smith-bush - transcendent unity con

8/2/2019 Smith-Bush - Transcendent Unity Con

1/6

JAAR 44/4 (1976) 715-719

Frithjof Schuon's The Transcendent Unityo f Religions: ConR I C H A R D C. BUSH

Y now this book by Frithjof Schuon is well known, certainly to those whoare interested in relationships among religions and who welcome anyeffort in the direction of religious unity. The new Harper Torchbooks

revision of the 1953 English translation by Peter Townsend (Pantheon) wasdistributed at a reduced price at the 1975 AAR Annual Meeting and has beenreviewed in several journals. During a session of the Philosophy of Religion andTheology section of the AAR in 1973, Schuon's thesis was the basis of radicaldisagreement between Huston Smith and myself. Professor Smith was convincedthat I had misunderstood Schuon at several points, so we agreed a few monthsafterward to write reviews from our respective points of view, to be published atthe time of the publication of the revised edition (1975). I have delayed thisundertaking for an unpardonable length of time and apologize for it.

Professor Smith has edited and provided an introduction to the revised editionof The Transcendent Unity of Religions. Certain sections have been omitted in therevision, notably for me the section which I seem to have grossly misunderstood.The substance of the book remains in an attractive, small volume. A briefbiographical sketch of the author would be helpful, even if only a few sentences onthe back cover.

Schuon asserts that the unity of religions can be realized and known only on aneternal, metaphysical level, that knowledge of the divine reality can only beintuited by man's intellect, which Schuon, like Meister Eckhardt, identifies withwhat is uncreated and uncreatable in the soul. All religions are one insofar as theyproceed from and manifest that transcendent essence which is ultimately real andtrue. At various points the author identifies this esoteric realm of unity with Godor the Word or with love, knowledge of which is only by direct intuition which isbased neither on belief nor reason and needs no proof or belief, but abides in"metaphysical certitude, [which] is absolute because of the identity between theknower and the known in the Intellect" (xxviii-xxix)*. Metaphysics is differentfrom and superior to philosophy for Schuon, since philosophy employs reasonand therefore involves the pretension to autonomy, and is also superior to religionwhich is based on belief.

'Since all quotations are from the volume under review, I have dispensed with footnotes andplaced all page references in parentheses following a quote or reference The above paragraphs atvarious points follow very closely certain statements made in my paper in the Philosophy ofReligion and Theology 1973 Proceedings, for the AAR edited by David Gnffin.

RICHARD C BUSH (Ph D , Chicago) is Professor and Acting Director, School of Fine Artsa n d Humanistic Studies, Oklahoma State University, where he teaches courses dealing withAsian religions, philosophies, and humanities. He is the author of Religion in Communist Chinaan d of a short work on religion in China to be published as part of a high school textbook series in7,5


2/6

7 1 6 RICHARD C. BUSH

In co n tra st to the eso ter ic realm discussed a bo ve, the exoteric s id e of religion i sto be found in i ts var ious express io n s a n d forms (no t the Pla ton ic fo rms) , whichare the doctr ines , pract ices and organ izat ions o f var ious rel ig ious groups . Mostpeo ple con fuse these express io n s wi th reali ty an d d o n o t lo o k beyon d thei r owncircles f o r the t ruth, so the uni ty o f relig io n can n o t be gras ped a t the exo teric level.Thus we begin with a n ultima te meta physica l un ity which ma y be d escribed a sabsolute, categorical, undifferentiated Unity Anthropologically this Unityprecludes final distinction between human and divine, epistemologically betweenknower and kn own It bespeaks a knowing that be com es its object, or rather is itsobject, for temporal distinctions are likewise inapp osite at this point, (xni)

We must remember that this ult imate unity "def ies vis ua liza t ion o r even co n s i sten tdescr iption." It i s not known by revelat ion or reason but through the Intellectintuitively. Glimpses of this esoteric Unity appear in unspecified "revealedrel ig ions" but as Smith goes on to say:

it is hidden and secret not because those who know will not tell, but because thetruth to which they are privy is buried so deep in the human composite that theycannot com mu nicate it, not in any way the majority will find conv incing (xv)

Those who do "realize that they have their roots in the Absolute" const i tute anesoteric min o r ity, whereas a n exo teric major i ty d o es n o t kno w o r regard s a s s teri lewhat the eso terics are ta lkin g a bo ut. Eso ter ics , to whom a lon e certa in ty a bo ut theultima te is a ccess ible, are "a spi ritua l elite which beco mes ever mo re restricted innumber." (xxx)There are two closely related problems in this thesis. I have no problem withthe as sumption o f the Real i ty or Min d o r God who i s complete an d utter un i ty,that He o r It t ra n scen d s o ur ef for ts to kn o w Him, tha t His ways a re n o t o ur ways ,etc., but the co n victio n is f a i rly widespread in the majo r relig ious tr ad i t i o n s , wi th ameas ure of philo so phica l s uppo rt, tha t this rea l i ty i s much mo re clo sely rela ted tothe wo rld in which we live, even to the exo ter ic realm, tha n Schuo n a llo ws. If this i sthe case, then whatever kn o wled ge is po ss ible of the ultima te must exten d beyo n deso teric circles. In the world of religio n s, go d s ma ke themselves kn o wn in pa rt a tleas t , and people cla im to know and be known by such gods . We are presentedwith s o me eviden ce, such as the "spirit-f illed life," the chan ge tha t takes pla ce in a nind iv id ual o r a comm uni ty, the tes t o f time. Even the Ta o Te Chin g, which tells ustha t " the Ta o which can be na med i s no t the Ta o ," goes on to sa y that the Ta o i sl ike water , an i n f ant , woman, a val ley, or an uncarved block. Even that mosten igmat ic o f phi losophical concepts i s not a s esoter ic as cla imed.Reason canno t be used to suppor t o r oppose the t r an scenden t un i ty whichSchuo n po si ts . Scientif ic in vest igat io n i s o ut. Every o bservable facet of religio uslife i n the world belo n gs to the exoteric realm a n d can n o t be c ited to s uppor t an ycon ten t ion a bo ut the eso teric . All we can d o i s accept the wo rd o f Schuo n an d hisfellow eso terics that they have intuited this tran s cen d en t un i ty, which is to sa y weexercise our faith which in turn is exoteric.My seco n d pro blem a t th i s po in t is the resultin g d eep divis io n between eso tericand exoter ic. Professor Smith, di sturbed as I am at the di f ferences which haved iv ided religi ous t ra d i ti o n s a n d communi ti es f rom each o ther, f i n d s i n Schuo n 'sscheme a bas i s for the unity of religions. I am impressed neither by the unityenvi saged nor wi th the poss ib i l i t ies for communicat ion o f i t , and, moreover , amdeeply troubled because of the further division between an elite few, howevermuch they kno w a n d can share in thei r eso ter ic c i rcles , an d the masses o f human


3/6


4/6

7 1 8 RICHARD C. BUSHthey are absorbed in the eso ter ic wisdom ident i f ied with Solomon.One must observe tha t th is han d lin g o f b iblica l pas sa ges i s an i l lus tra t ion o fSchuon's cathol ic ity, for he has employed and credits Is lamic interpreters atsevera l po in t s . Regardles s o f background, one cannot ignore the f ac t tha t the"ess ence" of the pro phetic mo vement with its in heren tly ethical thrust ha s beend is torted completely. I have d evoted mo re spa ce to this n o n sen se than it d eservesbecause Schuon regards the s tory an d h is han d l ing o f it as a n excellen t exa mple ofthe d i s t in c tio n between eso ter ic an d exoteric .Schuon 's t rea tment o f the David an d Ba thsheba s tory i s typica l o f his use o fh is to r ica l o r biblica l da ta to f i t the po in t he i s t ry in g to ma ke. If Muhammed i s at rue prophet and no t a f a l se one (certa in ly an acceptable cond i t ion) , then thebibl ical "passages referring to the Paraclete must inevitably concern him notexclus ively but eminen tly fo r it is in con ceivable that Chris t , when s peakin g ofthe future , should have pas sed over in s i lence a man i fes ta t io n o f such ma gn i tude"(108-9). There fo l lows the a s sertio n tha t Jesus ' wo rds co n cern in g f a lse pro phetsmust certa in ly not be read a s apply ing to Muhammed. Why cannot we regardMuhammed as an authen t ic prophet a n d exclude him f rom the ran ks o f the f a lseprophets without d i s tor t ing Jesus ' words to apply to a man s ix centur ies l a ter?Surely those of us who have grown t ired of hearing the beast of the Book ofRevelat ion iden tif ied success ively a s Hitler, Sta l in , Ma o , etc., sho uld be a ble tomake our po in t without d i s tor t ing our scr iptures or any o ther.Obviously one may choose a method by which to interpret scripture orh is tor ica l records which bes t elici ts mean in g for h im. In terpreta t io n s o f h is tor ica ld a ta which a bso rb a ll perso n a l i tie s , exper ien ces , an d events in to o n e a ll-inc lus ivewhole abo und i n the Veda n t a a n d i n mys tica l movement s i n ma ny religion s a n dcerta i n ly are to be con s id ered a mo n g o thers a s we search for tha t which bin d s ustogether. When, ho wever, such in terpreta t io n s ign o re, blur , o r d i s to r t his to r ica l o rbibl ical research in any tradit ion, then I suspect that the resultant unity is a lso ad i s t o r t i o n .I am also suspicious of any system which can so l ightly brush as ide ethicalcon cerns . It i s no t so much the brea kin g o f a mo ra l cod e tha t f o rbid s a d u lte ry o rkill ing, but rather the s id e-stepping of an ethical principle ro o ted in mo st cultureswhich as serts tha t huma n li fe has value an d therefo re tha t huma n bein gs a re n o t tobe ma n ipula ted for o n e man 's pleas ure . To live a cco rd in g to th is an d o ther e th ica lprin ciples is to live in un ity with the ultima te in just as au the n t i c a ma n n e r as i t is toin tuit a n a bso lute essen ce of religio n . M a n y a re the mystics who se experien ce hasappeared to lead them beyon d the ethica l , n o tably the grea t s o ul who s a id , "LoveGod an d d o what you please ." The o n es whom I respect a re thos e for whom th isd o es n o t mean licens e o r f aci le twis t ing o f what has been d o n e , but ra ther thos ewhos e higher experien ce mean s l ivin g a ccord in g to a higher mo ral ity which in turninspires me to that higher life.

This reference to mystics lead s to my erro r in a d i scuss io n o f Schuon in theprevio usly mentio n ed paper for the 1973 AA R meetin gs. The la s t chapter of the1953 edit io n of Transcendent Unity i s a d i scuss io n o f Chris t i an sp ir i tua l i ty whichhas been severely shortened in the To rchbo o k ed i t ion . In tha t sectio n o f the o lderedi t ion (p. 176), a f ter quite critical rema rks con cern in g Chris t ian myst ics , Schuono bserves that "the con d it ion s n ecessa ry fo r the grow th of mystic ism have becomegen eral o n ly in the Chris t ia n wo rld , where mystic ism ha s con sequen tly beco me thenormal mode o f sp ir i tua l i ty . . ." (None o f th is remains in the Torchbooked i t io n .) Po s s ibly because I was th in k in g o f d i f feren t Western Chris t i a n mystics


5/6

SCHUON'S THE TRANSCENDENT UNITY OF RELIGIONS CON 719

f rom those Schuon had in mind, or o f the language of myst ic i sm which runsthroughout the book, I appl ied that "only in the Chr i s t i an world" s ta tement toSchuon 's eso teri sm, thus equat in g myst ic ism with eso teri sm. Tha to f co urs ewa s amis take, which I d uly ackno wledge. I had n o in ten t ion o f s a ying that Schuo n gaveChri s t i an s a n y ed ge o r an y ad van tage in i n tui t i ng tha t ult imate eso teric un i ty. Hismany references to I s lam, Suf i s i n par t icular , and to Vedant in and Neo-Platon icways o f thin kin g, preclude a n y Chn st i a n b ias . To repeat , however, he wo uld belost without the language of Christ ian mysticism, which l ike Sufism, of course,was profoundly in f luenced by Neo-Platon i sm.There are man y o ther po in ts which could be rai s ed . I suppo se the i n tr od uct io nto a volume i s n o place to engage in cr itic ism of the a utho r 's wo rk, but I wo uld liketo see a mo re cri tica l apprecia t ion o f Schuo n by Pro fesso r Smith. That may be setfor th in an ar t icle I have not read, or perhaps a more cr i t ica l approach i sforthcoming in Smith's The Primo rdial Traditio n which will pro ba bly be in pr in tbefo re this review. At an y ra te, we sha ll loo k fo rward to a systematic trea tmen t inthat work of the Schuonian perspective to which Huston Smith has directed usduring these years.To con c lude o n a more pos i tive n o te, an a ppro a ch to the un i ty o f religi on swhich I f i n d much mo re respon s ible an d d efen s ible is o n e i nvo lvi ng a d ivine rea l i tywhich I would call God but which others lo o k upo n as ma n y go d s o r spi r i ts , or a san imperso n a l Mind which is truly Real, o r a s a pro cess . Such a rea l i ty is presentand active in the vast sweep of human cultures and i s certa inly the power, theloving presence, which is responsible for what has emerged in var ious religioustra d i t i o n s . As a h i s to r i an o f religion s my s tud ies suggest tha t lea d ers , s a in t s , an dthin kers , a s well as "co mmo n believers," are in clin ed tow a rd such a real i ty becauseof certa in i n d icat io n s , evidences , or happenin gs which they or thei r forbear s haveexperienced in the common l i fe.The old pro o f s for the exi s tence of Go d d o n ' t mea n much an y mo re, but therei s somethin g a bo ut the n a tura l wor ld , whether you ta lk a bo ut o rder or i n teractio nof yin an d yan g, which suggests a h igher o rder o r a co smic in tera ctio n . There arethe bibles , i ncluding of course the holy books o f a t leas t the major tr ad i t i ons ,whose/ words a bo ut god s o r n i rvan a o r Brahma n or the d i a lec ti c o f h i s to ryconst i tute the Word. There are the common concerns, expressed in s imple,specif ic, d o ctr in a l s tatemen ts, which to uch me d eeply: "Wha t must I d o to besaved? ' "Pra i se to the Saving Lord Amida Buddha." "In the name of Allah, theCompass ionate, the Merciful." "From the Unreal lead me to Real." People whosay such things, in the saying itself, are my kinsmen, whether they gather inchurch, temple, mosque, or in splendid sol i tude. The examples could bemultiplied. They are exo teric to the co re, ro o ted a n d gro un d ed to be sure in a nultima te rea lity called by va rio us n a mes in the exo teric experien ces, but the uni tyis in the realm of human experience in which no secret wisdom is kept for anesoter ic el i te , but may be known and enjoyed by any human being.Before s uch a un i ty the so -called "tran s cen d en t un i ty of religio n s" i s a vague,shadowy reflection of true real i ty. Please label me an exoter ic.


6/6

, The American Academy of Religionanno unce s the publication of this volum eas the second in its "Aids for the S tud y ofReligion" series.

John CalvinSelecations .from his Writings

Edited by John Dillenberger

F eu men have had a grea ter Influenceu p on W e ste rn h ~ s t o r ) h a n J o h n C a h ~ n .the s~xteen th-cen tur ! Keformer Tho ughn ot a P u n td n . ~ t h a s he u h o l a ~ d h ef o u n d a t ~ o n \o f P u r ~ t a n ~ s mro m u h ~ c hp r e u t h c P r o t e \ t d n t e t h ~ cThough no t ap o l ~ t l c ~ , i n .t u a s he u h o , l o ng b e fo reM on t c \qu ~eu . \poke of the need fo rg o \ e r n m e n t u ~ t h h e c k s a n d

The ed l to r hd \ cho \en d \ d r i e t \ o lt ext s to \h ou the rdnge of C a l \~ n ' s ~ f ea n d u r l t l n g j c o m m e n td r le \ . \ e r m o n \ .l et te r\ , c a t e c h ~ \ m \ . t r d c t j a \ uel lb roddhdsed theo log~ cal uo rk s Alsoprolld ed 1s a lu c~ d~ n t r o d u c t ~ o n! D rD ~ l le n be rg e r o C a l \ ~ n ' \ ~ f e nd thought

h al dn ce \ th e h a \ ~ r f theC ' o n \ t ~ t u t ~ o n. -I ' n i t ed S ta t e s . A \ a ~ l a b l ehrough Scholars PressPrlce. $ 7 . 0 0 ($5.00 t o m e m b e r \ )

SCHOLARS=WNERSITY OF MONTANAMSSOULA. ONTANA 59812

smith-bush - transcendent unity con

Documents