Ratherthanprolongsuchadispute，IamwillingtoacceptalmostanynameforthepersonalreligionofwhichIproposetotreat。
　　Callitconscienceormorality，ifyouyourselvesprefer，andnotreligion——undereithernameitwillbeequallyworthyofourstudy。Asformyself，Ithinkitwillprovetocontainsomeelementswhichmoralitypureandsimpledoesnotcontain，andtheseelementsIshallsoonseektopointout；soIwillmyselfcontinuetoapplytheword“religion“toit；andinthelastlectureofall，Iwillbringinthetheologiesandtheecclesiasticisms，andsaysomethingofitsrelationtothem。
　　Inonesenseatleastthepersonalreligionwillproveitselfmorefundamentalthaneithertheologyorecclesiasticism。
　　Churches，whenonceestablished，liveatsecond-handupontradition；buttheFOUNDERSofeverychurchowedtheirpoweroriginallytothefactoftheirdirectpersonalcommunionwiththedivine。Notonlythesuperhumanfounders，theChrist，theBuddha，Mahomet，butalltheoriginatorsofChristiansectshavebeeninthiscase；——sopersonalreligionshouldstillseemtheprimordialthing，eventothosewhocontinuetoesteemitincomplete。
　　Thereare，itistrue，otherthingsinreligionchronologicallymoreprimordialthanpersonaldevoutnessinthemoralsense。
　　Fetishismandmagicseemtohaveprecededinwardpietyhistorically——atleastourrecordsofinwardpietydonotreachbacksofar。Andiffetishismandmagicberegardedasstagesofreligion，onemaysaythatpersonalreligionintheinwardsenseandthegenuinelyspiritualecclesiasticismswhichitfoundsarephenomenaofsecondaryoreventertiaryorder。But，quiteapartfromthefactthatmanyanthropologists——forinstance，JevonsandFrazer——expresslyoppose“religion“and“magic“toeachother，itiscertainthatthewholesystemofthoughtwhichleadstomagic，fetishism，andthelowersuperstitionsmayjustaswellbecalledprimitivescienceascalledprimitivereligion。Thequestionthusbecomesaverbaloneagain；andourknowledgeofalltheseearlystagesofthoughtandfeelingisinanycasesoconjecturalandimperfectthatfartherdiscussionwouldnotbeworthwhile。
　　Religion，therefore，asInowaskyouarbitrarilytotakeit，shallmeanforus
　　DIVINE。Sincetherelationmaybeeithermoral，physical，orritual，itisevidentthatoutofreligioninthesenseinwhichwetakeit，theologies，philosophies，andecclesiasticalorganizationsmaysecondarilygrow。Intheselectures，however，asIhavealreadysaid，theimmediatepersonalexperienceswillamplyfillourtime，andweshallhardlyconsidertheologyorecclesiasticismatall。
　　Weescapemuchcontroversialmatterbythisarbitrarydefinitionofourfield。But，still，achanceofcontroversycomesupovertheword“divine。”ifwetakethedefinitionintoonarrowasense。Therearesystemsofthoughtwhichtheworldusuallycallsreligious，andyetwhichdonotpositivelyassumeaGod。
　　Buddhismisinthiscase。Popularly，ofcourse，theBuddhahimselfstandsinplaceofaGod；butinstrictnesstheBuddhisticsystemisatheistic。Moderntranscendentalidealism，Emersonianism，forinstance，alsoseemstoletGodevaporateintoabstractIdeality。Notadeityinconcreto，notasuperhumanperson，buttheimmanentdivinityinthings，theessentiallyspiritualstructureoftheuniverse，istheobjectofthetranscendentalistcult。InthataddresstothegraduatingclassatDivinityCollegein1838whichmadeEmersonfamous，thefrankexpressionofthisworshipofmereabstractlawswaswhatmadethescandaloftheperformance。
　　“Theselaws。”saidthespeaker，“executethemselves。Theyareoutoftime，outofspace，andnotsubjecttocircumstance：
　　Thus，inthesoulofmanthereisajusticewhoseretributionsareinstantandentire。Hewhodoesagooddeedisinstantlyennobled。Hewhodoesameandeedisbytheactionitselfcontracted。Hewhoputsoffimpuritytherebyputsonpurity。Ifamanisatheartjust，theninsofarisheGod；thesafetyofGod，theimmortalityofGod，themajestyofGod，doenterintothatmanwithjustice。Ifamandissemble，deceive，hedeceiveshimself，andgoesoutofacquaintancewithhisownbeing。
　　Characterisalwaysknown。Theftsneverenrich；almsneverimpoverish；murderwillspeakoutofstonewalls。Theleastadmixtureofalie——forexample，thetaintofvanity，anyattempttomakeagoodimpression，afavorableappearance——willinstantlyvitiatetheeffect。Butspeakthetruth，andallthingsaliveorbrutearevouchers，andtheveryrootsofthegrassundergroundtheredoseemtostirandmovetobearyourwitness。Forallthingsproceedoutofthesamespirit，whichisdifferentlynamedlove，justice，temperance，initsdifferentapplications，justastheoceanreceivesdifferentnamesontheseveralshoreswhichitwashes。Insofarasherovesfromtheseends，amanbereaveshimselfofpower，ofauxiliaries。Hisbeingshrinks……hebecomeslessandless，amote，apoint，untilabsolutebadnessisabsolutedeath。Theperceptionofthislawawakensinthemindasentimentwhichwecallthereligioussentiment，andwhichmakesourhighesthappiness。Wonderfulisitspowertocharmandtocommand。Itisamountainair。Itistheembalmeroftheworld。
　　Itmakestheskyandthehillssublime，andthesilentsongofthestarsisit。Itisthebeatitudeofman。Itmakeshimillimitable。Whenhesays’Iought’；whenlovewarnshim；whenhechooses，warnedfromonhigh，thegoodandgreatdeed；then，deepmelodieswanderthroughhissoulfromsupremewisdom。Thenhecanworship，andbeenlargedbyhisworship；forhecannevergobehindthissentiment。Alltheexpressionsofthissentimentaresacredandpermanentinproportiontotheirpurity。[They]
　　affectusmorethanallothercompositions。Thesentencesoftheoldentime，whichejaculatethispiety，arestillfreshandfragrant。AndtheuniqueimpressionofJesusuponmankind，whosenameisnotsomuchwrittenasploughedintothehistoryofthisworld，isproofofthesubtlevirtueofthisinfusion。”[10]
　　[10]Miscellanies，1868，p。120abridged。
　　SuchistheEmersonianreligion。Theuniversehasadivinesouloforder，whichsoulismoral，beingalsothesoulwithinthesoulofman。Butwhetherthissouloftheuniversebeamerequalityliketheeye’sbrilliancyortheskin’ssoftness，orwhetheritbeaself-consciouslifeliketheeye’sseeingortheskin’sfeeling，isadecisionthatneverunmistakablyappearsinEmerson’spages。Itquiversontheboundaryofthesethings，sometimesleaningonewaysometimestheother，tosuittheliteraryratherthanthephilosophicneed。Whateveritis，though，itisactive。AsmuchasifitwereaGod，wecantrustittoprotectallidealinterestsandkeeptheworld’sbalancestraight。ThesentencesinwhichEmerson，totheveryend，gaveutterancetothisfaithareasfineasanythinginliterature：
　　“Ifyouloveandservemen，youcannotbyanyhidingorstratagemescapetheremuneration。Secretretributionsarealwaysrestoringthelevel，whendisturbed，ofthedivinejustice。Itisimpossibletotiltthebeam。Allthetyrantsandproprietorsandmonopolistsoftheworldinvainsettheirshoulderstoheavethebar。Settlesforevermoretheponderousequatortoitsline，andmanandmote，andstarandsun，mustrangetoit，orbepulverizedbytherecoil。”[11]
　　[11]LecturesandBiographicalSketches，1868，p。186。
　　Nowitwouldbetooabsurdtosaythattheinnerexperiencesthatunderliesuchexpressionsoffaithasthisandimpelthewritertotheirutterancearequiteunworthytobecalledreligiousexperiences。ThesortofappealthatEmersonianoptimism，ontheonehand，andBuddhisticpessimism，ontheother，maketotheindividualandthesonofresponsewhichhemakestotheminhislifeareinfactindistinguishablefrom，andinmanyrespectsidenticalwith，thebestChristianappealandresponse。Wemusttherefore，fromtheexperientialpointofview，callthesegodlessorquasi-godlesscreeds“religions“；andaccordinglywheninourdefinitionofreligionwespeakoftheindividual’srelationto“whatheconsidersthedivine。”wemustinterprettheterm“divine“verybroadly，asdenotinganyobjectthatisgod-
　　LIKE，whetheritbeaconcretedeityornot。Buttheterm“godlike。”ifthustreatedasafloatinggeneralquality，becomesexceedinglyvague，formanygodshaveflourishedinreligioushistory，andtheirattributeshavebeendiscrepantenough。Whatthenisthatessentiallygodlikequality——beitembodiedinaconcretedeityornot——ourrelationtowhichdeterminesourcharacterasreligiousmen？Itwillrepayustoseeksomeanswertothisquestionbeforeweproceedfarther。
　　Foronething，godsareconceivedtobefirstthingsinthewayofbeingandpower。Theyoverarchandenvelop，andfromthemthereisnoescape。Whatrelatestothemisthefirstandlastwordinthewayoftruth。Whateverthenweremostprimalandenvelopinganddeeplytruemightatthisratebetreatedasgodlike，andaman’sreligionmightthusbeidentifiedwithhisattitude，whateveritmightbe，towardwhathefelttobetheprimaltruth。
　　Suchadefinitionasthiswouldinawaybedefensible。Religion，whateveritis，isaman’stotalreactionuponlife，sowhynotsaythatanytotalreactionuponlifeisareligion？Totalreactionsaredifferentfromcasualreactions，andtotalattitudesaredifferentfromusualorprofessionalattitudes。Togetatthemyoumustgobehindtheforegroundofexistenceandreachdowntothatcurioussenseofthewholeresidualcosmosasaneverlastingpresence，intimateoralien，terribleoramusing，lovableorodious，whichinsomedegreeeveryonepossesses。Thissenseoftheworld’spresence，appealingasitdoestoourpeculiarindividualtemperament，makesuseitherstrenuousorcareless，devoutorblasphemous，gloomyorexultant，aboutlifeatlarge；andourreaction，involuntaryandinarticulateandoftenhalfunconsciousasitis，isthecompletestofallouranswerstothequestion，“Whatisthecharacterofthisuniverseinwhichwedwell？”Itexpressesourindividualsenseofitinthemostdefiniteway。Whythennotcallthesereactionsourreligion，nomatterwhatspecificcharactertheymayhave？
　　Non-religiousassomeofthesereactionsmaybe，inonesenseoftheword“religious。”theyyetbelongtoTHEGENERALSPHEREOF
　　THERELIGIOUSLIFE，andsoshouldgenericallybeclassedasreligiousreactions。“HebelievesinNo-God，andheworshipshim。”saidacolleagueofmineofastudentwhowasmanifestingafineatheisticardor；andthemoreferventopponentsofChristiandoctrinehaveoftenenoughshownatemperwhich，psychologicallyconsidered，isindistinguishablefromreligiouszeal。
　　Butsoverybroadauseoftheword“religion“wouldbeinconvenient，howeverdefensibleitmightremainonlogicalgrounds。Therearetrifling，sneeringattitudeseventowardthewholeoflife；andinsomementheseattitudesarefinalandsystematic。Itwouldstraintheordinaryuseoflanguagetoomuchtocallsuchattitudesreligious，eventhough，fromthepointofviewofanunbiasedcriticalphilosophy，theymightconceivablybeperfectlyreasonablewaysoflookinguponlife。
　　Voltaire，forexample，writesthustoafriend，attheageofseventy-three：“Asformyself。”hesays，“weakasIam，Icarryonthewartothelastmoment，Igetahundredpike-thrusts，I
　　returntwohundred，andIlaugh。IseenearmydoorGenevaonfirewithquarrelsovernothing，andIlaughagain；and，thankGod，Icanlookupontheworldasafarceevenwhenitbecomesastragicasitsometimesdoes。Allcomesoutevenattheendoftheday，andallcomesoutstillmoreevenwhenallthedaysareover。”