God. This death Ahithophel underwent, not by any sentence of law, but by his choice, upon some private consideration; and though he avoided the ignominy of such a sentence, yet the ignominy of the death was not to be avoided; because it was accounted an ignominious and accursed death, and was appointed for notorious malefactors. But the use we may make of his choosing this particular rather than any other way of dying is very little, unless we may observe how far the wisest men are blinded by their passions, when, to avoid some shame, they run into courses that directly lead to it. The thing to be principally considered, is, not why he died in this manner, but why he died at all; what right he had to put an end to his life by hanging himself: for, to do this without blame, a man must be at perfect liberty both by the laws of God and man, and independent on them both: there must be no obligation on him, either from the law of nature and right reason, or from the revealed law of God, or from his lawful superiors upon earth: for if any of these withhold his hands, he cannot innocently lay them on himself. Now, as to the law of nature condemning this practice, I do not so much appeal to that innate love of life, and fear of death, which is generally implanted in all men's hearts, (for these men, being freed from these affections, will deny their power,) as to that general abhorrence that all nations of the world have had that practice in: and the more wise, more civil and polite those nations have been esteemed, the more they have condemned it; which if it be not a proof of the reasonableness of any doctrine, we shall never find what is. And though there be a great many examples, both of Greeks and Romans, even in their best times, that fell by their own hands, upon some pressing extremities, yet their rules, their laws, and their reasonings were all against it. And those examples against their rules are of no more authority to countenance such a practice, than the example of men committing any other wickedness will countenance such other wickedness, against their reason, and against express command of God. Their rules and their laws were against adultery, and rapes, and violence, oppression, exaction, and all injustice; and yet their great ones were guilty of them all, when they found their opportunities: and their historians often mention them

without reproach or blame; and some were still found that would call their impure liberties gallantries and fine freedoms; and their oppressions, conquests; and their unjust invasions of kingdoms, glorious ambition, and enlargement of empire. But a man would be much mistaken if he thought that this was the judgment of their wise and sober writers, or of the grave and serious part that governed them; or that such practices were countenanced by their laws and rules of living. This I mention, to obviate that objection, that many passages are found in the writings of these people, in commendation of such, as, to avoid some great calamity, have put an end to their lives by their own hands; for that will always happen, that men of loose principles should have false notions of liberty and honour and great courage, and should accordingly commend such practice as is conformable to such loose principles. And we, who live in an age where everything is justified by some poor writer or another, though never so extravagant, impious, and unreasonable, should not be hard to believe, that so it has been heretofore with other people, and so will be hereafter: and yet we should be loath to have posterity believe that this was the sense, the reason, the understanding, and the judgment of our age in the general. We must consult the wise, the sober, and the serious writers of the times, the laws, the rules, and reasonings of the grave and governing part of a nation, to understand their true sense of matters of moment: and from them we shall learn, that selfmurder was evermore an abhorred practice among them; that whatever pretence it made to great honour, magnanimity, and courage, it was indeed but an effect of cowardice and fear, and a mark of a poor impatient spirit, that sunk under the common calamities of life, and knew not how to bear misfortunes; that it was disobedience and impiety, to desert the station that their Supreme Commander gave them to maintain, and act apparently against their Sovereign's order. I trouble you not with the particulars, because there is no need it is certain, the considering, virtuous, and religious part of mankind have all along been of this opinion, and condemned the practice of those, who, to free themselves from some misfortunes, have ended their days, before their time, by violence; and it would be no great wonder, if more examples,

and more defenders of this practice were found among the Gentiles than there are, because they were, many of them, atheists, or believers in so many gods, that it almost came to the same thing: and to them, who acknowledge no supreme Power who governs the world, and to whom men are accountable for what they do, it is a vain thing to talk of the laws of nature, and right reason; for let them be never so plain and clear, they will go for nothing, where they may be transgressed without fear of being vindicated by any power or punishment. And doubtless, if a man believes he has nobody hereafter to account to, he will fear no master or superior here, from whom he knows he can escape so easily by death. But we are now supposing the belief of God, and upon that bottom affirm, that a man cannot be so much master of his life, as to throw it away at pleasure, without regard to that will of his, which appears to be written in our hearts, forbidding such a practice; of which, the concurring consent of the wisest lawgivers, and writers of the wisest and most civilized people, of all ages, is, I think, one very good proof.

As to any declaration of the will of God, in this particular, in the written revelation; it is not to be expected there should be a single prohibition of every single sin that a man can commit; it is sufficient, if there be general prohibitions that include them all. And such is, in this case, that general one, of, Thou shalt do no murder; which secures the life of every man and woman in the world, whose life is not obnoxious, by some other command, to be taken away: as, the laws, for instance, punish theft and other crimes with death, notwithstanding the sixth commandment; because men commit other offences, to which death is due by other laws of equal force with the law against murder. But it is murder still, to take away any one's life, and an offence against the sixth commandment, if that life be not forfeited by some other law of equal force and obligation with this against murder.

But these commands do all respect our neighbour only; and they who murder themselves know and confess they are tied by the sixth commandment not to murder any one else. To this it may be answered, that this is downright to beg the question in hand; for if the letter and the sense of the com

mand will reach a man's self as well as his neighbour, why should not the commandment include ourselves? A man is murdered when he murders himself, and the command prohibits murder: and though the commandments of the second table do especially refer to our neighbour, yet not exclusively of ourselves: we may not bear false witness against ourselves, no more than against our neighbour; because the truth is hurt thereby, and some wrong done by such a testimony; so that where it is possible for the commandments to take in our own case, there they will do so, as well as our neighbour's. But to make the matter plain, let it be taken for supposed, that both the sixth and the rest of the commandments of the second table respect our neighbour only; and we may ask, whether by neighbour is not to be understood any one that is truly injured by our offence, as well as the party most immediately concerned? The seventh commandment, for example, is, Thou shalt not commit adultery. When a wicked man falls into this commission, and abuses his neighbour's bed, does he only offend against the partner of his sin, the adulterous woman, or also against the injured husband? does he not also offend against his own wife, if he have one? does he not offend against the parents and relations also of his wicked accomplice, dishonouring their name and house; and filling the family with grief and shame and much confusion? When a man steals, against the eighth commandment, does he only offend against the party whom he immediately wrongs, or also against those who suffer by that wrong? When one bears false testimony, against the ninth commandment, and thereby defeats a man's title to his estate, his office, or employ, does he not offend against the wife and children of that man who lived by that estate or office or employ, as well as against the man and master of that family? You see then that the commandment respects more than one party under the notion of neighbour, even all that are injured by that transgression. Now I ask, whether this does not happen also, in breaking the sixth commandment, by murdering one's neighbour? are not the wife and children and the family made very miserable by such a death? and I ask again, whether the same mischief does not follow to one's own family by a self-murder as to another family by the murder of another? and if it do, it is

certain that the sixth commandment forbids self-murder as sure as it does the murder of another; because it forbids the consequences of self-murder (which are shame, and grief, and loss, and pain, and injury, and all sorts of mischiefs) as certainly as it forbids the consequences of murdering any one besides; because a man is no more at liberty to injure and afflict his own house and relations than the house and relations of a stranger. If therefore he offend against his neighbour, even all that are injured by his offence, as well as the single party injured more immediately; it is manifest he also offends against his neighbour, even all his own house, relations, and dependants, by taking away his own life; since (as I said) the consequences are the same, and full as calamitous, to my own family, by such a stroke, as they would be to another family, if I should by a murder deprive it of a like relation. If therefore a man were at full liberty, as to any express command of God, to do that violence to himself, yet he would be obliged to withhold his hand, by many other commands of God, which forbid the doing so much mischief to other people as such a violence does always do. There is therefore nothing gained to this cause by alleging the sixth commandment does not forbid self-murder, as relating to our neighbour only, i. e. to other people; because it is manifest, our neighbours, other people, are exceedingly mischiefed by the breach of it in self-murder. The mistake in all these cases seems to be this, at the bottom, the thinking the commands of the second table refer to one neighbour only, namely, the party concerned immediately in the injury, whereas they do undoubtedly refer to all neighbours that are, by a natural and easy consequence, concerned and injured: as, the wife in the husband, the husband in the wife, the parents in the children, and the children in the parents; and so in all relations, more or less. And therefore if the commands of God, prohibiting adultery, theft, and false-witness, are understood to prohibit not only the single acts, but also the mischievous and wicked consequences of those acts, which are natural and unavoidable; it is plain the sixth commandment does the like, and therefore forbids self-murder, unless it can be separated from all those mischievous and wicked consequences that unavoidably follow that practice.