The Rind and the Core

(Al-Qashar wa al-Lab) L'écorce et le noyau (El Qishr wa el-Lobb), March 1931.

This title, which is one of the many traits of Sayyidī Muhyiddin ibn 'Arabī, expresses in symbolic form the relations between exoterism and esoterism, compared respectively to the skin of a fruit and its inner part, the pulp or kernel.^[161] The skin or rind (al-qashar) is the sharīʻāh, which is to say the external religious law, which is addressed to all and is made to be followed by all, as indicated by the meaning of the 'great road' which is attached to the derivation of its name. The core (al-lab) is the haqiqah, that is to say the truth or the essential reality, which, unlike the sharī āh, is not accessible to all, but is reserved for those who know how to discover it under appearances and reach it through the external forms that cover it, protecting and concealing it all at once.^[162] In another sym- bolism, sharī āh and haqiqah are also designated respectively as the 'body' (al-jism) and the 'marrow' (al-mukh),^[163] whose relations are ex- actly the same as the rind and the core; and no doubt we would still find other symbols that are the equivalent to these. What we are talking about, under whatever designation, is always the ‘exterior' (az-zāhir) and the ‘interior' (al-bāțin), which is to say the ap- parent and the hidden, which by their very nature are such, and not by the effect of any conventions or precautions taken artificially, if not ar- bitrarily, by the holders of the traditional doctrine. This 'exterior' and this 'interior' are represented by the circumference and the center, which can be considered as the very section of the fruit evoked by the preceding symbolism, at the same time that we are thus returned to the image, com- mon to all traditions, of the 'wheel of things.' Indeed, if we consider the two terms in question in the universal sense, and without limiting our- selves to the application which is usually reserved to a particular tradi- tional form, we can say that the sharī āh, the 'great road' traversed by all beings, is nothing other than what the Far Eastern traditions calls the 'stream of forms,' while the haqiqah, the one and unchangeable truth, lies in the 'invariable middle.'^[164] To pass from one to the other, from the circumference to the center, one must follow one of the rays: it is the tariqah, which is to say the 'path,' the narrow way which is only followed by a few. ^[165] There are also a multitude of turuq, which are all the rays of the circumference taken in the centripetal sense, since it is a question of starting from the multiplicity to go towards the principal unity: each tarīqah, starting from a certain point on the circumference, is particularly appropriate to the beings who are at this point; but all whatever their point of departure, tends towards a single point,^[166] all ending in the cen- ter and bringing back the beings who follow them to the essential sim- plicity of the 'primordial state.' Indeed, beings who are now in multiplicity, are forced to leave from there if they seek any realization whatsoever; but this multiplicity is at the same time, for most of them, the obstacle that stops and holds them back: the changing and diversity of appearances prevent them from see- ing the true reality, so to speak, as the skin of the fruit prevents one from seeing one's interior; and this can only be attained by those who are able to pierce the skin, that is, to see the Principle through manifestation, and even to see only Him in all things, for the manifestation of the whole of itself is no more than a set of symbolic expressions. The application of this to exoterism and esoterism understood in their ordinary sense, which is to say, as aspects of a traditional doctrine, is easy to make here: here too, the outer forms hide the profound truth from the eyes of the vulgar, whereas they make it appear on the contrary to those of the elite, for which what is an obstacle or a limitation for others thus becomes a point of reference, support, and a means of realization. It must be understood that this difference results directly and necessarily from the very nature of the beings, the possibilities and the aptitudes that each one carries within himself, so that the exoteric side of the doctrine always plays exactly the role he must play for everyone, giving to those who cannot go further all that they can receive in their present state, and at the same time providing those who are beyond it the 'supports,' which without being a strict necessity, since contingents can greatly assist them in advancing inwardly, and without which the difficulties would, in certain cases, amount to real impossibilities. It must be noted, in this respect, that for the greater number of men, who inevitably cling to the exterior law, it takes on a character which is less that of a limit than that of a guide; it is always a link, but a link that prevents them from going astray or getting lost; without this law, which makes them go down a central road, not only would they never reach the center, but they would be able to move away from it indefinitely, while the circular shape keeps them at least at a constant distance.^[167] By this, those who cannot directly contemplate the light at least receive a reflection and a participation; and they thus remain attached in some way to the Principle, even though they do not have any and cannot have the actual consciousness. Indeed, the circumference cannot exist without the center, of which it proceeds in reality entirely, and, if the beings which are bound to the circumference do not see the center, or even the rays, each of them is found inevitably at the end of a ray whose other end is the very center. Only it is here that the rind intervenes and hides all that is inside, while the one that pierces it, thereby becoming aware of the radius corresponding to its own position on the circumference, will be freed from the indefinite rotation of it and will only have to follow this radius to go towards the center; this ray is the tariqah, by which, beginning with the sharīʻāh, it will reach the haqiqah. It must also be pointed out that, as soon as the skin has been penetrated, one finds oneself in the domain of esoterism, this penetration being, in the situation of being in relation to the skin itself, a sort of reversal in what consists of the passage from the exterior to the interior; it is even more properly, in a sense, that the designation of tariqah is appropriate when considered with eso- terism, because, to tell the truth, the haqiqah is beyond the distinction of exoterism and esoterism, which implies comparison and correlation: the center appears as the innermost point of all, but, as soon as one has reached it, there can no longer be any question of exterior or interior, any contingent distinction then disappears while resolving itself in the principal unity. This is why Allah, just as he is the 'First and the Last' (Al-Awwal wa Al-Akhir)^[168] is also the 'Exterior and the Interior' (Az- Zāhir wa Al-Bāțin)^[169], for nothing that can not be beyond Him, and in Him alone is contained all of reality, because He himself is the Absolute Reality, the Total Truth: 'Al-Haqq'.

The Hermetic Tradition La Tradition hermétique, April 1931.

Under the title: La Tradizione Ermetica nei suoi Simboli, nella sua Dottrina e nella sua « Ars Regia », ^[170] Mr. J. Evola has published an interesting work in many respects, but which shows once more, if necessary, the desira- bility of what we have written recently here (in the January 1931 issue) on the relationship of sacerdotal initiation and royal initiation. We find here, indeed, the same affirmation of the independence of the latter, to which the author wishes precisely to connect hermetism, and this idea of two distinct and even irreducible traditional types, one contemplative and the other active, which would be, generally, respectively character- istic of the East and the West. So, we must make some reservations about the interpretation given to hermetic symbolism, insofar as it is influenced by such a conception, although, on the other hand, it shows that true alchemy is spiritual and not material, which is precisely the truth, and a truth which is too often unknown and ignored by the moderns who pre- tend to cover these questions. We will take this opportunity to further clarify some important con- cepts, the first of which is the meaning that should be attributed to the word 'hermetism' itself, as some of our contemporaries seem to be using it somewhat incorrectly. This word indicates that it is essentially a tradi- tion of Egyptian origin, later clothed in a Hellenic form, most likely in the Alexandrian period, and transmitted in this form, in the Middle Age, to the Islamic world and to the Christian world, and, we will add, it is through the former that it has reached the latter, as the numerous Arab and Arabized terms adopted by the European hermetists prove, begin- ning with the very word 'alchemy' (al-kīmiyā). ^[171] It would therefore be quite illegitimate to extend this designation to other traditional forms, just as it would be, for example, to call 'Kabbalah' something other than Hebrew esoterism; it is not, of course, that there is no equivalent else- where, and there is even so much so that this traditional science of al- chemy has its exact correspondences in doctrines such as those of India, Tibet, and China, although with quite different modes of expression and methods of realization; but as soon as one pronounces the name ‘hermet- ism,' one specifies by this a definite form, whose origin can only be Greco-Egyptian. Indeed, the doctrine thus designated is thereby at- tributed to Hermes, as it was considered by the Greeks to be identical to the Egyptian Thoth; and we will point out immediately that this goes against Mr. Evola's thesis, this doctrine is presented as essentially de- rived from a sacerdotal teaching, for Thoth, in his role as conservator and transmitter of tradition, is not something other than the very represen- tation of the ancient Egyptian priesthood, or rather, to speak more pre- cisely, of the principle of inspiration with which he held authority and in whose name he formulated and communicated initiatic knowledge.

Now a question arises: what has been maintained under the name of 'hermetism,' does it constitute a complete traditional doctrine? The an- swer can only be negative, because it is strictly a knowledge of order and not metaphysical, but only cosmological (by hearing this it also applies the dual application of ‘macrocosmic' and 'microcosmic'). It is therefore not acceptable that hermetism, in the sense that this word has been taken since Alexandrian times and has been constantly kept since then, repre- sents the entirety of the Egyptian tradition; although, in this, the cosmo- logical view point seems to have been particularly advanced, and that it is in any case what is most apparent in all vestiges that remains, whether in texts or monuments, we must not forget that it can never be anything but a secondary and contingent point of view, an application of the doc- trine to the knowledge of what we can call the 'intermediate world.' It would be interesting, but probably quite difficult, to find out how this part of the Egyptian tradition could have been in some way isolated and preserved in a seemingly independent manner, then being incorporated into Islamic esoterism and Christian esoterism of the Middle Ages (which a complete doctrine never could have done), to the point of becoming a truly integral portion of both of them, and to provide them with a whole symbolism which, by a proper transposition, may even serve as a vehicle for truths of a higher order. This is not the place to enter into these com- plex historical considerations; but, in any case, we must say that the strictly cosmological character of hermetism, if it does not justify the conception of Mr. Evola, it may explain this at least to a certain extent, because the sciences of this order are indeed those which were the pre- rogative of the Kshatriyas or their equivalents, while the pure metaphys- ics was that of the Brahmins. This is why, by an effect of the Kshatriyas' revolt against the spiritual authority of the Brahmins, we have some- times seen the formation of incomplete traditional currents, reduced to those sciences separated from their principle, and even deviated in the 'naturalistic' sense, by the negation of metaphysics and the ignorance of the subordinate character of 'physical' science, as well as of the sacerdo-tal origin of all initiatic teachings, even more particularly intended for the use of Kshatriyas, as we have explained on a variety of occasions.^[172] This is not to say, certainly, that hermetism constitutes within itself such a deviation or that it essentially involves something illegitimate (which would have made it impossible to incorporate it into traditional orthodox forms); but it must be admitted that it can easily lend itself to it by its very nature, and it is there, more generally, the danger of all the tradi-tional sciences, when they are cultivated in a way for themselves which exposes them to losing sight of the attachment to the main order. Al-chemy, which could be defined as the 'techniques' of hermetism, is truly a 'royal art,' if we mean by this a mode of initiation more specifically appropriate to the nature of Kshatriyas; but this even marks its exact place in the whole of a regularly constituted tradition, and, furthermore, we must not confuse the means of initiatic realization, whatever they are, with its final goal, which is always of pure knowledge.

Another point which seems questionable to us in Mr. Evola's thesis is the assimilation which he tends almost constantly to establish between hermetism and 'magic;' it is true that he seems to take it in a sense quite different from that in which we usually hear it, but we are very much afraid that it may only cause some rather unfortunate confusions. Inevi-tably, as soon as one speaks of 'magic,' one thinks of a science destined to produce more or less extraordinary phenomena, notably (but not ex-clusively) in the sensible order; whatever the origin of this word may have been, this meaning has become so inherent within it, it should be left to this. It is then only the most inferior of all the applications of tra-ditional knowledge, we might even say the most despised, whose exer-cise is abandoned to those whom their individual limitations render in-capable of developing other possibilities; we see no advantage in evoking the idea when it is really a question of things which, even though still contingent, are still noticeably higher; and, if it is only a question of ter-minology, it's importance must be admitted. Besides, there may be some-thing more: this word 'magic' has a certain fascination with some people in our time, and, as we have already noted in the previous article which we referred to at the beginning, the preponderance accorded to such a point of view would not be the same as in intention, which is still linked to the alteration of the traditional sciences separated from their meta-physical principle, it is doubtless the pitfall with which every attempt at reconstituting such sciences is confronted, if we do not begin with what is the beginning in all respects, that is to say, by the very principle, which is also the end in view of which everything must be ordinarily ordered. On the other hand, where we fully agree with Mr. Evola, and where we see the greatest merit in his book, is when he insists on the purely spiritual and 'inner' nature of true alchemy, which has absolutely noth- ing to do with the material operations of any 'chemistry,' in the natural sense of the word; almost all the moderns are strangely mistaken on this, both those who wish to pose as defenders of alchemy and those who make themselves detractors. Yet it is easy to see in what terms the old hermetists speak of 'blowers' and 'coal burners,' in which we must rec- ognize the real precursors of the current chemists, which is so unflatter- ing for them; and, in the eighteenth century again, an alchemist like Pernéty does not fail to emphasize the difference between the 'hermetic philosophy' and the 'vulgar chemistry.' Thus, what gave birth to modern chemistry is not alchemy, with which it has in fact no relation (any more than the 'hyper chemistry' imagined by some contemporary occultists); it is only a distortion or deviation, resulting from the incomprehension of those who, unable to penetrate the true meanings of symbols, took all literally, and believing that it was all in material operations, embarked on a more or less disordered experimentation. In the Arab world too, material alchemy has always been considered very lowly, sometimes even assimilated to a kind of witchcraft, while spiritual alchemy, the only real type, is often referred to by the name of al-kīmiyāʼ as-saʼādah or the 'alchemy of bliss.’^[173] Moreover, this is not to say that it is necessary to deny the possibility of metallic transmutations, which represent the alchemy in the eyes of the vulgar; but we must not confuse things that are of a completely dif- ferent order, and we do not even see, ‘a priori,' why such transmutations could not be realized by processes that are simply a matter of secular chemistry (and, at its essence, the 'hyper chemistry' we were alluding to earlier is nothing other than this). However, there is another aspect of this issue, which Mr. Evola rightly points out: the being who has arrived at the realization of certain interior states can, by virtue of the analogical relation of the 'microcosm' with the 'macrocosm,' produce externally corresponding effects; it is therefore permissible for him who has at- tained to such a degree in the practice of spiritual alchemy to be able to thereby accomplish metallic transmutations, but this is an accidental consequence, and without recourse to any of the methods of material pseudo-alchemy, but only by a kind of projection outside the energies it carries within itself. Here there is a comparable difference to that which separates 'theurgy' or the action of ‘spiritual influences' from magic and even witchcraft: if the apparent effects are sometimes the same on both sides, the causes which provoke them are totally different. Moreover, we will add that those who really possess such powers do not generally make use of them, at least outside of very peculiar circumstances in which their exercise is legitimized by other considerations. Be that as it may, what we must never lose sight of, and what is at all the basis of all true initiatic teaching, is that any worthy realization of the name is essentially internal, even if it is likely to have exterior repercussions; man can find the principles and the means within himself, and he can because he carries in him the correspondence of all that exists: al-insānu ramz al-wujūd, "Man is a symbol of Universal Existence;” and if he manages to penetrate to the center of his own being, he thereby attains total knowledge, with all that it implies in addition: man 'yaraf nafsahu yaraf Rabbāhu, “Who-soever knows himself knows his Lord,” and he then knows all things in the supreme unity of the very Principle, out of which there is nothing that can have the least degree of reality.