What do you think?
Rate this book
Spiritual Authority - Temporal Power
Autorità spirituale e potere temporale
In un tempo remoto e presso le più varie civiltà, il potere si divise in due parti: sacerdotium e regnum, potere spirituale e potere temporale, auctoritas e potestas. E questi due poteri si trovarono da sempre in un precario equilibrio. Dovevano incontrarsi e sostenersi, come i Brâhmani e gli Kshatriya nell'India vedica, ma spesso erano destinati a scontrarsi. Nella storia europea per secoli, a cominciare dai conflitti medioevali fra Impero e Papato. Ma anche nei secoli successivi, in modo più o meno velato, sino a oggi. Per chi voglia capire che cosa è in gioco nell'incontro e nello scontro fra questi due poteri, nulla sarà d'aiuto più di questo libro di Guénon, nella sua chiaroveggente lucidità.
139 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1929
28 people are currently reading
559 people want to read
About the author
René Guénon
293 books763 followersRené Guénon (1886-1951) was a French author and intellectual who remains an influential figure in the domain of sacred science,traditional studies, symbolism and initiation.
French biography : http://arlesquint.free.fr/rene%20guen...
http://www.index-rene-guenon.org/
French biography : http://arlesquint.free.fr/rene%20guen...
http://www.index-rene-guenon.org/
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
September 12, 2023
First published in 1929, its message is timeless. Spiritual Authority is the ultimate power - giver. Temporal authority is sanctioned thereby. If these bounds are crossed, chaos ultimately ensues, to the detriment of both: hence the crisis which Guenon perceives in his world of 1929. He would not, I suspect, be surprised at the situation as it is today. He cites the evolvement of Monarchy.He argues that its authority is bestowed by the spiritual caste. Attempts on the part of the Temporal power to usurp the Spiritual authority inevitably end in tears. This has been the case throughout history. In Europe it is most marked since the Middle Ages he argues.
With this in mind, Guenon looks at the situations in France and Great Britain, one ostensibly ‘catholic’, the other protestant. Monarchical encroachments upon spiritual authority, particularly under Louis XI and Louis XIV, will lead eventually to revolution, the rise of the bourgeoisie and the end of Monarchy in France. In Great Britain the chipping away of spiritual authority culminated in Henry VIII’s break with Rome, the Reformation and the establishment of a National Church with the monarch at its head. Ultimately however the British monarchy would survive in name only, emasculated of power.
The author equates protestantism with a growth in nationalism and argues that Luther was a useful tool in the hands of ambitious princes, particularly German ones. This would lead to a steady decline in the status of The Holy Roman Emperor, his temporal powers sanctioned by the supreme pontiff.
A book I would like to re-read as it has got me thinking seriously about the balance between Church and State throughout the ages and particularly nowadays. The author’s notes, which accompany his text, are detailed and invaluable. I’ve lowered my ‘score’ as Guenon tends to repeat himself somewhat and thus the book is longer than it needs to be and becomes a tad tedious as a result.
With this in mind, Guenon looks at the situations in France and Great Britain, one ostensibly ‘catholic’, the other protestant. Monarchical encroachments upon spiritual authority, particularly under Louis XI and Louis XIV, will lead eventually to revolution, the rise of the bourgeoisie and the end of Monarchy in France. In Great Britain the chipping away of spiritual authority culminated in Henry VIII’s break with Rome, the Reformation and the establishment of a National Church with the monarch at its head. Ultimately however the British monarchy would survive in name only, emasculated of power.
The author equates protestantism with a growth in nationalism and argues that Luther was a useful tool in the hands of ambitious princes, particularly German ones. This would lead to a steady decline in the status of The Holy Roman Emperor, his temporal powers sanctioned by the supreme pontiff.
A book I would like to re-read as it has got me thinking seriously about the balance between Church and State throughout the ages and particularly nowadays. The author’s notes, which accompany his text, are detailed and invaluable. I’ve lowered my ‘score’ as Guenon tends to repeat himself somewhat and thus the book is longer than it needs to be and becomes a tad tedious as a result.
October 19, 2016
The Legend of Spiritual Authority, Part I
“If you only read the books that everyone else is reading, you can only think what everyone else is thinking.” My Murakami bookmark sheds this insight with slight irony, branded as it is by Book of the Month Club, an entity whose raison d’être is to capitalize on an “Everyone is Reading It!” zeitgeist. It wasn’t Murakami, though, that I held as mantra while I was buffeted by René Guénon’s archaic ideology. He overwhelmingly defines modernity as destruction, and the old order—with priests, particularly catholic priests—sitting at the top, as the pinnacle of society:
Being a nerdy kid that grew up in the U.S.A. in the late 1980’s, I have no frame of reference for “Power” or “Wisdom” that does not touch The Legend of Zelda. What kept me moving through Spiritual Authority & Temporal Power was the story of Link, Gannon, and Zelda, helped in part because I was also reading the sublime Legends of Localization: The Legend of Zelda. In the first portion of this two-part review, The Legend of Zelda serves as my map and compass to the symbolic parallels that tie the legend of the Triforce and Spiritual Authority & Temporal Power together.
Part I
Temporal Power
Beside the kismet of the Guénon/Gannon similarity, there isn’t much on the surface that ties the doom of Hyrule to the gloom of modern times. So let us start with what we can: the mysterious Gannon. He stole one of—or perhaps a portion of—the triforce; that of power. “Stole” does connotative duty. It is a normative judgment that Zelda is the rightful controller of both aspects of the triforce. She must have, prior to the theft, maintained both; thus she wielded power through wisdom. Or perhaps she is given power by submitting to wisdom, or balances the two through the grace of the divine. The key is that, before the game begins, Zelda—not Gannon—should has the wisdom necessary to truly wield power.
Gannon, the usurper, has upended the natural order. He has abdicated wisdom by seizing, rather than being granted, power:
Because Gannon’s rule—begot by strength alone and not through contemplative or spiritual guidance—the land of Hyrule falls to ruin. The Triforce of Wisdom is split into eight holy relicts and monstrous creatures run wild; power without rightful authority has unleashed the beasts of the field. Even as the land itself revolts:
In Guénon’s mind, it is only by subordinating the Temporal to the Spiritual that peace can return to Hyrule—or humanity. But Gannon is a monster—an actual monster—not a Protestant, atheist, or humanist. Guénon, apparently also a monster, dehumanizes and disenfranchises nearly everyone that is not the Pope:
This is where the The Legend of Zelda begins to diverge from the conclusions of this irredeemable pile of filth; Who shall stand against the bestial ravages of modernity? Not priest, spiritualist, or truly anointed royal. No, it is a boy, a simple traveler—full of heart [containers]—who begins a journey for the wisdom to return power to the society from whence it was reft:
The adventure begins at the nadir of spiritual authority for Hyrule. Link stands by himself, with no representative power; he can do nothing but wander. Shortly, a warning is given:
This symbology run through the whole of The Legend of Zelda; do they serve Guénon regressive vision of society, or will they, in the end, subvert it?
To Be Continued in
The Legend of Spiritual Authority, Part II
“If you only read the books that everyone else is reading, you can only think what everyone else is thinking.” My Murakami bookmark sheds this insight with slight irony, branded as it is by Book of the Month Club, an entity whose raison d’être is to capitalize on an “Everyone is Reading It!” zeitgeist. It wasn’t Murakami, though, that I held as mantra while I was buffeted by René Guénon’s archaic ideology. He overwhelmingly defines modernity as destruction, and the old order—with priests, particularly catholic priests—sitting at the top, as the pinnacle of society:
Those who are made for action are not made for pure knowledge, and in a society constituted on truly spiritual bases each person must fulfill the function for which he is really ‘qualified’; otherwise, all is confusion and disorder and no function is carried out as it should be—which is precisely the case today.Earthly strength—sovereignty of kings, for example—is pointless without the blessing of heaven. Earth without guidance from heaven becomes power for the sake of power, strength without constraint. Wisdom flows only from the divine, and cannot come from humanity. Temporal power is no true power without the divine sanction of wisdom.
Being a nerdy kid that grew up in the U.S.A. in the late 1980’s, I have no frame of reference for “Power” or “Wisdom” that does not touch The Legend of Zelda. What kept me moving through Spiritual Authority & Temporal Power was the story of Link, Gannon, and Zelda, helped in part because I was also reading the sublime Legends of Localization: The Legend of Zelda. In the first portion of this two-part review, The Legend of Zelda serves as my map and compass to the symbolic parallels that tie the legend of the Triforce and Spiritual Authority & Temporal Power together.
Part I
Temporal Power
MANY YEARS AGO PRINCE DARKNESS GANNON STOLE ONE OF THE TRIFORCE WITH POWER. PRINCESS ZELDA HAD ONE OF THE TRIFORCE WITH WISDOM. SHE DIVIDED IT INTO ‘8‘ UNITS TO HIDE IT FROM GANNON BEFORE SHE WAS CAPTURED. GO FIND THE ’8‘ UNITS ‘LINK’ TO SAVE HER.This was the nearly the whole story in 1987. As seen from the passable-at-best English phrasing, a book dedicated to parsing meaning from the mangling would be rad; it is. For those of us about to delve into Guénon, it might take us a bit longer to get to find out why “Pols Voice hate loud noises”, but it does come together eventually.
Beside the kismet of the Guénon/Gannon similarity, there isn’t much on the surface that ties the doom of Hyrule to the gloom of modern times. So let us start with what we can: the mysterious Gannon. He stole one of—or perhaps a portion of—the triforce; that of power. “Stole” does connotative duty. It is a normative judgment that Zelda is the rightful controller of both aspects of the triforce. She must have, prior to the theft, maintained both; thus she wielded power through wisdom. Or perhaps she is given power by submitting to wisdom, or balances the two through the grace of the divine. The key is that, before the game begins, Zelda—not Gannon—should has the wisdom necessary to truly wield power.
Gannon, the usurper, has upended the natural order. He has abdicated wisdom by seizing, rather than being granted, power:
The dependence of the temporal power on the spiritual authority has its visible sign in the anointing of kings, who are not truly ‘legitimized’ until they have received investiture and consecration from the hands of the priesthood, implying the transmission of a ‘spiritual influence’ necessary for the regular exercise of their functions.Gannon lacks the blessings of wisdom—Spiritual Authority—to correctly handle Temporal Power. He has not been consecrated. Power through power, through direct action, not contemplative or spiritual guidance, is wrong. And who controls those with power? The Spiritual Authority, which is the wisdom aspect of triforce for Hyrule, and the sacerdotal caste here on earth.
Because Gannon’s rule—begot by strength alone and not through contemplative or spiritual guidance—the land of Hyrule falls to ruin. The Triforce of Wisdom is split into eight holy relicts and monstrous creatures run wild; power without rightful authority has unleashed the beasts of the field. Even as the land itself revolts:
Individualism and naturalism are quite closely interdependent, for they are basically only two aspects of one and the same thing, looked at either with respect to man or to the world; and it may be said generally that ‘naturalistic’ or anti-metaphysical doctrines appear in a civilization when the element representing the temporal power becomes predominant over that representing the spiritual authority.When humanity takes the reigns of it’s own destiny from the hands of the divine, individuality runs amok. Spiritual Authority & Temporal Power is an apocalyptic tome that equates the modern move away from submissive feudal piety with the rampages of Prince Darkness Gannon.
In Guénon’s mind, it is only by subordinating the Temporal to the Spiritual that peace can return to Hyrule—or humanity. But Gannon is a monster—an actual monster—not a Protestant, atheist, or humanist. Guénon, apparently also a monster, dehumanizes and disenfranchises nearly everyone that is not the Pope:
During the Middle Ages there existed throughout the West a real unity, based on properly traditional foundations, which we call ‘Christendom’, but when these secondary unities of a purely political—that is to say temporal and no longer spiritual—order were formed, this great unity of the West was irremediably broken and the effective existence of Christendom came to an end.The conclusion one might be tempted to draw is that Gannon represents secular humanism ripping power away from God and the Church; Zelda—through her quasi-monastic “true” royalty—rules over a kingdom designed pre rights-of-man, pre nationalist revolutions.
This is where the The Legend of Zelda begins to diverge from the conclusions of this irredeemable pile of filth; Who shall stand against the bestial ravages of modernity? Not priest, spiritualist, or truly anointed royal. No, it is a boy, a simple traveler—full of heart [containers]—who begins a journey for the wisdom to return power to the society from whence it was reft:
Wisdom and strength...or, if one prefers, spiritual authority and temporal power; it is interesting to note that among the ancient Egyptians one of the meanings of the symbol of the Sphinx joined precisely these two attributes.Link is more than the “link” between the player and the Hyrule, but the link between wisdom and power, active agency in a stagnant land. He is not subsumed by obsequiousness to Spiritual Authority nor lust for Temporal Power.
The adventure begins at the nadir of spiritual authority for Hyrule. Link stands by himself, with no representative power; he can do nothing but wander. Shortly, a warning is given:
"It is dangerous to go alone! Take this."And so Link takes up the major symbol of Christendom—the cruciform sword—through which he gains agency over the turmoil that besets the land. With his sword, he becomes the true link between earthly strength and holy wisdom.
This symbology run through the whole of The Legend of Zelda; do they serve Guénon regressive vision of society, or will they, in the end, subvert it?
To Be Continued in
The Legend of Spiritual Authority, Part II
October 13, 2022
Guénon discusses the definitions, interaction, history and prognosis of the “spiritual” and the “temporal”. When using these terms, he is explicitly referring to social castes, using Hindu castes as an example, which he says are universal across cultures even if they have different names.
The spiritual is the social caste/class that deals with religious matters/inner world/subjective/contemplation while not wielding physical force. The temporal is the social caste/class that deals with external world/government/strength/action/force. The natural and ideal order of things, according to Guénon, is the spiritual caste on top, then temporal, then the merchants and rest.
He views the modern world as a catastrophe resulting from the centuries long undermining and usurpation of the spiritual caste by the temporal. The temporal had its divine right to rule and all legitimacy due to its subordination to God via the spiritual caste. By freeing itself of the spiritual caste, the temporal ruled alone, but paved the way for the lower castes to do the same thing. The example I liked was the temporal rolled part way down the hill, not realizing it was impossible to stop until it rolled all the way down. The result was the French Revolution overthrowing the temporal power by the merchant caste and then the communist revolutions overthrowing the merchant caste by the lower caste. Each caste is worse at ruling and therefore their time is shorter and shorter. Guénon says the result will be global catastrophe after the lowest caste fails at ruling, followed by the inevitable and irresistible return of the spiritual caste coming out on top.
His basic premise remind me of Nietzsche, where modern man has pulled out the bottom Jenga brick from society and is then shocked when the tower falls. With Nietzsche, he declared God was dead and man therefore had no moral structure to fall back on that did not rely on a deity. With Guénon, he says this was due to class struggle, but with a similar result where society crumbles. However Guénon just says wait and eventually things will go back to normal and Nietzsche says we need to reevaluate all moral values.
Some major critiques I have is Guénon portrays the spiritual caste as an innocent victim. I think they are somewhat complicit in degrading their moral authority, such as dabbling in temporal affairs. Also he states these trends are across all cultures but almost exclusively focuses on India and Europe where there were clear distinctions between the spiritual and temporal castes, however I don’t know how well that would map into the Orthodox and Muslim worlds where it is not as clear cut. Finally, the fact that ALL cultures have this usurpation of spiritual authority is not clearly explained. How is it that the “natural order” is so fragile but also will inevitably rise again? This appeared contradictory to me.
The spiritual is the social caste/class that deals with religious matters/inner world/subjective/contemplation while not wielding physical force. The temporal is the social caste/class that deals with external world/government/strength/action/force. The natural and ideal order of things, according to Guénon, is the spiritual caste on top, then temporal, then the merchants and rest.
He views the modern world as a catastrophe resulting from the centuries long undermining and usurpation of the spiritual caste by the temporal. The temporal had its divine right to rule and all legitimacy due to its subordination to God via the spiritual caste. By freeing itself of the spiritual caste, the temporal ruled alone, but paved the way for the lower castes to do the same thing. The example I liked was the temporal rolled part way down the hill, not realizing it was impossible to stop until it rolled all the way down. The result was the French Revolution overthrowing the temporal power by the merchant caste and then the communist revolutions overthrowing the merchant caste by the lower caste. Each caste is worse at ruling and therefore their time is shorter and shorter. Guénon says the result will be global catastrophe after the lowest caste fails at ruling, followed by the inevitable and irresistible return of the spiritual caste coming out on top.
His basic premise remind me of Nietzsche, where modern man has pulled out the bottom Jenga brick from society and is then shocked when the tower falls. With Nietzsche, he declared God was dead and man therefore had no moral structure to fall back on that did not rely on a deity. With Guénon, he says this was due to class struggle, but with a similar result where society crumbles. However Guénon just says wait and eventually things will go back to normal and Nietzsche says we need to reevaluate all moral values.
Some major critiques I have is Guénon portrays the spiritual caste as an innocent victim. I think they are somewhat complicit in degrading their moral authority, such as dabbling in temporal affairs. Also he states these trends are across all cultures but almost exclusively focuses on India and Europe where there were clear distinctions between the spiritual and temporal castes, however I don’t know how well that would map into the Orthodox and Muslim worlds where it is not as clear cut. Finally, the fact that ALL cultures have this usurpation of spiritual authority is not clearly explained. How is it that the “natural order” is so fragile but also will inevitably rise again? This appeared contradictory to me.
January 29, 2022
the first step on the stair of knowledge
June 2, 2024
"We said earlier that humanity has never been so removed from the 'Terrestrial Paradise' as it is at present; one must not forget however that the end of a cycle coincides with the beginning of another cycle. One need only refer to the Apocalypse to see that the extreme limit of disorder, proceeding toward an apparent annihilation of the 'external world', must bring about the advent of the 'Heavenly Jerusalem' that will be, for a new period of the history of mankind, the analogue of what the 'Terrestrial Paradise' had been to the one that will have ended at that very moment. The identity of the characteristics of the modern epoch with those indicated in the traditional doctrines for the final phases of the Kali-Yuga allow us to imagine without too much implausibility that this eventuality may not lie very far off; and this would most assuredly be the complete triumph of the spiritual after the present period of obscuration."
Engrave this book in my mind for it is now the centre of my world view.
Engrave this book in my mind for it is now the centre of my world view.
September 28, 2023
Never thought I’d rate one of Guenon’s works anything less than a 5. The reason for this is because of a very important problem that is never adequately resolved. Anyone familiar with the Traditionalist school is well aware that Guenon was a “partisan” of the contemplative life versus the path of action, the latter of which he rightly identifies with the temporal power, royalty. In the book, Guenon makes it clear that any power that is not consecrated or transmitted over to royalty from the priesthood is illegitimate and lacking in spiritual justification.
However, he brings up a very important case: the Roman Emperor as Pontifex Maximus, who fulfilled the function of both the priesthood and the royalty. The figure of Janus he frequently employs, he who wields the two keys, is effectively realized in the figure of the Pontifex Maximus. Guenon brings this case up as an anomaly, and even grants it a reserved legitimacy, but at the moment in which further elaboration is called for regarding this important case, he says that doing so would complicate the present study with unimportant considerations. So the figure of the Pontifex Maximus, who is simultaneously pope and emperor, who essentially wields both of the keys of Janus, which would be the most important symbol to consider regarding the subject of the book, is never resolved.
(Janus, in his view, represents the totality of spiritual wisdom, the principle from which all authority descends. Janus himself is undifferentiated spiritual authority; the golden key is in the possession of the priesthood, while the silver key is the possession of the royal power, handed down and legitimized by the former. However, in this symbol, there is no indication that the silver derives it’s raison d’etre from the golden key; Janus is simply he who wields both, and while it is true that gold is “superior” to silver, there is nothing in the symbol that justifies Guenon’s interpretation, which is that the silver key receives it’s power from the golden key.)
He then makes a point that the temporal power should always be subordinate to the priesthood, even in cases where the priestly authority has lost its true center of being, when it no longer fulfills the role of the “axis.” The reason for this, to Guenon, is that no temporal authority is ever qualified to decide whether or not this is the case, and that the mere existence of a priesthood is enough to maintain contact with the “Celestial Paradise”, however distant it may be. In other words, even in cases where the priesthood has become totally corrupted, the only legitimate “action” to be taken is total subservience. My question is why, then, was Dante qualified to critique the papacy in his day? What gave Dante the authority to adequately discern whether or not this was the case? Because Dante was not of the priestly caste (if anything, he was of the temporal power) and if Dante was qualified to make the distinctions, then logically, the royalty should be able to in certain cases as well.
With these considerations, I think I have found the first contention I’ve ever had with Guenon’s philosophy: his inability to resolve the case of Pontifex Maximus, in which the sacred symbol of Janus found its complete expression. And then I remembered who did attempt to resolve this: Julius Evola. For the longest time after reading Guenon, I began to view Evola as a figure far too immersed in the politics of his day, which riddled his work with many confusions and biases, genius as he was. And now I’ve gone full circle and I see the first point of contention Evola had with his former teacher, which caused the major schism in their philosophies. Evola set out to resolve this exact problem, by envisioning a royal power that was not a mere recipient of priestly transmission, but pointing to the fact that there were times when the priesthood and the royalty were brought together in perfect spiritual union. Where the symbol of Janus was actualized in the real world, and the exercise of the priestly power and the temporal power were derived from the same source, the same being; where action and contemplation were united in the figure of the “unmoved mover”, where the distinction of caste in the upper echelons reflected the primordial state of unity more closely than any example Guenon ever pointed to.
These are my present considerations after finishing this book. And perhaps, after much reflection, I will change my view. Guenon would probably claim that I have failed to grasp certain principles that would vindicate his worldview. But because Guenon never adequately elaborates on some of the most important points raised, I am unable to see any other way of viewing the subject.
However, he brings up a very important case: the Roman Emperor as Pontifex Maximus, who fulfilled the function of both the priesthood and the royalty. The figure of Janus he frequently employs, he who wields the two keys, is effectively realized in the figure of the Pontifex Maximus. Guenon brings this case up as an anomaly, and even grants it a reserved legitimacy, but at the moment in which further elaboration is called for regarding this important case, he says that doing so would complicate the present study with unimportant considerations. So the figure of the Pontifex Maximus, who is simultaneously pope and emperor, who essentially wields both of the keys of Janus, which would be the most important symbol to consider regarding the subject of the book, is never resolved.
(Janus, in his view, represents the totality of spiritual wisdom, the principle from which all authority descends. Janus himself is undifferentiated spiritual authority; the golden key is in the possession of the priesthood, while the silver key is the possession of the royal power, handed down and legitimized by the former. However, in this symbol, there is no indication that the silver derives it’s raison d’etre from the golden key; Janus is simply he who wields both, and while it is true that gold is “superior” to silver, there is nothing in the symbol that justifies Guenon’s interpretation, which is that the silver key receives it’s power from the golden key.)
He then makes a point that the temporal power should always be subordinate to the priesthood, even in cases where the priestly authority has lost its true center of being, when it no longer fulfills the role of the “axis.” The reason for this, to Guenon, is that no temporal authority is ever qualified to decide whether or not this is the case, and that the mere existence of a priesthood is enough to maintain contact with the “Celestial Paradise”, however distant it may be. In other words, even in cases where the priesthood has become totally corrupted, the only legitimate “action” to be taken is total subservience. My question is why, then, was Dante qualified to critique the papacy in his day? What gave Dante the authority to adequately discern whether or not this was the case? Because Dante was not of the priestly caste (if anything, he was of the temporal power) and if Dante was qualified to make the distinctions, then logically, the royalty should be able to in certain cases as well.
With these considerations, I think I have found the first contention I’ve ever had with Guenon’s philosophy: his inability to resolve the case of Pontifex Maximus, in which the sacred symbol of Janus found its complete expression. And then I remembered who did attempt to resolve this: Julius Evola. For the longest time after reading Guenon, I began to view Evola as a figure far too immersed in the politics of his day, which riddled his work with many confusions and biases, genius as he was. And now I’ve gone full circle and I see the first point of contention Evola had with his former teacher, which caused the major schism in their philosophies. Evola set out to resolve this exact problem, by envisioning a royal power that was not a mere recipient of priestly transmission, but pointing to the fact that there were times when the priesthood and the royalty were brought together in perfect spiritual union. Where the symbol of Janus was actualized in the real world, and the exercise of the priestly power and the temporal power were derived from the same source, the same being; where action and contemplation were united in the figure of the “unmoved mover”, where the distinction of caste in the upper echelons reflected the primordial state of unity more closely than any example Guenon ever pointed to.
These are my present considerations after finishing this book. And perhaps, after much reflection, I will change my view. Guenon would probably claim that I have failed to grasp certain principles that would vindicate his worldview. But because Guenon never adequately elaborates on some of the most important points raised, I am unable to see any other way of viewing the subject.
August 21, 2013
René Géunon parle dans ce livre du problème du pouvoir entre la vision moderniste et la vision traditionnelle : L'autorité spirituelle est selon lui la plus apte à attribuer le pouvoir temporel aux bonnes personnes, mais la dégénérescence moderne actuelle fait que le spirituel est passé derrière le temporel.
Voici un extrait qui résume bien le point de vue de l'auteur sur la question du pouvoir: (Extrait du chapitre "action et connaissance")
"Il est évident que le pouvoir temporel, sous ses diverses formes militaire,
judiciaire, administrative, est tout entier engagé dans l’action ; il est donc, par ses attributions mêmes, enfermé dans les mêmes limites que celle-ci, c’est-à-dire dans les limites du monde qu’on peut appeler proprement « humain », en comprenant d’ailleurs dans ce terme des possibilités beaucoup plus étendues que celles qu’on y envisage le plus habituellement. Au contraire, l’autorité spirituelle se fonde tout entière sur la connaissance, puisque, comme on l’a vu, sa fonction essentielle est la conservation et l’enseignement de la doctrine, et son domaine est illimité comme la vérité même ; ce qui lui est réservé par la nature même des choses, ce qu’elle ne peut communiquer aux hommes dont les fonctions sont d’un autre ordre, et cela parce que leurs possibilités ne le comportent pas, c’est la connaissance transcendante et « suprême » , celle qui dépasse le domaine « humain » et même, plus généralement,le monde manifesté, celle qui est, non plus « physique », mais « métaphysique » au sens étymologique de ce mot.
[...]
Les hommes qui sont faits pour l’action ne sont pas faits pour la pure connaissance, et, dans une société constituée sur des bases vraiment traditionnelles, chacun doit remplir la fonction pour laquelle il est réellement « qualifié » ; autrement, tout n’est que confusion et désordre, nulle fonction n’est remplie comme elle devrait l’être, et c’est précisément ce qui se produit à l’époque actuelle."
Le passage le plus marrant: (du chapitre II)
Qu’il n’en ait pas toujours été ainsi, le mot même de « clergé » en fournit la preuve, car, originairement, « clerc » ne signifie pas autre chose que « savant », et il s’oppose à « laïque », qui désigne l’homme du peuple, c’est-à-dire du « vulgaire », assimilé à l’ignorant ou au « profane », à qui on ne peut demander que de croire ce qu’il n’est pas capable de comprendre, parce que c’est là le seul moyen de le faire participer à la tradition dans la mesure de ses possibilités10. Il est même curieux de noter que les gens qui, à notre époque, se font gloire de se dire « laïques », tout aussi bien que ceux qui se plaisent à s’intituler « agnostiques », et d’ailleurs ce sont souvent les mêmes, ne font en cela que se vanter de leur propre ignorance ; et pour qu’ils ne se rendent pas compte que tel est le sens des étiquettes dont ils se parent, il faut que cette ignorance soit en effet bien grande et vraiment irrémédiable.
Voici un extrait qui résume bien le point de vue de l'auteur sur la question du pouvoir: (Extrait du chapitre "action et connaissance")
"Il est évident que le pouvoir temporel, sous ses diverses formes militaire,
judiciaire, administrative, est tout entier engagé dans l’action ; il est donc, par ses attributions mêmes, enfermé dans les mêmes limites que celle-ci, c’est-à-dire dans les limites du monde qu’on peut appeler proprement « humain », en comprenant d’ailleurs dans ce terme des possibilités beaucoup plus étendues que celles qu’on y envisage le plus habituellement. Au contraire, l’autorité spirituelle se fonde tout entière sur la connaissance, puisque, comme on l’a vu, sa fonction essentielle est la conservation et l’enseignement de la doctrine, et son domaine est illimité comme la vérité même ; ce qui lui est réservé par la nature même des choses, ce qu’elle ne peut communiquer aux hommes dont les fonctions sont d’un autre ordre, et cela parce que leurs possibilités ne le comportent pas, c’est la connaissance transcendante et « suprême » , celle qui dépasse le domaine « humain » et même, plus généralement,le monde manifesté, celle qui est, non plus « physique », mais « métaphysique » au sens étymologique de ce mot.
[...]
Les hommes qui sont faits pour l’action ne sont pas faits pour la pure connaissance, et, dans une société constituée sur des bases vraiment traditionnelles, chacun doit remplir la fonction pour laquelle il est réellement « qualifié » ; autrement, tout n’est que confusion et désordre, nulle fonction n’est remplie comme elle devrait l’être, et c’est précisément ce qui se produit à l’époque actuelle."
Le passage le plus marrant: (du chapitre II)
Qu’il n’en ait pas toujours été ainsi, le mot même de « clergé » en fournit la preuve, car, originairement, « clerc » ne signifie pas autre chose que « savant », et il s’oppose à « laïque », qui désigne l’homme du peuple, c’est-à-dire du « vulgaire », assimilé à l’ignorant ou au « profane », à qui on ne peut demander que de croire ce qu’il n’est pas capable de comprendre, parce que c’est là le seul moyen de le faire participer à la tradition dans la mesure de ses possibilités10. Il est même curieux de noter que les gens qui, à notre époque, se font gloire de se dire « laïques », tout aussi bien que ceux qui se plaisent à s’intituler « agnostiques », et d’ailleurs ce sont souvent les mêmes, ne font en cela que se vanter de leur propre ignorance ; et pour qu’ils ne se rendent pas compte que tel est le sens des étiquettes dont ils se parent, il faut que cette ignorance soit en effet bien grande et vraiment irrémédiable.
February 9, 2025
“certainly not the 'two halves of God' as Victor Hugo wrote but much more precisely the two halves of the Christ-Janus figure which certain representations depict holding a key in one hand and a scepter in the other, emblems respectively of the priesty and royal powers united in this figure as in their common principle. A This symbolic assimilation of Christ with Janus as the supreme principle of the two powers is the very clear sign of a certain traditional continuity (too often ignored or deliberately denied) between ancient Rome and Christian Rome; and we must not forget that in the Middle Ages the empire was just as 'Roman' as the papacy. But this same figure also explains the error we just pointed out and which was to prove fatal for the empire: this error lies, in brief, in regarding as equivalent the two faces of Janus; these are indeed so in appearance but, when they represent both the spiritual and the temporal, cannot be so in reality. In other words, it is again the error of mistaking the relationship of the two powers for one of coordination, whereas it is really one of subordination, because once they are separated the one proceeds directly from the supreme principle while the other does so only indirectly”
“If we consider religion in particular, since this is the special form that the spiritual takes in the Western world, this reversal of relations can be expressed in the following way: instead of regarding the entire social order as deriving from religion, as being suspended from it so to speak and finding its principle therein (as was the case in medieval Christendom, and as it was equally in Islam, which is quite similar to it in this respect), today people see religion at most only as one element of the social order, one element among others of equal value. This is the enslavement of the spiritual to the temporal, even its absorption by it, pending the inevitable complete negation. To consider things in this way amounts perforce to 'humanizing religion, that is, to treating religion as a purely human fact of the social order, or better still, of the
'sociological' or psychological order, depending on one's preference.
In truth, this is no longer religion, for religion essentially includes something 'supra-human' lacking which we are no longer in the spiritual domain, for the temporal and the human are essentially identical, as we explained earlier. Thus we have here a veritable implicit negation of religion and the spiritual, whatever the appearances may be, a negation such that the explicit and avowed negation will amount less to the establishment of a new order than simply to the recognition of a fait accompli. In this way the reversal of relations prepares directly for the suppression of the superior term-something it already implies, at least virtually-just as the revolt of the Kshatriyas against the authority of the Brahmins prepares for and summons as it were the ascendancy of the lowest castes, as we shall see. And those who have followed us this far will easily understand that there is something more in this parallel than a simple comparison.”
“This is why one sometimes encounters similar situations which, if one neglects their differences and focuses only on their similarities, can give the illusion of a repetition. In reality, there is never identity between different periods of history, but there is correspondence and analogy, just as there is between the cosmic cycles or the multiple states of a being; and just as different beings can pass through similar phases-with the one reservation that there are modalities proper to the nature of each of them-so too can peoples and civilizations.
Despite very great differences, then, there is, as we have shown above, an incontestable analogy (perhaps never sufficiently remarked upon before) between the social organization of India and that of the Western Middle Ages; between the castes of the one and the classes of the other there is only a correspondence, not an iden-tity, but this correspondence is nonetheless of the greatest importance because it serves to show with particular clarity that all institutions presenting a truly traditional character rest on the same natural foundations and in the final analysis differ from one another only by the adaptations required by varying circumstances of time and place”
“One might doubtless wonder why such a conception has remained an ideal that was never to be realized; and it is strange that at the very time Dante formulated it events current in Europe were precisely such as to forever preclude its realization. Dante's corpus as a whole is in certain respects like a testament to the closing medieval age; it shows what the Western world would have been had it not broken from its tradition. But that the modern deviation did take place shows that this world really did not contain such possibil-ities, or at least that they were no more than the privilege of an already restricted elite that doubtless realized them to its own benefit, though without being able to pass them on to be reflected in the social organization.”
“in the human domain it manifests itself through what is called injustice, for there is an identity between the notions of justice, order, equilibrium, and harmony; or, to be more precise, these are only diverse aspects of one and the same thing envisaged in different and multiple ways according to the domains to which they apply.? Now, according to Far-Eastern doctrine, justice is composed of the sum of all injustices, and in the total order all disorders are compensated by other disorders; this is why the revolution that overthrows the monarchy is both the logical result and the punishment, that is to say the balancing compensa-tion, of the prior revolt of that same monarchy against the spiritual authority. Law is repudiated from the moment one denies the very principle from which it emanates; but the deniers could not really suppress it, and so it recoils upon them; thus does disorder finally return again to order, against which nothing can stand except in appearance and in an altogether illusory way.
Some will no doubt object that the revolution by which the power of the inferior castes was substituted for that of the Kshatri-yas was only a worsening of that disorder, and this is certainly true it one considers only the immediate results; but it is precisely that worsening which prevents disorder from continuing indefinitely. If the temporal power did not lose its stability by the very fact that it ignored its subordination to the spiritual authority, there would be no reason for disorder to cease once it is introduced into the social organization. But to speak of the stability of disorder amounts to a contradiction in terms, for disorder is nothing but change reduced to itself so to speak, and this would be tantamount to asserting immobility in movement. When disorder is accentuated movement is accelerated, for one more step is taken in the direction of pure change and of 'instantaneity'; this is why, as we were saying earlier, the more inferior are the prevailing social elements, the less durable is their domination, for like everything that has only a negative eristence disorder destrovs itself.“
“If that truth were recognized even by a small number it would still be a result of considerable importance, for it is only in this way that a change of orientation leading to a restoration of the normal order can begin; and that restoration, whatever may be its means and modalities, will necessarily take place sooner or later—a point to which we now turn.”
“If we consider religion in particular, since this is the special form that the spiritual takes in the Western world, this reversal of relations can be expressed in the following way: instead of regarding the entire social order as deriving from religion, as being suspended from it so to speak and finding its principle therein (as was the case in medieval Christendom, and as it was equally in Islam, which is quite similar to it in this respect), today people see religion at most only as one element of the social order, one element among others of equal value. This is the enslavement of the spiritual to the temporal, even its absorption by it, pending the inevitable complete negation. To consider things in this way amounts perforce to 'humanizing religion, that is, to treating religion as a purely human fact of the social order, or better still, of the
'sociological' or psychological order, depending on one's preference.
In truth, this is no longer religion, for religion essentially includes something 'supra-human' lacking which we are no longer in the spiritual domain, for the temporal and the human are essentially identical, as we explained earlier. Thus we have here a veritable implicit negation of religion and the spiritual, whatever the appearances may be, a negation such that the explicit and avowed negation will amount less to the establishment of a new order than simply to the recognition of a fait accompli. In this way the reversal of relations prepares directly for the suppression of the superior term-something it already implies, at least virtually-just as the revolt of the Kshatriyas against the authority of the Brahmins prepares for and summons as it were the ascendancy of the lowest castes, as we shall see. And those who have followed us this far will easily understand that there is something more in this parallel than a simple comparison.”
“This is why one sometimes encounters similar situations which, if one neglects their differences and focuses only on their similarities, can give the illusion of a repetition. In reality, there is never identity between different periods of history, but there is correspondence and analogy, just as there is between the cosmic cycles or the multiple states of a being; and just as different beings can pass through similar phases-with the one reservation that there are modalities proper to the nature of each of them-so too can peoples and civilizations.
Despite very great differences, then, there is, as we have shown above, an incontestable analogy (perhaps never sufficiently remarked upon before) between the social organization of India and that of the Western Middle Ages; between the castes of the one and the classes of the other there is only a correspondence, not an iden-tity, but this correspondence is nonetheless of the greatest importance because it serves to show with particular clarity that all institutions presenting a truly traditional character rest on the same natural foundations and in the final analysis differ from one another only by the adaptations required by varying circumstances of time and place”
“One might doubtless wonder why such a conception has remained an ideal that was never to be realized; and it is strange that at the very time Dante formulated it events current in Europe were precisely such as to forever preclude its realization. Dante's corpus as a whole is in certain respects like a testament to the closing medieval age; it shows what the Western world would have been had it not broken from its tradition. But that the modern deviation did take place shows that this world really did not contain such possibil-ities, or at least that they were no more than the privilege of an already restricted elite that doubtless realized them to its own benefit, though without being able to pass them on to be reflected in the social organization.”
“in the human domain it manifests itself through what is called injustice, for there is an identity between the notions of justice, order, equilibrium, and harmony; or, to be more precise, these are only diverse aspects of one and the same thing envisaged in different and multiple ways according to the domains to which they apply.? Now, according to Far-Eastern doctrine, justice is composed of the sum of all injustices, and in the total order all disorders are compensated by other disorders; this is why the revolution that overthrows the monarchy is both the logical result and the punishment, that is to say the balancing compensa-tion, of the prior revolt of that same monarchy against the spiritual authority. Law is repudiated from the moment one denies the very principle from which it emanates; but the deniers could not really suppress it, and so it recoils upon them; thus does disorder finally return again to order, against which nothing can stand except in appearance and in an altogether illusory way.
Some will no doubt object that the revolution by which the power of the inferior castes was substituted for that of the Kshatri-yas was only a worsening of that disorder, and this is certainly true it one considers only the immediate results; but it is precisely that worsening which prevents disorder from continuing indefinitely. If the temporal power did not lose its stability by the very fact that it ignored its subordination to the spiritual authority, there would be no reason for disorder to cease once it is introduced into the social organization. But to speak of the stability of disorder amounts to a contradiction in terms, for disorder is nothing but change reduced to itself so to speak, and this would be tantamount to asserting immobility in movement. When disorder is accentuated movement is accelerated, for one more step is taken in the direction of pure change and of 'instantaneity'; this is why, as we were saying earlier, the more inferior are the prevailing social elements, the less durable is their domination, for like everything that has only a negative eristence disorder destrovs itself.“
“If that truth were recognized even by a small number it would still be a result of considerable importance, for it is only in this way that a change of orientation leading to a restoration of the normal order can begin; and that restoration, whatever may be its means and modalities, will necessarily take place sooner or later—a point to which we now turn.”
May 23, 2023
الكتاب مهم جدا ككل كتب الشيخ عبد الواحد يحيى.. تحفظي الوحيد على الترجمة؛ آظنها كان ممكن تكون أفضل من كده.
March 6, 2023
Found this very helpful! Spiritual Authority and Temporal Power is a short, more straightforward but in our opinion very crucial Guenon text, for 1) understanding the relationship between Guenon's weltanshauung (a particulary Brahmin type perspective), and that of the other "big name" in Traditionalism- Julius Evola (who is typically characterized as offering a more Kshatriya type perspective), as well as 2) understanding our particular position in Kali, where the perspectives of the other varnas- the Vaishya and the Shudra, are liable to be the more dominant positions.
Guenon's basic gripe is that once the Kshatriya class- whose proper place is to mediate temporal power: regal authority, military and law enforcement etc, the coup cannot stop there, since the entire social framework becomes unbalanced, and the temporal powers are soon to be inevitably unseated by the Vaishya (who likely played a supporting role in the original rebellion against spiritual authority). The most interesting part here is that Guenon seems to both welcome and dread this necessary unfolding of revolt, and the inevitable move towards the rule of Shudra, which he explicitly identifies with "Bolshevism". We however will maintain our firm amor fati and "where an idol totters, also push it over!" The future may appear bleak to some, but the rule of the Shudra- for a time and in its proper place, seems to us to be the most necessary thing now! This is the end of our cycle.. and so it is high time that "the first be made last and the last be made first!"
Guenon's basic gripe is that once the Kshatriya class- whose proper place is to mediate temporal power: regal authority, military and law enforcement etc, the coup cannot stop there, since the entire social framework becomes unbalanced, and the temporal powers are soon to be inevitably unseated by the Vaishya (who likely played a supporting role in the original rebellion against spiritual authority). The most interesting part here is that Guenon seems to both welcome and dread this necessary unfolding of revolt, and the inevitable move towards the rule of Shudra, which he explicitly identifies with "Bolshevism". We however will maintain our firm amor fati and "where an idol totters, also push it over!" The future may appear bleak to some, but the rule of the Shudra- for a time and in its proper place, seems to us to be the most necessary thing now! This is the end of our cycle.. and so it is high time that "the first be made last and the last be made first!"
November 3, 2025
One of Guenon's more accessible works, having been written as a response to a crisis between the Action Francaise and the Catholic Church. In this book he affirms the superiority of spiritual authority, or the clergy, over that of temporal power, or the monarchical government. The main argument features an analog between the Hindu caste system and the European feudal system, as well as that of the regression of the castes. It would have been interesting to see what Guenon would have thought if he had lived to see Vatican II; however, judging by the explicit polemic that a decadent spiritual authority will always have precedence over the most righteous temporal power, it seems clear cut that he would take the side of the Church even to this day.
This uncompromising viewpoint is what hampers this book in my eyes. Having lived through the papacy of Francis, it is much easier to side with Evola in his analysis of the Church as being a residue. Nevertheless, this book is relevant insofar as we remember the current phenomenon of modern day integralists such as Nick Fuentes, who will most likely come into conflict with a liberal Vatican forever shaped by Francis. As we saw with Action Francaise, such a possibility should not be disregarded as fantastical.
This uncompromising viewpoint is what hampers this book in my eyes. Having lived through the papacy of Francis, it is much easier to side with Evola in his analysis of the Church as being a residue. Nevertheless, this book is relevant insofar as we remember the current phenomenon of modern day integralists such as Nick Fuentes, who will most likely come into conflict with a liberal Vatican forever shaped by Francis. As we saw with Action Francaise, such a possibility should not be disregarded as fantastical.
March 21, 2022
A short work that normal. A brief summary of the counter currents of religion and government so to speak. It did not make much of an impression on me, but I suspect that due to its briefness it is meant to be viewed as part of a larger work.
May 15, 2022
Basically, everything goes to shit when the warriors don’t realize their own place- subordinate to priestly castes.
May 7, 2017
-UNNECESSARY NOISE PROHIBITED-
![]()
" Parmi ceux qui voudraient tenter une restauration de l’intellectualité, combien en est-il qui ne la rabaissent pas au niveau d’une simple « philosophie », entendue cette fois su sens habituel et « profane » de ce mot, et qui comprennent que, dans leur essence et dans leur réalité profonde, intellectualité et spiritualité ne sont absolument qu’une seule et même chose sous deux noms différents ? Parmi ceux qui ont gardé malgré tout quelque chose de l’esprit traditionnel, et nous ne parlons que de ceux-là parce que ce sont les seuls dont la pensée puisse avoir pour nous quelque valeur, combien en est-il qui envisagent la vérité pour elle-même, d’une façon entièrement désintéressée, indépendante de toute préoccupation sentimentale, de toute passion de parti ou d’école, de tout souci de domination ou de prosélytisme ? Parmi ceux qui, pour échapper an chaos social où se débat le monde occidental, comprennent qu’il faut, avant tout, dénoncer la vanité des illusions « démocratiques » et « égalitaires », combien en est-il qui aient la notion d’une vraie hiérarchie, basée essentiellement sur les différences inhérentes à la nature propre des êtres humains et sur les degrés de connaissance auxquels ceux-ci sont parvenus effectivement ? Parmi ceux qui se déclarent adversaires de l’« individualisme », combien en est-il qui aient en eux la conscience d’une réalité transcendante par rapport aux individus ? Si nous posons ici toutes ces questions, c’est qu’elles permettront, à ceux qui voudront bien y réfléchir, de trouver l’explication de l’inutilité de certains efforts, en dépit des excellentes intentions dont sont sans doute animés ceux qui les entreprennent, ..."
" Parmi ceux qui voudraient tenter une restauration de l’intellectualité, combien en est-il qui ne la rabaissent pas au niveau d’une simple « philosophie », entendue cette fois su sens habituel et « profane » de ce mot, et qui comprennent que, dans leur essence et dans leur réalité profonde, intellectualité et spiritualité ne sont absolument qu’une seule et même chose sous deux noms différents ? Parmi ceux qui ont gardé malgré tout quelque chose de l’esprit traditionnel, et nous ne parlons que de ceux-là parce que ce sont les seuls dont la pensée puisse avoir pour nous quelque valeur, combien en est-il qui envisagent la vérité pour elle-même, d’une façon entièrement désintéressée, indépendante de toute préoccupation sentimentale, de toute passion de parti ou d’école, de tout souci de domination ou de prosélytisme ? Parmi ceux qui, pour échapper an chaos social où se débat le monde occidental, comprennent qu’il faut, avant tout, dénoncer la vanité des illusions « démocratiques » et « égalitaires », combien en est-il qui aient la notion d’une vraie hiérarchie, basée essentiellement sur les différences inhérentes à la nature propre des êtres humains et sur les degrés de connaissance auxquels ceux-ci sont parvenus effectivement ? Parmi ceux qui se déclarent adversaires de l’« individualisme », combien en est-il qui aient en eux la conscience d’une réalité transcendante par rapport aux individus ? Si nous posons ici toutes ces questions, c’est qu’elles permettront, à ceux qui voudront bien y réfléchir, de trouver l’explication de l’inutilité de certains efforts, en dépit des excellentes intentions dont sont sans doute animés ceux qui les entreprennent, ..."
March 4, 2013
These are Guenon's views, not necessarily mine:
In some ways this book is a response to certain religio-political questions formed in the early 20th century, as opposed to Guenon's more typical explication of esoteric doctrines. As such, this book has a more "Western" focus, though he does clarify some Hindu doctrines on political power. Not dissimilar to Gelasius' two-swords doctrine, Guenon notes that the "Tradition" also had a dual focus of power between royalty and priesthood. Since royalty represents "temporal" power and religion "eternal" truths, it doesn't take much imagination to see which one will have lasting influence (in Guenon's mind).
That's not to say that the monarchy is markedly inferior. Viewed as a harmony, it's not. Further, the monarch, pace Guenon, can function as a symbol of the society's traditions. We can view it another way: if religion refers to the inner, and temporal power the outer, then one can surely see the outer manifesting the truths of the inner. In short, the monarch is the icon of tradition's values.
It's an interesting read and will spark discussion.
In some ways this book is a response to certain religio-political questions formed in the early 20th century, as opposed to Guenon's more typical explication of esoteric doctrines. As such, this book has a more "Western" focus, though he does clarify some Hindu doctrines on political power. Not dissimilar to Gelasius' two-swords doctrine, Guenon notes that the "Tradition" also had a dual focus of power between royalty and priesthood. Since royalty represents "temporal" power and religion "eternal" truths, it doesn't take much imagination to see which one will have lasting influence (in Guenon's mind).
That's not to say that the monarchy is markedly inferior. Viewed as a harmony, it's not. Further, the monarch, pace Guenon, can function as a symbol of the society's traditions. We can view it another way: if religion refers to the inner, and temporal power the outer, then one can surely see the outer manifesting the truths of the inner. In short, the monarch is the icon of tradition's values.
It's an interesting read and will spark discussion.
December 19, 2007
Algo deberían aprender nuestros líderes religiosos de lo que se manifiesta en este tratado, que han dejado fuera la autoridad espiritual que supuestamente representan en pos de ganancias obscenas que no podrían agotarse en muchas vidas, el resultado es una degeneración física evidente.
Qué poder se niegan, y que vacío dejan detrás, a merced de cualquiera que se anuncie y se crea un mesías. Es un abismo que se repite una y otra vez. Es sólo un hombre.
La ausencia épica destierra, despatria...
Qué poder se niegan, y que vacío dejan detrás, a merced de cualquiera que se anuncie y se crea un mesías. Es un abismo que se repite una y otra vez. Es sólo un hombre.
La ausencia épica destierra, despatria...
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews