Gilis was a leading French Traditionalist (of Belgian origin), an expert on Ibn Arabi, and a follower of Michel Valsan (1907-1974), the most important Traditionalist Sufi shaykh in France during the later twentieth century.
His first two books, published in 1960 and 1964, dealt with the Belgian Congo. His later books, of which there were many, dealt mostly with Islam, but he also wrote on other Traditionalist topics such as Free Masonry and on Guénon himself. His books on Islam included titles like Marie en Islam (Mary in Islam, 1990), La Doctrine initiatique du Pèlerinage (The Initiatic Doctrine of the Pilgrimage, 1994), and L'Intégrité islamique ni intégrisme, ni intégration (Islamic Integrity: Neither Fundamentalism nor Integration, 2011). Several were translated, most often into Italian. In addition, he published several translations of classic texts with notes and commentary, most notably a two-volume translation of Ibn Arabi’s Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, as Le livre des chatons des sagesses (1997). In addition to writing and translating, he served as Friday preacher in a Paris mosque.
An unsigned obituary on the website Conscience Soufie concluded:
Charles-André Gilis was… a combination of Ibn 'Arabî and Ibn Hazm, an eagle with a hieratic posture and a contemplative nature, who could swoop down on his prey at any moment like a marksman. Like everyone else, he had the qualities of his faults and the faults of his qualities. But it is up to believers to consider the greatness of a man by what he leaves behind, a legacy that is, in this case, essential for anyone who wishes to immerse themselves in the serious study of Ibn 'Arabi and Sufism in its speculative mode of expression.
7 comments:
Hello dear Pr. Sedgwick and once a great thank you for your interessant works.
Gilis is the perfect example of how guenonism can paradoxaly produce a new kind of religious fanarism: the esoteric fanatism. With Gilis, Guénon, Sufism, and islam were used as a tools for a frightened totalitarian project and vision.
For Gilis, the case was clear:Guénon only came to serve the final victory of islam botn esoteric and exo...No need to say that this is rather far from what Guénon wrote ! But of course you'd bet that Gilis meant (and said) that Guénon didn't write all what he thought...!
I had read some years ago, on an internet "chat", that the son of Gilis was murdered in relation with the times when Gilis had a certain role woth some african presidents (Gilis was Belgian so the country could be Congo ..?) but I have no details.
More recently I remember that Gilis was arrested by the Canadian poiice after he had a certain behaviour in the plane that carried him to the land of the caribous. Knowing a few the contain of some of Gilis books I bet that the reason why he was briefly arrested could've been some antisemitic remarks.
I had also read on internet, let's say 8 years ago a series of testimonies from a person who belonged to the "Sufi" sect led in France by Muhammad Vâlsan (Michel's son, of course!) and Gilis himself.
This testimony was, I must say, both sinister and hilarious. It decribed a sort of Bloomington cult but without nudism or Indians: it was also a circus but here it was a strictly rigid fantatical muslim circus.
The witness in question signed with the name "Lufti," but I later learned that his real name is Philippe Bergeron, an author who recently wrote yet another book on Guénon, of no real interest except that it celebrates the superiority of Judaism ! It just goes to show that one can go from "Sufism" to "Guénon" and end up as an ultra-Jew. What a strange world we live in.
I have my own modest explanation for this kind of madness and delusion, both that of Gilis and Bergeron: I truly believe that reading Guénon's books can seriously disturb the mind, unless one is protected by fundamentally elementary predispositions: critical thinking and a solid sense of humor. In any case, it is undeniable that Gilis had no sense of humor at all. Next to him, Schuon seems almost sympathetic, which says it all!
Gilis's own account of the Canadian incident is available at https://leturbannoir.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Un-dérapage-québécois.pdf. Gilis is not very clear about how it all happened, but thinks it might have had something to do with his book La profanation d'Israël selon le droit sacré (The desecration of Israel according to sacred law), whoch is certainly anti-Zionist and might be read as antisemitic.
The anonymous above sounds a lot like Alexandre Palchine or D.D. I don't think Guenon's books are harmful, I think that harmful people can find Guenon's books or anyone else's books for that matter. I also personally think that Islam is harmful because of its intolerance for everything and I think that Gilis was a harmful man that wanted to control everyone. So when a harmful man like Gilis finds a harmful religion like Islam, of course they will end up painting Guenon in a bad light! These are my simple views though, just giving my 2 cents. XD.
I am not at all this Palchine or this "D.D" (???)
I am french and I am only interested with the "tradi" milieu without being myself a "tradi" or a "guenonian".The informations I gave come from a personal source and some readings on the web a few years ago.
Thanks for your attention.
Thanks for your remarks Professor.
Yes I had read some years ago Gilis' account of the canadian incident, and I share your views about that.
About what this Lufti/Bergeron told of his experience in the Muhammad sufi group I regret that I didn't then think to register these accounts; but I do remember a very significative event related by Lufti/Bergeron: he was in the same car with Gilis and another "sufi" of the group when suddenly they almost knocked down a passerby on a road. Fortunately the car stopped and avoid the accident. And then Gilis told his chauffeur and Lufti/Bergeron that "It would not be important if this passer-by was killed because HE WAS ONLY A PROFANE." Dixit.
When you had the opportunity to read the whole series of Lufti/Bergeron accounts of the Valsan's son's cult ambiance this sort of anecdot really rang true....
I think that P. Bergeron should publish his testimony, it would bring another bricks in the wall of traditionalism scientific studies.
Well you sound a lot like him. D.D. as in Dominique Devie, whose pseudonym is Alexandre Palchine. He runs a website that I won't link here but that can easily be found. His website says everything that you just said in your comments. I'm sorry if I mistook you for him since even your further comments just make you sound a lot like him.
PS: For the anecdote this program (on a far-right channel ) on Guénon whose guest is this P. Bergeron. The show is not worth much and many errors and approximations are said. About the book which is promoted I didn't read it. And don't feel much doing it...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-uwxG2zDHo
Post a Comment