FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194  
195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   >>   >|  
of the dead. The Persians had their Fravashis, the Greeks their [Greek: eidola], or rather their [Greek: theoi patrooi] and their [Greek: daimones], [Greek: esthloi, epichthonioi, phylakes thneton anthropon; hoi rha phylassousin te dikas kai schetlia erga, eera hessamenoi pante phoitontes ep' aian, ploutodotai] (Hesiodi Opera et Dies, vv. 122-126);[279] while among the Romans the _Lares familiares_ and the _Divi Manes_ were worshipped more zealously than any other gods.[280] Manu goes so far as to tell us in one place (III. 203): "An oblation by Brahmans to their ancestor transcends an oblation to the deities;" and yet we are told that no Indo-European nation seems to have made a religion of the worship of the dead. Such things ought really not to be, if there is to be any progress in historical research, and I cannot help thinking that what Mr. Herbert Spencer meant was probably no more than that some scholars did not admit that the worship of the dead formed the whole of the religion of any of the Indo-European nations. That, no doubt, is perfectly true, but it would be equally true, I believe, of almost any other religion. And on this point again the students of anthropology will learn more, I believe, from the Veda than from any other book. In the Veda the Pit_ri_s, or fathers, are invoked together with the Devas, or gods, but they are not confounded with them. The Devas never become Pit_ri_s, and though such adjectives as d e v a are sometimes applied to the Pit_ri_s, and they are raised to the rank of the older classes of Devas (Manu III. 192, 284, Ya_gn_avalkya I. 268), it is easy to see that the Pit_ri_s and Devas had each their independent origin, and that they represent two totally distinct phases of the human mind in the creation of its objects of worship. This is a lesson which ought never to be forgotten. We read in the Rig-Veda, VI. 52, 4: "May the rising Dawns protect me, may the flowing Rivers protect me, may the firm Mountains protect me, may the Fathers protect me at this invocation of the gods." Here nothing can be clearer than the separate existence of the Fathers, apart from the Dawns, the Rivers, and the Mountains, though they are included in one common Devahuti, however, or invocation of the gods. We must distinguish, however, from the very first, between two classes, or rather between two concepts of Fathers, the one comprising the distant, half-forgotten, and almos
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194  
195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

protect

 

worship

 

Fathers

 

religion

 
classes
 
Rivers
 
Mountains
 

forgotten

 
European
 

oblation


invocation

 

applied

 

raised

 

confounded

 

anthropology

 

students

 

fathers

 
invoked
 
adjectives
 

distinct


clearer
 

separate

 
existence
 

rising

 
flowing
 

included

 

common

 
comprising
 

distant

 
concepts

Devahuti

 
distinguish
 
origin
 
independent
 

represent

 
totally
 

phases

 

avalkya

 
lesson
 

creation


objects

 

ploutodotai

 

Hesiodi

 

Romans

 
zealously
 

worshipped

 
familiares
 

phoitontes

 

esthloi

 

daimones