Esotericism, Modernity and al fātiḥah

An appreciation of al fātiḥah as an esoteric framework

While I have spent much time and energy achieving an explication of the Qur’an which is based on its textual contents (i.e. treating it in a Western mode on the basis of the sum of its words, roots, letters, etc.)¹ I accept that ‘esoteric’ — or at least non-quantitive — streams run though the Qur’anic text. The question is to what degree and for what purposes these streams are either useful or accessible at this time.

As I indicate in my recent and lengthy exploration titled The Qur'an vis-à-vis Earlier Writings, the time in which we now live — the Kali-Yuga (or Dark Age in the Western tradition) — presupposes increasing (and now near-total) deafness to the world of symbol.

I have avoided any personal incursion into that ‘non-concrete’ world in my writings to this point for two main reasons: firstly, I was too busy hammering away in the workshop of pan-textual analysis (an approach which is accessible to the quantitively-oriented Modern)² to allow myself to be distracted by such things and, secondly, because the logistics of our cosmological placement are against it. In other words: we, as Moderns, are — by virtue of being representatives of the time of Kali-Yuga — intrinsically poorly ‘adapted’³ to the task of deriving meaning from symbol.

Julian Jaynes in his The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind⁴ attempts a materialistic explication of the processes about which I am speaking.⁵ To simplify to a single sentence Jaynes’ principal point: pre-Modern man could hear (what in Jaynes’ materialist worldview he assumes to be a mistaken or collectively induced perception of) God, but given the intervening ‘progress’, modern man has no further need of such illusions.⁶

Access in full measure to what one may refer to here as the esoteric has always been the preserve of a minority elite. A corollary of traditional society (namely, one in which men of such calibre predominate according to their allotted function and caste), is a broader society in which more generalised, non-specialist access to the meaning of symbol arises due to custom and usage. With the collapse of, as it were, the brahmin caste into the kshatriya caste and the involution from a merely social aristocracy to an elite which is nothing more than a hyperactive and desacralised vaishya caste, society is impervious as a whole to the upward, solar influence of positive dharma.

This does not mean, however, that individual men are not perceptive of meaning behind symbol. But this is the final mode for such men: to be quietly perceptive in an ocean of denial. Again, this is natural for the time in which we live.⁷

By way of an adjunct, I should add to the following points. Firstly, since we have all but lost a common currency of symbolic ‘commerce’⁸ it is approaching impossible to speak about symbol or the esoteric and expect to be understood amid the common market of ideas; secondly, as solipsism and delusion expand and are normalised by a society which is characterised and motived by the same, it is largely pointless to engage in an exchange of ideas where the ‘correctness’ of an idea cannot be established by an appeal to the majority (or, failing that, to Wikipedia or ChatGPT). This leaves one in a tyranny of relativity in which one opinion is worth exactly that of every other (apparently), and nothing can be proven (and in which the very notion of absolute proof is itself precluded).

Fortunately, there is a number of authors whose works are accessible (for now) to what remains of the Western⁹ ‘mind’¹⁰ via which we as Moderns may, given both aptitude and application, gain some measure of access to insights provided by masters within Sufi, Vedic and other traditions, as well as apprehend some part of their process despite the fact that we find ourselves in objectively inferior circumstances in terms of both varna and dharma.

Having prepared my ground by means of the preceding caveats and clarifications, I will proceed now to offer some indications — admittedly born of an inferior time — of parallels of symbol which in my mind adhere to the substance and direction of the first surah of the Qur’an: al fātiḥah.

al fātiḥah

بِسْمِ ٱللَّـهِ ٱلرَّحْمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ

In the name of God, the Almighty, the Merciful.

(1:1)

Verse 1:1, then, opens with the letter bā. The correlation with the opening phoneme of Genesis 1:1 in the Hebrew scriptures is striking (b’reshīt — in the beginning). Of course, the later Babylonian (Talmudic) distortions of the Hebrew scriptures elided and obfuscated the name of God as a matter of religious observance, the Qur’an opens directly and unequivocally with the name of God (Arabic: allāh; cf. Heb. eloh, elohim); but whereas the Hebrew text uses the royal we (and thereby allows for ambiguity of number), the Arabic is resolved entirely, plainly and immediately into the singular.

The ineluctable singularity of allāh folds directly into duality: God as Almighty and Merciful.¹¹ Thus, the singularity of God is immediately presented in two aspects: the masculine, solar aspect (al raḥmān) and the feminine, lunar aspect (al raḥīm). This calls to mind the Pythagorean principle by which any ‘extension’ of the monad into the dyad presupposes the triad.¹² Thus allāh as the pre-existing para-brahman (to use Hindu terminology), expresses itself in duality resulting in a triangle (the strongest of all shapes) in which the initiating point is the cornerstone.

ٱلْحَمْدُ لِلَّـهِ رَبِّ ٱلْعَـٰلَمِينَ

Praise belongs to God, the Lord of All Creation,

(1:2)

Verse 1:2 presents an immediate retraction (or, perhaps, contraction) which emphasises and confirms the underlying, singular (and thus indivisible), pre-attributive nature of God, wherein praise (i.e. recognition for causation) belongs (alone) to God as the Lord of All Creation.

ٱلرَّحْمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ

The Almighty, the Merciful,

(1:3)

This is followed by a confirmation — in fact, a doubling — of the points made prior: namely, of God expressed in two aspects: the masculine, solar aspect (al raḥmān) and the feminine, lunar aspect (al raḥīm).

مَـٰلِكِ يَوْمِ ٱلدِّينِ

Master of the Day of Judgment.

(1:4)

The double — or dual — manifestation of the One God within the symbolic polarities of the masculine, solar aspect (al raḥmān) and the feminine, lunar aspect (al raḥīm) is then closed into conclusive and unambiguous unity and singularity with God (alone) as Master of the Day of Judgment at verse 1:4.

This process of pulling open the unity of God, as it were, to reveal complementary, subordinate facets of the solar masculine aspect (al raḥmān) and the feminine lunar aspect (al raḥīm) sets up a clear column structure within which we may understand what follows wherein the solar masculine aspect (al raḥmān) heads the first column and the feminine lunar aspect (al raḥīm) heads the second.

إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ

Thee alone do we serve, and from Thee alone do we seek help.

(1:5)

At verse 1:5 the believers collectively declare both fealty to and full dependence upon God in the light of what precedes.^⁠ The fact that verse 1:5 is clearly a single unit which unpacks into two intrinsically related portions not only mirrors what we noted above, its two parts fall naturally under the two column headings that the previous analysis provided, with Thee alone do we serve aligning with the first column treating of solar masculine aspect (al raḥmān), and with and from Thee alone do we seek help aligning with the second column treating of the feminine lunar aspect (al raḥīm).

ٱهْدِنَا ٱلصِّرَٰطَ ٱلْمُسْتَقِيمَ

Guide Thou us on the straight path,

(1:6)

صِرَٰطَ ٱلَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ ٱلْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا ٱلضَّآلِّينَ

The path of those whom Thou hast favoured; not of those who incur wrath, nor of those who go astray.

(1:7)

Verses 1:6-7 then comprise the features of the treaty binding upon God (given that we hold to our undertaking at verse 1:5). We note that verse 1:6 Guide Thou us on the straight path immediately emphasises singularity and unity (cf. the straight path), as does the opening segment of verse 1:7 (The path of those whom Thou hast favoured), which then is intersected by a new duality: the first two negative statements in the order of the Qur’anic text.

Final thoughts

The structure of al fātiḥah is as follows:

1. It opens with the monad which then expands into dual resulting in triad (1:1)

2. It then resolves into a monad with contingent features (1:2)

3. It then expands again into dual resulting in triad (1:3)

4. And then contracts into a monad with contingent features (1:4)

5. This is followed by a single statement in two parts (1:5)

6. There is then a single imperative or appeal for guidance (1:6)

7. The appeal at 1:6 is further clarified in three parts:

   1. That of those God has favoured, as opposed to either

   2. That of those who incur wrath, or

   3. That of those who stray.

It is, perhaps, interesting to note how closely this structure corresponds with a top-down reading of the Cabalistic tree of life.¹³

It is entirely possible that esoteric understandings from other traditions may be overlaid and correspondences found.

It is not my purpose here to insist upon the preceding thoughts as ‘doctrine’. It is, rather, to indicate in some small way that an esoteric understanding of the Qur’an is available. Such has been accessible to Ismaili, Nimatullahi and Hurufi orders within Shia Islam as well as to Sufi and Shadhiliyya orders within Sunni Islam, although as I have stated, the Technique under which we all now live cannot but close the door to such planes of reality, at least in social terms.¹⁴

For those who wish to consider the subject of esoteric reality in the time of Kali-Yuga and Moderns’ diminishing possibilities for legitimate initiation, I recommend the following:

• René Guénon:

  • Initiation & Spiritual Realisation

  • East & West

  • Perspectives on Initiation

• Frithjof Shuon:

  • The Transcendent Unity of Religions

• Julius Evola:

  • Ride the Tiger: A Survival Manual for the Aristocrats of the Soul

  • Men Among the Ruins

1. I call this method pan-textual analysis, and it informs much of the processes which underpin my three main works, downloadable in full at quranite.com.

2. I refer the interested reader to The Reign of Quantity & the Signs of the Times by René Guénon (first published in French in 1945). This book is required reading for anyone wishing to place the current time of materialism and ignorance within a legitimate traditional framework.

3. I do not imply here any connection with the religion of evolution.

4. First published 1976.

5. In my view, the first half of the book may be ignored to no disadvantage, the only point of which appears to be to establish Jaynes’ evolutionary credentials among his peers, whose association and good opinion he is clearly eager to retain. The remainder of the book, though necessarily highly speculative, is of value and may be compared with some of the work of Julius Evola (I am thinking in particular of his Revolt Against the Modern World) and René Guénon (here I am thinking of his Crisis of the Modern World).

6. I refer the reader to Jaques Ellul’s distilled, almost aphoristic critique of what he calls Technique in his Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes (first published in French in 1965; see in particular the fourth paragraph in the section entitled Fundamental Currents in Society, found on page 39 of the English translation of the 1973 edition).

7. I refer the reader to Julius Evola’s excellent works Ride the Tiger and Men Among the Ruins.

8. I use this word in the senses of recognised value and of mutual exchange.

9. By Western I mean today all countries which have embraced Technique as defined by Jacques Ellul (see his The Technological Society), namely: everywhere minor enclaves notwithstanding.

10. I have in mind Jacques Ellul, René Guénon, Julius Evola, Frithjof Shuon.

11. This is not the place to present our full analysis for our value of raḥmān as Almighty. Suffice it to say that the Traditionalist regards both words here in the rā ḥā mīm root to signify different aspects of mercy, and that this value in the case of the first of these appellations (raḥmān) clearly runs contrary to its use across the corpus of the Qur’an. See here: 1:1, 1:3, 2:163, 13:30, 17:110, 19:18, 19:26, 19:44, 19:45, 19:58, 19:61, 19:69, 19:75, 19:78, 19:85, 19:87, 19:88, 19:91, 19:92, 19:93, 19:96, 20:5, 20:90, 20:108, 20:109, 21:26, 21:36, 21:42, 21:112, 25:26, 25:59, 25:60, 25:63, 26:5, 27:30, 36:11, 36:15, 36:23, 36:52, 41:2, 43:17, 43:19, 43:20, 43:33, 43:36, 43:45, 43:81, 50:33, 55:1, 59:22, 67:3, 67:19, 67:20, 67:29, 78:37, 78:38.

12. In modern or ‘profane’ arithmetic, 1, 2, and 3 are numbers with no existential value; they are tools like hammers or pliers. For Pythagoreans, however, numbers are real, having ontological purpose and significance. Here, two is not simply one plus another one. Two has an existential value, purpose and significance on an entirely different ‘plane’ to one. One is the only true number (since everything is one). But the ‘progression’ (or existential crisis) in which one leads to an apprehension of two, necessarily presupposes the existence of three since the primary break is between singularity (true reality) and multiplicity (apparent reality; cf. maya in Hindu philosophy). Thus, one is a point with no depth, height or length; two is a line in which length is possible but not depth or height; three creates a triangle on a plane in which area is created but not depth. It is at four that material observation and ‘objectivity’ begin (i.e. with a tetrahedron, also known as a triangular pyramid) which is the point where material volume (i.e. length, breadth and height) occurs. For an excellent primer on Pythagorean thought, I recommend Serpent in the Sky: The High Wisdom of Ancient Egypt by John Anthony West (see pages 32-57).

13. This direction represents the process of creation and the flow of divine energy from the infinite and unknowable source, the Ain Soph, down through the Sephiroth to the physical world. The journey begins at the top with Kether (Crown) and proceeds downward through Chokmah (Wisdom), Binah (Understanding), and so on, ultimately reaching Malkuth (Kingdom), which represents the material world. This perspective focuses on the emanation of divine attributes and the unfolding of the universe.

14. By this I mean that individuals will remain for whom the transcendent and immanent retain their objective reality, but that those pools at which men could drink in any number (pre-Modernity) are evaporating. And where they have not evaporated entirely, they tend to become swamped in and imbued by concerns arising in Technique itself, and thus indistinguishable from it. However, as ever, God guides whom He guides: 2:213, 2:258, 2:264, 2:272, 3:86, 5:16, 5:51, 5:67, 5:108, 6:144, 7:178, 9:19, 9:24, 9:37, 9:80, 9:109, 10:35, 12:52, 16:107, 17:97, 18:17, 22:16, 22:54, 24:35, 24:46, 28:50, 28:56, 39:3, 39:37, 40:28, 46:10, 61:5, 61:7, 62:5, 63:6.