The Multiple States of Being
The Multiple States of Being is a book by the French metaphysician René Guénon. The title has also (incorrectly) been rendered as The Multiple States of the Being.
This book expands on the doctrine whose cornerstones were laid in Guénon's earlier book The Symbolism of the Cross. Guénon now leaves behind the geometrical approach developed in the earlier book, in order "to bring out the full range of this altogether fundamental theory".[1] Guénon now considers Being in its "human aspect", reminding his readers that "the human state is just one state of manifestation, like any other state, and is just one among an indefinite number of other states. It has its place in the hierarchy of degrees of Being, a place assigned to it by its very nature [...] and it is neither superior nor inferior to the other states of Being."
The doctrine of multiples states of Being is essentially related to the notion of "spiritual hierarchies", which is found in all religious traditions. Hence Guénon describes it as the universal process of the "realization of Being through Knowledge".
First he asserts the necessity of "metaphysical Infinity", understood in relation with "universal Possibility". "The Infinite, according to the etymology of the term, is that which has no limits", so this term can only be applied to what has absolutely no limit, and not to what is exempted from certain limitations while being subjected to others like space, time, or quantity. According to Guénon, there is no distinction between the Infinite and universal Possibility. The difference between these terms is merely a difference in emphasis: in the case of the Infinite, it is contemplated in its active aspect, while the universal Possibility refers to its passive aspect: these are the two aspects of Brahma and its Shakti in the Hindu doctrines. It follows from this that "the distinction between the possible and the real [...] has no metaphysical validity, for every possible is real in its way, according to the mode befitting its own nature".[2] This leads to the metaphysical distinction of "Being" and "Non-Being":
If we [...] define Being in the universal sense as the principle of manifestation, and at the same time as comprising in itself the totality of possibilities of all manifestation, then we must say that Being is not infinite because it does not coincide with total Possibility; and all the more so because Being, as the principle of manifestation, although it does indeed comprise all the possibilities of manifestation, does so only insofar as they are actually manifested. All the rest, that is all the possibilities of non-manifestation, as well as the possibilities of manifestation themselves insofar as they are in the unmanifested state, are outside of Being, therefore. But included among these is Being itself, which cannot belong to manifestation since it is the principle thereof, and in consequence is itself unmanifested. For want of any other term, we are obliged to designate all that is thus outside and beyond Being as "Non-Being", but for us this negative term is in no way synonym for 'nothingness'.[3]
According to Guénon, our present corporeal state is defined by five conditions: space, time, "matter" (i.e. quantity), "form", and life, and these five conditions enter into correlation with the five corporeal elements (bhutas of the Hindu doctrine, see below) to create all living forms in our world and state of existence (including ourselves in our corporeal modalities). But universal Manifestation is incommensurably more vast, including all the states of being that correspond to other conditions or possibilities. Yet Being Itself is the principle of universal Manifestation.
The foundation of the theory of multiple states, and of the metaphysical notion of the "Unicity of the Existence" (wahdatul-wujûd), was developed in Islamic esoteric thought, for instance by the philosopher Mohyddin Ibn Arabi.
The relationship of unity and multiplicity leads to a more accurate "description" of Non-Being: in Non-Being, there can be no question of a multiplicity of states, since this domain is essentially that of the undifferentiated and even of the unconditioned: "The undifferentiated cannot exist in a distinctive mode", writes Guénon, although we still speak "analogously" of the states of non-manifestation. Non-Being is "Metaphysical Zero" and is logically anterior to unity; that is why Hindu doctrine speaks in this regard only of "non-duality" (advaita).
Guénon then turns to the study of the dream state in order to help explain the relationship of unity and multiplicity by means of a concrete analogy. The dream state is "one of the modalities of the manifestation of human being, corresponding to the subtle (that is, non-corporeal) part of its individuality." In the dream state, "the human being produces a world which proceeds entirely from himself, and whose objects consist exclusively of mental conceptions (as opposed to the sensory perceptions characteristic of the waking state). The dream objects are combinations of ideas clothed in subtle forms - forms which depend substantially on the subtle form of the individual himself, since the ideal objects of the individual's dream are nothing but accidental and secondary modifications of the subtle form of the individual himself." (Chapter 6)
In the following chapter, Guénon then studies the possibilities of individual consciousness and of the mind as the characteristic element of human individuality.
In chapter 10 ("Limits of the Indefinite"), he comes back to the notion of metaphysical realization (moksha, or "Suprême identity"). He then introduces a higher sense of the notion of "darkness", most notably in chapter 12, "The two chaoses", which describes what happens in a moment of spiritual realization, when a disciple leaves the domain of "formal possibilities".