Aslan's Commands (Part 1)

Trigger warning: in this post I likely disagree with Lewis. 

In our last post we noted that Aslan’s inaugural address to his creations included three commands all related to their origins as Dumb Beasts. Narnians are to (1) treat the Dumb Beasts gently, (2) cherish the Dumb Beasts, and (3) not go back to the ways of the Dumb Beasts. (At least) the last of these commands comes with a warning/punishment, “lest you cease to be Talking Beasts.” Let’s take some time to consider these commands starting with the first two.  

First, the laws themselves: what does it mean to treat the Dumb Beasts gently? What does it mean to cherish them? 

Actually, there doesn’t seem to be much of a direct answer anywhere in the Chronicles of Narnia. So, let’s throw out some possibilities of specific actions that might be thought of as violating “gentle” and “cherish” and see if they fit. 

What about eating Dumb Beasts? That actually seems pretty reasonable given the physical similarities between Talking and Dumb Beasts. However, it’s simply not the case. There is no indication that Narnians are vegetarians (the only beings in the Chronicles of Narnia who are definitely vegetarians are Eustace’s parents and we know what Lewis thinks of them). Puddleglum, for example, realizes the tragedy of eating a talking stag, but everyone eats meaty sausages at the end of The Silver Chair. In Prince Caspian, Trumpkin shoots a Dumb Bear for food, and numerous characters throughout the Chronicles have bacon. So, eating meat (and even killing to eat meat) doesn’t seem to be a violation of Aslan’s commands. 

What about hunting Dumb Beasts for sport? That certainly seems relevant as even in our world there are non-vegetarians who would come out against the sport of hunting. Actually, it’s Nikabrik who levels the charge of hunting for sport against Prince Caspian and Trufflehunter the Badger who comes to Caspian’s defense. By way of stating his case, Trufflehunter notes the great divide between Talking Beasts like himself and the Dumb Beasts. 

Maybe wearing furs would violate these commands? I don’t think that’s it - everyone seems to wear fur in Narnia, even Father Christmas. 

Perhaps these commands mean not to work the Dumb Beasts or ride them? Well, that can’t be it either: Cor has a pony, Susan has a beautiful horse, Trumpkin has his donkey-chair.

I have to admit, I’m pretty much out of possibilities. In our world (besides the above), we might debate things like using animals for scientific experiments. That actually does have a Narnian parallel in Uncle Andrew’s using guinea pigs to test his rings. Digory points out the unfairness of this, but the exchange does not appear to carry over to Narnia.  

The one place I could recall where we see a hint of these commands coming up is in The Last Battle when Puzzle retrieves the lion skin. Puzzle wants to bury the lion skin rather than wear it as a coat saying, “even if the skin only belonged to a dumb, wild lion, oughtn't we to give it a decent burial? I mean, aren't all lions rather - well, rather solemn? Because of you know Who.” Still, that’s only one place. 

Of course, one may object that the rules are not important. In fact, rules or specified actions would force Narnian religion into dry, ritual, legalism. Aslan’s word provides a moral imperative (perhaps Lewis would say a path towards love), and nothing more is necessary. That seems like a pretty empty argument to me. What moral principle requires nothing for its fulfillment?

It goes without saying that such lack of detail would never stand in traditional Judaism. Myriads of aspects of biblical law, rabbinic decrees and enactments, and even custom have been, and continue to be, subjected to rigorous analysis as legal theory, statutory law, case law, and even mysticism. 

Perhaps such analysis is not necessary in Narnia? 

Well, we still have one more command to analyze…   

Aslan's Inaugural Adress

At first glance it may appear that the comment of Strawberry on which we ended the last post was ignored by Aslan who continues to address his creations. But in fact, a close reading of Aslan’s address demonstrates that he addresses Strawberry directly, Aslan is telling the creatures what they need to know.

Creatures, I give you yourselves. I give to you forever this land of Narnia. I give you the woods, the fruits, the rivers. I give you the stars and I give you myself. The Dumb Beasts whom I have not chosen are yours also. Treat them gently and cherish them but do not go back to their ways lest you cease to be Talking Beasts. For out of them you were taken and into them you can return. Do not do so.

In a few short lines, these inaugural words of Aslan to his creatures synthesize parts of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. In Genesis 1, God gives Adam, “... every seed-bearing plant that is upon all the earth, and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit…” (Genesis 1:29). All of this is given to man as food. In addition, upon creating man, God declares, “They shall rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the cattle, the whole earth, and all the creeping things that creep on earth” (Genesis 1:26). Aslan gives the Talking Beasts, the woods, fruits, rivers, the stars, and even himself (in the bible, God does not give Himself to man, instead, in Genesis 2 God gives Adam a helpmate, we’ll have to try to address this later).

In Genesis 2, God commands man, just as Aslan issues commands. God commands man not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge lest man die (Genesis 2:17) and return to the dust from which he came (Genesis 3:19). Aslan commands the Talking Beasts not to return to the ways of Dumb Beasts from which they have been chosen lest they cease to be Talking Beasts.

It is worth noting a comment of Sforno which brings the Narnian creation story even closer to that of the bible. Clarifying the verse (Genesis 1:26), “Let us make man in our image…,” Sforno interprets that God is advising His Heavenly Court concerning the creature man. This creature had been created with all the rest, but now God sees fit to endow it with His “image” and “likeness.” Like the chosen beasts of Narnia, in this reading the bible also endows with godliness creatures that are first created as one of the beasts.

The two-step process towards godliness is apparently fundamental in creation and requires further explanation.

Returning to Aslan’s commands (remembering that there is at least one more coming up in The Magician’s Nephew), they are the response to Strawberry’s self-doubt. Simple knowledge of oneself and one’s capabilities is not sufficient to fulfill Aslan’s purpose in creating Narnia. Aslan’s commands provide that knowledge. They can be used to distinguish right from wrong, what is proper and appropriate and what is slovenly and unacceptable.

Let’s take a closer look at these commands in our next post.  

Back to Pints with Jack

It's been just about a year since I announced that I was invited as a guest on the podcast Pints with Jack (the interview aired in April and can be listened to here). Apparently, it wasn't bad as I'm happy report that I was invited back,  

For those not familiar, Pints with Jack is a wonderful resource for all things related to C.S. Lewis. Its centerpiece is the podcast hosted by David Bates, Matt Bush, and Andrew Lazo. Every podcast season is dedicated to a different book of Lewis and the hosts do an amazing job exploring and analyzing these works. 

This year the podcast is dedicated to Out of the Silent Planet which is the first of Lewis' Space Trilogy. This is an important book in the development of Lewis' writing in general but particularly for Narnia. Perhaps shockingly many reviewers of Out of the Silent Planet did not realize its theological undertones! This caused Lewis to remark, "any amount of theology can now be smuggled into people’s minds under cover of romance without their knowing it" (note that Lewis uses the classic definition of the term romance).    

Besides the central book of every season, the Pints with Jack podcast hosts review a volume of The Chronicles of Narnia, have dedicated mini-themes related to Lewis, and host a plethora of guests. 

I'm looking forward to discussing with David a new book by theologian P. H. Brazier called, "A Hebraic Inkling" subtitled, "C. S. Lewis on Judaism and the Jews." I must admit that I was not aware of this book until David invited me to talk with him about it and I found its existence somewhat surprising. While there are mentions of Jews and Judaism in Lewis' works, and of course, Lewis eventually married a Christian convert from Judaism, I really didn't think there was much to say on the subject. 

Well, turns out I was wrong, because Brazier has plenty to say. 

So, I don't want to give anything away at this point, but please tune in and we'll probably expand on everything here after the podcast comes out (scheduled once again for April).

We Know

As we have discussed previously, Aslan’s declaration of Narnia consists of three parts: a call awakening Narnia, a series of four commands, and a descriptive fulfillment of Narnia’s awakening with the proclamation to be walking trees, talking beasts, and divine waters.

The response of Narnia’s sentient creatures (talking beasts, dwarfs, dryads, river gods) appears to parallel Aslan’s opening declaration. They salute Aslan and acknowledge and pledge to fulfill his four commands.

The creatures then make one additional assertion, “We know.” 

From the perspective of formulation, this statement is consistent with the creature’s acknowledgements of Aslan’s commands, “We love, we think…” But Aslan does not command the creatures to “Know” as he does to love and think. So, to what end is the creature’s assertion that they know?

Structurally, “We know,” is then in response to the third and final part of Aslan’s declaration, “Be walking trees. Be talking beasts. Be divine waters.” To the creatures to “Be” is to “Know.” The creatures may be reassuring Aslan that they know who and what they are. They know they are walking trees, they know they are talking beasts, and they know they are divine waters. The creatures even know that they love, think, and speak and perhaps even that they do so for Aslan’s command has instilled those capabilities within them.

Is such knowledge enough? 

Is knowing one’s origin and one’s capabilities (as instilled by Aslan) sufficient to fulfill Aslan’s purpose in your creation? 

Is that all that Aslan means when he calls for Narnia to awaken?

It is Strawberry who meekly raises some doubt. Though only as a dream, he has a dim recollection of another world. A world where there seem to be other things to know, but less capability to do so. He faintly remembers work, social interactions, punishments, but also rewards. The work is hard, the social rules mysterious, the punishments painful, but the sweet rewards wonderful.

So he humbly adds, “But please, we don't know very much yet.”

In this new country is there more to know?

Hail Aslan

Hail, Aslan. We hear and obey. We are awake. We love. We think. We speak. We know. 

The response of the talking beasts and other creatures of Narnia to Aslan, is very much in parallel to Aslan’s command. Aslan calls Narnia into being and commands them, the creatures salute him in return and pledge their service. They acknowledge Aslan’s commands to love, think, and speak, and their own capacity to do so.  Finally, they claim to know which does not appear to have a parallel in Aslan’s commands. This latter point will have to be addressed later, for now we concentrate on the creature’s response to being awakened, “We hear and obey.” 

In our last post we noted that the structure of Alsan’s opening speech to the new world of Narnia emphasizes the commands. To “be,” as Alsan asserts, is to be commanded. The creatures submit to being commanded (not necessarily the specific commands as they acknowledge each of those separately) by responding, “We hear and obey.” Aslan commands, the creatures hear his will, and execute. 

The biblical account, however, is different. After Moses descends from Mount Sinai, he tells the Children of Israel the "words of God and his statutes." The Children of Israel simply respond (Exodus 24:3), “We will do,” similar to Lewis’ “we obey.” However, there is no “we will hear.” An explanation as to why not to include a step prior to obedience is as follows. Stating “we will hear” as in we register the sound as comprehensible speech, is a given. Of course, one cannot obey if the command does not register. “We will hear,” may instead imply comprehension, understanding, and agreement. But none of these are necessary. God’s command is sacrosanct and must be obeyed even in the absence of agreement or even comprehension. The straightforward response, "We will do," leaves no room to do anything else.

Interestingly, the Children of Israel do proclaim “we will hear” a few verses later (24:7). After Moses' reading of the Book of the Covenant the Children of Israel declare, “All that God speaks we will do, and we will hear.” This appears to be in the wrong order! Hearing should be before obeying. Ibn Ezra sites two explanations for this order: (1) we will fulfill God’s current commands and hear His future commands, (2) we will perform his positive commands and do (or guard) his negative commands. But perhaps a more straightforward explanation flows from what we said above. Comprehension and understanding of God’s commands has its place, but not at the expense of fulfillment. 

Trees, Beasts, Waters

 Be walking trees. Be talking beasts. Be divine waters

Aslan’s opening proclamation of Narnia may be viewed as three statements in a chiasmus structure (a common biblical literary structure):

1) Narnia, Narnia, Narnia

2)         Awake. Love. Think. Speak.

3) Be walking trees. Be talking beasts. Be divine waters.

 

The first and third statements are declarative, each consisting of three parts. In the first statement each part is simply the call, “Narnia.” In the third statement, each part starts with the word, “Be.” These statements are of one theme, and are written in parallel, they define the country of Narnia. Each call “Narnia” of Aslan is fulfilled by the emergence of life and sentience in the trees, beasts, and waters.

The middle statement is a rendering of four commands each which we have examined in previous posts. 

The chiastic structure emphasizes this middle verse as the purpose of the declarative statements. Narnia is sung/spoken into being so that trees, beasts, and waters can fulfill these divine imperatives. 

Why does Lewis call out the trees, beasts, and waters, as the fulfillment of the call of Narnia? Aslan has already spent much time and effort on the emergence of the beasts as the human parallels of the Narnia creation story. The trees and the water (which simply appear from Aslan’s song) perhaps are meant to demonstrate that nature too reflects the Creator. In our world nature manifests God’s glory, but also, at times, His kindness or anger. Sin can cause a corruption of nature, as our Sages assert occurred in the pre-Deluge world. 

In Narnia, nature is actual creatures with wisdom and free-will. Nature can actively turn against Aslan, as Mr. Beaver says of the trees that have joined “Her side,” or as the dwarfs who are forgetful after the Telmarine conquest. Interestingly, as noted in our post on dwarfs, it is the humanlike beasts who don’t forget and eventually teach the Sons of Earth to worship Aslan and awaken the trees to fight in Aslan’s army. Humanity must guard and care for nature, and ensure it lives up to its divine inspiration.  

However, this environmental approach to Aslan’s statement goes beyond merely the importance of nature in Lewis’ worldview and our need to cherish it. By invoking a chiasmus structure, Lewis teaches us that all of Creation is subject to God’s commands. To be is to be commanded by God. 

Think. Speak.

After sharing with his creations the ideal of love, Aslan directs them in the tools they will need to bring this about, namely thought and speech. While certainly action will also be necessary to attain a love of God and the love of their fellows, it is thought and speech that separate the sentient beings from the Dumb Beasts. This is true for only by thought and (in general) appropriate counsel can an action be so prescribed as to attain a desired result.

Though the biblical account does not explicitly call out speech or thought in the story of creation it was inserted into the story by the earliest of the Jewish commentaries. In doing so, the creation of man is imbued with an aura of imitatio dei lacking from Lewis’ retelling. Let me explain.

In translating the original Hebrew text of the verse, “and man became a living creature,” the Targum states, “and man became a spirit of speech/thought.” The classic commentators discuss whether the Targum refers primarily to speech or to thought. R’ Bahya invokes the Targum’s translation when speaking of the power of speech as that of life or death. In contrast the commentary Akeidat Yitzchak clearly states that the Targum is first and foremost referencing thought (inner speech), but that speech per se is its partner in that it is the mode of revealing one’s thoughts.

In the biblical account of creation God creates the world via speech. This is noted by the Psalmist (33:6), “By the word of God the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth, all of their host.” When God blows into man the soul of life and transforms him into a “spirit of speech” He bequeaths to man the power to create. God created via speech and man, using God’s gift, may also create.

In Lewis’ account of creation, Alsan creates via song. And while the stars sing creating the music of the spheres, the creatures (be they beast, man, or dwarf) do not. They are thus lacking this connection to Aslan.

In fact, there is precious little singing in the Chronicles of Narnia. There are birds singing at various points. The revelers set to join the Old Narnian army to fight Miraz sing, as do the dwarfs in defiance of Rishda Tarkaan. The mer-people sing to honor the coronation of the Pevensies. But the only other singing of praise, akin to the music of the spheres, is the song of Ramandu (the star) and his daughter in praise of Aslan. Of course, there is also very little prayer in the Chronicles of Narnia. Maybe we can address that in a later post.