Ancient Faiths And Modern - LightNovelsOnl.com
You're reading novel online at LightNovelsOnl.com. Please use the follow button to get notifications about your favorite novels and its latest chapters so you can come back anytime and won't miss anything.
The animal usually sacrificed by the Peruvians was the llama, and the priest who officiated drew auguries from the appearance of the intestines. To effect the oblation a sacred fire was now kindled by a concave mirror which acted as "a burning gla.s.s," precisely as was done by Numa in the days of Ancient Rome. If the sky was clouded, and no rays could be collected, fire was produced by friction. When lighted, the fire was committed to the care of the virgins of the sun, who were bound to keep it up for the ensuing year. After the single sacrifice was completed, great numbers of other animals were slaughtered, and a regular carousal began, attended with music, dancing, and drinking, that lasted for many days, during which period all the lower orders kept holiday. In the distribution of bread and wine at this high festival, the invading Spaniards saw a striking resemblance to the Christian communion, and they recognised a similar likeness in the Peruvian practices of confession and penance. The virgins of the sun were called "the elect," and were young maidens taken from their homes at an early age, and introduced into convents, where they were placed under the care of elderly matrons, who taught them their religious duties, and how to spin and weave, embroider and adorn hangings for the temples, and to frame garments for the Incas. Their work was such, that it was found to be superior to any which the Spaniards had ever seen, or were themselves able to produce. The virgins were separated wholly, not simply, from the world in general, but also from their own relations and friends--none but the king and queen could enter into their convent. The closest attention was paid to the morals of these maidens, and visitors were sent every year to inspect the inst.i.tutions, and to report on the state of their discipline; a plan similar to which has been repeatedly proposed in Christian England, yet never sanctioned by the parliament!
If a virgin was discovered in an intrigue she was buried alive, her lover was strangled, and the town or village to which he belonged was razed to the ground, and sowed with stones, to efface even the memory of its site. These solar attendants were all of royal blood, and were estimated to number fifteen hundred; but to provincial convents the inferior n.o.bility were allowed to send their daughters, and sometimes a peculiarly lovely peasant girl was admitted. The convents were all sumptuously furnished. But, though virgins of the sun, they were brides of the Incas, and we cannot fail, when we read of the vast harem of the Peruvian monarch, to think of the female establishments of the Jewish Solomon, of the Persian Ahasuerus, and that of Louis XV. of Christian France. If at any time the Inca reduced his harem, the superfluous concubines were restored to their homes, swelling with the importance which they had gained by their familiarity with the monarch.
Polygamy was permitted. Matrimony was effected by the Inca, or other chief man, joining the hands of the parties. The king usually espoused his own sister, but no other person was allowed to do so. No marriage was valid without the consent of parents. As a general rule, all unions were effected on the same day of the year, and thus the wedding of couples was followed by general rejoicing.
The genius of the Peruvian government penetrated into the most private recesses of domestic life, allowing no man to act for himself, even in those personal matters in which none but himself, or his family, could be interested. No Peruvian was too low for the fostering vigilance of the government; none was so high that he was not made to feel his dependence upon it in every act of his life. The government of the Incas was the mildest, but the most searching and beneficent, of despotisms.
We now, but with great reluctance, leave our friendly guide, the accomplished Prescott, and ask ourselves, once more, the lessons which we have learned from the departed races of the vast American continent.
Can anyone doubt that one of the most conspicuous results obtained is, that Christian rule, and the Christian doctrine, have not proved themselves, in any respect, superior to the Incas' government and their solar religion? Who can read of the civilization, the theology, and the practice of the Peruvians, without believing one of two things--the one, that Jewish ritualism, and the majority of Christian teaching, is of human invention; the other, that the Almighty has revealed His will in the Western as well as in the Eastern Hemisphere? Can any thoughtful man believe that the brutal, covetous, lying Spaniards, who broke, with impunity, every commandment promulgated in those Gospels, to whose authority they professed allegiance, and upon which their faith is founded, were better men, or more favoured by the Lord, "who loveth righteousness and hateth iniquity," than were the gentle Peruvians, who fell before them as lambs and sheep before wolves and tigers? Surely the story of the Incas should make Christians, in all ages, blush for their inferiority to those, amongst whom neither Moses, Samuel, and other so-called prophets, Jesus, nor any of his apostles, preached; and more strongly should it convince us that the wish to do good on a large scale can come otherwise than by the Gospel. If grace, and peace, and love came by the Nazarene alone, how is it--and let us ponder over the question deeply--that all Christian countries have been, and that some are still, conspicuous for the brutality of their political and priestly governments, for the frequency with which they make war, for their ferocity in the destruction of religious enemies, and for the intense hatred evinced against rival sects, by those who call themselves the representatives of the Prince of Peace; whilst, on the other hand, a nation who never heard of the son of Joseph or of Mary, should be conspicuous for the virtues which ought to adorn the soldiers of the cross, but do not? Surely, if the saying be true, "by their fruit ye shall know them," the denizens of the old world must be children of the Devil, who do the work, of their father, whilst certain of the nations of the new world, as it is called, were really children of the light, abounding in love, charity, and goodwill towards all men.
To me it is astonis.h.i.+ng how thoughtful men, who have read accounts of the Mexicans and the Peruvians, can continue to believe that the Bible is the book of G.o.d, written by holy men, whose thoughts and diction were essentially those of the third person in the Trinity. Who can a.s.sert that Abraham and Jacob, Moses and Aaron, were taught of G.o.d, and that to the Hebrews alone has the Creator revealed His will? Who can see, in the sensual king David, a man after G.o.d's heart, and applaud the brutal murder of Agag, the destruction of the priests of Baal, by the orders of Elijah, and the extermination of the Baalites in Israel by Jehu?
Compared with such wretches as these the Incas were angels. They had not left to them the b.l.o.o.d.y legacy which has come to the Christian world by means of the Old Testament: they had not been taught to believe that the Almighty revelled in the blood of human beings: they never had, amongst their sacred songs, verses like the following--"that thy foot may be dipped in the blood of enemies, and the tongue of thy dogs in the same"
(Ps. lxviii. 23).
Ah, it is time for civilized men to cease their admiration for a book which has produced such frightful fruits, and which has converted millions of human beings into incarnate fiends.
The Vedas and the Shasters--the writings of the Buddhists, and those of the Pa.r.s.ees and the Chinese, contain, nowhere, such a justification of wholesale murder, as do the Scriptures of the Jews and of the Christians.* From these have been drawn the power to persecute, and, if possible, to exterminate those who wors.h.i.+p G.o.d in a different fas.h.i.+on to those in power. Calvin was as bad as Torquemada; and, even at the present time, it is only public opinion that prevents fanatics, like the early New Englanders, from reducing their Christian hate to practical torture. Everywhere the professed followers of Jesus a.s.sume the power to torment their opponents, whenever they can do so without breaking the civil law, and there are few pulpits from which the voice of revilement, contumely, and denunciation is not repeatedly heard. The Romans abuse the Anglicans; the Establishment sneers at Dissent; Nonconformists censure all churches; and all libel those whom they call Free Thinkers and Atheists. To find "toleration" in matters of religion, one must seek amongst the Deists, or amongst those who refuse to see in the Bible the revealed will of G.o.d to man.
* See Matthew x. 34, 85; Luke xii. 49, 51, 52, 53.
CHAPTER III.
Can civilization grow out of barbarism? Dislike of progress, especially if mental. Rediscovery of ancient knowledge.
Advance and retrogression. China and j.a.pan--influence of strangers. Decadence of nations--followed by a rise. The Shemitic and Negro races. Varied religious ideas. The Negro Fetish and Obi. Jewish, Arab, and Christian communication with the dead. Australian idea about white men. Ideas of a soul and futurity amongst the Aryans and Egyptians. Their priesthood. The Aryans Monotheiste. An Aryan hymn. Max Muller and Talboys Wheeler. Aryan conceptions compared with Psalm civ. 1-4. Monotheism of the Egyptians. Shemitic religions.
At one period of my life I entertained the idea that civilization never had grown, nor ever could grow, out of barbarism. Perhaps I have not yet wholly abandoned it. The considerations which the question involves are all but infinite. It is doubtful whether we can reduce them into shape without writing an extensive treatise. We will, however, attempt to do so, and present the subject to our readers to the best of our ability.
As far as our own personal and historic experience goes, we find that man has no natural propensity to learn beyond that which he has received simply as an animal. With him school is a hateful place, and education is a painful process, even in the midst of the highest civilization we see individuals who cast from them all the luxuries of life, and descend voluntarily to a level scarcely superior to that of the brute creation.
But those who take kindly to education, and consent to try and learn everything which the teacher presents to their notice, are bounded by the amount of knowledge possessed by the instructor, who cannot impart to others information in matters of which all are ignorant. It is true that I once read a question propounded by his schoolmaster to one of my sons, which ran--"Enumerate upon paper all the capes, bays, and rivers of England that you don't know by name, and describe the seas which you have never heard of." Without dwelling upon the anecdote farther than to say, that it points out the absurdity of the idea that education of itself advances knowledge, we may pa.s.s on to remark, that even in nations, whose intellect is highly cultivated, the propensity to advance in knowledge is singularly small. Throughout the old world an inventor is usually regarded as a visionary, or a lunatic, and flouted by all his contemporaries.* From the time of Aristotle and Hippocrates, scarcely any advance was made in philosophy, and, throughout Europe, the fourteenth century was as barbarous, if not indeed more so, than the first of our era; and to such a dark age there is a strong clerical party in Great Britain which desires us to return.
* A man who had travelled much once said to me,--"I will tell you the main difference between a Yankee and an Englishman. If you inform the latter of some new discovery-- or propose the use of some recent invention for his own benefit--he will tell you either that the thing is old, or worthless. On the other hand, if you recount to the former what you have told the latter of, his rejoinder will be, I can improve upon that." This is true, and we are now repeatedly adopting from the United States discoveries of various kinds, which we rejected when offered to us in the first place.
Yet, notwithstanding the propensity of cultivated nations to remain quiescent, there do appear, from time to time, individuals who, being discontented with things as they are, endeavour to bring about improvements in the arts, the sciences, and the general conditions of life. The recognition of a want, is an incentive to a thoughtful mind to supply the exigency. Whenever an individual endeavours to attain a definite end, he exercises his mind, not only in what he has been already taught, but what he can observe beyond that; he rakes up, if possible, the experience of others, studies their proceedings, and experiments with a definite object, and ponders upon the affinities, nature, and the like, of every substance which he surmises may be of service to him. When, by these means, he has obtained his purpose, he will repeatedly find that he has done no more than rediscover a something which was known thousands of years before his time. Without a doubt, much of the philosophy, science, art, religion, &c., of the present day, is due to a close observation and an attainment to the knowledge possessed by our predecessors. "Is there any thing whereof it may be said, see this is new?--it hath been already of old time, which was before us" (Eccles. i. 10).
If this be true, even though it may only be so to a partial extent, it is clearly more philosophical to believe that some primeval men were created with a considerable amount of knowledge, rather than that all were savage, barely, if at all, superior to monkeys, and that one or more of these, gradually elevated their race, by degrees so slow, as to be imperceptible in less time than many thousand years.
This side of the argument receives corroboration when we study the history of such semi-civilized countries as China, and such barbarous regions as those of Africa and Australia. In none of these parts do we see any general propensity to advance. In the first we see a retrogression; there is now no effort to repair ancient roads which have been worn away by centuries of traffic, to restore the old temples, towers, and landmarks, erected when time was younger, or even to keep up the teachings of Confucius. A similar apathy existed amongst the j.a.panese--yet no sooner do the civilized nations of Europe show the rulers of China and j.a.pan that it is necessary for them to improve, if they desire to retain their power, than they attempt to learn the arts which have enabled their rivals to overcome them. In both cases, the progress is recognized as due to the interference of a nation, superior for the time being, to that whose education has been faulty. Advance, then, in such countries, is clearly due to foreign influence, rather than to an innate propensity to general, mental, scientific, or practical development.
But, on the other side, it may be alleged that the African has been in existence from time immemorial--that he has been in contact with the civilization of ancient and modern Egypt--with Christianity--with the ancient Tyrians and Carthaginians--with the Arabs--with the Spaniards, Portuguese, and British, and yet the African tribes remain almost as savage now as when they first were known. Similar remarks apply to the inhabitants of the Andaman Isles, of the vast islands of Borneo, Celebez, Papua, New Guinea, and others.
Yet in many places, now considered barbarous, we see the remains of previous empires--and when we are able to find some comparatively authentic history which tells of the overthrow of a powerful kingdom, it is clear that the civilized people have usually been destroyed by the barbarian. The wealth of Rome tempted the hordes from the inhospitable north, just as the gold of Mexico and Peru were the causes of their decadence under the Spaniards, whose people were in themselves scarcely superior to the troops led by Alaric, Genseric, and other so called barbarians. Yet we know, as in the case of Spain herself, that decadence from civilization to comparative barbarism may be due to causes inherent in the people and its governors, wholly independent of foreign conquest.
This decadence is due to the b.e.s.t.i.a.l propensities of man being allowed to dominate over the intellectual, and the result is the same, whether the animal pa.s.sions be cultivated by a debased and degrading policy of monarch and priest, or by the indolence of each individual.
By developing the train of thought thus indicated, we imagine that the philosophical reader will conclude that amongst men, some race, family, or tribe, has been created with intelligence, as much above the rest of their kind as the elephant is superior to the hippopotamus, and the dog to the cat, and that others are generically as low as is the Australian "dingo" in the canine race. Those once perfect may deteriorate, yet carry with them the power of rising again--whilst those originally low never rise at all, no matter what example may be set them, unless force is used to make them learn. To these we must add a third set, specially to include the American, for we have no evidence whatever that the civilization of the Aztec and Peruvian was anything more than a restoration of the scientific knowledge of a more ancient people, possibly of an Aryan stock. Who that is acquainted with the Shemitic race can fail to see in its people the type of an ancient condition which has decayed, until, like a fallen gentleman, it can only show what once it was, by conserving and exhibiting a few ornaments of no value, save from their age, but whose sons may yet become princes in their paternal domains? Who that studies the negro in Africa, America, and St.
Domingo, can fail to see that he is, or, at any rate has. .h.i.therto shown himself, almost wholly incapable of development as a philosophic man?
And who can read the pages of Prescott without recognizing the fact that some of the ancient inhabitants of America inaugurated--una.s.sisted, as we judge by any example from others--a style of religion and government of which the world has hardly, if at all, seen an equal? Yet it is remarkable, that both the Mexican and Peruvian traced their laws and inst.i.tutions to strangers who came amongst them, as Oannes did to the Babylonians, and who taught them what arts, religion, and science they themselves had. The subject of centres of human life into which our considerations have drawn us, is by far too vast for discussion here.
It involves the study of geology, of anthropology, of glossology, of navigation, of physical geography, of climate, of the laws of reproduction, of the influences of climate over animals, and of diet upon man. Into all these we dare not enter: we shall confine ourselves rather to considering the religious ideas of the lowest of the known races of mankind; and then proceed to those which have been held by what we may call the oscillating people, i.e., those vibrating repeatedly between a state of empire and one of slavery, like the people of Hindostan, Babylon, Judea, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Egypt.
When we endeavour to ascertain the religion of the negro, by which term we include all the black native tribes of Africa, we find ourselves almost in the position of a modern chemist seeking for the philosopher's stone. In no single book, and I have read very many, can I find any trustworthy evidence of the negro having any religion at all. It is true that travellers in Abyssinia, and those who are now returned from their successful expedition against Magdala, tell us that in Abyssinia there is a form of religion which is evidently a corrupt form of Christianity, but with this exception, the blacks seem to have no idea of that congeries of fact and fiction, dogma, ritual, and practice, which pa.s.ses current for religion in more civilized countries. Yet though they have no definite idea of a Creator, and the way in which He works throughout the universe, they have a dread of some unseen power, and, like a number of frightened children, dread the effects of "fetish," and the power of the Obi or Obeah man. When the mind is predisposed to fear, and it is so amongst the lower animals as well as in man, it is astonis.h.i.+ng at what contemptible objects one may stand aghast. I can vividly remember being sent, whilst a very young child, with a message from an aunt, at whose home I was staying, to the maid, who was was.h.i.+ng in an outhouse, but ere I reached the door of the latter, I was terrified at a head which seemed to be rising from the ground, Such was my horror that I ran away, too proud to scream, yet almost fainting with horror. To me that ancient battered barber's doll was "fetish," and if my friends had determined to cultivate the timidity which I then showed, it is quite possible that to this day I might have a dread not dissimilar to that of the African.
As it was, my aunt told me that what had scared me, was only a piece of carved and painted wood, and so put me upon my mettle, that I delivered my message and gave the image a kick in the face; yet my valour was short lived, and during the rest of my sojourn I dared not venture within sight of the bugbear. To all intents and purposes that human head was, in my estimation, the guardian of the garden--its presence made all within its influence under taboo--had I ventured to tell a lie, or to have been naughty, I cannot conceive that any punishment would have been greater than being doomed to sit in the presence of the weird image.
Hence I can easily understand the abject terror of the African at "fetish," and his dread of the Obeah man, who a.s.serts that he can direct upon whom he will the power of the unknown G.o.d. So great is the fear of this negro magician, and so common is that fear to man in general, that we sometimes find the white man as full of it as the black. I have had, for example, under my own care, an Englishman of good education, who, whilst superintendent of a Jamaica plantation, became so cowed by "Obi,"
that he was obliged to give up his position and return to England, literally insane upon the subject of "fetish" and "Obeah," and wholly unfitted for any work whatever.
The objects to which the name of "fetish" is given are very numerous--a rock, a stone, a tree, a pool, a dried monkey, an alligator, man, or skull--anything will suit the purpose. One which is said to be very popular amongst chieftains is prepared somewhat in the following manner:--The head of a father is removed after death, and so placed, that as the brain decays and softens, it may fall into a receptacle already half filled with palm oil or other grease. The material so formed, consisting to a great extent of the thoughtful organ of the sire, is then supposed to give his spirit to the son, whenever the latter smears himself with it, or takes it as a potent medicinal spell.
The head thus placed becomes the royal "fetish," and the king goes to take counsel from it just as ancient priests inquired, or pretended to inquire, from the G.o.d or lord of some shrine or oracle. I cannot charge my memory with everything that has been at one time or another regarded as an object of wonder, wors.h.i.+p, or "fetish," but I have an indistinct recollection that a musical box has been venerated by Africans, as much as the Ancilia, the Palladium, the Diana which fell down from Jupiter, the Caaba or black stone of Mecca, the ark of the covenant, the brazen serpent, the wood of the true cross, the nails which pierced Jesus, and the handkerchief which was used to wipe the face of the suffering Nazarite, all of which have been sacred amongst civilized nations, and are still adored by some. It would be difficult for a philosopher to draw a distinction between an African "fetish" and a Papal relic. There is no virtue which the Romanist has attributed to old bones, old nails, old shoes, old coats, old houses, old staircases, old bits of wood, old links of chains, old hairs, old statues, &c., that has not been equally attributed by negroes to some absurd fetish in Ashantee, Dahomey, or elsewhere.
In some parts of the vast African continent, however, there seems to be an indistinct idea of a life after death, and when a great man dies, or is killed, his wives, and many of his slaves, are sacrificed for his future use, and vast human sacrifices are made annually in his honour, that the departed may hear, from time to time, of the welfare of those whom he has left behind. Feeling indisposed to regard this practice as the offspring of religious faith, I would compare it with the crude conceptions of some of the lowest cla.s.s in Europe and America, aye, of some cultivated intellects as well, who profess to be able, by means of _media_, to communicate with the dead, or who send messages to their departed relatives by friends that are dying. The most remarkable development of this idea which I have yet met with has recently occurred in France, where a young man attempted to murder a beautiful young woman, to whom he was a total stranger, the reason he a.s.signed being, that he intended to commit suicide immediately after the murder, so that he might enter the future world with a pleasant companion.
We can scarcely regard the persons figuring in the following true story as being very much superior to the King of Dahomey. In a well-cared for English village a poor woman was about to die in the full odour of Protestant sanct.i.ty. In youth she had lost one leg, and now had disease in the other. To her came an old woman and said,--"I hear thou's goin'
to dee Betty, and that thou's goin' to heaven--at least parson says so--when thou's got there, willee tell my owd man that I've just bought that field as he set his heart on." "Oh dear," said the dying woman, "how can I go stumping all about heaven with my legs in the state they're in." "Well, you can tell him at anyrate if you happen to see him go by!"
Pa.s.sing from the African, let us now say a word or two about the Australian. It is, I think, Mitch.e.l.l, who states, in an account of his travels in that country, that the white men were used in a manner so considerate, in some instances, indeed, so kindly, that he was induced to inquire into the cause. He found that these friendly tribes were in the habit of eating their defunct relatives--being always short of provisions, they used man meat, as do other starving creatures when they devour their like--and they cooked the body much in the same way as we do dead pig. By scalding the carca.s.s, the cuticle and the black layer, called _rete mucosum_, was removed, and the corpse became white. This gave the people the notion that Europeans were their own dead relatives returned from the spirit world. Sir G. Gray also, in his account of an expedition to the north-west coasts of the same vast island, describes how all the people with whom he came into contact believed in the power of sorcery or witchcraft. Without extending our inquiry into the undeveloped religious ideas of other barbarians, we may affirm, from the preceding examples, that there is, even amongst the lowest human beings, some idea of a future state, and of the existence of some unseen power, which may work mischief upon themselves or their friends. Beyond these vague notions the savage who has neither been taught, nor inherited the power or propensity to learn, rarely, if ever, pa.s.ses.
If, then, the surmise to which we gave utterance awhile ago is founded in truth, we may fairly endeavour to ascertain what is the race, or the people, which have been born with a higher religious development, a greater capacity for learning, and a higher appreciation of the value of agriculture and civilization than the rest of the world's inhabitants.
We now find ourselves on the threshold of a question which has, for many years past, divided the scientific world, viz., Was there originally one human couple only, or were there many intellectual centres? Into this matter it would be unprofitable to enter, for to give an account of the Chinese, Egyptian, Aryan, American, and Shemitic races, would require many huge volumes. It will, probably, be permitted to me to omit from the inquiry all but Aryans and Egyptians. I select these because I have, in the preceding volumes, descanted largely upon the faith of the Babylonians, a.s.syrians, Tyrians, and others, and because I believe that these ancients have done very much to modify the faith of Europe. If time and opportunity permitted, I fancy that anyone might make a most interesting a.n.a.lysis of that which Europe owes to the Shemites, Egyptians, and Aryans respectively; but it is beyond our powers at present to go into the whole subject. The volumes which have recently been published about the Ancient Hindoo religion may be counted by dozens, and the writings of Egyptologists are almost equally numerous.
We must, therefore, content ourselves with a reference to a few main points.
It seems to be an undoubted fact, that both the Egyptians and Aryans recognized the existence of a soul in human beings, and believed that it survived the dissolution of the body in some state, whose position and physical condition were unknown. They held, moreover, that the locality and condition of the spiritual part of man after death depended upon the actions of the individual during life. Both people believed in the influence of prayer, of sacrifices, of a maceration, or torturing of the fleshy body, and they had, moreover, each of them, a priestly race, who regulated festivals, ordained ceremonies, and prescribed everything which those who regarded their spiritual welfare should do. I believe that the Egyptians were, in reality, monotheistic; but my authority for the idea has escaped me. It is certain that the ancient Aryans were so, and I cannot do better than refer my readers to the _History of Sanscrit Literature_, by Max Muller, and the first vol. of the _History of India_, by Talboys Wheeler. Yet, as the first is out of print, and the second a volume of considerable size, it will, perhaps, be judicious if I quote some pa.s.sages from both. The following hymn, translated by M.
M., p. 559 sq., is, to my own ideas, far more grand in conception than any other which I have read, and shows a depth or sublimity of thought that could only be attained by a profoundly intelligent intellect.
Moderns might equal it, none could surpa.s.s it. Speaking of the beginning, the words run, "Nothing that is, was then; even what is not, did not exist then." The poet then proceeds to deny the existence of the sky, and of the firmament, and yet, unable to bear the idea of an unlimited nothing, he exclaims, "What was it that hid or covered the existing? what was the refuge of what? was water the deep abyss, the chaos which swallowed up everything?" Then his mind, turning away from nature, dwells upon man, and the problem of human life. "There was no death, therefore there was nothing immortal There was no s.p.a.ce, no life, and lastly, there was no time--no difference between day and night--no solar torch by which morning might have been told from evening. That One breathed breathless by itself, other than it, nothing since has been.
That One breathed and lived; it enjoyed more than mere existence; yet its life was not dependent upon anything else, as our life depends upon the air we breathe. It breathed, breathless. Darkness there was, and all at first was veiled in gloom, profound as ocean without life." Muller then rather describes what the poet means than gives his words; I will, therefore, adopt now, for the rest of the hymn, the metrical version, which he gives at p. 564:--
"The germ that still lay covered in the husk Burst forth, one nature, from the fervent heat.
Then first came Love upon it, the new spring Of mind; yea, poets in their hearts discerned, Pondering this bond between created things And uncreated.
Comes this spark from earth, Piercing and all-pervading, or from heaven?
These seeds were sown, and mighty power arose, Nature below, and Power and Will above.
Who knows the secret? who proclaimed it here?
Whence, whence this manifold creation sprang?
The G.o.ds themselves came later into being.
Who knows from whence this great creation sprang?
He, from whom all this great creation came.
Whether His will created or was mute, The Most High seer, that is in highest heaven, He knows it; or, perchance, e'en He knows not"
One more hymn is even more distinct in its monotheism, p. 569. "In the beginning there arose the source of golden light. He was the only born Lord of all that is. He established the earth and this sky. Who is the G.o.d to whom we shall offer our sacrifice? He who gives life. He who gives strength; whose blessing all the bright G.o.ds desire; whose shadow is immortality; whose shadow is death.... He who, through His power, is the only King of the breathing and the awakening world. He who governs all--man and beast.... He whose power these snowy mountains, whose power the sea proclaims, with the distant river. He whose these regions are, as it were, His two arms.... He through whom the sky is bright, and the earth firm. He through whom the heaven was 'stablished, nay, the highest heaven. He who measured out the light in the air.... He to whom heaven and earth, standing firm by His will, look up, trembling inwardly.
He over whom the rising sun s.h.i.+nes forth.... Where-ever the mighty water-clouds went, where they placed the seed, and lit the fire, thence arose He who is the only life of the bright G.o.ds.... He who, by His might, looked even over the water-clouds, the clouds which gave strength, and lit the sacrifice. He _who is G.o.d above all G.o.ds_.... May He not destroy us. He, the creator of the earth; or He, the righteous, who created the heaven. He who also created the bright and mighty waters." In this hymn I have only omitted the repeated question--Who is the G.o.d to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?
Of the high antiquity of these productions no competent scholar entertains a doubt. It is not certain how many years before our era it was composed, but it is considered that it was prior to B. C. 2000, long before the time when the ideal Moses is said to have written, and _a fortiori_ anterior, by at least a thousand years, to the authors of the Book of Psalms.
Talboys Wheeler remarks, p. 27--"Having thus sketched generally the individual character of the leading deities of the Aryans as they appear in the Rig Veda, it may be advisable to glance at that conception of One Supreme Being, as in all and above all, which finds full expression in the Vedic hymns. Upon this point the following pa.s.sages will be found very significant:--'Who has seen the primeval being at the time of His being born? what is that endowed with substance that the unsubstantial sustains? from earth are the breath and blood, but where is the soul--who may repair to the sage to ask this? What is that One alone, who has upheld these six spheres in the form of an unborn?'" Then follows the hymn just quoted from M. Muller.
I may add that the so-called G.o.ds Indra, Agni, Surya, the Maruts, &c., are only personifications of the abstract powers of nature, the sky, fire, the sun, the winds, &c. These are the same conceptions as are referred to in Ps. civ. 1-4--they are not deities, but ministers.
It will probably be said by the orthodox that these descriptions of the creation and the Creator are mere efforts of the human mind, and not the products of "revelation." We grant it at once, and answer, why, then, should the comparatively miserable conceptions of one or more Hebrews, who knew nothing of a soul or a future life till they had learned it from the Chaldeans or the Persians, be regarded differently? Was the Jewish ignorance the result of Divine "inspiration?" Did the Devil give to the heathen the knowledge of Satan's origin and power? If so, why did the Jews, and why do Christians, adopt it?
I have already mentioned that the Aryans believed in the efficacy of prayer to their G.o.ds: they offered to them, much as we do now, supplications for rain, abundant harvests, prolific cattle, bodily vigour, long life, numerous progeny, &c., just as did, very rarely, the seed of Abraham.