The Sword of Song

AN ESSAY IN ONTOLOGY 97 inertia is sufficient to oppose a most serious stumbling-block to so gigantic a process. The task before us is consequently of a ter- rible nature. It is easy to let things slide, to grin and bear it in fact, until every thing is merged in the ultimate unity, which may or may not be decently tolerable. But while we wait? There now arises the question of freewill. Causality is probably not fully extended in its own category,1 a circumstance which gives room for a fractional am ount of freewill. If this be not so, it m atters little; for if I find myself in a good state, that merely proves that my destiny took me there. We are, as Herbert Spencer observes, self-deluded with the idea of freewill; but if this be so, nothing matters at all. If, however, Herbert Spencer is mistaken (unlikely as it must ap- pear), then our reason is valid, and we should seek out the right path and pursue it. The question therefore need not trouble us at all. Here then we see the use of morals and of religion, and all the rest of the bag of tricks. All these are methods, bad or good, for extricating ourselves from the universe. Closely connected with this question is that of the will of God. People argue that an Infi- nite intelligence must have been at work on this cosmos. I reply No ! There is no intelligence at work worthy of the name. The Laws of Nature may be generalised in one—the Law of Inertia. Everything moves in the direction determined by the path of least resistance ; species arise, develop, and die as their collec- tive inertia determines; to this Law there is no exception but the doubtful one of Free- will ; the Law of Destiny itself is form ally and really identical with it.2 1 Causality is itself a secondary , and in its limitation as applied to volition, an inconceiv- able idea. H. Spencer, op. cit. T his con- sideration alone should add gr eat weight to the agnostic, and à fortiori to the Buddhist, position. 2 See H. Spencer, “ First Principles,” “ The Knowable,” for a fair summary of the facts under- lying this gener alisation; which indeed he comes within an ace of making in so many words. It may be observed that this law is nearly if not quite axiomatic, its contr ary being enor mously difficult if not impossible to formulate mentally. As to an infinite intelligence, all philo- sophers of any standing are agreed that all- love and all-power are incom patible. The existence of the universe is a standing proof of this. The Deist needs the Optimist to keep him company; over their firesides all goes well, but it is a sad shipwreck they suffer on emerging into the cold world. This is why those who seek to buttress up religion are so anxious to prove that the universe has no real existence, or only a temporary and relatively unimportant one; the result is of course the usual self-destruc- tive Advaitist muddle. The precepts of m orality and religion are thus of use, of vital use to us, in restraining the more violent forces alike of nature and of man. For unless la w and order prevail, we have not the necessary quiet and re- sources for investigating, and learning to bring under our control, all the divergent phenomena of our prison, a work which we undertake that at last we may be able to break down the walls, and find that freedom which an inconsiderate Inversion has denied. The mystical precepts of pseudo-Zoroaster, Buddha, Çankarachary a, pseudo-Christ and the rest, are for advanced students only , for direct attack on the problem . Our servants, the soldiers, lawy ers, all forms of govern- ment, make this our nobler work possible, and it is the graves t pos sible m istake to sneer at those humble but faithful followers of the great minds of the world. What, then, are the bes t, easiest, directed methods to attain our result? And how shall we, in mortal language, convey to the minds of others the nature of a result so bey ond language, baffling even imagina-tion eagle- pinioned? It may help us if we endeavour to outline the distinction between the Hindu and Buddhist methods and aims of the Great Work. The Hindu method is really mystical in the truest sense; for, as I have shown, the Atman is not infinite and eternal: one day