the Satanic theory, which is the most plausible of the two. For if the absolute existence of an evil one be denied, we are forced to conceive God as a clumsy contriver of nature, and an unjust ruler of the universe. Two difficulties at at once start up, and refuse to be ignored.

The one is this. An excessive amount of pain is made use of to bring about the object in view.

The other is this. Those who suffer are not always those who learn by their experience.

It is evident to all men that evil has a place in the economy of nature, and that it is productive of good in the long run; but it is also apparent that the same amount of good might have been produced without causing suffering to any one. For instance: we have already quoted the hurricane. It is obvious that the agitation of the air necessary for the preservation of its salubrity might be effected without the destruction of acres of wheat, and burying fifty families under the ruins of their houses. The denier of absolute evil argues: "The little girl, learning the limit between the Me and Not-me, mistakes and burns her fingers in the candle's flame; the great nation learning the limits between the just and the unjust, or the expedient and the unprofitable, mistakes and loses millions of men." But is not Fanny's burn a clumsy expedient for teaching her the lesson? The momentary pang would suffice, and the subsequent blisters are so much de trop. Besides, the amount of pain endured is not regulated so as nicely to balance the importance of the aim. Man suffers excruciating torture from a decayed tooth, to teach him what? not to sweeten his tea. He suffers scarce a pang when he is shot through the heart. He suffers nothing when he takes laudanum.

And, secondly, men suffer through the fault of others. A

little child in its mother's absence plays with matches, and is burnt to death. It cannot profit by its experience, for its life is cut short. But its mother is taught to be more prudent. Alas! the exquisite suffering of the child leads only to make Mrs. Brown put the match-box on the chimneypiece instead of on the table. The pain was inflicted on the child for the advantage of the mother. That is, God tortures A that B may be the wiser. The King of Bokhara threw an European traveller into a trough full of sheep-ticks, and laughed to watch the vermin fatten on Frankish blood. According to the denier of absolute evil, this atrocious act was according to God's providence, in order that the Tartars might learn to revolt against an autocracy and set up a constitutional government. Unfortunately for the argument, the way in which Divine Wisdom set to work is roundabout in the extreme.

Of what profit are the pangs of maternity and the throes of death? They make none the wiser and better. If we descend from the world of man to that of beasts, we see poor brutes, to whom the faculty of profiting by experience is denied, suffering cruel torments for no conceivable purpose. A ruffian amused his vulgar mind the other day by lowering a dog inch by inch into a cauldron of boiling vitriol. How did it profit dog or man?

The fact is, that there is a vast amount of pain in the world which is not remedial, and much that is remedial, is not so to those who are racked by it.

It has been shown in a former chapter how that the idea of God rose from one of mere physical force into the region of metaphysics, and from that passed into the moral sphere.

The idea of the evil one has passed through a similar

series of stages; but as the idea of God became one of the perfection of goodness, the idea of Satan became one of the perfection of evil. Man woke up and divided the light from the darkness, and the darkness condensed before the light, as it brightened, into the deepest night. The higher soared the conception of God, the lower dived the conception of Satan. A mediæval theologian called the devil the ape of God, because he copied Him in his acts, but did nothing well. He may be better designated as the shadow of God, owing his personality to God, objected from God, of God and by God, and yet never God.

CHAPTER XVII

ASCETICISM AND MYSTICISM

Ascetic instinct united with religious instinct-Buddhist ascetics-Asceticism of the Brahman and Mohammedan-Egyptian abstemiousnessJewish and Ssabian fasts-Fasting among Red Indians, and Peruvians, and Mexicans-Motives for practising austerities-Facts, not motives, important-Self-denial a law of human nature; Reason why-Polarization of force-All reformers ascetics-Asceticism may lead to polarization of force on mind or on feelings-Buddhism an instance of the former; its deficiencies-Christian mysticism an instance of the latter; its mischievous effects.

THE

HE ascetic instinct is intimately united with the religious instinct.

There is scarcely a religion of ancient and modern times, certain forms of Protestantism excepted, that does not recognise asceticism as an element in its system. The prevalence of asceticism throughout the world, and the respect it attracts, make it necessary for us to inquire here what is its mainspring and why it has exerted such influence. The principle of asceticism is abstinence from lawful pleasures, the subordination of certain faculties to others, and the restraint of certain propensities.

These pleasures are sensual, the propensities are animal, and the faculties actually or supposititiously inferior to other faculties.

Buddha taught his disciples a religion of abstinence. He gave five precepts for all men: Not to kill, not to steal, not to commit adultery, not to lie, not to be drunken. Five for professed disciples: To abstain from food out of season, from dances, songs, and music, from personal ornaments and perfumes, from soft and luxurious couches, and from money. To those further advanced in the religious life he enjoined twelve ordinances:-1. To wear only rags cast away by men in the world. 2. To wear only of these rags sufficient to serve as short skirt, nightshirt, and cape. 3. Of these to wear the cape only on one shoulder. 4. To live only on alms. 5. To take only one meal daily. 6. And that before noon. 7. To live in solitary places, and only to enter a town to ask alms. 8. To take no shelter but the foliage of trees. 9. To take rest seated at the foot of a tree. 10. And so to sleep, the back against the tree, and without lying down. 11. Not to move the carpet from place to place. 12. And to meditate nightly among the tombs on the transitoriness of all human things. All members of the community who forsook the world were called Sramána, "Victors over self."

Brahmanism has also its order of ascetics. From the earliest Vaidic age, Hindú thought turned to self-immolation, and annihilation of the carnal desires. "As the practised swimmer parts with his last cork or bladder, so must the soul of the ascetic in due course part with every object, and at length meditate without an object at all."1 Such are the principles of the Yoga school of Hindú philosophy, in which the Yogin, or devotee, aspires by renunciation of everything that can make life enjoyable, to perfect union with the Supreme Spirit.

Mohammedanism has its fakirs, subduing the flesh by 1 Aphorisms of the Yoga, i § 17; ed. Ballantyne.