Ancient Faiths And Modern Part 10

We may now turn our attention to one statement about the Athenians, viz., "that they and the strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else than to tell and to hear some new thing," and that they were so particular--in this respect resembling the Ancient Peruvians--in adopting foreign G.o.ds, that they had an altar to the Unknown Deity (Acts xvii). To this we must add what Sozomen says of them (_Ecclesiastical History_, book ii. chap. 24)--that the most celebrated philosophers amongst the Greeks took pleasure in exploring unknown cities and regions. Plato, the friend of Socrates, dwelt for a time amongst the Egyptians, in order to acquaint himself with their manners and customs.

He likewise sailed to Sicily, to examine its craters.... These craters were likewise explored by Empedocles. Democritus of Coos relates that he visited many cities, and countries, and nations, and that eighty years of his life were spent in travelling in foreign lands. Besides these philosophers, thousands of wise men amongst the Greeks, ancient and modern, habituated themselves to travel. Solon, it is well known, travelled to the court of Croesus, and it is affirmed that Pythagoras visited India. Sozomen makes the above statement to explain how it was that Merope of Tyre, with two young relatives, visited India, the two latter becoming its first two bishops.

Nothing is more probable than that Greeks, who had resided for a time in India, on their return, believing that as they had recognized in Hindostan an earnest form of Christianity, differing from the Alexandrian standard only in a few minor points, thought it right to introduce into western religion Buddhist practices--first into Egypt, _via_ Alexandria, and thence into Europe. We certainly cannot prove that they did it, but there is a very good reason for believing so.

The doctrines of Jesus emanated, we believe, from some early Asoka's missionaries; whilst the doctrines of the Alexandrians and the Ascetics, came from subsequent Buddhists, who placed their stamp on Christianity once more.

Thus we have been led, by a strict inquiry into every extant testimony known, to believe that the faith taught by Siddartha, was held for at least 250--and most probably, 500 years, before our era. Still further, we have been led to believe, from the extraordinary energy and success of Buddhist missionaries in the three centuries before Christ--a success before which all Christian missionary enterprise pales--that emissaries from Asoka's colleges of priests, penetrated westward with the Greeks as far as the eastern sh.o.r.es of the Mediterranean, and forced some devout Jews to modify their belief. But, though it is probable that the Hindoo teachers introduced the morality inculcated by Sakya Muni, it seems certain that they could not induce their Hebrew disciples to abandon their implicit trust in those writings which they had been induced to think were absolutely inspired or written by direct command of the Almighty--consequently, Christianity must be regarded not as pure Buddhism, but a form of it modified by Jewish traditions. But when those who embraced the religion of Jesus, had learned to distrust the literal truth of the Old Testament, and had the certainty that the prophesies about the immediate destruction of the world were false, they came again into contact with Buddhist teaching, and were content to forego Judaism. They did not, however, give up Jesus as the Saviour. Instead of believing with Sakya, that man suffered for his own sin, they clung to the legend of Adam and Eve, and affirmed that suffering was introduced into the whole world by this very original couple. Instead of Nirvana, their heaven was Ouranos--the sky above them. Instead of an abode where all the senses were at rest, they adopted the idea of a golden city, with a river of crystal running through it; brilliant with jewels, and guarded by gates and walls in which all the good should spend their time in singing and music. The Christians adopted all the Asceticism, dirt, and love of vermin, that the disciples of Sakya, and even Siddartha himself, delighted in--but they nevertheless clung to the idea that the world was sure to be destroyed, and that Jesus would come again. It is indeed, difficult to reconcile the belief, that he who washed his disciples' feet, and praised a woman for cleaning and anointing his own, sanctioned an idea which, throughout centuries, urged religionists to be filthy; yet we must do so if we are orthodox. We have, indeed, similar anomalies now. Devout Christians tell us that this world ought to be made a preparation for another; and that the main joy of heaven will be an indefinite increase of knowledge. Yet these same people affirm, sometimes in distinct terms, that an extension of scientific attainments, and a constant inquiry into the will of G.o.d, as expressed in the works of His hands, are snares of the Devil, and so to be avoided by all good people. The Orthodox as a rule believe--though few venture to affirm it, that Jehovah loves the fools the best, and that ignorance is G.o.dliness.

CHAPTER VI.

Estimation of the Bible. The Dhammapada and Hebrew (sacred) books. Certain important dates. Jews were never missionaries. Precepts of Buddha. Contrasts. How to overcome undesirable thoughts. Knowledge beats prayer. Sunday proverbs. New birth. Divines preach brotherly love in the pulpit, and provoke hate when out of it. Buddhist precept is "do as I do," not "do as I say." The narrow way of the Gospel finds an origin in Buddhism. One law broken all law broken--a Buddhist maxim. Sakya taught about a future world.

Parallel pa.s.sages. Effect of Buddhist and Christian teaching. Parallel pa.s.sages about truth and almsgiving.

Ignorance a Buddhist vice and a Christian virtue.

_Suppressio veri, suggestio falsi_ in the pulpit Cla.s.ses in the religious world. Why ignorance is cherished. Ignorance often more profitable than knowledge. Examples. Charlatans live by the fools. Honest doctors and parsons must be poor.

Poverty an essential part of Buddhism. Hierarchs are quite unnecessary to the enlightened man. Parallel pa.s.sages again.

Unphilosophical dicta in Buddhism and Bible. Prosperity not a proof of propriety, and misery not always a reward of badness. Lions and lambs. Design in creation. Right and wrong--do they exist before the Creator. False a.n.a.logies.

Persecution a Christian but not a Buddhist practice. Popgun thunders from the Vatican. Age not equivalent to wisdom.

Siddartha did not prophesy, and so made no mistake about that which was to follow. More negatives and positives.

Another contrast No obscene stories in Buddhist as in Jewish scriptures--no legend of Lot and his daughters, David and Bathsheba, of Onan, Judah and Tamar, Zimri, Cozbi, and Phinehas, and a host of others. A good deal of nonsense in all ancient writings. The foolish stories and prophecies of the Bible--if abstracted, little remains. The little might be improved by extracts from Plato, Epictetus, and Buddhist scriptures, and even from those of Confucius.

From the earliest times which I can remember, I have heard the English Bible spoken of with the utmost reverence, as the undoubted word of G.o.d, as a revelation of the will, ways, and even the thoughts of the Supreme Being. Everything which it contains has been regarded as infallibly true, and the wisdom, goodness, mercy, and justice of its doctrines and laws have been judged to be unimpeachable. From the pulpit of many earnest divines I have heard innumerable sermons whose burden has been praise of, and admiration for, the morality of the Old and New Testaments, the sublimity of the language therein used, and the loftiness of the thoughts embodied. From those same teachers, and from a still greater number of laymen, I have heard the a.s.sertion repeatedly made that the Bible must be divinely inspired, because no other set of men, except those who composed its books, could write so powerfully; and depict so graphically, the wants, the woes, the pleasures, the pa.s.sions, the aspirations, and the doubts of the human mind. By a great majority, if not by the whole of our imperfectly educated ministers and people, the a.s.sertion to which we here refer is raised to the position of an argument; and any opponent who ventures to question the truth of the a.s.sumption, is challenged to show a book of divinity equal or superior to the Bible.

The worthlessness of the argument might be readily shown to any one accustomed to use his reason, by pointing out that the religious books of the Ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, a.s.syrians, Medea, Persians, and Etruscans, are lost to us. We may compare the a.s.sertion with that which Englishmen might have made, to the effect that the British breed of horses was superior to any other, for no one could show them a better; yet as soon as our Crusaders became acquainted with the Arabian steed, the value of the a.s.sumption was destroyed. Yet such a remark would be wholly inoperative on the mind of every bigot whose judgment of evidence is always bribed by his prejudice. Consequently, to make any serious impression upon the mind of the Bibliolater, it is desirable, if possible, to make copies of the holy images wors.h.i.+pped by other nations, under the name of sacred books, and to place these side by side with that grotesque production, which, for our purposes, may be compared to Diana of the Ephesians--the thing which fell down from Jupiter.

Yet even when we do bring from distant countries, to which in our complacency we give the name of "heathen," copies of their deified books, and show their equality with, or superiority to that which we are told was arranged by the disposition of angels (Acts vii. 53)--the scriptures that Paul (2 Tim. iii. 16) affirms were entirely given by inspiration of G.o.d [--Greek--], see also 1 Pet. i. 11, 12,--we are met by the a.s.sertion, if the equality is allowed, that the Pagan writings have been copied from, or are traceable to, the writers in the Old or in the New Testament.

Whenever a thoughtless theologian a.s.serts that such a thing _must_ be so, he is not by any means particular as to the facts upon which he bases his belief. This weakness of his is so conspicuous to the logical observer, that he sometimes feels pity at having to wound a mind so earnest as to be unable to use its reason. He almost regards himself as a man fighting a child or a weak woman. Yet men will, in their power and knowledge, deprive a baby of a bon-bon, which it is sucking eagerly, if they know that it is poisonous, and will lay violent hands upon a tender girl who, in a whirlwind of pa.s.sion, is about to throw herself before a railway train. After the event both the individuals may learn to thank the roughness which saved them; and I feel sure that many an earnest religionist, who now thinks that the philosophers are treating him cruelly, by trying to deprive him of a cherished faith, will ultimately be grateful for having been induced to cease grovelling in the dust of a coa.r.s.e antiquity.

If we endeavour to ascertain the basis of the belief that everything which is good _must_ have come from the Bible, we find that it exists in the a.s.sertion that the Jews were the chosen people of G.o.d, selected by Him to receive a record of His past doings and His future desires. Hence it is argued, that all who have not been taught by the Jews, or through their influence, are without G.o.d in the world--poor, benighted pagans.

To support a.s.sumptions so monstrous as this, there is not a t.i.ttle of evidence beyond the existence of certain stories in some books, said to contain a truthful record of facts. But although the theologian heaps up protestation upon a.s.severation until the ma.s.s attains an imposing size, the whole is not of more substantial value than a huge bubble blown by an energetic school boy. If millions could be brought to believe that such a hollow sphere was a solid, painted with the most resplendent colours obtained from the celestial mansions, it would not make it other than a film of soap and water filled with air.

Yet though the unanimous consent of myriads cannot convert foam into a solid substance, a ma.s.s of froth may be treated as if it were something better, so long as all agree not to test its qualities; and any book may in like manner be regarded as of divine origin, so long as everybody determines not to test the reality of the opinion. We can easily imagine that those who have been educated to believe in the absolute density of a bubble, must be greatly distressed when it bursts. Indeed in every mercantile community we see frequent ill.u.s.trations of this. Designing men weave a plausible story, and by inflated words induce a number of thoughtless people to believe their statements, adopt their promises, and act upon their recommendation. Whilst all seems to be prosperous, every dupe repels with indignation the statement that the whole of his confraternity are deceived. If faith in the stability of a banking house could have upheld it, Overend & Gurnets would never have broken. If then faith, the most complete and child-like trust in the truth of anything,--say particularly in a certain book--will not make it valuable if it be in reality worthless, then all those who wish to feel beneath them the everlasting arms of truth, should inquire into current beliefs rather than take everything for granted.

At the time when the wealth, power, and stability of the Bank above referred to were implicitly believed in by the many, and especially trusted by its shareholders, there were, outside of its pale, many individuals who felt sure that the establishment was very shaky, and a few who were aware that it was toppling to its fall. If then, at that time, any customer or proprietor, feeling a doubt about its safety, should have endeavoured to investigate the rumours which were adverse to it; and should have acted as reason dictated, after he had weighed the alleged facts on both sides, he might have came to a safe decision and saved his money. What is true in this case may be applied to the Bible--the Bank upon which so many draw large drafts, and in whose stability they have unbounded confidence. The thoughtless may, and doubtless will, continue to trust it implicitly--the thoughtful will probably consult, not only the Bibliolaters, but those who put no faith whatever in the volume, and judge for themselves.

The fear which many men have of biblical inquiry, has for a long period struck me as being inexplicable, inasmuch as it is at variance with the a.s.sertion of these very same people, that an examination of the book must prove it to be infallibly true. But investigation into a supposed truth can only end by confirming it fully, and thus making the truth more useful; or by demonstrating that the belief entertained is untenable. It has been the dread--nay the certainty, of the latter result, which has deterred many great minds from investigating the matter. Amongst these the late Professor Faraday was conspicuous, for we learn from a letter in the Athenaeum of Jan. 7, 1870, written by one of his own personal friends, that he--perhaps the most accomplished seeker after physical truth in his time, declined firmly to search into the value of the commonly received notions respecting "the scriptures," as he felt sure that his faith in them would thereby be shaken. Yet he was illogical enough to use them as a basis for his theological teaching.

He preached to others from texts in which he had no confidence; and supported his doctrines by quotations from a book which, in his secret heart, he felt was valueless as an exponent of historical truth, or orthodox teaching.

Before we proceed to the comparison between the "Dhammapada" and the Bible, it will be judicious to place fairly before the reader the points which we hope to elucidate. We wish to show, by a collation of dates and doctrines, that the two are wholly independent of each other, and as we have elsewhere remarked, that if there has been any relations.h.i.+p between Buddhist and Christian writings, the first have had more than two centuries' precedence over the last. We wish to compare the morality taught by Buddha, with that promulgated in the Old and New Testaments.

We desire impartially to examine into the question, whether the claim for inspiration can be allowed in either one case or the other, or in both together--whether, indeed, it is possible to believe the Hebrew scriptures to be dictated by G.o.d, without giving a similar confidence to the teachings of Sakya Muni--or, a.s.suming that there is to be found a code of pure morality or ethics which we may suppose to be of universal application, we shall endeavour to ascertain whether the Hebrews and the followers of Mary, or the disciples of the son of Maya Deva, have made the nearest approach to its discovery and establishment. Collaterally we shall examine whether Jesus has a greater claim than Buddha to be the Son of G.o.d. The Dhammapada which has recently (Trubner & Co., London, 1870*) been translated by Max Mulller from the Pali, is one of the many books which profess to give, as our Gospels and Epistles do of Christ, the teachings or precepts of Buddha. These were for some two or three centuries traditional only; but about the period, B.C. 300, many, if not most of them, were committed to writing. As far as can be ascertained, the year b.c. 246 was the period of the first Buddhist council under Asok, and shortly after this, Mahuida, a priestly son of Asoka, went as a missionary to Ceylon; other emissaries went to Burmah, China, j.a.pan, and it is believed elsewhere. The oral promulgation of the Dhammapada would probably begin about b.c. 560--twenty years or thereabouts before the death of Siddartha. If we turn to contemporary history in the west of Asia, we find that at this period Jerusalem was in ruins, and the Jews were captives in Babylonia--no copies of any Hebrew sacred book were known to be in existence (2 Esdras xiv. 21; 2 Maccabees ii.

1-13--see also 1 Maccabees i. 21-23), and, so far as we could learn, India was a country wholly unknown to the Shemitic race. The acquaintances.h.i.+p between Hindustan and Europe seems to have been made in the time when the Greek monarch, Alexander, overthrew Darius of Persia.

Alexander invaded India about b.c. 327, consequently we infer that there was no possibility of Buddha being influenced by western notions in b.c.

560.

* _Buddhaghosa's Parables_, translated from Burmese, by Capt T. Rogers; with an introduction, containing Buddha's Dhammapada, or "Path of Virtue," by Max Muller. Trubner & Co., London, 1870.

To these considerations we must add the fact that the Jews have never been, from the earliest to the latest times, a missionary nation,--indeed, their laws and precepts forced them to be so peculiarly reserved, that even if they had known about India they would not have sent their emissaries there, inasmuch as the Mosaic law obliged them to present themselves at the Temple at Jerusalem thrice a-year, which was wholly incompatible with distant travel. Moreover, there are many extant histories to show that intelligent westerns went to India for knowledge and religion, and never seemed to think of carrying their own faith thither. The whole course of history points to religion and civilization coming westerly from India or Central Asia.

The dates above given will clearly show that Sakya Muni could not have derived his ideas from the teaching of Jesus, or of the Talmudists, neither of whom were in existence when he flourished. Whatever similarity, therefore, we find in the doctrines, &c., of the two, cannot be accounted for by supposing that Christian missionaries carried the New Testament to India. The reverse is far more probable, as we have demonstrated in a preceding chapter.

Some inquirers into the history of the sons of Maya Deva and of Mary are so convinced of the priority of the first, and of the close resemblance of the incidents in the lives and in the teaching of the two, that they have found themselves forced, reluctantly, to consider the question--whether Christianity is not Buddhism altered in some respects by Judaism. This point having been elsewhere spoken of, we will not pursue it. But a far more important, and, for many Christians, a more momentous inquiry, is, whether we can speak of the Son of Mary as the offspring of Jehovah, and yet affirm that the child of Maya Deva was nothing but a common man. So deeply have some been moved by this consideration, that I have positively heard the opinion broached, that the Indian sage was the very same as he who subsequently was put to death in Jerusalem. Wild though the allegation is, there is quite as great an amount of probability in it as in the a.s.sertion that Jesus went and preached unto those spirits which were sometime disobedient, i.e., in the time of Noah (1 Pet. iii. 19, 20), and were, consequently, then in prison, or that Buddha went to his dead mother, and converted her to his own faith. About supernatural births we shall treat in a succeeding part.

Without inc.u.mbering our pages with all the precepts of the Dhammapada, we will copy a few in detail to show the reader their style, and then we will only quote those which are most appropriate to our subject. The opening paragraphs singularly resemble those in Bacon's _Novum Organon_, and run thus--"All that we are, is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with an evil thought, pain follows him, as the wheel follows the foot of him who draws the carriage (lv.)."

2. "All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts, it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with a pure thought, happiness follows him, like a shadow that never leaves him" (lvi. et. seq.).

3. "He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me--hatred in those who harbour such thoughts will never cease."**

4. "He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me--hatred in those who do not harbour such thoughts will cease."

5. "For hatred does not cease by hatred at any time; hatred ceases by love"--this is an old rule.

* The figures refer to the separate precepts, which are given in numerical order.

** With this and the following saying we may compare the words of the Psalms--"Do not I hate those, O Lord, that hate thee? and am I not grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with a perfect hatred; I count them mine enemies" (Ps. cx.x.xix. 21, 22). The words of David, said to be a man after G.o.d's own heart, are equally opposed to the law of love, viz., "Thou hast given me the necks of my enemies, that I might destroy them that hate me" (2 Sam.

xxii. 41; Ps. xviii. 40); I shall see my desire on them that hate me" (Ps. cxviii. 7). In Deuteronomy we find, moreover, that indulgence in hatred is attributed to the Almighty, "who repayeth them that hate Him to their face to destroy them: He (G.o.d) will not be slack to him that hateth Him, he will repay him to his face" (chap. vii. 10). Hatred of their enemies is, indeed, everywhere encouraged in the Jewish Scriptures, called sacred, and the Hebrew Jehovah is described as one with whom the power to hate and revenge Himself is a favourite luxury.

6. "And some do not know that we must come to an end here; but others know it, and hence their quarrels cease."

7. "He who lives looking for pleasures only, his senses uncontrolled, immoderate in his enjoyments, idle and weak, Mara (the Tempter, the Adversary, or Satan) will certainly overcome him, as the wind throws down a weak tree."

8. "He who lives without looking for pleasures, his senses well controlled, in his enjoyments moderate, faithful and strong, Mara will certainly not overcome him, any more than the wind throws down a rocky mountain."

11. "They who imagine truth in untruth, and see untruth in truth, never arrive at truth, but follow vain desires."

15. "The evildoer mourns in this world, and he mourns in the next, he mourns in both."....

16. "The virtuous man delights in this world, and he delights in the next; he delights in both."

We may pause here, and ask ourselves whether, throughout the whole of the Old Testament, we can find a single pa.s.sage which so distinctly points to a future state as does this Buddhistic teaching. Yet bibliolaters a.s.sert that the effusions of Jewish writers were inspired by G.o.d! Mortal men cannot tell what takes place after their bodies have become dissipated into various chemical compounds; consequently, they cannot decide, with certainty, which deserves the greater credit for accuracy--the Dhammapada, or the Hebrew Scriptures; but all those who believe in the teaching of Jesus are bound to acknowledge that the Indian sage was inspired by a power superior to that which is said to have dictated to the Israelite.

How profitably, again, might the following observations be enunciated from our pulpits, instead of the vapid and superficial divinity, which disgraces both the utterer and the listener:--

21. "Reflection is the path of immortality, thoughtlessness the path of death. Those who reflect do not die; those who are thoughtless are as if dead already."

25. "By rousing himself, by reflection, by restraint and control, the wise man may make for himself an island, which no flood can overwhelm."

27. "Follow not after vanity, nor after the enjoyment of love and l.u.s.t.

He who reflects and meditates obtains ample joy"

We dare not affirm that the writer of the first epistle of John was familiar with the Dhammapada, but his words (chap. ii, v. 15), "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world," &c., are as purely Buddhistic as if he had known the doctrine of the Indian sage.

We doubt whether, in the whole Bible, a parallel pa.s.sage to the following can be found:--

36. "Let the wise man guard his thoughts, for they are difficult to perceive, very artful, and they rush wherever they list: thoughts well guarded bring happiness."

It is true that in the Psalms, and elsewhere, there is a full recognition of the power of G.o.d to know, and even to punish man for, bad thoughts, but there is no precept recommending man to cultivate his mental powers for the pleasure which the task will bring. The following observation is equally to be commended:--