"The most superficial and outward viewpoint is just to oppose contemplation and action in a pure and simple way, as two contraries in the specific sense of this term; but he who considers contemplation and action as complementary, places himself  from a deeper and more true viewpoint than the previous one, because the opposition is reconciled and solved, the two terms balancing themselves reciprocally, in some way (...). It is incontestable that, in general, the inclination to the action is the predominating one in the West. On the other hand, we have to point out that in the ancient times and in the Middle Age, the natural bent of the Westerners for the action did not prevent them to recognize the superiority of the contemplation..."

As expected, Guénon added this...: "The action cannot exist for the fellow contemplating everything inwardly, since existing in the Universal Spirit, and making no difference among the single objects" (R. G., Etudes sur l'Induisme, 1966).

 

In  <evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com>  Toni Ciopa <hyperborean@...> wrote:

 

·         Knowledge and action are complementary, not in opposition. However, action is subordinated to knowledge.

·         “Contemplation is superior to action just as the unchanging is superior to change”

·         In relation to action, knowledge is the “unmoved mover” – note that this same image is used also by Evola

·         “All true knowledge is identification with its object.” This statement can be difficult to understand without further elaboration. The main point is that “true” knowledge is not the same as rational and discursive knowledge; unfortunately, the latter is what most people assume to be knowledge.

·         “So long as Westerners persist in ignoring or repudiating intellectual intuition, they cannot possess any tradition in the true sense of the word.

·         True knowledge is knowledge of principles, independent of any temporal application. This cannot be overemphasised --- it is all too common to conceive of intellectual or spiritual knowledge as merely an extension of empirical experience. This leads to fanciful theories of “visions” of higher worlds or special powers as the equivalent of spiritual knowledge or intuition. Now such visions or powers may be possible, but, even if so, they would still belong to the contingent realm of becoming.

·         In other words, metaphysical knowledge is immutable and physical knowledge is of the laws of change.

·         “All action that does not proceed from knowledge is lacking in principle and thus is nothing but a vain agitation; likewise, all temporal power that fails to recognize its subordination vis-à-vis spiritual authority is vain and illusory: separated from its principle, it can only exert itself in a disorderly way and move inexorably to its own ruin.”

Guénon includes discussions of the relationship between knowledge and action in the East and the West, in Western history – particularly the Middle Ages, and how this is embodied in the different castes.