1

Some notes on Annie Besant’s Autobiography: Chapter VII Atheism As I knew and Thought it

One substance and varying manifestations: There is no difference between matter and spirit. The
distinction made between matter and spirit is simply made for the sake of convenience and clearness.
Therefore deity cannot be conceived of as apart from the universe. Just the way work worker are
inextricably interwoven, spirit is present in the matter. In the same way, the orthodox idea of God is
unreasonable and absurd.

God is not a personal being separate from the universe but part of the universe. The deity becomes
identified with nature, coextensive with the universe.

Her idea of atheism comes from her view of the unattainability of the knowledge of God. Neither she says
that there is no God nor does she say there is God. Our faculties fail us when we try to estimate the Deity,
but does it therefore follow that he is not? It seems to me that to deny His existence is to overstep the
boundaries of our thought-power almost as much to try and define it. We pretend to know the Unknown
if we declare Him to be the Unknowable.

Charles Bradlaugh a friend and mentor who guided her in the philosophy of atheism.

Atheism is without God. It does not assert no God. The atheist does not say there is no God but he says ‘I
know not what you mean by God; I am without idea of God; the word of God is to me a sound conveying
no clear or distinct affirmation. I do not deny god because I cannot deny that of which I have no conception,
and the conception of which by its affirmer, is so imperfect that he is unable to define to me. (p.192)

The atheist neither affirms nor denies the possibility of phenomena differing from those recognized by
human experiences. As his knowledge of the universe is extremely limited and very imperfect, the Atheist
declines either to deny or to affirm anything with regard to modes of existence of which he knows nothing.
He refuses to believe anything concerning that of which he knows nothing and affirms that which can
never be the subject of knowledge ought never be the object of belief. The atheist neither affirms nor
denies the unknown, he does deny all which conflicts with the knowledge to which he has already attained.
For example, he knows that one is one, and that three times one are three; he denies that three times
one can be one.

The belief of the atheist stops where his evidence stops. He believes in the existence of the universe,
judging the accessible proof thereof to be adequate, and he finds in this universe sufficient cause for the
happening of all phenomena. He finds no intellectual satisfaction in placing a gigantic conundrum behind
universe which only adds its own unintelligibility to the already sufficiently difficult problem of existence.

Our faculties do not suffice to tell us about God; they do suffice to study phenomena, and to deduce laws
from correlated facts. Surely then we should do wisely to concentrate our strength and our energies on
the discovery of the attainable instead of on the search after the unknowable. (p.199)

Another reason of her atheism: my heart revolts against the spectre of an Almighty Indifference to the
pain of sentient beings. My conscience rebels against the injustice, the cruelty, the inequality, which
surround me on every side. But I believe in Man. In man’s redeeming power; in man’s remoulding energy;
 2

in man’s approaching triumph through knowledge, love and work (p.193) (her idea is if there is God how
can he be so silent to the injustice, inequality, poverty, happening all around. She rather chooses to believe
in the power of enlightened men who feel for the injustice, who work towards bringing equality.)

Her idea of atheism is similar to pantheism. One gets confused. However, she tries to show the difference
between these two. Though both believe in the present world/matter. But to the atheist existence
manifests as force-matter, unconscious, unintelligent, while to the Pantheist it manifests as life-matter,
conscious, intelligent.

She does not believe in the existence of the soul or spirit. She does not believe in the immortality of soul.
But I am unable to believe an improbable proposition unless convincing evidence is brought in support to
it.

Atheist is one of the grandest titles a man can wear. It is the order of merit of the world’s heroes. Most
great discoverers most deep thinking philosophers most earnest reformers, most toiling pioneers of
progress, have in their turn had flung at them the name of Atheist. (see page 196 to see some of great
thinkers who claimed themselves to be atheists.) She views that in the world’s history atheism has meant
the pioneer of progress. The cry of the atheists is seen as step towards the redemption of humanity.

Her idea of morality: high and pure morality is the life-blood of humanity; mistakes in belief are inevitable,
and are of little moment. The true basis of morality is utility; that is the adaptation of our actions to the
promotions of the general welfare and happiness; morality enables us to serve and bless mankind. (p.198)
nobility of life is desirable for itself alone, because in so doing we are acting in harmony with the laws of
the nature, because in so doing we spread happiness around our pathway and gladden our fellow-men. It
is of vital importance that morality should stand on a foundation unshakable (utility) so through all
political and religious revolutions human life may grow purer and nobler, may rise upwards into settled
freedom, and not sink downwards into anarchy.

Her concept of heaven: I point to a heaven attainable on earth not a heaven in the clouds. She cannot
understand the morality which serves God who is unseen and unknowable but very cold to the poor and
miserable at one’s side. She questions wehter there is no warmth in brightening the lot of the sad, in
reforming abuses, in establishing equal justice for rich and the poor? You find warmth in the church but
none in the home? Warmth in imagining the cloud glories of heaven but none in creating substantial
glories on earth. You have tears to shed for Him but none for the sufferer at your doors? His passion
arouses your sympathies but you see no pathos in the passion of the poor?

Her idea of true immortality: So therefore there is no need to wait for the reward on the other side of
the grave. Is Beethoven’s true immortality in his continued personal consiciousness or in his gloiroius
music deathless while the world endures? Is Shelley’s true life in his existence in some far-off heaven or
in the pulsing liberty his lyrics send through men’s hearts. Music does not die, though one instrument be
broken; thought does not die, though one brain be shivered. Love does not die, though one heart’s strings
be rent; and no great thinker dies so long as his thought re-echoes though the ages, its melody the fuller-
toned the more human brains send its music on. (p.202-203)
 3

Christian type of humanity through Jesus the man of sorrows does not appeal Annie Besant (p.200).

Her idea of humanity/man: the ideal humanity of the Atheist: in form strong and fair, perfect in physical
development as the Hercules of Grecian art, radiant with love, glorious in self-reliant power, with lips bent
firm to resist oppression, and melting into soft curves of passion and of pity; with deep, far seeing eyes,
gazing piercingly into the secrets of the unknown, and resting lovingly on the beauties around; with hands
strong to work in the present; with heart full of hope which the future shall realize; making earth glad
with his labour and beautiful with his skill- this this is the ideal man, enshrined in the Atheist’s heart.
According to her, the ideal humanity of the Christian is the humanity of the slave, poor, meek, broken-
spirited, humble, submissive to authority, however oppressive and unjust, the ideal humanity of the
Atheist is the humanity of the free man who knows no lord, who brooks no tyranny, who relies on his own
strength. (p.200)

Truth of evolution: Her idea of morality evolves. All the evil, anti-social side of his nature was an
inheritance from his brute ancestry, and could be gradually eradicated. It may be acknowledged that man
inherits from his brute progenitors various bestial tendencies which are in curse of elimination. There are
many bestial tendencies one sees in the society: greed, lust etc. all these bestial tendencies will be
eradicated only by the recognition of human duty, of the social bond. Religion has not eradicated them,
but science.

For her atheism is full of hope instead of despair. (206). Her idea of evil? Where does evil come from?
From ignorance.

Christianity says this is God’s world. Then whose world will the next be, if not also His? If the world is
replete with evils and imperfections yet this is God’s world, what better world can be the next world?
(p.207)

She wants all churches, cathedrals chapels, which had been wasted on God, should be utilized for men.
(p.209)