the golden bough-第19部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！

en　that　the　operation　of　spirits　is　assumed；　and　that　an　attempt　is　made　to　win　their　favour　by　prayer　and　sacrifice。　But　these　cases　are　on　the　whole　exceptional；　they　exhibit　magic　tinged　and　alloyed　with　religion。　Wherever　sympathetic　magic　occurs　in　its　pure　unadulterated　form；　it　assumes　that　in　nature　one　event　follows　another　necessarily　and　invariably　without　the　intervention　of　any　spiritual　or　personal　agency。　Thus　its　fundamental　conception　is　identical　with　that　of　modern　science；　underlying　the　whole　system　is　a　faith；　implicit　but　real　and　firm；　in　the　order　and　uniformity　of　nature。　The　magician　does　not　doubt　that　the　same　causes　will　always　produce　the　same　effects；　that　the　performance　of　the　proper　ceremony；　accompanied　by　the　appropriate　spell；　will　inevitably　be　attended　by　the　desired　result；　unless；　indeed；　his　incantations　should　chance　to　be　thwarted　and　foiled　by　the　more　potent　charms　of　another　sorcerer。　He　supplicates　no　higher　power：　he　sues　the　favour　of　no　fickle　and　wayward　being：　he　abases　himself　before　no　awful　deity。　Yet　his　power；　great　as　he　believes　it　to　be；　is　by　no　means　arbitrary　and　unlimited。　He　can　wield　it　only　so　long　as　he　strictly　conforms　to　the　rules　of　his　art；　or　to　what　may　be　called　the　laws　of　nature　as　conceived　by　him。　To　neglect　these　rules；　to　break　these　laws　in　the　smallest　particular；　is　to　incur　failure；　and　may　even　expose　the　unskilful　practitioner　himself　to　the　utmost　peril。　If　he　claims　a　sovereignty　over　nature；　it　is　a　constitutional　sovereignty　rigorously　limited　in　its　scope　and　exercised　in　exact　conformity　with　ancient　usage。　Thus　the　analogy　between　the　magical　and　the　scientific　conceptions　of　the　world　is　close。　In　both　of　them　the　succession　of　events　is　assumed　to　be　perfectly　regular　and　certain；　being　determined　by　immutable　laws；　the　operation　of　which　can　be　foreseen　and　calculated　precisely；　the　elements　of　caprice；　of　chance；　and　of　accident　are　banished　from　the　course　of　nature。　Both　of　them　open　up　a　seemingly　boundless　vista　of　possibilities　to　him　who　knows　the　causes　of　things　and　can　touch　the　secret　springs　that　set　in　motion　the　vast　and　intricate　mechanism　of　the　world。　Hence　the　strong　attraction　which　magic　and　science　alike　have　exercised　on　the　human　mind；　hence　the　powerful　stimulus　that　both　have　given　to　the　pursuit　of　knowledge。　They　lure　the　weary　enquirer；　the　footsore　seeker；　on　through　the　wilderness　of　disappointment　in　the　present　by　their　endless　promises　of　the　future：　they　take　him　up　to　the　top　of　an　exceeding　high　mountain　and　show　him；　beyond　the　dark　clouds　and　rolling　mists　at　his　feet；　a　vision　of　the　celestial　city；　far　off；　it　may　be；　but　radiant　with　unearthly　splendour；　bathed　in　the　light　of　dreams。

The　fatal　flaw　of　magic　lies　not　in　its　general　assumption　of　a　sequence　of　events　determined　by　law；　but　in　its　total　misconception　of　the　nature　of　the　particular　laws　which　govern　that　sequence。　If　we　analyse　the　various　cases　of　sympathetic　magic　which　have　been　passed　in　review　in　the　preceding　pages；　and　which　may　be　taken　as　fair　samples　of　the　bulk；　we　shall　find；　as　I　have　already　indicated；　that　they　are　all　mistaken　applications　of　one　or　other　of　two　great　fundamental　laws　of　thought；　namely；　the　association　of　ideas　by　similarity　and　the　association　of　ideas　by　contiguity　in　space　or　time。　A　mistaken　association　of　similar　ideas　produces　homoeopathic　or　imitative　magic：　a　mistaken　association　of　contiguous　ideas　produces　contagious　magic。　The　principles　of　association　are　excellent　in　themselves；　and　indeed　absolutely　essential　to　the　working　of　the　human　mind。　Legitimately　applied　they　yield　science；　illegitimately　applied　they　yield　magic；　the　bastard　sister　of　science。　It　is　therefore　a　truism；　almost　a　tautology；　to　say　that　all　magic　is　necessarily　false　and　barren；　for　were　it　ever　to　become　true　and　fruitful；　it　would　no　longer　be　magic　but　science。　From　the　earliest　times　man　has　been　engaged　in　a　search　for　general　rules　whereby　to　turn　the　order　of　natural　phenomena　to　his　own　advantage；　and　in　the　long　search　he　has　scraped　together　a　great　hoard　of　such　maxims；　some　of　them　golden　and　some　of　them　mere　dross。　The　true　or　golden　rules　constitute　the　body　of　applied　science　which　we　call　the　arts；　the　false　are　magic。

If　magic　is　thus　next　of　kin　to　science；　we　have　still　to　enquire　how　it　stands　related　to　religion。　But　the　view　we　take　of　that　relation　will　necessarily　be　coloured　by　the　idea　which　we　have　formed　of　the　nature　of　religion　itself；　hence　a　writer　may　reasonably　be　expected　to　define　his　conception　of　religion　before　he　proceeds　to　investigate　its　relation　to　magic。　There　is　probably　no　subject　in　the　world　about　which　opinions　differ　so　much　as　the　nature　of　religion；　and　to　frame　a　definition　of　it　which　would　satisfy　every　one　must　obviously　be　impossible。　All　that　a　writer　can　do　is；　first；　to　say　clearly　what　he　means　by　religion；　and　afterwards　to　employ　the　word　consistently　in　that　sense　throughout　his　work。　By　religion；　then；　I　understand　a　propitiation　or　conciliation　of　powers　superior　to　man　which　are　believed　to　direct　and　control　the　course　of　nature　and　of　human　life。　Thus　defined；　religion　consists　of　two　elements；　a　theoretical　and　a　practical；　namely；　a　belief　in　powers　higher　than　man　and　an　attempt　to　propitiate　or　please　them。　Of　the　two；　belief　clearly　comes　first；　since　we　must　believe　in　the　existence　of　a　divine　being　before　we　can　attempt　to　please　him。　But　unless　the　belief　leads　to　a　corresponding　practice；　it　is　not　a　religion　but　merely　a　theology；　in　the　language　of　St。　James；　faith；　if　it　hath　not　works；　is　dead；　being　alone。　In　other　words；　no　man　is　religious　who　does　not　govern　his　conduct　in　some　measure　by　the　fear　or　love　of　God。　On　the　other　hand；　mere　practice；　divested　of　all　religious　belief；　is　also　not　religion。　Two　men　may　behave　in　exactly　the　same　way；　and　yet　one　of　them　may　be　religious　and　the　other　not。　If　the　one　acts　from　the　love　or　fear　of　God；　he　is　religious；　if　the　other　acts　from　the　love　or　fear　of　man；　he　is　moral　or　immoral　according　as　his　behaviour　comports　or　conflicts　with　the　general　good。　Hence　belief　and　practice　or；　in　theological　language；　faith　and　works　are　equally　essential　to　religion；　which　cannot　exist　without　both　of　them。　But　it　is　not　necessary　that　religious　practice　should　always　take　the　form　of　a　ritual；　that　is；　it　need　not　consist　in　the　offering　of　sacrifice；　the　recitation　of　prayers；　and　other　outward　ceremonies。　Its　aim　is　to　please　the　deity；　and　if　the　deity　is　one　who　delights　in　charity　and　mercy　and　purity　more　than　in　oblations　of　blood；　the　chanting　of　hymns；　and　the　fumes　of　incense；　his　worshippers　will　best　please　him；　not　by　prostrating　themselves　before　him；　by　intoning　his　praises；　and　by　filling　his　temples　with　costly　gifts；　but　by　being　pure　and　merciful　and　charitable　towards　men；　for　in　so　doing　they　will　imitate；　so　far　as　human　infirmity　allows；　the　perfections　of　the　divine　nature。　It　was　this　ethical　side　of　religion　which　the　Hebrew　prophets；　inspired　with　a　noble　ideal　of　God's　goodness　and　holiness；　were　never　weary　of　inculcating。　Thus　Micah　says：　He　hath　shewed　thee；　O　man；　what　is　good；　and　what　doth　the　Lord　require　of　thee；　but　to　do　justly；　and　to　love　mercy；　and　to　walk　humbly　with　thy　God？　And　at　a　later　time　much　of　the　force　by　which　Christianity　conquered　the　world　was　drawn　from　the　same　high　conception　of　God's　moral　nature　and　the　duty　laid　on　men　of　conforming　themselves　to　it。　Pure　religion　and　undefiled；　says　St。　James；　before　God　and　the　Father　is　this；　To　visit　the　fatherless　and　widows　in　their　affliction；　and　to　keep　himself　unspotted　from　the　world。

But　if　religion　involves；　first；　a　belief　in　superhuman　beings　who　rule　the　world；　and；　second；　an　attempt　to　win　their　favour；　it　clearly　assumes　that　the　course　of　nature　is　to　some　extent　elastic　or　variable；　and　that　we　can　persuade　or　induce　the　mighty　beings　who　control　it　to　deflect；　for　our　benefit；　the　current　of　events　from　the　channel　in　which　they　would　otherwise　flow。　Now　this　implied　elasticity　or　variability　of　nature　is　directly　opposed　to　the　principles　of　magic　as　well　as　of　science；　both　of　which　assume　that　the　processes　of　nature　are　rigid　and　invariable　in　their　operation；　and　that　they　can　as　little　be　turned　from　their　course　by　persuasion　and　entreaty　as　by　threats　and　intimidation。　The　distinction　between　the　two　conflicting　views　of　the　universe　turns　on　their　answer　to　the　crucial　question；　Are　the　forces　which　govern　the　world　conscious　and　personal；　or　unconscious　and　impersonal？　Religion；　as　a　conciliation　of　the　superhuman　powers；　assumes　the　former　member　of　the　alternative。　For　all　conciliation　implies　that　the　being　conciliated　is　a　conscious　or　personal　agent；　that　his　conduct　is　in　some　measure　uncertain；　and　that　he　can　be　prevailed　upon　to　vary　it　in　the　desired　direction　by　a　judicious　appeal　to　his　interests；　his　appetites；　or　his　emotions。　Conciliation　is　never　employed　towards　things　which　are　regarded　as　inanimate；　nor　towards　persons　whose　behaviour　in　the　particular　circumstances　is　known　to　be　determined　with　absolute　certainty。　Thus　in　so　far　as