1 SOME REMARKS ON THE DOCTRINE OF COSMIC CYCLES

WE HAVE OFTEN BEEN ASKED, regarding allusions we have been led to make here and there to the Hindu doctrine of cosmic cycles and its equivalents in other traditions, whether we might give, if not a complete explanation, at least an overview sufficient to reveal its broad outlines. In truth, this seems an almost impossible task, not only because the question is very complex in itself, but especially owing to the extreme difficulty of expressing these things in a European language and in a way that is intelligible to the present-day Western mentality, which has had no practice whatsoever with this kind of thinking. All that is really possible, in our opinion, is to try to clarify a few points with remarks such as those that follow, which can only raise suggestions about the meaning of the doctrine in question rather than to really explain it.

In the most general sense of the term, a cycle must be considered as representing the process of development of some state of manifestation, or, in the case of minor cycles, of one of the more or less restricted and specialized modalities of that state. Moreover, in virtue of the law of correspondence which links all things in universal Existence, there is necessarily and always a certain analogy, either among different cycles of the same order or among the principal cycles and their secondary divisions. This is what allows us to use one and the same mode of expression when speaking about them, although this must often be understood only symbolically, for the very essence of all symbolism is precisely founded on the analogies and correspondences which really exist in the nature of things. We allude here especially to the 'chronological' form under which the doctrine of cycles is presented: since a Kalpa represents the total development of a world, that is to say of a state or degree of universal Existence, it is obvious that one cannot speak literally about its duration, computed according to some temporal measure, unless this duration relates to a state of which time is one of the determining conditions, as in our world. Everywhere else, this duration and the succession that it implies can have only a purely symbolic value and must be transposed analogically, for temporal succession is then only an image, both logical and ontological, of an 'extra-temporal' series of causes and effects. On the other hand, since human language cannot directly express any condition other than those of our own state, such a symbolism is by that very fact sufficiently justified and must be regarded as perfectly natural and normal. We do not intend to deal just now with the most extensive cycles, such as the Kalpas; we will limit ourselves to those which develop within our Kalpa, that is, the Manvantaras and their subdivisions. At this level, the cycles have a character that is at once cosmic and historical, for they particularly concern terrestrial humanity, while at the same time being closely linked to events occurring in our world but outside of the history of humanity. There is nothing to surprise us here, for the idea of seeing human history as somehow isolated from all the rest is exclusively modern and sharply opposed to what is taught by all traditions, which on the contrary unanimously affirm a necessary and constant correlation between the cosmic and the human orders. The Manvantaras, or eras of successive Manus, are fourteen in number, forming two septenary series of which the first includes both past Manvantaras and our present one, and the second future Manvantaras. These two series, of which one relates to the past as well as to the present that is its immediate result, and the other to the future, can be linked with those of the seven Svargas and the seven Pātālas, which, from the point of view of the hierarchy of the degrees of existence or of universal manifestation, represent the states respectively higher and lower than the human state, or anterior and posterior with respect to that state if one places oneself at the viewpoint of the causal connection of the cycles symbolically described, as always, under the analogy of a temporal succession. This last point of view is obviously the most important here, for it enables us to see within our Kalpa a kind of reduced image of the totality of the cycles of universal manifestation according to the analogical relation we mentioned earlier; and in this sense one could say that the succession of Manvantaras in a way marks a reflection of other worlds in ours. To confirm this relationship, one could also note that the words Manu and Loka are both used as symbolic designations for the number 14; to say that this is simply a 'coincidence' would be to give proof of a complete ignorance of the profound reasons inherent in all traditional symbolism. Yet another correspondence with the Manvantaras concerns the seven Dvīpas or 'regions' into which our world is divided. Although according to the proper meaning of the word that designates them these are represented as islands or continents distributed in a certain way in space, one must be careful not to take this literally and to regard them simply as different parts of present-day earth; in fact, they 'emerge' in turns and not simultaneously, which is to say that only one of them is manifested in the sensible domain over the course of a certain period. If that period is a Manvantara, one will have to conclude that each Dvīpa will have to appear twice in the Kalpa or once in each of the just mentioned septenary series; and from the relationship of these two series, which correspond to one another inversely as do all similar cases, particularly the Svargas and the Pātālas, one can deduce that the order of appearance for the Dvīpas will likewise have to be, in the second series, the inverse of what it was in the first. In sum, this is a matter of different 'states' of the terrestrial world rather than 'regions' properly speaking; the Jambu-Dvīpa really represents the entire earth in its present state, and if it is said to extend to the south of Meru, the 'axial' mountain around which our world revolves, this is because Meru is identified symbolically with the North Pole, so that the whole earth is really situated to the south with respect to it. To explain this more completely it would be necessary to develop the symbolism of the directions of space according to which the Dvīpas are distributed, as well as correspondences existing between this spatial symbolism and the temporal symbolism on which the whole doctrine of cycles rests; but since we cannot here go into these considerations, which alone would require a whole volume, we must be content with these summary indications, which can be easily completed by all who already have some knowledge of what is involved. This way of envisaging the Dvīpas is also confirmed by concordant data from other traditions which also speak of ‘seven lands’, particularly Islamic esoterism and the Hebrew Kabbalah. Thus in the latter, even while these ‘seven lands’ are outwardly represented by as many divisions of the land of Canaan, they are related to the reigns of the ‘seven kings of Edom’ which clearly correspond to the seven Manus of the first series; and all are included in the ‘Land of the Living’ which represents the complete development of our world considered as realized permanently in its principal state. We can note here the coexistence of two points of view, one of succession, which refers to manifestation in itself, and the other of simultaneity, which refers to its principle or to what one could call its ‘archetype’; and at root the correspondence between these two points of view is in a certain way equivalent to that between temporal symbolism and spatial symbolism, to which we just alluded in connection with the Dvīpas of the Hindu tradition. In Islamic esoterism, the ‘seven lands’ appear, perhaps even more explicitly, as so many ṭabaqāt or ‘categories’ of terrestrial existence, which coexist and in a way interpenetrate, but only one of which is presently accessible to the senses while the others are in a latent state and can only be perceived exceptionally and under certain special conditions; these too are manifested outwardly in turn, during the different periods that succeed one another in the course of the total duration of this world. On the other hand, each of the ‘seven lands’ is governed by a Quṭb or ‘Pole’, which thus corresponds very clearly to the Manu of the period during which his land is manifested; and these seven Aqṭāb are subordinate to the supreme ‘Pole’ just as the different Manus are subordinate to the Adi-Manu or primordial Manu; but because these ‘seven lands’ coexist, they also in a certain respect exercise their functions in a permanent and simultaneous way. It is hardly necessary to point out that the designation of ‘Pole’ is closely related to the ‘polar’ symbolism of Meru which we just mentioned, for Meru itself has in any case its exact equivalent in the mountain of Qāf in Islamic tradition. Let us also add that the seven terrestrial ‘Poles’ are considered to be reflections of the seven celestial ‘Poles’ which preside respectively over the seven planetary heavens; and this naturally evokes the correspondence with the Svargas in Hindu doctrine, which shows in sum the perfect concordance in this regard between the two traditions. We shall now consider the divisions of a Manvantara, that is to say the Yugas, which are four in number. First of all, and without dwelling on it at length, let us point out that this quaternary division of a cycle is susceptible of multiple applications and that it is in fact found in many cycles of a more particular order. One can cite as examples the four seasons of the year, the four weeks of the lunar month, and the four ages of human life; here too there is correspondence with a spatial symbolism, in this case principally related to the four cardinal points. On the other hand, we have often called attention to the obvious equivalence of the four Yugas with the four ages of gold, silver, bronze, and iron as they were known to Greco-Latin antiquity, in both cases, each period is marked by a degeneration in regard to the age that preceded it; and this, which is directly opposed to the idea of ‘progress’ as understood by the modern world, is very simply explained by the fact that every cyclical development, that is in sum every process of manifestation, quite truly constitutes a ‘descent’ since it necessarily implies a gradual distancing from the principle, and this is moreover the real meaning of the ‘fall’ in the Judeo-Christian tradition. From one Yuga to the next the degeneration is accompanied by a decrease in duration, and this is thought to influence the length of human life; and what is most important in this respect are the ratios that exist between the respective durations of these different periods. If the total duration of the Manvantara is represented by 10, that of the Krita-Yuga or Satya-Yuga is 4, that of the Treta-Yuga is 3, that of the Dvapara-Yuga is 2, and that of the Kali-Yuga is 1. These numbers are also those belonging to the feet of the symbolic bull of Dharma which are represented as resting on the earth during the same periods. The division of the Manvantara is therefore carried out according to the formula 10 = 4 + 3 + 2 + 1, which is, in reverse, that of the Pythagorean Tetraktys: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10. This last formula corresponds to what the language of Western Hermeticism calls the 'circling of the square', and the other to the opposite problem of the 'squaring of the circle', which expresses precisely the relation of the end of a cycle to its beginning, that is, the integration of its total development. Here there is an entire symbolism both arithmetic and geometric which we can only indicate in passing so as not to digress too far from our principal subject. As for the numbers given in different texts for the duration of the Manvantara and consequently for that of the Yugas, it must be understood that they are not to be regarded as a 'chronology' in the ordinary sense of the word, we mean as expressing a literal number of years; and this is also why certain apparent differences in these numbers do not really imply any contradiction. Generally speaking, it is only the number 4,320 that is to be considered in these figures, for a reason that we shall explain later, and not the many zeros that follow it, which may well be meant to lead astray those who wish to devote themselves to certain calculations. At first glance, such a precaution might seem strange, and yet it is easily explained: if the real duration of the Manvantara were known, and if in addition its starting-point were exactly determined, anyone could without difficulty draw therefrom deductions allowing him to foresee certain future events. But no orthodox tradition has ever encouraged inquiries by means of which someone might see more or less into the future, since in practice such a knowledge has more drawbacks than real advantages. This is why the starting-point and the duration of the Manvantara have always been more or less carefully concealed, either by adding or subtracting a given number of years from the real dates, or by multiplying or dividing the durations of the cyclical periods so as to conserve only their exact proportions; and we will add that certain correspondences have also sometimes been reversed for similar reasons. If the duration of the Manvantara is 4,320, those of the four Yugas will respectively be 1,728, 1,296, 864, and 432; but by what number must we multiply them to obtain an expression of these durations in years? It is easy to see that all the cyclical numbers are directly related to the geometric division of the circle; thus 4,320 = 360 x 12.

Besides, there is nothing arbitrary or purely conventional in this division because, for reasons relating to the correspondence between arithmetic and geometry, it is normal for it to be carried out according to multiples of 3, 9, and 12, whereas decimal division is that best suited for the straight line. And yet this observation, although truly fundamental, would not enable us to go very far in determining cyclical periods if we did not also know that in the cosmic order their principal basis is the astronomical period of the precession of the equinoxes, of which the duration is 25,920 years, so that the displacement of the equinoctial points is one degree in 72 years. This number 72 is precisely a sub-multiple of 4,320 = 72 x 60, and 4,320 is in turn a sub-multiple of 25,920 = 4,320 x 6. The fact that we find in the precession of the equinoxes numbers linked to the division of the circle is yet another proof of its truly natural character; but the question that now arises is this: what multiple or sub-multiple of the astronomical period in question really corresponds to the duration of the Manvantara? The period that appears most frequently in different traditions is in truth not so much the precession of equinoxes as its half; actually, it is this that corresponds in particular to the 'great year' of the Persians and the Greeks which is often expressed by approximation as either 12,000 or 13,000 years, its exact duration being 12,960 years. Given the very particular importance which is thus attributed to that period, it is to be presumed that the Manvantara will have to comprise a whole number of these 'great years'; but what will that number be? Here we find, elsewhere than in Hindu tradition, at least a precise indication which this time seems plausible enough to be accepted literally: among the Chaldeans, the duration of the reign of Xisuthros, which is manifestly identical to Vaivasvata, the Manu of the present era, is fixed at 64,800 years, or exactly five 'great years'. Let us note incidentally that the number 5, being that of the bhūtas or elements of the sensory world, must necessarily have a special importance from the cosmological point of view, something that tends to confirm the reality of such an evaluation; perhaps there is reason to consider a correlation between the five bhūtas and the successive five 'great years' in question, all the more so in fact since in the ancient traditions of Central America one encounters an explicit association of the elements with certain cyclical periods; but this question would require closer examination. However that may be, if such is indeed the real duration of the Manvantara, and if we continue to take as a base the number 4,320, which is equal to the third part of the 'great year', it is then by 15 that this number will have to be multiplied. On the other hand, the five 'great years' will naturally be distributed unequally but according to simple relationships among the four Yugas: the Krita-Yuga will contain 2 of them, the Treta-Yuga 1½, the Dvapara-Yuga 1, and the Kali-Yuga ½; these numbers are of course half of those we previously used when representing the duration of the Manvantara by 10. Expressed in ordinary years, these same durations of the four Yugas will be respectively 25,920, 19,440, 12,960, and 6,480 years, forming the total of 64,800 years; and it will be recognized that these numbers are at least within perfectly plausible limits and may very well correspond to the true chronology of present terrestrial humanity.

We will end these considerations here, for as concerns the starting-point of our Manvantara and consequently the exact point in its course where we are presently situated, we do not intend to risk an attempt to determine them. By all traditional data we know that we have been in the Kali-Yuga for a long time already; and we can say without fear of error that we are in an advanced phase, a phase whose description in the Purāṇas corresponds in the most striking fashion to the characteristics of our present epoch. But would it not be imprudent to wish to be more exact, and would this not inevitably end in the kinds of predictions to which traditional doctrine has, not without good reasons, posed so many obstacles?

REVIEWS

MIRCEA ELIADE: Le Mythe de l'éternel retour: Archétypes et répétition (Paris: Gallimard, 1961) [The Myth of the Eternal Return (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991)]. The title of this small volume, which does not exactly correspond to its contents, does not appear to us to be a very happy one, for it inevitably makes one think of the modern notions to which this term 'eternal return' is usually applied and which, besides confusing eternity with indefinite duration, imply the existence of a repetition that is impossible and clearly contrary to the true traditional notion of cycles, according to which there is only correspondence and not identity. In the final analysis there is in the case of the macrocosmic order a difference comparable to that which exists in the microcosmic order between the idea of reincarnation and that of the passage of the being through the multiple states of manifestation. But this is not in fact what Eliade's book is about, and what he means by 'repetition' is nothing other than the reproduction or rather the ritual imitation of 'what was in the beginning'. In an integrally traditional civilization, everything proceeds from 'celestial archetypes'; thus cities, temples, and dwellings are always erected according to a cosmic model; another related question, one which at root differs much less from the former than the author seems to think, is that of symbolic identification with the 'Center'. These are things about which we ourselves have often spoken;^[1] Eliade has brought together numerous examples referring to the most diverse traditions which show quite well the universality and, we could say, the 'normality' of these ideas. He then goes on to the examination of rites properly so called, always from the same point of view; but there is one point on which we must state a serious reservation: he speaks of 'archetypes of profane activities', whereas precisely, as long as a civilization preserves an integrally traditional character, there are no profane activities. It seems to us that what he so designates is what has become profane as a result of a degeneration, which is something quite different, for then, and by that very fact, there can no longer be a question of 'archetypes', for the profane is such only because it is no longer linked to any transcendent principle. Besides, there is certainly nothing profane in the examples he gives (ritual dances, anointing of a king, traditional medicine). In what follows, the emphasis is more particularly on the question of the annual cycle and the rites linked to it. By virtue of the correspondence that exists between all cycles, the year itself may naturally be taken as a reduced image of the great cycles of universal manifestation, and this is what explains in particular that its beginning may be considered to have a 'cosmogonic' character. The idea of a 'regeneration of time', which the author interjects here, is not very clear, but it seems that what must be understood by this is the divine conservation of the manifested world, with which the ritual action is a true collaboration by virtue of the relations existing between the cosmic order and the human order. What is regrettable is that despite all of this he thinks he is obliged to speak of 'beliefs', whereas what is involved is the application of a very real knowledge and of traditional sciences which have a value altogether different from that of the profane sciences. And why must he also, in another concession to modern prejudices, excuse himself for having 'avoided all sociological or ethnographic interpretation', whereas on the contrary we could not praise the author too much for this abstention, especially when we recall to what extent other studies have been spoiled by such interpretations? The last chapters are less interesting from our point of view, and they are in any case the most questionable, for what they contain is no longer a description of traditional ideas but rather Eliade's own reflections, from which he tries to draw a sort of 'philosophy of history'. Moreover, we do not see how cyclical conceptions would be opposed in any way to history (he even uses the expression 'refutation of history'), and in truth history cannot really have meaning except insofar as it expresses the unfolding of events within the course of the human cycle, although profane historians are no doubt scarcely capable of conceiving this. If the idea of 'misfortune' can in one sense be attached to 'historical existence', it is precisely because the course of the cycle is accomplished according to a descending movement. One must add that the final remarks on the 'terror of history' seem to us rather too much inspired by 'current events'.

GASTON GEORGEL: Les Rythmes dans l'Histoire (Belfort: Gaston Georgel, 1937). This book constitutes an essay on the application of cosmic cycles to the history of peoples and to the phases of growth and decadence in civilizations. It is truly a pity that in undertaking such a work the writer did not have at his disposal more complete traditional data, and that he knew some only through rather doubtful intermediaries who mingled with them their own imaginings. Nevertheless, he has seen that the essential thing to consider is the period of the precession of the equinoxes and its division, even though he adds some complications that seem of little use; but the terminology he adopts to designate certain secondary periods betrays a number of misunderstandings and confusions. Thus, the twelfth part of the precession certainly cannot be called a 'cosmic year'; that name would be much more fitting either for the entire period, or even more to its half, which is precisely the 'great year' of the ancients. On the other hand, the period of 25,765 years is probably borrowed from some hypothetical calculation of modern astronomers, but the duration traditionally indicated is 25,920 years. A singular consequence of this is that the author is sometimes led to take the exact numbers for certain divisions, for example 2,160 and 540, but then considers them as only 'approximate'. Let us add still one more observation on this subject: he thinks he has found a confirmation of the cycle of 539 years in certain biblical texts which suggest the number 77 x 7 = 539; but precisely here he should have taken 77 x 7 + 1 = 540, even if only by analogy with the jubilee year, which was not the 49th but really the 50th, or 7 x 7 + 1 = 50. As for applications, if there are correspondences and relationships that are not only curious but really worthy of note, we must say there are others which are much less striking or which even seem somewhat forced, to the point of recalling unfortunately the childishness of certain occultists. There would also be quite a few reservations to be made on other points, for example the fanciful figures set forth for the chronology of ancient civilizations. On the other hand, it would have been interesting to see whether the writer could have continued to get results of the same kind by expanding his field of inquiries, for there have been and still are many other peoples than those he considers. In any case, we do not think it possible to establish a general 'synchronism' because, for different peoples, the starting-point must likewise be different; and moreover, different civilizations do not simply succeed one another, they also coexist, as one can still witness today. In conclusion, the author has thought it well to indulge in several attempts at 'foreseeing the future', within rather restricted limits; that is one of the dangers of this kind of research, especially in our time, where so-called 'prophecies' are in such vogue. Certainly, no tradition has ever encouraged such things and it is even in order to obstruct them as much as possible rather than for any other reason that certain aspects of the doctrine of cycles have always been shrouded in obscurity.

Gaston Georgel: Les Rythmes dans l'Histoire. (Besançon: Éditions 'Servir', 1947). We reviewed this book when the first edition appeared (October 1937 issue); at the time, the author, as he indicates in the foreword of this new edition, knew almost nothing of the traditional data concerning cycles, to the point that it was only by good fortune that, starting from a strictly empirical viewpoint, he happened to suspect the importance of the precession of the equinoxes. The few remarks we made then had the consequence of turning him toward more detailed studies, for which we can certainly only congratulate ourselves, and we must express our thanks to him for what he is willing to say on our behalf. He has therefore modified and completed his work on many points, adding new chapters or paragraphs, one a history of the question of cycles, correcting various inaccuracies, and suppressing the doubtful considerations that he at first accepted on faith from occultist writers because he was able to compare them with more authentic data. We regret only that he forgot to replace the numbers 539 and 1,078 years with the correct numbers 540 and 1,080, something which the foreword however seemed to announce, all the more so because he did indeed rectify 2,156 years with 2,160, which introduces a certain apparent disagreement between the chapters dealing with these different cycles that are multiples of one another. It is also somewhat unfortunate that he retained the expressions 'cosmic year' and 'cosmic season' to designate periods much too short to really apply correctly (2,160 and of 540 years), which are rather, so to speak, only 'months' and 'weeks', all the more so since the name 'month' fits rather well for the course of a zodiacal sign in the precession of the equinoxes, and that, on the other hand, the number 540 = 77 x 7 + 1 has, like the number of the sevenfold 'week of years' of the jubilee (50 = 7 x 7 + 1), of which it is so to speak an 'extension', a particular link with the septenary. In any case, these are almost the only detailed criticisms that we have to make this time, and the book as a whole is very worthy of interest and favorably distinguished from certain other works on cyclical theories which put forth far more ambitious and assuredly little justified claims. Naturally, he restricts himself to what we can call the 'minor historical cycles', and this only within the framework of the Western and Mediterranean civilizations; but we know that Georgel is presently preparing, in the same order of ideas, other works of a more general character, and we hope that he may soon be able to bring these also to a successful conclusion.