146 Wilber Theodore Elmore 



possess, and so have less opportunity to turn their spiritual au- 

 thority to carnal purposes. 



The Dravidian system of religion may be said, indeed, to be 

 non-moral rather than immoral.^^ Moral considerations do not 

 enter into it at all. The propitiation of the village goddess is not 

 to expiate moral lapses, but in so far as it has anything at all to 

 do with conduct it is to make peace with her for any failure in her 

 worship. In connection with their religion no one thinks of such 

 a thing as reward for moral action or punishment for immoral 

 conduct. 



In the accounts of the formation of Dravidian deities it has 

 been made evident that the immoral person is the one most likely 

 to be deified. This fact may produce the impression that immo- 

 rality is not condemned but rather sanctioned. It must be ad- 

 mitted that this making a god of the worst sinner may lead to 

 approval of evil deeds, for the one who has sinned is the hero, 

 and those who have brought just punishment upon him or her 

 are the ones who have reason to fear. The influence of such 

 ideas certainly is not good. In the deification of such evil doers, 

 however, the moral question does not have any place. It is not 

 because the man was a sinner that he became a god, but because 



*i Census of India, 1891, para. 99, p. 60 : " There is very little connection 

 between the religion and the morality of the people of the Madras Presi- 

 dency. Their religion concerns itself with the ways to avoid or remove 

 evil, but the idea that wicked conduct will be punished or good conduct 

 obtain its reward in a future state is hardly to be found at all in the purely 

 Dravidian religion. The fear of hell and the hope of heaven appear in the 

 Puranic beliefs, but this doctrine has very little currency beyond the 

 Brahmans and a few of the higher castes, and even among these the moral 

 code of their religion is but vaguely known and of no great influence. 

 Nearly every Hindu pays allegience to some guru or spiritual teacher, but 

 the energies of their instructions are for the most part confined to teaching 

 tnantrams that are unintelligible to the pupil, and not always understood by 

 the master, to performing ceremonial acts . . . and lastly to the collection 

 of funds. The functions of the domestic priests are entirely ceremonial, 

 and little if any religious instruction is given by the parents. The morality 

 of the Hindus, indeed, is a matter of caste and not of religion, and miscon- 

 duct is punished by the caste council, and not by the spiritual teacher." 



146 



