diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 04:35:18 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 04:35:18 -0700 |
| commit | 62927434cd090df8a2931b3e78adad71ae3971e1 (patch) | |
| tree | 6765115b3a20f0d2ab338ccc5f12b9bad731af76 /10833-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '10833-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 10833-h/10833-h.htm | 2818 |
1 files changed, 2818 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/10833-h/10833-h.htm b/10833-h/10833-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..905eacb --- /dev/null +++ b/10833-h/10833-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,2818 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> +<html> +<head> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /> +<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Essays of Arthur Schopenhauer; Religion, A Dialogue, Etc., by Arthur Schopenhauer</title> +<style type="text/css"> + /*<![CDATA[*/ + <!-- +body {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} +p {text-align: justify;} +blockquote {text-align: justify;} +h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 {text-align: center;} +pre {font-size: 0.7em;} + +hr {text-align: center; width: 50%;} +html>body hr {margin-right: 25%; margin-left: 25%; width: 50%;} +hr.full {width: 100%;} +html>body hr.full {margin-right: 0%; margin-left: 0%; width: 100%;} + +.note, .footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} + +.greek {cursor: help;} + +.poem {margin-left:10%; margin-right:10%; text-align: left;} +.poem .stanza {margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em;} +.poem p {margin: 0; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;} +.poem p.i2 {margin-left: 2em;} +.poem p.i4 {margin-left: 4em;} + a:link {color:blue; + text-decoration:none} + link {color:blue; + text-decoration:none} + a:visited {color:blue; + text-decoration:none} + a:hover {color:red} + --> + /*]]>*/ +</style> +</head> +<body> +<div>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10833 ***</div> +<h1>The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Essays of Arthur Schopenhauer; Religion, +A Dialogue, Etc., by Arthur Schopenhauer, Translated by T. Bailey Saunders</h1> + + +</pre> +<hr class="full" /> +<br /> +<br /> +<h2>THE ESSAYS OF ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER:</h2> +<h1>RELIGION: A DIALOGUE, ETC.</h1> +<center>TRANSLATED BY T. BAILEY SAUNDERS, M.A.</center> +<br /> +<br /> +<hr /> +<a name="TOC" id="TOC"><!-- TOC --></a> +<h2>CONTENTS.</h2> +<p><a href="#RULE4_1">PREFATORY NOTE</a></p> +<p><a href="#RULE4_2">RELIGION: A DIALOGUE.</a></p> +<p><a href="#RULE4_3">A FEW WORDS ON PANTHEISM.</a></p> +<p><a href="#RULE4_4">ON BOOKS AND READING.</a></p> +<p><a href="#RULE4_5">PHYSIOGNOMY.</a></p> +<p><a href="#RULE4_6">PSYCHOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS.</a></p> +<p><a href="#RULE4_7">THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.</a></p> +<hr /> +<a name="RULE4_1" id="RULE4_1"><!-- RULE4 1 --></a> +<h2>PREFATORY NOTE</h2> +<p>Schopenhauer is one of the few philosophers who can be generally +understood without a commentary. All his theories claim to be drawn +direct from the facts, to be suggested by observation, and to +interpret the world as it is; and whatever view he takes, he is +constant in his appeal to the experience of common life. This +characteristic endows his style with a freshness and vigor which +would be difficult to match in the philosophical writing of any +country, and impossible in that of Germany. If it were asked +whether there were any circumstances apart from heredity, to which +he owed his mental habit, the answer might be found in the abnormal +character of his early education, his acquaintance with the world +rather than with books, the extensive travels of his boyhood, his +ardent pursuit of knowledge for its own sake and without regard to +the emoluments and endowments of learning. He was trained in +realities even more than in ideas; and hence he is original, +forcible, clear, an enemy of all philosophic indefiniteness and +obscurity; so that it may well be said of him, in the words of a +writer in the <i>Revue Contemporaine, ce n'est pas un philosophe +comme les autres, c'est un philosophe qui a vu le monde</i>.</p> +<p>It is not my purpose, nor would it be possible within the limits +of a prefatory note, to attempt an account of Schopenhauer's +philosophy, to indicate its sources, or to suggest or rebut the +objections which may be taken to it. M. Ribot, in his excellent +little book, [Footnote: <i>La Philosophie de Schopenhauer</i>, par +Th. Ribot.] has done all that is necessary in this direction. But +the essays here presented need a word of explanation. It should be +observed, and Schopenhauer himself is at pains to point out, that +his system is like a citadel with a hundred gates: at whatever +point you take it up, wherever you make your entrance, you are on +the road to the center. In this respect his writings resemble a +series of essays composed in support of a single thesis; a +circumstance which led him to insist, more emphatically even than +most philosophers, that for a proper understanding of his system it +was necessary to read every line he had written. Perhaps it would +be more correct to describe <i>Die Welt als Wille und +Vorstellung</i> as his main thesis, and his other treatises as +merely corollary to it. The essays in this volume form part of the +corollary; they are taken from a collection published towards the +close of Schopenhauer's life, and by him entitled <i>Parerga und +Paralipomena</i>, as being in the nature of surplusage and +illustrative of his main position. They are by far the most popular +of his works, and since their first publication in 1851, they have +done much to build up his fame. Written so as to be intelligible +enough in themselves, the tendency of many of them is towards the +fundamental idea on which his system is based. It may therefore be +convenient to summarize that idea in a couple of sentences; more +especially as Schopenhauer sometimes writes as if his advice had +been followed and his readers were acquainted with the whole of his +work.</p> +<p>All philosophy is in some sense the endeavor to find a unifying +principle, to discover the most general conception underlying the +whole field of nature and of knowledge. By one of those bold +generalizations which occasionally mark a real advance in Science, +Schopenhauer conceived this unifying principle, this underlying +unity, to consist in something analogous to that <i>will</i> which +self-consciousness reveals to us. <i>Will</i> is, according to him, +the fundamental reality of the world, the thing-in-itself; and its +objectivation is what is presented in phenomena. The struggle of +the will to realize itself evolves the organism, which in its turn +evolves intelligence as the servant of the will. And in practical +life the antagonism between the will and the intellect arises from +the fact that the former is the metaphysical substance, the latter +something accidental and secondary. And further, will is +<i>desire</i>, that is to say, need of something; hence need and +pain are what is positive in the world, and the only possible +happiness is a negation, a renunciation of <i>the will to +live</i>.</p> +<p>It is instructive to note, as M. Ribot points out, that in +finding the origin of all things, not in intelligence, as some of +his predecessors in philosophy had done, but in will, or the force +of nature, from which all phenomena have developed, Schopenhauer +was anticipating something of the scientific spirit of the +nineteenth century. To this it may be added that in combating the +method of Fichte and Hegel, who spun a system out of abstract +ideas, and in discarding it for one based on observation and +experience, Schopenhauer can be said to have brought down +philosophy from heaven to earth.</p> +<p>In Schopenhauer's view the various forms of Religion are no less +a product of human ingenuity than Art or Science. He holds, in +effect, that all religions take their rise in the desire to explain +the world; and that, in regard to truth and error, they differ, in +the main, not by preaching monotheism polytheism or pantheism, but +in so far as they recognize pessimism or optimism as the true +description of life. Hence any religion which looked upon the world +as being radically evil appealed to him as containing an +indestructible element of truth. I have endeavored to present his +view of two of the great religions of the world in the extract +which concludes this volume, and to which I have given the title of +<i>The Christian System</i>. The tenor of it is to show that, +however little he may have been in sympathy with the supernatural +element, he owed much to the moral doctrines of Christianity and of +Buddhism, between which he traced great resemblance. In the +following <i>Dialogue</i> he applies himself to a discussion of the +practical efficacy of religious forms; and though he was an enemy +of clericalism, his choice of a method which allows both the +affirmation and the denial of that efficacy to be presented with +equal force may perhaps have been directed by the consciousness +that he could not side with either view to the exclusion of the +other. In any case his practical philosophy was touched with the +spirit of Christianity. It was more than artistic enthusiasm which +led him in profound admiration to the Madonna di San Sisto:</p> +<p class="poem">Sie trägt zur Welt ihn, und er schaut +entsetzt<br /> +In ihrer Gräu'l chaotische Verwirrung,<br /> +In ihres Tobens wilde Raserei,<br /> +In ihres Treibens nie geheilte Thorheit,<br /> +In ihrer Quaalen nie gestillten Schmerz;<br /> +Entsetzt: doch strahlet Rub' and Zuversicht<br /> +Und Siegesglanz sein Aug', verkündigend<br /> +Schon der Erlösung ewige gewissheit.</p> +<p>Pessimism is commonly and erroneously supposed to be the +distinguishing feature of Schopenhauer's system. It is right to +remember that the same fundamental view of the world is presented +by Christianity, to say nothing of Oriental religions.</p> +<p>That Schopenhauer conceives life as an evil is a deduction, and +possibly a mistaken deduction, from his metaphysical theory. +Whether his scheme of things is correct or not—and it shares +the common fate of all metaphysical systems in being unverifiable, +and to that extent unprofitable—he will in the last resort +have made good his claim to be read by his insight into the varied +needs of human life. It may be that a future age will consign his +metaphysics to the philosophical lumber-room; but he is a literary +artist as well as a philosopher, and he can make a bid for fame in +either capacity. What is remarked with much truth of many another +writer, that he suggests more than he achieves, is in the highest +degree applicable to Schopenhauer; and his <i>obiter dicta</i>, his +sayings by the way, will always find an audience.</p> +<p>T.B. SAUNDERS.</p> +<hr /> +<a name="RULE4_2" id="RULE4_2"><!-- RULE4 2 --></a> +<h2>RELIGION: A DIALOGUE.</h2> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Between ourselves, my dear fellow, I don't +care about the way you sometimes have of exhibiting your talent for +philosophy; you make religion a subject for sarcastic remarks, and +even for open ridicule. Every one thinks his religion sacred, and +therefore you ought to respect it.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. That doesn't follow! I don't see why, +because other people are simpletons, I should have any regard for a +pack of lies. I respect truth everywhere, and so I can't respect +what is opposed to it. My maxim is <i>Vigeat veritas et pereat +mundus</i>, like the lawyers' <i>Fiat justitia et pereat +mundus</i>. Every profession ought to have an analogous advice.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Then I suppose doctors should say <i>Fiant +pilulae et pereat mundus</i>,—there wouldn't be much +difficulty about that!</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. Heaven forbid! You must take everything +<i>cum grano salis</i>.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Exactly; that's why I want you to take +religion <i>cum grano salis</i>. I want you to see that one must +meet the requirements of the people according to the measure of +their comprehension. Where you have masses of people of crude +susceptibilities and clumsy intelligence, sordid in their pursuits +and sunk in drudgery, religion provides the only means of +proclaiming and making them feel the hight import of life. For the +average man takes an interest, primarily, in nothing but what will +satisfy his physical needs and hankerings, and beyond this, give +him a little amusement and pastime. Founders of religion and +philosophers come into the world to rouse him from his stupor and +point to the lofty meaning of existence; philosophers for the few, +the emancipated, founders of religion for the many, for humanity at +large. For, as your friend Plato has said, the multitude can't be +philosophers, and you shouldn't forget that. Religion is the +metaphysics of the masses; by all means let them keep it: let it +therefore command external respect, for to discredit it is to take +it away. Just as they have popular poetry, and the popular wisdom +of proverbs, so they must have popular metaphysics too: for mankind +absolutely needs <i>an interpretation of life</i>; and this, again, +must be suited to popular comprehension. Consequently, this +interpretation is always an allegorical investiture of the truth: +and in practical life and in its effects on the feelings, that is +to say, as a rule of action and as a comfort and consolation in +suffering and death, it accomplishes perhaps just as much as the +truth itself could achieve if we possessed it. Don't take offense +at its unkempt, grotesque and apparently absurd form; for with your +education and learning, you have no idea of the roundabout ways by +which people in their crude state have to receive their knowledge +of deep truths. The various religions are only various forms in +which the truth, which taken by itself is above their +comprehension, is grasped and realized by the masses; and truth +becomes inseparable from these forms. Therefore, my dear sir, don't +take it amiss if I say that to make a mockery of these forms is +both shallow and unjust.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. But isn't it every bit as shallow and unjust +to demand that there shall be no other system of metaphysics but +this one, cut out as it is to suit the requirements and +comprehension of the masses? that its doctrine shall be the limit +of human speculation, the standard of all thought, so that the +metaphysics of the few, the emancipated, as you call them, must be +devoted only to confirming, strengthening, and explaining the +metaphysics of the masses? that the highest powers of human +intelligence shall remain unused and undeveloped, even be nipped in +the bud, in order that their activity may not thwart the popular +metaphysics? And isn't this just the very claim which religion sets +up? Isn't it a little too much to have tolerance and delicate +forbearance preached by what is intolerance and cruelty itself? +Think of the heretical tribunals, inquisitions, religious wars, +crusades, Socrates' cup of poison, Bruno's and Vanini's death in +the flames! Is all this to-day quite a thing of the past? How can +genuine philosophical effort, sincere search after truth, the +noblest calling of the noblest men, be let and hindered more +completely than by a conventional system of metaphysics enjoying a +State monopoly, the principles of which are impressed into every +head in earliest youth, so earnestly, so deeply, and so firmly, +that, unless the mind is miraculously elastic, they remain +indelible. In this way the groundwork of all healthy reason is once +for all deranged; that is to say, the capacity for original thought +and unbiased judgment, which is weak enough in itself, is, in +regard to those subjects to which it might be applied, for ever +paralyzed and ruined.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles.</i> Which means, I suppose, that people have +arrived at a conviction which they won't give up in order to +embrace yours instead.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. Ah! if it were only a conviction based on +insight. Then one could bring arguments to bear, and the battle +would be fought with equal weapons. But religions admittedly +appeal, not to conviction as the result of argument, but to belief +as demanded by revelation. And as the capacity for believing is +strongest in childhood, special care is taken to make sure of this +tender age. This has much more to do with the doctrines of belief +taking root than threats and reports of miracles. If, in early +childhood, certain fundamental views and doctrines are paraded with +unusual solemnity, and an air of the greatest earnestness never +before visible in anything else; if, at the same time, the +possibility of a doubt about them be completely passed over, or +touched upon only to indicate that doubt is the first step to +eternal perdition, the resulting impression will be so deep that, +as a rule, that is, in almost every case, doubt about them will be +almost as impossible as doubt about one's own existence. Hardly one +in ten thousand will have the strength of mind to ask himself +seriously and earnestly—is that true? To call such as can do +it strong minds, <i>esprits forts</i>, is a description more apt +than is generally supposed. But for the ordinary mind there is +nothing so absurd or revolting but what, if inculcated in that way, +the strongest belief in it will strike root. If, for example, the +killing of a heretic or infidel were essential to the future +salvation of his soul, almost every one would make it the chief +event of his life, and in dying would draw consolation and strength +from the remembrance that he had succeeded. As a matter of fact, +almost every Spaniard in days gone by used to look upon an <i>auto +da fe</i> as the most pious of all acts and one most agreeable to +God. A parallel to this may be found in the way in which the Thugs +(a religious sect in India, suppressed a short time ago by the +English, who executed numbers of them) express their sense of +religion and their veneration for the goddess Kali; they take every +opportunity of murdering their friends and traveling companions, +with the object of getting possession of their goods, and in the +serious conviction that they are thereby doing a praiseworthy +action, conducive to their eternal welfare. [Footnote: Cf. +Illustrations of the history and practice of the Thugs, London, +1837; also the <i>Edinburg Review</i>, Oct.-Jan., 1836-7.] The +power of religious dogma, when inculcated early, is such as to +stifle conscience, compassion, and finally every feeling of +humanity. But if you want to see with your own eyes and close at +hand what timely inoculation will accomplish, look at the English. +Here is a nation favored before all others by nature; endowed, more +than all others, with discernment, intelligence, power of judgment, +strength of character; look at them, abased and made ridiculous, +beyond all others, by their stupid ecclesiastical superstition, +which appears amongst their other abilities like a fixed idea or +monomania. For this they have to thank the circumstance that +education is in the hands of the clergy, whose endeavor it is to +impress all the articles of belief, at the earliest age, in a way +that amounts to a kind of paralysis of the brain; this in its turn +expresses itself all their life in an idiotic bigotry, which makes +otherwise most sensible and intelligent people amongst them degrade +themselves so that one can't make head or tail of them. If you +consider how essential to such a masterpiece is inoculation in the +tender age of childhood, the missionary system appears no longer +only as the acme of human importunity, arrogance and impertinence, +but also as an absurdity, if it doesn't confine itself to nations +which are still in their infancy, like Caffirs, Hottentots, South +Sea Islanders, etc. Amongst these races it is successful; but in +India, the Brahmans treat the discourses of the missionaries with +contemptuous smiles of approbation, or simply shrug their +shoulders. And one may say generally that the proselytizing efforts +of the missionaries in India, in spite of the most advantageous +facilities, are, as a rule, a failure. An authentic report in the +Vol. XXI. of the Asiatic Journal (1826) states that after so many +years of missionary activity not more than three hundred living +converts were to be found in the whole of India, where the +population of the English possessions alone comes to one hundred +and fifteen millions; and at the same time it is admitted that the +Christian converts are distinguished for their extreme immorality. +Three hundred venal and bribed souls out of so many millions! There +is no evidence that things have gone better with Christianity in +India since then, in spite of the fact that the missionaries are +now trying, contrary to stipulation and in schools exclusively +designed for secular English instruction, to work upon the +children's minds as they please, in order to smuggle in +Christianity; against which the Hindoos are most jealously on their +guard. As I have said, childhood is the time to sow the seeds of +belief, and not manhood; more especially where an earlier faith has +taken root. An acquired conviction such as is feigned by adults is, +as a rule, only the mask for some kind of personal interest. And it +is the feeling that this is almost bound to be the case which makes +a man who has changed his religion in mature years an object of +contempt to most people everywhere; who thus show that they look +upon religion, not as a matter of reasoned conviction, but merely +as a belief inoculated in childhood, before any test can be +applied. And that they are right in their view of religion is also +obvious from the way in which not only the masses, who are blindly +credulous, but also the clergy of every religion, who, as such, +have faithfully and zealously studied its sources, foundations, +dogmas and disputed points, cleave as a body to the religion of +their particular country; consequently for a minister of one +religion or confession to go over to another is the rarest thing in +the world. The Catholic clergy, for example, are fully convinced of +the truth of all the tenets of their Church, and so are the +Protestant clergy of theirs, and both defend the principles of +their creeds with like zeal. And yet the conviction is governed +merely by the country native to each; to the South German +ecclesiastic the truth of the Catholic dogma is quite obvious, to +the North German, the Protestant. If then, these convictions are +based on objective reasons, the reasons must be climatic, and +thrive, like plants, some only here, some only there. The +convictions of those who are thus locally convinced are taken on +trust and believed by the masses everywhere.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Well, no harm is done, and it doesn't make +any real difference. As a fact, Protestantism is more suited to the +North, Catholicism to the South.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. So it seems. Still I take a higher +standpoint, and keep in view a more important object, the progress, +namely, of the knowledge of truth among mankind. And from this +point of view, it is a terrible thing that, wherever a man is born, +certain propositions are inculcated in him in earliest youth, and +he is assured that he may never have any doubts about them, under +penalty of thereby forfeiting eternal salvation; propositions, I +mean, which affect the foundation of all our other knowledge and +accordingly determine for ever, and, if they are false, distort for +ever, the point of view from which our knowledge starts; and as, +further, the corollaries of these propositions touch the entire +system of our intellectual attainments at every point, the whole of +human knowledge is thoroughly adulterated by them. Evidence of this +is afforded by every literature; the most striking by that of the +Middle Age, but in a too considerable degree by that of the +fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Look at even the first minds of +all those epochs; how paralyzed they are by false fundamental +positions like these; how, more especially, all insight into the +true constitution and working of nature is, as it were, blocked up. +During the whole of the Christian period Theism lies like a +mountain on all intellectual, and chiefly on all philosophical +efforts, and arrests or stunts all progress. For the scientific men +of these ages God, devil, angels, demons hid the whole of nature; +no inquiry was followed to the end, nothing ever thoroughly +examined; everything which went beyond the most obvious casual +nexus was immediately set down to those personalities. "<i>It was +at once explained by a reference to God, angels or demons</i>," as +Pomponatius expressed himself when the matter was being discussed, +"<i>and philosophers at any rate have nothing analogous</i>." There +is, to be sure, a suspicion of irony in this statement of +Pomponatius, as his perfidy in other matters is known; still, he is +only giving expression to the general way of thinking of his age. +And if, on the other hand, any one possessed the rare quality of an +elastic mind, which alone could burst the bonds, his writings and +he himself with them were burnt; as happened to Bruno and Vanini. +How completely an ordinary mind is paralyzed by that early +preparation in metaphysics is seen in the most vivid way and on its +most ridiculous side, where such a one undertakes to criticise the +doctrines of an alien creed. The efforts of the ordinary man are +generally found to be directed to a careful exhibition of the +incongruity of its dogmas with those of his own belief: he is at +great pains to show that not only do they not say, but certainly do +not mean, the same thing; and with that he thinks, in his +simplicity, that he has demonstrated the falsehood of the alien +creed. He really never dreams of putting the question which of the +two may be right; his own articles of belief he looks upon as +<i>à priori</i> true and certain principles.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. So that's your higher point of view? I assure +you there is a higher still. <i>First live, then philosophize</i> +is a maxim of more comprehensive import than appears at first +sight. The first thing to do is to control the raw and evil +dispositions of the masses, so as to keep them from pushing +injustice to extremes, and from committing cruel, violent and +disgraceful acts. If you were to wait until they had recognized and +grasped the truth, you would undoubtedly come too late; and truth, +supposing that it had been found, would surpass their powers of +comprehension. In any case an allegorical investiture of it, a +parable or myth, is all that would be of any service to them. As +Kant said, there must be a public standard of Right and Virtue; it +must always flutter high overhead. It is a matter of indifference +what heraldic figures are inscribed on it, so long as they signify +what is meant. Such an allegorical representation of truth is +always and everywhere, for humanity at large, a serviceable +substitute for a truth to which it can never attain,—for a +philosophy which it can never grasp; let alone the fact that it is +daily changing its shape, and has in no form as yet met with +general acceptance. Practical aims, then, my good Philalethes, are +in every respect superior to theoretical.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. What you say is very like the ancient advice +of Timaeus of Locrus, the Pythagorean, <i>stop the mind with +falsehood if you can't speed it with truth</i>. I almost suspect +that your plan is the one which is so much in vogue just now, that +you want to impress upon me that</p> +<p class="poem">The hour is nigh<br /> +When we may feast in quiet.</p> +<p>You recommend us, in fact, to take timely precautions, so that +the waves of the discontented raging masses mayn't disturb us at +table. But the whole point of view is as false as it is now-a-days +popular and commended; and so I make haste to enter a protest +against it. It is <i>false</i>, that state, justice, law cannot be +upheld without the assistance of religion and its dogmas; and that +justice and public order need religion as a necessary complement, +if legislative enactments are to be carried out. It is +<i>false</i>, were it repeated a hundred times. An effective and +striking argument to the contrary is afforded by the ancients, +especially the Greeks. They had nothing at all of what we +understand by religion. They had no sacred documents, no dogma to +be learned and its acceptance furthered by every one, its +principles to be inculcated early on the young. Just as little was +moral doctrine preached by the ministers of religion, nor did the +priests trouble themselves about morality or about what the people +did or left undone. Not at all. The duty of the priests was +confined to temple-ceremonial, prayers, hymns, sacrifices, +processions, lustrations and the like, the object of which was +anything but the moral improvement of the individual. What was +called religion consisted, more especially in the cities, in giving +temples here and there to some of the gods of the greater tribes, +in which the worship described was carried on as a state matter, +and was consequently, in fact, an affair of police. No one, except +the functionaries performing, was in any way compelled to attend, +or even to believe in it. In the whole of antiquity there is no +trace of any obligation to believe in any particular dogma. Merely +in the case of an open denial of the existence of the gods, or any +other reviling of them, a penalty was imposed, and that on account +of the insult offered to the state, which served those gods; beyond +this it was free to everyone to think of them what he pleased. If +anyone wanted to gain the favor of those gods privately, by prayer +or sacrifice, it was open to him to do so at his own expense and at +his own risk; if he didn't do it, no one made any objection, least +of all the state. In the case of the Romans, everyone had his own +Lares and Penates at home; they were, however, in reality, only the +venerated busts of ancestors. Of the immortality of the soul and a +life beyond the grave, the ancients had no firm, clear or, least of +all, dogmatically fixed idea, but very loose, fluctuating, +indefinite and problematical notions, everyone in his own way: and +the ideas about the gods were just as varying, individual and +vague. There was, therefore, really no <i>religion</i>, in our +sense of the word, amongst the ancients. But did anarchy and +lawlessness prevail amongst them on that account? Is not law and +civil order, rather, so much their work, that it still forms the +foundation of our own? Was there not complete protection for +property, even though it consisted for the most part of slaves? And +did not this state of things last for more than a thousand years? +So that I can't recognize, I must even protest against the +practical aims and the necessity of religion in the sense indicated +by you, and so popular now-a-days, that is, as an indispensable +foundation of all legislative arrangements. For, if you take that +point of view, the pure and sacred endeavor after truth would, to +say the least, appear quixotic, and even criminal, if it ventured, +in its feeling of justice, to denounce the authoritative creed as a +usurper who had taken possession of the throne of truth and +maintained his position by keeping up the deception.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. But religion is not opposed to truth; it +itself teaches truth. And as the range of its activity is not a +narrow lecture room, but the world and humanity at large, religion +must conform to the requirements and comprehension of an audience +so numerous and so mixed. Religion must not let truth appear in its +naked form; or, to use a medical simile, it must not exhibit it +pure, but must employ a mythical vehicle, a medium, as it were. You +can also compare truth in this respect to certain chemical stuffs +which in themselves are gaseous, but which for medicinal uses, as +also for preservation or transmission, must be bound to a stable, +solid base, because they would otherwise volatilize. Chlorine gas, +for example, is for all purposes applied only in the form of +chlorides. But if truth, pure, abstract and free from all mythical +alloy, is always to remain unattainable, even by philosophers, it +might be compared to fluorine, which cannot even be isolated, but +must always appear in combination with other elements. Or, to take +a less scientific simile, truth, which is inexpressible except by +means of myth and allegory, is like water, which can be carried +about only in vessels; a philosopher who insists on obtaining it +pure is like a man who breaks the jug in order to get the water by +itself. This is, perhaps, an exact analogy. At any rate, religion +is truth allegorically and mythically expressed, and so rendered +attainable and digestible by mankind in general. Mankind couldn't +possibly take it pure and unmixed, just as we can't breathe pure +oxygen; we require an addition of four times its bulk in nitrogen. +In plain language, the profound meaning, the high aim of life, can +only be unfolded and presented to the masses symbolically, because +they are incapable of grasping it in its true signification. +Philosophy, on the other hand, should be like the Eleusinian +mysteries, for the few, the <i>élite</i>.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. I understand. It comes, in short, to truth +wearing the garment of falsehood. But in doing so it enters on a +fatal alliance. What a dangerous weapon is put into the hands of +those who are authorized to employ falsehood as the vehicle of +truth! If it is as you say, I fear the damage caused by the +falsehood will be greater than any advantage the truth could ever +produce. Of course, if the allegory were admitted to be such, I +should raise no objection; but with the admission it would rob +itself of all respect, and consequently, of all utility. The +allegory must, therefore, put in a claim to be true in the proper +sense of the word, and maintain the claim; while, at the most, it +is true only in an allegorical sense. Here lies the irreparable +mischief, the permanent evil; and this is why religion has always +been and always will be in conflict with the noble endeavor after +pure truth.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Oh no! that danger is guarded against. If +religion mayn't exactly confess its allegorical nature, it gives +sufficient indication of it.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. How so?</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. In its mysteries. "Mystery," is in reality +only a technical theological term for religious allegory. All +religions have their mysteries. Properly speaking, a mystery is a +dogma which is plainly absurd, but which, nevertheless, conceals in +itself a lofty truth, and one which by itself would be completely +incomprehensible to the ordinary understanding of the raw +multitude. The multitude accepts it in this disguise on trust, and +believes it, without being led astray by the absurdity of it, which +even to its intelligence is obvious; and in this way it +participates in the kernel of the matter so far as it is possible +for it to do so. To explain what I mean, I may add that even in +philosophy an attempt has been made to make use of a mystery. +Pascal, for example, who was at once a pietist, a mathematician, +and a philosopher, says in this threefold capacity: <i>God is +everywhere center and nowhere periphery</i>. Malebranche has also +the just remark: <i>Liberty is a mystery</i>. One could go a step +further and maintain that in religions everything is mystery. For +to impart truth, in the proper sense of the word, to the multitude +in its raw state is absolutely impossible; all that can fall to its +lot is to be enlightened by a mythological reflection of it. Naked +truth is out of place before the eyes of the profane vulgar; it can +only make its appearance thickly veiled. Hence, it is unreasonable +to require of a religion that it shall be true in the proper sense +of the word; and this, I may observe in passing, is now-a-days the +absurd contention of Rationalists and Supernaturalists alike. Both +start from the position that religion must be the real truth; and +while the former demonstrate that it is not the truth, the latter +obstinately maintain that it is; or rather, the former dress up and +arrange the allegorical element in such a way, that, in the proper +sense of the word, it could be true, but would be, in that case, a +platitude; while the latter wish to maintain that it is true in the +proper sense of the word, without any further dressing; a belief, +which, as we ought to know is only to be enforced by inquisitions +and the stake. As a fact, however, myth and allegory really form +the proper element of religion; and under this indispensable +condition, which is imposed by the intellectual limitation of the +multitude, religion provides a sufficient satisfaction for those +metaphysical requirements of mankind which are indestructible. It +takes the place of that pure philosophical truth which is +infinitely difficult and perhaps never attainable.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. Ah! just as a wooden leg takes the place of +a natural one; it supplies what is lacking, barely does duty for +it, claims to be regarded as a natural leg, and is more or less +artfully put together. The only difference is that, whilst a +natural leg as a rule preceded the wooden one, religion has +everywhere got the start of philosophy.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. That may be, but still for a man who hasn't a +natural leg, a wooden one is of great service. You must bear in +mind that the metaphysical needs of mankind absolutely require +satisfaction, because the horizon of men's thoughts must have a +background and not remain unbounded. Man has, as a rule, no faculty +for weighing reasons and discriminating between what is false and +what is true; and besides, the labor which nature and the needs of +nature impose upon him, leaves him no time for such enquiries, or +for the education which they presuppose. In his case, therefore, it +is no use talking of a reasoned conviction; he has to fall back on +belief and authority. If a really true philosophy were to take the +place of religion, nine-tenths at least of mankind would have to +receive it on authority; that is to say, it too would be a matter +of faith, for Plato's dictum, that the multitude can't be +philosophers, will always remain true. Authority, however, is an +affair of time and circumstance alone, and so it can't be bestowed +on that which has only reason in its favor, it must accordingly be +allowed to nothing but what has acquired it in the course of +history, even if it is only an allegorical representation of truth. +Truth in this form, supported by authority, appeals first of all to +those elements in the human constitution which are strictly +metaphysical, that is to say, to the need man feels of a theory in +regard to the riddle of existence which forces itself upon his +notice, a need arising from the consciousness that behind the +physical in the world there is a metaphysical, something permanent +as the foundation of constant change. Then it appeals to the will, +to the fears and hopes of mortal beings living in constant +struggle; for whom, accordingly, religion creates gods and demons +whom they can cry to, appease and win over. Finally, it appeals to +that moral consciousness which is undeniably present in man, lends +to it that corroboration and support without which it would not +easily maintain itself in the struggle against so many temptations. +It is just from this side that religion affords an inexhaustible +source of consolation and comfort in the innumerable trials of +life, a comfort which does not leave men in death, but rather then +only unfolds its full efficacy. So religion may be compared to one +who takes a blind man by the hand and leads him, because he is +unable to see for himself, whose concern it is to reach his +destination, not to look at everything by the way.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. That is certainly the strong point of +religion. If it is a fraud, it is a pious fraud; that is +undeniable. But this makes priests something between deceivers and +teachers of morality; they daren't teach the real truth, as you +have quite rightly explained, even if they knew it, which is not +the case. A true philosophy, then, can always exist, but not a true +religion; true, I mean, in the proper understanding of the word, +not merely in that flowery or allegorical sense which you have +described; a sense in which all religions would be true, only in +various degrees. It is quite in keeping with the inextricable +mixture of weal and woe, honesty and deceit, good and evil, +nobility and baseness, which is the average characteristic of the +world everywhere, that the most important, the most lofty, the most +sacred truths can make their appearance only in combination with a +lie, can even borrow strength from a lie as from something that +works more powerfully on mankind; and, as revelation, must be +ushered in by a lie. This might, indeed, be regarded as the +<i>cachet</i> of the moral world. However, we won't give up the +hope that mankind will eventually reach a point of maturity and +education at which it can on the one side produce, and on the other +receive, the true philosophy. <i>Simplex sigillum veri</i>: the +naked truth must be so simple and intelligible that it can be +imparted to all in its true form, without any admixture of myth and +fable, without disguising it in the form of <i>religion</i>.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. You've no notion how stupid most people +are.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. I am only expressing a hope which I can't +give up. If it were fulfilled, truth in its simple and intelligible +form would of course drive religion from the place it has so long +occupied as its representative, and by that very means kept open +for it. The time would have come when religion would have carried +out her object and completed her course: the race she had brought +to years of discretion she could dismiss, and herself depart in +peace: that would be the <i>euthanasia</i> of religion. But as long +as she lives, she has two faces, one of truth, one of fraud. +According as you look at one or the other, you will bear her favor +or ill-will. Religion must be regarded as a necessary evil, its +necessity resting on the pitiful imbecility of the great majority +of mankind, incapable of grasping the truth, and therefore +requiring, in its pressing need, something to take its place.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Really, one would think that you philosophers +had truth in a cupboard, and that all you had to do was to go and +get it!</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. Well, if we haven't got it, it is chiefly +owing to the pressure put upon philosophy by religion at all times +and in all places. People have tried to make the expression and +communication of truth, even the contemplation and discovery of it, +impossible, by putting children, in their earliest years, into the +hands of priests to be manipulated; to have the lines, in which +their fundamental thoughts are henceforth to run, laid down with +such firmness as, in essential matters, to be fixed and determined +for this whole life. When I take up the writings even of the best +intellects of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, (more +especially if I have been engaged in Oriental studies), I am +sometimes shocked to see how they are paralyzed and hemmed in on +all sides by Jewish ideas. How can anyone think out the true +philosophy when he is prepared like this?</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Even if the true philosophy were to be +discovered, religion wouldn't disappear from the world, as you seem +to think. There can't be one system of metaphysics for everybody; +that's rendered impossible by the natural differences of +intellectual power between man and man, and the differences, too, +which education makes. It is a necessity for the great majority of +mankind to engage in that severe bodily labor which cannot be +dispensed with if the ceaseless requirements of the whole race are +to be satisfied. Not only does this leave the majority no time for +education, for learning, for contemplation; but by virtue of the +hard and fast antagonism between muscles and mind, the intelligence +is blunted by so much exhausting bodily labor, and becomes heavy, +clumsy, awkward, and consequently incapable of grasping any other +than quite simple situations. At least nine-tenths of the human +race falls under this category. But still the people require a +system of metaphysics, that is, an account of the world and our +existence, because such an account belongs to the most natural +needs of mankind, they require a popular system; and to be popular +it must combine many rare qualities. It must be easily understood, +and at the same time possess, on the proper points, a certain +amount of obscurity, even of impenetrability; then a correct and +satisfactory system of morality must be bound up with its dogmas; +above all, it must afford inexhaustible consolation in suffering +and death; the consequence of all this is, that it can only be true +in an allegorical and not in a real sense. Further, it must have +the support of an authority which is impressive by its great age, +by being universally recognized, by its documents, their tone and +utterances; qualities which are so extremely difficult to combine +that many a man wouldn't be so ready, if he considered the matter, +to help to undermine a religion, but would reflect that what he is +attacking is a people's most sacred treasure. If you want to form +an opinion on religion, you should always bear in mind the +character of the great multitude for which it is destined, and form +a picture to yourself of its complete inferiority, moral and +intellectual. It is incredible how far this inferiority goes, and +how perseveringly a spark of truth will glimmer on even under the +crudest covering of monstrous fable or grotesque ceremony, clinging +indestructibly, like the odor of musk, to everything that has once +come into contact with it. In illustration of this, consider the +profound wisdom of the Upanishads, and then look at the mad +idolatry in the India of to-day, with its pilgrimages, processions +and festivities, or at the insane and ridiculous goings-on of the +Saniassi. Still one can't deny that in all this insanity and +nonsense there lies some obscure purpose which accords with, or is +a reflection of the profound wisdom I mentioned. But for the brute +multitude, it had to be dressed up in this form. In such a contrast +as this we have the two poles of humanity, the wisdom of the +individual and the bestiality of the many, both of which find their +point of contact in the moral sphere. That saying from the Kurral +must occur to everybody. <i>Base people look like men, but I have +never seen their exact counterpart</i>. The man of education may, +all the same, interpret religion to himself <i>cum grano salis</i>; +the man of learning, the contemplative spirit may secretly exchange +it for a philosophy. But here again one philosophy wouldn't suit +everybody; by the laws of affinity every system would draw to +itself that public to whose education and capacities it was most +suited. So there is always an inferior metaphysical system of the +schools for the educated multitude, and a higher one for the +<i>élite</i>. Kant's lofty doctrine, for instance, had to be +degraded to the level of the schools and ruined by such men as +Fries, Krug and Salat. In short, here, if anywhere, Goethe's maxim +is true, <i>One does not suit all</i>. Pure faith in revelation and +pure metaphysics are for the two extremes, and for the intermediate +steps mutual modifications of both in innumerable combinations and +gradations. And this is rendered necessary by the immeasurable +differences which nature and education have placed between man and +man.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. The view you take reminds me seriously of +the mysteries of the ancients, which you mentioned just now. Their +fundamental purpose seems to have been to remedy the evil arising +from the differences of intellectual capacity and education. The +plan was, out of the great multitude utterly impervious to unveiled +truth, to select certain persons who might have it revealed to them +up to a given point; out of these, again, to choose others to whom +more would be revealed, as being able to grasp more; and so on up +to the Epopts. These grades correspond to the little, greater and +greatest mysteries. The arrangement was founded on a correct +estimate of the intellectual inequality of mankind.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. To some extent the education in our lower, +middle and high schools corresponds to the varying grades of +initiation into the mysteries.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. In a very approximate way; and then only in +so far as subjects of higher knowledge are written about +exclusively in Latin. But since that has ceased to be the case, all +the mysteries are profaned.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. However that may be, I wanted to remind you +that you should look at religion more from the practical than from +the theoretical side. <i>Personified</i> metaphysics may be the +enemy of religion, but all the same <i>personified</i> morality +will be its friend. Perhaps the metaphysical element in all +religions is false; but the moral element in all is true. This +might perhaps be presumed from the fact that they all disagree in +their metaphysics, but are in accord as regards morality.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. Which is an illustration of the rule of +logic that false premises may give a true conclusion.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Let me hold you to your conclusion: let me +remind you that religion has two sides. If it can't stand when +looked at from its theoretical, that is, its intellectual side; on +the other hand, from the moral side, it proves itself the only +means of guiding, controlling and mollifying those races of animals +endowed with reason, whose kinship with the ape does not exclude a +kinship with the tiger. But at the same time religion is, as a +rule, a sufficient satisfaction for their dull metaphysical +necessities. You don't seem to me to possess a proper idea of the +difference, wide as the heavens asunder, the deep gulf between your +man of learning and enlightenment, accustomed to the process of +thinking, and the heavy, clumsy, dull and sluggish consciousness of +humanity's beasts of burden, whose thoughts have once and for all +taken the direction of anxiety about their livelihood, and cannot +be put in motion in any other; whose muscular strength is so +exclusively brought into play that the nervous power, which makes +intelligence, sinks to a very low ebb. People like that must have +something tangible which they can lay hold of on the slippery and +thorny pathway of their life, some sort of beautiful fable, by +means of which things can be imparted to them which their crude +intelligence can entertain only in picture and parable. Profound +explanations and fine distinctions are thrown away upon them. If +you conceive religion in this light, and recollect that its aims +are above all practical, and only in a subordinate degree +theoretical, it will appear to you as something worthy of the +highest respect.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. A respect which will finally rest upon the +principle that the end sanctifies the means. I don't feel in favor +of a compromise on a basis like that. Religion may be an excellent +means of training the perverse, obtuse and ill-disposed members of +the biped race: in the eyes of the friend of truth every fraud, +even though it be a pious one, is to be condemned. A system of +deception, a pack of lies, would be a strange means of inculcating +virtue. The flag to which I have taken the oath is truth; I shall +remain faithful to it everywhere, and whether I succeed or not, I +shall fight for light and truth! If I see religion on the wrong +side—</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. But you won't. Religion isn't a deception: it +is true and the most important of all truths. Because its doctrines +are, as I have said, of such a lofty kind that the multitude can't +grasp them without an intermediary, because, I say, its light would +blind the ordinary eye, it comes forward wrapt in the veil of +allegory and teaches, not indeed what is exactly true in itself, +but what is true in respect of the lofty meaning contained in it; +and, understood in this way, religion is the truth.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. It would be all right if religion were only +at liberty to be true in a merely allegorical sense. But its +contention is that it is downright true in the proper sense of the +word. Herein lies the deception, and it is here that the friend of +truth must take up a hostile position.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. The deception is a <i>sine qua non</i>. If +religion were to admit that it was only the allegorical meaning in +its doctrine which was true, it would rob itself of all efficacy. +Such rigorous treatment as this would destroy its invaluable +influence on the hearts and morals of mankind. Instead of insisting +on that with pedantic obstinacy, look at its great achievements in +the practical sphere, its furtherance of good and kindly feelings, +its guidance in conduct, the support and consolation it gives to +suffering humanity in life and death. How much you ought to guard +against letting theoretical cavils discredit in the eyes of the +multitude, and finally wrest from it, something which is an +inexhaustible source of consolation and tranquillity, something +which, in its hard lot, it needs so much, even more than we do. On +that score alone, religion should be free from attack.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. With that kind of argument you could have +driven Luther from the field, when he attacked the sale of +indulgences. How many a one got consolation from the letters of +indulgence, a consolation which nothing else could give, a complete +tranquillity; so that he joyfully departed with the fullest +confidence in the packet of them which he held in his hand at the +hour of death, convinced that they were so many cards of admission +to all the nine heavens. What is the use of grounds of consolation +and tranquillity which are constantly overshadowed by the +Damocles-sword of illusion? The truth, my dear sir, is the only +safe thing; the truth alone remains steadfast and trusty; it is the +only solid consolation; it is the indestructible diamond.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Yes, if you had truth in your pocket, ready +to favor us with it on demand. All you've got are metaphysical +systems, in which nothing is certain but the headaches they cost. +Before you take anything away, you must have something better to +put in its place.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. That's what you keep on saying. To free a +man from error is to give, not to take away. Knowledge that a thing +is false is a truth. Error always does harm; sooner or later it +will bring mischief to the man who harbors it. Then give up +deceiving people; confess ignorance of what you don't know, and +leave everyone to form his own articles of faith for himself. +Perhaps they won't turn out so bad, especially as they'll rub one +another's corners down, and mutually rectify mistakes. The +existence of many views will at any rate lay a foundation of +tolerance. Those who possess knowledge and capacity may betake +themselves to the study of philosophy, or even in their own persons +carry the history of philosophy a step further.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. That'll be a pretty business! A whole nation +of raw metaphysicians, wrangling and eventually coming to blows +with one another!</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. Well, well, a few blows here and there are +the sauce of life; or at any rate a very inconsiderable evil +compared with such things as priestly dominion, plundering of the +laity, persecution of heretics, courts of inquisition, crusades, +religious wars, massacres of St. Bartholomew. These have been the +result of popular metaphysics imposed from without; so I stick to +the old saying that you can't get grapes from thistles, nor expect +good to come from a pack of lies.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. How often must I repeat that religion is +anything but a pack of lies? It is truth itself, only in a +mythical, allegorical vesture. But when you spoke of your plan of +everyone being his own founder of religion, I wanted to say that a +particularism like this is totally opposed to human nature, and +would consequently destroy all social order. Man is a metaphysical +animal,—that is to say, he has paramount metaphysical +necessities; accordingly, he conceives life above all in its +metaphysical signification, and wishes to bring everything into +line with that. Consequently, however strange it may sound in view +of the uncertainty of all dogmas, agreement in the fundamentals of +metaphysics is the chief thing, because a genuine and lasting bond +of union is only possible among those who are of one opinion on +these points. As a result of this, the main point of likeness and +of contrast between nations is rather religion than government, or +even language; and so the fabric of society, the State, will stand +firm only when founded on a system of metaphysics which is +acknowledged by all. This, of course, can only be a popular +system,—that is, a religion: it becomes part and parcel of +the constitution of the State, of all the public manifestations of +the national life, and also of all solemn acts of individuals. This +was the case in ancient India, among the Persians, Egyptians, Jews, +Greeks and Romans; it is still the case in the Brahman, Buddhist +and Mohammedan nations. In China there are three faiths, it is +true, of which the most prevalent—Buddhism—is precisely +the one which is not protected by the State; still, there is a +saying in China, universally acknowledged, and of daily +application, that "the three faiths are only one,"—that is to +say, they agree in essentials. The Emperor confesses all three +together at the same time. And Europe is the union of Christian +States: Christianity is the basis of every one of the members, and +the common bond of all. Hence Turkey, though geographically in +Europe, is not properly to be reckoned as belonging to it. In the +same way, the European princes hold their place "by the grace of +God:" and the Pope is the vicegerent of God. Accordingly, as his +throne was the highest, he used to wish all thrones to be regarded +as held in fee from him. In the same way, too, Archbishops and +Bishops, as such, possessed temporal power; and in England they +still have seats and votes in the Upper House. Protestant princes, +as such, are heads of their churches: in England, a few years ago, +this was a girl eighteen years old. By the revolt from the Pope, +the Reformation shattered the European fabric, and in a special +degree dissolved the true unity of Germany by destroying its common +religious faith. This union, which had practically come to an end, +had, accordingly, to be restored later on by artificial and purely +political means. You see, then, how closely connected a common +faith is with the social order and the constitution of every State. +Faith is everywhere the support of the laws and the constitution, +the foundation, therefore, of the social fabric, which could hardly +hold together at all if religion did not lend weight to the +authority of government and the dignity of the ruler.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. Oh, yes, princes use God as a kind of bogey +to frighten grown-up children to bed with, if nothing else avails: +that's why they attach so much importance to the Deity. Very well. +Let me, in passing, recommend our rulers to give their serious +attention, regularly twice every year, to the fifteenth chapter of +the First Book of Samuel, that they may be constantly reminded of +what it means to prop the throne on the altar. Besides, since the +stake, that <i>ultima ration theologorum</i>, has gone out of +fashion, this method of government has lost its efficacy. For, as +you know, religions are like glow-worms; they shine only when it is +dark. A certain amount of general ignorance is the condition of all +religions, the element in which alone they can exist. And as soon +as astronomy, natural science, geology, history, the knowledge of +countries and peoples have spread their light broadcast, and +philosophy finally is permitted to say a word, every faith founded +on miracles and revelation must disappear; and philosophy takes its +place. In Europe the day of knowledge and science dawned towards +the end of the fifteenth century with the appearance of the +Renaissance Platonists: its sun rose higher in the sixteenth and +seventeenth centuries so rich in results, and scattered the mists +of the Middle Age. Church and Faith were compelled to disappear in +the same proportion; and so in the eighteenth century English and +French philosophers were able to take up an attitude of direct +hostility; until, finally, under Frederick the Great, Kant +appeared, and took away from religious belief the support it had +previously enjoyed from philosophy: he emancipated the handmaid of +theology, and in attacking the question with German thoroughness +and patience, gave it an earnest instead of a frivolous tone. The +consequence of this is that we see Christianity undermined in the +nineteenth century, a serious faith in it almost completely gone; +we see it fighting even for bare existence, whilst anxious princes +try to set it up a little by artificial means, as a doctor uses a +drug on a dying patient. In this connection there is a passage in +Condorcet's "<i>Des Progrès de l'esprit humain</i>" which +looks as if written as a warning to our age: "the religious zeal +shown by philosophers and great men was only a political devotion; +and every religion which allows itself to be defended as a belief +that may usefully be left to the people, can only hope for an agony +more or less prolonged." In the whole course of the events which I +have indicated, you may always observe that faith and knowledge are +related as the two scales of a balance; when the one goes up, the +other goes down. So sensitive is the balance that it indicates +momentary influences. When, for instance, at the beginning of this +century, those inroads of French robbers under the leadership of +Bonaparte, and the enormous efforts necessary for driving them out +and punishing them, had brought about a temporary neglect of +science and consequently a certain decline in the general increase +of knowledge, the Church immediately began to raise her head again +and Faith began to show fresh signs of life; which, to be sure, in +keeping with the times, was partly poetical in its nature. On the +other hand, in the more than thirty years of peace which followed, +leisure and prosperity furthered the building up of science and the +spread of knowledge in an extraordinary degree: the consequence of +which is what I have indicated, the dissolution and threatened fall +of religion. Perhaps the time is approaching which has so often +been prophesied, when religion will take her departure from +European humanity, like a nurse which the child has outgrown: the +child will now be given over to the instructions of a tutor. For +there is no doubt that religious doctrines which are founded merely +on authority, miracles and revelations, are only suited to the +childhood of humanity. Everyone will admit that a race, the past +duration of which on the earth all accounts, physical and +historical, agree in placing at not more than some hundred times +the life of a man of sixty, is as yet only in its first +childhood.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Instead of taking an undisguised pleasure in +prophesying the downfall of Christianity, how I wish you would +consider what a measureless debt of gratitude European humanity +owes to it, how greatly it has benefited by the religion which, +after a long interval, followed it from its old home in the East. +Europe received from Christianity ideas which were quite new to it, +the Knowledge, I mean, of the fundamental truth that life cannot be +an end-in-itself, that the true end of our existence lies beyond +it. The Greeks and Romans had placed this end altogether in our +present life, so that in this sense they may certainly be called +blind heathens. And, in keeping with this view of life, all their +virtues can be reduced to what is serviceable to the community, to +what is useful in fact. Aristotle says quite naively, <i>Those +virtues must necessarily be the greatest which are the most useful +to others</i>. So the ancients thought patriotism the highest +virtue, although it is really a very doubtful one, since +narrowness, prejudice, vanity and an enlightened self-interest are +main elements in it. Just before the passage I quoted, Aristotle +enumerates all the virtues, in order to discuss them singly. They +are <i>Justice, Courage, Temperance, Magnificence, Magnanimity, +Liberality, Gentleness, Good Sense</i> and <i>Wisdom</i>. How +different from the Christian virtues! Plato himself, incomparably +the most transcendental philosopher of pre-Christian antiquity, +knows no higher virtue than <i>Justice</i>; and he alone recommends +it unconditionally and for its own sake, whereas the rest make a +happy life, <i>vita beata</i>, the aim of all virtue, and moral +conduct the way to attain it. Christianity freed European humanity +from this shallow, crude identification of itself with the hollow, +uncertain existence of every day,</p> +<p class="poem"> coelumque tueri<br /> +Jussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus.</p> +<p>Christianity, accordingly, does not preach mere Justice, but +<i>the Love of Mankind, Compassion, Good Works, Forgiveness, Love +of your Enemies, Patience, Humility, Resignation, Faith</i> and +<i>Hope</i>. It even went a step further, and taught that the world +is of evil, and that we need deliverance. It preached despisal of +the world, self-denial, chastity, giving up of one's will, that is, +turning away from life and its illusory pleasures. It taught the +healing power of pain: an instrument of torture is the symbol of +Christianity. I am quite ready to admit that this earnest, this +only correct view of life was thousands of years previously spread +all over Asia in other forms, as it is still, independently of +Christianity; but for European humanity it was a new and great +revelation. For it is well known that the population of Europe +consists of Asiatic races driven out as wanderers from their own +homes, and gradually settling down in Europe; on their wanderings +these races lost the original religion of their homes, and with it +the right view of life: so, under a new sky, they formed religions +for themselves, which were rather crude; the worship of Odin, for +instance, the Druidic or the Greek religion, the metaphysical +content of which was little and shallow. In the meantime the Greeks +developed a special, one might almost say, an instinctive sense of +beauty, belonging to them alone of all the nations who have ever +existed on the earth, peculiar, fine and exact: so that their +mythology took, in the mouth of their poets, and in the hands of +their artists, an exceedingly beautiful and pleasing shape. On the +other hand, the true and deep significance of life was lost to the +Greeks and Romans. They lived on like grown-up children, till +Christianity came and recalled them to the serious side of +existence.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. And to see the effects one need only compare +antiquity with the Middle Age; the time of Pericles, say, with the +fourteenth century. You could scarcely believe you were dealing +with the same kind of beings. There, the finest development of +humanity, excellent institutions, wise laws, shrewdly apportioned +offices, rationally ordered freedom, all the arts, including poetry +and philosophy, at their best; the production of works which, after +thousands of years, are unparalleled, the creations, as it were, of +a higher order of beings, which we can never imitate; life +embellished by the noblest fellowship, as portrayed in Xenophen's +<i>Banquet</i>. Look on the other picture, if you can; a time at +which the Church had enslaved the minds, and violence the bodies of +men, that knights and priests might lay the whole weight of life +upon the common beast of burden, the third estate. There, you have +might as right, Feudalism and Fanaticism in close alliance, and in +their train abominable ignorance and darkness of mind, a +corresponding intolerance, discord of creeds, religious wars, +crusades, inquisitions and persecutions; as the form of fellowship, +chivalry, compounded of savagery and folly, with its pedantic +system of ridiculous false pretences carried to an extreme, its +degrading superstition and apish veneration for women. Gallantry is +the residue of this veneration, deservedly requited as it is by +feminine arrogance; it affords continual food for laughter to all +Asiatics, and the Greeks would have joined in it. In the golden +Middle Age the practice developed into a regular and methodical +service of women; it imposed deeds of heroism, <i>cours +d'amour</i>, bombastic Troubadour songs, etc.; although it is to be +observed that these last buffooneries, which had an intellectual +side, were chiefly at home in France; whereas amongst the material +sluggish Germans, the knights distinguished themselves rather by +drinking and stealing; they were good at boozing and filling their +castles with plunder; though in the courts, to be sure, there was +no lack of insipid love songs. What caused this utter +transformation? Migration and Christianity.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. I am glad you reminded me of it. Migration +was the source of the evil; Christianity the dam on which it broke. +It was chiefly by Christianity that the raw, wild hordes which came +flooding in were controlled and tamed. The savage man must first of +all learn to kneel, to venerate, to obey; after that he can be +civilized. This was done in Ireland by St. Patrick, in Germany by +Winifred the Saxon, who was a genuine Boniface. It was migration of +peoples, the last advance of Asiatic races towards Europe, followed +only by the fruitless attempts of those under Attila, Zenghis Khan, +and Timur, and as a comic afterpiece, by the gipsies,—it was +this movement which swept away the humanity of the ancients. +Christianity was precisely the principle which set itself to work +against this savagery; just as later, through the whole of the +Middle Age, the Church and its hierarchy were most necessary to set +limits to the savage barbarism of those masters of violence, the +princes and knights: it was what broke up the icefloes in that +mighty deluge. Still, the chief aim of Christianity is not so much +to make this life pleasant as to render us worthy of a better. It +looks away over this span of time, over this fleeting dream, and +seeks to lead us to eternal welfare. Its tendency is ethical in the +highest sense of the word, a sense unknown in Europe till its +advent; as I have shown you, by putting the morality and religion +of the ancients side by side with those of Christendom.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. You are quite right as regards theory: but +look at the practice! In comparison with the ages of Christianity +the ancient world was unquestionably less cruel than the Middle +Age, with its deaths by exquisite torture, its innumerable burnings +at the stake. The ancients, further, were very enduring, laid great +stress on justice, frequently sacrificed themselves for their +country, showed such traces of every kind of magnanimity, and such +genuine manliness, that to this day an acquaintance with their +thoughts and actions is called the study of Humanity. The fruits of +Christianity were religious wars, butcheries, crusades, +inquisitions, extermination of the natives in America, and the +introduction of African slaves in their place; and among the +ancients there is nothing analogous to this, nothing that can be +compared with it; for the slaves of the ancients, the +<i>familia</i>, the <i>vernae</i>, were a contented race, and +faithfully devoted to their masters' service, and as different from +the miserable negroes of the sugar plantations, which are a +disgrace to humanity, as their two colors are distinct. Those +special moral delinquencies for which we reproach the ancients, and +which are perhaps less uncommon now-a-days than appears on the +surface to be the case, are trifles compared with the Christian +enormities I have mentioned. Can you then, all considered, maintain +that mankind has been really made morally better by +Christianity?</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. If the results haven't everywhere been in +keeping with the purity and truth of the doctrine, it may be +because the doctrine has been too noble, too elevated for mankind, +that its aim has been placed too high. It was so much easier to +come up to the heathen system, or to the Mohammedan. It is +precisely what is noble and dignified that is most liable +everywhere to misuse and fraud: <i>abusus optimi pessimus</i>. +Those high doctrines have accordingly now and then served as a +pretext for the most abominable proceedings, and for acts of +unmitigated wickedness. The downfall of the institutions of the old +world, as well as of its arts and sciences, is, as I have said, to +be attributed to the inroad of foreign barbarians. The inevitable +result of this inroad was that ignorance and savagery got the upper +hand; consequently violence and knavery established their dominion, +and knights and priests became a burden to mankind. It is partly, +however, to be explained by the fact that the new religion made +eternal and not temporal welfare the object of desire, taught that +simplicity of heart was to be preferred to knowledge, and looked +askance at all worldly pleasure. Now the arts and sciences subserve +worldly pleasure; but in so far as they could be made serviceable +to religion they were promoted, and attained a certain degree of +perfection.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. In a very narrow sphere. The sciences were +suspicious companions, and as such, were placed under restrictions: +on the other hand, darling ignorance, that element so necessary to +a system of faith, was carefully nourished.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. And yet mankind's possessions in the way of +knowledge up to that period, which were preserved in the writings +of the ancients, were saved from destruction by the clergy, +especially by those in the monasteries. How would it have fared if +Christianity hadn't come in just before the migration of +peoples.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. It would really be a most useful inquiry to +try and make, with the coldest impartiality, an unprejudiced, +careful and accurate comparison of the advantages and disadvantages +which may be put down to religion. For that, of course, a much +larger knowledge of historical and psychological data than either +of us command would be necessary. Academies might make it a subject +for a prize essay.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. They'll take good care not to do so.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. I'm surprised to hear you say that: it's a +bad look out for religion. However, there are academies which, in +proposing a subject for competition, make it a secret condition +that the prize is to go to the man who best interprets their own +view. If we could only begin by getting a statistician to tell us +how many crimes are prevented every year by religious, and how many +by other motives, there would be very few of the former. If a man +feels tempted to commit a crime, you may rely upon it that the +first consideration which enters his head is the penalty appointed +for it, and the chances that it will fall upon him: then comes, as +a second consideration, the risk to his reputation. If I am not +mistaken, he will ruminate by the hour on these two impediments, +before he ever takes a thought of religious considerations. If he +gets safely over those two first bulwarks against crime, I think +religion alone will very rarely hold him back from it.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. I think that it will very often do so, +especially when its influence works through the medium of custom. +An atrocious act is at once felt to be repulsive. What is this but +the effect of early impressions? Think, for instance, how often a +man, especially if of noble birth, will make tremendous sacrifices +to perform what he has promised, motived entirely by the fact that +his father has often earnestly impressed upon him in his childhood +that "a man of honor" or "a gentleman" or a "a cavalier" always +keeps his word inviolate.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. That's no use unless there is a certain +inborn honorableness. You mustn't ascribe to religion what results +from innate goodness of character, by which compassion for the man +who would suffer by his crime keeps a man from committing it. This +is the genuine moral motive, and as such it is independent of all +religions.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. But this is a motive which rarely affects the +multitude unless it assumes a religious aspect. The religious +aspect at any rate strengthens its power for good. Yet without any +such natural foundation, religious motives alone are powerful to +prevent crime. We need not be surprised at this in the case of the +multitude, when we see that even people of education pass now and +then under the influence, not indeed of religious motives, which +are founded on something which is at least allegorically true, but +of the most absurd superstition, and allow themselves to be guided +by it all their life long; as, for instance, undertaking nothing on +a Friday, refusing to sit down thirteen at a table, obeying chance +omens, and the like. How much more likely is the multitude to be +guided by such things. You can't form any adequate idea of the +narrow limits of the mind in its raw state; it is a place of +absolute darkness, especially when, as often happens, a bad, unjust +and malicious heart is at the bottom of it. People in this +condition—and they form the great bulk of humanity—must +be led and controlled as well as may be, even if it be by really +superstitious motives; until such time as they become susceptible +to truer and better ones. As an instance of the direct working of +religion, may be cited the fact, common enough, in Italy +especially, of a thief restoring stolen goods, through the +influence of his confessor, who says he won't absolve him if he +doesn't. Think again of the case of an oath, where religion shows a +most decided influence; whether it be that a man places himself +expressly in the position of a purely <i>moral being</i>, and as +such looks upon himself as solemnly appealed to, as seems to be the +case in France, where the formula is simply <i>je le jure</i>, and +also among the Quakers, whose solemn <i>yea</i> or <i>nay</i> is +regarded as a substitute for the oath; or whether it be that a man +really believes he is pronouncing something which may affect his +eternal happiness,—a belief which is presumably only the +investiture of the former feeling. At any rate, religious +considerations are a means of awakening and calling out a man's +moral nature. How often it happens that a man agrees to take a +false oath, and then, when it comes to the point, suddenly refuses, +and truth and right win the day.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. Oftener still false oaths are really taken, +and truth and right trampled under foot, though all witnesses of +the oath know it well! Still you are quite right to quote the oath +as an undeniable example of the practical efficacy of religion. +But, in spite of all you've said, I doubt whether the efficacy of +religion goes much beyond this. Just think; if a public +proclamation were suddenly made announcing the repeal of all the +criminal laws; I fancy neither you nor I would have the courage to +go home from here under the protection of religious motives. If, in +the same way, all religions were declared untrue, we could, under +the protection of the laws alone, go on living as before, without +any special addition to our apprehensions or our measures of +precaution. I will go beyond this, and say that religions have very +frequently exercised a decidedly demoralizing influence. One may +say generally that duties towards God and duties towards humanity +are in inverse ratio.</p> +<p>It is easy to let adulation of the Deity make amends for lack of +proper behavior towards man. And so we see that in all times and in +all countries the great majority of mankind find it much easier to +beg their way to heaven by prayers than to deserve to go there by +their actions. In every religion it soon comes to be the case that +faith, ceremonies, rites and the like, are proclaimed to be more +agreeable to the Divine will than moral actions; the former, +especially if they are bound up with the emoluments of the clergy, +gradually come to be looked upon as a substitute for the latter. +Sacrifices in temples, the saying of masses, the founding of +chapels, the planting of crosses by the roadside, soon come to be +the most meritorious works, so that even great crimes are expiated +by them, as also by penance, subjection to priestly authority, +confessions, pilgrimages, donations to the temples and the clergy, +the building of monasteries and the like. The consequence of all +this is that the priests finally appear as middlemen in the +corruption of the gods. And if matters don't go quite so far as +that, where is the religion whose adherents don't consider prayers, +praise and manifold acts of devotion, a substitute, at least in +part, for moral conduct? Look at England, where by an audacious +piece of priestcraft, the Christian Sunday, introduced by +Constantine the Great as a subject for the Jewish Sabbath, is in a +mendacious way identified with it, and takes its name,—and +this in order that the commands of Jehovah for the Sabbath (that +is, the day on which the Almighty had to rest from his six days' +labor, so that it is essentially the last day of the week), might +be applied to the Christian Sunday, the <i>dies solis</i>, the +first day of the week which the sun opens in glory, the day of +devotion and joy. The consequence of this fraud is that +"Sabbath-breaking," or "the desecration of the Sabbath," that is, +the slightest occupation, whether of business or pleasure, all +games, music, sewing, worldly books, are on Sundays looked upon as +great sins. Surely the ordinary man must believe that if, as his +spiritual guides impress upon him, he is only constant in "a strict +observance of the holy Sabbath," and is "a regular attendant at +Divine Service," that is, if he only invariably idles away his time +on Sundays, and doesn't fail to sit two hours in church to hear the +same litany for the thousandth time and mutter it in tune with the +others, he may reckon on indulgence in regard to those little +peccadilloes which he occasionally allows himself. Those devils in +human form, the slave owners and slave traders in the Free States +of North America (they should be called the Slave States) are, as a +rule, orthodox, pious Anglicans who would consider it a grave sin +to work on Sundays; and having confidence in this, and their +regular attendance at church, they hope for eternal happiness. The +demoralizing tendency of religion is less problematical than its +moral influence. How great and how certain that moral influence +must be to make amends for the enormities which religions, +especially the Christian and Mohammedan religions, have produced +and spread over the earth! Think of the fanaticism, the endless +persecutions, the religious wars, that sanguinary frenzy of which +the ancients had no conception! think of the crusades, a butchery +lasting two hundred years and inexcusable, its war cry "<i>It is +the will of God</i>," its object to gain possession of the grave of +one who preached love and sufferance! think of the cruel expulsion +and extermination of the Moors and Jews from Spain! think of the +orgies of blood, the inquisitions, the heretical tribunals, the +bloody and terrible conquests of the Mohammedans in three +continents, or those of Christianity in America, whose inhabitants +were for the most part, and in Cuba entirely, exterminated. +According to Las Cases, Christianity murdered twelve millions in +forty years, of course all <i>in majorem Dei gloriam</i>, and for +the propagation of the Gospel, and because what wasn't Christian +wasn't even looked upon as human! I have, it is true, touched upon +these matters before; but when in our day, we hear of <i>Latest +News from the Kingdom of God</i> [Footnote: A missionary paper, of +which the 40th annual number appeared in 1856], we shall not be +weary of bringing old news to mind. And above all, don't let us +forget India, the cradle of the human race, or at least of that +part of it to which we belong, where first Mohammedans, and then +Christians, were most cruelly infuriated against the adherents of +the original faith of mankind. The destruction or disfigurement of +the ancient temples and idols, a lamentable, mischievous and +barbarous act, still bears witness to the monotheistic fury of the +Mohammedans, carried on from Marmud, the Ghaznevid of cursed +memory, down to Aureng Zeb, the fratricide, whom the Portuguese +Christians have zealously imitated by destruction of temples and +the <i>auto de fé</i> of the inquisition at Goa. Don't let +us forget the chosen people of God, who after they had, by +Jehovah's express command, stolen from their old and trusty friends +in Egypt the gold and silver vessels which had been lent to them, +made a murderous and plundering inroad into "the Promised Land," +with the murderer Moses at their head, to tear it from the rightful +owners,—again, by the same Jehovah's express and repeated +commands, showing no mercy, exterminating the inhabitants, women, +children and all (Joshua, ch. 9 and 10). And all this, simply +because they weren't circumcised and didn't know Jehovah, which was +reason enough to justify every enormity against them; just as for +the same reason, in earlier times, the infamous knavery of the +patriarch Jacob and his chosen people against Hamor, King of +Shalem, and his people, is reported to his glory because the people +were unbelievers! (Genesis xxxiii. 18.) Truly, it is the worst side +of religions that the believers of one religion have allowed +themselves every sin again those of another, and with the utmost +ruffianism and cruelty persecuted them; the Mohammedans against the +Christians and Hindoos; the Christians against the Hindoos, +Mohammedans, American natives, Negroes, Jews, heretics, and +others.</p> +<p>Perhaps I go too far in saying <i>all</i> religions. For the +sake of truth, I must add that the fanatical enormities perpetrated +in the name of religion are only to be put down to the adherents of +monotheistic creeds, that is, the Jewish faith and its two +branches, Christianity and Islamism. We hear of nothing of the kind +in the case of Hindoos and Buddhists. Although it is a matter of +common knowledge that about the fifth century of our era Buddhism +was driven out by the Brahmans from its ancient home in the +southernmost part of the Indian peninsula, and afterwards spread +over the whole of the rest of Asia, as far as I know, we have no +definite account of any crimes of violence, or wars, or cruelties, +perpetrated in the course of it.</p> +<p>That may, of course, be attributable to the obscurity which +veils the history of those countries; but the exceedingly mild +character of their religion, together with their unceasing +inculcation of forbearance towards all living things, and the fact +that Brahmanism by its caste system properly admits no proselytes, +allows one to hope that their adherents may be acquitted of +shedding blood on a large scale, and of cruelty in any form. Spence +Hardy, in his excellent book on <i>Eastern Monachism</i>, praises +the extraordinary tolerance of the Buddhists, and adds his +assurance that the annals of Buddhism will furnish fewer instances +of religious persecution than those of any other religion.</p> +<p>As a matter of fact, it is only to monotheism that intolerance +is essential; an only god is by his nature a jealous god, who can +allow no other god to exist. Polytheistic gods, on the other hand, +are naturally tolerant; they live and let live; their own +colleagues are the chief objects of their sufferance, as being gods +of the same religion. This toleration is afterwards extended to +foreign gods, who are, accordingly, hospitably received, and later +on admitted, in some cases, to an equality of rights; the chief +example of which is shown by the fact, that the Romans willingly +admitted and venerated Phrygian, Egyptian and other gods. Hence it +is that monotheistic religions alone furnish the spectacle of +religious wars, religious persecutions, heretical tribunals, that +breaking of idols and destruction of images of the gods, that +razing of Indian temples, and Egyptian colossi, which had looked on +the sun three thousand years, just because a jealous god had said, +<i>Thou shalt make no graven image</i>.</p> +<p>But to return to the chief point. You are certainly right in +insisting on the strong metaphysical needs of mankind; but religion +appears to me to be not so much a satisfaction as an abuse of those +needs. At any rate we have seen that in regard to the furtherance +of morality, its utility is, for the most part, problematical, its +disadvantages, and especially the atrocities which have followed in +its train, are patent to the light of day. Of course it is quite a +different matter if we consider the utility of religion as a prop +of thrones; for where these are held "by the grace of God," throne +and altar are intimately associated; and every wise prince who +loves his throne and his family will appear at the head of his +people as an exemplar of true religion. Even Machiavelli, in the +eighteenth chapter of his book, most earnestly recommended religion +to princes. Beyond this, one may say that revealed religions stand +to philosophy exactly in the relation of "sovereigns by the grace +of God," to "the sovereignty of the people"; so that the two former +terms of the parallel are in natural alliance.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Oh, don't take that tone! You're going hand +in hand with ochlocracy and anarchy, the arch enemy of all +legislative order, all civilization and all humanity.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. You are right. It was only a sophism of +mine, what the fencing master calls a feint. I retract it. But see +how disputing sometimes makes an honest man unjust and malicious. +Let us stop.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. I can't help regretting that, after all the +trouble I've taken, I haven't altered your disposition in regard to +religion. On the other hand, I can assure you that everything you +have said hasn't shaken my conviction of its high value and +necessity.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. I fully believe you; for, as we may read in +Hudibras—</p> +<p class="poem">A man convinced against his will<br /> +Is of the same opinion still.</p> +<p>My consolation is that, alike in controversies and in taking +mineral waters, the after effects are the true ones.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Well, I hope it'll be beneficial in your +case.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. It might be so, if I could digest a certain +Spanish proverb.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Which is?</p> +<p><i>Philalethes. Behind the cross stands the devil</i>.</p> +<p><i>Demopheles</i>. Come, don't let us part with sarcasms. Let us +rather admit that religion, like Janus, or better still, like the +Brahman god of death, Yama, has two faces, and like him, one +friendly, the other sullen. Each of us has kept his eye fixed on +one alone.</p> +<p><i>Philalethes</i>. You are right, old fellow.</p> +<hr /> +<a name="RULE4_3" id="RULE4_3"><!-- RULE4 3 --></a> +<h2>A FEW WORDS ON PANTHEISM.</h2> +<p>The controversy between Theism and Pantheism might be presented +in an allegorical or dramatic form by supposing a dialogue between +two persons in the pit of a theatre at Milan during the performance +of a piece. One of them, convinced that he is in Girolamo's +renowned marionette-theatre, admires the art by which the director +gets up the dolls and guides their movements. "Oh, you are quite +mistaken," says the other, "we're in the Teatro della Scala; it is +the manager and his troupe who are on the stage; they are the +persons you see before you; the poet too is taking a part."</p> +<p>The chief objection I have to Pantheism is that it says nothing. +To call the world "God" is not to explain it; it is only to enrich +our language with a superfluous synonym for the word "world." It +comes to the same thing whether you say "the world is God," or "God +is the world." But if you start from "God" as something that is +given in experience, and has to be explained, and they say, "God is +the world," you are affording what is to some extent an +explanation, in so far as you are reducing what is unknown to what +is partly known (<i>ignotum per notius</i>); but it is only a +verbal explanation. If, however, you start from what is really +given, that is to say, from the world, and say, "the world is God," +it is clear that you say nothing, or at least you are explaining +what is unknown by what is more unknown.</p> +<p>Hence, Pantheism presupposes Theism; only in so far as you start +from a god, that is, in so far as you possess him as something with +which you are already familiar, can you end by identifying him with +the world; and your purpose in doing so is to put him out of the +way in a decent fashion. In other words, you do not start clear +from the world as something that requires explanation; you start +from God as something that is given, and not knowing what to do +with him, you make the world take over his role. This is the origin +of Pantheism. Taking an unprejudiced view of the world as it is, no +one would dream of regarding it as a god. It must be a very +ill-advised god who knows no better way of diverting himself than +by turning into such a world as ours, such a mean, shabby world, +there to take the form of innumerable millions who live indeed, but +are fretted and tormented, and who manage to exist a while +together, only by preying on one another; to bear misery, need and +death, without measure and without object, in the form, for +instance, of millions of negro slaves, or of the three million +weavers in Europe who, in hunger and care, lead a miserable +existence in damp rooms or the cheerless halls of a factory. What a +pastime this for a god, who must, as such, be used to another mode +of existence!</p> +<p>We find accordingly that what is described as the great advance +from Theism to Pantheism, if looked at seriously, and not simply as +a masked negation of the sort indicated above, is a transition from +what is unproved and hardly conceivable to what is absolutely +absurd. For however obscure, however loose or confused may be the +idea which we connect with the word "God," there are two predicates +which are inseparable from it, the highest power and the highest +wisdom. It is absolutely absurd to think that a being endowed with +these qualities should have put himself into the position described +above. Theism, on the other hand, is something which is merely +unproved; and if it is difficult to look upon the infinite world as +the work of a personal, and therefore individual, Being, the like +of which we know only from our experience of the animal world, it +is nevertheless not an absolutely absurd idea. That a Being, at +once almighty and all-good, should create a world of torment is +always conceivable; even though we do not know why he does so; and +accordingly we find that when people ascribe the height of goodness +to this Being, they set up the inscrutable nature of his wisdom as +the refuge by which the doctrine escapes the charge of absurdity. +Pantheism, however, assumes that the creative God is himself the +world of infinite torment, and, in this little world alone, dies +every second, and that entirely of his own will; which is absurd. +It would be much more correct to identify the world with the devil, +as the venerable author of the <i>Deutsche Theologie</i> has, in +fact, done in a passage of his immortal work, where he says, +"<i>Wherefore the evil spirit and nature are one, and where nature +is not overcome, neither is the evil adversary overcome</i>."</p> +<p>It is manifest that the Pantheists give the Sansara the name of +God. The same name is given by the Mystics to the Nirvana. The +latter, however, state more about the Nirvana than they know, which +is not done by the Buddhists, whose Nirvana is accordingly a +relative nothing. It is only Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans who +give its proper and correct meaning to the word "God."</p> +<p>The expression, often heard now-a-days, "the world is an +end-in-itself," leaves it uncertain whether Pantheism or a simple +Fatalism is to be taken as the explanation of it. But, whichever it +be, the expression looks upon the world from a physical point of +view only, and leaves out of sight its moral significance, because +you cannot assume a moral significance without presenting the world +as means to a higher end. The notion that the world has a physical +but not a moral meaning, is the most mischievous error sprung from +the greatest mental perversity.</p> +<hr /> +<a name="RULE4_4" id="RULE4_4"><!-- RULE4 4 --></a> +<h2>ON BOOKS AND READING.</h2> +<p>Ignorance is degrading only when found in company with riches. +The poor man is restrained by poverty and need: labor occupies his +thoughts, and takes the place of knowledge. But rich men who are +ignorant live for their lusts only, and are like the beasts of the +field; as may be seen every day: and they can also be reproached +for not having used wealth and leisure for that which gives them +their greatest value.</p> +<p>When we read, another person thinks for us: we merely repeat his +mental process. In learning to write, the pupil goes over with his +pen what the teacher has outlined in pencil: so in reading; the +greater part of the work of thought is already done for us. This is +why it relieves us to take up a book after being occupied with our +own thoughts. And in reading, the mind is, in fact, only the +playground of another's thoughts. So it comes about that if anyone +spends almost the whole day in reading, and by way of relaxation +devotes the intervals to some thoughtless pastime, he gradually +loses the capacity for thinking; just as the man who always rides, +at last forgets how to walk. This is the case with many learned +persons: they have read themselves stupid. For to occupy every +spare moment in reading, and to do nothing but read, is even more +paralyzing to the mind than constant manual labor, which at least +allows those engaged in it to follow their own thoughts. A spring +never free from the pressure of some foreign body at last loses its +elasticity; and so does the mind if other people's thoughts are +constantly forced upon it. Just as you can ruin the stomach and +impair the whole body by taking too much nourishment, so you can +overfill and choke the mind by feeding it too much. The more you +read, the fewer are the traces left by what you have read: the mind +becomes like a tablet crossed over and over with writing. There is +no time for ruminating, and in no other way can you assimilate what +you have read. If you read on and on without setting your own +thoughts to work, what you have read can not strike root, and is +generally lost. It is, in fact, just the same with mental as with +bodily food: hardly the fifth part of what one takes is +assimilated. The rest passes off in evaporation, respiration and +the like.</p> +<p>The result of all this is that thoughts put on paper are nothing +more than footsteps in the sand: you see the way the man has gone, +but to know what he saw on his walk, you want his eyes.</p> +<p>There is no quality of style that can be gained by reading +writers who possess it; whether it be persuasiveness, imagination, +the gift of drawing comparisons, boldness, bitterness, brevity, +grace, ease of expression or wit, unexpected contrasts, a laconic +or naive manner, and the like. But if these qualities are already +in us, exist, that is to say, potentially, we can call them forth +and bring them to consciousness; we can learn the purposes to which +they can be put; we can be strengthened in our inclination to use +them, or get courage to do so; we can judge by examples the effect +of applying them, and so acquire the correct use of them; and of +course it is only when we have arrived at that point that we +actually possess these qualities. The only way in which reading can +form style is by teaching us the use to which we can put our own +natural gifts. We must have these gifts before we begin to learn +the use of them. Without them, reading teaches us nothing but cold, +dead mannerisms and makes us shallow imitators.</p> +<p>The strata of the earth preserve in rows the creatures which +lived in former ages; and the array of books on the shelves of a +library stores up in like manner the errors of the past and the way +in which they have been exposed. Like those creatures, they too +were full of life in their time, and made a great deal of noise; +but now they are stiff and fossilized, and an object of curiosity +to the literary palaeontologist alone.</p> +<p>Herodotus relates that Xerxes wept at the sight of his army, +which stretched further than the eye could reach, in the thought +that of all these, after a hundred years, not one would be alive. +And in looking over a huge catalogue of new books, one might weep +at thinking that, when ten years have passed, not one of them will +be heard of.</p> +<p>It is in literature as in life: wherever you turn, you stumble +at once upon the incorrigible mob of humanity, swarming in all +directions, crowding and soiling everything, like flies in summer. +Hence the number, which no man can count, of bad books, those rank +weeds of literature, which draw nourishment from the corn and choke +it. The time, money and attention of the public, which rightfully +belong to good books and their noble aims, they take for +themselves: they are written for the mere purpose of making money +or procuring places. So they are not only useless; they do positive +mischief. Nine-tenths of the whole of our present literature has no +other aim than to get a few shillings out of the pockets of the +public; and to this end author, publisher and reviewer are in +league.</p> +<p>Let me mention a crafty and wicked trick, albeit a profitable +and successful one, practised by littérateurs, hack writers, +and voluminous authors. In complete disregard of good taste and the +true culture of the period, they have succeeded in getting the +whole of the world of fashion into leading strings, so that they +are all trained to read in time, and all the same thing, viz., +<i>the newest books</i>; and that for the purpose of getting food +for conversation in the circles in which they move. This is the aim +served by bad novels, produced by writers who were once celebrated, +as Spindler, Bulwer Lytton, Eugene Sue. What can be more miserable +than the lot of a reading public like this, always bound to peruse +the latest works of extremely commonplace persons who write for +money only, and who are therefore never few in number? and for this +advantage they are content to know by name only the works of the +few superior minds of all ages and all countries. Literary +newspapers, too, are a singularly cunning device for robbing the +reading public of the time which, if culture is to be attained, +should be devoted to the genuine productions of literature, instead +of being occupied by the daily bungling commonplace persons.</p> +<p>Hence, in regard to reading, it is a very important thing to be +able to refrain. Skill in doing so consists in not taking into +one's hands any book merely because at the time it happens to be +extensively read; such as political or religious pamphlets, novels, +poetry, and the like, which make a noise, and may even attain to +several editions in the first and last year of their existence. +Consider, rather, that the man who writes for fools is always sure +of a large audience; be careful to limit your time for reading, and +devote it exclusively to the works of those great minds of all +times and countries, who o'ertop the rest of humanity, those whom +the voice of fame points to as such. These alone really educate and +instruct. You can never read bad literature too little, nor good +literature too much. Bad books are intellectual poison; they +destroy the mind. Because people always read what is new instead of +the best of all ages, writers remain in the narrow circle of the +ideas which happen to prevail in their time; and so the period +sinks deeper and deeper into its own mire.</p> +<p>There are at all times two literatures in progress, running side +by side, but little known to each other; the one real, the other +only apparent. The former grows into permanent literature; it is +pursued by those who live <i>for</i> science or poetry; its course +is sober and quiet, but extremely slow; and it produces in Europe +scarcely a dozen works in a century; these, however, are permanent. +The other kind is pursued by persons who live <i>on</i> science or +poetry; it goes at a gallop with much noise and shouting of +partisans; and every twelve-month puts a thousand works on the +market. But after a few years one asks, Where are they? where is +the glory which came so soon and made so much clamor? This kind may +be called fleeting, and the other, permanent literature.</p> +<p>In the history of politics, half a century is always a +considerable time; the matter which goes to form them is ever on +the move; there is always something going on. But in the history of +literature there is often a complete standstill for the same +period; nothing has happened, for clumsy attempts don't count. You +are just where you were fifty years previously.</p> +<p>To explain what I mean, let me compare the advance of knowledge +among mankind to the course taken by a planet. The false paths on +which humanity usually enters after every important advance are +like the epicycles in the Ptolemaic system, and after passing +through one of them, the world is just where it was before it +entered it. But the great minds, who really bring the race further +on its course do not accompany it on the epicycles it makes from +time to time. This explains why posthumous fame is often bought at +the expense of contemporary praise, and <i>vice versa</i>. An +instance of such an epicycle is the philosophy started by Fichte +and Schelling, and crowned by Hegel's caricature of it. This +epicycle was a deviation from the limit to which philosophy had +been ultimately brought by Kant; and at that point I took it up +again afterwards, to carry it further. In the intervening period +the sham philosophers I have mentioned and some others went through +their epicycle, which had just come to an end; so that those who +went with them on their course are conscious of the fact that they +are exactly at the point from which they started.</p> +<p>This circumstance explains why it is that, every thirty years or +so, science, literature, and art, as expressed in the spirit of the +time, are declared bankrupt. The errors which appear from time to +time amount to such a height in that period that the mere weight of +their absurdity makes the fabric fall; whilst the opposition to +them has been gathering force at the same time. So an upset takes +place, often followed by an error in the opposite direction. To +exhibit these movements in their periodical return would be the +true practical aim of the history of literature: little attention, +however, is paid to it. And besides, the comparatively short +duration of these periods makes it difficult to collect the data of +epochs long gone by, so that it is most convenient to observe how +the matter stands in one's own generation. An instance of this +tendency, drawn from physical science, is supplied in the Neptunian +geology of Werter.</p> +<p>But let me keep strictly to the example cited above, the nearest +we can take. In German philosophy, the brilliant epoch of Kant was +immediately followed by a period which aimed rather at being +imposing than at convincing. Instead of being thorough and clear, +it tried to be dazzling, hyperbolical, and, in a special degree, +unintelligible: instead of seeking truth, it intrigued. Philosophy +could make no progress in this fashion; and at last the whole +school and its method became bankrupt. For the effrontery of Hegel +and his fellows came to such a pass,—whether because they +talked such sophisticated nonsense, or were so unscrupulously +puffed, or because the entire aim of this pretty piece of work was +quite obvious,—that in the end there was nothing to prevent +charlatanry of the whole business from becoming manifest to +everybody: and when, in consequence of certain disclosures, the +favor it had enjoyed in high quarters was withdrawn, the system was +openly ridiculed. This most miserable of all the meagre +philosophies that have ever existed came to grief, and dragged down +with it into the abysm of discredit, the systems of Fichte and +Schelling which had preceded it. And so, as far as Germany is +concerned, the total philosophical incompetence of the first half +of the century following upon Kant is quite plain: and still the +Germans boast of their talent for philosophy in comparison with +foreigners, especially since an English writer has been so +maliciously ironical as to call them "a nation of thinkers."</p> +<p>For an example of the general system of epicycles drawn from the +history of art, look at the school of sculpture which flourished in +the last century and took its name from Bernini, more especially at +the development of it which prevailed in France. The ideal of this +school was not antique beauty, but commonplace nature: instead of +the simplicity and grace of ancient art, it represented the manners +of a French minuet.</p> +<p>This tendency became bankrupt when, under Winkelman's direction, +a return was made to the antique school. The history of painting +furnishes an illustration in the first quarter of the century, when +art was looked upon merely as a means and instrument of mediaeval +religious sentiment, and its themes consequently drawn from +ecclesiastical subjects alone: these, however, were treated by +painters who had none of the true earnestness of faith, and in +their delusion they followed Francesco Francia, Pietro Perugino, +Angelico da Fiesole and others like them, rating them higher even +than the really great masters who followed. It was in view of this +terror, and because in poetry an analogous aim had at the same time +found favor, that Goethe wrote his parable <i>Pfaffenspiel</i>. +This school, too, got the reputation of being whimsical, became +bankrupt, and was followed by a return to nature, which proclaimed +itself in <i>genre</i> pictures and scenes of life of every kind, +even though it now and then strayed into what was vulgar.</p> +<p>The progress of the human mind in literature is similar. The +history of literature is for the most part like the catalogue of a +museum of deformities; the spirit in which they keep best is +pigskin. The few creatures that have been born in goodly shape need +not be looked for there. They are still alive, and are everywhere +to be met with in the world, immortal, and with their years ever +green. They alone form what I have called real literature; the +history of which, poor as it is in persons, we learn from our youth +up out of the mouths of all educated people, before compilations +recount it for us.</p> +<p>As an antidote to the prevailing monomania for reading literary +histories, in order to be able to chatter about everything, without +having any real knowledge at all, let me refer to a passage in +Lichtenberg's works (vol. II., p. 302), which is well worth +perusal.</p> +<p>I believe that the over-minute acquaintance with the history of +science and learning, which is such a prevalent feature of our day, +is very prejudicial to the advance of knowledge itself. There is +pleasure in following up this history; but as a matter of fact, it +leaves the mind, not empty indeed, but without any power of its +own, just because it makes it so full. Whoever has felt the desire, +not to fill up his mind, but to strengthen it, to develop his +faculties and aptitudes, and generally, to enlarge his powers, will +have found that there is nothing so weakening as intercourse with a +so-called littérateur, on a matter of knowledge on which he +has not thought at all, though he knows a thousand little facts +appertaining to its history and literature. It is like reading a +cookery-book when you are hungry. I believe that so-called literary +history will never thrive amongst thoughtful people, who are +conscious of their own worth and the worth of real knowledge. These +people are more given to employing their own reason than to +troubling themselves to know how others have employed theirs. The +worst of it is that, as you will find, the more knowledge takes the +direction of literary research, the less the power of promoting +knowledge becomes; the only thing that increases is pride in the +possession of it. Such persons believe that they possess knowledge +in a greater degree than those who really possess it. It is surely +a well-founded remark, that knowledge never makes its possessor +proud. Those alone let themselves be blown out with pride, who +incapable of extending knowledge in their own persons, occupy +themselves with clearing up dark points in its history, or are able +to recount what others have done. They are proud, because they +consider this occupation, which is mostly of a mechanical nature, +the practice of knowledge. I could illustrate what I mean by +examples, but it would be an odious task.</p> +<p>Still, I wish some one would attempt a <i>tragical</i> history +of literature, giving the way in which the writers and artists, who +form the proudest possession of the various nations which have +given them birth, have been treated by them during their lives. +Such a history would exhibit the ceaseless warfare, which what was +good and genuine in all times and countries has had to wage with +what was bad and perverse. It would tell of the martyrdom of almost +all those who truly enlightened humanity, of almost all the great +masters of every kind of art: it would show us how, with few +exceptions, they were tormented to death, without recognition, +without sympathy, without followers; how they lived in poverty and +misery, whilst fame, honor, and riches, were the lot of the +unworthy; how their fate was that of Esau, who while he was hunting +and getting venison for his father, was robbed of the blessing by +Jacob, disguised in his brother's clothes, how, in spite of all, +they were kept up by the love of their work, until at last the +bitter fight of the teacher of humanity is over, until the immortal +laurel is held out to him, and the hour strikes when it can be +said:</p> +<p class="poem">Der sehwere Panzer wird zum Flügelkleide<br /> +Kurz ist der Schmerz, unendlich ist die Freude.</p> +<hr /> +<a name="RULE4_5" id="RULE4_5"><!-- RULE4 5 --></a> +<h2>PHYSIOGNOMY.</h2> +<p>That the outer man is a picture of the inner, and the face an +expression and revelation of the whole character, is a presumption +likely enough in itself, and therefore a safe one to go by; +evidenced as it is by the fact that people are always anxious to +see anyone who has made himself famous by good or evil, or as the +author of some extraordinary work; or if they cannot get a sight of +him, to hear at any rate from others what he looks like. So people +go to places where they may expect to see the person who interests +them; the press, especially in England, endeavors to give a minute +and striking description of his appearance; painters and engravers +lose no time in putting him visibly before us; and finally +photography, on that very account of such high value, affords the +most complete satisfaction of our curiosity. It is also a fact that +in private life everyone criticises the physiognomy of those he +comes across, first of all secretly trying to discern their +intellectual and moral character from their features. This would be +a useless proceeding if, as some foolish people fancy, the exterior +of a man is a matter of no account; if, as they think, the soul is +one thing and the body another, and the body related to the soul +merely as the coat to the man himself.</p> +<p>On the contrary, every human face is a hieroglyphic, and a +hieroglyphic, too, which admits of being deciphered, the alphabet +of which we carry about with us already perfected. As a matter of +fact, the face of a man gives us a fuller and more interesting +information than his tongue; for his face is the compendium of all +he will ever say, as it is the one record of all his thoughts and +endeavors. And, moreover, the tongue tells the thought of one man +only, whereas the face expresses a thought of nature itself: so +that everyone is worth attentive observation, even though everyone +may not be worth talking to. And if every individual is worth +observation as a single thought of nature, how much more so is +beauty, since it is a higher and more general conception of nature, +is, in fact, her thought of a species. This is why beauty is so +captivating: it is a fundamental thought of nature: whereas the +individual is only a by-thought, a corollary.</p> +<p>In private, people always proceed upon the principle that a man +is what he looks; and the principle is a right one, only the +difficulty lies in its application. For though the art of applying +the principle is partly innate and may be partly gained by +experience, no one is a master of it, and even the most experienced +is not infallible. But for all that, whatever Figaro may say, it is +not the face which deceives; it is we who deceive ourselves in +reading in it what is not there.</p> +<p>The deciphering of a face is certainly a great and difficult +art, and the principles of it can never be learnt in the abstract. +The first condition of success is to maintain a purely objective +point of view, which is no easy matter. For, as soon as the +faintest trace of anything subjective is present, whether dislike +or favor, or fear or hope, or even the thought of the impression we +ourselves are making upon the object of our attention the +characters we are trying to decipher become confused and corrupt. +The sound of a language is really appreciated only by one who does +not understand it, and that because, in thinking of the +signification of a word, we pay no regard to the sign itself. So, +in the same way, a physiognomy is correctly gauged only by one to +whom it is still strange, who has not grown accustomed to the face +by constantly meeting and conversing with the man himself. It is, +therefore, strictly speaking, only the first sight of a man which +affords that purely objective view which is necessary for +deciphering his features. An odor affects us only when we first +come in contact with it, and the first glass of wine is the one +which gives us its true taste: in the same way, it is only at the +first encounter that a face makes its full impression upon us. +Consequently the first impression should be carefully attended to +and noted, even written down if the subject of it is of personal +importance, provided, of course, that one can trust one's own sense +of physiognomy. Subsequent acquaintance and intercourse will +obliterate the impression, but time will one day prove whether it +is true.</p> +<p>Let us, however, not conceal from ourselves the fact that this +first impression is for the most part extremely unedifying. How +poor most faces are! With the exception of those that are +beautiful, good-natured, or intellectual, that is to say, the very +few and far between, I believe a person of any fine feeling +scarcely ever sees a new face without a sensation akin to a shock, +for the reason that it presents a new and surprising combination of +unedifying elements. To tell the truth, it is, as a rule, a sorry +sight. There are some people whose faces bear the stamp of such +artless vulgarity and baseness of character, such an animal +limitation of intelligence, that one wonders how they can appear in +public with such a countenance, instead of wearing a mask. There +are faces, indeed, the very sight of which produces a feeling of +pollution. One cannot, therefore, take it amiss of people, whose +privileged position admits of it, if they manage to live in +retirement and completely free from the painful sensation of +"seeing new faces." The metaphysical explanation of this +circumstance rests upon the consideration that the individuality of +a man is precisely that by the very existence of which he should be +reclaimed and corrected. If, on the other hand, a psychological +explanation is satisfactory, let any one ask himself what kind of +physiognomy he may expect in those who have all their life long, +except on the rarest occasions, harbored nothing but petty, base +and miserable thoughts, and vulgar, selfish, envious, wicked and +malicious desires. Every one of these thoughts and desires has set +its mark upon the face during the time it lasted, and by constant +repetition, all these marks have in course of time become furrows +and blotches, so to speak. Consequently, most people's appearance +is such as to produce a shock at first sight; and it is only +gradually that one gets accustomed to it, that is to say, becomes +so deadened to the impression that it has no more effect on +one.</p> +<p>And that the prevailing facial expression is the result of a +long process of innumerable, fleeting and characteristic +contractions of the features is just the reason why intellectual +countenances are of gradual formation. It is, indeed, only in old +age that intellectual men attain their sublime expression, whilst +portraits of them in their youth show only the first traces of it. +But on the other hand, what I have just said about the shock which +the first sight of a face generally produces, is in keeping with +the remark that it is only at that first sight that it makes its +true and full impression. For to get a purely objective and +uncorrupted impression of it, we must stand in no kind of relation +to the person; if possible, we must not yet have spoken with him. +For every conversation places us to some extent upon a friendly +footing, establishes a certain <i>rapport</i>, a mutual subjective +relation, which is at once unfavorable to an objective point of +view. And as everyone's endeavor is to win esteem or friendship for +himself, the man who is under observation will at once employ all +those arts of dissimulation in which he is already versed, and +corrupt us with his airs, hypocrisies and flatteries; so that what +the first look clearly showed will soon be seen by us no more.</p> +<p>This fact is at the bottom of the saying that "most people gain +by further acquaintance"; it ought, however, to run, "delude us by +it." It is only when, later on, the bad qualities manifest +themselves, that our first judgment as a rule receives its +justification and makes good its scornful verdict. It may be that +"a further acquaintance" is an unfriendly one, and if that is so, +we do not find in this case either that people gain by it. Another +reason why people apparently gain on a nearer acquaintance is that +the man whose first aspect warns us from him, as soon as we +converse with him, no longer shows his own being and character, but +also his education; that is, not only what he really is by nature, +but also what he has appropriated to himself out of the common +wealth of mankind. Three-fourths of what he says belongs not to +him, but to the sources from which he obtained it; so that we are +often surprised to hear a minotaur speak so humanly. If we make a +still closer acquaintance, the animal nature, of which his face +gave promise, will manifest itself "in all its splendor." If one is +gifted with an acute sense for physiognomy, one should take special +note of those verdicts which preceded a closer acquaintance and +were therefore genuine. For the face of a man is the exact +impression of what he is; and if he deceives us, that is our fault, +not his. What a man says, on the other hand, is what he thinks, +more often what he has learned, or it may be even, what he pretends +to think. And besides this, when we talk to him, or even hear him +talking to others, we pay no attention to his physiognomy proper. +It is the underlying substance, the fundamental <i>datum</i>, and +we disregard it; what interests us is its pathognomy, its play of +feature during conversation. This, however, is so arranged as to +turn the good side upwards.</p> +<p>When Socrates said to a young man who was introduced to him to +have his capabilities tested, "Talk in order that I may see you," +if indeed by "seeing" he did not simply mean "hearing," he was +right, so far as it is only in conversation that the features and +especially the eyes become animated, and the intellectual resources +and capacities set their mark upon the countenance. This puts us in +a position to form a provisional notion of the degree and capacity +of intelligence; which was in that case Socrates' aim. But in this +connection it is to be observed, firstly, that the rule does not +apply to moral qualities, which lie deeper, and in the second +place, that what from an objective point of view we gain by the +clearer development of the countenance in conversation, we lose +from a subjective standpoint on account of the personal relation +into which the speaker at once enters in regard to us, and which +produces a slight fascination, so that, as explained above, we are +not left impartial observers. Consequently from the last point of +view we might say with greater accuracy, "Do not speak in order +that I may see you."</p> +<p>For to get a pure and fundamental conception of a man's +physiognomy, we must observe him when he is alone and left to +himself. Society of any kind and conversation throw a reflection +upon him which is not his own, generally to his advantage; as he is +thereby placed in a state of action and reaction which sets him +off. But alone and left to himself, plunged in the depths of his +own thoughts and sensations, he is wholly himself, and a +penetrating eye for physiognomy can at one glance take a general +view of his entire character. For his face, looked at by and in +itself, expresses the keynote of all his thoughts and endeavors, +the <i>arrêt irrevocable</i>, the irrevocable decree of his +destiny, the consciousness of which only comes to him when he is +alone.</p> +<p>The study of physiognomy is one of the chief means of a +knowledge of mankind, because the cast of a man's face is the only +sphere in which his arts of dissimulation are of no avail, since +these arts extended only to that play of feature which is akin to +mimicry. And that is why I recommend such a study to be undertaken +when the subject of it is alone and given up to his own thoughts, +and before he is spoken to: and this partly for the reason that it +is only in such a condition that inspection of the physiognomy pure +and simple is possible, because conversation at once lets in a +pathognomical element, in which a man can apply the arts of +dissimulation which he has learned: partly again because personal +contact, even of the very slightest kind, gives a certain bias and +so corrupts the judgment of the observer.</p> +<p>And in regard to the study of physiognomy in general, it is +further to be observed that intellectual capacity is much easier of +discernment than moral character. The former naturally takes a much +more outward direction, and expresses itself not only in the face +and the play of feature, but also in the gait, down even to the +very slightest movement. One could perhaps discriminate from behind +between a blockhead, a fool and a man of genius. The blockhead +would be discerned by the torpidity and sluggishness of all his +movements: folly sets its mark upon every gesture, and so does +intellect and a studious nature. Hence that remark of La +Bruyère that there is nothing so slight, so simple or +imperceptible but that our way of doing it enters in and betrays +us: a fool neither comes nor goes, nor sits down, nor gets up, nor +holds his tongue, nor moves about in the same way as an intelligent +man. (And this is, be it observed by way of parenthesis, the +explanation of that sure and certain instinct which, according to +Helvetius, ordinary folk possess of discerning people of genius, +and of getting out of their way.)</p> +<p>The chief reason for this is that, the larger and more developed +the brain, and the thinner, in relation to it, the spine and +nerves, the greater is the intellect; and not the intellect alone, +but at the same time the mobility and pliancy of all the limbs; +because the brain controls them more immediately and resolutely; so +that everything hangs more upon a single thread, every movement of +which gives a precise expression to its purpose.</p> +<p>This is analogous to, nay, is immediately connected with the +fact that the higher an animal stands in the scale of development, +the easier it becomes to kill it by wounding a single spot. Take, +for example, batrachia: they are slow, cumbrous and sluggish in +their movements; they are unintelligent, and, at the same time, +extremely tenacious of life; the reason of which is that, with a +very small brain, their spine and nerves are very thick. Now gait +and movement of the arms are mainly functions of the brain; our +limbs receive their motion and every little modification of it from +the brain through the medium of the spine.</p> +<p>This is why conscious movements fatigue us: the sensation of +fatigue, like that of pain, has its seat in the brain, not, as +people commonly suppose, in the limbs themselves; hence motion +induces sleep.</p> +<p>On the other hand those motions which are not excited by the +brain, that is, the unconscious movements of organic life, of the +heart, of the lungs, etc., go on in their course without producing +fatigue. And as thought, equally with motion, is a function of the +brain, the character of the brain's activity is expressed equally +in both, according to the constitution of the individual; stupid +people move like lay-figures, while every joint of an intelligent +man is eloquent.</p> +<p>But gesture and movement are not nearly so good an index of +intellectual qualities as the face, the shape and size of the +brain, the contraction and movement of the features, and above all +the eye,—from the small, dull, dead-looking eye of a pig up +through all gradations to the irradiating, flashing eyes of a +genius.</p> +<p>The look of good sense and prudence, even of the best kind, +differs from that of genius, in that the former bears the stamp of +subjection to the will, while the latter is free from it.</p> +<p>And therefore one can well believe the anecdote told by +Squarzafichi in his life of Petrarch, and taken from Joseph +Brivius, a contemporary of the poet, how once at the court of the +Visconti, when Petrarch and other noblemen and gentlemen were +present, Galeazzo Visconti told his son, who was then a mere boy +(he was afterwards first Duke of Milan), to pick out the wisest of +the company; how the boy looked at them all for a little, and then +took Petrarch by the hand and led him up to his father, to the +great admiration of all present. For so clearly does nature set the +mark of her dignity on the privileged among mankind that even a +child can discern it.</p> +<p>Therefore, I should advise my sagacious countrymen, if ever +again they wish to trumpet about for thirty years a very +commonplace person as a great genius, not to choose for the purpose +such a beerhouse-keeper physiognomy as was possessed by that +philosopher, upon whose face nature had written, in her clearest +characters, the familiar inscription, "commonplace person."</p> +<p>But what applies to intellectual capacity will not apply to +moral qualities, to character. It is more difficult to discern its +physiognomy, because, being of a metaphysical nature, it lies +incomparably deeper.</p> +<p>It is true that moral character is also connected with the +constitution, with the organism, but not so immediately or in such +direct connection with definite parts of its system as is +intellectual capacity.</p> +<p>Hence while everyone makes a show of his intelligence and +endeavors to exhibit it at every opportunity, as something with +which he is in general quite contented, few expose their moral +qualities freely, and most people intentionally cover them up; and +long practice makes the concealment perfect. In the meantime, as I +explained above, wicked thoughts and worthless efforts gradually +set their mask upon the face, especially the eyes. So that, judging +by physiognomy, it is easy to warrant that a given man will never +produce an immortal work; but not that he will never commit a great +crime.</p> +<hr /> +<a name="RULE4_6" id="RULE4_6"><!-- RULE4 6 --></a> +<h2>PSYCHOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS.</h2> +<p>For every animal, and more especially for man, a certain +conformity and proportion between the will and the intellect is +necessary for existing or making any progress in the world. The +more precise and correct the proportion which nature establishes, +the more easy, safe and agreeable will be the passage through the +world. Still, if the right point is only approximately reached, it +will be enough to ward off destruction. There are, then, certain +limits within which the said proportion may vary, and yet preserve +a correct standard of conformity. The normal standard is as +follows. The object of the intellect is to light and lead the will +on its path, and therefore, the greater the force, impetus and +passion, which spurs on the will from within, the more complete and +luminous must be the intellect which is attached to it, that the +vehement strife of the will, the glow of passion, and the intensity +of the emotions, may not lead man astray, or urge him on to ill +considered, false or ruinous action; this will, inevitably, be the +result, if the will is very violent and the intellect very weak. On +the other hand, a phlegmatic character, a weak and languid will, +can get on and hold its own with a small amount of intellect; what +is naturally moderate needs only moderate support. The general +tendency of a want of proportion between the will and the +intellect, in other words, of any variation from the normal +proportion I have mentioned, is to produce unhappiness, whether it +be that the will is greater than the intellect, or the intellect +greater than the will. Especially is this the case when the +intellect is developed to an abnormal degree of strength and +superiority, so as to be out of all proportion to the will, a +condition which is the essence of real genius; the intellect is +then not only more than enough for the needs and aims of life, it +is absolutely prejudicial to them. The result is that, in youth, +excessive energy in grasping the objective world, accompanied by a +vivid imagination and a total lack of experience, makes the mind +susceptible, and an easy prey to extravagant ideas, nay, even to +chimeras; and the result is an eccentric and phantastic character. +And when, in later years, this state of mind yields and passes away +under the teaching of experience, still the genius never feels +himself at home in the common world of every day and the ordinary +business of life; he will never take his place in it, and +accommodate himself to it as accurately as the person of moral +intellect; he will be much more likely to make curious mistakes. +For the ordinary mind feels itself so completely at home in the +narrow circle of its ideas and views of the world that no one can +get the better of it in that sphere; its faculties remain true to +their original purpose, viz., to promote the service of the will; +it devotes itself steadfastly to this end, and abjures extravagant +aims. The genius, on the other hand, is at bottom a <i>monstrum per +excessum</i>; just as, conversely, the passionate, violent and +unintelligent man, the brainless barbarian, is a <i>monstrum per +defectum</i>.</p> +<hr /> +<p><i>The will to live</i>, which forms the inmost core of every +living being, exhibits itself most conspicuously in the higher +order of animals, that is, the cleverer ones; and so in them the +nature of the will may be seen and examined most clearly. For in +the lower orders its activity is not so evident; it has a lower +degree of objectivation; whereas, in the class which stands above +the higher order of animals, that is, in men, reason enters in; and +with reason comes discretion, and with discretion, the capacity of +dissimulation, which throws a veil over the operations of the will. +And in mankind, consequently, the will appears without its mask +only in the affections and the passions. And this is the reason why +passion, when it speaks, always wins credence, no matter what the +passion may be; and rightly so. For the same reason the passions +are the main theme of poets and the stalking horse of actors. The +conspicuousness of the will in the lower order of animals explains +the delight we take in dogs, apes, cats, etc.; it is the entirely +naive way in which they express themselves that gives us so much +pleasure.</p> +<p>The sight of any free animal going about its business +undisturbed, seeking its food, or looking after its young, or +mixing in the company of its kind, all the time being exactly what +it ought to be and can be,—what a strange pleasure it gives +us! Even if it is only a bird, I can watch it for a long time with +delight; or a water rat or a hedgehog; or better still, a weasel, a +deer, or a stag. The main reason why we take so much pleasure in +looking at animals is that we like to see our own nature in such a +simplified form. There is only one mendacious being in the world, +and that is man. Every other is true and sincere, and makes no +attempt to conceal what it is, expressing its feelings just as they +are.</p> +<hr /> +<p>Many things are put down to the force of habit which are rather +to be attributed to the constancy and immutability of original, +innate character, according to which under like circumstances we +always do the same thing: whether it happens for the first or the +hundredth time, it is in virtue of the same necessity. Real force +of habit, as a matter of fact, rests upon that indolent, passive +disposition which seeks to relieve the intellect and the will of a +fresh choice, and so makes us do what we did yesterday and have +done a hundred times before, and of which we know that it will +attain its object. But the truth of the matter lies deeper, and a +more precise explanation of it can be given than appears at first +sight. Bodies which may be moved by mechanical means only are +subject to the power of inertia; and applied to bodies which may be +acted on by motives, this power becomes the force of habit. The +actions which we perform by mere habit come about, in fact, without +any individual separate motive brought into play for the particular +case: hence, in performing them, we really do not think about them. +A motive was present only on the first few occasions on which the +action happened, which has since become a habit: the secondary +after-effect of this motive is the present habit, and it is +sufficient to enable the action to continue: just as when a body +had been set in motion by a push, it requires no more pushing in +order to continue its motion; it will go on to all eternity, if it +meets with no friction. It is the same in the case of animals: +training is a habit which is forced upon them. The horse goes on +drawing his cart quite contentedly, without having to be urged on: +the motion is the continued effect of those strokes of the whip, +which urged him on at first: by the law of inertia they have become +perpetuated as habit. All this is really more than a mere parable: +it is the underlying identity of the will at very different degrees +of its objectivation, in virtue of which the same law of motion +takes such different forms.</p> +<hr /> +<p><i>Vive muchos años</i> is the ordinary greeting in +Spain, and all over the earth it is quite customary to wish people +a long life. It is presumably not a knowledge of life which directs +such a wish; it is rather knowledge of what man is in his inmost +nature, <i>the will to live</i>.</p> +<p>The wish which everyone has that he may be remembered after his +death,—a wish which rises to the longing for posthumous glory +in the case of those whose aims are high,—seems to me to +spring from this clinging to life. When the time comes which cuts a +man off from every possibility of real existence, he strives after +a life which is still attainable, even though it be a shadowy and +ideal one.</p> +<hr /> +<p>The deep grief we feel at the loss of a friend arises from the +feeling that in every individual there is something which no words +can express, something which is peculiarly his own and therefore +irreparable. <i>Omne individuum ineffabile</i>.</p> +<hr /> +<p>We may come to look upon the death of our enemies and +adversaries, even long after it has occurred, with just as much +regret as we feel for that of our friends, viz., when we miss them +as witnesses of our brilliant success.</p> +<hr /> +<p>That the sudden announcement of a very happy event may easily +prove fatal rests upon the fact that happiness and misery depend +merely on the proportion which our claims bear to what we get. +Accordingly, the good things we possess, or are certain of getting, +are not felt to be such; because all pleasure is in fact of a +negative nature and effects the relief of pain, while pain or evil +is what is really positive; it is the object of immediate +sensation. With the possession or certain expectation of good +things our demands rises, and increases our capacity for further +possession and larger expectations. But if we are depressed by +continual misfortune, and our claims reduced to a minimum, the +sudden advent of happiness finds no capacity for enjoying it. +Neutralized by an absence of pre-existing claims, its effects are +apparently positive, and so its whole force is brought into play; +hence it may possibly break our feelings, <i>i.e.</i>, be fatal to +them. And so, as is well known, one must be careful in announcing +great happiness. First, one must get the person to hope for it, +then open up the prospect of it, then communicate part of it, and +at last make it fully known. Every portion of the good news loses +its efficacy, because it is anticipated by a demand, and room is +left for an increase in it. In view of all this, it may be said +that our stomach for good fortune is bottomless, but the entrance +to it is narrow. These remarks are not applicable to great +misfortunes in the same way. They are more seldom fatal, because +hope always sets itself against them. That an analogous part is not +played by fear in the case of happiness results from the fact that +we are instinctively more inclined to hope than to fear; just as +our eyes turn of themselves towards light rather than darkness.</p> +<hr /> +<p>Hope is the result of confusing the desire that something should +take place with the probability that it will. Perhaps no man is +free from this folly of the heart, which deranges the intellect's +correct appreciation of probability to such an extent that, if the +chances are a thousand to one against it, yet the event is thought +a likely one. Still in spite of this, a sudden misfortune is like a +death stroke, whilst a hope that is always disappointed and still +never dies, is like death by prolonged torture.</p> +<p>He who has lost all hope has also lost all fear; this is the +meaning of the expression "desperate." It is natural to a man to +believe what he wishes to be true, and to believe it because he +wishes it, If this characteristic of our nature, at once beneficial +and assuaging, is rooted out by many hard blows of fate, and a man +comes, conversely, to a condition in which he believes a thing must +happen because he does not wish it, and what he wishes to happen +can never be, just because he wishes it, this is in reality the +state described as "desperation."</p> +<hr /> +<p>That we are so often deceived in others is not because our +judgment is at fault, but because in general, as Bacon says, +<i>intellectus luminis sicci non est, sed recipit infusionem a +voluntate et affectibus</i>: that is to say, trifles unconsciously +bias us for or against a person from the very beginning. It may +also be explained by our not abiding by the qualities which we +really discover; we go on to conclude the presence of others which +we think inseparable from them, or the absence of those which we +consider incompatible. For instance, when we perceive generosity, +we infer justice; from piety, we infer honesty; from lying, +deception; from deception, stealing, etc.; a procedure which opens +the door to many false views, partly because human nature is so +strange, partly because our standpoint is so one-sided. It is true, +indeed, that character always forms a consistent and connected +whole; but the roots of all its qualities lie too deep to allow of +our concluding from particular data in a given case whether certain +qualities can or cannot exist together.</p> +<hr /> +<p>We often happen to say things that may in some way or other be +prejudicial to us; but we keep silent about things that might make +us look ridiculous; because in this case effect follows very +quickly on cause.</p> +<hr /> +<p>The pain of an unfulfilled wish is small in comparison with that +of repentance; for the one stands in the presence of the vast open +future, whilst the other has the irrevocable past closed behind +it.</p> +<hr /> +<p><i>Geduld, patientia</i>, patience, especially the Spanish +<i>sufrimiento</i>, is strongly connected with the notion of +<i>suffering</i>. It is therefore a passive state, just as the +opposite is an active state of the mind, with which, when great, +patience is incompatible. It is the innate virtue of a phlegmatic, +indolent, and spiritless people, as also of women. But that it is +nevertheless so very useful and necessary is a sign that the world +is very badly constituted.</p> +<hr /> +<p>Money is human happiness in the abstract: he, then, who is no +longer capable of enjoying human happiness in the concrete, devotes +his heart entirely to money.</p> +<hr /> +<p>Obstinacy is the result of the will forcing itself into the +place of the intellect.</p> +<hr /> +<p>If you want to find out your real opinion of anyone, observe the +impression made upon you by the first sight of a letter from +him.</p> +<hr /> +<p>The course of our individual life and the events in it, as far +as their true meaning and connection is concerned, may be compared +to a piece of rough mosaic. So long as you stand close in front of +it, you cannot get a right view of the objects presented, nor +perceive their significance or beauty. Both come in sight only when +you stand a little way off. And in the same way you often +understand the true connection of important events in your life, +not while they are going on, nor soon after they are past, but only +a considerable time afterwards.</p> +<p>Is this so, because we require the magnifying effect of +imagination? or because we can get a general view only from a +distance? or because the school of experience makes our judgment +ripe? Perhaps all of these together: but it is certain that we +often view in the right light the actions of others, and +occasionally even our own, only after the lapse of years. And as it +is in one's own life, so it is in history.</p> +<p>Happy circumstances in life are like certain groups of trees. +Seen from a distance they look very well: but go up to them and +amongst them, and the beauty vanishes; you don't know where it can +be; it is only trees you see. And so it is that we often envy the +lot of others.</p> +<hr /> +<p>The doctor sees all the weakness of mankind, the lawyer all the +wickedness, the theologian all the stupidity.</p> +<hr /> +<p>A person of phlegmatic disposition who is a blockhead, would, +with a sanguine nature, be a fool.</p> +<hr /> +<p>Now and then one learns something, but one forgets the whole day +long.</p> +<p>Moreover our memory is like a sieve, the holes of which in time +get larger and larger: the older we get, the quicker anything +entrusted to it slips from the memory, whereas, what was fixed fast +in it in early days is there still. The memory of an old man gets +clearer and clearer, the further it goes back, and less clear the +nearer it approaches the present time; so that his memory, like his +eyes, becomes short-sighted.</p> +<hr /> +<p>In the process of learning you may be apprehensive about +bewildering and confusing the memory, but not about overloading it, +in the strict sense of the word. The faculty for remembering is not +diminished in proportion to what one has learnt, just as little as +the number of moulds in which you cast sand, lessens its capacity +for being cast in new moulds. In this sense the memory is +bottomless. And yet the greater and more various any one's +knowledge, the longer he takes to find out anything that may +suddenly be asked him; because he is like a shopkeeper who has to +get the article wanted from a large and multifarious store; or, +more strictly speaking, because out of many possible trains of +thought he has to recall exactly that one which, as a result of +previous training, leads to the matter in question. For the memory +is not a repository of things you wish to preserve, but a mere +dexterity of the intellectual powers; hence the mind always +contains its sum of knowledge only potentially, never actually.</p> +<p>It sometimes happens that my memory will not reproduce some word +in a foreign language, or a name, or some artistic expression, +although I know it very well. After I have bothered myself in vain +about it for a longer or a shorter time, I give up thinking about +it altogether. An hour or two afterwards, in rare cases even later +still, sometimes only after four or five weeks, the word I was +trying to recall occurs to me while I am thinking of something +else, as suddenly as if some one had whispered it to me. After +noticing this phenomenon with wonder for very many years, I have +come to think that the probable explanation of it is as follows. +After the troublesome and unsuccessful search, my will retains its +craving to know the word, and so sets a watch for it in the +intellect. Later on, in the course and play of thought, some word +by chance occurs having the same initial letters or some other +resemblance to the word which is sought; then the sentinel springs +forward and supplies what is wanting to make up the word, seizes +it, and suddenly brings it up in triumph, without my knowing where +and how he got it; so it seems as if some one had whispered it to +me. It is the same process as that adopted by a teacher towards a +child who cannot repeat a word; the teacher just suggests the first +letter of the word, or even the second too; then the child +remembers it. In default of this process, you can end by going +methodically through all the letters of the alphabet.</p> +<p>In the ordinary man, injustice rouses a passionate desire for +vengeance; and it has often been said that vengeance is sweet. How +many sacrifices have been made just to enjoy the feeling of +vengeance, without any intention of causing an amount of injury +equivalent to what one has suffered. The bitter death of the +centaur Nessus was sweetened by the certainty that he had used his +last moments to work out an extremely clever vengeance. Walter +Scott expresses the same human inclination in language as true as +it is strong: "Vengeance is the sweetest morsel to the mouth that +ever was cooked in hell!" I shall now attempt a psychological +explanation of it.</p> +<p>Suffering which falls to our lot in the course of nature, or by +chance, or fate, does not, <i>ceteris paribus</i>, seem so painful +as suffering which is inflicted on us by the arbitrary will of +another. This is because we look upon nature and chance as the +fundamental masters of the world; we see that the blow we received +from them might just as well have fallen on another. In the case of +suffering which springs from this source, we bewail the common lot +of humanity rather than our own misfortune. But that it is the +arbitrary will of another which inflicts the suffering, is a +peculiarly bitter addition to the pain or injury it causes, viz., +the consciousness that some one else is superior to us, whether by +force or cunning, while we lie helpless. If amends are possible, +amends heal the injury; but that bitter addition, "and it was you +who did that to me," which is often more painful than the injury +itself, is only to be neutralized by vengeance. By inflicting +injury on the one who has injured us, whether we do it by force or +cunning, is to show our superiority to him, and to annul the proof +of his superiority to us. That gives our hearts the satisfaction +towards which it yearns. So where there is a great deal of pride +and vanity, there also will there be a great desire of vengeance. +But as the fulfillment of every wish brings with it more or less of +a sense of disappointment, so it is with vengeance. The delight we +hope to get from it is mostly embittered by compassion. Vengeance +taken will often tear the heart and torment the conscience: the +motive to it is no longer active, and what remains is the evidence +of our malice.</p> +<hr /> +<a name="RULE4_7" id="RULE4_7"><!-- RULE4 7 --></a> +<h2>THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.</h2> +<p>When the Church says that, in the dogmas of religion, reason is +totally incompetent and blind, and its use to be reprehended, it is +in reality attesting the fact that these dogmas are allegorical in +their nature, and are not to be judged by the standard which +reason, taking all things <i>sensu proprio</i>, can alone apply. +Now the absurdities of a dogma are just the mark and sign of what +is allegorical and mythical in it. In the case under consideration, +however, the absurdities spring from the fact that two such +heterogeneous doctrines as those of the Old and New Testaments had +to be combined. The great allegory was of gradual growth. Suggested +by external and adventitious circumstances, it was developed by the +interpretation put upon them, an interpretation in quiet touch with +certain deep-lying truths only half realized. The allegory was +finally completed by Augustine, who penetrated deepest into its +meaning, and so was able to conceive it as a systematic whole and +supply its defects. Hence the Augustinian doctrine, confirmed by +Luther, is the complete form of Christianity; and the Protestants +of to-day, who take Revelation <i>sensu proprio</i> and confine it +to a single individual, are in error in looking upon the first +beginnings of Christianity as its most perfect expression. But the +bad thing about all religions is that, instead of being able to +confess their allegorical nature, they have to conceal it; +accordingly, they parade their doctrine in all seriousness as true +<i>sensu proprio</i>, and as absurdities form an essential part of +these doctrines, you have the great mischief of a continual fraud. +And, what is worse, the day arrives when they are no longer true +<i>sensu proprio</i>, and then there is an end of them; so that, in +that respect, it would be better to admit their allegorical nature +at once. But the difficulty is to teach the multitude that +something can be both true and untrue at the same time. And as all +religions are in a greater or less degree of this nature, we must +recognize the fact that mankind cannot get on without a certain +amount of absurdity, that absurdity is an element in its existence, +and illusion indispensable; as indeed other aspects of life +testify. I have said that the combination of the Old Testament with +the New gives rise to absurdities. Among the examples which +illustrate what I mean, I may cite the Christian doctrine of +Predestination and Grace, as formulated by Augustine and adopted +from him by Luther; according to which one man is endowed with +grace and another is not. Grace, then, comes to be a privilege +received at birth and brought ready into the world; a privilege, +too, in a matter second to none in importance. What is obnoxious +and absurd in this doctrine may be traced to the idea contained in +the Old Testament, that man is the creation of an external will, +which called him into existence out of nothing. It is quite true +that genuine moral excellence is really innate; but the meaning of +the Christian doctrine is expressed in another and more rational +way by the theory of metempsychosis, common to Brahmans and +Buddhists. According to this theory, the qualities which +distinguish one man from another are received at birth, are +brought, that is to say, from another world and a former life; +these qualities are not an external gift of grace, but are the +fruits of the acts committed in that other world. But Augustine's +dogma of Predestination is connected with another dogma, namely, +that the mass of humanity is corrupt and doomed to eternal +damnation, that very few will be found righteous and attain +salvation, and that only in consequence of the gift of grace, and +because they are predestined to be saved; whilst the remainder will +be overwhelmed by the perdition they have deserved, viz., eternal +torment in hell. Taken in its ordinary meaning, the dogma is +revolting, for it comes to this: it condemns a man, who may be, +perhaps, scarcely twenty years of age, to expiate his errors, or +even his unbelief, in everlasting torment; nay, more, it makes this +almost universal damnation the natural effect of original sin, and +therefore the necessary consequence of the Fall. This is a result +which must have been foreseen by him who made mankind, and who, in +the first place, made them not better than they are, and secondly, +set a trap for them into which he must have known they would fall; +for he made the whole world, and nothing is hidden from him. +According to this doctrine, then, God created out of nothing a weak +race prone to sin, in order to give them over to endless torment. +And, as a last characteristic, we are told that this God, who +prescribes forbearance and forgiveness of every fault, exercises +none himself, but does the exact opposite; for a punishment which +comes at the end of all things, when the world is over and done +with, cannot have for its object either to improve or deter, and is +therefore pure vengeance. So that, on this view, the whole race is +actually destined to eternal torture and damnation, and created +expressly for this end, the only exception being those few persons +who are rescued by election of grace, from what motive one does not +know.</p> +<p>Putting these aside, it looks as if the Blessed Lord had created +the world for the benefit of the devil! it would have been so much +better not to have made it at all. So much, then, for a dogma taken +<i>sensu proprio</i>. But look at it <i>sensu allegorico</i>, and +the whole matter becomes capable of a satisfactory interpretation. +What is absurd and revolting in this dogma is, in the main, as I +said, the simple outcome of Jewish theism, with its "creation out +of nothing," and really foolish and paradoxical denial of the +doctrine of metempsychosis which is involved in that idea, a +doctrine which is natural, to a certain extent self-evident, and, +with the exception of the Jews, accepted by nearly the whole human +race at all times. To remove the enormous evil arising from +Augustine's dogma, and to modify its revolting nature, Pope Gregory +I., in the sixth century, very prudently matured the doctrine of +<i>Purgatory</i>, the essence of which already existed in Origen +(cf. Bayle's article on Origen, note B.). The doctrine was +regularly incorporated into the faith of the Church, so that the +original view was much modified, and a certain substitute provided +for the doctrine of metempsychosis; for both the one and the other +admit a process of purification. To the same end, the doctrine of +"the Restoration of all things" [Greek: apokatastasis] was +established, according to which, in the last act of the Human +Comedy, the sinners one and all will be reinstated <i>in +integrum</i>. It is only Protestants, with their obstinate belief +in the Bible, who cannot be induced to give up eternal punishment +in hell. If one were spiteful, one might say, "much good may it do +them," but it is consoling to think that they really do not believe +the doctrine; they leave it alone, thinking in their hearts, "It +can't be so bad as all that."</p> +<p>The rigid and systematic character of his mind led Augustine, in +his austere dogmatism and his resolute definition of doctrines only +just indicated in the Bible and, as a matter of fact, resting on +very vague grounds, to give hard outlines to these doctrines and to +put a harsh construction on Christianity: the result of which is +that his views offend us, and just as in his day Pelagianism arose +to combat them, so now in our day Rationalism does the same. Take, +for example, the case as he states it generally in the <i>De +Civitate Dei</i>, Bk. xii. ch. 21. It comes to this: God creates a +being out of nothing, forbids him some things, and enjoins others +upon him; and because these commands are not obeyed, he tortures +him to all eternity with every conceivable anguish; and for this +purpose, binds soul and body inseparably together, so that, +instead, of the torment destroying this being by splitting him up +into his elements, and so setting him free, he may live to eternal +pain. This poor creature, formed out of nothing! At least, he has a +claim on his original nothing: he should be assured, as a matter of +right, of this last retreat, which, in any case, cannot be a very +evil one: it is what he has inherited. I, at any rate, cannot help +sympathizing with him. If you add to this Augustine's remaining +doctrines, that all this does not depend on the man's own sins and +omissions, but was already predestined to happen, one really is at +a loss what to think. Our highly educated Rationalists say, to be +sure, "It's all false, it's a mere bugbear; we're in a state of +constant progress, step by step raising ourselves to ever greater +perfection." Ah! what a pity we didn't begin sooner; we should +already have been there.</p> +<p>In the Christian system the devil is a personage of the greatest +importance. God is described as absolutely good, wise and powerful; +and unless he were counterbalanced by the devil, it would be +impossible to see where the innumerable and measureless evils, +which predominate in the world, come from, if there were no devil +to account for them. And since the Rationalists have done away with +the devil, the damage inflicted on the other side has gone on +growing, and is becoming more and more palpable; as might have been +foreseen, and was foreseen, by the orthodox. The fact is, you +cannot take away one pillar from a building without endangering the +rest of it. And this confirms the view, which has been established +on other grounds, that Jehovah is a transformation of Ormuzd, and +Satan of the Ahriman who must be taken in connection with him. +Ormuzd himself is a transformation of Indra.</p> +<p>Christianity has this peculiar disadvantage, that, unlike other +religions, it is not a pure system of doctrine: its chief and +essential feature is that it is a history, a series of events, a +collection of facts, a statement of the actions and sufferings of +individuals: it is this history which constitutes dogma, and belief +in it is salvation. Other religions, Buddhism, for instance, have, +it is true, historical appendages, the life, namely, of their +founders: this, however, is not part and parcel of the dogma but is +taken along with it. For example, the Lalitavistara may be compared +with the Gospel so far as it contains the life of Sakya-muni, the +Buddha of the present period of the world's history: but this is +something which is quite separate and different from the dogma, +from the system itself: and for this reason; the lives of former +Buddhas were quite other, and those of the future will be quite +other, than the life of the Buddha of to-day. The dogma is by no +means one with the career of its founder; it does not rest on +individual persons or events; it is something universal and equally +valid at all times. The Lalitavistara is not, then, a gospel in the +Christian sense of the word; it is not the joyful message of an act +of redemption; it is the career of him who has shown how each one +may redeem himself. The historical constitution of Christianity +makes the Chinese laugh at missionaries as story-tellers.</p> +<p>I may mention here another fundamental error of Christianity, an +error which cannot be explained away, and the mischievous +consequences of which are obvious every day: I mean the unnatural +distinction Christianity makes between man and the animal world to +which he really belongs. It sets up man as all-important, and looks +upon animals as merely things. Brahmanism and Buddhism, on the +other hand, true to the facts, recognize in a positive way that man +is related generally to the whole of nature, and specially and +principally to animal nature; and in their systems man is always +represented by the theory of metempsychosis and otherwise, as +closely connected with the animal world. The important part played +by animals all through Buddhism and Brahmanism, compared with the +total disregard of them in Judaism and Christianity, puts an end to +any question as to which system is nearer perfection, however much +we in Europe may have become accustomed to the absurdity of the +claim. Christianity contains, in fact, a great and essential +imperfection in limiting its precepts to man, and in refusing +rights to the entire animal world. As religion fails to protect +animals against the rough, unfeeling and often more than bestial +multitude, the duty falls to the police; and as the police are +unequal to the task, societies for the protection of animals are +now formed all over Europe and America. In the whole of +uncircumcised Asia, such a procedure would be the most superfluous +thing in the world, because animals are there sufficiently +protected by religion, which even makes them objects of charity. +How such charitable feelings bear fruit may be seen, to take an +example, in the great hospital for animals at Surat, whither +Christians, Mohammedans and Jews can send their sick beasts, which, +if cured, are very rightly not restored to their owners. In the +same way when a Brahman or a Buddhist has a slice of good luck, a +happy issue in any affair, instead of mumbling a <i>Te Deum</i>, he +goes to the market-place and buys birds and opens their cages at +the city gate; a thing which may be frequently seen in Astrachan, +where the adherents of every religion meet together: and so on in a +hundred similar ways. On the other hand, look at the revolting +ruffianism with which our Christian public treats its animals; +killing them for no object at all, and laughing over it, or +mutilating or torturing them: even its horses, who form its most +direct means of livelihood, are strained to the utmost in their old +age, and the last strength worked out of their poor bones until +they succumb at last under the whip. One might say with truth, +Mankind are the devils of the earth, and the animals the souls they +torment. But what can you expect from the masses, when there are +men of education, zoologists even, who, instead of admitting what +is so familiar to them, the essential identity of man and animal, +are bigoted and stupid enough to offer a zealous opposition to +their honest and rational colleagues, when they class man under the +proper head as an animal, or demonstrate the resemblance between +him and the chimpanzee or ourang-outang. It is a revolting thing +that a writer who is so pious and Christian in his sentiments as +Jung Stilling should use a simile like this, in his <i>Scenen aus +dem Geisterreich</i>. (Bk. II. sc. i., p. 15.) "Suddenly the +skeleton shriveled up into an indescribably hideous and dwarf-like +form, just as when you bring a large spider into the focus of a +burning glass, and watch the purulent blood hiss and bubble in the +heat." This man of God then was guilty of such infamy! or looked on +quietly when another was committing it! in either case it comes to +the same thing here. So little harm did he think of it that he +tells us of it in passing, and without a trace of emotion. Such are +the effects of the first chapter of Genesis, and, in fact, of the +whole of the Jewish conception of nature. The standard recognized +by the Hindus and Buddhists is the Mahavakya (the great +word),—"tat-twam-asi" (this is thyself), which may always be +spoken of every animal, to keep us in mind of the identity of his +inmost being with ours. Perfection of morality, indeed! +Nonsense.</p> +<p>The fundamental characteristics of the Jewish religion are +realism and optimism, views of the world which are closely allied; +they form, in fact, the conditions of theism. For theism looks upon +the material world as absolutely real, and regards life as a +pleasant gift bestowed upon us. On the other hand, the fundamental +characteristics of the Brahman and Buddhist religions are idealism +and pessimism, which look upon the existence of the world as in the +nature of a dream, and life as the result of our sins. In the +doctrines of the Zendavesta, from which, as is well known, Judaism +sprang, the pessimistic element is represented by Ahriman. In +Judaism, Ahriman has as Satan only a subordinate position; but, +like Ahriman, he is the lord of snakes, scorpions, and vermin. But +the Jewish system forthwith employs Satan to correct its +fundamental error of optimism, and in the <i>Fall</i> introduces +the element of pessimism, a doctrine demanded by the most obvious +facts of the world. There is no truer idea in Judaism than this, +although it transfers to the course of existence what must be +represented as its foundation and antecedent.</p> +<p>The New Testament, on the other hand, must be in some way +traceable to an Indian source: its ethical system, its ascetic view +of morality, its pessimism, and its Avatar, are all thoroughly +Indian. It is its morality which places it in a position of such +emphatic and essential antagonism to the Old Testament, so that the +story of the Fall is the only possible point of connection between +the two. For when the Indian doctrine was imported into the land of +promise, two very different things had to be combined: on the one +hand the consciousness of the corruption and misery of the world, +its need of deliverance and salvation through an Avatar, together +with a morality based on self-denial and repentance; on the other +hand the Jewish doctrine of Monotheism, with its corollary that +"all things are very good" [Greek: panta kala lian]. And the task +succeeded as far as it could, as far, that is, as it was possible +to combine two such heterogeneous and antagonistic creeds.</p> +<p>As ivy clings for the support and stay it wants to a rough-hewn +post, everywhere conforming to its irregularities and showing their +outline, but at the same time covering them with life and grace, +and changing the former aspect into one that is pleasing to the +eye; so the Christian faith, sprung from the wisdom of India, +overspreads the old trunk of rude Judaism, a tree of alien growth; +the original form must in part remain, but it suffers a complete +change and becomes full of life and truth, so that it appears to be +the same tree, but is really another.</p> +<p>Judaism had presented the Creator as separated from the world, +which he produced out of nothing. Christianity identifies this +Creator with the Saviour, and through him, with humanity: he stands +as their representative; they are redeemed in him, just as they +fell in Adam, and have lain ever since in the bonds of iniquity, +corruption, suffering and death. Such is the view taken by +Christianity in common with Buddhism; the world can no longer be +looked at in the light of Jewish optimism, which found "all things +very good": nay, in the Christian scheme, the devil is named as its +Prince or Ruler ([Greek: ho archon tou kosmoutoutou.] John 12, 33). +The world is no longer an end, but a means: and the realm of +everlasting joy lies beyond it and the grave. Resignation in this +world and direction of all our hopes to a better, form the spirit +of Christianity. The way to this end is opened by the Atonement, +that is the Redemption from this world and its ways. And in the +moral system, instead of the law of vengeance, there is the command +to love your enemy; instead of the promise of innumerable +posterity, the assurance of eternal life; instead of visiting the +sins of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth +generations, the Holy Spirit governs and overshadows all.</p> +<p>We see, then, that the doctrines of the Old Testament are +rectified and their meaning changed by those of the New, so that, +in the most important and essential matters, an agreement is +brought about between them and the old religions of India. +Everything which is true in Christianity may also be found in +Brahmanism and Buddhism. But in Hinduism and Buddhism you will look +in vain for any parallel to the Jewish doctrines of "a nothing +quickened into life," or of "a world made in time," which cannot be +humble enough in its thanks and praises to Jehovah for an ephemeral +existence full of misery, anguish and need.</p> +<p>Whoever seriously thinks that superhuman beings have ever given +our race information as to the aim of its existence and that of the +world, is still in his childhood. There is no other revelation than +the thoughts of the wise, even though these thoughts, liable to +error as is the lot of everything human, are often clothed in +strange allegories and myths under the name of religion. So far, +then, it is a matter of indifference whether a man lives and dies +in reliance on his own or another's thoughts; for it is never more +than human thought, human opinion, which he trusts. Still, instead +of trusting what their own minds tell them, men have as a rule a +weakness for trusting others who pretend to supernatural sources of +knowledge. And in view of the enormous intellectual inequality +between man and man, it is easy to see that the thoughts of one +mind might appear as in some sense a revelation to another.</p> +<br /> +<hr class="full" /> +<pre> + +<div>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 10833 ***</div> +</body> +</html> |