EYE OF THE HEART A Journal of Traditional Wisdom Issue 1, 2008 This publication has been supported by La Trobe University www.latrobe.edu.au Eye of the Heart is a scholarly journal providing a forum for the exploration of the great philosophical and religious traditions. It addresses the inner meaning of philosophy and religion through elucidations of metaphysical, cosmological, and soteriological principles, and through a penetration of the forms preserved in each religious tradition. Eye of the Heart is published bi-annually. It is an Open Access Journal freely available online. A print version is available at cost value through La Trobe University, Campus Graphics (via the Eye of the Heart website) . Unless otherwise stated all articles are original and have been peer-reviewed in accord with the Higher Education Research Data Collection (Australian Government, Department of Education, Science and Training) 2008 specifications. Editor: Timothy Scott Editorial Board: Rodney Blackhirst, Harry Oldmeadow, John Penwill, Roger Sworder, Algis Uždavinys Advisory Board: Waleed El-Ansary (University of South Carolina), David Burrell, (University of Notre Dame, Indiana), James Cutsinger (University of South Carolina), Renaud Fabbri (Miami University), Alan Godlas (The University of Georgia), Peter Kingsley (Warburg Institute), Klaus Klostermaier (University of Manitoba), Livia Kohn (Boston University), Jean-Pierre Lafouge (Marquette University), Patrick Laude (Georgetown University in Qatar), Joseph Lumbard (Brandeis University), Constant Mews (Monash University), James Morris (Boston College), Philip Novak (Dominican University of California), Patricia Reynaud (Miami University), Eliezer Segal (University of Calgary), Reza Shah-Kazemi (Institute of Ismaili Studies), Arvind Sharma (McGill University), David Tacey (La Trobe University), Arthur Versluis (Michigan State University) Contact: Dr Timothy Scott, Arts Program, La Trobe University P.O. Box 199 Bendigo 3552, Australia Tel: +61 3 5444 7243 Fax: +61 3 5444 7970 email: [email protected] Copyright: Unless otherwise indicated, all materials published in this issue are copyrighted by Eye of the Heart and the respective authors. No reproduction without express written permission, except in critical articles and reviews. Website: www.latrobe.edu.au/eyeoftheheart ISSN: 1835-4416 Table of Contents Editorial 1 Nirukta = Hermeneia 3 by Ananda Coomaraswamy Swami Abhishiktananda: Pilgrim of the Absolute 11 by Harry Oldmeadow Golgotha, Athens, Jerusalem: Patristic intimations of the 47 religio perennis by Graeme Castleman In defiance of natural order: The origins of "transhuman" 81 techno-utopia by David Catherine Voices of the Fire: Ancient theurgy and its tools 105 by Algis Uždavinys Remarks on the universal symbolism of the number 72 119 by Timothy Scott The symbolism of letters and language in the work of 141 Ibn ‘Arabi by Pierre Lory Contributors 151 Notices 153 Editorial E ye of the Heart: A Journal of Traditional Wisdom arises out of the perceived need for an academic journal that recognises traditional approaches to the study of philosophy and religion. There are in fact numerous journals of both philosophy and religion. Those which might be labelled academic tend, on the whole, to approach their subject through the application of contemporary theoretical models and analytical procedures that may well be described as non-traditional, at best. These have their value, but this intellectual weltanschauung does not have exclusive right to academic recognition and worth. The many non-academic publications in this field range from the highly questionable (to say the least) to some of the most exciting and intellectually stimulating works available. Still, even the best of these are rarely allowed the academic recognition they deserve. We hope Eye of the Heart may go some way to addressing this situation. A few words about the name of this new journal will not be out of place. Our first criterion for choosing a name was that it should be universal. The phrase “eye of the heart” fits this as the quotes from the various traditions on each page of the journal website show. We opted for a name in English, eschewing technical or obscure languages as these might suggest emphasis on either a particular tradition or a linguistic approach. So while Oculus Cordis may have lent a certain esoteric panache or even a scholarly credibility it was, in the end, not true to the inclusivity to which we aspire. Similarly there was debate about the subtitle, A Journal of Traditional Wisdom, the issue being the use of the English word “wisdom,” which has been so tainted by New Age abuse. Again, if we had opted for the Greek sophia we would have saved ourselves some angst. But we have chosen wisdom to remain true to our original idea. It remains to explain our use of the term “traditional.” Those who know the work of the Philosophy and Religious Studies department here at La Trobe, Bendigo will know that several members—but not all—of the editorial board are sympathetic to perennialism. However, we are not aiming to make a specifically “perennialist” or “traditionalist” journal. In the first place we feel that this niche is well filled by such publications as Sophia: The Journal of the Foundation of Traditional Studies, Sacred Web: A Journal of Tradition and Modernity, Connaissance des religions, and the recently re- released Studies in Comparative Religion. Secondly, as the editor I am keen to develop the content of Eye of the Heart beyond a purely perennialist current, to move beyond the traditions that perennialism is usually associated with, and to open perennialism itself to a wider dialogue. I am well aware that there are many people sympathetic to a traditional study of philosophy and religion, who, at the same time, may have never heard of perennialism, or who may even be hostile to elements that they perceive therein. Our intention with Eye of the Heart is to facilitate a forum where a variety of perspectives may be expressed. Our fundamental tenet is that the great philosophical and religious traditions of the world are treated with respect in light of the Reality they express. In referring to traditional approaches to the study of philosophy and religion, we have in mind two things. Firstly, a general approach that begins from the context of the traditions considered. The main thing here is the acceptance of a Reality as the essential starting point. We should also note the fundamentally symbolic mentality of traditional peoples. The second thing we have in mind, when talking of traditional approaches, are the various methodologies of the traditions as such. For example, Hermeneia (Greek), Nirukta (Hinduism), Lectio Divina (Christian), Kabbalistic practices such as gematria, notariqon, and temura, and the Islamic science of letters, ilm al- huruf. It is with these in mind that we have decided to republish some seminal works. These, it is hoped, will go some way to providing the methodological justification for original studies that wish to use these traditional approaches, or may serve to inspire further works on these modes of thought. In this first issue the reader will find Ananda Coomaraswamy’s essay, ‘Nirukta=Hermeneia,’ and Professor Pierre Lory’s article on the Islamic science of letters (ilm al-huruf), ‘The Symbolism of Letters and Language in the Work of Ibn ‘Arabi,’ both of which are republished here by kind permission. Our second issue will include a new article by Father Michael Casey on the practice of Lectio Divina. Fr Casey is the internationally acclaimed author of Sacred Reading: The Art of Lectio Divina and Toward God. I will let the other articles herein speak for themselves. Finally may I offer my thanks to all those people who have aided in various ways to getting Eye of the Heart on its feet: the editorial advisors, the contributors, and the reviewers. Special thanks are due to Mr Stephen Williams, Production Director of World Wisdom, Inc., for advice and material support and to Mr Graeme Castleman who helped in the task of transferring the republished articles from print text to electronic format and then undertook the painstaking task of proofreading these texts. ∗ Nirukta = Hermeneia Ananda Coomaraswamy E very student of Vedic literature will be familiar with what are called by modern scholars “folk etymologies.” I cite, for example, the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (VIII.3.3), “Verily, this Spirit is in the heart1 (eṣa ātmā hṛdi). The hermeneia (niruktam) thereof is this: ‘This is in the heart’ (hṛdayam), and that is why the ‘heart’ is called ‘hṛdayam.’ Whoever is a comprehensor of this reaches Heaven every day.” Specimens, of course, abound in Yāska— for example, Nirukta V.14, “Puṣkaram means ‘mid-world,’ because it ‘fosters’ (poṣati) things that come to be.2 Water is puṣkaram too, because it is a ‘means of worship’ (pūjākaram), and ‘to be worshipped’ (pūjayitavyam). Otherwise, as ‘lotus’ (puṣkaram) the word is of the same origin, being a ‘means of adorning’ (vapuṣkaram); and it is a ‘bloom’ (puṣyam) because it ‘blossoms’ (puṣpate).” Explanations of this kind are commonly dismissed as “etymological triflings” (J. Eggeling), “purely artificial” (A. B. Keith), and “very fanciful” (B. C. Mazumdar), or as “puns.” On the other hand, one feels that they cannot be altogether ignored, for as the last-mentioned author says, “There are in many Upaniṣads very fanciful explanations … disclosing bad grammar and worse idiom, and yet the grammarians who did not accept them as correct, did not say anything about them”;3 that is, the early Sanskrit grammarians, whose “scientific” abilities have been universally recognized, did not embody these ∗ [This essay originally appeared in the Viśva-Bhāratī Quarterly, NS II (1936) and concurrently in French in Études traditionelles, XLI (1936); the Addendum which concludes the essay was published in each journal the following year. The current version follows the bibliographical formatting used in Coomaraswamy, Selected Papers: 2 Metaphysics, ed. R. Lipsey (Princeton, 1987). Republished here by kind permission of the estate of Ananda Coomaraswamy and World Wisdom, Inc.] 1 I.e., “within you,” in the sense that “The Kingdom of Heaven is within you.” 2 The space between Heaven and Earth, being and not-being, light and darkness, essence and nature, being precisely the locus, opportunity, and “promised land” of all birth and becoming. 3 B. C. Mazumdar, review of J. N. Rawson, The Kaṭha Upaniṣad, in Indian Culture, II (1935/1936), 378. 3 Eye of the Heart: A Journal of Traditional Wisdom “explanations” in their “grammar,” but at the same time never condemned them. Nirukta is not, in fact, a part of philology in the modern sense; a hermeneutic explanation may or may not coincide with the actual pedigree of a word in question. Nirukta = hermeneia is founded upon a theory of language of which philology and grammar are only departments, one may even say the most humble departments, nor do I say this without a real and genuine respect for those “omniscient impeccable leviathans of science that headlong sound the linguistic ocean to its most horrid depths, and (in the intervals of ramming each other) ply their flukes on such audacious small fry as even on the mere surface will venture within their danger,”4 and whose advice in matters of verbal genealogy I am always ready to accept. Etymology, an excellent thing in its place, is nevertheless precisely one of those “modern sciences which really represent quite literally ‘residues’ of the old sciences, no longer understood.”5 In India the traditional science of language is the special domain of the pūrvamīmāṃsā, of which the characteristic is that “It lays stress on the proposition that articulate sounds are eternal,6 and on the consequent doctrine that the connection of a word with its sense is not due to convention, but is by nature inherent in the word itself.” When, however, A. A. Macdonell adds to this excellent characterization that “Owing to its lack of philosophical interest, the system has not as yet much occupied the attention of European scholars,”7 he only means that the subject is not of interest to himself and his kind; it is implausible that he should have had in mind deliberately to exclude Plato from the category of “philosophers.” For not only does Plato employ the hermeneutic method in the Cratylus—for example, when he says “ ‘to have called’ (τò καλέσαν) things useful is one and the same thing as to speak of ‘the beautiful’ (τò καλόν)”—but throughout this dialogue he is dealing with the problem of the nature of the relation between sounds and meanings, inquiring whether this is an essential or an accidental one. The general 4 Standish Hayes O’Grady, Silva Gadelica (London and Edinburgh, 1892), II, v. 5 René Guénon, La Crise du monde moderne (Paris, 1927), p. 103. 6 What is meant by the “eternity of the Veda” is sometimes misunderstood. “Eternal” is “without duration,” “not in time” (akāla), therefore ever present. The “eternity” of tradition has nothing to do with the “dating” of a given scripture, in a literary sense. As St. Thomas Aquinas expressed it, “Both the Divine Word and the writing of the Book of Life are eternal. But the promulgation cannot be from eternity on the part of the creature that hears or reads” (Sum. Theol. II-I.91.1 ad 2). 7 History of Sanskrit Literature (London, 1900), p. 400. 4 Coomaraswamy: Nirukta = Hermeneia conclusion is that the true name of anything is that which has a natural (Skr. sahaja) meaning—i.e., is really an “imitation” (μίμησις) of the thing itself in terms of sound, just as in painting things are “imitated” in terms of color— but that because of the actual imperfection of vocal imitation, which may be thought of as a matter of inadequate recollection, the formation of words in use has been helped out by art and their meaning partly determined by convention. What is meant by natural meaning can be understood when we find that Socrates and Cratylus are represented as agreeing that “the letter rho (Skr. ṛ, r) is expressive of rapidity, motion, and hardness.” Cratylus maintains that “he who knows the names knows also the things expressed by them,” and this is as much as to imply that “He who first gave names to things did so with sure knowledge of the nature of the things”; he maintains in so many words that this first giver of names (Skr. nāmadhāḥ) must have been “a power more than human” and that the names thus given in the beginning are necessarily their “true names.” The names themselves are dualistic, implying either motion or rest, and are thus descriptive of acts, rather than of the things that act; Socrates admits that the discovery of real existence, apart from denotations, may be “beyond you and me.” It is likewise the Indian doctrine (Bṛhad Devatā I.27 ff., Nirukta I.1 and 12, etc.) that “Names are all derived from actions”; insofar as they denote a course of action, names are verbs, and insofar as someone or something is taken to be the doer of the action, they are nouns. It must not be overlooked that Skr. nāma is not merely “name,” but “form,” “idea,” and “eternal reason.8 Sound and meaning (śabdārtha) are inseparably associated, so that we find this expression employed as an image of a perfect union, such as that of Śiva-śakti, essence and nature, act and potentiality in divinis. Names are the cause of existence; one may say that in any composite essence (sattva, nāmarūpa), the “name” (nāma) is the form of the “phenomenon” (rūpa) in the same sense that one says that “the soul is the form of the body.” In the state of nonbeing (asat) or darkness (tamas), the names of individual principles are unuttered or “hidden” (nāmāni guhyā, apīcyā, etc.; Ṛgveda passim);9 to be named is to proceed from death to life. The Eternal Avatar himself, proceeding as a child (kumāra) from the 8 See Coomaraswamy, “Vedic Exemplarism,” Selected Papers 2: Metaphysics (Princeton, 1987). Also René Guénon, “Le Symbolisme du théâtre,” Le Voile d’Isis, XXXVII (1932), 69. 9 “When names were not, nor any sign of existence endowed with name” (Rūmī, Dīvan, Ode XVII). 5 Eye of the Heart: A Journal of Traditional Wisdom unfriendly Father, demands a name, because it is “by name that one strikes away evil” (pāpmānam apahanti, Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa VI.1.3.9); all beings on their way dread most of all to be robbed of their names by the powers of Death, who lies in wait to thieve (krivir nāmāni pravaṇe muṣayati, ṚV V.44.4). “It is by his deathless name (amartyena nāmnā) that Indra overliveth human generations” (ṚV VI.18.7). So long as an individual principle remains in act, it has a name; the world of “names” is the world of “life.” “When a man dies, what does not go out of him is ‘name,’ that is ‘without end,’ and since what is ‘without end’ is the Several Angels, thereby he wins the ‘world without end’ ” (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad III.2.12). It is by the enunciation of names that a “more than human power” not merely designates existing things correctly but endows them with their being, and the All-maker can do this because He is omniscient of the hidden or titanic names of things that are not yet in themselves; it is by the foreknown names of mediate causes that He does all that must be done, including the creation of all separated beings. For example, ṚV I.155.6, “He by the names of the Four [Seasons] has set in motion the rounded wheel [of the Year] that is furnished with ninety steeds”; X.54.4, “Thy titan names, all these, O Maghavan, thou surely knowest, whereby thou hast performed thy mighty deeds”; VIII.41.5, “Varuṇa knoweth the hidden names remote, many a locution maketh he to blossom (kāvyā purū … puṣyati), even as the light of heaven (dyauḥ, here the Sun, pūsan, savitṛ, as in V.81.2) bringeth into blossom all kind (puṣyati … rūpam).” It is by the same token that all words of power are efficacious—for example, Pañcaviṃśa Brāhmaṇa VI.9.5 and VI.10.3, “By the word ‘born’ (jātam) he ‘brings to birth’ (jījanat).… In saying ‘lives’ he enlivens them that ‘live.’ ” It is thus by a divine providence that all things are brought forth in their variety: “Varuṇa knows all things speculatively” (viśvaṃ sa veda varuṇo yathā dhiyā, ṚV X.11.1). “All-maker, supernal seer-at-one-glance (saṃdṛk), of whom they speak as ‘One beyond the Seven Prophets,’ who is the only one Denominator of the Angels (yo devānāṃ nāmadhā eka eva), to him all other things turn for information (sampraśnam),” ṚV X.82.2-3,10 should be 10 It is quite right for us to think of “names as the consequences of things” (Aristotle, as quoted by Dante in the Vita nuova), because our knowledge of things is not essential, but accidental; aspiring to essential knowledge, names are for us a means to knowledge and not to be confused with knowledge itself. But let us not forget that from the point of view of the Creator, Plato’s “more than human power” which was the First Denominator, names (ideas) 6