Forest Poetry

Some people reading traditionalist writers get finicky when they first see Truth with a capital T, because they doubt that any ultimate Truth can be attainable, or even worse, they fear a monopolization of opinion in the intention of establishing an “intolerant” version of Truth in society; both are typical misunderstandings of an individualistic modern era. We will explain what we refer to as Truth in Traditionalism.

From a metaphysical perspective, the whole of existence is present because of its participation in Reality, the Absolute. This is what Aristotle, Avicenna and St. Aquinas called in some way or other the First Cause, an uncaused cause, that which is by itself, but also causes the entire creation and its elements. Therefore, forms that emerge from that origin have specific characteristics that adjoin with the rest of the characteristics of other forms, under a series of natural laws. All forms partake of a single reality and irremediably act according to Nature.

The quest of natural sciences is to understand the physical laws that govern matter and to elaborate theories to explain their functioning. However, it is outside of its capacities to determine that what would be outside action and reaction , the Uncaused Cause,  as well as a source of the laws of matter, even if laws themselves are made of matter. To understand Truth, it is essential to realize that “Truth” is not an empirical “truth” that may be contained within a scientifically experimental system.

Truth in the sense used by Traditionalists relates purely to the metaphysical nature of Reality, of God.  The revelations which found religions are crystallisations of this Truth within the contingent sphere of forms.  Once the metaphysical experience has occurred for the individual, to call it Truth is a logical consequence of a comprehension of a state preceding phenomena, from whence the multiplicity of forms is derived. “The Way produces one. One produces two. Two produces three. Three produces everything.” Tao Te Ching, 42.

In a strict sense, Truth is the saving manifestation of the Absolute, and according to Schuon, it differs from the concept of reality: “Truth and reality must not be confused: the latter relates to “being” and signifies the aseity of things, and the former relates to “knowing” – to the image of reality reflected in the mirror of the intellect “. Truth is the certainty of the Absolute. Also, as a term the word Truth provokes inquisitiveness, giving a variety of correlations in regards to specific aspects of spiritual pursuit.

An example is Truth serving as an opposition to what’s false or unreal in our perception: this is, in Sanskrit, maya. It is not that maya forms a reality apart from Truth, but only that it is an illusion that occurs within the Absolute, in which we see our ego and its material circumstances as the ultimate reality of consciousness. This ignorance of Truth, or avidya, makes us believe that the entire creation is separated and dispersed, through circumstantial dualities of attachment and aversion, and so the discovery of Truth requires man to pierce the veil of maya, surpassing ignorance. Again, this ignorance is not of an empirical nature, but it is a supposition that the thirst for our mundane ends (trsna) is the only possibility and therefore the highest motivation of man.

Truth has social implications as a social reality, even when both objects are different. Social reality is built around the pursuit of Truth, and finds its manifestation in the cultural sphere, bringing a mutually shared aim that pushes individuals towards a transcendent spirit. This, of course, does not escape from the organic life of societies. The rise of the greatest cultures in History has been conditioned by such sight, and their downfall has been marked by the pluralisation of smaller and individualistic convictions. The degeneration of civilizations shows a correspondent dysfunction in all strata of society, a neglect of Truth for the emergence of self-interests, causing class conflict. In this downfall, it is possible that an imposition of ideology may claim “Truth”, acting in an overly-coercive way foreign to aristocracy, and closer to tyranny. So, this “truth” is a social construction and an imposition very far from Truth.

Now, how can we know the constitution of this Truth, beyond its social functionality? Through Revelation.

We will cite Schuon again: “Revelation is none other than the objective and symbolic manifestation of the Light which man carries in himself, in the depths of his being”. Symbolic, Revelation carries a set of signs, and behaviour codes for the communities which essentially are connivance rules that even humanists can appreciate, and of which violation constitutes the disgrace of every culture. This aspect serves an exoteric purpose. The symbols are dependent on the history of cultures, but if they emerge from the Absolute, they have an objective end. Being Absolute and objective, God can’t be reduced as a social phenomena, even when there exists a social organization around the idea of a God. The key here is to understand the symbols in order to achieve the knowing of the Truth, attainable through the methods of prayer, which constitute a quest for the individual in his last stance.

Satya, a Sanskrit term for Truth, is understood in Hinduism as the everlasting reality independent to time and events. This means that Truth is immanent in the discoveries of a growing and positive science that occurs in human history, and also the rise and eventual death of human societies. Truth brings conditions for human reorganization across history, over a human and relative conception, and the man that ventures in the methods of Religion, not only through empirical science, finds himself in certainty of such Truth, transcending his human circumstances.

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.

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.

“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.

“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

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.)” […]

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.

-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

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.

-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