- ■ - Uilll 
 
 BUDDHISM 
 
 AND 
 
 CHRISTIANITY 
 
 FACE TO FACE; 
 
 OR AN ORAL DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE 
 
 REV. MIGETTUWATTE, '1 
 
 A 
 
 Buddhist Priest, 
 
 REV. D. SILVA, 
 
 * AND AN 
 
 . English Clergyman. 
 
 HELD AT PANTURAy CEYLON. 
 
 WITH AN 
 
 INTRODUCTION AND ANNOTATIONS 
 
 BY 
 
 J. M. PEEBLES, M.D., 
 
 Fellow of thfe Academy of Sciences, New Orleans, U.S.A. ; 
 Fellow of the Anthropological Society, London ; 
 Corresponding Member of the Psychological Society of 
 Great Britain ; Corresponding Member of the 
 Oriental Society of Archaeology, India, &c. 
 
 BOSTON : 
 
 COLBY AND RICH, PUBLISHERS, 
 
 9 Montgomeuy Place. 
 
 1878. 
 
,1 
 
 \ 
 
 % 
 
 ■ ' ‘j 
 
 
 - 
 
 k 
 
 «( 
 
 
 
BUDDHISM 
 
 AMO 
 
 CHRISTIANITY 
 
 FACE TO FACE; 
 
 OR AN ORAL DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE 
 
 REV. MIGETTUWATTE, ' 
 
 A r and - 
 
 Buddhist Priest, 
 
 REV. D. SILVA, 
 
 AN 
 
 English Clergyman. 
 
 HELD AT TANTUEA, CEYLON. 
 
 WITH AN 
 
 INTRODUCTION AND ANNOTATIONS 
 
 BY 
 
 J. M. PEEBLES, M.D., 
 
 Fell ow of the Academy of Sciences, New Orleans, U.S.A. ; 
 Fellow of the Anthropological Society, London ; 
 Corresponding Member of the Psychological Society of 
 Great Britain ; Corresponding Member of the 
 Oriental Society of Archsology, India, &C. 
 
 BOSTON : 
 
 COLBY AND RICH, PUBLISHERS, 
 
 9 Montgomery Place. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 "With an admiration of the calmness that characterises the 
 Oriental mind, and a deep interest in the symbolisms that 
 underlie the Eastern religions, I had long desired to see these 
 religions, especially Buddhism, brought into the arena of 
 discussion face to face with the Christian religion, that each 
 system might he subjected to the test of controversy. This 
 was partially done awhile since at Pantura, Ceylon, where a 
 Buddhist priest met, in an oral debate, the Rev. Mi'. Silva, 
 a "Wesleyan minister. 
 
 The discussion continued two days, before an almost 
 breathless audience, numbering at times from five to seven 
 thousand in attendance. Each of the parties had their 
 sympathising friends, and both, as usual, claimed the victory. 
 So far as I heard expressions from what seemed to be 
 impartial minds, they were to the end that the Buddhist 
 priest, being the most graceful speaker, and adapting him- 
 self to the popular mind, carried the multitude with him. 
 It is certain that some of the Christians did not feel satisfied 
 with the result. 
 
 The debate was reported, and a few copies published by 
 John Capper, Esq., Editor of the Ceylon Times. “ The 
 report,” so he says, “ has been revised by the respective 
 disputants, so that it may be taken as a correct account of 
 what passed. The Pali extracts were revised by Rev. C. 
 Alwis and a portion by Mr. L. de Zoysa, the Government 
 interpreter.” 
 
mTEODUCTION. 
 
 ORIGIN AND PREVALENCE OF BUDDHISM. 
 
 A pilgrim through eternity, 
 
 In countless births have I been bom.” 
 
 “ Mind is the root ; actions proceed from the mind. If any one 
 speak or act from a corrupt mind, suffering will follow, as the dust 
 follows the rolling wheel” 
 
 Buddha 
 
 Only think of it — there are estimated to be 500,000,000 of 
 Buddhists in Ceylon, China, Japan, Thibet, Burmah, Siam, 
 and other Eastern coun r^es — something like one-third of the 
 whole human race ! 
 
 The founder of this vast body of religionists was 
 Guatama Buddha, born at Kapilavastu, in Northern India, 
 about the year 556 b. c., according to Max Miiller, and the 
 best Hindu authority. He belonged by descent to the 
 Sakya clan — the proud Solar race of India. . Passing by his 
 earlier years, given to meditation and reverie — passing by 
 the spiritual marvels that preceded his public teachings, it is 
 but the commonest justice to say that he hallowed the nation 
 that gave him birth, and that his practical teachings have 
 become largely the common heritage of humanity. 
 
 On Himalaya’s lonely steep 
 
 There lived of old a holy sage. 
 
 Of shrivelled form, and bent with age, 
 
 Inured to meditations deep. 
 
 He — when great Buddha had been bom. 
 
 The glory of the Sakya race. 
 
 Endowed with every holy grace 
 To save the suffering world forlorn— 
 
6 
 
 Behold strange portents, signs which taught 
 The wise, that that auspicious time 
 Had witnessed some event sublim^ 
 
 With universal blessings fraught. 
 
 • * • • • 
 
 But once, 0 men, in many years, 
 
 The fir-tree somewhere flowers, perhaps | 
 
 So after countless ages lapse, 
 
 A Buddha once on earth appears 1 
 
 The world of men and gods to bless, 
 
 The way of rest and peace to teach, 
 
 A holy law this god did preach— 
 
 A law of stainless righteousness. 
 
 If, spuming worldly pomp as vain. 
 
 You choose to lead a tranquil life. 
 
 And wander forth from home and wife* 
 
 You, too, a Buddha’s rank shall gain,” 
 
 Chreat thinters, great self-sacrificing souls such as Buddha, 
 are the makers of history, and the standard-bearers of the 
 ages. They live immortal in books, and more so, if possible, 
 in the memories of admiring worshippers, 
 
 Guatama Bud lha, drinking from the fountain of 
 inspiration, became, long before the Christian era, a central 
 and radiating sun, the light from which crystallised into 
 Buddhism, the one great religious institution of the Orient. 
 And now, after a lapse of over 2000 years, it is still afire 
 with energy and spiritual vitality. Its shrines multiply ; 
 converts flock to i‘s standard ; and thoughtful minds in far- 
 away Europe aud America are more and more attracted to 
 its catholic spirit and broad tolerant principles. 
 
 The editor of the oldest daily newspaper in the island of 
 Ceylon — the Ceylon Times — had a little while since the 
 following editorial touching the status and progress of Bud- 
 dhism in Ceylon 
 
 “ There is no doubt that whilst we are congratulating 
 ourselves on the successful work of our missionary and 
 educational establishments, the Buddhists are stimulated 
 the same success to fresh efforts in behalf of their own faith. 
 
7 
 
 Not only have one or two of the most educated men amongst 
 them, priests and laj'men, put forward pamphlets and 
 periodicals in the vernacular, in defence and illustration of 
 their creed, but there is a greater activity generally amongst 
 the Buddhist priesthood, with the object of awakening in the 
 minds of the people a more lively fe ling tow rds their faith. 
 Religious services are now being held every Sunday, as the 
 appointed day of rest amongst nearly all classes, whereas it 
 was the wont of the priesthood some few years ago to call 
 their congregations together only on the o easion of some 
 day memorable in their calendar for its sanctity. Temples 
 are in course of construction, and where sucu work is not 
 immediately practicable, temporary structures have been 
 erected in which the people may assemble, and seated on 
 benches listen to the recital of ‘ Bana,’ and the exhortations 
 and illustrations of the ministering priest. 
 
 « • • • • 
 
 One such structure of rather large size we entered on a 
 recent Sunday. The ser^uce was conducted by Sipkadua 
 Sumangalabhidana, High Priest of Adam’s Peak, the most 
 accomplished Pali scholar in the island. He commenced by 
 the recital of ‘ Bana,’ in the responses to whi-^h the assem- 
 bled congregation joined in a most proper and devout 
 manner. At the conclusion of the prayer, the High Priest, 
 always seated, and holding a small talipot fan in his Laud, 
 commenced his address, which was intended as an intro- 
 duction to a course of lectures on Buddhism. 
 
 “ The learned High Priest commenced enumerating 
 some of the most important Buddliist books, and briefly 
 explaining their contents, and the objects for which they 
 were written. He stated that Buddha’s doctrines may be 
 divided into two parts — one the philosophical portion, con- 
 taining sublime truths which only the eminently learned can 
 understand, and the other, the plain discourses, embodying 
 great truths, but couched in homely language. The homely 
 language used, the priest went on to say, often conveyed 
 false ideas with it, but such language was made the medium 
 of conveying facts, with the view of adapting himself to the 
 capacities of the common people, and he w'ould particularly 
 remind them that they were not to suppose that the ‘ Great 
 High Buddha ’ meant to countenance the superficial meaning 
 which those words implied. 
 
 • • • • • 
 
8 
 
 ** After speating of the importance of -worts, of the 
 necessity of personal merit, he enlarged upon 8on-nn, 
 Sakradagami, Anagami, and Arhat, the four paths of -virtue 
 prescribed by Buddha to obtain Nirwana (at the mention of 
 which all the assembled crowd cried Sadu) ; he concluded a 
 learned sermon of some two hours’ duration by exhorting 
 the congregation to exercise patience, and to follow Buddha’s 
 command of not even so much as thinking evil of those who 
 cruelly used and persecuted them. 
 
 “ The priest had neither book nor any notes to refer to, 
 but the able manner in which he freely quoted from the 
 various Pali works, giving the title of every book in support 
 of his statements, the clear, logical manner in which he 
 reasoned, explaining each difficult term he used, giving even 
 the derivation of each word, and the able summing up, was, 
 to say the least, very remarkable. 
 
 “ Attached to the temple, Avhich is to be erected on the 
 ground now occupied by the temporary building, will be a 
 college for priests and laymen, in which Pali alone will be 
 taught to such students as may frequent it for secidar 
 education only, and the High Priest stated how gladly he 
 would give instruction to any English gentleman desiring to 
 learn the Pali language.” 
 
 THE DOCTRINES OF BUDDHISM — NIRVANA. 
 
 Buddhism has been charged -with atheism. This is rank 
 injustice. It is true that Buddhists do not believe in a 
 personal, human-shaped God, the subject of limitations, and 
 -even of such passions as anger and jealousy; but they do 
 believe in a Supreme Power — the ineffable, the infinite 
 Presence. They further believe that this ever-present God 
 -will not in some remote period judge the world, but that he 
 is incarnate in all worlds, and in the self-executive laws that 
 pertain to the physical and moral universe. Accordingly, to 
 the enlightened Buddhist, life is a sowing and a reaping — a 
 measureless series of causes and effects — of sins and punish- 
 ments, until the attainment of Nirvana. Then it is soul-life, 
 in endless unfoldment. 
 
 There has been much useless, if not really idle talk as to 
 “what Buddha meant, and what modem Buddhists still 
 mean, by entrance into Nirvana. What I have to say upon 
 this matter is not from prejudice ; nor is it gathered from 
 
9 
 
 the booked sayings and missionary fragments so often 
 referred to in current literature ; but rather from inquiries in 
 the homes, the temples, and the colleges of the priests. It 
 seems a little difficult for missionaries to see the bright and 
 beautiful side of what they denominate “ heathenism.” That 
 it has its excrescences and superstitions I freely admit ; and 
 may not the same be said of all the great religions of the 
 world. So far as missionaries teach the people of the East 
 the English language ; so far as they instruct them in the 
 arts and sciences, and encoiirage secular education generally, 
 they do great good ; but in matters of religion they have 
 nothing neio to take the Orientals that is true. 
 
 I have talked personally with scores of learned Buddhist 
 priests in Ceylon, China, and other Eastern countries ; and 
 with a single exception, they assured me that entrance into 
 Nirvana was emancipation from pains, sorrows, and dis- 
 appointments, final releaSb from re-births and a sweet, 
 divine, yet conscious repose that no language can fully 
 express. And this one priest who took a different view, did 
 not believe in the soul’s absolute annihilation, but rather in 
 its subjective, unconscious existence — something akin to final 
 absorption into the unknowable ! 
 
 It must be evident to every impartial student of the 
 Oriental religions that the aspirations of Buddhists, the 
 true construction of their ancient writings, and the present 
 testimony of their most learned priests, all go to shew that 
 Nirvana is not, in even a subordinate sense, extinction of 
 conscious existence ! And further, it is most distinctly 
 stated in the Buddhist Scriptures — scriptures that may be 
 traced to the age of Guatama Buddha himself — that Buddha 
 enjoyed Nirvana while yet in his mortal body ; and that he 
 appeared to his disciples in his glorified state after his 
 physical dissolution. To this end Max Muller says : “ If 
 we consider that Buddha himself, after he had already seen 
 Nirvana, still remains on earth until his body falls a prey to 
 death ; that in the legends Buddha appears to his disciples, 
 even after his death ; it seems to me that aU these circum- 
 stances are hardly reconcilable with the orthodox meta- 
 physical doctrine of Nirvana** Again, he says : “ Nirvana 
 
10 
 
 means tlie extinction of many things : of selfishness, desire, 
 and sin without going so far as the extinction of conscious- 
 ness, and even existence.” 
 
 In reviewing Max Muller’s “ Dhammapada,” James 
 D ’Alexis, F.R.A.S., and Member of the Parliamentary 
 Coimcil of Ceylon, after admitting that Guatama Buddha 
 attained not only Buddahood, but a foretaste of Nirvana 
 while yet in his body, through temperance, self-sacrifice, 
 prayer, and holy living, thus continues : “ But the relative 
 happiness of the Buddhist Nirvana is one which is acquired 
 in this very life. He jv’ho reaches the end of births has 
 attained Nirvana. He who has received his last body, and 
 is yet alive, has attained Nirvana. These and numerous 
 other texts clearly shew that man attains Nirvana in this 
 very Hfe.” And so a similar class of texts in the New 
 Testament shew that Nirvana — eternal hfe, that is, 
 spiritual life — is to be attained in a degree and largely 
 enjoyed in this present world. Such is the import of these 
 Biblical passages : “ And this is hfe eternal “ I am the 
 resurrection and the hfe “Walk in the spirit;” “Be of 
 good cheer, I have overcome the world.” That rehgious 
 body known in America as Shakers, and who in doctrines 
 and practices more nearly resemble the Buddhists than any 
 other class of rehgionists, denominate this Nirvana-life, the 
 resui’rection-hfe. It is the calm, serene hfe of the soul, 
 virtually hfted out of, and liAung above the plane of the 
 carnal nature and the earthly passions. It is spiritual 
 emancipation and victory ! 
 
 Buddha, speaking of a Rahan named Tharnula, said “ he 
 had conquered aU his passions, and attained the state of 
 Nirvana.” 
 
 When a Buddhist, through aspiration and effort, has 
 attained a very high degree of spirituahty, he is considered a 
 Hahat. And these Rahats, by dieting, by fasting, and 
 prayer, become so spiritual, so ethereal that they can rise in 
 the air, control to some degree the elements, and can even 
 become invisible, or vanish from sight, as did Jesus when 
 walking upon earth so many days in his spiritually- 
 materialised body. 
 
11 
 
 Nagasena, a Buddliist missionary before tbe Cbristian 
 era, said : is' tbe divine rest; the destroying of 
 
 the infinite sorrow of the world, the abode of abodes that 
 cannot be explained.” 
 
 And Wong-Chin-Fu, a Chinese scholar and Buddhist, 
 who has been recently travelling in America, remarked 
 repeatedly : “ By Nirvana we all understand a final re- 
 union with Q-od, coincident with the perfection of the human 
 spirit by its ultimate disembarrassment of matter. It is the 
 very opposite oi personal annihilation^' 
 
 In the opinion of all thoughtful Buddhists, Nirvana is 
 to be obtained only through struggle, self-denial, renuncia- 
 tion of worldly pleasures, release from selfish entanglements, 
 abstemious living, holy aspiration, and a sweet trust in the 
 illimitable, ineffable Oversoul of the Universe. And it con- 
 sists in the fruition of all hopes, the realisation of all 
 enchanting dreams, the fulfilment of all divine prophecies, 
 the eternal becoming, the fadeless glory of a conscious 
 imm ortality I 
 
 THE SAfIRIFICIAL ATONEMENT. 
 
 The great system of Buddhism knows nothing of a 
 crucified Saviour — nothing of salvation through atoning 
 blood. Its basic foundation rests upon the immutable 
 principle of cause and effect. Sin and punishment, virtue 
 and happiness are inseparably connected, according to the 
 doctrines of Gruatama Buddha. Listen : — 
 
 “ Sin will come back upon tbe sinful, like fine dust thrown 
 against the wind.” 
 
 “ An evil deed does not turn suddenly like milk; but smouldering, 
 it follows the fool, like fire covered by ashes.” 
 
 “ Thyself is its own defence, its own refuge ; it atones for its own 
 sins ; none can purify another. ” 
 
 “ All we are is the result of what we have thought. If a man 
 speaks or acts with evil thoughts, pain follows, as the wheel the foot 
 of him who draws the carriage.” 
 
 “The virtuous man rejoices in this world, and he will rejoice in 
 the next ; in both worlds has he joy. He rejoices, he exults, seeing 
 the purity of his deed.” 
 
 “ These wise people, meditative, steady, always possessed of 
 strong powers, attain to Nirvana, the highest felicity !” 
 
12 
 
 In tlie “ Indian Saint ; or Buddha and Buddhism,” a 
 most excellent volume by C. D. B. M*ills, the author declares 
 that “ There is no doctrine of commercial substitution here, 
 nor a shade of our Western dream of atonement by vicarious 
 blood.” He further says that *• Spence Hardy, a Wesleyan 
 missionary, many years resident in Ceylon, finds this one of 
 the most hopeless things in the prospect regarding the con- 
 version of the Buddhists ; they know notliing of the 
 salvation by blood ; it is so foreign to their entire system of 
 religion that there is found no place in the Oriental mind 
 wherein to graft such a conception. The Buddhist knows 
 nothing of an atonement.” 
 
 THE MORAL INFLTJEXCE OP BUDDHISM. 
 
 The tone of morality is higher, and the practice of 
 charitable deeds far more prevalent in Buddhist than in 
 Christian countries. This will be conceded by every unpre- 
 judiced traveller, and by every candid and trustworthy 
 foreign resident of Ceylon, Siam, China, and the East. 
 Only last week a bull-fight was indulged in at Madrid, in 
 honour of the marriage festival of the King and Queen. 
 And Spain, remember, is a Christian country. Magnificent 
 cathedrals dot the great cities, and costly churches crown the 
 hill-tops. The cross is the dominant symbol, and Mass is 
 the solemn song, and the ever-recurring echo of the passing 
 years. And yet the nobility — the elite, even the ladies, of 
 the realm, assemble to witness a brutal bull-fight ; where 
 Christian men, dressed like savages, shake crimson rags at 
 bulls to madden them for the bloody fray ! And when 
 these poor animals’ sides were pierced with flaming goads ; 
 when the hides of the horses were ripped and torn ; when 
 the men in the ring were bruised and wounded ; and when 
 pools of blood covered the ground, these ladies — the Christian 
 ladies of Eoman Catholic Spain — cheered and waved their 
 handkerchiefs — so say the Spanish journals ! It is sad to 
 write, though true, that buU-fights, dog-fights, and men- 
 fights — the latter under the name of war — indicate the 
 status of Christian morals in this evening-time of the nine- 
 teenth century. 
 
13 
 
 Tho columns of the English newspapers are often crowded 
 with records of drunkenness, robberies, midnight fightings, 
 and high-handed murders. The London Times, treating of 
 a terrible murder that transpired a few days ago in the West 
 End, says : — 
 
 “ The circumstances, as we have them set out palpably 
 before us, are a miserable revelation of the brutality of which 
 men and women Living around us are capable.” 
 
 In America, vith its 60,000 clergymen, milKons of 
 Bibles, and salaried revivalists, the state of morals is no 
 better. Of this the public journals offer abundant proof. 
 The editor of the Sornellsville Times declares that — 
 
 “ The records of the past have never presented a more 
 fearful and corrupt state of society than now exists through^ 
 out the United States. The newspapers from every quarter 
 are becoming more and more loaded with the records of 
 crime.” 
 
 The Scientific American says 
 
 “ It is admitted by all parties that crimes of the most 
 outrageous and unprecedented character abound throughout 
 the cormtry to a degree wholly unparalleled.” 
 
 Though I have travelled twice around the world 
 spending days in Buddhist temples, months in the homes of 
 Brahmans and Buddhists, and years in their countries, I 
 never saw a Buddhist in a state of intoxication. Murder is 
 comparatively unknown ; theft is uncommon ; and profanity 
 prevails only so far as Oriental people have mingled with the 
 Christian nations of the West. To this end, Wong-Chin-fu 
 a Chinese orator and Buddhist, said, when lecturing in 
 Chicago, U.S.A. — 
 
 “ I challenge any man to say that he ever heard a 
 Chinese man, woman, or child, take the name of Almighty 
 God in vain, unless it was in the English language after he 
 had become demoralised.” 
 
 Bishop Bigandet testifies not only to the general kind- 
 heartedness, chastity, and morality of Buddhists, but to the 
 ameliorating influences of the system upon woman. Their 
 
14 
 
 religion ignores caste, and they naturally accept the theory 
 that we are all brothers. Their hearts seem full of tender- 
 ness. They carefully care for the sick and the aged. 
 Keverenee and love for parents is proverbial in the East. 
 
 The following constitutes the ethical code, or the five 
 great commandments of the Buddhists: — 
 
 I. Thou shalt not kill. 
 
 II. Thou shalt not steal. 
 
 III. Thou shalt not commit adultery. 
 
 IV. Thou shalt not speak untruths. 
 
 V. Thou shalt not take any intoxicating drink. 
 
 This moral code has been amplified in some of the 
 Buddhist countries, the commandments being increased to 
 ten in number. Substantially embodying the five, and 
 adding others from their sacred canon, they stand thus : — 
 
 I. Thou shalt kill no animal whatever, from the 
 meanest insect up to man. 
 
 II. Thou shalt not steal. 
 
 III. Thou shalt not violate the wife of another. 
 
 IV. Thou shalt speak no word that is false. 
 
 V. Thou shalt not drink wine, nor anything that 
 may intoxicate. 
 
 VI. Thou shalt avoid all anger, hatred, and bitter 
 
 language. 
 
 VII. Thou shalt not indulge in idle and vain talk. 
 
 VIII. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s goods. 
 
 IX. Thou shalt not harbour envy, nor pride, nor 
 revenge, nor malice, nor the desire of thy 
 neighbour’s death or misfortune. 
 
 X. Thou shalt not follow the doctrines of false gods. 
 
 Those who keep these commandments ; who subdue their 
 passions ; who strive to live up to their divinest ideal ; who 
 through struggle conquer their selfishness, and hold the 
 perfect mastery over the lower earthly self, are on the way 
 to Nirvana — the rest of Buddha. 
 
15 
 
 “ The rest of Boodh ! The starry rest of Boodh t 
 The lore of old, and the ancestral feud, 
 
 Shall move no more, forgotten and forgiven, 
 
 In the repose of Heaven. 
 
 The stars may fall ; the sun be turned to blood ; 
 
 The earth be shrouded in a fiery flood ; 
 
 The heavens be rolled together as a scroll ; 
 
 The form and face of nature be renewed ; 
 
 Stdl shall abide the all-pervading Soul, 
 
 And still the calm of those who rest in Boodh.” 
 
 WUAT DO BUDDHISTS EAT? — AND WHAT ARE THEIB 
 AIMS OF LIFE ? 
 
 The word Buddha signifies enlightened — divinely 
 illumined. Though Guatama Buddha sought to induce 
 others to become self-sacrificing and pure, that thetj might 
 also become Buddhas, he professed no infallible leadership. 
 On the contrary, choosing a peaceful life of self-denial, he 
 hid himself behind the doctrines and truths he uttered. And 
 this has ever been my aim, whether in my native country, or 
 afar in foreign lands. It has also been the noble aim of my 
 co-workers in this reconstructive era of angel ministrants. 
 Inspirational truths, moral conquests, and impersonal prin- 
 ciples are the true leaders that lead men up on to the 
 mountain tops of holiness and harmony. The truths 
 
 enunciated by that great Indian sage, Buddha, have led 
 millions in the way of the better life. 
 
 Rice is the great staple of food in all Buddhist countries ; 
 and the general teachings of Buddhist priests are in favour 
 of vegetables, grains, and fruits, as food. Though some of 
 these religionists are fiesh-eating in a moderate way, their 
 strictest and holiest men, their consecrated o)ies, never touch 
 nor taste of animal food. The priests usually wear plain 
 yellow robes ; and, as they live upon alms, they are compelled 
 to take what is given them ; and this sometimes consists in 
 part of animal food. They eat it not from choice, but rather 
 from necessity. If the animal was killed especially for them 
 they would not taste it. 
 
 The whole spirit of Buddhism is against flesh-eating, 
 because all life is sacred, because of the pain produced in 
 
16 
 
 killing animals, and because eating animal food tends to 
 grossness of body and stupidity of mind. Buddhists use no 
 strong drinks or liquors. The priests generally eat but one 
 meal a day, and that in the forenoon. Should they eat two, 
 they would partake of them both before the sun had passed the 
 noon-day meridian. The afternoons and evenings they 
 devote to works of charity, to prayer, and meditation. 
 
 THE DEATH OF GUATAMA BUDDHA. 
 
 The general testimony of scholars, as well as the histories 
 of the Siamese, Birmese, and Singhalese, unite in the opinion 
 that Sakya-Muni Gluatama Buddha died a natural death, at 
 the age of about eighty years, the event occurring during the 
 reign of Adzatathat. Ills body, on the eighth day after its 
 death, was burned, and during the time of the cremation 
 the “ nats,” exalted intelligences in the heavenly world, hover- 
 ing over the corpse, discoursed sweet music, and threw down 
 upon the assei bl , je delicious perfumes. 
 
 According to the books and the legends of the East, 
 Buddha not only wrought such marvellous works as healing 
 the sick by a single touch, controlling the elements, sailing 
 through the air attended by his Mahans, and visiting other 
 worlds, but he foresaw and prophetically announced his 
 approaching end. Accordingly, Bishop Bigandet, who fre- 
 quently speaks of Buddha’s entering into a state of trance, 
 informs us that when the great sage, weary and worn, had 
 reached Welnwa he was taken with a painful sickness. But 
 says the Bishop, “ knowing that this was not the place he 
 was to select for his last moments, he overcame the evil 
 influences of the illness, and entering soon into a state of 
 absolute trance, he remained there for awhile. Awakening 
 from this situation, he appeared anew with his usual state of 
 strength.”* But the infirmities of age were upon him. 
 And though nominally in his body, he lived upon the verge 
 of Heaven. When sitting one day under the sala-trees to 
 give dying advice to Ananda, it was announced that 
 
 Bigandet’s Life of Buddha, p. 261. 
 
17 
 
 Thoubat wished to see him. He was admitted to Buddha’s 
 presence to converse upon religion. After a few moments, 
 as was his custom, of quiet contemplation, Buddha said, “ I 
 have spent fifty-one years following the ways of Ariahs, the 
 ways of self-denial and good works, observing the wheel of 
 the law. These lead to Nirvana. To follow the path is to 
 become a Buddha, and all may become Buddhas. For 
 twenty-nine years up to this moment I have striven to obtain 
 the supreme and perfect science. I have attained it. I am 
 at peace.” Approaching his closing hours and calling 
 Anauda and the Eahans, he said, “ When I shall have dis- 
 appeared from this state of existence and be no longer with 
 you, do not believe that the Buddha has left you and ceased 
 to dwell among you.. .Do not think, therefore, nor believe 
 that the Buddha has disappeared, and is no more with you.” 
 Ananda was Buddha’s cousin, and their mutual love was 
 excelled only by that existing between John and Jesus. In 
 the true harmonial man, intellect and affections balance. 
 Buddha’s last hours were spent in preaching, and in counselling 
 his friends upon those great spiritual themes that had oc- 
 cupied the prime and the setting years of his bfe. He passed 
 away in the morning — a morning whose sun can know no 
 setting. 
 
 2 
 
id 
 
 TB[E BUDDHIST CONTROVEBST. 
 
 As HELD AT PaNTURA, NEAR CoLOMBO, CeYLON, 
 
 On Tuesday, 2Qth August, 1873. 
 
 Those who are acquainted with the every day village life in 
 Ceylon can form no idea of the appearance Pantura presented 
 on the occasion of the great controversy between the Protes- 
 tants and Buddhists. The time appointed for commencing the 
 discussion was eight o’clock in the morning, and long before 
 that hour thousands of natives were seen wending their way, 
 attired in their gayest holiday suits, into the large enclosure 
 in which stood the ample bungalow where the adversaries were 
 to meet. By seven the green was one sea of heads. Each 
 district had sent its quota of villagers, and Colombo was 
 represented by a few intellectual looking, silk-garbed young 
 Singhalese, determined to give up all for the great champion 
 of Buddhism — Migettuwatte. 
 
 The Protestant party too was very strong. From 
 Monday, catechists and clergymen of every denomination. 
 Baptist, Wesleyan and Church Missionary, flocked from 
 various parts of the Island into the large house prepared 
 for them, one of them, an Oriental scholar of some 
 note, leaving the itinerating work in the wilds of 
 Anoorajapoora, to take part in this important discussion, and 
 assist the Protestant spokesman — Rev. David Silva. The 
 temporary building, the scene of this polemical strife, was a 
 neat cadjan-roofed structure with a raised platform, and 
 parted off in the middle : one portion was occupied by the 
 Rev. David Silva and his party, and the other by the Rev. 
 Mohatti watte Gunanda, commonlv known as Migettu- 
 watte, and about 200 priests. An attempt had been made to 
 
19 
 
 ascertain the numerical strength of each faction, by parting 
 off the compound, by a fence put up in a line with the parti- 
 tion of the platform on which the reverend gentlemen sat> 
 but the increasing numbers prevented the arrangement being 
 carried out. The bungalow itself presented a very gay ap- 
 pearance ; the half of it occupied by the Protestant party was 
 decorated with ever-greens, and had a ceiling and cloths on 
 the table as white as snow. The Buddhists, however, went in 
 for more colour ; they had rich damask table covers, a ceiling 
 which reminded one of the tri- colour flag of the French, and 
 festoonings of variegated hues, in addition to the yellow silk 
 or satin robes of the priests themselves. These were not all. 
 A posse of the Ceylon Police were also there, officered by In- 
 spector Ekenayeke, who was in his uniform ; gloved, belted, 
 and mounted on his noble steed, he was seen drilling a hand- 
 ful of police — some fourteen men — and performing all sorts 
 of evolutions amongst the crowds ; but the order and quiet- 
 ness which prevailed amongst the five or six thousand men 
 were not due to their presence, as was evidenced in more 
 than one instance during the meeting. 
 
 All this, the yellow robed priests, the sable attire of the 
 Protestant clergymen, the fantastic dresses of the immense 
 multitude, the Inspector stalking perfectly erect on the walk 
 lined on each side by children of all ages and complexions, 
 the slow murmur of human voices rising at times like the 
 waves of the ocean, interspersed occasionally by the clear 
 voices of the ubiquitous sherbet- vendor, and the roasted gram 
 seller — the invariable concomitants of a Ceylon crowd — ren- 
 dered the scene perfectly picturesque. Larger crowds may 
 often be seen in very many places in Europe, but surely such 
 a motley gathering as that which congregated on this occa- 
 sion can only be seen in the East. Imagine them all seated 
 down and listening with wrapt attention to a yellow robed 
 priest, holding forth from the platform filled with Buddhist 
 priests, clergymen, and Singhalese clad in their national cos- 
 tume, and your readers can form some idea — a very faint one 
 indeed — of the heterogeneous mass that revelled in a display 
 of Singhalese eloquence seldom heard in this country. 
 
 So much for the general appearance of the scene ; and 
 
 2—2 
 
20 
 
 now a few words concerning the speakers — ^at least concerning 
 one of them — the Buddhist priest, Migettuwatte — as he is 
 comparatively unknown to very many. He is a well-made 
 man of apparently forty-five or fifty years of age, rather short, 
 very intellectual looking, with eyes expressive of great dis- 
 trust, and a smile which ’ may either mean profoun 1 
 satisfaction or supreme contempt. Years ago, owing to some 
 differences with his confreres, he left the sect to which he be- 
 longed, and established a temple of his own at Cottanchiua (in 
 close proximity to St. Thomas’ College, Mutwal, and com- 
 menced, with the aid of a well educated native, reg\darly 
 delivering a series of lecture?, and publishing, in a printing 
 press established by himself, pamphlets against Christianity. 
 The Wesleyans, the only denomination who ever took the 
 trouble to come forward in defence of the religion of Christ, 
 held various meetings, and the addresses delivered by the 
 learned Pali scholar. Rev. Silva, the Rev. Perera and Mr. 
 John Perera at these gatherings, to the substance of whose 
 speeches permanence was subsequently given in the several 
 periodicals issued by this Society, terminated this quiet con- 
 troversy in about the year 1867. The desirability of personal 
 argument, however, occurred to the minds of the disputants 
 only a few years afterwards, and the Baddegaine monster 
 meeting, in which the Church missionaries took a leading 
 part, was the first important assembly of the kind ; but as on 
 that occasion the discussion was entirely carried on in writing, 
 no opportunity was afforded to the general public of judging 
 of the comparative merits of the leading men of the two 
 parties. On the present occasion no such conditions hampered 
 the disputants. Each man was allowed one full hour to 
 speak, and either to expose the unsoundness of the opponent’s 
 ireligion, or to reply to his adversary’s strictures, or both. 
 
 As the Rev. David Silva was the first to make some state- 
 ments adverse to Buddhism, in one of a series of sermons 
 which he was then preaching in the Pantura Wesleyan 
 ■Chapel, to which Migettuwatte took exception, and denounced 
 as untrue, and the accuracy of which he called upon any 
 'Christian to establish, he (Mr. Silva) was asked to open the 
 proceedings by stating his arguments against Buddhism. 
 
21 
 
 The proceedings commenced each day at 8 a.m., and closed 
 at 10 ; they were again resumed at 3 in the afternoon, and 
 terminated at 5 o’clock ; and as only two days were fixed for 
 the controversy, each speaker thus had four hours. The 
 Buddhist priest, it will be seen, had by this arrangement the 
 privilege of having the last word, no mean privilege on 
 any occasion, and to such a consummate master of public 
 speaking as Migettuwatte the advantages of this position 
 were incalculable. The Christian advocate — klr. Silva — is 
 a learned and fluent speaker : full of Pali and Sanscrit, he 
 addressed the audience as if each of his hearers was a James 
 Alwis, a Louis Zoysa, a Childers, or a Max Miiller ; he was 
 never at a loss for words, but he forgot that the powers of 
 comprehension in his audience were limited, and that the 
 abstruse metaphysics of Buddha and the learned disquisitions 
 on The Skandh^is, Ai/'daaas, and Patichasamnphada, in which, 
 he seems to be quite at home, are not adapted to the capacities 
 of his hearers. It is doubtful whether there were even thirty 
 out of the five or six thousand who were present at this 
 controversy who even understood the ornate, though chaste 
 and classic language in which his explanations of these 
 almost incompsehensible subjects were couched, much less the 
 subjects themselves. His renderings of the Pali extracts 
 may be correct, but who was to judge of this? Certainly 
 not the peasantry who hailed from the jungles of Raigam 
 and Pasdoom Cories. Even the Christian party was so 
 conscious of this error of judgment, if nothing more, that 
 they felt chagrined ; and several gave vent to their opinions 
 in rather forcible language at the apparent success of the 
 Buddhists on the first day. The Rev. Migettuwatte Grunanda 
 is just the reverse of this. He adapts himself to the 
 capabilities of his audience, and uses the plainest language 
 that the proper treatment of the subjects will allow. 
 Laughing at the idea of Mr. Silva, who in his opinion has 
 only a mere smattering of Pali, attempting to translate 
 difficult extracts from works in that language, he gets over 
 difficulties by arguments more plausible than sound. Of all 
 the weak points in Protestantism, he only touches upon those 
 which will excite the ridicule of the people and evoke a smile 
 
22 
 
 of derisive contempt, and winds up a very effective speecli, 
 rendered the more attractive by motions made with con- 
 summate skill, with a brilliant peroration to which the 
 “ great unwashed ” listen with deep attention, and the accents 
 of which ring in their ears for some minutes after delivery. 
 
 Amongst those present in the bungalow we noticed the 
 Revs. S. Langdon, R. Tebb, S. Coles, C. Jayesinghe, 
 P. Rodrigo, Jos, Fernando, L. Nathanielsz, 0. J. Grunasekara, 
 J. H. Abayasekara, II. Martensz, H. Silva, Juan de Silva, 
 D. Fonseka, S. Soysa Modliar, Dr. Staples, Proctors 
 Jayesinghe, Daniel, and Alwis, and a host of catechists 
 and others. Supporting the Buddhist champion were the 
 learned High Priest of Adam’s Peak, Sipkaduwe Sumangaa- 
 bhildhana, Bulatgama Dhammalankara Sri Sumanatissa, 
 Dhammalankara, Subhuti, Potuwilla Indajoti, Koggala 
 Sanghatissa, Amaramoli, Gunaratana, and Weligame Teru- 
 nanses, — the ablest Oriental scholars amongst the Buddhist 
 priests of this Island. 
 
 REV. DAVID DE SILVA ’s FIRST SPEECH. 
 
 Two minutes before the appointed hour, the Rev. 0. 
 Jayesinghe (C.M.S.) stepped forward, and in a very few 
 words, begged the audience to give that attention and quiet 
 hearing to what Rev. Mr. Silva had to say which the import- 
 ance of the matters he would touch upon deserved. In 
 behalf of the Buddhists, the aged priest “ Bulatgame ’’followed 
 in the same strain ; and hoped that the speakers would not 
 forget to use temperate language during the discussion. 
 
 Precisely as the clock struck eight, the Rev. David de 
 Silva rose to address the crowd. He stated that before 
 engaging in the controversy it was necessary to explain the 
 reasons for holding it. On the 12th of June last he delivered 
 a lecture in the Wesleyan Chapel, Pantura, on the teachings 
 of Buddha with reference to the human soul : on the 19th of 
 the same month it was taken exception to by the Buddhist 
 party, and denounced as untrue. The present occasion was, 
 therefore, appointed to shew that the doctrine of Buddhism 
 was with reference to the soul, and he hoped that the 
 Buddhist party would, if possible, meet his argument 
 
23 
 
 properly ; and that the assembly would judge for themselves 
 what statements were to be received as sound. 
 
 He stated that Buddhism taught that man had no soul, 
 and that the identical man received not the reward of his 
 good or had actions. 
 
 According to Buddhism, the satta, sentient beings, are 
 constituted in the five khandhds, namely rupdk-khandha, 
 the organised body, wedandk-khandha, the sensations, sannak- 
 khandha, the perceptions, sankharak-khandha, the reasoning 
 powers, and wiamnak-khandha, consciousness. In proof of this, 
 he quoted the following from Sanyouttanikaya, a section of 
 Buddha’s sermons, and from the Sutrapitaka. 
 
 Pauehime khikkhave khande desissami P anchupadanakkh ne 
 ca tain siinatha katameca bhikkhave pnncakkiianda yam khichi 
 hhikhhave rupani atitanagata pachcuppannani ajjhattain la 
 hahiddha va olarikaln va sukhumam m hinain va panitam va yam 
 dure m santike va ayam vuchehati rupckkhando. 
 
 Priests, I will declare the five Khandhas and the five Up- 
 adanakkhandas ; hear it. Priests, what are the five Khandhas? 
 Priests, the body, whether past, future, or present, whether 
 intrinsic or foreign, whether gross or minute, base or excellent, 
 remote or near, this is called Bupak-khandha, the material 
 form. 
 
 Ya kaci hhikkhave vedana 
 Ya kaci hhikkhave sanna 
 Ya kaci bhikkhave sankhara 
 Yan bhikkhave vinnanan 
 TIpadanakhanda, cleaving Khan- 
 
 Yan kinc. 
 
 So of Wedana 
 So of Sanna 
 So of Sankhara 
 So of Winnana 
 
 The same is said of the 
 dhas. 
 
 Kafame ca bhikkhave pancupanakkhandha ? 
 bhikkhave rupan ahtanagata paccuppanan, etc.^ etc. 
 
 Priests, what are the five Upadanak-khandas? Priests, 
 therupa, whether past, future, or present, whether intrinsic or 
 extrinsic, whether gross or minute, base or excellent, remote 
 or near, that is called rupapadanak~khanda. So of Wedana, 
 Sanna, Sankhara, and Winnana. 
 
 Yehi keci bhikkhave Samana va Brahmana va aneke vihitan 
 attanan Samanupassamana Samanupassanti Sabbe'te pancupada- 
 nakkhandhe Sammanupassati, 
 
24 
 
 Priests, any priest or Bralimin looking to one’s variegated 
 self sees anything, all that, are seen in the five cleaving 
 khandas. 
 
 Also from the following verse from Kawyasekara, the best 
 Elu poetical work extant. 
 
 Faskanda sa kelese 
 Duknam weya emese 
 Fu weyiii sanrese. 
 
 Satara vinnena namin mepase. 
 
 The five defiled constitute sorrow; they are, rupa, 
 icedana^ sauna, sankhara, and wimiana. 
 
 This same individual, it was declared, was comprised in 
 the twelve Ayatanas, organs, Chakkha-yatana, the eye, sota- 
 yatana, the ear, ghana-yatana, the nose, Jiwha-yatana, the 
 tongue, Kaya-yatana, the body, mana yatana, the mind with 
 theii’ haluddha-yatanay external aya-tanas, rupa, bodily form, 
 sadda, sound, gandha, odour, rasa, flavour, potthahba, touch, 
 and dhamma, events. The following extracts will bear out 
 this statement. 
 
 Katamauca hhikkhave salayatanan, cakkhayatanan sotayata- 
 nam ghanayatanam jivhayatanam kayayatanam manayatanam. 
 
 Priests, what are the six ayatanas ? the ear, the nose, 
 the tongue, the body and the mind. 
 
 Sabham vo bhikkhave desissami, tarn sunatha. Kimca hhik- 
 khave sabbam ? Cakkhunceva rupanca, sotanca, saddanea, 
 ghananea, ghandnea jivhaca rasaea, kayaca potthabbaca, manoea, 
 dhammaca ; idam vuccati bhikkhave sabbam. 
 
 Priests, I will preach to you sabban, the whole ; hear ye, 
 priests, what is the wliole ? the eye and the bodily form, the 
 ear and the sound, the nose and the odour, the tongue and 
 the flavour, the body and the touch, the mind and the 
 events. Priests, this is called the whole. 
 
 Again according to the following authorities, nama and 
 rupa constituted the whole man. 
 
 Katamanca bhikkhave nama rupan, wedana sanna cetana 
 phasso manesikaro ; idam vuccati namam. Cattaroca maha 
 bhutaca catunnaca maha bhutanam upadaya rupam. Idain 
 vuccati rupam. 
 
 Priests, what are the nama rupa, wedana, sensation, sanna. 
 
25 
 
 perception, chef am, tlie faculty of reason, phasso, toucli, and 
 manasiharo, mental objects ? this is called the nama. That 
 which is compounded of these four elements is called rupa. 
 
 Tatthn Icatamam namam ? Wedanakhhandho,sannakkdandho, 
 saiikharakkhandho Idam vuccatinamam. 
 
 What is nama ? sensation, perception, and discrimination. 
 Again, in the 2Iilindaprasne it is stated. 
 
 Tam olarikain etam rupam, ye sukkuma citta cetacika 
 dhamma eatam namam. 
 
 Anything gross, that is rupa, anything small, the mind 
 and thoughts, these are nama. Thus the first four Khandhas 
 evidently are mentioned as constituting nama rupa. But 
 from the following quotation it would appear that the fifth 
 khandha, consciousness, could not exist independently of the 
 four former. 
 
 To bhikkhace evam tadeipja aham anna rupeya annatha veda- 
 nayn anmtha sannaya annatha sankharehi vinnanassa agatini va 
 gatini ca cutini va appathne va vuddim va virulhim va vepuUdin 
 m pannapcsnamiti n etam thanam vijjati. 
 
 Priests, if anyone say I will shew the arrival and the 
 departure, the death and the birth, the growth, the amplifica- 
 tion, and the full development of ^rinnana, consciousness 
 independent of body or of sensation or of perception or of 
 discrimination, the cause is not as he states it, i.e., it is not 
 true, thus shewing that consciousness must be included with 
 the other four khandhas. 
 
 Again, from the follovnng quotations from the comment 
 of Wihhanga it would appear tliat all the five khandhas come 
 into existence together and at the same time ; — 
 
 Gahbha seyyaka sattanam hipatis patisandhikkhane pancake 
 khandha apachcha apure ekato pdtuhhavanti. 
 
 Beings conceived in the womb, at the moment of concep- 
 tion the five khandhas come into existence ; neither before nor 
 after, they come into existence together. 
 
 Evaeme gabbhaseyyadnan patisandhikkhandhane pancak- 
 khandha paripunna honti. 
 
 Thus, those that are conceived, at the moment of con- 
 ception the five khandhas are perfect. 
 
26 
 
 And also from tlie following verse from Kawyasekara. 
 Nam ru deka hem 
 Neta an inujul hehera 
 Pevata deka nohera 
 Sii/alu katayutu vcya nitora. 
 
 Besides narna ruma there is nothing else that constitutes 
 the individual ; by these two in connection at all times every- 
 thing proper is performed. 
 
 Thus is proved that the whole individual is constituted 
 in the five khandhas, or in the twelve ayatanas or in numn 
 rupa. 
 
 Now from the following extracts it will be seen that 
 Buddha denies the existence of a soul either in the Khandhas 
 or Ayatana. 
 
 Piipam hhikkhave anattam, yadanattam n’etam mama n'eno 
 ’hamasmin paneso attati. 
 
 Organised form, Priests, is not self, that which is not self 
 is not mind, I am not that, that is, not to me a soul. 
 
 So of Wedana, Sauna, Sankhara, and Winnana. 
 
 The same is said of rupa, present, past, and future, etc. 
 
 Yam kanci rupam atitanayata paccappannam ajjhattam vn 
 bahiddha va olarikam va sukhumam va hinam va panitam va yam 
 dure va santike va sahbam rupam n'etatn mama wV.su ’hamasrni 
 namem attati evametam yathalmtam sammappanaya datthabbam. 
 
 The body, whether past, future, or present, whether 
 belonging to the individual or to others, whether gross 
 or minute, base or excellent, remote or near, all that body 
 is not mine, is not myself, that is not my soul. 
 
 So of Wedana, Sanna, Sankhara, Winnana. 
 
 It is also stated, as will he seen from the following 
 extracts, that the very cause of the Khandhas was soulless 
 and that there was no soul to be found : — 
 
 Rupam hhikkhave anattamopi hctu yopi paccayo npassa 
 uppadaya sopi anattam anattasambhutam rupam kuto attam- 
 bhvissati. 
 
 Priests, body is not a soul ; if there he any cause or 
 paccayo (that on account of which the thing is produced) 
 for the production of the body, that too is soulless ; when 
 the body is soulless whence can there be a soul ? ’ 
 
27 
 
 So oiWedana, Sanna, SanMiara, Winnana. 
 
 The same is stated respecting the ayatanas ; they are soul- 
 less, and in them there was no soul to be found. The 
 following texts will bear out this statement. 
 
 Cakkhum hhikkhave anattam yopi hetu yopi paccaya cakhhitssa 
 uppaclaya sopi anattam anattasambhutam hikkhave cakkhum kuto 
 uttam bliavksati. 
 
 Priests, the eye is not a soul ; if there be any cause or 
 sequence for the production of the eye, that too is soulless ; 
 when the eye is soulless whence can there be a soul ? 
 
 So of sota, ear, ghana, nose, jivha, tongue, kaya, figure, 
 mano, mind. 
 
 In defining death, it is stated— 
 
 Katamanca bhikkhave maranam ? Yam tesam tesam sattanam 
 tamha tamha satta nikaya cuti cavanta bhedo antaradhanam 
 maccu maranam kalakiriya khandhanam bhedo, kalebarassa 
 nikkhepo. Idam vuccati maranan. 
 
 Priests, what is death ? It is the cessation of existence in 
 each state, the breaking up of the frame, the vanishing of its 
 parts, the destruction of the body, decease, the breaking up 
 of the Khandhas, the throwing away of the lifeless frame — 
 this is death. 
 
 In the advice given by Buddha to the priests to cast away 
 all desire the following passage occurs : — 
 
 Yo bhikkhave rupaamin chandarago tarn pajahatha, evam tarn 
 ritpam pahinam bhavissati iicchinna mulam talavatthu katam 
 anabhava katam ayatim anuppada dhammani. 
 
 Priests, put off attachment to the body ; thus that material 
 form will cease to be, will be cut up by the roots, be eradi- 
 cated, be reduced to non-existence, prevent future birth. 
 
 In the Mahapadhana siittam it is stated — 
 
 Yam kind samudaya dhammam tarn nirodha dhammam ; that 
 which comes into existence wiU cease to be. 
 
 From these authorities it is clear that Buddhism teaches 
 that everything which constitutes man will cease to be at 
 death, and that no immortal soul existed therein, and if then 
 man was only a brute what need had he of a rehgion ? can 
 he possess any moral principle ? 
 
 Thus if the Khandhai Ayatanas, and Nama and Rapa con- 
 
28 
 
 Btituted the whole of man, and if Buddha himself denied the 
 existence of Atnia in either of these constituents, and dis- 
 tinctly declared that these would be completely broken up, 
 it followed that there was no Atnia or soul, which survived 
 the body, but that the human being was on a par with tiie 
 frog, pig, or any other member of the brute creation. If this 
 were so, and nothing remained of the present man, any being 
 which would exist hereafter and sutfer punisliment or reap 
 the rewards for the actions committed in this world, which 
 the Buddhists say would be the case, must be a different 
 being, and could not by any possibility be the identical 
 IDerson who committed those actions. And this led the 
 learned lecturer to the second point on which he proposed to 
 speak, but before entering it, he would quote a few authorities 
 from the Holy Scriptures to shew his hearers why the 
 Christians believed in the existence of a soul. The attempt 
 made by the Buddhists to controvert these distinct declara- 
 tions, contained in the Bible, with reference to tlie soul, 
 was as futile and silly as the attempt of a small child to 
 conceal the bright rays of the sun by the aid of a lighted 
 candle. lie would now refer them to the following 
 passages from “ Giod’s Bible,” wliich he likened unto the 
 noon-day sun. 
 
 And Jesus said unto him. Verily I say unto thee, To-day 
 shalt thou be with me in Paradise. Luke xxiii. 43. 
 
 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, T/ord, 
 lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, 
 he fell asleep. Acts vii. 60. 
 
 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, 
 ha\'e judged already, as though I were present, concerning 
 him that hath so done this deed. 1 Cor. v. 3. 
 
 And now with reference to the second point, that it was 
 not the identical person who committed good or bad that 
 received the reward or suffered punishment, he would quote 
 the following passages from Saniyntta nikaya. 
 
 Khmiikho bho Gofamd so karoti so patisaimediyatiili so 
 karofi so patisanvcdenatiti Bralnnana, ayam eko anto. 
 
 What Gotama (asks a Brahmin) does he who commits 
 the action reap its reward. Brahmin the thought that he 
 
29 
 
 who commits the action reaping its reward is one extreme 
 {i.e.y a mistake). 
 
 Again, Xing Milhida asked Nagasena the following 
 question : — 
 
 Atthi Txoci satto imamha kaya annani mnkamatiti? 
 
 Is there any being who transmigrates from this body 
 to another body? to which Priest Nagasena gave this 
 reply 
 
 Nahi malm raja, imena pana malm raja namanipe>m kam- 
 mam karoti soblmnam va papakam va ; tena kammena annam 
 namurupam patisandaliatiti. 
 
 No, great King, by these nama and rupa good or evil 
 actions are performed, and in consequence of these actions 
 another nama and rnpa is conceived. 
 
 Again, the following passages occurred in one of the 
 comments : — 
 
 Atita hhave kamma paccayena nibbatta te khandlm tattheva 
 nruddlm atita hhavato imam blmvam agato eka dlmmmampi 
 nattlii. 
 
 Those Klmndlms which came into existence in consequence 
 of actions in a previous state of existence, there itself they 
 ceased to be. There is not one thing which has come to this 
 state of existence from the past state. 
 
 Sattena kata ka,unia paccaya nublmvena anapac chinna kilesa 
 bala vinamitam annam namarupam patublmvati. 
 
 “In consequence of the power of actions performed by 
 beings bent by the influence of successive defilement a 
 different nama rnpa comes into existence.” 
 
 Again, defining what birth was, in various parts of 
 Buddhist literature there are statements such as the 
 following : — 
 
 Katamanca bliikklmva jati ! Yaca tesam tesam sattanam 
 tamhi tamhi satta nikaye sanjati okkanti abliinnibbatti klmndlm- 
 nampatublmvo ayatananampatilablio ayam vuccati bhikklmve jati. 
 
 Priests, what is birth ? It is the production, the concep- 
 tion, coming into existence in such and such state, the 
 appearance of the Klmndlms, and the development oi 
 Ayatanas. Priests, this is called birth. 
 
 Speaking of Klmndhas and Ayatanas, it is said : — • 
 
30 
 
 TJppaUilikhane patuhhavanti — come into existence at the 
 very moment birth takes place. 
 
 He asked whether this, being the proper Buddhist doctrine 
 as expounded in their books, it was likely that the actions of 
 any human being would be influenced by it. If the doctrine 
 were true, it was clear that those who performed meritorious 
 actions would not be benefited, for even supposing that there 
 were any rewards, the doer would not reap them but another. 
 Besides, was it at all to be expected that a man who believes 
 his end to be similar to that of a dog, or a frog, would care 
 what actions he committed ? Is not the greatest inducement 
 held out to the murderer, the thief, and the voluptuary to 
 carry on their unlawful pursuits ? What mattered it to them 
 how evil their actions were ? They would not be punished 
 in a futiire life ; some other beings would be ; but how did 
 that in any way affect them ? Within man there is a deep- 
 rooted conviction that he will have to suffer for his mis-deeds. 
 This conviction, or conscience, was not confined to a single 
 individual, or a particular race or class of men ; it was a 
 general feeling, and does not this doctrine of Buddha belie 
 the convictions implanted in the heart of every man ? nay, 
 in the heart of every Buddhist ? Besides, was it possible to 
 imagine a dogma more prolific of baneful influences or a 
 greater incentive to evil than this held by the Buddhists, not 
 to mention how iniquitous and contrary to all principles of 
 justice it was to punish one for the misconduct of another. 
 What viUain will not exult in the idea that he is not to 
 suffer for what he does in this life ! He would challenge the 
 opposite party to adduce a single passage where this personal 
 punishment was even declared : if no authority existed where 
 this doctrine was plainly stated, he would, as an indulgence, 
 allow them to point out any passage from which this most 
 salutary doctrine could even be inferred. He knew it was 
 impossible. In order to mislead the ignorant, the opposite 
 party might produce metaphors, but in a logical argument 
 metaphors are of no weight, and the metaphors when intro- 
 duced would, he was sure, be found to prove nothing. The 
 identical wrong-doer, according to the Buddhists, never 
 suffered for his misdeeds. They denied the existence of an 
 
31 
 
 Atma (soul), and botli these doctrines only shewed that no 
 religion ever held out greater inducements to the unrighteous 
 than Buddhism did. He then lastly implored the audience, 
 in tire name of the Almighty, to carefully and without 
 prejudice weigh the replies that would he tendered, and to 
 hold fast, even at the risk of their lives, that which was true. 
 Before closing, he thanked the audience — fully 5,000 men — 
 for the quiet and attentive manner in which they had listened 
 to him. 
 
 REV. MIGETTUWATTe’s FIRST SPEECH IN REPLY. 
 
 The Priest Migettuwatte {2Iohattiwatte Gmanda) then 
 commenced his reply. He said that much penetration was 
 not needed to form a correct opinion of the Rev. Mr. Silva’s 
 lecture to which they had all listened. It was a very desultory 
 and rambling speech, which he was certain nobody under- 
 stood. In his exposition of the Pali extracts, made from 
 Buddha’s discourses, he was not more successful, because he 
 completely failed to convey to those present the correct 
 meaning in intelligible language. A very few of his audience, 
 however, doubtless perceived that the main argument of the 
 lecture was to shew that because at a human being’s death 
 here, his Pamaskhandha is completely destroyed, therefore 
 the being who was produced from it in another world was a 
 wholly different being. This was not so. Though the being 
 was not the same, it was not a different one, as he would 
 presently shew. Atma (the soul, the living principle) was 
 not an easy subject to explain, but because it was so abstruse 
 it did not follow that its existence was denied. Of course 
 they did not agree with the Christians’ view of the soul : 
 this declared that without any change man’s soul goes to a 
 state of misery or bliss according to its deserts ; if so, it must 
 be the human soul with all its imperfections that goes to 
 heaven. For instance, when the Rev. Mr. Silva leaves 
 Pantura for Wellawatta he does not become a different 
 person ; it is the same clergyman, and he is known by the 
 same name ; and if the human Atma goes to heaven that Atma 
 must be human still, and the being who enjoys bhss — a man I 
 
32 
 
 And now it l»eiioved him to explain this important doctrine 
 of Pancaslxhandha, in the expounding of which the rev. 
 gentleman, owing to his superficial knowledge of Pali, had 
 made such mistakes. 
 
 In doing so, he would take good, care not to use language 
 that seemed like Latin and Greek to the multitude ; and he 
 left to his learned coadjutors to judge of the correctness of 
 his interpretation of these doctrines. The great Buddha’s 
 last discourse, in which man’s nature was explained, was not 
 one that could he comprehended by everybody, and much 
 less by a clergyman of Xlr. Silva’s linguistic attainments. It 
 was perfectly true, according to Buddhist doctrines, to say 
 that at man’s death no portion of Pancaskhandha was trans- 
 ferred to another world ; yet the being who was produced at 
 death in consequence of existence here was not a different 
 being. This was not a new interpretation of the doctrine. 
 He could assure his hearers that this construction was 
 admitted to be the correct and proper one at several meetings, 
 held hundreds of years ago for the very purpose, in which 
 tlie most erudite of the age took part, whose knowledge of 
 Pah, it was needless to say, was far superior to that of the 
 rev. gentleman who had just spoken. The whole of Buddha’s 
 doctrines were written in Pali, and no person having an 
 imperfect knowledge of that language could he expected to 
 understand those abstruse sayings. He would now shew the 
 extent of the rev. gentleman’s Pali attainments, and 
 fortunately for him, he had in his possession a little publication 
 which greatly facilitated this task. This brochure, entitled 
 Granthnaekara, was published by Mr. Silva, and in it occurs a 
 short Pali verse of four hues giving the substance of a passage 
 in the Xew Testament, of which the first line even contains 
 several egregious blunders. For instance, in the sentence 
 commencing with “ Tava namo pavitht ho liothu'” it was quite 
 erroneous to use the aspirate paviththo. There was no such 
 pavithfho in the Pali language; it ought to have 
 been pavitto, and in Tam namo it was equally wrong to have 
 used the masculine termination. If the rev. gentleman was 
 not competent to connect two Pali words agreeably to 
 grammatical rules, but committed so many blunders in those 
 
33 
 
 few lines of Pali, ins hearers would be able to judge of his 
 fitness to explain the great Buddha’s abstruse metaphysics 
 found only in works written in that language. The assembled 
 multitude may not know whether his (the Priest’s) criticism 
 of the rev. gentleman’s grammatical constructions was 
 correct or not ; but if he were wrong, there was no doubt that 
 the priests well versed in Pali literature who surrounded him, 
 would correct him. To the learned it certainly was amusing 
 to hear the rev. gentleman, with such an imperfect knowledge 
 of Pali, attempting to explain the difficult doctrine of Pan- 
 caslchandha. 
 
 Pancaskhandha, then, consists of the five components, — 
 Rupaskhandha, the body. 2. Wedanaskhandha, sensation. 3. 
 Sannaskhandha, perception. 4. Sanskharaskhandha, discrimina- 
 tion; and 5. external consciousness. It was 
 
 well known that at man’s death Ricpaskhandha, or the body, 
 was consigned to the grave, and that Wedanaskhandha, or 
 physical sensation, ceased to exist. So they may be quite 
 sure that no part of these two Skhandhas ever went to another 
 world to enjoy bliss or suffer punishment. In like manner, 
 the remaining three Skhandhas, too, ceased to exist at man’s 
 death ; and neither did they suffer in a future existence 
 the consequences of acts done in this life. But yet the being 
 who is produced simultaneously with the extinction of 
 Pancaskhaadha was not a different being. He would try to 
 make this doctrine yet clearer. The much revered Bible of 
 the Christians was not the original Bible written by Hoses 
 and others, and in use amongst the primitive believers of 
 Christ ; and yet they could not say it was a different Bible. 
 The substance in both was the same, though it was not the 
 identical book : so it was Atma. Though at one’s death 
 all those constituents which make up the outward physical 
 man perish, and no portion of them is transferred to another 
 world, yet the conscious being, though produced in 
 consequence, is not a different one. Accordingly, it was as 
 incorrect to say that it was a different being who suffered for 
 the good or evil committed here, as to ^..ssert that it was the 
 identical doer with all his environments who thus suffered. 
 He (the Priest) hoped that his illustration of the Bible would 
 
 3 
 
84 
 
 have enabled his auditory to more fully comprehend this 
 abstruse doctrine. The following Pah, extract from the 
 Kattmrastu Prakarana of the Abhidhanna Pitaka fully bore 
 out the assertion made at the outset of his lecture, that if 
 the human soul participated in a future existence, the conse- 
 quences of acts done in this life, the beings who dwelt in 
 heaven must be men, instead of glorified spirits. 
 
 kio’eva puggalo sandhavati asma loka paran tokan, parasma 
 loka imaii lokan Hi amanta atthi koci mannsso hiitva devo hotiHi 
 micca, Sace hi sandhavati svHva gmggalo ito onto param 
 lokam anannahevan maranan nahotiHi pianatipato'pinupalahhhati. 
 
 “If they say that the same person passes from this world 
 to the other world, or from the other world to this world, 
 then some who having been men become gods, it is false. If 
 this very person passes it is the same man that having died 
 goes from here to the other world, not another, and there is 
 no death, and there will be no killing.” 
 
 Human beings had two deaths ; one was the complete 
 change sensations undem'-ent every moment, which resulted 
 in the production of new emotions ; and the other was that 
 death which every body understood by the phrase of 
 “ going to another world.” Sensations, they were well aware, 
 vary every moment : desires, power of thinking, passions, and 
 opinions change constantly. The body, too, which, according 
 to Buddhism, consisted of thii’ty-two parts, undergoes, though 
 imperceptibly, the same operation : for instance, hair, which 
 was one of these thirty-two components, grew every day, and 
 its attaining an extraordinary length, when not cut, was only 
 prevented by its occasionally faUiug off. Accordingly, the 
 hair now on their heads was not the same as that they had 
 when they were infants. This change was not confined to 
 hair ; the remaining constituents of the body shared the same 
 fate — that of being produced and of perishing every moment. 
 Moreover, the various parts of Pnpaskhandha (outward appear- 
 ance) were also subject to this momentary death to which 
 allusion was previously made. The proper meaning of the 
 second death, of which he had spoken, was the teraiination 
 of man’s career in this life. Simultaneously -ndth this death, 
 a change of existence, causing the production of a being to 
 
35 
 
 whom the quintessence of man’s inmost desires was trans- 
 feiTed, took place. It was not a new being that was thus 
 produced, as tiie rev. gentleman had attempted to shew ; 
 because the desire producing the being was not a new desire, 
 but only a result of those that preceded it. The origin of 
 the desu’es was the same, and there was a continuity in them, 
 the quintessence of wliich only took shape at death. If. as 
 Christians declared, the Afnia which proceeded to another 
 world were undying, and was not a cleaving to existence, as 
 he had just explained, and which was the view held by the 
 Buddhists, what did the Christians mean by it Was it 
 matter ? had it any shape ? was it like an egg, a stick, or a 
 fi’uit? If it were some substance that they meant by Atma, surely 
 it would not be diillcult to confine it by locking up a dying 
 man in an air-ticrht chest. Should the Christians fail to 
 explain the exact nature of this Atma, that itself would be 
 conclusive evidence to prove there was no Atma that travelled 
 to another world. The doctrine of the being that is producevl 
 at death has been propounded to the Buddhists in the words 
 na ca so, na ca anno. By na ca so was meant that it was not 
 the same being, and na ca anno signified that it was not 
 another. He could give abimdant authorities in support of 
 his positions, but he thought he had sufficiently clearly 
 explained to the assembly that though the conscious being 
 passing into another world was not the same hutnan being 
 that walked this earth, yet it was not another ; and so it was 
 most incorrect to say that it was a different person that 
 suffered in a future existence for the misdeeds committed in 
 this, or that the existence of a living principle was denied by 
 them (the Buddhists), as the rev. gentleman had attempted 
 to prove. 
 
 lie (tlie Priest) would now bring this pcrdlon of his 
 argument to a close, as he was sure he had completely refuted 
 the arguments adduced against Buddhism to the entire 
 satisfaction of his auditory. He had much more to say, 
 however, in regard to the same subject, but he would defer 
 further remarks to the subsequent occasions during which he 
 would have the privilege of addressing them. 
 
 And with reference to Cliristianity, the Priest went on to 
 
33 
 
 Bay tliat the Christian was not a true religion, and hy 
 embracing it no being can thereby hope to enjoy bliss in a 
 future life. Out of the many errors with which Christianity 
 teemed, he would point out a few, which would conclusively 
 shew that that religion was not wortliy of credence. 
 
 In the first place, Christians, wdierever they went, com- 
 menced propagating their religion by giving the object of 
 their worship the name of a being already held in veneration 
 by the nations amongst whom they intended preaching the 
 Gospel ; for instance, in Calcutta, Christ was called Son of 
 lujcara, which would be seen from tlie words, Isivanjna !>vfc 
 Khri-ste, to occur in a Sanskrit stanza. This was done ii 
 the view of enlisting the sympathies of the Hindus, who 
 held the god Isicara in great reverence. And in Ceylon, 
 Jehovah went by the name of Dewi^anira/Hmsc,” as this 
 term existed amongst the Singhalese to denote the gods iu 
 whom they believed. It would thus be seen that the 
 ‘Christians adapted themselves to different nations with the 
 view of deceiving them. Again in Exod. xx. 5, the words 
 ■used for “jealous God” did not express the meaning con- 
 veyed in the original. The word “Jevalita ” which appeared 
 in the Singhalese Bible, meant glittering, or luminous, but 
 the English word “jealous” did not mean anything of the 
 kind ; the proper synonym for it would have been envious, 
 for what w'as jealousy but envy ? If the word “ envy ” had 
 been used by the translators, there would have been no chance 
 of deceiving the people, for who would have believed in an 
 enviom God? and that was the reason for giving such an 
 interpretation to the English word “jealous.” He could 
 assure his hearers that deceit was habitually practised by the 
 Christian teachers with the view of gaining converts, and in 
 hopes that even such a course would help their cause. They 
 were also iu the habit of omitting portions of Scripture 
 whenever it suited their purpose ; for instance, in the edition 
 of the Scriptures published in 1840 by the very Society to 
 which the rev. gentleman belonged, the passage, “ And they 
 ■shall no more offer their services unto devils after whom they 
 have gone a whoring,” appeared in Lev. xvii. 6, but in the 
 later edition published by the same Society a gross deception 
 
87 
 
 had been practised by leaving those words out. Possibly 
 the Christians were ashamed that it should be known tliat 
 they had offered sacrifices to devils, and had omitted this 
 passage from the second edition. He was surprised at this 
 omission. Who had the right to omit or add a verse at 
 pleasure to a book for which a Divine origin was claimed ? 
 If such omissions were made in one portion, what was to 
 prevent garbled accounts appearing in other parts of the 
 Bible ? This habit of adding to, and omitting from, the 
 Bible was very common amongst Protestants, but he was 
 glad to say that it was not so with the Homan Catholics, to 
 whom great praise was due for never altering their Bibles. 
 
 Further, in Gen. vi. 6, speaking of Jehovah, the Creator, it 
 w'as declared, “ And it repented the Lord that he had made 
 man on the earth and it grieved him at his heart.” Who 
 usually commit actions for which they have cause to regret 
 afterwards? Was it not ignorant, foolish man alone? and 
 how supremely ridiculous was it for a Creator who was 
 declared to be omniscient to commit any actions for which it 
 was necessary to repent and grieve ? If he were omniscient, 
 he ought surely to have seen the consequences of his creating 
 man, on account of w'hich it is said he afterwards repented, 
 and his failing to foresee this result clearly proves that the 
 Christians’ God does not possess any such foreknowing power 
 as is attributed to him. How improper was it, then, to believe 
 on such a frail, repenting and grieving being as the Christians’ 
 omnipotent God and Creator? Were not they convinced 
 that Jehovah was not omniscient; and further, that he had 
 all the failings of man ? 
 
 It would also seem that God required some visible means 
 of identifying any required thing, or in other words, that 
 like a blind man he needs a guide; for instance, before the 
 first born of Egypt were killed, it was ordered that blood 
 should be sprinkled on the door posts of the houses of the 
 Israelites, in order to distinguish their houses from those of 
 the Egyptians ; for according to Exod. xii. 23, “ The Lord 
 wall pass through to smite the Egyptians, and when he seeth 
 the blood upon the lentil and on the two side posts, the Lord 
 will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer tc 
 
38 
 
 come in unto your Louses to smite you.” This shewed that 
 it was impossible for Jehol’ah to distinguish the houses of 
 the Israelites without this outward and visible sign: if he 
 were omniscient, surely this was not necessary. Wliat right, 
 then, bad they to call this being an omniscient God ? lie 
 (the Priest) knew that his friend the rev. gentleman would 
 attempt to explain this away by assigning the ridiculous 
 reason of its being a symbol of Christ’s death ; but he would 
 not let him otf with any such puerile reply. 
 
 In the command given to iloses in Exod. iv. 6, with refer- 
 ence to the miracles that he was to perform before the King of 
 Egypt, God’s orders were to do a certain miracle, and if the 
 Israelites were not given up, to perform a second and so on ; 
 but what was the necessity for this conditional order if he were 
 omniscient? Pie should have certainly known the effect 
 of those miracles if he really were what he was represented 
 to be. "Was not imperfect human nature betrayed even in 
 this ? The line of conduct of a medical man was precisely 
 similar : if one medicine failed, another was prescribed : this 
 w’as simply because the medical man was not omniscient, was 
 not certain of the effects of each medicine. What, then, did 
 this incident shew ? Simply what he asserted before, namely, 
 that the Creator was not omniscient. 
 
 There was another passage in the Bible which would give 
 them an idea of the nature of the God that the Christians 
 believed in ; and tliat was Exod. iv. 24. Itwas there stated — 
 “And it came to pass by the Avay in the inn, that the Lord met 
 him, and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, 
 and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and 
 said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. So he let him 
 go.” They will here see that tlie means adopted by Zipporah, 
 when God sought to kill Moses whom he had once chosen as 
 a servant, were not quite unknown to some of them. Did 
 it not remind them of the sacrifices usually made to appease 
 the ivrath of some other beings whom it was unnecessary to 
 name ? What was the procedure adopted by devil dancers 
 in this country when any body was afflicted with a disease 
 brought on by the influence of evil spirits ? Was it not to 
 shed the blood of a goat or a fowl, as the case might be, by 
 
39 
 
 cuttings some part of tlie animal, and offering' it to the Devx^? 
 The course pursued by Zipporah was just the same, and he 
 would leave them (the crowd) to judge of the natui'e of the 
 God of the Christians, whose wrath was appeased and Moses 
 saved by throwing the foreskin at his feet. 
 
 Again, it appeared from Jutlges i. 19 that “though the 
 Lord was with Judah when he drove out the inhahitauts of 
 tlie mountain, yet he could not drive out the inhabitants of 
 the valle}^ because they had chariots of iron.” This incident 
 was further proof , and a very convincing one, that the God of 
 the Hebrews, whom the Christians adored, was not Almighty; 
 it shewed that he feared iron ; and every one there p’resent, 
 the Pnest said, knew who vrere afraid of iron ! It was usual 
 amongst the natives of this country to have a small piece of 
 iron when food was carried from one place to another, and 
 when decoctions were prepared it wa^ customary to tie a 
 string with a piece of iron hanging from it round the pot in 
 which is the medicine. This was done to keep away devils 
 and sundry evil spirits ; and that was the meaning of the 
 God of the Hebrews fearing iron chariots ! It was needless 
 for him to further explain. These facts woukl greatly assist 
 his auditory to form a correct opinion as to whether the 
 Jehovah of the Christians was the true God or not. In 
 conclusion, the eloquent Priest said that he had explained 
 what the Buddhists meant by Atma, and he hoped the rev. 
 gentleman would tell them what Christians meant by a soul\ 
 and unless Mr. Silva would produce authorities to support 
 his statement that Buddha had likened a human beine: to a 
 brute, he (the Priest) would consider him as having uttered 
 an untruth. The term Atma was used by him, he said, as id 
 was the only word in general use to express the subtle 
 principle or cleaving to existence of which he had been 
 speaking. He had three hours more before him to engage 
 in this controversy, durirg which he would conclusively 
 shew the truth of Buddhism, and adduce further argumenta 
 to prove the falsity of Christianity. After thanking the 
 large audience for having so attentively listened to him, the 
 Priest closed his speech, and immediately the great crowd 
 dispersed. 
 
40 
 
 THE REV. MR. SILVa’s SECOND SPEECH. 
 
 At tliree o’clock — the hour appointed for resuming the con- 
 troversy — the crowd had increased three-fold ; the inhabitants 
 of the neighbouring villages, having heard of the two able 
 and effective speeches of the eloquent disputants, flocked into 
 the green arouud the bungalow, and by the time the speakers 
 ascended the “ rostrum,” the din of the thousands of human 
 voices was so great that a severe fight between the two fac- 
 tions was apprehended, hut when, in a sharp, but clear voice, 
 the Rev. David Silva commenced to reply, the confusion 
 ceased, and the multitude, at least as many of them as were 
 at a hearing distance, listened with deep attention to the 
 words that fell from the learned speaker. 
 
 Mr. Silva said that he would reply in as few words as 
 possible to the strictures made on Christianity, and pass on 
 to point out the very serious defects in the religion professed 
 by his opponent. With reference to the charge that he was 
 ignorant of the Pali language, and which was attempted to 
 be proved by pointing out a passage in a work published 
 by him, he said that if his opponent had taken the trouble 
 to understand the meaning of the title page even of the 
 Grantha sahera he would not have made such a miserable 
 exhibition of his ignorance. The misrepresentation of facts 
 by his opponent was either wilful, or done througli ignorance; 
 for the title page of the work distinctly stated that the 
 passages therein contained were selections made by him from 
 different works. Even if there was an ungrammatically 
 connected passage, he was not responsible. The two Avords 
 on which so much stress had been laid by his opponent Avere 
 simply reprinted by him from the Burmese Testament, and 
 sui’eiy it Avas not his proAunce, in a work like the one he was 
 engaged in, to correct the misreadings; his object was to 
 make a /(?(P from some standard works, and nothing 
 
 more. So much for his opponent’s charge of his ignorance 
 of Pali. 
 
 An attempt was also made by his opponent to impugn 
 the honesty of the translators of the Bible, by declaring that 
 a portion of a verse appearing in one edition of the Singha* 
 
41 
 
 lese Scriptures ■u-as wilfully and deliberately omitted in a 
 later one. A greater untruth had never been uttered. There 
 was not one in that assembly competent to question the 
 honesty of the learned translators of the Singhalese Bible. 
 In fact, there was no omission at all, but in order to render 
 the translation as close to the original as possible, a transpo- 
 sition of verses had been made in the second edition different 
 to that in the first ; and that was the omission of which his 
 opponent had made so much. lie would assure his hearers 
 that it was the love of truth that had actuated the translators, 
 and the charge of dishonesty laid against them would only 
 recoil on his opponent himself. And in regard to his oppo- 
 nent’s question, whether it would not be possible to retain 
 what Christians called the soul by locking up a dying man in 
 a closed chest, as even air could be confined, the learned 
 lecturer said that illustration only betraj'ed the ignorance of 
 his opponent. It was his (the Priest’s) impression that there 
 was nothing so fine as air ; but he little knew that electricity 
 was so much more subtle than air that it could pierce through 
 any substance, and certainly through an iron chest, in which 
 his opponent had proposed that a dying man should be 
 placed to prevent the soul from escaping from it. The 
 reason for styling Christ Sou of Isicara, in Calcutta, was not 
 with the view of deceiving the people as his opponent had 
 declared ; but as “ Isivara ” meant in the original Sanskrit 
 a being endowed with great power and might, this word was 
 made use of to express these qualities in the great Bather of 
 Christ. The meaning attached to the word Iswara at the 
 present day is not the one given to it in the Vedas, where the 
 term is used to express any being who was chief and lord. 
 With reference to the Singhalese word Dewijanwahnnse, used 
 by the Christians here to signify the God whom they wor- 
 ship, it was not adopted by them to deceive the people of the 
 land, as his opponent most unjustly asserted, but simply 
 because the language did not afford any better word. He 
 considered it very improper that one so profoundly ignorant 
 of the different senses in which the same word could be used, 
 as his opponent was, should engage in a controversy like the 
 present 
 
42 
 
 111 illustration of tlie fact tliat words liare different 
 meanings lie would quote the following passage from Vinaya 
 Pitdlca : — 
 
 Pandcil;o Bhildchave anuj)asamj)anno, na itpasampadctabho, 
 tipasampcnmo nascfahho. 
 
 All eunuch who was unordained ouccht not to be ordained. 
 If ordained nunttahho. 
 
 The word nasetahho may he translated “ ought to be 
 killed ; ” but Buddha, whose first precept was not to take 
 away life, would not say that the ordained eunuch was “ to 
 be killed,” or that his neck was to be cut off ; at least no 
 sane man will put that construction ; what Buddha really 
 said was to disrobe such an one, to excommunicate him ; so 
 it was with many words in Scripture. They had more than 
 one meaning. It was so in every language, and his opponent 
 himself whilst diseoursino: on the sold used the word Atma 
 throughout his speech, though he denied its existence 
 altogether ; what did he mean by it ? 
 
 II is opponent had also spoken of God’s repentance. The 
 original Hebrew word translated “ repentance ” in the Sing- 
 halese Bible was “ Kokam” which did not mean that God had 
 “regretted” for doing anything wrong: and to further eluci- 
 date this subject he would read an extract from an article in the 
 Singhalese periodical the Banner of Truth — See page 39 in 
 Yol. of 1801. (Tide Appendix A.) As for God’s order to 
 mark the door posts of the houses of the Israelites with blood, 
 the lecturer said that was simply a symbol of Christ’s death. 
 
 The lecturer then passed on to point out the absurdities 
 and contradictions of Buddha’s teaching in regard to the 
 origin of animal life, and quoted the following passage from 
 the Sanyutta nikuya : — 
 
 Katanie ca Blukkhave patkeammuppade J Avijja ptdccaya, 
 Bhikkhave sainkhara, mmkhara paccaya tdnnanam, linnana 
 paccaya nania rupa/n, nama rupa paccaya salayatanam, Sa/aya- 
 tana paccaya phasso, phassa paccaya vedam, redana paccaya 
 tanka, tanka paccaya npadanam. vpadana paccaya Ikavo, hkava 
 paccaya jati, jati paccaya jara maranam soka parideca diikkka 
 domanass upayam samhkavanti. Beam etas&a kevala&sa dukkka 
 khandkema nainudayo koti. 
 
43 
 
 Priests, -wliat is paticca samii})j)&cla ? On account of igno- 
 rance, Priests, sankhara, merit and demerit, are produced ; on 
 account of merit and demerit, consciousness, on account of 
 consciousness, nama rupa, on account of ncuna ripa, the six 
 sensitive organs, on account of the six sensitive organs, 
 contact, on account of contact, sensation, on account of sensa- 
 tion, desire, on account of desh-e, cleaving to existence, on 
 account of cleaving to existence, hh iva, states of existence, on 
 account of hhava, birth, on account of birth, decay, death, 
 sorrow, crying, pain, disgust, and passionate discontent. 
 Thus is produced the complete body of sorrow. 
 
 Now ai'ijja was dukklie annanam diikkha samudcnje annnnnm, 
 ignorance of sorrow, ignorance of the producing causes of 
 sorrow, etc., etc. But what is dukkha ? It is jcdi, jam, 
 maranam, — birth, decay, and death; avijja, then, is ignorance of 
 that which did not exist, ioi: jati, bu'th, is the consequence of 
 hhara, existence. 
 
 In consequence of avijja, samk/uira is produced. Samkhcira 
 is the accumulation of punnahhisamkhara, merit, and apiinnah- 
 Imamkliara, demerit ; he who had vijjd, clear preception, Avill 
 either accumulate merit or demerit, but tlie Buddhists are 
 told to perform kunal, merit, to accumulate merit ; but 
 according to Buddha’s doctrine, the accumulation of merit 
 was the consequence of ignorance. 
 
 Because of scmikhara vinnana, consciousness is produced. 
 Now what is vinnana ? It is cakkhu vinnanam, sota vinnanam, 
 ghana vinnanam, jivha vinnanam, kaya vinnanam, mano 
 vinnanam, consciousness of the eye, ear, the nose, the tongue, 
 the body, the mind. But tliese organs are not yet produced ; 
 they are not in existence ; the cause of the ayatanas, organs, 
 being nama rnpa. Besides it is clearly stated that the vinnana 
 cannot exist independent of nama rupa, that all the khandhas 
 must come into existence paripunna, perfect, and ekato, 
 together ; neither after nor before, apaccha apure. 
 
 In consequence of vinnana, nama rupa are produced, 
 although the fii’st four khandas constitute nama rupa; yet 
 Nam ru deka hera 
 Net an pugul hehera 
 
44 
 
 besides tbe nama rupa, there is no other individual. The 
 whole individual is perfect in nama rnpa. 
 
 lu consequence of nama rupa the six organs salayatana 
 ai’e produced, hut vinnana was the consciousness of the 
 eye, etc., and the nama rupa included the whole individual ; 
 but here the organs are the consequence of the perfect five 
 hhandhas. 
 
 In consequence of the six organs phassa, contact, is 
 produced, but p/iassa was included in the nama which was 
 the consequence of consciousness. Now it is the consequence 
 of ihe organs, and the nama was contact produced phamija. 
 
 In consequence of pha.isa, vedana, sensation, is produced, 
 hut what is vedana ? It is calckha sampha^snaja vedana, sensation 
 produced by the contact of the eye ; so of sotasamphassaja, 
 ghana, jicalia, kaga, mano. 
 
 But the vedana is included in the nama which was 
 produced before the organs were produced, and that as the 
 result of contact. Tattha katamam namam. What then is 
 nama ? vedanakkhandhn, sensation, sannakkkandko, perception, 
 samkharcdckliandho, discrimination. If nama rupa were the 
 result of vinnana, certainly vedana could not he the con- 
 sequence of 2iJtns>ia. 
 
 In consequence of vedana tanka, desire is produced, but 
 avijja was ignorance of dukkka samudaga, the producing cause 
 of sorrow, which is defined to be, ga gam tanka ponobkavika 
 nandiraga sakagata tandra tandaja nandini seggatkiidam. kama 
 tanlia; hkava tanka, vibkava tanka. It is the desire of 
 continued existence and delighting in the enjoyment of that 
 state they now occupy, i.e., desire of pleasure, of continued 
 transmigration, and of annihilation upon death ; so then this 
 tanka must exist befoi’e one could be ignorant of it. 
 
 Now to come to juti, the consequent of bhava; what hjati? 
 It is the kkandkanam pedubkavo, the coming to existence of 
 the kkandkas and the agatanam patilabko, the development of 
 the organs. But vinnana produced nama rupa, which in their 
 turn produced the organs ; here bkava is said to be the 
 antecedent kkandkas and the agatanas. Hence the great 
 confusion of this so-called, the previously unkno^vm 
 doctrine. 
 
43 
 
 The lecturer then wound up by saying : I divide this large 
 assembly into two classes, the learned and the unlearned, and 
 this subject being indeed a subject for the learned, I beg 
 them to consider whether this fundamental doctrine of 
 Buddha was not an absurdity, and a confusion of thought. 
 Is it not like saying the son is begotten by the father, and 
 the father is begotten by the son, and both, have one origin, 
 ignorance? How absurd is the theory I 
 
 THE UEV. migettuv.'atte’s second rejoixdeu. * 
 
 The Rev. Migettuwatte, rising, begged of the people to 
 give him a patient hearing, and said that though previously 
 he had styled the gentleman who had just spoken the rev. 
 gentleman, yet he, in his reply, having called him (the 
 Priest) virmlhakarayn, “the opponent,” it was his intention 
 to use the same epithet towards him, and wished his hearers 
 to distinctly understand this. Though the two speakers, 
 belonging to two different religions, had come forward to 
 take part in the controversy, solely with the view of ascer- 
 taining which was the true religion, he said that there was 
 no personal enmity between them, which the word “opponent 
 or adversary ” used by the opposite side would seem to imply, 
 but now that it had been used, he regretted to say he had no 
 other alternative but to do the same. 
 
 With regard to the last speech of the Christian party, he 
 would mention that no attempt had ever been made to explain 
 the reason for using the milder ■wordy?ra//i'« in the Singhalese 
 Bible, thus deceiving the natives of this Island. The 
 word “ envy,” as he once assured them, was the tr i ) 
 meaning of the w'ord “jealous” in the original ; neither dui 
 his opponent mention or explain how this jealousy or envy 
 
 • The Buddhist Priest, IMigettuwatte, though a noted Singhalese and 
 Pali scholar, was necessarily troubled at times in finding idiomatic wo ds 
 to convey his meaning. Knowing his deficiency in understanding the 
 genius of the English language, and difficulty in the selection of terms, I 
 have made, by request, some changes. I hope, however, they are to tha 
 benefit, rather than to the injury of the Buddhist's arguuu'nts. 
 
46 
 
 aspigned to the Creator could be reconciled with bis other 
 attributes. His opponent knew as well as himself that it 
 was impossible to give a satisfactory reply to these objections, 
 and that was the reason of bis silence. His opponent’s 
 sbiiking the responsibility of the work published in bis name, 
 which contained several ungrammatical Pali passages, by 
 stating that be was only a compiler, was not satisfactory. If 
 be knew Pali correctly be would not have allowed such an 
 egregious blunder as be bad pointed out to creep into bis 
 work uncorrected : the j)assage may have been taken from 
 the Burmese Testament, as was alleged, but that did not the 
 less betray bis opponent’s ignorance of Pali: it was highly 
 improper that the incorrect passage should have been copied 
 without alteration. The accounting for the omission of a 
 passage in one edition of the Singhalese Old Testament, 
 which appeared in a previous one, by stating that there bad 
 been a transposition of verses, was also unsatisfactory. 
 Clearly one or the other of the editions was WTong ! If tlie 
 placing a passage in a certain position correctly expressed the 
 meaning intended to be conveyed, by transposing it a 
 dillerent and an incorrect meaning would be given. Which 
 construction were they to receive as the correct one ? And 
 BO all his opponent’s eulogium as to the honesty of the 
 translators went for nothing. Both sets of translators could 
 not have been either equally honest or learned; if they were, 
 the airangement of the verses in both the translations would 
 have been the same ; the fact was that the Christians altered 
 their Bibles whenever they pleased. 
 
 Spvling Christ “ Son of Isvara ” was attempted to be 
 explained by proving that words had various meanings : but 
 they all knew that this was a very lame defence, and that 
 the true object of the Christians was to deceive, and ingratiate 
 themselves into the favour of the Hindus, who held laiara in 
 reverence. Well, if the Christians’ God was Iseciia, had 
 Jehovah a wife as Isvara is said to have? Umayan- 
 ganawa was the name of his wife ; what was the name of the 
 partner of the Christians’ God? Perhaps the Christians 
 themselves did not know. He would enlighten them on a 
 future occasion. What was the reply adduced by hia 
 
47 
 
 opponent to the remarks made by him upon Gen. vi. 6, 
 ■wherein it was said that the Lord repented and grieved for 
 ha'ving made man on earth ? Absolutely nothing. It is 
 true that he had read an extract from an old number of the 
 Banner of Truth, a pamphlet published by the Christians 
 in connection with a controversy held on a previous occasion 
 by the same parties, but at that time he had utterly refuted 
 the teachings of the passage, and so what ■was the use in 
 again reiterating those hackneyed argiunents ? It w’as highly 
 improper that that obsolete book should have been brought 
 forward before such an assembly as the present one, as it 
 was no reply at all to his objections. Fm’ther, how ridiculous 
 was it to explain away the command to mark the door posts 
 of the houses of the children of Israel ■with blood, by calling 
 it a symbol of Christ’s death. What marking of door posts 
 was there on that occasion, and -n-hat a silly reply ■tt'as this to 
 his argument, that because the Chi-istians’ God required an 
 outward and ■visible sign to distinguish objects, that, there- 
 fore, ho did not possess the power of knowing everything ? 
 Even he (the Priest) was ashamed that such a reply should 
 have been given before such a learned audience. The facts 
 recorded in the Scriptures ■v\’ere clear, that God, seeing the 
 blood, pas'ied over the houses of the Jews ; this plainly shewed, 
 as was previously stated, that the Creator required some sign 
 whereby to identify any given thing, and what was the 
 inference to be drawn from this but that Jehovah was not 
 omniscient ? 
 
 Thus much ■v\uth reference to those questions that had 
 been answered; but -^'hat about the several commuids 
 given to Moses in regard to the miracles that he was to 
 perform before Pharaoh, namely, that if he did not succeed 
 with one, then he was to try another, ■which fact was also 
 mentioned by him to prove, as it plainly did, that God ■s\'as 
 not omniscient; and ■svhat ■was the reason of the armies of 
 Judah fleeing a^vmy from the chariots of iron? How did 
 Christians get over the difficulty arising out of God’s 
 injunction to circumcise Moses’ son, thereby betraying His 
 fondness for human blood in common with evil spirits having 
 eimilar tastes, about whom it was unnecessary to give a more 
 
43 
 
 detailed account to Lis auditory ? As Le Lad sufTifiently 
 clearly explained, on a previous occasion, tLe reason for tLe 
 CLristians’ God fearing iron and of Lis fondness for Luman 
 Llood, Le would not enlarge upon tLese suLjects at present, 
 but tLe affair of Moses’ son would clearly sLew tLcin, if any 
 furtLer explanation were at all needed, tLe reason of tLis 
 fondness of iLe CLristians’ J eLovaL for Luman blood. 
 
 And now, wLat aLout tlie soul of tLe CLristians? wliat was 
 it made of ? and what was it like, if it did not resemble 
 wLat tlie BuddLists meant Ly Ahna ? None of tLese 
 questions Lad even been attempted to Le explained: tliey all 
 knew wliat that signified. 
 
 Lastly, witL reference to tlie Buddliist doctrine of Pan- 
 cmhhandha and man’s future, they were not subjects that were 
 intelligible to persons of limited knowledge: tLe being wLo 
 would Lereafter suffer for acticus committed in tills life was 
 not tLe identical one that walked this earth, tbougli it was 
 not a wholly different one, as Le Lad previously shewn ; and 
 Le would now quote a passage from the Buddhist Scriptures 
 which would more clearly explain to them this abstruse 
 subject. It was this: — 
 
 Marmumtika vcdana santattanmn samnpatam asahantassa 
 itape kldtta harita icda pcdt arnica kamena vpa aussamane sarire 
 naruddhcHU cakkhadisu indcii/esu hadaija vaiUni matte patitthite 
 kai/indrii/a manindn'i/a jicltindrhjesu tarn khanavasesa hadaya 
 ratthu sannissilam idnnana garu saina sevitasaima ptihhakanam 
 annataram laddhacasesa paccaya sankhara saiddiatam kaminan 
 tadupatthapitam va kamma nimitta gatinimitta saiddiatam visa- 
 yam arahhha pavattati tadecam pacattamanam ianha vijjanam 
 appaldnatta acijja piaticchadit adinace tasmia visaye tanhanamcti 
 saliajata sankhava kJdpanti saidati vascna tanhanamiyamanam 
 saiddtai-e/d Idtippiamaiiam orimatira ndddta viidbadd/iam rajjnma- 
 lamhitca. Matikatikkamakeriya pucimanca nissayaim jahati 
 aparanca kamma samutthapitam nissayam asadayamanam ana- 
 sadayamanam va arammanadild eva paccaycld pavattati. 
 
 As the meaning of the death and regeneration of a being 
 was, in the extract, sought to Le conveyed Ly a familiar 
 illustration, Le would give tlieni a free translation of its 
 meaning, and Le Lad no doubt that Lis auditory would then 
 
49 
 
 be able to better comprehend this difficult doctrine. As the 
 newly plucked talipot leaf, when put in the sun, loses its 
 green colour by degrees and assumes a whiteness, so at his 
 death the sentient being gradually loses the use of his 
 physical senses, such as those of seeing and hearing, owing to 
 the pains of death. 
 
 While this process of the loss of the use of these 
 senses is going on, three of the senses enter the body and 
 remain attached to the heart. These three are, the sense of 
 feeling, of understanding, and that of life. The sense of 
 feeling is that by which one is enabled to perceive when any 
 object touches the body, the sense of understanding is the 
 power of distinguishing any object, and what is called the 
 inner sense of life is the state of undying existence. At the 
 death of the being with whose heart was associated these 
 three senses, he sees, as if in a dream, that he is engaged in 
 the same actions, whether sinful or righteous, to which he 
 was greatly addicted in this life ; for instance, if he had been 
 given up to mui’der and other heinous crimes all his life 
 through, at his last moments he feels as if he is again com- 
 mitting them, but if his career on earth was a righteous one, 
 as if he had been practising meritorious actions, such as giving 
 alms and observing “ sila” he perceives at death that he is 
 going through such a holy life over again. If, at one’s dying 
 moments, this last scene presents itself, his future state is 
 sure to be a happy one. And it is equally certain that the 
 being who fancies at his death that he is committing immoral 
 actions will be born into a state of misery. The presentment 
 of the nature of the life that the being is in a future state to 
 enjoy, also resembles a dream, that is, he sees the state in 
 which he is to be re-bom as if it were in a dream. And as 
 this state, whether happy or miserable, appears in an enchanted 
 form, man, who is full of desires, naturally cleaves to it, and 
 in consequence, immediately after death, realisation takes 
 place in that state of which he had the presentiment. Thus 
 they would see that death and the re-birth of the being are 
 simultaneous. In short, man’s actions and desires here 
 affected and regulated his future career, and this cleaving to 
 existence believed in by them (the Buddhists) was according 
 
 4 
 
.^0 
 
 fo the desires indulged by tbe man in bis existence on earth. 
 Further, no part of man proceeded to another world to be 
 born again, but simply this cleaving to existence took place 
 at death, according to the nature of the desires that existed 
 in liim, and therefore to say that the being who suffered 
 hereafter for actions committed in this world was not the 
 same but another, was absurd. If any of his auditory had 
 been present at the bedside of a dying man, they could have 
 no doubt as to the fact that at the man’s death there was 
 always a presentiment of the future misery or bliss that he 
 was going to partake of. This found expression, they would 
 remember, either in hideous groanings or delightful raptures. 
 For the being who is to be born into a happy state always 
 sees such pleasant and delightful objects as heavenly 
 mansions, etc., but he wliose future will be misery only sees 
 the terrors of torments, and his exclamations often clearly' 
 shew to the bystander whether it is a state of misery or bliss 
 that the man is going to inherit. 
 
 The Buddhist doctrine concerning man was “ annmataggo 
 yam B/iiik/iave i<a»!iii(()'o puhha Icofi na pannaunti'' etc., that is, 
 that immortal man had neither a beginning nor an ejid ; and 
 tlie Cliristian Bible, rigidly interpreted, supported this view. 
 Consider the Scriptural account of the creation of man, as con- 
 tained in Cxen. ii. 7: “ The Lord God formed man of the dust of 
 the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life ; 
 and man became a living soul.” There could bo no doubt 
 acording to this account, then, that the spirit breathed into 
 Adiun was a portion of the spirit of God, who was eternal ; 
 tiius Adam, or the Adamic form, was made the receptacle of 
 spirit, was made eternal ; and if Adam were the f:dher of the 
 human race, as is alleged, then all men are eternal, and this 
 was precisely the Buddhist doctrine, according to winch, as 
 pvcA'iously saitl, man had not either a beginning or an end. 
 ']’ho only means of terminating this continual round of 
 existence was by entering Nirrana, and which excejrtional 
 consummation — exceptional because eternal existence was 
 the rule, aud man is by nature said to move about in the 
 anamatagga naimara, or in the immense or unborn and infinite 
 metempsychosis — was only to be attained by undergoing 
 
61 
 
 great pains, and acting according to, and realising tlie several 
 results of, the four suLlime paths of virtue preserihed by 
 Buddha, namely, Sonnt, SuJcraclayann, Anayami, and Arhat. 
 A being -\vIio walks thus will be saved. 
 
 I The eloquent Priest, again reverting to Christianit}^ said 
 
 that he could cite another instance which shewed that the 
 God whom the Christians worshipped was fond of burean 
 sacrifices: namely, the case of Jephthah’s daughter, who was, 
 it was declared, sacrificed according to Jcphthali’s vow.* 
 rhongh the Protestants tried to make out that it was not 
 literally carried out, yet he would refer to a note against that 
 passage appearing in the Douay Bible, which stated that the 
 sacrifice was made ; and here he could not but pass a high 
 
 • Bishop Coienso, of Natal, an eminent scholar and theologian in the 
 English Church,' says (in his Natal Sermons, page .".■/.l) that — “Itvas a 
 common practice among the Jews in the times of Jeremiah and Ezekitl 
 to offer human sacrifices.” And he quotes the following, among other 
 Biblical i assages, to prove it : — 
 
 “And they built the high places of B ah which are in the valley of the 
 Son of Ilinnom, tocause their sons and their daughters to pass through 
 the fire unto Moloch ; which I ctmmanded them nor.” — Jt-r. xxxii. .S.o. 
 
 “Then he took his elcest son, Ihutshould have reigned in his stead, and 
 offered him for a burnt-offering upon the wall.” — II. Kings iii. 27. 
 
 “For the children of Judah have done evil in my s ght, saith the Lord; 
 they have set their abomination, in the house wh ch is called by My name, 
 to pollute it ; and they have built the lii^h places of Ti phtt, which is in the 
 valley of the Son of Ilinnom, to barn their sons and their daughters 
 in the fire, which I commanded them not.”— Jer. vii. 30-31. 
 
 “They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with 
 fire for burnt-offerings unto Baal, which I cummani' d not.” — Jer. xix. 6. 
 
 “The Israrlite-* were mingled among the heathf n, and learned their 
 works ; and they rerved their idols, which were a snare unto them. . . For 
 they sacrificed their sons arid their danghiers unto dev.ds ; :iu 1 shed 
 innocent blond., even the blood of their sons and their d ugaters, 
 whom they sacrificed uuto the idols of Canaan.” — Ps. cvi. .35-36-37. 
 
 “ Moreover, thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou 
 hast borne unto me, and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be 
 devoured.” — Ez. xvi. 20. 
 
 “ And have also caused their sons, whom they bear unto me, to pass 
 for them through the fire to devour them. . . . For when they had slain 
 their children to their idols, then they came the same day into My 
 sanctuary to profane it.” — Ex. xxiii. 37-39. 
 
 “ Jephih-jh vowed to the Lord . . . and offered up for a burnt-offering, 
 or sacrifice, his own daughter.”— Judges xi. 29-40. 
 
 4—2 
 
52 
 
 compliment on the integrity of the Roman Catholics in 
 contradistinct-ou to Protestants, who were always in the 
 habit of altering their Pibles whenever it suited their 
 purposes. 
 
 In Matthew xii. 40 it was declared that Christ would 
 he in the heart of the earth three days and three nights, but 
 did not the event falsify this prediction ? Did Christ remain 
 three days and three nights in the tomb ? lie died on Friday, 
 and rose on the Sunday ; by wliat extended interpretation 
 could that be made to mean throe days and three nights ? 
 Even Dr. Claughton had failed to explain this away, when in 
 a recent controversy with a Secularist the latter put him 
 this question, and it was not to be expected that his opponent 
 would be more successful. He knew that his opponent’s 
 party would attempt some soil of answer, but they might be 
 sure that he would receive the answer for. what it was 
 -worth. 
 
 It was well known amongst Oriental nations that good 
 omens were invariably the harbingers of propitious events, and 
 that ill omens sufficiently indicated the nature of the events that 
 would follow. He could adduce various instances to prove 
 the truth of this statement from several ancient books, but 
 one would suffice. It was said of the wife of the Emperor 
 Bimbisara that when she had conceived the longing she had 
 was to drink the blood of her husband. When this was 
 satisfied, she gave birth. to a prince, who in time killed his 
 father, the Emperor, and obtained the Crown. This shewed 
 liiat an ill omen prefigured an unpropitious event. And what 
 were the omens about the time of the birth of the being who 
 came to save the world ? Why, a massacre of thousands of 
 little innocents. Did not this incident indicate that Christ 
 was a pretender who came to the world with the view of 
 casting men into perdition? Let them, therefore, remember 
 that no salvation in a future state could reasonably be 
 •expected by believing in such a being. It was also quite 
 iclear that Christ did not rise again, and that his disciples 
 made a, way with his body at night, as it was feared that they 
 would do. To this part of the subject he would recur on the 
 next day. 
 
53 
 
 Now what were the signs that preceded Baddha’s ministry 
 on earth ? He would refer to a few of the thirty-two good 
 and ciieerfiil omens and wonders that are mentioned in the 
 books as having appeared on the day that he w'as conceived 
 of Kiug Sudhodhana in the womb of the Queen Maliamaya, on 
 the day of his birth, and of his attaining Buddahood, 
 namely, receiving the use of eyes, ears, and legs by those 
 who had been blind, deaf, and cripple from their birth, the 
 mitigation of the pains in the several hells, the allaying of the 
 pangs of hunger and thirst of those evil spirits that had been 
 condemned to roam about in the universe, and the curing of 
 all hitherto incurable diseases. Were not these signs 
 sufficient to shew that the object of Buddha’s ministry was 
 to bring happiness and true bliss to this world, and to 
 introduce into it a true religion ? How Unlike were these to 
 those hideous omens relating to Christ’s birth, which it 
 W'as not even possible to mention without a shudder and 
 doing violence to one’s kindly feelings. If his opponents 
 are in a position to shew that even an ant had died in 
 consequence of Buddha’s birth, he would give them his word, 
 — he was not speaking for his confreres — that he would re- 
 nounce Buddhism as speedily as possible. This unusually 
 stirring speech was brought to a close by the Priest in these 
 words : — “ Christ is not our authority, neither is Buddha. 
 Weigh w'ithout prejudice the arguments that have been 
 adduced on either side : consider which party has failed to 
 answer the questions put to it, and hold fast the faith of the 
 reasonable party. I may have introduced some warmth into 
 the discussion of the subjects : why was that ? why have I 
 been so earaest? Simply because I so love the truth and 
 see such an immense multitude, to whom I have to offer my 
 best thanks for theii* patient attention.’* 
 
54 
 
 CONTINUATION OF THE BUDDHIST CONTBO- 
 VERSY AT PANTURA. 
 
 THE REV. F. S. SIRIMANNe’s SPEECH. 
 
 During the preceding day, Wednesday, it having "been 
 decided at a meeting held by the several clergymen assembled 
 in Pantnra, that a more fluent speaker, and one whose 
 language “ will be understanded of the common people, ’ 
 should address the multitude, the task of opening the 
 proceedings of the second or the last day fell on Mr F S. 
 Sirimanne, a catechist of the Church Missionary Society, as 
 he was considered, next to Rev. 0. Jayesinghe, who is not at 
 all controversially inclined, the best popular speaker in the 
 Singhalese ranks of the Christians. Unknown to the other 
 intelligent natives of this Island, this follower of the Church 
 Missionaries has, since the termination of his connection with 
 the Buddhist priests of Galpata wlhare, been working in 
 comparative seclusion amongst the lower classes of Colombo, 
 holding forth against Buddhism and expounding the Bible 
 doctrine of salvation to the hundreds who flock around to 
 hear the loud stentorian tones of this bland speaker, whenever 
 he addresses them at the different places appointed for “ open 
 air ” preaching. 
 
 Mr. Sirimanne commenced by stating that in the same 
 manner as fever patients had a dislike for food he it ever so 
 wholesome, the Priest, who was sulfering with the fever of 
 ignorance, could not appreciate the value of the precious 
 doctrines of the Bible ; and had raised several objections 
 against Christianity because the truth appeared to him false. 
 But he would assure them that not a single argument had 
 been adduced against this pure religion that could not be 
 
55 
 
 met by a boy attending any Christian school, nowever, as 
 he was addressing a nnmber of persons who were totally 
 unacquainted with Christianity, he would try and answer the 
 Priest as fully as he possibly could within the hour iu which 
 he had to speak. But before proceeding further, he had to 
 make a few remarks in regard to the replies given by the 
 Priest to the objections the Christian party had raised against 
 Buddhism. They (the Christians) had stated that Buddha 
 had distinctly denied the existence of a soul, and quoted the 
 words that Gautama had made use of when speaking on this 
 subject, namely, that man had no soul, that nothing remained 
 after death, and that nothing went to another state of exist- 
 ence. But what were the replies of the rev. Priest to this ? 
 These only served the purpose of confirming their objections, 
 and proving plainly that there was a soul. Buddhists 
 command the performance of meritorious actions, but how 
 did these avail if there were no soul that goes to another 
 world? The Priest also asked them to state the nature of the 
 soul, the existence of which the Christians did not deny. The 
 soul is an immaterial and invisible substance and. has no 
 form ; therefore to ask its form to be shewn is to require 
 that which was not possible. Has the Priest forgotten that 
 according to Buddhism even that such invisible and unnatu- 
 ral beings exist, and that Ampa Brahma loka is said to be 
 wholly peopled with such spirits. If the whole of what 
 constituted man perished here and there were \xo Atmn that 
 proceeded to another world, there would be no necessity for 
 a religion, and it was because there was such a state of 
 existence hereafter that they required to believe on the true 
 God, with the view of attaining eternal happiness. 
 
 And now with reference to the arguments raised against 
 the holy Christian religion by the Priest. Because God was 
 called a 'ealous God in the Bible, it did not follow that lie 
 was envious : he was a perfectly holy and righteous being. 
 The word “ ‘ealous ” as applied to God in the Bible only 
 signified that he will not give his glory to another person or 
 thing. A great deal was also made, by the Priest, of God’s 
 command to Moses to perform certain miracles before Pharaoh, 
 and if these had not the desu’ed effect of letting the children 
 
66 
 
 of Israel go, to perform others; such orders were given 
 simply because Pharaoh was exceedingly haughty and ques' 
 tioued who Jehovah was, when Moses first took his message 
 to the King of Egypt: Giod then assured Moses that he 
 would take out his people with a mighty liand with the view 
 of shewing both Pharaoh and the Israelites who he was. 
 Till the infliction of the tenth plague, God well knew what 
 the effect of each previous plague would be, but he ordered 
 Moses to work these different miracles and send the various 
 plagues to shew his might to Pharaoh, and to all succeeding 
 gfenerations. That God was not ignorant of Pharaoh’s 
 purposes is clear from Exod. iii. 19, wherein it is said, “ And 
 I am sure that the King of Eygpt will not let you go, no, 
 not by a mighty hand.” 
 
 To prove that God was fond of human blood, allu- 
 sion had also been made by the Priest to the circum- 
 cision of Moses’ son by Zipporah, but the Priest has, 
 either through ignorance or deliberately, distorted facts. 
 Zipporah did not, as was alleged, cast the foreskin of her son 
 at God’s feet, but at Moses’. Her e.vclamation, “ Surely a 
 bloody husband art thou to me,” clearly sliews this, even if 
 fhe use of the non-honorific third personal pronoun in 
 speaking of the person at whose feet the skin was thrown in 
 the Singhalese Bible did not remove all doubt on this point. 
 
 With reference to the incident mentioned in Judges i. 19, 
 that tlie Lord could not drive out the inhabitants of the 
 valley because they had chariots of iron, the Friest made out 
 the reason of this to bo that Jehovah feared iron chariots. 
 But it was not so, for did not the Lord subdue a host of 900 
 iron chariots only very sliortly after; and comjiletely destroy 
 Pharaoh and his iron chariots when the childi’en of Israel 
 were brought out of Egypt? it was not because the Lord 
 feared iron chariots that Judah did not meet with success in 
 this instance, but simply because -he lacked faith in God. 
 He was able to defeat the enemy only when he trusted in 
 God; but no sooner did he lose faith and fear iron chariots, 
 than he was discomfited. All the events mentioned in the 
 Bible, besides being historically tme, were so ordered by the 
 omuiscient God with the view of reveahng spiritual lessons 
 
57 
 
 to future generations; and tliis incident was recorded in 
 order to prove the power and importance of faith. 
 
 In attempting to compare the Buddhist doctrine of the 
 eternity of man with the Bible account of the creation, the 
 Priest, ^vith the view of misleading the ignorant, had stated 
 some ridiculous absurdities. His argument was that because 
 Grod breathed into Adam’s nostrils the breath of life, therefore 
 it was a portion of Grod’s soul that was thus breathed ; and as 
 Grod was everlasting, that man, who only became a living 
 soul after this infusion of the breath of life, was also Avithout 
 beginning or end. What a ridiculous inference ! The 
 passage referred to only meant that Grod ga^m life to man 
 and deposited the soul in him. There was nothing at all 
 there to shew that Grod parted with a portion of his own 
 soul. What man there present would attach the meaning 
 sought to be put upon this verse by the Priest to the homely 
 Singhale e words, “ blow some oil into his ear ?” Who will 
 asso iate the idea of blowdng a portion of one’s Lving p.inci- 
 ple with this injunction to infuse a little od nto another’s ear ? 
 The meaning of the expression in the Bible, “ brea..h.ng into 
 his nostrils the breath of life,” was also the same. 
 
 Now as regards the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter, 
 this is a sub ect that has been frequently brought forward 
 by the rev. Priest, and on every occasion the reply that 
 she was not killed and sacrificed was given ; and yet 
 the Priest does not seem to be satisfied. But suppos- 
 ing even that she had been sacrificed, no blame attaches 
 to God, because he was no party to J^phthah’s rash vow. 
 Human sacrifices were explicitly prohibited in the Holy 
 Scriptures; and provision was made in the Jewish code to 
 meet tiie case of a ].erson making such a rash vow, which 
 was to pay a sum oi money as a ransom, and thus save 
 the life of the fellow being. It is nowhere stated in the Bible 
 that Jepht ah’s daughter was killed, but what appeared there 
 was that she bewailed two months for her vii’ginity, not for 
 her death. And it was also said that her father did unto 
 iier accordiug to his vow, and she knew no man, and that the 
 daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the dargliter of 
 Jephthah, four days in a year. This ceremony nas gone 
 
68 
 
 throngli two months before the ac omplishment of the vow 
 ami was periodically repeated. So it is quite clear that from 
 that day she only lived a virgin ; and th^'iefore to say that 
 Jephthah’s daughter was sacrificed by cutting off her neck was 
 a falsehood. 
 
 Another argument raised by the Priest against Chris- 
 tianity was that Christ’s prediction that he would be in the 
 heart of the earth three days :md three i.ights was lalsified 
 1 y his having remained in the grave only from Friday till 
 Sunday morning. But anyone acquainted with the Jewish 
 modes of calculation will see that there is no di erepancy at all 
 be' ween the prediction and its fulfilment. The phrase “ three 
 days and three nights” was usel by the Jews to denote what 
 is generally understood as ihree days. If was so used in Gen. 
 vii. 12, where it is said that “ ti e rain was upon the earth forty 
 days and forty nights which wms the same as the expression in 
 17 V. that the flood was forty days upon the earth. In the 
 same manner, if it had been said that Christ remained in the 
 heart of the earth three days, which is the same, according 
 to Jewish idiom, as saying three days and three nights, 
 there would have been no difficulty at all, for surely the 
 Priest will not deny that Christ remained in the grave on 
 Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. True, he wms not in the 
 tomb either the whole of Friday or Sunday, but according 
 to Jewish qjhraseology any portion of a day was spoken of 
 as a wliole day, and numerous instances can be cited from 
 ancient writers in support of such an usage. And so much 
 for the vaunted objection which was alleged to have beeu 
 addm ed by an able European, and with which the Priest 
 intended to make short work of Christianity. 
 
 In order to shew that Christ’s birth was anything but bene- 
 ficial to mankind, the Priest mentioned the massacre of the 
 innocents as an ill omen, which indicated that something the 
 reverse of good would result by his birth. The Priest w^as liow- 
 ever mistaken : no ill omen attended the birth of Christ; and it 
 was nowhere said that thousands of children were killed at 
 his birth. The Priest said so either with the view of deceiving 
 those who were present or being ignorant of the facts. Two years 
 after Christ’s birth, it was perfectly true that the wicked King 
 
Cd 
 
 Ilerocl, having heard from the magicians that Christ would 
 become a mighty King, caused many infants of two years 
 old to be massacred, apprehending some danger to his crown ; 
 but by this massacre no injury resulted to the infants, 
 because as there is no doubt that their souls went to heaven, 
 it only expedited their enjoyment of eternal bliss ; and 
 as for the parents, why it may have been the means ol 
 bringing them to repentance, and thereby to everlasting 
 happiness. 
 
 These were all the remarks he (the Catechist) .had 
 to make in regard to the objections raised against Christianity ; 
 but he now saw a very short way of ending this contro- 
 versy, and would tell his hearers what it was. The rev. 
 Priest had in his last lecture said if it could be shewn 
 that even an ant had been killed at Buddha’s birth, that he 
 would renounce Buddhism. He (the Catechist) was in a 
 position to shew that greater beings than ants had been 
 deprived of their lives in consequence of Buddha’s birth, and 
 if the Priest were a man of his word he ought at once to 
 renounce Buddhism : then would this controversy be 
 
 satisfactorily ended, and their object accomplished. 
 
 lie would now enumerate some of the many* instances in 
 which death ensued on account of, or by means of, Buddha, 
 anil would beg of the Buddliist portion of his audience 
 particularly to lend him a patient hearing, as they had heard 
 what their champion had said — that he would forsake Bud- 
 dhism if it could be proved that even an ant had been killed 
 at Buddha’s birth. In the first place, Buddha’s own mother 
 died seven days after giving birth to this extraordinary baby, 
 who is said to have been able to walk and speak very jdainly 
 at the moment of his birth. The wonder is that the mother 
 of such a gigantic monster should have lived even for seven 
 days. Thus they will see that the death of the queen of the 
 highest emperor of India was caused at the instance of 
 Buddlia, and was not her death of greater consequence than 
 that of an ant ? Secondly, it appears in the sacred books of 
 the Buddhists that men and even beasts died by the roaring 
 of lions : these lions exist even at the present day in the 
 Himalaya Mountains, situated to the north of India, though 
 
60 
 
 •we in Cej lon cannot even Lear their roaring ; if it were so 
 and the aucieuts did die by hearing these poor lions roar, how 
 many millions of creatures ■would have perished at hearing 
 the roai’ing of the lion Gautama, 'W'hose exclamation 
 V/'/v« un/ii lolcifisa jotiho ham a-vni lohasm scttho 
 usnti Zob/.w/,” just after liis birth, is said to have been 
 Leaid by the gods of the uppermost Brahma world. Numer- 
 ous other instances of the deaths of men and beasts caused on 
 account of Buddha could be cited, but lie thought those he 
 had just mentioned were sufficient for the present. They 
 had all heard the construction put upon the so-called good 
 and evil omens attendant on the birth of Christ and Buddha 
 by the Priest. lie did not agree with it; and before arriving 
 at any conclusion, he would entreat his iiearers to hear the 
 Christians’ interpretation of these signs. Christ came into 
 the world to destroy the piower of sin, and to set up the 
 kingdom of righteousness. The subjects of the kingdom 
 of sin opposed the Savioia* by ind omens, as this 
 Priest terms them, and did their best to retain those 
 sinful pleasures in which they revelled. It was only natural 
 that this should be so. They could not possibly expect a 
 diliereut reception, and that was the reason for the so-called 
 bad omens. But in the case of Buddha it was ditferent. 
 He was a sinner, as other men were, and came to this woi’ld 
 to encourage vice, and enlarge its kingdom, and no wonder 
 that this sinful world w'elcomed him with good omens, just 
 as drunkards would receive with open arms one of their owr, 
 number, but S}»urn a teetotaller. 
 
 And now, with reference to Buddhism Before em- 
 bracing any religion, it is the duty of each one to examine 
 ivhether the books on which that religion rests are au- 
 thentic or not Buddhism that prevails in this Island 
 has for its authority only the Three Pitakas. and it 
 was, therefore, incumbent on them to find out what these 
 books were, when tiiey were written, and whether they did 
 contain the doctrines of Buddha as propounded by him ; in 
 short, whether there is any testimony for their authenticity, 
 lie will tell them, however, that these Pitakas were committed 
 to writing not in the land where Buddha is said to have lived, 
 
61 
 
 
 not by those who beard bim preacb, and not during bis life« 
 time, or that of those who were bis contemporaries; bui, 
 according to Mahawanm and 8arasa)ujraha, four hundred and 
 fifty years after Buddha’s death, at a convocation of priests 
 in Aluwihare of Matella in this very Island. Up to that day 
 Buddha’s sayings were transmitted orally, and what weight 
 could be attached, the Catechist imploringly asked of his 
 audience, to such documents, which simply stated that some 
 four or five hundred years ago there lived a sage in a distant 
 land called Dambhadiva, etc. ; and he is said to have ex- 
 pounded such and such doctrines ? Would a last will, with 
 such meagre evidence, be considered genuine in a Court of 
 Justice ? If not, how are th y to receive as true documents 
 which concern matters of such great moment as the 
 salvation of men’s souls? It is also stated in Buddhist 
 books that Gautama attained Buddahood by the observance 
 of the ten Paramita (or sacrifices) ; and so it will be well to 
 see whether those rites or offerings could have the effect 
 which they are said to have had. The first Paramita or 
 observance they read of as having been performed by Buddha 
 with the view of accumulating m< rit, and attaining the Budda- 
 hood, is Dana paranita, or almsgiving, which, besides others, 
 consisted of the extraordinary offering of his eyes, head, flesh, 
 blood, wives and children. 
 
 Many of those present knew with what love, care, 
 and attention a daughter is brought up by the parents ; 
 how at her proper age, whatever their affection to 
 each other may be, when she is given in marriage 
 to an utter stranger, the attachment to her parents gives 
 place to love for her newly found husband, and how the wife 
 looks solely to her husband for* her comfort and sustenance- 
 They were also not unacquainted with the fact that the birth 
 of children only tended to strengthen this bond of union, and 
 form a happy family. And what will they think of a father, 
 living in such happiness, giving up his children without anj^ 
 hesitation or sorrow to a wandering hermit, amidst the cries 
 and lamentations of his wife and the children themselves, 
 without any inquiry as to what he was going to do with 
 them, simply because he came to the door of this happy abode, 
 
62 
 
 and sail! — may be with some base motive of selling them aa 
 slaves or otherwise maltreating them — Give me your two 
 (.'liildren as an alms offering, and you will attain Budda- 
 hoodr Not satisfied w’itn tliis if even the wife be thus 
 sacrideed, what would tliey think cf such a husband? Were 
 inese meritorious acts? Was it meritorious to break the 
 nearts ci wves and cniidren anl bring desolation and misery 
 lO a happy home r If >.t were, what actions will they 
 enumerate under the head of demerds or sins? But yet 
 Gautama dm an tins, and tnis was the moans he adopted to 
 attain Buddahood. Ilcw often did he so give up his wives 
 and children; Was it a hundred times? No! A thousand 
 times? Oh no I As the science ot figures cannot sufficiently ex- 
 press the number of wives and children so sacrificed, in order to 
 convey to tne mind ol tue reader an approximate idea of the 
 cumber offered, i*^ 13 saia Tn Buddhist works that it the ropefi 
 and string <5 with wliicn the wives ana children 01 Buddha who 
 were sacrificed by him were tied witu, were collected into 
 a heap, its iieigiit would be a million times greater tnan that 
 ot Mahameru whicn he (the Cateciiist) would remind them 
 was Si OUO yoduns high — and iG mue? went to make up one 
 yoduna. This will give them a tolerably- good idea ci the 
 number of wives and children sacrificed. Did his heareiB 
 believe tliat any happy state could be attained by the com- 
 mission Ol ruch barbarous and cruel actions There would 
 be an end to all social happiness, and to even the continuance 
 of the world, if everybody set about perpetrating such 
 honible crimes as those which Buddha is said to have done 
 to attain Biuhlj hood. But these were not all tne offering® 
 he made to gain this end. It is said that Ihe number cf his 
 eyes ho sacrificed was more than the stars of the sky, the 
 quantity of blood he gave was more than the water in the 
 ocean, and tho {uautity of flesh was greater than ihe sub- 
 stance of this earth, and that of his heads was more than the 
 height of Mahameru. What a mass of men must have been 
 killed to offer so many eyes, hands and heads ! Even if, as is 
 declared, it was Gautama’s own eyes and hands which were 
 offered, self-destruction was quite as had as killing a third 
 person, and so the heinousuess of the crime was the same, 
 
63 
 
 and wliat do they think of a leing who committed such 
 villainy to attain a state of bliss ? 
 
 Buddha is also said to have been omniscient : but they 
 will find from instances he will presently mention that his 
 omniscience was of a peculiar nature, and that it represented 
 dead people as living, and those who were actually living as 
 being dead. For instance, in Mahawage it is said that Buddha, 
 at the commencement of his ministry, did not consider it 
 worth while to preach Bana, as it was his impression that 
 there was not a single being on earth who could understand 
 his doctrines and be edified by them ; but shortly after it is 
 stated that he was the means of sending twenty-four Asanka 
 souls to Nirwana. "Was it not plain from this that Buddha 
 did not possess any omniscient power. If fie fiad he would 
 not have failed to see even one of these twenty- loui’ Asankc 
 beings who were edified by Buddha discourses. Then 
 again after klaha Brahma convinced Gautama of the falsity 
 of this idea he cherished, that there was no human being or 
 earth competent enough to understand his doctrines, he 
 decided on preaching his Dhamma to Alarakalama as being 
 the most intelligent man alive. But did he carry out his 
 wishes? No; the All- wise Buddha found on inquiry that 
 Alarakalama had been dead some days, and there was no 
 possibibility of preaching to him. Ilis second choice then 
 fell on Ud'l ikarama, but the obiect of this selection also shared 
 the same fate. On making inquiry for this sage, he found 
 that he too had befen dead some time. If they believed this 
 helpless being, who committed so many and terrible mistakes, 
 and Avho often had to be corrected by third parties, to be 
 all-wise, who would not be omniscient ? Lastly, Buddhists 
 pray to, or take refuge in, Buddha, Dfiarma. — that is in his 
 doctrines contained in the Three Bitakas — and in the priest- 
 hood, in the words which his Buddhist friends often 
 repeat ; — 
 
 Buddlian mrannm (faccnmi, 
 
 Dhamman saranam gacexmiy 
 
 Sangham saranam gaccami. 
 
 But what was the use in taking refuge, or sarana, in either 
 of these ? Was there any protection to be gained by it? 
 
64 
 
 In tlie first place, as there is no sun-light when there is m 
 sun, so they could not expect any protection from a being 
 who was non-existent. Buddha is said to have attained the 
 state of annihilation, and how could he become any refuge ? 
 It was plain, therefore, that this first sarana, or refuge, was 
 of no avail. The second — the refuge in Dhamma or Bana 
 hooks — was no better; how could a man take refuge in books? 
 It is rather that the books are under the care and protection 
 of men, who get them transcribed into olas, and keep them 
 hound up safely in an almirah, or chest, to prevent their 
 being destroyed. Was it’ not clear that this refuge, or 
 sarana, too was of no avail ? And as regards the third 
 sarana — or the refuge in priests — he need not say much. 
 Between the two sects of the Buddhist priesthood — the 
 Amerapura and Siam — a controversy has been raging for 
 some time, each trying to prove that the other has 
 no JJpasampada, ordination, sarana, or Sila, or many other 
 observances — in short, that they were no priests. First, then, 
 they had to decide. as to whether they priests, about which 
 
 even amongst themselves there were such great disputes ; and 
 even if they could come to a decision, what availed it ? The 
 immorality of the priests was well known ; and was it not 
 like the blind leading the blind for the Buddhist priests, 
 men full of lust, envy, and ignorance as they were, to attempt 
 to guide the people who foolishly took refuge in the Sangha, 
 or the priesthood ? Now in conclusion, he would remind his 
 auditory that not a word had been said by the reverend 
 priest to explain the confusing and absurd doctrine of Patic- 
 casamuppada, nor as to the Buddhist Afwirt, and would entreat 
 of them to consider, without prejudice, all that he sail, seek 
 the truth so that it may be found, and after proving all 
 things, hold fast that which was good. 
 
 The Buddhist’s Reply. 
 
 IHE REV. MIGETTUWATTe’s THIRD SPEECH. 
 
 The Priest Migettuwatte, here rising, said that he had 
 invited the several learned priests there present to the con- 
 fc-oversy, believing that some able opponent would appear on 
 the Christian side, and that their assistance would be required 
 
65 
 
 to refute the arguments that might be adduced, but having 
 been surprisingly disappointed in this, he did not think it 
 necessary to give his friends further trouble by detaining 
 them longer. Before, however, making any comments on 
 the lecture of his friend the Catechist, he would say a few 
 it^ords in regard to some remarks that fell from his opponent 
 m a previous occasion. He (the Rev. Silva) stated that 
 Buddhism was not worthy of credence as it likened man 
 anto a frog, serpent, or a dog. By making this assertion 
 his opponent not only damaged his own cause, but betrayed 
 his ignorance of the Christian Bible, of which he professed to 
 be a preacher. For on turning to Ecclesiastes iii. 19, they 
 would find it stated, “ For that which befalleth the sons of 
 men befalleth beasts, even one thing befalleth them, as the 
 one dieth so dieth the other, yea they have all one breath ; so 
 that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast : for all is 
 vanity.” And now he would like to know where in Bud- 
 dhist scriptures a single passage occurred Likening man unto 
 a beast. 
 
 His opponent, in arguing that Buddhism was not a 
 proper religion to embrace because human beings were 
 likened unto beasts, was only arguing against Christianity, 
 and he was thankful for the assistance from this unexpected 
 quarter. He must say, however, that he was sure this 
 ignorance of the Bible would have cost him his place if the 
 Principal of the Society to which his opponent belonged 
 had been present on the occasion. And if the ignorance of 
 his opponent was so great in matters pertaining to his own 
 religion, the audience would be able to form an idea of the 
 extent of his knowledge of Buddhism, against which he 
 would take this opportunity of mentioning that not 
 a single tenable argument had been raised by his 
 opponent. 
 
 An attempt was made by him on the previous Tuesday to 
 depreciate Buddhism, by declaring that the doctrine of 
 Faticcasamnppada was an absurdity and a confusion of thought. 
 He would now, as promised on that day, try to make this sub- 
 ject a little clearer. Even the sage Buddhaghosa was so 
 
 5 
 
66 
 
 conscious of tlie difficulty of rightly explaining this abstruse 
 doctrine that he expressed himself thus in his work 
 Visuddhimarga 
 
 Vattu hamo aliam ajja 
 Paccagakara vannamm 
 Patittham na adhignceami 
 Ajjagidho na saga ran : — 
 
 the literal meaning of which is, *• that as there is no support 
 to one who has fallen into the ocean, I who am fallen into 
 the sea of Pahccasaniappadn doctrine have no support ; ” hut 
 the idea sought to be conveyed by this stanza is that it was 
 only tliose wise men who have attained the arihat that were 
 able to fully comprehend this theory, and that others, not so 
 fortunate, could not easily understand it. And the attempt 
 made by his opponent, who professed to fully understand it, 
 to carp at Paticcasamuppada, of which even the great and 
 learned commentator, well-versed in the Three Pitakas, spoke 
 in such terms as those he had above quoted, can only be 
 compared to the barking of a dog envious at the splendour of 
 the moon. That his opponent had not the remotest idea of 
 this doctrine of causation was plainly shewn by the example 
 of the father begetting the son, and the son begetting the 
 father he adduced in illustration of it. True, there was an 
 instance of such a circumlocutory genesis in the Christian 
 Scriptures which he would advert to on a future occasion. 
 He would now, however, endeavour to explain to the best of 
 his ability what this doctrine of Paticcasamappada is, and 
 would beg of the multitude to give him an attentive 
 hearing. 
 
 The doctrine of causation is enunciated in the folio win a: 
 passage : — Avijja paccaga samkhara, samkhara paccaga vin~ 
 nanam, vinnana paccaga nama rupam, nama rupa paccaga 
 salagatanam, salagatana paccaga phasso, phassa paccaga vedana, 
 cedana paccaga tanha, tanha paccaga upadanam, upadana paccaga 
 bhavo, hhava paccaga jati, jati paccaga jaratnaranam soka^ 
 paridem dukkha domanass upagasa sambhavanti. 
 
 The gist of which is that in consequence of, or from 
 
67 
 
 avi/ja, samkharm are produced, in consequence of, or from 
 aamkharas, vinana is produced, in consequence of, or from 
 vinnana, nama rupa is produced, etc. In short, what Buddha 
 evidently meant to say was that in regular succession all 
 these are produced causatively one from the other, hut this of 
 course his opponent could not understand, which was the 
 reason for his stating the ridiculous nonsense they heard, 
 that snmkhnm was produced from a thing called (tvijja which 
 existed independent of a sentient being, and that rinnava 
 was produced from samkhara. To shew the incorrectness of 
 his opponent’s views, and the further elucidation of this 
 subject, he would give them a short example. Though, 
 when it is said curd is made of milk, butter ./row curd, and 
 ghee from butter, and each of these is different from the 
 other, yet there can be no possible doubt that all these, curd, 
 milk, butter and ghee, existed together. In like manner, 
 there never existed avijja alone without a sentient being, n'" 
 samkhara alone, independent of, or without avijja, nor th^ 
 two nama rupa by themselves, independent of, or without 
 samkhara. That all these exist together is certain.* And 
 there was no doubt that his opponent put a different con- 
 struction altogether on the words that Buddha uttered to 
 shew the manner of the transmigratory movements of a 
 sentient being through Samsara or metempsychosis. All his 
 opponent’s utterances on this subject reminded him of the 
 babbling of a madman. The Pattlmnapprakarana of Ah- 
 hidarma also has the following in regard to the doctrine of 
 Paticcasamuppada : — 
 
 Moham paticcasampaijuttaka khanda patisamlhikkhane pat- 
 tum patticca sahctuka kliandhanam, etc. 
 
 And it signifies that the skhandhas connected with the 
 ignorance {i.e., of the present existence) and skhandhas con- 
 nected with the form of the object (which he sees at the 
 point of death) are born. 
 
 * The most learned Buddh'sfc with whom I conver?ed in the East 
 denied utterly the existence of matter. It was only an appearance, a 
 shadow. The only two realities in the universe were causation and 
 spiiitual substance. 
 
 5—2 
 
68 
 
 In order to sliew that samhharas never come to ex- 
 istence alone, the work entitled Visudhimarga says 
 thus : — 
 
 Samlihara Tiamma paccayena ca upanissaya paccmyena ca 
 paccaya honti, etc. 
 
 That is, mmhhams become sources of vinnana from 
 the source of kamma (or deed), or from source and 
 association. 
 
 The following passage will also shew that vinnana does not 
 come into existence before nama rupa, but simultaneously 
 with them : — 
 
 Vipaka vinnana sahajati anna manna nissaya sampayutta 
 vipaka ahara indriya atthi avigata paccaychi navadha paccaya 
 honti. 
 
 The purport of this is that the productive vinnana is 
 produced from nine different sources of coeval birth, mutual, 
 causal, associating, joined to each other, productive, objective, 
 existing in perception and separated. .If one thus under- 
 stands and can comprehend this abstruse doctrine aright, it 
 will be impossible for him to come to the conclusion that 
 nama rupa came into existence after vinnana, and the en- 
 deavour of his opponent, with such a limited knowledge, to 
 fathom this mysterious doctrine of Paticcasamuppada was 
 like the roaming of a blind elephant in a thick jungle. 
 He woiild here remind those present that no explanation had 
 been given by his opponent of what his party understood by 
 Atma, if it was not the cleaving to existence of which he had 
 already spoken. He would again impress on them that the 
 being who according to them (the Buddhists) suffered here- 
 after was not a different one. Each continued his indi- 
 viduality. All knew themselves in the future life. Why 
 the Christians put the construction that they did on the 
 Buddhist doctrine, viz., that it was a different being that 
 suffered in a future state for actions committed in this 
 Life, was owing to their incapability to understand this 
 subject properly. 
 
 And now before proceeding to meet the objections of hii 
 friend the Catechist, he would make another remark in refer- 
 ence to Christianity. In I. Corinthians xv. 22-28, it was 
 
69 
 
 said, “ For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all he 
 made alive ” — which statement clearly shewed — and it is the 
 belief of these Christians — that by believing on Christ 
 every one shall escape the punishment of eternal hell-fire and 
 obtain everlasting happiness. But there was another passage 
 in the Bible which had quite a different meaning, and he 
 would like to know how the Christians reconciled two such 
 diametrically contradictory declarations. He referred to 
 Matt. XXV. 41-46, wherein appeared the words — “ Then 
 shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart 
 from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the 
 devil and his angels : For I was an hungered, and ye gave 
 me no meat. I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink : I 
 was a stranger, and ye took me not in ; naked, and ye 
 clothed me not ; sick and in prison, and ye visited me not. 
 Then shall they also answer him saying, Lord, when saw we 
 thee an hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or in prison, and 
 did not minister to thee ? Then shall he answer them 
 saying. Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye did it not to 
 one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these 
 shall go away into everlasting punishment ; but the 
 righteous unto life eternal.” If words have any meaning, 
 this clearly shews that men’s salvation does not depend upon 
 belief in Christ alone ; but to attain happiness hereafter it 
 was necessary to perform righteous or good actions. Then 
 what did Christians mean by declaring that all wh(; 
 believe on Christ’s name would be saved ? If one portion 
 of the Bible so hopelessly contradicts another portion, which 
 om were they to accept as true ? It was certain that both 
 /statements could not be true, and which was the false one? 
 What right had they then to believe in a Bible which con- 
 tained so many contradictions ? and were they not justified 
 in coming to the conclusion that a religion based upon 
 such a hook, was false ? * 
 
 * Among discrepancies, contradictions, and irreconcilable passages in 
 the Bible, the following were selected by the Bev. M. Wollaston, aq 
 English clergyman, of Melbourne, Au.-tralia 
 
70 
 
 Now •natli reference to the remarks made by his friend, 
 the Catechist. A more desultory and unscholar-like speech 
 he had never heard, and it would be usele s to even touch on 
 those parts of his discourse which were quite irrelevant to the 
 issue, as the curing of a fever patient, etc. It had been said 
 by the Catechist that the Buddhist party had only confirmed 
 the objections raised against PancaMandha by the 
 Christians, but this was totally untrue ; they had completely 
 refuted all arguments raised against this abstruse doctrine by 
 
 2nd Sam., xxiv. v. 1 . — “krdifhe 
 Lord movfrt David ” to nutnbsr the 
 children of I,-ra“l. 
 
 9. — “Jo'b gave up the number 
 of the people unto the king, and 
 there were in Israel, 800,000 men 
 that drew the sword, and the men 
 < f Judah W" re .500.000 men I ” or 
 a total of 1,300,000. 
 
 13. — “ So Gad came to David and 
 '•said unto him, Shall seven years of 
 (amine come unto thee in thy 
 land ? ” etc. 
 
 24. — “ So David bought the 
 thresLing-floor and the oxen for 
 fift;/ shekels of silver;" equal to 
 of our money, at two shillings 
 the shekel. 
 
 For I have seen God face to face. 
 — Gen. xxxii. 30. 
 
 And they saw the God of Israel. 
 — E.x. xxiv. 19. 
 
 He rested and was refreshed. — 
 Ex. xxi. 19. 
 
 I am weary with repenting. — Jer. 
 
 XV. 6. 
 
 The eyes of the Lord are in every 
 iplac^”. — Prov. XV. 3. 
 
 Is there anything too hard for 
 me ? — Jer. xxxi 27. 
 
 With God all things are possible. 
 — Mat', xix. 26. 
 
 God is not a man * * that he 
 ■ eh' uld repent. — Num. xxiii. 19. 
 
 Those that seek me early shall 
 ■find me. — Prov. viii. 17. 
 
 To undo the heavy burdens, and 
 to let the oppressed go free, and 
 that ye break every yoke. — Is. 
 Iviii. 6. 
 
 I. Chron., xxi. v. 1. — ‘, And Satan 
 stood up. and provoked David to 
 number Israel.” 
 
 5. — •• And Joab gave the sum of 
 the number of the people to David. 
 And all they of Israel were 
 1,100.000 men that drew the sword ; 
 an i Judah was 470,000 men that 
 drew the sword,” or a total of 
 1,570,000. 
 
 II. — “ So Gad came to David and 
 said unto him Choose thee either 
 
 years of famine,” etc. 
 
 25. — ■' So David gave to Oman 
 for the place, six hundred shekels 
 of gold,' equal to £1.050 of our 
 money, at £1 15s. per shekel. 
 
 No man hath seen God at any 
 time. — John i. 18. 
 
 Whom no man hath seen nor can 
 see. — I. Tim. vi. 16. 
 
 The Creator * * fainteth not, 
 
 neither is weary. — Is. xl. 28. 
 
 And the Lord came down to see 
 the city and the tower. — G n. xi 5 . 
 
 And the Lord was with Judah 
 * * butcouli not drive out the 
 
 inhabitants of the valley, because 
 they had chariots of iron. — Judges 
 i. 19. 
 
 And God repented of the evil he 
 had said. — Jonah iii. 10. 
 
 They shall seek me early, but 
 shall not find me. — Prov. i. 28. 
 
 Of the children of the strangers 
 that do sojourn among you, of them 
 shall ye buy. * * They shall be 
 your bondmen for ever. — Lev. xxv. 
 45 , 46 . 
 
71 
 
 the Christians, and th’s all those who were present would 
 remember. He (the Priest) had never denied the esis ence 
 of a future state, but what he required was simply that the 
 opposite part}' should explain to him the nature of what they 
 meant by Atma. He had most plainly shewn them what 
 they (the Buddhists) understood by the idea of cleaving to 
 existence which took shape at death. The Catechist men- 
 tioned something about the dwellers of the Arupa Brahma 
 him in explanation of Atma, but if his friend had correctly 
 understood what was said in regard to Arupa Brahma him, 
 he was sure he would not have brought it forward as an 
 illustration. 
 
 S me nonsense was also uttered by the Catechist 
 in reply to the remarks made by him (the Priest), 
 with reference to Giod’s command to Moses to perform a 
 series of miracles before Pharaoh, according to the effect that 
 each one produced, thereby shewing that God was not 
 omniscient ; to meet this objection his friend declared that 
 the plagues had been inflicted on Egypt to punish Pharaoh 
 for bis haughtiness ; but what had that to do wdth the com- 
 mand “ do this and if that won’t induce him to let the 
 people go, do the other, etc.” Those of the asse nbly who 
 had any common sense would be able to judge of the in- 
 appropriateness of this reply to the objection he raised. 
 
 Tire reply his friend made to his remarks on the circumci- 
 sion of Ptoses’ son was not more happy. It was plainly declared 
 in the Bible that when Zipporah, Moses’ wife, knew that God 
 wa« angry with Moses and sc ’it to kill him, she circum- 
 cised their son and cast the foreskin at his feet, and this was 
 instanced by him to shew the fondness of the Christians’ 
 God for human blood as a sacrifice, in common with devils 
 and other evil spirits ; the course adopted to appease whom, 
 he would again remind them, was the same as that pursued 
 by Zipporah in the passage he had just cited. The Cate- 
 chist could not have possibly understood his (the Priest’s) 
 meaning ; if he did he would not certainly have adduced 
 such a ridiculous reply as he had done. He contented him- 
 self by saying that the foreskin was cast at Moses’ feet. 
 Apart from the absurdity of endeavouiing to convince them 
 
72 
 
 that the sacrifice with which God'’s wrath was sought tc he 
 appeased was throwu at Moses* feet ! — wliat a feeble reply it 
 was to his remark that God was fond of human sacrifices. It 
 was God that sought to kill Moses and yet his friend declares 
 that the bloody offering was thrown at Moses’ feet. How 
 absurd ! 
 
 The incident with reference to the armies of Judah 
 fleeing from iron chariots, though the Lord was with 
 them, was also mentioned by him (the Priest) to 
 shew that, like other evil spirits, the Jewish God 
 feared iron. If he did not fear iron, why was not 
 J udah, with whom the Lord was, more successful ? The 
 Catechist, in his reply, declared that the discomfiture of 
 the armies of Judah was not owing to any fear of iron, but 
 for lack of Judah’s faith. If then Judah had no faith, why 
 did the Christians’ God, whom they declared to be 
 omniscient, abide with him? When he joined him, if he 
 were omniscient, he would have known that Judah did not 
 possess faith ; and would have foreseen these disastrous 
 consequences ; and yet he remains with him till the last, 
 and only flees when the iron chariots appeared ! Did not 
 this clearly shew that either God was not omniscient or that 
 he feared iron ? How will his frienil get out of this dilemma ? 
 He would here warn him (the Catechist) not to venture on 
 such answers in future, which precipitated him into new 
 difficulties. 
 
 To shew that Jehovah did not breathe a portion of his 
 own soul into Adam (which was the inference to be drawn 
 from the passage, “The TiOrd God formed man of the dust 
 of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of 
 life, and man became a living soul”), his friend instanced 
 the case of blowing oil into a man’s ear, and asked whether 
 that ever meant blowing a portion of a man’s life with the 
 oil. What silly talk was this ! In saying that oil was 
 blown into one’s ear would it be inferred that “ the breath of 
 life was blown into him ? ” — which was the expression made 
 use of in tho passage, and which, therefore, warranted his 
 saying that it was a portion of the spirit of God that was 
 breathed, or infused, into Adam. 
 
73 
 
 Tlie Catechist also attempted to shew that Jephthah’s 
 daughter was not killed and sacrificed, by stating that she was 
 ransomed by paying a certain sum of money to Jehovah, but it 
 was distinctly said in the Bible that Jephthah did unto her 
 according to his vow, which was, they will remember, to offer up 
 unto the Lord as a burnt offering whatever came forth of the 
 doors of his house to meet him when he returns in peace from 
 the children of Ammon. "Well, what was the doing unto her 
 according to his vow if it were not offering his daughter, who 
 came to meet him, as a burnt offering to Jehovah ? If they 
 were not satisfied with this, there was the Douay Bible, 
 which he would be happy to hand to his opponents for their 
 delectation, which would conclusively shew that the neck of 
 Jephthah’s daughter was really cut off, and offered to Jehovah. 
 He (the Priest) regretted very much that he was under the 
 necessity of engaging in controversies "with those who ev n 
 attempted to deny facts, which were supported by such 
 incontrovertible testimony. 
 
 With reference to his statement that on account of Christ’s 
 birth several helpless innocents had been killed, the Catechist 
 had the audacity to declare that he (the Priest) said that the 
 innocents were slain at Christ’s birth, or on the day of his 
 birth, and proceeded to demolish that imaginary objection. 
 He never mentioned that the innocents were killed at Christ’s 
 birth, but only that, on account of Christ’s birth, many 
 had been killed by Herod. If the Catechist had any regard 
 for truth, he would not have uttered such a falsehood before 
 an assembly of the kind before him, and who would remem- 
 ber what he actually said. Being unable to deny this whole- 
 sale massacre of little children on account of the coming of 
 Christ, the Catechist sought to cast obloquy of a similar kind 
 on Buddha, by alleging that Buddha’s mother died seven 
 days after his birth. But the death of Buddha's mother, 
 however, was not in consequence of Buddha’s birth. It is 
 clearly seen from Buddhist books that before a Bhodisat 
 (or Buddha) leaves the abode of the gods to be born in this 
 world he foresees five things, one of these five being the dura- 
 tion of his mother’s life ; and in this instance it appears that he 
 was incarnated in his mother’s womb just ten months and 
 
74 
 
 seven days before tbe day on wliicb he foresaw she would 
 terminate her existence on earth. He was bom in ten 
 months, and as pre-ordained she died at the expiration of the 
 remaining seven days. How unreasonable then was it to 
 attribute to Buddha the death of his mother, who had only 
 paid her debt to nature at the appointed time. How could a 
 controversy he carried on with a party who misrepresented 
 the statements so clearly made in Buddhist scriptures ? 
 No misrepresentation nor concealment of facts, however, 
 would help them to give a fairer complexion to the 
 slaying of helpless innocents on account of Christ’s 
 birth, than the circumstance actually bears and which he 
 explained to them on a previous occasion. To clear Christ 
 from the imputation that he was to be blamed for this act, 
 the Catechist declared that Christ was an enemy of sin, and 
 that therefore the omen of the sinful massacring of innocents 
 was presented at his birth. This answer, however, was 
 extremely stupid. The appearance of sinful signs would 
 indicate that he was rather a, friend than an enemy of sin. At 
 the birth of one who is to bring happiness to this world, a 
 good omen must present itself, and as the slaughter of chil- 
 dren was not a good sign, there was no doubt that it only 
 portended the introduction of a false religion on earth and 
 consequent evil to man. 
 
 The truth or otherwise of omens is one that can be 
 experienced by anyone, for even the success of a journey 
 is often prefigured by the omens that shew themselves at 
 starting. It was not necessary, however, to enlarge on 
 this subject as he had fully treated of it before. The 
 only advantage which the Catochist derived by tins, his 
 explanation of the omens, was that the audience were enabled 
 to form a correct opinion of his intelligence. But even this 
 did not betray his friend’s stupidity and ignorance so much 
 as did the construction he had put upon the beautiful simile 
 used in Buddhist books to convey an idea of the power and 
 excellence of Buddha’s speech. The expression made use of 
 in the books is that at Gautama’s birth he made an ahhita 
 hesara sinJm uadnya, which his friend interpreted literally as 
 the roaring of an undaunted lion of the kesara or maned 
 
75 
 
 kind, and declared that owing to tkis roaring of Buddha, 
 which rent the ears of all creatures, several animals had died. 
 It would he impossible for the intelligent portion of his 
 audience to repress their laughter at this silly and stupid 
 explanation, and as Buddhism could not in any way suffer 
 from such feeble attacks, they could well afford to treat it 
 with contempt. According to his friend’s interpretation 
 Rajasingha signified a “ lion king,” instead of a valiant 
 king, which was its proper meaning. Would his friend, 
 however, be good enough to cite a single authority for his 
 statement that anyone suffered any injury at this “ lion-like ” 
 roaring of Buddha. 
 
 His friend also declared that the At/, which comprises 
 
 all Buddhist doctrines, were only consigned to writing 450 
 years after Buddha’s death, and that, as up to that time, his 
 teachings were transmitted orally, the doctrines must have been 
 put in writing according to the fancy of the priests who lived 
 at the time, who it was not to be supposed would be able to 
 retain correctly in their memories they had heard. This, 
 however, was all untrue ! It was certain that fifty-three 
 years after Buddha’s attaining Nirvana, during the reign of 
 Walagambahu, that the preaching of Buddha was consigned 
 to writing in this Island, and even during Buddha’s lifetime 
 it is recorded that Buddha’s sermons were engraved on gold 
 leaves. The authenticity of our Sacred Books cannot be 
 doubted by any truly learned man ! 
 
 In this Island the Buddhist scriptures were written by 
 Eahats, who were holy and sinless beings, possessed of 
 celestial knowledge, devoid of all passions, and only inferior 
 to Buddha, and hence had no difficulty whatever in retaining 
 anything in their memory for any length of time and 
 correctly consigning all they had heard to writing, without 
 adding to, or detracting one iota from what Buddha really 
 uttered. The case of the Christian Bible was, however, 
 different. It was not vo-itten by such holy personages as 
 those whom he had just mentioned, but by sinful and 
 despicable men, such as Moses, who had committed murders 
 and fled the country. Besides, it was recorded that the 
 Bible thus written was once completely burnt, but that one 
 
7 (> 
 
 of Jeliovali’s Kapm-alas (devil’s priest) re-wrote it, evidently as 
 suited his purposes, and somehow managed to impose it upon 
 the ting as a genuine work. 
 
 Speaking of Moses, he could not but mention what 
 occurred to him in regard to the miracles he is said to have 
 performed in Egypt. It was said that the magicians of 
 Egypt performed the miracles that Moses did. It was his 
 opinion that Moses also was a magician, and to say, then, 
 that the power of Almighty God was with him was absurd ! 
 If it were so, the magicians too, must have had this divine 
 power. 
 
 The Catechist also made some remarks in regard to the 
 offerings made by Gautama to attain Buddahood, and in par- 
 ticular made mention of his offering his childi’en, as King 
 Wessantara, to a hermit named Jutaka Bamnna ; but the 
 Catechist evidently said this, forgetting that before attaining 
 Buddahood, the most supreme state in the universe, it was 
 essential for the aspirant to conquer all q^u'-sions, and particu- 
 larly the love of worldly possessions ; and if, when he was 
 asked to sacrifice his wife and children. King Wessantara, who 
 was in hopes of* becoming Buddha, had refused to do so, it 
 would have she\vn him unfit for this high mission on account 
 of his desire to possess wives and children, and therefore it 
 was that King Wessantara offered his children. Besides 
 aged women who have heard the story of King Wessantara 
 and his offerings will remember that no evil befell his 
 children, but happiness was the result of their being given 
 away. 
 
 And again, the queen of King Wessantara was not, as 
 alleged by the Catechist, given away to be another man’s 
 wife. The fact was that Sakkra, the celestial king of the two 
 god worlds, in order to enable King AYessantara to accom- 
 plish his clana paramita (the offerings) necessary to attain 
 Buddahood in the highest degree, assumed a human form 
 and presenting himself before King Wessantara obtained 
 his queen as an offering and immediately returned her to 
 the king. Thus the king’s last sacrifice was made. It was 
 therefore untrue to say that Buddha gave away his wives to 
 other men in the sense that the Catechist used the expression. 
 
77 
 
 The Catechist’s remarks touching the height of the 
 strings with which Buddha’s wives were tied if collected into 
 a heap, and so on, were all to no purpose, as these figures 
 were simply made use of in the books to express the number 
 and the self-denying nature of the offerings made by Buddha. 
 Symbols and figures were the methods of speech in Buddha’s 
 time. Of course it was not to be expected that his friend 
 (the Catechist) would understand the pleonasm. 
 
 With reference to the reply made by the Catechist to his 
 (the Priest’s) remarks touching Christ not remaining three 
 days and three nights in the grave, as was declared in th^^ 
 Scriptures, he could only ejaculate novammmn (miserable). 
 The Catechist said that the expression in the Bible “ three 
 days and three nights ” was meant for three days. Even 
 supposing it were so, Christ having risen on Saturday night , 
 or according to the Catechist’s interpretation, before Sunday 
 commenced, he only remained two days in the grave, the 
 Friday and the Saturday, and how can that be made to 
 signify three days and three nights ? It was needless for 
 him to say anything more touching the Catechist’s feeble re- 
 marks As the hour allotted to him was nearly over, he 
 would now conclude, promising to still more completely prove 
 the falsity of Christianity during the last hour of the con- 
 troversy. He had not yet shewn the comparative excellence 
 of Jehovah, Christ, and Buddha; this he would thoroughly 
 do in the afternoon. Meanwhile, he would beg of the multi- 
 tude to keep in mind what had been said and sift the 
 truth from falsehood. Heartily thanking the assembly 
 for the great order which prevailed among them, the Priest 
 brought his discourse to a close. 
 
 The Discussion Continued. 
 
 REV. MR. SILVa’s THIRD SPEECH. 
 
 Pev. Mr. de Silva rose, and said that as that was the 
 last speech he had to make in that discussion, he asked the 
 assembly to pay due attention. 
 
 Peferring to the Priest’s charge against him for using the 
 term uciruddha karaya, opponent, he said that the term wag 
 
78 
 
 not an improper one for an opponent. He then quoted the 
 following gatha (stanza), and shewed that the word was 
 uuobjectionahle. 
 
 Apannakam thanam eke duthja dhut akkika eladanmya 
 medhra'i tarn ganheyyad apannakam. Here the words apanna- 
 kam thanam are translated in thejatakas avimddhakaranayak ; 
 the word virniddha, therefore, meant a subject about which 
 there was a difference of opinion. Vii'uddhakaraya was, 
 therefore, neither olfensive nor improper. 
 
 The passage from Eccl. iii. 19, quoted by the opponent 
 to shew that the Bible taught that man was only a bea t is 
 refuted by Eccl. iii. 7. In the former, animal life and the 
 mortality of the body are only meant ; but the latter shewed 
 that there was a spirit besides, which went to Grod who 
 gave it. 
 
 The opponent said that Buddhayhosn, attempting to ex- 
 plain Paticcasamuppada, found himself in unsurmonntable 
 difficulty, as one who fell into the deep ocean; but the 
 opponent promises to explain it. Is he more competent 
 than Bnddhayhosa ? Mr. de Silva next reviewed the Patic- 
 caaamnppadaya, and shewed its absurdity, as in his second 
 speech. 
 
 The opponent, explaining the Catimatya, appealed to the 
 people, ami asked whether birth, was not sorrow. But 
 Buddha said ; Pid>le ananussutesu dhammesu cakkhiim ndapadi 
 nanam udapadi panna ndapadi vijja udapadi aloko udapadi ; viz., 
 for the attainment of these previously unknown doctrines, 
 the eye, the knowledge, the wisdom, the clear perception, the 
 lights were developed within me (Buddha). What every 
 mail was expected to know, Buddha only knew after he had 
 attained to Buddahood. 
 
 Tlespecting the opponent’s objection to men being in 
 heaven if the present soul went there, Mr. Silva said human 
 souls wore human souls even in heaven. Men on earth were 
 subject to decay and death; but in heaven they were glorious 
 immortal beings. 
 
 Next, the absurdity of the opponent quoting I. Cor. xv. 22, 
 to shew that it contradicted the passages in Matt. xxv. 41-47 
 and Matt. vii. 13-14, were shewn. In the first passage the 
 
79 
 
 opponent confounded the meaning of the words jivnf- 
 u'anulahanawaeta, made alive, with galavamilahnnaicaeta, being 
 saved. Being made alive and being saved are different 
 things. All were made alive through Christ ; hut from 
 John V. 28 and 29 it would appear that “ all that are in the 
 graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have 
 done good into the resurrection of life, and they that have 
 done e\ul into the resm’rection of damnation.” The opponent 
 evidently did not know the meaning of even the Singhalese 
 words jivatvanulabanawa and galawanidahanawa. Hence the 
 confusion. 
 
 The opponent said that the arupa worlds and their 
 inhabitants were subjects very abstruse, and not easy to 
 explain ; but wished to know whether the Atma, the soul, 
 was like an egg or a ball. How absurd a question ! 
 
 The opponent said that even at the time of Buddha the 
 Dharma was written on leaves of gold ; but the books said 
 Satthakatham sabbam Buddha vacanam tathagatassa parinibba- 
 nato yam panasadhikani cattari vassa satani tava mati mmpanna 
 bhikkhii mukha patliena anemm ; that is, Buddha’s words, 
 with the comments, were brought down orally by intelligent 
 priests during 450 years after Buddha’s death. 
 
 The opponent objected to Moses and his writings because 
 he (Moses) at one time killed an Egyptian. Moses cer- 
 tainly did save the life of an innocent Hebrew by killing an 
 Egyptian, who was going to kill the Hebrew. Moses’ act 
 was perfectly justifiable and laudable. Even if it were 
 otherwise, if he were a culprit, he was so before he 
 was called of God. There was nothing to prevent him 
 from obeying God, repenting, and being reformed. Be- 
 sides, the Christians did not take refuge in Moses, 
 But see the character of some of those in whom the 
 Buddhists take refuge. AnguUmala, the finger-chained, 
 was a robber and a murderer who killed 999 human beings. 
 He was at once ordained by Buddha and attained, it is said, 
 rahatship. The Buddhists take refuge in him. AnguUmala 
 pirita is recited by the Buddhists at the present time for 
 protection. Harantika was also a robber. He also attained 
 rahatship. The Buddhists take refuge in him. The Demon 
 
80 
 
 Aloha for twelve years consecutively murdered and ate a 
 human being every day. He is said to have attained aon-an. 
 The Buddhists take refuge in him. Having these things before 
 our opponent, how ridiculous was it to charge Moses of 
 murder, aiid blaspheme Grod for calling him to his service. 
 
 The opponent denied that Bodhisat ever gave away his 
 wife and children for improper uses. The opponent was 
 either ignorant or cared not to utter falsehood even before 
 such an assembly. In Kmlngotmwji it is stated that Bud- 
 dha’s wife Yasodhara, taking leave of him to enter nibbanam, 
 addressing Buddha himself, said : — 
 
 Neha koti sah'vssani gooaratthaua dayi mam na taftha rimana 
 homi tiujh atthana mnha mime — Great sage, many thousands of 
 koti times thou gavest me away as prey to lions, etc., yet I 
 was not displeased with thee neka koti sahnssaui hharbja 'ttliaija 
 dayi mam many thousands of koti times thou gavest me away 
 as wife, etc., neka koti sahassani upakar atthaya dayi mam, 
 many thousands of koti times thou gavest me away iu order 
 to obtain favour, etc. 
 
 Again it is said in the comment agat agatanam yacakanam 
 alankata patiy attain sisam kantitva gala lohitam niharittxi 
 anjitani kkhini iippatetva kata vansa padipikam putta mnnapa 
 carinim hhariyamdenena namvya adiiinamdanam nama nathi. 
 There is nothing that I refused to give away to those that 
 came to me begging. I cut off my ornamented head, I sacri- 
 ficed the blood of my neck, I plucked off my beautiful eyes, 
 I gave away my promising children, and my beloved wife. 
 The opponent’s assertion was therefore palpable error or 
 monstrous falsehood. 
 
 Mr. de Silva next pointed out the character of Bodhisat 
 after he had the assurance of becoming Buddha. He was 
 then Buddhankara, a germ of Buddahood growing up to attain 
 that stage. A plant of any kind retained its nature when it 
 grew. 
 
 In the Parantapajataka Bodhisat was heir apparent to the 
 throne. Enemies having come to attack the city, tlie prince 
 was asked by the king to drive them away. The prince, for 
 fear of being killed, as was foretold by a she jackal, refused 
 to go to battle. The king repeated his command, but 
 
81 
 
 Bodliisat having for some time repeatedly refused to go, at 
 last consented. But instead of protecting the city and the 
 royal parent, he acted the part of an enemy. The royal 
 parent, with the family priest and a servant called Parantapa, 
 had to flee into the jungle for life. There the queen, 
 Bodhisat’s mother, fell in love with Parantapa and lived 
 immorally with him, by whom the poor king was at last 
 massacred ; and in return the second prince, who was born 
 in the jungle, when he grew up massacred Parantapa for 
 seducing his mother the queen. All these things followed 
 the treacherous conduct of Bodhisat, who acted the part of an 
 enemy to his father, to his king, and to the kingdom. No 
 civilised nation could countenance such misconduct and 
 treachery. 
 
 In another birth, Sitssondiya Jataka, Bodhisat was a 
 gurula. He was a famous gambler. He went to Benares to 
 gamble with the king Thambatanda and at last seduced the 
 queen and ran away with her. This was the conduct of 
 young Buddha. 
 
 In Matangajataka Bodhisat committed a similar act. 
 Are these the examples set on record for those who would 
 aspire to Buddhaship ? 
 
 Now to inquire into Buddha’s teachings. 
 
 In the Satta Suriyuggana Suttani of the Anguttara 
 Nikaya, Buddha says : — 
 
 Sinem bhUikhave pabhata raja, caturasiti yojana sahassani 
 ayamena caturasiti yojana sahassam vittharena caturasiti yojana 
 sahassani maha samudde ajjhogalho caturasiti yojana sahassani 
 malm samudad accuggato 
 
 Priests, the king of mountains is in length 84,000 yojanas, 
 in breadth 84,000 yojanas, beneath the great ocean 8-t,000 
 yojanas and above tlie sea 84,000 yojanas. In the same 
 suttam the order in which the world is destroyed is 
 stated. 
 
 Hoti kho so bhikkhave samayo bahuni vassa satani bahum 
 vassa sahassani bahuni cassa sata sahassani devo na vassati ; 
 devo kho puna bhikkhave avassante ye keci bijagama bhutaganm 
 osadhi vana Una vanaspatayo te ussussanti vissussanti na 
 bhamnti. 
 
 6 
 
C2 
 
 Prie'^ts, a time "will come when for many hundreds, thou- 
 sands, and hundred thousands of years there will he no rain. 
 Priests, there being no rain, all plants, herbs, medicinal roots, 
 forests, grass, and trees will become completely dried and 
 burnt up. "When the second sun appears, the little rivers, 
 ponds, and lakes will become dried up and disappear. When 
 the third sun appears, the large rivers, etc., will be dried upr 
 when the fourth sun appears, the large lakes will be dried 
 up. When the fifth sun appears, the seas will be dried up. 
 When the sixth sun appears {aijan ca niaha pafhnn siiiern ca 
 pabbata raja adippanti pajjalanti) this great earth and 
 Mahameru will burn continually ; thus this great earth and 
 Mahameru, as well as everything else, are mentioned, and the 
 order of their destruction Where, then, is this great 
 mountain which is 84,000 yojanas in length, 84,000 yojanas 
 in breadth, and 84,000 yojanas above the sea, situated? 
 How is it possible that it could not be seen to the eyes of 
 men ? this globe represents the earth. (Here the globe was 
 shewn.) In this the shape of the earth, its dimensions, the 
 great rivers and seas, and the positions of the coimtries, etc., 
 are all represented. Now, the circumference of the earth is 
 25,000 miles. This is admitted by all the civilised nations 
 of the world. This fact is proved by every day’s experience. 
 Therefore, a mountain with such dimensions could not exist 
 on this earth. Wherever it existed it must be seen, as this 
 globe which now stands on this little inkstand must be seen 
 by all V ho are on the four sides of it. So likewise if there 
 were a n oun ain of that kind it could not but be seen by all 
 the inhabitaats of the four quarters. Besides, man can 
 know to a certainty within a few weeks whether there be 
 such a mountain or not. Men at no period ever saw such a 
 mountain, nor have they known by science that there could 
 be such a mountain. One who had said that there was such 
 a mountain cannot be supposed to have been a wise man, nor 
 one who spoke the truth. That saying is a falsehood, it is 
 an ignorant saying. It is moreover said that Sahampati 
 made an offering of the size of Mahameru : that the re- 
 sidence of Sakkraya was on the top of Mahameru, and that 
 Buddha frequently went there; it is also said that Ab- 
 
83 
 
 hidharma was preached from its top. Many statements of 
 this kind in connection with Mahameru are to Le t'ouud 
 scattered in the sacred books of Buddhism. 
 
 If it be asked why speak about Mahameru, the reply 
 would be that if so great a falsehood could be uttered 
 respecting a thing in this world, about which men can remove 
 their doubts by seeing with their own eyes, how could any 
 statement made touching heavenly and Brahma worlds, 
 which we cannot see and examine, be believed ? Is this 
 person to be believed who speaks that which could easily be 
 proved as false, and declares a thing not existing as if it 
 existed ? Certainly not. Besides, everything that is stated 
 in Buddhism is connected with Mahameru.* The Chaturma- 
 harajika, heavenly worlds, are connected with Mahameru. 
 The Tawatinsa, heavenly world, is on the top of it. The 
 other heavenly worlds gradually rise above it. The 
 Brahma worlds are above those. The Arupa worlds are 
 above the rest. Thus, if Mahameru did not exist where then 
 could all those worlds exist ? They must all tumble down, as 
 a house whose foundation is rotten. Besides, if there is no 
 Mahameru what advantage is there in almsgiving or perform- 
 ing meritorious actions ? They are done with a view to be 
 bom in those worlds. What is the use of observing 8il, 
 precepts ? They are observed to be born in the heavenly 
 worlds. If those worlds do not exist all that is usi less. 
 What is the use of obser^ung Jhana. abstruse meditations, 
 as some priests at Matura observed until they got mad ? Ail 
 those things are useless. Mahamem, of 84,000 yojanas in 
 length and breadth and height, must be placed on the earth ; 
 
 ' This reference on the part of the Rev. Mr. Silva to Meru (or Maha- 
 meru) -termed in Hindu Mytholog’y. “ the navel ot the earth, ’ — was, in our 
 opinion, ill-timed aud out of place in a discussion relating to Buddhism; 
 and for the reason that it is Hinduism, rather than Buddhism, that 
 has to do with Meru. This mountain, reputed so high and so brond, is 
 traceable to Hindu legends, originating long before Buddha's time. 
 The same mountain was referred to by Cleanthes and Anaximenes, shew- 
 ing an interchange of thought between India and Greece. Buddhism bi re 
 something the same relation to Hinduism that Luther's Reformation 
 bore to Roman Catholicism, 
 
 C— 2 
 
84 
 
 if not, Burlflliism must be rejected at once. There is no 
 advantage to be derived In believing in Buddhism. 
 
 Next, if Buddha had the power of knowing anything, even 
 by meditation, it was proper for him to have given precepts, 
 having in view how those precepts would be understood by 
 his disciples; for because of the precept that his priests 
 should not have carnal connection, one priest had connection 
 with a female monkey, another priest with his own mother, 
 and another with his own sister. IIow strange it is that one 
 who professed to have the power of knowing everything 
 should have given a precept which he ought to have foreseen 
 would be misconstrued. Is there any other instance in the 
 world where a teacher had brought up disciples in this way ? 
 Could not this omniscient one lay down the precept so as to 
 prevent all these misunderstandings ? If he had the power 
 and did not use it, he was the cause of all these mischiefs. 
 These are not the only instances mentioned in the Parajika 
 book, but it contains a whole host of such filth. 
 
 Again, Buddha encouraged the practice of the most 
 heinous crimes. A priest committed the foulest sin, the par- 
 ticulars of which cannot be given. The punishment 
 Buddha inflicted upon the priest who so acted, was a minor 
 punishment. The punishmont was lie had simply 
 
 to confess his fault before the priests, when he was retained 
 in the priesthood. lie was not even excommunicated. 
 
 Another priest was guilty of a horrible crime of the 
 same kind. This crime was called by Buddha dukkata — very 
 minor offence. The priest was retained in his priesthood, 
 and associated with. 
 
 Another priest committed a similar offence : it was also 
 called dukkata, a very minor offence. 
 
 Another instance of causing a miscarriage was pronounced 
 'thu/lacca ; namely, the offence was very minute. Many 
 other instances of this kind may be quoted from the Parajika. 
 W ere there instances of this kind recorded among the dis- 
 ciples of any other teacher ? From the punishments given 
 to such inhuman offenders, was it not clear that this teacher 
 tencouraged vice ? Such offences would meet with the 
 highest condemnation among men, but Buddha, by slighting. 
 
85 
 
 encouraged them. It is no use to say that the priests in 
 Buddha’s time were good men, because these instances shew 
 the contrary. 
 
 With reference to Buddha’s death, Buddha accepted the 
 invitation of Chunda, the blacksmith. A young pig was 
 prepared with rice. Buddha prevented the pork being served 
 to any of his attending priests. He enjoyed it to satisfac- 
 tion and it caused dysentery. The invitation was at Pawa. 
 He had to go to Kusina from thence. Because of the 
 dysentery, he suffered excruciating pains. He had to lie 
 down twenty-five times on the way. He fainted several 
 times. He called for water to quench his thirst. He 
 managed to reach a little river, drank cold water, bathed in 
 the river, but of this dysentery he never recovered. He died. 
 These things are recorded in the Mahaparinibhana Suttan. 
 His object in bringing these circumstances connected 
 with his death was to shew that everything recorded 
 about his birth, the gods and Brahmas attending 
 on him, paying him glorious adorations, and Buddha’s 
 own miracles which he performed when required, 
 were only statements which no one ought to credit. 
 Here was the crisis in which all super-human attendance and 
 comfort was necessary, and his own power needed to be 
 manifested. Nothing of the kind was at hand. He got 
 sick, he suffered pains, he walked from one place to anothei’, 
 fainting and lying down on the road, and at last died as any 
 other miserable man would die. These things prove that the 
 statements recorded about Buddha’s super-human power 
 were as fabulous as those related to lull children. 
 
 He then stated that, according to Christianity, man had 
 an immortal soul as well as a body, which precious immortal 
 soul must go from hence to the other world. In order to 
 save this soul and take it to heaven, “ God so loved the world 
 that he gave his only begotten Son.” This Jesus Christ, 
 the Saviour of men, offered himself and died on the cross as 
 a sacrifice for sin, by which a way is now opened to those 
 who would be saved. He that believeth on him shall be 
 saved. There is no other name given under heaven for man’s 
 salvation except this one name. Therefore it was the duty 
 
G3 
 
 of all that TVf^re present to take refuge in tliat only Saviour 
 and be saved from the miseries of hell. This he implored of 
 all who were present to attend to. 
 
 Now, he said, no satisfactory answer was given to the 
 objections brought forward against Buddhism, and every 
 objection raised against Christianity was satisfactorily 
 answered. This he begged the audience to bear in mind. 
 
 The Buddhist’s Closing Speech, 
 
 OB 
 
 THE REV. MIGETTUWATTe’s FOURTH REPLY. 
 
 Tlie Priest Migettuwatte, commencing his reply, said that 
 this being the last hour of the controversy, it was the only 
 opportunity he should have of addressing the assembly, and 
 begged of them to listen to him patiently, and in as orderly 
 a manner as during the previous occasions. 
 
 They would remember that the rev. gentleman on the 
 first day of this controversy declared that Buddhism likened 
 man unto beasts ; in his morning lecture he most completely 
 shewed that it was not Buddhism but Christianity that had 
 done so ; but as he now saw before him several who were not 
 ])resent on that occasion he would, to prevent any mis- 
 conception, again read the passage appearing in the Bible in 
 reference to this matter. It was Ecclesiastes iii. 19, and 
 the words were, “ For that which befalleth the sons of men 
 befalleth beasts ; even one thing befalleth them : as the one 
 dieth, so dieth the other ; so that a man hath no pre-emiuence 
 above a beast : for all is vanity.” What clearer proof did 
 they require to establish the fact that it was Christianity that 
 likened man unto beasts and not Buddhism, as the rev. 
 gentleman had improperly asserted. 
 
 With reference to his brief explanation of Paficca- 
 s'lmuphadn, the rev. gentleman sneeringly asked whether 
 he (the Priest) was more competent to understand this 
 abstruse subject than Buddhaghosa, whose saying that 
 cue attempting to explain this doctrine was like a man 
 who fell into the deep ocean he had cited. It was true 
 that he had quoted this passage to illustrate the difficulty 
 
87 
 
 of properly comprehending this doctrine, hut his explaining 
 the subject to the utmost of his ability did not make him (the 
 Priest) cleverer than Buddhaghosa. He could only attribute 
 these stupid remarks touching his speech to the rev. 
 gentleman’s envious feeling towards him. 
 
 The rev. gentleman, in explaining Paticcamnuiphoda, 
 uttered some arrant nonsense, and declared that this doctrine 
 of causation was as confused and senseless as the statement 
 that the father was begotten of the son, and the son was 
 begotten of the father. This far-fetched illustration, he was 
 sure, would not have been adduced by the rev. gentleman 
 if he had the least idea of the correct meaning of Paticcn^ 
 samiiphada. He was in no manner justified in attributing to 
 Buddhism the advocacy of such a circumlocutory genesis as 
 his illustration implied. Buddhism did not contain any such 
 doctrine, but it was in Christianity that mention was made of 
 an extraordinary roundabout causation as instanced by the 
 rev. gentleman. 
 
 He would crave their most careful attention while 
 he partially explained what it was. As Mary, the 
 Mother of Christ, was created by Jehovah, Jehovah was 
 her father, and Mary his daughter ; but because the Holy 
 Gihost was conceived in Mary’s womb Jehovah becomes her son, 
 and Mary, Jehovah’s mother ; and as Christ is Jehovah’s son, 
 Jehovah becomes Mary’s husband, and Mary his wife. So 
 according to the Scriptures the same Mary becomes in 
 one case Jehovah’s daughter, in another Jehovah’s 
 mother, again J ehovah’s wife, and truly if the term 
 “ roundabout ” or “ circumlocutory genesis ” could be applied 
 to any proceeding, it was to the Trinity notion con- 
 nected with the birth of Christ, and not to the reasonable 
 doctrine of Paticcasamuphada. He hoped that now they were 
 satisfied that it was in Christianity and not in Buddhism 
 that a father is said to be born of a son and son of a father. 
 
 The rev gentleman also remarked, like his friend the 
 Catechist, that the BudJh’st doctrines could not be relied on 
 as they were consigned to writing about 450 years after 
 Buddha’s attaining Nlrcana ; in reply to this he need only 
 repeat what he previously asserted, that thero was abundant 
 
88 
 
 proof to sKew that even during Buddha’s lifetime, perma- 
 nency was gicen to his doctrines in wiiting. And the 
 Buddhist scriptures, he would assure them, did not share the 
 same fate as a portion of the original Christian Bible, which 
 was once completely burnt, hut subsequently cooked up by a 
 Ka]iua (devil’s priest) of a temple and palmed off as a 
 true copy of the original document. 
 
 The charge of murder raised by the rev. gentleman 
 against Angulimala Terunanse was totally untrue ? It 
 never appeared in any Buddhist works that even an 
 ant had been killed by him, much less a man. The 
 name Angulimala was given to this personage after 
 his ordination and the attainment of the Rabat state ; 
 and it was to this Rahat that offerings and oblations were 
 made by Buddhists, and so even if Angulimala Thero were 
 guilty of the alleged crime (which he was not, and which 
 his opponent could not substantiate) while he was a layman, 
 possessed of carnal desires and sinful passions, no blame 
 attaches to him after his becoming a Rahat ; and it could not 
 be brought forward now as a slur on him, after he had 
 attained that state, having made/«// expiation for all short- 
 comings. The same remarks will apply to the rev. gentleman’s 
 strictures on Ilarantika and Alawaka as well. 
 
 The rev. gentleman sought to attach blame on the holy 
 Rahats, Angulimala, Ilarantika, and Alawaka, who wi’ote 
 the Buddhist scriptures, and said lhit the Bible, however, 
 was pure, though written in part by the murderer Moses, 
 who fled the country, and subsequently joined Jehovah. 
 Mj" opponent talked something about “ filth ” in Buddhist 
 books. The charge is false and untrue ! But if there were 
 more filthy things in print than might be found in some 
 parts of the Christian’s Bible, he had not seen them. 
 
 The rev. gentleman can never prove from the Bible 
 that Moses was free from sin even after he joined 
 Jehovah. lie was a man as are others, full of lustful 
 desires and passions, and is even said to have slain 
 thousands after this event. Surely they would not call such 
 a man holy, and what credence can be placed on a work 
 emanating from such a despicable source ? But it was not 
 
89 
 
 so wifTi tlie writers of the Buddhist scriptures, who were all 
 Bahats, freed from all passions and lust, and whose sins had 
 been completely expiated And the attempt of the rev. 
 gentleman to asperse tholr holy character by mentioning 
 some of the shortcomings they may have been guilty of in a 
 previous state of existence, was as unsuccessful as disgraceful. 
 By such a course, Moses’ crimes could not be extenuated ; 
 and to hope to gain future happiness by believing in the 
 doctrines of such cruel and sinful men as Moses could only 
 be likened to an attempt to extract oil from sand ! 
 
 To shew that Buddha gave away his wife to others, 
 the rev. gentleman read some Pali stanzas, and declared 
 them to be quotations from Buddhist scriptures. His 
 opponent knew better. Nothing of the sort could be 
 established from the stanzas quoted from the Terapada- 
 naya ; and as for the other stanzas beginning Ayatagala- 
 nani such a passage as the rev. gentleman alleged never 
 appears amongst Buddha’s sayings! He regretted much 
 for being under the necessity of having to argue in matters 
 of religion with one who did not hesitate to speak such 
 untruths, with the view of deceiving the ignorant. This, 
 however, would help those present to form a correct estimate 
 of the character of the rev. gentleman. 
 
 He also disparaged the character of Buddha by 
 quoting from Parantajiajataka and Simandyajaiaka ; but 
 he would again tell them, as in the case of Angulimala, 
 that Holy Buddha was not to be blamed for sins com- 
 mitted in a previous birth, or even in a Bhodisat state, 
 which meant the state in which a being aspires to be a 
 Buddha. In both those states mortal beings are not devoid 
 of passions, but are liable to err. It was not correct to say 
 that Buddhists take refuge in such as these. Bhodisats are 
 neither worshipped nor resorted to for refuge, because they 
 do not pretend to possess the virtues of the Buddhas. The 
 interpretation given to Budhankara as being a growing 
 Buddha, is false and only shews the lamentable ignorance 
 of the rev. gentleman ! So much for his unsuccessful 
 attempt to bring Buddha into contempt for offences com- 
 mitted in a Bhodisat state 
 
90 
 
 After shewing from Sim'yofgamansatra that Buddha 
 had declared the existence of Mahameru, the rev. gentleman 
 stated that even a schoolboy could satisfactorily disprove his 
 statement. The rev gentleman no doubt alluded to Sir Isaac 
 Newton’s theory when he made that remark, according to 
 which day and night were caused by the earth revolving 
 round its axis, and not by the sun being hidden behind 
 Mahamer'i. The little globe which the rev. gentleman pro- 
 duced was one made on Newton’s principle: but even 
 amongst Englishmen there were serious doubts and differ- 
 ences of opinion as to whether Newton’s theory was correc,. 
 or not. Among others, Mr. Morrison, a learned gentleman, 
 had published a book refuting Newton’s arguments, and he 
 would be happy to allow the Christian party a sight of this 
 book, which was in his possession. (Here he produced and 
 handed around the “ New Principia,” by R. J. Morrison, 
 F.A.S.L., published in London.) 
 
 How unjust, then, to attempt to demolish the great 
 Buddha’s sayings by quoting as authority an immature 
 system of astronomy, the correctness of which is not yet 
 accepted. Besides, even according to Christianity, the 
 rev. gentleman’s statements are incorrect. For in Ec- 
 clesiastes i. 5, appeared the words : “ The sun also 
 
 ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his 
 place where he arose,” which was biblically conclufive as to 
 the sun moving, and the earth being sta' ionary. There was 
 a similar statement made in Buddhist books. The rev. 
 gentleman’s attempt to deny the existence of Mahameru 
 with the aid of this little globe and Newton’s theory, has 
 only given the lie to his own religion. 
 
 The mariner’s compa?s was the best proof he could give 
 them of the existence of Mahameru. Keep it where you 
 may, the attraction of the magnetic needle is always towards 
 the North. This demonstrated that there was a huge 
 mass in that direction which attracted the needle towards it, 
 and according to the Buddhist books, Mahameru, the 
 grandest and most stupendous rock on the fa e of the earth, 
 was situated in i±j.c; North. Were they not now satisfied that 
 their Mahameru did exist in the North, as is declared? li 
 
91 
 
 not, can the Christian party adduce a single reason why 
 there should be this a' traction in the needle towards tee 
 North more than to the East, West, or South ? This was 
 impossible The mariner’s compass was the mo t conclusive 
 argument for the existence of the famed Mahameru. The 
 passage through the northern zone of ice into the open Polar 
 Sea, where are lands, rocks, and mountains, may de- 
 monstrate this beyond a doubt. * The rev. gentleman has 
 asked how a rock 84,000 yojanas above the sea could exist 
 on the earth, the circumference of which was only 25,000 
 miles. But this has been questioned as it is based on 
 Newton’s theory, and besides, it was not possible to draw 
 any correct comparisons between the figures, because even at 
 the present day the true length of a yodun is a controverted 
 point among the savants in India. Has the rev. gentleman 
 discovered the true measure ? He would not argue further 
 on the point, as he hoped that he had, to the complete satis- 
 faction of the assembly, proved the existence of Mahameru, 
 and demolished what the rev. gentleman had urged against 
 its existence. 
 
 The rev. gentleman, amongst other matters brought 
 against Buddhism, stated that a certain priest of Matara 
 had gone mad by over-meditation ; that was not strange, 
 considering that meditation pure and simple, unaccom- 
 panied by philanthropic works and true piety, is said 
 in Buddhist books to beget madness. Further, what had a 
 man’s madness or sickness to do with the truth or falsity of 
 a religion ? 
 
 The very mention of the horrible crimes for which 
 punishments had been provided in the Vinaya, the 
 Buddhist code of morals, demonstrated the purity of Bud- 
 
 * Some of the Buddhist priests are thoronghly versed in the 'vvorks of 
 modern scientists. Spending part of a day at the Widyodaga College of 
 Buddhist professors and priests, near Colombo, Ce.ilon. and conversing 
 with them upon the nature of soul, its attributes and its forces, Professor 
 H. Sumangala. sending to his library, called my attention to a passage in 
 Dr. Louis Buchner’s work on “ Matter and Force.” Some of the books of 
 Bishop Colenso have been translated into the Singhalese of Ceylon, by the 
 Buddh sts. 
 
92 
 
 dhism, since it sliewed that remedies had heen provided for 
 every emergency. Of course, he (the Priest) was not to 
 blame for declaring these heinous crimes befoie this assembly , 
 the rev. gentleman "was responsible for it, and his ignorance 
 of what he w<as speaking about was more than once shewn 
 in the interpretation he had given to some of the passages 
 appearing in Vinaya. It did not, of course, a| pear that those 
 priests who committed offences before the promulgation of 
 these rules were puuished with rigour, and what lawgiver 
 would punish a man for an offence, though it may have been 
 one per se, before the enactment of the ordinance ? Let 
 him assure them once for all that no blame could be 
 attached to Buddhism, or any other religion, because of the 
 immorality of some of its preachers. Who would dream of 
 adducing the argument that Christianity was false because 
 the wife of a well-known Protestant clergyman, when she got 
 ill went awhile since to a distant village, and with the con- 
 nivance of her husband, performed a devil ceremony, though 
 he well knew of such an instance? Missionaries coming to 
 this country have not always proved themselves either 
 saintly or moral. How will the rev. gentleman get over the 
 innumerable immoralities mentioned in the Bible for instance, 
 that affair of Lot and his daughter, the incest committed by 
 the sons and daughters of Eve, and a host of others ? 
 
 The pork and the rice did not cause Buddha’s death, as 
 alleged by the rev. gentleman, but the incident was variously 
 recorded to shew the nature of food partaken of by Buddha 
 before his death. He would have died at the appointed day 
 even if he had not tasted it. Buddha and Buddhist priests 
 partake of what is put before them. They depend upon 
 alms. They take neither scrip nor purse. They hold all life 
 sacred. Some will not taste of animal food. And yet, after 
 all, what was there so very unclean in pork ? was it not better 
 than the locusts made mention of in the Bible that were eaten 
 by John the Baptist ? 
 
 He had now to answer some objections raised by the 
 Catechist in his speech, and be would do so briefly. His 
 friend, the Catechist, had said that the taking refuge in 
 Buddha, in the Dhamma or doctrines, and in the priesthood 
 
93 
 
 was all in vain, l)ecanse in the first instance Buddha is dead 
 and gone, and there could be no help from him ; hut if the 
 Catechist understood what was written on this subject aright, 
 he would not have uttered such astonishing folly. Buddha’s 
 death, it is recorded, consisted of three stages, the death of the 
 passions, of the Skhandas, which he had previously explained , 
 and of his relics. The death of his passions took place at the 
 foot of the Bo-tree on his attaining Buddahood, that of the 
 Skhandas was at the Sal-grove of King Mallava, and the last 
 stage, that of the complete destruction of relics, is to take 
 place 5,000 years after Buddha’s attaining Nirvana, that is, 
 about 2,500 years from the present time, when all Buddha’s 
 relics will be brought together near the Jayamaha Bo-tree in 
 India, assume the form of a living Buddha, and after preach- 
 ing for a short time will to the external cease to exist. Up to 
 such time, the effect of Buddha’s attaining Nirvana is not 
 complete, and much merit can be gained by those who with 
 faith make oblations and reverence these relics as Buddb.a 
 himself. Buddha is yet connected with all that he ever 
 touched, and all that he ever did on earth. Therefore to say 
 that Buddha’s influence does not exist at the present time is 
 extremely false. 
 
 The Sarana in Buddhist Dharma did not mean taking 
 refuge in Bana books, but in his doctrines, which if 
 one believed aright, he would be saved in a future 
 state ; and that in the priesthood did not apply te sinful 
 priests, but to those devoid of sin and passions. 
 
 As to the Upassampada controversy which the Catechist 
 said was being carried on by the sects of Amerapura and Siam, 
 he could assure them that not a single priest of any position 
 of either party took any part in this controversy. It was 
 simply a controversy carried on anonymously by two in 
 terested parties in the columns of The Lakrivikirana. 
 
 With reference to the charge that Buddha was not 
 omniscient, and if he were that he ought to have 
 known whether Alarakalama and others to whom he 
 decided to preach, were alive or not, he (the Priest) 
 said that this matter was brought forward at every 
 controversy the Christians had with the Buddhists; and 
 
94 
 
 as it was on every occasion satisfactorily answered, his 
 present explanation would be brief. It was true that Buddha 
 was omniscient, but bis omniscience was not of such an 
 unpleasant nature as that ascribed to Jehovah, who it is 
 declared sees and knows everything without directing his 
 attention to it. What a filthy vista must be ever open to him, if 
 without any effort of his, all the misery, filth, sin, unclean- 
 ness, and pollution of this world is continually seen by him ! 
 How could anyone be happy if compelled to witness all the 
 misery and dirt of this earth ? Did they not consider that 
 Jehovah suffered more misery thus than in hell if, being in 
 heaven, he necessarily witnessed all this ? Buddha’s omnis- 
 cience was. however, far different ; he only discovered and saw 
 what he wanted to by directing his power to it. True, from his 
 past experience of Alarakalama and another, he determined 
 upon preaching his doctrines to them as being men who were 
 capable of understanding them ; but as speedily as this 
 determination was made a god intimated to him that those 
 personages had died , and then it is said that he exercised 
 his power of omniscience, and saw even the state in which 
 Alarakalama had been born after death He hoped the assem- 
 bly now understood the pleasant and rational nature of 
 Buddha’s omniscience ; and lor the Christian party to say 
 that he did not possess this power, simply because he did not 
 exercise it, was like saying that a man who had full power 
 of vision was blind because he did not turn his eyes to a 
 certain object. Sc much for Buddha’s omniscience. 
 
 Now a word touching Christianity. His (the Priest’s) 
 object in engaging in this controversy was simply the 
 ascertainment of truth. He knew that Buddhism was true, 
 and he had come to defend it ; but he was not so prejudiced 
 in its favour as not to be open to connction, and even to 
 embrace Christianity, if they were able to prove it to be true , 
 but what was there in it to be believed ? 
 
 Why should the Christians lay so much stress on 
 the death of Christ, who had been killed by the authori- 
 ties for attempting to rise in rebellion against the 
 Homan Empire? What else could the “powers” do. to a 
 man who had openly advised his followers to sell even theii 
 
95 
 
 clothes and provide themselves with swords! and whose 
 crime, according to the inscription placed on the cross, was 
 that of styling himself the King of the Jews ! — a nation 
 then under the Roman Empire. 
 
 Besides, how unsatisfactory was the evidence as 
 to his bodily resurrection. The first witness they 
 had to testify to this all-important event, according 
 to Mark xvi. 9, was Mary Magdalene, who, they would 
 remember, was a woman who had at one time been 
 possessed of seven devils! What weight could be attached 
 to the evi fence of such a mad woman The fact was that 
 Christ’s body was removed from the tomb by his disciples on 
 the night when there were no guards, and how significant 
 were the words in the Scriptures that even at that time it was 
 rumoured that his body had been “stolen” away? Well, 
 if they were satisfied with this resurrection of Christ, they 
 should believe it by all means ! 
 
 The Christians declare that G^d’s spirit will be with 
 those who believe on him. He (the Priest) did 
 not deny belief in a Creator, bi.t admitted that he 
 owed his existence to one ; but why should man be allowed 
 to become the enemy of the Creator which, according to the 
 Bible, he now was ? The Christians’ theory of a Creator was 
 false, and he would presently explain to them who the true 
 Creator was, in w'hom he believed, and what he had to say 
 would be borne out even by the Scripture account of the 
 creation. He must say that this part of the Bible was most 
 prudently written by one who was in no way ignorant. It 
 was there said that the spirit of God moved upon the face of 
 the waters, and why should this fact have been mentioned if 
 not to shew that the acting of this spirit on the water was 
 the cause of all animal and vegetable life ? This was 
 certainly so. The action of air on water always produced 
 animal life ; if a cocoanut, which usually remains on the tree 
 without rotting for nine or ten months, be pierced through 
 and air be allowed to enter into it, the water inside was 
 sure to breed worms ; and so long as air could be excluded 
 from water, there was no generation of any insect. Like- 
 wise in this instance, “ the spirit of God,” as it was 
 
96 
 
 called, acted upon the face of the waters, and it produced 
 auimal life. 
 
 The origin of all species was then, even according to the 
 Bible, “breath,” or air, with which was associated heat and 
 water. To these three, air, heat, and water, by whatever name 
 known, whether Brahma, Vishnu, and Iswara, or God, Son, and 
 lloly Ghost, were attributable the origin of species. These, 
 so far as would be comprehended, were their only creator ; 
 and him he v'ould reverence ; and as neither air, nor water, 
 nor heat could produce alone without the aid of the other, 
 but were co-existent, and so closely associated with each 
 other that they could not be said to have separate existences, 
 the Christians were justified in saying that though there are 
 three beings, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, yet they 
 were not three Gods, but one God. These, however, were 
 not beings, but states. There is one Absolute Spirit in and 
 over all. 
 
 It was also declared in the Bible that Satan tempted 
 Adam and Eve to eat of the forbidden frmt. Here 
 he was certain that “ Satan ” meant lust, and “ eating the 
 forbidden fruit ” signified carnal knowledge, which produced 
 child-birth and all the other baneful consequences mentioned 
 in the Bible. “ Eating the forbidden fruit ” could mean 
 nothing else, for if sorrow in child-bearing was the punish- 
 ment for actually eating the fruit, in the literal sense of the 
 words, how could they account for the agony that many mem- 
 bers of the brute creation suffer when giving birth to their 
 young ? For instance, the travail the Polongas suffer is so 
 great that they sometimes burst whilst giving birth to their 
 young. Had they also eaten of the forbidden fruit ? Such 
 was Christianity ! It was full of irrational and unreasonable 
 notions. 
 
 But as for Buddhism, the most eminent had in all ages 
 given their testimony in favour of it. The gi’eat doctors of the 
 science of medicine, of the efficacy of which there can be only 
 one opinion, the originators of ethics, the propounders of that 
 important and wonderful science, astrology, by which even 
 the date of the death of a man could be accurately foretold, 
 not to mention details, and the names of learned men, always 
 
97 
 
 invoked tke aid of BuddTia and extolled tlie praises of him 
 and of his religion, in every one of their works. 
 
 Buddhism inculcated the purest morality and urged the 
 necessity of self-denial, self-sacrifice, and charity. It encou- 
 raged peace. It tolerated all religions in its midst. It had 
 nothing to fear. It pleaded of men to follow the example of 
 Holy Buddha,and pointed the sick and the sorrowing to the 
 blissful state of Nirvana. Quantities of books could be adduce'1 
 in proof of these teachings, but it was needless to so do, as he 
 had, he hoped, to the complete satisfaction of his auditory, 
 proved the truth of Buddhism and the falsity of Christianity. 
 He also trusted that they had not forgotten the nature of the 
 answers adduced by the opposite side, to meet the objection'; 
 raised by him ; and lastly, he would now earnestly beg of 
 them to bear these things in mind, and always take refuge in 
 Holy Buddha. 
 
 Scarcely had the last words of the above lecture bee. 
 uttered, when cries of “ Sadu ” ascended from the thousancki 
 who were present., Endeavours were made by the handfik 
 of police to keep order, but nothing induced them to cease 
 their vociferous cries until, at the request of the learned 
 High Priest of Adam’s Peak, the Priest Migettuwatte 
 again rose, and with a wave of his hand, beckoned to th'- 
 men to be quiet, when all was still.” 
 
 Eemaeks. 
 
 Thus ends a very spirited discussion, in which a Buddhist 
 priest — called a “ heathen,” — appealing to various Bibles, to 
 reason, and to the common sense of the gathered thousands, 
 bravely met a Christian minister in a square face-to-face con- 
 troversy. The reading deeply interested me; the more so, per- 
 haps, from perusing it in Ceylon, near the spot where it trans- 
 pired. The only thing that seriously mars the flow of thought 
 while turning over the pages is the bitterness, and even 
 offensive personalities, occasionally indulged in by the other- 
 wise eloquent disputants. Even if the Christians — as I was 
 
 7 
 
93 
 
 credibly mformed — were the aggressive party in commencing 
 the caustic, brow-beating style of argument, the Buddhist 
 Priest was hardly justifiable in following the example. It 
 was a bad one. Peace, calmness, and contemplation con- 
 stitute practically the very genius of Buddhism. And in all 
 religions it is the better way to return good for evil, and kind 
 for bitter words. The Quaker poet of America wrote these 
 telKng lines ; — 
 
 “ The truth’s worst foe is he who claims 
 To act as God’s avenger, 
 
 And dreams, beyond his sentry beat, 
 
 The crystal walls in danger. 
 
 Who sets for heresy his traps 
 Of verbal quirk and quibble, 
 
 And weeds the garden of the Lord 
 With Satan’s borrowed dibble.” 
 
 Both Gautama Buddha and Jesus not only taught, or laid 
 down, the principle of returning blessing for cursing, but 
 they beautifully exemplified their teachings in lives of 
 tenderest charity and forgiveness. 
 
 “ Before and during the Yedic era,” writes the scholarly 
 Sir M. Coomara Swamy, “ it was the shedding of blood, 
 the sacrifice of man or beast, the oblations of butter and milk, 
 the worship of fire and the warring of elements, which 
 marked the awakening of the supernatural sentiment in the 
 Hindu breast. But anon a change came over the land. 
 Peace, gentleness, and all the mild virtues gained the ascend- 
 ant. True sacrifice, it was taught, was self-sacrifice. The 
 preparation for heaven consisted in the destruction of all evil 
 passions. And the greatest happiness, it was inculcated, 
 consisted in a life of philosophic trust and quiet.” 
 
 As a sample of Gautama Buddha’s sermonising, I select 
 the following from the Khappavisana Sutta, and the com- 
 mentaries. The discourse was delivered by this Indian sago, 
 so it seems, at the request of Ananda, a disciple of 
 considerable distinction. 
 
 “Seek first for the true path, and when finding, 
 diligently follow in it. The true hero, abandoning the 
 vanity of life, and fors..Aug the foolish ways of the world, 
 
99 
 
 flings ofi“ tlie “bands of the household like a kovilara tree its 
 leaves, and walks alone. He who has houses, and fields, and 
 .cattle, and children grieves ; but he who is content, who has 
 no object of selfish desires, does not grieve. The greatest is 
 he who, desiring the least, gives the most. Humility is 
 better than honour. ... I learned a lesson from one who 
 sat calm and happy by the way-side, asking alms of the rich 
 that he might bestow them upon the poor. . . . The Brah- 
 mans, protected by virtue, were not 'injured by others. 
 They were invincible. None ever stopped them at the doors 
 of their houses. Formerly they practised celibacy from 
 their youth up to their forty- eighth year. The more con- 
 seerated continued pure unto the end of life. He who frees 
 himself from lasciviousness, refuses to reeount worthless 
 stories, abandons inordinate laughter, and yields not to 
 greediness, worldliness, and hypocrisy, becomes established 
 in peace, and knows what constitutes the true essenee of 
 wisdom and peacefulness. . . . Good friends may be ad- 
 mitted into one’s company ; but not obtaining such friends, 
 let one subsist upon pure food, engage in prayer, and walk 
 alone. ... I lived for a night on the banks of the Mahi ; 
 the house was roofless, the fire was extinguished by the rain, 
 and yet I was happy, because free from anger, free from 
 stubbornness, free from passions.” “ Like an ox that has 
 broken its bindings, like an elephant that has broken the 
 galucehi creeper, I have broken the chain of worldly attach- 
 ment. I shall not return for re-birth. I shall enter Nir- 
 vana.” . . . “ My mind is free from passions, is released from 
 the follies of the world, has long been under training, is 
 under thorough control ; there is no sin whatever in me. I 
 have obtained the victory.” 
 
 Thus spake Buddha to Anauda, and other disciples. 
 
 7-2 
 
£ I^ii t’j-$0fti4s/r^iiiiStiMiift‘iiL iimitti* T*Tf|'‘r'ff^jri I I ifMfi 
 
 - ,' K • ,»f‘^ i* ■• 
 
 
 «i 
 
 lu*C 
 
 'S-« 
 
 i 
 
 ♦/ •' 
 
 i 
 
WORKS OF J. M. PEEBLES, M. D. 
 
 Seers of the Ages. 
 
 Sixth Edition.— This work, treating of ancient Seers and Sages; of 
 Spiritualism in India, Egypt, China, Persia, Syria, Greece and Rome; of 
 the modern manifestations, witli the doctrines of Spirituaiists concerning 
 God, Jesus, Inspiration, Faitli, Judgment, Heaven, Hell, Evil Spirits, 
 Love, the Resurrection, and Immortality, has become a standard work in 
 this and other coimtries. Price, §2,00, postage 16 cents. 
 
 Travels Around the "World; 
 
 OR, WHAT I SAW IX THE SOUTH SEA ISLANDS, CHINA, INDIA, 
 ARABIA, EGYPT AND PALESTINE. 
 
 This intensely interesting volume of over four hundred pages, fresh with 
 the gleanings of something like two years’ travel in Europe and Oriental 
 Lands, is now ready lor delivery. As a work embodying personal experi- 
 ences, descriptions of Asiatic countries and observations relating to the 
 manners, customs, laws, rekgions and spiritual instincts of different na- 
 tions, this, in some respects, is the mo.st important and stirring book that 
 has appeared from ;he author’s pen. Price, §2,00, postage 16 cents. 
 
 Spiritual Harp. 
 
 A fine collection of vocal music for the choir, congregation and social 
 circle: is especially adapted for use at Grove Meetings. Picnics. &c. Edited 
 by ,1. M. Peebles and J. O. Barrftt. E. H. Bailey, Musical Editor. Price, 
 §2,00, postage 14 cents; full gilt, §3,00. 
 
 Jesus— Myth, Man or God? 
 
 Did Jesus Christ exist? Wh.at are the proofs? Was he man, begotten 
 like other men ? What Julian and Celsus said of him. The Moral Influence 
 of Christianity and Heathenism compared. These and other subjects are 
 critically discussed. Price, cloth, 75 cents, postage 5 cents; paper, 50 cents. 
 
 "Witch-Poison ; 
 
 OR, THE REV. DR. BALDWIN’S SERMON RELATING TO 
 Wil'CHES, HELL AND THE DEVIL. REVIEWED. 
 
 This is one of the most severe and caustic things published against the 
 Orthodox system of religion. Price, 35 cents, postage 3 cents. 
 
 Spiritualism Defined and Defended. 
 
 Being an Introductory Lecture delivered in Temperance Hall, Melbourne, 
 Australia. Price, 15 cents, postage l cent. 
 
 The Spiritual Teacher and Songster. 
 
 Designed for congregational singing, lyceumsand circles; as well as giv- 
 ing a general defluitioii of Spiritualism. Price, 15 cents. 
 
 The Conflict between Spiritualism and Darwinism. 
 
 A fearless and vigorously written Pamphlet of forty pages, treating of the 
 origin of man; the early appearance of the foetus; the unity of the human 
 species; the line of demarcation between monkeys and men; the immortal- 
 ity of insects, animals, &c. Price, 20 cents. 
 
 Christ the Corner-Stone of Spiritualism 
 
 This Pamphlet treats of the spiritual marvels of Jesus Christ, the phil- 
 osophy of salvation through Christ, the belief of Spiritualists and the 
 church of the future. Price, 10 cents. 
 
 The Great Ceylon Discussion between the Buddhists 
 and Christians; 
 
 With an introduction and comments by J. M. Peebles. Price, 25 cents. 
 
 Our Homes and Our Employments Hereafter; 
 
 OR, WHAT A HUNDRED SPIRITS SAY ABOUT LIFE IN THE 
 SPIRIT-WORLD. « 
 
 This book is now in press, and will soon be ready for delivery. 
 
 For sale by COLBY & RICH, 9 Montgomery Place, Boston, Mass. 
 
Modern Spiritualism. 
 
 By EPES SARGENT. 
 
 PLANCHETTE ; THE DESPAIR OF SCIENCE. 
 
 Being a Fall Acconnt of Modern Sniiltnalisni. 
 
 t*RiCB, IN Illuminated Paper Covers, $1; in Green Cloth, $1.25. Postage, 16c. 
 A New Edition, just issued by Roberts Brothers, Boston. 
 
 This volume should be properly called “ A History of Modern Spir 
 Itualism,” for it is a thorough and careful survey of the whole subject 
 of well-attested phenomena believi.d to be spiritual. 
 
 Prof. WM. CROOKES, F. R. S., of London, the celebrated chemist, 
 whose scientific verifications of the spiritual phenomena are now cre- 
 ating such a sensation, writes, under date of April 17, 1874, — 
 
 Planchette was the first book I read on Spiritualism, and it still remains 
 in my opinion, the best work to place in the hands of the uninitiated.” 
 
 GEO. WM. CURTIS, in Harper’s Weekly, says of it, — 
 
 “ It is a copious and popular but faithful summitry of the phenomena 
 and theories. The ample knowledge and literary skill with which the 
 subject is treated make this volume an indispensable manual to all 
 who are attracted to this speculation, and it will be read with great 
 interest by the skeptic as well as by the believer.” 
 
 The Rev. Dr. BELLOMS, in the Liberal Christian, says of it, — 
 
 “ It sets forth many important considerations witli regard to tlie phi- 
 losophy of the mind, while its historical notices of the development of 
 Spiritualism during the last twenty years give a more complete and 
 impartial view of the phenomena in question than has thus far been 
 presented to the public.” 
 
 The New York Express says, — 
 
 “ This is certainly one of the most startling works of our sensational 
 age. It purports to give a duly authenticated narration of spiritual mani- 
 festations, which are beyond the bounds of credulity by any calm think 
 ing reader ; and yet the asserted facts are given witli sucli an apparent 
 truthfulness and distinctness of detail, and tlie learned and distinguished 
 namf s connected with the scenes described are of such weight, that it 
 is impossible to deny the conviction impressed upon tlie mind that 
 either Spiritualism is one of the greatest delusions o ' the age, or that 
 it is indeed a new manifestation of supernatural power, deserving the 
 investigations of our theologians and teachers. The work, from its 
 extreme interest, will amply repay a careful perusal.” 
 
 The Boston Journal says,— 
 
 “ Mr. Sargent has here collected a vast amount of information, and 
 whoever wishes to have an intelligent epitome of the whole history of 
 modern Spiritualism will find it in this volume.” 
 
 For Sale by 
 
 ITo. 9 Llontgomery Place, Boston, Mass. 
 
NOW HEADY. 
 
 A BIOGRAPHY 
 
 OF 
 
 MRS. J. II. CONANT, 
 
 The World’s Medium of the Nineteenth 
 Century. 
 
 A HISTORY OF HER MEDIUMSHIP 
 
 From Childhood to the Present Time; 
 
 BEING A NiVERATIVE OF THE 
 
 Personal Experiences, Sharp Trials, and Liberalizing 
 Victories achieved in the cause of Human 
 Reason and Sj>iritual Knowledge. 
 
 Let the heart-stricken read it, and be comforted ; 
 
 Let the earth-weary peruse it, and be glad ; 
 
 Let the world’s w'orkers explore it, and be encouraged ; 
 
 Let the doubter scan its incontrovertible testimony, and he confounded ; 
 Let the true man and woman, wherever abiding, recognize in it the 
 life-line of a kindred soul. 
 
 _A.nSTID E.ZCHI, 
 
 PUBLISHERS, 
 
 NO. 9 MONTGOMERY PLACE, 
 
 BOSTON, MASS. 
 
FLASHES OF LIGHT 
 
 FROM 
 
 THE SPIRIT-LAND, 
 
 THROCGH THE MEDIUMSHTP OF 
 
 MRS. J. H. CONANT. 
 
 COMPIIXD AND AURANGED BE 
 
 ALLEN PUTNAM, 
 
 Author of “ Spirit-'Works; ” “ Natty, a Spirit;” “ ilesmerism, Spiritualism, 
 ■Witchcraft, and Miracle ; ” Etc., Etc. 
 
 This comprehensive volume of more than four hundred pages 
 will present to the reader a wide range of useful information 
 upon subjects of the utmost importance. 
 
 THE DISEMBODIED MINDS 
 
 of many distinguished lights of the past 
 
 HERE SPEAK 
 
 to the embodied intelligences of to-day, proclaiming their views 
 as derived from or modified by the Freedom from Artificial 
 Constraint, and the ADDED LIGHT OF THE SPIRIT- 
 WORLD, concerning 
 
 THE ORIGIN OF MAN, 
 
 the duty devolving upon each individual, and the 
 
 DESTINY OF THE RACE. 
 
 As an Encyclopaedia of Spiritual Information, this work is 
 ivithout a superior. 
 
 Price $1.50. Postage 22 cents. 
 
 COLBY AND RICH, PUBLISHERS, 
 9 Montgomery Placa^ Boston. 
 
K- 
 
 If-,' 
 
 ^ f - ’ 
 
 t' 
 
 r* 
 
 • cO. ‘ 
 
 
 
 L^i. 
 
 r S 
 
r -v 
 
4 . -If 
 
 I 
 
 V 
 
WORKS OF J._M^PEEBLES, M.D. 
 
 Travels around the World ; 
 
 OR, WHAT I SAW IN THE SOUTH SEA ISLANDS, CHINA, INDIA, 
 ARABIA, EGYPT, AND PALESTINE. 
 
 This intensely interesting volume ol over four hundred pages, fresh with the gleanings of 
 something like two years’ travel in Europe and Oriental Lands, is now ready for delivery. 
 
 As a work embodying personal experiences, descriptions of Asiatic countries, and obser- 
 vations relating to the manners, customs, laws, religions, and spiritual instincts of different 
 nations, this, in some respects, is the most important and stirring book that has appeared 
 from the author's pen. Price los. 6d. • 
 
 Seers of the Ages. 
 
 Seventh Edition. — This work, treating of ancient Seers and Sages ; of Spiritualism in 
 India, Egypt, China, Persia, Syria, Greece, and Rome ; of the modern manifestations, with 
 the doctrines of Spiritualists concerning God, Jesus, Inspiration, Faith, Judgment, Heaven, 
 Hell, Evil Spirits, Love, the Resurrection, and Immortality, has d^come a standard work in 
 (his and other countries. Price 2 dots. 32 cents ; or 5s. 
 
 The Conflict between Spiritualism and Darwinianism. 
 
 A fearless and vigorously written Pamphlet of about 40 pages, treating of the origin of 
 man: the early appearance of the foetus; the unity of the human species; the line of 
 demarcation between monkeys and men ; the immortality of insects, animals, &c. Price 20 
 cents ; or is. 
 
 Christ the Corner-stone of Spiritualism. 
 
 This Pamphlet treats of the spiritual marvels of Jesus Christ, the philosophy of 
 salvation through Christ, the belief of Spiritualists, and the Church of the future. Price 6d, 
 
 Jesus— Myth, Man, or God? (Reprinting.) 
 
 Did Jesus Chrisi exist? What are the prdofs? Was he begotten like other men? 
 What JuHan and C’elsus said of him. The Moral Influence of Christianity and Heathenism 
 compared. 'These and other subjects are critically discussed. Price 50 cents, postage 4 cents ; 
 or IS. 6d., cloth 2s. 6cl. 
 
 Buddhism and Christianity Face to Face ; 
 
 OR, THE GREAT CEYLON DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE BUDDHISTS* 
 
 AND CHRISTIANS; 
 
 With an introduction and comments by J. M. Peebles, Price is.’ 
 
 Spiritual Harp. 
 
 A fine collection of vocal music for the choir, congresration, and social circle ; is 
 especially adapted for use at Grove Meetings, Picnics, &c. By J. M. Peebles and 
 J. O. Barrett. E. H. Bailey, Musical Editor. Price 8s. 
 
 Spiritualism Deflned and Defended. 
 
 Being an Introductory Lecture delivered in Temperance Hall, Melbourne, Australia. 
 Price 15 cents, postage 1 cent ; or 6d. 
 
 The Spiritual Teacher and Songster. 
 
 Designed for congregational singing, lyceums ami circles ; as well as giving a general 
 definition of Spiritualism. Piice 25 cents ; or is. 
 
 Witch-Poison ; 
 
 OR, THE REV. DR. BALDWIN'S SERMON RELATING TO WITCHES, 
 HELL, AND THE DEVIL, REVIEWED. 
 
 This is one of the most severe and caustic things published against the orthodox system 
 of religion. Price 35 cents, postage 4 cents ; or 2s. 
 
 The Gadarene. 
 
 THE OBSESSIONAL INFLUENCES OF UNDEVELOPED AND EVIL 
 SPIRI rS, AND HOW TO DISPOSSESS THEM. 
 
 By J. M. Peebles and J. O. Barrett. Price 1 dol, 25 cents ; or, 4s. 6d. 
 
 The Conflict between Sectarists and Scientists; 
 
 OR, THE MORAL INFLUENCES OF BUDDHIS.M, MOHAMMEDANISM, AND 
 CHRISTIANITY COMPARED. 
 
 Our Homes and our Employments in the Future World. 
 The Radical Doctrines of Spiritualists, Shakers and Quakers. 
 
 These last three works ready for the press. 
 
 These books are for sale by the writer ; or for sale wholesale and retail by the publishers, 
 CoLBV & Rich, at No. 9, Montgomery- Place, corner of Province Street (lower floor), 
 Boston, Mass., and Ja.mes Burns, 15, Southampton Row, London.