5
The Mystery of the Rite
As the king by divine right was the center of the traditional state, two elements, rite and faithfulness (fides), connected particular components and activities within the social order to this center and allowed individuals to partake of the transcendent influence emanating from the sovereign.
The rite was the original cement binding together traditional organizations, whether large or small, considered in their nonnaturalistic dimension. The rite was first of all the prerogative of the king; second, of the aristocratic or priestly classes and of the magistrates (whom the Greeks called οί έν ιτέλε, “those whose responsibility is to perform sacrifices”)[1]; and finally, of the patres, or heads of households. Rites and sacrifices were regulated by detailed and strict traditional norms that left no room for anything arbitrary or subjective. The performance of rites and sacrifices was imperative, ius strictum: a ritual or sacrifice that was neglected or performed by an unqualified person, or performed in a way that did not conform to traditional rules, was considered a cause of misfortune for both individuals and society, since it unleashed dreadful powers both in the moral and in the material order. Conversely, in the classical world it was said that the priest in charge of the holy fire “saved” the city through his ritual, day after day[2] In the Chinese tradition, to establish the rites was the first of the three most important things in the government of an empire, since the rites were the “channels by which we can apprehend the ways of Heaven.”[3] In the Hindu tradition, the “sacrificial sites” were considered to be the seats of the “cosmic order” (ṛta) itself;[4] it is very significant that the expression ṛta (artha, in Persian) appears in connection with analogous conceptions as the root of the Latin word ritus, “ritual action.” In the ancient traditional way of life, both at an individual and at a collective level, every action was connected with a determined ritual element that acted as its support and as the transfiguring and guiding element “from above.” The tradition of rites and sacrifices, which was often confused with the legislative tradition (hence the notion of ius sacrum), referred both in the private and in the public dimensions to a nonhuman being or to a being who had transcended the human condition. This can hardly be comprehended by the modern, secular mentality that views every ritual either as an “outdated” superstition or as a mere ceremony[5] to be appreciated merely for the sake of its symbolical, aesthetical, or emotional value. At this point I wish to discuss some of the aspects and meanings of this particular form of the traditional spirit.
As far as “sacrifice” is concerned, according to a text universally regarded as very old, Brahman, “which in the beginning constituted the entire universe, created a higher and more perfect form of itself” from which the “gods of the warriors” (Indra, Mitra, and so on) came into existence.[6]
The primordial power’s ability to go beyond itself, an act that is credited with the origination of entities that are the heavenly archetypes of the divine and triumphal regality, is strictly connected with the nature of an entire class of sacrifices. A similar idea is found in a cycle of other myths in which we witness a fundamental identity between heroes and gods who fight victoriously against the personifications of the forces of chaos.[7] This is the same notion of a primordial power that reacts against itself, frees itself, and ascends to a higher plane of being that defines its peculiar divine aspect (the Upaniṣad’s “highest and most perfect form of itself”). This plane of being often manifests itself in a law or in a principle of order. For example, the Chaldean hero Marduk, who overcame Tiamat, the demon of chaos, is a cosmic principle of order; in Hindu cosmogony, the vital force produces the “One” of creation through asceticism (tapas tapyati). In the Nordic tradition the same idea is expressed through Odin’s sacrifice to the cosmic tree Yggdrasil, through which Odin draws out of the abyss the transcendent wisdom contained in the runes and puts it to good use[8] ; also, in one specific version of this myth Odin, who is viewed as a king, through his sacrifice points the way that leads to Valhalla, namely, to the type of action that allows a person to partake of the heroic, aristocratic, and Uranian immortality.[9]
According to its original meaning, the type of sacrifice to which I refer corresponds to either a similar action that generates a “god” or “hero,” or to its repetition, which is connected to a sacrificial tradition centered on that particular god or hero; this repetition either renews the effective power of that god or reproduces it and develops it within the order of a given community. In the Egyptian tradition these meanings find a very important expression: according to a myth, Osiris is believed to be the one who taught mankind how to perform rites as well as the sacred art of temple construction. Osiris is also the god of rites since he himself, first among all the gods, went through. sacrifice and experienced “death.” His death and dismemberment by Set are related to his “being the first to penetrate the unknown of the otherworld and to his becoming a being who knows the great secret.”[10] The myth is developed in the saga of Horus, son of Osiris, who resurrects his father. Horus finds the “proper rites” (khu) that give back to Osiris, who has gone into the otherworld or, strictly speaking, into the supernatural, the form that he previously had:
Through death and rites, Osiris, the first among all beings, knew the mystery and a new life: this science and this life were the privilege of beings who were considered divine. It is from this perspective that Osiris was thought to have initiated both men and gods into sacred rituals… . He had shown to beings who inhabit the heavens and earth how to become a god.[11]
From then on, the cult belonging to all divine beings or deified beings consisted in reenacting the mystery of Osiris. This was true first of all for the king; the sacrificial mystery of Osiris was repeated not only in the ritual of the enthroning and in the solemn rite called sed repeated every thirty years, but also in the daily cult, which aimed at renewing in the pharaoh the transcendent influence associated with his function. The king publicly acknowledged his kingship and paid homage to Osiris by “piecing him back together” and by ritually renewing his death and victory. The king was called “Horus who shapes the father (Osiris)” and also: “The giver of life, or he who through the rite makes divine life arise in a regal fashion, like the sun.”[12] The sovereign became “Horus” who resuscitated Osiris or was the resurrected Osiris himself. Similarly, in the Mysteries the initiates often took their name from the god who had founded those same Mysteries, since the initiation reproduces the same act that constitutes the essence of the god, thus determining an analogical similarity of natures; sometimes this similarity is figuratively described as “incarnation” or “generation.”
What has been said also applied to the rite in general, that is, to the rite dedicated to the “hero” or to the founding father to whom the traditional patrician family lines often attributed their nonmaterial origins as well as the principle of their rank and of their rights; it also applied to the rite dedicated to the cult of the founders of an institution, of a legislation, or of a city who were believed to be nonhuman beings. In these instances too it was believed that in the origins an action analogous to a sacrifice took place that produced a supernatural quality that remained as a potential spiritual legacy within the stock as the “soul” of those institutions, laws, or foundations. In these cases, rites and various ceremonies helped to actualize and to nourish that original influence, which by virtue of its own nature, appeared to be a principle of well-being, good fortune, and “happiness.”
Having clarified the meaning of a relevant body of traditional rites allows me to establish an important point. There are two elements within the traditions of those civilizations or of those castes characterized by a Uranian chrism. The first element is a materialistic and a naturalistic one; it consists of the transmission of something related to blood and race, namely, a vital force that originates in the subterranean world together with the elementary, collective, and ancestral influences. The second element is “from above,” and it is conditioned by the transmission and by the uninterrupted performance of rites that contain the secret of a certain transformation and domination realized within the abovementioned vital substratum. The latter element is the higher legacy that confirms and develops the quality the “divine forefather” has either established ex nova or attracted from another world. This quality originates the royal stock, the state, the city or the temple, and the caste, the gens or the patrician family according to the supernatural dimension that acts as a “form” shaping chaos. Both of these elements were found in the higher types of traditional civilizations. This is why the rites could appear to be “manifestations of the heavenly law,”[13] according to a Chinese saying.
The unfolding of the ritual action par excellence in its most complete form (e.g., the Vedic sacrifice) reveals three distinct phases. First of all, there was a ritual and spiritual purification on the part of the person performing the sacrifice that put him in real contact with invisible forces and facilitated the possibility of his dominating them. What followed was an evocative process that produced a saturation of these energies either within the person performing the sacrifice, within the victim, or within both—or even within a third element that varied according to the structure of the rite. Finally, there was an action that induced a crisis (for example, the slaying of the victim) and that “actualized” the presence of the god out of the substance of the evoked influences[14] With the exception of those cases in which the rite is aimed at creating a new entity destined to be the “soul” or the “genius” of a new tradition, a new city, or a new temple (traditionally even the construction of cities and temples had a supernatural counterpart),[15] what took place was something similar to the releasing and the resealing of hidden forces. In other words, what took place was the evocative renewal of the contact with the infernal forces that acted as the substratum of a primordial deification, as well as with the violence that freed and elevated them to a higher form. This explains the danger believed to be associated with the repetition of a traditional rite and also the reason why the person performing the sacrifice was called “virile hero.” [16] A rite that fails or that goes wrong or that deviates in any way from its original form, wounds and defaces a “god”: it is sacrilegium. Once a law has been altered, the seal of a supernatural dominion is broken and dark, ambiguous, and dreadful forces are unleashed. Even neglecting a rite has a similar effect: it lessens the presence of the “god” in the relationship with those who are guilty of such neglect and it strengthens those energies that were tamed and restrained in the “god” himself; in other words, it opens the doors to chaos. Conversely, a correctly performed and diligent sacrificial action was reputed to be the support that men and gods provide for each other in their mutual interest.[17] The fate awaiting those who no longer have any rite is the “infernal regions”; they fall from the supernatural order they had partaken of into the states of the lower nature. It has been said that only the sacrificial action does not create a “bond.”
Olympiodorus wrote that the whole world is one great symbol, since it reflects invisible realities through sensible forms. Plutarch wrote: “Among the things that belong to a higher order there are secret connections and correspondences, just like in the order of natural phenomena: these connections cannot be recognized other than through experience, traditions and universal consensus.”[18] A characteristic expression of Jewish esotericism is:
Through the impulse from below there is a stirring above, and through the impulse from above there is a stirring higher up still. Thus by the impulse of the smoke [of sacrifice] from below the lamp is kindled above and when this is kindled all the other lamps are kindled and all the worlds are blessed from it. Thus by the impulse of the sacrifice is the mainstay of the world and the blessing of all worlds.[19]
This may be considered the general profession of faith of traditional civilizations. According to modern man, both causes and effects are relegated to the physical plane, framed within time and space. According to traditional man the physical plane merely contains effects; nothing takes place in this world that did not originate first in the next world or in the invisible dimension. In this sense too, it is possible to see how the rite takes hold and affects the development of all actions, destinies, and ways of traditional life. In traditional societies the action par excellence consisted in shaping events, relations, victories, and defense mechanisms through the rite, that is, in preparing causes in the invisible dimension. Any material action not connected to this supreme action was impaired by a radical contingency; the very soul of an individual was inadequately protected from the dark and elusive forces acting within human passions, thoughts, and inclinations and behind the scenes of nature and of history.
All things considered, it is difficult to label as “fanciful” the fact that traditionally the performance of the rite was considered one of the fundamental principles in the hierarchical differentiation of people, and generally speaking, it was closely associated with every authority within the state, the gens, and the family itself. It is possible to reject the traditional world en bloc, but it is not possible to deny the intimate logical connection of all its parts, once its foundation has been properly understood.
Footnotes
1. F. de Coulanges, 211.
2. Pindar, The Nemean Odes, 11.1–5.
3. Li-Chi, 7.4.6: “It was on this account that the sages knew that the rules of ceremony could not be dispensed with, while the ruin of states, the destruction of families and the perishing of individuals are always preceded by their abandonment of the rules of propriety.” According to the Indo-Aryan tradition, not only truth, order and asceticism, but ritual formulations and sacrifices as well are the foundations of all human organizations.
4. Ṛg Veda, 10.124.3.
5. The original meaning of the word “ceremony” cannot be established for certain. The word comes from the root creo, which is identical to the Sanskrit root kṛ, “to do,” “to act,” “to create”; it did not express a conventional celebration, but an authentically creative action.
6. Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad, 1.4.11.
7. In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad, (1.2.7–8) the primordial principle says:
“Let my body become fit for sacrifice. Thanks to it I will acquire being.”
This sacrifice (aśvamedha) is related to the sun.
8. Havamal, 139.
9. Ynglingasaga, 10. Somebody pointed out that the name of the Eddie Tree, Yggdrasil, “the roots of which cannot be found by any mortal being” (Havamal, 139–40), seems to denote the instrument employed to sacrifice Yggr, “the Terrible,” which is one of Odin’s names.
10. A. Moret, Royauté pharaonique, 148.
11. Ibid., 149.
12. Ibid., 149; 153–61; 182–83. See also the expression of Ramses II: “I am a son who shapes the head of his own father and who gives life to the one who generated him,” (127). The king’s entrance into the throne room (paduat) corresponded to entering the otherworld (duat), namely, that of sacrificial death and transcendence.
13. Chung–yung, 27.6.
14. Introduzione alla magia (Rome, 1951), 3.281.
15. With regard to a new city, it is the formation of that τνχή πόλεως that in those civilizations of a higher type was identified with the “royal fortune” (τνχή βασίλεως). To consider such entities simply as “personified abstractions” is to adopt the perspective of profane knowledge. In ancient Egypt the divine king presided over the rites related to the construction of new temples; he even performed in a symbolical and ritual fashion the first steps in the construction process. To the vulgar construction materials, he also added gold and silver which symbolize the divine element that he bestowed, by virtue of his presence and of his rite, upon the visible construction as its soul. In this regard he acted in the spirit of an “eternal deed” and in some inscriptions it is written: “The king permeated the ground that will become the abode of the gods.”
16. Ṛg Veda, 1.40.3.
17. Bhagavadgītā, 3.11. In another text it is said that the sacrifice is the food of the gods and the “principle of their lives.” Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, 8.1.2, 10.
18. Plutarch, De sera num. vindicta, 28.
19. Zohar, trans. H. Sperling and M. Simon (London, 1933), 2.244a.