{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_1561/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_1561","id":"gutenberg_1561","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1561","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Religious","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Christianity and other religions","Mythology","Paganism","Religion"],"text":"PAGAN & CHRISTIAN CREEDS: THEIR ORIGIN AND MEANING\n\nBy Edward Carpenter\n\n\n\n\n\"The different religions being lame attempts to represent under various\nguises this one root-fact of the central universal life, men have at\nall times clung to the religious creeds and rituals and ceremonials as\nsymbolising in some rude way the redemption and fulfilment of their own\nmost intimate natures--and this whether consciously understanding\nthe interpretations, or whether (as most often) only doing so in an\nunconscious or quite subconscious way.\"\n\nThe Drama of Love and Death, p. 96.\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n     I.    INTRODUCTORY\n     II.   SOLAR MYTHS AND CHRISTIAN FESTIVALS\n     III.  THE SYMBOLISM OF THE ZODIAC\n     IV.   TOTEM-SACRAMENTS AND EUCHARISTS\n     V.    FOOD AND VEGETATION MAGIC\n     VI.   MAGICIANS, KINGS AND GODS\n     VII.  RITES OF EXPIATION AND REDEMPTION\n     VIII. PAGAN INITIATIONS AND THE SECOND BIRTH\n     IX.   MYTH OF THE GOLDEN AGE\n     X.    THE SAVIOUR-GOD AND THE VIRGIN-MOTHER\n     XI.   RITUAL DANCING\n     XII.  THE SEX-TABOO\n     XIII. THE GENESIS OF CHRISTIANITY\n     XV.   THE MEANING OF IT ALL\n     XV.   THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES\n     XVI.  THE EXODUS OF CHRISTIANITY\n     XVII. CONCLUSION\n\n     APPENDIX ON THE TEACHINGS OF THE UPANISHADS:\n     I.    REST\n     II.   THE NATURE OF THE SELF\n\n\n\n\nPAGAN AND CHRISTIAN CREEDS: THEIR ORIGIN AND MEANING\n\n\n\n\nI. INTRODUCTORY\n\nThe subject of Religious Origins is a fascinating one, as the great\nmultitude of books upon it, published in late years, tends to show.\nIndeed the great difficulty to-day in dealing with the subject, lies in\nthe very mass of the material to hand--and that not only on account of\nthe labor involved in sorting the material, but because the abundance\nitself of facts opens up temptation to a student in this department of\nAnthropology (as happens also in other branches of general Science) to\nrush in too hastily with what seems a plausible theory. The more facts,\nstatistics, and so forth, there are available in any investigation, the\neasier it is to pick out a considerable number which will fit a given\ntheory. The other facts being neglected or ignored, the views put\nforward enjoy for a time a great vogue. Then inevitably, and at a later\ntime, new or neglected facts alter the outlook, and a new perspective is\nestablished.\n\nThere is also in these matters of Science (though many scientific men\nwould doubtless deny this) a great deal of \"Fashion\". Such has been\nnotoriously the case in Political Economy, Medicine, Geology, and even\nin such definite studies as Physics and Chemistry. In a comparatively\nrecent science, like that with which we are now concerned, one would\nnaturally expect variations. A hundred and fifty years ago, and since\nthe time of Rousseau, the \"Noble Savage\" was extremely popular; and he\nlingers still in the story books of our children. Then the reaction from\nthis extreme view set in, and of late years it has been the popular cue\n(largely, it must be said, among \"armchair\" travelers and explorers)\nto represent the religious rites and customs of primitive folk as a\nsenseless mass of superstitions, and the early man as quite devoid of\ndecent feeling and intelligence. Again, when the study of religious\norigins first began in modern times to be seriously taken up--say in the\nearlier part of last century--there was a great boom in Sungods. Every\ndivinity in the Pantheon was an impersonation of the Sun--unless indeed\n(if feminine) of the Moon. Apollo was a sungod, of course; Hercules was\na sungod; Samson was a sungod; Indra and Krishna, and even Christ, the\nsame. C. F. Dupuis in France (Origine de tous les Cultes, 1795), F. Nork\nin Germany (Biblische Mythologie, 1842), Richard Taylor in England (The\nDevil's Pulpit, (1) 1830), were among the first in modern times to put\nforward this view. A little later the PHALLIC explanation of everything\ncame into fashion. The deities were all polite names for the organs and\npowers of procreation. R. P. Knight (Ancient Art and Mythology,\n1818) and Dr. Thomas Inman (Ancient Faiths and Ancient Names, 1868)\npopularized this idea in England; so did Nork in Germany. Then again\nthere was a period of what is sometimes called Euhemerism--the theory\nthat the gods and goddesses had actually once been men and women,\nhistorical characters round whom a halo of romance and remoteness\nhad gathered. Later still, a school has arisen which thinks little of\nsungods, and pays more attention to Earth and Nature spirits, to gnomes\nand demons and vegetation-sprites, and to the processes of Magic by\nwhich these (so it was supposed) could be enlisted in man's service if\nfriendly, or exorcised if hostile.\n\n\n (1) This extraordinary book, though carelessly composed and\ncontaining many unproven statements, was on the whole on the right\nlines. But it raised a storm of opposition--the more so because its\nauthor was a clergyman! He was ejected from the ministry, of course, and\nwas sent to prison twice.\n\n\nIt is easy to see of course that there is some truth in ALL these\nexplanations; but naturally each school for the time being makes the\nmost of its own contention. Mr. J. M. Robertson (Pagan Christs and\nChristianity and Mythology), who has done such fine work in this field,\n(1) relies chiefly on the solar and astronomical origins, though he does\nnot altogether deny the others; Dr. Frazer, on the other hand--whose\ngreat work, The Golden Bough, is a monumental collection of primitive\ncustoms, and will be an inexhaustible quarry for all future students--is\napparently very little concerned with theories about the Sun and the\nstars, but concentrates his attention on the collection of innumerable\ndetails (2) of rites, chiefly magical, connected with food and\nvegetation. Still later writers, like S. Reinach, Jane Harrison and\nE. A. Crowley, being mainly occupied with customs of very primitive\npeoples, like the Pelasgian Greeks or the Australian aborigines, have\nconfined themselves (necessarily) even more to Magic and Witchcraft.\n\n (1) If only he did not waste so much time, and so needlessly, in\nslaughtering opponents!\n\n (2) To such a degree, indeed, that sometimes the connecting clue\nof the argument seems to be lost.\n\n\nMeanwhile the Christian Church from these speculations has kept itself\nseverely apart--as of course representing a unique and divine revelation\nlittle concerned or interested in such heathenisms; and moreover (in\nthis country at any rate) has managed to persuade the general public\nof its own divine uniqueness to such a degree that few people, even\nnowadays, realize that it has sprung from just the same root as\nPaganism, and that it shares by far the most part of its doctrines and\nrites with the latter. Till quite lately it was thought (in Britain)\nthat only secularists and unfashionable people took any interest in\nsungods; and while it was true that learned professors might point to a\nbelief in Magic as one of the first sources of Religion, it was easy in\nreply to say that this obviously had nothing to do with Christianity!\nThe Secularists, too, rather spoilt their case by assuming, in their\nwrath against the Church, that all priests since the beginning of\nthe world have been frauds and charlatans, and that all the rites of\nreligion were merely devil's devices invented by them for the purpose of\npreying upon the superstitions of the ignorant, to their own enrichment.\nThey (the Secularists) overleaped themselves by grossly exaggerating a\nthing that no doubt is partially true.\n\nThus the subject of religious origins is somewhat complex, and yields\nmany aspects for consideration. It is only, I think, by keeping a broad\ncourse and admitting contributions to the truth from various sides, that\nvaluable results can be obtained. It is absurd to suppose that in this\nor any other science neat systems can be found which will cover all the\nfacts. Nature and History do not deal in such things, or supply them for\na sop to Man's vanity.\n\nIt is clear that there have been three main lines, so far, along which\nhuman speculation and study have run. One connecting religious rites and\nobservations with the movements of the Sun and the planets in the sky,\nand leading to the invention of and belief in Olympian and remote gods\ndwelling in heaven and ruling the Earth from a distance; the second\nconnecting religion with the changes of the season, on the Earth and\nwith such practical things as the growth of vegetation and food, and\nleading to or mingled with a vague belief in earth-spirits and magical\nmethods of influencing such spirits; and the third connecting religion\nwith man's own body and the tremendous force of sex residing in\nit--emblem of undying life and all fertility and power. It is clear\nalso--and all investigation confirms it--that the second-mentioned phase\nof religion arose on the whole BEFORE the first-mentioned--that is, that\nmen naturally thought about the very practical questions of food and\nvegetation, and the magical or other methods of encouraging the same,\nbefore they worried themselves about the heavenly bodies and the laws of\nTHEIR movements, or about the sinister or favorable influences the stars\nmight exert. And again it is extremely probable that the third-mentioned\naspect--that which connected religion with the procreative desires and\nphenomena of human physiology--really came FIRST. These desires and\nphysiological phenomena must have loomed large on the primitive mind\nlong before the changes of the seasons or of the sky had been at all\ndefinitely observed or considered. Thus we find it probable that, in\norder to understand the sequence of the actual and historical phases of\nreligious worship, we must approximately reverse the order above-given\nin which they have been STUDIED, and conclude that in general the\nPhallic cults came first, the cult of Magic and the propitiation of\nearth-divinities and spirits came second, and only last came the belief\nin definite God-figures residing in heaven.\n\nAt the base of the whole process by which divinities and demons were\ncreated, and rites for their propitiation and placation established, lay\nFear--fear stimulating the imagination to fantastic activity. Primus in\norbe deos fecit Timor. And fear, as we shall see, only became a mental\nstimulus at the time of, or after, the evolution of self-consciousness.\nBefore that time, in the period of SIMPLE consciousness, when the human\nmind resembled that of the animals, fear indeed existed, but its nature\nwas more that of a mechanical protective instinct. There being no figure\nor image of SELF in the animal mind, there were correspondingly no\nfigures or images of beings who might threaten or destroy that self. So\nit was that the imaginative power of fear began with Self-consciousness,\nand from that imaginative power was unrolled the whole panorama of the\ngods and rites and creeds of Religion down the centuries.\n\nThe immense force and domination of Fear in the first self-conscious\nstages of the human mind is a thing which can hardly be exaggerated, and\nwhich is even difficult for some of us moderns to realize. But naturally\nas soon as Man began to think about himself--a frail phantom and waif in\nthe midst of tremendous forces of whose nature and mode of operation he\nwas entirely ignorant--he was BESET with terrors; dangers loomed upon\nhim on all sides. Even to-day it is noticed by doctors that one of the\nchief obstacles to the cure of illness among some black or native races\nis sheer superstitious terror; and Thanatomania is the recognized word\nfor a state of mind (\"obsession of death\") which will often cause a\nsavage to perish from a mere scratch hardly to be called a wound.\nThe natural defence against this state of mind was the creation of an\nenormous number of taboos--such as we find among all races and on every\nconceivable subject--and these taboos constituted practically a\ngreat body of warnings which regulated the lives and thoughts of the\ncommunity, and ultimately, after they had been weeded out and to some\ndegree simplified, hardened down into very stringent Customs and Laws.\nSuch taboos naturally in the beginning tended to include the avoidance\nnot only of acts which might reasonably be considered dangerous, like\ntouching a corpse, but also things much more remote and fanciful in\ntheir relation to danger, like merely looking at a mother-in-law, or\npassing a lightning-struck tree; and (what is especially to be noticed)\nthey tended to include acts which offered any special PLEASURE or\ntemptation--like sex or marriage or the enjoyment of a meal. Taboos\nsurrounded these things too, and the psychological connection is easy to\ndivine: but I shall deal with this general subject later.\n\nIt may be guessed that so complex a system of regulations made life\nanything but easy to early peoples; but, preposterous and unreasonable\nas some of the taboos were, they undoubtedly had the effect of\ncompelling the growth of self-control. Fear does not seem a very worthy\nmotive, but in the beginning it curbed the violence of the purely animal\npassions, and introduced order and restraint among them. Simultaneously\nit became itself, through the gradual increase of knowledge and\nobservation, transmuted and etherealized into something more like wonder\nand awe and (when the gods rose above the horizon) into reverence.\nAnyhow we seem to perceive that from the early beginnings (in the\nStone Age) of self-consciousness in Man there has been a gradual\ndevelopment--from crass superstition, senseless and accidental, to\nrudimentary observation, and so to belief in Magic; thence to Animism\nand personification of nature-powers in more or less human form,\nas earth-divinities or sky-gods or embodiments of the tribe; and to\nplacation of these powers by rites like Sacrifice and the Eucharist,\nwhich in their turn became the foundation of Morality. Graphic\nrepresentations made for the encouragement of fertility--as on the\nwalls of Bushmen's rock-dwellings or the ceilings of the caverns of\nAltamira--became the nurse of pictorial Art; observations of plants\nor of the weather or the stars, carried on by tribal medicine-men for\npurposes of witchcraft or prophecy, supplied some of the material of\nScience; and humanity emerged by faltering and hesitating steps on the\nborderland of those finer perceptions and reasonings which are supposed\nto be characteristic of Civilization.\n\nThe process of the evolution of religious rites and ceremonies has in\nits main outlines been the same all over the world, as the reader will\npresently see--and this whether in connection with the numerous creeds\nof Paganism or the supposedly unique case of Christianity; and now the\ncontinuity and close intermixture of these great streams can no longer\nbe denied--nor IS it indeed denied by those who have really studied the\nsubject. It is seen that religious evolution through the ages has been\npractically One thing--that there has been in fact a World-religion,\nthough with various phases and branches.\n\nAnd so in the present day a new problem arises, namely how to account\nfor the appearance of this great Phenomenon, with its orderly phases\nof evolution, and its own spontaneous (1) growths in all corners of the\nglobe--this phenomenon which has had such a strange sway over the hearts\nof men, which has attracted them with so weird a charm, which has drawn\nout their devotion, love and tenderness, which has consoled them in\nsorrow and affliction, and yet which has stained their history with such\nhorrible sacrifices and persecutions and cruelties. What has been the\ninstigating cause of it?\n\n (1) For the question of spontaneity see chap. x and elsewhere.\n\n\nThe answer which I propose to this question, and which is developed to\nsome extent in the following chapters, is a psychological one. It is\nthat the phenomenon proceeds from, and is a necessary accompaniment of,\nthe growth of human Consciousness itself--its growth, namely, through\nthe three great stages of its unfoldment. These stages are (1) that of\nthe simple or animal consciousness, (2) that of SELF-consciousness, and\n(3) that of a third stage of consciousness which has not as yet been\neffectively named, but whose indications and precursive signs we here\nand there perceive in the rites and prophecies and mysteries of the\nearly religions, and in the poetry and art and literature generally of\nthe later civilizations. Though I do not expect or wish to catch Nature\nand History in the careful net of a phrase, yet I think that in the\nsequence from the above-mentioned first stage to the second, and then\nagain in the sequence from the second to the third, there will be found\na helpful explanation of the rites and aspirations of human religion. It\nis this idea, illustrated by details of ceremonial and so forth, which\nforms the main thesis of the present book. In this sequence of growth,\nChristianity enters as an episode, but no more than an episode. It does\nnot amount to a disruption or dislocation of evolution. If it did, or\nif it stood as an unique or unclassifiable phenomenon (as some of its\nvotaries contend), this would seem to be a misfortune--as it would\nobviously rob us of at any rate one promise of progress in the future.\nAnd the promise of something better than Paganism and better than\nChristianity is very precious. It is surely time that it should be\nfulfilled.\n\nThe tracing, therefore, of the part that human self-consciousness has\nplayed, psychologically, in the evolution of religion, runs like a\nthread through the following chapters, and seeks illustration in a\nvariety of details. The idea has been repeated under different aspects;\nsometimes, possibly, it has been repeated too often; but different\naspects in such a case do help, as in a stereoscope, to give solidity to\nthe thing seen. Though the worship of Sun-gods and divine figures in\nthe sky came comparatively late in religious evolution, 1 have put this\nsubject early in the book (chapters ii and iii), partly because (as I\nhave already explained) it was the phase first studied in modern times,\nand therefore is the one most familiar to present-day readers, and\npartly because its astronomical data give great definiteness and\n\"proveability\" to it, in rebuttal to the common accusation that the\nwhole study of religious origins is too vague and uncertain to have much\nvalue. Going backwards in Time, the two next chapters (iv and v) deal\nwith Totem-sacraments and Magic, perhaps the earliest forms of religion.\nAnd these four lead on (in chapters vi to xi) to the consideration of\nrites and creeds common to Paganism and Christianity. XII and xiii deal\nespecially with the evolution of Christianity itself; xiv and xv explain\nthe inner Meaning of the whole process from the beginning; and xvi and\nxvii look to the Future.\n\nThe appendix on the doctrines of the Upanishads may, I hope, serve to\ngive an idea, intimate even though inadequate, of the third Stage--that\nwhich follows on the stage of self-consciousness; and to portray the\nmental attitudes which are characteristic of that stage. Here in this\nthird stage, it would seem, one comes upon the real FACTS of the inner\nlife--in contradistinction to the fancies and figments of the second\nstage; and so one reaches the final point of conjunction between Science\nand Religion.\n\n\n\n\nII. SOLAR MYTHS AND CHRISTIAN FESTIVALS\n\nTo the ordinary public--notwithstanding the immense amount of work which\nhas of late been done on this subject--the connection between Paganism\nand Christianity still seems rather remote. Indeed the common notion\nis that Christianity was really a miraculous interposition into and\ndislocation of the old order of the world; and that the pagan gods (as\nin Milton's Hymn on the Nativity) fled away in dismay before the sign of\nthe Cross, and at the sound of the name of Jesus. Doubtless this was a\nview much encouraged by the early Church itself--if only to enhance its\nown authority and importance; yet, as is well known to every student, it\nis quite misleading and contrary to fact. The main Christian doctrines\nand festivals, besides a great mass of affiliated legend and ceremonial,\nare really quite directly derived from, and related to, preceding\nNature worships; and it has only been by a good deal of deliberate\nmystification and falsification that this derivation has been kept out\nof sight.\n\nIn these Nature-worships there may be discerned three fairly independent\nstreams of religious or quasi-religious enthusiasm: (1) that connected\nwith the phenomena of the heavens, the movements of the Sun, planets and\nstars, and the awe and wonderment they excited; (2) that connected with\nthe seasons and the very important matter of the growth of vegetation\nand food on the Earth; and (3) that connected with the mysteries of Sex\nand reproduction. It is obvious that these three streams would mingle\nand interfuse with each other a good deal; but as far as they were\nseparable the first would tend to create Solar heroes and Sun-myths;\nthe second Vegetation-gods and personifications of Nature and the\nearth-life; while the third would throw its glamour over the other two\nand contribute to the projection of deities or demons worshipped with\nall sorts of sexual and phallic rites. All three systems of course have\ntheir special rites and times and ceremonies; but, as, I say, the rites\nand ceremonies of one system would rarely be found pure and unmixed with\nthose belonging to the two others. The whole subject is a very large\none; but for reasons given in the Introduction I shall in this and\nthe following chapter--while not ignoring phases (2) and (3)--lay most\nstress on phase (1) of the question before us.\n\nAt the time of the life or recorded appearance of Jesus of Nazareth, and\nfor some centuries before, the Mediterranean and neighboring world had\nbeen the scene of a vast number of pagan creeds and rituals. There were\nTemples without end dedicated to gods like Apollo or Dionysus among the\nGreeks, Hercules among the Romans, Mithra among the Persians, Adonis and\nAttis in Syria and Phrygia, Osiris and Isis and Horus in Egypt, Baal\nand Astarte among the Babylonians and Carthaginians, and so forth.\nSocieties, large or small, united believers and the devout in the\nservice or ceremonials connected with their respective deities, and\nin the creeds which they confessed concerning these deities. And an\nextraordinarily interesting fact, for us, is that notwithstanding great\ngeographical distances and racial differences between the adherents\nof these various cults, as well as differences in the details of their\nservices, the general outlines of their creeds and ceremonials were--if\nnot identical--so markedly similar as we find them.\n\nI cannot of course go at length into these different cults, but I may\nsay roughly that of all or nearly all the deities above-mentioned it was\nsaid and believed that:\n\n\n(1) They were born on or very near our Christmas Day.\n\n(2) They were born of a Virgin-Mother.\n\n(3) And in a Cave or Underground Chamber.\n\n(4) They led a life of toil for Mankind.\n\n(5) And were called by the names of Light-bringer, Healer, Mediator,\nSavior, Deliverer.\n\n(6) They were however vanquished by the Powers of Darkness.\n\n(7) And descended into Hell or the Underworld.\n\n(8) They rose again from the dead, and became the pioneers of mankind to\nthe Heavenly world.\n\n(9) They founded Communions of Saints, and Churches into which disciples\nwere received by Baptism.\n\n(10) And they were commemorated by Eucharistic meals.\n\n\nLet me give a few brief examples.\n\nMithra was born in a cave, and on the 25th December. (1) He was born of\na Virgin. (2) He traveled far and wide as a teacher and illuminator\nof men. He slew the Bull (symbol of the gross Earth which the sunlight\nfructifies). His great festivals were the winter solstice and the Spring\nequinox (Christmas and Easter). He had twelve companions or disciples\n(the twelve months). He was buried in a tomb, from which however he rose\nagain; and his resurrection was celebrated yearly with great rejoicings.\nHe was called Savior and Mediator, and sometimes figured as a Lamb; and\nsacramental feasts in remembrance of him were held by his followers.\nThis legend is apparently partly astronomical and partly vegetational;\nand the same may be said of the following about Osiris.\n\n (1) The birthfeast of Mithra was held in Rome on the 8th day\nbefore the Kalends of January, being also the day of the Circassian\ngames, which were sacred to the Sun. (See F. Nork, Der Mystagog,\nLeipzig.)\n\n (2) This at any rate was reported by his later disciples (see\nRobertson's Pagan Christs, p. 338).\n\n\nOsiris was born (Plutarch tells us) on the 361st day of the year,\nsay the 27th December. He too, like Mithra and Dionysus, was a great\ntraveler. As King of Egypt he taught men civil arts, and \"tamed them by\nmusic and gentleness, not by force of arms\"; (1) he was the discoverer\nof corn and wine. But he was betrayed by Typhon, the power of darkness,\nand slain and dismembered. \"This happened,\" says Plutarch, \"on the 17th\nof the month Athyr, when the sun enters into the Scorpion\" (the sign of\nthe Zodiac which indicates the oncoming of Winter). His body was placed\nin a box, but afterwards, on the 19th, came again to life, and, as in\nthe cults of Mithra, Dionysus, Adonis and others, so in the cult\nof Osiris, an image placed in a coffin was brought out before the\nworshipers and saluted with glad cries of \"Osiris is risen.\" (1) \"His\nsufferings, his death and his resurrection were enacted year by year in\na great mystery-play at Abydos.\" (2)\n\n (1) See Plutarch on Isis and Osiris.\n\n (2) Ancient Art and Ritual, by Jane E. Harrison, chap. i.\n\n\nThe two following legends have more distinctly the character of\nVegetation myths.\n\nAdonis or Tammuz, the Syrian god of vegetation, was a very beautiful\nyouth, born of a Virgin (Nature), and so beautiful that Venus and\nProserpine (the goddesses of the Upper and Underworlds) both fell in\nlove with him. To reconcile their claims it was agreed that he should\nspend half the year (summer) in the upper world, and the winter half\nwith Proserpine below. He was killed by a boar (Typhon) in the autumn.\nAnd every year the maidens \"wept for Adonis\" (see Ezekiel viii. 14). In\nthe spring a festival of his resurrection was held--the women set out\nto seek him, and having found the supposed corpse placed it (a wooden\nimage) in a coffin or hollow tree, and performed wild rites and\nlamentations, followed by even wilder rejoicings over his supposed\nresurrection. At Aphaca in the North of Syria, and halfway between\nByblus and Baalbec, there was a famous grove and temple of Astarte,\nnear which was a wild romantic gorge full of trees, the birthplace of\na certain river Adonis--the water rushing from a Cavern, under lofty\ncliffs. Here (it was said) every year the youth Adonis was again wounded\nto death, and the river ran red with his blood, (1) while the scarlet\nanemone bloomed among the cedars and walnuts.\n\n (1) A discoloration caused by red earth washed by rain from the\nmountains, and which has been observed by modern travelers. For the\nwhole story of Adonis and of Attis see Frazer's Golden Bough, part iv.\n\n\nThe story of Attis is very similar. He was a fair young shepherd or\nherdsman of Phrygia, beloved by Cybele (or Demeter), the Mother of the\ngods. He was born of a Virgin--Nana--who conceived by putting a ripe\nalmond or pomegranate in her bosom. He died, either killed by a boar,\nthe symbol of winter, like Adonis, or self-castrated (like his own\npriests); and he bled to death at the foot of a pine tree (the pine\nand pine-cone being symbols of fertility). The sacrifice of his blood\nrenewed the fertility of the earth, and in the ritual celebration of\nhis death and resurrection his image was fastened to the trunk of a\npine-tree (compare the Crucifixion). But I shall return to this legend\npresently. The worship of Attis became very widespread and much honored,\nand was ultimately incorporated with the established religion at Rome\nsomewhere about the commencement of our Era.\n\nThe following two legends (dealing with Hercules and with Krishna) have\nrather more of the character of the solar, and less of the vegetational\nmyth about them. Both heroes were regarded as great benefactors of\nhumanity; but the former more on the material plane, and the latter on\nthe spiritual.\n\nHercules or Heracles was, like other Sun-gods and benefactors of\nmankind, a great Traveler. He was known in many lands, and everywhere\nhe was invoked as Saviour. He was miraculously conceived from a divine\nFather; even in the cradle he strangled two serpents sent to destroy\nhim. His many labors for the good of the world were ultimately\nepitomized into twelve, symbolized by the signs of the Zodiac. He slew\nthe Nemxan Lion and the Hydra (offspring of Typhon) and the Boar. He\novercame the Cretan Bull, and cleaned out the Stables of Augeas; he\nconquered Death and, descending into Hades, brought Cerberus thence and\nascended into Heaven. On all sides he was followed by the gratitude and\nthe prayers of mortals.\n\nAs to Krishna, the Indian god, the points of agreement with the general\ndivine career indicated above are too salient to be overlooked, and too\nnumerous to be fully recorded. He also was born of a Virgin (Devaki)\nand in a Cave, (1) and his birth announced by a Star. It was sought to\ndestroy him, and for that purpose a massacre of infants was ordered.\nEverywhere he performed miracles, raising the dead, healing lepers, and\nthe deaf and the blind, and championing the poor and oppressed. He had\na beloved disciple, Arjuna, (cf. John) before whom he was transfigured.\n(2) His death is differently related--as being shot by an arrow, or\ncrucified on a tree. He descended into hell; and rose again from the\ndead, ascending into heaven in the sight of many people. He will return\nat the last day to be the judge of the quick and the dead.\n\n (1) Cox's Myths of the Aryan Nations, p. 107.\n\n (2) Bhagavat Gita, ch. xi.\n\n\nSuch are some of the legends concerning the pagan and pre-Christian\ndeities--only briefly sketched now, in order that we may get something\nlike a true perspective of the whole subject; but to most of them, and\nmore in detail, I shall return as the argument proceeds.\n\nWhat we chiefly notice so far are two points; on the one hand the\ngeneral similarity of these stories with that of Jesus Christ; on the\nother their analogy with the yearly phenomena of Nature as illustrated\nby the course of the Sun in heaven and the changes of Vegetation on the\nearth.\n\n\n(1) The similarity of these ancient pagan legends and beliefs with\nChristian traditions was indeed so great that it excited the attention\nand the undisguised wrath of the early Christian fathers. They felt no\ndoubt about the similarity, but not knowing how to explain it fell\nback upon the innocent theory that the Devil--in order to confound the\nChristians--had, CENTURIES BEFORE, caused the pagans to adopt certain\nbeliefs and practices! (Very crafty, we may say, of the Devil, but also\nvery innocent of the Fathers to believe it!) Justin Martyr for instance\ndescribes (1) the institution of the Lord's Supper as narrated in the\nGospels, and then goes on to say: \"Which the wicked devils have IMITATED\nin the mysteries of Mithra, commanding the same thing to be done. For,\nthat bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in\nthe mystic rites of one who is being initiated you either know or can\nlearn.\" Tertullian also says (2) that \"the devil by the mysteries of\nhis idols imitates even the main part of the divine mysteries.\"...\n\"He baptizes his worshippers in water and makes them believe that\nthis purifies them from their crimes.\"... \"Mithra sets his mark on the\nforehead of his soldiers; he celebrates the oblation of bread; he offers\nan image of the resurrection, and presents at once the crown and the\nsword; he limits his chief priest to a single marriage; he even has his\nvirgins and ascetics.\" (3) Cortez, too, it will be remembered complained\nthat the Devil had positively taught to the Mexicans the same things\nwhich God had taught to Christendom.\n\n (1) I Apol. c. 66.\n\n (2) De Praescriptione Hereticorum, c. 40; De Bapt. c. 3; De\nCorona, c. 15.\n\n (3) For reference to both these examples see J. M. Robertson's\nPagan Christs, pp. 321, 322.\n\n\nJustin Martyr again, in the Dialogue with Trypho says that the Birth in\nthe Stable was the prototype (!) of the birth of Mithra in the Cave of\nZoroastrianism; and boasts that Christ was born when the Sun takes its\nbirth in the Augean Stable, (1) coming as a second Hercules to cleanse\na foul world; and St. Augustine says \"we hold this (Christmas) day holy,\nnot like the pagans because of the birth of the Sun, but because of the\nbirth of him who made it.\" There are plenty of other instances in the\nEarly Fathers of their indignant ascription of these similarities to the\nwork of devils; but we need not dwell over them. There is no need for\nUS to be indignant. On the contrary we can now see that these\nanimadversions of the Christian writers are the evidence of how and to\nwhat extent in the spread of Christianity over the world it had become\nfused with the Pagan cults previously existing.\n\n (1) The Zodiacal sign of Capricornus, iii.\n\n\nIt was not till the year A.D. 530 or so--five centuries after the\nsupposed birth of Christ--that a Scythian Monk, Dionysius Exiguus, an\nabbot and astronomer of Rome, was commissioned to fix the day and the\nyear of that birth. A nice problem, considering the historical science\nof the period! For year he assigned the date which we now adopt, (2) and\nfor day and month he adopted the 25th December--a date which had been\nin popular use since about 350 B.C., and the very date, within a day or\ntwo, of the supposed birth of the previous Sungods. (3) From that\nfact alone we may fairly conclude that by the year 530 or earlier the\nexisting Nature-worships had become largely fused into Christianity. In\nfact the dates of the main pagan religious festivals had by that time\nbecome so popular that Christianity was OBLIGED to accommodate itself to\nthem. (1)\n\n (1) As, for instance, the festival of John the Baptist in June\ntook the place of the pagan midsummer festival of water and bathing;\nthe Assumption of the Virgin in August the place of that of Diana in the\nsame month; and the festival of All Souls early in November, that of the\nworld-wide pagan feasts of the dead and their ghosts at the same season.\n\n (2) See Encycl. Brit. art. \"Chronology.\"\n\n (3) \"There is however a difficulty in accepting the 25th December\nas the real date of the Nativity, December being the height of the rainy\nseason in Judaea, when neither flocks nor shepherds could have been at\nnight in the fields of Bethlehem\" (!). Encycl. Brit. art. \"Christmas\nDay.\" According to Hastings's Encyclopaedia, art. \"Christmas,\" \"Usener\nsays that the Feast of the Nativity was held originally on the 6th\nJanuary (the Epiphany), but in 353-4 the Pope Liberius displaced it to\nthe 25th December... but there is no evidence of a Feast of the Nativity\ntaking place at all, before the fourth century A.D.\" It was not till 534\nA.D. that Christmas Day and Epiphany were reckoned by the law-courts as\ndies non.\n\n\nThis brings us to the second point mentioned a few pages back--the\nanalogy between the Christian festivals and the yearly phenomena of\nNature in the Sun and the Vegetation.\n\nLet us take Christmas Day first. Mithra, as we have seen, was reported\nto have been born on the 25th December (which in the Julian Calendar was\nreckoned as the day of the Winter Solstice AND of the Nativity of the\nSun); Plutarch says (Isis and Osiris, c. 12) that Osiris was born on\nthe 361st day of the year, when a Voice rang out proclaiming the Lord of\nAll. Horus, he says, was born on the 362nd day. Apollo on the same.\n\nWhy was all this? Why did the Druids at Yule Tide light roaring fires?\nWhy was the cock supposed to crow all Christmas Eve (\"The bird of\ndawning singeth all night long\")? Why was Apollo born with only one hair\n(the young Sun with only one feeble ray)? Why did Samson (name derived\nfrom Shemesh, the sun) lose all his strength when he lost his hair? Why\nwere so many of these gods--Mithra, Apollo, Krishna, Jesus, and others,\nborn in caves or underground chambers? (1) Why, at the Easter Eve\nfestival of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem is a light brought from the\ngrave and communicated to the candles of thousands who wait outside, and\nwho rush forth rejoicing to carry the new glory over the world? (2) Why\nindeed? except that older than all history and all written records has\nbeen the fear and wonderment of the children of men over the failure of\nthe Sun's strength in Autumn--the decay of their God; and the anxiety\nlest by any means he should not revive or reappear?\n\n\n (1) This same legend of gods (or idols) being born in caves has,\ncuriously enough, been reported from Mexico, Guatemala, the Antilles,\nand other places in Central America. See C. F. P. von Martius,\nEtknographie Amerika, etc. (Leipzig, 1867), vol. i, p. 758.\n\n (2) Compare the Aztec ceremonial of lighting a holy fire and\ncommunicating it to the multitude from the wounded breast of a human\nvictim, celebrated every 52 years at the end of one cycle and the\nbeginning of another--the constellation of the Pleiades being in the\nZenith (Prescott's Conquest of Mexico, Bk. I, ch. 4).\n\n\nThink for a moment of a time far back when there were absolutely NO\nAlmanacs or Calendars, either nicely printed or otherwise, when all that\ntimid mortals could see was that their great source of Light and Warmth\nwas daily failing, daily sinking lower in the sky. As everyone now knows\nthere are about three weeks at the fag end of the year when the days are\nat their shortest and there is very little change. What was happening?\nEvidently the god had fallen upon evil times. Typhon, the prince of\ndarkness, had betrayed him; Delilah, the queen of Night, had shorn his\nhair; the dreadful Boar had wounded him; Hercules was struggling\nwith Death itself; he had fallen under the influence of those malign\nconstellations--the Serpent and the Scorpion. Would the god grow weaker\nand weaker, and finally succumb, or would he conquer after all? We can\nimagine the anxiety with which those early men and women watched for the\nfirst indication of a lengthening day; and the universal joy when the\nPriest (the representative of primitive science) having made some\nsimple observations, announced from the Temple steps that the day WAS\nlengthening--that the Sun was really born again to a new and glorious\ncareer. (1)\n\n (1) It was such things as these which doubtless gave the\nPriesthood its power.\n\n\nLet us look at the elementary science of those days a little closer.\nHow without Almanacs or Calendars could the day, or probable day, of the\nSun's rebirth be fixed? Go out next Christmas Evening, and at midnight\nyou will see the brightest of the fixed stars, Sirius, blazing in the\nsouthern sky--not however due south from you, but somewhat to the\nleft of the Meridian line. Some three thousand years ago (owing to the\nPrecession of the Equinoxes) that star at the winter solstice did\nnot stand at midnight where you now see it, but almost exactly ON\nthe meridian line. The coming of Sirius therefore to the meridian at\nmidnight became the sign and assurance of the Sun having reached the\nvery lowest point of his course, and therefore of having arrived at the\nmoment of his re-birth. Where then was the Sun at that moment? Obviously\nin the underworld beneath our feet. Whatever views the ancients may have\nhad about the shape of the earth, it was evident to the mass of people\nthat the Sungod, after illuminating the world during the day, plunged\ndown in the West, and remained there during the hours of darkness in\nsome cavern under the earth. Here he rested and after bathing in the\ngreat ocean renewed his garments before reappearing in the East next\nmorning.\n\nBut in this long night of his greatest winter weakness, when all the\nworld was hoping and praying for the renewal of his strength, it is\nevident that the new birth would come--if it came at all--at midnight.\nThis then was the sacred hour when in the underworld (the Stable or the\nCave or whatever it might be called) the child was born who was destined\nto be the Savior of men. At that moment Sirius stood on the southern\nmeridian (and in more southern lands than ours this would be more nearly\noverhead); and that star--there is little doubt--is the Star in the East\nmentioned in the Gospels.\n\nTo the right, as the supposed observer looks at Sirius on the midnight\nof Christmas Eve, stands the magnificent Orion, the mighty hunter. There\nare three stars in his belt which, as is well known, lie in a straight\nline pointing to Sirius. They are not so bright as Sirius, but they are\nsufficiently bright to attract attention. A long tradition gives them\nthe name of the Three Kings. Dupuis (1) says: \"Orion a trois belles\netoiles vers le milieu, qui sont de seconde grandeur et posees en ligne\ndroite, l'une pres de l'autre, le peuple les appelle les trois rois.\nOn donne aux trois rois Magis les noms de Magalat, Galgalat, Saraim;\net Athos, Satos, Paratoras. Les Catholiques les appellent Gaspard,\nMelchior, et Balthasar.\" The last-mentioned group of names comes in\nthe Catholic Calendar in connection with the feast of the Epiphany (6th\nJanuary); and the name \"Trois Rois\" is commonly to-day given to these\nstars by the French and Swiss peasants.\n\n (1) Charles F. Dupuis (Origine de Tous les Cultes, Paris, 1822)\nwas one of the earliest modern writers on these subjects.\n\n\nImmediately after Midnight then, on the 25th December, the Beloved Son\n(or Sun-god) is born. If we go back in thought to the period, some three\nthousand years ago, when at that moment of the heavenly birth Sirius,\ncoming from the East, did actually stand on the Meridian, we shall come\ninto touch with another curious astronomical coincidence. For at the\nsame moment we shall see the Zodiacal constellation of the Virgin in\nthe act of rising, and becoming visible in the East divided through the\nmiddle by the line of the horizon.\n\nThe constellation Virgo is a Y-shaped group, of which [gr a], the star\nat the foot, is the well-known Spica, a star of the first magnitude. The\nother principal stars, [gr g] at the centre, and [gr b] and [gr e] at\nthe extremities, are of the second magnitude. The whole resembles more a\ncup than the human figure; but when we remember the symbolic meaning\nof the cup, that seems to be an obvious explanation of the name Virgo,\nwhich the constellation has borne since the earliest times. (The three\nstars [gr b], [gr g] and [gr a], lie very nearly on the Ecliptic, that\nis, the Sun's path--a fact to which we shall return presently.)\n\nAt the moment then when Sirius, the star from the East, by coming to the\nMeridian at midnight signalled the Sun's new birth, the Virgin was seen\njust rising on the Eastern sky--the horizon line passing through\nher centre. And many people think that this astronomical fact is the\nexplanation of the very widespread legend of the Virgin-birth. I do not\nthink that it is the sole explanation--for indeed in all or nearly all\nthese cases the acceptance of a myth seems to depend not upon a single\nargument but upon the convergence of a number of meanings and reasons in\nthe same symbol. But certainly the fact mentioned above is curious, and\nits importance is accentuated by the following considerations.\n\nIn the Temple of Denderah in Egypt, and on the inside of the dome,\nthere is or WAS an elaborate circular representation of the Northern\nhemisphere of the sky and the Zodiac. (1) Here Virgo the constellation\nis represented, as in our star-maps, by a woman with a spike of corn in\nher hand (Spica). But on the margin close by there is an annotating and\nexplicatory figure--a figure of Isis with the infant Horus in her arms,\nand quite resembling in style the Christian Madonna and Child, except\nthat she is sitting and the child is on her knee. This seems to show\nthat--whatever other nations may have done in associating Virgo with\nDemeter, Ceres, Diana (2) etc.--the Egyptians made no doubt of the\nconstellation's connection with Isis and Horus. But it is well known as\na matter of history that the worship of Isis and Horus descended in the\nearly Christian centuries to Alexandria, where it took the form of the\nworship of the Virgin Mary and the infant Savior, and so passed into\nthe European ceremonial. We have therefore the Virgin Mary connected by\nlinear succession and descent with that remote Zodiacal cluster in the\nsky! Also it may be mentioned that on the Arabian and Persian globes of\nAbenezra and Abuazar a Virgin and Child are figured in connection with\nthe same constellation. (3)\n\n (1) Carefully described and mapped by Dupuis, see op. cit.\n\n (2) For the harvest-festival of Diana, the Virgin, and her\nparallelism with the Virgin Mary, see The Golden Bough, vol. i, 14 and\nii, 121.\n\n (3) See F. Nork, Der Mystagog (Leipzig, 1838).\n\n\nA curious confirmation of the same astronomical connection is afforded\nby the Roman Catholic Calendar. For if this be consulted it will be\nfound that the festival of the Assumption of the Virgin is placed on the\n15th August, while the festival of the Birth of the Virgin is dated the\n8th September. I have already pointed out that the stars, [gr a], [gr\nb] and [gr g] of Virgo are almost exactly on the Ecliptic, or Sun's path\nthrough the sky; and a brief reference to the Zodiacal signs and the\nstar-maps will show that the Sun each year enters the sign of Virgo\nabout the first-mentioned date, and leaves it about the second date. At\nthe present day the Zodiacal signs (owing to precession) have shifted\nsome distance from the constellations of the same name. But at the time\nwhen the Zodiac was constituted and these names were given, the first\ndate obviously would signalize the actual disappearance of the cluster\nVirgo in the Sun's rays--i. e. the Assumption of the Virgin into the\nglory of the God--while the second date would signalize the reappearance\nof the constellation or the Birth of the Virgin. The Church of Notre\nDame at Paris is supposed to be on the original site of a Temple of\nIsis; and it is said (but I have not been able to verify this myself)\nthat one of the side entrances--that, namely, on the left in entering\nfrom the North (cloister) side--is figured with the signs of the Zodiac\nEXCEPT that the sign Virgo is replaced by the figure of the Madonna and\nChild.\n\nSo strange is the scripture of the sky! Innumerable legends and customs\nconnect the rebirth of the Sun with a Virgin parturition. Dr. J. G.\nFrazer in his Part IV of The Golden Bough (1) says: \"If we may trust the\nevidence of an obscure scholiast the Greeks (in the worship of Mithras\nat Rome) used to celebrate the birth of the luminary by a midnight\nservice, coming out of the inner shrines and crying, 'The Virgin has\nbrought forth! The light is waxing!' ([gr 'H parhenos tetoken, auzei\npws].)\" In Elie Reclus' little book Primitive Folk (2) it is said of the\nEsquimaux that \"On the longest night of the year two angakout (priests),\nof whom one is disguised as a WOMAN, go from hut to hut extinguishing\nall the lights, rekindling them from a vestal flame, and crying out,\n'From the new sun cometh a new light!'\"\n\n (1) Book II, ch. vi.\n\n (2) In the Contemporary Science Series, I. 92.\n\n\nAll this above-written on the Solar or Astronomical origins of the myths\ndoes not of course imply that the Vegetational origins must be denied\nor ignored. These latter were doubtless the earliest, but there is no\nreason--as said in the Introduction (ch. i)--why the two elements should\nnot to some extent have run side by side, or been fused with each other.\nIn fact it is quite clear that they must have done so; and to separate\nthem out too rigidly, or treat them as antagonistic, is a mistake. The\nCave or Underworld in which the New Year is born is not only the place\nof the Sun's winter retirement, but also the hidden chamber beneath the\nEarth to which the dying Vegetation goes, and from which it re-arises\nin Spring. The amours of Adonis with Venus and Proserpine, the lovely\ngoddesses of the upper and under worlds, or of Attis with Cybele, the\nblooming Earth-mother, are obvious vegetation-symbols; but they do not\nexclude the interpretation that Adonis (Adonai) may also figure as a\nSun-god. The Zodiacal constellations of Aries and Taurus (to which I\nshall return presently) rule in heaven just when the Lamb and the Bull\nare in evidence on the earth; and the yearly sacrifice of those two\nanimals and of the growing Corn for the good of mankind runs\nparallel with the drama of the sky, as it affects not only the said\nconstellations but also Virgo (the Earth-mother who bears the sheaf of\ncorn in her hand).\n\nI shall therefore continue (in the next chapter) to point out these\nastronomical references--which are full of significance and poetry; but\nwith a recommendation at the same time to the reader not to forget the\npoetry and significance of the terrestrial interpretations.\n\nBetween Christmas Day and Easter there are several minor festivals or\nholy days--such as the 28th December (the Massacre of the Innocents),\nthe 6th January (the Epiphany), the 2nd February (Candlemas (1) Day),\nthe period of Lent (German Lenz, the Spring), the Annunciation of the\nBlessed Virgin, and so forth--which have been commonly celebrated in\nthe pagan cults before Christianity, and in which elements of Star and\nNature worship can be traced; but to dwell on all these would take too\nlong; so let us pass at once to the period of Easter itself.\n\n (1) This festival of the Purification of the Virgin corresponds\nwith the old Roman festival of Juno Februata (i. e. purified) which was\nheld in the last month (February) of the Roman year, and which included\na candle procession of Ceres, searching for Proserpine. (F. Nork, Der\nMystagog.)\n\n\n\n\nIII. THE SYMBOLISM OF THE ZODIAC\n\nThe Vernal Equinox has all over the ancient world, and from the earliest\ntimes, been a period of rejoicing and of festivals in honor of the\nSungod. It is needless to labor a point which is so well known. Everyone\nunderstands and appreciates the joy of finding that the long darkness is\ngiving way, that the Sun is growing in strength, and that the days are\nwinning a victory over the nights. The birds and flowers reappear, and\nthe promise of Spring is in the air. But it may be worth while to give\nan elementary explanation of the ASTRONOMICAL meaning of this period,\nbecause this is not always understood, and yet it is very important in\nits bearing on the rites and creeds of the early religions. The priests\nwho were, as I have said, the early students and inquirers, had worked\nout this astronomical side, and in that way were able to fix dates and\nto frame for the benefit of the populace myths and legends, which were\nin a certain sense explanations of the order of Nature, and a kind of\n\"popular science.\"\n\nThe Equator, as everyone knows, is an imaginary line or circle girdling\nthe Earth half-way between the North and South poles. If you imagine a\ntransparent Earth with a light at its very centre, and also imagine the\nSHADOW of this equatorial line to be thrown on the vast concave of\nthe Sky, this shadow would in astronomical parlance coincide with the\nEquator of the Sky--forming an imaginary circle half-way between the\nNorth and South celestial poles.\n\nThe Equator, then, may be pictured as cutting across the sky either by\nday or by night, and always at the same elevation--that is, as seen from\nany one place. But the Ecliptic (the other important great circle of the\nheavens) can only be thought of as a line traversing the constellations\nas they are seen at NIGHT. It is in fact the Sun's path among the fixed\nstars. For (really owing to the Earth's motion in its orbit) the Sun\nappears to move round the heavens once a year--travelling, always to the\nleft, from constellation to constellation. The exact path of the sun is\ncalled the Ecliptic; and the band of sky on either side of the Ecliptic\nwhich may be supposed to include the said constellations is called the\nZodiac. How then--it will of course be asked--seeing that the Sun and\nthe Stars can never be seen together--were the Priests ABLE to map out\nthe path of the former among the latter? Into that question we need not\ngo. Sufficient to say that they succeeded; and their success--even with\nthe very primitive instruments they had--shows that their astronomical\nknowledge and acuteness of reasoning were of no mean order.\n\nTo return to our Vernal Equinox. Let us suppose that the Equator and\nEcliptic of the sky, at the Spring season, are represented by two lines\nEq. and Ecl. crossing each other at the point P. The Sun, represented\nby the small circle, is moving slowly and in its annual course along the\nEcliptic to the left. When it reaches the point P (the dotted circle)\nit stands on the Equator of the sky, and then for a day or two, being\nneither North nor South, it shines on the two terrestrial hemispheres\nalike, and day and night are equal. BEFORE that time, when the sun\nis low down in the heavens, night has the advantage, and the days are\nshort; AFTERWARDS, when the Sun has travelled more to the left, the days\ntriumph over the nights. It will be seen then that this point P where\nthe Sun's path crosses the Equator is a very critical point. It is the\nastronomical location of the triumph of the Sungod and of the arrival of\nSpring.\n\nHow was this location defined? Among what stars was the Sun moving at\nthat critical moment? (For of course it was understood, or supposed,\nthat the Sun was deeply influenced by the constellation through which it\nwas, or appeared to be, moving.) It seems then that at the period when\nthese questions were occupying men's minds--say about three thousand\nyears ago--the point where the Ecliptic crossed the Equator was, as a\nmatter of fact, in the region of the constellation Aries or the he-Lamb.\nThe triumph of the Sungod was therefore, and quite naturally, ascribed\nto the influence of Aries. THE LAMB BECAME THE SYMBOL OF THE RISEN\nSAVIOR, AND OF HIS PASSAGE FROM THE UNDERWORLD INTO THE HEIGHT OF\nHEAVEN. At first such an explanation sounds hazardous; but a thousand\ntexts and references confirm it; and it is only by the accumulation of\nevidence in these cases that the student becomes convinced of a theory's\ncorrectness. It must also be remembered (what I have mentioned before)\nthat these myths and legends were commonly adopted not only for\none strict reason but because they represented in a general way the\nconvergence of various symbols and inferences.\n\nLet me enumerate a few points with regard to the Vernal Equinox. In the\nBible the festival is called the Passover, and its supposed institution\nby Moses is related in Exodus, ch. xii. In every house a he-lamb was to\nbe slain, and its blood to be sprinkled on the doorposts of the house.\nThen the Lord would pass over and not smite that house. The Hebrew word\nis pasach, to pass. (1) The lamb slain was called the Paschal Lamb. But\nwhat was that lamb? Evidently not an earthly lamb--(though certainly\nthe earthly lambs on the hillsides WERE just then ready to be killed and\neaten)--but the heavenly Lamb, which was slain or sacrificed when the\nLord \"passed over\" the equator and obliterated the constellation Aries.\nThis was the Lamb of God which was slain each year, and \"Slain since the\nfoundation of the world.\" This period of the Passover (about the 25th\nMarch) was to be (2) the beginning of a new year. The sacrifice of\nthe Lamb, and its blood, were to be the promise of redemption. The\ndoor-frames of the houses--symbols of the entrance into a new life--were\nto be sprinkled with blood. (3) Later, the imagery of the saving power\nof the blood of the Lamb became more popular, more highly colored. (See\nSt. Paul's epistles, and the early Fathers.) And we have the expression\n\"washed in the blood of the Lamb\" adopted into the Christian Church.\n\n (1) It is said that pasach sometimes means not so much to pass\nover, as to hover over and so protect. Possibly both meanings enter in\nhere. See Isaiah xxxi. 5.\n\n (2) See Exodus xii. i.\n\n (3) It is even said (see The Golden Bough, vol. iii, 185) that\nthe doorways of houses and temples in Peru were at the Spring festival\ndaubed with blood of the first-born children--commuted afterwards to the\nblood of the sacred animal, the Llama. And as to Mexico, Sahagun, the\ngreat Spanish missionary, tells us that it was a custom of the people\nthere to \"smear the outside of their houses and doors with blood drawn\nfrom their own ears and ankles, in order to propitiate the god of\nHarvest\" (Kingsborough's Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi, p. 235).\n\n\nIn order fully to understand this extraordinary expression and its\norigin we must turn for a moment to the worship both of Mithra, the\nPersian Sungod, and of Attis the Syrian god, as throwing great light\non the Christian cult and ceremonies. It must be remembered that in the\nearly centuries of our era the Mithra-cult was spread over the whole\nWestern world. It has left many monuments of itself here in Britain.\nAt Rome the worship was extremely popular, and it may almost be said\nto have been a matter of chance whether Mithraism should overwhelm\nChristianity, or whether the younger religion by adopting many of the\nrites of the older one should establish itself (as it did) in the face\nof the latter.\n\nNow we have already mentioned that in the Mithra cult the slaying of a\nBull by the Sungod occupies the same sort of place as the slaving of the\nLamb in the Christian cult. It took place at the Vernal Equinox and the\nblood of the Bull acquired in men's minds a magic virtue. Mithraism was\na greatly older religion than Christianity; but its genesis was similar.\nIn fact, owing to the Precession of the Equinoxes, the crossing-place of\nthe Ecliptic and Equator was different at the time of the establishment\nof Mithra-worship from what it was in the Christian period; and the\nSun instead of standing in the He-lamb, or Aries, at the Vernal Equinox\nstood, about two thousand years earlier (as indicated by the dotted line\nin the diagram), in this very constellation of the Bull. (1) The bull\ntherefore became the symbol of the triumphant God, and the sacrifice\nof the bull a holy mystery. (Nor must we overlook here the agricultural\nappropriateness of the bull as the emblem of Spring-plowings and of\nservice to man.)\n\n (1) With regard to this point, see an article in the Nineteenth\nCentury for September 1900, by E. W. Maunder of the Greenwich\nObservatory on \"The Oldest Picture Book\" (the Zodiac). Mr. Maunder\ncalculates that the Vernal Equinox was in the centre of the Sign of\nthe Bull 5,000 years ago. (It would therefore be in the centre of Aries\n2,845 years ago--allowing 2,155 years for the time occupied in passing\nfrom one Sign to another.) At the earlier period the Summer solstice was\nin the centre of Leo, the Autumnal equinox in the centre of Scorpio, and\nthe Winter solstice in the centre of Aquarius--corresponding roughly,\nMr. Maunder points out, to the positions of the four \"Royal Stars,\"\nAldebaran, Regulus, Antares and Fomalhaut.\n\n\nThe sacrifice of the Bull became the image of redemption. In a certain\nwell-known Mithra-sculpture or group, the Sungod is represented as\nplunging his dagger into a bull, while a scorpion, a serpent, and other\nanimals are sucking the latter's blood. From one point of view this may\nbe taken as symbolic of the Sun fertilizing the gross Earth by plunging\nhis rays into it and so drawing forth its blood for the sustenance of\nall creatures; while from another more astronomical aspect it symbolizes\nthe conquest of the Sun over winter in the moment of \"passing over\" the\nsign of the Bull, and the depletion of the generative power of the Bull\nby the Scorpion--which of course is the autumnal sign of the Zodiac\nand herald of winter. One such Mithraic group was found at Ostia, where\nthere was a large subterranean Temple \"to the invincible god Mithras.\"\n\nIn the worship of Attis there were (as I have already indicated) many\npoints of resemblance to the Christian cult. On the 22nd March (the\nVernal Equinox) a pinetree was cut in the woods and brought into the\nTemple of Cybele. It was treated almost as a divinity, was decked\nwith violets, and the effigy of a young man tied to the stem (cf. the\nCrucifixion). The 24th was called the \"Day of Blood\"; the High Priest\nfirst drew blood from his own arms; and then the others gashed and\nslashed themselves, and spattered the altar and the sacred tree with\nblood; while novices made themselves eunuchs \"for the kingdom of\nheaven's sake.\" The effigy was afterwards laid in a tomb. But when\nnight fell, says Dr. Frazer, (1) sorrow was turned to joy. A light was\nbrought, and the tomb was found to be empty. The next day, the 25th, was\nthe festival of the Resurrection; and ended in carnival and license\n(the Hilaria). Further, says Dr. Frazer, these mysteries \"seem to have\nincluded a sacramental meal and a baptism of blood.\"\n\n (1) See Adonis, Attis and Osiris, Part IV of The Golden Bough, by\nJ. G. Frazer, p. 229.\n\n\n\"In the baptism the devotee, crowned with gold and wreathed with\nfillets, descended into a pit, the mouth of which was covered with a\nwooden grating. A bull, adorned with garlands of flowers, its forehead\nglittering with gold leaf, was then driven on to the grating and there\nstabbed to death with a consecrated spear. Its hot reeking blood\npoured in torrents through the apertures, and was received with devout\neagerness by the worshiper on every part of his person and garments,\ntill he emerged from the pit, drenched, dripping, and scarlet from head\nto foot, to receive the homage, nay the adoration, of his fellows--as\none who had been born again to eternal life and had washed away his sins\nin the blood of the bull.\" (1) And Frazer continuing says: \"That the\nbath of blood derived from slaughter of the bull (tauro-bolium)\nwas believed to regenerate the devotee for eternity is proved by an\ninscription found at Rome, which records that a certain Sextilius\nAgesilaus Aedesius, who dedicated an altar to Attis and the mother of\nthe gods (Cybele) was taurobolio criobolio que in aeternum renatus.\"\n(2) \"In the procedure of the Taurobolia and Criobolia,\" says Mr. J. M.\nRobertson, (3) \"which grew very popular in the Roman world, we have the\nliteral and original meaning of the phrase 'washed in the blood of the\nlamb' (4); the doctrine being that resurrection and eternal life\nwere secured by drenching or sprinkling with the actual blood of a\nsacrificial bull or ram.\" (5) For the POPULARITY of the rite we may\nquote Franz Cumont, who says:--\"Cette douche sacree (taurobolium) pareit\navoir ete administree en Cappadoce dans un grand nombre de sanctuaires,\net en particulier dans ceux de Ma la grande divinite indigene, et dans\nceux: de Anahita.\"\n\n (1) See vol. i, pp. 334 ff.\n\n (2) Adonis, Attis and Osiris, p. 229. References to Prudentius,\nand to Firmicus Maternus, De errore 28. 8.\n\n (3) That is, \"By the slaughter of the bull and the slaughter of\nthe ram born again into eternity.\"\n\n (4) Pagan Christs, p. 315.\n\n (5) Mysteres de Mithra, Bruxelles, 1902, p. 153.\n\n\nWhether Mr. Robertson is right in ascribing to the priests (as he\nappears to do) so materialistic a view of the potency of the actual\nblood is, I should say, doubtful. I do not myself see that there is\nany reason for supposing that the priests of Mithra or Attis regarded\nbaptism by blood very differently from the way in which the Christian\nChurch has generally regarded baptism by water--namely, as a SYMBOL of\nsome inner regeneration. There may certainly have been a little more\nof the MAGICAL view and a little less of the symbolic, in the older\nreligions; but the difference was probably on the whole more one of\ndegree than of essential disparity. But however that may be, we cannot\nbut be struck by the extraordinary analogy between the tombstone\ninscriptions of that period \"born again into eternity by the blood of\nthe Bull or the Ram,\" and the corresponding texts in our graveyards\nto-day. F. Cumont in his elaborate work, Textes et Monuments relatifs\naux Mysteres de Mithra (2 vols., Brussels, 1899) gives a great number of\ntexts and epitaphs of the same character as that above-quoted, and they\nare well worth studying by those interested in the subject. Cumont, it\nmay be noted (vol. i, p. 305), thinks that the story of Mithra and the\nslaying of the Bull must have originated among some pastoral people to\nwhom the bull was the source of all life. The Bull in heaven--the symbol\nof the triumphant Sungod--and the earthly bull, sacrificed for the good\nof humanity were one and the same; the god, in fact, SACRIFICED HIMSELF\nOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE. And Mithra was the hero who first won this\nconception of divinity for mankind--though of course it is in essence\nquite similar to the conception put forward by the Christian Church.\n\nAs illustrating the belief that the Baptism by Blood was accompanied by\na real regeneration of the devotee, Frazer quotes an ancient writer\n(1) who says that for some time after the ceremony the fiction of a new\nbirth was kept up by dieting the devotee on MILK, like a new-born\nbabe. And it is interesting in that connection to find that even in the\npresent day a diet of ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BUT MILK for six or eight\nweeks is by many doctors recommended as the only means of getting rid\nof deep-seated illnesses and enabling a patient's organism to make a\ncompletely new start in life.\n\n (1) Sallustius philosophus. See Adonis, Attis and Osiris, note,\np. 229.\n\n\n\"At Rome,\" he further says (p. 230), \"the new birth and the remission\nof sins by the shedding of bull's blood appear to have been carried\nout above all at the sanctuary of the Phrygian Goddess (Cybele) on\nthe Vatican Hill, at or near the spot where the great basilica of St.\nPeter's now stands; for many inscriptions relating to the rites were\nfound when the church was being enlarged in 1608 or 1609. From\nthe Vatican as a centre,\" he continues, \"this barbarous system of\nsuperstition seems to have spread to other parts of the Roman empire.\nInscriptions found in Gaul and Germany prove that provincial sanctuaries\nmodelled their ritual on that of the Vatican.\"\n\nIt would appear then that at Rome in the quiet early days of the\nChristian Church, the rites and ceremonials of Mithra and Cybele,\nprobably much intermingled and blended, were exceedingly popular. Both\nreligions had been recognized by the Roman State, and the Christians,\npersecuted and despised as they were, found it hard to make any headway\nagainst them--the more so perhaps because the Christian doctrines\nappeared in many respects to be merely faint replicas and copies of the\nolder creeds. Robertson maintains (1) that a he-lamb was sacrificed in\nthe Mithraic mysteries, and he quotes Porphyry as saying (2) that\n\"a place near the equinoctial circle was assigned to Mithra as an\nappropriate seat; and on this account he bears the sword of the Ram\n(Aries) which is a sign of Mars (Ares).\" Similarly among the early\nChristians, it is said, a ram or lamb was sacrificed in the Paschal\nmystery.\n\n (1) Pagan Christs, p. 336.\n\n (2) De Antro, xxiv.\n\n\nMany people think that the association of the Lamb-god with the Cross\narose from the fact that the constellation Aries at that time WAS on the\nheavenly cross (the crossways of the Ecliptic and Equator-see diagram,\nch. iii), and in the very place through which the Sungod had to pass\njust before his final triumph. And it is curious to find that Justin\nMartyr in his Dialogue with Trypho (1) (a Jew) alludes to an old Jewish\npractice of roasting a Lamb on spits arranged in the form of a Cross.\n\"The lamb,\" he says, meaning apparently the Paschal lamb, \"is roasted\nand dressed up in the form of a cross. For one spit is transfixed right\nthrough the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to\nwhich are attached the legs (forelegs) of the lamb.\"\n\n (1) Ch. xl.\n\n\nTo-day in Morocco at the festival of Eid-el-Kebir, corresponding to the\nChristian Easter, the Mohammedans sacrifice a young ram and hurry it\nstill bleeding to the precincts of the Mosque, while at the same time\nevery household slays a lamb, as in the Biblical institution, for its\nfamily feast.\n\nBut it will perhaps be said, \"You are going too fast and proving too\nmuch. In the anxiety to show that the Lamb-god and the sacrifice of the\nLamb were honored by the devotees of Mithra and Cybele in the Rome of\nthe Christian era, you are forgetting that the sacrifice of the Bull and\nthe baptism in bull's blood were the salient features of the Persian and\nPhrygian ceremonials, some centuries earlier. How can you reconcile\nthe existence side by side of divinities belonging to such different\nperiods, or ascribe them both to an astronomical origin?\" The answer\nis simple enough. As I have explained before, the Precession of the\nEquinoxes caused the Sun, at its moment of triumph over the powers of\ndarkness, to stand at one period in the constellation of the Bull, and\nat a period some two thousand years later in the constellation of the\nRam. It was perfectly natural therefore that a change in the sacred\nsymbols should, in the course of time, take place; yet perfectly natural\nalso that these symbols, having once been consecrated and adopted,\nshould continue to be honored and clung to long after the time of their\nastronomical appropriateness had passed, and so to be found side by side\nin later centuries. The devotee of Mithra or Attis on the Vatican\nHill at Rome in the year 200 A.D. probably had as little notion or\ncomprehension of the real origin of the sacred Bull or Ram which he\nadored, as the Christian in St. Peter's to-day has of the origin of the\nLamb-god whose vicegerent on earth is the Pope.\n\nIt is indeed easy to imagine that the change from the worship of the\nBull to the worship of the Lamb which undoubtedly took place among\nvarious peoples as time went on, was only a ritual change initiated\nby the priests in order to put on record and harmonize with the\nastronomical alteration. Anyhow it is curious that while Mithra in the\nearly times was specially associated with the bull, his association with\nthe lamb belonged more to the Roman period. Somewhat the same happened\nin the case of Attis. In the Bible we read of the indignation of\nMoses at the setting up by the Israelites of a Golden Calf, AFTER\nthe sacrifice of the ram-lamb had been instituted--as if indeed the\nrebellious people were returning to the earlier cult of Apis which they\nought to have left behind them in Egypt. In Egypt itself, too, we find\nthe worship of Apis, as time went on, yielding place to that of the\nRam-headed god Amun, or Jupiter Ammon. (1) So that both from the Bible\nand from Egyptian history we may conclude that the worship of the Lamb\nor Ram succeeded to the worship of the Bull.\n\n (1) Tacitus (Hist. v. 4) speaks of ram-sacrifice by the Jews in\nhonor of Jupiter Ammon. See also Herodotus (ii. 42) on the same in\nEgypt.\n\n\nFinally it has been pointed out, and there may be some real connection\nin the coincidence, that in the quite early years of Christianity the\nFISH came in as an accepted symbol of Jesus Christ. Considering that\nafter the domination of Taurus and Aries, the Fish (Pisces) comes next\nin succession as the Zodiacal sign for the Vernal Equinox, and is now\nthe constellation in which the Sun stands at that period, it seems\nnot impossible that the astronomical change has been the cause of the\nadoption of this new symbol.\n\nAnyhow, and allowing for possible errors or exaggerations, it becomes\nclear that the travels of the Sun through the belt of constellations\nwhich forms the Zodiac must have had, from earliest times, a profound\ninfluence on the generation of religious myths and legends. To say that\nit was the only influence would certainly be a mistake. Other causes\nundoubtedly contributed. But it was a main and important influence. The\norigins of the Zodiac are obscure; we do not know with any certainty the\nreasons why the various names were given to its component sections, nor\ncan we measure the exact antiquity of these names; but--pre-supposing\nthe names of the signs as once given--it is not difficult to imagine the\ngrowth of legends connected with the Sun's course among them.\n\nOf all the ancient divinities perhaps Hercules is the one whose role\nas a Sungod is most generally admitted. The helper of gods and men, a\nmighty Traveller, and invoked everywhere as the Saviour, his labors\nfor the good of the world became ultimately defined and systematized\nas twelve and corresponding in number to the signs of the Zodiac. It\nis true that this systematization only took place at a late period,\nprobably in Alexandria; also that the identification of some of the\nLabors with the actual signs as we have them at present is not always\nclear. But considering the wide prevalence of the Hercules myth over\nthe ancient world and the very various astronomical systems it must have\nbeen connected with in its origin, this lack of exact correspondence is\nhardly to be wondered at.\n\nThe Labors of Hercules which chiefly interest us are: (1) The capture\nof the Bull, (2) the slaughter of the Lion, (3) the destruction of the\nHydra, (4) of the Boar, (5) the cleansing of the stables of Augeas, (6)\nthe descent into Hades and the taming of Cerberus. The first of these\nis in line with the Mithraic conquest of the Bull; the Lion is of course\none of the most prominent constellations of the Zodiac, and its conquest\nis obviously the work of a Saviour of mankind; while the last four\nlabors connect themselves very naturally with the Solar conflict in\nwinter against the powers of darkness. The Boar (4) we have seen already\nas the image of Typhon, the prince of darkness; the Hydra (3) was said\nto be the offspring of Typhon; the descent into Hades (6)--generally\nassociated with Hercules' struggle with and victory over Death--links on\nto the descent of the Sun into the underworld, and its long and doubtful\nstrife with the forces of winter; and the cleansing of the stables\nof Augeas (5) has the same signification. It appears in fact that the\nstables of Augeas was another name for the sign of Capricorn through\nwhich the Sun passes at the Winter solstice (1)--the stable of course\nbeing an underground chamber--and the myth was that there, in this\nlowest tract and backwater of the Ecliptic all the malarious and evil\ninfluences of the sky were collected, and the Sungod came to wash them\naway (December was the height of the rainy season in Judaea) and cleanse\nthe year towards its rebirth.\n\n (1) See diagram of Zodiac.\n\n\nIt should not be forgotten too that even as a child in the cradle\nHercules slew two serpents sent for his destruction--the serpent and the\nscorpion as autumnal constellations figuring always as enemies of the\nSungod--to which may be compared the power given to his disciples by\nJesus (1) \"to tread on serpents and scorpions.\" Hercules also as a\nSungod compares curiously with Samson (mentioned above, ii), but we\nneed not dwell on all the elaborate analogies that have been traced (2)\nbetween these two heroes.\n\n (1) Luke x. 19.\n\n (2) See Doane's Bible Myths, ch. viii, (New York, 1882.)\n\n\nThe Jesus-story, it will now be seen, has a great number of\ncorrespondences with the stories of former Sungods and with the actual\ncareer of the Sun through the heavens--so many indeed that they cannot\nwell be attributed to mere coincidence or even to the blasphemous wiles\nof the Devil! Let us enumerate some of these. There are (1) the birth\nfrom a Virgin mother; (2) the birth in a stable (cave or underground\nchamber); and (3) on the 25th December (just after the winter solstice).\nThere is (4) the Star in the East (Sirius) and (5) the arrival of the\nMagi (the \"Three Kings\"); there is (6) the threatened Massacre of the\nInnocents, and the consequent flight into a distant country (told also\nof Krishna and other Sungods). There are the Church festivals of (7)\nCandlemas (2nd February), with processions of candles to symbolize the\ngrowing light; of (8) Lent, or the arrival of Spring; of (9) Easter Day\n(normally on the 25th March) to celebrate the crossing of the Equator\nby the Sun; and (10) simultaneously the outburst of lights at the Holy\nSepulchre at Jerusalem. There is (11) the Crucifixion and death of the\nLamb-God, on Good Friday, three days before Easter; there are (12) the\nnailing to a tree, (13) the empty grave, (14) the glad Resurrection (as\nin the cases of Osiris, Attis and others); there are (15) the twelve\ndisciples (the Zodiacal signs); and (16) the betrayal by one of the\ntwelve. Then later there is (17) Midsummer Day, the 24th June, dedicated\nto the Nativity of John the Baptist, and corresponding to Christmas\nDay; there are the festivals of (18) the Assumption of the Virgin\n(15th August) and of (19) the Nativity of the Virgin (8th September),\ncorresponding to the movement of the god through Virgo; there is the\nconflict of Christ and his disciples with the autumnal asterisms, (20)\nthe Serpent and the Scorpion; and finally there is the curious fact that\nthe Church (21) dedicates the very day of the winter solstice (when any\none may very naturally doubt the rebirth of the Sun) to St. Thomas, who\ndoubted the truth of the Resurrection!\n\nThese are some of, and by no means all, the coincidences in question.\nBut they are sufficient, I think, to prove--even allowing for possible\nmargins of error--the truth of our general contention. To go into the\nparallelism of the careers of Krishna, the Indian Sungod, and\nJesus would take too long; because indeed the correspondence is so\nextraordinarily close and elaborate. (1) I propose, however, at the\nclose of this chapter, to dwell now for a moment on the Christian\nfestival of the Eucharist, partly on account of its connection with the\nderivation from the astronomical rites and Nature-celebrations already\nalluded to, and partly on account of the light which the festival\ngenerally, whether Christian or Pagan, throws on the origins of\nReligious Magic--a subject I shall have to deal with in the next\nchapter.\n\n (1) See Robertson's Christianity and Mythology, Part II, pp.\n129-302; also Doane's Bible Myths, ch. xxviii, p. 278.\n\n\nI have already (Ch. II) mentioned the Eucharistic rite held in\ncommemoration of Mithra, and the indignant ascription of this by Justin\nMartyr to the wiles of the Devil. Justin Martyr clearly had no doubt\nabout the resemblance of the Mithraic to the Christian ceremony. A\nSacramental meal, as mentioned a few pages back, seems to have been held\nby the worshipers of Attis (1) in commemoration of their god; and\nthe 'mysteries' of the Pagan cults generally appear to have included\nrites--sometimes half-savage, sometimes more aesthetic--in which a\ndismembered animal was eaten, or bread and wine (the spirits of the Corn\nand the Vine) were consumed, as representing the body of the god whom\nhis devotees desired to honor. But the best example of this practice is\nafforded by the rites of Dionysus, to which I will devote a few lines.\nDionysus, like other Sun or Nature deities, was born of a Virgin (Semele\nor Demeter) untainted by any earthly husband; and born on the 25th.\nDecember. He was nurtured in a Cave, and even at that early age was\nidentified with the Ram or Lamb, into whose form he was for the time\nbeing changed. At times also he was worshiped in the form of a Bull.\n(2) He travelled far and wide; and brought the great gift of wine to\nmankind. (3) He was called Liberator, and Saviour. His grave \"was shown\nat Delphi in the inmost shrine of the temple of Apollo. Secret offerings\nwere brought thither, while the women who were celebrating the feast\nwoke up the new-born god.... Festivals of this kind in celebration of\nthe extinction and resurrection of the deity were held (by women and\ngirls only) amid the mountains at night, every third year, about the\ntime of the shortest day. The rites, intended to express the excess of\ngrief and joy at the death and reappearance of the god, were wild even\nto savagery, and the women who performed them were hence known by\nthe expressive names of Bacchae, Maenads, and Thyiades. They wandered\nthrough woods and mountains, their flying locks crowned with ivy or\nsnakes, brandishing wands and torches, to the hollow sounds of the drum,\nor the shrill notes of the flute, with wild dances and insane cries and\njubilation.\"\n\n (1) See Frazer's Golden Bough, Part IV, p. 229.\n\n (2) The Golden Bough, Part II, Book II, p. 164.\n\n (3) \"I am the TRUE Vine,\" says the Jesus of the fourth gospel,\nperhaps with an implicit and hostile reference to the cult of\nDionysus--in which Robertson suggests (Christianity and Mythology, p.\n357) there was a ritual miracle of turning water into wine.\n\n\nOxen, goats, even fawns and roes from the forest were killed, torn to\npieces, and eaten raw. This in imitation of the treatment of Dionysus by\nthe Titans, (1)--who it was supposed had torn the god in pieces when a\nchild.\n\n (1) See art. Dionysus. Dictionary of Classical Antiquities,\nNettleship and Sandys 3rd edn., London, 1898).\n\n\nDupuis, one of the earliest writers (at the beginning of last century)\non this subject, says, describing the mystic rites of Dionysus (1):\n\"The sacred doors of the Temple in which the initiation took place were\nopened only once a year, and no stranger might ever enter. Night lent to\nthese august mysteries a veil which was forbidden to be drawn aside--for\nwhoever it might be. (2) It was the sole occasion for the representation\nof the passion of Bacchus (Dionysus) dead, descended into hell, and\nrearisen--in imitation of the representation of the sufferings of Osiris\nwhich, according to Herodotus, were commemorated at Sais in Egypt. It\nwas in that place that the partition took place of the body of the god,\n(3) which was then eaten--the ceremony, in fact, of which our Eucharist\nis only a reflection; whereas in the mysteries of Bacchus actual raw\nflesh was distributed, which each of those present had to consume in\ncommemoration of the death of Bacchus dismembered by the Titans, and\nwhose passion, in Chios and Tenedos, was renewed each year by the\nsacrifice of a man who represented the god. (4) Possibly it is this last\nfact which made people believe that the Christians (whose hoc est corpus\nmeum and sharing of an Eucharistic meal were no more than a shadow of a\nmore ancient rite) did really sacrifice a child and devour its limbs.\"\n\n (1) See Charles F. Dupuis, \"Traite des Mysteres,\" ch. i.\n\n (2) Pausan, Corinth, ch. 37.\n\n (3) Clem, Prot. Eur. Bacch.\n\n (4) See Porphyry, De Abstinentia, lii, Section 56.\n\n\nThat Eucharistic rites were very very ancient is plain from the\nTotem-sacraments of savages; and to this subject we shall now turn.\n\n\n\n\nIV. TOTEM-SACRAMENTS AND EUCHARISTS\n\nMuch has been written on the origin of the Totem-system--the system,\nthat is, of naming a tribe or a portion of a tribe (say a CLAN)\nafter some ANIMAL--or sometimes--also after some plant or tree or\nNature-element, like fire or rain or thunder; but at best the subject is\na difficult one for us moderns to understand. A careful study has been\nmade of it by Salamon Reinach in his Cultes, Mythes et Religions, (1)\nwhere he formulates his conclusions in twelve statements or definitions;\nbut even so--though his suggestions are helpful--he throws very little\nlight on the real origin of the system. (2)\n\n (1) See English translation of certain chapters (published by\nDavid Nutt in 1912) entitled Cults, Myths and Religions, pp. 1-25. The\nFrench original is in three large volumes.\n\n (2) The same may be said of the formulated statement of the\nsubject in Morris Jastrow's Handbooks of the History of Religion, vol.\niv.\n\nThere are three main difficulties. The first is to understand why\nprimitive Man should name his Tribe after an animal or object of nature\nat all; the second, to understand on what principle he selected the\nparticular name (a lion, a crocodile, a lady bird, a certain tree); the\nthird, why he should make of the said totem a divinity, and pay honor\nand worship to it. It may be worth while to pause for a moment over\nthese.\n\n(1) The fact that the Tribe was one of the early things for which Man\nfound it necessary to have a name is interesting, because it shows\nhow early the solidarity and psychological actuality of the tribe\nwas recognized; and as to the selection of a name from some animal or\nconcrete object of Nature, that was inevitable, for the simple reason\nthat there was nothing else for the savage to choose from. Plainly to\ncall his tribe \"The Wayfarers\" or \"The Pioneers\" or the \"Pacifists\" or\nthe \"Invincibles,\" or by any of the thousand and one names which modern\nassociations adopt, would have been impossible, since such abstract\nterms had little or no existence in his mind. And again to name it after\nan animal was the most obvious thing to do, simply because the animals\nwere by far the most important features or accompaniments of his own\nlife. As I am dealing in this book largely with certain psychological\nconditions of human evolution, it has to be pointed out that to\nprimitive man the animal was the nearest and most closely related of all\nobjects. Being of the same order of consciousness as himself, the animal\nappealed to him very closely as his mate and equal. He made with regard\nto it little or no distinction from himself. We see this very clearly in\nthe case of children, who of course represent the savage mind, and who\nregard animals simply as their mates and equals, and come quickly into\nrapport with them, not differentiating themselves from them.\n\n(2) As to the particular animal or other object selected in order to\ngive a name to the Tribe, this would no doubt be largely accidental. Any\nunusual incident might superstitiously precipitate a name. We can hardly\nimagine the Tribe scratching its congregated head in the deliberate\neffort to think out a suitable emblem for itself. That is not the way in\nwhich nicknames are invented in a school or anywhere else to-day. At the\nsame time the heraldic appeal of a certain object of nature, animate or\ninanimate, would be deeply and widely felt. The strength of the lion,\nthe fleetness of the deer, the food-value of a bear, the flight of a\nbird, the awful jaws of a crocodile, might easily mesmerize a whole\ntribe. Reinach points out, with great justice, that many tribes placed\nthemselves under the protection of animals which were supposed (rightly\nor wrongly) to act as guides and augurs, foretelling the future.\n\"Diodorus,\" he says, \"distinctly states that the hawk, in Egypt, was\nvenerated because it foretold the future.\" (Birds generally act as\n and Samoa the kangaroo, the crow and the owl premonish their fellow\nclansmen of events to come. At one time the Samoan warriors went so far\nas to rear owls for their prophetic qualities in war. (The jackal,\nor 'pathfinder'--whose tracks sometimes lead to the remains of a\nfood-animal slain by a lion, and many birds and insects, have a value of\nthis kind.) \"The use of animal totems for purposes of augury is, in all\nlikelihood, of great antiquity. Men must soon have realized that the\nsenses of animals were acuter than their own; nor is it surprising that\nthey should have expected their totems--that is to say, their natural\nallies--to forewarn them both of unsuspected dangers and of those\nprovisions of nature, WELLS especially, which animals seem to scent\nby instinct.\" (1) And again, beyond all this, I have little doubt that\nthere are subconscious affinities which unite certain tribes to certain\nanimals or plants, affinities whose origin we cannot now trace, though\nthey are very real--the same affinities that we recognize as existing\nbetween individual PERSONS and certain objects of nature. W. H.\nHudson--himself in many respects having this deep and primitive relation\nto nature--speaks in a very interesting and autobiographical volume (2)\nof the extraordinary fascination exercised upon him as a boy, not\nonly by a snake, but by certain trees, and especially by a particular\nflowering-plant \"not more than a foot in height, with downy soft\npale green leaves, and clusters of reddish blossoms, something like\nvalerian.\" ... \"One of my sacred flowers,\" he calls it, and insists on\nthe \"inexplicable attraction\" which it had for him. In various ways of\nthis kind one can perceive how particular totems came to be selected by\nparticular peoples.\n\n\n (1) See Reinach, Eng. trans., op. cit., pp. 20, 21.\n\n (2) Far away and Long ago (1918) chs. xvi and xvii.\n\n\n(3) As to the tendency to divinize these totems, this arises no doubt\npartly out of question (2). The animal or other object admired on\naccount of its strength or swiftness, or adopted as guardian of the\ntribe because of its keen sight or prophetic quality, or infinitely\nprized on account of its food-value, or felt for any other reason to\nhave a peculiar relation and affinity to the tribe, is by that fact SET\nAPART. It becomes taboo. It must not be killed--except under necessity\nand by sanction of the whole tribe--nor injured; and all dealings with\nit must be fenced round with regulations. It is out of this taboo or\nsystem of taboos that, according to Reinach, religion arose. \"I propose\n(he says) to define religion as: A SUM OF SCRUPLES (TABOOS) WHICH IMPEDE\nTHE FREE EXERCISE OF OUR FACULTIES.\" (1) Obviously this definition is\ngravely deficient, simply because it is purely negative, and leaves\nout of account the positive aspect of the subject. In Man, the positive\ncontent of religion is the instinctive sense--whether conscious or\nsubconscious--of an inner unity and continuity with the world around.\nThis is the stuff out of which religion is made. The scruples or taboos\nwhich \"impede the freedom\" of this relation are the negative forces\nwhich give outline and form to the relation. These are the things which\ngenerate the RITES AND CEREMONIALS of religion; and as far as Reinach\nmeans by religion MERELY rites and ceremonies he is correct; but clearly\nhe only covers half the subject. The tendency to divinize the totem is\nat least as much dependent on the positive sense of unity with it, as on\nthe negative scruples which limit the relation in each particular case.\nBut I shall return to this subject presently, and more than once, with\nthe view of clarifying it. Just now it will be best to illustrate the\nnature of Totems generally, and in some detail.\n\n\n (1) See Orpheus by S. Reinach, p. 3.\n\n\nAs would be gathered from what I have just said, there is found among\nall the more primitive peoples, and in all parts of the world, an\nimmense variety of totem-names. The Dinkas, for instance, are a rather\nintelligent well-grown people inhabiting the upper reaches of the Nile\nin the vicinity of the great swamps. According to Dr. Seligman their\nclans have for totems the lion, the elephant, the crocodile, the\nhippopotamus, the fox, and the hyena, as well as certain birds which\ninfest and damage the corn, some plants and trees, and such things as\nrain, fire, etc. \"Each clan speaks of its totem as its ancestor, and\nrefrains (as a rule) from injuring or eating it.\" (1) The members of the\nCrocodile clan call themselves \"brothers of the crocodile.\" The tribes\nof Bechuana-land have a very similar list of totem-names--the buffalo,\nthe fish, the porcupine, the wild vine, etc. They too have a Crocodile\nclan, but they call the crocodile their FATHER! The tribes of Australia\nmuch the same again, with the differences suitable to their country; and\nthe Red Indians of North America the same. Garcilasso, della Vega,\nthe Spanish historian, son of an Inca princess by one of the Spanish\nconquerors of Peru and author of the well-known book Commentarias\nReales, says in that book (i, 57), speaking of the pre-Inca period, \"An\nIndian (of Peru) was not considered honorable unless he was descended\nfrom a fountain, river or lake, or even from the sea, or from a wild\nanimal, as a bear, lion, tiger, eagle, or the bird they call cuntur\n(condor), or some other bird of prey.\" (2) According to Lewis Morgan,\nthe North American Indians of various tribes had for totems the wolf,\nbear, beaver, turtle, deer, snipe, heron, hawk, crane, loon, turkey,\nmuskrat; pike, catfish, carp; buffalo, elk, reindeer, eagle, hare,\nrabbit, snake; reed-grass, sand, rock, and tobacco-plant.\n\n (1) See The Golden Bough, vol. iv, p. 31.\n\n (2) See Andrew Lang, Custom and Myth, p. 104, also Myth, Ritual\nand Religion, vol. i, pp. 71, 76, etc.\n\n\nSo we might go on rather indefinitely. I need hardly say that in more\nmodern and civilized life, relics of the totem system are still to be\nfound in the forms of the heraldic creatures adopted for their crests by\ndifferent families, and in the bears, lions, eagles, the sun, moon and\nstars and so forth, which still adorn the flags and are flaunted as the\ninsignia of the various nations. The names may not have been ORIGINALLY\nadopted from any definite belief in blood-relationship with the animal\nor other object in question; but when, as Robertson says (Pagan Christs,\np. 104), a \"savage learned that he was 'a Bear' and that his father\nand grandfather and forefathers were so before him, it was really\nimpossible, after ages in which totem-names thus passed current, that he\nshould fail to assume that his folk were DESCENDED from a bear.\"\n\nAs a rule, as may be imagined, the savage tribesman will on no account\nEAT his tribal totem-animal. Such would naturally be deemed a kind of\nsacrilege. Also it must be remarked that some totems are hardly suitable\nfor eating. Yet it is important to observe that occasionally, and\nguarding the ceremony with great precautions, it has been an almost\nuniversal custom for the tribal elders to call a feast at which\nan animal (either the totem or some other) IS killed and commonly\neaten--and this in order that the tribesmen may absorb some virtue\nbelonging to it, and may confirm their identity with the tribe and with\neach other. The eating of the bear or other animal, the sprinkling with\nits blood, and the general ritual in which the participants shared its\nflesh, or dressed and disguised themselves in its skin, or otherwise\nidentified themselves with it, was to them a symbol of their community\nof life with each other, and a means of their renewal and salvation in\nthe holy emblem. And this custom, as the reader will perceive, became\nthe origin of the Eucharists and Holy Communions of the later religions.\n\nProfessor Robertson-Smith's celebrated Camel affords an instance of\nthis. (1) It appears that St. Nilus (fifth century) has left a detailed\naccount of the occasional sacrifice in his time of a spotless white\ncamel among the Arabs of the Sinai region, which closely resembles a\ntotemic communion-feast. The uncooked blood and flesh of the animal had\nto be entirely consumed by the faithful before daybreak. \"The slaughter\nof the victim, the sacramental drinking of the blood, and devouring in\nwild haste of the pieces of still quivering flesh, recall the details\nof the Dionysiac and other festivals.\" (2) Robertson-Smith himself\nsays:--\"The plain meaning is that the victim was devoured before its\nlife had left the still warm blood and flesh... and that thus in the\nmost literal way, all those who shared in the ceremony absorbed part of\nthe victim's life into themselves. One sees how much more forcibly\nthan any ordinary meal such a rite expresses the establishment or\nconfirmation of a bond of common life between the worshipers, and also,\nsince the blood is shed upon the altar itself, between the worshipers\nand their god. In this sacrifice, then, the significant factors are two:\nthe conveyance of the living blood to the godhead, and the absorption of\nthe living flesh and blood into the flesh and blood of the worshippers.\nEach of these is effected in the simplest and most direct manner, so\nthat the meaning of the ritual is perfectly transparent.\"\n\n (1) See his Religion of the Semites, p. 320.\n\n (2) They also recall the rites of the Passover--though in this\nlatter the blood was no longer drunk, nor the flesh eaten raw.\n\n\nIt seems strange, of course, that men should eat their totems; and\nit must not by any means be supposed that this practice is (or was)\nuniversal; but it undoubtedly obtains in some cases. As Miss Harrison\nsays (Themis, p. 123); \"you do not as a rule eat your relations,\" and as\na rule the eating of a totem is tabu and forbidden, but (Miss Harrison\ncontinues) \"at certain times and under certain restrictions a man not\nonly may, but MUST, eat of his totem, though only sparingly, as of a\nthing sacrosanct.\" The ceremonial carried out in a communal way by the\ntribe not only identifies the tribe with the totem (animal), but is\nheld, according to early magical ideas, and when the animal is desired\nfor food, to favor its manipulation. The human tribe partakes of the\nmana or life-force of the animal, and is strengthened; the animal tribe\nis sympathetically renewed by the ceremonial and multiplies exceedingly.\nThe slaughter of the sacred animal and (often) the simultaneous\noutpouring of human blood seals the compact and confirms the magic. This\nis well illustrated by a ceremony of the 'Emu' tribe referred to by Dr.\nFrazer:--\n\n\"In order to multiply Emus which are an important article of food, the\nmen of the Emu totem in the Arunta tribe proceed as follows: They clear\na small spot of level ground, and opening veins in their arms they let\nthe blood stream out until the surface of the ground for a space of\nabout three square yards is soaked with it. When the blood has dried\nand caked, it forms a hard and fairly impermeable surface, on which they\npaint the sacred design of the emu totem, especially the parts of the\nbird which they like best to eat, namely, the fat and the eggs. Round\nthis painting the men sit and sing. Afterwards performers wearing long\nhead-dresses to represent the long neck and small head of the emu, mimic\nthe appearance of the bird as it stands aimlessly peering about in all\ndirections.\" (1)\n\n (1) The Golden Bough i, 85--with reference to Spencer and\nGillen's Native Tribes of Central Australia, pp. 179, 189.\n\n\nThus blood sacrifice comes in; and--(whether this has ever actually\nhappened in the case of the Central Australians I know not)--we can\neasily imagine a member of the Emu tribe, and disguised as an actual\nemu, having been ceremonially slaughtered as a firstfruits and promise\nof the expected and prayed-for emu-crop; just as the same certainly\nHAS happened in the case of men wearing beast-masks of Bulls or Rams\nor Bears being sacrificed in propitiation of Bull-gods, Ram-gods or\nBear-gods or simply in pursuance of some kind of magic to favor the\nmultiplication of these food-animals.\n\n\"In the light of totemistic ways of thinking we see plainly enough the\nrelation of man to food-animals. You need or at least desire flesh food,\nyet you shrink from slaughtering 'your brother the ox'; you desire his\nmana, yet you respect his tabu, for in you and him alike runs the common\nlife-blood. On your own individual responsibility you would never kill\nhim; but for the common weal, on great occasions, and in a fashion\nconducted with scrupulous care, it is expedient that he die for his\npeople, and that they feast upon his flesh.\" (1)\n\n (1) Themis, p. 140.\n\n\nIn her little book Ancient Art and Ritual (1) Jane Harrison describes\nthe dedication of a holy Bull, as conducted in Greece at Elis, and at\nMagnesia and other cities. \"There at the annual fair year by year the\nstewards of the city bought a Bull 'the finest that could be got,' and\nat the new moon of the month at the beginning of seed-time (? April)\n Bull was led in procession at the head of which went the chief priest\nand priestess of the city. With them went a herald and sacrificer,\nand two bands of youths and maidens. So holy was the Bull that nothing\nunlucky might come near him. The herald pronounced aloud a prayer for\n'the safety of the city and the land, and the citizens, and the women\nand children, for peace and wealth, and for the bringing forth of grain\nand all other fruits, and of cattle.' All this longing for fertility,\nfor food and children, focuses round the holy Bull, whose holiness is\nhis strength and fruitfulness.\" The Bull is sacrificed. The flesh is\ndivided in solemn feast among those who take part in the procession.\n\"The holy flesh is not offered to a god, it is eaten--to every man his\nportion--by each and every citizen, that he may get his share of the\nstrength of the Bull, of the luck of the State.\" But at Athens the\nBouphonia, as it was called, was followed by a curious ceremony. \"The\nhide was stuffed with straw and sewed up, and next the stuffed animal\nwas set on its feet and yoked to a plough as though it were ploughing.\nThe Death is followed by a Resurrection. Now this is all important. We\nare accustomed to think of sacrifice as the death, the giving up, the\nrenouncing of something. But SACRIFICE does not mean 'death' at all. It\nmeans MAKING HOLY, sanctifying; and holiness was to primitive man just\nspecial strength and life. What they wanted from the Bull was just that\nspecial life and strength which all the year long they had put into him,\nand nourished and fostered. That life was in his blood. They could not\neat that flesh nor drink that blood unless they killed him. So he must\ndie. But it was not to give him up to the gods that they killed him,\nnot to 'sacrifice' him in our sense, but to have him, keep him, eat him,\nlive BY him and through him, by his grace.\"\n\n (1) Home University Library, p. 87.\n\n\nWe have already had to deal with instances of the ceremonial eating of\nthe sacred he-Lamb or Ram, immolated in the Spring season of the year,\nand partaken of in a kind of communal feast--not without reference (at\nany rate in later times) to a supposed Lamb-god. Among the Ainos in the\nNorth of Japan, as also among the Gilyaks in Eastern Siberia, the Bear\nis the great food-animal, and is worshipped as the supreme giver of\nhealth and strength. There also a similar ritual of sacrifice occurs. A\nperfect Bear is caught and caged. He is fed up and even pampered to the\nday of his death. \"Fish, brandy and other delicacies are offered to him.\nSome of the people prostrate themselves before him; his coming into\na house brings a blessing, and if he sniffs at the food that brings a\nblessing too.\" Then he is led out and slain. A great feast takes place,\nthe flesh is divided, cupfuls of the blood are drunk by the men;\nthe tribe is united and strengthened, and the Bear-god blesses the\nceremony--the ideal Bear that has given its life for the people. (1)\n\n\n (1) See Art and Ritual, pp. 92-98; The Golden Bough, ii, 375\nseq.; Themis, pp. 140, 141; etc.\n\n\nThat the eating of the flesh of an animal or a man conveys to you some\nof the qualities, the life-force, the mana, of that animal or man, is an\nidea which one often meets with among primitive folk. Hence the common\ntendency to eat enemy warriors slain in battle against your tribe. By\ndoing so you absorb some of their valor and strength. Even the enemy\nscalps which an Apache Indian might hang from his belt were something\nmagical to add to the Apache's power. As Gilbert Murray says, (1) \"you\ndevoured the holy animal to get its mana, its swiftness, its strength,\nits great endurance, just as the savage now will eat his enemy's brain\nor heart or hands to get some particular quality residing there.\"\nEven--as he explains on the earlier page--mere CONTACT was often\nconsidered sufficient--\"we have holy pillars whose holiness consists\nin the fact that they have been touched by the blood of a bull.\" And in\nthis connection we may note that nearly all the Christian Churches have\na great belief in the virtue imparted by the mere 'laying on of hands.'\n\n (1) Four Stages of Greek Religion, p. 36.\n\n\nIn quite a different connection--we read (1) that among the Spartans a\nwarrior-boy would often beg for the love of the elder warrior whom he\nadmired (i. e. the contact with his body) in order to obtain in that\nway a portion of the latter's courage and prowess. That through the\nmediation of the lips one's spirit may be united to the spirit of\nanother person is an idea not unfamiliar to the modern mind; while the\nexchange of blood, clothes, locks of hair, etc., by lovers is a custom\nknown all over the world. (2)\n\n (1) Aelian VII, iii, 12: [gr autoi goun (oi paides) deontai twn\nerastwn] [gr eispnein autois]. See also E. Bethe on \"Die Dorische\nKnabenliebe\" in the Rheinisches Museum, vol. 26, iii, 461.\n\n (2) See Crawley's Mystic Rose, pp. 238, 242.\n\n\nTo suppose that by eating another you absorb his or her soul is somewhat\nnaive certainly. Perhaps it IS more native, more primitive. Yet there\nmay be SOME truth even in that idea. Certainly the food that one eats\nhas a psychological effect, and the flesh-eaters among the human race\nhave a different temperament as a rule from the fruit and vegetable\neaters, while among the animals (though other causes may come in\nhere) the Carnivora are decidedly more cruel and less gentle than the\nHerbivora.\n\nTo return to the rites of Dionysus, Gilbert Murray, speaking of\nOrphism--a great wave of religious reform which swept over Greece and\nSouth Italy in the sixth century B.C.--says: (1) \"A curious relic of\nprimitive superstition and cruelty remained firmly imbedded in Orphism,\na doctrine irrational and unintelligible, and for that very reason\nwrapped in the deepest and most sacred mystery: a belief in the\nSACRIFICE OF DIONYSUS HIMSELF, AND THE PURIFICATION OF MAN BY HIS\nBLOOD. It seems possible that the savage Thracians, in the fury of their\nworship on the mountains, when they were possessed by the god and became\n'wild beasts,' actually tore with their teeth and hands any hares,\ngoats, fawns or the like that they came across.... The Orphic\ncongregations of later times, in their most holy gatherings, solemnly\npartook of the blood of a bull, which was by a mystery the blood of\nDionysus-Zagreus himself, the Bull of God, slain in sacrifice for the\npurification of man.\" (2)\n\n (1) See Notes to his translation of the Bacch[ae] of Euripides.\n\n (2) For a description of this orgy see Theocritus, Idyll xxvi;\nalso for explanations of it, Lang's Myth, Ritual and Religion, vol. ii,\npp, 241-260, on Dionysus. The Encyclop[ae]dia Brit., article \"Orpheus,\"\nsays:--\"Orpheus, in the manner of his death, was considered to personate\nthe god Dionysus, and was thus representative of the god torn to pieces\nevery year--a ceremony enacted by the Bacchae in the earliest times with\na human victim, and afterwards with a bull, to represent the bull-formed\ngod. A distinct feature of this ritual was [gr wmofagia] (eating the\nflesh of the victim raw), whereby the communicants imagined that they\nconsumed and assimilated the god represented by the victim, and thus\nbecame filled with the divine ecstasy.\" Compare also the Hindu doctrine\nof Praj[pati, the dismembered Lord of Creation.\n\n\nSuch instances of early communal feasts, which fulfilled the double part\nof confirming on the one hand the solidarity of the tribe, and on the\nother of bringing the tribe, by the shedding of the blood of a divine\nVictim into close relationship with the very source of its life,\nare plentiful to find. \"The sacramental rite,\" says Professor\nRobertson-Smith, (1) \"is also an atoning rite, which brings the\ncommunity again into harmony with its alienated god--atonement being\nsimply an act of communion designed to wipe out all memory of previous\nestrangement.\" With this subject I shall deal more specially in chapter\nvii below. Meanwhile as instances of early Eucharists we may mention the\nfollowing cases, remembering always that as the blood is regarded as the\nLife, the drinking or partaking of, or sprinkling with, blood is always\nan acknowledgment of the common life; and that the juice of the grape\nbeing regarded as the blood of the Vine, wine in the later ceremonials\nquite easily and naturally takes the place of the blood in the early\nsacrifices.\n\n (1) Religion of the Semites, p. 302.\n\n\nThus P. Andrada La Crozius, a French missionary, and one of the first\nChristians who went to Nepaul and Thibet, says in his History of India:\n\"Their Grand Lama celebrates a species of sacrifice with BREAD and WINE,\nin which, after taking a small quantity himself, he distributes the\nrest among the Lamas present at this ceremony.\" (1) \"The old Egyptians\ncelebrated the resurrection of Osiris by a sacrament, eating the sacred\ncake or wafer after it had been consecrated by the priest, and thereby\nbecoming veritable flesh of his flesh.\" (2) As is well known, the eating\nof bread or dough sacramentally (sometimes mixed with blood or seed)\nas an emblem of community of life with the divinity, is an extremely\nancient practice or ritual. Dr. Frazer (3) says of the Aztecs,\nthat \"twice a year, in May and December, an image of the great god\nHuitzilopochtli was made of dough, then broken in pieces and solemnly\neaten by his worshipers.\" And Lord Kingsborough in his Mexican\nAntiquities (vol. vi, p. 220) gives a record of a \"most Holy Supper\"\nin which these people ate the flesh of their god. It was a cake made of\ncertain seeds, \"and having made it, they blessed it in their manner, and\nbroke it into pieces, which the high priest put into certain very clean\nvessels, and took a thorn of maguey which resembles a very thick needle,\nwith which he took up with the utmost reverence single morsels, which\nhe put into the mouth of each individual in the manner of a communion.\"\nAcostas (4) confirms this and similar accounts. The Peruvians partook of\na sacrament consisting of a pudding of coarsely ground maize, of which\na portion had been smeared on the idol. The priest sprinkled it with the\nblood of the victim before distributing it to the people. Priest and\npeople then all took their shares in turn, \"with great care that no\nparticle should be allowed to fall to the ground--this being looked upon\nas a great sin.\" (5)\n\n\n (1) See Doane's Bible Myths, p. 306.\n\n (2) From The Great Law, of religious origins: by W. Williamson\n(1899), p. 177.\n\n (3) The Golden Bough, vol. ii, p. 79.\n\n (4) Natural and Moral History of the Indies. London (1604).\n\n (5) See Markham's Rites and laws of the Incas, p. 27.\n\n\nMoving from Peru to China (instead of 'from China to Peru') we find that\n\"the Chinese pour wine (a very general substitute for blood) on a straw\nimage of Confucius, and then all present drink of it, and taste the\nsacrificial victim, in order to participate in the grace of Confucius.\"\n(Here again the Corn and Wine are blended in one rite.) And of Tartary\nFather Grueber thus testifies: \"This only I do affirm, that the devil so\nmimics the Catholic Church there, that although no European or Christian\nhas ever been there, still in all essential things they agree so\ncompletely with the Roman Church, as even to celebrate the Host with\nbread and wine: with my own eyes I have seen it.\" (1) These few\ninstances are sufficient to show the extraordinarily wide diffusion of\nTotem-sacraments and Eucharistic rites all over the world.\n\n (1) For these two quotations see Jevons' Introduction to the\nHistory of Religion, pp. 148 and 219.\n\n\n\n\nV. FOOD AND VEGETATION MAGIC\n\nI have wandered, in pursuit of Totems and the Eucharist, some way from\nthe astronomical thread of Chapters II and III, and now it would appear\nthat in order to understand religious origins we must wander still\nfarther. The chapters mentioned were largely occupied with Sungods and\nastronomical phenomena, but now we have to consider an earlier period\nwhen there were no definite forms of gods, and when none but the vaguest\nastronomical knowledge existed. Sometimes in historical matters it is\nbest and safest to move thus backwards in Time, from the things recent\nand fairly well known to things more ancient and less known. In this way\nwe approach more securely to some understanding of the dim and remote\npast.\n\nIt is clear that before any definite speculations on heaven-dwelling\ngods or divine beings had arisen in the human mind--or any clear\ntheories of how the sun and moon and stars might be connected with the\nchanges of the seasons on the earth--there were still certain obvious\nthings which appealed to everybody, learned or unlearned alike. One of\nthese was the return of Vegetation, bringing with it the fruits or the\npromise of the fruits of the earth, for human food, and also bringing\nwith it increase of animal life, for food in another form; and the other\nwas the return of Light and Warmth, making life easier in all ways. Food\ndelivering from the fear of starvation; Light and Warmth delivering from\nthe fear of danger and of cold. These were three glorious things which\nreturned together and brought salvation and renewed life to man. The\nperiod of their return was 'Spring,' and though Spring and its benefits\nmight fade away in time, still there was always the HOPE of its\nreturn--though even so it may have been a long time in human evolution\nbefore man discovered that it really did always return, and (with\ncertain allowances) at equal intervals of time.\n\nLong then before any Sun or Star gods could be called in, the return of\nthe Vegetation must have enthralled man's attention, and filled him with\nhope and joy. Yet since its return was somewhat variable and uncertain\nthe question, What could man do to assist that return? naturally\nbecame a pressing one. It is now generally held that the use of\nMagic--sympathetic magic--arose in this way. Sympathetic magic seems to\nhave been generated by a belief that your own actions cause a similar\nresponse in things and persons around you. Yet this belief did not rest\non any philosophy or argument, but was purely instinctive and sometimes\nof the nature of a mere corporeal reaction. Every schoolboy knows how\nin watching a comrade's high jump at the Sports he often finds himself\nlifting a knee at the moment 'to help him over'; at football matches\nquarrels sometimes arise among the spectators by reason of an\nill-placed kick coming from a too enthusiastic on-looker, behind one;\nundergraduates running on the tow-path beside their College boat in\nthe races will hurry even faster than the boat in order to increase its\nspeed; there is in each case an automatic bodily response increased\nby one's own desire. A person ACTS the part which he desires to be\nsuccessful. He thinks to transfer his energy in that way. Again, if by\nchance one witnesses a painful accident, a crushed foot or what-not,\nit commonly happens that one feels a pain in the same part oneself--a\nsympathetic pain. What more natural than to suppose that the pain\nreally is transferred from the one person to the other? and how easy the\ninference that by tormenting a wretched scape-goat or crucifying a human\nvictim in some cases the sufferings of people may be relieved or their\nsins atoned for?\n\nSimaetha, it will be remembered, in the second Idyll of Theocritus,\ncurses her faithless lover Delphis, and as she melts his waxen image she\nprays that HE TOO MAY MELT. All this is of the nature of Magic, and is\nindependent of and generally more primitive than Theology or Philosophy.\nYet it interests us because it points to a firm instinct in early\nman--to which I have already alluded--the instinct of his unity and\ncontinuity with the rest of creation, and of a common life so close\nthat his lightest actions may cause a far-reaching reaction in the world\noutside.\n\nMan, then, independently of any belief in gods, may assist the arrival\nof Spring by magic ceremonies. If you want the Vegetation to appear you\nmust have rain; and the rain-maker in almost all primitive tribes has\nbeen a MOST important personage. Generally he based his rites on quite\nfanciful associations, as when the rain-maker among the Mandans wore a\nraven's skin on his head (bird of the storm) or painted his shield with\nred zigzags of lightning (1); but partly, no doubt, he had observed\nactual facts, or had had the knowledge of them transmitted to him--as,\nfor instance that when rain is impending loud noises will bring about\nits speedy downfall, a fact we moderns have had occasion to notice on\nbattlefields. He had observed perhaps that in a storm a specially loud\nclap of thunder is generally followed by a greatly increased downpour\nof rain. He had even noticed (a thing which I have often verified in\nthe vicinity of Sheffield) that the copious smoke of fires will generate\nrain-clouds--and so quite naturally he concluded that it was his smoking\nSACRIFICES which had that desirable effect. So far he was on the track\nof elementary Science. And so he made \"bull-roarers\" to imitate the\nsound of wind and the blessed rain-bringing thunder, or clashed\ngreat bronze cymbals together with the same object. Bull-voices and\nthunder-drums and the clashing of cymbals were used in this connection\nby the Greeks, and are mentioned by Aeschylus (2); but the bull-roarer,\nin the form of a rhombus of wood whirled at the end of a string, seems\nto be known, or to have been known, all over the world. It is described\nwith some care by Mr. Andrew Lang in his Custom and Myth (pp. 29-44),\nwhere he says \"it is found always as a sacred instrument employed in\nreligious mysteries, in New Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, ancient\nGreece, and Africa.\"\n\n (1) See Catlin's North American Indians, Letter 19.\n\n (2) Themis, p. 61.\n\n\nSometimes, of course, the rain-maker was successful; but of the inner\ncauses of rain he knew next to nothing; he was more ignorant even than\nwe are! His main idea was a more specially 'magical' one--namely, that\nthe sound itself would appeal to the SPIRITS of rain and thunder and\ncause them to give a response. For of course the thunder (in Hebrew\nBath-Kol, \"the daughter of the Voice\") was everywhere regarded as\nthe manifestation of a spirit. (1) To make sounds like thunder would\ntherefore naturally call the attention of such a spirit; or he, the\nrain-maker, might make sounds like rain. He made gourd-rattles (known\nin ever so many parts of the world) in which he rattled dried seeds\nor small pebbles with a most beguiling and rain-like insistence; or\nsometimes, like the priests of Baal in the Bible, (2) he would cut\nhimself with knives till the blood fell upon the ground in great drops\nsuggestive of an oncoming thunder-shower. \"In Mexico the rain god was\npropitiated with sacrifices of children. If the children wept and shed\nabundant tears, they who carried them rejoiced, being convinced that\nrain would also be abundant.\" (3) Sometimes he, the rain-maker, would\nWHISTLE for the wind, or, like the Omaha Indians, flap his blankets for\nthe same purpose.\n\n (1) See A. Lang, op. cit.: \"The muttering of the thunder is said\nto be his voice calling to the rain to fall and make the grass grow up\ngreen.\" Such are the very words of Umbara, the minstrel of the Tribe\n(Australian).\n\n (2) I Kings xviii.\n\n (3) Quoted from Sahagun II, 2, 3 by A. Lang in Myth, Ritual and\nReligion, vol. ii, p. 102.\n\n\nIn the ancient myth of Demeter and Persephone--which has been adopted by\nso many peoples under so many forms--Demeter the Earth-mother loses her\ndaughter Persephone (who represents of course the Vegetation), carried\ndown into the underworld by the evil powers of Darkness and Winter.\nAnd in Greece there was a yearly ceremonial and ritual of magic for the\npurpose of restoring the lost one and bringing her back to the world\nagain. Women carried certain charms, \"fir-cones and snakes and unnamable\nobjects made of paste, to ensure fertility; there was a sacrifice of\npigs, who were thrown into a deep cleft of the earth, and their remains\nafterwards collected and scattered as a charm over the fields.\"\n(1) Fir-cones and snakes from their very forms were emblems of male\nfertility; snakes, too, from their habit of gliding out of their own\nskins with renewed brightness and color were suggestive of resurrection\nand re-vivification; pigs and sows by their exceeding fruitfulness would\nin their hour of sacrifice remind old mother Earth of what was expected\nfrom her! Moreover, no doubt it had been observed that the scattering of\ndead flesh over the ground or mixed with the seed, did bless the\nground to a greater fertility; and so by a strange mixture of primitive\nobservation with a certain child-like belief that by means of symbols\nand suggestions Nature could be appealed to and induced to answer to the\ndesires and needs for her children this sort of ceremonial Magic arose.\nIt was not exactly Science, and it was not exactly Religion; but it was\na naive, and perhaps not altogether mistaken, sense of the bond between\nNature and Man.\n\n (1) See Gilbert Murray's Four Stages of Greek Religion, p. 29.\n\n\nFor we can perceive that earliest man was not yet consciously\ndifferentiated from Nature. Not only do we see that the tribal life was\nso strong that the individual seldom regarded himself as different or\nseparate or opposed to the rest of the tribe; but that something of the\nsame kind was true with regard to his relation to the Animals and to\nNature at large. This outer world was part of himself, was also himself.\nHis sub-conscious sense of unity was so great that it largely dominated\nhis life. That brain-cleverness and brain-activity which causes modern\nman to perceive such a gulf between him and the animals, or between\nhimself and Nature, did not exist in the early man. Hence it was\nno difficulty to him to believe that he was a Bear or an Emu.\nSub-consciously he was wiser than we are. He knew that he was a bear or\nan emu, or any other such animal as his totem-creed led him to fix his\nmind upon. Hence we find that a familiarity and common consent existed\nbetween primitive man and many of his companion animals such as has\nbeen lost or much attenuated in modern times. Elisee Reclus in his very\ninteresting paper La Grande Famille (1) gives support to the idea that\nthe so-called domestication of animals did not originally arise from any\nforcible subjugation of them by man, but from a natural amity with\nthem which grew up in the beginning from common interests, pursuits and\naffections. Thus the chetah of India (and probably the puma of Brazil)\nfrom far-back times took to hunting in the company of his two-legged and\nbow-and-arrow-armed friend, with whom he divided the spoil. W. H. Hudson\n(2) declares that the Puma, wild and fierce though it is, and capable\nof killing the largest game, will never even to-day attack man, but\nwhen maltreated by the latter submits to the outrage, unresisting, with\nmournful cries and every sign of grief. The Llama, though domesticated\nin a sense, has never allowed the domination of the whip or the bit,\nbut may still be seen walking by the side of the Brazilian peasant\nand carrying his burdens in a kind of proud companionship. The mutual\nrelations of Women and the Cow, or of Man and the Horse (3) (also the\nElephant) reach so far into the past that their origin cannot be traced.\nThe Swallow still loves to make its home under the cottage eaves and\nstill is welcomed by the inmates as the bringer of good fortune. Elisee\nReclus assures us that the Dinka man on the Nile calls to certain snakes\nby name and shares with them the milk of his cows.\n\n\n (1) Published originally in Le Magazine International, January\n1896.\n\n (2) See The Naturalist in La Plata, ch. ii.\n\n (3) \"It is certain that the primitive Indo-European reared droves\nof tame or half-tame horses for generations, if not centuries, before\nit ever occurred to him to ride or drive them\" (F. B. Jevons, Introd. to\nHist. Religion, p. 119).\n\n\nAnd so with Nature. The communal sense, or subconscious perception,\nwhich made primitive men feel their unity with other members of their\ntribe, and their obvious kinship with the animals around them, brought\nthem also so close to general Nature that they looked upon the trees,\nthe vegetation, the rain, the warmth of the sun, as part of their\nbodies, part of themselves. Conscious differentiation had not yet set\nin. To cause rain or thunder you had to make rain- or thunder-like\nnoises; to encourage Vegetation and the crops to leap out of the ground,\nyou had to leap and dance. \"In Swabia and among the Transylvanian Saxons\nit is a common custom (says Dr. Frazer) for a man who has some hemp to\nleap high in the field in the belief that this will make the hemp grow\ntall.\" (1) Native May-pole dances and Jacks in the Green have hardly\nyet died out--even in this most civilized England. The bower of green\nboughs, the music of pipes, the leaping and the twirling, were all an\nencouragement to the arrival of Spring, and an expression of Sympathetic\nMagic. When you felt full of life and energy and virility in yourself\nyou naturally leapt and danced, so why should you not sympathetically do\nthis for the energizing of the crops? In every country of the world\nthe vernal season and the resurrection of the Sun has been greeted with\ndances and the sound of music. But if you wanted success in hunting\nor in warfare then you danced before-hand mimic dances suggesting the\nsuccessful hunt or battle. It was no more than our children do to-day,\nand it all was, and is, part of a natural-magic tendency in human\nthought.\n\n (1) See The Golden Bough, i, 139 seq. Also Art and Ritual, p. 31.\n\n\nLet me pause here for a moment. It is difficult for us with our\nacademical and somewhat school-boardy minds to enter into all this, and\nto understand the sense of (unconscious or sub-conscious) identification\nwith the world around which characterized the primitive man--or to look\nupon Nature with his eyes. A Tree, a Snake, a Bull, an Ear of Corn. WE\nknow so well from our botany and natural history books what these things\nare. Why should our minds dwell on them any longer or harbor a doubt as\nto our perfect comprehension of them?\n\nAnd yet (one cannot help asking the question): Has any one of us really\never SEEN a Tree? I certainly do not think that I have--except most\nsuperficially. That very penetrating observer and naturalist, Henry D.\nThoreau, tells us that he would often make an appointment to visit a\ncertain tree, miles away--but what or whom he saw when he got there, he\ndoes not say. Walt Whitman, also a keen observer, speaks of a tulip-tree\nnear which he sometimes sat--\"the Apollo of the woods--tall and\ngraceful, yet robust and sinewy, inimitable in hang of foliage and\nthrowing-out of limb; as if the beauteous, vital, leafy creature could\nwalk, if it only would\"; and mentions that in a dream-trance he actually\nonce saw his \"favorite trees step out and promenade up, down and around\nVERY CURIOUSLY.\" (1) Once the present writer seemed to have a partial\nvision of a tree. It was a beech, standing somewhat isolated, and\nstill leafless in quite early Spring. Suddenly I was aware of its\nskyward-reaching arms and up-turned finger-tips, as if some vivid life\n(or electricity) was streaming through them far into the spaces of\nheaven, and of its roots plunged in the earth and drawing the same\nenergies from below. The day was quite still and there was no movement\nin the branches, but in that moment the tree was no longer a separate or\nseparable organism, but a vast being ramifying far into space, sharing\nand uniting the life of Earth and Sky, and full of a most amazing\nactivity.\n\n (1) Specimen Days, 1882-3 Edition, p. iii.\n\n\nThe reader of this will probably have had some similar experiences.\nPerhaps he will have seen a full-foliaged Lombardy poplar swaying in\nhalf a gale in June--the wind and the sun streaming over every little\ntwig and leaf, the tree throwing out its branches in a kind of ecstasy\nand bathing them in the passionately boisterous caresses of its two\nvisitants; or he will have heard the deep glad murmur of some huge\nsycamore with ripening seed clusters when after weeks of drought the\nsteady warm rain brings relief to its thirst; and he will have known\nthat these creatures are but likenesses of himself, intimately and\ndeeply-related to him in their love and hunger longing, and, like\nhimself too, unfathomed and unfathomable.\n\nIt would be absurd to credit early man with conscious speculations\nlike these, belonging more properly to the twentieth century; yet it is\nincontrovertible, I think, that in SOME ways the primitive peoples, with\ntheir swift subconscious intuitions and their minds unclouded by mere\nbook knowledge, perceived truths to which we moderns are blind. Like\nthe animals they arrived at their perceptions without (individual) brain\neffort; they knew things without thinking. When they did THINK of course\nthey went wrong. Their budding science easily went astray. Religion\nwith them had as yet taken no definite shape; science was equally\nprotoplasmic; and all they had was a queer jumble of the two in the form\nof Magic. When at a later time Science gradually defined its outlook and\nits observations, and Religion, from being a vague subconscious feeling,\ntook clear shape in the form of gods and creeds, then mankind gradually\nemerged into the stage of evolution IN WHICH WE NOW ARE. OUR scientific\nlaws and doctrines are of course only temporary formulae, and so also\nare the gods and the creeds of our own and other religions; but these\nthings, with their set and angular outlines, have served in the past\nand will serve in the future as stepping-stones towards another kind of\nknowledge of which at present we only dream, and will lead us on to\na renewed power of perception which again will not be the laborious\nproduct of thought but a direct and instantaneous intuition like that of\nthe animals--and the angels.\n\n\nTo return to our Tree. Though primitive man did not speculate in modern\nstyle on these things, I yet have no reasonable doubt that he felt (and\nFEELS, in those cases where we can still trace the workings of his\nmind) his essential relationship to the creatures of the forest more\nintimately, if less analytically, than we do to-day. If the animals with\nall their wonderful gifts are (as we readily admit) a veritable part\nof Nature--so that they live and move and have their being more or less\nsubmerged in the spirit of the great world around them--then Man, when\nhe first began to differentiate himself from them, must for a long\ntime have remained in this SUBconscious unity, becoming only distinctly\nCONSCIOUS of it when he was already beginning to lose it. That early\ndawn of distinct consciousness corresponded to the period of belief\nin Magic. In that first mystic illumination almost every object was\ninvested with a halo of mystery or terror or adoration. Things were\neither tabu, in which case they were dangerous, and often not to be\ntouched or even looked upon--or they were overflowing with magic grace\nand influence, in which case they were holy, and any rite which released\ntheir influence was also holy. William Blake, that modern prophetic\nchild, beheld a Tree full of angels; the Central Australian native\nbelieves bushes to be the abode of spirits which leap into the bodies of\npassing women and are the cause of the conception of children; Moses\nsaw in the desert a bush (perhaps the mimosa) like a flame of fire, with\nJehovah dwelling in the midst of it, and he put off his shoes for\nhe felt that the place was holy; Osiris was at times regarded as a\nTree-spirit (1); and in inscriptions is referred to as \"the solitary one\nin the acacia\"--which reminds us curiously of the \"burning bush.\" The\nsame is true of others of the gods; in the old Norse mythology Ygdrasil\nwas the great branching World-Ash, abode of the soul of the universe;\nthe Peepul or Bo-tree in India is very sacred and must on no account be\ncut down, seeing that gods and spirits dwell among its branches. It is\nof the nature of an Aspen, and of little or no practical use, (2) but so\nholy that the poorest peasant will not disturb it. The Burmese believe\nthe things of nature, but especially the trees, to be the abode of\nspirits. \"To the Burman of to-day, not less than to the Greek of long\nago, all nature is alive. The forest and the river and the mountains\nare full of spirits, whom the Burmans call Nats. There are all kinds of\nNats, good and bad, great and little, male and female, now living round\nabout us. Some of them live in the trees, especially in the huge figtree\nthat shades half-an-acre without the village; or among the fern-like\nfronds of the tamarind.\" (3)\n\n\n (1) The Golden Bough, iv, 339.\n\n (2) Though the sap is said to contain caoutchouc.\n\n (3) The Soul of a People, by H. Fielding (1902), p. 250.\n\n\nThere are also in India and elsewhere popular rites of MARRIAGE of women\n(and men) to Trees; which suggest that trees were regarded as very\nnear akin to human beings! The Golden Bough (1) mentions many of these,\nincluding the idea that some trees are male and others female. The\nwell-known Assyrian emblem of a Pine cone being presented by a priest to\na Palm-tree is supposed by E. B. Tylor to symbolize fertilization--the\nPine cone being masculine and the Palm feminine. The ceremony of the god\nKrishna's marriage to a Basil plant is still celebrated in India down\nto the present day; and certain trees are clasped and hugged by pregnant\nwomen--the idea no doubt being that they bestow fertility on those\nwho embrace them. In other cases apparently it is the trees which are\nbenefited, since it is said that men sometimes go naked into the\nClove plantations at night in order by a sort of sexual intercourse to\nfertilize them. (2)\n\n (1) Vol. i, p. 40, Vol. iii, pp. 24 sq.\n\n (2) Ibid., vol. ii, p. 98.\n\n\nOne might go on multiplying examples in this direction quite\nindefinitely. There is no end to them. They all indicate--what was\ninstinctively felt by early man, and is perfectly obvious to all to-day\nwho are not blinded by \"civilization\" (and Herbert Spencer!) that the\nworld outside us is really most deeply akin to ourselves, that it is\nnot dead and senseless but intensely alive and instinct with feeling and\nintelligence resembling our own. It is this perception, this conviction\nof our essential unity with the whole of creation, which lay from the\nfirst at the base of all Religion; yet at first, as I have said, was\nhardly a conscious perception. Only later, when it gradually became more\nconscious, did it evolve itself into the definite forms of the gods and\nthe creeds--but of that process I will speak more in detail presently.\n\nThe Tree therefore was a most intimate presence to the Man. It grew in\nthe very midst of his Garden of Eden. It had a magical virtue, which\nhis tentative science could only explain by chance analogies and\nassimilations. Attractive and beloved and worshipped by reason of its\nmany gifts to mankind--its grateful shelter, its abounding fruits, its\ntimber, and other invaluable products--why should it not become the\nnatural emblem of the female, to whom through sex man's worship is ever\ndrawn? If the Snake has an unmistakable resemblance to the male organ in\nits active state, the foliage of the tree or bush is equally remindful\nof the female. What more clear than that the conjunction of Tree and\nSerpent is the fulfilment in nature of that sex-mystery which is so\npotent in the life of man and the animals? and that the magic ritual\nmost obviously fitted to induce fertility in the tribe or the herds\n(or even the crops) is to set up an image of the Tree and the Serpent\ncombined, and for all the tribe-folk in common to worship and pay it\nreverence. In the Bible with more or less veiled sexual significance\nwe have this combination in the Eden-garden, and again in the brazen\nSerpent and Pole which Moses set up in the wilderness (as a cure for the\nfiery serpents of lust); illustrations of the same are said to be found\nin the temples of Egypt and of South India, and even in the ancient\ntemples of Central America. (1) In the myth of Hercules the golden\napples of the Hesperides garden are guarded by a dragon. The Etruscans,\nthe Persians and the Babylonians had also legends of the Fall of man\nthrough a serpent tempting him to taste of the fruit of a holy Tree. And\nDe Gubernatis, (2) pointing out the phallic meaning of these stories,\nsays \"the legends concerning the tree of golden apples or figs which\nyields honey or ambrosia, guarded by dragons, in which the life, the\nfortune, the glory, the strength and the riches of the hero have their\nbeginning, are numerous among every people of Aryan origin: in India,\nPersia, Russia, Poland, Sweden, Germany, Greece and Italy.\"\n\n (1) See Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism, by Thomas\nInman (Trubner, 1874), p. 55.\n\n (2) Zoological Mythology, vol. ii, pp. 410 sq.\n\n\nThus we see the natural-magic tendency of the human mind asserting\nitself. To some of us indeed this tendency is even greater in the case\nof the Snake than in that of the Tree. W. H. Hudson, in Far Away\nand Long Ago, speaks of \"that sense of something supernatural in\nthe serpent, which appears to have been universal among peoples in a\nprimitive state of culture, and still survives in some barbarous or\nsemi-barbarous countries.\" The fascination of the Snake--the fascination\nof its mysteriously gliding movement, of its vivid energy, its\nglittering eye, its intensity of life, combined with its fatal dart of\nDeath--is a thing felt even more by women than by men--and for a reason\n(from what we have already said) not far to seek. It was the Woman who\nin the story of the Fall was the first to listen to its suggestions.\nNo wonder that, as Professor Murray says, (1) the Greeks worshiped a\ngigantic snake (Meilichios) the lord of Death and Life, with ceremonies\nof appeasement, and sacrifices, long before they arrived at the worship\nof Zeus and the Olympian gods.\n\n (1) Four Stages of Greek Religion, p. 29.\n\n\nOr let us take the example of an Ear of Corn. Some people\nwonder--hearing nowadays that the folk of old used to worship a\nCorn-spirit or Corn-god--wonder that any human beings could have been so\nfoolish. But probably the good people who wonder thus have never REALLY\nLOOKED (with their town-dazed eyes) at a growing spike of wheat. (1) Of\nall the wonderful things in Nature I hardly know any that thrills one\nmore with a sense of wizardry than just this very thing--to observe,\neach year, this disclosure of the Ear within the Blade--first a swelling\nof the sheath, then a transparency and a whitey-green face within a\nhooded shroud, and then the perfect spike of grain disengaging itself\nand spiring upward towards the sky--\"the resurrection of the wheat with\npale visage appearing out of the ground.\"\n\n (1) Even the thrice-learned Dr. Famell quotes apparently with\napproval the scornful words of Hippolytus, who (he says) \"speaks of the\nAthenians imitating people at the Eleusinian mysteries and showing to\nthe epoptae (initiates) that great and marvelous mystery of perfect\nrevelation--in solemn silence--a CUT CORNSTALK ([gr teqerismenon] [gr\nstacon]).\"--Cults of the Greek States, vol. iii, p. 182.\n\n\nIf this spectacle amazes one to-day, what emotions must it not have\naroused in the breasts of the earlier folk, whose outlook on the world\nwas so much more direct than ours--more 'animistic' if you like! What\nwonderment, what gratitude, what deliverance from fear (of starvation),\nwhat certainty that this being who had been ruthlessly cut down and\nsacrificed last year for human food had indeed arisen again as a savior\nof men, what readiness to make some human sacrifice in return, both as\nan acknowledgment of the debt, and as a gift of something which would\nno doubt be graciously accepted!--(for was it not well known that where\nblood had been spilt on the ground the future crop was so much more\ngenerous?)--what readiness to adopt some magic ritual likely to\npropitiate the unseen power--even though the outline and form of the\nlatter were vague and uncertain in the extreme! Dr. Frazer, speaking of\nthe Egyptian Osiris as one out of many corn-gods of the above character,\nsays (1): \"The primitive conception of him as the corn-god comes clearly\nout in the festival of his death and resurrection, which was celebrated\nthe month of Athyr. That festival appears to have been essentially a\nfestival of sowing, which properly fell at the time when the husbandman\nactually committed the seed to the earth. On that occasion an effigy of\nthe corn-god, moulded of earth and corn, was buried with funeral rites\nin the ground in order that, dying there, he might come to life again\nwith the new crops. The ceremony was in fact a charm to ensure the\ngrowth of the corn by sympathetic magic, and we may conjecture that as\nsuch it was practised in a simple form by every Egyptian farmer on his\nfields long before it was adopted and transfigured by the priests in the\nstately ritual of the temple.\" (2)\n\n (1) The Golden Bough, iv, p. 330.\n\n (2) See ch. xv.\n\n\nThe magic in this case was of a gentle description; the clay image of\nOsiris sprouting all over with the young green blade was pathetically\npoetic; but, as has been suggested, bloodthirsty ceremonies were also\ncommon enough. Human sacrifices, it is said, had at one time been\noffered at the grave of Osiris. We hear that the Indians in Ecuador used\nto sacrifice men's hearts and pour out human blood on their fields\nwhen they sowed them; the Pawnee Indians used a human victim the same,\nallowing his blood to drop on the seed-corn. It is said that in Mexico\ngirls were sacrificed, and that the Mexicans would sometimes GRIND their\n(male) victim, like corn, between two stones. (\"I'll grind his bones to\nmake me bread.\") Among the Khonds of East India--who were particularly\ngiven to this kind of ritual--the very TEARS of the sufferer were an\nincitement to more cruelties, for tears of course were magic for Rain.\n(1)\n\n (1) The Golden Bough, vol. vii, \"The Corn-Spirit,\" pp. 236 sq.\n\n\nAnd so on. We have referred to the Bull many times, both in his\nastronomical aspect as pioneer of the Spring-Sun, and in his more direct\nrole as plougher of the fields, and provider of food from his own body.\n\"The tremendous mana of the wild bull,\" says Gilbert Murray, \"occupies\nalmost half the stage of pre-Olympic ritual.\" (1) Even to us there is\nsomething mesmeric and overwhelming in the sense of this animal's\nglory of strength and fury and sexual power. No wonder the primitives\nworshiped him, or that they devised rituals which should convey his\npower and vitality by mere contact, or that in sacramental feasts\nthey ate his flesh and drank his blood as a magic symbol and means of\nsalvation.\n\n (1) Four Stages, p. 34.\n\n\n\n\nVI. MAGICIANS, KINGS AND GODS\n\nIt is perhaps necessary, at the commencement of this chapter, to say a\nfew more words about the nature and origin of the belief in Magic.\nMagic represented on one side, and clearly enough, the beginnings of\nReligion--i.e. the instinctive sense of Man's inner continuity with the\nworld around him, TAKING SHAPE: a fanciful shape it is true, but with\nvery real reaction on his practical life and feelings. (1) On the other\nside it represented the beginnings of Science. It was his first attempt\nnot merely to FEEL but to UNDERSTAND the mystery of things.\n\n (1) For an excellent account of the relation of Magic to Religion\nsee W. McDougall, Social Psychology (1908), pp. 317-320.\n\n\nInevitably these first efforts to understand were very puerile, very\nsuperficial. As E. B. Tylor says (1) of primitive folk in general, \"they\nmistook an imaginary for a real connection.\" And he instances the case\nof the inhabitants of the City of Ephesus, who laid down a rope, seven\nfurlongs in length, from the City to the temple of Artemis, in order to\nplace the former under the protection of the latter! WE should lay down\na telephone wire, and consider that we established a much more efficient\nconnection; but in the beginning, and quite naturally, men, like\nchildren, rely on surface associations. Among the Dyaks of Borneo (2)\nwhen the men are away fighting, the WOMEN must use a sort of telepathic\nmagic in order to safeguard them--that is, they must themselves rise\nearly and keep awake all day (lest darkness and sleep should give\nadvantage to the enemy); they must not OIL their hair (lest their\nhusbands should make any SLIPS); they must eat sparingly and put aside\nrice at every meal (so that the men may not want for food). And so on.\nSimilar superstitions are common. But they gradually lead to a little\nthought, and then to a little more, and so to the discovery of actual\nand provable influences. Perhaps one day the cord connecting the temple\nwith Ephesus was drawn TIGHT and it was found that messages could be, by\ntapping, transmitted along it. That way lay the discovery of a fact. In\nan age which worshiped fertility, whether in mankind or animals, TWINS\nwere ever counted especially blest, and were credited with a magic\npower. (The Constellation of the Twins was thought peculiarly lucky.)\nPerhaps after a time it was discovered that twins sometimes run in\nfamilies, and in such cases really do bring fertility with them. In\ncattle it is known nowadays that there are more twins of the female sex\nthan of the male sex. (3)\n\n (1) Primitive Culture, vol. i, p. 106.\n\n (2) See The Golden Bough, i, 127.\n\n (3) See Evolution of Sex, by Geddes and Thomson (1901), p. 41,\nnote.\n\n\nObservations of this kind were naturally made by the ablest members of\nthe tribe--who were in all probability the medicine-men and wizards--and\nbrought in consequence power into their hands. The road to power in\nfact--and especially was this the case in societies which had not\nyet developed wealth and property--lay through Magic. As far as magic\nrepresented early superstition and religion it laid hold of the _hearts_\nof men--their hopes and fears; as far as it represented science and the\nbeginnings of actual knowledge, it inspired their minds with a sense of\npower, and gave form to their lives and customs. We have no reason to\nsuppose that the early magicians and medicine-men were peculiarly wicked\nor bent on mere self-aggrandizement--any more than we have to think the\nsame of the average country vicar or country doctor of to-day. They\nwere merely men a trifle wiser or more instructed than their flocks.\nBut though probably in most cases their original intentions were decent\nenough, they were not proof against the temptations which the possession\nof power always brings, and as time went on they became liable to trade\nmore and more upon this power for their own advancement. In the\nmatter of Religion the history of the Christian priesthood through the\ncenturies shows sufficiently to what misuse such power can be put; and\nin the matter of Science it is a warning to us of the dangers attending\nthe formation of a scientific priesthood, such as we see growing up\naround us to-day. In both cases--whether Science or Religion--vanity,\npersonal ambition, lust of domination and a hundred other vices, unless\ncorrected by a real devotion to the public good, may easily bring as\nmany evils in their train as those they profess to cure.\n\nThe Medicine-man, or Wizard, or Magician, or Priest, slowly but\nnecessarily gathered power into his hands, and there is much evidence to\nshow that in the case of many tribes at any rate, it was HE who became\nultimate chief and leader and laid the foundations of Kingship. The\nBasileus was always a sacred personality, and often united in himself as\nhead of the clan the offices of chief in warfare and leader in priestly\nrites--like Agamemnon in Homer, or Saul or David in the Bible. As a\nmagician he had influence over the fertility of the earth and, like the\nblameless king in the Odyssey, under his sway\n\n                         \"the dark earth beareth in season\n     Barley and wheat, and the trees are laden with fruitage, and\n     alway\n      Yean unfailing the flocks, and the sea gives fish in\n     abundance.\" (1)\n\n (1) Odyssey xix, 109 sq. Translation by H. B. Cotterill.\n\n\nAs a magician too he was trusted for success in warfare; and\nSchoolcraft, in a passage quoted by Andrew Lang, (1) says of the Dacotah\nIndians \"the war-chief who leads the party to war is always one of\nthese medicine-men.\" This connection, however, by which the magician is\ntransformed into the king has been abundantly studied, and need not be\nfurther dwelt upon here.\n\nAnd what of the transformation of the king into a god--or of the\nMagician or Priest directly into the same? Perhaps in order to\nappreciate this, one must make a further digression.\n\nFor the early peoples there were, as it would appear, two main objects\nin life: (1) to promote fertility in cattle and crops, for food; and (2)\nto placate or ward off Death; and it seemed very obvious--even before\nany distinct figures of gods, or any idea of prayer, had arisen--to\nattain these objects by magic ritual. The rites of Baptism, of\nInitiation (or Confirmation) and the many ceremonies of a Second Birth,\nwhich we associate with fully-formed religions, did belong also to\nthe age of Magic; and they all implied a belief in some kind of\nre-incarnation--in a life going forward continually and being renewed\nin birth again and again. It is curious that we find such a belief among\nthe lowest savages even to-day. Dr. Frazer, speaking of the Central\nAustralian tribes, says the belief is firmly rooted among them \"that the\nhuman soul undergoes an endless series of re-incarnations--the living\nmen and women of one generation being nothing but the spirits of their\nancestors come to life again, and destined themselves to be reborn\nin the persons of their descendants. During the interval between\ntwo re-incarnations the souls live in their nanja spots, or local\ntotem-centres, which are always natural objects such as trees or rocks.\nEach totem-clan has a number of such totem-centres scattered over the\ncountry. There the souls of the dead men and women of the totem, but no\nothers, congregate, and are born again in human form when a favorable\nopportunity presents itself.\" (2)\n\n (1) Myth, Ritual and Religion, vol. i, p. 113.\n\n (2) The Golden Bough, vol. i, p. 96.\n\n\nAnd what the early people believed of the human spirit, they believed of\nthe corn-spirits and the tree and vegetation spirits also. At the great\nSpring-ritual among the primitive Greeks \"the tribe and the growing\nearth were renovated together: the earth arises afresh from her dead\nseeds, the tribe from its dead ancestors.\" And the whole process\nprojects itself in the idea of a spirit of the year, who \"in the first\nstage is living, then dies with each year, and thirdly rises again from\nthe dead, raising the whole dead world with him. The Greeks called him\nin this stage 'The Third One' (Tritos Soter) or 'the Saviour'; and the\nrenovation ceremonies were accompanied by a casting-off of the old year,\nthe old garments, and everything that is polluted by the infection of\ndeath.\" (1) Thus the multiplication of the crops and the renovation of\nthe tribe, and at the same time the evasion and placation of death, were\nall assured by similar rites and befitting ceremonial magic. (2)\n\n (1) Gilbert Murray, Four Stages, p. 46.\n\n (2) It is interesting to find, with regard to the renovation of\nthe tribe, that among the Central Australians the foreskins or male\nmembers of those who died were deposited in the above-mentioned nanja\nspots--the idea evidently being that like the seeds of the corn the\nseeds of the human crop must be carefully and ceremonially preserved for\ntheir re-incarnation.\n\n\nIn all these cases, and many others that I have not mentioned--of\nthe magical worship of Bulls and Bears and Rams and Cats and Emus and\nKangaroos, of Trees and Snakes, of Sun and Moon and Stars, and the\nspirit of the Corn in its yearly and miraculous resurrection out of the\nground--there is still the same idea or moving inspiration, the sense\nmentioned in the foregoing chapter, the feeling (hardly yet conscious of\nits own meaning) of intimate relationship and unity with all this outer\nworld, the instinctive conviction that the world can be swayed by the\nspirit of Man, if the man can only find the right ritual, the right\nword, the right spell, wherewith to move it. An aura of emotion\nsurrounded everything--of terror, of tabu, of fascination, of desire.\nThe world, to these people, was transparent with presences related to\nthemselves; and though hunger and sex may have been the dominant and\noverwhelmingly practical needs of their life, yet their outlook on the\nworld was essentially poetic and imaginative.\n\nMoreover it will be seen that in this age of magic and the belief in\nspirits, though there was an intense sense of every thing being\nalive, the gods, in the more modern sense of the world, hardly existed\n(1)--that is, there was no very clear vision, to these people, of\nsupra-mundane beings, sitting apart and ordaining the affairs of\nearth, as it were from a distance. Doubtless this conception was slowly\nevolving, but it was only incipient. For the time being--though there\nmight be orders and degrees of spirits (and of gods)--every such being\nwas only conceived of, and could only be conceived of, as actually a\npart of Nature, dwelling in and interlaced with some phenomenon of Earth\nand Sky, and having no separate existence.\n\n (1) For a discussion of the evolution of RELIGION out of MAGIC,\nsee Westermarck's Origin of Moral Ideas, ch. 47.\n\n\nHow was it then, it will be asked, that the belief in separate and\nseparable gods and goddesses--each with his or her well-marked outline\nand character and function, like the divinities of Greece, or of India,\nor of the Egyptian or Christian religions, ultimately arose? To\nthis question Jane Harrison (in her Themis and other books) gives an\ningenious answer, which as it chimes in with my own speculations (in the\nArt of Creation and elsewhere) I am inclined to adopt. It is that the\nfigures of the supranatural gods arose from a process in the human mind\nsimilar to that which the photographer adopts when by photographing a\nnumber of faces on the same plate, and so superposing their images on\none another, he produces a so-called \"composite\" photograph or image.\nThus, in the photographic sphere, the portraits of a lot of members\nof the same family superposed upon one another may produce a composite\nimage or ideal of that family type, or the portraits of a number of\nAztecs or of a number of Apache Indians the ideals respectively of the\nAztec or of the Apache types. And so in the mental sphere of each member\nof a tribe the many images of the well-known Warriors or Priests or\nwise and gracious Women of that tribe did inevitably combine at last\nto composite figures of gods and goddesses--on whom the enthusiasm\nand adoration of the tribe was concentrated. (1) Miss Harrison has\ningeniously suggested how the leading figures in the magic rituals of\nthe past--being the figures on which all eyes would be concentrated; and\nwhose importance would be imprinted on every mind--lent themselves to\nthis process. The suffering Victim, bound and scourged and crucified,\nrecurring year after year as the centre-figure of a thousand ritual\nprocessions, would at last be dramatized and idealized in the great\nrace-consciousness into the form of a Suffering God--a Jesus Christ or\na Dionysus or Osiris--dismembered or crucified for the salvation of\nmankind. The Priest or Medicine-Man--or rather the succession of Priests\nor Medicine-Men--whose figures would recur again and again as leaders\nand ordainers of the ceremonies, would be glorified at last into the\ncomposite-image of a God in whom were concentrated all magic powers.\n\"Recent researches,\" says Gilbert Murray, \"have shown us in abundance\nthe early Greek medicine-chiefs making thunder and lightning and rain.\"\nHere is the germ of a Zeus or a Jupiter. The particular medicine-man\nmay fail; that does not so much matter; he is only the individual\nrepresentative of the glorified and composite being who exists in the\nmind of the tribe (just as a present-day King may be unworthy, but is\nsurrounded all the same by the agelong glamour of Royalty). \"The real\n[gr qeos], tremendous, infallible, is somewhere far away, hidden in\nclouds perhaps, on the summit of some inaccessible mountain. If the\nmountain is once climbed the god will move to the upper sky. The\nmedicine-chief meanwhile stays on earth, still influential. He has some\nconnection with the great god more intimate than that of other men... he\nknows the rules for approaching him and making prayers to him.\" (2) Thus\ndid the Medicine-man, or Priest, or Magician (for these are but three\nnames for one figure) represent one step in the evolution of the god.\n\n (1) See The Art of Creation, ch. viii, \"The Gods as Apparitions\nof the Race-Life.\"\n\n (2) The Four Stages, p. 140.\n\n\nAnd farther back still in the evolutionary process we may trace (as in\nchapter iv above) the divinization or deification of four-footed animals\nand birds and snakes and trees and the like, from the personification of\nthe collective emotion of the tribe towards these creatures. For people\nwhose chief food was bear-meat, for instance, whose totem was a bear,\nand who believed themselves descended from an ursine ancestor, there\nwould grow up in the tribal mind an image surrounded by a halo of\nemotions--emotions of hungry desire, of reverence, fear, gratitude and\nso forth--an image of a _divine Bear_ in whom they lived and moved and had\ntheir being. For another tribe or group in whose yearly ritual a Bull or\na Lamb or a Kangaroo played a leading part there would in the same\nway spring up the image of a holy bull, a divine lamb, or a sacred\nkangaroo. Another group again might come to worship a Serpent as its\npresiding genius, or a particular kind of Tree, simply because these\nobjects were and had been for centuries prominent factors in its yearly\nand seasonal Magic. As Reinach and others suggest, it was the Taboo\n(bred by Fear) which by first forbidding contact with the totem-animal\nor priest or magician-chief gradually invested him with Awe and\nDivinity.\n\nAccording to this theory the god--the full-grown god in human shape,\ndwelling apart and beyond the earth--did not come first, but was a late\nand more finished product of evolution. He grew up by degrees and out of\nthe preceding animal-worships and totem-systems. And this theory is much\nsupported and corroborated by the fact that in a vast number of early\ncults the gods are represented by human figures with animal heads. The\nEgyptian religion was full of such divinities--the jackal-headed\nAnubis, the ram-headed Ammon, the bull-fronted Osiris, or Muth, queen of\ndarkness, clad in a vulture's skin; Minos and the Minotaur in Crete; in\nGreece, Athena with an owl's head, or Herakles masked in the hide\nand jaws of a monstrous lion. What could be more obvious than that,\nfollowing on the tribal worship of any totem-animal, the priest or\nmedicine-man or actual king in leading the magic ritual should don the\nskin and head of that animal, and wear the same as a kind of mask--this\npartly in order to appear to the people as the true representative of\nthe totem, and partly also in order to obtain from the skin the magic\nvirtues and mana of the beast, which he could then duly impart to the\ncrowd? Zeus, it must be remembered, wears the aegis, or goat-skin--said\nto be the hide of the goat Amaltheia who suckled him in his infancy;\nthere are a number of legends which connected the Arcadian Artemis with\nthe worship of the bear, Apollo with the wolf, and so forth. And, most\ncurious as showing similarity of rites between the Old and New Worlds,\nthere are found plenty of examples of the wearing of beast-masks in\nreligious processions among the native tribes of both North and South\nAmerica. In the Atlas of Spix and Martius (who travelled together in\nthe Amazonian forests about 1820) there is an understanding and\ncharacteristic picture of the men (and some women) of the tribe of the\nTecunas moving in procession through the woods mostly naked, except for\nwearing animal heads and masks--the masks representing Cranes of various\nkinds, Ducks, the Opossum, the Jaguar, the Parrot, etc., probably\nsymbolic of their respective clans.\n\nBy some such process as this, it may fairly be supposed, the forms of\nthe Gods were slowly exhaled from the actual figures of men and women,\nof youths and girls, who year after year took part in the ancient\nrituals. Just as the Queen of the May or Father Christmas with us are\nidealized forms derived from the many happy maidens or white-bearded\nold men who took leading parts in the May or December mummings and thus\ngained their apotheosis in our literature and tradition--so doubtless\nZeus with his thunderbolts and arrows of lightning is the idealization\ninto Heaven of the Priestly rain-maker and storm-controller; Ares the\ngod of War, the similar idealization of the leading warrior in the\nritual war-dance preceding an attack on a neighboring tribe; and Mercury\nof the foot-running Messenger whose swiftness in those days (devoid of\nsteam or electricity) was so precious a tribal possession.\n\nAnd here it must be remembered that this explanation of the genesis of\nthe gods only applies to the SHAPES and FIGURES of the various deities.\nIt does not apply to the genesis of the widespread belief in spirits or\na Great Spirit generally; that, as I think will become clear, has\nquite another source. Some people have jeered at the 'animistic' or\n'anthropomorphic' tendency of primitive man in his contemplation of the\nforces of Nature or his imaginations of religion and the gods. With a\nkind of superior pity they speak of \"the poor Indian whose untutored\nmind sees God in clouds and hears him in the wind.\" But I must confess\nthat to me the \"poor Indian\" seems on the whole to show more good sense\nthan his critics, and to have aimed his rude arrows at the philosophic\nmark more successfully than a vast number of his learned and scientific\nsuccessors. A consideration of what we have said above would show that\nearly people felt their unity with Nature so deeply and intimately\nthat--like the animals themselves--they did not think consciously or\ntheorize about it. It was just their life to be--like the beasts of the\nfield and the trees of the forest--a part of the whole flux of things,\nnon-differentiated so to speak. What more natural or indeed more\nlogically correct than for them to assume (when they first began to\nthink or differentiate themselves) that these other creatures, these\nbirds, beasts and plants, and even the sun and moon, were of the same\nblood as themselves, their first cousins, so to speak, and having the\nsame interior nature? What more reasonable (if indeed they credited\nTHEMSELVES with having some kind of soul or spirit) than to credit these\nother creatures with a similar soul or spirit? Im Thurn, speaking of the\nGuiana Indians, says that for them \"the whole world swarms with beings.\"\nSurely this could not be taken to indicate an untutored mind--unless\nindeed a mind untutored in the nonsense of the Schools--but rather a\nvery directly perceptive mind. And again what more reasonable (seeing\nthat these people themselves were in the animal stage of evolution) than\nthat they should pay great reverence to some ideal animal--first cousin\nor ancestor--who played an important part in their tribal existence, and\nmake of this animal a totem emblem and a symbol of their common life?\n\nAnd, further still, what more natural than that when the tribe passed\nto some degree beyond the animal stage and began to realize a life more\nintelligent and emotional--more specially human in fact--than that\nof the beasts of the field, that it should then in its rituals and\nceremonies throw off the beast-mask and pay reverence to the interior\nand more human spirit. Rising to a more enlightened consciousness of its\nown intimate quality, and still deeply penetrated with the sense of its\nkinship to external nature, it would inevitably and perfectly logically\ncredit the latter with an inner life and intelligence, more\ndistinctly human than before. Its religion in fact would become MORE\n'anthropomorphic' instead of less so; and one sees that this is a\nprocess that is inevitable; and inevitable notwithstanding a\ncertain parenthesis in the process, due to obvious elements in our\n'Civilization' and to the temporary and fallacious domination of\na leaden-eyed so-called 'Science.' According to this view the true\nevolution of Religion and Man's outlook on the world has proceeded not\nby the denial by man of his unity with the world, but by his seeing and\nunderstanding that unity more deeply. And the more deeply he understands\nhimself the more certainly he will recognize in the external world a\nBeing or beings resembling himself.\n\nW. H. Hudson--whose mind is certainly not of a quality to be jeered\nat--speaks of Animism as \"the projection of ourselves into nature:\nthe sense and apprehension of an intelligence like our own, but more\npowerful, in all visible things\"; and continues, \"old as I am this same\nprimitive faculty which manifested itself in my early boyhood, still\npersists, and in those early years was so powerful that I am almost\nafraid to say how deeply I was moved by it.\" (1) Nor will it be quite\nforgotten that Shelley once said:--\n\n     The moveless pillar of a mountain's weight\n     Is active living spirit. Every grain\n     Is sentient both in unity and part,\n     And the minutest atom comprehends\n     A world of loves and hatreds.\n\n (1) Far Away and Long Ago, ch. xiii, p. 225.\n\n\nThe tendency to animism and later to anthropomorphism is I say\ninevitable, and perfectly logical. But the great value of the work done\nby some of those investigators whom I have quoted has been to show that\namong quite primitive people (whose interior life and 'soul-sense' was\nonly very feeble) their projections of intelligence into Nature were\ncorrespondingly feeble. The reflections of themselves projected into\nthe world beyond could not reach the stature of eternal 'gods,' but\nwere rather of the quality of ephemeral phantoms and ghosts; and the\nceremonials and creeds of that period are consequently more properly\ndescribed as Magic than as Religion. There have indeed been great\ncontroversies as to whether there has or has not been, in the course\nof religious evolution, a _pre_-animistic stage. Probably of course human\nevolution in this matter must have been perfectly continuous from stages\npresenting the very feeblest or an absolutely deficient animistic sense\nto the very highest manifestations of anthropomorphism; but as there is\na good deal of evidence to show that _animals_ (notably dogs and horses)\nsee ghosts, the inquiry ought certainly to be enlarged so far as to\ninclude the pre-human species. Anyhow it must be remembered that the\nquestion is one of _consciousness_--that is, of how far and to what degree\nconsciousness of self has been developed in the animal or the primitive\nman or the civilized man, and therefore how far and to what degree the\nanimal or human creature has credited the outside world with a similar\nconsciousness. It is not a question of whether there _is_ an inner life\nand _sub_-consciousness common to all these creatures of the earth and\nsky, because that, I take it, is a fact beyond question; they all emerge\nor have emerged from the same matrix, and are rooted in identity; but\nit is a question of how far they are _aware_ of this, and how far by\nseparation (which is the genius of evolution) each individual creature\nhas become conscious of the interior nature both of itself and of the\nother creatures _and_ of the great whole which includes them all.\n\nFinally, and to avoid misunderstanding, let me say that\nAnthropomorphism, in man's conception of the gods, is itself of course\nonly a stage and destined to pass away. In so far, that is, as the\nterm indicates a belief in divine beings corresponding to our PRESENT\nconception of ourselves--that is as separate personalities having each\na separate and limited character and function, and animated by\nthe separatist motives of ambition, possession, power, vainglory,\nsuperiority, patronage, self-greed, self-satisfaction, etc.--in so far\nas anthropomorphism is the expression of that kind of belief it is of\ncourse destined, with the illusion from which it springs, to pass away.\nWhen man arrives at the final consciousness in which the idea of such a\nself, superior or inferior or in any way antagonistic to others, ceases\nto operate, then he will return to his first and primal condition, and\nwill cease to need ANY special religion or gods, knowing himself and all\nhis fellows to be divine and the origin and perfect fruition of all.\n\n\n\n\nVII. RITES OF EXPIATION AND REDEMPTION\n\nThere is a passage in Richard Jefferies' imperishably beautiful book\nThe Story of my Heart--a passage well known to all lovers of that\nprose-poet--in which he figures himself standing \"in front of the Royal\nExchange where the wide pavement reaches out like a promontory,\" and\npondering on the vast crowd and the mystery of life. \"Is there any\ntheory, philosophy, or creed,\" he says, \"is there any system of culture,\nany formulated method, able to meet and satisfy each separate item of\nthis agitated pool of human life? By which they may be guided, by which\nthey may hope, by which look forward? Not a mere illusion of the craving\nheart--something real, as real as the solid walls of fact against\nwhich, like seaweed, they are dashed; something to give each separate\npersonality sunshine and a flower in its own existence now; something\nto shape this million-handed labor to an end and outcome that will leave\nmore sunshine and more flowers to those who must succeed? Something real\nnow, and not in the spirit-land; in this hour now, as I stand and the\nsun burns.... Full well aware that all has failed, yet, side by side\nwith the sadness of that knowledge, there lives on in me an unquenchable\nbelief, thought burning like the sun, that there is yet something to\nbe found.... It must be dragged forth by the might of thought from the\nimmense forces of the universe.\"\n\nIn answer to this passage we may say \"No,--a thousand times No! there\nis no theory, philosophy, creed, system or formulated method which\nwill meet or ever satisfy the demand of each separate item of the\nhuman whirlpool.\" And happy are we to know there is no such thing! How\nterrible if one of these bloodless 'systems' which strew the history\nof religion and philosophy and the political and social paths of\nhuman endeavor HAD been found absolutely correct and universally\napplicable--so that every human being would be compelled to pass\nthrough its machine-like maw, every personality to be crushed under\nits Juggernath wheels! No, thank Heaven! there is no theory or creed or\nsystem; and yet there is something--as Jefferies prophetically felt and\nwith a great longing desired--that CAN satisfy; and that, the root\nof all religion, has been hinted at in the last chapter. It is the\nCONSCIOUSNESS of the world-life burning, blazing, deep down within us:\nit is the Soul's intuition of its roots in Omnipresence and Eternity.\n\nThe gods and the creeds of the past, as shown in the last\nchapter--whatever they may have been, animistic or anthropomorphic\nor transcendental, whether grossly brutish or serenely ideal and\nabstract--are essentially projections of the human mind; and no doubt\nthose who are anxious to discredit the religious impulse generally will\ncatch at this, saying \"Yes, they are mere forms and phantoms of the\nmind, ephemeral dreams, projected on the background of Nature, and\nhaving no real substance or solid value. The history of Religion (they\nwill say) is a history of delusion and illusion; why waste time over\nit? These divine grizzly Bears or Aesculapian Snakes, these cat-faced\nPashts, this Isis, queen of heaven, and Astarte and Baal and Indra\nand Agni and Kali and Demeter and the Virgin Mary and Apollo and Jesus\nChrist and Satan and the Holy Ghost, are only shadows cast outwards onto\na screen; the constitution of the human mind makes them all tend to\nbe anthropomorphic; but that is all; they each and all inevitably pass\naway. Why waste time over them?\"\n\nAnd this is in a sense a perfectly fair way of looking at the matter.\nThese gods and creeds ARE only projections of the human mind. But all\nthe same it misses, does this view, the essential fact. It misses the\nfact that there is no shadow without a fire, that the very existence of\na shadow argues a light somewhere (though we may not directly see it) as\nwell as the existence of a solid form which intercepts that light.\nDeep, deep in the human mind there is that burning blazing light of\nthe world-consciousness--so deep indeed that the vast majority of\nindividuals are hardly aware of its existence. Their gaze turned\noutwards is held and riveted by the gigantic figures and processions\npassing across their sky; they are unaware that the latter are only\nshadows--silhouettes of the forms inhabiting their own minds. (1) The\nvast majority of people have never observed their own minds; their own\nmental forms. They have only observed the reflections cast by these.\nThus it may be said, in this matter, that there are three degrees of\nreality. There are the mere shadows--the least real and most\nevanescent; there are the actual mental outlines of humanity (and of\nthe individual), much more real, but themselves also of course slowly\nchanging; and most real of all, and permanent, there is the light \"which\nlighteth every man that cometh into the world\"--the glorious light\nof the world-consciousness. Of this last it may be said that it never\nchanges. Every thing is known to it--even the very IMPEDIMENTS to its\nshining. But as it is from the impediments to the shining of a light\nthat shadows are cast, so we now may understand that the things of this\nworld and of humanity, though real in their degree, have chiefly a\nkind of negative value; they are opaquenesses, clouds, materialisms,\nignorances, and the inner light falling upon them gradually reveals\ntheir negative character and gradually dissolves them away till they\nare lost in the extreme and eternal Splendor. I think Jefferies, when\nhe asked that question with which I have begun this chapter, was in some\nsense subconsciously, if not quite consciously, aware of the answer. His\nfrequent references to the burning blazing sun throughout The Story of\nthe Heart seem to be an indication of his real deep-down attitude of\nmind.\n\n (1) See, in the same connection, Plato's allegory of the Cave,\nRepublic, Book vii.\n\n\nThe shadow-figures of the creeds and theogonies pass away truly like\nephemeral dreams; but to say that time spent in their study is wasted,\nis a mistake, for they have value as being indications of things much\nmore real than themselves, namely, of the stages of evolution of the\nhuman mind. The fact that a certain god-figure, however grotesque and\nqueer, or a certain creed, however childish, cruel, and illogical, held\nsway for a considerable time over the hearts of men in any corner or\ncontinent of the world is good evidence that it represented a real\nformative urge at the time in the hearts of those good people, and\na definite stage in their evolution and the evolution of humanity.\nCertainly it was destined to pass away, but it was a step, and a\nnecessary step in the great process; and certainly it was opaque and\nbrutish, but it is through the opaque things of the world, and not\nthrough the transparent, that we become aware of the light.\n\nIt may be worth while to give instances of how some early rituals and\ncreeds, in themselves apparently barbarous or preposterous, were really\nthe indications of important moral and social conceptions evolving in\nthe heart of man. Let us take, first, the religious customs connected\nwith the ideas of Sacrifice and of Sin, of which such innumerable\nexamples are now to be found in the modern books on Anthropology. If we\nassume, as I have done more than once, that the earliest state of Man\nwas one in which he did not consciously separate himself from the world,\nanimate and inanimate, which surrounded him, then (as I have also said)\nit was perfectly natural for him to take some animal which bulked large\non his horizon--some food-animal for instance--and to pay respect to it\nas the benefactor of his tribe, its far-back ancestor and totem-symbol;\nor, seeing the boundless blessing of the cornfields, to believe in\nsome kind of spirit of the corn (not exactly a god but rather a magical\nghost) which, reincarnated every year, sprang up to save mankind\nfrom famine. But then no sooner had he done this than he was bound to\nperceive that in cutting down the corn or in eating his totem-bear\nor kangaroo he was slaying his own best self and benefactor. In\nthat instant the consciousness of DISUNITY, the sense of sin in some\nundefined yet no less disturbing and alarming form would come in. If,\nbefore, his ritual magic had been concentrated on the simple purpose of\nmultiplying the animal or, vegetable forms of his food, now in addition\nhis magical endeavor would be turned to averting the just wrath of the\nspirits who animated these forms--just indeed, for the rudest savage\nwould perceive the wrong done and the probability of its retribution.\nClearly the wrong done could only be expiated by an equivalent sacrifice\nof some kind on the part of the man, or the tribe--that is by the\noffering to the totem-animal or to the corn-spirit of some victim whom\nthese nature powers in their turn could feed upon and assimilate. In\nthis way the nature-powers would be appeased, the sense of unity would\nbe restored, and the first At-one-ment effected.\n\nIt is hardly necessary to recite in any detail the cruel and hideous\nsacrifices which have been perpetrated in this sense all over the world,\nsometimes in appeasement of a wrong committed or supposed to have been\ncommitted by the tribe or some member of it, sometimes in placation or\nfor the averting of death, or defeat, or plague, sometimes merely\nin fulfilment of some long-standing custom of forgotten origin--the\nflayings and floggings and burnings and crucifixions of victims without\nend, carried out in all deliberation and solemnity of established\nritual. I have mentioned some cases connected with the sowing of the\ncorn. The Bible is full of such things, from the intended sacrifice of\nIsaac by his father Abraham, to the actual crucifixion of Jesus by\nthe Jews. The first-born sons were claimed by a god who called himself\n\"jealous\" and were only to be redeemed by a substitute. (1) Of the\nCanaanites it was said that \"even their daughters they have BURNT in the\nfire to their gods\"; (2) and of the King of Moab, that when he saw\nhis army in danger of defeat, \"he took his eldest son that should have\nreigned in his stead and offered him for a burnt-offering on the wall!\"\n(3) Dr. Frazer (4) mentions the similar case of the Carthaginians\n(about B.C. 300) sacrificing two hundred children of good family as a\npropitiation to Baal and to save their beloved city from the assaults\nof the Sicilian tyrant Agathocles. And even so we hear that on that\noccasion three hundred more young folk VOLUNTEERED to die for the\nfatherland.\n\n (1) Exodus xxxiv. 20.\n\n (2) Deut. xii. 31.\n\n (3) 2 Kings iii. 27.\n\n (4) The Golden Bough, vol. \"The Dying God,\" p. 167.\n\n\nThe awful sacrifices made by the Aztecs in Mexico to their gods\nHuitzilopochtli, Texcatlipoca, and others are described in much detail\nby Sahagun, the Spanish missionary of the sixteenth century. The victims\nwere mostly prisoners of war or young children; they were numbered by\nthousands. In one case Sahagun describes the huge Idol or figure of the\ngod as largely plated with gold and holding his hands palm upward and in\na downward sloping position over a cauldron or furnace placed below. The\nchildren, who had previously been borne in triumphal state on litters\nover the crowd and decorated with every ornamental device of feathers\nand flowers and wings, were placed one by one on the vast hands and\nROLLED DOWN into the flames--as if the god were himself offering them.\n(1) As the procession approached the temple, the members of it wept and\ndanced and sang, and here again the abundance of tears was taken for a\ngood augury of rain. (2)\n\n (1) It is curious to find that exactly the same story (of the\nsloping hands and the children rolled down into the flames) is related\nconcerning the above-mentioned Baal image at Carthage (see Diodorus\nSiculus, xx. 14; also Baring Gould's Religious Belief, vol. i, p. 375).\n\n (2) \"A los ninos que mataban, componianlos en muchos atavios para\nllevarlos al sacrificio, y llevabos en unas literas sobre los hombros,\nestas literas iban adornadas con plumages y con flores: iban tanendo,\ncantando y bailando delante de ellos... Cuando Ileviban los ninos a\nmatar, si llevaban y echaban muchos lagrimas, alegrabansi los que los\nllevaban porque tomaban pronostico de que habian de tener muchas aguas\nen aquel ano.\" Sahagun, Historia Nueva Espana, Bk. II, ch. i.\n\n\nBernal Diaz describes how he saw one of these monstrous figures--that\nof Huitzilopochtli, the god of war, all inlaid with gold and precious\nstones; and beside it were \"braziers, wherein burned the hearts of three\nIndians, torn from their bodies that very day, and the smoke of them and\nthe savor of incense were the sacrifice.\"\n\nSahagun again (in Book II, ch. 5) gives a long account of the sacrifice\nof a perfect youth at Easter-time--which date Sahagun connects with the\nChristian festival of the Resurrection. For a whole year the youth had\nbeen held in honor and adored by the people as the very image of the\ngod (Tetzcatlipoca) to whom he was to be sacrificed. Every luxury\nand fulfilment of his last wish (including such four courtesans as he\ndesired) had been granted him. At the last and on the fatal day, leaving\nhis companions and his worshipers behind, be slowly ascended the Temple\nstaircase; stripping on each step the ornaments from his body; and\nbreaking and casting away his flutes and other musical instruments;\ntill, reaching the summit, he was stretched, curved on his back, and\nbelly upwards, over the altar stone, while the priest with obsidian\nknife cut his breast open and, snatching the heart out, held it up, yet\nbeating, as an offering to the Sun. In the meantime, and while the heart\nstill lived, his successor for the next year was chosen.\n\nIn Book II, ch. 7 of the same work Sahagun describes the similar\noffering of a woman to a goddess. In both cases (he explains) of young\nman or young woman, the victims were richly adorned in the guise of the\ngod or goddess to whom they were offered, and at the same time great\nlargesse of food was distributed to all who needed. (Here we see the\nconnection in the general mind between the gift of food (by the gods)\nand the sacrifice of precious blood (by the people).) More than once\nSahagun mentions that the victims in these Mexican ceremonials not\ninfrequently offered THEMSELVES as a voluntary sacrifice; and Prescott\nsays (1) that the offering of one's life to the gods was \"sometimes\nvoluntarily embraced, as a most glorious death opening a sure passage\ninto Paradise.\"\n\n (1) Conquest of Mexico, Bk. I, ch. 3.\n\n\nDr. Frazer describes (1) the far-back Babylonian festival of the Sacaea\nin which \"a prisoner, condemned to death, was dressed in the king's\nrobes, seated on the king's throne, allowed to issue whatever commands\nhe pleased, to eat, drink and enjoy himself, and even to lie with the\nking's concubines.\" But at the end of the five days he was stripped\nof his royal robes, scourged, and hanged or impaled. It is certainly\nastonishing to find customs so similar prevailing among peoples so far\nremoved in space and time as the Aztecs of the sixteenth century A.D.\nand the Babylonians perhaps of the sixteenth century B.C. But we know\nthat this subject of the yearly sacrifice of a victim attired as a\nking or god is one that Dr. Frazer has especially made his own, and for\nfurther information on it his classic work should be consulted.\n\n (1) Golden Bough, \"The Dying God,\" p. 114. (See also S. Reinach,\nCults, Myths and Religion, p. 94) on the martyrdom of St. Dasius.\n\n\nAndrew Lang also, with regard to the Aztecs, quotes largely from\nSahagun, and summarizes his conclusions in the following passage:\n\"The general theory of worship was the adoration of a deity, first by\ninnumerable human sacrifices, next by the special sacrifice of a MAN for\nthe male gods, of a WOMAN for each goddess. (1) The latter victims were\nregarded as the living images or incarnations of the divinities in, each\ncase; for no system of worship carried farther the identification of the\ngod with the sacrifice (? victim), and of both with the officiating priest.\nThe connection was emphasized by the priests wearing the newly-flayed skins\nof the victims--just as in Greece, Egypt and Assyria, the fawn-skin\nor bull-hide or goat-skin or fish-skin of the victims is worn by the\ncelebrants. Finally, an image of the god was made out of paste, and this\nwas divided into morsels and eaten in a hideous sacrament by those who\ncommunicated.\" (2)\n\n (1) Compare the festival of Thargelia at Athens, originally\nconnected with the ripening of the crops. A procession was formed and\nthe first fruits of the year offered to Apollo, Artemis and the Horae.\nIt was an expiatory feast, to purify the State from all guilt and avert\nthe wrath of the god (the Sun). A man and a woman, as representing\nthe male and female population, were led about with a garland of figs\n(fertility) round their necks, to the sound of flutes and singing. They\nwere then scourged, sacrificed, and their bodies burned by the seashore.\n(Nettleship and Sandys.)\n\n (2) A Lang, Myth, Ritual and Religion, vol. ii, p. 97.\n\n\nRevolting as this whole picture is, it represents as we know a mere\nthumbnail sketch of the awful practices of human sacrifice all over the\nworld. We hold up our hands in horror at the thought of Huitzilopochtli\ndropping children from his fingers into the flames, but we have to\nremember that our own most Christian Saint Augustine was content to\ndescribe unbaptized infants as crawling for ever about the floor of\nHell! What sort of god, we may ask, did Augustine worship? The Being who\ncould condemn children to such a fate was certainly no better than the\nMexican Idol.\n\nAnd yet Augustine was a great and noble man, with some by no means\nunworthy conceptions of the greatness of his God. In the same way the\nAztecs were in many respects a refined and artistic people, and their\nreligion was not all superstition and bloodshed. Prescott says of them\n(1) that they believed in a supreme Creator and Lord \"omnipresent,\nknowing all thoughts, giving all gifts, without whom Man is as\nnothing--invisible, incorporeal, one God, of perfect perfection and\npurity, under whose wings we find repose and a sure defence.\" How can\nwe reconcile St. Augustine with his own devilish creed, or the religious\nbelief of the Aztecs with their unspeakable cruelties? Perhaps we can\nonly reconcile them by remembering out of what deeps of barbarism and\nwhat nightmares of haunting Fear, man has slowly emerged--and is\neven now only slowly emerging; by remembering also that the ancient\nceremonies and rituals of Magic and Fear remained on and were cultivated\nby the multitude in each nation long after the bolder and nobler spirits\nhad attained to breathe a purer air; by remembering that even to the\npresent day in each individual the Old and the New are for a long period\nthus intricately intertangled. It is hard to believe that the practice\nof human and animal sacrifice (with whatever revolting details) should\nhave been cultivated by nine-tenths of the human race over the globe\nout of sheer perversity and without some reason which at any rate to\nthe perpetrators themselves appeared commanding and convincing. To-day\n(1918) we are witnessing in the Great European War a carnival of human\nslaughter which in magnitude and barbarity eclipses in one stroke all\nthe accumulated ceremonial sacrifices of historical ages; and when\nwe ask the why and wherefore of this horrid spectacle we are told,\napparently in all sincerity, and by both the parties engaged, of the\nnoble objects and commanding moralities which inspire and compel it. We\ncan hardly, in this last case, disbelieve altogether in the genuineness\nof the plea, so why should we do so in the former case? In both cases we\nperceive that underneath the surface pretexts and moralities Fear is and\nwas the great urging and commanding force.\n\n (1) Conquest of Mexico, Bk. I, ch. 3.\n\n\nThe truth is that Sin and Sacrifice represent--if you once allow for the\noverwhelming sway of fear--perfectly reasonable views of human conduct,\nadopted instinctively by mankind since the earliest times. If in a\nmoment of danger or an access of selfish greed you deserted your brother\ntribesman or took a mean advantage of him, you 'sinned' against him; and\nnaturally you expiated the sin by an equivalent sacrifice of some kind\nmade to the one you had wronged. Such an idea and such a practice were\nthe very foundation of social life and human morality, and must have\nsprung up as soon as ever, in the course of evolution, man became\nCAPABLE of differentiating himself from his fellows and regarding his\nown conduct as that of a 'separate self.' It was in the very conception\nof a separate self that 'sin' and disunity first began; and it was\nby 'sacrifice' that unity and harmony were restored, appeasement and\natonement effected.\n\nBut in those earliest times, as I have already indicated more than once,\nman felt himself intimately related not only to his brother tribesman,\nbut to the animals and to general Nature. It was not so much that he\nTHOUGHT thus as that he never thought OTHERWISE! He FELT subconsciously\nthat he was a part of all this outer world. And so he adopted for his\ntotems or presiding spirits every possible animal, as we have seen,\nand all sorts of nature-phenomena, such as rain and fire and water and\nclouds, and sun, moon and stars--which WE consider quite senseless and\ninanimate. Towards these apparently senseless things therefore he felt\nthe same compunction as I have described him feeling towards his brother\ntribesmen. He could sin against them too. He could sin against his\ntotem-animal by eating it; he could sin against his 'brother the ox' by\nconsuming its strength in the labor of the plough; he could sin against\nthe corn by cutting it down and grinding it into flour, or against the\nprecious and beautiful pine-tree by laying his axe to its roots and\nconverting it into mere timber for his house. Further still, no doubt he\ncould sin against elemental nature. This might be more difficult to be\ncertain of, but when the signs of elemental displeasure were not to be\nmistaken--when the rain withheld itself for months, or the storms and\nlightning dealt death and destruction, when the crops failed or evil\nplagues afflicted mankind--then there could be little uncertainty that\nhe had sinned; and Fear, which had haunted him like a demon from the\nfirst day when he became conscious of his separation from his fellows\nand from Nature, stood over him and urged to dreadful propitiations.\n\nIn all these cases some sacrifice in reparation was the obvious thing.\nWe have seen that to atone for the cutting-down of the corn a human\nvictim would often be slaughtered. The corn-spirit clearly approved of\nthis, for wherever the blood and remains of the victim were strewn the\ncorn always sprang up more plentifully. The tribe or human group made\nreparation thus to the corn; the corn-spirit signified approval. The\n'sin' was expiated and harmony restored. Sometimes the sacrifice was\nvoluntarily offered by a tribesman; sometimes it was enforced, by lot\nor otherwise; sometimes the victim was a slave, or a captive enemy;\nsometimes even an animal. All that did not so much matter. The main\nthing was that the formal expiation had been carried out, and the wrath\nof the spirits averted.\n\nIt is known that tribes whose chief food-animal was the bear felt it\nnecessary to kill and eat a bear occasionally; but they could not do\nthis without a sense of guilt, and some fear of vengeance from the great\nBear-spirit. So they ate the slain bear at a communal feast in which\nthe tribesmen shared the guilt and celebrated their community with their\ntotem and with each other. And since they could not make any reparation\ndirectly to the slain animal itself AFTER its death, they made their\nreparation BEFORE, bringing all sorts of presents and food to it for a\nlong anterior period, and paying every kind of worship and respect to\nit. The same with the bull and the ox. At the festival of the Bouphonia,\nin some of the cities of Greece as I have already mentioned, the actual\nbull sacrificed was the handsomest and most carefully nurtured that\ncould be obtained; it was crowned with flowers and led in procession\nwith every mark of reverence and worship. And when--as I have already\npointed out--at the great Spring festival, instead of a bull or a goat\nor a ram, a HUMAN victim was immolated, it was a custom (which can be\ntraced very widely over the world) to feed and indulge and honor the\nvictim to the last degree for a WHOLE YEAR before the final ceremony,\narraying him often as a king and placing a crown upon his head, by way\nof acknowledgment of the noble and necessary work he was doing for the\ngeneral good.\n\nWhat a touching and beautiful ceremony was that--belonging especially\nto the North of Syria, and lands where the pine is so beneficent and\nbeloved a tree--the mourning ceremony of the death and burial of Attis!\nwhen a pine-tree, felled by the axe, was hollowed out, and in the hollow\nan image (often itself carved out of pinewood) of the young Attis was\nplaced. Could any symbolism express more tenderly the idea that the\nglorious youth--who represented Spring, too soon slain by the rude tusk\nof Winter--was himself the very human soul of the pine-tree? (1) At some\nearlier period, no doubt, a real youth had been sacrificed and his body\nbound within the pine; but now it was deemed sufficient for the maidens\nto sing their wild songs of lamentation; and for the priests and male\nenthusiasts to cut and gash themselves with knives, or to sacrifice\n(as they did) to the Earth-mother the precious blood offering of their\nvirile organs--symbols of fertility in return for the promised and\nexpected renewal of Nature and the crops in the coming Spring. For\nthe ceremony, as we have already seen, did not end with death and\nlamentation, but led on, perfectly naturally, after a day or two to a\nfestival of resurrection, when it was discovered--just as in the case of\nOsiris--that the pine-tree coffin was empty, and the immortal life had\nflown. How strange the similarity and parallelism of all these things to\nthe story of Jesus in the Gospels--the sacrifice of a life made in order\nto bring salvation to men and expiation of sins, the crowning of the\nvictim, and arraying in royal attire, the scourging and the mockery, the\nbinding or nailing to a tree, the tears of Mary, and the resurrection\nand the empty coffin!--or how not at all strange when we consider in\nwhat numerous forms and among how many peoples, this same parable\nand ritual had as a matter of fact been celebrated, and how it had\nultimately come down to bring its message of redemption into a somewhat\nobscure Syrian city, in the special shape with which we are familiar.\n\n (1) See Julius Firmicus, who says (De Errore, c. 28): \"in sacris\nPhrygiis, quae Matris deum dicunt, per annos singulos arbor pinea\ncaeditur, et in media arbore simulacrum uvenis subligatur. In Isiacis\nsacris de pinea arbore caeditur truncus; hujus trunci media pars\nsubtiliter excavatur, illis de segminibus factum idolum Osiridis\nsepelitur. In Prosperpinae sacris caesa arbor in effigiem virginis\nformaraque componitur, et cum intra civitatem fuerit illata, quadraginta\nnoctibus piangitur, quadragesima vero nocte comburitur.\"\n\n\nThough the parable or legend in its special Christian form bears with it\nthe consciousness of the presence of beings whom we may call gods, it is\nimportant to remember that in many or most of its earlier forms, though\nit dealt in 'spirits'--the spirit of the corn, or the spirit of the\nSpring, or the spirits of the rain and the thunder, or the spirits of\ntotem-animals--it had not yet quite risen to the idea of gods. It\nhad not risen to the conception of eternal deities sitting apart and\ngoverning the world in solemn conclave--as from the slopes of Olympus\nor the recesses of the Christian Heaven. It belonged, in fact, in its\ninception, to the age of Magic. The creed of Sin and Sacrifice, or of\nGuilt and Expiation--whatever we like to call it--was evolved perfectly\nnaturally out of the human mind when brought face to face with Life\nand Nature) at some early stage of its self-consciousness. It was\nessentially the result of man's deep, original and instinctive sense of\nsolidarity with Nature, now denied and belied and to some degree\nbroken up by the growth and conscious insistence of the self-regarding\nimpulses. It was the consciousness of disharmony and disunity,\ncausing men to feel all the more poignantly the desire and the need of\nreconciliation. It was a realization of union made clear by its very\nloss. It assumed of course, in a subconscious way as I have already\nindicated, that the external world was the HABITAT of a mind or minds\nsimilar to man's own; but THAT being granted, it is evident that the\nparticular theories current in this or that place about the nature of\nthe world--the theories, as we should say, of science or theology--did\nnot alter the general outlines of the creed; they only colored its\ndetails and gave its ritual different dramatic settings. The mental\nattitudes, for instance, of Abraham sacrificing the ram, or of the\nSiberian angakout slaughtering a totem-bear, or of a modern and pious\nChristian contemplating the Saviour on the Cross are really almost\nexactly the same. I mention this because in tracing the origins or the\nevolution of religions it is important to distinguish clearly what is\nessential and universal from that which is merely local and temporary.\nSome people, no doubt, would be shocked at the comparisons just made;\nbut surely it is much more inspiriting and encouraging to think that\nwhatever progress HAS been made in the religious outlook of the world\nhas come about through the gradual mental growth and consent of the\npeoples, rather than through some unique and miraculous event of a\nrather arbitrary and unexplained character--which indeed might never be\nrepeated, and concerning which it would perhaps be impious to suggest\nthat it SHOULD be repeated.\n\nThe consciousness then of Sin (or of alienation from the life of the\nwhole), and of restoration or redemption through Sacrifice, seems to\nhave disclosed itself in the human race in very far-back times, and\nto have symbolized itself in some most ancient rituals; and if we are\nshocked sometimes at the barbarities which accompanied those rituals,\nyet we must allow that these barbarities show how intensely the early\npeople felt the solemnity and importance of the whole matter; and we\nmust allow too that the barbarities did sear and burn themselves into\nrude and ignorant minds with the sense of the NEED of Sacrifice, and\nwith a result perhaps which could not have been compassed in any other\nway.\n\nFor after all we see now that sacrifice is of the very essence of social\nlife. \"It is expedient that ONE man should die for the people\"; and not\nonly that one man should actually die, but (what is far more important)\nthat each man should be ready and WILLING to die in that cause, when\nthe occasion and the need arises. Taken in its larger meanings and\nimplications Sacrifice, as conceived in the ancient world, was a\nperfectly reasonable thing. It SHOULD pervade modern life more than it\ndoes. All we have or enjoy flows from, or is implicated with, pain\nand suffering in others, and--if there is any justice in Nature or\nHumanity--it demands an equivalent readiness to suffer on our part. If\nChristianity has any real essence, that essence is perhaps expressed\nin some such ritual or practice of Sacrifice, and we see that the dim\nbeginnings of this idea date from the far-back customs of savages coming\ndown from a time anterior to all recorded history.\n\n\n\n\nVIII. PAGAN INITIATIONS AND THE SECOND BIRTH\n\nWe have suggested in the last chapter how the conceptions of Sin and\nSacrifice coming down to us from an extremely remote past, and\nembodied among the various peoples of the world sometimes in crude and\nbloodthirsty rites, sometimes in symbols and rituals of a gentler and\nmore gracious character, descended at last into Christianity and became\na part of its creed and of the creed of the modern world. On the whole\nperhaps we may trace a slow amelioration in this process and may flatter\nourselves that the Christian centuries exhibit a more philosophical\nunderstanding of what Sin is, and a more humane conception of what\nSacrifice SHOULD be, than the centuries preceding. But I fear that any\nvery decided statement or sweeping generalization to that effect would\nbe--to say the least--rash. Perhaps there IS a very slow amelioration;\nbut the briefest glance at the history of the Christian churches--the\nhorrible rancours and revenges of the clergy and the sects against\neach other in the fourth and fifth centuries A.D., the heresy-hunting\ncrusades at Beziers and other places and the massacres of the Albigenses\nin the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the witch-findings and\nburnings of the sixteenth and seventeenth, the hideous science-urged and\nbishop-blessed warfare of the twentieth--horrors fully as great as any\nwe can charge to the account of the Aztecs or the Babylonians--must give\nus pause. Nor must we forget that if there is by chance a substantial\namelioration in our modern outlook with regard to these matters the same\nhad begun already before the advent of Christianity and can by no means\nbe ascribed to any miraculous influence of that religion. Abraham was\nprompted to slay a ram as a substitute for his son, long before the\nChristians were thought of; the rather savage Artemis of the old Greek\nrites was (according to Pausanias) (1) honored by the yearly sacrifice\nof a perfect boy and girl, but later it was deemed sufficient to draw a\nknife across their throats as a symbol, with the result of spilling only\na few drops of their blood, or to flog the boys (with the same result)\nupon her altar. Among the Khonds in old days many victims (meriahs) were\nsacrificed to the gods, \"but in time the man was replaced by a horse,\nthe horse by a bull, the bull by a ram, the ram by a kid, the kid by\nfowls, and the fowls by many flowers.\" (2) At one time, according to the\nYajur-Veda, there was a festival at which one hundred and twenty-five\nvictims, men and women, boys and girls, were sacrificed; \"but reform\nsupervened, and now the victims were bound as before to the stake,\nbut afterwards amid litanies to the immolated (god) Narayana, the\nsacrificing priest brandished a knife and--severed the bonds of the\ncaptives.\" (3) At the Athenian festival of the Thargelia, to which I\nreferred in the last chapter, it appears that the victims, in later\ntimes, instead of being slain, were tossed from a height into the sea,\nand after being rescued were then simply banished; while at Leucatas a\nsimilar festival the fall of the victim was graciously broken by tying\nfeathers and even living birds to his body. (4)\n\n (1) vii. 19, and iii. 8, 16.\n\n (2) Primitive Folk, by Elie Reclus (Contemp. Science Series), p.\n330.\n\n (3) Ibid.\n\n (4) Muller's Dorians Book II, ch. ii, par. 10.\n\n\nWith the lapse of time and the general progress of mankind, we may,\nI think, perceive some such slow ameliorations in the matter of the\nbrutality and superstition of the old religions. How far any later\nameliorations were due to the direct influence of Christianity might\nbe a difficult question; but what I think we can clearly see--and what\nespecially interests us here--is that in respect to its main religious\nideas, and the matter underlying them (exclusive of the MANNER of\ntheir treatment, which necessarily has varied among different peoples)\nChristianity is of one piece with the earlier pagan creeds and is\nfor the most part a re-statement and renewed expression of world-wide\ndoctrines whose first genesis is lost in the haze of the past, beyond\nall recorded history.\n\nI have illustrated this view with regard to the doctrine of Sin and\nSacrifice. Let us take two or three other illustrations. Let us take the\ndoctrine of Re-birth or Regeneration. The first few verses of St. John's\nGospel are occupied with the subject of salvation through rebirth or\nregeneration. \"Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of\nGod.\"... \"Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter\ninto the kingdom of God.\" Our Baptismal Service begins by saying that\n\"forasmuch as all men are conceived and born in sin; and that our\nSaviour Christ saith, None can enter into the kingdom of God except he\nbe regenerate and born anew of water and the Holy Ghost\"; therefore it\nis desirable that this child should be baptized, \"received into Christ's\nHoly Church, and be made a lively member of the same.\" That, is to say,\nthere is one birth, after the flesh, but a second birth is necessary, a\nbirth after the Spirit and into the Church of Christ. Our Confirmation\nService is simply a service repeating and confirming these views, at\nan age (fourteen to sixteen or so) when the boy or girl is capable of\nunderstanding what is being done.\n\nBut our Baptismal and Confirmation ceremonies combined are clearly\nthe exact correspondence and parallel of the old pagan ceremonies of\nInitiation, which are or have been observed in almost every primitive\ntribe over the world. \"The rite of the second birth,\" says Jane\nHarrison, (1) \"is widespread, universal, over half the savage world.\nWith the savage to be twice-born is the rule. By his first birth he\ncomes into the world; by his second he is born into his tribe. At his\nfirst birth he belongs to his mother and the women-folk; at his second\nhe becomes a full-fledged man and passes into the society of the\nwarriors of his tribe.\"... \"These rites are very various, but they all\npoint to one moral, that the former things are passed away and that\nthe new-born man has entered upon a new life. Simplest of all, and most\ninstructive, is the rite practised by the Kikuyu tribe of British East\nAfrica, who require that every boy, just before circumcision, must be\nborn again. The mother stands up with the boy crouching at her feet; she\npretends to go through all the labour pains, and the boy on being reborn\ncries like a babe and is washed.\" (2)\n\n (1) Ancient Art and Ritual, p. 104.\n\n (2) See also Themis, p. 21.\n\n\nLet us pause for a moment. An Initiate is of course one who \"enters\nin.\" He enters into the Tribe; he enters into the revelation of certain\nMysteries; he becomes an associate of a certain Totem, a certain God; a\nmember of a new Society, or Church--a church of Mithra, or Dionysus or\nChrist. To do any of these things he must be born again; he must die\nto the old life; he must pass through ceremonials which symbolize the\nchange. One of these ceremonials is washing. As the new-born babe is\nwashed, so must the new-born initiate be washed; and as by primitive\nman (and not without reason) BLOOD was considered the most vital and\nregenerative of fluids, the very elixir of life, so in earliest times\nit was common to wash the initiate with blood. If the initiate had to be\nborn anew, it would seem reasonable to suppose that he must first die.\nSo, not unfrequently, he was wounded, or scourged, and baptized with his\nown blood, or, in cases, one of the candidates was really killed and his\nblood used as a substitute for the blood of the others. No doubt HUMAN\nsacrifice attended the earliest initiations. But later it was sufficient\nto be half-drowned in the blood of a Bull as in the Mithra cult, (1)\nor 'washed in the blood of the Lamb' as in the Christian phraseology.\nFinally, with a growing sense of decency and aesthetic perception\namong the various peoples, washing with pure water came in the\ninitiation-ceremonies to take the place of blood; and our baptismal\nservice has reduced the ceremony to a mere sprinkling with water. (2)\n\n (1) See ch. iii.\n\n (2) For the virtue supposed to reside in blood see Westermarck's\nMoral Ideas, Ch. 46.\n\n\nTo continue the quotation from Miss Harrison: \"More often the new birth\nis stimulated, or imagined, as a death and a resurrection, either of\nthe boys themselves or of some one else in their presence. Thus at\ninitiation among some tribes of South-east Australia, when the boys are\nassembled an old man dressed in stringy bark-fibre lies down in a\ngrave. He is covered up lightly with sticks and earth, and the grave is\nsmoothed over. The buried man holds in his hand a small bush which seems\nto be growing from the ground, and other bushes are stuck in the ground\nround about. The novices are then brought to the edge of the grave and\na song is sung. Gradually, as the song goes on, the bush held by the\nburied man begins to quiver. It moves more and more, and bit by bit the\nman himself starts up from the grave.\"\n\nStrange in our own Baptismal Service and just before the actual\nchristening we read these words, \"Then shall the Priest say: O merciful\nGod, grant that old Adam in this child may be so BURIED that the new\nman may be raised up in him: grant that all carnal affections may die\nin him, and that all things belonging to the Spirit may live and grow\nin him!\" Can we doubt that the Australian medicine-man, standing at the\ngraveside of the re-arisen old black-fellow, pointed the same moral to\nthe young initiates as the priest does to-day to those assembled before\nhim in church--for indeed we know that among savage tribes initiations\nhave always been before all things the occasions of moral and social\nteaching? Can we doubt that he said, in substance if not in actual\nwords: \"As this man has arisen from the grave, so you must also arise\nfrom your old childish life of amusement and self-gratification and,\nENTER INTO the life of the tribe, the life of the Spirit of the tribe.\"\n\"In totemistic societies,\" to quote Miss Harrison again, \"and in the\nanimal secret societies that seem to grow out of them, the novice is\nborn again as THE SACRED ANIMAL. Thus among the Carrier Indians (1)\nwhen a man wants to become a Lulem or 'Bear,' however cold the season\nhe tears off his clothes, puts on a bear-skin and dashes into the\nwoods, where he will stay for three or four days. Every night his\nfellow-villagers will go out in search parties to find him. They cry out\nYi! Kelulem (come on, Bear), and he answers with angry growls. Usually\nthey fail to find him, but he comes back at last himself. He is met, and\nconducted to the ceremonial lodge, and there in company with the rest\nof the Bears dances solemnly his first appearance. Disappearance and\nreappearance is as common a rite in initiation as stimulated killing and\nresurrection, and has the same object. Both are rites of transition,\nof passing from one to another.\" In the Christian ceremonies the boy or\ngirl puts away childish things and puts on the new man, but instead\nof putting on a bear-skin he puts on Christ. There is not so much\ndifference as may appear on the surface. To be identified with your\nTotem is to be identified with the sacred being who watches over your\ntribe, who has given his life for your tribe; it is to be born again,\nto be washed not only with water but with the Holy Spirit of all your\nfellows. To be baptized into Christ ought to mean to be regenerated\nin the Holy Spirit of all humanity; and no doubt in cases it does mean\nthis, but too often unfortunately it has only amounted to a pretence of\nreligious sanction given to the meanest and bitterest quarrels of the\nChurches and the States.\n\n (1) Golden Bough, Section 2, III, p. 438.\n\n\nThis idea of a New Birth at initiation explains the prevalent pagan\ncustom of subjecting the initiates to serious ordeals, often painful and\neven dangerous. If one is to be born again, obviously one must be ready\nto face death; the one thing cannot be without the other. One must be\nable to endure pain, like the Red Indian braves; to go long periods\nfasting and without food or drink, like the choupan among the Western\nInoits--who, wanders for whole nights over the ice-fields under the\nmoon, scantily clothed and braving the intense cold; to overcome the\nvery fear of death and danger, like the Australian novices who, at first\nterrified by the sound of the bull-roarer and threats of fire and the\nknife, learn finally to cast their fears away. (1) By so doing one\nputs off the old childish things, and qualifies oneself by firmness\nand courage to become a worthy member of the society into which one\nis called. (2) The rules of social life are taught--the duty to one's\ntribe, and to oneself, truth-speaking, defence of women and children,\nthe care of cattle, the meaning of sex and marriage, and even the\nmysteries of such religious ideas and rudimentary science as the tribe\npossesses. And by so doing one really enters into a new life. Things of\nthe spiritual world begin to dawn. Julius Firmicus, in describing\nthe mysteries of the resurrection of Osiris, (3) says that when the\nworshipers had satiated themselves with lamentations over the death\nof the god then the priest would go round anointing them with oil and\nwhispering, \"Be of good cheer, O Neophytes of the new-arisen God, for to\nus too from our pains shall come salvation.\" (4)\n\n (1) According to accounts of the Wiradthuri tribe of Western\nAustralia, in their initiations, the lads were frightened by a large\nfire being lighted near them, and hearing the awful sound of the\nbull-roarers, while they were told that Dhuramoolan was about to burn\nthem; the legend being that Dhuramoolan, a powerful being, whose voice\nsounded like thunder, would take the boys into the bush and instruct\nthem in all the laws, traditions and customs of the community. So he\npretended that he always killed the boys, cut them up, and burnt them to\nashes, after which he moulded the ashes into human shape, and restored\nthem to life as new beings. (See R. H. Matthews, \"The Wiradthuri\ntribes,\" Journal Anthrop. Inst., vol. xxv, 1896, pp. 297 sq.)\n\n (2) See Catlin's North-American Indians, vol. i, for initiations\nand ordeals among the Mandans.\n\n (3) De Errore, c. 22.\n\n (4) [gr Qarreite, mustai ton qeou seswsmenou,]\n[gr Estai gar hmin ek ponwn swthria.]\n\n\nIt would seem that at some very early time in the history of tribal and\npriestly initiations an attempt was made to impress upon the neophytes\nthe existence and over-shadowing presence of spiritual and ghostly\nbeings. Perhaps the pains endured in the various ordeals, the long\nfastings, the silences in the depth of the forests or on the mountains\nor among the ice-floes, helped to rouse the visionary faculty.\nThe developments of this faculty among the black and colored\npeoples--East-Indian, Burmese, African, American-Indian, etc.--are well\nknown. Miss Alice Fletcher, who lived among the Omaha Indians for thirty\nyears, gives a most interesting account (1) of the general philosophy\nof that people and their rites of initiation. \"The Omahas regard all\nanimate and inanimate forms, all phenomena, as pervaded by a common\nlife, which was continuous with and similar to the will-power they were\nconscious of in themselves. This mysterious power in all things they\ncalled Wakonda, and through it all things were related to man and\nto each other. In the idea of the continuity of life a relation was\nmaintained between the seen and the unseen, the dead and the living,\nand also between the fragment of anything and its entirety.\" (2) Thus an\nOmaha novice might at any time seek to obtain Wakonda by what was called\nTHE RITE OF THE VISION. He would go out alone, fast, chant incantations,\nand finally fall into a trance (much resembling what in modern times has\nbeen called COSMIC CONSCIOUSNESS) in which he would perceive the inner\nrelations of all things and the solidarity of the least object with the\nrest of the universe.\n\n (1) Summarized in Themis, pp. 68-71.\n\n (2) A. C. Fletcher, The Significance of the Scalp-lock, Journal\nof Anthropological Studies, xxvii (1897-8), p. 436.\n\n\nAnother rite in connection with initiation, and common all over\nthe pagan world--in Greece, America, Africa, Australia, New Mexico,\netc.--was the daubing of the novice all over with clay or chalk or even\ndung, and then after a while removing the same. (1) The novice must have\nlooked a sufficiently ugly and uncomfortable object in this state; but\nlater, when he was thoroughly WASHED, the ceremony must have afforded a\nthrilling illustration of the idea of a new birth, and one which would\ndwell in the minds of the spectators. When the daubing was done as not\ninfrequently happened with white clay or gypsum, and the ritual took\nplace at night, it can easily be imagined that the figures of young men\nand boys moving about in the darkness would lend support to the idea\nthat they were spirits belonging to some intermediate world--who had\nalready passed through death and were now waiting for their second birth\non earth (or into the tribe) which would be signalized by their thorough\nand ceremonial washing. It will be remembered that Herodotus (viii)\ngives a circumstantial account of how the Phocians in a battle with the\nThessalians smeared six hundred of their bravest warriors with white\nclay so that, looking like supernatural beings, and falling upon the\nThessalians by night, they terrified the latter and put them to instant\nflight.\n\n (1) See A. Lang's Myth, Ritual and Religion, i, 274 sq.\n\n\nSuch then--though only very scantily described--were some of the rites\nof Initiation and Second Birth celebrated in the old Pagan world. The\nsubject is far too large for adequate treatment within the present\nlimits; but even so we cannot but be struck by the appropriateness in\nmany cases of the teaching thus given to the young, the concreteness of\nthe illustrations, the effectiveness of the symbols used, the dramatic\ncharacter of the rites, the strong enforcement of lessons on the nature\nand duties of the life into which the candidates were about to enter.\nChristianity followed on, and inherited these traditions, but one feels\nthat in its ceremonies of Baptism and Confirmation, which of course\ncorrespond to the Pagan Initiations, it falls short of the latter. Its\nceremonies (certainly as we have them to-day in Protestant countries)\nare of a very milk-and-watery character; all allusion to and teaching on\nthe immensely important subject of Sex is omitted, the details of social\nand industrial morality are passed by, and instruction is limited to a\nfew rather commonplace lessons in general morality and religion.\n\n\nIt may be appropriate here, before leaving the subject of the Second\nBirth, to inquire how it has come about that this doctrine--so remote\nand metaphysical as it might appear--has been taken up and embodied in\ntheir creeds and rituals by quite PRIMITIVE people all over the world,\nto such a degree indeed that it has ultimately been adopted and built\ninto the foundations of the latter and more intellectual religions, like\nHinduism, Mithraism, and the Egyptian and Christian cults. I think the\nanswer to this question must be found in the now-familiar fact that the\nearliest peoples felt themselves so much a part of Nature and the animal\nand vegetable world around them that (whenever they thought about these\nmatters at all) they never for a moment doubted that the things which\nwere happening all round them in the external world were also happening\nwithin themselves. They saw the Sun, overclouded and nigh to death in\nwinter, come to its birth again each year; they saw the Vegetation\nshoot forth anew in spring--the revival of the spirit of the Earth; the\nendless breeding of the Animals, the strange transformations of Worms\nand Insects; the obviously new life taken on by boys and girls at\npuberty; the same at a later age when the novice was transformed into\nthe medicine-man--the choupan into the angakok among the Esquimaux, the\nDacotah youth into the wakan among the Red Indians; and they felt in\ntheir sub-conscious way the same everlasting forces of rebirth and\ntransformation working within themselves. In some of the Greek Mysteries\nthe newly admitted Initiates were fed for some time after on milk only\n\"as though we were being born again.\" (See Sallustius, quoted by Gilbert\nMurray.) When sub-conscious knowledge began to glimmer into direct\nconsciousness one of the first aspects (and no doubt one of the truest)\nunder which people saw life was just thus: as a series of rebirths and\ntransformations. (1) The most modern science, I need hardly say, in\nbiology as well as in chemistry and the field of inorganic Nature,\nsupports that view. The savage in earliest times FELT the truth of some\nthings which we to-day are only beginning intellectually to perceive and\nanalyze.\n\n (1) The fervent and widespread belief in animal metamorphoses\namong early peoples is well known.\n\n\nChristianity adopted and absorbed--as it was bound to do--this\nworld-wide doctrine of the second birth. Passing over its physiological\nand biological applications, it gave to it a fine spiritual\nsignificance--or rather it insisted especially on its spiritual\nsignificance, which (as we have seen) had been widely recognized before.\nOnly--as I suppose must happen with all local religions--it narrowed the\napplication and outlook of the doctrine down to a special case--\"As\nin Adam all die, so in CHRIST shall all be made alive.\" The Universal\nSpirit which can give rebirth and salvation to EVERY child of man to\nwhom it comes, was offered only under a very special form--that of Jesus\nChrist. (1) In this respect it was no better than the religions\nwhich preceded it. In some respects--that is, where it was especially\nfanatical, blinkered, and hostile to other sects--it was WORSE. But\nto those who perceive that the Great Spirit may bring new birth and\nsalvation to some under the form of Osiris, equally well as to others\nunder the form of Jesus, or again to some under the form of a Siberian\ntotem-Bear equally as to others under the form of Osiris, these\nquestionings and narrowings fall away as of no importance. We in this\nlatter day can see the main thing, namely that Christianity was and is\njust one phase of a world-old religion, slowly perhaps expanding its\nscope, but whose chief attitudes and orientations have been the same\nthrough the centuries.\n\n (1) The same happened with regard to another great Pagan doctrine\n(to which I have just alluded), the doctrine of transformations and\nmetamorphoses; and whereas the pagans believed in these things, as the\ncommon and possible heritage of EVERY man, the Christians only allowed\nthemselves to entertain the idea in the special and unique instance of\nthe Transfiguration of Christ.\n\n\nMany other illustrations might be taken of the truth of this view, but\nI will confine myself to two or three more. There is the instance of the\nEucharist and its exceedingly widespread celebration (under very various\nforms) among the pagans all over the world--as well as among Christians.\nI have already said enough on this subject, and need not delay over it.\nBy partaking of the sacramental meal, even in its wildest and crudest\nshapes, as in the mysteries of Dionysus, one was identified with and\nunited to the god; in its milder and more spiritual aspects as in the\nMithraic, Egyptian, Hindu and Christian cults, one passed behind the\nveil of maya and this ever-changing world, and entered into the region\nof divine peace and power. (1)\n\n\n (1) Baring Gould in his Orig. Relig. Belief, I. 401,\nsays:--\"Among the ancient Hindus Soma was a chief deity; he is called\nthe Giver of Life and Health.... He became incarnate among men, was\ntaken by them and slain, and brayed in a mortar (a god of corn and wine\napparently). But he rose in flame to heaven to be 'the Benefactor of the\nWorld' and the 'Mediator between God and Man!' Through communion with\nhim in his sacrifice, man (who partook of this god) has an assurance of\nimmortality, for by that sacrament he obtains union with his divinity.\"\n\n\nOr again the doctrine of the Saviour. That also is one on which I need\nnot add much to what has been said already. The number of pagan deities\n(mostly virgin-born and done to death in some way or other in their\nefforts to save mankind) is so great (1) as to be difficult to keep\naccount of. The god Krishna in India, the god Indra in Nepaul and\nThibet, spilt their blood for the salvation of men; Buddha said,\naccording to Max Muller, (2) \"Let all the sins that were in the world\nfall on me, that the world may be delivered\"; the Chinese Tien, the Holy\nOne--\"one with God and existing with him from all eternity\"--died to\nsave the world; the Egyptian Osiris was called Saviour, so was Horus;\nso was the Persian Mithras; so was the Greek Hercules who overcame Death\nthough his body was consumed in the burning garment of mortality, out\nof which he rose into heaven. So also was the Phrygian Attis called\nSaviour, and the Syrian Tammuz or Adonis likewise--both of whom, as we\nhave seen, were nailed or tied to a tree, and afterwards rose again\nfrom their biers, or coffins. Prometheus, the greatest and earliest\nbenefactor of the human race, was NAILED BY THE HANDS and feet, and with\narms extended, to the rocks of Mount Caucasus. Bacchus or Dionysus,\nborn of the virgin Semele to be the Liberator of mankind (Dionysus\nEleutherios as he was called), was torn to pieces, not unlike Osiris.\nEven in far Mexico Quetzalcoatl, the Saviour, was born of a virgin, was\ntempted, and fasted forty days, was done to death, and his second coming\nlooked for so eagerly that (as is well known) when Cortes appeared, the\nMexicans, poor things, greeted HIM as the returning god! (3) In Peru\nand among the American Indians, North and South of the Equator, similar\nlegends are, or were, to be found.\n\n (1) See for a considerable list Doane's Bible Myths, ch. xx.\n\n (2) Hist. Sanskrit Literature, p. 80.\n\n (3) See Kingsborough, Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi.\n\n\nBriefly sketched as all this is, it is enough to prove quite abundantly\nthat the doctrine of the Saviour is world-wide and world-old, and that\nChristianity merely appropriated the same and (as the other cults did)\ngave it a special color. Probably the wide range of this doctrine would\nhave been far better and more generally known, had not the Christian\nChurch, all through, made the greatest of efforts and taken the greatest\nprecautions to extinguish and snuff out all evidence of pagan claims on\nthe subject. There is much to show that the early Church took this line\nwith regard to pre-Christian saviours; (1) and in later times the same\npolicy is remarkably illustrated by the treatment in the sixteenth\ncentury of the writings of Sahagun the Spanish missionary--to whose work\nI have already referred. Sahagun was a wonderfully broad-minded and fine\nman who, while he did not conceal the barbarities of the Aztec religion,\nwas truthful enough to point out redeeming traits in the manners and\ncustoms of the people and some resemblances to Christian doctrine and\npractice. This infuriated the bigoted Catholics of the newly formed\nMexican Church. They purloined the manuscripts of Sahagun's Historia and\nscattered and hid them about the country, and it was only after infinite\nlabor and an appeal to the Spanish Court that he got them together\nagain. Finally, at the age of eighty, having translated them into\nSpanish (from the original Mexican) he sent them in two big volumes home\nto Spain for safety; but there almost immediately THEY DISAPPEARED, and\ncould not be found! It was only after TWO CENTURIES that they ultimately\nturned up (1790) in a Convent at Tolosa in Navarre. Lord Kingsborough\npublished them in England in 1830.\n\n (1) See Tertullian's Apologia, c. 16; Ad Nationes, c. xii.\n\n\nI have thus dwelt upon several of the main doctrines of\nChristianity--namely, those of Sin and Sacrifice, the Eucharist, the\nSaviour, the Second Birth, and Transfiguration--as showing that they are\nby no means unique in our religion, but were common to nearly all the\nreligions of the ancient world. The list might be much further extended,\nbut there is no need to delay over a subject which is now very generally\nunderstood. I will, however, devote a page or two to one instance, which\nI think is very remarkable, and full of deep suggestion.\n\nThere is no doctrine in Christianity which is more reverenced by the\nadherents of that religion, or held in higher estimation, than that God\nsacrificed his only Son for the salvation of the world; also that since\nthe Son was not only of like nature but of the SAME nature with the\nFather, and equal to him as being the second Person of the Divine\nTrinity, the sacrifice amounted to an immolation of Himself for the good\nof mankind. The doctrine is so mystical, so remote, and in a sense so\nabsurd and impossible, that it has been a favorite mark through the\ncenturies for the ridicule of the scoffers and enemies of the Church;\nand here, it might easily be thought, is a belief which--whether it be\nconsidered glorious or whether contemptible--is at any rate unique, and\npeculiar to that Church.\n\nAnd yet the extraordinary fact is that a similar belief ranges all\nthrough the ancient religions, and can be traced back to the earliest\ntimes. The word host which is used in the Catholic Mass for the bread\nand wine on the Altar, supposed to be the transubstantiated body\nand blood of Christ, is from the Latin Hostia which the dictionary\ninterprets as \"an animal slain in sacrifice, a sin-offering.\" It takes\nus far far back to the Totem stage of folk-life, when the tribe, as I\nhave already explained, crowned a victim-bull or bear or other animal\nwith flowers, and honoring it with every offering of food and worship,\nsacrificed the victim to the Totem spirit of the tribe, and consumed it\nin an Eucharistic feast--the medicine-man or priest who conducted the\nritual wearing a skin of the same beast as a sign that he represented\nthe Totem-divinity, taking part in the sacrifice of 'himself to\nhimself.' It reminds us of the Khonds of Bengal sacrificing their\nmeriahs crowned and decorated as gods and goddesses; of the Aztecs doing\nthe same; of Quetzalcoatl pricking his elbows and fingers so as to draw\nblood, which he offered on his own altar; or of Odin hanging by his own\ndesire upon a tree. \"I know I was hanged upon a tree shaken by the winds\nfor nine long nights. I was transfixed by a spear; I was moved to Odin,\nmyself to myself.\" And so on. The instances are endless. \"I am the\noblation,\" says the Lord Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita, (1) \"I am the\nsacrifice, I the ancestral offering.\" \"In the truly orthodox conception\nof sacrifice,\" says Elie Reclus, (2) \"the consecrated offering, be it\nman, woman or virgin, lamb or heifer, cock or dove, represents THE DEITY\nHIMSELF.... Brahma is the 'imperishable sacrifice'; Indra, Soma, Hari\nand the other gods, became incarnate in animals to the sole end that\nthey might be immolated. Perusha, the Universal Being, caused himself to\nbe slain by the Immortals, and from his substance were born the birds of\nthe air, wild and domestic animals, the offerings of butter and curds.\nThe world, declared the Rishis, is a series of sacrifices disclosing\nother sacrifices. To stop them would be to suspend the life of Nature.\nThe god Siva, to whom the Tipperahs of Bengal are supposed to have\nsacrificed as many as a thousand human victims a year, said to the\nBrahamins: 'It is I that am the actual offering; it is I that you\nbutcher upon my altars.'\"\n\n (1) Ch. ix, v. 16.\n\n (2) Primitive Folk, ch. vi.\n\n\nIt was in allusion to this doctrine that R. W. Emerson, paraphrasing the\nKatha-Upanishad, wrote that immortal verse of his:--\n\n     If the red slayer thinks he slays,\n          Or the slain thinks he is slain,\n     They know not well the subtle ways\n          I take, and pass, and turn again.\n\n\nI say it is an astonishing thing to think and realize that this profound\nand mystic doctrine of the eternal sacrifice of Himself, ordained by\nthe Great Spirit for the creation and salvation of the world--a doctrine\nwhich has attracted and fascinated many of the great thinkers and nobler\nminds of Europe, which has also inspired the religious teachings of\nthe Indian sages and to a less philosophical degree the writings of the\nChristian Saints--should have been seized in its general outline and\nessence by rude and primitive people before the dawn of history, and\nembodied in their rites and ceremonials. What is the explanation of this\nfact?\n\nIt is very puzzling. The whole subject is puzzling. The world-wide\nadoption of similar creeds and rituals (and, we may add, legends and\nfairy tales) among early peoples, and in far-sundered places and times\nis so remarkable that it has given the students of these subjects\n'furiously to think' (1)--yet for the most part without great success in\nthe way of finding a solution. The supposition that (1) the creed, rite\nor legend in question has sprung up, so to speak, accidentally, in one\nplace, and then has travelled (owing to some inherent plausibility) over\nthe rest of the world, is of course one that commends itself readily at\nfirst; but on closer examination the practical difficulties it presents\nare certainly very great. These include the migrations of customs and\nmyths in quite early ages of the earth across trackless oceans and\ncontinents, and between races and peoples absolutely incapable of\nunderstanding each other. And if to avoid these difficulties it is\nassumed that the present human race all proceeds from one original\nstock which radiating from one centre--say in South-Eastern Asia\n(2)--overspread the world, carrying its rites and customs with it, why,\nthen we are compelled to face the difficulty of supposing this radiation\nto have taken place at an enormous time ago (the continents being then\nall more or less conjoined) and at a period when it is doubtful if any\nreligious rites and customs at all existed; not to mention the further\ndifficulty of supposing all the four or five hundred languages now\nexisting to be descended from one common source. The far tradition of\nthe Island of Atlantis seems to afford a possible explanation of the\ncommunity of rites and customs between the Old and New World, and\nthis without assuming in any way that Atlantis (if it existed) was the\noriginal and SOLE cradle of the human race. (3) Anyhow it is clear that\nthese origins of human culture must be of extreme antiquity, and that\nit would not be wise to be put off the track of the investigation of a\npossible common source merely by that fact of antiquity.\n\n (1) See A. Lang's Myth, Ritual and Religion, vol. ii.\n\n (2) See Hastings, Encycl. Religion and Ethics, art. \"Ethnology.\"\n\n (3) E. J. Payne, History of the New World called America (vol. i,\np. 93) says: \"It is certain that Europe and America once formed a single\ncontinent,\" but inroads of the sea \"left a vast island or peninsula\nstretching from Iceland to the Azores--which gradually disappeared.\"\nAlso he speaks (i. 93) of the \"Miocene Bridge\" between Siberia and the\nNew World.\n\n\nA second supposition, however, is (2) that the natural psychological\nevolution of the human mind has in the various times and climes led folk\nof the most diverse surroundings and heredity--and perhaps even sprung\nfrom separate anthropoid stocks--to develop their social and religious\nideas along the same general lines--and that even to the extent of\nexhibiting at times a remarkable similarity in minute details. This is a\ntheory which commends itself greatly to a deeper and more philosophical\nconsideration; but it brings us up point-blank against another most\ndifficult question (which we have already raised), namely, how to\naccount for extremely rude and primitive peoples in the far past, and on\nthe very borderland of the animal life, having been SUSCEPTIBLE to the\ngerms of great religious ideas (such as we have mentioned) and having\nbeen instinctively--though not of course by any process of conscious\nreasoning--moved to express them in symbols and rites and ceremonials,\nand (later no doubt) in myths and legends, which satisfied their\nFEELINGS and sense of fitness--though they may not have known WHY--and\nafterwards were capable of being taken up and embodied in the great\nphilosophical religions.\n\nThis difficulty almost compels us to a view of human knowledge which has\nfound supporters among some able thinkers--the view, namely, that a vast\nstore of knowledge is already contained in the subconscious mind of man\n(and the animals) and only needs the provocation of outer experience\nto bring it to the surface; and that in the second stage of human\npsychology this process of crude and piecemeal externalization is\ntaking place, in preparation for the final or third stage in which the\nknowledge will be re-absorbed and become direct and intuitional on a\nhigh and harmonious plane--something like the present intuition of the\nanimals as we perceive it on the animal plane. However this general\nsubject is one on which I shall touch again, and I do not propose to\ndwell on it at any length now.\n\nThere is a third alternative theory (3)--a combination of (1) and\n(2)--namely, that if one accepts (2) and the idea that at any given\nstage of human development there is a PREDISPOSITION to certain symbols\nand rites belonging to that stage, then it is much more easy to accept\ntheory (1) as an important factor in the spread of such symbols and\nrites; for clearly, then, the smallest germ of a custom or practice,\ntransported from one country or people to another at the right time,\nwould be sufficient to wake the development or growth in question\nand stimulate it into activity. It will be seen, therefore, that the\nimportant point towards the solution of this whole puzzling question is\nthe discussion, of theory (2)--and to this theory, as illustrated by the\nworld-wide myth of the Golden Age, I will now turn.\n\n\n\n\nIX. MYTH OF THE GOLDEN AGE\n\nThe tradition of a \"Golden Age\" is widespread over the world, and it is\nnot necessary to go at any length into the story of the Garden of Eden\nand the other legends which in almost every country illustrate this\ntradition. Without indulging in sentiment on the subject we may hold it\nnot unlikely that the tradition is justified by the remembrance, among\nthe people of every race, of a pre-civilization period of comparative\nharmony and happiness when two things, which to-day we perceive to be\nthe prolific causes of discord and misery, were absent or only weakly\ndeveloped--namely, PROPERTY and SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS. (1)\n\n (1) For a fuller working out of this, see Civilisation: its Cause\nand Cure, by E. Carpenter, ch. i.\n\n\nDuring the first century B.C. there was a great spread of Messianic\nIdeas over the Roman world, and Virgil's 4th Eclogue, commonly called\nthe Messianic Eclogue, reflects very clearly this state of the public\nmind. The expected babe in the poem was to be the son of Octavian\n(Augustus) the first Roman emperor, and a messianic halo surrounded it\nin Virgil's verse. Unfortunately it turned out to be a GIRL! However\nthere is little doubt that Virgil did--in that very sad age of the\nworld, an age of \"misery and massacre,\" and in common with thousands\nof others--look for the coming of a great 'redeemer.' It was only a few\nyears earlier--about B.C. 70--that the great revolt of the shamefully\nmaltreated Roman slaves occurred, and that in revenge six thousand\nprisoners from Spartacus' army were nailed on crosses all the way from\nRome to Capua (150 miles). But long before this Hesiod had recorded a\npast Golden Age when life had been gracious in communal fraternity and\njoyful in peace, when human beings and animals spoke the same language,\nwhen death had followed on sleep, without old age or disease, and after\ndeath men had moved as good daimones or genii over the lands. Pindar,\nthree hundred years after Hesiod, had confirmed the existence of the\nIslands of the Blest, where the good led a blameless, tearless, life.\nPlato the same, (1) with further references to the fabled island of\nAtlantis; the Egyptians believed in a former golden age under the god\nR[a^] to which they looked back with regret and envy; the Persians had\na garden of Eden similar to that of the Hebrews; the Greeks a garden\nof the Hesperides, in which dwelt the serpent whose head was ultimately\ncrushed beneath the heel of Hercules; and so on. The references to a\nsupposed far-back state of peace and happiness are indeed numerous.\n\n (1) See arts. by Margaret Scholes, Socialist Review, Nov. and\nDec. 1912.\n\n\nSo much so that latterly, and partly to explain their prevalence, a\ntheory has been advanced which may be worth while mentioning. It is\ncalled the \"Theory of intra-uterine Blessedness,\" and, remote as it may\nat first appear, it certainly has some claim for attention. The theory\nis that in the minds of mature people there still remain certain vague\nmemories of their pre-natal days in the maternal womb--memories of a\nlife which, though full of growing vigor and vitality, was yet at that\ntime one of absolute harmony with the surroundings, and of perfect peace\nand contentment, spent within the body of the mother--the embryo indeed\nstanding in the same relation to the mother as St. Paul says WE stand to\nGod, \"IN whom we live and move and have our being\"; and that these vague\nmemories of the intra-uterine life in the individual are referred back\nby the mature mind to a past age in the life of the RACE. Though it\nwould not be easy at present to positively confirm this theory, yet one\nmay say that it is neither improbable nor unworthy of consideration;\nalso that it bears a certain likeness to the former ones about the\nEden-gardens, etc. The well-known parallelism of the Individual history\nwith the Race-history, the \"recapitulation\" by the embryo of the\ndevelopment of the race, does in fact afford an additional argument for\nits favorable reception.\n\nThese considerations, and what we have said so often in the foregoing\nchapters about the unity of the Animals (and Early Man) with Nature, and\ntheir instinctive and age-long adjustment to the conditions of the\nworld around them, bring us up hard and fast against the following\nconclusions, which I think we shall find difficult to avoid.\n\nWe all recognize the extraordinary grace and beauty, in their different\nways, of the (wild) animals; and not only their beauty but the extreme\nfitness of their actions and habits to their surroundings--their subtle\nand penetrating Intelligence in fact. Only we do not generally use\nthe word \"Intelligence.\" We use another word (Instinct)--and rightly\nperhaps, because their actions are plainly not the result of definite\nself-conscious reasoning, such as we use, carried out by each\nindividual; but are (as has been abundantly proved by Samuel Butler and\nothers) the systematic expression of experiences gathered up and sorted\nout and handed down from generation to generation in the bosom of the\nrace--an Intelligence in fact, or Insight, of larger subtler scope than\nthe other, and belonging to the tribal or racial Being rather than to\nthe isolated individual--a super-consciousness in fact, ramifying afar\nin space and time.\n\nBut if we allow (as we must) this unity and perfection of nature, and\nthis somewhat cosmic character of the mind, to exist among the Animals,\nwe can hardly refuse to believe that there must have been a period when\nMan, too, hardly as yet differentiated from them, did himself\npossess these same qualities--perhaps even in greater degree than the\nanimals--of grace and beauty of body, perfection of movement and action,\ninstinctive perception and knowledge (of course in limited spheres); and\na period when he possessed above all a sense of unity with his fellows\nand with surrounding Nature which became the ground of a common\nconsciousness between himself and his tribe, similar to that which\nMaeterlinck, in the case of the Bees, calls the Spirit of the Hive. (1)\nIt would be difficult, nay impossible, to suppose that human beings\non their first appearance formed an entire exception in the process of\nevolution, or that they were completely lacking in the very graces and\nfaculties which we so admire in the animals--only of course we see that\n(LIKE the animals) they would not be SELF-conscious in these matters,\nand what perception they had of their relations to each other or to\nthe world around them would be largely inarticulate and\nSUB-conscious--though none the less real for that.\n\n (1) See The Life of the Bee by Maurice Maeterlinck; and for\nnumerous similar cases among other animals, P. Kropotkin's Mutual Aid: a\nfactor in Evolution.\n\n\nLet us then grant this preliminary assumption--and it clearly is not\na large or hazardous one--and what follows? It follows--since to-day\ndiscord is the rule, and Man has certainly lost the grace, both physical\nand mental, of the animals--that at some period a break must have\noccurred in the evolution-process, a discontinuity--similar perhaps to\nthat which occurs in the life of a child at the moment when it is born\ninto the world. Humanity took a new departure; but a departure which for\nthe moment was signalized as a LOSS--the loss of its former harmony and\nself-adjustment. And the cause or accompaniment of this change was the\ngrowth of Self-consciousness. Into the general consciousness of the\ntribe (in relation to its environment) which in fact had constituted\nthe mentality of the animals and of man up to this stage, there now was\nintruded another kind of consciousness, a consciousness centering round\neach little individual self and concerned almost entirely with the\ninterests of the latter. Here was evidently a threat to the continuance\nof the former happy conditions. It was like the appearance of\ninnumerable little ulcers in a human body--a menace which if continued\nwould inevitably lead to the break-up of the body. It meant loss of\ntribal harmony and nature-adjustment. It meant instead of unity a myriad\nconflicting centres; it meant alienation from the spirit of the tribe,\nthe separation of man from man, discord, recrimination, and the fatal\nunfolding of the sense of sin. The process symbolized itself in the\nlegend of the Fall. Man ate of the Tree of the knowledge of good and\nevil. Sometimes people wonder why knowledge of any kind--and especially\nthe knowledge of good and evil--should have brought a curse. But the\nreason is obvious. Into, the placid and harmonious life of the animal\nand human tribes fulfilling their days in obedience to the slow\nevolutions and age-long mandates of nature, Self-consciousness broke\nwith its inconvenient and impossible query: \"How do these arrangements\nsuit ME? Are they good for me, are they evil for me? I want to know. I\nWILL KNOW!\" Evidently knowledge (such knowledge as we understand by\nthe word) only began, and could only begin, by queries relating to the\nlittle local self. There was no other way for it to begin. Knowledge and\nself-consciousness were born, as twins, together. Knowledge therefore\nmeant Sin (1); for self-consciousness meant sin (and it means sin\nto-day). Sin is Separation. That is probably (though disputed) the\netymology of the word--that which sunders. (2) The essence of sin is\none's separation from the whole (the tribe or the god) of which one is\na part. And knowledge--which separates subject from object, and in its\ninception is necessarily occupied with the 'good and evil' of the little\nlocal self, is the great engine of this separation. (Mark! I say nothing\nAGAINST this association of Self-consciousness with 'Sin' (so-called)\nand 'Knowledge' (so-called). The growth of all three together is an\nabsolutely necessary part of human evolution, and to rail against it\nwould be absurd. But we may as well open our eyes and see the fact\nstraight instead of blinking it.) The culmination of the process and the\nfulfilment of the 'curse' we may watch to-day in the towering expansion\nof the self-conscious individualized Intellect--science as the handmaid\nof human Greed devastating the habitable world and destroying its\nunworthy civilization. And the process must go on--necessarily must\ngo on--until Self-consciousness, ceasing its vain quest (vain in both\nsenses) for the separate domination of life, surrenders itself back\nagain into the arms of the Mother-consciousness from which it originally\nsprang--surrenders itself back, not to be merged in nonentity, but to be\naffiliated in loving dependence on and harmony with the cosmic life.\n\n (1) Compare also other myths, like Cupid and Psyche, Lohengrin\netc., in which a fatal curiosity leads to tragedy.\n\n (2) German Sunde, sin, and sonder, separated; Dutch zonde, sin;\nLatin sons, guilty. Not unlikely that the German root Suhn, expiation,\nis connected; Suhn-bock, a scape-goat.\n\n\nAll this I have dealt with in far more detail in Civilization: its\nCause and Cure, and in The Art of Creation; but I have only repeated the\noutline of it as above, because some such outline is necessary for the\nproper ordering and understanding of the points which follow.\n\nWe are not concerned now with the ultimate effects of the 'Fall' of Man\nor with the present-day fulfilment of the Eden-curse. What we want to\nunderstand is how the 'Fall' into self-consciousness led to that great\npanorama of Ritual and Religion which we have very briefly described\nand summarized in the preceding chapters of this book. We want for the\npresent to fix our attention on the COMMENCEMENT of that process by\nwhich man lapsed away from his living community with Nature and his\nfellows into the desert of discord and toil, while the angels of the\nflaming sword closed the gates of Paradise behind him.\n\nIt is evident I think that in that 'golden' stage when man was simply\nthe crown and perfection of the animals--and it is hardly possible\nto refuse the belief in such a stage--he possessed in reality all the\nessentials of Religion. (1) It is not necessary to sentimentalize over\nhim; he was probably raw and crude in his lusts of hunger and of sex;\nhe was certainly ignorant and superstitious; he loved fighting with\nand persecuting 'enemies' (which things of course all religions\nto-day--except perhaps the Buddhist--love to do); he was dominated often\nby unreasoning Fear, and was consequently cruel. Yet he was full of that\nFaith which the animals have to such an admirable degree--unhesitating\nfaith in the inner promptings of his OWN nature; he had the joy which\ncomes of abounding vitality, springing up like a fountain whose outlet\nis free and unhindered; he rejoiced in an untroubled and unbroken\nsense of unity with his Tribe, and in elaborate social and friendly\ninstitutions within its borders; he had a marvelous sense-acuteness\ntowards Nature and a gift in that direction verging towards\n\"second-sight\"; strengthened by a conviction--which had never become\nCONSCIOUS because it had never been QUESTIONED--of his own personal\nrelation to the things outside him, the Earth, the Sky, the Vegetation,\nthe Animals. Of such a Man we get glimpses in the far past--though\nindeed only glimpses, for the simple reason that all our knowledge of\nhim comes through civilized channels; and wherever civilization has\ntouched these early peoples it has already withered and corrupted\nthem, even before it has had the sense to properly observe them. It\nis sufficient, however, just to mention peoples like some of the early\nPacific Islanders, the Zulus and Kafirs of South Africa, the Fans of the\nCongo Region (of whom Winwood Reade (2) speaks so highly), some of the\nMalaysian and Himalayan tribes, the primitive Chinese, and even the\nevidence with regard to the neolithic peoples of Europe, (3) in order to\nshow what I mean.\n\n (1) See S. Reinach, Cults, Myths, etc., introduction: \"The\nprimitive life of humanity, in so far as it is not purely animal, is\nreligious. Religion is the parent stem which has thrown off, one by one,\nart, agriculture, law, morality, politics, etc.\"\n\n (2) Savage Africa, ch. xxxvii.\n\n (3) See Kropotkin's Mutual Aid, ch. iii.\n\n\nPerhaps one of the best ideas of the gulf of difference between the\nsemi-civilized and the quite primal man is given by A. R. Wallace in\nhis Life (Vol. i, p. 288): \"A most unexpected sensation of surprise and\ndelight was my first meeting and living with man in a state of nature\nwith absolute uncontaminated savages! This was on the Uaupes river....\nThey were all going about their own work or pleasure, which had nothing\nto do with the white men or their ways; they walked with the free step\nof the independent forest-dweller... original and self-sustaining as the\nwild animals of the forests, absolutely independent of civilization...\nliving their own lives in their own way, as they had done for countless\ngenerations before America was discovered. Indeed the true denizen of\nthe Amazonian forests, like the forest itself, is unique and not to be\nforgotten.\" Elsewhere (3) Wallace speaks of the quiet, good-natured,\ninoffensive character of these copper-colored peoples, and of their\nquickness of hand and skill, and continues: \"their figures are generally\nsuperb; and I have never felt so much pleasure in gazing at the finest\nstatue as at these living illustrations of the beauty of the human\nform.\"\n\n\n (3) Travels on the Amazon (1853), ch. xvii.\n\n\nThough some of the peoples just mentioned may be said to belong to\ndifferent grades or stages of human evolution and physically some no\ndoubt were far superior to others, yet they mostly exhibit this simple\ngrace of the bodily and mental organism, as well as that closeness of\ntribal solidarity of which I have spoken. The immense antiquity, of\nthe clan organization, as shown by investigations into early marriage,\npoints to the latter conclusion. Travellers among Bushmen, Hottentots,\nFuegians, Esquimaux, Papuans and other peoples--peoples who have been\npushed aside into unfavorable areas by the invasion of more warlike\nand better-equipped races, and who have suffered physically in\nconsequence--confirm this. Kropotkin, speaking of the Hottentots, quotes\nthe German author P. Kolben who travelled among them in 1275 or so. \"He\nknew the Hottentots well and did not pass by their defects in silence,\nbut could not praise their tribal morality highly enough. Their word is\nsacred, he wrote, they know nothing of the corruption and faithless arts\nof Europe. They live in great tranquillity and are seldom at war with\ntheir neighbors, and are all kindness and goodwill to one another.\" (1)\nKropotkin further says: \"Let me remark that when Kolben says 'they are\ncertainly the most friendly, the most liberal and the most benevolent\npeople to one another that ever appeared on the earth' he wrote a\nsentence which has continually appeared since in the description of\nsavages. When first meeting with primitive races, the Europeans usually\nmake a caricature of their life; but when an intelligent man has\nstayed among them for a longer time he generally describes them as the\n'kindest' or the 'gentlest' race on the earth. These very same words\nhave been applied to the Ostyaks, the Samoyedes, the Eskimos, the Dyaks,\nthe Aleuts, the Papuans, and so on, by the highest authorities. I also\nremember having read them applied to the Tunguses, the Tchuktchis, the\nSioux, and several others. The very frequency of that high commendation\nalready speaks volumes in itself.\" (2)\n\n (1) P. Kropotkin, Mutual Aid, p. 90. W. J. Solias also speaks in\nterms of the highest praise of the Bushmen--\"their energy, patience,\ncourage, loyalty, affection, good manners and artistic sense\" (Ancient\nHunters, 1915, p. 425).\n\n (2) Ibid, p. 91.\n\n\nMany of the tribes, like the Aleuts, Eskimos, Dyaks, Papuans, Fuegians,\netc., are themselves in the Neolithic stage of culture--though for the\nreason given above probably degenerated physically from the standard of\ntheir neolithic ancestors; and so the conclusion is forced upon one\nthat there must have been an IMMENSE PERIOD, (1) prior to the first\nbeginnings of 'civilization,' in which the human tribes in general led a\npeaceful and friendly life on the earth, comparatively little broken\nup by dissensions, in close contact with Nature and in that degree\nof sympathy with and understanding of the Animals which led to the\nestablishment of the Totem system. Though it would be absurd to credit\nthese tribes with any great degree of comfort and well-being according\nto our modern standards, yet we may well suppose that the memory of\nthis long period lingered on for generations and generations and was\nultimately idealized into the Golden Age, in contrast to the succeeding\nperiod of everlasting warfare, rancor and strife, which came in with the\ngrowth of Property with its greeds and jealousies, and the accentuation\nof Self-consciousness with all its vanities and ambitions.\n\n (1) See for estimates of periods ch. xiv; also, for the\npeacefulness of these early peoples, Havelock Ellis on \"The Origin of\nWar,\" where he says \"We do not find the WEAPONS of warfare or the WOUNDS\nof warfare among these Palaeolithic remains ... it was with civilization\nthat the art of killing developed, i. e. within the last 10,000 or\n12,000 years when Neolithic men (who became our ancestors) were just\narriving.\"\n\n\nI say that each tribe at this early stage of development had within it\nthe ESSENTIALS of what we call Religion--namely a bedrock sense of its\ncommunity with Nature, and of the Common life among its members--a sense\nso intimate and fundamental that it was hardly aware of itself (any more\nthan the fish is aware of the sea in which it lives), but yet was really\nthe matrix of tribal thought and the spring of tribal action. It\nwas this sense of unity which was destined by the growth of\nSELF-CONSCIOUSNESS to come to light and evidence in the shape of all\nmanner of rituals and ceremonials; and by the growth of the IMAGINATIVE\nINTELLECT to embody itself in the figures and forms of all manner of\ndeities.\n\nLet us examine into this a little more closely. A lark soaring in the\neye of the sun, and singing rapt between its \"heaven and home\" realizes\nno doubt in actual fact all that those two words mean to us; yet\nits realization is quite subconscious. It does not define its own\nexperience: it FEELS but it does not THINK. In order to come to the\nstage of THINKING it would perhaps be necessary that the lark should\nbe exiled from the earth and the sky, and confined in a cage. Early Man\nFELT the great truths and realities of Life--often I believe more purely\nthan we do--but he could not give form to his experience. THAT stage\ncame when he began to lose touch with these realities; and it showed\nitself in rites and ceremonials. The inbreak of self-consciousness\nbrought OUT the facts of his inner life into ritualistic and afterwards\ninto intellectual forms.\n\nLet me give examples. For a long time the Tribe is all in all; the\nindividual is completely subject to the 'Spirit of the Hive'; he\ndoes not even THINK of contravening it. Then the day comes when\nself-interest, as apart from the Tribe, becomes sufficiently strong to\ndrive him against some tribal custom. He breaks the tabu; he eats the\nforbidden apple; he sins against the tribe, and is cast out. Suddenly he\nfinds himself an exile, lonely, condemned and deserted. A horrible sense\nof distress seizes him--something of which he had no experience before.\nHe tries to think about it all, to understand the situation, but\nis dazed and cannot arrive at any conclusion. His one NECESSITY is\nReconciliation, Atonement. He finds he cannot LIVE outside of and\nalienated from his tribe. He makes a Sacrifice, an offering to his\nfellows, as a seal of sincerity--an offering of his own bodily suffering\nor precious blood, or the blood of some food-animal, or some valuable\ngift or other--if only he may be allowed to return. The offering is\naccepted. The ritual is performed; and he is received back. I have\nalready spoken of this perfectly natural evolution of the twin-ideas\nof Sin and Sacrifice, so I need not enlarge upon the subject. But two\nthings we may note here: (1) that the ritual, being so concrete (and\noften severe), graves itself on the minds of those concerned, and\nexpresses the feelings of the tribe, with an intensity and sharpness of\noutline which no words could rival, and (2) that such rituals may have,\nand probably did, come into use even while language itself was in an\ninfantile condition and incapable of dealing with the psychological\nsituation except by symbols. They, the rituals, were the first effort of\nthe primitive mind to get beyond, subconscious feeling and emerge into a\nworld of forms and definite thought.\n\nLet us carry the particular instance, given above, a stage farther, even\nto the confines of abstract Thought and Philosophy. I have spoken of\n\"The Spirit of the Hive\" as if the term were applicable to the Human as\nwell as to the Bee tribe. The individual bee obviously has never THOUGHT\nabout that 'Spirit,' nor mentally understood what Maeterlinck means by\nit; and yet in terms of actual experience it is an intense reality to\nthe bee (ordaining for instance on some fateful day the slaughter of all\nthe drones), controlling bee-movements and bee-morality generally. The\nindividual tribesman similarly steeped in the age-long human life of his\nfellows has never thought of the Tribe as an ordaining being or Spirit,\nseparate from himself--TILL that day when he is exiled and outcast from\nit. THEN he sees himself and the tribe as two opposing beings, himself\nof course an Intelligence or Spirit in his own limited degree, the Tribe\nas a much greater Intelligence or Spirit, standing against and over him.\nFrom that day the conception of a god arises on him. It may be only\na totem-god--a divine Grizzly-Bear or what not--but still a god or\nsupernatural Presence, embodied in the life of the tribe. This is\nwhat Sin has taught him. (1) This is what Fear, founded on\nself-consciousness, has revealed to him. The revelation may be true,\nor it may be fallacious (I do not prejudge it); but there it is--the\nbeginning of that long series of human evolutions which we call\nReligion.\n\n (1) It is to be noted, in that charming idyll of the Eden garden,\nthat it is only AFTER eating of the forbidden fruit that Adam and Eve\nperceive the Lord God walking in the garden, and converse with him\n(Genesis iii. 8).\n\n\n (For when the human mind has reached that stage of\nconsciousness in which each man realizes his own 'self' as a rational\nand consistent being, \"looking before and after,\" then, as I have\nsaid already, the mind projects on the background of Nature similarly\nrational Presences which we may call 'Gods'; and at that stage\n'Religion' begins. Before that, when the mind is quite unformed and\ndream-like, and consists chiefly of broken and scattered rays, and when\ndistinct self-consciousness is hardly yet developed, then the presences\nimagined in Nature are merely flickering and intermittent phantoms, and\ntheir propitiation and placation comes more properly under, the head of\n'Magic.')\n\nSo much for the genesis of the religious ideas of Sin and Sacrifice, and\nthe rites connected with these ideas--their genesis through the in-break\nof self-consciousness upon the corporate SUB-consciousness of the life\nof the Community. But an exactly similar process may be observed in the\ncase of the other religious ideas.\n\nI spoke of the doctrine of the SECOND BIRTH, and the rites connected\nwith it both in Paganism and in Christianity. There is much to show that\namong quite primitive peoples there is less of shrinking from death and\nmore of certainty about a continued life after death than we generally\nfind among more intellectual and civilized folk. It is, or has been,\nquite, common among many tribes for the old and decrepit, who are\nbecoming a burden to their fellows, to offer themselves for happy\ndispatch, and to take willing part in the ceremonial preparations for\ntheir own extinction; and this readiness is encouraged by their\nna[i:]ve and untroubled belief in a speedy transference to \"happy\nhunting-grounds\" beyond the grave. The truth is that when, as in such\ncases, the tribal life is very whole and unbroken--each individual\nidentifying himself completely with the tribe--the idea of the\nindividual's being dropped out at death, and left behind by the tribe,\nhardly arises. The individual is the tribe, has no other existence.\nThe tribe goes on, living a life which is eternal, and only changes its\nhunting-grounds; and the individual, identified with the tribe, feels in\nsome subconscious way the same about himself.\n\nBut when one member has broken faith with the tribe, when he has sinned\nagainst it and become an outcast--ah! then the terrors of death and\nextinction loom large upon him. \"The wages of sin is death.\" There comes\na period in the evolution of tribal life when the primitive bonds are\nloosening, when the tendency towards SELF-will and SELF-determination\n(so necessary of course in the long run for the evolution of humanity)\nbecomes a real danger to the tribe, and a terror to the wise men and\nelders of the community. It is seen that the children inherit this\ntendency--even from their infancy. They are no longer mere animals,\neasily herded; it seems that they are born in sin--or at least in\nignorance and neglect of their tribal life and calling. The only cure is\nthat they MUST BE BORN AGAIN. They must deliberately and of set purpose\nbe adopted into the tribe, and be made to realize, even severely,\nin their own persons what is happening. They must go through the\ninitiations necessary to impress this upon them. Thus a whole series of\nsolemn rites spring up, different no doubt in every locality, but all\nhaving the same object and purpose. (And one can understand how the\nnecessity of such initiations and second birth may easily have been\nitself felt in every race, at some stage of its evolution--and THAT\nquite as a spontaneous growth, and independently of any contagion of\nexample caught from other races.)\n\nThe same may be said about the world-wide practice of the Eucharist.\nNo more effective method exists for impressing on the members of a body\ntheir community of life with each other, and causing them to forget\ntheir jangling self-interests, than to hold a feast in common. It is a\nmethod which has been honored in all ages as well as to-day. But when\nthe flesh partaken of at the feast is that of the Totem--the guardian\nand presiding genius of the tribe--or perhaps of one of its chief\nfood-animals--then clearly the feast takes on a holy and solemn\ncharacter. It becomes a sacrament of unity--of the unity of all with the\ntribe, and with each other. Self-interests and self-consciousness are\nfor the time submerged, and the common life asserts itself; but here\nagain we see that a custom like this would not come into being as a\ndeliberate rite UNTIL self-consciousness and the divisions consequent\nthereon had grown to be an obvious evil. The herd-animals (cows, sheep,\nand so forth) do not have Eucharists, simply because they are sensible\nenough to feed along the same pastures without quarrelling over the\nrichest tufts of grass.\n\nWhen the flesh partaken of (either actually or symbolically) is not that\nof a divinized animal, but the flesh of a human-formed god--as in the\nmysteries of Dionysus or Osiris or Christ--then we are led to suspect\n(and of course this theory is widely held and supported) that the rites\ndate from a very far-back period when a human being, as representative\nof the tribe, was actually slain, dismembered and partly devoured;\nthough as time went on, the rite gradually became glossed over and\nmitigated into a love-communion through the sharing of bread and wine.\n\nIt is curious anyhow that the dismemberment or division into fragments\nof the body of a god (as in the case of Dionysus, Osiris, Attis,\nPraj[a']pati and others) should be so frequent a tenet of the\nold religions, and so commonly associated with a love-feast of\nreconciliation and resurrection. It may be fairly interpreted as a\nsymbol of Nature-dismemberment in Winter and resurrection in Spring; but\nwe must also not forget that it may (and indeed must) have stood as\nan allegory of TRIBAL dismemberment and reconciliation--the tribe,\nconceived of as a divinity, having thus suffered and died through the\ninbreak of sin and the self-motive, and risen again into wholeness by\nthe redemption of love and sacrifice. Whatever view the rank and file of\nthe tribe may have taken of the matter, I think it is incontestable that\nthe more thoughtful regarded these rites as full of mystic and spiritual\nmeaning. It is of the nature, as I have said before, of these early\nsymbols and ceremonies that they held so many meanings in solution; and\nit is this fact which gave them a poetic or creative quality, and their\ngreat hold upon the public mind.\n\nI use the word \"tribe\" in many places here as a matter of convenience;\nnot forgetting however that in some cases \"clan\" might be more\nappropriate, as referring to a section of a tribe; or \"people\" or \"folk\"\nas referring to unions of SEVERAL tribes. It is impossible of course to\nfollow out all the gradations of organization from tribal up to national\nlife; but it may be remembered that while animal totems prevail as a\nrule in the earlier stages, human-formed gods become more conspicuous in\nthe later developments. All through, the practice of the Eucharist goes\non, in varying forms adapting itself to the surrounding conditions; and\nwhere in the later societies a religion like Mithraism or Christianity\nincludes people of very various race, the Rite loses quite naturally\nits tribal significance and becomes a celebration of allegiance to a\nparticular god--of unity within a special Church, in fact. Ultimately it\nmay become--as for a brief moment in the history of the early Christians\nit seemed likely to do--a celebration of allegiance to all Humanity,\nirrespective of race or creed or color of skin or of mind: though\nunfortunately that day seems still far distant and remains yet\nunrealized. It must not be overlooked, however, that the religion of the\nPersian B[a^]b, first promulgated in 1845 to 1850--and a subject I shall\ndeal with presently--had as a matter of fact this all embracing and\nuniversal scope.\n\nTo return to the Golden Age or Garden of Eden. Our conclusion seems to\nbe that there really was such a period of comparative harmony in human\nlife--to which later generations were justified in looking back, and\nlooking back with regret. It corresponded in the psychology of human\nEvolution to stage One. The second stage was that of the Fall; and so\none is inevitably led to the conjecture and the hope that a third stage\nwill redeem the earth and its inhabitants to a condition of comparative\nblessedness.\n\n\n\n\nX. THE SAVIOUR-GOD AND THE VIRGIN-MOTHER\n\nFrom the consideration of the world-wide belief in a past Golden Age,\nand the world-wide practice of the Eucharist, in the sense indicated\nin the last chapter, to that of the equally widespread belief in a\nhuman-divine Saviour, is a brief and easy step. Some thirty years ago,\ndealing with this subject, (1) I wrote as follows:--\"The true Self of\nman consists in his organic relation with the whole body of his fellows;\nand when the man abandons his true Self he abandons also his true\nrelation to his fellows. The mass-Man must rule in each unit-man, else\nthe unit-man will drop off and die. But when the outer man tries to\nseparate himself from the inner, the unit-man from the mass-Man, then\nthe reign of individuality begins--a false and impossible individuality\nof course, but the only means of coming to the consciousness of the true\nindividuality.\" And further, \"Thus this divinity in each creature,\nbeing that which constitutes it and causes it to cohere together, was\nconceived of as that creature's saviour, healer--healer of wounds of\nbody and wounds of heart--the Man within the man, whom it was not only\npossible to know, but whom to know and be united with was the alone\nsalvation. This, I take it, was the law of health--and of holiness--as\naccepted at some elder time of human history, and by us seen as through\na glass darkly.\"\n\n (1) See Civilisation: its Cause and Cure, ch. i.\n\n\nI think it is impossible not to see--however much in our pride of\nCivilization (!) we like to jeer at the pettinesses of tribal\nlife--that these elder people perceived as a matter of fact and direct\nconsciousness the redeeming presence (within each unit-member of the\ngroup) of the larger life to which he belonged. This larger life was a\nreality--\"a Presence to be felt and known\"; and whether he called it by\nthe name of a Totem-animal, or by the name of a Nature-divinity, or\nby the name of some gracious human-limbed God--some Hercules, Mithra,\nAttis, Orpheus, or what-not--or even by the great name of Humanity\nitself, it was still in any case the Saviour, the living incarnate Being\nby the realization of whose presence the little mortal could be lifted\nout of exile and error and death and suffering into splendor and life\neternal.\n\nIt is impossible, I think, not to see that the myriad worship of\n\"Saviours\" all over the world, from China to Peru, can only be\nascribed to the natural working of some such law of human and tribal\npsychology--from earliest times and in all races the same--springing up\nquite spontaneously and independently, and (so far) unaffected by the\nmere contagion of local tradition. To suppose that the Devil, long\nbefore the advent of Christianity, put the idea into the heads of all\nthese earlier folk, is really to pay TOO great a compliment both to the\npower and the ingenuity of his Satanic Majesty--though the ingenuity\nwith which the early Church DID itself suppress all information about\nthese pre-Christian Saviours almost rivals that which it credited to\nSatan! And on the other hand to suppose this marvellous and universal\nconsent of belief to have sprung by mere contagion from one accidental\nsource would seem equally far-fetched and unlikely.\n\nBut almost more remarkable than the world-encircling belief in\nhuman-divine Saviours is the equally widespread legend of their birth\nfrom Virgin-mothers. There is hardly a god--as we have already had\noccasion to see--whose worship as a benefactor of mankind attained\npopularity in any of the four continents, Europe, Asia, Africa and\nAmerica--who was not reported to have been born from a Virgin, or at\nleast from a mother who owed the Child not to any earthly father, but to\nan impregnation from Heaven. And this seems at first sight all the more\nastonishing because the belief in the possibility of such a thing is so\nentirely out of the line of our modern thought. So that while it\nwould seem not unnatural that such a legend should have, sprung up\nspontaneously in some odd benighted corner of the world, we find it\nvery difficult to understand how in that case it should have spread\nso rapidly in every direction, or--if it did not spread--how we are\nto account for its SPONTANEOUS appearance in all these widely sundered\nregions.\n\nI think here, and for the understanding of this problem, we are thrown\nback upon a very early age of human evolution--the age of Magic. Before\nany settled science or philosophy or religion existed, there were\nstill certain Things--and consequently also certain Words--which had\na tremendous influence on the human mind, which in fact affected it\ndeeply. Such a word, for instance, is 'Thunder'; to hear thunder, to\nimitate it, even to mention it, are sure ways of rousing superstitious\nattention and imagination. Such another word is 'Serpent,' another\n'Tree,' and so forth. There is no one who is insensible to the\nreverberation of these and other such words and images (1); and among\nthem, standing prominently out, are the two 'Mother' and 'Virgin.'\nThe word Mother touches the deepest springs of human feeling. As the\nearliest word learnt and clung to by the child, it twines itself with\nthe heart-strings of the man even to his latest day. Nor must we forget\nthat in a primitive state of society (the Matriarchate) that influence\nwas probably even greater than now; for the father of the child being\n(often as not) UNKNOWN the attachment to the mother was all the more\nintense and undivided. The word Mother had a magic about it which has\nremained even until to-day. But if that word rooted itself deep in the\nheart of the Child, the other word 'virgin' had an obvious magic for\nthe full grown and sexually mature Man--a magic which it, too, has never\nlost.\n\n (1) Nor is it difficult to see how out of the discreet use of\nsuch words and images, combined with elementary forms like the square,\nthe triangle and the circle, and elementary numbers like 3, 4, 5, etc.,\nquite a science, so to speak, of Magic arose.\n\n\nThere is ample evidence that one of the very earliest objects of human\nworship was the Earth itself, conceived of as the fertile Mother of all\nthings. Gaia or Ge (the earth) had temples and altars in almost all the\ncities of Greece. Rhea or Cybele, sprung from the Earth, was \"mother of\nall the gods.\" Demeter (\"earth mother\") was honored far and wide as the\ngracious patroness of the crops and vegetation. Ceres, of course, the\nsame. Maia in the Indian mythology and Isis in the Egyptian are forms\nof Nature and the Earth-spirit, represented as female; and so forth. The\nEarth, in these ancient cults, was the mystic source of all life, and\nto it, as a propitiation, life of all kinds was sacrificed. (There are\nstrange accounts of a huge fire being made, with an altar to Cybele in\nthe midst, and of deer and fawns and wild animals, and birds and sheep\nand corn and fruits being thrown pell-mell into the flames. (1)) It was,\nin a way, the most natural, as it seems to have been the earliest\nand most spontaneous of cults--the worship of the Earth-mother,\nthe all-producing eternal source of life, and on account of her\nnever-failing ever-renewed fertility conceived of as an immortal Virgin.\n\n (1) See Pausanias iv. 32. 6; and Lucian, De Syria Dea, 49.\n\n\nBut when the Saviour-legend sprang up--as indeed I think it must\nhave sprung up, in tribe after tribe and people after people,\nindependently--then, whether it sprang from the divinization of some\nactual man who showed the way of light and deliverance to his fellows\n\"sitting in darkness,\" or whether from the personification of the tribe\nitself as a god, in either case the question of the hero's parentage was\nbound to arise. If the 'saviour' was plainly a personification of the\ntribe, it was obviously impossible to suppose him the son of a mortal\nmother. In that case--and if the tribe was generally traced in the\nlegends to some primeval Animal or Mountain or thing of Nature--it was\nprobably easy to think of him (the saviour) as, born out of Nature's\nwomb, descended perhaps from that pure Virgin of the World who is\nthe Earth and Nature, who rules the skies at night, and stands in the\nchanging phases of the Moon, and is worshiped (as we have seen) in\nthe great constellation Virgo. If, on the other hand, he was the\ndivinization of some actual man, more or less known either personally\nor by tradition to his fellows, then in all probability the name of his\nmortal mother would be recognized and accepted; but as to his father,\nthat side of parentage being, as we have said, generally very uncertain,\nit would be easy to suppose some heavenly Annunciation, the midnight\nvisit of a God, and what is usually termed a Virgin-birth.\n\nThere are two elements to be remembered here, as conspiring to this\nconclusion. One is the condition of affairs in a remote matriarchial\nperiod, when descent was reckoned always through the maternal line, and\nthe fatherhood in each generation was obscure or unknown or commonly\nleft out of account; and the other is the fact--so strange and difficult\nfor us to realize--that among some very primitive peoples, like the\nAustralian aborigines, the necessity for a woman to have intercourse\nwith a male, in order to bring about conception and child-birth, was\nactually not recognized. Scientific observation had not always got as\nfar as that, and the matter was still under the domain of Magic! (1)\nA Virgin-Mother was therefore a quite imaginable (not to say\n'conceivable') thing; and indeed a very beautiful and fascinating thing,\ncombining in one image the potent magic of two very wonderful words.\nIt does not seem impossible that considerations of this kind led to the\nadoption of the doctrine or legend of the virgin-mother and the heavenly\nfather among so many races and in so many localities--even without any\ncontagion of tradition among them.\n\n (1) Probably the long period (nine months) elapsing between\ncohabitation and childbirth confused early speculation on the subject.\nThen clearly cohabitation was NOT always followed by childbirth. And,\nmore important still, the number of virgins of a mature age in primitive\nsocieties was so very minute that the fact of their childlessness\nattracted no attention--whereas in OUR societies the sterility of the\nwhole class is patent to everyone.\n\n\nAnyhow, and as a matter of fact, the world-wide dissemination of the\nlegend is most remarkable. Zeus, Father of the gods, visited Semele, it\nwill be remembered, in the form of a thunderstorm; and she gave birth to\nthe great saviour and deliverer Dionysus. Zeus, again, impregnated Danae\nin a shower of gold; and the child was Perseus, who slew the Gorgons\n(the powers of darkness) and saved Andromeda (the human soul (1)).\nDevaki, the radiant Virgin of the Hindu mythology, became the wife\nof the god Vishnu and bore Krishna, the beloved hero and prototype of\nChrist. With regard to Buddha St. Jerome says (2) \"It is handed down\namong the Gymnosophists, of India that Buddha, the founder of their\nsystem, was brought forth by a Virgin from her side.\" The Egyptian Isis,\nwith the child Horus, on her knee, was honored centuries before the\nChristian era, and worshiped under the names of \"Our Lady,\" \"Queen of\nHeaven,\" \"Star of the Sea,\" \"Mother of God,\" and so forth. Before her,\nNeith, the Virgin of the World, whose figure bends from the sky over the\nearthly plains and the children of men, was acclaimed as mother of the\ngreat god Osiris. The saviour Mithra, too, was born of a Virgin, as we\nhave had occasion to notice before; and on the Mithrais monuments the\nmother suckling her child is a not uncommon figure. (3)\n\n (1) For this interpretation of the word Andromeda see The Perfect\nWay by Edward Maitland, preface to First Edition, 1881.\n\n (2) Contra Jovian, Book I; and quoted by Rhys Davids in his\nBuddhisim.\n\n (3) See Doane's Bible Myths, p. 332, and Dupuis' Origins of\nReligious Beliefs.\n\n\nThe old Teutonic goddess Hertha (the Earth) was a Virgin, but was\nimpregnated by the heavenly Spirit (the Sky); and her image with a child\nin her arms was to be seen in the sacred groves of Germany. (1) The\nScandinavian Frigga, in much the same way, being caught in the embraces\nof Odin, the All-father, conceived and bore a son, the blessed Balder,\nhealer and saviour of mankind. Quetzalcoatl, the (crucified) saviour of\nthe Aztecs, was the son of Chimalman, the Virgin Queen of Heaven. (2)\nEven the Chinese had a mother-goddess and virgin with child in her arms\n(3); and the ancient Etruscans the same. (4)\n\n (1) R. P. Knight's Ancient Art and Mythology, p. 21.\n\n (2) See Kingsborough's Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi, p. 176,\nwhere it is said \"an ambassador was sent from heaven on an embassy to a\nVirgin of Tulan, called Chimalman... announcing that it was the will\nof the God that she should conceive a son; and having delivered her the\nmessage he rose and left the house; and as soon as he had left it\nshe conceived a son, without connection with man, who was called\nQuetzalcoat, who they say is the god of air.\" Further, it is explained\nthat Quetzalcoatl sacrificed himself, drawing forth his own blood with\nthorns; and that the word Quetzalcoatlotopitzin means \"our well-beloved\nson.\"\n\n (3) Doane, p. 327.\n\n (4) See Inman's Pagan and Christian Symbolism, p. 27.\n\n\nFinally, we have the curiously large number of BLACK virgin mothers\nwho are or have been worshiped. Not only cases like Devaki the Indian\ngoddess, or Isis the Egyptian, who would naturally appear black-skinned\nor dark; but the large number of images and paintings of the same\nkind, yet extant--especially in the Italian churches--and passing for\nrepresentations of Mary and the infant Jesus. Such are the well-known\nimage in the chapel at Loretto, and images and paintings besides in the\nchurches at Genoa, Pisa, Padua, Munich and other places. It is difficult\nnot to regard these as very old Pagan or pre-Christian relics which\nlingered on into Christian times and were baptized anew--as indeed\nwe know many relics and images actually were--into the service of the\nChurch. \"Great is Diana of the Ephesians\"; and there is I believe more\nthan one black figure extant of this Diana, who, though of course a\nvirgin, is represented with innumerable breasts (1)--not unlike some of\nthe archaic statues of Artemis and Isis. At Paris, far on into Christian\ntimes there was, it is said, on the site of the present Cathedral of\nNotre Dame, a Temple dedicated to 'our Lady' Isis; and images belonging\nto the earlier shrine would in all probability be preserved with altered\nname in the later.\n\n (1) See illustration, p. 30, in Inman's Pagan and Christian\nSymbolism.\n\n\nAll this illustrates not only the wide diffusion of the doctrine of the\nVirgin-mother, but its extreme antiquity. The subject is obscure, and\nworthy of more consideration than has yet been accorded it; and I do not\nfeel able to add anything to the tentative explanations given a page or\ntwo back, except perhaps to suppose that the vision of the Perfect Man\nhovered dimly over the mind of the human race on its first emergence\nfrom the purely animal stage; and that a quite natural speculation\nwith regard to such a being was that he would be born from a Perfect\nWoman--who according to early ideas would necessarily be the Virgin\nEarth itself, mother of all things. Anyhow it was a wonderful Intuition,\nslumbering as it would seem in the breast of early man, that the Great\nEarth after giving birth to all living creatures would at last bring\nforth a Child who should become the Saviour of the human race.\n\nThere is of course the further theory, entertained by some, that\nvirgin-parturition--a kind of Parthenogenesis--has as a matter of fact\noccasionally occurred among mortal women, and even still does occur. I\nshould be the last to deny the POSSIBILITY of this (or of anything else\nin Nature), but, seeing the immense difficulties in the way of PROOF\nof any such asserted case, and the absence so far of any thoroughly\nattested and verified instance, it would, I think, be advisable to leave\nthis theory out of account at present.\n\nBut whether any of the EXPLANATIONS spoken of are right or wrong,\nand whatever explanation we adopt, there remains the FACT of the\nuniversality over the world of this legend--affording another instance\nof the practical solidarity and continuity of the Pagan Creeds with\nChristianity.\n\n\n\n\nXI. RITUAL DANCING\n\nIt is unnecessary to labor the conclusion of the last two or three\nchapters, namely that Christianity grew out of the former Pagan Creeds\nand is in its general outlook and origins continuous and of one piece\nwith them. I have not attempted to bring together ALL the evidence\nin favor of this contention, as such work would be too vast, but more\nillustrations of its truth will doubtless occur to readers, or will\nemerge as we proceed.\n\nI think we may take it as proved (1) that from the earliest ages, and\nbefore History, a great body of religious belief and ritual--first\nappearing among very primitive and unformed folk, whom we should call\n'savages'--has come slowly down, broadening and differentiating itself\non the way into a great variety of forms, but embodying always certain\nmain ideas which became in time the accepted doctrines of the later\nChurches--the Indian, the Egyptian, the Mithraic, the Christian, and\nso forth. What these ideas in their general outline have been we can\nperhaps best judge from our \"Apostles' Creed,\" as it is recited every\nSunday in our churches.\n\n\"I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth: And in\nJesus Christ his only Son our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,\nborn of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified,\ndead and buried. He descended into Hell; the third day he rose again\nfrom the dead, He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand\nof God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick\nand the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy Catholic Church; the\ncommunion of Saints; the Forgiveness of sins; the Resurrection of the\nbody, and the life everlasting. Amen.\"\n\nHere we have the All-Father and Creator, descending from the Sky in the\nform of a spirit to impregnate the earthly Virgin-mother, who thus gives\nbirth to a Saviour-hero. The latter is slain by the powers of Evil, is\nburied and descends into the lower world, but arises again as God\ninto heaven and becomes the leader and judge of mankind. We have the\nconfirmation of the Church (or, in earlier times, of the Tribe) by means\nof a Eucharist or Communion which binds together all the members, living\nor dead, and restores errant individuals through the Sacrifice of the\nhero and the Forgiveness of their sins; and we have the belief in a\nbodily Resurrection and continued life of the members within the fold of\nthe Church (or Tribe), itself regarded as eternal.\n\nOne has only, instead of the word 'Jesus,' to read Dionysus or Krishna\nor Hercules or Osiris or Attis, and instead of 'Mary' to insert Semele\nor Devaki or Alcmene or Neith or Nana, and for Pontius Pilate to use the\nname of any terrestrial tyrant who comes into the corresponding story,\nand lo! the creed fits in all particulars into the rites and worship of\na pagan god. I need not enlarge upon a thesis which is self-evident\nfrom all that has gone before. I do not say, of course, that ALL\nthe religious beliefs of Paganism are included and summarized in our\nApostles' Creed, for--as I shall have occasion to note in the next\nchapter--I think some very important religious elements are there\nOMITTED; but I do think that all the beliefs which ARE summarized in the\nsaid creed had already been fully represented and elaborately expressed\nin the non-Christian religions and rituals of Paganism.\n\nFurther (2) I think we may safely say that there is no certain proof\nthat the body of beliefs just mentioned sprang from any one particular\ncentre far back and radiated thence by dissemination and mental\ncontagion over the rest of the world; but the evidence rather shows that\nthese beliefs were, for the most part, the SPONTANEOUS outgrowths\n(in various localities) of the human mind at certain stages of its\nevolution; that they appeared, in the different races and peoples, at\ndifferent periods according to the degree of evolution, and were largely\nindependent of intercourse and contagion, though of course, in cases,\nconsiderably influenced by it; and that one great and all-important\noccasion and provocative of these beliefs was actually the RISE OF\nSELF-CONSCIOUSNESS--that is, the coming of the mind to a more or\nless distinct awareness of itself and of its own operation, and\nthe consequent development and growth of Individualism, and of the\nSelf-centred attitude in human thought and action.\n\nIn the third place (3) I think we may see--and this is the special\nsubject of the present chapter--that at a very early period, when\nhumanity was hardly capable of systematic expression in what we call\nPhilosophy or Science, it could not well rise to an ordered and literary\nexpression of its beliefs, such as we find in the later religions\nand the 'Churches' (Babylonian, Jewish, East Indian, Christian, or\nwhat-not), and yet that it FELT these beliefs very intensely and was\nurged, almost compelled, to their utterance in some form or other. And\nso it came about that people expressed themselves in a vast mass of\nritual and myth--customs, ceremonies, legends, stories--which on account\nof their popular and concrete form were handed down for generations, and\nsome of which linger on still in the midst of our modern civilization.\nThese rituals and legends were, many of them, absurd enough, rambling\nand childish in character, and preposterous in conception, yet they gave\nthe expression needed; and some of them of course, as we have seen, were\nfull of meaning and suggestion.\n\nA critical and commercial Civilization, such as ours, in which\n(notwithstanding much TALK about Art) the artistic sense is greatly\nlacking, or at any rate but little diffused, does not as a rule\nunderstand that poetic RITES, in the evolution of peoples, came\nnaturally before anything like ordered poems or philosophy or\nsystematized VIEWS about life and religion--such as WE love to wallow\nin! Things were FELT before they were spoken. The loading of diseases\ninto disease-boats, of sins onto scape-goats, the propitiation of the\nforces of nature by victims, human or animal, sacrifices, ceremonies of\nre-birth, eucharistic feasts, sexual communions, orgiastic celebrations\nof the common life, and a host of other things--all SAID plainly enough\nwhat was meant, but not in WORDS. Partly no doubt it was that at some\nearly time words were more difficult of command and less flexible in use\nthan actions (and at all times are they not less expressive?). Partly it\nwas that mankind was in the child-stage. The Child delights in ritual,\nin symbol, in expression through material objects and actions:\n\n      See, at his feet some little plan or chart,\n      Some fragment from his dream of human life,\n      Shaped by himself with newly learned art;\n          A wedding or a festival,\n          A mourning or a funeral;\n               And this hath now his heart.\n\nAnd primitive man in the child-stage felt a positive joy in ritual\ncelebrations, and indulged in expressions which we but little\nunderstand; for these had then his heart.\n\nOne of the most pregnant of these expressions was DANCING. Children\ndance instinctively. They dance with rage; they dance with joy, with\nsheer vitality; they dance with pain, or sometimes with savage glee at\nthe suffering of others; they delight in mimic combats, or in animal\nplays and disguises. There are such things as Courting-dances, when\nthe mature male and female go through a ritual together--not only in\ncivilized ball-rooms and the back-parlors of inns, but in the farmyards\nwhere the rooster pays his addresses to the hen, or the yearling bull\nto the cow--with quite recognized formalities; there are elaborate\nceremonials performed by the Australian bower-birds and many other\nanimals. All these things--at any rate in children and animals--come\nbefore speech; and anyhow we may say that LOVE-RITES, even in mature\nand civilized man, hardly ADMIT of speech. Words only vulgarize love and\nblunt its edge.\n\nSo Dance to the savage and the early man was not merely an amusement or\na gymnastic exercise (as the books often try to make out), but it was\nalso a serious and intimate part of life, an expression of religion and\nthe relation of man to non-human Powers. Imagine a young dancer--and\nthe admitted age for ritual dancing was commonly from about eighteen\nto thirty--coming forward on the dancing-ground or platform for the\nINVOCATION OF RAIN. We have unfortunately no kinematic records, but it\nis not impossible or very difficult to imagine the various gestures\nand movements which might be considered appropriate to such a rite in\ndifferent localities or among different peoples. A modern student of\nDalcroze Eurhythmics would find the problem easy. After a time a certain\nritual dance (for rain) would become stereotyped and generally adopted.\nOr imagine a young Greek leading an invocation to Apollo to STAY SOME\nPLAGUE which was ravaging the country. He might as well be accompanied\nby a small body of co-dancers; but he would be the leader and chief\nrepresentative. Or it might be a WAR-DANCE--as a more or less magical\npreparation for the raid or foray. We are familiar enough with accounts\nof war-dances among American Indians. C. O. Muller in his History and\nAntiquities of the Doric Race (1) gives the following account of the\nPyrrhic dance among the Greeks, which was danced in full armor:--\"Plato\nsays that it imitated all the attitudes of defence, by avoiding a thrust\nor a cast, retreating, springing up, and crouching-as also the opposite\nmovements of attack with arrows and lances, and also of every kind of\nthrust. So strong was the attachment to this dance at Sparta that, long\nafter it had in the other Greek states degenerated into a Bacchanalian\nrevel, it was still danced by the Spartans as a warlike exercise, and\nboys of fifteen were instructed in it.\" Of the Hunting-dance I have\nalready given instances. (2) It always had the character of Magic about\nit, by which the game or quarry might presumably be influenced; and it\ncan easily be understood that if the Hunt was not successful the blame\nmight well be attributed to some neglect of the usual ritual mimes or\nmovements--no laughing matter for the leader of the dance.\n\n (1) Book IV, ch. 6, Section 7.\n\n (2) See also Winwood Reade's Savage Africa, ch. xviii, in which\nhe speaks of the \"gorilla dance,\" before hunting gorillas, as a\n\"religious festival.\"\n\n\nOr there were dances belonging to the ceremonies of Initiation--dances\nboth by the initiators and the initiated. Jane E. Harrison in Themis (p.\n24) says, \"Instruction among savage peoples is always imparted in more\nor less mimetic dances. At initiation you learn certain dances which\nconfer on you definite social status. When a man is too old to dance,\nhe hands over his dance to another and a younger, and he then among\nsome tribes ceases to exist socially.... The dances taught to boys at\ninitiation are frequently if not always ARMED dances. These are not\nnecessarily warlike. The accoutrement of spear and shield was in part\ndecorative, in part a provision for making the necessary hubbub.\" (Here\nMiss Harrison reproduces a photograph of an Initiation dance among the\nAkikuyu of British East Africa.) The Initiation-dances blend insensibly\nand naturally with the Mystery and Religion dances, for indeed\ninitiation was for the most part an instruction in the mysteries and\nsocial rites of the Tribe. They were the expression of things which\nwould be hard even for us, and which for rude folk would be impossible,\nto put into definite words. Hence arose the expression--whose meaning\nhas been much discussed by the learned--\"to dance out ([gr ezorceisqai])\na mystery.\" (1) Lucian, in a much-quoted passage, (2) observes: \"You\ncannot find a single ancient mystery in which there is not dancing ...\nand this much all men know, that most people say of the revealers of the\nmysteries that they 'dance them out.'\" Andrew Lang, commenting on this\npassage, (3) continues: \"Clement of Alexandria uses the same term when\nspeaking of his own 'appalling revelations.' So closely connected are\nmysteries with dancing among savages that when Mr. Orpen asked Qing, the\nBushman hunter, about some doctrines in which Qing was not initiated,\nhe said: 'Only the initiated men of that dance know these things.' To\n'dance' this or that means to be acquainted with this or that\nmyth, which is represented in a dance or ballet d'action. So widely\ndistributed is the practice that Acosta in an interesting passage\nmentions it as familiar to the people of Peru before and after the\nSpanish conquest.\" (And we may say that when the 'mysteries' are of a\nsexual nature it can easily be understood that to 'dance them out' is\nthe only way of explaining them!)\n\n (1) Meaning apparently either simply to represent, or, sometimes\nto DIVULGE, a mystery.\n\n (2) [gr peri 'Orchsews], Ch. xv. 277.\n\n (3) Myth, Ritual and Religion, i, 272.\n\n\nThus we begin to appreciate the serious nature and the importance of the\ndance among primitive folk. To dub a youth \"a good dancer\" is to pay him\na great compliment. Among the well-known inscriptions on the rocks in\nthe island of Thera in the Aegean sea there are many which record in\ndeeply graven letters the friendship and devotion to each other of\nSpartan warrior-comrades; it seems strange at first to find how often\nsuch an epithet of praise occurs as Bathycles DANCES WELL, Eumelos is\na PERFECT DANCER ([gr aristos orcestas]). One hardly in general expects\none warrior to praise another for his dancing! But when one realizes\nwhat is really meant--namely the fitness of the loved comrade to lead in\nreligious and magical rituals--then indeed the compliment takes on a\nnew complexion. Religious dances, in dedication to a god, have of course\nbeen honored in every country. Muller, in the work just cited, (1)\ndescribes a lively dance called the hyporchema which, accompanied by\nsongs, was used in the worship of Apollo. \"In this, besides the chorus\nof singers who usually danced around THE BLAZING ALTAR, several persons\nwere appointed to accompany the action of the poem with an appropriate\npantomimic display.\" It was probably some similar dance which is\nrecorded in Exodus, ch. xxxii, when Aaron made the Israelites a golden\nCalf (image of the Egyptian Apis). There was an altar and a fire and\nburnt offerings for sacrifice, and the people dancing around. Whether in\nthe Apollo ritual the dancers were naked I cannot say, but in the affair\nof the golden Calf they evidently were, for it will be remembered that\nit was just this which upset Moses' equanimity so badly--\"when he SAW\nTHAT THE PEOPLE WERE NAKED\"--and led to the breaking of the two tables\nof stone and the slaughter of some thousands of folk. It will be\nremembered also that David on a sacrificial occasion danced naked before\nthe Lord. (2)\n\n (1) Book II, ch. viii, Section 14.\n\n (2) 2 Sam. vi.\n\n\nIt may seem strange that dances in honor of a god should be held naked;\nbut there is abundant evidence that this was frequently the case, and it\nleads to an interesting speculation. Many of these rituals undoubtedly\nowed their sanctity and solemnity to their extreme antiquity. They came\ndown in fact from very far back times when the average man or woman--as\nin some of the Central African tribes to-day--wore simply nothing at\nall; and like all religious ceremonies they tended to preserve their\nforms long after surrounding customs and conditions had altered.\nConsequently nakedness lingered on in sacrificial and other rites into\nperiods when in ordinary life it had come to be abandoned or thought\nindecent and shameful. This comes out very clearly in both instances\nabove--quoted from the Bible. For in Exodus xxxii. 25 it is said that\n\"Aaron had made them (the dancers) naked UNTO THEIR SHAME among their\nenemies (READ opponents),\" and in 2 Sam. vi. 20 we are told that Michal\ncame out and sarcastically rebuked the \"glorious king of Israel\" for\n\"shamelessly uncovering himself, like a vain fellow\" (for which rebuke,\nI am sorry to say, David took a mean revenge on Michal). In both cases\nevidently custom had so far changed that to a considerable section of\nthe population these naked exhibitions had become indecent, though as\nparts of an acknowledged ritual they were still retained and supported\nby others. The same conclusion may be derived from the commands recorded\nin Exodus xx. 26 and xxviii. 42, that the priests be not \"uncovered\"\nbefore the altar--commands which would hardly have been needed had not\nthe practice been in vogue.\n\nThen there were dances (partly magical or religious) performed at rustic\nand agricultural festivals, like the Epilenios, celebrated in Greece at\nthe gathering of the grapes. (1) Of such a dance we get a glimpse in the\nBible (Judges xxi. 20) when the elders advised the children of Benjamin\nto go out and lie in wait in the vineyards, at the time of the yearly\nfeast; and \"when the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in the\ndances, then come ye out of the vineyards and catch you every man a wife\nfrom the daughters of Shiloh\"--a touching example apparently of early\nso-called 'marriage by capture'! Or there were dances, also partly or\noriginally religious, of a quite orgiastic and Bacchanalian character,\nlike the Bryallicha performed in Sparta by men and women in hideous\nmasks, or the Deimalea by Sileni and Satyrs waltzing in a circle; or the\nBibasis carried out by both men and women--a quite gymnastic exercise in\nwhich the performers took a special pride in striking their own buttocks\nwith their heels! or others wilder still, which it would perhaps not be\nconvenient to describe.\n\n (1) [gr Epilhnioi umnoi]:  hymns sung over the winepress\n(Dictionary).\n\n\nWe must see how important a part Dancing played in that great panorama\nof Ritual and Religion (spoken of in the last chapter) which, having\noriginally been led up to by the 'Fall of Man,' has ever since the dawn\nof history gradually overspread the world with its strange procession of\ndemons and deities, and its symbolic representations of human destiny.\nWhen it is remembered that ritual dancing was the matrix out of which\nthe Drama sprang, and further that the drama in its inception (as still\nto-day in India) was an affair of religion and was acted in, or in\nconnection with, the Temples, it becomes easier to understand how all\nthis mass of ceremonial sacrifices, expiations, initiations, Sun and\nNature festivals, eucharistic and orgiastic communions and celebrations,\nmystery-plays, dramatic representations, myths and legends, etc., which\nI have touched upon in the preceding chapters--together with all the\nemotions, the desires, the fears, the yearnings and the wonderment which\nthey represented--have practically sprung from the same root: a root\ndeep and necessary in the psychology of Man. Presently I hope to show\nthat they will all practically converge again in the end to one meaning,\nand prepare the way for one great Synthesis to come--an evolution also\nnecessary and inevitable in human psychology.\n\nIn that truly inspired Ode from which I quoted a few pages back, occur\nthose well-known words whose repetition now will, on account of their\nbeauty, I am sure be excused:--\n\n      Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting:\n      The Soul that rises with us, our life's Star,\n          Hath had elsewhere its setting,\n               And cometh from afar;\n          Not in entire forgetfulness,\n          And not in utter nakedness,\n      But trailing clouds of glory do we come\n          From God, who is our home:\n      Heaven lies about us in our infancy!\n      Shades of the prison-house begin to close\n          Upon the growing Boy,\n      But He beholds the light and whence it flows\n          He sees it in his joy;\n      The youth who daily farther from the east\n          Must travel, still is Nature's Priest,\n          And by the vision splendid\n          Is on his way attended;\n      At length the man perceives it die away\n      And fade into the light of common day.\n\n\nWordsworth--though he had not the inestimable advantage of a\nnineteenth-century education and the inheritance of the Darwinian\nphilosophy--does nevertheless put the matter of the Genius of the Child\nin a way which (with the alteration of a few conventional terms) we\nscientific moderns are quite inclined to accept. We all admit now that\nthe Child does not come into the world with a mental tabula rasa of\nentire forgetfulness but on the contrary as the possessor of vast stores\nof sub-conscious memory, derived from its ancestral inheritances; we\nall admit that a certain grace and intuitive insight and even prophetic\nquality, in the child-nature, are due to the harmonization of these\nracial inheritances in the infant, even before it is born; and that\nafter birth the impact of the outer world serves rather to break up\nand disintegrate this harmony than to confirm and strengthen it. Some\npsychologists indeed nowadays go so far as to maintain that the child\nis not only 'Father of the man,' but superior to the man, (1) and that\nBoyhood and Youth and Maturity are attained to not by any addition but\nby a process of loss and subtraction. It will be seen that the last ten\nlines of the above quotation rather favor this view.\n\n (1) \"Man in the course of his life falls away more and more from\nthe specifically HUMAN type of his early years, but the Ape in the\ncourse of his short life goes very much farther along the road of\ndegradation and premature senility.\" (Man and Woman, by Havelock Ellis,\np. 24).\n\n\nBut my object in making the quotation was not to insist on the truth\nof its application to the individual Child, but rather to point out\nthe remarkable way in which it illustrates what I have said about the\nChildhood of the Race. In fact, if the quotation be read over again with\nthis interpretation (which I do not say Wordsworth intended) that\nthe 'birth' spoken of is the birth or evolution of the distinctively\nself-conscious Man from the Animals and the animal-natured,\nunself-conscious human beings of a preceding age, then the parable\nunfolds itself perfectly naturally and convincingly. THAT birth\ncertainly was sleep and a forgetting; the grace and intuition and\ninstinctive perfection of the animals was lost. But the forgetfulness\nwas not entire; the memory lingered long of an age of harmony, of an\nEden-garden left behind. And trailing clouds of this remembrance\nthe first tribal men, on the edge of but not yet WITHIN the\ncivilization-period, appear in the dawn of History.\n\nAs I have said before, the period of the dawn of Self-consciousness was\nalso the period of the dawn of the practical and inquiring Intellect; it\nwas the period of the babyhood of both; and so we perceive among these\nearly people (as we also do among children) that while in the main the\nheart and the intuitions were right, the intellect was for a long period\nfutile and rambling to a degree. As soon as the mind left the ancient\nbases of instinct and sub-conscious racial experience it fell into\na hopeless bog, out of which it only slowly climbed by means of the\npainfully-gathered stepping-stones of logic and what we call Science.\n\"Heaven lies about us in our infancy.\" Wordsworth perceived that\nwonderful world of inner experience and glory out of which the child\nemerges; and some even of us may perceive that similar world in which\nthe untampered animals STILL dwell, and OUT of which self-regarding Man\nin the history of the race was long ago driven. But a curse went\nwith the exile. As the Brain grew, the Heart withered. The inherited\ninstincts and racially accumulated wisdom, on which the first men\nthrived and by means of which they achieved a kind of temporary\nParadise, were broken up; delusions and disease and dissension set\nin. Cain turned upon his brother and slew him; and the shades of the\nprison-house began to close. The growing Boy, however, (by whom we may\nunderstand the early tribes of Mankind) had yet a radiance of Light and\njoy in his life; and the Youth--though travelling daily farther from the\nEast--still remained Nature's priest, and by the vision splendid was on\nhis way attended: but\n\n     At length the Man perceived it die away.\n     And fade into the light of common day.\n\nWhat a strangely apt picture in a few words (if we like to take it\nso) of the long pilgrimage of the Human Race, its early and pathetic\nclinging to the tradition of the Eden-garden, its careless and vigorous\nboyhood, its meditative youth, with consciousness of sin and endless\nexpiatory ritual in Nature's bosom, its fleeting visions of\nsalvation, and finally its complete disillusionment and despair in the\nworld-slaughter and unbelief of the twentieth century!\n\nLeaving Wordsworth, however, and coming back to our main line of\nthought, we may point out that while early peoples were intellectually\nmere babies--with their endless yarns about heroes on horseback leaping\nover wide rivers or clouds of monks flying for hundreds of miles\nthrough the air, and their utter failure to understand the general\nconcatenations of cause and effect--yet practically and in their\ninstinct of life and destiny they were, as I have already said, by no\nmeans fools; certainly not such fools as many of the arm-chair students\nof these things delight to represent them. For just as, a few years\nago, we modern civilizees studying outlying nations, the Chinese for\ninstance, rejoiced (in our vanity) to pick out every quaint peculiarity\nand absurdity and monstrosity of a supposed topsyturvydom, and failed\nentirely to see the real picture of a great and eminently sensible\npeople; so in the case of primitive men we have been, and even still\nare, far too prone to catalogue their cruelties and obscenities and\nidiotic superstitions, and to miss the sane and balanced setting of\ntheir actual lives.\n\nMr. R. R. Marett, who has a good practical acquaintance with his\nsubject, had in the Hibbert Journal for October 1918 an article on \"The\nPrimitive Medicine Man\" in which he shows that the latter is as a rule\nanything but a fool and a knave--although like 'medicals' in all ages he\nhocuspocuses his patients occasionally! He instances the medicine-man's\nexcellent management, in most cases, of childbirth, or of wounds and\nfractures, or his primeval skill in trepanning or trephining--all of\nwhich operations, he admits, may be accompanied with grotesque and\nsuperstitious ceremonies, yet show real perception and ability. We all\nknow--though I think the article does not mention the matter--what a\nconsiderable list there is of drugs and herbs which the modern art of\nhealing owes to the ancient medicine-man, and it may be again mentioned\nthat one of the most up-to-date treatments--the use of a prolonged and\nexclusive diet of MILK as a means of giving the organism a new start\nin severe cases--has really come down to us through the ages from this\nearly source. (1) The real medicine-man, Mr. Marett says, is largely\na 'faith-healer' and 'soul-doctor'; he believes in his vocation, and\nundergoes much for the sake of it: \"The main point is to grasp that by\nhis special initiation and the rigid taboos which he practises--not to\nspeak of occasional remarkable gifts, say of trance and ecstasy, which\nhe may inherit by nature and have improved by art--he HAS access to a\nwonder-working power.... And the great need of primitive folk is for\nthis healer of souls.\" Our author further insists on the enormous play\nand influence of Fear in the savage mind--a point we have touched on\nalready--and gives instances of Thanatomania, or cases where, after a\nquite slight and superficial wound, the patient becomes so depressed\nthat he, quite needlessly, persists in dying! Such cases, obviously,\ncan only be countered by Faith, or something (whatever it may be) which\nrestores courage, hope and energy to the mind. Nor need I point out\nthat the situation is exactly the same among a vast number of 'patients'\nto-day. As to the value, in his degree, of the medicine-man many modern\nobservers and students quite agree with the above. (2) Also as the\npresent chapter is on Ritual Dancing it may not be out of place to call\nattention to the supposed healing of sick people in Ceylon and other\nplaces by Devil-dancing--the enormous output of energy and noise in the\nritual possibly having the effect of reanimating the patient (if it does\nnot kill him), or of expelling the disease from his organism.\n\n (1) Milk (\"fast-milk\" or vrata) was, says Mr. Hewitt, the only\ndiet in the Soma-sacrifice. See Ruling Races of Prehistoric Times\n(preface). The Soma itself was a fermented drink prepared with ceremony\nfrom the milky and semen-like sap of certain plants, and much used in\nsacrificial offerings. (See Monier-Williams. Sanskrit Dictionary.)\n\n (2) See Winwood Reade (Savage Africa), Salamon Reinach (Cults,\nMyths and Religions), and others.\n\n\nWith regard to the practical intelligence of primitive peoples,\nderived from their close contact with life and nature, Bishop Colenso's\nexperiences among the Zulus may appropriately be remembered. When\nexpounding the Bible to these supposedly backward 'niggers' he was met\nat all points by practical interrogations and arguments which he was\nperfectly unable to answer--especially over the recorded passage of the\nRed Sea by the Israelites in a single night. From the statistics given\nin the Sacred Book these naughty savages proved to him absolutely\nconclusively that the numbers of fugitives were such that even supposing\nthem to have marched--men, women and children--FIVE ABREAST and in close\norder, they would have formed a column 100 miles long, and this\nnot including the baggage, sheep and cattle! Of course the feat was\nabsolutely impossible. They could not have passed the Red Sea in a night\nor a week of nights.\n\nBut the sequel is still more amusing and instructive. Colenso, in his\ninnocent sincerity, took the side of the Zulus, and feeling sure the\nChurch at home would be quite glad to have its views with regard to\nthe accuracy of Bible statistics corrected, wrote a book embodying the\namendments needed. Modest as his criticisms were, they raised a STORM of\nprotest and angry denunciation, which even led to his deposition for the\ntime being from his bishopric! While at the same time an avalanche of\nbooks to oppose his heresy poured forth from the press. Lately I had the\ncuriosity to look through the British Museum catalogue and found that\nin refutation of Colenso's Pentateuch Examined some 140 (a hundred and\nforty) volumes were at that time published! To-day, I need hardly\nsay, all these arm-chair critics and their works have sunk into utter\nobscurity, but the arguments of the Zulus and their Bishop still stand\nunmoved and immovable.\n\nThis is a case of searching intelligence shown by 'savages,' an\nintelligence founded on intimate knowledge of the needs of actual\nlife. I think we may say that a similarly instinctive intelligence\n(sub-conscious if you like) has guided the tribes of men on the whole\nin their long passage through the Red Sea of the centuries, from those\nfirst days of which I speak even down to the present age, and has in\nsome strange, even if fitful, way kept them along the path of that final\nemancipation towards which Humanity is inevitably moving.\n\n\n\n\nXII. THE SEX-TABOO\n\nIn the course of the last few chapters I have spoken more than once\nof the solidarity and continuity of Christianity, in its essential\ndoctrines, with the Pagan rites. There is, however, one notable\nexception to this statement. I refer of course to Christianity's\ntreatment of Sex. It is certainly very remarkable that while the Pagan\ncults generally made a great deal of all sorts of sex-rites, laid much\nstress upon them, and introduced them in what we consider an unblushing\nand shameless way into the instincts connected with it. I say 'the\nChristian Church,' on the whole took quite the opposite line--ignored\nsex, condemned it, and did much despite to the perfectly natural\ninstincts connected with it. I say 'the Christian Church,' because\nthere is nothing to show that Jesus himself (if we admit his figure as\nhistorical) adopted any such extreme or doctrinaire attitude; and the\nquite early Christian teachers (with the chief exception of Paul) do not\nexhibit this bias to any great degree. In fact, as is well known, strong\ncurrents of pagan usage and belief ran through the Christian assemblies\nof the first three or four centuries. \"The Christian art of this period\nremained delightfully pagan. In the catacombs we see the Saviour as a\nbeardless youth, like a young Greek god; sometimes represented, like\nHermes the guardian of the flocks, bearing a ram or lamb round his neck;\nsometimes as Orpheus tuning his lute among the wild animals.\" (1)\nThe followers of Jesus were at times even accused--whether rightly\nor wrongly I know not--of celebrating sexual mysteries at their\nlove-feasts. But as the Church through the centuries grew in power and\nscope--with its monks and their mutilations and asceticisms, and its\ncelibate clergy, and its absolute refusal to recognize the sexual\nmeaning of its own acclaimed symbols (like the Cross, the three fingers\nof Benediction, the Fleur de Lys and so forth)--it more and more\nconsistently defined itself as anti-sexual in its outlook, and stood out\nin that way in marked contrast to the earlier Nature-religions.\n\n (1) Angels' Wings, by E. Carpenter, p. 104.\n\n\nIt may be said of course that this anti-sexual tendency can be traced in\nother of the pre-Christian Churches, especially the later ones, like the\nBuddhist, the Egyptian, and so forth; and this is perfectly true; but it\nwould seem that in many ways the Christian Church marked the culmination\nof the tendency; and the fact that other cults participated in the taboo\nmakes us all the more ready and anxious to inquire into its real cause.\n\nTo go into a disquisition on the Sex-rites of the various pre-Christian\nreligions would be 'a large order'--larger than I could attempt to fill;\nbut the general facts in this connection are fairly patent. We know,\nof course, from the Bible that the Syrians in Palestine were given to\nsexual worships. There were erect images (phallic) and \"groves\" (sexual\nsymbols) on every high hill and under every green tree; (1) and these\nsame images and the rites connected with them crept into the Jewish\nTemple and were popular enough to maintain their footing there for a\nlong period from King Rehoboam onwards, notwithstanding the efforts of\nJosiah (2) and other reformers to extirpate them. Moreover there were\ngirls and men (hierodouloi) regularly attached during this period to\nthe Jewish Temple as to the heathen Temples, for the rendering of sexual\nservices, which were recognized in many cases as part of the ritual.\nWomen were persuaded that it was an honor and a privilege to be\nfertilized by a 'holy man' (a priest or other man connected with the\nrites), and children resulting from such unions were often called\n\"Children of God\"--an appellation which no doubt sometimes led to a\nlegend of miraculous birth! Girls who took their place as hierodouloi in\nthe Temple or Temple-precincts were expected to surrender themselves\nto men-worshipers in the Temple, much in the same way, probably, as\nHerodotus describes in the temple of the Babylonian Venus Mylitta, where\nevery native woman, once in her life, was supposed to sit in the Temple\nand have intercourse with some stranger. (3) Indeed the Syrian and\nJewish rites dated largely from Babylonia. \"The Hebrews entering\nSyria,\" says Richard Burton (4) \"found it religionized by Assyria and\nBabylonia, when the Accadian Ishtar had passed West, and had become\nAshtoreth, Ashtaroth, or Ashirah, the Anaitis of Armenia, the Phoenician\nAstarte, and the Greek Aphrodite, the great Moon-goddess who is queen of\nHeaven and Love.\" The word translated \"grove\" as above, in our Bible,\nis in fact Asherah, which connects it pretty clearly with the Babylonian\nQueen of Heaven.\n\n (1) 1 Kings xiv. 22-24.\n\n (2) 2 Kings xxiii.\n\n (3) See Herodotus i. 199; also a reference to this custom in the\napocryphal Baruch, vi. 42, 43.\n\n (4) The Thousand Nights and a Night (1886 edn.), vol. x, p. 229.\n\n\nIn India again, in connection with the Hindu Temples and their rites,\nwe have exactly the same institution of girls attached to the Temple\nservice--the Nautch-girls--whose functions in past times were certainly\nsexual, and whose dances in honor of the god are, even down to the\npresent day, decidedly amatory in character. Then we have the very\nnumerous lingams (conventional representations of the male organ) to\nbe seen, scores and scores of them, in the arcades and cloisters of the\nHindu Temples--to which women of all classes, especially those who\nwish to become mothers, resort, anointing them copiously with oil, and\nsignalizing their respect and devotion to them in a very practical\nway. As to the lingam as representing the male organ, in some form or\nother--as upright stone or pillar or obelisk or slender round tower--it\noccurs all over the world, notably in Ireland, and forms such a\nmemorial of the adoration paid by early folk to the great emblem and\ninstrument of human fertility, as cannot be mistaken. The pillars set\nup by Solomon in front of his temple were obviously from their\nnames--Jachin and Boaz (1)--meant to be emblems of this kind; and the\nfact that they were crowned with pomegranates--the universally accepted\nsymbol of the female--confirms and clinches this interpretation. The\nobelisks before the Egyptians' temples were signs of the same character.\nThe well-known T-shaped cross was in use in pagan lands long before\nChristianity, as a representation of the male member, and also at the\nsame time of the 'tree' on which the god (Attis or Adonis or Krishna or\nwhoever it might be) was crucified; and the same symbol combined with\nthe oval (or yoni) formed THE Crux Ansata {Ankh} of the old Egyptian\nritual--a figure which is to-day sold in Cairo as a potent charm, and\nconfessedly indicates the conjunction of the two sexes in one design.\n(2) MacLennan in The Fortnightly Review (Oct. 1869) quotes with approval\nthe words of Sanchoniathon, as saying that \"men first worship plants,\nnext the heavenly bodies, supposed to be animals, then 'pillars'\n(emblems of the Procreator), and last, the anthropomorphic gods.\"\n\n (1) \"He shall establish\" and \"In it is strength\" are in the Bible\nthe marginal interpretations of these two words.\n\n (2) The connection between the production of fire by means of the\nfire-drill and the generation of life by sex-intercourse is a very\nobvious one, and lends itself to magical ideas. J. E. Hewitt in his\nRuling Races of Prehistoric Times (1894) says (vol. i, p. 8) that\n\"Magha, the mother-goddess worshipped in Asia Minor, was originally the\nsocket-block from which fire was generated by the fire-drill.\" Hence we\nhave, he says, the Magi of Persia, and the Maghadas of Indian History,\nalso the word \"Magic.\"\n\n\nIt is not necessary to enlarge on this subject. The facts of the\nconnection of sexual rites with religious services nearly everywhere in\nthe early world are, as I say, sufficiently patent to every inquirer.\nBut it IS necessary to try to understand the rationale of this\nconnection. To dispatch all such cases under the mere term \"religious\nprostitution\" is no explanation. The term suggests, of course, that the\nplea of religion was used simply as an excuse and a cover for sexual\nfamiliarities; but though this kind of explanation commends itself,\nno doubt, to the modern man--whose religion is as commercial as his\nsex-relationships are--and though in CASES no doubt it was a true\nexplanation--yet it is obvious that among people who took religion\nseriously, as a matter of life and death and who did not need\nhypocritical excuses or covers for sex-relationships, it cannot be\naccepted as in general the RIGHT explanation. No, the real explanation\nis--and I will return to this presently--that sexual relationships are\nso deep and intimate a part of human nature that from the first it has\nbeen simply impossible to keep them OUT of religion--it being of\ncourse the object of religion to bring the whole human being into\nsome intelligible relation with the physical, moral, and if you like\nsupernatural order of the great world around him. Sex was felt from the\nfirst to be part, and a foundational part, of the great order of the\nworld and of human nature; and therefore to separate it from Religion\nwas unthinkable and a kind of contradiction in terms. (1)\n\n (1) For further development of this subject see ch. xv.\n\n\nIf that is true--it will be asked--how was it that that divorce DID take\nplace--that the taboo did arise? How was it that the Jews, under the\ninfluence of Josiah and the Hebrew prophets, turned their faces away\nfrom sex and strenuously opposed the Syrian cults? How was it that this\nreaction extended into Christianity and became even more definite in the\nChristian Church--that monks went by thousands into the deserts of the\nThebaid, and that the early Fathers and Christian apologists could\nnot find terms foul enough to hurl at Woman as the symbol (to them) of\nnothing but sex-corruption and delusion? How was it that this contempt\nof the body and degradation of sex-things went on far into the Middle\nAges of Europe, and ultimately created an organized system of hypocrisy,\nand concealment and suppression of sex-instincts, which, acting as cover\nto a vile commercial Prostitution and as a breeding ground for horrible\nDisease, has lasted on even to the edge of the present day?\n\nThis is a fair question, and one which demands an answer. There must\nhave been a reason, and a deep-rooted one, for this remarkable reaction\nand volte-face which has characterized Christianity, and, perhaps to\na lesser degree, other both earlier and later cults like those of the\nBuddhists, the Egyptians, the Aztecs, (1) and so forth.\n\n (1) For the Aztecs, see Acosta, vol. ii, p. 324 (London, 1604).\n\n\nIt may be said--and this is a fair answer on the SURFACE of the\nproblem--that the main reason WAS something in the nature of a reaction.\nThe excesses and corruptions of sex in Syria had evidently become pretty\nbad, and that very fact may have led to a pendulum-swing of the Jewish\nChurch in the opposite direction; and again in the same way the general\nlaxity of morals in the decay of the Roman empire may have confirmed the\nChurch of early Christendom in its determination to keep along the\ngreat high road of asceticism. The Christian followed on the Jewish\nand Egyptian Churches, and in this way a great tradition of sexual\ncontinence and anti-pagan morality came right down the centuries even\ninto modern times.\n\nThis seems so far a reasonable theory; but I think we shall go farther\nand get nearer the heart of the problem if we revert to the general clue\nwhich I have followed already more than once--the clue of the necessary\nevolution of human Consciousnss. In the first or animal stage of\nhuman evolution, Sex was (as among the animals) a perfectly necessary,\ninstinctive and unself-conscious activity. It was harmonious with\nitself, natural, and unproductive of evil. But when the second stage set\nin, in which man became preponderantly _self_-conscious, he inevitably\nset about deflecting sex-activities to his own private pleasure and\nadvantage; he employed his budding intellect in scheming the derailment\nof passion and desire from tribal needs and Nature's uses to the poor\ndetails of his own gratification. If the first stage of harmonious\nsex-instinct and activity may be held as characteristic of the Golden\nAge, the second stage must be taken to represent the Fall of man and his\nexpulsion from Paradise in the Garden of Eden story. The pleasure and\nglory of Sex having been turned to self-purposes, Sex itself became the\ngreat Sin. A sense of guilt overspread man's thoughts on the subject.\n\"He knew that he was naked,\" and he fled from the voice and face of the\nLord. From that moment one of the main objects of his life (in its inner\nand newer activities) came to be the _denial_ of Sex. Sex was conceived\nof as the great Antagonist, the old Serpent lying ever in wait to betray\nhim; and there arrived a moment in the history of every race, and of\nevery representative religion, when the sexual rites and ceremonies of\nthe older time lost their naive and quasi-innocent character and became\nafflicted with a sense of guilt and indecency. This extraordinarily\ninteresting and dramatic moment in human evolution was of course that in\nwhich self-consciousness grew powerful enough to penetrate to the centre\nof human vitality, the _sanctum_ of man's inner life, his sexual instinct,\nand to deal it a terrific blow--a blow from which it has never yet\nrecovered, and from which indeed it will not recover, until the very\nnature of man's inner life is changed.\n\nIt may be said that it was very foolish of Man to deny and to try\nto expel a perfectly natural and sensible thing, a necessary and\nindispensable part of his own nature. And that, as far as I can see, is\nperfectly true. But sometimes it is unavoidable, it would seem, to do\nfoolish things--if only to convince oneself of one's own foolishness.\nOn the other hand, this policy on the part of Man was certainly very\nwise--wiser than he knew--for in attempting to drive out Sex (which of\ncourse he could not do) he entered into a conflict which was bound\nto end in the expulsion of SOMETHING; and that something was the\ndomination, within himself, of self-consciousness, the very thing which\nmakes and ever has made sex detestable. Man did not succeed in driving\nthe snake out of the Garden, but he drove himself out, taking the real\nold serpent of self-greed and self-gratification with him. When some day\nhe returns to Paradise this latter will have died in his bosom and been\ncast away, but he will find the good Snake there as of old, full of\nhealing and friendliness, among the branches of the Tree of Life.\n\nBesides it is evident from other considerations that this moment of the\ndenial of sex HAD to come. When one thinks of the enormous power of this\npassion, and its age-long, hold upon the human race, one realizes that\nonce liberated from the instinctive bonds of nature, and backed by a\nself-conscious and self-seeking human intelligence it was on the way to\nbecome a fearful curse.\n\n  A monstrous Eft was of old the Lord and Master of Earth;\n  For him did his high sun flame, and his river billowing ran.\n\nAnd this may have been all very well and appropriate in the\ncarboniferous Epoch, but WE in the end of Time have no desire to fall\nunder any such preposterous domination, or to return to the primal\nswamps from which organic nature has so slowly and painfully emerged.\n\nI say it was the entry of self-consciousness into the sphere of Sex, and\nthe consequent use of the latter for private ends, which poisoned\nthis great race-power at its root. For above all, Sex, as representing\nthrough Childbirth the life of the Race (or of the Tribe, or, if you\nlike, of Humanity at large) should be sacred and guarded from merely\nselfish aims, and therefore to use it only for such aims is indeed a\ndesecration. And even if--as some maintain and I think rightly (1)--sex\nis not MERELY for child-birth and physical procreation, but for mutual\nvitalizing and invigoration, it still subserves union and not egotism;\nand to use it egotistically is to commit the sin of Separation indeed.\nIt is to cast away and corrupt the very bond of life and fellowship. The\nancient peoples at any rate threw an illumination of religious (that is,\nof communal and public) value over sex-acts, and to a great extent made\nthem into matters either of Temple-ritual and the worship of the gods,\nor of communal and pandemic celebration, as in the Saturnalia and\nother similar festivals. We have certainly no right to regard these\ncelebrations--of either kind--as insincere. They were, at any rate in\ntheir inception, genuinely religious or genuinely social and festal;\nand from either point of view they were far better than the secrecy\nof private indulgence which characterizes our modern world in these\nmatters. The thorough and shameless commercialism of Sex has alas!\nbeen reserved for what is called \"Christian civilization,\" and with\nit (perhaps as a necessary consequence) Prostitution and Syphilis have\ngrown into appalling evils, accompanied by a gigantic degradation of\nsocial standards, and upgrowth of petty Philistinism and niaiserie.\nLove, in fact, having in this modern world-movement been denied, and its\nnatural manifestations affected with a sense of guilt and of sin, has\nreally languished and ceased to play its natural part in life; and a\nvast number of people--both men and women, finding themselves barred or\nderailed from the main object of existence, have turned their energies\nto 'business' or 'money-making' or 'social advancement' or something\nequally futile, as the only poor substitute and pis aller open to them.\n\n (1) See Havelock Ellis, The Objects of Marriage, a pamphlet\npublished by the \"British Society for the Study of Sex-psychology.\"\n\n\nWhy (again we ask) did Christianity make this apparently great mistake?\nAnd again we must reply: Perhaps the mistake was not so great as\nit appears to be. Perhaps this was another case of the necessity of\nlearning by loss. Love had to be denied, in the form of sex, in order\nthat it might thus the better learn its own true values and needs. Sex\nhad to be rejected, or defiled with the sense of guilt and self-seeking,\nin order that having cast out its defilement it might return one day,\ntransformed in the embrace of love. The whole process has had a deep and\nstrange world-significance. It has led to an immensely long period of\nsuppression--suppression of two great instincts--the physical instinct\nof sex and the emotional instinct of love. Two things which should\nnaturally be conjoined have been separated; and both have suffered.\nAnd we know from the Freudian teachings what suppressions in the\nroot-instincts necessarily mean. We know that they inevitably terminate\nin diseases and distortions of proper action, either in the body or\nin the mind, or in both; and that these evils can only be cured by the\nliberation of the said instincts again to their proper expression and\nharmonious functioning in the whole organism. No wonder then that, with\nthis agelong suppression (necessary in a sense though it may have\nbeen) which marks the Christian dispensation, there should have\nbeen associated endless Sickness and Crime and sordid Poverty, the\nCrucifixion of animals in the name of Science and of human workers in\nthe name of Wealth, and wars and horrors innumerable! Hercules writhing\nin the Nessus-shirt or Prometheus nailed to the rocks are only as\nfigures of a toy miniature compared with this vision of the great and\ndivine Spirit of Man caught in the clutches of those dread Diseases\nwhich through the centuries have been eating into his very heart and\nvitals.\n\nIt would not be fair to pile on the Christian Church the blame for all\nthis. It had, no doubt, its part to play in the whole great scheme,\nnamely, to accentuate the self-motive; and it played the part very\nthoroughly and successfully. For it must be remembered (what I have\nagain and again insisted on) that in the pagan cults it was always\nthe salvation of the CLAN, the TRIBE, the people that was the main\nconsideration; the advantage of the individual took only a very\nsecondary part. But in Christendom--after the communal enthusiasms\nof apostolic days and of the medieval and monastic brotherhoods and\nsisterhoods had died down--religion occupied itself more and more with\neach man or woman's INDIVIDUAL salvation, regardless of what might\nhappen to the community; till, with the rise of Protestantism and\nPuritanism, this tendency reached such an extreme that, as some one has\nsaid, each man was absorbed in polishing up his own little soul in a\ncorner to himself, in entire disregard to the damnation which might come\nto his neighbor. Religion, and Morality too, under the commercial regime\nbecame, as was natural, perfectly selfish. It was always: \"Am _I_ saved?\nAm _I_ doing the right thing? Am _I_ winning the favor of God and man?\nWill my claims to salvation be allowed? Did _I_ make a good bargain\nin allowing Jesus to be crucified for me?\" The poison of a diseased\nself-consciousness entered into the whole human system.\n\nAs I say, one must not blame the Christians too much for all\nthis--partly because, AFTER the communal periods which I have just\nmentioned, Christianity was evidently deeply influenced by the rise\nof COMMERCIALISM, to which during the last two centuries it has so\ncarefully and piously adapted itself; and partly because--if our view is\nanywhere near right--this microbial injection of self-consciousness was\njust the necessary work which (in conjunction with commercialism) it HAD\nto perform. But though one does not blame Christianity one cannot blind\noneself to its defects--the defects necessarily arising from the part it\nhad to play. When one compares a healthy Pagan ritual--say of Apollo or\nDionysus--including its rude and crude sacrifices if you like, but also\nincluding its whole-hearted spontaneity and dedication to the common\nlife and welfare--with the morbid self-introspection of the Christian\nand the eternally recurring question \"What shall I do to be saved?\"--the\ncomparison is not favorable to the latter. There is (at any rate in\nmodern days) a mawkish milk-and-wateriness about the Christian attitude,\nand also a painful self-consciousness, which is not pleasant; and though\nNietzsche's blonde beast is a sufficiently disagreeable animal, one\nalmost thinks that it were better to be THAT than to go about with one's\nhead meekly hanging on one side, and talking always of altruism and\nself-sacrifice, while in reality one's heart was entirely occupied with\nthe question of one's own salvation. There is besides a lamentable want\nof grit and substance about the Christian doctrines and ceremonials.\nSomehow under the sex-taboo they became spiritualized and etherealized\nout of all human use. Study the initiation-rites of any savage\ntribe--with their strict discipline of the young braves in fortitude,\nand the overcoming of pain and fear; with their very detailed lessons in\nthe arts of war and life and the duties of the grown man to his tribe;\nand with their quite practical instruction in matters of Sex; and then\nread our little Baptismal and Confirmation services, which ought to\ncorrespond thereto. How thin and attenuated and weak the latter\nappear! Or compare the Holy Communion, as celebrated in the sentimental\natmosphere of a Protestant Church, with an ancient Eucharistic feast of\nreal jollity and community of life under the acknowledged presence\nof the god; or the Roman Catholic service of the Mass, including its\ngenuflexions and mock oblations and droning ritual sing-song, with the\nactual sacrifice in early days of an animal-god-victim on a blazing\naltar; and I think my meaning will be clear. We do not want, of course,\nto return to all the crudities and barbarities of the past; but also we\ndo not want to become attenuated and spiritualized out of all mundane\nsense and recognition, and to live in an otherworld Paradise void of\napplication to earthly affairs.\n\nThe sex-taboo in Christianity was apparently, as I have said, an effort\nof the human soul to wrest itself free from the entanglement of physical\nlust--which lust, though normal and appropriate and in a way gracious\namong the animals, had through the domination of self-consciousness\nbecome diseased and morbid or monstrous in Man. The work thus done has\nprobably been of the greatest value to the human race; but, just as in\nother cases it has sometimes happened that the effort to do a certain\nwork has resulted in the end in an unbalanced exaggeration so here. We\nare beginning to see now the harmful side of the repression of sex, and\nare tentatively finding our way back again to a more pagan attitude.\nAnd as this return-movement is taking place at a time when, from many\nobvious signs, the self-conscious, grasping, commercial conception of\nlife is preparing to go on the wane, and the sense of solidarity to\nre-establish itself, there is really good hope that our return-journey\nmay prove in some degree successful.\n\nMan progresses generally, not both legs at once like a sparrow, but\nby putting one leg forward first, and then the other. There was this\nadvantage in the Christian taboo of sex that by discouraging the\nphysical and sensual side of love it did for the time being allow the\nspiritual side to come forward. But, as I have just now indicated,\nthere is a limit to that process. We cannot always keep one leg first in\nwalking, and we do not want, in life, always to put the spiritual first,\nnor always the material and sensual. The two sides in the long run have\nto keep pace with each other.\n\nAnd it may be that a great number of the very curious and seemingly\nsenseless taboos that we find among the primitive peoples can be partly\nexplained in this way: that is, that by ruling out certain directions\nof activity they enabled people to concentrate more effectually, for\nthe time being, on other directions. To primitive folk the great world,\nwhose ways are puzzling enough in all conscience to us, must have been\nsimply bewildering in its dangers and complications. It was an amazement\nof Fear and Ignorance. Thunderbolts might come at any moment out of the\nblue sky, or a demon out of an old tree trunk, or a devastating plague\nout of a bad smell--or apparently even out of nothing at all! Under\nthose circumstances it was perhaps wise, wherever there was the smallest\nSUSPICION of danger or ill-luck, to create a hard and fast TABOO--just\nas we tell our children ON NO ACCOUNT to walk under a ladder (thereby\ncreating a superstition in their minds), partly because it would take\ntoo long to explain all about the real dangers of paint-pots and other\nthings, and partly because for the children themselves it seems simpler\nto have a fixed and inviolable law than to argue over every case that\noccurs. The priests and elders among early folk no doubt took the\nline of FORBIDDAL of activities, as safer and simpler, even if\ncarried sometimes too far, than the opposite, of easy permission and\nencouragement. Taboos multiplied--many of them quite senseless--but\nperhaps in this perilous maze of the world, of which I have spoken,\nit really WAS simpler to cut out a large part of the labyrinth, as\nforbidden ground, thus rendering it easier for the people to find their\nway in those portions of the labyrinth which remained. If you read in\nDeuteronomy (ch. xiv) the list of birds and beasts and fishes permitted\nfor food among the Israelites, or tabooed, you will find the list on\nthe whole reasonable, but you will be struck by some curious exceptions\n(according to our ideas), which are probably to be explained by the\nnecessity of making the rules simple enough to be comprehended by\neverybody--even if they included the forbiddal of some quite eatable\nanimals.\n\nAt some early period, in Babylonia or Assyria, a very stringent taboo on\nthe Sabbath arose, which, taken up in turn by the Jewish and Christian\nChurches, has ruled the Western World for three thousand years or more,\nand still survives in a quite senseless form among some of our rural\npopulations, who will see their corn rot in the fields rather than save\nit on a Sunday. (1) It is quite likely that this taboo in its first\nbeginning was due not to any need of a weekly rest-day (a need which\ncould never be felt among nomad savages, but would only occur in\nsome kind of industrial and stationary civilization), but to some\nsuperstitious fear, connected with such things as the changes of the\nMoon, and the probable ILL-LUCK of any enterprise undertaken on the\nseventh day, or any day of Moon-change. It is probable, however, that as\ntime went on and Society became more complex, the advantages of a weekly\nREST-DAY (or market-day) became more obvious and that the priests and\nlegislators deliberately turned the taboo to a social use. (2) The\nlearned modern Ethnologists, however, will generally have none of this\nlatter idea. As a rule they delight in representing early peoples as\ntotally destitute of common sense (which is supposed to be a monopoly\nof us moderns!); and if the Sabbath-arrangement has had any value or\nuse they insist on ascribing this to pure accident, and not to the\napplication of any sane argument or reason.\n\n (1) For other absurd Sunday taboos see Westermarck on The Moral\nIdeas, vol. ii, p. 289.\n\n (2) For a tracing of this taboo from useless superstition to\npractical utility see Hastings's Encycl. Religion and Ethics, art. \"The\nSabbath.\"\n\n\nIt is true indeed that a taboo--in order to be a proper taboo--must not\nrest in the general mind on argument or reason. It may have had good\nsense in the past or even an underlying good sense in the present, but\nits foundation must rest on something beyond. It must be an absolute\nfiat--something of the nature of a Mystery (1) or of Religion or\nMagic-and not to be disputed. This gives it its blood-curdling quality.\nThe rustic does not know what would happen to him if he garnered his\ncorn on Sunday, nor does the diner-out in polite society know what\nwould happen if he spooned up his food with his knife--but they both are\nstricken with a sort of paralysis at the very suggestion of infringing\nthese taboos.\n\n (1) See Westermarck, Ibid., ii. 586.\n\n\nMarriage-customs have always been a fertile field for the generation\nof taboos. It seems doubtful whether anything like absolute promiscuity\never prevailed among the human race, but there is much to show that wide\nchoice and intercourse were common among primitive folk and that the\ntendency of later marriage custom has been on the whole to LIMIT this\nrange of choice. At some early period the forbiddal of marriage between\nthose who bore the same totem-name took place. Thus in Australia \"no man\nof the Emu stock might marry an Emu woman; no Blacksnake might marry a\nBlacksnake woman, and so forth.\" (1) Among the Kamilaroi and the Arunta\nof S. Australia the tribe was divided into classes or clans, sometimes\nfour, sometimes eight, and a man of one particular clan was only\nmarriageable with a woman of another particular clan--say (1) with (3)\nor (2) with (4), and so on. (2) Customs with a similar tendency, but\ndifferent in detail, seem to have prevailed among native tribes in\nCentral Africa and N. America. And the regulations in all this matter\nhave been so (apparently) entirely arbitrary in the various cases that\nit would almost appear as if the bar of kinship through the Totem had\nbeen the EXCUSE, originating perhaps in some superstition, but that the\nreal and more abiding object was simply limitation. And this perhaps was\na wise line to take. A taboo on promiscuity had to be created, and for\nthis purpose any current prejudice could be made use of. (3)\n\n (1) Myth, Ritual and Religion, i, p. 66.\n\n (2) See Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes of Australia.\n\n (3) The author of The Mystic Rose seems to take this view. See\np. 214 of that book.\n\n\nWith us moderns the whole matter has taken a different complexion. When\nwe consider the enormous amount of suffering and disease, both of mind\nand body, arising from the sex-suppression of which I have just spoken,\nespecially among women, we see that mere unreasoning taboos--which\npossibly had their place and use in the past--can be tolerated no\nlonger. We are bound to turn the searchlight of reason and science on a\nnumber of superstitions which still linger in the dark and musty\nplaces of the Churches and the Law courts. Modern inquiry has shown\nconclusively not only the foundational importance of sex in the\nevolution of each human being, but also the very great VARIETY of\nspontaneous manifestations in different individuals and the vital\nnecessity that these should be recognized, if society is ever to expand\ninto a rational human form. It is not my object here to sketch the\nfuture of marriage and sex-relations generally--a subject which is now\nbeing dealt with very effectively from many sides; but only to insist on\nour using our good sense in the whole matter, and refusing any longer to\nbe bound by senseless pre-judgments.\n\nSomething of the same kind may be said with regard to Nakedness, which\nin modern Civilization has become the object of a very serious and\nindeed harmful taboo; both of speech and act. As someone has said, it\nbecame in the end of the nineteenth century almost a crime to mention\nby name any portion of the human body within a radius of about twenty\ninches from its centre (!) and as a matter of fact a few dress-reformers\nof that period were actually brought into court and treated as criminals\nfor going about with legs bare up to the knees, and shoulders and chest\nuncovered! Public follies such as these have been responsible for much\nof the bodily and mental disease and suppression just mentioned, and\nthe sooner they are sent to limbo the better. No sensible person\nwould advocate promiscuous nakedness any more than promiscuous\nsex-relationship; nor is it likely that aged and deformed people would\nat any time wish to expose themselves. But surely there is enough good\nsense and appreciation of grace and fitness in the average human mind\nfor it to be able to liberate the body from senseless concealment, and\ngive it its due expression. The Greeks of old, having on the whole\nclean bodies, treated them with respect and distinction. The young men\nappeared quite naked in the palaestra, and even the girls of Sparta ran\nraces publicly in the same condition; (1) and some day when our\nbodies (and minds too) have become clean we shall return to similar\ninstitutions. But that will not be just yet. As long as the defilement\nof this commercial civilization is on us we shall prefer our dirt and\nconcealment. The powers that be will protest against change. Heinrich\nScham, in his charming little pamphlet Nackende Menschen, (2) describes\nthe consternation of the commercial people at such ideas:\n\n\"'What will become of us,' cried the tailors, 'if you go naked?'\n\n\"And all the lot of them, hat, cravat, shirt, and shoemakers joined in\nthe chorus.\n\n\"'AND WHERE SHALL I CARRY MY MONEY?' cried one who had just been made a\ndirector.\"\n\n\n (1) See Theocritus, Idyll xviii.\n\n (2) Published at Leipzig about 1893.\n\n\n\n\nXIII. THE GENESIS OF CHRISTIANITY\n\nReferring back to the existence of something resembling a great\nWorld-religion which has come down the centuries, continually expanding\nand branching in the process, we have now to consider the genesis of\nthat special brand or branch of it which we call Christianity. Each\nreligion or cult, pagan or Christian, has had, as we have seen, a vast\namount in common with the general World-religion; yet each has had its\nown special characteristics. What have been the main characteristics of\nthe Christian branch, as differentiating it from the other branches?\n\nWe saw in the last chapter that a certain ascetic attitude towards Sex\nwas one of the most salient marks of the Christian Church; and that\nwhereas most of the pagan cults (though occasionally favoring frightful\nausterities and cruel sacrifices) did on the whole rejoice in pleasure\nand the world of the senses, Christianity--following largely on\nJudaism--displayed a tendency towards renunciation of the world and the\nflesh, and a withdrawal into the inner and more spiritual regions of the\nmind. The same tendency may be traced in the Egyptian and Phrygian cults\nof that period. It will be remembered how Juvenal (Sat. VI, 510-40)\nchaffs the priests of Cybele at Rome for making themselves \"eunuchs for\nthe kingdom of heaven's sake,\" or the rich Roman lady for plunging in\nthe wintry Tiber for a propitiation to Isis. No doubt among the later\npagans \"the long intolerable tyranny of the senses over the soul\" had\nbecome a very serious matter. But Christianity represented perhaps the\nmost powerful reaction against this; and this reaction had, as indicated\nin the last chapter, the enormously valuable result that (for the time)\nit disentangled love from sex and established Love, pure and undefiled,\nas ruler of the world. \"God is Love.\" But, as also indicated, the\ndivorce between the two elements of human nature, carried to an extreme,\nled in time to a crippling of both elements and the development of a\ncertain morbidity and self-consciousness which, it cannot be denied, is\npainfully marked among some sections of Christians--especially those of\nthe altruistic and 'philanthropic' type.\n\nAnother characteristic of Christianity which is also very fine in\nits way but has its limits of utility, has been its insistence on\n\"morality.\" Some modern writers indeed have gone so far--forgetting, I\nsuppose, the Stoics--as to claim that Christianity's chief mark is its\nhigh morality, and that the pagans generally were quite wanting in the\nmoral sense! This, of course, is a profound mistake. I should say that,\nin the true sense of the word, the early and tribal peoples have been\nmuch more 'moral' as a rule--that is, ready as individuals to pay\nrespect to the needs of the community--than the later and more civilized\nsocieties. But the mistake arises from the different interpretations of\nthe word; for whereas all the pagan religions insisted very strongly on\nthe just-mentioned kind of morality, which we should call _civic duty to\none\u2019s neighbor_, the Christian made morality to consist more especially\nin a man\u2019s _duty to God_. It became with them a private affair between a\nman\u2019s self and God, rather than a public affair; and thus led in the end\nto a very obnoxious and quite pharisaic kind of morality, whose chief\ninspiration was not the helping of one's fellow-man but the saving of\none's own soul.\n\nThere may perhaps be other salient points of differentiation between\nChristianity and the preceding pagan religions; but for the present we\nmay recognize these two--(a) the tendency towards a renunciation of the\nworld, and the consequent cultivation of a purely spiritual love and (b)\nthe insistence on a morality whose inspiration was a private sense of\nduty to God rather than a public sense of duty to one's neighbor and to\nsociety generally. It may be interesting to trace the causes which led\nto this differentiation.\n\nThree centuries before our era the conquests of Alexander had had the\neffect of spreading the Greek thought and culture over most of the known\nworld. A vast number of small bodies of worshipers of local deities,\nwith their various rituals and religious customs, had thus been broken\nup, or at least brought into contact with each other and partially\nmodified and hellenized. The orbit of a more general conception of life\nand religion was already being traced. By the time of the founding of\nthe first Christian Church the immense conquests of Rome had greatly\nextended and established the process. The Mediterranean had become a\ngreat Roman lake. Merchant ships and routes of traffic crossed it in all\ndirections; tourists visited its shores. The known world had become one.\nThe numberless peoples, tribes, nations, societies within the girdle of\nthe Empire, with their various languages, creeds, customs, religions,\nphilosophies, were profoundly influencing each other. (1) A great fusion\nwas taking place; and it was becoming inevitable that the next great\nreligious movement would have a world-wide character.\n\n (1) For an enlargement on this theme see Glover's Conflict of\nReligions in the early Roman Empire; also S. J. Case, Evolution of\nEarly Christianity (University of Chicago, 1914). The Adonis worship, for\ninstance (a resurrection-cult), \"was still thriving in Syria and Cyprus\nwhen Paul preached there,\" and the worship of Isis and Serapis had\nalready reached then, Rome and Naples.\n\n\nIt was probable that this new religion would combine many elements from\nthe preceding rituals in one cult. In connection with the fine temples\nand elaborate services of Isis and Cybele and Mithra there was growing\nup a powerful priesthood; Franz Cumont (1) speaks of \"the learned\npriests of the Asiatic cults\" as building up, on the foundations of old\nfetichism and superstition, a complete religious philosophy--just as\nthe Brahmins had built the monism of the Vedanta on the \"monstrous\nidolatries of Hinduism.\" And it was likely that a similar process would\nevolve the new religion expected. Toutain again calls attention to the\npatronage accorded to all these cults by the Roman Emperors, as favoring\na new combination and synthesis:--\"Hadrien, Commode, Septime S\u00e9v\u00e8re,\nJulia Domna, Elagabal, Alexandre S\u00e9v\u00e8re, en particulier ont contribu\u00e9\npersonnellement a la popularit\u00e9 et au succes des cultes qui se\ncelebraient en l'honneur de Serapis et d'Isis, des divinit\u00e9s syriennes\net de Mithra.\" (2)\n\n (1) See Cumont, Religions Orientales dans le Paganisme Romain\n(Paris, 1906), p. 253.\n\n (2) Cultes paiens dans l'Empire Romain (2 vols., 1911), vol. ii,\np. 263.\n\n\nIt was also probable that this new Religion would show (as indicated\nin the last chapter) a reaction against mere sex-indulgence; and,\nas regards its standard of Morality generally, that, among so many\nconflicting peoples with their various civic and local customs, it could\nnot well identify itself with any ONE of these but would evolve an\ninner inspiration of its own which in its best form would be love of the\nneighbor, regardless of the race, creed or customs of the neighbor, and\nwhose sanction would not reside in any of the external authorities\nthus conflicting with each other, but in the sense of the soul's direct\nresponsibility to God.\n\nSo much for what we might expect a priori as to the influence of the\nsurroundings on the general form of the new Religion. And what about the\nkind of creed or creeds which that religion would favor? Here again\nwe must see that the influence of the surroundings compelled a certain\nresult. Those doctrines which we have described in the preceding\nchapters--doctrines of Sin and Sacrifice, a Savior, the Eucharist, the\nTrinity, the Virgin-birth, and so forth--were in their various forms\nseething, so to speak, all around. It was impossible for any new\nreligious synthesis to escape them; all it could do would be to\nappropriate them, and to give them perhaps a color of its own. Thus\nit is into the midst of this germinating mass that we must imagine the\nvarious pagan cults, like fertilizing streams, descending. To trace all\nthese streams would of course be an impossible task; but it may be of\nuse, as an example of the process, to take the case of some particular\nbelief. Let us take the belief in the coming of a Savior-god; and this\nwill be the more suitable as it is a belief which has in the past been\ncommonly held to be distinctive of Christianity. Of course we know now\nthat it is not in any sense distinctive, but that the long tradition of\nthe Savior comes down from the remotest times, and perhaps from every\ncountry of the world. (1) The Messianic prophecies of the Jews and the\nfifty-third chapter of Isaiah emptied themselves into the Christian\nteachings, and infected them to some degree with a Judaic tinge. The\n\"Messiah\" means of course the Anointed One. The Hebrew word occurs some\n40 times in the Old Testament; and each time in the Septuagint or Greek\ntranslation (made mainly in the third century BEFORE our era) the word\nis translated [gr cristos], or Christos, which again means Anointed.\nThus we see that the idea or the word \"The Christ\" was in vogue in\nAlexandria as far back certainly as 280 B.C., or nearly three centuries\nbefore Jesus. And what the word \"The Anointed\" strictly speaking means,\nand from what the expression is probably derived, will appear later. In\nThe Book of Enoch, written not later than B.C. 170, (2) the Christ is\nspoken of as already existing in heaven, and about to come as judge\nof all men, and is definitely called \"the Son of Man.\" The Book of\nRevelations is FULL of passages from Enoch; so are the Epistles of Paul;\nso too the Gospels. The Book of Enoch believes in a Golden Age that is\nto come; it has Dantesque visions of Heaven and Hell, and of Angels good\nand evil, and it speaks of a \"garden of Righteousness\" with the \"Tree of\nWisdom\" in its midst. Everywhere, says Prof. Drews, in the first century\nB.C., there was the longing for a coming Savior.\n\n (1) Even to-day, the Arabian lands are always vibrating with\nprophecies of a coming Mahdi.\n\n (2) See Edition by R. H. Charles (1893).\n\n\nBut the Savior-god, as we also know, was a familiar figure in Egypt. The\ngreat Osiris was the Savior of the world, both in his life and death: in\nhis life through the noble works he wrought for the benefit of mankind,\nand in his death through his betrayal by the powers of darkness and\nhis resurrection from the tomb and ascent into heaven. (1) The Egyptian\ndoctrines descended through Alexandria into Christianity--and though\nthey did not influence the latter deeply until about 300 A.D., yet they\nthen succeeded in reaching the Christian Churches, giving a color to\ntheir teachings with regard to the Savior, and persuading them to accept\nand honor the Egyptian worship of Isis in the Christian form of the\nVirgin Mary.\n\n (1) See ch. ii.\n\n\nAgain, another great stream of influence descended from Persia in the\nform of the cult of Mithra. Mithra, as we have seen, (1) stood as a\ngreat Mediator between God and man. With his baptisms and eucharists,\nand his twelve disciples, and his birth in a cave, and so forth,\nhe seemed to the early Fathers an invention of the devil and a most\ndangerous mockery on Christianity--and all the more so because his\nworship was becoming so exceedingly popular. The cult seems to have\nreached Rome about B.C. 70. It spread far and wide through the Empire.\nIt extended to Great Britain, and numerous remains of Mithraic\nmonuments and sculptures in this country--at York, Chester and other\nplaces--testify to its wide acceptance even here. At Rome the vogue of\nMithraism became so great that in the third century A. D., it was quite\ndoubtful (2) whether it OR Christianity would triumph; the Emperor\nAurelian in 273 founded a cult of the Invincible Sun in connection with\nMithraism; (3) and as St. Jerome tells us in his letters, (4) the latter\ncult had at a later time to be suppressed in Rome and Alexandria by\nPHYSICAL FORCE, so powerful was it.\n\n (1) Ch. ii.\n\n (2) See Cumont, op. cit., who says, p. 171:--\"Jamais, pas meme a\nl'epoque des invasions mussulmanes, l'Europe ne sembla plus pres\nde devenir asiatique qu'au moment ou Diocletien reconnaissait\nofficiellement en Mithra, le protecteur de l'empire reconstitue.\" See\nalso Cumont's Mysteres de Mithra, preface. The Roman Army, in fact,\nstuck to Mithra throughout, as against Christianity; and so did the\nRoman nobility. (See S. Augustine's Confessions, Book VIII, ch. 2.)\n\n (3) Cumont indeed says that the identification of Mithra with the\nSun (the emblem of imperial power) formed one reason why Mithraism was\nNOT persecuted at that time.\n\n (4) Epist. cvii, ad Laetam. See Robertson's Pagan Christs, p.\n350.\n\n\nNor was force the only method employed. IMITATION is not only the\nsincerest flattery, but it is often the most subtle and effective way of\ndefeating a rival. The priests of the rising Christian Church were, like\nthe priests of ALL religions, not wanting in craft; and at this moment\nwhen the question of a World-religion was in the balance, it was an\nobvious policy for them to throw into their own scale as many elements\nas possible of the popular Pagan cults. Mithraism had been flourishing\nfor 600 years; and it is, to say the least, CURIOUS that the Mithraic\ndoctrines and legends which I have just mentioned should all have been\nadopted (quite unintentionally of course!) into Christianity; and still\nmore so that some others from the same source, like the legend of the\nShepherds at the Nativity and the doctrine of the Resurrection and\nAscension, which are NOT mentioned at all in the original draft of the\nearliest Gospel (St. Mark), should have made their appearance, in the\nChristian writings at a later time, when Mithraism was making great\nforward strides. History shows that as a Church progresses and expands\nit generally feels compelled to enlarge and fortify its own foundations\nby inserting material which was not there at first. I shall shortly give\nanother illustration of this; at present I will merely point out\nthat the Christian writers, as time went on, not only introduced new\ndoctrines, legends, miracles and so forth--most of which we can trace to\nantecedent pagan sources--but that they took especial pains to\ndestroy the pagan records and so obliterate the evidence of their own\ndishonesty. We learn from Porphyry (1) that there were several elaborate\ntreatises setting forth the religion of Mithra; and J. M. Robertson adds\n(Pagan Christs, p. 325): \"everyone of these has been destroyed by the\ncare of the Church, and it is remarkable that even the treatise of\nFirmicus is mutilated at a passage (v.) where he seems to be accusing\nChristians of following Mithraic usages.\" While again Professor Murray\nsays, \"The polemic literature of Christianity is loud and triumphant;\nthe books of the Pagans have been DESTROYED.\" (2)\n\n (1) De Abstinentia, ii. 56; iv. 16.\n\n (2) Four Stages, p. 180. We have probably an instance of this\ndestruction in the total disappearance of Celsus' lively attack\non Christianity (180 A.D.), of which, however, portions have been\nfortunately preserved in Origen's rather prolix refutation of the same.\n\n\nReturning to the doctrine of the Savior, I have already in preceding\nchapters given so many instances of belief in such a deity among the\npagans--whether he be called Krishna or Mithra or Osiris or Horus or\nApollo or Hercules--that it is not necessary to dwell on the subject any\nfurther in order to persuade the reader that the doctrine was 'in the\nair' at the time of the advent of Christianity. Even Dionysus, then\na prominent figure in the 'Mysteries,' was called Eleutherios, The\nDeliverer. But it may be of interest to trace the same doctrine among\nthe PRE-CHRISTIAN sects of Gnostics. The Gnostics, says Professor\nMurray, (1) \"are still commonly thought of as a body of CHRISTIAN\nheretics. In reality there were Gnostic sects scattered over the\nHellenistic world BEFORE Christianity as well as after. They must have\nbeen established in Antioch and probably in Tarsus well before the\ndays of Paul or Apollos. Their Savior, like the Jewish Messiah, was\nestablished in men's minds before the Savior of the Christians. 'If\nwe look close,' says Professor Bousset, 'the result emerges with great\nclearness that the figure of the Redeemer as such did not wait for\nChristianity to force its way into the religion of Gnosis, but was\nalready present there under various forms.'\"\n\n (1) Four Stages, p. 143.\n\n\nThis Gnostic Redeemer, continues Professor Murray, \"is descended by a\nfairly clear genealogy from the 'Tritos Soter' ('third Savior') (1) of\nearly Greece, contaminated with similar figures, like Attis and Adonis\nfrom Asia Minor, Osiris from Egypt, and the special Jewish conception of\nthe Messiah of the Chosen people. He has various names, which the name\nof Jesus or 'Christos,' 'the Anointed,' tends gradually to supersede.\nAbove all, he is in some sense Man, or 'the second Man' or 'the Son of\nMan'... He is the real, the ultimate, the perfect and eternal Man, of\nwhom all bodily men are feeble copies.\" (2)\n\n (1) There seems to be some doubt about the exact meaning of this\nexpression. Even Zeus himself was sometimes called 'Soter,' and at\nfeasts, it is said, the THIRD goblet was always drunk in his honor.\n\n (2) See also The Gnostic Story of Jesus Christ, by Gilbert T.\nSadler (C. W. Daniel, 1919).\n\n\nThis passage brings vividly before the mind the process of which I\nhave spoken, namely, the fusion and mutual interchange of ideas on the\nsubject of the Savior during the period anterior to our era. Also it\nexemplifies to us through what an abstract sphere of Gnostic religious\nspeculation the doctrine had to travel before reaching its expression in\nChristianity. (1) This exalted and high philosophical conception passed\non and came out again to some degree in the Fourth Gospel and the\nPauline Epistles (especially I Cor. xv); but I need hardly say it\nwas not maintained. The enthusiasm of the little scattered Christian\nbodies--with their communism of practice with regard to THIS world and\ntheir intensity of faith with regard to the next--began to wane in the\nsecond and third centuries A.D. As the Church (with capital initial)\ngrew, so was it less and less occupied with real religious feeling, and\nmore and more with its battles against persecution from outside, and its\nquarrels and dissensions concerning heresies within its own borders. And\nwhen at the Council of Nicaea (325 A.D.) it endeavored to establish an\nofficial creed, the strife and bitterness only increased. \"There is no\nwild beast,\" said the Emperor Julian, \"like an angry theologian.\" Where\nthe fourth Evangelist had preached the gospel of Love, and Paul had\nannounced redemption by an inner and spiritual identification with\nChrist, \"As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive\";\nand whereas some at any rate of the Pagan cults had taught a glorious\nsalvation by the new birth of a divine being within each man: \"Be of\ngood cheer, O initiates in the mystery of the liberated god; For to\nyou too out of all your labors and sorrows shall come Liberation\"--the\nNicene creed had nothing to propound except some extremely futile\nspeculations about the relation to each other of the Father and the\nSon, and the relation of BOTH to the Holy Ghost, and of all THREE to the\nVirgin Mary--speculations which only served for the renewal of shameful\nstrife and animosities--riots and bloodshed and murder--within the\nChurch, and the mockery of the heathen without. And as far as it dealt\nwith the crucifixion, death and resurrection of the Lord it did not\ndiffer from the score of preceding pagan creeds, except in the thorough\nmaterialism and lack of poetry in statement which it exhibits. After\nthe Council of Nicaea, in fact, the Judaic tinge in the doctrines of the\nChurch becomes more apparent, and more and more its Scheme of Salvation\nthrough Christ takes the character of a rather sordid and huckstering\nbargain by which Man gets the better of God by persuading the latter\nto sacrifice his own Son for the redemption of the world! With the\nexception of a few episodes like the formation during the Middle Ages of\nthe noble brotherhoods and sisterhoods of Frairs and Nuns, dedicated to\nthe help and healing of suffering humanity, and the appearance of a few\nreal lovers of mankind (and the animals) like St. Francis--(and these\nmanifestations can hardly be claimed by the Church, which pretty\nconsistently opposed them)--it may be said that after about the fourth\ncentury the real spirit and light of early Christian enthusiasm died\naway. The incursions of barbarian tribes from the North and East, and\nlater of Moors and Arabs from the South, familiarized the European\npeoples with the ideas of bloodshed and violence; gross and material\nconceptions of life were in the ascendant; and a romantic and aspiring\nChristianity gave place to a worldly and vulgar Churchianity.\n\n (1) When travelling in India I found that the Gnanis or Wise Men\nthere quite commonly maintained that Jesus (judging from his teaching)\nmust have been initiated at some time in the esoteric doctrines of the\nVedanta.\n\n\nI have in these two or three pages dealt only--and that very\nbriefly--with the entry of the pagan doctrine of the Savior into the\nChristian field, showing its transformation there and how Christianity\ncould not well escape having a doctrine of a Savior, or avoid giving a\ncolor of its own to that doctrine. To follow out the same course\nwith other doctrines, like those which I have mentioned above, would\nobviously be an endless task--which must be left to each student or\nreader to pursue according to his opportunity and capacity. It is clear\nanyhow, that all these elements of the pagan religions--pouring down\ninto the vast reservoir, or rather whirlpool, of the Roman Empire,\nand mixing among all these numerous brotherhoods, societies, collegia,\nmystery-clubs, and groups which were at that time looking out intently\nfor some new revelation or inspiration--did more or less automatically\nact and react upon each other, and by the general conditions prevailing\nwere modified, till they ultimately combined and took united shape\nin the movement which we call Christianity, but which only--as I have\nsaid--narrowly escaped being called Mithraism--so nearly related and\nclosely allied were these cults with each other.\n\n\nAt this point it will naturally be asked: \"And where in this scheme of\nthe Genesis of Christianity is the chief figure and accredited leader of\nthe movement--namely Jesus Christ himself--for to all appearance in the\naccount here given of the matter he is practically non-existent or a\nnegligible quantity?\" And the question is a very pertinent one, and very\ndifficult to answer. \"Where is the founder of the Religion?\"--or to\nput it in another form: \"Is it necessary to suppose a human and visible\nFounder at all?\" A few years ago such a mere question would have been\naccounted rank blasphemy, and would only--if passed over--have been\nignored on account of its supposed absurdity. To-day, however, owing to\nthe enormous amount of work which has been done of late on the\nsubject of Christian origins, the question takes on quite a different\ncomplexion. And from Strauss onwards a growingly influential and learned\nbody of critics is inclined to regard the whole story of the Gospels as\nLEGENDARY. Arthur Drews, for instance, a professor at Karlsruhe, in his\ncelebrated book The Christ-Myth, (1) places David F. Strauss as first\nin the myth field--though he allows that Dupuis in L'origine de tous\nles cultes (1795) had given the clue to the whole idea. He then mentions\nBruno Bauer (1877) as contending that Jesus was a pure invention\nof Mark's, and John M. Robertson as having in his Christianity and\nMythology (1900) given the first thoroughly reasoned exposition of the\nlegendary theory; also Emilio Bossi in Italy, who wrote Jesu Christo\nnon e mai esistito, and similar authors in Holland, Poland, and other\ncountries, including W. Benjamin Smith, the American author of The\nPre-christian Jesus (1906), and P. Jensen in Das Gilgamesch Epos in\nden Welt-literatur (1906), who makes the Jesus-story a variant of the\nBabylonian epic, 2000 B.C. A pretty strong list! (2) \"But,\" continues\nDrews, \"ordinary historians still ignore all this.\" Finally, he\ndismisses Jesus as \"a figure swimming obscurely in the mists of\ntradition.\" Nevertheless I need hardly remark that, large and learned\nas the body of opinion here represented is, a still larger (but less\nlearned) body fights desperately for the actual HISTORICITY of Jesus,\nand some even still for the old view of him as a quite unique and\nmiraculous revelation of Godhood on earth.\n\n (1) Die Christus-mythe: verbesserte und erweitezte Ausgabe, Jena,\n1910.\n\n (2) To which we may also add Schweitzer's Quest of the historical\nJesus (1910).\n\n\nAt first, no doubt, the LEGENDARY theory seems a little TOO far-fetched.\nThere is a fashion in all these things, and it MAY be that there is a\nfashion even here. But when you reflect how rapidly legends grow up even\nin these days of exact Science and an omniscient Press; how the figure\nof Shakespeare, dead only 300 years, is almost completely lost in\nthe mist of Time, and even the authenticity of his works has become a\nsubject of controversy; when you find that William Tell, supposed to\nhave lived some 300 years again before Shakespeare, and whose deeds in\nminutest detail have been recited and honored all over Europe, is almost\ncertainly a pure invention, and never existed; when you remember--as\nmentioned earlier in this book (1)--that it was more than five hundred\nyears after the supposed birth of Jesus before any serious effort\nwas made to establish the date of that birth--and that then a purely\nmythical date was chosen: the 25th December, the day of the SUN'S new\nbirth after the winter solstice, and the time of the supposed birth of\nApollo, Bacchus, and the other Sungods; when, moreover, you think for\na moment what the state of historical criticism must have been, and\nthe general standard of credibility, 1,900 years ago, in a country like\nSyria, and among an ignorant population, where any story circulating\nfrom lip to lip was assured of credence if sufficiently marvelous\nor imaginative;--why, then the legendary theory does not seem so\nimprobable. There is no doubt that after the destruction of Jerusalem\n(in A.D. 70), little groups of believers in a redeeming 'Christ' were\nformed there and in other places, just as there had certainly existed,\nin the first century B.C., groups of Gnostics, Therapeutae, Essenes and\nothers whose teachings were very SIMILAR to the Christian, and there was\nnow a demand from many of these groups for 'writings' and 'histories'\nwhich should hearten and confirm the young and growing Churches. The\nGospels and Epistles, of which there are still extant a great abundance,\nboth apocryphal and canonical, met this demand; but how far their\nrecords of the person of Jesus of Nazareth are reliable history, or how\nfar they are merely imaginative pictures of the kind of man the Saviour\nmight be expected to be, (2) is a question which, as I have already\nsaid, is a difficult one for skilled critics to answer, and one on which\nI certainly have no intention of giving a positive verdict. Personally I\nmust say I think the 'legendary' solution quite likely, and in some ways\nmore satisfactory than the opposite one--for the simple reason that\nit seems much more encouraging to suppose that the story of Jesus,\n(gracious and beautiful as it is) is a myth which gradually formed\nitself in the conscience of mankind, and thus points the way of\nhumanity's future evolution, than to suppose it to be the mere record\nof an unique and miraculous interposition of Providence, which depended\nentirely on the powers above, and could hardly be expected to occur\nagain.\n\n (1) Ch. II.\n\n (2) One of Celsus' accusations against the Christians was that\ntheir Gospels had been written \"several times over\" (see Origen, Contra\nCelsum, ii. 26, 27).\n\n\nHowever, the question is not what we desire, but what we can prove to be\nthe actual fact. And certainly the difficulties in the way of regarding\nthe Gospel story (or stories, for there is not one consistent story)\nas TRUE are enormous. If anyone will read, for instance, in the four\nGospels, the events of the night preceding the crucifixion and reckon\nthe time which they would necessarily have taken to enact--the Last\nSupper, the agony in the Garden, the betrayal by Judas, the haling\nbefore Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, and then before Pilate in the Hall\nof judgment (though courts for the trial of malefactors do not GENERALLY\nsit in the middle of the night); then--in Luke--the interposed visit to\nHerod, and the RETURN to Pilate; Pilate's speeches and washing of hands\nbefore the crowd; then the scourging and the mocking and the arraying of\nJesus in purple robe as a king; then the preparation of a Cross and the\nlong and painful journey to Golgotha; and finally the Crucifixion at\nsunrise;--he will see--as has often been pointed out--that the whole\nstory is physically impossible. As a record of actual events the story\nis impossible; but as a record or series of notes derived from the\nwitnessing of a \"mystery-play\"--and such plays with VERY SIMILAR\nincidents were common enough in antiquity in connection with cults of\na dying Savior, it very likely IS true (one can see the very dramatic\ncharacter of the incidents: the washing of hands, the threefold denial\nby Peter, the purple robe and crown of thorns, and so forth); and as\nsuch it is now accepted by many well-qualified authorities. (1)\n\n (1) Dr. Frazer in The Golden Bough (vol. ix, \"The Scapegoat,\" p.\n400) speaks of the frequency in antiquity of a Mystery-play relating\nto a God-man who gives his life and blood for the people; and he\nputs forward tentatively and by no means dogmatically the following\nnote:--\"Such a drama, if we are right, was the original story of Esther\nand Mordecai, or (to give their older names) Ishtar and Marduk. It was\nplayed in Babylonia, and from Babylonia the returning Captives brought\nit to Judaea, where it was acted, rather as an historical than a\nmythical piece, by players who, having to die in grim earnest on a\ncross or gallows, were naturally drawn from the gaol rather than the\ngreen-room. A chain of causes, which because we cannot follow them\nmight--in the loose language of common life--be called an accident,\ndetermined that the part of the dying god in this annual play should\nbe thrust upon Jesus of Nazareth, whom the enemies he had made in high\nplaces by his outspoken strictures were resolved to put out of the way.\"\nSee also vol. iv, \"The Dying God,\" in the same book.\n\n\nThere are many other difficulties. The raising of Lazarus, already dead\nthree days, the turning of water into wine (a miracle attributed to\nBacchus, of old), the feeding of the five thousand, and others of the\nmarvels are, to say the least, not easy of digestion. The \"Sermon on the\nMount\" which, with the \"Lord's Prayer\" embedded in it, forms the great\nand accepted repository of 'Christian' teaching and piety, is well known\nto be a collection of sayings from pre-christian writings, including the\nPsalms, Isaiah, Ecclesiasticus, the Secrets of Enoch, the Shemonehesreh\n(a book of Hebrew prayers), and others; and the fact that this\ncollection was really made AFTER the time of Jesus, and could not\nhave originated from him, is clear from the stress which it lays on\n\"persecutions\" and \"false prophets\"--things which were certainly not a\nsource of trouble at the time Jesus is supposed to be speaking, though\nthey were at a later time--as well as from the occurrence of the word\n\"Gentiles,\" which being here used apparently in contra-distinction to\n\"Christians\" could not well be appropriate at a time when no recognized\nChristian bodies as yet existed.\n\nBut the most remarkable point in this connection is the absolute\nsilence of the Gospel of Mark on the subject of the Resurrection and\nAscension--that is, of the ORIGINAL Gospel, for it is now allowed on\nall hands that the twelve verses Mark xvi. 9 to the end, are a later\ninsertion. Considering the nature of this event, astounding indeed, if\nphysically true, and unique in the history of the world, it is strange\nthat this Gospel--the earliest written of the four Gospels, and nearest\nin time to the actual evidence--makes no mention of it. The next Gospel\nin point of time--that of Matthew--mentions the matter rather briefly\nand timidly, and reports the story that the body had been STOLEN from\nthe sepulchre. Luke enlarges considerably and gives a whole long chapter\nto the resurrection and ascension; while the Fourth Gospel, written\nfully twenty years later still--say about A. D. 120--gives two chapters\nand a GREAT VARIETY OF DETAILS!\n\nThis increase of detail, however, as one gets farther and farther from\nthe actual event is just what one always finds, as I have said before,\nin legendary traditions. A very interesting example of this has lately\ncome to light in the case of the traditions concerning the life and\ndeath of the Persian Bab. The Bab, as most of my readers will know, was\nthe Founder of a great religious movement which now numbers (or numbered\nbefore the Great War) some millions of adherents, chiefly Mahommedans,\nChristians, Jews and Parsees. The period of his missionary activity\nwas from 1845 to 1850. His Gospel was singularly like that of Jesus--a\ngospel of love to mankind--only (as might be expected from the\ndifference of date) with an even wider and more deliberate inclusion of\nall classes, creeds and races, sinners and saints; and the incidents and\nentourage of his ministry were also singularly similar. He was born at\nShiraz in 1820, and growing up a promising boy and youth, fell at the\nage of 21 under the influence of a certain Seyyid Kazim, leader of a\nheterodox sect, and a kind of fore-runner or John the Baptist to the\nBab. The result was a period of mental trouble (like the \"temptation in\nthe wilderness\"), after which the youth returned to Shiraz and at the\nage of twenty-five began his own mission. His real name was Mirza Ali\nMuhammad, but he called himself thenceforth The Bab, i.e. the Gate (\"I\nam the Way\"); and gradually there gathered round him disciples, drawn\nby the fascination of his personality and the devotion of his character.\nBut with the rapid increase of his following great jealousy and hatred\nwere excited among the Mullahs, the upholders of a fanatical and\nnarrow-minded Mahommedanism and quite corresponding to the Scribes and\nPharisees of the New Testament. By them he was denounced to the\nTurkish Government. He was arrested on a charge of causing political\ndisturbance, and was condemned to death. Among his disciples was one\nfavorite, (1) who was absolutely devoted to his Master and refused to\nleave him at the last. So together they were suspended over the city\nwall (at Tabriz) and simultaneously shot. This was on the 8th July,\n1850.\n\n (1) Mirza Muhammad Ali; and one should note the similarity of\nthe two names.\n\n\nIn November 1850--or between that date and October 1851, a book\nappeared, written by one of the B[a^]b's earliest and most enthusiastic\ndisciples--a merchant of Kashan--and giving in quite simple and\nunpretending form a record of the above events. There is in it no\naccount of miracles or of great pretensions to godhood and the like. It\nis just a plain history of the life and death of a beloved teacher.\nIt was cordially received and circulated far and wide; and we have no\nreason for doubting its essential veracity. And even if proved now to be\ninaccurate in one or two details, this would not invalidate the moral of\nthe rest of the story--which is as follows:\n\nAfter the death of the Bab a great persecution took place (in 1852);\nthere were many Babi martyrs, and for some years the general followers\nwere scattered. But in time they gathered themselves together again;\nsuccessors to the original prophet were appointed--though not without\ndissensions--and a Babi church, chiefly at Acca or Acre in Syria, began\nto be formed. It was during this period that a great number of legends\ngrew up--legends of miraculous babyhood and boyhood, legends of miracles\nperformed by the mature Bab, and so forth; and when the newly-forming\nChurch came to look into the matter it concluded (quite naturally!) that\nsuch a simple history as I have outlined above would never do for the\nfoundation of its plans, now grown somewhat ambitious. So a new Gospel\nwas framed, called the Tarikh-i-Jadid (\"The new History\" or \"The new\nWay\"), embodying and including a lot of legendary matter, and issued\nwith the authority of \"the Church.\" This was in 1881-2; and comparing\nthis with the original record (called The point of Kaf) we get a\nluminous view of the growth of fable in those thirty brief years which\nhad elapsed since the Bab's death. Meanwhile it became very necessary of\ncourse to withdraw from circulation as far as possible all copies of the\noriginal record, lest they should give the lie to the later 'Gospel';\nand this apparently was done very effectively--so effectively indeed\nthat Professor Edward Browne (to whom the world owes so much on account\nof his labors in connection with Babism), after arduous search, came at\none time to the conclusion that the original was no longer extant. Most\nfortunately, however, the well-known Comte de Gobineau had in the course\nof his studies on Eastern Religions acquired a copy of The point of Kaf;\nand this, after his death, was found among his literary treasures and\nidentified (as was most fitting) by Professor Browne himself.\n\nSuch in brief is the history of the early Babi Church (1)--a Church\nwhich has grown up and expanded greatly within the memory of many yet\nliving. Much might be written about it, but the chief point at present\nis for us to note the well-verified and interesting example it gives of\nthe rapid growth in Syria of a religious legend and the reasons which\ncontributed to this growth--and to be warned how much more rapidly\nsimilar legends probably grew up in the same land in the middle of\nthe First Century, A.D. The story of the Bab is also interesting to us\nbecause, while this mass of legend was formed around it, there is no\npossible doubt about the actual existence of a historical nucleus in the\nperson of Mirza Ali Muhammad.\n\n (1) For literature, see Edward G. Browne's Traveller's Narrative\non the Episode of the Bab (1891), and his New History of the Bab\ntranslated from the Persian of the Tarikh-i-Jadid (Cambridge, 1893).\nAlso Sermons and Essays by Herbert Rix (Williams and Norgate, 1907), pp.\n295-325, \"The Persian Bab.\"\n\n\nOn the whole, one is sometimes inclined to doubt whether any great\nmovement ever makes itself felt in the world, without dating first from\nsome powerful personality or group of personalities, ROUND which the\nidealizing and myth-making genius of mankind tends to crystallize. But\none must not even here be too certain. Something of the Apostle Paul we\nknow, and something of 'John' the Evangelist and writer of the Epistle\nI John; and that the 'Christian' doctrines dated largely from the\npreaching and teaching of these two we cannot doubt; but Paul never\nsaw Jesus (except \"in the Spirit\"), nor does he ever mention the man\npersonally, or any incident of his actual life (the \"crucified Christ\"\nbeing always an ideal figure); and 'John' who wrote the Gospel was\ncertainly not the same as the disciple who \"lay in Jesus' bosom\"--though\nan intercalated verse, the last but one in the Gospel, asserts the\nidentity. (1)\n\n (1) It is obvious, in fact, that the WHOLE of the last chapter of\nSt. John is a later insertion, and again that the two last verses of\nthat chapter are later than the chapter itself!\n\n\nThere may have been a historic Jesus--and if so, to get a reliable\noutline of his life would indeed be a treasure; but at present it would\nseem there is no sign of that. If the historicity of Jesus, in any\ndegree, could be proved, it would give us reason for supposing--what I\nhave personally always been inclined to believe--that there was also\na historical nucleus for such personages as Osiris, Mithra, Krishna,\nHercules, Apollo and the rest. The question, in fact, narrows itself\ndown to this, Have there been in the course of human evolution certain,\nso to speak, NODAL points or periods at which the psychologic currents\nran together and condensed themselves for a new start; and has each such\nnode or point of condensation been marked by the appearance of an actual\nand heroic man (or woman) who supplied a necessary impetus for the\nnew departure, and gave his name to the resulting movement? OR is\nit sufficient to suppose the automatic formation of such nodes or\nstarting-points without the intervention of any special hero or genius,\nand to imagine that in each case the myth-making tendency of mankind\nCREATED a legendary and inspiring figure and worshiped the same for a\nlong period afterwards as a god?\n\nAs I have said before, this is a question which, interesting as it is,\nis not really very important. The main thing being that the prophetic\nand creative spirit of mankind HAS from time to time evolved those\nfigures as idealizations of its \"heart's desire\" and placed a halo\nround their heads. The long procession of them becomes a REAL piece of\nHistory--the history of the evolution of the human heart, and of human\nconsciousness. But with the psychology of the whole subject I shall deal\nin the next chapter.\n\n\nI may here, however, dwell for a moment on two other points which belong\nproperly to this chapter. I have already mentioned the great reliance\nplaced by the advocates of a unique 'revelation' on the high morality\ntaught in the Gospels and the New Testament generally. There is no need\nof course to challenge that morality or to depreciate it unduly; but the\nargument assumes that it is so greatly superior to anything of the kind\nthat had been taught before that we are compelled to suppose something\nlike a revelation to explain its appearance--whereas of course anyone\nfamiliar with the writings of antiquity, among the Greeks or Romans\nor Egyptians or Hindus or later Jews, knows perfectly well that the\nreported sayings of Jesus and the Apostles may be paralleled abundantly\nfrom these sources. I have illustrated this already from the Sermon\non the Mount. If anyone will glance at the Testament of the Twelve\nPatriarchs--a Jewish book composed about 120 B. C.--he will see that\nit is full of moral precepts, and especially precepts of love and\nforgiveness, so ardent and so noble that it hardly suffers in any way\nwhen compared with the New Testament teaching, and that consequently no\nspecial miracle is required to explain the appearance of the latter.\n\nThe twelve Patriarchs in question are the twelve sons of Jacob, and the\nbook consists of their supposed deathbed scenes, in which each patriarch\nin turn recites his own (more or less imaginary) life and deeds and\ngives pious counsel to his children and successors. It is composed in a\nfine and poetic style, and is full of lofty thought, remindful in scores\nof passages of the Gospels--words and all--the coincidences being too\nstriking to be accidental. It evidently had a deep influence on the\nauthors of the Gospels, as well as on St. Paul. It affirms a belief\nin the coming of a Messiah, and in salvation for the Gentiles. The\nfollowing are some quotations from it: (1) Testament of Zebulun (p.\n116): \"My children, I bid you keep the commands of the Lord, and show\nmercy to your neighbours, and have compassion towards all, not towards\nmen only, but also towards beasts.\" Dan (p. 127): \"Love the Lord through\nall your life, and one another with a true heart.\" Joseph (p. 173): \"I\nwas sick, and the Lord visited me; in prison, and my God showed favor\nunto me.\" Benjamin (p. 209): \"For as the sun is not defiled by shining\non dung and mire, but rather drieth up both and driveth away the evil\nsmell, so also the pure mind, encompassed by the defilements of earth,\nrather cleanseth them and is not itself defiled.\"\n\n (1) The references being to the Edition by R. H. Charles (1907).\n\n\nI think these quotations are sufficient to prove the high standard of\nthis book, which was written in the Second Century B. C., and FROM which\nthe New Testament authors copiously borrowed.\n\nThe other point has to do with my statement at the beginning of this\nchapter that two of the main 'characteristics' of Christianity were its\ninsistence on (a) a tendency towards renunciation of the world, and a\nconsequent cultivation of a purely spiritual love, and (b) on a morality\nwhose inspiration was a private sense of duty to God rather than a\npublic sense of duty to one's neighbor and to society generally. I\nthink, however, that the last-mentioned characteristic ought to\nbe viewed in relation to a third, namely, (c) the extraordinarily\nDEMOCRATIC tendency of the new Religion. (1) Celsus (A.D. 200) jeered\nat the early Christians for their extreme democracy: \"It is only\nthe simpletons, the ignoble, the senseless--slaves and womenfolk and\nchildren--whom they wish to persuade (to join their churches) or CAN\npersuade\"--\"wool-dressers and cobblers and fullers, the most uneducated\nand vulgar persons,\" and \"whosoever is a sinner, or unintelligent or\na fool, in a word, whoever is god-forsaken ([gr kakodaimwn]), him the\nKingdom of God will receive.\" (2) Thus Celsus, the accomplished, clever,\nphilosophic and withal humorous critic, laughed at the new religionists,\nand prophesied their speedy extinction. Nevertheless he was mistaken.\nThere is little doubt that just the inclusion of women and weaklings\nand outcasts did contribute LARGELY to the spread of Christianity (and\nMithraism). It brought hope and a sense of human dignity to the despised\nand rejected of the earth. Of the immense numbers of lesser officials\nwho carried on the vast organization of the Roman Empire, most perhaps,\nwere taken from the ranks of the freedmen and quondam slaves, drawn from\na great variety of races and already familiar with pagan cults of all\nkinds--Egyptian, Syrian, Chaldean, Iranian, and so forth. (3) This\nfact helped to give to Christianity--under the fine tolerance of the\nEmpire--its democratic character and also its willingness to accept all.\nThe rude and menial masses, who had hitherto been almost beneath the\nnotice of Greek and Roman culture, flocked in; and though this was\ndoubtless, as time went on, a source of weakness to the Church, and a\ncause of dissension and superstition, yet it was in the inevitable\nline of human evolution, and had a psychological basis which I must now\nendeavor to explain.\n\n (1) It is important to note, however, that this same democratic\ntendency was very marked in Mithraism. \"Il est certain,\" says Cumont,\n\"qu'il a fait ses premieres conquetes dans les classes inferieures de\nla societe et c'est l'a un fait considerable; le mithracisme est reste\nlongtemps la religion des humbles.\" Mysteres de Mithra, p. 68.\n\n (2) See Glover's Conflict of Religions in the early Roman Empire,\nch. viii.\n\n (3) See Toutain, Cultes paiens, vol. ii, conclusion.\n\n\n\n\nXIV. THE MEANING OF IT ALL\n\nThe general drift and meaning of the present book must now, I think,\nfrom many hints scattered in the course of it, be growing clear. But it\nwill be well perhaps in this chapter, at the risk of some repetition,\nto bring the whole argument together. And the argument is that since the\ndawn of humanity on the earth--many hundreds of thousands or perhaps\na million years ago--there has been a slow psychologic evolution, a\ngradual development or refinement of Consciousness, which at a certain\nstage has spontaneously given birth in the human race to the phenomena\nof religious belief and religious ritual--these phenomena (whether in\nthe race at large or in any branch of it) always following, step by\nstep, a certain order depending on the degrees of psychologic evolution\nconcerned; and that it is this general fact which accounts for the\nstrange similarities of belief and ritual which have been observed all\nover the world and in places far remote from each other, and which have\nbeen briefly noted in the preceding chapters.\n\nAnd the main stages of this psychologic evolution--those at any rate\nwith which we are here concerned--are Three: the stage of Simple\nConsciousness, the stage of Self-consciousness, and a third Stage\nwhich for want of a better word we may term the stage of Universal\nConsciousness. Of course these three stages may at some future time be\nanalyzed into lesser degrees, with useful result--but at present I only\ndesire to draw attention to them in the rough, so to speak, to show that\nit is from them and from their passage one into another that there\nhas flowed by a perfectly natural logic and concatenation the strange\npanorama of humanity's religious evolution--its superstitions and\nmagic and sacrifices and dancings and ritual generally, and later its\nincantations and prophecies, and services of speech and verse, and\npaintings and forms of art and figures of the gods. A wonderful Panorama\nindeed, or poem of the Centuries, or, if you like, World-symphony with\nthree great leading motives!\n\n\nAnd first we have the stage of Simple Consciousness. For hundreds of\ncenturies (we cannot doubt) Man possessed a degree of consciousness not\nradically different from that of the higher Animals, though probably\nmore quick and varied. He saw, he heard, he felt, he noted. He acted or\nreacted, quickly or slowly, in response to these impressions. But the\nconsciousness of himSELF, as a being separate from his impressions, as\nseparate from his surroundings, had not yet arisen or taken hold on him.\nHe was an instinctive part, of Nature. And in this respect he was very\nnear to the Animals. Self-consciousness in the animals, in a germinal\nform is there, no doubt, but EMBEDDED, so to speak, in the general\nworld consciousness. It is on this account that the animals have such\na marvellously acute perception and instinct, being embedded in Nature.\nAnd primitive Man had the same. Also we must, as I have said before,\nallow that man in that stage must have had the same sort of grace and\nperfection of form and movement as we admire in the (wild) animals now.\nIt would be quite unreasonable to suppose that he, the crown in the same\nsense of creation, was from the beginning a lame and ill-made abortion.\nFor a long period the tribes of men, like the tribes of the higher\nanimals, must have been (on the whole, and allowing for occasional\nprivations and sufferings and conflicts) well adapted to their\nsurroundings and harmonious with the earth and with each other. There\nmust have been a period resembling a Golden Age--some condition at\nany rate which, compared with subsequent miseries, merited the epithet\n'golden.'\n\nIt was during this period apparently that the system of Totems arose.\nThe tribes felt their relationship to their winged and fourfooted mates\n(including also other objects of nature) so deeply and intensely that\nthey adopted the latter as their emblems. The pre-civilization Man\nfairly worshipped, the animals and was proud to be called after them.\nOf course we moderns find this strange. We, whose conceptions of these\nbeautiful creatures are mostly derived from a broken-down cab-horse,\nor a melancholy milk-rummaged cow in a sooty field, or a diseased and\ndespondent lion or eagle at the Zoo, have never even seen or loved them\nand have only wondered with our true commercial instinct what profit we\ncould extract from them. But they, the primitives, loved and admired\nthe animals; they domesticated many of them by the force of a natural\nfriendship, (1) and accorded them a kind of divinity. This was the age\nof tribal solidarity and of a latent sense of solidarity with Nature.\nAnd the point of it all is (with regard to the subject we have in hand)\nthat this was also the age from which by a natural evolution the sense\nof Religion came to mankind. If Religion in man is the sense of ties\nbinding his inner self to the powers of the universe around him, then it\nis evident I think that primitive man as I have described him possessed\nthe REALITY of this sense--though so far buried and subconscious that\nhe was hardly aware of it. It was only later, and with the coming of\nthe Second Stage, that this sense began to rise distinctly into\nconsciousness.\n\n (1) See ch. iv. Tylor in his Primitive Culture (vol. i, p. 460,\nedn. 1903) says: \"The sense of an absolute psychical distinction between\nman and beast, so prevalent in the civilized world, is hardly to be\nfound among the lower races.\"\n\n\nLet us pass then to the Second Stage. There is a moment in the evolution\nof a child--somewhere perhaps about the age of three (1)--when the\nsimple almost animal-like consciousness of the babe is troubled by a new\nelement--SELF-consciousness. The change is so marked, so definite, that\n(in the depth of the infant's eyes) you can almost SEE it take place. So\nin the evolution of the human race there has been a period--also marked\nand definite, though extending intermittent over a vast interval\nof time--when on men in general there dawned the consciousness of\nTHEMSELVES, of their own thoughts and actions. The old simple acceptance\nof sensations and experiences gave place to REFLECTION. The question\narose: \"How do these sensations and experiences affect ME? What can _I_\ndo to modify them, to encourage the pleasurable, to avoid or inhibit the\npainful, and so on?\" From that moment a new motive was added to life.\nThe mind revolved round a new centre. It began to spin like a little\neddy round its own axis. It studied ITSELF first and became deeply\nconcerned about its own pleasures and pains, losing touch the while with\nthe larger life which once dominated it--the life of Nature, the life of\nthe Tribe. The old unity of the spirit, the old solidarity, were broken\nup.\n\n (1) See Bucke's Cosmic Consciousness (Philadelphia, 1901), pp. 1\nand 39; also W. McDougall's Social Psychology (1908), p. 146--where the\nsame age is tentatively suggested.\n\n\nI have touched on this subject before, but it is so important that the\nreader must excuse repetition. There came an inevitable severance, an\ninevitable period of strife. The magic mirror of the soul, reflecting\nnature as heretofore in calm and simple grace, was suddenly cracked\nacross. The new self-conscious man (not all at once but gradually)\nbecame alienated from his tribe. He lapsed into strife with his fellows.\nAmbition, vanity, greed, the love of domination, the desire for property\nand possessions, set in. The influences of fellowship and solidarity\ngrew feebler. He became alienated from his great Mother. His instincts\nwere less and less sure--and that in proportion as brain-activity and\nself-regarding calculation took their place. Love and mutual help were\nless compelling in proportion as the demands of self-interest grew\nlouder and more insistent. Ultimately the crisis came. Cain murdered\nhis brother and became an outcast. The Garden of Eden and the Golden Age\nclosed their gates behind him. He entered upon a period of suffering--a\nperiod of labor and toil and sorrow such as he had never before\nknown, and such as the animals certainly have never known. And in that\ndistressful state, in that doleful valley of his long pilgrimage, he\nstill remains to-day.\n\nThus has the canker of self-consciousness done its work. It would be\nfoolish and useless to rail against the process, or to blame any one for\nit. It had to be. Through this dismal vale of self-seeking mankind had\nto pass--if only in order at last to find the True Self which was (and\nstill remains) its goal. The pilgrimage will not last for ever. Indeed\nthere are signs that the recent Great War and the following Events mark\nthe lowest point of descent and the beginning of the human soul's return\nto sanity and ascent towards the heavenly Kingdom. No doubt Man will\narrive again SOME day at the grace, composure and leisurely beauty of\nlife which the animals realized long ago, though he seems a precious\nlong time about it; and when all this nightmare of Greed and Vanity and\nSelf-conceit and Cruelty and Lust of oppression and domination, which\nmarks the present period, is past--and it WILL pass--then Humanity will\ncome again to its Golden Age and to that Paradise of redemption and\npeace which has for so long been prophesied.\n\nBut we are dealing with the origins of Religion; and what I want\nthe reader to see is that it was just this breaking up of the old\npsychologic unity and continuity of man with his surroundings which led\nto the whole panorama of the rituals and creeds. Man, centering round\nhimself, necessarily became an exile from the great Whole. He committed\nthe sin (if it was a sin) of Separation. Anyhow Nemesis was swift. The\nsense of loneliness and the sense of guilt came on him. The realization\nof himself as a separate conscious being necessarily led to his\nattributing a similar consciousness of some kind to the great Life\naround him. Action and reaction are equal and opposite. Whatever he may\nhave felt before, it became clear to him now that beings more or less\nlike himself--though doubtless vaster and more powerful--moved behind\nthe veil of the visible world. From that moment the belief in Magic and\nDemons and Gods arose or slowly developed itself; and in the midst of\nthis turmoil of perilous and conflicting powers, he perceived himself an\nalien and an exile, stricken with Fear, stricken with the sense of Sin.\nIf before, he had experienced fear--in the kind of automatic way of\nself-preservation in which the animals feel it--he now, with fevered\nself-regard and excited imagination, experienced it in double or treble\ndegree. And if, before, he had been aware that fortune and chance were\nnot always friendly and propitious to his designs, he now perceived\nor thought he perceived in every adverse happening the deliberate\npersecution of the powers, and an accusation of guilt directed against\nhim for some neglect or deficiency in his relation to them. Hence by\na perfectly logical and natural sequence there arose the belief in\nother-world or supernatural powers, whether purely fortuitous and\nmagical or more distinctly rational and personal; there arose the sense\nof Sin, or of offence against these powers; there arose a complex ritual\nof Expiation--whether by personal sacrifice and suffering or by\nthe sacrifice of victims. There arose too a whole catalogue of\nceremonies--ceremonies of Initiation, by which the novice should learn\nto keep within the good grace of the Powers, and under the blessing of\nhis Tribe and the protection of its Totem; ceremonies of Eucharistic\nmeals which should restore the lost sanctity of the common life and\nremove the sense of guilt and isolation; ceremonies of Marriage and\nrules and rites of sex-connection, fitted to curb the terrific and\ndemonic violence of passions which else indeed might easily rend the\ncommunity asunder. And so on. It is easy to see that granted an early\nstage of simple unreflecting nature-consciousness, and granting\nthis broken into and, after a time, shattered by the arrival of\nSELF-consciousness there would necessarily follow in spontaneous yet\nlogical order a whole series of religious institutions and beliefs,\nwhich phantasmal and unreal as they may appear to us, were by no\nmeans unreal to our ancestors. It is easy also to see that as the\npsychological process was necessarily of similar general character in\nevery branch of the human race and all over the world, so the religious\nevolutions--the creeds and rituals--took on much the same complexion\neverywhere; and, though they differed in details according to climate\nand other influences, ran on such remarkably parallel lines as we have\nnoted.\n\nFinally, to make the whole matter clear, let me repeat that this event,\nthe inbreak of Self-consciousness, took place, or BEGAN to take place,\nan enormous time ago, perhaps in the beginning of the Neolithic Age.\nI dwell on the word \"began\" because I think it is probable that in its\nbeginnings, and for a long period after, this newborn consciousness had\nan infantile and very innocent character, quite different from its later\nand more aggressive forms--just as we see self-consciousness in a little\nchild has a charm and a grace which it loses later in a boastful\nor grasping boyhood and manhood. So we may understand that though\nself-consciousness may have begun to appear in the human race at this\nvery early time (and more or less contemporaneously with the invention\nof very rude tools and unformed language), there probably did elapse\na very long period--perhaps the whole of the Neolithic Age--before the\nevils of this second stage of human evolution came to a head. Max Muller\nhas pointed out that among the words which are common to the various\nbranches of Aryan language, and which therefore belong to the very early\nperiod before the separation of these branches, there are not found\nthe words denoting war and conflict and the weapons and instruments of\nstrife--a fact which suggests a long continuance of peaceful habit among\nmankind AFTER the first formation and use of language.\n\nThat the birth of language and the birth of self-consciousness were\nAPPROXIMATELY simultaneous is a probable theory, and one favored by many\nthinkers; (1) but the slow beginnings of both must have been so\nvery protracted that it is perhaps useless to attempt any very exact\ndetermination. Late researches seem to show that language began in what\nmight be called TRIBAL expressions of mood and feeling (holophrases like\n\"go-hunting-kill-bear\") without reference to individual personalities\nand relationships; and that it was only at a later stage that words like\n\"I\" and \"Thou\" came into use, and the holophrases broke up into \"parts\nof speech\" and took on a definite grammatical structure. (2) If\ntrue, these facts point clearly to a long foreground of rude communal\nlanguage, something like though greatly superior to that of the animals,\npreceding or preparing the evolution of Self-consciousness proper, in\nthe forms of \"I\" and \"Thou\" and the grammar of personal actions and\nrelations. \"They show that the plural and all other forms of number in\ngrammar arise not by multiplication of an original 'I,' but by selection\nand gradual EXCLUSION from an original collective 'we.'\" (3) According\nto this view the birth of self-consciousness in the human family, or\nin any particular race or section of the human family, must have been\nequally slow and hesitating; and it would be easy to imagine, as just\nsaid, that there may have been a very long and 'golden' period at its\nbeginning, before the new consciousness took on its maturer and harsher\nforms.\n\n (1) Dr. Bucke (Cosmic Consciousness) insists on their\nsimultaneity, but places both events excessively far back, as we\nshould think, i.e. 200,000 or 300,000 years ago. Possibly he does not\ndifferentiate sufficiently between the rude language of the holophrase\nand the much later growth of formed and grammatical speech.\n\n (2) See A. E. Crawley's Idea of the Soul, ch. ii; Jane Harrison's\nThemis, pp. 473-5; and E. J. Payne's History of the New World called\nAmerica, vol. ii, pp. 115 sq., where the beginning of self-consciousness\nis associated with the break-up of the holophrase.\n\n (3) Themis, p. 471.\n\n\nAll estimates of the Time involved in these evolutions of early man are\nnotoriously most divergent and most difficult to be sure of; but if we\ntake 500,000 years ago for the first appearance of veritable Man (homo\nprimigenius), (2) and (following Professor W. J. Sollas) (3) 30,000\nor 40,000 years ago for the first tool-using men (homo sapiens) of\nthe Chellean Age (palaeolithic), 15,000 for the rock-paintings and\ninscriptions of the Aurignacian and Magdalenian peoples, and 5,000 years\nago for the first actual historical records that have come down to us,\nwe may perhaps get something like a proportion between the different\nperiods. That is to say, half a million years for the purely animal man\nin his different forms and grades of evolution. Then somewhere\ntowards the end of palaeolithic or commencement of neolithic times\nSelf-consciousness dimly beginning and, after some 10,000 years of slow\ngermination and pre-historic culture, culminating in the actual historic\nperiod and the dawn of civilization 40 or 50 centuries ago, and to-day\n(we hope), reaching the climax which precedes or foretells its abatement\nand transformation.\n\n (2) Though Dr. Arthur Keith, Ancient Types of Man (1911), pp. 93\nand 102, puts the figure at more like a million.\n\n (3) See Ancient Hunters (1915); also Hastings's Encycl. art.\n\"Ethnology\"; and Havelock Ellis, \"The Origin of War,\" in The Philosophy\nof Conflict and other Essays.\n\n\nNo doubt many geologists and anthropologists would favor periods greatly\nLONGER than those here mentioned; but possibly there would be some\nagreement as to the RATIO to each other of the times concerned: that\nis, the said authorities would probably allow for a VERY long animal-man\n(1)-period corresponding to the first stage; for a much shorter\naggressively 'self conscious' period, corresponding to the Second\nStage--perhaps lasting only one thirtieth or fiftieth of the time of\nthe first period; and then--if they looked forward at all to a third\nstage--would be inclined for obvious reasons to attribute to that again\na very extended duration.\n\n (1) I use the phrase 'animal-man' here, not with any flavor of\ncontempt or reprobation, as the dear Victorians would have used it, but\nwith a sense of genuine respect and admiration such as one feels towards\nthe animals themselves.\n\n\nHowever, all this is very speculative. To return to the difficulty about\nLanguage and the consideration of those early times when words adequate\nto the expression of religious or magical ideas simply did not exist,\nit is clear that the only available, or at any rate the CHIEF means\nof expression, in those times, must have consisted in gestures, in\nattitudes, in ceremonial ACTIONS--in a more or less elaborate ritual,\nin fact. (1) Such ideas as Adoration, Thanksgiving, confession of Guilt,\nplacation of Wrath, Expiation, Sacrifice, Celebration of Community,\nsacramental Atonement, and a score of others could at that time be\nexpressed by appropriate rites--and as a matter of fact are often\nso expressed even now--MORE readily and directly than by language.\n'Dancing'--when that word came to be invented--did not mean a mere\nflinging about of the limbs in recreation, but any expressive movements\nof the body which might be used to convey the feelings of the dancer or\nof the audience whom he represented. And so the 'religious dance' became\na most important part of ritual.\n\n (1) See ch. ix and xi.\n\n\nSo much for the second stage of Consciousness. Let us now pass on to\nthe Third Stage. It is evident that the process of disruption and\ndissolution--disruption both of the human mind, and of society round\nabout it, due to the action of the Second Stage--could not go on\nindefinitely. There are hundreds of thousands of people at the present\nmoment who are dying of mental or bodily disease--their nervous\nsystems broken down by troubles connected with excessive\nself-consciousness--selfish fears and worries and restlessness. Society\nat large is perishing both in industry and in warfare through the\ndomination in its organism of the self-motives of greed and vanity and\nambition. This cannot go on for ever. Things must either continue in\nthe same strain, in which case it is evident that we are approaching\na crisis of utter dissolution, OR a new element must enter in, a new\ninspiration of life, and we (as individuals) and the society of which\nwe form a part, must make a fresh start. What is that new and necessary\nelement of regeneration?\n\nIt is evident that it must be a new birth--the entry into a further\nstage of consciousness which must supersede the present one. Through\nsome such crisis as we have spoken of, through the extreme of\nsuffering, the mind of Man, AS AT PRESENT CONSTITUTED, has to die. (1)\nSelf-consciousness has to die, and be buried, and rise again in a new\nform. Probably nothing but the extreme of suffering can bring this\nabout. (2) And what is this new form in which consciousness has to\nrearise? Obviously, since the miseries of the world during countless\ncenturies have dated from that fatal attempt to make the little personal\nSELF the centre of effort and activity, and since that attempt has\ninevitably led to disunity and discord and death, both within the mind\nitself and within the body of society, there is nothing left but\nthe return to a Consciousness which shall have Unity as its\nfoundation-principle, and which shall proceed from the direct SENSE\nAND PERCEPTION of such an unity throughout creation. The simple mind of\nEarly Man and the Animals was of that character--a consciousness, so\nto speak, continuous through nature, and though running to points of\nillumination and foci of special activity in individuals, yet at no\npoint essentially broken or imprisoned in separate compartments. (And\nit is this CONTINUITY of the primitive mind which enables us, as I have\nalready explained, to understand the mysterious workings of instinct\nand intuition.) To some such unity-consciousness we have to return; but\nclearly it will be--it is not--of the simple inchoate character of the\nFirst Stage, for it has been enriched, deepened, and greatly extended\nby the experience of the Second Stage. It is in fact, a new order of\nmentality--the consciousness of the Third Stage.\n\n (1) \"The mind must be restrained in the heart till it comes to an\nend,\" says the Maitrayana-Brahmana-Upanishad.\n\n (2) One may remember in this connection the tapas of the Hindu\nyogi, or the ordeals of initiates into the pagan Mysteries generally.\n\n\nIn order to understand the operation and qualities of this Third\nConsciousness, it may be of assistance just now to consider in what more\nor less rudimentary way or ways it figured in the pagan rituals and in\nChristianity. We have seen the rude Siberyaks in North-Eastern Asia or\nthe 'Grizzly' tribes of North American Indians in the neighborhood of\nMount Shasta paying their respects and adoration to a captive bear--at\nonce the food-animal, and the divinity of the Tribe. A tribesman had\nslain a bear--and, be it said, had slain it not in a public hunt with\nall due ceremonies observed, but privately for his own satisfaction. He\nhad committed, therefore, a sin theoretically unpardonable; for had he\nnot--to gratify his personal desire for food--levelled a blow at the\nguardian spirit of the Tribe? Had he not alienated himself from his\nfellows by destroying its very symbol? There was only one way by which\nhe could regain the fellowship of his companions. He must make amends by\nsome public sacrifice, and instead of retaining the flesh of the animal\nfor himself he must share it with the whole tribe (or clan) in a common\nfeast, while at the same time, tensest prayers and thanks are offered to\nthe animal for the gift of his body for food. The Magic formula demanded\nnothing less than this--else dread disaster would fall upon the man who\nsinned, and upon the whole brotherhood. Here, and in a hundred similar\nrites, we see the three phases of tribal psychology--the first, in which\nthe individual member simply remains within the compass of the tribal\nmind, and only acts in harmony with it; the second, in which the\nindividual steps outside and to gratify his personal SELF performs an\naction which alienates him from his fellows; and the third, in which,\nto make amends and to prove his sincerity, he submits to some sacrifice,\nand by a common feast or some such ceremony is received back again\ninto the unity of the fellowship. The body of the animal-divinity is\nconsumed, and the latter becomes, both in the spirit and in the flesh,\nthe Savior of the tribe.\n\nIn course of time, when the Totem or Guardian-spirit is no longer merely\nan Animal, or animal-headed Genius, but a quite human-formed Divinity,\nstill the same general outline of ideas is preserved--only with gathered\nintensity owing to the specially human interest of the drama. The\nDivinity who gives his life for his flock is no longer just an ordinary\nBull or Lamb, but Adonis or Osiris or Dionysus or Jesus. He is betrayed\nby one of his own followers, and suffers death, but rises again\nredeeming all with himself in the one fellowship; and the corn and the\nwine and the wild flesh which were his body, and which he gave for the\nsustenance of mankind, are consumed in a holy supper of reconciliation.\nIt is always the return to unity which is the ritual of Salvation, and\nof which the symbol is the Eucharist--the second birth, the formation of\n\"a new creature when old things are passed away.\" For \"Except a man be\nborn again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God\"; and \"the first man is of\nthe earth, earthly, but the second man is the Lord from heaven.\" Like\na strange refrain, and from centuries before our era, comes down this\nbelief in a god who is imprisoned in each man, and whose liberation is a\nnew birth and the beginning of a new creature: \"Rejoice, ye initiates\nin the mystery of the liberated god\"--rejoice in the thought of the hero\nwho died as a mortal in the coffin, but rises again as Lord of all!\n\nWho then was this \"Christos\" for whom the world was waiting three\ncenturies before our era (and indeed centuries before that)? Who was\nthis \"thrice Savior\" whom the Greek Gnostics acclaimed? What was the\nmeaning of that \"coming of the Son of Man\" whom Daniel beheld in vision\namong the clouds of heaven? or of the \"perfect man\" who, Paul declared,\nshould deliver us from the bondage of corruption into the glorious\nliberty of the children of God? What was this salvation which time after\ntime and times again the pagan deities promised to their devotees, and\nwhich the Eleusinian and other Mysteries represented in their religious\ndramas with such convincing enthusiasm that even Pindar could say \"Happy\nis he who has seen them (the Mysteries) before he goes beneath the\nhollow earth: that man knows the true end of life and its source\ndivine\"; and concerning which Sophocles and Aeschylus were equally\nenthusiastic? (1)\n\n (1) See Farnell's Cults of the Greek States, vol. iii, p. 194;\nalso The Mysteries, Pagan and Christian, by S. Cheetham, D.D. (London,\n1897).\n\n\nCan we doubt, in the light of all that we have already said, what\nthe answer to these questions is? As with the first blossoming of\nself-consciousness in the human mind came the dawn of an immense cycle\nof experience--a cycle indeed of exile from Eden, of suffering and toil\nand blind wanderings in the wilderness, yet a cycle absolutely necessary\nand unavoidable--so now the redemption, the return, the restoration has\nto come through another forward step, in the same domain. Abandoning\nthe quest and the glorification of the separate isolated self we have to\nreturn to the cosmic universal life. It is the blossoming indeed of this\n'new' life in the deeps of our minds which is salvation, and which\nall the expressions which I have just cited have indicated. It is\nthis presence which all down the ages has been hailed as Savior and\nLiberator: the daybreak of a consciousness so much vaster, so much more\nglorious, than all that has gone before that the little candle of the\nlocal self is swallowed up in its rays. It is the return home, the\nreturn into direct touch with Nature and Man--the liberation from the\nlong exile of separation, from the painful sense of isolation and\nthe odious nightmare of guilt and 'sin.' Can we doubt that this new\nbirth--this third stage of consciousness, if we like to call it so--has\nto come, that it is indeed not merely a pious hope or a tentative\ntheory, but a FACT testified to already by a cloud of witnesses in the\npast--witnesses shining in their own easily recognizable and authentic\nlight, yet for the most part isolated from each other among the arid and\nunfruitful wastes of Civilization, like glow-worms in the dry grass of a\nsummer night?\n\nSince the first dim evolution of human self-consciousness an immense\nperiod, as we have said--perhaps 30,000 years, perhaps even more--has\nelapsed. Now, in the present day this period is reaching its\nculmination, and though it will not terminate immediately, its end is,\nso to speak, in sight. Meanwhile, during all the historical age behind\nus--say for the last 4,000 or 5,000 years--evidence has been coming in\n(partly in the religious rites recorded, partly in oracles, poems and\nprophetic literature) of the onset of this further illumination--\"the\nlight which never was on sea or land\"--and the cloud of witnesses,\nscattered at first, has in these later centuries become so evident and\nso notable that we are tempted to believe in or to anticipate a great\nand general new birth, as now not so very far off. (1) (We should,\nhowever, do well to remember, in this connexion, that many a time\nalready in the history the Millennium has been prophesied, and yet not\narrived punctual to date, and to take to ourselves the words of\n'Peter,' who somewhat grievously disappointed at the long-delayed\nsecond coming of the Lord Jesus in the clouds of heaven, wrote in his\nsecond Epistle: \"There shall come in the last days scoffers, walking\nafter their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of his coming?\nfor since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were\nfrom the beginning of the creation.\" (2))\n\n (1) For an amplification of all this theme, see Dr. Bucke's\nremarkable and epoch-making book, Cosmic Consciousness (first published\nat Philadelphia, 1901).\n\n (2) 2 Peter iii. 4; written probably about A.D. 150.\n\n\nI say that all through the historical age behind us there has been\nevidence--even though scattered--of salvation and the return of the\nCosmic life. Man has never been so completely submerged in the bitter\nsea of self-centredness but what he has occasionally been able to dash\nthe spray from his eyes and glimpse the sun and the glorious light of\nheaven. From how far back we cannot say, but from an immense antiquity\ncome the beautiful myths which indicate this.\n\n Cinderella, the cinder-maiden, sits unbeknown in her earthly hutch;\n Gibed and jeered at she bewails her lonely fate;\n Nevertheless youngest-born she surpasses her sisters and endues\n     a garment of the sun and stars;\n From a tiny spark she ascends and irradiates the universe,\n     and is wedded to the prince of heaven.\n\n\nHow lovely this vision of the little maiden sitting unbeknown close to\nthe Hearth-fire of the universe--herself indeed just a little spark from\nit; despised and rejected; rejected by the world, despised by her two\nelder sisters (the body and the intellect); yet she, the soul, though\nlatest-born, by far the most beautiful of the three. And of the Prince\nof Love who redeems and sets her free; and of her wedding garment the\nglory and beauty of all nature and of the heavens! The parables of\nJesus are charming in their way, but they hardly reach this height of\ninspiration.\n\nOr the world-old myth of Eros and Psyche. How strange that here again\nthere are three sisters (the three stages of human evolution), and the\nlatest-born the most beautiful of the three, and the jealousies and\npersecutions heaped on the youngest by the others, and especially by\nAphrodite the goddess of mere sensual charm. And again the coming of the\nunknown, the unseen Lover, on whom it is not permitted for mortals to\nlook; and the long, long tests and sufferings and trials which Psyche\nhas to undergo before Eros may really take her to his arms and translate\nher to the heights of heaven. Can we not imagine how when these things\nwere represented in the Mysteries the world flocked to see them, and the\npoets indeed said, \"Happy are they that see and seeing can understand?\"\nCan we not understand how it was that the Amphictyonic decree of the\nsecond century B.C. spoke of these same Mysteries as enforcing the\nlesson that \"the greatest of human blessings is fellowship and mutual\ntrust\"?\n\n\n\n\nXV. THE ANCIENT MYSTERIES\n\nThus we come to a thing which we must not pass over, because it throws\ngreat light on the meaning and interpretation of all these rites and\nceremonies of the great World-religion. I mean the subject of the\nAncient Mysteries. And to this I will give a few pages.\n\nThese Mysteries were probably survivals of the oldest religious rites\nof the Greek races, and in their earlier forms consisted not so much\nin worship of the gods of Heaven as of the divinities of Earth, and\nof Nature and Death. Crude, no doubt, at first, they gradually became\n(especially in their Eleusinian form) more refined and philosophical;\nthe rites were gradually thrown open, on certain conditions, not only\nto men generally, but also to women, and even to slaves; and in the end\nthey influenced Christianity deeply. (1)\n\n (1) See Edwin Hatch, D.D., The Influence of Greek Ideas and\nUsages on the Christian Church (London, 1890), pp. 283-5.\n\n\nThere were apparently three forms of teaching made use of in these\nrites: these were [gr legomena], things SAID; [gr deiknumena], things\nSHOWN; and [gr drwmena], things PERFORMED or ACTED. (1) I have given\nalready some instances of things said\u2014texts whispered for consolation in\nthe neophyte's ear, and so forth; of the THIRD group, things enacted,\nwe have a fair amount of evidence. There were ritual dramas or\npassion-plays, of which an important one dealt with the descent of Kore\nor Proserpine into the underworld, as in the Eleusinian representations,\n(2) and her redemption and restoration to the upper world in Spring;\nanother with the sufferings of Psyche and her rescue by Eros, as\ndescribed by Apuleius (3)--himself an initiate in the cult of Isis.\nThere is a parody by Lucian, which tells of the birth of Apollo, the\nmarriage of Coronis, and the coming of Aesculapius as Savior; there was\nthe dying and rising again of Dionysus (chief divinity of the Orphic\ncult); and sometimes the mystery of the birth of Dionysus as a holy\nchild. (4) There was, every year at Eleusis, a solemn and lengthy\nprocession or pilgrimage made, symbolic of the long pilgrimage of the\nhuman soul, its sufferings and deliverance.\n\n (1) Cheetham, op. cit., pp. 49-61 sq.\n\n (2) See Farnell, op. cit., iii. 158 sq.\n\n (3) See The Golden Ass.\n\n (4) Farnell, ii, 177.\n\n\n\"Almost always,\" says Dr. Cheetham, \"the suffering of a god--suffering\nfollowed by triumph--seems to have been the subject of the sacred\ndrama.\" Then occasionally to the Neophytes, after taking part in the\npilgrimage, and when their minds had been prepared by an ordeal of\ndarkness and fatigue and terrors, was accorded a revelation of Paradise,\nand even a vision of Transfiguration--the form of the Hierophant\nhimself, or teacher of the Mysteries, being seen half-lost in a blaze\nof light. (1) Finally, there was the eating of food and drinking\nof barley-drink from the sacred chest (2)--a kind of Communion or\nEucharist.\n\n (1) Ibid., 179 sq.\n\n (2) Ibid., 186. Sacred chests, in which holy things were kept,\nfigure frequently in early rites and legends--as in the case of the ark\nof the Jewish tabernacle, the ark or box carried in celebrations of the\nmysteries of Bacchus (Theocritus, Idyll xxvi), the legend of Pandora's\nbox which contained the seeds of all good and evil, the ark of Noah\nwhich saved all living creatures from the flood, the Argo of the\nargonauts, the moonshaped boat in which Isis floating over the waters\ngathered together the severed limbs of Osiris, and so brought about his\nresurrection, and the many chests or coffins out of which the various\ngods (Adonis, Attis, Osiris, Jesus), having been laid there in death,\nrose again for the redemption of the world. They all evidently refer to\nthe mystic womb of Nature and of Woman, and are symbols of salvation and\nredemption (For a full discussion of this subject, see The Great Law of\nreligious origins, by W. Williamson, ch. iv.)\n\n\nApuleius in The Golden Ass gives an interesting account of his induction\ninto the mysteries of Isis: how, bidding farewell one evening to the\ngeneral congregation outside, and clothed in a new linen garment, he was\nhanded by the priest into the inner recesses of the temple itself; how\nhe \"approached the confines of death, and having trod on the threshold\nof Proserpine (the Underworld), returned therefrom, being borne through\nall the elements. At midnight I saw the sun shining with its brilliant\nlight: and I approached the presence of the Gods beneath and the Gods\nabove, and stood near and worshipped them.\" During the night things\nhappened which must not be disclosed; but in the morning he came forth\n\"consecrated by being dressed in twelve stoles painted with the figures\nof animals.\" (1) He ascended a pulpit in the midst of the Temple,\ncarrying in his right hand a burning torch, while a chaplet encircled\nhis head, from which palm-leaves projected like rays of light. \"Thus\narrayed like the Sun, and placed so as to resemble a statue, on a\nsudden the curtains being drawn aside, I was exposed to the gaze of the\nmultitude. After this I celebrated the most joyful day of my initiation,\nas my natal day (day of the New Birth) and there was a joyous banquet\nand mirthful conversation.\"\n\n (1) An allusion no doubt to the twelve signs of the Zodiac, the\npathway of the Sun, as well as to the practice of the ancient priests of\nwearing the skins of totem-animals in sign of their divinity.\n\n\nOne can hardly refuse to recognize in this account the description of\nsome kind of ceremony which was supposed to seal the illumination of a\nman and his new birth into divinity--the animal origin, the circling of\nall experience, the terrors of death, and the resurrection in the\nform of the Sun, the symbol of all light and life. The very word\n\"illumination\" carries the ideas of light and a new birth with it.\nReitzenstein in his very interesting book on the Greek Mysteries (1)\nspeaks over and over again of the illumination ([gr fwtismos]) which\nwas held to attend Initiation and Salvation. The doctrine of Salvation\nindeed ([gr swthria]) was, as we have already seen, rife and widely\ncurrent in the Second Century B. C. It represented a real experience,\nand the man who shared this experience became a [gr qeios] [gr anqrwpos]\nor divine man. (2) In the Orphic Tablets the phrase \"I am a child of\nearth and the starry heaven, but my race is of heaven (alone)\" occurs\nmore than once. In one of the longest of them the dead man is instructed\n\"after he has passed the waters (of Lethe) where the white Cypress and\nthe House of Hades are\" to address these very words to the guardians\nof the Lake of Memory while he asks for a drink of cold water from that\nLake. In another the dead person himself is thus addressed: \"Hail, thou\nwho hast endured the Suffering, such as indeed thou hadst never suffered\nbefore; thou hast become god from man!\" (3) Ecstacy was the acme of the\nreligious life; and, what is especially interesting to us, Salvation or\nthe divine nature was open to all men--to all, that is, who should go\nthrough the necessary stages of preparation for it. (4)\n\n (1) Die hellenistischen Mysterien-Religionen, by R. Reitzenstein,\nLeipzig, 1910.\n\n (2) Reitzenstein, p. 12.\n\n (3) These Tablets (so-called) are instructions to the dead as to\ntheir passage into the other world, and have been found in the tombs, in\nItaly and elsewhere, inscribed on very thin gold plates and buried with\nthe departed. See Manual of Greek Antiquities by Percy Gardner and F.\nB. Jerome (1896); also Prolegomena to Greek Religion by Jane E. Harrison\n(1908).\n\n (4) Reitzenstein, pp. 15 and 18; also S. J. Case, Evolution of\nEarly Christianity, p. 301.\n\n\nReitzenstein contends (p. 26) that in the Mysteries, transfiguration\n([gr metamorfwsis]), salvation ([gr swthria]), and new birth ([gr\npaliggenesia]) were often conjoined. He says (p. 31), that in the\nEgyptian Osiris-cult, the Initiate acquires a nature \"equal to God\"\n([gr isoqeos]), the very same expression as that used of Christ Jesus in\nPhilippians ii. 6; he mentions Apollonius of Tyana and Sergius Paulus\nas instances of men who by their contemporaries were considered to have\nattained this nature; and he quotes Akhnaton (Pharaoh of Egypt in 1375\nB.C.) as having said, \"Thou art in my heart; none other knows Thee, save\nthy son Akhnaton; Thou hast initiated him into thy wisdom and into thy\npower.\" He also quotes the words of Hermes (Trismegistus)--\"Come unto\nMe, even as children to their mother's bosom: Thou art I, and I am Thou;\nwhat is thine is mine, and what is mine is thine; for indeed I am thine\nimage ([gr eidwlon]),\" and refers to the dialogue between Hermes and\nTat, in which they speak of the great and mystic New Birth and Union\nwith the All--with all Elements, Plants and Animals, Time and Space.\n\n\"The Mysteries,\" says Dr. Cheetham very candidly, \"influenced\nChristianity considerably and modified it in some important respects\";\nand Dr. Hatch, as we have seen, not only supports this general view, but\nfollows it out in detail. (1) He points out that the membership of the\nMystery-societies was very numerous in the earliest times, A.D.; that\ntheir general aims were good, including a sense of true religion, decent\nlife, and brotherhood; that cleanness from crime and confession were\ndemanded from the neophyte; that confession was followed by baptism\n([gr kaqarsis]) and THAT by sacrifice; that the term [gr fwtismos]\n(illumination) was adopted by the Christian Church as the name for the\nnew birth of baptism; that the Christian usage of placing a seal on the\nforehead came from the same source; that baptism itself after a time\nwas called a mystery ([gr musihriou]); that the sacred cakes and\nbarley-drink of the Mysteries became the milk and honey and bread\nand wine of the first Christian Eucharists, and that the occasional\nsacrifice of a lamb on the Christian altar (\"whose mention is often\nsuppressed\") probably originated in the same way. Indeed, the conception\nof the communion-table AS an altar and many other points of ritual\ngradually established themselves from these sources as time went on. (2)\nIt is hardly necessary to say more in proof of the extent to which\nin these ancient representations \"things said\" and \"scenes enacted\"\nforestalled the doctrines and ceremonials of Christianity.\n\n (1) See Hatch, op. cit., pp. 290 sq.\n\n (2) See Dionysus Areop. (end of fifth century), who describes the\nChristian rites generally in Mystery language (Hatch, 296).\n\n\n\"But what of the second group above-mentioned, the \"things SHOWN\"? It\nis not so easy naturally to get exact information concerning these, but\nthey seem to have been specially holy objects, probably things connected\nwith very ancient rituals in the past--such as sacred stones, old and\nrude images of the gods, magic nature-symbols, like that half-disclosed\near of corn above-mentioned (Ch. V.). \"In the Temple of Isis at Philae,\"\nsays Dr. Cheetham, \"the dead body of Osiris is represented with stalks\nof corn springing from it, which a priest waters from a vessel. An\ninscription says: 'This is the form of him whom we may not name, Osiris\nof the Mysteries who sprang from the returning waters' (the Nile).\"\nAbove all, no doubt, there were images of the phallus and the vulva, the\ngreat symbols of human fertility. We have seen (Ch. XII) that the lingam\nand the yoni are, even down to to-day, commonly retained and honored as\nholy objects in the S. Indian Temples, and anointed with oil (some\nof them) for a very practical reason. Sir J. G. Frazer, in his lately\npublished volumes on The Folk-lore of the Old Testament, has a chapter\n(in vol. ii) on the very numerous sacred stones of various shapes and\nsizes found or spoken of in Palestine and other parts of the world.\nThough uncertain as to the meaning of these stones he mentions that they\nare \"frequently, though not always, UPRIGHT.\" Anointing them with oil,\nhe assures us, \"is a widespread practice, sometimes by women who wish\nto obtain children.\" And he concludes the chapter by saying: \"The holy\nstone at Bethel was probably one of those massive standing stones or\nrough pillars which the Hebrews called masseboth, and which, as we\nhave seen, were regular adjuncts of Canaanite and early Israelitish\nsanctuaries.\" We have already mentioned the pillars Jachin and Boaz\nwhich stood before the Temple of Solomon, and which had an acknowledged\nsexual significance; and so it seems probable that a great number of\nthese holy stones had a similar meaning. (1) Following this clue it\nwould appear likely that the lingam thus anointed and worshipped in the\nTemples of India and elsewhere IS the original [gr cristos] (2) adored\nby the human race from the very beginning, and that at a later time,\nwhen the Priest and the King, as objects of worship, took the place of\nthe Lingam, THEY also were anointed with the chrism of fertility.\nThat the exhibition of these emblems should be part of the original\n'Mystery'-rituals was perfectly natural--especially because, as we have\nexplained already (3) old customs often continued on in a quite naive\nfashion in the rituals, when they had come to be thought indecent or\nimproper by a later public opinion; and (we may say) was perfectly\nin order, because there is plenty of evidence to show that in SAVAGE\ninitiations, of which the Mysteries were the linear descendants, all\nthese things WERE explained to the novices, and their use actually\ntaught. (4) No doubt also there were some representations or dramatic\nincidents of a fairly coarse character, as deriving from these ancient\nsources. (5) It is, however, quaint to observe how the mere mention of\nsuch things has caused an almost hysterical commotion among the critics\nof the Mysteries--from the day of the early Christians who (in order\nto belaud their own religion) were never tired of abusing the Pagans,\nonward to the present day when modern scholars either on the one hand\nfollow the early Christians in representing the Mysteries as sinks of\niniquity or on the other (knowing this charge could not be substantiated\nexcept in the period of their final decadence) take the line of ignoring\nthe sexual interest attaching to them as non-existent or at any rate\nunworthy of attention. The good Archdeacon Cheetham, for instance, while\nwriting an interesting book on the Mysteries passes by this side of the\nsubject ALMOST as if it did not exist; while the learned Dr. Farnell,\novercome apparently by the weight of his learning, and unable to\nconfront the alarming obstacle presented by these sexual rites and\naspects, hides himself behind the rather non-committal remark (speaking\nof the Eleusinian rites) \"we have no right to imagine any part of this\nsolemn ceremony as coarse or obscene.\" (6) As Nature, however, has been\nknown (quite frequently) to be coarse or obscene, and as the initiators\nof the Mysteries were probably neither 'good' nor 'learned,' but were\nsimply anxious to interpret Nature as best they could, we cannot find\nfault with the latter for the way they handled the problem, nor indeed\nwell see how they could have handled it better.\n\n (1) F. Nork, Der Mystagog, mentions that the Roman Penates were\ncommonly anointed with oil. J. Stuart Hay, in his Life of Elagabalus\n(1911), says that \"Elagabal was worshipped under the symbol of a great\nblack stone or meteorite, in the shape of a Phallus, which having fallen\nfrom the heavens represented a true portion of the Godhead, much after\nthe style of those black stone images popularly venerated in Norway and\nother parts of Europe.\"\n\n (2) J. E. Hewitt, in his Ruling Races of Pre-historic Times (p.\n64), gives a long list of pre-historic races who worshipped the lingam.\n\n (3) See Ch. XI.\n\n (4) See Ernest Crawley's Mystic Rose, ch. xiii, pp. 310 and 313:\n\"In certain tribes of Central Africa both boys and girls after\ninitiation must as soon as possible have intercourse.\" Initiation being\nnot merely preliminary to, but often ACTUALLY marriage. The same\namong Kaffirs, Congo tribes, Senegalese, etc. Also among the Arunta of\nAustralia.\n\n (5) Professor Diederichs has said that \"in much ancient ritual it\nwas thought that mystic communion with the deity could be obtained\nthrough the semblance of sex-intercourse--as in the Attis-Cybele\nworship, and the Isis-ritual.\" (Farnell.) Reitzenstein says (op. cit.,\np. 20.) that the Initiates, like some of the Christian Nuns at a later\ntime, believed in union with God through receiving the seed.\n\n (6) Farnell, op. cit., iii. 176. Messrs. Gardner and Jevons, in\ntheir Manual of Greek Antiquities, above-quoted, compare the Eleusinian\nMysteries favorably with some of the others, like the Arcadian, the\nTroezenian, the Aeginaean, and the very primitive Samothracian:\nsaying (p. 278) that of the last-mentioned \"we know little, but safely\nconjecture that in them the ideas of sex and procreation dominated EVEN\nMORE than in those of Eleusis.\"\n\n\nAfter all it is pretty clear that the early peoples saw in Sex the great\ncohesive force which kept (we will not say Humanity but at any rate)\nthe Tribe together, and sustained the race. In the stage of simple\nConsciousness this must have been one of the first things that the\nbudding intellect perceived. Sex became one of the earliest divinities,\nand there is abundant evidence that its organs and processes generally\nwere invested with a religious sense of awe and sanctity. It was in fact\nthe symbol (or rather the actuality) of the permanent undying life\nof the race, and as such was sacred to the uses of the race. Whatever\ntaboos may have, among different peoples, guarded its operations, it\nwas not essentially a thing to be concealed, or ashamed of. Rather the\ncontrary. For instance the early Christian writer, Hippolytus, Bishop of\nPontus (A.D. 200), in his Refutation of all Heresies, Book V, says that\nthe Samothracian Mysteries, just mentioned, celebrate Adam as the\nprimal or archetypal Man eternal in the heavens; and he then continues:\n\"Habitually there stand in the temple of the Samothracians two images\nof naked men having both hands stretched aloft towards heaven, and their\npudenda turned upwards, as is also the case with the statue of Mercury\non Mt. Cyllene. And the aforesaid images are figures of the primal man,\nand of that spiritual one that is born again, in every respect of the\nsame substance with that (first) man.\"\n\n\nThis extract from Hippolytus occurs in the long discourse in which he\n'exposes' the heresy of the so-called Naassene doctrines and mysteries.\nBut the whole discourse should be read by those who wish to understand\nthe Gnostic philosophy of the period contemporary with and anterior to\nthe birth of Christianity. A translation of the discourse, carefully\nanalyzed and annotated, is given in G. R. S. Mead's Thrice-greatest\nHermes (1) (vol. i); and Mead himself, speaking of it, says (p. 141):\n\"The claim of these Gnostics was practically that the good news of the\nChrist (the Christos) was the consummation of the inner doctrine of the\nMystery-institutions of all the nations; the end of them all being the\nrevelation of the Mystery of Man.\" Further, he explains that the Soul,\nin these doctrines, was regarded as synonymous with the Cause of All;\nand that its loves were twain--of Aphrodite (or Life), and of Persephone\n(or Death and the other world). Also that Attis, abandoning his sex in\nthe worship of the Mother-Goddess (Dea Syria), ascends to Heaven--a new\nman, Male-female, and the origin of all things: the hidden Mystery being\nthe Phallus itself, erected as Hermes in all roads and boundaries and\ntemples, the Conductor and Reconductor of Souls.\n\n (1) Reitzenstein, op. cit., quotes the discourse largely. The\nThrice-greatest Hermes may also be consulted for a translation of\nPlutarch's Isis and Osiris.\n\n\nAll this may sound strange, but one may fairly say that it represented\nin its degree, and in that first 'unfallen' stage of human thought\nand psychology, a true conception of the cosmic Life, and indeed a\nconception quite sensible and admirable, until, of course, the Second\nStage brought corruption. No sooner was this great force of the cosmic\nlife diverted from its true uses of Generation and Regeneration (1) and\nappropriated by the individual to his own private pleasure--no sooner\nwas its religious character as a tribal service (2), (often rendered\nwithin the Temple precincts) lost sight of or degraded into a commercial\ntransaction--than every kind of evil fell upon mankind. Corruptio optimi\npessima. It must be remembered too that simultaneous with this sexual\ndisruption occurred the disruption of other human relations; and\nwe cease to be surprised that disease and selfish passions, greed,\njealousy, slander, cruelty, and wholesale murder, raged--and have raged\never since.\n\n (1) For the special meaning of these two terms, see The Drama of\nLove and Death, by E. Carpenter, pp. 59-61.\n\n (2) Ernest Crawley in The Mystic Rose challenges this\nidentification of Religion with tribal interests; yet his arguments\nare not very convincing. On p. 5 he admits that \"there is a religious\nmeaning inherent in the primitive conception and practice of ALL human\nrelations\"; and a large part of his ch. xii is taken up in showing that\neven such institutions as the Saturnalia were religious in confirming\nthe sense of social union and leading to 'extended identity.'\n\n\nBut for the human soul--whatever its fate, and whatever the dangers and\ndisasters that threaten it--there is always redemption waiting. As we\nsaw in the last chapter, this corruption of Sex led (quite naturally) to\nits denial and rejection; and its denial led to the differentiation from\nit of Love. Humanity gained by the enthronement and deification of Love,\npure and undefiled, and (for the time being) exalted beyond this mortal\nworld, and free from all earthly contracts. But again in the end, the\ndivorce thus introduced between the physical and the spiritual led\nto the crippling of both. Love relegated, so to speak, to heaven as a\npurely philanthropical, pious and 'spiritual' affair, became exceedingly\nDULL; and sex, remaining on earth, but deserted by the redeeming\npresence, fell into mere \"carnal curiosity and wretchedness of unclean\nliving.\" Obviously for the human race there remains nothing, in the\nfinal event, but the reconciliation of the physical and the spiritual,\nand after many sufferings, the reunion of Eros and Psyche.\n\n\nThere is still, however, much to be said about the Third State of\nConsciousness. Let us examine into it a little more closely. Clearly,\nsince it is a new state, and not merely an extension of a former one,\none cannot arrive at it by argument derived from the Second state, for\nall conscious Thought such as we habitually use simply keeps us IN the\nSecond state. No animal or quite primitive man could possibly understand\nwhat we mean by Self-consciousness till he had experienced it. Mere\nargument would not enlighten him. And so no one in the Second state\ncan quite realize the Third state till he has experienced it. Still,\nexplanations may help us to perceive in what direction to look, and\nto recognize in some of our experiences an approach to the condition\nsought.\n\nEvidently it is a mental condition in some respects more similar to the\nfirst than to the second stage. The second stage of human psychologic\nevolution is an aberration, a divorce, a parenthesis. With its\nculmination and dismissal the mind passes back into the simple state of\nunion with the Whole. (The state of Ekagrata in the Hindu philosophy:\none-pointedness, singleness of mind.) And the consciousness of\nthe Whole, and of things past and things to come and things far\naround--which consciousness had been shut out by the concentration on\nthe local self--begins to return again. This is not to say, of course,\nthat the excursus in the second stage has been a loss and a defect. On\nthe contrary, it means that the Return is a bringing of all that\nhas been gained during the period of exile (all sorts of mental and\ntechnical knowledge and skill, emotional developments, finesse and\nadaptability of mind) BACK into harmony with the Whole. It means\nultimately a great gain. The Man, perfected, comes back to a vastly\nextended harmony. He enters again into a real understanding and\nconfidential relationship with his physical body and with the body of\nthe society in which he dwells--from both of which he has been sadly\ndivorced; and he takes up again the broken thread of the Cosmic Life.\n\nEveryone has noticed the extraordinary consent sometimes observable\namong the members of an animal community--how a flock of 500 birds (e.\ng. starlings) will suddenly change its direction of flight--the light\non the wings shifting INSTANTANEOUSLY, as if the impulse to veer came\nto all at the same identical moment; or how bees will swarm or otherwise\nact with one accord, or migrating creatures (lemmings, deer, gossamer\nspiders, winged ants) the same. Whatever explanation of these facts we\nfavor--whether the possession of swifter and finer means of external\ncommunication than we can perceive, or whether a common and inner\nsensitivity to the genius of the Tribe (the \"Spirit of the Hive\") or to\nthe promptings of great Nature around--in any case these facts of animal\nlife appear to throw light on the possibilities of an accord and consent\namong the members of emaciated humanity, such as we dream of now, and\nseem to bid us have good hope for the future.\n\nIt is here, perhaps, that the ancient worship of the Lingam comes in.\nThe word itself is apparently connected with our word 'link,' and has\noriginally the same meaning. (1) It is the link between the generations.\nBeginning with the worship of the physical Race-life, the course of\npsychologic evolution has been first to the worship of the Tribe (or\nof the Totem which represents the tribe); then to the worship of\nthe human-formed God of the tribe--the God who dies and rises\nagain eternally, as the tribe passes on eternal--though its members\nperpetually perish; then to the conception of an undying Savior, and the\nrealization and distinct experience of some kind of Super-consciousness\nwhich does certainly reside, more or less hidden, in the deeps of the\nmind, and has been waiting through the ages for its disclosure and\nrecognition. Then again to the recognition that in the sacrifices,\nthe Slayer and the Slain are one--the strange and profoundly mystic\nperception that the God and the Victim are in essence the same--the\ndedication of 'Himself to Himself' (2) and simultaneously with this the\ninterpretation of the Eucharist as meaning, even for the individual,\nthe participation in Eternal Life--the continuing life of the Tribe,\nor ultimately of Humanity. (3) The Tribal order rises to Humanity; love\nascends from the lingam to yogam, from physical union alone to the union\nwith the Whole--which of course includes physical and all other kinds of\nunion. No wonder that the good St. Paul, witnessing that extraordinary\nwhirlpool of beliefs and practices, new and old, there in the first\ncentury A.D.--the unabashed adoration of sex side by side with the\ntranscendental devotions of the Vedic sages and the Gnostics--became\nsomewhat confused himself and even a little violent, scolding his\ndisciples (I Cor. x. 21) for their undiscriminating acceptance, as it\nseemed to him, of things utterly alien and antagonistic. \"Ye cannot\ndrink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers\nof the Lord's table and the table of devils.\"\n\n\n (1) See Sanskrit Dictionary.\n\n (2) See Ch. VIII.\n\n (3) There are many indications in literature--in prophetic or\npoetic form--of this awareness and distinct conviction of an eternal\nlife, reached through love and an inner sense of union with others and\nwith humanity at large; indications which bear the mark of absolute\ngenuineness and sincerity of feeling. See, for instance, Whitman's poem,\n\"To the Garden the World\" (Leaves of Grass, complete edition, p. 79).\nBut an eternal life of the third order; not, thank heaven! an eternity\nof the meddling and muddling self-conscious Intellect!\n\n\nEvery careful reader has noticed the confusedness of Paul's mind and\narguments. Even taking only those Epistles (Galatians, Romans and\nCorinthians) which the critics assign to his pen, the thing is\nobservable--and some learned Germans even speak of TWO Pauls. (1) But\nalso the thing is quite natural. There can be little doubt that Paul of\nTarsus, a Jew brought up in the strictest sect of the Pharisees, did at\nsome time fall deeply under the influence of Greek thought, and quite\npossibly became an initiate in the Mysteries. It would be difficult\notherwise to account for his constant use of the Mystery-language.\nReitzenstein says (p. 59): \"The hellenistic religious literature MUST\nhave been read by him; he uses its terms, and is saturated with its\nthoughts (see Rom. vi. 1-14.\" And this conjoined with his Jewish\nexperience gave him creative power. \"A great deal in his sentiment and\nthought may have REMAINED Jewish, but to his Hellenism he was indebted\nfor his love of freedom and his firm belief in his apostleship.\" He\nadopts terms (like [gr sarkikos], [gr yucikos] and [gr pneumatikos])\n(2) which were in use among the hellenistic sects of the time; and\nhe writes, as in Romans vi. 4, 5, about being \"buried\" with Christ or\n\"planted\" in the likeness of his death, in words which might well have\nbeen used (with change of the name) by a follower of Attis or Osiris\nafter witnessing the corresponding 'mysteries'; certainly the allusion\nto these ancient deities would have been understood by every religionist\nof that day. These few points are sufficient to acentuate{sic} the two\nelements in Paul, the Jewish and the Greek, and to explain (so far)\nthe seeming confusion in his utterances. Further it is interesting to\nnote--as showing the pagan influences in the N. T. writings--the degree\nto which the Epistle to Philemon (ascribed to Paul) is FULL--short as it\nis--of expressions like PRISONER of the Lord, FELLOW SOLDIER, CAPTIVE or\nBONDMAN, (3) which were so common at the time as to be almost a cant in\nMithraism and the allied cults. In I Peter ii. 2 (4), we have the verse\n\"As newborn babes, desire ye the sincere MILK of the word, that ye\nmay grow thereby.\" And again we may say that no one in that day could\nmistake the reference herein contained to old initiation ceremonies and\nthe new birth (as described in Chapter VIII above), for indeed milk was\nthe well-known diet of the novice in the Isis mysteries, as well as (in\nsome savage tribes) of the Medicine-man when practising his calling.\n\n (1) \"Die Mysterien-anschauungen, die bei Paulus im Hintergrunde\nstehen, drangen sich in dem sogenarmten Deuteropaulinismus machtig vor\"\n(Reitzenstein).\n\n (2) Remindful of our Three Stages: the Animal, the\nSelf-conscious, and the Cosmic.\n\n (3) [gr desmios, stratiwths, doulos].\n\n (4) See also I Cor. iii. 2.\n\n\nAnd here too Democracy comes in--strangely foreboded from the first in\nall this matter. (1) Not only does the Third Stage bring illumination,\nintuitive understanding of processes in Nature and Humanity, sympathy\nwith the animals, artistic capacity, and so forth, but it necessarily\nbrings a new Order of Society. A preposterous--one may almost say a\nhideous--social Age is surely drawing to its end, The debacle we are\nwitnessing to-day all over Europe (including the British Islands), the\nbreak-up of old institutions, the generally materialistic outlook on\nlife, the coming to the surface of huge masses of diseased and fatuous\npopulations, the scum and dregs created by the past order, all point to\nthe End of a Dispensation. Protestantism and Commercialism, in the two\nfields of religion and daily life have, as I have indicated before,\nbeen occupied in concentrating the mind of each man solely on his OWN\nwelfare, the salvation of his OWN soul or body. These two forces have\ntherefore been disruptive to the last degree; they mark the culmination\nof the Self-conscious Age--a culmination in War, Greed, Materialism, and\nthe general principle of Devil-take-the-hindmost--and the clearing of\nthe ground for the new order which is to come. So there is hope for the\nhuman race. Its evolution is not all a mere formless craze and jumble.\nThere is an inner necessity by which Humanity unfolds from one degree or\nplane of consciousness to another. And if there has been a great 'Fall'\nor Lapse into conflict and disease and 'sin' and misery, occupying the\nmajor part of the Historical period hitherto, we see that this period\nis only brief, so to speak, in comparison with the whole curve of growth\nand expansion. We see also that, as I have said before, the belief in a\nstate of salvation or deliverance has in the past ages never left\nitself quite without a witness in the creeds and rituals and poems and\nprophecies of mankind. Art, in some form or other, as an activity or\ninspiration dating not from the conscious Intellect, but from deeper\nregions of sub-conscious feeling and intuition, has continually come to\nus as a message from and an evidence of the Third stage or state, and as\na promise of its more complete realization under other conditions.\n\n Through the long night-time where the Nations wander\n     From Eden past to Paradise to be,\n Art's sacred flowers, like fair stars shining yonder,\n     Alone illumine Life's obscurity.\n\n O gracious Artists, out of your deep hearts\n     'Tis some great Sun, I doubt, by men unguessed,\n Whose rays come struggling thus, in slender darts,\n     To shadow what Is, till Time shall manifest.\n\n\n (1) See the germs of Democracy in the yoga teaching of the\nHindus, and in the Upanishads, the Bhagavat Gita, and other books.\n\n\nWith the Cosmic stage comes also necessarily the rehabilitation of the\nWHOLE of Society in one fellowship (the true Democracy). Not the rule or\ndomination of one class or caste--as of the Intellectual, the Pious,\nthe Commercial or the Military--but the fusion or at least consentaneous\norganization of ALL (as in the corresponding functions of the human\nBody). Class rule has been the mark of that second period of human\nevolution, and has inevitably given birth during that period to wars and\nself-agrandizements of classes and sections, and their consequent greeds\nand tyrannies over other classes and sections. It is not found in the\nprimitive human tribes and societies, and will not be found in the final\nforms of human association. The liberated and emancipated Man passes\nunconstrained and unconstraining through all grades and planes of human\nfellowship, equal and undisturbed, and never leaving his true home\nand abiding place in the heart of all. Equally necessarily with the\nrehabilitation of Society as an entirety will follow the rehabilitation\nof the entire physical body IN each member of Society. We have spoken\nalready of Nakedness: its meaning and likely extent of adoption (Ch.\nXII). The idea that the head and the hands are the only seemly and\npresentable members of the organism, and that the other members are\nunworthy and indecent, is obviously as onesided and lopsided as that\nwhich honors certain classes in the commonwealth and despises others.\nWhy should the head brag of its ascendancy and domination, and the heart\nbe smothered up and hidden? It will only be a life far more in the open\nair than that which we lead at present, which will restore the balance\nand ultimately bring us back to sanity and health.\n\n\n\n\nXVI. THE EXODUS OF CHRISTIANITY\n\nWe have dealt with the Genesis of Christianity; we now come to the\nExodus. For that Christianity can CONTINUE to hold the field of Religion\nin the Western World is neither probable nor desirable. It is true, as\nI have remarked already, that there is a certain trouble about\ndefining what we mean by \"Christianity\" similar to that about the word\n\"Civilization.\" If we select out of the great mass of doctrines and\nrites favored by the various Christian Churches just those which commend\nthemselves to the most modern and humane and rational human mind and\nchoose to call that resulting (but rather small) body of belief and\npractice 'Christianity' we are, of course, entitled to do so, and to\nhope (as we do hope) that this residuum will survive and go forward into\nthe future. But this sort of proceeding is hardly fair and certainly not\nlogical. It enables Christianity to pose as an angel of light while at\nthe same time keeping discreetly out of sight all its own abominations\nand deeds of darkness. The Church--which began its career by destroying,\ndistorting and denying the pagan sources from which it sprang; whose\nbishops and other ecclesiastics assassinated each other in their\ntheological rancour \"of wild beasts,\" which encouraged the wicked folly\nof the Crusades--especially the Children's Crusades--and the shameful\nmurders of the Manicheans, the Albigenses, and the Huguenots; which\nburned at the stake thousands and thousands of poor 'witches' and\n'heretics'; which has hardly ever spoken a generous word in favor or\ndefence of the animals; which in modern times has supported vivisection\nas against the latter, Capitalism and Commercialism as against the\npoorer classes of mankind; and whose priests in the forms of its various\nsects, Greek or Catholic, Lutheran or Protestant, have in these last\ndays rushed forth to urge the nations to slaughter each other with every\ndiabolical device of Science, and to glorify the war-cry of Patriotism\nin defiance of the principle of universal Brotherhood--such a Church can\nhardly claim to have established the angelic character of its mission\namong mankind! And if it be said--as it often IS SAID: \"Oh! but you must\ngo back to the genuine article, and the Church's real origin and one\nfoundation in the person and teaching of Jesus Christ,\" then indeed you\ncome back to the point which this book, as above, enforces: namely, that\nas to the person of Jesus, there is no CERTAINTY at all that he ever\nexisted; and as to the teaching credited to him, it is certain that that\ncomes down from a period long anterior to 'Christianity' and is part of\nwhat may justly be called a very ancient World-religion. So, as in the\ncase of 'Civilization,' we are compelled to see that it is useless to\napply the word to some ideal state of affairs or doctrine (an ideal\nby no means the same in all people's minds, or in all localities and\ntimes), but that the only reasonable thing to do is to apply it in each\ncase to a HISTORICAL PERIOD. In the case of Christianity the historical\nperiod has lasted nearly 2,000 years, and, as I say, we can hardly\nexpect or wish that it should last much longer.\n\nThe very thorough and careful investigation of religious origins which\nhas been made during late years by a great number of students and\nobservers undoubtedly tends to show that there has been something like\na great World-religion coming down the centuries from the remotest times\nand gradually expanding and branching as it has come--that is to say\nthat the similarity (in ESSENCE though not always in external detail)\nbetween the creeds and rituals of widely sundered tribes and peoples is\nso great as to justify the view--advanced in the present volume--that\nthese creeds and rituals are the necessary outgrowths of human\npsychology, slowly evolving, and that consequently they have a common\norigin and in their various forms a common expression. Of this great\nWorld-religion, so coming down, Christianity is undoubtedly a branch,\nand an important branch. But there have been important branches before;\nand while it may be true that Christianity emphasizes some points which\nmay have been overlooked or neglected in the Vedic teachings or in\nBuddhism, or in the Persian and Egyptian and Syrian cults, or in\nMahommedanism, and so forth, it is also equally true that Christianity\nhas itself overlooked or neglected valuable points in these religions.\nIt has, in fact, the defects of its qualities. If the World-religion\nis like a great tree, one cannot expect or desire that all its branches\nshould be directed towards the same point of the compass.\n\nReinach, whose studies of religious origins are always interesting\nand characterized by a certain Gallic grace and nettete, though with a\nsomewhat Jewish non-perception of the mystic element in life, defines\nReligion as a combination of animism and scruples. This is good in\na way, because it gives the two aspects of the subject: the inner,\nanimism, consisting of the sense of contact with more or less\nintelligent beings moving in Nature; and the outer, consisting in\nscruples or taboos. The one aspect shows the feeling which INSPIRES\nreligion, the other, the checks and limitations which DEFINE it and give\nbirth to ritual. But like most anthropologists he (Reinach) is a little\nTOO patronizing towards the \"poor Indian with untutored mind.\" He is\nsorry for people so foolish as to be animistic in their outlook, and he\nis always careful to point out that the scruples and taboos were quite\nsenseless in their origin, though occasionally (by accident) they turned\nout useful. Yet--as I have said before--Animism is a perfectly sensible,\nlogical and NECESSARY attitude of the human mind. It is a necessary\nattribute of man's psychical nature, by which he projects into the great\nWorld around him the image of his own mind. When that mind is in a very\nprimitive, inchoate, and fragmentary condition, the images so projected\nare those of fragmentary intelligences ('spirits,' gnomes, etc.--the age\nof magic); when the mind rises to distinct consciousness of itself the\nreflections of it are anthropomorphic 'gods'; when finally it reaches\nthe universal or cosmic state it perceives the presence of a universal\nBeing behind all phenomena--which Being is indeed itself--\"Himself to\nHimself.\" If you like you may call the whole process by the name of\nAnimism. It is perfectly sensible throughout. The only proviso is that\nyou should also be sensible, and distinguish the different stages in the\nprocess.\n\nJane Harrison makes considerable efforts to show that Religion is\nprimarily a reflection of the SOCIAL Conscience (see Themis, pp.\n482-92)--that is, that the sense in Man of a \"Power that makes for\nrighteousness\" outside (and also inside) him is derived from his feeling\nof continuity with the Tribe and his instinctive obedience to its\nbehests, confirmed by ages of collective habit and experience. He\ncannot in fact sever the navel-string which connects him with his tribal\nMother, even though he desires to do so. And no doubt this view of the\norigin of Religion is perfectly correct. But it must be pointed out that\nit does not by any means exclude the view that religion derives\nalso from an Animism by which man recognizes in general Nature his\nfoster-mother and feels himself in closest touch with HER. Which may\nhave come first, the Social affiliation or the Nature affiliation, I\nleave to the professors to determine. The term Animism may, as far as I\ncan see, be quite well applied to the social affiliation, for the latter\nis evidently only a case in which the individual projects his own degree\nof consciousness into the human group around him instead of into the\nanimals or the trees, but it is a case of which the justice is so\nobvious that the modern man can intellectually seize and understand it,\nand consequently he does not tar it with the 'animistic' brush.\n\nAnd Miss Harrison, it must be noticed, does, in other passages of the\nsame book (see Themis, pp. 68, 69), admit that Religion has its origin\nnot only from unity with the Tribe but from the sense of affiliation to\nNature--the sense of \"a world of unseen power lying behind the visible\nuniverse, a world which is the sphere, as will be seen, of magical\nactivity and the medium of mysticism. The mystical element, the oneness\nand continuousness comes out very clearly in the notion of Wakonda among\nthe Sioux Indians.... The Omahas regarded all animate and inanimate\nforms, all phenomena, as pervaded by a common life, which was continuous\nand similar to the will-power they were conscious of in themselves. This\nmysterious power in all things they called Wakonda, and through it\nall things were related to man, and to each other. In the idea of the\ncontinuity of life, a relation was maintained between the seen and\nthe unseen, the dead and the living, and also between the fragment of\nanything and its entirety.\" Thus our general position is confirmed,\nthat Religion in its origin has been INSPIRED by a deep instinctive\nconviction or actual sense of continuity with a being or beings in the\nworld around, while it has derived its FORM and ritual by slow degrees\nfrom a vast number of taboos, generated in the first instance chiefly\nby superstitious fears, but gradually with the growth of reason and\nobservation becoming simplified and rationalized into forms of use. On\nthe one side there has been the positive impulse--of mere animal Desire\nand the animal urge of self-expression; on the other there has been\nthe negative force of Fear based on ignorance--the latter continually\ncarving, moulding and shaping the former. According to this an organized\nstudy and classification of taboos might yield some interesting results;\nbecause indeed it would throw light on the earliest forms of both\nreligion and science. It would be seen that some taboos, like those\nof CONTACT (say with a menstruous woman, or a mother-in-law, or a\nlightning-struck tree) had an obvious basis of observation, justifiable\nbut very crude; while others, like the taboo against harming an enemy\nwho had contracted blood-friendship with one of your own tribe, or\nagainst giving decent burial to a murderer, were equally rough and rude\nexpressions or indications of the growing moral sentiment of mankind.\nAll the same there would be left, in any case, a large residuum of\ntaboos which could only be judged as senseless, and the mere rubbish of\nthe savage mind.\n\nSo much for the first origins of the World-religion; and I think enough\nhas been said in the various chapters of this book to show that the same\ngeneral process has obtained throughout. Man, like the animals, began\nwith this deep, subconscious sense of unity with surrounding Nature.\nWhen this became (in Man) fairly conscious, it led to Magic and\nTotemism. More conscious, and it branched, on the one hand, into figures\nof Gods and definite forms of Creeds, on the other into elaborate\nScientific Theories--the latter based on a strong INTELLECTUAL belief in\nUnity, but fervently denying any 'anthropomorphic' or 'animistic'\nSENSE of that unity. Finally, it seems that we are now on the edge of\na further stage when the theories and the creeds, scientific and\nreligious, are on the verge of collapsing, but in such a way as to leave\nthe sense and the perception of Unity--the real content of the whole\nprocess--not only undestroyed, but immensely heightened and illuminated.\nMeanwhile the taboos--of which there remain some still, both religious\nand scientific--have been gradually breaking up and merging themselves\ninto a reasonable and humane order of life and philosophy.\n\nI have said that out of this World-religion Christianity really sprang.\nIt is evident that the time has arrived when it must either acknowledge\nits source and frankly endeavor to affiliate itself to the same, or\nfailing that must perish. In the first case it will probably have to\nchange its name; in the second the question of its name 'will interest\nit no more.'\n\nWith regard to the first of these alternatives, I might venture--though\nwith indifference--to make a few suggestions. Why should we\nnot have--instead of a Holy Roman Church--a Holy HUMAN Church,\nrehabilitating the ancient symbols and rituals, a Christianity (if you\nstill desire to call it so) frankly and gladly acknowledging its own\nsources? This seems a reasonable and even feasible proposition. If such\na church wished to celebrate a Mass or Communion or Eucharist it would\nhave a great variety of rites and customs of that kind to select from;\nthose that were not appropriate for use in our times or were connected\nwith the worship of strange gods need not be rejected or condemned,\nbut could still be commented on and explained as approaches to the same\nidea--the idea of dedication to the Common Life, and of reinvigoration\nin the partaking of it. If the Church wished to celebrate the\nCrucifixion or betrayal of its Founder, a hundred instances of such\ncelebrations would be to hand, and still the thought that has underlain\nsuch celebrations since the beginning of the world could easily be\ndisentangled and presented in concrete form anew. In the light of such\nteaching expressions like \"I know that my Redeemer liveth\" would be\ntraced to their origin, and men would understand that notwithstanding\nthe mass of rubbish, cant and humbug which has collected round them they\nreally do mean something and represent the age-long instinct of Humanity\nfeeling its way towards a more extended revelation, a new order of\nbeing, a third stage of consciousness and illumination. In such a Church\nor religious organization EVERY quality of human nature would have to\nbe represented, every practice and custom allowed for and its place\naccorded--the magical and astronomical meanings, the rites connected\nwith sun-worship, or with sex, or with the worship of animals; the\nconsecration of corn and wine and other products of the ground,\ninitiations, sacrifices, and so forth--all (if indeed it claimed to be\na World-religion) would have to be represented and recognized. For they\nall have their long human origin and descent in and through the pagan\ncreeds, and they all have penetrated into and become embodied to some\ndegree in Christianity. Christianity therefore, as I say, must either\nnow come frankly forward and, acknowledging its parentage from the great\nOrder of the past, seek to rehabilitate THAT and carry mankind one step\nforward in the path of evolution--or else it must perish. There is no\nother alternative. (1)\n\n (1) Comte in founding his philosophy of Positivism seems to have\nhad in view some such Holy Human Church, but he succeeded in making it\nall so profoundly dull that it never flourished, The seed of Life was\nnot in it.\n\n\nLet me give an instance of how a fragment of ancient ritual which has\nsurvived from the far Past and is still celebrated, but with little\nintelligence or understanding, in the Catholic Church of to-day, might\nbe adopted in such a Church as I have spoken of, interpreted, and made\neloquent of meaning to modern humanity. When I was in Ceylon nearly 30\nyears ago I was fortunate enough to witness a night-festival in a Hindu\nTemple--the great festival of Taipusam, which takes place every year in\nJanuary. Of course, it was full moon, and great was the blowing up of\ntrumpets in the huge courtyard of the Temple. The moon shone down above\nfrom among the fronds of tall coco-palms, on a dense crowd of native\nworshipers--men and a few women--the men for the most part clad in\nlittle more than a loin-cloth, the women picturesque in their colored\nsaris and jewelled ear and nose rings. The images of Siva and two other\ngods were carried in procession round and round the temple--three or\nfour times; nautch girls danced before the images, musicians, blowing\nhorns and huge shells, or piping on flageolets or beating tom-toms,\naccompanied them. The crowd carrying torches or high crates with flaming\ncoco-nuts, walked or rather danced along on each side, elated and\nexcited with the sense of the present divinity, yet pleasantly free from\nany abject awe. The whole thing indeed reminded one of some bas-relief\nof a Bacchanalian procession carved on a Greek sarcophagus--and\nespecially so in its hilarity and suggestion of friendly intimacy with\nthe god. There were singing of hymns and the floating of the chief\nactors on a raft round a sacred lake. And then came the final Act. Siva,\nor his image, very weighty and borne on the shoulders of strong men, was\ncarried into the first chamber or hall of the Temple and placed on an\naltar with a curtain hanging in front. The crowd followed with a rush;\nand then there was more music, recital of hymns, and reading from sacred\nbooks. From where we stood we could see the rite which was performed\nbehind the curtain. Two five-branched candlesticks were lighted; and the\nmanner of their lighting was as follows. Each branch ended in a\nlittle cup, and in the cups five pieces of camphor were placed, all\napproximately equal in size. After offerings had been made, of fruit,\nflowers and sandalwood, the five camphors in each candlestick were\nlighted. As the camphor flames burned out the music became more wild and\nexciting, and then at the moment of their extinction the curtains\nwere drawn aside and the congregation outside suddenly beheld the god\nrevealed and in a blaze of light. This burning of camphor was, like\nother things in the service, emblematic. The five lights represent\nthe five senses. Just as camphor consumes itself and leaves no residue\nbehind, so should the five senses, being offered to the god, consume\nthemselves and disappear. When this is done, that happens in the soul\nwhich was now figured in the ritual--the God is revealed in the inner\nlight. (1)\n\n (1) For a more detailed account of this Temple-festival, see\nAdam's Peak to Elephanta by E. Carpenter, ch. vii.\n\n\nWe are familiar with this parting or rending of the veil. We hear of it\nin the Jewish Temple, and in the Greek and Egyptian Mysteries. It had\na mystically religious, and also obviously sexual, signification. It\noccurs here and there in the Roman Catholic ritual. In Spain, some\nancient Catholic ceremonials are kept up with a brilliance and splendor\nhardly found elsewhere in Europe. In the Cathedral, at Seville the\nservice of the Passion, carried out on Good Friday with great\nsolemnity and accompanied with fine music, culminates on the Saturday\nmorning--i.e. in the interval between the Crucifixion and the\nResurrection--in a spectacle similar to that described in Ceylon. A rich\nvelvet-black curtain hangs before the High Altar. At the appropriate\nmoment and as the very emotional strains of voices and instruments reach\ntheir climax in the \"Gloria in Excelsis,\" the curtain with a sudden\nburst of sound (thunder and the ringing of all the bells) is rent\nasunder, and the crucified Jesus is seen hanging there revealed in a\nhalo of glory.\n\nThere is also held at Seville Cathedral and before the High Altar every\nyear, the very curious Dance of the Seises (sixes), performed now by 16\ninstead of (as of old) by 12 boys, quaintly dressed. It seems to be a\nsurvival of some very ancient ritual, probably astronomical, in which\nthe two sets of six represent the signs of the Zodiac, and is celebrated\nduring the festivals of Corpus Christi, the Immaculate Conception, and\nthe Carnival.\n\nNumerous instances might of course be adduced of how a Church aspiring\nto be a real Church of Humanity might adopt and re-create the rituals\nof the past in the light of a modern inspiration. Indeed the difficulty\nwould be to limit the process, for EVERY ancient ritual, we can now\nsee, has had a meaning and a message, and it would be a real joy to\ndisentangle these and to expose the profound solidarity of humanity and\naspiration from the very dawn of civilization down to the present day.\nNor would it be necessary to imagine any Act of Uniformity or dead\nlevel of ceremonial in the matter. Different groups might concentrate on\ndifferent phases of religious thought and practice. The only necessity\nwould be that they should approach the subject with a real love of\nHumanity in their hearts and a real desire to come into touch with the\ndeep inner life and mystic growing-pains of the souls of men and women\nin all ages. In this direction M. Loisy has done noble and excellent\nwork; but the dead weight and selfish blinkerdom of the Catholic\norganization has hampered him to that degree that he has been unable\nto get justice done to his liberalizing designs--or, perhaps, even to\nreveal the full extent of them. And the same difficulty will remain. On\nthe one hand no spiritual movement which does not take up the attitude\nof a World-religion has now in this age, any chance of success; on the\nother, all the existing Churches--whether Roman Catholic, or Greek,\nor Protestant or Secularist--whether Christian or Jewish or Persian or\nHindu--will in all probability adopt the same blind and blinkered and\nselfish attitude as that described above, and so disqualify themselves\nfor the great role of world-wide emancipation, which some religion at\nsome time will certainly have to play. It is the same difficulty which\nis looming large in modern World-politics, where the local selfishness\nand vainglorious \"patriotisms\" of the Nations are sadly impeding and\nobstructing the development of that sense of Internationalism and\nBrotherhood which is the clearly indicated form of the future, and\nwhich alone can give each nation deliverance from fear, and a promise of\ngrowth, and the confident assurance of power.\n\nI say that Christianity must either frankly adopt this generous attitude\nand confess itself a branch of the great World-religion, anxious only to\ndo honor to its source--or else it must perish and pass away. There is\nno other alternative. The hour of its Exodus has come. It may be, of\ncourse, that neither the Christian Church nor any branch of it, nor any\nother religious organization, will step into the gap. It may be--but I\ndo not think this is likely--that the time of rites and ceremonies and\nformal creeds is PAST, and churches of any kind will be no more needed\nin the world: not likely, I say, because of the still far backwardness\nof the human masses, and their considerable dependence yet on laws and\nforms and rituals. Still, if it should prove that that age of dependence\nIS really approaching its end, that would surely be a matter for\ncongratulation. It would mean that mankind was moving into a knowledge\nof the REALITY which has underlain these outer shows--that it was coming\ninto the Third stage of its Consciousness. Having found this there would\nbe no need for it to dwell any longer in the land of superstitions and\nformulae. It would have come to the place of which these latter are only\nthe outlying indications.\n\nIt may, therefore, happen--and this quite independently of the growth of\na World-cult such as I have described, though by no means in antagonism\nto it--that a religious philosophy or Theosophy might develop and\nspread, similar to the Gnonam of the Hindus or the Gnomsis of the\npre-Christian sects, which would become, first among individuals and\nafterwards among large bodies over the world, the religion of--or\nperhaps one should say the religious approach to the Third State. Books\nlike the Upanishads of the Vedic seers, and the Bhagavat Gita, though\ngarbled and obscured by priestly interferences and mystifications, do\nundoubtedly represent and give expression to the highest utterance of\nreligious experience to be found anywhere in the world. They are indeed\nthe manuals of human entrance into the cosmic state. But as I say,\nand as has happened in the case of other sacred books, a vast deal of\nrubbish has accreted round their essential teachings, and has to be\ncleared away. To go into a serious explication of the meaning of these\nbooks would be far too large an affair, and would be foreign to the\npurpose of the present volume; but I have in the Appendix below inserted\ntwo papers, (on \"Rest\" and \"The Nature of the Self\") containing the\nsubstance of lectures given on the above books. These papers or lectures\nare couched in the very simplest language, free from Sanskrit terms and\nthe usual 'jargon of the Schools,' and may, I hope, even on that account\nbe of use in familiarizing readers who are not specially STUDENTS with\nthe ideas and mental attitudes of the cosmic state. Non-differentiation\n(Advaita (1)) is the root attitude of the mind inculcated.\n\n (1) The word means \"not-two-ness.\" Here we see a great subtlety\nof definition. It is not to be \"one\" with others that is urged, but to\nbe \"not two.\"\n\n\nWe have seen that there has been an age of non-differentiation in the\n_Past_\u2014non-differentiation from other members of the Tribe, from the\nAnimals, from Nature and the Spirit or Spirits of nature; why\nshould there not arise a similar sense of non-differentiation in the\n_Future_--similar but more extended more intelligent? Certainly this _will_\narrive, in its own appointed time. There will be a surpassing of the\nbounds of separation and division. There will be a surpassing of all\nTaboos. We have seen the use and function of Taboos in the early stages\nof Evolution and how progress and growth have been very much a matter\nof their gradual extinction and assimilation into the general body\nof rational thought and feeling. Unreasoning and idiotic taboos still\nlinger, but they grow weaker. A new Morality will come which will shake\nitself free from them. The sense of kinship with the animals (as in the\nold rituals) (1) will be restored; the sense of kinship with all the\nraces of mankind will grow and become consolidated; the sense of the\ndefilement and impurity of the human body will (with the adoption of a\ngenerally clean and wholesome life) pass away; and the body itself will\ncome to be regarded more as a collection of shrines in which the\ngods may be worshiped and less as a mere organ of trivial\nself-gratifications; (2) there will be no form of Nature, or of human\nlife or of the lesser creatures, which will be barred from the approach\nof Man or from the intimate and penetrating invasion of his spirit; and\nas in certain ceremonies and after honorable toils and labors a citizen\nis sometimes received into the community of his own city, so the\nemancipated human being on the completion of his long long pilgrimage on\nEarth will be presented with the Freedom of the Universe.\n\n\n (1) The record of the Roman Catholic Church has been sadly\ncallous and inhuman in this matter of the animals.\n\n (2) See The Art of Creation, by E. Carpenter.\n\n\n\n\nXVII. CONCLUSION\n\nIn conclusion there does not seem much to say, except to accentuate\ncertain points which may still appear doubtful or capable of being\nunderstood.\n\nThe fact that the main argument of this volume is along the lines of\npsychological evolution will no doubt commend it to some, while on the\nother hand it will discredit the book to others whose eyes, being fixed\non purely MATERIAL causes, can see no impetus in History except through\nthese. But it must be remembered that there is not the least reason\nfor SEPARATING the two factors. The fact that psychologically man has\nevolved from simple consciousness to self-consciousness, and is now\nin process of evolution towards another and more extended kind of\nconsciousness, does not in the least bar the simultaneous appearance and\ninfluence of material evolution. It is clear indeed that the two must\nlargely go together, acting and reacting on each other. Whatever the\nphysical conditions of the animal brain may be which connect themselves\nwith simple (unreflected and unreflecting) consciousness, it is evident\nthat these conditions--in animals and primitive man--lasted for an\nenormous period, before the distinct consciousness of the individual and\nseparate SELF arose. This second order of consciousness seems to have\ngerminated at or about the same period as the discovery of the use\nof Tools (tools of stone, copper, bronze, &c.), the adoption of\npicture-writing and the use of reflective words (like \"I\" and \"Thou\");\nand it led on to the appreciation of gold and of iron with their\nornamental and practical values, the accumulation of Property, the\nestablishment of slavery of various kinds, the subjection of Women,\nthe encouragement of luxury and self-indulgence, the growth of crowded\ncities and the endless conflicts and wars so resulting. We can see\nplainly that the incoming of the self-motive exercised a direct stimulus\non the pursuit of these material objects and adaptations; and that\nthe material adaptations in their turn did largely accentuate the\nself-motive; but to insist that the real explanation of the whole\nprocess is only to be found along one channel--the material OR the\npsychical--is clearly quite unnecessary. Those who understand that all\nmatter is conscious in some degree, and that all consciousness has a\nmaterial form of some kind, will be the first to admit this.\n\nThe same remarks apply to the Third Stage. We can see that in modern\ntimes the huge and unlimited powers of production by machinery, united\nwith a growing tendency towards intelligent Birth-control, are\npreparing the way for an age of Communism and communal Plenty which will\ninevitably be associated (partly as cause and partly as effect) with\na new general phase of consciousness, involving the mitigation of\nthe struggle for existence, the growth of intuitional and psychical\nperception, the spread of amity and solidarity, the disappearance of\nWar, and the realization (in degree) of the Cosmic life.\n\nPerhaps the greatest difficulty or stumbling-block to the general\nacceptance of the belief in a third (or 'Golden-Age') phase of human\nevolution is the obstinate and obdurate pre-judgment that the passing of\nHumanity out of the Second stage can only mean the entire ABANDONMENT\nOF SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS; and this people say--and quite rightly--is both\nimpossible and undesirable. Throughout the preceding chapters I have\nstriven, wherever feasible, to counter this misunderstanding--but I have\nlittle hope of success. The DETERMINATION of the world to misunderstand\nor misinterpret anything a little new or unfamiliar is a thing which\nperhaps only an author can duly appreciate. But while it is clear that\nself-consciousness originally came into being through a process of\nalienation and exile and fear which marked it with the Cain-like brand\nof loneliness and apartness, it is equally clear that to think of that\napartness as an absolute and permanent separation is an illusion, since\nno being can really continue to live divorced from the source of its\nlife. For a period in evolution the SELF took on this illusive form in\nconsciousness, as of an ignis fatuus--the form of a being sundered from\nall other beings, atomic, lonely, without refuge, surrounded by dangers\nand struggling, for itself alone and for its own salvation in the midst\nof a hostile environment. Perhaps some such terrible imagination was\nnecessary at first, as it were to start Humanity on its new path. But\nit had its compensation, for the sufferings and tortures, mental and\nbodily, the privations, persecutions, accusations, hatreds, the wars and\nconflicts--so endured by millions of individuals and whole races--have\nat length stamped upon the human mind a sense of individual\nresponsibility which otherwise perhaps would never have emerged, and\nwhose mark can now be effaced; ultimately, too, these things have\nsearched our inner nature to its very depths and exposed its bed-rock\nfoundation. They have convinced us that this idea of ultimate\nseparation is an illusion, and that in truth we are all indefeasible and\nindestructible parts of one great Unity in which \"we live and move and\nhave our being.\" That being so, it is clear that there remains in the\nend a self-consciousness which need by no means be abandoned, which\nindeed only comes to its true fruition and understanding when\nit recognizes its affiliation with the Whole, and glories in an\nindividuality which is an expression both of itself AND of the whole.\nThe human child at its mother's knee probably comes first to know it\nHAS a 'self' on some fateful day when having wandered afar it goes\nlost among alien houses and streets or in the trackless fields. That\nappalling experience--the sense of danger, of fear, of loneliness--is\nnever forgotten; it stamps some new sense of Being upon the childish\nmind, but that sense, instead of being destroyed, becomes all the\nprouder and more radiant in the hour of return to the mother's arms. The\nreturn, the salvation, for which humanity looks, is the return of the\nlittle individual self to harmony and union with the great Self of the\nuniverse, but by no means its extinction or abandonment--rather the\nfinding of its own true nature as never before.\n\n\nThere is another thing which may be said here: namely, that the\ndisentanglement, as above, of three main stages of psychological\nevolution as great formative influences in the history of mankind, does\nnot by any means preclude the establishment of lesser stages within the\nboundaries of these. In all probability subdivisions of all the three\nwill come in time to be recognized and allowed for. To take the\nSecond stage only, it MAY appear that Self-consciousness in its first\ndevelopment is characterized by an accentuation of Timidity; in its\nsecond development by a more deliberate pursuit of sensual Pleasure\n(lust, food, drink, &c.); in its third by the pursuit of mental\ngratifications (vanities, ambitions, enslavement of others); in its\nfourth by the pursuit of Property, as a means of attaining these\nobjects; in its fifth by the access of enmities, jealousies, wars and so\nforth, consequent on all these things; and so on. I have no intention at\npresent of following out this line of thought, but only wish to suggest\nits feasibility and the degree to which it may throw light on the social\nevolutions of the Past. (1)\n\n (1) For an analysis of the nature of Self-consciousness see vol.\niii, p. 375 sq. of the three ponderous tomes by Wilhelm\nWundt--Grund-zuge der Physiologischen Psychologie--in which amid an\nenormous mass of verbiage occasional gleams of useful suggestion are to\nbe found.\n\n\nAs a kind of rude general philosophy we may say that there are only two\nmain factors in life, namely, Love and Ignorance. And of these we may\nalso say that the two are not in the same plane: one is positive and\nsubstantial, the other is negative and merely illusory. It may be\nthought at first that Fear and Hatred and Cruelty, and the like, are\nvery positive things, but in the end we see that they are due merely to\nABSENCE of perception, to dulness of understanding. Or we may put the\nstatement in a rather less crude form, and say that there are only\ntwo factors in life: (1) the sense of Unity with others (and with\nNature)--which covers Love, Faith, Courage, Truth, and so forth, and\n(2) Non-perception of the same--which covers Enmity, Fear, Hatred,\nSelf-pity, Cruelty, Jealousy, Meanness and an endless similar list.\nThe present world which we see around us, with its idiotic wars, its\nsenseless jealousies of nations and classes, its fears and greeds\nand vanities and its futile endeavors--as of people struggling in a\nswamp--to find one's own salvation by treading others underfoot, is a\nnegative phenomenon. Ignorance, non-perception, are at the root of it.\nBut it is the blessed virtue of Ignorance and of non-perception that\nthey inevitably\u2014if only slowly and painfully--DESTROY THEMSELVES. All\nexperience serves to dissipate them. The world, as it is, carries' the\ndoom of its own transformation in its bosom; and in proportion as that\nwhich is negative disappears the positive element must establish itself\nmore and more.\n\nSo we come back to that with which we began, (1) to Fear bred by\nIgnorance. From that source has sprung the long catalogue of follies,\ncruelties and sufferings which mark the records of the human race since\nthe dawn of history; and to the overcoming of this Fear we perforce\nmust look for our future deliverance, and for the discovery, even in\nthe midst of this world, of our true Home. The time is coming when the\npositive constructive element must dominate. It is inevitable that Man\nmust ever build a state of society around him after the pattern and\nimage of his own interior state. The whole futile and idiotic structure\nof commerce and industry in which we are now imprisoned springs from\nthat falsehood of individualistic self-seeking which marks the second\nstage of human evolution. That stage is already tottering to its fall,\ndestroyed by the very flood of egotistic passions and interests, of\nvanities, greeds, and cruelties, all warring with each other, which are\nthe sure outcome and culmination of its operation. With the restoration\nof the sentiment of the Common Life, and the gradual growth of a mental\nattitude corresponding, there will emerge from the flood something like\na solid earth--something on which it will be possible to build with good\nhope for the future. Schemes of reconstruction are well enough in their\nway, but if there is no ground of REAL HUMAN SOLIDARITY beneath, of what\navail are they?\n\n (1) See Introduction, Ch. I.\n\n\nAn industrial system which is no real industrial order, but only (on\nthe part of the employers) a devil's device for securing private profit\nunder the guise of public utility, and (on the part of the employed) a\ndismal and poor-spirited renunciation--for the sake of a bare living--of\nall real interest in life and work: such a 'system' must infallibly\npass away. It cannot in the nature of things be permanent. The first\ncondition of social happiness and prosperity must be the sense of the\nCommon Life. This sense, which instinctively underlay the whole Tribal\norder of the far past--which first came to consciousness in the\nworship of a thousand pagan divinities, and in the rituals of countless\nsacrifices, initiations, redemptions, love-feasts and communions, which\ninspired the dreams of the Golden Age, and flashed out for a time in the\nCommunism of the early Christians and in their adorations of the risen\nSavior--must in the end be the creative condition of a new order: it\nmust provide the material of which the Golden City waits to be built.\nThe long travail of the World-religion will not have been in vain, which\nassures this consummation. What the signs and conditions of any general\nadvance into this new order of life and consciousness will be, we know\nnot. It may be that as to individuals the revelation of a new vision\noften comes quite suddenly, and GENERALLY perhaps after a period of\ngreat suffering, so to society at large a similar revelation will\narrive--like \"the lightning which cometh out of the East and shineth\neven unto the West\"--with unexpected swiftness. On the other hand\nit would perhaps be wise not to count too much on any such sudden\ntransformation. When we look abroad (and at home) in this year of grace\nand hoped-for peace, 1919, and see the spirits of rancour and revenge,\nthe fears, the selfish blindness and the ignorance, which still hold in\ntheir paralyzing grasp huge classes and coteries in every country in the\nworld, we see that the second stage of human development is by no means\nyet at its full term, and that, as in some vast chrysalis, for the\nliberation of the creature within still more and more terrible struggles\nMAY be necessary. We can only pray that such may not be the case.\nAnyhow, if we have followed the argument of this book we can hardly\ndoubt that the destruction (which is going on everywhere) of the\nouter form of the present society marks the first stage of man's final\nliberation; and that, sooner or later, and in its own good time, that\nfurther 'divine event' will surely be realized.\n\n\nNor need we fear that Humanity, when it has once entered into the great\nDeliverance, will be again overpowered by evil. From Knowledge back to\nIgnorance there is no complete return. The nations that have come to\nenlightenment need entertain no dread of those others (however hostile\nthey appear) who are still plunging darkly in the troubled waters\nof self-greed. The dastardly Fears which inspire all brutishness and\ncruelty of warfare--whether of White against White or it may be of White\nagainst Yellow or Black--may be dismissed for good and all by that blest\nrace which once shall have gained the shore--since from the very nature\nof the case those who are on dry land can fear nothing and need fear\nnothing from the unfortunates who are yet tossing in the welter and\nturmoil of the waves.\n\nDr. Frazer, in the conclusion of his great work The Golden Bough, (1)\nbids farewell to his readers with the following words: \"The laws of\nNature are merely hypotheses devised to explain that ever-shifting\nphantasmagoria of thought which we dignify with the high-sounding names\nof the World and the Universe. In the last analysis magic, religion\nand science are nothing but theories (of thought); and as Science has\nsupplanted its predecessors so it may hereafter itself be superseded by\nsome more perfect hypothesis, perhaps by some perfectly different way of\nlooking at phenomena--of registering the shadows on the screen--of which\nwe in this generation can form no idea.\" I imagine Dr. Frazer is right\nin thinking that \"a way of looking at phenomena\" different from the way\nof Science, may some day prevail. But I think this change will come,\nnot so much by the growth of Science itself or the extension of its\n'hypotheses,' as by a growth and expansion of the human HEART and a\nchange in its psychology and powers of perception. Perhaps some of the\npreceding chapters will help to show how much the outlook of humanity on\nthe world has been guided through the centuries by the slow evolution of\nits inner consciousness. Gradually, out of an infinite mass of folly and\ndelusion, the human soul has in this way disentangled itself, and will\nin the future disentangle itself, to emerge at length in the light of\ntrue FREEDOM. All the taboos, the insane terrors, the fatuous forbiddals\nof this and that (with their consequent heart-searchings and distress)\nmay perhaps have been in their way necessary, in order to rivet and\ndefine the meaning and the understanding of that word. To-day\nthese taboos and terrors still linger, many of them, in the form of\nconventions of morality, uneasy strivings of conscience, doubts and\ndesperations of religion; but ultimately Man will emerge from all these\nthings, FREE--familiar, that is, with them all, making use of all,\nallowing generously for the values of all, but hampered and bound by\nNONE. He will realize the inner meaning of the creeds and rituals of the\nancient religions, and will hail with joy the fulfilment of their far\nprophecy down the ages--finding after all the long-expected Saviour of\nthe world within his own breast, and Paradise in the disclosure there of\nthe everlasting peace of the soul.\n\n (1) See \"Balder,\" vol. ii, pp. 306, 307. (\"Farewell to Nemi.\")\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX\n\nTHE TEACHING OF THE UPANISHADS\n\nBEING THE SUBSTANCE OF TWO LECTURES TO POPULAR AUDIENCES\n\nI. REST\n\nII. THE NATURE OF THE SELF\n\n\n\nI. REST\n\nTo some, in the present whirlpool of life and affairs it may seem almost\nan absurdity to talk about Rest. For long enough now rest has seemed a\nthing far off and unattainable. With the posts knocking at our doors\nten or twelve times a day, with telegrams arriving every hour, and the\ntelephone bell constantly ringing; with motors rushing wildly about the\nstreets, and aeroplanes whizzing overhead, with work speeded up in every\ndirection, and the drive in the workshops becoming more intolerable\nevery day; with the pace of the walkers and the pace of the talkers from\nhour to hour insanely increasing--what room, it may well be asked, is\nthere for Rest? And now the issues of war, redoubling the urgency of all\nquestions, are on us.\n\nThe problem is obviously a serious one. So urgent is it that I think one\nmay safely say the amount of insanity due to the pressure of daily life\nis increasing; nursing-homes have sprung up for the special purpose of\ntreating such cases; and doctors are starting special courses of\ntuition in the art--now becoming very important--of systematically doing\nnothing! And yet it is difficult to see the outcome of it all. The clock\nof what is called Progress is not easily turned backward. We should\nnot very readily agree nowadays to the abolition of telegrams or to a\nregulation compelling express trains to stop at every station! We can't\nALL go to Nursing Homes, or afford to enjoy a winter's rest-cure in\nEgypt. And, if not, is the speeding-up process to go on indefinitely,\nincapable of being checked, and destined ultimately to land civilization\nin the mad-house?\n\nIt is, I say, a serious and an urgent problem. And it is, I think,\nforcing a certain answer on us--which I will now endeavor to explain.\n\nIf we cannot turn back and reverse this fatal onrush of modern life (and\nit is evident that we cannot do so in any very brief time--though of\ncourse ultimately we might succeed) then I think there are clearly only\ntwo alternatives left--either to go forward to general dislocation and\nmadness, or--to learn to rest even in the very midst of the hurry and\nthe scurry.\n\nTo explain what I mean, let me use an illustration. The typhoons and\ncyclones of the China Seas are some of the most formidable storms that\nships can encounter. Their paths in the past have been strewn with\nwrecks and disaster. But now with increased knowledge much of their\ndanger has been averted. It is known that they are CIRCULAR in\ncharacter, and that though the wind on their outskirts often reaches a\nspeed of 100 miles an hour, in the centre of the storm there is a\nspace of complete calm--not a calm of the SEA certainly, but a complete\nabsence of wind. The skilled navigator, if he cannot escape the storm,\nsteers right into the heart of it, and rests there. Even in the midst\nof the clatter he finds a place of quiet where he can trim his sails\nand adjust his future course. He knows too from his position in what\ndirection at every point around him the wind is moving and where it will\nstrike him when at last his ship emerges from the charmed circle.\n\nIs it not possible, we may ask, that in the very midst of the cyclone of\ndaily life we may find a similar resting-place? If we can, our case is\nby no means hopeless. If we cannot, then indeed there is danger.\n\nLooking back in History we seem to see that in old times people took\nlife much more leisurely than they do now. The elder generations gave\nmore scope in their customs and their religions for contentment and\npeace of mind. We associate a certain quietism and passivity with the\nthought of the Eastern peoples. But as civilization traveled Westward\nexternal activity and the pace of life increased--less and less time was\nleft for meditation and repose--till with the rise of Western Europe and\nAmerica, the dominant note of life seems to have simply become one of\nfeverish and ceaseless activity--of activity merely for the sake of\nactivity, without any clear idea of its own purpose or object.\n\nSuch a prospect does not at first seem very hopeful; but on second\nthoughts we see that we are not forced to draw any very pessimistic\nconclusion from it. The direction of human evolution need not remain\nalways the same. The movement, in fact, of civilization from East to\nWest has now clearly completed itself. The globe has been circled, and\nwe cannot go any FARTHER to the West without coming round to the East\nagain. It is a commonplace to say that our psychology, our philosophy\nand our religious sense are already taking on an Eastern color; nor is\nit difficult to imagine that with the end of the present dispensation a\nnew era may perfectly naturally arrive in which the St. Vitus' dance of\nmoney-making and ambition will cease to be the chief end of existence.\n\nIn the history of nations as in the history of individuals there\nare periods when the formative ideals of life (through some hidden\ninfluence) change; and the mode of life and evolution in consequence\nchanges also. I remember when I was a boy wishing--like many other\nboys--to go to sea. I wanted to join the Navy. It was not, I am sure,\nthat I was so very anxious to defend my country. No, there was a much\nsimpler and more prosaic motive than that. The ships of those days with\ntheir complex rigging suggested a perfect paradise of CLIMBING, and I\nknow that it was the thought of THAT which influenced me. To be able\nto climb indefinitely among those ropes and spars! How delightful! Of\ncourse I knew perfectly well that I should not always have free access\nto the rigging; but then--some day, no doubt, I should be an Admiral,\nand who then could prevent me? I remember seeing myself in my mind's\neye, with cocked hat on my head and spy-glass under my arm, roaming at\nmy own sweet will up aloft, regardless of the remonstrances which\nmight reach me from below! Such was my childish ideal. But a time\ncame--needless to say--when I conceived a different idea of the object\nof life.\n\nIt is said that John Tyndall, whose lectures on Science were so much\nsought after in their time, being on one occasion in New York was\naccosted after his discourse by a very successful American business\nman, who urged him to devote his scientific knowledge and ability to\ncommercial pursuits, promising that if he did so, he, Tyndall, would\neasily make \"a big pile.\" Tyndall very calmly replied, \"Well, I myself\nthought of that once, but I soon abandoned the idea, having come to\nthe conclusion that I had NO TIME TO WASTE IN MAKING MONEY.\" The man of\ndollars nearly sank into the ground. Such a conception of life had never\nentered his head before. But to Tyndall no doubt it was obvious that if\nhe chained himself to the commercial ideal all the joy and glory of his\ndays would be gone.\n\nWe sometimes hear of the awful doom of some of the Russian convicts in\nthe quarries and mines of Siberia, who are (or were) chained permanently\nto their wheelbarrows. It is difficult to imagine a more dreadful fate:\nthe despair, the disgust, the deadly loathing of the accursed thing from\nwhich there is no escape day or night--which is the companion not only\nof the prisoner's work but of his hours of rest--with which he has to\nsleep, to feed, to take his recreation if he has any, and to fulfil all\nthe offices of nature. Could anything be more crushing? And yet, and\nyet... is it not true that we, most of us, in our various ways are\nchained to our wheelbarrows--is it not too often true that to these\nbeggarly things we have for the most part chained OURSELVES?\n\nLet me be understood. Of course we all have (or ought to have) our work\nto do. We have our living to get, our families to support, our trade,\nour art, our profession to pursue. In that sense no doubt we are tied;\nbut I take it that these things are like the wheelbarrow which a man\nuses while he is at work. It may irk him at times, but he sticks to it\nwith a good heart, and with a certain joy because it is the instrument\nof a noble purpose. That is all right. But to be chained to it, not to\nbe able to leave it when the work of the day is done--that is indeed\nan ignoble slavery. I would say, then, take care that even with these\nthings, these necessary arts of life, you preserve your independence,\nthat even if to some degree they may confine your body they do not\nenslave your mind.\n\nFor it is the freedom of the mind which counts. We are all no doubt\ncaught in the toils of the earth-life. One man is largely dominated\nby sensual indulgence, another by ambition, another by the pursuit\nof money. Well, these things are all right in themselves. Without the\npleasures of the senses we should be dull mokes indeed; without ambition\nmuch of the zest and enterprise of life would be gone; gold, in the\npresent order of affairs, is a very useful servant. These things are\nright enough--but to be CHAINED to them, to be unable to think of\nanything else--what a fate! The subject reminds one of a not uncommon\nspectacle. It is a glorious day; the sun is bright, small white clouds\nfloat in the transparent blue--a day when you linger perforce on the\nroad to enjoy the scene. But suddenly here comes a man painfully running\nall hot and dusty and mopping his head, and with no eye, clearly, for\nanything around him. What is the matter? He is absorbed by one idea.\nHe is running to catch a train! And one cannot help wondering what\nEXCEEDINGLY important business it must be for which all this glory and\nbeauty is sacrificed, and passed by as if it did not exist.\n\nFurther we must remember that in our foolishness we very commonly chain\nourselves, not only to things like sense-pleasures and ambitions which\nare on the edge, so to speak, of being vices; but also to other things\nwhich are accounted virtues, and which as far as I can see are just as\nbad, if we once become enslaved to them. I have known people who were so\nexceedingly 'spiritual' and 'good' that one really felt quite depressed\nin their company; I have known others whose sense of duty, dear things,\nwas so strong that they seemed quite unable to REST, or even to allow\ntheir friends to rest; and I have wondered whether, after all, worriting\nabout one's duty might not be as bad--as deteriorating to oneself, as\ndistressing to one's friends--as sinning a good solid sin. No, in this\nrespect virtues MAY be no better than vices; and to be chained to a\nwheelbarrow made of alabaster is no way preferable to being chained to\none of wood. To sacrifice the immortal freedom of the mind in order to\nbecome a prey to self-regarding cares and anxieties, self-estimating\nvirtues and vices, self-chaining duties and indulgences, is a mistake.\nAnd I warn you, it is quite useless. For the destiny of Freedom is\nultimately upon every one, and if refusing it for a time you heap your\nlife persistently upon one object--however blameless in itself that\nobject may be--Beware! For one day--and when you least expect it--the\ngods will send a thunderbolt upon you. One day the thing for which\nyou have toiled and spent laborious days and sleepless nights will lie\nbroken before you--your reputation will be ruined, your ambition will be\ndashed, your savings of years will be lost--and for the moment you will\nbe inclined to think that your life has been in vain. But presently you\nwill wake up and find that something quite different has happened. You\nwill find that the thunderbolt which you thought was your ruin has been\nyour salvation--that it has broken the chain which bound you to your\nwheelbarrow, and that you are free! --------\n\nI think you will now see what I mean by Rest. Rest is the loosing of the\nchains which bind us to the whirligig of the world, it is the passing\ninto the centre of the Cyclone; it is the Stilling of Thought. For (with\nregard to this last) it is Thought, it is the Attachment of the Mind,\nwhich binds us to outer things. The outer things themselves are all\nright. It is only through our thoughts that they make slaves of us.\nObtain power over your thoughts and you are free. You can then use the\nouter things or dismiss them at your pleasure.\n\nThere is nothing new of course in all this. It has been known for ages;\nand is part of the ancient philosophy of the world.\n\nIn the Katha Upanishad you will find these words (Max Muller's\ntranslation): \"As rainwater that has fallen on a mountain ridge runs\ndown on all sides, thus does he who sees a difference between qualities\nrun after them on all sides.\" This is the figure of the man who does NOT\nrest. And it is a powerful likeness. The thunder shower descends on the\nmountain top; torrents of water pour down the crags in every direction.\nImagine the state of mind of a man--however thirsty he may be--who\nendeavors to pursue and intercept all these streams!\n\nBut then the Upanishad goes on: \"As pure water poured into pure water\nremains the same, thus, O Gautama, is the Self of a thinker who\nknows.\" What a perfect image of rest! Imagine a cistern before you with\ntransparent glass sides and filled with pure water. And then imagine\nsome one comes with a phial, also of pure water, and pours the contents\ngently into the cistern. What will happen? Almost nothing. The pure\nwater will glide into the pure water--\"remaining the same.\" There will\nbe no dislocation, no discoloration (as might happen if MUDDY water were\npoured in); there will be only perfect harmony.\n\nI imagine here that the meaning is something like this. The cistern is\nthe great Reservoir of the Universe which contains the pure and\nperfect Spirit of all life. Each one of us, and every mortal creature,\nrepresents a drop from that reservoir--a drop indeed which is also pure\nand perfect (though the phial in which it is contained may not always\nbe so). When we, each of us, descend into the world and meet the great\nOcean of Life which dwells there behind all mortal forms, it is like the\nlittle phial being poured into the great reservoir. If the tiny canful\nwhich is our selves is pure and unsoiled, then when it meets the\nworld it will blend with the Spirit which informs the world perfectly\nharmoniously, without distress or dislocation. It will pass through and\nbe at one with it. How can one describe such a state of affairs? You\nwill have the key to every person that you meet, because indeed you are\nconscious that the real essence of that person is the same as your own.\nYou will have the solution of every event which happens. For every event\nis (and is felt to be) the touch of the great Spirit on yours. Can any\ndescription of Rest be more perfect than that? Pure water poured into\npure water.... There is no need to hurry, for everything will come in\nits good time. There is no need to leave your place, for all you desire\nis close at hand.\n\nHere is another verse (from the Vagasaneyi-Samhita Upanishad) embodying\nthe same idea: \"And he who beholds all beings in the Self, and the\nSelf in all beings, he never turns away from It. When, to a man who\nunderstands, the Self has become all things, what sorrow, what trouble,\ncan there be to him--having once beheld that Unity?\"--What trouble,\nwhat sorrow, indeed, when the universe has become transparent with the\npresences of all we love, held firm in the One enfolding Presence?\n\nBut it will be said: \"Our minds are NOT pure and transparent. More often\nthey are muddy and soiled--soiled, if not in their real essence, yet by\nreason of the mortal phial in which they are contained.\" And that alas!\nis true. If you pour a phial of muddy water into that reservoir which\nwe described--what will you see? You will see a queer and ugly cloud\nformed. And to how many of us, in our dealings with the world, does life\ntake on just such a form--of a queer and ugly cloud?\n\nNow not so very long after those Upanishads were written there lived\nin China that great Teacher, Lao-tze; and he too had considered these\nthings. And he wrote--in the Tao-Teh-King--\"Who is there who can make\nmuddy water clear?\" The question sounds like a conundrum. For a moment\none hesitates to answer it. Lao-tze, however, has an answer ready. He\nsays: \"But if you LEAVE IT ALONE it will become clear of itself.\" That\nmuddy water of the mind, muddied by all the foolish little thoughts\nwhich like a sediment infest it--but if you leave it alone it will\nbecome clear of itself. Sometimes walking along the common road after\na shower you have seen pools of water lying here and there, dirty and\nunsightly with the mud stirred up by the hoofs of men and animals. And\nthen returning some hours afterwards along the same road--in the evening\nand after the cessation of traffic--you have looked again, and lo!\neach pool has cleared itself to a perfect calm, and has become a lovely\nmirror reflecting the trees and the clouds and the sunset and the stars.\n\nSo this mirror of the mind. Leave it alone. Let the ugly sediment\nof tiresome thoughts and anxieties, and of fussing over one's\nself-importances and duties, settle down--and presently you will look\non it, and see something there which you never knew or imagined\nbefore--something more beautiful than you ever yet beheld--a reflection\nof the real and eternal world such is only given to the mind that rests.\n\n\nDo not recklessly spill the waters of your mind in this direction and in\nthat, lest you become like a spring lost and dissipated in the desert.\n\nBut draw them together into a little compass, and hold them still, so\nstill;\n\nAnd let them become clear, so clear--so limpid, so mirror-like;\n\nAt last the mountains and the sky shall glass themselves in peaceful\nbeauty,\n\nAnd the antelope shall descend to drink, and the lion to quench his\nthirst,\n\nAnd Love himself shall come and bend over, and catch his own likeness in\nyou. (1)\n\n\n (1) Towards Democracy, p. 373.\n\n\nYes, there is this priceless thing within us, but hoofing along the\nroads in the mud we fail to find it; there is this region of calm,\nbut the cyclone of the world raging around guards us from entering it.\nPerhaps it is best so--best that the access to it should not be made\ntoo easy. One day, some time ago, in the course of conversation with\nRabindranath Tagore in London, I asked him what impressed him most in\nvisiting the great city. He said, \"The restless incessant movement of\neverybody.\" I said, \"Yes, they seem as if they were all rushing about\nlooking for something.\" He replied, \"It is because each person does not\nknow of the great treasure he has within himself.\" --------\n\nHow then are we to reach this treasure and make it our own? How are we\nto attain to this Stilling of the Mind, which is the secret of all power\nand possession? The thing is difficult, no doubt; yet as I tried to show\nat the outset of this discourse, we Moderns MUST reach it; we have got\nto attain to it--for the penalty of failure is and must be widespread\nMadness.\n\nThe power to still the mind--to be ABLE, mark you, when you want,\nto enter into the region of Rest, and to dismiss or command your\nThoughts--is a condition of Health; it is a condition of all Power\nand Energy. For all health, whether of mind or body, resides in one's\nrelation to the central Life within. If one cannot get into touch with\nTHAT, then the life-forces cannot flow down into the organism. Most,\nperhaps all, disease arises from the disturbance of this connection. All\nmere hurry, all mere running after external things (as of the man after\nthe water-streams on the mountain-top), inevitably breaks it. Let a pond\nbe allowed calmly under the influence of frost to crystallize, and most\nbeautiful flowers and spears of ice will be formed, but keep stirring\nthe water all the time with a stick or a pole and nothing will result\nbut an ugly brash of half-frozen stuff. The condition of the exercise of\npower and energy is that it should proceed from a center of Rest within\none. So convinced am I of this, that whenever I find myself hurrying\nover my work, I pause and say, \"Now you are not producing anything\ngood!\" and I generally find that that is true. It is curious, but I\nthink very noticeable, that the places where people hurry most--as\nfor instance the City of London or Wall Street, New York--are just the\nplaces where the work being done is of LEAST importance (being\nmostly money-gambling); whereas if you go and look at a ploughman\nploughing--doing perhaps the most important of human work--you find\nall his movements most deliberate and leisurely, as if indeed he had\ninfinite time at command; the truth being that in dealing (like a\nploughman) with the earth and the horses and the weather and the things\nof Nature generally you can no more hurry than Nature herself hurries.\n\nFollowing this line of thought it might seem that one would arrive at a\nhopeless paradox. If it be true that the less one hurries the better\nthe work resulting, then it might seem that by sitting still and merely\ntwirling one's thumbs one would arrive at the very greatest activity and\nefficiency! And indeed (if understood aright) there is a truth even in\nthis, which--like the other points I have mentioned--has been known and\ntaught long ages ago. Says that humorous old sage, Lao-tze, whom I have\nalready quoted: \"By non-action there is nothing that cannot be done.\" At\nfirst this sounds like mere foolery or worse; but afterwards thinking on\nit one sees there is a meaning hidden. There is a secret by which Nature\nand the powers of the universal life will do all for you. The Bhagavat\nGita also says, \"He who discovers inaction in action and action in\ninaction is wise among mortals.\"\n\nIt is worth while dwelling for a moment on these texts. We are all--as I\nsaid earlier on--involved in work belonging to our place and station; we\nare tied to some degree in the bonds of action. But that fact need not\nimprison our inner minds. While acting even with keenness and energy\nalong the external and necessary path before us, it is perfectly\npossible to hold the mind free and untied--so that the RESULT of our\naction (which of course is not ours to command) shall remain indifferent\nand incapable of unduly affecting us. Similarly, when it is our part\nto remain externally INACTIVE, we may discover that underneath this\napparent inaction we may be taking part in the currents of a deeper life\nwhich are moving on to a definite end, to an end or object which in a\nsense is ours and in a sense is NOT ours.\n\nThe lighthouse beam flies over land and sea with incredible velocity,\nand you think the light itself must be in swiftest movement; but when\nyou climb up thither you find the lamp absolutely stationary. It is only\nthe reflection that is moving. The rider on horseback may gallop to and\nfro wherever he will, but it is hard to say that HE is acting. The horse\nguided by the slightest indication of the man's will performs an the\naction that is needed. If we can get into right touch with the immense,\nthe incalculable powers of Nature, is there anything which we may not be\nable to do? If a man worship the Self only as his true state,\" says\nthe Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad, \"his work cannot fail, for whatever he\ndesires, that he obtains from the Self.\" What a wonderful saying, and\nhow infallibly true! For obviously if you succeed in identifying your\ntrue being with the great Self of the universe, then whatever you desire\nthe great Self will also desire, and therefore every power of Nature\nwill be at your service and will conspire to fulfil your need.\n\nThere are marvelous things here \"well wrapped up\"--difficult to\ndescribe, yet not impossible to experience. And they all depend upon\nthat power of stilling Thought, that ability to pass unharmed and\nundismayed through the grinning legions of the lower mind into the very\nheart of Paradise.\n\nThe question inevitably arises, How can this power be obtained? And\nthere is only one answer--the same answer which has to be given for the\nattainment of ANY power or faculty. There is no royal road. The only way\nis (however imperfectly) to DO the thing in question, to practice it. If\nyou would learn to play cricket, the only way is to play cricket; if you\nwould be able to speak a language, the only way is to speak it. If you\nwould learn to swim, the only way is to practice swimming. Or would you\nwish to be like the man who when his companions were bathing and bidding\nhim come and join them, said: \"Yes, I am longing to join you, but I am\nnot going to be such a fool as to go into the water TILL I KNOW HOW TO\nSWIM!\"\n\nThere is nothing but practice. If you want to obtain that priceless\npower of commanding Thought--of using it or dismissing it (for the\ntwo things go together) at will--there is no way but practice. And\nthe practice consists in two exercises: (a) that of concentration--in\nholding the thought steadily for a time on one subject, or point of a\nsubject; and (b) that of effacement--in effacing any given thought from\nthe mind, and determining NOT to entertain it for such and such a\ntime. Both these exercises are difficult. Failure in practicing them is\ncertain--and may even extend over years. But the power equally certainly\ngrows WITH practice. And ultimately there may come a time when the\nlearner is not only able to efface from his mind any given thought\n(however importunate), but may even succeed in effacing, during short\nperiods, ALL thought of any kind. When this stage is reached, the\nveil of illusion which surrounds all mortal things is pierced, and the\nentrance to the Paradise of Rest (and of universal power and knowledge)\nis found.\n\nOf indirect or auxiliary methods of reaching this great conclusion,\nthere are more than one. I think of life in the open air, if not\nabsolutely necessary, at least most important. The gods--though\nsometimes out of compassion they visit the interiors of houses--are not\nfond of such places and the evil effluvium they find there, and avoid\nthem as much as they can. It is not merely a question of breathing\noxygen instead of carbonic acid. There is a presence and an influence in\nNature and the Open which expands the mind and causes brigand cares\nand worries to drop off--whereas in confined places foolish and futile\nthoughts of all kinds swarm like microbes and cloud and conceal the\nsoul. Experto Crede. It is only necessary to try this experiment in\norder to prove its truth.\n\nAnother thing which corresponds in some degree to living physically in\nthe open air, is the living mentally and emotionally in the atmosphere\nof love. A large charity of mind, which refuses absolutely to shut\nitself in little secluded places of prejudice, bigotry and contempt for\nothers, and which attains to a great and universal sympathy, helps, most\nobviously, to open the way to that region of calm and freedom of which\nwe have spoken, while conversely all petty enmity, meanness and spite,\nconspire to imprison the soul and make its deliverance more difficult.\n\nIt is not necessary to labor these points. As we said, the way to attain\nis to sincerely TRY to attain, to consistently PRACTICE attainment.\nWhoever does this will find that the way will open out by degrees, as\nof one emerging from a vast and gloomy forest, till out of darkness the\npath becomes clear. For whomsoever really TRIES there is no failure; for\nevery effort in that region is success, and every onward push, however\nsmall, and however little result it may show, is really a move forward,\nand one step nearer the light.\n\n\n\nII. THE NATURE OF THE SELF\n\nThe true nature of the Self is a matter by no means easy to compass. We\nhave all probably at some time or other attempted to fathom the deeps of\npersonality, and been baffled. Some people say they can quite distinctly\nremember a moment in early childhood, about the age of THREE (though the\nexact period is of course only approximate) when self-consciousness--the\nawareness of being a little separate Self--first dawned in the mind.\nIt was generally at some moment of childish tension--alone perhaps in a\ngarden, or lost from the mother's protecting hand--that this happened;\nand it was the beginning of a whole range of new experience. Before\nsome such period there is in childhood strictly speaking no distinct\nself-consciousness. As Tennyson says (In Memoriam xliv):\n\n      The baby new to earth and sky,\n          What time his tender palm is prest\n          Against the circle of the breast,\n      Hath never thought that \"This is I.\"\n\nIt has consciousness truly, but no distinctive self-consciousness. It\nis this absence or deficiency which explains many things which at first\nsight seem obscure in the psychology of children and of animals. The\nbaby (it has often been noticed) experiences little or no sense of FEAR.\nIt does not know enough to be afraid; it has never formed any image of\nitself, as of a thing which might be injured. It may shrink from actual\npain or discomfort, but it does not LOOK FORWARD--which is of the\nessence of fear--to pain in the future. Fear and self-consciousness are\nclosely interlinked. Similarly with animals, we often wonder how a horse\nor a cow can endure to stand out in a field all night, exposed to cold\nand rain, in the lethargic patient way that they exhibit. It is not that\nthey do not FEEL the discomfort, but it is that they do not envisage\nTHEMSELVES as enduring this pain and suffering for all those coming\nhours; and as we know with ourselves that nine-tenths of our miseries\nreally consist in looking forward to future miseries, so we understand\nthat the absence or at any rate slight prevalence of self-consciousness\nin animals enables them to endure forms of distress which would drive us\nmad.\n\nIn time then the babe arrives at self-consciousness; and, as one might\nexpect, the growing boy or girl often becomes intensely aware of Self.\nHis or her self-consciousness is crude, no doubt, but it has very little\nmisgiving. If the question of the nature of the Self is propounded to\nthe boy as a problem he has no difficulty in solving it. He says \"I know\nwell enough who I am: I am the boy with red hair what gave Jimmy Brown\nsuch a jolly good licking last Monday week.\" He knows well enough--or\nthinks he knows--who he is. And at a later age, though his definition\nmay change and he may describe himself chiefly as a good cricketer or\nsuccessful in certain examinations, his method is practically the same.\nHe fixes his mind on a certain bundle of qualities and capacities which\nhe is supposed to possess, and calls that bundle Himself. And in a more\nelaborate way we most of us, I imagine, do the same.\n\nPresently, however, with more careful thought, we begin to see\ndifficulties in this view. I see that directly I think of myself as a\ncertain bundle of qualities--and for that matter it is of no account\nwhether the qualities are good or bad, or in what sort of charming\nconfusion they are mixed--I see at once that I am merely looking at\na bundle of qualities: and that the real \"I,\" the Self, is not that\nbundle, but is the being INSPECTING the same--something beyond and\nbehind, as it were. So I now concentrate my thoughts upon that inner\nSomething, in order to find out what it really is. I imagine perhaps an\ninner being, of 'astral' or ethereal nature, and possessing a new\nrange of much finer and more subtle qualities than the body--a being\ninhabiting the body and perceiving through its senses, but quite capable\nof surviving the tenement in which it dwells and I think of that as the\nSelf. But no sooner have I taken this step than I perceive that I am\ncommitting the same mistake as before. I am only contemplating a new\nimage or picture, and \"I\" still remain beyond and behind that which I\ncontemplate. No sooner do I turn my attention on the subjective being\nthan it becomes OBJECTIVE, and the real subject retires into the\nbackground. And so on indefinitely. I am baffled; and unable to say\npositively what the Self is.\n\nMeanwhile there are people who look upon the foregoing speculations\nabout an interior Self as merely unpractical. Being perhaps of a more\nmaterialistic type of mind they fix their attention on the body. Frankly\nthey try to define the Self by the body and all that is connected\ntherewith--that is by the mental as well as corporeal qualities which\nexhibit themselves in that connection; and they say, \"At any rate the\nSelf--whatever it may be--is in some way limited by the body; each\nperson studies the interest of his body and of the feelings, emotions\nand mentality directly associated with it, and you cannot get beyond\nthat; it isn't in human nature to do so. The Self is limited by this\ncorporeal phenomenon and doubtless it perishes when the body perishes.\"\nBut here again the conclusion, though specious at first, soon appears to\nbe quite inadequate. For though it is possibly true that a man, if left\nalone in a Robinson Crusoe life on a desert island, might ultimately\nsubside into a mere gratification of his corporeal needs and of those\nmental needs which were directly concerned with the body, yet we know\nthat such a case would by no means be representative. On the contrary we\nknow that vast numbers of people spend their lives in considering other\npeople, and often so far as to sacrifice their own bodily and mental\ncomfort and well-being. The mother spends her life thinking almost\nday and night about her babe and the other children--spending all her\nthoughts and efforts on them. You may call her selfish if you will, but\nher selfishness clearly extends beyond her personal body and mind, and\nextends to the personalities of her children around her; her \"body\"--if\nyou insist on your definition--must be held to include the bodies of all\nher children. And again, the husband who is toiling for the support of\nthe family, he is thinking and working and toiling and suffering for a\n'self' which includes his wife and children. Do you mean that the whole\nfamily is his \"body\"? Or a man belongs to some society, to a church or\nto a social league of some kind, and his activities are largely ruled by\nthe interests of this larger group. Or he sacrifices his life--as many\nhave been doing of late--with extraordinary bravery and heroism for the\nsake of the nation to which he belongs. Must we say then that the whole\nnation is really a part of the man's body? Or again, he gives his life\nand goes to the stake for his religion. Whether his religion is right or\nwrong does not matter, the point is that there is that in him which can\ncarry him far beyond his local self and the ordinary instincts of his\nphysical organism, to dedicate his life and powers to a something of far\nwider circumference and scope.\n\nThus in the FIRST of these two examples of a search for the nature of\nthe Self we are led INWARDS from point to point, into interior and ever\nsubtler regions of our being, and still in the end are baffled; while\nin the SECOND we are carried outwards into an ever wider and wider\ncircumference in our quest of the Ego, and still feel that we have\nfailed to reach its ultimate nature. We are driven in fact by these two\narguments to the conclusion that that which we are seeking is indeed\nsomething very vast--something far extending around, yet also buried\ndeep in the hidden recesses of our minds. How far, how deep, we do not\nknow. We can only say that as far as the indications point the true self\nis profounder and more far-reaching than anything we have yet fathomed.\n\nIn the ordinary commonplace life we shrink to ordinary commonplace\nselves, but it is one of the blessings of great experiences, even though\nthey are tragic or painful, that they throw us out into that enormously\ngreater self to which we belong. Sometimes, in moments of inspiration,\nof intense enthusiasm, of revelation, such as a man feels in the midst\nof a battle, in moments of love and dedication to another person, and\nin moments of religious ecstasy, an immense world is opened up to the\nastonished gaze of the inner man, who sees disclosed a self stretched\nfar beyond anything he had ever imagined. We have all had experiences\nmore or less of that kind. I have known quite a few people, and most of\nyou have known some, who at some time, even if only once in their lives,\nhave experienced such an extraordinary lifting of the veil, an opening\nout of the back of their minds as it were, and have had such a vision of\nthe world, that they have never afterwards forgotten it. They have seen\ninto the heart of creation, and have perceived their union with the rest\nof mankind. They have had glimpses of a strange immortality belonging to\nthem, a glimpse of their belonging to a far greater being than they have\never imagined. Just once--and a man has never forgotten it, and even if\nit has not recurred it has colored all the rest of his life.\n\nNow, this subject has been thought about--since the beginning of the\nworld, I was going to say--but it has been thought about since the\nbeginnings of history. Some three thousand years ago certain groups\nof--I hardly like to call them philosophers--but, let us say, people who\nwere meditating and thinking upon these problems, were in the habit of\nlocating themselves in the forests of Northern India; and schools arose\nthere. In the case of each school some teacher went into the woods and\ncollected groups of disciples around him, who lived there in his company\nand listened to his words. Such schools were formed in very considerable\nnumbers, and the doctrines of these teachers were gathered together,\ngenerally by their disciples, in notes, which notes were brought\ntogether into little pamphlets or tracts, forming the books which\nare called the 'Upanishads' of the Indian sages. They contain some\nextraordinary words of wisdom, some of which I want to bring before\nyou. The conclusions arrived at were not so much what we should call\nphilosophy in the modern sense. They were not so much the result of the\nanalysis of the mind and the following out of concatenations of strict\nargument; but they were flashes of intuition and experience, and all\nthrough the 'Upanishads' you find these extraordinary flashes embedded\nin the midst of a great deal of what we should call a rather rubbishy\nkind of argument, and a good deal of merely conventional Brahmanical\ntalk of those days. But the people who wrote and spoke thus had an\nintuition into the heart of things which I make bold to say very few\npeople in modern life have. These 'Upanisihads,' however various their\nsubject, practically agree on one point--in the definition of the\n\"self.\" They agree in saying: that the self of each man is continuous\nwith and in a sense identical with the Self of the universe. Now that\nseems an extraordinary conclusion, and one which almost staggers the\nmodern mind to conceive of. But that is the conclusion, that is the\nthread which runs all through the 'Upanishads'--the identity of the self\nof each individual with the self of every other individual throughout\nmankind, and even with the selves of the animals and other creatures.\n\nThose who have read the Khandogya Upanishad remember how in that\ntreatise the father instructs his son Svetakeitu on this very\nsubject--pointing him out in succession the objects of Nature and\non each occasion exhorting him to realize his identity with the\nvery essence of the object--\"Tat twam asi, THAT thou art.\" He calls\nSvetaketu's attention to a tree. What is the ESSENCE of the tree?\nWhen they have rejected the external characteristics--the leaves, the\nbranches, etc.--and agreed that the SAP is the essence, then the father\nsays, \"TAT TWAM ASI--THAT thou art.\" He gives his son a crystal of salt,\nand asks him what is the essence of that. The son is puzzled. Clearly\nneither the form nor the transparent quality are essential. The father\nsays, \"Put the crystal in water.\" Then when it is melted he says, \"Where\nis the crystal?\" The son replies, \"I do not know.\" \"Dip your finger in\nthe bowl,\" says the father, \"and taste.\" Then Svetaketu dips here and\nthere, and everywhere there is a salt flavor. They agree that THAT is\nthe essence of salt; and the father says again, \"TAt twam asi.\" I am of\ncourse neither defending nor criticizing the scientific attitude here\nadopted. I am only pointing out that this psychological identification\nof the observer with the object observed runs through the Upanishads,\nand is I think worthy of the deepest consideration.\n\nIn the 'Bhagavat Gita,' which is a later book, the author speaks of\n\"him whose soul is purified, whose self is the Self of all creatures.\" A\nphrase like that challenges opposition. It is so bold, so sweeping, and\nso immense, that we hesitate to give our adhesion to what it implies.\nBut what does it mean--\"whose soul is purified\"? I believe that it means\nthis, that with most of us our souls are anything but clean or\npurified, they are by no means transparent, so that all the time we are\ncontinually deceiving ourselves and making clouds between us and others.\nWe are all the time grasping things from other people, and, if not in\nwords, are mentally boasting ourselves against others, trying to think\nof our own superiority to the rest of the people around us. Sometimes we\ntry to run our neighbors down a little, just to show that they are not\nquite equal to our level. We try to snatch from others some things which\nbelong to them, or take credit to ourselves for things to which we are\nnot fairly entitled. But all the time we are acting so it is perfectly\nobvious that we are weaving veils between ourselves and others. You\ncannot have dealings with another person in a purely truthful way, and\nbe continually trying to cheat that person out of money, or out of his\ngood name and reputation. If you are doing that, however much in the\nbackground you may be doing it, you are not looking the person fairly\nin the face--there is a cloud between you all the time. So long as your\nsoul is not purified from all these really absurd and ridiculous little\ndesires and superiorities and self-satisfactions, which make up so much\nof our lives, just so long as that happens you do not and you cannot see\nthe truth. But when it happens to a person, as it does happen in times\nof great and deep and bitter experience; when it happens that all these\ntrumpery little objects of life are swept away; then occasionally, with\nastonishment, the soul sees that. It is also the soul of the others\naround. Even if it does not become aware of an absolute identity, it\nperceives that there is a deep relationship and communion between itself\nand others, and it comes to understand how it may really be true that\nto him whose soul is purified the self is literally the Self of all\ncreatures.\n\nOrdinary men and those who go on more intellectual and less intuitional\nlines will say that these ideas are really contrary to human nature and\nto nature generally. Yet I think that those people who say this in the\nname of Science are extremely unscientific, because a very superficial\nglance at nature reveals that the very same thing is taking place\nthroughout nature. Consider the madrepores, corallines, or sponges. You\nfind, for instance, that constantly the little self of the coralline\nor sponge is functioning at the end of a stem and casting forth its\ntentacles into the water to gain food and to breathe the air out of\nthe water. That little animalcule there, which is living in that way,\nimagines no doubt that it is working all for itself, and yet it is\nunited down the stem at whose extremity it stands, with the life of the\nwhole madrepore or sponge to which it belongs. There is the common\nlife of the whole and the individual life of each, and while the little\ncreature at the end of the stem is thinking (if it is conscious at all)\nthat its whole energies are absorbed in its own maintenance, it really\nis feeding the common life through the stem to which it belongs, and in\nits turn it is being fed by that common life.\n\nYou have only to look at an ordinary tree to see the same thing going\non. Each little leaf on a tree may very naturally have sufficient\nconsciousness to believe that it is an entirely separate being\nmaintaining itself in the sunlight and the air, withering away and dying\nwhen the winter comes on--and there is an end of it. It probably does\nnot realize that all the time it is being supported by the sap which\nflows from the trunk of the tree, and that in its turn it is feeding\nthe tree, too--that its self is the self of the whole tree. If the leaf\ncould really understand itself, it would see that its self was deeply,\nintimately connected, practically one with the life of the whole tree.\nTherefore, I say that this Indian view is not unscientific. On the\ncontrary, I am sure that it is thoroughly scientific.\n\nLet us take another passage, out of the 'Svetasvatara Upanishad,' which,\nspeaking of the self says: \"He is the one God, hidden in all creatures,\nall pervading, the self within all, watching over all works, shadowing\nall creatures, the witness, the perceiver, the only one free from\nqualities.\"\n\nAnd now we can return to the point where we left the argument at the\nbeginning of this discourse. We said, you remember, that the Self is\ncertainly no mere bundle of qualities--that the very nature of the mind\nforbids us thinking that. For however fine and subtle any quality or\ngroup of qualities may be, we are irresistibly compelled by the\nnature of the mind itself to look for the Self, not in any quality or\nqualities, but in the being that PERCEIVES those qualities. The passage\nI have just quoted says that being is \"The one God, hidden in all\ncreatures, all pervading, the self within all... the witness, the\nperceiver, the only one free from qualities.\" And the more you\nthink about it the clearer I think you will see that this passage is\ncorrect--that there can be only ONE witness, ONE perceiver, and that\nis the one God hidden in all creatures, \"Sarva Sakshi,\" the Universal\nWitness.\n\nHave you ever had that curious feeling, not uncommon, especially in\nmoments of vivid experience and emotion, that there was at the back of\nyour mind a witness, watching everything that was going on, yet too deep\nfor your ordinary thought to grasp? Has it not occurred to you--in a\nmoment say of great danger when the mind was agitated to the last degree\nby fears and anxieties--suddenly to become perfectly calm and collected,\nto realize that NOTHING can harm you, that you are identified with\nsome great and universal being lifted far over this mortal world and\nunaffected by its storms? Is it not obvious that the real Self MUST be\nsomething of this nature, a being perceiving all, but itself remaining\nunperceived? For indeed if it were perceived it would fall under the\nhead of some definable quality, and so becoming the object of thought\nwould cease to be the subject, would cease to be the Self.\n\nThe witness is and must be \"free from qualities.\" For since it is\ncapable of perceiving ALL qualities it must obviously not be itself\nimprisoned or tied in any quality--it must either be entirely without\nquality, or if it have the potentiality of quality in it, it must have\nthe potentiality of EVERY quality; but in either case it cannot be in\nbondage to any quality, and in either case it would appear that there\ncan be only ONE such ultimate Witness in the universe. For if there were\ntwo or more such Witnesses, then we should be compelled to suppose them\ndistinguished from one another by something, and that something could\nonly be a difference of qualities, which would be contrary to our\nconclusion that such a Witness cannot be in bondage to any quality.\n\nThere is then I take it--as the text in question says--only one Witness,\none Self, throughout the universe. It is hidden in all living things,\nmen and animals and plants; it pervades all creation. In every thing\nthat has consciousness it is the Self; it watches over all operations,\nit overshadows all creatures, it moves in the depths of our hearts, the\nperceiver, the only being that is cognizant of all and yet free from\nall.\n\nOnce you really appropriate this truth, and assimilate it in the depths\nof your mind, a vast change (you can easily imagine) will take place\nwithin you. The whole world will be transformed, and every thought\nand act of which you are capable will take on a different color and\ncomplexion. Indeed the revolution will be so vast that it would be quite\nimpossible for me within the limits of this discourse to describe it.\nI will, however, occupy the rest of my time in dealing with some points\nand conclusions, and some mental changes which will flow perfectly\nnaturally from this axiomatic change taking place at the very root of\nlife.\n\n\"Free from qualities.\" We generally pride ourselves a little on our\nqualities. Some of us think a great deal of our good qualities, and some\nof us are rather ashamed of our bad ones! I would say: \"Do not trouble\nvery much about all that. What good qualities you have--well you may be\nquite sure they do not really amount to much; and what bad qualities,\nyou may be sure they are not very important! Do not make too much fuss\nabout either. Do you see? The thing is that you, you yourself, are not\nANY of your qualities--you are the being that perceives them. The thing\nto see to is that they should not confuse you, bamboozle you, and hide\nyou from the knowledge of yourself--that they should not be erected into\na screen, to hide you from others, or the others from you. If you cease\nfrom running after qualities, then after a little time your soul will\nbecome purified, and you will KNOW that your self is the Self of all\ncreatures; and when you can feel that you will know that the other\nthings do not much matter.\n\nSometimes people are so awfully good that their very goodness hides them\nfrom other people. They really cannot be on a level with others,\nand they feel that the others are far below them. Consequently their\n'selves' are blinded or hidden by their 'goodness.' It is a sad end to\ncome to! And sometimes it happens that very 'bad' people--just because\nthey are so bad--do not erect any screens or veils between themselves\nand others. Indeed they are only too glad if others will recognize them,\nor if they may be allowed to recognize others. And so, after all, they\ncome nearer the truth than the very good people.\n\n\"The Self is free from qualities.\" That thing which is so deep, which\nbelongs to all, it either--as I have already said--has ALL qualities,\nor it has none. You, to whom I am speaking now, your qualities, good and\nbad, are all mine. I am perfectly willing to accept them. They are all\nright enough and in place--if one can only find the places for them. But\nI know that in most cases they have got so confused and mixed up that\nthey cause great conflict and pain in the souls that harbor them. If\nyou attain to knowing yourself to be other than and separate from the\nqualities, then you will pass below and beyond them all. You will be\nable to accept ALL your qualities and harmonize them, and your soul\nwill be at peace. You will be free from the domination of qualities then\nbecause you will know that among all the multitudes of them there are\nnone of any importance!\n\nIf you should happen some day to reach that state of mind in connection\nwith which this revelation comes, then you will find the experience\na most extraordinary one. You will become conscious that there is no\nbarrier in your path; that the way is open in all directions; that all\nmen and women belong to you, are part of you. You will feel that there\nis a great open immense world around, which you had never suspected\nbefore, which belongs to you, and the riches of which are all yours,\nwaiting for you. It may, of course, take centuries and thousands of\nyears to realize this thoroughly, but there it is. You are just at the\nthreshold, peeping in at the door. What did Shakespeare say? \"To thine\nown self be true, and it must follow as the night the day, thou can'st\nnot then be false to any man.\" What a profound bit of philosophy in\nthree lines! I doubt if anywhere the basis of all human life has been\nexpressed more perfectly and tersely.\n\nOne of the Upanishads (the Maitrayana-Brahmana) says: \"The\nhappiness belonging to a mind, which through deep inwardness (1) (or\nunderstanding) has been washed clean and has entered into the Self, is a\nthing beyond the power of words to describe: it can only be perceived by\nan inner faculty.\" Observe the conviction, the intensity with which this\njoy, this happiness is described, which comes to those whose minds have\nbeen washed clean (from all the silly trumpery sediment of self-thought)\nand have become transparent, so that the great universal Being residing\nthere in the depths can be perceived. What sorrow indeed, what, grief,\ncan come to such an one who has seen this vision? It is truly a thing\nbeyond the power of words to describe: it can only be PERCEIVED--and\nthat by an inner faculty. The external apparatus of thought is of no\nuse. Argument is of no use. But experience and direct perception are\npossible; and probably all the experiences of life and of mankind\nthrough the ages are gradually deepening our powers of perception to\nthat point where the vision will at last rise upon the inward eye.\n\n (1) The word in the Max Muller translation is \"meditation.\" But\nthat is, I think, a somewhat misleading word. It suggests to most people\nthe turning inward of the THINKING faculty to grope and delve in the\ninterior of the mind. This is just what should NOT be done. Meditation\nin the proper sense should mean the inward deepening of FEELING and\nconsciousness till the region of the universal self is reached; but\nTHOUGHT should not interfere there. That should be turned on outward\nthings to mould them into expression of the inner consciousness.\n\n\nAnother text, from the Brihad-Aranyaka Upanishad (which I have already\nquoted in the paper on \"Rest\"), says: \"If a man worship the Self only as\nhis true state, his work cannot fail, for whatever he desires, that he\nobtains from the Self.\" Is that not magnificent? If you truly realize\nyour identity and union with the great Self who inspires and informs the\nworld, then obviously whatever you desire the great Self win desire, and\nthe whole world will conspire to bring it to you. \"He maketh the winds\nhis angels, and the flaming fires his ministers.\" (I need not say that\nI am not asking you to try and identify yourself with the great Self\nuniversal IN ORDER to get riches, \"opulence,\" and other things of that\nkind which you desire; because in that quest you will probably not\nsucceed. The Great Self is not such a fool as to be taken in in that\nway. It may be true--and it is true--that if ye seek FIRST the Kingdom\nof Heaven all these things shall be added unto you; but you must seek it\nfirst, not second.)\n\nHere is a passage from Towards Democracy: \"As space spreads everywhere,\nand all things move and change within it, but it moves not nor changes,\n\n\"So I am the space within the soul, of which the space without is but\nthe similitude and mental image;\n\n\"Comest thou to inhabit me, thou hast the entrance to all life--death\nshall no longer divide thee from whom thou lovest.\n\n\"I am the Sun that shines upon all creatures from within--gazest thou\nupon me, thou shalt be filled with joy eternal.\"\n\nYes, this great sun is there, always shining, but most of the time it is\nhidden from us by the clouds of which I have spoken, and we fail to see\nit. We complain of being out in the cold; and in the cold, for the time\nbeing, no doubt we are; but our return to the warmth and the light has\nnow become possible.\n\n\nThus at last the Ego, the mortal immortal self--disclosed at first in\ndarkness and fear and ignorance in the growing babe--FINDS ITS TRUE\nIDENTITY. For a long period it is baffled in trying to understand what\nit is. It goes through a vast experience. It is tormented by the\nsense of separation and alienation--alienation from other people, and\npersecution by all the great powers and forces of the universe; and it\nis pursued by a sense of its own doom. Its doom truly is irrevocable.\nThe hour of fulfilment approaches, the veil lifts, and the soul beholds\nat last ITS OWN TRUE BEING.\n\n\nWe are accustomed to think of the external world around us as a nasty\ntiresome old thing of which all we can say for certain is that it works\nby a \"law of cussedness\"--so that, whichever way we want to go, that way\nseems always barred, and we only bump against blind walls without\nmaking any progress. But that uncomfortable state of affairs arises from\nourselves. Once we have passed a certain barrier, which at present looks\nso frowning and impossible, but which fades into nothing immediately we\nhave passed it--once we have found the open secret of identity--then the\nway is indeed open in every direction.\n\nThe world in which we live--the world into which we are tumbled as\nchildren at the first onset of self-consciousness--denies this great\nfact of unity. It is a world in which the principle of separation\nrules. Instead of a common life and union with each other, the contrary\nprinciple (especially in the later civilizations) has been the one\nrecognized--and to such an extent that always there prevails the\nobsession of separation, and the conviction that each person is an\nisolated unit. The whole of our modern society has been founded on this\ndelusive idea, WHICH IS FALSE. You go into the markets, and every man's\nhand is against the others--that is the ruling principle. You go into\nthe Law Courts where justice is, or should be, administered, and you\nfind that the principle which denies unity is the one that prevails.\nThe criminal (whose actions have really been determined by the society\naround him) is cast out, disacknowledged, and condemned to further\nisolation in a prison cell. 'Property' again is the principle which\nrules and determines our modern civilization--namely that which is\nproper to, or can be appropriated by, each person, as AGAINST the\nothers.\n\nIn the moral world the doom of separation comes to us in the shape of\nthe sense of sin. For sin is separation. Sin is actually (and that\nis its only real meaning) the separation from others, and the\nnon-acknowledgment of unity. And so it has come about that during all\nthis civilization-period the sense of sin has ruled and ranged to such\nan extraordinary degree. Society has been built on a false base, not\ntrue to fact or life--and has had a dim uneasy consciousness of its\nfalseness. Meanwhile at the heart of it all--and within all the frantic\nexternal strife and warfare--there is all the time this real great life\nbrooding. The kingdom of Heaven, as we said before, is still within.\n\nThe word Democracy indicates something of the kind--the rule of the\nDemos, that is of the common life. The coming of that will transform,\nnot only our Markets and our Law Courts and our sense of Property, and\nother institutions, into something really great and glorious instead\nof the dismal masses of rubbish which they at present are; but it will\ntransform our sense of Morality.\n\nOur Morality at present consists in the idea of self-goodness--one of\nthe most pernicious and disgusting ideas which has ever infested the\nhuman brain. If any one should follow and assimilate what I have just\nsaid about the true nature of the Self he will realize that it will\nnever again be possible for him to congratulate himself on his own\ngoodness or morality or superiority; for the moment he does so he will\nseparate himself from the universal life, and proclaim the sin of his\nown separation. I agree that this conclusion is for some people a most\nsad and disheartening one--but it cannot be helped! A man may truly be\n'good' and 'moral' in some real sense; but only on the condition that\nhe is not aware of it. He can only BE good when not thinking about the\nmatter; to be conscious of one's own goodness is already to have fallen!\n\nWe began by thinking of the self as just a little local self; then we\nextended it to the family, the cause, the nation--ever to a larger and\nvaster being. At last there comes a time when we recognize--or see that\nwe SHALL have to recognize--an inner Equality between ourselves and all\nothers; not of course an external equality--for that would be absurd and\nimpossible--but an inner and profound and universal Equality. And so we\ncome again to the mystic root-conception of Democracy.\n\nAnd now it will be said: \"But after all this talk you have not defined\nthe Self, or given us any intellectual outline of what you mean by the\nword.\" No--and I do not intend to. If I could, by any sort of copybook\ndefinition, describe and show the boundaries of myself, I should\nobviously lose all interest in the subject. Nothing more dull could be\nimagined. I may be able to define and describe fairly exhaustively\nthis inkpot on the table; but for you or for me to give the limits and\nboundaries of ourselves is, I am glad to say, impossible. That does not,\nhowever, mean that we cannot FEEL and be CONSCIOUS of ourselves, and of\nour relations to other selves, and to the great Whole. On the contrary\nI think it is clear that the more vividly we feel our organic unity with\nthe whole, the less shall we be able to separate off the local self and\nenclose it within any definition. I take it that we can and do become\never more vividly conscious of our true Self, but that the mental\nstatement of it always does and probably always will lie beyond us.\nAll life and all our action and experience consist in the gradual\nmanifestation of that which is within us--of our inner being. In that\nsense--and reading its handwriting on the outer world--we come to know\nthe soul's true nature more and more intimately; we enter into the mind\nof that great artist who beholds himself in his own creation.","title":"Pagan and Christian Creeds: Their Origin and Meaning","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":98441}