THE BUILDER APRIL 1926

The Pillars of Freemasonry

By BRO. N. W. J. HAYDON,

There are altogether ten pillars in Masonic usage, outside the
temple or lodge room, three within it and five in its symbolic
content. The first five are present at all times; the second five
are employed for but one special purpose. As might be supposed,
most of our interest and discussion gathers the first two, the
famous brazen pillars that marked the chief entrance to the Temple
of King Solomon, the position and significance of which have caused
unlimited argument.

There two descriptions in the V.S.L. of the temple and its
components, one in I Kings, chap. 7, and the other in II
Chronicles, chap. 4, which, while appearing to disagree with each
other, are said to give the inner and outer dimensions of this
building and its several parts, so that without either of them it
would be impossible to get a correct image of what that famous
building might have been when completed.

The names of these two were first given prominence as to their
Masonic connection by a man named Goodall, who published one of the
earliest so-called exposures in 1762, under the title "Jachin and
Boaz." Thackery, too, poked fun at the "terrors of Jachin and Boaz"
in his "Book of Snobs." There are at least three points in
connection with these pillars that have been fruitful causes of
dispute and the first is, perhaps, the strangest since the records
are so clear and should be equally well known. These points are
their position, their use, exact nature of their capitals. As to
the first, the arguments rest on whether the record is based on the
act of approaching the temple or of leaving it. I have heard
brethren argue stoutly that because the description says "the
porchway or entrance" to the temple, therefore the position of the
pillars must be that seen by one coming towards it, otherwise--say
they -- the word exit, or its equivalent, would have been used. On
that basis the pillar on the right hand, known as Jachin, and on
the left hand known as Boaz, would be on the north and south sides
of the entrance. Then there are those who oppose this opinion,
holding that the description applies when standing between the
pillars and looking out upon the court with its great altar and ten
basins for washing the sacrifices.

All this argument has been nothing better than vocal exercise, as
the sacred record states in both descriptions that the "right side"
meant "eastward, over against the south," thus making it quite
clear that Jachin was placed on the south of the porch and Boaz on
the north, or as they would be seen by an observer who stood in the
door of the temple looking outwards. Again, we read in Ezekiel
47-1, that "the forefront of the house stood towards the East, and
the waters came down from under the right side of the house, at the
South side of the Altar." A fourth witness to this is Josephus, who
officiated in the third temple built by Herod the Great, and
witnessed its destruction by the Romans. From his writings we learn
that when Herod decided to rival the work of Solomon, and pulled
down the existent building, he kept careful record of the position
of the material so that, while rebuilding on the original site to
preserve the continuity of the edifice, he also ensured so far as
was humanly possible that his work should be an exact copy of its
famous original. (1) We read in his record that "the left side was
that towards the north wind, and the right side towards the south,"
thus leaving no grounds for any further argument on the subject.

As to the symbolic values of these pillars, or the special purposes
they served, there are various theories. One is that being hollow
they were used to contain the archives of the nation. But it is
incredible that a column twenty-seven feet high and six feet in
diameter, without any opening save at the top, which was left
uncovered, would be used for such a purpose, because of the evident
difficulties attendant thereon, especially if it became necessary
to consult a document. (2) Another is that they were intended to
remind the Israelites of the pillars of fire and smoke by which
their flight from Egypt was expedited, and such use is not foreign
to their national customs, as we read several times of pillars,
mounds and altars being raised to commemorate special events. This
usage continues today, in the common use of a broken pillar in
cemeteries and obituary notices as an emblem of death. Be this as
it may, it is undeniable that the setting up of columns at the
porches of temples was a familiar custom among the Phoenicians, who
built this one, and who were also a much older people than the
Israelites. They, in their turn, were taught by, or borrowed from,
the Egyptians and Assyrians whose custom it was from pre-historic
times, as proven by evidence still in existence.

There is, however, just ground for criticism of the idea that the
left pillar commemorated a man named Boaz and the right another
named Jachin. To begin with the Mosaic law strictly prohibited the
Israelites from raising or making images of any living thing, and
a pillar could as easily be considered an image of a man as of the
membrum virile. There is, I believe, only one exception on record
of this rule being transgressed, which was done by Ahsalom; but he
was a wild young rake who sought notoriety and came to a violent
and deserved ending. Moreover, that Boaz, or as some rabbis hold,
Ibzan, (3) who was a judge in Bethlehem (Judges 12-8), was a
great-grandfather of David is not sufficient reason for his name
being held in honor. For, like each one of us, David must have had
three other great-grandfathers and of them we know nothing. Nor is
the rabbinical tradition that although Boaz was eighty years old
when he married Ruth and, dying the day after his marriage, yet
succeeded in leaving her with child, anything out of the ordinary
for that time and people, if the Hebrew records are correct. It is
rather the story of Ruth that has immortalized her husband as a
sort of side issue, just as modern husbands are simply a part of
the furnishings in the weddings they help to bring about! No, we
must look elsewhere for a reasonable explanation.

Then as regards Jachin, why should the name of one who was only an
"assistant high priest" (4) be so remembered and none of the
others, not even the High Priest himself? The V.S.L. does not name
any of the priests who attended the dedication and, in the time of
David there were twenty-four families of them, of whom a Jachin
(named in I Chron. 24-17) was in the twenty first--nearly at the
last in order of importance. (5) It is true there were Assistant,
or Second, or Vice-High Priests in the temple service, of whom we
read in Jeremiah 52-24 that 'they served in the High Priest's stead
if he had any necessarie impediment"; but these would be occasional
official impurities, which would be disregarded in the case of the
laity.

But even this explanation is rather far-fetched seeing how vastly
important this dedication would be to all Israelites, so that the
High Priest's presence would be indispensable, and I feel that the
origin for these names, as given, is as unreliable as many of the
other "historical" details which accompany them, and which appear
to have arisen from the intense desire of early Masonic writers,
headed by Dr. Oliver, to force the whole system on to an Old
Testament basis, regardless of anything else. We can, however, get
a plausible reason for these names if we examine them simply as
Hebrew words. "Bo" means in him or in it and "Az" means strength,
so that the word is quite appropriate as meaning the sentence "In
Him (it) is Strength" whether referring to the temple as the
embodiment of religious strength or to the Deity as the source of
all strength. A similar explanation can be given to Jachin--"Jah"
(or Jehovah) and "Chin", which means will establish or make firm,
so that the two pillars in front could properly serve to represent
a pious motto, such as we often see painted over chancels, namely,
"God will establish it (this temple) in strength." This can be met
with the criticism that we are reading a modern meaning into an
ancient practice, and it does not account for the similar use of
pillars by older nations, which was copied in this instance. The
suggestion is made (6) that since the Hebrews used certain letters
as figures for commercial and other purposes, as did the Greeks and
Romans, the names given these pillars represent numerical symbolic
values. We learn from many sources that there grew into being an
elaborate system of symbolism in the use of Hebrew letters, known
as Gematria, and, according to this, the numbers representing the
Unspeakable Name were so used for purposes of worship where secrecy
was required. We find a similar method in early Christian times,
when the picture of a fish contained the whole of a creed which it
was death to profess openly. (7)

It is interesting to notice that in the Grand Lodge of England,
prior to the Union, both words were used, but not spoken, being
pointed out to the E. A. after he had been sworn. Also that between
1743 and 1766 the use of these words was reversed to offset the
numerous exposures which had been published. This reversal was one
of the innovations objected to by many brethren who finally
organized themselves in 1753 into the Grand Lodge of the Ancients,
but the Act of Union in 1813 between the two Grand Lodges confirmed
the original practice.

At least one other feature of our methods with these pillars is
open to contention, and that is the placing of globes upon their
capitals. This is another piece of foolishness, which seems to be
here to stay. The Israelites knew nothing about terrestrial and
celestial globes, or even that the world was round. For them, as
for many other peoples, the earth was a flat place surrounded by
water, for the benefit of which the sun, moon and stars pursued
their courses. The Hebrew word here translated globe is "Keteret",
which really means a crown, (8) or perhaps a bowl, and might well
be equivalent to the baskets set on the heads of the statues that
as columns support some of the Greek temples. The most probable
explanation is that these globes are descended from the winged
discs set by the Egyptians over the doorways of their temples,
which represented both the soul of man on the path of evolution and
the Lord of Day in his work of beneficence to the earth. (9)

An astronomical theory as to their use has been well supported by
illustrated articles in THE BUILDER for September, 1922, and
October, 1923, and another reasonable theory is that the
Israelites, being a theocracy and government equally by King and
Priest, used Jachin as a Royal or Coronation Pillar by which the
monarch stood to be anointed, of which instances are given in the
V.S.L. and Boaz similarly at the consecration of the High Priest.
(10) One other interpretation should not be omitted, if only
because of its very real antiquity. I refer to that direct worship
of the Great Architect of which we have today only a decadent
remnant in the use of phallic symbols. For this purpose either
Jachin or Boaz could well serve, as in the old rituals, since such
a position requires strength for the establishment of the race. But
there have been nations as there is today a church, where the
female line of descent is more valued than the male and the symbol
of the Vesica Piscis is their equivalent to the two pillars.

Then again, we pass to initiation between two pillars at the porch
of the temple, and in II Esdras, 7-7, the path to Wisdom and Life
is said to lie between Fire and Water and to be so narrow and
painful that only one may pass through at a time. (18) If our
symbolism is correctly interpreted by finding in the human body the
type of the lodge wherein are taken the experiences that lead to
spiritual birth and illumination, then we can see wherein our
entrance to that lodge comes with pain and travail through the
passage from our mother's womb during the mystery of childbirth,
between the pillars that support it, so that even in what has
become a commonplace of physical life, we can find the workbench
and tools of the Great Architect. Had we but a little of the
clearer vision that comes with purity of thought and conscience,
perhaps we might even see Him at work and copy Him the more
faithfully.

The next set of pillars to be considered are generally spoken of as
the Three Columns to avoid confusion with the Two Pillars. These
are the Ionic, Doric and Corinthian and are used to symbolize the
qualities of Wisdom, Strength and Beauty and the officers to whom
these should most fittingly apply, namely, the Master and his
Wardens. They should not be confused with the Wardens' columns
which are raised or lowered as occasion requires, nor with their
pedestals, which are but the shrivelled remnants of their personal
work benches. It is difficult to account for this pairing of a
specific style of architecture with a definite quality of mind. Our
oldest catechism gives us the qualities only and we are indebted to
the work of Preston for the additions from Greek architecture.
Browne had the same allocation of orders to qualities as Preston,
but does not seem to have copied him. Finch (1802) has Ionic
instead of Tuscan, and is hardly likely to have been influenced by
Webb, though he used the Tuscan in place of the Doric. The change
to the present usage was made by Webb for the United States work
(at least we first find it in his Monitor) and later by Hemming for
the English. (19) If they were based on seniority of style, then
the Doric comes first as being the oldest of the Greek orders,
since it dates from at least 650 B. C. and is closely akin to that
of contemporary Egypt as shown by certain tombs at Thebes. This is
the style used in building that architectural marvel known as the
Parthenon and was best exemplified by the work of Pericles. Its
oldest example, a temple at Corinth, shows a proportion of only one
to four between diameter and height, but this gradually increases,
as can be seen in the temple of Zeus at Aegina, built about a
century later, where it is one to five and a half, and finally in
the Parthenon, where it is one to six. (11)

A Scandinavian origin for these pillars is claimed in the statement
that Odin, Thor and Freya had always a pillar by their altars,
symbolic of their cosmic qualities, which were also Wisdom,
Strength and Beauty, and that the last named had also a sheaf of
wheat hung over her pillar as, being Mother Nature, she was
productive as well as beautiful. (12) However, Bro. Fort does not
give any examples of the appearance of these pillars, and his
theory does not appear to have been accepted. It has also been
noted that the holy altars and places of Hinduism are supported by
three pillars in honor of Brahma, Vishnu and siva. After the Doric
comes in point of age the Ionic and the Corinthian. The Ionic took
its name from its being used, almost exclusively, by the people of
Ionia. Its earliest example is the famous temple of the Wingless
victory, NIKE APTEROS, which dates from about 470 B. C. The great
temple of Diana at Ephesus and of the Dionysian Artificers at Teos,
were built in this style. Its special feature was a greater height
than the Doric, its proportion being one to nine, and the use of a
sort of ram's horn curve for its capitals, known as volutes. These
latter appear to have come from Nineveh and may have evolved from
the heads of bulls and horses which were carved as capitals on
their columns by the Assyrian sculptors, whose influence is to be
seen in the work of the Dionysians who traveled through part, at
least, of the territory included in that ancient empire. (13) The
statement is made that the Doric was modeled on the figure of a
sturdy young man and the Corinthian on that of a slender virgin,
but I have not found any technical authority for it, though I am
informed it is taken from vitruvius. The symbolic value of this
pillar may have been based on the technical skill required to carve
the volutes correctly. The Corinthian order is better described as
sumptuous or magnificent, rather than as beautiful, for beauty is
frequently simple, which this column is not. It is said to have
been invented by a sculptor named Callimachus about 400 B. C., from
the curves of an acanthus leaf. Its proportion is one to ten, and
it has a fluted shaft which fills the eye with a sense of elegance
and harmonious proportion.

It is suggested that the use of these pillars was due to the
classical renaissance which followed the death of the Operative
gild system, as is seen by the general tone of the polite
literature of that time, which was padded with quotations from the
Greek and Roman authors. There can be no doubt that many members of
our Order were drawn from those who read and wrote this sort of
matter since the Fraternity had become fashionable through the
admission of royalty and members of the nobility to its ranks. (14)
Still that does not explain why the quality of the Master as Wisdom
to instruct his craftsmen should be shown in the Ionic column, or
the Strength of the Wages paid by the Senior Warden shown by the
Doric column, or the Beauty of the noon-tide rest and refreshment
supplied by the Junior Warden, shown by the Corinthian, even though
we can all agree that Wisdom is required to contrive, Strength to
support, and Beauty to adorn, both the lodge and the member. The
crucial point for a Research Society is not so much the theoretical
duties of the lodge officers as the fitness of their symbols. In
this connection we read "In a primitive trestle-board, the Blazing
star represented Beauty, and was called the Glory in the Centre,
being placed exactly in the middle of the Floor Cloth." (15) The
same author states in this book, too, that Dunckerley was
authorized by Grand Lodge to construct a new Code of Lectures by a
careful revision of the ritual then in use. This, however, is
denied by a later writer, (16); who says there is "nothing in the
Transactions of the Hall Committee to warrant any such conclusion."
(This Committee was the first Board of General Purposes.) The
unnamed writer of Lecture VIII in Oliver's "Masonic Institutes"
states that "The mighty pillars on which Masonry is founded are
those whose basis is Wisdom, whose shaft is Strength, and whose
chapiter is Beauty," thus making all three similar in their
symbolic values and leaving the necessity for three to be served by
their introduction as memorials of the "three founders of the
Order," viz., Solomon and the two Hirams.

Lastly we have the five symbolic pillars, each an example of the
five Noble Orders of Architecture, but ' without any definite
attributes other than those already mentioned for the three of
Greek origin. There are' various ceremonial quintettes in
Freemasonry, but we are left to apply them as we please, an
unfortunate lapse in a claim to a systematic illustration by
symbol. The two additional pillars, Tuscan and Composite, are
stated to be of Roman origin and, of the former, it is said "The
Simplicity of the Construction of this Column renders it eligible
where solidity is the chief object and where ornament would be
superfluous." (17) Although it contains the divine proportion of
seven to one, it may still be said to represent all primitive
peoples and states generally, in having Strength without Beauty,
this being a usual feature of immaturity. Of the Composite we find
that, like the Corinthian, it" is built on a ten to one basis, but
differs from it by adding double the ornamental features of both
this capital and that of the Ionic. It might be considered to
represent any decadent civilization which has lost its sense of
proportion and, like immaturity, confuses "better" with "more." It
shows us Beauty without Wisdom and reminds us of those unfortunate
men and women whose empty minds cannot teach them to grow old
gracefully, but whose wealth makes them victims of beauty doctors
and other imposters who fatten on human vanities.

There is a curious theory of the sort for which our Speculative
ancestors have been burnt at the stake, that as our physical body
has ten extensions, each caused by a definite need, though today we
make no complete use of them, so our sensory apparatus contains ten
extensions whereby we shall become fully conscious of our
surroundings, though today we are familiar with but five, the
"sixth sense" being in evidence only here and there and the rest
latent. It may be that our ritual makers builded better than they
knew, and that the finished plan of the Great Architect will need
ten pillars, or types of mind, for its full accomplishment.
Certainly it is not for us to set any limits as to that. But we can
well afford to say "it may be so" since as a theory it does no
violence either to those present facts on which our faith must be
built, or to the processes of reason, which all Masons should
follow, whereby our faith is reinforced.

If it be admitted that, as Bro. Wilmshurst says, (18) "the purpose
of all initiation is to lift human consciousness from lower to
higher levels by quickening the latent, spiritual, potentialities
in man to their fullest extent through appropriate discipline. No
higher level of attainment is possible than that in which the human
merges in the Divine consciousness and knows as God knows," then
one may justly claim for our ten pillars, as for all the other
symbolic decades, from the Sephiroth down to our fingers and toes,
the property of representing, through their own proper duties,
these dormant powers of the now half-awakened divine man, the
appropriate disciplines by which they will be aroused, and the
tools wherewith their purposes will be served in meeting the
requirements of the Master Builder.

NOTES

(1) A Lecture on the Two Pillars, by J. T. Thorpe, P.M., Secretory
of the Leicester Lodge of Research.
(2) W. Bro. Rev. F. de P. Castells, A. K. C., sheds light on this,
as on other Masonic problems, in his "Apocalypse of Freemasonry,"
recently published. He suggests that the outer surface of these
pillars, like that of "Cleopatra's Needle", were used for the
inscription of historical events. In that way they might well carry
rather than "contain" the archives of the nation. This suggestion
is sufficiently simple to be probable, as the unadorned area of
their shafts would be quite large.
(3) The Pillars of Freemasonry, by Wm. Harvey, P.M., J.P., F.S.A.,
Scotland.
(4) I am informed that the word used here (Ontario) fifty years ago
was "Ancient," not "Assistant." This would be much more
appropriate, and is most probably correct as this officer could
hardly be a young man.
(5) Masonic Names and Words, by Rev. Morris Rosenbaum, P.M.; also
Evidences of Freemasonry From Hebrew Sources, by Rabbi Chumaceiro.
(6) Beginning of Masonry, by Frank C. Higgins.
(7) Fellowcrafts' Handbook, by J.S.M. Ward, B.A., F.S.S. Another
most illuminating suggestion comes from Bro. The Hon. Sir John
Cockburn, M.D., K.C.M.G., P.D.G.M., of South Australia, namely,
that in the course of oral transmission foreign words become so
corrupt in form that they cease to be intelligible and, in
consequence, attempts are made to replace them by words whose
meaning is known and whose shape, or sound, is similar to that of
the corrupted word. Many Masonic students suspect that this has
occurred in our rituals, and Sir John thinks that the original name
attached to these pillars were the Greek names Iacchus and Boue.
Iacchus, or Bacchu was the God of Youth and of the procreative
powers, who in some of the Grecian mysteries was slain and rose
again. Boue means the primeval chaos, the dark womb of time, and so
the womb of all mothers. This is somewhat confirmed by the practice
of the Supreme Council, 33d of France, in giving to its members an
interpretation of important words in Freemasonry wherein "J" is
explained as the phallus and "B" as the womb. This would indicate
that from the descent of the divine life into the womb of substance
was brought forth all natural forms of life.
(8) The Perfect Ashlar, by Rev. J. T. Lawrence, M. A.
(9) Mysteries of Freemasonry, by John Fellows.
(10) Solomon's Temple, by Rev. Shaw Caldecott
(11) Story of Architecture, by C. A. Mathews, or similar works
(12) Antiquities of Freemasonry, by Fort.
(13) A Study of the Dionysian Artificers, by Da Costa.
(14) The Keystone, by Rev. J. T. Lawrence, M. A., also Revelations
of a Square, by Rev. Geo. Oliver, D. D.
(15) The Symbol of Glory, Lecture XI, by Rev. Geo. Oliver, D. D.
(16) Live, Labors and Letters of Thomas Dunckerley, by Henry
Sadler.
(17) Freemasons' Manual, by Jeremiah How, K. T., 30d.
(18) The Meaning of Masonry, by W. L. Wilmshurst.
(19) I am indebted for this information to the Editor of THE
BUILDER.
