The problem which occupied the powerful intellects of Hume and Kant,
and which these philosophers named the principle of causality, was
already exercising the brains of our fathers when they gave names for
the first time to the sky, the sun, the dawn, and the other physical
phenomena, by means of roots indicating activity; for the principle of
causality manifested itself in the beginning, not in the direct search
for a cause, but in the assertion of the existence of an agent. This
mental labour, commenced and accomplished thousands of centuries ago by
millions of human beings, deserves at least as much attention from us
as the learned speculations of two modern philosophers, be they Hume or
Kant.
So striking an object as the sun, even before possessing a definite
name, must have been designated in some special way; perhaps as a
simple circle, such as we find in the Egyptian hieroglyphics, in the
Chinese writing, and in our astronomical almanacs; this symbol would
give little opportunities to the mythologists; but when the idea arose
that the sun was a ball, and that an analogy was found between a ball
and an eye, man began to speak of the sun as the eye of the sky. We say
readily in all languages, “God is omniscient,” but Hesiod, to express
the same truth said, “The sun is the eye of Zeus who sees and knows
all.” If the language appears childish to us, we must remember that it
was the expression of a poet who lived long before the philosophers of
Greece, we shall then be less struck by its harshness than by the happy
and pure thought which has been expressed.
The sun has been an object of adoration with many of the primitive
nations; it seems uncertain whether as the divinity himself or as
his representative; most of the mythologists assure us that the
ancient Egyptians worshipped the sun’s disc itself. The first step is
invariably followed by a second, and a good example of development in
religious belief is afforded by a Mexican legend. The story is told of
the Inca Tupac Yupanqui, who, though reputed a son of the sun, began
to doubt the divine omnipotence of his divine ancestor. At a great
religious council, held at the consecration of the newly built temple
of the sun at Cuzco, he rose before the assembled multitude to deny
the divinity of the sun. “Many say,” he began, “that the sun is the
maker of all things. But he who makes should abide by what he has made.
Now many things happen when the sun is absent; therefore he cannot be
the universal Creator. And that he is alive at all, is doubtful, for
his journeys do not tire him. He is like a tethered beast who makes
a daily round; he is like an arrow which must go whither it is sent,
not whither it wishes. I tell you that he, our father and maker--the
sun--must have a lord and master more powerful than himself, who
constrains him to his daily circuit without pause or rest.”[95]
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