The Religious Sentiment: Its Source and Aim: A Contribution to the Science and; Philosophy of ReligionBrinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)
Religion
The Religious Sentiment: Its Source and Aim: A Contribution to the Science and; Philosophy of Religion
Brinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)
Religion -- Philosophy
This oppressive sense of time, regarded not in its real meaning as one
of the conditions of perception, but as an active force destroying
thought as well as motion, recurs continually in mythology. To the
Greek, indefinite time as Cronos, was the oldest of the gods, begetting
numberless children, but with unnatural act consuming them again; while
definite time, as the Horæ, were the blithe goddesses of the order in
nature and the recurrent seasons. Osiris, supreme god of the Egyptians,
was born of a yet older god, Sev, Time. Adonis and Aeon acknowledge the
same parentage.[165-2] The ancient Arab spoke of time (_dahr_, _zaman_)
as the final, defining principle; as uniting and separating all things;
and as swallowing one thing after another as the camel drains the water
from a trough.[166-1] In the Koran it is written: “Time alone destroys
us.” Here and there, through the sacred songs of the Parsees, composed
long before Aristotle wrote, beyond all the dust and noise of the
everlasting conflict of good and evil, of Ahura Mazda and Anya-Mainyus,
there are glimpses of a deeper power, Zeruana Akerana, Eternal Duration,
unmoved by act or thought, in the face of which these bitter opponents
are seen to be children, brethren, “twin sons of Time.”[166-2] The
Alexandrian Gnostics, in their explanations of Christian dogmas,
identify Aeon, infinite time, with God the Father, as the source and
fount of existence; not merely as a predicate of the highest, but the
Highest himself.
This heavy-weighing sense of the infinity of duration, and the urgency
of escaping from the weariness of thinking it, led to the construction
of the myth of the Creation. Man devised it so that he might be able to
say, “in the beginning.” But a new difficulty met him at the
threshold--as change must be in existence, “we cannot think of a change
from non-existence to existence.” His only refuge was to select some
apparently primordial, simple, homogeneous substance from which, by the
exertion of volition, things came into being. The one which most
naturally suggested itself was _water_.[167-1] This does in fact cover
and hide the land, and the act of creation was often described as the
emerging of the dry land from the water; it dissolves and wears away the
hard rock; and, diminishing all things, itself neither diminishes nor
increases. Therefore nearly all cosmogonical myths are but variations of
that one familiar to us all: “And God said, Let the waters under the
heaven be gathered together in one place, and let the dry land appear;
and it was so.” The manifestation of the primordial energy was supposed
to have been akin to that which is shown in organic reproduction. The
myths of the primeval egg from which life proceeded, of the mighty bird
typical of the Holy Spirit which “brooded” upon the waters, of Love
developing the Kosmos from the Chaos, of the bull bringing the world
from the waters, of Protogonus, the “egg-born,” the “multispermed,” and
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