Selon Donoso Cortés, il était caractéristique du libéralisme bourgeois de ne pas décider dans cette bataille mais plutôt d’entamer une discussion. Il définit directement la bourgeoisie comme une « classe de discussion ». Cette définition contient la classe caractéristique de vouloir éluder la décision. Une classe qui déplace toute l’activité politique sur le plan de la conversation dans la presse et au parlement n’est pas fait pour le conflit social.

La futilité du débat

Voici le cœur de la question. La classe bourgeoise, bien que nominalement au pouvoir, n’a aucune compréhension, ni même croyance en aucun principe d’ordre transcendant. Par conséquent, il n’y a plus de convictions. Sans aucune compréhension des vrais principes, il n’y a pas d’argument contre les forces destructrices du désordre. Quand le contraire de la vérité est mis à égalité avec la vérité, il ne peut y avoir de résolution. Le débat se poursuivra sans résolution, comme quelque spectacle des Highlanders, mais sans les éléments héroïques. Au lieu d’un « les deux/ou», il y a maintenant un « et/ou ». Les masses elles-mêmes n’ont aucun moyen de résoudre le problème, et donc se considèrent libres de choisir une alternative basée sur rien d’autre que leurs caprices. Ainsi, le choix du désordre est tout aussi valable que le choix de l’ordre.

Si un enfant touche un poêle chaud, il reçoit immédiatement des commentaires négatifs et apprend à ne jamais le faire à nouveau. Dans le cours de sa vie, un homme fera beaucoup d’erreurs. Souvent, les conséquences ne sont pas clairement connues jusqu’à des années plus tard, lorsque les enchevêtrements qu’il a créés deviennent difficiles à échapper. Sur le plan sociétal, les effets négatifs ne seront pas remarqués pendant de nombreuses années, dépassant souvent même la durée de la vie d’un homme. C’est pourquoi ils persistent, sous le regard perplexe de ceux qui sont encore capables de voir les vraies causes et conséquences des événements.

Décision 

L’Etat libéral et bourgeois n’a pas la volonté de prendre une décision. Schmitt explique:

Donoso Cortés a considéré la discussion éternelle comme une méthode de contournement de la responsabilité et d’attribution à la liberté d’expression et de la presse une importance excessive qui en dernière analyse permet à la décision d’être évitée. Tout comme le libéralisme discute et négocie tous les détails politiques, il veut aussi dissoudre la vérité métaphysique dans une discussion. L’essence du libéralisme est la négociation, une demi-mesure prudente, dans l’espoir que le conflit définitif, la bataille sanglante décisive, puisse se transformer en débat parlementaire et permettre que la décision soit suspendue pour toujours dans une discussion éternelle.

Nous voyons, cependant, que la négociation ne bouge que dans une seule direction. Par exemple, supposons que j’offre 50 $ pour un produit et que le vendeur demande 100 $. Nous négocions pour 75 $. Le vendeur connaît alors ma limite. Donc la prochaine fois que nous négocions, nous commençons à 75 $ et il exige 125 $. Si, par indécision, ou si je manque de volonté pour tenir ferme, vous pouvez voir que le prix va continuer à augmenter. Ainsi, les conflits sociaux continuent d’être résolus dans un seul sens, malgré les intentions des conservateurs de maintenir le statu quo, et, en tout cas, continue à « évoluer » dans la même direction.

Le contraire de la discussion est la décision. Dans une société traditionnelle, la décision finale était prise par le grand prêtre ou le roi. À ce moment-là, la décision était sensiblement définitive et la discussion prenait fin. Dans la sphère religieuse, l’autorité spirituelle est infaillible; dans le domaine politique, le Roi établit la loi. Dans cette optique, le conflit ne peut pas être négocié et doit être traité de façon plus primitive. Cela a toujours été reconnu. Par exemple, Dante a reconnu le duel comme l’arbitrage ultime. Joseph de Maistre louait le bourreau comme la force cachée derrière l’ordre. C’est pourquoi les révolutionnaires s’opposent toujours à la peine de mort, du moins jusqu’à ce qu’ils acquièrent eux-mêmes le pouvoir.

Pour Donoso, qui vivait à une époque où les rois ne détenaient plus le pouvoir que dans un sens nominal, la solution était un dictateur ou un « homme de destin ». C’est la conclusion logique. C’est un pas en arrière, dans la perspective de la contre-révolution, car c’est encore l’autorité sans vérité ni légitimité. Tout en ne rejetant pas cette notion, pour Evola, ce n’est

que le stade où l’autorité suffit et la vérité est superflue; où les mythes, et non les vrais principes, sont le meilleur instrument pour saisir et organiser les forces collectives; dans lequel le miracle d’une personnalité exceptionnelle, d’un « homme de destin » saturé du « droit divin », et non pas un pur « droit divin », fonde et légitime la souveraineté et le commandement et confère un caractère transcendant à l’idée de l’État.

En fin de compte, cette étape doit elle-même être surpassée: nous entrerons dans une nouvelle phase dans laquelle le Léviathan, pour ainsi dire, deviendra le corps formé pour rendre possible l’incarnation et la manifestation d’un principe et d’un ordre supérieur: avec cela, l’aspect collectiviste et irrationnel du principe du totalitarisme sera surpassé et mettra en œuvre de nouveau un type d’organisation vraiment spirituelle et traditionnelle hiérarchique.

Traduction de l’anglais, même titre, de Cologero Salvo sur Gornahoor (http://www.gornahoor.net/?p=4499) daté du 19 juillet 2012. Ce texte est pertinent en ce qu’il traite des auteurs principaux d’une frange catholique de la contre-révolution/révolution conservatrice. Ces auteurs seront repris individuellement sur ce site dans le future proche.

[1] À ce sujet : http://www.gornahoor.net/?p=639

Le chamanisme d'Asie centrale et de Turquie : histoire et anthropologie / Zarcone Thierry

La Lucarne et la Nuit

Le chamanisme d'Asie centrale et de Turquie : histoire et anthropologie. Conférence de Thierry Zarcone. Date de réalisation : 27 Mars 2012

Marcos Ghio - Pensamiento Fuerte o pensamiento Débil: Julius Evola o Gianni Vattimo

Centro Evoliano de América

Conferencia organizada por el CENTRO EVOLIANO DE AMÉRICA, brindada el 22.11.16 en la ciudad de Buenos Aires Argentina. Expone el Lic. Marcos Ghio. Título: "Pensamiento Fuerte o Pensamiento Débil: Julius Evola o Gianni Vattimo.

Royauté et Sacré dans les civilisations

Dans l’histoire de l’humanité, politique et transcendance sont intimement liées. A la lecture du dernier essai de Christophe Levalois, on découvre même que ce lien est commun à bien des sociétés et des civilisations : de la Chine à l’Egypte, de l’Inde ancienne au Moyen-Orient jusqu’à l’Europe moderne, royauté et sacré ne font qu’un. C’est cette unicité, ce lien entre royauté et sacré que Storiavoce vous propose de découvrir. Qu’est-ce qu’un roi ? Au nom de quoi règne-t-il ? Quelles relations entretient-il avec ces autres pouvoirs que sont le clergé, l’armée, le peuple ? Et, surtout, peut-on édifier une théorie de la royauté par-delà la diversité des temps et des lieux ? S’appuyant sur les fondements et les légendes, les récits et les rites de la monarchie, mais aussi sur les faits de l’histoire, Christophe Levalois répond à ces questions avec simplicité, pédagogie et érudition.

Christophe Levalois, La royauté et le sacré, Editions du Cerf, Coll. Lexio, 128 pages, 10€.

En savoir plus…

• Christophe Levalois sur le site des éditions du Cerf: lien.
• Le blog de Christophe Levalois: lien.
• Le discours de Benoît XVI à Westminster, 17 septembre 2010: lien.

The Return of Myth

Boris Nad

Ex: http://www.katehon.com

The contradictory processes of de-mythologization and re-mythologization are not unknown to ancient civilizations, in which the old myths are sometimes destroyed (demythologization) and replaced with new myths (remythologization). In other words, herein are the processes of de-mythologization and re-mythologization mutually caused and interdependent processes. They do not call into question the very basis of traditional mythical community; moreover, they are maintaining it current and alive.

Myth, namely - except in special cases of extreme degradation and secularization of tradition and culture - for us, is not a fiction of primitive people, a superstition or a misunderstanding, but a very concise expression of the highest sacred truths and principles, which are “translated” to a specific language of earthly reality, to such an extent which is practically possible. The myth is sacral truth described by popular language. Where the presumptions for its understanding are disappearing, the mythical content must be discarded to let in its place another one.

The dangerous intuitions

Myth is, in traditional cultures, a great antithesis as well, where, as it was shown in the capital work of J. J. Bachofen, Mother Right: An Investigation of the Religious and Juridical Character of Matriarchy in the Ancient World, the two major and irreconcilable principles are confronted: uranic and htonic, patriarchal and matriarchal, and this is projected to all second modalities of state and social order through to the arts and culture.

With the advent of Indo-European, patriarchal invaders on the soil of the old, matriarchal Europe started the struggle of two opposite principles what is highlighted in Bachofen’s study. In the given case, the old matriarchal myths and cults turns patriarchal, through the parallel and alternating processes of de-mythologization and re-mythologization, and traces of this struggle are also found in some mythic themes, which can be understood as a very brief religious-political history, the way Robert Graves interpreted them, in his book The Greek Myths.

In contrast, in Greece, a process of demythologization which reaches its peak after Xenophanes (565-470) is complete and radical. This is not followed by any process of re-mythologization, it is a consequence of a total process of de-sacralization and profanization of the culture, which results in the extinguishing of mythical and awakening of a historical consciousness, when man stops seeing self as a mythical, and begins to understand self as a historical being. This is a phenomenon that has analogies with the two moments in history: first, with a process of de-mythologization brought by early Christianity. To the first Christian theologians, myth was the opposite of the Gospel, and Jesus was a historical figure, whose historicity the church fathers proved and defended to the unbelieving. As a contrast there is the actual process of re-mythologization of the Middle Ages, with a whole series of examples of revitalization of the ancient mythical content, often conflicting and irreconcilable, from the Graal myths and the myth of Friedrich the Second, to eschatological myths in the epoch of Crusades and various millennium myths. It is, without doubt, a much older re-actualization of mythic content and its "dangerous intuition”, which surpasses its causes and it serves as an evidence of the presence of mythic forces of the historical world, which no process of de-mythologization is able to destroy or extinguish.

The consumer mythology. The midnight of history

Another example of radical process of de-mythologization is de-mythologization that begins with the epoch of enlightenment to its peak experienced in the “technological universe”. It is (as above) direct expression of degradation and decline of modern man, who is no longer a mythical or historical being, but a mere "consumer" within the "consumeristic and technocratic civilization" or simply a plug to the technological universe. Heroic impulse of man as a mythical, and historical being, was burnt out. Destructive forces of de-mythologization constantly clean and remove the mythical ingredients from the area of consumeristic civilization and human memory in general, exterminating "dangerous intuitions" that are contained in them. Within the technological universe, which is only a final stage of the fall of (modern) man, the humane horizon is finally closing, because here man has only one power and only one freedom: power to spend and freedom to buy and sell. This freedom and this power, testify about the death of man (known by the myth and history), because within the universe of technology and consumer civilization, anything that transcends this "animal of consumption" simply can not exist. “The Death of Art" spoken about by the historical avant-garde is a simple consequence of the death of man, first as a mythical, then as a historical being.

Of course, the process of de-mythologization can never be completed, for the simple reason that destruction does not touch the very mythical forces. They continue to appear and return through history, whether under the guise of "historical", or as something that is opposed to history. This is also true for one-dimensional universe of a technocratic utopia. As a result, the consumer civilization real mythical contents are replaced by the mythical simulacrum: wild-growing sub-cultural ideologies and myths, or consumer mythology, whose heroes are comics’ figures such as Superman.

But the exhaustion of long and destructive processes of de-mythologization does not mean a return to the mythical time.

"We are standing in the midnight of history, the clock struck twelve and we look ahead into the darkness where we see the contours of future things. This view is followed by fear and heavy premonition. Things we see or think that we can see still do not have a name, they are nameless. If we address them, we do not affect them accurately and they escape the noose of our governing. When we say peace it could be a war. Plans of happiness turn into murderous ones, often through the night. "

In short: "Rough incursions, which in many places convert historical landscapes into elementary ones, hide subtle changes but of the more aggressive kind” (Ernst Jünger: At the Wall of Time).

At the dawn of history

The writing At the Wall of Time by a German author Ernst Jünger conveys about the transition of myth into the history, about the moment in which the mythical consciousness was replaced by the historic one. History, of course, does not exist as long as man: historical consciousness rejects as non-historic the vast spaces and epochs (“prehistory"), and peoples, civilizations and countries, because "a person, an event must have very specific characteristics that would make them historic". The key to this transition, according to this author, provides the work of Herodotus, through which man "passes through a country illuminated by rays of dawn":

"Before him (Herodotus) there was something else, the mythical night. That night, however, was not darkness. It was more of a dream, and it knew about a different way of connecting people and events of historical consciousness and its selective forces. This brings rays of dawn into Herodotus’ work. He stands on top of the mountain that separates day from night: not only the two epochs, but also two types of epochs, the two types of light."

In other words, it is the moment of the transition from one way of existence into something quite different, that we call history. This is the time of the shift of two cycles, which we can not identify with the change of historical epochs - the issue in question is the profound change in the existence of man. The sacral in the manner of previous epochs retreats, ancient cults disappear and into their place come religions, which soon after, by themselves become historical or anti-historical, even when they trigger events and historical plots. Crusader wars, called on by the Western Church, deepened divisions and schisms and eventually gave birth to the Reformation, which began with religious enthusiasm and desire to return to "biblical beginnings", and then ended with the historical movement which opens the way to unhampered development of industry and technology - unconstrained by the norms of (Christian) tradition, and free of human hopes and desires.

The grimace of horror

World of History, outlines of which we can find in Homer, which were shaped by Thucydides, and which experienced its zenith somewhere at the end of XIX and at the beginning of XX century, with unclear boundaries in time and space, but with a clear consciousness of its laws and regulations, started to collapse; and the vast edifice of history becomes unstable, as a sign of penetration of the hitherto unknown foreign forces. These forces have titanic, elementary character, first seen in technical disasters, which affected hundreds of thousands of victims and then, in the cataclysmic events of XX century, in the world wars and revolutions, the millions were killed and crippled. The release of nuclear energy, radiation and environmental destruction that enormous areas were exposed to, the daily toll in blood, whether it is sacrificed to "progress" in peacetime conditions, whether as a direct consequence of military intervention and conflict, are something that comes out of the framework established by the historical world. Of course, history does not end there, as expected, by Marx or by Fukuyama. What is more noticeable is the acceleration of historical time, which concentrates events and reduces the distance between the key turning points of history. What we are talking about is, however, that here are not only forces operating that we call historical, and that the role of man in these events fundamentally changed: he is no longer able to operate equally with the gods, or to follow them, to stand against them or to even subjugate them, as was represented by myth. He (man) is no longer an active participant in history, guided by the passions or the will of its own, as it happens in mature historical epoch. He becomes the plaything of something unknown, involved in events that surpass him, against his will and outside of his ideas.

The expression of cheerful confidence is gradually replaced by a grimace of horror. Man, who until yesterday considered himself a sovereign and master, acknowledges his weakness. The means that were trusted show as weak or in the decisive hour turn against his creator. Technological systems and social orders have his other sides, his automatic schemes, which do not restrain but encourage (izbaciti a van) destruction, which place man in the position of sorcerer’s apprentice, who released uncontrollable forces. Corruption, crime, violence and terror are rather results than the causes. Political responses, regardless of colour and sign, do not offer solutions but rather increase disintegration. If he would not have found himself in the time of panic, man might gain at least an awareness of his own decline.

All this was unthinkable in the ripe age of history because then, man still ruled by himself, and thus history as well, and therefore history could have no sense of direction other than the one given by man himself, his own deeds and thoughts.

Each concept of "meaning of history” is the concept of beginning of man, while in the classical historical time man is not created but he is. Question about the "meaning of history" was a meaningless question, and it is indeed not found in classical writers, from Herodotus onward. Question about the "meaning of history”, which is always found outside of man, becomes possible only when the history and the focus moves out of man, either in the social sphere, whether in the sphere of technological relations.

Modern man is too late to reveal his own weakness, but his breakdown does not accuse myth or history, but precisely the weakness and cowardice of modern man. World of "civilized values", the historical world in general, which he himself had created, is showing much weaker than we used to believe - structurally weak, spiritually and ethically. At the first sign of alarm, he begins to shatter, exposing, in fact, internal readiness to capitulate modern man.

This is a "midnight of history", which will soon be replaced by something different, and that moment is marked by the spread of titanic forces, requiring the sacrifice of blood.

Towards post-history: The Awakening of myth

History, we should repeat it again, does not last as long as man on Earth. But the consciousness about it occurs late in history, perhaps only at its end, when the boundaries of time and space are changing: on one side, by discovering distant past of man, with lost civilizations, then past of the planet and the universe, and on the other side, with exploration of cosmic spaces, depths of the oceans, or the interior of Earth itself, through the archaeological and geological layers, in almost a Verne’s way. New perspectives cause dizziness. Prehistory and post-history gain in importance only when history becomes a crumbling edifice. But turning man from history to something that he has not been able to determine yet or clearly perceive, now reminisce of the flight.

In one way or another, the technological universe and the consumer civilization will come to an end, in the same way as classic historical epoch ends with technocracy and with a totalitarian order in its complete form, which arises neither from the courage nor strength but from cowardice, weakness and fear. It is impossible to say how long this will take. It is irrelevant whether this will happen due to an internal attrition, an overstrain or a disaster, or with all of these together. But in each of these cases, the collapse is only a consequence of man's inability to further dwell within the historical world, and to rule it as a sovereign-supreme being.

The return to myth, however, is not possible in terms of return to the state of "pre-history." Mythological forces remain present, as it was during the entire historical period, but they can not establish a previous state because it lacks the preconditions, in the first place, a missing "substrate", a fertile ground. Modern man is too weak for that, in the spiritual, psychological and even "physiological" sense.

Together with the history, the culture gradually disappears as well, in its current meaning, which is basically just an instrument of social engineering. In a technocratic utopia (as opposed to the culture in the historical period), mass culture is just one of the ways that channels the energy and drive utopian fantasies and desires of the masses; the elite culture, which constantly wanders between conformism and negation, between skepticism and denial, between skepticism and irony, and back to conformism, essentially remains a tool of de-mythology (or deconstruction of mythology) and destruction of dangerous intuitions contained in myth, which allows more or less seamlessly integration into the technological universe, with the illusion of free will. The appearance and the awakening of dangerous intuitions and sleeping archetypes, on the margins of the technocratic social mechanism, creates a situation of conflict and leads to delays in its functioning.

In the region beyond the technocratic utopia, culture will need to take more traditional role than the one it has in the consumer civilization. The disintegration of the historical world in its late stage, which we are just witnessing, allows us to see something of it.

For much of the historical period, culture is a privileged area of sacred and mythical powers. This is one of the ways in which mythical forces again penetrate into the world historically, realizing themselves in history, unlike the technological universe, where they usually manifest themselves through the uncontrolled elements of folklore subcultures, and often distorted to the unrecognizable as simulacra of mythical, and not as his credible expression.

They more testify about the eternal and unquenched need of man for mythical content, than they represent a sign of their real presence.

Culture in post-technocratic era will be very closely related to the reestablishment of mythology, in terms of recognition and the awakening of true mythical content, marked by innovation and revitalization of the ancient and traditional form, rather than, as hitherto, their exorcism. Meaning and purpose of the process of de-mythology, by contrast, must be limited to the one it had in traditional societies: the cleaning of degenerate "folklore" mythical forms, as to let into their place those who credibly represent the tradition.

Translated by: Zinka Brkic

Julius Evola: una mística y lúcida rebelión contra la modernidad

CanalTLV1

Especial TLV1 N° 14

Julius Evola: una mística y lúcida rebelión contra la modernidad

Desde la "Librería Europa", en Barcelona, España, Juan Manuel Soaje Pinto entrevista al prof. Eduard Alcántara, historiador, investigador y escritor; autor de "El hombre de la Tradición", y "Reflexiones contra la Modernidad", prologados por Enric Ravello y Santiago de Andrés, acerca de la vida y el pensamiento de Julius Evola, un filósofo, pintor e ideólogo italiano, desconocido todavía hoy para el gran público, y cuya personalidad y obra son imprescindibles para todo aquel que busca entender el cómo y el por qué del mundo moderno y sus consecuencias.

Sufi Brotherhoods in Syria and Israel

Itzchak Weismann:

Sufi Brotherhoods in Syria and Israel

A Contemporary Overview (full text)

Ex: http://elkorg-projects.blogspot.com

In the geographical area of Syria, as in other parts of the Muslim world, Sufism found itself during the twentieth century under increasing attack. Though accustomed to strictures against their theosophical meditations and popular-ecstatic practices, with the advent of modernity Sufis had to contend with challenges of an altogether different magnitude. These derived not only from the direct impact of the West with its rationalist mode of thinking, but, even more so, from the growing intervention of a secularized State and the concomitant antagonism of a rising Islamic fundamentalism. Under such circumstances, many Sufi brotherhoods declined; yet others were able to develop a variety of strategies from within their divergent traditions to survive, adapt, and at times even thrive. Since the 1980s, with the turn of Muslim governments against the radical upsurge, and the general rise of interest in “Oriental” mysticism in the West, there has been a marked revival in Sufi activities. [1]

This paper focuses on the current manifestations of Sufism and Sufi brotherhoods in the states of Syria and Israel, with occasional references to Lebanon and Jordan. Although subjected to increasingly differentiated socioeconomic and political processes since the later part of the Ottoman period, Sufis in three of the four countries share in a basic situation of living under non-Sunni governments. In Syria, the sectarian-based authoritarian Ba‘th regime, in power since 1963, has been generally hostile toward independent Sufi activity, the more so during the Islamic uprising that culminated in Hamah in 1982. The same regime imposed itself on the Christian-Maronite-dominated political system in Lebanon following the outbreak of civil war in 1976. In the Jewish State of Israel such activity had been almost eliminated by the disruption of the War in 1948, but partly revived after the renewal of contacts with the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza in the wake of the 1967 War. Rather than an exhaustive survey, my aim in this paper is to analyze the various ways by which different Sufi brotherhoods in Syria and Israel have responded to the challenges of modernity in general, and to the peculiar political circumstances in which they live in particular.

Among the Syrian brotherhoods that experienced a marked decline or that disappeared during the twentieth century, De Jong includes the major turuq of the Qadiriyya, Khalwatiyya and Mawlawiyya in his mid-1980s survey. [2] The weakening of the Qadiriyya had already become conspicuous by the turn of that century. Essentially an urban brotherhood in Syria, its major branches were led by the notable Kaylani family of Damascus and Hamah, who claimed descent from the founder ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani. In the late Ottoman period leading members of the family became administrators, later turning into influential politicians and entrepreneurs.[3] The last actual shaykh in the family was Muhammad Fariz al-Kaylani, a follower of Ibn ‘Arabi who died in Damascus in 1971 without designating an heir.[4] In Hamah, the Qadiriyya continued to be observed as a family tradition until its open support of the Islamic uprising in 1982 brought upon it the brunt of the regime. Many members of the family were killed by the security forces, while their illustrious lodge (zawiya), and indeed the entire quarter in which they resided, were razed to the ground.[5] In the rural areas local leading Qadiri families, such as the Zu‘bis of the Hawran, have continued to enjoy influence among the peasants even after relinquishing their Sufi identity.[6]

A closer look at this process of decline is provided by Paolo Pinto in a recent anthropological study conducted in Aleppo. One of the focuses of this study is the Hilaliyya brotherhood, which since the eighteenth century has combined the local Qadiri tradition with the then reformist Khalwati import. At present the dhikr is still performed in two lodges in the city, but the brotherhood’s characteristic practice of seclusion (khalwa) is no longer in use because, as its leaders maintain, in modern times people have neither the leisure nor the possibility to set aside their work.[7] Shaykh al-Hilali, a physician, follows his ancestors’ tradition in stressing the primacy of the shari‘a and in combining the religious and secular sciences. Subscribing to the decision of his grandfather to discontinue the path rather than compromise its ideals, he avoids guiding disciples and is content with conducting the dhikr and with providing spiritual advice for the community. In the weekly session (hadra), Pinto reports, around one hundred adherents are assembled, most of them belonging to the old commercial families of Aleppo. Some of the participants are organized into an informal study group in which they discuss their spiritual experiences and read Sufi texts. Among these texts is the Sufi compendium of the local Shadhili-‘Alawi reformist shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Isa, which has appeared in several editions since it was first published in 1961.[8]

The other major brotherhood that De Jong considers as having lost its ground in Syria, the Mawlawiyya, may have done so in its traditional form. In Aleppo, to where the Great Master moved following the ban on Sufi activity in Turkey in 1925, the tariqa died out in the late 1950s. Yet, as elsewhere in the Muslim world, as well as in the West, groups of Mawlawis have exploited the unique ritual resources of their brotherhood – the whirling dance, musical improvisations, and special clothing – to turn the dhikr into a highly impressive, though often touristic, performance. In Damascus, the leader of the new-style whirling dervishes is Shaykh Hamza Shakkur, the choirmaster of singers (munshidin) in the Umayyad mosque and a vocalist who is much in demand for official religious ceremonies. Shakkur also cooperates with the al-Kindi Ensemble from Aleppo, which was founded in 1983 by Julien Jalaleddin Weiss, a converted Frenchman of Swiss extraction who had studied Arab music and specialized on the qanun. The group holds regular concert tours both in the Arab world and in Europe and America.[9]

As against the general decline of these basically urban-elitist brotherhoods, their rural-popular counterparts have proved more capable of holding to their traditions. Such is the case with the Sa‘diyya, although the spectacular dawsa (the shaykh riding a horse over the backs of his murids) has been long prohibited by the state. Numerous local shaykhs are affiliated with this brotherhood in both the major Syrian cities and in the countryside. Its two centers are the Golan village of Jaba’, the site of the founder’s tomb, and Damascus, where his descendants vie for control over its rich awqaf. The Sa‘diyya in the capital is considerably weakened, but still it is the only brotherhood to take part in the annual procession of laylat al-qadar, in which the first revelation to the Prophet is commemorated by exhibiting one of his hairs in the presence of religious dignitaries and State representatives. In Jaba’ and the neighboring villages, by contrast, hadarat are still regularly conducted with all their traditional vigor, including beating drums, piercing the body with swords and eating burning coal and glass.[10]

Even more popular is the Rifa‘iyya brotherhood, of which the Sa‘diyya is sometimes considered a branch. Rifa‘i zawiyas can be found in most towns of Syria, although, as in the case of the Qadiriyya, the leading families have been incorporated into the local elites; in Damascus rich merchants who are attached to the tariqa are engaged in editing and publishing its basic manuscripts. In Aleppo, however, some of its zawiyas were closed under Shishakli’s military regime in the early 1950s, while in Hamah shaykh Mahmud al-Shaqfa, who was associated with the Muslim Brothers, was killed by Asad’s security forces and his lodge closed in 1979.[11] The mainstay of the Rifa‘iyya has always been in the countryside. The fortunes of the tariqa were enormously enhanced in Syria in the days of the infamous Abu al-Huda al-Sayyadi, who under the patronage of Sultan ‘Abdülhamid II (1876-1909) attracted to the brotherhood a great number of people from the towns, the villages, and the tribes.[12] Considerably reduced during the interwar period, it still persists in many villagers. Thus for instance in Nahjat Brak in the Ghuta the dhikr is held, though only once a year, and is attended by peasants from the adjacent regions.[13] Pinto describes the working of another Rifa‘i lodge in the predominantly Kurdish village of ‘Afrin, north of Aleppo. The head of this zawiya, Shaykh Mahmud, is a descendant of a local family of the brotherhood and has eighteen disciples in various stages of the path. The dhikr of the group includes healing and expulsion of jinns, as well as, like the Sa‘diyya, transpiercing the abdomen with an iron skewer (shish), walking over burning coals and glass eating.[14]

Popular mystical traditions are maintained in contemporary Syria, to some extent or another, also in their non-tariqa forms, particularly around the numerous tombs of prophets and saints which are dispersed throughout the country. The richest locus of sacred sites is naturally Damascus, and it may serve as an illustration of some of the still existing practices. Thus the caves on Mount Qasyun, overlooking the city from the north, are believed to contain the remains of literally hundreds of prophets. Barren women visit Maqam Ibrahim, while wayfarers address themselves to the alleged tomb of al-Khidr, their legendary patron. To this day sixty shaykhs will climb up the mountain in times of drought to perform the traditional prayer for rain. Another important sacred focus is the central Umayyad mosque where, it is claimed, the Prophet Yahya and Imam Husayn’s severed head are interred. At the first, women solicit help in solving problems of motherhood and marriage, and many of them tie a rope to the lattice-work as a symbol of their commitment to fulfill their vow. The second tomb is the starting point of the afore-mentioned solemn procession of laylat al-qadar.[15]

Among the saints (awliya’) buried in Damascus, the most illustrious is Muhyi al-Din ibn ‘Arabi, in whose shrine in the north of the city an impressive hadra is conducted on Friday evenings. Al-Shaykh al-Akbar is visited both by common believers asking for worldly benefits and by mystics who attach themselves to his tomb for spiritual illumination. For the local population, though, even more important is the shrine of Shaykh Arslan, the twelfth-century patron saint and protector of the city. A recent saint is Shaykh Ahmad al-Harun (d. 1962), whose picture adorns many shops and whose miraculous deeds (karamat) are still widely circulated. A stonecutter in Mount Qasyun Harun, who had fiercely fought the French, immersed himself at an advanced age not only in the intricacies of Ibn ‘Arabi’s theosophy but also in the natural sciences, gaining the respect of both ulema and laymen.[16] The “Tales of the Saints” genre is indeed still popular in Syria, as is testified to, for example, by the posthumous publication of a collection of such stories compiled by Muhammad Abu al-Yusr ‘Abidin, the Grand Mufti of the country between 1954 and 1962.[17]

Beyond the unchecked decline of an “elitist”-urban Qadiriyya or the retrograde traditionalism of a “popular”-rural Rifa‘iyya, the Shadhiliyya and Naqshbandiyya Sufi brotherhoods of Syria have tapped into their reformist traditions in an effort to adapt themselves to the modern situation. Such adaptability allows their leaders not only to transcend the urban-rural divide, but – more importantly - to adopt elements from Western culture as well as from Islamic fundamentalist discourse. Moreover, in some cases the Sufi brotherhood appears to have transformed itself into new forms of religious organization in the face of these challenges, notably the educational society and the political movement.

Three Shadhili sub-brotherhoods have had a lasting impact on the Syrian lands in the modern period, all three crossing current political boundaries. The oldest among these branches, and the less effective today, is the Yashrutiyya, which has always stressed its a-political character. Founded in Acre by the Tunisian Shadhili-Madani Shaykh ‘Ali Nur al-Din Yashruti (ca. 1815-1899) in the mid-nineteenth century, the brotherhood spread swiftly throughout the region, from Aleppo in the north to Gaza in the south, attracting both orthodox educated urban elites and disaffected villagers from the countryside with antinomian tendencies.[18] The leadership of the Yashrutiyya has remained within the founder’s family, while its center moved first to Beirut, in the wake of the War of 1948 and then, in 1980, in the midst of the Lebanese civil war, to Amman. In Damascus a regular hadra is still held in the zawiya of Abu al-Shamat, ‘Ali Nur al-Din’s principal deputy (khalifa) in the city, though the once glorious construction is now in a deplorable state. Concentrations of Yashrutis are also found in small towns in the Hawran, in Sirmin near Aleppo, and in the Ghuta villages of Harasta and Daraya. Still a predominantly Palestinian brotherhood, its members are most numerous in the refugee camp of south Damascus, and even more so in the camps near Beirut and Sidon.[19] Another Shadhili sub-brotherhood introduced in Syria in the Second half of the nineteenth century was that of Yashruti’s Madani colleague Muhammad al-Fasi. Brought to Damascus by the celebrated amir ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri, it seems to have remained confined to his elitist circle and died out before the end of the French Mandate.[20]

The second major modern Shadhili branch to strike roots in Syria was the Dandarawiyya, which had been founded toward the end of the nineteenth century by the Egyptian Muhammad al-Dandarawi (1839-1910), a spiritual grandson of the reformist Sufi scholar Ahmad ibn Idris. Spreading to both Damascus and the surrounding Ghuta in the 1890s, the tariqa still has a small presence in these areas, particularly in the village of Jisrin. Its center of activity in the Syrian lands, however, moved to Beirut, where it underwent a major transformation.[21] A glimpse at the working of this brotherhood is provided by Mark Sedgwick in a study of the worldwide spread and “normalization” of Ibn Idris’ legacy. Its current head is the founder’s grandson, Fadl al-Dandarawi (b. 1934), a Cairo-based wealthy businessman who in the early 1970s launched a new project to remold the tariqa. He was assisted by Su‘ad al-Hakim, a Lebanese professor of Arab and Islamic philosophy and author of a celebrated study on Ibn ‘Arabi’s terminology.[22] On one level, Sedgwick argues, the new “Dandarawi thought” represents an attempt to return to the original reformist Ahmadi path; on another it is designed as an inclusive way which combines Sufism and Salafism and is appropriate for the modern world. This is embodied in the “Dandarawi family”, and the history of the Dandarawiyya is reconstructed as having been a social organization in this “family” mold from the outset, rather than a Sufi tariqa. Fadl insists on being addressed as amir and regards the hadra as an “art” or “folklore”. Hakim, a woman, conducts in Beirut, in accordance with this philosophy, a sober hadra for both men and women, as well as an educated discussion group.[23]

No research is as yet available on the Syrian ‘Alawiyya, the third modern Shadhili branch to operate in the country, although the brotherhood as a whole is well known in the West, having been the inspiration for a remarkable group of mystically-minded intellectuals in Europe and North America.[24] Founded by the Darqawi shaykh Ahmad ibn ‘Aliwa of Mustaghanim, Western Algeria, in the early nineteenth century, the ‘Alawiyya was introduced by him in Damascus in the course of a pilgrimage he undertook shortly before his death in 1934. Combining, not unlike the Idrisi tradition, the theosophy of Ibn ‘Arabi with a call to strictly follow the Qur‘an and the Sunna, the brotherhood under the leadership of Muhammad al-Hashimi soon spread to other parts of the country, from Aleppo in the north to Amman in the south, and was very active both in the field of religious education and in the struggle against the French.[25] Similar to the case of the urban Rifa‘iyya, the leaders of the Damascene ‘Alawiyya have been lately engaged in publishing the writings of their masters, but more significant were the shaykhs from the north, who maintained its original militant zeal in supporting the violent struggle against the Ba‘th. Among them were disciples of the above-mentioned Aleppine ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Isa, who was consequently forced to spend the last years of his life in exile in Jordan, as well as those of ‘Abd al-Ghaffar al-Durubi of Homs, many of whom were killed along with the Muslim Brothers in the notorious massacre in the Tadmur (Palmyra) military prison in June 1980.[26]

The Naqshbandiyya, unquestionably the most active brotherhood in contemporary Syria, has been long characterized by a tradition combining a strong orthodoxy with a sociopolitical orientation. Both traits were reinforced in the early nineteenth century by Shaykh Khalid, the founder of the Khalidi sub-brotherhood whose mausoleum lies in Damascus. Two of his spiritual descendants were responsible for turning the Khalidiyya into the most widespread Sufi organization in Syria in the twentieth century. These were ‘Isa al-Kurdi (1831-1912), an immigrant scholar who ordained a great number of disciples in Damascus and the Ghuta, and Abu al-Nasr Khalaf (1875-1949), who propagated the path in the villages around his hometown Homs, as well as in Aleppo and Hamah.[27] A third center of the Naqshbandiyya-Khalidiyya can be found in the Kurdish areas of the northeast - the Jazira and Dayr al-Zor.[28] These essentially independent local branches adopted different and, in some respects, even opposing attitudes toward the questions of religious renewal, the Salafi challenge and, above all, relations with the Ba‘th regime. Mention should also be made of Nazim al-Qubrusi, founder of the Haqqaniyya branch, who had initially established himself at his master’s shrine in Damascus, but whose brotherhood has now become a truly international organization counting members in many countries around the globe, from Lebanon and Turkey to England and the United States.[29]

The leading Naqshbandi branch in Syria today is that of Ahmad Kuftaro (b. 1915), son of one of ‘Isa al-Kurdi’s principal deputies in Damascus.[30] This is the only Sufi organization in the country to be allowed freedom of action by the regime, with whom it is closely associated. Despite claims for early beginnings, the Kuftariyya seems to have emerged following the Ba‘th takeover in 1963, and the election of Kuftaro a year later to the highest religious position in Syria, that of the Grand Mufti.[31] In 1971, after the rise to power of Hafiz al-Asad who sought to appease the Sunni population, Kuftaro’s mosque in north Damascus was made the basis of the Abu al-Nur Islamic Foundation. The first recognized college within this trust, The College for Islamic Propagation, was inaugurated in 1982, at the height of the Islamic uprising. The Kuftariyya appeals to social strata generally higher than other Sufi brotherhoods in Syria, especially small merchants and junior functionaries. It has a female wing under Kuftaro’s younger daughter, Wafa’, who propagate his message among women in weekly lectures in the Abu al-Nur Foundation, where she also conducts the dhikr, and in various mosques in Damascus.[32] Kuftaro regards himself in addition as the spiritual father of the more independent female Sufi organization of the Qubaysiyya, which directs its attention to women from higher social classes. Members of this organization run highly appreciated private schools in Syria, and it has lately spread to other countries of the Middle East.

Faithful to the reformist tradition of the Naqshbandiyya, Ahmad Kuftaro seeks to adapt its path to the modern situation by propagating a learned and discreet form of Sufism which is based on the Qur’an and the shari‘a. Particularly under the inspiration of the Indian scholar Abu al-Hasan al-Nadwi, he also stresses engagement in social affairs and rejects monastic mysticism (rahbaniyya) as a major cause of the social and cultural weakening of Islam.[33] The focus of Kuftaro’s reformist activity lies in the sphere of education. On the basis of the Abu al-Nur Foundation, where he himself continues to deliver a weekly lesson in front of thousands of people, Kuftaro has founded numerous religious institutions, from private schools for boys and girls to an Islamic center of higher education which since 1992 has provided Ph.D. degrees in Islamic Law. To enhance the prestige of the foundation, he formed connections with various universities in the Muslim world – in Libya, Pakistan and Sudan – as well as in North America, where an Abu al-Nur Institute was opened in 1993 in Baltimore, Maryland. In view of the great importance that Kuftaro attaches to modern technology, the foundation also supports students of high-status professions, while inculcating in them its religious values. Some of his close relatives are themselves engineers trained in the West, and they helped him develop the Abu al-Nur Foundation beyond its strictly religious functions into an effective economic, social and political organization.

Yet in face of the fierce Salafi critique of Sufism, Ahmad Kuftaro has proved ready to go beyond the traditional reformism of the Naqshbandiyya and eventually adopt much of the discourse and argumentation of his rivals. In this endeavor, he downplays his relation to the great Naqshbandi masters of the past, including Shaykh Khalid,[34] while stressing his good relations with most moderate Islamists.[35] Moreover, once again in the footsteps of Nadwi,[36] Kuftaro suggests to do away with the Sufi terminology in favor of a strictly Qur’anic vocabulary. In this scheme of “spiritual education” (tarbiya ruhiyya) the terms tasawwuf and tariqa themselves are to be substituted by the less controversial ihsan and tazkiyat al-nafs.[37] Kufatro explicitly follows the Salafis in denouncing legal school partisanship and the practice of imitation (taqlid) in favor of individual reasoning (ijtihad). He likewise stresses the need to interpret Islam in relation to the present, and of being guided by reason, often declaring that religion is nothing but “mature reason”. On the other hand, Kuftaro and his associates are keen to demonstrate to the Salafis that the Sufis’ inner search of God has not diverted them from active participation in jihad.[38] Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti, a highly popular doctor of Islamic Law from the University of Damascus who is also affiliated to the Naqshbandiyya,[39] fully supports Kuftaro’s approach. In a book dedicated to the refutation of extreme Salafi positions, Buti approves of the shaykh’s terminology while showing, by way of ijtihad, that the dhikr and other Sufi practices are fully compatible with the Qur’an and the Sunna.[40]

Another aspect in which Ahmad Kuftaro departs from the traditional way of the Naqshbandiyya, in this case even beyond the reformism of the Salafis, concerns his propagation of the religion. As already mentioned, the Abu al-Nur Foundation has an active da‘wa department, which uses modern devices - from videotapes and audio cassettes to the Internet - to spread the shaykh’s message among both Muslim and non-Muslim audiences. For the latter, a collection of lectures translated into English was published in 1993 under the title “The Way of Truth”, and was expanded in a second edition in 1997. Kuftaro himself has exploited his extensive travels in an official capacity to present Islam and Sufism, his earliest visit being as early as 1966 to the United States.[41] His da‘wa is nevertheless characterized by an intentional ambiguity. On the one hand, Kuftaro adheres to the orthodox position, held by Naqshbandis and Salafis alike, that Islam is the final and most perfect religion; on the other hand, however, he points out that the three monotheistic religions stem from a common source, and further maintains that all denominations are different traditions of the one universal religion. In harmony with the latter position, also indicated in the title of his official website – Abrahamic religions - Kuftaro has been long engaged in interfaith dialogue, taking part in various conferences around the world and hosting delegations of clergymen, particularly Christian, in the Abu al-Nur mosque. In recent years his interests have expanded to include other issues of international concern, notably those of human rights and the environment.[42]

Students of the Syrian religious scene assess differently the special relations between Ahmad Kuftaro and the Asad regime. Thus the more affirmative Geoffroy counts the shaykh among those resilient men of religion, mostly from Damascus, who have sought to assuage the hostility of the Ba‘th and avoid complete rupture. The accusations against his compromising stands are, according to this interpretation, nothing but the age-old claim about the corruption of ulema in the service of rulers.[43] Stenberg, on his part, stresses the fact that although Kuftaro may be allied with – or even controlled by – the Syrian regime, he also can influence the political leadership through his position as the highest religious authority at the head of a large religious movement.[44] He however concurs with Böttcher’s view of Kuftaro as a tool in the Islamic policy of the regime,[45] and with De Jong’s assertion that the cultivation of the Kuftariyya seems to have been designed to weaken the position of the politically unreliable Naqshbandi shaykhs of the north and northeast.[46] In my view, its cultivation was more specifically aimed at offsetting the influence of Sa‘id Hawwa, the foremost ideologue of the Islamic opposition in Syria, who was deeply attached to Sufism in general, and to the northern branch of the Naqshbandiyya in particular.[47]

The affinity between the ideas and discourse of the Naqshbandi brotherhood of Syria and its Salafis-Islamists, which has been noted even in the case of the state-backed Kuftaro, was much more pronounced in the north, where disciples of Abu al-Nasr Khalaf were instrumental in founding local branches of the Muslim Brothers in the 1930s and 1940s. Outstanding among these Naqshbandi-oriented Brothers were Muhammad al-Hamid (1910-1969) in Hamah and ‘Abd al-Fattah Abu-Ghudda (1917-1997) in Aleppo.[48] Under the rule of the Ba‘th, Abu-Ghudda emerged as the leader of the Islamists’ northern faction, while Sa‘id Hawwa (1935-1989) perpetuated Hamid’s work on the national level. Sufism permeates Hawwa’s entire oeuvre, one of the expressed aims of which was to familiarize the Islamic movement with the reformist Sufi tradition and thus provide it with a spiritual “depth”. In a series of books he dedicated to the subject, notably Tarbiyatuna al-ruhiyya and al-Mustakhlas fi tazkiyat al-anfus, Hawwa in all probability preceded Kuftaro in deemphasizing the Sufi vocabulary.[49] Indignant, though, at the Damascene shaykh’s complicity with the un-Islamic Ba‘th, he went beyond the latter’s rejection of rahbaniyya to elaborate upon Nadwi’s complementary concept of rabbaniyya, making it the basis for a sociopolitical alternative. Through this concept, Hawwa conceived of a grass-roots organization, a popular supra-brotherhood as it were, that would unite all the Islamic forces in the country and lead them in the struggle for religious revival in general, and against the secular tendencies of the Ba‘th in particular.[50] The Hamah uprising of 1982, and its brutal suppression by Asad’s regime, left Kufatro’s accommodating collaboration the only alternative open before the Syrian Naqshbandiyya.

Sufi manifestations in contemporary Israel differ considerably from those in Syria in both their scope and the identity of the brotherhoods involved. The differences go back to Ottoman Palestine, in which the Sufi brotherhoods were less organized and of a more limited social significance. The Naqshbandiyya has never struck roots here, its presence being generally restricted to a zawiya run by Uzbeks in Jerusalem, while the Mawlawiyya and Rifa‘iyya had practically disappeared, the first already by the beginning of the twentieth century, the other in 1948.[51] Three brotherhoods - The Qadiriyya, Yashrutiyya and Khalwatiyya-Rahmaniyya were able to adapt themselves to the Israeli realities, in ascending order of success. Various local groups of the Qadiriyya were active in Palestine during Ottoman times, in both towns and villages. These groups disintegrated in 1948, but in recent years new ones appeared, in the same fragmented manner, under leaders who received the path from different shaykhs in the West Bank and Gaza. They include Sa‘id Abu-Laban, a descendant from the leading Qadiri family of Ottoman Ramla which was responsible for the ziyara at Nabi Salih’s tomb; ‘Abd al-Salam Manasara, an ex-Communist from Nazareth who adheres to a more sober type of Sufism; and the charismatic though controversial Abu Filastin from Sahnin in the Lower Galilee. In some cases, to fortify their standing, the shaykhs combine with the Qadiriyya other affiliations such as the Rifa‘iyya and ‘Alawiyya.[52]

The Yashrutiyya, whom we met in the refugee camps of Syria and Lebanon, introduced into Palestine a more organized type of Sufism during the last decades of Ottoman rule. Retaining its essentially centralized structure, the brotherhood was able to attract a wide membership throughout the country well into the British Mandate. Its fortunes were severely affected, however, by the events of 1948, when Muhammad al-Hadi, the founder’s grandson, moved with many of his followers to Beirut. Several zawiyas were lost during the battles, and in 1952 the economic basis of the mother lodge in Acre was further undermined as most of its awqaf were confiscated. After 1967, the Yashrutis in Israel regained some of their former strength as they were allowed to establish contacts with adherents in the West Bank and Gaza, as well as in other parts of the Muslim world. The main figure in this renewed activity was Ibrahim Abu al-Hashish of Umm al-Fahm, where the largest concentration of Yashrutis is found today. With contributions from abroad the zawiya in Acre was also renovated, al-Hadi being buried there beside his fathers in 1981 with Israel’s permission.[53] His son Ahmad occasionally visits the lodge and conducts a celebrated dhikr, but otherwise activity is limited to the religious festivals, notably the Prophet’s mawlid.[54]

Much more successful in its accommodation to the Israeli realities is the Rahmani branch of the Khalwatiyya, a brotherhood that eventually disappeared in other parts of the Syrian lands. This branch was founded immediately after World War I by ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sharif, a former deputy (muqaddam) of the Yashrutiyya in Hebron who switched to the Khalwati silsila returning to the great reviver of the brotherhood in the eighteenth century, Mustafa al-Bakri. In his footsteps, the Rahmaniyya has propagated, possibly as a counterbalance to the antinomian tendencies among the rural Yashrutiyya, a reformist type of Sufism combining strictly following the Qur’an and the Sunna with the pursuit of worldly concerns.[55] Splitting after the founder’s death in 1925, his most outstanding khalifa, Husni al-Din al-Qasimi, established himself in the village of Zayta, and further spread the path to the villages that now form the Triangle area in Israel.[56] Most important among these is the lodge in Baqa al-Gharbiyya, which four successive sons of Husni al-Din, the last being the present shaykh ‘Abd al-Rauf al-Qasimi, managed by keeping cordial relations with Israeli authorities to develop after 1967 into an impressive religious-educational complex. It includes both a large mosque-zawiya where a regular dhikr is held for both men and women in separate rooms, and a rapidly expanding Islamic College, which was opened in 1989 and is served by a modern academic library. Enjoying the official recognition of the Ministry of Education, the college has currently more than five hundred students.[57]

Finally attention should be drawn to an Israeli version of the tariqa Ibrahimiyya. Although, as in Syria, this way aims at enhancing an interfaith dialogue, in Israel it was founded by a Jewish group, including a conservative Rabbi and academic scholars, who relate themselves to the Jewish Sufi tradition inaugurated by Rabbi Abraham son of Maimonides in the thirteenth century. The members used to meet to read Sufi texts and perform the dhikr under the guidance of Muslim Sufi shaykhs. These activities were interrupted following the break of the last Intifada in 2000, but recently they have been renewed.[58]

Although clearly losing ground in the face of the multi-faceted challenge mounted against it through the twentieth century, Sufism is still conspicuously present in many countries of the contemporary Muslim world. As the cases of Syria and Israel show, among the diverse Sufi traditions, it was primarily the reformist brotherhoods of the pre-modern era, particularly the Naqshbandiyya but also the Shadhiliyya and the Khalwatiyya, which proved most capable of adjusting to the modern circumstances. Adopting a seemingly paradoxical strategy of accommodating one agent of modernity or another - western rationalism, Islamic fundamentalism or, most importantly, the all-powerful State – by the close of the century branches from these brotherhoods have managed not merely to preserve their mystical traditions, but also at times to expand into new enterprises in the educational, socioeconomic and political realms.

-------------------

[1] For a general discussion of the debate on Sufism in the twentieth century, see Carl W. Ernst, Sufism: An Essential Introduction to the Philosophy and Practice of

the Mystical Tradition of Islam (Boston: Shambhala, 1997), 199-228; Elizabeth Sirriyeh, Sufis and Anti-Sufis: The Defence, Rethinking and Rejection of Sufism in the Modern World (Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press, 1999), chs. 4-6.

[2] Fred de Jong, “Les confréries mystiques musulmanes au Machreq arabe,” in Alexandre Popovic and Gilles Veinstein (eds.), Les Ordres mystiques dans l’Islam: Cheminements et situation actuelle (Paris: Editions de l’EHESS, 1986), 214.

[3] Linda Schatkowski Schilcher, Families in Politics: Damascene Factions and Estates of the 18th and 19th Centuries (Stuttgart: Steiner Verlag, 1985), 194-196; Zaim Khenchelaoui and Thierry Zarcone, “La Famille Jilânî de Hama – Syrie (Bayt al- Jilânî),” Journal of the History of Sufism, 1-2 (2000), 61-71.

[4] On Fariz al-Kaylani, see Muhammad Muti‘ al-Hafiz and Nizar Abaza, Tarikh ‘ulama’ Dimashq fi al-qarn al-rabi‘ ‘ashar al-hijri, (3 vols. Damascus: Dar al-fikr, 1986-1991), 3: 363-365.

[5] Eric Geoffroy, “Sufism, réformisme et pouvoir en Syrie contemporaine,” Égypte/Monde arabe 29 (1997), 17.

[6] Hanna Batatu, Syria’s Peasantry, the Descendants of its Lesser Rural Notables, and their Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999), 107-108.

[7] On the Hilaliyya, see Julia Gonnella, Islamischer Heiligenverherung im urbanen Kontext am Beispiel von Aleppo (Syrien) (Berlin: Klaus Schwartz Verlag, 1995), 248-250, 261-263. Similar reasons are given for the actual disappearance of the Khalwatiyya from its once thriving center of Tripoli, see Daphne Habibis, “Change and Continuity: A Sufi Order in Contemporary Lebanon,” Social Analysis 31 (1992), 49-50.

[8] Paolo Pinto, “Proof and Experience: the Construction of Religious Identity in the Sufi Zawiyas of Aleppo, Syria,” a paper read at the 16th Middle East History and Theory Conference, University of Chicago, May 11-12, 2001, 3-8; ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Isa, Haqa‘iq ‘an al-tasawwuf (5th ed. Damascus: Mu’assasat al-Sham lil-tiba‘a wal-tajlid, 1993).

[9] www.turath.org/Events/Dervishes.htm. See also the discussion in Ernst, 191-194.

[10] De Jong, “Machreq arabe,” 212-214; Pierre-Jean Luizard, “Le Moyen-Orient arabe,” in Alexandre Popovic and Gilles Veinstein (eds.), Les voies d’Allah (Paris: Fayard, 1996), 361-362.

[11] De Jong, ibid., 215-216; Gonnella, 118-119, 263-268. For Mahmud al-Shaqfa, see Johannes Reissner, Ideologie und politik der Muslimbrüder Syriens von den Wahlen 1947 bis zum Verbot unter Adīb aš-Šišaklī 1952 (Freiburg: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1980), 427-428.

[12] Butrus Abu-Manneh, “Sultan Abdulhamid II and Shaikh Abulhuda al-Sayyadi,” Middle Eastern Studies, 15 (1979), 131-153; Batatu, 107-108.

[13] Ibid., 105-108.

[14] Pinto, 8-14. For the practice of piercing the body with a shish, see also Gonnella, 74-76.

[15] Eric Geoffroy, “L’empreinte de la sainteté,” in Anne-Marie Bianquis (ed.), Damas: Miroir brise d’un Orient arabe (Paris: Éditions Autrement, 1993), 166-169.

[16] Ibid, 169-174. On Ahmad al-Harun see also Hafiz and Abaza, 753-762.

[17] Muhammad Abu al-Yusr ‘Abidin, Hakaya al-Sufiyya (Damascus: Dar al-basha’ir, 1993).

[18] On the history of the brotherhood see Josef Van Ess, “Libanesische Miszellen, 6: Die YašruÔīya,” Die Welt des Islams, 16 (1975), 1-103; Itzchak Weismann, Taste of Modernity: Sufism, Salafiyya, and Arabism in Late Ottoman Damascus (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 219-224, 252-255.

[19] De Jong, “Machreq arabe,” 217-218.

[20] Weismann, Taste of Modernity, 197-198.

[21] Ibid., 255-256; De Jong, ibid., 216.

[22] Su‘ad al-Hakim, al-Mu‘jam al-sufi: al-hikma fi hudud al-kalima (Beirut: Dandara lil-tiba‘a wal-nashr, 1981).

[23] Mark J.R. Sedgwick, “The Heirs of Ahmad Ibn Idris: The Spread and Normalization of a Sufi Order, 1799-1996,” (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Bergen, 1998), 235-247, 266-277.

[24] See Martin Lings, A Sufi Saint of the Twentieth Century - Shaykh Ahmad al-‘Alawi: His Spiritual Heritage and Legacy (2nd ed. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1971); Mark Sedgwick, “Traditional Sufism”, Aries 22 (1999), 3-24.

[25] See the entries on Muhammad al-Hashimi and Muhammad Sa‘id al-Burhani in Hafiz and Abaza, 747-751, 794-804; as well as ‘Isa, 618-631, and Muhammad Riyad al-Malih, al-‘Allama Muhammad Sa‘id al-Burhani: Arba‘un ‘amm fi mihrab al-tawba (Damascus: n.p., 1387 A.H.).

[26] Geoffroy, “Sufism, réformisme et pouvoir,” 17-18.

[27] See my two articles, “The Forgotten Shaykh: ‘Isa al-Kurdi and the Transformation of the Naqshbandi-Khalidi Order in Twentieth Century Syria,” Die Welt des Islams 43 (2003), 273-293; and “Sa‘id Hawwa: The Making of a Radical Muslim Thinker in Modern Syria,” Middle Eastern Studies 29 (1993), 607-611.

[28] De Jong, “Machreq arabe,” 214-215; Gonnella, 224, 269-270.

[29] On Nazim al-Qubrusi and his international activity, see Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, The Naqshbandi Sufi Way: History and Guidebook of the Saints of the Golden Chain (Chicago: Kazi Publications, 1995), 375-408; Habibis, 44-78; Annabelle Böttcher, “The Naqshbandiyya in the United States”, www. naqshbandi.net/haqqani/features/ Naqshbandiyya_in_us.htm.

[30] For biographical details, see Muhammad Habash, al-Shaykh Amin Kuftaru fi dhikra khamsin ‘am ‘ala wafatihi (Damascus: Dar al-ma‘rifa, 1989); idem, al-Shaykh Ahmad Kuftaru wa-minhajuhu fi al-tajdid wal-islah (Damascus: Dar al-nur, 1996).

[31] My description of the Kuftariyya and its working is mainly based on the following sources: Annabelle Böttcher, Syrische Religionspolitik unter Asad (Freiburg, 1998), 147-223; Leif Stenberg, “Naqshbandiyya in Damascus: Strategies to Establish and Strengthen the Order in a Changing Society,” in Elisabeth Özdalga (ed.), Naqshbandis in Western and Central Asia (Istanbul: Swedish Research Institute, 1999), 101-116; Geoffroy, “Sufism, réformisme et pouvoir,” 11-18.

[32] See also Annabelle Böttcher, “L’élite féminine kurde de la Kaftariyya: une confrérie Naqshbandi Damascène,” in Martin van Bruinessen (ed.), Islam des Kurdes (Paris: ERISM, 1998), 125-139.

[33] See Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali al-Hasani al-Nadwi, Rabbaniyya la rahbaniyya (4th ed. Beirut: Mu’assasat al-risala, 1986). On his acquaintance with Kuftaro see idem, Mudhakkirat sa’ih fi al-sharq al-‘arabi (2nd ed. Beirut: Mu’assasat al-risala, 1975), 224-225, 236-238.

[34] Stenberg, 109.

[35] ‘Imad ‘Abd al-Latif Naddaf, Al-Shaykh Ahmad Kuftaru yatahaddath (Beirut: Dar al-rashid, 1997), 150-192. Stenberg reports that among Kuftaro’s young adherents the ideas of Hasan al-Banna are well-known and widely discussed.

[36] Nadwi, 7-11.

[37] For an exposition of this doctrine in the context of the anti-Salafi debate, see Muhammad al-Shaykhani, al-Tarbiya al-ruhiyya bayn al-Sufiyyin wal-Salafiyyin (Damascus: Dar Qutayba, 1990), esp. 191-195, 287-297.

[38] Ibid., 299-303. For a widely acclaimed historical exposition of the Sufi’s contribution to jihad struggles, see As‘ad al-Khatib, al-Butula wal-fida’ ‘inda al-Sufiyya (Damascus: Maktab al-Ghazali, 1995).

[39] See Andreas Christmann, “Islamic Scholar and Religious Leader: a Portrait of Shaykh Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti,” Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 9 (1998), 149-169.

[40] Muhammad Sa‘id Ramadan al-Buti, Al-Salafiyya: marhala zamaniyya mubaraka, la madhhab Islami (Damascus: Dar al-fikr, 1988), 189-209.

[41] On Kuftaro’s philosophy of da‘wa, see Wahid Taja, al-Khitab al-Islami al-mu‘asir: muhawarat fikriyya (Aleppo: Fussilat lil-dirasat wal-tarjama wal-nashr, 2000), 21-34.

[42] See Naddaf, 120-149; www.abrahamicreligions.com/kuftaro/Interfaith.htm and www.abrahamicreligions.com/kuftaro/Environment.htm. For meetings with German and Swiss delegations see Naddaf, 295-309, and with an American delegation, see Syria Times, 18 December 1999, www.islamic-study.org/new

[43] Geoffroy, “Sufism, réformisme et pouvoir,” 17.

[44] Stenberg, 106-107.

[45] Böttcher, 149.

[46] Frederick De Jong, “The Naqshbandiyya in Egypt and Syria. Aspects of its History, and Observations Concerning its Present-Day Condition,” in Marc Gaborieau, Alexandre Popovic and Thierry Zarcone (eds.), Naqshbandis: cheminements et situation actuelle d’un ordre mystique musulman (Istanbul and Paris: ISIS, 1990), 600.

[47] For his biography, see Itzchak Weismann, “Radical Muslim Thinker”, 601-623.

[48] For Abu-Ghudda, who was a disciple of Khalaf’s deputy ‘Isa al-Bayanuni, see Hanna Batatu, “Syria’s Muslim Brethren,” Merip Reports 110 (1982), 14; Muhammad ibn ‘Abdallah Al Rashid, Imdad al-fattah bi-asanid wa-muruyyat al-Shaykh ‘Abd al-Fattah (Riyadh: Maktabat al-Imam al-Shafi‘i, 1999), esp. 149-150, 152; and www.aboghodda.com. For Hamid see my, “Religious Strife on the Periphery: Sufi Populists, Salafi Ideologues, and Muslim Brothers in Twentieth-Century Hamah,” forthcoming in International Journal of Middle East Studies.

[49] Sa‘id Hawwa, Tarbiyyatuna al-ruhiyya (2nd ed. Amman: Maktabat al-risala al-haditha, 1981), 6-8. See also the discussion in Geoffroy, “Sufism, Réformisme et Pouvoir,” 12-13.

[50] Itzchak Weismann, “Sa‘id Hawwa and Islamic Revivalism in Ba‘thist Syria,” Studia Islamica 85 (1997), 131-154.

[51] F. De Jong, “The Sufi Orders in Nineteenth and Twentieth-Century Palestine,” Studia Islamica 58 (1983), 149-158, 167-174.

[52] De Jong, “Machreq arabe,” 221-223; Luizard, 364-365; Arnon Dancho, “Ha-techiya shel ha-Sufim (The Revival of the Sufis),” Eretz ve-Teva 53 (1999), 45-53.

[53] De Jong, “Palestine,” 179-180.

[54] Interview with Ibrahim Satal, attendant at the Shadhiliyya-Yashrutiyya complex in Acre, 7 August, 2002.

[55] ‘Afif ibn Husni al-Din al-Qasimi, Adwa’ ‘ala al-tariqa al-Khalwatiyya al-Jami‘a al-Rahmaniyya (n.p., 1997).

[56] De Jong, “Palestine,” 175; idem, “Machreq arabe,” 220. For the Rahmani silsila see Qasimi, 4-7. For the activities of its successive shaykhs, ibid., 59-63.

[57] Interview with ‘Adil Badran, chief librarian of the Islamic College, Baqa al-Gharbiyya, 28 October, 2002.

[58] Zohara Ron, “Be-Darko shel Avraham (In the Path of Abraham),” Masa Akher 111 (2000), 83-88.

Publicat de Radu Iliescu la 10:54 PM

La géographie sacrée de Douguine: la Russie au coeur de la tradition

Auteur : Bertrand Garandeau

Ex: http://www.philitt.fr

Régulièrement sous le feu des projecteurs pour sa supposée influence sur le Kremlin, Alexandre Douguine a repris et développé le concept géopolitique d’Eurasie. À travers cette notion, il prône le recours à la géographie sacrée et à la tradition dans la géopolitique contemporaine.

Pour Douguine, la géopolitique n’est pas une science comme les autres. Si l’alchimie et la magie ont disparu au profit de leurs formes modernes et séculières que sont la chimie et la physique, la géographie sacrée des Anciens reste vivante à travers la géopolitique. Rappelant la théorie du Heartland du géopoliticien britannique Mackinder, Douguine fait de l’Eurasie la pièce maîtresse de la géographie sacrée. Avec la Russie en son centre, l’Eurasie incarnerait le dernier bastion de la tradition dans l’hémisphère nord, seul capable de lutter efficacement contre la modernité.

Le penseur russe prétend que la géographie façonne les idéologies, les cultures et les religions. Les civilisations des plaines, des steppes ou des déserts, propices à l’expansion et à la conquête, diffèrent par exemple des civilisations des montagnes et des forêts, lesquelles sont plus enclines à conserver les traditions des peuples. Douguine défend également la pertinence de l’opposition traditionnelle thalassocratie – tellurocratie, utilisée pour qualifier deux types distincts de puissances. Celles qui dominent par la maîtrise de la mer et celles qui dominent par la maîtrise de la terre, étant précisé que ces modes de domination ne seraient pas anodins sur le plan idéologique.

Selon Douguine, la tellurocratie incarnerait la stabilité, la pesanteur, la fixité et le politique, tandis que la thalassocratie promouvrait la mobilité, la fluidité, la dynamique et l’économie. Alors que les empires terrestres, souvent militaires, seraient de forme tellurocratique, les empires coloniaux, plus commerciaux, seraient davantage thalassocratiques. Cependant, le géopoliticien remarque que cette typologie ne se résume pas à une simple opposition eau/terre et à un déterminisme géographique strict. Il existerait ainsi des terres maritimes (les îles) et des eaux terrestres (les fleuves et les mers intérieurs). De même, Douguine remarque que la géopolitique japonaise est de type tellurocratique malgré son caractère insulaire, tandis qu’il voit dans la puissance du continent nord américain une thalassocratie qui repose sur le dynamisme de ses interfaces maritimes et commerciales. En appliquant cette grille de lecture, le penseur russe considère que l’Eurasie, continent terrestre allant de l’Europe à l’Asie et dont le centre de gravité se situe en Russie, pourrait constituer le modèle tellurocratique opposé aux atlantistes États-Unis d’Amérique.

Géographie sacrée et religions

Dépassant le strict cadre de la géographie, ce dualisme se retrouverait au sein des systèmes religieux. Les valeurs de la terre transposées au religieux se manifesteraient par la profondeur, la tradition, la contemplation et le mysticisme. Le principe atlantiste serait au contraire plus superficiel et matérialiste, accordant la primauté au rite, à l’organisation de la vie quotidienne et pouvant aller jusqu’à méconnaître la part de divin dans l’homme. Douguine voit ainsi dans l’orthodoxie l’aspect terrestre du christianisme, tandis que le catholicisme et le protestantisme en constitueraient la face atlantiste. De même, au sein de l’islam, le principe terrestre se retrouverait davantage dans certaines branches du chiisme et dans le soufisme. Au contraire, le salafisme et le wahhabisme seraient davantage atlantistes par l’importance accordée au rite et par leur dogmatisme religieux désireux d’éradiquer les spiritualités traditionnelles des peuples convertis. Face au protestantisme américain et au salafisme saoudien, dont Douguine fait remarquer les alliances géopolitiques depuis 1945, le monde russe réunit au contraire des religions de type tellurique avec l’orthodoxie russe mais aussi l’islam caucasien et d’Asie centrale.

Quant au judaïsme, non seulement il n’échapperait pas à cette opposition interne, mais celle-ci se retrouverait aussi dans les formes séculières de la pensée juive. Douguine analyse les branches mystiques du judaïsme (hassidisme, sabbataïsme, kabbalisme) comme l’expression de l’aspect terrestre de cette religion. Au contraire, le talmudisme en représenterait l’aspect atlantiste notamment par l’accent mis sur la rigueur dogmatique et le rationalisme. Par ailleurs, rappelant l’influence du messianisme juif sur le développement du marxisme et du bolchevisme, Douguine voit dans ces derniers des formes séculières du judaïsme terrestre. Au contraire, le judaïsme atlantiste sécularisé aurait contribué à l’essor du capitalisme et de l’esprit bourgeois. Le géopoliticien russe voit dans cette tension interne au judaïsme l’explication d’un récurrent « antisémitisme juif ». Les propos de Karl Marx, affirmant notamment que l’argent serait le Dieu profane du judaïsme (La question juive), seraient l’incarnation empirique du juif mystique s’attaquant au juif talmudiste, soit une émanation de la tradition contre une forme de la modernité.

Actualisation de l’éternelle lutte entre tellurocratie et thalassocratie, mais aussi fondement sous-jacent de la guerre entre tradition et modernité, l’opposition entre eurasisme et atlantisme ne résume pas la vision de la géographie sacrée selon Alexandre Douguine. Celui-ci s’appuie également sur les dualismes Orient – Occident et Nord – Sud. Pour le chantre de l’eurasisme, l’Orient incarne l’archaïsme, la tradition et la primauté du supra-individuel sur l’individu. L’Occident représente au contraire le progrès matériel, la modernité et l’individualisme. Fidèle aux représentations géographiques de nombreuses traditions (biblique, égyptienne, iranienne ou encore chinoise), cette opposition est également corroborée par les représentations contemporaines fréquentes du « monde occidental » et de l’Orient. Cependant, dans la géographie sacrée, ce sont les valeurs orientales qui sont supérieures aux valeurs occidentales. On peut observer l’exact inverse dans la géopolitique moderne pour laquelle les valeurs occidentales de la démocratie libérale et des individualistes droits de l’homme associées à une stricte économie de marché sont érigées en modèle.

La tradition du Nord

Aux yeux de Douguine, le couple Orient – Occident ne serait cependant qu’une transposition horizontale tardive du couple géographique primordial opposant le Nord au Sud. Terre divine par excellence, le Nord serait la terre de l’esprit et de l’être. S’il refuse l’idée d’un Nord purement objectif qui désignerait uniquement un pôle géographique, le philosophe russe écarte toutefois la définition d’un Nord réduit à une idée. Certes, la tradition primordiale serait issue du nord géographique, mais cette époque serait révolue. L’homme du Nord, presque divin, aurait aujourd’hui disparu en tant que tel mais serait toujours présent de façon diffuse et dans des proportions variables au sein de tous les peuples. Il en est de même de l’homme du Sud, celui-ci incarnant la tendance au matérialisme et à l’idolâtrie. Si l’homme du Sud vénère le cosmos, souvent sous la forme de la Terre – Mère, il ne l’appréhende que par son instinct et se montre incapable d’en saisir la part spirituelle. Ces deux types d’homme ne s’opposeraient plus aujourd’hui frontalement mais à l’intérieur même des peuples et des civilisations. En aucun cas, cette opposition ne peut être comparée à un combat manichéen du bien contre le mal. Le Nord et le Sud sont complémentaires, le premier s’incarnant dans le second. Néanmoins, Douguine estime que le respect de l’ordre divin nécessite la supériorité du principe spirituel du Nord sur le principe matériel du Sud.

Bien que l’opposition entre le Nord et le Sud prime pour lui sur celle entre l’Est et l’Ouest, le stratège russe remarque que le premier couple prend une coloration différente selon les transpositions géographiques qui s’opèrent. Diverses combinaisons peuvent être formées par la spiritualité du Nord, le matérialisme du Sud, le holisme de l’Est et l’individualisme de l’Ouest. Douguine établit ainsi que les valeurs sacrées du Nord sont conservées stérilement par le Sud, mises en valeur par l’Est et fragmentées par l’Ouest. Quant aux valeurs du Sud, selon leur milieu d’immersion elles opacifient l’esprit du Nord, transforment le holisme oriental en négation pure de l’individu, et génèrent un matérialisme individualiste en Occident. C’est sous cette dernière forme que la modernité occidentale apparaît aux yeux du philosophe eurasiste. Fruit de la combinaison la plus négative de la géographie sacrée, la réussite supposée des pays occidentaux pourtant essentiellement situés au nord géographique prône des valeurs opposées à la tradition. Cette inversion des pôles constituerait une caractéristique de l’âge sombre, ou Kali Yuga, dans lequel le monde se trouverait aujourd’hui.

Néanmoins, Alexandre Douguine ne considère pas que le salut doive venir du Sud. Stérile par essence, celui-ci serait uniquement apte à conserver des fragments de tradition nordiste que le mystique russe perçoit dans le monde islamique, dans l’Inde hindouiste, voire dans la Chine malgré sa conversion partielle à la modernité. Le salut viendrait donc de l’alliance entre ce sud conservateur et les îlots de tradition authentique encore présent au nord, et particulièrement au nord-est. Douguine situe donc dans le monde russe le cœur actuel de la tradition et de la lutte contre la modernité. Incluant la Russie mais également ses diverses périphéries, le monde russe réunirait des qualités géographiques (être situé au nord-est au sens de la géographie sacrée), religieuses (orthodoxie, islam eurasiste, judaïsme russe) et les caractéristiques d’une puissance tellurique qui lui permettraient de jouer un rôle déterminant dans la lutte contre la modernité atlantiste, occidentale et opposée à l’esprit du Nord.

Ripartire da EVOLA!

The Indo-European Concept of Cyclical History and the Quest to Acquire Lost Wisdom

Christopher Pisarenko

Ex: http://www.geopolitica.ru

Despite all of the bad things one could say of Hitler’s Germany during the Second World War (and there are plenty of “bad things” to be said!), it is a fact of history that prior to the war (from 1933 to 1939) the German government pursued a scientific-cultural quest for lost knowledge which was unprecedented in the annals of recorded history. Specificallythe German Reich sought to acquire as much of the lost knowledge orwisdom of the ancient Indo-European peoples as possible. It was the special task of the Ahnenerbe (the cultural and scientific division of the SS) to research and investigate all aspects of the Indo-European or, as they put it, the“Aryan” past.

Needless to say, this massive scientific undertaking was by no means confined to the European continent, but spanned an area encompassing the entire globe. From Germany to Tibet to South America and beyond – wherever a great civilization was said to have arisen and mysteriously vanish – the Ahnenerbewas there “on the scene,” as it were, conducting extensive archeological fieldwork and employing other integrated methods of scientific research.

This admirable if not entirely praiseworthy endeavor, regardless of the variousideologically-based shortcomings of the National Socialist regime itself, is what prompted Eurasianist leader Alexander Dugin to say in his 1997 article “Fascism – Borderless and Red” that the Ahnenerbe was “an intellectual oasis in the framework of the National Socialist regime.”In fact, this statement is entirely accurate. In great contradistinction to the undeniablyethno-chauvinist and hyper-militarist aspects of the National Socialist regime – and the overtly boorish culture of bureaucracy which therefore emerged and was typified by the likes of Martin Bormann – the Ahnenerbe was indeed a great “intellectual oasis”which accumulated a vast wealth of scholarly information that the Western allies either ignored or openly refuted. The result is that, to this day, the majority of people in the West remain totally ignorant of many of the proven historical findings which were “common knowledge” to the cutting-edge scholars of the Third Reich (most of whom are now deceased).

One thing which became clear to the Ahnenerbe, early on, was that all pre-Christian Indo-European cultures seemed to conceive of history as being cyclical rather than linear. In other words, all ancient “pagan” Indo-European cultures believed in an organic rhythmical order to both Time and Space. This conception of cyclical history – first expounded upon in modern times by Nikolai Danilevsky (1822-1885) and then Oswald Spengler (1880-1936) – stands in stark contrast to the Semitic-derived, “Abrahamic” belief in a purely linear or teleological conception of Time.

Perhaps the most convincing evidence supporting the cyclical conception of Time is the recurring “Four Ages of Man” theme which appears in many of the world’s ancient Indo-Europeancultures. The great Italian mystic and self-designated “Radical Traditionalist”Julius Evola is to be credited for his scholarly study of the Four Ages, most notably in his Revolt Against the Modern World (first published in 1934).

As Evola points out in his work, the Greco-Roman description of the Four Ages comes down to us from the ancient Greek and Roman authors Hesiod and Ovid, who associated each period with a particular metal. They outlined the Four Ages thus: (1) the Gold Age, (2) the Silver Age, (3) the Bronze Age, and (4) the Iron Age. The reader should note that these last two epochs bear no relation whatsoever to the mainstream historical Bronze and Iron ages. Rather they correspond to the cyclical periods of Indo-Aryan (Hindu) cosmology known as Yugas, which are (in order): (1) Satya or “Krita” Yuga, (2) Treta Yuga, (3) Dvapara Yuga, and (4) Kali Yuga or the “Dark Age.” In Hesiod’s model, a fifth “Age of Heroes” was inserted between the Bronze and Iron Ages. Evidently the Age of Heroes was a partial yet short-lived restoration of the high primordial state (the Gold Age) as recounted in the numerous heroic tales of mythology, which all point to a deeper esoteric meaning. Our own present epoch, which includes both modernity and postmodernity, is that of the Kali Yuga or Dark Age – the era of unbridled human degeneracy.

The Doctrine of the Four Ages fundamentally supports the concept of humanity’s devolution or “fall” from a primeval state of higher consciousness. In fact both devolution and evolution (in the non-Darwinian sense) are in complete harmony with the beliefs of most traditional cultures worldwide. Indeed both evolution (i.e. the quest for higher spiritual awareness) and devolution (submission to materialist degeneracy) are viewed organically, as continually interacting positive and negative charges to Nature’s cosmic balance or “dance.”Thus, the concept of devolution maintains that as spiritual decadence set in among the original Hyperborean and Atlantean races, their respective cultural declines also ensued. Such devolution can be found in many other civilizations known to the historical record, perhaps most famously in the Egyptian civilization which, many Egyptologists insist, mysteriously began at its apex.

Devolution is essentially the concept behind the biblical story of the fall of man. This “fall,” famously described in the Book of Genesis, is a metaphorical reference to the literal separation of man from the Spiritual realm. In other words, the fall of man symbolized the separation of original mankind, created in God’s image, from its spiritual Source. As man deviated further and further from hisoriginal godly or “Hyperborean” source (during the Golden Age), man became more hybridized and animalistic, both spiritually and physically. Man became more human.

The many similar stories of conflict between the primordial race of men descended from the gods and the rest of animalistic humanity, as described in the Indo-European epics, confirm the quintessential truths of devolution, though in a highly mythologized form. For example, the Norse tradition tells of a great battle between the divine Aesir and the nefarious Giants. The Hellenic tradition depicts the Olympians and Heroes fighting the various Titans and monsters. In the East, the Aryan devas battle against the materialistic asuras. In Celtic lore the noble TuathaDéDanann triumphed over the Fomorians. All of these legends are still greatly relevant to people of Indo-European stock, as they speak to the absolute essence of what it means “to be” – i.e. to be created in the image of the Divine Source or Deity.

Below is a concise description of the Four Ages as they relate to the various Indo-European peoples and the lands associated with them:

I. The Gold Age

The Gold Age or “Golden Age” represents the primordialcivilization which was in total harmony with the traditional spirit. It was an era of Being, not becoming. In the words of Evola, “Purity of heart, justice, wisdom, and adherence to sacred institutions are qualities that characterized every caste during the first age.”[1]The Hindu name for the Golden Age is Satya Yuga (or Krita Yuga). Satya means “being” and “truth”; the Roman Saturn, Father of the gods and King of the Golden Age, is derived from the older Sanskrit root. This was an Age of Ur, which is to say of Or-igin, not derivation. Hence the oldest of the gods have their roots in the Golden Age, and consequently their names reflect a common Indo-European origin – e.g. Ur-anus, Sat-urn, Buri, Pur-usha, etc. In the terminology of the late Russian esotericist Nicolai Levashov (1961-2012), this was an Age of “Urs” and “Ruses.”

The Gold Age is a time in which both men and gods shared one immortal life – when Kings or Leaders embodied the gods and had no need to communicate their divine authority via a caste of high priests. It was an Age of polar unity, and not “polarization.” Attached to the primordial polar epoch are the supreme gods of the Indo-European pantheon which include: Dyeus (Proto-Indo-European), Dyaus Pita (Indo-Aryan), Zeus (Hellenic), Deus or Dis Pater or Jupiter (Roman), TiwazorTyr (Norse) – again, these are all etymologically related names for the same supreme “sky deity” or force which is scheduled to return at the start of the new Golden Age.

The primordial Northern Land, Hyperborea, is associated with the Golden Age. Fundamentally, the legend of Hyperborea is characterized by a polar, arctic, celestial, “Uranian” spirituality – a primordial spirituality of the greatest purity, above the solar and degenerated lunar/Demetrian tradition of the Silver Age.

All of the ancient divine centers of the gods – Mount Meru, Olympus, Asgard, Agartha, AiryanaVaejo, Ultima Thule, etc. – are referring to the same primeval Hyperborean Land, the same polar center inhabited by the otherworldly ancestors of the Indo-Europeans or Aryans:the Aesir/Olympians. In fact, the word “polar” (consisting of the two syllables “pol” and “ar”) literally means “pole of the Aryans.” The current lands bordering the “Ar-ctic” Ocean are said to be the geographic remnants of the ancient polar continent of Hyperborea. This includes Scandinavia, Iceland, Greenland, northern Canada, and northern Eurasia.

As for the primordial Hyperborean “race” or people: they were at the same time kingly and priestly, regal and ascetic, warrior-like and spiritual. The Hyperboreans (aka “Boreads”) were of a tall stature and Nordic in appearance. Some traditions state that they were androgynous, possessing a semi-etheric/semi-physical body type and had many superhuman qualities. The Arcane Tradition connects the Hyperborean stock to the transcendental “Great White Brotherhood.”

In any caseit is clear that the Hyperboreans (original mankind), at some point, devolved from their original godlysource and did not evolve from apes as suggested by the thoroughly materialist adherents of Darwinism. As the Hyperborean species strayed spiritually and physically from its original Arctic/polarorigin and as it was drawn more and more toward the demonic energy of the South (toward Materialism), it began its downward descent toward the ape, which is to say toward humanity. This highlights the great geographic/geomantic divide which exists on this planet (to this day) between North and South (Spirit and Material).

II. The Silver Age

The Silver Age is associated with Atlantis and the “mystery of the West,” as opposed to the Golden North. The Atlantean Civilization epitomized the Silver Age, with its solar symbolism in contradistinction to the Hyperborean symbolism of the immobile Pole. Whereas Hyperborea represented a superior state of Being, Atlantis symbolized the inferior state of becoming. Atlantis is also characterized by an eventual descent from (and abandonment of) the solar tradition, as the Silver Age is symbolic of a reflective/feminine lunar light. As the Masculine Force gives life, the Feminine Force receives life.

And so, prior to the total collapse of Atlantis, a degenerate lunar tradition took root: the Cult of the Mother Goddess or “Demetrism” as Julius Evola described the phenomenon. Geographically, it is difficult to say with certainty where Atlantis was located. Perhaps in the Atlantic or Mediterranean, or perhaps it was more immediately connected to Hyperborea as a distorted continuation of that original Northern Civilization.It is difficult to determine. What is certain, however, is that the Atlanteans inhabited Atlantis (wherever it might have been located), and they had degenerated considerably from the original Hyperborean stock.

Here it is important to mention that the Atlanteans were neither “Mongolian” in appearance nor the progenitors of the Mongoloid race, as traditional Theosophists have consistently claimed. Rather the Atlanteans developed, as a result of a spiritual/biological metamorphosis, out of the least tainted or diluted segment of the old Hyperborean race. For example, the Atlanteans preserved the golden hair, light eyes and fairappearance of the Hyperboreans. They also retained much of the mental capabilities and thus the inherited wisdom of the Hyperboreans. Nevertheless they were not completely free of baser elements or what could rightly be called “Lemurian” characteristics.

By all accounts, the Atlantean Civilization (as a more physical/materialist offshoot of the Hyperborean) was truly remarkable. Many technological marvels were achieved that have not been replicated since. Through the efforts of their divinely inspired scientists who had tapped into the universal Akashic Records, the Atlanteans acquired the secrets of universal energy. The universal knowledge of the five elements – earth, water, fire, air, and cosmic ether – formed the basis of a global sustenance. Mirroring the universal five elements are the five dimensions of all existence. Here, the Atlanteans understood and harnessed the power of pyramidal structures.

Pyramids were constructed on geomantic gates of energy in order to mark the power-centers of the earth. The High Priests of Atlantis used pyramids as natural portals or gateways. Symbolically, pyramids reflect the divine mission of mankind to progress upward through four dimensions, and finally into the fifth dimension which is the dimension of Cosmic Completion. This fifth dimension is perfectly symbolized by the center of the Swastika – the fifth point from which the four arms (twelve points and eight directions) of the Cosmos derive their collective energy.

Human beings have five fingers on each hand and five toes on each foot, and also four limbs projecting from a central body simply because we descend from – and were created for – the fifth dimension. As bearers of the hidden Akashic knowledge, the Atlanteans understood that they were an extension of the Supreme God Force on earth, and that absolutely nothing exists separately from this Almighty Force.

III. The Bronze Age

Sometime during the latter part of the Silver Age there was a polarizing shift in the moral outlook of the Atlantean Civilization and society. It was at this time that the malevolent effects of the Bronze Age began to appear. The Bronze Age was defined by “violence and injustice, [a] yearning for power, and covetousness.”[2]It was an era of lawlessness and pride, exhibiting all the degenerative features described by Plato in his Critias.The majority of the Atlantean population became selfish and materialistic, using their technology for evil endeavors rather than for the common good.

And so, the Atlanteansdescended into pitiful, abject materialism. Eventually a cataclysmic set of disasters (earthquakes and floods) wiped out Atlantis and its civilization. Again, the biblical account is not to be dismissed, as the story of Noah corresponds to the submergence of Atlantis beneath the sea – even though the biblical account is obviously flawed in its claim that only a handful of people were said to have survived and also in the suggested time period of the cataclysm.

In any event, the forces of Light represented the last hope of the Atlantean Civilization in all things good and spiritual, while the forces of Darkness were agents of immorality and materialism. Theforces of Light would later be remembered as the Aesir, Olympians and Heroes of the various Indo-European traditions, and the forces of Darkness would be associated with the ever-subversive Giants or Titans. The Aesir/Olympians/Heroes represented the Golden cycle and the Giants represented the sinister usurpers. The Aesir embodied the spiritual-kingly element, and the Giants embodied the temporal-priestly. It was during the Bronze Age, this time of epic schism, that the priestly caste (the Giants) rebelled against the superior regal-warrior caste (the Aesir) and for the first time endeavored to usurp the latter’s powers.

This marked the beginning of a power-struggle that has erupted time and again between Pharaoh and Priest, Emperor and Pope, legitimate ruler of a masculine-solar essence and illegitimate pretender of a feminine-lunar essence – between those who stand for Authority, Hierarchy, Tradition and Order versus those who stand for mass-leveling, chaos and decadence. In esoteric circles the Bronze Age is known as the Age of the Giants – the Age in which materialism and usurpation ultimately triumphed over the Atlanteanand higher traditions. Overall, the Age was characterized by a population that no longer valued the spiritual principle as it related to a masculine warrior caste. And so, the decadence of the Giants effectively brought the polar and solar traditions to an end.

From Atlantis the “Atlanto-Aryan” race spread all over the world, as did the rival factions of Light and Darkness. The war between these two diametrically opposed sides continues to this day. It has been waged covertly by competing secret societies who, through their “moves” on the Great Geopolitical Chess Board, have manipulated the course of world history, and for thousands of years.On one side is the Darkness, manifesting itself in International Banking and Freemasonry – two offshoots of the same brazen international scheme of the medieval Knights Templar, now championed by the Atlanticist powers (the United States and Britain).And on the other side is the remnant of the True Light of Hyperborea (i.e. Eurasia), comprised of all those forces which stand for continental values such as Truth, Order and Tradition – those fighting to restore the warrior-principle as it existed in its purest state during the Golden Age.

IV. The Iron Age

After the chaos of the Bronze Age, which stretched into the postdiluvian world, the Iron Age or Dark Age began – this still remains the current epoch of our planet’s history. The Iron Age is characterized by a total lack of any earthly connection to the divine element. The wolf of Norse tradition swallowed the Sun and caught the Moon – meaning that both the solar and lunar spiritual cycles of the Silver and Bronze Ages were finished. And so, lacking any higher guidance, the earth was abandoned to its own internal anarchy. The Iron Age is equivalent to the Hindu tradition’s Age of Kali Yuga. The defining feature of the Age has been mankind’scollective Struggle against the forces of darkness in order to push back the murky tide of decadence.The Crusades represent one such period of “push back” in the history of the Dark Age. They were initiated, on the esoteric level, as a great rebellion against the Darkness or rather Ignorance of the time. Sadly, this rebellion was doomed to fail due to the overwhelming greed and vanity of all the parties involved.

During the Crusades, the various knightly brotherhoods and orders were primarily on a quest for spiritual and scientific truth – or rather, a quest for the lost “Science of the Spirit” which thegreatest philosophers have sought to recapture since time immemorial. The exoteric mainstream belief that the knights were formed simply to “fight the Muslim Infidel” is wrong. The various knightly orders were instead searching for truth, as they disagreed with the unruly and degenerate head of the Roman Catholic Church: the Pope. This is especially true of the Teutonic Knights who upon reaching Syria met an old esoteric master called the “Elder of the Days.” He revealed to them the lost wisdom, history and traditions of Atlantis and Hyperborea.

The new revelations greatly impacted Europe, ultimately leading to massive building programs, a great technological boom, an increase in exploration, and the establishment of the modern banking system. Since it was the knightly brotherhoods that were in sole possession of this vast amount of wisdom, they came to be viewed as dangerous by the Pope and were subsequently persecuted and disbanded. Thus, the knights had no choice but to go underground, forming secret orders with various new names. Of course the most famous Order to go into hiding was the Knights Templar which eventually allied itself to the forces of World Zionism and, through proxy organizations (like the so-called “Order of Christ” in Portugal),went on to found various other black magician orders such as the Rosicrucians, Jesuits, Freemasons, Ordo TempliOrientis, Church of Satan and other derivative Satanic groups which happen to wield a great amount of power in the nations of the West and especially in the United States – a country which, it could accurately be said, was founded on the intertwined “Templar”principles of commerce, militarism and occultism.

Of the Templars it could be saidthat they originally set out on their great journey as legitimate Christian warrior-ascetics, however they returned to Europe as little more than money-lending vampires. Somewhere along the way the Templars became totally corrupt, adopting the wicked, usurious ways of the money-lending Levantines with whom they came into contact in the Holy Land. The Teutonic Knights, on the other hand, remainedtrue to their ancient “white magician” (i.e. Christian) roots.A Teutonic capital that survived well into modern times was Vienna. At Heiligenkreuz, the Teutonic Knights established several monasteries and castles on sacred geomantic energy sites. There they kept part of their newly acquired knowledge and scriptures upon returning from the Levant. For centuries, much of the wisdom acquired by the Teutonic Order was hidden in and around Vienna.

At the turn of the twentieth century there was a Catholic monk in Vienna who was a member of the old Teutonic Order. Disillusioned and disgusted with mainstream Christian dogma, he eventually left the monastery and assumed the name of “Lanz von Liebenfels.” He is most famous for writing Theozoology – a philosophical work that centers on the perennial earthly Struggle between Man(created in the image of God) and the hominid/apeling masses of the soulless, material world. It is said that von Liebenfels had an epiphany in his native Austria upon seeing a statue of a knight standing victoriously on top of a primate. Of course the knight symbolized a Noble, a true Man, a Man of the divine – and the primate symbolized the great bulk of animalistic humanity.

Von Liebenfels realized the great fact of Nature that the biological aristocrat (the God-man) is designed and destined to stand in unabashed superiority over the degenerate materialistic masses, as symbolized by the primate. It should be noted that, through the ages, human degenerates or animalistic “sub-humans” have also been depicted as serpents, dragons, demons, and other such reptilian creatures. In any event, it is the God-man’s responsibility to crush all those that seek to drag the God-man downward and ultimately destroy him through wanton immorality. Hence the reality of a spiritually-oriented God-like race existing in perennial opposition to a thoroughly materialistic, degenerateand animal-like human race. Although perhaps radical by nineteenth century standards, Lanz von Liebenfels’ philosophy was merely a reiteration of a much older spiritual philosophy. This philosophy, also prevalent in the fin desiècle works of Nietzsche, is part of a much broader tradition stretching all the way back to the epics of Aryan India.

Aware of the older traditions, von Liebenfels mingled his preexisting Teutonic knowledge with the spiritual/historical truths of the Bhagavad Gita, which describes the great battle of Atlantis. He thus came to the conclusion that the “Aryan Race” was in fact descended from the original God Race, and that the Chandalans were degenerate animal-men. Both sides were involved in endless battles throughout history, as confirmed in Hindu mysticism. The ancient Zoroastrian tradition also makes use of a similar theme describing the relationship between the Ashavan and the Anashvan. The Ashavan represent the pure, faithful and blessed on earth and in heaven – those who boost the power of the principle of light – and the Anashvan represent the impure ones opposed to the principle of light.

Von Liebenfels further taught that the Aryansare the descendants of the original Hyperborean-Atlantean god-men, and their noble origin can be discerned from their physical characteristics – i.e. their blond hair, blue eyes, fine features and fair skin. And so here we are, at the end of the Iron Age or Dark Age (i.e. Kali Yuga) – here we are, fighting as ever against the advances of the infernal Materialist Enemy.

To the fatalistic adherents of priestly/monastic prayer, these are the famous “End Times” of Revelation. To those who hold true to the primordialWarrior Wisdom, this is the era of Kali Yuga – an era that will soon give way to the new Golden Age or Krita Yuga. Regardless of one’s spiritual/religious inclination, this much is clear: the many disasters which currently threaten humanity – the earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, mysterious animal deaths, famines, diseases, miscegenation, immorality, unbridled avarice, widespread violence, wars – all these things have been predicted by countless seers and spiritual men through the centuries.They accurately foresaw the tumultuous events unfolding in our own time. So take heed and take solace! These things must come – the darkness must come into the world (and as black as night!) before the New Dawn can commence.

According to the ancient Vedic tradition, the end of the Dark Age does not translate to mean the destruction or “end of the world,” but rather the end of a long, dark epoch in world history and the correspondingly dark world order. More so than the Christian Bible, the Mahabharata outlines the dark period of Kali Yuga (our current age) quite vividly. It is a period defined by quantity, not quality – a time in which the majority of the earth’s inhabitants are Sudras, or materialistic slave-like people. They are wicked, deceitful, quarrelsome, vulgar, parasitical and beggar-like. They value the degraded and live in cities full of thieves. The men are dominated by their womenfolk who are shallow, garrulous, lascivious, and who bear too many inferior children. During this time, there are many famines and wars. Great migrations occur during this period as well; it is a time of uprooting and unfamiliarity, as opposed to kinship, localism and permanence. Rulers levy taxes unfairly, and abandon any interest in the spiritual or religious life of their people. Greed, lust, drug-addiction, anti-natural behavior, criminality – all these are just some of the evil pursuits indulged in by man. Does any of this sound familiar? It should. For this is the current age in which we live: the Kali Yuga. And the Mahabharata predicted it all.

In the Indo-Aryan tradition the end of our current era shall witness the return of God to earth. A new glorious Golden Age shall then be upon us. His coming will initiate a Great War, and then he will set up his millennial kingdom on earth. This is the Age of Krita Yuga described in the ancient Hindu texts – an age of justice, duty, virtue and happiness; a time when the “Great White God” of the heavens reigns supreme on earth. In the Hindu religion it will be the tenth and final avatar of Lord Vishnu who returns: Kalki the Destroyer.

---

[1]Evola, Julius. Revolt Against the Modern World. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions International, 1995, p. 184 (see footnote 1).

[2]Ibid., p. 219.

 

Julius Evola - Tom Sunic & E. Christian Kopff

Julius Evola - Tom Sunic & E. Christian Kopff

Yanni McQueen

 

Tom Sunic interviews renowned educator, classicist and writer Dr. E. Christian Kopff. Topics include:

- How Tradition get passed down through the generations
- The mind of Julius Evola and what he meant by “revolting against the modern world.”
- Evola’s thoughts on the “masses.”
- Evola’s thoughts on Western Tradition
- Evola’s thoughts on masculinity
- Evola’s relevance for Americans and the rest of the modern West
- Evola’s criticism of Communism and its comparison to Capitalism
- The spiritual life vs. racial science; the State vs. the People
- Ezra Pound
- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Recorded April 20, 2010

Von China lernen – Konfuzius für Krisen

von Holger Schnepf

Ex: http://younggerman.de

Wenn etwas in der eigenen Zivilisation so richtig schief läuft, wie bei uns in der Westlichen Kultur, dann lohnt ein Blick aus einer höheren Warte, dass man einmal inne hält und versucht, einen neuen Blickwinkel zu finden. Zu leicht verliert man sich im Kleinen, in den Niederungen der politischen Programme, im Gefeilsche um 3% mehr dort oder 2% weniger hier. Die Westliche Welt ist in einer grundlegenden Krise, und die Zeichen sind in den USA ähnlich zu sehen, wie in den westeuropäischen Staaten. Daher Westliche Welt: schon Osteuropa tickt in vielem ganz anders.

Manch einen mag die Vorstellung, historische Wurzeln und philosophische Ansätze heranzuziehen, um die gegenwärtige Krise zu verstehen, erst einmal irritieren. Die Realität aber ist, dass unser ganzes Denken auf eine sehr grundlegende Weise nicht Zufall ist, sondern in der Tat das Resultat von Jahrtausenden der Zivilisations-Geschichte. Geschichte ist unsere zweite Haut, unser zweites Ich. Es durchdringt unser Fühlen, aber wir sind uns dessen nicht bewusst. Und darin ist jedes Volk ebenso eigen wie jeder Kulturkreis. Es ist eben ein Irrtum der Linksgrünen zu glauben, es seien „nur“ kulturelle Unterschiede, welche in Europa oder in der Migrationskrise zu bewältigen seien; als sei Kultur etwas, das man leicht hinter sich lässt.

Die meisten haben so leider nur eine vage Vorstellung davon, wie stark uns historische Entwicklungen und bestimmte Philosophien beeinflussen. Zwei Beispiele.

Die Deutschen sind schon immer ein Volk in der Mitte Europas, eingekreist von anderen Völkern und Nationen. Die lange, verheerende Invasion deutscher Staaten im 30jährigen Krieg (1618 – 1648), bei der in manchen Gegenden bis zu 90% der Menschen getötet wurden und eine ungeheure gewaltsame Verrohung herrschte, hinterließ ein tiefes Trauma, dass die Deutschen kollektiv bis ins 20. Jahrhundert beherrschte, es prägte das politische Handeln und Tiefenempfinden der Deutschen: nie wieder so schwach, so zerstritten und isoliert sein, dass sich dieses Trauma der Invasion von allen Seiten, die totale Verwüstung, wiederholt. Der ganze deutsche Militarismus entstand als Folge dieses Traumas, und dominierte 400 Jahre deutscher Geschichte.

Unser philosophisches Erbe aber ist der Individualismus. Wie stark uns das von allen anderen Kulturen der Welt unterscheidet, ist den meisten Europäern kaum bewusst. Dass wir Dinge vom Individuum her denken, scheint uns ganz normal, ganz selbstverständlich. Wenn man Menschen in außer-europäischen Kulturen fragt, was uns Europäer kennzeichnet, wird man dies unisono hören: euer Individualismus. Und meist ist der Tonfall dabei nicht, als würde das beneidet. Für die Asiatischen Kulturen ist der westliche Individualismus ein Irrweg, eine Art Marotte, wie sie trotzige kleine Kinder haben. Der Grund für diesen zunächst etwas überheblich klingenden Blick ist wiederum die Geschichte.

Europas zersplitterte Geschichte

Europa kannte nur eine Zivilisation in seiner Geschichte, das Römische Reich, und dieses Projekt ein geeintes Europa zu schaffen, ging komplett unter. Was danach folgte, waren über 1000 Jahre Finsternis, das Mittelalter; eine Zeit deren Herrscher nüchtern betrachtet kaum mehr als Raubritter waren, bar aller Gelehrsamkeit und ewig im Krieg mit sich selbst. Eine stagnierende Epoche. In Asien verlief die Geschichte komplett anders. Wenn man sich die Weltkarte ansieht, wird man bemerken, dass China den Löwenanteil der Landmasse ausmacht. Dabei ist es ein Irrtum, China als einen Nationalstaat wie Deutschland oder Frankreich, nur in groß zu sehen. China war von Anfang an ein Vielvölkerstaat, ähnlich wie später Russland, mit einer dominierenden Ethnie: den Han-Chinesen. Auf diese Weise kann ein großes Reich funktionieren, wenn es eine Leit-Kultur und Leit-Ethnie gibt. In Russland sind das die Russen, in China die Han-Chinesen. Der Versuch, mit einer Römischen Leitkultur Europa zu einen, ging dagegen in die Binsen. So stehen wir heute als gespaltene Völkergruppen da, mit 1500 Jahren getrennter Geschichte.

Neben dem historischen Aspekt möchte ich aber hier vor allem den Philosophischen betrachten. Für uns Westler ist die westliche Philosophie, welche die politischen Ideale des Westens prägte, der Mittelpunkt der Welt, quasi das einzig Gültige. Mit Sokrates, Plato und Aristoteles fing das an, die beiden großen, prägenden Gedanken: Von Plato kam der Universalismus, von Aristoteles die Logik.

Universalismus das ist, dass wir dauernd all-gültige abstrakte Werte suchen. Etwas muss an sich richtig sein. Wir kennen das von Kants Kategorischem Imperativ: Handle stets so, dass dein Handeln Maxime für alle sein kann. Das ist Platonische Ideenlehre in modernere Begriffe gekleidet. Es ist die typische westliche Vorstellung, es müsse abstrakte Ideen und Gedankengebilde geben, die an sich, a priori richtig und wahr sind. Wir können uns kein relatives Gutes vorstellen. Schon das ist schwer zu begreifen. Ich will ein Beispiel geben. Das Gegenteil von Universalismus ist Partikularismus, also ein Gutes für eine begrenzte Gruppe. Zum Beispiel Tribalismus, eine Stammes-Moral. Ein Mensch, der statt einem Universalismus einem Tribalismus anhängt, für den würde nur das Wohl des eigenen Stammes gelten. Regeln, Gesetze, Gut und Böse, das gibt es im Tribalismus nur innerhalb des eigenen Stammes. Nur die eigenen Leute muss man recht und gut behandeln. Weite Teile Afrikas und Arabiens werden noch immer im Wesentlichen durch eine Stammesmoral beherrscht. Für sie gibt es kein abstraktes Gutes. Der Gedanke scheint uns so selbstverständlich, dass das Gute etwas universelles sein sollte, dass immer und allen gegenüber auf gleiche Weise gilt. Menschenrechte zum Beispiel. Die hat jeder Mensch. Das ist aber ein typisch westliches Denken.

Von Aristoteles kommt die Logik, und daraus erwuchs der Individualismus. Der Einzelne entscheidet was richtig ist, nur aufgrund von Rationalität, also von der Frage ist es für mich richtig. Das hat sich erheblich ausgewirkt. Richtig in Fahrt kam das mit Martin Luther. Er wollte sich nicht mit biblischen Deutungen der Obrigkeit zufrieden geben, er wollte sich seine eigene Meinung bilden, er wollte, dass die Bibel alle in ihrer eigenen Sprache lesen können, so dass jeder durch eigene Überlegung entscheidet, wie er die Bibel deutet. Für uns scheint das heute ganz normal, auch in Fragen jenseits der Bibel. Für die Zeit des späten Mittelalters war dies ein Affront, eine Ungeheuerlichkeit, dass ein Einzelner sich anmaßte aufgrund seines eigenen Verstandes zu urteilen. Damit ist die ganze Entwicklung zur Individualität in Europa losgetreten.

Ich musste hier so weit ausholen, damit man versteht, dass unser Denken, politisch und philosophisch, eben uns ganz eigen ist. Das Problem ist, wenn ich so sagen darf, dass uns heute diese Vergötterung des Individuums, das Genick bricht. Man hat eine an sich gute Idee, die Freiheit des Einzelnen, so weit ins Extrem getrieben, dass es heute keinen Zusammenhalt mehr gibt, jeder ist ein Einzelkämpfer, die Zahl der Singles und Alleinerziehenden explodiert, damit einhergehend fallen die Geburtenraten. Auch der Sozialstaat ist überfordert, als eine Folge: früher gab es Großfamilien, die einen Großteil der sozialen Aufgaben übernahmen. Man musste weder Kindergärten finanzieren, weil Mütter die Kinder aufzogen, noch Seniorenheime, da die Familie die Eltern pflegte. Je vereinzelter die Menschen sind, desto teurer wird es für den Staat. Man sehe sich zum Unterschied eine türkische oder arabische Familie an: hier wird keiner, der arbeitslos wird, hängen gelassen: man findet eine kleine Arbeit im Laden eines Familienangehörigen oder Bekannten. Man hat Netzwerke, in die man sich einfügt und die einen auffangen. Was wiederum ein Hemmnis der Integration ist – man hat Sicherheit in der Sippe, kaum einer, der diese Sicherheit im Familienclan und der eigenen Ethnie hat, will als Araber oder Türke in die Hyper-Individualisierte Vereinzelung und Einsamkeit der westlichen Menschen fallen.

Die Lehre von Konfuzius

Wenn man Menschen heute von chinesischer Philosophie erzählt und was wir davon lernen können, so muss man oft erst dumme Klischees beseitigen. Der witzige Chinese, der dümmlich lispelt, der Zwang zum immer Lächeln und das Gesicht wahren, die Idee lächerlicher Kalender-Sprüche. Das ist ein Zerrbild wie das vom Deutschen in Lederhose. Keiner bestimmte das Denken ganz Asiens so sehr, wie Konfuzius. Seine Ideen und Vorstellungen haben den ganzen kulturellen Raum Asiens tief geprägt. Es gibt im Westen gar keine einzelne Person, die unser westliches Denken so im Alleingang geprägt hat, wie Konfuzius das Denken Asiens.

Konfuzius lebte zwischen 551 und 479 v. Chr. In einer Zeit, da China gespalten und tief zerstritten war, da allgemein ein Verfall von Sitten und eine starke Verrohung der Menschen herrschte. Er versuchte die Frage zu beantworten, wie dies kommen konnte, und wie man dem abhelfen konnte. Dabei standen für ihn keine hochtrabenden politischen Programme im Vordergrund, sondern ethische und philosophische Grundlagen. Für Konfuzius waren dies fünf Punkte, die alle aus einer Grunderkenntnis heraus entstanden.

Die Grunderkenntnis von Konfuzius war, dass nur in einer richtigen gesellschaftlichen Ordnung ein gutes Leben in Ethik und sinnhaften Handeln möglich ist. Das ist quasi eine auf den Kopf Stellung gegenüber dem westlichen Denken: für uns scheint das Gute immer aus dem Einzelnen zu kommen. Für Konfuzius dagegen entspringt Freiheit nur aus einer rechten Ordnung. „In einer gerechten Gesellschaft, ist es eine Schande arm zu sein; in einer ungerechten Gesellschaft, ist es eine Schande, reich zu sein.“ Das ist ein Ausspruch, der sein Denken kennzeichnet. Das Gerechte, das Gute und die Entfaltung hängen von der ganzen Ordnung ab, die die Menschen umgibt. Für Konfuzius aber waren die Regeln, die Ordnung, kein Selbstzweck, und schon gar kein Zwang, der einem von der Obrigkeit erteilt wurde, sondern etwas wie Spielregeln: alle einigen sich darauf, weil nur so ein sinnvolles Handeln möglich wird. Es ist ein gemeinschaftlicher Akt der Einsicht.

Fünf Lehren

Die fünf Pfeiler auf denen sich diese Ordnung gründet sind Menschlichkeit, Gerechtigkeit, Pietät, Sitten und Bildung. Für Konfuzius ist der Kern aller menschlichen Ordnung die Familie. Sie ist die Keimzelle der Gesellschaft, innerhalb der Familie lernt der Mensch alle notwendigen sittlichen und emotionalen Fähigkeiten. Sie, und nicht das Individuum, machen den Kern der konfuzianischen Lehre aus. Daher haben bis heute in Asien die Familienclans und familiäre Gemeinschaften die überragende Bedeutung; das Individuum entfaltet sich nur im Einklang mit dieser.

Das Li Gi, ein konfuzianisches Grundlagenwerk, beschreibt diesen Gedanken so:

„Die Familienordnung als Grundlage der Menschheitsordnung: Die Liebe leitet sich von den Eltern her und stuft sich ab nach oben hin bis zum Urahn des Geschlechts. Die Pflicht leitet sich von den Urahnen her und steigert sich nach unten hin bis zum heimgegangenen Vater. So ist der Weg des Menschen die Liebe zu den Nächsten.

Die Liebe zu den Nächsten führt zur Verehrung der Ahnen; die Verehrung der Ahnen führt zur Achtung vor den näheren Vorfahren; die Achtung vor den Vorfahren führt zum Zusammenhalt des Stammes; der Zusammenhalt des Stammes führt zur Heilighaltung des Ahnentempels; die Heilighaltung des Ahnentempels führt zum Wichtignehmen der Landessitten; das Wichtignehmen der Landessitten führt zur Liebe zum Volk.

Die Liebe zum Volk führt dazu, dass die Strafen gerecht werden; sind die Strafen gerecht, so leben die Leute in Sicherheit; leben die Leute in Sicherheit, so sind genügend Güter da; sind genügend Güter da, so kann man alle seine Absichten verwirklichen; kann man seine Absichten verwirklichen, so nehmen die Traditionen und Sitten feste Formen an. Haben Traditionen und Sitten feste Formen, so folgt die Freude.“

Der Einzelne lernt die moralischen Qualitäten in der Familie. Die Liebe und Leitung der Eltern ist das Vorbild für eine gerechte Staatsführung: der ideale Herrscher leitet das Volk wie Eltern ihre Kinder: mit Liebe, Gerechtigkeit und klaren Regeln. Die Liebe zu anderen lernen Menschen hier überhaupt nur als Ableitung aus der familiären Erfahrung. Dies ist verwurzelt in einer festen ethnischen und regionalen Bindung. Ein Mensch sieht sich nicht als eine zufällige einzelne Erscheinung, sondern als Erbe seiner Ahnen, die die Region, das Land und die Kultur aufbauten. Diesen schuldet er alles, was er hat, wie er selbst ein Ahne wird, und das weitergibt, was er empfing. Es ist höchste Verpflichtung für ihn, die Bewahrung und Weiterentwicklung.

Im Kern steht, anders als der Konfuzianismus im Westen manchmal wahrgenommen wird, keine autoritäre Härte, sondern die Menschlichkeit. Sie macht den Kern der Lehre aus. Ohne dieses Verlangen nach Menschlichkeit wäre die Philosophie in der Tat nur eine hohle Sittenlehre. Und gerade das war nicht die Absicht. Wie sich diese definiert, zeigt wiederum das Li Gi auf:

„Die Sittsamkeit verlangt, dass man zu den Vornehmen ehrerbietig ist, zu den Alten ehrfürchtig, zu den Kleinen liebevoll, zu den Jugendlichen freundschaftlich, zu den Geringen gnädig ist; das ist Sittsamkeit. Heute aber sind die Menschen gegen die Oberen aufsässig, die Unteren werden in Not gebracht, das Rechte wird missachtet und man setzt sich mit Gewalt durch.“

Konfuzius waren Gewalt und Unterdrückung zutiefst zuwider, und ein klares Kennzeichen einer Gesellschaft, die im Ganzen den Weg verloren hat. Konfuzius wollte Menschen sanft auf den richtigen Weg führen, durch Vorbild und Bildung. Er betont dies immer wieder. „Der Edle kennt keinen Streit.“ Und: „Irrlehren angreifen, das schadet nur.“

Damit überall Menschlichkeit walten kann, muss Gerechtigkeit bestehen, d.h. eine unparteiische Ordnung, in welcher die Guten hoch kommen und die Ungerechten nieder gehalten werden, also in dem nicht Gauner und Betrüger nach Oben kommen. Wenn oben die Sitten verfallen, so verfallen sie am Ende auch unten. Das ist für uns im Westen eine seltsame Sicht. Nur wenige kämen auf den Gedanken, die private Lebensführung unserer Politiker zu hinterfragen. Dass viele sich mehrfach scheiden lassen, im Privaten unleidliche und niedere Typen sind, das interessiert uns wenig; wir schauen nur nach den politischen Programmen. Damit aber setzt der Verfall ein, weil Menschen immer die ihnen oberen imitieren. Das Beispiel von oben, eben auch das Schlechte, setzt sich im Volk fort.

Konfuzius geht es nicht um eine abstrakt definierte Moral, sondern um eine individuelle, durch persönliches Beispiel gelebte Sittlichkeit. Er lehrte nicht durch logische Erklärungen, sondern Umschreibungen. „Als der Stall niederbrannte und Konfuzius zurück kehrte, fragte er: ‚Wurde jemand verletzt?‘ Er fragte nicht nach den Pferden.“ Dieses berühmte Zitat beleuchtet die Lehrweise Konfuzius und wie er Menschlichkeit definiert. Er sorgt sich nicht um den Besitz – die Pferde. Aber er sagt es nicht direkt, das Gleichnis umschreibt es nur. Es ist eben kein Kantianischer Imperativ, sondern eine Ermutigung zum persönlichen Vorbild. Von ihm stammt die berühmte Goldene Regel: „Füge anderen nicht zu, was du nicht willst, dass dir zugefügt wird.“ Dabei steht der Konfuzianismus zwischen den Extremen des Universalismus und Tribalismus. Es gibt eine Moral, eben die Menschlichkeit, die man allen Menschen gegenüber walten lässt; dennoch ist das Verhältnis der Einzelnen zueinander wichtig. Man verhält sich den Obigen gegenüber mit Respekt, den Unteren gegenüber mit Milde. Die Eltern leiten die Kinder mit Strenge und Güte, die Kinder achten die Eltern mit Respekt. Dies setzt sich in allen Bereichen fort: es gibt eben keine Gleichheit, aus der die Moral entspringt, sondern was sittlich ist, bestimmt das Verhältnis der Menschen, wie sie zueinander stehen. Damit wird die gesellschaftliche Ordnung aufrecht erhalten. Die Rollen der Menschen sind eben unterschiedlich, und das Urbild dazu ist die Familie. Der Vater als Beschützer und Leiter, die Mutter als nährend und umsorgend, die Kinder folgsam und respektvoll. Auch die Rollen von Mann und Frau können nicht die gleichen sein, sie sind Abbilder von Yin und Yang, dem männlichen Himmelsprinzip und dem weiblichen der Erde: der Himmel beleuchtet und überwölbt, die Erde trägt und nährt. Es ist keine Unfreiheit, keine Ungleichheit der Würde, aber es sind sich ergänzende Rollen, wie eben im Yin-Yang Symbol: zwei Teile deren gegensätzliche Rollen einander zu einem Ganzen ergänzen, da sie sich ihren natürlichen Anlagen entsprechend einbringen. Ethik von der Familie als Kern aus zu denken, ist die Balance zwischen Universalismus und Tribalismus. Die Familie steht einem näher als alle anderen, ihr ist man zuhöchst verpflichtet, danach kommt die eigene Region, und dann die Nation, der Staat, und erst danach die Menschheit als Ganzes. Es ist aber auch kein Tribalismus, in dem nur dem eigenen Stamm moralische Pflicht gilt. Die Menschlichkeit und Gerechtigkeit gelten gegen alle, aber die moralische Pflicht ist vom inneren Kreise, von der Familie ausgehend, abgestuft. Dem Eigenen gilt die höhere Pflicht als dem Fremden.

Im Kern muss aber die Sanftheit, die Menschlichkeit stehen, sie darf kein Zwang, keine Gewalt sein. Als Konfuzius Richter war und ein Vater seinen Sohn verklagt, weil dieser ihm ungehorsam war, sperrte er einige Zeit beide ein, da er sagte, durch seine Härte habe auch der Vater seine Pflicht, seinen Sohn weise und gerecht zu leiten, missachtet. Bei Menzius, dem Schüler Konfuzius wird dies auch auf die Politik ausgedehnt: eine Regierung verliert ihr „Mandat des Himmels“, wenn sie gegen das Wohl des Volkes handelt. Es ist bei aller Betonung von Respekt und Sittlichkeit kein einseitiges Vorrecht der Oberen, sondern eine auf Gegenseitigkeit beruhende Ordnung. Die Pflicht der Oberen ist Vorbild zu sein auch in der privaten Lebensführung, sonst hört sie auf wahre Obrigkeit zu sein und wird Tyrann.

Pietät, Sitte und Bildung

Das dritte Standbein der Philosophie macht die Pietät aus. Das meint durchaus eine religiöse Komponente. Auch wenn China keine Religion im Sinne fest stehender Dogmen kennt und eine eher sanfte Religiosität übt, war für Konfuzius die Religion wichtig. „Ein Mensch ohne Glauben ist wie ein Wagen ohne Joch und Deichsel: wie soll der voran kommen?“ Die religiöse Pietät wurzelt im Chinesischen wie in allen heidnischen Religionen, in der Verehrung der Ahnen. In jedem Haushalt ist ein Ahnenschrein, vor ihm finden die täglichen Andachten statt. Man ist mit den eigenen Ahnen verbunden, eine in fast allen vor-Christlichen Religionen verbreitete Vorstellung. Ahnen und Götter sind etwas in der Küche, im Haushalt, etwas Persönliches und kein ferner, abstrakter Gott auf einem Thron. Das ist eine nahe, weltliche und persönliche Religiosität. Wohl gibt es auch Hohe Gottheiten, den Himmel und die Erde, der wichtige Bezug aber sind die eigenen Ahnen, die aufgestiegen sind, in deren Reihe man sich verpflichtet fühlt. Das Gefühl der Verbundenheit umfasst so die Lebenden in der Familie, ebenso wie die Verstorbenen. Man verliert das Band der eigenen Geschichte nicht, weil es jeden Tag in der pietätvollen Andacht ins Gedächtnis gerufen wird.

Pietät ist ein sich zurück nehmen, man sieht sich als Teil eines größeren Ganzen, eines Erbes, das einen verpflichtet, und das man würdig weiter gibt. Das ist ein ganz anderes Bewusstsein, als der Individualismus des Westens, in dem jeder Einzelne als „seines Glückes Schmied“ angesehen wird, und die Einzelleistung gegenüber der Sippe, der Gemeinschaft, den Vorrang hat. So nehmen wir immer die Geschichte als eine Aneinanderreihung einzelner „Genies“ war, als ob diese quasi aus dem Nichts sich selbst erschaffen hätten und ihren Status niemand anders, keinem Vorangegangenen schulden würden. Mit entsprechendem Leichtsinn wird denn auch heute das Alte zerschlagen. Es gibt keinen Respekt für das Gewachsene. Konfuzius betont die Bedeutung des Gewachsenen immer wieder. Geduld und Selbstbeherrschung, seine Zeit abwarten, nichts Erzwingen, sich im Einklang mit dem natürlichen Wandel bewegen, das sind in ganz Asien herausragende Vorstellungen.

In Japan gibt es das Sprichwort, der Nagel der herausragt, wird eingeschlagen. Was für uns Individualisten erst einmal grausam klingt, kann man auch ganz anders sehen. Ich hatte die Gelegenheit, zweimal nach Japan zu reisen. Meine Erwartungen waren ähnlich wie die vieler Westler: eine Kultur erzwungener, falscher Höflichkeit, die nur Maske sei. Die Doppelstadt Tokio – Yokohama ist ein gigantisches Menschengewusel, von einem Ausmaß, das man sich als Deutscher nicht vorstellen kann. Dennoch herrscht eine sehr große Ruhe in der Öffentlichkeit. Nie habe ich schreiende, tobende oder laute Kinder erlebt, nie zankende Menschen. Das Spannende ist: man fühlt sich durch diese allseits geltende Höflichkeit schnell extrem entspannt. Man wird selbst höflich und sanft, weil man weiß: niemand macht mir den Platz streitig, niemand motzt mich an, ich laufe nicht durch die Großstadt wie durch ein Kriegsgebiet. Die Wirkung ist enorm. Innerhalb kurzer Zeit verliert man die Abwehrhaltung, die gespannte Aufmerksamkeit, die man als Großstädter ansonsten erworben hat. Und nicht umsonst: Japan zählt zu den sichersten Ländern der Welt. Obwohl es Japan ist, dient es als Beispiel gut, weil man in Japan, mehr als im durch die kommunistische Revolution verdorbenen China, besser den Geist konfuzianischer Werte im Alltag erleben kann; sie prägen und dominieren ganz Asien.

Das ist was Sittlichkeit meint: ein sich zurücknehmen, aber keine Kriecherei. Konfuzius betont immer wieder, die Form wahren. Was uns als Zwang scheint, ist eigentlich ein Sicherungsmechanismus gegen ein Übermaß.

„Ehrerbietung ohne Einhaltung der Form wird zu Kriecherei. Vorsicht ohne Einhaltung der Form wird zu Ängstlichkeit. Mut ohne Einhaltung der Form wird zu Auflehnung. Aufrichtigkeit ohne Einhaltung der Form wird zu Grobheit.“

Dieses Konzept der Sittlichkeit ist eine Selbstbeherrschung, durch die man sich voreinander schützt, aber auch, durch das man sich selbst schützt, vor einem sinnlosen Übermaß, vor geistloser Kriecherei und Unterwürfigkeit, die Konfuzius Lehre eben gerade nicht ist. Der „Edle“ in der konfuzianischen Lehre ist kein Superkapitalist, der das Maximum an Profit für sich sucht, wie es das individualistische Ideal der westlichen Moderne darstellt, sondern er ist Teil seines Bezugsrahmens: der Familie, der Nachbarschaft und dem Staat. Diese verfällt von oben, wird aber von unten her erneuert. „Wenn du den Staat verbessern willst, musst du erst die Regionen verbessern. Wenn du die Regionen verbessern willst, musst du erst die Städte verbessern. Wenn du die Städte verbessern willst, musst du erst die Nachbarschaften verbessern. Wenn du die Nachbarschaften verbessern willst, musst du erst die Familie verbessern. Wenn du die Familie verbessern willst, verbessere erst dich selbst.“ Die Ethik geht in immer größeren Kreisen vom Kleinen aufwärts. Sie ist keine Schulmeisterei eines Obrigkeitsstaates.

Den fünften Grundpfeiler macht die Bildung, sie ist für Konfuzius Mittel und Selbstzweck zugleich. Unbildung war für ihn ein großer Fluch. „Ein Volk ohne Bildung in den Krieg führen, das heißt, es dem Untergang weihen.“ Hier kommen zwei Übel zusammen: ein ungebildetes Volk und eine Führung in Krieg und Gewalt: das kann nur schlecht ausgehen. Nur Bildung ermöglicht Verstehen, ermöglicht, seinen Platz und seinen Weg in der Gemeinschaft finden. Aber für Konfuzius, der sein Leben lang nicht den Erfolg seiner Lehre erlebte, war Bildung auch ein Trost, etwas um das man sich immer bemüht, um sein Wissen und seinen Charakter immer zu bessern. Für Konfuzius bezeichnet der Weg des Edlen Fleiß, Hingabe und immer wieder Selbstverbesserung, Lernen und Bildung erlangen. „Wer sich nie schämt, wie kann der sich bessern?“ Es ist diese Scham, die den Menschen heute abhanden gekommen ist im Westen. Man will sich nicht bessern, ja man kann sich gar nicht mehr bessern, weil keiner mehr ein rechtes Gefühl für die eigenen Unzulänglichkeiten hat. Jeder ist ein kleiner König, von Kindesbeinen an werden Menschen ermutigt, sich nicht zu ändern, dass alles was sie tun recht und billig sei. Wir wurden überschwemmt mit Ratgebern, die uns sagen, wir sind ok, egal wie wir sind, wir müssen alles akzeptieren und eine kritische Selbst-Befragung, die Notwendigkeit sich zu bessern, haben wir damit verloren. Es wurde den Menschen aberzogen sich zu schämen. Dumme, rohe, derbe Menschen werden uns überall vorgeführt, im Fernsehen, in der Politik ebenso. Es sind oben wie unten Menschen unfähig der Scham, eine schamlose Gesellschaft, die keinen Sinn für die eigenen Charakterschwächen mehr hat, die eigene Unbildung und Primitivität. „Die Alten hielten mit ihren Worten zurück, denn sie schämten sich, mit ihren Taten hinter ihren Worten zurück zu bleiben.“ Heute agieren die Leute im Westen genau umgekehrt: wer am lautesten Schreit und am größten angibt, der bekommt. Damit kommen die Dummen und die Primitiven nach oben.

Was uns die Perspektive Asiens und Konfuzius sagen könnte, damit ließe sich viel sagen. Mich erfüllt in der Betrachtung klar das Gefühl, dass wir auf eine ganz grundlegende Weise in die Irre gegangen sind, und dass es hier keine schnellen Lösungen gibt, sondern nur ein sehr geduldiges Aufbauen, oder erst einmal ein Bewahren für die Zeit des erneuten Aufbaus. Konfuzius glaubte in seiner Lebensaufgabe gescheitert zu sein; er erlebte das Ende der Zeit des Chaos nicht mehr, noch erlebte er, welch überragenden Einfluss seine Lehre in ganz Asien erreichen würde. Dennoch ließ er sich nicht verdrießen, sondern lehrte gelassen und heiter bis an sein Ende.

„Nicht, dass ich kein Amt erhalte, sollte mich betrüben, sondern dass ich nicht würdig sei, ein Amt zu erhalten.“

Einige gesammelte Aphorismen

Der Weise hat in seiner Einstellung zur Welt weder Vorlieben noch Vorurteile. Er ist auf der Seite des Rechts.

Dem Menschen, der der Menschlichkeit entbehrt, helfen keine frommen Gesten.

Geschickte Reden und eine zurechtgemachte Erscheinung sind selten Zeichen von Mitmenschlichkeit.

Der Weise ist friedliebend, aber er kennt keine Kompromisse. Der gewöhnliche Mensch macht Kompromisse, aber ist nie friedliebend.

Der Edle ist kein Gerät.

Gute Menschen machen die Schönheit eines Platzes aus. Wer die Wahl hat, und nicht unter guten Menschen wohnt, wie kann der weise genannt werden?

Der Gebildete richtet sein Streben auf die Wahrheit; aber wenn einer sich schlechter Kleidung und schlechter Nahrung schämt, der ist noch nicht reif, um mitzureden.

Wer sich selbst regiert, was sollte der Schwierigkeiten haben zu regieren? Wer sich nicht selbst regieren kann, was geht den die Regierung von anderen an?

Sept films à voir ou à revoir sur le Cycle arthurien

Sept films à voir ou à revoir sur le Cycle arthurien

Ex: http://cerclenonconforme.hautetfort.com

Issu d'un ensemble de textes médiévaux autocentrés autour de la figure du roi Arthur, le Cycle arthurien compte parmi les plus merveilleuses gestes européennes. Loin de constituer un texte unique, la légende arthurienne s'est au contraire enrichie, à partir du 9ème siècle, de divers apports issus des traditions orales bretonnes et, plus généralement celtiques, compilés par plusieurs générations d'écrivains. C'est le poète du 12ème siècle Chrétien de Troyes qui, le premier, fixe par écrit la légende dans ses Romans de la Table Ronde et fait émerger la Quête du Graal, voyage initiatique parsemé d'embuches visant à la découverte du vase contenant le Sang du Christ. De la même manière, l'amour que se portent le chevalier Lancelot et Guenièvre préfigure-t-il les romans d'amour courtois qui dicteront une part importante de la littérature médiévale. Et la Quête de transcender très rapidement les frontières du monde celte pour s'internationaliser et former la quintessence de l'aventure européenne, jusque dans les mondes germanique et slave qui conservent le souvenir de la Table Ronde dans le Royaume mythique de Bretagne, regroupant une majeure partie de l'Angleterre contemporaine et un territoire non défini de la Bretagne armoricaine. L'unité de temps est également conservée quelque soit sa forme et les influences internationales subies. Aussi, le Cycle arthurien prend-il place après le départ des troupes romaines d'Angleterre à la fin du 5ème et au début du 6ème siècles. Transformée, réécrite, adaptée, la littérature arthurienne parvient jusqu'à notre monde moderne, popularisée de nouveau par les écrits de Xavier de Langlais ou Jean Markale au 20ème siécle. Et il ne sera pas exagéré d'indiquer, qu'avec Homère et Virgile, le Cycle arthurien est père de toute la littérature de contes et légendes initiatiques ; Le Seigneur des anneaux de John Ronald Reuel Tolkien demeurant la plus parfaite illustration. Païen et chrétien solaire, le Cycle arthurien a massivement débordé le cadre de la littérature pour être largement repris dans l'ensemble des autres arts, de la peinture au théâtre en passant par le chant, et bien évidemment le cinéma. Plus ou moins inspirés, dans tous les sens du terme..., du Cycle arthurien, plus ou moins fidèles aux textes initiaux ou, au contraire, en totale confrontation, on dénombre pas moins d'une soixantaine de films, téléfilms, dessins animés et séries s'y rattachant. Et le phénomène semble s'accélérer dans la seconde moitié du 20ème siècle. Rentré de plein fouet dans notre ère désenchantée et matérialiste, le cinéma, majoritairement anglo-saxon , entreprit de contribuer au réenchantement du monde. Le chef-d'œuvre en la matière est signé John Boorman qui rend à la légende ses lettres de noblesse païenne, évolienne et eliadienne pourrait-on dire. Par ailleurs déjà auteur de Lancelot et la reine chevalerie hyperboréenne et féminité, l'écrivain Nicolas Bonnal, dans son dernier ouvrage Le Paganisme au cinéma, indique qu'Excalibur "est une grande réussite : la fin de cette chevalerie arthurienne est une fin de notre monde. Bienvenue après au centre commercial et à la salle de bains américaine". Plus qu'un film, Excalibur est un crachat lancé à la figure hideuse de la médiocrité contemporaine. Excalibur et quelques autres à découvrir maintenant ! Et la Quête ne fait que commencer en réalité. Le destin de l'Europe est à ce prix...

LES BRUMES D'AVALON

Titre original : The Mists of Avalon

Film américano-germano-tchèque d'Uli Edel (2001)

Une invasion barbare se précise sur les côtes anglaises. Les hommes de Camelot se préparent à défendre le Royaume d'Avalon dont Viviane est la grande prêtresse de ce monde invisible aux impies. Elle est la Dame du Lac chargée de la préservation des traditions et mythes païens du royaume. Même pour les fidèles, Avalon devient un lieu mystérieux de plus en plus introuvable tant sont nombreux ceux qui se détournent de la Déesse-Mère. Il faut un roi à la Bretagne ! Et c'est aux femmes qu'il revient de le trouver. Viviane est rejointe dans sa quête par Morgaine, désignée à sa succession un jour, et sa sœur Morgause, femme du Roi Lot qui, au prix de nombreuses infamies, intrigue en vue de capter l'héritage du trône à son profit. L'irréversible combat que vont se mener ces trois femmes va changer à jamais la destinée du Royaume d'Arthur Pendragon et de ses chevaliers...

Réalisée pour la télévision, cette mini-série de deux téléfilms est bien évidemment tirée de deux romans du Cycle d'Avalon de l'écrivaine américaine Marion Zimmer Bradley qui assume une réécriture de fond en comble des mythes arthuriens. Sacrilège !, ne manquerons pas de hurler certains d'entre nous. Fidèle au roman, Edel filme son histoire à l'aune de ses personnages féminins narrant l'histoire d'Arthur au cours de trois heures de téléfilm à grand spectacle qui contiennent cependant de nombreuses longueurs. Et c'est peu dire... Le réalisateur filme, en revanche, magnifiquement certaines scènes, à l'instar des feux de Beltaine. On pourrait croire au premier abord à un film de contes et légendes pour enfants. Les têtes blondes feront pourtant bien de ne pas regarder certaines scènes de mœurs assez... "païennes".

CAMELOT

Film américain de Joshua Logan (1967)

Roi du pays pacifié de Camelot, ceint par une merveilleuse forêt enchantée, Arthur épouse Guenièvre et fonde la confrérie des chevaliers de la Table Ronde. Ce mariage arrangé devenu romance procure au royaume une forte période de stabilité, de liberté et de justice, dont les chevaliers doivent constituer le fer de lance. Arrive de France Lancelot du Lac qui formule le vœu de rejoindre l'ordre chevaleresque. Arthur voit en celui-ci un fils mais le chevalier trahit son roi en tombant éperdument amoureux de la reine Guenièvre dont il devient bientôt l'amant. Cet amour interdit précipite la fin de la confrérie...

Le Cycle arthurien se décline à toutes les sauces. Aussi en 1960, Alan Jay Lerner et Frederick Loewe produisent-ils une comédie musicale à Broadway, adaptée d'un roman de Terence Hanbury White, dont la réalisation de Logan constitue l'adaptation cinématographique revisitée. A titre d'exemple, sont manquants les personnages de Viviane et la fée Morgane. Idem, la Quête du Graal. Camelot est l'anti-Excalibur de Boorman et développe un curieux univers Flower Power, il est vrai bien contemporain en 1967. Une plaisante mise en scène, des décors et costumes soignés, et pourtant, Camelot laisse un goût amer. La faute peut-être à une théâtralisation trop académique qui peine à convaincre. A plus forte raison, le film dure trois heures... De même, la qualité des chansons mises en scène laisse à désirer. Pour une camelote musicale, c'est un comble !

LES CHEVALIERS DE LA TABLE RONDE

Titre original : The Knights of the Round Table

Film anglais de Richard Thorpe (1953)

Au 6ème siècle, au sein d'un royaume miné par les dissensions internes, le Roi Arthur s'appuie sur Merlin l'Enchanteur et le chevalier Lancelot pour ramener la paix sur l'ensemble de ses terres. L'ordre des Chevaliers de la Table Ronde qu'Arthur fonde doit pourvoir à ce but. A la cour, l'intrépidité et l'élégance du chevalier Lancelot font l'unanimité auprès de tous. Presque tous..., car Mordred, un des chefs de clan rebelle jalouse le prestige dont jouit le chevalier et cherche par tous les moyens à ourdir contre lui. La reine Guenièvre est son talon d'Achille ; Lancelot et la reine éprouvant de forts sentiments auxquels leur loyauté empêche de se livrer. La fée Morgane, mère de Mordred, diffuse la calomnie dans tout le royaume. Afin de faire taire les médisances, Lancelot épouse dame Elaine et fuit la cour pour guerroyer. Les périls pointent à l'horizon. Lancelot absent, la malédiction s'abat sur le royaume sans protection face à l'appétit saxon, affaibli qu'il est par les tensions au sein de l'ordre de chevalerie...

Une année après Ivanhoé, la société de production hollywoodienne Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer récidive en confiant à Thorpe une adaptation du Cycle du Graal. Et la M.G.M. met le paquet dans cette superproduction à très haut budget pour l'époque. Pour qui n'est pas un héraut fanatique de l'imaginaire arthurien, le résultat est à la hauteur grâce à un subtil mélange de romance dramatique et de guerre chevaleresque, accompagné d'une sublime musique de Miklos Rózsa. Il est une curieuse tradition pour chaque réalisateur s'essayant au cinéma arthurien : gommer certains personnages et parties de l'intrigue. Ici, c'est à Viviane d'en faire les frais tandis que Merlin et la Quête du Graal ne sont quasiment pas évoqués. Une fois n'est pas coutume, Ava Gardner peine à convaincre, à la différence de Robert Taylor, grande figure de la geste cinématographique médiévale anglo-américaine. Un petit bijou.

EXCALIBUR

Film américain de John Boorman (1981)

De Merlin l'Enchanteur, Uther Pendragon reçoit l'épée Excalibur sortie des eaux par la Dame du Lac. A Uther revient la mission d'unir et de pacifier le Royaume de Bretagne. Mais les espoirs de Merlin sont bientôt ruinés par les amours du Roi qui convoite la belle Ygraine, épouse du duc de Cornouaille. Afin qu'Uther séduise Ygraine, Merlin use de sa magie et offre les traits du duc à Uther. Du lit illégitime nait Arthur qu'enlève Merlin à son père en échange de l'utilisation de ses pouvoirs. A la mort d'Uther, Excalibur demeure scellée dans une stèle de granit. Il est dit que seul celui qui parviendra à retirer l'Epée deviendra Roi. Seul Arthur parvient à extraire le métal de la pierre et le brandir. Quelques années plus tard, le nouveau Roi épouse Guenièvre en même temps qu'il fonde la Table Ronde. Sa demi-soeur, la fée Morgane intrigue et parvient à enfanter un bâtard d'Arthur. L'enfant va provoquer la perte du Roi...

Si le film de Boorman peut sembler avoir vieilli sous certains aspects, quel chef-d'œuvre il demeure ! Le réalisateur livre l'adaptation cinématographique la plus fidèle au Cycle arthurien dans sa chronologie malgré quelques entorses imposées par la nécessité de ne pas produire une œuvre trop longue. Elle est également la transposition la plus païenne de la légende au cinéma tant un grand soin est apporté aux rapports de l'homme à Dame Nature et aux apports prodigués par celle-ci. Boorman fait également la part belle à la Quête du Graal en opposition avec les autres réalisations arthuriennes. Cet Excalibur résonne, en outre, comme une tragédie grecque dans laquelle le destin de chacun est aliéné, empêchant toute possibilité d'échappatoire. Quant aux mélomanes, ils apprécieront, à n'en pas douter, l'immixtion précieuse d'œuvres de Richard Wagner et Carl Orff. A voir et à revoir!

LANCELOT DU LAC

Film franco-italien de Robert Bresson (1974)

La Quête du Graal se solde par un échec et a décimé les chevaliers de la Table Ronde l'un après l'autre au cours de furieux combats. Parmi les derniers survivants contraints au désespoir maintenant que l'ordre chevaleresque est sur le point de disparaître, le chevalier Lancelot regagne la cour du Roi Artus. Il y retrouve Guenièvre qui, bien que Reine entretient une relation adultérine avec le noble chevalier. Lancelot se persuade que l'échec de sa Quête est une punition divine exigée par Dieu pour que le chevalier expie sa relation cachée. Humblement, Lancelot demande à son amante de le délivrer de son serment de l'aimer ; ce que la Reine refuse. Gauvain exhorte à la poursuite de la Quête tandis que Mordred, souffrant du prestige du chevalier, entend user de tous les stratagèmes pour le déshonorer. Plus que tout autre, il devine la passion adultère qui unit les amants et en apporte la preuve irréfutable à Artus...

Spécialiste de l'adaptation au cinéma des œuvres de Georges Bernanos, mais encore de Léon Tolstoï et Fiodor Dostoïevski, Bresson prend le risque de s'attaquer au mythe arthurien. Le film n'est pas le meilleur du genre mais conserve un intérêt certain dans l'"identité" cinématographique française de l'œuvre. A la différence des adaptations américaines ou anglaises, le présent film offre une transcription plus austère et plus dépouillée, plus cérébrale et plus théâtrale également. Cela manque certainement de panache mais l'intention est louable. Bresson ne conserve qu'un seul personnage féminin en la personne de Guenièvre. Exit les autres ! Mais on ne restera pas insensible à la scène lors de laquelle elle prend un bain. Moins spectaculaire que les autres, il n'en est pas moins à voir. Le Lancelot de Bresson est largement supérieur en tout cas à celui de Jerry Zucker réalisé deux décennies plus tard.

MONTY PYTHON, SACRE GRAAL

Titre original : Monty Python and the Holy Grail

Film anglais de Terry Gilliam et Terry Jones (1974)

Recruter des chevaliers de la Table Ronde, tel est le défi qui anime le Roi Arthur. L'entreprise n'est pas sans difficultés et les tentatives d'approches du chevalier noir ou de paysans anarcho-syndicalistes s'avèrent vaines. Au cours du procès d'une sorcière, Sir Bedevere le Sage accepte de se joindre au Roi, bientôt rejoints par d'autres chevaliers sans montures. Cheminant vers Camelot, la petite troupe part en Quête du Graal à la suite d'une divine rencontre. Un château renfermant des soldats français serait détenteur d'un Graal. Qu'à cela ne tienne, nos courageux chevaliers entreprennent la construction d'un lapin de Troie afin de pénétrer à l'intérieur des lieux. Mais le sort s'acharne contre les chevaliers qui oublient de se cacher à l'intérieur de la structure. Les hommes d'Arthur sont contraints d'abandonner toute velléité de tenir plus longtemps le siège car les Français se battent vaillamment en lançant des vaches domestiques depuis la muraille. Et encore ne sont-ils pas au bout de leur dangereuses aventures. Heureusement, la police motorisée veille...

Hilarant que cette parodie du mythe arthurien, la plus montypythonesque qui soit ! Ça n'est que succession de gags tous plus loufoques les uns que les autres, anachronismes surréalistes, danses absurdes, redondances abrutissantes ; le tout apparaissant dès la première seconde du générique. Il paraît que les loufiats Gilliam, Jones et consorts ne pouvaient produire que des navets. Alors l'industrie cinématographique anglaise refusa d'y mettre le moindre penny. Le film put quand même être produit grâce aux largesses de Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd ou encore des Rolling Stones. Comme quoi l'Angleterre a quand même pu léguer à l'humanité quelques bonnes choses. En cherchant bien... Même Henri Béraud eut pu esquisser un sourire à la vision de ce film irrésistible ! A côté de Monty Python, la série, quoique réussie, de Kaamelott, fait figure de thèse d'histoire médiévale !

PERCEVAL LE GALLOIS

Film français d'Eric Rohmer (1978)

Perceval est un jeune valet éduqué par sa mère loin de toute présence masculine. Aussitôt qu'il croise par hasard des chevaliers, Perceval rêve d'en épouser le code et ses dangers. Malgré la farouche opposition de sa mère qui a vu mourir au combat son mari et ses deux autres fils, Perceval quitte le château maternel afin de gagner la cour du Roi Arthur et être adoubé à son tour. Il y apprendra le maniement des armes et aura à venger une offense faite à une damoiselle dont l'honneur a été bafoué par un triste personnage que Lancelot tue sans sourciller. Il est désormais temps pour le preux chevalier de partir en Quête mais auparavant de saluer sa mère. Se dresse alors sur son chemin un étrange château où le chevalier est invité à demeurer le temps d'un étrange festin...

A l'instar de Bresson, Rohmer fait une brève incursion dans l'imaginaire médiéval avec cette curieuse adaptation du Perceval de Chrétien de Troyes. Curieuse mais réussie ! Curieux décors en papier mâché en effet qui ne sont pas sans rappeler l'art de l'enluminure médiévale, en ce qui concerne la disproportion des perspectives, mélangés à des décors de séries animées pour enfants des années 1970 et en contraste total avec le grand soin apporté aux costumes. D'aucuns seront effarés de cette hardiesse mais le style esthétique est intéressant. A plus forte raison, si Rohmer traduit en langue moderne le roman courtois du 12ème siècle, il en conserve la versification. La musique est composée de chœurs s'inspirant d'airs médiévaux. Loin de l'argot célinien, Fabrice Luchini dans l'un de ses tous premiers grands rôles. Ce film est un bijou majestueusement conservé dans son écrin !

Virgile / C.N.C.

Note du C.N.C.: Toute reproduction éventuelle de ce contenu doit mentionner la source.