¶9 This clarification was necessary, for there are certain things that must be said; but we would reproach ourselves for insisting further, the thesis of the ‘defenders of the West’ being truly too fragile and inconsistent.1 Moreover, if we have momentarily departed from the reserve that we usually observe with respect to individuals in order to mention Mr. Henri Massis, it is above all because he represents in the circumstances a certain part of the contemporary mentality, which we must also take into account in this study on the state of the modern world.2 How could this ‘traditionalism’ of an inferior order, narrowly limited and lacking in understanding, perhaps even quite artificial, really and effectively oppose a spirit whose prejudices it shares to such a great extent?3 On both sides, it is, with few differences, the same ignorance of true principles; it is the same bias towards denying everything that goes beyond a certain horizon; it is the same inability to understand the existence of different civilisations, the same superstition of Greco-Latin ‘classicism’.4 This insufficient reaction is of interest to us only insofar as it marks a certain dissatisfaction with the present state among some of our contemporaries; moreover, there are other manifestations of this same dissatisfaction that would be capable of going further if they were well directed; but, for the moment, all this is very chaotic, and it is still very difficult to say what will emerge from it.5 However, some predictions in this regard will perhaps not be entirely useless; and, as they are closely linked to the destiny of the present world, they may at the same time serve as conclusions to this study, insofar as it is permissible to draw conclusions without giving ‘profane’ ignorance the opportunity for too easy attacks, by imprudently developing considerations that it would be impossible to justify by ordinary means.6 We are not among those who think that everything can be said indifferently, at least when one moves from pure doctrine to its applications; there are then certain reserves that are imposed, and questions of opportunity that inevitably arise;7 but these legitimate, and even indispensable, reserves have nothing in common with certain puerile fears that are only the effect of an ignorance comparable to that of a man who, according to the Hindu proverbial expression, ‘takes a rope for a serpent’.8 Whether one wishes it or not, what must be said will be said as circumstances require it; neither the self-interested efforts of some, nor the unconscious hostility of others, will be able to prevent this from being so, any more than, on the other hand, the impatience of those who, swept along by the feverish haste of the modern world, would like to know everything at once, can cause certain things to be known outside sooner than is fitting;9 but the latter may at least console themselves by thinking that the accelerated march of events will doubtless give them fairly prompt satisfaction; may they not have cause to regret then having prepared themselves insufficiently to receive a knowledge that they too often seek with more enthusiasm than true discernment!10
←
⤒

Summary

Guénon explains that his clarification about Massis was necessary, but he will not insist further as the ‘defenders of the West’ thesis is too fragile. He notes that he mentioned Massis because he represents a part of contemporary mentality that must be taken into account. He observes that this inferior ‘traditionalism’ shares so many prejudices with the modern spirit that it cannot effectively oppose it, as both sides share the same ignorance of true principles and inability to understand different civilisations. This insufficient reaction is of interest only because it marks some dissatisfaction among contemporaries, though other manifestations of this dissatisfaction could go further if properly directed. He states that some predictions about the destiny of the modern world may serve as conclusions to this study, but with necessary reserves when moving from pure doctrine to applications. What must be said will be said as circumstances require, neither self-interested efforts nor unconscious hostility can prevent it, nor can modern impatience accelerate knowledge of things before their proper time.

General notes

  1. thèse des « défenseurs de l’Occident » — Rendered as ‘thesis of the “defenders of the West”’. Guénon refers here to Western traditionalists like Henri Massis who claim to defend the West against a supposed invasion of Oriental ideas. He judges their position too fragile and inconsistent because it rests on a misunderstanding of authentic Oriental traditions. ↩︎
  2. réserve habituelle de Guénon concernant les individualités — Rendered as ‘Guénon’s usual reserve concerning individuals’. Guénon specifies that he generally avoids citing people by name, for he is interested in ideas and general tendencies, not in individuals. He makes an exception for Massis because he embodies a significant current of opinion within the modern mentality. ↩︎
  3. « traditionalisme » d’ordre inférieur — Rendered as ‘“traditionalism” of an inferior order’. Guénon distinguishes authentic traditionalism (attachment to universal metaphysical principles) from its modern counterfeits. Massis’s ‘traditionalism’ is inferior because it remains a prisoner of Western prejudices (superiority of Greco-Latin classicism, incomprehension of other civilisations) and does not call into question the very foundations of modern thought. ↩︎
  4. « classicisme » gréco-latin — Rendered as ‘Greco-Latin “classicism”’. Guénon criticises the idea that Greco-Roman civilisation is the absolute source and model of all superior culture. This classical prejudice, typical of Western humanism, prevents any understanding of the value and legitimacy of non-European civilisations (India, China, Islam). ↩︎
  5. insatisfaction de l’état présent chez certains contemporains — Rendered as ‘dissatisfaction with the present state among some contemporaries’. Guénon notes that criticism of the modern world is not only the work of traditionalists like Massis. Other currents also express a dissatisfaction (intransigent Catholics, regionalists, certain anti-modern socialists, etc.). But these criticisms are still confused and uncoordinated. ↩︎
  6. réserve dans les conclusions : ne pas exposer les vérités aux attaques profanes — Rendered as ‘reserve in conclusions: not to expose truths to profane attacks’. Guénon justifies his caution: certain traditional truths cannot be exposed to the general public without risk of being distorted or ridiculed. One must therefore measure what one says according to one’s audience. This is an application of esoteric discipline. ↩︎
  7. tout ne peut pas être dit indifféremment — Rendered as ‘not everything can be said indifferently’. Guénon recalls the traditional principle of esotericism: certain knowledge must only be communicated to those who are qualified to receive it. In the theoretical domain (pure doctrine), principles can be expounded; in the practical domain (applications), reserves are necessary. ↩︎
  8. expression proverbiale hindoue : prendre une corde pour un serpent — Rendered as ‘Hindu proverbial expression: taking a rope for a serpent’. Guénon cites a classic example from Advaita Vedāntic literature (Śaṅkara, Vivekacūḍāmaṇi). The ignorant man mistakes an inoffensive object (a rope) for a mortal danger (a serpent). Similarly, the ‘defenders of the West’ are afraid of the East without real reason. ↩︎
  9. l’impatience moderne veut tout savoir d’un seul coup — Rendered as ‘modern impatience wants to know everything at once’. Guénon criticises the intellectual precipitousness of the modern world, which wants immediate answers without the necessary preparations. Traditional knowledge requires time, maturation and qualifications. One cannot ‘know everything at once’. ↩︎
  10. enthousiasme sans discernement — Rendered as ‘enthusiasm without discernment’. Guénon warns against those who seek truth with passion but without the necessary intellectual and spiritual qualities (discernment, patience, humility). Enthusiasm alone is not enough; it can even be dangerous if not accompanied by discernment. ↩︎