hip.
But it has been shown that his attempt to establish a middle stage, to
demonstrate that the worshipped ancestor was really the Red Dawn, is not
logical nor convincing. Even if that middle stage were established, it
is a far cry from the worship of Dawn (supposed by the Australians to be
a woman of bad character in a cloak of red' possum-skin) to the adoration
of the Infinite. Our own argument has been successful if we have shown
that there are not only two possible schools of mythological
interpretation--the Euhemeristic, led by Mr. Spencer, and the
Philological, led by Mr. Max Muller. We have seen that it is possible to
explain the legend of Tsui Goab without either believing him to have been
a real historical person (as Mr. Spencer may perhaps believe), or his
myth to have been the result of a 'disease of language' as Mr. Muller
supposes. We have explained the legend and worship of a supposed dead
conjurer as natural to a race which believes in conjurers and worships
dead men. Whether he was merely an ideal ancestor and warrior, or
whether an actual man has been invested with what divine qualities Tsui
Goab enjoys, it is impossible to say; but, if he ever lived, he has long
been adorned with ideal qualities and virtues which he never possessed.
The conception of the powerful ancestral ghost has been heightened and
adorned with some novel attributes of power: the conception of the
Infinite has not been degraded, by forgetfulness of language, to the
estate of an ancestral ghost with a game leg.
* * * * *
If this view be correct, myth is the result of thought, far more than of
a disease of language. The comparative importance of language and
thought was settled long ago, in our sense, by no less a person than
Pragapati, the Sanskrit Master of Life.
'Now a dispute once took place between Mind and Speech, as to which was
the better of the two. Both Mind and Speech said, "I am excellent!" Mind
said, "Surely I am better than thou, for thou dost not speak anything
that is not understood by me; and since thou art only an imitator of what
is done by me and a follower in my wake, I am surely better than thou!"
Speech said, "Surely I am better than thou, for what thou knowest I make
known, I communicate." They went to appeal to Pragapati for his
decision. He (Pragapati) decided in favour of Mind, saying (to Speech),
"Mind is indeed better than thou, for thou art an imitator of its deeds,
and a follower in its
|