Royal Institute of Philosophy

The Perennial Philosophy

Author(s): W. R. Inge
Source: Philosophy, Vol. 22, No. 81 (Apr., 1947), pp. 66-70
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Institute of Philosophy
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3747215
Accessed: 01-07-2015 09:28 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and Royal Institute of Philosophy are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Philosophy.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 01 Jul 2015 09:28:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DISCUSSION:

The Perennial Philosophyl

The phrase philosophiaperennisis said to have been firstused by Leibniz.

It has been adopted and freelyemployedby the Catholic Neo-Thomists,for
whom it means a developmentof the Aristotelianism,modifiedby strong
Neoplatonic elements, which Arabian scholars transmitted to the first
Renaissance in the West. It claims also to be a returnto the early Christian
philosophyof religion,a fusionof Hellenisticand Jewishthought,the latter
itself a syncretisticreligionwith many Persian and other borrowings.The
directedagainstvariousmodernphilosophies,has been conducted
controversy,
with great abilityby such writersas Gilson,Maritain,Sheen,Watkin,Dawson
and D'Arcy, whose books would perhaps have receivedmore attentionfrom
independent thinkers, but for the suspicion which surrounds apparent
attemptsto revivethe methodsand inhibitionsof the medieval schoolmen.
There has been a parallel movement in the Orthodox Eastern Church,
representedin Russian by Frank, Bardyaeff,Solovioffand Lossky. These
writersare more Platonic and more fearlesslymysticalthan the Thomists.
Origenin the East has more weightthan Augustine.
The phrase philosophiaperennishas also been annexed by the American
Wilbur Urban, in his very able book The IntelligibleWorld. The Great
Tradition,as he calls it, is above the oppositionbetweenrealismand idealism.
It rests on the ultimate inseparabilityof value and reality.Our standard is
what man recognizesas value when his life is fullest.Ens est unum, verum,
bonum. Historicismturns the absolutes of religioninto the relatives of an
evolutionaryprocess; psychologyand biology reduce faith to an instinctin
the serviceof life.Modernismhas ended in a philosophyof illusionismwhich
includes science itself.Permanentpresuppositionsare turnedinto gratuitous
assumptions, and enduring postulates into plain prejudices. A certain
emancipationfromslavery to time is, as Bertrand Russell says, essential to
philosophicthought.And yet we cannot, with Whitehead,refuseto consider
the space-timeproblemin relationto values. Bergson and otherspack time,
or space-time,with meaningsand values which do not belong to them, and
thisis the onlythingthat givesto moderndoctrinesofemergencethe apparent
whichtheyseem to have. We have no rightto endow time with
intelligibility
a nisus,to replace the old idea of providence,and even to become the begetter
of the Deity. There is no elementof directionin space and time. Space and
time are onlythe warp and woofof the canvas on whichwe draw our pictures
of ponderable and measurable things. The intelligibleworld is non-spatial
and non-temporal.If mutual externalityis the condition of things in the
worldof sense, mutual compenetrationis the characterof the spiritualworld.
If we regardrealityas a realm of values, phenomenaland noumenalmay be
translatedinto instrumentaland intrinsic.May we not thinkof eternityas a
mode in whichwe expressabsolute value? The solutionof the riddle of space
and time,if therebe a solution,lies outside space and time.
With all this I heartilyagree. But when Urban tries to relate the modern
postulate of human perfectibilityand universal progresswith the Second
Law of Thermodynamics,the principleof Carnot as the French call it, it
seems to me that he is as little successfulas all otherswho have attempted
I The Perennial Philosophy. By ALDOUS HUXLEY. (I946. London: Chatto

and Windus. Pp. vii + 358. I2s. 6d. net.)

66

This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 01 Jul 2015 09:28:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE

PERENNIAL

PHILOSOPHY

to reconciletwo contradictorytheoriesof process in the cosmos. He holds,

rightlyin my opinion,that ultimatelythe time process is irrelevantto value,
because value can neithercome into being nor pass out of being. But he
cannot give up the notion that the world is somehow getting better and
better,and refusesto allow that entropymeans the ultimatevital and physical
extinctionof the universe."To speak forthe universein termsof narrowand
abstract predictionsof physics and astronomyis to betray a bias of mind
that is provincial." I agree that "there is no such thing as an entropyof
value." But I cannot agree that we can accept a theoryof "progress,with
its notionof destiny,whichmakes of historyan unique and individualwhole,"
nor that evolutioninvolvesthe idea of a universalnisus. Like HerbertFisher,
I can findno evidence fora unique nisus in history.Nor, if we pack the time
process with intrinsicvalues, can we agree with Bosanquet that "for a
philosophy that knows its business, the law of degradation makes no
difference."Bosanquet, of course, has no use for this time-philosophy.
William James suggests that "the last expiringpulsation of the universe's
life may be, I am so happy and perfectthat I can stand it no longer"perhaps the silliest remarkever made by a great man. I do not think that
Urban is really doubtfulabout the philosophywhich he expounds; but the
problem of time has not yet been solved. Science seems, once again, to be
resolvingitselfinto mathematicalsymbols.But mathematicsknows nothing
of irreversibleprocesses,nor of a nisus which controlscause and effect.Sir
James Jeans' mathematical God, whetherhe is xn or the square root of
minus one, must be puzzled by the perishinguniversewhich is the "moving
image" of the unchanging.It is certainlypuzzlingto those who do not think
that subjective idealism is a legitimateroad of escape. Eddington admitted
that he could see no way out of the dilemma.
And now we have a book by Aldous Huxley, duly labelled The Perennial
Philosophy.The developmentin the thoughtof this brilliantwritertowards
a spiritualreligionwas already apparent in his Ends and Means (I937). He
is now quite definitelya mysticalphilosopher.The same tendencyis manifest
in other independentthinkers.To myself,as is natural, it appears as one of
the very few encouragingsigns in the dismal age in which our lot is cast.
But the perennial philosophy,for Huxley, goes much furtherback than
Thomas Aquinas, furtherthan Origen and Plotinus, furtherthan St. Paul
and the FourthGospel. It is the philosophyof India, and ofthe wholemystical
tradition,which is fundamentallythe same in all countriesand behind all
creeds. So at least our author thinks.
There is more than one way of studyinghistory.We may describeit as a
series of attempts to establish a decent and civilized life, interruptedand
sometimes destroyed by periodical senseless wars. Parochial squabbles
wreckedthe two most graciouscivilizationsin history,those of ancientGreece
and medieval Italy. The same fate now threatensthe Renaissance civilization
of Europe, which may or may not be now engaged in co-operativesuicide.
But historymay also be the biographyof ideas. From this point of view
we may ask whetherthere has been a perennial philosophy,as old not as
the human race, but as the higherreligion,and whetherwe can assign a
date forits appearance. Strangelyenough we can answerthe latterquestion.
The most importantperiodin the historyof religionis not the firstcentury
of our era, but the middle of the last millenniumbeforeChrist. Almost at
the same time a highertype of religionappeared in China, India, Persia, the
Hellenic cities, and Palestine. The Upanishads, followedby Buddha, Laotze
and Confuciusin China, the spread of Zoroastranismin Persia, the Ionic
philosophers and Pythagoras among the Greeks, and the later Hebrew

67

This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 01 Jul 2015 09:28:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PHILOSOP

HY

prophets,mark a new era in human thought.When we comparethe theology

of Jeremiah,Micah, and the later Psalms with that of the so-calledhistorical
books, we must admit that we are not dealing with the same religion.It is,
as ChristopherDawson says, a spiritualchange of profoundsignificance,the
discovery of a new world of absolute and unchanging reality. The later
prophecyhas its culminationin the Gospel of Christ,"the prophetofNazareth
in Galilee."
The wind of the Spirit bloweth where it listeth,and we need not discuss
why this unique revelationtook place at this particulartime. But one fact
seems to be well established. The floweringtimes of humanity follow the
fusion of two cultures. In Greece the northerninvaders mixed with the
"Pelasgians." Hebrew thought was deeply affectedby the Exile. Arabian
philosophy flourishedat the two ends of Islamic conquest, in Spain and
Persia. Indian thoughthas been fertilizedby the Aryans and by later invaders. Kabir is claimed as a co-religionistboth by Moslems and Hindus.
That Christianityis a syncretisticreligionthere can be no doubt. Isolation
always tends to produce stagnation.
Even in the Catholic Church there was a good deal of what the Greeks
called theocrasia,until dogma and cultus froze.The birthdayof Mithrasthe
Invincible Sun became the birthday of the Sun of Righteousness. The
December Saturnalia are still honouredwith plum pudding and yule logs,
and by presentsof a turkeyto Bob Cratchit.The Isis of Apuleius,the Queen
of heaven, took kindlyto her promotionto be /urjzTp
0eov. In Cyprusthereis
a church dedicated to Panagia Aphroditessa,the Blessed VirginAphrodite.
The Aencadumgenetrix,hominumdivomquevoluptas,alma Venus, like many
gay young women,has become ultra-respectablein her old age.
But these accommodationsmust not be too long deferred.There is no give
and take now between Moslems and Hindus in India, nor even between
separated branchesof the ChristianChurch.And yet it may not be too late,
if both sides realize that theirunwillingnessto learnis doingthemboth harm.
It has been said that Christianityand Buddhismare both suffering
fromtheir
refusalto respect each other. Radhakrishnan'sstimulatingbook on Eastern
and Western thought gives a long list of European and American writers
who have acknowledged great obligations to Indian philosophy,and this
writerhimself,like Rabindranath Tagore, has not studied European philosophy in vain. Much, however, remains to be done, and, as Huxley sees
clearly,the rapprochementmust be throughmysticalreligion,thecommunion
of the soul with God, whichis religionin its essentialfoundation.
The perennialphilosophy,says Huxley, is the metaphysicthat recognizes
a divine realitysubstantial to the world; a psychologythat findsin the soul
somethingsimilar to or even identical with divine reality; an ethic that
places man's final end in the knowledge of the ground of all being. Such
knowledge can be won by those who fulfil the conditions upon which
alone it can be gained. It is a faculty which, as Plotinus says, "all
possess but few use." Only the pure in heart and poor in spirit can come
to unitive knowledge.All the exponents of the perennialphilosophyagree
that man is a kind of trinitycomposed of body, soul, and spirit. The distinction between soul and spirit is much emphasized by St. Paul, whose
pneuma, as the Greek Fathers recognized, is almost identical with the
Platonic nous, and, as Huxley insists,with the Indian atman. Christianity,
he says, has been overlaid by an idolatrous preoccupationwith events and
thingsin time,regardedas intrinsicallysacred and divine. The mysticshave
gone some way towards liberating it from this unfortunateservitude to
historicfact. Modern idolatersof progresspreferan impossibleexistence on
dry land to love, joy and peace in our native ocean (p. Io7.)
68

This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 01 Jul 2015 09:28:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE

PERENNIAL

PHILOSOPHY

The way of life may be summed up as charity,the marks of which are

disinterestedness,tranquillityand humility.That disinterestedness,or as
as the root and flowerof religion,is also
Huxley used to say non-attachment,
the creed of Walter Lippmann.
Anotherimportantdistinctionis that between intellect (in the scholastic
sense) and reason, between nous and dianoia. Neglect of this distinction
had led to much ignorantcensureof "Greek intellectualism,"encouragedby
modernpragmatism.
The doctrine of an evolving God, with a passionate concern not with
eternitybut with futuretime,has colourednot only such popular philosophy
as that of Wells, but that of Alexander and other leaders of thought.It is
not Christian.Bosanquet vainly protestedthat to throwour ideals into the
futureis the death of sane idealism. The temptationhas been too strong.
The future,as Anatole France says, is a convenientplace in which to store
our dreams.
The eternalNow is a consciousness;the temporalworldis known,sustained
and perpetuallycreated by an eternal consciousness.Eternal life "stands in
the knowledge" of the Godhead. Popular religionhas forgotteneternityand
occupied itself with events in time. "Into the yawning void thus created
flowedthe tide of political idolatry; of which the practical consequences are
total war, revolutionand tyranny." (p. 278.) In the words of William Law,
whose greatness Huxley appreciates, "religion in the hands of self serves
only to discover vices of a worse kind than in nature left to itself. Pride,
self-exaltation,hatred and persecution,under a cloak of religiouszeal, will
sanctifyactions which nature leftto itselfwould be ashamed to own."
This book, enrichedby copious and well chosenquotations fromthe masters
of the spirituallife,is probablythe most importanttreatiseon mysticismthat
we have had formany years. But many will thinkthat it is more Buddhist
than Christian. Crucial questions suggest themselves. Was the Christian
revelation a mere disclosure of timeless truths,or do happenings in time
affectsupertemporalreality? Is the conflictwith evil a real battle, still
undecided? Is the growthof soul into spiritrightlydescribedas self-noughtas the German mysticssaid? Many of the Christian
ing-ich bin entworden,
mysticshave used this language. "Leave nothingof myselfin me," Crashaw
makes St. Teresa pray. But surelypersonalityis enlarged,not transcended,
as we advance in the spiritual life. Personalitymust be preserved,Plotinus
says. Se[ EKaarov EKaarovEtvva. In the spiritualworld,as he picturesit,we
are transparentto each other, because there is no longer anything that
separates us. But this does not mean that we are no longerourselves.
The question comes to a head whenwe considerour relationsto our "evenChristian,"as Julian of Norwichputs it. "Until we put an end to particular
attachments,"Huxley says in p. 122, "there can be no love of God with the
whole heart." Is this true? There is, we remember,a text in the Gospels in
which Christbids us "hate" even our parents as the conditionof being his
disciples. If Christeversaid this,it is an example ofthe hyperbolicallanguage
which he permittedhimself,like other popular preachers,to use without
fearingthat his words might be misunderstood.A cloisteredcontemplative
mightbe freefromparticularattachments;but is this a counsel forpersons
living in the world? Can we love God withoutloving our brotheralso? And
do not many of us arrive at the love of God throughthe purificationand
intensificationof familyand conjugal affection?What do we mean by the
love of God? For myself,it means homage to the attributes of Love or
Goodness, Truth and Beauty, in which the divine nature has been revealed
to us, and gratitude for the response to private prayer, of which I have
sometimes,less often than I could wish, been conscious. But the kind of

69

This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 01 Jul 2015 09:28:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PHILOSOPHY
isolation which some of the extrememysticsseem to recommendwould be
forme a fatal impoverishment
of my spirituallife. "Do I wish to know anything except God and myself?Nothing," so Augustineonce says. It is not
true, unless we expand our notions both of God and self far beyond our
customaryuse of the words. The negativeroad, if followedexclusively,leads
to Nirvana, not to the Christian heaven or the intelligibleworld of the
Platonists. The spirituallife,as lived on earth,must be a double movement
of withdrawaland return.
There is one othercuriousfeaturein this book whichmay or may not have
a vital connexion with Huxley's philosophy. He has studied psychical
research,and believes that "laboratorytests" have establishedthe realityof
some beliefs which fiftyyears ago would have been stigmatizedas foolish
superstitions.He now believes not only in telepathybut in clairvoyanceor
second sight,miraculouscures, the power of predictingthe future,and even
in levitation. Three "mystical phenomena," as they used to be called, are
I suppose,
inhisopinionona lowerlevelthanspiritualreligion,and are therefore,
irrelevantto the philosophyof mysticism,but on the materialand psychical
plane he believes them to be real. He speaks as a man of science,and would
regard my incredulityas mere obstinacy; but though I try to keep an open
mind about telepathy,of whichI am still quite unconvinced,I do not believe
a word of all the rest. Either Christina Mirabilis and Home, the medium,
flewwithout wings, or they did not. If they did, the law of gravitationis
unreliable.If they did not, no doubt seeingis believing,but intelligentpeople
may sometimessee things that are not there. I know of a case when two
detectives flew howlingfroma ghost which was, literally,only moonshine.
Crookes was an honest man and a real man of science, but he was not
necessarilyexempt fromhallucinations.He chose as the motto for his coat
of arms, Ubi cruxibi lux. His friendsamended it to Ubi Crookesibi Spooks.
I thinkThomas Huxley would have spoken severelyto his grandson.
W. R. INGE.

70

This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 01 Jul 2015 09:28:22 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions