APPENDIX A
Letter from Satyendranath Tagore
See Vol. I, p. 348.
Ahmedabad, Guzrat, May 13, 1865.
My dear Sir,— I promised when I had the pleasure of seeing you at Oxford, to send you some information on the tenets and working of the Brahma Somaj. I am afraid that the materials which I can lay before you are too scanty to be useful or satisfactory. It is this feeling of uncertainty which has deterred me from writing to you so long. Rammohun Roy, whom the Bengal Theists regard as the great founder of their religion, has left no works from which its distinct tenets could be gathered. The fundamental principle of all his teaching was certainly Monotheism. His liberal views may be witnessed in the trust-deed in regard to a particular building, set apart for worship of the true God in accordance with the principle of the Brahma Somaj. His was, for the most part, a negative task, that of pulling down the later idolatry of the Puranas. He tried, moreover, to cull out, from the pages of the Koran, the Bible, and the Upanishads, those portions which appeared to him to contain the pure doctrine of Theism, His work called Precepts of Jesus, an Arabic work of a controversial character, is constantly dinned into our ears as his best production. His numerous treatises on the Vedas, Upanishads, &c., I think, would bear out my assertion that his leading idea was to establish the doctrine of Monotheism, but that he failed to build up a positive system of religion. The immediate followers of this great Hindu reformer endeavoured, though feebly, to uphold the Vedas, and even some of the later Vedic writings, as Revelation. The earlier Brahmas seem to have imbibed from their leader an idea that the doctrines of Theism are too pure and sublime to suit the gross ideas of the common people, and that therefore some sort of external authority is necessary to convince them. It was soon felt that the Veda, Vedanta, Upanishads, &c., containing as they do a mass of heterogeneous subjects, philosophical and unphilosophical, could not stand the test of reason in their entirety — that they must either be held to the full, or given up entirely as Revelation. Though the earlier Brahmas laid so much stress on the Vedas, yet it does not appear that any Veda scholars rose from among them. More attention, it seems, was from the beginning paid to the Upanishads. The present President and Acharya1 [Keshub Chunder Sen.] of the Brahma Somaj had his mind first awakened, and his spiritual aspirations fed, by some of the sublime portions of those wild treatises. When he first took them up (he picked up a torn leaf accidentally which excited his curiosity), and began to pore into their pages with an earnestness he never felt before, what struck him most was the complete absence of idolatry in what he read. Many of the Pantheistic doctrines contained in them were easily construed into Monotheism, and the result of the President’s studies was a collection of passages from several of the Upanishads, breathing sublime and pure sentiments towards the Supreme Being. This collection is called the Brahma Dharma, and may be considered as the textbook for the Liturgy and forms of worship of the Brahmas. It has supplied texts to the Acharya, when acting as a minister and preacher of the Somaj, for sermons in Bengali which could scarcely be surpassed anywhere in sublimity of thought and vivid representation of spiritual truths. There is another little book in Bengali, prepared by me from his oral lectures, called Doctrines and tenets of the Brahma religion.
A Brahma, before he can be recognized as such, is called upon to subscribe to a settled form of faith and practice. The cardinal points of his faith are: —
1. In the beginning there was nothing but the one true God. He it was who created the universe.
2. He is the true, the good, and the living God; present in all time, pervading all space, infinite, omnipotent, everlasting.
3. In His worship is our true happiness in this world, and only salvation in the next.
4. Our true worship consists in loving the Lord, and fulfilling the duties He has enjoined.
These are the cardinal points of faith, which every Brahma binds himself to cherish. As regards his practice, he publicly renounces idolatry, and holds himself to a daily offering of prayer and worship to the one true God. You will perceive that the four doctrinal points, as I have given them, include to the full the doctrine of Immortality. It is written that the soul’s true worship of its Maker, dependence on His absolute goodness, and fulfilling of the Law, are the means of its salvation in the world to come. Our solid hope of immortality proceeds from our consciousness of that union with the divine, which has its beginning only in this world, but which is a sure guarantee of the life everlasting and bliss undying which is reserved to the faithful, the very shadow of which supports the soul in her sorrows and trials in this world.
There have been some attempts recently made to establish some sort of ceremonial in accordance with the principles of Brahmaism. The first impetus was given to them by the respected Acharya of the Somaj on the occasion of his daughter’s marriage. It has been for a long time our Acharya’s earnest endeavour to get rid of idolatry in all its branches. He waited till all was ripe for his noble design, and on the occasion of his daughter’s marriage he succeeded in striking a deadly blow against idolatry, which has not since dared to show its face in his family. This merely negative step of breaking through idolatry created such a sensation among the Acharya’s relatives, that one and all kept themselves aloof from the wedding. To do away completely with idolatrous portions of the marriage ceremony, mere removal of the idol was not enough; some Mantras used on that occasion, and some other portions of the ceremony, had to be rejected. This improved ceremonial has since been adopted by a few Brahma families. Not only marriage, but Nama Kurana mourning and other domestic ceremonies, have been invested with a new form.
I need scarcely remark here, that although something has been done to discard idolatry, and to spread the doctrines of pure Theism in Bengal, yet much remains to be accomplished. Some of the leading Brahmas seem to forget that our religious education cannot go on isolated from our social and moral culture, that all the different parts of our inner life are intimately connected. Duty and good work are the limbs of Brahmaism, without which faith is lame and powerless. We have the mass of the people to educate and generally to elevate. We have to emancipate our ladies from the darkness of ignorance and the degrading thraldom of the zenana. We have to pull down idolatry and caste, which have enslaved the heart and intellect of millions of our flesh and blood. We have to do all this and more, before we can rear up the superstructure of a pure religion on a sound and durable basis. The social life of a Hindu is thoroughly interwoven with un- meaning forms of religion, The whole system of caste is a monstrous imposition sanctioned by religion. The Brahmana must put on his sacred thread, which is the badge of his spiritual superiority. All purely social acts have a religious sanction attached to them. A Brahmana therefore who has renounced with all his heart idolatry and Hindu superstitions, has to exert his moral courage at every step of his life’s career. The Brahmas, as I have already hinted, now admit no book-revelation. They admit, indeed, that there is some manifestation of divine will in ail revelations, inasmuch as they are utterances of souls religiously pure and noble. But the great doctrine on which the Brahmas stand, is internal revelation— revelation to individual souls. As there arise now and then in this world prodigies of intellect, towering above their fellow beings, so there are sent men gifted with religious and moral intuitions in far more than ordinary measure. They are meant as our examples. The great Being who sends to this world individuals strongly stamped with the divine, does not yet cease to inspire the world with His presence and reveal Himself to the prayer of faith. It is to Him only that we are bound to offer our tribute of worship and allegiance. The Brahmas, however, would not fail to appreciate the beauty of the moral precepts of Christ, or the sense of absolute trust and dependence on Providence, as taught by Mohammed.
In regard to the doctrine of Atonement, the Brahmas are, I am disposed to think, at variance with some of the Christians. We are told by the missionaries that we are sinners—no religion has ever doubted the fact. Then we are reminded that nothing can save us from our sins but belief in a Christ crucified. The Brahmas hold that it is God’s absolute goodness, from which alone we can hope for our salvation. We cannot undo that which we have done— all we can do is to repent for our past sins and try with all our strength to amend our future. We are not left alone, but if we pray Heaven with an earnest and lowly heart for purity and strength, God will send His blessings to us. Some of these missionaries would turn us out of God’s mercy-seat, by frightening us with the awful name of Justice, as if it is something incompatible with His goodness and mercy. If God’s mercy and justice will not and cannot save us, the Brahmas ask, what will? ‘Christ’s blood,’ is the answer. Tell us how? Christ was innocent, and, as you say, perfectly pure. He took upon Himself, it is said, all our sins, and died a torturing death. This was God’s dispensation to save sinners. We cannot reconcile this with our idea of God’s justice. Kill the innocent to save the guilty, kill him not merely in a physical sense, but throw on him all the sins of all the world, and drown him to death in an ocean of sins, that all sinners might escape! We are landed in this by the ordinary theory of atonement. We have a full faith in immortality, without which religion itself would be unmeaning. The Brahma believes in a system of rewards and punishments in a future world, and in unending progress of the soul towards perfection and happiness. What the exact nature of that world is to be, no religion has attempted to set forth without falling into fanciful absurdities. The Brahma, I may remark by the way, is horrified at the idea of eternal hell-fire, with which (the minister of) Christ so often threatens refractory individuals. It is commonly maintained that Brahmaism or Theism is too theoretical to maintain its ground. The generality of people want something more substantial to stand upon than the vague doctrines of Theism. Whether pure Theism, divested of all false forms and false revelations, which hold such marvellous ascendency in this world, will ever be anywhere dominant, I cannot pretend to say. Many physical improvements, social and moral movements to which the ancients were utter strangers, have taken a start in the modern world, and such an advent may be hoped for in regard to Theism, if it be God’s Truth. There are hopeful signs of the spread of Brahmaism in India, notwithstanding the serious obstacles which obstruct its progress.
The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Muller
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 2:19 am
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 2:29 am
Appendix B
Max Muller’s Speech at the Peace Festival
May, 1871
See Vol. I, p. 442.
Ladies and Gentlemen—
'Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.' Yes, but the heart may be too full, and one hardly dares to dive into the depths of the soul, and to give utterance to what so powerfully excites and moves us. I feel that I shall not find the right words to-day; but I know that you will understand this and forgive it: for, like my own heart, the hearts of all whom I here address are full, I believe, of overpowering feelings and thoughts, full even to over- flowing— full of thankfulness for what has been achieved— full of hope for what has still to be achieved— full of rejoicing as we think of the brave soldiers who, covered with glory, are returning to their homes— full of mourning as we remember those dear to us who are never to return, but whose memory will be sacred to us for ever— full of regret as we recall the men who from the beginning of this century have striven and suffered like martyrs for the deliverance of Germany, who prophetically looked forward to this day of victory, but have not lived to see it— full of joyful pride as we look to the heroes, who through word and deed have completed the great and difficult task of the union and freedom of Germany,— yes, full of enthusiasm as we pronounce the names of our statesmen, our generals, our young Fritz, our old hero-Emperor— but, above and beyond all, full of love for our great and beautiful and noble, and now at last again united and free, Fatherland!
Yes, my German countrymen, Germany has never known greater days; and it is right that we— I mean especially we here in a foreign country— should feel and remember this, and derive strength and comfort from it. The present quickly becomes the past, and even the greatest events look smaller at a distance. Therefore the pictures which have just passed before your eyes were meant to turn the past again into the present, and give new life to it in our remembrance. You have seen how Germania calls her children together to her defence, to guard, to fight for the Rhine. You have seen how she distributes her arms, and how the German host— that is, the German people— pours forth from every city and village of the Fatherland, to guard freedom and honour, and to fight for life or death. ‘All Germany stands unanimous in arms' — that royal word sounded on the second of August as a blast of a trumpet from the old fortress of Mayence, in every palace, in every cottage where beat a German heart. Do you still remember the feelings which then moved our hearts? Not with light, no, with heavy, heavy hearts we saw the dreadful tragedy of war unrolled. We did not believe in rapid victory— we were prepared for a long and hard struggle — we thought of 1806, but we also thought of 1813.
And what gave us our confidence in our army and in our people, and the trust that the just cause must prevail in the end? Four things I have to mention.
First comes German courage; not that wild frenzy which at every disagreeable word grasps the hilt. No, that is not German courage. No people on earth has borne so much as the German. But when not only the independence of a people is curtailed, and its natural development impeded from without— nay, when the old sacred frontiers are invaded, when some fine morning the newly-invented engines of death are tried on the inhabitants of a peaceful city, then the measure is full, patience becomes indignation, indignation wrath unto death— death is better than life under such an outrage. ‘The people rose, the storm broke.’
In the second place, I name German Diligence. Gentlemen, we have often been abused as a nation of schoolmasters and Professors. I know of no more honourable abuse, and I am firmly convinced that Germany owes much of its great success in war to its hard-working schoolmasters and Professors. The German army is an educated and an intelligent army. Through determined, unbending diligence— through hard, ungrudging work from morning till evening —has our German army become what it is; so that, as in a loom, one touch moves and intertwines a thousand threads, no thread breaks, no pattern fails. Genius is indeed a long patience.
In the third place, I name the German sense of duty, and in war perfect obedience. When a great work has to be achieved, the individual must sacrifice for a time his personal views and wishes, must stay like a soldier on the battle-field. Gentlemen, people have dared to question the discipline of the German army. Lies have been invented, and when they had been thoroughly refuted, people said, ‘There is no smoke without fire.’ That is a cowardly proverb. Translate it into German, and you will see how false it is, ‘There is no lie without truth.’ If such a proverb were believed, the honour of no man would be safe. That in an army of nearly a million there should be some black sheep is not surprising. But before the judgement-seat of history it will appear that in no war has there been so little unnecessary cruelty, in no war has every crime been punished with so much severity, in no war has humanity achieved such triumphs as in the last German war of liberation. We are prouder of these triumphs than of all the triumphs of our arms.
In the fourth place, I mention German perseverance, undauntedness even in misfortune, which is founded on a firm trust in God, and in a Divine Providence. People have not hesitated to scoff at this German trust in God; this faith in the Lord of Hosts. But we keep to our own old German way. Before the battle our army sings with Theodor Korner, ‘Father, I call to Thee’; it sings after the battle the old psalm which our Luther has changed into a popular song, ‘ Our God is a strong tower.’
These four qualities— German Courage, German Diligence, German Sense of Duty, and German Perseverance— have been to us the sure warrants of victory. They pervade the whole army; but I may name for each a living representative.
As representative of German Courage, I name Bismarck. His heart never failed him.
As representative of German Diligence, I name Moltke. He is the real, true, indefatigable German Professor, and though he can be silent in seven languages, his last lecture will not soon be forgotten by the world.
As representative of German Sense of Duty, I name the Crown Prince. No one hates war more than he does; no one has done his duty so faithfully, though often with a heavy heart.
As representative of German Perseverance, I name our Emperor. That man has indeed clung to his purpose. At the battle of Jena he was exactly as old as Hannibal when his father made him take his famous oath, and what bitter days has he gone through since 1 But, undismayed, he has carried on the one work of his life, the raising and strengthening of the German army, till the disgrace of Jena was wiped out on the field of Sedan.
With such irresistible powers Germany began the war and brought it gloriously to an end; and we have to thank the Statesman, the Generals, the Emperor, the German Army, and the ‘God who made iron grow,’ that we celebrate to-day this happy festival of peace.
We celebrate it in a foreign country;— but is England really a foreign country to us? I confess I hardly ever felt this, not even during this war, when many a dastardly word fell on the English side, and also on the German. I feel that in England I am in a friend’s, not in an enemas country. There are even liberal and rational people, who, during the late war, have judged wrongly of the German nation. Gentlemen, you know that in England a man is worth very little who is not attacked and abused by some party. There are insults of which one ought to be proud, as there is praise of which one ought to be ashamed. Were I to mention the names of those who, from beginning to end, have remained true to the German cause, you would hear names that have the best ring, not only in England, but in the whole world. The kernel of the English people is not against us; the true aristocracy of the country is with us.
And why? Not only because the same blood runs in our veins— not because ‘English is, after all, but Old Low-German’—not because the Reformation has its two strongest pillars in Germany and England— no, I can give you a better and a deeper reason. It is so because the Germans and English owe allegiance to the same queen, and recognize the same majesty as their highest authority, and that queen and that majesty is the Voice of Conscience, That is the firm ground on which the greatness of England stands immovable, on which the greatness of Germany is being built up.
Gentlemen, the political guidance of Europe belongs in the immediate future to those two so closely related nations; the political guidance of the whole civilized world belongs to the English, the Americans, and the Germans. If these three Teutonic nations hold together, the world will have peace again. But if these three Teutonic nations are divided by suspicion, jealousy, or pride, the furies of war will never be chained in Europe.
Therefore, if this our festival is to be a true peace festival, let us forget from this moment all bitterness; let us do what we can, every one in his own small sphere, in order to maintain mutual respect, and a firm friendship founded on it, between England, Germany, and America. The festival which we celebrate to-day should not be a passing ebullition of joy and gladness, but should receive a higher sanction and confirmation, and become a festival of peace and con- cord for all times and all people.
The memory of the great days of the years 1870-1 should never fade, but retain its life and vigour, and support in coming generations the same sentiment of patriotism which glows in our hearts to-day— which has brought us together to-day, no longer as North Germans or South Germans, as Protestants or Catholics, as Liberals or Conservatives— no, as brothers, as sons of one Fatherland, as children of one great and beautiful and noble, and now at last again united and free, Germany.
Max Muller’s Speech at the Peace Festival
May, 1871
See Vol. I, p. 442.
Ladies and Gentlemen—
'Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.' Yes, but the heart may be too full, and one hardly dares to dive into the depths of the soul, and to give utterance to what so powerfully excites and moves us. I feel that I shall not find the right words to-day; but I know that you will understand this and forgive it: for, like my own heart, the hearts of all whom I here address are full, I believe, of overpowering feelings and thoughts, full even to over- flowing— full of thankfulness for what has been achieved— full of hope for what has still to be achieved— full of rejoicing as we think of the brave soldiers who, covered with glory, are returning to their homes— full of mourning as we remember those dear to us who are never to return, but whose memory will be sacred to us for ever— full of regret as we recall the men who from the beginning of this century have striven and suffered like martyrs for the deliverance of Germany, who prophetically looked forward to this day of victory, but have not lived to see it— full of joyful pride as we look to the heroes, who through word and deed have completed the great and difficult task of the union and freedom of Germany,— yes, full of enthusiasm as we pronounce the names of our statesmen, our generals, our young Fritz, our old hero-Emperor— but, above and beyond all, full of love for our great and beautiful and noble, and now at last again united and free, Fatherland!
Yes, my German countrymen, Germany has never known greater days; and it is right that we— I mean especially we here in a foreign country— should feel and remember this, and derive strength and comfort from it. The present quickly becomes the past, and even the greatest events look smaller at a distance. Therefore the pictures which have just passed before your eyes were meant to turn the past again into the present, and give new life to it in our remembrance. You have seen how Germania calls her children together to her defence, to guard, to fight for the Rhine. You have seen how she distributes her arms, and how the German host— that is, the German people— pours forth from every city and village of the Fatherland, to guard freedom and honour, and to fight for life or death. ‘All Germany stands unanimous in arms' — that royal word sounded on the second of August as a blast of a trumpet from the old fortress of Mayence, in every palace, in every cottage where beat a German heart. Do you still remember the feelings which then moved our hearts? Not with light, no, with heavy, heavy hearts we saw the dreadful tragedy of war unrolled. We did not believe in rapid victory— we were prepared for a long and hard struggle — we thought of 1806, but we also thought of 1813.
And what gave us our confidence in our army and in our people, and the trust that the just cause must prevail in the end? Four things I have to mention.
First comes German courage; not that wild frenzy which at every disagreeable word grasps the hilt. No, that is not German courage. No people on earth has borne so much as the German. But when not only the independence of a people is curtailed, and its natural development impeded from without— nay, when the old sacred frontiers are invaded, when some fine morning the newly-invented engines of death are tried on the inhabitants of a peaceful city, then the measure is full, patience becomes indignation, indignation wrath unto death— death is better than life under such an outrage. ‘The people rose, the storm broke.’
In the second place, I name German Diligence. Gentlemen, we have often been abused as a nation of schoolmasters and Professors. I know of no more honourable abuse, and I am firmly convinced that Germany owes much of its great success in war to its hard-working schoolmasters and Professors. The German army is an educated and an intelligent army. Through determined, unbending diligence— through hard, ungrudging work from morning till evening —has our German army become what it is; so that, as in a loom, one touch moves and intertwines a thousand threads, no thread breaks, no pattern fails. Genius is indeed a long patience.
In the third place, I name the German sense of duty, and in war perfect obedience. When a great work has to be achieved, the individual must sacrifice for a time his personal views and wishes, must stay like a soldier on the battle-field. Gentlemen, people have dared to question the discipline of the German army. Lies have been invented, and when they had been thoroughly refuted, people said, ‘There is no smoke without fire.’ That is a cowardly proverb. Translate it into German, and you will see how false it is, ‘There is no lie without truth.’ If such a proverb were believed, the honour of no man would be safe. That in an army of nearly a million there should be some black sheep is not surprising. But before the judgement-seat of history it will appear that in no war has there been so little unnecessary cruelty, in no war has every crime been punished with so much severity, in no war has humanity achieved such triumphs as in the last German war of liberation. We are prouder of these triumphs than of all the triumphs of our arms.
In the fourth place, I mention German perseverance, undauntedness even in misfortune, which is founded on a firm trust in God, and in a Divine Providence. People have not hesitated to scoff at this German trust in God; this faith in the Lord of Hosts. But we keep to our own old German way. Before the battle our army sings with Theodor Korner, ‘Father, I call to Thee’; it sings after the battle the old psalm which our Luther has changed into a popular song, ‘ Our God is a strong tower.’
These four qualities— German Courage, German Diligence, German Sense of Duty, and German Perseverance— have been to us the sure warrants of victory. They pervade the whole army; but I may name for each a living representative.
As representative of German Courage, I name Bismarck. His heart never failed him.
As representative of German Diligence, I name Moltke. He is the real, true, indefatigable German Professor, and though he can be silent in seven languages, his last lecture will not soon be forgotten by the world.
As representative of German Sense of Duty, I name the Crown Prince. No one hates war more than he does; no one has done his duty so faithfully, though often with a heavy heart.
As representative of German Perseverance, I name our Emperor. That man has indeed clung to his purpose. At the battle of Jena he was exactly as old as Hannibal when his father made him take his famous oath, and what bitter days has he gone through since 1 But, undismayed, he has carried on the one work of his life, the raising and strengthening of the German army, till the disgrace of Jena was wiped out on the field of Sedan.
With such irresistible powers Germany began the war and brought it gloriously to an end; and we have to thank the Statesman, the Generals, the Emperor, the German Army, and the ‘God who made iron grow,’ that we celebrate to-day this happy festival of peace.
We celebrate it in a foreign country;— but is England really a foreign country to us? I confess I hardly ever felt this, not even during this war, when many a dastardly word fell on the English side, and also on the German. I feel that in England I am in a friend’s, not in an enemas country. There are even liberal and rational people, who, during the late war, have judged wrongly of the German nation. Gentlemen, you know that in England a man is worth very little who is not attacked and abused by some party. There are insults of which one ought to be proud, as there is praise of which one ought to be ashamed. Were I to mention the names of those who, from beginning to end, have remained true to the German cause, you would hear names that have the best ring, not only in England, but in the whole world. The kernel of the English people is not against us; the true aristocracy of the country is with us.
And why? Not only because the same blood runs in our veins— not because ‘English is, after all, but Old Low-German’—not because the Reformation has its two strongest pillars in Germany and England— no, I can give you a better and a deeper reason. It is so because the Germans and English owe allegiance to the same queen, and recognize the same majesty as their highest authority, and that queen and that majesty is the Voice of Conscience, That is the firm ground on which the greatness of England stands immovable, on which the greatness of Germany is being built up.
Gentlemen, the political guidance of Europe belongs in the immediate future to those two so closely related nations; the political guidance of the whole civilized world belongs to the English, the Americans, and the Germans. If these three Teutonic nations hold together, the world will have peace again. But if these three Teutonic nations are divided by suspicion, jealousy, or pride, the furies of war will never be chained in Europe.
Therefore, if this our festival is to be a true peace festival, let us forget from this moment all bitterness; let us do what we can, every one in his own small sphere, in order to maintain mutual respect, and a firm friendship founded on it, between England, Germany, and America. The festival which we celebrate to-day should not be a passing ebullition of joy and gladness, but should receive a higher sanction and confirmation, and become a festival of peace and con- cord for all times and all people.
The memory of the great days of the years 1870-1 should never fade, but retain its life and vigour, and support in coming generations the same sentiment of patriotism which glows in our hearts to-day— which has brought us together to-day, no longer as North Germans or South Germans, as Protestants or Catholics, as Liberals or Conservatives— no, as brothers, as sons of one Fatherland, as children of one great and beautiful and noble, and now at last again united and free, Germany.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 2:37 am
Appendix C
Speech of Dean Liddell, February 15, 1876
See Vol. II, p. 7.
From a letter written by Professor Max Muller, bearing date December 1, 1875, the University learnt, with surprise and regret, that it was the Professor’s intention to resign his office at the end of the Academical year. The reasons he gave were that he had served the University as Professor for exactly a quarter of a century; that the chief work of his life had been the publication from MSS. of the text and commentary of the oldest of the sacred books of India; that though this work had been completed, he wished to devote himself to the task of making the hymns of the Brahmans accessible to general students by translations, together with other work connected with the same object; that he could not undertake to continue this task and at the same time discharge the duties of his professorship.
The purpose of this Decree is to enable him to keep his Chair, and to devote himself to the work in Indian Literature which he proposes to himself; a work not alien from the subject of his Chair; for Sanskrit is the parent of Comparative Philology. I know well the difficulties I have to encounter in bringing this proposal before you. The objections are patent. The difficulties we have to overcome are not so well known. So far as I apprehend them, the objections are of two kinds: first, the objections to the Decree on constitutional grounds, and secondly, objections to the terms of the Decree itself. (1) Now with regard to the objection that we ought to have proceeded by Statute, rather than Decree, I must confess that we are guilty. But then we had no choice in the matter. If any attempt to retain Professor Max Muller was to be made, it must be made at once. He has received several proposals from foreign Governments; and one especially from the Austrian Minister, offering him the Sanskrit Chair lately founded at Vienna, together with an undertaking on the part of the Imperial Academy to publish the Indian translations which he contemplates, and it was necessary to give a prompt answer. This Decree is not intended as a permanent measure. I hope then that the House will not object to pass the Decree, on the distinct understanding that it is only proposed in this form for the purpose of gaining time. (2) But the terms of the Decree are objected to. We are proposing to rob the Chair of Comparative Philology for an indefinite time. As to robbing the Chair, I would ask you to consider this. If the Professor had been unhappily disabled by those calamities enumerated with terrible precision in this as in other Professorial Statutes, he would have had a deputy appointed to do his work at a salary assigned by the Vice-Chancellor, and this might be for an indefinite time. Perhaps also a Professor so disabled might not have been very industrious, might not have conferred honour on the University throughout Europe, America, and India, and yet he might have continued Professor and retained half his salary for a time truly indefinite. But in this case, though the time is undefined rather than indefinite, I hope that no long period may elapse before we may be able to propose a measure terminating this not very satisfactory proposal. I may add that the portion of the salary left to the Professor is not wholly subtracted from the Science of Comparative Philology.
No one, it has been said, who wishes to acquire a thorough know- ledge of Greek or Latin, or any other of the Indo-European languages, no one who takes an interest in the philosophy and historical growth of human speech, can, for the future, dispense with some knowledge of the language and ancient literature of India. . . .
I will ask the House to bear with me while I lay before them a brief statement of Professor Max Muller’s work. I have collected it from such sources as were open to me, not from the Professor himself. It has made a deep impression on my own mind, and I think it must produce a deep impression on any mind. It appears that more than thirty years ago. Max Muller, then about twenty-three years of age, who had turned his attention to the study of Sanskrit, went to Paris to attend the lectures of the celebrated Eugene Burnouf. At that time he believed firmly in the supreme importance and beauty of the later Sanskrit literature, and was astonished to hear Burnouf disparage these later books as of small value in comparison with the older portion of the Vedas and other ancient sacred books. At the time these archaic monuments were unknown, except to Burnouf himself and one or two more scholars. A small beginning had been made in the work of editing them; they remained buried in MS., and in the obscurity of a language which could not be understood by those well versed in the common Sanskrit Burnouf told him that to enter into the real treasures of Indian Literature, it was necessary to be master of the Veda and its voluminous Commentary. Burnouf lent him some of his MSS., and encouraged him to study them. It was hard work, he says, and had not Burnouf told him that he himself was often baffled by the language of the Commentary, he would have relinquished the task of reading them in despair. I remember very well that Professor Gaisford used to advise young Greek scholars to make themselves masters of Homer and the Scholia, and they would then possess the key to all later Greek. But then Homer was printed, and his commentators also. What should we have thought of Gaisford’s advice if Homer was still locked up in MSS., if the Commentaries and Scholia were also still in MS., and not a word existed of all that had been done by the great scholars of Germany, France, and England? Who amongst us would have had the courage to say, I will undertake to collate all the MSS. of Homer, to form a reliable text, and will also edit the Commentary of Eustathius in an intelligible text? How many of us could have done this? Yet a task like this, only much more difficult, was undertaken with open eyes by the young student at an age when we have only just taken our degree. The text of the Veda indeed had already been put into a good condition by learned Indians, but without the Commentary it was, in great part, unintelligible; and the state of the Commentary was such as to daunt the courage of the stoutest scholastic heart. The errors and corruptions are countless; the Commentary abounds in short extracts taken, without reference, from works on all sorts of subjects, grammatical, etymological, philosophical, theological. These extracts are for the most part detached fragments, full of technical phrases, and often absolutely unintelligible by themselves. It was necessary for an editor to hunt up these passages in the authors from which they were taken; very often these works existed only in MS., and they had to be analysed and indexed before they could be used. This Herculean labour was undertaken by the young scholar. He found it necessary to come to England, for the MSS. he must use were in the India House and our own Bodleian. He raised funds by working hard, copying MSS., making translations and the like, for Sanskrit scholars wealthier than himself. By the assistance of his noble countryman, Baron de Bunsen, and encouraged by our own great Professor, Horace Wilson, he began his work. Five years were spent in preparatory labours, and in 1849 his first volume appeared. It was followed at intervals by five other massive quartos; till in 1874, little more than a year ago, he was able to lay down his pen, feeling, as he says, as if he had parted with an old, old friend, on whom his thoughts had been fixed for full thirty years. During these years this absorbing work had not been his only occupation. He published his History of Sanskrit Literature in 1859, which, after reaching a second edition, has been now ten years out of print, besides other works bearing on Indian studies, and besides his direct contributions to Comparative Philology, of which the Lectures on the Science of Language have been translated into French, German, Italian, Russian, Hungarian, and Swedish. But it is on his great editio princeps [Google translate: high edition] of the Veda and its Commentary that I wish to fix your attention. It is difficult to say whether our wonder and admiration are more excited by the bold ardour with which, as a young man, he undertook such a task; by the steady and courageous perseverance with which he wrought at it for so many long years, or by the genius with which he surmounted all difficulties and erected a monument which may be truly called aere perennius [Google translate: the air is more permanent]. This great work has been printed at our Press, supported by the sagacious liberality of the old East India Company and the new Council of India. The text and its Sanskrit Commentary are in the hands of scholars; and the Professor wishes to devote himself to making these treasures of old Indian lore accessible to the general student, by editing translations with notes and illustrations. This work our Clarendon Press is willing to undertake, so as to secure to Oxford the credit of bringing out books so closely connected with our great Indian Empire.
And shall we allow him to carry his stores of Eastern learning away? Just at the moment when troops of native princes have been paying willing homage to the heir of the British crown, just when it is announced that the Sovereign of our Islands is about to assume the proud title of Empress of India, shall we suffer the groundwork of the old Indian Faith to be translated, not into English, but into German, and published by the munificence of the Austrian Government, who neither have, nor can have, any immediate connexion with India? I have great reason to fear that, unless we embrace the present opportunity, we shall have to submit to this discredit, for discredit I feel it will be. Other Governments have acknowledged Professor Max Muller’s great achievements; the French Institute several years ago elected him a Foreign Member, the Royal Academy of Turin paid him the same honour, and made him one of a distinguished six, the others being Cousin, Thiers, Bockh, Mommsen, and Grote. He received the Cross of the Order of Merit from the German Emperor two years ago, along with von Moltke. England has been behindhand. Let Oxford by a unanimous vote to-day do something to repair this backwardness: not for his sake, but for our own, I ask it. Let us keep him if we can, how we can, while we can.
Speech of Dean Liddell, February 15, 1876
See Vol. II, p. 7.
From a letter written by Professor Max Muller, bearing date December 1, 1875, the University learnt, with surprise and regret, that it was the Professor’s intention to resign his office at the end of the Academical year. The reasons he gave were that he had served the University as Professor for exactly a quarter of a century; that the chief work of his life had been the publication from MSS. of the text and commentary of the oldest of the sacred books of India; that though this work had been completed, he wished to devote himself to the task of making the hymns of the Brahmans accessible to general students by translations, together with other work connected with the same object; that he could not undertake to continue this task and at the same time discharge the duties of his professorship.
The purpose of this Decree is to enable him to keep his Chair, and to devote himself to the work in Indian Literature which he proposes to himself; a work not alien from the subject of his Chair; for Sanskrit is the parent of Comparative Philology. I know well the difficulties I have to encounter in bringing this proposal before you. The objections are patent. The difficulties we have to overcome are not so well known. So far as I apprehend them, the objections are of two kinds: first, the objections to the Decree on constitutional grounds, and secondly, objections to the terms of the Decree itself. (1) Now with regard to the objection that we ought to have proceeded by Statute, rather than Decree, I must confess that we are guilty. But then we had no choice in the matter. If any attempt to retain Professor Max Muller was to be made, it must be made at once. He has received several proposals from foreign Governments; and one especially from the Austrian Minister, offering him the Sanskrit Chair lately founded at Vienna, together with an undertaking on the part of the Imperial Academy to publish the Indian translations which he contemplates, and it was necessary to give a prompt answer. This Decree is not intended as a permanent measure. I hope then that the House will not object to pass the Decree, on the distinct understanding that it is only proposed in this form for the purpose of gaining time. (2) But the terms of the Decree are objected to. We are proposing to rob the Chair of Comparative Philology for an indefinite time. As to robbing the Chair, I would ask you to consider this. If the Professor had been unhappily disabled by those calamities enumerated with terrible precision in this as in other Professorial Statutes, he would have had a deputy appointed to do his work at a salary assigned by the Vice-Chancellor, and this might be for an indefinite time. Perhaps also a Professor so disabled might not have been very industrious, might not have conferred honour on the University throughout Europe, America, and India, and yet he might have continued Professor and retained half his salary for a time truly indefinite. But in this case, though the time is undefined rather than indefinite, I hope that no long period may elapse before we may be able to propose a measure terminating this not very satisfactory proposal. I may add that the portion of the salary left to the Professor is not wholly subtracted from the Science of Comparative Philology.
No one, it has been said, who wishes to acquire a thorough know- ledge of Greek or Latin, or any other of the Indo-European languages, no one who takes an interest in the philosophy and historical growth of human speech, can, for the future, dispense with some knowledge of the language and ancient literature of India. . . .
I will ask the House to bear with me while I lay before them a brief statement of Professor Max Muller’s work. I have collected it from such sources as were open to me, not from the Professor himself. It has made a deep impression on my own mind, and I think it must produce a deep impression on any mind. It appears that more than thirty years ago. Max Muller, then about twenty-three years of age, who had turned his attention to the study of Sanskrit, went to Paris to attend the lectures of the celebrated Eugene Burnouf. At that time he believed firmly in the supreme importance and beauty of the later Sanskrit literature, and was astonished to hear Burnouf disparage these later books as of small value in comparison with the older portion of the Vedas and other ancient sacred books. At the time these archaic monuments were unknown, except to Burnouf himself and one or two more scholars. A small beginning had been made in the work of editing them; they remained buried in MS., and in the obscurity of a language which could not be understood by those well versed in the common Sanskrit Burnouf told him that to enter into the real treasures of Indian Literature, it was necessary to be master of the Veda and its voluminous Commentary. Burnouf lent him some of his MSS., and encouraged him to study them. It was hard work, he says, and had not Burnouf told him that he himself was often baffled by the language of the Commentary, he would have relinquished the task of reading them in despair. I remember very well that Professor Gaisford used to advise young Greek scholars to make themselves masters of Homer and the Scholia, and they would then possess the key to all later Greek. But then Homer was printed, and his commentators also. What should we have thought of Gaisford’s advice if Homer was still locked up in MSS., if the Commentaries and Scholia were also still in MS., and not a word existed of all that had been done by the great scholars of Germany, France, and England? Who amongst us would have had the courage to say, I will undertake to collate all the MSS. of Homer, to form a reliable text, and will also edit the Commentary of Eustathius in an intelligible text? How many of us could have done this? Yet a task like this, only much more difficult, was undertaken with open eyes by the young student at an age when we have only just taken our degree. The text of the Veda indeed had already been put into a good condition by learned Indians, but without the Commentary it was, in great part, unintelligible; and the state of the Commentary was such as to daunt the courage of the stoutest scholastic heart. The errors and corruptions are countless; the Commentary abounds in short extracts taken, without reference, from works on all sorts of subjects, grammatical, etymological, philosophical, theological. These extracts are for the most part detached fragments, full of technical phrases, and often absolutely unintelligible by themselves. It was necessary for an editor to hunt up these passages in the authors from which they were taken; very often these works existed only in MS., and they had to be analysed and indexed before they could be used. This Herculean labour was undertaken by the young scholar. He found it necessary to come to England, for the MSS. he must use were in the India House and our own Bodleian. He raised funds by working hard, copying MSS., making translations and the like, for Sanskrit scholars wealthier than himself. By the assistance of his noble countryman, Baron de Bunsen, and encouraged by our own great Professor, Horace Wilson, he began his work. Five years were spent in preparatory labours, and in 1849 his first volume appeared. It was followed at intervals by five other massive quartos; till in 1874, little more than a year ago, he was able to lay down his pen, feeling, as he says, as if he had parted with an old, old friend, on whom his thoughts had been fixed for full thirty years. During these years this absorbing work had not been his only occupation. He published his History of Sanskrit Literature in 1859, which, after reaching a second edition, has been now ten years out of print, besides other works bearing on Indian studies, and besides his direct contributions to Comparative Philology, of which the Lectures on the Science of Language have been translated into French, German, Italian, Russian, Hungarian, and Swedish. But it is on his great editio princeps [Google translate: high edition] of the Veda and its Commentary that I wish to fix your attention. It is difficult to say whether our wonder and admiration are more excited by the bold ardour with which, as a young man, he undertook such a task; by the steady and courageous perseverance with which he wrought at it for so many long years, or by the genius with which he surmounted all difficulties and erected a monument which may be truly called aere perennius [Google translate: the air is more permanent]. This great work has been printed at our Press, supported by the sagacious liberality of the old East India Company and the new Council of India. The text and its Sanskrit Commentary are in the hands of scholars; and the Professor wishes to devote himself to making these treasures of old Indian lore accessible to the general student, by editing translations with notes and illustrations. This work our Clarendon Press is willing to undertake, so as to secure to Oxford the credit of bringing out books so closely connected with our great Indian Empire.
And shall we allow him to carry his stores of Eastern learning away? Just at the moment when troops of native princes have been paying willing homage to the heir of the British crown, just when it is announced that the Sovereign of our Islands is about to assume the proud title of Empress of India, shall we suffer the groundwork of the old Indian Faith to be translated, not into English, but into German, and published by the munificence of the Austrian Government, who neither have, nor can have, any immediate connexion with India? I have great reason to fear that, unless we embrace the present opportunity, we shall have to submit to this discredit, for discredit I feel it will be. Other Governments have acknowledged Professor Max Muller’s great achievements; the French Institute several years ago elected him a Foreign Member, the Royal Academy of Turin paid him the same honour, and made him one of a distinguished six, the others being Cousin, Thiers, Bockh, Mommsen, and Grote. He received the Cross of the Order of Merit from the German Emperor two years ago, along with von Moltke. England has been behindhand. Let Oxford by a unanimous vote to-day do something to repair this backwardness: not for his sake, but for our own, I ask it. Let us keep him if we can, how we can, while we can.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 2:45 am
Appendix D
Missionary Speech, 1887
See Vol. II, p. 231.
I am not going to speak to you to-night about what missionaries have done for the science of language; they have helped us to a much truer and much more elevated knowledge of so-called savage or heathen religions than our fathers ever dreamt of. The question, therefore, which I should like to ask to-night, is this— whether savage religions are really like what savage dialects were represented to be, hardly articulate, brutal, ferocious, fiendish; or whether, hidden beneath the rubbish, they contain some elements of truth and goodness which the missionary may recognize as common ground on which he may build, and on which he should take his stand when first approaching his future converts. The change which has taken place in our view of non-Christian religions is one of the most remarkable features of our age, though, as in the case of many of the newest views of our age, we shall find, I believe, on closer inspection, that after all they are not so new as we imagine. St. Augustine, though he had probably seen and experienced more of the terrible sides of heathen religions than any one else, yet declared his conviction that he never had seen any religion which did not contain some truth After a long experience in life, I have been led to divide all my friends, missionaries included, into two classes—those who seem to have eyes for all that is good, and those who seem to have eyes for all that is bad. Well, you all know the men I mean. If you go with them to a concert, they will speak of nothing but the wrong notes. If you go with them to church, the first they tell you is what the preacher ought not to have said. I have been a guide through Oxford for many years, and in watching my friends from every part of the globe I found they fell into two classes, what I call the bright-eyed and the dark-eyed. The dark-eyed tell you that the Oxford buildings are all in rags, that the stone decays and is hideous. They point out incongruities in architectural style, they are scandalized at the attire of the undergraduates coming home in crowds from football, and they wonder whether all University lectures are given in the Parks, because they see undergraduates nowhere else. But there are others, whom I call my bright-eyed friends, who admire the effects of light and shade on the crumbling old stones, who read history in the incongruities of architectural style, who approve of the bones and sinews of our athletes, and who express real regret that they could have heard only one of Professor Palgrave’s lectures, or one of the Bishop of Ripon’s sermons. Now I need not tell you which of these two classes I like best, and I may add that I generally find that the really great artists and scholars and statesmen are bright-eyed, the smaller artists, scholars, and statesmen dark-eyed. I remember so well walking many years ago through the colleges and gardens of Oxford with Professor Rauch, the great German sculptor. He was an old, magnificent, and most beautiful man, and he certainly seemed to have eyes for what was beautiful only. When he looked at the Raphael drawings he stood back in awe, holding his breath. And what was it? Some small child's hand that would have struck no one else's eyes. Over and over again he gazed at an old building, and showed me effects which I had never observed before. All that was commonplace or imperfect seemed hardly to exist for him. We need not wonder, therefore, if missionaries too are dark-eyed and bright-eyed. Some see only the darkness of the night, others the brightness of the stars, even if so dim that ordinary eyes can hardly perceive them. I shall to-night appeal to Dr. Codrington and Mr. Cousins to tell us something, however little it may be, of the bright side, something of what St. Augustine meant when he said that there is no religion which does not contain some truth. They have been so long among heathens that they must have seen more than the mere surface of their religion. They must surely have met some God-fearing men, some pure-minded women, some human creatures to prove that St. Paul was right in saying that God never left Himself without witness, and that St. Peter perceived a great truth when he boldly declared that in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted with God.
My own acquaintance with non-Christian religions is restricted to what are called in the East book-religions, that is religions which are founded on some kind of sacred book. When I undertook to publish for the University Press a series of translations of the most important of these sacred books, one of my objects was to assist missionaries. What should we think of a missionary who came to convert us, and who had never read our Bible? No doubt it is but too true that religions are seldom in practice what their Bibles represent them to be, or what they were meant to be by their founders. Yet if we wished our own religion to be judged, we should wish it to be judged by the New Testament. It is but fair, therefore, that we should judge other religions according to the same rule. But, it will be said, you cannot deny that the Hindus are polytheists, that they worship idols. But let us look at their own Bible, at the Veda, older than any other book in India. No doubt we find there many names for the Divine, many gods, as we are accustomed to say. But there are also passages in which the oneness of the Deity is dearly asserted. In later writings, too, we find bright sparks of truth. It is true that the Hindus worship idols. But in the Bhagavad-gita. the Supreme Spirit is introduced as looking with pity on all these helpless childish customs, as saying with the sublimest and almost super-divine unselfishness: 'Even those who worship idols, worship me.' Is not this the same thought which St. Paul expressed so powerfully at Athens: 'Whom, therefore, ye ignorantly worship, Him declare I unto you,' and is not this the spirit in which missionaries might and ought to approach every religion? But while for gaining a true and accurate knowledge of any of the great book-religions, a study of their recognized sacred boob is sufficient, a keener insight, a warmer sympathy, a truly Christian kindness are wanted in our treatment of lower savages and in our judgment of their religion. The lowest of all savages are said to be the Papuas. They are often supposed to be without any religion, any morality, any conscience. Yet these very same Papuas, if they want to know whether what they are going to undertake is right or wrong, squat before their Karwar, some hideous stock or stone, clasp the hands over the forehead, and bow repeatedly, at the same time stating their intentions. If they are seized with any nervous feeling during this process it is considered a bad sign, and that project is abandoned for a time; if otherwise, the idol is supposed to approve. Here we have but to translate what they in their helpless language call nervous feeling by our word 'conscience,' and we shall not only understand what they really mean, but confess, perhaps, that it would be well for us if in our own heart the Karwar occupied the same prominent place which it occupies in the cottage of every Papua.
Missionary Speech, 1887
See Vol. II, p. 231.
I am not going to speak to you to-night about what missionaries have done for the science of language; they have helped us to a much truer and much more elevated knowledge of so-called savage or heathen religions than our fathers ever dreamt of. The question, therefore, which I should like to ask to-night, is this— whether savage religions are really like what savage dialects were represented to be, hardly articulate, brutal, ferocious, fiendish; or whether, hidden beneath the rubbish, they contain some elements of truth and goodness which the missionary may recognize as common ground on which he may build, and on which he should take his stand when first approaching his future converts. The change which has taken place in our view of non-Christian religions is one of the most remarkable features of our age, though, as in the case of many of the newest views of our age, we shall find, I believe, on closer inspection, that after all they are not so new as we imagine. St. Augustine, though he had probably seen and experienced more of the terrible sides of heathen religions than any one else, yet declared his conviction that he never had seen any religion which did not contain some truth After a long experience in life, I have been led to divide all my friends, missionaries included, into two classes—those who seem to have eyes for all that is good, and those who seem to have eyes for all that is bad. Well, you all know the men I mean. If you go with them to a concert, they will speak of nothing but the wrong notes. If you go with them to church, the first they tell you is what the preacher ought not to have said. I have been a guide through Oxford for many years, and in watching my friends from every part of the globe I found they fell into two classes, what I call the bright-eyed and the dark-eyed. The dark-eyed tell you that the Oxford buildings are all in rags, that the stone decays and is hideous. They point out incongruities in architectural style, they are scandalized at the attire of the undergraduates coming home in crowds from football, and they wonder whether all University lectures are given in the Parks, because they see undergraduates nowhere else. But there are others, whom I call my bright-eyed friends, who admire the effects of light and shade on the crumbling old stones, who read history in the incongruities of architectural style, who approve of the bones and sinews of our athletes, and who express real regret that they could have heard only one of Professor Palgrave’s lectures, or one of the Bishop of Ripon’s sermons. Now I need not tell you which of these two classes I like best, and I may add that I generally find that the really great artists and scholars and statesmen are bright-eyed, the smaller artists, scholars, and statesmen dark-eyed. I remember so well walking many years ago through the colleges and gardens of Oxford with Professor Rauch, the great German sculptor. He was an old, magnificent, and most beautiful man, and he certainly seemed to have eyes for what was beautiful only. When he looked at the Raphael drawings he stood back in awe, holding his breath. And what was it? Some small child's hand that would have struck no one else's eyes. Over and over again he gazed at an old building, and showed me effects which I had never observed before. All that was commonplace or imperfect seemed hardly to exist for him. We need not wonder, therefore, if missionaries too are dark-eyed and bright-eyed. Some see only the darkness of the night, others the brightness of the stars, even if so dim that ordinary eyes can hardly perceive them. I shall to-night appeal to Dr. Codrington and Mr. Cousins to tell us something, however little it may be, of the bright side, something of what St. Augustine meant when he said that there is no religion which does not contain some truth. They have been so long among heathens that they must have seen more than the mere surface of their religion. They must surely have met some God-fearing men, some pure-minded women, some human creatures to prove that St. Paul was right in saying that God never left Himself without witness, and that St. Peter perceived a great truth when he boldly declared that in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted with God.
My own acquaintance with non-Christian religions is restricted to what are called in the East book-religions, that is religions which are founded on some kind of sacred book. When I undertook to publish for the University Press a series of translations of the most important of these sacred books, one of my objects was to assist missionaries. What should we think of a missionary who came to convert us, and who had never read our Bible? No doubt it is but too true that religions are seldom in practice what their Bibles represent them to be, or what they were meant to be by their founders. Yet if we wished our own religion to be judged, we should wish it to be judged by the New Testament. It is but fair, therefore, that we should judge other religions according to the same rule. But, it will be said, you cannot deny that the Hindus are polytheists, that they worship idols. But let us look at their own Bible, at the Veda, older than any other book in India. No doubt we find there many names for the Divine, many gods, as we are accustomed to say. But there are also passages in which the oneness of the Deity is dearly asserted. In later writings, too, we find bright sparks of truth. It is true that the Hindus worship idols. But in the Bhagavad-gita. the Supreme Spirit is introduced as looking with pity on all these helpless childish customs, as saying with the sublimest and almost super-divine unselfishness: 'Even those who worship idols, worship me.' Is not this the same thought which St. Paul expressed so powerfully at Athens: 'Whom, therefore, ye ignorantly worship, Him declare I unto you,' and is not this the spirit in which missionaries might and ought to approach every religion? But while for gaining a true and accurate knowledge of any of the great book-religions, a study of their recognized sacred boob is sufficient, a keener insight, a warmer sympathy, a truly Christian kindness are wanted in our treatment of lower savages and in our judgment of their religion. The lowest of all savages are said to be the Papuas. They are often supposed to be without any religion, any morality, any conscience. Yet these very same Papuas, if they want to know whether what they are going to undertake is right or wrong, squat before their Karwar, some hideous stock or stone, clasp the hands over the forehead, and bow repeatedly, at the same time stating their intentions. If they are seized with any nervous feeling during this process it is considered a bad sign, and that project is abandoned for a time; if otherwise, the idol is supposed to approve. Here we have but to translate what they in their helpless language call nervous feeling by our word 'conscience,' and we shall not only understand what they really mean, but confess, perhaps, that it would be well for us if in our own heart the Karwar occupied the same prominent place which it occupies in the cottage of every Papua.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 2:56 am
Appendix E
Memorial Oration by Professor Max Muller, March, 1888
See Vol. II, p. 235.
'The German Emperor is gone home.' So spoke his noble son, bowed down with grief; so in deep sorrow speaks the whole German nation. The long and heavy task of his life is finished, the victory won. He had long reached and even exceeded the usual span of human life. What was left for the Emperor still to wish for on earth? After long toil and labour he had a right to rest, and God has called him home to peace with honour.
Therefore, deeply as we sympathize with those who in the Emperor have lost an old and cherished friend, keenly as we all miss the faithful honest eyes which have for so long kept watch over Germany's weal and woe, we feel that mere weak sorrow is out of place at the grave of the German Hero-Emperor. The human heart demands its rights, and the sweet bonds of life cannot be broken without tears. But when the tears are dried, then the voice of lamentation must cease and rise again in new chords of thanksgiving, of firm trust, nay, even of joyful triumph.
Let us speak out boldly! In the whole course of the world's history we shall find no life to compare with the life of the Kaiser Wilhelm. We ourselves stand far too near to the events of the last decades to estimate aright their full importance in the history of the world. We have witnessed great, infinitely great events.
What does the work which the Emperor achieved really import? What imports a German Empire in the heart of Europe and in the centre of the whole world? Does it only show the success of a clever diplomacy, the restoration of the balance of power in Europe shattered by Napoleon's arrogance? Is the victory of Sedan nothing but a sharp answer to the defeat of Jena?
No; we must look far higher if we are to measure the true importance of these events in the world's history. The struggle of the German nation for its German life, so gloriously ended by the Kaiser Wilhelm, began 2,000 years ago with the first beginnings of European history. It began with the victory of Arminius or Sigfrid in the Teutoburger Forest, it had its first prophet in Tacitus, its numberless martyrs in Grimhilda and Theodoric, for these were their names, and in the German slaves and mercenaries who were buried under the ruins of the Roman Empire. For hundreds, aye, for thousands, of fears the storms raged and the waves were tossed hither and thither between the German and Romanic nations, while sometimes one, sometimes the other, overflowed the sacred boundaries which a wise nature had drawn so clearly and visibly between them -- the mighty Alps and the free Rhine. In the fifth century the youthful daring of the German hosts triumphed; Germans were lords of Italy and of Gaul. The Western Empire fell, and the German King, Theodoric the Ostrogoth, held at Ravenna in 493 the fate of the whole of Europe in his hands. The Lombard kingdom followed, and still the power was in German hands. Then came Charles the Great, whom Germany, France, and Italy claim as their own, but who was in word and thought a German, and no Roman.
After his death the great nationalities. of Europe developed to their full importance -- the Franks, soon to become the French. the Romans who became Italians, and the Germans who remained what they were, on German soil, with German spirit and German speech.
The struggle which in earlier centuries had been carried on with the sword was now conducted with the weapons of the spirit. The Romish Papacy threw its net out over France, Spain, and Germany. With every century the quarrels increased which the foreign Roman powers stirred up in Germany, and heavier and heavier became the spiritual pressure of the foreign Roman priesthood in all German countries, till at length, under Charles V, the German mind burst the foreign fetters and succeeded in creating a free Church, though not as yet a free German state.
For, first in the seventeenth century, the Thirty-one Years' War had to be waged against foreign jealousy. and in the eighteenth century the North German nation had to prove its strength in the Seven Years' War; and then Napoleonic arrogance had to be twice broken down before it was permitted to the German people and the Pomeranian statesman and the Prussian King to fortify anew those sacred boundaries which a wise nature had drawn so clearly and visibly, and to make Germany the guardian of its own Marches, the watch on the Rhine, the watch on the Vistula, the protector of the peace of all Europe.
If we now look down from this high pinnacle over the whole history of the world in order to measure the greatness of the present by the greatness of the past, what do we see? Greater than Arminius, than Theodoric, than Charles the Great, than Frederick Barbarossa, than Gustavus Adolphus -- for he, too, was a German -- than Frederick the Great, stands the man who has triumphantly closed for ever this struggle of 2,000 years -- a man whose homegoing we celebrate to-day with heavy yet proud hearts, the Kaiser Wilhelm, the first German Emperor.
And now let us ask what made this man so great? In intellectual gifts his elder brother Friedrich Wilhelm IV was far his superior. But he possessed the strongest sense of duty, and the most noble uprightness, and with that a trust in God -- a faith in the inevitable triumph of good and right -- which even defeats like Jena and Olmutz, and even ingratitude like that of 1848, could not shake.
I saw him as Prince of Prussia as few people saw him, as he, in 1848, entered the room of the Prussian Minister Bunsen in Carlton Terrace, suddenly and unannounced, a fugitive from his Fatherland, hardly to be recognized by those who had known him as a Prussian officer. Those were indeed the darkest days of his life; but from the first day he was at work. He lived on terms of the most friendly intimacy with Bunsen, and he never forgot how much he then owed to the counsel of this upright but often misjudged statesman. He saw all he could of the first men in England. He knew that the old times in Prussia were over for ever; and, highly as he valued the old Prussia, he quickly recognized it as his duty to fit himself for the active service of the new Prussia. He tried to imbibe the principles of a constitutional Government. He read, he learnt, he worked early and late. It was a hard experience for him to be banished from his own country; to be misunderstood by his own people. His own words describe what he then was, what he then felt, and what he even then hoped. After the first victory near Schleswig, he wrote the following lines to one of his comrades:--
'God tries me severely, but with a pure conscience I wait for the day of truth, hoping that I may devote my powers to the new Prussia as I did to the old, though the heart will always be sorrowful over the fall of the old Prussia, the independent Prussia.
'Ever your true friend,
'WILHELM.'
Here you see the future Emperor, here you have the real secret of his future greatness -- 'With a pure conscience, I wait for the day of truth.' These are words as if carved in marble, and no more beautiful inscription could be engraved on his tomb than this -- 'With a pure conscience, I wait for the day of truth.'
And the day of truth came, as it always will come for all who can wait for it with a pure conscience. He became Regent, he became King, he became Emperor, he became the most revered, the most beloved man of his people, and always he remained the same, faithful to his duties, hard-working from morning till evening, and animated by one thought only -- how to make Germany strong and respected, how to secure to the German people peace abroad and peace at home.
After seeing him often as an exile in London, I did not see him again till, in 1871, I was allowed to greet him as Emperor at Ems. There he was, the same man, simple, hard-working, faithful to his duty. While others were enjoying their liberty at Ems, he was attending to his business; and often when I came home late at night, and saw at the window the tall Imperial figure at his desk lighted by the small green lamp, I said to myself, 'That is how the German Imperial Crown was won.'
Yes, we are mourning to-day over the German Emperor; but even now the sounds of sorrow begin to vanish. The lowered flags are raised again, and pride and gratitude re-enter the hearts of the German people that they could call such an Emperor their own.
But we harbour a still deeper sorrow in our hearts. What is more natural than death when our life has lasted 'threescore years and ten, or, by reason of our strength, fourscore years'? It is when we think of the new Emperor, who was once the hope, then the pride. and is now the keenest grief of the German nation, that all thoughts and words fail us. The heart knows its own bitterness. The misfortune is overwhelming, and yet, as the poet says, 'Not hopelessly does man yield to the power of the gods.' The fearless son of a fearless father, the new Emperor will perform the work which Providence has assigned to him. The hero who won the battle of Koniggratz by storm, who never flinched under the shower of bullets at Worth, who was one of the victors at Sedan -- his life has not been in vain. But those who know him best expected still greater deeds, still higher victories from him; and even now they know that whatever his hand finds to do, he does it with all his might. From the depth of our heart we say -- 'Long live, long live the Emperor Frederick, the darling of the German people; long live the noble Empress Victoria, the darling of the English people; and may the English and the German peoples follow their example, and faithfully hold together in dark, as well as in bright days!'
Memorial Oration by Professor Max Muller, March, 1888
See Vol. II, p. 235.
'The German Emperor is gone home.' So spoke his noble son, bowed down with grief; so in deep sorrow speaks the whole German nation. The long and heavy task of his life is finished, the victory won. He had long reached and even exceeded the usual span of human life. What was left for the Emperor still to wish for on earth? After long toil and labour he had a right to rest, and God has called him home to peace with honour.
Therefore, deeply as we sympathize with those who in the Emperor have lost an old and cherished friend, keenly as we all miss the faithful honest eyes which have for so long kept watch over Germany's weal and woe, we feel that mere weak sorrow is out of place at the grave of the German Hero-Emperor. The human heart demands its rights, and the sweet bonds of life cannot be broken without tears. But when the tears are dried, then the voice of lamentation must cease and rise again in new chords of thanksgiving, of firm trust, nay, even of joyful triumph.
Let us speak out boldly! In the whole course of the world's history we shall find no life to compare with the life of the Kaiser Wilhelm. We ourselves stand far too near to the events of the last decades to estimate aright their full importance in the history of the world. We have witnessed great, infinitely great events.
What does the work which the Emperor achieved really import? What imports a German Empire in the heart of Europe and in the centre of the whole world? Does it only show the success of a clever diplomacy, the restoration of the balance of power in Europe shattered by Napoleon's arrogance? Is the victory of Sedan nothing but a sharp answer to the defeat of Jena?
No; we must look far higher if we are to measure the true importance of these events in the world's history. The struggle of the German nation for its German life, so gloriously ended by the Kaiser Wilhelm, began 2,000 years ago with the first beginnings of European history. It began with the victory of Arminius or Sigfrid in the Teutoburger Forest, it had its first prophet in Tacitus, its numberless martyrs in Grimhilda and Theodoric, for these were their names, and in the German slaves and mercenaries who were buried under the ruins of the Roman Empire. For hundreds, aye, for thousands, of fears the storms raged and the waves were tossed hither and thither between the German and Romanic nations, while sometimes one, sometimes the other, overflowed the sacred boundaries which a wise nature had drawn so clearly and visibly between them -- the mighty Alps and the free Rhine. In the fifth century the youthful daring of the German hosts triumphed; Germans were lords of Italy and of Gaul. The Western Empire fell, and the German King, Theodoric the Ostrogoth, held at Ravenna in 493 the fate of the whole of Europe in his hands. The Lombard kingdom followed, and still the power was in German hands. Then came Charles the Great, whom Germany, France, and Italy claim as their own, but who was in word and thought a German, and no Roman.
After his death the great nationalities. of Europe developed to their full importance -- the Franks, soon to become the French. the Romans who became Italians, and the Germans who remained what they were, on German soil, with German spirit and German speech.
The struggle which in earlier centuries had been carried on with the sword was now conducted with the weapons of the spirit. The Romish Papacy threw its net out over France, Spain, and Germany. With every century the quarrels increased which the foreign Roman powers stirred up in Germany, and heavier and heavier became the spiritual pressure of the foreign Roman priesthood in all German countries, till at length, under Charles V, the German mind burst the foreign fetters and succeeded in creating a free Church, though not as yet a free German state.
For, first in the seventeenth century, the Thirty-one Years' War had to be waged against foreign jealousy. and in the eighteenth century the North German nation had to prove its strength in the Seven Years' War; and then Napoleonic arrogance had to be twice broken down before it was permitted to the German people and the Pomeranian statesman and the Prussian King to fortify anew those sacred boundaries which a wise nature had drawn so clearly and visibly, and to make Germany the guardian of its own Marches, the watch on the Rhine, the watch on the Vistula, the protector of the peace of all Europe.
If we now look down from this high pinnacle over the whole history of the world in order to measure the greatness of the present by the greatness of the past, what do we see? Greater than Arminius, than Theodoric, than Charles the Great, than Frederick Barbarossa, than Gustavus Adolphus -- for he, too, was a German -- than Frederick the Great, stands the man who has triumphantly closed for ever this struggle of 2,000 years -- a man whose homegoing we celebrate to-day with heavy yet proud hearts, the Kaiser Wilhelm, the first German Emperor.
And now let us ask what made this man so great? In intellectual gifts his elder brother Friedrich Wilhelm IV was far his superior. But he possessed the strongest sense of duty, and the most noble uprightness, and with that a trust in God -- a faith in the inevitable triumph of good and right -- which even defeats like Jena and Olmutz, and even ingratitude like that of 1848, could not shake.
I saw him as Prince of Prussia as few people saw him, as he, in 1848, entered the room of the Prussian Minister Bunsen in Carlton Terrace, suddenly and unannounced, a fugitive from his Fatherland, hardly to be recognized by those who had known him as a Prussian officer. Those were indeed the darkest days of his life; but from the first day he was at work. He lived on terms of the most friendly intimacy with Bunsen, and he never forgot how much he then owed to the counsel of this upright but often misjudged statesman. He saw all he could of the first men in England. He knew that the old times in Prussia were over for ever; and, highly as he valued the old Prussia, he quickly recognized it as his duty to fit himself for the active service of the new Prussia. He tried to imbibe the principles of a constitutional Government. He read, he learnt, he worked early and late. It was a hard experience for him to be banished from his own country; to be misunderstood by his own people. His own words describe what he then was, what he then felt, and what he even then hoped. After the first victory near Schleswig, he wrote the following lines to one of his comrades:--
'God tries me severely, but with a pure conscience I wait for the day of truth, hoping that I may devote my powers to the new Prussia as I did to the old, though the heart will always be sorrowful over the fall of the old Prussia, the independent Prussia.
'Ever your true friend,
'WILHELM.'
Here you see the future Emperor, here you have the real secret of his future greatness -- 'With a pure conscience, I wait for the day of truth.' These are words as if carved in marble, and no more beautiful inscription could be engraved on his tomb than this -- 'With a pure conscience, I wait for the day of truth.'
And the day of truth came, as it always will come for all who can wait for it with a pure conscience. He became Regent, he became King, he became Emperor, he became the most revered, the most beloved man of his people, and always he remained the same, faithful to his duties, hard-working from morning till evening, and animated by one thought only -- how to make Germany strong and respected, how to secure to the German people peace abroad and peace at home.
After seeing him often as an exile in London, I did not see him again till, in 1871, I was allowed to greet him as Emperor at Ems. There he was, the same man, simple, hard-working, faithful to his duty. While others were enjoying their liberty at Ems, he was attending to his business; and often when I came home late at night, and saw at the window the tall Imperial figure at his desk lighted by the small green lamp, I said to myself, 'That is how the German Imperial Crown was won.'
Yes, we are mourning to-day over the German Emperor; but even now the sounds of sorrow begin to vanish. The lowered flags are raised again, and pride and gratitude re-enter the hearts of the German people that they could call such an Emperor their own.
But we harbour a still deeper sorrow in our hearts. What is more natural than death when our life has lasted 'threescore years and ten, or, by reason of our strength, fourscore years'? It is when we think of the new Emperor, who was once the hope, then the pride. and is now the keenest grief of the German nation, that all thoughts and words fail us. The heart knows its own bitterness. The misfortune is overwhelming, and yet, as the poet says, 'Not hopelessly does man yield to the power of the gods.' The fearless son of a fearless father, the new Emperor will perform the work which Providence has assigned to him. The hero who won the battle of Koniggratz by storm, who never flinched under the shower of bullets at Worth, who was one of the victors at Sedan -- his life has not been in vain. But those who know him best expected still greater deeds, still higher victories from him; and even now they know that whatever his hand finds to do, he does it with all his might. From the depth of our heart we say -- 'Long live, long live the Emperor Frederick, the darling of the German people; long live the noble Empress Victoria, the darling of the English people; and may the English and the German peoples follow their example, and faithfully hold together in dark, as well as in bright days!'
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 3:03 am
Appendix F
Translation of the World Shangti
Extracts from Letter to Chinese Missionaries.
See Vol. II, p. 95.
' ... There are, perhaps, passages in the sacred texts of the Chinese in which Shangti is spoken of in what we should call mythological language; language, in our opinion, inapplicable to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe. But does it follow, therefore, that the Chinese, when they formed the name of Shangti, did not mean the true God, or that the best among them had never had any idea of the true God? You know that there must be in the prayers and creeds of all religions a compromise between the language of the wise and foolish; and that the sacred texts of no nation, not even those of Jews and Christians, are entirely free from childlike, poetical, what are called mythological expressions ... And if we are not to translate Shangti by God, what are we to do? You would not say that the Chinese alone of all nations on earth had never any name for God at all? You suggest that either the name Shangti should be left untranslated, or that it should have been rendered by Supreme Ruler. If left untranslated, all readers would have taken Shangti for a proper name, such as Jupiter, while Dr. Legge states: "it never became a proper name with the people like Zeus in Greece." If Shangti had been rendered by Supreme Ruler, would it have evoked any conception different to God, the true God? How could missionaries in China, if they are willing to translate Shangti by Supreme Ruler, continue to represent him as a false god, or, at all events, as not quite true .... If we are so hard on the Chinese, and tell them that their word Shangti cannot be used as the name of the true God, because it is used synonymously with T'ien, meaning sky, what should we say when they point to such verses as "I have sinned against heaven, and in Thy sight"? Do the words of Dante: --
apply to our Scriptures alone? Should we not apply them in a far more generous spirit to the scriptures of the Chinese, Hindus, &c.?
'Surely the name for God in Chinese or in any other language. unless it is simply intolerable, should be treated with the greatest reverence. Let missionaries slowly and gently cut down the rank growth of mythology that has choked so many of the names of God, but let them be careful lest, in tearing up the roots. they kill the stem on which alone their new grafts can live and thrive. Let them follow in the footsteps of the boldest missionary the world has ever seen, who, at Athens, did not break the altar of the unknown God, but said, "Whom ye ignorantly worship, Him declare I unto you!'"
Translation of the World Shangti
Extracts from Letter to Chinese Missionaries.
See Vol. II, p. 95.
' ... There are, perhaps, passages in the sacred texts of the Chinese in which Shangti is spoken of in what we should call mythological language; language, in our opinion, inapplicable to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe. But does it follow, therefore, that the Chinese, when they formed the name of Shangti, did not mean the true God, or that the best among them had never had any idea of the true God? You know that there must be in the prayers and creeds of all religions a compromise between the language of the wise and foolish; and that the sacred texts of no nation, not even those of Jews and Christians, are entirely free from childlike, poetical, what are called mythological expressions ... And if we are not to translate Shangti by God, what are we to do? You would not say that the Chinese alone of all nations on earth had never any name for God at all? You suggest that either the name Shangti should be left untranslated, or that it should have been rendered by Supreme Ruler. If left untranslated, all readers would have taken Shangti for a proper name, such as Jupiter, while Dr. Legge states: "it never became a proper name with the people like Zeus in Greece." If Shangti had been rendered by Supreme Ruler, would it have evoked any conception different to God, the true God? How could missionaries in China, if they are willing to translate Shangti by Supreme Ruler, continue to represent him as a false god, or, at all events, as not quite true .... If we are so hard on the Chinese, and tell them that their word Shangti cannot be used as the name of the true God, because it is used synonymously with T'ien, meaning sky, what should we say when they point to such verses as "I have sinned against heaven, and in Thy sight"? Do the words of Dante: --
"Per questo la Scrittura condiscende
A vostra facultate, e piedi e mano
Attribuisce a Dio, ed altro intende"
[Google translate:
This is why Scripture condescends
At your facultate, and feet and hand
He attributes it to God, and he means something else
apply to our Scriptures alone? Should we not apply them in a far more generous spirit to the scriptures of the Chinese, Hindus, &c.?
'Surely the name for God in Chinese or in any other language. unless it is simply intolerable, should be treated with the greatest reverence. Let missionaries slowly and gently cut down the rank growth of mythology that has choked so many of the names of God, but let them be careful lest, in tearing up the roots. they kill the stem on which alone their new grafts can live and thrive. Let them follow in the footsteps of the boldest missionary the world has ever seen, who, at Athens, did not break the altar of the unknown God, but said, "Whom ye ignorantly worship, Him declare I unto you!'"
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 3:10 am
Appendix G
Chronological List of the Right Hon. Professor Max Muller's Works
1844. Hitopadesa, translation.
1847. Meghaduta. translation in verse.
Relation of Bengali to the Aboriginal Languages of India.
1849-73. Rig-veda and Sayana's Commentary.
1853. Essay on the Turanian Languages.
Essay on Indian Logic.
1854. Proposals for a Uniform Missionary Alphabet.
Languages of the Seat of War.
1856. Essay on Comparative Mythology.
1857. Deutsche Liebe (14th edition, 1901).
Buddhist Pilgrims.
1858. German Classics.
1859. Ancient Sanskrit Literature.
1861. Lectures on the Science of Language, vol. I (14th edition, 1886).
1862. Ancient Hindu Astronomy.
1864. Lectures on the Science of Language, vol. II.
1866. Hitopadesa, Text, Notes, &c.
Sanskrit Grammar.
1867-75. Chips from a German Workshop, four vols.
1868. Stratification of Language.
1869. Rig-veda, translation, vol. I.
Rig-veda Pratisakhya.
1870. Dhammapada; translation.
1871. Letters on the War.
1873. Rig-veda in Samhiti and Pada Texts.
Darwin's Philosophy of Language.
Introduction to Science of Religion.
1875. J. B. Basedow.
Schiller's Briefwechsel.
1876. On Spelling.
1878. Hibbert Lectures.
1879. Upanishads, translation.
1881. Selected Essays.
Kant's Critique, translation.
1882. India, What can it teach us?
1884. Biographical Essays.
1887. Science of Thought.
La Carita of Andrea del Sarto.
1888. Biographies of Words.
Science of Thought, three Lectures.
1888-92. Gifford Lectures, four vols.
1889. Science of Language, three Lectures.
1890-2. Rig-veda, new edition.
1893. Apastamha Sutras, translated.
1894. New Edition of Chips, four vols., much altered.
Lectures on the Vedanta Philosophy.
1897. Science of Mythology, two vols.
1898. Auld Lang Syne, vol. I.
Ramakrishna.
1899. Auld Lang Syne, vol. II.
Six Systems of Indian Philosophy.
Das Pferdeburla.
1900. Transvaal War.
1901. Posthumous. Autobiography and Last Essays, two vols.
Chronological List of the Right Hon. Professor Max Muller's Works
1844. Hitopadesa, translation.
1847. Meghaduta. translation in verse.
Relation of Bengali to the Aboriginal Languages of India.
1849-73. Rig-veda and Sayana's Commentary.
1853. Essay on the Turanian Languages.
Essay on Indian Logic.
1854. Proposals for a Uniform Missionary Alphabet.
Languages of the Seat of War.
1856. Essay on Comparative Mythology.
1857. Deutsche Liebe (14th edition, 1901).
Buddhist Pilgrims.
1858. German Classics.
1859. Ancient Sanskrit Literature.
1861. Lectures on the Science of Language, vol. I (14th edition, 1886).
1862. Ancient Hindu Astronomy.
1864. Lectures on the Science of Language, vol. II.
1866. Hitopadesa, Text, Notes, &c.
Sanskrit Grammar.
1867-75. Chips from a German Workshop, four vols.
1868. Stratification of Language.
1869. Rig-veda, translation, vol. I.
Rig-veda Pratisakhya.
1870. Dhammapada; translation.
1871. Letters on the War.
1873. Rig-veda in Samhiti and Pada Texts.
Darwin's Philosophy of Language.
Introduction to Science of Religion.
1875. J. B. Basedow.
Schiller's Briefwechsel.
1876. On Spelling.
1878. Hibbert Lectures.
1879. Upanishads, translation.
1881. Selected Essays.
Kant's Critique, translation.
1882. India, What can it teach us?
1884. Biographical Essays.
1887. Science of Thought.
La Carita of Andrea del Sarto.
1888. Biographies of Words.
Science of Thought, three Lectures.
1888-92. Gifford Lectures, four vols.
1889. Science of Language, three Lectures.
1890-2. Rig-veda, new edition.
1893. Apastamha Sutras, translated.
1894. New Edition of Chips, four vols., much altered.
Lectures on the Vedanta Philosophy.
1897. Science of Mythology, two vols.
1898. Auld Lang Syne, vol. I.
Ramakrishna.
1899. Auld Lang Syne, vol. II.
Six Systems of Indian Philosophy.
Das Pferdeburla.
1900. Transvaal War.
1901. Posthumous. Autobiography and Last Essays, two vols.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 3:16 am
Appendix H
List of Universities, Colleges, Royal Academies, and Learned Societies Which Conferred Membership on Professor Max Muller
Universities:
Leipzig (M.A. and Ph.D., 1843); Oxford (M.A.); Cambridge (LL. D.); Hon. Doctor in the Universities of Dublin, Edinburgh, Bologna, Buda-Pesth, Princeton, Odessa, Lafayette.
Colleges:
All Souls College, Oxford (Fellowship).
Foreign Associate:
French Institute, Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (8).
Imperial Academy of Vienna.
Royal Academy of Berlin.
Royal Sardinian Academy (6).
Royal Academy of the Lincei, Rome (12).
Royal Bavarian Academy.
Royal Hungarian Academy.
Royal Academy of Belgium.
Royal Irish Academy.
Royal Society of Upsala.
De Maatschappy der Nederlandsche Letterkunde de Leyden.
American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
American Philosophical Society.
Honorary Membership:
Royal Academy of Sciences at Amsterdam.
Royal Academy of Roumania.
Royal Batavian Society of Arts and Sciences.
Royal Society of Gottingen.
Royal Society of Literature, London.
Royal Historical Society (Vice-President).
Royal Asiatic Society.
Societe Asiatique.
Royal Italian Asiatic Society.
German Oriental Society.
American Oriental Society.
Asiatic Society of Bengal.
Philological Society of Buda-Pesth.
Oriental Society of Peking.
Societe de Litterature Finnoise, Helsingfors.
Societe Finno-Ougrienne.
Cambridge Philosophical Society.
Syllogos Hellenikos of Constantinople.
Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland.
Deutsches Hochstift zu Frankfurt.
Philosophical Society of Glasgow.
Literary and Philosophical Society of Liverpool.
Archaeological Society, Moscow.
Litauische Literarische Gesellschaft.
American Philological Society.
Societe d'Ethnographie de France.
New Zealand Institute.
Polynesian Society, Wellington.
British Association, Anthropological Section (President, 1891).
International Congress of Orientalists (President of Aryan Section, 1889); President of Congress, 1892).
Corresponding Membership:
Royal Academy of Lisbon.
Royal Society of Palermo.
Reale Associazione dei Benemeriti Italiani.
List of Universities, Colleges, Royal Academies, and Learned Societies Which Conferred Membership on Professor Max Muller
Universities:
Leipzig (M.A. and Ph.D., 1843); Oxford (M.A.); Cambridge (LL. D.); Hon. Doctor in the Universities of Dublin, Edinburgh, Bologna, Buda-Pesth, Princeton, Odessa, Lafayette.
Colleges:
All Souls College, Oxford (Fellowship).
Foreign Associate:
French Institute, Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (8).
Imperial Academy of Vienna.
Royal Academy of Berlin.
Royal Sardinian Academy (6).
Royal Academy of the Lincei, Rome (12).
Royal Bavarian Academy.
Royal Hungarian Academy.
Royal Academy of Belgium.
Royal Irish Academy.
Royal Society of Upsala.
De Maatschappy der Nederlandsche Letterkunde de Leyden.
American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
American Philosophical Society.
Honorary Membership:
Royal Academy of Sciences at Amsterdam.
Royal Academy of Roumania.
Royal Batavian Society of Arts and Sciences.
Royal Society of Gottingen.
Royal Society of Literature, London.
Royal Historical Society (Vice-President).
Royal Asiatic Society.
Societe Asiatique.
Royal Italian Asiatic Society.
German Oriental Society.
American Oriental Society.
Asiatic Society of Bengal.
Philological Society of Buda-Pesth.
Oriental Society of Peking.
Societe de Litterature Finnoise, Helsingfors.
Societe Finno-Ougrienne.
Cambridge Philosophical Society.
Syllogos Hellenikos of Constantinople.
Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland.
Deutsches Hochstift zu Frankfurt.
Philosophical Society of Glasgow.
Literary and Philosophical Society of Liverpool.
Archaeological Society, Moscow.
Litauische Literarische Gesellschaft.
American Philological Society.
Societe d'Ethnographie de France.
New Zealand Institute.
Polynesian Society, Wellington.
British Association, Anthropological Section (President, 1891).
International Congress of Orientalists (President of Aryan Section, 1889); President of Congress, 1892).
Corresponding Membership:
Royal Academy of Lisbon.
Royal Society of Palermo.
Reale Associazione dei Benemeriti Italiani.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 3:23 am
Appendix I
The following letter was sent to the Editor after all MS. had gone to press, but as it is so complete a summary of Max Muller's views on Missions, it is inserted: --
To Dr. (Sir Henry) Acland.
Parks End, November 7, 1783
'My Dear Acland, -- I felt very much tempted to speak last night, yet I am glad I held my peace, for I could not possibly have spoken without giving offence to some of the many people present. It was extraordinary, not extraordinary I ought to say, but it was delightful to see a man like Sir Bartle Frere, a man accustomed to command and to be obeyed, a ruler of a province as large as many a kingdom, a leading statesman at home, pleading humbly, before an Oxford audience, the cause of Missions. His heart was in it -- it was an effort to him, but he did it, because he felt it was right. There were several points on which I differed from him, there would probably be many more, if we came to enter on details, but I truly admired his manly courage in expressing his convictions as he did. There is this great blessing about Missions, that, however we may differ about theological questions at home, we are all united when it comes to missionary work. We should all rather have a man High, Broad, or Low Church. Roman Catholic, or Unitarian, than to have him not a Christian at all. When we have a real heathen before us -- and I have had something to do with a few of them -- we think little of Creeds and Articles and Councils, and theories of Inspiration and Miracles; we want him to love -- to love God and to love his neighbour for God's sake. I believe that missionary work does quite as much good at home as abroad, if it teaches us to forget the outer crust and to discover the. living kernel of Christianity. But I go further -- I hold that there is a Divine element in everyone of the great religions of the world. I consider it blasphemous to call them the work of the Devil, when they are the work of God, and I hold that there is nowhere any belief in God except as the result of a Divine revelation, the effect of a Divine Spirit working in man. Holding that opinion, I do not wish to see the old religions destroyed. I want to see them reformed, reanimated, resuscitated by contact with Christianity. There is much rubbish in the present form of Brahmanism, but so there is in the present form of Christianity. Let us try to get rid of the whitewash and the plaster -- the work of men, whether Popes, Bishops, or Philosophers -- and try to discover the original plan and purpose, whether in Christianity or Hinduism. When we do that, I believe. we shall arrive at the deep and only safe and solid foundation of religious belief, and a truly religious life -- we shall find the true Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus [Google translate: That always, that everywhere that from all], in all the religions of mankind. I could not call myself a Christian if I were to believe otherwise, if I were to force myself against all my deepest instincts to believe that the prayers of Christians were the only prayers that God could understand. All religions are mere stammerings, our own as much as that of the Brahmans -- they all have to be translated, and, I have no doubt, they all will be translated, whatever their shortcomings may be.'
The following letter was sent to the Editor after all MS. had gone to press, but as it is so complete a summary of Max Muller's views on Missions, it is inserted: --
To Dr. (Sir Henry) Acland.
Parks End, November 7, 1783
'My Dear Acland, -- I felt very much tempted to speak last night, yet I am glad I held my peace, for I could not possibly have spoken without giving offence to some of the many people present. It was extraordinary, not extraordinary I ought to say, but it was delightful to see a man like Sir Bartle Frere, a man accustomed to command and to be obeyed, a ruler of a province as large as many a kingdom, a leading statesman at home, pleading humbly, before an Oxford audience, the cause of Missions. His heart was in it -- it was an effort to him, but he did it, because he felt it was right. There were several points on which I differed from him, there would probably be many more, if we came to enter on details, but I truly admired his manly courage in expressing his convictions as he did. There is this great blessing about Missions, that, however we may differ about theological questions at home, we are all united when it comes to missionary work. We should all rather have a man High, Broad, or Low Church. Roman Catholic, or Unitarian, than to have him not a Christian at all. When we have a real heathen before us -- and I have had something to do with a few of them -- we think little of Creeds and Articles and Councils, and theories of Inspiration and Miracles; we want him to love -- to love God and to love his neighbour for God's sake. I believe that missionary work does quite as much good at home as abroad, if it teaches us to forget the outer crust and to discover the. living kernel of Christianity. But I go further -- I hold that there is a Divine element in everyone of the great religions of the world. I consider it blasphemous to call them the work of the Devil, when they are the work of God, and I hold that there is nowhere any belief in God except as the result of a Divine revelation, the effect of a Divine Spirit working in man. Holding that opinion, I do not wish to see the old religions destroyed. I want to see them reformed, reanimated, resuscitated by contact with Christianity. There is much rubbish in the present form of Brahmanism, but so there is in the present form of Christianity. Let us try to get rid of the whitewash and the plaster -- the work of men, whether Popes, Bishops, or Philosophers -- and try to discover the original plan and purpose, whether in Christianity or Hinduism. When we do that, I believe. we shall arrive at the deep and only safe and solid foundation of religious belief, and a truly religious life -- we shall find the true Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus [Google translate: That always, that everywhere that from all], in all the religions of mankind. I could not call myself a Christian if I were to believe otherwise, if I were to force myself against all my deepest instincts to believe that the prayers of Christians were the only prayers that God could understand. All religions are mere stammerings, our own as much as that of the Brahmans -- they all have to be translated, and, I have no doubt, they all will be translated, whatever their shortcomings may be.'
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: The Life and Letters of The Right Hon. Friedrich Max Mul
by admin » Wed Dec 13, 2023 3:24 am
Index
[NOT INCLUDED HERE]
THE END.
[NOT INCLUDED HERE]
THE END.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 36180
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Return to Biography/Autobiography/Memoirs
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests