Talk:Al-Masih ad-Dajjal/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

untitled

Please Fix this contradiction!!!

From Wikipedia article: "He will be physically misshapen, and see everything only with his left eye. His right eye will be present but it will be dark (black) and he will be unable to see through it."

From http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html (linked from Wikipedia article) "Hadhrat Huzaifah (R.A.) says, Dajjal will be blind in his left eye. He will have very thick hair on his body and he will also have his own type of Jannat (Heaven) and Jahannam (Hell) with him: Although his Jannat will appear as Jannat, in reality it will be Jahannam and likewise though his Jahannam will appear to be Jahannam, in reality it will be Jannat. (Hadith: Muslim)"

I think that aeroplanes are cool

please fix this as soon as possible!!!! --Atamyrat 22:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Dajjal is mentioned in the Quran. There is an entire sura (verse). The verse is about seeking protection against the Dajjal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IHusain (talk • contribs) 20:10, July 25, 2006 (UTC)

Provide citation

Provide a reference when a citation needed tag is there...don't just remove the tag!!Xevorim (talk) 18:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

This page doesn't need more tags, but better content. I acknowledge references are required for content, but littering the page with tags isn't productive, esp. in this case when the information isn't generally disputed. If you dispute the content, then add something of substance to the article instead of just drive-by tagging it. What can we do to improve it and make it more accurate for the reader? _Disarray^General 20:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Masih in Arabic means "the annointed one". And it refers to Jesus Christ who muslims believe to come at the end of days. Almasih aldajjal comes imposing to be the messiah that the Jews and muslims believe to be coming, but of course he's fake. Thus, the name almasih aldajjal.Xevorim (talk) 10:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

If you look to the bottom of the paragraph in question you'll see there is a footnote which provides reference for the content in question, and therefore the tags are unwarranted as the citation was already provided. Clearly if the content is inaccurate it would be a benefit to the article to bring forward citations disputing the content, but these would also need references as WP:OR is not allowed. As it stands this content is referenced, and as long as it's verifiable it is allowed. Perhaps you can contribute something with references to counter these claims? _Disarray^General 18:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately I can't check out the reference u added. However I urge u to check the following references. Also there are plenty of books in Arabic talking about almasih aldajjal which derive the meaning in the same way I did.

Xevorim (talk) 10:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't add the reference to the article; it was there when you added the "citation needed" tag which is why I removed your tags. The citations were present. Since you have a working knowledge of this subject, it would probably be best for you to make the contributions. _Disarray^General 18:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Clean up of Talk page?

This page has become something of a dumping zone for strange ideological comments and rants in non-standard English. Is there anyway we clean up the Talk page? It should only be for how to better the article, not a place for expounding one's own religious interpretations... Sigil7 (talk) 11:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality?

This article reads like something the Muslim equivalent of a Jehova's Witness might hand out to readers. It looks like the entire section entitled "Protection from the Dajjal" needs deleting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.62.13 (talk • contribs) 16:52, July 16, 2006 (UTC)

It's What We Believe

For the clean-up you could just write that muslims believe the stuff there because, we do, I don't see you saying that stuff sounds fictious or dubious or conspiratorial on the other pages, the fact is that when it comes to pages about religons, the stuff on them is only really believed by the followers of that religon and most people of other religons read it to find out about common beliefs of that religon and don't actually think that they may take it seriously, although us muslims do. But I do agree that some of the information may need to be changed to reflect the more common beliefs of the followers of that religon, like when one website says something and another says another. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheDalek (talk • contribs) 15:37, July 26, 2006 (UTC)

The Story of Dajjal is actually not meant to be taken literally. Dajjal is the deciever and he controls the earth's resources much like a nation controls resources, and he rides a donkey much like an airforce. you see if back in Muhammed's (pbuh) time they would have said airplane no one would have understood.. Back then donkeys were a main part of the transportation so a donkey with huge ears moving as fast as the wind is the only way people back then would have understood an airplane. Dajjal's main way of communicating his deception to the masses will be the media. His blind eye may mean he cannot see the truth. When Dajjal has what he calls paradise and offers it to you, it is actually like earthly pleasures that he can give you but will lead to HELLFIRE. 71.172.17.32 08:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Hadith

I think there should be hadith from Bukhari and Muslim and other books regarding Dajjal, rather than fancy stories from other people. TruthSpreader^Talk 06:23, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Dajjal is the anti-christ of christianity

in the summary it says "He is similar to the Antichrist in Christianity" but according to Islam the Dajjal IS the anti-christ in Christianity. it doesn't say that they are similar. it says he IS. i don't have sources thats why i didn't change it.

)

Antichrist is in Quran too

Antichrist is mentioned in Quran but not by name , [7:175-176].

And recite (O Muhammad) to them the story of [him]to whom We gave Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations), but (peeled ,cast them aside), so Shaitan (Satan) followed him up, and he became of those who Cause to seduce With that knowledge We could have raised him to new heights, had We so wished. But he clung to the ground and yielded to his whims and wishes. His example is that of a dog! Whether you shoo him away or leave him alone, a dog will (always) stick out his tongue and pant. That is the similitude of those who reject Our (signs and) revelations. Keep relating to them these stories (faoqsusi alqasasa ); perchance they may reflect [007:175-176]

Some scholars say it is the false prophet named "Balaam " mentioned in the bible [book of Numbers 22] ,but that is the scholars point of views .The Fact is there is NO ONE Hadith of (Muhammad) himself says that Balaam exist, let alone reciting his story, knowing the fact that the verse Start with {And recite (O Muhammad) to them the story of [him]} an order to to keep telling them a bout him.86.147.252.83 13:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

Dajjal = Cyclop?

Considering that Dajjal has one eye, does Dajjal actually appear to look like that of a Cyclop? --Fantastic4boy 06:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

The fourth Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces (1953-1958) Moshe Dayan Has One eye..and the other one is off...DO you call someone like Moshe Dayan a Cyclop?..Dajjal is someone like Moshe Dayan..Has One Eye

Actually...If you look at the the Great seal of the United states.....you see the "one eye of the god " on the TOP of the Unfinished Pyramid , see also that one all seeing Eye of this god on the one Dollar bill paper.

Prophet muhammad PBUH said: You should know that the Antichrist is one-eyed, and LORD is not one-eyed."

This One eye God is the symbol of the Antichrist who claim himself to be the LORD.86.146.199.169 17:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Dajjal's Donkey

It seems that all mention of Dajjal's mythical donkey has been gradually downplayed and, as of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dajjal&oldid=100293328, has been completely eliminated from the article -- I would say that it's a pretty crucial element, embarrassing as it may be. The story is actually quite explicit in detail about this remarkable beast, whose ears span one mile, and is capable of traversing oceans with single steps. I feel that omitting this albeit humorous detail does a disservice to wikipedia. As funny as this backwards-ridden Superdonkey may sound, its omission reads to me as an attempt to lend false credence (for fear that anachronistic Islamic tradition will come off as absurd) to the prophecy of Dajjal, or Islam as a whole. -Etafly 10:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Nothing embarrassing ..at all ! Actually we should put this into the Dajjal Article, and see how is it related to Current present world state. We don’t talk about Dragons and 7 headed beast , little horn with eyes , whore of babylon , or even a bout a god that walk long walk and been defeated by man named Jacob after a wrestle... that continued all night long..and named himself lord jealous exodus 34:14....etc...as book of Daniel and book of revelation , or the bible keep talking about. ...We talk about facts

The Super donkeys are airplanes..like jumbo jets that are capable of traversing oceans with single steps, without stopping.

The beasts ears that span one mile.. are the Radars mesh mash with link satellites systems that spay across miles of lands.. from his single aircraft.

An example of this EAR is well manifested in system called ECHELON that describe a highly secretive world-wide signals intelligence system that hear your phone speech, read your e-mails and even see your daily activity through credit and bank cards social security numbers.. etc . see ..in another word total BIG -Dajjalic-anti brother anti christ control system . see this web site http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON

Thank you very much...great Idea…we should add this too

81.153.30.157 17:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, lets not put speculation or unattributed information in there. That said, I think that inclusion of the donkey sounds like it could only improve the article, Etafly. Speaking of, can you recomend a good print hadith for someone interested in the folklore aspect of it? --mordicai. 19:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, all I can recommend is a google search. I originally learned of Dajjal and his extraordinary companion through stories I heard as a young muslim. It always aroused my curiosity as much as it tickled my ulnar nerve! -Etafly 04:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

81.153.30.157, If that's supposed to be sarcasm, it's lost on me. As stated above, his donkey is quite pertinent with regards to the lore. As also stated above, I'm voicing my concern at the removal of this information, and the intentions behind said removal. Also note that this article has nothing to do with Christianity or the Bible, not that equating the absurdities in Islam with the absurdities in another religion furthers Islam's legitimacy. Your point is taken -- Neither holds more water than the other. But please, I'll go insane if I have to suffer another "But the Christians did it too!" justification. If you hold your religion to the same standard as another (that you deem blasphemous, no less), and consistently fall back on it for justification, then you may as well join the other religion, right?

Anyway, if a reliable source can be obtained, it should be added. Perhaps if it expands into its own article, you can include the claim that the donkey is actually a Jumbo Jet that utilizes ECHELON - Providing, of course, that you can cite reliable secondary sources on the matter! -Etafly 04:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps I've been too hasty in rushing to assume the logic behind said removal. What are the chances that someone simply thought that this was vandalism? -Etafly 17:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Etafly and the Super Donkey

First of all .....it is not an absurd article at all .... It is you whom clamed it to be absurd by quote and quote {As funny as this backwards-ridden Superdonkey may sound}… { Islamic tradition will come off as absurd) …and then you finished your comment by a conclusion quote { its ...lend false credence (for fear that anachronistic Islamic tradition will come off as absurd) to the prophecy of Dajjal, or Islam as a whole }.

With providing my explanation which it could be false since it is not a doctrine, I did not put the word "absurd" in my answer when I have mentioned the biblical stories

Secondly ...Although The False Christ ( Dajjal ) described in Quran ,as a Lier one ...his name in Hadith ...is defined as the Imposter Christ = Massseh al Dajjal, ..It is Important to know that...the story of the Donkey is not mentioned in the Holy Quran , it is in the traditions., and the traditions are not infallible could be subjected to the Textual criticism (depending on its relation to Quranic text ....if it contradict or comply with Quran,... and its Realtion to The Current Factual events that we see at Present Time...which in this peticular case Sound Alarmingly RIGHT and Valid...ECHELON..airplanes..the one eye of god in the dollar bill ..great seal of USA..etc..etc.).

However These Stories that I have quoted from the bible which you think to be “Absurdities” ..are not in Jewish Traditions ( Talmud ), BUT in The Sacred text of the Bible itself….it is a CORE belief Issue.

The Story of YHWH Elohim whom named himself to be Lord jealous Ex 34:14 and gave Mosses a peek at his "back parts." Exodus 33:23 was being beaten by man named Jacob in Gen32:22-28 is in the sacred text of Torah

The story of of 14400 virgin Israelites men whom only out of all Humanity will be redeemed rev 14 :4, have a seal of God on their foreheads rev 7:3

Thirdly ..........I do put Quran and Bible in to same standard when it comes to the cross examination texture test, however how valid the Jewsish and Christians answers are . These answers Have to be subjected to the Literal biblical texture and it is context, and see if they are valid or not..FIRST..and then relate them to the current events. In this respect I will ignore all forms of speculation and "hearsay" concerning either Books( including Quran), and instead focus on textually-hard and testable evidences, and linking the evidence together ...that is far more better..than going to Google looking for websites to see people's OWN point of view or a hear saying Fallacy regarding any subjects

And then .....Finaly ....you should ask the question … Why you should (or must) believe in the Qur’an. The same opportunity will be available to you to provide any convincing counter evidence as to ‘why I should believe in the Bible ?81.153.30.157 13:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

You seem to misunderstand what I've written. I never stated that the article was absurd. I said that the removal of dajjal's donkey from the article was orchestrated for fear that it may seem absurd. With regards to 'why you should believe in the Bible', I never told you to do so. I won't waste time repeating what I said -- The section I created above was for the purpose of reintegrating Dajjal's donkey into the article about Dajjal. This section, however, clearly has nothing to do with the article, and will serve no purpose to that end (Unless of course you're planning to integrate -me- into the article!). On that note, I shall close by saying that if you have anything to contribute to the article regarding this topic (Dajjal's Donkey), please do so. -Etafly 16:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Etafly

When I say article I mean the traditions that you made mockery of them and you applied that to whole Islam as abusrd faith..by saying { its ...lend false credence (for fear that anachronistic Islamic tradition will come off as absurd) to the prophecy of Dajjal, or Islam as a whole }.. That what I mean sorry for not making it Clear

These Traditions are Not Absurd .at all …and not "embarrassing" ..as you claim ...by saiyng I would say that it's a pretty crucial element, embarrassing as it may be ..They are Factual. …even being just traditions not Holy Quranic texts.. they are even more factual than these stories being told in the bible that because of them we have wars in Middle east..only just ..to justify the bible ...that iself has textual problems as i have showns to you before.

Since you have said ..“But the Christians did it too!" justification”...YES ..same as jews when it coms to story like jacob and god..….and the Jewish chronology that dates of the start of cosmos Creation from September 25 or March 29, 3760 BC....but are they Valid justifications?

I gave a suggestion method for testing all these "justification" ..if they are factual or Not ..that is by exposing them to the Literal biblical texts and compare them to testable Scientific evidences available.

Have to be subjected to the texture and it is context, and see if these "justification" are valid or not....and then relate them to the ...scientific physical facts/(current events if they are Prophecies).

This method should be applied to all faith or ideologies, and even Atheism But It is either all Faith and Ideologies ( atheism included) are WRONG…or just one of them is Right….and that is for you to examine.

I don’t justify Quran Credibility because of the fallacy of others…But I justify the Quran by the examining It and put it to the SAME standards and Scientific Scrutiny Criteria ( in regards to all subjects that Quran mention ) ..Same as I do to others ..be it Faith based texts or Atheist ideology Theories (like Evolution " , and there shall be NO Mercy ..either it past the test or Fail it.

217.44.222.210 18:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Dajjal and 666 beast in the bible

Quran [006:112] Thus have We appointed unto every prophet an adversary - devils of humankind and jinn who inspire in one another plausible discourse through guile. If thy Lord willed, they would not do so; so leave them alone with their devising;

It means there are DEVILs among Human Race , and the Chief is the Antichrist (who is seed of serpent ...whom will be Crushed by seed of Woman who is Jesus As Gen3:15...and that what it meant by jesus when he said Before Abraham I am John 8:58..it means that he was Prophesized before Abraham existence)

The Other kind of the Devils are among the Jinn Race whom their Chief leader is ...Lucifer (Iblis the satan..the morning star Isa14:12..whom ironically and Falsely gave and attached this title the morning star to jesus in Rev22:16))

The two heads/leaders of the evils united together to plan and inspire each other plausible discourse and guile .

To explain this .....The Unfinished Pyramid in which the all seeing Eye of the Antichrist the Chief devil of Human Race on top of it, is just one side of another Reverse Pyramid of Lucifer(morning star) ( from the Jin kind) the unseen Chief Jinn devil(or the Satan).

These two Pyramids Joined together ( UNITED as it is Explained in Quran [6:112] ) ,to Form the SIX Pointed Star ……..Hence The six pointed Star is 6 Triangles 6 Heads 6 sides... which is the number of the beast (though in some text it is 616) mentioned in the bible. ..It could be true ..why Not ?.. ...that is just an explanation ..I am not saying its right.. since I don’t like the idea of linking Quran with the bible at all.

There is No one proof from Quran that Antichrist is an Israelite...Actually..there is a belief/HINT ..from Quran that Antichrist..been in EXISTANCE..since the time of Prophet Noah PBUH217.44.222.210 21:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation Significance?

Hey, hope I'm doing this right, I'm new to contributing to the 'pedia. Here's an issue I came across:

Top of the page, the article says "It is rather interesting to note the similarities between "Dajjal" and "Devil" when spoken."

Hunh? I don't see what that has got to do with anything. If they share some linguistics background, cool, that should be included, ut if it's just a "hey, these words rhyme, isn't that neat," which is what it reads like to me now, that doesn't seem encyclopedia-worthy.

JordanPhillips 05:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Classic WP:OR. Removed. -Etafly 05:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

The remote similarity in sound is not significant. Daǧǧāl would be a loan from Syriac daggālā 'false, deceitful,feigned'. (This is, BTW, the correct transliteration, I think, no deghala). The root DGL means 'to lie, pretend, be false'. The word devil, on the other hand ultimately derives from Greek diabolos 'the accuser, slanderer'. No relation there. --Simha (talk) 12:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Dajjal is Antichrist?

I don't really think that the Antichrist of Christianity is the same or even similar to Dajjal. While both are said to come before Resurrection Day and bring trouble, the idea of Antichrist relies on being anti-Christ (as Christ is viewed as God and Messiah in Christianity), the enemy of Christ; Dajjal is not Antichrist in that he won't claim to be Jesus Christ, as Christ is not viewed in Islam as being God. Please correct me if I'm wrong. C-Cheat 16:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Though "Christ is not viewed in Islam as being God", the dajjal is the antichrist in Islam because (in Islam) the Dajjal will claim to be Christ (though islam says he is not) and will be an enemy of good and will be killed by Christ. The Dajjal & Antichrist seem to be similar but it is Christianity's & Islam's perception of Christ that differs.[[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 15:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Dajjal in Arabic (roughly) means liar or trickster. Some muslims believe that he will claim to be Jesus (PBUH) the son of mary (Christ) and in doing so, he is the Anti-Christ. User: cs1kh

External Link

One of the external links is to a site of rather poorly supported conjecture, some theories which to my knowledge have no popular, expert, or otherwise notable support, it is also filled with judenhaas. I'm removing it. S. Martin 04:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Out of Place Intro Paragraph

I made a quick edit of the page to remove a paragraph at the top (before the actual intro) that was very POV and, anti-semitic. I'm assuming whoever added the paragraph will put it back up at a later date and then flame me so this discussion post is my side of the argument in advance. Eno-Etile 00:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Today’s dajjal fitna is combined of all previous Prophecies time fitnas and present Muslim peoples also adopted and emerged into those fitnas now they called this is part of life or secular life so who is first for Azab-e-Allah… kafir who were they already kafir or who were Muslims now they adopted kafir culture. Dajjal is fitna and big lair presently its in your home can you stop watching movies I don’t think so, can you be able to stop cheating each others only for one day I don’t think so, can you share your facilities to other poor brothers for one day nop can you put hajjab on your eyes for one day nop, can you stop thinking make more money nop, did you give the food to poor person last 30 days nop, so you are materialistic and you are under siege by dajjal who created this atmosphere for you and who interrupt them they will destroyed physically and also mentally, your brains economically siege by yahood economists because you are fare from Islam.

Dajjal has one eye to look world one eye not spiritual eye like satellite cameras, GPS, Radars and media they are dajjal predator eye, dajjal heaven his own place like his countries and systems they are look like peaceful places he called them heaven but actually they are traps and take you in hell because these countries law against Islamic rules and who will effected by dajjal like dajjal killed them those Muslims get shahadeth (shaheed) that dajjal called hell but its not hell peoples get shahadet.

Zulkarnan Allah Salaam said (Allah mention in Quran) Dajjal will appear that time when Iron and Copper will fly on earth surface and Yajuj and Majuj (Gog and Magog) will fight each others, Now this is the time all flying machines dependant on copper and iron with out these elements not possible to fly on earth surface even cannot move.

Communism and Christianity (Yajuj and Majuj ) collapse each others when they strength down than Islam sun will rise in whole world not with these present Molvies educations, there will be new system will rise that system only for poor peoples and they will crush the both Communism and Christianize systems then poor peoples faith convert into Islam and churches will convert into Masjjid (Mosques). I don’t believe present Molvies, Ulma and Umma but soon you will also don’t believe them just believe on Quran and read if you don’t understand read again and read again Allah give you the right path Allah most merciful, Allah give everything who request from Allah.

Gog and Magog

Yajuj and Majuj

Turkish "Deccal"

I was trying to find info on the Turkish "Deccal" very few sources on the web. (also happens to be the Turkish name for Neitzche's Antichrist). It can be difficult to find the arabic origin of Turkish words because of vowel and other phonetic changes. (very rarely does turkish have a double c). I created a redirect from Deccal to here. I was wondering if anyone was interested in putting this info Deccal = Dajjal in the article (maybe on top with the rest of the transliterations) ? Ygraber (talk) 20:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Meaning of masīḥ

'Linguistically, the reason for his name being al-Masīḥ ad-Dajjāl is simply because masih is a title given to one who travels extensively to increase their influence in the world.' Since when does "masīḥ" mean that? According to Masih, it means "anointed one" (as its cognate forms in Hebrew and Aramaic do). 71.90.131.109 (talk) 05:10, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Depends on your sources & interpretations. From what I have read and learnt, he will claim to be Jesus (al-Masih) but he isnt (so he is a Dajjal - with all the other lies he makes) together that would be Al-Masih al-Dajjal!

Dajjal is not satan

This will be changed by me (a muslim). (according to Islam) Dajaal is not satan (Iblis), he is an evil person that will impersonate Jesus. According to Islam (which is what this page is to be based on) Dajaal & satan are 2 seperate entities.[[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 17:02, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Though I have changed it back (again), there seems to be someone that is changing the page to state that muslims say that the Dajjal is the Devil, when this is incorrect. (it may be the belief of some/minority of Muslims - but this belief is incorrect and is not the belief of Islam). [[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 12:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but this policy is clear that your opinion (point of view) is not a consideration here; even if it's entirely correct. What's required is that you provide a reference from a published source to state ANY opinion. Notwithstanding, your contribution could be better worded if you do provide a source. Just adding "incorrectly" is kind of a harassing phrase. Please find a source, and these views will not get reverted. If you are familiar with sources, this whole article could benefit from them. There's only two right now, and one's pointing to a website for the Hadith. This article is a mess, and someone could justifiably come along and cull everything in it that's unsourced; basically all of it save two sentences. Can you provide some of the references it needs and improve this? _{Baha'i Under the Covenant}^Jeff 18:26, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Would (searching for &) stating a source from the Koran that states that (god states that) the devil is a enemy to all humans till the end of time. And since Hadith/muslims says/belives that Dajjal will be killed, shows that the 2 people cannot be the same? (as one dies while humans are alive and one dies after all humans!) be 3ufficient?

Anyway, your wording "some CLAIM the Dajjal is the devil" has improved it from the original which stated that muslims believe that the dajjal IS the devil [[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 08:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I have changed 'Incorrectly' to 'though this should not be the case', I am hoping that this is less harrasing a phrase?[[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 09:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

This page really is a mess, the closer one looks at it. It seems to be one entirely unsourced research paper. WP:OR is about what's called "original research", and is to be avoided in almost all circumstances. What you're proposing Cs1kh is just your own original research. The most ideal solution would be if there were secondary publications being provided where the author/research/scholar had made reference and comments like these ones. Simply providing links to a primary source like the Koran don't really fix anything, but they are an improvement. With religious interpretations the scriptural source is considered the "primary source", and its generally accepted that a "secondary source" provides the interpretations, and not the contributing editor (see WP:PSTS. It's great that you're going to help improve this article. Are you aware of any type of valid secondary sources? _{Baha'i Under the Covenant}^Jeff 16:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I am trying to improve it and fix any obvious mistakes that I may find. I did not create the document, so I did not create the 'mess' that you claim (though I admit, I am not very good at creating pages myself).

Anyway, I have provided a source from the Koran that says that the devil has respite from death (by God) till humans are resurrected and I have provided a book reference that states a well known Muslim hadith that says that Jesus will kill the Dajjal. These 2 sources of information contradict each other if a Muslim believes that the Dajjal is the Devil but are clear in stating/implying that the two are separate beings.

- Remember, what I am stating is the Dajjal in Islam and not what other religions believe.

Regarding 'valid secondary sources', I am aware of books that state what I am claiming or state the two parts separately and so allow the person to deduce (the way that I have stated on the page) the information (but I dont know if they are classed as 'valid'! - they are printed books, but they are mostly printed in Arabic!)![[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 09:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe I accused you for the mess that is this page; I was just noting it's a mess. It has but one source, and very little content. Again, your contributions are not meeting any of the policies and guidelines which govern Wikipedia. Maybe you could familiarize yourself with the policies I provided links to on your talk page. Everything you're contributing is WP:OR. It has nothing to do with whether you're correct; contributions need to come from published verifiable sources and not from compiling verses you have hand picked from the Koran. Also, your section heading "Dajjal is not Satan", or derivitives thereof are not germane, as nothing in the article states that anyone believes he is. It makes no sense to state what Dajjal isn't, when nothing here says it is, see?

what I am trying to state is a common misunderstanding of what people think Muslims believe! As I have had people say that muslims believe that the Dajjal is the Devil, and when I said that that is incorrect (me being a Muslim), they would quote wikipedia directly as their evidence and state that Wikipedia's Dajjal page has heavier weighting than what I said muslims believe (though me speaking being muslim, reading the relevant books & speaking to Imams know what muslims believe) and that I should request that the page be changed if I think it is incorrect! [[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 09:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I would have cited your sources correctly for you, but I have no idea where to start with what you provided. See how to cite sources to get yourself in the ball park. Please don't begin to take anything personally. We can likely use what you've brought forward, but it has to come from a published source to use it; it can't be a compilation of your ideas. _{Baha'i Under the Covenant}^Jeff 05:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Nothing personal taken, I also request that you dont take anything personally. I have undid your change BUT I removed my translations. What is left is a direct copy from a English/Arabic Koran, and another direct copy from the Major signs of Judgement Day book. Hopefully that should be OK? all I am doing now is quoting directly from 2 books and stating the obvious contradiction that occurs! I have read the WK:OR page but if what is left at the dajjal is not the devil section is still not allowed, then I cant work out how far the limits are on what people can conclude from evidence from quoted documents [[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 09:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, my basic understanding is that editors can't make any conclusions; this is an encyclopedia not a soapbox for ideas and conclusions (see WP:NOT). Conclusions regarding interpretations of religious texts and doctrines need come from secondary sources, as we cannot provide our own clever conclusions. The section title itself is original research, as nothing provided reaches the conclusion being offered. Just find an author who states Dajjal is not the Devil. Again, no one said Dajjal is the Devil, yet you opened the section with "Some Muslims believe (or people believe that Muslims believe) ...", and leave it uncited. Who believes this, exactly? Isn't there one published source that reaches the conclusions and connections you've derived? What's been offered is original research, so we should find a way to improve it. _{Baha'i Under the Covenant}^Jeff 19:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

It is not a conclusion from personal research, I am a Muslim and I am trying to state the beliefs of (the majority of) Muslims. Muslims Believe that the Dajjal and the devil are 2 different/seperate beings. The Dajjal & devil are very rarely menioned in the same book because of the very different scenarios that is stated about each (it would be the equivalent for a book to have to say that Moses and Jesus are not the same). To state the very different scenarios of the Dajjal & Devil as direct quotes from 2 different books (without stating directly that they are different beings should be OK?). Regarding 'Who believes this, exactly?' have you ever used 'Answerbag? ("http://www.answerbag.co.uk/") go in (you can be anonymous) and type in the question "Who is Dajjal". when I wrote this for you, the question was still valid - select it when it appears. The Top answer states Dajjal is Devil, below his answer select 'Show all comments' and you will find that (one of) his source(s) is Wikipedia! - which is what I am trying to sort out! Anyway, Please note: I am not trying to annoy you and I am not trying to edit war with you! [[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 08:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, I will provide 2 direct quotes from the same published book (Islamic dictionary definitions) of 'Dajjal' and 'Devil'. how I complete the section with a sentence that says Muslims dont believe the two are the same? I dont know? Any Ideas from you is more than welcome.[[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 09:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

References

I have placed some quotes from the Koran & 2 books, but I do not know how to make the small numbers (to create reference numbers), if anyone can change the text that states the source of infomation into proper proper references & numbers, that would be appreciated.

I would have cited your sources correctly for you, but I have no idea where to start with what you provided. See how to cite sources to get yourself in the ball park._{Baha'i Under the Covenant}^Jeff 06:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou, the Difficulty was the full stop at the end that I kept missing![[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 10:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Peshitta MSS evidence POST-DATES the Qur'an!

"The term al-Masīḥ ad-Dajjāl (Arabic for "the false messiah") is a literal translation of the Syriac term Mšīḥā Daggālā, which had been in the common vocabulary of the Middle East and adapted into the Arabic language 400 years prior to the Qur'an via the Peshitta (which uses that term instead of the Greek "Antichristos")"

This is nonsense which cites no references at all! All manuscript evidence of the Peshitta POST-DATES the manuscript evidence of the Qur'an. So on what basis does the author say that "Masih al-Dajjal" was adopted from Syriac? This Wiki entry is a mess and in serious need of cleanup in the article as well as the melee in the Talk section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.208.0.200 (talk) 02:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

One note, this document has many editors and the claims "Masih al-Dajjal" was adopted from Syriac was not from me but from another editor (that I have been trying to correct). I do not agree with this, as "Masih al-Dajjal" is Arabic words that literally means: 'Masih' Christ and 'al-Dajjal' the liar/trickster (in arabic). This syriac claims are generally made by people that do not accept Islam as a religion of God or claim it was made by a person that copied either Christianity or Judaism (rather than sent by God). [[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 14:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The above citation is no nonsense. Dr. E. W. Bullinger, in “The Companion Bible” writes "Of these, the Aramaic (or Syriac), that is to say, the Peshitto, is the most important, ranking as superior in authority to the oldest Greek manuscripts, and dating from as early as A.D. 170." A quick glance at *any* internet page dealing with the issue will let you verify this. Both terms, masīḥ and daǧǧāl predate the Qur'ān by a lot. The term masīḥ clearly reflects Hebrew məšīaḥ, which is also found in Aramaic etc. As these are all semitic languages, so the words are easily adapted into Arabic. These words first have significance in Judaism and Christianity. Nobody says that this means that Islam 'copied'. That's actually complete nonsense. If the Qur'ān is revealed by God and it speaks about earlier revelations and enjoins you to believe in these and sees itself in the tradition of these Abrahamic religions and tells you in which part to believe and which part not, it is only natural that God would cite these key-words (allaḏīna yu'minūna bi-mā unzila ilayka *wa mā unzila min qablika* Q 2:4). Just as English _street_ and _tile_ are words of Latin origin but also normal English, so are the above words loanwords that have been naturalized into Arabic. They have then become ʿarabī mubīn just as _street_ and _tile_ are inglīzī mubīn. Maybe you should read more carefully and be less paranoid. --Simha (talk) 14:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Dajjal's claim of jesus

The Dajjal will not claim to be jeses.he will claim to be Allah.Rasullallah has stated Allah is not one eyed while Messiah, Ad-Dajjal is blind in the right eye and his eye looks like a bulging out grape.I have added five references.I didn't find any reliable source that states dajjal will claim to be jesus.Though i did find a source which says dajjal will claim prophethood,then he will claim to be Allah.Allah knows better.Legalpepsi (talk) 02:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

It appears there are varying opinions on this matter, and it would be useful to the article to resolve which is accurate. The references provided in this last contribution are not reliable sources so should be avoided. Are there any secondary published sources that could be included that would settle the matter? _Disarray^General 07:34, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm > these narrations are from Sahih Al-bukhari:

Volume 9, Book 88, Number 245: Narrated Anas:The Prophet said, "No prophet was sent but that he warned his followers against the one-eyed liar (Ad-Dajjal). Beware! He is blind in one eye, and your Lord is not so, and there will be written between his (Ad-Dajjal's) eyes (the word) Kafir (i.e., disbeliever)." (This Hadith is also quoted by Abu Huraira and Ibn 'Abbas).

Volume 9, Book 88, Number 241: Narrated Abdullah bin Umar:Allah's Apostle stood up amongst the people and then praised and glorified Allah as He deserved and then he mentioned Ad-Dajjal, saying, "I warn you of him, and there was no prophet but warned his followers of him; but I will tell you something about him which no prophet has told his followers: Ad-Dajjal is one-eyed whereas Allah is not."

In the first hadith if you see that its written And your lord is not so and in the second hadith it is written whereas Allah is not so its a clear message to the people, so that they dont believe that dajjal is their God.So the question is why prophet muhammad (sallahahu alaihi wassalam)is telling people that Allah is not one eyed.It is simple as prophet muhammad (sallahahu alaihi wassalam) didnt want the people of that time to believe in him as a God because of his feats and claims. There is another Hadith from Sahih Al-Bukhari which i will like to share. Volume 9, Book 88, Number 246: Narrated Abu Sa'id:One day Allah's Apostle narrated to us a long narration about Ad-Dajjal and among the things he narrated to us, was: "Ad-Dajjal will come, and he will be forbidden to enter the mountain passes of Medina. He will encamp in one of the salt areas neighboring Medina and there will appear to him a man who will be the best or one of the best of the people. He will say 'I testify that you are Ad-Dajjal whose story Allah's Apostle has told us.' Ad-Dajjal will say (to his audience), 'Look, if I kill this man and then give him life, will you have any doubt about my claim?' They will reply, 'No,' Then Ad-Dajjal will kill that man and then will make him alive. The man will say, 'By Allah, now I recognize you more than ever!' Ad-Dajjal will then try to kill him (again) but he will not be given the power to do so."

Now in this hadith if you read dajjal says that 'Look, if I kill this man and then give him life, will you have any doubt about my claim?' the dajjal over here talks about a claim and he also says if i kill this man and bring him back to life'",the power of bringing a person back to life is with Allah alone.This proves that he will claim to be Allah.(one point to note is that he will be able to do all those miraculous feats with the will of Allah without his will he wont be able to even move a stick)Also i could'nt find any hadith related to his claim of prohpethood, if anyone has a hadith or a source it would be highly appreciated.:)Legalpepsi (talk) 14:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I'm not particularly interested in the exhaustive details and history so long as the sources being used for new content are reliable and the content verifiable. I think the article can only stand to be improved by referenced contributions. If there are published sources available lets use those instead of blogs and unsourced webpages. _Disarray^General 18:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I edited the content in the first place because i didn't find any reliable islamic source which states that the dajjal will pretend to be jesus.But i did find some sources and i also heard that the dajjal will pretend to be Allah,whereas he will not be.so please provide some islamic sources which state that dajjal will pretend to be jesus,because there are no sources of this claim on the page.Legalpepsi (talk) 18:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

You're likely onto something here, and as I said you're encouraged to bring forward verifiable material and improve the article. Please do so; the burden of verifiability is on the contributing editor. This is likely a valid correction, we just need to source it properly. If you're familiar enough with the material then all we need is the reference for the contribution and it's all good. _Disarray^General 00:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Added some references from Sahih Al-Bukhari which is most trusted source of hadith in islam.Legalpepsi (talk) 19:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Now that's how statements are to be sourced; I wish the whole page could have such strong reliable sources. Thanks for cleaning that up!

There's seems to be a conflict of opinions about whether al-Mahdi and Jesus are the same personage or two different promised ones. I saw you changed that and left the statement reading the Jesus would defeat Dajjal. On the Mahdi page there's a similar statement that Jesus will return after the Mahdi appears; meaning they are separate personages. What is your understanding of this, and can we source it? _Disarray^General 20:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I think topic of mahdi is a debatable topic.The page itself says that no hadiths are present in the sahih al-bukhari and sahih muslim.but there are hadith present in Sunan abu dawud and Sunan ibn majah related to him.its a basic belief of the shia sect that he will come.But as there are no hadiths present in Sahih Al-bukhari nor Sahih muslim which are one of the best source,its very difficult to say anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.42.2.11 (talk) 09:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Making a few changes:

The full name of Dajjal is "Masih-Al-Dajjal". Which means that he will claim be Messiah. As far as the expression of "your lord" in the Ahadith is concerned, it tells us that the claim of Messiah will be as big as the claim of Messiah in other famous traditions i.e. Christians, who believe their Messiah was God. And secondly, his claim to be "God" instead of Messiah needs secondary source, not Ahadith, which are primary source.
Removing the paragraph starting with "By definition the Devil....", because it was repetition of the same thing which was said above.
Jesus is said to fight with Dajjal along with Mahdi, so in order to say that Mahdi will fight Dajjal doesn't seem correct. The correct stance has already been described by the two secondary sources in the article.
Just a few small changes and re-arrangement for better reading. TruthSpreader^reply 05:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

BACON'S PHILOSOPHY CHARACTERISTICALLY ANTICHRISTIC By Allama Muhammad Yousaf Gabriel “It is not you O Mohammad", our promised Messiah. "contended the Jews", " but he shall be form among us. Our messiah : Son of David; he shall be the lord of the sea d the land. Canals of water shall move along with him. He shall restore our lost kingdom, and he shall be sign out of the signs of the Lord". Yes replied the prophet, your Messiah (Jesus Christ) came to you ad you rejected him. I am not the messiah. I am the last of the prophets. Your messiah will come, but he will be the messiah-id-dajjal (the lying, simulating, gilding Christ). QURAN'S ANSWER To the contention of the Jews was:- "As to those who cavil at the sign of God without authority having reached them, nougat is there but pride in their breasts: but now they shall not succeed. Fly thou for refuge then to God, for He is the hear, beholder. greater surely that the creation man is the creation of the heavens and of the earth; but most men know it not. Moreover; the blind and the seeing, and the evil-doer and they who believe and do the things that are right, shall to be deemed equal. How few ponder this .Aye, “the hour" will surely come: There in no o doubt of it: But most men believe it not". (Quran 40x56-59) Now the phrase Messiah-id-dajjal means a lying, simulating glutting Christ, who pretends to be the Messiah, but is false. We will now treat the topic of messiah-id-dajjal in the light of the description of the prodigy as is given by the Holy Prophet of Islam peace be upon him, I say not to you that this Baconian culture is that very same Messiah-id-Dajjal as was prophesied by the prophet, but what I will show in that it has al those characteristics most easily and clearly observably by any one. What, however, I insists on saying is that this Baconian philosophy and this Baconian progress and this Baconian culture deserves to be opposed by the believers, and needs its eradication as a noxious weed, or, if it is not eradicated in time, it surely will destroy this mankind bodily and spiritually, leave in no chance even for preparedness. I will show the identity between the characteristics of the messiah-id-Dajjal and this Baconian sprit. And there is nothing in it, that which could not be observed by any one anyone with greatest ease and clarity. In the following is given point by point the characterization of the messiah-id-dajjal as is given by the Holy Prophet; each point followed by the relative characteristics of this Baconian culture:- (1) "He shall be of the race of the Jews". Mark that this modern Baconian culture is utterly, entirely, basically and completely the Jewish culture. Not indeed the mosaic Jewish. But the culture which is generally associated with the Jews. The culture of wealth-seeking, wealth accumulating and wealth-increasing. Culture of the love of wealth. Culture of usury, interest, trade merchandise. The culture which stood against Jesus Christ as basically antagonistic to this doctrine of otherworldliness. Could this present day Baconian culture of wealth and world be regarded as Islamic or Christian, or Hinduism, or Buddhists? No not with any justice. It is clearly Jewish. (2) "He shall be nick-named as Messiah--il-Makhmur, that is the intoxicated, drunken Christ". How so very truthfully this modern Baconian culture, and how obviously, is the culture of intoxication and drunkenness. You find nowhere the religious remorse or contrition in any heart. No one weeps for the sins committed. No one ever removers death or the resurrection. But a general atmosphere of intoxication and drunkenness prevails throughout. Laughter and not weeping, pleurae and not sobriety is the quest an intoxicated pursuit of wealth. (3) "In his right eye there will be a wart of the size of a grape and he will have frizzled hair". Now this is the point. This modern Baconian culture exclusively is concerned with the material, substantial world. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the moral, or spiritual, or the go her worldliness. The right eye may be metaphorically regarded as of the spiritual. The left eye as for the worldly and material. Thus this modern Baconian culture is blind of its right eye, though its left eye is exceptionally sharp and far-seeing. Equally blind of the right eye is this modern science which guides this Baconian culture. It is well-known that this modern science is confined to the five senses only, and can deal with only the material, substantial, and is totally line of spiritual and metaphysics". But its left eye is exceptionally sharp. It can peep through earth to the death of miles, and it can gaze upwards to distances of millions of miles, though it can see nothing that side of the grave. It is surprising that people in spite of knowing these facts should neglect them. (4) "He shall be riding a donkey". And this is the point. The mechanical mode of transport is a feature which is a most distinctive feature in comparison with the entire human history. The biological donkey has always been the symbol of transport and conveyance. While this modern age has its won particular mechanical mode of transport and conveyance. The point assumes conspicuity when it is seen in comparison with the past ages, and it is a weighty point. Also it has to be borne n mind that it is the messiah-id-dajjal, the adversary of Messiah-in- Nazarite that is the objective of discussion, for there exists a memorable tradition of Jesus Christ having ridden the donkey. The simulating Christ too ought to ride the donkey. But his is the donkey of his own special making that is a mechanical donkey against the biological donkey. And what after all is the difference between a donkey carrying a load of wood, and struck loaded with wood, excepts that the one moves on its legs and brays, while the other moves on its wheels and brays. (5) "Messiah-id-Dajjal shall make his first appearance is Syria and Iraq, and there he shall announce his prophethod, and then He shall proceed to Asphahan, and seventy thousand of the Jews will be flowing him, and there he shall announce his claim to Godhead, calling the people to his worship". No doubt this modern Baconian culture has raised the first with the claim of prophethood. Bacon's has been a philosophy of life complete in itself and indeed in radical opposition to the prophetic religion, that while all revealed religion was based on the doctrine of the next life in heaven, Bacon's philosophy is based exclusively on this material world and this temporal life, and Baconian philosophy is taught like the teachings of a prophet. Then on a further stage we see the Baconian philosophy assuming the role of God-head> No doubt the germ of godhead may have been found in the Baconian philosophy itself in virtue of the doctrine of man's dominion over nature an man's right. Today Baconian culture's role of God may clearly be seen in the fact that this mankind depends not on God, the Creator of the world, but on the Baconian culture, the process or of modern science. It is not to god that the people resort, but it is to science that they resort for their necessities or guidance, or problems or troubles. Also like God this science-guided culture dominate nature. It is said, that the messiah-id-dajjal will make his first appearance in Syria and Iraq. if England and France are regarded as the substitute for Syria and Iraq the mater appears to be well adjusted touching this Baconian culture. It was like a religion that Baconian culture m merged from England the homeland of Bacon and of Baconian philosophy. Then by the tie the scientific achievements a had covered the phrases of human life, and man had become completely dependent on science, it may be regarded that the time for the assumption of the claim of Godhead by the Baconian culture had reached. It is said that seventy thousand Jews will follow the messiah-id-dajjal. Now every student of the history of this modern Baconian age knows, that the Jews conspicuously have been and still are the alpha and the omega, and the creators of this Baconian culture. This Baconian culture is the exact and complete interpretation of their dream that they had been seeing for millenniums. It is the materialized realization of their long cherished hopes. It is the achievement of their prolonged deep-rooted ambition. In short, it is their triumph. It is they that have commenced it, created it, worked at it, build edit and completed it. Others may be regarded only as their poroselytes in the formation of the Baconian culture, and their followers". (6) "Miracles by the power of god for the test of the mankind will be wrought through his hand". From the railway engine to television and atomic bomb, are the numerous miracles wrought by him. But because all these works function on the principles of nature created by the god himself, they may be said to be worked by the power of God. The position of the Messiah-id-dajjal in this respect is only of a conjure. (7) "In spite of all these miracles the letters K.F.R. that is Kafir (infidels) will be written on his forehead. They who shall have faith in Allah will read these letters on his forehead, even if they were illiterate. They, however, who will be devoid of faith in Allah, will not be able to read those letters on his forehead even if the they were illiterate". No doubt, no knowledge, but faith it is that a show the reality of this Baconian culture. (8) "A fire named hell and a garden named paradise shall accompany him during his tour of the world. He shall throw his enemies in his hell and he will enter his friends in his paradise. But in reality his hell shall be paradise and his paradise a hell". No doubt today, all those that are zealous pursuers of this Baconian progress, and are seemingly well off, suffer from a torturous fever and constant torment of heart-burning, and are deprived for heart's contention. On the other hand it three be any such people as have faith, and due to their faith take less interest in this modern progress and culture, and thus suffer from financial difficulties, their sacrifice is well rewarded in the form of contentment, hopes and joy in their God. (9) 'After three year's famine he shall appear, and a pile of broadened quantity of water will be with him. To whomsoever he shall wish he shall give of bread and water. and to whomsoever he shall wish he shall refuse. Praise of God and prayer will at that time be the subsistence of the faithful, and thus it is that their thirst and hunger shall be assuaged". The strangest state of religion in the world, and the burning, ungratified desire of the people of the West fore worldly feast prior to the appearance of Bacon's philosophy (1626), may be referred to as famine. As for as the question of bread is concerned, it is quite obvious, that this modern Baconian culture is the culture of bread, and nothing but bread. (10) "Canals will move along with him wherever he will go". This again is no hidden secret. Canals of water are a particular feature of this culture. This earth today is covered with a network of canals. (11) "And on whatever people he shall pass, if they will take him as their God, he will order the cloud to rain, and it shall rain, and will order the earth to bring forth the corp., and it shall obey him, and will order the trees to bear fruit, and they shall bear fruit, and will order the goats to become fatted and to become with milk, and they shall be so. And fantasy people will not believe in hi, he will stop the rains upon them; and their crops and their fruits will vanish, and their beasts shall become lean. And he shall order the treasures of the earth to come up and they shall come up, and the beasts shall walk in his company". Now there appears to be no need of spending any words or many words to show that all that has been said above about the doings of the Messih-id-dajjal, is being done by this modern science-guided, culture in a manner more than manifest. Any one, however, who has no knowledge of the pre-modern ages, might not notice the particularity of these activities, considering them as usual. But anyone who has knowledge of the condition of pre-modern age will at once discern these activities as unusual particularly associated with this modern age. Artificial rain is being made from the clouds. Crops are being grown with amazing speeds and in much increased magnitudes by improved methods. And so also the fruits of the trees are being grown in amazing ways. Animal husbandry is taking particular attention, and even artificial seminarian is being successfully practices. And see how the earth has rendered up all the its treasures, water, oil, minerals, metals etc. (12) "And he shall say to the people, "If I brig your dead mothers and your deaf fathers back to life, will you believe on them.". And he will order the devils who shall thrust themselves into the earth and the emerge in the shapes of their dead mothers and dead fathers, and shall say, " O our children believe in him"> There might be some better examples to explain this point, but see that ape records of the voices of the people, and their picture, that have been long dead. (13) "No one could slay him except Jesus Christ. And Jesus Christ it is that will kill him". Judging from the actual situation f this modern Baconian culture, it appears that unless the people adopt the doctrines of FAQR (poverty) . There is no possibility of getting grid of this culture and its economico-industrial set up. The doctrine of poverty ad otherworldliness reputedly associated with the name of Jesus Christ, Quran, though is in no way behind the teachings of Jesus Christ in respect of poverty and otherworldliness. At present the remedy of their ills and the solution of the peculiar and particular problems of this culture is prescribed as more production and still more production ad-infinitum by the assuages of this age. This in fact is no remedy of this malady. It is just as to add fuel in an endeavour to extinguish the fire. People will have to revert to the pre--modern philosophy of poverty and self-abnegation to escape the dreadful effects of this culture. (14) "The stay of the Messiah-id-Dajjal on earth will be forty days. of which the first will be equal to a year; the second will be equal to a year' the second will e equal to a month, the third will be equal to a week, and the rest will be equal to ordinary days. And they only will escape his enchantment who will take refuge in the mosque". This duration is known to God only. But inside the mosque now is the spirit of religion whereas out-side the Baconian culture reigns supreme. It is interesting to observe that this Baconian culture has undertaken to do all the works which were done by Jesus Christ. We will enumerate them in the following:- (1) Christ feeded a few thousand people by a few loaves miraculously. This Baconian culture is the culture of providing the people with food and other necessities of life. To fight against hunger is one of its basic slogans (2) Christ cured the sick, and gave sight to the blind. The Baconian culture has undertaken the same things. See the hospitals. To fight against disease is one of its basic slogans. (3) Christ raised the dead. This Baconian culture has particular attention on this fact, and has kept constant endeavour to achieve his miracle. Though hither to has no seen success. (4) Christ made out of clay things reassembling birds. And breathed in them, and Lo! They went flying. This Baconian culture has made the aircraft. (5) Christ walked on water. This modern Baconian culture has caused iron to float on water in the form of sea-ships, and has devised submarines, and divers' suits. (6) Christ's teachings inspired compassion and mercy in the hearts of his followers, compassion and mercy also is a feature of this Baconian age. And inspite of all this resemblance, there exists basic antipathy between the work of Jesus and this modern e culture. Jews worked these things with spiritual power. This modern a culture does all by means of material agency. And Jesus had always heaven and resurrection in sight, where this modern culture has its eyes fixed always on the earth. The end of the teachings of Jesus was heavenly paradise. The end of this modern culture is atomic hell on earth, as well as in heaven in the next life. The compassion and mercy of this age is that of a world in sheep's skin, to burn the people alive is a feature of this age, sea, bombs, incendiaries, atomic, gas, and plague bombs. The people of pre-modern ages cold not have the heart to commit such strictly despite their proverbial savagery. In these days if on the one hand relief is sent for a stricken people, on the other hand one atomic bomb is added to the stock-pile. Do you understand? This is Baconian civilization. Typically. We have brought our discussion of the Messiah-id-Dajjal to its end. We will however continue history further to his end as is told by the Prophet of Islam. Peace be upon Him. It is as follows:"- "And he will pass over so many lands until he will enter ye men. And will take many a renegada with him for everywhere. And when he will reach near Mecca, he will not be permitted to enter therein by the guards of angels there. from there he will set out for Medina. Medina will at that time have seven gates. On every gate Good will appoint two angels with drawn swords in their hands, and they will not allow any of the Dajjalian army to enter the city. After his arrival there thrice the shocks of earthquake will be felt within the city, and those of weak belief, and the hypocrites will leave the city and will join the Messiah-id-dajjal. There will be at that time a youth in Medina, and he will come out to give a battle to the dajjal, and will inquire about him form His comparisons. Some of them seeing the insolence of his manner, will want to kill him, but others will say, no it is prohibited by our Lord to kill anyone except by the order of Mehdi. Then they will inform the Dajjal, that a person, insolent and disobedient sought his audience. Dajjals admit him to his audience. The youth will on the first sight of the dajjal exclaim “verily will I have recognized you are that same accursed dajjal about whom our Prophet has forewarned us, and has explained the lie and deceit that is yours. Dajjal upon hearing this will be greatly incensed and will order a saw to be brought and having fixed that on the head for the man, will saw him in two. and will cause the two parts of the ode to fall on either side. Then he shall walk to and fro between the two parts. And will say to his followers" if I bring this man back to life, will you believe in my Godhead?". To which they will say: verily, verily, we do already believe in your being our God, but if that will be done,, our faith will only be strengthened. Then He will place the two parts of the dead man joined together, and will say: Arise, and the man will rise, alive, actually by the power of the real God. No sooner than the dead man will come to life than he will say "Now I am quite certain that you are the same accursed dajjal whose identity the Holy Prophet has revealed. Dajjal upon hearing this will fly into rage, and will command his followers to kill the man. His men will do it to the utmost of their power to kill the man, but the knife with which they will endeavour to kill him, will have no effect on the body of the man. Dajjal upon this will in a feverish manner command him to be thrown into the hell-fire. The man will then be thrown into the fire but the by the mercy of God the fire shall become cold ad ineffective. Thereafter the dajjal will not be able to bring the dead to life. His power to do so will be taken away y from him. Thence he shall move mount toward Syria. When he will reach near Damascus, Mehdi will be in Damascus and will have made the preparations for war against Dajjal. The caller will call to the prayers of after-noon, and the Muslims will be in preparation for the prayers when Jesus Christ reclining on the shoulders of two angels will descend form heaven on the eastern minarets of the Jamiah Mosque of Damascus, and will ask for a ladder. People will fix the ladder against the minarets, and Jesus Christ will come down, and will meet the Mehdi. Mehdi will say "O Prophet of Allah lead the prayers". To which Jesus Christ will say, "You will lead the prayers, for certain among you have the lead of certain others, and this honour is fro this (the Muslim) ummah (nation) only. Mehdi will then lead the prayers, and Jesus Christ will follow to him in the prayers. After the prayers will be over, Mehdi will say to Jesus Christ, O prophet of Allah, else take the command of the army in your hands, and do as you deem fit. To which Jesus Christ will say, No. The command of the army will remain in your hands. I have me only to kill the Antichrist (Dajjal). He is to be killed by my hand. When the night will pass and the morning will appear, Mehdi will march his army out against the force of Dajjal. Jesus will then say. Fetch me a lance and a horse. So that I will assail the infidels (Dajjal).Jesus then along with the Islamic force attack the forces of Dajjal and a gruesome fight will begin between the contending forces. A peculiar feature of the fight will be that to whomsoever of the opposite army the breath of Jesus will reach, he shall die. Dajjal will try to flee before Jesus, but Jesus will pursue him, and overtaking him will thrust his lance through his back, and will kill him. Blood will gush forth form the body Dajjal, which Jesus taking in his hands will throw towards the Muslims as a surety that he had killed the dajjal. And it is said that Jesus would not spear him, the dajjal would in the hot pursuit be dissolved just as salt is dissolved in water. The Islamic force will busy themselves in the slaughter of the force of Dajjal. The Jews that had accompanied the Dajjal will find no refuge any where. So that a Jew will hid himself behind a tree or a stone, the tree and the stone will cry out, its way the slaves of Allah, he is he (the Jew hiding; take him. Thereafter an era of peace and prosperity will begin. There will be great security and plenty n the world. All hatred and malice will be laid aside. Lions, camels, bears and sheep shall live in peace, and a child shall play with serpent unhurt. Allama Muhammad Yousuf Gabriel Adara Afqar e Gabriel QA St.Nawababad Wah Cantt Distt Rawalpindi Pakistan Yousuf_gabriel@yahoo.com www.oqasa.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.99.55.27 (talk) 05:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

More Additions

As per User:General Disarray requests, I've fixed the sources as best as I could. I have mentioned both sides of the debate on 'the birth' subsection of shia views, and I leave the 'views on his defeat' section open to further addition by other branches of Shiism - as such, further removal of this material, by User:General Disarray under the false pretense of NPOV will be reported as vandalism, and third parties will be notified. Toushiro (talk) 05:52, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Threatening me at the outset of a content related discussion would under no circumstances be considered assuming good faith by any administrator or "third party" looking into the matter. If you are in fact interested in resolution and consensus building I suggest you check your attitude at the door, for here in Wikipedia our ability to play well with others is often put to the test.

Your tone leaves a lot to be desired, but I will assume you feel your contributions to this article were improvements and your work should have been given greater consideration? First of all, the issues of the references are entirely separate from the WP:NPOV of the wording. Either warrant this contents removal, and both still need much improvement. Instead of being offended at me for pointing this out, why not consider for a moment that there's room for improvement here. This article can only benefit from contributions, for it is sorely lacking content. On that note it *doesn't* need any more half-baked content. Your contributions created subsections with scant content of 1-2 sentence that rely heavily on weaselly wording creating a general confusion in regards to Shi'a Islam's view of Dajjal. Specifically one glaring issue is you're attributing ideas of the authors of these two books to the whole of Shi'a Islam when clearly these concepts are somewhat debatable and in question as they are not specifically outlined in the Koran, right? I don't honestly know where to begin, let alone how to resolve this, but it's clear to me that these edits are not improvements to the article when they create more questions than they resolve. The sections about his birth and emergence are both comprised of only 2 confusing sentences are completely ambiguous, while employing phrases like "some sources state" (weasel) and adds zero value to the article. This whole contribution can be widdled down and moved up to the Islam section. His defeat "section" is another 1 sentence claim which only offers the view of the Twelvers and fails undue weight. _Disarray^General 09:04, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for making the adjustments to the page as opposed to deleting everything again. This had less to do with my 'attitude' than it had to do with a certain lack of co-operation on your part. Had you been more helpful in your editting instead of simply deleting everything 3 times, there wouldn't have been any conflict. If your goals were to improve this page, you would have been spending your time figuring out ways of dealing with the unsourced claims that fill up the entire first half of the page - instead, you spent all your time, going out of your way to impede the addition of a few sourced facts. Even in your response your showing another way of improving this article - is this considered a debatable issue?, does everyone agree?, what are the views on the subject?, are there differences between Sunni and Shia?, what are the views of the scholars of the Sunni schools of thought?, what the views of the Shia? (which on a side note, the divisions amongst the Shia who view Muhammad, Fatimah and the Imams as being living versions of the Qur'an and infallible in nature, do not consider this a debatable issue), what are the views of the other divisions amongst the Shia?, do all groups believe dajjal is an actual person? - there are any number of ways that this article could have been improved, yet none of your actions reflected such a goal.

As this article is still growing, I added those portions for birth, emergence, defeat with hopes that these would later be expanded on by other contributers. The section on his emergence can infact be attributed to all of Shi'a Islam, as the hadith given in those books relate to Muhammad and Ali, not from any Imams (which is where differences would arise). As well, the sentence that is already in the article on his defeat: "Author Maulana Ahmad Ali claims Imam Mahdi will arrange a Muslim army, and will be on the verge of leading the Muslims in morning prayer when Jesus will descend and kill the Dajaal" can hardly describe the views of all of Islam, mentioning it there like that is easily misleading to the reader. Normally, pages like this are split to show both Sunni and Shia views because they do differ. Trying to combine them all in one by quoting a random author does not help. And if I knew the views of the Ismaili (Musta'li/Nizari) and Zaydi I would have added them; but as this article is still growing, saying the Twelver views falls under undue weight is hardly the case. Whether it be added now or 10 years from now, it will be the same when its added - and it is a fact for this group, which by no means lessens or degrades the views of another group. For someone who is actually researching this topic, all these things are necessary, yet by deleting them, your not allowing the article to progress and show all these views. Tagging the article would have been far more appropriate than out-right deleting the facts. Finally, I have no argument if you wish to remove the portion about his birth, however it is a debated issue which again, I was hoping could have been expanded on. Toushiro (talk) 23:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

All of those are great questions to which the answers would improve this article tremendously. If you're aware of published sources that answer those questions I think they would be a great benefit here. In the meantime, I suggest you avail yourself of the information in the policies I have hotlinked to in my first reply. While you're at it, what Wikipedia is not may shed some further light on what should and shouldn't be contributed to this page. _Disarray^General 23:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC) AN ESSAY ON BACON'S LIFE IN REFERENCE TO HIS PHILOSOPHY

        ALLAMA YOUSUF GABRIEL

"When time Allur'd think how Bacon shined, The wisest, brightest, meanest of mankind".

(Alexander Pope)

Printing year : Price : RS.50/- By the infinite grace and the boundless mercy of Allah, this series of volumes is my original work. The application of scientific facts, and the new discoveries from the Quran are all my own and quite unknown to anyone, anywhere, Muslim or non-Muslim. And for that, the most benign and merciful Allah to be praised, for ever, eternally. And thus is all the responsibility of mine. And again Allah be praised. And it is my conviction that it will save the mankind from atomic doom.

Gabriel.

LIFE OF BACON Foreword:

Of Jesus was a light as shining as of the truth. It appeared and it dazzled and it left a dazzling reflection in the eye of mankind to the day of judgement. Jesus was the harbinger of pure spiritualism, and was a destroyer of materialism. Bacon in seventeenth century arose as the champion of materialism and as an antithesis to Jesus Christ. Of all the false prophets who simulated Jesus, Bacon has been one most successful. His philosophy gained universal acceptance, and was very deceptive. It promised a paradise on earth, and after a few glimpses of bliss, it has turned this earth into a hell, and is now ready to be consumed by the atomic hell, the logical consequence of Bacon’s philosophy of modern atomism. We have hitherto discussed the philosophy of Bacon in its completeness in previous volumes, and will now treat the mind which produced it. We will treat the tree which produced such a fruit. Various lives of Bacon have appeared, but some of these may be regarded as penegyrical compositions bestowed on a redeemer by the grateful devotees, while others have presented the life of the Hero in true colours, but have regarded his philosophy as a real redeemer of mankind and the best of all the philosophies that ever appeared on earth. The reason of this is only that at the time at which these assessments of Bacon’s philosophy were made, the progress of science showed only the benefits and no problems. Indeed it could have been regarded in those times as a bliss unmixed. And now the modern science and progress, the fruits of Bacon’s philosophy are there in their final perspective and true realities. It is high time now therefore to discuss Bacon’s philosophy and reassess it in its present light. And let it be for ever remembered that, Bacon being an instrument of Anti-Christic spirit, and responsible for the most destructive of all the previous anti- religious revolutions in all previous human history, the truth both about his life and his philosophy has to be completely and clearly told in the interest of humanity which with its soul destroyed now stands on the verge of a most painful and most disgraceful end of its bodily existence, as a result of this very philosophy of Bacon. Humanity must now be warned without any reservations, not indeed with any intent of blackening any one’s memory but with the sole purpose of finding a relation between the philosophy and the mind which produced it, indeed, in reference to the circumstances, then prevalent. It is essential to know the mind that has produced a philosophy which has withstood and overcome every other philosophy, has gained complete sway over the entire world, has thrown every religion into the background, and leading the world through the promised bliss of earthly paradise for centuries together, partially full-filling the promise in its course, has eventually brought this world to the verge of universal destruction both of mind and of body. I will base my work mainly on Macaulay’s essay on Lord Bacon. He has treated the conduct of Bacon with impartiality and has done every thing with admirable ability. The article of Macaulay is no doubt a masterpiece, in itself, though I stand in radical opposition to his view of Bacon’s philosophy. And yet inspite of my difference with Macaulay on the subject, it is impossible not to admire Macaulay’s great talent. He simply appears as bewitching. Macaulay likes the philosophy of Bacon because it multiplied human enjoyments, and it mitigated human sufferings. Macaulay praised Baconian philosophy under the inebriating influence of these two objects, and he was not in the wrong. Indeed at that time the world went in the first sweet swings of the achievements of Bacon’s philosophy, with the hectic background of the premodern west still fresh in memory, and no modern problems hand as yet appeared. We today stand on a different pedestal and see the things from a different frame of reference. The order of the things is reversed from what it was in Macaulay’s time. The Baconian philosophy now has begun to mitigate human enjoyments and multiply human sufferings, and that perhaps could have been tolerated. But apart-from that the Baconian philosophy now clearly threatens the existence of humanity through the flames of atomic hell. How dearly it is wished that Macaulay were himself alive today to see with his own eyes the error of his opinion about the philosophy of Baconian Atomism. And yet it appears doubtful whether Macaulay, if living today could have judged this philosophy aright, for we can see a world of the greater intellects blinking before it and lavishing the greatest praises on it, and ignoring all the various hazards that are incident on it. Indeed besides the blindness of the people of this age, their helplessness is proverbial. Bacon of all the philosophers from the beginning to the end enjoys a distinctive position in that, he did to the sons of Adam exactly that which the devil had done to Adam himself. Satan seduced Adam. Bacon seduced the sons of Adam, and the design of seduction is identical in both the cases. We will discuss this very interesting and indeed very alarming topic at length. Today the fast changing, and deteriorating situation of this Baconian world reveals, that this Baconian culture is not now very far from the point of explosion. And a very miserable end it does portend. Another distinction which Bacon enjoys in this world is that whereas even the greatest of the prophets have claimed the allegiance of but a part of this world, Bacon's philosophy pervades the entire world from one end to the other. We will in this Bacon’s life history try to reveal the mental and moral affinity that existed between Bacon’s life and his philosophy. And we will discern the hand of providence at play therein. Bacon’s philosophy may be regarded as the voice of the age and the cry of the times. The Western world stood then on the fence gazing with wonder and peeping with anxiety into the material world, pining after the sweet smells and inviting odours of the feast of nature. Bacon just gave them the signal. The theory (Atomism) which had failed in ancient world because of the want of congenial atmosphere succeeded in modern age because of the field well-prepared, in the presence of suitable mental conditions. The things which appear in the sight of the modern man as a source of joy and pride, would appear to a pre-modern generation as dreadful, grisly and hideous works of the devil. As far as Bacon is concerned, his heart was eaten up with the desire of wealth and power, and it is up to you to call his desire of wealth as the dream and his philosophy as the interpretation, or vice versa, that is his philosophy as the dream and his life as the interpretation. GABRIEL

§ Francis Bacon, Baron Verulam, Viscount-St. Albana, the Lord Chancellor of British Exchequer and the author of “The Proficiency and Advancement of Learning”, and ‘The Novum Organum” and the new Athantis, about whom the poet Ben Johnson in his sixtieth year said :- “England’s high chancellor, the destined heir, In his soft cradle, to his father's chair, Whose even thread the fates spin round and full Out of their choicest and their whitest wool", was born on twenty-second of January at York house in the Strand, the residence of his father Sir Nicholas Bacon, the Lord Keeper of the great seal of England". §§§§ Of Bacon’s minor age we have a few glimpses only. He was a boy of delicate health, and had a gravity of carriage and a love of sedentary pursuits which distinguished him from other boys. His pre premature readiness of wit and sobriety of deportment much amused the Queen Elizabeth, and she would call him, her young Lord Keeper. Once asked by the Queen how old he was, the young prodigy gave a reply that almost startled the Queen "Two years”, he said, ‘Two years younger than her Majesty’s happy reign”. Then we see him as a student at Trinity College Cambridge, striking a pillar of iron that supported the upper chamber of his residence, and being amused by the great bomb made in the chamber beneath. And then we see him in St Jame’s Fields as a boy crying out in the rift of a round house of stone to hear a fearful roaring at the window. And then a few years later we descry him in France absorbed in the listening to the echoes in a dilapidated room of a ruined chapel. There he is being told by an old partisan, that it was all the work of spirits, and of good spirits, for, said he, call Satan, and the echo will not deliver back the Devil’s name; but will say vate'n which is as much in French as "avoid". How little at that time the poor old partisan knew how the young boy will one day exorcise the entire world of all the spirits, nor did the young experimenter himself know to what dark destinies would his tendency toward the observation of Natural phenomena lead this world. §§§§ In the thirteenth year of his age, Bacon was entered at Trinity College, Cambridge, along with his elder brother Anthony. It has often been said that Bacon while still at college planned that great intellectual revolution with which his name is inseparably connected. The evidence on this subject, however, is hardly sufficient to prove what is in itself so improbable as that any definite scheme of that kind should have been so early formed, even by so powerful and active a mind. But it is certain that, after a residence of three years at Cambridge, Bacon departed, carrying with him a profound contempt for the course of study pursued there, a fixed conviction that the system of academic education in England was radically vicious, a just scorn for the trifles on which the followers of Aristotle had wasted their powers, and no great reverence for Aristotle himself. It was the unfruitfulness of the philosophy of Aristotle materially, and its material bareness that Bacon hated. The peripatetic philosophy though had been in disrepute in the West before the birth of Bacon, and the scholastic philosophy had been shaken to its foundations, and the entire Christendom clamoured for a philosophy that allowed them the delight of the feast of nature, and relieved them of the tyrannies of the Church and Austerities of the religion. §§§§ Bacon was by nature endowed with a tendency toward observation of natural phenomena, and was keen-sighted, and had a powerful intellect, but his father had in view for him a public career as statesman or diplomatist. After three years having spent over books in Cambridge, Bacon was sent by his father to France to read men. There for some time Bacon resided under the care of Sir Amias Paulet, Elizabeth's minister at French Court, and one of the ablest and most upright of the many valuable servants whom she employed. About his stay in France Bacon had recorded two instances in Sylva Sylvarum. Of these, one is about his inquisitiveness regarding the echo in the ruins of a chapel and which has previously been mentioned. The other is about his warts. He writes, “I had from my childhood a wart upon one of my fingers: Afterwards when I was about sixteen years old, being then in Paris, there grew upon both of my hands a number of warts (at the least- an hundred) in a month’s space. The English Ambassador's Lady, who was a woman far from superstitious, told me one day, she would help me away with my warts. Where upon she got a piece of Lard with the skin on, and rubbed the warts all over with the fat side; and amongst the rest, that wart which I had from my childhood: then she nailed the piece of the lard, with the fat towards the sun, upon the post of her chamber window, which was to the south. The success was, that within five week's space all the warts went quite away; and the wart which I had so long endured, for company”- (Sylva Sylvarum, Cent. X 997). §§§§ And there in France he saw a dream, two or three days before the untimely and sudden death of his father Sir Nicholas Bacon in England. The death of Sir Nicholas was an event which changed the whole current of Bacon’s life and was by a strange coincidence foreshadowed by a dream, which Bacon, upon after reflection appears to have regarded almost as a sign of the coming disaster. “I myself remember”, he says, “ that being in Paris, and my father dying in London, two or three days before my father’s death I had a dream, which I told to diverse English gentlemen, that my father's house in the country was plastered all over with black mortar”. (Sylva, Cen. X. 986). §§§§ No doubt, the death of Bacon’s father was a sudden, a severe blow to Bacon that caused the whole future scheme of Bacon’s life to collapse. Yet seeing the great eminence, to which Bacon rose, and his struggle that was graciously crowned with success, and the fame which he achieved as philosopher would not countenance the black character of the dream which Bacon saw. The dream consequently was related to the universal effects of his philosophy as a result of which the building of the entire mankind now stands plastered with black morter. §§§§ Supposing there was an oracle in Paris and Bacon had applied to that oracle for the interpretation of his dream, the answer of the oracle might have been something as follows:- “Let the suppliant know that the interpretation of his dream is sombre. His whole future appears to be overcast with clouds of misery and anxiety. The entire span of his life will be a chain of misfortunes and the end will be sad. The purport of his dream is that his father shall soon die and leave him a poor man obliged to earn his livelihood in professional drudgery. The death of his father and the subsequent change of the current of his life will result in the formulation of a philosophy which consequently shall plaster the entire abode of mankind, this earth, with black mortar and bring the entire world to a state of mourning. His heart shall burn with ambition incessantly, his desire of wealth and power shall find no bounds, but his plans meeting frustration, His choked desires shall appear as cries, wails, and laments, which assuming the form of words will appear as a philosophy, and it is that philosophy which being followed by the entire mankind will mar their destiny. For a full decade he shall not have his desires, and being obliged to be engrossed in professional drudgery during all this period, under testing conditions. The severity of want, poverty, insults, humiliations and the torment will impart so great a strength to his words, and acuteness to his thought, that his writings will carry everything before them. He shall have cast away every scruple and blinded by the urge he shall even not desist from misinterpreting the word of scripture, and such shall be the intensity of his mind that his sighs, groans, mourns, his bewailing and his laments shall appear as words personified on paper as a philosophy. He shall eventually succeed in achieving his worldly ambitions of wealth and power, but his desires being insatiable, his boundless greed shall bring on him misfortune, and he shall end his career in misery and shame. Though after his death his philosophy shall bestow on him the position of a benefactor of humanity, till at last it has brought the world to the ruin. §§§§ Two or three days after Bacon had seen the portentious dream, his father died in London on 20th February 1580. On 20th March Bacon left Paris and returned to England. It might have been a sad moment for him. But the scheme of providence leaves no choice and God’s will be done. The drama of his life had commenced. The death of Bacon’s father had over cast the prospects of Bacon’s life completely. It had given a twist to the course of his life that set him on a path quite different from that which his father had contemplated for him. How strange are the works of providence? This twist in the course of Bacon’s life set him on a path that culminated in the accomplishment of his peculiar philosophy. And this twist bears a perfect analogy to that twist which Bacon in his philosophy gave to the course of mankind. §§§§ On his return to England Bacon discovered that his father had accumulated a considerable amount of money for the purpose of purchasing an estate for him, but sudden death had prevented its accomplishment, and Bacon was thus left with only the fifth part of his father’s personal property. Diplomacy was now abandoned as a career. His prospects of a studious leisure became more distant than ever, and for him who would willingly have lived only to study, there was nothing left but to study how to live. He was most desirous to obtain a provision which might enable him to devote himself to literature and politics. Bacon’s heart did burn with the desire of accomplishing his long cherished plan that of writing a new philosophy of fruit against the barren and unfruitful philosophy of Aristotle. The cry of the West clamouring at that time for a leader after the fall of Aristotle echoed in the ears of Bacon, and he eagerly sought some place that would relieve him of the fear of want to enable him to write his new philosophy, with a mind quite free from fear of want in an atmosphere of peace and tranquillity. Yet all his earnest endeavours, all his hereditary claims, and all the support of his friends failed in this respect and he was left to professional drudgery in the occupation of law for more than a decade. Almost every biographer of Bacon has lamented this particular misfortune and has considered it as a great loss to Bacon’s philosophy and his literary pursuits. To me personally the laments of these biographers appear as amiss. Bacon needed as an incentive to his new philosophy to be provided neither by a lucrative position nor by ample provision, for, that would have dulled his appetite and sapped his spirit, but what he needed was hunger, want, fears, insults and humiliations that would inspire him with something of fury. How often Bacon might have thought in the heart of hearts, how deplorable a thing the want was, and how earnestly he would have desired to write a philosophy which would relieve others of want. Want thus was not an impediment to Bacons’ philosophy but rather an asset and support. §§§§ Macaulay has wondered why Bacon should have been unsuccessful in obtaining some provision. "He appealed to the Government”, says Macaulay, “and it seems strange that he should have applied in vain. His wishes were moderate. His hereditary claims on the administration were great. He had himself been favourably noticed by the Queen. His uncle was Prime Minister. His own talents were such as any Minister might have been eager to enlist in the public service. But his solicitations were unsuccessful. The supplications which Francis addressed to his uncle and aunt were earnest, humble and almost servile. He was the most promising and accomplished young man of his time. His father had been the brother-in-law, the most useful colleague, the nearest friend of the Minister, but all this availed poor Francis nothing. He was forced, much against his will, to betake himself to the study of law. He was admitted at Gray’s Inn, and during some years he laboured there in obscurity”. (The Literary Essays by Lord Macaulay, page 217-19). §§§§ The providence, however, knew better the needs of a man destined to give this world the new philosophy than the lamenting biographers and the critics of Bacon. Also, Bacon had at that time not distinguished himself as the author of the “Advancement of Learning” and "The Novum Organum”. Nor was anything like that anticipated of him at that time. To them at that time Bacon was merely a showy, quick-witted young man of the rising generation. Also there might be some secret initiative misgivings in the heart of the people of that age about a young man who was destined to produce a philosophy which would supplant faith and bring this world to destruction. §§§§ Bacon entered upon the course of law in Gray’s Inn, and after having submitted himself to the drudgery in obscurity there, he was thrown into a profession in which his heart was not, and remained a poor man in purse for many years to come. After attaining some eminence in his profession he applied to Lord Burleigh to be called within the Bar. But what he received was only a testy refusal, and a sharp lecture on his vanity and want of respect for his betters. Bacon returned a most submissive reply, thanked the treasurer for the admonition and promised to profit by it. In his twenty-sixth year Bacon became a bencher of his inn, and two years later he was appointed lent reader. At length in 1590, he obtained for the first time some show of favour from the court. He was sworn in Queen’s counsel extraordinary. But this mark of honour was not accompanied by any pecuniary emolument. He continued, therefore to solicit his powerful relations for some provision which might enable him to live without drugging at his profession, and spend all his time and energy in study. He bore with a patience and serenity which, we fear, bordered on meanness, the morose humours of his uncle, and the sneering reflections which his cousin cast on speculative men, lost in philosophical dreams, and too wise to be capable of transacting public business. §§§§ Bacon’s uncle and cousin, hardly could imagine then, what effect their insulting reflections were to make on the mind of their relative whose heart and soul were on fire due to his secret enthusiasm for his intended philosophy, nor could they then realise what effects their ill-treatment of a prospective philosopher would in time have on the formation of the views and ideas of his contemplated philosophy. How all he accumulated fire of the years of poverty and insult would glow in his views in the realm of philosophy in which he sat as the sole majesty and with complete prosperity and without interference from any quarters. §§§§ Although the Cecils were generous enough to procure for Bacon the reversion of the registrarship of the Star Chamber in 1589, this was a lucrative place worth 1600 or 2000 a year, the promise helped only to keep Bacon’s hope a year, the promise helped only to keep Bacon’s hope from extinguishing, for, it was not until July 16, 1608, that is about 19 years later, that the place actually fell in. All these years Bacon remained under the necessity of labouring for his daily bread. This, however, is a fact which clearly tells, how the hope of Bacon was continually sustained and not allowed to completely die out. The situation kept Bacon labouring in poverty and under insults, suffering afflictions of body and of mind. All this was necessary psychologically for the end to which Bacon was destined. Bacon was during all these years engaged besides his professional drudgery in wiring his philosophy. Like Tantalus he pined and like Farhad he excavated the channels of his philosophy in order to reach the palace of new philosophy. The pangs of poverty continually inflamed his desire for wealth, and this fire in turn inflamed the views of his philosophy. The factor of wealth and the world assumed ever-increasing prominence. The considerations of morality and religion were every moment being taxed by the bitterness of feelings, till like a lion dying of hunger, grief and rage, Bacon stretched a paw and tore away the basic doctrine of the scripture that appeared to abstract his way to material utility and declared that the natural philosophy was the command of the creator to be obeyed, and, was to be pursued for the material exploitation of the forces and sources of nature for man’s dominion over nature as his destiny, and the material well-being as his purpose. The pursuit of moral philosophy declared by Bacon, was only a vain and impious attempt of man to give himself the law. This declaration of Bacon in his philosophy was clearly an anti-scripture, and anti-religious declaration. A person like Bacon obstinate enough to continue the burning desire of wealth and more wealth could eventually explode, and his scattered smithereen may be seen in the form of writings that may be called as the philosophy of Bacon. Bacon was a man whose monitory ambitions were boundless. His afflictions and dis-appointments served only to harden his ambitions. His love of wealth was so inseparably inherent in his nature that the more it was impeded, the hotter and stronger did it grow. §§§§ Bacon’s hatred of moral philosophy may be traced to his exceeding and uncontrollable love of the world and the worldly things, and to this may be added his reluctant adoption of the profession of law and the miseries suffered therein, a fact that may justly be attributed to his hatred of the law. Therein may be seen his trend of damning the moral philosophy as well as the law in his philosophy. Whatever might have been the reality it cannot be denied that whereas his philosophy basically was of a worldly nature, the feeling of poverty, the pangs of hunger, the bitterness of insults in his endeavours to obtain the ideal circumstances to suit his own desires, and continuous disappointments changed his worldly philosophy into one quite infernal, anti-religious and abominable. §§§§ It has been observed by some of his biographers in the form of a lament, that when Bacon trudged in his profession for a living in poverty, he consoled himself for his professional disappointments by increased devotion to his favourite studies. It is not difficult to guess from this observation that the increase in the heat of Bacon’s enthusiasm for his philosophy was directly proportional to his disappointments. And this struggle continued for about thirty years. In 1605 his book “Advancement of Learning” was published, while his most important work “The Novum Organum”, he presented to the King in October 1620. §§§§ The story of Bacon’s disappointments is not complete as yet. There are other events prior to his attaining to the office of solicitor--generalship, that deserve mention to bring the picture to its completeness. All these will show how Bacon was kept tin Check and how the doors were opened and then closed on him, and thus his sense of suffering was intensified and consequently his philosophical views were affected, and gradually became more openly worldly, more frankly anti-religious and more profoundly abominable. §§§§ In 1594, the office of Attorney General became vacant, and Bacon hoped to obtain it. Essex made the cause of his friend his own. He sued, he expostulated, he promised, he threatened. But all in vain. It is probable that the dislike felt by the Cecils for Bacon had been increased by the connection which he had lately made with the Earl (Essex). Robert was then on the point of being made Secretary of State. He happened one day to be in the same coach with Essex, and a remarkable conversation took place between them, “My Lord”, said Sir Robert, “the queen has determined to appoint an Attorney-General without more delay. I pray your Lordship to let me know whom you will favour. "I wonder at your question”, replied the Earl. “You cannot but know that resolutely against the entire world, I stand for your cousin, Francis Bacon”. "good Lord! Lord! cried Cecil, Essex, unable to bridle his temper, I wonder your Lordship should spend your strength in so unlikely a matter can you name one precedent of so raw a youth promoted to so great place?". This objection came with a singularly had grace from a man who, though younger than Bacon, was in daily expectation of being made Secretary of State. The blot was too obvious to be missed by Essex who seldom forbore to speak his mind “ I have made no search”, said he, for precedents of young men who have filled the office of Attorney General. But I could name to you, Sir Robert, a man younger than Francis, less learned, and equally inexperienced, who is suing and striving with all his might for an office of far greater weight”. Sir Robert had nothing to say. But that he thought his own abilities equal to the place which he hoped to obtain, and that his father’s long services deserved such a mark of gratitude from the Queen; as if his abilities were comparable to his cousin's, or as if Sir Nicholas Bacon had done no service to the state. Cecil then hinted, that if Bacon would be satisfied with the solicitorship, that might be of easier digestion to the queen. “ Digest me no digestions”, said the generous and ardent Earl. “The Attorneyship for Francis is that I must have; and in that I will spend all my power, might, authority, and amity; and with tooth and nail procure the same for him against whomsoever getteth this office out of my hands for any other, before he has it, it shall cost him the coming by. And this be you assured of , sir Robert, for now I fully declare myself, and for my own part, Sir Robert, I think strange both of my Lord treasurer and you, that can have the mind to seek the preference of a stranger before so near a kinsman; for if you weigh in a balance the parts every way of his competitor and him, only excepting five poor years of admitting to a house of court before Francis, you shall find in all other respects whatsoever no comparison between them". §§§§ Yet all the power, might, authority, and amity of the generous and ardent Earl in Bacon's favour went in vain and the office went to Coke, the relentless enemy of Bacon and Bacon was left once again to continue his hopes in the star chamber. It also appears that at the time when Essex began his efforts to secure the Attorney Generalship for Bacon, Bacon was in a mind to sell the reversion of his property, and purchase an annuity and abandon a profession for which he had no love, and live the life of a student. But the hope of obtaining the post of Attorney Generalship came in, and he was kept in suspense during the summer of 1593, and the delay decided his future career. §§§§ And so Bacon did neither succeed in obtaining the wealth and leisure that accrued from the post of Attorney Generalship, as was he successful in obtaining moderate wealth and greater leisure that would have resulted from his selling the reversion of his property, and purchasing an annuity, and abandoning the legal profession and living as student. Bacon as a full-time student in moderate circumstances is a postulate that deserves the attention of every thinking being. Could Bacon have strayed in moderate circumstances for long like Plato or Aristotle? And what could have been the resultant form of a philosophy emanating from the mind of a Bacon contended with a moderate life. It appears to be a priori very unlikely that a Bacon content with a moderate life would have gone to such extremes in his philosophical views. The hand of providence was strong enough to relieve the thinking beings of any necessity of contemplating any such postulates. Bacon was left suspended among his hopes for some lucrative place. Bacon’s intense love for opulence and ostentation perhaps might not have allowed him to continue long in forced solitude, poverty and obscurity. Providence selected for Bacon a life as the best of all the possible lives on the pattern of Leibniz’s best of all the possible worlds. §§§§ By the appointment of Sir Edward Coke to Attorney Generalship, the post of Solicitor-General became vacant. Essex again pressed the Queen to make Bacon solicitor-General, and on this occasion, the old Lord Treasurer Professed himself not unfavourable to his nephew's pretensions. But after a contest which lasted more than a year and a half, and in which Essex, to use his own words, "Spent all his power, might, authority, and amity”, the place was given to another. Essex felt this disappointment keenly, but found consolation in the most munificent and delicate liberality. He presented Bacon with an estate worth near two thousand pounds, situated at Twichenham; and this, as Bacon owned many years after, “ With so kind and noble circumstances the manner was worth more than the matter”. Although the old Lord treasurer professed himself not unfavourable to Bacon's obtaining the Solicitor-Generalship, yet the Queen expressing her opinion about Bacon said, “ Bacon hath a great wit and much learning, but in law showeth to the uttermost of his knowledge and is not deep". And indeed Bacon unfortunately was not deep enough to discern the deeper truth of religion regarding the futility of this life of the world from the view-point of its wealth. That is but transient, and is fleeting, and brings but vain deluding joys. §§§§ On the 30th of April, 1596, the mastership of the Roll’s became vacant by the death of Lord Keeper Puckering, and the promotion of Egerton to his place. For this post again Bacon was a candidate. Essex as before supported his claim but with the same result. Suspense and ultimate disappointment. Burleigh’s influence was exerted with no better success. He had endeavoured to procure the solicitorship for his nephew, and failing that, “ the place of the wards". But all came to nothing. Some very powerful yet unseen had was there at the same time exerting its power, might, authority and amity to ensure Bacon’s stay in suspense, and wanted Bacon to remain in hope and professional drudgery, with constant fear of want and with perpetual hope for a lucrative place. And who could this mysterious had be, but the accumulated and collective force of the worldly desires and pinings of the people of the West, who disgusted with their church and pining after the feast of nature hissed, and sighed, and prayed. Nearly the same could be said of the rest of the world. §§§§ Amidst these recurring disappointments, Bacon contemplated the possibility of a break in another line. He thought of making his fortune by marriage, and had begun to pay court to the wealthy widow of Sir William Hatton. Essex pleaded the causes of his friend with his usual ardour. The letter which he addressed to Lady Hatton and to her mother are still extant, and are highly honourable to him, “If”, he wrote, “She were my sister or my daughter, I protest I would as confidently resolve to further it as I now persuade you”, and again, “If my faith be anything, I protest if I had one as near me as she is to you I had rather match her with him, than with men of far greater titles. The suit happily for Bacon, was unsuccessful. The mysterious hand again had prevailed against the protestations of Essex. The lady in question had by her eccentric manners and violent temper made herself a disgrace and a torment to her connections but Bacon was either not aware of her faults or was disposed to overlook them for the sake of her ample fortune. But she was kind to Bacon in more ways than one. She rejected him and accepted his enemy. She married that narrow minded, bad-hearted pedant, Sir Edward Coke, and did her best to make him as miserable as he deserved to be. And again we find ourselves faced with postulates, namely that whether if the Lady had accepted Bacon---Bacon and the lady could have stayed together. And further, that if the lady had accepted Bacon, whether she could have exorcised the devil of philosophy out of his mind. And again we are saved the trouble of answering these questions by the hand of providence which did not allow the union. §§§§ Bacon, however, later on married Alice Barnham, the daughter of Elderman Benedict Barnham. This marriage took place in 1606, that is seven months after the publication of Bacon’s “Advancement of Learning”. It might be amusing to observe that whereas Bacon sought a lucrative place in order to write his philosophy in ease, he desired to be knighted in order to find it easy to marry. Bacon in fact had two reasons to be solicitous for knighthood. Both appear somewhat amusing, but both are in keeping with Bacon’s character. The king had already dubbed half London, and Bacon found himself the only untitled person in his mess at Gary's inn. This was not very agreeable to him. He also, to quote his own words, “Found an Elderman’s daughter, a handsome maid, to his liking”. On both these grounds, he begged his cousin Robert Cecil, “ If it might please his good Lordship, to use his interest on his behalf”. The application was successful. Bacon was one of three hundred gentlemen who, on the coronation day, received the honour, if it is to be so called, of knighthood. The handsome maiden soon after consented to become Sir Francis's lady. Unfortunately, however, for Bacon, it seems that the marriage proved not very happy one. From a sentence of Bacon’s will it may be learned, that she had given him some grievous cause of offence. We feel sorry for Bacon in his conjugal discomforts, but alas, the pursuit of philosophy, particularly the writing of an original philosophy, it seems would not go hand in hand with conjugal comforts, nor perhaps, generally speaking, a philosopher husband would prove as an ideal husband to a particular type of ladies. §§§§ By far the greatest event in Bacon‘s life is the publication of his “ Proficience and Advancement of Learning Divine and Human”, in October 1605, and seven months before his marriage to Alice Barnham. Thus it was that double felicity fell to Bacon's lot, the achievement of two of his life-long ambitions. Bacon applied to Dr. Playfer Margaret, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge to translate the book into Latin, but the specimen of his version was too ornate for Bacon’s taste and it was never completed. In the year 1623, however, the book was issued by Bacon in its Latin form under the title of “ De Augmentis Scientiarum". §§§§ On the 25th June, 1607, at last the longed-for moon appeared on the dark horizon of Bacon, to wit, that he was made Solicitor General. He had no longer to fear that, either want would steal upon him as a wayfaring man or assault him as an unarmed man. There was no fear now of being put to shame, publicly by being arrested in the street at the suit of a goldsmith for a debt of three hundred pounds, and being carried to a spunging house in Coleman street, as in September 1598 he had been. Next year that is in 1608, the clerkship of the star chamber for which Bacon had to wait for about twenty years, eventually fell to him on the 16th July by the death of William Mill. §§§§ Another part of Bacon’s mind needs a mention, namely, his abilities as a parliamentarian Bacon took a prominent part in the parliament, and proved his eminence as a debator. His thought of a lucrative place in reference to his thought of proposed philosophy, and his ardent, unabating love of wealth, power and ostentation could never be lost sight of whether in a court or in a parliament. He was neither a Budha to renounce his palace, his family, his world and all in the quest of truth, nor was he a Socrates to live in self-imposed poverty for the love of philosophy. Here we see a Mammon in the form of Bacon, seeking for himself the wealth of this world and desiring to impart his own view to the mankind in general. His activities in the parliament could not possibly be disassociated from his basic nature. §§§§ In 1584, he took his seat in the house of Commons as member for Melcombe regions, in Devonshire. In the next parliament which met October 29, 1586, he sat for Taunton. The ninth parliament of Elizabeth met on 24th of October 1597 and Bacon sat as Member of Ipswich. In the last parliament of Elizabeth which met on the 27th of October 1601, Bacon was returned both by Ipsuich and St. Allans the first parliament of the new reign of King James met on the 19th of March 1603, and Bacon was again returned both by Ipswich and St. Allans. And so on so forth. This appears to be a glorious record of parliamentary activities. §§§§ About Bacon's eloquence, Ben Johnson, a most unexceptionable Judge said, “There happened to be in my time one noble speaker who was full of gravity in his speaking. His language, where he could spare or pass by a jest, was nobly censorious. No man ever spoke more neatly, more pressly, more weightily, or suffered less emptiness, less idleness, in what he uttered. No member of his speech but consisted of his own graces. His hearers could not cough or look aside from him without loss. He commanded where he spoke, and had his judges angry and pleased at his devotion. No man had their affections more in his power. The fear of every man that heard him was lest he should make an end". (Literary Essays of Lord Macaulay page 221). Bacon tried to play a very difficult game in politics. He wished to be at once a favourite at court and popular with the multitude. If any man could have succeeded in this attempt, a man of talents so rare, of judgement so prematurely ripe, of temper so calm, and of manners so plausible, might have been expected to succeed. Nor indeed did he wholly fail. Once, however, he indulged in a burst of patriotism which cost him a long and bitter remorse, and which he never ventured to repeat. The court asked for large subsidies and for speedy payment. The remains of Bacon’s speech breath all the spirit of the long parliament. “The Gentlemen”, said he, “must sell their plate, and the farmers their brass pots ere this will be paid; and for us, we are here to search the wounds of the realm, and not to skim them over. The dangers are these. First, we shall breed discontent and endanger her Majesty's safety, which must consist more in the love of the people than their wealth. Secondly, this being granted in this sort, other princes hereafter will look for the like; so that we shall put an evil precedent on ourselves and our posterity; and in histories, it is to be observed, of all the nations the English are not to be subject, base, or taxable”. The Queen and her ministers resented this outbreak of public spirit in the highest manner. Indeed many an honest member of the House of Commons had, for a much smaller matter, been sent to the tower by the proud and hot-blooded Tudors. The young patriot condescended to make the most abject apologies. He adjured the Lord Treasurer to show some favour to his poor servant and ally. He bemoaned himself to the Lord keeper, in a letter which may keep in countenance the most unmanly of the epistles which Cicero wrote during his Banishment. The lesson was not thrown away. Bacon never offended in the same manner again. §§§§ The point of note, however, here is, that whatever the distinctions of Bacon in the parliament, nothing proved of any avail to him in obtaining some lucrative place to relieve him of the fear of want, and to provide him leisure, until his philosophy had been formulated and his first book published. Nor was ever his hope allowed to die out completely. Bacon, no doubt, remained ignorant of this peculiar policy of the mysterious hand to his last day. Nor has this point been raised by any of his biographers hitherto. But now that the moment of resurrection and judgement both of Bacon and his philosophy has approached, let the mysteries be revealed. The whole situation now is fast assuming clarity. §§§§ Bacon’s hatred of the barren and unfruitful philosophy of Aristotle, and his innate and ardent desire of giving this world a philosophy of fruit and utility against Aristotle's philosophy of fruit and utility was fixed in his mind since his younger days. But judging from the proposed plan of his father regarding his career, that was in the line of diplomacy, it appears really doubtful that Bacon could have been able to achieve the desire of his heart in case his father was alive to direct and supervise his course, for in that case such activities only would have been preferred as were deemed useful to the attainment of that goal which was set for Bacon by his father. Activities like composing poetry, or the philosophic engrossment in writing a new philosophy might have been regarded not only superfluous but even detrimental to the occupation of a diplomat or a statesman endeavouring to reach the seat of a minister or a lord keeper. But the death of his father left Bacon to his own way, and involved in a special set of circumstances, and the end of independent journey was to appear in the form of the new philosophy, a philosophy of fruit and utility that Bacon had cherished since his child-hood. A philosophy of the lucrative place or the philosophy of a lord chancellor, as William Harvey called it, and the philosophy of an anti-Christ as Blake called it and the seed of atomic hell as we have found it to be. No doubt the origin of atomic hell may be traced to Bacon’s philosophy of modern atomism. It was Bacon who planted the seed of modern atomism that gradually grew into a blazing, braying and bursting atomic hell. §§§§ None was then in the world more fit than Bacon for the venture of leading the world out of the reign of moral philosophy into the realm of natural science for material benefit. Possessed of all the pre-requisites of such a task, namely, boundless greed and excessive love of wealth and ostentation, a unique premature intellect, independence and above all else the illuck, Bacon struggled for more than thirty years to achieve his object. The Christendom then disgusted with their religion due to its austerity, its hierarchies, and its lord’s appointed despots, and pining after the flavours feast of nature had prepared an atmosphere most congenial with and conducive to the appearance of a philosophy of the world. Considering the Christian church as an institution of hypocritically tyrannical inappeasibly and greedy functionaries, and regarding the sovereignty of despots as the source of perpetual despotism, the people of the West, wading knee-deep in the night -marsh Hades of ignorance, superstition, and corruption, and thinking the philosophy of Aristotle as the cause of their troubles, grief for the demolition of peripatetic philosophy and the appearance of some new philosophy that might relieve them of their afflictions and allow them the necessities of life. And thus when Bacon’s philosophy of scientific atomism and rationalism appeared, it was generally regarded as the voice of a Moses from Sinai. It was universally accepted as a remedy for all their ills : i.e ignorance, poverty, disease, superstition, and it was viewed as a light that would lead them out of their pandemonium onto the paradisical bliss, natural dominion, worldly opulence and unprecedented glory; that would relieve them of the excesses of their uncompromising religion and its atrocious functionaries. §§§§ The peripatetic philosophy had been deposed, and the scholastic philosophy had been shaken to its foundations long before Bacon was born. And there was in the intellectual world of the Western anarchy resembling that which in the political world often followed the overthrew of an old and deeply rooted government. The dynasty which had reigned for ages was at an end; and the vacant throne was left to be struggled by pretenders. Freed, yet not knowing how to use that freedom, they pursued no determinate course and found no leader capable of conducting them. Their yearnings were materialised in the form of Bacon and their leader eventually appeared with his new philosophy as the interpretation of their long-cherished dream. The revolution which was begun in 13th century by Roger Bacon was in 17th century entered into its final phase by Francis Bacon. Bacon as may be judged could never have a daring to present to the world a philosophy which had the least possibility of meeting opposition. He just rode the current and utilised the opportunity offered by the atmosphere. §§§§ Bacon was a person qualified for the work he undertook. His mother was Anne, the second wife of Sir Nicholas, and one of the daughters of Sir Anthony Cooke, a man of distinguished learning, who had been tutor to Edward the Sixth. Sir Anthony had paid considerable attention to the education of his daughters, and lived to see them all splendidly and happily married. Their classical acquirements made them conspicuous even among the women of fashion of that age. Anne, the mother of Francis Bacon, was distinguished both as a linguist and as a theologian. She corresponded in Greek with Bishop Jewel, and translated his Apologia from the Latin, so correctly that neither he nor Archbishop Parker could suggest a single alternation. She also translated a series of Sermons on Fate and free-will from the Tucsan of Bernando Ochio. Nor Sir Nicholas Bacon was an ordinary man. Besides being a Minister for a considerable period he was an admirably accomplished person. Francis Bacon was possessed of a precociously developed mind, a powerful intellect, a keen observation and a special gift of a succinct and scientific expression. All this was combined with an exceptional love of wealth and ostentation. The basic colour of lowly principles finished the portrait, and the unfortunate leader of the new mental and intellectual revolution appeared on the scene, in the form of Bacon. Whatever, however, might have been the suit abilities of pre-requisites, and the congenialities of the atmosphere, the task of writing the new philosophy proved for Bacon an ordeal indeed gruesome, and his pinning and sufferings formed up a continuous tragedy, which only a man pre-ordained to a mission could sustain for long. Men of far greater fortitude than Bacon are known to have jumped into craters and others have committed suicide. §§§§ Bacon was not a prophet ordained by God. At the most he could have been regarded as the companion of the devil and a secret recipient of Devil’s help. God revealed nothing to him. He had himself to devise his methods in the particular set of circumstances in which he found himself. Observation and experience were his feelers. Yet it is difficult to deny that some special set of conditions was arranged by the mysterious hand. Bacon was constantly a prey to fear of want and ambition for power. These two phantoms never disappeared from before his eyes. The more these phantoms threatened him, the more actively he thought of his philosophy. Bacon, the prospective giver of the new philosophy to the world, had needed spurring, and exhorting and goading when treading on his arduous path, and this he received from the particular set of circumstances in which he found himself. Poverty gave him the desire, while hope of praise gave him encouragement. Opulence would have been harmful for his mission as a handicap. Nay even it would have drawn a complete blind between Bacon and his proposed philosophy. But the sighs and the cries and the prayers of the people of the west would not allow that. The storm raised by the moaning, groaning and bewailing west would carry Bacon’s mind like a pigeon and make his wings flutter in a whirl-wind as desired. The people of that age rejoiced at the appearance of Bacon’s new philosophy but when its logical and scientific consequences appeared in the form of the flames of the atomic hell in this world, and consumed the two cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the world shuddered though unintelligently. The philosophy of Bacon was the philosophy of fruit no doubt. But the fruit ultimately turned very bitter, and proved to be very venomous. §§§§ It is not easy to conjecture what would have been the course of world-history if Bacon had not given to this world his new philosophy of modern atomism. But that which could be conjectured with considerable plausibility is, that if Bacon’s father had not died, and he had, by the dint of his unusual talents and the presence of an influential father to patronise him, risen to the dizzying heights of success in the line of diplomacy and statesmanship, his worldly desires having been gratified, and the heat of his heart quenched, the thought of giving a new philosophy to the world might have been cast into the oblivion of forgetfulness, and this world might have been saved from the miserable and painful end in the flames of atomic hell, theological and scientific consequence of Bacon’s new philosophy of modern atomism. Yet who knows. If not Bacon, someone else might have taken up the task of writing the new philosophy, for, the universal circumstances in the stream of history decided the change inevitably. The worldly eminence of Bacon, however did a good turn to Bacon’s philosophy. His word as the word of a Lord Chancellor of a country was regarded with respect and any danger of opposition was removed. Bacon thus appears on a pedestal quite different from his progenitor, Democritus, whose reputation as an atheist had proved a great handicap to his philosophical view, and Bacon surely seems to have conquered with chalk. Yet it could not be denied that Bacons’ example was that of a man whose boat capsized and he was obliged to swim toward the coast in a crocodile infested and storm- rent sea or be drowned. His father’s untimely death may be likened to the capsizing of Bacon’s boat of life. §§§§ It is very interesting to think of Bacon as a reformer of religion instead of a giver of his own new philosophy. What would have been his technique in that line? Whether of a soaring angel or a creeping snake. Whether he had spoken against the church for the proverbial greed of its servants or whether he had exhorted the Christian world to adopt the line of the wealth-accumulation hierarchies of the church. Or whether his motive had been to revise the original form of the Christian faith. These, however, are all speculations and Bacon was not at all destined to play such a role. Burning with the passion of wealth and worldly glory he struck at the very root of Christian faith, not indeed in the garb of an opponent or atheist, but as a well-wisher, who holding the green bough of a sweet worldly comforts in his hand enticed the mule of greed by the inviting green bough. With what admirable sleuth handiness, he displayed his tact in legerdemain by Just reverting the role of the natural and moral philosophy in man’s life, and thus taking the soul of revealed religion, without causing the faintest cry of pain or protest, and without leaving the slightest trace of the most cold-blooded murder he so dextrously committed in the broad day-light and on the high way itself. How complacently and with what inward satisfaction the world accepted and adopted his sinister view. Yet nature could in no way be deceived. The result is there what it ought to have been. §§§§ But of all the merits of Bacon, the one which may be observed as a speciality is the complacence and complaisance, serenity and tranquillity he displayed throughout. Judging from the intensity of his love of wealth and ostentation, and the obstacles that stood to check his progress, Bacon may well be imagined as enclosed in a hot oven, the unbearable heat inciting the views of his philosophy of comfort. Any one borne of a woman would have been turned stark mad, and transformed into fury. His conversation would have belched fire, his speeches would have resembled lava shot up by an enraged volcano, and his philosophy might appear as a deluge of fire to consume every thing that fell in its way. Philosophers are known to have reached the stage of madness. But Bacon appeared to be like the legendary sea-beast leviathan, remaining cool to the last despite all the fire raging in his heart. Men in that situation have been known to cross all bounds from displeasure to rebellion, and spend their fury without fear, restraint or remorse. Their sighs, cries, shrieks, wails and moans may be heard as issuing from a compartment of hell. Yet Bacon was none of that. He remained proof against excitement eternally, and like cool sweet drink he effected his readers and inspired them with his own habits, wishes and desires. §§§§ The hand of providence gave a twist to the cause of Bacon’s life by causing the death of his father. Then Bacon gave a twist to the religious doctrine of moral and natural philosophy by reverting the order of moral and natural philosophy. He changed the places of moral and natural philosophy. He placed the natural philosophy in the place of moral philosophy, and placed the moral philosophy in the place of natural philosophy. The former twist that is, which was given by the hand of providence to the course of Bacon’s life through the untimely death of Bacon’s father tossed Bacon on to a track that culminated in the appearance of his universal and far-reaching philosophy. The latter twist which Bacon gave to religious doctrine of moral and natural philosophy, flung the entire human race, cross and the crescent, the swastika and the chucker, the hammer and the scythe, onto a course which running through stages ultimately culminated in the blazing flames of the atomic hell, the logical and scientific conclusion of Bacon's philosophy of modern atomism. Not all the most convincing arguments and references to prove compatibility between a particular religion and this modern atomism could alter the course of the philosophy of atomism that led to the atomic hell, nor all the wishful thinking of the Baconian world could avert the logical doom from a misguided mankind. Indeed all those world-wide eulogies, that have been poured on the author of so felicitous a philosophy, and on the philosophy itself since its appearance would be signed by merely the mention of the result of Bacon’s philosophy, the atomic hell, that is these very atomic bombs and atomic radiations that today threaten the existence of life on earth. English nation prided over Bacon’s nationality, but who will own the honour for the appearance of the results of Bacon’s philosophy. Bacon, indeed, did not formulate his philosophy in any vindictive mood, nor did he mean harm intentionally, far it be from him, but it all resulted from the error of his judgement, and the intensity of his feelings, Indeed, it is not for man to give mankind a philosophy of his own contriving. It is for the divine revelation to do that. Religion for man has been perfected and completed by God to be resorted to by mankind for guidance, and Bacon cannot be absolved from the guilt. §§§§ In 1607, Bacon was given the post of Solicitor-General, and was thus at least relieved of the fear of want, and worked on his philosophy in leisure. In 1613, Bacon became Attorney General, and in 1617 the Lord Keeper ----- an appellation which he later changed for the higher title of Chancellor. In October 1620 he presented the king with the great work of his life, the "NOVUM ORGANUM", the object of which he said was to enlarge the bounds of reason, and endow man’s estate with new value. That day for Bacon might have been a great day. It is difficult to imagine the inward joy of his mind. He had realised both the ambitions of his life. He had by then reached the zenith of his worldly power and dignity, and he had completed his philosophical work which had haunted his mind ever since a student in Cambridge, and which he thought was a light to guide humanity to eternal bliss. §§§§ It is surprising to hear in the light of Bacon’s life and his activities that the works of Shakespeare were written by Bacon. The tongue turns simply dumb with wonder to hear such an opinion. Most of Bacon's time from sixteen to sixty was spent in wool-sack and council board. While yet a boy he was plunged into the midst of diplomatic business. Thence he passed to the study of a vast technical system of law, and worked his way up through a succession of laborious office to the highest post in his progression. In the mean time he took an active part in every parliament: he was an advisor of the Crown: he paid court with greatest assiduity and address to all whose favour was likely to be of use to him. Scarcely any man has led a more stirring life than that which Bacon led from sixteen to sixty. When did he then write all those bulky plays of Shakespeare? Perhaps people preferred to think that plays get written by themselves and require neither time, talent, wit or labour. Or that every work of Merit should be attributed to Bacon. A man, who clamoured for a decade for a lucrative place in order to write his philosophy, could not be expected to have turned off thirty-seven plays of Shakespeare, in shear amusement. The assumption might have been regarded as more plausible if the writing of Shakespearean plays was attributed to king James himself, who considering the work below his regal grace might have transferred it to Shakespeare. Indeed, neither Bacon, nor King James, nor any one else could have written those plays except Shakespeare himself. How could Bacon have written shylock. And if he could have written it, then indeed he could have been regarded a monster of far greater rank than Macaulay has given him out to be. §§§§ “Bacon’s greatest performance” says Macaulay, “ is the first book of the Novum Organum. All the peculiarities of this extraordinary mind are found there in the highest perfection. Many of the aphorisms, but particularly those in which he gives examples of the influence of the Idols, show nicety of observation that has never been surpassed. Every part of the book blazes with wit, but with wit which is employed only to illustrate and decorate truth. No book ever made so great a revolution in the mode of thinking, overthrew so many prejudices, introduced so many new opinions. Yet no book was overwritten in a less contentious spirit. It truly conquers with chalk and not with steel. Proposition after proposition enters into the mind, is received not as invader, but as a welcome friend, and, though previously unknown, becomes at once domesticated. But what we now most admire is the vast capacity of that intellect which, without effort, takes in at once all the domains of science, all the past, the present, and the future, all the errors of two thousand years, all the encouraging signs of the passing times, all the bright hopes of the coming age”- (Literary Essays by Lord Macaulay page 320 ). §§§§ Now this is all very nice and beautiful. But woe, woe to the times. This passage of Macaulay that indeed is a masterpiece in itself even today appears no more than the delusion of a capable mind. Time has disclosed the reality of Bacon’s philosophy. It appeared at first as honey which eventually has proved to be a bitter poison. Yet it is not to be wondered if a species which yesterday could attribute the plays of Shakespeare to Bacon, today interprets hopes of avoiding the hazards of atomic age “Science”. They would say even today, “Science could be used both for constructive as well as destructive purposes, it depends on men whether they used science for constructive or whether for destructive purposes”. Now who could tell them that the present perspective of the affairs shows the impossibility, to wit, that it is not possible for anyone to use this atomic science for constructive purposes, and that the end of this modern progress certainly is in the flames of atomic hell. But if this world prefers to play the blind who could convince them of the existence of the sun during the bright day light. Judging from the mood of this present day generation it appears, that it will be hard for them to believe in the assertion even when they will be being actually broiled in the fire of atomic bombs, or will have been changed into a bundle of cancers or chimeras due to the atomic radiations. Their assertion even then will be, “Science could be used both for constructive as well as destructive purposes, and man himself is responsible for all this". And it is well said, for, no doubt a man himself is responsible for all this. The difficulty only is that it is not in the power of man to avert the atomic doom or to provide means of protection against the atomic phenomena. Macaulay has alluded to the bright hopes of future, and we have before us the darkened horizons that presage complete atomic annihilation of all life on earth. §§§§ Macaulay continues to says, “ Cowley, who was among the most ardent and, and not among the least discerning followers of the new philosophy, has in one of his finest poems, compared Bacon to Moses standing on mount pisgah. It is to Bacon, we think, as he appears in first book of “Novum Organum” that the comparison applies with peculiar felicity. There we see the great law-giver looking round from his lonely elevation on an infinite expanse; behind him a wilderness of treasury sands and bitter waters in which successive generations have sojourned, always moving yet, never advancing, reaping no harvest, and building no abiding city; before him a goodly land, a land of promise, a land flowing with milk and honey. While the multitude below saw only the flat sterile desert in which they had so long wandered, bounded on every side by a near horizon, or diversified only by some deceitful mirage, he was gazing from a far higher stand on a far lovelier country, following with his eye the long course of fertilising rivers, through ample pastures, and under the bridges of great capitals, marts and havens, and portioning out all those wealthy regions from Dan to Beer sheba". (Ibid -page 320-1) §§§§ O how really splendid a description and we have to say nothing but that the name of Moses be substituted by anti-Christ, as is described by the Prophet of Islam, (peace be upon him,) by a particular appellation of Messiah-id-Dajjal, that is the lying, simulating Christ. Anyone acquainted with the topic will find a very interesting example. We will presently add that Bacon pointed only to the panorama of atomic hell, and that the prophets of the past ages were not amiss. Bacon’s philosophy has given only intensified sense of unappeasable hunger, and desolation of mind, and problems that could not be solved and were ever-increasing. §§§§ Earl of Essex was a real benefactor and a kind of friend of Bacon. We are obliged to state such events only to reveal the nature of Bacon, the originator of modern philosophy, and we confess that we do so with some pain. Circumstances drew the Earl in some real trouble. He was sent to Ireland and he returned in disgrace. Trouble flared up when he was summoned to give the account of his conduct in Ireland, and he made reckless by despair ventured on a rash and criminal enterprise. He rushed out of his house with two hundred men on foot, crying hysterically that plots were laid against his life, and that the country was sold to the spaniard. And armed scuffle took place and two men on each side were slain. Essex himself was shot through the hat, but escaped to his house and surrendered in the evening. It was on the strength of arms that the intended to make terms. The person of the Queen was to be secured but not to be harmed, but blunt it is said, confessed on the scaffold, that “They were prepared, rather than fail in their ends to have drawn blood from herself”. The case obviously was of a grievous nature. We do not intend to sit here as a judge to decide the case, Essex versus Bacon. But what we intend is to show what friendship and gratitude in the eyes of Bacon was when his own interest was at stake. §§§§ The person on whom, during the decline of his influence, Essex chiefly depended, to whom he confided his perplexities, whose advice he solicited, whose intercession he employed, namely, Bacon, a friend so loved, so trusted, bore a principal part in ruining his fortunes, in shedding his blood, in Blackening his memory. Bacon, indeed, had no desire to injure Essex. He did whatever he could to serve his friend, but when he felt that he could not help his friend without doing damage to his own interests he changed his role. This was of those conjectures which show what men are. To high-minded man, wealth, power, court-favour, even personal safety, would have appeared of no account, when opposed to friendship, gratitude and honour. Such a man would have stood by the side of Essex at the trial, would have spent all his power, might, authority, and amity in soliciting the mitigation of the sentence, would have been a daily visitor at the cell, would have received the last injunctions and the last embrace on the scaffold, would have employed all the power of his intellect to guard from insult the fame of his generous though erring friend. An ordinary man would neither have incurred the danger of succouring Essex, nor the disgrace of assailing him. But Bacon did not even preserve the neutrality and became the instrument of the court. He appeared as the counsel for the prosecution. He employed all his wit, his rhetoric, and his learning, not to insure a conviction for the circumstances were such that a conviction was inevitable- but to deprive the unhappy prisoner of all those excuses which, though legally of no value, yet tended to diminish the moral guilt of the crime, and which therefore, though they could not justify the peers in pronouncing an equittal, might incline the Queen to grant a pardon. §§§§ All this, however, is wishful thinking in which we join with Macaulay, but unfortunately nothing and no one could stand in Bacon’s way to a lucrative place, so that he might write his philosophy for this world. But the more you will read about this case of Essex the more clearly you will see the character of Bacon. And indeed, we are concerned not so much with the conduct and the character of Bacon, as with a correlation which appeared between the conduct and character of Bacon and of this Baconian culture, and this Baconian population. Bacon’s was a mean, opportunist, mal-odourous and skunky philosophy of life that emanated from a similar origin, and infused the same qualities in those who adopted and practised it. And hence it was, that most of the biographers of Bacon were blinded to see these particulars, and did everywhere see a plausible defence and innocence of their hero and their redeemer, who according to them, was the redeemer of all mankind from all the misunderstandings of mankind since the human race began its life on earth. And it was nothing, short of a miracle that Macaulay, otherwise great admirer of Baconian philosophy should keenly observe the faulty conduct of Bacon and the lowly features of his actual nature. But to fate might be referred the affair of Bacon. §§§§ And let us resume the sad event that shed a flood-light on a particular point of Bacon’s conduct. The Earl urged as a palliation of his frantic as that he was surrounded by powerful and inveterate enemies, that they had ruined his fortunes, that they sought his life, and that their persecutions had driven him to despair. This was true; and Bacon well knew it to be true. But he affected to treat it as an idle pretence. He compared Essex to Pisistratus who by pretending to be in immediate danger of assassination and by exhibiting self-inflicted wounds, succeeded in establishing tyranny at Athens. This was too much for the prisoner to bear. He interrupted his ungrateful friend by calling on him to quit the part of an advocate, to come forward as a witness, and to tell the lords whether, in old times, he, Francis Bacon, had not, under his own hand, repeatedly asserted the truth of what he knew represented as idle pretexts. The story altogether is lamentable, and the reader is requested to note the trends and tendencies which help to reveal, the true nature of men when on test. Bacon returned a shuffling answer to the Earl’s question, and, as if the allusion to Pisistratus were not sufficiently offensive, made another allusion still more unjustifiable. He compared Essex to Henry Duke of Guise, and the rash attempt in the city to the day of the Barricades at Paris. Why Bacon had recourse to such a topic, it is difficult to say. For, it was quite unnecessary for the purpose of obtaining a verdict. It was certain to produce strong impression on the mind of the haughty and jealous princes on whose pleasure the Earl’s fate depended. §§§§ The Earl was convicted. Bacon made no effort to save him, though the Queen’s feelings were such that he might have pleaded his benefactors' cause plausibly with success, and certainly without any serious danger to himself. The English Queen certainly was never to be so mean as not to understand the feelings of a person under such obligations of a friend who stood on the verge of death. The unhappy nobleman was executed. And now let every one who is a follower of Bacon, rush to the mirror to see if there were no similar signs of opportunistic ingratitude to be discerned in his own face in this age of Baconian attitude. And who in this age is not the follower of Baconian philosophy, a philosophy of Moral bankruptcy. The fate of Essex excited strong, perhaps unreasonable feelings of compassion and indignation. Essex had a place in their hearts and they admired and loved him for his qualities. The Queen was received by the citizens of London with gloomy looks and faint acclamations. She thought it expedient to publish a vindication of her late proceedings. The faithless friend who had assisted in taking the Earls’ life was now employed to murder the Earl's fame. The queen had seen some of Bacon’s writings and had been pleased with them. He was accordingly selected to write. A declaration of the practices and treasons attempted and committed by Robert Earl of Essex, which was printed by authority. The excuses of Bacon in this respect appear to be insufficient. He was under no professional obligation to write this abusive pamphlet regarding a man who was in his grave, and was once a friend and benefactor of Bacon. Bacon exerted his professional talents to shed his friend’s blood, and his literary talents to blacken his memory. And all this for what? §§§§ If Bacon could lie prostrate at the feet of Buckingham and would not rise till excused, why Bacon could not fall at the feet of the Queen to beg life of his benefactor and a loveable gentleman. For his own benefit, though provided indeed the proud and haughty English Queen would suffer him to do so, he would as life throw himself a hundred times at her feet and expend all his rhetoric is supplication uttering heart-touching moans. It is hard to miss the resemblance between this habit of Bacon and of this present day Baconian culture. Just mark the prevailing selfishness and opportunism in this Baconian race. Macaulay’s surmise was “Bacon was a servile Advocate that he might be a corrupt judge”. And Macaulay could not have been regarded as amiss in his surmise. §§§§ We are obliged to relate other events which help reveal and assess the conduct and character of the founder of the modern philosophy of atomism and the model of this present day Baconian culture. This event is concerned with Oliver St. John, a gentleman of Marlborough and not the St. John of the long parliament. He was brought before the Star Chamber during Bacon’s Attorney-Generalship, for maintaining that the king had no right to levy Benevolence, and was for his manly and constitutional conduct sentenced to imprisonment during the Royal pleasure and to a fine of five thousand pounds. Bacon appeared as counsel for the prosecution. About the same time he was deeply engaged in a still more disgraceful transaction. An aged clergyman of the name of Peacham, was accused of treason on account of some passages of a sermon which was found in his study. The sermon whether written by him or not, had never been preached. It did not appear that he had any intention of preaching it. The most servile lawyers of those servile times were forced to admit that there were great difficulties both as to the facts, and as to the law. Bacon the future patriarch of modern Baconian culture was employed to remove those difficulties. He was employed to settle the question of law by tempting with the judges, and the question of the fact by torturing the prisoner. §§§§ “Three judges of the Court of King’s Bench were tractable. But coke was made of different stuff. Pedant, Bigot and Brute as he was, he had qualities which bore a strong, though a very disagreeable resemblance to some of the highest qualities which a public man can possess. On the present occasion he was stubborn and surly. He declared that tit was a new and highly improper practice in the judges to confer with a law-officer of the Crown about capital cases which they were afterwards to try; and for some time he resolutely kept aloof. But Bacon was equally artful and persevering”. "I am not wholly out of hope”, said he in a letter to the king “ that my Lord Coke himself, when I have in some dark manner put him in doubt that he shall be left alone, will not be singular". After some time Bacon’s dexterity was successful; and Coke sullenly and reluctantly, followed the example of his brethren. §§§§ But in order to convict Peacham it was necessary to find facts as well as law. Accordingly, this wretched old man was put to the rack, and while undergoing the horrible infliction, was examined by Bacon, but in vain. No confession could be wrung out of him; and Bacon wrote to the king, complaining that Peacham had a dumb devil. At length the trial came on. A conviction was obtained; but the charges were so obviously futile, that the government could not, for very shame, carry the sentence into execution and Peacham was suffered to languish away the short remainder of his life in a prison. §§§§ And believe me we are relating these facts that are concerned with no gruff ordinary English feudal lord of seventeenth century but a person who gave this world a philosophy that prevailed from one corner of the earth to the other, and is generally regarded by his followers ---- and this entire world today follows Bacon-----not only the best but the only best of all philosophies that ever appeared on earth. Mr. Montague might well say, “we ought not to try the men of one age by the standard of another”. But we can certainly see philosophers both before and after Bacon’s age, whose philosophies and whose lives mutually resemble. And therefore Bacon could not be regarded as an exception to this rule. We have seen Bacon’s faithlessness and his selfishness in the case of Essex. And we can infer that the philosophy of Bacon too ought essentially to contain the features of faithlessness and selfishness, which it does. These features further may be seen in the followers of Baconian culture, while in the case of Oliver St. John we see Bacon as an unprincipled man which he was. And the same may be found both in his philosophy and the followers of his philosophy. Old Peacham's case shows Bacon as a man of very low principles and mean obviously. These are the features characteristically distinct in Bacon’s philosophy and the followers of that philosophy. And in order to judge of Bacon we ought to judge him against Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates and indeed against Diagnoses the tub dweller. And Bacon does not fail the comparison in that, that just as in the case of all these philosophers a perfect accord existed between their philosophy and their conduct, the conduct and the philosophy of Bacon show a perfect identity which may further be observed in the followers of the philosophy of Bacon. §§§§ We imagine the greatest benefactor and redeemer of mankind, and the writer of the most salubrious philosophy for the children of men, sitting by the side of poor old Peacham in racks and questioning him if he had written the treasonable sermon, and whether he intended to preach the same, in an endeavour to make the dumb devil speak. And we can see the ugly distortions of Peacham's face, and can hear his frightening moans. But the image does not end with it. Another image appears before the eyes of our mind and we can see, a successor of Bacon, also reckoned as the greatest benefactor of humanity; his image appears through the explosion of atomic bomb, silent, sober, confident and triumphant. This is the image of atomist, also a benefactor of the children of men, and is successor of Bacon. §§§§ Indeed, a good philosophy could never emanate from a bad mind, and no good accrues from a bad philosophy even if written in the language of angels. And great intellects have power to show a bad thing as good and a good thing as bad. Time, however, is the judge, and brings the truth out, from beneath the veil. Bacon’s philosophy though a seemingly blissful and salubrious has been ultimately proved as noxious, exceedingly noxious, descriptive, extremely destructive, and harmful, unbelievably harmful. §§§§ We have hitherto shown how Bacon was held in excruciating circumstances during his ordeal until he reached a particular point, and how thereafter was placed in a situation of leisure and luxury, and have shown the logical necessity of such a scheme of providence. And we can see another character in the play which has played a conscious role, namely, king James; it was during the reign of King James that Bacon realised his two-pronged ambition, that is, if on one side he rose from office to office in succession till he reached the highest place in the realm. On the other side he finished his philosophy, and presented this book "Novum Organum" to the King. King James was himself, a very learned man and was a great patron of learning and genius. Bacon obtained not only the worldly benefits from his sovereign but also derived inspiration and encouragement in the accomplishment of his great philosophical scheme. Macaulay says about the King James, that :- “James mounted the throne, and Bacon employed all his address to obtain for himself a share of the favour of his new master. This was no difficult task. The faults of James, both as a man and a as prince, were numerous; but insensibility to the claims of genius and learning was not among them. He was indeed made up of two men; a witty well-read scholar, who wrote, disputed and harangued, and a nervous, drivelling idiot, who acted. If he had been a cannon of Christ church or a prebendary Westminster. §§§§ It is not improbable that he would have left a highly respectable name to posterity; that he would have distinguished himself among the translators of the Bible, and among the divines who attended the synod of dort; and that he would have been regarded by the literary world as no contemptible rival of vossius and casaubon. But fortune placed him in a situation in which his weakness covered him with disgrace, and in which his accomplishments brought him no honour. In a college, much eccentricity and childishness would have been readily pardoned in so learned a man. But all that learning could do for him on the throne was to make people think him a pedant and a fool. Bacon was favourably received at Court; and soon found that his chance of promotion was not diminished by the death of the Queen. He was solicitous to be knighted”. (Literary Essays By Lord Macaulay - Page 238). §§§§ James mounted the thrown and thus was the providential scheme completed. Bacon had ploughed the field and had sowed the seed; King James appeared like a cloud to water it. The circumstances which had appeared as a result of the yearning of the West for the feast of nature, succeeded at last in brining about the union of the earth and the heaven of the new philosophy of fruit and utility, namely, Francis Bacon and King James. And the factors having been completed, the "Novum Organum" appeared, and the philosophy of Bacon saw the light of the day, and subsequently gained currency in the west. Bacon unlike King James was a man of a single make who may be regarded as the symbol of greed for wealth and ostentation. His mind and his philosophy both bore the same mark. Bacon, however, misunderstood his own view, and under-rated his civil ends, when he said, “ I have as vast contemplative ends as I have moderate civil ends”. §§§§ The defending biographer of Bacon, Mr. Montague, in order to rid Bacon of the charge of ingratitude attempts to show that Bacon lay under greater obligations to the Queen than to Essex. Macaulay’s answer to this may be read with interest. He says, “What these obligations were it is not easy to discover. The situation of Queen’s Counsel, and a remote reversion, were surely favours very far below Bacon’s personal and hereditary claims. They were favours which did not cost the Queen a groat, nor had they put a groat into Bacons’ purse. It was necessary to rest Elizabeth’s claims to gratitude on some other grounds; and this Mr. Montague felt”. What perhaps was her greatest kindness”, says he, “instead of having hastily advanced Bacon, she had, with a continuance of her friendship, made him bear the yoke in his Youth. Such were his obligations to Elizabeth”. Such indeed they were. Being the son of one of her oldest and most faithful ministers, being himself the ablest and most accomplished young man of his time, he had been condemned by her to drudgery, to obscurity, to poverty. She had depreciated his acquirements. She had checked him in the most imperious manner, when in parliament he ventured to act an independent part. She had refused to him the professional advancement to which he had a just claim. To her it was owing that, while younger men, not superior to him in extraction, and far inferior to him in every kind of personal merit, were filling the highest offices of the state, adding manor to manor, rearing palace after palace, he was lying a spunging ---house for a debt of three hundred pounds. Assuredly if Bacon owed gratitude to Elizabeth, he owed none to Essex. If the Queen really was his best friend, the Earl was his worst enemy. We wonder that Mr. Montague did not press this argument a little further. He might have maintained that Bacon was excusable in revenging himself on a man who had attempted to rescue his youth from the salutary yoke imposed on it by the Queen, who had wished to advance him hastily, who, not content with attempting to inflict the Attorney-Generalship upon him, had been so cruel as to present him with a landed estate”. (Literary .Essays page 231-232) §§§§ Obviously Earl of Essex was inspite of faults a man of very noble and generous disposition and was real friend and benefactor of Bacon who acted as mean and ungrateful opportunist that he was by nature, or was made so by the circumstances. Mr .Montague’s argument hardly bears the semblance of an argument, and truth is on Macaulay’s side. But when the case is beheld from the actual frame of reference, befitting the place of Bacon, the prospective giver of a universal philosophy to mankind, this display of argument and counter-argument of Mr. Montague and Lord Macaulay appears as the bickering of two women, the two wives of the same husband. It is a strange precedent to hear the harangues of advancements, posts, lucrative places regarding a man, who contemplated a design of preparing the elixir of a philosophy intended to be a remedy for all the ills and evils of humanity, and provided sure guidance to a misguided mankind that had wandered aimlessly in the dark wilderness since the birth of mankind on earth. We always had heard the stories of sufferings, sacrifices, afflictions of all those men in the past who had intended to take up the mission of reform or guidance. They had all lived in poverty and had preached poverty. And they had based their teachings on moral philosophy and not on natural philosophy (science) like Bacon. Bacon stands alone to preach the world, wealth, comforts, and dominion over nature. And it is easy to understand his feat of conquering the world with chalk. But why Jesus Christ could not have done this?. He offered bitter pill for health. Bacon’s was the poisonous pill coated with sugar. §§§§ Bacon when still young wrote to Burghly, “I confess, that I have as vast contemplative ends as I have moderate civil ends”. And what actually was the nature of his contemplative ends. Time has shown that his contemplative ends were no other than the proposed discoveries of means and methods of wealth accumulation for physical comfort. How a man preoccupied with such thoughts as these could be expected to feel any desire except that of wealth and the world. Bacon in this respect is to be regarded as the embodiment of mammonistic spirit. And he wrote to the Queen, “My mind, turneth upon other wheels than those of the profit”. This he wrote in connection with his desire to receive Attorney-Generalship. Bacon appears to be assuring the Queen that it was not for the sake of profit that he aspired to the post of Attorney-General. Nay, but rather he sought the place with the sheer spirit of service to her. Perhaps indeed, it was with the sheer spirit of services to Essex that he served him, as he did, by carrying him to the edge of the scaffold. And it also was equally with the spirit of service that he blackened the memory of Essex after he had been in his grave. The Queen was endowed with at least so much shrewdness as to discern the true nature of Bacon’s offer, form beneath the veil of the outward pretext. And in a mood of disgust due to his failures he wrote to a friend, “ I will, by God’s assistance-----...... retire myself with a couple of men to Cambridge, and there spend my life in my studies and contemplations, without looking back”. Indeed, the best thought that ever occurred to Bacon. But unfortunately it was only a protest, a remonstrance, and empty threat. He simply could not do it. Nor did he put his threat to action. And if he had intended, none would have said to him. No. But might be that in Cambridge his philosophy would have been sobered a little. And he wrote to Cecil “My ambition now I shall only put upon my pen, whereby I shall be able to maintain memory and merit of the times succeeding”. To admire a man's philosophy of greed, and condemned him for his own greed is strange. And that is exactly what Macaulay did. §§§§ Here then the gloomy cries of a soul, struggling helplessly against obstacles and oppositions, and burning inwardly with ambition excites pity, whereas the consequences of his success end with feelings of sorrow and remorse. Eventually Mr. Contemplative-end and Mr. Civil-end compromised in Bacon, and both succeeded, but their success presaged the ruin of mankind. Bacon’s philosophy has utterly, entirely failed and has proved to be the greatest folly in all the history of philosophy. Bacon had called himself as “ Buccinator novi temporis”, that is the "Trumpeter of the new age". How truly, indeed, he has trumpeted the world to its atomic annihilation and resurrection. Baconian philosophy has changed everything. But what it has not been able to change is the Letter H of the Hell and the Hades. The sound of Bacon’s trumpet raised all the sleeping calamities of the four corners of the world. His act could be likened to the act of opening the lid of the pandora box of the atomistic materialism. The great trumpeter of the new age proved to be the piper who conjured up a world of vicious, furious, hissing, infuriated atomic cobras with fiery tongues ready to consume this world, and world indeed rendered miserable by Bacon’s new philosophy, and a world now fit for devils only to inhabit. §§§§ Bacon put his lips to his trumpet and lo! everything and every one in this world turned like its prototype that is Bacon himself. Bacon, humanity, and atomism appeared to be diffused with each other. And indeed the entire order of the world assumed a topsyturvied form in every way. The circle was moved so that its upper point became the lower point, while the lower point became the upper point. Material rose high. Spiritual went down. The earth went up high. The heaven went below. This life went up, the life in heaven went down. Gallileo (1564-1642) a contemporary of Bacon caused the solar system to be topsyturvied at the same time. Bacon had given a twist to the place of moral and natural philosophies in man’s life, Darwin about two and half centuries after Bacon, in his prodigious flight of imagination crossing all bounds, and catching at ambiguous shadows, and chasing fanciful illusions, and gazing at queer, unrecognisable and illusive phantoms that endlessly appeared and continually multiplied, did at last succeed in giving a twist to the origin of species, topsyturvying the origin of man, and Spinoza produced the creator of the universe in the material garb of the universe itself. The world ran wild with material fever, running, rushing, wheezing, panting, sweating, fretting inappreciably, in discontent just as Bacon, the prototype of this age had experienced during the span of his life. Whether earth is in motion or whether sun moves, and whether the material benefit should be the object of man's life or whether the next world ought to be aimed at, and whether man’s destiny is dominion over nature or it is the humility, are the questions that have been overshadowed by the fast approaching hazards of atomism. This is a topic that has assumed the central position. Let other questions be viewed in the light of this same question. And let the system that produced it be rejected forthwith in the interest of mankind. §§§§ To know Bacon is to know this age. And because the moral character holds the central position in the assessment of man himself, it is the moral character of Bacon that ought to be reviewed. And when we know the moral character of Bacon, and his emotions, ambitions, his aesthetic appreciations and his views on religion, we discover, to our horror, that this present age appears to be an exact replica of that picture which was of the mind of Bacon, the founder of the philosophy which this world of today admires and follows. It is indeed very difficult to produce a real moral picture of those men who have left imperishable monuments of their genius, and generally every moral excellence is ascribed to them. Bacon’s case appears even more difficult, for he has also given a philosophy which bears him to the pedestal of a benefactor, towards which the multitude and the elite equally look with a sense of heart-felt gratitude. His biographer will quite naturally and indeed unknowingly endeavour to raise him to a station even higher than the angels in the heavens. Macaulay, however, has tried to have a realistic view of the moral conduct of this worshipful prodigy and has amply succeeded in his attempt. It is surprising, how and why and wherefore, a critic, for instance Macaulay n the case of Bacon, should be determined to proceed toward painting a real picture of the moral conduct of a hero, and present him in real colours, at a time when that hero was being worshipped as the greatest benefactor of mankind, and was being portrayed by his critics as innocent as an angel, and as noble as any noble man that ever lived on earth. This point also may be regarded as worthy of consideration, and could with some real plausibility be regarded as a part of the general scheme of the providence. Macaulay was himself great admirer of Bacon’s philosophy and perhaps the ablest expounder and analyst of that philosophy. What on earth did he means by unveiling with typical Macaulian dexterity of the pen the true moral picture of his hero. May be you might say :Well it is the custom of the critics to reveal both the sides of the picture. You might not be wrong in that, but it is not that much only. It is on Macaulay that I shall depend in this topic with gratitude no doubt. At times I am deluded into the belief that Macaulay had penned this article on Lord Bacon especially for my sake. The providence hand so planned the thing, and had desired it to be thus to be the seed of the destruction of Baconian philosophy. Here we will quote some excerpts from Macaulay's Article on Lord Bacon. At times there will be allusions only, but let then the reader exercise his mind to complete the picture for himself. The reader, however, ought to be referred to this article of Macaulay and advised to read it. It may well be regarded if not the best, at least one of those exceptional specimens that have appeared as the production of human mind in this modern age. The reader may also be requested to read the remarks of Macaulay, trying in every instance, to discover for himself the resemblance which existed between Bacon's conduct and his philosophy, and the people of this Baconian age. Following are the excerpts of Macaulay:- §§§§ (1) “He had not been lord keeper a month when Buckingham began to interfere in chancery suits; and Buckingham's interference was, as might have been expected, successful”. (Literary Essays page 253). §§§§ (2) “It was impossible that a man with a tithe of his sagacity and experience should not have known that a judge who suffers friends or patrons to dictate his decrees violates the plainest rules of duty. In fact, as we have seen, he knew this well: he expressed it admirably. Neither on this occasion nor on any other could his bad actions be attributed to any defect of the head. They sprang from quite a different cause. A man who stooped to render such services to others was not likely to be scrupulous as to the means by which he enriched himself. He and his dependants accepted large presents from persons who were engaged in chancery suits. The amount of the plunder which he collected in this way it is impossible to estimate. There can be no doubt that he received very much more than was proved on his trial, though, it may be, less than was suspected by the public. His enemies stated his illicit gains at a hundred thousand pounds. But this was probably an exaggeration. It was long before the day of reckoning arrived”. (L.Essays. page 253-4) (3) “It should seem that even Bacon’s brain was not strong enough to bear without some discomposure the inebriating effect of so much good fortune. For some time after his elevation, he showed himself a little wanting in that wariness and self-command to which, more than even to his transcendent talents, his elevation was to be ascribed. He was by no means a good hater. The temperature of his revenge, like that of his gratitude, was scarcely ever more than lukewarm. But there was one person whom he had long regarded with an animosity, which, though studiously suppressed, was perhaps the stronger for the suppression. The insults and injuries which, when a young man struggling into note and professional practice, he had received from Sir Edward Coke, were such as might move the most placable nature to resentment. About the time at which Bacon received the Seals, Coke had, on account of his contumacious resistance to the royal pleasure, been deprived of his seat in the Court of King's Bench, and had ever since languished in retirement. §§§§ Sir John Villiers, the Brother of Buckingham was looking out for a rich wife. Coke had a large fortune and an unmarried daughter. A bargain was struck. But lady Coke, the lady whom twenty years before. Essex had wooed on behalf of Bacon, would not hear of the match. A violent and scandalous family quarrel followed. The mother carried the girl away by stealth. The father pursued them, and regained possession of his daughter by force. The King was then in Scotland and Buckingham had attended him thither. Bacon was, during their absence, at the head of affairs in England. He felt towards Coke as much malevolence as it was in his nature to feel towards any body. His wisdom had been laid to sleep by prosperity. In an evil hour he determined to interfere in the disputes which agitated his enemy's household. He declared for the wife, countenanced the Attorney-General in filling and information in the Star Chamber against the husband, and wrote letters to the King and the favourite against the proposed marriage. The strong language which he used in those letters shows that, sagacious as he was, he did not quite know his place, and that he was not fully acquainted with the extent either of Bukhingam's, a power, or of the change which the possession of that power had produced in Buckingham's character. He soon had a lesson which he never forgot. The favourite received the news of the Lord Keeper’s interference with feelings of the most violent resentment, and made the king even more angry than himself. Bacon’s eyes were at once opened to his error, and to all its possible consequences. He had been elated, if not intoxicated, by greatness. The shock sobered him in an instant. He was all himself again. He apologised submissively for his interference. He directed the Attorney General to stop the proceedings against Coke. He sent to tell Lady Coke that he could do nothing for her. He announced to both the families that he was desirous to promote the connection. Having given these proofs of contrition, he ventured to present himself before Buckingham. But the young upstart did not think that he had yet sufficiently humbled an old man who had been his friend and his benefactor, who was the highest civil functionary in the realm, and the most eminent man of letters in the world. It is said that on two successive days Bacon repaired to Buckingham's house, that on two successive days he was suffered to remain in an antechamber among foot-boys seated on an old wooden box, with the Great Seal of England at his side, and that when at length he was admitted, he flung himself on the floor, kissed the favourites's feet, and vowed never to rise till he was forgiven”- (Literary Essays. page 254-256) §§§§ (4) “The unfavourable impression which his conduct had made (in the tragic event of Essex) appears to have been gradually effaced. Indeed it must be some very peculiar cause that can make a man like him long unpopular. His talents secured him from contempt, his temper and his manners from hatred. There is scarcely any story so black that it may not be got over by a man of great abilities, whose abilities are united with caution, good-humour, patience, and affability, who pays daily sacrifice to nemesis, who is a delightful companion, a serviceable though not an ardent friend, and a dangerous yet a placable enemy.

§§§§ Waller in the next generation was an eminent instance of this. Indeed Waller had much more than may at first sight appears in common with Bacon. To the higher intellectual qualities of the great English philosopher, to the genius which has made an immortal epoch in the history of science, Waller indeed had no pretentions. But the mind of Waller, as far as it extended, coincides with that of Bacon, and might, so to speak, has been cut-out that of Bacon. In the qualities which make a man an object of interest and veneration to posterity, they cannot be compared together. But in the qualities by which chiefly a man is known to his contemporaries, there was a striking similarity between them. Considered as men of the world, as courtiers, as politicians, as associates, as allies, as enemies, they had nearly the same merits and the same defects. They were not malignant. They were not tyrannical. But they wanted warmth of affection and elevation of sentiment. There were many things which they loved better than virtue, and which they feared more than guilt. Yet, even after they had stooped to acts of which it is impossible to read the account in the most partial narratives without strong disapprobation and contempt, the public still continued to regard them with a feeling not easily to be distinguished from esteem. The hyperbole of Juliet seemed to be verified with respect to them. “Upon their brows shame was ashamed to sit”. Every body seemed as desirous to throw a veil over their misconduct as if it had been his own. §§§§ Clarendon, who felt, and who had reason to feel, strong personal dislike towards Waller, speaks of him thus “ There needs no more to be said to extol the excellence and power of his wit and pleasantness of his conversation, than that it was of magnitude enough to cover a world of very great fault, that is, so to cover them that they were not taken notice of to his reproach, viz., a narrowness in his nature to the lowest degree, an abjectness and want of courage to support him in any virtuous undertaking, an insinuation and servile flattery to the height the vainest and most imperious nature could be contended with .......It had power to reconcile him to those whom he had most offended and provoked, and continued to his age with that race felicity, that his company was acceptable where his spirit was odious, and he was at least pitied where he was most detested”. Much of this, with some softening, might, we fear, be applied to Bacon. §§§§ The influence of Waller's talents, manners, and accomplishments, died with him; and the world had pronounced an unbiased sentence on his character. A few flowing lines are not bribe sufficient to pervert the judgement of posterity. But the influence of Bacon is felt and will long be felt over the whole civilised world. Leniently as he was treated by his contemporaries, posterity has treated him more leniently still. Turn where we may, the trophies of that mighty intellect are full in view. We are judging manlius in sight of the capitol.”.

             (Literary Essays page 240-241)

§§§§ (5) “Again, we can hardly think Mr. Montague serious when he tells us that Bacon was bound for the sake of the public not to destroy his own hopes of advancement, and that he took part against Essex from a wish to obtain power which might enable him to be useful to his country. We really do not know how to refute such arguments except by stating them. Nothing is impossible which does not involve a contradiction. It is barely possible that Bacon’s motives for acting as he did on this occasion may have been gratitude to the Queen for keeping him poor, and a desire to benefit his fellow creatures in some high situation. And there is a possibility that Bonner may have been a good Protestant, who, being convinced that the blood of martyrs is the seed of the church, heroically went through all the drudgery and infamy of persecution in order that he might inspire the English people with an intense and lasting hatred of Popery. There is a possibility that Jeffreys may have been an ardent lover of liberty, and that he may have beheaded Algernon Sydney, and burned Elizabeth Gaunt, only in order to produce a reaction which might lead to the limitation of the prerogative. There is a possibility that thurtell may have killed we are only in order to give the youth of England an impressive warning against gaming and bad company. There is a possibility that Fauntleroy may have forged powers of attorney, only in order that his fate, might turn the attention of the public to the defects of the penal law. These things, we say, are possible. But they are so extravagantly improbable that a man who should act on such suppositions would be fit only for St. Luke's. And we do not see why suppositions on which no rational man would act in ordinary life should be admitted into history. §§§§ Mr. Montague’s notion that Bacon desired power only in order to do good to mankind, appears somewhat strange to us, when we consider how Bacon afterwards used power, and how he lost it. Surely the service which he rendered to mankind by taking lady Wharton’s broad pieces and Sir John Kennedy's Cabinet was not of such vast importance as to sanctify all the means which might conduce to that end. If the case were fairly stated, it would, we much fear, stand thus : Bacon was a servile advocate, that he might be a corrupt judge”. (Literary Essays page 232-233) §§§§ (6) “ But if we admit the plea which Mr. Montague urges in defence of what Bacon did as an advocate (in the case of Essex), what shall we say of the “Declaration of the treason of Robert Earl of Essex”? Here at least there was no pretence of professional obligation. Even those who may think it the duty of a lawyer to hang, draw, and quarter his benefactors, for a proper consideration, will hardly say that it is his duty to write abusive pamphlets against them, after they are in their graves. Bacon excused himself by saying that he was not answerable for the matter of the book, and that he furnished only the language. But why did he endow such purpose with words? Could no hack writer, without virtue or shame, be found to exaggerate the errors, already so dearly expiated, of a gentle and noble spirit? Every age produces those links between the man and the baboon. Every age is fertile of Oldmixones, of Kenricks, and of Anthony Pasquins. But was it for Bacon so to prostitute his intellect? Could he not feel that, while he rounded and pointed some period dictated by the envy of Cecil, or gave a plausible form to some slander invented by the dastardly malignity of Cobham, he was not sinning, merely against his friend's honour and his own? Could he not feel that letters, eloquence, philosophy, were all degraded in his degradation? §§§§ The real explanation of all this is perfectly obvious; and nothing but a partiality amounting to a ruling passion could cause anybody to miss it. The moral qualities of Bacon were not of a high order. We do not say that he was a bad Man. He was not inhuman or tyrannical. He bore with meekness his high civil honours, and the far higher honours gained by his intellect. He was very seldom, if ever provoked into treating any person with malignity and insolence. No man more readily held up the left cheeck to those who had smitten the right. No man was more expert at the soft answer which turneth away wrath. He was never charged, by any accuser entitled to the smallest credit, with licentious habits. His even temper, his flowing courtesy, the general respectability of his demeanour, made a favourable impression on those who saw him in situations which do not severely try the principles. His faults were ------ we write it with pain-----coldness of heart, and manners of spirit. He seems to have bee incapable of feeling strong affection, of facing great dangers, of making great sacrifices. His desires were set on things below. Wealth, precedence, titles, patronage, the mace, the Seals, the coronet, large houses, fair gardens, rich manors, massy services of plate, gay hangings, curios cabinets, had as great attraction for him as for any of the courtiers who dropped on their knees in the dirt when Elizabeth passed by, and then Hastened home to write to the king of Scots that her grace seemed to be breaking fast. Of these objects he had stooped to every thing, and endured everything. For these he had sued in the humblest manner, and, when unjustly and ungraciously repulsed, had thanked those who had repulsed him, and had begun to sue again. For these objects, as soon as he found that the smallest show of independence in parliament was offensive to the Queen, he had abased himself to the dust before her, and implored forgiveness in terms better suited to a convicted thief than to a knight of the shire. For these he joined and for these he forsook, lord Essex. He continued to plead his patron’s cause with the Queen as long as he thought that by pleading that cause he might serve himself. Nay, he went further; for his feelings, though not warm, were kind; he pleaded that cause as long as he thought that he could plead it without injury to himself. But when it became evident that Essex was going headlong to his ruin, Bacon began to tremble for his own fortunes. What he had to fear would not indeed have been very alarming to a man of lofty character. It was not death. It was not imprisonment. It was the loss of court favour. It was the being left behind by others in the career of ambition. It was the having leisure to finish the INSTAURATIO MAGNA. The Queen looked coldly on him. The courtiers began to consider him as a marked man. He determined to change his line of conduct, and to proceed in a new course with as much vigour as to make up for the lost time. When once he had determined to act against his friend, knowing himself to be suspected, he acted with more zeal than would have been necessary or justifiable if he had been employed against a stranger. He exerted his professional talents to shed the Earl's blood, and his literary talents to blacken the Earls’ memory”. (L.Essays page 235-237) §§§§ We interrupt the course of Macaulay, to cite the Quran as it exemplifies man’s inherent love of the things of the world. We quote it with respect to Bacon’s exceptional yearning for the worldly things. Bible too may be quoted with exactitude. The Quran says:- §§§§ “Beautified for mankind is love of joys (that come) from women and offspring, and stored up heaps of gold and silver, and horses branded (with their mark), and cattle and land. That is comfort of the life of the world. Allah! With him is a more excellent abode”-. (Quran III-14) §§§§ The love of the beautiful things of the world is inherent in man’s nature. But the case of Bacon appears to be exceptional and abnormal. He was himself the embodiment of the love of the things of the world. Let us, however, resume the course of Macaulay. Who has done the greatest service to mankind by exposing the reality of the founder of the philosophy which is about to ruin this world. But will they understand?. §§§§ “We therefore say that Bacon (in this instance of poor old Peacham’s being put to rack) stands in a very different situation from that in which Mr. Montague tries to place him. Bacon was here distinctly behind his age. He was one of the last of the tools of power who persisted in a practice the most Barbarous and the most absured that has ever disgraced jurisprudence, in a practice of which, in the preceding generation, Elizabeth and her Ministers had been ashamed, in a practice which, a few days later, no sycophant in all the inns of Court had the heart or the forehead to defend”. §§§§ Bacon far behind his age! Bacon far behind Sir Edward Coke! Bacon clinging to exploded abuses! Bacon withstanding the progress of improvement! Bacon struggling to push back the human mind! The words seem strange. They sound like a contradiction in terms. Yet the fact is even so: And the explanation may be readily found in any person who is not blinded by prejudice. Mr. Montague cannot believe that so extraordinary a man as Bacon could be guilty of a bad action; as if history were not made up of the bad actions of extra-ordinary men, as if all the most noted destroyers and deceivers of our species, all the founders of arbitrary governments and false religions had not been extraordinary men, as if nine-tenths of the calamities which have befallen the human race had any other origin than the union of high intelligence with low desires. §§§§ Bacon knew this well. He has told us that there are persons “SCIENTIA TANQUAM ANGELI ALATI, CUPIDITATIBUS VERO TANQUAM SERPENTES QUI HUMI REPTANT” (DE AUGMENTIS, LIB.V.CAP.1); and it did not require his admirable sagacity and his extensive converse with mankind to make the discovery. Indeed, he had only to look within. The difference between THE SOARING ANGEL and THE CREEPING SNAKE was but a type of the difference between Bacon the philosopher and Bacon the Attorney-General. Bacon seeking for truth, and Bacon seeking for the seals. Those who survey only one half of his character may speak of him with unmixed admiration, or with unmixed contempt. But those only judge of him correctly who take in at one view Bacon in speculation and Bacon in action. They will have no difficulty in comprehending how one and the same man should have been far before his age and far behind it, in one line the boldest and most useful of innovators, in another line the most obstinate champion of the foulest-abuses. In his library, all his rare powers were under the guidance of an honest ambition, of an enlarged philanthropy, of a sincere love of truth. There, no temptation drew him away from the right course. Thomas Acuinas could pay no fees. Duns Scotus could confer no peerages. The Master of the Sentences had no rich reversions in his gift. For different was the situation of the great philosopher when he came forth from his study and his laboratory to mingle with the crowd which filled the galleries of white hall. In all that crowd there was no man equally qualified to render great and lasting service to mankind. But in all that crowed there was not a heart more set on things which no man ought to suffer to be necessary to his happiness, on things which can often be obtained only by the sacrifice of integrity and honour. To be the leader of the human race in the career of improvement, to found on the ruins of ancient intellectual dynasties a more proferous and a more enduring empire, to be revered by the latest generations as the most illustrious among the benefactors of mankind, all this was within his reach. But all this availed him nothing while some quibbling a special pleader was promoted before him to the Bench, while some heavy country gentlemen took precedence of him by virtue of a purchased coronet, while some pander, happy in a fair wife, could obtain a more cordial salute from Buckingham, while some buffoon, worst in all the latest scandal of the court, could draw a louder laugh from James”. (L.Essays page 246-248) §§§§ (7) The way in which the two favourites acted towards Bacon was highly characteristic, and may serve to illustrate the old and true saying, that a man is generally more inclined to feel kindly towards one on whom he has conferred invous than towards one from whom he has received them. Essex loaded Bacon with benefits, and never thought that he had done enough. It seems never to have crossed the mind of the powerful and wealthy noble that the poor barister whom he treated with such munificent kindness was not his equal. It was, we have no doubt, with perfect sincerity that the Earl declared that he would willingly give his sister or daughter in marriage to his friend. He was in general more than sufficiently sensible of his own merits; but he did not seem to know that he had eve deserved well of Bacon. On that cruel day when they saw each other for the last time at the bar of the Lords, Essex taxed his perfidious friend with unkindness and insincerity, but never with ingratitude. Even in such a moment, more bitter than the bitterness of death, that noble he art was too great to vent itself in such a reproach. Villiers, on the other hand, owned much to Bacon. When their acquaintance began, Sir Francis was a man of mature age, of high station, and of established fame as a politician, an advocate, and a writer. Villiers was little more than a boy, a younger son of a house then of no great note. He was but just entering on the career of court favour; and none but the most discerning observers could as yet perceive that he was likely to distance all his competitors. The countenance and advice of a man so highly distinguished as the attorney -General must have been an object of the highest importance to the young adventurer. But though Villiers was the obliged party, he was far less warmly attached to Bacon, and far less delicate in his conduct towards Bacon, than essex had been. To do the new favourite justice, he early exerted his influence in behalf of his illustrious friend. In 16161 Sir Francis was sworn of the Privy Council, and in March, 1617, on the retirement of Lord Brackley, was appointed Keeper of the Great Seal. On the seventh of May, the first day of term, he rode in state to Westminster Hall, with the Lord Treasurer on his right hand, the Lord Privy Seal on his left, a long procession of students and ushers before him, and a crowd of peers, prevy-councilors, and judges following in his train. Having entered his court, he addressed the splendid auditory in a grave and dignified speech, which proves how well he understood those judicial duties which he afterwards performed so ill. Even at that moment, the proudest moment of his life in the estimation of the vulgar, and, it may be, even in his own, he cast back a look of lingering affection towards those noble pursuits from which, as it seemed, he was about to be estranged. "The depths of the three long vacations", said he, “I would reserve in some measure free from business of estate, and for studies, arts, and sciences, to which of my own nature I am most inclined". (Literary Essays page 249-250) §§§§ (8) “The years during which Bacon held the Great Seal were among the darkest and most shameful in English history. Every thing at home and abroad was mismanaged. First came the execution of Raliegh, an act which, if done in a proper manner, might have been defensible, but which, under all the circumstances, must be considered as a dastardly murder. Worse was behind, the war of Bohemia, the success of Tilly and Spinola, the Palatinate conquered, the King’s son-in-law an exile, the house of Austria dominant on the continent, the Protestant religion and the liberties of the Germanic body trodden underfoot. Meanwhile, the wavering and cowardly policy of England furnished matter of ridicule to all the nations of Europe. The love of peace which James professed would, even when indulged to an impolite excess, have been respectable, if it had proceeded from tenderness for his people. But the truth is that, while he had nothing to spare for the defence of the natural allies of England, he resorted without cruple to the most illegal and oppressive devices, for the purpose of enabling Buckingham and Buckingham’s relations to outshine the ancient aristocracy of the realm. Benevolence were exacted. Patents of monopoly were multiplied. All the resources which could have been employed to replenish a beggared exchequer, at the close of a ruinous war, were put in motion during the season of ignominious peace”. (Literary Essays. page 250-251 ) §§§§ (9) “Bacon and his dependants accepted large presents from persons who were engaged in chancery suits. The amount of the plunder which he recollected in this way it is impossible to estimate. There can be no doubt that he received very much more than was proved on his trial, though, it may be, less than was suspected by the public. His enemies stated his illicit gains at a hundred thousand pounds. But this was probably an exaggeration. §§§§ It was long before the day of reckoning arrived, During the interval between the second and the third parliaments of James, the nation was absolutely governed by the crown. The prospects of the Lord Keeper were bright and serene. His great place rendered the splendour of his talents even more conspicuous, and gave an additional charm to the serenity of his temper, the courtesy of his manners, and the eloquence of his conversation. The pillaged suitor might mutter. The austere Puritan patriot might, in his retreat, grieve that one on whom God had bestowed without measure all the abilities which qualify men to take the lead in great reform, should be found among the adherents of the worst abuses. But the murmurs of the suitor and the lamentations of the patriot had scarcely any avenue to the ears of the powerful. The king, and the minister who was the king’s master, smiled on their illustrious flatterer. The whole crowd of courtiers and nobles sought this favour with emulous eagerness. Men of wit and learning hailed with delight the elevation of one who had so signally shown that a man of profound learning and of brilliant with might understand, far better than any plodding dunce, the art of thriving in the world”. (L.Essays. page 254). §§§§ (10) “In the main, however, Bacon’s life, while he held the great seal, was, in outward appearance, most enviable. In London he lived with great dignity at York House, the venerable mansion of his father. Here it was that, in January 1620, he celebrated his entrance into his sixtieth year amidst a splendid circle of friends. He had then exchanged the appellation of keeper for the higher title of chancellor. Ben Johnson was one of the party, and wrote on the occasion some of the happiest of his rugged rhymes. All things, he tells us, seemed to smile about the old house, “the fire, the wine, and the men”. The spectacle of the accomplished host, after a life marked by no great disaster, entering on a green old age, in the enjoyment of Riches, power, high honours, undiminished mental activity, and vast literary reputation, made a strong impression on the poet, if we may judge from those well-known lines:- §§§§ “England's high Chancellor, the destined heir, In his soft cradle, to his father’s chair, Whose even thread the Fates spin round and full Out of their choicest and their whitest wool”. §§§§ In the intervals of rest which Bacon's political and judicial functions afforded, he was in the habit of retiring to Gorhambury. At that place his business was literature, and his favourable amusement gardening, which in one of his most interesting Essays he calls “ the purest of human pleasures”. In his magnificent grounds he erected, at a cost of ten thousand pounds, a retreat to which he repaired when he wished to avoid all visitors, and to devote himself wholly to study. On such occasions, a few young men of a distinguished talents were sometimes the companions of his retirement; and among them his quick eye soon discerned the superior abilities of Thomas Hobbes. It is not probable, however, that he fully appreciated the powers of his disciple, or foresaw the vast influence, both for good and for evil, which that most vigorous and acute of human intellects was destined to exercise on the two succeeding generations”. (L. Essays page 256-257). §§§§ (11) “In January, 1621, Bacon had reached the zenith of his fortunes. He had just published the "Novum Organum" and that extraordinary book had drawn forth the warmest expressions of admiration from the ablest men in Europe. He had obtained honours of a widely different kind, but perhaps not less valued by him. He had been created Baron or Verulam. He had subsequently been raised to the higher dignity of Viscount St. Albans. His patent was drawn in the most flattering terms, and the prince of Wales signed it as a witness. The ceremony of investiture was performed with great state at Toebalds, and Buckingham condescended to be one of the chief actors. Posterity has felt that the greatest of English philosophers could derive no accession of dignity from any title which James could bestow, and in defiance of the royal letters patent, has obstinately refused to degrade Francis Bacon into viscount St. Albans”. (L. Essays page 257-258) §§§§ (12) “In a few weeks was signally brought to the test the value of those objects for which Bacon had sullied his integrity, had resigned his independence, had violated the most sacred obligations of friendship and gratitude, had flattered the worthless, had persecuted the innocent, had tempered with judges, had tortured prisoners, had plundered suitors, had wasted on paltry intrigues, all the powers of the most exquisitely constructed intellect that has ever been bestowed on any of the children of Men. A sudden and terrible reverse was at hand. A parliament had been summoned. After six years of silence the voice of the nation was again to be heard. Only three days after the pageant which was performed at theobalds in honour of Bacon, the houses met”. (L. Essays. page 258) §§§§ (13) “The parliament had no sooner met than the House of Commons proceeded, in a temperate and respectful, but most determined manner, to discuss the public grievances. Their first attacks were directed against those odious patents, under cover of which Buckingham and these creatures had pillaged and oppressed the nation. The vigour with which these proceedings were conducted spread dismay through the court. Buckingham thought himself in danger, and, in his alarm, had recourse to an advisor who had lately acquired considerable influence over him, William's, Dean of Westminster............. He advised the favourite to abandon all thoughts of defending the monopolies, to find some foreign Embassy for his brother Sir Edward, who was deeply implicated in the villanies of Mompesson, and to leave the other offenders to the justice of parliament. Buckingham received this advice with the warmest expressions of gratitude, and declared that a load had been lifted from his heart. He then repaired with William to the royal presence. They found the King engaged in earnest consultation with Prince Charles. The plan of operations proposed by the dean was fully discussed, and approved in all its parts”. (L. Essays. page 259-260) §§§§ (14) "The first victims whom the court abandoned to the vengeance of the Commons were Sir Giles Mompesson and Sir Francis Michell. It was some time before Bacon began to entertain any apprehensions. His talents and his address gave him great influence in the house of which he had lately become a member, as indeed they must have done in any assembly. In the House of Commons he had many personal friends and many warm admirers. But at length about six weeks after the meeting of parliament, the storm burst”. (L. Essays page 260) §§§§ (15) "A committee of the lower house had been appointed to inquire into the state of the courts of justice. On the fifteenth of March the Chairman of that Committee, Sir Robert Philips, member for Bath, reported that great abuses had been discovered. “ The person” said he, “against whom these things are alleged is no less than the Lord Chancellor, a man so endued with all parts, both of nature and art, as that I will say no more of him, being not able to say enough”. Sir Robert then proceeded to state, in the most temperate manner, the nature of the charges. A person of the name of Aubrey had a case depending in chancery. He had almost been ruined by the law-expenses, and his patience had been exhausted by the delays of the court. He received a hint from some of the hangers -----on of the chancellor that a present of one hundred pounds would expedite matters. The poor man had not the sum required. However, having found out an usurer who accommodated him with it at high interest, he carried it to York house. The Chancellor took the money, and his dependants assured the suitor that all would go right. Aubrey was, however, disappointed; for, after considerable delay, “a killing decree” was pronounced against him. Another suitor of the name of Egerton complained that he had been induced by two of the chancellor's jackals to make his Lordship a present of four hundred pounds, and that, nevertheless, he had not been able to obtain a decree in his favour. The evidence to these facts was overwhelming. Bacon’s friends could only entreat the house to suspend its judgement, and to send up the case to the lords, in a form less offensive than an impeachment”. (L. Essays. page 260) §§§§ (16) "On the nineteenth of March the King sent a message to the Commons, Expressing his deep regret that so eminent a person as the Chancellor should be suspected of misconduct. His majesty declared that he had no wish to screen the guilty from justice, and proposed to appoint a new kind of tribunal, consisting of eighteen commissioners, who might be chosen from among the members of the two houses, to investigate the matter. The commons were not disposed to depart from their regular course of proceeding. On the same day they held a conference with the Lords, and delivered in the heads of the accusation against the Chancellor. At this conference Bacon was not present. Overwhelmed with shame and remorse, and abandoned by all those in whom he had weakly put his trust, he had shut himself up in his chamber from the eyes of men. The dejection of his mind soon disordered his body. Buckingham, who visited him by the Kings’ orders, “found his Lordship very sick and heavy”. It appears from a pathetic letter which the unhappy man addressed to the peers on the day of the conference that he neither expected nor wished to survive his disgrace. During several days he remained in his bed, refusing to see any human being. He passionately told his attendants to leave him, to forget him, never again to name his name, never to remember that there had been such a man in the world. In the meantime, fresh instances of corruption were every day brought to the knowledge of his accusers. The number of charges rapidly increased from two to twenty-three. The lords entered on the investigation of the case with laudable alacrity. Some witnesses were examined at the bar of the house. A select committee was appointed to take the depositions of others; and the inquiry was rapidly proceeding, when, on the twenty sixth of March, the king adjourned the parliament for three weeks”. (L. Essays page 261) §§§§ (17) "This measure revived Bacon’s hopes. He made the most of his short respite. He attempted to work on the feeble mind of the king. He appealed to all the strongest feelings of James, to his fears, to his vanity, to his high notions of prerogative. Would the Solomon of the age commit so gross an error as to encourage the encroaching spirit of parliaments? Would God’s anointed, accountable to God alone, pay homage to the clamorous multitude? “Those”, exclaimed Bacon, “who now strike at the chancellor will soon strike at the crown. I am the first sacrifice. I wish I may be the last”. But all his eloquence and address were employed in vain. Indeed, whatever Mr. Montague may say, we are firmly convinced that it was not in the King's power to save Bacon, without having recourse to measures which would have convulsed the realm. The crown had not sufficient influence over the parliament to procure an acquittal in so clear a case of guilt. And to dissolve a parliament which is universally allowed to have been one of the best parliaments that ever sat, which had acted liberally and respectfully towards the sovereign, and which enjoyed in the highest degree the favour of the people, only in order to stop a grave, temperate, and constitutional inquiry into the personal integrity of the first judge in the kingdom, would have been a measure more scandalous and absurd than any of those which were the ruin of the house of Stuart. Such a measure, while it would have been as fatal to the Chancellor’s honour as a conviction, would have endangered the very existence of the monarchy. The king, acting by the advice of Williams, very properly refused to engage in a dangerous struggle with his people, for the purpose of saving from legal condemnation a minister whom it was impossible to save from dishonour. He advised Bacon to plead guilty, and promised to do all in his power to mitigate the punishment. Mr. Montague is exceedingly angry with James on this account. But though we are, in general, very little inclined to admire that Prince’s conduct, we really think that his advice was, under all the circumstances, the best advice that could have been given”. (L. Essays. Pages 261-262) §§§§ (18) "On the seventeenth of April the houses reassembled, and the Lords resumed their inquiries into the abuses of the court of chancery. On the twenty-second, Bacon addressed to the peers a letter, which the Prince of Wales condescended to deliver. In this artful and pathetic composition, the chancellor acknowledged his guilt in guarded and general terms, and, while acknowledging, endeavoured to palliate it. This, however, was not though sufficient by his judges. They required a more particular confession, and sent him a copy of the charges. On the thirtieth, he delivered a paper in which he admitted, with few and unimportant reservations, the truth of the accusations brought against him, and threw himself entirely on the mercy of his peers. “Upon advised consideration of the charges”, said he, “descending into my own conscience, and calling my memory to account so far as I am able, I do plainly and ingenuously confess that I am guilty of corruption, and do renounce all defence”. §§§§ The Lord came to a resolution that the chancellor’s confession appeared to be full and ingenuous, and sent a committee to inquire of him whether it was really subscribed by himself. The deputies, among whom was Southampton, the common friend, many years before, of Bacon and Essex, performed their duty with great delicacy. Indeed the agonies of such a mind and the degradation of such a name might well have softened the most obdurate natures. “My lords”, said Bacon, “it is my act, my hand, my heart. I beseech your Lordships to be merciful to a broken reed”. They withdrew; and he again retired to his chamber in the deepest dejection. The next day, the sergeant-at-arms and the usher of the House of Lords came to conduct him to Westminster hall, where sentence was to be pronounced. But they found him so unwell that they could not leave his bed; and this excuse for his absence was readily accepted. In no quarter does there appear to have been the smallest desire to add to his humiliation”. (L . Essays page 262-263) §§§§ (19) "The sentence was, however, severe, the more sever, no doubt, because the Lords knew that it would not be executed, and that they had an excellent opportunity of exhibiting, at small cost, the inflexibility of their justice, and their abhorrence of corruption. Bacon was condemned to pay a fine of forty thousand pounds, and to be imprisoned in the tower during the king’s pleasure. He was declared incapable of holding any office in the state or of sitting in parliament; and he was banished for life from the verge of the court. In such misery and shame ended that long career of worldly wisdom and worldly prosperity”. (L. Essays. page 263). §§§§ We have known the life as well as the impeachment and the end of Bacon from Macaulay. Now let us interrupt the course of Macaulay that we may hear the surmise of the Quran. Now keeping, Bacon’s impeachment, the legal proceedings, the judgement, and the sentence of Bacon, “the trumpeter of the new age”, in mind, hear the following from the Quran. and see if it has missed the least circumstance in Bacon’s case. §§§§ “And when the trumpet shall sound one blast, and the earth and the mountains shall be lifted up and crushed with one crash. Then on that day will the event befall. And the heaven will split asunder, for that day it will be frail. And the angels will be on the sides thereof, and eight will uphold the throne of their lord that day, above them. On that day ye will be exposed. Not a secret of you will be hidden. Then, as for him who is given, his record in his right hand, he will say: Take, read my book! surely I knew that I should have to meet my reckoning. Then he will be in blissful state. In a high garden whereof the clusters are in easy reach. (And it will be said unto those therein) : Eat and drink at ease for that which you sent on before you in past days. But as for him who is given his record in his left hand, he will say: Oh, would that I had not been given my book, and knew not what my reckoning! Oh, would that it had been death! My wealth hath not availed me, my power hath gone from me, (It will be said) : Take him and fetter him, and then expose him to hell-fire, and then insert him in a chain whereof the length is seventy cubits. Lo! He used not to believe in Allah the tremendous, and urged not on the feeding of the wretched, therefore hath he no lover here this day. Nor any food save filth which none but sinners eat”. (Quran -69X 13-37) §§§§ “Bacon’s fortune, which four nearly four years had borne him smoothly on, now raised him to his greatest height, as if to make the final catastrophe more dramatic and appalling. It came like a thunderclap”. And Macaulay says, “A sudden and terrible reverse was at hand. A parliament had been summoned. After six years of silence the voice of the nation was again to be heard. Only three days after the pageant which was performed at theobolds in honour of Bacon, the houses met and the storm burst”. §§§§ And the Quran says:

“Then, when they forgot where of they had been reminded, we opened unto them the gates of all things till, even as they were rejoicing in that which they were given, we seized them unawares, and lo! they were dumbfounded. So of the people who did wrong the last remnant was cut off. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds”. (Quran 6 x 44-45) §§§§ Bacon’s life bespeaks the fact that he had made his desires as his God. Both his philosophy and his life are the embodiment of the worldly desires. The Quran says:- “Hast thou seen him who hath made a God of his passions, and whom God causeth wilfully to err, and whose ears and whose heart he hath sealed up, and over whose sight he hath placed a veil--who after ( his rejection by) God, shall guide such one? Will ye not then be warned?”. (Quran 45 x23) §§§§ Bacon as we have known secured safety in worldly prosperity and for that purpose he endeavoured for decades together to obtain some lucrative place to relieve himself of fear of want, and was completely lost in the life of this world, and has afforded not one hint that he had any apprehension of the next world or his meeting therein with God. This the Quran has interpreted as earning the fire as a home in the next world. Just read:- §§§§ “Lo! those who expect not the meeting with us but desire the life of the world and feel secure therein, and those who are neglectful of Our revelations, their home will be the fire because of what they sued to earn”. (Quran 10X8) §§§§ The same may be said with truth of Bacon’s philosophy. It is utterly and entirely a philosophy of the worldly life. This present age being the followers of Bacon’s philosophy may be seen utterly, entirely engrossed in the pursuit of wealth and the world, quite unmindful of the next world, and of meeting with God therein. Then could the fire of atomic hell be doubted. §§§§ The Quran injunction therefore is:- “Then withdraw from him who fleeth from our remembrance and desireth but the life of the world. Such is their sum of knowledge, Lo! Thy Lord is best aware of him who strayeth, and He is best aware of him who goeth right”. (Quran 53 x 29) §§§§ The only way for this world now to avoid the complete annihilation and utter destruction in the atomic hell is to forthwith renounce the Baconian philosophy of modern atomism, its scientific achievements, its economic progress and all. We will now resume the course of Macaulay. §§§§ (20) “The sentence of Bacon had scarcely been pronounced when it was mitigated. He was indeed sent to the tower. But this was merely a form. In two days he was set at liberty, and soon after he retired to gorhambury. His fine was speedily released by the crown. He was next suffered to present himself at court, and at length, in 1624, the rest of his punishment was remitted. He was now at liberty to resume his seat in the House of Lords, and he was actually summoned to the next parliament. But age, infirmity, and perhaps shame, prevented him from attending. The government allowed him a pension of twelve hundred pounds a year; and his whole annual income is estimated by Mr. Montague at two thousand five hundred pounds, a sum which was probably above the average income of a nobleman of that generation, and which was certainly sufficient for comfort and even for splendour, unhappily Bacon was fond of display, and unused to pay minute attention to domestic affairs. He was not easily persuaded to give up any part of the magnificence to which he had been accustomed in the time of his power and prosperity. No pressure of distress could induce him to part with the woods of gorhambury. “ I will not”, he said, “ be stripped of my feathers”. He travelled with so splendid an equipage and so large a retinue that prince Charles, who once fell in with him on the road, exclaimed in surprise, “Well; do what we can, this man scorns to go out in snuff”. This carelessness and ostentation reduced Bacon to frequent distress. He was under the necessity of parting with York House, and of taking up his residence, during his visits to London, at his old Chambers in Gray's Inn. He had other vexations, the exact nature of which is unknown. It is evident from his will that some part of his wife’s conduct had greatly disturbed and irritated him”. (L. Essays. page 274-275) §§§§ (21) “But whatever might be his pecuniary difficulties or his conjugal discomforts, the powers of his intellect still remained undiminished. Those noble studies for which he had found leisure in the midst of professional drudgery and of courtly intrigues gave to this-last-sad stage of his life a dignity beyond what power or titles could bestow. Impeached, convicted, sentenced; driven with ignominy from the presence of his sovereign, shut out from the deliberations of his fellow nobles, loaded with debt, branded with dishonour, sinking under the weight of years, sorrows, and diseases, Bacon was Bacon still. "My conceit of his person”, says Ben Johnson very finally, "was never increased towards him by his place or honours; but I have and do reverence him for the greatness that was only proper to himself; in that he seemed to me ever, by his work, one of the greatest men and most worthy of admiration, that had been in many ages. In his adversity I ever prayed that God would give him strength; for greatness he could not want”. (L. Essays page 275)

§§§§ (22) ‘The great apostle of experimental philosophy was destined to be its martyr. It had occurred to him that snow might be used with advantage for the purpose of preventing animal substances from putrefying. On a very cold day, early in the spring of the year 1626, he alighted from his coach near Highgate in order to try the experiment. He went into a cottage, bought a fowl, and with his own hand stuffed it with snow. While thus engaged he felt a sudden chill, and was soon so much indisposed that it was impossible for him to return to Gary's Inn. The Earl of Arundel, with whom he was well - acquainted, had a house at Highgate, to that house Bacon was carried. The earl was absent; but the servants who were in charge of the place showed great respect and attention to the illustrious guest. Here after an illness of about a week, he expired early on the morning of Easter-day 1626. His mind appears to have retained its strength and liveliness to the end. He did not forget the fowl which had caused his death. On the last letter that he ever wrote, with fingers which, as he said could not steadily hold a pen, he did not omit to mention that the experiment of the snow had succeeded 'excellently well.’ §§§§ Herein then in the death of Bacon, there is a lesson. The man who had struggled all his life for the world, and had written an epidemic philosophy of the world for mankind, was not himself fortunate enough to die under the roof of his own house. This much only is the life of this world and its love. §§§§ (23) "Our opinion of the moral character of this great man has already been sufficiently explained. Had his life been past in literacy retirement, he would, in all probability, have deserved to be considered, not only as a great philosopher, but as a worthy and good-natured member of the society but neither his principles nor his spirit were such as could be trusted, when strong temptations were to be resisted, and serious dangers to be braved”. (L. Essays page 276) §§§§ (24) “In his will he expressed with singular brevity, energy, dignity, and pathos, a mournful consciousness that is actions had not been such as to entitle him to the esteem of those under whose observation his life had been passed, and, at the same time, a proud confidence that his writings had secured for him a high and permanent place among the benefactors of mankind. So at least we understand those striking works which have been often quoted, but which we must quote once more: "For my name and memory, I leave it to men’s charitable speeches, and to foreign nations, and to the next age”. (L. Essays. page 276) §§§§ (25) “It is very reluctantly that Seneca can be brought to confess that any philosopher had ever paid the smallest attention to anything that could possibly promote what vulgar people would consider as the well-being of mankind. He labours to clear Democritus from the disgraceful imputation of having made the first arch, and Anacharsis from the charge of having contrived the potter’s wheel. He is forced to own that such a thing might happen; and it may also happen, he tells us, that a philosopher may be swift off foot. But it is not in his character of philosopher that he either wins a race or invents a machine. No, to be sure. The business of a philosopher was to declaim in praise of poverty with two million sterling out at usury, to mediate epigrammatic conceits about the evils of luxury, in gardens which moved the envy of sovereigns, to rant about liberty, while fawning on the insolent and pampered freedmen of a tyrant, to celebrate the divine beauty of virtue with the same pen which had just before written a defence of the murder of a mother by a son. §§§§ From the cant of this philosophy, a philosophy meanly proud of its own unprofitableness , it is delightful to turn to the lessons of great English teacher........, this majestic humility, this persuasion that nothing can be too insignificant for the attention of the wisest, which is not too insignificant to give pleasure or pain to the meanest, is the great characteristic distinction, the essential spirit of Baconian philosophy. We trace it in all that Bacon has written on physics, on laws, on morals. And we conceive that from this peculiarity all the other peculiarities of his system directly and almost necessarily sprang”. (L. Essays page 278-279) (Herein then is a cause that with justice prompted the Baconian revolution). Macaulay continued :- §§§§ (26) “It is painful to turn back from contemplating Bacon’s philosophy to contemplate his life. Yet without so turning back it is impossible fairly to estimate his powers. He left the university at an earlier age than that at which most people repair thither. While yet a boy he was plunged into the midst of diplomatic business. Thence he passed to the study of a vast technical system of law, and worked his way up through a succession of laborious offices to the highest post in his profession. In the mean time he took an active part in every parliament; he was an advisor of the crown: he paid court with the greatest assiduity and address to all whose favour was likely to be of use to him; he lived much in society; he noted the lightest peculiarities of character and the slightest changes of fashion. Scarcely any man has led a more stirrling life than that which Bacon led from sixteen to sixty. Scarcely any man has been better entitled to be called a thorough man of the world. The founding of a new philosophy, the imparting of a new direction to the minds of speculators, this was the amusement of his leisure, the work of hours occasionally stolen from the woolsack and the council board. This consideration while it increases the admiration with which we regard his intellect, increases also our regret that such an intellect should so often have been unworthily employed. He well knew the better course, and had at one time, resolved to pursue it. "I confess”, said he, in a letter written when he was still young,” that I have as vast contemplative ends as I have moderate civil ends”. Had his civil ends continued to be moderate, he would have been, not only the Moses, but the Joshua of philosophy. He would have fulfilled a large part of his own magnificent predictions. He would have led his followers, not only to the verge, but into the heart of the promised land. He would not merely have pointed out, but would have divided the spoil. Above all, he would have left, not only a great, but a spotless name. Mankind would then have been able to esteem their illustrious benefactor. We should not then be compelled to regard his character with mingled contempt and admiration, with mingled aversion and gratitude. We should not then regret that there should be so many proofs of the narrowness and selfishness of a heart, the benevolence of which was yet large enough to take in all races and all ages. We should not then have to blush for the disingenuousness of the most devoted worshipper of speculative truth, for the servility of the boldest champion of intellectual freedom. We should not then have seen the same man at one time for in the van, and at another time for in the rear of his generation. We should not then be forced to own that he who first treated legislation as science was among the last Englishmen who used the rack, that he who first summoned philosophers to the great work of interpreting nature was among the last Englishmen who sold justice. And we should conclude our survey of a life, placidly, honourably, beneficiently passed, "in industrious observations, grounded conclusions and profitable inventions and discoveries", with feelings very different from those with which we now turn away from the checkered spectacle of so much glory and so much shame". (L. Essays. Page 321-322) §§§§ Macaulay has yearned after something which is not possible, and as impossible as it is. To desire mangoes from Thistles and we have ended Macaulay's quotations. §§§§ Macaulay appears to have been so heartily gratified by the fruitful philosophy of Bacon, that he is even willing to forgive the faults of his life. And this enthusiasm of Macaulay may be found not only to deserve censure but may even appear as quite justifiable if viewed in the light of a comparison between the state of Pre-Baconian and Baconian West. Bacon in such a light may appear as a redeemer of the West from a hell of ignorance, poverty, disease, superstition, hierarchical hypocrisy, tyranny, and extravagance; Monarchical despotism, a formidable endless, and ever-increasing anarchy of politically fanatical and fanatically theological disputes, harangues and controversies, and a confusing Babel of philosophic, mystic, Gnostic, esoteric and ecetoric creeds, systems, doctrines and isms, and as a harbinger of an age of knowledge, rationalistic wisdom, peace, progress, plenty, prosperity and glory. Macaulay who could still have shuddered at the horrific plight of the pre-Baconian west was justly pardonable if he praised heartily the philosophy of Bacon out of gratitude, particularly when as yet no peculiar problems and hazards of Bacon's philosophy had made their appearance, and the west was experiencing only the first inebriating swings of the new philosophy of fruit and utility. Macaulay required to live one hundred and eight years after 1837 to know that Bacon had only rescued this world from the pre-Baconian hell to be cast into the Baconian hell, the atomic hell-----a hell of far worse a nature than the previous one-----for it was in 1945-----that is one hundred and eight years after Macaulay had penned his article on Lord Bacon, in which he had extensively and indeed very ably extolled the Baconian philosophy as the greatest philosophy----- that the true reality of the philosophy of Bacon was exposed in Hiroshima and in Nagasaki, when the two flourishing cities were wiped out of existence for ever. The intervening period, that is from the commencement of the Baconian process to its logical result in Hiroshima, that is the transition from the Pre-Baconian hell to the Baconian hell, that is the period of Baconian progress and prosperity was such that if could not be termed exactly as hellish, it could hardly deserve the appellation of paradisic. It could only be regarded as a period preparatory to the Baconian hell that is the atomic hell. It is to be wondered, however, what would have been the attitude of Macaulay, if he were alive today. Reticence upon this atomic hazards, or white wash and ostriching as most others do, or a war of words against it. Indeed, if he had taken up the field against it, he could work wonders, but it was hardly probable, and he knew no science. §§§§ How dearly Macaulay has wished his hero had a noble conduct, and how sadly he has lamented his meanness. This is the sigh of grateful heart, and gratitude in a man in a virtue indeed commendable. Macaulay has wished a respectable name for Bacon among the posterity, and it is a credible wish. If, however, Bacon had been a saint, even an angel, could his piety or nobility of conduct have made any difference to the natural effects of his philosophy? We hardly think his name could have made any noticeable difference to the nature of this philosophy as it was. A brand of fire put in a hay - stack would show little difference in its function, whether it was cast by the hand of a saint or a sinner. Bacon’s philosophy was accepted and adopted not because of Bacon’s person or personality, but only for its apparent character. Bacon’s name even is long forgotten. How many today among the ignorant or the elite have heard of his works? Yet his philosophy is prevalent in proportion to its character. The lamentable fact, however, is that perhaps it was not possible for the worldly people in the beginning to foresee the dark side of Bacon’s philosophy until its long-term, collective and cumulative effects made their appearance, and it was till then universally regarded as a philosophy par-excellence, and the best of all philosophies that ever appeared, as also it was called by Macaulay. Nor was its dark side ever observed or declared to the day of its calamity, to wit, that of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But the tragedy even greater than Hiroshima is that even after the catastrophic nature of Baconian progress has appeared before the world in a form quite unmistakable, in Hiroshima, not a mind throughout the world has suspected a link between the atomic catastrophe, and the Baconian progress and its mother, the Baconian philosophy. Nor an eye has been turned to the Baconian system with suspicion that there might be some basic fault somewhere in the nature of this Baconian progress. A close scrutiny of this Baconian system of progress reveals that its design is faulty and is unnatural. A systematic, organised, universal infinite and ever-increasing science-guided and machine ridden progress is sooner or later bound to exceed the limits of the natural design and place demands on a natural resources far in excess of the natural ratios, and to consume and exhaust the quantities in a natural haste and in unnatural amounts obliging the mankind to resort to deleterious types of energy like atomic energy to its ruin. The particular characteristics of this Baconian progress, namely that of ever-increasing, must obviously out-proportion the natural resources, and outstrip the natural limits, and consequently oblige the needy mankind to resort to the means of energy detrimental to health and life, and meet the ultimate ruin. Not the keen sight of a Socrates or a Plato is necessary to discern this fact, but the basic cause, that is greed of wealth-accumulation, and belief in the eternity of this process of Baconian progress, being a guilt of the basic kind, has hypnotised this mankind and blinded it to the nature of this progress, and its effects and consequences, that the guilt may be painfully reattributed. Similarly the thought of morality, spiritualism, death and the other world must be gradually expelled from man’s mind due to the ever-increasing occupation of man's mind by the ever increasing thought of ever - increasing progress. The followers of religions, however, still think this progress to be compatible with the doctrines of their religion. §§§§ Macaulay was fortunate to escape the hazard of the atomic fire, that was to flare up in Baconian pyre, and departed with a conscience satisfied with the thought of having paid the tribute to the philosophy, that had redeemed the mankind from the torments of pre-Baconian philosophies of life, And he praised the philosophy of Bacon for its fruit and utility. But it is not improbable that he might taste the fruit of Bacon’s philosophy even after his death in his grave, just as he had the fortune of tasting the fruit thereof during his life on earth. Westminster Abbey where his bones now lie buried is not out of the domain of the fiery giant atumbumb. And if it ever visited the English isle it would not lose the opportunity of visiting the sepulchre of the man who had during his life lavished appreciable praises on the philosophy of fruit and utility. Nor it is improbable, that the library of the founder of that philosophy in Grohambury, the library in which Bacon had contemplated his philosophy of fruit might be visited by the fruit of that philosophy, namely the fiery, furious and frantic giant autumbumb to do with its birth place what he did to all other places which he ever happened to visit, sad indeed. Sad its beginning and sad its end. §§§§ Macaulay has lamented the loss of Bacon’s time that was passed in wool-sack and council board, and in all other professional drudgery. Such a time according to Macaulay was ill-employed, and if Bacon had employed all this time in his study, he would not have according to Macaulay, merely like Moses pointed out the Promised Land, but had like Joshma divided the spoil also. The hero himself had perhaps known his place better. He had called himself ‘BUCCINATOR NOVI TEMPORIS’ which means “the Trumpeter of a new age”, as a trumpeter indeed he was unique, and when he blew his trumpet, it was heard from one corner of the world to the other and obeyed. Macaulay has expected that if Bacon’s civil ends had continued to be moderate, he would have fulfilled a large part of his own magnificent predictions, he would have led his followers, not only to the verge, but into the heart of Promised Land. He would not merely have pointed out, but would have divided the spoil. Macaulay’s expectations might be right, but Bacon is reputed to have been one who despite his being the most eloquent champion of the progress of natural science, could not find himself ready to welcome the chief results of this progress. Of his countryman, William Gilbert (1540-1603), the founder of the sciences of Electricity and Magnetism, he speaks more often with censure than with approbation, and he ignored the great discovery of the true nature of the circulation of blood made by his own physician, William Harvey (1578-1657), who, indeed, said of him, in contempt of his scientific pretensions, that he wrote philosophy like (what he was at the time) a Lord Chancellor. Nor did he bring himself to accept the theory put forward by the polish mathematician Nicholas Copernicus in 1543, and confirmed by the discoveries made with the lately made telescope, in Bacon’s own time and within his knowledge, by the Italian Galileo Gallile (1564-1642). It was the theory that the earth rotates daily upon its axis, and that the sun, and not the earth, is the centre about which the planets (and the earth among them) revolve. If such then was the attitude of Bacon, how then he could have fulfilled his predictions, and how he could have divided the spoil in the war of man and nature, which was the field of his philosophy. §§§§ The actual reason for his particular attitude of disapproval towards the discoveries of natural science may be known to Bacon himself alone, but it may be guessed, and it is no more than a mere guess than Bacon had in his mind a particular conceit of sublimity, a particular kind of sublimity touching his philosophy. His design was, by means of inquiries directed not toward immediate gain, but toward a through-going knowledge, vastly to increase in the long run the dominion of man over nature. The object of a natural philosopher according to him was to study and interpret the works of God and raise in his own intelligence a true image of the universe. Thus it appears that the image of this philosophy in his mind constituted a world of cosmic saints engaged in contemplating the works of God and perusing the book of God’s work and raising in their intelligence a true image of the universe in a Wordsworthian spirit and in a world that flowed with milk and honey. The scientists which made the discoveries and their discoveries perhaps had appeared to Bacon as bearing a resemblance of immediate gain, and therefore came short of his lofty ideal, and he therefore shunned those scientists with a sneer as the detestable pursuers of immediate gains, and deserving not of approbation but censure. If this were the reason of Bacon’s disapproval, then it is better to assume reticence about the understanding of a man who wrote wonderful prose, and had assimilated vast learning, and produced a philosophy of life, but failed only to realise the true nature of the philosophy which he gave. Nor did he foresee the course its philosophy would adopt. Strange ultimate consequences of this philosophy no doubt, could not have been predicted even by a Socrates or a Plato or an Aristotle. They had in their own times been themselves antagonistic towards the philosophy of ancient atomism and have left no recorded prediction of the mother of Bacon’s philosophy of modern atomism. But Bacon appears to be saying, kindled fire and do not kindled fire at the same time. It is not for Aristotle, nor for Bacon, but for the Quran to behold the entire future course of the process of modern atomism and predict the appearance of atomic phenomenon, with its manifestations such as atomic bombs and radiations. Not only simply predict but scientifically characterise the atomic phenomenon, and portray the atomic bomb. And call the atomic phenomenon as the HOTAMIC PHENOMENON and show the way out of the atomic hell, to peace, prosperity and safety. §§§§ Macaulay has expressed his opinion that Bacon unworthy employed his time in woolsack and the council board, and that if Bacon had employed all his time in study, and that his civil ends had been moderate, he would have fulfilled a large part of his own magnificent predictions. He would have led his followers, not only to the verge but, into the heart of the Promised Land. He would not merely have pointed out, but would have divided the spoil. And above all, he would have left, not only a great, but a spotless name. §§§§ Now this is a very difficult postulate, and it is not easy to at once assent to it. Bacon would have been only, what he was. Sir James Jeans in his great work, “The Mysterious Universe”, tells us and very truly that, “life of the kind we know can only exist under suitable conditions of light and heart; we only exist ourselves because the earth receives exactly the right amount of radiation from the sun; upset the balance in either direction, excess or defect, and life must disappear from the earth. And the essence of the situation is that the balance is very easily upset”. (The Mysterious Universe page 10) §§§§ Applying this proportion to Bacon’s case, it may be concluded, that “philosophy can emanate from a mind in a suitable atmosphere of particular circumstances. Bacon formed his philosophy because his mind received the exact direction from the conditions in which it found itself. If the situation had been changed, the philosophy in the mind of Bacon, if it had not completely died out, at least its form would have been greatly affected”. §§§§ Had Bacon renounced his worldly ambition, and had he repaired to the university of Cambridge or some monastery, to devote his life to mere study, it appears highly probable that he would have renounced the thought of writing a philosophy of the world, for, the fire of worldly ambition having been quenched, the exclusive philosophy of the world would have appeared to him in a form not so pleasant to any self-abnegating convert, and he therefore might probably have undertaken instead the reform of Christian Church which at that time stood in great necessity of purgation. If, however, the thought of his worldly philosophy was too strongly fixed in his mind, and he inspite of the changed state of his mind, as well of environment had intended to write his philosophy of the world, he might have written five or six or seven volumes instead of the two which he could have written in the atmosphere of his professional drudgery. But what different the addition of volumes would have made to his philosophy, which had been completely and fully treated in those two volumes, which he had produced. And it is hardly probable that his philosophy written in the cloister would have had the same gusto and the same intensity of thought and expression as is to be met with in his two volumes written in a state of mind which could only be likened to alive volcano of worldly ambition, hissing, sizzling, puttering, smoking and belching fire, and recording its agonies as a philosophy. Hungry souls cry, and Bacon’s soul convulsed with sever pangs of hunger for wealth and power, and its terrible cries assumed the forms of worlds which Bacon’s had printed on paper, and lo, it was Bacon’s philosophy of the world. §§§§ All these, however, are mere conjectures. The fact only is that Bacon did produce a philosophy. A philosophy which completely changed this world, and reversed the order of man’s mind. §§§§ The Question arises, why Bacon could not complete his new Atlantis, just as Plato before him had not been able to complete his CRITIAS. Reasons of time or circumstances may be attributed to their failure in completing these works, but it is to be wondered how Bacon would have described his city in his new Atlantis. Merely the house of Solomon, and the brew houses, the perfume houses and the dispensatories would not do. These things did even exist in pre-Bacon and pre-modern days. Bacon would have been executed to describe his city as it appeared as a result of the changes produced by his philosophy of science and progress. How Bacon could have been expected to describe and portray the London of modern times in its mechanical and electrical perspective. Electric lights, motor cars, aeroplanes, factories, ships, railways, trains, trams, and all its distinctively characteristic features of modernity. It is for the prophets of God to see far if in future with surety, and a prophet of God surely Bacon was not. §§§§ The disquieted mind of the West, disgusted with the unbearably hypocritical, tyrannical, world-loving hierarchies, despotic monarchies, tortuous poverty, superstition, ignorance and disease, Smouldered, yearning impatiently after the luxurious and sumptuous feast of nature, tired of the long Christian fast, sighed, groaned, and bewailed. Millions of souls, in the western Christendom, sighing, moaning, groaning, wailing day and night in misery for relief, till their sighs, and groans mingling and mixing in a continued process, eventually assumed a form of an apparition, that appeared as an elfish child, called Francis Bacon and endowed with precociously mature and strong intellect, delicate health and unusual gravity of carriage. §§§§ It was known that nothing in the heart of this apparition existed but a burning desire of wealth, and power and ostentation, so that all the three, that is the desire of wealth, and of power and of ostentation vied with each other in his heart for precedence. Religion being susceptible of superstition, and feared as a handicap to the attainment of worldly wealth and power and ostentation was to be expelled from such a heart, though denied not by the pen or the tongue. The philosophy which emanated from such a heart was essentially to be a philosophy such as the Baconian philosophy is, namely a philosophy of dominion over nature for material exploitation, and wealth accumulation and physical comforts, and renunciation of moral philosophy. A philosophy therefore certainly as an antithesis to the philosophy of revealed religion. No compromise, no reconcilement is thus possible between the philosophy of revealed religion and the philosophy which Bacon formed. Machiavelli (1469-1527) appears to be the model of Bacon in the attainment of his object that is wealth and power. Anything which appeared as adverse to the attainment of the worldly object was to be sacrificed, even if it were personal honour, moral obligation, or the sacred obligation of friendship and gratitude, or religious values nothing would count when the worldly objects were at stake. §§§§ Bacon, his philosophy, and his followers are all at one with each other in almost every feature. Moral, spiritual and religious values as were considered by the pre-modern people were to be cast away as detrimental to progress. Fruit and utility as was taught by Baconian philosophy was the sole aim and the object of man’s life and exertions. Man's purpose was to accumulate riches of the world, and no honour was in anything except riches, or in those values which helped in gaining the riches, and maintaining the riches and multiplying the riches. Bacon’s heart and his followers' heart and the heart of Bacon’s philosophy, throbbed together for wealth, and burned together for power, and yearned together after ostentation. Together, and indeed together with their hearts throbbing in unison, will they go into the flames of the atomic hell, the terminus of the road of Bacon’s philosophy of atomism. Greed of wealth was inherent in the very nature of Bacon, and was naturally inherent in the philosophy of Bacon, and the secret hand of providence helped Bacon by throwing him into a career of poverty and obscurity as incentive for a struggle out of the dungeon in which he had found himself fallen, and subsequent entry into the paradise of wealth, power and ostentation. §§§§ Of all the philosophies of life that were ever given, the philosophy of Bacon it is that is exclusively based on this world and its wealth, excepting perhaps the philosophy of Epicurus etc., thus the philosophy of Bacon stands in direct opposition to every other philosophy both of revealed religions, and others given by philosophers like Socrates, Plato or Aristotle. The philosophy of Budha and the philosophy of Hindu religion also basically differ from the philosophy of Bacon. All the philosophies, whether they are based exclusively on spiritualism. e.g. Christian, or whether they have formed a balance between the spiritual and the material e.g. Islamic. are opposed to Bacon’s philosophy, since the philosophy of Bacon is exclusively based on materialism. People in this world belonging to every religion consider that if the element of religion is inserted in the philosophy of modern progress, the resultant form is quite compatible with their respective religion. If such people, and they comprise the entire population of the world, will not try to clear their misunderstanding, and will not realise the truth that there is not a revealed religion in this world which can go parallel to this abominable creed that is this system of modern progress, time will teach them a lesson in the flames of the atomic hell which they will never forget, and that will be their first and their last lesson in their life, and therein they will be broiled in the fire of atomic bombs and the atomic radiations, and not only they themselves but they shall see their children, their relatives, friends, cattle, pets and all, being broiled in the agonising fires of atomic nature but what we want to point out here is that if this creed of wealth-accumulating and lechery and its consequences are evil in the sight of God, Bacon shall receive a share of every man’s evil and will stand with a huge load of crime and evil on his back on the day of judgement. One philosopher, however, in the history of philosophy who gave a philosophy of the physical pleasure, namely Epicurus in Ancient Greece seen to stand with Bacon in the love of worldly pleasures, but his creed disappeared after a spell of disgraceful existence. Individually, the lust of pleasure, may be seen distributed in the world, particularly in this modern age which basically is an age of lust for worldly pleasure and physical comfort. However, this is a quality inherent in human nature, and needs suppression. §§§§ The philosophies in the pre-modern ages taught poverty, patience, perseverance, and sacrifice of this transient world for the sake of the next eternal world .This world was to be shunned as an issue of deceit. Love of God was preferred to the love of wealth and this world. The torture of worldly misery was thus mitigated, and also the calamity was attributed to the will of God and was thus taken with patience. All the givers of revealed religion, excepting perhaps Solomon, lived in poverty and preferred poverty to wealth. The lives of all the great teachers of mankind, e.g Socrates, Budha, Christ and the Prophet of Islam, peace be upon him, serve as the precedent. Bacon's life on the other had is an example of the worldly pleasure and luxury and engenders hatred for poverty, morality and humility. Epicurus may only be seen to side with Bacon in this. §§§§ Bacon’s relation to his own philosophy may be surmised as follows:- “Love of wealth, power and ostentation was inherent in the nature of Bacon, that he might give the philosophy of fruit and man’s right of dominion over nature. And his mind was so set on these things that he went as far as condemning the moral philosophy and misinterpreting the word of Bible”. §§§§ If the tree is recognised by its fruit then the mind of Bacon could be recognised by its philosophy. And if the fruit is related to the tree then the philosophy of Bacon is certainly related to the mind which produced it. Emperor Akber confirmed the philosophy which raised him to the status, that of the Shadow of God. And if Diogenes had given a philosophy he must naturally had given the philosophy of Tub-dwelling. And thus if the people had accepted the testy philosophy of Diogenes with as much eagerness as they have accepted the odoriferous and flavoursome philosophy of Bacon, then surely the trade of tubs would have flourished to the extent to which the trace of house building has flourished in the times of Bacon. However, do what we may to expose Bacon, and explain Bacon’s philosophy, this world of today may hardly be expected to take notice of it, for indeed, so blindly intoxicated it appears to be by the inebriating effects of the philosophy of fruit and worldly pleasure, that no advice, no warning could have any effect. Bacon may reign supreme as the greatest and the most genuine benefactor of mankind, till the worst has happened. No doubt, the factor of humanity’s helplessness in the chains of this universal economico-industrial set up of the Baconian progress could not be ignored. Bacon during his life had himself constructed and put on the chains, and so have his followers. It may be asked why Bacon had made the attainment of highest places of great wealth and great power as the inevitable object of his life. While diverse other equally able and perhaps abler men in history had acquiesced in a life of poverty as their lot in the world, and had produced works equally great if not greater than those produced by Bacon. Why it is to be wondered, almost every man who wrote about Bacon, lamented his difficulties in obtaining the highest places in the administration, as if it has been a natural right of Bacon to have the places of wealth, honour and power. The reason for this could be guessed as the appreciation of Bacon’s philosophy of lucre and luxury which they entertained in the light of their own worldly desires. §§§§ To know the mind of Bacon is to know his philosophy. And to know his philosophy is to know these who accepted and adopted his philosophy. And to know the life of Bacon is to know the life of his followers. And further to know the end of Bacon is to know the end of his followers. And because the entire world has followed him, therefore it means the end of all in shame, in misery, in the burning flames of the hell of atomic bombs and atomic radiations. §§§§ Bacon’s philosophy stands unique in all history as a philosophy of universal acceptance and prevalence, so that it has surpassed every other philosophy. Buddha's philosophy claims the allegiance of but a part of mankind. The same may be said of Hindu philosophy. The same may be said of Islam and of Christianity. But Bacon's philosophy of science-guided, materialistic progress owns the allegiance of the entire world, east and west, white and black, yellow and green, unchallenged and unshared by any other. Indeed, it has seized this mankind like the intoxication of wine, so that every nation on earth is engaged in the race of progress, vieing with each other and endeavouring to excel every other, surpass every other, and outwit every other, knowing that they tended toward a blazing, braying, boiling and bursting atomic hell. The credit, however, for so unique so admirable and so wonderful a success of Bacon’s philosophy is shared with Bacon by his followers due to their unreserved acceptance and hard, incessant endeavour not for a year, not for a couple of years, but for centuries at stretch. To them it has been like an article of faith. So complete has been the acceptance of Bacon’s philosophy by the entire human race, and so complete and perfect has been their adoption of Baconian culture, that a complete unmistakable identity of attitude, appearance, behaviour, and demeanour may be observed from one corner of the world to the other, and the portrait of Bacon may be discerned visibly imprinted in the mind even of those who have never heard the name of Bacon, and have not even seen him in dream. This identity does not end here, but further their end may also be expected as identical both in this world and the next. §§§§ Bacon's philosophy has furnished the mankind with a unique example of the inadequacy of human mind for the requirements of giving a philosophy of life to humanity. The philosophy of Bacon after its universal prevalence for centuries together, and inspite of its great rationalistic wisdom, its admirable freedom from dark superstition, its laudable enlightenment, its joys, its comforts, and its literary, scientific and economic achievements has eventually brought the mankind to a grief as universal and catastrophic as is the prevalence and the nature of Baconian philosophy. §§§§ "To conclude therefore", writes Bacon, " let no man upon weak conceit of sobriety or ill-applied moderation think or maintain, that a man can search too far, or be too well studied in the book of God's word, or in the book of God's works, divinity or philosophy; but rather let men endeavour an endless progress of proficience in both; only let men beware that they apply both to charity, and not to swelling; to use, and not to ostentation; and again, that they do not unwisely mingle or confound these learnings together".

       (Advancement of Learning, page 10)

§§§§ Answer to Bacon may be:- §§§§ “To conclude therefore, let no man upon a strong conceit of wisdom or ill-applied zeal, think or maintain that a man can search too far, or be too well studied to give mankind a philosophy of life. But let men rather realize their place and desist from taking upon themselves a duty which appertains to the prophets ordained by God himself". §§§§ Says, W.H.D.Rouse, " Milton's poetry, especially "Paradise Lost", is a universe infused with mind, giving the same impression of irresistible and overwhelming force as the universe itself. His thoughts fill the imagination and transcend it. His rhythms fill the ears like the sound of the sea. Sense and intellect are filled, and more than filled. We feel the same complete satisfaction and fullness in Homer, but with Milton we feel also a kind of awe. Homer is man's poet; by him all the passions and enthusiasms of humanity are sung with perfect sympathy; man with all his failings, often so lovable, some times so dark, becomes a god, or at least shows his capacity for god-head. Virgil again, the poet of imperial dignity and national ambition, paints for us the pathos of human frailty, and the tragedy of a gentle soul chosen by fate to do ungentle deeds. With these the divine is something not to be explained, that must be endured or obeyed. Homer, despairing perhaps of any rational explanation of the universe, touches his gods with light ridicule; yet he owns a moral rule, which the best men must obey they know not why, only he does not explicitly connect this with a divine sanction. With Virgil, divine has something of the grimness of a stoic fate: Its plans are dark, but they must be carried out, no matter if men and women are broken. Milton has the courage to grapple with the great problem: He will justify the ways of God to man. If he does not succeed in doing this, that is because the thing cannot be done by human intellects". (Introduction to Poetical works of John Milton page viii) §§§§ Now we have no objection to this opinion. Nay, we would be rather the happier if Milton's works, are extolled in even higher strains and with greater assiduity. But when we here from Mr. Rouse that, " nothing now remains to say about John Milton: his place among the immortals is secure", a cloud of doubt appears before the eye of our mind. And we think, paradoxically though that nothing of real worth as yet has been said of Milton. Milton's example is of an instrument placed in exhibition, whose beauty, appearance, and form is praised by every onlooker, but none has ever broached the topic of its aim, object, or purpose. §§§§ Ever since the memorable works of Milton, namely, “The Paradise Lost", and “The Paradise Regained", have appeared, their literary and poetical value has been assessed. Indeed these works of Milton are of so high an order that excepting the possibility of doctrinal differences, their literary and poetic merit cannot be fully extolled. But more than the assessment of their poetic value, the necessity of the judgment of their basic object and purpose deserves precedence. Yet it may be pointed out with regret that no thought whatsoever has hitherto been given to this very important fact. It is by this means that Milton may be rescued from oblivion, with revived interest, and with real benefit to a misguided world, not because we have greater sympathy with Milton than other celebrities that have been lost in oblivion, but because these works of Milton have a direct bearing on this modern age of Baconian atomism, and are as important as any treatise on atomic science. Perhaps even more important due to the much required spiritual element. §§§§ We will here briefly state the object of these works of Milton, and will briefly support our statement by the evidence of certain excerpts from " The Paradise Lost", Milton (1608-1674) born twelve years before the publication of Bacon's "Novum Orgaum", and well aware of Galileo's astronomical discoveries, and one of the greatest scholars of his age, and well acquainted with the state of the surrounding world, could not have been regarded as ignorant of that Baconian storm which was then brewing in the western Christendom. And Milton a Christian to the core of his heart could not have been expected to endorse the antichristian and Mammonistic culture of the worldly philosophy of modern atomism. "The Paradise Lost", is as much the epic of Adam's fall from Paradise as it is of man's fall into the ungodly, materialistic culture of Baconian atomism. And Milton's "Paradise Lost" is not only a universe infused with mind, but it is at the same time is a dire yell of a stubborn, and deeply religious mind against the approaching cavalcade of Baconian heathenism. §§§§ "Paradise Lost", is a warning against the Baconian culture sounded as a warning to the Western Christendom. "The Paradise Lost", appears as if it is an allegorical description of this modern revolution of atomism. We see a trumpeter against a trumpet, and a trumpeter against a trumpet. §§§§ If we hold this modern revolution of atomism in view of "Paradise Lost", we can see therein the Satan, the Serpent, the Molach, the Belial, the Belzebub, the Mulciber, and the Mammon among all the multitudinous host of the fallen angels. And we can audibly hear the speeches made by the Molach, and the Belial, and the Belzebab, and the Mammon indeed without the least disguise. And we can see "the founding of Nether Empire, to rise by policy and long process of time, in emulation opposite to heaven". In Bacon's language the same fact may be expressed, "Gaining by scientific inquiry and experimentation such a knowledge of nature's inner workings as may make it possible to emulate them". And we clearly discern Mulciber, the mechanical engineer and Mamoon the traditional Banker, and we can see the Beelzebub and the Belial in their modern apparel. §§§§ And we can see the numerous brigades of fallen angels, led by Mammon, rifling the Bowels of the earth for treasures hid, and many a row of starry lamps and blazing cressets, pendent by subtle magic and, fed with naphtha and asphaltus. And the fallen angels engaged in mechanical inventions to exploit the natural resources. And Stan may be seen:-

§§§§ "Inventing devilish engines of war, pregnant with infernal flame, which into hollow engines long and round, thick-rammed, at the other bore with touch of fire dilated and infuriate, shall send forth from far, with thundering noise, among our foes such implements of mischief as shall dash to pieces and overwhelm whatever stands adverse, that they shall fear we have disarmed the thunder of his only dreadful bolt". (Paradise Lost Book VI) §§§§ These are one and all the scenes described in "Paradise Lost", and because these are all attributed to Stan and his devilish host therefore it is hard to expect that they were commendable in the sight of Milton, nor it is probable that he recommended or allowed these practices to the Christians. The whole of the playing "Paradise Lost" may be seen and cited in this philosophy, and culture of Bacon. But let us read the decryption of battle in the "Paradise Lost" and then see if the description is not of a fighting with modern weapons:- "Hills amid the air countered hills, Hurled to and fro with Jaculation Dire, That underground they fought in dismal shade. Infernal noise! war seemed a civil game To this uproar; horrid confusion heaped Upon confusion rose. And now all heaven Had gone to wrack, with ruin ovespread". (Paradise Lost Book VI) §§§§ And see if the following is not like the Baconian struggle ending in atomic war:-

"Hell heard the unsufferable noise; Hell saw Heaven running from heaven, and would have fled Affrighted; but strict fate had cast too deep. Her dark foundations, and too fast had bound. Nine days they fell; confounded chaos roared, and felt tenfold confusion in their fall. Through his wild anarchy; so huge a rout Encumbered him with ruin. Hell at last, Yawning, received them whole, and on them closed hell, their fit habitation, fraught with fire Unquenchable, the house of woe and pain". (Paradise Lost book VI) §§§§ It is no hidden secret now that the universal atomic war can annihilate all life on earth. And the scientific estimates have confirmed that the long-term genetic effects of radiations can make all life extinct on earth and they change every living species and plant to chimeras. Cancer ridden, miserable chimeras. Chimera is a monster with lion's head, goat's body, and serpent's tail. But the chimeras produced by radiations will be of infinite forms and assemblies of organs. Keeping this in mind read the following from the "Paradise Lost":- "A universe of death which god by curse created evil, for evil only good; where all life dies, death lives, and nature breeds, Perverse, all monsters, all prodigious things, Abominable, inutterable, and worse. Than fables yet have feigned or fear conceived, Gorgons, and Hydras, and Chimeras dire". (Paradise Lost Book-II) §§§§ Indeed no better description of the creatures in the age of full-fledged atomic-energy-for-peace could be expected. It is simply wonderful. §§§§ The discovery of the atomic phenomenon with its horrid manifestations, namely the atomic bombs and the atomic radiations has appeared as a link in the chain of the scientific discoveries of modern Baconian atomism. If then the credit of the facilities of science goes to Bacon, the credit of the atomic miseries and destruction too must naturally go to him. Macaulay has penned an essay on Bacon and has penned an essay on Milton. But it is surprising that no connection between the two has occurred to him. And it is not only to Macaulay but to no one else hitherto any connection between the two has occurred. Indeed, this mankind has been so strangely blinded by the magic of Bacon's philosophy of fruit and utility. It is a hypnotized world, bound in clanking claims, and on the move towards the atomic hell. Another celebrity appearing contemporaneous with Milton, and Shining along with him like the twin in Gemini, and shedding its light against the dark Baconian culture is John Bunyan, the author of the "The Pilgrim's Progress", about whom Macaulay says:- "Though there were many clever men in England during the latter half of the seventeenth century, there were only two minds which possessed the imaginative faculty in a very eminent degree. One of those minds produced the paradise lost, the other the Pilgrim's Progress". §§§§ Macaulay relates that Cowper, forty or fifty years ago, dared not name John Bunyan in his verse, for fear of moving a sneer. To our refined forefathers, we suppose, "Lord Roscoman's essay on Translated verse, and the Duke of Buckingham shires essay on Poetry, appeared to be compositions infinitely superior to the allegory of the preaching tinker. We live in better times; and we are not afraid to say that, though there were many clever men in England during the latter half of the seventh century, there were only two minds which possessed the imaginative faculty in a very eminent degree. One of those minds produced the "Paradise Lost", the other the "Pilgrim's Progress". (L. Essays Page 163-164) §§§§ Mr. Southey called Bunyan a "Blackguard". This was perhaps because Bunyan was of a labouring class and a tinker's son. It reveals that religion in those days did not have much regard. The heart of the people was set on other things, the things of the world. Now perhaps, the time has come that religion will receive such regard as it deserves, or to say more properly, such regard as it shall deserve as a necessity. We can see that the Baconian culture is fast tending toward its logical and scientific end in misery and affliction, and in the burring flames of the atomic hell, the product of atomism. People will need some means, method, agency that might save them from this painful devastation. Indeed, religion can take up this role. Actually the doctrine of poverty, charity and humility is the effective, only effective antidote against the effects of Baconian philosophy of wealth, and selfishness and pride of man's dominion over nature. It is in virtue of poverty, humility and charity that religion in general will combat with this Baconian culture and shall destroy it. If this be the consideration, then Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress" appears to have the most suitable them, and deserves to be regarded with due respect among all the relative productions, of human mind. §§§§ Now Milton and Bunyan were contemporaries. Milton lived in this world from 1608 to 1674. Bunyan from 1628 to 1688. Both have been discussed by Macaulay, in a separate article minutely reviewed. In none of these articles any connection with Baconian philosophy or any sense or sign of antipathy to Baconian philosophy therein, has occurred to Macaulay's mind. And Macaulay is no exception in this matter. To no critic hitherto it has occurred, although Bunyan's "Pilgrims progress" appears to be a direct antidote to Bacon's philosophy of the world. In the case of Bunyan's "Pilgrim's progress", however, Macaulay has suspected certain reflections on the existing practices in the time of Bunyan or some time before him in the past. Although the antipathy existing between the worldly nature of the philosophy of Bacon and the spiritual nature of the allegory of the "Pilgrim's Progress" appears in such glaring hues, that it is impossible not to see them. The reason for this omission may be sought in the particular place of religion then and now in people's minds. Religion was regarded as Something antique, and moreover of a private nature that had little to do with the worldly affairs in man's life. Milton's "Paradise Lost" was read copiously and praised fluently. Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress" was read extensively and liked heartily, but none of these great popular works could cause so much as a wrinkle on the face of the Baconian culture. A non-Christian may have doctrinal difference to the "Paradise Lost" or “The Pilgrim's Progress", but what apprehension a Christian could entertain regarding these works. They have completely missed the actual line in their literary and poetic appreciations of these too great works of momentous purport and import. §§§§ How could a Baconian Christian go through the "Pilgrim's Progress" without suffering the severest stings of conscience, to read therein worldly love and worldly life at every step condemned, while it is well known that the Baconian culture consists exclusively of a life of the world and pursuit of wealth. This world according to the "Pilgrim's Progress" is only a vanity fair, with its jugglers and the apes, its shops and the puppet-shows. Its Italian rows, and French rows, and Spanish rows, and British rows, and the crowds of buyers and sellers, and loungers, jabbering all the languages of the earth. And who this worldly wise man of "Pilgrim's Progress" could be other than, Bacon, the giver of the worldly philosophy of materialism himself, with his legality and civility, while the Christian pilgrim is advised to stay away from all these snares and keep on his road to the mount zion and the house of God. §§§§ When we peruse the "Pilgrim's Progress" we find not a hint anywhere which might go in favour of Bacon's Philosophy. Nay, even if we open the book at haphazard, our sight falls on some or the other point which severely condemns this world and its love and its vanities. Persons like the Evangelist have no place in Bacon's philosophy. No Bunyan Pilgrim could be sighted anywhere in the entire Baconian world. The world of Bacon is termed by the pilgrim as the city of destruction, while the entire Baconian mankind moves onto the pilgrimage of the Jehannah of atomic hell. Nowhere in Bacon's writings our sight falls on anything like the following:- "Let nothing that is on this side the other world get within you; and above all, look well to your own hearts, and to the lusts thereof, for they are deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; set your faces like a flint; your faces like a flint you have all power in heaven and earth on your side". (Pilgrim's Progress page 85) And:- §§§§ "Thou must abhor his turning thee out of the way; and thine own consenting thereunto: Because this is to reject the counsel of god for the sake of the counsel of a worldly wiseman. The Lord says, strive to enter in at the strait gate, the gate which I sent thee for strait is the gate which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. From this little wicket gate, and from the way thereto, hath this wicked man turned thee, to the bringing of thee almost to destruction; hate therefore his turning thee out of the way, and abhor thyself for hearkening to him". (Ibid-page 22) §§§§ This is the Evangelist talking to the Pilgrim who found himself standing hard by the hill that was very high, and its side towards the way did hang so much over the pilgrim, that he was afraid to venture further lest the hill fall on his head. Also there came the flashes of fire out of the hill that made him afraid that he should be burned. Thither he was sent by the worldly wise man in quest of the house of civility, that the latter would take off his burden. §§§§ The West dreading the fire of poverty was directed by Bacon to seek the services of civility in order to take off them their burden of poverty, and enjoy the feast. This worldly wise man could not be other than the giver of the worldly philosophy of physical comfort. But is not this Baconian world even now caught up under the overhanging hill of economico- industrial system of Baconian progress. And is it not standing even now before the atomic hell which might any moment consume this mankind with surging flames. And read the following surmise of the author of the "Pilgrims Progress":- "When Christians unto carnal men give ear, Out of their way they go, and pay for't dear; For master worldly-wise man can but show A saint the way to bondage and to woe"- (Ibid page 20) §§§§ Indeed Mr. Worldly-wise man, namely, Bacon the giver of this new philosophy of wealth, and luxuries, has shown not to one saint but to all the world of saints the way to material bondage, and to atomic woe, and not only the Christian but the entire mankind has to pay for it dear. Just see. §§§§ But may be this mankind will one day in its iron cage make the confession as is made by man in the "Pilgrim's Progress". Just read the answer of man in the cage to the question. "For what did you bring yourself into this condition"? His answer is :- "For the lusts, pleasures, and profits of this world' in the enjoyment of which I did then promise myself much delight; but now every one of those things also bite me, and gnaw me like a burning worm". And his answer to the question, "But canst thou not now repent and turn?" is:- "God hath denied me repentance. His word gives me no encouragement to believe; yea, himself hath shut me up in this iron cage; nor can all the men in the world let me out. O Eternity, Eternity! how shall I grapple with the misery that I must meet with in eternity!". (Ibid- page 34) §§§§ Is this then not exactly the state of this mankind at present? Only it has not yet completely understood its own condition. Or will it be willing to make its confession like the confession of the man quoted above; when in time it has realized the true reality of its own state. §§§§ It is highly probable that I too like everyone else might have preferred to assume reticence in this mater, but the consequences of the Baconian philosophy have assumed such frightful clarity that I can find courage to speak, and at least no one now can call my bewailing as the hue and cry set up for nothing; or a storm raised in a tea cup. But it is astonishing to hear a clamourous uproar set up by one man in Eighteenth century against the Baconian philosophy in an age when not a feather anywhere stirred against the philosophy of Baconian atomism, or the exclusively materialistic mode of life. This man was William Blake (1757-1827), a poet who rose against all the pressure of this material world in a divine frenzy of vision and prophecy. "If what Bacon says is right, what Christ says is false", he pronounced. Amidst the irreligious and ungodly world of materialism he yearned after building Jerusalem in England. In a poem that appears to burn with passion he says:- "And did those feet in ancient time, Walk upon England's mountains green, And was the Holy lamb of God, On England's pleasant pastures seen? And did the countenance divine Shine forth on our clouded hills? And was Jerusalem builded here, Among these dark satanic mills? bring me my bow of burning gold; Bring me my arrows of desire: Bring me my spear: O clouds unfold: Bring me my chariot of fire. I will not cease from mental flight, Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand; Till we built Jerusalem, In England's green and pleasant land". §§§§ We do not know whether Blake's cry is still heard over England or not. But what we know for sure is that Blake's country is not only utterly wrapped in smoke of the chimneys of the dark satanic mills, but also, another, far more noxious plague, called the hazard of radiations is spreading. And his countrymen now think not of the Tomb of Jerusalem but they are prepossessed by the thoughts of the tombs of atomic reactors. Alas for Blake. §§§§ Evans in his, "Short History of English Literature", 1948, writes about Bacon:- "One can picture him in his study, in a half-light, with music playing softly in an adjoining room, running his fingers through a heap of precious stones, while his mind all the while is contemplating the nature of truth". §§§§ Now this is an exactly realistic and aptly representative sketch of Bacon the man and Bacon the philosopher. But perhaps upon descending into a deeper and keener reality one's sight may show this picture as follows:- "Bacon sitting in his study, in the half-light, with a multitude of glistening snakes musically hissing in an adjoining room, and he running his fingers in a heap of radiant scorpions. His mind all the while burning to know how to render them innocuous and useful to mankind". §§§§ Evan's critical judgment of Bacon's work displays a discerning insight and an adorable serenity, read as follows:- "The great prose writer of the early seventeenth century", says Evans, " is Francis Bacon (1561-1626), and it is not without significance that the middle of his career should coincide with the publication of the Authorized version of the Bible. If the Bible gave religion its great document, Bacon encouraged the methods of scientific investigation, which latter were to challenge Christina thought. Bacon himself is orthodox enough in his religious professions, but the attitude he encouraged came into conflict with faith, and indeed with any mystical view of human experience. Most of Bacon's work is in Latin, and it is ironical that the greatest prose writer of the time should have mistrusted the permanence of English as a language. Bacon is the most complete representative of the Renaissance in England: learned, worldly, ambitious, intriguing, enamoured of all the luxury that wealth in his times can supply, and while knowing so much almost completely ignorant of himself. One can picture him in his study, in the half-light, with music playing softly in an adjoining room, running his fingers through a heap of precious stones, while his mind all the while is contemplating the nature of truth. His history of Henry the seventh gave historical writing in England the first work which had design. His unfinished narrative of the New Atlantis told an adventure story in simple prose, and, in the manner of G.H.Wells, embedded in the middle of it a plea for historical research. The "Advancement of Learning", a portion of his great scientific work, described the condition of knowledge and the way in which it might be improved. None of these can equal in human interest the Essays (1597). The essays added in the editions of 1612 and 1625 are in each instance significant of different periods of Bacon's life. In 1597 with such essays as "of studies", Bacon informs the ambitious young man how he can make his way in the world. In 1621 he has wider range of them, and suggests the responsibilities of power. The third volume, with its essay “Of Gardens", hints at the release of retirement. The essays are compact in style, almost gnomic, with a pretty balance in the phrasing, and with images, such as, "Men fear death as children fear to go into the darks which have become part of the common tradition of our speech. In arrangement they are precise and well-ordered, as one would expect from a scientist, and in this they contrast with the happy and informal intimacy of me on Montaigne". (A short history of English literature, by B. Ifor. Evans, page 199-200) §§§§ Evans has carried his point to the conflict appearing between the attitude which Bacon encouraged and faith or any mystical view of human experience. He has recognized Bacon as the most complete representative of the Renaissance of England, and has clearly discerned him as learned, worldly, ambitious, intriguing, enamoured of all the luxury that wealth in his times could supply. And has known him as one who inspite of so much knowledge was almost completely ignorant of himself. And he has pictured him as one sitting in his study, in the half-light, with music playing softly in an adjoining room running his fingers through a heap of precious stones, his mind engaged in the contemplation of the nature truth all the while", indeed, but in this house of trial, no such felicity is allowed, not at least with any permanence. §§§§ This picture of Bacon by Evans is admirably well-drawn and is discerning. Its prototype, however was drawn about three hundred and twenty-eight years before Evans during the life of Bacon by Ben Johnson which could be reproduced as follows:- "England's high chancellor, the destined heir, in his soft cradle, to his father's chair, whose even thread the fates spin round and full out of their choicest and their choicest and their whitest wool". §§§§ The two pictures, however display a difference at the same time. Evans has added certain well discernible delineating shades to the picture, which identify certain outstanding characteristic features that have come to light during the period of three hundred and twenty-eight years after Ben Johnson had first drawn the picture of his illustrious model. §§§§ No doubt, the picture of Evans is not that simple and vague sketch drawn by Ben Johnson. There are delineations and shades which conspicuously portray Bacon's greed of worldly wealth, and his ignorance of himself, and the attitude of conflict between his philosophy and faith which his views had encouraged. All this is admirable, but it is not enough. Evan's book was published in 1948 that is only three years after the tragic happening of Hiroshima in which Bacon the originator of that system which had resulted in that tragedy appeared with unmistakable identity. No allusion to that effect meets our eye in Evan's picture of Bacon. Evans, however, in this tendency does not stand alone and is not blamable any the more, for all the entire world today has assumed the same attitude of reticence about the possible causes of all these horrific hazards that are incident on science-guided, material progress of Baconian culture. §§§§ It is pity that men of this age have come to regard this Baconian culture of scientific investigation and material progress as natural, genuine and correct. If they want to affect reform, or they want to correct the faults, or they think of contending with the hazards incident on this culture, or they decide to remove the impending dangers, they think of it only from the existing frame of reference of this very culture, and in the light of their existing view of its correctness. They cannot even think of casting aside this Baconian system and having a look at the facts from a different frame of reference. Their helplessness in this matter however may be seen in this universal set up of Economico-industrial system. They want to stay in this existing Baconian set up, and staying within it they want to remove the apparent inconsistencies, and fill the occurring breaches. Some may think, that because the factor of religion and morality was absent in this existing system, the insertion of religion and morality in it might remedy the malady. While their diagnosis is incorrect, their remedy surely is impracticable. Most people today are desirous of finding a compromise between this worldly system and faith. No doubt it is a blessed thought, but why no compromise is being affected despite the wish of the entire human population. No compromise is being achieved between this Baconian culture and faith, because it is basically not possible. It is impossible to diffuse these two different elements. Sodium and Chlorine could be compounded to form the table salt, but Baconian system of progress and faith could in no way be compounded. They could at the most be combined into a mixture of heterogeneous element with gradual increase of the material element and decrease of the religious element till eventually the religious element has completely been dissolved and the material element has taken its place. If Ronald Knox be still in this house of trial, I have regrettably to inform him that no compromise between this Baconian culture and faith is possible. Either of these contestants has the possibility to exist alone, and no man on earth cold achieve the miracle of blending the Baconian culture and faith together. For forty years I have fought the battle royal and have expended my thought, and have strained my eyes, for decades at a stretch in my endeavour to find any possibility of a compromise between these implacable adversaries, but have fond none. What a joy it would have been for me, if I had discovered anywhere the least probability, and then I had been acclaimed a hero of this age. That unique honour I missed. But no honour equals that of uttering the truth, howsoever bitter, howsoever distasteful. §§§§ No amount of wishful thinking could avail anything in this most crucial of all the matters, this most excruating of all the problems, and the most catastrophic of all the calamities. The period of wishful thinking is long past. And the disease is inherent in the very nature of the problem. The system of this Baconian culture is the essence of samario-antichristic bane appearing in the form of this science-guided, economico-industrial set up, that would admit of no remedy except death. "Hell trembled at the Hideous name, and sighed From all her caves, and back resounded death". §§§§ Either Death therefore to this Baconian bane, or death will be the lot of mankind in the flames of atomic hell. The worse still is the fact, that eternal atomic hell is ablaze in the next world for those how justly deserved the punishment in the atomic hell of this transient world, even if they escaped it. Make haste therefore to decide. The margin left now is too narrow. The sands of life are running out too fast. The decisive moment is fast approaching. These are no false pretentions. Nor are they hysterical, alarmist rantings. Nor even are they the mere emotional fulminations, empty threats or idle boasts. Nay, but they are proved, established, recognized, clear and conspicuous facts of science and logic, visible to me with as much clarity as to any of you in the west and the east, excepting those who close their eyes and feign blindness, or those who turn their gaze away from the horrible site, and wish that there were nothing. But neither closing the eyes, nor turning away the gaze will be of any avail against the truth. See therefore the truth, and face facts. That perhaps you might be saved". §§§§ Bacon occupies a position unique in the history of mankind as Satan the second. Bacon has done to the posterity of Adam exactly that which Satan had done to Adam himself. Satan the first seduced Adam and caused his expulsion from paradise. Bacon seduced the posterity of Adam and caused their entry into the hell. Satan seduced Adam, introduced sin and the result was the appearance of hell-fire. Bacon seduced the posterity of Adam, introduced science-guided materialism and the result was the appearance of atomic hell fire. §§§§ Satan assured Adam that the eating of the fruit of the forbidden tree of the knowledge of good and evil meant the revelation of all mysterious and secrets, besides an eternal kingdom, and the transformation into angel. Bacon assured the posterity of Adam, that the pursuit of natural philosophy (science) meant the revelation of the secrets of nature, besides the establishment of ever-increasing and ever-lasting dominion of man over the universe, and consequently the transformation of man into superman. Satan opened the way of the sin by causing Adam to taste the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. Bacon barred the way to paradise by condemning the pursuit of moral philosophy as the repetition of the original transgression of Adam, namely, his eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Satan the first caused expulsion of Adam from the paradise, yet the possibility of returning back to the paradise had remained, by avoiding the evil and pursuing the path of good. Satan the second, by condemning the pursuit of moral philosophy barred the way back to the paradise. Instead, he gave a plan of changing this earth itself into a paradise. Though not only his earthly paradise gradually changed into a hell, but the atomic-hell-fire- appeared to consume all earthly life as a result of his philosophy. Had not Bacon said, man had erred from natural to moral philosophy merely to give himself the law is not the prohibition of moral philosophy? §§§§ The following lament of Milton at the occasion of Adam's tasting the fruit of the forbidden thee, may well and with real appropriateness be cited against the second fall of man, that is his pursuit of natural philosophy (science for material benefit) at the expense of moral:- Milton says:- "Earth trembled from her entrails as again In pangs, and nature gave a second groan; Sky loured, and, muttering thunder, some sand drops, Wept at completing of the mortal sin original" (Milton's Paradise Lost book-ix) §§§§ The glimpse of Bacon's pose appears to me, as Bacon bending assiduously on the roots of the tree of knowledge, and twisting them in an endeavour to revert their mutual opposition assigned to them by revealed religion. The revealed religion had assigned a place of primary importance to Moral philosophy, and had assigned only a secondary position to the natural philosophy (science for material benefit). Bacon just reverted this order and brought about a revolution of a universal nature, the like of which human history fail to produce. Milton sang the fall of Adam in a grand epic. This Baconian fall of the posterity of Adam too provides an occasion of an equally elaborate epic in poetry or in prose. But no Milton arose. §§§§ This age has lost completely the sense of the moral guilt previously associated with the engrossment in this world, and the pursuit of wealth at the cast of the next world. And how dubious might appear the success of a warning against the hazards of Baconian philosophy, to the men of a generation which inspite of this present situation of the atomic science, the atomic bomb, radiations and all the appendages of atomic hell, dangling before their eyes still assert that science could be used both for destruction as well as construction. It is perhaps not known to them that there is no protection against the atomic bombs as well as against the atomic radiations. No protection is simply possible. Now or ever. And surely the atomic bombs and the atomic radiations can change this world into a real hell of misery, poverty, disease and destruction. But will the people not realize the nature of the hazard, till the hails of atomic bombs and the swarms of the deadly-stinged radiations that are at present in their pursuit, have at last overtaken them to make a minced meat of them, and change this earth into a panorama bestrewn with charred, stinking heaps of unrecognizable dead. Is it not better to think before the moment has arrived. Could they not even now pause and ponder, or have they been completely divested of sense. No doubt, a show of personal pride, or a sense of valour might present this configuration in a colour light and slight. If, however, the tale had ended with death, such attitude could evade censure. But I have a kind of a news that could pale even the faces of the most intrepid. To wit, that those among the people of this present atomic age, who will be found deserving of the punishment in this transient atomic hell of this transient world, they even if they have escaped the punishment in this life, will surely find an eternally blazing, braying atomic hell waiting for them in the next eternal world, to be broiled therein eternally and for ever. And this is a story not of my own making. I speak on the infallible, and authentic authority of the Quran, expressed by that book most unambiguous, most scientific and clearest of terms, based both on the atomic science as well as the divine authority of the scripture. §§§§ Life and conduct of Bacon displayed in a most unambiguous manners such features and such characteristics as justly render him liable to the title of antichrist. The same may be said of his philosophy, and the same may be said of the resultant culture. And the role of Al-Samari, the memorable maker of the lowing gold calf for the children of Israel in the time of Moses---is clearly discernible in these magical inventions of modern science. Yet I will not say, that this is that very same Antichrist which was prophesied by the Holy Prophet of Islam (Peace be upon him), by the appellation of Messih-id-Dajjal that is the lying, simulating Christ. This much, however, may be said with real plausibility, that if this Baconian culture is not destroyed, whether this is easy or whether it is difficult, then surely it will destroy both the worlds of this mankind. And this is a matter which deserves consideration unless the destruction of this mankind has been preceded by the providence. May Allah save this world.

End. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.153.133.96 (talk) 16:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Verifiabilty of Mulla Omar being Dajjal

Just look a few lines below that section and you will see the notes about his being one eyed.

Even the top of this talk page contains references.

--ChJameel (talk) 02:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi folks; I'm a contributor to the Christian Eschatological Articles and have enjoyed your article and find that the challenges of being a contributor are very similar from your comments. THANKS FOR AN ABSOLUTELY FANTASTIC ARTICLE. Love you guys... Aeldanila (talk) 10:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)