ON RE-READING ‘RELIGIO MEDICI’

 

C. RAMAKRISHNA RAO, M.A.

Sir C. R. Reddi College, Eluru

 

            It was Andrew Lang who once said “to write on Izaak Walton is indeed to hold a candle to the Sun.” The same thing might be said even of Sir Thomas Browne’s ‘Religio Medici.’

 

            The moment one closes down Shakespeare’s ‘Sonnets’ he is likely to banish all thoughts pertaining to Mr. W. H., the Rival Poet and the Dark Lady and begin to admire at Shakespeare the poet who raised Love to the level of religion and worshipped it. The people would read Shakespeare’s ‘Sonnets’ day in and day out for here is “the greatest love poetry” to quote C. S. Lewis. Love in the sense of Agape, not Eros. Likewise when we come to the end of Browne’s ‘Religio Medici’ we realise in no time that the author comes nearer to our hearts not because of his vocabulary, not because of his latinisms but because of his profound philosophy.

 

            Sir Thomas Browne who is acclaimed by George Saintsbury as “the greatest prose writer, perhaps in the whole range of English literature” was a famous physician before he became a philosopher. His ‘Religio Medici’ is a confession of his faith. It is not an “Elizabethan lumber room” as some would make us believe. His views on the problems of life and religion are contained in this book. Browne wrote this book because “there was raging battle of sects and churches as obstinate and as confused as the famous conflict in Spenser where the knights are constantly changing their allies and their enemies.” This book is an attempt to make his religious opinions clear to his own mind and to defend himself and his profession against the ancient charge of impiety.

 

            Browne may not be a philosopher in the real sense of the term. Surely he is not an Indian ascetic or Yogi or a follower of the Buddha or of Kant sitting either on the banks of the Ganges or on the mountain tops having closed the eyes in quiet meditation and pondering over the world’s ills and problems. But his tolerant views expressed on religion, his conception of the Universe and the role assigned to the human spirit in the great drama of existence are enough to speak of him as a philosopher.

 

            No other person except a philosopher can have such tolerant views and brotherly outlook. The book ‘Religio Medici’ expounds a tolerant view of Christianity. Though he is of the ‘Reformed new-cast Religion’ he is not vehemently opposed to the Catholic Church for in his view Protestants and Catholics–both are Christians. He is not so fanatical as to hate even the infidels. Browne does not hold a man in contempt because his faith is different from his or because his views do not agree with his own ideas. His firm faith in Christianity leads him to accept without doubt or question the mysteries and miracles pertaining to it. He accepts the passage in the Bible as true. He never questions their veracity or apply his logic. As Edmund Gosse observed, Browne, like his contemporary philosopher Pascal, held the realms of Science and Religion as entirely distinct. Neither Pascal nor Browne allowed science to interfere in the domain of faith or with the dogmatism of moral ideas. Thus we see an amalgamation of dual personality in him. The philosopher has obtained his ideas of God from two books–one the Holy Book and the other Book of Nature. He believes that God directs our actions though we commonly believe that the events of our life are determined by destiny. For destiny is nothing but the will of God. He says the Gunpowder’s plot, the defeat of the Armada and the victory of the Netherlands are all the mysterious workings of the will of God. Browne deplores the schisms which have given rise to diverse beliefs. He says it is madness to bring men to reason by force or by sword–a principle which reminds us of Gandhi. It is as cruel an act as that of Nero’s. He refers to Christ’s promise that all Christians will be united one day or other. He longs to see that day.

 

            As a doctor he cures the bodies of his patients with medicines and as a philosopher he cures their souls with prayers. Browne loves all mankind alike. To him all are equal and he is charitable to each and all. In the second part of his ‘Religio Medici’ he advises us to love even the poor. For he says “who giveth to the poor lendeth to the Lord.” So we must love our neighbour for God’s sake. That is true love and that is the source of all happiness. Like Saint Francis of Assisi, he loves even creatures, birds and animals for they are also a part of God’s creation. So when he sees a scorpion or a serpent or a toad or a viper, he is not startled to pick up a stone to kill them and smash them. Like the ancient mariner of S. T. Coleridge he admires even at the slimy creatures. All that he scorns or laughs at is the mob so opposed to reason, virtue and religion. Man should not question and doubt the validity of the scriptures. We must have implicit faith in God. Men cannot question God as the Pot cannot question the Pot-maker. Browne’s views on ‘sex’ are queer like that of a true philosopher. He will be happy if the population is produced by any other method like the plants and trees. He abhors the word ‘sex’ as he does the ‘Hell.’

 

            Browne does not believe in the theory of Pythagoras that souls pass into beasts. He is not afraid of Death like many great people. Browne’s peaceful life was disturbed occasionally by the death of his children. Out of his ten children six died right in front of his eyes. He knows full well that Death is certain and inevitable. So he bore their loss as the inexorable Fate. After the shock at every bereavement he soon regained his normal placidity. Browne honours the man who hates life. For when men die the birds and vultures pounce upon them and tear them into pieces. The sight filled him with disgust as the sight of the slaves at New Orleans Town filled Abraham Lincoln with disgust and moved him to tears. Like Donne, Whitman, Emily Dickinson and Tagore, Browne considers Death as the gateway to immortality but not a thing to be afraid of. Francis Bacon said “Death is no terrible enemy.” It is the accompaniments of Death that frighten more than the death itself.

 

            The world we live in appears to the philosophers in a different way. Browne the philosopher regards the world not as an inn to live in but a hospital to die in. World to him is a mock-show and as Shakespeare, Browne too thought every man and woman is an actor in it. So in his short span of life man should think and realise God. Man the microcosm of the Universe, if he neglects his business it will be provoking the wrath of God. So his aim should be high. As Emerson said “hitch your wagon to the star,” man should fix his attention on God. Like Arnold’s Scholar gipsy he should always await the Heaven-sent spark. Man should always think about Truth that is God. He should not give even least importance to wealth and riches. He should never run after gold even in his dreams. Though Browne is not born rich he does not stoop to gold. For he knows full well the words of the Bible, “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle rather than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Heaven.” Moreover, the riches cannot buy one necessary of the Soul. So if gold is God, Browne will be the first man to become an atheist. For he cannot persuade himself to honour what the world adores. For him there is no happiness here in this world except in God. This world is full of transient, ephemeral and broken joys. All else is vanity and everything earthly. What the world calls happy is to Browne a delusion and an illusion.

 

            Thus one finds Browne awakening the earth-bound mortals from their deep slumber to the realisation of God. As Milton, Browne too pointed out the just ways of God to the earthly mortals. Few doctors of medicine could have written such a book and as such it is unique. The allusions, the philosophy, the learning bear witness to his vast reading and deep meditation. On matters of theology, Bacon is on par with Browne. But a more exact comparison can be made with Pascal, his contemporary French philosopher. The only difference is that Pascal ended his life as an ascetic and a thorough-going pessimist as regards human knowledge and endeavour believing in nothing except the necessity of a humble resignation to the will of God, whereas Browne lived and died as an optimist pursuing his hobbies and science. It is not too much if we say that if Vasco de Gama had not rounded the sea-route to India somebody would have done it, but if Browne had not been born there would have been no ‘Religio Medici.’ In his prefatory note to ‘Gitanjali’ W. B. Yeats once wrote “I have carried the manuscript of these translations with me for days reading it in railway-trains or on the top of omnibuses and in restaurants and I have often had to close lest some stranger should see how much it moved me.” And I am sure Browne’s book ‘Religio Medici’ is being read down the ages and round the clock for its philosophy, ideas and ideals.

 

Back