MONIER- WILLIAMS 
 
 MONISM , PANTHEISM 
 AND DUALISM 
 
 DI3I 
 
 .M74 
 

 •A N * 
 
 •’"I 'soaa oaoTAV0 ! 
 
 nq p»inpD/nuD//\/ t 
 
 881^48 ' 
 
 'ON ±Vd ' 
 
 aaoNia jjiHdvwd 
 
 INnOWOiOHd 
 
 P 4 L 
 
 
 ‘AH- 
 
UNREVISED PROOF-PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL. 
 
 Only for those wishing more conveniently to join in' t^ discussion 
 
 (Bye-laws § vi. I, and Object 4). ^ Si 139^ 
 
 . 
 
 SPECIAL. 
 
 The Presence at the Meeting of those whose studies haV5' lafiT 
 especially in the direction of the subject taken up is always 
 important; and if any such are unavoidably prevented from 
 attending, the Council will be much gratified by receiving their 
 MS. comments, which will be read after the Paper. 
 
 YICTORLA. INSTITUTE. — Paper to be read at a Meeting 
 of the Members and Associates, on Monday, March 10, 
 1890, at Eight o’clock, to be held at the House of the 
 Society of Arts, JoJm Street, Adelphi, near dialing Cross, 
 
 n\c. * 
 
 REMARKS ON THE MONISM, PANTHEISM, AND 
 DUALISM OF BRAHMANICAL AND yEORO- 
 ASTRIAN PHILOSOPHERS. By Sir M. Monier- 
 WlLLlAMS, K.C.I.E., D.C.L., Boden Professor of Sanskrit, 
 Oxford. 
 
 I N the present paper I propose to draw the attention of 
 this Society to the principal monistic, pantheistic, and 
 dualistic theories of Indian philosophers — whether Brahmans 
 or Parsis — with the object of pointing out that these theoiies, 
 although apparently contradictory, are in reality closely con- 
 nected with each other, as well as with the polytheistic 
 doctrines and practices of modern Hinduism. 
 
 Perhaps other members of this Society may be induced by 
 my remarks to draw attention to some of the parallel lines of 
 thought in European systems of philosophy. 
 
 I ought at the outset to explain that my observations will 
 be formded quite as much on the conversations which I had 
 with living learned men during my travels in India, as on the 
 ancient philosophical writings of Hindus and Zoroastrians. 
 
 Clearly the first difficulty is to settle exactly what is meant 
 by the terms Monism, Pantheism, and Dualism. 
 
 Without pretending to any special knowledge of the philo- 
 
 a3 
 
2 SIK M. MOXIEK-WILUAMS OX TIIK MONISM, PANTHlilSM, AND 
 
 sophical terms current in Europe, I believe I am right in 
 stating that Monism is a term which may be fairly used to 
 express the doctrine that only one Being really exists — or, in 
 other words, that everything is resolvable into one eternal 
 Essence, and into one only. 
 
 Pantheism, again, so far as I understand this vague expres- 
 sion, generally means that, whatever the one infinite Essence 
 or Substance, Avhom Ave call God, may be, the Universe or 
 all Nature is identical Avith that one God. or again that God 
 is identical with the UniA^erse (not merely immanent in it). 
 
 Dualism, on the other hand, is a term Avhich is generally 
 employed to express the existence of tAvo co-eternal princi- 
 ples, neither of Avhich is the product of the other. 
 
 But there may be different kinds of IMonism, Pantheism, 
 and Dualism. 
 
 F or example, there may be a kind of l\Ionism which consists 
 in belicAung that matter is the only really existing thing, and 
 that Spirit is merely a form or modification of Matter. 
 
 Again, there may be another kind of Monism which, like 
 the Monism of the Indian Vedanta, teaches that Spirit is the 
 only really existing (Sanskrit paramiirthilta) thing, and that 
 material (jada) forms are merely modifications or illusory 
 (pratibhasikal manifestations of this one all-pervading Spirit. 
 
 Or, again, there may be another kind of Monism Avhich 
 substitutes the term “Mind” for “Spirit,” maintaining that 
 l\lind (including, of course, volition) is the only eternally 
 existing Essence, and that Mind creates or evohms out ot 
 itself all material organisms, and the Avhole external Avorld. 
 
 It should be noted, however, that this idea of Mind is 
 opposed to the doctrine of Indian philosophers, Avho make 
 Mind (manas) an internal organ (antah-karana) developed by 
 and belonging to the perishable body, and occupying an 
 intermediate position betAveen the organs of perception (such 
 as the eye, ear, &c.) and the organs of action (such as the 
 hand, foot, &c.), its sole function being to serA^e as an instru- 
 ment or inlet of thought to the Spirit. 
 
 Again, some Avriters substitute the term “ Soul ” for “ Spirit,” 
 or employ these tAvo expressions as if they Avere identical. 
 
 Peril ap"s the chief objection to the indiscriminate use of 
 the terms “ Spirit” and “ Soul,” at least in Indian philosophy, 
 appears to be that our Avord “ Soul ” coiweys the idea of 
 liability to affections, passions, and feelings, AA'hereas pure 
 Spirit, according to the Vedanta, is not liable to emotions of 
 any kind, and does not e\'en possess self-consciousness, or a 
 sense of individuality. It is Nir-guna, quality-less. 
 
Dl'AT.ISM OF BRAIIMANICAI, AM) ZOKOASTKIAN I’UILOSOIMIKUS, 3 
 
 It is for this reason that the term “ Self” sometimes pre- 
 ferred to both “ Spirit ” and “ Soul ” by English translators 
 ol‘ the Sanskrit Avord Atman, seems open to exception. 
 
 Finally, I may note here a form of Monism said to be in 
 favour Avith some European Scientists, Avho maintain that 
 AAdiat is termed “ Vital Force ” (Sanskrit Prana ?) is the only 
 existing Essence, and that this all-perAmding Energy evolves 
 infinite forms of matter Avhich are periodically dissolved, 
 and by their dissolution furnish a constant succession of raAV 
 material for the reproduction and perpetuation of life. 
 
 Clearly every one of these monistic theories may be 
 regarded as also pantheistic, so that there Avill be as many 
 different kinds of Pantheism as of Monism. 
 
 As to the term Diiahsm, it is evident that there may be one 
 kind of Dualism Avhich simply asserts that Spirit and Matter 
 exist as separate co-eternal substances. 
 
 Another kind of Dualism — and this I may remark is the 
 true Dvaita of Sanskrit philosophers — simply asserts the 
 duality of Spirit, meaning by the term Dualit}’' that God’s 
 Spirit and man’s Spirit have had a real separate existence from 
 all eternity, and aviII continue to have such an existence. 
 
 This dualistic tlieory might more suitably be called plural- 
 istic, inasmuch as it holds that human spirits are not only 
 distinct from the Supreme Spirit, but from each other, and 
 are infinitely numerous. 
 
 Again, the term Dualism may be used to express the 
 eternal separate existence of tAvo opposing principles — the 
 respective originators of good and evil, knoAvledge and igno- 
 rance— as exemplified in the teaching of Zoroaster, and in 
 the later philosophy of the Manicheans. The idea may hare 
 arisen fi'om the supposed impossibility of believing that the 
 Creator of good is also the Creator of evil ; or else from a simple 
 belief in the existence of some eternal laAv of antagonism as 
 a necessary factor in the equilibrium of the UniAmrse. 
 
 Turning noAv more particularly to the monistic, pantheistic, 
 and dualistic theories current in India, I may remark that 
 there are tAvo Avell-knoAvn Sanskrit philosophical terms, Dvaita 
 and AdA'aita; of Avhich the tA\m equivalent cognate English 
 expressions are. Duality and Non-duality. 
 
 But in an introduction to the Advaita philosophy, just 
 published by Pandit DAUvedi, Professor of Sanskrit at 
 Bhaunagar, the Avord Monism, as Avell as Non-duality 
 (equivalent, he says, to “ inseparability ”), is used for Advaita. 
 
 And I may state that almost every . learned Brahman in 
 India is a belieAmr in the spiritual Monism of the Vedanta 
 
4 SIR M. JIONIER- WILLIAMS ON THE MONISM, PANTHEISM, AND 
 
 philosophy, while materialistic Monism is thought to be the 
 doctrine of heretics. 
 
 The Vedantist, in fact, professes to be more orthodox than 
 any other teacher, because his belief is founded on the inner 
 doctrine of the Veda, which, according to him, is absolutely 
 monistic, and inculcates spiritual Pantheism. 
 
 True Brrdimanism, he asserts, lays down as its fundamental 
 dogma that there is only one really existing Essence, and 
 that that Essence is pure Spirit. 
 
 This dogma is expressed by three Sanskrit words : Elam 
 eva advitiyam., there is only one Being, no second.’’ 
 
 In this favourite phrase the one Being is designated by a 
 neuter termination, yet a Brahman ■will often apply to that 
 Being the ancient name Atma (nom. case of Atman), “ the 
 bi'eathing Spmt,” or “ Breath,”* which is a Sanskrit masculine 
 noun. 
 
 In his daily worship,! too, he Avill often repeat a well-known 
 hymn of the Rig-veda, which adopts another masculine title 
 of the one Spirit, namely, Piu’usha (“ the one representative 
 man ”?), a name Avhich has no trustworthy etymology. 
 
 Then he often designates that Being by a very remarkable 
 name, Sac-cid-ananda, which is a compound word, or three 
 words combined in one, ending in a masculine termination, 
 and denoting one Essence, composed of three inherent facul- 
 ties, “ Existence, Thought, Joy,” which are inseparable. 
 
 Sometimes he prefers the simple name Cid (C = our Ch) or 
 Cit, that is, the faculty of “Thought,” which is a feminine 
 noun; or again, Caitanya, “abstract Thought,” which is 
 neuter. 
 
 In real truth, however, he most commonly designates the 
 one Being by a name which is incompatible with all idea of sex. 
 
 He calls the one Being Brahma, a neuter word implpng 
 “ growth,” “ expansion,” “ evolution,” “ universal pervasion.” 
 
 It is only when that Being becomes the Evolver that he is 
 called by a masculine name, Brahma.! 
 
 This one eternal neuter Essence (in the Illusion by which it 
 
 * I am aware that different etymologies of this word are given, but I 
 prefer deriving it from the Sanskrit root an, to breathe ; cf. German athem, 
 t That is, in the Pancayatana ceremony ; see my Brahmanism and Hin- 
 duism (John Murray), p. 414. The final act of adoration in this ceremony is 
 as follows : — Veneration to the infinite and eternal male (Purusha), who 
 has thousands of names, thousands of forms, thousands of feet, thousands 
 of eyes, thousands of heads, &c. (see p. 415). 
 
 I The masculine deity Brahma is not eternal, but lapses back into the 
 neuter Brahma. The crude base Brahman (in grammar) stands for both. 
 
DUALISM OF BKAHMANICAL AND ZOUOASTRIAN PIIILOSOrilEKS. '> 
 
 is overspread) is to the external world and to tlie human spirit 
 Avhat yarn is to cloth, what milk is to curds, what clay is to a 
 jar. 
 
 From him is everything born, in him it breathes, in him it 
 is dissolved (according to the Sanskrit formula tajjalaii). 
 
 The Vedantist’s own personal identitication with the one 
 universal Spirit is expressed by the two monosyllables Tat 
 tvam, “ That art thou,” two words which, when combined in 
 one, stand for all philosophical truth (tattvam). 
 
 The number One, indeed, appears to have assumed the 
 character of a kind of God in the minds of some Indian 
 thinkers. 
 
 Hence we read in the Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad (iv, 5) 
 that : — 
 
 “ When there is anything like duality there one sees 
 another, one smells another, one tastes another, one speaks 
 to another, one hears another, one minds another, one regards 
 another, one knows another.” 
 
 Then this ancient philosophical work, which represents 
 the views of Indian metaphysicians at least 500 years B.C., 
 goes on to assert that the One Infinite Essence “ neither sees, 
 nor smells, nor tastes, nor speaks, nor hears, nor minds, nor 
 regards, nor knows.”* 
 
 The apparent sternness of ancient Indian Monism seems 
 to be paralleled by almost identical phases of modern German 
 philosophical thought. According to Dean Mansel : — 
 
 “ With German philosophers the root of all mischief is the 
 number two — Self and Not-self, Ego and Non-ego. 
 
 ‘•The (German) pantheist tells me that I have not a real 
 distinct existence and unity of my own, but that I am merely 
 a phenomenal manifestation or an aggregate of many mani- 
 festations of the one infinite Being.” 
 
 Then again, we know that a favourite dogma with all 
 Asiatic pantheists is. Ex nihilo nihil jit (ndvastuno vastu- 
 siddhih or a-satah saj jdyeta kutas), “ nothiug is produced out 
 of nothing so that if there is a Supreme Creator, he cannot 
 create the external world out of nothing. 
 
 Hence he evolves all visible nature out of Himself, and all 
 nature is Himself. 
 
 And is it not the case that some of our own modern 
 scientists are continually telling us that all Nature is one, and 
 that mind and matter are inseparable ? or that all the ele- 
 ments are mere modifications of one element ? or again, that 
 
 * Compare Amos v, 21. 
 
6 PIR M. MOXIER-WIIXIAMS ON THE MONISM, PANTHEISM, AND 
 
 all the forces Avhich act on the elements are mere modifica- 
 tions of one force ; or that “ everything is everything else ” ?* 
 
 The point to be noticed is that in India the Unity- 
 theory was ciiiTent many centuries before it Avas even heard 
 of in Europe, and that there this idea is found to be compati- 
 ble not only AAUth dnalistio, but Avith the gi'ossest polytheistic, 
 doctrines and practices. 
 
 1 found in fact that, although, in my conversations Avith 
 learned Bifihmans, they laid the greatest stress on their 
 dogma, Ekam eva advitlyom, “ there is only one Being, no 
 second,” they always, AA^hen questioned, admitted the truth 
 of another Vedantic dogma, Maya-cid-yogo’nCidih, “the union 
 of the one Essence AA'ith Illusion is fx’om all eternity.” In 
 other words, the one infinite Essence is associated from all 
 eternity with Maya, “Illusion ” (also called Avidya, Ignorance), 
 Avhich is also an eternal Essence, though merely an illusory 
 (me. 
 
 In point of fact the modern Yedantist holds that it is from 
 this one Illusory Essence, eternally associated u'iih the one Real 
 Essence, that the whole external universe is eA^oh’-ed. 
 
 From this Illusory Essence, too, are evolved the separate 
 indiA'^idual spirits of men, whose sense of indiAdduality ceases 
 at the moment AA’hen they deliver themselves from all Illusion 
 (or Ignorance) and attain a knowledge of the Truth, that is, 
 of their own identity AA’ith the one spiritual Essence. 
 
 Confessedly, moreoA^er, the Advaita or Non-duality of the 
 ^'ed^Ultist amounts practically (that is, in the vydcaharika or 
 ])iactical Avorld) to a kind of Dx^aita or Duality. 
 
 It is commonly said that Sankara, the great Yedantist 
 'J’'eacl:er of the 8th century of our era, AAms a stern upholder 
 of the Non-duality creed against the Dvaita, or Duality 
 creed. 
 
 On the other hand it is commonly alleged that the chief 
 teacher of the Duality (DA^aita) doctrine was the great 
 VaishnaAm teacher MadliA’a, aa-Iio is belieA'ed to have liAmd in 
 the Ifith century. 
 
 Strictly speaking, hoAA'CA^er, the only difference betAveen the 
 teaching of these tAvo eminent philosophei'S AAms that Sankara 
 taught that the separate spirits of men AA-ere the product of 
 an eternal Illusion united from all eternity AA'ith the one 
 Spiritual Essence, AAdiile IMadhva taught that the spirits of 
 men had a real eternal existence of their OAvn. 
 
 * The President of the Royal Society i»i a recent speecli (juoted this 
 saying of the eminent chemist Galen. 
 
DUALISM OF BRAHMAXICAL AND ZOROASTRIAN rillLOSOl’lIERS. 7 
 
 It is a question, indeed, whether one form of Dualism, which 
 ultimately became formulated in the Sankhya system of 
 philosophy, was not a more ancient belief in India than 
 Advaita or Non-duahty. 
 
 'J’he idea of a second principle, as necessary to the act of 
 creation, is vaguely implied in a text of the well-known hymn 
 of the Kig-veda (x, 129), thus ti-anslatable : — 
 
 “ In that one Being arose Desire, Avhich was the primal 
 germ of Mind, and the subtle bond of connection between 
 Entity and Nullity.” 
 
 Again, in an ancient Brahmana (Satapathabrahmana xiv, 4, 
 24), as well as in an ancient Dpanishad (Brihad-aranyaka i, 3), 
 it is affirmed that the “ One Being was not happy being 
 alone. 
 
 “ He wished for a Second. 
 
 “He caused his own self to fall in twain, and thus became 
 husband and wife.”’ 
 
 A still older idea was the supposed marriage of a 
 Heavenly Father (Dyo or Dyans) with Mother Earth (Prithivi) 
 for the creation of gods, men, and all creatures. 
 
 When the Sankhya philosophy was formulated its dis- 
 tinctive characteristic was the assertion of the eternal existence 
 of two principles : 
 
 1. A Producer or creative germ, named Prakriti (but also 
 called Maya or “Illusion”), and 
 
 2. A Spirit (Purusha). 
 
 This Spirit, however, is not one, as in the Vedanta ; but is 
 multitudinous, each human spirit existing of itself as an in- 
 dependent eternal entity. 
 
 Neither the Producer nor a Sph'it, however, can create by 
 itself. 
 
 The external Avorld (including the human frame, conscious- 
 ness, feeling, individuality, and mind) is evolved out of the 
 eternal creative germ, Prakidti, and yet only so evolved Avhen 
 an individual eternal spirit is associated with it. 
 
 It is abundantly clear, therefore, that the only distinction 
 between the so-called Unity-theory of the Vedanta and the 
 Duality of the Sankhya system seems to be that the germ of 
 the material world has an illusory etenial existence in the 
 one system, and a real eternal existence in the other. 
 
 And if this be so, I think I am justified in asserting that 
 a kind of dualistic woof CA^erywbere underlies the monistic 
 and pantheistic wai-p of Indian philosophy. 
 
 I may add that such an assertion is borne out by ocular 
 
8 
 
 SIR JI. M0NIKR-WII.LIA5IS OX THE MONISM, PANTHEISM, AND 
 
 observation, for it is certain that the idolatrons Avorship of 
 the Ling-a and Yoni* — united in one image and symbolizing 
 the mysterious union of the tAvo creatiA'e principles — meets 
 the eye of obserA^ant traA-ellers in every part of India. 
 
 And this is not all — the student of Indian philosophical 
 thought, AA'ho has been brought into actual contact Avith the 
 religious life and usages of the inhabitants of India in 
 their oaa'ii country, Avill obserA^e in every Aullage, and 
 almost in every nook and corner of the land, illustrations of 
 the remarkable fact that the IMonism and Pantheism of the 
 Vedanta are compatible A\’ith all Amrieties of religious belief — 
 noAA’ AA-ith Theism — noAv Avith Deism — noAV Avith Dualism — 
 noAA' AA'ith Triadism — that is, A\dth the AA’orship of the Indian 
 Triad (AATongly called the Indian Trinity), Brahma, Vishnu, and 
 8iva, the three gods aa'Iio, A\dth their AA’iAms, preside over 
 creation, presei’A'ation, and dissolution respecth’ely — and noAv 
 Avith all the grosser polytheism, polydemonism, and fetishism 
 associated AA'ith these three chief deities of the Hindu Pantheon. 
 
 Time AA'ill not admit of my going into this impoidant sub- 
 ject at any greater length; it aamII be sufficient for me to 
 state that, according to Indian philosophers, the one Being- 
 delights in manifesting his Essence in A'arious foi-ms. 
 
 He also delights in ignoring himself for a time, so that any 
 one of his forms may do homage to another, as to a superior 
 Being, or deal practically AA'ith another as A\nth a distinct 
 Being. 
 
 This alone AA'ill account for the multiplicity of diA'ine mani- 
 festations (popularly thought to be 330 millions), Avorshipped 
 or honoured as gods, although the number represented by 
 images is not large. 
 
 And here, too, lies the secret of the great difficulty of 
 Christianizing India according to the true meaning of Chris- 
 tianity. 
 
 For, according to the Bi-rdimanical theory. Chnstianity is to 
 be accepted as an example of the one Being’s many mani- 
 festations suited to Europeans. 
 
 Its excellence is CA'en sometimes admitted ; at any rate I 
 found that AA'henever I succeeded in pointing out to thoughtful 
 men the fundamental differences betAveen the religion of 
 Christians and that of Hindus, the reply generally Avas that 
 both might be true, according to the doctrine taught by one 
 of the oldest texts of the Rig-\'eda (1-164, 46), Ekam sad 
 
 * Only those who ha\'e studied Indian religions are likely' to know 
 that these symbols represent the phallic emblem (linga) and the emblem 
 of the opposite sex (yoni) united. 
 
DUALISM OK BKAIIMANICAL AND ZOROASTIUAN KHILOSOKIIEKS. 
 
 9 
 
 Vipra bahudha vadanti. “ Sages declare that the one Essence 
 manifests himself in various ways ; ” just as (according to a 
 later illustration) the metal gold, though really preser\dug 
 the unity of its nature everywhere, assumes different forms, 
 names, and uses in different places. 
 
 I must not conclude my remarks without adverting more 
 particularly to the theory of the existence of good and cauI 
 spirits — the respective sources of good and evil. 
 
 It is well known that the eternal existence of a good and 
 evil piinciple is a kind of Dualism, which is generally regarded 
 as a distinguishing feature of the Zoroastrian philosophy. 
 
 The idea, hoAvever, is by no means exclusively Zoroastrian. 
 The continual conflict between good and evil spirits is a 
 dominant idea in many other religious systems. 
 
 In Sankara’s commentary on tlie Chandogya Upanishad 
 (p. 26, 11. 2-8) there is a remarkable passage, describing the 
 constant struggle between good and eAul, knowledge and 
 ignoi’ance. 
 
 All Sanskrit literature, too, teems with descriptions of the 
 battle coutiuually going on between gods and evil demons ; 
 and images of the chief gods of the Hindu Pantheon fre- 
 quently represent them in the act of crushing their demon- 
 antagonists. 
 
 Krishna (a form of Vishnu) is often. seen bruising the head 
 of the malignant serpent Kiiliya, and Siva tramples, during a 
 kind of wild dance, on the prostrate body of the arch-fiend 
 Tripura. 
 
 As regards the Dualism of Zoroaster, I venture to siibmit 
 briefly to this Society the explanation of it given to me by 
 the learned Parsis of Bombay (esj^ecially by Mr. K. R. Cama). 
 
 Let me first remark that we read in the Gathas, that Zoro- 
 aster began his mission by declaring that : “ In the beginning 
 there were two spirits— each active. These are the good 
 and the base in thought, word, and deed.” “ I Avflll declare 
 the two primeval spirits of the world, of whom the better 
 One thus spoke to the eAul Oue — ‘Neither our minds, nor our 
 doctrines, nor our understandings, nor our belief, nor our 
 words, nor our actions, nor our laAVs, nor our souls agree.’ ” 
 
 The explanation given to me Avas that Zoroaster, although a 
 believer in one Supreme Being, and a teacher of Monotheism, 
 set himself to account for the existence of eAul, which could 
 not have its source in an all-Avise Creator. 
 
 He, therefore, taught thattwo opposite — but not opposing — 
 principles or forces, Avhich he calls “ T wins,” were inherent in 
 the nature of the Supreme Being, called by him Ahura Mazda 
 
10 SIR M. MOXIKR-AVII.I.IAMS OX THE MONISM, PANTHEISM, AND 
 
 (or in Persian Ormazd), and emanated from that Being, just 
 as in Hinduism, Vishnu and Siva emanate from the Supreme 
 Being Brahma. 
 
 These two forces were set in motion by Ahura IMazda, as 
 his appointed mode of maintaining the continuity of the 
 Universe. 
 
 The one Avas constructive, the other destructiA’e. 
 
 One created and composed. 
 
 The other disintegrated and decomposed, but only to co- 
 operate Avith the creative piiuciple by providing fresh raw 
 material for the Avork of re-composition. 
 
 Hence there could be no neAv life Avithout death, no exist- 
 ence AArithout non-existence. 
 
 Hence, also, according to Zoroaster, there Avas originally no 
 really antagonistic force of evil opposed to good. 
 
 The creatiA'e energy Avas called Ahura i\Iazda’s beneficent 
 spirit (Spento-i\lainyus), and the destructive force Avas called 
 his maleficent spirit (Angro-^Iainyus, afteiwards corrupted 
 into Ahriman), but only because the idea of eAul is connected 
 AAdth dissolution. 
 
 The tAvo spirits were merely antagonistic in name. 
 
 They were in reality co-operative and mutually helpful. 
 
 They Avere essential to the alternating processes of con- 
 struction and dissolution, thi-ough which cosmical being Avas 
 perpetuated. 
 
 The only real antagonism was that alternately brought 
 about by the free agent, man, Avho could hasten the Avork of 
 destruction or retard the work of construction by his OAvn acts. 
 
 It is therefore held that the so-called dualistic doctrines of 
 Zoroaster Avere compatible AAuth the absolute unity of the 
 one God (symbolized especially by Fire). 
 
 Ultimately, hoAvever, Zoroastrianism crystallized into a 
 hard and uncompromising dualism. 
 
 That is to say, in process of time, Spento-Mainyus became 
 merely another name for Ahura iMazda, as the eternal 
 principle of good, Avhile Angro-J\Iainyus or Ahriman became 
 altogether dissociated from i^hura Mazda, and couAmrted into 
 an eternal principle of eAul. 
 
 These two jirinciples were belieA’ed to be the sources of 
 two opposite creations AA:hich Avere incessantly at Avar. 
 
 On the one side was a celestial hierarchy, at the head of 
 Avhich was Ormazd ; on the other side, a demoniacal, at the 
 head of Avhich Avas Ahriman. 
 
 They are as opposed to each other as light to darkness, 
 falsehood to truth. 
 
Dt'AMSM OK UKAllMAXICAI, AND ZOUOASTKIAN PlIILOSOPHEKS. 1 1 
 
 The whole energy of a religions Indian Parsi in the present 
 day is concentrated on the endeavour to make himself — so 
 to speak — demon-proof, and this he considers can only be 
 accomplished by absolute pnrity symbolized by whiteness. 
 
 He is ever on his guard against bodily defilement, and 
 never goes out to his daily occupations withont first putting 
 on a sacred white shirt and a sacred wiiite girdle. Even the 
 most highly educated, enlightened, and Anglicized Parsis 
 are rigorous observers of this custom, though it seems 
 probable that their real creed has little in common with the 
 old and snperstitions belief in demons and evil spirits, but 
 rather consists in a kind of cold monotheistic pantheism. 
 
 How far Zoroastriau dualism had alfected the religious 
 opinions of the Babylonians at the time of the Jewish cap- 
 tivity is doubtful, but that the Hebrew prophets of those 
 days had to reckon Avith dualistic ideas seems probable from 
 Isaiah xlv, 6 : “ I am the Lord, and there is none else. I 
 form the light and create darkness. I make peace and create 
 evil. I, the Lord, do all these things.” The New Testament, 
 on the other hand, might be thought by a superficial reader 
 to lend some support to dualistic doctrines, inasmuch as it 
 asserts the personality of Satan, and takes for granted the 
 existence of evil spirits hostile to the spirits of men. 
 
 I need scarcely, however, point out that the Bible account 
 of the ongin, nature, and destiny of Satan and his angels 
 differs, ioto coelo, from the Zoroastrian description of Ahriman 
 and his host. 
 
 Nor need I add that the various monistic, pantheistic, and 
 dualistic theories, briefly indicated by me in this paper, are 
 utterly at variance with the Christian doctrine of a Personal, 
 Eternal, and Infinite Being existing and working outside man 
 and outside the material universe which He has Himself 
 created, and controlling both, and in the case of human 
 beings working not only outside man but in and through him. 
 
 Our Church of England Prayer Book tells us in one place 
 that God “ made all things of nothing,”* and this, no doubt, is 
 the meaning we give to the word “ create ” in the first chapter 
 of Genesis. But Ave are nowhere told, either in the Bible or 
 Prayer Book, that, having created material germs on the one 
 hand and the spirits of men on the other. He Avilled to endoAv 
 these tAvo distinct creations with an eternal independent 
 separate existence and an independent capacity for self- 
 evolution. 
 
 * See the third prayer at the end of the Marriage Service ; and com- 
 pare Psalm xc, 2. 
 
12 SIK M. MONIEK-WILLIAMS ON THE MONISM, PANTHEISM, ETC. 
 
 We knoAV, indeed, that God is Spirit {UveviJia 6 0e6s). 
 and that, having created man’s spirit with a separate person- 
 ality of its own, He has endowed it Avitli moral free agency; 
 that is, with the power to clioose or reject the good or the evil. 
 
 We know, too, that this freedom of choice is held by acute 
 thinkers to furnish a sufficiently satisfactory explanation of 
 the origin of evil without having recourse to the Indian 
 method of solving the difficulty through the doctrine of 
 metempsychosis. But the exact relationship of man’s spirit to 
 material organization is not revealed to us. Nor can we tell 
 whether the dissolution ot man’s body at death releases his . 
 spirit fi'om all connection with even the subtlest fonns of 
 matter, so that an intermediate conscious existence of entire 
 separation from matter is possible to it. But compare 
 Butler's Analogy, Part I, Ch. 1. 
 
 What we may surely believe is that God is always creating, 
 and that out of His eternal Workshop (if I may so speak 
 reverently) are for ever issuing new spirits and new material 
 forms. 
 
 Surely, too, we must believe that God is for ever super- 
 intending and supporting His creations; and that not a 
 single spirit and not a single material atom can exist for a 
 single instant without His upholding and \dvifying power. 
 
 We Christians, at any rate, who feel that we depend on 
 our Creator for life and breath and all things, may surely so 
 interpret the words of Christ, “ My F ather woi'keth hitherto 
 and I work.” 
 
 Postscript. 
 
 The Brrdimanical expression for the One Infinite Being 
 (Sac-cid-ananda, see p. 4) has been compared with the 
 Christian statement of God’s tri-une nature — God is Life 
 (Sat), God IS Light (i.e., absolute Intelligence = Cit or Chit), 
 and God is Love — but the difference between “God is Joy 
 (Ananda)” and “God is Love” must be noted. The sacredness 
 of the number three in all Eastern systems is remarkable. In 
 tills connexion I have heard it stated that there are not a 
 few cases in which three seems to exhaust all that can be 
 conceived of any subject, e.g.. Past, Present, and Future, of 
 time ; Length, Breadth, and Height, of space ; Solid, Liquid, 
 and Gaseous, of matter; and not less than three lines (a 
 triangle) enclose a space. 
 
 Uakhibon & Sons, Printers in Ordinary to Her Majesty, St. Martin's Lane. 
 
C|c iidflria 
 
 or 
 
 Ijilosapljkal Socittn of ®reat ^lifain. 
 
 lA, ADELPFII TERRACE, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. 
 
 Correspondence (including communications from intending Members 
 or Associates, &c.) to be addressed to “ The Secretary.” 
 
 THE PBIMABY OBJECTS. 
 
 LIIHIS SOCIETY has been founded for the purpose of promoting the following 
 -L Objects, which will be admitted by all to be of high importance both to 
 
 Religion and Science : — 
 
 First. — To investigate fully and impartially the most important questions of 
 Philosophy and Science, but more especially those that bear upon the great 
 truths revealed in Holy Scripture. 
 
 Second. — To associate Men of Science and Authors* who have already 
 been engaged in such investigations, and all others who may be interested 
 in them, in order to strengthen their efforts by association ; and by bringing 
 together the results of such labours, after full discussion, in the printed 
 Transactions of an Institution, to give greater force and influence to proofs 
 and arguments which might be little known, or even disregarded, if put 
 forward merely by individuals. 
 
 Third. — To consider the mutual bearings of the various scientific conclusions 
 arrived at in the several distinct branches into which Science is now 
 divided, in order to get rid of contradictions and conflicting hypotheses, and 
 thus promote the real advancement of true Science ; and to examine and 
 discuss all supposed scientific results with reference to final causes, and the 
 more comprehensive and fundamental principles of Philosophy proper, based 
 upon faith in the existence of one Eternal God, who in His wisdom created 
 all things very good. 
 
 Special advantages are secured to Country and Colonial Members and 
 Associates in the Journal of Transactions. 
 
 The Journal of Transactions 
 
 Contains the Papers read at the Meetings and the Discussions thereon. 
 
 Before these are published in the Journal, both are finally submitted to 
 their Authors for any revision, and MS. comments and supplementary remarks 
 are added, which have been sent in by such British, American, and other 
 Members to whom, as being specially qualified to contribute information 
 upon the respective subjects, proof copies of the Papers had been submitted 
 for consideration— the authors of Papers adding their final comments. These 
 arrangements, which are found to add greatly to the value of the Journal, are 
 carried out with a view to securing the special usefulness of the Journal to 
 all, whether home or Non-resident Members or Associates ; these thus 
 find in the Journal much valuable matter, and often much (contributed by men 
 of learning in all parts of the world) in addition to that which had come before 
 those actually present at the Meetings, (The Journal is sent post-free.) 
 
 * The Society now consists of 1,200 Subscribers (about one-third of whom 
 are Foreign Members) ; including Literary and Scientific Men and others 
 favourable to the Objects. (The present average annual increase is upwards 
 of a hundred.) 
 
THE VICTORIA INSTITUTE. 
 
 Pretidenl. 
 
 Sir George Gabbieu Stokes, Bart., D.C.L., M.P., Pres, of the Royal Society. 
 
 Vice-Pre$idenls. 
 
 Sir H. Babkly, K.C.B., G.C.M.G., F.R.S. 
 Sir J. Risdon Bennett, M.D., F.R.S. 
 
 Sir Joseph Fatrer, K.C.S.I., M.D., F.R.S. 
 
 The Rigrht Hon. The Lord Chancellor. 
 
 VV. Forsyth, Es^., Q.C., LL. D. 
 Rev. Robinson Thornton, D. 1). 
 A. McArthur, Esq., M.P. 
 
 Correspondent Members. 
 
 Professor L. Pasteur, F.R.S., Paris. | Sir J. W. Dawson, K.C.M.G., F.R.S. 
 
 Prof. Maspero. I H. Rassam, Esq. | Prof. A. H. Sayce. | M. B. Naville. | Count D’Hdlst. 
 The Council (24 Members). — Professor Allbynb-Nicholson, F.K.S.E. Revs. W. Abthob and 
 Dr. Angus. The Bishop op Wakbpibld. J. Batbman, Esq., F.R.S. J. F. La-Tbobb 
 Batbsian, F.R.S., F.K.S.E. Captain Cbbae, F.R.S. Dr. Gunning, F.R.S.E., F.R.C.S.E. 
 Surg.-Gen. Gordon, C.B. Dr. F. B. Hawkins, F.R.S. D. Howard, Esq., V. Pres. Chem. Soc. , 
 ■ Pres. S.C.I., Ac. Ac. 
 
 Trustees. — Sir Robert N. Fowler, Bart., M.P. ; R. Baxter, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Auditors.— G. Crawford Harrison, Esq. ; J. Allen, Esq. 
 
 Honorary Treasurer. — William Nowell West, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Sec. and Editor of Journal. — Captain Francis W. H. Petrie, F.6.S., Ac. 
 
 MEMBERSHIP AND SUBSCRIPTIONS. 
 
 Intending Members and Associates are requested to address “The Secretary.” 
 
 The Annual Subscription for Members is Two Guineas, with One Guinea 
 Entrance Fee (see privileges). The Annual Subscription for Associates is One 
 Guinea, without Entrance Fee. {All receive the Journal post free.) 
 
 In lieu of Annual Subscription, the payment of Twenty Guineas (without 
 Entrance Fee) will constitute a Life Member, or Ten Guineas a Life Associate. 
 
 The payment of a Donation of not less than Sixty Guineas qualifies for the office 
 of Vice- Patron, with all the privileges of a Life Member or Life Associate. 
 
 [It is to be understood, that only such as are professedly Christians are entitled 
 to become Metnbers.] 
 
 *** Subscriptions are payable to the “Victoria Institute’s” credit at 
 “ Ransom’s Bank,” 1, Pall Mall East, S.W., or may be remitted to the Secretary, 
 at the Office. Cheques or Post Office Orders (on General Post Office) should be 
 made payable to “ Victoria Institute or order,” and crossed “ Ransom & Co.” 
 
 PRIVILEGES. 
 
 Me.mbers — on election, are presented with any Volume of the First or Second 
 Series of Coo Journal of the Transactions, a.uA are entitled to a Copy of the Journal, 
 either in the Quarterly Parts, or the Annual (hound) Volume, or the years during 
 which they may subscribe, and to a copy of any other documents or books which may be 
 published under the auspices of the Society, and, on application, to a copy of every paper 
 re-published in the “People’s Edition” ; to the use of the Library (Books can be sent to the 
 country), Reading and Writing Rooms ; and to introduce two Visitors at each Meeting. 
 The Council are chosen from among the Members, who alone are eligible to vote 
 by ballot in determining any question at a General Meeting. Members are further 
 privileged to obtain any Volumes, other than that chosen, of the Transactions issued 
 prior to their joining the Institute at half-price (half-a-guinea each), or any Quarterly 
 Parts for past years at half-a-crown each. 
 
 The Library, Reading and Writing Rooms are open, for the use of the 
 Members only, from ten till five (Saturdays till two). The Institute 
 exchanges Transactions with the Royal Society and many other 
 leading English and Foreign Scientific bodies, whose Transaclione 
 are therefore added to the Library. 
 
 Associates — are entitled, to the Journal, id Quarterly Parts or in the Annual Volume, 
 for the years during which they may subscribe ; to obtain the earlier Volumes or Parts 
 at a reduced price ; and to introduce oue Visitor at each Meeting. 
 
 Members and Associates have the right to be present at all Meetings of the Society. 
 
 The Meetings, of which due notice is given, are held at Adelphi Terrace, at Eight 
 o’clock on the evenings of the First and Third Mondays of the Winter, Spring, and Summer 
 Months. Proof Copies of the Papers to be read can be had by those desirous of placine their 
 opinions thereon before the Members (when unable to attend, they can do this in writing). 
 
 Members and Associates on 1st January, 1871, 203. — Joined since: — In 1871, 
 91 1872, 109 1873, 110 1874, 111 1875, 115 1876, 107 1877, 
 
 100;— 1878, 101;— 1879, 105;— 1880, 104;— 1881, 122;— 1882, 122 ;— 188.3, 
 126 ;— 1884, 109 ;— 1885, 110 ;— 1886, 101 ;— 1887, Foreigfn, 47 ; Home, 62— 
 109 ; — 1888, Home and Foreign, 141 ; — 1889, 143. 
 

 s 
 
 - ^ s 
 
 s 2 
 
 o 
 z 
 
 S ' 
 
 a. 
 
 00 
 
 CQ 
 
 s ? 
 2 
 
 CC 
 
 Z ^ 
 
 o ? 
 
 »« CO 
 E~* cc 
 
 < ^ 
 r> ^ 
 
 01 
 O 
 H 
 O 
 
 > 
 
 2 
 
 *fc-» 
 
 v> 
 
 * 
 
 e 
 
 2 i 0) 
 
 E-i 
 
 < 
 
 E^ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 p-^ 
 
 > 
 
 to 
 
 s 
 
 o 
 
 « nJ 
 
 * <? 
 ® Ph 
 
 S£ 
 
 O 
 
 ^ *N 
 
 2 H 
 
 r^ 
 
 <» 
 
 s 
 
 ?s 
 
 O 
 
 *iO 
 
 «C 
 
 
 5- 
 
 ts 
 
 
 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 .g 
 
 
 S 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 1 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 at 
 
 s 
 
 «0 
 
 'f' 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 § 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 qS 
 
 S 
 
 
 s 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 e 
 
 
 o g 
 
 o 
 •< z 
 d 
 
 o z 
 
 W C J, 
 ^ 1-2 - 
 
 H C 
 to C H 
 Z o3 
 1— I _tr C 
 
 <1 ^>2 2 
 
 K 
 
 O 
 
 t-i 
 
 o 
 
 S 
 
 rP 
 
 °r§ 
 
 CO <^ 
 
 S - 
 
 O <! 
 
 5£ 
 
 O 
 
 £ >1 
 t-i 
 
 ^ ce 
 
 I s 
 
 O o 
 
 a 
 
 tn 
 
 5 
 
 &-I 
 
 JOURNAL OF TRANSACTIONS. 
 
 69 . 
 
 70 . 
 
 71 
 
 72 . 
 
 73 . 
 
 74 . 
 
 VOL. XVIII. 
 
 On Misrepresentations of Christianity. By Lord O’Neill (the late). 
 
 Science not Opposed to Revelation. By J. L. Porter, D.D., J.iL.D. (the late). 
 
 Recent Egyptological Research in its Biblical Relation. By the Rev. H. G. Tomkins. 
 Cuneiform Inscriptions as illustrative of the times of the Jewish Captivity. By W. St. 
 Chad Boscawen, F.R.Hist.Soc. 
 
 Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon — On Recently Discovered Inscriptions of this King. By 
 
 E. A. Budge, M.A., M.R.A.S. 
 
 Buddhism. By Rev. R. Collins. Remarks by Dr. Leitner (Lahore), Professor Rhts 
 Davids, Mr. Rassam, Rev. S. Coles (Ceylon), &c. Also a Full Note on Krishna. 
 Pessimism. By (the late) W. P. James, Esq. 
 
 On the Prehistoric Factory of Flints at Spiennes. By Rev. J. Magens Mello, F.G.S. 
 
 The Evolution of the Pearly Nautilus. By S. R. Pattison, Esq., F.G.S. 
 
 On “Prehistoric Man in Egypt and the Lebanon.” By Sir J. W. Dawson, K.C.M.G., 
 
 F. R.S., McGill University, Montreal. Remarks by Sir Warington W. Smith, F.R.S., 
 W. Boyd Dawkins, F.R.S., T. Rupert Jones, F.R.S., T. Wiltshire, F.G.S., Colonel 
 Herschel, F.R.S., Dr. Rae, F.R.S. 
 
 VOL. XIX. 
 
 ' On the Inductive Logic. By Prof. R. L. Dabney, D.D., LL.D. Speeches by Sir H. 
 
 Barkly, K.C. B., G.C.M.’G., F.R.S., Sir J. Lefroy, K.C.M.G., F.R.S., &c. 
 
 On Evolution by Natural Selection. J. Hassell, Esq. 
 
 / Remarks on Evolution by Professor Virchow. 
 
 On the Recency of the Close of the Glac’al Epoch. By D. Mackintosh, Esq., F.G.S. 
 
 Communications from Prof. T. Rupert Jones, F.R.S., and others. 
 
 On the recession of Niagara (with the United States Government Survey Diagrams). 
 
THE VICTORIA INSTITUTE. 
 
 On the Religion of the Aboriginal Tribes of India. By Professor J. Avery. Remarks by 
 ; General Haiq, Mr. H. RassaM, and others. 
 
 On the Evolution of Savages by Degradation. Rev. F. A. Allen, M. A. 
 
 I Some Thoughts on the Evolution of Religions. By Rev. W. R. Blackett, M.A. 
 
 On the Relation of Fossil Botany to Theories of Evolution. By late W. P. James, F. L.S. 
 Remarks by Sir R. Owen, F.R.S., Prof. W. Carbctheks, F.R.S., Dr. J. Braxton 
 75. ’ Hicks, F.R.S., &c. 
 
 ] Was Primeval Man a Savage ? By J. Hassell, Esq. 
 
 I Remarks on Evolution and Development. By Rev. J. White, M.A. 
 
 On Some Characteristics of Primitive Religions. By Rev. R. Collins, .VI. A. 
 
 ' Human Responsibility. By Rev. G. Blencowe. 
 
 76 On the Worship and Traditions of the Aborigines of America. By Rev. M. Eells, M.A. 
 Remarks by Professor J. 0. Dorsey, U.S. Survey. 
 
 Note on Comparative Religions. 
 
 VOL. XX. 
 
 77. Special Address by the Institute’s President, Sir G. G. Stokes, Bart., M.A., D.C.L., 
 
 President of the Royal Society. 
 
 Egypt: Physical, Historical, Literary, and Social. By J. Leslie Porter, D.D.,D.C. L., 
 (the late). Remarks by the Earl of Belmore, Right Hon. A. S. Ayrton (the late), &c. 
 
 On the Theory of Natural Selection and the Theory of Design. By Professor Duns, D. D., 
 F.R.S.E. Remarks by Right Hon. Lord Grimthorpe, kc. 
 
 78. On Agnosticism. By J. Hassell, Esq. 
 
 On the Structure of the Gorilla. By E. Charlesworth, Esq., F.G.S. : with illustration. 
 
 Notes on the Antiquity of Man. By the Editor. The Chronology of Animal Life on the 
 Earth prior to the Advent of Man. By Sir J. William Dawson, K.C.M.G., F.R.S., 
 President of the British Association. 
 
 Historical Evidences of the Migration of Abram. By W. St. C. Boscawen, F.R.Hist.Soc., 
 with drawings. Notes oy Professor Sayce, E. A. W. Budge, Esip, kc. 
 
 A Samoan Tradition of Creation. Rev. T. Powell, F.L.S. (the late); Notes on the Islands. 
 
 79. The Fundamental Assumptions of Agnosticism. By Rev. H. J. Clarke. 
 
 On Miracles. By Rev. H. C. M. Watson. Remarks by Lord Grimthorpe, &c. 
 
 On Accounts of the Creation. By W. P. James, Esq., F.L.S. (the late). 
 
 80. On Final Cause. By Professor R. L. Dabney, D.D., LL.D. 
 
 On Structure and Structureless. By Prof. Lionel S. Beale, M.B., F. R.S. 
 
 On the Meteorology of Syria and Palestine. By ProfessorG. E. Post, F.L.S. (with chart). 
 Remarks by Sir Joseph Fayrer, K.C.S.I., F.R.S., &c. 
 
 On the Geographical Names on the List of Thothmes III. By Professor G. Maspero 
 (with map). Remarks by Sir Charles Wilson ,K.C.B., K.C.M.G., F.R.S., Major 
 C. R. CONDER, R.E., Dr. Wright, kc. Note on Excavations round the Sphinx. By 
 Prof. Maspero. 
 
 VOL. XXI.— 1887-8. 
 
 81. Results oi an Expedition to Arabia Petrsea and Palestine (with chart). By Professor F.. 
 
 Hull, F.R.S., Director of the Geological Survey of Ireland. 
 
 Jewish, Phoenician, and Early Greek Art. By Rev. J. Leslie Porter, D.C.L. (the late). 
 
 82. The Discoveries at Sidon. 
 
 The Empire of the Hittites. By Rev. W. Wright, D.D. Note on theHittites. 
 
 Canaan, Ancient and Modem. By Professor Tristram, F.R.S. 
 
 On Caves. By Professor T. McK. Hughes, F.R.S. (Cambridge), with comments by Sir 
 J. W. Dawson, K.C.M.G., F.R.S., Sir Warington W. Smyth, F.R.S., and others. 
 Oriental Entomology. By Rev. F. A. Walker, D.D., F.L.S. Notes by S. T. Klein, Esq., 
 F.L.S., and others. 
 
 Petra. By Professor E. Hull, F.R.S. (with chart). 
 
 83. On Krishna. By Rev. R. Collins, M.A. Notes by Sir M. Monikr-Williams, K.C.I.K, 
 
 Professors Max Muller, E. B. Cowell, Douglas, de Lacouperie, Dr. Leitner, and 
 Dr. Edersheim (the late). 
 
 The Pedigree of the Coral Reefs of England. By S. R. Pattison, F.G.S. Remarks by 
 Sir G. G. Stokes, Bart., P. R.S. 
 
 Practical Optimism. By the Most Rev. Bishop Saumarez Smith, D.D. 
 
 84. Traditions of the Aborigines of North America. By Rev. S. D. Peet (with illustrations). 
 On the Beauty of Nature. By Lord Grimthorpe, with special paper by Rev. W. 
 
 .A.RTHUR M iVa 
 
 Evolution. By Rev. H. J. Clarke, M. A. RemarksbySirJ. W. Dawson, K.C.M.G.,F.R.S. 
 Appendices ; The Jewish Nation and Diseases. Egyptian Discoveries in 1888 (Library 
 List, &c.) The Sacred Books of the East. By Sir M. Monier-M illiams, K.C.I.E. 
 
B131.M74 
 
 Remarks on the monism, pantheism, and 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 00158 6264