Preface

N VERSITY OF CALIFORN A. SAN D EGO
3 1822027008135
Social Sciences & Humanities Library
University of California, San Diego Please Note: This item is subject to recall.
Date Due — JAN 2 8 2001
JAN 0 6 200Z
Cl 39 (5/97)
UCSD Lib.
so
JNIVERSITY OF CALIFORN A. SAN D EGO
31822027008135
COLLECTED WORKS
OF
THE RIGHT HON. F. MAX MOLLER
IV
THEOSOPHY OR PSYCHOLOGICAL RELIGION
THEOSOPHY
OB
PSYCHOLOGICAL RELIGION
(Btfforb
DELIVERED
BEFORE THE UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW IN 1892
R MAX MULLER, K.M.
FORMERLY FOREIGN MEMBER OF THE FRENCH INSTITUTE
NEW IMPRESSION
LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO.
39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON
FOURTH AVENUE & SOrn STREET, NEW YORK BOMBAY, CALCUTTA, AND MADRAS
1917
[All rights reserved]
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
First Edition April, 1893; Second Edition October, 1895
Re-issued in the Collected Works June, 1898 Reprinted January, 1899; July, 1903; January, 1911; May, 1917
Maiie in (it fat Britain
PREFACE.
discovery of God, the discovery of the Soul, and the discovery of the oneness of God and the Soul, such have been the three principal themes of my Gifford Lectures, and I have ventured to make at least an attempt to treat each of them, not simply as a philosopher, but as an historian. While the philosophy of religion treats the belief in a First Cause of the universe, and in an Ego or Self, and in the true relation between the two, as matters of psycho- logical development, or of logical consecution, it was my purpose to show, not what the process of each of these discoveries may or must have been, but what it has been in the history of the world, so far as it is known to us at present. I am fully aware that this historical method is beset with grave difficulties, and has in consequence found but little favour in the eyes of speculative philosophers. So long as we look on the history of the human race as something that might or might not have been, we cannot wonder that the student of religion should prefer to form his opinions of the nature of religion and the laws of its growth from the masterwork of Thomas Aquinas, the Sunima Sacrae Theologiae, rather than from the Sacred Books of the East. But when we have learnt
VI PREFACE.
to recognise in history the realisation of a rational purpose, when we have learnt to look upon it as in the truest sense of the word a Divine Drama, the plot revealed in it ought to assume in the eyes of the philosopher also a meaning and a value far beyond the speculations of even the most enlightened and logical theologians.
I am not ignorant of the dangers of such an under- taking, and painfully conscious of the imperfections inevitable in a first attempt. The chief danger is that we are very prone to find in the facts of history the lesson which we wish to find. It is well known how misleading the Hegelian method has proved, because, differing in this respect from Herder and from the historical school in general, Hegel was bent on seeing in the history of religion what ought to be there according to his view of the logical necessity in the development of the idea, if not of the psychological growth of the human mind. The result has been that the historical side in Hegel's Philosophy of Religion is almost entirely untrustworthy. My endeavour has been on the contrary to yield to no presumptions, but to submit to facts only, such as we find them in the Sacred Books of the East, to try to decipher and understand them as we try to decipher and under- stand the geological annals of the earth, and to discover in them reason, cause and effect, and, if possible, that close genealogical coherence which alone can change empirical into scientific knowledge. This genealogical method is no doubt the most perfect
PREFACE. Vll
when we can follow the growth of religious ideas, as it were, from son to father, from pupil to teacher, from the negative to the positive stage. But where this is impossible, the analogical method also has its advantages, enabling us to watch the same dogmas springing up independently in various places, and to discover from their similarities and dissimilarities what is due to our common nature, and what must be attributed to the influence of individual thinkers. Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus is not necessarily what is true, but it is what is natural, it constitutes what we have accustomed ourselves to call Natural Religion, though few historical students would now maintain that Supernatural Religion has no right to the name of Natural Religion, or that it forms no part of the Divine Drama of Man as acted from age to age on the historical stage of the world.
It has been my object in these three consecutive courses of Lectures on Physical, Anthropological, an Psychological religion to prove that what in my first volume I put forward as a preliminary definition of religion in its widest sense, namely the Perception of the Infinite, can be shown by historical evidence to have been the one element shared in common by all religions. Only we must not forget that, like every other concept, that of the Infinite also had to pass through many phases in its historical evolution, be- ginning with the simple negation of what is finite, and the assertion of an invisible Beyond, and leading up to a perceptive belief in that most real Infinite in which we live and move and have our being. This
Vlll PREFACE.
historical evolution of the concept of the objective Infinite I tried to trace in my Lectures on Physical Religion, that of the concept of the subjective Infinite in my Lectures on Anthropological Religion, while this last volume was reserved for the study of the discovery of the oneness of the objective God and the subjective Soul which forms the final consummation of all religion and all philosophy.
The imperfections to which a first attempt in a comparative study of religions is liable arise from the enormous amount of the materials that have to be consulted, and from the ever-increasing number of books devoted to their interpretation. The amount of reading that would be required in order to treat this subject as it ought to be treated is more than any single scholar can possibly force into the small span of his life. It is easy to find fault and say, Qui trop embrasse, ftial etreint, but in comparative studies it is impossible to embrace too much, and critics must learn to be reasonable and not expect from a scholar engaged in a comparative study of many religions the same thorough acquaintance with every one of them which they have a right to expect from 8 specialist. No one has felt more keenly than myself the annoyance whenever I had to be satisfied with a mere relata refero, or had to accept the judgments of others, even when I knew that they were better qualified to judge .than myself.
This applies more particularly to my concluding Lectures, Lect. XII to XV in this volume. These Lec- tures contain the key to the whole series, and they
PREFACE. IX
formed from the very beginning my final aim. They are meant as the coping-stone of the arch that rests on the two pillars of Physical and Anthropological Religion, and unites the two into the true gate of the temple of the religion of the future. They are to show that from a purely historical point of view Christianity is not a mere continuation or even reform of Judaism, but that, particularly in its theology or theosophy it represents a synthesis of Semitic and Aryan thought which forms its real strength and its power of satis- fying not only the requirements of the heart, but likewise the postulates of reason.
My object was to show that there is a constant action and reaction in the growth of religious ideas, and that the first action by which the Divine was separated from and placed almost beyond the reach of the human mind, was followed by a reaction which tried to reunite the two. This process, though visible in many religions, more particularly in that of the Vedanta, was most pronounced in Judaism in its transition to Christianity. Nowhere had the invisible God been further removed from the visible world than in the ancient Jewish re- ligion, and nowhere have the two been so closely drawn together again and made one as by that fundamental doctrine of Christianity, the divine sonship of man. It has been my chief object to show that this reaction was produced or at least accelerated by the historical contact between Semitic and Aryan thought, chiefly at Alexandria, and on this point I have to confess that I have ventured to go far
X PREFACE.
beyond Harnack, Drummond, Westcott, and others. They seem to me to ascribe too little importance to the influence of Greek philosophy in the formation of the earliest Christian theology, while I feel convinced that without that influence, the theology of Alexandria would have been simply impossible, or would probably never have advanced beyond that of the Talmud. What weighs with me more than anything else in forming this opinion are the facts of language, the philoso- phical terminology which both Jews like Philo and Christians like St. Clement employ, and which is clearly taken over from Greek philosophy. Whoever uses such words as Logos, the Word, Monogenes, the Only- begotten, Prototokos, the First-born, Hyios tou theou, the Son of God, has borrowed the very germs of his religious thoughts from Greek philosophy. To suppose that the Fathers of the Church took these words without borrowing the ideas, is like supposing that savages would carry away fire-arms without getting at the same time powder and shot for firing them. Words may be borrowed and their ideas may be modified, purified, magnified by the borrower, but the substance is always the same, and the gold that is in a gold coin will always remain the same gold, even though it is turned into a divine image. I have tried to show that the doctrine of the Logos, the very life-blood of Christianity, is exclusively Aryan, and that it is one of the simplest and truest conclu- sions at which the human mind can arrive, if the presence of Reason or reasons in the world has once been recognised.
PREFACE. XI
We all know the words of Lucretius :
'Praeterea caeli rationes ordine certo Et varia annorum cernebant tempora verti.' (v. 1182.)
If the human reason has once recognised Reason or reasons (logoi) in the universe, Lucretius may call it a fatal error to ascribe them to the gods, but are they to be ascribed to no one ? Is the Reason or the Logos in the world nothing but a. name, a mere generalisa- tion or abstraction, or is it a real power, and, if so, whose power is it ? If the Klamaths, a tribe of Red Indians, declared that the world was thought and willed by the Old One on high, the Greeks went only one step further by maintaining that this thought of the Supreme Being, this Logos, as they called it, was the issue, the offspring, the Son of God, and that it consisted of the logoi or ideas or, as we now say, the types of all created things. The highest of these types being the type of manhood, the Alexandrian Fathers of the Church in calling Christ the Logos or the Word or the Son of God, were bestowing the highest predicate which they possessed in their vocabulary on Christ, in whom they believed that the divine thought of manhood had been realised in all its fulness. That predicate, however, was not of their own workmanship, nor was it a mere modification of the Semitic Wisdom, which in the beginning was with God. That Wisdom, a feminine, may be recognised in the Epistemd or knowledge with which the Father begets the Son, but it cannot be taken at the same time as the prototype of the masculine Logos or the spoken Word or the Son of God.
Xll PREFACE.
This philosophical concept of the Son of God can- not be derived from the Old Testament concept of Israel as the son of God, nor from the occasional expressions of personal piety addressed to Yahweh as the Father of all the sons of man. ' Son of God,' as applied to Jesus, loses its true meaning unless we take it in its idiomatic Greek sense, as the Logos1, and unless we learn to understand what the Fathers of the Church had fully understood, that the Logos or the Word of God could become manifest to mankind in one form only, namely, in that of man, the ideal or perfect man. I am quite willing to admit, on the other hand, that an expression such as ' Son of Man ' is of Semitic growth. It is a solecism even when translated into Greek. No Greek would ever have said son of man in the sense of man. as little as any Roman would ever have spoken of Agnus Dei, except under the influence of Jewish thought. Son of man meant simply man, before it was applied to the Messiah. Thus only can we understand the antithesis which meets us as early as the first century, ' the Son of God. not the son of man V
If we have once entered into the thoughts of Philo and St. Clement as the representatives of Jewish and Christian theology at Alexandria, we shall perceive how closely the doctrine of the Incarnation is con- nected with that of the Logos, and receives its true historical explanation from it and from it alone.
1 In passages such as Matt. viii. 29, Mark xiv. 61, xvi. 89, ' Son of God ' is used in its popular sense, which to the Jews was blasphemous. a Barnabas, xii. 10, oi*x« f for avOpwitov, d\\& v'i&s rov Seov.
PREFACE. Xlll
It was only on the strength of their old belief in the Logos that the earliest Greek converts could with perfect honesty, and, in spite of the sneers of Celsus and other Greek philosophers, bring them- selves to accept Jesus of Nazareth as the incarnate Logos, as the Word or the Son of God. If they had taken any lower view of Christ, if they had been satisfied with a mythological Son of God, or with a Nazarene Christ, and if they had held, as some theo- logians held afterwards, nay as some hold even now, that there was between Christ and His brethren what they call a difference of kind, not of degree, however wide, they could not have answered the taunts of their former fellow-students, they could not have joined the Catechetical School at Alexandria or followed such teachers as Athenagoras, Pantaenus, St. Clement, and Origen.
What Athenagoras, one of the earliest apologetes of Christianity, thought about the Son of God, we can learn from his defence which was addressed to Marcus Aurelius, where he says (cap. x): 'Let no one think it ridiculous that God should have a son. For though the poets in their fictions represent the gods as no better than men (that is, as begetting sons), our mode of thinking is not the same as theirs, concern- ing either God the Father or the Son. But the Son of God is the Logos of the Father, in idea and in opera- tion ; for after the pattern of Him and by Him were all things made, the Father and the Son being one.'
All this refers to Christian theology or theosophy only, and not to what we mean by Christian religion.
XIV PREFACE.
This drew its life from another source, from the historical personality of Jesus, and not from the Alexandrian Logos This distinction is very im- portant for the early history of Christianity, and we must never forget that the Greek philosophers who joined the Christian community, after they had once made their peace with their philosophical conscience, became true disciples of Christ and, accepted with all their heart the moral law which He had preached, the law of love on which hang all His command- ments. What that personality was they must have known far better than we can, for Clement, having been born in the middle of the second century, may possibly have known Papias or some of his friends, who knew the Apostles, and he certainly knew many Christian writings which are lost to us :. To restore the image of that personality must be left to each be- liever in Christ, according to the ideals of which his mind is capable, and according to his capacity of com- prehending the deep significance of the few words of Christ that have been preserved to us by the Apostles and their disciples. What interests the historian is to understand how the belief of a small brotherhood of Galilean fishermen and their devotion to their Master could have influenced, as they did, the religious beliefs and the philosophical convictions of the whole of the ancient world. The key to that riddle should be sought for, I believe, at Alexandria rather than at
o * *
Jerusalem. But if that riddle is ever to be solved, it is the duty of the historian to examine the facts and
1 Bigg, Christian Platonists, p. 46.
PREFACE. XV
the facts only, without any bias whether of orthodoxy, of rationalism, or of agnosticism. To the historian orthodoxy has no existence. He has to deal with facts only, and with deductions that can be justified by facts. I cannot give here the names of all the books which have been of use to me in preparing these Lectures. Many of them are quoted in the notes. My earliest acquaintance with the subject treated in this volume goes back to the lectures of Weisse, Lotze, and Niedner at Leipzig, and of Schelling and Neander at Berlin, which I attended more than fifty years ago. Since then the additions to our knowledge of ancient religions, and of Christianity in its most ancient form, have been so enormous that even a biblio- graphical index would form a volume. I cannot, however, conclude this, preface without acknowledging my obligations to the authors of some of the more recent works which have been of the greatest use to me. I feel deeply grateful to Professor Harnack, whose Dogmen-geschichte, 1888, is the most marvellous storehouse of well-authenticated facts in the history of the Christian Church, to Dr. Charles Bigg, whose learned Bampton Lectures on the Christian Platonists, 1888, make us regret that they were never continued, and to Dr. James Drummond, whose work on Philo Judaeus, 1888, has supplied me not only with most valuable evidence, but likewise with the most careful analysis of whatever evidence there exists in illus- tration of the epoch of Philo Judaeus. That epoch was an epoch in the true sense of the word, for it made both Greeks and Jews pause for a time before
XVI PREFACE.
they went on, each on their own way. It was a real epoch in the history of Christianity, for Philo's works were studied by St. Clement and the other Fathers of the Alexandrian Church, and opened their eyes to see the truth in the inspired writings of Moses and the Prophets, and likewise in the inspired writings of Plato and Aristotle. It was a real epoch in the history of the world, if we are right in supposing that we owe to the philosophical defenders of the Christian faith at Alexandria the final victory of Christian philosophy and Christian religion over the religion and philosophy of the whole Roman Empire.
I ought, perhaps, to explain why, to the title of Psychological Religion, originally chosen for this my final course of Gifford Lectures, I have added that of Theosophy. It seemed to me that this venera- ble name, so well known among early Christian thinkers, as expressing the highest conception of God within the reach of the human mind, has of late been so greatly misappropriated that it was high time to restore it to its proper function. It should be known once for all that one may call oneself a theosophist, without being suspected of believing in spirit-rappings, table- turnings, or any other occult sciences and black arts,
I am painfully aware that at seventy my eyes are not so keen as they were at seventeen, and I must not conclude this preface without craving the in- dulgence of my readers for any misprints or wrong references that may have escaped me.
F. M. M.
OXFORD, February, 1893.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
MM
PEEFACE v
INTRODUCTORY LECTURE. THE HISTORICAL STUDY OF RELIGION.
Die Weltgeschichte ist das Weltgericht. — The Fundamental Principle of the Historical School. — History of Religion is the True Philosophy of Religion. — Natural Religion the Foundation of our Belief in God. — The Real Purpose of the Biography of Agni. — Natural Revelation. — The True Object of comparing the Christian and other Religions. — Ancient Prayers. — Egyptian, Accadian, Babylonian, Vedic, Avestic, Gathas, Chinese, Mohammedan, Modern Hindu Prayers. — Moses and the Shepherd. — Advantages of a Comparative Study of Religions ..... 1-26
LECTURE II. THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACRED BOOKS EXAMINED.
Historical Documents for Studying the Origin of Religion. — Religious Language. — Literary Documents. — Modern Date of Sacred Books. — Fragmentary Character of the Sacred Books of (*) b
XVU1 TABLE OF CONTENTS.
nun
India. — Low of the Sacred Literature of Persia. — The Relation between the A vesta and the Old Testament. — ' I am that I am ' 27-57
LECTURE IH.
THE HISTORICAL RELATIONSHIP OF ANCIENT RELIGIONS AND PHILOSOPHIES.
How to compare Ancient Religions and Ancient Philosophies. — Common Humanity. — Common Language. — Common History. — Common Neighbourhood. — Relation between the Religions of India and Persia. — Independent Character of Indian Philosophy. — The Indian View of Life. — Language, the Common Background of Philosophy. — Common Aryan Religion and Mythology. — Chariteg = Haritas. — The later Growth of Philosophy. — Help derived by Philosophy from Language. — Independent Character of Indian Philosophy. — Was Greek Philosophy borrowed from the East T — Indian Philosophy autochthonous 6S-86
LECTURE IV.
THE RELATION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TO PHYSICAL AND
ANTHROPOLOGICAL RELIGION.
The Constituent Elements of Religion. — My own Division. — The meaning of Psychological Religion. — I. Return of the Soul to God, after death. — II. Knowledge of the unity of the Divine and the Human. — Veda and Vedanta. — Upanishads. — Vedanta-Sutras. — Commentary by Sankaraiarya. — Commentary by Ramanuya. — Three Periods of Vedanta Literature. — Peculiar Character of Indian Philosophy. — Philosophy begins with doubting the Evi- dence of the Senses. — firuti or Inspiration. — Tat tvam asi. — Two VedanU Schools.— The Upanishads difficult to translate 87-118
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XIX
LECTURE V. JOURNEY OF THE SOUL AFTER DEATH.
PAGE
Different Statements from the Upaiiishads. — Passages from the Upanishads. — Difficulties of Interpretation. — Historical Progress in the Upanishads. — Attempts to harmonise the different State- ments of the Upanishads. — Vedanta-Sutras. — Independent State- ments in the Mantras. — Mythological Language misunderstood. — The Devayana or Path of the Gods. — Metempsychosis. — Reality of Invisible Things. — Absence of Hells. — Transmigration as con- ceived in the Laws of Manu. — The Three Qualities, Darkness, Activity, and Goodness. — The Nine Classes. — Punishments of the Wicked.— Bridges 113-176
LECTURE VI.
THE ESCHATOLOGY OF THE AvESTA.
General similarities in Eschatological Legends. — Peculiar re- lation between the Religions of India and Persia. — Zoroaster teaches neither Fire-worship nor Dualism. — The Problem of the Origin of Evil. — The Angels, originally qualities of Ormazd. — Asuras and Suras. — Abjuration of Daeva Worship. — Immortality of the Soul in the Avesta. — The Pitris or Fathers as conceived in the Vedic Hymns. — Fate of the individual Soul at the general resurrection. — Rewards and Punishments after Death. — Good Works in the shape of a Beautiful Maiden. — Influence on Moham- medanism.— Extract from the Minokhired on the Weighing of the Dead. — Arrival of the Soul before the throne of Bahman and Ahuramazda.— Common backs round of Avesta and Veda. — Pitaras, the Fathers in the Veda, the Fravaabia in the Avesta. — Wider
meaning of Fravadu 177-207
' ' b 2
XX TABLE OF CONTENTS.
LECTURE VII.
ESCHATOLOGY OF PLATO.
MM
Plato's Authority. — Plato's Mythological Language. — The Tale of the Soul. — The Charioteer and the Horses. — The Procession of the Gods. — Belief in metempsychosis in Plato and the Upanishads. — The Nine Classes of Plato and Manu. — Human Souls migrating into Anima.1 Bodies. — The Story of Er. — Coincidences and Dif- ferences.— Truth underlying Myth. — The Haidas on the Immor- tality of the Soul. — The Polynesians on the Immortality of the Soul— The last result of Physical Religion . . . 208-232
LECTURE VIII. TRUE IMMORTALITY.
Judaism and Buddhism. — The Vedanta Doctrine on True Immortality. — Personality, a Limitation of the Godhead. — Struggle for higher conception of the Godhead. — Name for the highest Godhead, Brahman, Purusha, Prana, Spirit. — Other Names of the Supreme Being, Skambha. — Names for the Soul.— Aham, Ego. — Atman. — Dialogue from the .KMndogya-Upanishad. — Deductions from the Dialogue. — /Sankara's Remarks. — The True Nature of the Individual Soul. — The Phenomenal and the Real. — The Atman unchanged amidst the changes of the World. — Nescience or Avidya the Cause of Phenomenal Semblance. — Satyabhedavada and Bhedabhedavada. — The Approach of the Soul to Brahman. — Later Speculations. — Identity of the Soul with Brahman 233-281
LECTURE IX.
THE VEDANTA-PHILOSOPHY.
The Vedanta as a Philosophical System.— Identity of Soul and Brahman. — Dialogue from the JO&ndogya-Upanishad. — Union, not Absorption. — Knowledge, not Love of God. — Avidya or Nescience.
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XXI
PAGE
— Brahman as sat, ai Arit, and as a nan da. — Philosophy and Religion. —The Supreme Lord or l«vara. — Upadhis, Sukshmasarlra, and Sthulaaarlra. — Creation or Emanation. — Brahman and Avidya the Cause of the Phenomenal World. — The Essence of Man. — Karman or Apurva. — Different States of the Soul. — Kramaruukti. (?lvanmukti. — Personality of the Soul .... 282-311
LECTURE X. THE Two SCHOOLS OF THE VED!NTA.
Equivocal Passages in the Upanishads. — /S'ankai a and Ramanugra. — Ramanugra. — S'ankara. — Moral Character of the Vedanta. — Ascetic Practices. — Esoteric Doctrines. — Difference between India and Greece 312-336
LECTUEE XI.
SUFIISM.
Religion, System of Relations between Man and God. — Sufiism, its Origin. — Abstract of Sufi Doctrines. — Rabia, the earliest Sufi. — Connection of Sufiism with Early Christianity. — Abu Said Abul Cheir, Founder of Sufiism. — Abu Yasld and Junaid. — Sufi, Fakir, Darwlsh. — Asceticism. — The Mesnevi. — Mohammed's Opinion. — The Four Stages. — The Poetical Language of Sufiism. — Morality of Sufiism.— Extracts from Sufi Poets 336-360
LECTURE XIL THE LOGOS.
Religion a Bridge between the Visible and the Invisible.— Oriental Influences in Early Christianity. — Borrowing of Religious Thoughts. — Philo and his Allegorical Interpretation. — Synesins.
XX11 TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE
— Logos. — The Logos among the Klamathg. — The Historical Antecedents of the Logon. — The Origin of Species. — Heraclitus. — Anaxagoras. — Socrates and Plato. — Aristotle. — The Stoics. — Philo's Inheritance. — Philo's Philosophy. — The Logos a Bridge between G-od and the World. — Logos as the Son of God. — Wisdom or Sophia. — MonogenSs, the Only Begotten. — Jupiter as Son of God . .... 361-423
LECTURE XIII. ALEXANDRIAN CHBISTIANITT.
Stoics and Neo-Platonists. — Plotinus. — Letter from Plotinus to Flaccus. — Ecstatic Intuition. — Alexandrian Christianity. St. Clement — The Trinity of St. Clement. — Origen. — The Alogoi 424-458
LECTURE XIV.
DlONTSIUS THE ABEOPAGITB.
The Logos in the Latin Church. — Tertullian. — Dionysius the Areopagite. — Writings of Dionysius. — Translation by Scotus Erigena. — The Influence of the Dionysian Writings. — Sources of Dionysius. — The Daimones. — Influence of Dionysius during the Middle Ages. — The System of Dionysius. — Milman on Dionysius. — Keal Attraction of Dionysius.— The Fifth Century.— Five Stages of Mystic Union. — Mysteries. — Mystic and Scholastic Theology. — Mysticism, and Christian Mysticism. — Objections to Mystic Religion reconsidered. — St. Bernard. — Love of God. — Ecstasia, according to St. Bernard. — St. Bernard's Position in the Church and State. — Hugo of St. Victor, Knowledge more certain than Faith.— Thomas Aquinas 459-498
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XX111
LECTURE XV. CHBISTIAN THEOSOPHT.
PAGE
Mystic CliriBtianity. — The German Mystics. — The Fourteenth Century in Germany. — The Interdict. — The People and the Priesthood. — Dominicans and Franciscans. — Eckhart and Tauler.. — Eckhart's Mysticism. — Eckhart's Definition of the Deity. — Creation is Emanation. — The Human Soul. — The Messiah and the Logos. — The Approach to God. — Birth of the Son. — Passages from the Fourth GospeL— Objections to Mystic Religion. — Excessive As- ceticism. — Sinlessness. — Want of Reverence for God. — Religion, the Bridge between the Finite and the Infinite . . 499-544
545
INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OF RELIGION. Die Weltg-eschichte 1st das Weltgericlit.
7}te 2Beltgefd;)tc(jte ift ba3 2Be(tgertc^t — this is one of those pregnant sayings of Schiller s which have a far wider application than we at first suspect. It is difficult to translate these words literally, without depriving them of their idiomatic force. Literally translated they mean, ' the history of the world is the judgment of the world.' But in German, the judg- ment of the world means at the same time ' the day of judgment,' or ' doom's day.'
What Schiller meant therefore was that every day is a day of doom, that the history of the world, if comprehended as a whole, is the true judgment of the world, and that we must learn to understand that judgment, and to accept it as right. If we adopt this view of Schiller's, and learn to look upon the history of the world as an unbroken vindication of the highest wisdom, and of the most perfect justice which, in spite of all appearances to the contrary, govern the world, it would follow that what applies to the history of the world in general, must likewise apply to all that constitutes that history. Schiller's
(4) B
2 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
dictum would in fact express in general terms what I have tried to explain to you in my former lectures as the fundamental principle of the Historical School.
The Fundamental Principle of the Historical School.
The followers of that school hold with Schiller that the history of religion, for instance, is the truest vindication of religion, the history of philosophy the best judgment of philosophy, the history of art the highest and final test of art. If in this spirit we study the history of the world, or any part of it, we shall learn that many things may seem wrong for the time being, and may, nay must be right for the time to come, for all time or for eternity. Many things which seem imperfect, are seen to be most perfect, if only understood as a preparation for higher objects. If we have once brought ourselves to see that there is an unbroken continuity, a constant ascent, or an eternal purpose, not only a mechanical development, in the history of the world, we shall cease to find fault with what is as yet an imperfect germ only, and not yet the perfect flower or the final fruit ; we shall not despise the childhood of the world, nor the childhood of the religions of the world, though we cannot discover therein that mature and perfect manhood which we admire in later periods of history. We shall learn to understand the imperfect or less perfect as a necessary preparation for the more perfect. No doubt such a view of the history of the world requires faith ; we have often to believe, even though we cannot prove, simply from a firm conviction that it cannot be otherwise, that there must be law and order and purpose in the world, and that there must
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OP RELIGION. 3
be goodness and justice in the Godhead. That faith was expressed by Friedrich Logau in the well-known verse, as translated by Longfellow, ' Though the mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small.' And the same faith found utterance long ago in Euripides also, when he said : ' 'Tis true the working of the gods is slow, but it is sure and strong1.'
Anyhow, those philosophers who have become reconciled to the idea of the survival of the fittest, can hardly object to the principle that what is, is fit, and will in the end prove right, or, to put it into Schiller's words, that the ' Weltgeschichte ist das Weltgericht.'
History of Religion is the True Philosophy of Religion.
You will understand now why I felt so strongly that the most satisfactory way of carrying out the intentions of the founder of this lectureship, the only effective way of studying what is called the philo- sophy of religion, or the philosophical criticism of religion, is to study the history of religion. History sifts and tests all forms and varieties of religion far more effectively than any single philosopher could possibly hope to do. I do not mean to say that a purely theoretic, as distinguished from an historical treatment of religion, is utterly useless. Far from it. I know that Kant scouts the idea that the history of philosophy is itself philosophy. But is not Kant's own philosophy by this time part and parcel of the history of philosophy 1 It is quite true that we can study a science apart from its history. We can, for instance, study the science of Political Economy
1 Bacchac, 882, 'Op^drai /noXis, dAA' o'/tws maroy TO jf Otiov aOevos. B 2
4 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
apart from all history. We can learn what ought to be and what ought not to be, according to the general principles of that science. All I maintain is that it is better to test the truth of these general principles by history, and not by theory only. Certain theories of Political Economy which seemed quite perfect in the abstract, have been tried and found wanting. We hear it said even now that the principles of free trade and protection are on their trial. What does that mean, except that they are being tried by the judgment of history, by results, by facts, by statistics against which there is no appeal, unless we say with some philosophers ' tant pis pour les faits,' or ' tant pis pour rhistoire.'
A strategist in his study may know all the rules of the science of war, but the great general must know how these rules have stood the test of history ; he must study the actual battles that have been fought, and thus learn to account for the victories and the defeats of the greatest commanders. In the same way then, as the true science of war js the history of war, the true science of religion is, I believe, the history of religion.
Natural Religion the Foundation of our Belief in God.
To show that, given the human mind such as it is, and its environment such as it is. the concept of God and a belief in God would be inevitable, is something, no doubt. Still you know how all the proofs of the existence of God that have been framed by the most eminent philosophers and theologians have been con- troverted by equally eminent philosophers and theolo- crians. You know that there survive even now some
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OP RELIGION. O
half-petrified philosophers and theologians who call it heresy to believe that unassisted human reason could ever attain to a concept of or a belief in God, who maintain that a special revelation is absolutely neces- sary for that purpose, but that such a revelation was granted to the human race twice only, once in the Old, and once in the New Testament. They point triumphantly to Kant's Critique of Pure Reason which has demolished once for all, they say, such poor human cobwebs as the cosmological, the teleological, and the ontological proofs of the existence of a Divine Being, and has thus proved, from a quite unexpected quarter, that unassisted human reason cannot possibly attain to a sure knowledge even of the mere existence of God.
It may be said that such views are mere survivals, and not exactly survivals of the fittest. Those who maintain them, certainly know not what they do. But such views, though really subversive of all true religion, are very often preached as essential to Chris- tianity, and many who know not the history of religion, are deceived by their reiterated assertion.
You know that in a court of law a clever pleader can defend almost anything ; and in the court of philosophy also, I believe that pleaders can always be found to argue most eloquently whether for the plaintiff or for the defendant. -The only evidence, however, which safely tells in the end, consists in facts.
The Real Purpose of the Biography of Ag-ni.
That being the case, I devoted the principal part of my second course of lectures to placing before you facts, — facts which cannot be controverted, or which,
6 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
at all events, have not been controverted, and which show how the human mind, unassisted by what is called special revelation, found its way step by step from the lowest perception of something material and visible to the highest concept of a supreme and invisible God. I chose for that purpose what I called the Biography of Agni or fire, that is the succession of the various ideas called forth in the human mind by the various aspects of fire, which be- ginning with the simplest perception of the fire on the hearth, as giving warmth and light and life to young and old, culminated in the concept of Agni as the god of light, the creator and ruler of the whole world.
This was an arduous task,, and it may have proved as tedious to my hearers as it proved laborious to myself. Still, there was no other way of silencing all gainsayers once for all. If any so-called Christian Divine doubts the fact that in times past ' God did not leave himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fire also, that is light and warmth, from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness ' (Acts xiv. 17), what I call the biography of Agni will in future supply evidence that ought to convince both those who believe and those who disbelieve the words of St. Paul and Barnabas, and that anyhow cannot be gainsayed. I can quite understand the anger that has been roused by the production of this evidence, though I cannot admire the efforts that have been made to discredit it. It is quite possible that in putting together this biography of Agni, I may have left out some passages from the Veda which would have been helpful for my purpose. Let them be produced, and I shall be most
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OF RELIGION. 7
grateful. It is quite possible also that here and there I may have misapprehended the exact meaning of a verse taken from the Veda. Again, let it be proved, and I shall be most grateful. I am the last man to claim infallibility, not even in the interpretation of the Veda. But if people wish to controvert any statements of mine of which they disapprove, they ought to know that there are two ways only of doing it. They must show either that my facts are wrong, or that my deductions from these facts are faulty. In either case, no one will feel more grateful to them than I myself. For, if they can show that my facts were wrong, they will of course supply us at the same time with the true facts, and if my conclusions were faulty, that can be settled once for all by the rules of logic. If critics would confine themselves to these two tasks, they would be conferring a benefit on us for which every true scholar would be truly grateful. But if they deal, as so many do, in mere rhetoric or invective, they must not be offended if no notice is taken of their rage and vain imaginings. These matters are far too serious, nay, to my mind, far too sacred for mere wrangling. Though some excellent divines may differ from me, they ought to know that the cause of truth is never served by mere assertions, still less by insinuations, and that such insinuations are far more dishonouring to those who utter them than they could possibly be to those against whom they are uttered.
Natural Revelation.
I maintain, therefore, until any of my statements have been refuted by facts, that we can see in the history of Vedic Religion, how the human mind was led by a
8 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
natural revelation, far more convincing than any so- called special revelation, from the perception of the great phenomena of nature to the conception of agents behind these phenomena. The case of Agni or fire was chosen by me as a typical case, as but one out of many, all showing how the phenomena of nature forced the human mind with a power irresistible to human reason, to the conception of and a belief in agents behind nature, and in the end to a belief in one Agent behind or above all these agents ; to a belief in One God of Nature, a belief in a cosmic or objective Deity. Here was my answer to the statement repeated again and again, that the human mind, unassisted by a special revelation, was incapable of conceiving a Supreme Being. My answer was not an argument, nor a mere assertion. My answer consisted in his- torical facts, in chapter and verse quoted from the Veda ; and these facts are stubborn things, not to be annihilated by mere clamour and chiding.
The True Object of comparing' the Christian and other Religious.
I must confess, however, that I did not expect that the attacks on what I called the historical proof of the existence of a Supreme Being would have come from the quarters from which they came. I thought that those who profess and call themselves Christians would have welcomed the facts which confirm the teaching of St. Paul. I hoped they would have seen that the facts which I collected from the ancient religions of the world formed in reality the only safe foundation of Natural Religion, and indirectly the strongest confirmation of the truth of the Christian
THE HISTOKICAL STUDY OF RELIGION. 9
religion. That religion, I say once more, should challenge rather than deprecate comparison. If we find certain doctrines which we thought the exclusive property of Christianity in other religions also, does Christianity lose thereby, or is the truth of these doctrines impaired by being recognised by other teachers also ? You know that it has often been said that almost every Christian doctrine could be traced back to the Talmud. I am no judge on that subject ; but if it were so, what should we lose ? All I can say is that I have never met in the extracts from the Talmud with the most characteristic, nay, the fundamental doctrine of Christianity, the recognition of the divine element in man, or the divine sonship of man. Many things which Christianity shares in common with the Talmud, it shares in common, as we know now, with other religions likewise. It is true that Hillel, when asked to describe the religion of the Jews in a few words, replied, ' What thou wouldst not have done to thee, do not that to others. This is the whole law ; all the rest is but interpretation. Go, then, and learn what it means V But it is well known by this time that the same doctrine occurs in almost every religion. Con- fucius said : ' What I do not wish men to do to me, I also wish not to do to men.' We read in the Mahabha- rata : 'Hear the sum total of duties, and having heard, bear it in mind — Thou shalt not do to others what is disagreeable to thyself (Pandit, 1871, p. 238). Why then should Christians wish to claim an exclusive property in this truth ?
The Talmud, we must remember, sprang from the same historical soil as Christianity, its authors breathed
1 Talmud babli, Sabbath, fol. 31 a. Kuenen, "Ribbert Lectures, p. 211.
10 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
the same air as the disciples of Christ. Coincidences between the two are therefore most natural, and it does loy no means follow that the Talmud can always claim a priority in time. But whoever may claim priority, whoever may have lent or borrowed, I confess I rejoice whenever I meet with passages from the Talmud or any other Sacred Book, that remind me of the Old or the New Testament. We read, for instance, in the Talmud : ' Be not as slaves that minister to the Lord with a view to receive recompense ; but be as slaves that minister to the Lord without a view to receive recompense ; and let the fear of Heaven be upon you ' (Antigonus of Sochow, in Pirkd Aboth I. 3 ; Kuenen, 1. c. p. 212). And again, ' Do His will as if it were thy will, that He may do thy will as if it were His will ' (Gamaliel, I.e. II. 4).
These are Christian sentiments ; they may or may not have been borrowed from the Talmud. They are rays from a sun that lighteth the whole world. Marcus Aurelius said : ' Love mankind, follow God' (vii. 31) ; Epictetus said : ' Dare to look up to God and say : Do with me henceforth as Thou wilt. I am of one mind with Thee. I am Thine. I decline nothing that seems good to Thee. Lead me whither Thou wilt. Clothe me as Thou wilt. Wilt thou that I take office or live a private life, remain at home or go into exile, be poor or rich, I will defend Thy purpose with me in respect of all these ' (Discourses, H. 16). These are truly Christian sentiments, Christian, because eternal and universal ; but it would be very difficult to prove that they were borrowed either from or by Christianity. And why should every truth be borrowed from Christianity ? Why should not Christianity also have borrowed ?
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OF RELIGION. 11
And why should not certain truths be world- wide and universal ? To me these truths seem to gain rather than to lose in power, if we accept them as springing up spontaneously in different minds, than if we main- tain that they were conceived once only, and then borrowed by others.
The reason why people will not see the identity of a truth as enuntiated in different religions, is generally the strangeness of the garb in which it is clothed. No doubt the old heathen names of the Gods, even of their Supreme God, are often offensive •to us by what they imply. But is it not all the more interesting to see how, for instance, Aristides the Sophist (176 A.D.), though retaining the name of Jupiter, is striving with all his might for a higher conception of the Deity, purer even than what we find in many portions of the Old Testament. This is how Aristides speaks of Jupiter :
' Jupiter made all things ; all things whatever are the works of Jupiter — rivers, and the earth, and the sea, and the heaven, and whatever is between or above, or beneath them, and gods and men, and all living things, and all things visible and intelligible. First of all, he made himself ; nor was he ever brought up in the caverns of Crete ; nor did Saturn ever intend to devour him ; nor did he swallow a stone in his stead ; nor was Jupiter ever in any danger, nor will he ever be. ... But he is the First, and the most ancient, and the Prince of all things, and Himself from Himself.'
Why should we be less able and willing to see through the mists of mythology than those who were brought up with a belief in their own mythological gods 1 Why should we decline to recognise the higher
12 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
purpose that was in these divine names from the beginning, and which the best among the pagans never failed to recognise ?
Ancient Prayers.
It has often been said that what we mean by prayer does not or even cannot exist in any of the pagan religions. It may be true that the loving re- lation between man and God is absent in the prayers of the heathen world. It is certainly true that there are some religions unfavourable to prayer, particularly if prayer is taken in the sense of praying for worldly blessings. The Buddhists in general know of no prayer addressed to a superintendent deity, because they deny the existence of such a deity; but even prayers addressed to the Buddhas or Buddhist Saints are never allowed to assume the character of petitions. They are praises and meditations rather than solicita- tions. Prayers in the sense of petitions are considered actually sinful by the Sin-shiu sect of Buddhists in Japan. It is different with the followers of Confucius. They believe in a God to whom prayers might be addressed. But Professor Legge tells us that we look in vain for real prayers in their ancient literature, and this is most likely due to that sense of awe and reverence which Confucius himself expressed when he said that we should respect spiritual beings, but keep aloof from them l.
It is true also that when man has once arrived at a philosophical conception of the Deity, his prayers assume a form very different from the prayers ad- dressed by a child to his Father in heaven. Still even such prayers are full of interest. Almost the last 1 Confucian Analects, VI. 20.
THE HISTOKICAL STUDY OF KELIGION. 13
word which Greek philosophy has said to the world, is a prayer which we find at the end of the commen- tary of Simplicius on Epictetus, a prayer full of honest purpose :
' I beseech Thee, 0 Lord, the Father. Guide of our reason, to make us mindful of the noble origin Thou hast thought worthy to confer upon us ; and to assist us to act as becomes free agents ; that we may be cleansed from the irrational passions of the body and may subdue and govern the same, using them as in- struments in a fitting manner ; and to assist us to the right direction of the reason that is in us, and to its participation in what is real by the light of truth. And thirdly, I beseech Thee, my Saviour, entirely to remove the darkness from the eyes of our souls, in order that we may know aright, as Homer says, both God and men.' (See J. A. Farrer, Paganism and Christianity, p. 44.)
I shall devote the rest of this introductory lecture to reading some extracts which will show, I hope, that the heathen also could utter prayers, and some prayers which require but little modification before we ourselves can join in them.
Egyptian Prayer.
' Hail to Thee, maker of all beings, Lord of law, Father of the Gods ; maker of men, creator of beasts ; Lord of
grains, making food for the beasts of the field The
. One alone without a second King alone, single among
the Gods ; of many names, unknown is their number.
I come to Thee, O Lord of the Gods, who hast existed from the beginning, eternal God, who hast made all things that are. Thy name be my protection ; prolong my term of life
14 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
to a good age ; may my son be in my place (after me) ; may my dignity remain with him (and his) for ever, as is done to the righteous, who is glorious in the house of his Lord.
Who then art Thou, O my father Amon 1 Doth a father forget his son ? Surely a wretched lot awaiteth him who opposes Thy will ; but blessed is he who knoweth Thee, for Thy deeds proceed from a heart full of love. I call upon Thee, O my father Amon ! behold me in the midst of many peoples, unknown to me ; all nations are united against me, and I am alone ; no other is with me. My many warriors have abandoned me, none of my horsemen hath looked towards me ; and when I called them, none hath listened to my voice. But I believe that Amon is worth more to me than a million of warriors, than a hundred thousand horse- men and ten thousands of brothers and sons, even were they all gathered together. The work of many men is nought ; Amon will prevail over them.'
(From Le Page Renouf. Hiblert Lectures, p. 227.)
An Accadiau Prayer. " O my God, the lord of prayer, may my prayer address
thee !
0 my goddess, the lady of supplication, may my supplica- tion address thee ! 0 Mato (Matu), the lord of the mountain, may my prayer
address thee !
O Gubarra, lady of Eden (sic), may my prayer address thee ! O Lord of heaven and earth, lord of Eridu, may my
supplication address thee ! 0 Merodach (Asar-mula-dag), lord of Tin-tir (Babylon)
may my prayer address thee ! O wife of him, (the princely offspring (f) of heaven and
earth), may my supplication address thee ! 0 (messenger of the spirit) of the god who proclaims (the
good name), may my prayer address thee!
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OF RELIGION. 15
0 (bride, first-born of) Uras (?), may my supplication
address thee ! 0 (lady, who binds the hostile (?) mouth), may my prayer
address thee ! 0 (exalted one, the great goddess, my lady Nana) may
my supplication address thee !
May it say to thee : ' (Direct thine eye kindly unto me).' May it say to thee : ' (Turn thy face kindly to me).' (May it say to thee : ' Let thy heart rest.') (May it say to thee : ' Let thy liver be quieted.') •(May it say to thee : ' Let thy heart, like the heart of a
mother who has borne children, be gladdened.') (' As a mother who has borne children, as a father who
has begotten a child, let it be gladdened.') "
(Sayce, HiVbert Lectures, p. 336.) A Babylonian Prayer. ' 0 my .God who art violent (against me), receive (my
supplication). O my Goddess, thou who art fierce (towards me), accept
(my prayer).
Accept my prayer, (may thy liver be quieted). O my lord, long-suffering (and) merciful, (may thy heart
be appeased). By day, directing unto death that which destroys me, 0
my God, interpret (the vision).
0 my goddess, look upon me and accept my prayer. May my sin be forgiven, may my transgression be cleansed. Let the yoke be unbound, the chain be loosed. May the seven winds carry away my groaning. May I strip off my evil so that the bird bear (it) up to
heaven. May the fish carry away my trouble, may the river bear
(it) along. May the reptile of the field receive (it) from me; may
the waters of the river cleanse me as they flow.
16 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
Make me shine as a mask of gold.
May I be precious in thy sight as a goblet (?) of glass.
Burn up(?) my evil, knit together my life; bind together
thy altar, that I may set up thine image. Let me pass from my evil, and let me be kept with thee. Enlighten me and let me dream a favourable dream. May the dream that I dream be favourable ; may the
dream that I dream, be established. Turn the dream that I dream into a blessing. May Makhir the god of dreams rest upon my head. Yea, let me enter into E-Sagil, the palace of the gods,
the temple of life. To Merodach, the merciful, to blessedness, to prospering
hands, entrust me.
Let me exalt thy greatness, let me magnify thy divinity. Let the men of my city honour thy mighty deeds.'
(Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, p. 355.)
A Vedic Prayer. Rig-veda VII. 89 :
1. Let me not yet, 0 Varurca, enter into the house of clay ; have mercy, almighty, have mercy !
2. If I go along trembling, like a cloud driven by the wind ; have mercy, almighty, have mercy !
3. Through want of strength, thon strong and bright god, have I gone to the wrong shore ; have mercy, almighty, have mercy !
4. Thirst came upon the worshipper, though he stood in the midst of the waters; have mercy, almighty, have mercy !
5. Whenever we men, 0 Varuna, commit an offence before the heavenly host ; whenever we break the law through thoughtlessness ; hurt us not, 0 God, for this offence !
(M. M., History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 540.)
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OP RELIGION. 17
Another Vedio Prayer.
'Let us be blessed in thy service, O Varima, for we always think of thee and praise thee, greeting thee day by day, like the fires lighted on the altar, at the approach of the rich dawns.' 2.
' O Varima, our guide, let us stand in thy keeping, thou who art rich in heroes and praised far and wide ! And you, unconqueved sons of Aditi, deign to accept us as your friends, 0 gods ! ' 3.
' Aditya, the ruler, sent forth these rivers ; they follow the law of Varuwa. They tire not, they cease not ; like birds they fly quickly everywhere.' 4.
' Take from me my sin, like a fetter, and we shall increase, O Varuwa, the spring of thy law. Let not the thread (of life) be cut while I weave my song ! Let not the form of the workman break before the time ! ' 5.
' Take far away from me this terror, O Varuwa ! Thou, 0 righteous king, have mercy on me ! Like as a rope from a calf, remove from me my sin ; for away from thee I am not master even of the twinkling of an eye.' 6.
' Do not strike us, Varuna, with weapons which at thy will hurt the evil-doer. Let us not go where the light has vanished ! Scatter our enemies, that we may live.' 7.
'We did formerly, O Varuwa, and do now, and shall in future also, sing praises to thee, 0 mighty one! For on thee, unconquerable hero, rest all statutes, immovable, as if established on a rock.' 8.
'Move far away from me all self-committed guilt, and may I not, 0 king, suffer for what others have committed ! Many dawns have not yet dawned ; grant us to live in them, O Varurca.' 9.
(M. M., India, p. 195, from Kig-veda II. 28.) (4) C
18 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
An Avestic Prayer.
1. 'Blessed is he, blessed is every one, to whom Ahura- mazda, ruling by his own will, shall grant the two ever- lasting powers (health and immortality). For this very good I beseech Thee. Mayest Thou through Thy angel of piety, give me happiness, the good true things, and the possession of the good mind.
2. I believe Thee to be the best being of all, the source of light for the world. Every one shall believe in Thee as the source of light ; Thee, O Mazda, most beneficent spirit ! Thou createdst all good true things by means of the power of Thy good mind at any time, and promisedst us a long life.
4. I will believe Thee to be the powerful benefactor, O Mazda ! For Thou givest with Thy hand, filled with helps, good to the -righteous man, as well as to the wicked, by means of the warmth of the fire strengthening the good things. For this reason the vigour of the good mind has fallen to my lot.
5. Thus I believed in Thee, O Ahuramazda! as the furtherer of what is good ; because I beheld Thee to be the primeval cause of life in the creation ; for Thou, who hast rewards for deeds and words, hast given evil to the bad and good to the good. I will believe in Thee, 0 Ahura ! in the last period of the world.
6. In whatever period of my life I believed in Thee, O Mazda, munificent spirit ! in that Thou earnest with wealth, and with the good mind through whose actions our settle- ments thrive '
(M. Haug, Essays on the Parsis, p. 155 seq., from Yasiia XLIII. 1-6 ; see also Mills, S. B. E., vol. xxxi. p. 98.)
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OF RELIGION. 19
Verses from Zoroaster's Gathas.
' This I ask Thee, O Ahura ! tell me aright : When praise is to be offered, how (shall I complete) the praise of One like You, O Mazda ? Let one like Thee declare it earnestly to the friend who is such as I, thus through Thy righteous- ness to offer friendly help to us, so that One like Thee may draw near us through Thy good mind. 1.
This I ask Thee, O Ahura ! tell me aright : Who by genera- tion was the first father -of the righteous order ? Who gave the (recurring) sun and stars their (undeviating) way 1 Who established that whereby the moon waxes, and whereby she wanes, save Thee 1 These things, 0 Great Creator ! would I know, and others likewise still. 3.
This I ask Thee, O Ahura ! tell me aright : Who from beneath hath sustained the earth and the clouds above that they do not fall 1 Who made the waters and the plants 1 Who to the wind has yoked on the storm-clouds, the swift and fleetest 1 Who, O Great Creator ! is the inspirer of the good thoughts (within our souls) ? 4.
This I ask Thee, 0 Ahura ! tell me aright : Who, as a skilful artizan, hath made the lights and the darkness 1 Who, as thus skilful, has made sleep and the zest (of waking hours) ? Who spread the dawns, the noontides, and the mid- night, monitors to discerning (man), duty's true (guides) 1 5.
This I ask Thee, O Ahura ! tell me aright : These things which I shall speak forth, if they are truly thus. Doth the piety (which we cherish) increase in reality the sacred orderliness within our actions ? To these Thy true saints hath she given the realm through the Good Mind. For whom hast Thou made the mother-kine, the producer of joy? 6.
This I ask Thee, O Ahura! tell me aright, that I may ponder these which are Thy revelations, 0 Mazda ! and the
Oi
20 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
words which were asked (of Thee) by Thy Good Mind (within us), and that whereby we may attain through Thine order, to this life's perfection. Yea, how may my soul with joy- fulness increase in goodness ? Let it thus be. 8.
This I ask Thee, O Ahura ! tell us aright : How shall I banish this Demon of the Lie from us hence to those beneath who are filled with rebellion ? The friends of righteousness (as it lives in Thy saints) gain no light (from their teachings), nor have they loved the questions which Thy Good Mind (asks in the soul)/ 13.
(Yasna XLIV : L. H. Mills, S. B. E., vol. xxxi. pp. Ill scq.)
Chinese Prayer. The Emperor's Prayer.
•To Thee, 0 mysteriously- working Maker, I look up in thought. How imperial is the expansive arch, where Thou dwellest . . . Thy servant, I am but a reed or willow ; my heart is but as that of an ant ; yet have I received Thy favouring decree, appointing me to the government of the empire. I deeply cherish a sense of my ignorance and blind- ness, and am afraid lest I prove unworthy of Thy great favours. Therefore will I observe all the rules and statutes, striving, insignificant as I am, to discharge my loyal duty. Far distant here, I look up to Thy heavenly palace. Come in Thy precious chariot to the altar. Thy servant, I bow my head to the earth, reverently expecting Thine abundant grace. All my officers are here arranged along with me, joyfully worshipping before Thee. All the spirits accom- pany Thee as guards, (filling the air) from the East to the West. Thy servant, I prostrate myself to meet Thee, and reverently look up for Thy coming, O god. 0 that Thou wouldest vouchsafe to accept our offerings, and regard us, while thus we worship Thee, whose goodness is inexhaus- tible!'
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OP RELIGION. 21
'Thou hast vouchsafed, O God, to hear us, for Thcu regardest us as a Father. I, Thy child, dull and unen- lightened, am unable to show forth my dutiful feelings. I thank Thee that Thou hast accepted the intimation. Honourable is Thy great name. With reverence we spread out these gems and silks, and, as swallows rejoicing in the spring, praise Thine abundant love.'
(From the Imperial Prayer-book in the time of the Emperor Kea- tsing. See James Legge, On the Notions of the Chinese concerning God and Spirits, Houg-kong, 1852, p. 24. The date of this prayer is modern.)
Mohammedan Profession.
Qur'an, II. 255-256 :
' O ye who believe ! expend in alms of what we have be- stowed upon you, before the day comes in which is no barter, and no friendship, and no intercession; and the misbelievers, they are the unjust.
God, there is no god but He, the living, the self-sub- sistent. Slumber takes Him not, nor sleep. His is what is in the heavens and what is in the earth. Who is it that intercedes with Him save by His permission 1 He knows what is before them and what behind them, and they com- prehend not aught of his knowledge but of what He pleases. His throne extends over the heavens and the earth, and it tires Him not to guard them both, for He is high and grand.'
(Palmer, S. B. E., vi. 39 seq.)
Modern Hindu Prayer.
1. ' Whatsoever hath been made, God made. Whatsoever is to be made, God will make. Whatsoever is, God maketh, — then why do any of ye afflict yourselves ?
2. Dadu sayeth, Thou, O God ! art the author of all things which have been made, and from thee will originate all things which are to be made. Thou art the maker, and the cause of all things made. There is none other but Thee.
22 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
3. He is my God, who maketh all things perfect. Meditate upon him in whose hands are life and death.
4. He is my God, who created heaven, earth, hell, and the intermediate space ; who is the beginning and end of all creation ; and who provideth for all.
5. I believe that God made man, and that he maketh everything. He is my friend.
6. Let faith in Gbd characterize all your thoughts, words, and actions. He who serveth God, places confidence in nothing else.
7. If the remembrance of God be in your hearts, ye will be able to accomplish things which are impracticable. But those who seek the paths of God are few !
8. He who understandeth how to render his calling sinless, shall be happy in that calling, provided he be with God.
9. 0 foolish one ! God is not far from you. He is near you. You are ignorant, but he knoweth everything, and is careful in bestowing.
10. Whatever is the will of God, will assuredly happen; therefore do not destroy yourselves by anxiety, but listen.
11. Adversity is good, if on account of God; but it is useless to pain the body. Without God, the comforts of wealth are unprofitable.
12. He that believeth not in the one God, hath an un- settled mind ; he will be in sorrow, though in the pos- session of riches : but God is without price.
13. God is my clothing and my dwelling. He is my ruler, my body, and my soul.
14. God ever fostereth his creatures; even as a mother serves her offspring, and keepeth it from harm.
15. 0 God, thou who art the truth, grant me content- ment, love, devotion, and faith. Thy servant Dadu prayeth for true patience, and that he may be devoted to thee.'
(Verses from Dadu, the founder of the Dadupanthi sect, about 1600 A.D.)
THE HISTOKICAL STUDY OF RELIGION. 23
I confess that my heart beats with joy whenever I meet with such utterances in the Sacred Books of the East. A sudden brightness seems to spread over the darkest valleys of the earth. We learn that no human soul was ever quite forgotten, and that there are no clouds of superstition through which the rays of eternal truth cannot pierce. Such moments are the best rewards to the student of the religions of the world — they are moments of true revelation, revealing the fact that God has not forsaken any of his children, if only they feel after Him, if haply they may find him. I am quite aware how easy it is to find fault with these childish gropings, and how readily people join in a laugh when some strange and to us grotesque expres- sion is pointed out in the prayers of the old world. We know how easy it is to pass from the sublime to the ridiculous, and nowhere is this more the case than in religion. Perhaps Jelaleddin's lesson in his Mesnevi may not be thrown away even on modern scoffers.
Moses and the Shepherd.
" Moses once heard a shepherd praying as follows : ' O God, show me where Thou art, that I may become Thy servant. I will clean Thy shoes and comb Thy hair, and sew Thy clothes,, and fetch Thee milk.' When Moses heard him praying in this senseless manner, he rebuked him, saying, ' 0 foolish one, though your father was a Mussulman, you have be- come an infidel. God is a Spirit, and needs not such gross ministrations as, in your ignorance, you suppose.' The shepherd was abashed at his rebuke, and tore his clothes and fled away into the desert. Then a voice from heaven was heard, saying, ' O Moses, wherefore have you driven away my servant? Your office is to
24 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
reconcile my people with me, not to drive them away from me. I have given to each race different usages and forms of praising and adoring me. I have no need of their praises, being exalted above all such needs. I regard not the words that are spoken, but the heart that offers them. I do not require fine words, but a burning heart. Men' s ways of showing de- votion to me are various, but so long as the devotions are genuine, they are accepted.' "
Advantages of a Comparative Study of Religions.
I have never disguised my conviction that a com- parative study of the religions of the world, so far from undermining the faith in our own religion, serves only to make us see more clearly what is the distinctive and essential character of Christ's teaching, and helps us to discover the strong rock on which the Christian as well as every other religion must be founded.
But as a good general, if he wishes to defend a fortress, has often to insist that the surrounding villas and pleasure grounds should be razed, so as not to serve as a protection to the enemy, those also who wish to defend the stronghold of their own religion have often to insist on destroying the outlying in- trenchments and useless ramparts which, though they may be dear to many from long association, offer no real security, nay, are dangerous as lending a support to the enemy, that is to say, to those who try to sap the rock on which all true religion, call it natural or supernatural, must be founded.
It is quite true, for instance, that the fact that we meet with so-called miracles in almost every religion, cannot but tell upon us and change our very concep-
THE HISTORICAL STUDY OF RELIGION. 25
tion of a miracle. If Comparative Theology has taught us anything, it has taught us that a belief in miracles, so far from being impossible, is almost inevitable, and that it springs everywhere from the same source, a deep veneration felt by men, women, and children for the founders and teachers of their religion. This gives to all miracles a new, it may be, a more profound meaning. It relieves us at once from the never-ending discussions of what is possible, probable, or real, of what is rational, irrational, natural, or supernatural. It gives us true mira, instead of small miracula, it makes us honest towards ourselves, and honest towards the founder of our own religion. It places us in a new and real world where all is miraculous, all is admirable, but where there is no room for small surprises, a world in which no sparrow can fall to the ground without the Father, a world of faith, and not of sight1. If we compare the treatment which miracles received from Hume with the treatment which they now receive from students of Comparative Theology, we see that, after all, the world is moving, nay even the theological world. Few only will now deny that Christians can be Chris- tians without what was called a belief in miracles; nay, few will deny that they are better Christians without, than with that belief. What the students of Comparative Theology take away with one hand, they restore a hundredfold with the other. That in our time a man like Professor Huxley should have had to waste his time on disproving the miracle of the Gergesenes by scientific arguments, will rank hereafter as one of the most curious survivals in the history of theology.
1 See some excellent remarks on this point in the Rev. Charles Gore's 'Bampton Lectures, p. 180.
26 INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.
When delivering these lectures, I confess that what I feared far more than the taunts of those who, like Henry VIII, call themselves the defenders of the faith, were the suspicions of those who might doubt my perfect fairness and impartiality in defending Chris- tianity by showing how, if only properly understood, it is infinitely superior to all other religions. A good cause and a sacred cause does not gain, it is only damaged, by a dishonest defence, and I do not blame those who object to a Christian Advocate, an office till lately maintained at Cambridge, pleading the cause of Christianity against all other religions. It is on that account that the attacks of certain Christian Divines have really been most welcome to me, for they have shown at all events that I hold no brief from them, and that if I and those who honestly share my con- victions claim a perfect right to the name of Chris- tians, we do so with a good conscience. We have sub- jected Christianity to the severest criticism and have not found it wanting. We have done what St. Paul exhorts every Christian to do, we have proved every- thing, we have not been afraid to compare Christianity with any other religion, and if we have retained it, we have done so, because we found it best. All religions, Christianity not excepted, seem really to have suffered far more from their defenders than from their assail- ants, and I certainly know no greater danger to Christianity than that contempt of Natural Religion which has of late been expressed with so much vio- lence by those who have so persistently attacked both the founder of this lectureship on Natural Religion and the lecturers, nay even those who have ventured to attend their lectures.
LECTURE 11.
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACKED BOOKS EXAMINED.
Historical Documents for Studying- the Origin of Beligion.
ORIENTAL scholars have often been charged with exaggerating the value of the Sacred Books of the East for studying the origin and growth of religion. It cannot be denied that these books are much less perfect than we could wish them to be. They are poor fragments only, and the time when they were* collected and reduced to writing is in most cases far removed from the date of their original composition, still more from the times which they profess to describe. All this is true ; but my critics ought to have known that, so far from wishing to hide these facts, I have myself been the first to call attention to them again and again. Wherever we meet with a religion, it has always long passed its childhood ; it is generally full-grown, and presup- poses a past which is far beyond the reach of any historical plummet. Even with regard to modern religions, such as Christianity and Islam, we know very little indeed about their real historical begin- nings or antecedents. Though we may know their cradle and those who stood around it, the powerful
28 LEOTUEE II.
personality of the founders seems in each case to have overshadowed all that was around and before them ; nay, it may sometimes have been the object of their disciples and immediate followers to represent the new religion as entirely new, as really the creation of one mind, though no historical religion can ever be that ; and to ignore all historical influences that are at work in forming the mind of the real founder of an historical religion J. With regard to more ancient religions, we hardly ever reach their deepest springs, as little as we can hope to reach the lowest strata of ancient languages. And yet religion, like language, exhibits everywhere the clear traces of historical an- tecedents and of a continuous development.
Religions Language.
It has been my object in my former lectures to show that there is but one way by which we may get, so to say, behind that phase of a religion which is represented to us in its sacred or canonical books. Some of the most valuable historical documents of religion lie really imbedded in the language of re- ligion, in the names of the various deities, and in the name which survives in the end as that of the one true God. Certain expressions for sacrifice also, for sin, for breath and soul and all the rest, disclose occa- sionally some of the religious thoughts of the people among whom these Sacred Books grew up. I have also tried to show how much may be gained by a comparison of these ancient religious terminologies, and how more particularly the religious terminology
1 See Kuenen, Hibbert Lectures, p. 189 seq.
THE TRUE VALUE OP THE SACRED BOOKS. 29
of ancient India sheds the most welcome light on many of the religious expressions that have become obscure or altogether unmeaning even in Greek and Latin.
How should we have known that Zeus meant originally the bright light of the sky, and that deus was at first an adjective meaning bright, but for the evidence supplied to us in the Veda? This lesson of Zeus or Jupiter cannot be dinned too often into the ears of the incredulous, or rather the ignorant, who fail to see that the Pantheon of Zeus cannot be separated from Zeus himself, and that the other Olym- pian gods must have had the same physical beginnings as Zeus, the father of gods and men. There are still a few unbelievers left who shake their wise heads when they are told that Erinys meant the dawn, Agni fire, and Marut or Mars the storm wind, quite as cer- tainly as that Eos meant the dawn, Helios the sun, and Selene the moon. If they did not, what did these names mean, unless they meant nothing at all!
When we have once gained in this, the earliest germinal stage of religious thought and language, a real historical background for the religions of India, Greece, and Rome, we have learnt a lesson which we may safely apply to other religions also, though no doubt with certain modifications, namely that there is a meaning in every divine name, and that an intimate relation exists between a religion and the language in which it was born and sent out into the world. When that is done, we may proceed to the Sacred Books and collect from them as much in- formation as we can concerning the great religions of the world in their subsequent historical development.
30 LECTURE II.
Literary Documents.
And here, whatever may be said to the contrary, we have nothing more important, nothing that can more safely be relied upon than the literary docu- ments which some of the ancient religions of the world have left us, and which were recognised as authoritative by the ancients themselves. These materials have become accessible of late years only, and it has been my object, with the assistance of some of my friends, to bring out a very large collection of translations of these Sacred Books of the East. That collection amounts now to forty-two volumes, and will in future enable every student of Comparative Theology to judge for himself of the true nature of the religious beliefs of the principal nations of antiquity.
Modern Date of Sacred Books.
If people like to call these books modern, let them do so, but let them remember that at all events there is nothing more ancient in any literature. In almost every country it may be said that the history of literature begins with Sacred Books, nay, that the very idea of literature took its origin from these Sacred Books. Literature, at least a written literature, and, most of all, a literature in alphabetic writing is, according to its very nature, a very modern inven- tion. There can be no doubt that the origin of all the ancient religions of the world goes back to a time when writing for literary purposes was as yet entirely unknown. I still hold that book-writing or writing for literary purposes does not appear any- where in the history of the world much before the
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 31
seventh century B.C. I know that I stand almost alone in dating the existence of a written literature, of real books that were meant to be read by the people at large, from so late a period. But I do not know of any facts that enable us to speak with confidence of a literature, in the true sense of the word, before that date. I have been told that the very latest date unanimously assigned by all com- petent Semitic scholars to the E documents of the O.T. is 750 B. c. But no one has shown in what alpha- bet, nay, even in what dialect they were then written. I have been reminded also of the much earlier date of an Egyptian and Babylonian literature, but I thought I had carefully guarded against such a reminder, by speaking of books in alphabetic writing only. Books presuppose the existence not only of people who can write, but likewise of people who can read, and their number in the year 750 B.C. must have been very small indeed.
To those who are not acquainted with the powers of the human memory when well disciplined, or rather when not systematically ruined, as ours has been, it may seem almost incredible that so much of the ancient traditional literature should have been com- posed, and should have survived during so many centuries, before it was finally consigned to writing. Still we have got so far, that everybody now admits that the poets of the Veda did not write their hymns, and that Zoroaster did not leave any written documents. There is no word for writing in the Veda, neither is there, as Dr. Haug (Essays on the Parsis, p. 136 n.) has shown, in the Avesta. I have myself pointed out how familiar the idea of writing seems to have been to
32 LECTURE II.
the authors of some of the books of the Old Testament, and how this affects the date of these books.
We read in the First Book of Kings iv. 3, of scribes and recorders at the court of King Solomon, and the same officers are mentioned again in 2 Kings xviii. 18, at the court of Hezekiah, while in the reign of Josiah we actually read of the discovery of the Book of the Law. But we find the same anachronisms elsewhere. Thrones and sceptres are ascribed to kings who never had them, and in the Shahnameh (910, 5) we read of Feridun as having not only built a fire-temple in Baikend, but as having deposited there a copy of the Avesta written in golden (cuneiform ?) letters. Kir- jath-sepher, the city of letters, mentioned in the Book of Joshua xv. 15, refers probably to some inscription, in the neighbourhood, not to books.
Of Buddha also it may now be asserted without fear of contradiction that he never left any MSS. of his discourses1. If it had been otherwise, it would cer- tainly have been mentioned, as so many less important things concerning Buddha's daily life and occupations have been mentioned in the Buddhist canon. And although to us it may seem almost impossible that long compositions in poetry, nay even in prose, should have been elaborated and handed down by oral tradition only, it is important to observe that the ancients themselves never express any surprise at the extraordinary achievements of the human memory, whereas the very idea of an alphabet, of alphabetic writing, or of paper and ink, is entirely absent from their minds.
I readily admit therefore that whatever we possess 1 See Der Buddhismus, von Wassiljew, p. 247.
THE TKUE VALUE OF THE SACKED BOOKS. 33
of sacred literature in writing is comparatively modern ; also that it represents a very small por- tion only of what originally existed. We know that even after a book had been written, the danger of loss was by no means past. We know how much of Greek and Latin literature that was actually consigned to writing has been lost. Aeschylus is said to have composed ninety plays. We possess MSS. of seven only. And what has become of the works of Berosus, Manetho, Sanchoniathan ? What of the complete MSS. of Polybius, Diodorus Siculus, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Dio Cassius ? what of those of Livy and Tacitus ?
If therefore people will have it that what we possess of sacred books is modern, I do not object, if only they will define what they mean by modern. And if they insist on calling what has been saved out of the general shipwreck mere flotsam and jetsam, we need not quarrel about such names. Much has been lost of the ancient literary monuments of almost every religion, but that makes what is left all the more valuable to us.
Fragmentary Character of the Sacred Books of India.
In Sanskrit literature we frequently meet with references to lost books. It is not an uncommon practice in theological controversy in India to appeal to lost $akhas of the Veda, particularly when customs for which there is no authority in the existing Vedas have to be defended. When, for instance, European scholars had proved that there was no authority for the burning of widows in the Veda, as known to us, native scholars appealed to lost $akhas of the Veda (4) D
34 LECTURE II.
in support of this cruel custom. However, native casuists themselves have supplied us with the right answer to this kind of argument. They call it ' the argument of the skull,' and they remark with great shrewdness that you might as well bring a skull into court as a witness, as appeal to a lost chapter of the Veda in support of any prevailing custom or doctrine. $akha means a branch, and as the Veda is often represented as a tree, a /S'akha of the Veda is what we also might call a branch of the Veda.
We must not imagine, however, that what we now possess of Vedic literature is all that ever existed, or that it can give us anything like a complete image of Vedic religion.
The Buddhists are likewise in the habit of speaking of some of the words or sayings of Buddha as being lost, or not recorded.
In the Old Testament we have the well-known allusions to the Book of Jasher (2 Sam. i. 18), and the Wars of God (Num. xxi. 14), the Chronicles of David, and the Acts of Solomon, which prove the former existence, if not of books, at least of popular songs and legends under those titles.
And with regard to the New Testament also, not only does St. Luke tell us that ' many had taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning those matters which i have been fulfilled among us, even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning- were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word,' but we know that there existed in the early centuries other Gospels and other Epistles which have either been lost or have been declared apocryphal by later authorities, such as the Gospels according to tho
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 35
Hebrews and the Egyptians, the Acts of Andrew, John, and Thomas, the Epistles of St. Paul to the Laodiceans, the Epistles of Barnabas and of St. Clement, &C.1 We read besides, at the end of the Fourth Gospel, that 'there were also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that should be written.' This may be an exaggeration, but it ought to be at the same time a warning against the supposi- tion that the New Testament can ever give us a com- plete account of the religious teaching of Christ.
Loss of the Sacred Literature of Persia.
There is no religion, however, where we can study the loss of a great portion of its sacred literature so closely as in the religion of Zoroaster and his disciples, and it is well that we should learn a lesson from it. What by a very erroneous name we call the Zend Avesta is a book of very moderate dimensions. I explained to you, I believe, in a former lecture, why Zend Avesta is an erroneous name. The Persians call their sacred writings not Zend Avesta, but Avesta Zend, or in Pehlevi Avistak va Zand, and this means simply text and commentary. Avesta is the text, Zend the commentary. Avesta is probably derived from vid, to know, from which, you may remember, we have also the name Veda2. But avesta is a participle passive, originally a + vista (for vid-ta), and meant therefore what is known or
1 See J. E. Carpenter, The First Three Gospels, p. 3.
2 Oppert (Journ. Asiat., 1672, March; compares the old Persian &basta, law.
D 2
36 LECTURE II.
what has been made known, while Zend is derived from the Aryan root *zeno, to know, in Sanskrit grna, Greek yi-yvu>- likewise knowledge or understanding of the Avesta. While avista was used as the name of Zarathushtra's ancient teachings, Zend was applied to all later explanations of those sacred texts, and particularly to the translations and explanations of the old text in Pehlevi or Pahlavi, the Persian language as spoken in the Sassanian kingdom. In spite of this, it has become the custom to call the ancient language of Zarathushtra Zend, literally, commentary, and to speak of what is left us of the sacred code of the Zoroastrians as the Zend Avesta. This is one of those mistakes which it will be difficult to get rid of; scholars seem to have agreed to accept it as inevitable, and they will probably continue to speak of the Zend Avesta, and of the Zend language. Some writers, who evidently imagine that Zoroaster wor- shipped the fire instead of Ormazd, his supreme deity, and who suppose that Vesta was originally a deity of the fire, have actually gone so far as to spell Zenda Vesta as if Vesta was the name of the sacred fire of the Parsis. If we wish to be correct, we should speak of the Avesta as the ancient texts of Zarathushtra, and we should call Zend all that has been written at a later time, whether in the ancient Avestic language or in Pehlevi, by way of translation and interpreta- tion of the Avesta. This Pehlevi is simply the old ' name for the Persian language, and there can be little doubt that Pehlevi, which is the Persian name for what is ancient, was derived from pahlav, a hero- warrior, which pahlav again is a regular modification
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACRED BOOKS. .37
of parthav, the name of the Parthians who were the rulers of Persia for nearly five hundred years (256 B. C.-226 A. D.). But though Pehlevi would thus seem to mean the language of the Parthians, it is really the name of the Persian language, as spoken in Persia when under Parthian rule. It is an Aryan language written in a peculiar Semitic alphabet and mixed with many Semitic words. The first traces of Pehlevi have been discovered on coins referred to the third or fourth century B. c., possibly even on some tablets found in Nineveh, and ascribed to the seventh century B.C. (Haug's Essays, p. 81). We find Pehlevi written in two alphabets, as in the famous inscriptions of Hajiabad (third century A.D.), found near the ruins of Persepolis1. Besides the language of the Avesta, which we call Zend, and the language of the glosses and translations, which we call Pehlevi, there is the Pazend, originally not the name of a language, as little as Zend was, but the name of a commentary on a commentary. There are such Pazends written in Avestic2 or in Pehlevi. But when used as the name of a language, Pazend means mediaeval Iranian, used chiefly in the transcriptions of Pehlevi texts, written either in Avestic or Persian characters, and freed from all Semitic ingredients. In fact the language of the great epic poet Firdusi (1000 A.D.) does not differ much from that of Pazend ; and both are the lineal descendants of Pehlevi and ancient Persian.
One thing, however, is quite certain, namely, that the sacred literature which once existed in these three
1 See Haug, 1. c. p. 87, and Friedrich Miiller, Die Pahlawi Inschriften von Hadsiabdd.
2 Haug, 1. c. p. 122.
88 LECTURE II.
successive languages, Avestic, Pehlevi, and Pazend, must have been infinitely larger than what we now possess.
It is important to observe that the existence of this much larger ancient sacred literature in Persia was known even to Greeks and Romans, such as Her- mippos J, who wrote his book ' On the Magi ' while residing at Smyrna. He lived in the middle of the third century B.C. Though this book is lost, it is quoted by Plutarch, Diogenes Laertius, and Pliny. Pliny (H. N. xxx. 2) tells us that Hermippos studied the books of Zoroaster, which were then said to comprise two millions of lines. Even so late an authority as Abu Jafir Attavari (an Arabic historian) assures us that Zoroaster's writings covered twelve hundred cowhides (parchments).
These statements of classical writers are confirmed to a great extent by the traditions current among the followers of Zoroaster in Persia, who agree in accusing Alexander the Great of having destroyed or carried off their sacred MSS. We read in the Dinkarrf (West, p. 412) that the first collection of the sacred texts of Zoroaster took place at the time of Vistasp, the mythical ruler who accepted the religion of Zoroaster. Afterwards, we are told, Darai commanded that two complete copies of the whole Avesta and Zend should be preserved, one in the treasury of Shapigan, and one in the fortress of written documents. This Darai is likewise more or less mythical, but he is generally considered by the Persian poets as the predecessor of Alexander. We are on more historical ground when we are told in the Dinkarrf (West, p. xxxi) that tho
1 Diugcueb L;ierlius, Frouem. 6.
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 39
MS. which was in the fortress of documents came to be burnt, while that in the treasury of Shapigan fell into the hands of the Greeks and was translated by or for Alexander into the Greek language, as ' information connected with ancient times.' Now the fact that the Royal Palace at Persepolis was burnt by Alexander in a drunken frolic is confirmed by Greek historians, though nothing is said by them of a Greek translation of the Avestic writings. It is quite possible, however, that Hermippos had before him the very MS. that had been carried away from the treasury of Shapigan by Alexander's soldiers.
We hear nothing more about the Avesta till we come to the time of Valkhas, evidently a Vologeses, possibly Vologeses I. the contemporary of Nero. Though he was a Parthian ruler, we are told in the Dinkarc? that he ordered ' the careful preservation and making of memoranda for the royal city, of the Avesta and Zend as it had purely come unto them, and also of whatever instruction, due to it, had remained written about, as well as deliverable by the tongue through a high-priest, in a scattered state in the country of Iran, owing to the ravages and devastations of Alex- ander, and the cavalry and infantry of the Arumans (Greeks).'
Whatever the exact meaning of these words may be, they clearly imply that an attempt had been made, even before the rise of the Sassanian dynasty, to collect what could still be collected of the old sacred writings, either from scattered fragments of MSS. or from oral tradition. It does not appear that any attempt of the same kind had been made before that time, and after the devastations ascribed to Alexander.
40 LECTURE II.
It does not seem to ine to follow that, as M. Dar- mesteter suggests (S. B. E. iv. Introd.), the Parthian rulers had actually embraced Zoroastrianism as the state-religion of their kingdom. That was reserved for the Sassanians. But it shows at all events that they valued the ancient faith of their subjects, and it is a fact that some of the Philhellenic Parthian princes had actually adopted it.
The real revival, however, of Zoroastrianism as the national religion of Persia and the final constitution of the Avestic canon were due, no doubt, to the Sassanians. We read in the Dinka?*d! that Arta- kshatar (Ardeshir), the son of Papak, king of kings (A.D. 226-240), summoned Tosar and other priests to the capital to settle the true doctrine of the old religion. His son, Shahpuhar ( A. D. 2 40-2 71). folio wed his example, and brought together a number of secular writings also, scattered about, as we are told, in the country, in India, Greece, and elsewhere, and ordered their collocation with the Avesta. After that a correct copy was deposited once more in the treasury of Shapigan.
Shahpuhar II (Sapores), the son of Auharmazd (A. D. 309-379), seems to have done for the Avestic religion very much what Constantine was doing about the same time for Christianity. He convoked a ' tribunal for the controversy of the inhabitants of all regions, and brought all statements to proper con- sideration and investigation.' The heresy with which Shahpuhar H and Aturpad had to deal was probably that of Manichaeism. The doctrines of Hani had been spreading so widely during the third century that even a king, Shahpuhar I, was supposed to have
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 41
embraced them. Thus while Constantine and Atha- nasius settled the orthodox doctrines of Christianity at Nicaea, 325 A.D., Shahpuhar II and Aturpad, the son of Maraspand, were engaged in Persia in extinguishing the heresy of Mani and restoring Mazdaism to its original purity. The collecting of the Nasks and the num- bering of them as twenty-one, is ascribed to Aturpad. Prof. Darmesteter (Introd. p. xxxix) supposes that at his time it was still possible to make additions to the Avestic texts, and he points out passages in the Vendidad which may have reference to the schism of Mani, if not even to Christianity, as- known in the East.
At a still later time, under Khusroi (Khosroes), called Anosharuvan, the son of Kavad (A.D. 531-579), we read that new heresies had to be suppressed, and that a new command was given for ' the proper con- sideration of the Avesta and Zend of the primitive Magian statements.'
Soon after followed the Arab conquest, when we are told that the archives and treasures of the realm were once more devastated. Still the Mohammedan conquerors seem to have been far less barbarous than Alexander and his Greek soldiers, for when, after the lapse of three centuries, a new effort was made to collect the Avestic writings, Atur-farnbagi Farukho- zacZan was able to make a very complete collection of the ancient Nasks. Nay, even at the end of the ninth century, when another high-priest, Aturpad, the son of Himid, the author, or, at all events, the finisher of the DinkarcZ, made a final collection of the Avesta and Zend, MSS. of all the Nasks seem to have been forthcoming with very few exceptions, whether in the
42 LECTURE II.
ancient Avestic language or in Pehlevi, so that Aturpad could give in his Dinkarrf an almost complete ac- count of the Zoroastrian religion and its sacred literature. According to some authorities it was Atur-farnbagi Farukho-zacZan who began the DinkarcZ, while Aturpad, the son of Himid, finished it. This would place the work between 820 and 890 A.'D. Aturpad, or whoever he was, speaks of the twenty-one Nasks or books of the A vesta, as if he had read them either in the original language or in their Pehlevi translation. The only Nask he failed to obtain was the Vastag Nask, and the Pehlevi version of the Nadar Nask. We owe all this information partly to Dr. Haug. partly to Dr. West, who has recovered large portions of the MS. of the DinkardJ and translated them in volume xxxvii of the Sacred Books of the East.
Of these twenty-one Nasks which, since the days of Aturpad, the son of Maraspand, constituted the Avestic canon, and which are reckoned to have con- sisted of 345,700 words in Zend, and of 2,094,200 words of Pehlevi (West, 1. c. p. xlv), three only, the 14th, 19th, and 21st, have been saved complete. We are told in one of the Persian Eivayats (S. B. E. xxxvii. p. 437), that even at the time when the first attempt was made to collect the sacred literature which had escaped the soldiers of Alexander, portions only of each Nask were forthcoming, and none in its original completeness, except the Vindad, i. e. the Vendidad. If we could trust to this statement, it would prove that the division in the Nasks existed even before the time of Aturpad, the son of Maraspand (325 A.D.), and was possibly of Achaemenian origin.
There arc fragments of some other Nasks in exist-
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 43
ence, such as the Vistasp sasto, Hadokhto and Bako, but what the Parsis now consider as their sacred canon, consists, besides the Vendidad, of no more than the Yasna, Vispered, Yashts, &c., which contain the bulk of the two other extant Nasks, the Stod and Bakan Yashts.
The Vendidad contains religious laws and old legends. The Vispered contains litanies, chiefly for the celebration of the six season-festivals, the so-called Gahanbars. The Yasna also contains litanies, but its most important portion consists of the famous Gathas (stem gatha, nom. sing, gatha), metrical portions, written in a more ancient dialect, probably the oldest nucleus round which all the rest of the Avestic litera- ture gathered. The Gathas are found in the Yasna, xxviii-xxxiv, xliii-xlvi, xlvii-1, li, and liii. Each of these three collections, the Vendidad, Vispered, and Yasna, if they are copied singly, are generally accom- panied by a Pehlevi translation and glosses, the so- called Zend. But if they are all copied together, according to the order in which they are required for liturgical purposes, they are without the Pehlevi translation, and the whole collection is then called the Vendidad Sadah, i.e. the Vendidad pure and simple, i. e. without commentary.
The remaining fragments are comprehended under the name of Khorda Avesta or Small Avesta. They consist chiefly of prayers such as the five Gah, the Sirozeh, the three Afringan, the five Nyayish, the Yashts, lit. acts of worship, hymns addressed to the thirty Izads, of which twenty only have been pre- served, and some other fragments, for instance, the Hadhokht Nask (S. £. E. iv. p. xxx ; xxiii. p. 1).
44 LECTURE II.
The Parsis sometimes divide the twenty-one Nasks into three classes : (1) the Gathic, (2) the Hadha- mathric, (3) the Law. The Gathic portion represents the higher spiritual knowledge and spiritual duty, the Law the lower worldly duty, and the Hadha-mathric what is between the two (Dinkarrf, VIII. 1. 5). In many cases, however,' these subjects are mixed.
The Gathas are evidently the oldest fragments of the Avestic religion, when it consisted as yet in a simple belief in Ahuramazda as the Supreme Spirit, and in a denial of the Daevas, most of them known to us as worshipped by the poets of the Veda. If Zara- thushtra was the name of the founder or reformer of. this ancient religion, these Gathas may be ascribed to him. As their language differs dialectically from that of the Achaemenian inscriptions, and as the Pehlevi interpreters, though conversant with the ordinary Avestic language, found it difficult to interpret these Gathas, we are justified in supposing that the Gathic dialect may have been originally the dialect of Media, for it was from Media that the Magi l, or the teachers and preachers of the religion of Ahuramazda, are said to have come 2. It has been pointed out that certain deities, well known in the Veda, and in later Avestic texts, are absent from the Gathas ; for instance, Mithra and Homa ; also Anahita and the title of Arneshaspenta (Haug, 1. c. p. 259). Many abstract concepts, such as Asha, righteousness, Vohumano, good thought, have not yet assumed a definite mythological personality in
1 Magi, the Magavas of the Gathas, the Magush in the cuneiform inscription, the Mog of later times, Haug, p. 169 n., possibly the rab mag of Jerem. xxxix. 3.
2 Darmestetor, S. B. E., iv. p. xlvi, gives all the evidence for assigning the origin of Zoroaster's religion to Media.
THE TRUE VALUE OP THE SACKED BOOKS. 45
the chapters composed in the Gathic dialect (Haug, p. 171). And what is more important still, the Angro Mainyu or Ahriman of the later Avestic writings has in the Gathas not yet been invested with the character of the Evil Spirit, the Devil, the constant opponent of Ahuramazda1 (Haug, I.e. pp. 303-4). I call this important, because in the cuneiform inscriptions also this character does not, and we may probably be justi- fied in saying, does not yet occur. The early Greek writers also, such as Herodotos, Theopompos, and Her- mippos, though acquainted with the Magian doctrine of a dualism in nature and even in the godhead, do not seem to have known the name of Ahriman. Plato knew the name of Ahuramazda, for he calls Zoroaster the son of Oromasos, which must be meant for Ahura- mazda, but he too never mentions the name of Angro Mainyu or Areimanios. Aristotle may have known the name of Areimanios as well as that of Oromasdes, though we have only the authority of Diogenes Laer- tius (Prooem. c. 8) for it. Later writers, both Greek and Koman, are well acquainted with both names.
I mention all this chiefly in order to show that there are signs of historical growth and historical decay in the various portions of what we call Avestic literature. If with Dr- Haug we place the earliest Gatha literature in about 1000 to 1200 B. c., which of course is a purely hypothetical date, we can say at all events that the Gathas are in thought, if not in language also, older than the inscriptions of Darius; that they belonged to Media, and existed there probably before the time of Cyrus and his conquest of the Persian empire.
When we come to the time of Alexander, we see 1 Angra occurs in the Gathas in the sense of evil.
46 LECTURE II.
that there existed then so large an amount of sacred literature, that we cannot be far wrong in ascribing the whole of the twenty-one Nasks to a pre-Achae- menian period, before 500 B.C. Here we can dis- tinguish again between the old and the later Yasna. The Vendidad, Vispered, the Yashts, and the smaller prayers may be ascribed to the end of the Avestic period. Dr. Haug places the larger portion of the original Vendidad at about 1000-900 B. c., the com- position of the later Yasna at about 800-700 E. c.
The Pehlevi literature may have begun soon after Alexander. Linguistic chronology is, no doubt, of a very uncertain character. Still, that there is an his- torical progress both in language and thought from the Gathas to the Yasna, and from the Yasna to the Yashts, can hardly be doubted. Real historical dates are unfor- tunately absent, except the mention of Gaotama in the Fravardin Yasht (16). If this is meant for Gautama, the founder of Buddhism, we can hardly be wrong in supposing that this name of Buddha had reached Bactria during the first century after Buddha's death, say 477-377 B.C. In later times the presence of Buddhists in Bactria cannot be doubted l. About the same time coins had been struck with inscriptions in Pehlevi. which must have been the language of the
1 The presence of Buddhists in Bactria in the first century B.C. is attested by several authorities. Alexander Polyhistor, who wrote between 80-60 B.C. (as quoted by Cyrillus contra Julian.), mentions among philosophers the Samanyioi among the Persian Bactrians, the Magoi among the Persians, and the Gymnosophists among the Indians. These Samanyioi were meant for Buddhists. Later still Clemens of Alexandria, Strom, i. p. 359, speaks of Samanaioi among the Bactrians and of Gymnosophists among the Indians, while Euse- bius (Praep. Ev. vii. 10) speaks of thousands of Brahmans among Indians and Bactrians. See Lassen, Ind. Alterthumskunde, ii. p. 1075 ; Spiegel, Eran. Alterthumskunde. i. 671.
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 47
people about the time of Alexander's conquests. The Avestic language, however, continued to be under- stood for a long time after, so that, under the Parthian and the Sassanian dynasties, interpreters could be found, able to translate and explain the ancient sacred texts. Nay, if M. Darmesteter is right, additions in Avestic continued to be made as late as the fourth century A. D., provided that the passages which he has pointed out in the Vendidad refer to the suppression of the heresy of Mani by king Shahpur II.
The Relation between the Avesta and the Old Testament.
I thought it necessary to enter thus fully into the history of the rise and decline of the sacred literature of Persia, because I wanted to show how impossible it is to institute a satisfactory comparison between the Persian and any other religion, unless we are fully aware of the historical growth of its sacred canon. Though much light had been shed on this subject by Dr. Haug, it is but lately that the valuable translation of the Dink&rd, contributed by Mr. West to my Sacred Books of the East, has enabled us to form an indepen- dent judgment on that subject. The Persian religion has often been the subject of comparison both with the religion of India and with that of the Jews, par- ticularly after their return from the exile. The chief doctrines which the Jews are supposed to have bor- rowed from the followers of Zoroaster are a belief in the resurrection of the body, a belief in the immor- tality of the soul, and a belief in future rewards and punishments. It is well known that these doctrines were entirely, or almost entirely, absent from the oldest phase of religion among the Jews, so that their presence
48 LECTURE II.
in some of the Psalms and the Prophets has often been used as an argument in support of the later date now assigned to these compositions. Here there are no chronological difficulties. These doctrines exist, as we shall see, at least in their germinal stage, in the Gathas, while of the more minute details added to these old doctrines in the later portions of the Avesta, or in the still later Pehlevi writings, there is no trace even in post-exilic books of the Old Testament. This point has been well argued by Prof. Cheyne in the Exposl- toi^y Times, June, July, August, 1891 1.
But there is another point on which we can observe an even more striking similarity between the Old Testa- ment and the Avesta, namely, the strong assertion of the oneness of God. Here, however, it seems to me that, if there was any exchange of thought between the followers of Moses and of Zoroaster, it may have been the latter who were influenced. The sudden change from the henotheisrn of the Veda to the mono- theism of the Avesta has never been accounted for, and I venture to suggest, though not without hesitation, that it may have taken place in Media, in the original home of the Zoroastrian religion. It was in the cities of Media that a large Jewish population was settled, after the king of Assyria had carried away Israel, and put them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes (2 Kings xviii. 11). No^, however difficult an exchange of religious ideas may be between people speaking different languages, the fact of their worshipping either one God or many gods could hardly fail to attract attention. If then the
' On Possible Zoroastrian Influences or. the Religion of Israel. See also Spiegel, Erunische Alterthumskunde, vol. i. pp. 446 seq. I am not con- vinced by Prof. Cheyne's remarks in the Academy, July, 1893, p. 44.
THE TRUE VALUE OP THE SACRED BOOKS. 49
Jews impressed their neighbours with the conviction that there could be but one God, a conviction which in spite of many backslidings, seems never to have ceased altogether to form part of the national faith of Israel, everything else would naturally have followed, exactly as we find it in the Avesta, as compared with the Veda. One of the ancient gods, the Asura Varuwa, was taken as the one and supreme God, the God above all gods, under the name of Ahura Mazda ; the other Devas, if they claimed to be gods, were renounced, and those only who could be treated as secondary spirits, were allowed to remain, nay, were increased in number by such spirits or angels as Ameretat, Haurvatat, Vohumano, and all the rest.
I am far from saying that this can be strictly proved. Neither can it be proved that the belief in a resurrec- tion and immortality was necessarily borrowed by the Jews from the Zoroastrians. For, after all, people who deny the immortality of the soul, can also assert it. All I say is that such a supposition being his* torically possible, would help to explain many things in the Avesta and its development out of Vedic or pre-Vedic elements, that have not yet any satisfactory explanation.
I am that I am.
But there is a still more startling coincidence. You may remember that the highest expression of this Supreme Being that was reached in India, was one found in the Vedic hymns, ' He who above all gods is the only God.' I doubt whether Physical Religion can reach a higher level. We must remember that each individual god had from the first been invested
(4} E
50 LECTURE IT.
with a character high above any human character. Indra, Soma, Agni, and whatever other Devas there were in the Vedic Pantheon, had been described as the creators of the world, as the guardians of what is good and right, as all-powerful, all-wise, and victorious over all their enemies. What more then could human language and religious devotion achieve than to speak of one Supreme Being, high above all these gods, and alone worthy of the name of God ?
We saw that in Greece also a similar exalted con- ception of the true God had at a very early time found expression in a verse of Xenophanes, who in the face of Zeus, and Apollo, and Athene ventured to say, 'There is but one God, the best among mortals and immortals, neither in form nor in thought like unto mortals' This again seems to me to mark the highest altitude which human language can reach in its desire to give an adequate description of the one true God. For though the existence of other immortals is admitted, yet He is supposed to hold his own pre- eminent position among or above them, and even a similarity with anything human, whether in shape or thought, is distinctly denied, thus excluding all those anthropomorphic conceptions from which even in the best of religions the Deity seems unable altogether to divest itself. The Hebrew Psalmist uses the same exalted language about Jehovah. ' Among the gods,' he says, as if admitting the possibility of other gods, 1 there is none like unto Thee' And again he calls Jehovah, the great King above all gods, using almost the same expressions as the Vedic Kishi and the old Greek philosopher. The conception of the Supreme Being as we find it in the Avesta, is by no means
THE TKUE VALUE OP THE SACRED BOOKS. 51
inferior to that of Jehovah in the Old Testament. Dr. Haug (Essays, p. 302) goes so far as to say that it is perfectly identical. Ahura Mazda is called by Zarathushtra 'the Creator of the earthly and spiritual life, the Lord of the whole universe, in whose hands are all creatures. He is the light and the source of light; he is the wisdom and intellect. He is in possession of all good things, spiritual and worldly, such as the good mind (vohu-rnano), immortality (ameretacZ), health (haurvatacZ), the best truth (asha vahishta), devotion and piety (armaiti), and abundance of earthly goods (khshathra vairya), that is to say, he grants all these gifts to the righteous man, who is upright in thoughts, words, and deeds. As the ruler of the whole universe, he not only rewards the good, but he is a punisher of the wicked at the same time. All that is created, good or evil, fortune or misfortune, is his work. A separate evil spirit of equal power with Ahura Mazda, and always opposed to him, is foreign to the earlier portions of the Avesta, though the existence of such a belief among the Zoroastrians may be gathered from some of the later writings, such as the Vendidad.'
Coincidences such as these are certainly startling, but to a student of comparative theology they only prove the universality of truth ; they necessitate by ho means the admission of a common historical origin or the borrowing on one side or the other. We ought in fact rejoice that with regard to these fundamental truths the so-called heathen religions are on a perfect level with the Jewish and the Christian religions.
'But suppose we found the same name, the same proper name of the Deity, say Jehovah in the Avesta,
E 2
52 LECTURE II.
or Ahura Mazda in the Old Testament, what should we say? We should at once have to admit a borrowing on one side or the other. Now it is true we do not find the name of Ahura Mazda in the Old Testament, but we find something equally surprising. You may remember how we rejoiced when in the midst of many imperfect and more or less anthropomorphic names given to the deity in the Old Testament, we suddenly were met by that sublime and exalted name of Jehovah, 'I am that I am.' It seemed so different from the ordinary concepts of deity among the ancient Jews. What then should we say, if we met with exactly the same most abstract appellation of the deity in the Avesta "? Yet, in the Avesta also there is among the twenty sacred names of God, the name 'Ahmi ya£ ah mi,' 'I am that I am.' Shall we read in this co- incidence also the old lesson that God has revealed Himself to all who feel after Him, if haply they may find Him, or is the coincidence so minute that we have to admit an actual borrowing ? And if so, on which side is the borrowing likely to have taken place ? In the Avesta this name occurs in the Yashts. In the Old Testament it occurs in Exodus iii. 13. Chrono- logically therefore the Hebrew text is anterior to the Avestic text. In Exodus we read :
' And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you ; and they shall say to me, What is his name ? what shall I say unto them 1 And God said unto Moses, / am that T am: and he said. Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I am hath sent me unto you.'
This passage, as I am informed by the best authori-
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACKED BOOKS. 58
ties, is now unanimously referred to the Elohistic section. Dillmann, Driver, Kuenen, Wellhausen, Cor- nill, Kittel, &c., all agree on that point. But does it not look like a foreign thought ? What we expect as the answer to the question of Moses, is really what follows in ver. 15, 'And God said [moreover] unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob hath sent me unto you ; this is my name for ever. . . .' This is what we expect, for it was actually in the name of Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, that Moses brought the people out of Egypt; nor is there any trace of Moses having obeyed the divine command and having appealed to ' I am that I am,' as the God who sent him. Nay, there is never again any allusion to such a name in the Old Testament, not even where we might fully expect to meet with it.
If we take ver. 14 as a later addition, and the Rev. J. Estlin Carpenter informs me that this is quite possible, in the Elohistic narrative, everything becomes clear and natural, and we can hardly doubt therefore that this addition came from an extraneous, and most likely from a Zoroastrian source. In Zend the connection between Ahura, the living god, and the verb ah, to be, might have been felt. In Sanskrit also the connection between asura and as, to be, could hardly have escaped attention, particularly as there was also the word as-u, breath. Now it is certainly very strange that in Hebrew also ehyeh seems to point to the same root as Jehovah, but even if this etymology were tenable historically, it does not 'seem to have struck the Jewish mind except in this passage.
1 A O
54 LECTURE H.
But let us look now more carefully at our autho- rities in Zend. The passage in question occurs in the Ormazd Yasht, and the Yashts, as we saw, were some of the latest productions of Avestic literature, in some cases as late as the fourth century B. C. The Elohistic writer, therefore, who is supposed to be not later than 750 B. c., could not have borrowed from that Yasht. The interpolator, however, might have done so. Be- sides we must remember that this Ormazd Yasht is simply an enumeration of the names of Ahura. The twenty names of Ahura are given, in order to show their efficacy as a defence against all dangers. It cannot be doubted, therefore, that these names were recognised as sacred names, and that they had existed long before the time of their compilation. I shall subjoin the translation of the introductory para- graphs from the S. B. E., vol. xxiii. p. 23 :
Zarathushtra asked Ahura Mazda : * O Ahura Mazda, most beneficent Spirit, Maker of the material world, thou Holy One, what Holy Word is the strongest1? What is the most victorious? What is the most glorious"? What is the most effective? What is the most fiend-smiting? What is the best-healing? What destroyeth best the malice of Daevas and men ? What maketh the material world best come to the fulfilment of its wishes? What freeth the material world best from the anxieties of the heart ? ' Ahura Mazda answered : ' Our name, O Spitama Zara- thushtra, who are the Ameshaspentas, that is the strongest part of the Holy Word, that is the most victorious, that is the most glorious, that is the most effective,' &c.
Then Zarathushtra said : * Reveal unto me that name
THE TRUE VALUE OP THE SACRED BOOKS. 55
of thine, 0 Ahura Mazda ! that is the greatest, the best, the fairest, the most effective/ &c.
Ahura Mazda replied unto him : 'My name is the One of whom questions are asked, O Holy Zarathushtra ! '
Now it is curious to observe that Dr. Haug trans- lates the same passage freely, but not accurately, by : ' The first name is Ahmi, I am.'
The text is Frakhshtya nama ahmi, and this means, ' One to be asked by name am I.' ' To ask ' is the recognised term for asking for revealed truth, so that spento frasna, the holy question, including the. answer, came to mean with the Parsis almost the same as revelation. Dr. Haug seems to have overlooked that word, and his translation has therefore been wrongly quoted as showing that I am was a name of Ahura Mazda.
But when we come to the twentieth name we find that Hang's translation is more accurate than Darme- steter's. The text is visastemo ahmi ya£ ahmi Mazdau nama. This means, 'the twentieth, I am what I am, Mazda by name.' Here Darmesteter translates : ' My twentieth name is Mazda (the all- knowing one),' Dr. Haug more accurately : ' The twentieth (name is) I am who I am, Mazda1.'
Here then in this twentieth name of Ahura Mazda, ' I am that I am/ we have probably the source of the verse in Exodus iii. 14, unless we are prepared to
1 Another translation of the words visastemS ahmi ya Mazdau nama has been suggested by West. Ahmi in Zend, he writes, is not only the same as Sk. as mi, I am, but is used also as the locative of the first personal pronoun, corresponding to the Sk. mayi. It is possible, therefore, to translate 'the twentieth name for me is that I am Mazda,' though most scholars would prefer to take the two ahmi's for the same, and to translate, ' the twentieth is I am what I am. Mazda by name.'
56 LEOTUBE n.
admit a most extraordinary coincidence, and that under circumstances where a mutual influence, nay actual borrowing, was far from difficult, and where the character of the passage in Exodus seems to give clear indication on which side the borrowing must have taken place.
I hope I have thus made it clear in what the real value of the Sacred Books of the East consists with regard to a comparative study of religions. We must freely admit that many literary documents in which we might have hoped to find the traces of the earliest growth of a religion, are lost to us for ever. I have tried to show how. more particularly in the case of the Zoroastrian religion, our loss has been very great, and the recent publication of the Dinkarrf by Mr. E. W. West (8. JB. E., vol. xxxvii) has made us realise more fully how much of the most valuable information is lost to us for ever. We read, for instance (Book ix. cap. 31, 13), that in the Varstmansar Nask there was a chapter on ' the arising of the spiritual creation, the first thought of AuharamzcZ ; and, as to the creatures of AuharmazcZ, first the spiritual achievement, and then the material formation and the mingling of spirit with matter ; [the advancement of the creatures thereby, through his wisdom and the righteousness of Vohuman being lodged in the creatures,] and all the good creatures being goaded thereby into purity and joy fulness. This too, that a complete under- standing of things arises through Vohuman having made a home in one's reason (varom).'
To have seen the full treatment of these questions in the Avesta would have been of the greatest value to the students of the history of religions, whether
THE TRUE VALUE OF THE SACRED BOOKS. 57
they admit a direct influence of Persian on Jewish and Christian thought, or whether they look upon the Zoroastrian idea of a spiritual followed by a material creation as simply an instructive parallel to the Philonic concept of the Logos, its realisation in the material world, or the o-dp£, and on Vohuman as a parallel to the Holy Ghost. But there is now no hope of our ever recovering what has been lost so long. We must admit, therefore, that, with all the Sacred Books of the East, our knowledge of ancient religions will always remain very imperfect, and that we are often forced to depend on writings, the date of which as writings is very late, if compared with the times which they profess to describe. It does not follow that there may not be ancient relics imbedded in modern books, but it does follow that these modern books have to be used with great caution, also that their translation can never be too literal. There is a dangerous tendency in Oriental scholarship, namely an almost unconscious inclination to translate certain passages in the Veda, the Zend Avesta, or the Buddhist Canon into language taken from the Old or New Testa- ment. In some respects this may be useful, as it brings the meaning of such passages nearer to us. But there is a danger also, for such translations are apt to produce an impression that the likeness is greater than it really is, so great in fact that it could be accounted for by actual borrowing only. It is right that we should try to bring Eastern thought and language as near as possible to our own thought and language, but we must be careful also not to obliterate the minute features peculiar to each, even though the English translation may sometimes sound strange and unidiornatic.
LECTURE III.
THE HISTORICAL RELATIONSHIP OF ANCIENT RELIGIONS AND PHILOSOPHIES.
How to compare Ancient Religions and Ancient Philosophies.
WE saw in the case of the Avesta how absolutely necessary it is that we should have formed to ourselves a clear conception of the relation in which the religions and philosophies of the ancient world stand to each other before we venture to compare them.
In former days, when little was known of the more distant degrees of relationship by which the historical nations of the world were bound together, the tempta- tion was great, whenever some similarity was pointed out between the beliefs of different nations, to suppose that one had borrowed from the other. The Greeks, as we saw, actually persuaded themselves that they had borrowed the names of some of their gods from Egypt, because they discovered a certain similarity between their own deities and those of that ancient country. But we know now that there was no foundation whatever for such an opinion. Christian theologians, from the days of Clement of Alexandria to our own time, were convinced that any startling coin-
ANCIENT RELIGIONS AND PHILOSOPHIES. 59
cidences between the Bible and the Sacred Books of other religions could be due to one cause only, namely, to borrowing on the part of the Gentiles ; while there were not wanting Greek philosophers who accused Christian teachers of having taken their best doctrines from Plato and Aristotle.
Common Humanity.
We must therefore, at the very outset, try to clear our mind on this subject. We may distinguish, I believe, between four different kinds of relationship. The most distant relationship is that which is simply due to our common humanity. Homines sumus, nihil humani a nobis alienum putamus. Much of what is possible in the Arctic regions is possible in the Antarctic regions also ; and nothing can be more interesting than when we succeed in discovering co- incidences between beliefs, superstitions, and customs, peculiar to nations entirely separated from each other, and sharing nothing but their common humanity. Such beliefs, superstitions, and customs possess a .peculiar importance in the eye of the psychologist, because, unless we extend the chapter of accidents very far indeed, they can hardly be deprived of a claim of being founded in human nature, and, in that case, of being, if not true, at all events, humanly speaking, legitimate. It is true that it has been found very difficult to prove any belief or any custom to be quite universal. Speech, no doubt, and, in one sense, certain processes of grammar too. a conception of number and an acceptance of certain numerals, may be called universal ; a belief in gods or supernatural powers is almost universal, and so is a sense of shame
60 LECTURE III.
with regard to sex, and a more or less accurate obser- vation of the changes of the moon and the seasons of the year.
But there is one point which, as anthropologists, we ought never to forget. We gain nothing, or very little, by simply collecting similar superstitions or similar customs among different and widely distant nations. This amounts to little more than if, as com- parative philologists, we discover that to be in love is in French amoureux and in Mandshu in Northern China amourou. This is curious, but nothing more. Or, if we compare customs, it is well known that a very strange custom, the so-called Couvade, has been discovered among different nations, both in ancient and modern times. It consists, as you know, in the father being put to bed when the mother has given birth to a child. But, besides the general likeness of the custom, which is certainly very extraordinary, its local varieties ought to have been far more carefully studied than they hitherto have been. In some cases it seems that the husband is most considerately nursed and attended to, in others he is simply kept quiet and prevented from making a noise in the house. In other countries, again, quite a new element comes in. The poor father is treated with the greatest malignity — is actually flogged by the female members of his household, and treated as a great criminal. Until we can discover the real motive of those strange varieties of the same custom, the mere fact that they have been met with in many places is no more than curious. It has no more scientific value than the coincidence between the French amoureux and the Mandshu amourou. Or, to take another instance,
ANCIENT RELIGIONS AND PHILOSOPHIES. 61
the mere fact that the Sanskrit Haritas is letter by letter the same word as the Greek Charites, teaches us nothing. It is only when we are able to show why the Haritas in India and the Charites in Greece received the same name, that these outward similar- ities gain a truly scientific value. To say that some- thing like the Couvade existed till very lately in Spain and likewise in China explains nothing-, or only explains ignotum per ignotius. Not till we can discover the common motive of a custom or a super- stition, founded in our common humanity, can we claim for these studies the name of Anthropology, can we speak of a real Science of Man l.
Common Language.
The second kind of relationship is that of a common language. Most people would think that community of blood was a stronger bond than community of language. But no one has ever defined what is meant by blood ; it is generally used as a mere metaphor ; and there remains in most cases the difficulty, or I should rather say the impossibility, of proving either the purity or the mixture of blood in the most ancient periods of man's existence on earth. Lastly, when we are concerned with beliefs and customs, it is after all the intellect that tells and not the blood. Now the outward or material form of the intellect is language, and when we have to deal with nations who belong to the same family of language, Semitic or Aryan or Polynesian, we ought to be prepared for similarities in their customs, in their religions, nay in their philo- sophical expressions also.
1 On the Couvade see Academy 1892, Nos. 1059. 1072, 1075.
62 LECTUEE III.
Common History.
Thirdly, there is what I should call a real historical relationship, as when nations, whether speaking related or unrelated languages, have been living together for a certain time before they became politically separated. The inhabitants of Iceland, for instance, not only speak a dialect closely connected with the Scandinavian languages, but they actually passed through the early periods of their history under the same political sway as the people of Norway. Common customs, there- fore, found in Iceland and Norway admit of an his- torical explanation. The same applies to existing American customs as compared with earlier English or Irish customs.
Common Neighbourhood.
Different from these three relationships is that of mere neighbourhood which may lead to a borrowing of certain things ready made on one side or the other, very different from a sharing in a common ancestral property. We know how much the Fins, for instance, have borrowed from their Scandinavian neighbours in customs, legends, religion, and language. It happens not unfrequently that two, if not three, of these rela- tionships exist at the same time. Thus, if we take the Semitic and the Aryan religions, any coincidences between them can be due to their common humanity only, except in cases where we can prove at a later time historical contact between an Aryan and a Semitic race. No one can doubt that the Phenicians were the schoolmasters, or at least the writing masters, of the Greeks ; also that in several parts of the world
ANCIENT RELIGIONS AND PHILOSOPHIES. 63
Greeks and Phenicians were brought into close rela- tions by commercial intercourse. Hence we can account by mere borrowing for the existence of Semitic names, such as Melikertes in Greek mytho- logy ; likewise for the grafting of Semitic ideas on Greek deities, as in the case of Aphrodite or Heracles. No Greek scholar, however, would suppose that the Greeks had actually borrowed their original concept and name of Aphrodite or Heracles from Semitic sources, though the grafting of Semitic ideas on Greek stems may have led in certain cases to a complete transfusion of Semitic thought into Greek forms. Generally the form of a name, and the phonetic laws which determine the general character of Semitic and Aryan words, are sufficient to enable us to decide who was the borrower and who was the lender in these exchanges ; still, there are some cases where for the present we are left in doubt.
Though no satisfactory Aryan etymology of Aphro- dite has yet been discovered, yet no one would claim a Semitic origin for such a word, as little as one would claim a Greek etymology for Melikertes. It is dis- appointing when we see the old idea of deriving Greek mythological names straight from Hebrew, not even from Phenician, revived and countenanced by so respected a Journal as the Jahrbucher fur classische Philologie. In the volume for 1892, pp. 177 seq., an article is published in which Dr. Heinrich Lewy derives Elysion from 'Elisha, one of the four sons of Javan (Gen. x. 4), and supposed to be a representative of Sicily and Lower Italy *. Suppose it were so, are we to
1 The Sirens are supposed by Dr. Lewy to have derived their name from Shir-chen. song of favour; Eileithyias from chilith,
64 LECTURE III.
believe that not only the Greeks, but other Aryan nations also, derived their belief in the West, as the abode of the Blessed, inHesperia and the Ma/capo^ vfja-oi, from the Jews'? I do not mean to say that we have a satisfactory etymology of Elysion in Greek ; all I say is, that there is nothing to suggest a foreign origin. Elysion seems to be connected with the Greek /}Au0 in *i\vOov, T>po move. In Sk. we have both a-ruh, to mount, and ava-ruh, to descend. We actually find Rv. I. 52, 9, r6ha7iarndiva&, the ascent or summit of heaven, and Rv. I. 105, 11, madhye arodhane diva&, where, if we could take rudh for ruh, we should have a strong analogy of an Elysion, as a heavenly abode ; while in