PREFACE
In our preceding study, The Symbolism of the Cross, we set forth a geometrical representation of the being based entirely on the metaphysical theory of the multiple states according to the data furnished by the different traditional doctrines. The present volume will form a sort of complement to the earlier study, for the information given there was perhaps not sufficient to bring out the full range of this altogether fundamental theory; indeed, at that time we had to limit ourselves to what related most directly to the clearlydefined goal we had set ourselves. That is why, setting aside the symbolic representation already described, or at most only referring to it incidentally as need arises, we devote this new work entirely to an ampler development of the theory in question, both-and above all-in its very principles and in certain of its applications as they concern the being more particularly in its human aspect.
Regarding this last point, it is perhaps not useless to recall from the outset that the fact of our pausing to consider matters of this order in no way implies that the human state occupies a privileged rank in the totality of universal Existence, or that it is metaphysically distinguished with respect to other states by the possession of any prerogative whatsoever. In reality, this human state is no more than one state of manifestation among an indefinitude of others; in the hierarchy of the degrees of Existence it is situated in the place assigned to it by its own nature, that is, by the limiting character of the conditions which define it, and this place confers upon it neither absolute superiority nor absolute inferiority. If we must sometimes consider this human state in particular, it is solely because this is the state in which we find ourselves, and it thereby acquires for us, but for us alone, an especial importance; but this is only an altogether relative and contingent point of view belonging to the individuals that we are in our present mode of manifestation. This is why, especially in speaking of superior and inferior states, we always make
this hierarchical division from the human point of view, for it is the only term of comparison directly graspable by us as individuals; and we must not forget that every expression is enclosed in a form and necessarily framed in individual mode, so much so that when we wish to speak of anything, even purely metaphysical truths, we can do so only by descending to an altogether different order-an essentially limited and relative one-in order to translate them into the language of human individualities. The reader will doubtless understand without difficulty all the precautions and reservations imposed by the inevitable imperfections of this language, which is so manifestly inadequate to what it must express in such a case; there is an obvious disproportion here, but one found equally in all formal representations whatsoever, including strictly symbolic representations, although these latter are incomparably less narrowly restricted than ordinary language and consequently more apt for the communication of transcendent truths, and so they are invariably used in all truly 'initiatic' and traditional teaching.[^1] Indeed, as we have noted time and time again, in order not to alter the truth by a partial, restrictive, or systematized explanation, it is always fitting to reserve a place for the inexpressible, that is to say for what cannot be enclosed in any form and in reality is, metaphysically speaking, the most important thing.
While still considering the human state, if we wish to relate the individual point of view to the metaphysical point of view, as must always be done when it is a question of 'sacred science', and not merely profane knowledge, it can be said that the realization of the total being can be accomplished taking any state at all as a base or point of departure, by reason of the equivalence of all contingent modes of existence when regarded from the standpoint of the Absolute; thus it can be accomplished from the human state as well as from any other, and, as we have said elsewhere, even from any modality of that state, which amounts to saying more particularly
that it is also possible for corporeal and terrestrial man, whatever Westerners may think, led into error as they are about the importance to be attributed to 'corporeity' because of the extraordinary insufficiency of their conceptions concerning the constitution of the human being.[^2] Since it is in this state that we presently find ourselves, it is here that we must begin if our goal is to attain metaphysical realization in any degree; and this is the essential reason for considering this case more particularly; but having developed these observations elsewhere, we shall not dwell on them further here, especially since our present exposition will enable us to understand them still better.[^3]
On the other hand, to avoid all possible confusion, the reader must be reminded at once that when we speak of the multiple states of the being it is not a question of a multiplicity that is simply numerical, nor even more generally 'quantitative', but rather multiplicity of a 'transcendent' or truly universal order, applicable to all the domains that constitute the different 'worlds' or degrees of Existence considered separately or in their totality, and therefore outside and beyond the special domain of number and even of quantity in all its modes. In fact, quantity-and all the more so number, which is only one of its modes, namely that of discontinuous quantity-is but one of the conditions that determine certain states, ours among them; it could not therefore be transferred to other states, and still less could it be applied to the totality of states, which obviously escapes any such determination. That is why when we speak in this respect of an indefinite multitude, we should always be careful to observe that the indefinitude in question exceeds all number, and also everything to which quantity is more or less directly applicable, such as spatial and temporal indefinitude, which similarly arise only from conditions proper to our world.[^4]
Yet another remark is imperative concerning our use of the word 'being' itself, which, strictly speaking, can no longer be applied in its
proper sense to certain states of non-manifestation that lie beyond the degree of pure Being, and which we shall discuss below. However, the very constitution of human language obliges us to retain this same term in such a case for want of a more adequate one, but we attribute to it only the purely analogical and symbolic meaning without which it would be quite impossible to speak in any way of these matters, this providing a very clear example of the insufficiencies of expression to which we have just alluded. In this way, we shall be able, as we have already done elsewhere, to continue speaking of the total being as simultaneously manifested in certain of its states and non-manifested in others, without this in any way implying that for the latter states we must restrict ourselves to the consideration of what corresponds properly to the degree of Being.[^5]
In this connection we should recall that to stop at Being and to consider nothing beyond it, as if in some way it were the supreme Principle, the most Universal of all, is one of the characteristic traits of certain ideas found in Western antiquity and the Middle Ages; and while they incontestably contain a metaphysical element not found in modern conceptions, they remain largely incomplete in this respect, and also insofar as they are presented as theories established for their own sakes and not in view of a corresponding effective realization. This, of course, is not to say that there were no other ideas current at that time in the West; we are only referring to those conceptions that are generally known, and whose value and importance have been exaggerated by those who, despite their praiseworthy efforts to react against modern negations, have failed to realize that these are still only fairly exterior points of view, and that in civilizations such as this, where a kind of rift has formed between two orders of instruction superimposed upon each other without ever being opposed, 'exoterism' requires 'esoterism' as its necessary complement. When this esoterism is misunderstood, and the civilization is no longer directly attached to its superior principles by any effective link, it is not long before it loses all its traditional character, for the elements of this order still subsisting in it are like a body abandoned by the spirit, and consequently are henceforth powerless to
constitute anything more than a sort of empty formalism, which is exactly what has occurred in the modern Western world.[^6]
Having provided these few explanations, we can now enter into our subject itself without the delay of further preliminaries, for all that we have already explained elsewhere allows us to dispense with them in great part. We cannot in fact return indefinitely to what we have said in our previous works, for this would be a waste of time; if some repetitions should prove inevitable, we shall try to reduce them to what is strictly indispensable in order to understand what we now propose to set forth, referring the reader when necessary to the appropriate parts of our other works, where he will find complementary discussions or more ample developments of the questions that we must now consider anew. The principal cause of difficulty in this exposition is that all these questions are more or less closely connected to one another, and although it is important to show these connections as often as possible, it is no less important to avoid any appearance of 'systematization', that is, of a limitation incompatible with the very nature of metaphysical doctrine, which, on the contrary, should open up to those who can comprehend and 'assent' to it, possibilities of conception that are not only indefinite in number, but-and we say this with no abuse of language-really infinite, representing the totality of Truth itself.