Talk:Scientia sacra

Scientia Sacra by Béla Hamvas

The Hungarian writer, philosopher, and social critic Bela Hamvas (1897-1968) also used the term scientia sacra, which is the title of one his posthumously published works. The work is titled as Scientia Sacra: The Spiritual Tradition of the Ancients. He composed this work between 1943 and 1944, but it could only be published in 1988. According to the Biographical Dictionary of Central and Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century (page 331), "During the war [World War II] he [Hamvas] lost some of his notes and parts of the study Scientia Sacra, which consisted of nearly twenty essays. The study, devoted to interrelations among metaphysics, anthropology, and culture, was finally published in 1988." In fact, most of his works have been published posthumously, almost after fifty years of their composition. Hungarian Book Review writes: "His [Hamvas's] works, suffering as many vicissitudes as their author, have become available to the public nearly two decades after his death but with a delay of almost fifty years compared to the time they were written."(Hungarian Book Review, Volume 30-32, page 31) Many of his works are perhaps yet to be published. The Handbook of Contemporary European Social Theory (2006), has this to say: "His [Hamvas's] two most important works are the three-volume Scientia Sacra, an overview of the wisdom contained in the sacred tradition of mankind, of which the first two volumes were written during the Second World War, and a third and unfinished volume in the early 1960s; and the two-volume Patmosz, a collection of essays dating from the 1960s. A collected edition of his works, planned for twenty-six volumes, is currently being published." Scientia Sacra, without doubt, is one of his most important works. György Endre Szőnyi calls it his magnum opus, confirming that although it was written during 1943-44, it saw the face of light only in 1988.(The Apocalyptic Complex: Perspectives, Histories, Persistence, edited by Nadia Al-Bagdadi, David Marno and Matthias Riedl, page 305)

It is thus clear that Nasr could not have been influenced by Hamvas's work, as was suggested by an IP. Hamvas's book was posthumously published in 1988, whereas Nasr's Knowledge and the Sacred was originally published in 1981, containing his Gifford Lectures delivered in the same year. Now, although I do not know much about Hamvas and his orientation to the traditionalist school of Guenon and others, I see a few sources referring to him as a traditionalist, who propagated the school's philosophy in Hungary. The book itself is written in Hungarian language, and secondary English sources on this book, or any of his works published in a different language, are inevitably going to be hard to come by. It would be expedient to write a thing or two about Hamvas's version of Scientia Sacra, if there were enough sources discussing about it. Unfortunately, there isn't. Or perhaps I am unaware of those, if any. Based on what I found after a thorough search on various different sources, I am almost certain that Hamvas's version of Scientia Sacra doesn't resemble the version advanced by Guenon or Schoun, and more importantly by Nasr—the principal proponent of Scientia Sacra. I infer from the book's contents that his version does not provide a conceptual foundation for Scientia Sacra (I may be wrong); instead, it resembles a compendium that includes and explores various spiritual traditions from around the world. My assumption does not, of course, prevent us from writing about his notion or his book. However, I don't see enough sources mandating that. Mosesheron (talk) 23:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Updated the article using the above sources that I mentioned. Thanks. Mosesheron (talk) 10:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)