|
|
Volume XIII:1 January - June 2023
.jpg)
Converging Wisdom:
Questioning the Continued Relevance of the Perennial Philosophy
On October 2-4, 2022 an international conference on the perennial philosophy was held at the University of Notre Dame. The conference was underwritten with generous financial support from DIM•MID, Notre Dame, and other U.S. institutions. The great majority of the presenters at the conference were practitioner-scholars representing some of the great world religions, and a number of them were leading advocates of the perennial philosophy. Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism were especially well represented among those giving talks. The keynote speaker was Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the most influential perennialist thinker in the world today.
The purpose of the conference was to investigate whether and to what degree the claims of the perennial philosophy – also called “perennialism” - are still relevant and credible today. This was in response to academic developments in recent decades that have marked a shift away from recognizing what unites the religions and what they have in common to the more commonly accepted contemporary approach that emphasizes the particularities of each religion and what makes it unique and even incommensurable with the others.
Of late, academic discourse has thus tended to shy away from grand religious theories that would draw sweeping conclusions about multiple religions and their spiritual value, such as those propounded by perennialism. The perennial philosophy teaches that there is one transcendent Reality, one supreme and eternal Truth that has manifested itself throughout history as a primordial wisdom accessible to all people and in various ways in their religions and even outside of religion. And while the divergent and even conflicting teachings of the religions would seem to speak against such a common wisdom, perennialists assert that there does nevertheless exist a common core of salvific truth shared by the many religions. Thus, the changing world of multiplicity is understood to derive its meaning from its relation to an ontologically more real eternal Absolute; the human person bears within it a natural orientation to this Absolute; and the final goal of life is the attainment of unity with the ultimate Reality.
The perennialist assertion here is not that people of the different religions are making exactly the same inner liberating experience (a charge often leveled at perennialists by their detractors), only giving it diverging names and expressions unavoidably shaped by the cultural presuppositions of their time. Rather the followers of the different religions are said to apprehend the supreme Truth in quite different and distinct ways, but ways that also manifest common spiritual principles that derive from a single transcendent Source. The analogy sometimes given is that of a pure light passing through a glass prism to reveal a spectrum of differing colors. All the colors are united in their source, and yet each is truly distinct and different from all the others. Is this the proper way to understand the many religions? Do they really have one Source deliberately expressing itself in different ways or is this a simplistic approach to understanding religious pluralism today? Does such a theology of religions fall short of doing justice to the uniqueness and distinctiveness of each religious tradition?
That the doctrines of the various religions often contradict one another is the main theoretical problem that is not satisfactorily answered by perennialism, according to its critics. But religious teachings, according to perennialist thinkers, are not simply expressions of the human search for truth and liberation; they are in fact purposely revealed by the eternal divine for the benefit of humanity. This means that the supreme reality providentially and intentionally reveals truths that, while at first sight appearing to be contradictory, ultimately show themselves to be indispensable symbols and channels of the Supreme, each manifestation being the most appropriate and suitable one given to each historically and culturally situated people. Of course, notions of revelation originating in divine intention necessarily imply a personal nature to that same divine. It is perhaps for that reason, among others, that some Buddhist thinkers were reluctant to present talks at this conference. Their perspective on these issues and their critique were sorely missed.
The term “Perennial Philosophy” itself did not appear until the sixteenth century in Italy (as philosophia perennis), but its central idea has been around since antiquity, especially with the engagement of early Christian thinkers with Greek and Roman philosophy. It originally signified an inner harmony of ancient Greek thought with Christian teaching. And, as is well known, in modern times perennialism was made popular by Aldous Huxley in his famous 1945 book, The Perennial Philosophy,[1] whereby the experiences and teachings of the great world religions were also now included and not just ancient philosophies. However, many perennialist thinkers today consider Huxley’s approach to be deficient and outdated, in part because of his readiness to allow the highest mystical awareness to be available to the lone seeker, independent of its of connection to any spiritual or religious community or tradition. By contrast, most advocates of perennialism today emphasize the necessity of belonging to a religious community, under the wise guidance of a spiritual master. Huxley was also criticized for favoring non-dual awareness as the pinnacle of spiritual insight, thereby relegating mysticisms centering on divine love to a lower status.
The Notre Dame conference frequently centered its attention on the modern expression of the perennial philosophy as represented by the so-called “Traditionalist School,” whose leading thinkers are from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The mantle of this school has been passed on from Rene Guenon (1886-1951) to Frithjof Schuon (1907-1998) and now to Seyyed Hossein Nasr (1933-). But, among perennialists, Schuon continues to exert the greatest influence, and Nasr faithfully continues his teachings. The Traditionalist School is not without its particular critics, however. Among the standard criticisms leveled against it is its alleged wholesale rejection of modernity. However, as Nasr has frequently pointed out and repeated in his keynote address, it is not modernity as a whole that is being rejected, but rather its enslavement to relativism, rationalism, and materialism, all of which obscure awareness of what is timeless and transcendent.
Schuon’s work found strong support among some of the conference presenters, a number of whom knew him personally during his many years (1980-1998) in Bloomington, Indiana. Among them was Michael Fitzgerald, author and editor of books on world religions, sacred art, tradition, and culture, who presented on the wisdom of Native American tribes. Other proponents of Schuon’s work at the conference were Harry Oldmeadow of Australia, who delivered a talk entitled, “Primordial Wisdom, Perennialism and the Challenges of Modernity.”[2] and Adnan Aslan of Turkey, an expert on the similarities and differences of Seyyed Nasr and John Hick with regard to interpretations of contemporary religious pluralism.Another well-known proponent of Schuon’s work was Reza Shah-Kazemi of the UK, who delivered a talk called “Frithjof Schuon and the Perennial Relevance of Primordial Nature (al-fitra).” Shah-Kazemi’s own work is wide-ranging, including comparative studies of different religions with a focus on converging spiritual insights.[3] Similar in that regard is Patrick Laude of France, whose talk was titled, “Reflections on Esoterism and the Law.”[4]
Various alternatives to Schuon’s teachings on spiritual wisdom were offered, as well as strong critiques. Foremost among the critiques was the presentation of Perry Schmidt-Leukel of Germany in his “Muslim-Buddhist Dialogue and the Contribution of Frithjof Schuon.” While acknowledging the achievement of Schuon, Schmidt-Leukel went on to criticize Schuon for his “excessive and more or less undifferentiated rejection of modernity, his inappropriate epistemic self-certainty, his all too easy readiness to condemn those who hold different opinions or follow different methods such as in historical or historical-critical studies of religious texts, his overall elistist demeanor, his insufficient and highly problematic discussion of religiously motivated violence.”
Catherine Cornille of Boston College, in her “Tracing Perennial Philosophy in Comparative Theology,” and during her subsequent exchange with audience members, expressed concern that the perennialist endeavor to uncover the one supreme Truth behind the particular individual traditions was in danger of undervaluing that same particularity as integral to each religion’s identity and self-understanding. By contrast, the modern method of comparative theology gives greater attention to the particular and what is unique to individual traditions. She worried that the unique features and teachings of the individual religions were in danger of being undervalued by perennialists. She pointed this out as someone who does in fact value the perennialist teaching of seeing real and at times surprising convergence of mystical experience across religious boundaries.
Steven Taylor, senior lecturer in psychology at Leeds Beckett University in the UK, took the novel approach of focusing on perennialist phenomenology instead of on perennialist philosophy. He called this approach “soft perennialism,” which leaves aside questions about the nature of the Absolute and its connection to revealed religious doctrine and focused instead on the commonalities of ego-transcending experiences found around the world, i.e., experiences of a sudden and unexpected breakthrough into an expansive state of awareness involving the dissolution of the old sense of self, in what Taylor called an “identity shift.” Such a breakthrough experience of transcendence and freedom, according to recent research, is surprisingly widespread and found even more often outside of religion and religious practice than connected to it. Soft perennialism, Taylor added, does not necessarily invalidate the perennial philosophy, but it does not go far as to assert a single eternal Truth manifesting itself in the conflicting doctrines of the world religions, as the perennial philosophy is wont to do.
One of the conference panels was entirely comprised of Hindu voices: Anantanand Rambachan delivered a talk on “The Perennial Philosophy and Advaita (Nondual) Vedanta,” Jeffery Long spoke on “A Universal Religion? The Perenniality of Vedanta in the Thought of Swami Vivekananda,” and Swami Medhananda (Ayon Maharaj), a monk of the Ramakrishna Order at the Vedanta Society of Southern California, presented on “Sri Ramakrishna’s Vijnana Vedanta as a Perennial Philosophy.” Medhananda summarized some of the material found in his famous 2018 book, Infinite Paths to Infinite Reality: Sri Ramakrishna and Cross-Cultural Philosophy of Religion.[5] Basing himself on the teachings of the 19th-century Hindu sage, Sri Ramakrishna, who enjoyed a wide range of mystical experiences, both relational-devotional as well as impersonal and monistic, Medhananda summarized Ramakrishna’s teaching as a passing beyond merely witnessing to a variety of mystical experiences to assert that that the variability and particularity of such experiences were not so much derived from the influence of the mystics’ cultures and religious affiliations as they were caused by the very different intentional manifestations of the “impersonal-personal Infinite Reality” to human beings. The supreme Reality itself is characterized by both theistic and non-theistic principles and freely – and playfully – reveals itself in strikingly different ways that often enough do not conform to the spiritual aspirant’s expectations.
Bradley Malkovsky of Notre Dame presented his talk on “Bede Griffiths and the Problem of Reconciling Christian Claims about Christ with the Perennial Philosophy.” Griffiths enthusiastically supported the perennial philosophy, especially as articulated in the writings of Seyyed Nasr, but he also embraced a position that placed him outside mainstream perennialism. He recognized that there was truth and salvation mediated through all religions by God. But he also affirmed the ultimacy of the foundational teachings of Christianity that had been revealed in Christ. He saw them as non-negotiable truths. He understood Christ as the key to understanding God’s will and intent for all of humanity. Father Bede thus advocated what might be called a “Christ-centered Perennialism.”
Other conference speakers, presenting on a wide range of topics, included David Bentley Hart, Charles Upton, Carol Zaleski, Jeremy Brown, Trent Pomplun, Mateus Soares de Azevedo, and Alireza K. Ziarani. All the conference talks can be found online.
It is expected that a book will appear within a year or two, in which all the conference presentations will be found, as well as contributions by other well-known scholars who did not attend this spiritual gathering.
Notes
[1] Aldous Huxley, the Perennial Philosophy (NY: Harper & Brothers, 1945).
[2] DIM•MID readers might be familiar with Oldmeadow’s famous book, A Christian Pilgrim in India: The Spiritual Journey of Swami Abhishiktananda (Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom, 2007).
[3] See, for example, his Paths to Transcendence: According to Shankara, Ibn Arabi, and Meister Eckhart (Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom, 2006).
[4] Among his many books, see most recently Laude’s Surrendering to the Self: Ramana Maharshi’s Message for the Present (London: C. Hurst & Co., 2022).
[5] Oxford University Press. |
_Web.jpg) |