The saviors of mankind

Front matter

.

a

Dav SERN x s

Preface

This is the overlooked and untold story of the world’s great prophets and their messages. In a sense it is the inevitable story, for the investigations of scholars and the splendid results from scientific procedure in other fields are rapidly making it certain that religion must be viewed as a social phenomenon, a construction growing out of a social situation and designed primarily to produce a social effect. As it is told within these pages it is necessarily incomplete, now that so many ages have passed and so much priceless evidence has forever perished, but it will serve perhaps to yield a new point of view and to indicate a field for further investigation.

The author wishes to acknowledge his very great indebtedness to Dr. James A. Kelsoe, whose course in Comparative Religion at Western Theological Seminary first called to his attention the profound forces which operate in the origin and development of every religion. The responsibility for the point of view and the opinions expressed in this work is, however, solely that of the author and is not to be assigned to his instructors.

v i ERY wa rt ¥ a ¢ f “

LY eae weve eniiyy (AN i

Introduction

The study of religion from the standpoint of its intellectual form subjects the work of the founders of the world’s religious systems to the norm of logical necessity alone. By this method we discover behind the special local manifestations in each religion the presence of common elements which owe their origin to the universal character of the human mind. All religious constructions have these points of similarity— thoughts, doctrines, and devices—which bear upon identical human situations. These indicate that mankind has a set of persistent problems due to the fact that man is what he is. And while there may be some variety in the answer given to each question, the answer is nevertheless universal, as if it were automatic and reflexive. To discover all this may shed some illumination upon human nature, and may show that religion is inevitable, but it can give us very little information about any particular religious system.

The reason for this is not far to seek—the investigation is too general, too abstract. The logical necessities will operate according to the nature of the human intellect, once the proper stimulus is present. But the special character of any religious construction depends entirely upon the source of stimulation and the peculiar way in which it expresses itself. We learn more about a religion, therefore, if we try to discover what the stimulus was than if we catalogue the various points at which it is similar to other faiths. And this follows just because it is the social and personal necessities which have furnished by far the larger portion of every prophet’s inspiration, | | x INTRODUCTION

A study of the theology of any religion is therefore a rather unfruitful procedure and yields little in the way of religious understanding. It omits from the account the intuitive, or mystic, element—the very factor which has constituted the élan vital of all great faiths. And it separates religious deliverances from those actual social forces which have always supplied the chief reason for the prophetic voice. When the background which will reveal both the prophet’s provocation and the purpose of his utterance is ignored, there is naturally little left except a rather pointless bit of human thinking.

Religions have always appeared in times of national crisis, and are to be regarded as the highest answer of an aspiring soul to the perils and needs of the hour. Aside from the abiding problems which arise from our common humanity, nearly all questions affecting our lot on earth grow out of the social conditions in which we find ourselves. Almost any faith will serve to minister to universal needs, and reformations of the faith are infrequent when society is undisturbed. But when a social order meets with disaster, when the tempo of life increases the centripetal strain, compensation must be found. The prophets of the race have always appeared at such times and have gone about the very practical business of saving the situation, Their problems are perhaps almost always universal, for man’s life rises and falls in cycles—emerges from poor and simple conditions to become luxurious, to erect complex societies, and to revert to simplicity and poverty again—but they are concrete and historical problems for all that. The prophet addresses himself to an actual historical peril and his recommendations are designed to remedy the conditions of a people who inhabit this earth.

How inadequate then has been the usual presentation of the religions of mankind. To state a few facts about a world religion, and to call attention to the present-day social depravity of its devotees, is utterly to miss the mark. Such a study gives us nothing of the background which called the

INTRODUCTION xi faith into being, ignores completely the tendency of all faiths to become formal when the crisis is well passed, and fails in its analysis of the social situation which has resulted more from irreligion than from the vision of the prophet in question. No real knowledge of the founder’s purpose can be gained when the historical situation, which he faced and for which his teachings afford relief, is wholly disregarded. And to compare the doctrines of the various world-religions with Christianity is to go just as wide of the mark. It is to substitute pure ideas for the religious values behind the doctrines. The method may have some value as a mental exercise, but it can give us no proper understanding of any of the religions involved.

The science of Comparative Religion so called has proved thus far a very doubtful quantity. Usually it is only comparative theology, or comparative ethics, and, even in its more pretentious moments, is little more than comparative ethnology. Very seldom does it discover a real basis for comparison. It has taken the great leaders and prophets violently out of the only conditions which can explain them, for the purpose of the prophet is always the salvation of his people in a given social situation and at a given period in that people’s social development. If we ask, “To what and from what does he try to save them?” we shall come face to face with something more than a sheaf of theological doctrines. We shall discover two forces at war in every conscientious man—the spirit of his group with all its handicaps, and the genius of the individual, pitted against the unfavorable features of society and Nature. This is no abstraction, but a living force struggling against a force no less powerful in the drama of self-expression and survival. Comparative Religion as a study fails largely because it compares doctrinal systems rather than the spirits of historical ages.

The problems of mankind are, to be sure, the same in all ages, yet are ever changing. The thinkers of the world are

Xl INTRODUCTION constantly entering new environments to think upon the old problems, but old problems modified by the exigencies of a new age. It is true that the old humanity periodically renews itself by fresh contacts with the heart of Reality and gains thus a knowledge more mystic than reasoned. But after such moments of personal and mental transfiguration it comes back to lowly everyday affairs and follows the old paths of the race. It looks through the ancient opinions and visions of its seers, and practices the antique habits of departed men. For all its renewed nature it accepts its heritage. It would therefore be utterly impossible for the native Persian to feel and think upon any given question in identically the way a Greek or a Chinese would do. Thus in spite of the similarity to be found in all human thinking the world around, there is a difference, and one that counts heavily against the usual procedure in Comparative Religion. To deprive the several religions of all dissimilar elements is to screen out just the facts which are peculiar to each national group and to lose thereby the very special situation which each religion was designed to meet.

The historical and social approach to the study of any religion is therefore of paramount importance. If any comparisons are to be drawn, they should follow after the historical and social materials have been found and have been well digested. Perhaps only the broadest general statements will be permissible in any case, for it is not easy to compare two widely separated ages within the same nation or to rate the merit of the several leaders involved. One finds it exceedingly difficult to compare George Washington and Ulysses S. Grant; and still more difficult to compare Gladstone and Lincoln. Yet the difficulties to be surmounted by the conventional method of Comparative Religion are even more disconcerting. Religious conclusions based upon an anatomical study of the brains of Confucius and Moses could scarcely be less absurd.

Thus it is clear that environment becomes a profound fac-

INTRODUCTION xill tor in determining the point and purpose of every religion. It supplies the prophet with his stage of action, it puts a problem to his mind, and it contains within itself the germ of a solution. The prophet sees deeply enough to glimpse the metaphysical principles involved and to read the special force of universal truth as it expresses itself in his time and nation. In other words, he goes to the fount of all truth and finds in the presence of deity the answer he makes to his nation’s perplexities. To feel thus a people’s afflictions and to find and support a remedy with uncompromising loyalty, is to exercise the prophetic gift. But it is the unfavorable nature of the environment which begins the process of prophet-making and supplies the radius to all prophetic utterance.

The personalities presented in this study are approached from the standpoint of the historical and social problems of their respective nations. In this way it is possible to discover the concrete nature of religion and to determine with greater certainty those factors which contribute to the vogue of a world-faith. By this approach the prophet is rescued from the stigma of impracticability, is permitted to join again the ranks of his fellow mortals, and is allowed to contribute his vision to the totality of human wisdom. We are enabled also to behold the reasons for the prophet’s failure when he fails, and to gauge the several devices and forces which have made possible any success he may have achieved. We shall never be able to understand the true nature and function of a religion until we are able to reconstruct the age in which it made its appearance. Nothing so pretentious can be claimed for this story of religion, but it is hoped that the reader will gain from it an inspiration to lift the curtain of oblivion which hides from him the true worth of all his beliefs.

One ought to secure from any correct appraisal of the age of each prophet materials for a new science and philosophy of religion. Such a result should give us new methods for combatting the degeneracy which overtakes all societies. The

XiV INTRODUCTION whole regenerative force of belief may then be presented with greater certainty to achieve deeper and more general results, And a new era of spiritual discovery should replace the feeling that nothing further can now be added to revelation. Scientific procedure, such as characterizes the search for the ideals and purposes of secular education, will replace pious imaginings, and sane and proved methods will supplant those cheap devices which now litter the religious educational field. We shall find the true purpose of religion and set about the construction of an educational procedure which will stamp it indelibly upon the race. This will call for a constant succession of new prophets as the race unfolds its genius and emerges into the light of new ages of the world. It is the purpose of this book only to suggest a way to this lofty enterprise.

Contents

PREFACE

INTRODUCTION

. Lao-Tzz

. ConFuctus

. IsatAH OF BABYLON . . SOCRATES

. Jesus oF NAZARETH . SAUL OF Tarsus ae yep 0 hd Tepes w? i.

wie

CHAPTER I Lao-TzE

When the Chinese came from Central Asia to China in about 3000 B.c. they found that another race had preceded them. This first eastward moving wave of peoples had penetrated the land between the Yang Tse and the Hwang Ho rivers, and in this latitude which we are accustomed to speak of as “the belt of power” had established those institutions, arts, and views of government which have continued with but slight modification even to this day. The Chinese succeeded in subjugating the territory between the two rivers eastward to the sea, but they were too few in number to enforce at once any considerable basic change in the civilization they had conquered.

The aborigines, variously mentioned by the Annals of the Chinese as the Great Mung, the Lung, the Pu, and the Lao Shan peoples, continued to dwell in the land and to perpetuate their culture and institutions until 1000 av. Up to the sixth century B.c. the coming of the Chinese had done little more than to establish a loose confederacy of the native states or kingdoms. The rulers of these states, therefore, continued in office from father to son with but slight embarrassment from the Chinese overlordship.

But somewhere near the ninth century s.c. the nines who had multiplied to vast numbers, began to press eastward and southward and to occupy lands among the aborigines. Three hundred years of this quiet infiltration of the conquerors developed within the native states a tense racial situa-

I tion. The native princes and peoples resented these encroachments. Friction and bitterness led to frequent armed oppositions on the part of the Lao, but these wars always terminated with the triumph of the Chinese.

When one of the native armies would be defeated it would march out of the country with its possessions and seek a new home. It would conquer the peoples in the territory it was forced to occupy, and thus the Lao in this way came finally to rule all Asia south of the Yang Tse and east of India. Between the Yang Tse and the Hwang Ho several millions of the Lao remained to supply perhaps the largest single element in the present Chinese race-stock. Thus the Chinese became a composite people with institutions and customs very much like those of the peoples they had only apparently absorbed.

It was inevitable that the native princes who saw the fate of their brother rulers, through the encroachments of the Chinese, should attempt to make the most of privileges destined to be of short duration. Those who did not possess the vigor to lead their people forth to find a new home gave themselves up to licentiousness and the effort to live well while they could. They became corrupt, greedy, and tyrannical. This state of vice and oppression naturally outraged the best minds among the native peoples and caused the more courageous ones to demand a remedy. |

Thus after the first great migration of the Lao, which took place early in the sixth century s.c., those of the race who remained north of the Yang Tse found themselves in a condition of social turmoil and strife. The self-assertiveness of the native peoples and the oppressive demands of the conquerors made the situation well-nigh intolerable. It was during this period that the great teachers appeared who have shaped the thought and religion of present-day China. There is strong evidence in nearly every case to support the belief that these teachers were members of the subjugated race. Lao-Tze perhaps reveals his race by his name; Mencius, or Mung-Tze, is probably a member of the Great Mung race; and Confucius was born in the little independent kingdom of Lu, a state which was undoubtedly composed of the Lu tribe of the Lao peoples.

Renan in one of his essays calls attention to the Celtic contribution to legend and literature and points out the many spiritual contributions of the conquered. Greece fell but she gave to her conquerors the impulse to, and substance of, philosophy and religion. We encounter the same thing in ancient China. The conquered Lao supplied to the composite race the philosophy and religion which it should ever afterwards hold. And what is more natural? That which is truly indigenous should by right come from that race which supplies the preponderant element to the new stock.

When adversity, strife, cruelty, loss, and defeat overtake a race the hopelessness of the social condition does not permit men of genius to enjoy the privileges of external self-realization. The great minds are therefore forced to turn within themselves and to call upon the intellectual and imaginative faculties for salvation. The inner harmony and peace thus secured lead naturally to the construction of an imagined social condition in which these inner achievements may be realized by all. Thus philosophy, religion, and social reformation come to exist. Often, perhaps almost always, the dream outruns the possibility of even the most remote realization by society as a whole. A few will accept the dream, but the great mass of the population will always remain unevangelized. The teacher may become discouraged because of the ebb and flow of discipleship attending popular adjustment. He may in despair go into exile, or, if blessed with much fortitude of

*Lao is rendered by several writers as meaning “Old,” but it probably means “ancient,” “aboriginal.” Originally it perhaps meant the Lao people. Lacouperie suggests that the names have been masked to save Chinese dignity. A glance at the names will show very little masking if due allowance is made for Chinese transliteration.

spirit, continue on as the pathetic figure of a lost or impractical cause.

The above is not always, of course, the exact history of the origin of philosophy and religion, but the social condition is, without doubt, the clue which will help us to account for the appearance of practically every great system of religious thought. The prophet appears in the days of decadence. Out of the buoyancy of the human soul in rebellion against its lot, the system comes to be. It is the profound reaction of reason and righteousness, the long-considered answer, to the intolerable condition of spiritual defeat. The recommendations may touch upon the universal facts of life and destiny, but the prescriptions almost always bear marks which show that they are aimed at an immediate social need.

Especially is this true of the teachers who appeared in ancient China during that period of social unrest due to the constant pressure of the conquerors. The immediate situation bulked so large in the minds of these sages that their teachings, while possessing many universal elements, were devised chiefly to meet the affairs of the moment. There is in the writings of each the unmistakable shadow of social policy, and their recommendations are vibrant with life just because they advise an attitude calculated to meet the emergencies of the hour. !

One may very properly ask how it would be possible for a member of a conquered race to formulate a teaching that would be acceptable to his conquerors. The answer may be found in the depth and richness of the teaching, the superiority it possesses over any teaching brought by the conquerors. Greek art, philosophy, and religion did make themselves acceptable to the Romans. And Christianity, after many adversities, achieved the same result. If these arts and systems of thought could gain the day by the sheer force of their superiority, how much more would the teachings of the Lao philosophers appeal to a race having souls that were of the

- predominant Lao stock. The composite Chinese therefore found these teachings more congenial to him than pure Chinese teachings, which could appeal at the most to only a fraction of his being. The long-suppressed Lao nature would rise up with a shout to greet the native voice of its deliverance. A Lao philosopher would be acceptable just because the soul of the new race was a Lao soul.

The first of these teachers was Lao-Tze. Little is known of his acts or of his manner of life. It is generally believed that he was born about 600 B.c., and the date is fixed by some at 604 B.c. Practically all of his biographers include the account of the interview between the aged Lao-Tze and the young Confucius, The account is of great significance in two ways. First, it brings together the system of Lao-Tze and the ideas of Confucius, and shows them to be in conflict. Second, it reveals a weakness in the methods of Lao-Tze, and one that will have a far-reaching influence upon their future as a social force. He is reported to have treated Confucius with an austerity which amounted almost to contempt. This is often the attitude of the ripened wisdom of age to the rather fresh visions of youth. But there is more than a matter of age between these men. Lao-Tze knows something of the views of Confucius, and from his more profound height is antagonistic to what he considers the shallow practicality of Confucius. The truth which Confucius sees supplies its own credential and gives to the younger man an assurance which nettles the old sage. He replies to Confucius’ question with the advice, “Put away, sir, your proud air and many desires, your plausibility and ungoverned will. These are of no advantage to you.”

This advice is sound enough, but it will not do for this questing age that has stolen upon the old philosopher while he has been preoccupied with the internal matters of the self. There is a social state in which it is advisable to do no more than eat, drink, and walk softly. But that attitude loses its virtue when the customs, arts, and indigenous views of a race are dying with the passing generation. Action for the preservation of native customs may become the better policy, and Confucius for all his shallow doctrines has grasped this truth. The younger man wisely overlooks the scorn of Lao- Tze and finds unerringly the rent in the armor. He turns away saying, “I know how birds fly, fishes swim, and animals run. Yet the runner may be snared, the swimmer hooked, and the flier shot. But there is the dragon. I cannot tell how he mounts on the wind through the clouds, and rises to heaven. To-day I have seen Lao-Tze, and I can only compare him to the dragon.” This is no compliment to Lao-Tze. His uncommunicativeness leaves him unintelligible and his philosophical downrightness prevents his acceptance of a wholesome expediency. There has been some doubt as to the authenticity of this interview, but there need not be. This is exactly what would have been said at such a meeting. _

We are further told that Lao-Tze was the keeper of the treasury of the imperial court, and that in his old age he resigned and set out for the West. On reaching the frontier, he was asked by the guard to commit his teachings to writing before withdrawing from the world. His compliance with this request resulted in the Tao Te Ching.

This information is meager enough, and at first seems too little to enable us to construct a worthy biography. But with the aid of his teachings it will suffice. Lao-Tze was not a man of action. At his desk in the treasury he performed all the physical action his nature required. The rest of his vital movements may be found in the profound philosophy which he formulated. His story, like that of Kant, consists of the walk every day and the endless staring at a wall.

The first deep stirring of the mind of Lao-Tze began when he noted the amount of taxes collected and saw the items of royal expense. The money he handled had been made sacred by the tears of the people who had been deprived of personal comforts. As he watched the lavish squandering of this wealth by his sovereign his soul rose in protest, and he began to look for a remedy. The prince’s will was absolute. Therefore, the first step in reformation must meet the unjust desires of the prince. But there was the conqueror and his demands; he too must be taught to curb his desires.

The more Lao-Tze pondered this principle the more he saw that it was applicable to all men. If the people could be made content with the simple life, they would be happy in their poverty. If they could be taught to be less outspoken, less given to self-seeking, they would not come into conflict with the conqueror. Action and word helped none. Was not a man always himself? Could anything deprive him of his soul except his uncurbed desires and his undiplomatic utterances? Lao-Tze knew that he had kept his position by silence when his soul had been deeply outraged. He had been able to turn within himself and to find there a peace which the prince could not find with all his wealth. If men would get rid of desire there would be peace within and without. Thus originated the social policy and the personal code which made the story of Lao-Tze the briefest of all biographies.

This social policy which seems to grow so naturally out of the broodings of Lao-Tze is not altogether the result of intellectual struggle. If he had been a man of more rash and daring nature, he would have formulated from the same situation a more vigorous policy. In fact, many men had already done so. They had all died in battle against the Chinese, or had gone to join those kindred spirits who had been compelled to migrate south of the Yang Tse. Those who had remained behind in the old home of the race were of docile mold and had arrived at less troublesome conclusions. The teachings of Lao-Tze therefore presuppose the popular decision to stay at home, and are designed to make that decision tolerable.

From the insight afforded by the above set of facts we may guess with no little accuracy as to the events of the early life of Lao-Tze. Men of quiet temper, who construct quietist philosophies, do not achieve their calm souls. They are born as they are. And we shall not go far astray by filling in the silence of history with the statement that Lao-Tze was a quiet, thoughtful, industrious youth who kept well within the prevailing customs of his people. His dependability, honesty, and industry gained for him very early many positions of trust. And his early life and character were such as to bring him at last to the position of King’s treasurer. By the same token his studious habits had prepared him for the rédle of the philosopher, and his mystical nature determined the kind of philosopher he would be.

This view of his youth is confirmed by the events of the middle years of his life. Men who had known him in his student days came to talk with him just because they knew that he had always been a painstaking student. From these quiet conversations grew his later reputation. His friends, who were worthy of him, were amazed at his understanding and began to speak openly in his praise. Students began to flock to him to attend the forums he no doubt conducted after business hours. And during the long years in which this manner of life continued there were thousands of young men to pass under his instruction. It was this practice of teaching which built up the reputation which brought Confucius to interview him.

Thus the years passed quietly and with the sameness which is characteristic of Chinese life to-day. Having learned the story of one day in the life of the sage, we know the story of all his days; for he conducted his affairs with the regularity of a clock. There was nothing to record at great length, just because there was nothing unusual about him except his rare intellectual power.

But there were new forces abroad in the land toward the close of his life. It is the nature of youth to seek for action.

The austere quietism of Lao-Tze ceased to recommend itself to the young, and already the social situation had become so ameliorated that an extreme caution was unnecessary. The young men who were born under the new régime, many of them of mixed blood, were above suspicion. The school of Lao-Tze saw its attendance dwindle until only those who sought philosophy for philosophy’s sake were in attendance. And it did not occur to these to think of their master as a great social leader.

Furthermore, the general lukewarmness of the prince toward the views of his treasurer continued to prevail. The monarch showed no tendency toward either repentance or the curtailment of his expenditures. Lao-Tze could see that as a reformer he was losing ground. Either from disgust, or from personal pride, he resigned his post and withdrew from the land. At the border he came up with an official who knew his worth, a man who perhaps had been one of his pupils. This official, being well acquainted with the oral method of instruction that Lao-Tze had used, saw that the great teaching would now be lost. He besought the sage to write out his principles for the good of humanity before leaving the land. There is about this request an irony which shall repeat itself many times hereafter in the world’s history. Lao-Tze has been rejected by his people, and, but for the request of this official at the border, the world would have lost all knowledge of him.