that "one energy governs all things"-a chair, we will say, and a
man; we could only say that one energy governed a man and a
chair, if the chair were a reasonable living person, who was
actively and consciously engaged in helping the man to attain a
certain end, unless, that is to say, we are to depart from all
usual interpretation of words, in which case we invalidate the
advantages of language and all the sanctions of morality.

"All things shall again become unity" is intelligible as meaning
that all things probably have come from a single elementary
substance, say hydrogen or what not, and that they will return to
it; but the explanation of unity as being the "unity of
multiplicity" puzzles; if there is any meaning it is too
recondite to be of service to us.

What, again, is meant by saying that "the soul of the world is
the Divine energy which interpenetrates every portion of the
mass" ? The soul of the world is an expression which, to myself,
and, I should imagine, to most people, is without propriety. We
cannot think of the world except as earth, air, and water, in
this or that state, on and in which there grow plants and
animals. What is meant by saying that earth has a soul, and
lives? Does it move from place to place erratically? Does it
feed? Does it reproduce itself? Does it make such noises, or
commit such vagaries as shall make us say that it feels? Can it
achieve its ends, and fail of achieving them through mistake? If
it cannot, how has it a soul more than a dead man has a soul, out
of whom we say that the soul has departed, and whose body we
conceive of as returning to dead earth, inasmuch as it is now
soulless? Is there any unnatural violence which can be done to