It is not difficult to see why this was so if we realize that the
insight into the value of disinterestedness, which is the core of high
religion, was not a sudden discovery nor a complete one, anywhere or
any time. Like all other things associated with evolutionary man, this
insight must have had very crude beginnings; it would be possible
to show, I think, that there have been many tentative and partial
perceptions of it which, under the clarifying power of men of genius,
have at times become coherent. When we remember that we are dealing
with an insight into the qualities of a matured personality, there is
no reason to suppose that the full significance of this insight has
ever been completely exhausted. It seems far more likely that the sages
demonstrated the existence of the realm of the spirit, but that it
still remains to be thoroughly explored.
If that is true then the attempt to live by these partial insights
must necessarily have presented inordinate practical difficulties.
Pythagoras, for example, seems to have grasped the idea that the
disinterested study of mathematics and music was cleansing to the
passions and also that in order to be disinterested it was necessary
to have purity of mind. So when he established his society in Southern
Italy he evidently attempted to combine the [p205] serious pursuit
of science with an ascetic discipline. But the pursuit of science was
too much for the mass of the faithful who assumed that “to follow
Pythagoras meant to go barefoot and to abstain from animal flesh and
beans.” And this in turn was too much for the dignity of the learned
who proceeded to dissociate themselves from the disciplinary aspect of
the Pythagorean teaching. It is a fair conclusion, I think, that the
breakdown of this early experiment must have been due fundamentally to
the fact that Pythagoras could not have known any tested method either
of equipping his followers to appreciate science or anything beside a
crude asceticism as a means of moral discipline. If this is true, then
the reason for the failure lay in the fact that though the original
insight was marvelously good, it was not implemented with the necessary
technical knowledge for applying it. Only a few, we may suppose, who
were already by the accidents of nature and nurture suited to the
Pythagorean ideal, can ever have successfully applied it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account