POSTSCRIPT.

In endeavouring to perform the very honourable task assigned to me, I have had to contend all along with the difficulty of comprising in six what would require many more lectures properly to relate. Much which was actually prepared I have been forced to omit, consoling myself with the thought that, after all, I had simply to lecture and not to write a compendious treatise, and that it was my business to sketch as truthfully as I could what it was simply impossible, within the limits prescribed, adequately to depict. It was originally my intention to give in parallel quotations the alleged similarities between the contents of the Pitakas and the New Testament, but the conditions of time and space compelled me to be content with references to specimens of them in theSacred Books of the East, from which any ordinary English reader may be able to form a judgment concerning them. Moreover, when well on with the work, I discovered that a much more thorough examination of Professor Seydel’sBuddhist-Christian Harmonythan I could profess to make had already been published by Professor Kellogg of Allegheny,U.S., in his book on theLight of Asia and the Light of the World. An Indian missionary of eleven years’ experience, and the author of an excellent Grammar of the Hindi language, can write upon this subject, not only with greater authority, but to much better purpose, than one who only knows Indian books through the medium of European translations, and who has not seldom been compelled to take on trust what he felt strongly inclined to question. If Dr. Kellogg’s book is not extensively read in this country, it certainly deserves to be.

Our sketch has been confined to Buddhism as a religion and as an ethical system. The philosophy which has grown out of it, and especially the psychology which lies at the base of its original dogmas, would require a large volume to expound. A great field is open here for those who have the ability and the leisure to cultivate it; and though good work has already been done in it, we may be convinced that, until this psychology has been more thoroughly investigated, we must continue in uncertainty as to what original Buddhism was. Though much has been written upon the origin and growth of Buddhism, the first authoritative words are only now beginning to be spoken by the learned translators of the Pali texts; and thoughthey have dispelled illusions and corrected false impressions not a few, we cannot affirm that there is a strong consensus of opinion among them as to the life and teaching of the founder of Buddhism. One is greatly impressed by the modest hesitation with which they have presented their views, but this very diffidence makes one fear that we may be attributing to Buddha sayings which he never uttered, or that we have drawn from them inferences which he would have disowned.

In working out a sketch like this, the temptation constantly besetting one is to compare or contrast actual Buddhism with ideal Christianity.

I have endeavoured to bear in mind that our modern religion may in many features grossly misrepresent that of its Divine Author, and, indeed, that “Christianity has all along been much embarrassed in being obliged to apologise for Christendom.”[401]In like manner I have tried to make plain the great distinction between the original system of Buddha and that which very soon came to be known by his name. An Oriental will certainly misjudge Christianity if he derives his knowledge of it from mediæval theology or from some nineteenth-century sermons; and we may unconsciously commit the same mistake in ascribing to the primitive dogmas the interpretation put upon them by its laterschools.[402]I have read several books in which this mistake was flagrant, and I should be extremely sorry to follow their bad example. In the present state of our knowledge, however, and until the earliest texts have been accurately ascertained, and sifted, and classified, this, to a certain extent, is inevitable, and therefore excusable. If I have failed in my attempt to portray accurately even the salient features of this great religion, it has been from no desire to caricature it. The days have surely passed when it could be said that we were “too infatuated by a sense of the superiority of our own to make a fair survey of other religions.”[403]It is our duty, and it will be for our interest, to do justice to them, and, instead of being content with the schoolboy’s endeavour to prove them false, we should seek carefully among the ruins of the most degraded of them for all the elements of truth we can discover. It is in this direction that we must proceed if we would find solid foundations for a true Christian theology, and the more we address ourselves to the work the more likely shall we be to convince the Church of the proper value of the Faith deposited in its keeping, and to rouse it to realise its destiny and fulfil its glorious mission to the world.

In correcting these sheets for the press, I have often been sensible of my great obligations to a very highly valued personal friend, whose goodness was as remarkable as his learning. May I be forgiven if, in gratitude for his kind and generous help in these very studies, given now long ago, I desire to keep alive the memory of this justly esteemed Sanskrit scholar, by adding this little stone to his cairn, and adorning my book with the name of Dr. John Muir.

Printed byT.andA. Constable, Printers to Her Majesty,at the Edinburgh University Press.

Footnotes

1.Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung,Pref.xiii.

2.Professor Max Müller, Gifford Lectures for 1888, onNatural Religion,p.11.

3.T. W.Rhys Davids, Hibbert Lectures, 1881, “On the Origin and Growth of Religion as illustrated by some points in the History of Indian Buddhism,”p.10.

4.Max Müller,Introduction to the Science of Religion,p.38.

5.Johnv.39.

6.Baring Gould,Origin and Development of Religious Belief,vol.i.p.121.

7.Westcott,Victory of the Cross,pp.3, 6.

8.T. W.Rhys Davids estimates the number at five hundred millions (Handbook of Buddhism,p.6). The previous general estimate was about four hundred millions; but Dr.A. J.Happer, missionary at Canton for forty-five years, reduces this number to seventy-three millions. Sir Monier Williams, in his recent book on Buddhism, quoting Professor Legge’s introduction toTravels of Fa-Hian, calculates the number at one hundred millions, and claims for Christianity, with its four hundred and thirty millions of adherents, the numerical preponderance over all others.

9.T. W.Rhys Davids,Buddhism,pp.4, 7; Sir Monier Williams,Buddhism,p.171.

10.Dr. Caird,Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion, Croall Lectures, 1878-9,pp.82seq.;T. W.Rhys Davids, Hibbert Lectures, 1881,On the Origin and Growth of Religion as illustrated by Buddhism,p.7.

11.To draw proper inferences from statistics of the spread and supremacy of a religion, we must first investigate the circumstances in which it was propagated, and the intellectual and moral conditions of the peoples whom it has converted. If it has gained only the belief ofonesection of the human race, it is evidently not entitled to rank with another which proves itself influential amongallsections. A religion dominant only overinferiorraces is manifestly of less value than another which, while satisfying the wants of the lowest and most degraded peoples, is yet fulfilling the spiritual aspirations of thehighest. The first, if in any way related to the second, can only be so as preparatory and prophetic of the mission which the second alone can accomplish.

12.Sacred Books of the East,vol.i.Introd.

13.Köppen,Die Religion des Buddha,s.231;J.Barthelemy Saint-Hilaire,Le Bouddha, etc.,pp.78, 144, 181; Spence Hardy,Manual of Buddhism,p.358.

14.Sir Monier Williams,Buddhism,p.xv,Introd.

15.Alabaster,Modern Buddhist; in the Wheel of the Law,p.73; Trübner andCo., 1871.

16.5thApril 1885. In the MadrasTimesfor October 29, 1886, a meeting of the Society for the Propagation of True Religion is advertised, for reading and exposition of the Bhagavad-Gita.

17.The Light of Asia;The Occult World;Esoteric Buddhism;Theosophy of Archaic Religions.

18.Parerga,3ded.i.59.

19.Westminster Review, New Series,vol.xlviii.p.469.

20.Gerald Massey,Light,16thJune 1883.

21.Among these are reckoned Adam, Fohi, Laotze, Jesus, Mohammed, and Jenghiz Khān.—Kinnealy,Commentary on the Apocalypse,p.685.

22.Pember,Earth’s Earlier Ages,p.326.

23.H. H.Wilson,Essays,vol.ii.p.376; Huc and Gabet,Travel in Tartary and Thibet; translated by Mrs.p.Sinnett andW.Hazlitt.

24.Buddhist Birth Stories, translated byT. W.Rhys Davids,vol.iIntrod.p.xli.

25.Foucher de Careil,Hegel et Schopenhauer,p.306.

26.Vie de Jésus,p.98,4thed.; Paris, 1863.

27.The Buddhists, as Professor Kuenen remarks, do not believe in angels, and they have noMessiah. Tathagata, which Mr. de Bunsen translates “The Coming One,”i.e.Messiah, means “Onewho has gone” or “has arrived at” (Nirvana), like his predecessors. So Oldenberg, Rhys Davids, Bigandet, Edkins, Rajendralal Mitra: see too Dr. Kellogg,Light of Asia and the Light of the World,pp.106, 107.

28.See for these and other curious instances his article on “The Obligations of the New Testament to Buddhism,”Nineteenth Century,Dec.1880.

29.Natural and Universal Religions, Hibbert Lectures, 1882.

30.Strom.i.15; Porphyry,de Abstin.iv.17.

31.Schwanbeck,Megasthenes Indica,p.20; Lassen,Ind. Alterthumskunde, 209;H. H.Wilson,Essays,ii.p.314seq.; Reinaud,Relations Politiques et Commerciales de l’Empire Romain avec l’Asie Central, Paris, 1863; Priaulx,Travels of Apollonius and the Indian Embassies to Rome, Paris, 1873.

32.The question of the disciples in Johnix.2, concerning the man who was born blind, “Who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” is alleged by Professor Seydel (Das Evangelium von Jesu in seinen Verhältnissen zu Buddha-Sage und Buddha-Lehre) to indicate an idea introduced into the Gospel from a foreign source, as the doctrine of the pre-existence of souls was then unknown among the Jews. Meyer in his critical and exegetical Handbook toSt.John’s Gospel has shown that no one required to go outside the sphere of Jewish thought for an explanation of this part of the disciples’ question. In addition to his quotations from the Rabbinical books illustrating this Jewish belief, Kuenen in his brief criticism of Seydel adduces another from the Wisdom of Solomonviii.20, as also rendering the Buddhist derivation of this “thought quite superfluous” (Hibbert Lectures, 1882, Appendix). Many instances of agreement in thought and phraseology with the Gospels in passages in Buddhist works are adduced by Dr. Kellogg,Light of Asia, etc.,p.137seq., and are satisfactorily accounted for by the similarity of circumstances under which Buddha and the Saviour taught and the condition of men which they both perceived and described.

33.Lucius,Die Therapeuten und ihre Stellung in der Geschichte der Askese, Strassburg, 1880; alsoDer Essenismus in seinem Verhältniss zum Judenthum, Strassburg, 1881.

34.Dissertation in Commentary onColossians,pp.119, 157.

35.Jewish Wars,ii.8. 2-13;Antiq.xiii.5. 9;xv.10. 4, 5;xviii.1. 2-6.

36.Edersheim,Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah,vol.i.p.325.

37.Hibbert Lectures, 1882,p.203.

38.Oldenberg,Buddha, sein Leben, seine Lehre, seine Gemeinde, translated byW.Hoey, 1882,p.6; Williams and Norgate.

39.Dr. Joseph Edkins,Chinese Buddhism,pp.250, 343; Trübner, 1880.

40.Fergusson,Tree and Serpent Worship, Introduction,p.77.

41.This must be read in the light of Professor Max Müller’sWhat can India teach us?

42.Lukeviii.46.

43.Even Kuenen and Wellhausen assume as established that Monotheism shows itself with unmistakable distinctness in Hebrew prophecies of the eighth centuryB.C.(Hibbert Lectures, 1882,p.119;Theological Review, 1874,pp.329, 336;Encyc. Brit., art.Israel). ProfessorH.Schultz maintains that Monotheism was established in Israel from the time of Moses downward, among the leaders of thought at least. (Alttest. Theolog.,2ded., 1878,pp.440, 457.)

44.Light of Asia and Light of the World,pp.40, 102, 161.

45.Weber,Indische Studien,vol.i.p.400;J.Muir,Sanskrit Texts,p.xxxiv; Lorinser,Bhagavadgitâ, Appendix, translated by Muir inInd. Antiq.vol.ii.p.283.

46.Buddha, sein Leben, seine Lehre, seine Gemeinde, translated byWm.Hoey, 1882,p.292.

47.Müller, Gifford Lectures,Natural Religion,p.169.

48.Dr. Caird,Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion,p.343seq.

49.SirA.Mitchell, Rhind Lectures for 1876 and 1878,The Past in the Present,pp.207, 214; Edinburgh, Douglas, 1880.

50.Whately,Political Economy,p.68.

51.Max Müller, Gifford Lectures,Natural Religion,p.54.

52.The savagery of a great city is in some aspects more awful than that of Africa.

53.T. W.Rhys Davids, Hibbert Lectures,p.10.

54.Tylor,Primitive Culture,vol.i.p.380.

55.Müller,Introduction to the Science of Religion,p.41;Chips from a German Workshop,vol.ii.p.254.

56.Fairbairn,Studies in Religion and Philosophy,p.13.

57.Baring Gould,Origin and Development of Religious Belief,vol.i.p.109.

58.“Nations,” says Professor Goldwin Smith, “redeem each other. They preserve for each other principles, truths, and hopes, and aspirations which, committed to the keeping of one, might become extinct for ever. They thus not only raise each other again when fallen, but they prevent each other from falling.”—Lectures on the Study of History, delivered in Oxford 1859-61,p.71.

59.Celsus, quoting our Lord’s saying,Matt.xix.24, and the exhortation to forgive our enemies,Matt.v.43, 45, alleged they were transferred and coarsely perverted from Plato,de Legibus, andCrito.—Origen,contra Celsum, Bookvi.chaps.15, 16, and Bookvii.chap.61.

60.Enarr. in Psalm.cxl.6. Clement of Alexandria regarded Greek philosophy as a προπαιδεία or preparatory discipline for the reception of Christian truth,Strom.vi.chap.8, and as a step to something higher, ὑποβάθραν οὖσαν τῆς κατὰ Χριστὸν φιλοσοφίας,Strom.vi.chap.17.

61.Trench, Hulsean Lectures for 1846,p.153.

62.Introduction toLe Bouddha et sa Religion; Paris, 1858.

63.Müller, Introd. toSacred Books of the East,vol.i.p.xxi.

64.A.Burnell,Indian Antiq., 1880,p.223, quoted byProf.Max Müller in Introduction tovol.x.ofSacred Books of the East,p.xi.

65.Frankfurter, Appendix to Wordsworth’s Bampton Lectures for 1881;The One Religion,p.340; EitelLectures on Buddhism,p.44; Edkins,Chinese Buddhism,p.232.

66.Prof.Max Müller, Introduction tovol.i.ofSacred Books of the East,p.xxvii.

67.A. E.Gough,Philosophy of the Upanishads, etc.,p.5; Trübner’s Oriental Series.

68.This statement is hazarded, notwithstanding the recent reply of the author ofSupernatural Religionto Bishop Lightfoot’s Essays. It will be generally conceded that he has adopted an untenable position, and that, though his rejoinder to the learned Bishop may be a vigorous assault, it is weak criticism. Sanday’s work onThe Gospels in the Second Centuryis on the whole a better reply than the Bishop’s to the allegations of the author ofSupernatural Religion, whose extreme scepticism of literary evidence is quite equalled by his dogmatic extravagance of statement.

69.Vie de Jésus,Introd.pp.xv, xvii,4thed.; Paris, 1863.

70.Science de Religions,pp.12, 20.

71.Professor Max Müller, Introd. to Dhammapada,Sacred Books of the East,vol.x.p.x.

72.Sacred Books of the East,vol.xiii.p.37;Introd.,vol.xi.p.xx.

73.Oldenberg,Buddha, etc.,p.27.

74.Mahavansa, by Turnour; Dipavansa,xx.20, quoted by Professor Max Müller inSacred Books of the East,vols.x.p.xxiv, andxiii.p.xxxv.

75.Buddhist Birth Stories,vol.i.p.lvii; Trübner’s Oriental Series.

76.Weber,Indian Literature,p.294;ibid.

77.We may safely assert that in the mass of Buddhist literature already available nothing has been found, nor is anything at all likely to be found, corresponding in character and evidential value to the Christian Scriptures. What would the New Testament have been, asks Professor Müller, “if the spurious Gospels, the pseudo-apostolic and post-apostolic productions, the debates of the Councils, the commentaries of the Fathers, and the lives of the saints, had all been bound and mixed up with it”? (Sacred Books of the East,vol.i.,Introd.,pp.xv,xvi.) And yet this is a parallel to the confusion represented by the so-called Buddhist Bible. In truth, it is not a Bible, but a library, containing not only the earliest treatises, but the commentaries upon them made in later ages, and extracts and repetitions from itself so extensive and numerous that were they omitted this portentous collection—four times as voluminous as our Christian Bible—would be found to be much shorter than it. When the original Bible of Buddhism has been disinterred from this pile it will be found to resemble almost in nothing our New Testament, but it may present many analogies to the Talmud and Targums, and perhaps some very interesting resemblances to isolated portions of the Old Testament. As far as it has been translated to us, the Tripitaka contain neither prophecy nor history; but one division of it presents suggestive coincidences with portions of the apocryphal Scriptures; and scholars may find a comparison of some of the texts of Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes with those of the Dhammapada and some of the Suttas an agreeable and not unprofitable study, without in the least being tempted to transfer their allegiance from the Hebrew to the Indian sages.

78.Eitel,Lectures on Buddhism,p.6; Hunter, “Historical Aspects of Indian Geography,”Scot. Geog. Mag.,Dec.1888.

79.Rogers,Superhuman Origin of the Bible, Lecturev.

80.Professor Max Müller,Introduction to the Science of Religion,p.103.

81.Professor Müller, Gifford Lectures,Natural Religion,p.564.

82.Record of Missionary Conference in London, 1888,vol.i.p.39; also hisBuddhism,p.558.

83.Le Génie des Religions.

84.Sutta Nipata, translated by Fausböll invol.x.ofSacred Books of the East, Partii.pp.23, 76, 109, 113.

85.Ibid.vol.x.,ibid.Partii.p.40. We are also reminded that a man is not a Bikkhu because he puts on yellow robes, unless he has cleansed himself from evil (Dhammapada,i.9, 10).

86.T. W.Rhys Davids,Buddhism,pp.5, 145.

87.Sir Monier Williams,Buddhism,pp.162, 163.

88.Émile Burnouf,Science de Religions,p.24.

89.M.Vivien deSt.Martin,Mémoires sur les contrées occidentales.

90.Oldenberg,Buddha, etc.,p.10.

91.Sacred Books of the East,vol.i.p.xxii.

92.Tylor,Primitive Culture,vol.ii.p.338; Weber,Indian Literature,p.38; Sir Monier Williams,Religious Thought and Life in India,p.18.

93.See Satapatha-Brâhmana, translated by Professor Eggeling invols.xii.andxxvi.ofSacred Books of the East. Max Müller places the age of these books within the ninth and seventh centuriesB.C.

94.E.Quinet,Le Génie des Religions,p.185; Paris, 1857.

95.Sir Monier Williams,Religious Thought and Life in India,p.24, referring to the Aitareya-Brahmana,vii.13.

96.Oldenberg,Buddha, etc.,p.15;T. W.Rhys Davids, Hibbert Lectures,p.25.

Back to Index Next