Frithjof Schuon > Quotes

“Spiritual realization is theoretically the easiest thing and in practice the most difficult thing there is. It is the easiest because it is enough to think of God. It is the most difficult because human nature is forgetfulness of God.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Spiritual Perspectives and Human Facts

“When people want to be rid of Heaven it is logical to start by creating an atmosphere in which spiritual things appear out of place; in order to be able to declare successfully that God is unreal they have to construct around man a false reality, a reality that is inevitably inhuman because only the inhuman can exclude God. What is involved is a falsification of the imagination and so its destruction.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Understanding Islam

“We live in an age of confusion and thirst in which the advantages of communication are greater than those of secrecy.”
― Frithjof Schuon , Esoterism As Principle and As Way

“If Mohammed had been a false prophet. there is no reason why Christ should not have spoken of him as he spoke of Antichrist but if Mohammed is a true Prophet the passages referring to the Paraclete must inevitably concern him - not exclusively but eminently - for it is inconceivable that Christ, when speaking of the future, should have passed over in silence a manifestation of such magnitude. The same reasoning excludes a priori the possibility that Christ. when making his predictions, intended to include Mohammed under the general denomination of'' false prophets", for in the history of our era Mohammed is in no sense a typical example among others of the same kind, but on the contrary, a unique and incomparable apparition(1). If he had been one of the false prophets announced by Christ he would have been followed by others and there would exist in our day a multitude of false religions subsequent to Christ and comparable in importance and extension to Islam. The spirituality to be found within Islam from its origins up to our days is an incontestable fact. and "by their fruits ye shall know them." Moreover, it will be recalled that the Prophet in his doctrine has testified to the second coming of Christ without attributing to himself any glory. unless it be that of being the last Prophet of the cycle and history proves that he spoke the truth, no comparable manifestation having followed after him.”
― Frithjof Schuon, The Transcendent Unity of Religions

“In relation to Monotheism considered as such, Judaism stabilized but “confiscated” the Message; Christianity universalized but “altered” it; Islam in turn restored it by stabilizing and universalizing it.”
― Frithjof Schuon

“It is impossible to describe a landscape so validly as to exclude all other descriptions, for no one can see the landscape in all its aspects at the same time, and no single view can prevent the existence and validity of other equally possible views.”
― Frithjof Schuon, In the Face of the Absolute

“Many people of our time reason along the following lines: The religions—or the differing spiritual perspectives within a given religion—contradict one another, therefore they cannot all be right; consequently none is true. This is exactly as if one said: Every individual claims to be "I," thus they cannot all be right; consequently none is "I." This example shows up the absurdity of the antireligious argument, by recalling the real analogy between the inevitable external limitation of religious language and the no less inevitable limitation of the human ego. To reach this conclusion, as do the rationalists who use the above argument, amounts in practice to denying the diversity of the knowing subjects as also the diversity of aspects in the object to be known. It amounts to pretending that there are neither points of view nor aspects; that is to say, that there is but a single man to see a mountain and that the mountain has but a single side to be seen. The error of the subjectivist and relativist philosophers is a contrary one. According to them, the mountain would alter its nature according to whoever viewed it; at one time it might be a tree and at another a stream.

[No activity without Truth] - Studies in Comparative Religion, Vol. 3, No. 4. (Autumn 1969)”
― Frithjof Schuon

“Beauty attached to God is sacrament, cut off from God it becomes an idol.”
― Frithjof Schuon

“The esoteric finds the Absolute within the traditions, as poets find poetry within the poems.”
― Frithjof Schuon, The Transcendent Unity of Religions

“O Thou whose Name is sweetest remedy
And whose remembrance heals our soul’s disease
With Thee each moment is Eternity
A drop from Heaven that consoles and frees.”
― Frithjof Schuon

“Such was also the case with Nietzsche, a volcanic genius if ever there was one. Here, too, there is passionate exteriorization of an inward fire, but in a manner that is both deviated and demented; we have in mind here, not the Nietzschian philosophy, which taken literally is without interest, but his poetical work, whose most intense expression is in part his ‘Zarathustra’. What this highly uneven book manifests above all is the violent reaction of an a priori profound soul against a mediocre and paralyzing cultural environment; Nietzsche’s fault was to have only a sense of grandeur in the absence of all intellectual discernment. ‘Zarathustra’ is basically the cry of a grandeur trodden underfoot, whence comes the heart-rending authenticity – grandeur precisely – of certain passages; not all of them, to be sure, and above all not those which express a half-Machiavellian, half-Darwinian philosophy, or minor literary cleverness. Be that as it may, Nietzsche’s misfortune, like that of other men of genius, such as Napoleon, was to be born after the Renaissance and not before it; which indicates evidently an aspect of their nature, for there is no such thing as chance.”
― Frithjof Schuon, To Have a Center

“A civilization is integral and healthy to the extent [that] it is founded on the "invisible" or "underlying" religion, the religio perennis, that is, to the extent [that] its expressions or forms are transparent to the Non-Formal and tend toward the Origin, thus conveying the recollection of a lost Paradise, but also - and with all the more reason - the presentiment of a timeless Beatitude. For the Origin is at once within us and before us; time is but a spiral movement around a motionless Center.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Light on the Ancient Worlds: A New Translation with Selected Letters

“In our day everyone wants to appear intelligent, one would prefer to be accused of crime than of naiveté if the accompanying risks could be avoided. But since intelligence cannot be drawn from the void, subterfuge are resorted to, one of the most prevalent being the mania for "demystification", which allows an air of intelligence to be conveyed at small cost, for all one need do is assert that the normal response to a particular phenomenon is "prejudiced" and that it is high time it was cleared of the "legends" surrounding it; if the ocean could be made out to be a pond or the Himalayas a hill, it would be done. Certain writers find it impossible to be content with taking note of the fact that a particular thing or person has a particular character or destiny, as everyone had done before them; they must always begin by remarking that "it has too often been said", and go on to declare that the reality is something quite different and has at last been discovered, and that up till now all the world has been "living a lie". This strategy is applied above all to things that are evident and universally known, it would doubtless be too naive to acknowledge in so many words that a lion is a carnivore and that he is not quite safe to meet.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Light on the Ancient Worlds: A New Translation with Selected Letters

“Relativism reduces every element of absoluteness to relativity while making a completely illogical exception in favor of this reduction itself. Fundamentally it consists in propounding the claim that there is no truth as if this were truth or in declaring it to be absolutely true that there is nothing but the relatively true; one might just as well say that there is no language or write that there is no writing. In short, every idea is reduced to a relativity of some sort, whether psychological, historical, or social; but the assertion nullifies itself by the fact that it too presents itself as a psychological, historical, or social relativity. The assertion nullifies itself if it is true and by nullifying itself logically proves thereby that it is false; its initial absurdity lies in the implicit claim to be unique in escaping, as if by enchantment, from a relativity that is declared to be the only possibility.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Logic and Transcendence

“Trials there must be upon this earth. We are made of a stuff that easily corrupts when nothing calls to order, when a sign from the Lord does not reach us soon enough. Do not complain that destiny has rent your soul; For God knows best what will help us.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Autumn Leaves & The Ring: Poems by Frithjof Schuon

“The differences between religions are reflected very clearly in the different forms of sacred art: compared with Gothic art, above all in its “flamboyant” style, Islamic art is contemplative rather than volitive: it is “intellectual” and not “dramatic”, and it opposes the cold beauty of geometrical design to the mystical heroism of cathedrals. Islam is the perspective of “omnipresence” (“God is everywhere”), which coincides with that of “simultaneity” (“Truth has always been”); it aims at avoiding any “particularization” or “condensation”, any “unique fact” in time and space, although as a religion it necessarily includes an aspect of “unique fact”, without which it would be ineffective or even absurd. In other words Islam aims at what is “everywhere center”, and this is why, symbolically speaking, it replaces the cross with the cube or the woven fabric: it “decentralizes” and “universalizes” to the greatest possible extent, in the realm of art as in that of doctrine; it is opposed to any individualist mode and hence to any “personalist” mysticism.

To express ourselves in geometrical terms, we could say that a point which seeks to be unique, and which thus becomes an absolute center, appears to Islam—in art as in theology—as a usurpation of the divine absoluteness and therefore as an “association” (shirk); there is only one single center, God, whence the prohibition against “centralizing” images, especially statues; even the Prophet, the human center of the tradition, has no right to a “Christic uniqueness” and is “decentralized” by the series of other Prophets; the same is true of Islam—or the Koran—which is similarly integrated in a universal “fabric” and a cosmic “rhythm”, having been preceded by other religions—or other “Books”—which it merely restores. The Kaaba, center of the Muslim world, becomes space as soon as one is inside the building: the ritual direction of prayer is then projected toward the four cardinal points.

If Christianity is like a central fire, Islam on the contrary resembles a blanket of snow, at once unifying and leveling and having its center everywhere.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Gnosis: Divine Wisdom, A New Translation with Selected Letters

“Il est un côté de la « culture bourgeoise » qui en dévoile toute la petitesse, c'est son aspect de « roulement » conventionnel, de manque d'imagination, bref d'inconscience et de vanité : on ne se demande pas un instant « à quoi bon tout cela » ; aucun auteur ne se demande s'il vaut la peine d'écrire une nouvelle histoire après tant d'autres histoires ; on semble en écrire simplement parce que d'autres en ont écrit, et parce qu'on ne voit pas pourquoi on ne le ferait pas et pourquoi on ne gagnerait pas une gloire que d'autres ont gagnée. C'est un perpetuum mobile que rien ne peut arrêter, sauf une catastrophe ou, moins tragiquement, la disparition progressive des lecteurs ; sans public point de célébrité, nous l'avons dit plus haut. Et ceci est arrivé dans une certaine mesure : on ne lit plus d'anciens auteurs dont le prestige paraissait assuré ; le grand public a d'autres besoins, d'autres ressources et d'autres distractions, fussent-elle des plus basses. La culture c'est, de plus en plus, l'absence de culture : la manie de se couper de ses racines et d'oublier d'où l'on vient.
Une des raisons subjectives de ce que nous pouvons appeler le « roulement culturel » est que l'homme n'aime pas se perdre tout seul, qu'il aime par conséquent trouver des complices pour une perdition commune ; c'est ce que fait la culture profane, inconsciemment ou consciemment, mais non innocemment car l'homme porte au fond de lui-même l'instinct de sa raison d'être et de sa vocation. On a souvent reproché aux civilisations orientales leur stérilité culturelle, c'est-à-dire le fait qu'elles ne comportent pas un fleuve habituel de production littéraire, artistique et philosophique ; nous croyons pouvoir nous dispenser à présent de la peine d'en expliquer les raisons.”
― Frithjof Schuon, To Have a Center

“Man is made of thought, of will and of love: he can think truth or error, he can will good or evil, he can love beauty or ugliness. Now thought of the true — or knowledge of the real — demands on the one hand willing of the good and on the other love of the beautiful, hence virtue, for virtue is none other than beauty of soul; that is why the Greeks, who were aesthetes as well as thinkers, included virtue within philosophy. Without beauty of soul, all willing is sterile, it is petty and closes itself to grace; and in an analogous manner: without effort of will, all spiritual thought ultimately remains superficial and ineffectual and leads to pretension. Virtue coincides with a sensibility proportioned — or conformed — to the Truth, and that is why the soul of the sage soars above things and thereby above itself, if one may put it thus; whence the disinterestedness, nobleness and generosity of great souls. Quite clearly, the consciousness of metaphysical principles cannot go hand in hand with moral pettiness, such as ambition and hypocrisy : "Be ye perfect even as your Father in Heaven is perfect.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Survey of Metaphysics and Esoterism

“Nothing is easier than to be original thanks to a false absolute, all the more so when this absolute is negative, for to destroy is easier than to construct. Humanism is the reign of horizontality, either naive or perfidious; and since it is also — and by that very fact — the negation of the Absolute, it is a door open to a multitude of sham absolutes, which in addition are often negative, subversive, and destructive. It is not too difficult to be original with such intentions and such means; all one needs is a little imagination. It should be noted that subversion includes not only philosophical and moral schemes designed to undermine the normal order of things, but also — in literature and on a seemingly harmless plane — all that can satisfy an unhealthy curiosity: namely all the narrations that are fantastic, grotesque, lugubrious, "dark," thus satanic in their way, and well-fitted to predispose men to all excesses and all perversions; this is the sinister side of romanticism. Without fearing in the least to be "childlike" or caring in the least to be "adult," we readily dispense with these somber lunacies, and are fully satisfied with Snow White and Sleeping Beauty.”
― Frithjof Schuon, To Have a Center

“The mentality of today seeks in fact to reduce everything to temporal categories: a work of art, a thought, a truth have no value in themselves and independently of any historical classification, but only as a result of the time in which they are rightly or wrongly placed; everything is considered the expression of a “period”, not of a timeless and intrinsic value, and this is entirely in conformity with modern relativism and with a psychologism or biologism that destroys essential values . This philosophy derives a maximum of originality from what in effect is nothing but a hatred of God; but since it is impossible to abuse directly a God in whom one does not believe, one abuses Him indirectly through the laws of nature , and one goes so far as to disparage the very form of man and his intelligence, the intelligence with which one thinks and abuses. But there is no escaping immanent Truth: “The more he blasphemes,” says Meister Eckhart, “the more he praises God.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Light on the Ancient Worlds: A New Translation with Selected Letters

“And this leads us to a further consideration: if there are different religions — each of them by definition speaking an absolute and hence exclusive language — this is because the difference between the religions corresponds exactly, by analogy, to the differences between human individuals. In other words, if the religions are true it is because each time it is God who has spoken, and if they are different, it is because God has spoken in different “languages” in conformity with the diversity of the receptacles. Finally, if they are absolute and exclusive, it is because in each of them God has said “I.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Understanding Islam

“To believe with certain "neoyogists" that "evolution" will produce a superman "who will differ from man as much as man differs from the animal or the animal from the vegetable" is not to know what man is: it is one more example of a pseudo-wisdom that deems itself vastly superior to the "separatist" religions but in fact shows itself more ignorant than the most elementary catechism. For the most elementary catechism does know what man is: it knows that by his qualities, and as an autonomous world, he stands opposed to the other kingdoms of nature taken together; that in one particular respect--that of spiritual possibilities and not of animal nature--the difference between a monkey and a man is "infinitely" greater than that between a fly and a monkey. For man alone is able to leave the world; man alone is able to return to God; and this is the reason he cannot be surpassed by a new earthly being in any way. Man is central among the beings of the earth; this is an absolute position; there cannot be a center more central than the center if definitions have any meaning.

This neoyogism, like other similar movements, pretends that it can add an essential value to the wisdom of our ancestors; it believes the religions are partial truths that it is called upon to paste together after centuries or millennia of waiting and then to crown with its own naive little system.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Spiritual Perspectives and Human Facts

“Religion has accepted and almost “Christianized” the machine, and it is dying from this, whether through absurdity and hypocrisy, as in the past, or through capitulation and suicide, as today. It is as if there were only two sins, unbelief and unchastity; the machine is neither an unbeliever nor is it unchaste; therefore one may sprinkle it with holy water in good conscience.”
― Frithjof Schuon, The Fullness of God: Frithjof Schuon on Christianity

“that is sacred which in the first place is attached to the transcendent order, secondly, possesses the character of absolute certainty and, thirdly, eludes the comprehension and power of investigation of the ordinary human mind...The sacred is the presence of the centre in the periphery, of the motionless in the moving; dignity is essentially an expression of it, for in dignity too the centre manifests at the exterior; the heart is revealed in gestures. The sacred introduces a quality of the absolute into relativities and confers on perishable things a texture of eternity.”
― Frithjof Schuon

“Un mot sur la « libre-pensée », ou plus précisément sur l’obligation quasi morale qui est faite à tout homme de « penser par lui-même » : cette exigence n’est nullement conforme à la nature humaine, car l’homme normal et vertueux, en tant que membre d’une collectivité sociale et traditionnelle, se rend compte en général des limites de sa compétence. De deux choses l’une : ou bien l’homme est exceptionnellement doué sur tel ou tel plan, et alors rien ne peut l’empêcher de penser d’une manière originale, ce qu’il fera d’ailleurs en accord avec la tradition — dans les mondes traditionnels qui seuls nous intéressent ici— précisément parce que son intelligence lui permet de saisir la nécessité de cet accord ; ou bien l’homme est d’intelligence moyenne ou médiocre, sur un plan quelconque ou d’une façon générale, et alors il s’en remettra aux jugements de ceux qui sont plus compétents que lui, et c’est là dans son cas la chose la plus intelligente à faire. La manie de détacher l’individu de la hiérarchie intellectuelle, c’est-à-dire de l’individualiser intellectuellement, est une violation de sa nature et équivaut pratiquement à l’abolition de l’intelligence, et aussi des vertus sans les quelles l’entendement réel ne saurait s’actualiser pleinement. On n’aboutit ainsi qu’à l’anarchie et à la codification de l’incapacité de penser.”
― Frithjof Schuon, The Transfiguration of Man

“The existentialist will not ask, “What is this thing?” but “What does this thing signify for me?” Thus he will put the altogether subjective “significance” in place of the objective nature, which is not only the height of absurdity but also of pride and insolence. As true greatness “ signifies” nothing for the little man, he will see in it only a kind of infirmity the better to be able to enjoy his own “significant” inflatedness.”
― Frithjof Schuon

“Tacite se moquait des Germains qui tentaient d'arrêter un torrent avec leur boucliers ; ce n'est pourtant pas plus naïf que de croire à l'émigration planétaire, ou de croire à l'installation, avec des moyens purement humains, d'une société humaine définitivement satisfaite et parfaitement inoffensive, et continuant indéfiniment à progresser. Tout cela prouve que l'homme, s'il est forcément devenu moins naïf pour certaines choses, n'a pourtant rien appris quant à l'essentiel, pour dire le moins ; la seule chose dont l'homme livré à lui-même soit capable, c'est de "faire les péchés les plus anciens de la manière la plus nouvelle", comme dirait Shakespeare. Et le monde étant ce qu'il est, ce n'est sans doute pas commettre un truisme que d'ajouter qu'il vaut mieux aller naïvement au Ciel que d'aller intelligemment en enfer.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Light on the Ancient Worlds: A New Translation with Selected Letters

“Le relativisme réduit tout élément d'absoluité à la relativité, en faisant une exception parfaitement illogique avec cette réduction même. Il consiste en somme à déclarer qu'il est vrai qu'il n'y a pas de vérité, ou qu'il est absolument vrai qu'il n'y a que du relativement vrai ; autant dire qu'il n'y a pas de langage, ou écrire qu'il n'y a pas d'écriture. Bref, toute idée se trouve réduite à une relativité soit psychologique, soit historique, soit sociale ; l'assertion s'annule du fait qu'elle se présente elle-même comme une relativité psychologique, historique, ou sociale, et ainsi de suite. L'assertion s'annule, si elle est vraie, et en s'annulant logiquement, prouve qu'elle est fausse ; son absurdité initiale, c'est la prétention implicite d'être seule à sortir, comme par enchantement, d'une relativité déclarée seule possible.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Logic and Transcendence

“Il y a un curieux rapport - soit dit en passant - entre la fonction impériale et le rôle du fou de cour, et ce rapport semble d’ailleurs apparaître dans le fait que le costume des fous, comme celui de certains empereurs, était orné de clochettes, à l’instar de la robe sacrée du Grand Prêtre : le rôle du fou consistait à l’origine à dire publiquement ce que nul ne pouvait se permettre d’exprimer, et à introduire ainsi un élément de vérité dans un monde forcément gêné par d’inévitables conventions ; or cette fonction, qu’on le veuille ou non, fait penser à la sapience ou à l’ésotérisme du fait qu’elle brise à sa manière des « formes » au nom de « l’esprit qui souffle où il veut ». Mais seule la folie peut se permettre d’énoncer des vérités cruelles et de toucher aux idoles, précisément parce qu’elle reste à l’écart d’un certain engrenage humain, ce qui prouve que, dans ce monde de coulisses qu’est la société, la vérité pure et simple est démence. C’est sans doute pour cela que la fonction du fou de cour succomba en fin de compte au monde du formalisme et de l’hypocrisie : le fou intelligent finit par céder la place au bouffon, qui ne tarda pas à ennuyer et à disparaître.”
― Frithjof Schuon, Light on the Ancient Worlds: A New Translation with Selected Letters

“Dans la critique de la preuve ontologique de Dieu, l'erreur consiste à ne pas voir qu'imaginer un objet quelconque n'est nullement la même chose que concevoir de l'absolu, ou l'Absolu en soi : car ce qui prime ici, ce n'est pas le jeu subjectif de notre esprit, c'est essentiellement l'Objet absolu qui le détermine et qui constitue même, en dernière analyse, la raison d'être de l'intelligence humaine. Sans un Dieu réel, point d'homme possible.
En parlant de l'argument ontologique, nous pensons à la thèse essentielle et non aux raisonnements en partie problématiques qui sont censés l'étayer. Au fond, la base de l'argument est l'analogie entre le méta-macrocosme et le microcosme, ou entre Dieu et l'âme : sous un certain rapport, nous somme ce qui est et par conséquent nous pouvons connaître tout ce qui est, donc l'Être en soi ; car s'il y a le rapport d'incommensurabilité, il y a aussi celui d'analogie et même celui d'identité, sans quoi nous serions le néant pur et simple. Le principe de connaissance n'implique par lui-même aucune limitation ; connaître, c'est connaître tout le connaissable, et celui-ci coincide avec le réel étant donné qu'a priori et dans l'Absolu le sujet et l'objet se confondent : connaître c'est être, et inversement. Ce qui nous ramène à la sentence arabe : « Qui connaît son âme, connaît son Seigneur. » ; sans oublier la formule du sanctuaire de Delphe : « Connais-toi toi-même »... Si l'on nous dit que l'Absolu est inconnaissable, cela se rapporte non à notre faculté intellective de principe mais à telle modalité de facto de cette faculté ; à telle écorce, non à la substance.”
― Frithjof Schuon, To Have a Center