initial commit of ebook 25338HEADmain

189 files changed, 14123 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/25338-8.txt b/25338-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..270171b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,4612 @@
+The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Idea of God in Early Religions, by F. B.
+Jevons
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+
+
+
+Title: The Idea of God in Early Religions
+
+
+Author: F. B. Jevons
+
+
+
+Release Date: May 5, 2008  [eBook #25338]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE IDEA OF GOD IN EARLY
+RELIGIONS***
+
+
+E-text prepared by Juliet Sutherland, Jeannie Howse, and the Project
+Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net)
+
+
+
+THE IDEA OF GOD IN EARLY RELIGIONS
+
+by
+
+F. B. JEVONS, LITT.D.
+
+Professor of Philosophy in the
+University of Durham
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Cambridge:
+at the University Press
+1913
+
+First Edition, 1910
+Reprinted 1911, 1913
+
+      _With the exception of the coat of arms at the foot, the
+      design on the title page is a reproduction of one used by
+      the earliest known Cambridge printer, John Siberch, 1521_
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+In _The Varieties of Religious Experience_ the late Professor William
+James has said (p. 465): 'The religious phenomenon, studied as an
+inner fact, and apart from ecclesiastical or theological
+complications, has shown itself to consist everywhere, and at all its
+stages, in the consciousness which individuals have of an intercourse
+between themselves and higher powers with which they feel themselves
+to be related. This intercourse is realised at the time as being both
+active and mutual.' The book now before the reader deals with the
+religious phenomenon, studied as an inner fact, in the earlier stages
+of religion. By 'the Idea of God' may be meant either the
+consciousness which individuals have of higher powers, with which they
+feel themselves to be related, or the words in which they, or others,
+seek to express that consciousness. Those words may be an expression,
+that is to say an interpretation or a misinterpretation, of that
+consciousness. But the words are not the consciousness: the feeling,
+without which the consciousness does not exist, may be absent when the
+words are spoken or heard. It is however through the words that we
+have to approach the feeling and the consciousness of others, and to
+determine whether and how far the feeling and the consciousness so
+approached are similar in all individuals everywhere and at all
+stages.
+
+                                               F. B. JEVONS.
+
+  HATFIELD HALL,
+    DURHAM.
+      _October, 1910_
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+                                                             PAGE
+
+     BIBLIOGRAPHY                                              ix
+
+  I. INTRODUCTION                                               1
+
+ II. THE IDEA OF GOD IN MYTHOLOGY                              30
+
+III. THE IDEA OF GOD IN WORSHIP                                60
+
+ IV. THE IDEA OF GOD IN PRAYER                                103
+
+  V. THE IDEA AND BEING OF GOD                                152
+
+     INDEX                                                    167
+
+
+
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY
+
+
+  Allen, Grant. The Evolution of the Idea of God. London, 1897.
+
+  Anthropology and the Classics. Oxford, 1908.
+
+  Bastian, A. Volks- und Menschenkunde. Berlin, 1888.
+
+  Bousset, W. What is Religion? (English Translation). London, 1907.
+
+  Crawley, A.E. The Idea of the Soul. London, 1909.
+
+  Fossey, C. La Magie Assyrienne. Paris, 1902.
+
+  Frazer, J.G. Early History of the Kingship. London, 1895.
+
+  ---- The Golden Bough. London, 1900.
+
+  ---- Psyche's Task. London, 1909.
+
+  Gardner, P. Modernity and the Churches. London, 1909.
+
+  Hobhouse, L.T. Morals in Evolution. London, 1906.
+
+  Höffding, H. The Philosophy of Religion (English Translation).
+    London, 1906.
+
+  Hollis, A.C. The Masai. Oxford, 1905.
+
+  ---- The Nandi. Oxford, 1909.
+
+  James, W. The Varieties of Religious Experience. London, 1902.
+
+  Jastrow, M. Jun. Study of Religion. London, 1901.
+
+  Jevons, F.B. Introduction to the History of Religion. London,
+    1896.
+
+  ---- Religion in Evolution. London, 1906.
+
+  ---- Study of Comparative Religion. London, 1908.
+
+  Lang, A. Magic and Religion. London, 1901.
+
+  ---- The Making of Religion. London, 1898.
+
+  Mackenzie, W.D. The Final Faith. London, 1910.
+
+  Marett, R.R. The Threshold of Religion. London, 1909.
+
+  Mitchell, H.B. Talks on Religion. London, 1908.
+
+  Nassau, R.H. Fetichism in West Africa. London, 1904.
+
+  Parker, K.L. The Euahlayi Tribe. London, 1905.
+
+  Saussaye, P.D.C. de la. Religionsgeschichte. Freiburg i. B., 1889.
+
+  Schaarschmidt, C. Die Religion. Leipzig, 1907.
+
+  Thompson, R.C. Semitic Magic. London, 1908.
+
+  Tisdall W. St C. Comparative Religion. London, 1909.
+
+  Transactions of the Third International Congress of the History of
+    Religions. Oxford, 1908.
+
+  Tylor, E.B. Primitive Culture. London, 1873.
+
+  Westermarck, E. Origin and Development of Moral Ideas. London,
+    1906.
+
+  Wundt, W. Völkerpsychologie. Leipzig, 1904-6.
+
+
+
+
+I
+
+INTRODUCTION
+
+
+Every child that is born is born of a community and into a community,
+which existed before his birth and will continue to exist after his
+death. He learns to speak the language which the community spoke
+before he was born, and which the community will continue to speak
+after he has gone. In learning the language he acquires not only words
+but ideas; and the words and ideas he acquires, the thoughts he thinks
+and the words in which he utters them, are those of the community from
+which he learnt them, which taught them before he was born and will go
+on teaching them after he is dead. He not only learns to speak the
+words and think the ideas, to reproduce the mode of thought, as he
+does the form of speech, of the circumambient community: he is taught
+and learns to act as those around him do--as the community has done
+and will tend to do. The community--the narrower community of the
+family, first, and, afterwards, the wider community to which the
+family belongs--teaches him how he ought to speak, what he ought to
+think, and how he ought to act. The consciousness of the child
+reproduces the consciousness of the community to which he belongs--the
+common consciousness, which existed before him and will continue to
+exist after him.
+
+The common consciousness is not only the source from which the
+individual gets his mode of speech, thought and action, but the court
+of appeal which decides what is fact. If a question is raised whether
+the result of a scientific experiment is what it is alleged by the
+original maker of the experiment to be, the appeal is to the common
+consciousness: any one who chooses to make the experiment in the way
+described will find the result to be of the kind alleged; if everyone
+else, on experiment, finds it to be so, it is established as a fact of
+common consciousness; if no one else finds it to be so, the alleged
+discovery is not a fact but an erroneous inference.
+
+Now, it is not merely with regard to external facts or facts
+apprehended through the senses, that the common consciousness is
+accepted as the court of appeal. The allegation may be that an
+emotion, of a specified kind--alarm or fear, wonder or awe--is, in
+specified circumstances, experienced as a fact of the common
+consciousness. Or a body of men may have a common purpose, or a common
+idea, as well as an emotion of, say, common alarm. If the purpose,
+idea or emotion, be common to them and experienced by all of them, it
+is a fact of their common consciousness. In this case, as in the case
+of any alleged but disputed discovery in science, the common
+consciousness is the court of appeal which decides the facts, and
+determines whether what an individual thinks he has discovered in his
+consciousness is really a fact of the common consciousness. The idea
+of powers superior to man, the emotion of awe or reverence, which goes
+with the idea, and the purpose of communicating with the power in
+question are facts, not peculiar to this or that individual
+consciousness, but facts of the common consciousness of all mankind.
+
+The child up to a certain age has no consciousness of self: the
+absence of self-consciousness is one of the charms of children. The
+child imitates its elders, who speak of him and to him by his name. He
+speaks of himself in the third person and not in the first person
+singular, and designates himself by his proper name and not by means
+of the personal pronoun 'I'; eventually the child acquires the use and
+to some extent learns the meaning of the first personal pronoun; that
+is, if the language of the community to which he belongs has developed
+so far as to have produced such a pronoun. For there was a period in
+the evolution of speech when, as yet, a first personal pronoun had not
+been evolved; and that, probably, for the simple reason that the idea
+which it denotes was as unknown to the community as it is to the child
+whose absence of self-consciousness is so pleasing. For a period, the
+length of which may have been millions of years, the common
+consciousness, the consciousness of the community, did not discover or
+discriminate, in language or in thought, the existence of the
+individual self.
+
+The importance of this consideration lies in its bearing upon the
+question, in what form the idea of powers superior to man disclosed
+itself in the common consciousness at that period. It is held by many
+students of the science of religion that fetishism preceded polytheism
+in the history of religion; and it is undoubted that polytheism
+flourished at the expense of fetishism. But what is exactly the
+difference between fetishism and polytheism? No one now any longer
+holds that a fetish is regarded, by believers in fetish, as a material
+object and nothing more: everyone recognises that the material object
+to which the term is applied is regarded as the habitation of a
+spiritual being. The material object in question is to the fetish what
+the idol of a god is to a god. If the material object, through which,
+or in which, the fetish-spirit manifests itself, bears no resemblance
+to human form, neither do the earliest stocks or blocks in which gods
+manifest themselves bear any resemblance to human form. Such unshaped
+stocks do not of themselves tell us whether they are fetishes or gods
+to their worshippers. The test by which the student of the science of
+religion determines the question is a very simple one: it is, who
+worships the object in question? If the object is the private property
+of some individual, it is fetish; if it is worshipped by the community
+as a whole, it, or rather the spirit which manifests itself therein,
+is a god of the community. The functions of the two beings differ
+accordingly: the god receives the prayers of the community and has
+power to grant them; the fetish has power to grant the wishes of the
+individual who owns it. The consequence of this difference in function
+is that as the wishes of the individual may be inconsistent with the
+welfare of other members of the community; as the fetish may be, and
+actually is, used to procure injury and death to other members of the
+community; a fetish is anti-social and a danger to the community,
+whereas a god of the community is there expressly as a refuge and a
+help for the community. The fetish fulfils the desires of the
+individual, the self; the god listens to the prayers of the community.
+
+Let us now return to that stage in the evolution of the community
+when, as yet, neither the language nor the thought of the community
+had discovered or discriminated the existence of the individual self.
+If at that stage there was in the common consciousness any idea,
+however dim or confused, of powers superior to man; if that idea was
+accompanied or coloured by any emotion, whether of fear or awe or
+reverence; if that emotion prompted action of any kind; then, such
+powers were not conceived to be fetishes, for the function of a fetish
+is to fulfil the desires of an individual self; and until the
+existence of the individual self is realised, there is no function for
+a fetish to perform.
+
+It may well be that the gradual development of self-consciousness, and
+the slow steps by which language helped to bring forth the idea of
+self, were from the first, and throughout, accompanied by the gradual
+development of the idea of fetishism. But the very development of the
+idea of a power which could fulfil the desires of self, as
+distinguished from, and often opposed to, the interests of the
+community, would stimulate the growth of the idea of a power whose
+special and particular function was to tend the interests of the
+community as a whole. Thus the idea of a fetish and the idea of a god
+could only persist on condition of becoming more and more inconsistent
+with, and contradictory of, one another. If the lines followed by the
+two ideas started from the same point, it was only to diverge the
+more, the further they were pursued. And the tendency of fetishism to
+disappear from the later and higher stages of religion is sufficient
+to show that it did not afford an adequate or satisfactory expression
+of the idea contained in the common consciousness of some power or
+being greater than man. That idea is constantly striving, throughout
+the history of religion, to find or give expression to itself; it is
+constantly discovering that such expressions as it has found for
+itself do it wrong; and it is constantly throwing, or in the process
+of throwing, such expressions aside. Fetishism was thrown aside sooner
+than polytheism: for it was an expression not only inadequate but
+contradictory to the idea that gave it birth. The emotions of fear and
+suspicion, with which the community regarded fetishes, were emotions
+different from the awe or reverence with which the community
+approached its gods.
+
+What practically provokes and stimulates the individual's dawning
+consciousness of himself, or the community's consciousness of the
+individual as in a way distinct from itself, is the dash between the
+desires, wishes, interests of the one, and the desires, wishes and
+interests of the other. But though the interests of the one are
+sometimes at variance with those of the other, still in some cases,
+also, the interests of the individual--even though they be purely
+individual interests--are not inconsistent with those of the
+community; and in most cases they are identical with them--the
+individual promotes his own interests by serving those of the
+community, and promotes those of the community by serving his own. In
+a word, the interests of the one are not so clearly and plainly cut
+off from those of the other, that the individual can always be
+condemned for seeking to gratify his self-interests or his own
+personal desires. That is presumably one reason why fetishism is so
+wide-spread and so long-lived in Western Africa, for instance: though
+fetishes may be used for anti-social purposes, they may be and are
+also used for purposes which if selfish are not, or are not felt to
+be, anti-social. The individual owner of a fetish does not feel that
+his ownership does or ought to cut him off from membership of the
+community. And so long as such feeling is common, so long an
+indecisive struggle between gods and fetishes continues.
+
+Now this same cause--the impossibility of condemning the individual
+for seeking to promote his own interests--will be found on examination
+to be operative elsewhere, viz. in magic. The relation of magic to
+religion is as much a matter of doubt and dispute as is that of
+fetishism to religion. And I propose to treat magic in much the same
+way as I have treated fetishism. The justification which I offer for
+so doing is to be found in the parallel or analogy that may be drawn
+between them. The distinction which comes to be drawn within the
+common consciousness between the self and the community manifests
+itself obviously in the fact that the interests and desires of the
+individual are felt to be different, and yet not to be different, from
+those of the community; and so they are felt to be, yet not to be,
+condemnable from the point of view of the common consciousness. Now,
+this is precisely the judgment which is passed upon magic, wherever it
+is cultivated. It is condemnable, it is viewed with suspicion, fear
+and condemnation; and yet it is also and at the same time viewed and
+practised with general approval. It may be used on behalf of the
+community and for the good of the community, and with public approval,
+as it is when it is used to make the rain which the community needs.
+It may be viewed with toleration, as it is when it is believed to
+benefit an individual without entailing injury on the community. But
+it is visited with condemnation, and perhaps with punishment, when it
+is employed for purposes, such as murder, which the common
+consciousness condemns. Accordingly the person who has the power to
+work the marvels comprehended under the name of magic is viewed with
+condemnation, toleration or approval, according as he uses his power
+for purposes which the common consciousness condemns, tolerates or
+approves. The power which such a person exerts is power personal to
+him; and yet it is in a way a power greater and other than himself,
+for he has it not always under his control or command: whether he
+uses it for the benefit of the community or for the injury of some
+individual, he cannot count on its always coming off. And this fact is
+not without its influence and consequences. If he is endeavouring to
+use it for the injury of some person, he will explain his failure as
+due to some error he has committed in the _modus operandi_, or to the
+counter-operations of some rival. But if he is endeavouring to
+exercise it for the benefit of the community, failure makes others
+doubtful whether he has the power to act on behalf of the community;
+while, on the contrary, a successful issue makes it clear that he has
+the power, and places him, in the opinion both of the community and of
+himself, in an exceptional position: his power is indeed in a way
+personal to himself, but it is also greater and other than himself.
+His sense of it, and the community's sense of it, is reinforced and
+augmented by the approval of the common consciousness, and by the
+feeling that a power, in harmony with the common consciousness and the
+community's desires, is working in him and through him. This power,
+thus exercised, of working marvels for the common good is obviously
+more closely analogous to that of a prophet working miracles, than it
+is to that of the witch working injury or death. And, in the same way
+that I have already suggested that gods and fetishes may have been
+evolved from a prior indeterminate concept, which was neither but
+might become either; so I would now suggest that miracles are not
+magic, nor is magic miracles, but that the two have been
+differentiated from a common source. And if the polytheistic gods,
+which are to be found where fetishism is believed in, present us with
+a very low stage in the development of the idea of a 'perfect
+personality,' so too the sort of miracles which are believed in, where
+the belief in magic flourishes, present us with a very low stage in
+the development of the idea of an almighty God. Axe-heads that float
+must have belonged originally to such a low stage; and rods that turn
+into serpents were the property of the 'magicians of Egypt' as well as
+of Aaron.
+
+The common source, then, from which flows the power of working marvels
+for the community's good, or of working magic in the interest of one
+individual member and perhaps to the injury of another, is a personal
+power, which in itself--that is to say, apart from the intention with
+which it is used and apart from the consequences which ensue--is
+neither commendable nor condemnable from the community's point of
+view; and which consequently can neither be condemned nor commended by
+the common consciousness, until the difference between self and the
+community has become manifest, and the possibility of a divergence
+between the interests of self or _alter_ and those of the community
+has been realised. Further, this power, in whichever way it comes to
+be exercised, marks a strong individuality; and may be the first, as
+it is certainly a most striking, manifestation of the fact of
+individuality: it marks off, at once, the individual possessing such
+power from the rest of the community. And the common consciousness is
+puzzled by the apparition. Just as it tolerates fetishes though it
+disapproves of them and is afraid of them, so it tolerates the
+magician, though it is afraid of him and does not cordially approve of
+him, even when he benefits an individual client without injuring the
+community. But though the man of power may use, and apparently most
+often does use, his power, in the interest of some individual and to
+the detriment of the community; and though it is this condemnable use
+which is everywhere most conspicuous, and probably earliest developed;
+still there is no reason why he should not use, and as a matter of
+fact he sometimes does use, his power on behalf of the community to
+promote the food-supply of the community or to produce the rain which
+is desired. In this case, then, the individual, having a power which
+others have not, is not at variance with the community but in harmony
+with the common consciousness, and becomes an organ by which it acts.
+When, then, the belief in gods, having the interests of the community
+at heart, presents itself or develops within the common consciousness,
+the individual who has the power on behalf of the community to make
+rain or increase the food supply is marked out by the belief of the
+community--or it may be by the communings of his own heart--as
+specially related to the gods. Hence we find, in the low stages of the
+evolution of religion, the proceedings, by which the man of power had
+made rain for the community or increased the food-supply, either
+incorporated into the ritual of the gods, or surviving traditionally
+as incidents in the life of a prophet, e.g. the rain-making of Elijah.
+In the same way therefore as I have suggested that the resemblances
+between gods and fetishes are to be explained by the theory that the
+two go back to a common source, and that neither is developed from the
+other, so I suggest that the resemblances between the conception of
+prophet and that of magician point not to the priority of either to
+the other, but to the derivation or evolution of both from a prior and
+less determinate concept.
+
+Just as a fetish is a material thing, and something more, so a
+magician is a man and something more. Just as a god is an idol and
+something more, so a prophet or priest is a man and something more.
+The fetish is a material thing which manifests a power that other
+things do not exhibit; and the magician is a man possessing a power
+which other men have not. The difference between the magician and the
+prophet or priest is the same as the difference between the fetish and
+the god. It is the difference between that which subserves the wishes
+of the individual, which may be, and often are, anti-social, and that
+which furthers the interests of the community. Of this difference each
+child who is born into the community learns from his elders: it is
+part of the common consciousness of the community. And it could not
+become a fact of the common consciousness until the existence of self
+became recognised in thought and expressed in language. With that
+recognition of difference, or possible difference, between the
+individual and the community, between the desires of the one and the
+welfare of the other, came the recognition of a difference between
+fetish and god, between magician and priest. The power exercised by
+either was greater than that of man; but the power manifested in the
+one was exercised with a view to the good of the community; in the
+case of the other, not. Thus, from the beginning, gods were not merely
+beings exercising power greater than that of man, but beings
+exercising their power for the good of man. It is as such that, from
+the beginning to the end, they have figured both in the common
+consciousness of the community, and in the consciousness of every
+member born into the community. They have figured in both; and,
+because they have figured both in the individual consciousness and the
+common consciousness, they have, from the beginning, been something
+present to both, something at once within the individual and without.
+But as the child recognises objects long before he becomes aware of
+the existence of himself, so man, in his infancy, sought this power or
+being in the external world long before he looked for it within
+himself.
+
+It is because man looked for this being or power in the external world
+that he found, or thought he found, it there. He looked for it and
+found it, in the same way as to this day the African negro finds a
+fetish. A negro found a stone and took it for his fetish, as Professor
+Tylor relates, as follows:--'He was once going out on important
+business, but crossing the threshold he trod on this stone and hurt
+himself. Ha! ha! thought he, art thou there? So he took the stone, and
+it helped him through his undertaking for days.' So too when the
+community's attention is arrested by something in the external world,
+some natural phenomenon which is marvellous in their eyes, their
+attitude of mind, the attitude of the common consciousness, translated
+into words is: 'Ha! ha! art thou there?' This attitude of mind is one
+of expectancy: man finds a being, possessed of greater power than
+man's, because he is ready to find it and expecting it.
+
+So strong is this expectancy, so ready is man to find this being,
+superior to man, that he finds it wherever he goes, wherever he looks.
+There is probably no natural phenomenon whatever that has not
+somewhere, at some time, provoked the question or the reflection 'Art
+thou there?' And it is because man has taken upon himself to answer
+the question, and to say: 'Thou art there, in the great and strong
+wind which rends the mountains; or, in the earthquake; or, in the
+fire' that polytheism has arisen. Perhaps, however, we should rather
+use the word 'polydaemonism' than 'polytheism.' By a god is usually
+meant a being who has come to possess a proper name; and, probably, a
+spirit is worshipped for some considerable time, before the
+appellative, by which he is addressed, loses its original meaning, and
+comes to be the proper name by which he, and he alone, is addressed.
+Certainly, the stage in which spirits without proper names are
+worshipped seems to be more primitive than that in which the being
+worshipped is a god, having a proper name of his own. And the
+difference between the two stages of polydaemonism and polytheism is
+not merely limited to the fact that the beings worshipped have proper
+names in the later stage, and had none in the earlier. A development
+or a difference in language implies a development or difference in
+thought. If the being or spirit worshipped has come to be designated
+by a proper name, he has lost much of the vagueness that characterises
+a nameless spirit, and he has come to be much more definite and much
+more personal. Indeed, a change much more sinister, from the
+religious point of view, is wrought, when the transition from
+polydaemonism to polytheism is accomplished.
+
+In the stage of human evolution known as animism, everything which
+acts--or is supposed to act--is supposed to be, like man himself, a
+person. But though, in the animistic stage, all powers are conceived
+by man as being persons, they are not all conceived as having human
+form: they may be animals, and have animal forms; or birds, and have
+bird-form; they may be trees, clouds, streams, the wind, the
+earthquake or the fire. In some, or rather in all, of these, man has
+at some time found the being or the power, greater than man, of whom
+he has at all times been in quest, with the enquiry, addressed to each
+in turn, 'Art thou there?' The form of the question, the use of the
+personal pronoun, shows that he is seeking for a person. And students
+of the science of religion are generally agreed that man, throughout
+the history of religion, has been seeking for a power or being
+superior to man and greater than he. It is therefore a personal power
+and a personal being that man has been in search of, throughout his
+religious history. He has pushed his search in many directions--often
+simultaneously in different directions; and, he has abandoned one line
+of enquiry after another, because he has found that it did not lead
+him whither he would be. Thus, as we have seen, he pushed forward, at
+the same time, in the direction of fetishism and of polytheism, or
+rather of polydaemonism; but fetishism failed to bring him
+satisfaction, or rather failed to satisfy the common consciousness,
+the consciousness of the community, because it proved on trial to
+subserve the wishes--the anti-social wishes--of the individual, and
+not the interests of the community. The beings or powers that man
+looked to find and which he supposed he found, whether as fetishes in
+this or that object, or as daemons in the sky, the fire or the wind,
+in beast or bird or tree, were taken to be personal beings and
+personal powers, bearing the same relation to that in which, or
+through which, they manifested themselves, as man bears to his body.
+They do not seem to have been conceived as being men, or the souls of
+men which manifested themselves in animals or trees. At the time when
+polydaemonism has, as yet, not become polytheism, the personal beings,
+worshipped in this or that external form, have not as yet been
+anthropomorphised. Indeed, the process which constitutes the change
+from polydaemonism to polytheism consists in the process, or rather is
+the process, by which the spirits, the personal beings, worshipped in
+tree, or sky, or cloud, or wind, or fire came gradually to be
+anthropomorphised--to be invested with human parts and passions and to
+be addressed like human beings with proper names. But when
+anthropomorphic polytheism is thus pushed to its extreme logical
+conclusions, its tendency is to collapse in the same way, and for the
+same reasons, as fetishism, before it, had collapsed. What man had
+been in search of, from the beginning, and was still in search of, was
+some personal being or power, higher than and superior to man. What
+anthropomorphic polytheism presented him with, in the upshot, was with
+beings, not superior, but, in some or many cases, undeniably inferior
+to man. As such they could not thenceforth be worshipped. In Europe
+their worship was overthrown by Christianity. But, on reflection, it
+seems clear not only that, as such, they could not thenceforth be
+worshipped; but that, as such, they never had been worshipped. In the
+consciousness of the community, the object of worship had always been,
+from the beginning, some personal being superior to man. The apostle
+of Christianity might justifiably speak to polytheists of the God
+'whom ye ignorantly worship.' It is true, and it is important to
+notice, that the sacrifices and the rites and ceremonies, which
+together made up the service of worship, had been consciously and
+intentionally rendered to deities represented in human form; and, in
+this sense, anthropomorphic deities had been worshipped. But, if
+worship is something other than sacrifice and rite and ceremony, then
+the object of worship--the personal being, greater than man--presented
+to the common consciousness, is something other than the
+anthropomorphic being, inferior in much to man, of whom poets speak in
+mythology and whom artists represent in bodily shape.
+
+Just as fetishism developed and persisted, because it did contain,
+though it perverted, one element of religious truth--the accessibility
+of the power worshipped to the worshipper--so too anthropomorphism,
+notwithstanding the consequences to which, in mythology, it led, did
+contain, or rather, was based on, one element of truth, viz. that the
+divine is personal, as well as the human. Its error was to set up, as
+divine personalities, a number of reproductions or reflections of
+human personality. It leads to the conclusion, as a necessary
+consequence, that the divine personality is but a shadow of the human
+personality, enlarged and projected, so to speak, upon the clouds, but
+always betraying, in some way or other, the fact that it is but the
+shadow, magnified or distorted, of man. It excludes the possibility
+that the divine personality, present to the common consciousness as
+the object of worship, may be no reproduction of the human
+personality, but a reality to which the human personality has the
+power of approximating. Be this as it may, we are justified in saying,
+indeed we are compelled to recognise, that in mythology, all the world
+over, we see a process of reflection at work, by which the beings,
+originally apprehended as superior to man, come first to be
+anthropomorphised, that is to be apprehended as having the parts and
+passions of men, and then, consequently, to be seen to be no better
+than men. This discovery it is which in the long run proves fatal to
+anthropomorphism.
+
+We have seen, above, the reason why fetishism becomes eventually
+distasteful to the common consciousness: the beings, superior to man,
+which are worshipped by the community, are worshipped as having the
+interests of the community in their charge, and as having the good of
+the community at heart; whereas a fetish is sought and found by the
+individual, to advance his private interests, even to the cost and
+loss of other individuals and of the community at large. Thus, from
+the earliest period at which beings, superior to man, are
+differentiated into gods and fetishes, gods are accepted by the common
+consciousness as beings who maintain the good of the community and
+punish those who infringe it; while fetishes become beings who assist
+individual members to infringe the customary morality of the tribe.
+Thus, from the first, the beings, of whom the community is conscious
+as superior to man, are beings, having in charge, first, the customary
+morality of the tribe; and, afterwards, the conscious morality of the
+community.
+
+This conception, it was, of the gods, as guardians of morality and of
+the common good, that condemned fetishism; and this conception it was,
+which was to prove eventually the condemnation of polytheism. A
+multitude of beings--even though they be divine beings--means a
+multitude, that is a diversity, of ideas. Diversity of ideas,
+difference of opinion, is what is implied by every mythology which
+tells of disputes and wars between the gods. Every god, who thus
+disputed and fought with other gods, must have felt that he had right
+on his side, or else have fought for the sake of fighting.
+Consequently the gods of polytheism are either destitute of morality,
+or divided in opinion as to what is right. In neither case, therefore,
+are the gods, of whom mythology tells, the beings, superior to man,
+who, from the beginning, were present in the common consciousness to
+be worshipped. From the outset, the object of the community's worship
+had been conceived as a moral power. If, then, the many gods of
+polytheism were either destitute or disregardful of morality, they
+could not be the moral power of which the common consciousness had
+been dimly aware: that moral power, that moral personality, must be
+other than they. As the moral consciousness of the community
+discriminated fetishes from gods and tended to rule out fetishes from
+the sphere of religion; so too, eventually, the moral consciousness of
+the community came to be offended by the incompatibility between the
+moral ideal and the conception of a multitude of gods at variance with
+each other. If the common consciousness was slow in coming to
+recognise the unity of the Godhead--and it was slower in some people
+than in others--the unity was logically implied, from the beginning,
+in the conception of a personal power, greater and higher than man,
+and having the good of the community at heart. The history of religion
+is, in effect, from one point of view, the story of the process by
+which this conception, however dim, blurred or vague, at first, tends
+to become clarified and self-consistent.
+
+That, however, is not the only point of view from which the history of
+religion can, or ought to be, regarded. So long as we look at it from
+that point of view, we shall be in danger of seeing nothing in the
+history of religion but an intellectual process, and nothing in
+religion itself but a mental conception. There is, however, another
+element in religion, as is generally recognised; and that an emotional
+element, as is usually admitted. What however is the nature of that
+emotion, is a question on which there has always been diversity of
+opinion. The beings, who figured in the common consciousness as gods,
+were apprehended by the common consciousness as powers superior to
+man; and certainly as powers capable of inflicting suffering on the
+community. As such, then, they must have been approached with an
+emotion of the nature of reverence, awe or fear. The important, the
+determining, fact, however, is that they were approached. The emotion,
+therefore, which prompted the community to approach them, is at any
+rate distinguishable from the mere fright which would have kept the
+community as far away from these powers as possible. The emotion which
+prompted approach could not have been fear, pure and simple. It must
+have been more in the nature of awe or reverence; both of which
+feelings are clearly distinguishable from fear. Thus, we may fear
+disease or disgrace; but the fear we feel carries with it neither awe
+nor reverence. Again, awe is an inhibitive feeling, it is a feeling
+which--as in the case of the awe-struck person--rather prevents than
+promotes action or movement. And the determining fact about the
+religious emotion is that it was the emotion with which the community
+approached its gods. That emotion is now, and probably always was,
+reverential in character. The occasion, on which a community
+approaches its gods, often is, and doubtless often was, a time when
+misfortune had befallen the community. The misfortune was viewed as a
+visitation of the god's wrath upon his community; and fear--that 'fear
+of the Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom'--doubtless played a
+large part in the complex emotion which stirred the community, not to
+run away but to approach the god for the purpose of appeasing his
+wrath. In the complexity of an emotion which led to action of this
+kind, we must recognise not merely fear but some trust and
+confidence--so much, at least, as prevented the person who experienced
+it from running away simply. The emotion is not too complex for man,
+in however primitive a stage of development: it is not more complex
+than that which brings a dog to his master, though it knows it is
+going to be thrashed.
+
+That some trust and confidence is indispensable in the complex feeling
+with which a community approaches its gods, for the purpose of
+appeasing their wrath--still more, for beseeching favours from
+them--seems indisputable. But we must not exaggerate it. Wherever
+there are gods at all, they are regarded by the community as beings
+who can be approached: so much confidence, at least, is placed in them
+by the community that believes in them. Even if they are offended and
+wrathful, the community is confident that they can be appeased: the
+community places so much trust in them. Indeed its trust goes even
+further: it is sure that they do not take offence without reasonable
+grounds. If they display wrath against the community and send calamity
+upon it, it is, and in the opinion of the community, can only be,
+because some member of the community has done that which he should not
+have done. The gods may be, on occasion, wrathful; but they are just.
+They are from the beginning moral beings--according to such standard
+of morality as the community possesses--and it is breaches of the
+tribe's customary morality that their wrath is directed against. They
+are, from the beginning, and for long afterwards in the history of
+religion, strict to mark what is amiss, and, in that sense, they are
+jealous gods. And this aspect of the Godhead it is which fills the
+larger part of the field of religious consciousness, not only in the
+case of peoples who have failed to recognise the unity of the Godhead,
+but even in the case of a people like the Jews, who did recognise it.
+The other aspect of the Godhead, as the God, not merely of mercy and
+forgiveness, but of love, was an aspect fully revealed in Christianity
+alone, of all the religions in the world.
+
+But the love God displays to all his children, to the prodigal son as
+well as to others, is not a mere attribute assigned to Him. It is not
+a mere quality with which one religion may invest Him, and of which
+another religion, with equal right, may divest Him. The idea of God
+does not consist merely of attributes and qualities, so that, if you
+strip off all the attributes and qualities, nothing is left, and the
+idea is shown to be without content, meaning or reality.
+
+The Godhead has been, in the common consciousness, from the beginning,
+a being, a personal being, greater than man; and it is as such that He
+has manifested Himself in the common consciousness, from the beginning
+until the present day. To this personality, as to others, attributes
+and qualities may be falsely ascribed, which are inconsistent with one
+another and are none of His. Some of the attributes thus falsely
+ascribed may be discovered, in the course of the history of religion,
+to have been falsely ascribed; and they will then be set aside. Thus,
+fetishism ascribed, or sought to ascribe, to the Godhead, the quality
+of willingness to promote even the anti-social desires of the owner of
+the fetish. And fetishism exfoliated, or peeled off from the religious
+organism. Anthropomorphism, which ascribed to the divine personality
+the parts and passions of man, along with a power greater than man's to
+violate morality, is gradually dropped, as its inconsistency with the
+idea of God comes gradually to be recognised and loathed. So too with
+polytheism: a pantheon which is divided against itself cannot stand.
+Thus, fetishism, anthropomorphism and polytheism ascribe qualities to
+the Godhead, which are shown to be attributes assigned to the Godhead
+and imposed upon it from without, for eventually they are found by
+experience to be incompatible with the idea of God as it is revealed in
+the common consciousness.
+
+On the other hand, the process of the history of religion, the process
+of the manifestation or revelation of the Godhead, does not proceed
+solely by this negative method, or method of exclusion. If an
+attribute, such as that of human form, or of complicity in anti-social
+purposes, is ascribed, by anthropomorphism or fetishism, to the divine
+personality, and is eventually felt by the common consciousness to be
+incompatible with the idea of God, the result is not merely that the
+attribute in question drops off, and leaves the idea of the divine
+personality exactly where it was, and what it was, before the
+attribute had been foisted on it. The incompatibility of the quality,
+falsely ascribed or assigned, becomes--if, and when, it does
+become--manifest and intolerable, just in proportion as the idea of
+God, which has always been present, however vaguely and ill-defined,
+in the common consciousness, comes to manifest itself more definitely.
+The attribution, to the divine personality, of qualities, which are
+eventually found incompatible with it, may prove the occasion of the
+more precise and definite manifestation; we may say that action
+implies reaction, and so false ideas provoke true ones, but the false
+ideas do not create the new ones. The false ideas may stimulate closer
+attention to the actual facts of the common consciousness and thus may
+stimulate the formation of truer ideas about them, by leading to a
+concentration of attention upon the actual facts. But it is from this
+closer attention, this concentration of attention, that the newer and
+truer knowledge comes, and not from the false ideas. What we speak
+of, from one point of view, as closer attention to the facts of the
+common consciousness, may, from another point of view, be spoken of as
+an increasing manifestation, or a clearer revelation, of the divine
+personality, revealed or manifested to the common consciousness. Those
+are two views, or two points of view, of one and the same process. But
+whichever view we take of it, the process does not proceed solely by
+the negative method of exclusion: it is a process which results in the
+unfolding and disclosure, not merely of what is in the common
+consciousness, at any given moment, but of what is implied in the
+divine personality revealed to the common consciousness. If we choose
+to speak of this unfolding or disclosure as evolution, the process,
+which the history of religion undertakes to set forth, will be the
+evolution of the idea of God. But, in that case, the process which we
+designate by the name of evolution, will be a process of disclosure
+and revelation. Disclosure implies that there is something to
+disclose; revelation, that there is something to be revealed to the
+common consciousness--the presence of the Godhead, of divine
+personality.
+
+
+
+
+II
+
+THE IDEA OF GOD IN MYTHOLOGY
+
+
+The idea of God is to be found, it will be generally admitted, not
+only in monotheistic religions, but in polytheistic religions also;
+and, as polytheisms have developed out of polydaemonism, that is to
+say, as the personal beings or powers of polydaemonism have, in course
+of time, come to possess proper names and a personal history, some
+idea of divine personality must be admitted to be present in
+polydaemonism as well as in polytheism; and, in the same way, some
+idea of a personality greater than human may be taken to lie at the
+back of both polydaemonism and fetishism.
+
+If we wish to understand what ideas are in a man's mind, we may infer
+them from the words that he speaks and from the way in which he acts.
+The most natural and the most obvious course is to start from what he
+says. And that is the course which was followed by students of the
+history of religion, when they desired to ascertain what idea exactly
+man has had of his gods. They had recourse, for the information they
+wanted, to mythology. Later on, indeed, they proceeded to enquire into
+what man did, into the ritual which he observed in approaching his
+gods; and, in the next chapter, we will follow them in that enquiry.
+But in this chapter we have to ask what light mythology throws upon
+the idea man has had of his gods.
+
+Before doing so, however, we cannot but notice that mythology and
+polytheism go together. Fetishism does not produce any mythology.
+Doubtless, the owner of a fetish which acts knows and can tell of the
+wonderful things it has done. But those anecdotes do not get taken up
+into the common stock of knowledge; nor are they handed down by the
+common consciousness to all succeeding generations of the community.
+Mythology, like language, is the work, and is a possession, of the
+common consciousness.
+
+Polydaemonism, like fetishism, does not produce mythology; but, for a
+different reason. The beings worshipped in the period of polydaemonism
+are beings who have not yet come to possess personal names, and
+consequently cannot well have a personal history attached to them. The
+difficulty is not indeed an absolute impossibility. Tales can be told,
+and at a certain stage in the history of fiction, especially in the
+pre-historic stage, tales are told, in which the hero has no proper
+name: the period is 'once upon a time,' and the hero is 'a man'
+_simpliciter_. But myths are not told about 'a god' _simpliciter_. In
+mythology the hero of the myth is not 'a god,' in the sense of any god
+you like, but this particular, specified god. And the reason is clear.
+In fiction the artist creates the hero as well as the tale; and the
+primitive teller of tales did not find it always necessary to invent a
+name for the hero he created. The hero could, and did, get along for
+some time without any proper name. But with mythology the case is
+different. The personal being, superior to man, of whom the myth is
+told, is not the creation of the teller of the tale: he is a being
+known by the community to exist. He cannot therefore, when he is the
+hero of a myth, be described as 'a god--any god you like.' Nor is the
+myth a tale which could be told of any god whatever: if a myth is a
+tale, at any rate it is a tale which can be told of none other god but
+this. Indeed, a myth is not a tale: it is an incident--or string of
+incidents--in the personal history of a particular person, or being,
+superior to man.
+
+It is then as polydaemonism passes into polytheism, as the beings of
+the one come to acquire personal names and personal history, and so to
+become the gods of the other, that mythology arises. It is under
+polytheism that mythology reaches its most luxuriant growth; and when
+polytheism disappears, mythology tends to disappear with it. Thus, the
+light which mythology may be expected to throw on the idea of God is
+one, which, however it may illumine the polytheistic idea of God, will
+not be found to shine far beyond the area of polytheism.
+
+Myths then are narratives, in which the doings of some god or gods are
+related. And those gods existed in the belief of the community, before
+tales were told, or could be told, about them. Myths therefore are the
+outcome of reflection--of reflection about the gods and their
+relations to one another, or to men, or to the world. Mythology is not
+the source of man's belief of the gods. Man did not begin by telling
+tales about beings whom he knew to be the creations of his own
+imagination, and then gradually fall into the error of supposing them
+to be, after all, not creatures of his own imagination but real
+beings. Mythology is not even the source of man's belief in a
+plurality of gods: man found gods everywhere, in every external object
+or phenomenon, because he was looking for God everywhere, and to every
+object, in turn, he addressed the question, 'Art thou there?'
+Mythology was not the source of polytheism. Polytheism was the source
+of mythology. Myths preserve to us the reflections which men have made
+about their gods; and reflection, on any subject, cannot take place
+until the thing is there to be reflected upon. The result of prolonged
+reflection may be, indeed must be, to modify the ideas from which we
+started, for the better--or, it may be, for the worse. But, even so,
+the result of reflection is not to create the ideas from which it
+started.
+
+From this point of view, it becomes impossible to accept the theory,
+put forward by Max Müller, that mythology is due to 'disease of
+language.' According to his theory, simple statements were made of
+such ordinary, natural processes as those of the rising, or the
+setting, of the sun. Then, by disease of language, the meaning of the
+words or epithets, by which the sun or the dawn were, at the
+beginning, designated or described, passed out of mind. The epithets
+then came to be regarded as proper names; and so the people, amongst
+which these simple statements were originally made, found itself
+eventually in possession of a number of tales told of persons
+possessing proper names and doing marvellous things. Thus, Max
+Müller's theory not only accounted for the origin of tales told about
+the gods: it also explained the origin of the gods, about whom the
+tales were told. It is a theory of the origin, not merely of
+mythology, but also of polytheism.
+
+Thus, even on Max Müller's theory, mythology is the outcome of
+reflection--of reflection upon the doings and behaviour of the sun,
+the clouds, wind, fire etc. But, on his theory, the sun, moon etc.,
+were not, at first, regarded as persons, at all: it was merely owing
+to 'disease of language' that they came to be so regarded. Only if we
+make this original assumption, can we accept the conclusions deduced
+from it; and no student now accepts the assumption: it is one which is
+forbidden by the well-established facts of animism. Sun, moon, wind
+and fire, everything that acts, or is supposed to act, is regarded by
+early man as animated by personal power. If, therefore, the external
+objects, to which man turned with his question, 'Art thou there?' were
+regarded by him, from the beginning, as animated by personal power,
+the theory that they were not so regarded falls to the ground; and,
+consequently, we cannot accept it as accounting for the origin of
+polytheism.
+
+Doubtless, during the time of its vogue, Max Müller's theory was
+accepted precisely because it did profess to account for the origin of
+polytheism, and because it denied polytheism any religious value or
+meaning whatever. On the theory, polytheism did not originate from any
+religious sentiment whatever, but from a disease of language. And this
+was a view which naturally commended itself to those who were ready to
+say and believe that polytheism is not religion at all. But the
+consequences of saying this are such as to make any science of
+religion, or indeed any history of religion, impossible. Where the
+idea of God is to be found, there some religion exists; and to say
+that, in polytheism, no idea of God can be found, is out of the
+question. If then polytheism is a stage in the history of religious
+belief, we have to consider it in relation to the other stages of
+religious belief, which preceded or followed it. We have to relate the
+idea of God, as it appeared in polytheism, with the idea as it
+appeared in other stages of belief. In order to do this, we must first
+discover what the polytheistic idea of God is; and for that purpose we
+must turn, at any rate at first, to the myths which embody the
+reflections of polytheists upon the attributes and actions of the
+Godhead, or of those beings, superior to man, whose existence was
+accepted by the common consciousness. It may be that the reflections
+upon the idea of God, which are embodied in mythology, have so tended
+to degrade the idea of God, that religious advance upon the lines of
+polytheism became impossible, just as the conception of God as a being
+who would promote the anti-social wishes of an individual, rendered
+religious advance upon the lines of fetishism impossible. In that
+case, religion would forsake the line of polytheism, as it had
+previously abandoned that of fetishism.
+
+A certain presumption that myths tend to the degradation of religion
+is created by the mere use of the term 'mythology.' It has come to be
+a dyslogistic term, partly because all myths are lies, but still more
+because some of them are ignoble lies. It becomes necessary,
+therefore, to remind ourselves that, though we see them to be untrue,
+they were not regarded as untrue by those who believed in them; and
+that many of them were not ignoble. Aeschylus and Sophocles are
+witnesses, not to be disbelieved, on these points. In their writings
+we have the reflections of polytheists upon the actions and attributes
+of the gods. But the reflections made by Aeschylus and Sophocles, and
+their treatment of the myths, must be distinguished from the myths,
+which they found to hand, just as the very different treatment and
+reflection, which the myths received from Euripides, must be
+distinguished from them. In both cases, the treatment, which the myths
+met with from the tragedians, is to be distinguished from the myths,
+as they were current among the community before and after the plays
+were performed. The writings of the tragedians show what might be made
+of the myths by great poets. They do not show what the myths were in
+the common consciousness that made them. And the history of mythology
+after the time of the three great tragedians makes it clear enough
+that even so noble a writer as Aeschylus could not impart to mythology
+any direction other than that determined for it by the conditions
+under which it originated, developed and ran its course.
+
+Mythology is the work and the product of the common consciousness. The
+generation existing at any time receives it from preceding
+generations; civilised generations from barbarous, and barbarous
+generations from their savage predecessors. If it grows in the process
+of transmission, and so reflects to some extent the changes which take
+place in the common consciousness, it changes but little in character.
+The common consciousness itself changes with exceeding slowness; it
+retains what it has received with a conservatism like that of
+children's minds; and, what it adds must, from the nature of the case,
+be modelled on that which it has received, and be of a piece with it.
+But, though the common consciousness changes but slowly, it does
+change: with the change from savagery to civilisation there goes moral
+development. Some of the myths, which are re-told from one generation
+to another, may be capable of becoming civilised and moralised in
+proportion as do those who tell them; but some are not. These latter
+are incidents in the personal history of the gods, which, if told at
+all, can only be told, as they had been told from the beginning, in
+all their repulsiveness. They survive, in virtue of the tenacity and
+conservatism of the common consciousness; and, as survivals, they
+testify to the moral development which has taken place in the very
+community which conserves them. By them the eye of modern science
+measures the development and the difference between the stage of
+society which originally produced them and the stage which begins to
+be troubled by them. They are valuable for the purposes of modern
+science because they are evidence of the continuity with which the
+later stages have developed from the earlier; and, also, because they
+are the first outward indications of the discovery which was
+eventually to be made, of the difference between mythology and
+religion--a difference which existed from the beginning of mythology,
+and all through its growth, though it existed in the sphere of feeling
+long before it found expression for itself in words.
+
+The course of history has shown, as a matter of fact, that these
+repulsive and disgusting myths could not be rooted out without
+uprooting the whole system of mythology. But the course of history has
+also shown that religion could continue to exist after the destruction
+of mythology, as it had done before its birth. But, of this the
+generations to whom myths had been transmitted and for whom mythology
+was the accepted belief, could not be aware. In their eyes the attempt
+to discredit some myths appeared to involve--as it did really
+involve--the overthrow of the whole system of mythology. If they
+thought--as they undoubtedly did think--that the destruction of
+mythology was the same thing as the destruction of religion, their
+error was one of a class of errors into which the human mind is at no
+time exempt from falling. And they had this further excuse, that the
+destruction of mythology did logically and necessarily imply the
+destruction of polytheism. Polytheism and mythology were complementary
+parts of their idea of the Godhead. Demonstrations therefore of the
+inconsistency and immorality involved in their idea were purely
+negative and destructive; and they were, accordingly, unavailing until
+a higher idea of the unity of the Godhead was forthcoming.
+
+Until that time, polytheism and mythology struggled on. They were
+burdened, and, as time went on, they were overburdened, with the
+weight of the repulsive myths which could not be denied and disowned,
+but could only be thrust out of sight as far, and as long, as
+possible. These myths, however offensive they became in the long run
+to the conscience of the community, were, in their origin, narratives
+which were not offensive to the common consciousness, for the simple
+reason that they were the work of the common consciousness, approved
+by it and transmitted for ages under the seal of its approval. If they
+were not offensive to the common consciousness at the time when they
+originated, and only became so later, the reason is that the morality
+of the community was less developed at the time of their origin than
+it came to be subsequently. If they became offensive, it was because
+the morality of the community tended to advance, while they remained
+what they had always been.
+
+It may, perhaps, be asked, why the morality of the community should
+tend to change, and the myths of the community should not? The reason
+seems to be that myths are learned by the child in the nursery, and
+morality is learned by the man in the world. The family is a smaller
+community than the village community, the city, or the state; and the
+smaller the community, the more tenacious it is of its customs and
+traditions. The toys of Athenian children, which have been discovered,
+are, all, the toys which children continue to use to this day. In the
+Iliad children built sand-castles on the sea-shore as they do now; and
+the little child tugged at its mother's dress then as now. Children
+then as now would insist that the tales told to them should always be
+told exactly as they were first told. Of the discrepancy between the
+morality exhibited by the heroes of nursery-tales and that practised
+by the grown-up world the child has no knowledge, for the sufficient
+reason that he is not as yet one of the grown-up world. When he enters
+the grown-up world, he may learn the difference; but he can only enter
+the grown-up world, if there is one for him to enter; and, in the
+childhood of man, there is none which he can enter, for the adults
+themselves, though of larger growth, are children still in mind.
+Custom and tradition rule the adult community then as absolutely as
+they rule the child community. In course of time, the adult community
+may break the bonds of custom and tradition; but the community which
+consists of children treasures them and hands them on. Within the
+tribe, thenceforth, there are two communities, that of the adults and
+that of the children. The one community is as continuous with itself
+as the other; but the children's community is highly conservative of
+what it has received and of what it hands on--and that for the simple
+reason that children will be children still. It is this homogeneity of
+the children's community which enables it to preserve its customs,
+traditions and beliefs. And as long as the community of adults is
+homogeneous, it also departs but little from the customs, traditions
+and beliefs, which it has inherited from the same source as the
+children's community has inherited them. The two communities, the
+children's and the adults', originate and develop within the larger
+community of the tribe. They differentiate, at first, with exceeding
+slowness; the children's community changes more slowly even than the
+adults'--its weapons continue to be the bow and arrow, long after
+adults have discarded them; and the bull-roarer continues sacred in
+its eyes to a period when the adult community has not only discarded
+its use but forgotten its meaning. In its tales and myths it may
+preserve the memory of a stage of morality which the adult community
+has outgrown, and has left behind as far it has left behind the
+bull-roarer or the bow and arrow. And the stage of morality, of which
+it preserves the memory, is one from which the adult community in past
+time emerged. Having emerged, indeed, it found itself, eventually,
+when made to look back, compelled to condemn that which it looked back
+upon.
+
+What, then, were these myths, with which the moralised community might
+find itself confronted? They were tales which originated in the mind
+of the community when it was yet immature. They preserve to us the
+reflections of the immature mind about the gods and what they did. And
+it is because the minds, which made these reflections, were immature,
+that the myths which embodied or expressed these reflections, were
+such as might be accepted by immature minds, but were eventually found
+intolerable by more mature minds. It may, perhaps, be said--and it may
+be said with justice--that the reflections even of the immature mind
+are not all, of necessity, erroneous, for it is from them that the
+whole of modern knowledge has been evolved or developed, just as the
+steam-plough may be traced back to the primitive digging-stick:
+reflection upon anything may lead to better knowledge of the thing, as
+well as to false notions about it. But the nations, which have
+outgrown mythology, have cast it aside because in the long run they
+became convinced that the notions it embodied were false notions. And
+they reached that conclusion on this point in the same way and for
+the same reason as they reached the same conclusion in other matters;
+for there is only one way. There is only one way and one test by which
+it is possible to determine whether the inferences we have drawn about
+a thing are true or false, and that is the test of experience. That
+alone can settle the question whether the thing actually does or does
+not act in the way, or display the qualities alleged. If it proves in
+our experience to act in the way, or to display the qualities, which
+our reflection led us to surmise, then our conception of the thing is
+both corrected and enlarged, that is to say, the thing proves to be
+both more and other than it was at first supposed to be. If experience
+shows that it is not what we surmised, does not act in the way or
+display the qualities our reflection led us to expect, then, as the
+conclusions we reached are wrong, our reflections were on a wrong
+line, and must have started from a false conception or an imperfect
+idea of the thing.
+
+It is collision of this kind between the conclusions of mythology and
+the idea of the gods, as the guardians of morality, that rouses
+suspicion in a community, still polytheistic, first that the
+conclusions embodied in mythology are on a wrong line, and next that
+they must have started from a false conception or imperfect idea of
+the Godhead. By its fruits is the error found to be error--by the
+immorality which it ascribes to the very gods whose function it is to
+guard morality. Mythology is the process of reflection which leads to
+conclusions eventually discarded as false, demonstrably false to
+anyone who compared them with the idea of the Godhead which he had in
+his own soul. Mythology worked out the consequences of the assumption
+that it is to the external world we must look for the divine
+personality of whose presence in the common consciousness, the
+community has at all times, been, even though dimly, aware. Doubts as
+to the truth of myths were first aroused by the inconsistency between
+the myths told and the justice and morality which had been from the
+beginning the very essence of divine personality. The doubts arose in
+the minds and hearts of individual thinkers; and, if those individuals
+had been the only members of the community who conceived justice and
+morality to be essential qualities of the divine personality, then it
+would have been necessary for such thinkers first to convert the
+community to that view. Now, one of the consequences of the prevalence
+of mythology is that the community, amongst whom it flourishes, comes
+to be, if not doubtful, then at times forgetful, of the fact that the
+gods of the community are moral beings and the guardians of morality.
+That fact had to be dismissed from attention, for the time being,
+whenever certain myths were related. And, the more frequently a fact
+is dismissed from attention, the less likely it is to reappear on the
+surface of consciousness. Thus, the larger the part played by
+mythology in the field of the common consciousness, the greater its
+tendency to drive out from attention those moral qualities which were
+of the essence of divine personality. But, however large the part
+played by mythology, and however great its tendency to obliterate the
+moral qualities of the gods, it rarely, if indeed ever, entirely
+obliterates them from the field of the common consciousness.
+Consequently, the individual thinkers, who become painfully aware of
+the contrast and opposition between the morality, which is essential
+to a divine personality, and the immorality ascribed to the gods in
+some myths, have not to deal with a community which denies that the
+gods have any morality whatever, but with a community which is ready
+to admit the morality of the gods, whenever its attention is called
+thereto. Thus, though it may be that it is in this or that individual
+that the inconsistency between the moral qualities, which belong to
+the gods, and the immoral actions which mythology ascribes to the
+gods, first manifests itself, to his distress and disturbance, still
+what has happened in his case happens in the case of some, and may
+happen in the case of all, other members of the community. The
+inconsistency then comes to exist not merely for the individual but
+for the common consciousness.
+
+It was the immorality of mythology which first drew the attention of
+believers in polytheism to the inconsistency between the goodness,
+which was felt to be of the essence of the divine nature, and the
+vileness, which was imputed to them in some myths; but it is the
+irrationality and absurdity of mythology that seems, to the modern
+mind, to be its most uniform characteristic. So long as the only
+mythology that was studied was the mythology of Indo-European peoples,
+it was assumed, without question, that the myths could not really be,
+or originally have been, irrational and absurd: they must conceal,
+under their seeming absurdity and outwardly irrational appearance,
+some truth. They must have had, originally, some esoteric meaning.
+They must have conveyed--allegorically, indeed--some profound truths,
+known or revealed to sages of old, which it was the business of modern
+students to re-discover in mythology. And accordingly profound
+truths--scientific, cosmographic, astronomical, geographical,
+philosophic or religious--were discovered. There was no knowledge
+which the early ancestors of the human race were not supposed to have
+possessed, and their descendants to have forgotten.
+
+But, when it came to be discovered, and accepted, that the ancestors
+of the Indo-European peoples had once been savages, and that savages,
+all the world over, possessed myths, it became impossible to maintain
+that such savages possessed in their mythologies treasures of truth
+either scientific or religious. Myths have no esoteric meaning.
+Obviously we must take them to be what we find them to be amongst
+present-day savages, that is, absurd and irrational stories, with no
+secret meaning behind them. Yet it is difficult, indeed impossible, to
+accept this as the last word on the subject. The stories are rejected
+by us, because they are patently absurd and irrational. But the savage
+does not reject them: he accepts them. And he could not accept and
+believe them, if he, as well as we, found them irrational and absurd.
+In a word, it is the same with the irrationality as it is with the
+immorality of mythology: myths are the work and the product of the
+common consciousness. As such, myths cannot be viewed as irrational by
+the common consciousness in which they originated, and by which they
+were accepted and transmitted, any more than they were regarded as
+immoral.
+
+Obviously, the common consciousness which produces mythology cannot
+pronounce the myths, when it produces them, and accepts them, absurd.
+On the contrary, they are rational, in its eyes, and according to its
+level of understanding, however absurd the growth of knowledge may
+eventually show them to be. Myths, then, in their origin, are told and
+heard, narrated and accepted, as rational and intelligible. As
+narrated, they are narratives: can we say that they are anything more?
+or are they tales told simply for the pleasure of telling? Tales of
+this latter kind, pure fiction, are to be found wherever man is. But,
+we have already seen some points in which myths differ from tales of
+this kind: in fiction the artist creates his hero, but in myths the
+being superior to man, of whom the story is told is not the creation
+of the teller of the tale; he is a being known to the community to
+exist. Another point of difference is that a myth belongs to the god
+of whom it is told and cannot properly be told of any other god. These
+are two respects in which the imagination is limited, two points on
+which, in the case of myths, the creative imagination is, so to speak,
+nailed down. Is it subject to any further restriction in the case of
+myths? Granted that an adventure, when once it has been set down to
+one god, may not be set down to another, is the creative imagination
+free, in the case of mythology, as it is in the case of pure fiction,
+to invent the incidents and adventures, which eventually--in a lexicon
+of mythology--go to make up the biography of the god? The freedom, it
+appears, is of a strictly limited character.
+
+It is an induction, as wide as the world--being based on mythologies
+from all parts of the world--that myths are aetiological, that their
+purpose is to give the reason of things, to explain the origin of
+fire, agriculture, civilisation, the world--of anything, in fact, that
+to the savage seems to require explanation. In the animistic period,
+man found gods everywhere because everywhere he was looking for gods.
+To every object that arrested his attention, in the external world, he
+put, or might put, the question, 'Art thou there?' Every happening
+that arrested the attention of a whole community, and provoked from
+the common consciousness the affirmation, 'Thou art there,' was, by
+that affirmation, accepted as the doing of a god. But neither at this
+stage, nor for long after, is there any myth. The being, whose
+presence is thus affirmed, has at first no name: his personality is of
+the faintest, his individuality, the vaguest. Mythology does not begin
+until the question is put, 'Why has the god done this thing?' A myth
+consists, or originally consisted, of the reason which was found and
+adopted by the common consciousness as the reason why the god did what
+he did do. It is in this sense that myths are aetiological. The
+imagination which produces them is, in a sense, a 'scientific
+imagination.' It works within limits. The data on which it works are
+that this thing was done, or is done, by this god; and the problem set
+to the mythological imagination is, 'Why did he, or does he, do it?'
+The stories which were invented to answer this question constituted
+mythology; and the fact that myths were invented for the purpose of
+answering this question distinguishes them from stories in the
+invention of which the imagination was not subject to restriction, was
+not tied down to this god and to this action of his, and was not
+limited to the sole task of imagining an answer to the question, 'Why
+did he do it?' All myths are narratives, but not all narratives are
+myths. Some narratives have men alone for their heroes. They are
+imaginative but not mythological. Some narratives are about gods and
+what they did. Their purpose is to explain why the gods did what they
+did do, and those narratives are mythological.
+
+It may, perhaps, seem that the imagination of early man would from the
+first be set to work to invent myths in answer to the question, 'Why
+did the god do this thing?' But, as a matter of fact, man can get on
+for a long time without mythology. A striking instance of this is
+afforded by the _di indigites_ of Italy. Over everything man did, or
+suffered, from his birth to his death, one of these gods or goddesses
+presided. The Deus Vagitanus opened the lips of the new-born infant
+when it uttered its first cry; the Dea Ossipago made the growing
+child's bones stout and strong; the Deus Locutius made it speak
+clearly; the goddess Viriplaca restored harmony between husband and
+wife who had quarrelled; the Dea Orbona closed a man's eyes at death.
+These _di indigites_ had shrines and received sacrifices. They were
+distinguished into gods and goddesses. Their names were proper names,
+though they are but words descriptive of the function which the deity
+performed or presided over. Yet though these _di indigites_ are gods,
+personal gods, to whom prayer and sacrifice are offered, they have no
+mythology attached to them; no myths are told about them.
+
+The fact thus forced on our notice by the _di indigites_ of Rome
+should be enough to warn us that mythology does not of necessity
+spring up, as an immediate consequence of the worship of the gods. It
+may even suggest a reason why mythology must be a secondary, rather
+than a primary consequence of worship. The Romans were practical, and
+so are savages: if they asked the question, 'Why did this god do this
+thing?' they asked it in no spirit of speculation but for a practical,
+common-sense reason: because they did not want this thing done again.
+And they offered sacrifices to the god or goddess, with that end in
+view. The things with regard to which the savage community first asks
+the question, 'Why did the god do it?' are things disastrous to the
+community--plague or famine. The answer to the question is really
+implied by the terms in which the question is stated: the community,
+or some member of the community has transgressed; he must be
+discovered and punished. So long and so far as the question is thus
+put and thus answered, there is little room for mythology to grow in.
+And it did not grow round the _di indigites_ in Italy, or round
+corresponding deities in other countries.
+
+But the question, 'Why did the god do it?' is susceptible, on
+reflection, of another kind of answer. And from minds of a more
+reflective cast than the Roman, it received answer in the form of
+mythology, of aetiological myths. Mythology is the work of reflection:
+it is when the community has time and inclination to reflect upon its
+gods and their doings that mythology arises in the common
+consciousness. For everything which happens to him, early man has one
+explanation, if the thing is such as seems to him to require
+explanation, and the explanation is that this thing is the doing of
+some god. If the thing that arrests attention is some disaster, which
+calls for remedy, the community approaches the god with prayer and
+sacrifice; its object is practical, not speculative; and no myth
+arises. But if the thing that arrests attention is not one which calls
+for action, on the part of the community, but one which stimulates
+curiosity and provokes reflection, then the reflective answer to the
+question, why has this thing been done by whatever god that did it, is
+a myth.
+
+Thus the mood, or state of mind, in which mythology originates is
+clearly different from that in which the community approaches its
+offended gods for the purpose of appeasing them. The purpose in the
+latter case is atonement and reconciliation. The state of mind in the
+former case is one of enquiry. The emotion, of mingled fear and hope,
+which constitutes the one state of mind, is clearly different from the
+spirit of enquiry which characterises and constitutes the other state
+of mind. The one mood is undeniably religious; the other, not so. In
+the one mood, the community feels itself to be in the presence of its
+gods; in the other it is reflecting and enquiring about them. In the
+one case the community appears before its god; in the other it is
+reflectively using its idea of god, for the purpose of explaining
+things that call for explanation. But the idea of God, when used in
+this way, for the purpose of explaining things by means of myths, is
+modified by the use it is put to. It is not merely that everything
+which happens is explained, if it requires explanation, as the doing
+of some god; but the motives which early man ascribed, in his
+mythological moments, to the gods--motives which only undeveloped man
+could have ascribed to them--became part of the idea of God on which
+mythology worked and with which myths had to do. The idea of god thus
+gradually developed in polytheistic myths, the accumulated reflections
+of savage, barbarous and semi-barbarous ancestors, tends eventually to
+provoke reaction. But why? Not merely because the myths are immoral
+and irrational. But because of the essential impiety of imputing
+immoral and irrational acts to the divine personality. Plainly, then,
+those thinkers and writers who were painfully impressed by such
+impiety, who were acutely conscious that divine personality was
+irreconcilable with immorality and irrationality, had some other idea
+of God than the mythological. We may go further: we may safely say
+that the average man would not have been perturbed, as he was, by
+Socrates, for instance, had he, also, not found within him some other
+idea of God than the mythological. And we can understand, to some
+extent, how this should be, if we call to mind that, though mythology
+grows and luxuriates, still the worship of the gods goes on. That is
+to say, the community, through it all, continues to approach its gods,
+for the purpose, and with the emotion of mingled fear and hope, with
+which it had always come into the presence of its gods. It is the
+irreconcilability of the mood of emotion, which is essentially
+religious, with the mythological mode of reflective thought, which is
+not, that tends to bring about the religious reaction against
+mythology. It is not however until the divergence between religion
+and mythology has become considerable that the irreconcilability
+becomes manifest. And it is in the experience of some individual, and
+not in the common consciousness, that this irreconcilability is first
+discovered. That discovery it is which makes the discoverer realise
+that it is not merely when he comes before the presence of his gods in
+their temples, but that, whenever his heart rises on the tide of
+mingled fear, hope and thanksgiving, he comes into the presence of his
+God. Having sought for the divine personality in all the external
+objects of the world around him in the end he learns, what was the
+truth from the beginning,--that it is in his heart he has access to
+his God.
+
+The belief in gods does not of necessity result in a mythology. The
+instance of the _di indigites_ of Italy is there to show that it is no
+inevitable result. But mythology, wherever it is found, is of itself
+sufficient proof that gods are, or have been, believed in; it is the
+outcome of reflection and enquiry about the gods, whom the community
+approaches, with mingled feelings of hope and fear, and worships with
+sacrifice and prayer. Now, a mythology, or perhaps we should rather
+say fragments of a mythology, may continue to exist as survivals, long
+after belief in the gods, of whom the myths were originally told, has
+changed, or even passed away entirely. Such traces of gods dethroned
+are to be found in the folk-lore of most Christian peoples. Indeed,
+not only are traces of bygone mythology to be found in Christendom;
+but rites and customs, which once formed part of the worship of now
+forgotten gods; or it may be that only the names of the gods survive
+unrecognised, as in the names of the days of the week. The existence
+of such survivals in Europe is known; their history has been traced;
+their origin is undoubted. When, then, in other quarters of the globe
+than Europe, amongst peoples which are as old as any European people,
+though they have no recorded history, we find fragments of mythology,
+or of ritual, or mere names of gods, without the myths and the ritual
+which attach elsewhere to gods, the presumption is that here too we
+have to deal with survivals of a system of worship and mythology,
+which once existed, and has now gone to pieces, leaving but these
+pieces of wreckage behind. Thus, amongst the Australian black-fellows
+we find myths about gods who now receive no worship. But they never
+could have become gods unless they had been worshipped at some time;
+they could not have acquired the proper, personal names by which they
+are designated in these surviving myths, if they had not been
+worshipped long enough for the words which designate them to become
+proper names, i.e. names denoting no other person than the one
+designated by them. Amongst other backward peoples of the earth we
+find the names of gods surviving, not only with no worship but no
+myths attached to them; and the inference plainly is that, as they are
+still remembered to be gods, they once were objects of worship
+certainly, and probably once were subjects of mythology. And if, of a
+bygone religious system all that remains is in one place some
+fragments of mythology, and in another nothing but the mere names of
+the gods, then it is nothing astonishing if elsewhere all that we find
+is some fragment of worship, some rite, which continues to be
+practised, for its own sake, even though all memory of the gods in
+whose worship it originated has disappeared from the common
+consciousness--a disappearance which would be the easier if the gods
+worshipped had acquired no names, or names as little personal as those
+of the _di indigites_. Ritual of this kind, not associated with the
+names of any gods, is found amongst the Australian tribes, and may be
+the wreckage of a system gone to pieces.
+
+Here, too, there is opportunity again, for the same error as that into
+which students of mythology once fell before, when they found, or
+thought they found, in mythology, profound truths, known or revealed
+to sages of old. The survivals mentioned in the last paragraph may be
+interpreted as survivals of a prior monotheism or a primitive
+revelation. But if they are survivals, at all, then they are
+survivals from a period when the ancestors of the present-day Africans
+or Australian black-fellows were in an earlier stage of social
+development--in an earlier stage even of linguistic development and of
+the thought which develops with language--than their descendants are
+now. Even in that earlier stage of development, however, man sought
+for God. If he thought, mistakenly, to find Him in this or that
+external object, he was not wrong in the conviction that underlay his
+search--the conviction that God is at no time afar off from any one of
+us.
+
+
+
+
+III
+
+THE IDEA OF GOD IN WORSHIP
+
+
+We have found mythology of but little use in our search after the idea
+of God; and the reason, as we have suggested, is that myth-making is a
+reflective process, a process in which the mind reflects upon the
+idea, and therefore a process which cannot be set up unless the idea
+is already present, or, rather we should say, has already been
+presented. When it has been presented, it can become food for
+reflection, but not until then. If then we wish to discover where and
+when it is thus immediately presented, let us look for it in worship.
+If it is given primarily in the moment of worship, it may be
+reproduced in a secondary stage as a matter for reflection. Now, in
+worship--provided that it be experienced as a reality, and not
+performed as a conventionality--the community's purpose is to approach
+its God: let us come before the Lord and enter His courts with praise,
+are words which represent fairly the thought and feeling which, on
+ordinary occasions, the man who goes to worship--really--experiences,
+whether he be polytheist or monotheist. I have spoken of 'the moment
+of worship,' but worship is, of course, a habit: if it is not a habit,
+it ceases to be at all, in any effective sense. And it is a habit of
+the community, of the common consciousness, which is continuous
+through the ages, even though it slowly changes; and which, as
+continuous, is conservative and tenacious. Even when it has become
+monotheistic, it may continue to speak of the one God as 'a great god
+above all other gods,' in terms which are survivals of an earlier
+stage of belief. Such expressions are like the clouds which, though
+they are lifting, still linger round the mountain top: they are part
+of the vapour which had previously obscured from view the reality
+which was there, and cannot be shaken at any time.
+
+Worship may include words spoken, hymns of praise and prayer; but it
+includes also things done, acts performed, ritual. It is these acts
+that are the facts from which we have now to start, in order to infer
+what we can from them as to the idea of God which prompted them. There
+is an infinite diversity in these facts of ritual, just as the gods of
+polytheism are infinite in number and kind. But if there is diversity,
+there is also unity. Greatly as the gods of polytheism differ from one
+another, they are at least beings worshipped--and worshipped by the
+community. Greatly as rituals vary in their detail, they are all
+ritual: all are worship, and, all, the worship rendered by the
+community to its gods. And there can be no doubt as to their object or
+the purpose with which the community practises them: that purpose is,
+at least, to bring the community into the presence of its Lord. We may
+safely say that there can be no worship unless there is a community
+worshipping and a being which is worshipped. Nor can there be any
+doubt as to the relation existing between the two. The community bow
+down and worship: that is the attitude of the congregation. Nor can
+there be any doubt as to the relation which the god bears, in the
+common consciousness, to his worshippers: he is bound to them by
+special ties--from him they expect the help which they have received
+in ages past. They have faith in him--else they would not worship
+him--faith that he will be what he has been in the past, a very help
+in time of trouble. The mere fact that they seek to come before him is
+a confession of the faith that is in them, the faith that they are in
+the presence of their God and have access to Him. However primitive,
+that is rudimentary, the worship may be; however low in the scale of
+development the worshippers may be; however dim their idea of God and
+however confused and contradictory the reflections they may make
+about Him, it is in that faith that they worship. So much is implied
+by worship--by the mere fact that the worshippers are gathered
+together for worship. If we are to find any clue which may give us
+uniform guidance through the infinite variety in the details of the
+innumerable rituals that are, or have been, followed in the world, we
+must look to find it in the purpose for which the worshippers gather
+together. But, if we wish to be guided by objective facts rather than
+by hasty, _a priori_ assumptions, we must begin by consulting the
+facts: we must enquire whether the details of the different rituals
+present nothing but diversity, or whether there is any respect in
+which they show likeness or uniformity. There is one point in which
+they resemble one another; and, what is more, that point is the
+leading feature in all of them; they all centre round sacrifice. It is
+with sacrifice, or by means of sacrifice, that their gods are
+approached by all men, beginning even with the jungle-dwellers of
+Chota Nagpur, who sacrifice fowls and offer victims, for the purpose
+of conciliating the powers that send jungle-fever and murrain. The
+sacrificial rite is the occasion on which, and a means by which, the
+worshipper is brought into that closer relation with his god, which he
+would not seek, if he did not--for whatever reason--desire it. As
+bearing on the idea of God, the spiritual import, and the practical
+importance, of the sacrificial rite is that he who partakes in it can
+only partake of it so far as he recognises that God is no private idea
+of his own, existing only in his notion, but is objectively real. The
+jungle-dweller of Chota Nagpur may have no name for the being to whom,
+at the appointed season and in the appointed place, he sacrifices
+fowls; but, as we have seen, the gods only come to have proper,
+personal names in slow course of time. He may be incapable of giving
+any account, comprehensible to the civilised enquirer, of the idea
+which he has of the being to whom he offers sacrifice: more
+accomplished theologians than he have failed to define God. But of the
+reality of the being whom he seeks to approach he has no doubt. It is
+not the case that the reality of that being, by whomsoever worshipped,
+is an assumption which must be made, or a hypothesis that must be
+postulated, for the sake of providing a logical justification of
+worship. The simple fact is that the religious consciousness is the
+consciousness of God as real, just as the common consciousness is the
+consciousness of things as real. To represent the reality of either as
+something that is not experienced but inferred is to say that we have
+no experience of reality, and therefore have no real grounds for
+inference. We find it preferable to hold that we have immediate
+consciousness of the real, to some extent, and that by inference we
+may be brought, to a larger extent, into immediate consciousness of
+the real.
+
+Of the reality of Him, whom even the jungle-dweller of Chota Nagpur
+seeks to approach, it is only possible to doubt on grounds which seek
+to deny the ultimate validity of the common consciousness on any
+point. With the inferences which men have drawn about that reality,
+and the ideas those inferences have led to, the case is different.
+What exactly those ideas are, or have been, we have, more or less, to
+guess at, from such facts as the science of religion furnishes. One
+such set of facts is comprised under the term, worship; and of that
+set the leading fact everywhere is the rite of sacrifice. By means of
+it we may reasonably expect to penetrate to some of the ideas which
+the worshippers had of the gods whom they worshipped. Unfortunately,
+however, there is considerable difference of opinion, between students
+of the science of religion, as to the idea which underlies sacrifice.
+
+One fact from which we may start is that it is with sacrifice that the
+community draws near to the god it wishes to approach. The outward,
+physical fact, the visible set of actions, is that the body of
+worshippers proceed, with their oblation, to the place in which the
+god manifests himself and is to be found. The inference which follows
+is that, corresponding to this series of outward actions, there is an
+internal conviction in the hearts and minds of the worshippers: they
+would not go to the place, unless they felt that, in so doing, they
+were drawing near to their god.
+
+In thus drawing near, both physically and spiritually, they take with
+them something material. And this they would not do, unless taking the
+material thing expressed, in some way, their mental attitude, or
+rather their religious attitude. The attitude thus expressed must be
+part of, or implied by, the desire to approach the god both physically
+and spiritually. The fact that they carry with them some material
+thing, expresses in gesture-language--such as is used by explorers
+towards natives whose speech is unknown to them--the desire that
+actuates them. And thus much may be safely inferred, viz. that the
+desire is, at any rate, to prepossess favourably the person
+approached.
+
+Thus man approaches, bearing with him something intended to please the
+god that he draws near. But though that is part of his intention, it
+is not the whole. His desire is that the god shall be pleased not
+merely with the offering but with him. What he brings--his
+oblation--is but a means to that end. Why he wishes the god to be
+pleased with him, we shall have to enquire hereafter. Thus far,
+however, we see that that is the wish and is the purpose intimated by
+the fact that he brings something material with him.
+
+It seems clear also that the something material, with which the
+community draws near to its god, need only be something which is
+conceived to be pleasing to the god. All that is necessary is that it
+should express, or symbolise, the feeling with which the community
+draws near. So long as it does this, its function is discharged. What
+it is of importance to notice, and what is apt to be forgotten, is the
+feeling which underlies the outward act, and without which the action,
+the rite, would not be performed. The feeling is the desire of the
+worshipper to commend himself. If we take this point of view, then the
+distinction, which is sometimes drawn between offerings and sacrifice,
+need not mislead us. The distinction is that the term 'sacrifice' is
+to be used only of that which is consumed, or destroyed, in the
+service; while the term 'offering' is to be used only of what is not
+destroyed. And the reason for drawing, or seeking to draw, the
+distinction, seems to be that the destruction, or consumption, of the
+material thing, in the service, is required to prove that the offering
+is accepted. But, though this proof may have come, in some cases, to
+be expected, as showing that the community was right in believing that
+the offering would be acceptable; the fact remains that the
+worshippers would not start out with the offering in their hands,
+unless they thought, to begin with, that it was acceptable. They would
+not draw near to the god, with an offering about the acceptability of
+which they were in doubt. Anything therefore which they conceived to
+be acceptable would suffice to indicate their desire to please, and
+would serve to commend them. And the desire to do that which is
+pleasing to their god is there from the beginning, as the condition on
+which alone they can enter his presence. Neglect of this fact may lead
+us to limit unduly the potentialities contained in the rite of
+sacrifice, from the beginning.
+
+The rite did, undoubtedly, in the long course of time, come in some
+communities to be regarded and practised in a spirit little better
+than commercial. Sacrifices came to be regarded as gifts, or presents,
+made to the god, on the understanding that _do ut des_. Commerce
+itself, when analysed, is nothing but the application of the principle
+of giving to get. All that is necessary, in order to reduce religion
+to commercial principles, is that the payment of vows made should be
+contingent on the delivery of the goods stipulated for; that the thing
+offered should be regarded as payment; that the god's favour should be
+considered capable of being bought. It is however in communities which
+have some aptitude for commerce and have developed it, that religion
+is thus interpreted and practised. If we go back to the period in the
+history of a race when commerce is as yet unknown, we reach a state of
+things when the possibility of thus commercialising worship was, as
+yet, undeveloped. At that early period, as in all periods, of the
+history of religion, the desire of the worshippers was to be pleasing,
+and to do that which was pleasing, to him whom they worshipped; and
+the offerings they took with them when they approached his presence
+were intended to be the outward and visible sign of their desire. But
+in some, or even in many, cases, they came eventually to rely on the
+sign or symbol rather than on the desire which it signified; and that
+is a danger which constantly dogs all ritual. Attention is
+concentrated rather on the rite than on the spiritual process, which
+underlies it, and of which the rite is but the expression; and then it
+becomes possible to give a false interpretation to the meaning of the
+rite.
+
+In the case of the offerings, which are made in the earliest stages of
+the history of religion, the false interpretation, which comes in some
+cases to be put upon them by those who make the offerings, has been
+adopted by some students of the history of religion, as the true
+explanation, the real meaning and the original purpose of offerings
+and sacrifice. This theory--the Gift-theory of sacrifice--requires us
+to believe that religion could be commercialised before commerce was
+known; that religion consists, or originally consisted, not in doing
+that which is pleasing in the sight of God, but in bribing the gods;
+that the relatively late misinterpretation is the original and true
+meaning of the rite; in a word, that there was no religion in the
+earliest manifestation of religion. But it is precisely this last
+contention which is fatal to the Gift-theory. Not only is it a
+self-contradiction in terms, but it denies the very possibility of
+religious evolution. Evolution is a process and a continuous process:
+there is an unbroken continuity between the earliest and the latest of
+its stages. If there was no religion whatever in the earliest stages,
+neither can there be any in the latest. And that is why those who hold
+religion to be an absurdity are apt to adopt the Gift-theory: the
+Gift-theory implies a degrading absurdity from the beginning to the
+end of the evolutionary process--an unbroken continuity of absurdity.
+On the other hand, we may hold by the plain truth that there must have
+been religion in the earliest manifestations of religion, and that
+bribing a god is not, in our sense of the word, religious. In that
+case, we shall also hold that the offerings which have always been
+part of the earliest religious ritual were intended as the outward and
+visible sign or symbol of the community's desire to do that which was
+pleasing to their god; and that it is only in the course of time, and
+as the consequence of misinterpretation, that the offerings come to
+be regarded as gifts made for the purpose of bribing the gods or of
+purchasing what they have to bestow. Thus, just as, in the evolution
+of religion, fetishism was differentiated from polytheism, and was
+cast aside--where it was cast aside--as incompatible with the demands
+of the religious sentiment, so too the making of gifts to the gods,
+for the purpose of purchasing their favour, came to be differentiated
+from the service which God requires.
+
+The endeavour to explain the history and purpose of sacrifice by means
+of the Gift-theory alone has the further disadvantage that it requires
+us to close our eyes to other features of the sacrificial rite, for,
+if we turn to them, we shall find it impossible to regard the
+Gift-theory as affording a complete and exhaustive account of all that
+there was in the rite from the beginning. Indeed, so important are
+these other features, that, as we have seen, some students would
+maintain that the only rite which can be properly termed sacrificial
+is one which presents these features. From this point of view, the
+term sacrifice can only be used of something that is consumed or
+destroyed in the service; while the term offering is restricted to
+things which are not destroyed. But, from this point of view, we must
+hold that sacrifices, to be sacrifices in the specific must not merely
+be destroyed or consumed, for then anything that could be destroyed
+by fire would be capable of becoming a burnt-offering; and the burning
+would simply prove that the offering was acceptable--a proof which may
+in some cases have been required to make assurance doubly sure, but
+which was really superfluous, inasmuch as no one who desires his
+offering to be accepted will make an offering which he thinks to be
+unacceptable. Sacrifices, to be sacrifices in the specific sense thus
+put upon the word, we must hold to be things which by their very
+nature are marked out to be consumed: they must be articles of food.
+But even with this qualification, sacrifices are not satisfactorily
+distinguished from offerings, for a food-offering is an offering, and
+discharges the function of a sacrifice, provided that it is offered.
+That it should actually be consumed is neither universally nor
+necessarily required. That it is often consumed in the service is a
+fact which brings us to a new and different feature of the sacrificial
+rite. Let us then consider it.
+
+Thus far, looking at the rite on its outward side, from the point of
+view of the spectator, we have seen that the worshippers, carrying
+with them something material, draw near to the place where the god
+manifests himself. From this series of actions and gestures, we have
+inferred the belief of the worshippers to be that they are drawing
+near to their god both physically and spiritually. We have inferred
+that the material oblation is intended by the worshippers as the
+outward and visible sign of their wish to commend themselves to the
+god. We have now to notice what has been implied throughout, that the
+worshippers do not draw near to the god without a reason, or seek to
+commend themselves to him without a purpose. And if we consult the
+facts once more, we shall find that the occasions, on which the god is
+thus approached, are generally occasions of distress, experienced or
+apprehended. The feelings with which the community draws near are
+compounded of the fear, occasioned by the distress or danger, and the
+hope and confidence that it will be removed or averted by the step
+which they are taking. Part of their idea of the god is that he can
+and will remove the present, or avert the coming, calamity; otherwise
+they would not seek to approach him. But part also of their idea is
+that they have done something to provoke him, otherwise calamity would
+not have come upon them. Thus, when the worshippers seek to come into
+the presence of their god, they are seeking him with the feeling that
+he is estranged from them, and they approach him with something in
+their hands to symbolise their desire to please him, and to restore
+the relation which ordinarily subsists between a god and his
+worshippers. Having deposited the offering they bring, and having
+proffered the petition they came to make, they retire satisfied that
+all now is well. The rite is now in all its essential features
+complete. But though complete, as an organism in the early stages of
+its history may be complete, it has, like the organism, the power of
+growth; and it grows.
+
+The conviction with which the community ends the rite is the joyful
+conviction that the trouble is over-past. The joy which the community
+feels often expresses itself in feast and song; and where the
+offerings are, as they most commonly are, food-offerings or
+animal-sacrifice, the feast may come to be regarded as one at which
+the god himself is present and of which he partakes along with his
+worshippers. The joy, which expresses itself in feast and song, may,
+however, not make itself felt until the prayer of the community has
+been fulfilled and the calamity has passed away; and then the feast
+comes to be of the nature of a joyful thank-offering. But it is
+probably only in one or other of these two cases that the offering
+comes to be consumed in the service of feast and song. And although
+the rite may and does grow in this way, still this development of
+it--'eating with the god'--is rather potentially than actually present
+in the earliest form of the rite.
+
+From this point of view, sacrificial meals or feasts are not part of
+the ritual of approach: they belong to the termination of the
+ceremony. They mark the fact of reconciliation; they are an
+expression of the conviction that friendly relations are restored. The
+sacrificial meal then is accordingly not a means by which
+reconciliation is effected, but the outward expression of the
+conviction that the end has been attained; and, as expressing, it has
+the force of confirming, the conviction. Where the sacrificial rite
+grows to comprehend a sacrificial feast or meal, there the
+food-offering or sacrifice is consumed in the service. But the rite
+does not always develop thus; and even without this development it
+discharges its proper function. Before this development, it is on
+occasions of distress that the god is approached by the community, in
+the conviction that the community has offended, and with the object of
+purging the community and removing the distress, of appeasing the god
+and restoring good relations. Yet even at this stage the object of the
+community is to be at one with its god--at-one-ment and communion so
+far are sought. There is implied the faith that he, the community's
+god, cannot possibly be for ever alienated and will not utterly
+forsake them, even though he be estranged for the time. Doubtless the
+feast, which in some cases came to crown the sacrificial rite, may,
+where it was practised amongst peoples who believed that persons
+partaking of common food became united by a common bond, have come to
+be regarded as constituting a fresh bond and a more intimate
+communion between the god and his worshippers who alike partook of the
+sacrificial meal. But this belief is probably far from being, or
+having been, universal; and it is unnecessary to assume that this
+belief must have existed, wherever we find the accomplishment of the
+sacrificial rite accompanied by rejoicing. The performance of the
+sacrificial rite is prompted by the desire to restore the normal
+relation between the community and its god. It is carried out in the
+conviction that the god is willing to return to the normal relation;
+when it has been performed, the community is relieved and rejoices,
+whether the rejoicing does or does not take form in a feast; and the
+essence of the rejoicing is the conviction that all now is well, a
+conviction which arises from the performance of the sacrificial rite
+and not from the meal which may or may not follow it.
+
+Where the institution of the sacrificial feast did grow up, the
+natural tendency would be for it to become the most important feature
+in the whole rite. The original and the fundamental purpose of the
+rite was to reconcile the god and his worshippers and to make them at
+one: the feast, therefore, which marked the accomplishment of the very
+purpose of the rite, would come to be regarded as the object of the
+rite. In that, however, there is nothing more than the shifting
+forward of the centre of religious interest from the sacrifice to the
+feast: there is nothing in it to change the character or conception
+of the feast. Yet, in the case of some peoples, its character and
+conception did change in a remarkable way. In the case of some
+peoples, we find that the feast is not an occasion of 'eating with the
+god' but what has been crudely called 'eating the god.' This
+conception existed, as is generally agreed, beyond the possibility of
+doubt, in Mexico amongst the Aztecs, and perhaps--though not beyond
+the possibility of doubt--elsewhere.
+
+The Aztecs were a barbarous or semi-civilised people, with a long
+history behind them. The circumstances under which the belief and
+practice in question existed and had grown up amongst them are clear
+enough. The Aztecs worshipped deities, and amongst those deities were
+plants and vegetables, such as maize. It was, of course, not any one
+individual specimen that they worshipped: it was the spirit, the
+maize-mother, who manifested herself in every maize-plant, but was not
+identical with any one. At the same time, though they worshipped the
+spirit, or species, they grew and cultivated the individual plants, as
+furnishing them with food. Thus they were in the position of eating as
+food the plant, the body, in which was manifested the spirit whom they
+worshipped. In this there was an outward resemblance to the Christian
+rite of communion, which could not fail to attract the attention of
+the Spanish priests at the time of the conquest of Mexico, but which
+has probably been unconsciously magnified by them. They naturally
+interpreted the Aztec ceremony in terms of Christianity, and the
+spirit of the translation probably differs accordingly from the spirit
+of the original.
+
+We have now to consider the new phase of the sacrificial--indeed, in
+this connection, we may say the sacramental--rite which was found in
+Mexico, and to indicate the manner in which it probably originated.
+The offerings earliest made to the gods were not necessarily, but were
+probably, food-offerings, animal or vegetable; and as we are not in a
+position to affirm that there was any restriction upon the kind of
+food offered, it seems advisable to assume that any kind of food might
+be offered to any kind of god. The intention of offerings seems to be
+to indicate merely that the worshippers desire to be pleasing in the
+sight of the god whom they wish to approach. At this, the simplest and
+earliest stage of the rite, the sacrificial feast has not yet come
+into existence: it is enough if the food is offered to the god; it is
+not necessary that it should be eaten, or that any portion of it
+should be eaten, by the community. There is evidence enough to warrant
+us in believing that generally there was an aversion to eating the
+god's portion. If the worshippers ate any portion, they certainly
+would not eat and did not eat, until after the god had done so. At
+this stage in the development of the rite, the offerings are
+occasional, and are not made at stated, recurring, seasons. The reason
+for believing this is that it is on occasions of alarm and distress
+that the community seeks to draw near its god. But though it is in
+alarm that the community draws nigh, it draws nigh in confidence that
+the god can be appeased and is willing to be appeased. It is part of
+the community's idea of its god that he has the power to punish; that
+he does not exercise his power without reason; and that, as he is
+powerful, so also he is just to his worshippers, and merciful.
+
+But though occasional offerings, and sacrifices made in trouble to
+gods who are conceived to be a very help in time of trouble, continue
+to be made, until a relatively late period in the history of religion,
+we also find that there are recurring sacrifices, annually made. At
+these annual ceremonies, the offerings are food-offerings. Where the
+food-offerings are offerings of vegetable food, they are made at
+harvest time. They are made on the occasion of harvest; and that they
+should be so made is probably no accident or fortuitous coincidence.
+At the regularly recurring season of harvest, the community adheres to
+the custom, already formed, of not partaking of the food which it
+offers to its god, until a portion has been offered to the god. The
+custom, like other customs, tends to become obligatory: the
+worshippers, that is to say the community, may not eat, until the
+offering has been made and accepted. Then, indeed, the worshippers may
+eat, solemnly, in the presence of their god. The eating becomes a
+solemn feast of thanksgiving. The god, after whom they eat, and to
+whom they render thanks, becomes the god who gives them to eat. What
+is thus true of edible plants--whether wild or domesticated--may also
+hold true to some extent of animal life, where anything like a 'close
+time' comes to be observed.
+
+As sacrificial ceremonies come to be, thus, annually recurring rites,
+a corresponding development takes place in the community's idea of its
+god. So long as the sacrificial ceremony was an irregularly recurring
+rite, the performance of which was prompted by the occurrence, or the
+threat, of disaster, so long it was the wrath of the god which filled
+the fore-ground, so to speak, of the religious consciousness; though
+behind it lay the conviction of his justice and his mercy. But when
+the ceremony becomes one of annual worship, a regularly recurring
+occasion on which the worshippers recognise that it is the god, to
+whom the first-fruits belong, who gives the worshippers the harvest,
+then the community's idea of its god is correspondingly developed. The
+occasion of the sacrificial rite is no longer one of alarm and
+distress; it is no longer the wrath of the god, but his goodness as
+the giver of good gifts, that tends to emerge in the fore-ground of
+the religious consciousness. Harvest rites tend to become feasts of
+thanksgiving and thank-offerings; and so, by contrast with these
+joyous festivals, the occasional sacrifices, which continue to be
+offered in times of distress, tend to assume, more and more, the
+character of sin-offerings or guilt-offerings.
+
+We have, however, now to notice a consequence which ensues upon the
+community's custom of not eating until after the first-fruits have
+been offered to the god. Not only is a habit or custom hard to break,
+simply because it is a habit; but, when the habit is the habit of a
+whole community, the individual who presumes to violate it is visited
+by the disapproval and the condemnation of the whole community. When
+then the custom has established itself of abstaining from eating,
+until the first-fruits have been offered to the god, any violation of
+the custom is condemned by the community as a whole. The consequence
+of this is that the fruit or the animal tends to be regarded by the
+community as sacred to the god, and not to be meddled with until after
+the first-fruits have been offered to him. The plant or animal becomes
+sacred to the god because the community has offered it to him, and
+intends to offer it to him, and does offer it to him annually. Now it
+is not a necessary and inevitable consequence that an animal or plant,
+which has come to be sacred, should become divine. But where we find
+divine animals or animal gods--divine corn or corn-goddesses--we are
+entitled to consider this as one way in which they may have come to be
+regarded as divine, because sacred, and as deities, because divine.
+When we find the divine plant or animal constituting the sacrifice,
+and furnishing forth the sacrificial meal, there is a possibility that
+it was in this way and by this process that the plant or animal came
+to be, first, sacred, then divine, and finally the deity, to whom it
+was offered. In many cases, certainly, this last stage was never
+reached. And we may conjecture a reason why it was not reached.
+Whether it could be reached would depend largely on the degree of
+individuality, which the god, to whom the offering was made, had
+reached. A god who possesses a proper, personal name, must have a long
+history behind him, for a personal name is an epithet the meaning of
+which comes in course of time to be forgotten. If its meaning has come
+to be entirely forgotten, the god is thereby shown not only to have a
+long history behind him but to have acquired a high degree of
+individuality and personality, which will not be altered or modified
+by the offerings which are made to him. Where, however, the being or
+power worshipped is, as with the jungle-dwellers of Chota Nagpur,
+still nameless, his personality and individuality must be of the
+vaguest; and, in that case, there is the probability that the plant or
+animal offered to him may become sacred to him; and, having become
+sacred, may become divine. The animal or plant may become that in
+which the nameless being manifests himself. The corn or maize is
+offered to the nameless deity; the deity is the being to whom the corn
+or maize is habitually offered; and then becomes the corn-deity or
+maize-deity, the mother of the maize or the corn-goddess.
+
+Like the _di indigites_ of Italy, these vegetation-goddesses are
+addressed by names which, though performing the function of personal
+names and enabling the worshippers to make appeals to the deities
+personally, are still of perfectly transparent meaning. Both present
+to us that stage in the evolution of a deity, in which as yet the
+meaning of his name still survives; in which his name has not yet
+become a fully personal name; and in which he has not yet attained to
+full personality and complete individuality. This want of complete
+individuality can hardly be dissociated from another fact which goes
+with it. That fact is that the deity is to be found in any plant of
+the species sacred to him, or in any animal of the species sacred to
+him, but is not supposed to be found only in the particular plant or
+animal which is offered on one particular occasion. If the
+corn-goddess is present, or manifests herself, in one particular sheaf
+of corn, at her harvest festival this year, still she did manifest
+herself last year, and will manifest herself next year, in another.
+The deity, that is to say, is the species; and the species, and no
+individual specimen thereof, is the deity. That is the reason which
+prevents, or tends to prevent, deities of this kind from attaining
+complete individuality.
+
+This want of complete individuality and of full personality it is
+which characterises totems. The totem, also, is a being who, if he
+manifests himself in this particular animal, which is slain, has also
+manifested himself and will manifest himself in other animals of the
+same species: but he is not identical with any particular individual
+specimen. Not only is the individuality of the totem thus incomplete,
+but in many instances the name of the species has not begun to change
+into a proper personal name for the totem, as 'Ceres' or
+'Chicomecoatl' or 'Xilonen' have changed into proper names of personal
+deities. Whether we are or are not to regard the totem as a god, at
+any rate, viewed as a being in the process of acquiring individuality,
+he seems to be acquiring it in the same way, and by the same process,
+as corn-goddesses and maize-mothers acquired theirs, and to present to
+our eyes a stage of growth through which these vegetation-deities
+themselves have passed. They also at one time had not yet acquired
+the personal names by which they afterwards came to be addressed. They
+were, though nameless, the beings present in any and every sheaf of
+corn or maize, though not cabined and confined to any one sheaf or any
+number of sheaves. And these beings have it in them to become--for
+they did become--deities. The process by which and the period at which
+they may have become deities we have already suggested: the period is
+the stage at which offerings, originally made at irregular times of
+distress, become annual offerings, made at the time of harvest; the
+process is the process by which what is customary becomes obligatory.
+The offerings at harvest time, from customary, become obligatory. That
+which is offered, is thereby sacred; the very intention to offer it,
+this year in the same way as it was offered last year, suffices to
+make it sacred, before it is offered. Thus, the whole species, whether
+plant or animal, becomes sacred, to the deity to whom it is offered:
+it is his. And if he be as vague and shadowy as the power or being to
+whom the jungle-dwellers of Chota Nagpur make their offerings at
+stated seasons, then he may be looked for and found in the plant or
+animal species which is his. The harvest is his alone, until the
+first-fruits are offered. He makes the plants to grow: if they fail,
+it is to him the community prays. If they thrive, it is because he is,
+though not identical with them, yet in a way present in them, and is
+not to be distinguished from the being who not only manifests himself
+in every individual plant or animal of the species, though not
+identical with any one, but is called by the name of the species.
+
+Whether we are to see in totems, as they occur in Australia, beings in
+the stage through which vegetation deities presumably passed, before
+they became corn-goddesses and mothers of the maize, is a question,
+the answer to which depends upon our interpretation of the ceremonies
+in which they figure. It is difficult, at least, to dissociate those
+ceremonies from the ritual of first-fruits. The community may not eat
+of the animal or plant, at the appropriate season, until the head-man
+has solemnly and sparingly partaken of it. About the solemnity of the
+ceremonial and the reverence of those who perform it, there is no
+doubt. But, whereas in the ritual of first-fruits elsewhere, the
+first-fruits are, beyond possibility of doubt or mistake, offered to a
+god, a personal god, having a proper name, in Australia there is no
+satisfactory evidence to show that the offerings are supposed, by
+those who make them, to be made to any god; or that the totem-spirit,
+if it is distinguished from the totem-species, is regarded as a god.
+There has accordingly been a tendency on the part of students of the
+science of religion to deny to totemism any place in the evolution of
+religion, and even to regard the Australian black-fellows as
+exemplifying, within the region of our observation, a pre-religious
+period in the process of human evolution. This latter view may safely
+be dismissed as untenable, whether we do or do not believe totemism to
+have a religious side. There is sufficient mythology, still existing
+amongst the Australian tribes, to show that the belief in gods
+survives amongst them, even though, as seems to be the case, no
+worship now attaches to the gods, with personal names, who figure in
+the myths. That myths survive, when worship has ceased; and that the
+names of gods linger on, even when myths are no longer told of them,
+are features to be seen in the decay of religious systems, all the
+world over, and not in Australia alone. The fact that these features
+are to be found in Australia points to a consideration which hitherto
+has generally been overlooked, or not sufficiently weighed. It is that
+in Australia we are in the midst of general religious decay, and are
+not witnessing the birth of religion nor in the presence of a
+pre-religious period. From this point of view, the worship of the
+gods, who figure in the myths, has ceased, but their names live on.
+And from this point of view, the names of the beings worshipped, in
+the totemistic first-fruits ceremonies, have disappeared, though the
+ceremonies are elaborate, solemn, reverent, complicated and
+prolonged; and religion has been swallowed up in ritual.
+
+Even amongst the Aztecs, who had reached a stage of social
+development, barbarous or semi-civilised, far beyond anything attained
+by the Australian tribes, the degree of personality and individuality
+reached by the vegetation deities was not such that those deities had
+strictly proper names: the deity of the maize was still only 'the
+maize-mother.' Amongst the Australians, who are so far below the level
+reached in Mexico, the beings worshipped at the first-fruits
+ceremonies may well have been as nameless as the beings worshipped by
+the jungle-dwellers of Chota Nagpur. Around these nameless beings, a
+ritual, simple in its origin, but luxuriant in its growth, has
+developed, overshadowing and obscuring them from our view, so that we,
+and perhaps the worshippers, cannot see the god for the ritual.
+
+In Mexico the vegetation-goddesses struggled for existence amongst a
+crowd of more developed deities, just as in Italy the _di indigites_
+competed, at a disadvantage, with the great gods of the state. In
+Australia the greater gods of the myths seem to have given way
+before--or to--the spread of totemism. Where gods are worshipped for
+the benefits expected from them, beings who have in charge the
+food-supply of the community will be worshipped not only annually at
+the season of the first-fruits, but with greater zeal and more
+continuous devotion than can be displayed towards the older gods who
+are worshipped only at irregular periods. Not only does the existence
+of mythology in Australia indicate that the gods who figure in the
+myths were once worshipped, though worship now no longer is rendered
+to them; but the totemistic ceremonies by their very nature show that
+they are a later development of the sacrificial rite. The simplest
+form of the rite is that in which the community draw near to their
+god, bearing with them offerings, acceptable to the god: it is at a
+later stage in the development of the rite that the offerings, having
+been accepted by the god, are consumed by the community, as is the
+case with the totem animals and plants. At its earliest stage, again,
+the rite is performed, at irregular periods, on occasions of distress:
+it is only at a more advanced stage that the rite is performed at
+fixed, annual periods, as in Australia. And this change of periodicity
+is plainly connected with the growth of the conviction that the annual
+first-fruits belong to the gods--a conviction springing from the
+belief that they are annually accepted by the god, a belief which in
+its turn implies a prior belief that they are acceptable. In other
+words, the centre of religious interest at first lies in approaching
+the god, that is in the desire to restore the normal state of
+relations, which calamity shows to have been disturbed. But in the
+end, religious interest is concentrated on, and expressed by, the
+feast which terminates the ceremony and marks the fact that the
+reconciliation is effected. What is at first accepted by the god at
+the feast comes to be regarded as belonging to him and sacred to him:
+the worshippers may not touch it until a portion of it, the
+first-fruits, has been accepted by him. Thus the rite which indicates
+and marks his acceptance becomes more than ever the centre of
+religious interest. The rite may thus become of more importance than
+the god, as in Australia seems to be the case; for the performance of
+the rite is indispensable if the community is to be admitted to eat of
+the harvest. When this point of view has been reached, when the
+performance of the rite is the indispensable thing, the rite tends to
+be regarded as magical. If this is what has happened in the case of
+the Australian rite, it is but what tends to happen, wherever ritual
+flourishes at the expense of religion. If it were necessary to assume
+that only amongst the Australian black-fellows, and never elsewhere,
+did a rite, originally religious, tend to become magical, then it
+would be _a priori_ unlikely, in the extreme, that this happened in
+Australia. But inasmuch as this tendency is innate in ritual, it is
+rather likely that in Australia the tendency has run its course, as it
+has done elsewhere, in India, for example, where, also, the
+sacrificial rite has become magical. Whether a rite, originally
+religious, will become assimilated to magic, depends very much on the
+extent to which the community believes in magic. The more the
+community believes in magic, the more ready it will be to put a
+magical interpretation on its religious rites. But the fact that, in
+the lower communities, religion is always in danger of sinking into
+magic, does not prove that religion springs from magic and is but one
+kind of magic. That view, once held by some students, is now generally
+abandoned. It amounts simply to saying once more that in the earliest
+manifestations of religion there was no religion, and that religion is
+now, what it was in the beginning--nothing but magic. If that position
+is abandoned, then religious rites are, in their very nature, and from
+their very origin, different from magical rites. Religious rites are,
+first, rites of approach, whereby the community draws nigh to its god;
+and, afterwards, rites of sacramental meals whereby the community
+celebrates its reconciliation and enjoys communion with its god. Those
+meals are typically cases of 'eating with the god,' celebrated on the
+occasion of first-fruits, and based on the conviction, which has
+slowly grown up, that 'the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness
+thereof.' Meals, such as were found in Mexico, and have left their
+traces in Australia, in which the fruit or the animal that was offered
+had come to be regarded as standing in the same relation to the god
+as an individual does to the species, are meals having the same origin
+as those in which the community eats with its god, but following a
+different line of evolution.
+
+The object of the sacrificial rite is first to restore and then to
+maintain good relations between the community and its god. Pushed to
+its logical conclusion, or rather perhaps we should say, pushed back
+to the premisses required for its logical demonstration, the very idea
+of renewing or restoring relations implies an original understanding
+between the community and its god; and implies that it is the
+community's departure from this understanding which has involved it in
+the disaster, from which it desires to escape, and to secure escape
+from which, it approaches its god, with desire to renew and restore
+the normal relations. The idea that if intelligent beings do something
+customarily, they must do so because once they entered into a
+contract, compact or covenant to do so, is one which in Plato's time
+manifested itself in the theory of a social compact, to account for
+the existence of morality, and which in Japan was recorded in the
+tenth century A.D. as accounting for the fact that certain sacrifices
+were offered to the gods. Thus in the fourth ritual of 'the Way of the
+Gods'--that is Shinto--it is explained that the Spirits of the Storm
+took the Japanese to be their people, and the people of Japan took the
+Spirits of the Storm to be gods of theirs. In pursuance of that
+covenant, the spirits on their part undertook to be Gods of the Winds
+and to ripen and bless the harvest, while the people on their part
+undertook to found a temple to their new gods; and that is why the
+people are now worshipping them. It was, according to the account
+given in the fourth ritual, the gods themselves who dictated the
+conditions on which they were willing to take the Japanese to be their
+people, and fixed the terms of the covenant. So too in the account
+given in the sixth chapter of Exodus, it was Jehovah himself who
+dictated to Moses the terms of the covenant which he was willing to
+make with the children of Israel: 'I will take you to me for a people,
+and I will be to you a God.' In Japan it was to the Emperor, as high
+priest, that the terms of the covenant were dictated, in consequence
+of which the temple was built and the worship instituted.
+
+The train of thought is quite clear and logically consistent. If the
+gods of the Winds were to be trusted--as they were unquestionably
+trusted--it must be because they had made a covenant with the people,
+and would be faithful to it, if the people were. The direct statement,
+in plain, intelligible words, in the fourth ritual, that a covenant of
+this kind had actually been entered into, was but a statement of what
+is implied by the very idea, and in the very act, of offering
+sacrifices. And sacrifices had of course been offered in Japan long
+before the tenth century: they were offered, and long had been offered
+annually to the gods of the Harvest. Probably they had been offered to
+the gods of the Storms long before they were offered to the gods of
+the Winds; and the procedure narrated in the fourth ritual records the
+transformation of the occasional and irregular sacrifices, made to the
+winds when they threatened the harvest with damage, into annual
+sacrifices, made every year as a matter of course. Thus, we have an
+example of the way in which the older sacrifices, made originally only
+in times of disaster, come to be assimilated to the more recent
+sacrifices, which from their nature and origin, are offered regularly
+every year. Not only is there a natural tendency in man to assimilate
+things which admit of assimilation and can be brought under one rule;
+but also it is advisable to avert calamity rather than to wait for it,
+and, when it has happened, to do something. It would therefore be
+desirable from this point of view to render regular worship to deities
+who can send disaster; and thus to induce them to abstain from sending
+it.
+
+In the fourth Shinto ritual the gods of the Winds are represented as
+initiating the contract and prescribing its terms. But in the first
+ritual, which is concerned with the worship of the gods of the
+Harvest, it is the community which is represented as taking the first
+step, and as undertaking that, if the gods grant an abundant harvest,
+the people will, through their high priest, the Emperor, make a
+thank-offering, in the shape of first-fruits, to the gods of the
+Harvest. This is, of course, no more an historical account of the way
+in which the gods of the Harvest actually came to be worshipped, than
+is the account which the fourth Shinto ritual gives of the way the
+gods of the Winds came to be worshipped. In both cases the worship
+existed, and sacrifices had been made, as a matter of custom, long
+before any need was felt to explain the origin of the custom. As soon
+as the need was felt, the explanation was forthcoming: if the
+community had made these sacrifices, for as long back as the memory of
+man could run, and if the gods had granted good harvests in
+consequence, it must have been in consequence of an agreement entered
+into by both parties; and therefore a covenant had been established
+between them, on some past occasion, which soon became historical.
+
+This history of the origin and meaning of sacrifice has an obvious
+affinity with the gift-theory of sacrifice. Both in the gift-theory and
+the covenant-theory, the terms of the transaction are that so much
+blessing shall be forthcoming for so much service, or so much sacrifice
+for so much blessing. The point of view is commercial; the obligation
+is legal; if the terms are strictly kept on the one part, then they
+are strictly binding on the other. The covenant-theory, like the
+gift-theory, is eventually discovered by spiritual experience, if
+pushed far enough, to be a false interpretation of the relations
+existing between god and man. Being an interpretation, it is an outcome
+of reflection--of reflection upon the fact that, in the time of
+trouble, man turns to his gods, and that, in returning to them, he
+escapes from his trouble. On that fact all systems of worship are
+based, from that fact all systems of worship start. If, as is the case,
+they start in different directions and diverge from one another, it is
+because men, in the process of reflecting upon that fact, come to put
+different interpretations upon it. And so far as they eventually come
+to feel that any interpretation is a misinterpretation, they do so
+because they find that it is not, as they had been taught to believe, a
+correct interpretation but a misinterpretation of the fact: there is
+found in the experience of returning to God, something with which the
+misinterpretation is irreconcilable; and, when the misinterpretation is
+dispersed, like a vapour, the vision of God, the idea of God, shines
+forth the more brightly. One such misinterpretation is the reflection
+that the favour of the gods can be bought by gifts. Another is the
+reflection that the gods sell their favours, on the terms of a covenant
+agreed upon between them and man. Another is that that which is offered
+is sacred, and that that which is sacred is divine--that the god is
+himself the offering which is made to him.
+
+In all systems of worship man not only turns to his gods but does so
+in the conviction that he is returning, or trying to return, to
+them--trying to return to them, because they have been estranged, and
+access to them is therefore difficult. Accordingly, he draws near to
+them, bearing in his hands something intended to express his desire to
+return to them. The material, external symbol of his desire--the
+oblation, offering or sacrifice which he brings with him because it
+expresses his desire--is that on which at first his attention centres.
+And because his attention centres on it, the rite of sacrifice, the
+outward ceremony, develops in ways already described. The object of
+the rite is to procure access to the god; and the greater the extent
+to which attention is concentrated on the right way of performing the
+external acts and the outward ceremony, the less attention is bestowed
+upon the inward purpose which accompanies the outward actions, and for
+the sake of which those external actions are performed. As the object
+of the rite is to procure access, it seems to follow that the proper
+performance of the rite will ensure the access desired. The reason why
+access is sought, at all, is the belief--arising on occasions when
+calamity visits the community--that the god has been estranged, and
+the faith that he may yet become reconciled to his worshippers. The
+reason why his wrath descends, in the shape of calamities, upon the
+community, is that the community, in the person of one of its members,
+has offended the god, by breaking the custom of the community in some
+way. For this reason--in this belief and faith--access is sought, by
+means of the sacrificial rite; and the purpose of the rite is assumed
+to be realised by the performance of the ceremonies, in which the
+outward rite consists. The meaning and the value of the outward
+ceremonies consists in the desire for reconciliation which expresses
+itself in the acts performed; and the mere performance of the acts
+tends of itself to relieve the desire. That is why the covenant-theory
+of sacrifice gains acceptance: it represents--it is an official
+representation--that performance of the sacrificial ceremony is all
+that is required, by the terms of the agreement, to obtain
+reconciliation and to effect atonement. But the representation is
+found to be a misrepresentation: the desire for reconciliation and
+atonement is not to be satisfied by outward ceremonies, but by
+hearkening and obedience. 'To obey is better than sacrifice and to
+hearken than the fat of rams.' Sacrifice remains the outward rite, but
+it is pronounced to have value only so far as it is an expression of
+the spirit of obedience. Oblations are vain unless the person who
+offers them is changed in heart, unless there is an inward, spiritual
+process, of which the external ceremony is an expression. Though this
+was an interpretation of the meaning of the sacrificial rite which was
+incompatible with the covenant-theory and which was eventually fatal
+to it, it was at once a return to the original object of the rite and
+a disclosure of its meaning. Some such internal, spiritual process is
+implied by sacrifice from the beginning, for it is a plain
+impossibility to suppose that in the beginning it consisted of mere
+external actions which had absolutely no meaning whatever, for those
+who performed them; and it is equally impossible to maintain that such
+meaning as they had was not a religious meaning. The history of
+religion is the history of the process by which the import of that
+meaning rises to the surface of clear consciousness, and is gradually
+revealed. Beneath the ceremony and the outward rite there was always a
+moral and religious process--moral because it was the community of
+fellow-worshippers who offered the sacrifice, on occasions of a breach
+of the custom, that is of the customary morality, of the tribe;
+religious because it was to their god that they offered it. The very
+purpose with which the community offered it was to purge itself of the
+offence committed by one of its members. The condition precedent, on
+which alone sacrifice could be offered, was that the offence was
+repented of. From the beginning sacrifice implied repentance and was
+impossible without it. But it sufficed if the community repented and
+punished the transgressor: his repentance however was not
+necessary--all that was necessary was his punishment.
+
+The re-interpretation of the sacrificial rite by the prophets of
+Israel was that until there was hearkening and obedience there could
+be nothing but an outward performance of the rite. The revelation made
+by Christ was that every man may take part in the supreme act of
+worship, if he has first become reconciled to his brother, if he has
+first repented his own offences, from love for God and his fellow-man.
+The old covenant made the favour of God conditional on the receipt of
+sacrificial offerings. The new covenant removes that limit, and all
+others, from God's love to his children: it is infinite love. It is
+not conditional or limited; conditional on man's loving God, or
+limited to those who love Him. Otherwise the new covenant would be of
+the same nature as the old. But love asks for love; the greater love
+for the greater love; infinite love for the greatest man is capable
+of. And it is hard for a man to resist love; impossible indeed in the
+end: all men come under and into the new covenant, in which there is
+infinite love on the one side, and love that may grow infinitely on
+the other. If it is to grow, however, it is in a new life that it must
+grow: a life of sacrifice, a life in which he who comes under the new
+covenant is himself the offering and the 'lively sacrifice.'
+
+The worshipper's idea of God necessarily determines the spirit in
+which he worships. The idea of God as a God of love is different from
+the idea of Him as a God of justice, who justly requires hearkening
+and obedience. The idea of God as a God who demands obedience and is
+not to be put off with vain oblations is different from that of a God
+to whom, by the terms of a covenant, offerings are to be made in
+return for benefits received. But each and all of these ideas imply
+the existence, in the individual consciousness, and in the common
+consciousness, of the desire to draw near to God, and of the need of
+drawing nigh. Wherever that need and that desire are felt, there
+religion is; and the need and the desire are part of the common
+consciousness of mankind. From the beginning they have always
+expressed or symbolised themselves in outward acts or rites. The
+experience of the human race is testimony that rites are
+indispensable, in the same way and for the same reason that language
+is indispensable to thought. Thought would not develop were there no
+speech, whereby thought could be sharpened on thought. Nor has
+religion ever, anywhere, developed without rites. They, like language,
+are the work of the community, collectively; and they are a mode of
+expression which is, like language, intelligible to the community,
+because the community expresses itself in this way, and because each
+member of the community finds that other members have thoughts like
+his, and the same desire to draw near to a Being whose existence they
+doubt not, however vaguely they conceive Him, or however
+contradictorily they interpret His being. But, if language is
+indispensable to thought, and a means whereby we become conscious of
+each other's thought, language is not thought. Nor are rites, and
+outward acts, religion--indispensable though they be to it. They are
+an expression of it. They must be an inadequate expression; and they
+are always liable to misinterpretation, even by some of those who
+perform them. The history of religion contains the record of the
+misinterpretations of the rite of sacrifice. But it also records the
+progressive correction of those misinterpretations, and the process
+whereby the meaning implicit in the rite from the beginning has been
+made manifest in the end.
+
+The need and the desire to draw nigh to the god of the community are
+felt in the earliest of ages on occasions when calamity befalls the
+community. The calamity is interpreted as sent by the god; and the god
+is conceived to have been provoked by an offence of which some member
+of the community had been guilty. We may say, therefore, that from
+the beginning there has been present in the common consciousness a
+sense of sin and the desire to make atonement. Psychologically it
+seems clear that at the present day, in the case of the individual,
+personal religion first manifests itself usually in the consciousness
+of sin. And what is true in the psychology of the individual may be
+expected within limits to hold true in the psychology of the common
+consciousness. But though we may say that, in the beginning, it was by
+the occurrence of public calamity that the community became conscious
+that sin had been committed, still it is also true to say that the
+community felt that it was by some one of its members, rather than by
+the community, that the offence had been committed, for which the
+community was responsible. It was the responsibility, rather than the
+offence, which was prominent in the common consciousness--as indeed
+tends to be the case with the individual also. But the fact that the
+offence had been committed, not by the community, but by some one
+member of the community, doubtless helped to give the community the
+confidence without which its attitude towards the offended power would
+have been simply one of fear. Had the feeling been one of fear, pure
+and unmixed, the movement of the community could not have been towards
+the offended being. But religion manifests itself from the beginning
+in the action of drawing near to the god. The fact that the offence
+was the deed of some one member, and not of the community as a whole,
+doubtless helped to give the community the confidence, without which
+its attitude towards the offended power would have been simply one of
+fear. But it also tended necessarily to make religion an affair of the
+community rather than a personal need: sin had indeed been committed,
+but not by those who drew near to the god for the purpose of making
+the atonement. They were not the offenders. The community admitted its
+responsibility, indeed, but it found one of its members guilty.
+
+We may, therefore, fairly say that personal religion had at this time
+scarcely begun to emerge. And the reason why this was so is quite
+clear: it is that in the infancy of the race, as in the infancy of the
+individual, personal self-consciousness is as yet undeveloped. And it
+is only as personal self-consciousness develops that personal religion
+becomes possible. We must not however from this infer that personal
+religion is a necessary, or, at any rate, an immediate consequence of
+the development of self-consciousness. In ancient Greece one
+manifestation--and in the religious domain the first manifestation--of
+the individual's consciousness of himself was the growth of
+'mysteries.' Individuals voluntarily entered these associations: they
+were not born into them as they were into the state and the
+state-worship. And they entered them for the sake of individual
+purification and in the hope of personal immortality. The desire for
+salvation, for individual salvation, is manifest. But it was in rites
+and ceremonies that the _mystae_ put their trust, and in the fact that
+they were initiated that they found their confidence--so long as they
+could keep it. The traditional conviction of the efficacy of ritual
+was unshaken: and, so long as men believed in the efficacy of rites,
+the question, 'What shall I do to be saved?' admitted of no
+permanently satisfactory answer. The only answer that has been found
+permanently satisfying to the personal need of religion is one which
+goes beyond rites and ceremonies: it is that a man shall love his
+neighbour and his God.
+
+But in thus becoming personal, religion involved man's fellow-men as
+much as himself. In becoming personal thus, religion became, thereby,
+more than ever before, the relation of the community to its God. The
+relation however is no longer that the community admits the
+transgressions of some one of its members: it prays for the
+forgiveness of 'our trespasses'; and though it prays for each of its
+members, still it is the community that prays and worships and comes
+before its God, as it has done from the beginning of the history of
+religion. It is with rites of worship that the community, at any
+period in the history of religion, draws nigh to its god; for its
+inward purpose cannot but reveal itself in some outward manifestation.
+Indeed it seeks to manifest itself as naturally and as necessarily as
+thought found expression for itself in the languages it has created;
+and, though the re-action of forms of worship upon religion sometimes
+results, like the re-action of language upon thought, in misleading
+confusion, still, for the most part, language does serve to express
+more or less clearly--indeed we may say more and more clearly--that
+which we have it in us to utter.
+
+As there are more forms of speech than one, so there are more forms of
+religion than one; and as the language of savages who can count no
+higher than three is inadequate for the purposes of the higher
+mathematics, so the religion of man in the lower stages of his
+development is inadequate, compared with that of the higher stages.
+Nevertheless the civilised man can come to understand the savage's
+form of speech; and it would be strange to say that the savage's form
+of speech, or that his form of religion, is unintelligible nonsense.
+Behind the varieties of speech and of religion there is that in the
+spirit of man which is seeking to express itself and which is
+intelligible to all, because it is in all. Though few of us understand
+any but civilised languages, we feel no difficulty in believing that
+savage languages not merely are intelligible but must have sprung from
+the same source as our own, though far inferior to it for every
+purpose that language is employed to subserve. The many different
+forms of religion are all attempts--successful in as many very various
+degrees as language itself--to give expression to the idea of God.
+
+
+
+
+IV
+
+THE IDEA OF GOD IN PRAYER
+
+
+The question may perhaps be raised, whether it is necessary for us to
+travel beyond worship, in order to discover what was, in early
+religions, or is now, the idea of God, as it presents itself to the
+worshipper. The answer to the question will depend partly on what we
+consider the essence of religion to be. If we take the view, which is
+held by some writers of authority on the history of religion, that the
+essence of religion is adoration, then indeed we neither need nor can
+travel further, for we shall hold that worship is adoration, and
+adoration, worship.
+
+To exclude adoration, to say that adoration does not, or should not,
+form any part of worship, seems alike contrary to the very meaning of
+the word 'worship' and to be at variance with a large and important
+body of the facts recorded in the history of religion. The courts of a
+god are customarily entered with the praise which is the outward
+expression of the feeling of adoration with which the worshippers
+spiritually gaze upon the might and majesty of the god whom they
+approach. He is to them a great god, above all other gods. Even to
+polytheists, the god who is worshipped at the moment, is, at that
+moment, one than whom there is no one, and nought, greater, _quo nihil
+maius_. A god who should not be worshipped thus--a god who was not the
+object of adoration--would not be worthy of the name, and would hardly
+be called a god. So strongly is this felt that even writers who
+incline to regard religion as an illusion, define gods as beings
+conceived to be superior to man. The degree of respect, rising to
+adoration, will vary directly with the degree of superiority
+attributed to them; but not even in the case of a fetish, so long as
+it is worshipped, is the respect, which is the germ of adoration,
+wholly wanting. Even in the case of gods, on whom, on occasion, insult
+is put, it is precisely in moments when their superiority is in doubt
+that the worship of adoration is momentarily wanting. Worship without
+adoration is worship only in name, or rather is no worship at all.
+Only with adoration can worship begin: 'hallowed be Thy name'
+expresses the emotion with which all worship begins, even where the
+emotion has not yet found the words in which to express itself. It is
+because the emotion is there, pent up and seeking escape, that it can
+travel along the words, and make them something more than a succession
+of syllables and sounds.
+
+If then it is on the wings of adoration that the soul has at all times
+striven to rise to heaven to find its God, even though it flutters but
+a little height and soon falls again to the ground, then we must admit
+that from the beginning there has been a mystical element, or a
+tendency to mysticism, in religion. In the lowest, and probably in the
+earliest, stages of the evolution of religion, this tendency is most
+manifest in individual members of the community, who are subject to
+'possession,' ecstasy, trance and visions, and are believed, both by
+themselves and others, to be in especial communion with their god.
+This is the earliest manifestation of the fact that religion, besides
+being a social act and a matter in which the community is concerned,
+is also one which may profoundly affect the individual soul. But in
+these cases it is the exceptional soul which is alone affected--the
+seer of visions, the prophet. And it is not necessarily in connection
+with the ordinary worship, or customary sacrifice, that such instances
+of mystic communion with the gods are manifested. For the development
+of the mystical tendency of worship and sacrifice, we must look, not
+to the lowest, or to the earliest, stages of religious evolution, but
+to a later stage in the evolution of the sacrificial meal. It is
+where, as in ancient Mexico, the plant, or animal, which furnishes
+forth the sacrificial meal, is in some way regarded as, or identified
+with, the body of the deity worshipped, that the rite of sacrifice is
+tinged with mysticism and that all partakers of the meal, and not some
+exceptional individuals, are felt to be brought into some mystic
+communion with the god whom they adore.
+
+In these cases, adoration is worship; and worship is adoration--and
+little more. Judging them by their fruits, we cannot say that the
+Mexican rites, or even the Greek mysteries, encourage us to believe
+that adoration is all that is required to make worship what the heart
+of man divines that it should be. Doubtless, this is due in part to
+the fact that the idea of God was so imperfectly disclosed to the
+polytheists of Mexico and Greece. Let us not therefore use Greece and
+Mexico as examples for the disparagement of mysticism or for the
+depreciation of man's tendency to seek communion with the Highest. Let
+us rather appeal at once to the reason which makes mysticism, of
+itself, inadequate to satisfy all the needs of man. The reason simply
+is that man is not merely a contemplative but an active being. If
+action were alien to his nature, then man might be satisfied to gaze,
+and merely gaze, on God. But man is active and not merely
+contemplative. We must therefore either hold that religion, being in
+its essence adoration and nothing more, has no function to perform, or
+sphere to fill, in the practical life of man; or else, if we hold
+that it does, or should, affect the practice of his life, we must
+admit that, though religion implies adoration always, it cannot
+properly be fulfilled in quietism, but must bear its fruit in what man
+does, or in the way he does it. The being or beings whom man worships
+are, indeed, the object of adoration, an object _quo nihil maius_; but
+they are something more. To them are addressed man's prayers.
+
+It is vain to pretend that prayer, even the simple petition for our
+daily bread, is not religious. It may perhaps be argued that prayer is
+not essential to religion; that it has not always formed part of
+religion; and that it is incompatible with that acquiescence in the
+will of God, and that perfect adoration of God, which is religion in
+its purest and most perfect sense. Whether there is in fact any
+incompatibility between the petition for deliverance from evil, and
+the aspiration that God's will may be done on earth, is a question on
+which we need not enter here. But the statement that prayer has not
+always formed part of religion is one which it should be possible to
+bring to the test of fact.
+
+In the literature of the science of religion, the prayers of the lower
+races of mankind have not been recorded to any great extent by those
+who have had the best opportunities of becoming acquainted with them,
+if and so far as they actually exist. This is probably due in part to
+their seeming too obvious and too trivial to deserve being put on
+record. It may possibly in some cases be due to the reticence the
+savage observes towards the white man, on matters too sacred to be
+revealed. The error of omission, so far as it can be remedied
+henceforth, will probably be repaired, now that savage beliefs are
+coming to be examined and recorded on the spot by scientific students
+in the interests of science. And the reticence of the savage promises
+to avail him but little: the comparative method has thrown a flood of
+light on his most sacred mysteries.
+
+There may however be another reason why the prayers of the lower races
+have not been recorded to any great extent: they may not have been
+recorded for the simple reason that they may not have been uttered.
+The nature and the occasion of the rite with which the god is
+approached may be such as to make words superfluous: the purpose of
+the ceremony may find adequate expression in the acts performed, and
+may require no words to make it clear. If a community approaches its
+god with sacrifice or offering, in time of sore distress, it
+approaches him with full conviction that he understands the
+circumstances and the purpose of their coming. Words of
+dedication--'this to thee' is a formula actually in use--may be
+necessary, but nothing more. Indeed, the Australian tribes, in rites
+analogous to harvest-offerings, use no spoken words at all. We cannot,
+however, imagine that the rites are, or in their origin were,
+absolutely without meaning or purpose. We must interpret them on the
+analogy of similar rites elsewhere, the purpose of which is expressed
+not merely, as in Australia, by gesture-language, but is reinforced by
+the spoken word. Indeed, we may, perhaps, go even further, and believe
+that as gesture-language was earlier than speech, so the earliest
+rites were conducted wholly by means of ritual acts or gestures; and
+that it was only in course of time, and as a consequence of the
+development of language, that verbal formulae came to be used to give
+fuller expression to the emotions which prompted the rites.
+
+If then we had merely to account for cases in which prayer does not
+happen to have been recorded as a constituent part of the rite of
+worship, we should not be warranted in inferring that prayer was
+really absent. The presumption would rather be that either the records
+are faulty, or that prayer, even though not uttered in word, yet
+played its part. The ground for the presumption is found in the nature
+of the occasions on which the gods are approached in the lower stages
+of religion. Those occasions are either exceptional or regularly
+recurring. The exceptional occasions are those on which the community
+is threatened, or afflicted, with calamity; and on such occasions,
+whether spoken words of prayer happen to have been recorded by our
+informants, or not, it is beyond doubt that the purpose of the
+community is to escape the calamity, and that the attitude of mind in
+which the god is approached is one of supplication or prayer. The
+regularly recurring occasions are those of seed-time and harvest, or
+first-fruits. The ceremonies at seed-time obviously admit of the
+presumption, even if there be no spoken prayers to prove it, that they
+too have a petitionary purpose; while the recorded instances of the
+prayers put up at harvest time, and on the occasion of the offering of
+first-fruits, suffice to show that thanksgiving is made along with
+prayers for continued prosperity.
+
+It is however not merely on the ground of the absence of recorded
+prayers that it is maintained that there was a stage in the evolution
+of religion when prayer was unpractised and unknown. It is the
+presence and the use of spells which is supposed to show that there
+may have been a time when prayer was as yet unknown, and that the
+process of development was a progress from spell to prayer. On this
+theory, spells, in the course of time, and in accordance with their
+own law of growth, become prayers. The nature and operation of this
+law, it may be difficult or impossible now for us to observe. The
+process took place in the night of time and is therefore not open to
+our observation. But that the process, by which the one becomes the
+other, is a possible process, is perhaps shown by the fact that we can
+witness for ourselves prayer reverting or casting back to spell.
+Wherever prayers become 'vain repetitions,' it is obvious that they
+are conceived to act in the same way as the savage believes spells to
+act: the mere utterance of the formula has the same magical power, as
+making the sign of the cross, to avert supernatural danger. If prayers
+thus cast back to spells, it may reasonably be presumed that it is
+because prayer is in its origin but spell. It is because oxygen and
+hydrogen, combined, produce water, that water can be resolved into
+oxygen and hydrogen.
+
+This theory, when examined, seems to imply that spell and prayer, so
+far from being different and incompatible things, are one and the same
+thing: seen from one point of view, and in one set of surroundings, it
+is spell; seen from another point of view, and in other surroundings,
+it is prayer. The point of view and the circumstances may change, but
+the thing itself remains the same always. What then is the thing
+itself, which, whether it presents itself as prayer or as spell, still
+always remains the same? It is, and can only be, desire. In spell and
+prayer alike the common, operative element present is desire. Desire
+may issue in spell or prayer; but were there no desires, there would
+be neither prayer nor spell. That we may admit. But, then, we may, or
+rather must go further: if there were no desire, neither would there
+be any action, whatever, performed by man. Men's actions, however,
+differ endlessly from one another. They differ partly because men's
+desires, themselves, differ; and partly because the means they adopt
+to satisfy them differ also. It would be vain to say that different
+means cannot be adopted for attaining one and the same end. Equally
+vain would it be to say that the various means may not differ from one
+another, to the point of incompatibility. If then we regard prayer and
+spell as alike means which have been employed by man for the purpose
+of realising his desires, we are yet at liberty to maintain that
+prayer and spell are different and incompatible.
+
+That there is a difference between prayer and spell--a difference at
+any rate great enough to allow the two words to be used in
+contradistinction to one another--is clear enough. The cardinal
+distinction between the two is also clear: a spell takes effect in
+virtue of the power resident in the formula itself or in the person
+who utters it; while a prayer is an appeal to a personal power, or to
+a power personal enough to be able to listen to the appeal, and to
+understand it, and to grant it, if so it seems good. That this
+difference obtains between prayer and spell will not be denied by any
+student of the science of religion. But if this difference is
+admitted, as admitted it must be, it is plain that prayer and spell
+are terms which apply to two different moods or states of mind. Desire
+is implied by each alike: were there no desire, there would be neither
+prayer nor spell. But, whereas prayer is an appeal to some one who has
+the power to grant one's desire, spell is the exercise of power which
+one possesses oneself, or has at one's command.
+
+That the two moods are different, and are incompatible with one
+another, is clear upon the face of it: to beg for a thing as a mercy
+or a gift is quite different from commanding that the thing be done.
+The whole attitude of mind assumed in the one case is different from
+that assumed in the other. It is possible, indeed, to pass from the
+one attitude to the other. But it is impossible to say that the one
+attitude is the other. It is correct to say that the one attitude may
+follow the other. But it is to be misled by language to say that the
+one attitude becomes the other. It is possible for one and the same
+man to fluctuate between the two attitudes, to alternate between
+them--possible, though inconsistent. The child, or even that larger
+child, the man, may beg and scold, almost in the same breath. The
+savage, as is well known, will treat his fetish in the same
+inconsequential way. That it is inconsequential is a fact; but it is a
+fact which, if learned, is but very slowly learned. The process by
+which it is learned is part of the evolution of religion; and it is a
+process in the course of which the idea of God tends to disengage
+itself from the confusion of thought and the confusion of feeling, in
+which it is at first enshrouded.
+
+We, indeed, at the present day, may see, or at any rate feel, the
+difference between magic and religion, between spell and prayer. And
+we may imagine that the difference, because real, has always been seen
+or felt, as we see and feel it. But, if we so imagine, we are
+mistaken. The difference was not felt so strongly, or seen so
+definitely, as to make it impossible to ascribe magic to Moses, or
+rain-making to Elijah. In still earlier ages, the difference was still
+more blurred. The two things were not discriminated as we now
+discriminate them: they were not felt then, as they are felt now to be
+inconsistent and incompatible. It was the likeness between the two
+that filled the field of mental vision, originally. Whether a man
+makes a petition or a command, the fact is that he wants something;
+and, with his attention centred on that fact, he may be but little
+aware, as the child is little, if at all, aware, that he passes, or is
+guilty of unreasonable inconsistency in passing, from the one mood to
+the other, and back again. It is in the course of time and as a
+consequence of mental growth that he becomes aware of the difference
+between the two moods.
+
+If we insist on maintaining that, because spell and prayer are
+essentially different, men have at all times been fully conscious of
+the difference, we make it fundamentally impossible to explain the
+growth of religion, or to admit that it can have any growth. Just as,
+on the argument advanced in our first chapter, gods and fetishes have
+gradually been differentiated from some conception, prior to them, and
+indeterminate; just as magician and priest, eventually distinguished,
+were originally undistinguished, for a man of power was potentially
+both and might become either; so spell and prayer have come to be
+differentiated, to be recognised as different and fundamentally
+antagonistic, though originally the two categories were confused.
+
+The theory that spell preceded prayer and became prayer, or that magic
+developed into religion, finds as little support in the facts afforded
+by the science of religion, as the converse theory of a primitive
+revelation and a paradisaical state in which religion alone was known.
+For what is found in one stage of evolution the capacity must have
+existed in earlier stages; and if both prayer and spell, both magic
+and religion, are found, the capacity for both must have pre-existed.
+And instead of seeking to deny either, in the interests of a
+pre-conceived theory, we must recognise both potentialities, in the
+interest of truth.
+
+Just as man spoke, for countless thousands of years, before he had
+any idea of the principles on which he spoke, of the laws of speech or
+of the grammar of his language; just as he reasoned, long before he
+made the reasoning process matter of reflection, and reduced it to the
+laws of logic; so from the beginning he was religious though he had no
+more idea that there were principles of religion, than that there were
+principles of grammar or laws of correct thought. 'First principles of
+every kind have their influence, and indeed operate largely and
+powerfully, long before they come to the surface of human thought and
+are articulately expounded' (Ferrier: _Institute of Metaphysics_, p.
+13).
+
+But this is not to say that primitive man argued, or thought, with
+never an error, or spoke with never a mistake, until by some
+catastrophe he was expelled from some paradise of grammarians and
+logicians. Though correct reasoning was logical before the time of
+Aristotle, and correct speech grammatical before the time of Dionysius
+Thrax; there was before, as there has been since, plenty both of bad
+logic and bad grammar. But that is very different from saying that, in
+the beginning, all reasoning was unsound, or all speech ungrammatical.
+To say so, would be as unmeaning and as absurd as to say that
+primitive man's every action was immoral, and his habitual state one
+of pure, unmitigated wickedness. If the assumption of a primitive
+paradise is unworkable, neither will the assumption of a primitive
+inferno act, whether it is for the evolution of the grammar of
+language or morality, or of logic or religion, that we wish to
+account. It is to ask too much, to ask us to believe that in the
+beginning there was only wrong-doing and no right, only error and no
+correctness of thought or speech, only spell and no prayer. And if
+both have been always, as they are now, present, there must also
+always have been a tendency in that which has prevailed to conquer. We
+may say that, in the process of evolution, man becomes aware of
+differences to which at first he gave but little attention; and, so
+far as he becomes conscious of them, he sets aside what is illogical,
+immoral, or irreligious, because he is satisfied it is illogical,
+immoral, or irreligious, and for no other reason.
+
+The theory that spell preceded prayer in the evolution of religion
+proceeds upon a misconception of the process of evolution. At one time
+it was assumed and accepted without question that the vegetable and
+animal kingdoms, and all their various species, were successive stages
+of one process of evolution; and that the process proceeded on one
+line and one alone. On the analogy of the evolution of living beings,
+as thus understood, all that remained, when the theory of evolution
+came to be applied to the various forms of thought and feeling, was to
+arrange them also in one line; and that, it was assumed, would be the
+line which the evolution of religion had followed. On this assumption,
+either magic must be prior to religion, or religion prior to magic;
+and, on the principle that priority must be assigned to the less
+worthy, it followed that magic must have preceded religion.
+
+It will scarcely be disputed that it was on the analogy of what was
+believed to be the course of evolution, in the case of vegetable and
+animal life, that the first attempts to frame a theory of the
+evolution of religion proceeded, with the result that gods were
+assumed to have been evolved out of fetishes, religion out of magic,
+and prayer out of spell. To disprove this, it is not necessary to
+reject the theory of evolution, or to maintain that evolution in
+religion proceeds on lines wholly different from those it follows
+elsewhere. All that is necessary is to understand the theory of the
+evolution of the forms of life, as that theory is held by naturalists
+now; and to understand the lines which the evolution of life is now
+held to have followed. The process of evolution is no longer held to
+have followed one line alone, or to have described but one single
+trajectory like that of a cannon-ball fired from a cannon. The process
+of evolution is, and has been from the beginning, dispersive. To
+borrow M. Bergson's simile, the process of evolution is not like that
+of a cannon-ball which followed one line, but like that of a shell,
+which burst into fragments the moment it was fired off; and these
+fragments being, as it were, themselves shells, in their turn burst
+into other fragments, themselves in their turn destined to burst, and
+so on throughout the whole process. The very lines, on which the
+process of evolution has moved, show the process to be dispersive. If
+we represent the line by which man has risen from the simplest forms
+of life or protoplasm by an upright line; and the line by which the
+lowest forms of life, such as some of the foraminifera, have continued
+on their low level, by a horizontal line starting from the bottom of
+the upright line, then we have two lines forming a right angle. One
+represents the line of man's evolution, the other that of the
+foraminifera. Between these two lines you may insert as many other
+lines as necessary. That line which is most nearly upright will
+represent the evolution of the highest form of vertebrate, except man;
+the next, the next highest; and so on till you come to the lines
+representing the invertebrates; and so on till you come to the lines
+which are getting nearer and nearer to the horizontal. Thus you will
+have a whole sheaf of lines, all radiating indeed from one common
+point, but all nevertheless dispersing in different directions.
+
+The rush of life, the _élan de la vie_, is thus dispersive; and if we
+are to interpret the evolution of mental on the analogy of physical
+life, we shall find, M. Bergson says, nothing in the latter which
+compels us to assume either that intelligence is developed instinct,
+or that instinct is degraded intelligence. If that be so, then, we may
+say, neither is there anything to warrant us in assuming either that
+religion is developed magic, or magic degraded religion. Spell is not
+degraded prayer, nor is prayer a superior form of spell: neither does
+become or can become the other, though man may oscillate, with great
+rapidity, between the two, and for long may continue so to oscillate.
+The two moods were from the beginning different, though man for long
+did not clearly discriminate between the two. The dispersive force of
+evolution however tends to separate them more and more widely, until
+eventually oscillation ceases, if it does not become impossible.
+
+The dispersive force of evolution manifests itself in the power of
+discrimination whereby man becomes aware of differences to which, in
+the first confusion of thought, he paid little attention; and
+ultimately may become conscious of the first principles of reason,
+morality or religion, as normative principles, in accordance with
+which he feels that he should act, though he has not always acted, and
+does not always act in accordance with them. In the beginning there is
+confusion of feeling and confusion of thought both as to the quarter
+to which prayer is addressed and as to the nature of the petitions
+which should be proffered. But we should be mistaken, if from the
+confusion we were to infer that there was no principle underlying the
+confusion. We should be mistaken, were we to say that prayer, if
+addressed to polytheistic gods, is not prayer; or that prayer, if
+addressed to a fetish, is not prayer. In both cases, the being to whom
+prayer is offered is misconceived and misrepresented by polytheism and
+fetishism; and the misconception is due to want of discrimination and
+spiritual insight. But failure to observe is no proof either that the
+power of observation is wanting or that there is nothing to be
+observed. The being to whom prayer is offered may be very different
+from the conception which the person praying has of him, and may yet
+be real.
+
+Petitions, then, put up to polytheistic gods, or even to fetishes, may
+still be prayers. But petitions may be put up, not only to
+polytheistic gods, or to fetishes, but even to the one god of the
+monotheist, which never should be put up. 'Of thy goodness, slay mine
+enemies,' is, in form, prayer: it is a desire, a petition to a god,
+implying recognition of the superiority of the divine power, implying
+adoration even. But eventually it comes to be condemned as an
+impossible prayer: spiritually it is a contradiction in terms. If
+however we say that it is not, and never was, prayer; and that only by
+confusion of thought was it ever considered so, we may be told that,
+as a simple matter of actual fact, it is an actual prayer that was
+actually put up. That it ought not--from the point of view of a later
+stage in the development of religion--to have been put up, may be
+admitted; but that it was a prayer actually put up, cannot be denied.
+To this the reply seems to be that it is with prayer as it is with
+argument: a fallacy is a fallacy, just as much before it is detected
+as afterwards. The fact that it is not detected does not make it a
+sound argument; still less does it prove either that there are now no
+principles of correct reasoning or that there were none then; it only
+shows that there was, on this point, confusion of thought. So too we
+may admit--we have no choice but to admit--that there are spiritual
+fallacies, as well as fallacies of logic. Of such are the petitions
+which are in form prayers, just as logical fallacies are, in form,
+arguments. They may be addressed to the being worshipped, as fallacies
+are addressed to the reason; and eventually their fallacious nature
+may become evident even to the reason of man. But it is only by the
+evolution of prayer, that is by the disclosure of its true nature,
+that petitions of the kind in question come to be recognised and
+condemned as spiritual fallacies. The petitioner who puts up such
+petitions is indeed unconscious of his error, but he errs, for all
+that, just as the person who uses a fallacious argument may be
+himself the victim of his fallacy: but he errs none the less because
+he is deceived himself. There are normative principles of prayer as
+well as the normative principles of thought; and both operate 'long
+before they come to the surface of human thought and are articulately
+expounded.' It is in thinking that the normative principles of thought
+emerge. But it is by no means the case that they come to the surface
+of every man's thought. So too it is in prayer that the normative
+principles of prayer emerge; yet men require teaching how to pray.
+Some petitions are permissible, some not.
+
+If then there are normative principles of prayer, just as there are of
+action, thought and speech; if there are petitions which are not
+permissible, and which are not and never can be prayers, though by a
+spiritual fallacy, analogous to logical fallacies, they may be thought
+to be prayers, what is it that decides the nature of an admissible
+petition? It seems to be the conception of the being to whom the
+petition is addressed. Thus it is that prayer throws light on the idea
+of God. From the prayers offered we can infer the nature of the idea.
+The confusion of admissible and inadmissible petitions points to
+confused apprehension of the idea of God. It is not merely imperfect
+apprehension but confused apprehension. In polytheism the confusion
+betrays itself, because it leads to collision with the principles of
+morality: of the gods who make war upon one another, each must be
+supposed to hold himself in the right; therefore either some gods do
+not know what is right, or there is no right to be known even by the
+gods. From this confusion the only mode of escape, which is
+satisfactory both to religion and to morality, is to recognise that
+the unity of morality and the unity of the godhead mutually imply one
+another. But so long as a plurality of gods, with a shifting standard
+of morality, is believed in, the distinction between admissible and
+inadmissible petitions cannot be firmly or correctly drawn.
+
+A tribal god is petitioned to slay the tribe's enemies, because he is
+conceived as the god of the tribe and not the god of its enemies. If
+the declaration, that 'I am thy servant,' is affirmed with emphasis on
+the first personal pronoun, so as to imply that others are no servants
+of thine, the implication is that thy servants' enemies are thy
+enemies; whereas if there is, for all men, one God only, then all men
+are his servants, and not one person, or one tribe, alone. The
+conception of God as the god of one tribe alone is an imperfect and
+confused apprehension of the idea of God. But it is less so than is
+the conception of a god as belonging to one individual owner, as a
+fetish does. To a fetish the distinctive, though not the only, prayer
+offered, precisely is 'Slay mine enemies'; and therein it is that lies
+the difference between a fetish and a god of the community. The
+difference is the same in kind as that between a tribal god and the
+God of all mankind. The fetish and the tribal god are both inadequate
+ideas of God; and the inadequacy implies confusion--the confusion of
+conceiving that the god is there only to subserve the desires and to
+do the will of the individual worshipper or body of worshippers.
+
+Escape from this confusion is to some extent secured by the fact that
+prayers to the community's god are offered by the community aloud, in
+public and as part of the public worship; and, consequently, with the
+object of securing the fulfilment of the desires of the community as a
+community. The blessing on the community is, at this stage, the only
+blessing in which the individual can properly share, and the only one
+for which he can pray to the god of the community. Thus the nature of
+the petitions, and the quarter to which permissible petitions can be
+addressed, are determined by the fact that prayer is an office
+undertaken by the community as a community. If the desires which an
+individual entertains are such as would be repudiated by the
+community, because injurious to the community, they cannot be
+preferred, in the presence of the community, to the god of the
+community; and thus permissible petitions begin to be differentiated
+from those which are impermissible--a normative principle of prayer
+emerges, and the idea of God begins to take more definite form, or to
+emerge somewhat from the mist which at first enveloped it.
+
+But though permissible petitions be distinguished from petitions
+which are impermissible, it by no means follows that impermissible
+petitions cease to be put up. What actually happens is that since the
+community does not, and cannot, allow petitions, conceived to be
+injurious to itself, to be put up to its god, they are put up
+privately to a fetish; or, to put the matter more correctly, a being
+or power not identified with the welfare of the community is sought
+in such cases; and the being so found is known to the science of
+religion as a fetish. But though a fetish differs from a god,
+inasmuch as the fetish will, and a god will not, injure a member of
+the tribe, the distinction is not clear-cut. There are things which
+both alike may be prayed to do: both may be besought to do good to
+the individual who addresses them. To this protective mimicry the
+fetish owes in part its power of survival. For the same reason spell
+and magic contrive to continue their existence side by side with
+religion and prayer. What conduces to this result is that at first
+the god of the community is conceived as listening to the prayers of
+the community rather than of the individual: from the beginning it
+is part of the idea of God that He cares for all His worshippers
+alike. This conviction, to be carried out to its full consequences,
+both logical and spiritual, requires that each individual worshipper
+should forget himself, should renounce his particular inclinations,
+should abandon himself and long to do not his own will but that of
+God. But before self can be consciously abandoned, the consciousness
+of self must be realised. Before self-will can be surrendered, its
+existence must be realised. And self-consciousness, the recognition
+of the existence of the will and the reality of the self, comes
+relatively late both in the history of the community and in the
+personal history of the individual. At first the existence of the
+individual will and the individual self is not recognised by the
+community and is not provided for in the community's worship and
+prayers. It is the community, as a community, and not as so many
+individual worshippers, offering separate prayers, that first
+approaches the community's god. The existence of the individual
+worshipper, as an individual is not denied, it is simply unknown, or
+rather not realised by the community. But its stirrings are felt in
+the individual himself: he is conscious of desires which are other
+than those of the community, and the fulfilment of which forms no
+part of the community's prayers to the community's god. His
+self-consciousness, his consciousness of himself as contrasted with
+the community, is fostered by the growth of such desires. For the
+fulfilment of some of them, those which are manifestly anti-social,
+he must turn to his fetish, or rely upon the power of magic. Even for
+the fulfilment of those of his desires which are not felt to be
+anti-social, but which find no place in the prayers of the community,
+he must rely on some other power than that of the god of the
+community; and it is in spells, therefore, that he continues to trust
+for the fulfilment of these innocent desires, inasmuch as the prayers
+of the community do not include them.
+
+The existence, in the individual, of desires, other than those of the
+community, wakes the individual to some consciousness of his
+individual existence. The effort to secure the fulfilment of those
+desires increases still further his self-consciousness, for he resorts
+to powers which are not exercised solely in the interests of the
+community, as are the powers of the community's god. But his
+increasing self-consciousness cannot and does not fail to modify his
+character and action as a worshipper of the community's gods. It
+modifies his relation to the community's gods in this sense, viz. that
+he appears before them not merely as a member of the community
+undistinguished from other members, but as an individual conscious to
+some extent of his individuality. He continues to take part in the
+worship of the gods, but he comes to it conscious of wishes of his own
+which may become petitions to the god, so far as they are not felt to
+be inconsistent with the good of the community.
+
+Of this stage we have ample evidence afforded by the cuneiform
+inscriptions of Assyria. Spells employed to the hurt of any worshipper
+of the gods are spells against which the worshipper may properly
+appeal to the gods for protection. A god is essentially the protector
+of his worshippers, and he protects each as well as all of them. Each
+of them may therefore appeal to him for protection. But though any one
+of them may so appeal, it is apparently only in course of time that
+individual petitions of this kind come to be put up to the gods. And
+the evidence of the cuneiform inscriptions is particularly interesting
+and instructive on the way in which this came about.
+
+In the 'Maklu' tablets we find that the writers of the tablets are, or
+anticipate that they may be, the victims of spells. The inscriptions
+themselves may be regarded, and by some authorities are described, as
+counter-charms or counter-spells. They do in fact include, though they
+cannot be said to consist of, counter-spells. Their typical feature is
+that they include some such phrase as, 'Whoever thou art, O witch, I
+bind thy hands behind thee,' or 'May the magic thou hast made recoil
+upon thyself.' If the victim is being turned yellow by sickness, the
+counter-spell is 'O witch, like the circlet of this seal, may thy face
+grow yellow and green.'
+
+The ceremonies with which these counter-spells were performed are
+indicated by the words, and they are ceremonies of the same kind as
+those with which spells are performed: they are symbolic actions, that
+is to say, actions which express by gesture the same meaning and
+intention as are expressed by the words. Thus, from the words:
+
+    'As the water trickleth away from his body
+    So may the pestilence in his body trickle away,'
+
+it is obvious that this counter-spell accompanied a ceremonial rite of
+the kind indicated by the words. As an image of the person to be
+bewitched was used by the workers of magic, so an image of her 'who
+hath bewitched me' is used by the worker of the counter-spell, with
+the words:
+
+    'May her spell be wrecked, and upon her
+    And upon her image may it recoil.'
+
+If, now, such words, and the symbolical actions which are described
+and implied, were all that these Maklu tablets contained, it might be
+argued that these counter-spells were pure pieces of magic. The
+argument would not indeed be conclusive, because though the sentences
+are in the optative mood, there would be nothing to show on what, or
+on whom, the speaker relied for the fulfilment of his wish. But as it
+happens, it is characteristic of these Maklu tablets that they are all
+addressed to the gods by name, e.g. 'May the great gods remove the
+spell from my body,' or 'O flaming Fire-god, mighty son of Anu! judge
+thou my case and grant me a decision! Burn up the sorcerers and
+sorceress!' It is the gods that are prayed to that the word of the
+sorceress 'shall turn back to her own mouth; may the gods of might
+smite her in her magic; may the magic which she has worked be crumbled
+like salt.'
+
+Thus these Maklu petitions are not counter-spells, as at first sight
+they may appear; nor are they properly to be treated as being
+themselves spells for the purpose of counteracting magic. They are in
+form and in fact prayers to the gods 'to undo the spell' and 'to force
+back the words' of the witch into her own mouth. But though in the
+form in which these Maklu petitions are preserved to us, they appear
+as prayers to the gods, and not as spells, or counter-spells; it is
+true, and important to notice, that, in some cases, the sentences in
+the optative mood seem quite detachable from the invocation of the
+gods. Those sentences may apparently have stood, at one time, quite
+well by themselves, and apart from any invocation of the gods; that
+is to say, they may originally have been spells or counter-spells, and
+only subsequently have been incorporated into prayers addressed to the
+gods.
+
+Let us then assume that this was the case with some of these Maklu
+petitions, and let us consider what is implied when we make the
+assumption. What is implied is that there are some wishes, for
+instance those embodied in these Maklu petitions, which may be
+realised by means of spells, or may quite appropriately be preferred
+to the gods of the community. Such are wishes for the well-being of
+the individual worshipper and for the defeat of evil-doers who would
+do or are doing him wrong. When it is recognised that individuals--as
+well as the community--may come with their plaints before the gods of
+the community, the functions of those gods become enlarged, for they
+are extended to include the protection of individual members of the
+community, as well as the protection of the community, as such; and
+the functions of the community's gods are thus extended and enlarged,
+because the members of the community have become, in some degree,
+individuals conscious of their individuality. The importance, for the
+science of religion, of this development of self-consciousness is that
+the consciousness of self must be realised before self can
+consciously be abandoned, that is before self-will can be consciously
+surrendered.
+
+As is shown by the Maklu petitions, there may come, in the course of
+the evolution of religion, a stage in which it is recognised that the
+individual worshipper may petition the gods for deliverance from the
+evil which afflicts them. And the petitions used appear in some cases,
+as we have seen, to have been adopted into the ritual of the gods,
+word for word as they were found already in existence. If then they
+were, both in the words in which they were expressed, and in the
+purpose which they sought to achieve, such that they could be taken
+up, as they were and without change, into the ritual of the
+community's gods, it would seem that, even before they were so taken
+up, they could not have been wholly, if at all, alien to the spirit of
+religion. What marks them as religious, in the cuneiform inscriptions,
+is their context: it shows that the power, relied on for the
+accomplishment of the desires expressed in these petitions, was the
+power of the gods. Remove the context, and it becomes a matter of
+ambiguity, whether the wish is supposed, by those who utter it, to
+depend for its realisation on some power, possessed and exercised by
+those who express the wish, or whether it is supposed to depend on the
+good will of some being vaguely conceived, and not addressed by name.
+But if eventually the wish, and the words in which it was expressed,
+are taken up into the worship of the gods, there seems a balance of
+probability that the wish was from the beginning rather in the nature
+of religion than of magic, rather a petition than a command; though
+the categories were not at first discriminated, and there was at first
+no clear vision of the quarter from which fulfilment of the wish was
+hoped for.
+
+From this point of view, optative sentences, sentences which express
+the wishes of him who pronounces them, may, in the beginning, well
+have been ambiguous, because there was, in the minds of those who
+uttered them, no clear conception of the quarter to which they were
+addressed: the idea of God may have been vague to the extreme of
+vagueness. Some of these optative sentences however, were such that
+the community as a whole could join in them; and they were
+potentially, and became actually, prayers to the god of the community.
+The being to whom the community, as a whole, could pray, was thereby
+displayed as the god of the community. The idea of God became, so far,
+somewhat less vague, somewhat more sharply defined. Optative
+sentences, however, in which the community could not join, in which no
+one but the person who framed them could take part, could not be
+addressed to the god of the community. The idea of God thus was
+defined negatively: there were wishes which could not be communicated
+to him--those which were repugnant to the well-being of the community.
+
+The prayers of savages, that is of the men who are probably still
+nearest to the circumstances and condition of primitive man, furnish
+the material from which we can best infer what was the idea of God
+which was present in their consciousness at those moments when it was
+most vividly present to them. In view of the infinite number and
+variety of the forms of religion and religious belief, nothing would
+seem, _a priori_, more reasonable than to expect an equally infinite
+number of various and contradictory ideas. Especially should this seem
+a reasonable expectation to those who consider the idea of God to be
+fundamentally, and of its very nature, impossible and untenable. And
+so long as we look at the attempts which have been made, by means of
+reflection upon the idea, to body it forth, we have the evidence of
+all the mythologies to show the infinite variety of monstrosities,
+which reflection on the idea has been capable of producing. If then we
+stop there, our _a priori_ expectation of savage and irrational
+inconsistency is fulfilled to abundance and to loathsome excess. But
+to stop there is to stop short, and to accept the speculations of the
+savage when he is reflecting on his experience, instead of pushing
+forward to discover for ourselves, if we may, what his experience
+actually was. To discover that, we cannot be content to pause for
+ever on his reflections. We must push back to the moment of his
+experience, that is to the moments when he is in the presence of his
+gods and is addressing them. Those are the moments in which he prays
+and in which he has no doubt that he is in communion with his gods. It
+is, then, from his prayers that we must seek to infer what idea he has
+of the gods to whom he prays.
+
+When, however, we take his prayers as the evidence from which to infer
+his idea of God, instead of the luxuriant overgrowth of speculative
+mythology, we find everywhere a bare simplicity, and everywhere
+substantial identity. If this is contrary to our expectation and at
+first seems strange, let us bear in mind that the science of morals
+offers a parallel, in this respect, to the science of religion. At one
+time it was, unconsciously but none the less decidedly, assumed that
+savages had a multiplicity of irrational and disgusting customs but no
+morals. The idea that there could be a substantial identity between
+the moral rules of different savage races, and even between their
+moral rules and ours, was an idea that simply was not entertained.
+Nevertheless, it was a fact, though unnoticed; and now it is a fact
+which, thanks to Dr Westermarck, is placed beyond dispute. 'When,' he
+says, 'we examine the moral rules of uncivilised races we find that
+they in a very large measure resemble those prevalent among nations
+of culture.' The human spirit throughout the process of its evolution
+is, in truth, one; the underlying unity which manifests itself
+throughout the evolution of morality is to be found also in the
+evolution of religion; and it is from the prayers of man that we can
+infer it.
+
+The first and fundamental article of belief implied by the offering of
+prayers is that the being to whom they are offered--however vaguely he
+may be conceived--is believed to be accessible to man. Man's cry can
+reach Him. Not only does it reach Him but, it is believed, He will
+listen to it; and it is of His very nature that He is disposed to
+listen favourably to it. But, though He will listen, it is only to
+prayers offered in the right spirit that He will listen. The earliest
+prayers offered are in all probability those which the community sends
+up in time of trouble; and they must be offered in the spirit of
+repentance. It is with the conviction that they have offended that the
+community first turns to the being worshipped, by whom they hope to be
+delivered from the evil which is upon them, and by whom they pray to
+be forgiven.
+
+Next, the offering of prayer implies the belief that the being
+addressed, not merely understands the prayers offered, but has the
+power to grant them. As having not only the power, but also the will
+so to do, he is approached not only with fear but also with hope. No
+approach would or could be made, if nothing could be hoped from it;
+and nothing could be hoped, unless the being approached were believed
+to have the power to grant the prayer. The very fact that approach is
+made shows that the being is at the moment believed to be one with
+whom it rests to grant or refuse the supplication, one than whom no
+other is, in this respect at least, more powerful, _quo nihil maius_.
+
+But prayers offered in time of trouble, though they be, or if they be,
+the earliest, are not the only prayers that are offered by early man.
+Man's wishes are not, and never were, limited: escape from calamity is
+not, and never has been, the only thing for which man is capable of
+wishing. It certainly is not the only thing for which he has been
+capable of praying. Even early man wishes for material blessings: the
+kindly fruits of the earth and his daily food are things for which he
+not only works but also prays. The negro on the Gold Coast prays for
+his daily rice and yams, the Zulu for cattle and for corn, the Samoan
+for abundant food, the Finno-Ugrian for rain to make his crops grow;
+the Peruvian prayed for health and prosperity. And when man has
+attained his wish, when his prayers have been granted, he does not
+always forget to render thanks to the god who listened to his prayer.
+'Thank you, gods'; says the Basuto, 'give us bread to-morrow also.'
+
+Whether the prayer be for food, or for deliverance from calamity, the
+natural tendency is for gratitude and thanks to follow, when the
+prayer has been fulfilled; and the mental attitude, or mood of
+feeling, is then no longer one of hope or fear, but of thankfulness
+and praise. It is in its essence, potentially and, to varying degrees,
+actually, the mood of veneration and adoration.
+
+    'My lips shall praise thee,
+    So will I bless thee while I live:
+    I will lift up my hands in thy name,
+    And my mouth shall praise thee with joyful lips.'
+
+From the prayers that are offered in early, if not primitive,
+religions we may draw with safety some conclusions as to the idea,
+which the worshippers had before their minds, of the being to whom
+they believed they had access in prayer. He was a being accessible in
+prayer; and he had it in his power, and, if properly approached, in
+his will, to deliver the community from material and external evils.
+The spirit in which he was to be properly approached was one of
+confession and repentance of offences committed against him: the
+calamities which fell upon the community were conceived to have fallen
+justly. He was not conceived to be offended without a cause. Doubtless
+the causes of offence, like the punishments with which they were
+visited, were external and visible, in the sense that they could be
+discovered and made plain to all who were concerned to recognise
+them. The offences were actions which not only provoked the wrath of
+the god, but were condemned by the community. They included offences
+which were purely formal and external; and, in the case of some
+peoples, the number of such offences probably increased rather than
+diminished as time went on. The _Surpu_ tablets of the cuneiform
+inscriptions, which are directed towards the removal of the _mamit_,
+the ban or taboo, consequent upon such offences, are an example of
+this. Adultery, murder and theft are included amongst the offences,
+but the tablets include hundreds of other offences, which are purely
+ceremonial, and which probably took a long time to reach the luxuriant
+growth they have attained in the tablets. For ceremonial offences a
+ceremonial purification was felt to suffice. But there were others
+which, as the Babylonian Penitential Psalms testify, were felt to go
+deeper and to be sins, personal sins of the worshipper against his
+God. The penitent exclaims:
+
+    'Lord, my sins are many, great are my misdeeds.'
+
+The spirit, in which he approaches his God, is expressed in the words:
+
+    'I thy servant, full of sighs, call upon thee.
+    Like the doves do I moan, I am o'ercome with sighing,
+    With lamentation and groaning my spirit is downcast.'
+
+His prayer is that his trespasses may be forgiven:
+
+    'Rend my sins, like a garment!
+    My God, my sins are unto seven times seven.
+    Forgive my iniquities.'
+
+And his hope is in God:
+
+    'Oh, Lord, thy servant, cast him not away,
+    The sins which I have committed, transform by thy grace!'
+
+The attitude of mind, the relation in which the worshipper finds
+himself to stand towards his God, is the same as that revealed in the
+Psalm of David:
+
+    'Wash me throughly from mine iniquity,
+    And cleanse me from my sin.
+    For I acknowledge my transgressions:
+    And my sin is ever before me.
+    Against thee, thee only, have I sinned.
+    Cast me not away from thy presence.'
+
+The earliest prayers offered by any community probably were, as we
+have already seen, those which were sent up in time of trouble and
+inspired by the conviction that the community's god had been justly
+offended. The psalms, from which quotations have just been given, show
+the same idea of God, conceived to have been justly offended by the
+transgressions of his servants. The difference between them is that,
+in the later prayers, the individual self-consciousness has come to
+realise that the individual as well as the community exists; that the
+individual, as well as the community, is guilty of trespasses; and
+that the individual, as well as the community, needs forgiveness. That
+is to say, the idea of God has taken more definite shape: God has been
+revealed to the individual worshipper to be 'My God'; the worshipper
+to be 'Thy servant'; and what is feared is not merely that the
+worshipper should be excluded from the community, but that he should
+be cast away from communion with God. The communion, aspired to, is
+however still such communion as may exist between a servant and his
+master.
+
+Material and external blessings, further, are, together with
+deliverance from material and external evil, still the principal
+subjects of prayer in the Psalms both of the Old Testament and of the
+cuneiform inscriptions; and, so far as this is the case, the
+worshipper's prayer is that his individual will may be done, and it is
+because he has received material and external blessings, because his
+will has been done, that his joyful lips praise and bless the Lord.
+That is to say, the idea of God, implied by such prayer and praise, is
+that He is a being who may help man to the fulfilment of man's desires
+and to the realisation of man's will. The assumption required to
+justify this conception is that in man, man's will alone is operative,
+and never God's. This assumption has its analogy in the fact, already
+noticed, that in the beginning the individual is not self-conscious,
+or aware of the individuality of his own existence. When the
+individual's self-consciousness is thus but little, if at all,
+manifested, it is the community, as a community, which approaches its
+god and is felt to be responsible for the transgressions which have
+offended him. As self-consciousness comes to manifest itself, more and
+more, the sense of personal transgression and individual
+responsibility becomes more and more strong. If now we suppose that at
+this point the evolution, or unfolding, of the self ceases, and that
+the whole of its contents is now revealed, we shall hold that, in man,
+man's will alone can operate, and never God's. It is indeed at this
+point that non-Christian religions stop, if they get so far. The idea
+of God as a being whose will is to be done, and not man's, is a
+distinctively Christian idea.
+
+The petition, which, as far as the science of religion enables us to
+judge, was the first petition made by man, was for deliverance from
+evil. The next, in historical order, was for forgiveness of sins; and,
+then, when society had come to be settled on an agricultural basis and
+dependent on the harvest, prayer was offered for daily bread. In the
+Lord's Prayer, the order of these petitions is exactly reversed. A
+fresh basis, or premiss, for them, is supplied. They are still
+petitions proper to put forward, if put forward in the consciousness
+of a fact, hitherto not revealed--that man may do not his own will
+but the will of Our Father, who is in heaven.
+
+Prayer is thus, at the end, what it was at the beginning, the prayer
+of a community. But whereas at the beginning the community was the
+narrow and exclusive community of the family or tribe, at the end it
+is a community which may include all mankind. Thus, the idea of God
+has increased in its extension. In its intension, so to speak, it has
+deepened: God is disclosed not as the master and king of his subjects
+and servants, but as the Father in heaven of his children on earth. It
+has however not merely deepened, it has been transformed, or rather it
+is to be approached in a different mood, and therefore is revealed in
+a new aspect: whereas in the beginning the body of worshippers,
+whether it approached its god with prayer for deliverance from
+calamities or for material blessings, approached him in order that
+their desires might be fulfilled; in the end the worshipper is taught
+that approach is possible only on renunciation of his own desires and
+on acceptance of God's will. The centre of religion is transposed: it
+is no longer man and his desires round which religion is to revolve.
+The will of God is to be the centre, to which man is no longer to
+gravitate unconsciously but to which he is deliberately to determine
+himself. As in the solar system the force of gravity is but one, so in
+the spiritual system that which holds all spiritual beings together
+is the love which proceeds from God to his creatures and may
+increasingly proceed from them to Him. It is the substitution of the
+love of God for the desires of man which makes the new heaven and the
+new earth.
+
+From the point of view of evolution the important fact is that this
+new aspect of the idea of God is not something merely superposed upon
+the old: if it were simply superposed, it would not be evolved.
+Neither is the disclosure, to the soul, of God as love, evolved from
+the conception of Him as the being from whom men may seek the
+fulfilment of their desires. To interpret the process of religious
+evolution in this way would be to misinterpret it, in exactly the same
+way as if we were to suppose that, only when the evolution of
+vegetable life had been carried out to the full in all its forms, did
+the evolution of animal life begin. Animals are not vegetables carried
+to a rather higher stage of evolution, any more than vegetables are
+animals which have relapsed to a lower stage. If then we are to apply
+the theory of evolution to spiritual life, as well as to bodily life,
+we must apply it in the same way. We must regard the various forms, in
+the one case as in the other, as following different lines, and
+tending in different directions from a common centre, rather than as
+different and successive sections of one and the same line. Spell no
+more becomes prayer than vegetables become animals. Impelled by the
+force of calamity to look in one direction--that of deliverance from
+pestilence or famine--early man saw, in the idea of God, a refuge in
+time of trouble. Moved at a later time by the feeling of gratitude,
+man found in the idea of God an object of veneration; and then
+interpreted his relation as that of a servant to his lord. Whichever
+way this interpretation was pushed--whether to mean that the servant
+was to do things pleasing to his lord, in order to gain the fulfilment
+of his own desires; or to imply that his transgressions stood ever
+between him and his offended master--further advance in that direction
+was impossible. A new direction, and therefore a fresh point of
+departure, was necessary. It was forthcoming in the Christian idea of
+God as the heavenly Father. That idea when revealed is seen to have
+been what was postulated but never attained by religion in its earlier
+stages. The petitions for our daily bread, for forgiveness of sins,
+and for delivery from evil, had as their basis, in pre-Christian
+religions, man's desire. In Christianity those petitions are preferred
+in the conviction that the making of them is in accordance with God's
+will and the granting of them in accordance with His love; and that
+conviction is a normative principle of prayer.
+
+
+
+
+V
+
+THE IDEA AND BEING OF GOD
+
+
+Men thought, spoke and acted for long ages before they began to
+reflect on the ways in which they did so; and, when they did begin to
+reflect, it was long before they discovered the principles on which
+they thought, spoke and acted, or recognised them as the principles on
+which man must speak, if he is to speak intelligibly; on which, as
+laws of thought, he must think, if he is to think correctly; and on
+which, as laws of morality, he must act, if he is to act as he should
+act.
+
+But though many thousands of years elapsed before he recognised these
+laws, they were, all the time, the laws on which he had to think,
+speak and act, and did actually think, speak and act, so far as he did
+so correctly. When, then, we speak of the evolution of thought, speech
+and action, we cannot mean that the laws of thought, for instance,
+were in the beginning different from what they are now, and only
+gradually came to be what they are at present. That would be just the
+same as saying that the law of gravitation did not operate in the way
+described by Newton until Newton formulated the law. The fact is that
+science has its evolution, just as thought, speech and action have.
+Man gradually and with much effort discovers laws of science, as he
+discovers the laws of thought, speech and action. In neither case does
+he make the laws; all that he does in either case is to come to
+recognise that they are there. But the recognition is a process, a
+slow process, attended by many mistakes and set-backs. And this slow
+process of the gradual recognition or discovery of fundamental laws,
+or first principles, is the process in which the evolution of science,
+as well as the evolution of thought, speech and action, consists. It
+is the process by which the laws that are at the bottom of man's
+thought, speech and action, and are fundamental to them, tend to rise
+to the surface of consciousness.
+
+It is in this same process that the evolution of religion consists. It
+is the slow process, the gradual recognition, of the fundamental idea
+of religion--the idea of God--which tends to rise to the surface of
+the religious consciousness. Just as laws of thought, speech and
+action are implied by the very conception of right thought or speech
+or action, so the idea of God is implied by the mere conception of
+religion. It is implied always; it is implicit from the very
+beginning. It is disclosed gradually and imperfectly. The process of
+disclosure, which is the evolution of the idea, may, in many
+instances, be arrested at a stage of very early imperfection, by
+causes which make further development in that direction impossible;
+and then, if further progress is to be made, a fresh movement, in a
+fresh direction must be made. Just as men do not always think
+correctly, or act rightly, though they tend, in different degrees, to
+do so; so too, in religion, neither do they always move in the right
+direction, even if they move at all. They may even deteriorate, at
+times, in religion, as, at times, they deteriorate in morality. But it
+is not necessary to infer from this undoubted fact that there are no
+principles of either morality or religion. We are not led to deny the
+existence of the laws of logic or of grammar, because they are
+frequently disregarded by ourselves and others.
+
+The principles, or rather some particular principle, of morality may
+be absolutely misconceived by a community, at some stage of its
+history, in such a way that actions of a certain kind are not
+condemned by it. The inconsistency of judgment and feeling, thus
+displayed, is not the less inconsistent because it is almost, if not
+entirely, unconscious. In the same way a community may fail to
+recognise a principle of religion, or may misinterpret the idea of
+God; still the fact that they misinterpret it is proof that they have
+it--if they had it not, they could not interpret it in different ways.
+And the different interpretations are the different ways in which its
+evolution is carried forward. Its evolution is not in one continuous
+line, but is radiative from one common centre, and is dispersive. That
+is the reason why the originators of religious movements, and the
+founders of religions, consider themselves to be restoring an old
+state of things, rather than initiating a new one; to be returning to
+the old religion, rather than starting a new religion. But in point of
+fact they are not reverting to a bygone stage in the history of
+religion; they are starting afresh from the fundamental principles of
+religion. From the central idea of religion, the idea of God, they
+move in a direction different from any hitherto followed. Monotheism
+may in order of time follow upon polytheism, but it is not polytheism
+under another name, any more than prayer is spell under another name.
+It is something very different: it is the negation of polytheism, not
+another form of it. It strikes at the roots of polytheism; and it does
+so because it goes back not to polytheism but to that from which
+polytheism springs, the idea of God; and starts from it in a direction
+which leads to a very different manifestation of the idea of God. And
+if monotheism displaces polytheism, it does so because it is found by
+experience to be the more faithful interpretation of that idea of God
+which even the polytheist has in his soul. In the same way, and for
+the same reasons, polytheism is not fetishism under another name. The
+gods of a community are not the fetishes of individuals. The
+difference between them is not a mere difference of name. Polytheism
+may, or may not, follow, in order of time, upon fetishism; but
+polytheism is not merely a form of fetishism. The two are different,
+and largely inconsistent, interpretations, or misinterpretations, of
+the same fundamental idea of God. They move in different directions,
+and are felt by the communities in which they are found, to tend in
+the direction of very different ends--the one to the good of the
+community, the other, in its most characteristic manifestations, to
+the injury of the community. In fetishism and polytheism we see the
+radiative, dispersive, force of evolution manifesting itself, just as
+in polytheism and monotheism. The different lines of evolution radiate
+in different directions, but those lines, all point to a common centre
+of dispersion--the idea of God. But fetishism, polytheism and
+monotheism are not different and successive stages of one line of
+evolution, following the same direction. They are lines of different
+lengths, moving in different directions, though springing from a
+common centre--the soul of man. It is because they have a common
+centre, that man, whichever line he has followed, can fall back upon
+it and start afresh.
+
+The fact that men fall victims to logical fallacies does not shake our
+faith in the validity of the principles of reason; nor does the fact
+that false reasoning abounds the more, the lower we descend in the
+scale of humanity, lead us to believe that the principles of reason
+are invalid and non-existent there. Still less do we believe that,
+because immature minds reason often incorrectly, therefore correct
+reasoning is for all men an impossibility and a contradiction in
+terms. And these considerations apply in just the same way to the
+principles of religion and the idea of God, as to the principles of
+reason. Yet we are sometimes invited to believe that the existence of
+religious fallacies, or fallacious religions, is of itself enough to
+prove that there is no validity in the principles of religion, no
+reality in the idea of God; that because the uncultured races of
+mankind are the victims of error in religion, there is in religion no
+truth at all: the religion of civilised mankind consists but of the
+errors of the savage disguised in civilised garb. So far as this view
+is supposed to be the outcome of the study of the evolution of
+religion, it is due probably to the conception of evolution from which
+it proceeds. It proceeds on the assumption that the process of
+evolution exhibits the continuity of one and the same continuous line.
+It ignores the radiative, dispersive movement of evolution in
+different lines; and overlooks the fact that new forms of religion
+are all re-births, renaissances, and spring not from one another, but
+from the soul of man, in which is found the idea of God. It further
+assumes not merely that there are errors but that there is no truth
+whatever in the lowest, or the earliest, forms of religion; and that
+therefore neither is there any truth in the highest. But this
+assumption, if applied to the principles of thought, speech or action,
+would equally prove thought to be irrational, speech unintelligible,
+moral action absurd; and evolution would be the process by which this
+fundamental irrationality, unintelligibility and absurdity was worked
+out.
+
+Either this is the conclusion, or some means must be sought whereby to
+distinguish the evolution of religion from the evolution of thought,
+speech and morals, and to show that--whereas in the case of the
+latter, evolution is the process in which the principles whereon man
+should think, speak and act, tend to manifest themselves with
+increasing clearness--in the case of religion, there is no such
+progressive revelation, and no first principle, or fundamental idea,
+which all forms of religion seek to express. But any attempt to show
+this is hopeless: the science of religion is engaged throughout in
+ascertaining and comparing the ideas which the various races of men
+have had of their gods; and in tracing the evolution of the idea of
+God.
+
+The science of religion, however, it may be said, is concerned
+exclusively with the evolution, and not in the least with the value or
+validity, of the idea. But neither, we must remember, is it concerned
+to dispute its value or to deny its validity; and no man can help
+drawing his own conclusions from the established fact that the idea is
+to be found wherever man is to be found. If, however, by the idea of
+God we mean simply an intellectual idea, merely a verbal proposition,
+we shall be in danger of drawing erroneous conclusions. The historian
+of religion, in discussing the idea of God, its manifestations and its
+evolution, is bound to express himself in words, and to reduce what he
+has to say to a series of verbal propositions. Nothing, therefore, is
+more natural than to imagine that the idea of God is a verbal,
+intellectual proposition; and nothing is more misleading. If we start
+from this misleading notion, then, as words are but words, we may be
+led to imagine that the idea of God is nothing more or other than the
+words: it is mere words. If however this conclusion is, for any
+reason, displeasing to us, and if we stick to the premiss that the
+idea of God is a verbal proposition, then we shall naturally draw a
+distinction between the idea of God and the being of God; and, having
+thus fixed a great gulf between the idea and the being of God, we
+shall be faced with the difficulty of crossing it. We may then feel it
+to be not merely difficult but impossible to get logically to the
+other side of the gulf; that is to say, we shall conclude that the
+being of God is an inference, but an inference which never can be
+logically verified: the inference may be a correct or an incorrect
+inference, but we cannot possibly know which it is. From the idea of
+God we can never logically infer His being. Since then no logic will
+carry us over the chasm we have fixed between the idea and the being
+of God, if we are to cross it, we must jump it: we must take the leap
+of faith, we must believe the passage possible, just because it is
+impossible. And those who take the leap, do land safely--we have their
+own testimony to that--as safely as, in _King Lear_, Gloucester leaps
+from the cliff of Dover; and they well may
+
+    'Think that the clearest gods, who make them honours
+    Of men's impossibilities, have preserv'd them.'
+
+But, in Gloucester's case, there was no cliff and no abyss; and, in
+our case, it may be well to enquire whether the great gulf between the
+idea and the being of God has any more reality than that down which
+Gloucester, precipitating, flung himself. The premiss, that the idea
+of God is a mere verbal proposition, may be a premiss as imaginary as
+that from which Gloucester leaped. If the idea of God is merely a
+proposition in words, and if words are but words, then the gulf
+between idea and being is real. If the being of God is an inference
+from the idea of God, it is merely an inference, and an inference of
+no logical value. And the same remark holds equally true, if we apply
+it to the case of any finite personal being: if the being of our
+neighbours were an inference from the idea we have formed of them, it
+also would be an inference of no logical value. But, fortunately,
+their being does not depend on the idea we have formed of them: it
+partially reveals itself to us in our idea of them, and partially is
+obscured by it. It is a fact of our experience, or a fact experienced
+by us. We interpret it, and to some extent misinterpret it, as we do
+all other facts. If this partly true, and partly false, interpretation
+is what we mean by the word 'idea,' then it is the idea which is an
+inference from the being of our neighbour--an inference which can be
+checked by closer acquaintance--but we do not first have the idea of
+him, and then wonder whether a being, corresponding more or less to
+the idea, exists. If we had the idea of our fellow-beings
+first--before we had experience of them--if it were from the edge of
+the idea that we had to leap, we might reasonably doubt whether to
+fling ourselves into such a logical, or rather into such an illogical,
+abyss. But it is from their being as an experienced fact, that we
+start; and with the intention of constructing from it as logical an
+idea as lies within our power. What is inference is not the being but
+the idea, so far as the idea is thus constructed.
+
+The idea, thus constructed, may be constructed correctly, or
+incorrectly. Whether it is constructed correctly or incorrectly is
+determined by further experience. What is important to notice is first
+that it is only by further experience, personal experience, that we
+can determine how far the construction we have put upon it is or is
+not correct; and, next, that so far as the construction we have put
+upon it is correct, that is to say is confirmed by actual experience,
+it is thereby shown to be not inference--even though it was reached by
+a process of inference--but fact. The process of inference may be
+compared to a path by which we struggle up the face of a cliff: it is
+the path by which we get there, but it is not the firm ground on which
+eventually we rest. The path is not that which upholds the cliff; nor
+is the inference that on which the being of God rests. The being of
+God is not something inferred but something experienced. It is by
+experience--the experience of ourselves or others--that we find out
+whether what by inference we were led to expect is really something of
+which we can--if we will--have experience. And that which is
+experienced ceases, the moment it is experienced, to be inferential.
+The experience is fact: the statement of it in words is truth. But
+apart from the experience, the words in which it is stated are but
+words; and, without the experience, the words must remain for ever
+words and nothing more than words.
+
+If then by the idea of God we mean the words, in which it is
+(inadequately) stated, and nothing more, the idea of God is separated
+by an impassable gulf from the being of God. Further, if we admit that
+the idea is, by its very nature, and by the very facts of the case,
+essentially different from the being of God, then it is of little use
+to continue to maintain that the being of God is a fact of human
+experience. In that case, the supposed fact of experience is reduced
+to something of which we neither have, nor can have, any idea, or
+consciousness, whatever. It thereby ceases to be a fact of experience
+at all. And it is precisely on this assumption that the being of God
+is denied to be a fact of experience--the assumption that being and
+idea are separated from one another by an impassable gulf: the idea we
+can be conscious of, but of His being we can have no experience. We
+must therefore ask not whether this gulf is impassable, but whether it
+exists at all, or is of the same imaginary nature as that to which
+Gloucester was led by Edgar.
+
+That there may be beings, of whom we have no idea, is a proposition
+which it is impossible to disprove. Such beings would be _ex hypothesi_
+no part of our experience; and if God were such a being, man would
+have no experience of Him. And, having no experience of Him, man could
+have no idea of Him. But the experience man has, of those beings whom
+he knows, is an experience in which idea and being are given together.
+Even if in thought we attend to one rather than to the other of the two
+aspects, the idea is still the idea of the being; and the being is
+still the being of the idea. So far from there being an impassable gulf
+between the two, the two are inseparable, in the moment of actual
+experience. It is in moments of reflection that they appear separable
+and separate, for the memory remains, when the actual experience has
+ceased. We have then only to call the memory the idea, and then the
+idea, in this use of the word, is as essentially different from that of
+which it is said to be the idea, as the memory of a being or thing is
+from the being or thing itself. If we put the memory into words, and
+pronounce those words to another, we communicate to him what we
+remember of our experience (modified--perhaps transmogrified--by our
+reflections upon it) but we do not communicate the actual experience,
+simply because we cannot. What we communicate may lead him to actual
+experience for himself; but it is not itself the experience. The memory
+may give rise, in ourselves or in others to whom we communicate, to
+expectation and anticipation; and the expectation is the more likely
+to be realised, the less the memory has been transmogrified by
+reflection. But, both the memory and the anticipation are clearly
+different from actual experience. It is only when they are confused
+with one aspect of the actual experience--that which we have called the
+idea--that the idea is supposed to be detachable from the being of whom
+we have actual experience. The idea is part of the experience; the
+memory obviously is not.
+
+If then it be said that the being of God is always an inference and is
+never anything more, the reply is that the being of anything whatever
+that is remembered or expected is, in the moment of memory or of
+anticipation, inferential; but, in the moment of actual experience, it
+is not inferred--it is experienced. And what is experienced is, and
+from the beginning has always been, in religions of the lower as well
+as of the higher culture, at once the being and the idea of God.
+
+
+
+
+INDEX
+
+
+Aaron, 11
+
+Adoration, 108 ff., 126, 144
+
+Aeschylus, 37
+
+Aetiological myths, 50, 53
+
+Africans, 59
+
+Allegory, 47
+
+Animism, 17, 35, 50
+
+Anthropomorphism, 18 ff., 27
+
+Anti-social character of fetishism, 8, 14
+
+Anu, 136
+
+Aristotle, 121
+
+Assyria, 134 ff.
+
+Atonement, 54, 75
+
+Australians, 57, 58, 59, 86-89, 113, 114
+
+Awe, 24
+
+Axe-heads, 11
+
+Aztecs, 77, 78, 88
+
+
+Babylonian psalms, 145
+
+Basutos, 143
+
+Being, and idea, 161 ff.
+
+Bergson, 123, 125
+
+Black-fellows, 57
+
+Bow, and arrow, 42
+
+Bull-roarer, 42
+
+Burnt-offerings, 72
+
+
+Calamity, 73, 97, 103
+
+Ceres, 84
+
+Chicomecoatl, 84
+
+Child (the), and the community, 1, 14
+
+Child (the), and self-consciousness, 3
+
+Children, their toys, 41;
+  and tales, 41;
+  community of, 42
+
+Chota Nagpur, 63, 64, 65, 83, 85, 88
+
+Christ, 100
+
+Christianity, 19, 26, 57, 148, 151
+
+Commerce, 69
+
+Common consciousness, capable of emotion and purpose, 2, 3, 14;
+  the source and the criterion of the individual's speech, thought and
+    action, 2, 3;
+  its attitude towards magic, 9 ff., 18;
+  and tales, 31;
+  and mythology, 37, 38, 48
+
+Communion (Christian), 77
+
+Communion, 110, 111, 147
+
+Corn-deities, 82 ff.
+
+Counter-spells, 134 ff.
+
+Covenant, the old and the new, 100
+
+Covenant-theory, 92 ff., 98 ff.
+
+Cuneiform inscriptions, 134 ff., 147
+
+Custom, 41, 42, 98
+
+
+Desire (and prayer), 118 ff.
+
+Desires, of individual and community, 7, 8, 9
+
+Digging-stick, 43
+
+Di indigites, 51-53, 56, 58, 83, 88
+
+Dionysius Thrax, 121
+
+Disease of language, 33, 34
+
+Dog, and master, 25
+
+_Do ut des_, 68
+
+
+Eating with the god, 74, 77, 91
+
+Ecstasy, 110
+
+Elijah, 13, 119
+
+Emotion, 2, 3, 7, 23, 54, 55
+
+Emperor, of Japan, 93, 95
+
+Euripides, 37
+
+Europe, 57
+
+Evolution, and revelation, 29, 122, 150, 152 ff.
+
+Exodus, 93
+
+Expectation, 164
+
+Experience, 44, 161 ff.
+
+
+Faith, 62
+
+Fallacies, 127, 128, 157
+
+Fear, 25, 103
+
+Feast, sacrificial, 74 ff.
+
+Ferrier, 121
+
+Fetishism, 4-8, 13-15, 20, 21, 27, 30, 31, 36, 120, 123, 126,
+  129-131, 156
+
+Fiction, 31, 32
+
+Finno-Ugrians, 143
+
+Fire-god, 136
+
+First-fruits, 80 ff., 90, 115
+
+Folk-lore, 57
+
+Food-offerings, 72, 78, 89
+
+Food-supply, 12, 13
+
+Foraminifera, 124
+
+Forms, of speech and of religion, 106
+
+
+Gesture-language, 66, 114
+
+Gift-theory, 68 ff., 95
+
+Gloucester, 160
+
+Godhead, unity of, 23;
+  a personal being, 26
+
+Gods, 4-6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 21, 22, 25, 26, 44
+
+Gold-coast, 143
+
+Grammar, 121
+
+Gravitation, 153
+
+Greece, 104, 111
+
+
+Harvest-gods, 94 ff.
+
+Harvest-offerings, 114, 115
+
+Harvest-rites, 81, 85
+
+Hero, of tales, 30;
+  of myths, 31
+
+History of religion, 23, 27, 28, 29, 30
+
+
+Idea, and being, 161 ff.
+
+Idol, and fetish, 4, 13
+
+_Iliad_, 41
+
+Imagination, in tales and myths, 49, 50, 51
+
+Immorality, of mythology, 47
+
+Immortality, 105
+
+Individual (the), 4, 14, 132 ff.
+
+Indo-Europeans, 47, 48
+
+Inference, 162 ff.
+
+Israel, 93, 100
+
+Italy, 51, 56
+
+
+Japan, 92 ff.
+
+Jehovah, 93
+
+Jews, 26
+
+
+_King Lear_, 156 ff.
+
+
+Language, 101, 102, 106, 107
+
+Law, 153 ff.
+
+Locutius, 52
+
+Logic, 121
+
+Love, 26, 100, 105, 150
+
+
+Magic, 8 f., 9, 10, 11 f., 12, 91, 116, 119, 120, 123, 125, 133 ff.
+
+Maize-mother, 77, 88
+
+Maklu tablets, 134 ff.
+
+Mamit, 145
+
+Max Müller, 33, 34
+
+Meal, sacrificial, 74 ff.
+
+Memory, 164
+
+Mexico, 77, 78, 88, 91, 110, 111
+
+Miracles, 10 ff.
+
+Monotheism, 58, 61, 155
+
+Moods, 119
+
+Morality, 21, 22, 25, 26, 41, 44-46, 125, 141 ff., 154
+
+Moses, 93, 119
+
+Mysteries, 104 ff., 111
+
+Mysticism, 110
+
+Myths, 20-22, 30 ff., 39, 40, 43, 47, 48-52, 55-58, 60
+
+
+Names, 16, 52, 57, 64, 82 ff.
+
+Narratives, and myths, 33, 40, 49, 51
+
+Negroes, 15
+
+Nursery-tales, 41
+
+
+Obedience, 98, 100, 101
+
+Oblations, 65, 66, 73, 97, 98
+
+Offerings, 67 ff., 85 ff.
+
+Optative sentences, 139 ff.
+
+Orbona, 52
+
+Origin, of gods and of mythology, 34
+
+Ossipago, 51
+
+
+Penitential Psalms, 145, 147
+
+Personality, 3, 4, 11, 17, 20, 28, 29, 45, 54, 55, 82, 83, 86
+
+Peruvians, 143
+
+Petitions, 126, 128, 130 ff.
+
+Plague, 52
+
+Plato, 92
+
+Polydaemonism, 16 ff.;
+  change to polytheism, 18, 30;
+  and mythology, 31, 32
+
+Polytheism, 4, 7, 16, 18, 22, 30-32, 35, 36, 40, 61, 155
+
+Possession, 110
+
+Power, man of, 12 ff.
+
+Prayer, 108 ff.
+
+Priests, 120
+
+Principles, 121, 123, 128, 153 ff.
+
+Prophet and magician, 10 ff.
+
+Protoplasm, 124
+
+Psalms of David, 146, 147
+
+
+Quietism, 112
+
+
+Rain-making, 9, 12, 13, 119
+
+Reconciliation, 98
+
+Reflection, 33, 36, 53-56, 60, 96
+
+Religion, 8 ff., 35, 39, 54-56, 104 ff.
+
+Revelation, 29, 58
+
+Reverence, 24
+
+Ritual, 31, 57, 61-63, 101 ff., 114
+
+Romans, the, 52, 53
+
+
+Sacrifice, 52, 63, 64, 67 ff., 72, 73, 79 ff., 85, 97 ff.
+
+Salvation, 105
+
+Samoans, 143
+
+Search, for God, 59
+
+Seed-time, 115
+
+Self, 3, 4, 7, 104, 132 ff., 137, 148
+
+Self-renunciation, 149
+
+Shinto, 92 ff.
+
+Sign (of the cross), 116
+
+Sin, 103, 104, 145 ff.
+
+Socrates, 55
+
+Sophocles, 37
+
+Species, 83 ff., 91, 92
+
+Speech, 3, 121, 153 ff.
+
+Spells, 115 ff., 134 ff., 150, 151
+
+Survivals, 38, 56, 57, 58, 59
+
+
+Taboo, 145
+
+Tales, and myths, 31-33, 49, 51
+
+Totems, 84 ff.
+
+Tylor, Professor, 15
+
+
+Vagitanus, 51
+
+Vegetation-deities, 81 ff.
+
+Veneration, 151
+
+Viriplaca, 52
+
+
+Water, 135
+
+Way of the Gods, 92 ff.
+
+Western Africa, 8, 15
+
+Will, of God, 149 ff.
+
+Wind, spirits of, 93 ff.
+
+Witches, 134 ff.
+
+Worship, 19, 55, 57, 58, 60-63
+
+
+Xilonen, 84
+
+
+Zulus, 143
+
+
+
+
+CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE IDEA OF GOD IN EARLY RELIGIONS***
+
+
+******* This file should be named 25338-8.txt or 25338-8.zip *******
+
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/5/3/3/25338
+
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
diff --git a/25338-8.zip b/25338-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1850665
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-8.zip
diff --git a/25338-h.zip b/25338-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f3e3c1f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-h.zip
diff --git a/25338-h/25338-h.htm b/25338-h/25338-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..279916c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-h/25338-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,4883 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" />
+<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Idea of God in Early Religions, by F. B. Jevons</title>
+    <style type="text/css">
+/*<![CDATA[  XML blockout */
+<!--
+    p {  margin-top: .5em;
+         text-align: justify;
+         margin-bottom: .5em;
+         text-indent: 1em;
+         }
+    h1   {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    h1.pg   {
+         text-align: center; font-family: Times-Roman, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    h5,h6 {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    h2 {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* centered and coloured */
+         }
+    h3 {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* centered and coloured */
+         }
+    h3.pg   {
+         text-align: center; font-family: Times-Roman, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    h4 {
+         text-align: center; font-family: garamond, serif; /* all headings centered */
+         }
+    hr { width: 33%;
+         margin-top: 1em;
+         margin-bottom: 1em;
+       }
+    body{margin-left: 10%;
+         margin-right: 10%;
+        }
+    a  {text-decoration: none} /* no lines under links */
+    div.centered {text-align: center;} /* work around for IE centering with CSS problem part 1 */
+    div.centered table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: left;} /* work around for IE centering with CSS problem part 2 */
+    ul        {list-style-type: none} /* no bullets on lists */
+    ul.nest   {margin-top: .15em; margin-bottom: .15em; text-indent: -1.5em;} /* spacing for nested list */
+    li        {margin-top: .15em; margin-bottom: .15em;} /* spacing for list */
+
+    .cen      {text-align: center; text-indent: 0em;} /* centering paragraphs */
+    .sc       {font-variant: small-caps;} /* small caps */
+    .fakesc   {font-size: 80%;} /* fake small caps, small font size */
+    .noin     {text-indent: 0em;} /* no indenting */
+    .hang     {text-indent: -2em;} /* hanging indents */
+    .block    {margin-left: 25%; margin-right: 25%;} /* block indent */
+    .block2   {margin-left: 7%; margin-right: 5%;} /* block indent 2 */
+    .right    {text-align: right; padding-right: 2em;} /* right aligning paragraphs */
+    .totoc    {position: absolute; right: 2%; font-size: 75%; text-align: right;} /* Table of contents anchor */
+    .totoi    {position: absolute; right: 2%; font-size: 75%; text-align: right;} /* to Table of Illustrations link */
+    .img      {text-align: center; padding: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;} /* centering images */
+    .sidenote {width: 20%; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-top: 1em; padding-left: 1em; font-size: smaller; float: right; clear: right;}
+    .tdr      {text-align: right; padding-right: .5em;} /* right align cell */
+    .tdc      {text-align: center;} /* center align cell */
+    .tdl      {text-align: left;}  /* left align cell */
+    .tdlsc    {text-align: left; font-variant: small-caps;} /* aligning cell content and small caps */
+    .tdrsc    {text-align: right; font-variant: small-caps;} /* aligning cell content and small caps */
+    .tdcsc    {text-align: center; font-variant: small-caps;} /* aligning cell content and small caps */
+    .tr       {margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; margin-top: 5%; margin-bottom: 5%; padding: 1em; background-color: #f6f2f2; color: black; border: dotted black 1px;} /* transcriber's notes */
+
+    .pagenum  { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
+               /*  visibility: hidden;  */
+               position: absolute; right: 2%;
+               font-size: 75%;
+               color: silver;
+               background-color: inherit;
+               text-align: right;
+               text-indent: 0em;
+               font-style: normal;
+               font-weight: normal;
+               font-variant: normal;} /* page numbers */
+
+    .poem             {margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; text-align: left;}
+    .poem br          {display: none;}
+    .poem .stanza     {margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em;}
+    .poem span        {display: block; margin: 0; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i2     {display: block; margin-left: 2em;}
+    .poem span.i4     {display: block; margin-left: 4em;}
+    .poem span.pn     { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
+                        /*  visibility: hidden;  */
+                            position: absolute; right: 2%;
+                            font-size: 75%;
+                            text-align: right;
+                            text-indent: 0em;
+                            font-style: normal;
+                            font-weight: normal;
+                            color: silver; background-color: inherit;
+                            font-variant: normal;} /* page numbers in poems */
+
+    hr.full { width: 100%;
+              margin-top: 0em;
+              margin-bottom: 0em;
+              border: solid black;
+              height: 5px; }
+    pre      {font-size: 85%; }
+    // -->
+    /* XML end  ]]>*/
+    </style>
+</head>
+<body>
+<h1 class="pg">The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Idea of God in Early Religions, by F. B.
+Jevons</h1>
+<pre>
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at <a href = "http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a></pre>
+<p>Title: The Idea of God in Early Religions</p>
+<p>Author: F. B. Jevons</p>
+<p>Release Date: May 5, 2008  [eBook #25338]</p>
+<p>Language: English</p>
+<p>Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1</p>
+<p>***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE IDEA OF GOD IN EARLY RELIGIONS***</p>
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<h3 class="pg">E-text prepared by Juliet Sutherland, Jeannie Howse,<br />
+    and the Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team<br />
+    (http://www.pgdp.net)</h3>
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<hr class="full" />
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+
+<div class="img">
+<a href="images/cover.jpg">
+<img border="0" src="images/cover.jpg" width="45%" alt="Book Cover" /></a>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<div class="img">
+<a href="images/title.jpg">
+<img border="0" src="images/title.jpg" width="45%" alt="Title Page Art" /></a>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+<br />
+
+
+<h1>THE IDEA OF GOD<br />
+IN EARLY RELIGIONS</h1>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<h4>BY</h4>
+
+<h2>F. B. JEVONS, <span class="sc">Litt.D.</span></h2>
+
+<h5>Professor of Philosophy in the<br />
+University of Durham</h5>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<h4>Cambridge:<br />
+at the University Press<br />
+1913</h4>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+
+
+<h5><i>First Edition, 1910<br />
+Reprinted 1911, 1913</i></h5>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<div class="block"><p><i>With the exception of the coat of arms at the foot, the
+design on the title page is a reproduction of one used by
+the earliest known Cambridge printer, John Siberch, 1521</i></p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="PREFACE" id="PREFACE"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">[v]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>PREFACE<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+<br />
+
+<p>In <i>The Varieties of Religious Experience</i> the late Professor William
+James has said (p. 465): 'The religious phenomenon, studied as an
+inner fact, and apart from ecclesiastical or theological
+complications, has shown itself to consist everywhere, and at all its
+stages, in the consciousness which individuals have of an intercourse
+between themselves and higher powers with which they feel themselves
+to be related. This intercourse is realised at the time as being both
+active and mutual.' The book now before the reader deals with the
+religious phenomenon, studied as an inner fact, in the earlier stages
+of religion. By 'the Idea of God' may be meant either the
+consciousness which individuals have of higher powers, with which they
+feel themselves to be related, or the words in which they, or others,
+seek to express that consciousness. Those words may be an expression,
+that is to say an interpretation or a misinterpretation, of that
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_vi" id="Page_vi">[vi]</a></span>consciousness. But the words are not the consciousness: the feeling,
+without which the consciousness does not exist, may be absent when the
+words are spoken or heard. It is however through the words that we
+have to approach the feeling and the consciousness of others, and to
+determine whether and how far the feeling and the consciousness so
+approached are similar in all individuals everywhere and at all
+stages.</p>
+
+<p class="right">F. B. JEVONS.</p>
+
+<p><span class="sc">Hatfield Hall,</span><br />
+<span class="sc" style="margin-left: 2em;">Durham.</span><br />
+<span style="margin-left: 3em;"><i>October, 1910</i></span></p>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="toc" id="toc"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_vii" id="Page_vii">[vii]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>CONTENTS</h3>
+<br />
+
+<div class="centered">
+<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="70%" summary="Table of Contents">
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr" width="10%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdl" width="80%">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdr" width="10%"><span style="font-size: 80%;">PAGE</span></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#BIBLIOGRAPHY">Bibliography</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">ix</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr">I.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#I">Introduction</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">1</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr">II.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#II">The Idea of God in Mythology</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">30</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr">III.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#III">The Idea of God in Worship</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">60</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr">IV.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#IV">The Idea of God in Prayer</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">103</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr">V.</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#V">The Idea and Being of God</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">152</td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+  <td class="tdr">&nbsp;</td>
+  <td class="tdlsc"><a href="#INDEX">Index</a></td>
+  <td class="tdr">167</td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_viii" id="Page_viii">[viii]</a></span><br />
+<a name="BIBLIOGRAPHY" id="BIBLIOGRAPHY"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_ix" id="Page_ix">[ix]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>BIBLIOGRAPHY<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+<br />
+
+<div class="block2"><p class="hang">Allen, Grant. The Evolution of the Idea of God. London, 1897.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Anthropology and the Classics. Oxford, 1908.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Bastian, A. Volks- und Menschenkunde. Berlin, 1888.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Bousset, W. What is Religion? (English Translation). London, 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Crawley, A.E. The Idea of the Soul. London, 1909.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Fossey, C. La Magie Assyrienne. Paris, 1902.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Frazer, J.G. Early History of the Kingship. London, 1895.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">&nbsp;&nbsp;&mdash;&mdash;&nbsp; The Golden Bough. London, 1900.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">&nbsp;&nbsp;&mdash;&mdash;&nbsp; Psyche's Task. London, 1909.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Gardner, P. Modernity and the Churches. London, 1909.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Hobhouse, L.T. Morals in Evolution. London, 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">H&ouml;ffding, H. The Philosophy of Religion (English Translation).
+London, 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Hollis, A.C. The Masai. Oxford, 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">&nbsp;&nbsp;&mdash;&mdash;&nbsp; The Nandi. Oxford, 1909.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">James, W. The Varieties of Religious Experience. London, 1902.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Jastrow, M. Jun. Study of Religion. London, 1901.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Jevons, F.B. Introduction to the History of Religion. London,
+1896.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">&nbsp;&nbsp;&mdash;&mdash;&nbsp; Religion in Evolution. London, 1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">&nbsp;&nbsp;&mdash;&mdash;&nbsp; Study of Comparative Religion. London, 1908.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Lang, A. Magic and Religion. London, 1901.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">&nbsp;&nbsp;&mdash;&mdash;&nbsp; The Making of Religion. London, 1898.</p>
+
+<p class="hang"><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_x" id="Page_x">[x]</a></span>Mackenzie, W.D. The Final Faith. London, 1910.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Marett, R.R. The Threshold of Religion. London, 1909.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Mitchell, H.B. Talks on Religion. London, 1908.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Nassau, R.H. Fetichism in West Africa. London, 1904.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Parker, K.L. The Euahlayi Tribe. London, 1905.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Saussaye, P.D.C. de la. Religionsgeschichte. Freiburg i. B., 1889.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Schaarschmidt, C. Die Religion. Leipzig, 1907.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Thompson, R.C. Semitic Magic. London, 1908.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Tisdall W. St C. Comparative Religion. London, 1909.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Transactions of the Third International Congress of the History of
+Religions. Oxford, 1908.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Tylor, E.B. Primitive Culture. London, 1873.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Westermarck, E. Origin and Development of Moral Ideas. London,
+1906.</p>
+
+<p class="hang">Wundt, W. V&ouml;lkerpsychologie. Leipzig, 1904-6.</p></div>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="I" id="I"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>I<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>INTRODUCTION</h4>
+<br />
+
+
+<p>Every child that is born is born of a community and into a community,
+which existed before his birth and will continue to exist after his
+death. He learns to speak the language which the community spoke
+before he was born, and which the community will continue to speak
+after he has gone. In learning the language he acquires not only words
+but ideas; and the words and ideas he acquires, the thoughts he thinks
+and the words in which he utters them, are those of the community from
+which he learnt them, which taught them before he was born and will go
+on teaching them after he is dead. He not only learns to speak the
+words and think the ideas, to reproduce the mode of thought, as he
+does the form of speech, of the circumambient community: he is taught
+and learns to act as those around him do&mdash;as the community has done
+and will tend to do. The community&mdash;the narrower community of the
+family, first, and, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a></span>afterwards, the wider community to which the
+family belongs&mdash;teaches him how he ought to speak, what he ought to
+think, and how he ought to act. The consciousness of the child
+reproduces the consciousness of the community to which he belongs&mdash;the
+common consciousness, which existed before him and will continue to
+exist after him.</p>
+
+<p>The common consciousness is not only the source from which the
+individual gets his mode of speech, thought and action, but the court
+of appeal which decides what is fact. If a question is raised whether
+the result of a scientific experiment is what it is alleged by the
+original maker of the experiment to be, the appeal is to the common
+consciousness: any one who chooses to make the experiment in the way
+described will find the result to be of the kind alleged; if everyone
+else, on experiment, finds it to be so, it is established as a fact of
+common consciousness; if no one else finds it to be so, the alleged
+discovery is not a fact but an erroneous inference.</p>
+
+<p>Now, it is not merely with regard to external facts or facts
+apprehended through the senses, that the common consciousness is
+accepted as the court of appeal. The allegation may be that an
+emotion, of a specified kind&mdash;alarm or fear, wonder or awe&mdash;is, in
+specified circumstances, experienced as a fact of the common
+consciousness. Or a body of men may have a common purpose, or a common
+idea, as well as an <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span>emotion of, say, common alarm. If the purpose,
+idea or emotion, be common to them and experienced by all of them, it
+is a fact of their common consciousness. In this case, as in the case
+of any alleged but disputed discovery in science, the common
+consciousness is the court of appeal which decides the facts, and
+determines whether what an individual thinks he has discovered in his
+consciousness is really a fact of the common consciousness. The idea
+of powers superior to man, the emotion of awe or reverence, which goes
+with the idea, and the purpose of communicating with the power in
+question are facts, not peculiar to this or that individual
+consciousness, but facts of the common consciousness of all mankind.</p>
+
+<p>The child up to a certain age has no consciousness of self: the
+absence of self-consciousness is one of the charms of children. The
+child imitates its elders, who speak of him and to him by his name. He
+speaks of himself in the third person and not in the first person
+singular, and designates himself by his proper name and not by means
+of the personal pronoun 'I'; eventually the child acquires the use and
+to some extent learns the meaning of the first personal pronoun; that
+is, if the language of the community to which he belongs has developed
+so far as to have produced such a pronoun. For there was a period in
+the evolution of speech when, as yet, a first personal pronoun had not
+been evolved; and that, probably, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a></span>for the simple reason that the idea
+which it denotes was as unknown to the community as it is to the child
+whose absence of self-consciousness is so pleasing. For a period, the
+length of which may have been millions of years, the common
+consciousness, the consciousness of the community, did not discover or
+discriminate, in language or in thought, the existence of the
+individual self.</p>
+
+<p>The importance of this consideration lies in its bearing upon the
+question, in what form the idea of powers superior to man disclosed
+itself in the common consciousness at that period. It is held by many
+students of the science of religion that fetishism preceded polytheism
+in the history of religion; and it is undoubted that polytheism
+flourished at the expense of fetishism. But what is exactly the
+difference between fetishism and polytheism? No one now any longer
+holds that a fetish is regarded, by believers in fetish, as a material
+object and nothing more: everyone recognises that the material object
+to which the term is applied is regarded as the habitation of a
+spiritual being. The material object in question is to the fetish what
+the idol of a god is to a god. If the material object, through which,
+or in which, the fetish-spirit manifests itself, bears no resemblance
+to human form, neither do the earliest stocks or blocks in which gods
+manifest themselves bear any resemblance to human form. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span>Such unshaped
+stocks do not of themselves tell us whether they are fetishes or gods
+to their worshippers. The test by which the student of the science of
+religion determines the question is a very simple one: it is, who
+worships the object in question? If the object is the private property
+of some individual, it is fetish; if it is worshipped by the community
+as a whole, it, or rather the spirit which manifests itself therein,
+is a god of the community. The functions of the two beings differ
+accordingly: the god receives the prayers of the community and has
+power to grant them; the fetish has power to grant the wishes of the
+individual who owns it. The consequence of this difference in function
+is that as the wishes of the individual may be inconsistent with the
+welfare of other members of the community; as the fetish may be, and
+actually is, used to procure injury and death to other members of the
+community; a fetish is anti-social and a danger to the community,
+whereas a god of the community is there expressly as a refuge and a
+help for the community. The fetish fulfils the desires of the
+individual, the self; the god listens to the prayers of the community.</p>
+
+<p>Let us now return to that stage in the evolution of the community
+when, as yet, neither the language nor the thought of the community
+had discovered or discriminated the existence of the individual self.
+If at that stage there was in the common <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a></span>consciousness any idea,
+however dim or confused, of powers superior to man; if that idea was
+accompanied or coloured by any emotion, whether of fear or awe or
+reverence; if that emotion prompted action of any kind; then, such
+powers were not conceived to be fetishes, for the function of a fetish
+is to fulfil the desires of an individual self; and until the
+existence of the individual self is realised, there is no function for
+a fetish to perform.</p>
+
+<p>It may well be that the gradual development of self-consciousness, and
+the slow steps by which language helped to bring forth the idea of
+self, were from the first, and throughout, accompanied by the gradual
+development of the idea of fetishism. But the very development of the
+idea of a power which could fulfil the desires of self, as
+distinguished from, and often opposed to, the interests of the
+community, would stimulate the growth of the idea of a power whose
+special and particular function was to tend the interests of the
+community as a whole. Thus the idea of a fetish and the idea of a god
+could only persist on condition of becoming more and more inconsistent
+with, and contradictory of, one another. If the lines followed by the
+two ideas started from the same point, it was only to diverge the
+more, the further they were pursued. And the tendency of fetishism to
+disappear from the later and higher stages of religion is sufficient
+to show that it did not <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span>afford an adequate or satisfactory expression
+of the idea contained in the common consciousness of some power or
+being greater than man. That idea is constantly striving, throughout
+the history of religion, to find or give expression to itself; it is
+constantly discovering that such expressions as it has found for
+itself do it wrong; and it is constantly throwing, or in the process
+of throwing, such expressions aside. Fetishism was thrown aside sooner
+than polytheism: for it was an expression not only inadequate but
+contradictory to the idea that gave it birth. The emotions of fear and
+suspicion, with which the community regarded fetishes, were emotions
+different from the awe or reverence with which the community
+approached its gods.</p>
+
+<p>What practically provokes and stimulates the individual's dawning
+consciousness of himself, or the community's consciousness of the
+individual as in a way distinct from itself, is the dash between the
+desires, wishes, interests of the one, and the desires, wishes and
+interests of the other. But though the interests of the one are
+sometimes at variance with those of the other, still in some cases,
+also, the interests of the individual&mdash;even though they be purely
+individual interests&mdash;are not inconsistent with those of the
+community; and in most cases they are identical with them&mdash;the
+individual promotes his own interests by serving those of the
+community, and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span>promotes those of the community by serving his own. In
+a word, the interests of the one are not so clearly and plainly cut
+off from those of the other, that the individual can always be
+condemned for seeking to gratify his self-interests or his own
+personal desires. That is presumably one reason why fetishism is so
+wide-spread and so long-lived in Western Africa, for instance: though
+fetishes may be used for anti-social purposes, they may be and are
+also used for purposes which if selfish are not, or are not felt to
+be, anti-social. The individual owner of a fetish does not feel that
+his ownership does or ought to cut him off from membership of the
+community. And so long as such feeling is common, so long an
+indecisive struggle between gods and fetishes continues.</p>
+
+<p>Now this same cause&mdash;the impossibility of condemning the individual
+for seeking to promote his own interests&mdash;will be found on examination
+to be operative elsewhere, viz. in magic. The relation of magic to
+religion is as much a matter of doubt and dispute as is that of
+fetishism to religion. And I propose to treat magic in much the same
+way as I have treated fetishism. The justification which I offer for
+so doing is to be found in the parallel or analogy that may be drawn
+between them. The distinction which comes to be drawn within the
+common consciousness between the self and the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span>community manifests
+itself obviously in the fact that the interests and desires of the
+individual are felt to be different, and yet not to be different, from
+those of the community; and so they are felt to be, yet not to be,
+condemnable from the point of view of the common consciousness. Now,
+this is precisely the judgment which is passed upon magic, wherever it
+is cultivated. It is condemnable, it is viewed with suspicion, fear
+and condemnation; and yet it is also and at the same time viewed and
+practised with general approval. It may be used on behalf of the
+community and for the good of the community, and with public approval,
+as it is when it is used to make the rain which the community needs.
+It may be viewed with toleration, as it is when it is believed to
+benefit an individual without entailing injury on the community. But
+it is visited with condemnation, and perhaps with punishment, when it
+is employed for purposes, such as murder, which the common
+consciousness condemns. Accordingly the person who has the power to
+work the marvels comprehended under the name of magic is viewed with
+condemnation, toleration or approval, according as he uses his power
+for purposes which the common consciousness condemns, tolerates or
+approves. The power which such a person exerts is power personal to
+him; and yet it is in a way a power greater and other than himself,
+for he has it not always under his control or command: whether <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span>he
+uses it for the benefit of the community or for the injury of some
+individual, he cannot count on its always coming off. And this fact is
+not without its influence and consequences. If he is endeavouring to
+use it for the injury of some person, he will explain his failure as
+due to some error he has committed in the <i>modus operandi</i>, or to the
+counter-operations of some rival. But if he is endeavouring to
+exercise it for the benefit of the community, failure makes others
+doubtful whether he has the power to act on behalf of the community;
+while, on the contrary, a successful issue makes it clear that he has
+the power, and places him, in the opinion both of the community and of
+himself, in an exceptional position: his power is indeed in a way
+personal to himself, but it is also greater and other than himself.
+His sense of it, and the community's sense of it, is reinforced and
+augmented by the approval of the common consciousness, and by the
+feeling that a power, in harmony with the common consciousness and the
+community's desires, is working in him and through him. This power,
+thus exercised, of working marvels for the common good is obviously
+more closely analogous to that of a prophet working miracles, than it
+is to that of the witch working injury or death. And, in the same way
+that I have already suggested that gods and fetishes may have been
+evolved from a prior indeterminate concept, which was neither but
+might become <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span>either; so I would now suggest that miracles are not
+magic, nor is magic miracles, but that the two have been
+differentiated from a common source. And if the polytheistic gods,
+which are to be found where fetishism is believed in, present us with
+a very low stage in the development of the idea of a 'perfect
+personality,' so too the sort of miracles which are believed in, where
+the belief in magic flourishes, present us with a very low stage in
+the development of the idea of an almighty God. Axe-heads that float
+must have belonged originally to such a low stage; and rods that turn
+into serpents were the property of the 'magicians of Egypt' as well as
+of Aaron.</p>
+
+<p>The common source, then, from which flows the power of working marvels
+for the community's good, or of working magic in the interest of one
+individual member and perhaps to the injury of another, is a personal
+power, which in itself&mdash;that is to say, apart from the intention with
+which it is used and apart from the consequences which ensue&mdash;is
+neither commendable nor condemnable from the community's point of
+view; and which consequently can neither be condemned nor commended by
+the common consciousness, until the difference between self and the
+community has become manifest, and the possibility of a divergence
+between the interests of self or <i>alter</i> and those of the community
+has been realised. Further, this power, in whichever way it comes to
+be <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span>exercised, marks a strong individuality; and may be the first, as
+it is certainly a most striking, manifestation of the fact of
+individuality: it marks off, at once, the individual possessing such
+power from the rest of the community. And the common consciousness is
+puzzled by the apparition. Just as it tolerates fetishes though it
+disapproves of them and is afraid of them, so it tolerates the
+magician, though it is afraid of him and does not cordially approve of
+him, even when he benefits an individual client without injuring the
+community. But though the man of power may use, and apparently most
+often does use, his power, in the interest of some individual and to
+the detriment of the community; and though it is this condemnable use
+which is everywhere most conspicuous, and probably earliest developed;
+still there is no reason why he should not use, and as a matter of
+fact he sometimes does use, his power on behalf of the community to
+promote the food-supply of the community or to produce the rain which
+is desired. In this case, then, the individual, having a power which
+others have not, is not at variance with the community but in harmony
+with the common consciousness, and becomes an organ by which it acts.
+When, then, the belief in gods, having the interests of the community
+at heart, presents itself or develops within the common consciousness,
+the individual who has the power on behalf of the community to make
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span>rain or increase the food supply is marked out by the belief of the
+community&mdash;or it may be by the communings of his own heart&mdash;as
+specially related to the gods. Hence we find, in the low stages of the
+evolution of religion, the proceedings, by which the man of power had
+made rain for the community or increased the food-supply, either
+incorporated into the ritual of the gods, or surviving traditionally
+as incidents in the life of a prophet, e.g. the rain-making of Elijah.
+In the same way therefore as I have suggested that the resemblances
+between gods and fetishes are to be explained by the theory that the
+two go back to a common source, and that neither is developed from the
+other, so I suggest that the resemblances between the conception of
+prophet and that of magician point not to the priority of either to
+the other, but to the derivation or evolution of both from a prior and
+less determinate concept.</p>
+
+<p>Just as a fetish is a material thing, and something more, so a
+magician is a man and something more. Just as a god is an idol and
+something more, so a prophet or priest is a man and something more.
+The fetish is a material thing which manifests a power that other
+things do not exhibit; and the magician is a man possessing a power
+which other men have not. The difference between the magician and the
+prophet or priest is the same as the difference between the fetish and
+the god. It is the difference <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span>between that which subserves the wishes
+of the individual, which may be, and often are, anti-social, and that
+which furthers the interests of the community. Of this difference each
+child who is born into the community learns from his elders: it is
+part of the common consciousness of the community. And it could not
+become a fact of the common consciousness until the existence of self
+became recognised in thought and expressed in language. With that
+recognition of difference, or possible difference, between the
+individual and the community, between the desires of the one and the
+welfare of the other, came the recognition of a difference between
+fetish and god, between magician and priest. The power exercised by
+either was greater than that of man; but the power manifested in the
+one was exercised with a view to the good of the community; in the
+case of the other, not. Thus, from the beginning, gods were not merely
+beings exercising power greater than that of man, but beings
+exercising their power for the good of man. It is as such that, from
+the beginning to the end, they have figured both in the common
+consciousness of the community, and in the consciousness of every
+member born into the community. They have figured in both; and,
+because they have figured both in the individual consciousness and the
+common consciousness, they have, from the beginning, been <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span>something
+present to both, something at once within the individual and without.
+But as the child recognises objects long before he becomes aware of
+the existence of himself, so man, in his infancy, sought this power or
+being in the external world long before he looked for it within
+himself.</p>
+
+<p>It is because man looked for this being or power in the external world
+that he found, or thought he found, it there. He looked for it and
+found it, in the same way as to this day the African negro finds a
+fetish. A negro found a stone and took it for his fetish, as Professor
+Tylor relates, as follows:&mdash;'He was once going out on important
+business, but crossing the threshold he trod on this stone and hurt
+himself. Ha! ha! thought he, art thou there? So he took the stone, and
+it helped him through his undertaking for days.' So too when the
+community's attention is arrested by something in the external world,
+some natural phenomenon which is marvellous in their eyes, their
+attitude of mind, the attitude of the common consciousness, translated
+into words is: 'Ha! ha! art thou there?' This attitude of mind is one
+of expectancy: man finds a being, possessed of greater power than
+man's, because he is ready to find it and expecting it.</p>
+
+<p>So strong is this expectancy, so ready is man to find this being,
+superior to man, that he finds it wherever he goes, wherever he looks.
+There is <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span>probably no natural phenomenon whatever that has not
+somewhere, at some time, provoked the question or the reflection 'Art
+thou there?' And it is because man has taken upon himself to answer
+the question, and to say: 'Thou art there, in the great and strong
+wind which rends the mountains; or, in the earthquake; or, in the
+fire' that polytheism has arisen. Perhaps, however, we should rather
+use the word 'polydaemonism' than 'polytheism.' By a god is usually
+meant a being who has come to possess a proper name; and, probably, a
+spirit is worshipped for some considerable time, before the
+appellative, by which he is addressed, loses its original meaning, and
+comes to be the proper name by which he, and he alone, is addressed.
+Certainly, the stage in which spirits without proper names are
+worshipped seems to be more primitive than that in which the being
+worshipped is a god, having a proper name of his own. And the
+difference between the two stages of polydaemonism and polytheism is
+not merely limited to the fact that the beings worshipped have proper
+names in the later stage, and had none in the earlier. A development
+or a difference in language implies a development or difference in
+thought. If the being or spirit worshipped has come to be designated
+by a proper name, he has lost much of the vagueness that characterises
+a nameless spirit, and he has come to be much more definite and much
+more personal. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span>Indeed, a change much more sinister, from the
+religious point of view, is wrought, when the transition from
+polydaemonism to polytheism is accomplished.</p>
+
+<p>In the stage of human evolution known as animism, everything which
+acts&mdash;or is supposed to act&mdash;is supposed to be, like man himself, a
+person. But though, in the animistic stage, all powers are conceived
+by man as being persons, they are not all conceived as having human
+form: they may be animals, and have animal forms; or birds, and have
+bird-form; they may be trees, clouds, streams, the wind, the
+earthquake or the fire. In some, or rather in all, of these, man has
+at some time found the being or the power, greater than man, of whom
+he has at all times been in quest, with the enquiry, addressed to each
+in turn, 'Art thou there?' The form of the question, the use of the
+personal pronoun, shows that he is seeking for a person. And students
+of the science of religion are generally agreed that man, throughout
+the history of religion, has been seeking for a power or being
+superior to man and greater than he. It is therefore a personal power
+and a personal being that man has been in search of, throughout his
+religious history. He has pushed his search in many directions&mdash;often
+simultaneously in different directions; and, he has abandoned one line
+of enquiry after another, because he has found that it did not lead
+him whither he would be. Thus, as we have seen, he pushed forward, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span>at
+the same time, in the direction of fetishism and of polytheism, or
+rather of polydaemonism; but fetishism failed to bring him
+satisfaction, or rather failed to satisfy the common consciousness,
+the consciousness of the community, because it proved on trial to
+subserve the wishes&mdash;the anti-social wishes&mdash;of the individual, and
+not the interests of the community. The beings or powers that man
+looked to find and which he supposed he found, whether as fetishes in
+this or that object, or as daemons in the sky, the fire or the wind,
+in beast or bird or tree, were taken to be personal beings and
+personal powers, bearing the same relation to that in which, or
+through which, they manifested themselves, as man bears to his body.
+They do not seem to have been conceived as being men, or the souls of
+men which manifested themselves in animals or trees. At the time when
+polydaemonism has, as yet, not become polytheism, the personal beings,
+worshipped in this or that external form, have not as yet been
+anthropomorphised. Indeed, the process which constitutes the change
+from polydaemonism to polytheism consists in the process, or rather is
+the process, by which the spirits, the personal beings, worshipped in
+tree, or sky, or cloud, or wind, or fire came gradually to be
+anthropomorphised&mdash;to be invested with human parts and passions and to
+be addressed like human beings with proper names. But when
+anthropomorphic <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span>polytheism is thus pushed to its extreme logical
+conclusions, its tendency is to collapse in the same way, and for the
+same reasons, as fetishism, before it, had collapsed. What man had
+been in search of, from the beginning, and was still in search of, was
+some personal being or power, higher than and superior to man. What
+anthropomorphic polytheism presented him with, in the upshot, was with
+beings, not superior, but, in some or many cases, undeniably inferior
+to man. As such they could not thenceforth be worshipped. In Europe
+their worship was overthrown by Christianity. But, on reflection, it
+seems clear not only that, as such, they could not thenceforth be
+worshipped; but that, as such, they never had been worshipped. In the
+consciousness of the community, the object of worship had always been,
+from the beginning, some personal being superior to man. The apostle
+of Christianity might justifiably speak to polytheists of the God
+'whom ye ignorantly worship.' It is true, and it is important to
+notice, that the sacrifices and the rites and ceremonies, which
+together made up the service of worship, had been consciously and
+intentionally rendered to deities represented in human form; and, in
+this sense, anthropomorphic deities had been worshipped. But, if
+worship is something other than sacrifice and rite and ceremony, then
+the object of worship&mdash;the personal being, greater than man&mdash;presented
+to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span>the common consciousness, is something other than the
+anthropomorphic being, inferior in much to man, of whom poets speak in
+mythology and whom artists represent in bodily shape.</p>
+
+<p>Just as fetishism developed and persisted, because it did contain,
+though it perverted, one element of religious truth&mdash;the accessibility
+of the power worshipped to the worshipper&mdash;so too anthropomorphism,
+notwithstanding the consequences to which, in mythology, it led, did
+contain, or rather, was based on, one element of truth, viz. that the
+divine is personal, as well as the human. Its error was to set up, as
+divine personalities, a number of reproductions or reflections of
+human personality. It leads to the conclusion, as a necessary
+consequence, that the divine personality is but a shadow of the human
+personality, enlarged and projected, so to speak, upon the clouds, but
+always betraying, in some way or other, the fact that it is but the
+shadow, magnified or distorted, of man. It excludes the possibility
+that the divine personality, present to the common consciousness as
+the object of worship, may be no reproduction of the human
+personality, but a reality to which the human personality has the
+power of approximating. Be this as it may, we are justified in saying,
+indeed we are compelled to recognise, that in mythology, all the world
+over, we see a process of reflection at work, by which the beings,
+originally apprehended as <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span>superior to man, come first to be
+anthropomorphised, that is to be apprehended as having the parts and
+passions of men, and then, consequently, to be seen to be no better
+than men. This discovery it is which in the long run proves fatal to
+anthropomorphism.</p>
+
+<p>We have seen, above, the reason why fetishism becomes eventually
+distasteful to the common consciousness: the beings, superior to man,
+which are worshipped by the community, are worshipped as having the
+interests of the community in their charge, and as having the good of
+the community at heart; whereas a fetish is sought and found by the
+individual, to advance his private interests, even to the cost and
+loss of other individuals and of the community at large. Thus, from
+the earliest period at which beings, superior to man, are
+differentiated into gods and fetishes, gods are accepted by the common
+consciousness as beings who maintain the good of the community and
+punish those who infringe it; while fetishes become beings who assist
+individual members to infringe the customary morality of the tribe.
+Thus, from the first, the beings, of whom the community is conscious
+as superior to man, are beings, having in charge, first, the customary
+morality of the tribe; and, afterwards, the conscious morality of the
+community.</p>
+
+<p>This conception, it was, of the gods, as guardians <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span>of morality and of
+the common good, that condemned fetishism; and this conception it was,
+which was to prove eventually the condemnation of polytheism. A
+multitude of beings&mdash;even though they be divine beings&mdash;means a
+multitude, that is a diversity, of ideas. Diversity of ideas,
+difference of opinion, is what is implied by every mythology which
+tells of disputes and wars between the gods. Every god, who thus
+disputed and fought with other gods, must have felt that he had right
+on his side, or else have fought for the sake of fighting.
+Consequently the gods of polytheism are either destitute of morality,
+or divided in opinion as to what is right. In neither case, therefore,
+are the gods, of whom mythology tells, the beings, superior to man,
+who, from the beginning, were present in the common consciousness to
+be worshipped. From the outset, the object of the community's worship
+had been conceived as a moral power. If, then, the many gods of
+polytheism were either destitute or disregardful of morality, they
+could not be the moral power of which the common consciousness had
+been dimly aware: that moral power, that moral personality, must be
+other than they. As the moral consciousness of the community
+discriminated fetishes from gods and tended to rule out fetishes from
+the sphere of religion; so too, eventually, the moral consciousness of
+the community came to be offended by the incompatibility between <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span>the
+moral ideal and the conception of a multitude of gods at variance with
+each other. If the common consciousness was slow in coming to
+recognise the unity of the Godhead&mdash;and it was slower in some people
+than in others&mdash;the unity was logically implied, from the beginning,
+in the conception of a personal power, greater and higher than man,
+and having the good of the community at heart. The history of religion
+is, in effect, from one point of view, the story of the process by
+which this conception, however dim, blurred or vague, at first, tends
+to become clarified and self-consistent.</p>
+
+<p>That, however, is not the only point of view from which the history of
+religion can, or ought to be, regarded. So long as we look at it from
+that point of view, we shall be in danger of seeing nothing in the
+history of religion but an intellectual process, and nothing in
+religion itself but a mental conception. There is, however, another
+element in religion, as is generally recognised; and that an emotional
+element, as is usually admitted. What however is the nature of that
+emotion, is a question on which there has always been diversity of
+opinion. The beings, who figured in the common consciousness as gods,
+were apprehended by the common consciousness as powers superior to
+man; and certainly as powers capable of inflicting suffering on the
+community. As such, then, they must have been approached with an
+emotion of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span>the nature of reverence, awe or fear. The important, the
+determining, fact, however, is that they were approached. The emotion,
+therefore, which prompted the community to approach them, is at any
+rate distinguishable from the mere fright which would have kept the
+community as far away from these powers as possible. The emotion which
+prompted approach could not have been fear, pure and simple. It must
+have been more in the nature of awe or reverence; both of which
+feelings are clearly distinguishable from fear. Thus, we may fear
+disease or disgrace; but the fear we feel carries with it neither awe
+nor reverence. Again, awe is an inhibitive feeling, it is a feeling
+which&mdash;as in the case of the awe-struck person&mdash;rather prevents than
+promotes action or movement. And the determining fact about the
+religious emotion is that it was the emotion with which the community
+approached its gods. That emotion is now, and probably always was,
+reverential in character. The occasion, on which a community
+approaches its gods, often is, and doubtless often was, a time when
+misfortune had befallen the community. The misfortune was viewed as a
+visitation of the god's wrath upon his community; and fear&mdash;that 'fear
+of the Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom'&mdash;doubtless played a
+large part in the complex emotion which stirred the community, not to
+run away but to approach the god <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span>for the purpose of appeasing his
+wrath. In the complexity of an emotion which led to action of this
+kind, we must recognise not merely fear but some trust and
+confidence&mdash;so much, at least, as prevented the person who experienced
+it from running away simply. The emotion is not too complex for man,
+in however primitive a stage of development: it is not more complex
+than that which brings a dog to his master, though it knows it is
+going to be thrashed.</p>
+
+<p>That some trust and confidence is indispensable in the complex feeling
+with which a community approaches its gods, for the purpose of
+appeasing their wrath&mdash;still more, for beseeching favours from
+them&mdash;seems indisputable. But we must not exaggerate it. Wherever
+there are gods at all, they are regarded by the community as beings
+who can be approached: so much confidence, at least, is placed in them
+by the community that believes in them. Even if they are offended and
+wrathful, the community is confident that they can be appeased: the
+community places so much trust in them. Indeed its trust goes even
+further: it is sure that they do not take offence without reasonable
+grounds. If they display wrath against the community and send calamity
+upon it, it is, and in the opinion of the community, can only be,
+because some member of the community has done that which he should not
+have done. The gods may be, on occasion, wrathful; <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span>but they are just.
+They are from the beginning moral beings&mdash;according to such standard
+of morality as the community possesses&mdash;and it is breaches of the
+tribe's customary morality that their wrath is directed against. They
+are, from the beginning, and for long afterwards in the history of
+religion, strict to mark what is amiss, and, in that sense, they are
+jealous gods. And this aspect of the Godhead it is which fills the
+larger part of the field of religious consciousness, not only in the
+case of peoples who have failed to recognise the unity of the Godhead,
+but even in the case of a people like the Jews, who did recognise it.
+The other aspect of the Godhead, as the God, not merely of mercy and
+forgiveness, but of love, was an aspect fully revealed in Christianity
+alone, of all the religions in the world.</p>
+
+<p>But the love God displays to all his children, to the prodigal son as
+well as to others, is not a mere attribute assigned to Him. It is not
+a mere quality with which one religion may invest Him, and of which
+another religion, with equal right, may divest Him. The idea of God
+does not consist merely of attributes and qualities, so that, if you
+strip off all the attributes and qualities, nothing is left, and the
+idea is shown to be without content, meaning or reality.</p>
+
+<p>The Godhead has been, in the common consciousness, from the beginning,
+a being, a personal being, greater than man; and it is as such that He
+has <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span>manifested Himself in the common consciousness, from the beginning
+until the present day. To this personality, as to others, attributes
+and qualities may be falsely ascribed, which are inconsistent with one
+another and are none of His. Some of the attributes thus falsely
+ascribed may be discovered, in the course of the history of religion,
+to have been falsely ascribed; and they will then be set aside. Thus,
+fetishism ascribed, or sought to ascribe, to the Godhead, the quality
+of willingness to promote even the anti-social desires of the owner of
+the fetish. And fetishism exfoliated, or peeled off from the religious
+organism. Anthropomorphism, which ascribed to the divine personality
+the parts and passions of man, along with a power greater than man's to
+violate morality, is gradually dropped, as its inconsistency with the
+idea of God comes gradually to be recognised and loathed. So too with
+polytheism: a pantheon which is divided against itself cannot stand.
+Thus, fetishism, anthropomorphism and polytheism ascribe qualities to
+the Godhead, which are shown to be attributes assigned to the Godhead
+and imposed upon it from without, for eventually they are found by
+experience to be incompatible with the idea of God as it is revealed in
+the common consciousness.</p>
+
+<p>On the other hand, the process of the history of religion, the process
+of the manifestation or revelation of the Godhead, does not proceed
+solely by this <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span>negative method, or method of exclusion. If an
+attribute, such as that of human form, or of complicity in anti-social
+purposes, is ascribed, by anthropomorphism or fetishism, to the divine
+personality, and is eventually felt by the common consciousness to be
+incompatible with the idea of God, the result is not merely that the
+attribute in question drops off, and leaves the idea of the divine
+personality exactly where it was, and what it was, before the
+attribute had been foisted on it. The incompatibility of the quality,
+falsely ascribed or assigned, becomes&mdash;if, and when, it does
+become&mdash;manifest and intolerable, just in proportion as the idea of
+God, which has always been present, however vaguely and ill-defined,
+in the common consciousness, comes to manifest itself more definitely.
+The attribution, to the divine personality, of qualities, which are
+eventually found incompatible with it, may prove the occasion of the
+more precise and definite manifestation; we may say that action
+implies reaction, and so false ideas provoke true ones, but the false
+ideas do not create the new ones. The false ideas may stimulate closer
+attention to the actual facts of the common consciousness and thus may
+stimulate the formation of truer ideas about them, by leading to a
+concentration of attention upon the actual facts. But it is from this
+closer attention, this concentration of attention, that the newer and
+truer knowledge comes, and not from the false ideas. What we speak
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span>of, from one point of view, as closer attention to the facts of the
+common consciousness, may, from another point of view, be spoken of as
+an increasing manifestation, or a clearer revelation, of the divine
+personality, revealed or manifested to the common consciousness. Those
+are two views, or two points of view, of one and the same process. But
+whichever view we take of it, the process does not proceed solely by
+the negative method of exclusion: it is a process which results in the
+unfolding and disclosure, not merely of what is in the common
+consciousness, at any given moment, but of what is implied in the
+divine personality revealed to the common consciousness. If we choose
+to speak of this unfolding or disclosure as evolution, the process,
+which the history of religion undertakes to set forth, will be the
+evolution of the idea of God. But, in that case, the process which we
+designate by the name of evolution, will be a process of disclosure
+and revelation. Disclosure implies that there is something to
+disclose; revelation, that there is something to be revealed to the
+common consciousness&mdash;the presence of the Godhead, of divine
+personality.</p>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="II" id="II"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>II<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE IDEA OF GOD IN MYTHOLOGY</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p>The idea of God is to be found, it will be generally admitted, not
+only in monotheistic religions, but in polytheistic religions also;
+and, as polytheisms have developed out of polydaemonism, that is to
+say, as the personal beings or powers of polydaemonism have, in course
+of time, come to possess proper names and a personal history, some
+idea of divine personality must be admitted to be present in
+polydaemonism as well as in polytheism; and, in the same way, some
+idea of a personality greater than human may be taken to lie at the
+back of both polydaemonism and fetishism.</p>
+
+<p>If we wish to understand what ideas are in a man's mind, we may infer
+them from the words that he speaks and from the way in which he acts.
+The most natural and the most obvious course is to start from what he
+says. And that is the course which was followed by students of the
+history of religion, when they desired to ascertain what idea exactly
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span>man has had of his gods. They had recourse, for the information they
+wanted, to mythology. Later on, indeed, they proceeded to enquire into
+what man did, into the ritual which he observed in approaching his
+gods; and, in the next chapter, we will follow them in that enquiry.
+But in this chapter we have to ask what light mythology throws upon
+the idea man has had of his gods.</p>
+
+<p>Before doing so, however, we cannot but notice that mythology and
+polytheism go together. Fetishism does not produce any mythology.
+Doubtless, the owner of a fetish which acts knows and can tell of the
+wonderful things it has done. But those anecdotes do not get taken up
+into the common stock of knowledge; nor are they handed down by the
+common consciousness to all succeeding generations of the community.
+Mythology, like language, is the work, and is a possession, of the
+common consciousness.</p>
+
+<p>Polydaemonism, like fetishism, does not produce mythology; but, for a
+different reason. The beings worshipped in the period of polydaemonism
+are beings who have not yet come to possess personal names, and
+consequently cannot well have a personal history attached to them. The
+difficulty is not indeed an absolute impossibility. Tales can be told,
+and at a certain stage in the history of fiction, especially in the
+pre-historic stage, tales are told, in which the hero has no proper
+name: the period is 'once upon <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span>a time,' and the hero is 'a man'
+<i>simpliciter</i>. But myths are not told about 'a god' <i>simpliciter</i>. In
+mythology the hero of the myth is not 'a god,' in the sense of any god
+you like, but this particular, specified god. And the reason is clear.
+In fiction the artist creates the hero as well as the tale; and the
+primitive teller of tales did not find it always necessary to invent a
+name for the hero he created. The hero could, and did, get along for
+some time without any proper name. But with mythology the case is
+different. The personal being, superior to man, of whom the myth is
+told, is not the creation of the teller of the tale: he is a being
+known by the community to exist. He cannot therefore, when he is the
+hero of a myth, be described as 'a god&mdash;any god you like.' Nor is the
+myth a tale which could be told of any god whatever: if a myth is a
+tale, at any rate it is a tale which can be told of none other god but
+this. Indeed, a myth is not a tale: it is an incident&mdash;or string of
+incidents&mdash;in the personal history of a particular person, or being,
+superior to man.</p>
+
+<p>It is then as polydaemonism passes into polytheism, as the beings of
+the one come to acquire personal names and personal history, and so to
+become the gods of the other, that mythology arises. It is under
+polytheism that mythology reaches its most luxuriant growth; and when
+polytheism disappears, mythology tends to disappear with it. Thus, the
+light which <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span>mythology may be expected to throw on the idea of God is
+one, which, however it may illumine the polytheistic idea of God, will
+not be found to shine far beyond the area of polytheism.</p>
+
+<p>Myths then are narratives, in which the doings of some god or gods are
+related. And those gods existed in the belief of the community, before
+tales were told, or could be told, about them. Myths therefore are the
+outcome of reflection&mdash;of reflection about the gods and their
+relations to one another, or to men, or to the world. Mythology is not
+the source of man's belief of the gods. Man did not begin by telling
+tales about beings whom he knew to be the creations of his own
+imagination, and then gradually fall into the error of supposing them
+to be, after all, not creatures of his own imagination but real
+beings. Mythology is not even the source of man's belief in a
+plurality of gods: man found gods everywhere, in every external object
+or phenomenon, because he was looking for God everywhere, and to every
+object, in turn, he addressed the question, 'Art thou there?'
+Mythology was not the source of polytheism. Polytheism was the source
+of mythology. Myths preserve to us the reflections which men have made
+about their gods; and reflection, on any subject, cannot take place
+until the thing is there to be reflected upon. The result of prolonged
+reflection may be, indeed must be, to modify the ideas from which we
+started, for <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span>the better&mdash;or, it may be, for the worse. But, even so,
+the result of reflection is not to create the ideas from which it
+started.</p>
+
+<p>From this point of view, it becomes impossible to accept the theory,
+put forward by Max M&uuml;ller, that mythology is due to 'disease of
+language.' According to his theory, simple statements were made of
+such ordinary, natural processes as those of the rising, or the
+setting, of the sun. Then, by disease of language, the meaning of the
+words or epithets, by which the sun or the dawn were, at the
+beginning, designated or described, passed out of mind. The epithets
+then came to be regarded as proper names; and so the people, amongst
+which these simple statements were originally made, found itself
+eventually in possession of a number of tales told of persons
+possessing proper names and doing marvellous things. Thus, Max
+M&uuml;ller's theory not only accounted for the origin of tales told about
+the gods: it also explained the origin of the gods, about whom the
+tales were told. It is a theory of the origin, not merely of
+mythology, but also of polytheism.</p>
+
+<p>Thus, even on Max M&uuml;ller's theory, mythology is the outcome of
+reflection&mdash;of reflection upon the doings and behaviour of the sun,
+the clouds, wind, fire etc. But, on his theory, the sun, moon etc.,
+were not, at first, regarded as persons, at all: it was merely owing
+to 'disease of language' that they <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span>came to be so regarded. Only if we
+make this original assumption, can we accept the conclusions deduced
+from it; and no student now accepts the assumption: it is one which is
+forbidden by the well-established facts of animism. Sun, moon, wind
+and fire, everything that acts, or is supposed to act, is regarded by
+early man as animated by personal power. If, therefore, the external
+objects, to which man turned with his question, 'Art thou there?' were
+regarded by him, from the beginning, as animated by personal power,
+the theory that they were not so regarded falls to the ground; and,
+consequently, we cannot accept it as accounting for the origin of
+polytheism.</p>
+
+<p>Doubtless, during the time of its vogue, Max M&uuml;ller's theory was
+accepted precisely because it did profess to account for the origin of
+polytheism, and because it denied polytheism any religious value or
+meaning whatever. On the theory, polytheism did not originate from any
+religious sentiment whatever, but from a disease of language. And this
+was a view which naturally commended itself to those who were ready to
+say and believe that polytheism is not religion at all. But the
+consequences of saying this are such as to make any science of
+religion, or indeed any history of religion, impossible. Where the
+idea of God is to be found, there some religion exists; and to say
+that, in polytheism, no idea of God can be <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span>found, is out of the
+question. If then polytheism is a stage in the history of religious
+belief, we have to consider it in relation to the other stages of
+religious belief, which preceded or followed it. We have to relate the
+idea of God, as it appeared in polytheism, with the idea as it
+appeared in other stages of belief. In order to do this, we must first
+discover what the polytheistic idea of God is; and for that purpose we
+must turn, at any rate at first, to the myths which embody the
+reflections of polytheists upon the attributes and actions of the
+Godhead, or of those beings, superior to man, whose existence was
+accepted by the common consciousness. It may be that the reflections
+upon the idea of God, which are embodied in mythology, have so tended
+to degrade the idea of God, that religious advance upon the lines of
+polytheism became impossible, just as the conception of God as a being
+who would promote the anti-social wishes of an individual, rendered
+religious advance upon the lines of fetishism impossible. In that
+case, religion would forsake the line of polytheism, as it had
+previously abandoned that of fetishism.</p>
+
+<p>A certain presumption that myths tend to the degradation of religion
+is created by the mere use of the term 'mythology.' It has come to be
+a dyslogistic term, partly because all myths are lies, but still more
+because some of them are ignoble lies. It becomes necessary,
+therefore, to remind ourselves <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span>that, though we see them to be untrue,
+they were not regarded as untrue by those who believed in them; and
+that many of them were not ignoble. Aeschylus and Sophocles are
+witnesses, not to be disbelieved, on these points. In their writings
+we have the reflections of polytheists upon the actions and attributes
+of the gods. But the reflections made by Aeschylus and Sophocles, and
+their treatment of the myths, must be distinguished from the myths,
+which they found to hand, just as the very different treatment and
+reflection, which the myths received from Euripides, must be
+distinguished from them. In both cases, the treatment, which the myths
+met with from the tragedians, is to be distinguished from the myths,
+as they were current among the community before and after the plays
+were performed. The writings of the tragedians show what might be made
+of the myths by great poets. They do not show what the myths were in
+the common consciousness that made them. And the history of mythology
+after the time of the three great tragedians makes it clear enough
+that even so noble a writer as Aeschylus could not impart to mythology
+any direction other than that determined for it by the conditions
+under which it originated, developed and ran its course.</p>
+
+<p>Mythology is the work and the product of the common consciousness. The
+generation existing at any time receives it from preceding
+generations; <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span>civilised generations from barbarous, and barbarous
+generations from their savage predecessors. If it grows in the process
+of transmission, and so reflects to some extent the changes which take
+place in the common consciousness, it changes but little in character.
+The common consciousness itself changes with exceeding slowness; it
+retains what it has received with a conservatism like that of
+children's minds; and, what it adds must, from the nature of the case,
+be modelled on that which it has received, and be of a piece with it.
+But, though the common consciousness changes but slowly, it does
+change: with the change from savagery to civilisation there goes moral
+development. Some of the myths, which are re-told from one generation
+to another, may be capable of becoming civilised and moralised in
+proportion as do those who tell them; but some are not. These latter
+are incidents in the personal history of the gods, which, if told at
+all, can only be told, as they had been told from the beginning, in
+all their repulsiveness. They survive, in virtue of the tenacity and
+conservatism of the common consciousness; and, as survivals, they
+testify to the moral development which has taken place in the very
+community which conserves them. By them the eye of modern science
+measures the development and the difference between the stage of
+society which originally produced them and the stage which begins to
+be troubled by them. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span>They are valuable for the purposes of modern
+science because they are evidence of the continuity with which the
+later stages have developed from the earlier; and, also, because they
+are the first outward indications of the discovery which was
+eventually to be made, of the difference between mythology and
+religion&mdash;a difference which existed from the beginning of mythology,
+and all through its growth, though it existed in the sphere of feeling
+long before it found expression for itself in words.</p>
+
+<p>The course of history has shown, as a matter of fact, that these
+repulsive and disgusting myths could not be rooted out without
+uprooting the whole system of mythology. But the course of history has
+also shown that religion could continue to exist after the destruction
+of mythology, as it had done before its birth. But, of this the
+generations to whom myths had been transmitted and for whom mythology
+was the accepted belief, could not be aware. In their eyes the attempt
+to discredit some myths appeared to involve&mdash;as it did really
+involve&mdash;the overthrow of the whole system of mythology. If they
+thought&mdash;as they undoubtedly did think&mdash;that the destruction of
+mythology was the same thing as the destruction of religion, their
+error was one of a class of errors into which the human mind is at no
+time exempt from falling. And they had this further excuse, that the
+destruction of mythology did logically and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span>necessarily imply the
+destruction of polytheism. Polytheism and mythology were complementary
+parts of their idea of the Godhead. Demonstrations therefore of the
+inconsistency and immorality involved in their idea were purely
+negative and destructive; and they were, accordingly, unavailing until
+a higher idea of the unity of the Godhead was forthcoming.</p>
+
+<p>Until that time, polytheism and mythology struggled on. They were
+burdened, and, as time went on, they were overburdened, with the
+weight of the repulsive myths which could not be denied and disowned,
+but could only be thrust out of sight as far, and as long, as
+possible. These myths, however offensive they became in the long run
+to the conscience of the community, were, in their origin, narratives
+which were not offensive to the common consciousness, for the simple
+reason that they were the work of the common consciousness, approved
+by it and transmitted for ages under the seal of its approval. If they
+were not offensive to the common consciousness at the time when they
+originated, and only became so later, the reason is that the morality
+of the community was less developed at the time of their origin than
+it came to be subsequently. If they became offensive, it was because
+the morality of the community tended to advance, while they remained
+what they had always been.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span>It may, perhaps, be asked, why the morality of the community should
+tend to change, and the myths of the community should not? The reason
+seems to be that myths are learned by the child in the nursery, and
+morality is learned by the man in the world. The family is a smaller
+community than the village community, the city, or the state; and the
+smaller the community, the more tenacious it is of its customs and
+traditions. The toys of Athenian children, which have been discovered,
+are, all, the toys which children continue to use to this day. In the
+Iliad children built sand-castles on the sea-shore as they do now; and
+the little child tugged at its mother's dress then as now. Children
+then as now would insist that the tales told to them should always be
+told exactly as they were first told. Of the discrepancy between the
+morality exhibited by the heroes of nursery-tales and that practised
+by the grown-up world the child has no knowledge, for the sufficient
+reason that he is not as yet one of the grown-up world. When he enters
+the grown-up world, he may learn the difference; but he can only enter
+the grown-up world, if there is one for him to enter; and, in the
+childhood of man, there is none which he can enter, for the adults
+themselves, though of larger growth, are children still in mind.
+Custom and tradition rule the adult community then as absolutely as
+they rule the child community. In course of time, the adult community
+may break the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span>bonds of custom and tradition; but the community which
+consists of children treasures them and hands them on. Within the
+tribe, thenceforth, there are two communities, that of the adults and
+that of the children. The one community is as continuous with itself
+as the other; but the children's community is highly conservative of
+what it has received and of what it hands on&mdash;and that for the simple
+reason that children will be children still. It is this homogeneity of
+the children's community which enables it to preserve its customs,
+traditions and beliefs. And as long as the community of adults is
+homogeneous, it also departs but little from the customs, traditions
+and beliefs, which it has inherited from the same source as the
+children's community has inherited them. The two communities, the
+children's and the adults', originate and develop within the larger
+community of the tribe. They differentiate, at first, with exceeding
+slowness; the children's community changes more slowly even than the
+adults'&mdash;its weapons continue to be the bow and arrow, long after
+adults have discarded them; and the bull-roarer continues sacred in
+its eyes to a period when the adult community has not only discarded
+its use but forgotten its meaning. In its tales and myths it may
+preserve the memory of a stage of morality which the adult community
+has outgrown, and has left behind as far it has left behind the
+bull-roarer or the bow <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span>and arrow. And the stage of morality, of which
+it preserves the memory, is one from which the adult community in past
+time emerged. Having emerged, indeed, it found itself, eventually,
+when made to look back, compelled to condemn that which it looked back
+upon.</p>
+
+<p>What, then, were these myths, with which the moralised community might
+find itself confronted? They were tales which originated in the mind
+of the community when it was yet immature. They preserve to us the
+reflections of the immature mind about the gods and what they did. And
+it is because the minds, which made these reflections, were immature,
+that the myths which embodied or expressed these reflections, were
+such as might be accepted by immature minds, but were eventually found
+intolerable by more mature minds. It may, perhaps, be said&mdash;and it may
+be said with justice&mdash;that the reflections even of the immature mind
+are not all, of necessity, erroneous, for it is from them that the
+whole of modern knowledge has been evolved or developed, just as the
+steam-plough may be traced back to the primitive digging-stick:
+reflection upon anything may lead to better knowledge of the thing, as
+well as to false notions about it. But the nations, which have
+outgrown mythology, have cast it aside because in the long run they
+became convinced that the notions it embodied were false notions. And
+they reached that conclusion <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span>on this point in the same way and for
+the same reason as they reached the same conclusion in other matters;
+for there is only one way. There is only one way and one test by which
+it is possible to determine whether the inferences we have drawn about
+a thing are true or false, and that is the test of experience. That
+alone can settle the question whether the thing actually does or does
+not act in the way, or display the qualities alleged. If it proves in
+our experience to act in the way, or to display the qualities, which
+our reflection led us to surmise, then our conception of the thing is
+both corrected and enlarged, that is to say, the thing proves to be
+both more and other than it was at first supposed to be. If experience
+shows that it is not what we surmised, does not act in the way or
+display the qualities our reflection led us to expect, then, as the
+conclusions we reached are wrong, our reflections were on a wrong
+line, and must have started from a false conception or an imperfect
+idea of the thing.</p>
+
+<p>It is collision of this kind between the conclusions of mythology and
+the idea of the gods, as the guardians of morality, that rouses
+suspicion in a community, still polytheistic, first that the
+conclusions embodied in mythology are on a wrong line, and next that
+they must have started from a false conception or imperfect idea of
+the Godhead. By its fruits is the error found to be error&mdash;by the
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span>immorality which it ascribes to the very gods whose function it is to
+guard morality. Mythology is the process of reflection which leads to
+conclusions eventually discarded as false, demonstrably false to
+anyone who compared them with the idea of the Godhead which he had in
+his own soul. Mythology worked out the consequences of the assumption
+that it is to the external world we must look for the divine
+personality of whose presence in the common consciousness, the
+community has at all times, been, even though dimly, aware. Doubts as
+to the truth of myths were first aroused by the inconsistency between
+the myths told and the justice and morality which had been from the
+beginning the very essence of divine personality. The doubts arose in
+the minds and hearts of individual thinkers; and, if those individuals
+had been the only members of the community who conceived justice and
+morality to be essential qualities of the divine personality, then it
+would have been necessary for such thinkers first to convert the
+community to that view. Now, one of the consequences of the prevalence
+of mythology is that the community, amongst whom it flourishes, comes
+to be, if not doubtful, then at times forgetful, of the fact that the
+gods of the community are moral beings and the guardians of morality.
+That fact had to be dismissed from attention, for the time being,
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span>whenever certain myths were related. And, the more frequently a fact
+is dismissed from attention, the less likely it is to reappear on the
+surface of consciousness. Thus, the larger the part played by
+mythology in the field of the common consciousness, the greater its
+tendency to drive out from attention those moral qualities which were
+of the essence of divine personality. But, however large the part
+played by mythology, and however great its tendency to obliterate the
+moral qualities of the gods, it rarely, if indeed ever, entirely
+obliterates them from the field of the common consciousness.
+Consequently, the individual thinkers, who become painfully aware of
+the contrast and opposition between the morality, which is essential
+to a divine personality, and the immorality ascribed to the gods in
+some myths, have not to deal with a community which denies that the
+gods have any morality whatever, but with a community which is ready
+to admit the morality of the gods, whenever its attention is called
+thereto. Thus, though it may be that it is in this or that individual
+that the inconsistency between the moral qualities, which belong to
+the gods, and the immoral actions which mythology ascribes to the
+gods, first manifests itself, to his distress and disturbance, still
+what has happened in his case happens in the case of some, and may
+happen in the case of all, other members <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span>of the community. The
+inconsistency then comes to exist not merely for the individual but
+for the common consciousness.</p>
+
+<p>It was the immorality of mythology which first drew the attention of
+believers in polytheism to the inconsistency between the goodness,
+which was felt to be of the essence of the divine nature, and the
+vileness, which was imputed to them in some myths; but it is the
+irrationality and absurdity of mythology that seems, to the modern
+mind, to be its most uniform characteristic. So long as the only
+mythology that was studied was the mythology of Indo-European peoples,
+it was assumed, without question, that the myths could not really be,
+or originally have been, irrational and absurd: they must conceal,
+under their seeming absurdity and outwardly irrational appearance,
+some truth. They must have had, originally, some esoteric meaning.
+They must have conveyed&mdash;allegorically, indeed&mdash;some profound truths,
+known or revealed to sages of old, which it was the business of modern
+students to re-discover in mythology. And accordingly profound
+truths&mdash;scientific, cosmographic, astronomical, geographical,
+philosophic or religious&mdash;were discovered. There was no knowledge
+which the early ancestors of the human race were not supposed to have
+possessed, and their descendants to have forgotten.</p>
+
+<p>But, when it came to be discovered, and accepted, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span>that the ancestors
+of the Indo-European peoples had once been savages, and that savages,
+all the world over, possessed myths, it became impossible to maintain
+that such savages possessed in their mythologies treasures of truth
+either scientific or religious. Myths have no esoteric meaning.
+Obviously we must take them to be what we find them to be amongst
+present-day savages, that is, absurd and irrational stories, with no
+secret meaning behind them. Yet it is difficult, indeed impossible, to
+accept this as the last word on the subject. The stories are rejected
+by us, because they are patently absurd and irrational. But the savage
+does not reject them: he accepts them. And he could not accept and
+believe them, if he, as well as we, found them irrational and absurd.
+In a word, it is the same with the irrationality as it is with the
+immorality of mythology: myths are the work and the product of the
+common consciousness. As such, myths cannot be viewed as irrational by
+the common consciousness in which they originated, and by which they
+were accepted and transmitted, any more than they were regarded as
+immoral.</p>
+
+<p>Obviously, the common consciousness which produces mythology cannot
+pronounce the myths, when it produces them, and accepts them, absurd.
+On the contrary, they are rational, in its eyes, and according to its
+level of understanding, however absurd the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span>growth of knowledge may
+eventually show them to be. Myths, then, in their origin, are told and
+heard, narrated and accepted, as rational and intelligible. As
+narrated, they are narratives: can we say that they are anything more?
+or are they tales told simply for the pleasure of telling? Tales of
+this latter kind, pure fiction, are to be found wherever man is. But,
+we have already seen some points in which myths differ from tales of
+this kind: in fiction the artist creates his hero, but in myths the
+being superior to man, of whom the story is told is not the creation
+of the teller of the tale; he is a being known to the community to
+exist. Another point of difference is that a myth belongs to the god
+of whom it is told and cannot properly be told of any other god. These
+are two respects in which the imagination is limited, two points on
+which, in the case of myths, the creative imagination is, so to speak,
+nailed down. Is it subject to any further restriction in the case of
+myths? Granted that an adventure, when once it has been set down to
+one god, may not be set down to another, is the creative imagination
+free, in the case of mythology, as it is in the case of pure fiction,
+to invent the incidents and adventures, which eventually&mdash;in a lexicon
+of mythology&mdash;go to make up the biography of the god? The freedom, it
+appears, is of a strictly limited character.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span>It is an induction, as wide as the world&mdash;being based on mythologies
+from all parts of the world&mdash;that myths are aetiological, that their
+purpose is to give the reason of things, to explain the origin of
+fire, agriculture, civilisation, the world&mdash;of anything, in fact, that
+to the savage seems to require explanation. In the animistic period,
+man found gods everywhere because everywhere he was looking for gods.
+To every object that arrested his attention, in the external world, he
+put, or might put, the question, 'Art thou there?' Every happening
+that arrested the attention of a whole community, and provoked from
+the common consciousness the affirmation, 'Thou art there,' was, by
+that affirmation, accepted as the doing of a god. But neither at this
+stage, nor for long after, is there any myth. The being, whose
+presence is thus affirmed, has at first no name: his personality is of
+the faintest, his individuality, the vaguest. Mythology does not begin
+until the question is put, 'Why has the god done this thing?' A myth
+consists, or originally consisted, of the reason which was found and
+adopted by the common consciousness as the reason why the god did what
+he did do. It is in this sense that myths are aetiological. The
+imagination which produces them is, in a sense, a 'scientific
+imagination.' It works within limits. The data on which it works are
+that this thing was done, or is done, by this god; and the problem set
+to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span>the mythological imagination is, 'Why did he, or does he, do it?'
+The stories which were invented to answer this question constituted
+mythology; and the fact that myths were invented for the purpose of
+answering this question distinguishes them from stories in the
+invention of which the imagination was not subject to restriction, was
+not tied down to this god and to this action of his, and was not
+limited to the sole task of imagining an answer to the question, 'Why
+did he do it?' All myths are narratives, but not all narratives are
+myths. Some narratives have men alone for their heroes. They are
+imaginative but not mythological. Some narratives are about gods and
+what they did. Their purpose is to explain why the gods did what they
+did do, and those narratives are mythological.</p>
+
+<p>It may, perhaps, seem that the imagination of early man would from the
+first be set to work to invent myths in answer to the question, 'Why
+did the god do this thing?' But, as a matter of fact, man can get on
+for a long time without mythology. A striking instance of this is
+afforded by the <i>di indigites</i> of Italy. Over everything man did, or
+suffered, from his birth to his death, one of these gods or goddesses
+presided. The Deus Vagitanus opened the lips of the new-born infant
+when it uttered its first cry; the Dea Ossipago made the growing
+child's bones stout and strong; the Deus <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span>Locutius made it speak
+clearly; the goddess Viriplaca restored harmony between husband and
+wife who had quarrelled; the Dea Orbona closed a man's eyes at death.
+These <i>di indigites</i> had shrines and received sacrifices. They were
+distinguished into gods and goddesses. Their names were proper names,
+though they are but words descriptive of the function which the deity
+performed or presided over. Yet though these <i>di indigites</i> are gods,
+personal gods, to whom prayer and sacrifice are offered, they have no
+mythology attached to them; no myths are told about them.</p>
+
+<p>The fact thus forced on our notice by the <i>di indigites</i> of Rome
+should be enough to warn us that mythology does not of necessity
+spring up, as an immediate consequence of the worship of the gods. It
+may even suggest a reason why mythology must be a secondary, rather
+than a primary consequence of worship. The Romans were practical, and
+so are savages: if they asked the question, 'Why did this god do this
+thing?' they asked it in no spirit of speculation but for a practical,
+common-sense reason: because they did not want this thing done again.
+And they offered sacrifices to the god or goddess, with that end in
+view. The things with regard to which the savage community first asks
+the question, 'Why did the god do it?' are things disastrous to the
+community&mdash;plague or famine. The answer to the question is <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span>really
+implied by the terms in which the question is stated: the community,
+or some member of the community has transgressed; he must be
+discovered and punished. So long and so far as the question is thus
+put and thus answered, there is little room for mythology to grow in.
+And it did not grow round the <i>di indigites</i> in Italy, or round
+corresponding deities in other countries.</p>
+
+<p>But the question, 'Why did the god do it?' is susceptible, on
+reflection, of another kind of answer. And from minds of a more
+reflective cast than the Roman, it received answer in the form of
+mythology, of aetiological myths. Mythology is the work of reflection:
+it is when the community has time and inclination to reflect upon its
+gods and their doings that mythology arises in the common
+consciousness. For everything which happens to him, early man has one
+explanation, if the thing is such as seems to him to require
+explanation, and the explanation is that this thing is the doing of
+some god. If the thing that arrests attention is some disaster, which
+calls for remedy, the community approaches the god with prayer and
+sacrifice; its object is practical, not speculative; and no myth
+arises. But if the thing that arrests attention is not one which calls
+for action, on the part of the community, but one which stimulates
+curiosity and provokes reflection, then the reflective answer to the
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span>question, why has this thing been done by whatever god that did it, is
+a myth.</p>
+
+<p>Thus the mood, or state of mind, in which mythology originates is
+clearly different from that in which the community approaches its
+offended gods for the purpose of appeasing them. The purpose in the
+latter case is atonement and reconciliation. The state of mind in the
+former case is one of enquiry. The emotion, of mingled fear and hope,
+which constitutes the one state of mind, is clearly different from the
+spirit of enquiry which characterises and constitutes the other state
+of mind. The one mood is undeniably religious; the other, not so. In
+the one mood, the community feels itself to be in the presence of its
+gods; in the other it is reflecting and enquiring about them. In the
+one case the community appears before its god; in the other it is
+reflectively using its idea of god, for the purpose of explaining
+things that call for explanation. But the idea of God, when used in
+this way, for the purpose of explaining things by means of myths, is
+modified by the use it is put to. It is not merely that everything
+which happens is explained, if it requires explanation, as the doing
+of some god; but the motives which early man ascribed, in his
+mythological moments, to the gods&mdash;motives which only undeveloped man
+could have ascribed to them&mdash;became part of the idea of God on which
+mythology worked <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span>and with which myths had to do. The idea of god thus
+gradually developed in polytheistic myths, the accumulated reflections
+of savage, barbarous and semi-barbarous ancestors, tends eventually to
+provoke reaction. But why? Not merely because the myths are immoral
+and irrational. But because of the essential impiety of imputing
+immoral and irrational acts to the divine personality. Plainly, then,
+those thinkers and writers who were painfully impressed by such
+impiety, who were acutely conscious that divine personality was
+irreconcilable with immorality and irrationality, had some other idea
+of God than the mythological. We may go further: we may safely say
+that the average man would not have been perturbed, as he was, by
+Socrates, for instance, had he, also, not found within him some other
+idea of God than the mythological. And we can understand, to some
+extent, how this should be, if we call to mind that, though mythology
+grows and luxuriates, still the worship of the gods goes on. That is
+to say, the community, through it all, continues to approach its gods,
+for the purpose, and with the emotion of mingled fear and hope, with
+which it had always come into the presence of its gods. It is the
+irreconcilability of the mood of emotion, which is essentially
+religious, with the mythological mode of reflective thought, which is
+not, that tends to bring about the religious reaction against
+mythology. It is not however until <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[56]</a></span>the divergence between religion
+and mythology has become considerable that the irreconcilability
+becomes manifest. And it is in the experience of some individual, and
+not in the common consciousness, that this irreconcilability is first
+discovered. That discovery it is which makes the discoverer realise
+that it is not merely when he comes before the presence of his gods in
+their temples, but that, whenever his heart rises on the tide of
+mingled fear, hope and thanksgiving, he comes into the presence of his
+God. Having sought for the divine personality in all the external
+objects of the world around him in the end he learns, what was the
+truth from the beginning,&mdash;that it is in his heart he has access to
+his God.</p>
+
+<p>The belief in gods does not of necessity result in a mythology. The
+instance of the <i>di indigites</i> of Italy is there to show that it is no
+inevitable result. But mythology, wherever it is found, is of itself
+sufficient proof that gods are, or have been, believed in; it is the
+outcome of reflection and enquiry about the gods, whom the community
+approaches, with mingled feelings of hope and fear, and worships with
+sacrifice and prayer. Now, a mythology, or perhaps we should rather
+say fragments of a mythology, may continue to exist as survivals, long
+after belief in the gods, of whom the myths were originally told, has
+changed, or even passed away entirely. Such traces of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[57]</a></span>gods dethroned
+are to be found in the folk-lore of most Christian peoples. Indeed,
+not only are traces of bygone mythology to be found in Christendom;
+but rites and customs, which once formed part of the worship of now
+forgotten gods; or it may be that only the names of the gods survive
+unrecognised, as in the names of the days of the week. The existence
+of such survivals in Europe is known; their history has been traced;
+their origin is undoubted. When, then, in other quarters of the globe
+than Europe, amongst peoples which are as old as any European people,
+though they have no recorded history, we find fragments of mythology,
+or of ritual, or mere names of gods, without the myths and the ritual
+which attach elsewhere to gods, the presumption is that here too we
+have to deal with survivals of a system of worship and mythology,
+which once existed, and has now gone to pieces, leaving but these
+pieces of wreckage behind. Thus, amongst the Australian black-fellows
+we find myths about gods who now receive no worship. But they never
+could have become gods unless they had been worshipped at some time;
+they could not have acquired the proper, personal names by which they
+are designated in these surviving myths, if they had not been
+worshipped long enough for the words which designate them to become
+proper names, i.e. names denoting no other person than the one
+designated by them. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[58]</a></span>Amongst other backward peoples of the earth we
+find the names of gods surviving, not only with no worship but no
+myths attached to them; and the inference plainly is that, as they are
+still remembered to be gods, they once were objects of worship
+certainly, and probably once were subjects of mythology. And if, of a
+bygone religious system all that remains is in one place some
+fragments of mythology, and in another nothing but the mere names of
+the gods, then it is nothing astonishing if elsewhere all that we find
+is some fragment of worship, some rite, which continues to be
+practised, for its own sake, even though all memory of the gods in
+whose worship it originated has disappeared from the common
+consciousness&mdash;a disappearance which would be the easier if the gods
+worshipped had acquired no names, or names as little personal as those
+of the <i>di indigites</i>. Ritual of this kind, not associated with the
+names of any gods, is found amongst the Australian tribes, and may be
+the wreckage of a system gone to pieces.</p>
+
+<p>Here, too, there is opportunity again, for the same error as that into
+which students of mythology once fell before, when they found, or
+thought they found, in mythology, profound truths, known or revealed
+to sages of old. The survivals mentioned in the last paragraph may be
+interpreted as survivals of a prior monotheism or a primitive
+revelation. But <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[59]</a></span>if they are survivals, at all, then they are
+survivals from a period when the ancestors of the present-day Africans
+or Australian black-fellows were in an earlier stage of social
+development&mdash;in an earlier stage even of linguistic development and of
+the thought which develops with language&mdash;than their descendants are
+now. Even in that earlier stage of development, however, man sought
+for God. If he thought, mistakenly, to find Him in this or that
+external object, he was not wrong in the conviction that underlay his
+search&mdash;the conviction that God is at no time afar off from any one of
+us.</p>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="III" id="III"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[60]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>III<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE IDEA OF GOD IN WORSHIP</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p>We have found mythology of but little use in our search after the idea
+of God; and the reason, as we have suggested, is that myth-making is a
+reflective process, a process in which the mind reflects upon the
+idea, and therefore a process which cannot be set up unless the idea
+is already present, or, rather we should say, has already been
+presented. When it has been presented, it can become food for
+reflection, but not until then. If then we wish to discover where and
+when it is thus immediately presented, let us look for it in worship.
+If it is given primarily in the moment of worship, it may be
+reproduced in a secondary stage as a matter for reflection. Now, in
+worship&mdash;provided that it be experienced as a reality, and not
+performed as a conventionality&mdash;the community's purpose is to approach
+its God: let us come before the Lord and enter His courts with praise,
+are words which represent fairly the thought and feeling which, on
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[61]</a></span>ordinary occasions, the man who goes to worship&mdash;really&mdash;experiences,
+whether he be polytheist or monotheist. I have spoken of 'the moment
+of worship,' but worship is, of course, a habit: if it is not a habit,
+it ceases to be at all, in any effective sense. And it is a habit of
+the community, of the common consciousness, which is continuous
+through the ages, even though it slowly changes; and which, as
+continuous, is conservative and tenacious. Even when it has become
+monotheistic, it may continue to speak of the one God as 'a great god
+above all other gods,' in terms which are survivals of an earlier
+stage of belief. Such expressions are like the clouds which, though
+they are lifting, still linger round the mountain top: they are part
+of the vapour which had previously obscured from view the reality
+which was there, and cannot be shaken at any time.</p>
+
+<p>Worship may include words spoken, hymns of praise and prayer; but it
+includes also things done, acts performed, ritual. It is these acts
+that are the facts from which we have now to start, in order to infer
+what we can from them as to the idea of God which prompted them. There
+is an infinite diversity in these facts of ritual, just as the gods of
+polytheism are infinite in number and kind. But if there is diversity,
+there is also unity. Greatly as the gods of polytheism differ from one
+another, they are at <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[62]</a></span>least beings worshipped&mdash;and worshipped by the
+community. Greatly as rituals vary in their detail, they are all
+ritual: all are worship, and, all, the worship rendered by the
+community to its gods. And there can be no doubt as to their object or
+the purpose with which the community practises them: that purpose is,
+at least, to bring the community into the presence of its Lord. We may
+safely say that there can be no worship unless there is a community
+worshipping and a being which is worshipped. Nor can there be any
+doubt as to the relation existing between the two. The community bow
+down and worship: that is the attitude of the congregation. Nor can
+there be any doubt as to the relation which the god bears, in the
+common consciousness, to his worshippers: he is bound to them by
+special ties&mdash;from him they expect the help which they have received
+in ages past. They have faith in him&mdash;else they would not worship
+him&mdash;faith that he will be what he has been in the past, a very help
+in time of trouble. The mere fact that they seek to come before him is
+a confession of the faith that is in them, the faith that they are in
+the presence of their God and have access to Him. However primitive,
+that is rudimentary, the worship may be; however low in the scale of
+development the worshippers may be; however dim their idea of God and
+however confused and contradictory the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[63]</a></span>reflections they may make
+about Him, it is in that faith that they worship. So much is implied
+by worship&mdash;by the mere fact that the worshippers are gathered
+together for worship. If we are to find any clue which may give us
+uniform guidance through the infinite variety in the details of the
+innumerable rituals that are, or have been, followed in the world, we
+must look to find it in the purpose for which the worshippers gather
+together. But, if we wish to be guided by objective facts rather than
+by hasty, <i>a priori</i> assumptions, we must begin by consulting the
+facts: we must enquire whether the details of the different rituals
+present nothing but diversity, or whether there is any respect in
+which they show likeness or uniformity. There is one point in which
+they resemble one another; and, what is more, that point is the
+leading feature in all of them; they all centre round sacrifice. It is
+with sacrifice, or by means of sacrifice, that their gods are
+approached by all men, beginning even with the jungle-dwellers of
+Chota Nagpur, who sacrifice fowls and offer victims, for the purpose
+of conciliating the powers that send jungle-fever and murrain. The
+sacrificial rite is the occasion on which, and a means by which, the
+worshipper is brought into that closer relation with his god, which he
+would not seek, if he did not&mdash;for whatever reason&mdash;desire it. As
+bearing on the idea of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[64]</a></span>God, the spiritual import, and the practical
+importance, of the sacrificial rite is that he who partakes in it can
+only partake of it so far as he recognises that God is no private idea
+of his own, existing only in his notion, but is objectively real. The
+jungle-dweller of Chota Nagpur may have no name for the being to whom,
+at the appointed season and in the appointed place, he sacrifices
+fowls; but, as we have seen, the gods only come to have proper,
+personal names in slow course of time. He may be incapable of giving
+any account, comprehensible to the civilised enquirer, of the idea
+which he has of the being to whom he offers sacrifice: more
+accomplished theologians than he have failed to define God. But of the
+reality of the being whom he seeks to approach he has no doubt. It is
+not the case that the reality of that being, by whomsoever worshipped,
+is an assumption which must be made, or a hypothesis that must be
+postulated, for the sake of providing a logical justification of
+worship. The simple fact is that the religious consciousness is the
+consciousness of God as real, just as the common consciousness is the
+consciousness of things as real. To represent the reality of either as
+something that is not experienced but inferred is to say that we have
+no experience of reality, and therefore have no real grounds for
+inference. We find it preferable to hold that we have immediate
+consciousness of the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[65]</a></span>real, to some extent, and that by inference we
+may be brought, to a larger extent, into immediate consciousness of
+the real.</p>
+
+<p>Of the reality of Him, whom even the jungle-dweller of Chota Nagpur
+seeks to approach, it is only possible to doubt on grounds which seek
+to deny the ultimate validity of the common consciousness on any
+point. With the inferences which men have drawn about that reality,
+and the ideas those inferences have led to, the case is different.
+What exactly those ideas are, or have been, we have, more or less, to
+guess at, from such facts as the science of religion furnishes. One
+such set of facts is comprised under the term, worship; and of that
+set the leading fact everywhere is the rite of sacrifice. By means of
+it we may reasonably expect to penetrate to some of the ideas which
+the worshippers had of the gods whom they worshipped. Unfortunately,
+however, there is considerable difference of opinion, between students
+of the science of religion, as to the idea which underlies sacrifice.</p>
+
+<p>One fact from which we may start is that it is with sacrifice that the
+community draws near to the god it wishes to approach. The outward,
+physical fact, the visible set of actions, is that the body of
+worshippers proceed, with their oblation, to the place in which the
+god manifests himself and is to be found. The inference which follows
+is that, corresponding to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[66]</a></span>this series of outward actions, there is an
+internal conviction in the hearts and minds of the worshippers: they
+would not go to the place, unless they felt that, in so doing, they
+were drawing near to their god.</p>
+
+<p>In thus drawing near, both physically and spiritually, they take with
+them something material. And this they would not do, unless taking the
+material thing expressed, in some way, their mental attitude, or
+rather their religious attitude. The attitude thus expressed must be
+part of, or implied by, the desire to approach the god both physically
+and spiritually. The fact that they carry with them some material
+thing, expresses in gesture-language&mdash;such as is used by explorers
+towards natives whose speech is unknown to them&mdash;the desire that
+actuates them. And thus much may be safely inferred, viz. that the
+desire is, at any rate, to prepossess favourably the person
+approached.</p>
+
+<p>Thus man approaches, bearing with him something intended to please the
+god that he draws near. But though that is part of his intention, it
+is not the whole. His desire is that the god shall be pleased not
+merely with the offering but with him. What he brings&mdash;his
+oblation&mdash;is but a means to that end. Why he wishes the god to be
+pleased with him, we shall have to enquire hereafter. Thus far,
+however, we see that that is the wish and is the purpose <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[67]</a></span>intimated by
+the fact that he brings something material with him.</p>
+
+<p>It seems clear also that the something material, with which the
+community draws near to its god, need only be something which is
+conceived to be pleasing to the god. All that is necessary is that it
+should express, or symbolise, the feeling with which the community
+draws near. So long as it does this, its function is discharged. What
+it is of importance to notice, and what is apt to be forgotten, is the
+feeling which underlies the outward act, and without which the action,
+the rite, would not be performed. The feeling is the desire of the
+worshipper to commend himself. If we take this point of view, then the
+distinction, which is sometimes drawn between offerings and sacrifice,
+need not mislead us. The distinction is that the term 'sacrifice' is
+to be used only of that which is consumed, or destroyed, in the
+service; while the term 'offering' is to be used only of what is not
+destroyed. And the reason for drawing, or seeking to draw, the
+distinction, seems to be that the destruction, or consumption, of the
+material thing, in the service, is required to prove that the offering
+is accepted. But, though this proof may have come, in some cases, to
+be expected, as showing that the community was right in believing that
+the offering would be acceptable; the fact remains that the
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[68]</a></span>worshippers would not start out with the offering in their hands,
+unless they thought, to begin with, that it was acceptable. They would
+not draw near to the god, with an offering about the acceptability of
+which they were in doubt. Anything therefore which they conceived to
+be acceptable would suffice to indicate their desire to please, and
+would serve to commend them. And the desire to do that which is
+pleasing to their god is there from the beginning, as the condition on
+which alone they can enter his presence. Neglect of this fact may lead
+us to limit unduly the potentialities contained in the rite of
+sacrifice, from the beginning.</p>
+
+<p>The rite did, undoubtedly, in the long course of time, come in some
+communities to be regarded and practised in a spirit little better
+than commercial. Sacrifices came to be regarded as gifts, or presents,
+made to the god, on the understanding that <i>do ut des</i>. Commerce
+itself, when analysed, is nothing but the application of the principle
+of giving to get. All that is necessary, in order to reduce religion
+to commercial principles, is that the payment of vows made should be
+contingent on the delivery of the goods stipulated for; that the thing
+offered should be regarded as payment; that the god's favour should be
+considered capable of being bought. It is however in communities which
+have some aptitude for commerce and have developed it, that religion
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[69]</a></span>is thus interpreted and practised. If we go back to the period in the
+history of a race when commerce is as yet unknown, we reach a state of
+things when the possibility of thus commercialising worship was, as
+yet, undeveloped. At that early period, as in all periods, of the
+history of religion, the desire of the worshippers was to be pleasing,
+and to do that which was pleasing, to him whom they worshipped; and
+the offerings they took with them when they approached his presence
+were intended to be the outward and visible sign of their desire. But
+in some, or even in many, cases, they came eventually to rely on the
+sign or symbol rather than on the desire which it signified; and that
+is a danger which constantly dogs all ritual. Attention is
+concentrated rather on the rite than on the spiritual process, which
+underlies it, and of which the rite is but the expression; and then it
+becomes possible to give a false interpretation to the meaning of the
+rite.</p>
+
+<p>In the case of the offerings, which are made in the earliest stages of
+the history of religion, the false interpretation, which comes in some
+cases to be put upon them by those who make the offerings, has been
+adopted by some students of the history of religion, as the true
+explanation, the real meaning and the original purpose of offerings
+and sacrifice. This theory&mdash;the Gift-theory of sacrifice&mdash;requires us
+to believe that religion could be commercialised before <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[70]</a></span>commerce was
+known; that religion consists, or originally consisted, not in doing
+that which is pleasing in the sight of God, but in bribing the gods;
+that the relatively late misinterpretation is the original and true
+meaning of the rite; in a word, that there was no religion in the
+earliest manifestation of religion. But it is precisely this last
+contention which is fatal to the Gift-theory. Not only is it a
+self-contradiction in terms, but it denies the very possibility of
+religious evolution. Evolution is a process and a continuous process:
+there is an unbroken continuity between the earliest and the latest of
+its stages. If there was no religion whatever in the earliest stages,
+neither can there be any in the latest. And that is why those who hold
+religion to be an absurdity are apt to adopt the Gift-theory: the
+Gift-theory implies a degrading absurdity from the beginning to the
+end of the evolutionary process&mdash;an unbroken continuity of absurdity.
+On the other hand, we may hold by the plain truth that there must have
+been religion in the earliest manifestations of religion, and that
+bribing a god is not, in our sense of the word, religious. In that
+case, we shall also hold that the offerings which have always been
+part of the earliest religious ritual were intended as the outward and
+visible sign or symbol of the community's desire to do that which was
+pleasing to their god; and that it is only in the course of time, and
+as the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[71]</a></span>consequence of misinterpretation, that the offerings come to
+be regarded as gifts made for the purpose of bribing the gods or of
+purchasing what they have to bestow. Thus, just as, in the evolution
+of religion, fetishism was differentiated from polytheism, and was
+cast aside&mdash;where it was cast aside&mdash;as incompatible with the demands
+of the religious sentiment, so too the making of gifts to the gods,
+for the purpose of purchasing their favour, came to be differentiated
+from the service which God requires.</p>
+
+<p>The endeavour to explain the history and purpose of sacrifice by means
+of the Gift-theory alone has the further disadvantage that it requires
+us to close our eyes to other features of the sacrificial rite, for,
+if we turn to them, we shall find it impossible to regard the
+Gift-theory as affording a complete and exhaustive account of all that
+there was in the rite from the beginning. Indeed, so important are
+these other features, that, as we have seen, some students would
+maintain that the only rite which can be properly termed sacrificial
+is one which presents these features. From this point of view, the
+term sacrifice can only be used of something that is consumed or
+destroyed in the service; while the term offering is restricted to
+things which are not destroyed. But, from this point of view, we must
+hold that sacrifices, to be sacrifices in the specific must not merely
+be destroyed or consumed, for <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[72]</a></span>then anything that could be destroyed
+by fire would be capable of becoming a burnt-offering; and the burning
+would simply prove that the offering was acceptable&mdash;a proof which may
+in some cases have been required to make assurance doubly sure, but
+which was really superfluous, inasmuch as no one who desires his
+offering to be accepted will make an offering which he thinks to be
+unacceptable. Sacrifices, to be sacrifices in the specific sense thus
+put upon the word, we must hold to be things which by their very
+nature are marked out to be consumed: they must be articles of food.
+But even with this qualification, sacrifices are not satisfactorily
+distinguished from offerings, for a food-offering is an offering, and
+discharges the function of a sacrifice, provided that it is offered.
+That it should actually be consumed is neither universally nor
+necessarily required. That it is often consumed in the service is a
+fact which brings us to a new and different feature of the sacrificial
+rite. Let us then consider it.</p>
+
+<p>Thus far, looking at the rite on its outward side, from the point of
+view of the spectator, we have seen that the worshippers, carrying
+with them something material, draw near to the place where the god
+manifests himself. From this series of actions and gestures, we have
+inferred the belief of the worshippers to be that they are drawing
+near to their god both physically and spiritually. We have <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[73]</a></span>inferred
+that the material oblation is intended by the worshippers as the
+outward and visible sign of their wish to commend themselves to the
+god. We have now to notice what has been implied throughout, that the
+worshippers do not draw near to the god without a reason, or seek to
+commend themselves to him without a purpose. And if we consult the
+facts once more, we shall find that the occasions, on which the god is
+thus approached, are generally occasions of distress, experienced or
+apprehended. The feelings with which the community draws near are
+compounded of the fear, occasioned by the distress or danger, and the
+hope and confidence that it will be removed or averted by the step
+which they are taking. Part of their idea of the god is that he can
+and will remove the present, or avert the coming, calamity; otherwise
+they would not seek to approach him. But part also of their idea is
+that they have done something to provoke him, otherwise calamity would
+not have come upon them. Thus, when the worshippers seek to come into
+the presence of their god, they are seeking him with the feeling that
+he is estranged from them, and they approach him with something in
+their hands to symbolise their desire to please him, and to restore
+the relation which ordinarily subsists between a god and his
+worshippers. Having deposited the offering they bring, and having
+proffered the petition they came to make, they <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[74]</a></span>retire satisfied that
+all now is well. The rite is now in all its essential features
+complete. But though complete, as an organism in the early stages of
+its history may be complete, it has, like the organism, the power of
+growth; and it grows.</p>
+
+<p>The conviction with which the community ends the rite is the joyful
+conviction that the trouble is over-past. The joy which the community
+feels often expresses itself in feast and song; and where the
+offerings are, as they most commonly are, food-offerings or
+animal-sacrifice, the feast may come to be regarded as one at which
+the god himself is present and of which he partakes along with his
+worshippers. The joy, which expresses itself in feast and song, may,
+however, not make itself felt until the prayer of the community has
+been fulfilled and the calamity has passed away; and then the feast
+comes to be of the nature of a joyful thank-offering. But it is
+probably only in one or other of these two cases that the offering
+comes to be consumed in the service of feast and song. And although
+the rite may and does grow in this way, still this development of
+it&mdash;'eating with the god'&mdash;is rather potentially than actually present
+in the earliest form of the rite.</p>
+
+<p>From this point of view, sacrificial meals or feasts are not part of
+the ritual of approach: they belong to the termination of the
+ceremony. They mark the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[75]</a></span>fact of reconciliation; they are an
+expression of the conviction that friendly relations are restored. The
+sacrificial meal then is accordingly not a means by which
+reconciliation is effected, but the outward expression of the
+conviction that the end has been attained; and, as expressing, it has
+the force of confirming, the conviction. Where the sacrificial rite
+grows to comprehend a sacrificial feast or meal, there the
+food-offering or sacrifice is consumed in the service. But the rite
+does not always develop thus; and even without this development it
+discharges its proper function. Before this development, it is on
+occasions of distress that the god is approached by the community, in
+the conviction that the community has offended, and with the object of
+purging the community and removing the distress, of appeasing the god
+and restoring good relations. Yet even at this stage the object of the
+community is to be at one with its god&mdash;at-one-ment and communion so
+far are sought. There is implied the faith that he, the community's
+god, cannot possibly be for ever alienated and will not utterly
+forsake them, even though he be estranged for the time. Doubtless the
+feast, which in some cases came to crown the sacrificial rite, may,
+where it was practised amongst peoples who believed that persons
+partaking of common food became united by a common bond, have come to
+be regarded as constituting a fresh bond and a more intimate
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[76]</a></span>communion between the god and his worshippers who alike partook of the
+sacrificial meal. But this belief is probably far from being, or
+having been, universal; and it is unnecessary to assume that this
+belief must have existed, wherever we find the accomplishment of the
+sacrificial rite accompanied by rejoicing. The performance of the
+sacrificial rite is prompted by the desire to restore the normal
+relation between the community and its god. It is carried out in the
+conviction that the god is willing to return to the normal relation;
+when it has been performed, the community is relieved and rejoices,
+whether the rejoicing does or does not take form in a feast; and the
+essence of the rejoicing is the conviction that all now is well, a
+conviction which arises from the performance of the sacrificial rite
+and not from the meal which may or may not follow it.</p>
+
+<p>Where the institution of the sacrificial feast did grow up, the
+natural tendency would be for it to become the most important feature
+in the whole rite. The original and the fundamental purpose of the
+rite was to reconcile the god and his worshippers and to make them at
+one: the feast, therefore, which marked the accomplishment of the very
+purpose of the rite, would come to be regarded as the object of the
+rite. In that, however, there is nothing more than the shifting
+forward of the centre of religious interest from the sacrifice to the
+feast: there is <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[77]</a></span>nothing in it to change the character or conception
+of the feast. Yet, in the case of some peoples, its character and
+conception did change in a remarkable way. In the case of some
+peoples, we find that the feast is not an occasion of 'eating with the
+god' but what has been crudely called 'eating the god.' This
+conception existed, as is generally agreed, beyond the possibility of
+doubt, in Mexico amongst the Aztecs, and perhaps&mdash;though not beyond
+the possibility of doubt&mdash;elsewhere.</p>
+
+<p>The Aztecs were a barbarous or semi-civilised people, with a long
+history behind them. The circumstances under which the belief and
+practice in question existed and had grown up amongst them are clear
+enough. The Aztecs worshipped deities, and amongst those deities were
+plants and vegetables, such as maize. It was, of course, not any one
+individual specimen that they worshipped: it was the spirit, the
+maize-mother, who manifested herself in every maize-plant, but was not
+identical with any one. At the same time, though they worshipped the
+spirit, or species, they grew and cultivated the individual plants, as
+furnishing them with food. Thus they were in the position of eating as
+food the plant, the body, in which was manifested the spirit whom they
+worshipped. In this there was an outward resemblance to the Christian
+rite of communion, which could not fail to attract the attention of
+the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[78]</a></span>Spanish priests at the time of the conquest of Mexico, but which
+has probably been unconsciously magnified by them. They naturally
+interpreted the Aztec ceremony in terms of Christianity, and the
+spirit of the translation probably differs accordingly from the spirit
+of the original.</p>
+
+<p>We have now to consider the new phase of the sacrificial&mdash;indeed, in
+this connection, we may say the sacramental&mdash;rite which was found in
+Mexico, and to indicate the manner in which it probably originated.
+The offerings earliest made to the gods were not necessarily, but were
+probably, food-offerings, animal or vegetable; and as we are not in a
+position to affirm that there was any restriction upon the kind of
+food offered, it seems advisable to assume that any kind of food might
+be offered to any kind of god. The intention of offerings seems to be
+to indicate merely that the worshippers desire to be pleasing in the
+sight of the god whom they wish to approach. At this, the simplest and
+earliest stage of the rite, the sacrificial feast has not yet come
+into existence: it is enough if the food is offered to the god; it is
+not necessary that it should be eaten, or that any portion of it
+should be eaten, by the community. There is evidence enough to warrant
+us in believing that generally there was an aversion to eating the
+god's portion. If the worshippers ate any portion, they certainly
+would not eat and did not eat, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[79]</a></span>until after the god had done so. At
+this stage in the development of the rite, the offerings are
+occasional, and are not made at stated, recurring, seasons. The reason
+for believing this is that it is on occasions of alarm and distress
+that the community seeks to draw near its god. But though it is in
+alarm that the community draws nigh, it draws nigh in confidence that
+the god can be appeased and is willing to be appeased. It is part of
+the community's idea of its god that he has the power to punish; that
+he does not exercise his power without reason; and that, as he is
+powerful, so also he is just to his worshippers, and merciful.</p>
+
+<p>But though occasional offerings, and sacrifices made in trouble to
+gods who are conceived to be a very help in time of trouble, continue
+to be made, until a relatively late period in the history of religion,
+we also find that there are recurring sacrifices, annually made. At
+these annual ceremonies, the offerings are food-offerings. Where the
+food-offerings are offerings of vegetable food, they are made at
+harvest time. They are made on the occasion of harvest; and that they
+should be so made is probably no accident or fortuitous coincidence.
+At the regularly recurring season of harvest, the community adheres to
+the custom, already formed, of not partaking of the food which it
+offers to its god, until a portion has been offered to the god. The
+custom, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[80]</a></span>like other customs, tends to become obligatory: the
+worshippers, that is to say the community, may not eat, until the
+offering has been made and accepted. Then, indeed, the worshippers may
+eat, solemnly, in the presence of their god. The eating becomes a
+solemn feast of thanksgiving. The god, after whom they eat, and to
+whom they render thanks, becomes the god who gives them to eat. What
+is thus true of edible plants&mdash;whether wild or domesticated&mdash;may also
+hold true to some extent of animal life, where anything like a 'close
+time' comes to be observed.</p>
+
+<p>As sacrificial ceremonies come to be, thus, annually recurring rites,
+a corresponding development takes place in the community's idea of its
+god. So long as the sacrificial ceremony was an irregularly recurring
+rite, the performance of which was prompted by the occurrence, or the
+threat, of disaster, so long it was the wrath of the god which filled
+the fore-ground, so to speak, of the religious consciousness; though
+behind it lay the conviction of his justice and his mercy. But when
+the ceremony becomes one of annual worship, a regularly recurring
+occasion on which the worshippers recognise that it is the god, to
+whom the first-fruits belong, who gives the worshippers the harvest,
+then the community's idea of its god is correspondingly developed. The
+occasion of the sacrificial rite is no longer one of alarm and
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[81]</a></span>distress; it is no longer the wrath of the god, but his goodness as
+the giver of good gifts, that tends to emerge in the fore-ground of
+the religious consciousness. Harvest rites tend to become feasts of
+thanksgiving and thank-offerings; and so, by contrast with these
+joyous festivals, the occasional sacrifices, which continue to be
+offered in times of distress, tend to assume, more and more, the
+character of sin-offerings or guilt-offerings.</p>
+
+<p>We have, however, now to notice a consequence which ensues upon the
+community's custom of not eating until after the first-fruits have
+been offered to the god. Not only is a habit or custom hard to break,
+simply because it is a habit; but, when the habit is the habit of a
+whole community, the individual who presumes to violate it is visited
+by the disapproval and the condemnation of the whole community. When
+then the custom has established itself of abstaining from eating,
+until the first-fruits have been offered to the god, any violation of
+the custom is condemned by the community as a whole. The consequence
+of this is that the fruit or the animal tends to be regarded by the
+community as sacred to the god, and not to be meddled with until after
+the first-fruits have been offered to him. The plant or animal becomes
+sacred to the god because the community has offered it to him, and
+intends to offer it to him, and does offer it to him annually. Now it
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[82]</a></span>is not a necessary and inevitable consequence that an animal or plant,
+which has come to be sacred, should become divine. But where we find
+divine animals or animal gods&mdash;divine corn or corn-goddesses&mdash;we are
+entitled to consider this as one way in which they may have come to be
+regarded as divine, because sacred, and as deities, because divine.
+When we find the divine plant or animal constituting the sacrifice,
+and furnishing forth the sacrificial meal, there is a possibility that
+it was in this way and by this process that the plant or animal came
+to be, first, sacred, then divine, and finally the deity, to whom it
+was offered. In many cases, certainly, this last stage was never
+reached. And we may conjecture a reason why it was not reached.
+Whether it could be reached would depend largely on the degree of
+individuality, which the god, to whom the offering was made, had
+reached. A god who possesses a proper, personal name, must have a long
+history behind him, for a personal name is an epithet the meaning of
+which comes in course of time to be forgotten. If its meaning has come
+to be entirely forgotten, the god is thereby shown not only to have a
+long history behind him but to have acquired a high degree of
+individuality and personality, which will not be altered or modified
+by the offerings which are made to him. Where, however, the being or
+power worshipped is, as with the jungle-dwellers of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[83]</a></span>Chota Nagpur,
+still nameless, his personality and individuality must be of the
+vaguest; and, in that case, there is the probability that the plant or
+animal offered to him may become sacred to him; and, having become
+sacred, may become divine. The animal or plant may become that in
+which the nameless being manifests himself. The corn or maize is
+offered to the nameless deity; the deity is the being to whom the corn
+or maize is habitually offered; and then becomes the corn-deity or
+maize-deity, the mother of the maize or the corn-goddess.</p>
+
+<p>Like the <i>di indigites</i> of Italy, these vegetation-goddesses are
+addressed by names which, though performing the function of personal
+names and enabling the worshippers to make appeals to the deities
+personally, are still of perfectly transparent meaning. Both present
+to us that stage in the evolution of a deity, in which as yet the
+meaning of his name still survives; in which his name has not yet
+become a fully personal name; and in which he has not yet attained to
+full personality and complete individuality. This want of complete
+individuality can hardly be dissociated from another fact which goes
+with it. That fact is that the deity is to be found in any plant of
+the species sacred to him, or in any animal of the species sacred to
+him, but is not supposed to be found only in the particular plant or
+animal which is offered on one particular occasion. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[84]</a></span>If the
+corn-goddess is present, or manifests herself, in one particular sheaf
+of corn, at her harvest festival this year, still she did manifest
+herself last year, and will manifest herself next year, in another.
+The deity, that is to say, is the species; and the species, and no
+individual specimen thereof, is the deity. That is the reason which
+prevents, or tends to prevent, deities of this kind from attaining
+complete individuality.</p>
+
+<p>This want of complete individuality and of full personality it is
+which characterises totems. The totem, also, is a being who, if he
+manifests himself in this particular animal, which is slain, has also
+manifested himself and will manifest himself in other animals of the
+same species: but he is not identical with any particular individual
+specimen. Not only is the individuality of the totem thus incomplete,
+but in many instances the name of the species has not begun to change
+into a proper personal name for the totem, as 'Ceres' or
+'Chicomecoatl' or 'Xilonen' have changed into proper names of personal
+deities. Whether we are or are not to regard the totem as a god, at
+any rate, viewed as a being in the process of acquiring individuality,
+he seems to be acquiring it in the same way, and by the same process,
+as corn-goddesses and maize-mothers acquired theirs, and to present to
+our eyes a stage of growth through which these vegetation-deities
+themselves have passed. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[85]</a></span>They also at one time had not yet acquired
+the personal names by which they afterwards came to be addressed. They
+were, though nameless, the beings present in any and every sheaf of
+corn or maize, though not cabined and confined to any one sheaf or any
+number of sheaves. And these beings have it in them to become&mdash;for
+they did become&mdash;deities. The process by which and the period at which
+they may have become deities we have already suggested: the period is
+the stage at which offerings, originally made at irregular times of
+distress, become annual offerings, made at the time of harvest; the
+process is the process by which what is customary becomes obligatory.
+The offerings at harvest time, from customary, become obligatory. That
+which is offered, is thereby sacred; the very intention to offer it,
+this year in the same way as it was offered last year, suffices to
+make it sacred, before it is offered. Thus, the whole species, whether
+plant or animal, becomes sacred, to the deity to whom it is offered:
+it is his. And if he be as vague and shadowy as the power or being to
+whom the jungle-dwellers of Chota Nagpur make their offerings at
+stated seasons, then he may be looked for and found in the plant or
+animal species which is his. The harvest is his alone, until the
+first-fruits are offered. He makes the plants to grow: if they fail,
+it is to him the community prays. If they thrive, it is because he is,
+though not identical <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[86]</a></span>with them, yet in a way present in them, and is
+not to be distinguished from the being who not only manifests himself
+in every individual plant or animal of the species, though not
+identical with any one, but is called by the name of the species.</p>
+
+<p>Whether we are to see in totems, as they occur in Australia, beings in
+the stage through which vegetation deities presumably passed, before
+they became corn-goddesses and mothers of the maize, is a question,
+the answer to which depends upon our interpretation of the ceremonies
+in which they figure. It is difficult, at least, to dissociate those
+ceremonies from the ritual of first-fruits. The community may not eat
+of the animal or plant, at the appropriate season, until the head-man
+has solemnly and sparingly partaken of it. About the solemnity of the
+ceremonial and the reverence of those who perform it, there is no
+doubt. But, whereas in the ritual of first-fruits elsewhere, the
+first-fruits are, beyond possibility of doubt or mistake, offered to a
+god, a personal god, having a proper name, in Australia there is no
+satisfactory evidence to show that the offerings are supposed, by
+those who make them, to be made to any god; or that the totem-spirit,
+if it is distinguished from the totem-species, is regarded as a god.
+There has accordingly been a tendency on the part of students of the
+science of religion to deny to totemism any place in the evolution of
+religion, and even to regard <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[87]</a></span>the Australian black-fellows as
+exemplifying, within the region of our observation, a pre-religious
+period in the process of human evolution. This latter view may safely
+be dismissed as untenable, whether we do or do not believe totemism to
+have a religious side. There is sufficient mythology, still existing
+amongst the Australian tribes, to show that the belief in gods
+survives amongst them, even though, as seems to be the case, no
+worship now attaches to the gods, with personal names, who figure in
+the myths. That myths survive, when worship has ceased; and that the
+names of gods linger on, even when myths are no longer told of them,
+are features to be seen in the decay of religious systems, all the
+world over, and not in Australia alone. The fact that these features
+are to be found in Australia points to a consideration which hitherto
+has generally been overlooked, or not sufficiently weighed. It is that
+in Australia we are in the midst of general religious decay, and are
+not witnessing the birth of religion nor in the presence of a
+pre-religious period. From this point of view, the worship of the
+gods, who figure in the myths, has ceased, but their names live on.
+And from this point of view, the names of the beings worshipped, in
+the totemistic first-fruits ceremonies, have disappeared, though the
+ceremonies are elaborate, solemn, reverent, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[88]</a></span>complicated and
+prolonged; and religion has been swallowed up in ritual.</p>
+
+<p>Even amongst the Aztecs, who had reached a stage of social
+development, barbarous or semi-civilised, far beyond anything attained
+by the Australian tribes, the degree of personality and individuality
+reached by the vegetation deities was not such that those deities had
+strictly proper names: the deity of the maize was still only 'the
+maize-mother.' Amongst the Australians, who are so far below the level
+reached in Mexico, the beings worshipped at the first-fruits
+ceremonies may well have been as nameless as the beings worshipped by
+the jungle-dwellers of Chota Nagpur. Around these nameless beings, a
+ritual, simple in its origin, but luxuriant in its growth, has
+developed, overshadowing and obscuring them from our view, so that we,
+and perhaps the worshippers, cannot see the god for the ritual.</p>
+
+<p>In Mexico the vegetation-goddesses struggled for existence amongst a
+crowd of more developed deities, just as in Italy the <i>di indigites</i>
+competed, at a disadvantage, with the great gods of the state. In
+Australia the greater gods of the myths seem to have given way
+before&mdash;or to&mdash;the spread of totemism. Where gods are worshipped for
+the benefits expected from them, beings who have in charge the
+food-supply of the community will be worshipped not only <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[89]</a></span>annually at
+the season of the first-fruits, but with greater zeal and more
+continuous devotion than can be displayed towards the older gods who
+are worshipped only at irregular periods. Not only does the existence
+of mythology in Australia indicate that the gods who figure in the
+myths were once worshipped, though worship now no longer is rendered
+to them; but the totemistic ceremonies by their very nature show that
+they are a later development of the sacrificial rite. The simplest
+form of the rite is that in which the community draw near to their
+god, bearing with them offerings, acceptable to the god: it is at a
+later stage in the development of the rite that the offerings, having
+been accepted by the god, are consumed by the community, as is the
+case with the totem animals and plants. At its earliest stage, again,
+the rite is performed, at irregular periods, on occasions of distress:
+it is only at a more advanced stage that the rite is performed at
+fixed, annual periods, as in Australia. And this change of periodicity
+is plainly connected with the growth of the conviction that the annual
+first-fruits belong to the gods&mdash;a conviction springing from the
+belief that they are annually accepted by the god, a belief which in
+its turn implies a prior belief that they are acceptable. In other
+words, the centre of religious interest at first lies in approaching
+the god, that is in the desire to restore the normal state of
+relations, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[90]</a></span>which calamity shows to have been disturbed. But in the
+end, religious interest is concentrated on, and expressed by, the
+feast which terminates the ceremony and marks the fact that the
+reconciliation is effected. What is at first accepted by the god at
+the feast comes to be regarded as belonging to him and sacred to him:
+the worshippers may not touch it until a portion of it, the
+first-fruits, has been accepted by him. Thus the rite which indicates
+and marks his acceptance becomes more than ever the centre of
+religious interest. The rite may thus become of more importance than
+the god, as in Australia seems to be the case; for the performance of
+the rite is indispensable if the community is to be admitted to eat of
+the harvest. When this point of view has been reached, when the
+performance of the rite is the indispensable thing, the rite tends to
+be regarded as magical. If this is what has happened in the case of
+the Australian rite, it is but what tends to happen, wherever ritual
+flourishes at the expense of religion. If it were necessary to assume
+that only amongst the Australian black-fellows, and never elsewhere,
+did a rite, originally religious, tend to become magical, then it
+would be <i>a priori</i> unlikely, in the extreme, that this happened in
+Australia. But inasmuch as this tendency is innate in ritual, it is
+rather likely that in Australia the tendency has run its course, as it
+has done elsewhere, in India, for example, where, also, the
+sacrificial rite has <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[91]</a></span>become magical. Whether a rite, originally
+religious, will become assimilated to magic, depends very much on the
+extent to which the community believes in magic. The more the
+community believes in magic, the more ready it will be to put a
+magical interpretation on its religious rites. But the fact that, in
+the lower communities, religion is always in danger of sinking into
+magic, does not prove that religion springs from magic and is but one
+kind of magic. That view, once held by some students, is now generally
+abandoned. It amounts simply to saying once more that in the earliest
+manifestations of religion there was no religion, and that religion is
+now, what it was in the beginning&mdash;nothing but magic. If that position
+is abandoned, then religious rites are, in their very nature, and from
+their very origin, different from magical rites. Religious rites are,
+first, rites of approach, whereby the community draws nigh to its god;
+and, afterwards, rites of sacramental meals whereby the community
+celebrates its reconciliation and enjoys communion with its god. Those
+meals are typically cases of 'eating with the god,' celebrated on the
+occasion of first-fruits, and based on the conviction, which has
+slowly grown up, that 'the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness
+thereof.' Meals, such as were found in Mexico, and have left their
+traces in Australia, in which the fruit or the animal that was offered
+had come to be regarded as standing in the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[92]</a></span>same relation to the god
+as an individual does to the species, are meals having the same origin
+as those in which the community eats with its god, but following a
+different line of evolution.</p>
+
+<p>The object of the sacrificial rite is first to restore and then to
+maintain good relations between the community and its god. Pushed to
+its logical conclusion, or rather perhaps we should say, pushed back
+to the premisses required for its logical demonstration, the very idea
+of renewing or restoring relations implies an original understanding
+between the community and its god; and implies that it is the
+community's departure from this understanding which has involved it in
+the disaster, from which it desires to escape, and to secure escape
+from which, it approaches its god, with desire to renew and restore
+the normal relations. The idea that if intelligent beings do something
+customarily, they must do so because once they entered into a
+contract, compact or covenant to do so, is one which in Plato's time
+manifested itself in the theory of a social compact, to account for
+the existence of morality, and which in Japan was recorded in the
+tenth century <span class="fakesc">A.D.</span> as accounting for the fact that certain
+sacrifices were offered to the gods. Thus in the fourth ritual of 'the
+Way of the Gods'&mdash;that is Shinto&mdash;it is explained that the Spirits of
+the Storm took the Japanese to be their people, and the people of
+Japan took the Spirits of the Storm <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[93]</a></span>to be gods of theirs. In
+pursuance of that covenant, the spirits on their part undertook to be
+Gods of the Winds and to ripen and bless the harvest, while the people
+on their part undertook to found a temple to their new gods; and that
+is why the people are now worshipping them. It was, according to the
+account given in the fourth ritual, the gods themselves who dictated
+the conditions on which they were willing to take the Japanese to be
+their people, and fixed the terms of the covenant. So too in the
+account given in the sixth chapter of Exodus, it was Jehovah himself
+who dictated to Moses the terms of the covenant which he was willing
+to make with the children of Israel: 'I will take you to me for a
+people, and I will be to you a God.' In Japan it was to the Emperor,
+as high priest, that the terms of the covenant were dictated, in
+consequence of which the temple was built and the worship instituted.</p>
+
+<p>The train of thought is quite clear and logically consistent. If the
+gods of the Winds were to be trusted&mdash;as they were unquestionably
+trusted&mdash;it must be because they had made a covenant with the people,
+and would be faithful to it, if the people were. The direct statement,
+in plain, intelligible words, in the fourth ritual, that a covenant of
+this kind had actually been entered into, was but a statement of what
+is implied by the very idea, and in the very act, of offering
+sacrifices. And sacrifices had of course <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[94]</a></span>been offered in Japan long
+before the tenth century: they were offered, and long had been offered
+annually to the gods of the Harvest. Probably they had been offered to
+the gods of the Storms long before they were offered to the gods of
+the Winds; and the procedure narrated in the fourth ritual records the
+transformation of the occasional and irregular sacrifices, made to the
+winds when they threatened the harvest with damage, into annual
+sacrifices, made every year as a matter of course. Thus, we have an
+example of the way in which the older sacrifices, made originally only
+in times of disaster, come to be assimilated to the more recent
+sacrifices, which from their nature and origin, are offered regularly
+every year. Not only is there a natural tendency in man to assimilate
+things which admit of assimilation and can be brought under one rule;
+but also it is advisable to avert calamity rather than to wait for it,
+and, when it has happened, to do something. It would therefore be
+desirable from this point of view to render regular worship to deities
+who can send disaster; and thus to induce them to abstain from sending
+it.</p>
+
+<p>In the fourth Shinto ritual the gods of the Winds are represented as
+initiating the contract and prescribing its terms. But in the first
+ritual, which is concerned with the worship of the gods of the
+Harvest, it is the community which is represented as <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[95]</a></span>taking the first
+step, and as undertaking that, if the gods grant an abundant harvest,
+the people will, through their high priest, the Emperor, make a
+thank-offering, in the shape of first-fruits, to the gods of the
+Harvest. This is, of course, no more an historical account of the way
+in which the gods of the Harvest actually came to be worshipped, than
+is the account which the fourth Shinto ritual gives of the way the
+gods of the Winds came to be worshipped. In both cases the worship
+existed, and sacrifices had been made, as a matter of custom, long
+before any need was felt to explain the origin of the custom. As soon
+as the need was felt, the explanation was forthcoming: if the
+community had made these sacrifices, for as long back as the memory of
+man could run, and if the gods had granted good harvests in
+consequence, it must have been in consequence of an agreement entered
+into by both parties; and therefore a covenant had been established
+between them, on some past occasion, which soon became historical.</p>
+
+<p>This history of the origin and meaning of sacrifice has an obvious
+affinity with the gift-theory of sacrifice. Both in the gift-theory and
+the covenant-theory, the terms of the transaction are that so much
+blessing shall be forthcoming for so much service, or so much sacrifice
+for so much blessing. The point of view is commercial; the obligation
+is legal; if the terms are strictly kept on the one part, then they
+are <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[96]</a></span>strictly binding on the other. The covenant-theory, like the
+gift-theory, is eventually discovered by spiritual experience, if
+pushed far enough, to be a false interpretation of the relations
+existing between god and man. Being an interpretation, it is an outcome
+of reflection&mdash;of reflection upon the fact that, in the time of
+trouble, man turns to his gods, and that, in returning to them, he
+escapes from his trouble. On that fact all systems of worship are
+based, from that fact all systems of worship start. If, as is the case,
+they start in different directions and diverge from one another, it is
+because men, in the process of reflecting upon that fact, come to put
+different interpretations upon it. And so far as they eventually come
+to feel that any interpretation is a misinterpretation, they do so
+because they find that it is not, as they had been taught to believe, a
+correct interpretation but a misinterpretation of the fact: there is
+found in the experience of returning to God, something with which the
+misinterpretation is irreconcilable; and, when the misinterpretation is
+dispersed, like a vapour, the vision of God, the idea of God, shines
+forth the more brightly. One such misinterpretation is the reflection
+that the favour of the gods can be bought by gifts. Another is the
+reflection that the gods sell their favours, on the terms of a covenant
+agreed upon between them and man. Another is that that which is offered
+is sacred, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[97]</a></span>and that that which is sacred is divine&mdash;that the god is
+himself the offering which is made to him.</p>
+
+<p>In all systems of worship man not only turns to his gods but does so
+in the conviction that he is returning, or trying to return, to
+them&mdash;trying to return to them, because they have been estranged, and
+access to them is therefore difficult. Accordingly, he draws near to
+them, bearing in his hands something intended to express his desire to
+return to them. The material, external symbol of his desire&mdash;the
+oblation, offering or sacrifice which he brings with him because it
+expresses his desire&mdash;is that on which at first his attention centres.
+And because his attention centres on it, the rite of sacrifice, the
+outward ceremony, develops in ways already described. The object of
+the rite is to procure access to the god; and the greater the extent
+to which attention is concentrated on the right way of performing the
+external acts and the outward ceremony, the less attention is bestowed
+upon the inward purpose which accompanies the outward actions, and for
+the sake of which those external actions are performed. As the object
+of the rite is to procure access, it seems to follow that the proper
+performance of the rite will ensure the access desired. The reason why
+access is sought, at all, is the belief&mdash;arising on occasions when
+calamity visits the community&mdash;that the god has been estranged, and
+the faith that he <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[98]</a></span>may yet become reconciled to his worshippers. The
+reason why his wrath descends, in the shape of calamities, upon the
+community, is that the community, in the person of one of its members,
+has offended the god, by breaking the custom of the community in some
+way. For this reason&mdash;in this belief and faith&mdash;access is sought, by
+means of the sacrificial rite; and the purpose of the rite is assumed
+to be realised by the performance of the ceremonies, in which the
+outward rite consists. The meaning and the value of the outward
+ceremonies consists in the desire for reconciliation which expresses
+itself in the acts performed; and the mere performance of the acts
+tends of itself to relieve the desire. That is why the covenant-theory
+of sacrifice gains acceptance: it represents&mdash;it is an official
+representation&mdash;that performance of the sacrificial ceremony is all
+that is required, by the terms of the agreement, to obtain
+reconciliation and to effect atonement. But the representation is
+found to be a misrepresentation: the desire for reconciliation and
+atonement is not to be satisfied by outward ceremonies, but by
+hearkening and obedience. 'To obey is better than sacrifice and to
+hearken than the fat of rams.' Sacrifice remains the outward rite, but
+it is pronounced to have value only so far as it is an expression of
+the spirit of obedience. Oblations are vain unless the person who
+offers them is changed in heart, unless there is <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[99]</a></span>an inward, spiritual
+process, of which the external ceremony is an expression. Though this
+was an interpretation of the meaning of the sacrificial rite which was
+incompatible with the covenant-theory and which was eventually fatal
+to it, it was at once a return to the original object of the rite and
+a disclosure of its meaning. Some such internal, spiritual process is
+implied by sacrifice from the beginning, for it is a plain
+impossibility to suppose that in the beginning it consisted of mere
+external actions which had absolutely no meaning whatever, for those
+who performed them; and it is equally impossible to maintain that such
+meaning as they had was not a religious meaning. The history of
+religion is the history of the process by which the import of that
+meaning rises to the surface of clear consciousness, and is gradually
+revealed. Beneath the ceremony and the outward rite there was always a
+moral and religious process&mdash;moral because it was the community of
+fellow-worshippers who offered the sacrifice, on occasions of a breach
+of the custom, that is of the customary morality, of the tribe;
+religious because it was to their god that they offered it. The very
+purpose with which the community offered it was to purge itself of the
+offence committed by one of its members. The condition precedent, on
+which alone sacrifice could be offered, was that the offence was
+repented of. From the beginning sacrifice <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[100]</a></span>implied repentance and was
+impossible without it. But it sufficed if the community repented and
+punished the transgressor: his repentance however was not
+necessary&mdash;all that was necessary was his punishment.</p>
+
+<p>The re-interpretation of the sacrificial rite by the prophets of
+Israel was that until there was hearkening and obedience there could
+be nothing but an outward performance of the rite. The revelation made
+by Christ was that every man may take part in the supreme act of
+worship, if he has first become reconciled to his brother, if he has
+first repented his own offences, from love for God and his fellow-man.
+The old covenant made the favour of God conditional on the receipt of
+sacrificial offerings. The new covenant removes that limit, and all
+others, from God's love to his children: it is infinite love. It is
+not conditional or limited; conditional on man's loving God, or
+limited to those who love Him. Otherwise the new covenant would be of
+the same nature as the old. But love asks for love; the greater love
+for the greater love; infinite love for the greatest man is capable
+of. And it is hard for a man to resist love; impossible indeed in the
+end: all men come under and into the new covenant, in which there is
+infinite love on the one side, and love that may grow infinitely on
+the other. If it is to grow, however, it is in a new life that it must
+grow: a life <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[101]</a></span>of sacrifice, a life in which he who comes under the new
+covenant is himself the offering and the 'lively sacrifice.'</p>
+
+<p>The worshipper's idea of God necessarily determines the spirit in
+which he worships. The idea of God as a God of love is different from
+the idea of Him as a God of justice, who justly requires hearkening
+and obedience. The idea of God as a God who demands obedience and is
+not to be put off with vain oblations is different from that of a God
+to whom, by the terms of a covenant, offerings are to be made in
+return for benefits received. But each and all of these ideas imply
+the existence, in the individual consciousness, and in the common
+consciousness, of the desire to draw near to God, and of the need of
+drawing nigh. Wherever that need and that desire are felt, there
+religion is; and the need and the desire are part of the common
+consciousness of mankind. From the beginning they have always
+expressed or symbolised themselves in outward acts or rites. The
+experience of the human race is testimony that rites are
+indispensable, in the same way and for the same reason that language
+is indispensable to thought. Thought would not develop were there no
+speech, whereby thought could be sharpened on thought. Nor has
+religion ever, anywhere, developed without rites. They, like language,
+are the work of the community, collectively; and they are a mode of
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[102]</a></span>expression which is, like language, intelligible to the community,
+because the community expresses itself in this way, and because each
+member of the community finds that other members have thoughts like
+his, and the same desire to draw near to a Being whose existence they
+doubt not, however vaguely they conceive Him, or however
+contradictorily they interpret His being. But, if language is
+indispensable to thought, and a means whereby we become conscious of
+each other's thought, language is not thought. Nor are rites, and
+outward acts, religion&mdash;indispensable though they be to it. They are
+an expression of it. They must be an inadequate expression; and they
+are always liable to misinterpretation, even by some of those who
+perform them. The history of religion contains the record of the
+misinterpretations of the rite of sacrifice. But it also records the
+progressive correction of those misinterpretations, and the process
+whereby the meaning implicit in the rite from the beginning has been
+made manifest in the end.</p>
+
+<p>The need and the desire to draw nigh to the god of the community are
+felt in the earliest of ages on occasions when calamity befalls the
+community. The calamity is interpreted as sent by the god; and the god
+is conceived to have been provoked by an offence of which some member
+of the community had been guilty. We may say, therefore, that from
+the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[103]</a></span>beginning there has been present in the common consciousness a
+sense of sin and the desire to make atonement. Psychologically it
+seems clear that at the present day, in the case of the individual,
+personal religion first manifests itself usually in the consciousness
+of sin. And what is true in the psychology of the individual may be
+expected within limits to hold true in the psychology of the common
+consciousness. But though we may say that, in the beginning, it was by
+the occurrence of public calamity that the community became conscious
+that sin had been committed, still it is also true to say that the
+community felt that it was by some one of its members, rather than by
+the community, that the offence had been committed, for which the
+community was responsible. It was the responsibility, rather than the
+offence, which was prominent in the common consciousness&mdash;as indeed
+tends to be the case with the individual also. But the fact that the
+offence had been committed, not by the community, but by some one
+member of the community, doubtless helped to give the community the
+confidence without which its attitude towards the offended power would
+have been simply one of fear. Had the feeling been one of fear, pure
+and unmixed, the movement of the community could not have been towards
+the offended being. But religion manifests itself from the beginning
+in the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[104]</a></span>action of drawing near to the god. The fact that the offence
+was the deed of some one member, and not of the community as a whole,
+doubtless helped to give the community the confidence, without which
+its attitude towards the offended power would have been simply one of
+fear. But it also tended necessarily to make religion an affair of the
+community rather than a personal need: sin had indeed been committed,
+but not by those who drew near to the god for the purpose of making
+the atonement. They were not the offenders. The community admitted its
+responsibility, indeed, but it found one of its members guilty.</p>
+
+<p>We may, therefore, fairly say that personal religion had at this time
+scarcely begun to emerge. And the reason why this was so is quite
+clear: it is that in the infancy of the race, as in the infancy of the
+individual, personal self-consciousness is as yet undeveloped. And it
+is only as personal self-consciousness develops that personal religion
+becomes possible. We must not however from this infer that personal
+religion is a necessary, or, at any rate, an immediate consequence of
+the development of self-consciousness. In ancient Greece one
+manifestation&mdash;and in the religious domain the first manifestation&mdash;of
+the individual's consciousness of himself was the growth of
+'mysteries.' Individuals voluntarily entered these associations: they
+were not born into them as they <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[105]</a></span>were into the state and the
+state-worship. And they entered them for the sake of individual
+purification and in the hope of personal immortality. The desire for
+salvation, for individual salvation, is manifest. But it was in rites
+and ceremonies that the <i>mystae</i> put their trust, and in the fact that
+they were initiated that they found their confidence&mdash;so long as they
+could keep it. The traditional conviction of the efficacy of ritual
+was unshaken: and, so long as men believed in the efficacy of rites,
+the question, 'What shall I do to be saved?' admitted of no
+permanently satisfactory answer. The only answer that has been found
+permanently satisfying to the personal need of religion is one which
+goes beyond rites and ceremonies: it is that a man shall love his
+neighbour and his God.</p>
+
+<p>But in thus becoming personal, religion involved man's fellow-men as
+much as himself. In becoming personal thus, religion became, thereby,
+more than ever before, the relation of the community to its God. The
+relation however is no longer that the community admits the
+transgressions of some one of its members: it prays for the
+forgiveness of 'our trespasses'; and though it prays for each of its
+members, still it is the community that prays and worships and comes
+before its God, as it has done from the beginning of the history of
+religion. It is with rites of worship <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[106]</a></span>that the community, at any
+period in the history of religion, draws nigh to its god; for its
+inward purpose cannot but reveal itself in some outward manifestation.
+Indeed it seeks to manifest itself as naturally and as necessarily as
+thought found expression for itself in the languages it has created;
+and, though the re-action of forms of worship upon religion sometimes
+results, like the re-action of language upon thought, in misleading
+confusion, still, for the most part, language does serve to express
+more or less clearly&mdash;indeed we may say more and more clearly&mdash;that
+which we have it in us to utter.</p>
+
+<p>As there are more forms of speech than one, so there are more forms of
+religion than one; and as the language of savages who can count no
+higher than three is inadequate for the purposes of the higher
+mathematics, so the religion of man in the lower stages of his
+development is inadequate, compared with that of the higher stages.
+Nevertheless the civilised man can come to understand the savage's
+form of speech; and it would be strange to say that the savage's form
+of speech, or that his form of religion, is unintelligible nonsense.
+Behind the varieties of speech and of religion there is that in the
+spirit of man which is seeking to express itself and which is
+intelligible to all, because it is in all. Though few of us understand
+any but civilised languages, we <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[107]</a></span>feel no difficulty in believing that
+savage languages not merely are intelligible but must have sprung from
+the same source as our own, though far inferior to it for every
+purpose that language is employed to subserve. The many different
+forms of religion are all attempts&mdash;successful in as many very various
+degrees as language itself&mdash;to give expression to the idea of God.</p>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="IV" id="IV"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[108]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>IV<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE IDEA OF GOD IN PRAYER</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p>The question may perhaps be raised, whether it is necessary for us to
+travel beyond worship, in order to discover what was, in early
+religions, or is now, the idea of God, as it presents itself to the
+worshipper. The answer to the question will depend partly on what we
+consider the essence of religion to be. If we take the view, which is
+held by some writers of authority on the history of religion, that the
+essence of religion is adoration, then indeed we neither need nor can
+travel further, for we shall hold that worship is adoration, and
+adoration, worship.</p>
+
+<p>To exclude adoration, to say that adoration does not, or should not,
+form any part of worship, seems alike contrary to the very meaning of
+the word 'worship' and to be at variance with a large and important
+body of the facts recorded in the history of religion. The courts of a
+god are customarily entered with the praise which is the outward
+expression of the feeling of adoration with which the worshippers
+spiritually gaze upon the might and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[109]</a></span>majesty of the god whom they
+approach. He is to them a great god, above all other gods. Even to
+polytheists, the god who is worshipped at the moment, is, at that
+moment, one than whom there is no one, and nought, greater, <i>quo nihil
+maius</i>. A god who should not be worshipped thus&mdash;a god who was not the
+object of adoration&mdash;would not be worthy of the name, and would hardly
+be called a god. So strongly is this felt that even writers who
+incline to regard religion as an illusion, define gods as beings
+conceived to be superior to man. The degree of respect, rising to
+adoration, will vary directly with the degree of superiority
+attributed to them; but not even in the case of a fetish, so long as
+it is worshipped, is the respect, which is the germ of adoration,
+wholly wanting. Even in the case of gods, on whom, on occasion, insult
+is put, it is precisely in moments when their superiority is in doubt
+that the worship of adoration is momentarily wanting. Worship without
+adoration is worship only in name, or rather is no worship at all.
+Only with adoration can worship begin: 'hallowed be Thy name'
+expresses the emotion with which all worship begins, even where the
+emotion has not yet found the words in which to express itself. It is
+because the emotion is there, pent up and seeking escape, that it can
+travel along the words, and make them something more than a succession
+of syllables and sounds.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[110]</a></span>If then it is on the wings of adoration that the soul has at all times
+striven to rise to heaven to find its God, even though it flutters but
+a little height and soon falls again to the ground, then we must admit
+that from the beginning there has been a mystical element, or a
+tendency to mysticism, in religion. In the lowest, and probably in the
+earliest, stages of the evolution of religion, this tendency is most
+manifest in individual members of the community, who are subject to
+'possession,' ecstasy, trance and visions, and are believed, both by
+themselves and others, to be in especial communion with their god.
+This is the earliest manifestation of the fact that religion, besides
+being a social act and a matter in which the community is concerned,
+is also one which may profoundly affect the individual soul. But in
+these cases it is the exceptional soul which is alone affected&mdash;the
+seer of visions, the prophet. And it is not necessarily in connection
+with the ordinary worship, or customary sacrifice, that such instances
+of mystic communion with the gods are manifested. For the development
+of the mystical tendency of worship and sacrifice, we must look, not
+to the lowest, or to the earliest, stages of religious evolution, but
+to a later stage in the evolution of the sacrificial meal. It is
+where, as in ancient Mexico, the plant, or animal, which furnishes
+forth the sacrificial meal, is in some way regarded as, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[111]</a></span>or identified
+with, the body of the deity worshipped, that the rite of sacrifice is
+tinged with mysticism and that all partakers of the meal, and not some
+exceptional individuals, are felt to be brought into some mystic
+communion with the god whom they adore.</p>
+
+<p>In these cases, adoration is worship; and worship is adoration&mdash;and
+little more. Judging them by their fruits, we cannot say that the
+Mexican rites, or even the Greek mysteries, encourage us to believe
+that adoration is all that is required to make worship what the heart
+of man divines that it should be. Doubtless, this is due in part to
+the fact that the idea of God was so imperfectly disclosed to the
+polytheists of Mexico and Greece. Let us not therefore use Greece and
+Mexico as examples for the disparagement of mysticism or for the
+depreciation of man's tendency to seek communion with the Highest. Let
+us rather appeal at once to the reason which makes mysticism, of
+itself, inadequate to satisfy all the needs of man. The reason simply
+is that man is not merely a contemplative but an active being. If
+action were alien to his nature, then man might be satisfied to gaze,
+and merely gaze, on God. But man is active and not merely
+contemplative. We must therefore either hold that religion, being in
+its essence adoration and nothing more, has no function to perform, or
+sphere to fill, in the practical <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[112]</a></span>life of man; or else, if we hold
+that it does, or should, affect the practice of his life, we must
+admit that, though religion implies adoration always, it cannot
+properly be fulfilled in quietism, but must bear its fruit in what man
+does, or in the way he does it. The being or beings whom man worships
+are, indeed, the object of adoration, an object <i>quo nihil maius</i>; but
+they are something more. To them are addressed man's prayers.</p>
+
+<p>It is vain to pretend that prayer, even the simple petition for our
+daily bread, is not religious. It may perhaps be argued that prayer is
+not essential to religion; that it has not always formed part of
+religion; and that it is incompatible with that acquiescence in the
+will of God, and that perfect adoration of God, which is religion in
+its purest and most perfect sense. Whether there is in fact any
+incompatibility between the petition for deliverance from evil, and
+the aspiration that God's will may be done on earth, is a question on
+which we need not enter here. But the statement that prayer has not
+always formed part of religion is one which it should be possible to
+bring to the test of fact.</p>
+
+<p>In the literature of the science of religion, the prayers of the lower
+races of mankind have not been recorded to any great extent by those
+who have had the best opportunities of becoming acquainted with them,
+if and so far as they actually exist. This is <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[113]</a></span>probably due in part to
+their seeming too obvious and too trivial to deserve being put on
+record. It may possibly in some cases be due to the reticence the
+savage observes towards the white man, on matters too sacred to be
+revealed. The error of omission, so far as it can be remedied
+henceforth, will probably be repaired, now that savage beliefs are
+coming to be examined and recorded on the spot by scientific students
+in the interests of science. And the reticence of the savage promises
+to avail him but little: the comparative method has thrown a flood of
+light on his most sacred mysteries.</p>
+
+<p>There may however be another reason why the prayers of the lower races
+have not been recorded to any great extent: they may not have been
+recorded for the simple reason that they may not have been uttered.
+The nature and the occasion of the rite with which the god is
+approached may be such as to make words superfluous: the purpose of
+the ceremony may find adequate expression in the acts performed, and
+may require no words to make it clear. If a community approaches its
+god with sacrifice or offering, in time of sore distress, it
+approaches him with full conviction that he understands the
+circumstances and the purpose of their coming. Words of
+dedication&mdash;'this to thee' is a formula actually in use&mdash;may be
+necessary, but nothing more. Indeed, the Australian tribes, in <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[114]</a></span>rites
+analogous to harvest-offerings, use no spoken words at all. We cannot,
+however, imagine that the rites are, or in their origin were,
+absolutely without meaning or purpose. We must interpret them on the
+analogy of similar rites elsewhere, the purpose of which is expressed
+not merely, as in Australia, by gesture-language, but is reinforced by
+the spoken word. Indeed, we may, perhaps, go even further, and believe
+that as gesture-language was earlier than speech, so the earliest
+rites were conducted wholly by means of ritual acts or gestures; and
+that it was only in course of time, and as a consequence of the
+development of language, that verbal formulae came to be used to give
+fuller expression to the emotions which prompted the rites.</p>
+
+<p>If then we had merely to account for cases in which prayer does not
+happen to have been recorded as a constituent part of the rite of
+worship, we should not be warranted in inferring that prayer was
+really absent. The presumption would rather be that either the records
+are faulty, or that prayer, even though not uttered in word, yet
+played its part. The ground for the presumption is found in the nature
+of the occasions on which the gods are approached in the lower stages
+of religion. Those occasions are either exceptional or regularly
+recurring. The exceptional occasions are those on which the community
+is threatened, or afflicted, with calamity; and on such <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[115]</a></span>occasions,
+whether spoken words of prayer happen to have been recorded by our
+informants, or not, it is beyond doubt that the purpose of the
+community is to escape the calamity, and that the attitude of mind in
+which the god is approached is one of supplication or prayer. The
+regularly recurring occasions are those of seed-time and harvest, or
+first-fruits. The ceremonies at seed-time obviously admit of the
+presumption, even if there be no spoken prayers to prove it, that they
+too have a petitionary purpose; while the recorded instances of the
+prayers put up at harvest time, and on the occasion of the offering of
+first-fruits, suffice to show that thanksgiving is made along with
+prayers for continued prosperity.</p>
+
+<p>It is however not merely on the ground of the absence of recorded
+prayers that it is maintained that there was a stage in the evolution
+of religion when prayer was unpractised and unknown. It is the
+presence and the use of spells which is supposed to show that there
+may have been a time when prayer was as yet unknown, and that the
+process of development was a progress from spell to prayer. On this
+theory, spells, in the course of time, and in accordance with their
+own law of growth, become prayers. The nature and operation of this
+law, it may be difficult or impossible now for us to observe. The
+process took place in the night of time and is therefore not <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[116]</a></span>open to
+our observation. But that the process, by which the one becomes the
+other, is a possible process, is perhaps shown by the fact that we can
+witness for ourselves prayer reverting or casting back to spell.
+Wherever prayers become 'vain repetitions,' it is obvious that they
+are conceived to act in the same way as the savage believes spells to
+act: the mere utterance of the formula has the same magical power, as
+making the sign of the cross, to avert supernatural danger. If prayers
+thus cast back to spells, it may reasonably be presumed that it is
+because prayer is in its origin but spell. It is because oxygen and
+hydrogen, combined, produce water, that water can be resolved into
+oxygen and hydrogen.</p>
+
+<p>This theory, when examined, seems to imply that spell and prayer, so
+far from being different and incompatible things, are one and the same
+thing: seen from one point of view, and in one set of surroundings, it
+is spell; seen from another point of view, and in other surroundings,
+it is prayer. The point of view and the circumstances may change, but
+the thing itself remains the same always. What then is the thing
+itself, which, whether it presents itself as prayer or as spell, still
+always remains the same? It is, and can only be, desire. In spell and
+prayer alike the common, operative element present is desire. Desire
+may issue in spell or prayer; but were there no desires, there would
+be neither prayer nor spell. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[117]</a></span>That we may admit. But, then, we may, or
+rather must go further: if there were no desire, neither would there
+be any action, whatever, performed by man. Men's actions, however,
+differ endlessly from one another. They differ partly because men's
+desires, themselves, differ; and partly because the means they adopt
+to satisfy them differ also. It would be vain to say that different
+means cannot be adopted for attaining one and the same end. Equally
+vain would it be to say that the various means may not differ from one
+another, to the point of incompatibility. If then we regard prayer and
+spell as alike means which have been employed by man for the purpose
+of realising his desires, we are yet at liberty to maintain that
+prayer and spell are different and incompatible.</p>
+
+<p>That there is a difference between prayer and spell&mdash;a difference at
+any rate great enough to allow the two words to be used in
+contradistinction to one another&mdash;is clear enough. The cardinal
+distinction between the two is also clear: a spell takes effect in
+virtue of the power resident in the formula itself or in the person
+who utters it; while a prayer is an appeal to a personal power, or to
+a power personal enough to be able to listen to the appeal, and to
+understand it, and to grant it, if so it seems good. That this
+difference obtains between prayer and spell will not be denied by any
+student of the science of religion. But if this difference is
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[118]</a></span>admitted, as admitted it must be, it is plain that prayer and spell
+are terms which apply to two different moods or states of mind. Desire
+is implied by each alike: were there no desire, there would be neither
+prayer nor spell. But, whereas prayer is an appeal to some one who has
+the power to grant one's desire, spell is the exercise of power which
+one possesses oneself, or has at one's command.</p>
+
+<p>That the two moods are different, and are incompatible with one
+another, is clear upon the face of it: to beg for a thing as a mercy
+or a gift is quite different from commanding that the thing be done.
+The whole attitude of mind assumed in the one case is different from
+that assumed in the other. It is possible, indeed, to pass from the
+one attitude to the other. But it is impossible to say that the one
+attitude is the other. It is correct to say that the one attitude may
+follow the other. But it is to be misled by language to say that the
+one attitude becomes the other. It is possible for one and the same
+man to fluctuate between the two attitudes, to alternate between
+them&mdash;possible, though inconsistent. The child, or even that larger
+child, the man, may beg and scold, almost in the same breath. The
+savage, as is well known, will treat his fetish in the same
+inconsequential way. That it is inconsequential is a fact; but it is a
+fact which, if learned, is but very slowly learned. The process by
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[119]</a></span>which it is learned is part of the evolution of religion; and it is a
+process in the course of which the idea of God tends to disengage
+itself from the confusion of thought and the confusion of feeling, in
+which it is at first enshrouded.</p>
+
+<p>We, indeed, at the present day, may see, or at any rate feel, the
+difference between magic and religion, between spell and prayer. And
+we may imagine that the difference, because real, has always been seen
+or felt, as we see and feel it. But, if we so imagine, we are
+mistaken. The difference was not felt so strongly, or seen so
+definitely, as to make it impossible to ascribe magic to Moses, or
+rain-making to Elijah. In still earlier ages, the difference was still
+more blurred. The two things were not discriminated as we now
+discriminate them: they were not felt then, as they are felt now to be
+inconsistent and incompatible. It was the likeness between the two
+that filled the field of mental vision, originally. Whether a man
+makes a petition or a command, the fact is that he wants something;
+and, with his attention centred on that fact, he may be but little
+aware, as the child is little, if at all, aware, that he passes, or is
+guilty of unreasonable inconsistency in passing, from the one mood to
+the other, and back again. It is in the course of time and as a
+consequence of mental growth that he becomes aware of the difference
+between the two moods.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[120]</a></span>If we insist on maintaining that, because spell and prayer are
+essentially different, men have at all times been fully conscious of
+the difference, we make it fundamentally impossible to explain the
+growth of religion, or to admit that it can have any growth. Just as,
+on the argument advanced in our first chapter, gods and fetishes have
+gradually been differentiated from some conception, prior to them, and
+indeterminate; just as magician and priest, eventually distinguished,
+were originally undistinguished, for a man of power was potentially
+both and might become either; so spell and prayer have come to be
+differentiated, to be recognised as different and fundamentally
+antagonistic, though originally the two categories were confused.</p>
+
+<p>The theory that spell preceded prayer and became prayer, or that magic
+developed into religion, finds as little support in the facts afforded
+by the science of religion, as the converse theory of a primitive
+revelation and a paradisaical state in which religion alone was known.
+For what is found in one stage of evolution the capacity must have
+existed in earlier stages; and if both prayer and spell, both magic
+and religion, are found, the capacity for both must have pre-existed.
+And instead of seeking to deny either, in the interests of a
+pre-conceived theory, we must recognise both potentialities, in the
+interest of truth.</p>
+
+<p>Just as man spoke, for countless thousands of <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[121]</a></span>years, before he had
+any idea of the principles on which he spoke, of the laws of speech or
+of the grammar of his language; just as he reasoned, long before he
+made the reasoning process matter of reflection, and reduced it to the
+laws of logic; so from the beginning he was religious though he had no
+more idea that there were principles of religion, than that there were
+principles of grammar or laws of correct thought. 'First principles of
+every kind have their influence, and indeed operate largely and
+powerfully, long before they come to the surface of human thought and
+are articulately expounded' (Ferrier: <i>Institute of Metaphysics</i>, p.
+13).</p>
+
+<p>But this is not to say that primitive man argued, or thought, with
+never an error, or spoke with never a mistake, until by some
+catastrophe he was expelled from some paradise of grammarians and
+logicians. Though correct reasoning was logical before the time of
+Aristotle, and correct speech grammatical before the time of Dionysius
+Thrax; there was before, as there has been since, plenty both of bad
+logic and bad grammar. But that is very different from saying that, in
+the beginning, all reasoning was unsound, or all speech ungrammatical.
+To say so, would be as unmeaning and as absurd as to say that
+primitive man's every action was immoral, and his habitual state one
+of pure, unmitigated wickedness. If the assumption of a primitive
+paradise is unworkable, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[122]</a></span>neither will the assumption of a primitive
+inferno act, whether it is for the evolution of the grammar of
+language or morality, or of logic or religion, that we wish to
+account. It is to ask too much, to ask us to believe that in the
+beginning there was only wrong-doing and no right, only error and no
+correctness of thought or speech, only spell and no prayer. And if
+both have been always, as they are now, present, there must also
+always have been a tendency in that which has prevailed to conquer. We
+may say that, in the process of evolution, man becomes aware of
+differences to which at first he gave but little attention; and, so
+far as he becomes conscious of them, he sets aside what is illogical,
+immoral, or irreligious, because he is satisfied it is illogical,
+immoral, or irreligious, and for no other reason.</p>
+
+<p>The theory that spell preceded prayer in the evolution of religion
+proceeds upon a misconception of the process of evolution. At one time
+it was assumed and accepted without question that the vegetable and
+animal kingdoms, and all their various species, were successive stages
+of one process of evolution; and that the process proceeded on one
+line and one alone. On the analogy of the evolution of living beings,
+as thus understood, all that remained, when the theory of evolution
+came to be applied to the various forms of thought and feeling, was to
+arrange them also in one line; and that, it was <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[123]</a></span>assumed, would be the
+line which the evolution of religion had followed. On this assumption,
+either magic must be prior to religion, or religion prior to magic;
+and, on the principle that priority must be assigned to the less
+worthy, it followed that magic must have preceded religion.</p>
+
+<p>It will scarcely be disputed that it was on the analogy of what was
+believed to be the course of evolution, in the case of vegetable and
+animal life, that the first attempts to frame a theory of the
+evolution of religion proceeded, with the result that gods were
+assumed to have been evolved out of fetishes, religion out of magic,
+and prayer out of spell. To disprove this, it is not necessary to
+reject the theory of evolution, or to maintain that evolution in
+religion proceeds on lines wholly different from those it follows
+elsewhere. All that is necessary is to understand the theory of the
+evolution of the forms of life, as that theory is held by naturalists
+now; and to understand the lines which the evolution of life is now
+held to have followed. The process of evolution is no longer held to
+have followed one line alone, or to have described but one single
+trajectory like that of a cannon-ball fired from a cannon. The process
+of evolution is, and has been from the beginning, dispersive. To
+borrow M. Bergson's simile, the process of evolution is not like that
+of a cannon-ball which followed one line, but like that <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[124]</a></span>of a shell,
+which burst into fragments the moment it was fired off; and these
+fragments being, as it were, themselves shells, in their turn burst
+into other fragments, themselves in their turn destined to burst, and
+so on throughout the whole process. The very lines, on which the
+process of evolution has moved, show the process to be dispersive. If
+we represent the line by which man has risen from the simplest forms
+of life or protoplasm by an upright line; and the line by which the
+lowest forms of life, such as some of the foraminifera, have continued
+on their low level, by a horizontal line starting from the bottom of
+the upright line, then we have two lines forming a right angle. One
+represents the line of man's evolution, the other that of the
+foraminifera. Between these two lines you may insert as many other
+lines as necessary. That line which is most nearly upright will
+represent the evolution of the highest form of vertebrate, except man;
+the next, the next highest; and so on till you come to the lines
+representing the invertebrates; and so on till you come to the lines
+which are getting nearer and nearer to the horizontal. Thus you will
+have a whole sheaf of lines, all radiating indeed from one common
+point, but all nevertheless dispersing in different directions.</p>
+
+<p>The rush of life, the <i>&eacute;lan de la vie</i>, is thus dispersive; and if we
+are to interpret the evolution of mental on the analogy of physical
+life, we shall <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[125]</a></span>find, M. Bergson says, nothing in the latter which
+compels us to assume either that intelligence is developed instinct,
+or that instinct is degraded intelligence. If that be so, then, we may
+say, neither is there anything to warrant us in assuming either that
+religion is developed magic, or magic degraded religion. Spell is not
+degraded prayer, nor is prayer a superior form of spell: neither does
+become or can become the other, though man may oscillate, with great
+rapidity, between the two, and for long may continue so to oscillate.
+The two moods were from the beginning different, though man for long
+did not clearly discriminate between the two. The dispersive force of
+evolution however tends to separate them more and more widely, until
+eventually oscillation ceases, if it does not become impossible.</p>
+
+<p>The dispersive force of evolution manifests itself in the power of
+discrimination whereby man becomes aware of differences to which, in
+the first confusion of thought, he paid little attention; and
+ultimately may become conscious of the first principles of reason,
+morality or religion, as normative principles, in accordance with
+which he feels that he should act, though he has not always acted, and
+does not always act in accordance with them. In the beginning there is
+confusion of feeling and confusion of thought both as to the quarter
+to which prayer is addressed and as to the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[126]</a></span>nature of the petitions
+which should be proffered. But we should be mistaken, if from the
+confusion we were to infer that there was no principle underlying the
+confusion. We should be mistaken, were we to say that prayer, if
+addressed to polytheistic gods, is not prayer; or that prayer, if
+addressed to a fetish, is not prayer. In both cases, the being to whom
+prayer is offered is misconceived and misrepresented by polytheism and
+fetishism; and the misconception is due to want of discrimination and
+spiritual insight. But failure to observe is no proof either that the
+power of observation is wanting or that there is nothing to be
+observed. The being to whom prayer is offered may be very different
+from the conception which the person praying has of him, and may yet
+be real.</p>
+
+<p>Petitions, then, put up to polytheistic gods, or even to fetishes, may
+still be prayers. But petitions may be put up, not only to
+polytheistic gods, or to fetishes, but even to the one god of the
+monotheist, which never should be put up. 'Of thy goodness, slay mine
+enemies,' is, in form, prayer: it is a desire, a petition to a god,
+implying recognition of the superiority of the divine power, implying
+adoration even. But eventually it comes to be condemned as an
+impossible prayer: spiritually it is a contradiction in terms. If
+however we say that it is not, and never was, prayer; and that only by
+confusion of thought <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[127]</a></span>was it ever considered so, we may be told that,
+as a simple matter of actual fact, it is an actual prayer that was
+actually put up. That it ought not&mdash;from the point of view of a later
+stage in the development of religion&mdash;to have been put up, may be
+admitted; but that it was a prayer actually put up, cannot be denied.
+To this the reply seems to be that it is with prayer as it is with
+argument: a fallacy is a fallacy, just as much before it is detected
+as afterwards. The fact that it is not detected does not make it a
+sound argument; still less does it prove either that there are now no
+principles of correct reasoning or that there were none then; it only
+shows that there was, on this point, confusion of thought. So too we
+may admit&mdash;we have no choice but to admit&mdash;that there are spiritual
+fallacies, as well as fallacies of logic. Of such are the petitions
+which are in form prayers, just as logical fallacies are, in form,
+arguments. They may be addressed to the being worshipped, as fallacies
+are addressed to the reason; and eventually their fallacious nature
+may become evident even to the reason of man. But it is only by the
+evolution of prayer, that is by the disclosure of its true nature,
+that petitions of the kind in question come to be recognised and
+condemned as spiritual fallacies. The petitioner who puts up such
+petitions is indeed unconscious of his error, but he errs, for all
+that, just as the person who uses <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[128]</a></span>a fallacious argument may be
+himself the victim of his fallacy: but he errs none the less because
+he is deceived himself. There are normative principles of prayer as
+well as the normative principles of thought; and both operate 'long
+before they come to the surface of human thought and are articulately
+expounded.' It is in thinking that the normative principles of thought
+emerge. But it is by no means the case that they come to the surface
+of every man's thought. So too it is in prayer that the normative
+principles of prayer emerge; yet men require teaching how to pray.
+Some petitions are permissible, some not.</p>
+
+<p>If then there are normative principles of prayer, just as there are of
+action, thought and speech; if there are petitions which are not
+permissible, and which are not and never can be prayers, though by a
+spiritual fallacy, analogous to logical fallacies, they may be thought
+to be prayers, what is it that decides the nature of an admissible
+petition? It seems to be the conception of the being to whom the
+petition is addressed. Thus it is that prayer throws light on the idea
+of God. From the prayers offered we can infer the nature of the idea.
+The confusion of admissible and inadmissible petitions points to
+confused apprehension of the idea of God. It is not merely imperfect
+apprehension but confused apprehension. In polytheism the confusion
+betrays <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[129]</a></span>itself, because it leads to collision with the principles of
+morality: of the gods who make war upon one another, each must be
+supposed to hold himself in the right; therefore either some gods do
+not know what is right, or there is no right to be known even by the
+gods. From this confusion the only mode of escape, which is
+satisfactory both to religion and to morality, is to recognise that
+the unity of morality and the unity of the godhead mutually imply one
+another. But so long as a plurality of gods, with a shifting standard
+of morality, is believed in, the distinction between admissible and
+inadmissible petitions cannot be firmly or correctly drawn.</p>
+
+<p>A tribal god is petitioned to slay the tribe's enemies, because he is
+conceived as the god of the tribe and not the god of its enemies. If
+the declaration, that 'I am thy servant,' is affirmed with emphasis on
+the first personal pronoun, so as to imply that others are no servants
+of thine, the implication is that thy servants' enemies are thy
+enemies; whereas if there is, for all men, one God only, then all men
+are his servants, and not one person, or one tribe, alone. The
+conception of God as the god of one tribe alone is an imperfect and
+confused apprehension of the idea of God. But it is less so than is
+the conception of a god as belonging to one individual owner, as a
+fetish does. To a fetish the distinctive, though not the only, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[130]</a></span>prayer
+offered, precisely is 'Slay mine enemies'; and therein it is that lies
+the difference between a fetish and a god of the community. The
+difference is the same in kind as that between a tribal god and the
+God of all mankind. The fetish and the tribal god are both inadequate
+ideas of God; and the inadequacy implies confusion&mdash;the confusion of
+conceiving that the god is there only to subserve the desires and to
+do the will of the individual worshipper or body of worshippers.</p>
+
+<p>Escape from this confusion is to some extent secured by the fact that
+prayers to the community's god are offered by the community aloud, in
+public and as part of the public worship; and, consequently, with the
+object of securing the fulfilment of the desires of the community as a
+community. The blessing on the community is, at this stage, the only
+blessing in which the individual can properly share, and the only one
+for which he can pray to the god of the community. Thus the nature of
+the petitions, and the quarter to which permissible petitions can be
+addressed, are determined by the fact that prayer is an office
+undertaken by the community as a community. If the desires which an
+individual entertains are such as would be repudiated by the
+community, because injurious to the community, they cannot be
+preferred, in the presence of the community, to the god of the
+community; and thus permissible <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[131]</a></span>petitions begin to be differentiated
+from those which are impermissible&mdash;a normative principle of prayer
+emerges, and the idea of God begins to take more definite form, or to
+emerge somewhat from the mist which at first enveloped it.</p>
+
+<p>But though permissible petitions be distinguished from petitions which
+are impermissible, it by no means follows that impermissible petitions
+cease to be put up. What actually happens is that since the community
+does not, and cannot, allow petitions, conceived to be injurious to
+itself, to be put up to its god, they are put up privately to a fetish;
+or, to put the matter more correctly, a being or power not identified
+with the welfare of the community is sought in such cases; and the
+being so found is known to the science of religion as a fetish. But
+though a fetish differs from a god, inasmuch as the fetish will, and a
+god will not, injure a member of the tribe, the distinction is not
+clear-cut. There are things which both alike may be prayed to do: both
+may be besought to do good to the individual who addresses them. To
+this protective mimicry the fetish owes in part its power of survival.
+For the same reason spell and magic contrive to continue their
+existence side by side with religion and prayer. What conduces to this
+result is that at first the god of the community is conceived as
+listening to the prayers of the community rather than of the
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[132]</a></span>individual: from the beginning it is part of the idea of God that He
+cares for all His worshippers alike. This conviction, to be carried out
+to its full consequences, both logical and spiritual, requires that
+each individual worshipper should forget himself, should renounce his
+particular inclinations, should abandon himself and long to do not his
+own will but that of God. But before self can be consciously abandoned,
+the consciousness of self must be realised. Before self-will can be
+surrendered, its existence must be realised. And self-consciousness,
+the recognition of the existence of the will and the reality of the
+self, comes relatively late both in the history of the community and in
+the personal history of the individual. At first the existence of the
+individual will and the individual self is not recognised by the
+community and is not provided for in the community's worship and
+prayers. It is the community, as a community, and not as so many
+individual worshippers, offering separate prayers, that first
+approaches the community's god. The existence of the individual
+worshipper, as an individual is not denied, it is simply unknown, or
+rather not realised by the community. But its stirrings are felt in the
+individual himself: he is conscious of desires which are other than
+those of the community, and the fulfilment of which forms no part of
+the community's prayers to the community's god. His
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[133]</a></span>self-consciousness, his consciousness of himself as contrasted with the
+community, is fostered by the growth of such desires. For the
+fulfilment of some of them, those which are manifestly anti-social, he
+must turn to his fetish, or rely upon the power of magic. Even for the
+fulfilment of those of his desires which are not felt to be
+anti-social, but which find no place in the prayers of the community,
+he must rely on some other power than that of the god of the community;
+and it is in spells, therefore, that he continues to trust for the
+fulfilment of these innocent desires, inasmuch as the prayers of the
+community do not include them.</p>
+
+<p>The existence, in the individual, of desires, other than those of the
+community, wakes the individual to some consciousness of his
+individual existence. The effort to secure the fulfilment of those
+desires increases still further his self-consciousness, for he resorts
+to powers which are not exercised solely in the interests of the
+community, as are the powers of the community's god. But his
+increasing self-consciousness cannot and does not fail to modify his
+character and action as a worshipper of the community's gods. It
+modifies his relation to the community's gods in this sense, viz. that
+he appears before them not merely as a member of the community
+undistinguished from other members, but as an individual conscious to
+some extent of his <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[134]</a></span>individuality. He continues to take part in the
+worship of the gods, but he comes to it conscious of wishes of his own
+which may become petitions to the god, so far as they are not felt to
+be inconsistent with the good of the community.</p>
+
+<p>Of this stage we have ample evidence afforded by the cuneiform
+inscriptions of Assyria. Spells employed to the hurt of any worshipper
+of the gods are spells against which the worshipper may properly
+appeal to the gods for protection. A god is essentially the protector
+of his worshippers, and he protects each as well as all of them. Each
+of them may therefore appeal to him for protection. But though any one
+of them may so appeal, it is apparently only in course of time that
+individual petitions of this kind come to be put up to the gods. And
+the evidence of the cuneiform inscriptions is particularly interesting
+and instructive on the way in which this came about.</p>
+
+<p>In the 'Maklu' tablets we find that the writers of the tablets are, or
+anticipate that they may be, the victims of spells. The inscriptions
+themselves may be regarded, and by some authorities are described, as
+counter-charms or counter-spells. They do in fact include, though they
+cannot be said to consist of, counter-spells. Their typical feature is
+that they include some such phrase as, 'Whoever thou art, O witch, I
+bind thy hands behind <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[135]</a></span>thee,' or 'May the magic thou hast made recoil
+upon thyself.' If the victim is being turned yellow by sickness, the
+counter-spell is 'O witch, like the circlet of this seal, may thy face
+grow yellow and green.'</p>
+
+<p>The ceremonies with which these counter-spells were performed are
+indicated by the words, and they are ceremonies of the same kind as
+those with which spells are performed: they are symbolic actions, that
+is to say, actions which express by gesture the same meaning and
+intention as are expressed by the words. Thus, from the words:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'As the water trickleth away from his body<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">So may the pestilence in his body trickle away,'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p class="noin">it is obvious that this counter-spell accompanied a ceremonial rite of
+the kind indicated by the words. As an image of the person to be
+bewitched was used by the workers of magic, so an image of her 'who
+hath bewitched me' is used by the worker of the counter-spell, with
+the words:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'May her spell be wrecked, and upon her<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And upon her image may it recoil.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>If, now, such words, and the symbolical actions which are described
+and implied, were all that these Maklu tablets contained, it might be
+argued that these counter-spells were pure pieces of magic. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[136]</a></span>The
+argument would not indeed be conclusive, because though the sentences
+are in the optative mood, there would be nothing to show on what, or
+on whom, the speaker relied for the fulfilment of his wish. But as it
+happens, it is characteristic of these Maklu tablets that they are all
+addressed to the gods by name, e.g. 'May the great gods remove the
+spell from my body,' or 'O flaming Fire-god, mighty son of Anu! judge
+thou my case and grant me a decision! Burn up the sorcerers and
+sorceress!' It is the gods that are prayed to that the word of the
+sorceress 'shall turn back to her own mouth; may the gods of might
+smite her in her magic; may the magic which she has worked be crumbled
+like salt.'</p>
+
+<p>Thus these Maklu petitions are not counter-spells, as at first sight
+they may appear; nor are they properly to be treated as being
+themselves spells for the purpose of counteracting magic. They are in
+form and in fact prayers to the gods 'to undo the spell' and 'to force
+back the words' of the witch into her own mouth. But though in the
+form in which these Maklu petitions are preserved to us, they appear
+as prayers to the gods, and not as spells, or counter-spells; it is
+true, and important to notice, that, in some cases, the sentences in
+the optative mood seem quite detachable from the invocation of the
+gods. Those sentences may apparently have stood, at one time, quite
+well by <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[137]</a></span>themselves, and apart from any invocation of the gods; that
+is to say, they may originally have been spells or counter-spells, and
+only subsequently have been incorporated into prayers addressed to the
+gods.</p>
+
+<p>Let us then assume that this was the case with some of these Maklu
+petitions, and let us consider what is implied when we make the
+assumption. What is implied is that there are some wishes, for
+instance those embodied in these Maklu petitions, which may be
+realised by means of spells, or may quite appropriately be preferred
+to the gods of the community. Such are wishes for the well-being of
+the individual worshipper and for the defeat of evil-doers who would
+do or are doing him wrong. When it is recognised that individuals&mdash;as
+well as the community&mdash;may come with their plaints before the gods of
+the community, the functions of those gods become enlarged, for they
+are extended to include the protection of individual members of the
+community, as well as the protection of the community, as such; and
+the functions of the community's gods are thus extended and enlarged,
+because the members of the community have become, in some degree,
+individuals conscious of their individuality. The importance, for the
+science of religion, of this development of self-consciousness is that
+the consciousness of self must be realised <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[138]</a></span>before self can
+consciously be abandoned, that is before self-will can be consciously
+surrendered.</p>
+
+<p>As is shown by the Maklu petitions, there may come, in the course of
+the evolution of religion, a stage in which it is recognised that the
+individual worshipper may petition the gods for deliverance from the
+evil which afflicts them. And the petitions used appear in some cases,
+as we have seen, to have been adopted into the ritual of the gods,
+word for word as they were found already in existence. If then they
+were, both in the words in which they were expressed, and in the
+purpose which they sought to achieve, such that they could be taken
+up, as they were and without change, into the ritual of the
+community's gods, it would seem that, even before they were so taken
+up, they could not have been wholly, if at all, alien to the spirit of
+religion. What marks them as religious, in the cuneiform inscriptions,
+is their context: it shows that the power, relied on for the
+accomplishment of the desires expressed in these petitions, was the
+power of the gods. Remove the context, and it becomes a matter of
+ambiguity, whether the wish is supposed, by those who utter it, to
+depend for its realisation on some power, possessed and exercised by
+those who express the wish, or whether it is supposed to depend on the
+good will of some being vaguely conceived, and not addressed by name.
+But if eventually the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[139]</a></span>wish, and the words in which it was expressed,
+are taken up into the worship of the gods, there seems a balance of
+probability that the wish was from the beginning rather in the nature
+of religion than of magic, rather a petition than a command; though
+the categories were not at first discriminated, and there was at first
+no clear vision of the quarter from which fulfilment of the wish was
+hoped for.</p>
+
+<p>From this point of view, optative sentences, sentences which express
+the wishes of him who pronounces them, may, in the beginning, well
+have been ambiguous, because there was, in the minds of those who
+uttered them, no clear conception of the quarter to which they were
+addressed: the idea of God may have been vague to the extreme of
+vagueness. Some of these optative sentences however, were such that
+the community as a whole could join in them; and they were
+potentially, and became actually, prayers to the god of the community.
+The being to whom the community, as a whole, could pray, was thereby
+displayed as the god of the community. The idea of God became, so far,
+somewhat less vague, somewhat more sharply defined. Optative
+sentences, however, in which the community could not join, in which no
+one but the person who framed them could take part, could not be
+addressed to the god of the community. The idea of God thus was
+defined negatively: there were wishes which could not be <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[140]</a></span>communicated
+to him&mdash;those which were repugnant to the well-being of the community.</p>
+
+<p>The prayers of savages, that is of the men who are probably still
+nearest to the circumstances and condition of primitive man, furnish
+the material from which we can best infer what was the idea of God
+which was present in their consciousness at those moments when it was
+most vividly present to them. In view of the infinite number and
+variety of the forms of religion and religious belief, nothing would
+seem, <i>a priori</i>, more reasonable than to expect an equally infinite
+number of various and contradictory ideas. Especially should this seem
+a reasonable expectation to those who consider the idea of God to be
+fundamentally, and of its very nature, impossible and untenable. And
+so long as we look at the attempts which have been made, by means of
+reflection upon the idea, to body it forth, we have the evidence of
+all the mythologies to show the infinite variety of monstrosities,
+which reflection on the idea has been capable of producing. If then we
+stop there, our <i>a priori</i> expectation of savage and irrational
+inconsistency is fulfilled to abundance and to loathsome excess. But
+to stop there is to stop short, and to accept the speculations of the
+savage when he is reflecting on his experience, instead of pushing
+forward to discover for ourselves, if we may, what his experience
+actually was. To <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[141]</a></span>discover that, we cannot be content to pause for
+ever on his reflections. We must push back to the moment of his
+experience, that is to the moments when he is in the presence of his
+gods and is addressing them. Those are the moments in which he prays
+and in which he has no doubt that he is in communion with his gods. It
+is, then, from his prayers that we must seek to infer what idea he has
+of the gods to whom he prays.</p>
+
+<p>When, however, we take his prayers as the evidence from which to infer
+his idea of God, instead of the luxuriant overgrowth of speculative
+mythology, we find everywhere a bare simplicity, and everywhere
+substantial identity. If this is contrary to our expectation and at
+first seems strange, let us bear in mind that the science of morals
+offers a parallel, in this respect, to the science of religion. At one
+time it was, unconsciously but none the less decidedly, assumed that
+savages had a multiplicity of irrational and disgusting customs but no
+morals. The idea that there could be a substantial identity between
+the moral rules of different savage races, and even between their
+moral rules and ours, was an idea that simply was not entertained.
+Nevertheless, it was a fact, though unnoticed; and now it is a fact
+which, thanks to Dr Westermarck, is placed beyond dispute. 'When,' he
+says, 'we examine the moral rules of uncivilised races we find that
+they in a very large <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[142]</a></span>measure resemble those prevalent among nations
+of culture.' The human spirit throughout the process of its evolution
+is, in truth, one; the underlying unity which manifests itself
+throughout the evolution of morality is to be found also in the
+evolution of religion; and it is from the prayers of man that we can
+infer it.</p>
+
+<p>The first and fundamental article of belief implied by the offering of
+prayers is that the being to whom they are offered&mdash;however vaguely he
+may be conceived&mdash;is believed to be accessible to man. Man's cry can
+reach Him. Not only does it reach Him but, it is believed, He will
+listen to it; and it is of His very nature that He is disposed to
+listen favourably to it. But, though He will listen, it is only to
+prayers offered in the right spirit that He will listen. The earliest
+prayers offered are in all probability those which the community sends
+up in time of trouble; and they must be offered in the spirit of
+repentance. It is with the conviction that they have offended that the
+community first turns to the being worshipped, by whom they hope to be
+delivered from the evil which is upon them, and by whom they pray to
+be forgiven.</p>
+
+<p>Next, the offering of prayer implies the belief that the being
+addressed, not merely understands the prayers offered, but has the
+power to grant them. As having not only the power, but also the will
+so to <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[143]</a></span>do, he is approached not only with fear but also with hope. No
+approach would or could be made, if nothing could be hoped from it;
+and nothing could be hoped, unless the being approached were believed
+to have the power to grant the prayer. The very fact that approach is
+made shows that the being is at the moment believed to be one with
+whom it rests to grant or refuse the supplication, one than whom no
+other is, in this respect at least, more powerful, <i>quo nihil maius</i>.</p>
+
+<p>But prayers offered in time of trouble, though they be, or if they be,
+the earliest, are not the only prayers that are offered by early man.
+Man's wishes are not, and never were, limited: escape from calamity is
+not, and never has been, the only thing for which man is capable of
+wishing. It certainly is not the only thing for which he has been
+capable of praying. Even early man wishes for material blessings: the
+kindly fruits of the earth and his daily food are things for which he
+not only works but also prays. The negro on the Gold Coast prays for
+his daily rice and yams, the Zulu for cattle and for corn, the Samoan
+for abundant food, the Finno-Ugrian for rain to make his crops grow;
+the Peruvian prayed for health and prosperity. And when man has
+attained his wish, when his prayers have been granted, he does not
+always forget to render thanks to the god who listened to his prayer.
+'Thank you, gods'; says the Basuto, 'give us bread to-morrow also.'</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[144]</a></span>Whether the prayer be for food, or for deliverance from calamity, the
+natural tendency is for gratitude and thanks to follow, when the
+prayer has been fulfilled; and the mental attitude, or mood of
+feeling, is then no longer one of hope or fear, but of thankfulness
+and praise. It is in its essence, potentially and, to varying degrees,
+actually, the mood of veneration and adoration.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'My lips shall praise thee,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">So will I bless thee while I live:<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">I will lift up my hands in thy name,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And my mouth shall praise thee with joyful lips.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>From the prayers that are offered in early, if not primitive,
+religions we may draw with safety some conclusions as to the idea,
+which the worshippers had before their minds, of the being to whom
+they believed they had access in prayer. He was a being accessible in
+prayer; and he had it in his power, and, if properly approached, in
+his will, to deliver the community from material and external evils.
+The spirit in which he was to be properly approached was one of
+confession and repentance of offences committed against him: the
+calamities which fell upon the community were conceived to have fallen
+justly. He was not conceived to be offended without a cause. Doubtless
+the causes of offence, like the punishments with which they were
+visited, were external and visible, in the sense that they could be
+discovered and made plain to all who were concerned <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[145]</a></span>to recognise
+them. The offences were actions which not only provoked the wrath of
+the god, but were condemned by the community. They included offences
+which were purely formal and external; and, in the case of some
+peoples, the number of such offences probably increased rather than
+diminished as time went on. The <i>Surpu</i> tablets of the cuneiform
+inscriptions, which are directed towards the removal of the <i>mamit</i>,
+the ban or taboo, consequent upon such offences, are an example of
+this. Adultery, murder and theft are included amongst the offences,
+but the tablets include hundreds of other offences, which are purely
+ceremonial, and which probably took a long time to reach the luxuriant
+growth they have attained in the tablets. For ceremonial offences a
+ceremonial purification was felt to suffice. But there were others
+which, as the Babylonian Penitential Psalms testify, were felt to go
+deeper and to be sins, personal sins of the worshipper against his
+God. The penitent exclaims:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'Lord, my sins are many, great are my misdeeds.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The spirit, in which he approaches his God, is expressed in the words:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'I thy servant, full of sighs, call upon thee.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Like the doves do I moan, I am o'ercome with sighing,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">With lamentation and groaning my spirit is downcast.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[146]</a></span>His prayer is that his trespasses may be forgiven:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'Rend my sins, like a garment!<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">My God, my sins are unto seven times seven.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Forgive my iniquities.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p class="noin">And his hope is in God:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'Oh, Lord, thy servant, cast him not away,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The sins which I have committed, transform by thy grace!'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The attitude of mind, the relation in which the worshipper finds
+himself to stand towards his God, is the same as that revealed in the
+Psalm of David:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'Wash me throughly from mine iniquity,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And cleanse me from my sin.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">For I acknowledge my transgressions:<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And my sin is ever before me.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Against thee, thee only, have I sinned.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Cast me not away from thy presence.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The earliest prayers offered by any community probably were, as we
+have already seen, those which were sent up in time of trouble and
+inspired by the conviction that the community's god had been justly
+offended. The psalms, from which quotations have just been given, show
+the same idea of God, conceived to have been justly offended by the
+transgressions of his servants. The difference between them is that,
+in the later prayers, the individual self-consciousness has come to
+realise that the individual as well as the community exists; that the
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[147]</a></span>individual, as well as the community, is guilty of trespasses; and
+that the individual, as well as the community, needs forgiveness. That
+is to say, the idea of God has taken more definite shape: God has been
+revealed to the individual worshipper to be 'My God'; the worshipper
+to be 'Thy servant'; and what is feared is not merely that the
+worshipper should be excluded from the community, but that he should
+be cast away from communion with God. The communion, aspired to, is
+however still such communion as may exist between a servant and his
+master.</p>
+
+<p>Material and external blessings, further, are, together with
+deliverance from material and external evil, still the principal
+subjects of prayer in the Psalms both of the Old Testament and of the
+cuneiform inscriptions; and, so far as this is the case, the
+worshipper's prayer is that his individual will may be done, and it is
+because he has received material and external blessings, because his
+will has been done, that his joyful lips praise and bless the Lord.
+That is to say, the idea of God, implied by such prayer and praise, is
+that He is a being who may help man to the fulfilment of man's desires
+and to the realisation of man's will. The assumption required to
+justify this conception is that in man, man's will alone is operative,
+and never God's. This assumption has its analogy in the fact, already
+noticed, that in the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[148]</a></span>beginning the individual is not self-conscious,
+or aware of the individuality of his own existence. When the
+individual's self-consciousness is thus but little, if at all,
+manifested, it is the community, as a community, which approaches its
+god and is felt to be responsible for the transgressions which have
+offended him. As self-consciousness comes to manifest itself, more and
+more, the sense of personal transgression and individual
+responsibility becomes more and more strong. If now we suppose that at
+this point the evolution, or unfolding, of the self ceases, and that
+the whole of its contents is now revealed, we shall hold that, in man,
+man's will alone can operate, and never God's. It is indeed at this
+point that non-Christian religions stop, if they get so far. The idea
+of God as a being whose will is to be done, and not man's, is a
+distinctively Christian idea.</p>
+
+<p>The petition, which, as far as the science of religion enables us to
+judge, was the first petition made by man, was for deliverance from
+evil. The next, in historical order, was for forgiveness of sins; and,
+then, when society had come to be settled on an agricultural basis and
+dependent on the harvest, prayer was offered for daily bread. In the
+Lord's Prayer, the order of these petitions is exactly reversed. A
+fresh basis, or premiss, for them, is supplied. They are still
+petitions proper to put forward, if put forward in the consciousness
+of a fact, hitherto not <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[149]</a></span>revealed&mdash;that man may do not his own will
+but the will of Our Father, who is in heaven.</p>
+
+<p>Prayer is thus, at the end, what it was at the beginning, the prayer
+of a community. But whereas at the beginning the community was the
+narrow and exclusive community of the family or tribe, at the end it
+is a community which may include all mankind. Thus, the idea of God
+has increased in its extension. In its intension, so to speak, it has
+deepened: God is disclosed not as the master and king of his subjects
+and servants, but as the Father in heaven of his children on earth. It
+has however not merely deepened, it has been transformed, or rather it
+is to be approached in a different mood, and therefore is revealed in
+a new aspect: whereas in the beginning the body of worshippers,
+whether it approached its god with prayer for deliverance from
+calamities or for material blessings, approached him in order that
+their desires might be fulfilled; in the end the worshipper is taught
+that approach is possible only on renunciation of his own desires and
+on acceptance of God's will. The centre of religion is transposed: it
+is no longer man and his desires round which religion is to revolve.
+The will of God is to be the centre, to which man is no longer to
+gravitate unconsciously but to which he is deliberately to determine
+himself. As in the solar system the force of gravity is but one, so in
+the spiritual system that which holds all <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[150]</a></span>spiritual beings together
+is the love which proceeds from God to his creatures and may
+increasingly proceed from them to Him. It is the substitution of the
+love of God for the desires of man which makes the new heaven and the
+new earth.</p>
+
+<p>From the point of view of evolution the important fact is that this
+new aspect of the idea of God is not something merely superposed upon
+the old: if it were simply superposed, it would not be evolved.
+Neither is the disclosure, to the soul, of God as love, evolved from
+the conception of Him as the being from whom men may seek the
+fulfilment of their desires. To interpret the process of religious
+evolution in this way would be to misinterpret it, in exactly the same
+way as if we were to suppose that, only when the evolution of
+vegetable life had been carried out to the full in all its forms, did
+the evolution of animal life begin. Animals are not vegetables carried
+to a rather higher stage of evolution, any more than vegetables are
+animals which have relapsed to a lower stage. If then we are to apply
+the theory of evolution to spiritual life, as well as to bodily life,
+we must apply it in the same way. We must regard the various forms, in
+the one case as in the other, as following different lines, and
+tending in different directions from a common centre, rather than as
+different and successive sections of one and the same line. Spell no
+more becomes prayer <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[151]</a></span>than vegetables become animals. Impelled by the
+force of calamity to look in one direction&mdash;that of deliverance from
+pestilence or famine&mdash;early man saw, in the idea of God, a refuge in
+time of trouble. Moved at a later time by the feeling of gratitude,
+man found in the idea of God an object of veneration; and then
+interpreted his relation as that of a servant to his lord. Whichever
+way this interpretation was pushed&mdash;whether to mean that the servant
+was to do things pleasing to his lord, in order to gain the fulfilment
+of his own desires; or to imply that his transgressions stood ever
+between him and his offended master&mdash;further advance in that direction
+was impossible. A new direction, and therefore a fresh point of
+departure, was necessary. It was forthcoming in the Christian idea of
+God as the heavenly Father. That idea when revealed is seen to have
+been what was postulated but never attained by religion in its earlier
+stages. The petitions for our daily bread, for forgiveness of sins,
+and for delivery from evil, had as their basis, in pre-Christian
+religions, man's desire. In Christianity those petitions are preferred
+in the conviction that the making of them is in accordance with God's
+will and the granting of them in accordance with His love; and that
+conviction is a normative principle of prayer.</p>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="V" id="V"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[152]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>V<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+
+<h4>THE IDEA AND BEING OF GOD</h4>
+<br />
+
+<p>Men thought, spoke and acted for long ages before they began to
+reflect on the ways in which they did so; and, when they did begin to
+reflect, it was long before they discovered the principles on which
+they thought, spoke and acted, or recognised them as the principles on
+which man must speak, if he is to speak intelligibly; on which, as
+laws of thought, he must think, if he is to think correctly; and on
+which, as laws of morality, he must act, if he is to act as he should
+act.</p>
+
+<p>But though many thousands of years elapsed before he recognised these
+laws, they were, all the time, the laws on which he had to think,
+speak and act, and did actually think, speak and act, so far as he did
+so correctly. When, then, we speak of the evolution of thought, speech
+and action, we cannot mean that the laws of thought, for instance,
+were in the beginning different from what they are now, and only
+gradually came to be what they are at present. <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[153]</a></span>That would be just the
+same as saying that the law of gravitation did not operate in the way
+described by Newton until Newton formulated the law. The fact is that
+science has its evolution, just as thought, speech and action have.
+Man gradually and with much effort discovers laws of science, as he
+discovers the laws of thought, speech and action. In neither case does
+he make the laws; all that he does in either case is to come to
+recognise that they are there. But the recognition is a process, a
+slow process, attended by many mistakes and set-backs. And this slow
+process of the gradual recognition or discovery of fundamental laws,
+or first principles, is the process in which the evolution of science,
+as well as the evolution of thought, speech and action, consists. It
+is the process by which the laws that are at the bottom of man's
+thought, speech and action, and are fundamental to them, tend to rise
+to the surface of consciousness.</p>
+
+<p>It is in this same process that the evolution of religion consists. It
+is the slow process, the gradual recognition, of the fundamental idea
+of religion&mdash;the idea of God&mdash;which tends to rise to the surface of
+the religious consciousness. Just as laws of thought, speech and
+action are implied by the very conception of right thought or speech
+or action, so the idea of God is implied by the mere conception of
+religion. It is implied always; it is implicit from the very
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[154]</a></span>beginning. It is disclosed gradually and imperfectly. The process of
+disclosure, which is the evolution of the idea, may, in many
+instances, be arrested at a stage of very early imperfection, by
+causes which make further development in that direction impossible;
+and then, if further progress is to be made, a fresh movement, in a
+fresh direction must be made. Just as men do not always think
+correctly, or act rightly, though they tend, in different degrees, to
+do so; so too, in religion, neither do they always move in the right
+direction, even if they move at all. They may even deteriorate, at
+times, in religion, as, at times, they deteriorate in morality. But it
+is not necessary to infer from this undoubted fact that there are no
+principles of either morality or religion. We are not led to deny the
+existence of the laws of logic or of grammar, because they are
+frequently disregarded by ourselves and others.</p>
+
+<p>The principles, or rather some particular principle, of morality may
+be absolutely misconceived by a community, at some stage of its
+history, in such a way that actions of a certain kind are not
+condemned by it. The inconsistency of judgment and feeling, thus
+displayed, is not the less inconsistent because it is almost, if not
+entirely, unconscious. In the same way a community may fail to
+recognise a principle of religion, or may misinterpret the idea of
+God; still the fact that they misinterpret it is proof that they have
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[155]</a></span>it&mdash;if they had it not, they could not interpret it in different ways.
+And the different interpretations are the different ways in which its
+evolution is carried forward. Its evolution is not in one continuous
+line, but is radiative from one common centre, and is dispersive. That
+is the reason why the originators of religious movements, and the
+founders of religions, consider themselves to be restoring an old
+state of things, rather than initiating a new one; to be returning to
+the old religion, rather than starting a new religion. But in point of
+fact they are not reverting to a bygone stage in the history of
+religion; they are starting afresh from the fundamental principles of
+religion. From the central idea of religion, the idea of God, they
+move in a direction different from any hitherto followed. Monotheism
+may in order of time follow upon polytheism, but it is not polytheism
+under another name, any more than prayer is spell under another name.
+It is something very different: it is the negation of polytheism, not
+another form of it. It strikes at the roots of polytheism; and it does
+so because it goes back not to polytheism but to that from which
+polytheism springs, the idea of God; and starts from it in a direction
+which leads to a very different manifestation of the idea of God. And
+if monotheism displaces polytheism, it does so because it is found by
+experience to be the more faithful interpretation of that idea of God
+which <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[156]</a></span>even the polytheist has in his soul. In the same way, and for
+the same reasons, polytheism is not fetishism under another name. The
+gods of a community are not the fetishes of individuals. The
+difference between them is not a mere difference of name. Polytheism
+may, or may not, follow, in order of time, upon fetishism; but
+polytheism is not merely a form of fetishism. The two are different,
+and largely inconsistent, interpretations, or misinterpretations, of
+the same fundamental idea of God. They move in different directions,
+and are felt by the communities in which they are found, to tend in
+the direction of very different ends&mdash;the one to the good of the
+community, the other, in its most characteristic manifestations, to
+the injury of the community. In fetishism and polytheism we see the
+radiative, dispersive, force of evolution manifesting itself, just as
+in polytheism and monotheism. The different lines of evolution radiate
+in different directions, but those lines, all point to a common centre
+of dispersion&mdash;the idea of God. But fetishism, polytheism and
+monotheism are not different and successive stages of one line of
+evolution, following the same direction. They are lines of different
+lengths, moving in different directions, though springing from a
+common centre&mdash;the soul of man. It is because they have a common
+centre, that man, whichever line he has followed, can fall back upon
+it and start afresh.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[157]</a></span>The fact that men fall victims to logical fallacies does not shake our
+faith in the validity of the principles of reason; nor does the fact
+that false reasoning abounds the more, the lower we descend in the
+scale of humanity, lead us to believe that the principles of reason
+are invalid and non-existent there. Still less do we believe that,
+because immature minds reason often incorrectly, therefore correct
+reasoning is for all men an impossibility and a contradiction in
+terms. And these considerations apply in just the same way to the
+principles of religion and the idea of God, as to the principles of
+reason. Yet we are sometimes invited to believe that the existence of
+religious fallacies, or fallacious religions, is of itself enough to
+prove that there is no validity in the principles of religion, no
+reality in the idea of God; that because the uncultured races of
+mankind are the victims of error in religion, there is in religion no
+truth at all: the religion of civilised mankind consists but of the
+errors of the savage disguised in civilised garb. So far as this view
+is supposed to be the outcome of the study of the evolution of
+religion, it is due probably to the conception of evolution from which
+it proceeds. It proceeds on the assumption that the process of
+evolution exhibits the continuity of one and the same continuous line.
+It ignores the radiative, dispersive movement of evolution in
+different lines; and <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[158]</a></span>overlooks the fact that new forms of religion
+are all re-births, renaissances, and spring not from one another, but
+from the soul of man, in which is found the idea of God. It further
+assumes not merely that there are errors but that there is no truth
+whatever in the lowest, or the earliest, forms of religion; and that
+therefore neither is there any truth in the highest. But this
+assumption, if applied to the principles of thought, speech or action,
+would equally prove thought to be irrational, speech unintelligible,
+moral action absurd; and evolution would be the process by which this
+fundamental irrationality, unintelligibility and absurdity was worked
+out.</p>
+
+<p>Either this is the conclusion, or some means must be sought whereby to
+distinguish the evolution of religion from the evolution of thought,
+speech and morals, and to show that&mdash;whereas in the case of the
+latter, evolution is the process in which the principles whereon man
+should think, speak and act, tend to manifest themselves with
+increasing clearness&mdash;in the case of religion, there is no such
+progressive revelation, and no first principle, or fundamental idea,
+which all forms of religion seek to express. But any attempt to show
+this is hopeless: the science of religion is engaged throughout in
+ascertaining and comparing the ideas which the various races of men
+have had of their gods; and in tracing the evolution of the idea of
+God.</p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[159]</a></span>The science of religion, however, it may be said, is concerned
+exclusively with the evolution, and not in the least with the value or
+validity, of the idea. But neither, we must remember, is it concerned
+to dispute its value or to deny its validity; and no man can help
+drawing his own conclusions from the established fact that the idea is
+to be found wherever man is to be found. If, however, by the idea of
+God we mean simply an intellectual idea, merely a verbal proposition,
+we shall be in danger of drawing erroneous conclusions. The historian
+of religion, in discussing the idea of God, its manifestations and its
+evolution, is bound to express himself in words, and to reduce what he
+has to say to a series of verbal propositions. Nothing, therefore, is
+more natural than to imagine that the idea of God is a verbal,
+intellectual proposition; and nothing is more misleading. If we start
+from this misleading notion, then, as words are but words, we may be
+led to imagine that the idea of God is nothing more or other than the
+words: it is mere words. If however this conclusion is, for any
+reason, displeasing to us, and if we stick to the premiss that the
+idea of God is a verbal proposition, then we shall naturally draw a
+distinction between the idea of God and the being of God; and, having
+thus fixed a great gulf between the idea and the being of God, we
+shall be faced with the difficulty of crossing it. We may then feel it
+to be not merely <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[160]</a></span>difficult but impossible to get logically to the
+other side of the gulf; that is to say, we shall conclude that the
+being of God is an inference, but an inference which never can be
+logically verified: the inference may be a correct or an incorrect
+inference, but we cannot possibly know which it is. From the idea of
+God we can never logically infer His being. Since then no logic will
+carry us over the chasm we have fixed between the idea and the being
+of God, if we are to cross it, we must jump it: we must take the leap
+of faith, we must believe the passage possible, just because it is
+impossible. And those who take the leap, do land safely&mdash;we have their
+own testimony to that&mdash;as safely as, in <i>King Lear</i>, Gloucester leaps
+from the cliff of Dover; and they well may</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'Think that the clearest gods, who make them honours<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Of men's impossibilities, have preserv'd them.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>But, in Gloucester's case, there was no cliff and no abyss; and, in
+our case, it may be well to enquire whether the great gulf between the
+idea and the being of God has any more reality than that down which
+Gloucester, precipitating, flung himself. The premiss, that the idea
+of God is a mere verbal proposition, may be a premiss as imaginary as
+that from which Gloucester leaped. If the idea of God is merely a
+proposition in words, and if words are but words, <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[161]</a></span>then the gulf
+between idea and being is real. If the being of God is an inference
+from the idea of God, it is merely an inference, and an inference of
+no logical value. And the same remark holds equally true, if we apply
+it to the case of any finite personal being: if the being of our
+neighbours were an inference from the idea we have formed of them, it
+also would be an inference of no logical value. But, fortunately,
+their being does not depend on the idea we have formed of them: it
+partially reveals itself to us in our idea of them, and partially is
+obscured by it. It is a fact of our experience, or a fact experienced
+by us. We interpret it, and to some extent misinterpret it, as we do
+all other facts. If this partly true, and partly false, interpretation
+is what we mean by the word 'idea,' then it is the idea which is an
+inference from the being of our neighbour&mdash;an inference which can be
+checked by closer acquaintance&mdash;but we do not first have the idea of
+him, and then wonder whether a being, corresponding more or less to
+the idea, exists. If we had the idea of our fellow-beings
+first&mdash;before we had experience of them&mdash;if it were from the edge of
+the idea that we had to leap, we might reasonably doubt whether to
+fling ourselves into such a logical, or rather into such an illogical,
+abyss. But it is from their being as an experienced fact, that we
+start; and with the intention of constructing from it as logical an
+idea as lies within our <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[162]</a></span>power. What is inference is not the being but
+the idea, so far as the idea is thus constructed.</p>
+
+<p>The idea, thus constructed, may be constructed correctly, or
+incorrectly. Whether it is constructed correctly or incorrectly is
+determined by further experience. What is important to notice is first
+that it is only by further experience, personal experience, that we
+can determine how far the construction we have put upon it is or is
+not correct; and, next, that so far as the construction we have put
+upon it is correct, that is to say is confirmed by actual experience,
+it is thereby shown to be not inference&mdash;even though it was reached by
+a process of inference&mdash;but fact. The process of inference may be
+compared to a path by which we struggle up the face of a cliff: it is
+the path by which we get there, but it is not the firm ground on which
+eventually we rest. The path is not that which upholds the cliff; nor
+is the inference that on which the being of God rests. The being of
+God is not something inferred but something experienced. It is by
+experience&mdash;the experience of ourselves or others&mdash;that we find out
+whether what by inference we were led to expect is really something of
+which we can&mdash;if we will&mdash;have experience. And that which is
+experienced ceases, the moment it is experienced, to be inferential.
+The experience is fact: the statement of it in words is truth. But
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[163]</a></span>apart from the experience, the words in which it is stated are but
+words; and, without the experience, the words must remain for ever
+words and nothing more than words.</p>
+
+<p>If then by the idea of God we mean the words, in which it is
+(inadequately) stated, and nothing more, the idea of God is separated
+by an impassable gulf from the being of God. Further, if we admit that
+the idea is, by its very nature, and by the very facts of the case,
+essentially different from the being of God, then it is of little use
+to continue to maintain that the being of God is a fact of human
+experience. In that case, the supposed fact of experience is reduced
+to something of which we neither have, nor can have, any idea, or
+consciousness, whatever. It thereby ceases to be a fact of experience
+at all. And it is precisely on this assumption that the being of God
+is denied to be a fact of experience&mdash;the assumption that being and
+idea are separated from one another by an impassable gulf: the idea we
+can be conscious of, but of His being we can have no experience. We
+must therefore ask not whether this gulf is impassable, but whether it
+exists at all, or is of the same imaginary nature as that to which
+Gloucester was led by Edgar.</p>
+
+<p>That there may be beings, of whom we have no idea, is a proposition
+which it is impossible to disprove. Such beings would be <i>ex hypothesi</i>
+no <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[164]</a></span>part of our experience; and if God were such a being, man would
+have no experience of Him. And, having no experience of Him, man could
+have no idea of Him. But the experience man has, of those beings whom
+he knows, is an experience in which idea and being are given together.
+Even if in thought we attend to one rather than to the other of the two
+aspects, the idea is still the idea of the being; and the being is
+still the being of the idea. So far from there being an impassable gulf
+between the two, the two are inseparable, in the moment of actual
+experience. It is in moments of reflection that they appear separable
+and separate, for the memory remains, when the actual experience has
+ceased. We have then only to call the memory the idea, and then the
+idea, in this use of the word, is as essentially different from that of
+which it is said to be the idea, as the memory of a being or thing is
+from the being or thing itself. If we put the memory into words, and
+pronounce those words to another, we communicate to him what we
+remember of our experience (modified&mdash;perhaps transmogrified&mdash;by our
+reflections upon it) but we do not communicate the actual experience,
+simply because we cannot. What we communicate may lead him to actual
+experience for himself; but it is not itself the experience. The memory
+may give rise, in ourselves or in others to whom we communicate, to
+expectation <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[165]</a></span>and anticipation; and the expectation is the more likely
+to be realised, the less the memory has been transmogrified by
+reflection. But, both the memory and the anticipation are clearly
+different from actual experience. It is only when they are confused
+with one aspect of the actual experience&mdash;that which we have called the
+idea&mdash;that the idea is supposed to be detachable from the being of whom
+we have actual experience. The idea is part of the experience; the
+memory obviously is not.</p>
+
+<p>If then it be said that the being of God is always an inference and is
+never anything more, the reply is that the being of anything whatever
+that is remembered or expected is, in the moment of memory or of
+anticipation, inferential; but, in the moment of actual experience, it
+is not inferred&mdash;it is experienced. And what is experienced is, and
+from the beginning has always been, in religions of the lower as well
+as of the higher culture, at once the being and the idea of God.</p>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[166]</a></span><br />
+<a name="INDEX" id="INDEX"></a><hr />
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[167]</a></span><br />
+
+<h3>INDEX<span class="totoc"><a href="#toc">ToC</a></span></h3>
+<br />
+
+<ul><li>Aaron, <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li>
+
+<li>Adoration, <a href="#Page_108">108 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li>
+
+<li>Aeschylus, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li>
+
+<li>Aetiological myths, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a></li>
+
+<li>Africans, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li>
+
+<li>Allegory, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li>
+
+<li>Animism, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li>
+
+<li>Anthropomorphism, <a href="#Page_18">18 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li>
+
+<li>Anti-social character of fetishism, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li>
+
+<li>Anu, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
+
+<li>Aristotle, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li>
+
+<li>Assyria, <a href="#Page_134">134 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Atonement, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li>
+
+<li>Australians, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86-89</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
+
+<li>Awe, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li>
+
+<li>Axe-heads, <a href="#Page_11">11</a></li>
+
+<li>Aztecs, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Babylonian psalms, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
+
+<li>Basutos, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
+
+<li>Being, and idea, <a href="#Page_161">161 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Bergson, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li>
+
+<li>Black-fellows, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li>
+
+<li>Bow, and arrow, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li>
+
+<li>Bull-roarer, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li>
+
+<li>Burnt-offerings, <a href="#Page_72">72</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Calamity, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li>
+
+<li>Ceres, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li>
+
+<li>Chicomecoatl, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li>
+
+<li>Child (the), and the community, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li>
+
+<li>Child (the), and self-consciousness, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li>
+
+<li>Children, their toys, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>and tales, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li>
+  <li>community of, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li>Chota Nagpur, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li>
+
+<li>Christ, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li>
+
+<li>Christianity, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li>
+
+<li>Commerce, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li>
+
+<li>Common consciousness, capable of emotion and purpose, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>;
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>the source and the criterion of the individual's speech, thought and action, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>;</li>
+  <li>its attitude towards magic, <a href="#Page_9">9 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>;</li>
+  <li>and tales, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</li>
+  <li>and mythology, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li>Communion (Christian), <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li>
+
+<li>Communion, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
+
+<li>Corn-deities, <a href="#Page_82">82 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Counter-spells, <a href="#Page_134">134 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Covenant, the old and the new, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li>
+
+<li>Covenant-theory, <a href="#Page_92">92 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Cuneiform inscriptions, <a href="#Page_134">134 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
+
+<li>Custom, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Desire (and prayer), <a href="#Page_118">118 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Desires, of individual and community, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a></li>
+
+<li>Digging-stick, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li>
+
+<li>Di indigites, <a href="#Page_51">51-53</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li>
+
+<li>Dionysius Thrax, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li>
+
+<li>Disease of language, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[168]</a></span></li>
+
+<li>Dog, and master, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li>
+
+<li><i>Do ut des</i>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Eating with the god, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a></li>
+
+<li>Ecstasy, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li>
+
+<li>Elijah, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li>
+
+<li>Emotion, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li>
+
+<li>Emperor, of Japan, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li>
+
+<li>Euripides, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li>
+
+<li>Europe, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li>
+
+<li>Evolution, and revelation, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Exodus, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li>
+
+<li>Expectation, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li>
+
+<li>Experience, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161 ff.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Faith, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li>
+
+<li>Fallacies, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li>
+
+<li>Fear, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a></li>
+
+<li>Feast, sacrificial, <a href="#Page_74">74 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Ferrier, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li>
+
+<li>Fetishism, <a href="#Page_4">4-8</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13-15</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129-131</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li>
+
+<li>Fiction, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
+
+<li>Finno-Ugrians, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
+
+<li>Fire-god, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li>
+
+<li>First-fruits, <a href="#Page_80">80 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
+
+<li>Folk-lore, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li>
+
+<li>Food-offerings, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li>
+
+<li>Food-supply, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
+
+<li>Foraminifera, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li>
+
+<li>Forms, of speech and of religion, <a href="#Page_106">106</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Gesture-language, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
+
+<li>Gift-theory, <a href="#Page_68">68 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li>
+
+<li>Gloucester, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li>
+
+<li>Godhead, unity of, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>a personal being, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li>Gods, <a href="#Page_4">4-6</a>, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li>
+
+<li>Gold-coast, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
+
+<li>Grammar, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li>
+
+<li>Gravitation, <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li>
+
+<li>Greece, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Harvest-gods, <a href="#Page_94">94 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Harvest-offerings, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
+
+<li>Harvest-rites, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li>
+
+<li>Hero, of tales, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>of myths, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li>History of religion, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Idea, and being, <a href="#Page_161">161 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Idol, and fetish, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li>
+
+<li><i>Iliad</i>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li>
+
+<li>Imagination, in tales and myths, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li>
+
+<li>Immorality, of mythology, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li>
+
+<li>Immortality, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li>
+
+<li>Individual (the), <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Indo-Europeans, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li>
+
+<li>Inference, <a href="#Page_162">162 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Israel, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li>
+
+<li>Italy, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Japan, <a href="#Page_92">92 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Jehovah, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li>
+
+<li>Jews, <a href="#Page_26">26</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li><i>King Lear</i>, <a href="#Page_156">156 ff.</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Language, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li>
+
+<li>Law, <a href="#Page_153">153 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Locutius, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
+
+<li>Logic, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li>
+
+<li>Love, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Magic, <a href="#Page_8">8 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11 f.</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Maize-mother, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[169]</a></span></li>
+
+<li>Maklu tablets, <a href="#Page_134">134 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Mamit, <a href="#Page_145">145</a></li>
+
+<li>Max M&uuml;ller, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
+
+<li>Meal, sacrificial, <a href="#Page_74">74 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Memory, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li>
+
+<li>Mexico, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li>
+
+<li>Miracles, <a href="#Page_10">10 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Monotheism, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li>
+
+<li>Moods, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li>
+
+<li>Morality, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44-46</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li>
+
+<li>Moses, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li>
+
+<li>Mysteries, <a href="#Page_104">104 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li>
+
+<li>Mysticism, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li>
+
+<li>Myths, <a href="#Page_20">20-22</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48-52</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55-58</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Names, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Narratives, and myths, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li>
+
+<li>Negroes, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li>
+
+<li>Nursery-tales, <a href="#Page_41">41</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Obedience, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li>
+
+<li>Oblations, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li>
+
+<li>Offerings, <a href="#Page_67">67 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Optative sentences, <a href="#Page_139">139 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Orbona, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
+
+<li>Origin, of gods and of mythology, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li>
+
+<li>Ossipago, <a href="#Page_51">51</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Penitential Psalms, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li>
+
+<li>Personality, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li>
+
+<li>Peruvians, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
+
+<li>Petitions, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Plague, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li>
+
+<li>Plato, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li>
+
+<li>Polydaemonism, <a href="#Page_16">16 ff.</a>;
+  <ul class="nest">
+  <li>change to polytheism, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li>
+  <li>and mythology, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li>
+  </ul>
+</li>
+
+<li>Polytheism, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30-32</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a></li>
+
+<li>Possession, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li>
+
+<li>Power, man of, <a href="#Page_12">12 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Prayer, <a href="#Page_108">108 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Priests, <a href="#Page_120">120</a></li>
+
+<li>Principles, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Prophet and magician, <a href="#Page_10">10 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Protoplasm, <a href="#Page_124">124</a></li>
+
+<li>Psalms of David, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Quietism, <a href="#Page_112">112</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Rain-making, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a></li>
+
+<li>Reconciliation, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li>
+
+<li>Reflection, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53-56</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li>
+
+<li>Religion, <a href="#Page_8">8 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54-56</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Revelation, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li>
+
+<li>Reverence, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li>
+
+<li>Ritual, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61-63</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li>
+
+<li>Romans, the, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Sacrifice, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Salvation, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li>
+
+<li>Samoans, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
+
+<li>Search, for God, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li>
+
+<li>Seed-time, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li>
+
+<li>Self, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li>
+
+<li>Self-renunciation, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li>
+
+<li>Shinto, <a href="#Page_92">92 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Sign (of the cross), <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li>
+
+<li>Sin, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Socrates, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li>
+
+<li>Sophocles, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li>
+
+<li>Species, <a href="#Page_83">83 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li>
+
+<li>Speech, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Spells, <a href="#Page_115">115 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134 ff.</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li>
+
+<li>Survivals, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Taboo, <a href="#Page_145">145</a><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[170]</a></span></li>
+
+<li>Tales, and myths, <a href="#Page_31">31-33</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li>
+
+<li>Totems, <a href="#Page_84">84 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Tylor, Professor, <a href="#Page_15">15</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Vagitanus, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li>
+
+<li>Vegetation-deities, <a href="#Page_81">81 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Veneration, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li>
+
+<li>Viriplaca, <a href="#Page_52">52</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Water, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li>
+
+<li>Way of the Gods, <a href="#Page_92">92 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Western Africa, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li>
+
+<li>Will, of God, <a href="#Page_149">149 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Wind, spirits of, <a href="#Page_93">93 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Witches, <a href="#Page_134">134 ff.</a></li>
+
+<li>Worship, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60-63</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Xilonen, <a href="#Page_84">84</a><br /><br /></li>
+
+
+<li>Zulus, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<br />
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+<br />
+
+<h4>CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.</h4>
+
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+<hr class="full" />
+<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE IDEA OF GOD IN EARLY RELIGIONS***</p>
+<p>******* This file should be named 25338-h.txt or 25338-h.zip *******</p>
+<p>This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:<br />
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/5/3/3/25338">http://www.gutenberg.org/2/5/3/3/25338</a></p>
+<p>Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.</p>
+
+<p>Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.</p>
+
+
+
+<pre>
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/license">http://www.gutenberg.org/license)</a>.
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS,' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Each eBook is in a subdirectory of the same number as the eBook's
+eBook number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII,
+compressed (zipped), HTML and others.
+
+Corrected EDITIONS of our eBooks replace the old file and take over
+the old filename and etext number.  The replaced older file is renamed.
+VERSIONS based on separate sources are treated as new eBooks receiving
+new filenames and etext numbers.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org">http://www.gutenberg.org</a>
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+EBooks posted prior to November 2003, with eBook numbers BELOW #10000,
+are filed in directories based on their release date.  If you want to
+download any of these eBooks directly, rather than using the regular
+search system you may utilize the following addresses and just
+download by the etext year.
+
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext06/">http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext06/</a>
+
+    (Or /etext 05, 04, 03, 02, 01, 00, 99,
+     98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90)
+
+EBooks posted since November 2003, with etext numbers OVER #10000, are
+filed in a different way.  The year of a release date is no longer part
+of the directory path.  The path is based on the etext number (which is
+identical to the filename).  The path to the file is made up of single
+digits corresponding to all but the last digit in the filename.  For
+example an eBook of filename 10234 would be found at:
+
+http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/1/0/2/3/10234
+
+or filename 24689 would be found at:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/4/6/8/24689
+
+An alternative method of locating eBooks:
+<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/GUTINDEX.ALL">http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/GUTINDEX.ALL</a>
+
+*** END: FULL LICENSE ***
+</pre>
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/25338-h/images/cover.jpg b/25338-h/images/cover.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a9e2be1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-h/images/cover.jpg
diff --git a/25338-h/images/title.jpg b/25338-h/images/title.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1cc31f1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-h/images/title.jpg
diff --git a/25338-page-images/c0001.jpg b/25338-page-images/c0001.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1a985b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/c0001.jpg
diff --git a/25338-page-images/f0001.png b/25338-page-images/f0001.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c47343a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/f0001.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/f0002.png b/25338-page-images/f0002.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..afec608
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/f0002.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/f0003.png b/25338-page-images/f0003.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8bfd357
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/f0003.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/f0004.png b/25338-page-images/f0004.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..231379e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/f0004.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/f0005.png b/25338-page-images/f0005.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..134085e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/f0005.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/f0007.png b/25338-page-images/f0007.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7c0b128
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/f0007.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/f0008.png b/25338-page-images/f0008.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0a19e2c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/f0008.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0001.png b/25338-page-images/p0001.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..70fac8b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0001.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0002.png b/25338-page-images/p0002.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..880bb3a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0002.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0003.png b/25338-page-images/p0003.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b5e5b90
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0003.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0004.png b/25338-page-images/p0004.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..67990cd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0004.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0005.png b/25338-page-images/p0005.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cd6a28d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0005.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0006.png b/25338-page-images/p0006.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f098423
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0006.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0007.png b/25338-page-images/p0007.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..293f6fe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0007.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0008.png b/25338-page-images/p0008.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..58c3616
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0008.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0009.png b/25338-page-images/p0009.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e2eb399
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0009.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0010.png b/25338-page-images/p0010.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..52408e9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0010.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0011.png b/25338-page-images/p0011.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bf65989
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0011.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0012.png b/25338-page-images/p0012.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8a6cc5a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0012.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0013.png b/25338-page-images/p0013.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..db06a37
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0013.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0014.png b/25338-page-images/p0014.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ec19c41
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0014.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0015.png b/25338-page-images/p0015.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..61f1a6a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0015.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0016.png b/25338-page-images/p0016.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bbc03e1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0016.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0017.png b/25338-page-images/p0017.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..36d038e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0017.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0018.png b/25338-page-images/p0018.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8e0fba2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0018.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0019.png b/25338-page-images/p0019.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1a9fb38
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0019.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0020.png b/25338-page-images/p0020.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8f31b29
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0020.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0021.png b/25338-page-images/p0021.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a1e2f13
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0021.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0022.png b/25338-page-images/p0022.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0d60489
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0022.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0023.png b/25338-page-images/p0023.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6ffc0b2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0023.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0024.png b/25338-page-images/p0024.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7b10170
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0024.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0025.png b/25338-page-images/p0025.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cf3c30d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0025.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0026.png b/25338-page-images/p0026.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e49eccd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0026.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0027.png b/25338-page-images/p0027.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..402b198
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0027.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0028.png b/25338-page-images/p0028.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..382b3b7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0028.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0029.png b/25338-page-images/p0029.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..660acaa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0029.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0030.png b/25338-page-images/p0030.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0e28701
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0030.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0031.png b/25338-page-images/p0031.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8be97c6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0031.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0032.png b/25338-page-images/p0032.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d1a21fb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0032.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0033.png b/25338-page-images/p0033.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..38cd4f6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0033.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0034.png b/25338-page-images/p0034.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ca71c5f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0034.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0035.png b/25338-page-images/p0035.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c6f7a87
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0035.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0036.png b/25338-page-images/p0036.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dc16d85
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0036.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0037.png b/25338-page-images/p0037.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..94ba20f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0037.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0038.png b/25338-page-images/p0038.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..93f28cb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0038.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0039.png b/25338-page-images/p0039.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e5f51c0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0039.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0040.png b/25338-page-images/p0040.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b4d4af6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0040.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0041.png b/25338-page-images/p0041.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4233599
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0041.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0042.png b/25338-page-images/p0042.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..eace426
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0042.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0043.png b/25338-page-images/p0043.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..760f430
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0043.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0044.png b/25338-page-images/p0044.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c57165a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0044.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0045.png b/25338-page-images/p0045.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1f80007
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0045.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0046.png b/25338-page-images/p0046.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4a6c82d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0046.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0047.png b/25338-page-images/p0047.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..36563b2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0047.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0048.png b/25338-page-images/p0048.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e67c23a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0048.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0049.png b/25338-page-images/p0049.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b2fe065
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0049.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0050.png b/25338-page-images/p0050.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9ad5b97
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0050.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0051.png b/25338-page-images/p0051.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e31c99e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0051.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0052.png b/25338-page-images/p0052.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..92ae293
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0052.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0053.png b/25338-page-images/p0053.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a5aacd9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0053.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0054.png b/25338-page-images/p0054.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..21ffd18
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0054.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0055.png b/25338-page-images/p0055.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8437279
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0055.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0056.png b/25338-page-images/p0056.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d7aaf1d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0056.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0057.png b/25338-page-images/p0057.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..51a008f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0057.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0058.png b/25338-page-images/p0058.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3ff140e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0058.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0059.png b/25338-page-images/p0059.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..afb38a1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0059.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0060.png b/25338-page-images/p0060.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ba97800
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0060.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0061.png b/25338-page-images/p0061.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b5fd71c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0061.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0062.png b/25338-page-images/p0062.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0d30f89
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0062.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0063.png b/25338-page-images/p0063.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1e44e6d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0063.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0064.png b/25338-page-images/p0064.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5846ded
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0064.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0065.png b/25338-page-images/p0065.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3224136
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0065.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0066.png b/25338-page-images/p0066.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..31dbd89
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0066.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0067.png b/25338-page-images/p0067.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..27862fa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0067.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0068.png b/25338-page-images/p0068.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3a90348
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0068.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0069.png b/25338-page-images/p0069.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..40018d8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0069.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0070.png b/25338-page-images/p0070.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..92118fc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0070.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0071.png b/25338-page-images/p0071.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f4d5f9f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0071.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0072.png b/25338-page-images/p0072.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f082a92
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0072.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0073.png b/25338-page-images/p0073.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..308de06
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0073.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0074.png b/25338-page-images/p0074.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..50862b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0074.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0075.png b/25338-page-images/p0075.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..500e72b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0075.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0076.png b/25338-page-images/p0076.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..20d1433
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0076.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0077.png b/25338-page-images/p0077.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6f8e93a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0077.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0078.png b/25338-page-images/p0078.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..40ab9ff
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0078.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0079.png b/25338-page-images/p0079.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5e00eb0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0079.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0080.png b/25338-page-images/p0080.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8ae0807
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0080.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0081.png b/25338-page-images/p0081.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e7cfff2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0081.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0082.png b/25338-page-images/p0082.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..df7da64
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0082.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0083.png b/25338-page-images/p0083.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7a266c2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0083.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0084.png b/25338-page-images/p0084.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..806a210
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0084.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0085.png b/25338-page-images/p0085.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8497bc2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0085.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0086.png b/25338-page-images/p0086.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dd4a553
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0086.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0087.png b/25338-page-images/p0087.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8b0192c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0087.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0088.png b/25338-page-images/p0088.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0c25010
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0088.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0089.png b/25338-page-images/p0089.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..530ee56
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0089.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0090.png b/25338-page-images/p0090.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..556aea1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0090.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0091.png b/25338-page-images/p0091.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..544f8f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0091.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0092.png b/25338-page-images/p0092.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2e939fb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0092.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0093.png b/25338-page-images/p0093.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1c4338b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0093.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0094.png b/25338-page-images/p0094.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1f7aece
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0094.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0095.png b/25338-page-images/p0095.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..826b376
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0095.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0096.png b/25338-page-images/p0096.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ae47e5e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0096.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0097.png b/25338-page-images/p0097.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7efb926
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0097.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0098.png b/25338-page-images/p0098.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..56307fd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0098.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0099.png b/25338-page-images/p0099.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..58abc39
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0099.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0100.png b/25338-page-images/p0100.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7b667ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0100.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0101.png b/25338-page-images/p0101.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bd6b68d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0101.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0102.png b/25338-page-images/p0102.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e915f7c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0102.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0103.png b/25338-page-images/p0103.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a3a28c1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0103.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0104.png b/25338-page-images/p0104.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0b5f1c0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0104.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0105.png b/25338-page-images/p0105.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..979677e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0105.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0106.png b/25338-page-images/p0106.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..eff4e24
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0106.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0107.png b/25338-page-images/p0107.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..eed7fc4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0107.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0108.png b/25338-page-images/p0108.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a4768ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0108.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0109.png b/25338-page-images/p0109.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..eb9ff89
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0109.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0110.png b/25338-page-images/p0110.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..adc2446
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0110.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0111.png b/25338-page-images/p0111.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..88328cd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0111.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0112.png b/25338-page-images/p0112.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1269901
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0112.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0113.png b/25338-page-images/p0113.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bb84c3a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0113.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0114.png b/25338-page-images/p0114.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ae309b7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0114.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0115.png b/25338-page-images/p0115.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..74ce9e4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0115.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0116.png b/25338-page-images/p0116.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dacdde6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0116.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0117.png b/25338-page-images/p0117.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e24697c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0117.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0118.png b/25338-page-images/p0118.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e1be093
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0118.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0119.png b/25338-page-images/p0119.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e0e68cc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0119.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0120.png b/25338-page-images/p0120.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..40af065
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0120.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0121.png b/25338-page-images/p0121.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a41186c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0121.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0122.png b/25338-page-images/p0122.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e0c2c71
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0122.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0123.png b/25338-page-images/p0123.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f0435b9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0123.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0124.png b/25338-page-images/p0124.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..02cfe38
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0124.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0125.png b/25338-page-images/p0125.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..091fe87
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0125.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0126.png b/25338-page-images/p0126.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..37b7265
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0126.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0127.png b/25338-page-images/p0127.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..924d21e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0127.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0128.png b/25338-page-images/p0128.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a3f96ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0128.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0129.png b/25338-page-images/p0129.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7e83e53
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0129.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0130.png b/25338-page-images/p0130.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e4545f6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0130.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0131.png b/25338-page-images/p0131.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..43a8391
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0131.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0132.png b/25338-page-images/p0132.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f2edc6c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0132.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0133.png b/25338-page-images/p0133.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..123bd79
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0133.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0134.png b/25338-page-images/p0134.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d06941b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0134.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0135.png b/25338-page-images/p0135.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e65ce36
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0135.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0136.png b/25338-page-images/p0136.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..acdd954
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0136.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0137.png b/25338-page-images/p0137.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dc1d3b0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0137.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0138.png b/25338-page-images/p0138.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..feddccd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0138.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0139.png b/25338-page-images/p0139.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c505bee
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0139.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0140.png b/25338-page-images/p0140.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8202332
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0140.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0141.png b/25338-page-images/p0141.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f12bc62
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0141.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0142.png b/25338-page-images/p0142.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4c48b9f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0142.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0143.png b/25338-page-images/p0143.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..553bce0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0143.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0144.png b/25338-page-images/p0144.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2145a74
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0144.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0145.png b/25338-page-images/p0145.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8952601
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0145.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0146.png b/25338-page-images/p0146.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2beb3e3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0146.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0147.png b/25338-page-images/p0147.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8743466
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0147.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0148.png b/25338-page-images/p0148.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e87d0ec
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0148.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0149.png b/25338-page-images/p0149.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0477dbe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0149.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0150.png b/25338-page-images/p0150.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..68d1885
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0150.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0151.png b/25338-page-images/p0151.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ad97b0e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0151.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0152.png b/25338-page-images/p0152.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1d271eb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0152.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0153.png b/25338-page-images/p0153.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..109c875
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0153.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0154.png b/25338-page-images/p0154.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2903e97
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0154.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0155.png b/25338-page-images/p0155.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ebb3e1f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0155.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0156.png b/25338-page-images/p0156.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..061c858
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0156.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0157.png b/25338-page-images/p0157.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..06161f1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0157.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0158.png b/25338-page-images/p0158.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6719d98
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0158.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0159.png b/25338-page-images/p0159.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a5a265d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0159.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0160.png b/25338-page-images/p0160.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cc9dd6e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0160.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0161.png b/25338-page-images/p0161.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..16d67cc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0161.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0162.png b/25338-page-images/p0162.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b84e4eb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0162.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0163.png b/25338-page-images/p0163.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cc306f3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0163.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0164.png b/25338-page-images/p0164.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c62c337
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0164.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0165.png b/25338-page-images/p0165.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..36f9b08
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0165.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0166-blank.png b/25338-page-images/p0166-blank.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8ce998b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0166-blank.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0167.png b/25338-page-images/p0167.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..98773f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0167.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0168.png b/25338-page-images/p0168.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9004eb6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0168.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0169.png b/25338-page-images/p0169.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bbb7af1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0169.png
diff --git a/25338-page-images/p0170.png b/25338-page-images/p0170.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c514619
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338-page-images/p0170.png
diff --git a/25338.txt b/25338.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f32a885
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,4612 @@
+The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Idea of God in Early Religions, by F. B.
+Jevons
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+
+
+
+Title: The Idea of God in Early Religions
+
+
+Author: F. B. Jevons
+
+
+
+Release Date: May 5, 2008  [eBook #25338]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII)
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE IDEA OF GOD IN EARLY
+RELIGIONS***
+
+
+E-text prepared by Juliet Sutherland, Jeannie Howse, and the Project
+Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net)
+
+
+
+THE IDEA OF GOD IN EARLY RELIGIONS
+
+by
+
+F. B. JEVONS, LITT.D.
+
+Professor of Philosophy in the
+University of Durham
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Cambridge:
+at the University Press
+1913
+
+First Edition, 1910
+Reprinted 1911, 1913
+
+      _With the exception of the coat of arms at the foot, the
+      design on the title page is a reproduction of one used by
+      the earliest known Cambridge printer, John Siberch, 1521_
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+In _The Varieties of Religious Experience_ the late Professor William
+James has said (p. 465): 'The religious phenomenon, studied as an
+inner fact, and apart from ecclesiastical or theological
+complications, has shown itself to consist everywhere, and at all its
+stages, in the consciousness which individuals have of an intercourse
+between themselves and higher powers with which they feel themselves
+to be related. This intercourse is realised at the time as being both
+active and mutual.' The book now before the reader deals with the
+religious phenomenon, studied as an inner fact, in the earlier stages
+of religion. By 'the Idea of God' may be meant either the
+consciousness which individuals have of higher powers, with which they
+feel themselves to be related, or the words in which they, or others,
+seek to express that consciousness. Those words may be an expression,
+that is to say an interpretation or a misinterpretation, of that
+consciousness. But the words are not the consciousness: the feeling,
+without which the consciousness does not exist, may be absent when the
+words are spoken or heard. It is however through the words that we
+have to approach the feeling and the consciousness of others, and to
+determine whether and how far the feeling and the consciousness so
+approached are similar in all individuals everywhere and at all
+stages.
+
+                                               F. B. JEVONS.
+
+  HATFIELD HALL,
+    DURHAM.
+      _October, 1910_
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+                                                             PAGE
+
+     BIBLIOGRAPHY                                              ix
+
+  I. INTRODUCTION                                               1
+
+ II. THE IDEA OF GOD IN MYTHOLOGY                              30
+
+III. THE IDEA OF GOD IN WORSHIP                                60
+
+ IV. THE IDEA OF GOD IN PRAYER                                103
+
+  V. THE IDEA AND BEING OF GOD                                152
+
+     INDEX                                                    167
+
+
+
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY
+
+
+  Allen, Grant. The Evolution of the Idea of God. London, 1897.
+
+  Anthropology and the Classics. Oxford, 1908.
+
+  Bastian, A. Volks- und Menschenkunde. Berlin, 1888.
+
+  Bousset, W. What is Religion? (English Translation). London, 1907.
+
+  Crawley, A.E. The Idea of the Soul. London, 1909.
+
+  Fossey, C. La Magie Assyrienne. Paris, 1902.
+
+  Frazer, J.G. Early History of the Kingship. London, 1895.
+
+  ---- The Golden Bough. London, 1900.
+
+  ---- Psyche's Task. London, 1909.
+
+  Gardner, P. Modernity and the Churches. London, 1909.
+
+  Hobhouse, L.T. Morals in Evolution. London, 1906.
+
+  Hoeffding, H. The Philosophy of Religion (English Translation).
+    London, 1906.
+
+  Hollis, A.C. The Masai. Oxford, 1905.
+
+  ---- The Nandi. Oxford, 1909.
+
+  James, W. The Varieties of Religious Experience. London, 1902.
+
+  Jastrow, M. Jun. Study of Religion. London, 1901.
+
+  Jevons, F.B. Introduction to the History of Religion. London,
+    1896.
+
+  ---- Religion in Evolution. London, 1906.
+
+  ---- Study of Comparative Religion. London, 1908.
+
+  Lang, A. Magic and Religion. London, 1901.
+
+  ---- The Making of Religion. London, 1898.
+
+  Mackenzie, W.D. The Final Faith. London, 1910.
+
+  Marett, R.R. The Threshold of Religion. London, 1909.
+
+  Mitchell, H.B. Talks on Religion. London, 1908.
+
+  Nassau, R.H. Fetichism in West Africa. London, 1904.
+
+  Parker, K.L. The Euahlayi Tribe. London, 1905.
+
+  Saussaye, P.D.C. de la. Religionsgeschichte. Freiburg i. B., 1889.
+
+  Schaarschmidt, C. Die Religion. Leipzig, 1907.
+
+  Thompson, R.C. Semitic Magic. London, 1908.
+
+  Tisdall W. St C. Comparative Religion. London, 1909.
+
+  Transactions of the Third International Congress of the History of
+    Religions. Oxford, 1908.
+
+  Tylor, E.B. Primitive Culture. London, 1873.
+
+  Westermarck, E. Origin and Development of Moral Ideas. London,
+    1906.
+
+  Wundt, W. Voelkerpsychologie. Leipzig, 1904-6.
+
+
+
+
+I
+
+INTRODUCTION
+
+
+Every child that is born is born of a community and into a community,
+which existed before his birth and will continue to exist after his
+death. He learns to speak the language which the community spoke
+before he was born, and which the community will continue to speak
+after he has gone. In learning the language he acquires not only words
+but ideas; and the words and ideas he acquires, the thoughts he thinks
+and the words in which he utters them, are those of the community from
+which he learnt them, which taught them before he was born and will go
+on teaching them after he is dead. He not only learns to speak the
+words and think the ideas, to reproduce the mode of thought, as he
+does the form of speech, of the circumambient community: he is taught
+and learns to act as those around him do--as the community has done
+and will tend to do. The community--the narrower community of the
+family, first, and, afterwards, the wider community to which the
+family belongs--teaches him how he ought to speak, what he ought to
+think, and how he ought to act. The consciousness of the child
+reproduces the consciousness of the community to which he belongs--the
+common consciousness, which existed before him and will continue to
+exist after him.
+
+The common consciousness is not only the source from which the
+individual gets his mode of speech, thought and action, but the court
+of appeal which decides what is fact. If a question is raised whether
+the result of a scientific experiment is what it is alleged by the
+original maker of the experiment to be, the appeal is to the common
+consciousness: any one who chooses to make the experiment in the way
+described will find the result to be of the kind alleged; if everyone
+else, on experiment, finds it to be so, it is established as a fact of
+common consciousness; if no one else finds it to be so, the alleged
+discovery is not a fact but an erroneous inference.
+
+Now, it is not merely with regard to external facts or facts
+apprehended through the senses, that the common consciousness is
+accepted as the court of appeal. The allegation may be that an
+emotion, of a specified kind--alarm or fear, wonder or awe--is, in
+specified circumstances, experienced as a fact of the common
+consciousness. Or a body of men may have a common purpose, or a common
+idea, as well as an emotion of, say, common alarm. If the purpose,
+idea or emotion, be common to them and experienced by all of them, it
+is a fact of their common consciousness. In this case, as in the case
+of any alleged but disputed discovery in science, the common
+consciousness is the court of appeal which decides the facts, and
+determines whether what an individual thinks he has discovered in his
+consciousness is really a fact of the common consciousness. The idea
+of powers superior to man, the emotion of awe or reverence, which goes
+with the idea, and the purpose of communicating with the power in
+question are facts, not peculiar to this or that individual
+consciousness, but facts of the common consciousness of all mankind.
+
+The child up to a certain age has no consciousness of self: the
+absence of self-consciousness is one of the charms of children. The
+child imitates its elders, who speak of him and to him by his name. He
+speaks of himself in the third person and not in the first person
+singular, and designates himself by his proper name and not by means
+of the personal pronoun 'I'; eventually the child acquires the use and
+to some extent learns the meaning of the first personal pronoun; that
+is, if the language of the community to which he belongs has developed
+so far as to have produced such a pronoun. For there was a period in
+the evolution of speech when, as yet, a first personal pronoun had not
+been evolved; and that, probably, for the simple reason that the idea
+which it denotes was as unknown to the community as it is to the child
+whose absence of self-consciousness is so pleasing. For a period, the
+length of which may have been millions of years, the common
+consciousness, the consciousness of the community, did not discover or
+discriminate, in language or in thought, the existence of the
+individual self.
+
+The importance of this consideration lies in its bearing upon the
+question, in what form the idea of powers superior to man disclosed
+itself in the common consciousness at that period. It is held by many
+students of the science of religion that fetishism preceded polytheism
+in the history of religion; and it is undoubted that polytheism
+flourished at the expense of fetishism. But what is exactly the
+difference between fetishism and polytheism? No one now any longer
+holds that a fetish is regarded, by believers in fetish, as a material
+object and nothing more: everyone recognises that the material object
+to which the term is applied is regarded as the habitation of a
+spiritual being. The material object in question is to the fetish what
+the idol of a god is to a god. If the material object, through which,
+or in which, the fetish-spirit manifests itself, bears no resemblance
+to human form, neither do the earliest stocks or blocks in which gods
+manifest themselves bear any resemblance to human form. Such unshaped
+stocks do not of themselves tell us whether they are fetishes or gods
+to their worshippers. The test by which the student of the science of
+religion determines the question is a very simple one: it is, who
+worships the object in question? If the object is the private property
+of some individual, it is fetish; if it is worshipped by the community
+as a whole, it, or rather the spirit which manifests itself therein,
+is a god of the community. The functions of the two beings differ
+accordingly: the god receives the prayers of the community and has
+power to grant them; the fetish has power to grant the wishes of the
+individual who owns it. The consequence of this difference in function
+is that as the wishes of the individual may be inconsistent with the
+welfare of other members of the community; as the fetish may be, and
+actually is, used to procure injury and death to other members of the
+community; a fetish is anti-social and a danger to the community,
+whereas a god of the community is there expressly as a refuge and a
+help for the community. The fetish fulfils the desires of the
+individual, the self; the god listens to the prayers of the community.
+
+Let us now return to that stage in the evolution of the community
+when, as yet, neither the language nor the thought of the community
+had discovered or discriminated the existence of the individual self.
+If at that stage there was in the common consciousness any idea,
+however dim or confused, of powers superior to man; if that idea was
+accompanied or coloured by any emotion, whether of fear or awe or
+reverence; if that emotion prompted action of any kind; then, such
+powers were not conceived to be fetishes, for the function of a fetish
+is to fulfil the desires of an individual self; and until the
+existence of the individual self is realised, there is no function for
+a fetish to perform.
+
+It may well be that the gradual development of self-consciousness, and
+the slow steps by which language helped to bring forth the idea of
+self, were from the first, and throughout, accompanied by the gradual
+development of the idea of fetishism. But the very development of the
+idea of a power which could fulfil the desires of self, as
+distinguished from, and often opposed to, the interests of the
+community, would stimulate the growth of the idea of a power whose
+special and particular function was to tend the interests of the
+community as a whole. Thus the idea of a fetish and the idea of a god
+could only persist on condition of becoming more and more inconsistent
+with, and contradictory of, one another. If the lines followed by the
+two ideas started from the same point, it was only to diverge the
+more, the further they were pursued. And the tendency of fetishism to
+disappear from the later and higher stages of religion is sufficient
+to show that it did not afford an adequate or satisfactory expression
+of the idea contained in the common consciousness of some power or
+being greater than man. That idea is constantly striving, throughout
+the history of religion, to find or give expression to itself; it is
+constantly discovering that such expressions as it has found for
+itself do it wrong; and it is constantly throwing, or in the process
+of throwing, such expressions aside. Fetishism was thrown aside sooner
+than polytheism: for it was an expression not only inadequate but
+contradictory to the idea that gave it birth. The emotions of fear and
+suspicion, with which the community regarded fetishes, were emotions
+different from the awe or reverence with which the community
+approached its gods.
+
+What practically provokes and stimulates the individual's dawning
+consciousness of himself, or the community's consciousness of the
+individual as in a way distinct from itself, is the dash between the
+desires, wishes, interests of the one, and the desires, wishes and
+interests of the other. But though the interests of the one are
+sometimes at variance with those of the other, still in some cases,
+also, the interests of the individual--even though they be purely
+individual interests--are not inconsistent with those of the
+community; and in most cases they are identical with them--the
+individual promotes his own interests by serving those of the
+community, and promotes those of the community by serving his own. In
+a word, the interests of the one are not so clearly and plainly cut
+off from those of the other, that the individual can always be
+condemned for seeking to gratify his self-interests or his own
+personal desires. That is presumably one reason why fetishism is so
+wide-spread and so long-lived in Western Africa, for instance: though
+fetishes may be used for anti-social purposes, they may be and are
+also used for purposes which if selfish are not, or are not felt to
+be, anti-social. The individual owner of a fetish does not feel that
+his ownership does or ought to cut him off from membership of the
+community. And so long as such feeling is common, so long an
+indecisive struggle between gods and fetishes continues.
+
+Now this same cause--the impossibility of condemning the individual
+for seeking to promote his own interests--will be found on examination
+to be operative elsewhere, viz. in magic. The relation of magic to
+religion is as much a matter of doubt and dispute as is that of
+fetishism to religion. And I propose to treat magic in much the same
+way as I have treated fetishism. The justification which I offer for
+so doing is to be found in the parallel or analogy that may be drawn
+between them. The distinction which comes to be drawn within the
+common consciousness between the self and the community manifests
+itself obviously in the fact that the interests and desires of the
+individual are felt to be different, and yet not to be different, from
+those of the community; and so they are felt to be, yet not to be,
+condemnable from the point of view of the common consciousness. Now,
+this is precisely the judgment which is passed upon magic, wherever it
+is cultivated. It is condemnable, it is viewed with suspicion, fear
+and condemnation; and yet it is also and at the same time viewed and
+practised with general approval. It may be used on behalf of the
+community and for the good of the community, and with public approval,
+as it is when it is used to make the rain which the community needs.
+It may be viewed with toleration, as it is when it is believed to
+benefit an individual without entailing injury on the community. But
+it is visited with condemnation, and perhaps with punishment, when it
+is employed for purposes, such as murder, which the common
+consciousness condemns. Accordingly the person who has the power to
+work the marvels comprehended under the name of magic is viewed with
+condemnation, toleration or approval, according as he uses his power
+for purposes which the common consciousness condemns, tolerates or
+approves. The power which such a person exerts is power personal to
+him; and yet it is in a way a power greater and other than himself,
+for he has it not always under his control or command: whether he
+uses it for the benefit of the community or for the injury of some
+individual, he cannot count on its always coming off. And this fact is
+not without its influence and consequences. If he is endeavouring to
+use it for the injury of some person, he will explain his failure as
+due to some error he has committed in the _modus operandi_, or to the
+counter-operations of some rival. But if he is endeavouring to
+exercise it for the benefit of the community, failure makes others
+doubtful whether he has the power to act on behalf of the community;
+while, on the contrary, a successful issue makes it clear that he has
+the power, and places him, in the opinion both of the community and of
+himself, in an exceptional position: his power is indeed in a way
+personal to himself, but it is also greater and other than himself.
+His sense of it, and the community's sense of it, is reinforced and
+augmented by the approval of the common consciousness, and by the
+feeling that a power, in harmony with the common consciousness and the
+community's desires, is working in him and through him. This power,
+thus exercised, of working marvels for the common good is obviously
+more closely analogous to that of a prophet working miracles, than it
+is to that of the witch working injury or death. And, in the same way
+that I have already suggested that gods and fetishes may have been
+evolved from a prior indeterminate concept, which was neither but
+might become either; so I would now suggest that miracles are not
+magic, nor is magic miracles, but that the two have been
+differentiated from a common source. And if the polytheistic gods,
+which are to be found where fetishism is believed in, present us with
+a very low stage in the development of the idea of a 'perfect
+personality,' so too the sort of miracles which are believed in, where
+the belief in magic flourishes, present us with a very low stage in
+the development of the idea of an almighty God. Axe-heads that float
+must have belonged originally to such a low stage; and rods that turn
+into serpents were the property of the 'magicians of Egypt' as well as
+of Aaron.
+
+The common source, then, from which flows the power of working marvels
+for the community's good, or of working magic in the interest of one
+individual member and perhaps to the injury of another, is a personal
+power, which in itself--that is to say, apart from the intention with
+which it is used and apart from the consequences which ensue--is
+neither commendable nor condemnable from the community's point of
+view; and which consequently can neither be condemned nor commended by
+the common consciousness, until the difference between self and the
+community has become manifest, and the possibility of a divergence
+between the interests of self or _alter_ and those of the community
+has been realised. Further, this power, in whichever way it comes to
+be exercised, marks a strong individuality; and may be the first, as
+it is certainly a most striking, manifestation of the fact of
+individuality: it marks off, at once, the individual possessing such
+power from the rest of the community. And the common consciousness is
+puzzled by the apparition. Just as it tolerates fetishes though it
+disapproves of them and is afraid of them, so it tolerates the
+magician, though it is afraid of him and does not cordially approve of
+him, even when he benefits an individual client without injuring the
+community. But though the man of power may use, and apparently most
+often does use, his power, in the interest of some individual and to
+the detriment of the community; and though it is this condemnable use
+which is everywhere most conspicuous, and probably earliest developed;
+still there is no reason why he should not use, and as a matter of
+fact he sometimes does use, his power on behalf of the community to
+promote the food-supply of the community or to produce the rain which
+is desired. In this case, then, the individual, having a power which
+others have not, is not at variance with the community but in harmony
+with the common consciousness, and becomes an organ by which it acts.
+When, then, the belief in gods, having the interests of the community
+at heart, presents itself or develops within the common consciousness,
+the individual who has the power on behalf of the community to make
+rain or increase the food supply is marked out by the belief of the
+community--or it may be by the communings of his own heart--as
+specially related to the gods. Hence we find, in the low stages of the
+evolution of religion, the proceedings, by which the man of power had
+made rain for the community or increased the food-supply, either
+incorporated into the ritual of the gods, or surviving traditionally
+as incidents in the life of a prophet, e.g. the rain-making of Elijah.
+In the same way therefore as I have suggested that the resemblances
+between gods and fetishes are to be explained by the theory that the
+two go back to a common source, and that neither is developed from the
+other, so I suggest that the resemblances between the conception of
+prophet and that of magician point not to the priority of either to
+the other, but to the derivation or evolution of both from a prior and
+less determinate concept.
+
+Just as a fetish is a material thing, and something more, so a
+magician is a man and something more. Just as a god is an idol and
+something more, so a prophet or priest is a man and something more.
+The fetish is a material thing which manifests a power that other
+things do not exhibit; and the magician is a man possessing a power
+which other men have not. The difference between the magician and the
+prophet or priest is the same as the difference between the fetish and
+the god. It is the difference between that which subserves the wishes
+of the individual, which may be, and often are, anti-social, and that
+which furthers the interests of the community. Of this difference each
+child who is born into the community learns from his elders: it is
+part of the common consciousness of the community. And it could not
+become a fact of the common consciousness until the existence of self
+became recognised in thought and expressed in language. With that
+recognition of difference, or possible difference, between the
+individual and the community, between the desires of the one and the
+welfare of the other, came the recognition of a difference between
+fetish and god, between magician and priest. The power exercised by
+either was greater than that of man; but the power manifested in the
+one was exercised with a view to the good of the community; in the
+case of the other, not. Thus, from the beginning, gods were not merely
+beings exercising power greater than that of man, but beings
+exercising their power for the good of man. It is as such that, from
+the beginning to the end, they have figured both in the common
+consciousness of the community, and in the consciousness of every
+member born into the community. They have figured in both; and,
+because they have figured both in the individual consciousness and the
+common consciousness, they have, from the beginning, been something
+present to both, something at once within the individual and without.
+But as the child recognises objects long before he becomes aware of
+the existence of himself, so man, in his infancy, sought this power or
+being in the external world long before he looked for it within
+himself.
+
+It is because man looked for this being or power in the external world
+that he found, or thought he found, it there. He looked for it and
+found it, in the same way as to this day the African negro finds a
+fetish. A negro found a stone and took it for his fetish, as Professor
+Tylor relates, as follows:--'He was once going out on important
+business, but crossing the threshold he trod on this stone and hurt
+himself. Ha! ha! thought he, art thou there? So he took the stone, and
+it helped him through his undertaking for days.' So too when the
+community's attention is arrested by something in the external world,
+some natural phenomenon which is marvellous in their eyes, their
+attitude of mind, the attitude of the common consciousness, translated
+into words is: 'Ha! ha! art thou there?' This attitude of mind is one
+of expectancy: man finds a being, possessed of greater power than
+man's, because he is ready to find it and expecting it.
+
+So strong is this expectancy, so ready is man to find this being,
+superior to man, that he finds it wherever he goes, wherever he looks.
+There is probably no natural phenomenon whatever that has not
+somewhere, at some time, provoked the question or the reflection 'Art
+thou there?' And it is because man has taken upon himself to answer
+the question, and to say: 'Thou art there, in the great and strong
+wind which rends the mountains; or, in the earthquake; or, in the
+fire' that polytheism has arisen. Perhaps, however, we should rather
+use the word 'polydaemonism' than 'polytheism.' By a god is usually
+meant a being who has come to possess a proper name; and, probably, a
+spirit is worshipped for some considerable time, before the
+appellative, by which he is addressed, loses its original meaning, and
+comes to be the proper name by which he, and he alone, is addressed.
+Certainly, the stage in which spirits without proper names are
+worshipped seems to be more primitive than that in which the being
+worshipped is a god, having a proper name of his own. And the
+difference between the two stages of polydaemonism and polytheism is
+not merely limited to the fact that the beings worshipped have proper
+names in the later stage, and had none in the earlier. A development
+or a difference in language implies a development or difference in
+thought. If the being or spirit worshipped has come to be designated
+by a proper name, he has lost much of the vagueness that characterises
+a nameless spirit, and he has come to be much more definite and much
+more personal. Indeed, a change much more sinister, from the
+religious point of view, is wrought, when the transition from
+polydaemonism to polytheism is accomplished.
+
+In the stage of human evolution known as animism, everything which
+acts--or is supposed to act--is supposed to be, like man himself, a
+person. But though, in the animistic stage, all powers are conceived
+by man as being persons, they are not all conceived as having human
+form: they may be animals, and have animal forms; or birds, and have
+bird-form; they may be trees, clouds, streams, the wind, the
+earthquake or the fire. In some, or rather in all, of these, man has
+at some time found the being or the power, greater than man, of whom
+he has at all times been in quest, with the enquiry, addressed to each
+in turn, 'Art thou there?' The form of the question, the use of the
+personal pronoun, shows that he is seeking for a person. And students
+of the science of religion are generally agreed that man, throughout
+the history of religion, has been seeking for a power or being
+superior to man and greater than he. It is therefore a personal power
+and a personal being that man has been in search of, throughout his
+religious history. He has pushed his search in many directions--often
+simultaneously in different directions; and, he has abandoned one line
+of enquiry after another, because he has found that it did not lead
+him whither he would be. Thus, as we have seen, he pushed forward, at
+the same time, in the direction of fetishism and of polytheism, or
+rather of polydaemonism; but fetishism failed to bring him
+satisfaction, or rather failed to satisfy the common consciousness,
+the consciousness of the community, because it proved on trial to
+subserve the wishes--the anti-social wishes--of the individual, and
+not the interests of the community. The beings or powers that man
+looked to find and which he supposed he found, whether as fetishes in
+this or that object, or as daemons in the sky, the fire or the wind,
+in beast or bird or tree, were taken to be personal beings and
+personal powers, bearing the same relation to that in which, or
+through which, they manifested themselves, as man bears to his body.
+They do not seem to have been conceived as being men, or the souls of
+men which manifested themselves in animals or trees. At the time when
+polydaemonism has, as yet, not become polytheism, the personal beings,
+worshipped in this or that external form, have not as yet been
+anthropomorphised. Indeed, the process which constitutes the change
+from polydaemonism to polytheism consists in the process, or rather is
+the process, by which the spirits, the personal beings, worshipped in
+tree, or sky, or cloud, or wind, or fire came gradually to be
+anthropomorphised--to be invested with human parts and passions and to
+be addressed like human beings with proper names. But when
+anthropomorphic polytheism is thus pushed to its extreme logical
+conclusions, its tendency is to collapse in the same way, and for the
+same reasons, as fetishism, before it, had collapsed. What man had
+been in search of, from the beginning, and was still in search of, was
+some personal being or power, higher than and superior to man. What
+anthropomorphic polytheism presented him with, in the upshot, was with
+beings, not superior, but, in some or many cases, undeniably inferior
+to man. As such they could not thenceforth be worshipped. In Europe
+their worship was overthrown by Christianity. But, on reflection, it
+seems clear not only that, as such, they could not thenceforth be
+worshipped; but that, as such, they never had been worshipped. In the
+consciousness of the community, the object of worship had always been,
+from the beginning, some personal being superior to man. The apostle
+of Christianity might justifiably speak to polytheists of the God
+'whom ye ignorantly worship.' It is true, and it is important to
+notice, that the sacrifices and the rites and ceremonies, which
+together made up the service of worship, had been consciously and
+intentionally rendered to deities represented in human form; and, in
+this sense, anthropomorphic deities had been worshipped. But, if
+worship is something other than sacrifice and rite and ceremony, then
+the object of worship--the personal being, greater than man--presented
+to the common consciousness, is something other than the
+anthropomorphic being, inferior in much to man, of whom poets speak in
+mythology and whom artists represent in bodily shape.
+
+Just as fetishism developed and persisted, because it did contain,
+though it perverted, one element of religious truth--the accessibility
+of the power worshipped to the worshipper--so too anthropomorphism,
+notwithstanding the consequences to which, in mythology, it led, did
+contain, or rather, was based on, one element of truth, viz. that the
+divine is personal, as well as the human. Its error was to set up, as
+divine personalities, a number of reproductions or reflections of
+human personality. It leads to the conclusion, as a necessary
+consequence, that the divine personality is but a shadow of the human
+personality, enlarged and projected, so to speak, upon the clouds, but
+always betraying, in some way or other, the fact that it is but the
+shadow, magnified or distorted, of man. It excludes the possibility
+that the divine personality, present to the common consciousness as
+the object of worship, may be no reproduction of the human
+personality, but a reality to which the human personality has the
+power of approximating. Be this as it may, we are justified in saying,
+indeed we are compelled to recognise, that in mythology, all the world
+over, we see a process of reflection at work, by which the beings,
+originally apprehended as superior to man, come first to be
+anthropomorphised, that is to be apprehended as having the parts and
+passions of men, and then, consequently, to be seen to be no better
+than men. This discovery it is which in the long run proves fatal to
+anthropomorphism.
+
+We have seen, above, the reason why fetishism becomes eventually
+distasteful to the common consciousness: the beings, superior to man,
+which are worshipped by the community, are worshipped as having the
+interests of the community in their charge, and as having the good of
+the community at heart; whereas a fetish is sought and found by the
+individual, to advance his private interests, even to the cost and
+loss of other individuals and of the community at large. Thus, from
+the earliest period at which beings, superior to man, are
+differentiated into gods and fetishes, gods are accepted by the common
+consciousness as beings who maintain the good of the community and
+punish those who infringe it; while fetishes become beings who assist
+individual members to infringe the customary morality of the tribe.
+Thus, from the first, the beings, of whom the community is conscious
+as superior to man, are beings, having in charge, first, the customary
+morality of the tribe; and, afterwards, the conscious morality of the
+community.
+
+This conception, it was, of the gods, as guardians of morality and of
+the common good, that condemned fetishism; and this conception it was,
+which was to prove eventually the condemnation of polytheism. A
+multitude of beings--even though they be divine beings--means a
+multitude, that is a diversity, of ideas. Diversity of ideas,
+difference of opinion, is what is implied by every mythology which
+tells of disputes and wars between the gods. Every god, who thus
+disputed and fought with other gods, must have felt that he had right
+on his side, or else have fought for the sake of fighting.
+Consequently the gods of polytheism are either destitute of morality,
+or divided in opinion as to what is right. In neither case, therefore,
+are the gods, of whom mythology tells, the beings, superior to man,
+who, from the beginning, were present in the common consciousness to
+be worshipped. From the outset, the object of the community's worship
+had been conceived as a moral power. If, then, the many gods of
+polytheism were either destitute or disregardful of morality, they
+could not be the moral power of which the common consciousness had
+been dimly aware: that moral power, that moral personality, must be
+other than they. As the moral consciousness of the community
+discriminated fetishes from gods and tended to rule out fetishes from
+the sphere of religion; so too, eventually, the moral consciousness of
+the community came to be offended by the incompatibility between the
+moral ideal and the conception of a multitude of gods at variance with
+each other. If the common consciousness was slow in coming to
+recognise the unity of the Godhead--and it was slower in some people
+than in others--the unity was logically implied, from the beginning,
+in the conception of a personal power, greater and higher than man,
+and having the good of the community at heart. The history of religion
+is, in effect, from one point of view, the story of the process by
+which this conception, however dim, blurred or vague, at first, tends
+to become clarified and self-consistent.
+
+That, however, is not the only point of view from which the history of
+religion can, or ought to be, regarded. So long as we look at it from
+that point of view, we shall be in danger of seeing nothing in the
+history of religion but an intellectual process, and nothing in
+religion itself but a mental conception. There is, however, another
+element in religion, as is generally recognised; and that an emotional
+element, as is usually admitted. What however is the nature of that
+emotion, is a question on which there has always been diversity of
+opinion. The beings, who figured in the common consciousness as gods,
+were apprehended by the common consciousness as powers superior to
+man; and certainly as powers capable of inflicting suffering on the
+community. As such, then, they must have been approached with an
+emotion of the nature of reverence, awe or fear. The important, the
+determining, fact, however, is that they were approached. The emotion,
+therefore, which prompted the community to approach them, is at any
+rate distinguishable from the mere fright which would have kept the
+community as far away from these powers as possible. The emotion which
+prompted approach could not have been fear, pure and simple. It must
+have been more in the nature of awe or reverence; both of which
+feelings are clearly distinguishable from fear. Thus, we may fear
+disease or disgrace; but the fear we feel carries with it neither awe
+nor reverence. Again, awe is an inhibitive feeling, it is a feeling
+which--as in the case of the awe-struck person--rather prevents than
+promotes action or movement. And the determining fact about the
+religious emotion is that it was the emotion with which the community
+approached its gods. That emotion is now, and probably always was,
+reverential in character. The occasion, on which a community
+approaches its gods, often is, and doubtless often was, a time when
+misfortune had befallen the community. The misfortune was viewed as a
+visitation of the god's wrath upon his community; and fear--that 'fear
+of the Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom'--doubtless played a
+large part in the complex emotion which stirred the community, not to
+run away but to approach the god for the purpose of appeasing his
+wrath. In the complexity of an emotion which led to action of this
+kind, we must recognise not merely fear but some trust and
+confidence--so much, at least, as prevented the person who experienced
+it from running away simply. The emotion is not too complex for man,
+in however primitive a stage of development: it is not more complex
+than that which brings a dog to his master, though it knows it is
+going to be thrashed.
+
+That some trust and confidence is indispensable in the complex feeling
+with which a community approaches its gods, for the purpose of
+appeasing their wrath--still more, for beseeching favours from
+them--seems indisputable. But we must not exaggerate it. Wherever
+there are gods at all, they are regarded by the community as beings
+who can be approached: so much confidence, at least, is placed in them
+by the community that believes in them. Even if they are offended and
+wrathful, the community is confident that they can be appeased: the
+community places so much trust in them. Indeed its trust goes even
+further: it is sure that they do not take offence without reasonable
+grounds. If they display wrath against the community and send calamity
+upon it, it is, and in the opinion of the community, can only be,
+because some member of the community has done that which he should not
+have done. The gods may be, on occasion, wrathful; but they are just.
+They are from the beginning moral beings--according to such standard
+of morality as the community possesses--and it is breaches of the
+tribe's customary morality that their wrath is directed against. They
+are, from the beginning, and for long afterwards in the history of
+religion, strict to mark what is amiss, and, in that sense, they are
+jealous gods. And this aspect of the Godhead it is which fills the
+larger part of the field of religious consciousness, not only in the
+case of peoples who have failed to recognise the unity of the Godhead,
+but even in the case of a people like the Jews, who did recognise it.
+The other aspect of the Godhead, as the God, not merely of mercy and
+forgiveness, but of love, was an aspect fully revealed in Christianity
+alone, of all the religions in the world.
+
+But the love God displays to all his children, to the prodigal son as
+well as to others, is not a mere attribute assigned to Him. It is not
+a mere quality with which one religion may invest Him, and of which
+another religion, with equal right, may divest Him. The idea of God
+does not consist merely of attributes and qualities, so that, if you
+strip off all the attributes and qualities, nothing is left, and the
+idea is shown to be without content, meaning or reality.
+
+The Godhead has been, in the common consciousness, from the beginning,
+a being, a personal being, greater than man; and it is as such that He
+has manifested Himself in the common consciousness, from the beginning
+until the present day. To this personality, as to others, attributes
+and qualities may be falsely ascribed, which are inconsistent with one
+another and are none of His. Some of the attributes thus falsely
+ascribed may be discovered, in the course of the history of religion,
+to have been falsely ascribed; and they will then be set aside. Thus,
+fetishism ascribed, or sought to ascribe, to the Godhead, the quality
+of willingness to promote even the anti-social desires of the owner of
+the fetish. And fetishism exfoliated, or peeled off from the religious
+organism. Anthropomorphism, which ascribed to the divine personality
+the parts and passions of man, along with a power greater than man's to
+violate morality, is gradually dropped, as its inconsistency with the
+idea of God comes gradually to be recognised and loathed. So too with
+polytheism: a pantheon which is divided against itself cannot stand.
+Thus, fetishism, anthropomorphism and polytheism ascribe qualities to
+the Godhead, which are shown to be attributes assigned to the Godhead
+and imposed upon it from without, for eventually they are found by
+experience to be incompatible with the idea of God as it is revealed in
+the common consciousness.
+
+On the other hand, the process of the history of religion, the process
+of the manifestation or revelation of the Godhead, does not proceed
+solely by this negative method, or method of exclusion. If an
+attribute, such as that of human form, or of complicity in anti-social
+purposes, is ascribed, by anthropomorphism or fetishism, to the divine
+personality, and is eventually felt by the common consciousness to be
+incompatible with the idea of God, the result is not merely that the
+attribute in question drops off, and leaves the idea of the divine
+personality exactly where it was, and what it was, before the
+attribute had been foisted on it. The incompatibility of the quality,
+falsely ascribed or assigned, becomes--if, and when, it does
+become--manifest and intolerable, just in proportion as the idea of
+God, which has always been present, however vaguely and ill-defined,
+in the common consciousness, comes to manifest itself more definitely.
+The attribution, to the divine personality, of qualities, which are
+eventually found incompatible with it, may prove the occasion of the
+more precise and definite manifestation; we may say that action
+implies reaction, and so false ideas provoke true ones, but the false
+ideas do not create the new ones. The false ideas may stimulate closer
+attention to the actual facts of the common consciousness and thus may
+stimulate the formation of truer ideas about them, by leading to a
+concentration of attention upon the actual facts. But it is from this
+closer attention, this concentration of attention, that the newer and
+truer knowledge comes, and not from the false ideas. What we speak
+of, from one point of view, as closer attention to the facts of the
+common consciousness, may, from another point of view, be spoken of as
+an increasing manifestation, or a clearer revelation, of the divine
+personality, revealed or manifested to the common consciousness. Those
+are two views, or two points of view, of one and the same process. But
+whichever view we take of it, the process does not proceed solely by
+the negative method of exclusion: it is a process which results in the
+unfolding and disclosure, not merely of what is in the common
+consciousness, at any given moment, but of what is implied in the
+divine personality revealed to the common consciousness. If we choose
+to speak of this unfolding or disclosure as evolution, the process,
+which the history of religion undertakes to set forth, will be the
+evolution of the idea of God. But, in that case, the process which we
+designate by the name of evolution, will be a process of disclosure
+and revelation. Disclosure implies that there is something to
+disclose; revelation, that there is something to be revealed to the
+common consciousness--the presence of the Godhead, of divine
+personality.
+
+
+
+
+II
+
+THE IDEA OF GOD IN MYTHOLOGY
+
+
+The idea of God is to be found, it will be generally admitted, not
+only in monotheistic religions, but in polytheistic religions also;
+and, as polytheisms have developed out of polydaemonism, that is to
+say, as the personal beings or powers of polydaemonism have, in course
+of time, come to possess proper names and a personal history, some
+idea of divine personality must be admitted to be present in
+polydaemonism as well as in polytheism; and, in the same way, some
+idea of a personality greater than human may be taken to lie at the
+back of both polydaemonism and fetishism.
+
+If we wish to understand what ideas are in a man's mind, we may infer
+them from the words that he speaks and from the way in which he acts.
+The most natural and the most obvious course is to start from what he
+says. And that is the course which was followed by students of the
+history of religion, when they desired to ascertain what idea exactly
+man has had of his gods. They had recourse, for the information they
+wanted, to mythology. Later on, indeed, they proceeded to enquire into
+what man did, into the ritual which he observed in approaching his
+gods; and, in the next chapter, we will follow them in that enquiry.
+But in this chapter we have to ask what light mythology throws upon
+the idea man has had of his gods.
+
+Before doing so, however, we cannot but notice that mythology and
+polytheism go together. Fetishism does not produce any mythology.
+Doubtless, the owner of a fetish which acts knows and can tell of the
+wonderful things it has done. But those anecdotes do not get taken up
+into the common stock of knowledge; nor are they handed down by the
+common consciousness to all succeeding generations of the community.
+Mythology, like language, is the work, and is a possession, of the
+common consciousness.
+
+Polydaemonism, like fetishism, does not produce mythology; but, for a
+different reason. The beings worshipped in the period of polydaemonism
+are beings who have not yet come to possess personal names, and
+consequently cannot well have a personal history attached to them. The
+difficulty is not indeed an absolute impossibility. Tales can be told,
+and at a certain stage in the history of fiction, especially in the
+pre-historic stage, tales are told, in which the hero has no proper
+name: the period is 'once upon a time,' and the hero is 'a man'
+_simpliciter_. But myths are not told about 'a god' _simpliciter_. In
+mythology the hero of the myth is not 'a god,' in the sense of any god
+you like, but this particular, specified god. And the reason is clear.
+In fiction the artist creates the hero as well as the tale; and the
+primitive teller of tales did not find it always necessary to invent a
+name for the hero he created. The hero could, and did, get along for
+some time without any proper name. But with mythology the case is
+different. The personal being, superior to man, of whom the myth is
+told, is not the creation of the teller of the tale: he is a being
+known by the community to exist. He cannot therefore, when he is the
+hero of a myth, be described as 'a god--any god you like.' Nor is the
+myth a tale which could be told of any god whatever: if a myth is a
+tale, at any rate it is a tale which can be told of none other god but
+this. Indeed, a myth is not a tale: it is an incident--or string of
+incidents--in the personal history of a particular person, or being,
+superior to man.
+
+It is then as polydaemonism passes into polytheism, as the beings of
+the one come to acquire personal names and personal history, and so to
+become the gods of the other, that mythology arises. It is under
+polytheism that mythology reaches its most luxuriant growth; and when
+polytheism disappears, mythology tends to disappear with it. Thus, the
+light which mythology may be expected to throw on the idea of God is
+one, which, however it may illumine the polytheistic idea of God, will
+not be found to shine far beyond the area of polytheism.
+
+Myths then are narratives, in which the doings of some god or gods are
+related. And those gods existed in the belief of the community, before
+tales were told, or could be told, about them. Myths therefore are the
+outcome of reflection--of reflection about the gods and their
+relations to one another, or to men, or to the world. Mythology is not
+the source of man's belief of the gods. Man did not begin by telling
+tales about beings whom he knew to be the creations of his own
+imagination, and then gradually fall into the error of supposing them
+to be, after all, not creatures of his own imagination but real
+beings. Mythology is not even the source of man's belief in a
+plurality of gods: man found gods everywhere, in every external object
+or phenomenon, because he was looking for God everywhere, and to every
+object, in turn, he addressed the question, 'Art thou there?'
+Mythology was not the source of polytheism. Polytheism was the source
+of mythology. Myths preserve to us the reflections which men have made
+about their gods; and reflection, on any subject, cannot take place
+until the thing is there to be reflected upon. The result of prolonged
+reflection may be, indeed must be, to modify the ideas from which we
+started, for the better--or, it may be, for the worse. But, even so,
+the result of reflection is not to create the ideas from which it
+started.
+
+From this point of view, it becomes impossible to accept the theory,
+put forward by Max Mueller, that mythology is due to 'disease of
+language.' According to his theory, simple statements were made of
+such ordinary, natural processes as those of the rising, or the
+setting, of the sun. Then, by disease of language, the meaning of the
+words or epithets, by which the sun or the dawn were, at the
+beginning, designated or described, passed out of mind. The epithets
+then came to be regarded as proper names; and so the people, amongst
+which these simple statements were originally made, found itself
+eventually in possession of a number of tales told of persons
+possessing proper names and doing marvellous things. Thus, Max
+Mueller's theory not only accounted for the origin of tales told about
+the gods: it also explained the origin of the gods, about whom the
+tales were told. It is a theory of the origin, not merely of
+mythology, but also of polytheism.
+
+Thus, even on Max Mueller's theory, mythology is the outcome of
+reflection--of reflection upon the doings and behaviour of the sun,
+the clouds, wind, fire etc. But, on his theory, the sun, moon etc.,
+were not, at first, regarded as persons, at all: it was merely owing
+to 'disease of language' that they came to be so regarded. Only if we
+make this original assumption, can we accept the conclusions deduced
+from it; and no student now accepts the assumption: it is one which is
+forbidden by the well-established facts of animism. Sun, moon, wind
+and fire, everything that acts, or is supposed to act, is regarded by
+early man as animated by personal power. If, therefore, the external
+objects, to which man turned with his question, 'Art thou there?' were
+regarded by him, from the beginning, as animated by personal power,
+the theory that they were not so regarded falls to the ground; and,
+consequently, we cannot accept it as accounting for the origin of
+polytheism.
+
+Doubtless, during the time of its vogue, Max Mueller's theory was
+accepted precisely because it did profess to account for the origin of
+polytheism, and because it denied polytheism any religious value or
+meaning whatever. On the theory, polytheism did not originate from any
+religious sentiment whatever, but from a disease of language. And this
+was a view which naturally commended itself to those who were ready to
+say and believe that polytheism is not religion at all. But the
+consequences of saying this are such as to make any science of
+religion, or indeed any history of religion, impossible. Where the
+idea of God is to be found, there some religion exists; and to say
+that, in polytheism, no idea of God can be found, is out of the
+question. If then polytheism is a stage in the history of religious
+belief, we have to consider it in relation to the other stages of
+religious belief, which preceded or followed it. We have to relate the
+idea of God, as it appeared in polytheism, with the idea as it
+appeared in other stages of belief. In order to do this, we must first
+discover what the polytheistic idea of God is; and for that purpose we
+must turn, at any rate at first, to the myths which embody the
+reflections of polytheists upon the attributes and actions of the
+Godhead, or of those beings, superior to man, whose existence was
+accepted by the common consciousness. It may be that the reflections
+upon the idea of God, which are embodied in mythology, have so tended
+to degrade the idea of God, that religious advance upon the lines of
+polytheism became impossible, just as the conception of God as a being
+who would promote the anti-social wishes of an individual, rendered
+religious advance upon the lines of fetishism impossible. In that
+case, religion would forsake the line of polytheism, as it had
+previously abandoned that of fetishism.
+
+A certain presumption that myths tend to the degradation of religion
+is created by the mere use of the term 'mythology.' It has come to be
+a dyslogistic term, partly because all myths are lies, but still more
+because some of them are ignoble lies. It becomes necessary,
+therefore, to remind ourselves that, though we see them to be untrue,
+they were not regarded as untrue by those who believed in them; and
+that many of them were not ignoble. Aeschylus and Sophocles are
+witnesses, not to be disbelieved, on these points. In their writings
+we have the reflections of polytheists upon the actions and attributes
+of the gods. But the reflections made by Aeschylus and Sophocles, and
+their treatment of the myths, must be distinguished from the myths,
+which they found to hand, just as the very different treatment and
+reflection, which the myths received from Euripides, must be
+distinguished from them. In both cases, the treatment, which the myths
+met with from the tragedians, is to be distinguished from the myths,
+as they were current among the community before and after the plays
+were performed. The writings of the tragedians show what might be made
+of the myths by great poets. They do not show what the myths were in
+the common consciousness that made them. And the history of mythology
+after the time of the three great tragedians makes it clear enough
+that even so noble a writer as Aeschylus could not impart to mythology
+any direction other than that determined for it by the conditions
+under which it originated, developed and ran its course.
+
+Mythology is the work and the product of the common consciousness. The
+generation existing at any time receives it from preceding
+generations; civilised generations from barbarous, and barbarous
+generations from their savage predecessors. If it grows in the process
+of transmission, and so reflects to some extent the changes which take
+place in the common consciousness, it changes but little in character.
+The common consciousness itself changes with exceeding slowness; it
+retains what it has received with a conservatism like that of
+children's minds; and, what it adds must, from the nature of the case,
+be modelled on that which it has received, and be of a piece with it.
+But, though the common consciousness changes but slowly, it does
+change: with the change from savagery to civilisation there goes moral
+development. Some of the myths, which are re-told from one generation
+to another, may be capable of becoming civilised and moralised in
+proportion as do those who tell them; but some are not. These latter
+are incidents in the personal history of the gods, which, if told at
+all, can only be told, as they had been told from the beginning, in
+all their repulsiveness. They survive, in virtue of the tenacity and
+conservatism of the common consciousness; and, as survivals, they
+testify to the moral development which has taken place in the very
+community which conserves them. By them the eye of modern science
+measures the development and the difference between the stage of
+society which originally produced them and the stage which begins to
+be troubled by them. They are valuable for the purposes of modern
+science because they are evidence of the continuity with which the
+later stages have developed from the earlier; and, also, because they
+are the first outward indications of the discovery which was
+eventually to be made, of the difference between mythology and
+religion--a difference which existed from the beginning of mythology,
+and all through its growth, though it existed in the sphere of feeling
+long before it found expression for itself in words.
+
+The course of history has shown, as a matter of fact, that these
+repulsive and disgusting myths could not be rooted out without
+uprooting the whole system of mythology. But the course of history has
+also shown that religion could continue to exist after the destruction
+of mythology, as it had done before its birth. But, of this the
+generations to whom myths had been transmitted and for whom mythology
+was the accepted belief, could not be aware. In their eyes the attempt
+to discredit some myths appeared to involve--as it did really
+involve--the overthrow of the whole system of mythology. If they
+thought--as they undoubtedly did think--that the destruction of
+mythology was the same thing as the destruction of religion, their
+error was one of a class of errors into which the human mind is at no
+time exempt from falling. And they had this further excuse, that the
+destruction of mythology did logically and necessarily imply the
+destruction of polytheism. Polytheism and mythology were complementary
+parts of their idea of the Godhead. Demonstrations therefore of the
+inconsistency and immorality involved in their idea were purely
+negative and destructive; and they were, accordingly, unavailing until
+a higher idea of the unity of the Godhead was forthcoming.
+
+Until that time, polytheism and mythology struggled on. They were
+burdened, and, as time went on, they were overburdened, with the
+weight of the repulsive myths which could not be denied and disowned,
+but could only be thrust out of sight as far, and as long, as
+possible. These myths, however offensive they became in the long run
+to the conscience of the community, were, in their origin, narratives
+which were not offensive to the common consciousness, for the simple
+reason that they were the work of the common consciousness, approved
+by it and transmitted for ages under the seal of its approval. If they
+were not offensive to the common consciousness at the time when they
+originated, and only became so later, the reason is that the morality
+of the community was less developed at the time of their origin than
+it came to be subsequently. If they became offensive, it was because
+the morality of the community tended to advance, while they remained
+what they had always been.
+
+It may, perhaps, be asked, why the morality of the community should
+tend to change, and the myths of the community should not? The reason
+seems to be that myths are learned by the child in the nursery, and
+morality is learned by the man in the world. The family is a smaller
+community than the village community, the city, or the state; and the
+smaller the community, the more tenacious it is of its customs and
+traditions. The toys of Athenian children, which have been discovered,
+are, all, the toys which children continue to use to this day. In the
+Iliad children built sand-castles on the sea-shore as they do now; and
+the little child tugged at its mother's dress then as now. Children
+then as now would insist that the tales told to them should always be
+told exactly as they were first told. Of the discrepancy between the
+morality exhibited by the heroes of nursery-tales and that practised
+by the grown-up world the child has no knowledge, for the sufficient
+reason that he is not as yet one of the grown-up world. When he enters
+the grown-up world, he may learn the difference; but he can only enter
+the grown-up world, if there is one for him to enter; and, in the
+childhood of man, there is none which he can enter, for the adults
+themselves, though of larger growth, are children still in mind.
+Custom and tradition rule the adult community then as absolutely as
+they rule the child community. In course of time, the adult community
+may break the bonds of custom and tradition; but the community which
+consists of children treasures them and hands them on. Within the
+tribe, thenceforth, there are two communities, that of the adults and
+that of the children. The one community is as continuous with itself
+as the other; but the children's community is highly conservative of
+what it has received and of what it hands on--and that for the simple
+reason that children will be children still. It is this homogeneity of
+the children's community which enables it to preserve its customs,
+traditions and beliefs. And as long as the community of adults is
+homogeneous, it also departs but little from the customs, traditions
+and beliefs, which it has inherited from the same source as the
+children's community has inherited them. The two communities, the
+children's and the adults', originate and develop within the larger
+community of the tribe. They differentiate, at first, with exceeding
+slowness; the children's community changes more slowly even than the
+adults'--its weapons continue to be the bow and arrow, long after
+adults have discarded them; and the bull-roarer continues sacred in
+its eyes to a period when the adult community has not only discarded
+its use but forgotten its meaning. In its tales and myths it may
+preserve the memory of a stage of morality which the adult community
+has outgrown, and has left behind as far it has left behind the
+bull-roarer or the bow and arrow. And the stage of morality, of which
+it preserves the memory, is one from which the adult community in past
+time emerged. Having emerged, indeed, it found itself, eventually,
+when made to look back, compelled to condemn that which it looked back
+upon.
+
+What, then, were these myths, with which the moralised community might
+find itself confronted? They were tales which originated in the mind
+of the community when it was yet immature. They preserve to us the
+reflections of the immature mind about the gods and what they did. And
+it is because the minds, which made these reflections, were immature,
+that the myths which embodied or expressed these reflections, were
+such as might be accepted by immature minds, but were eventually found
+intolerable by more mature minds. It may, perhaps, be said--and it may
+be said with justice--that the reflections even of the immature mind
+are not all, of necessity, erroneous, for it is from them that the
+whole of modern knowledge has been evolved or developed, just as the
+steam-plough may be traced back to the primitive digging-stick:
+reflection upon anything may lead to better knowledge of the thing, as
+well as to false notions about it. But the nations, which have
+outgrown mythology, have cast it aside because in the long run they
+became convinced that the notions it embodied were false notions. And
+they reached that conclusion on this point in the same way and for
+the same reason as they reached the same conclusion in other matters;
+for there is only one way. There is only one way and one test by which
+it is possible to determine whether the inferences we have drawn about
+a thing are true or false, and that is the test of experience. That
+alone can settle the question whether the thing actually does or does
+not act in the way, or display the qualities alleged. If it proves in
+our experience to act in the way, or to display the qualities, which
+our reflection led us to surmise, then our conception of the thing is
+both corrected and enlarged, that is to say, the thing proves to be
+both more and other than it was at first supposed to be. If experience
+shows that it is not what we surmised, does not act in the way or
+display the qualities our reflection led us to expect, then, as the
+conclusions we reached are wrong, our reflections were on a wrong
+line, and must have started from a false conception or an imperfect
+idea of the thing.
+
+It is collision of this kind between the conclusions of mythology and
+the idea of the gods, as the guardians of morality, that rouses
+suspicion in a community, still polytheistic, first that the
+conclusions embodied in mythology are on a wrong line, and next that
+they must have started from a false conception or imperfect idea of
+the Godhead. By its fruits is the error found to be error--by the
+immorality which it ascribes to the very gods whose function it is to
+guard morality. Mythology is the process of reflection which leads to
+conclusions eventually discarded as false, demonstrably false to
+anyone who compared them with the idea of the Godhead which he had in
+his own soul. Mythology worked out the consequences of the assumption
+that it is to the external world we must look for the divine
+personality of whose presence in the common consciousness, the
+community has at all times, been, even though dimly, aware. Doubts as
+to the truth of myths were first aroused by the inconsistency between
+the myths told and the justice and morality which had been from the
+beginning the very essence of divine personality. The doubts arose in
+the minds and hearts of individual thinkers; and, if those individuals
+had been the only members of the community who conceived justice and
+morality to be essential qualities of the divine personality, then it
+would have been necessary for such thinkers first to convert the
+community to that view. Now, one of the consequences of the prevalence
+of mythology is that the community, amongst whom it flourishes, comes
+to be, if not doubtful, then at times forgetful, of the fact that the
+gods of the community are moral beings and the guardians of morality.
+That fact had to be dismissed from attention, for the time being,
+whenever certain myths were related. And, the more frequently a fact
+is dismissed from attention, the less likely it is to reappear on the
+surface of consciousness. Thus, the larger the part played by
+mythology in the field of the common consciousness, the greater its
+tendency to drive out from attention those moral qualities which were
+of the essence of divine personality. But, however large the part
+played by mythology, and however great its tendency to obliterate the
+moral qualities of the gods, it rarely, if indeed ever, entirely
+obliterates them from the field of the common consciousness.
+Consequently, the individual thinkers, who become painfully aware of
+the contrast and opposition between the morality, which is essential
+to a divine personality, and the immorality ascribed to the gods in
+some myths, have not to deal with a community which denies that the
+gods have any morality whatever, but with a community which is ready
+to admit the morality of the gods, whenever its attention is called
+thereto. Thus, though it may be that it is in this or that individual
+that the inconsistency between the moral qualities, which belong to
+the gods, and the immoral actions which mythology ascribes to the
+gods, first manifests itself, to his distress and disturbance, still
+what has happened in his case happens in the case of some, and may
+happen in the case of all, other members of the community. The
+inconsistency then comes to exist not merely for the individual but
+for the common consciousness.
+
+It was the immorality of mythology which first drew the attention of
+believers in polytheism to the inconsistency between the goodness,
+which was felt to be of the essence of the divine nature, and the
+vileness, which was imputed to them in some myths; but it is the
+irrationality and absurdity of mythology that seems, to the modern
+mind, to be its most uniform characteristic. So long as the only
+mythology that was studied was the mythology of Indo-European peoples,
+it was assumed, without question, that the myths could not really be,
+or originally have been, irrational and absurd: they must conceal,
+under their seeming absurdity and outwardly irrational appearance,
+some truth. They must have had, originally, some esoteric meaning.
+They must have conveyed--allegorically, indeed--some profound truths,
+known or revealed to sages of old, which it was the business of modern
+students to re-discover in mythology. And accordingly profound
+truths--scientific, cosmographic, astronomical, geographical,
+philosophic or religious--were discovered. There was no knowledge
+which the early ancestors of the human race were not supposed to have
+possessed, and their descendants to have forgotten.
+
+But, when it came to be discovered, and accepted, that the ancestors
+of the Indo-European peoples had once been savages, and that savages,
+all the world over, possessed myths, it became impossible to maintain
+that such savages possessed in their mythologies treasures of truth
+either scientific or religious. Myths have no esoteric meaning.
+Obviously we must take them to be what we find them to be amongst
+present-day savages, that is, absurd and irrational stories, with no
+secret meaning behind them. Yet it is difficult, indeed impossible, to
+accept this as the last word on the subject. The stories are rejected
+by us, because they are patently absurd and irrational. But the savage
+does not reject them: he accepts them. And he could not accept and
+believe them, if he, as well as we, found them irrational and absurd.
+In a word, it is the same with the irrationality as it is with the
+immorality of mythology: myths are the work and the product of the
+common consciousness. As such, myths cannot be viewed as irrational by
+the common consciousness in which they originated, and by which they
+were accepted and transmitted, any more than they were regarded as
+immoral.
+
+Obviously, the common consciousness which produces mythology cannot
+pronounce the myths, when it produces them, and accepts them, absurd.
+On the contrary, they are rational, in its eyes, and according to its
+level of understanding, however absurd the growth of knowledge may
+eventually show them to be. Myths, then, in their origin, are told and
+heard, narrated and accepted, as rational and intelligible. As
+narrated, they are narratives: can we say that they are anything more?
+or are they tales told simply for the pleasure of telling? Tales of
+this latter kind, pure fiction, are to be found wherever man is. But,
+we have already seen some points in which myths differ from tales of
+this kind: in fiction the artist creates his hero, but in myths the
+being superior to man, of whom the story is told is not the creation
+of the teller of the tale; he is a being known to the community to
+exist. Another point of difference is that a myth belongs to the god
+of whom it is told and cannot properly be told of any other god. These
+are two respects in which the imagination is limited, two points on
+which, in the case of myths, the creative imagination is, so to speak,
+nailed down. Is it subject to any further restriction in the case of
+myths? Granted that an adventure, when once it has been set down to
+one god, may not be set down to another, is the creative imagination
+free, in the case of mythology, as it is in the case of pure fiction,
+to invent the incidents and adventures, which eventually--in a lexicon
+of mythology--go to make up the biography of the god? The freedom, it
+appears, is of a strictly limited character.
+
+It is an induction, as wide as the world--being based on mythologies
+from all parts of the world--that myths are aetiological, that their
+purpose is to give the reason of things, to explain the origin of
+fire, agriculture, civilisation, the world--of anything, in fact, that
+to the savage seems to require explanation. In the animistic period,
+man found gods everywhere because everywhere he was looking for gods.
+To every object that arrested his attention, in the external world, he
+put, or might put, the question, 'Art thou there?' Every happening
+that arrested the attention of a whole community, and provoked from
+the common consciousness the affirmation, 'Thou art there,' was, by
+that affirmation, accepted as the doing of a god. But neither at this
+stage, nor for long after, is there any myth. The being, whose
+presence is thus affirmed, has at first no name: his personality is of
+the faintest, his individuality, the vaguest. Mythology does not begin
+until the question is put, 'Why has the god done this thing?' A myth
+consists, or originally consisted, of the reason which was found and
+adopted by the common consciousness as the reason why the god did what
+he did do. It is in this sense that myths are aetiological. The
+imagination which produces them is, in a sense, a 'scientific
+imagination.' It works within limits. The data on which it works are
+that this thing was done, or is done, by this god; and the problem set
+to the mythological imagination is, 'Why did he, or does he, do it?'
+The stories which were invented to answer this question constituted
+mythology; and the fact that myths were invented for the purpose of
+answering this question distinguishes them from stories in the
+invention of which the imagination was not subject to restriction, was
+not tied down to this god and to this action of his, and was not
+limited to the sole task of imagining an answer to the question, 'Why
+did he do it?' All myths are narratives, but not all narratives are
+myths. Some narratives have men alone for their heroes. They are
+imaginative but not mythological. Some narratives are about gods and
+what they did. Their purpose is to explain why the gods did what they
+did do, and those narratives are mythological.
+
+It may, perhaps, seem that the imagination of early man would from the
+first be set to work to invent myths in answer to the question, 'Why
+did the god do this thing?' But, as a matter of fact, man can get on
+for a long time without mythology. A striking instance of this is
+afforded by the _di indigites_ of Italy. Over everything man did, or
+suffered, from his birth to his death, one of these gods or goddesses
+presided. The Deus Vagitanus opened the lips of the new-born infant
+when it uttered its first cry; the Dea Ossipago made the growing
+child's bones stout and strong; the Deus Locutius made it speak
+clearly; the goddess Viriplaca restored harmony between husband and
+wife who had quarrelled; the Dea Orbona closed a man's eyes at death.
+These _di indigites_ had shrines and received sacrifices. They were
+distinguished into gods and goddesses. Their names were proper names,
+though they are but words descriptive of the function which the deity
+performed or presided over. Yet though these _di indigites_ are gods,
+personal gods, to whom prayer and sacrifice are offered, they have no
+mythology attached to them; no myths are told about them.
+
+The fact thus forced on our notice by the _di indigites_ of Rome
+should be enough to warn us that mythology does not of necessity
+spring up, as an immediate consequence of the worship of the gods. It
+may even suggest a reason why mythology must be a secondary, rather
+than a primary consequence of worship. The Romans were practical, and
+so are savages: if they asked the question, 'Why did this god do this
+thing?' they asked it in no spirit of speculation but for a practical,
+common-sense reason: because they did not want this thing done again.
+And they offered sacrifices to the god or goddess, with that end in
+view. The things with regard to which the savage community first asks
+the question, 'Why did the god do it?' are things disastrous to the
+community--plague or famine. The answer to the question is really
+implied by the terms in which the question is stated: the community,
+or some member of the community has transgressed; he must be
+discovered and punished. So long and so far as the question is thus
+put and thus answered, there is little room for mythology to grow in.
+And it did not grow round the _di indigites_ in Italy, or round
+corresponding deities in other countries.
+
+But the question, 'Why did the god do it?' is susceptible, on
+reflection, of another kind of answer. And from minds of a more
+reflective cast than the Roman, it received answer in the form of
+mythology, of aetiological myths. Mythology is the work of reflection:
+it is when the community has time and inclination to reflect upon its
+gods and their doings that mythology arises in the common
+consciousness. For everything which happens to him, early man has one
+explanation, if the thing is such as seems to him to require
+explanation, and the explanation is that this thing is the doing of
+some god. If the thing that arrests attention is some disaster, which
+calls for remedy, the community approaches the god with prayer and
+sacrifice; its object is practical, not speculative; and no myth
+arises. But if the thing that arrests attention is not one which calls
+for action, on the part of the community, but one which stimulates
+curiosity and provokes reflection, then the reflective answer to the
+question, why has this thing been done by whatever god that did it, is
+a myth.
+
+Thus the mood, or state of mind, in which mythology originates is
+clearly different from that in which the community approaches its
+offended gods for the purpose of appeasing them. The purpose in the
+latter case is atonement and reconciliation. The state of mind in the
+former case is one of enquiry. The emotion, of mingled fear and hope,
+which constitutes the one state of mind, is clearly different from the
+spirit of enquiry which characterises and constitutes the other state
+of mind. The one mood is undeniably religious; the other, not so. In
+the one mood, the community feels itself to be in the presence of its
+gods; in the other it is reflecting and enquiring about them. In the
+one case the community appears before its god; in the other it is
+reflectively using its idea of god, for the purpose of explaining
+things that call for explanation. But the idea of God, when used in
+this way, for the purpose of explaining things by means of myths, is
+modified by the use it is put to. It is not merely that everything
+which happens is explained, if it requires explanation, as the doing
+of some god; but the motives which early man ascribed, in his
+mythological moments, to the gods--motives which only undeveloped man
+could have ascribed to them--became part of the idea of God on which
+mythology worked and with which myths had to do. The idea of god thus
+gradually developed in polytheistic myths, the accumulated reflections
+of savage, barbarous and semi-barbarous ancestors, tends eventually to
+provoke reaction. But why? Not merely because the myths are immoral
+and irrational. But because of the essential impiety of imputing
+immoral and irrational acts to the divine personality. Plainly, then,
+those thinkers and writers who were painfully impressed by such
+impiety, who were acutely conscious that divine personality was
+irreconcilable with immorality and irrationality, had some other idea
+of God than the mythological. We may go further: we may safely say
+that the average man would not have been perturbed, as he was, by
+Socrates, for instance, had he, also, not found within him some other
+idea of God than the mythological. And we can understand, to some
+extent, how this should be, if we call to mind that, though mythology
+grows and luxuriates, still the worship of the gods goes on. That is
+to say, the community, through it all, continues to approach its gods,
+for the purpose, and with the emotion of mingled fear and hope, with
+which it had always come into the presence of its gods. It is the
+irreconcilability of the mood of emotion, which is essentially
+religious, with the mythological mode of reflective thought, which is
+not, that tends to bring about the religious reaction against
+mythology. It is not however until the divergence between religion
+and mythology has become considerable that the irreconcilability
+becomes manifest. And it is in the experience of some individual, and
+not in the common consciousness, that this irreconcilability is first
+discovered. That discovery it is which makes the discoverer realise
+that it is not merely when he comes before the presence of his gods in
+their temples, but that, whenever his heart rises on the tide of
+mingled fear, hope and thanksgiving, he comes into the presence of his
+God. Having sought for the divine personality in all the external
+objects of the world around him in the end he learns, what was the
+truth from the beginning,--that it is in his heart he has access to
+his God.
+
+The belief in gods does not of necessity result in a mythology. The
+instance of the _di indigites_ of Italy is there to show that it is no
+inevitable result. But mythology, wherever it is found, is of itself
+sufficient proof that gods are, or have been, believed in; it is the
+outcome of reflection and enquiry about the gods, whom the community
+approaches, with mingled feelings of hope and fear, and worships with
+sacrifice and prayer. Now, a mythology, or perhaps we should rather
+say fragments of a mythology, may continue to exist as survivals, long
+after belief in the gods, of whom the myths were originally told, has
+changed, or even passed away entirely. Such traces of gods dethroned
+are to be found in the folk-lore of most Christian peoples. Indeed,
+not only are traces of bygone mythology to be found in Christendom;
+but rites and customs, which once formed part of the worship of now
+forgotten gods; or it may be that only the names of the gods survive
+unrecognised, as in the names of the days of the week. The existence
+of such survivals in Europe is known; their history has been traced;
+their origin is undoubted. When, then, in other quarters of the globe
+than Europe, amongst peoples which are as old as any European people,
+though they have no recorded history, we find fragments of mythology,
+or of ritual, or mere names of gods, without the myths and the ritual
+which attach elsewhere to gods, the presumption is that here too we
+have to deal with survivals of a system of worship and mythology,
+which once existed, and has now gone to pieces, leaving but these
+pieces of wreckage behind. Thus, amongst the Australian black-fellows
+we find myths about gods who now receive no worship. But they never
+could have become gods unless they had been worshipped at some time;
+they could not have acquired the proper, personal names by which they
+are designated in these surviving myths, if they had not been
+worshipped long enough for the words which designate them to become
+proper names, i.e. names denoting no other person than the one
+designated by them. Amongst other backward peoples of the earth we
+find the names of gods surviving, not only with no worship but no
+myths attached to them; and the inference plainly is that, as they are
+still remembered to be gods, they once were objects of worship
+certainly, and probably once were subjects of mythology. And if, of a
+bygone religious system all that remains is in one place some
+fragments of mythology, and in another nothing but the mere names of
+the gods, then it is nothing astonishing if elsewhere all that we find
+is some fragment of worship, some rite, which continues to be
+practised, for its own sake, even though all memory of the gods in
+whose worship it originated has disappeared from the common
+consciousness--a disappearance which would be the easier if the gods
+worshipped had acquired no names, or names as little personal as those
+of the _di indigites_. Ritual of this kind, not associated with the
+names of any gods, is found amongst the Australian tribes, and may be
+the wreckage of a system gone to pieces.
+
+Here, too, there is opportunity again, for the same error as that into
+which students of mythology once fell before, when they found, or
+thought they found, in mythology, profound truths, known or revealed
+to sages of old. The survivals mentioned in the last paragraph may be
+interpreted as survivals of a prior monotheism or a primitive
+revelation. But if they are survivals, at all, then they are
+survivals from a period when the ancestors of the present-day Africans
+or Australian black-fellows were in an earlier stage of social
+development--in an earlier stage even of linguistic development and of
+the thought which develops with language--than their descendants are
+now. Even in that earlier stage of development, however, man sought
+for God. If he thought, mistakenly, to find Him in this or that
+external object, he was not wrong in the conviction that underlay his
+search--the conviction that God is at no time afar off from any one of
+us.
+
+
+
+
+III
+
+THE IDEA OF GOD IN WORSHIP
+
+
+We have found mythology of but little use in our search after the idea
+of God; and the reason, as we have suggested, is that myth-making is a
+reflective process, a process in which the mind reflects upon the
+idea, and therefore a process which cannot be set up unless the idea
+is already present, or, rather we should say, has already been
+presented. When it has been presented, it can become food for
+reflection, but not until then. If then we wish to discover where and
+when it is thus immediately presented, let us look for it in worship.
+If it is given primarily in the moment of worship, it may be
+reproduced in a secondary stage as a matter for reflection. Now, in
+worship--provided that it be experienced as a reality, and not
+performed as a conventionality--the community's purpose is to approach
+its God: let us come before the Lord and enter His courts with praise,
+are words which represent fairly the thought and feeling which, on
+ordinary occasions, the man who goes to worship--really--experiences,
+whether he be polytheist or monotheist. I have spoken of 'the moment
+of worship,' but worship is, of course, a habit: if it is not a habit,
+it ceases to be at all, in any effective sense. And it is a habit of
+the community, of the common consciousness, which is continuous
+through the ages, even though it slowly changes; and which, as
+continuous, is conservative and tenacious. Even when it has become
+monotheistic, it may continue to speak of the one God as 'a great god
+above all other gods,' in terms which are survivals of an earlier
+stage of belief. Such expressions are like the clouds which, though
+they are lifting, still linger round the mountain top: they are part
+of the vapour which had previously obscured from view the reality
+which was there, and cannot be shaken at any time.
+
+Worship may include words spoken, hymns of praise and prayer; but it
+includes also things done, acts performed, ritual. It is these acts
+that are the facts from which we have now to start, in order to infer
+what we can from them as to the idea of God which prompted them. There
+is an infinite diversity in these facts of ritual, just as the gods of
+polytheism are infinite in number and kind. But if there is diversity,
+there is also unity. Greatly as the gods of polytheism differ from one
+another, they are at least beings worshipped--and worshipped by the
+community. Greatly as rituals vary in their detail, they are all
+ritual: all are worship, and, all, the worship rendered by the
+community to its gods. And there can be no doubt as to their object or
+the purpose with which the community practises them: that purpose is,
+at least, to bring the community into the presence of its Lord. We may
+safely say that there can be no worship unless there is a community
+worshipping and a being which is worshipped. Nor can there be any
+doubt as to the relation existing between the two. The community bow
+down and worship: that is the attitude of the congregation. Nor can
+there be any doubt as to the relation which the god bears, in the
+common consciousness, to his worshippers: he is bound to them by
+special ties--from him they expect the help which they have received
+in ages past. They have faith in him--else they would not worship
+him--faith that he will be what he has been in the past, a very help
+in time of trouble. The mere fact that they seek to come before him is
+a confession of the faith that is in them, the faith that they are in
+the presence of their God and have access to Him. However primitive,
+that is rudimentary, the worship may be; however low in the scale of
+development the worshippers may be; however dim their idea of God and
+however confused and contradictory the reflections they may make
+about Him, it is in that faith that they worship. So much is implied
+by worship--by the mere fact that the worshippers are gathered
+together for worship. If we are to find any clue which may give us
+uniform guidance through the infinite variety in the details of the
+innumerable rituals that are, or have been, followed in the world, we
+must look to find it in the purpose for which the worshippers gather
+together. But, if we wish to be guided by objective facts rather than
+by hasty, _a priori_ assumptions, we must begin by consulting the
+facts: we must enquire whether the details of the different rituals
+present nothing but diversity, or whether there is any respect in
+which they show likeness or uniformity. There is one point in which
+they resemble one another; and, what is more, that point is the
+leading feature in all of them; they all centre round sacrifice. It is
+with sacrifice, or by means of sacrifice, that their gods are
+approached by all men, beginning even with the jungle-dwellers of
+Chota Nagpur, who sacrifice fowls and offer victims, for the purpose
+of conciliating the powers that send jungle-fever and murrain. The
+sacrificial rite is the occasion on which, and a means by which, the
+worshipper is brought into that closer relation with his god, which he
+would not seek, if he did not--for whatever reason--desire it. As
+bearing on the idea of God, the spiritual import, and the practical
+importance, of the sacrificial rite is that he who partakes in it can
+only partake of it so far as he recognises that God is no private idea
+of his own, existing only in his notion, but is objectively real. The
+jungle-dweller of Chota Nagpur may have no name for the being to whom,
+at the appointed season and in the appointed place, he sacrifices
+fowls; but, as we have seen, the gods only come to have proper,
+personal names in slow course of time. He may be incapable of giving
+any account, comprehensible to the civilised enquirer, of the idea
+which he has of the being to whom he offers sacrifice: more
+accomplished theologians than he have failed to define God. But of the
+reality of the being whom he seeks to approach he has no doubt. It is
+not the case that the reality of that being, by whomsoever worshipped,
+is an assumption which must be made, or a hypothesis that must be
+postulated, for the sake of providing a logical justification of
+worship. The simple fact is that the religious consciousness is the
+consciousness of God as real, just as the common consciousness is the
+consciousness of things as real. To represent the reality of either as
+something that is not experienced but inferred is to say that we have
+no experience of reality, and therefore have no real grounds for
+inference. We find it preferable to hold that we have immediate
+consciousness of the real, to some extent, and that by inference we
+may be brought, to a larger extent, into immediate consciousness of
+the real.
+
+Of the reality of Him, whom even the jungle-dweller of Chota Nagpur
+seeks to approach, it is only possible to doubt on grounds which seek
+to deny the ultimate validity of the common consciousness on any
+point. With the inferences which men have drawn about that reality,
+and the ideas those inferences have led to, the case is different.
+What exactly those ideas are, or have been, we have, more or less, to
+guess at, from such facts as the science of religion furnishes. One
+such set of facts is comprised under the term, worship; and of that
+set the leading fact everywhere is the rite of sacrifice. By means of
+it we may reasonably expect to penetrate to some of the ideas which
+the worshippers had of the gods whom they worshipped. Unfortunately,
+however, there is considerable difference of opinion, between students
+of the science of religion, as to the idea which underlies sacrifice.
+
+One fact from which we may start is that it is with sacrifice that the
+community draws near to the god it wishes to approach. The outward,
+physical fact, the visible set of actions, is that the body of
+worshippers proceed, with their oblation, to the place in which the
+god manifests himself and is to be found. The inference which follows
+is that, corresponding to this series of outward actions, there is an
+internal conviction in the hearts and minds of the worshippers: they
+would not go to the place, unless they felt that, in so doing, they
+were drawing near to their god.
+
+In thus drawing near, both physically and spiritually, they take with
+them something material. And this they would not do, unless taking the
+material thing expressed, in some way, their mental attitude, or
+rather their religious attitude. The attitude thus expressed must be
+part of, or implied by, the desire to approach the god both physically
+and spiritually. The fact that they carry with them some material
+thing, expresses in gesture-language--such as is used by explorers
+towards natives whose speech is unknown to them--the desire that
+actuates them. And thus much may be safely inferred, viz. that the
+desire is, at any rate, to prepossess favourably the person
+approached.
+
+Thus man approaches, bearing with him something intended to please the
+god that he draws near. But though that is part of his intention, it
+is not the whole. His desire is that the god shall be pleased not
+merely with the offering but with him. What he brings--his
+oblation--is but a means to that end. Why he wishes the god to be
+pleased with him, we shall have to enquire hereafter. Thus far,
+however, we see that that is the wish and is the purpose intimated by
+the fact that he brings something material with him.
+
+It seems clear also that the something material, with which the
+community draws near to its god, need only be something which is
+conceived to be pleasing to the god. All that is necessary is that it
+should express, or symbolise, the feeling with which the community
+draws near. So long as it does this, its function is discharged. What
+it is of importance to notice, and what is apt to be forgotten, is the
+feeling which underlies the outward act, and without which the action,
+the rite, would not be performed. The feeling is the desire of the
+worshipper to commend himself. If we take this point of view, then the
+distinction, which is sometimes drawn between offerings and sacrifice,
+need not mislead us. The distinction is that the term 'sacrifice' is
+to be used only of that which is consumed, or destroyed, in the
+service; while the term 'offering' is to be used only of what is not
+destroyed. And the reason for drawing, or seeking to draw, the
+distinction, seems to be that the destruction, or consumption, of the
+material thing, in the service, is required to prove that the offering
+is accepted. But, though this proof may have come, in some cases, to
+be expected, as showing that the community was right in believing that
+the offering would be acceptable; the fact remains that the
+worshippers would not start out with the offering in their hands,
+unless they thought, to begin with, that it was acceptable. They would
+not draw near to the god, with an offering about the acceptability of
+which they were in doubt. Anything therefore which they conceived to
+be acceptable would suffice to indicate their desire to please, and
+would serve to commend them. And the desire to do that which is
+pleasing to their god is there from the beginning, as the condition on
+which alone they can enter his presence. Neglect of this fact may lead
+us to limit unduly the potentialities contained in the rite of
+sacrifice, from the beginning.
+
+The rite did, undoubtedly, in the long course of time, come in some
+communities to be regarded and practised in a spirit little better
+than commercial. Sacrifices came to be regarded as gifts, or presents,
+made to the god, on the understanding that _do ut des_. Commerce
+itself, when analysed, is nothing but the application of the principle
+of giving to get. All that is necessary, in order to reduce religion
+to commercial principles, is that the payment of vows made should be
+contingent on the delivery of the goods stipulated for; that the thing
+offered should be regarded as payment; that the god's favour should be
+considered capable of being bought. It is however in communities which
+have some aptitude for commerce and have developed it, that religion
+is thus interpreted and practised. If we go back to the period in the
+history of a race when commerce is as yet unknown, we reach a state of
+things when the possibility of thus commercialising worship was, as
+yet, undeveloped. At that early period, as in all periods, of the
+history of religion, the desire of the worshippers was to be pleasing,
+and to do that which was pleasing, to him whom they worshipped; and
+the offerings they took with them when they approached his presence
+were intended to be the outward and visible sign of their desire. But
+in some, or even in many, cases, they came eventually to rely on the
+sign or symbol rather than on the desire which it signified; and that
+is a danger which constantly dogs all ritual. Attention is
+concentrated rather on the rite than on the spiritual process, which
+underlies it, and of which the rite is but the expression; and then it
+becomes possible to give a false interpretation to the meaning of the
+rite.
+
+In the case of the offerings, which are made in the earliest stages of
+the history of religion, the false interpretation, which comes in some
+cases to be put upon them by those who make the offerings, has been
+adopted by some students of the history of religion, as the true
+explanation, the real meaning and the original purpose of offerings
+and sacrifice. This theory--the Gift-theory of sacrifice--requires us
+to believe that religion could be commercialised before commerce was
+known; that religion consists, or originally consisted, not in doing
+that which is pleasing in the sight of God, but in bribing the gods;
+that the relatively late misinterpretation is the original and true
+meaning of the rite; in a word, that there was no religion in the
+earliest manifestation of religion. But it is precisely this last
+contention which is fatal to the Gift-theory. Not only is it a
+self-contradiction in terms, but it denies the very possibility of
+religious evolution. Evolution is a process and a continuous process:
+there is an unbroken continuity between the earliest and the latest of
+its stages. If there was no religion whatever in the earliest stages,
+neither can there be any in the latest. And that is why those who hold
+religion to be an absurdity are apt to adopt the Gift-theory: the
+Gift-theory implies a degrading absurdity from the beginning to the
+end of the evolutionary process--an unbroken continuity of absurdity.
+On the other hand, we may hold by the plain truth that there must have
+been religion in the earliest manifestations of religion, and that
+bribing a god is not, in our sense of the word, religious. In that
+case, we shall also hold that the offerings which have always been
+part of the earliest religious ritual were intended as the outward and
+visible sign or symbol of the community's desire to do that which was
+pleasing to their god; and that it is only in the course of time, and
+as the consequence of misinterpretation, that the offerings come to
+be regarded as gifts made for the purpose of bribing the gods or of
+purchasing what they have to bestow. Thus, just as, in the evolution
+of religion, fetishism was differentiated from polytheism, and was
+cast aside--where it was cast aside--as incompatible with the demands
+of the religious sentiment, so too the making of gifts to the gods,
+for the purpose of purchasing their favour, came to be differentiated
+from the service which God requires.
+
+The endeavour to explain the history and purpose of sacrifice by means
+of the Gift-theory alone has the further disadvantage that it requires
+us to close our eyes to other features of the sacrificial rite, for,
+if we turn to them, we shall find it impossible to regard the
+Gift-theory as affording a complete and exhaustive account of all that
+there was in the rite from the beginning. Indeed, so important are
+these other features, that, as we have seen, some students would
+maintain that the only rite which can be properly termed sacrificial
+is one which presents these features. From this point of view, the
+term sacrifice can only be used of something that is consumed or
+destroyed in the service; while the term offering is restricted to
+things which are not destroyed. But, from this point of view, we must
+hold that sacrifices, to be sacrifices in the specific must not merely
+be destroyed or consumed, for then anything that could be destroyed
+by fire would be capable of becoming a burnt-offering; and the burning
+would simply prove that the offering was acceptable--a proof which may
+in some cases have been required to make assurance doubly sure, but
+which was really superfluous, inasmuch as no one who desires his
+offering to be accepted will make an offering which he thinks to be
+unacceptable. Sacrifices, to be sacrifices in the specific sense thus
+put upon the word, we must hold to be things which by their very
+nature are marked out to be consumed: they must be articles of food.
+But even with this qualification, sacrifices are not satisfactorily
+distinguished from offerings, for a food-offering is an offering, and
+discharges the function of a sacrifice, provided that it is offered.
+That it should actually be consumed is neither universally nor
+necessarily required. That it is often consumed in the service is a
+fact which brings us to a new and different feature of the sacrificial
+rite. Let us then consider it.
+
+Thus far, looking at the rite on its outward side, from the point of
+view of the spectator, we have seen that the worshippers, carrying
+with them something material, draw near to the place where the god
+manifests himself. From this series of actions and gestures, we have
+inferred the belief of the worshippers to be that they are drawing
+near to their god both physically and spiritually. We have inferred
+that the material oblation is intended by the worshippers as the
+outward and visible sign of their wish to commend themselves to the
+god. We have now to notice what has been implied throughout, that the
+worshippers do not draw near to the god without a reason, or seek to
+commend themselves to him without a purpose. And if we consult the
+facts once more, we shall find that the occasions, on which the god is
+thus approached, are generally occasions of distress, experienced or
+apprehended. The feelings with which the community draws near are
+compounded of the fear, occasioned by the distress or danger, and the
+hope and confidence that it will be removed or averted by the step
+which they are taking. Part of their idea of the god is that he can
+and will remove the present, or avert the coming, calamity; otherwise
+they would not seek to approach him. But part also of their idea is
+that they have done something to provoke him, otherwise calamity would
+not have come upon them. Thus, when the worshippers seek to come into
+the presence of their god, they are seeking him with the feeling that
+he is estranged from them, and they approach him with something in
+their hands to symbolise their desire to please him, and to restore
+the relation which ordinarily subsists between a god and his
+worshippers. Having deposited the offering they bring, and having
+proffered the petition they came to make, they retire satisfied that
+all now is well. The rite is now in all its essential features
+complete. But though complete, as an organism in the early stages of
+its history may be complete, it has, like the organism, the power of
+growth; and it grows.
+
+The conviction with which the community ends the rite is the joyful
+conviction that the trouble is over-past. The joy which the community
+feels often expresses itself in feast and song; and where the
+offerings are, as they most commonly are, food-offerings or
+animal-sacrifice, the feast may come to be regarded as one at which
+the god himself is present and of which he partakes along with his
+worshippers. The joy, which expresses itself in feast and song, may,
+however, not make itself felt until the prayer of the community has
+been fulfilled and the calamity has passed away; and then the feast
+comes to be of the nature of a joyful thank-offering. But it is
+probably only in one or other of these two cases that the offering
+comes to be consumed in the service of feast and song. And although
+the rite may and does grow in this way, still this development of
+it--'eating with the god'--is rather potentially than actually present
+in the earliest form of the rite.
+
+From this point of view, sacrificial meals or feasts are not part of
+the ritual of approach: they belong to the termination of the
+ceremony. They mark the fact of reconciliation; they are an
+expression of the conviction that friendly relations are restored. The
+sacrificial meal then is accordingly not a means by which
+reconciliation is effected, but the outward expression of the
+conviction that the end has been attained; and, as expressing, it has
+the force of confirming, the conviction. Where the sacrificial rite
+grows to comprehend a sacrificial feast or meal, there the
+food-offering or sacrifice is consumed in the service. But the rite
+does not always develop thus; and even without this development it
+discharges its proper function. Before this development, it is on
+occasions of distress that the god is approached by the community, in
+the conviction that the community has offended, and with the object of
+purging the community and removing the distress, of appeasing the god
+and restoring good relations. Yet even at this stage the object of the
+community is to be at one with its god--at-one-ment and communion so
+far are sought. There is implied the faith that he, the community's
+god, cannot possibly be for ever alienated and will not utterly
+forsake them, even though he be estranged for the time. Doubtless the
+feast, which in some cases came to crown the sacrificial rite, may,
+where it was practised amongst peoples who believed that persons
+partaking of common food became united by a common bond, have come to
+be regarded as constituting a fresh bond and a more intimate
+communion between the god and his worshippers who alike partook of the
+sacrificial meal. But this belief is probably far from being, or
+having been, universal; and it is unnecessary to assume that this
+belief must have existed, wherever we find the accomplishment of the
+sacrificial rite accompanied by rejoicing. The performance of the
+sacrificial rite is prompted by the desire to restore the normal
+relation between the community and its god. It is carried out in the
+conviction that the god is willing to return to the normal relation;
+when it has been performed, the community is relieved and rejoices,
+whether the rejoicing does or does not take form in a feast; and the
+essence of the rejoicing is the conviction that all now is well, a
+conviction which arises from the performance of the sacrificial rite
+and not from the meal which may or may not follow it.
+
+Where the institution of the sacrificial feast did grow up, the
+natural tendency would be for it to become the most important feature
+in the whole rite. The original and the fundamental purpose of the
+rite was to reconcile the god and his worshippers and to make them at
+one: the feast, therefore, which marked the accomplishment of the very
+purpose of the rite, would come to be regarded as the object of the
+rite. In that, however, there is nothing more than the shifting
+forward of the centre of religious interest from the sacrifice to the
+feast: there is nothing in it to change the character or conception
+of the feast. Yet, in the case of some peoples, its character and
+conception did change in a remarkable way. In the case of some
+peoples, we find that the feast is not an occasion of 'eating with the
+god' but what has been crudely called 'eating the god.' This
+conception existed, as is generally agreed, beyond the possibility of
+doubt, in Mexico amongst the Aztecs, and perhaps--though not beyond
+the possibility of doubt--elsewhere.
+
+The Aztecs were a barbarous or semi-civilised people, with a long
+history behind them. The circumstances under which the belief and
+practice in question existed and had grown up amongst them are clear
+enough. The Aztecs worshipped deities, and amongst those deities were
+plants and vegetables, such as maize. It was, of course, not any one
+individual specimen that they worshipped: it was the spirit, the
+maize-mother, who manifested herself in every maize-plant, but was not
+identical with any one. At the same time, though they worshipped the
+spirit, or species, they grew and cultivated the individual plants, as
+furnishing them with food. Thus they were in the position of eating as
+food the plant, the body, in which was manifested the spirit whom they
+worshipped. In this there was an outward resemblance to the Christian
+rite of communion, which could not fail to attract the attention of
+the Spanish priests at the time of the conquest of Mexico, but which
+has probably been unconsciously magnified by them. They naturally
+interpreted the Aztec ceremony in terms of Christianity, and the
+spirit of the translation probably differs accordingly from the spirit
+of the original.
+
+We have now to consider the new phase of the sacrificial--indeed, in
+this connection, we may say the sacramental--rite which was found in
+Mexico, and to indicate the manner in which it probably originated.
+The offerings earliest made to the gods were not necessarily, but were
+probably, food-offerings, animal or vegetable; and as we are not in a
+position to affirm that there was any restriction upon the kind of
+food offered, it seems advisable to assume that any kind of food might
+be offered to any kind of god. The intention of offerings seems to be
+to indicate merely that the worshippers desire to be pleasing in the
+sight of the god whom they wish to approach. At this, the simplest and
+earliest stage of the rite, the sacrificial feast has not yet come
+into existence: it is enough if the food is offered to the god; it is
+not necessary that it should be eaten, or that any portion of it
+should be eaten, by the community. There is evidence enough to warrant
+us in believing that generally there was an aversion to eating the
+god's portion. If the worshippers ate any portion, they certainly
+would not eat and did not eat, until after the god had done so. At
+this stage in the development of the rite, the offerings are
+occasional, and are not made at stated, recurring, seasons. The reason
+for believing this is that it is on occasions of alarm and distress
+that the community seeks to draw near its god. But though it is in
+alarm that the community draws nigh, it draws nigh in confidence that
+the god can be appeased and is willing to be appeased. It is part of
+the community's idea of its god that he has the power to punish; that
+he does not exercise his power without reason; and that, as he is
+powerful, so also he is just to his worshippers, and merciful.
+
+But though occasional offerings, and sacrifices made in trouble to
+gods who are conceived to be a very help in time of trouble, continue
+to be made, until a relatively late period in the history of religion,
+we also find that there are recurring sacrifices, annually made. At
+these annual ceremonies, the offerings are food-offerings. Where the
+food-offerings are offerings of vegetable food, they are made at
+harvest time. They are made on the occasion of harvest; and that they
+should be so made is probably no accident or fortuitous coincidence.
+At the regularly recurring season of harvest, the community adheres to
+the custom, already formed, of not partaking of the food which it
+offers to its god, until a portion has been offered to the god. The
+custom, like other customs, tends to become obligatory: the
+worshippers, that is to say the community, may not eat, until the
+offering has been made and accepted. Then, indeed, the worshippers may
+eat, solemnly, in the presence of their god. The eating becomes a
+solemn feast of thanksgiving. The god, after whom they eat, and to
+whom they render thanks, becomes the god who gives them to eat. What
+is thus true of edible plants--whether wild or domesticated--may also
+hold true to some extent of animal life, where anything like a 'close
+time' comes to be observed.
+
+As sacrificial ceremonies come to be, thus, annually recurring rites,
+a corresponding development takes place in the community's idea of its
+god. So long as the sacrificial ceremony was an irregularly recurring
+rite, the performance of which was prompted by the occurrence, or the
+threat, of disaster, so long it was the wrath of the god which filled
+the fore-ground, so to speak, of the religious consciousness; though
+behind it lay the conviction of his justice and his mercy. But when
+the ceremony becomes one of annual worship, a regularly recurring
+occasion on which the worshippers recognise that it is the god, to
+whom the first-fruits belong, who gives the worshippers the harvest,
+then the community's idea of its god is correspondingly developed. The
+occasion of the sacrificial rite is no longer one of alarm and
+distress; it is no longer the wrath of the god, but his goodness as
+the giver of good gifts, that tends to emerge in the fore-ground of
+the religious consciousness. Harvest rites tend to become feasts of
+thanksgiving and thank-offerings; and so, by contrast with these
+joyous festivals, the occasional sacrifices, which continue to be
+offered in times of distress, tend to assume, more and more, the
+character of sin-offerings or guilt-offerings.
+
+We have, however, now to notice a consequence which ensues upon the
+community's custom of not eating until after the first-fruits have
+been offered to the god. Not only is a habit or custom hard to break,
+simply because it is a habit; but, when the habit is the habit of a
+whole community, the individual who presumes to violate it is visited
+by the disapproval and the condemnation of the whole community. When
+then the custom has established itself of abstaining from eating,
+until the first-fruits have been offered to the god, any violation of
+the custom is condemned by the community as a whole. The consequence
+of this is that the fruit or the animal tends to be regarded by the
+community as sacred to the god, and not to be meddled with until after
+the first-fruits have been offered to him. The plant or animal becomes
+sacred to the god because the community has offered it to him, and
+intends to offer it to him, and does offer it to him annually. Now it
+is not a necessary and inevitable consequence that an animal or plant,
+which has come to be sacred, should become divine. But where we find
+divine animals or animal gods--divine corn or corn-goddesses--we are
+entitled to consider this as one way in which they may have come to be
+regarded as divine, because sacred, and as deities, because divine.
+When we find the divine plant or animal constituting the sacrifice,
+and furnishing forth the sacrificial meal, there is a possibility that
+it was in this way and by this process that the plant or animal came
+to be, first, sacred, then divine, and finally the deity, to whom it
+was offered. In many cases, certainly, this last stage was never
+reached. And we may conjecture a reason why it was not reached.
+Whether it could be reached would depend largely on the degree of
+individuality, which the god, to whom the offering was made, had
+reached. A god who possesses a proper, personal name, must have a long
+history behind him, for a personal name is an epithet the meaning of
+which comes in course of time to be forgotten. If its meaning has come
+to be entirely forgotten, the god is thereby shown not only to have a
+long history behind him but to have acquired a high degree of
+individuality and personality, which will not be altered or modified
+by the offerings which are made to him. Where, however, the being or
+power worshipped is, as with the jungle-dwellers of Chota Nagpur,
+still nameless, his personality and individuality must be of the
+vaguest; and, in that case, there is the probability that the plant or
+animal offered to him may become sacred to him; and, having become
+sacred, may become divine. The animal or plant may become that in
+which the nameless being manifests himself. The corn or maize is
+offered to the nameless deity; the deity is the being to whom the corn
+or maize is habitually offered; and then becomes the corn-deity or
+maize-deity, the mother of the maize or the corn-goddess.
+
+Like the _di indigites_ of Italy, these vegetation-goddesses are
+addressed by names which, though performing the function of personal
+names and enabling the worshippers to make appeals to the deities
+personally, are still of perfectly transparent meaning. Both present
+to us that stage in the evolution of a deity, in which as yet the
+meaning of his name still survives; in which his name has not yet
+become a fully personal name; and in which he has not yet attained to
+full personality and complete individuality. This want of complete
+individuality can hardly be dissociated from another fact which goes
+with it. That fact is that the deity is to be found in any plant of
+the species sacred to him, or in any animal of the species sacred to
+him, but is not supposed to be found only in the particular plant or
+animal which is offered on one particular occasion. If the
+corn-goddess is present, or manifests herself, in one particular sheaf
+of corn, at her harvest festival this year, still she did manifest
+herself last year, and will manifest herself next year, in another.
+The deity, that is to say, is the species; and the species, and no
+individual specimen thereof, is the deity. That is the reason which
+prevents, or tends to prevent, deities of this kind from attaining
+complete individuality.
+
+This want of complete individuality and of full personality it is
+which characterises totems. The totem, also, is a being who, if he
+manifests himself in this particular animal, which is slain, has also
+manifested himself and will manifest himself in other animals of the
+same species: but he is not identical with any particular individual
+specimen. Not only is the individuality of the totem thus incomplete,
+but in many instances the name of the species has not begun to change
+into a proper personal name for the totem, as 'Ceres' or
+'Chicomecoatl' or 'Xilonen' have changed into proper names of personal
+deities. Whether we are or are not to regard the totem as a god, at
+any rate, viewed as a being in the process of acquiring individuality,
+he seems to be acquiring it in the same way, and by the same process,
+as corn-goddesses and maize-mothers acquired theirs, and to present to
+our eyes a stage of growth through which these vegetation-deities
+themselves have passed. They also at one time had not yet acquired
+the personal names by which they afterwards came to be addressed. They
+were, though nameless, the beings present in any and every sheaf of
+corn or maize, though not cabined and confined to any one sheaf or any
+number of sheaves. And these beings have it in them to become--for
+they did become--deities. The process by which and the period at which
+they may have become deities we have already suggested: the period is
+the stage at which offerings, originally made at irregular times of
+distress, become annual offerings, made at the time of harvest; the
+process is the process by which what is customary becomes obligatory.
+The offerings at harvest time, from customary, become obligatory. That
+which is offered, is thereby sacred; the very intention to offer it,
+this year in the same way as it was offered last year, suffices to
+make it sacred, before it is offered. Thus, the whole species, whether
+plant or animal, becomes sacred, to the deity to whom it is offered:
+it is his. And if he be as vague and shadowy as the power or being to
+whom the jungle-dwellers of Chota Nagpur make their offerings at
+stated seasons, then he may be looked for and found in the plant or
+animal species which is his. The harvest is his alone, until the
+first-fruits are offered. He makes the plants to grow: if they fail,
+it is to him the community prays. If they thrive, it is because he is,
+though not identical with them, yet in a way present in them, and is
+not to be distinguished from the being who not only manifests himself
+in every individual plant or animal of the species, though not
+identical with any one, but is called by the name of the species.
+
+Whether we are to see in totems, as they occur in Australia, beings in
+the stage through which vegetation deities presumably passed, before
+they became corn-goddesses and mothers of the maize, is a question,
+the answer to which depends upon our interpretation of the ceremonies
+in which they figure. It is difficult, at least, to dissociate those
+ceremonies from the ritual of first-fruits. The community may not eat
+of the animal or plant, at the appropriate season, until the head-man
+has solemnly and sparingly partaken of it. About the solemnity of the
+ceremonial and the reverence of those who perform it, there is no
+doubt. But, whereas in the ritual of first-fruits elsewhere, the
+first-fruits are, beyond possibility of doubt or mistake, offered to a
+god, a personal god, having a proper name, in Australia there is no
+satisfactory evidence to show that the offerings are supposed, by
+those who make them, to be made to any god; or that the totem-spirit,
+if it is distinguished from the totem-species, is regarded as a god.
+There has accordingly been a tendency on the part of students of the
+science of religion to deny to totemism any place in the evolution of
+religion, and even to regard the Australian black-fellows as
+exemplifying, within the region of our observation, a pre-religious
+period in the process of human evolution. This latter view may safely
+be dismissed as untenable, whether we do or do not believe totemism to
+have a religious side. There is sufficient mythology, still existing
+amongst the Australian tribes, to show that the belief in gods
+survives amongst them, even though, as seems to be the case, no
+worship now attaches to the gods, with personal names, who figure in
+the myths. That myths survive, when worship has ceased; and that the
+names of gods linger on, even when myths are no longer told of them,
+are features to be seen in the decay of religious systems, all the
+world over, and not in Australia alone. The fact that these features
+are to be found in Australia points to a consideration which hitherto
+has generally been overlooked, or not sufficiently weighed. It is that
+in Australia we are in the midst of general religious decay, and are
+not witnessing the birth of religion nor in the presence of a
+pre-religious period. From this point of view, the worship of the
+gods, who figure in the myths, has ceased, but their names live on.
+And from this point of view, the names of the beings worshipped, in
+the totemistic first-fruits ceremonies, have disappeared, though the
+ceremonies are elaborate, solemn, reverent, complicated and
+prolonged; and religion has been swallowed up in ritual.
+
+Even amongst the Aztecs, who had reached a stage of social
+development, barbarous or semi-civilised, far beyond anything attained
+by the Australian tribes, the degree of personality and individuality
+reached by the vegetation deities was not such that those deities had
+strictly proper names: the deity of the maize was still only 'the
+maize-mother.' Amongst the Australians, who are so far below the level
+reached in Mexico, the beings worshipped at the first-fruits
+ceremonies may well have been as nameless as the beings worshipped by
+the jungle-dwellers of Chota Nagpur. Around these nameless beings, a
+ritual, simple in its origin, but luxuriant in its growth, has
+developed, overshadowing and obscuring them from our view, so that we,
+and perhaps the worshippers, cannot see the god for the ritual.
+
+In Mexico the vegetation-goddesses struggled for existence amongst a
+crowd of more developed deities, just as in Italy the _di indigites_
+competed, at a disadvantage, with the great gods of the state. In
+Australia the greater gods of the myths seem to have given way
+before--or to--the spread of totemism. Where gods are worshipped for
+the benefits expected from them, beings who have in charge the
+food-supply of the community will be worshipped not only annually at
+the season of the first-fruits, but with greater zeal and more
+continuous devotion than can be displayed towards the older gods who
+are worshipped only at irregular periods. Not only does the existence
+of mythology in Australia indicate that the gods who figure in the
+myths were once worshipped, though worship now no longer is rendered
+to them; but the totemistic ceremonies by their very nature show that
+they are a later development of the sacrificial rite. The simplest
+form of the rite is that in which the community draw near to their
+god, bearing with them offerings, acceptable to the god: it is at a
+later stage in the development of the rite that the offerings, having
+been accepted by the god, are consumed by the community, as is the
+case with the totem animals and plants. At its earliest stage, again,
+the rite is performed, at irregular periods, on occasions of distress:
+it is only at a more advanced stage that the rite is performed at
+fixed, annual periods, as in Australia. And this change of periodicity
+is plainly connected with the growth of the conviction that the annual
+first-fruits belong to the gods--a conviction springing from the
+belief that they are annually accepted by the god, a belief which in
+its turn implies a prior belief that they are acceptable. In other
+words, the centre of religious interest at first lies in approaching
+the god, that is in the desire to restore the normal state of
+relations, which calamity shows to have been disturbed. But in the
+end, religious interest is concentrated on, and expressed by, the
+feast which terminates the ceremony and marks the fact that the
+reconciliation is effected. What is at first accepted by the god at
+the feast comes to be regarded as belonging to him and sacred to him:
+the worshippers may not touch it until a portion of it, the
+first-fruits, has been accepted by him. Thus the rite which indicates
+and marks his acceptance becomes more than ever the centre of
+religious interest. The rite may thus become of more importance than
+the god, as in Australia seems to be the case; for the performance of
+the rite is indispensable if the community is to be admitted to eat of
+the harvest. When this point of view has been reached, when the
+performance of the rite is the indispensable thing, the rite tends to
+be regarded as magical. If this is what has happened in the case of
+the Australian rite, it is but what tends to happen, wherever ritual
+flourishes at the expense of religion. If it were necessary to assume
+that only amongst the Australian black-fellows, and never elsewhere,
+did a rite, originally religious, tend to become magical, then it
+would be _a priori_ unlikely, in the extreme, that this happened in
+Australia. But inasmuch as this tendency is innate in ritual, it is
+rather likely that in Australia the tendency has run its course, as it
+has done elsewhere, in India, for example, where, also, the
+sacrificial rite has become magical. Whether a rite, originally
+religious, will become assimilated to magic, depends very much on the
+extent to which the community believes in magic. The more the
+community believes in magic, the more ready it will be to put a
+magical interpretation on its religious rites. But the fact that, in
+the lower communities, religion is always in danger of sinking into
+magic, does not prove that religion springs from magic and is but one
+kind of magic. That view, once held by some students, is now generally
+abandoned. It amounts simply to saying once more that in the earliest
+manifestations of religion there was no religion, and that religion is
+now, what it was in the beginning--nothing but magic. If that position
+is abandoned, then religious rites are, in their very nature, and from
+their very origin, different from magical rites. Religious rites are,
+first, rites of approach, whereby the community draws nigh to its god;
+and, afterwards, rites of sacramental meals whereby the community
+celebrates its reconciliation and enjoys communion with its god. Those
+meals are typically cases of 'eating with the god,' celebrated on the
+occasion of first-fruits, and based on the conviction, which has
+slowly grown up, that 'the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness
+thereof.' Meals, such as were found in Mexico, and have left their
+traces in Australia, in which the fruit or the animal that was offered
+had come to be regarded as standing in the same relation to the god
+as an individual does to the species, are meals having the same origin
+as those in which the community eats with its god, but following a
+different line of evolution.
+
+The object of the sacrificial rite is first to restore and then to
+maintain good relations between the community and its god. Pushed to
+its logical conclusion, or rather perhaps we should say, pushed back
+to the premisses required for its logical demonstration, the very idea
+of renewing or restoring relations implies an original understanding
+between the community and its god; and implies that it is the
+community's departure from this understanding which has involved it in
+the disaster, from which it desires to escape, and to secure escape
+from which, it approaches its god, with desire to renew and restore
+the normal relations. The idea that if intelligent beings do something
+customarily, they must do so because once they entered into a
+contract, compact or covenant to do so, is one which in Plato's time
+manifested itself in the theory of a social compact, to account for
+the existence of morality, and which in Japan was recorded in the
+tenth century A.D. as accounting for the fact that certain sacrifices
+were offered to the gods. Thus in the fourth ritual of 'the Way of the
+Gods'--that is Shinto--it is explained that the Spirits of the Storm
+took the Japanese to be their people, and the people of Japan took the
+Spirits of the Storm to be gods of theirs. In pursuance of that
+covenant, the spirits on their part undertook to be Gods of the Winds
+and to ripen and bless the harvest, while the people on their part
+undertook to found a temple to their new gods; and that is why the
+people are now worshipping them. It was, according to the account
+given in the fourth ritual, the gods themselves who dictated the
+conditions on which they were willing to take the Japanese to be their
+people, and fixed the terms of the covenant. So too in the account
+given in the sixth chapter of Exodus, it was Jehovah himself who
+dictated to Moses the terms of the covenant which he was willing to
+make with the children of Israel: 'I will take you to me for a people,
+and I will be to you a God.' In Japan it was to the Emperor, as high
+priest, that the terms of the covenant were dictated, in consequence
+of which the temple was built and the worship instituted.
+
+The train of thought is quite clear and logically consistent. If the
+gods of the Winds were to be trusted--as they were unquestionably
+trusted--it must be because they had made a covenant with the people,
+and would be faithful to it, if the people were. The direct statement,
+in plain, intelligible words, in the fourth ritual, that a covenant of
+this kind had actually been entered into, was but a statement of what
+is implied by the very idea, and in the very act, of offering
+sacrifices. And sacrifices had of course been offered in Japan long
+before the tenth century: they were offered, and long had been offered
+annually to the gods of the Harvest. Probably they had been offered to
+the gods of the Storms long before they were offered to the gods of
+the Winds; and the procedure narrated in the fourth ritual records the
+transformation of the occasional and irregular sacrifices, made to the
+winds when they threatened the harvest with damage, into annual
+sacrifices, made every year as a matter of course. Thus, we have an
+example of the way in which the older sacrifices, made originally only
+in times of disaster, come to be assimilated to the more recent
+sacrifices, which from their nature and origin, are offered regularly
+every year. Not only is there a natural tendency in man to assimilate
+things which admit of assimilation and can be brought under one rule;
+but also it is advisable to avert calamity rather than to wait for it,
+and, when it has happened, to do something. It would therefore be
+desirable from this point of view to render regular worship to deities
+who can send disaster; and thus to induce them to abstain from sending
+it.
+
+In the fourth Shinto ritual the gods of the Winds are represented as
+initiating the contract and prescribing its terms. But in the first
+ritual, which is concerned with the worship of the gods of the
+Harvest, it is the community which is represented as taking the first
+step, and as undertaking that, if the gods grant an abundant harvest,
+the people will, through their high priest, the Emperor, make a
+thank-offering, in the shape of first-fruits, to the gods of the
+Harvest. This is, of course, no more an historical account of the way
+in which the gods of the Harvest actually came to be worshipped, than
+is the account which the fourth Shinto ritual gives of the way the
+gods of the Winds came to be worshipped. In both cases the worship
+existed, and sacrifices had been made, as a matter of custom, long
+before any need was felt to explain the origin of the custom. As soon
+as the need was felt, the explanation was forthcoming: if the
+community had made these sacrifices, for as long back as the memory of
+man could run, and if the gods had granted good harvests in
+consequence, it must have been in consequence of an agreement entered
+into by both parties; and therefore a covenant had been established
+between them, on some past occasion, which soon became historical.
+
+This history of the origin and meaning of sacrifice has an obvious
+affinity with the gift-theory of sacrifice. Both in the gift-theory and
+the covenant-theory, the terms of the transaction are that so much
+blessing shall be forthcoming for so much service, or so much sacrifice
+for so much blessing. The point of view is commercial; the obligation
+is legal; if the terms are strictly kept on the one part, then they
+are strictly binding on the other. The covenant-theory, like the
+gift-theory, is eventually discovered by spiritual experience, if
+pushed far enough, to be a false interpretation of the relations
+existing between god and man. Being an interpretation, it is an outcome
+of reflection--of reflection upon the fact that, in the time of
+trouble, man turns to his gods, and that, in returning to them, he
+escapes from his trouble. On that fact all systems of worship are
+based, from that fact all systems of worship start. If, as is the case,
+they start in different directions and diverge from one another, it is
+because men, in the process of reflecting upon that fact, come to put
+different interpretations upon it. And so far as they eventually come
+to feel that any interpretation is a misinterpretation, they do so
+because they find that it is not, as they had been taught to believe, a
+correct interpretation but a misinterpretation of the fact: there is
+found in the experience of returning to God, something with which the
+misinterpretation is irreconcilable; and, when the misinterpretation is
+dispersed, like a vapour, the vision of God, the idea of God, shines
+forth the more brightly. One such misinterpretation is the reflection
+that the favour of the gods can be bought by gifts. Another is the
+reflection that the gods sell their favours, on the terms of a covenant
+agreed upon between them and man. Another is that that which is offered
+is sacred, and that that which is sacred is divine--that the god is
+himself the offering which is made to him.
+
+In all systems of worship man not only turns to his gods but does so
+in the conviction that he is returning, or trying to return, to
+them--trying to return to them, because they have been estranged, and
+access to them is therefore difficult. Accordingly, he draws near to
+them, bearing in his hands something intended to express his desire to
+return to them. The material, external symbol of his desire--the
+oblation, offering or sacrifice which he brings with him because it
+expresses his desire--is that on which at first his attention centres.
+And because his attention centres on it, the rite of sacrifice, the
+outward ceremony, develops in ways already described. The object of
+the rite is to procure access to the god; and the greater the extent
+to which attention is concentrated on the right way of performing the
+external acts and the outward ceremony, the less attention is bestowed
+upon the inward purpose which accompanies the outward actions, and for
+the sake of which those external actions are performed. As the object
+of the rite is to procure access, it seems to follow that the proper
+performance of the rite will ensure the access desired. The reason why
+access is sought, at all, is the belief--arising on occasions when
+calamity visits the community--that the god has been estranged, and
+the faith that he may yet become reconciled to his worshippers. The
+reason why his wrath descends, in the shape of calamities, upon the
+community, is that the community, in the person of one of its members,
+has offended the god, by breaking the custom of the community in some
+way. For this reason--in this belief and faith--access is sought, by
+means of the sacrificial rite; and the purpose of the rite is assumed
+to be realised by the performance of the ceremonies, in which the
+outward rite consists. The meaning and the value of the outward
+ceremonies consists in the desire for reconciliation which expresses
+itself in the acts performed; and the mere performance of the acts
+tends of itself to relieve the desire. That is why the covenant-theory
+of sacrifice gains acceptance: it represents--it is an official
+representation--that performance of the sacrificial ceremony is all
+that is required, by the terms of the agreement, to obtain
+reconciliation and to effect atonement. But the representation is
+found to be a misrepresentation: the desire for reconciliation and
+atonement is not to be satisfied by outward ceremonies, but by
+hearkening and obedience. 'To obey is better than sacrifice and to
+hearken than the fat of rams.' Sacrifice remains the outward rite, but
+it is pronounced to have value only so far as it is an expression of
+the spirit of obedience. Oblations are vain unless the person who
+offers them is changed in heart, unless there is an inward, spiritual
+process, of which the external ceremony is an expression. Though this
+was an interpretation of the meaning of the sacrificial rite which was
+incompatible with the covenant-theory and which was eventually fatal
+to it, it was at once a return to the original object of the rite and
+a disclosure of its meaning. Some such internal, spiritual process is
+implied by sacrifice from the beginning, for it is a plain
+impossibility to suppose that in the beginning it consisted of mere
+external actions which had absolutely no meaning whatever, for those
+who performed them; and it is equally impossible to maintain that such
+meaning as they had was not a religious meaning. The history of
+religion is the history of the process by which the import of that
+meaning rises to the surface of clear consciousness, and is gradually
+revealed. Beneath the ceremony and the outward rite there was always a
+moral and religious process--moral because it was the community of
+fellow-worshippers who offered the sacrifice, on occasions of a breach
+of the custom, that is of the customary morality, of the tribe;
+religious because it was to their god that they offered it. The very
+purpose with which the community offered it was to purge itself of the
+offence committed by one of its members. The condition precedent, on
+which alone sacrifice could be offered, was that the offence was
+repented of. From the beginning sacrifice implied repentance and was
+impossible without it. But it sufficed if the community repented and
+punished the transgressor: his repentance however was not
+necessary--all that was necessary was his punishment.
+
+The re-interpretation of the sacrificial rite by the prophets of
+Israel was that until there was hearkening and obedience there could
+be nothing but an outward performance of the rite. The revelation made
+by Christ was that every man may take part in the supreme act of
+worship, if he has first become reconciled to his brother, if he has
+first repented his own offences, from love for God and his fellow-man.
+The old covenant made the favour of God conditional on the receipt of
+sacrificial offerings. The new covenant removes that limit, and all
+others, from God's love to his children: it is infinite love. It is
+not conditional or limited; conditional on man's loving God, or
+limited to those who love Him. Otherwise the new covenant would be of
+the same nature as the old. But love asks for love; the greater love
+for the greater love; infinite love for the greatest man is capable
+of. And it is hard for a man to resist love; impossible indeed in the
+end: all men come under and into the new covenant, in which there is
+infinite love on the one side, and love that may grow infinitely on
+the other. If it is to grow, however, it is in a new life that it must
+grow: a life of sacrifice, a life in which he who comes under the new
+covenant is himself the offering and the 'lively sacrifice.'
+
+The worshipper's idea of God necessarily determines the spirit in
+which he worships. The idea of God as a God of love is different from
+the idea of Him as a God of justice, who justly requires hearkening
+and obedience. The idea of God as a God who demands obedience and is
+not to be put off with vain oblations is different from that of a God
+to whom, by the terms of a covenant, offerings are to be made in
+return for benefits received. But each and all of these ideas imply
+the existence, in the individual consciousness, and in the common
+consciousness, of the desire to draw near to God, and of the need of
+drawing nigh. Wherever that need and that desire are felt, there
+religion is; and the need and the desire are part of the common
+consciousness of mankind. From the beginning they have always
+expressed or symbolised themselves in outward acts or rites. The
+experience of the human race is testimony that rites are
+indispensable, in the same way and for the same reason that language
+is indispensable to thought. Thought would not develop were there no
+speech, whereby thought could be sharpened on thought. Nor has
+religion ever, anywhere, developed without rites. They, like language,
+are the work of the community, collectively; and they are a mode of
+expression which is, like language, intelligible to the community,
+because the community expresses itself in this way, and because each
+member of the community finds that other members have thoughts like
+his, and the same desire to draw near to a Being whose existence they
+doubt not, however vaguely they conceive Him, or however
+contradictorily they interpret His being. But, if language is
+indispensable to thought, and a means whereby we become conscious of
+each other's thought, language is not thought. Nor are rites, and
+outward acts, religion--indispensable though they be to it. They are
+an expression of it. They must be an inadequate expression; and they
+are always liable to misinterpretation, even by some of those who
+perform them. The history of religion contains the record of the
+misinterpretations of the rite of sacrifice. But it also records the
+progressive correction of those misinterpretations, and the process
+whereby the meaning implicit in the rite from the beginning has been
+made manifest in the end.
+
+The need and the desire to draw nigh to the god of the community are
+felt in the earliest of ages on occasions when calamity befalls the
+community. The calamity is interpreted as sent by the god; and the god
+is conceived to have been provoked by an offence of which some member
+of the community had been guilty. We may say, therefore, that from
+the beginning there has been present in the common consciousness a
+sense of sin and the desire to make atonement. Psychologically it
+seems clear that at the present day, in the case of the individual,
+personal religion first manifests itself usually in the consciousness
+of sin. And what is true in the psychology of the individual may be
+expected within limits to hold true in the psychology of the common
+consciousness. But though we may say that, in the beginning, it was by
+the occurrence of public calamity that the community became conscious
+that sin had been committed, still it is also true to say that the
+community felt that it was by some one of its members, rather than by
+the community, that the offence had been committed, for which the
+community was responsible. It was the responsibility, rather than the
+offence, which was prominent in the common consciousness--as indeed
+tends to be the case with the individual also. But the fact that the
+offence had been committed, not by the community, but by some one
+member of the community, doubtless helped to give the community the
+confidence without which its attitude towards the offended power would
+have been simply one of fear. Had the feeling been one of fear, pure
+and unmixed, the movement of the community could not have been towards
+the offended being. But religion manifests itself from the beginning
+in the action of drawing near to the god. The fact that the offence
+was the deed of some one member, and not of the community as a whole,
+doubtless helped to give the community the confidence, without which
+its attitude towards the offended power would have been simply one of
+fear. But it also tended necessarily to make religion an affair of the
+community rather than a personal need: sin had indeed been committed,
+but not by those who drew near to the god for the purpose of making
+the atonement. They were not the offenders. The community admitted its
+responsibility, indeed, but it found one of its members guilty.
+
+We may, therefore, fairly say that personal religion had at this time
+scarcely begun to emerge. And the reason why this was so is quite
+clear: it is that in the infancy of the race, as in the infancy of the
+individual, personal self-consciousness is as yet undeveloped. And it
+is only as personal self-consciousness develops that personal religion
+becomes possible. We must not however from this infer that personal
+religion is a necessary, or, at any rate, an immediate consequence of
+the development of self-consciousness. In ancient Greece one
+manifestation--and in the religious domain the first manifestation--of
+the individual's consciousness of himself was the growth of
+'mysteries.' Individuals voluntarily entered these associations: they
+were not born into them as they were into the state and the
+state-worship. And they entered them for the sake of individual
+purification and in the hope of personal immortality. The desire for
+salvation, for individual salvation, is manifest. But it was in rites
+and ceremonies that the _mystae_ put their trust, and in the fact that
+they were initiated that they found their confidence--so long as they
+could keep it. The traditional conviction of the efficacy of ritual
+was unshaken: and, so long as men believed in the efficacy of rites,
+the question, 'What shall I do to be saved?' admitted of no
+permanently satisfactory answer. The only answer that has been found
+permanently satisfying to the personal need of religion is one which
+goes beyond rites and ceremonies: it is that a man shall love his
+neighbour and his God.
+
+But in thus becoming personal, religion involved man's fellow-men as
+much as himself. In becoming personal thus, religion became, thereby,
+more than ever before, the relation of the community to its God. The
+relation however is no longer that the community admits the
+transgressions of some one of its members: it prays for the
+forgiveness of 'our trespasses'; and though it prays for each of its
+members, still it is the community that prays and worships and comes
+before its God, as it has done from the beginning of the history of
+religion. It is with rites of worship that the community, at any
+period in the history of religion, draws nigh to its god; for its
+inward purpose cannot but reveal itself in some outward manifestation.
+Indeed it seeks to manifest itself as naturally and as necessarily as
+thought found expression for itself in the languages it has created;
+and, though the re-action of forms of worship upon religion sometimes
+results, like the re-action of language upon thought, in misleading
+confusion, still, for the most part, language does serve to express
+more or less clearly--indeed we may say more and more clearly--that
+which we have it in us to utter.
+
+As there are more forms of speech than one, so there are more forms of
+religion than one; and as the language of savages who can count no
+higher than three is inadequate for the purposes of the higher
+mathematics, so the religion of man in the lower stages of his
+development is inadequate, compared with that of the higher stages.
+Nevertheless the civilised man can come to understand the savage's
+form of speech; and it would be strange to say that the savage's form
+of speech, or that his form of religion, is unintelligible nonsense.
+Behind the varieties of speech and of religion there is that in the
+spirit of man which is seeking to express itself and which is
+intelligible to all, because it is in all. Though few of us understand
+any but civilised languages, we feel no difficulty in believing that
+savage languages not merely are intelligible but must have sprung from
+the same source as our own, though far inferior to it for every
+purpose that language is employed to subserve. The many different
+forms of religion are all attempts--successful in as many very various
+degrees as language itself--to give expression to the idea of God.
+
+
+
+
+IV
+
+THE IDEA OF GOD IN PRAYER
+
+
+The question may perhaps be raised, whether it is necessary for us to
+travel beyond worship, in order to discover what was, in early
+religions, or is now, the idea of God, as it presents itself to the
+worshipper. The answer to the question will depend partly on what we
+consider the essence of religion to be. If we take the view, which is
+held by some writers of authority on the history of religion, that the
+essence of religion is adoration, then indeed we neither need nor can
+travel further, for we shall hold that worship is adoration, and
+adoration, worship.
+
+To exclude adoration, to say that adoration does not, or should not,
+form any part of worship, seems alike contrary to the very meaning of
+the word 'worship' and to be at variance with a large and important
+body of the facts recorded in the history of religion. The courts of a
+god are customarily entered with the praise which is the outward
+expression of the feeling of adoration with which the worshippers
+spiritually gaze upon the might and majesty of the god whom they
+approach. He is to them a great god, above all other gods. Even to
+polytheists, the god who is worshipped at the moment, is, at that
+moment, one than whom there is no one, and nought, greater, _quo nihil
+maius_. A god who should not be worshipped thus--a god who was not the
+object of adoration--would not be worthy of the name, and would hardly
+be called a god. So strongly is this felt that even writers who
+incline to regard religion as an illusion, define gods as beings
+conceived to be superior to man. The degree of respect, rising to
+adoration, will vary directly with the degree of superiority
+attributed to them; but not even in the case of a fetish, so long as
+it is worshipped, is the respect, which is the germ of adoration,
+wholly wanting. Even in the case of gods, on whom, on occasion, insult
+is put, it is precisely in moments when their superiority is in doubt
+that the worship of adoration is momentarily wanting. Worship without
+adoration is worship only in name, or rather is no worship at all.
+Only with adoration can worship begin: 'hallowed be Thy name'
+expresses the emotion with which all worship begins, even where the
+emotion has not yet found the words in which to express itself. It is
+because the emotion is there, pent up and seeking escape, that it can
+travel along the words, and make them something more than a succession
+of syllables and sounds.
+
+If then it is on the wings of adoration that the soul has at all times
+striven to rise to heaven to find its God, even though it flutters but
+a little height and soon falls again to the ground, then we must admit
+that from the beginning there has been a mystical element, or a
+tendency to mysticism, in religion. In the lowest, and probably in the
+earliest, stages of the evolution of religion, this tendency is most
+manifest in individual members of the community, who are subject to
+'possession,' ecstasy, trance and visions, and are believed, both by
+themselves and others, to be in especial communion with their god.
+This is the earliest manifestation of the fact that religion, besides
+being a social act and a matter in which the community is concerned,
+is also one which may profoundly affect the individual soul. But in
+these cases it is the exceptional soul which is alone affected--the
+seer of visions, the prophet. And it is not necessarily in connection
+with the ordinary worship, or customary sacrifice, that such instances
+of mystic communion with the gods are manifested. For the development
+of the mystical tendency of worship and sacrifice, we must look, not
+to the lowest, or to the earliest, stages of religious evolution, but
+to a later stage in the evolution of the sacrificial meal. It is
+where, as in ancient Mexico, the plant, or animal, which furnishes
+forth the sacrificial meal, is in some way regarded as, or identified
+with, the body of the deity worshipped, that the rite of sacrifice is
+tinged with mysticism and that all partakers of the meal, and not some
+exceptional individuals, are felt to be brought into some mystic
+communion with the god whom they adore.
+
+In these cases, adoration is worship; and worship is adoration--and
+little more. Judging them by their fruits, we cannot say that the
+Mexican rites, or even the Greek mysteries, encourage us to believe
+that adoration is all that is required to make worship what the heart
+of man divines that it should be. Doubtless, this is due in part to
+the fact that the idea of God was so imperfectly disclosed to the
+polytheists of Mexico and Greece. Let us not therefore use Greece and
+Mexico as examples for the disparagement of mysticism or for the
+depreciation of man's tendency to seek communion with the Highest. Let
+us rather appeal at once to the reason which makes mysticism, of
+itself, inadequate to satisfy all the needs of man. The reason simply
+is that man is not merely a contemplative but an active being. If
+action were alien to his nature, then man might be satisfied to gaze,
+and merely gaze, on God. But man is active and not merely
+contemplative. We must therefore either hold that religion, being in
+its essence adoration and nothing more, has no function to perform, or
+sphere to fill, in the practical life of man; or else, if we hold
+that it does, or should, affect the practice of his life, we must
+admit that, though religion implies adoration always, it cannot
+properly be fulfilled in quietism, but must bear its fruit in what man
+does, or in the way he does it. The being or beings whom man worships
+are, indeed, the object of adoration, an object _quo nihil maius_; but
+they are something more. To them are addressed man's prayers.
+
+It is vain to pretend that prayer, even the simple petition for our
+daily bread, is not religious. It may perhaps be argued that prayer is
+not essential to religion; that it has not always formed part of
+religion; and that it is incompatible with that acquiescence in the
+will of God, and that perfect adoration of God, which is religion in
+its purest and most perfect sense. Whether there is in fact any
+incompatibility between the petition for deliverance from evil, and
+the aspiration that God's will may be done on earth, is a question on
+which we need not enter here. But the statement that prayer has not
+always formed part of religion is one which it should be possible to
+bring to the test of fact.
+
+In the literature of the science of religion, the prayers of the lower
+races of mankind have not been recorded to any great extent by those
+who have had the best opportunities of becoming acquainted with them,
+if and so far as they actually exist. This is probably due in part to
+their seeming too obvious and too trivial to deserve being put on
+record. It may possibly in some cases be due to the reticence the
+savage observes towards the white man, on matters too sacred to be
+revealed. The error of omission, so far as it can be remedied
+henceforth, will probably be repaired, now that savage beliefs are
+coming to be examined and recorded on the spot by scientific students
+in the interests of science. And the reticence of the savage promises
+to avail him but little: the comparative method has thrown a flood of
+light on his most sacred mysteries.
+
+There may however be another reason why the prayers of the lower races
+have not been recorded to any great extent: they may not have been
+recorded for the simple reason that they may not have been uttered.
+The nature and the occasion of the rite with which the god is
+approached may be such as to make words superfluous: the purpose of
+the ceremony may find adequate expression in the acts performed, and
+may require no words to make it clear. If a community approaches its
+god with sacrifice or offering, in time of sore distress, it
+approaches him with full conviction that he understands the
+circumstances and the purpose of their coming. Words of
+dedication--'this to thee' is a formula actually in use--may be
+necessary, but nothing more. Indeed, the Australian tribes, in rites
+analogous to harvest-offerings, use no spoken words at all. We cannot,
+however, imagine that the rites are, or in their origin were,
+absolutely without meaning or purpose. We must interpret them on the
+analogy of similar rites elsewhere, the purpose of which is expressed
+not merely, as in Australia, by gesture-language, but is reinforced by
+the spoken word. Indeed, we may, perhaps, go even further, and believe
+that as gesture-language was earlier than speech, so the earliest
+rites were conducted wholly by means of ritual acts or gestures; and
+that it was only in course of time, and as a consequence of the
+development of language, that verbal formulae came to be used to give
+fuller expression to the emotions which prompted the rites.
+
+If then we had merely to account for cases in which prayer does not
+happen to have been recorded as a constituent part of the rite of
+worship, we should not be warranted in inferring that prayer was
+really absent. The presumption would rather be that either the records
+are faulty, or that prayer, even though not uttered in word, yet
+played its part. The ground for the presumption is found in the nature
+of the occasions on which the gods are approached in the lower stages
+of religion. Those occasions are either exceptional or regularly
+recurring. The exceptional occasions are those on which the community
+is threatened, or afflicted, with calamity; and on such occasions,
+whether spoken words of prayer happen to have been recorded by our
+informants, or not, it is beyond doubt that the purpose of the
+community is to escape the calamity, and that the attitude of mind in
+which the god is approached is one of supplication or prayer. The
+regularly recurring occasions are those of seed-time and harvest, or
+first-fruits. The ceremonies at seed-time obviously admit of the
+presumption, even if there be no spoken prayers to prove it, that they
+too have a petitionary purpose; while the recorded instances of the
+prayers put up at harvest time, and on the occasion of the offering of
+first-fruits, suffice to show that thanksgiving is made along with
+prayers for continued prosperity.
+
+It is however not merely on the ground of the absence of recorded
+prayers that it is maintained that there was a stage in the evolution
+of religion when prayer was unpractised and unknown. It is the
+presence and the use of spells which is supposed to show that there
+may have been a time when prayer was as yet unknown, and that the
+process of development was a progress from spell to prayer. On this
+theory, spells, in the course of time, and in accordance with their
+own law of growth, become prayers. The nature and operation of this
+law, it may be difficult or impossible now for us to observe. The
+process took place in the night of time and is therefore not open to
+our observation. But that the process, by which the one becomes the
+other, is a possible process, is perhaps shown by the fact that we can
+witness for ourselves prayer reverting or casting back to spell.
+Wherever prayers become 'vain repetitions,' it is obvious that they
+are conceived to act in the same way as the savage believes spells to
+act: the mere utterance of the formula has the same magical power, as
+making the sign of the cross, to avert supernatural danger. If prayers
+thus cast back to spells, it may reasonably be presumed that it is
+because prayer is in its origin but spell. It is because oxygen and
+hydrogen, combined, produce water, that water can be resolved into
+oxygen and hydrogen.
+
+This theory, when examined, seems to imply that spell and prayer, so
+far from being different and incompatible things, are one and the same
+thing: seen from one point of view, and in one set of surroundings, it
+is spell; seen from another point of view, and in other surroundings,
+it is prayer. The point of view and the circumstances may change, but
+the thing itself remains the same always. What then is the thing
+itself, which, whether it presents itself as prayer or as spell, still
+always remains the same? It is, and can only be, desire. In spell and
+prayer alike the common, operative element present is desire. Desire
+may issue in spell or prayer; but were there no desires, there would
+be neither prayer nor spell. That we may admit. But, then, we may, or
+rather must go further: if there were no desire, neither would there
+be any action, whatever, performed by man. Men's actions, however,
+differ endlessly from one another. They differ partly because men's
+desires, themselves, differ; and partly because the means they adopt
+to satisfy them differ also. It would be vain to say that different
+means cannot be adopted for attaining one and the same end. Equally
+vain would it be to say that the various means may not differ from one
+another, to the point of incompatibility. If then we regard prayer and
+spell as alike means which have been employed by man for the purpose
+of realising his desires, we are yet at liberty to maintain that
+prayer and spell are different and incompatible.
+
+That there is a difference between prayer and spell--a difference at
+any rate great enough to allow the two words to be used in
+contradistinction to one another--is clear enough. The cardinal
+distinction between the two is also clear: a spell takes effect in
+virtue of the power resident in the formula itself or in the person
+who utters it; while a prayer is an appeal to a personal power, or to
+a power personal enough to be able to listen to the appeal, and to
+understand it, and to grant it, if so it seems good. That this
+difference obtains between prayer and spell will not be denied by any
+student of the science of religion. But if this difference is
+admitted, as admitted it must be, it is plain that prayer and spell
+are terms which apply to two different moods or states of mind. Desire
+is implied by each alike: were there no desire, there would be neither
+prayer nor spell. But, whereas prayer is an appeal to some one who has
+the power to grant one's desire, spell is the exercise of power which
+one possesses oneself, or has at one's command.
+
+That the two moods are different, and are incompatible with one
+another, is clear upon the face of it: to beg for a thing as a mercy
+or a gift is quite different from commanding that the thing be done.
+The whole attitude of mind assumed in the one case is different from
+that assumed in the other. It is possible, indeed, to pass from the
+one attitude to the other. But it is impossible to say that the one
+attitude is the other. It is correct to say that the one attitude may
+follow the other. But it is to be misled by language to say that the
+one attitude becomes the other. It is possible for one and the same
+man to fluctuate between the two attitudes, to alternate between
+them--possible, though inconsistent. The child, or even that larger
+child, the man, may beg and scold, almost in the same breath. The
+savage, as is well known, will treat his fetish in the same
+inconsequential way. That it is inconsequential is a fact; but it is a
+fact which, if learned, is but very slowly learned. The process by
+which it is learned is part of the evolution of religion; and it is a
+process in the course of which the idea of God tends to disengage
+itself from the confusion of thought and the confusion of feeling, in
+which it is at first enshrouded.
+
+We, indeed, at the present day, may see, or at any rate feel, the
+difference between magic and religion, between spell and prayer. And
+we may imagine that the difference, because real, has always been seen
+or felt, as we see and feel it. But, if we so imagine, we are
+mistaken. The difference was not felt so strongly, or seen so
+definitely, as to make it impossible to ascribe magic to Moses, or
+rain-making to Elijah. In still earlier ages, the difference was still
+more blurred. The two things were not discriminated as we now
+discriminate them: they were not felt then, as they are felt now to be
+inconsistent and incompatible. It was the likeness between the two
+that filled the field of mental vision, originally. Whether a man
+makes a petition or a command, the fact is that he wants something;
+and, with his attention centred on that fact, he may be but little
+aware, as the child is little, if at all, aware, that he passes, or is
+guilty of unreasonable inconsistency in passing, from the one mood to
+the other, and back again. It is in the course of time and as a
+consequence of mental growth that he becomes aware of the difference
+between the two moods.
+
+If we insist on maintaining that, because spell and prayer are
+essentially different, men have at all times been fully conscious of
+the difference, we make it fundamentally impossible to explain the
+growth of religion, or to admit that it can have any growth. Just as,
+on the argument advanced in our first chapter, gods and fetishes have
+gradually been differentiated from some conception, prior to them, and
+indeterminate; just as magician and priest, eventually distinguished,
+were originally undistinguished, for a man of power was potentially
+both and might become either; so spell and prayer have come to be
+differentiated, to be recognised as different and fundamentally
+antagonistic, though originally the two categories were confused.
+
+The theory that spell preceded prayer and became prayer, or that magic
+developed into religion, finds as little support in the facts afforded
+by the science of religion, as the converse theory of a primitive
+revelation and a paradisaical state in which religion alone was known.
+For what is found in one stage of evolution the capacity must have
+existed in earlier stages; and if both prayer and spell, both magic
+and religion, are found, the capacity for both must have pre-existed.
+And instead of seeking to deny either, in the interests of a
+pre-conceived theory, we must recognise both potentialities, in the
+interest of truth.
+
+Just as man spoke, for countless thousands of years, before he had
+any idea of the principles on which he spoke, of the laws of speech or
+of the grammar of his language; just as he reasoned, long before he
+made the reasoning process matter of reflection, and reduced it to the
+laws of logic; so from the beginning he was religious though he had no
+more idea that there were principles of religion, than that there were
+principles of grammar or laws of correct thought. 'First principles of
+every kind have their influence, and indeed operate largely and
+powerfully, long before they come to the surface of human thought and
+are articulately expounded' (Ferrier: _Institute of Metaphysics_, p.
+13).
+
+But this is not to say that primitive man argued, or thought, with
+never an error, or spoke with never a mistake, until by some
+catastrophe he was expelled from some paradise of grammarians and
+logicians. Though correct reasoning was logical before the time of
+Aristotle, and correct speech grammatical before the time of Dionysius
+Thrax; there was before, as there has been since, plenty both of bad
+logic and bad grammar. But that is very different from saying that, in
+the beginning, all reasoning was unsound, or all speech ungrammatical.
+To say so, would be as unmeaning and as absurd as to say that
+primitive man's every action was immoral, and his habitual state one
+of pure, unmitigated wickedness. If the assumption of a primitive
+paradise is unworkable, neither will the assumption of a primitive
+inferno act, whether it is for the evolution of the grammar of
+language or morality, or of logic or religion, that we wish to
+account. It is to ask too much, to ask us to believe that in the
+beginning there was only wrong-doing and no right, only error and no
+correctness of thought or speech, only spell and no prayer. And if
+both have been always, as they are now, present, there must also
+always have been a tendency in that which has prevailed to conquer. We
+may say that, in the process of evolution, man becomes aware of
+differences to which at first he gave but little attention; and, so
+far as he becomes conscious of them, he sets aside what is illogical,
+immoral, or irreligious, because he is satisfied it is illogical,
+immoral, or irreligious, and for no other reason.
+
+The theory that spell preceded prayer in the evolution of religion
+proceeds upon a misconception of the process of evolution. At one time
+it was assumed and accepted without question that the vegetable and
+animal kingdoms, and all their various species, were successive stages
+of one process of evolution; and that the process proceeded on one
+line and one alone. On the analogy of the evolution of living beings,
+as thus understood, all that remained, when the theory of evolution
+came to be applied to the various forms of thought and feeling, was to
+arrange them also in one line; and that, it was assumed, would be the
+line which the evolution of religion had followed. On this assumption,
+either magic must be prior to religion, or religion prior to magic;
+and, on the principle that priority must be assigned to the less
+worthy, it followed that magic must have preceded religion.
+
+It will scarcely be disputed that it was on the analogy of what was
+believed to be the course of evolution, in the case of vegetable and
+animal life, that the first attempts to frame a theory of the
+evolution of religion proceeded, with the result that gods were
+assumed to have been evolved out of fetishes, religion out of magic,
+and prayer out of spell. To disprove this, it is not necessary to
+reject the theory of evolution, or to maintain that evolution in
+religion proceeds on lines wholly different from those it follows
+elsewhere. All that is necessary is to understand the theory of the
+evolution of the forms of life, as that theory is held by naturalists
+now; and to understand the lines which the evolution of life is now
+held to have followed. The process of evolution is no longer held to
+have followed one line alone, or to have described but one single
+trajectory like that of a cannon-ball fired from a cannon. The process
+of evolution is, and has been from the beginning, dispersive. To
+borrow M. Bergson's simile, the process of evolution is not like that
+of a cannon-ball which followed one line, but like that of a shell,
+which burst into fragments the moment it was fired off; and these
+fragments being, as it were, themselves shells, in their turn burst
+into other fragments, themselves in their turn destined to burst, and
+so on throughout the whole process. The very lines, on which the
+process of evolution has moved, show the process to be dispersive. If
+we represent the line by which man has risen from the simplest forms
+of life or protoplasm by an upright line; and the line by which the
+lowest forms of life, such as some of the foraminifera, have continued
+on their low level, by a horizontal line starting from the bottom of
+the upright line, then we have two lines forming a right angle. One
+represents the line of man's evolution, the other that of the
+foraminifera. Between these two lines you may insert as many other
+lines as necessary. That line which is most nearly upright will
+represent the evolution of the highest form of vertebrate, except man;
+the next, the next highest; and so on till you come to the lines
+representing the invertebrates; and so on till you come to the lines
+which are getting nearer and nearer to the horizontal. Thus you will
+have a whole sheaf of lines, all radiating indeed from one common
+point, but all nevertheless dispersing in different directions.
+
+The rush of life, the _elan de la vie_, is thus dispersive; and if we
+are to interpret the evolution of mental on the analogy of physical
+life, we shall find, M. Bergson says, nothing in the latter which
+compels us to assume either that intelligence is developed instinct,
+or that instinct is degraded intelligence. If that be so, then, we may
+say, neither is there anything to warrant us in assuming either that
+religion is developed magic, or magic degraded religion. Spell is not
+degraded prayer, nor is prayer a superior form of spell: neither does
+become or can become the other, though man may oscillate, with great
+rapidity, between the two, and for long may continue so to oscillate.
+The two moods were from the beginning different, though man for long
+did not clearly discriminate between the two. The dispersive force of
+evolution however tends to separate them more and more widely, until
+eventually oscillation ceases, if it does not become impossible.
+
+The dispersive force of evolution manifests itself in the power of
+discrimination whereby man becomes aware of differences to which, in
+the first confusion of thought, he paid little attention; and
+ultimately may become conscious of the first principles of reason,
+morality or religion, as normative principles, in accordance with
+which he feels that he should act, though he has not always acted, and
+does not always act in accordance with them. In the beginning there is
+confusion of feeling and confusion of thought both as to the quarter
+to which prayer is addressed and as to the nature of the petitions
+which should be proffered. But we should be mistaken, if from the
+confusion we were to infer that there was no principle underlying the
+confusion. We should be mistaken, were we to say that prayer, if
+addressed to polytheistic gods, is not prayer; or that prayer, if
+addressed to a fetish, is not prayer. In both cases, the being to whom
+prayer is offered is misconceived and misrepresented by polytheism and
+fetishism; and the misconception is due to want of discrimination and
+spiritual insight. But failure to observe is no proof either that the
+power of observation is wanting or that there is nothing to be
+observed. The being to whom prayer is offered may be very different
+from the conception which the person praying has of him, and may yet
+be real.
+
+Petitions, then, put up to polytheistic gods, or even to fetishes, may
+still be prayers. But petitions may be put up, not only to
+polytheistic gods, or to fetishes, but even to the one god of the
+monotheist, which never should be put up. 'Of thy goodness, slay mine
+enemies,' is, in form, prayer: it is a desire, a petition to a god,
+implying recognition of the superiority of the divine power, implying
+adoration even. But eventually it comes to be condemned as an
+impossible prayer: spiritually it is a contradiction in terms. If
+however we say that it is not, and never was, prayer; and that only by
+confusion of thought was it ever considered so, we may be told that,
+as a simple matter of actual fact, it is an actual prayer that was
+actually put up. That it ought not--from the point of view of a later
+stage in the development of religion--to have been put up, may be
+admitted; but that it was a prayer actually put up, cannot be denied.
+To this the reply seems to be that it is with prayer as it is with
+argument: a fallacy is a fallacy, just as much before it is detected
+as afterwards. The fact that it is not detected does not make it a
+sound argument; still less does it prove either that there are now no
+principles of correct reasoning or that there were none then; it only
+shows that there was, on this point, confusion of thought. So too we
+may admit--we have no choice but to admit--that there are spiritual
+fallacies, as well as fallacies of logic. Of such are the petitions
+which are in form prayers, just as logical fallacies are, in form,
+arguments. They may be addressed to the being worshipped, as fallacies
+are addressed to the reason; and eventually their fallacious nature
+may become evident even to the reason of man. But it is only by the
+evolution of prayer, that is by the disclosure of its true nature,
+that petitions of the kind in question come to be recognised and
+condemned as spiritual fallacies. The petitioner who puts up such
+petitions is indeed unconscious of his error, but he errs, for all
+that, just as the person who uses a fallacious argument may be
+himself the victim of his fallacy: but he errs none the less because
+he is deceived himself. There are normative principles of prayer as
+well as the normative principles of thought; and both operate 'long
+before they come to the surface of human thought and are articulately
+expounded.' It is in thinking that the normative principles of thought
+emerge. But it is by no means the case that they come to the surface
+of every man's thought. So too it is in prayer that the normative
+principles of prayer emerge; yet men require teaching how to pray.
+Some petitions are permissible, some not.
+
+If then there are normative principles of prayer, just as there are of
+action, thought and speech; if there are petitions which are not
+permissible, and which are not and never can be prayers, though by a
+spiritual fallacy, analogous to logical fallacies, they may be thought
+to be prayers, what is it that decides the nature of an admissible
+petition? It seems to be the conception of the being to whom the
+petition is addressed. Thus it is that prayer throws light on the idea
+of God. From the prayers offered we can infer the nature of the idea.
+The confusion of admissible and inadmissible petitions points to
+confused apprehension of the idea of God. It is not merely imperfect
+apprehension but confused apprehension. In polytheism the confusion
+betrays itself, because it leads to collision with the principles of
+morality: of the gods who make war upon one another, each must be
+supposed to hold himself in the right; therefore either some gods do
+not know what is right, or there is no right to be known even by the
+gods. From this confusion the only mode of escape, which is
+satisfactory both to religion and to morality, is to recognise that
+the unity of morality and the unity of the godhead mutually imply one
+another. But so long as a plurality of gods, with a shifting standard
+of morality, is believed in, the distinction between admissible and
+inadmissible petitions cannot be firmly or correctly drawn.
+
+A tribal god is petitioned to slay the tribe's enemies, because he is
+conceived as the god of the tribe and not the god of its enemies. If
+the declaration, that 'I am thy servant,' is affirmed with emphasis on
+the first personal pronoun, so as to imply that others are no servants
+of thine, the implication is that thy servants' enemies are thy
+enemies; whereas if there is, for all men, one God only, then all men
+are his servants, and not one person, or one tribe, alone. The
+conception of God as the god of one tribe alone is an imperfect and
+confused apprehension of the idea of God. But it is less so than is
+the conception of a god as belonging to one individual owner, as a
+fetish does. To a fetish the distinctive, though not the only, prayer
+offered, precisely is 'Slay mine enemies'; and therein it is that lies
+the difference between a fetish and a god of the community. The
+difference is the same in kind as that between a tribal god and the
+God of all mankind. The fetish and the tribal god are both inadequate
+ideas of God; and the inadequacy implies confusion--the confusion of
+conceiving that the god is there only to subserve the desires and to
+do the will of the individual worshipper or body of worshippers.
+
+Escape from this confusion is to some extent secured by the fact that
+prayers to the community's god are offered by the community aloud, in
+public and as part of the public worship; and, consequently, with the
+object of securing the fulfilment of the desires of the community as a
+community. The blessing on the community is, at this stage, the only
+blessing in which the individual can properly share, and the only one
+for which he can pray to the god of the community. Thus the nature of
+the petitions, and the quarter to which permissible petitions can be
+addressed, are determined by the fact that prayer is an office
+undertaken by the community as a community. If the desires which an
+individual entertains are such as would be repudiated by the
+community, because injurious to the community, they cannot be
+preferred, in the presence of the community, to the god of the
+community; and thus permissible petitions begin to be differentiated
+from those which are impermissible--a normative principle of prayer
+emerges, and the idea of God begins to take more definite form, or to
+emerge somewhat from the mist which at first enveloped it.
+
+But though permissible petitions be distinguished from petitions
+which are impermissible, it by no means follows that impermissible
+petitions cease to be put up. What actually happens is that since the
+community does not, and cannot, allow petitions, conceived to be
+injurious to itself, to be put up to its god, they are put up
+privately to a fetish; or, to put the matter more correctly, a being
+or power not identified with the welfare of the community is sought
+in such cases; and the being so found is known to the science of
+religion as a fetish. But though a fetish differs from a god,
+inasmuch as the fetish will, and a god will not, injure a member of
+the tribe, the distinction is not clear-cut. There are things which
+both alike may be prayed to do: both may be besought to do good to
+the individual who addresses them. To this protective mimicry the
+fetish owes in part its power of survival. For the same reason spell
+and magic contrive to continue their existence side by side with
+religion and prayer. What conduces to this result is that at first
+the god of the community is conceived as listening to the prayers of
+the community rather than of the individual: from the beginning it
+is part of the idea of God that He cares for all His worshippers
+alike. This conviction, to be carried out to its full consequences,
+both logical and spiritual, requires that each individual worshipper
+should forget himself, should renounce his particular inclinations,
+should abandon himself and long to do not his own will but that of
+God. But before self can be consciously abandoned, the consciousness
+of self must be realised. Before self-will can be surrendered, its
+existence must be realised. And self-consciousness, the recognition
+of the existence of the will and the reality of the self, comes
+relatively late both in the history of the community and in the
+personal history of the individual. At first the existence of the
+individual will and the individual self is not recognised by the
+community and is not provided for in the community's worship and
+prayers. It is the community, as a community, and not as so many
+individual worshippers, offering separate prayers, that first
+approaches the community's god. The existence of the individual
+worshipper, as an individual is not denied, it is simply unknown, or
+rather not realised by the community. But its stirrings are felt in
+the individual himself: he is conscious of desires which are other
+than those of the community, and the fulfilment of which forms no
+part of the community's prayers to the community's god. His
+self-consciousness, his consciousness of himself as contrasted with
+the community, is fostered by the growth of such desires. For the
+fulfilment of some of them, those which are manifestly anti-social,
+he must turn to his fetish, or rely upon the power of magic. Even for
+the fulfilment of those of his desires which are not felt to be
+anti-social, but which find no place in the prayers of the community,
+he must rely on some other power than that of the god of the
+community; and it is in spells, therefore, that he continues to trust
+for the fulfilment of these innocent desires, inasmuch as the prayers
+of the community do not include them.
+
+The existence, in the individual, of desires, other than those of the
+community, wakes the individual to some consciousness of his
+individual existence. The effort to secure the fulfilment of those
+desires increases still further his self-consciousness, for he resorts
+to powers which are not exercised solely in the interests of the
+community, as are the powers of the community's god. But his
+increasing self-consciousness cannot and does not fail to modify his
+character and action as a worshipper of the community's gods. It
+modifies his relation to the community's gods in this sense, viz. that
+he appears before them not merely as a member of the community
+undistinguished from other members, but as an individual conscious to
+some extent of his individuality. He continues to take part in the
+worship of the gods, but he comes to it conscious of wishes of his own
+which may become petitions to the god, so far as they are not felt to
+be inconsistent with the good of the community.
+
+Of this stage we have ample evidence afforded by the cuneiform
+inscriptions of Assyria. Spells employed to the hurt of any worshipper
+of the gods are spells against which the worshipper may properly
+appeal to the gods for protection. A god is essentially the protector
+of his worshippers, and he protects each as well as all of them. Each
+of them may therefore appeal to him for protection. But though any one
+of them may so appeal, it is apparently only in course of time that
+individual petitions of this kind come to be put up to the gods. And
+the evidence of the cuneiform inscriptions is particularly interesting
+and instructive on the way in which this came about.
+
+In the 'Maklu' tablets we find that the writers of the tablets are, or
+anticipate that they may be, the victims of spells. The inscriptions
+themselves may be regarded, and by some authorities are described, as
+counter-charms or counter-spells. They do in fact include, though they
+cannot be said to consist of, counter-spells. Their typical feature is
+that they include some such phrase as, 'Whoever thou art, O witch, I
+bind thy hands behind thee,' or 'May the magic thou hast made recoil
+upon thyself.' If the victim is being turned yellow by sickness, the
+counter-spell is 'O witch, like the circlet of this seal, may thy face
+grow yellow and green.'
+
+The ceremonies with which these counter-spells were performed are
+indicated by the words, and they are ceremonies of the same kind as
+those with which spells are performed: they are symbolic actions, that
+is to say, actions which express by gesture the same meaning and
+intention as are expressed by the words. Thus, from the words:
+
+    'As the water trickleth away from his body
+    So may the pestilence in his body trickle away,'
+
+it is obvious that this counter-spell accompanied a ceremonial rite of
+the kind indicated by the words. As an image of the person to be
+bewitched was used by the workers of magic, so an image of her 'who
+hath bewitched me' is used by the worker of the counter-spell, with
+the words:
+
+    'May her spell be wrecked, and upon her
+    And upon her image may it recoil.'
+
+If, now, such words, and the symbolical actions which are described
+and implied, were all that these Maklu tablets contained, it might be
+argued that these counter-spells were pure pieces of magic. The
+argument would not indeed be conclusive, because though the sentences
+are in the optative mood, there would be nothing to show on what, or
+on whom, the speaker relied for the fulfilment of his wish. But as it
+happens, it is characteristic of these Maklu tablets that they are all
+addressed to the gods by name, e.g. 'May the great gods remove the
+spell from my body,' or 'O flaming Fire-god, mighty son of Anu! judge
+thou my case and grant me a decision! Burn up the sorcerers and
+sorceress!' It is the gods that are prayed to that the word of the
+sorceress 'shall turn back to her own mouth; may the gods of might
+smite her in her magic; may the magic which she has worked be crumbled
+like salt.'
+
+Thus these Maklu petitions are not counter-spells, as at first sight
+they may appear; nor are they properly to be treated as being
+themselves spells for the purpose of counteracting magic. They are in
+form and in fact prayers to the gods 'to undo the spell' and 'to force
+back the words' of the witch into her own mouth. But though in the
+form in which these Maklu petitions are preserved to us, they appear
+as prayers to the gods, and not as spells, or counter-spells; it is
+true, and important to notice, that, in some cases, the sentences in
+the optative mood seem quite detachable from the invocation of the
+gods. Those sentences may apparently have stood, at one time, quite
+well by themselves, and apart from any invocation of the gods; that
+is to say, they may originally have been spells or counter-spells, and
+only subsequently have been incorporated into prayers addressed to the
+gods.
+
+Let us then assume that this was the case with some of these Maklu
+petitions, and let us consider what is implied when we make the
+assumption. What is implied is that there are some wishes, for
+instance those embodied in these Maklu petitions, which may be
+realised by means of spells, or may quite appropriately be preferred
+to the gods of the community. Such are wishes for the well-being of
+the individual worshipper and for the defeat of evil-doers who would
+do or are doing him wrong. When it is recognised that individuals--as
+well as the community--may come with their plaints before the gods of
+the community, the functions of those gods become enlarged, for they
+are extended to include the protection of individual members of the
+community, as well as the protection of the community, as such; and
+the functions of the community's gods are thus extended and enlarged,
+because the members of the community have become, in some degree,
+individuals conscious of their individuality. The importance, for the
+science of religion, of this development of self-consciousness is that
+the consciousness of self must be realised before self can
+consciously be abandoned, that is before self-will can be consciously
+surrendered.
+
+As is shown by the Maklu petitions, there may come, in the course of
+the evolution of religion, a stage in which it is recognised that the
+individual worshipper may petition the gods for deliverance from the
+evil which afflicts them. And the petitions used appear in some cases,
+as we have seen, to have been adopted into the ritual of the gods,
+word for word as they were found already in existence. If then they
+were, both in the words in which they were expressed, and in the
+purpose which they sought to achieve, such that they could be taken
+up, as they were and without change, into the ritual of the
+community's gods, it would seem that, even before they were so taken
+up, they could not have been wholly, if at all, alien to the spirit of
+religion. What marks them as religious, in the cuneiform inscriptions,
+is their context: it shows that the power, relied on for the
+accomplishment of the desires expressed in these petitions, was the
+power of the gods. Remove the context, and it becomes a matter of
+ambiguity, whether the wish is supposed, by those who utter it, to
+depend for its realisation on some power, possessed and exercised by
+those who express the wish, or whether it is supposed to depend on the
+good will of some being vaguely conceived, and not addressed by name.
+But if eventually the wish, and the words in which it was expressed,
+are taken up into the worship of the gods, there seems a balance of
+probability that the wish was from the beginning rather in the nature
+of religion than of magic, rather a petition than a command; though
+the categories were not at first discriminated, and there was at first
+no clear vision of the quarter from which fulfilment of the wish was
+hoped for.
+
+From this point of view, optative sentences, sentences which express
+the wishes of him who pronounces them, may, in the beginning, well
+have been ambiguous, because there was, in the minds of those who
+uttered them, no clear conception of the quarter to which they were
+addressed: the idea of God may have been vague to the extreme of
+vagueness. Some of these optative sentences however, were such that
+the community as a whole could join in them; and they were
+potentially, and became actually, prayers to the god of the community.
+The being to whom the community, as a whole, could pray, was thereby
+displayed as the god of the community. The idea of God became, so far,
+somewhat less vague, somewhat more sharply defined. Optative
+sentences, however, in which the community could not join, in which no
+one but the person who framed them could take part, could not be
+addressed to the god of the community. The idea of God thus was
+defined negatively: there were wishes which could not be communicated
+to him--those which were repugnant to the well-being of the community.
+
+The prayers of savages, that is of the men who are probably still
+nearest to the circumstances and condition of primitive man, furnish
+the material from which we can best infer what was the idea of God
+which was present in their consciousness at those moments when it was
+most vividly present to them. In view of the infinite number and
+variety of the forms of religion and religious belief, nothing would
+seem, _a priori_, more reasonable than to expect an equally infinite
+number of various and contradictory ideas. Especially should this seem
+a reasonable expectation to those who consider the idea of God to be
+fundamentally, and of its very nature, impossible and untenable. And
+so long as we look at the attempts which have been made, by means of
+reflection upon the idea, to body it forth, we have the evidence of
+all the mythologies to show the infinite variety of monstrosities,
+which reflection on the idea has been capable of producing. If then we
+stop there, our _a priori_ expectation of savage and irrational
+inconsistency is fulfilled to abundance and to loathsome excess. But
+to stop there is to stop short, and to accept the speculations of the
+savage when he is reflecting on his experience, instead of pushing
+forward to discover for ourselves, if we may, what his experience
+actually was. To discover that, we cannot be content to pause for
+ever on his reflections. We must push back to the moment of his
+experience, that is to the moments when he is in the presence of his
+gods and is addressing them. Those are the moments in which he prays
+and in which he has no doubt that he is in communion with his gods. It
+is, then, from his prayers that we must seek to infer what idea he has
+of the gods to whom he prays.
+
+When, however, we take his prayers as the evidence from which to infer
+his idea of God, instead of the luxuriant overgrowth of speculative
+mythology, we find everywhere a bare simplicity, and everywhere
+substantial identity. If this is contrary to our expectation and at
+first seems strange, let us bear in mind that the science of morals
+offers a parallel, in this respect, to the science of religion. At one
+time it was, unconsciously but none the less decidedly, assumed that
+savages had a multiplicity of irrational and disgusting customs but no
+morals. The idea that there could be a substantial identity between
+the moral rules of different savage races, and even between their
+moral rules and ours, was an idea that simply was not entertained.
+Nevertheless, it was a fact, though unnoticed; and now it is a fact
+which, thanks to Dr Westermarck, is placed beyond dispute. 'When,' he
+says, 'we examine the moral rules of uncivilised races we find that
+they in a very large measure resemble those prevalent among nations
+of culture.' The human spirit throughout the process of its evolution
+is, in truth, one; the underlying unity which manifests itself
+throughout the evolution of morality is to be found also in the
+evolution of religion; and it is from the prayers of man that we can
+infer it.
+
+The first and fundamental article of belief implied by the offering of
+prayers is that the being to whom they are offered--however vaguely he
+may be conceived--is believed to be accessible to man. Man's cry can
+reach Him. Not only does it reach Him but, it is believed, He will
+listen to it; and it is of His very nature that He is disposed to
+listen favourably to it. But, though He will listen, it is only to
+prayers offered in the right spirit that He will listen. The earliest
+prayers offered are in all probability those which the community sends
+up in time of trouble; and they must be offered in the spirit of
+repentance. It is with the conviction that they have offended that the
+community first turns to the being worshipped, by whom they hope to be
+delivered from the evil which is upon them, and by whom they pray to
+be forgiven.
+
+Next, the offering of prayer implies the belief that the being
+addressed, not merely understands the prayers offered, but has the
+power to grant them. As having not only the power, but also the will
+so to do, he is approached not only with fear but also with hope. No
+approach would or could be made, if nothing could be hoped from it;
+and nothing could be hoped, unless the being approached were believed
+to have the power to grant the prayer. The very fact that approach is
+made shows that the being is at the moment believed to be one with
+whom it rests to grant or refuse the supplication, one than whom no
+other is, in this respect at least, more powerful, _quo nihil maius_.
+
+But prayers offered in time of trouble, though they be, or if they be,
+the earliest, are not the only prayers that are offered by early man.
+Man's wishes are not, and never were, limited: escape from calamity is
+not, and never has been, the only thing for which man is capable of
+wishing. It certainly is not the only thing for which he has been
+capable of praying. Even early man wishes for material blessings: the
+kindly fruits of the earth and his daily food are things for which he
+not only works but also prays. The negro on the Gold Coast prays for
+his daily rice and yams, the Zulu for cattle and for corn, the Samoan
+for abundant food, the Finno-Ugrian for rain to make his crops grow;
+the Peruvian prayed for health and prosperity. And when man has
+attained his wish, when his prayers have been granted, he does not
+always forget to render thanks to the god who listened to his prayer.
+'Thank you, gods'; says the Basuto, 'give us bread to-morrow also.'
+
+Whether the prayer be for food, or for deliverance from calamity, the
+natural tendency is for gratitude and thanks to follow, when the
+prayer has been fulfilled; and the mental attitude, or mood of
+feeling, is then no longer one of hope or fear, but of thankfulness
+and praise. It is in its essence, potentially and, to varying degrees,
+actually, the mood of veneration and adoration.
+
+    'My lips shall praise thee,
+    So will I bless thee while I live:
+    I will lift up my hands in thy name,
+    And my mouth shall praise thee with joyful lips.'
+
+From the prayers that are offered in early, if not primitive,
+religions we may draw with safety some conclusions as to the idea,
+which the worshippers had before their minds, of the being to whom
+they believed they had access in prayer. He was a being accessible in
+prayer; and he had it in his power, and, if properly approached, in
+his will, to deliver the community from material and external evils.
+The spirit in which he was to be properly approached was one of
+confession and repentance of offences committed against him: the
+calamities which fell upon the community were conceived to have fallen
+justly. He was not conceived to be offended without a cause. Doubtless
+the causes of offence, like the punishments with which they were
+visited, were external and visible, in the sense that they could be
+discovered and made plain to all who were concerned to recognise
+them. The offences were actions which not only provoked the wrath of
+the god, but were condemned by the community. They included offences
+which were purely formal and external; and, in the case of some
+peoples, the number of such offences probably increased rather than
+diminished as time went on. The _Surpu_ tablets of the cuneiform
+inscriptions, which are directed towards the removal of the _mamit_,
+the ban or taboo, consequent upon such offences, are an example of
+this. Adultery, murder and theft are included amongst the offences,
+but the tablets include hundreds of other offences, which are purely
+ceremonial, and which probably took a long time to reach the luxuriant
+growth they have attained in the tablets. For ceremonial offences a
+ceremonial purification was felt to suffice. But there were others
+which, as the Babylonian Penitential Psalms testify, were felt to go
+deeper and to be sins, personal sins of the worshipper against his
+God. The penitent exclaims:
+
+    'Lord, my sins are many, great are my misdeeds.'
+
+The spirit, in which he approaches his God, is expressed in the words:
+
+    'I thy servant, full of sighs, call upon thee.
+    Like the doves do I moan, I am o'ercome with sighing,
+    With lamentation and groaning my spirit is downcast.'
+
+His prayer is that his trespasses may be forgiven:
+
+    'Rend my sins, like a garment!
+    My God, my sins are unto seven times seven.
+    Forgive my iniquities.'
+
+And his hope is in God:
+
+    'Oh, Lord, thy servant, cast him not away,
+    The sins which I have committed, transform by thy grace!'
+
+The attitude of mind, the relation in which the worshipper finds
+himself to stand towards his God, is the same as that revealed in the
+Psalm of David:
+
+    'Wash me throughly from mine iniquity,
+    And cleanse me from my sin.
+    For I acknowledge my transgressions:
+    And my sin is ever before me.
+    Against thee, thee only, have I sinned.
+    Cast me not away from thy presence.'
+
+The earliest prayers offered by any community probably were, as we
+have already seen, those which were sent up in time of trouble and
+inspired by the conviction that the community's god had been justly
+offended. The psalms, from which quotations have just been given, show
+the same idea of God, conceived to have been justly offended by the
+transgressions of his servants. The difference between them is that,
+in the later prayers, the individual self-consciousness has come to
+realise that the individual as well as the community exists; that the
+individual, as well as the community, is guilty of trespasses; and
+that the individual, as well as the community, needs forgiveness. That
+is to say, the idea of God has taken more definite shape: God has been
+revealed to the individual worshipper to be 'My God'; the worshipper
+to be 'Thy servant'; and what is feared is not merely that the
+worshipper should be excluded from the community, but that he should
+be cast away from communion with God. The communion, aspired to, is
+however still such communion as may exist between a servant and his
+master.
+
+Material and external blessings, further, are, together with
+deliverance from material and external evil, still the principal
+subjects of prayer in the Psalms both of the Old Testament and of the
+cuneiform inscriptions; and, so far as this is the case, the
+worshipper's prayer is that his individual will may be done, and it is
+because he has received material and external blessings, because his
+will has been done, that his joyful lips praise and bless the Lord.
+That is to say, the idea of God, implied by such prayer and praise, is
+that He is a being who may help man to the fulfilment of man's desires
+and to the realisation of man's will. The assumption required to
+justify this conception is that in man, man's will alone is operative,
+and never God's. This assumption has its analogy in the fact, already
+noticed, that in the beginning the individual is not self-conscious,
+or aware of the individuality of his own existence. When the
+individual's self-consciousness is thus but little, if at all,
+manifested, it is the community, as a community, which approaches its
+god and is felt to be responsible for the transgressions which have
+offended him. As self-consciousness comes to manifest itself, more and
+more, the sense of personal transgression and individual
+responsibility becomes more and more strong. If now we suppose that at
+this point the evolution, or unfolding, of the self ceases, and that
+the whole of its contents is now revealed, we shall hold that, in man,
+man's will alone can operate, and never God's. It is indeed at this
+point that non-Christian religions stop, if they get so far. The idea
+of God as a being whose will is to be done, and not man's, is a
+distinctively Christian idea.
+
+The petition, which, as far as the science of religion enables us to
+judge, was the first petition made by man, was for deliverance from
+evil. The next, in historical order, was for forgiveness of sins; and,
+then, when society had come to be settled on an agricultural basis and
+dependent on the harvest, prayer was offered for daily bread. In the
+Lord's Prayer, the order of these petitions is exactly reversed. A
+fresh basis, or premiss, for them, is supplied. They are still
+petitions proper to put forward, if put forward in the consciousness
+of a fact, hitherto not revealed--that man may do not his own will
+but the will of Our Father, who is in heaven.
+
+Prayer is thus, at the end, what it was at the beginning, the prayer
+of a community. But whereas at the beginning the community was the
+narrow and exclusive community of the family or tribe, at the end it
+is a community which may include all mankind. Thus, the idea of God
+has increased in its extension. In its intension, so to speak, it has
+deepened: God is disclosed not as the master and king of his subjects
+and servants, but as the Father in heaven of his children on earth. It
+has however not merely deepened, it has been transformed, or rather it
+is to be approached in a different mood, and therefore is revealed in
+a new aspect: whereas in the beginning the body of worshippers,
+whether it approached its god with prayer for deliverance from
+calamities or for material blessings, approached him in order that
+their desires might be fulfilled; in the end the worshipper is taught
+that approach is possible only on renunciation of his own desires and
+on acceptance of God's will. The centre of religion is transposed: it
+is no longer man and his desires round which religion is to revolve.
+The will of God is to be the centre, to which man is no longer to
+gravitate unconsciously but to which he is deliberately to determine
+himself. As in the solar system the force of gravity is but one, so in
+the spiritual system that which holds all spiritual beings together
+is the love which proceeds from God to his creatures and may
+increasingly proceed from them to Him. It is the substitution of the
+love of God for the desires of man which makes the new heaven and the
+new earth.
+
+From the point of view of evolution the important fact is that this
+new aspect of the idea of God is not something merely superposed upon
+the old: if it were simply superposed, it would not be evolved.
+Neither is the disclosure, to the soul, of God as love, evolved from
+the conception of Him as the being from whom men may seek the
+fulfilment of their desires. To interpret the process of religious
+evolution in this way would be to misinterpret it, in exactly the same
+way as if we were to suppose that, only when the evolution of
+vegetable life had been carried out to the full in all its forms, did
+the evolution of animal life begin. Animals are not vegetables carried
+to a rather higher stage of evolution, any more than vegetables are
+animals which have relapsed to a lower stage. If then we are to apply
+the theory of evolution to spiritual life, as well as to bodily life,
+we must apply it in the same way. We must regard the various forms, in
+the one case as in the other, as following different lines, and
+tending in different directions from a common centre, rather than as
+different and successive sections of one and the same line. Spell no
+more becomes prayer than vegetables become animals. Impelled by the
+force of calamity to look in one direction--that of deliverance from
+pestilence or famine--early man saw, in the idea of God, a refuge in
+time of trouble. Moved at a later time by the feeling of gratitude,
+man found in the idea of God an object of veneration; and then
+interpreted his relation as that of a servant to his lord. Whichever
+way this interpretation was pushed--whether to mean that the servant
+was to do things pleasing to his lord, in order to gain the fulfilment
+of his own desires; or to imply that his transgressions stood ever
+between him and his offended master--further advance in that direction
+was impossible. A new direction, and therefore a fresh point of
+departure, was necessary. It was forthcoming in the Christian idea of
+God as the heavenly Father. That idea when revealed is seen to have
+been what was postulated but never attained by religion in its earlier
+stages. The petitions for our daily bread, for forgiveness of sins,
+and for delivery from evil, had as their basis, in pre-Christian
+religions, man's desire. In Christianity those petitions are preferred
+in the conviction that the making of them is in accordance with God's
+will and the granting of them in accordance with His love; and that
+conviction is a normative principle of prayer.
+
+
+
+
+V
+
+THE IDEA AND BEING OF GOD
+
+
+Men thought, spoke and acted for long ages before they began to
+reflect on the ways in which they did so; and, when they did begin to
+reflect, it was long before they discovered the principles on which
+they thought, spoke and acted, or recognised them as the principles on
+which man must speak, if he is to speak intelligibly; on which, as
+laws of thought, he must think, if he is to think correctly; and on
+which, as laws of morality, he must act, if he is to act as he should
+act.
+
+But though many thousands of years elapsed before he recognised these
+laws, they were, all the time, the laws on which he had to think,
+speak and act, and did actually think, speak and act, so far as he did
+so correctly. When, then, we speak of the evolution of thought, speech
+and action, we cannot mean that the laws of thought, for instance,
+were in the beginning different from what they are now, and only
+gradually came to be what they are at present. That would be just the
+same as saying that the law of gravitation did not operate in the way
+described by Newton until Newton formulated the law. The fact is that
+science has its evolution, just as thought, speech and action have.
+Man gradually and with much effort discovers laws of science, as he
+discovers the laws of thought, speech and action. In neither case does
+he make the laws; all that he does in either case is to come to
+recognise that they are there. But the recognition is a process, a
+slow process, attended by many mistakes and set-backs. And this slow
+process of the gradual recognition or discovery of fundamental laws,
+or first principles, is the process in which the evolution of science,
+as well as the evolution of thought, speech and action, consists. It
+is the process by which the laws that are at the bottom of man's
+thought, speech and action, and are fundamental to them, tend to rise
+to the surface of consciousness.
+
+It is in this same process that the evolution of religion consists. It
+is the slow process, the gradual recognition, of the fundamental idea
+of religion--the idea of God--which tends to rise to the surface of
+the religious consciousness. Just as laws of thought, speech and
+action are implied by the very conception of right thought or speech
+or action, so the idea of God is implied by the mere conception of
+religion. It is implied always; it is implicit from the very
+beginning. It is disclosed gradually and imperfectly. The process of
+disclosure, which is the evolution of the idea, may, in many
+instances, be arrested at a stage of very early imperfection, by
+causes which make further development in that direction impossible;
+and then, if further progress is to be made, a fresh movement, in a
+fresh direction must be made. Just as men do not always think
+correctly, or act rightly, though they tend, in different degrees, to
+do so; so too, in religion, neither do they always move in the right
+direction, even if they move at all. They may even deteriorate, at
+times, in religion, as, at times, they deteriorate in morality. But it
+is not necessary to infer from this undoubted fact that there are no
+principles of either morality or religion. We are not led to deny the
+existence of the laws of logic or of grammar, because they are
+frequently disregarded by ourselves and others.
+
+The principles, or rather some particular principle, of morality may
+be absolutely misconceived by a community, at some stage of its
+history, in such a way that actions of a certain kind are not
+condemned by it. The inconsistency of judgment and feeling, thus
+displayed, is not the less inconsistent because it is almost, if not
+entirely, unconscious. In the same way a community may fail to
+recognise a principle of religion, or may misinterpret the idea of
+God; still the fact that they misinterpret it is proof that they have
+it--if they had it not, they could not interpret it in different ways.
+And the different interpretations are the different ways in which its
+evolution is carried forward. Its evolution is not in one continuous
+line, but is radiative from one common centre, and is dispersive. That
+is the reason why the originators of religious movements, and the
+founders of religions, consider themselves to be restoring an old
+state of things, rather than initiating a new one; to be returning to
+the old religion, rather than starting a new religion. But in point of
+fact they are not reverting to a bygone stage in the history of
+religion; they are starting afresh from the fundamental principles of
+religion. From the central idea of religion, the idea of God, they
+move in a direction different from any hitherto followed. Monotheism
+may in order of time follow upon polytheism, but it is not polytheism
+under another name, any more than prayer is spell under another name.
+It is something very different: it is the negation of polytheism, not
+another form of it. It strikes at the roots of polytheism; and it does
+so because it goes back not to polytheism but to that from which
+polytheism springs, the idea of God; and starts from it in a direction
+which leads to a very different manifestation of the idea of God. And
+if monotheism displaces polytheism, it does so because it is found by
+experience to be the more faithful interpretation of that idea of God
+which even the polytheist has in his soul. In the same way, and for
+the same reasons, polytheism is not fetishism under another name. The
+gods of a community are not the fetishes of individuals. The
+difference between them is not a mere difference of name. Polytheism
+may, or may not, follow, in order of time, upon fetishism; but
+polytheism is not merely a form of fetishism. The two are different,
+and largely inconsistent, interpretations, or misinterpretations, of
+the same fundamental idea of God. They move in different directions,
+and are felt by the communities in which they are found, to tend in
+the direction of very different ends--the one to the good of the
+community, the other, in its most characteristic manifestations, to
+the injury of the community. In fetishism and polytheism we see the
+radiative, dispersive, force of evolution manifesting itself, just as
+in polytheism and monotheism. The different lines of evolution radiate
+in different directions, but those lines, all point to a common centre
+of dispersion--the idea of God. But fetishism, polytheism and
+monotheism are not different and successive stages of one line of
+evolution, following the same direction. They are lines of different
+lengths, moving in different directions, though springing from a
+common centre--the soul of man. It is because they have a common
+centre, that man, whichever line he has followed, can fall back upon
+it and start afresh.
+
+The fact that men fall victims to logical fallacies does not shake our
+faith in the validity of the principles of reason; nor does the fact
+that false reasoning abounds the more, the lower we descend in the
+scale of humanity, lead us to believe that the principles of reason
+are invalid and non-existent there. Still less do we believe that,
+because immature minds reason often incorrectly, therefore correct
+reasoning is for all men an impossibility and a contradiction in
+terms. And these considerations apply in just the same way to the
+principles of religion and the idea of God, as to the principles of
+reason. Yet we are sometimes invited to believe that the existence of
+religious fallacies, or fallacious religions, is of itself enough to
+prove that there is no validity in the principles of religion, no
+reality in the idea of God; that because the uncultured races of
+mankind are the victims of error in religion, there is in religion no
+truth at all: the religion of civilised mankind consists but of the
+errors of the savage disguised in civilised garb. So far as this view
+is supposed to be the outcome of the study of the evolution of
+religion, it is due probably to the conception of evolution from which
+it proceeds. It proceeds on the assumption that the process of
+evolution exhibits the continuity of one and the same continuous line.
+It ignores the radiative, dispersive movement of evolution in
+different lines; and overlooks the fact that new forms of religion
+are all re-births, renaissances, and spring not from one another, but
+from the soul of man, in which is found the idea of God. It further
+assumes not merely that there are errors but that there is no truth
+whatever in the lowest, or the earliest, forms of religion; and that
+therefore neither is there any truth in the highest. But this
+assumption, if applied to the principles of thought, speech or action,
+would equally prove thought to be irrational, speech unintelligible,
+moral action absurd; and evolution would be the process by which this
+fundamental irrationality, unintelligibility and absurdity was worked
+out.
+
+Either this is the conclusion, or some means must be sought whereby to
+distinguish the evolution of religion from the evolution of thought,
+speech and morals, and to show that--whereas in the case of the
+latter, evolution is the process in which the principles whereon man
+should think, speak and act, tend to manifest themselves with
+increasing clearness--in the case of religion, there is no such
+progressive revelation, and no first principle, or fundamental idea,
+which all forms of religion seek to express. But any attempt to show
+this is hopeless: the science of religion is engaged throughout in
+ascertaining and comparing the ideas which the various races of men
+have had of their gods; and in tracing the evolution of the idea of
+God.
+
+The science of religion, however, it may be said, is concerned
+exclusively with the evolution, and not in the least with the value or
+validity, of the idea. But neither, we must remember, is it concerned
+to dispute its value or to deny its validity; and no man can help
+drawing his own conclusions from the established fact that the idea is
+to be found wherever man is to be found. If, however, by the idea of
+God we mean simply an intellectual idea, merely a verbal proposition,
+we shall be in danger of drawing erroneous conclusions. The historian
+of religion, in discussing the idea of God, its manifestations and its
+evolution, is bound to express himself in words, and to reduce what he
+has to say to a series of verbal propositions. Nothing, therefore, is
+more natural than to imagine that the idea of God is a verbal,
+intellectual proposition; and nothing is more misleading. If we start
+from this misleading notion, then, as words are but words, we may be
+led to imagine that the idea of God is nothing more or other than the
+words: it is mere words. If however this conclusion is, for any
+reason, displeasing to us, and if we stick to the premiss that the
+idea of God is a verbal proposition, then we shall naturally draw a
+distinction between the idea of God and the being of God; and, having
+thus fixed a great gulf between the idea and the being of God, we
+shall be faced with the difficulty of crossing it. We may then feel it
+to be not merely difficult but impossible to get logically to the
+other side of the gulf; that is to say, we shall conclude that the
+being of God is an inference, but an inference which never can be
+logically verified: the inference may be a correct or an incorrect
+inference, but we cannot possibly know which it is. From the idea of
+God we can never logically infer His being. Since then no logic will
+carry us over the chasm we have fixed between the idea and the being
+of God, if we are to cross it, we must jump it: we must take the leap
+of faith, we must believe the passage possible, just because it is
+impossible. And those who take the leap, do land safely--we have their
+own testimony to that--as safely as, in _King Lear_, Gloucester leaps
+from the cliff of Dover; and they well may
+
+    'Think that the clearest gods, who make them honours
+    Of men's impossibilities, have preserv'd them.'
+
+But, in Gloucester's case, there was no cliff and no abyss; and, in
+our case, it may be well to enquire whether the great gulf between the
+idea and the being of God has any more reality than that down which
+Gloucester, precipitating, flung himself. The premiss, that the idea
+of God is a mere verbal proposition, may be a premiss as imaginary as
+that from which Gloucester leaped. If the idea of God is merely a
+proposition in words, and if words are but words, then the gulf
+between idea and being is real. If the being of God is an inference
+from the idea of God, it is merely an inference, and an inference of
+no logical value. And the same remark holds equally true, if we apply
+it to the case of any finite personal being: if the being of our
+neighbours were an inference from the idea we have formed of them, it
+also would be an inference of no logical value. But, fortunately,
+their being does not depend on the idea we have formed of them: it
+partially reveals itself to us in our idea of them, and partially is
+obscured by it. It is a fact of our experience, or a fact experienced
+by us. We interpret it, and to some extent misinterpret it, as we do
+all other facts. If this partly true, and partly false, interpretation
+is what we mean by the word 'idea,' then it is the idea which is an
+inference from the being of our neighbour--an inference which can be
+checked by closer acquaintance--but we do not first have the idea of
+him, and then wonder whether a being, corresponding more or less to
+the idea, exists. If we had the idea of our fellow-beings
+first--before we had experience of them--if it were from the edge of
+the idea that we had to leap, we might reasonably doubt whether to
+fling ourselves into such a logical, or rather into such an illogical,
+abyss. But it is from their being as an experienced fact, that we
+start; and with the intention of constructing from it as logical an
+idea as lies within our power. What is inference is not the being but
+the idea, so far as the idea is thus constructed.
+
+The idea, thus constructed, may be constructed correctly, or
+incorrectly. Whether it is constructed correctly or incorrectly is
+determined by further experience. What is important to notice is first
+that it is only by further experience, personal experience, that we
+can determine how far the construction we have put upon it is or is
+not correct; and, next, that so far as the construction we have put
+upon it is correct, that is to say is confirmed by actual experience,
+it is thereby shown to be not inference--even though it was reached by
+a process of inference--but fact. The process of inference may be
+compared to a path by which we struggle up the face of a cliff: it is
+the path by which we get there, but it is not the firm ground on which
+eventually we rest. The path is not that which upholds the cliff; nor
+is the inference that on which the being of God rests. The being of
+God is not something inferred but something experienced. It is by
+experience--the experience of ourselves or others--that we find out
+whether what by inference we were led to expect is really something of
+which we can--if we will--have experience. And that which is
+experienced ceases, the moment it is experienced, to be inferential.
+The experience is fact: the statement of it in words is truth. But
+apart from the experience, the words in which it is stated are but
+words; and, without the experience, the words must remain for ever
+words and nothing more than words.
+
+If then by the idea of God we mean the words, in which it is
+(inadequately) stated, and nothing more, the idea of God is separated
+by an impassable gulf from the being of God. Further, if we admit that
+the idea is, by its very nature, and by the very facts of the case,
+essentially different from the being of God, then it is of little use
+to continue to maintain that the being of God is a fact of human
+experience. In that case, the supposed fact of experience is reduced
+to something of which we neither have, nor can have, any idea, or
+consciousness, whatever. It thereby ceases to be a fact of experience
+at all. And it is precisely on this assumption that the being of God
+is denied to be a fact of experience--the assumption that being and
+idea are separated from one another by an impassable gulf: the idea we
+can be conscious of, but of His being we can have no experience. We
+must therefore ask not whether this gulf is impassable, but whether it
+exists at all, or is of the same imaginary nature as that to which
+Gloucester was led by Edgar.
+
+That there may be beings, of whom we have no idea, is a proposition
+which it is impossible to disprove. Such beings would be _ex hypothesi_
+no part of our experience; and if God were such a being, man would
+have no experience of Him. And, having no experience of Him, man could
+have no idea of Him. But the experience man has, of those beings whom
+he knows, is an experience in which idea and being are given together.
+Even if in thought we attend to one rather than to the other of the two
+aspects, the idea is still the idea of the being; and the being is
+still the being of the idea. So far from there being an impassable gulf
+between the two, the two are inseparable, in the moment of actual
+experience. It is in moments of reflection that they appear separable
+and separate, for the memory remains, when the actual experience has
+ceased. We have then only to call the memory the idea, and then the
+idea, in this use of the word, is as essentially different from that of
+which it is said to be the idea, as the memory of a being or thing is
+from the being or thing itself. If we put the memory into words, and
+pronounce those words to another, we communicate to him what we
+remember of our experience (modified--perhaps transmogrified--by our
+reflections upon it) but we do not communicate the actual experience,
+simply because we cannot. What we communicate may lead him to actual
+experience for himself; but it is not itself the experience. The memory
+may give rise, in ourselves or in others to whom we communicate, to
+expectation and anticipation; and the expectation is the more likely
+to be realised, the less the memory has been transmogrified by
+reflection. But, both the memory and the anticipation are clearly
+different from actual experience. It is only when they are confused
+with one aspect of the actual experience--that which we have called the
+idea--that the idea is supposed to be detachable from the being of whom
+we have actual experience. The idea is part of the experience; the
+memory obviously is not.
+
+If then it be said that the being of God is always an inference and is
+never anything more, the reply is that the being of anything whatever
+that is remembered or expected is, in the moment of memory or of
+anticipation, inferential; but, in the moment of actual experience, it
+is not inferred--it is experienced. And what is experienced is, and
+from the beginning has always been, in religions of the lower as well
+as of the higher culture, at once the being and the idea of God.
+
+
+
+
+INDEX
+
+
+Aaron, 11
+
+Adoration, 108 ff., 126, 144
+
+Aeschylus, 37
+
+Aetiological myths, 50, 53
+
+Africans, 59
+
+Allegory, 47
+
+Animism, 17, 35, 50
+
+Anthropomorphism, 18 ff., 27
+
+Anti-social character of fetishism, 8, 14
+
+Anu, 136
+
+Aristotle, 121
+
+Assyria, 134 ff.
+
+Atonement, 54, 75
+
+Australians, 57, 58, 59, 86-89, 113, 114
+
+Awe, 24
+
+Axe-heads, 11
+
+Aztecs, 77, 78, 88
+
+
+Babylonian psalms, 145
+
+Basutos, 143
+
+Being, and idea, 161 ff.
+
+Bergson, 123, 125
+
+Black-fellows, 57
+
+Bow, and arrow, 42
+
+Bull-roarer, 42
+
+Burnt-offerings, 72
+
+
+Calamity, 73, 97, 103
+
+Ceres, 84
+
+Chicomecoatl, 84
+
+Child (the), and the community, 1, 14
+
+Child (the), and self-consciousness, 3
+
+Children, their toys, 41;
+  and tales, 41;
+  community of, 42
+
+Chota Nagpur, 63, 64, 65, 83, 85, 88
+
+Christ, 100
+
+Christianity, 19, 26, 57, 148, 151
+
+Commerce, 69
+
+Common consciousness, capable of emotion and purpose, 2, 3, 14;
+  the source and the criterion of the individual's speech, thought and
+    action, 2, 3;
+  its attitude towards magic, 9 ff., 18;
+  and tales, 31;
+  and mythology, 37, 38, 48
+
+Communion (Christian), 77
+
+Communion, 110, 111, 147
+
+Corn-deities, 82 ff.
+
+Counter-spells, 134 ff.
+
+Covenant, the old and the new, 100
+
+Covenant-theory, 92 ff., 98 ff.
+
+Cuneiform inscriptions, 134 ff., 147
+
+Custom, 41, 42, 98
+
+
+Desire (and prayer), 118 ff.
+
+Desires, of individual and community, 7, 8, 9
+
+Digging-stick, 43
+
+Di indigites, 51-53, 56, 58, 83, 88
+
+Dionysius Thrax, 121
+
+Disease of language, 33, 34
+
+Dog, and master, 25
+
+_Do ut des_, 68
+
+
+Eating with the god, 74, 77, 91
+
+Ecstasy, 110
+
+Elijah, 13, 119
+
+Emotion, 2, 3, 7, 23, 54, 55
+
+Emperor, of Japan, 93, 95
+
+Euripides, 37
+
+Europe, 57
+
+Evolution, and revelation, 29, 122, 150, 152 ff.
+
+Exodus, 93
+
+Expectation, 164
+
+Experience, 44, 161 ff.
+
+
+Faith, 62
+
+Fallacies, 127, 128, 157
+
+Fear, 25, 103
+
+Feast, sacrificial, 74 ff.
+
+Ferrier, 121
+
+Fetishism, 4-8, 13-15, 20, 21, 27, 30, 31, 36, 120, 123, 126,
+  129-131, 156
+
+Fiction, 31, 32
+
+Finno-Ugrians, 143
+
+Fire-god, 136
+
+First-fruits, 80 ff., 90, 115
+
+Folk-lore, 57
+
+Food-offerings, 72, 78, 89
+
+Food-supply, 12, 13
+
+Foraminifera, 124
+
+Forms, of speech and of religion, 106
+
+
+Gesture-language, 66, 114
+
+Gift-theory, 68 ff., 95
+
+Gloucester, 160
+
+Godhead, unity of, 23;
+  a personal being, 26
+
+Gods, 4-6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 21, 22, 25, 26, 44
+
+Gold-coast, 143
+
+Grammar, 121
+
+Gravitation, 153
+
+Greece, 104, 111
+
+
+Harvest-gods, 94 ff.
+
+Harvest-offerings, 114, 115
+
+Harvest-rites, 81, 85
+
+Hero, of tales, 30;
+  of myths, 31
+
+History of religion, 23, 27, 28, 29, 30
+
+
+Idea, and being, 161 ff.
+
+Idol, and fetish, 4, 13
+
+_Iliad_, 41
+
+Imagination, in tales and myths, 49, 50, 51
+
+Immorality, of mythology, 47
+
+Immortality, 105
+
+Individual (the), 4, 14, 132 ff.
+
+Indo-Europeans, 47, 48
+
+Inference, 162 ff.
+
+Israel, 93, 100
+
+Italy, 51, 56
+
+
+Japan, 92 ff.
+
+Jehovah, 93
+
+Jews, 26
+
+
+_King Lear_, 156 ff.
+
+
+Language, 101, 102, 106, 107
+
+Law, 153 ff.
+
+Locutius, 52
+
+Logic, 121
+
+Love, 26, 100, 105, 150
+
+
+Magic, 8 f., 9, 10, 11 f., 12, 91, 116, 119, 120, 123, 125, 133 ff.
+
+Maize-mother, 77, 88
+
+Maklu tablets, 134 ff.
+
+Mamit, 145
+
+Max Mueller, 33, 34
+
+Meal, sacrificial, 74 ff.
+
+Memory, 164
+
+Mexico, 77, 78, 88, 91, 110, 111
+
+Miracles, 10 ff.
+
+Monotheism, 58, 61, 155
+
+Moods, 119
+
+Morality, 21, 22, 25, 26, 41, 44-46, 125, 141 ff., 154
+
+Moses, 93, 119
+
+Mysteries, 104 ff., 111
+
+Mysticism, 110
+
+Myths, 20-22, 30 ff., 39, 40, 43, 47, 48-52, 55-58, 60
+
+
+Names, 16, 52, 57, 64, 82 ff.
+
+Narratives, and myths, 33, 40, 49, 51
+
+Negroes, 15
+
+Nursery-tales, 41
+
+
+Obedience, 98, 100, 101
+
+Oblations, 65, 66, 73, 97, 98
+
+Offerings, 67 ff., 85 ff.
+
+Optative sentences, 139 ff.
+
+Orbona, 52
+
+Origin, of gods and of mythology, 34
+
+Ossipago, 51
+
+
+Penitential Psalms, 145, 147
+
+Personality, 3, 4, 11, 17, 20, 28, 29, 45, 54, 55, 82, 83, 86
+
+Peruvians, 143
+
+Petitions, 126, 128, 130 ff.
+
+Plague, 52
+
+Plato, 92
+
+Polydaemonism, 16 ff.;
+  change to polytheism, 18, 30;
+  and mythology, 31, 32
+
+Polytheism, 4, 7, 16, 18, 22, 30-32, 35, 36, 40, 61, 155
+
+Possession, 110
+
+Power, man of, 12 ff.
+
+Prayer, 108 ff.
+
+Priests, 120
+
+Principles, 121, 123, 128, 153 ff.
+
+Prophet and magician, 10 ff.
+
+Protoplasm, 124
+
+Psalms of David, 146, 147
+
+
+Quietism, 112
+
+
+Rain-making, 9, 12, 13, 119
+
+Reconciliation, 98
+
+Reflection, 33, 36, 53-56, 60, 96
+
+Religion, 8 ff., 35, 39, 54-56, 104 ff.
+
+Revelation, 29, 58
+
+Reverence, 24
+
+Ritual, 31, 57, 61-63, 101 ff., 114
+
+Romans, the, 52, 53
+
+
+Sacrifice, 52, 63, 64, 67 ff., 72, 73, 79 ff., 85, 97 ff.
+
+Salvation, 105
+
+Samoans, 143
+
+Search, for God, 59
+
+Seed-time, 115
+
+Self, 3, 4, 7, 104, 132 ff., 137, 148
+
+Self-renunciation, 149
+
+Shinto, 92 ff.
+
+Sign (of the cross), 116
+
+Sin, 103, 104, 145 ff.
+
+Socrates, 55
+
+Sophocles, 37
+
+Species, 83 ff., 91, 92
+
+Speech, 3, 121, 153 ff.
+
+Spells, 115 ff., 134 ff., 150, 151
+
+Survivals, 38, 56, 57, 58, 59
+
+
+Taboo, 145
+
+Tales, and myths, 31-33, 49, 51
+
+Totems, 84 ff.
+
+Tylor, Professor, 15
+
+
+Vagitanus, 51
+
+Vegetation-deities, 81 ff.
+
+Veneration, 151
+
+Viriplaca, 52
+
+
+Water, 135
+
+Way of the Gods, 92 ff.
+
+Western Africa, 8, 15
+
+Will, of God, 149 ff.
+
+Wind, spirits of, 93 ff.
+
+Witches, 134 ff.
+
+Worship, 19, 55, 57, 58, 60-63
+
+
+Xilonen, 84
+
+
+Zulus, 143
+
+
+
+
+CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE IDEA OF GOD IN EARLY RELIGIONS***
+
+
+******* This file should be named 25338.txt or 25338.zip *******
+
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/5/3/3/25338
+
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit:
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
diff --git a/25338.zip b/25338.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c48aadc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/25338.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fd72ba1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #25338 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25338)