Tannhäuser

In one direction I have restrained myself. Nowhere does Tannhauser refer to the Vedas and Shastras or to the Dhamma of that blameless hypochondriac, Gotama Buddha. I take all the blame for so important an omission, not without a shrewd suspicion that the commination will take the form of " For this relief much thanks ! " The particular object that I have in view in speaking both in Hebrew and Egypto-Christian symbology is that by this means I may familiarise my readers with the one thing of any importance that life, travel, and study have taught me, to wit : the Origin of Religions. I take it that there have always, or nearly always, been on the earth those whom Councillor von Eckartshausen, the Svdmi Vivekdnanda and their like, call " great spiritual giants" (can there be any etymological link between "yogi" and " ogre " ?) and that such persons, themselves per- ceiving Truth, have tried to " diminish the message to the dog " for the benefit of less exalted minds, and hidden that Truth (which, unveiled, would but blind men with its glory) in a mass of symbology often perverted or grotesque, yet to the proper man transparent ; a " bait of falsehood to catch the carp of truth." Now, regarded in this light, all religions, qud religions, are equally contemptible. The Hindu Gnanis say "That which can be thought is not true." As machineries for the exercise of spiritual and intellectual powers innate or developed, certain sets of symbols may be more or less convenient to a special trend 12