10 § The Idea of the Centre in the Traditions of Antiquity

HAVING had occasion previously to allude to the 'Centre of the World' and to the various symbols which represent it, ^[1] we must now return to this idea of the Centre, which is of the greatest importance in all the ancient traditions, and indicate some of the chief meanings that are linked to it. For men of today this idea no longer immediately evokes all that the ancients saw in it. Here, as in all else that touches on symbolism, many things have been forgotten and certain modes of thinking seem to have become totally foreign to the great majority of our contemporaries. All the more reason, therefore, to insist on these points, in view of the general spread of an incomprehension which is more complete than ever.

The Centre is, above all, the origin, the point of departure of all things; it is the principial point, without form and without dimensions, therefore indivisible, and thus the only image that can be given to the primordial Unity. From it, by its radiation, all things are produced, just as unity produces all numbers without its essence being modified or affected in any way whatsoever. There is a complete parallelism here between two modes of expression, geometric symbolism and numerical symbolism, so that it makes no difference which is used, and it is perfectly natural to pass from the one to the other. It must not be forgotten, moreover, that in either case it is always a question of symbolism: arithmetical unity is not metaphysical Unity, but only its figure, a figure in which there is however nothing arbitrary, for there exists between the one and the other a real analogical relationship that makes it possible to transpose the idea of Unity beyond the domain of quantity into the transcendent. It is the same with the idea of the Centre, which is susceptible of a similar transposition whereby it is stripped of its spatial character, this being no longer evoked except as a symbol. Symbolically, the central point is the Principle, it is pure Being; and the space which it fills by its radiation and which itself only exists by that same radiation (the _fiat lux_ of Genesis) without which it would be only 'privation' and nothingness, is the world in the widest sense of the word, the totality of all the beings and all the states of existence that constitute universal manifestation.

The simplest representation of the idea which we have been formulating is the point at the centre of a circle (figure 1): the point is the emblem of the

Figure 1 Figure 2

Principle, while the circle is that of the world. It is quite impossible to fix any origin in time whatsoever for the use of this figuration, for it is often to be found on prehistoric objects. No doubt we must see in it one of those signs which are linked directly to the Primordial Tradition. Sometimes the point is surrounded by concentric circles which seem to represent the different states or degrees of manifested existence, arranged hierarchically according to their greater or lesser distance from the primordial Principle. The point at the centre of the circle has been taken also, and probably from very ancient times, as a figure of the sun, because the sun is truly, in the physical domain, the Centre or 'Heart of the World'; and this figure has remained until our own time as the usual astrological and astronomical sign for the sun. It is perhaps for this reason that most archeologists, wherever they find this symbol, claim for it an exclusively solar significance, while in reality it has a far vaster and deeper meaning. They forget, if ever they knew, that the sun, from the standpoint of all the traditions of antiquity, is itself only a symbol, that of the 'Centre of the World', which is the Divine Principle.

The relationship which exists between the centre and the circumference, or between what they respectively represent, is already indicated clearly enough by the fact that the circumference cannot exist without its centre, while the centre is entirely independent of the circumference. This relationship can be denoted even more precisely and explicitly by the rays issuing from the centre and ending at the circumference. These rays can of course be depicted in a variety of numbers, since they really are indefinitely numerous, as are the points on the circumference which are their extremities. But in fact, for figurations of this kind, numbers that have in themselves a particular symbolic value have always been chosen. The simplest of such forms is that which has only four rays dividing the circle into equal parts, that is two radii at right angles forming a cross inside the circumference (figure 2). This new figure is of the same general significance as the first, but has attached to it certain secondary significations which complete it: the circumference, if represented as having to be followed in a particular direction, is the image of a cycle of manifestation, such as the cosmic cycles, the theory of which is especially well developed in Hindu doctrine. The divisions marked on the circumference by the extremities of the branches of the cross will then corre-spond to the different periods or phases into which the cycle is divided; and such a division can be interpreted on diverse scales according to whether the cycles in question are of greater or lesser extent. Thus, for example, keeping only to the order of terrestrial existence, there are the four main periods of the day, the four phases of the moon, the four seasons of the year; and also, following the conception that we find in the traditions of India and Central America as well as those of Greco-Latin antiquity, that of the four ages of humanity. We indicate these considerations only summarily in order to give a general idea of what the symbol in question expresses. All this is connected more directly to what we will have to say in the remarks that follow.

Among the figures which comprise a greater number of rays, we must mention especially the wheels or 'rounds' which most commonly have six or eight radii (figures 3 and 4). The Celtic 'round' which was perpetuated

Figure 3

Figure 4

throughout almost all the Middle Ages, is found in both these forms; these same figures, and especially the second, are to be met with very often in oriental lands, especially in Chaldea and Assyria, in India (where the wheel is called _chakra_) and in Tibet. On the other hand, there is a close kinship between the wheel of six spokes and the chrismon^[2] which only differs from it in that the circumference which marks the extremities of the rays is not normally drawn. Now the wheel, instead of being simply a 'solar' sign as is commonly thought in our time, is before all else a symbol of the world, which can be understood without difficulty. In the symbolic language of India, one speaks constantly of the 'wheel of things' or of the 'wheel of life', which corresponds precisely to this signification. There is also the question of the 'wheel of the Law', an expression which Buddhism has borrowed, as with many others, from earlier doctrines and which, originally at least, refers especially to cyclic theories. It must be added that the Zodiac is also represented in the form of a wheel, naturally of twelve spokes, and that the name given it in Sanskrit signifies literally 'wheel of signs', according to the primary sense of the word _rashi_ which serves to designate the signs of the Zodiac.^[3]

The wheel has likewise a connection with various floral symbols;^[4] for certain cases at least we could even have spoken of a real equivalence.^[5] To take a symbolic flower such as the lotus, the lily, or the rose,^[6] their blossoming represents, among other things (for these symbols have multiple significations) and by a quite understandable sameness of meaning, the development of manifestation. This blossoming, moreover is a radiation around the Centre, for here also it is a question of 'centred' figures, and it is this which justifies their assimilation to the wheel. In the Hindu tradition, the world is sometimes represented in the form of a lotus, in the centre of which rises Meru, the sacred mountain which symbolises the Pole.

But let us return to the meanings of the Centre, for until now we have expounded only the first of all, that which makes of it an image of the Principle. We shall find another of its significations in the fact that the Centre is strictly the 'midmost', the point which is equidistant from all points of the circumference and which divides each diameter into two equal parts. So far the Centre has been considered as prior to the circumference, which has no reality apart from the centre's radiation; now it is to be seen in relation to the realized circumference, that is, as a symbol of the action of the Principle at the heart of creation. The point midmost between the extremes, represented by opposite points on the circumference, is the place where contrary tendencies, ending at these extremes, are neutralized so to speak and are in perfect equilibrium. Certain schools of Muslim esoterism, which attribute to the cross a symbolic value of the highest importance, refer to the centre of this cross as the 'divine station' (_al-maqam al-ilāhī_), and they designate this centre as the place where all contraries are unified, where all oppositions are resolved.^[8] The idea expressed here more particularly is, therefore, that of equilibrium; and this idea is really one with that of harmony. These are not two different ideas, but two aspects of the same idea. There is yet a third aspect to this symbolism, linked especially to the moral point of view (though admitting of other significations also), and this is the idea of justice. One can thereby relate to what we have just said the Platonic concept of virtue as a just mean between two extremes. From a much more universal point of view, the Far Eastern traditions speak unceasingly of the 'Invariable Middle' which is the point where the 'Activity of Heaven' is manifested; and according to Hindu doctrine, at the centre of every being, as of every state of existence, there resides a reflection of the supreme Principle.

Equilibrium itself moreover is nothing other than the reflection in the manifested order of the absolute immutability of the Principle. To see things under this new relationship, the circumference must be considered as being in motion around its centre which alone does not participate in this movement. The very name of the wheel (_rota_) immediately evokes the idea of rotation; and this rotation is the figure of the continual change to which all manifested things are subject. In such a movement, there is but one single point that remains fixed and immutable, and this point is the Centre. This brings us back to the cyclic concept we spoke of earlier: the course of any cycle, or the rotation of the circumference, is succession, whether in temporal or some other mode. The fixity of the Centre is the image of Eternity, where all things are present in perfect simultaneity. The circumference can only turn around a fixed centre; likewise, change, which does not suffice unto itself, necessarily supposes a principle which is outside change. This is the 'unmoved mover' of Aristotle^[9] which again is represented by the Centre. Thus at the same time, since all that exists, all that changes or moves, has no reality apart from the immutable Principle on which it totally depends, this Principle is that which gives motion its first impulse and also that which, subsequently, governs and directs it, which gives it its law, the conservation of the order of the world being in a way nothing but a prolongation of the creative act. The Principle is, according to a Hindu expression, the 'Internal Co-ordinator' (_antaryāmī_), for it directs all things from within, itself residing at the innermost point of all, which is the Centre. ^[10]

Instead of the rotation of a circumference around its centre, we can also consider that of a sphere rotating around a fixed axis, the symbolic significance of which is exactly the same. This is why representations of the 'World Axis' are so numerous and so important in all the ancient traditions; and the general meaning of this last symbol is fundamentally the same as that of the figures of the 'Centre of the World', except perhaps that these figures evoke the function of the immutable Principle with regard to universal manifestation more directly than the other relationships under which the Centre may also be considered. When the sphere, terrestrial or celestial revolves round its axis, there are on that sphere two points which remain fixed: these are the poles, which are the extremities of the axis or its points of contact with the surface of the sphere; and this is why the idea of the Pole is yet another equivalent of the idea of the Centre. The symbolism which relates to the Pole, and which sometimes takes on very complex forms, is thus to be found in all traditions and may even be said to hold in them a place of considerable importance. ^[11]

One of the most striking figures which sums up the ideas that we have been expounding is the swastika (figures 5 and 6), which is essentially the 'sign of

卍 Figure 5

卐 Figure 6

the Pole'. ^[12] It would seem, moreover, that in modern Europe its true significance has never yet been made known. Vain attempts have been made to explain this symbol by the most fantastic theories, even to the point of seeing in it the outline of a primitive instrument for making fire. In fact, if it sometimes actually has a certain relationship with fire, that is for quite different reasons. Most often it is made out to be a 'solar' sign, which it could only have become accidentally and in a rather indirect way. We might repeat here what we said above in connection with the wheel and the point at the centre of the circle. Those who have been closest to the truth are they who have considered the _swastika_ as a symbol of movement, but this interpretation is still insufficient, for it is not a question of just any movement, but of a rotation around a centre or an immutable axis; and it is precisely the fixed point that is the essential element to which the symbol in question directly relates. The other meanings which this same figure comprises are all derived from this one. The Centre imparts movement to all things; and as movement represents life, the _swastika_ becomes thereby a symbol of life or, more precisely, the vivifying function of the Principle in relation to the cosmic order.

If we compare the _swastika_ with the figure of the cross inscribed in the circumference (figure 2), we can see that fundamentally these are two equivalent symbols. But the rotation, instead of being represented by the tracing of the circumference, is indicated in the _swastika_ only by the lines at right angles to the extremities of the branches of the cross. These lines are tangents to the circumference, which mark the directions of movement at the corresponding points. As the circumference represents the World, the fact that it is only implied, so to speak, indicates very clearly that the _swastika_ is not a figure of the World, but rather of the action of the Principle with regard to the World.^[13]

When the _swastika_ is related to the rotation of a sphere such as the celestial sphere around its axis, it must be considered as traced on the equatorial plane, and then the central point will be the projection of the axis onto this plane which is perpendicular to it. As for the direction of the rotation indicated by the figure, the importance is only secondary. In fact, both the one and the other of the two forms which we have reproduced above^[14] are to be found, nor is it necessary to see in this an intention of establishing between them any kind of opposition.^[15] We are well aware that in certain countries and at certain times, the partisans of schisms may have deliberately given this figure an orientation contrary to the one prevailing in the circles which they themselves were breaking away from, in order to affirm their antagonism by an outward manifestation; but that in no way touches the essential significance of the symbol, which remains the same in every case.

The _swastika_ is far from being exclusively an oriental symbol, as is sometimes believed. In reality it is one of the most widespread of all, and it is to be found nearly everywhere from the Far East to the Far West, for it even exists among certain indigenous peoples of North America. At the present time, it continues to be used especially in India and in Central and East Asia, and it is probably only in these regions that its real significance is still known, though even in Europe it has not disappeared entirely.^[16] In Lithuania and Courland, peasants still trace this sign on their houses; doubtless they are no longer aware of what it means, and see in it only a sort of protective talisman; but perhaps what is most curious is that they give it the Sanskrit name of _swastika_.^[17] In antiquity this sign was particularly prevalent among the Celts and in prehellenic Greece;^[18] yet again, and still in the West, as M. Charbonneau-Lassay has remarked,^[19] it was one of the early emblems of Christ, and even remained in use as such until towards the end of the Middle Ages. Like the point at the centre of the circle and like the wheel, this sign incontestably goes back to prehistoric times; and for our part, we see in it, without the least hesitation, one of the vestiges of the Primordial Tradition.^[20]

We have not yet finished indicating all the meanings of the Centre. If it is first of all a point of departure, it is also a terminal point. All has come from the Centre, and all must finally return to it. As all things exist only by the Principle and could not subsist without it, there must be between them and it a permanent bond, represented by rays joining to the Centre all points on the circumference. But these rays can be traversed in two opposite directions; first from the Centre to the circumference, and then returning from the circumference to the Centre. There are, as it were, two complementary phases, the first represented by a centrifugal movement and the second by a centripetal movement. These two phases can be compared to those of respiration according to a symbolism to which the Hindu doctrines often refer; and on the other hand, they have a no less remarkable analogy with the physiological function of the heart. In fact, the blood leaves the heart, is diffused throughout the organism which it vivifies, then returns to the heart, whose function as organic centre is thus truly complete and altogether corresponds to the idea that, in a general way, we must form of the Centre in the fullness of its significance.

All beings, dependent on the Principle in all that they are, must consciously or unconsciously aspire to return to it. This tendency to return towards the Centre has, in all traditions, its symbolic representation. We refer to ritual orientation, which is strictly speaking the direction towards a spiritual centre, a terrestrial and perceptible image of the veritable 'Centre of the World'. The orientation of Christian churches is only a particular case of this and relates essentially to the same idea which is common to all religions. In Islam, this orientation (_qiblah_) is as the materialisation, so to speak, of the intention (_niyyah_) by which all the powers of the being must be directed towards the Divine Principle, ^[21] and many other examples can easily be found. Much more could be said on this question, but no doubt we shall have some opportunities of returning to it later, ^[22] and this is why we shall limit ourselves for the moment to no more than a brief indication of the last aspect of the symbolism of the Centre.

To sum up, the Centre is both the principle and the end of all things; it is, according to a well known symbolism, the _alpha_ and the _omega_. Better still, it is the beginning, the middle, and the end; and these three aspects are represented in the monosyllable AUM, to which Charbonneau-Lassay alluded as emblem of Christ and the association of which with the _swastika_, among the signs of the monastery of the Carmelites of Loudun, seems to us particularly significant. ^[23] In fact, this symbol, much more complete than the _alpha_ and the _omega_, and susceptible of meanings which can be developed almost indefinitely, is, by one of the most astonishing concordances that one could encounter, common to the ancient Hindu tradition and to Christian eso-terism of the Middle Ages; and in both cases, it is also _par excellence_ a symbol of the Word, which is in very truth the real 'Centre of the World'. ^[24]