Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Frithjof Schuon: Child molestation and Obstruction of Justice

Frithjof Schuon: Child molestation and Obstruction of Justice


I have changed my mind and decided to put some of the evidence about the Schuon cult on the Internet. I have hesitated out of fear of the fact that the cult has maliciously prosecuted many of their critics in an effort to intimidate and silence freedom of speech. But I think it is important this information be made public at last. What follows are selections from research conducted by me over a seven year period, 1991-98. I quote materials that are copyrighted within the guidelines of US law which states that one may quote copyrighted material for "criticism", "comment" and as part of "research". The following is the result of research, and to criticize and comment. Much of the research was done by me during projects involved with getting my Master's Thesis in history completed. The following information was also gathered as part of an effort to build a legal case against members of the Schuon cult. I am not seeking now to pursue a legal remedy. I would much prefer a non-legal solution be found. The copyrights of the cult members do not supersede the right of the truth to be known, since the truth involves an obstruction of justice and the corruption of minors. Copyright law cannot be used to silence those with information about felony crimes and misdemeanors. Nor do copyrights of members of the cult constitute sufficient legal ground to stop public access to information germane to proving criminal and civil wrong doing. Everything I have written here is true to the best of my knowledge. If anyone can show me that what I have written is factually untrue, and their case seems reasonable and uninspired by the cults tendency to lie, fabricate and falsify I will accommodate what they say and change my text. Frithjof Schuon was the head of a religious cult centered in Bloomington, Indiana. He died on May 5th 1998. Some of Schuon's more well known disciples are Huston Smith, the author of The World's Religions; Joseph Epes Brown, the author of The Sacred Pipe, Hossein Nasr, Martin Lings and Rama Coomaraswamy. Schuon has, or had, four wives. There names are Catherine Schuon, Barbara Perry, Sharlyn Romaine and Maude Murray. The latter, apparently, was "spiritually divorced" from Schuon and has been thrown out of the cult, as of 1995.

On October 11th 1991, Frithjof Schuon, the leader of an international religious order, was indicted on the felony charge of child molestation. committed under "cult pressure and influence". The indictment, passed down by a five member Grand Jury, headed by Lucy Cherbas, stated:

"that Frithjof Schuon... did perform fondling or touching [on three girls] 15 years of age, 14 years of age and 13 years of age, respectively, with the intent to arouse or satisfy sexual desires of Frithjof Schuon, in violation of I.C. 35-42 43. [And that] said persons were compelled to submit to touching by force or imminent threat of force, to wit: by undue cult influences and cult pressures, in violation of 35-42-4-8."

The case was mysteriously dropped, and the assistant prosecutor who handled the case, David Hunter, was fired. This despite the unanimous indictment of the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury tried to reconvene and investigate the head prosecutor, Robert Miller, because they suspected him of corruption on various grounds. Lucy Cherbas told me she hoped to reopen the case against Schuon: she was sure he was guilty. David Hunter claimed to me repeatedly that they case had been dropped for "political" reasons, and he said he suspected that the cult had engineered this behind the scenes, possibly through bribery. But let me make this clear. My effort was to expose Schuon as a fraud not to put him in jail. I was led to the child molestation charge by the prosecutor, the police Sargeant Richardson, Rama Coomaraswamy, Wolfgang Smith, Scott Whittaker, Mary Ann Danner, my mother among others. . Please notice that the Grand Jury thought there was enough to convict Schuon in 1991. That is not nothing... There is a lot more evidence now that there was in 1991. Schuon would be convicted of the crime were a case brought now and he were still alive. But again, to convict him was not my aim. I was concerned to expose a fraud. It is enough that he is known as a polygamous pretender and a man who abused his power, did harm to children and was not at all what he claimed to be. When I helped bring the case in 1991 I knew that the cult people would all lie in court. I knew I would probably lose. But I felt it was essential that Schuon be exposed and a court was the best way to do it. I knew the cult would attack me viciously and try to destroy my credibility. But I thought that by exposing this man I would help many people see through the lie of his claim to holiness. Many people did indeed leave the cult and Schuon is largely discredited now except among a shrinking circle of fanatical followers.

New evidence has been forthcoming since 1991. There is now enough evidence not only to prove that Schuon is guilty of the felony crime of child molestation but also that Michael Fitzgerald, Sharlyn Romaine, Michael Pollock, among others conspired to obstruct justice on Schuon's behalf and with Schuon's advice and encouragement.. The purpose af airing this evidence is not to convict a dead man. But merely to supply history with a record of true events.

Molestation was not my main concern. Telling the truth was my main concern. This is reflected in the documents I have gathered. Yes there were young girls molested by Schuon. As I show below, it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Frithjof Schuon did molest or fondle inappropriately, a number of young women at Primordial Gatherings in 1991. What Schuon did was not a horrible thing in the sense that there was no penetration: he did not rape or murder anyone. Unable to get erections at age 84 he felt a need to press his penis against 30 or 40 women all of whom gave him their bodes in an act of worship and veneration for a man who had serious delusions of grandeur, delusions, moreover partly create and sustained by the very women who embraced him. It was a pathetic event, more than a terrible one. It is true that there was not sufficient evidence to convict him in 1991, but it is clear now that there were young girls who were molested in a cult environment, under cult pressure, and in order to fulfill the megalomaniac needs of a cult leader. My concern was to be a witness about this. I was not out for revenge or motivated by malice, greed or any of the low and base motives attributed to me.

What follows is a small selection of some of the evidence for this case.

I recorded in a privately distributed book called "the Account", in 1991 the following description of the Primordial Gatherings, which are the private events or ceremonies in which the molestation of young girls occurred. I wrote:

"In the basement of Sharlyn Romaine's house there were] Indian singers singing Indian songs; Schuon, with genitals exposed, goes into the center of the Indian Lodge. The women circle around him clockwise, shoulder to shoulder. From the center towards the periphery', Schuon goes up to each woman in turn and gives them a kind of embrace, pressing his chest and stomach against the breasts and abdomen of the women. In another dance, he puts his hands around their hips and backsides. In yet another dance, he sits on his bench to the side of the lodge and as the women circle the lodge, each woman, as she approaches a few feet from Schuon, directly in front of him, stops and does a 360 degree turn, giving him an opportunity to look each woman up and down, back and front".

Some of the people present at this event besides Schuon and his "wives", were Keith Arbogast and his wife, Stanley Jones, Roger Gaetani, Mr and Mrs, Fluri, Hernan Cadavid and his wife, Jeffery Willsey and his wife, Mr and Mrs. Reyonolds, Mr and Mrs Patrick Casey, Mark Perry and his wife, Michael Pollack and family, Barry and Rebecca MacDonald and many others, nearly all of whom live in Bloomington Indiana and are disciples of Schuon and memebers of his cult. You can see the compound where most of the cult resides by looking up the folllowing address

http://maps.yahoo.com/

Plug in Schuon's address: 3700 Inverness Farms Road, Bloomington, Indiana. Most of these houses are McMansions, built by Michael Fitzgerald and others. The large house next to Schuon's house is that of Stanley Jones where many of the gatherings occurred. But there were also gatherings at Fitzgerald's house, with is next to Jones house and at the McDonald's house, which is next to the Schuon's house on the opposite side. Sharlyn Romaine's house is next to Fitzgerald's house and that is where I saw Primordial Gatherings.

Regarding Primordial Gatherings: Stephen Lambert, at the request of Aldo Vidali, wrote the following affidavit describing these Primordial Gatherings on October 9, 1992:

"In June or July of 1991 while visiting Bloomington, Indiana, I was invited to several "Primordial" occasions initiated by Mr. Frithjof Schuon of Inverness Farms, in which the following was observed. In these gatherings both women and men appear semi-nude and dance alternately, although occasionally in mixed mode, to Plains Indians chants and drumming. The participants assume the configuration of a circle at the center of which stands Mr. Schuon in a semi-nude state crowned with a feathered war bonnet or a horned headdress of one kind or another."

"During the women's dance, Mr. Schuon invariably embraces each woman in turn encircling their upper bodies with his arms, momentarily pressing them to himself while the women's husbands (a minority of the women and of the men were unmarried) stood in an outer circle as spectators to this enactment. At no time during the occasion did Mr. Schuon extend his attention in any specific act or gesture of presumed "blessing" that may have been appropriate for the men's culture."

"In one small gathering of four couples which I attended, the women were completely nude and performed dances which were approximations of various Far and Middle Eastern dance forms. Then to popular East Indian devotional songs, Mr. Schuon -- standing as above described, but without American Indian vestimentary, rather in the presumed regalia of an East Indian "rajah" -- embraced each woman in turn, pressing them to himself in full body contact by first clasping them about the upper torso and then about the buttocks."

Mr. Lambert also writes, in "my concrete experience in these occasions amounted to no more than a man indulging his taste for and preoccupation with women". He concludes, "I claim the right to make these judgments as one who has been closely and intimately associated with the group for more than twelve years, even at its upper echelons, and who has since severed all relations exactly because of the evidence of its spiritual bankruptcy and the consequent machinations that result to obscure this fact". Lambert and I have never spoken of these matters in any way, so our accounts and independent and corroborate eachother.

Indirectly corroborating both Lambert's and my accounts of Primordial Gatherings, is the account of Sharlyn Romaine, Schuon's forth "wife".. In her Text "Veneration of the Shaykh", she states that in considering Schuon "one is faced with an Avataric phenomenon... with a prophetic figure with a spiritual manifestation of major import". After stating that members of the cult have an "obligation" to venerate Schuon she continues:

"What could be more natural and fitting than that this understanding and therefore veneration, be expressed in a manner corresponding to the eminence in question: and moreover, than that heaven itself would aid us in determining the manner of this darshan, as it has, in the beautiful and manifestly inspired ceremonies which are an aid in effectively conveying the guru's barakah, which is a marvelous gift of the spirit to his faithful disciples, infusing them with something of his very being, transmitted to the disciple in a manner more intimate and direct than words.

Romaine is using the word "darshan", which is a Hindu word that refers to the contemplation of a saint, in a way specifically adapted to the needs of the Schuon cult. When she says that Schuon's 'blessing' or "barakah... "is transmitted to the disciple in a manner more intimate and direct than words", she is describing what happens at the Primordial Gatherings, confirming the descriptions of Lambert and myself. She is also describing the spiritual power which Schuon claims he derives from the Virgin Mary. Romaine used similar language in her Text, co-authored by Schuon, "The Message of the Icons", where she describes that "beginning with her adoption of our Shaykh... the Blessed Virgin has chosen a most intimate way of revealing herself. One could even say that she is her revelation... one is irresistibly attracted to her and she in return enters into one's heart, the viewer and the image are one". Schuon's body is supposed to be his revelation just as the nude virgin's body in Schuon's paintings of her is supposed to be her revelation. Schuon unites with the women at Primordial Gatherings, just as the virgin united with him in his vision. This is implicitly an admission and description, phrased in the coded language of the cult, of the sexual nature of the Primordial Gatherings. Maude Murray, Schuon's third wife has written about these gatherings. She is describing "secret" gatherings, which are more restricted than those I attended, at which 40 people were present. She writes as as follows:

"at secret primordial Gatherings, no one was present but Schuon, Catherine Schuon, Sharlyn Romaine , Rebecca and Barry Macdonald, John Murray, Mr. and Mrs. Garcia Varela and Barbara Perry" [the 2nd 'wife']. The women were naked... the men wore loincloths, except for Schuon, who wore a 'free' loincloth, that is one... could often see him naked... Sharlyn did some lovely Hindu.. American Indian or Balinese [dances]. Rebecca would do a more static kind of belly dancing. emphasizing hips and stomach and breasts... Schuon would do the Primordial Dance... The only real objection anyone could make to these gatherings in my opinion, is that Sharlyn [Romaine] would sit for long periods with her legs apart and in front of the Shaykh who would meditate on this position with the rest of us present. Rebecca did this somewhat... too.

Jesus Garcia Varela, a high ranking inner circle member of the cult, had been investigated by the Louisville Police in 1991 for nude photos of his 2 young daughters. He escaped prosecution of this episode by claiming that it was a common practice in Spain to visually record a girl's puberty. This is an unlikely story and not why the photographs were taken. They were taken to accord with the fashion and imperatives of Schuon's doctrine of Sacred Nudity which was then reigning in the cult. Srg. Richardson told me that he felt that the Varela's daughters had been couched to lie to the police in Louisville. They also had been couched to lie to the Press Murray admitted to me that the Varela's lied to the Police. The same girls were couched to lie to the Press and on T.V. about their involvement in Primordial gatherings. All three of the girls, and some 20 or so cult members who testified before the Grand Jury for Schuon had been couched by Fitzgerald, Romaine and others to lie. Maude Murray writes in a letter to me that the entire group "were told to lie" to the Grand Jury. It 's standard procedure in the cult to cover up facts compromising to the "hierarchy" of the cult. and to lie to outsiders and "profane" people about the nature of the cult and its activities There are many documents where Schuon counsels cult members to dissemble and obscure their group affiliation. In Schuon's Memoirs he states that the "habit" of "dissimulation" developed early in his life.

On Dec. 4th, 1991, Dr. Ronald and Sarah Bodmer made out an affidavit in which they stated that they attended a gathering at the Schuon residence in the fall of 1989. "during which certain followers wore little costumes showing the inferior part of the women's sex and the superior part of the penis and scrotum of the men. The dance took place while Frithjof Schuon was watching. A thirteen to fourteen year old boy [the son of Michael Fitzgerald] was watching and so was little Mary Elizabeth Casey [then aged 3 or 4]" Bodmer claimed he had watched a Gathering at Jeffrey Willsey's house at which there was nudity and young children present. I wrote in my "Account" that Michael Fitzgerald's son was present at the Gatherings. Why didn't the Grand Jury take action on this fact? The boy, then perhaps 14, had been made to watch his mother and her sister, Jennifer Casey, dance nude for Schuon at one of the Gatherings . Bodmer's evidence is direct evidence of the involvement of children in the Gatherings, as is my own.

Not only was the son of Michael Fitzgerald present at some of he gatherings, but the daughter of Roger Gaetani was also present. She was then 15 or 16. But Maude Murray has corroborated my evidence that she was present and must have embraced Schuon. Murray writes that at a Primordial Gathering: "I saw [Roger Gaetani's daughter] in the dance circle around the Shaykh... I do not recall seeing her hug him but she must have done so as all the women in the circle always did".

Aldo Vidali reports the following about this girl: "On March 4, 1989, I visited Frithjof Schuon... at his house at 3700 Inverness Farms Road Bloomington Indiana. I was received in the study upstairs. As we were talking there was the sudden entrance of [Gaetani's daughter], a fifteen year old daughter of members of the Schuon cult. She was completely nude."

There were other under-aged girls that at the gatherings and embraced and fondled by Schuon. I testified in Court in 1991, that I saw Schuon embrace the daughters of Mr and Mrs. Jesus Garcia Varela, and the daughter of Mr and Mrs. William Wroth. Schuon embraced these girls in the same manner he did the older women, about the torso and buttocks and in full body contact, pulling their bodies against his own. They were part of a circle that included 15-20 nude and semi-nude women. Schuon was wearing what has been called a "free" loin cloth, which exposes Schuon's genitals when he moves. These events occurred on two separate occasions. I said in 1991 that I was sure that one of the occasions was May 17th 1991, the other was earlier in the year, March 27th. But I told the police that I was unsure of the earlier date. There were other alternative dates at which these girls might have been present. Murray writes me that my dates may have been mistaken. One of them may have been and i said so at the time. Murray writes me that on a different date, the events I described "certainly did" happen. In any case, I was not trying to prove the dates were correct, but that these events did indeed occur.

On the subject of the parents giving permission for the children to indulge Schuon's sexual interests Maude Murray has provided new evidence. She reports that another inner circle member of the cult, Michael Pollock, allowed his daughter, to be used by Schuon for visual and sexual amusement. She writes that Pollack's daughter danced for Schuon "stark naked... when she was technically underaged". Murray writes that Pollack's daughter "was a charming, round little girl who loved dancing and nudity and wanted to play at being a dancing girl" She "did want to dance for the Shaykh [Schuon]... [and] asked to do that, in her parents house and with their permission" . Murray justifies this on the grounds that "there must be millions of men in the U.S. who've seen girls underage dance stark naked -- without even thinking of whether it is illegal or not. Is it illegal?" Murray is reaching in this passage to try to justify the involvement of girls in Schuon's primordial enactments. She is naive of the law, but she is also blaming the victim here. She is trying to blame the children, who supposedly "asked" to be involved. But even if this is true, the crime remains. The parents had no doubt encouraged the girls to wish to do this. And the parents themselves can only have wanted it because they knew Schuon wanted it. The ultimate responsibility for this is with Schuon and the Pollocks, not with their daughter, who was being used and manipulated. The girls were forced to participate in Schuon's sexual obsessions because of cult pressure. The Wroths, Varelas, Gaetanis Pollocks and Fitzgeralds, all of whose children were enlisted in service of Schuon's fantasies are probably guilty of the corruption of minors.

Murray admits that the young girls were involved in the gatherings but says a number of times that they wanted to do it and did it of their own volition. She concludes that Schuon is not responsible therefore. She writes for instance, in a complete admission of the involvement of children, that "no one of us ever thought of [what] the legal age of a child is... Some of [Schuon's] disciples were apparently under this age and were present at [Primordial Gatherings] and wanted to hug him... it was their choice and their age was an accident". She blames it on the child by saying that "it was their choice" and excuses Schuon. This is typical of cults to blame their victims for harms actually committed by the cult leader. She goes on to explain that :

"when I was less than nine years old a friend of mine took me home and we children played naked in a shower with the naked father. I'd never seen a man stark naked and.... Now, if I had a mean soul, I could very well have gotten that man accused of child abuse. It is very likely that he hugged me when he was completely naked -- but no one ever dreamt of protecting oneself from child abuse in a situation like that. This is very analogous to the Indian Day [Primordial Gatherings] in that all disciples and children of disciples are like the children of a spiritual master [Schuon]".

This is another direct admission of the involvement of children in the Primordial Gatherings. But Primordial gatherings are not the same thing as giving a child a bath or shower. Schuon's motive in these gatherings was power and self exaltation and he was using children to achieve this. The crime that Schuon committed against children was to subject them to his delusional spiritual-sexual fantasies within a system of mind control and cult pressure that enlisted the parents of the children in the abuse. the crime is primarily a crime of exploitation and power, which used sex as a pretext. The primordial Gatherings were not about sex, primarily, but about serving the power needs of Schuon. It is a crime, in other words that is not only about sexuality but about Schuon whole philosophy and the cult he has created to embody his beliefs. Schuon's guilt of this crime, in other words, brings into question his entire philosophy, his 'system', and his cult. In another letter, Murray is somewhat more hesitant about admitting that the young girls embraced Schuon. She writes

"maybe, (I'm not sure) the Shaykh pressed some girl/women just below adult age -- to his bare chest. If he did (it is quite possible) then it was because many women wanted to be close to him and went up to him for this in a kind of dance. It is normal for women to want something like this in respect of a saint -- just as it is normal for girl children to hug a grown man. Even if I scour my conscience, I cannot attribute any blame to the Shaykh for this, no matter what the facts were

If one reads this passage carefully, she begins with uncertainty as to whether or not Schuon did anything with underage girls. But by the end of the passage she not only implies that underage girls were involved, but that she cannot blame Schuon for it. These are important admissions of the involvement of underage girls in the gatherings, which, taken together supply direct evidence that corroborates mine, Bodmer's and Lambert's evidence. Murray admits that the that the cult lied uniformly to the Grand Jury about the charges against Schuon to cover up for Schuon. She writes: "The main disciples of Frithjof Schuon had to lie to protect him. Fine. But then they had to lie again -- and again... until finally everyone knew they were lying and no one could trust anyone to tell the truth" She goes on in the same letter to say that "some disciples of Frithjof Schuon -- having common sense -- lied a few times for good reason... there were lies in Court under oath and on T.V." It is clear she believes that the lies to the Grand Jury were justified. She writes that she does not blame the members of the cult for lying to "protect a saint". She reproaches them for continuing to lie after the initial lie. In any case, Murray's admission that they all lied in Court under oath is implicitly an admission of Schuon's guilt, but at the same time she cannot bring herself to question the righteousness of her cult leader, even though he has had many people lie under oath to protect him from prosecution for his crime. This is not usual that members of cults are unable to see the leaders culpability and wrongdoing even when it stares them in the face. Typically cult members who have been thrown out of a cult blame themselves and deny the depravity of the cult leader, even though it is obvious.

Murray also admits lying about Schuon's marriages: "there were many lies about these marriages... Everyone began to lie to freely about [the marriages] and also about little things- that I became quite alarmed. Also the disciples broke promises and made illegal financial deals such that I became more and more aware of the moral and spiritual degeneration of this group". She also tried to confront Schuon about his lies and complains that Schuon "refuses any comment about all the lying under oath and all of the illegal and inhuman things his disciples have been doing". She also admits:

"We lied in the hearing about polygamy and broke many legal rules to protect Mr. Schuon. Our lawyers cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars and we lied to them to... I had been told to lie as we all had".

In another letter Murray further admits, "there were lies under oath and on T.V. ...I lied too. The Jury knew we were lying -- they even knew we would lie before we got into the court room". Over twenty people were forced under cult influence, to lie to Grand jury under oath, to protect Schuon. Murray indicates that Michael Fitzgerald and Sharlyn Romaine orchestrated this conspiracy to obstruct and subvert justice. Murray gives evidence that helps to show that Schuon must also be implicated in this conspiracy to subvert justice. Murray claims that Schuon lied on TV and elsewhere. She writes that Schuon "lied pretty easily". "The Shaykh's idea was that telling the truth to shysters was stupid, unrealistic and moralistic". Schuon wrote a letter to a French nun in 1991 which according to Murray "was full of lies... [and] was read and approved by the Shaykh in my presence".. She repeats what she said in an earlier letter to me that "the Shaykh lies and has others lie quite easily". Murray admits that "Michael Fitzgerald... lied in court under oath, lied to his lawyers and led a spiritual community in a very expensive lawsuit that was won, but with a substrata of lies". Murray reveals that Michael Fitzgerald "took charge" of the cult in 1991, and on Schuon's behalf, orchestrated a conspiracy to subvert justice. In a film she made for Schuon called "Colors of Light", she reports that Michael Fitzgerald, "took charge" and "led the entire group to lie in court under oath,,,and to our lawyers" to protect Schuon against the charge of child molestation. She also claims that Schuon's 4th wife, Sharlyn Romaine, assisted Fitzgerald in the obstruction of justice. She writes that Romaine "engineered this thing... which was for lying to the court". Murray says of Romaine, who is Schuon's 4th wife that "I actually think she would murder someone if he [Schuon] gave the slightest reason for it". In 1991 the case against Schuon was mysteriously dropped because justice had been obstructed, against the will of the Grand Jury, who correctly tried to oppose the dropping of the charges. It is now clear and can be proven, I believe, that Schuon, Fitzgerald and Romaine and perhaps others led the cult in a conspiracy to obstruct justice.

Murray claims that evidence was "fabricated" by Fitzgerald and others in order to get Schuon off the hook.. Murray writes that Fitzgerald, who has been the principle mind behind the obstruction of justice, claims to be a lawyer, but, she also claims he "was disbarred in Colorado for trickery and income tax evasion". Schuon is dead now and so cannot be prosecuted, but Fitzgerald, Romaine and perhaps Pollock, as well as the parents of the children involved could be charged with the conspiracy to obstruct Justice. If this is not possible or desirable, then at the very least the truth should be disseminated about this cult. Acting on Schuon's behalf, Fitzgerald, Romaine and Pollock are ultimately responsible.

Beginning in 1992 Fitzgerald, Romaine, Pollock and other members of the inner circle of the cult initiated lawsuits that extended the effort to subvert justice by actively seeking to legally persecute, maliciously and without cause. those who have tried to tell the truth about Schuon. They tried, and failed to initiate lawsuits against me for copyright infringement. In 1992 they began a series of 3 malicious lawsuits against Aldo Vidali clearly intended to bankrupt and ruin him. Vidali writes that the cult spent over $250,000 to maliciously him. The three cases were brought simultaneously after Aldo threatened to expose his knowledge of Schuon's sexual excesses. Aldo was trying to get his son and daughter in law out of the cult. The cult, led by Fitzgerald, Romaine and Pollock, Willsey, Jones and others, applied pressure on Aldo's son to sue his own father in a bogus legal case, involving a boat that the son was claiming, falsely, belonged to him. The entire case, was funded and advised by the cult. There were two other cases brought against Aldo at the same time. As a result of these cases, Vidali lost his son to the cult, was pushed toward bankruptcy, and was forced to defend himself alone in court, since he couldn't afford a lawyer. Both he and his family suffered hardship during the three years of malicious prosecution. It was a blatant case of malicious prosecution. Both the malicious prosecution and the dividing of families are tactics cults often use against members who leave the organization. The cult owes Vidali damages for malicious prosecution. They also owe damages to David Hunter and Jim Richardson, two men who tried to investigate the cult and who suffered dearly for their efforts.

The cult has sued most of the people that have sought to provide evidence of their corruption. Maude Murray was sued by the cult on various pretexts as well. They forced her to sign confidentiality agreements to prevent her from using their names in public, denying her freedom of speech. They also sued and muzzled Rama Coomarawamy for sending nude pictures of Schuon around, as well as nude photos of Schuon about to have sexual union with the nude Virgin Mary. As guilty parties, they are paranoid of any mention of their names in public. . The new evidence indicates that members of the Schuon cult conspired to subvert and obstruct justice on Schuon's behalf. What subverted justice in 1991 was ability of Michael Fitzgerald and other members of Schuon's dangerous organization to use their considerable financial and legal resources to harass, subvert justice and maliciously prosecute anyone who questions the cult leader or his representatives. The cult has lied about these events and promoted Schuon under false pretences for years. This needs to be widely known. It needs to be known that now there is enough evidence to show that Schuon was guilty, his writing and art hide corruption behind it, and his cult was a dangerous organization that should be avoided at all costs.

There were many victims of this cult, but all those who have been hurt can take solace in the fact that the truth about this man will become known. Many people helped me to put all this information together. To them go the praise and thanks

Note in 2007
I wrote the above in 1998. It was put up on a French web site for 7 or 8 years. My essays were taken off this site a year or two ago, at my request. In any case, after nine years no one has ever successfully disputed any of the the evidence presented here. It is true and represents many witnesses besides myself, all of whom recorded their testimony independently of the others. The Schuon cult tries to paint the picture of an elaborate conspiracy against them. Actually those against them have merely told the truth about them, separately and without conspiracy. Their paranoia comes from they constant need to lie and dissimulate. They merely accuse others of that which they are guilty.

Mark Sedgwick published a book in 2004, Against the Modern World , which advanced the thesis, partly derived from my work and conversations with me, that traditionalism is a a far right movement with some relation to post World War II fascism, but that it is not a fascist movement per se, but a far right form of spirituality--- a sort of "spiritual fascism". I write about this in this essay
http://www.naturesrights.com/knowledge%20power%20book/guenon.asp

Sedgwick wrote me in 2004 that both he and his publisher, Oxford, were threatened by the Schuon cult with legal harassment. Rather than face the mafioso tactics thrown at him by the Schuon cult, Sedgwick's backed down and published a rather weak assessment of Schuon's, polygamous activities, criminal actions, visions of nude Virgins and delusions of grandeur. But despite that the book has some merit as an expose of the reactionary spirituality of the traditionalists. You can see reviews of Mark's book here

http://www.aucegypt.edu/faculty/sedgwick/against.html



Evidence 2 :

Primordial Gatherings and Schuon's books:

Schuon's Vision of the Virgin is one source, and perhaps the most important source, of his belief that he is a manifestation of the Logos or a prophet, avatara or a man "not like other men". It took me about a year to find out about this vision. It was consistently portrayed to me as an important mystery, the deepest secret of the brotherhood, and I wanted to know what the vision actually portrayed. My interest was not in the sexual content of the vision, but rather to know what this man, Schuon, who was supposed to be my spiritual master, was really about. Other people in the cult, had filled my head with all kinds of superlatives about Schuon's alleged greatness. As I grew more skeptical I needed to know the truth about this man. Maude Murray, Schuon's third wife offered explanations. Schuon does not define the actual content of his vision in his Memoirs. He only says that the Virgin Mary "approached me inwardly in a feminine form" and that the "consolation [was] streaming forth from the primordial femininity". He concludes by saying that "to say more would not become me". There are many other references to this vision in his writings which I have recorded elsewhere. But the actual vision is most clearly understood if one can gain access to Schuon's paintings, which picture him with the nude virgin Mary behind him, with her genitals shaved, about to give him her sex. The result of this vision is described by Schuon in his Memoirs as follows:

"On my way to Morocco in 1965, when I was suffering from asthma and feeling ill to the point of death - owing to causes of a moral order - there occurred on the ship...a blessed contact with the Heavenly Virgin. And this had as its immediate result the almost irresistible urge to be naked like her little child; from this event onwards I went naked as mush as possible, indeed, most of he time...it was as if the contact with the Virgin had sanctified my body...A few years later - in the summer of 1973 - this mystery came upon me once again, and it did so in connection with the irresistible awareness that I am not a man like other men...one must distinguish, in the sanctified man, between the teachings of the Truth and a radiance that emanates from the body; and this applies to all degrees of participation in the Logos. (From Schuon's essay "Sacred Nudity" which is part of his memoirs)"

Schuon's need to be nude as much as possible was the basis of his creating the Primordial Gatherings, in which he tried to get the members of his cult to imitate him and confirm him in his delusion of his transcendent significance. It might be useful to complement the evidence about Primordial Gatherings supplied by others with some of the evidence from Schuon's own writings about them. I cannot be exhaustive here, so what follows represents only a selection.

Schuon said that if one wants to know if he is guilty or not guilty of the crimes for which he is accused, one should read his books. In 1991, at the time that Lambert and I witnessed the events described, Schuon wrote articles which describe his view of Primordial Gatherings. In the writings from 1990-91 Schuon describes himself and his role in the Primordial Gatherings, in slightly veiled prose, as the "deified man, who thus is central......with regard to the multitude of ordinary men. The 'believers' are like the gopis dancing around Krishna and uniting themselves to him; whereas he-- the 'motionless mover'-- plays his saving flute". The sexual symbolism of the 'saving flute' isn't too hard to figure out, nor is the reference to Aristotle definition of god as the "motionless mover". The gopis are described as "uniting' with Krishna, and this is a reference to what Schuon does with the women at Primordial Gatherings. I was aware on a regular basis of Schuon's conversations in 1991 and he worked out these analogies to Primordial Gatherings with his wives, especially Murray and Romaine. In this same essay, in a footnote, Schuon compares the Primordial Gatherings, implicitly, with the circumambulations of the pilgrims around the Kaaba in Mecca, which, he claims, was originally done nude. He goes on to multiply the analogies, as if to exhaust all the possibilities that might exalt himself and his Primordial ritual even further.

"The movement is circular like the revolution of the planets: another example is the Sun Dance around a tree representing the axis 'heaven-earth'; the movement is alternatively centripetal and centrifugal like the phases of respiration, which takes us back to the dance of the gopis with its two modes of circumambulation and union, precisely. (The Play of Masks pg. 42)"

As will be noticed, Schuon is here describing in his usual abstract and coded language the circling of the women and his "union" with them in the Gatherings. The "union" Schuon describes here is described by Romaine as "more intimate than words". In the same book, Schuon observes that "sexuality is determined by the which constitutes man's prerogative as is attested by the theomorphic form of his body."(Ibid. pg 49) He continues in the same passage that the "human body itself, not in some diminished form--is a symbol-sacrament because it is made in the image of God: that is why it is the object of love par excellence. The body invites to adoration by its very theomorphic form, and that is why it can be a vehicle of a celestial presence that in principle is salvific".(Ibid pg 89) Schuon is here setting up a hierarchical notion of bodies, his body, of course, being a superior "vehicle of a celestial presence", and not a body "in some diminished form". In the Primordial Gatherings Schuon thinks he is providing salvation to the women by embracing them with his 'theomorphic body". All this seems quite logical to Schuon and the members of the cult, who somehow convince themselves that this old man really is the "Center as such", like Krishna, the Kaaba, the sun in the middle of the solar system, the Sun dance Tree and other superlatives. Schuon's style of writing hides his personal life behind loaded abstractions and sparkling generalities. I know that the above passages refer to specific developments in the history of Primordial Gatherings because I was on the scene, and discussed these matters with his wives. I was told Primordial Gatherings go back to the 1950's in rudimentary form, but earlier references to Primordial Gatherings are obscure for lack of personal references. Earlier references to Primordial Gatherings are less grandiose though tending towards the delusional grandiosity of more recent years. One can recognize the familiar rationalizations for 'primordial sexuality' in the following quote, written in the 1970's:

"Woman is unveiled - in certain rights or certain ritual dances - with the aim of operating a kind of magic by analogy, the unveiling of beauty with an erotic vibration evoking, in the manner of a catalyst, the revelation of the liberating and beatific essence."

In a footnote to this passage, Schuon speaks of the unveiling of the Queen of Sheba and of the Virgin Mary. The virgin's veil "opens because of mercy".(Esoterism as principle and Way, pg 61-62) This is an obvious reference to Schuon's vision of the virgin. In another book Schuon points out the Arabic word for "mercy" has its root in the word 'rahim' "which means womb, and this corroborates the interpretation of Rahmah [mercy] as Divine Femininity." This relates back again to Schuon's vision of the Virgin mercifully comforting him with her sexual parts. But it also relates to the Primordial Gatherings. Schuon speaks elsewhere of "the Divine Beauty manifested in earthly beauties". The essence of the 'prophet' has a feature, which , Schuon writes, "could be called 'Solomonian' or 'Krishnaite'". The Prophet, that is Schuon himself, has the ability to find

"concretely in woman all aspects of the Divine Femininity...The sensorial experience that produces in the ordinary man an inflation of the ego, actualizes in the 'deified' Man extinction in the Divine Self. (In the Face of the Absolute pg. 221)"

In other words, women are merely symbols and sexual desire leads a man like Schuon to god-symbols, since Schuon's desire is not like other men's desires since he is, "not a man like other men" (Memoirs). So too, when he desires a woman, it is not an ordinary act since he is not an ordinary man, but a "deified man". Schuon's sexuality proves to him his own transcendent importance. He is beyond all laws and the chosen vessel of god on earth. Therefore, Schuon can press his naked, or near naked body, against under-aged girls in the Primordial Gatherings because Schuon's desire is god's desire and he is Primordially innocent, even if he breaks the law. Schuon can do this, he thinks, because the women are not women, but examples of Divine Femininity. Their individuality, and thus their human rights, are dissolved in abstraction or essentializations. They are reduced merely to archetypes or symbols. Schuon exploits real women by ignoring their reality and seeing them only as symbols. This is a pathology of of a remorseless psychopath.

The purpose of the Primordial Gatherings is to join Schuon, who is the Logos and the Holy Spirit to the 'Divine Feminine'. All of this is supposed to result in "healing" and "salvation" for those who embrace Schuon. In the words of one of the cult's songs. Schuon is the "All - Holy" and the "All Holy is a healing for the wombs". In the words of the second wife, Barbara Perry this means that, "the radiation of the Avataric body (i.e. Schuon's body) heals the wombs", and she interprets the word "wombs" to mean "souls". This peculiar hierarchical and demeaning attitude towards women as being merely manifestations of "archetypes" and thus only secondarily individuals with rights, is explained by Schuon as follows:

"A distinction should be made between a polygamy in which several women keep their personality, and a princely 'pantogamy' on which a multitude of women represent femininity in a quasi impersonal manner; the latter would be an affront to the dignity of human persons if it were not founded on the idea that a given bridegroom is situated at the summit of human kind. Pantogamy is possible because Krishna is Vishnu, because David and Soloman are prophets...It could also be said that innumerable and anonymous harem has a function analogous to that of an imperial throne adorned with precious stones; A function that is analogous, but not identical, for the throne made of human substance - the harem, that is - indicates in an eminently more direct and concrete manner the real of borrowed divinity of the monarch.(Esoterism. pg 133} (emphasis mine)"

In other words, in Schuon's mind the Primordial Gatherings in which he treats the women as a harem is "not an affront to the dignity of persons" because he is "situated at the summit of human kind". The women in the gatherings are like a "throne made of human substance", an especially disgusting image, recalling Nazi lampshades made of human skin. Schuon is a "monarch" as he claims in other documents and the harem of dehumanized women is suppose to prove his divinity. He reduces women to the image of "a throne made of human substance" in order to exalt himself. He claims to be the "summit of the human species" and arrogate himself the rights of a tyrant who can turn people into objects to glorify himself. Schuon continues the above passage by saying that his own preferences are not indicated by what he has written, but this is merely an evasion or the result of what he calls in his Memoirs, his "inevitable and habitual dissimulation" which he was forced to practice from an early age. Memoirs, pg 50) In other words, its the world's fault that Schuon lies, since he is the last great prophet. Being perfect, "in every respect", any blame attached to him must belong to someone else. Anyone who criticizes him is therefore and axiomatically guilty. "The Fuehrer is always right", it was said of Hitler. Schuon claims to be infallible on almost everything too. For Schuon, there are no real women, there are only symbols of women, and women in fact are embodiments of Schuon himself, in disguise. As he says, "the opposite sex is only a symbol, the true center is hidden in ourselves, in the heart intellect".(Essential Writings pg.394) Schuon's theory of sexuality is hierarchical. The deified man has sexual rights the "ordinary man" does not have. Schuon has four wives and a harem in Primordial Gatherings and he can do this because he is a monarch and an Avatara. I am dwelling on this because to prove the legal case against Schuon, it must be proven that he pressed himself against young girls to satisfy his desires. To prove this, one must enter into the fantasy world where Schuon's desires cannot be like other men's because he is "not a man like other men".

Schuon has publicly denied that he has had any desires. He said, in a public relations video, made by inner circle members, Michael Pollock and Michel Fitzgerald, that "it is psychologically impossible that a man like me could have a passionate pleasure", and he says soon thereafter, "to ask if I am guilty or not is a waste of time... read my books, look at my books to see if I am guilty or not". Yes. Read Schuon's books carefully and you will see that this is a man with serious delusions of grandeur. Schuon's sexuality was closely connected to his delusions of his own magnificence. It is this that made him able to violate the human rights women and young girls and this that enabled him to counsel members of his cult to obstruct justice and lie to a Grand Jury.

This is exactly the point: Schuon's books indicate he is guilty.

*******************************

French Translation of the above essay

Les Assemblées Primordiales et les Ecrits de Frithjof Schuon.

La Vision de la Vierge de Schuon est une source, et peut-être la plus

importante, de sa croyance qu'il est une manifestation du Logos ou un

prophète, avatara, ou encore un homme "différent des autres hommes".

Cela m'a pris plus d'un an avant qu'on ne me parle de cette vision.

On me la présentait systématiquement comme un mystère important,

le secret le plus profond de la fraternité, et je voulais savoir ce

qu'était vraiment cette vision. Mon intérêt ne se portait pas vers le

contenu sexuel de cette vision, mais plutôt vers ce que cet homme, Schuon,

qui devait être mon maître spirituel, était réellement. D'autres membres

de la secte m'avaient rempli la tête avec des superlatifs concernant la

grandeur de Schuon. En devenant plus sceptique, je voulais apprendre la

vérité concernant cet homme. Maude Murray, troisième épouse de Schuon,

m'a donné des explications. Schuon ne définit pas le contenu précis de

sa vision dans ses Mémoires. Il dit seulement que la Vierge Marie l'a

"approché intérieurement sous une forme féminine" et que "la consolation

jaillissait de la féminité primordiale". Il conclut en disant "qu'il ne

serait pas décent d'en dire plus". Il y a beaucoup d'autres références

à cette vision dans ses écrits, je les ai consignées ailleurs. Mais la

vision elle-même est comprise le plus clairement si l'on a accès aux

tableaux de Schuon qui le représentent avec la Vierge Marie nue derrière

lui, les poils de son pubis rasés, prête à lui offrir son sexe. Le

résultat de cette vision est décrit par Schuon dans ses Mémoires de la

façon suivante: "En route vers le Maroc en 1965, souffrant d'asthme

et malade à en mourir - ceci par certaines causes d'ordre moral - il

y eut à bord du navire... un contact béni avec la Céleste Vierge. Et

ceci eut pour résultat immédiat le besoin presque irrésistible d'être

nu comme son petit enfant; depuis cet événement je marchais nu tant que

possible, en fait, presque tout le temps... c'était comme si le contact

avec la Vierge avait sanctifié mon corps... Quelques années plus tard -

pendant l'été de 1973 - ce mystère me visita encore une fois, et cela

en connexion avec la conscience irrésistible que je n'étais pas un être

humain comme les autres... il faut distinguer, dans l'homme sanctifié,

les enseignements de la Vérité et une radiation qui émane du corps;

et ceci est applicable à tous les degrés de participation au Logos."

(Extrait de l'essai "La Nudité sacrée" qui fait partie de ses Mémoires.)

Le besoin de Schuon d'être nu le plus souvent possible est à la base de

sa création des Assemblées Primordiales, pendant lesquelles il essayait

d'amener les membres de sa secte à l'imiter et à le confirmer dans sa

folie de son importance transcendante. Il serait utile d'ajouter aux

preuves concernant les Assemblées Primordiales des preuves issues des

écrits de Schuon lui-même à leur sujet. Je ne peux pas être exhaustif ici,

donc je ne présente qu'une sélection.

Schuon a dit que si l'on voulait savoir s'il était coupable ou non

des crimes dont on l'a accusé, il fallait lire ses livres. En 1991,

lorsque Lambert et moi étaient témoins des événements décrits, Schuon

écrivait des articles qui décrivent son opinion concernant les Assemblées

Primordiales. Dans ses écrits de 1990-1991 Schuon se décrit lui-même

et son rôle dans les Assemblées Primordiales, en prose à peine voilée,

comme "l'homme déifié, qui se trouve donc au centre... par rapport à la

multitude des hommes ordinaires. Les 'croyants' sont comme les gopis

dansant autour de Krishna et s'unissant à lui, pendant que lui, le

'moteur immobile', joue de sa flûte salvatrice." Le symbolisme sexuel

de la 'flûte salvatrice' n'est pas très difficile à reconnaître, ni

la référence à la définition Aritotélicienne de Dieu comme 'moteur

immobile'. Il dit que les gopis s'unissent à Krishna, et c'est une

référence à ce que Schuon fait avec les femmes lors des Assemblées

Primordiales. J'entendais régulièrement la conversation de Schuon en

1991 et il élaborait ces analogies des Assemblées Primordiales avec ses

épouses, en particulier avec Murray et Romaine. Dans le même essai, dans

une note, Schuon compare les Assemblées Primordiales implicitement avec

les circumambulations des pèlerins autour de la Kaaba à la Mecque, qui,

prétend-il, s'effectuaient originellement nu. Ils continue en multipliant

les analogies, comme pour épuiser toutes les possibilités de s'exalter

lui-même et son rituel Primordial au-delà de toute limite.

"Le mouvement est circulaire comme l'est la trajectoire des planètes; un

autre exemple est la Danse du Soleil autour d'un arbre représentant l'axe

entre le Ciel et la Terre; le mouvement est alternativement centripète

et centrifuge comme les phases de la respiration, qui nous ramènent à

la danse des gopis, avec ses deux modes de circumambulation et d'union,

précisément." (Le Jeu des Masques, p. 42.)

On remarquera que Schuon décrit ici dans le langage abstrait et codé

qui lui est habituel, le cercle des femmes et son "union" avec elles

lors des Assemblées. Cette "union" décrite ici par Schuon est décrite

par Romaine comme étant "intime au-delà de toute description verbale".

Dans le même livre, Schuon remarque que "la sexualité est déterminée

par le [un mot manque] qui constitue la prérogative masculine comme

l'atteste la forme théomorphe de son corps." (Ibid. p. 49). Il continue,

dans le même passage, en disant que "le corps humain lui-même, non

sous quelque forme diminuée, est un symbole-sacrement parce qu'il est

fait à l'image de Dieu: c'est pourquoi il est l'objet par excellence de

l'amour. Le corps invite à l'adoration par sa forme théomorphe elle-même,

et voilà pourquoi il peut être le véhicule d'une présence céleste qui

est salvatrice en principe." (Ibid. p. 89.) Schuon établit ici une

notion hiérarchique des corps, le sien, bien sûr, étant un "véhicule"

supérieur "d'une présence céleste", et non un corps "sous une forme

diminuée". Lors des Assemblées Primordiales Schuon croit qu'il offre

le salut aux femmes en les embrassant avec son "corps théomorphe". Tout

ceci semble très logique à Schuon et aux membres de la secte, qui d'une

façon ou d'une autre se convainquent que cet homme âgé est réellement le

"Centre en tant que tel", comme Krishna, la Kaaba, le soleil au milieu du

système solaire, l'arbre de la Danse du Soleil et d'autres superlatifs.

Le style de l'écriture de Schuon cache sa vie personnelle derrière des

abstractions chargées et des généralités étincelantes. Je sais que les

passages cités se rapportent à des développements spécifiques pendant

l'histoire des Assemblées Primordiales parce que j'étais là-bas, et

parce que j'ai discuté de ces choses avec ses épouses. On m'a dit que les

Assemblées Primordiales remontent aux années 1950 pour leur forme la plus

rudimentaire, mais les références antérieures aux Assemblées Primordiales

sont obscurcies par manque de références personnelles. Les références

antérieures aux Assemblées Primordiales sont moins grandioses quoiqu'elles

tendent déjà à la grandeur délirante des années plus récentes. On peut

reconnaître les rationalisations habituelles de la "sexualité primordiale"

dans l'extrait suivant, écrit pendant les années 1970:

"La Femme est dévoilée - dans certains droits ou dans certaines danses

rituelles - avec le but d'opérer une sorte de magie analogique, le

dévoilement de la beauté par une vibration érotique évoquant, comme un

catalyseur, la révélation de l'essence libératrice et béatifique."

Dans une note auprès de ce passage, Schuon parle du dévoilement

de la Reine de Saba et de la Vierge Marie. Le voile de la vierge

"s'ouvre par compassion". (L'Ésotérisme comme principe et comme voie",

p. 61-62.) ceci est une référence évidente à la vision de la Vierge

de Schuon. Dans un autre livre Schuon remarque que le mot Arabe pour

"compassion" a pour racine le mot "rahim", "qui signifie utérus, ce

qui confirme l'interprétation de Rahmah [compassion] comme Féminité

Divine." Ceci se rapporte encore à la vision de Schuon de la Vierge qui

le réconforte par compassion en employant ses organes sexuels. Mais cela

se rapporte aussi aux Assemblées Primordiales. Schuon parle ailleurs de

"la Beauté Divine manifestée dans les beautés terrestres." L'essence du

"prophète" est une propriété qui, dit Schuon, "pourrait être qualifiée

de 'Salomonienne' ou de 'Krishaïte'." Le Prophète, c'est-à-dire Schuon

lui-même, a le pouvoir de trouver i "concrètement dans la femme tous

les aspects de la Divinité Féminine... l'expérience sensorielle qui,

chez l'homme ordinaire, produit un gonflement de l'égo, actualise, chez

l'homme 'déifié', l'extinction dans le Soi Divin. (En face de l'Absolu,

p. 221.)"

En d'autres mots, les femmes ne sont que des symboles et le désir

sexuel mène un homme comme Schuon aux symboles de dieu, puisque le désir

de Schuon n'est pas comme le désir des autres hommes, puisqu'il n'est

"pas un homme comme les autres." (Mémoires.) De même, lorsqu'il désire

une femme, ce n'est pas un acte ordinaire puisqu'il n'est pas un homme

ordinaire, mais un "homme déifié". La sexualité de Schuon prouve à

lui-même son importance transcendante. Il est au-delà de toutes les lois,

et est le vaisseau élu de Dieu sur terre. Donc, Schuon peut presser son

corps nu, ou presque nu, contre des filles mineures lors des Assemblées

Primordiales parce que le désir de Schuon est le désir de Dieu et qu'il

est primordialement innocent, même s'il désobéit aux lois. Schuon peut

faire ceci, pense-t-il, parce que les femmes ne sont pas des femmes,

mais des exemples de la Féminité Divine. Leur individualité, et donc

leurs droits humains, se trouvent dissous dans l'abstraction et dans les

essentialisations. Elles se trouvent réduites à de simples archétypes ou

symboles. Schuon exploite des femmes réelles en ignorant leur réalité

et en ne les voyant que comme des symboles. Le but des Assemblées

Primordiales est de joindre Schuon, qui est le Logos et le Saint-Esprit,

à la "Féminité Divine". Tout ceci devrait produire la "guérison" et le

"salut". En citant les paroles d'un des chants de la secte, Schuon est

le "Tout-Saint", et le "Tout-Saint est une guérison pour les utérus"

[a healing for the wombs]. En empruntant les mots de sa deuxième épouse,

Barbara Perry, ceci signifie que "la radiation du corps Avatarique

(c-a-d celui de Schuon) guérit les utérus" et elle interprète le mot

"utérus" par "âmes". Cette attitude spécifiquement hiérarchique et

méprisante envers les femmes, assimilées à de simples manifestations

d'"archétypes" et donc seulement accessoirement des individus avec des

droits, est expliquée par Schuon de la façon suivante:

"Il faut distinguer entre la polygamie où plusieurs femmes gardent leur

personnalité, et une "pantogamie" princière où une multitude de femmes

représentent la féminité de façon quasiment impersonnelle; celle-ci

serait un affront à la dignité humaine si elle n'était pas fondée sur

l'idée qu'un mari donné est situé au sommet de l'espèce humaine. La

pantogamie est possible parce que Krishna est Vishnu, parce que David

et Salomon sont des prophètes... On pourrait aussi dire que le harem

innombrable et anonymes a une fonction semblable à celle d'un trône

impérial décoré de pierres précieuses; une fonction qui est analogue,

mais non identique, car le trône de chair humaine, le harem, indique

d'une façon éminemment plus directe et plus concrète la divinité réelle

ou empruntée du monarque. (Ésotérisme, p. 133.)

En d'autres termes, dans l'esprit de Schuon les Assemblées Primordiales où

il emploie des femmes comme un harem ne sont pas "un affront à la dignité

humaine" parce qu'il est "situé au sommet de l'espèce humaine." Les

femmes dans les Assemblées sont comme un "trône de chair humaine," une

métaphore particulièrement dégoûtante, qui rappelle les abat-jours de

peau humaine des Nazis. Schuon est un "monarque", comme il le prétend

dans d'autres documents, et le harem de femmes déshumanisées doit

prouver sa divinité. Il réduit les femmes à ne servir que de "trône

de chair humaine" afin de s'exalter lui-même. Il prétend être "le

sommet de l'espèce humaine" et s'arroge des droits tyranniques qui

peuvent transformer des gens en objets et qui doivent le glorifier

lui-même. Schuon continue le passage cité en disant que ses écrits

n'indiquent pas ses propres préférences, mais ceci n'est qu'évasion,

ou le résultat de ce qu'il appelle dans ses Mémoires sa "dissimulation

inévitable et habituelle", qu'il a été forcé de pratiquer dès son plus

jeune âge. (Mémoires, p. 50.) En d'autres termes, c'est la faute du monde

que Schuon ment, parce qu'il est le dernier grand prophète. Étant parfait,

"à tout point", toute faute doit nécessairement appartenir à quelqu'un

d'autre. Toute personne qui le critique est donc axiomatiquement coupable.

"Le Führer a toujours raison" disait-on d'Hitler. Schuon aussi prétend à

l'infaillibilité dans presque tous les domaines. Pour Schuon, il n'y a

pas de vraies femmes, il n'y a que des symboles de femmes; et les femmes

sont en fait des incarnations de Schuon lui-même, en déguisement. Il it

que "le sexe opposé n'est qu'un symbole, le centre véritable est caché

en nous-mêmes, dans le coeur intellect." (Écrits essentiels, p. 394.)

La théorie sexuelle de Schuon est hiérarchique. L'homme déifié a des

droits sexuels dont l'"homme ordinaire" ne jouit pas. Schuon a quatre

femmes et un harem dans les Assemblées Primordiales, et il peut faire

tout ça parce qu'il est monarque et un Avatara. Je souligne ceci parce

que pour établir un dossier légal contre Schuon il faut prouver qu'il

s'est pressé contre de très jeunes filles pour satisfaire ses désirs. Pour

prouver ceci, il faut entrer dans le monde fantasmatique où les désirs de

Schuon ne peuvent être comme ceux des autres hommes parce qu'il n'est pas

"un homme comme les autres".

Schuon a nié publiquement d'avoir eu des désirs quelconques. Il a

dit, dans une vidéo de relations publiques tournée par des membres du

cercle intérieur, Michael Pollock et Michel Fitzgerald, qu'"il était

psychologiquement impossible qu'un homme comme moi pût avoir un plaisir

passionnel", et il dit peu après "c'est une perte de temps que de me

demander si je suis coupable ou non... lisez mes livres, regardez mes

livres pour voir si je suis coupable ou non." Oui. Lisez soigneusement

les livres de Schuon et vous verrez que c'est un homme souffrant de

folie des grandeurs. Voilà ce qui l'a fait violer les droits humains de

femmes et de jeunes filles, et voilà ce qui lui a permis de conseiller

aux membres de sa secte de faire obstruction à la justice et de mentir

à un Grand Jury.

Voilà exactement où j'en voulais venir: les livres de Schuon indiquent

qu'il est coupable.

Schuon nudist

"Traditionalist Sufism"(1)

This article was published in ARIES 22 (1999), pp. 3-24, and is reproduced here with the kind permission of the publishers.

It was based on a paper ("How Traditional are the Traditionalists? The Case of the Guénonian Sufis") given to the eleventh international congress of the Center for Studies on New Religions in Amsterdam, August 7-9, 1997.

Given its age, this article is now somewhat out of date, but is included "for the record."

In many cities in Europe and the United States, there exist groups which describe themselves as 'Centers' or 'Foundations' for 'Traditional [sometimes, 'Metaphysical'] Studies.' Normally, these groups derive from a French 'metaphysician,' René Guénon (1886-1951); often they are the public face of a Sufi tariqa, or occasionally of a Masonic lodge.(2) There are also political Traditionalists, normally deriving more from the Italian writer Julius Evola, but often also acknowledging Guénon. The most important of these is perhaps the Moscow Center for Special Metastrategic Studies. This is a serious organization despite its fanciful name, or at least an organization which has to be taken seriously, to judge by the weekly print-run - 50,000 copies - of its in-house journal, Elementy.(3)

My purpose in this article is not, however, to survey the vast and growing influence of René Guénon, but rather to ask how traditional Traditionalists really are, concentrating on Sufi Guénonians. My choice of Sufism is based on two grounds: firstly, that it is arguably the mainstream of Guénonianism, since Sufism was the path which Guénon himself chose. My second ground is more pragmatic: Sufism in the Muslim world is my own principal field. A second limitation is that in this article I am asking how traditional Traditionalists are, not how traditional Traditionalism is. The 'perennial philosophy' of course sees itself as anything but new, but for various reasons I have no intention of approaching here the question of whether it is modern or perennial.(4) Instead, I will look at practice, associating non-traditional or 'new' with organizations such as Encausse's Ordre martiniste, where Guénon's career started, and 'traditional' with tariqas such as the Hamdiyya Shadhiliyya, the almost entirely traditional Egyptian tariqa(5) where Guénon's career ended.

In order to place my subject, I will start with a classification of Sufism in the West. Western Sufism can in general be divided into four groups: immigrants' tariqas, standard tariqas, novel tariqas, and non-Islamic groups.(6) The two extremes are the easiest to describe. An immigrants' tariqa is a transplant: Senegalese Mourides in Italy or Egyptian Burhamis in Denmark, tariqas taken with immigrants to their new countries, following shaykhs who are also followed in the immigrants' home countries. Non-Islamic groups are usually self-identified as such - the 'Sufi Movement' of Idries Shah, for example, which argues that Sufism is separate from Islam, many of whose members are not and would never describe themselves as Muslim.

Non-Islamic Sufi groups are, clearly, not traditional - they are new. Though there have been occasional cases of Sufi shaykhs in the Muslim world having non-Muslim followers, and occasional cases of Sufi tariqas which stray outside Islam,(7) it is axiomatic for a scholar of Sufism, or indeed for 99.9% of Sufis in the Muslim world, that Sufism is a path within Islam. Equally, immigrants' tariqas are clearly traditional. Although the new environment within which they exist inevitably has consequences and leads to changes, this is part of the normal rhythm of Sufism. Sufi tariqas have been moving into new environments since first there were tariqas.

My two remaining classifications are less easily described. A standard tariqa is easiest to define by example: that of the Naqshbandiyya of Muhammad Nazim al-Haqqani (1922- ), a Turkish shaykh who has many followers in Turkey, Syria and Malaysia. Al-Haqqani is a standard shaykh in terms of Islamic studies, but was educated in Cyprus under the British and so happens to speak English - and also has numerous English, German, American and other converts amongst his followers.(8) His English Naqshbandiyya is not an immigrants' tariqa, since even though there are many immigrants amongst al-Haqqani's followers in London they did not take the Naqshbandiyya with them to England; there are also many non-immigrants amongst his followers. I would argue that this 'standard' tariqa is traditional (rather than new) in three senses. First, al-Haqqani is a shaykh on the classic Islamic pattern, taking his silsila [chain of spiritual descent] from a universally-accepted source, and recognized and followed by born Muslims in the Muslim world. Secondly, his tariqa is - in mainstream Islamic terms - orthodox. Although not every follower of his conforms to the Islamic Sharia [Sacred Law] in every respect, al-Haqqani does his best to hold his followers to the Sharia, and is in most cases successful. Finally, this tariqa is standard and traditional because its spread conforms to an established pattern. For a charismatic shaykh such as al-Haqqani to spread Islam in non-Muslim lands is something which has been happening for centuries, notably in Africa, but also in various parts of Asia - and now in Europe and America.

The remaining classification, then, is of 'novel' tariqa, into which I would put any tariqa which does not fit into one of my three other categories. It is into this category that Sufi Guénonians, or Traditionalist Sufis, fall. A 'novel' tariqa may be traditional, or may be new.

Guénon and Aguéli
Ivan Aguéli (1860-71), from whom Guénon took his first tariqa, and Guénon himself both made their débuts in Paris, in existing non-Christian spiritual and esoteric organizations. Aguéli, a painter, left his native Sweden for Paris at the age of 21, and, as well as painting and taking an interest in anarchism, joined the Theosophical Society in 1891. Guénon arrived in Paris from his native Blois a few years later, in 1904. He interested himself in various esoteric groups,(9) initially those established by Gérard Encausse, 'Papus' (1865-1916). Encausse had also been a co-founder of the Theosophical Society in France (though he later opposed the Theosophists).(10) The Theosophical Society thus features in Guénon's early years as well as Aguéli's.

Aguéli took the Shadhiliyya Arabiyya tariqa in Egypt in 1907, from Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad Illish,(11) and received an ijaza [authorization] to give the tariqa himself.(12) Illish in fact gave so many ijazas 'to anyone applying for them' that Fred De Jong concludes that 'he does not seem to have taken the requirements of [his] position seriously.'(13)

Guénon, meanwhile, had taken part in the Spiritualist and Masonic Congress in Paris in 1908,(14) and in the same year had founded his own Ordre du temple rénové, in which one authority has distinguished elements of Theosophy and of the Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor.(15) As a result of the establishment of the Ordre du temple, Guénon and his followers were expelled from the Ordre martiniste by Encausse. In 1909, Guénon joined the Gnostic Church of Fabre des Essarts ('the Patriarch Synésius'), and edited until 1912 the periodical La Gnose, described as 'the official organ of the Universal Gnostic Church.'(16)

In 1910-11, Guénon published in La Gnose a series of articles on Hinduism which were later to form the basis of two of his most important works, the Introduction générale à l'étude des doctrines hindoues and L'homme et son devenir selon le Vêdânta.(17) It is unclear whence Guénon got the knowledge of Hinduism on which these articles and his later books draw.(18) Chacornac states that both books were approved of by 'the orthodox pundits' of Benares,(19) and they have met with approval from sections of the Indian public in recent years.(20) French orientalists however considered Guénon's work second-hand and his method unscholarly.(21) The Introduction générale was rejected by Professor Sylvain Lévi of the Sorbonne, where Guénon submitted it as a thesis, 'because it was so thoroughly opposed to any form of historicity.'(22) The same might of course be said of many works originating from within a religion rather than from scholars outside a religion. In general, partisans of Guénon commend his understanding of Hinduism, and opponents criticize it.(23) I am not aware of any study so far carried out by an independent scholar, and am myself unqualified to perform one.

It was through La Gnose that Guénon met Aguéli, and also Albert Puyoo, Comte de Pouvourville, a prominent Gnostic who had been initiated into a Chinese Taoist secret society a few years before; his Taoist name was Matgioi.(24) Both Aguéli and Guénon took Taoist initiations from Pouvourville; the three all wrote in La Gnose on various aspects of Eastern religion.(25) Aguéli, for example, wrote on the doctrinal identity of Islam and Taoism.(26) In 1912, Guénon became Muslim, taking the Shadhili tariqa from Aguéli; he took the name of Abd al-Wahid.

Guénon and Islam
Guénon's conversion to Islam was followed by an unequivocal repudiation of his earliest connections and interests, testified to by two books in which he attacked and exposed Theosophy and spiritualism in general and, in particular, a number of organizations ranging from Aleister Crowley's Golden Dawn to the Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor.(27) He however retained a conviction of the efficacy of magic, as we will see, as well as an involvement in Masonry, which he considered to contain the vestiges of 'valid' Western 'initiatic traditions.'(28) Lings suggests that Guénon's secluded lifestyle in Cairo - extending to a refusal to give his actual address even to regular correspondents - was the result of fear of attack by magic by certain Europeans.(29) These included, according to a slightly dubious source, Téder / Charles Detré, an enemy of his from the days of the Ordre du temple.(30) In a letter to Evola in 1948, Guénon wrote that an 'attack of rheumatism' in 1939 had been caused by 'une influence maléfique,' and disagreed with Evola, who had evidently said that such things could not hurt those who have spiritual stature. Guénon pointed out that the Prophet himself was made ill by sorcerers.(31) Most Guénonian biographers tend to gloss over Guénon's concern with magic, sometimes referring to attacks of persecution mania when Guénon was ill, but in one sense such apologies are unnecessary. A belief in the efficacy of magic is not un-Islamic, as Guénon's own reference to the Prophet reminds us. Such a belief was (and is) widespread in Egypt amongst all types and classes of person,(32) and so may be described as traditional within Islam.

Guénon also retained his interest in non-Islamic religions; indeed, Oldmeadow (for example) argues that he had not abandoned Catholicism, but his evidence is far from conclusive.(33) Guénon's writings certainly continued to emphasize Hinduism; it has been suggested that this was because Westerners who might reject Islam as 'another religion' ('we have had enough of religion') might more easily accept 'truths' which came from something 'on the surface very different,' and possibly because Hinduism is an Aryan religion, and Westerners have an Aryan heritage.(34) In similar vein, Pallis writes: 'Guénon felt that a knowledge of the Eastern tradition, notably the Hindu and the Taoist, might be a means of spurring Christians into rediscovering the deeper meaning which the teachings of the Church harbor implicitly and this, for Guénon, was the only remaining hope for the West.'(35) Hinduism was certainly the tradition which most interested the Western reading public at that time.

Despite this continued interest in Hinduism and other religions, however, Guénon's own practice was (as far as we know) purely Islamic. He is not known ever to have recommended anyone to become a Hindu,(36) whereas (as we will see) he introduced many to Islam.

As well as the two important works on Hinduism already mentioned, Guénon also published in 1927 his La crise du monde moderne. These three works, expanded by his most important later work, La règne de la quantité et les signes des temps (1945), contain the heart of Guénonianism. Guénon is perhaps best described as an influential commentator on modernity, which - he argues - is the Last Age (kali yuga). His method is not to analyze modernity sociologically or to argue against it on the grounds of modernity's own characteristics. This sets him apart from other critics of the age, from Marx to Spengler or Baudrillard. He instead expounds the Traditions (principally, the Hindu tradition), and leaves the reader in this light to judge the modernity the reader himself has experienced.(37) Guénon is also the great exponent of Tradition in a second sense, in the sense of the need to adhere to one of the great orthodox religious traditions which embody 'perennial' Truth. This concept of the Transcendent Unity of Religions is one of Guénon's most important and problematic legacies; its compatibility with Islam is considered below.

Early Guénonians
The years after Guénon's conversion to Islam were devoted mostly to writing; Guénon wrote more than half of his books, and all save one of his most important works, in the 1920s. In 1914, excused military service on health grounds, he had began a series of periods of employment as a high-school philosophy teacher which lasted until 1927, all either in Paris or his native Blois (save for the year 1917-18, spent at a school in Sétif, Algeria). In 1927, however, a new period in Guénon's life began. His wife died, and the niece they had been bringing up (having had no children themselves) was taken back by her mother in 1928. In 1930 Guénon went to Egypt to collect texts for an esoteric publishing house,(38) but remained in Cairo until his death in 1951, marrying an Egyptian in 1934. In Cairo, Guénon dressed in a jallabiyya [robe] and spoke fluent Arabic.(39) Although he shunned the company of most Europeans,(40) he continued to write books and articles for publication in France, and he also continued his involvement in Muslim and non-Muslim religious circles, in Egypt and abroad.(41) He referred many of the Europeans he encountered or corresponded with in this period to Frithjof Schuon (1907-98).(42)

Schuon, the son of a German musician resident in Switzerland, had left school at sixteen and later moved to Paris,(43) where an interest in religions(44) led him to read extensively on Hinduism and Buddhism, and finally led him to the works of Guénon. In the early 1930s, Schuon wrote from Paris to Guénon in Cairo, asking him to recommend a 'master.' Guénon replied that he should go to Ahmad ibn Mustafa al-Alawi (1869-1934), then at Mustaghanim (Algeria).(45)

It is strange that Guénon sent Schuon to an Alawi shaykh in Algeria rather than to his own shaykh in Cairo, who was by then Salama ibn Hasan Salama (1867-1939), the founder of the Hamdiyya Shadhiliyya, later to become one of the largest tariqas in Egypt.(46) In the same way, it is strange that he subsequently sent European visitors to Schuon (whom he had met in 1938 and 1939)(47) rather than to an Arab shaykh. Had Guénon sent his European visitors to his own shaykh, Guénonian Sufis today would most likely be followers of the Hamdiyya Shadhiliyya, and there would be few or no 'novel' Guénonian tariqas for this article to examine. It is interesting that, towards the end of his life, Guénon seems to have decided that sending people to Schuon had been a mistake.

The most likely explanation of his sending Schuon to al-Alawi is that there are obvious reasons for sending a European aspirant to a shaykh who speaks his language and understands his culture. Guénon may have considered al-Alawi an especially suitable person to whom to send a European: although he was reluctant to speak French he understood it well, and in 1926 had led the prayer for the inauguration of the Paris mosque. Many Frenchmen, from his doctor in Algeria to Jacques Berque, were clearly very impressed by him and his baraka [grace].(48) After al-Alawi's death, Guénon may have considered his successor a less suitable person;(49) he may, alternatively, have considered Schuon a more suitable person, for reasons which will be explored below.

In the event, Schuon had moved from Paris to Marseilles before Guénon's reply arrived, but in Marseilles he met some Algerians who belonged to an Alawi zawiya [lodge] there. These Alawis not only insisted that Schuon visit their shaykh, but even raised the money to buy him a ticket on a boat to Oran. In 1932, Schuon traveled to Mustaghanim, where he stayed four months, taking the Alawi tariqa.(50) He took the Muslim name of Nur al-Din Isa.

Probably before leaving Mustaghanim, Schuon received from al-Alawi's nib [deputy], Adda ibn Tunis, an undated document which has been described by later followers of Schuon's as a 'Diplôme de Moqaddem.' This is a curious document, in which Ibn Tunis gives Schuon permission to spread the message of Islam (qad adhantu fi nashr al-dawa al-islamiyya, we have permitted him to propagate the Islamic summons), accept people into Islam (talqin kalimat al-tawhid 'la illaha ila Allah', dictation/inculcation of the Words of Unity 'there is no deity save God') and teach them their basic religious practices (al-wajibat al-diniyya, religious duties).(51) Since no mention is made anywhere of representing or of giving the Alawiyya, this can hardly be considered an appointment as muqaddam [representative] in any normal sense. Indeed, all the things 'permitted' to Schuon are things for which no permission is needed, and which are actually incumbent upon any Muslim anyhow. The 'diplôme' thus has the form of an appointment without any substance.(52) It is hard to think of any reason for Ibn Tunis to produce such an empty document, save perhaps to respond tactfully to a request for an ijaza with which he was unwilling to comply.

Schuon began writing on his return to France, publishing his first articles in Le Voile d'Isis in 1933.(53) These articles are Islamic, but not unsurprisingly also reflect the wider esoteric interests of the periodical in which they were published and of Schuon himself.(54) In 1934, following the death of Ahmad al-Alawi, Schuon established zawiyas of his own in Amiens and then Basel and Paris.(55) He had no independent fortune, and continued working as a textile designer in France, living just over the border from Switzerland, making weekly visits to his zawiya on the banks of the Rhine in Basel, reached down a winding staircase from the Münstergasse.(56) His locum tenens in Basel was Titus (Ibrahim) Burckhardt (1908-84).(57) Burckhardt, who was born in Florence into an established Swiss artistic family, had known Schuon since their schooldays together.(58) In the 1930s, Burckhardt spent some years in Morocco, during which time he had learned Arabic(59) and encountered Sufism.(60) It is unclear at what point he became Muslim. In Paris, Schuon's muqaddam was Michel (Mustafa) Vâlsan (1907-74), a Romanian diplomat who took the Alawi tariqa from Schuon in 1938.(61)

Schuon is the second European Guénonian Muslim to act as shaykh. Aguéli, the first, had received his ijaza from an Egyptian shaykh who may not have taken his position seriously; Aguéli is not known to have used his ijaza to give his tariqa to anyone save Guénon.(62) Schuon, on the other hand, gave his tariqa to hundreds; he seems to have received his ijaza from al-Alawi after al-Alawi's death, in a dream. That this dream included the Buddha Amitabha did not augur well for the future Islamic orthodoxy of his tariqa.(63) It was not widely known that this had been the nature of Schuon's ijaza.

Later followers of Schuon make a distinction between the ability and the authority to pass on a tariqa, arguing that any 'initiate' has the power to initiate others even in the absence of authorization to do so, and that what came to Schuon in his dream was the 'title of shaykh,' i.e. authorization, not the power to initiate, and that he had already been appointed muqaddam.(64) While it is true that the meaning of ijaza is 'authorization,' this is not a distinction normally made in Sufism, and (as we have seen) Schuon's appointment as muqaddam was not one which had any real meaning in the context of the Alawi tariqa.

In 1937, Schuon received, in a vision, 'Six Themes of Meditation' from God; these themes were introduced into the Alawi practice of his zawiya.(65) The receipt of some special practice, often in a vision, frequently heralds the creation of a new tariqa; receipt from God directly, without any intermediary, is highly unusual, if not otherwise unheard of.

New Traditionalist Groups
In 1951, Guénonianism entered a new phase. This year saw a breach between Schuon and Guénon, and Guénon's death; by this time his fame had become sufficient for his death to be reported on the French radio.(66) The immediate grounds of the breach between Schuon and Guénon were the ever problematic question of the Transcendent Unity of Religions.(67) Schuon went further than Guénon on this point, holding that Christian initiation retained 'virtual' validity, and needed only to be somehow 'activated.' Whilst Guénon agreed with Schuon in accepting the validity of Masonic initiation, he held that Christian baptism had ceased to have any esoteric value at the end of the Middle Ages.(68) Schuon held that it was impossible for the Christian baptism to lose all validity, since this would be a betrayal by the Holy Ghost.(69) The implications of this dispute in terms of Islam will be considered later. Guénon was also concerned about the laxity of religious practice at Schuon's zawiya in Lausanne; this point will also be considered later.

Lings took Schuon's side in this dispute, even though he was Guénon's close associate, and Vâlsan took Guénon's side, even though he was Schuon's muqaddam in Paris.(70) As a result of this dispute the first non-Schuonian Guénonian tariqa arose, since Schuon instructed Vâlsan to establish his own separate zawiya in Paris, and to receive into it whoever he wanted.(71)

Following on this dispute, on Guénon's death, and on the Revolution in Egypt, the history of Guénonianism can be divided into three streams: Schuonian, non-Schuonian Muslim, and non-Muslim. Of these, the most important is the Schuonian stream: Schuon already had a large following before Guénon's death, and if anyone can be said to have inherited Guénon's position as the leading Traditionalist, it is Schuon. The non-Muslim stream falls outside the scope of this article; the other two streams are clearly 'novel' in the sense established above.

Taking my earlier criteria in reverse: their spreading is not so different from the established Islamic pattern, and on these grounds they might be classified as 'standard.' However, leaving aside for the moment the question of orthodoxy (which, as we will see, is central to the question of how traditional these groups are) groups in both streams must be classified as 'novel' if only because the shaykhs in question are not on the classic Islamic pattern. Schuon, for example, does not take his silsila from a universally-accepted source - while the source may be accepted, the taking is problematic. Schuon has later attracted a following among born Muslims in the Muslim world, but those non-Schuonian Guénonians who have a more normal silsila have not. Thus, although some Traditionalist Sufis may fulfill one of the two conditions established here, none fulfill both. We will now take Schuon's tariqa, later known as the Maryamiyya, as one case study, and a non-Schuonian tariqa, that of Abd al-Wahid Pallavicini in Milan, as another.

The Maryamiyya
Schuon moved to the US in 1981,(72) settling outside Bloomington, Indiana. A Schuonian community had come into existence there under the leadership of a professor of comparative religion at Indiana University who had been using Schuon's books in his courses. One of these followers of Schuon had established a zawiya near Bloomington, and offered Schuon adjoining land.(73) The reason normally given for Schuon's move is his interest in Native American religion,(74) to which we will return.

I have not visited Bloomington,(75) and the Maryamiyya is a more secretive organization than is normal amongst Sufi tariqas (though no more than is normal amongst Western esoteric organizations). My conclusions must therefore be tentative, and may be excessively negative, since criticism sometimes spreads faster than other varieties of fame. The later Maryamiyya, for example, is widely criticized for having 'left Islam' - an accusation normally based on the presence of non-Muslim followers of Schuon's, and on Maryami failure to observe the Islamic Sharia.

In having Christian (and Buddhist) followers,(76) Schuon was not alone. The US Khalwatiyya-Jarahiyya of the Turkish shaykh Muzaffer Özak, a non-Guénonian tariqa which might be classified as 'standard,' allows non-Muslims to be muhibb [fan, lover; unaffiliated follower] of the shaykh, though only Muslims may be murid [affiliated follower; disciple].(77) The Naqshbandiyya of al-Haqqani also accepts non-Muslims as visiting participants in the tariqa's activities, and many of these take the Naqshbandiyya before becoming Muslim, though in most cases Islam follows within a few days. It is not possible for a non-Muslim to follow the practice of the tariqa, and though there may be a few cases of non-Muslim Naqshbandi followers, these are anomalous. It is suggested that these individuals may be Muslim without acknowledging it.(78) Özak and al-Haqqani thus both make pragmatic concessions. In contrast to Schuon, neither is known to consider Christian sacraments in any way 'valid'- Schuon saw the Christian sacraments as 'initiatory' and Christians as thus able to follow a Master while remaining Christian.(79) Although Schuonians point to great shaykhs of the classical Islamic period who had Christian followers,(80) none of these had non-Muslim followers on the scale that Schuon did. Pragmatic concessions such as those made by Özak and al-Haqqani are well within Sufi tradition. Schuon's stance was not, and so can hardly be described as traditional.

Similarly, Schuon's tariqa is probably not alone in having (reportedly) relaxed the Sharia somewhat for its adherents, at least in principle. According to Hermansen, all Sufi orders in the US allow for some laxity in the practice of the Sharia, especially for new Muslims,(81) and this is also true of al-Haqqani's Naqshbandiyya in Europe. Pragmatic concessions in this area, though in some ways dangerous, are understandable. The question is one of degree and duration: while al-Haqqani may permit new Muslims to pray three times a day rather than five, the clear understanding is that five times a day is the norm, and that this norm should be reached as soon as practicable. There is some indication that Schuon's concessions went further. Although I do not know to what extent this represented Schuon's own position, other Schuonians have argued, for example, that it is permissible to delay the dawn prayer in an age of electric light, or to miss Friday prayers and conceal one's Islam in the hostile environment of the contemporary United States. This is an approach different in kind from al-Haqqani's, and - again - seems to go beyond the tradition of pragmatic concession to verge on modification of the Sharia.

One especially problematic relaxation of the Sharia is Schuon's own. In the late 1940s, for example, he kept in his room a statue of the Virgin Mary. Of this, he wrote later 'I was always strict in matters of sacred law, yet on the other hand I took my stand above all on the Religio Perennis and never allowed myself to become imprisoned in forms which for myself could have no validity.'(82) This seems a clear following of Traditionalism in preference to the Sharia. We will return to this question of priorities

The place of the Virgin Mary in Schuon's tariqa also caused concern. In 1965, Schuon had a vision of the Virgin (Maryam in Arabic), as a result of which he changed the name of his tariqa to 'Maryamiyya.'(83) Shortly afterwards, rumors of unorthodoxy were circulating, notably of the display of pictures of the Virgin in the Lausanne zawiya. Such pictures, referred to as 'icons,' were used (at least by the 1980s) as a focus for meditation in the practice of the tariqa.(84) Maryamis stress that these icons are not used 'in the zawiya,'(85) but this is a distinction which would mean little to most Muslims. In 1985, in a further vision of the Virgin, Schuon received the unusual wird [element of litany; office] 'Ya Maryam aleyka al-salam ya rahman ya rahim' [O Mary, on you be peace, O Compassionate, O Merciful].(86)

Most problematic of all, however, is Schuon's interest in Native American religion. In 1959 he and his wife were 'adopted officially by the Lakota tribe' of Crow Indians, whom they had first met in Paris on 1958.(87) In 1963 Schuon and his wife 'were received as members of the Sioux tribe' during the second of their two early visits to the United States to see the Sioux and Crow Indians of South Dakota and Montana.(88) By the 1980s, Schuon was holding events variously known as 'Primordial Gatherings,' 'Pow Wows' or 'Indian Days,' at which ceremonies such as the 'Rite of the Sacred Pipe' and the Sun Dance were held. Schuon presided over such occasions, sometimes wearing a Native American feather head-dress with two horns, and carrying a feathered staff.(89) Maryamis stress that Muslim 'initiates' of Schuon were forbidden to participate in Native American religious rites, though not in dances which were not 'rites.'(90) This distinction, like that between an icon of the Virgin in different places, indicates a Schuonian concern to avoid syncretism, but again would satisfy few if any non-Guénonian Muslims. It is in no way a traditional distinction.

A further non-Islamic element in Schuon's practice is nakedness. Following his 1965 vision of the Virgin, Schuon (in his own words) had 'the almost irresistible urge to be naked like her little child; from this event onwards I went naked as often as possible;'(91) in at least the 1985 vision, the Virgin herself was naked.(92) Both Schuon and the Virgin appear naked in certain 'Tantric icons' produced by Schuon and one of his wives, Sharlyn Romaine (Badriyah),(93) and at Primordial Gatherings 'women w[ore] what amount[ed] to American Indianized bikinis' or, at the 'Rite of the Sacred Pipe,' (usually attended only by 50 or 60 followers in the 'inner circle') loin-cloths.(94) Schuon maintained that sacred nakedness was compatible with Islam,(95) a highly unusual position, again far from traditional.

Another non-Islamic element in at least Schuon's own personal life was the application to marriage of a distinction unknown to the fiqh [codification of the Law] or the Sharia, that between the 'vertical,' which reaches to God, and the 'horizontal,' which is of earth, which is frequently made in other contexts by Schuonians.(96) In 1965, Schuon (first married in 1949) 'married' Barbara Perry (Hamidah), in a 'vertical' marriage. That this was a 'vertical' marriage is important: Mrs Perry was still married (in a 'horizontal' marriage) to her husband, Whithall Perry, at the time.(97)

There is thus little room to argue that the practice of the contemporary Maryamiyya is traditional. Though it undoubtedly contains traditional elements, and although Schuon's published works may often be compatible with Islamic tradition, the totality of his followers' practice contains sufficient non-Islamic elements to be described as 'new.'

The Ahmadiyya
In about 1949, Abd al-Wahid Pallavicini (1926- ), a wealthy young Italian who had read Guénon's Crise du monde moderne, visited its Italian translator, Evola. Evola told Pallavicini that his own interests were more in temporal than spiritual power, and referred him instead to Burckhardt. In 1951, Pallavicini became Muslim at Burckhardt's hands and took the Alawi tariqa, and the name of Abd al-Wahid Yahya.(98) Having earlier broken with Schuon over the vexed question of the validity of Christian initiation, Pallavicini visited (in 1971) the zawiya in Singapore of the Ahmadi shaykh Abd al-Rashid ibn Muhammad Said (1918-92), an Azhari alim [scholar trained at the prestigious Azhar mosque-university in Cairo] as well as an important shaykh.(99)

The Ahmadi zawiya and the dhikr [communal invocatory prayer] very much impressed Pallavicini, who took the Ahmadi tariqa. During the six months he spent with his new shaykh, Pallavicini learned the Ahmadi awrad [office; litany].(100) Although he could only understand Abd al-Rashid through an interpreter, he also had numerous conversations with Ali Salim, later Abd al-Rashid's khalifa [deputy].(101) On one occasion, Abd al-Rashid suggested that they should pray for the conversion to Islam of Pallavicini's parents. Pallavicini demurred, saying that they were all right as they were, as People of the Book, and could expect to go to Heaven as non-Muslims - a Guénonian view more than an Islamic one. In order to resolve their disagreement, the two wrote to the Azhar for a fatwa [opinio, ruling] - which, unsurprisingly, supported Abd al-Rashid.(102) Either before or despite this dispute, Pallavicini was given an ijaza by Abd al-Rashid.(103) Given that the two earlier ijazas of which we know which were received by Guénonians were somewhat unusual, it is interesting to see how Pallavicini came to receive his. Abd al-Rashid is only known to have given four other ijazas, and of these only one was to someone who was not a long-established Ahmadi, the Director of Dakwah [calling to God] in Brunei, already an important Muslim dignitary. Pallavicini was a very different case, and seems to have been a departure from Abd al-Rashid's normal practice. It is impossible to say why Abd al-Rashid decided to give Pallavicini an ijaza,(104) but shaykhs in any tariqa do sometimes give ijazas for their recipients to 'grow into.' Another partial explanation is that Abd al-Rashid was perhaps reverting to an earlier Ahmadi practice, evidently followed at some times by his father, of distributing ijazas almost wholesale. At any rate, Pallavicini's ijaza, unlike Schuon's, seems to have been entirely regular; on this basis his tariqa might almost be classified as 'standard.'

On returning to Italy, Pallavicini went first to Rome; he had at that time no particular intention of doing anything with his ijaza.(105) It was not until the end of the 1970s that a fortuitous combination of circumstances led to the establishment of an Ahmadiyya in Europe. Pallavicini became involved in Muslim-Christian dialogue and so became famous, and used his fame to spread the Guénonian message. One of the high points of Pallavicini's involvement with this dialogue was the Day of Prayer held by Pope John Paul in Assisi on 27 October 1986, at which representatives of twelve religions met together to pray for peace.(106) Ten delegations represented Islam; Pallavicini went with the CICI, the main Islamic organization in Rome, made a speech to a 'round table of the representatives of religions,' and issued a press release.(107) Pallavicini became a popular interviewee for the Italian newspapers,(108) reflecting the role he had played at Assisi, both because a much interviewed person becomes newsworthy anyhow, and because at this time the position of Islam in Italy was changing significantly. By 1990, Pallavicini had become the most interviewed Muslim in Catholic papers, a sort of Muslim 'de confiance.'(109) He was even being described by the major newspaper Corriere della Sera as shaykh 'of one of the most important Sufi brotherhoods.'(110)

During his Muslim-Christian dialogue, Pallavicini did not try to proselytize for Islam, but found that many of those persons with whom he was trying to carry out an inter-religious dialogue became Muslim (and Ahmadi), so that in the end the 'dialogue with Christians' became a 'monologue of Muslims.'(111) By 1996, three buildings in Milan housed Pallavicini's Milan home, the Centro Studi Metafisici 'René Guénon,'(112) the zawiya of the Ahmadiyya in Italy, the Associazione Italiana per l'Informazione sull'Islam (AIII),(113) and Sintesi (a small publishing house).(114)

Pallavicini's followers see themselves more as members of the Centro Studi Metafisici than as Ahmadis. During their monthly meeting in January 1996, time was divided more or less equally between considering their next step in a new round of the old controversy over the validity of Christian initiation (being held with a Greek Orthodox Guénonian in the pages of the Guénonian publication Vers la tradition),(115) and such recognizably Sufi activities as prayer, dhikr, and communal living in the zawiya. This dual identity - as Ahmadi Muslims and as Guénonians - persists at other times. Various Ahmadis spend much time attending almost every conceivable possible forum to spread the Guénonian view, but also perform the normal Muslim duties and the Ahmadi awrad. The strong identity of Milan Ahmadis as Guénonians combines, in many cases, with a somewhat weak identity as Muslims. Milan Ahmadis are separated from most other Muslims not only by disputes, but by geography and language. This is not true of Pallavicini himself or of his son Yahya, both of whom have contacts with the Islamic world and with various sections of the Ahmadiyya, but it is true of almost everyone else. It is less true, in contrast, for the Western followers of al-Haqqani, who are inevitably in contact with the significant numbers of immigrants among his followers in the West, and who may also from time to time visit their shaykh in the Muslim world, as well as seeing him on his regular visits to the West.

Were it not for the dual identity of its followers, Pallavicini's Ahmadiyya could be described not only as a standard tariqa, but also as traditional. The Milan Ahmadis are all Muslim, and no significant variations of the Sharia are known; their practice is orthodox and their silsila recognized. The spread of the Ahmadiyya from Singapore to Milan differs little from the spread of the Ahmadiyya from Singapore to Brunei or the Naqshbandiyya to Germany. Pallavicini himself was evidently accepted as an Ahmadi shaykh by Ahmad ibn Idris al-Idrisi (a descendant of Ahmad ibn Idris, fount of the Ahmadiyya) when they met in Dubai, since Ahmad ibn Idris al-Idrisi instructed Pallavicini to give the Ahmadiyya to his son Yahya, then aged fifteen.(116) The dual identity however produces conflicts in the area of Transcendent Unity, both in doctrine (Pallavicini's recognition of the validity of Christianity, if not of Christian initiation) and in practice (a tendency to urge Italians to return to Catholicism rather than to become Muslim).

The Milan Ahmadiyya came to be on very bad terms with most of the rest of the Islamic community in Italy, largely for this reason. Pallavicini's high exposure in the press, his unorthodox views on Transcendent Unity - the belief that revelations preceding Islam still remain valid for '[their] believers... not only because they believe in them, but also because [they] are indeed true relative to the community for which [they] are destined'(117) - and his emphasis on 'Sayyidunâ 'Isâ [our lord Jesus] (on whom be Peace), the Christ, 'the Seal of Sanctity''(118) could hardly be expected to pass unremarked, and they did not. He has been criticized for his views on the transcendent unity of religions, for ignorance of the Arabic language, for 'fill[ing] the deficiencies [of his knowledge of Islamic] doctrine with his own personal theories, the enunciation of which is a clear form of kufr [apostasy],' and for actually discouraging Christians from becoming Muslim.(119) Relations at one point became so bad that many non-Ahmadi Muslims refused to return Pallavicini's salamat [ritual salutations] (which is haram [strictly forbidden] unless the greeting comes from a non-Muslim). A demonstration against him was on one occasion organized outside a bookshop in Rome where he was speaking, and on another occasion he was physically ejected from the CICI in Rome. The Ahmadiyya had to change the mosque in which they prayed on Fridays, and finally retreated to their own zawiya.(120) This state of affairs did not last, and by 1995 Pallavicini had to some extent been 'rehabilitated.'

Sections of the Muslim community in Italy, then, clearly rejected Pallavicini's Ahmadiyya as being (in our terms) other than traditional, but this rejection took place within a particular context. At about the same time as it attacked Pallavicini, however, Il Messagero dell'Islam also ran a full-page article with the title: 'Sufism is not Islam!'(121) This view is itself also far from traditional: it is characteristic of the Salafi reformers and their descendants, and while it may now have become part of a strong current within the Islamic mainstream, rejection of Pallavicini on the grounds that he is a Sufi is inconclusive. Some of the further grounds for Pallavicini's opponents' rejection of him, however, are indicative: his views on the status of Christianity, for example, are Guénonian rather than Islamic.(122)

Conclusion
Immigrants' tariqas in the West are commonly as traditional as those in non-Western countries with significant Muslim minorities or as those in the Muslim world itself. Only those Western Sufi tariqas which can be classified as 'standard,' however, can safely be assumed to be traditional. Whilst non-Muslim groups are clearly 'new' in the sense of 'New Religious Movements,' the intermediate category of 'novel' tariqas, and especially the Traditionalist or Guénonian tariqas, may sometimes be significantly 'new' like the Maryamiyya. They may also be broadly traditional, within certain limits, like the Milan Ahmadiyya.

This conclusion is open to dispute, above all by those who see religion as a cultural construct. For those who stress the differences between Moroccan and Indonesian Islam, and who would even dispute that there is 'one' Islam, the implication that the Singapore Ahmadiyya and the Milan Ahmadiyya are the same thing might appear little short of preposterous. It is implicit in this article that I do not share this view. Though it is clear that not all Muslims at all times and in all places have believed exactly the same things and behaved in exactly the same way, there is a central core of beliefs and practices which all Sunni Muslims have always shared, and these - in my view - constitute 'one' Islam. Secondly, as has been pointed out by other scholars,(123) horizontal distinctions may matter more than vertical ones. The son of the Shaykh Abd al-Rashid of Singapore from whom Pallavicini took the Ahmadiyya holds a Ph.D. from a French university and teaches at a Malaysian university, and probably has more in common with Pallavicini than either have with an illiterate Ahmadi peasant in the remote northern Malay state of Kelantan.

This conclusion is also open to more serious dispute on grounds of motivation. The dual identity of the Milan Ahmadiyya, as Guénonians and as Muslims, gives rise to the suspicion that an Ahmadi may be Muslim because he is Guénonian, rather than be Muslim and Guénonian. In the case of Schuon and many of his followers, this Guénonian motivation towards Islam is clear: it is implicit in Schuon's reasoning over his statue of the Virgin in the 1940s, and almost explicit in what some Maryamis say in private conversation. Being Muslim and Guénonian potentially gives rise to the same difficulties as does being Muslim and, say, Marxist: to what extent can a Muslim legitimately defer to an authority which derives its bases from outside Islam? Being Muslim because one is Guénonian is even more difficult: who comes first, the Prophet Muhammad or Guénon? That Pallavicini, for example, parted with Schuon because Schuon disagreed with Guénon - not with the Prophet or with Islam - would make most Muslims uncomfortable, as would Pallavicini's habit of taking Guénon (rather than God or the Prophet) as his standard authority in his speeches and articles. This question of motivation may be the final irreducible difference between Guénonian Sufis and all others. While it is not really within the realm of practice, to which I limited myself at the beginning of this article, it results in an almost tangible difference of orientation between followers of al-Haqqani, who have become Muslim because the truth of Islam and the baraka of their shaykh burst upon them as a blinding light, and the Sufi inhabitants of Traditional Studies Centers.

Mark SEDGWICK,

American University in Cairo


References

  • ABAZA, Mona. 1993. Changing Images of Three Generations of Azharites in Indonesia. Singapore: Institute of South East Asian Studies.
  • ALI SALIM. 1994. Interview in Dandara, Egypt, August.
    • 1996. Various interviews in Singapore, March 1996.
  • ALLIEVI, Stefano. 1996. Interview in Milan, January.
    • and Felice Dassetto. 1993. Il rittorno dell'Islam: i musulmani in Italia. Rome: Edizioni Lavoro.
  • BORELLA, Jean. 1992. "René Guénon and the Traditionalist School". In Antoine Faivre and Jakob Needleman (ed.s), Modern Esoteric Spirituality. New York: Crossroads, 330-58.
  • CASPAR, Robert. 1974 & 1975. "Mystique Musulmane. Bilan d'une décennie [1963-1973]", Institut de Belles Lettres Arabes [Tunis] vol. 133, 69-101 and vol. 135, 39-111.
  • CHACORNAC, Paul. 1958. La vie simple de Rene Guenon. Paris: Ed. traditionelles.
  • DE JONG, Fred. 1978. Turuq and Turuq-linked Institutions in Nineteenth Century Egypt: A Historical Study in Organizational Dimensions of Islamic Mysticism. Leiden: EJ Brill.
  • DERMENGHEM, Emile. 1923. Joseph de Maistre mystique. Paris: La Colombe, 1946.
  • DEVIE, Dominique. 1994. Dossier 'Affaire Schuon' ou les tribulations d'une idôle déchue. Paris: Privately printed.
    • 1996. "Lettres de René Guénon". In The File on the Schuon Case: The History of a Psuedo-Guénonian Cult, http://www.mygale.org/00/cret/ltguenon.htm, accessed 13 Dec.
  • GILSENAN, Michael. 1973. Saint and Sufi in Modern Egypt: An Essay in the Sociology of Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • GODWIN, Joscelyn. 1996. "L'entrée des philosophes orientales dans l'ésoterisme occidentale", paper presented at a conference on 'Symboles et mythes dans les mouvements initiatiques et ésotériques' at the Sorbonne Nouvelle, 11-12 October.
  • GUÉNON, René. 1921a. Introduction générale à l'étude des doctrines hindoues. Paris: M. Rivière.
    • 1921b. Le théosophisme, histoire d'une pseudo-religion. Paris.
    • 1923. L'erreur spirite. Paris.
    • 1925. L'homme et son devenir selon le Vedanta. Paris: Bossard.
  • HABIBIS, Daphne. 1990. "Mahdism in a Branch of a Contemporary Naqshbandi Order in Lebanon". In Marc Gaborieau, Alexandre Popovic and Thierry Zarcone (ed.s), Naqshbandis: cheminements et situation actuelle d'un ordre mystique musulman. Istanbul: Isis, 603-19.
  • HERMANSEN, Marcia K. 1997. "In the Garden of American Sufi Movements: Hybrids and Perennials". In Peter C Clarke (ed.), New Islamic Movements.
    • Forthcoming. "Hybrid Identity Formations in Muslim America: The Case of American Sufi Movements".
  • HOLDIJK, Lammert. 1997. "The Spread of the Naqshbandi Sufi Order within the Mediterranean and Beyond", paper presented at a conference on Cross-cultural Encounters in the Mediterranean, American University in Cairo, 13-15 May.
  • JAMES, Marie-France. 1981. Esotérisme, Ocultisme, Franc-Maçonnerie et Christianisme aux XIXe et XXe siècles. Explorations bio-bibliographiques. Paris, NP.
  • LAURANT, Jean-Pierre. 1982. Matgioi, un aventurier taoïste. Paris: Dervy.
    • (ed.). 1985. René Guénon. Paris: Cahiers de l'Herne.
  • LEVY, John. 1951. Immediate Knowledge and Happiness: Hindu Doctrine of Vedanta. London.
  • LINGS, Martin. 1961. A Sufi Saint of the Twentieth Century: Shaikh Ahmad al-Alawi. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1973.
    • 1995. "René Guénon", Sophia vol. 1, 21-37.
    • 1996. Interview in Surrey, England, September.
  • MARYAMI. 1997. Interview with a senior long-term Maryami who wished to remain anonymous.
  • MIR-HOSSEINI, Ziba. 1994. "Inner Truth and Outer History: The Two Worlds of the Ahl-i Haqq of Kurdistan", International Journal of Middle East Studies vol. 26, 267-85.
  • MUHAMMAD ZABID. 1996. Interview in Kuala Lumpur, April.
  • NASR, Seyyed Hossein. 1991. "Biography of Frithjof Schuon". In Nasr and Stoddart 1991, 1-6.
    • 1996. Interview in Washington DC, May.
    • and William Stoddart (ed.s). 1991. Religion of the Heart: Essays Presented to Frithjof Schuon on his Eightieth Birthday. Washington: Foundation for Traditional Studies.
  • OLDMEADOW, Kenneth S. 1982. Frithjof Schuon, the Perennial Philosophy and the Meaning of Tradition: A Study of Traditionalism. MA thesis: University of Sydney.
  • PAILLARD, Denis. 1993. "Encouragée par des activistes occidentaux: L'inquiétante renaissance de l'extrême droite", Le Monde diplomatique January.
  • PALLAVICINI, Abdul Wahid. 1985. "Death and Immortality", lecture given at the Catholic University of Rome, reprinted in Pallavicini 1995, 123-31.
    • 1990. "At the Full Price", speech delivered at the Institute of San Carlo of Modena, printed in Sacro e Profano vol. 4 (1990) and reprinted in Pallavicini 1995, 147-52.
    • 1992. "On the Immanent Unity of Orthodox Religions", speech delivered at the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions, reprinted in Pallavicini 1995, 163-71.
    • 1995. L'islam intérieur: La spiritualité universelle dans la religion islamique. Paris: Christian de Bartillat.
    • 1996. Various interviews in Milan, January.
  • PALLIS, Marco. 1978. "A Fateful Meeting of Minds: AK Coomaraswamy and R Guénon", Studies in Comparative Religion vol. 12, 176-88.
  • QUINN, William W. 1997. The Only Tradition. Albany: SUNY Press.
  • RAWLINSON, Andrew. 1993. "A History of Western Sufism", Diskus vol. 1, no. 1, 45-83.
    • 1997. The Book of Enlightened Masters: Western Teachers in Eastern Traditions. Chicago: Open Court Press.(124)
  • ROBIN, Jean. 1986. René Guénon: témoin de la tradition. Paris: Guy Trédaniel.
  • SARDAR, Ziauddun. 1993. "A Man for All Seasons", Impact International December, 33-36.
  • SCHUON, Catherine. 1993. Letter to Dominique Devie, 2 April 1993, reproduced in Devie 1994, 54.
  • SCHUON, Frithjof. NDa. Autobiography. MS, privately circulated.
    • NDb. "Sacred Nudity". MS, privately circulated.
  • SCHUTZ, Ali. 1996. Interview in Milan.(125)
  • SEDGWICK, Mark John Robert. 1998. The Heirs of Ahmad ibn Idris: The Spread and Normalization of a Sufi Order, 1799-1996. Doctor Philos. thesis, University of Bergen.
  • SIGAUD, Pierre-Marie (ed.). 1984. René Guénon. Paris: L'Age d'Homme.
  • STENBERG, Leif. 1996. The Islamization of Science: Four Muslim Positions Developing an Islamic Modernity. Lund: Religionshistoriska avdelningen, Lunds universitet.
  • STODDART, William. 1987. "Titus Burckhardt: An Outline of his Life and Works". In Titus Burckhardt, Mirror of the Intellect: Essays on traditional Science and Sacred Art. Cambridge: Quinta Essentia, 3-9.
  • TRABUCCHI, Stefania. 1990. "'Un centro per capire l'Islam': Lo 'shaikh' Pallavicini e l'incontro tra Allah e Roma", Corriere della Sera [Rome edition], 30 July, 18.
  • VÂLSAN, Michel. 1984. L'islam et la fonction de René Guénon: recueil posthume. Paris: Ed. de l'Oeuvre.
  • WATERFIELD, Robin. 1987. René Guénon and the Future of the West: The Life and Writings of a 20th-century Metaphysician. [UK]: Crucible Press.

Notes


1. This article was originally given as a paper ("How Traditional are the Traditionalists? The Case of the Guénonian Sufis") to the eleventh international congress of the Center for Studies on New Religions, Amsterdam (Netherlands), August 7-9, 1997. A version is also forthcoming in the Proceedings of that congress, ed. Mikael Rothstein and Reender Kranenborg (Århus University Press).

2. Tariqa, here spelt tariqa for aesthetic reasons, is normally translated as "brotherhood" or "order." It is the physical embodiment of a tariq or spiritual path within Islam, the group consisting of a shaykh [master] and his followers (male and female).

3. Paillard 1993.

4. For fuller consideration of questions such as this, see ARIES 11, 12 and 13, and Quinn 1997.

5. Gilsenan 1973 of course argues that the Hamdiyya Shadhiliyya was, in Islamic terms, novel. Whilst not wanting to enter this dispute here, I would merely observe that the Hamdiyya Shadhiliyya is sufficiently well within the Egyptian Islamic mainstream for its novel features not to need to concern us.

6. I find this more useful than the binary definition adopted by Hermansen 1997 & Hermansen forthcoming.

7. One of the most interesting of these is the 'Ahl-i Haqq' - see Mir-Hosseini 1994.

8. Almost the only published study of this tariqa, Habibis 1990, is somewhat disappointing. My information is drawn from my own fieldwork and from Holdijk 1997.

9. Chacornac 1958, 25-27, 31-33 & 42-43.

10. Waterfield 1987, 33.

11. Chacornac 1958, 45.

12. Rawlinson 1997.

13. De Jong 1978, 173-74.

14. Chacornac 1958, 31-33. One of the Masonic orders followed the Rite national espagnol, and the other the Rite primitif et originel swédenborgien.

15. Godwin 1996. The Hindu terms for symbolic metaphysics can be traced to the Theosophists, and the conception of cyclic periods to the HB of L.

16. He was consecrated a bishop (Chacornac 1958, 33-39); there was no lower rank than this (Rawlinson 1997).

17. Guénon 1921a and Guénon 1925.

18. Chacornac points out this problem and is unable to suggest a solution (Chacornac 1958, 39-42). Martin Lings suggests that the Hindus in question must have been of the Advaita Vedanta school (Lings 1995, 21-22), since Guénon's views on Buddhism were uncharacteristic of other Hindu schools (Lings 1996).

19. Chacornac 1958, 72. It is unclear in what language these works were available in Benares.

20. The Introduction générale's English translation was published in New Delhi in 1992 (Munshiram Manoharlal), as was L'homme et son devenir's English translation in 1981.

21. Borella 1992, 335.

22. Rawlinson 1997. Rawlinson's interpretation of Lévi's views should probably be understood in the context of the gulf between Guénon's methodology, assumptions and interpretations and those of the professional orientalists of his time.

23. A one-time follower of Guénon, for example, later wrote: 'Vedanta is not the heartless, aloof and repellent body that it seems to have become in the hands of Mr. Guénon, [who] seems often to aim more at promoting his peculiar theory of the oneness of spiritual tradition than at laying bare the truth itself' (Levy 1951, 98, quoted in Rawlinson 1997).

24. See Laurant 1982.

25. See Rawlinson 1993 for Aguéli; for Guénon, Lings 1996. See also Rawlinson 1997.

26. Rawlinson, 1993.

27. Guénon 1921b and Guénon 1923. See Chacornac 1958, 61-62, 65-66.

28. See, for example, the articles he published to this effect in 1913-14 (Chacornac 1958, 51-53). The relationship between Guénon and Masonry is an important and interesting one, which however falls beyond the scope of this article.

29. Lings 1995, 31-32. Guénon advised Lings never to have anything to do with magic, since a person who did thereby made himself more vulnerable to magic (Lings 1996).

30. This said to be from letters written by Guénon in 1932, referring to 'the blood of black animals,' which Robin glosses as 'Sethian magic' (Robin 1986, 261, 266-67). I describe this source as 'somewhat dubious' since, amongst other things, Robin describes Aleister Crowley as 'a notorious spy, working simultaneously for France and Britain' (Robin 1986, 272). Whilst I know little of Crowley, this sounds like the fruit of an over-heated imagination.

31. Robin 1986, 265-66.

32. That Guénon might have earned the enmity of European practitioners of magic is also likely.

33. A full consideration of Guénon's relationship with Catholicism falls beyond the scope of this article. Oldmeadow bases his argument (Oldmeadow 1982, 24-25) largely on Guénon's 1912 marriage to a Catholic wife, and his continuing social and intellectual contacts with Catholics, and on the view of Olivier de Fremond, a friend of Guénon's at this time. Rawlinson, similarly, points out that Guénon married according to the Catholic rite despite his 'initiation' (Rawlinson 1993). I am unsure of the value of the views of Fremond, but the mere fact of social and intellectual contacts with Catholics seem to me to prove little, since Guénon maintained such contacts with believers in a variety of religions (including Catholic Christianity) until the end of his life. It is possible that Oldmeadow (himself a Catholic Guénonian) may be tempted to read more into them than they bear. Both Guénon's conversion to Islam and his marriage happened in the same year, 1912 - I am unsure which happened first, but if Guénon did marry in a Catholic ceremony whilst a Muslim, this is not inexplicable. His (French) wife's relatives would presumably have been less than delighted at the idea of a Muslim ceremony, even supposing that one were possible in France at that time; and so long as steps were taken to ensure that the legal requirements of marriage under the Sharia (mahr [bridewealth] etc) were also met at some point, it would not be hard to make a case for the acceptability of participation in (as opposed to belief in the elements of) a Christian ceremony.

34. Lings 1995, 24 & 29.

35. Pallis 1978, 183-34.

36. Lings 1995, 29.

37. The two most important recent collections of Guénon's works are probably Laurant 1985 and Sigaud 1984.

38. Chacornac 1958, 55-56, 67, 83-84 & 91-92.

39. Chacornac 1958, 92-105. Arabic was the language he used to communicate with his wife (Lings 1995, 32).

40. Guénon used a post office box for many years, and finally had people write to him c/o Martin Lings (Lings 1996).

41. In Egypt, he was a follower of the Hamdiyya Shadhiliyya and was also involved in discussions with non-Muslim foreigners. Guénon continued a sizable correspondence with various figures in Europe, as well as occasionally receiving visitors (Lings 1996).

42. Lings 1996.

43. He was born in Basel, Switzerland, of a German father and a (French) Alsatian mother. See Nasr 1991, 2-3.

44. This interest seems to have been a family interest. Schuon's father, originally a Protestant, on his deathbed requested his two sons to become Catholics. Schuon's brother later became a Trappist monk (Lings 1996).

45. Lings 1996.

46. Guénon's first shaykh, Abd al-Rahman Illish, had died soon after his arrival in Cairo. Rawlinson gives the date of Illish's death as 1929 (Rawlinson 1993), but Guénon clearly met him, since Vâlsan reports Guénon saying that Illish had explained the esoteric meaning of the letters of the name Allah to him, and it was to Illish that Guénon dedicated his Symbolisme de la Croix in 1931 (Vâlsan 1984, 30-31).

47. Nasr 1991, 4.

48. See Lings 1961, 14 & passim, and pp. 79-82 & 116. Although Guénon never met Ahmad al-Alawi (Lings 1996), it is unsurprising that he knew of such a famous shaykh: in 1923, al-Alawi had as many as 100,000 followers, mostly in North Africa but also in Damascus, Palestine, and Aden (Lings 1961, 116). He had zawiyas [lodges] in Marseilles and Cardiff, but his followers in these places were mostly Algerian and Yemeni, respectively.

49. According to Caspar 1974 & 1975, the tariqa went into decline after Al-Alawi's death.

50. Lings 1996. Schuon found Guénon's letter on his return to France.

51. Quoted from a photocopy lent me by 'Maryami.' The photocopy was accompanied by an accurate type-written translation into French on another sheet; the title of 'Diplôme de Moqaddem' had been added at the top of the translation in an unknown hand.

52. It is notable that Ibn Tunis uses idhn [permission] rather than ijaza [authorization].

53. After Guénon's departure from Paris, Le Voile d'Isis was edited by Marcelle Clavelle, who was in correspondence with Guénon (Lings 1996).

54. The first was 'L'aspect ternaire de la Tradition monothéiste' (June 1933), followed by 'Shahadah et Fatihah' (July 1933); in February 1934, he published 'Réflexions sur le symbolisme de la pyramide.' See Bibliography in Nasr & Stoddart 1991.

55. Rawlinson 1993 states that the first Swiss zawiya was in Lausanne, but according to Lings (1996) it was in Basel, moving with Schuon to Lausanne during the Second World War.

56. Lings 1996.

57. So it would seem, since it was Burckhardt who, in Schuon's absence, was called to the zawiya to meet the young Martin Lings.

58. Stoddart 1987, 3-5. His father, Carl, was a sculptor; his most famous relation was his great uncle, Jakob Burckhardt (1818-97), whose Geschichte der Renaissance in Italien, written in the 1870s, remains a standard work. Carl Burckhardt fills six pages in the catalogue of the British Library. Titus Burckhardt was evidently not related to Johann Ludwig Burckhardt, the explorer of Nubia, Egypt, etc.

59. Sufficiently well later to translate the Fusus al-hikam of Ibn Arabi and Jili's Al-insan al-kamil (Stoddart 1987, 9).

60. Stoddart 1987, 8-9.

61. James 1981, 335-36.

62. Rawlinson 1997.

63. 'I had in dream seen all the prophets, and their voices were sometimes like rushing water; the Buddha Amitabha also arose, golden, before my inward eye. Sidi 'Addah ben Tunes, sitting beside the tomb of Shaykh Ahmad, gave me the Shaykh's instructions. I was then appointed muqaddam.' (Schuon NDa, 127-28, quoted in Rawlinson 1997). The context makes it possible that Adda appointed Schuon muqaddam in response to a dream, but it seems much more likely that Adda formed part of the dream.

64. Maryami 1997.

65. Rawlinson 1997.

66. Chacornac 1958, 10.

67. Rawlinson 1997 mentions other grounds: that followers of Schuon felt that Guénon should become Schuon's muqaddam, likening the role of Abd al-Wahid Yahya Guénon in relation to Nur al-Din Isa Schuon to that of a more famous Yahya [John] and Isa [Jesus].

68. This, of course, is not the view of Islam, which is more concerned with the Prophet Muhammad than the end of the Middle Ages.

69. Lings 1996.

70. Lings describes himself in those years as 'young and tactless.' Relations between him and Guénon deteriorated further because Guénon became concerned that Lings was not merely transmitting his letters, but also opening them. This suspicion is voiced in a letter of Guénon's dated 18 September 1950, excerpted in Devie 1996. It is likely that Guénon's letters had indeed been opened, but by the Egyptian censorship: Lings had been on one occasion summoned by the police to explain apparently coded writing (in fact, Masonic symbols) in one letter addressed to Guénon c/o Lings. Although Lings's wife continued to visit Guénon's wife, relations between Lings and Guénon were interrupted: Lings only saw Guénon once again, when he took a doctor to see him shortly before his death.

71. Lings 1996.

72. Nasr 1991, 5.

73. Schuon 1993. Catherine Schuon does not give the name of the professor, and there is no obvious choice from the IU faculty in 1997. Catherine Schuon does not say that there was a 'zawiya,' but since she talks of 'a house where friends could come to pray' a zawiya must be meant, despite her later denial that there was any 'community' in Bloomington.

74. This is the explanation, for example, given by Nasr.

75. When I was considering a visit there two years before Schuon's death, one senior Maryami told me that it was unlikely that Schuon would agree to meet me.

76. Various reports.

77. Hermansen 1997, 153. Nasr is evidently on good terms with the Khalwatiyya-Jarahiyya, since he wrote the foreword to an English translation of the works of their shaykh (Stenberg, email to the author, November 1996).

78. Observation and various interviews.

79. Pallavicini 1996. Guénon, on the other hand, saw medieval European Christianity as retaining esoteric validity. That he saw any 'validity' in Christian esotericism even after the revelation of Islam is difficult, though not impossible, to reconcile with Islamic teachings.

80. This point was made both by Maryami 1997 and by Nasr 1996.

81. Hermansen 1997, 153.

82. Schuon NDa, 264, quoted in Rawlinson 1997.

83. Rawlinson 1997.

84. Rawlinson 1997 and Sardar 1993, 35.

85. Maryami 1997.

86. Sardar 1993, 35. 'Compassionate' and 'Merciful' are Divine Names and attributes; the formula is reminiscent of that used for the Prophet.

87. Schuon 1993.

88. Nasr 1991, 5.

89. Sardar 1993, 35, and Rawlinson 1997. Photograph of one such Gathering were given to the author by Rawlinson.

90. Maryami 1997. The same distinction between 'rites' and 'dances' was made by Catherine Schuon in a marginal comment on a draft sent her by Devie (reproduced in Devie 1994, 10-11).

91. Schuon NDb, quoted in Rawlinson 1997)

92. Sardar 1993, 35.

93. Rawlinson 1997. Rawlinson has provided the author with a photograph of such a painting.

94. Sardar 1993, 35, and Rawlinson 1997. Rawlinson's photograph of a Gathering shows bikinis.

95. Rawlinson 1997.

96. For example, Nasr - see Stenberg 1996. The distinction may derive from Guénon's Symbolisme de la croix.

97. Rawlinson 1997.

98. Pallavicini 1996. Burckhardt was no sympathizer of Evola's: when Pallavicini passed on a question of Evola's to Burckhardt - why was Burckhardt no longer publishing his articles - Burckhardt replied in surprise: 'Does Monsieur Evola not remember that he trained the SS?' The question of a link through Guénon and Evola to the occultist elements of the NSDAP is a fascinating one, which lies far beyond the scope of this article.

99. For details, see Sedgwick 1998.

100. Pallavicini 1996.

101. Ali Salim, 1994 & 1996. Some of these conversations took place while Pallavicini was playing his piano, and are remembered by Ali Salim as amongst the more bizarre episodes of his life.

102. Ali Salim 1994.

103. Pallavicini 1996.

104. He is said by his son to have later been 'very angry' with Pallavicini, though again it is not clear exactly why (Muhammad Zabid 1996).

105. Pallavicini 1996.

106. The twelve were: African and Amerindian animists, Baha'is, Buddhists, Christians, Jains, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Shintoists, Sikhs and Zoroastrians (New York Times 28 October 1986, p. A3).

107. Numerous verbal reports confirm his attendance.

108. Allievi & Dassetto 1993, 195.

109. Allievi 1996.

110. Trabucchi 1990.

111. Pallavicini 1996.

112. Later called simply the Metaphysical Studies Centre of Milan, after objections from Guénon's family (Yahya Pallavicini, interview, January 1996).

113. In non-Italian contexts, the meaning of the first 'I' in AIII is usually changed from Italiano to Internazionale.

114. Where no other source is given, information such as this derives from my field trip to the Milan Ahmadiyya in January 1996.

115. Nikos Vardhikas had reviewed Pallavicini's L'Islam intérieur in Vers la tradition 61 (Sept 1995), pp. 55-57. The review had been generally sympathetic and complimentary, but raised questions over Pallavicini's rejection of Christian baptism as a valid rite of initiation. The following edition (62, Dec 1995) carried a reply signed by the Centro Studi Metafisici objecting principally to Vardhikas's views on initiation (pp. 49-51), and a one-page reply to this by Vardhikas (p. 51). A five-page draft 'response to the response to the response' was discussed on at least three occasions over the weekend, for a total of several hours. The controversy was obscure to a non-Guénonian; in mainstream Islamic terms it was also incomprehensible, if not entirely meaningless.

116. Pallavicini 1996.

117. Pallavicini 1990.

118. See for example Pallavicini 1992. The description of Jesus as rasul [the title reserved for the Prophet Muhammad] (Pallavicini 1985) is presumably a slip of the pen.

119. Letters printed in Il Messagero dell'Islam from Abdu-l-Rahim Yahya (5:3, 15 Dec 1986), Ali Schutz (5:5, Feb/March 1987) and Abdu-l-Hadi Ibn Yahya (5:16, 15 Apr 1987). Schutz 1996 stated that his name had been borrowed by the then editor of Il Messagero, Abd al-Rahman (Danilo Rosario) Pasquini, who may also have been the author of the other two letters.

120. Schutz 1996 and Allievi 1996, confirmed in part by Pallavicini 1996.

121. Il Messagero dell'Islam 5:17 (15 May 1987), p. 5.

122. While Guénonians may argue that this view should be the proper Islamic view, it is undeniable that, in general, it is not the mainstream Islamic view.

123. See, for example, Abaza 1993.

124. References to this work are to a manuscript version containing some information not included in the shorter, published version. For this reason, no page references are given.

125. Ali Schutz is the Secretary of the UCOII, a major Italian Islamic organization.