288 BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY [Bull. 175 



Be that as it may, it is quite certain that the myth fragment con- 

 cerning tlie origin of death is, in fact, all the Mohave believe it to be : 

 A condensed precedent for all forms of death, including suicide, which 

 explains practically every cultural — and, in part, also psychological — 

 aspect of death and suicide and whose most striking feature is that, in 

 the last resort, it views voluntary death (vicarious suicide) as more 

 basic than death from natural causes. 



Since it is extremely likely that the IMohave tendency to derive 

 death from suicide will be utilized by the champions of the primary 

 self-aggression (death instinct) theory as an argument in support of 

 their views, the following observations are in order : 



(1) The Mohave do not possess a better "phylogenetic memory" 

 than anyone else. Their myths do not show how life and death did, in 

 fact, start. They only show what the JNIohave happen to believe about 

 the origin of life and death. 



(2) It is psychologically almost a certainty that the Mohave 

 belief and the occidental theory, both of which derive natural death 

 from suicidal impulses, are simply psychic defenses against the un- 

 pleasant realization that — due to perfectly natural causes — man would 

 die even if he never once experienced self-destructive impulses. The 

 attempt to make the inevitable appear as a product of our own will is, 

 thus, a megalomanic defense against the realization of man's inevitable 

 mortality.^^ 



It seems desirable to inquire at this point into theories regarding 

 the origins of death. According to the Freudian death instinct 

 theory, the prototypal deatli is suicide, while according to many 

 mythologies death is brought into being through murder or its equiva- 

 lent. In fact, even though the Bible postulates that man is inherently 

 mortal, the first death recorded in the Bible is that of Abel, slain by 

 his brother Cain. As regards the Mohave, their mytliology takes a 

 somewhat ambiguous position regarding the origin of death: Mata- 



** The pretense that events independent of our will are the consequences of our acts 

 can l)e oliscrved iimonj; psychotics, anionfr a few irrcgponnihle students of parapsychology 

 and also in children. As regards psychotics, I myself saw a paranoid schizoplirenic pre- 

 tend that tlie leaves on a bush, which could be seen from his window, moved because he 

 sang certain magical songs "long enough." Actually, this " feat" simply took place on 

 a slightly windy day, wlien mild gusts of breeze alternated with total calm. As regards 

 some irreaiiovsible students of parapsychology (telekinesis), the Journal of the American 

 Society for Psychical Research published a devastating critiiiue of a certain individual's 

 alleged abilities to dispel a type of clouds l)y an act of will. This man simply chose clouds 

 of a type which always disintegrate in a sliort time (D. Parsons, 10.57). As regards 

 children, Koniain Rolland, in his novel Jean Christophe, describes better than any clinician 

 a boy's attempt to control the movement of clouds. If tliey refused to drift in the 

 prescribed direction, he stamped his feet and "ordered" them — with most satisfactory 

 results — to move in tlie direction in which they had b(>en drifting all along. Even 

 humor takes cognizance of such omnipotence fantasies ; witness the story of the dog owner 

 wlio boasted of his dog's absolute obedience: "When I tell him: 'Are you coming or 

 are you not?' he either comes or lie doesn't." Needless to say, humor often illuminates 

 deeply buried unconscious processes (Freud, 1938). 



