The Gift of Languages

Le Don des langues, August 1927.

Among the gifts of the true Rosicrucians, or, to speak more precisely (because the word 'gifts' could give rise to incorrect interpretations), among their characteristic features, we often mention the 'gift of languages;' which has never been clearly explained what is meant. Of course, the literal meaning of such an expression can be justified in certain ways: indeed, the possession of certain keys of language can provide, in order to understand and speak a diverse array of languages, the means that are quite other than those understood ordinarily; and it is certain there exists what might be called a ‘sacred philology,' which is entirely different from profane philology. Nevertheless, while accepting this initial interpretation, it is permissible to concede above all, a symbolic meaning, of a higher order, which is superimposed above the former while not contradicting it in anyway, and which coincides with the initiatory principles common to all traditions, whether Oriental or Occidental.

Originating at this point of view, it can be said that the one who truly possesses the 'gift of languages' is the one who speaks to each of his own languages, in the sense that he always expresses himself in a form appropriate to the ways of man's different languages: it is always the same thought, which, in and of itself, is independent of all expression; every time it is expressed in another language it becomes accessible to men who, without it, could never have known it; and this analogy is, moreover, strictly in accordance with the symbolism of the 'gift of languages.'

The one who has reached this point is the one who has reached, through a direct and profound knowledge, the identical source of all traditional doctrines, who has found the truth that hides under the multiplicity and diversity of the external forms. The difference, indeed, is only in form and appearance; the essential substance is everywhere and always the same, because there is only a singular truth, and that, as the Initiate-Muslims still say, “the doctrine of Unity is unique;" but it takes a variety of forms to adapt to the mental conditions of this country, that country, of this era, of that era; and those who stop at the form see firstly the differences, while these differences dissipate for those who go beyond. Those who go beyond can then descend into form, but without being affected by it in anyway, without their profound knowledge being modified in any manner; they can draw the logical conclusion of a principle, and realize, preceding from above below, from the inside out (and it is in this true synthesis that is quite the opposite of a vulgar 'syncretism'), all the acclimations of the fundamental doctrine. In this manner, to use the same symbolism, they are no longer obliged to speak one particular language, they are capable of speaking all of them because they have realized the very principle of which all languages derive and adapt from. What we have designated as languages here are all the traditional forms, religious and otherwise, which are, in reality, only adaptations of the great primordial, universal Tradition, different trappings of the one truth. Those who have gone beyond all particular forms and have attained universality, thus 'knowing' what others merely 'believe,' are necessarily 'Orthodox' in the light of any formal tradition; and, at the same time, they are the only ones that can call themselves fully and effectively 'Catholic,' in the strictly etymological sense of the word, while others can only be so virtually, by an aspiration that has not yet realized an object.

Those who have gone beyond form are thereby freed from the limitations inherent in the individual condition of ordinary humanity; that is why they can, as stated above, assume different individualities to suit all circumstances; these individualities, for them, really have no more importance than clothes. They are, according to the Hindu tradition, superior when compared to 'name' and 'form,' which constitute the elements of individuality; the name is the expression of the individual essence itself, and one can understand this by what a change of name or title really means from the initiatic point of view. The same external formality is found to symbolize a change of state everywhere; and, even in the monastic orders, the raison d'être is in no way different from at the secular level, for here too the individuality must disappear to give way to a new being, and even when the symbolism does not exist it is still more fully understood in its deepest sense, despite still retaining a certain forcefulness.

If one can understand these indications, one will understand at the same time why the true Rosicrucians could never form a ‘society' in the modern and profane sense of the word: those who are beyond any form cannot shut oneself in the forms of an organization possessing written statues and regulations, definite meeting places, external signs of recognition, all of which they do not necessitate. They can, no doubt, as can still be seen in the Orient, inspire visibly, and in a certain way invisibly, external organizations constituted temporarily for a particular and definite reason; but they themselves do not bind themselves to these organizations, nor do they, except in quite exceptional cases, play an apparent role therein. What has been labelled as Rosicrucians in the West since the 14th century, and which has received other designations in other times and in other places (since the name here has only a purely symbolic meaning and must itself adapt to circumstances), is not an association whatsoever, it is the collectivity of Beings who have reached the same superior state that, when compared to inferior humanity, makes appar-ent the degree of initiation, of which we have tried to indicate one of the essential aspects, and who thus possess the same internal character, which is sufficient enough for signs of recognition. This is why they have no meeting place other than the "Temple of the Holy Ghost, which is everywhere;" and this is also why they remain unknown to the laymen among whom they reside, precisely because their only distinctive marks are purely interior and can be perceived only by those who have attained the same spiritual development and marks, so that their influence is ex-ercised by ways that are incomprehensible to the common man.