The Pillars of Freemasonry – From The Builder Magazine April 1926

 By BRO. N. W. J. HAYDON, Associate Editor, Canada

Sourced By Martin Solis, Staff Writer

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 Absalom; 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 shriveled 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 Shiva.  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., Secretary 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, 33rd 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) The Early History and Antiquities of Freemasonry, by George F. 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.