"There is no attribute of God which is not either borrowed

Produced by Digital & Multimedia Center, Michigan State

University Libraries, Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, Sankar

Viswanathan, and Distributed Proofreaders Europe at

http://dp.rastko.net

PERCY BYSSHE SHELLEY

AS A

PHILOSOPHER AND REFORMER.

BY

CHARLES SOTHERAN.

_INCLUDING AN ORIGINAL SONNET_

BY

CHARLES W. FREDERICKSON

TOGETHER WITH

A PORTRAIT OF SHELLEY AND A VIEW OF HIS TOMB.

"Let us See the Truth, whatever that may be."--_Shelley_, 1822.

_NEW YORK_.

CHARLES P. SOMERBY, 139 EIGHTH STREET.

1876.

Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1876,

by Charles Sotheran,

In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.

* * * * *

TO

CHARLES WILLIAM FREDERICKSON,

OF NEW YORK.

DEAR FRIEND:

As in ancient times, none were allowed participation in the Higher

Mysteries, without having proved their fitness for the reception of

esoteric truth, so in these days only those seem to be permitted to

breathe the hidden essence in Shelley, who have realized the acute

phases of spiritality. Among the few who have enjoyed these bi-fold

gifts, none have had more fortuitous experience than yourself, to whom

I now take the liberty of dedicating this volume.

Yours fraternally,

CHARLES SOTHERAN.

_December_, 1875.

[Illustration: VIEW OF SHELLEY'S TOMB, IN THE

PROTESTANT CEMETERY, AT ROME. FROM A SKETCH BY A.J. STRUTT.]

* * * * *

"To see the sun shining on its bright grass, and hear the whispering

of the wind among the leaves of the trees, which have overgrown the

tomb of Cestius, and the soil which is stirring in the sun-warm earth,

and to mark the tombs, mostly of women and young children, who, buried

there, we might, if we were to die, desire a sleep they seem to

sleep."--SHELLEY.

To the Memory

OF

PERCY BYSSHE SHELLEY,

BY

CHARLES W. FREDERICKSON.

Amid the ruins of majestic Rome,

That told the story of its countless years,

I stood, and wondered by the silent dust

Of the "Eternal Child." Oh, Shelley!

To me it was not given to know thy face,

Save through the mirrored pages of thy works;

Those whisper'd words of wood and wave, are to mine ears,

Sweet as the music of ocean's roar, that breaks on sheltered shores.

Thy sterner words of Justice, Love and Truth,

Will to the struggling soul a beacon prove,

And barrier against the waves of tyranny and craft.

Then rest, "_Cor Cordium_," and though thy life

Was brief in point of years, its memory will outlive

The column'd monuments around thy tomb.

* * * * *

NEW YORK, _Nov_. 25, 1875.

MY DEAR SOTHERAN:--

The copy of the lines on our Beloved-Poet, which you requested, are

entirely at your service--make what use of them you please.

Yours, sincerely,

C.W. FREDERICKSON.

PERCY BYSSHE SHELLEY, AS A PHILOSOPHER AND REFORMER.

A PAPER READ BEFORE THE NEW YORK LIBERAL CLUB, ON FRIDAY, AUGUST 6TH,

1875.

"Let us see the Truth, whatever that may be."--SHELLEY, 1822.

_Mr. Vice-President and Members of the Liberal Club_:

"The Blood of the Martyr is the Seed of the Church." Persecution ever

fails in accomplishing its desired ends, and as a rule lays the

foundations broad and deep for the triumph of the objects of and

principles inculcated by the persecuted.

Driven from their homes by fanatical tyranny, not permitted to worship

as they thought fit, a band of noble and earnest, yet on some points

mistaken men, were, a little over two hundred and fifty years ago,

landed on this continent from the good ship "Mayflower." The "Pilgrim

Fathers" were, in their native land, refused liberty of conscience and

freedom of discussion; their apparent loss was our gain, for if it had

not been for that despotism, and the corresponding re-action, which

made those stern old zealots give to others many of the inalienable

rights of liberty denied to themselves, you and I could not to-night

perhaps be allowed to meet face to face, without fear, to discuss

metaphysical and social questions in their broadest aspects, without

the civil or theological powers intervening to close our mouths.

"Fragile in health and frame; of the purest habits in morals; full of

devoted generosity and universal kindness; glowing with ardor to attain

wisdom; resolved at every personal sacrifice to do right; burning with a

desire for affection and sympathy," a boy-under-graduate of Oxford,

described as of tall, delicate, and fragile figure, with large and

lively eyes, with expressive, beautiful and feminine features, with head

covered with long, brown hair, of gracefulness and simplicity of manner,

the heir to a title and the representation of one of the most ancient

English families, which numbered Sir Philip Sidney on its roll of

illustrious names, just sixty-four years ago, and in this nineteenth

century, for no licentiousness, violence, or dishonor, but, for his

refusal to criminate himself or inculpate friends, was, without trial,

expelled by learned divines from his university for writing an

argumentative thesis, which, if it had been the work of some Greek

philosopher, would have been hailed by his judges as a fine specimen of

profound analytical abstruseness--for that expulsion are we the debtors

to theological charity and tolerance for "Queen Mab."

Excommunicated by a mercenary and abject priesthood, cast off by a

savage father, the admirer of that gloomy theology founded by the

murderer of Michael Servetus, and charged by his jealous brother

writers as one of the founders of a Satanic School, for neither

immorality of life nor breach of the parental relation, but for

heterodoxy to an expiring system of dogmatism, and for acting on and

asserting the right of man to think and judge for himself, a father

was to have two children torn from him, in the sacred name of law and

justice, by the principal adviser of a dying madman, "Defender of the

Faith, by Law Established," and by us despised as the self-willed

tyrant, who lost America and poured out human blood like water to

gratify his lust of power. By that Lord Chancellor whose cold,

impassive statue has a place in Westminster Abbey, where Byron's was

refused admittance, and whose memory, when that stone has crumbled

into dust, will live as one who furnished an example for execrable

tyranny over the parental tie, and that Lord Eldon whom an outraged

father curses in imperishable verse:

"By thy most impious hell, and all its terrors;

By all the grief, the madness and the guilt

Of thine impostures, which must be _their_ errors,

That sand on which thy crumbling power is built;

* * * * *

By all the hate which checks a father's love;

By all the scorn which kills a father's care;

By those most impious hands that dared remove

Nature's high bounds--by thee, and by despair.

"Yes, the despair which bids a father groan,

And cry, 'my children are no longer mine.

The blood within those veins may be mine own,

But, tyrant, their polluted souls are thine.'

"I curse thee, though I hate thee not. O slave!

If thou could'st quench the earth consuming hell

Of which thou art a demon, on thy grave

This curse should be a blessing. Fare thee well."

Sad as it is to contemplate any human being in his agony making use of

such language to another; and however much we may sympathize with the

poet, yet we cannot but have inwardly a feeling of rejoicing; for, if

it had not been for this unheard of villainy, we should probably never

have had the other magnificent poetry and prose of Percy Bysshe

Shelley composed during his self-imposed ostracism, and which furnish

such glorious thoughts for the philosopher, and keen trenchant weapons

for the reformer.

Have any of my hearers ever stood, in the calm of a summer evening, in

Shelley's native land, listening to the lovely warble of the

nightingale, making earth joyful with its unpremeditated strains, and

the woods re-echo with its melody? Or gazed upwards with anxious ken

towards the skylark careering in the "blue ether," far above this

sublunary sphere of gross, sensual earth, there straining after

immortality, and

"Like a poet hidden,

In the light of thought,

Singing hymns unbidden,

Till the world is wrought

To sympathy with hopes and fears, it heeded not,"

pouring out such bursts of song as to make one almost worship and

credit the fables, taught in childhood at our mothers' knees, of the

angelic symphonies of heavenly choirs. Such was the poetry of Shelley;

and as the music of the nightingale or the skylark is far exceeding in

excellence that of the other members of the feathered kingdom, so does

Shelley rank as a poet far above all other poets, making even the poet

of nature, the great Wordsworth himself, confess that Shelley was

indeed the master of harmonious verse in our modern literature. It is

broadly laid down in the Marvinian theory that all poets are insane. I

would much like to break a lance with the learned Professor of

Psychology and Medical Jurisprudence; but as the overthrow of this

dogma does not come within the scope of my essay, I would suggest to

those who may have been influenced by that paper to read Shelley's

"Defence of Poetry." I shall quote two extracts therefrom, each

pertinent to my subject. The first describes the function of the poet:

"But poets, or those who imagine and express this

indestructible order, are not only the authors of language

and of music, of the dance, and architecture, and statuary,

and painting; they are the institutors of laws, and the

founders of civil society, and the inventors of the arts of

life, and the teachers, who draw into a certain propinquity

with the beautiful and the true, that partial apprehension

of the agencies of the invisible world, which is called

religion."

The other is in extension of the same idea, and concludes the essay:

"Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration;

the mirrors of the gigantic shadows which futurity casts

upon the present; the words which express what they

understand not; the trumpets which sing to battle and feel

not what they inspire; the influence which is moved not, but

moves. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the

world."

I have no hesitation in saying that for treating Shelley as a

philosopher, I shall be attacked with great "positivism" by the

disciples[A] of manufacturers of bran-new Brummagen philosophies dug

out of Aristotelian and other depths to which are added new thoughts,

not their own. The reason which David Masson offers in his "Recent

British Philosophy" for placing Alfred Tennyson among the same class

is equally applicable now:

[Footnote A: If Diogenes or Socrates, leaving High Olympus and sweet

converse with the immortals, were to condescend to visit New York some

Friday evening. I am sadly afraid they would be astounded at many of

their would-be brothers in philosophy. On seeing the travestie of

ancient academies and groves where the schools used to congregate, the

dialogues consisting of bald atheism under sheep's clothing to trap

the unwary, and termed "The _Religion_ of Humanity," of abuse and

personality in lieu of argument, of buffoonery called wit, of airing

pet hobbies alien to the subject instead of disputating, of shouting

vulgar claptrap instead of rhetoric, etc.--I sadly fear these stout

old Greeks, having power for the nonce, would, throwing philosophy to

the dogs in a moment of paroxysmal indignation, despite physiognomies

trained to resemble their own, have these fellows casked up in tubs

without lanterns, but with the appropriate "snuffers," fit emblems of

their faiths, and dropped far outside Sandy Hook. A proper finale to

the vapid utterance made by one of these gentry that all "Reformers

should be annihilated," Imagine Plato or Epicurus offering such a

suggestion. O tempora! O mores!]

"To those who are too strongly possessed with our common habit of

classifying writers into kinds, as historians, poets, scientific and

speculative writers, and so on, it may seem strange to include Mr.

Tennyson in this list. But as I have advisedly referred to Wordsworth

as one of the representatives and powers of British philosophy in the

age immediately past, so I advisedly named Tennyson as succeeding him

in the same character. Though it is not power of speculative reason

alone that constitutes a poet, is it not felt that the worth of a poet

essentially is measured by the depth and amount of his speculative

reason? Even popularly, do we not speak of every great poet as the

exponent of the spirit of his age? What else can this mean than that

the philosophy of his age, its spirit and heart in relation to all the

great elemental problems, find expression in his verse? Hence I ought

to include other poets in this list, and more particularly Mr.

Browning and Mrs. Browning, and the late Mr. Clough. But let the

mention of Mr. Tennyson suggest such other names, and stand as a

sufficient protest against our absurd habit of omitting such in a

connection like the present. As if, forsooth, when a writer passed

into verse, he were to be abandoned as utterly out of calculable

relationship to all on this side of the boundary, and no account were

to be taken of his thoughts and doings, except in a kind of curious

appendix at the end of the general register? What if philosophy, at a

certain extreme range, and of a certain kind, tends of necessity to

pass into poesy, and can hardly help being passionate and metrical? If

so, might not the omission of poets, purely as being such, from a

conspectus of the speculative writers of any time, lead to erroneous

conclusions, by giving an undue prominence in the estimate of all such

philosophizing as could most easily, by its nature, refrain from

passionate or poetic expression? Thus, would philosophy, or one kind

of philosophy in comparison with another, have seemed to had been in

such a diminished condition in Britain about the year 1830, if critics

had been in the habit of counting Wordsworth in the philosophic list

as well as Coleridge, Mackintosh, Bentham, and James Mill? Was there

not more of what you might call Spinozaism in Wordsworth than even in

Coleridge, who spoke more of Spinoza? But that hardly needs all this

justification, so far as Mr. Tennyson is concerned, of our reckoning

_him_ in the present list. He that would exclude In "Memoriam" (1850)

and "Maud" (1855) from the conspectus of the philosophical literature

of our time, has yet to learn what philosophy is. Whatever else "In

Memoriam" may be, it is a manual for many of the latest hints and

questions in British Metaphysics."

The soi-disant philosophers and classifiers of the sciences and arts

who will not permit such poets as Shelley and Tennyson to be put in

the category of philosophers, remind one very forcibly of the passage

in Macbeth: "The earth has bubbles, as the water has, and these are of

them!"

As a poet and not as a poet, as an acknowledged legislator for the

race, as a philosopher, (a searcher after, or lover of wisdom) and as

a political and social reformer, it is my intention to treat Shelley

this evening, and having finished my prefatory remarks, will now

regard him in those attributes which peculiarly should enshrine him in

your hearts and mine.

The philosophical theories of advanced thinkers are always tinged with

the reflex of that which called them forth, or impeded them in their

development, consequently social bondage and the "anarch custom" being

always present to Shelley, the great idea ever uppermost to him was

that true happiness is only attainable in perfect freedom: the

atrocious system of fagging, now almost extinct in the English Public

Schools and the tyrannical venality of ushers, deeply impressed

themselves on the mind of Shelley, and he tells us, in the beautiful

lines to his wife, of the remembrance of his endeavors to overthrow

these abominations having failed, of flying from "the harsh and

grating strife of tyrants and of foes" and of the high and noble

resolves which inspired him:

"And then I clasp'd my hands, and look'd around;

But none were near to mock my streaming eyes,

Which pour'd their warm drops on the sunny ground.

So, without shame, I spake: 'I will be wise,

And just, and free, and mild, if in me lies

Such power; for I grow weary to behold

The selfish and the strong still tyrannize

Without reproach or check.' I then controll'd

My tears; my heart grew calm; and I was meek and bold.

"And from that hour did I, with earnest thought,

Heap knowledge from forbidden mines of lore;

Yet nothing that my tyrants knew or taught,

I cared to learn; but from that secret store

Wrought linked armor for my soul, before

It might walk forth, to war among mankind.

Thus, power and hope were strengthen'd more and more

Within me, till there came upon my mind

A sense of loneliness, a thirst with which I pined."

The fruits born of this seed are discernible in every line of his

works. While having all reverence for his college companions,

Aristotle, Aeschylus, and Demosthenes, his mind instinctively turns

towards the deemed heretical works of the later French philosophers,

D'Holbach, Condillac, La Place, Rousseau, the encyclopaedists, and

other members of that school. His intellect he furbishes with stores

of logic and of chemistry, in which his greatest love was to

experimentalize; of botany and astronomy, in which he was more than a

mere adept; from Hume, too, whose essay on "Miracles," wrong as it is

in the main on many important points, was one of the alphas of his

creed--and with deep draughts from his great instructor, Plato, of

whom he always spoke with the greatest adoration, as, for instance, in

the preface to the Symposium:

"Plato is eminently the greatest among the Greek

philosophers; and from, or rather perhaps through him and

his master, Socrates, have proceeded those emanations of

moral and metaphysical knowledge, on which a long series and

an incalculable variety of popular superstitions have

sheltered their absurdities from the slow contempt of

mankind."

It is desirable to call attention to the great minds from whom the

student of the early part of this century could only cull his

knowledge--he had no Spencer and no Mill, at whose feet to sit--he had

in science none of the conclusions of Darwin, of Huxley, of Tyndall,

of Murchison, of Lyell, to refer to, and yet I think, that the careful

reader will, like myself, find prefigured in Shelley's works much of

that of which the world is in full possession to-day, and which the

mystical Occultists, Rosicrucians, and Cabalists have now, and have

ever had, conjoined to a mysterious command over the active hidden

material and spiritual powers in the infinite domain of nature.

The idea of the _Supreme Power_ or _God_, as emanating from Shelley,

is one of the most sublime to be found in the pages of metaphysical

learning at the command of ordinary mortals. By many it may be

considered only a vague pantheism; yet, rightly regarded in a

reconciliative spirit, it is of such an universal character as to

harmonize with not only Deism, Theism and Polytheism, but even

Atheistical Materialism. Listen to the following, which I select out

of numerous examples, as a finger-post for others who seek the living

springs of undefiled truth, as in Shelley:

"Whosoever is free from the contamination of luxury and

license may go forth to the fields and to the woods,

inhaling joyous renovation from the breath of Spring, and

catching from the odors and sounds of autumn some diviner

mood of sweetest sadness, which improves the softened heart.

Whosoever is no deceiver and destroyer of his fellow-men--no

liar, no flatterer, no murderer--may walk among his species,

deriving, from the communion with all which they contain of

beautiful or majestic, some intercourse with the Universal

God. Whosoever has maintained with his own heart the

strictest correspondence of confidence, who dares to examine

and to estimate every imagination which suggests itself to

his mind--whosoever is that which he designs to _become_,

and only aspires to that which the divinity of his own

nature shall consider and approve--he has already seen God."

Can any one cavil with these beautiful expressions, this outpouring of

genius? If such there be, his heart and understanding must be sadly

warped, any appeal would be in vain, for him the Veil of Isis could

never be lifted. After a careful study of Shelley's works I can find

nothing to warrant the execration formerly levelled at his head, not

even in the "Refutation of Deism," that remarkable argument in the

Socratic style between Eusebes and Theosophus in which, as in all his

prose works, is displayed keen discernment, logical acuteness, and

close analytical reasoning not surpassed by the greatest

philosophers--most certainly his notions of God were not in unison

with the current theological ideas, and it was this daring rebellion

against the popular faith, the chief support of custom which caused

all the trouble. If ever he attempted to show the non-existence of

Deity, his negation was solely directed against the gross human

notions of a creative power, and _ergo_ a succession of finite

creative powers _ad infinitum_, or a Personal God who has only been

acknowledged in the popular teachings as an autocratic tyrant, and as

Shelley puts it in his own language:

"A venerable old man, seated on a throne of clouds, his

breast the theatre of various passions, analogous to those

of humanity, his will changeable and uncertain as that of an

earthly king."

Not to be compared with the far different eternal and infinite.

"Spirit of Nature! all sufficing power,

Necessity! thou mother of the world!

Unlike the God of human error, thou

Requirest no prayers or praises, the caprice

Of man's weak will belongs no more to thee

Than do the changeful passions of his breast

To thy unvarying harmony."

And by this doctrine of necessity here apostrophised our philosopher

instructs us in a lengthy statement of great clearness:

"We are taught that there is neither good nor evil in the

universe, otherwise than as the events to which we apply

these epithets have relation to our own peculiar mode of

being. Still less than with the hypothesis of a personal

God, will the doctrine of necessity accord with the belief

of a future state of punishment. God made man such as he is,

and then damned him for being so; for to say that God was

the author of all good, and man the author of all evil, is

to say that one man made a straight line and a crooked one,

and another man made the incongruity."

For you to better understand the exact position in which Shelley

placed himself, it is elsewhere thus admirably expressed:

"The thoughts which the word 'God' suggest to the human mind

are susceptible of as many variations as human minds

themselves. The Stoic, the Platonist, and the Epicurean, the

Polytheist, the Dualist, and the Trinitarian, differ entirely

in their conceptions of its meaning. They agree only in

considering it the most awful and most venerable of names,

as a common term to express all of mystery, or majesty, or

power, which the invisible world contains. And not only has

every sect distinct conceptions of the application of this

name, but scarcely two individuals of the same sect, which

exercise in any degree the freedom of their judgment, or

yield themselves with any candor of feeling to the

influences of the visible world, find perfect coincidence of

opinion to exist between them.... God is neither the Jupiter

who sends rain upon the earth; nor the Venus through whom

all living things are produced; nor the Vulcan who presides

over the terrestrial element of fire; nor the Vesta that

preserves the light which is enshrined in the sun, the moon,

and the stars. He is neither the Proteus nor the Pan of the

material world. But the word 'God' unites all the attributes

which these denominations contain and is the (inter-point)

and over-ruling spirit of all the energy and wisdom included

within the circle of existing things."

Of these attributes generally supposed to appertain to Deity, he

writes:

"There is no attribute of God which is not either borrowed

from the passions and powers of the human mind, or which is

not a negation. Omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence,

infinity, immutability, incomprehensibility, and

immateriality, are all words which designate properties and

powers peculiar to organized beings, with the addition of

negations, by which the idea of limitation is excluded."

There is no other writer, I think, who seems to grasp so clearly as

Shelley the everlasting and immutable laws of Naturismus, or who

believed so fully in the divine mission of man, and the religion of

humanity. Ever soaring into the ideal, philosophizing by the aid of

his emotional impulses, Shelley possessed, like all true Hermetists

and Theosophists imbued with mysticism, a wonderful power of continued

abstraction in the contemplation of the Supreme Power. His mentality,

described by one of his critics as essentially Greek, "simple, not

complex, imaginative rather than fanciful, abstract not concrete,

intellectual not emotional," contributed its share to his belief in a

pantheistic philosophy, making him find Supreme Intelligence permeated

through the whole of infinite and interminable Nature. Regarding the

universe as an abstract whole, he endorsed the fundamental

metaphysics of Plato, and believed that "passing phenomena are types

of eternal archetypes, embodiments of eternal realities."

Even if despite of my assertions to the contrary, there be those who

still insist on the atheism of Shelley, they had better restudy the

elementary axioms and learn to think--to those who imagine that there

is but little difference between atheism and pantheism to the

discredit of either, I would remind them that Bacon in his "Moral

Essays," lays down as a principle that:--

"Atheism leaves to man reason, philosophy, nature, piety,

laws, reputation and everything that can serve to conduct him

to virtue; but superstition destroys all these, and erects

itself into a tyranny over the understandings of men; hence

atheism never disturbs the government, but renders man more

clear-sighted, since he sees nothing beyond the boundaries of

the present life."

In making use of this quotation do not let it be presumed that I wish

to endorse Materialism; my desire is to add the authority of a great

mind like that of the Elizabethan philosopher, to the fact that

superstition is so hateful that even blank, bald atheism is preferable

thereto. I should state that Bacon in extension of the extract I have

quoted, speaking of this soul-destroying incubus on humanity observes

that:--"A little philosophy inclineth men's minds to atheism; but

depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds to religion."

No amount of mere reasoning, or argument _a priori_ or _a posteriori_,

can prove the existence of the Most High or destroy the same; in every

breast is implanted an innate belief in Deity, the inner consciousness

of the race, by the "Vox Dei" speaking within, has throughout all time,

the past and the present revelled in this sublimity, and will continue

to do so in the future, notwithstanding the insane and insensate efforts

of pseudo scientists or iconoclastic materialists--the brain and the

heart must act in harmony to consolidate a pure philosophy, for mere

intellect alone is an untrustworthy guide. By logic Whately proved

apparently indisputably the non-existence of Napoleon Bonaparte, at the

time when there was no doubt in any reasonable mind that he was actually

living in the flesh, by the same means one can disprove one's own being,

and so by this unsafe method have I frequently heard the God idea very

learnedly overthrown. On such occasions I have simply taken the words

of the logicians for what all their idle wind is worth--ZERO.

The Immortality of the Soul has ever been a subject of primary

importance to all philosophers--the last dying efforts of Socrates,

noblest of Greece's sons, as Plato has shown us in the Phaedo, were

expended in a discussion on the _pros_ and _cons_ of an argument in

favor of a future life. Many of the highest intelligences since his

day have been endeavoring to prove this satisfactorily without the aid

of theological revelation. All mankind, from sage to peasant, from the

most learned Brahmin on the banks of the Ganges to the untutored red

Indian beside the Mississippi, has the question, "is there an

existence after death," been approached with the most earnest hopes to

solve as one of the greatest mysteries. Shelley devoted a vast amount

of energy to the elucidation of this occult, yet overt, truth; and in

one place remarks:

"The desire to be forever as we are; the reluctance to a

violent and unexperienced change, which is common to all;

the animate and inanimate combinations of the universe, is,

indeed, the secret persuasion which has (among other

reasons) given birth to a belief in a future state."

Full well he knew, that independent of matter, there was a power,

which has been denominated by some, Spirit; by others, simply mind,

force, or intelligence; and by metaphysical philosophers, soul. If he

approached the subject logically, as in his essay, "On a Future

State," the _ignis fatuus_ seems to escape him and be lost; if

poetically, with the innate voice which speaks within us all, ever

present.

After close reasoning in the essay I have referred to, he arrived at

the conclusion that even

"if it be proved that the world is ruled by a divine power,

no inference can necessarily be drawn from that circumstance

in favor of a future state."

and that

"if a future state be clearly proved, does it follow that it

will be a state of punishment or reward?"

Then in extension of the same argument he urges:

"Sleep suspends many of the faculties of the vital and

intellectual principle--drunkenness and disease will either

temporarily or permanently derange them. Madness, or

idiotcy, may utterly extinguish the most excellent and

delicate of these powers. In old age the mind gradually

withers; and as it grew and strengthened with the body, so

does it with the body sink into decrepitude."

He also considered that:

"It is probable that what we call thought is not an actual

being, but no more than the relation between certain parts

of that infinitely varied mass, of which the rest of the

universe is composed, and which ceases to exist so soon as

those parts change their position with regard to each other.

Thus color, and sound, and taste, and odor, exist only

relatively."

Even granted that mind or thought be a part of, or in fact, the soul,

then he asks in what manner it could be made a proof of its

imperishability, as all that we see or know perishes and is changed.

Here then comes the query, "Have we existed before birth?" A difficult

possibility to conceive of individual intelligence and if unprovable

against the theory of existence after death.

He then winds up the whole by thinking that it is impossible that,

"we should continue to exist after death in some mode

totally inconceivable to us at present."

and that only those who desire to be persuaded are persuaded.

This is but a rough outline of some of the principal features of his

considerations on soul immortality from a logical basis, and which,

after all, only constitute an argument, to which, and the thoughts

presented therein, he did not necessarily bind himself. There can be

little doubt, independently of what I have quoted, that he did not

believe in a future state as popularly accepted. Trelawney asked him on

one occasion: "Do you believe in the immortality of the spirit?"

Shelley's answer was unmistakable, "Certainly not; how can I? We know

nothing; we have no evidence."[B]

[Footnote B: Those who desire to fully investigate Shelley's ideas on

the immortality of the soul, and the existence, or nature, of Deity,

will be amply repaid by reading W.M. Rossetti's admirable memoir of

the poet, appended to the last two-volume London edition of his

works.]

When we take Shelley from a poetical standpoint, or with the divine

truism implanted by the Ain-soph clamoring within to his intelligence

for expression, how confident he appears of a hereafter, as in the

"Adonais," or in the following extract from an unpublished letter to

his father-in-law, William Godwin, the property of my friend C.W.

Frederickson, of New York, one of the most enthusiastic admirers of

Shelley, and who has been often known to pay more than the weight in

gold for Shelleyana:

"With how many garlands we can beautify the tomb. If we

begin betimes, we can learn to make the prospect of the

grave the most seductive of human visions. By little and

little we hive therein all the most pleasing of our dreams.

Surely, if any spot in the world be sacred, it is that in

which grief ceases, and for which, if the voice within our

hearts mocks us not with an everlasting lie, we spring upon

the untiring wings of a pangless and seraphic life--those

whom we love around us--our nature, universal intelligence,

our atmosphere, eternal love."

How exquisite these remarks and his description of a disembodied

spirit:

"it stood

All beautiful in naked purity,

The perfect semblance of its bodily frame,

Instinct with inexpressible beauty and grace,

Each stain of earthliness

Had passed away, it re-assumed

Its native dignity, and stood

Immortal amid ruin."

It must appear impossible to any rational mind, that, with the full

evidence before their eyes, materialists can attempt to claim Shelley

as endorsing their doctrines, for even in the "Queen Mab," which has

been considered by those not understanding it as a most atheistical

poem, he speaks of--

"the remembrance

With which the happy spirit contemplates

Its well-spent pilgrimage on earth."

Positive dogmatists are tyrannically endeavoring to crush the belief in

a soul, that All which makes the-present life happy on earth, the hope

of our heritage in a future state. To them the fact that the race from

the dawn of history, and through the ages has knelt down in abnegation

before this inscrutable truth is nothing. This glorious belief evolved

from the primaeval Cabala, taught in ancient Egypt, found

contemporaneously in India, enunciated by scholarly Rabbis, ever present

before the Chaldaean and Assyrian Magi, and laid down as axioms in the

philosophical schools of Greece and Rome, not only to be discovered a

fundamental in the Egyptian, the Hebraistic, the Brahminical, the

Buddhistic, the Vedic, but also in all the sacred books of every nation,

and handed down and perpetuated to these days as a sacred legacy from

the past, by both Mohammed and Christ. This, the great co-mystery of all

the ancient mysteries, shall remain ever present through all futurity

like "the existing order of the Universe, or rather, of the _part of it

known to us_," to use the phraseology of John Stuart Mill. Nations may

rise and fall, theologies may flourish and decay, but this glorious and

divine inheritance shall never pass away. Let pseudo-scientists avail

themselves of stale and exploded arguments, and urge that there is no

invisible world, and therefore no immortality for man, but honest

scientists, like Professors Tait and Stewart, in the "Unseen Universe,"

will agree with the Illuminati: "in the position assigned by Swedenborg,

and by the Spiritualists, according to which they look upon the

invisible world not as something absolutely distinct from the visible

universe, and absolutely unconnected with it, as is frequently thought

to be the case, but rather as a universe that has some bond of union

with the present;" and like Tyndall, will be obliged in abject humility

to acknowledge, unlike the initiated occultist, that: "When we endeavor

to pass from the phenomena of physics to those of thought, we meet a

problem which transcends any conceivable expansion of the powers we now

possess. We may think over the subject again and again--it eludes all

intellectual presentation--we stand at length face to face with the

incomprehensible."

Shelley was ever calling attention to the fact that either from

ignorance or the casuistical sophistries of mal-interested teachers

who have distorted the divine pristine truths for their own base ends,

emanated superstition, the taint of all it looked upon; and with no

unsparing hand he flagellated the professors of the numerous false

faiths, bastardized from their original purity, which have in their

decay, darkened the earth, and with all the force of his powerful pen,

mightier than any sword, he ridiculed these gross theologies existant

among men, as in the following:

"Barbarous and uncivilized nations have uniformly adored,

under various names, a God of which themselves were the

model: revengeful, blood-thirsty, groveling and capricious.

The idol of a savage is a demon that delights in carnage.

The steam of slaughter, the dissonance of groans, the flames

of a desolated land, are the offerings which he deems

acceptable, and his innumerable votaries throughout the

world have made it a point of duty to worship him to his

taste. The Phoenicians, the Druids and the Mexicans have

immolated hundreds at the shrines of their divinity, and the

high and holy name of God has been in all ages the watchword

of the most unsparing massacres, the sanction of the most

atrocious perfidies."

Of the treatment Judaism, the foster mother of Christianity, received

at the poet's hands, I will now recite two examples. To Moses, the

Jehovah of the Hebrews is thus made to speak:

"From an eternity of idleness

I, God, awoke; in seven days' toil made earth

From nothing; rested, and created man;

I placed him in a paradise, and there

Planted the tree of evil, so that he

Might eat and perish, and my soul procure

Wherewith to sate its malice, and to turn

Even like a heartless conqueror of the earth,

All misery to my fame. The race of men

Chosen to my honor, with impunity

May sate the lusts _I_ planted in their hearts.

Here I command thee hence to lead them on,

Until, with harden'd feet, their conquering troops

Wade on the promised soil through woman's blood.

And make my name be dreaded through the land,

Yet ever-burning flame and ceaseless woe

Shall be the doom of their eternal souls,

With every soul on this ungrateful earth,

Virtuous or vicious, weak or strong--even all

Shall perish to fulfill the blind revenge

(Which you to men call justice) of their God."

In another place Shelley is equally descriptive of the early stages of

Jewish history, and makes the following observations on the building

of the Temple of Jerusalem, which rearing high its thousand golden

domes to heaven, exposed its glory to the face of day:

"Oh! many a widow, many an orphan cursed

The building of that fane; and many a father,

Worn out with toil and slavery, implored

The poor man's God to sweep it from the earth,

And spare his children the detested task

Of piling stone on stone, and poisoning

The choicest days of life,

To soothe a dotard's vanity.

There an inhuman and uncultured race

Howl'd hideous praises to their demon--God;

They rushed to war, tore from the mother's womb

The unborn child--old age and infancy

Promiscuous perished; their victorious arms

Left not a soul to breathe. Oh! they were fiends,

And what was he who taught them that the God

Of nature and benevolence had given

A special sanction to the trade of blood?

His name and theirs are fading, and the tales

Of this barbarian nation, which imposture

Recites till terror credits, are pursuing

Itself into forgetfulness."

With the enlightenment of the present century in every department of

knowledge, so has a corresponding degree of advancement been thrown on

the science of history, which Shelley only partially apprehended. An

enormous amount of new information is now to be gleaned from the

writings of Ewald, Fergusson, Bunsen, Deutsch, Max Muller,

Baring-Gould, Stanley, and other scholars of Orientation, which shows

that the Hebrews, like every other nation, passed through the various

phases of Nomadism and Pastoralism, to that of offensive and defensive

war. The same as other races, they came through the usual steps in

religious progress--Fetishism, Astrolatry, Polytheism and Monotheism.

During phases in their history they participated in the various forms

of tree and serpent, Phallic, or fire-worship. They had, as the

Talmud, Targums, and the Old Testament show, a knowledge of the

Egyptian or Chaldaic account of the creation and fall, the latter

still to be seen on the walls of the temple of Osiris at Philae. They

had much knowledge of the Cabala, through their great prophet Moses,

who was "learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians," and, like

Pythagoras, had been initiated into their mysteries, and who both

imparted the knowledge in part to their compatriots, on which they

both founded systems.

A great traveler, and most learned modern writer on Occultism, who

claims, on good grounds, to have been received into the ancient branch

of the Rosie Cross in the far East, Madame Helena P. de Blavatsky,

imparts the following particulars: "The first Cabala in which a mortal

man ever dared to explain the greatest mysteries of the universe, and

show the keys to those masked doors in the ramparts of Nature, through

which no mortal can ever pass without rousing dread sentries never

seen upon this side her wall, was compiled by a certain Simeon Ben

Jochai, who lived at the time of the second temple's destruction. Only

about thirty years after the death of this renowned Cabalist, his MSS.

and written explanations, which had till then remained in his

possession as a most precious secret, were used by his son, Rabbi

Elizzar, and other learned men. Making a compilation of the whole,

they so produced the famous work called _Zohar_ (God's splendor). This

book proved an inexhaustible mine for all the subsequent Cabalists,

their source of information and knowledge, and all more recent and

genuine Cabalas were all more or less carefully copied from the

former. Before that, all the mysterious doctrines had come down in an

unbroken line of merely oral tradition as far back as man could trace

himself on earth. They were scrupulously and jealously guarded by the

wise men of Chaldea, India, Persia and Egypt, and passed from one

initiate to another, in the same purity of form as when handed down to

the first man by the angels, students of God's great Theosophic

seminary."

Many Free Thinkers, in their anxiety to crush everything belonging to

Christianity, often forget that, in throwing aside the Hebrew records as

utterly worthless, they are getting rid of one of the most ancient

literatures in the world. They also do not remember the history of a

peculiar nation, strangely preserved amid the fluctuations of time, the

purity and excellence of the Book of Job, the Psalms, and others which I

could name. They cast unmerited contempt on these compilations, when, at

the same time, they will throw themselves, with almost Fetish reverence,

and apparently rapt adoration, before the Institutes of Menu, the

Bhagvat-Geeta, the morals of Chaoung-Fou-Tszee, the Zend-Avesta, the

Rig-Veda, the Oracles of Zoroaster, the Book of the Dead, the Puranas,

the Shastras, and the like.

Well may the Sons of Israel be proud of their ancient descent. They

suffered through Christian persecutions uncomplainingly--the torture,

the rack, the _auto-da-fe_--and yet they bowed their heads in

submission to the will of Adonai. To-day they stand upright and

united, as in olden times. They have gained the victory over the false

disciples of the Nazarene, who, in days gone by, forgot their

erudition, their medical knowledge, their commercial activity, and

general culture. Pre-eminent in wealth and learning, they are found on

the lecture-platform, in the fields of literature and science, in the

councils of rulers, on the exchange, in the legislature--everywhere.

When Greece and Rome were in their infancy, this extraordinary people

was in middle age; and when our Saxon forefathers were in the lowest

stage of barbarism, they were in a state of high civilization; and

to-day, although scattered, they show a compact front, firmly knit in

the bonds of brotherly love, a model for Christians. The great reform

movement now agitating Judaism, as well as every other species of

political and metaphysical thought, will eventually aid to consolidate

all the races into one race--Humanity.

In order to make Christians prejudge Shelley it has been the wont of

theologians, as usual in fighting their antagonists, to cry up a false

issue, and to make their followers believe that he was rather more

than a mere hater of Jesus Christ, and of the teachings of that

religious and social reformer, in fact, that he was an infidel of

infidels. To have no misconceptions--for it has been stated that

Shelley changed his views on Christ, which after ten years' careful

study of his writings, I utterly deny, it should be thoroughly

understood that he regarded this pious Israelite in a duismal

aspect--as Christ the Man, and as Christ the God. I must not, while

here, forget that many advanced metaphysicians agree that they cannot

satisfactorily prove the historical existence of Christ, and that they

have to winnow through a vast amount of chaff to get at his presumed

philosophy, and the facts in his life, which like that of Buddha is

wrapped up in traditional fable.

For the Man Christ, Jesus of Nazareth, the carpenter's carnate son,

the mystical Essene and occultist, Shelley exceeded in love and

reverence many of the most earnest Christians, and in no theological

writings can there be discovered such beautiful sentiments concerning

the "The Regenerator of the World," and the "Meek Reformer," of whom

he speaks as contemplating that mysterious principle called God, the

fundamental of all good, and the source of all happiness, as every

true poet and philosopher must have done. It is impossible to turn to

any page of his works, where, in speaking of Christ, he fails in

this--he expatiates with as great fervor as Renan, Seeley, or

Strauss, on Christ's exposing with earnest eloquence, like all true

members of the brotherhood of Illuminati, to which he belonged, the

panic fears and hateful superstitions which have enslaved mankind for

ages, and extols

"His extraordinary genius, the wide and rapid effects of his

unexampled doctrines, his invincible gentleness and

benignity, (and) the devoted love borne to him by his

adherents."

For the God Christ, as depicted by the Sacerdotal order, he had the

greatest contempt. It was impossible for a mind constituted like his

to tamely rest contented with the incredible story forced on mankind's

intelligence, that the Supreme Power could or would for any wise

purpose be transformed into a dove, and re-enact the mythical part of

Jupiter with a Christian Leda, the Jew carpenter's wife, Mary, under

the disguise of a bird. Such a story and the theory on which it rests

Shelley summarised as follows:

"According to this book, God created Satan, who, instigated

by the impulses of his nature, contended with the Omnipotent

for the throne of Heaven. After a contest for the empire, in

which God was victorious, Satan was thrust into a pit of

burning sulphur. On man's creation, God placed within his

reach a tree whose fruit he forbade him to taste, on pain of

death; permitting Satan, at the same time, to employ all his

artifice to persuade this innocent and wondering creature to

transgress the fatal prohibition.

"The first man yielded to this temptation; and to satisfy

Divine Justice the whole of his posterity must have been

eternally burned in hell, if God had not sent his only Son

on earth, to save those few whose salvation had been

foreseen and determined before the creation of the world."

The hero of this fabulous episode, beneath which a great truth lies

hidden, the Christian Ahrimanes or Typhon, the Devil, as painted by

Milton, he considered a moral being, far superior to the God depicted

by the same author, and who, under the form of the second person of

the Christian Trinity, Shelley tells us of coming humbly,

Percy Bysshe Shelley as a Philosopher and Reformer · 第 1 / 5 段