A definition of the Perennial Philosophy
World Wisdom's books focus on the Perennial Philosophy. The many books in our series of that name clearly show this focus, but all the other series are very much related to this central theme. Thus it is important to understand what is meant by the term Perennial Philosophy.
This slideshow will be the first in a series of slideshows to address specific topics of importance to the exposition of the Perennial Philosophy. This slideshow will present a very elementary definition of the terms Perennial Philosophy and tradition.
Our starting point will be a definition taken from the primary writer on the Perennial Philosophy in the twentieth century, Frithjof Schuon:
The term philosophia perennis…designates the science of fundamental and universal ontological principles…
This is certainly a very compact statement. However, we will look at it word by word in the rest of this slideshow, and in doing so we hope to gradually unfold the layers of meaning that can help us understand the Perennial Philosophy.
==
The central idea of the Perennial Philosophy
However, before we examine Schuon's terse statement, here is a paragraph that should immediately offer some keys to understanding the Perennial Philosophy. It is found in William Stoddart's introduction to Ye Shall Know the Truth: Christianity and the Perennial Philosophy. Stoddart writes:
The central idea of the perennial philosophy is that Divine Truth is one, timeless, and universal, and that the different religions are but different languages expressing that one Truth. The symbol most often used to convey this idea is that of the uncolored light and the many colors of the spectrum which are made visible only when the uncolored light is refracted. In the Renaissance, the term betokened the recognition of the fact that the philosophies of Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, and Plotinus incontrovertibly expounded the same truth as lay at the heart of Christianity. Subsequently the meaning of the term was enlarged to cover the metaphysics and mysticisms of all of the great world religions, notably, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam.
The "central idea" is "that Divine Truth is one, timeless, and universal." As this single Truth reverberates through all times and places in human history, It is manifested in different civilizations so "that the different religions are but different languages expressing that one Truth." Unfortunately, in this brief summary we cannot go into the detailed reasons why the Perennial Philosophy rejects unqualified exclusivist claims to the Truth by the different religions.
What is important to note here are two prominent characteristics of the Perennial Philosophy: First, its starting point is an Absolute. It proceeds from the notion that there is a God, which puts it at odds with most modern philosophies. Second, though resting on the principle of an Absolute Reality, it is non-sectarian. When writing of the Divine Truth, for example, Perennialists have no agenda due to their personal religious affiliations. They only search to express that Truth on its own terms, not on the terms of one or another of its earthly expressions. The Perennial Philosophy respects the theologies of the great religious traditions, but points out to us that these all are various "colors," to use Stoddart's image, derived from the same uncolored Source. It is this Source and its nature that is of primary importance to perennialists.
We can now move on to Schuon's statement, but first we will have to clear up the confusion that arises from the use of certain terminology.
==
==
Why is this philosophy considered "perennial"?
The term philosophia perennis ("perennial philosophy") was apparently first used during the Renaissance. Christian thinkers had become familiar with the ideas of Plato, Aristotle, and other "pagan" philosophers and realized that great truths had been expressed in non-Christian places and times. They used the term philosophia perennis to indicate the wisdom that was timeless, accessible to pre-Christian sages as well as to themselves.
The word perennis has been accepted by contemporary expositors of the Perennial Philosophy as being very well suited to express its timeless and perpetual nature. This wisdom, or philosophy, is timeless because the truths it expresses were the same in ancient times as they are in any present moment, and they will be immutable, unchanged in any future time. Perennial truths exist on their own terms, and do not depend for their reality on the specific labels or terms given to them by this or that religion or thinker.
Some have suggested that adding the adjective "universal" to "perennial" might assist in pointing out that these truths are not only unbounded by time, but that they are also unbounded by spatial limitations: they are recognized and manifested everywhere, in every different place and tradition, even though the way they are expressed in the diverse religions will naturally differ. Perennialists take this universal character to be understood, and so the term Perennial Philosophy has been thought sufficient.
==
What distinguishes this philosophy from others?
The term philosophia is much more problematic for perennialists. The most important early twentieth-century voice of the Perennial Philosophy or Tradition, René Guénon, noted that the use of the term philosophia should cause "serious reservations" when applying it too generously, because
…this word too easily gives rise to ambiguities, especially as the moderns habitually use it. One could of course resolve them by making it clear that the Philosophia Perennis is by no means ‘a’ philosophy, that is to say one particular conception more or less limited and systematic and having this or that individual as its author, but is rather the common foundation from which proceeds whatever is truly valid in all philosophies.
The word "philosophy" as it is commonly used and understood today refers to a humanly contrived system of ideas. It is not the quest to articulate a timeless, universal, and absolute Divine Truth, as mentioned by Stoddart in Slide 2. It is unfortunate that today most people equate "philosophy" with a specifically non-spiritual, academic, dry, and overly complex system of thought.
This is not the "philosophy" of Guénon, Coomaraswamy, Schuon, or for that matter Plato or many other ancient philosophers. For them, its literal meaning of "love of wisdom"—implying a way of life and a deep motivation towards seeking the highest Truth—is closer to their own philosophia. This philosophy does not seek to manufacture or create a system of thought. It seeks to uncover, to articulate eternal and universal truths. No-one but God is the 'author' of the Perennial Philosophy. Human agents merely detect its unchanging laws, describe them as adequately as possible in human language, and apply this knowledge to a host of domains of human concern.
From all the above, it can be seen why perennialists and traditionalists have to clear the word "philosophy" of its current connotations before the sense in which they use it can be fully understood.
=
Perennialism and Traditionalism: The same thing?
The designations "traditionalist" and "perennialist" are nearly synonymous and are, for all intents and purposes, interchangeable. All of the major twentieth writers in this area wrote of Tradition. By this they meant the entirety of the intellectual, religious, cultural, and artistic aspects that tie a people to a Revelation or to a sacred origin. Thus, such an entity as this Tradition is itself considered sacred. All things centered on this Tradition, such as a civilization, its arts or crafts, doctrines, etc., all can be referred to as "traditional."
"Traditional" is not used by these writers just to designate cultural artifacts passed along from one generation to another by sheer habit. Instead, it is used to indicate, for example, those civilizations whose ideas, practices, creations, and so on are still guided and formed by the attraction to and the principles of the domain of the Spirit. People who study Tradition are called "traditionalists," and all such traditionalists accept the premises of the Perennial Philosophy.
It might be said that there is a slight difference in accentuation that the two appellations imply. Those who call themselves perennialists might be more likely to say that the loftiest principles and realities are of most interest to them, while those who call themselves traditionalists might be more focused on exploring within one or several specific traditions and from there to trace back specific forms to their divine archetypes or to analogous forms in other traditions. In practice, it is really more a matter of personal preference and is not an essential distinction, so we must consider traditionalists and perennialists to follow similar precepts.
==
How the word "Tradition" is used in a special sense
Just as with the term "philosophy," confusion can arise with the usage of the terms "tradition" or "traditionalist." One only has to look around to see and hear the overwhelmingly negative attitude of the West toward "tradition." Unfortunately, modern language usage has been determined in large part by anti-traditionalists who would have us believe that "tradition" is the last resort of weak, unenlightened, uncreative people who cling to the past because they are afraid of an uncertain future. The word now carries with it connotations that do not support the meaning intended by perennialists and spiritual traditionalists.
In addition, some academics have contributed to even greater misunderstanding. They have grouped "traditionalists" of all descriptions together, so that perennialists seem related to nationalist political fringe groups who also call themselves "traditionalists." There is no kinship between seekers of the Perennial Philosophy and modernistic political action groups, even if the latter appeal to some vague glorious "tradition" of bygone years as their rallying cry. To suggest a kinship between these modern activists and perennialists such as those we have mentioned is, to put it mildly, absurd. In fact, the perennialists and traditionalists of which we speak would instinctively avoid such intrigues if for no other reason than that they would sense the profanation by these opportunists of sacred Tradition.
So, the term "traditionalist," too, requires these qualifications to rid it of negative connotations before we can use it correctly in relation to adherents of the Perennial Philosophy.
==
The science of the Perennial Philosophy
We can now return to Frithjof Schuon's short definition given in Slide 1. He wrote that "The term philosophia perennis…designates the science of fundamental and universal ontological principles." It is significant that Schuon uses the word "science" here, where most modern observers would not expect it.
In French, the language in which Schuon and Guénon wrote, the cognate "science" only very recently took on this secondary, rationalistic meaning. Indeed, the Latin origin of the word (i.e. scientia) simply meant "knowledge" and was derived from a root meaning "to know." In other ancient languages such as Arabic, the same is true: the word for "knowledge" has a secondary meaning that refers to what we would call empirical science. A look at an English dictionary will show that this other meaning is now primary, while the original meaning of "knowledge" is now secondary and rarely used in modern English.
Thus, we must understand that Schuon uses the term philosophia perennis to designate the systematic search for knowledge of fundamental and universal ontological principles. This search is indeed quite systematic, just as with modern science. However, the science of the Perennial Philosophy works in the opposite direction from that of modern empirical science. Let us look at this for a moment.
The Perennial Philosophy takes the highest levels of Reality as its starting point, as the most real of all givens, and then it proceeds to lower levels of existence. It always stays grounded in universal, perennial principles and all other levels of existence are seen in this light. The completely opposite approach is taken by empirical science: it, on the other hand, only accepts the reality of measurable physical objects, and grounded in this base, it may hypothesize possible realities of a more subtle and less observable order. The approaches of these two sciences are both rigorous, and yet could not be more different.
It is obvious that empirical science will never be able to measure, and thus to acknowledge, realms of existence in which its instruments can never operate. For people who believe that there are realms beyond our own and which in fact determine our own existence, they will find that the science of the Perennial Philosophy can produce very meaningful results.
==
The study of multiple levels of existence
Much more can said about the kind of principial knowledge that is the goal of the Perennial Philosophy, and how human beings are capable of attaining something that is distinctly beyond the limitations of our rational minds, but this requires much more attention than we can give it here. It will have to be covered in another slideshow.
Returning to Schuon's definition, let us examine the next part of his statement that the Perennial Philosophy is the science of "fundamental and universal ontological principles." First, "ontological" applies to being. Ontology is the study of the nature of being. It answers questions such as: What does it mean to "exist"? How do things come into being? Are there categories and levels of being, and what are these?
A critical characteristic of the Perennial Philosophy is that it concerns itself with the many levels and kinds of being. These exist between the absolute Source, namely God, all the way to the very relative realms of physical and material existence. From the starting point of the Absolute, the highest level, we might say that these levels of existence "unfold." Below the realm of the Absolute, they would include angelic realms, paradisical realms, and eventually material realms.
The Perennial Philosophy states that every manifested being has its cause in a higher level of reality, and ultimately with the highest reality—God. As we ascend from the material levels of reality upward toward more and more subtle levels, we approach the "fundamental and universal ontological principles" of which Schuon wrote. They are fundamental because lower levels of reality are based upon them for their existence. They are universal because they lend existence to all created things, regardless of time, place, or level in the hierarchy of existence.
All traditional doctrines, even the beliefs of shamanistic religions, are in agreement that the universe is ordered in just such levels of existence. All traditional societies are based upon the reality of unseen and transcendent realms that lie above our own realm of existence, but which at the same time are reflected in it and determine it.
It is precisely in the hierarchy and relationships of these multiple levels of being that the Perennial Philosophy is able to demonstrate how, as Stoddart put it, "the different religions are but different languages expressing [the] one Truth."
==
The science of the Absolute and the relative
Now that we have understood the particular ways in which perennialists use some terms, we can sum up our examination of Schuon's definition of the Perennial Philosophy in this way:
The Perennial Philosophy is the science of the Absolute and the relative.
If we understand the words "science," "Absolute," and "relative" as they have been used in the previous slides, the definition just above will suggest a great deal to us. If we understand the relationship of the Absolute to the relative (or, to put it another way, of the Divine to the human), we are able to resolve all sorts of previously irreconcilable problems, with the primary one, of course, being how the world's great faiths can all be valid expressions of a single Truth.
We know that the Perennial Philosophy sees everything from the standpoint of realities that transcend the level of material existence. Although its point of departure is always from the higher to lower levels of being, it must be stressed that the Perennial Philosophy is not a religion. It does not pretend to be one, nor can it accept people making a religion of it. It is a wisdom, not a practice. This is abundantly evident from its content and its insistence on the traditional, that is to say revealed, nature of valid doctrines and practices.
On the other hand, this science must also encompass the relative, in other words human existence and experience. It does this by being grounded, at the other end of its spectrum, in Tradition. As we saw in an earlier slide, this means that the Perennial Philosophy focuses on that which in human civilizations is still attached to its divine origin. So, when they discuss art, perennialists will naturally focus on the sacred art of a given tradition. Sometimes it becomes necessary to step outside of the continuum that connects the Divine to the human, and so the Perennial Philosophy will inevitably address modern deviations from tradition, such as the deviation that is profane modern art.
The next slide examines the language that perennialists have used to explain the Perennial Philosophy.
==
The language of the Perennial Philosophy
The Perennial Philosophy is based upon the premise that the Absolute, and thus God, exists. Although it is an essentially spiritual perspective, it does not favor one religious form over any other in its explanations. It has no agenda to prove the rightness of one form over another. Indeed, from Dr. Stoddart's definition in the second slide, we know that the central idea of the Perennial Philosophy is that "Divine Truth is one, timeless, and universal, and that the different religions are but different languages expressing that one Truth."
So, this means that the Perennial Philosophy lends itself to any traditional thinker who is searching for metaphysical arguments related to the forms of her tradition. What it will not support is any claim for supremacy of her form above others. Thus, the language of the Perennial Philosophy strives as much as possible to be accessible to people from any tradition whatsoever, showing no favoritism.
In practice, however, one must choose one word or term rather than another. Because of the influence of its early twentieth century exponents, a number of terms are borrowed from Hindu metaphysics, for the simple reason that they express particularly well certain realities such as the many-layered relationship between the Absolute and the relative. There are other terms from Platonic philosophy and still others borrowed from Christianity.
The use of these various terms does not result in a patched together mish-mash of ideas such as occurs in many New Age theories. Readers of perennialist writings come to realize that this is not an attempt to mix traditions together, but instead is an attempt to utilize existing terminology when it is appropriate. It is also an illustration of how various traditions are able to express one and the same Truth that transcends them all. These ideas, in different languages and different modalities, still point to one and the same Reality. When understood, they prove in a very striking way the power, mercy, and beauty of the Reality that communicates Itself to all of the traditions, favoring no one above any other.
It is the Perennial Philosophy that helps us understand the single 'song' despite the innumerable voices.
==
