stands out among explicit doctrines as one of the mostdirect formulations possible of what constitutes the very essence of our spiritual reality; this directness is offset by its requirement of renunciation or, more precisely, total detachment (
).The Vedantic perspective finds its equivalents in the great reli-gions that regulate humanity, for truth is one; the formulations, how-ever, may be dependent on dogmatic perspectives that restrict theirimmediate intelligibility or that make it difficult to express them in astraightforward way. In fact, whereas Hinduism is composed of whatmight be called autonomous fractions, the monotheistic religions areorganisms in which the parts are formally bound up with the whole.Hinduism, while it is organically linked with the
s,is nonetheless not reducible to Shivaite and Shankarian Vedantism,although this must be regarded as the essence of the
and thusof Hindu tradition.** *Shankarian
, which is what we are thinking of especiallyhereand which is divine and immemorial in its origin and in nosense the creation of Shankara, who was only its great and providen-tial spokesmanis concerned above all with the mental virtues, thosewhich converge upon perfect and permanent concentration, whereasmoral systems, whether Hindu or monotheistic, extend the sameprinciples to the domain of action, which is nearly suppressed in thecase of the wandering monk (
In the case of the Muslim,for example, calmness of mind (
) thus becomes contentment(
or confidence in God (
which in fact produces calm-ness of mind.
retains the alchemical essence of the virtues.
This is what Ibn al-Arif also does when he seems to reject the religious virtues oneby one; in reality he detaches them from both the self-interested ego and the anthro-pomorphic aspect of the Divinity in order to keep only their essences. Let us note thatHinduism also knows contentment (
) and confidence in God (