What is Tradition?

Truth exists. In all things, and as an infinitude. It is therefore self evident that the goal of life should be to become aware of, understand, and then embody that truth. The methodologies associated with this spiritual path are diverse, as evidenced by the multiplicity of ancient religions. But like how all things in our world share a divine principle, so do these methods share a common feature. This is Tradition, or in other words, the transmission and therefore preservation of absolute knowledge through the transitory shifts in human history.

The past five-hundred years of Man’s existence have seen an unprecedented drop in this transmission. Whereas tradition used to run like a rushing river through all cultures of earth, it now exists only as a trickling stream in a shrinking number of places. Man has forgotten his eternal center. If western civilization is to continue its excellence, then a rediscovery and application of its tradition is necessary. Traditionalism is both the personal method and the cultural gateway through which this rededication to the Truth can be actualized.

En Español.

News

With the collapse of tradition, two different worldviews have taken its place: scientific materialism, and religious superstition. Both of these positions are equally modern, although it is the adherents of the former that explicitly claim to be so, while those of the latter claim to uphold traditional ideas, although their ideas lack proper metaphysical understanding.

A good example of these two worldviews can be found in the reaction to the earthquake in Haiti, particularly the controversy surrounding the claim made by some adherents of the superstitious worldview that the earthquake was divine retribution for sinful conduct (Pat Robertson has been the most prominent to make this claim). The adherents of scientific materialism naturally reject this idea, although their explanation of the phenomenon is also unsatisfactory.

The situation in Haiti is worth examining because throughout history natural disasters and other environmental factors have often played a significant role in human events. The materialists seize on this fact and claim that environmental determinism is the key factor in the rise and fall of civilizations (Jared Diamond is one of the more prominent proponents of this view). This is a standard anti-traditional approach, an approach that assumes that the greater comes from the lesser, in this case, that the material world is responsible for human civilization, rather than divine creation. Leaving aside the metaphysical difficulties of this materialist approach, we would like to offer a more sophisticated way of looking at natural disaster and its effect on civilizations.

rotten2

The important point is that the result of a natural disaster is dependent on two things: the direct effects of the disaster (in the case of an earthquake, these would be the actual shaking of the earth and the following destruction of buildings, etc), and the level of the health of the individuals and civilization. In other words, disasters of the same magnitude will have different results for civilizations that are at different levels of internal health, depending on how well the individuals in those civilizations can deal with the difficulties. The earthquake in Haiti resulted in much more chaos than in would have in another country (for example, in western Europe), because the people in Haiti were already more chaotic in their psychic existence. The people who turned to savage violence following the disaster did so because they lack spiritual and mental order. The poor infrastructure of the country is also a result of a poor inner state. When the disaster struck, some of the external factors that held back this inner chaos were removed, and the latent chaos manifested itself. Everything in the material world has its source in the Divine, and earthquakes sometimes strike Haiti, and sometimes strike elsewhere. They can be a factor in the success or failure of a civilization, but not the only factor, barring a disaster of extreme proportions that physically destroys every member of a civilization.

Turning now to the problem with the superstitious account, while its proponents are correct to claim that this destructive phenomenon has a divine origin, they do not properly illustrate that punishment for wrongdoing begins long before external manifestations of retribution, and even seem to think that sinful acts are disadvantageous only after the punishment itself. If the Haitians were indeed turning away from the Divine, their punishment was found in the very act of turning away, just as order and wisdom are more fundamentally their own reward than any material benefit that might result from them. When turning away, one loses the ability to instill the world with order and becomes an inevitable vehicle for destruction. When natural disasters occur, the outer and inner destructiveness work as allies.

Up to this point we have looked at the situation from a very narrow perspective. In examining the question of how different societies react to natural disasters, we have judged the health or sickness of a society by the level of technical infrastructure and cooperation among the societies members. But we want to make it clear that in so doing we are not holding up modern, western societies as paragons, for these societies, while technically proficient, are equally lacking in spiritual values. In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that the spiritual life of western man is as destructive and chaotic as the current external situation in Haiti. Even if our technical infrastructure is perpetuated and perhaps improves, our inner life verges ever closer to annihilation, towards being enveloped in formlessness. Some westerners deride the Haitians for their inability to bring order to their external environment, but only because they see only outer appearances and are unaware of how they themselves have neglected the eternal part within us, the part that truly matters.

Mixing modernism and ecology results in an environmental movement that does not wish to sacrifice its “progress” and modern comforts. Adding mass media to this combination produces a superficial ecology that has no intent of questioning our world-view as deep-ecology does, but instead entertains us within our consumerist mental frames exploiting a purely emotional approach. .

An example of this is celebrities getting naked for animals. “I’d rather go naked than wear fur”, they say, appearing to deliberately lessen their social status through humility, but ironically only to increase it. These stars and their endorsers seek only fame and naive consumers, selling a product that appears to be critical of modern society, but that only produces televised gossip. And on the other side of the screen, there exists a distracted and sentimentalist audience that cannot see the bigger picture of the ecological problem.

fur_lady 5Vanity and mawkishness in a mass media product. What results can we expect after the trend is gone?

“Fur has never been more popular,” says a spokesman for Origin Assured, an initiative developed by the International Fur Trade Federation that states that it sources “ethical” fur. “From 1998 to 2008 there has been year-on-year growth in global sales for fur. People now are more comfortable showing their love of fur.”

-link

We must question ourselves in order to face the truth. We must also have the sense of responsibility to take the necessary actions to correct this wrongdoing. We must be smarter and less sly, more compassionate and less naively sentimental. A deep understanding of spirituality can provoke these changes.

To be in contact with holy grace turns us into compassionate, satisfied beings, willing to choose long term well being in lieu of instantaneous comfort and entertainment. This radiance of grace goes deep into our sensitivity, turning compassion in all living beings into an absolutely honest sentiment, making us eager to do what is necessary to preserve biological diversity. A fundamental revaluation of our role on this planet and a critical vision of our empowering as a species demands a heroic amount of love that can’t be found in pop culture, but only in the higher forms of Culture. Once this higher love is settled in ourselves, we are ready to act and aware enough to do it sensibly; only then are we ready to embrace ecology as a science and to face the real problems: overpopulation and culture-less consumerism.

As we can see, pop ecology is a misdirection of real compassion, which manifests itself in a fashion of love that bypasses judgment, handicapping itself so that it cannot grow up to become a strong piety. Pop ecology has no roots in order to become permanent and no conviction to be effective and transcendental. There’s an intrinsic fascination with vanity in these “naking” campaigns that in no way is able raise our noblest and heroic thinking in order to protect biodiversity.

Organizations like PETA have now abandoned the bandwagon of fur to ride on the bandwagon of climatic change. We are now seeing another fashion of pop ecology, and we can foretell another failure as well.

En Español

This method of spiritual recognition has two inescapable and mutually inclusive sides: on one hand ethics as a guide for behavior for the external, material world, and on the other hand a contemplative exercise for inward, spiritual experience. In order to know the Divine, beyond all the acknowledged metaphysical theory, both these interdependent and indivisible aspects must be present within a given religion.¹

What exactly is this contemplative praxis? Very simple: Prayer.

Read the full article here.

“The first thing that becomes apparent in times like this is how imaginary the economy is. Not imaginary in the sense of fake, necessarily, but in the sense of the way economic realities depend on how reality is imagined. So much of the panic selling of stocks, for example, is based on perception of reality, which then becomes the reality. When billions of dollars of wealth can vanish overnight, it becomes apparent how imaginary wealth is.

[…]

Ethics in the economy depends on character, not calculation. It depends on being a good person, not on “stakeholders” or other utilitarian considerations. The word “ethics” comes from the Greek word for “character,” and such an approach through what humans could aspire to be dominated Western — and for that matter Eastern — thinking for millennia.”

-Link

Maybe the reason that best explains why we understand ethics in a relativist way is that our modern perception of reality is entirely defined in functions of production. Economic science makes whatever falls into its study field relative, because it is grounded in the valuations made by individuals in reference to their circumstantial needs. This is not harmful when applied to merchandise, but when every human act is capitalized, everything is determined as good or bad by consumers. The ideal becomes capital, and goodness becomes what is desirable for the most.

If someone wants to access the goods or services of his choice, he must act according to certain exchange rules of the economic system: ethics is reduced to a certain set of contrived rules that allows individuals to build wealth and to access other goods. Ethics is no longer a spiritual understanding of behavior, but only an implement of the economic system, and thus it subordinates its own authenticity to the dominion of the economy.

Economics studies how we produce and exchange our goods and services, but it invades realms beyond its capacities when it attempts to answer why we produce at all. It circles in a redundant logic where the result is “we produce to consume and we consume to produce”. We think that we can overcome this redundancy with the use of entertainment products and services, but unfortunately, making this material pleasure the teleological goal of the economy leaves man in the evident desperation of our times. Even worse, both socialism and capitalism should produce wealth, services, products and leisure time, but their “ethics” and purposes corrupt and fail because they lack the element that transcends and govern their materiality: Tradition.

market

How does Tradition make a difference in our understanding of economics? By making economies just production systems rather than all-regulating utilitarian mechanisms, and by maintaining Culture as its goal and putting its ideal over the category of capital. Ethics coming from Tradition regulates our earthly activity, transcending the mundane and its momentary interests. In this ordination, only under the shelter of Tradition, ethics acquires sense when applied to every material aspect.

Truth over economy, in order to not subordinate ethics to the economy. Any ethical code without Truth becomes an exploitable device to those individuals that somehow find a way to violate it. Truth acts in the soul of individuals making them better people, who will find in the mystique of their labor enough satisfaction and strength to not become corrupted. Every persisting goodness in this world grounds in no different fact than this.

Traditionalists do not believe that Truth is that which is convenient, but that Truth is always convenient. We can transcend the redundant hedonism of our current socio-economic system through Tradition by adapting our acts and desires to Truth, not vice-versa.

En Español

“A monotheistic religion is one which revolves around a single God. Usually monotheism refers specifically to religions of Semitic origin (Judaism, Christianity and Islam). The word itself, however, directly implies that which is essential to all religions and metaphysical doctrines, the Absolute

[...]

Monotheism makes two basic demands of all men, firstly faith in God, and secondly an actualization of this faith in every aspect of life. These two demands are outlined by Jesus Matthew 22:34-40, and form the fundamental principles of spiritual life within the sphere of all the major religions, monotheistic or not.”

Read the full article here: Monotheism

In countless myths from all traditional cultures of the world, strong, fair heroes do battle with vile and deformed beasts. Sometimes the heroes are remarkable mortals, sometimes the gods themselves, the villains also varying in power. These tales have endured in popularity, even to the modern day, although their true meaning is no longer widely understood. It is often assumed that these tales serve to show the triumph of good over evil and to serve as an inspiration to act in a similar manner. While this is an accurate interpretation, it is not the most profound level of understanding, and one must not neglect the metaphysical significance, the meaning of the tales that can be applied to internal spiritual realization.

The characters in these myths represent the eternal metaphysical principles that govern the world and the life of man. The “battle” that takes places represents the struggle in manifested things that exist suspended between the beauty and order of the divine and the shadow existence of matter. These things can either hold fast to the divine and thereby stabilize their existence (that is, the heroes can be triumphant), or they can veer towards matter and dissolution (that is, the villains can be triumphant). The Greek philosopher Proclus describes it thus, referencing the myth of Athena doing battle with the giants:

“The true warfare with the giants takes place in souls: whenever reason and intellect rule in them, the goods of the Olympians and Athena prevail, and the entire life is kingly and philosophical; but whenever the passions reign, or in general the worse and earth-born elements, then the constitution within them is tyranny.” ¹

Many of those who deplore modernity lament that the glorious struggles of past legends are absent from a world that has been reduced by technology and quantitative valuations, and they long for an age when a man can exert all of his energies in a struggle for the good. While such external conditions are indeed desirable, a yearning for such an external struggle must not obscure the true battle. If the true battle is in our souls, then good men must be more fervent in this battle; they must crave victory and sacrifice in this struggle just as assiduously as they would with swords in their hands. Unlike the physical battle, this inner battle does not end, at least not for any but the most advanced spiritual masters. Consider, then, how hard you would fight and strain when facing enemies on the field, and make that thought present in your mind when the worse elements within yourself begin to assert themselves.

¹Proclus. Proclus’ Commentary on Plato’s “Parmenides” Trans. Glenn R. Morrow and John M. Dillon. New York: Princeton UP, 1992. Print, 71.

“Proponents of modernity often relate with glee how science has shown traditional concepts of man and the cosmos to be materially and demonstrably false. In some cases they even claim that the latest scientific theory represents an improvement not only in physical understanding, but also in moral understanding.

[...]

Some seem to think that when Aristotle placed the earth in the center of his physical model he did so because his “primitive” conceptions could not allow him to imagine a universe where man was not of the utmost importance, and that the modern models, by making man’s abode just one of a countless multitude of peripheral specs driven about in various cycles, made him more humble. This idea is completely false, and is in fact an inversion of the truth.”

Read the full article here: Man’s Place in the Cosmos

Roughly three months ago, Jon Meacham published an article for NEWSWEEK titled The End of Christian America. In this article, the author mentions that “the rising numbers of religiously unaffiliated Americans are people more apt to call themselves ‘spiritual’ rather than ‘religious.’ (In the new NEWSWEEK Poll, 30 percent describe themselves this way, up from 24 percent in 2005.)” […]

To begin with, I think that society as a whole harbors incorrect presuppositions about religion. I won’t necessarily play the blame game, seeing as I feel that Christianity has often been misrepresented by its supposed adherents, but nonetheless, society now possesses numerous false ideas about what the movement is or what it should be. The truth of the matter is, Christianity becomes simply religion when relationship is replaced by routine.

This is the exact problem the apostle Paul dealt with in writing to the church at Philippi. In Philippians 3:1-16, Paul addresses the difficulty in dealing with the Judaizers in the church. This group set out to impose a sort of “Christian checklist” for all believers. The problem in this, of course, is that salvation is nothing that can be earned by human means. Upon successfully explaining this issue, Paul then proceeded in 3:17-4:1 to address antinomianism. This movement was essentially the opposite of the legalistic Judaizers, and these people felt that salvation could be obtained only by faith. Unfortunately, these people had actual standards for behavior.

What this means for Christians today is that we won’t be saved by simply fulfilling self-imposed obligations of praying, reading the Bible, etc. However, we do have to maintain behavioral standards for spiritual living, and these disciplines will involve structure and order to some extent.

-Link

The moment that a man communicates his spiritual emotions to another man, religion takes shape, because from this communication, a dialectic springs forth, and association occurs. Through the success of these ideas, or Revelations, Religion becomes the inescapable connection between the human group and the Divine.

Reading the article in this light, we notice the loss of contact from people towards this connection, to place themselves exclusively in the grounds of spiritual individuality. Why does this happen? A diversity of cultures living together and having a common territory produces a system which has to sustain them economically based on a democratic and secular ambience independent of their beliefs, creating space for an elective form of spirituality for the individual. However, this form of spirituality is often lacking.

We know that the mystic experience takes the form of the subjective , but its action framework doesn’t end there. It tends to be communicated, compared, and transmitted simply due to the love for Truth. Beyond seeing religious precepts as norms, religion brings behavioral standards to aid in a successful life in the community.

What does a man or woman gain by entering into traditional religion?

-Knowledge, peculiar to the communicative nature of religious association.

-An expert’s guidance in metaphysical and ethical issues.

-Identity.

-Social cohesion with like minded people, disposed to common objectives.

-Friendship and even romantic relationships with persons of similar values.

-Familiar integration in religious activities.

An individual of spiritual wealth can only benefit from traditional religion, acquiring associative capabilities and an opportunity to share knowledge.

En Español

“Michael Sandel’s second Reith Lecture entered the treacherous terrain of morality in politics, and not just morality but religiously inspired morality to boot

His argument, in a nutshell, is that you can’t remove morality from political discourse, so you’re better to have it out in public. Moreover, if you don’t, political life is impoverished. That’s not just an intellectual loss, for it causes real social problems too: it opens up a kind of moral vacuum into which all sorts of reactionary and fundamentalist opinions will rush.

That said, moral debate is risky in a plural democracy because people will profoundly disagree. This is what the liberal tradition seeks to avoid when it does not enquire into the merits of individual lives: instead it asserts rights based solely on the principle of autonomy – each can decide. And yet, if you take the risk, Sandel’s contention is that a more mature kind of politics is made possible. “A politics of moral engagement is also a more promising basis for a just society,” he concluded at the end of the lecture.”

-Link

When awareness of Good is lost, fragmented and relative perceptions of goodness replace it. While these are convenient imitations of Good, they bring only short term satisfaction. But what about the overall direction of our cultures? In the post-modernist view, there’s no direction, but instead separated perceptions of relativistic happiness in the form of legislation and private norms. Politicians avoid moral issues in the ignorance of Good, but keep a dogmatic approach to secularism and materialistic relativism as a surrogate. Supposedly, everyone knows what is just, but no one is able to define Justice, blaming the concept itself, but not our lack of intelligence.

If we wish to have an ascendant direction for our cultures, then morality and its metaphysical and teleological concerns have to become the core of politics. According to Aristotle, Politics are nothing but a complement of the Mora. In spite of the modern paradigm, Politics are transformed by ethics, and therefore a philosophical ruler, one who understands the essence of phenomena, is needed to guide the moral character of any particular society.

As an example in his lecture, Professor Sandel brings up gay marriage, and whether it has to be backed by the state. Beyond giving a response, he analyzes the fact that, in order to define the issue, moral questions have to be answered, specifically, does gay marriage support values or methods worthy of being honored? From a liberalist view, such moral conditions should be avoided, but actually, moral discussion does enrich the debate, and does serve to interpret hard data.

En Español

“Nine verses made upon an ecstasy of high contemplation” by Saint John of the Cross

I entered in, not knowing where,
And there remained uncomprehending,
All knowledge transcending.

I entered – where – I did not know,
Yet when I found that I was there,
Though where I was I did not know,
Profound and subtle things I learned;
Nor can I say what I discerned,
For I remained uncomprehending,
All knowledge transcending.

Of peace and holy truth
It was knowledge to perfection,
Within the depths of solitude
The narrow path of wisdom;
A secret so profoundly hidden
That I was left there stammering,
All knowledge transcending.

I was so caught up and rapt away,
In such oblivion immersed,
That every sense and feeling lay
Of sense and feeling dispossessed;
And so my mind and soul were blessed
To understand not understanding,
All knowledge transcending.

The one who truly reaches there
No longer in himself remains,
And all that he had known at first
Seems base and mean to him, and wanes
So great a knowledge the he gains
That he is left uncomprehending
All knowledge transcending.

His understanding is the less endowed
The more he climbs to greater heights
To understand the shadowed cloud
Which there illuminates the night;
Thus he who comprehends this sight
Will always stay not understanding,
All knowledge transcending.

This knowledge through uncomprehending
Is of such supreme dominion
That by learned men contending
It is never grasped or won;
Their learning never lights upon
The knowledge of unknowing,
Beyond all knowledge going.

And that exalted wisdom
Is of such a high degree,
It can be undertaken
By no art or faculty;
Who knows the way to mastery
By a knowledge that unknown
Transcending ever goes.

And if you wish to hear,
This highest knowledge is conceived
In a sense, sublime and clear
Of the essence of the Deity;
It is an act of His great Clemency
That keeps us there uncomprehending,
All knowledge transcending.

-Saint John of the Cross

The truly mystic man knows that the rationalist outlook is a corruption of understanding, which displaces the direct and silent knowing of God, incommunicable in words. What if the inspired man wishes to speak to those who only understand words? The paradox is then in the hands of the inspired man, a tool to order the cognitive elements instead of placing them as opposites.

In this beautiful poem, St. John of the Cross speaks to us about two ways of acquiring knowing: one from the mind, and one from the spirit. Because knowing from the spirit is superior than knowing from the mind, the latter is overwhelmed, thus surrenders its privilege to spiritual knowledge, allowing a coexistence of both views in the same man. In other words, in this poem, when he ignores God and considers Him to be inscrutable, it’s because he uses his reason, and fails to grasp the totality. But as an inspired man, he subordinates his reasoning to his spirit, and so he knows even what seems to be unknowable.

Undoubtedly, it is necessary to revaluate our current priorities in knowledge, in order that they might reach a whole notion of Truth.

En Español

Next Page »