The human mind has always been comparator; therefore, it cannot be mentioned as a starting point for comparative studies. In general, two groups, one from the position of tradition and the other from the position of modernity have paid attention to comparative studies ;In other words, one group with an esoteric tendency and the second group with a positivist tendency have studied comparative studies. The first group has made opposition to any kind of historical Approach and historical criticism And the second group believes that the only way to systematize philosophy is to use the comparative and historical method. Gnostics, theosophists, traditionalists and thinkers of Eranus Circle are among the first group, and Paul Masson-Oursel is the Pioneer and founder of the second group; Influenced by positivism and new philosophy, he established comparative philosophy in a new sense. Masson-Orsel refers to pre-modern comparative studies as well as tradition-based comparative studies as eclecticism and eclectic theosophy To define the border between them and comparative philosophy as a consequence of new philosophy. This article aims to find an answer to the question why Mason-Orsel does not consider the comparative studies of the above groups as Comparison in the modern sense of the word?. In short, disregarding history and historical criticism as an achievement of modernity and emphasizing the duality of appearance and interiority And the emphasis on spiritual history or metahistory instead of calendar and apparent history are the most important issues that separate Mason-Orsel's way in comparative studies from others.