¶11 Be that as it may, if it is supposed that the West, in some way or other, returns to its tradition, its opposition to the East would thereby be resolved and would cease to exist, since this opposition arose only from the fact of the Western deviation, and is in reality nothing but the opposition between the traditional spirit and the anti‑traditional spirit.1 Thus, contrary to what those to whom we alluded a moment ago suppose, a return to tradition would have, among its first results, that of rendering an understanding with the East immediately possible, as it is between all civilisations that possess comparable or equivalent elements, and only between those, because it is these elements that constitute the sole ground on which this understanding can validly operate. The true traditional spirit, whatever form it may put on, is everywhere and always the same at bottom; the diverse forms, which are specially adapted to such and such mental conditions, to such and such circumstances of time and place, are only expressions of one and the same truth;2 but one must be able to place oneself in the order of pure intellectuality in order to discover this fundamental unity beneath their apparent multiplicity. Moreover, it is in this intellectual order that the principles reside upon which everything else normally depends as consequences or more or less remote applications; it is therefore on these principles that agreement must above all be reached, if a truly deep understanding is to be involved, since that is the whole essential; and as soon as one truly understands them, agreement establishes itself. It must be noted, in fact, that the knowledge of principles, which is knowledge par excellence, metaphysical knowledge in the true sense of this word, is universal like the principles themselves, thus completely freed from all individual contingencies, which on the contrary necessarily intervene as soon as one comes to applications; hence this purely intellectual domain is the only one where no effort of adaptation between different mentalities is needed.3 Furthermore, when a work of this order is accomplished, it only remains to develop its results for agreement in all the other domains to be equally realised, since, as we have just said, it is upon this that everything directly or indirectly depends; conversely, agreement obtained in a particular domain, outside the principles, will always be eminently unstable and precarious, and much more like a diplomatic combination than a true understanding.4 This is why, we insist again, it can only really operate from above, not from below, and this must be understood in a double sense: one must start from what is highest, that is, from the principles, in order to descend gradually to the various orders of applications, always rigorously observing the hierarchical dependence that exists between them; and this work, by its very character, can only be that of an elite, giving to this word its truest and fullest meaning: it is an intellectual elite that we mean exclusively, and, in our eyes, there can be no others, all external social distinctions being of no importance from the standpoint we adopt.5
←
→
intellecthierarchy

Summary

Guénon explains that if the West were to return to its tradition, its opposition to the East would cease to exist, since this opposition is only that between the traditional spirit and the anti-traditional spirit. Contrary to what some suppose, a return to tradition would make an understanding with the East immediately possible, as between all traditional civilisations. The true traditional spirit is everywhere the same at bottom, beneath diverse forms adapted to different conditions. It is in the order of pure intellectuality that the principles reside, and agreement on these principles establishes itself when one truly understands them. Metaphysical knowledge is universal and freed from individual contingencies. Understanding can only operate from above (starting from principles), not from below, and can only be the work of an intellectual elite in the truest sense of the word.

General notes

  1. l’opposition de l’esprit traditionnel et de l’esprit antitraditionnel — Rendered as ‘the opposition between the traditional spirit and the anti‑traditional spirit’. Guénon here distinguishes two metaphysical polarities: the traditional spirit, which is rooted in the transcendent Principle and orders all hierarchy; and the anti‑traditional spirit, which is the negation or inversion of that Principle. This anti‑traditional spirit manifests itself not only in crude atheism or materialism, but also in subtler forms: rationalism, individualism, ‘humanitarianism’, ‘progressivism’, and all ideologies that place man at the centre of the universe. The opposition between West and East is only a superficial manifestation of this fundamental conflict: the modern West has become the seat of the anti‑tradition, whereas the East has preserved tradition. If the West were to return to tradition, the opposition would vanish of itself, because it would be the anti‑traditional spirit that would disappear. ↩︎
  2. une seule et même vérité — Rendered as ‘one and the same truth’. The ‘unique truth’ (ekam sat in the Ṛgveda) is the fundamental affirmation of the sophia perennis: the supreme Principle is one, even though it is expressed by multiple names (Brahman, Tao, Allāh, God). Differences between traditions are purely formal (rites, symbols, sacred languages); the metaphysical foundation remains identical. Guénon here opposes any religious ‘pluralism’ that would see incompatible ‘multiple truths’; there is only one truth, but it is veiled by the multiplicity of exoteric forms. Esotericism (pure intellection) unveils this unity. ↩︎
  3. le seul où il n’y ait pas besoin d’un effort d’adaptation entre mentalités différentes — Rendered as ‘the only one where no effort of adaptation between different mentalities is needed’. Guénon stresses here that pure metaphysics (knowledge of principles) is trans‑cultural: it depends neither on language, nor race, nor epoch. A Hindu, a Chinese and a European who have attained direct intellection of the Principle will understand one another perfectly, because they share the same non‑discursive vision. Difficulties of ‘adaptation’ arise only at the level of exoteric applications (rites, social laws, customs). Thus, understanding between traditions does not come through syncretism or through laborious translation, but through a common ascent towards the source. ↩︎
  4. une combinaison diplomatique — Rendered as ‘a diplomatic combination’. Guénon here ironises about attempts at inter‑religious or inter‑cultural dialogue that limit themselves to the social, political or ethical level. Modern ‘ecumenical dialogues’, for example, seek a practical consensus (charity, peace, justice) without agreeing on metaphysical principles. For Guénon, such an agreement is superficial (‘diplomatic’) and fragile, because it rests on human compromises rather than on the intellection of the one truth. True understanding can only be ‘from above’: first agreement in the intellectual order, then its consequences in the lower orders. ↩︎
  5. toutes les distinctions sociales extérieures étant sans aucune importance — Rendered as ‘all external social distinctions being of no importance’. Guénon here opposes the confusion between social elite (nobility, wealth, political power) and intellectual (spiritual) elite. An authentic traditional ‘elite’ is defined solely by its knowledge of metaphysical principles and its initiation, not by birth or fortune. In normal traditional societies, the social elite (royalty, nobility, hierarchical clergy) was normally subordinate to the spiritual elite (the initiates, the ṛṣis, the gurūs). But in the modern disorder, social distinctions are ‘of no importance’ for the work of restoration: only the level of inner realisation matters. Guénon specifies that this is not to deny all social hierarchy, but to recall that it must be founded on spiritual hierarchy, not the reverse. ↩︎