48 § Gathering What Is Scattered
In The Great Triad (ch. 6) with reference to the Ming-Tang and the Tien-tiHouei, we have cited a Masonic formula according to which the task of the Masters is 'to diffuse the light and to gather that which is scattered'. In fact, the comparison that we made then bore only upon the first part of this formula. As to the second part, which may seem more enigmatic, it has some remarkable connections in traditional symbolism, nor do we think it would be without interest to make here some observations which could not be included on that other occasion.
In order to understand as completely as possible what is involved, it is advisable to refer first of all to the Vedic tradition which is particularly explicit in this respect: 'what has been scattered' is the dismembered body of the primordial Purusha who was divided at the first sacrifice accomplished by the Devas at the beginning, and from whom, by this very division, were born all manifested beings. It is obvious that we have here a symbolic description of the passage from unity to multiplicity, without which there could not in fact be any manifestation whatsoever; and this makes it already
clear that the 'gathering of what is scattered', or the reconstitution of Purusha as he was 'before the beginning', if such an expression is permissible, that is, in the state of non-manifestation, is nothing other than the return to principial unity. This Purusha is identical with Prajāpati, 'the Lord of beings brought forth', all of whom have issued forth from him and are thus considered in a certain sense as his 'progeny'. He is also Vishvakarma, that is, the 'Grand Architect of the Universe', and, as Vishvakarma, it is he himself who accomplishes the sacrifice while at the same time he is the victim thereof; and if it is said that he is sacrificed by the Devas, this makes no difference in reality, for the Devas are after all nothing other than the 'powers' that he carries within himself.
We have already said, on several occasions, that every ritual sacrifice must be looked on as an image of this first cosmogonic sacrifice; and in every sacrifice, as Ananda Coomaraswamy has remarked, 'the Brāhmanas abound with evidence that the victim is a representation of the sacrificer himself, or as the texts express it, is the sacrificer himself. In accordance with the universal rule that initiation (dikṣā) is a death and a rebirth, it is clear that the 'initiate is the oblation' (Taittiriya Samhita 6: I. 4), 'the victim is substantially the sacrificer himself' (Aitareya Brāhmana 2: 2). This leads us directly to the Masonic symbolism of the grade of Master, in which the initiated is identified in fact with the victim. Moreover, the relationship of the legend of Hiram with the myth of Osiris has often been emphasised so that, when it comes to 'gathering that which is scattered', we think immediately of Isis gathering together the scattered members of Osiris. Essentially, however, the scattering of the members of Osiris is precisely the same thing as that of the members of Purusha or of Prajāpati: these are just two versions of the description of the same cosmogonic process in two different traditional forms. It is true that in the case of Osiris and in that of Hiram, it is no longer a question of a sacrifice, at least not explicitly, but of a murder; but even that does not change anything essentially, for it is really the same thing that is considered under two complementary aspects, as a sacrifice under its 'devic' aspect, and as a murder under its 'asuric' aspect. Suffice it to note this point in passing, for to dwell on it
would mean entering into unduly long developments not relevant to the question we are now considering.
Again, in the Hebraic Kabbala-though here it is no longer really a question of either sacrifice or of murder, but rather a kind of 'disintegration', the consequences of which are, moreover, the same-it was from the fragmentation of the body of Adam Qadmon that the Universe was formed with all the beings that it contains, so that these are like particles of this body, their 'reintegration' into unity corresponding to the reconstitution of Adam Qadmon, who is 'Universal Man'; and Purusha, according to one sense of this word, is also 'Man' par excellence. In all this, then, it is always exactly the same thing that is being symbolised. Let us add, before going further, that since the grade of Master represents, virtually at least, the accomplishment of the Lesser Mysteries, what is to be understood in this case is strictly speaking the reintegration at the centre of the human state. But the same symbolism is always applicable to different levels in virtue of the correspondences that exist between them, so that it may be referred either to a given world, or to universal manifestation as a whole; and the reintegration into the 'primordial state', which is also the 'Adamic' state, prefigures as it were the total and final reintegration, even though in reality it is but a step on the way that leads to it.
In the study we cited above, Coomaraswamy said that 'the essential, in the Sacrifice, in the first place is to divide, and in the second place to reunite'. It includes, therefore, the two complementary poles of 'disintegration' and 'reintegration' which constitute the cosmic process in its entirety: Purusha, 'being one, becomes many, and being many, he again becomes one'. The reconstitution of Purusha is effected symbolically, in particular, in the construction of the Vedic altar, which includes in its different parts a representation of all the worlds; and the sacrifice, to be accomplished correctly, demands the cooperation of all the arts, which assimilates the sacrificer to Vishvakarma himself. On the other hand, since every ritual action-that is, every truly normal action that conforms to 'order' (rita)-can be regarded as having in a way a 'sacrificial' function, according to the etymological sense of the word (sacrum facere), what is true for the Vedic altar is also true in a certain way and in some degree for every construction erected in conformity with traditional rules, these always proceeding in reality from a same 'cosmic model', as we have explained on other occasions. It is clear that this is directly
related to a 'construction' symbolism such as that of Masonry, and, moreover, even in the most immediate sense, the builder does in fact gather the scattered materials to form of them an edifice which, if it is truly what it ought to be, will have an 'organic' unity comparable to that of a living creature from the microcosmic point of view, or to that of a world from the macrocosmic point of view.
In conclusion there is still something to be said about another kind of symbolism, which may seem very different on the surface, but which nevertheless has in reality an equivalent significance. This is the reconstitution of a word from its literal elements taken initially in isolation. In order to understand this it must be remembered that from a traditional point of view the name of a being is nothing other than the expression of the very essence of this being. The reconstitution of the name, therefore, is symbolically the same thing as the reconstitution of the being itself. The part which letters play in a symbolism like that of the Kabbala with regard to creation or universal manifestation, is also well known; it could be said that manifestation is formed by the separated letters which correspond to the multiplicity of its elements, and that to reunite these letters is to bring it back to its Principle if, that is, this reunion is accomplished in such a way as to reconstitute truly the name of the Principle. From this point of view, 'to gather that which is scattered' is the same thing as 'to find the lost Word' for, in reality and in its most profound sense, this 'lost Word' is nothing other than the name of the 'Great Architect of the Universe'.