« ПредишнаНапред »
manifold and amazing complications of the figure, I shall, however, endeavour to condense my reasonings thereupon in a metaphysical point of view, as inwardly deduced from this or that fact presentable to my mind therein.
Now, nature, by common assent, as well as in accordance with its own innate law of self-renewal, of self-preservation, in its atmospheric adjustment of fluids, harmonises with itself at stated periods in most, if not in all its parts—works per se, reveals and resolves itself afresh, after having been exposed to frequent etherial flashings and warring attacks from without and within its own constituent ingredients or elements of created action.
The idea is partly conveyed in Virgil, and philosophically comprehended by the scholar and student of nature.
“ Eripiunt subito nubes, cælumque diemque
“Intonuere poli, et crebris micat ignibus ether.” These convulsions of its own primary existence, though severe, yet transitory, are not irremediable, though the one element may be momentarily environed and attacked, so as thereby to imperil the equilibrium of sanatory life, and thus becomes, so to speak, by the jarring or fermenting action of contact—the death of the other, as the co-efficient W, or water, is in one ratio the destroyer of another D, or fire, so fire is in another of water; and so forth, permutationally.
“Presentemque viris intentant omnia mortem." This secret springing force of certain elementary convulsive principles of action would thus occasionally war with each otherendanger the safety of the agent employed in the analysis of its hidden operations, whether in the explosive essence of gases created in density of C as earth, or by exposure to certain aerodynamic influences of D as fire, of A as air, and W as water ; and yet these tropical or polaric principles, symbolically speaking, would be indissolubly linked together, under certain conditions, in every variety of true mathematical form, or natural points of beauty. Similarly, according to another process of induction“ The actions of the body result from one force resisting the operations of another. Are not the revolutions of the planets regulated by the same law-motion, opposing gravity? These are the forces which (in equilibrium perpetually destroyed and perpetually renewed) determine the sweep of the orbs about the sun. Nor does observation reveal to us, nor can thought suggest, any limit to the mutual action of these kindred but balancing powerslife sets its stamp upon the universe ; in nature, the loftiest claims kindred with the lowest, and the bond which ties all in one brotherhood, proclaim one Author”: namely, the divine centre symbolised in our paradigm and symbol.
These, and other generating physical forces issuing out therefrom, were, I contend, subject matters of academic instruction not altogether unrevealed to the prehistoric and historic youth of Prydain during Cæsar's invasion, and not ignored by the ovyddion and derwyddon in their professorial chairs, as questions too difficult to be grappled with and mastered by British, Armoric, and Gaulic students-even though certain unknown roots and raiment supplied the only staple nourishment, the sole embellishment, the sagacity of English historians could extract from the Cimmerian past and expatiate upon. Is it not time that the libel should cease, independently of material proof?
Let us examine this question from another point of view.
Now, if Abaris, a celebrated philosopher of the sixth century, B. C., be admitted a disciple of the Hyperborean school, and recognised as an ancient Druid, according to the elaborate and learned researches of a distinguished French numismatologist, the Institute, as exemplified in, and in conjunction with many an Abaris, must have inculcated the doctrine of a Tywarchen or Ty— wrch—en, an essentiality of infinite life, a Näf, a Cælum, a Creator, as the Prisaer, Rhannwr y bydysawd, the elementary Contriver, Disinfector, and Dispensator of the universe—the balance-restoring Agent of inter-fomenting elements in their druidical philosophy. As such they must inevitably have taught that the Elfenau a hâdau pob peth—the elenienta et semina rerum, were organically divided into five representative lines segments or classes of angles, and that they elaborated them symbolically and textually as Elfenau llythyrenog natur, or, deciphered elements of and in nature in reference to principles of Ichaad, as— 1.-Of durdeb, a concretion, or consolidation of matter, as earth. 2.–Of an ymmodiad anweladwy, a ventilated invisible motion,
or purity of atmospheric life, as air. 3.—Of an êangiad dibwys, a non-weighing expansion, as fire. 4.–Of a cwdd gwyol, a liquified concavity, as water. 5.–Of an anghyfnewidioldeb, an impossibility of birth or immu
tability of change either as Tywarchen,-Tywrch-en-
paradigmatic elementation. In other words, these four elements of C. A. D. W., supplementary to the fifth controlling power, when Chaos was made manifest to the light of the arong by the Creawdwr, according to the logical definition of the 'triad on elements,' must have represented the naturally-revealed condition of yr holl ddefnydd, neu, “POB defnydd difywyd," i.e. the whole or every PRIMARY MATERIAL void of life and thereby symbolised yr OLL mewn bod, the AGGREGATE, i.e., the union of every materiality as atoms or elements, or the TOTUM quod est, vel existat in vultu Creatoris, or the vin apwonthe prima materia—the ovola oln vel tota essentia, so to speak, in all its wide range of universal existence.
Again, as our druid was generally considered by the Hellenes to be els TWY Tauralatwy oidoooowy, one of the most ancient, the most remote philosophers, even in the days of Plato and Aristotle, who flourished only between the 88th and 115th Olympiads, or 429 to 332 years before the Christian era, respectively, and as his philosophic tenets were held in high repute, and as the (druidical) divine doctrine of the teuttn ovora of the Greek (the quinta essentia, possibly, of the Latins), the 'pummed tywarchen' of the Cimbric triad, was not claimed by Aristotle or his immediate predecessors, but attributed by him, if my deduction be correct, not merely to a Platonic origin or school, but to a far more distant period—to certain hyperborean rautalalol dewloyou, the term maunalalol, “the altogether old,' is usually understood by scholars to refer to a cyclic or prehomeric period, and thus it brings us, on this assumption of modernity, to the age, if not far beyond the really historic confines, of Cadmus, the reputed parent or introducer of the letters that bear his name.
Hence it is evident that this ethereal doctrine of elements is to be considered, even in the Aristotelian age, as a traditionary emanation of a prehistoric era, mounting up to the rautalacou Apvidai, the “inventors of the theogony of the Hellenes.”
Abaris, the Celtic or Cimbric druid, must, therefore, in harmony with the institutional formulæ,' as understood by his contemporary ovyddion and druidical confraternity, have been disciplined, suivant les regles · ediscere magnum numerum’of tenets, diametrically opposed to the crass original atomic particles, if I may, for argument's sake, be allowed to antedate by a few hundred years, the Epicurean atomic transformation of the pure, life-preserving alone of the Cadw, into a corrupted destructive form of a rup or ao0ɛvia, which had been misconceived, not only philologically, but philosophically misinterpreted by this later school of plagiarists and subversionists.
Our Abaris, then, as a member of the order, must have handed down the infinite sublime emanation of Nef or Nâf, as, for instance, in a druidical expression, Iolaf Wledig Nef,' I will adore or praise the Supreme of Heaven—the Creator of the heaven of heavens, the ethereal expanse of D. U. W.—the God of all light and life,' from du, chaos, and w, a moving out of chaos into light'--the w“ being a terminal negative quality serving to show a reverse state to that which precedes it.” Hence is deduced that clause in the triad adverting to “ D. U. W., a phob bywyd, a bywydol," as 'the God of light with every life and living thing’; hence, also, is perceived the summing up of the tywar:hen =the loyos ang ovolag=the essentia, in the latter part of the triad, in the following emphatic language : “ac o ymgyd y pump hyn, pob peth, ai bywydawl ai ammywydawl y bo," or, otherwise expressed, and “ from the mutual union or intersection of these five, everything, whether it be animate or inanimate.” Whence, organized life, whether as regards man, beast, or bird, and all living things, is acted upon and influenced by a combination or mutation of the ethereal light of the Nef, through the instrumentality, form, or law of the elements, as sychder y tîr, “the dryness of earth,' iriant y dwr, 'the moisture of water,' oerni neu burdeb yr air, the coldness or purity of air,' and poethder y tân, or “heat of fire.'
Again, as regards the conception of Cimmerian, Persian, and Egyptian elements, a similarity of principles and analogy of thought will be found to be, when investigated, most striking and unimpeachable. My authorities are not at hand.
Thus, the Cimmerian term Nâf or Nef is singularly discoverable in the Egyptian Nef or hnef, the Diw of the Persian magi, which primarily signified the Spirit of God,' and indicated the true worship of one spiritual and eternal Being, as the early doctrine of the Noachidæ, till debased by an ulterior false philosophy of the priests of Memnon, who converted, like an infatuated world at large, the pure, primitive Nef, Knef, Duw, or Diw, into a gross, a material and enthroned form (like the Bonzes of the idol Fo, the Lamas of the Great Lama, the sacerdotes Jovis vel Pontificis Romani) of a Thebaid Divinity, visible to the eye of frenzied zeal, or touched by the hand or lip of prostrated superstition.
Devotees, then as now, seemed conscientiously, yet impiously, to palliate the innovation, whether on the vi et armis principles of a state in open or secret alliance with the priests, or on the dictatorial authority of teachings indoctrinated into helpless humanity by the temple orders in council' of the time being. The scruples of one party would not shrink from worshipping through the 'yn gyfrwys or crafty formality of invoking, saluting, bending, prostrating, bowing down to, and kissing animate nature or inanimate matter, imaged on wood, stones, brass, silver, gold, wax, or canvas, according to the gorgeous fertility of the imaginations of the exorcists, and averring that the apis, ibis, serpents, goats, relicked bones, pictures, or garments of this or that animal or being, &c., though worshipped as gods, demi-divinities, or aidgods, with the sine quà non attributes of omniscience pir ned, as it were, thereto, were, as an excuse for the idolatry, only “so many figures and allegories of certain virtues, by which, as by helps, mankind is governed.” If not so endowed, what could the ceremonial mean, but a pia fraus—a mockery, a delusion, and a snare'? Another party would cling to and rely on the efficacy of deified humanity, whether dead or alive, for safety and bliss hereafter, according to the “ degree of honor, of due honor, of relative honor or veneration or honorary adoration," imposed by religious codes and formulæ. Festival prayers would, I grant, be offered, in later times, to Bel or Beal y Buddrodydd, ‘Bel, the distributor, the bestower of celestial or ethereal gifts,' also to Dianhoff or Diana, the unknown God' of the island, as a species of Patron Vicariates; but still there were no images either in Prydain or Ierne in pagan eras.
In ancient, as in modern, times the mental quibble of the pretext would be, and is, that the honor of the imaged Fo, Lama, Kneph, Bel, Iau, Weden, Tria, and other deified saints (nomen Salvatoris nostri non audeo generatim narrare vobis) would pass, by a species of miraculous legerdemain, to the original, and they who adored the wooden, stone, brass, silver, gold, wax, or canvassed inage, merely adored, in the symbol, the person of the god who was thereby depicted to their imaginations. Be it so. The Israelites, on a guilty parity of reasoning and on the preceding model, used to say “to a tree, Thou art my father, and to a stone, Thou hast begotten me”: so, also, do the kissers of modern images and genuflexionists, say to a tree or image of a right-angled triangle, “ Thou hast redeemed us, thou hast cruci. fied us to the Father." Are not things equal the same equal each other? If criminal in one, can it be justified in another ?
What is idolatry? Does it really exist on earth? Did it ever exist, since the two-edged logic of mankind seems to repudiate the idea conveyed by it, but not the practice of prostration, &c., authoritatively recommended ? What could it mean under Pagan systems, to create the ire of the Almighty? What does it signify, and how can it essentially differ from that under Christian adaptations ? The Jews, though charged with what constituted its signs, did not, Hebraicè, succeed in warding off the stingthe guilt and stain of its worshipped existence among them by palliative technical ideas, according to the scriptural experience of
Let us put it in a syllogistic form :-
images of their gods or deified heroes, are idolaters in
Mount Sinai to man.
under the mysticism of an ‘yn gyfrwys' reservation, of