Chapter 5
The passage from Pages dédiées à Mercure of Abdul-Haadi reads as follows:
The two initiatic chains: One is historical, the other spontaneous. The first is spread in known and established Sanctuaries under the direction of a living authorized Shaykh (Guru), who possesses the keys to the mystery. Such is the At-Taltmur-rajāl or instruction of men. The other is at-Taltmur-rabbäni or dominical or lordly instruction, which I venture to call 'Marian initiation' since it is that received by the Holy Virgin, mother of Jesus, son of Mary. There is always a master, but he can be absent, unknown, even dead for several centuries. In this initiation you draw from the present the same spiritual substance that others draw from antiquity. It is presently rather frequent in Europe, at least in its lower degrees, but it is almost unknown in the East.
This text was published in the review La Gnose, num. 10, of January, 1911. When we decided to reprint it in Études Traditionelles we asked René Guénon if he would be willing to write a note in order to prevent possible errors of interpretation. He sent us the following note, to which he alludes in chapter 5 , note 11 of the present work.
As this paragraph might occasion certain misunderstandings, it seemed to us necessary to clarify its meaning a bit. First of all, it must be understood that what is involved here is nothing that could be assimilated to a 'mystical' way, which would obviously be contradictory to the affirmation of the existence of a real 'initiatic chain' in this case as well as in that which can be considered 'normal'. In this connection we may cite a passage of Jalāl al-Dīn Rumi which relates to exactly the same thing: 'If anyone by a rare
exception has traversed this [initiatic] way alone [that is to say without a Pīr, a Persian term equivalent to the Arab Shaykh], he has arrived by the help of the hearts of the Pirs. The hand of the Pīr is not refused to one who is absent; this hand is nothing other than the embrace of God.' (Mathnavī 1, 2974-5). In these last words can be seen an allusion to the role of the true interior Guru in a sense perfectly in conformity with the teaching of the Hindu tradition; but this takes us rather far from the question that directly occupies us here. We will say that from the point of view of Islamic tasawwuf, what is involved is the way of the Afrād, whose Master is Seyyidna Al Khidr, [1] and is outside of what one might call the jurisdiction of the 'Pole' (al-Quṭb) which includes only the regular and usual paths of initiation. It cannot be too much emphasized that these are only very exceptional cases, as is expressly declared in the text just cited, and that they occur only in circumstances which make normal transmission impossible, for example in the absence of any regularly constituted initiatic organization. On this subject, see also the closing pages of East and West.
On the same subject we extract a few lines from a letter René Guénon addressed to us on March 14, 1937:
Al-Khidr is properly the Master of the Afrād, who are independent of the Quṭb and may not even be known by him; it is indeed as you say a matter of something more 'direct' and in a way outside defined and delimited functions no matter how elevated they may be; and this is why the number of the Afrād is indeterminate. This comparison is sometimes used: a prince, even if he exercises no function, is nonetheless higher in himself than a
minister (at least if the minister is not himself a prince, something that can happen but which is not at all necessary); in the spiritual order the Afrād are analogous to princes and the Aqtāb to ministers. This is only a comparison, of course, but all the same it helps somewhat in understanding the relation of the ones to the others.