37 The Gift of Tongues
A question directly linked to initiatic teaching and its adaptations is that of what is called the 'gift of tongues', often mentioned as one of the 'privileges' of the true Brotherhood of the RoseCross, or, more exactly (for the word 'privileges' can too easily give rise to false interpretations), one of their characteristic signs, although one capable of a much more extended application than is made by particular traditional forms. In fact, it seems that no one has ever clearly explained how we should understand this from the strictly initiatic point of view, for many who have used the expression seem to have understood it almost solely in the most literal sense, which is insufficient even though this literal meaning can certainly be justified in some ways. Indeed, the possession of certain keys to language can furnish means quite distinct from the ordinary for understanding and speaking the most diverse languages; and in the order of the traditional sciences, there certainly does exist what one could call a sacred philology, which is entirely different from the profane philology that first came to light in the modern West. However, even while accepting this first interpretation and situating it in its proper place among the contingent applications of esoterism, there is a symbolic meaning of a higher order that is supetimposed upon the first without in any way contradicting it, and which moreover agrees with the initiatic ideas common to all traditions of both East and West.
From this point of view, one can say that he who tuuly possesses the 'gift of tongues' speaks to each person his own language in the sense that he always expresses himself in a form appropriate to the
ways of thinking of those he addresses. This is what is alluded to in a more outward way when it is said that the Brotherhood of the RoseCross had to adopt the dress and habits of the country in which they found themselves; and some have even added that they had to take a new name-as if to take on a new individuality-each time they changed countries. Thus a representative of this Brotherhood, by virtue of the spiritual degree he had reached, was no more bound to any definite form than to the special conditions of a particular place, [1] and this is why he was a 'Cosmopolitan' in the true sense of the word. [2] We meet the same teaching in Islamic esoterism: Muhyi 'd-Din ibn al-'Arabi says that 'the true sage does not tie himself to any beliefs' because, having obtained the knowledge of their common principle, he is beyond all particular beliefs; yet precisely because of this he is able, according to the circumstances, to speak the language proper to each belief. Moreover, regardless of what the profane may think, there is no 'opportunism' or dissimulation here; on the contrary, this is the necessary consequence of a knowledge superior to all forms but which can only be communicated (to the extent that it is communicable) through forms, each of which, by the very fact that it is a special adaptation, cannot be suitable for all men indiscriminately. To understand this, we can compare it to the translation of one idea into different languages; the idea always remains the same, in itself independent of any expression, but each time it is expressed in another language it becomes accessible to men who otherwise could not have known it; and this comparison also conforms strictly to the very symbolism of the 'gift of tongues'.
He who has arrived at this point has, by a direct and profound knowledge (and not by a merely theoretical or verbal one), reached
the self-same foundation of all traditional doctrines, and, by placing himself at the central point from which they all emanate, has found the one truth hidden under the diversity and multiplicity of outward forms. Indeed, the difference exists only in form and appearance, the essential foundation being always and everywhere the same, for there is only one truth, cven though it has multiple aspects according to the more or less special points of view from which it is considered and because, as the Muslim initiates say, 'the doctrine of Oneness is one. [3] But a variety of forms is necessary to fit the mental conditions of a particular country or epoch, or, if one prefers, to correspond to the various particular points of view determined by these conditions; and those who stop at the form sce the differences above all, to the point of taking them for oppositions, whereas they disappear for those who go further. Such people can subsequently descend again into the form, but are no longer affected by it in any way, and without their profound knowledge of it being in any way modified; and, just as one draws the consequences from the principle, they can realize all the adaptations of the fundamental doctrine by proceeding from higher to lower, from inward to outward (and it is in this way that true 'synthesis' is completely the opposite of vulgar 'syncretism', as we have previously explained). Thus, to use the same symbolism, they are no longer restricted to any particular language and therefore they can speak them all, for they have learned the very principle from which all languages derive through adaptation; and what we here call languages are all traditional forms, religious or otherwise, which in effect are only adaptations of the great primordial and universal Tradition, that is, diverse garments of the unique truth. Those who have passed beyond all particular forms to arrive at universality and who thus 'know' what others can only 'believe', are necessarily 'orthodox' in regard to every regular tradition; and only they can claim to be fully and effectively 'catholic' in the strictly etymological sense of the word, [4] whereas the others can only be so virtually, by a kind of aspiration that has not yet realized
its object, or by a movement that, though directed toward the center, has not really succeeded in reaching it.
Those who have passed beyond form are thereby freed from the limitations inherent in the individual condition of ordinary humanity; even those who have only reached the center of the human state, without yet having effectively realized the superior states, are at least freed from the limitations by which a man, fallen from that 'primordial state' into which they are now reintegrated, is tied to a particular individuality as well as to a determinate form, since all individualities and all forms of the human domain have their immediate principle at the very point where they now stand. That is why, as we said earlier, they are able to put on diverse individualities in order to adapt to every circumstance, these individualities being truly no more important to them than mere garments. By this we can understand what the change of name really signifies, which naturally relates to what we have previously explained about initiatic names. Moreover, wherever this practice is found it always represents a more or less profound change of state; in the monastic orders its purpose is fundamentally the same, for there too the profane individuality [5] must disappear to be replaced by a new being; and even when the symbolism is no longer entirely understood in its profound sense, it nonetheless retains a certain efficacy.
If one understands these few indications, it will also be cvident why the Brotherhood of the Rose-Cross could never have constituted anything even remotely resembling a 'society' or an external organization of any sort; they were no doubt able to more or less directly but invisibly inspire outward organizations that are formed temporarily for a special and definite purpose, as initiates of a like degree still do in the East, especially in the Far East; but though these organizations might for this reason be called 'Rosicrucian', they were not linked to them in any way and, except perhaps in some altogether exceptional cases played no apparent role in them. What in the West has been called the Brotherhood of the Rose-Cross
from the fourteenth century onward, and which has received other names in other times and places (since this name has only a purely symbolic value and must itself adapt to circumstances), is not some association, but rather the collectivity of beings that have reached the same state superior to that of ordinary humanity, the same degree of effective initiation (of which we have just noted one essential aspect), and who also possess the same inward qualities which suffice for them to recognize one another without requiring any outward sign. That is why they have no meeting-place other than 'the Temple of the Holy Spirit, which is everywhere', so that the descriptions sometimes given of it can only be understood symbolically; and that is also why they necessarily remain unknown to the profane among whom they live and to whom they are outwardly similar although in reality entirely different, for their distinctive marks are purely inward and thus perceived only by those who have reached the same level of spiritual development, so that their influence, which derives rather from an 'action of presence' than from any outward activity, is exercised in ways that are utterly incomprehensible to the common man.