¶5 To complete this clarification, we must also explain ourselves, at least briefly, regarding certain ideas of restoring a ‘Western tradition’ that have appeared in various contemporary circles;1 the sole interest they present, in essence, is to show that some minds are no longer satisfied with modern negation,2 that they feel the need for something other than what our epoch offers them, that they glimpse the possibility of a return to tradition, in one form or another, as the only means of emerging from the present crisis.3 Unfortunately, ‘traditionalism’ is not the same thing as the true traditional spirit;4 it can be, and very often in fact it is, only a simple tendency, a more or less vague aspiration, which presupposes no real knowledge;5 and, in the mental disarray of our time, this aspiration provokes above all – one must say it – fanciful and chimerical conceptions, devoid of any serious foundation. Finding no authentic tradition upon which they can rely, they go so far as to imagine pseudo-traditions6 that have never existed, and which lack principles just as much as that which they would like to replace; the whole modern disorder is reflected in these constructions, and, whatever the intentions of their authors may be, the only result they obtain is to bring a new contribution to the general imbalance. We shall mention only for the record, in this category, the alleged ‘Western tradition’ fabricated by certain occultists from the most disparate elements,7 and intended above all to compete with a no less imaginary ‘Eastern tradition’, that of the Theosophists;8 we have spoken sufficiently of these things elsewhere, and we prefer to come immediately to the examination of certain other theories that may seem more worthy of attention, because in them one finds at least the desire to appeal to traditions that have had an effective existence.
←
→
intellect

Summary

Guénon addresses ideas about restoring a ‘Western tradition’ that have appeared in contemporary circles. He acknowledges that these ideas show dissatisfaction with modern negation and a desire to return to tradition. However, he distinguishes ‘traditionalism’ from the true traditional spirit: the former is often only a vague aspiration without real knowledge, giving rise to fanciful and chimerical conceptions. Finding no authentic tradition to rely on, some imagine pseudo-traditions that have never existed, which only adds to the general imbalance. Guénon briefly mentions the alleged ‘Western tradition’ fabricated by certain occultists, as well as that of the Theosophists, but prefers to examine other theories that at least appeal to traditions that actually existed.

General notes

  1. certaines idées de restauration d’une « tradition occidentale » qui ont vu le jour dans divers milieux contemporains — Rendered as ‘certain ideas of restoring a “Western tradition” that have appeared in various contemporary circles’. Here Guénon distinguishes between a genuine return to traditional principles and modern attempts to ‘reconstruct’ an artificial Western tradition. He targets both occultist circles and certain so-called ‘traditionalist’ movements, which claim to revive a single Western tradition whereas the West has known multiple forms (Christianity, Hermeticism, regular Freemasonry), often disconnected from their original metaphysical source. ↩︎
  2. la négation moderne — Rendered as ‘modern negation’. This refers to the systematic denial of every transcendent principle, characteristic of the modern mentality stemming from nominalism and critical rationalism. This negation expresses itself through materialism, scientism, individualism and moral relativism – as many manifestations of a break with the sophia perennis and with any hierarchical conception of being. ↩︎
  3. la crise actuelle — Rendered as ‘the present crisis’. Guénon means by this the ‘reign of quantity’, that is, the modern epoch conceived as a Western kali-yuga, where quality and pure intellect are replaced by quantity and discursive reason. The crisis is not merely social or economic but metaphysical: it is the culmination of a process of progressive solidification and materialisation. ↩︎
  4. le « traditionalisme » n’est point la même chose que le véritable esprit traditionnel — Rendered as ‘“traditionalism” is not the same thing as the true traditional spirit’. Guénon here opposes traditionalism as a sentimental or ideological attitude (often superficial and syncretistic) to the genuine traditional spirit, which presupposes an effective transmission, doctrinal orthodoxy and a real initiation. The traditionalist is often content with an external admiration for ancient forms, whereas the traditional spirit requires an inner conformity to universal metaphysical principles. ↩︎
  5. aucune connaissance réelle — Rendered as ‘no real knowledge’. ‘Real knowledge’ (jñāna in Sanskrit) is for Guénon direct metaphysical intellection, non-discursive, belonging to the pure intellect (intellectus) and not to mere reason (ratio). It implies an identification of the knower with the known object beyond the subject-object duality, and it lies at the root of every orthodox tradition. ↩︎
  6. pseudo-traditions — Rendered as ‘pseudo-traditions’. Guénon rigorously distinguishes true tradition (transmission of a primordial revelation through uninterrupted initiatic chains) from pseudo-traditions, which are intellectual constructs without any real basis. These may mix elements borrowed from authentic traditions, but because they lack regular transmission, they possess no spiritual efficacy and merely aggravate modern confusion. ↩︎
  7. la prétendue « tradition occidentale » fabriquée par certains occultistes — Rendered as ‘the alleged “Western tradition” fabricated by certain occultists’. Here Guénon mainly targets movements such as Theosophy and certain currents of nineteenth-century neo-occultism (Papus, Stanislas de Guaita, etc.), which attempted to reconstruct a synthetic Western tradition from misunderstood fragments of Kabbalah, Hermeticism, alchemy, and Celtic or Nordic mythology. These constructions ignore the real diversity of Western traditional forms and their necessary attachment to a living initiatic chain. ↩︎
  8. tradition orientale […] des théosophistes — Rendered as ‘“Eastern tradition” […] of the Theosophists’. The Theosophical Society (founded by H.P. Blavatsky in 1875) claimed to transmit an ‘ancient wisdom’ from Tibet, but Guénon denounces this claim as pure invention. In Theosophism: History of a Pseudo-Religion (1921) he shows that Theosophy is a syncretism without any initiatic basis, borrowing from Hinduism, Buddhism and modern occultism without any regular transmission. Guénon writes ‘Theosophists’ to distinguish these pseudo-initiates from true theosophers such as Jacob Böhme or Swedenborg. ↩︎