Even from the purely scientific point of view, generalization is
obviously of value. When we have found unity in the outer world’s
apparent diversity, direction in its apparent disorderliness, we
have obviously achieved a great gain. But religion appears to demand
something more. If for a moment we look at the matter pragmatically,
we shall find that a number of the great mystics (and a large majority
of those of our own occidental type and tradition) speak of their
experiences of “divine communion” as being communion with a _person_.
What does this mean? We have seen that a purely intellectual analysis
gives us no handle for finding personality in God. Can we suppose that
this direct intuition gives us that handle? To say so, to my mind,
would be simple obscurantism. Intuition, if it shows us reality, can
only show a reality capable in the long run of intellectual analysis;
to deny this is to deny all our premisses. No: their intuition shows
us that something akin to personality is perceived, but permits no
pronouncement as to whether its resemblance to personality is given in
its real nature, or introduced into it by their thought.
If we look into the history of religion, we find over and over again
that man has taken something from his own mind and projected it into
the external world. The magic power of fetishes, the tabus incurred by
contact with certain objects, the endowment of the idea of external
powers, of God, with human form, the ascription of miraculous influence
to places or things--in every case there has been this projection.
And there is no reason to doubt that here again there has been a
similar occurrence, that man has organized his idea of external power
after the pattern of a personality, and has then ascribed this type
of organization to the external power itself. This projection Blake
symbolized in a sentence: “Thus men forgot that All Deities reside in
the Human breast.”
The rival schools of psychology may disagree: but all are agreed that
some modes of thinking are more primitive than others, and even in the
most educated amongst us tend to persist, often in the subconscious,
side by side with more developed methods that have arisen later.
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