The Platform of Lebanese Studies

Last update: 2025-01-21 16:02:36

When in 1946 the Lebanese found for the first time in their history that they were an independent and sovereign national entity, a Lebanese intellectual, Michel Asmar, founded a cultural platform – the Lebanese Cenacle – whose principal function was to take part in the cultural formation and consolidation of the Lebanese identity. A setting for debate with a  review, a weekly radio broadcast (starting in 1953), a publishing house, and a centre for thought and encounter, Asmar wanted to make the Lebanese Cenacle a space in which lecturers and specialists, engaging in dialogue about scientific, literary, artistic, economic and political subjects, could enter into a ‘dialectic relationship’, with the aim of drawing up a ‘political philosophy of the Lebanon’.[1] In the view of Asmar, the Cenacle was to perform the function of being a ‘lung or brain’ in Lebanese national life.

The idea took shape immediately with the help of Edmond Rabbath, Kamal Jumblat and Michel Chiha.[2] It was to be ‘a free national intellectual platform’ which brought together the best specialists who wanted to address national problems and offer their visions with the aim of ‘awakening national consciousness and constructing the future of the modern Lebanon’, responding to the thirst of those who asked for culture, and spreading the ‘intellectual irradiation of the Lebanon’ and its ‘vocation’ in the East and the West.

The Lebanese Cenacle not only constitutes an excellent case study to describe the cultural and intellectual formation of an identity, of a nation, of a people and of a state, but was also an example of awareness by a part of the Lebanese intelligentsia of the role played by it in the building of the country. Espousing this approach, the founder of the Lebanese Cenacle Michel Asmar presented the platform as ‘the expression of the Lebanese conscience.[3] Antoine Messarra, the Professor of Law and Political Science at the Saint-Jospeh University of Beirut and a member of the Constitutional Council of the Lebanon, went beyond this when he stated that the Cenacle was a centre of thought which had the great merit of creating ‘Lebanese studies’, a ‘science of the Lebanon’.

During the forty years of its existence the Lebanese Cenacle involved in its activities 413 Lebanese, Arab, African, European and American speakers; organised 597 conferences in four languages (of which 451 were published in the twenty volumes of the Conférences du Cénacle); and published over sixty multilingual works. It is no accident, therefore, that René Habachi declared in his paper on ‘Committed and Free Thought in the Lebanon’ that ‘through its free platform the Lebanese Cenacle worthily served the nation and drew up the archives of the future’.

A Laboratory of Political Philosophy

‘The Epoch of the Cenacle’ witnessed the succession of three major periods. The first, which went from 1946 to 1958, was marked by a progressive definition of the goal of the Cenacle which was to draw up a ‘political philosophy’ for the Lebanon. This philosophy was based upon three pillars. First of all, that of creating a ‘Lebanese mythology’. This was a necessary mythology in the view of Asmar and one that had to become rooted in the hearts and the minds of the Lebanese. Adopting this approach, the civilisation of the Phoenicians was invoked as the ‘matrix civilisation’ of contemporary Lebanon and emphasis was laid on the action of the two emirs, Fakhr al-Dîn and Bashîr,[4] as representatives of the ‘Lebanese cause’ and the aspiration to independence of neighbouring countries. The second pillar of Lebanese political philosophy lay in the definition of the identity of the Lebanon in relation to the Phoenician heritage. It was the expression of the singular personality shaped by Lebanese nature and the mountainous terrain of the country which are different from the Arab hinterland which, indeed, for the most part is desert. The definition of Lebanese man was the third pillar of this philosophy. The contemporary Lebanese were the descendants of Egbert, the ‘first Lebanese man’ who lived on the coast of the Lebanon 35,000 years ago, but they were also the descendants of Phoenicians and the product of the union between Mount Lebanon and the Mediterranean. With their sense of freedom and adventure, the Lebanese were always ready the push to the ends of the world, differently from the ‘Arabs of the desert’ who were always satisfied with what they have. They were the synthesis of Phoenician mariners and mountain folk. They were the ‘historical compendium of all centuries’, the product of a ‘synthesis of all previous states of mind’ whose most significant characteristics were attachment to their roots and openness to the whole world.

 

Towards the Reform of the Political Regime

 

Once these ideas had been established, the Cenacle, during the second period which goes from 1958 to 1967, set itself the mission of taking part intellectually in the construction of the Lebanese State and the reform of its political regime. But the Cenacle was first and foremost aware of the fact that the political regime and the structure of the modern state could become stable only with a general philosophy which affirmed the approach of the Lebanese to existence, to man, to the world and even to the world beyond. It was in this context that the Cenacle adopted personalism as a humanistic vision that saw the person as an ‘absolute’, reconciling him with ‘others’ and meeting his material and spiritual needs. Aware of the need to adapt this approach to the realities of the Lebanon and the East, the Cenacle worked with René Habachi and Khalîl Râmiz Sarkîz to create an ‘Oriental personalism’, before this was Arabised by Sarkîs and Fu’âd Kan‘ân. In this way, the Lebanese Cenacilum set itself the task of renewing the conception of the State, a task that was that much more necessary and advisable given that this renewal converged with a political project – Chehabism – which was promoted by the President of the Republic Fouad Chehab (1958-1964) to strengthen the structures of the Lebanese state. By now it was no longer a question of a state that imposed on it subjects through coercion or which was embodied in a leader but of a modern state that represented that ‘juridical personification of the nation’ which was free and sovereign. A refuge for its citizens, the state hoped for by the Cenacle was an ‘administrator’ which, in organising the life of society and utilising in a productive way the human and natural resources of the nation, sought to assure the common good of all citizens. The modern state, which was ‘human, social, functional and a synthesis of national activities’, could not be separated from social justice. But to be able to assure the common good and constantly to improve the level of life of society, the State had to be founded on planning. This involved the creation of a strong administration whose institutions had to be profoundly reformed and permanently readapted and whose civil servants would be recruited on the basis of their competence.

Arab and Mediterranean at one and the same time. Lebanon, as described by the Cenacle, was the best space there was for the reconciliation of the Arabs with the West.

With respect to the political regime, confessionalism was imposed as a guiding theme. Although some lecturers would defend confessionalism as a political expression of the structure of Lebanese society, many others contested it and defined it as unjust and antiquated, inviting its replacement by total secularity. A third way envisaged neither uniting the temporal and the spiritual, as in the case of confessionalism, nor separating them, as desired by secularity. It aimed, instead, at revolutionising the temporal through the spiritual, with everything that this implied in terms of new relationships between the two and of a new organisation of the role of each of them within society. All of these recommendations aimed to guarantee a ‘soft evolution’ of the Lebanon that was not reconcilable with brutal and violent revolutions.

 

 

A New Relationship with Arabness

After the earthquake of the Six Days War, the Cenacle was faced with the need to think anew about the Lebanon and to deal with the repercussions of an event which most of the Arabophone intelligentsia saw as a disaster. The hour had come to redefine the relations of the Lebanon with the Arab world. For Asmar, the Lebanese no longer had to anything to fear as regards solidarity with their neighbours with whom they shared a language, a history and many values. Always linked to the singularity of the Lebanon, Asmar did not hesitate to invite the Lebanese to accept Arabness as a shared identity with their Arab brothers, starting with Syria. In the view of the Cenacle, in parallel with its membership of the Arab world the Lebanon had to be proud of its nature as a country of Mediterranean thought. Arab and Mediterranean at one and the same time, the Lebanon, as described by the Cenacle, was the best space there was for the reconciliation of the Arabs with the West. In recognising their belonging to the Mediterranean, the Arabs would have been capable of reacquiring the ‘right of primogeniture’ in the process of the edification of civilisation, to overcome their inferiority complex as regards the West, and to become again lords amongst the lords of this civilisation.

But the Cenacle was first and foremost aware of the fact that the political regime and the structure of the modern State could become stable only with a general philosophy which upheld the approach of the Lebanese to existence, man, the world and even the world beyondAs regards how the Cenacle worked, starting in 1969 Michel Asmar began to ask himself about the efficacy of lectures as a vector for intellectual engagement. It is evident that during this period Asmar set out to find a new formula which would reconcile lectures with other forms of cultural action in order to enable the Cenacle to engage in intellectual activity that was able to be expressed in practical terms in the public space. In this way one can explain and understand the organisation of lectures with a number of voices, the publication of texts on subjects such as Islamic-Christian dialogue and the heritage of Antioch, and the organisation of cultural meetings with Arab partners, in particular Syrian ones. The boldest attempt was that undertaken in 1977 when Michel Asmar and his friends of the Cenacle launched the ‘Movement of the Lebanese Cenacle’ whose principal task was to help the new President of the Republic, Elias Sarkîs, in the reconstruction of the country at a political  economic, social, intellectual and educational level. Despite this, it is advisable to observe that for various reasons, the most important of which was connected to a lack of funds, the activities of the Cenacle were very much reduced in the years 1968-1974.

 

Decline

5 June 1967 was only the first signal that announced the arrival of very dark times both for the Lebanon and for the Cenacle. After the outbreak of the war in the Lebanon, on 13 April 1975, the founder of the Lebanese Cenacle and his companions became aware of the fact that their ‘Lebanon’ of 1943 no longer existed. Some laid down their arms and decided to abandon the country and to go abroad given that the Lebanon for them was no longer a country where dignity and security were respected. Others, although they despaired of the situation, remained in the Lebanon waiting for an opportunity that would allow them to bring the country out of its hell. Amongst these were some friends who had supported Asmar and his Cenacle during the years of war and had tried on a number of occasions to relaunch the Lebanese Cenacle. But the death of Michel Asmar on 24 December 1984 put an end to these attempts.

By now it was no longer a question of a State that imposed on it subjects through coercion or which was embodied in a leader but of a modern State that represented that ‘juridical personification of the nation’ which was free and sovereignTwenty-five years after the death of Michel Asmar the Foundation of the Cenacle was established whose objective was to ‘revive the memory of the institution founded by Michel Asmar in 1946 and undertake activity directed towards constructing a civic space of thought and exchange’. This foundation, which has taken on the form of an association (jam‘iyya), was created by three members: Renée Asmar Herbouze, Mouna Taqî al-Dîn – a professor of literature at the American University of Beirut – and Karîm Qubaysî, a lawyer and the son of Ahmad Qubaysî, a member of the group near to Michel Asmar during the last years of the Lebanese Cenacle up to the year 1984. Two programmes have been engaged in. The first, placed in the calendar of the events for Beirut – the ‘world book capital’ – in 2009, involved the organisation of some papers on ‘The Reconstruction of the National Library of the Lebanon’ and ‘How to Write History’. The second involved the organisation of an exhibition that was held from 27 September to 18 October 2012 in the centre of Beirut and the launch of a film that outlined the ‘itinerary of the founder and the great moments of the institution’. This exhibition and book had a certain success both in the local press and in various Lebanese television channels. At the present time a new programme is being drawn up which is more directly conceived for young Lebanese.[5] This new undertaking of the Lebanese Cenacle Foundation has been received warmly both by young people, school heads and universities and by numerous cultural, political and religious forces in the country. Indeed, it is no accident that in the homily that was given in Bkerke on 6 January 2013 a few weeks after the closure of the exhibition and the launch of the book, the Maronite Patriarch Beshara Rai invited ‘intellectuals, university lecturers and specialists’ to create a ‘forum for national dialogue in Beirut similar to the Lebanese Cenacle’ which could address many political, economic, social and cultural questions and issues in order to create ‘healthy and objective public opinion’ and ensure ‘a national culture for the Lebanese people’.[6]

 

Bibliography

Amin Elias, Lubnân bi qalam mufakkirî al-nadwa (Pusek, Beirut, 2012).

Les Années Cénacle (Dâr al-Nahâr, Beirut, 1997).

Le temps du Cénacle, entre l’histoire, la mémoire et l’actualité (Fondation du Cénacle libanais, Beirut, 2012).

Tags

• oasis 20
• lebanon