¶11 This leads us to say once again, for this is a wholly essential point upon which it is indispensable to allow no ambiguity to remain, that intellectual intuition, by which alone true metaphysical knowledge is obtained, has absolutely nothing in common with that other intuition of which certain contemporary philosophers speak: the latter belongs to the sensible order, it is properly infra‑rational, whereas the former, which is pure intelligence, is on the contrary supra‑rational.1 But moderns, who know nothing superior to reason in the order of intelligence, do not even conceive what intellectual intuition could be, whereas the doctrines of antiquity and the Middle Ages, even when they had only a simply philosophical character and, consequently, could not effectively appeal to this intuition, nonetheless expressly recognised its existence and its supremacy over all other faculties.2 This is why there was no ‘rationalism’ before Descartes; this is again a specifically modern thing, and moreover closely tied to ‘individualism’, since it is nothing other than the negation of every faculty of the supra‑individual order.3 As long as Occidentals persist in misunderstanding or denying intellectual intuition, they can have no tradition in the true sense of this word, nor can they understand the authentic representatives of Oriental civilisations, in which everything is, as it were, suspended from this intuition, immutable and infallible in itself, and the unique starting point of every development conforming to traditional norms.4
←
⤒
five levels of realityintellectprofane sciencetraditional sciencehierarchy

Summary

Guénon emphasises a crucial distinction: intellectual intuition, which alone provides true metaphysical knowledge, has nothing in common with the sensible intuition spoken of by certain contemporary philosophers. He explains that the latter is infra-rational, while intellectual intuition is supra-rational and belongs to pure intelligence. Guénon notes that moderns, knowing nothing superior to reason, cannot even conceive of intellectual intuition, whereas ancient and medieval doctrines, even when merely philosophical, expressly recognised its existence and supremacy. He states that rationalism is specifically modern and tied to individualism, as it negates every faculty of the supra-individual order. Guénon concludes that as long as Occidentals misunderstand or deny intellectual intuition, they can have no true tradition nor understand the authentic representatives of Oriental civilisations, where everything depends on this immutable and infallible intuition.

General notes

  1. intuition intellectuelle / intuition sensible — Rendered as ‘intellectual intuition / sensible intuition’. A capital distinction of Guénonian metaphysics. Intellectual intuition (Sanskrit prajñā or jñāna, Greek noēsis, Latin intellectus) is the act of the pure intellect, which directly grasps universal and transcendent principles, without discursive reasoning. It is supra‑rational (beyond reason). Sensible intuition (Bergson, certain German Romantics) is on the contrary the immediate apprehension of the flux of sensations, of concrete qualities; it is infra‑rational (below reason). To confuse the two, as the moderns do, is a fatal error that prevents any authentic metaphysics. ↩︎
  2. suprématie de l’intellect — Rendered as ‘supremacy of the intellect’. Guénon establishes a hierarchy of faculties: pure intellect (supreme) > reason (middle) > senses (inferior). In ancient (Plato, Aristotle) and medieval (Thomas Aquinas, Meister Eckhart) philosophy, the existence of the pure intellect (intellectus agens) was recognised even if one did not always effectively attain it. Moderns (from Descartes onward) reduce all knowledge to reason and the senses, suppressing the intellect. This is what Guénon calls ‘rationalism’. ↩︎
  3. individualisme / rationalisme — Rendered as ‘individualism / rationalism’. Guénon links these two traits of modernity. Individualism is the reduction of man to his individual and separate ego, denying any participation in superior principles (the Universal Intellect, God, Brahman). Rationalism is the reduction of knowledge to what the individual can produce by his own rational faculties alone, without reception of a transcendent light. The two are linked: the individual who wills himself autonomous and sovereign cannot accept a knowledge that surpasses him and comes from a supra‑individual principle. ↩︎
  4. suspendu à cette intuition — Rendered as ‘suspended from this intuition’. A strong formula: in traditional civilisations (India, ancient China, Egypt, archaic Greece, Christian Middle Ages), all of life — religion, art, science, politics, morality — is ordered to intellectual intuition as to its source and norm. Particular developments (rituals, laws, techniques) are valid only if they ‘descend’ from this superior intuition, as consequences follow from principles. Without this vertical reference, there are only changing human opinions, not tradition. infaillible en soi: intellectual intuition, being the very act of the pure intellect, participates in the infallibility of principles. Error can only come from the lower faculties (reason, senses) when they are not properly regulated. ↩︎