Payload Website Template

THOUGH We have already spoken of the symbolism of the bridge on different occasions, we will add some further considerations in connection with a study by Doña Luisa Coomaraswamy on this subject^[1] in which she emphasises particularly a point that shows the close connection of this symbolism with the doctrine of the _sūtrātmā_. What is involved is the original meaning of the word _setu_ which is the oldest of the different Sanskrit terms for bridge and the only one found in the _Rig Veda_. This word, derived from the root _si_, 'to attach', means strictly a bond or a tie; and, in fact, the bridge thrown over a river is indeed what links one bank to the other; but over and above this very general remark there is in addition, in what is implied by this term, something much more precise. The bridge must be thought of as primitively constituted by lines or cords, which is its most orthodox natural model, or by a rope fastened in the same way as these, for example, to trees growing on the two banks, so that the banks are seen to be actually 'attached' to each other by the rope. Since the two banks symbolically represent two different states of the being, it is obvious that the rope plays the same part here as the thread which unites all these states, that is, the _sūtrātmā_ itself. The quality of such a bond, both slender and strong, is also an adequate image of its spiritual nature; and this is why the bridge, which is also assimilated to a ray of light, is often described traditionally as being as narrow as the edge of a sword, or again, if it is made of wood, as formed from a single beam or a single tree trunk. This narrowness brings out the peril of the way in question which, moreover, is the only way possible, but which all do not succeed in traversing and which very few indeed can pass over unaided, by their own means, ^[3] We recalled just now that the axis both links and separates heaven and earth. Similarly, though the bridge is really the way that unites the two shores and allows the passage from one to the other, it may none the less be, in a sense, like an obstacle placed between them, which brings us once again to its 'perilous' nature. This is itself implied, moreover, in the meaning of the word _sētu_, which is a bond in the two senses in which it can be understood: on the one hand, that which connects two things to each other, but also, on the other hand, a fetter in which the being finds itself caught. A rope can serve equally well for either of these two purposes, and the bridge will appear likewise under one or the other aspect, that is, as benefic or malefic, according to whether the being is successful or not in freeing itself from it. It can be noted that the double symbolic sense of the bridge results also from the fact that it can be traversed in the two opposite directions, while nevertheless it must be crossed in only one direction, that going from 'this shore' towards the 'other', any turning back constituting a danger to be avoided, ^[9] except in the case of the being who, already freed from conditioned existence, can henceforth 'move at will' through all the worlds and for whom such a reversal is moreover only a purely illusory appearance. In every other case but this, the part of a bridge that has already been traversed must normally be 'lost from view' and become as if it no longer existed, just as the symbolic ladder is always regarded as having its feet in the very domain where the climber actually finds himself, the lower part of the ladder disappearing for him insofar as his ascent has been accomplished. ^[10] So long as the being has not reached the principial world, from which he may re-descend into manifestation without being affected in any way, realisation cannot in fact be accomplished except in an ascending direction; and for anyone who should attach himself to the way for its own sake, thus taking the means for the end, that way would become veritably an obstacle instead of leading him effectively to liberation. This implies that he must continue to destroy the ties that bind him to the stages he has already traversed, until the axis is finally reduced to a single point which contains all and is the centre of the total being.

Footnotes

[14]It goes without saying that such a manner of speaking is valid only from the point of view that looks at the attributes themselves distinctively (and they can be so considered only in relation to manifestation), whereas the indivisible unity of the Divine Essence itself, to which all is finally brought back, cannot be affected by that manifestation in any way whatsoever.

[1]'The Perilous Bridge of Welfare' in _Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies_, August 1944 [Luisa Coomaraswamy was the wife of Ananda Coomaraswamy to whose work Guénon has so frequently referred in recent chapters. Tr.].

[2]Let us recall in this connection the double sense of the English word _beam_ which designates both a girder and a luminous ray, as we have already remarked elsewhere ('Maçons et Charpentiers' in _Etudes Traditionnelles_, December 1946 [and republished in the posthumous collection of the author's studies, *Etudes sur la Franc-Maçonnerie et le Compagnonnage*, vol II, Paris, Editions Traditionelles, 1964].

[3]This is a privilege only of the 'solar heros' in the myths and tales in which the crossing of a bridge is involved. for there is always a certain danger in the passage from one state to another; but this danger relates especially to the double sense, '_benefic_' and '_malefic_', which the bridge has in common with so many other symbols, and to which we shall have to return shortly. The two worlds represented by the two shores are, in the most general sense, heaven and earth which at the beginning were united but which were separated by the fact of manifestation, the entire domain of which is then assimilated to a river or to a sea that lies between them. The bridge, therefore, is the exact equivalent of the axial pillar that links heaven and earth even while holding them apart; and it is because of this meaning that it must be conceived of as essentially vertical as like all the other symbols of the '_World Axis_'—for example, the axle of the '_cosmic chariot_' when its two wheels represent heaven and earth. This establishes also the fundamental identity of the symbolism of the bridge with that of the ladder which was the theme of an earlier chapter.[^7] Crossing the bridge is thus nothing other than the passage along the axis which alone truly unites the different states one to another. The bank from which the bridge extends is, in fact, this world, that is, the state in which the being who has to traverse the axis actually is; and the bank to which it ultimately leads, after having passed through the other states of manifestation, is the principial world. One of the two banks is the domain of death, where everything is subject to change, and the other is the domain of immortality.[^8]

[4]In all the more restricted applications of this same symbolism, it will always be a question of two states that, from a certain '_level of reference_', have between them a relationship corresponding to that between heaven and earth.

[5]In this respect and in connection with what has just been said, we will recall the '_rope trick_' that is so often described, in which a rope thrown into the air remains or seems to remain vertical while a man or a child climbs it until he disappears from view. Even if this should be, most often at least, only a phenomenon of suggestion, that is of little importance from our present point of view, nor is it any the less a very significant representation of what we are discussing. The same applies to the ascent of a pole.

[6]Mme. Coomaraswamy remarked that if there are cases where the bridge is described as having the shape of an arch, which identifies it more or less explicitly with the rainbow, these cases are far from being the most frequent in traditional symbolism. We will add that even this is not in contradiction with the conception of the bridge as vertical, for as we said in connection with the '_chain of the worlds_', a curved line of indefinite length can be assimilated, in each of its portions, to a straight line which will always be vertical in the sense that it will be perpendicular to the domain of existence that it passes through. Moreover even where the bridge and the rainbow are not identical, the rainbow in itself is none the less very generally considered to be a symbol of the union of heaven and earth.

[7]'_The Symbolism of the Ladder_' [56 above].

[8]It is evident that in the general symbolism of the passage over the waters, conceived as leading from '_death to immortality_', the crossing by means of a bridge or by a ford corresponds only to the case where the passage is from one bank to the other, to the exclusion of those where it is described either as a movement against the current to its source, or, on the contrary, as a descent towards the sea, and where the voyage must necessarily be accomplished by other means, for example, in conformity with the symbolism of navigation, which moreover is applicable to all cases (see '_Passing Over the Waters_') [58 above].

[9]Hence the allusions, so frequently to be found in myths and legends of every provenance, to the danger of going back on one's tracks or of looking behind.

[10]There is here something like a 'reabsorption' of the axis by the being who ascends it, as we have already explained in _The Great Triad_, to which we will also refer in connection with certain other related points, such as the identification of this being with the axis itself, whatever the symbol by which it is represented. In the case of the bridge, this identification gives the real sense of the pontifical function to which this phrase from _The Mabinogion_ alludes, along with other traditional formulas cited by Mme. Coomaraswamy: 'He who would be Chief, let him be the Bridge' [The *Mabinogion* is a collection of medieval Welsh tales, apparently reduced to written form in the fourteenth century, but which are most probably much older, having been passed down from generation to generation orally. The content is Celtic mythology and folk themes. The title of the collection is modern. Tr.].

65 § The Symbolism of the Bridge

Footnotes