All this being so, if it is right to speak of ‘qualified’ space, it is all the more right to speak of ‘qualified’ time, which means that there must be fewer quantitative determinations and more qualitative determinations in time than in space. ‘Empty time’, moreover, has no more an effective existence than has ‘empty space’, and in this connection everything that has been said about space could be repeated about time: outside this world there is no time, just as there is no space, and inside it, realized time contains all events, just as realized space contains all bodies. In certain respects there is something like a symmetry between space and time, so that they can often be alluded to in terms that are more or less parallel; but this symmetry, which is not found with respect to the other conditions of corporeal existence, arises rather on the qualitative than on the quantitative side, as is indicated by the difference already pointed out between the determination of spatial magnitudes and temporal magnitudes, as well as by the absence, in the case of time, of a quantitative science of an order comparable to that of the geometry of space. Moreover, on the qualitative side symmetry is conspicuously apparent in the correspondence existing between spatial symbolism and temporal symbolism, of which many examples have been given elsewhere; in fact it goes without saying that whenever symbolism is in question the essential part is played by considerations of quality and not of quantity.
It is evident that periods of time are qualitatively differentiated by the events unfolded within them, just as the parts of space are differentiated by the bodies they contain; it is not therefore in any way justifiable to regard as being really equivalent durations of time that are quantitatively equal when they are filled by totally different sequences of events; it is indeed a matter of current observation that quantitative equality disappears completely from the mental appreciation of duration in the face of qualitative difference. Someone may perhaps argue that qualitative difference is not inherent in duration itself, but only in what happens within it; it therefore becomes necessary to enquire whether there be not something in the qualitative determination of events that originates from time itself; and it seems that such is recognized to be the case, at least implicitly, when, as constantly happens in ordinary speech, the particular conditions of this or that period are referred to. This seems indeed to be even more obvious in the case of time than in that of space, although, as explained, qualitative elements are far from being negligible when the situation of bodies is in question; and it could even be said, in the final analysis, that a particular body cannot be situated indifferently in any place, any more than a particular event can happen indifferently at any time; but here the symmetry is not perfect, because the situation of a body in space can vary through the occurrence of movement, whereas that of an event in time is rigidly determined and strictly ‘unique’, so that the essential nature of events seems to be much more rigidly tied to time than that of bodies is to space; and this again confirms that time must have in itself the more markedly qualitative character.
The truth is that time is not something that unrolls itself uniformly, so that the practice of representing it geometrically by a straight line, usual among modern mathematicians, conveys an idea of time that is wholly falsified by over-simplification; we shall see later that a tendency toward a pernicious simplification is yet another characteristic of the modern spirit, and also that it inevitably accompanies a tendency to reduce everything to quantity. The correct representation of time is to be found in the traditional conception of cycles, and this conception obviously involves a ‘qualified’ time; besides, whenever the question of geometrical representation arises, whether in fact it be set out graphically or only expressed through the use of an appropriate terminology, it is clear that a spatial symbolism is being made use of; all this may suggest that an indication of some kind of correlation may well be discovered between the qualitative determinations of time and those of space. A correlation can in fact be found: in the case of space, these determinations consist essentially in the directions; and the cyclical figuration effectively establishes a correspondence between the phases of a temporal cycle and the directions of space. In order to satisfy oneself of this, it is enough to consider an example chosen from among those that are simplest and most immediately accessible, that of the annual cycle, which, as is well enough known, plays a very important part in traditional symbolism,[23] wherein the four seasons are made to correspond with the four cardinal points.[24]
A more or less complete exposition of the doctrine of cycles cannot be entered upon here, although that doctrine is naturally implicit in and fundamental to the whole of this study; if the limits of the available space are not to be overstepped, it must suffice for the present to formulate a few observations more directly connected with the subject of this book taken as a whole, referring wherever necessary in later chapters to relevant matters connected with the doctrine of cycles. The first of these observations is as follows: not only has each phase of a temporal cycle, of whatever kind it may be, its peculiar quality that influences the determination of events, but the speed with which events are unfolded also depends on these phases, and is therefore of a qualitative rather than of a quantitative order. Therefore, in speaking of the speed of events in time, by analogy with the speed of displacement of a body in space, a certain transposition of the notion of speed has to be effected, for speed in time cannot be reduced to quantitative expression, as can be done in mechanics when speed properly so called is in question. What this means is that, according to the different phases of the cycle, sequences of events comparable one to another do not occupy quantitatively equal durations; this is particularly evident in the case of the great cycles, applicable both to the cosmic and to the human orders, the most notable example being furnished by the decreasing lengths of the respective durations of the four Yugas that together make up a Manvantara.[25] For that very reason, events are being unfolded nowadays with a speed unexampled in the earlier ages, and this speed goes on increasing and will continue to increase up to the end of the cycle; there is thus something like a progressive ‘contraction’ of duration, the limit of which corresponds to the ‘stopping-point’ previously alluded to; it will be necessary to return to a special consideration of these matters later on, and to explain them more fully.
23
It will suffice at this point to call attention, on the one hand, to the extent of the use of the symbolism of the zodiac, especially from a strictly initiatic point of view, and on the other hand, to the direct applications in the field of ritual to which the unfolding of the annual cycle gives rise in most traditional forms.
24
While on the subject of the qualitative determinations of space and time and their correspondences, it would be a pity not to mention a testimony which is certainly not suspect, as being that of an ‘official’ orientalist, Marcel Granet, who has devoted to such traditional notions a whole section of his book entitled
25
The decrease is known to be proportionate to the numbers 4, 3, 2, 1, their total, 10, comprising the entire cycle; human life itself is moreover well known to be considered as growing shorter from one age to another, which amounts to saying that life passes by with ever-increasing rapidity from the beginning to the end of a cycle.