The Principle of Orthodoxy

[Thomas]

(Continued from Oldmeadow)

"One criterion of religion derives from the principle of orthodoxy. Schuon articulates the principle thus:
"In order to be orthodox a religion must possess a mythological or doctrinal symbolism establishing the essential distinction between the Real and the illusory, or the Absolute and the relative... and must offer a way that serves both the perfection of concentration on the Real and also its continuity. In other words a religion is orthodox on condition that it offers a sufficient, if not always exhaustive, idea of the absolute and the relative, and therewith an idea of their reciprocal relationships... " (Light on the Ancient Worlds, p. 138).

Elsewhere Schuon affirms that
"Traditional orthodoxy means being in accord with a doctrinal or ritual form, and also, and indeed above all, with the truth which resides in all revealed forms; thus the essence of every orthodoxy is intrinsic truth... " (Language of the Self, p. 1).

In yet another passage he writes,
"For a religion to be considered intrinsically orthodox – an extrinsic orthodoxy hangs upon formal elements which cannot apply literally outside their own perspective – it must rest upon a fully adequate doctrine ... then it must extol and actualise a spirituality that is equal to this doctrine and thereby include sanctity within its ambit both as concept and reality; this means it must be of Divine and not philosophical origin and thus be charged with a sacramental or theurgic presence..." (Islam and the Perennial Philosophy, London, 1976, p. 14. (Italics Oldmeadow's.) See also commentary by Leo Schaya in Traditional Modes of Contemplation and Action, ed. Y. Ibish & P.L. Wilson, Tehran, 1977, pp. 462ff).

The ramifications of these claims will become clearer as our discussion proceeds.
"What of the attitude of one orthodoxy to another? The key is in Schuon's reference to "formal elements which cannot apply literally outside their own perspective". From the exoteric vantage point of any particular tradition there can only be one orthodoxy, i.e., the one determining the outlook in question. Thus, for example, from a Hindu viewpoint Buddhism must appear as heterodox, the test of orthodoxy here being the acceptance of Vedic authority.

The exclusivist or alternativist perspective belongs firmly in the domain of religious exotericism. Here the Hindu viewpoint is both 'right' and 'wrong'. This paradox is resolved in an illuminating passage from Schuon: "What makes the definition of orthodoxy rather troublesome is that it presents two principal modes, the one essential or intrinsic, and the other formal or extrinsic: the latter is being in accord with a revealed form, and the former the being in accord with the essential and universal truth, with or without being in accord with any particular form, so that the two modes sometimes stand opposed externally. To give an example, it can be said that Buddhism is extrinsically heterodox in relation to Hinduism, because it makes a departure from the basic forms of the latter, and at the same time intrinsically orthodox, because it is in accord with that universal truth from which both traditions proceed; on the other hand the Brahmo-Samaj, like every other variety of "progressive" neo-Hinduism, is doubly heterodox, first in relation to Hinduism itself and secondly in relation to truth unqualified..." (Language of the Self, p. 1. See also Nasr, Knowledge and the Sacred, New York, 1981, pp. 78-80.)

 

[TheLightWithin]

To give an example, it can be said that Buddhism is extrinsically heterodox in relation to Hinduism, because it makes a departure from the basic forms of the latter, and at the same time intrinsically orthodox, because it is in accord with that universal truth from which both traditions proceed;

Bahai being intrinsically orthodox but extrinsically heterodox in relation to earlier Abrahamic faiths
Mormonism being internally orthodox but extrinsically heterodox in relation to Christianity.
(Perhaps various categories of Christianity in relationship to themselves AND other or older branches of Christianity)

 

[Thomas]

Indeed, every new thing would make that distinction, but the question remains with regard to whether that claim is valid.

 

[TheLightWithin]

Indeed, every new thing would make that distinction, but the question remains with regard to whether that claim is valid.

Where do we get that information from? (Clarity as to whether a claim is "valid" - what constitutes valid?)

After all I suppose it could be said that Christianity was -- or at least strove to become -- internally orthodox though heterodox in relation to Judaism. Christians then and now feel very strongly their claim is valid.

 

[Thomas]

Where do we get that information from? (Clarity as to whether a claim is "valid" - what constitutes valid?)

Discernment ... by which I mean it's not at all easy.

René Guénon, one of the giants of Perennialism and a founder of its Traditionalist School in the 20th century, for a long time regarded Buddhism as a kind of Hindu heresy – it took visits from his respected contemporaries to argue the case otherwise.

My go-to is symbolism, metaphysics, and the principles of Traditionalist discourse, which is the best of comparative religion.

It's there I learnt that NeoPlatonism and Hindu metaphysics do not contradict each other, that this religion is 'right', and as 'right', as that one. Religions akin to reflections off the face of a multi-faceted jewel. In Traditionalism, Buddhism and Christianity stand side-by-side.

All religion is one beyond the realm of forms, and all religions deserve equal respect...

... but one can only do one religion effectively, and the more one does the one effectively, the more one honours them all.

I think wise counsel was offered by Gamaliel in Acts 5:38-39
"And now, therefore, I say to you, refrain from these men, and let them alone; for if this council or this work be of men, it will come to nought; But if it be of God, you cannot overthrow it, lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God."

 

[TheLightWithin]

Religions akin to reflections off the face of a multi-faceted jewel. In Traditionalism, Buddhism and Christianity stand side-by-side.

Yes, that idea must have been in something I read or heard when I was a kid, because I recall having that idea and trying to explain it to somebody.