Initiation & 'Passivity'

We said above that nothing pertaining to initiatic knowledge can be the object of discussion and that discussion in general is, if one may put it thus, a profane undertaking par excellence. Some have claimed to infer from this that initiatic teaching must be received 'passively', and have even gone so far as to make this an argument against initiation itself. Here is yet another equivocation that it is particularly important to dispel. In order to be truly profitable, initiatic teaching naturally requires a 'receptive' mental attitude, but 'receptivity' is not at all a synonym for 'passivity'; on the contrary, this teaching requires of the one who receives it a continual effort of assimilation, which is essentially active, and even active to the highest degree that can be conceived. It is really profane teaching that can with some reason be reproached with passivity, since it has no other purpose than to furnish information that must be 'learned' instead of understood, that is, which the student need merely register and store in his memory without really assimilating it. By its wholly outward character and results, any personal and inward activity is obviously reduced to a minimum, if it is not completely lacking. But at the root of this equivocation there is something still more serious. Indeed, we have often noted among those who claim to be enemies of esoterism a regrettable tendency to confuse it with its counterfeits, and consequently to include in similar attacks things that are in reality quite different, and indeed even totally opposed. This is of course another example of modern incomprehension, for ignorance of all that touches upon the csoteric and initiatic domain is so complete and widespread in our time that nothing can be astonishing in this regard, and in many cases this may excuse those who act in this way; moreover, one is sometimes tempted to wonder whether this is really a sufficient explanation for anyone who wants to go to the root of things. First of all, it goes without saying that this very incomprehension and ignorance are part of the scheme to destroy every traditional idea, the implementation of which has continued throughout the modern period, and that therefore they can only have been intentional and undertaken by the subversive influences working toward this destruction. But apart from this entirely general consideration, it seems that there is also something more in what we are alluding to, answering to a precise and clearlydefined plan. Indeed, when initiation is deliberately confused with pseudo-initiation, or even with the counter-initiation, and everything is jumbled together so inextricably that nothing can be recognized any longer, it is truly very difficult for anyone capable of the least reflection not to wonder who or what profits from all these confusions. It is of course not a question of good or bad faith that we wish to raise here, something that would in any case have only a very secondary importance, since the malevolence of false ideas so circulated would thus be neither increased nor decreased; and it is quite possible that the very prejudice some people exhibit is due solely to the fact that they are unconsciously obeying some suggestion. What is to be concluded from all this is not only that the enemies of the initiatic tradition make dupes among those they attract to organizations directly or indirectly 'controlled' by them, but that even the very people who believe themselves to be combatting them are in fact sometimes instruments just as useful for the ends they have in view, though in a different way. When the counter-initiation cannot entirely dissimulate its undertakings and purposes, it is doubly to its advantage to attribute them to true initiation, for by this they cause it undeniable harm and at the same time deflect the danger that threatens them by misleading those who might be on the trail of certain discoveries. We have frequently been occupied with this subject, [1], more recently in particular with reference to a book published some time ago in England by a former member of certain organizations of dubious character, by which we mean those pseudo-initiatic organizations most clearly marked by the influence of the counter-initiation. Although the author left these organizations and even openly turned against them, he was still very much affected by the teaching he had received from them, which is quite apparent in his conception of initiation. This conception, in which precisely the notion of passivity predominates, is strange enough to warrant our close attention because it serves as the guiding idea of what was meant to be a history of initiatic organizations, or what are so called, from antiquity down to our own day, an eminently fanciful history in which everything is jumbled together as we just described, and which is supported by many irregular citations, most of which are taken from very dubious 'sources'. But since here we do not mean to undertake a review of this book, this is not what presently interests us, any more than what simply conforms to the 'accepted' ideas invariably found in all works of this kind. We prefer to limit ourselves to exposing the errors implied in the guiding idea itself, errors that the author clearly owes to his previous attachments, so that, ultimately, he simply helps to disseminate and sanction the views of those whose adversary he believes he has become, continuing to take for initiation what they have presented to him as such, but which is really only one very efficacious way of preparing agents or instruments for the counter-initiation - this being what is most 'instructive' from our point of view. All this is naturally limited to a purely psychic domain, and for this reason can have no connection with true initiation, since this, on the contrary, is of an essentially spiritual order. Here it is largely a question of 'magic', and as we have already sufficiently explained, magical operations of whatever sort in no way constitute an initiatic process. On the other hand, we find in this book the singular belief that every initiation must be based on the awakening and ascent of the subtle force that the Hindus call Kundalini, something that is in fact a method proper only to certain very particular forms of initiation. What is more, this is not the first time we have noticed, in what we are inclined to call anti-initiatic legends, a sort of obsession with Kundalini, which is curious to say the least, and for which the reasons are generally not very clear. Here it is linked fairly closely with an interpretation of the symbolism of the serpent taken in an exclusively 'malefic' sense, for the author seems not to have the least idea of the double meaning of certain symbols, a very important subject that we have already treated elsewhere. [2] Howcver this may be, Kundalini Yoga, as practiced particularly in the Tantric initiation, is assuredly something altogether different from magic, although what is abusively considered under this name in the present instance may well be nothing more than that. Indeed, if it were only a case of pseudo-initiation, it would doubtless be even less than that, a 'psychological' illusion pure and simple. But if the counter-initiation intervenes in any degree, there can well be a real deviation and even a sort of 'inversion' leading to contact, not with a transcendent principle or with higher states of the being, but quite simply with the 'astral light', what we would prefer to call the world of 'wandering influences', that is to say, in the final analysis, with the nethermost part of the subtle domain. The author, who accepts the expression 'astral light', describes this outcome as 'illumination', thus making this teim curiously equivocal; rather than referring to something of a purely intellectual order and to the acquisition of a higher knowledge as it should normally do if taken in a legitimate initiatic sense, it then relates only to phenomena of 'clairvoyance' or to other powers of the same kind, of little interest in themselves, and especially negative in this case besides, for it seems that ultimately they serve to tender the one afflicted by them accessible to suggestions emanating from so-called unknown 'Masters' who, under the circumstances, could only be sinister 'black magicians'. We readily admit the accuracy of such a description for certain auxiliary organizations of the counter-initiation, for these generally seek nothing more than to make of their members mere instruments to be used as it pleases; but we do wonder, for this point does not seem perfectly clear, just what is the precise role played by the so-called 'initiate' in the magical operations leading to this result, and it seems that fundamentally this can only be the entirely passive one of a 'subject', in the sense in which 'psychics' of every sort understand the word. What we categorically deny, however, is that this same result has anything at all in common with initiation, which on the contrary excludes all passivity. We have already explained that this is one reason why initiation is incompatible with mysticism; with all the more reason, then, is it incompatible with something implying a passivity of an incomparably lower order than that of the mystics, one in short that, since the advent of spiritualism, belongs to what is popularly called 'mediumship'. Perhaps, let us say in passing, what is involved here is entirely comparable to the actual origin of 'mediumship', and of spiritism itself; and when 'clairvoyance' is obtained by psychic 'exercises', even if Kundalini plays no role, the usual effect is to render the subject eminently 'suggestible', as is proven by the unvarying conformity, alluded to above, of his visions to the special theories of the school to which he belongs. It is therefore not difficult to see to what advantage this can be put by 'black magicians', that is, the conscious representatives of the counter-initiation, nor is it difficult to realize that all of this goes directly against the true aim of initiation, which is properly speaking to 'deliver' the being from all contingencies, and not to impose new bonds over and above those naturally conditioning the existence of the ordinary man. The initiate is not a 'subject'; indeed, he is exactly the contrary; every tendency to passivity can only be an obstacle to initiation, and where it predominates it constitutes an 'irremediable' disqualification. What is more, every initiatic organization that has retained a clear understanding of its true purpose regards all hypnotic and other practices implying the use of a 'subject' as unlawful and strictly forbidden; and we might add that an active attitude is even prescribed toward the transitory spiritual states that may be reached in the first steps of 'realization' in order to avoid any danger of 'auto-suggestion. [3] Strictly speaking, from the initiatic point of view passivity is only conceivable and admissible exclusively in face of the supreme Principle. We are well aware that it might be objected that certain initiatic paths include a more or less complete submission to a guru; but this objection is by no means valid, firstly because we are speaking of a submission to which the initiate freely consents, not a subjection imposed without his knowledge, and secondly because the guru is always someone known to the disciple, someone with whom he has a real and direct relationship, and not some unknown figure who manifests himself 'astrally', that is, all phantasmagoria apart, who conveys suggestions by a kind of 'telepathic' influence without the disciple knowing whence they come. Furthermore, this submission is no more than a simple 'pedagogic' method, one could say, of entirely transitory necessity; not only would a true spiritual teacher never abuse it, but he would use it only to enable his disciple to free himself from it as soon as possible, for if there is any unvarying affirmation to be made in such a case, it is that the true guru is purely inward, that he is no other than the being's very 'Self', which the outward guru does no more than represent for as long as the being remains unable to enter into conscious communication with this 'Self'. Initiation ought precisely to lead to the fully realized and effective consciousness of the 'Self', which can obviously be the case neither with children in the nursery nor with psychic automata. The initiatic 'chain' is not meant to bind the being, but on the contrary to furnish a support that allows it to raise itself indefinitely and to go beyond its limits as an individual and conditioned being. Even when there are contingent applications that can coexist secondarily with its essential goal, an initiatic organization has no use for blind and passive instruments, whose normal place could in any case only be in the profane world, since they lack all qualification. What must exist among all its members at all levels and in all functions is a conscious and voluntary collaboration that implies all the effective understanding of which each is capable; and no true hicrarchy can be realized or maintained on any other basis than this.