American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
10
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue03 2025
PAGE NO.
10-13
10.37547/ajsshr/Volume05Issue03-03
Rene Guenon’s
Place in The System of World
Comparative Philosophy
Bekbaev Rauf Rustamovich
PhD, Head of the Department of Education Management and Pedagogy, Tashkent International University of Education, Uzbekistan
Received:
23 January 2025;
Accepted:
25 February 2025;
Published:
14 March 2025
Abstract:
The article examines the contribution of Rene Guenon to the development of world comparative
studies. The author analyzes his unique approach to comparing traditional religious and philosophical systems
based on the concept of the Primordial Tradition. Guenon did not just compare different cultural and spiritual
teachings, but sought to identify their universal metaphysical core. Special attention is paid to his criticism of
modernity, opposition to Western rationalism and the use of the symbolic method of analysis. The article
discusses to what extent Guenon's traditionalist approach can be considered as an alternative to classical methods
of comparative studies and to what extent his ideas remain relevant in modern scientific and philosophical
discourse.
Keywords:
Tradition, traditionalism, comparative philosophy, Rene Guenon, dialogue of cultures.
Introduction:
Rene Guenon is one of the most
mysterious and controversial figures in the intellectual
history of the 20th century. His works had a significant
impact on the development of comparative religious
studies, the philosophy of traditionalism and
comparative studies in a broad sense. A researcher,
philosopher, and esotericist, he balanced between
strict academicism and deep involvement in traditional
spiritual teachings. Comparative studies as a discipline
involves a comparative analysis of cultural,
philosophical and religious systems, revealing their
structural analogies and deep connections. In this
context, Guenon stands out for a special approach that
is opposed to Western rationalism. He did not just
compare different traditions, but sought to show their
common metaphysical basis, arguing that all authentic
spiritual systems go back to a single Primordial
Tradition. Guenon's figure does not fit into the
standard academic categories. His texts simultaneously
resemble fundamental philosophical studies and
esoteric treatises, offering a kind of "meta-view" of the
universe. In this sense, his work represents a challenge
to modern scientific discourse, requiring not only
rational,
but
also
intuitive
comprehension.
Consideration of Guenon's place in the system of world
comparative studies requires taking into account his
concept of traditionalism, attitude to modernity and
the method of symbolic analysis. How relevant are his
ideas today? Is his approach an alternative to classical
comparativism, or does it represent an independent
line of thought? These questions continue to worry
researchers and highlight the complexity and
complexity of Guenon's legacy.
LITERATURE ANALYSIS AND METHODOLOGY
In this work, the author relies on primary sources, i.e.
the works of representatives of comparative
philosophy and Rene Guenon in order to determine his
place in the system of world comparative philosophy.
To do this, the author applied such methods as
hermeneutics,
structural
analysis,
comparative
analysis, and an axiological approach. The author drew
on the works of such philosophers as P. Masson-Oursel,
P.T.Raju, Fung Yu-
Lan, Hu ShiР, Nishida Kitaro and
others. At the same time, the work of Rene Guenon
himself occupied an important place for the
implementation of an objective comparative analysis.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Rene Guenon's activity falls during the period of
conceptualization
and
institutionalization
of
philosophical comparative studies in the 20-60s of the
XX century, when Paul Masson Oursel published his
Comparative Philosophy (1923), in which he discusses
the methodology of comparative philosophy,
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
11
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research (ISSN: 2771-2141)
chronology, logic, metaphysics and psychology.
Attempting to generalize the results of his research and
analysis of Western and Eastern philosophy, Masson-
Oursel believes that a truly positive philosophy should
be a comparative p
hilosophy that “captures” in
comparative reflection the “common and special”,
similarities and differences, the universal interrelation
of phenomena, the world in its diversity and integrity
[1, 13-25]. Comparative philosophy should study
spiritual and cultural phenomena in their interrelation
and mutual influence, both in the East and in the West,
but without the influence of Eurocentrism and any
"isms" in general, since this leads to the loss of the
uniqueness of philosophical concepts. The thinker
believes that the natural-geographical and socio-
cultural environment has a great influence on the
formation of a particular worldview, which also affects
the development of philosophical reflection in any
region, therefore, the broadest environment for the
development of philosophy is civilization, which
encompasses all spiritual and material processes [2,
109-110]. It is civilization that is the determining factor
in the development of a particular philosophy,
therefore it is necessary to take into account the
relationship, for example, of Indian philosophy with
religion. In this regard, it should be said that Guenon's
comparative studies also pays great attention to the
phenomenon of civilization, but as a "generation and
expression of a certain mindset," for the most objective
consideration of which Guenon considers it necessary
to study its structural components, however, through
the prism of their relationship to tradition [3, 79].
Guenon distinguishes between traditional and non-
traditional civilizations. He considers the Eastern
civilizations (Indian, Chinese, Islamic) to be the first,
and the entire Western civilization as a whole to be the
second, therefore, we can talk about metaphysical,
spiritual, and material civilizations, respectively, and in
this regard the positions of the two thinkers are already
diverging, especially considering that Masson-Oursel
applies the principle of parallelism of spiritual and
philosophical development. Europe, India and China,
giving preference to India due to its enormous
influence on other peoples in the past and its
ethnolinguistic kinship with Western civilization [4, 66].
For Guenon, Indian civilization is also a priority, but he
finds absolutely no parallelism, even in terms of
language. On the contrary, the difference between the
West and the East “is comparable to that which exists
geographically between Asia and Europe, where the
latter is only a continuation of the former; in the same
way, strictly speaking, the position of the West in
relation to the East is equal to the position of the
branch growing from the trunk” [3, 28].
Bertrand Russell, as one of those who contributed to
the conceptualization of philosophical comparative
studies, had a negative attitude towards the attempt to
westernize China, calling for the preservation of the
"soul of Chinese civilization", Chinese culture and
philosophy, and dialogue between the West and the
East; he opposed the suppression of its aggressiveness,
the spirit of exploitation and profit inherent in Western
countries [4]. Rene Guenon, calling the West a
“material civilization”, also saw among its essential
features a desire for expansion, which “represents
nothing new, but in previous eras it was limited to a
more or less crude dominance over peoples, and the
influence of the West did not extend beyond the level
of politics and economics… Today, more and more
Eastern people are... completely and completely
"Westernized.... renounce their traditions and
assimilate all the misconceptions inherent in a purely
modern worldview” [5
, 114]. If Russell mainly draws
attention to the attempt to “Westernize” China,
Guenon extrapolates this to the entire Eastern world.
At the same time, he notes that an almost completely
Westernized Japan is already present in the East, which
“seeks to exe
rcise its hegemony over the whole of Asia
and organize it in its own way; but in such an enterprise
it will meet the same resistance as that offered to the
European peoples, and perhaps even more,” despite
the presence of traditional Shintoism, which could
“play the same role as Confucianism in China.”
Regarding the dialogue between East and West, the
thinker believes that “it is necessary for the initiative to
come from the West ... in modern conditions,
authoritative representatives of Eastern traditions
cannot be intellectually interested in the West” [6,
161].
The interaction between China and the West was the
central theme of comparative studies by Feng Yulan,
who became interested in the problem of East-West
cultural interaction in the early 20s while studying in
the United States [7]. Yulan, through his “new lixue”,
tried to open the way for the modernization of Chinese
philosophical thought through its synthesis with the
achievements of the Western tradition. Guenon
considered such a synthesis to be completely
impossible in the vector in which the Chinese
philosopher provides it. For Guenon, the very concept
of “modernization” is identical to the concept of
“modernity”, which is essentially an anti
-metaphysical
phenomenon, since it covers up a confusing and
incoherent “syncretism” in which ancient concepts are
interpreted in the most erroneous and arbitrary way.
For Guenon, modernization itself is nothing more than
the spread of the West in the East, which leads to
destructive consequences. The synthesis that Feng
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
12
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research (ISSN: 2771-2141)
Yulan is talking about is possible for Guenon only in the
key of transformation in line with the Eastern tradition.
Western trends were stronger in the philosophical and
comparative views of Hu Shi, who believed that for
several millennia Chinese philosophy had been
following the “wrong path”. The Chinese philosopher,
who embraced the American pragmatism of John
Dewey, criticized not only the material but also the
spiritual backwardness of China. The latter was
expressed for him in Confucianism and Taoism, which
became an obstacle to China's scientific and
technological progress. Therefore, he considers it
necessary to abandon traditionalism in favor of
Western individualism and liberalism. Interestingly,
even Hu Shi's “Great Course of Chinese Philosophy”,
according to the reviewer, seems to have been written
by an American researching Chinese thought [8, 6].
Although the thinker still finds some similarities
between Chinese and Western philosophy, in
particular, in the presence of a “logical method” in
them, since “philosophy is conditioned by the logical
method, the development of philosophy certainly
proceeds from the development of the logical
method”. Guenon, speaking about logic, called it a
“special science” because “its connection with
metaphysics is much more direct, since what is called
logical principles is a simple application in the field of
conditioned true principles of a universal order”. Based
on Guenon's opinion, we can say that logic, as such, is
a metaphysical science, and, consequently, a
traditional one. Based on this, the similarity in logic
between East and West was present only when there
was a Western tradition before the Renaissance. In
modern times, this similarity has been lost. For
Guenon, Confucianism and Taoism are absolutely not
factors that contributed to China's backwardness, on
the contrary, both of them are two parts of traditional
Chinese doctrine. The West, which is the standard for
Hu Shi, for Guenon is in a state of crisis, “social chaos”
and is close to its degeneration, salvation from which is
possible only through “communication” with the East.
Pragmatism, on the other hand, “represents the logical
conclusion of modern [i.e. Western] philosophy and the
last stage of its decline” [5, 18].
In Nishida's works, Kitaro consistently develops
“Buddhist
-Confucian-
Western
syncretism”.
He
attempts to express Eastern philosophy through the
prism of Western philosophy and, conversely, Western
philosophy through the prism of Eastern philosophy.
His synthesis proceeds through Zen Buddhism and
Western philosophy through a selective approach to its
currents, namely through Neoplatonism, Fichteanism,
Bergsonianism, Husserlianism, Boehme mysticism and
Schopenhauer's philosophy [9]. However, Kitaro
recognizes the lack of logic in Eastern philosophy, and
then approach universal logic. A distinctive feature of
the Japanese thinker is the desire for mutual
understanding of East and West. This trait also
distinguishes him from Guenon, who, on the contrary,
does not see the possibility of such mutual
understanding and believes that the West seeks only
proselytism and the expansion of its civilization. As for
Boehme's Neoplatonism and mysticism, they are
traditional teachings, but the philosophies of Bergson
and Schopenhauer are the fruit of orientalism and
Western rationalism, distorting the “true essence of
things”. Regarding Buddhism, Guenon wrote that soon
after its emergence, Buddhism in India became one of
the main manifestations of the Kshatriya revolution
against the power of the Brahmins, and as can be
concluded from everything previous, there is an
indisputable connection between the denial of any
unchangeable principle and the denial of spiritual
power, as well as between the reduction of all reality to
“becoming” and the assert
ion of a purely secular the
authorities whose sphere is the world of action. It can
also be shown that naturalistic and anti-metaphysical
doctrines always arise when secular power begins to
prevail over spiritual power in a civilization. According
to Guenon, Buddhism in China communicated more
with Taoism than with Confucianism, but since it is a
“rebellion against Tradition”, its rapprochement with
Confucianism is completely unacceptable for a thinker,
especially Buddhist-Confucian-Western syncretism.
Poola Tirupati Raju, along with Paul Masson-OOursel,
had a fundamental influence on the conceptualization
and institutionalization of philosophical comparative
studies. For Raju, criticism is the basic principle of his
philosophy, as a result of which he believes that Indian
idealism should be changed to meet the modern level
of philosophical thinking. Based on the synthesis of
ideas from Indian, Chinese, Jewish and Greek
philosophy, Raju comes to an anthropological turn in
his comparative studies, putting forward the idea of the
individual as an idealized mystical entity [10, 16].
Regarding the East-West theme, Raju believes that
Western philosophy is the philosophy of the outside,
and Indian philosophy is the philosophy of the inside.
The Western contribution to world philosophy is
evident in his socio-political thought, while Indian
philosophy is distinguished by its spiritual orientation
and tolerance. The philosophical tradition of the West
is essentially rational and scientific, the Chinese is
humanistic, and the Indian is rooted in the inner
development of man. Raju's works provide a rich
overview of the history of philosophy in both the East
and the West, the main purpose of this analysis is to
search for similarities and differences both within one
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research
13
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajsshr
American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research (ISSN: 2771-2141)
tradition and between different ones in order to
identify "points of contact". At the same time, Raju
does not assert the superiority of any philosophical
tradition, since everything goes towards the unity and
mutual prolongation of traditions. It is unacceptable for
him to draw boundaries between East and West, since
both are interconnected. Philosophy, first of all, is a
philosophy of values, therefore, a comparative
philosophy should be a vehicle of spirituality.
Raju's comparative philosophy stands in stark contrast
to Guenon's metaphysics. For Guenon, first of all, there
is a dividing line between East and West, and it is the
latter's fault. Although the original unity between
civilizations was present, it was gradually lost, as the
medieval Christian civilization fell at the hands of
Renaissance humanism, because centralization on man
is impossible, since he is only an integral part of the
entire universe. Western philosophy is not a philosophy
of the external, it is "nothing more than the product of
the mental activity of human individuals devoid of any
sources of non-human revelation or inspiration, which
means, in a word, it is a purely "profane"
phenomenon." The socio-political structure of the
West denies the traditional social hierarchy as a whole,
which is the true cause of the social chaos that reigns in
Western public life today. Eastern metaphysics reflects
the inner essence of things, tradition as such, but the
mutual continuation of traditions is impossible, since a
single Eastern tradition has been localized in the form
of the Hindu, Chinese and Islamic traditions, which are
united in their metaphysical essence. The Western
tradition has been lost. East and West are
interconnected, but only in terms of the fact that the
latter comes from the former, as mentioned above.
Therefore, the comparative studies of Raju and Guenon
are opposite to each other.
CONCLUSION
There are various trends and concepts in the system of
world comparative studies, each of which sees in its
own way the further development of the East-West
dichotomy, the possibility of a dialogue of civilizations
and intercultural relations. However, Rene Guenon
occupies a special place here, since he is distinguished
not only by the radicality of his “orientocentrism” and
the totality of his criticism of the West, but also by the
fact that he requires Western civilization to take the
initiative to establish contacts with the East [11, 196].
As shown above, Guenon differed in many ways from
his contemporaries, rather than having any points of
contact with both Western and Eastern thinkers. It is
encouraging that Guenon's comparative approach and
his entire metaphysical philosophy found followers
already during the thinker's lifetime, and is being
popularized in modern times. Seyyed Hossein Nasr
believes that supporters of Tradition criticize
modernism totally and comprehensively, but their
criticism is not derived from observation of facts, but
concerns the causes and premises that they qualify as
false. Their goal is not to destroy what is positive, but
to tear down the veil of ignorance that allows the
illusory to seem real, the negative to be positive, and
the false to be true. We believe that when evaluating
Guenon's work and philosophy, a total critical approach
is necessary, since the thinker's metaphysics is
fundamentally looking for an ideal where there is none,
and its consequences can be quite negative. Therefore,
we consider it necessary to adhere to one of the key
principles of philosophical thinking
–
“Doubt
everything”.
REFERENCES
Masson-OOursel P. La Philosophie comparee.
–
Paris,
1923.
Алиева
Ч.Э.
Философская
компаративистика:
проблема концептуализации. –
СПб.: СПбГУ, 2005.
Генон Р. Общее введение в изучение индусских
учений. –
М.: Беловодье, 2013.
Цверианишвили А.Г. Лян Шумин и Бертран Рассел о
китайской и западной культурах / Развивающиеся
страны: Политика и идеология. –
М., 1985.
Генон Р. Кризис современного мира. –
М.: Эксмо,
2008.
Генон Р. Восток и Запад. –
М.: Беловодье, 2019.
Fung Yu-Lan. A Comparative S
tudy of life’s Ideas: The
Way of Decrease and Increase with Interpretations and
Illustrations from Philosophies of the East and West.
Shanghai, 1924.
Ху Ши. Ши вэньцзи. Т. 6. –
Пекин: Бэйцзин дасюэ
шубаньшэ, 1998.
Kitaro Nisida. An Inquiry into Good.
–
New Hawen;
London, 1992.
Raju P. T. Indian Idealism and Modern Challenges.
Chandigarh, 1961.
Karimov R., Bekbaev R. The Traditionalism of Rene
Guenon in the Discourse of Philosophy of History and
Social Anthropology // Wisdom.
–
2022.
–
No.1(21).
–
P.194-202.
