TllE EVOLUTION 
 
 "\ 
 
 NT Hinduism 
 
 A, M. F LOVER 
 
 ■ !'i!;«:,!j,':':';-;i''> ■■,; . 
 
 %. :flHHHHMI 
 
 
 ^ggg 
 
 f#'yL>*?sJWA 
 
 
 
 i5ft lK-.«/r%& jrL^.-^ -t-ir-r-- 
 
 
 
 W^^j^^^^^W^^'^^f^W^'^^Si^^^K^.^^m^^'^'MLK^^^^^K^^n^^^^^^^^BmB^^ -■ '' .'* 
 
 k 
 
, ^. -J. «v I ~ I 
 
 ?fKKi^ 
 
 
 -I;" 
 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 \ 
 
 Shelf 
 
 Division BLi-l 5 
 
 Section t— :. 
 
 Number, 
 

 
 y :<.xmM^'/ 
 
 
 
 ,^3«^ "." 
 
 ♦< 7 
 
 
 ■^^?f^« 
 
 k;: » V 
 
 :ii8P 
 
 
 »^' 
 
 
 
 
 
 <!i. 
 
 
 ^ * 
 
 '^^^r 
 
 
 :^€ 
 
 
 tA7.ris: 
 

THE EVOLUTION 
 
 OF 
 
 ANCIENT HINDUISM 
 
THE EVOLUTION 
 
 OF 
 
 ANCIENT HINDUISM 
 
 BY 
 
 A. M.^LOYER 
 
 LONDON: CHAPMAN & HALL 
 
 Limited 
 
 1888 
 
 All rights reserved 
 
Richard Clay & Sons, Limited, 
 London & Bungay. 
 
PART L— PANTHEISM. 
 
 B 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 It has long been my opinion, that a short 
 history of the evolution of ancient Hinduism, 
 from its primitive form up to its highest 
 development, namely, Buddhism, would prove 
 an interesting study to those who are fond of 
 probing the mysteries and tracing the progress 
 of the human mind. I have therefore taken 
 the labour upon myself, and shall endeavour 
 to point out, as accurately as I can, the main 
 features of this evolutionary process. To 
 attain my object I need not necessarily enter 
 into any details of religious ceremonials, or 
 legends of the gods, because these subjects, 
 however interesting to those who make 
 mythology their special study, are quite sub- 
 sidiary to the main principles or philosophy 
 of the Hindu religion. It is my intention, 
 therefore, to make use of the researches of 
 others, and merely to glean from them the 
 
 B 2 
 
4 Evohitio7i of Ancie7it Hinduism. 
 
 main facts upon which all scholars are agreed. 
 In dealing with periods of time so long past 
 as 1500 and 2000 years B.C., it is almost 
 unavailing to dispute about the interpretation 
 of any one particular passage or saying ; all 
 we can do is to gather the general meaning 
 and tendency of the various traditions, and 
 then piece them together by the aid of 
 common sense and our general knowledge of 
 the characteristics and peculiarities of human 
 nature. I fully admit, therefore, that the 
 theories I am about to offer for consideration 
 are little more than conjectures ; but they 
 are, at all events, consistent with facts of 
 which we are certain, and tend to throw some 
 light on a subject which has been frequently 
 and grievously misunderstood. 
 
 Before commencing our studies it will be 
 well for us to form a clear notion of the 
 meaning of the word Hinduism. Hinduism 
 is the name of the orthodox religion of the 
 Hindus, an Aryan race which migrated to 
 the banks of the Indus, and gradually spread 
 over that large portion of India now known 
 as Hindustan. It is because Hinduism Is 
 the name given to the religion of the Hindu 
 race that I venture, for philosophical purposes, 
 
Pantheism, 5 
 
 to describe Buddhism as its culmination. 
 Nominally, of course, these two religions are 
 at variance with each other, because Buddha 
 discarded many of the oldest and most cher- 
 ished of the Hindu traditions ; but as Buddha 
 himself and his immediate followers were 
 Hindus by birth, his teaching cannot but 
 be regarded as a phase or development of 
 Hinduism. Besides this, Buddha was the 
 exponent of all that w^as good in the religion 
 in which he had been educated, rather than 
 a dissentient from it, and as Mr. Rhys Davids 
 says, " Buddhism was the child, the product 
 of Hinduism. Gautama's whole training was 
 Brahmanism ; he probably deemed himself to 
 be the most correct exponent of the spirit as 
 distinct from the letter of the ancient faith ; 
 and It can only be claimed for him that he 
 was the greatest and wisest and best of the 
 Hindus." It Is universally admitted that the 
 first form of Hinduism was a kind of nature-' 
 worship, or physiolatry, as it has been termed. 
 That is to say, natural objects, as, for Instance, 
 mountains, rivers, and groves, &c., w^ere re- 
 garded with superstitious veneration, and wor- 
 shipped as conscious, almost human deities. 
 Many persons think that, notwithstanding 
 
6 Evohttion of Ancient Hindzdsin. 
 
 this deification of nature, the Hindus must 
 have brouofht with them some dim remem- 
 brance of pure Monotheism from their home 
 in Central Asia. But if this was so, one can- 
 not help coming to the conclusion, that for 
 a time, at least, all practical belief in a 
 Supreme Being must have died out, other- 
 wise Hinduism could hardly have developed 
 in the manner in which it afterwards did. 
 
 That all recoQ^nlzable belief in God should 
 have been lost is not so extraordinary as it 
 at first sight appears, for when religious teach- 
 ing was exclusively oral, and the teachers occa- 
 sionally both credulous and corrupt, we can 
 readily suppose that religion would lose much 
 of Its primitive vigour and simplicity, and 
 become insensibly coloured by the prejudices 
 and superstitions of the time. Even in the 
 present day, in spite of our vast literature 
 and the spread of education, how quickly the 
 spirit and essence of truth is obscured, and 
 how much more completely this must have 
 been the case in older times. We see a 
 striking Illustration of the manner in which 
 false notions crowd out the fundamental 
 principles upon which they are based in the 
 religious system of the Roman Catholic 
 
Pantheism. 7 
 
 Church. In spite of the teaching of the 
 Bible, upon which this faith Is founded, the 
 Roman CathoHcs seem to regard God as an 
 abstract principle, an awful and terrible Idea 
 who (or which ?) cannot be approached except 
 through the medium of Jesus Christ ; whilst 
 Christ must be approached through the 
 medium of the Virgin Mary or the saints, 
 and in order to secure the patronage of these 
 it is necessary to gain the good offices of 
 the priests. To the masses of the people, 
 therefore, the patron saint seems more real 
 than God or Christ, and the favour of the 
 priest seems the most essential point of all. 
 It is hardly too much to say, perhaps, that 
 had there been no literature and no general 
 education during the past 1800 years, the 
 Roman Catholic religion would have de- 
 veloped into a species of Polytheism before 
 now. 
 
 We may therefore very reasonably con- 
 clude, that whatever may have been the 
 original belief of the Hindus, It was entirely 
 merged Into a system of Polytheism, such as 
 nature-worship at first was. How it came 
 about that the various phenomena of nature 
 should be regarded as divine is a question of 
 
8 EvohUion of Ancient Hindnisin. 
 
 much Interest, and opinions are greatly divided 
 upon It. Some think that the beauties, the 
 wonders, and the terrors of nature must have 
 made so deep an Impression on the minds of 
 the Hindus, that they instinctively wondered 
 and worshipped! It Is thought, for Instance, 
 that the majestic spectacle of the sun rising 
 morning after morning in the east, and nightly 
 sinking out of sight in the bosom of the west, 
 must have appeared to those ancient people 
 as the stately progressions of a god ; whilst 
 the ceaseless flow of the rivers, the mysterious 
 growth of vegetation, and all the strange 
 forms of life with which nature teems, must 
 each and all have claimed the homage of the 
 poetical Hindus. There appear, however, to 
 be many objections to this theory, plausible 
 though it be. In the first place. It is very 
 questionable whether simple, unsophisticated 
 people could have been much Impressed by 
 the wonders of nature. All those things to 
 which men are accustomed are accepted as 
 matters of course, besides which, to the 
 ancient Hindus every trivial incident of life 
 was as unaccountable as the grand evolutions 
 of nature. Difficult though it is to realize. It 
 is a fact, that men are apt to be Impressed by 
 
Pa7itheisnt, 9 
 
 the various aspects of phenomena In pro- 
 portion to their knowledge rather than their 
 ignorance. It is a knowledge of the bound- 
 less force and the complex systems of nature, 
 rather than the visible results of those forces 
 and laws, which impress us as truly marvellous. 
 Besides which, the more we are able to 
 account for, the more extraordinary does some 
 unaccountable fact become ; as, for instance, 
 Darwin would have been much more sur- 
 prised at the sight of a horned horse than 
 a man totally unacquainted with natural history 
 would be. 
 
 I do not think, therefore, that the 
 ancient Hindus could have experienced re- 
 verential emotions in their contemplation of 
 nature, any more than an ordinary workman 
 experiences emotional awe as he watches his 
 tobacco kindle, or drops a stone from his 
 hand. Supposing, however, that a few of 
 the intellectual elite amonof the Hindus did 
 observe and marvel at the wonderful objects 
 by which they were surrounded, surely they 
 would have been led to look for the great 
 Maker of all, rather than to deify those objects 
 themselves. Natural phenomena, however 
 magnificent, do not even remotely suggest 
 
lo Evolution of Ancient Hinditism. 
 
 the possession of mental powers or self-con- 
 sciousness, and therefore, whatever curiosity 
 the perception of them might awaken, would 
 be most probably directed from themselves to 
 their possible author. It is true that any very 
 unusual occurrence, such as an earthquake, 
 would create a vague feeling of awe and fear, 
 but it is most doubtful whether this fear could 
 in any sense be regarded as a religious emo- 
 tion. On the whole, the idea that nature- 
 worship was the result of man's instinctive 
 admiration and reverence presents so many 
 difficulties, that I am inclined to think it has 
 no foundation on fact ; but if, on the other 
 hand, we accept the less romantic view that 
 nature-worship was at first only a form of 
 ancestor-worship, much that must otherwise 
 remain obscure becomes intelligible. Greatly 
 as we may disagree with some of Mr. Herbert 
 Spencer's conclusions, we may well admit, 
 that in all probability man's first false notions 
 of the supernatural arose from his inability to 
 understand the meaninof of death ! 
 
 The ancients knew that all living creatures 
 are liable to fall into a state of bodily inac- 
 tivity which we call sleep, and they also knew, 
 from their own personal experiences, that 
 
Pantheism, 1 1 
 
 during this state of bodily repose the mind 
 frequently wanders through all kinds of 
 places, and takes part in various scenes and 
 adventures. 
 
 The true explanation of dreams not being 
 understood by them, they naturally adopted 
 the supposition that a man has two selves — the 
 self that rests quietly in the hut or tent, and 
 the "other" self that wanders away at will. 
 This was, in fact, the embodiment of the great 
 principle of the existence of spirit as apart from 
 matter, but owing to a natural confusion of 
 ideas the spirit was supposed to be possessed 
 of a second body, just as appears to be the case 
 in dreams. When a man died they believed 
 that his spirit still continued to exist in the 
 second body, under the same conditions as 
 in life ; that it might at any time return to 
 reanimate the body which it had deserted, 
 and that in any case he would have the same 
 power to befriend or to injure which he had 
 previously possessed. It was this conviction 
 which gave rise to the notion of ghosts who 
 might be propitiated by offerings and prayers, 
 or offended by neglect. It then followed, as 
 a natural sequence, that if a man was drowned 
 in a stream it was thenceforth believed that 
 
12 Evolution of Ancient Hinduis7n. 
 
 that stream was haunted by his spirit. As 
 time went on, and the individuality of the 
 drowned man was forgotten, his ghost was 
 only remembered as the water-demon, and 
 so on. 
 
 By such accidents as these It will easily be 
 understood how, in course of time, the whole 
 of nature might be peopled with ghosts both 
 good and bad — ghosts which were originally 
 thought to be the spirits of the dead, but 
 afterwards only associated with the wood, the 
 river, or the mountain which they were said 
 to haunt. 
 
 Mr. Spencer has also pointed out other 
 means by which nature-worship was, or at 
 least may have been, developed. That is, by 
 names given either at birth or in eulogy. 
 For instance, a child born at sunrise was 
 frequently named " Dawn." We can easily 
 suppose that when a person so named came 
 to die, and his ghost propitiated by his de- 
 scendants for some generations, all knowledge 
 of the individual ancestor or "chief" would 
 gradually be forgotten, and Dawn would be 
 regarded only as the spirit who presided over 
 the sunrise. 
 
 Also names given in praise, such as Lion- 
 
Pantheism. 1 3 
 
 heart, the Serpent, the Bull, and so forth, 
 have been handed down In legends of great 
 men, until at last these descriptive terms have 
 been Interpreted literally, and It Is believed 
 that men have existed with hoofs like a 
 horse, or horns like a bull. These and many 
 other accidents are sufficient to show how 
 nature-worship may have arisen, and this 
 theory recommends Itself to us for many 
 reasons. To begin with, It is an extremely 
 likely and natural explanation of a religion 
 otherwise difficult to account for ; but It has 
 greater claims than this to our consideration. 
 To my mind one of the strongest arguments 
 in Its support Is the belief that these super- 
 stitions were founded on the principle of 
 which most people are instinctively convinced, 
 namely, the Immortality of the soul. It would 
 seem that every species of religion, no matter 
 how debased and absurd it may have become, 
 has been originally founded upon some 
 truth, and it Is this which has kept alive the 
 strangest and most grotesque fancies with 
 which it has been overgrown. It may be 
 compared to a disease which, however corrupt, 
 yet depends for its progress and nourishment 
 upon the life and vitality of the person 
 
14 Evolution of Ayicient Hinduism. 
 
 afflicted by it. That men in old days should 
 have regarded the dead with so much super- 
 stition is not at all surprising, when we con- 
 sider what confusion of thought exists on the 
 subject at the present day. The belief in 
 corporal ghosts, the unreasoning fear of pass- 
 ing through churchyards at night, and so forth, 
 all show us how a belief in the immortality 
 of the soul is mixed and confused with man's 
 Inability to comprehend a purely spiritual con- 
 dition of existence. It is beyond the power 
 of many people to imagine a soul existing 
 without a body, and uninfluenced by mundane 
 conditions ; and if this be so In the nineteenth 
 century, how much more likely the Hindus 
 were to have been misled in the ages of 
 antiquity. 
 
15 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Whatever opinions may be held as to the / 
 origin of nature-worship, every one is agreed 1 t^ 
 that this was the earHest form of Hinduism./ 
 As (for reasons previously given) I do not 
 think the Hindus had heard of the existence 
 of an Omnipotent Deity, I mark the first 
 step they made towards forming this concep- 
 tion as a transition from physiolatry to the 
 primitive form of Pantheism. At first sight 
 it may appear that Pantheism and physiolatry 
 are synonymous terms, and I shall therefore 
 endeavour to show why a distinction should be 
 made between them. Physiolatry is the ador- 
 ation of various phases of nature which may 
 have been the mere outgrowth of ancestor- 
 worship, whereas Pantheism is a wo rship of ^ 
 nature as a whole — the worship of the uni- 
 verse, including the various elements of which 
 it is composed. Physiolatry is essentially 
 
1 6 Evolution of Ancient Hindtcism. 
 
 polytheistic, whilst Pantheism may be regard- 
 ed as monotheistic, in tendency at least. If 
 we are curious to know what gave rise to 
 this transition, we must endeavour to picture 
 to ourselves the condition of a people whose 
 mental powers were slowly developing, and 
 then try to imagine how the problems of life 
 would strike them. 
 
 We must necessarily suppose that as time 
 went on, and the Hindus became more 
 capable of abstract thought, they would not 
 rest satisfied with a vague belief in a number 
 of gods whom tradition did not represent as 
 being vastly superior to themselves. More- 
 over, the idea must have occurred to them, that 
 If everything in nature had its double, — If there 
 was a spirit of this and that river and hill, 
 and of the various fruits of the earth, — then 
 feurely there must also have existed the spirit 
 pr double of the universe itself. This notion 
 was probably not originated by any one man, 
 but was simply the outgrowth of progressive 
 thought. Time begets the power and habit 
 of generalization, and as soon as the Hindus 
 learnt to regard nature as a whole, it seems 
 to me they would be irresistibly drawn to the 
 conclusion that there must be a spirit of the 
 
Pantheism, 1 7 
 
 i 
 
 universe, superior to all other spirits, just In ^f*ir,"^ 
 
 proportion as the universe Is greater than \jf^ 
 anything contained within it. It may be 
 that the habit of generalization was developed 
 in the Hindus long before they acquired the 
 power of analogy, but it Is pretty certain that 
 the one was the Inevitable result of the other, 
 and we can fully understand why some of 
 the oldest Vedic hymns vaguely refer to a 
 prevailing belief in a spirit of the universe. 
 We have now arrived at a period when our 
 studies will be somewhat simplified, because 
 we can go to the Vedas for information ; and 
 it will be well, therefore, at this stage to con- 
 sider what the Vedas were, and by whom 
 they were taught. The name given by the 
 Hindus to the universal spirit was Brahm a, P^^^T^q 
 and he was supposed to have entrusted to a 
 few chosen people the Vedas, or unwritten 
 knowledge, directly inspired by himself. 
 These chosen people were called Brahmans, 
 and became at once a select class, or priest- 
 hood, whose duty it was to teach the inspired 
 word, and to hand it down orally to their 
 descendants. Thus they acquired a power 
 and position which exists to a great extent 
 even at the present day. 
 
1 8 Evohtiion of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 The Brahmans were in fact the Intellectual 
 elite, the pioneers of thought, who formed 
 themselves into an hereditary priesthood, 
 and naturally acquired habits and modes of 
 thought widely different from the rest of 
 the community. Consequently the terms 
 Brahmanism and Hinduism, although both 
 names of the Hindu religion, became diverse 
 from each other in their practical meaning. 
 The former was a beautiful and subtle phi- 
 losophy, to which idolatry was but an append- 
 age ; Hinduism, on the other hand, being 
 the religion of the masses, was a system of 
 idolatry to which philosophy was but an 
 appendage. In short, we may say that 
 Brahmanism was Pantheism as it presents 
 itself to the minds of the intellectual and 
 refined ; whilst Hinduism was Pantheism as it 
 presents itself to the minds of the ignorant, 
 thoughtless, and superstitious. 
 
 There is one question which is sure to be 
 asked concerning the Brahmans, namely, how 
 could they suppose that the Vedas which 
 they or their forefathers had composed could 
 possibly be the inspired words of Brahma ? 
 It seems to us strange beyond belief that any 
 man, or set of men, could imagine for one 
 
PantJieism, 1 9 
 
 moment that their own speculations and con- 
 victions were directly inspired. Probably 
 the true answer to this question is, that it was 
 not until long after they were composed, and 
 after they had acquired the venerable dignity 
 of aofe, that the Vedas were believed to have 
 literally emanated from Brahma. But they 
 might easily be thought to have emanated 
 from him in a metaphorical sense, even by 
 those whose productions they were. 
 
 When we remind ourselves how strange 
 and incomprehensible is the origination of a 
 single idea, and that we cannot by any effort 
 of will force a new idea into existence, must 
 we not suppose that in old days they were 
 regarded as heaven-sent ? We can therefore 
 believe that men w^ho knew far less than 
 even we do of the phenomena of the human 
 mind, and who were accustomed to attribute 
 every surprising occurrence to some super- 
 natural agency, should have been firmly 
 persuaded, that an idea which flashed upon 
 them was really a revelation, and had been 
 inspired by the essence of all truth and 
 knowledge. 
 
 It is probable, therefore, that as a class the 
 
 Brahmans were honest and intelligent men, 
 
 c 2 
 
20 Evolzction of Ancient Hinduisrn, 
 
 who devoted their lives to philosophy and 
 speculation ; and when we consider their 
 ignorance of science, together with the many 
 difficulties they had to encounter in the 
 pursuit of knowledge, we cannot but marvel 
 at the vigour of their mental powers, in spite 
 of the discrepancies and superstitions which 
 cling like parasites to their simple and 
 beautiful system. 
 
21 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 In one of the oldest of the Vedic hymns 
 we find an attempt to explain the creation of 
 the universe — 
 
 " In the beginning there was neithei naught nor aught ; 
 Then was there neither sky nor atmosphere above. .j 
 
 What, then, enshrouded all this teeming universe? ; 
 
 In the receptacle of what was it contained ? // 
 
 Was it enveloped in the gulf profound of water ? 
 Then was there neither death nor immortality ; 
 Only the Existent One breathed calmly, self-contained. 
 Naught else but He there was — naught else above, 
 
 beyond. 
 Then first came darkness hid in darkness, gloom in 
 
 gloom ; 
 Next all was water, all a chaos indiscreet, 
 In which the One lay void, shrouded in nothingness. 
 Then turning inwards, HejDy self-developed force 
 Of inner fervour and intense abstraction grew. 
 First in His mind was formed desire, the primal germ 
 Productive, which the wise, profoundly searching, say 
 Is the first subtle bond connecting entity 
 With nullity." 
 
2 2 Evoltition of Ancient Hinduism, 
 
 This dawn of the belief that the universe 
 had been created, is the commencement of 
 what I venture to call the middle form of 
 Pantheism. It shows a far greater tendency 
 v/ towards Monotheism than does the first form 
 of Pantheism, it may be observed, because so 
 much more power and importance is neces- 
 sarily attached to the Author of all things 
 than to a god who was thought to differ from 
 other gods in degree only and not in kind. 
 
 It is not difficult to perceive how it came 
 about that Brahma was believed to be the 
 author of the universe. Nature's wonderful 
 adaptations of means to ends, her sun that 
 rules the day, her stars that steal the gloom 
 from night, her rains that come down to 
 nourish the fruits in her bosom, her ocean 
 tides that ebb and flow obedient to an un- 
 known force, all these marvels, and many 
 more, must ultimately have persuaded the 
 Brahmans (after they had learnt to reflect as 
 well as to observe) that some vast intelligence 
 must have designed and made the whole. 
 This vast intelligence would naturally be 
 ascribed to the chief of their gods, to great 
 nature's double — the self-existent one, Brah- 
 ma ! Brahma, they must have said, has 
 
PaniJieism, 2^ 
 
 existed before anything that is, was made ; 
 nevertheless, he must have contained within 
 himself the essence of all things, because 
 *' nothing can be produced out of nothing" 
 (a favourite maxim of the Hindus). 
 
 In one sense the verses I have quoted 
 serve as a key to the entire polyglon of 
 Hinduism, for they enable us to understand 
 how it happened that as knowledge grew, 
 and the Hindu religion became more and 
 more complex, the most rationalistic of their 
 thinkers could yet give at least a nominal 
 assent to the most ancient doctrines in the 
 Vedas, because they were so vague that 
 almost any interpretation might be put on 
 them. 
 
 Thus, for instance, the lines quoted might 
 be accepted literally, or they might be under- 
 stood to mean that the essence of what is 
 called the soul, and the essence of what is 
 called the body (or the material) co-existed 
 together through all ages ; or it might even 
 be regarded as merely a picturesque descrip- 
 tion of force actinor on matter. We thus see 
 how it was possible for the various schools of 
 Hindu philosophy, widely as they afterwards 
 differed from one another, to be each and all 
 
24 Evolution of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 considered orthodox. In this, as in many 
 other instances, we see the tendency of 
 humanity to cling to the letter rather than 
 to the spirit. If a philosopher had declared 
 the Vedas to be a mere collection of verses 
 he would have been considered an infidel, 
 but if he said they must only be taken 
 figuratively, or that they really meant more 
 or less than they appeared to do, he was 
 perfectly welcome to hold his opinions. We, 
 however, cannot doubt but that they who 
 composed the Vedas meant exactly what they 
 said, in the literal sense, and the idea they 
 wished to convey in the verses on the crea- 
 tion must have been somewhat as follows. 
 1 Brahma is a being from whom emanated the 
 material of which the world is made, and he 
 fashioned it in accordance with his will. He 
 took from himself the essence of the female 
 principle with which he united himself, and 
 from this union proceeded the human race ! ^ 
 Thus was slowly formed the idea of an 
 
 ^ This inference is hardly justified by the lines quoted, 
 but the following, taken from the Sama-Veda, shows that 
 this is what is meant — "He caused his own self to fall 
 in twain, and thus became husband and wife. He 
 approached her, and thus were human beings produced." 
 
PantJieism. 25 
 
 Omnipotent deity ; but, as we shall see, the 
 idea was a very imperfect one. In truth, it 
 is beyond the power of the mightiest intellect 
 to form a clear idea of absolute omnipotence, 
 for however far we may wander in our flights 
 of imagination, we are always bounded by 
 objective experience. We have reason to 
 know that the Hindus regarded the gods, or f 
 the doubles of nature, as men like themselves, 
 only more powerful, and having control over 
 physical forces, but by no means independent 
 of physical laws. For instance, they would 
 not suppose that a god could travel at the ' 
 rate of sixty or seventy miles an hour without 
 wings, but they were quite willing to believe 
 that a god had or might have wings. They 
 would argue, birds have wings, we know 
 not from whence, therefore why should not 
 gods have them? In short, they went by-fj 1 
 experience. They knew of many wonder- ' 
 
 ful and unaccountable things in nature, and 
 it was not difficult for them to carry the 
 analogy into the spirit world ; or, as it would 
 be more correct to term it, the world of 
 fancy. If they saw a caterpillar metamor- 
 phosed into a butterfly, it would not seem 
 to them more marvellous that a god should 
 
26 Evolution of Ancient Hinduisin. 
 
 be transformed Into an elephant, and we 
 must own that, from their point of view, their 
 reasoning was most plausible. Farther than 
 these analogies led them they did not and 
 could not go ; hence we are not surprised 
 to find that their supreme deity, their eternal 
 self-existing one, was a strange medley of 
 power and weakness, of superhuman ability 
 bounded by human frailty — In short, a huge, 
 strong. Infinite kind of man ! Christians 
 may deem It strange that the Hindus should 
 /^suppose omnipotence limited in power by the 
 laws of nature, but we must remember that 
 Christians base their conceptions of nature on 
 the revelations of God, whereas the ancient 
 Hindus based ther conceptions of God on the 
 revelations of nature. They probably thought 
 that Brahma, being the universal essence, 
 might easily become divested of portions of 
 himself, as a tree may shed Its leaves ; and 
 having thus permitted matter to emanate 
 from him, besides force, heat, desire, and 
 other motive powers, it would only be another 
 step. Implying no supernatural abilities, for the 
 same essence to become the author of the 
 universe, although bound by the nature and 
 sequence of those emanations, just as a man's 
 
Pantheism. 27 
 
 actions are limited by his inherent, mental, 
 and physical powers. 
 
 These theories, however, would hardly ac- 
 count for the existence of mankind. There 
 is something in man, by whatever name it 
 may be called, that makes him differ from the 
 rest of creation, and therefore, they argued, 
 man must have been produced in a different 
 way. To rid themselves of this embarrassing 
 dilemma, the Brahmans were obliged to sup- 
 pose that Brahma divested himself of the 
 female principle, and thus through marriage j 
 with her became the parent of humanity. It 
 may be objected that these conjectural evolu- 
 tions of thought are too subtle and intricate 
 to bear the stamp of truth upon them ; that 
 they represent cunning workmanship rather 
 than the simple results of time and nature. 
 But we must remember that these theories 
 which I have summed up In a few pages are 
 not supposed to be the work of one philo- 
 sopher, or one generation. On the contrary, 
 we must believe that they were slowly and 
 almost Instinctively adopted, because they 
 seemed too obvious to be contradicted. Man 
 has seldom been at a loss to account for 
 
28 Evoliction of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 beliefs, of the truth of which he is fully 
 persuaded, and the links necessary to connect 
 accepted facts are easily forged out of the 
 imagination. 
 
 With regard to the practical philosophy 
 of the ancient Hindus, we find as yet very 
 little to work out, nevertheless a slight 
 change from primitive ideas is noticeable. 
 The first notions of nature-worshippers as to 
 the destiny of man were extremely simple. 
 They believed that the human race, as well 
 as the world itself, was eternal, and that 
 a man's second self, his spirit, must live, 
 whether it deserted the bodily form or not. 
 This spirit, they supposed, would be relatively 
 happy or unhappy according to its conduct 
 on earth, and the degree of favour in which 
 it stood with the gods. It soon became a 
 fixed conviction that the dead went to live 
 in other realms, and thus arose the idea of 
 burning the dead body, so that its double 
 might encompass the spirit in the other 
 world. When, however, the Hindus came 
 to the conclusion that the world was not 
 eternal, but created, and that man was the 
 offspring of Brahma, they were also led to 
 
Pantheism. 29 
 
 conclude that man must ultimately return to 
 him, and become one with him. This, then, 
 in brief, was the middle form of Pantheism. 
 It was a belief in spirits of nature, and in 
 Brahma as tlie__spirit of the universe, from 
 whom all that is proceeded. 
 
30 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 We must now turn our attention to what 
 I term the fixed or final form of Pantheism, 
 because, strictly speaking, it is the last evolu- 
 tion of Pantheism which is perceptible in 
 Hinduism, and it is also the crystallized form 
 of the old orthodox Hinduism as distinguish- 
 able from the more modern philosophical 
 schools. We have just been studying a 
 monotheistic tendency ; we are now about to 
 study a dualistic tendency. We see in the 
 Vedas that the notion of Brahma being the 
 creator of the universe, became merged in the 
 idea that Brahma was himself the universe 
 rather than its author ; as if, in fact, the 
 universe were a gigantic organism, of which 
 all the material formed the body and all the 
 spiritual formed the soul. Instead of Brahma 
 having created and fashioned phenomena, it 
 came to be believed that phenomena were a 
 
Pantheism. 3 1 
 
 part of himself, existing co-equally with him, 
 as a man's body exists together with his soul. 
 But although every flower of the field was 
 thus thought to be a portion of God, yet it 
 was not supposed to be perfect, or omnipotent, 
 or eternal, any more than the fingers, or the 
 skin, or the hair of a man are identical with 
 him. Man's body is continually growing, 
 changing, and wearing away, every portion 
 of him is in a constant state of renewal, and 
 yet we regard him as the same individual. 
 So of Brahma ! The plants, the animals, 
 nay, the world itself is in a continual state ot 
 change, growth, maturity, production, and 
 decay, yet the great whole, of which all 
 phenomena are but parts, exists for ever, 
 unchangeable, eternal, so far as man can see. 
 These ideas are beautifully expressed in the 
 following translation from the Isa Upainshad — 
 
 *' Whate'er exists within the universe 
 Is all to be regarded as enveloped -^ 
 
 By the great Lord, as if wrapped in a vesture. 
 There is one only Being who exists 
 Unmoved, yet moving swifter than the wind ; 
 Who far outstrips the senses, though as gods 
 They strive to reach Him; who, Himself at rest. 
 Transcends the fleetest flight of other beings ; 
 Who like the air supports all vital action. 
 
32 Evohition of Ancient Hindidsm. 
 
 He moves, yet moves not; He is far, yet near; 
 He is within the universe." 
 
 The same idea is more clearly illustrated 
 in the following lines from the Bhagavad 
 gita — 
 
 " I see Thee, mighty Lord of all, revealed 
 In forms of infinite diversity. 
 I see Thee, like a mass of purest light, 
 Flashing Thy lustre everywhere around. 
 I see Thee crowned with splendour like the sun, 
 Pervading earth and sky immeasurable ; 
 Boundless, without beginning, middle, end ; 
 Preserver of imperishable law, 
 The everlasting Man ! '' 
 
 We may well ask ourselves how those who 
 could compose anything so beautiful as the 
 above poetry, and whose notions of God were 
 at least refined and elevated, could yet have 
 sanctioned, still less believed, in the inferior 
 and gross gods of Hindu mythology. The 
 reason is in all probability not far to seek. 
 We know from our own experience how diffi- 
 cult it is to free ourselves from old habits of 
 thought ; and the traditions of our childhood 
 are not easily displaced. Sentiment lingers 
 around customs and actions which reason has 
 long ago condemned, and the curfew bell still 
 rings in our ears with a warning sound, 
 
Pantheis7n, 33 
 
 although the law with which It is associated 
 has long since passed away. It is compara- 
 tively easy to progress In philosophy provided 
 that the new can be grafted on the old, but 
 It Is almost impossible to abolish the old at 
 the introduction of the new. 
 
 These considerations, united with others 
 of a more selfish or prudential kind, would 
 render It very hard even for the most advanced 
 philosopher to cast away his gods. How 
 much more so then would It be for the 
 common people ? Those uneducated masses 
 who could not help degrading a religion to 
 their own level, — men who could only under- 
 stand and care for a system of rewards and 
 punishments, and of securing the best terms 
 for themselves that they conveniently could, 
 — these would naturally cling to superstition 
 with all the stubborn tenacity of Ignorance. 
 So long, therefore, as the gods satisfied the 
 religious demands of the people, the people 
 would uphold them, and bitterly denounce 
 those who hinted that they were myths. Thus 
 upon this question sentiment, expediency, and 
 bigotry would join hands together for the 
 purpose of upholding the old regiine ; whilst 
 
 D 
 
34 Evolution of Ancient Hindnisin, 
 
 reason, ever ready to become a partisan, 
 would soon suggest some new method of 
 reconciling philosophy with superstition. 
 
 The dualistic theories with regard to 
 Brahma caused a slight but Inevitable change 
 of opinion concerning the origin and destiny 
 of man. The notion that the human race 
 was the offspring of Brahma came to be 
 believed metaphorically only, and simply 
 meant that the union of the spiritual and 
 material produced mankind. Man was there- 
 fore thought to be derived from, but not born 
 of, Brahma, his body being a portion of 
 eternal matter, and his soul a portion of the 
 soul of the universe. One great distinction, 
 
 f however, seems to have been made between 
 
 the condition of God and man. Brahma was 
 completely dual, spirit and body existing to- 
 
 I gether, united Indeed, but not fused into one ; 
 
 whilst man was regarded as a mixture of 
 
 "pa spiritual and material, or animal qualities. 
 Brahma's existence, according to these views, 
 might be illustrated by two distinct circles 
 which just touched each other, whereas man 
 might be compared to two circles, one en- 
 
 /y . compassed by the other ; and it was this 
 
 Co 
 
 ^^-'-f .<*, 
 
Pantheism, 35 
 
 environment of spirit in matter which (In the 
 opinion of the Hindus) was the origin of evil. 
 Man's soul, once pure and godlike, became 
 obscured, it was thought, by its imprisonment 
 in the flesh, because mere matter is Ignorant 
 and gross. To separate himself as much as 
 possible from all material pleasures and 
 interests was therefore considered the proper 
 object of a man's life. This idea gave rise 
 to the most exaggerated notions about the 
 necessity of self-torture, and the efficacy of 
 bodily suffering. It was believed that the 
 body, together with the physical desires at- 
 tributed to it, was necessarily opposed to the 
 soul which dwelt within it, and that an un- 
 ceasing warfare between the two was unavoid- 
 able. In old days, as at the present time, it 
 was very difficult not to believe that distinc- 
 tions made for practical use are not arbitrary 
 and final. We all know that there is a 
 difference between body and spirit ; but if 
 we forget their Inter-dependence on each 
 other, we commit a blunder which may cause 
 much unhappiness In life. This blunder the 
 Hindus unconsciously made! They taught 
 that the spiritual could be cultivated by the 
 
 D 2 
 
36 Evohitioii of Ancieiit Hinduism. 
 
 suppression of the physical, never recognizing 
 that the one has its roots In the other. 
 ,1.1 1 About 500 years B.C., or rather before, the 
 Ijjidoctrlne of the transmigration of souls was 
 
 iJ^J^ I taught. It found favour, no doubt, on ac- 
 I count of its explanation of the inequalities of 
 life. If a man was born blind as a punish- 
 ment for sins committed in a previous life, the 
 apparent injustice of nature was explained 
 away. 
 
 A few words must be added here on the 
 subject of those horrible sacrificial rites which 
 have been extensively practised by the 
 Hindus. We have reason to believe that 
 the Brahmans were averse to these sacrifices, 
 partly on humanitarian grounds, and partly 
 because of the inconsistency of offering to the 
 gods portions of Brahma. But sacrificial 
 rites were congenial to the people, and chiefly 
 
 > --^ on this account they were maintained. Why 
 the people should be so fond of offering sacri- 
 fices seems strange, but w^e must remember 
 that they had always been used to them. In 
 the days of ancestor-worship, food was offered 
 to the spirits of the dead, because It was sup- 
 posed that they required food as much as did 
 
Pantheism, 3 7 
 
 the living men. These offerings were, of 
 course, acts of propitiation, and the idea took 
 such deep root in the minds of the unedu- 
 cated, that persuasion and philosophy were 
 alike unable to overcome it. 
 
 We have now obtained a bird's-eye view of 
 Hindu Pantheism in its final condition, before 
 it became merged into different philosophical 
 schools. 
 
 Shortly before the advent of Buddha there 
 was a period of great intellectual activity 
 among the Brahmans, and they were anxious 
 to form clearer and more scientific views of 
 religion and ethics. This spirit of inquiry 
 resulted in the formation of six orthodox 
 schools of philosophy. It is not known 
 whether these schools were actually estab- 
 lished before Buddha began to teach, but it 
 is highly probable that they were. In any 
 case, however, the different opinions were 
 known and discussed in his time, and many 
 of them were incorporated into his own 
 philosophy. 
 
 From an evolutionary point of view, the 
 only school of importance is the Vedanta, 
 because it is the one connecting link between 
 
38 EvoliUio7i of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 the old pantheistic Hinckiism and Buddhism. 
 To speak scientifically, Vedantism was a new 
 species, whilst the other schools were but 
 varieties, of the old Hinduism. 
 
 It is to the study of this school, therefore, 
 that I propose to devote the whole of the 
 next part. 
 
PART II.— VEDANTISM 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 The Vedantist school of thought was 
 founded some five or six centuries B.C., and 
 owed its origin to a philosopher named Bada- 
 rayana. The precise date when this school 
 was formed is, as I have said, a matter of 
 uncertainty, but the question is not one of 
 much importance to us. The ideas of which 
 it was the embodiment are shadowed forth 
 in the Upanlshads, and must therefore have 
 existed for some time before Badarayana put 
 them Into definite shape. 
 
 Our knowledge of the growth and develop- 
 ment of the Vedanta is so scanty, that we 
 shall frequently be obliged to supplement our 
 information by drawing upon our common 
 sense. We know that the Brahmans attained 
 great wisdom and the power of abstract 
 thought, hence when we come to consider 
 theories of theirs, which appear to be full of 
 
42 Evolution of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 contradictions and absurdities, we must not 
 rest satisfied, as some are content to do, and 
 say, "What follies these ancient philosophers 
 were capable of." We must feel assured that 
 however mistaken the Brahmans were, at all 
 events they could not have been the dupes 
 of vulgar and transparent errors. There 
 must then be something more plausible in 
 these apparently conflicting doctrines than 
 we are at first sight able to perceive, and we 
 may well ask ourselves what Is the explanation 
 of them ? 
 
 This great question I have endeavoured to 
 solve, but I am conscious of having done so 
 very imperfectly, and much yet remains to 
 be done. 
 
 Our first consideration must of course be 
 the nature and attributes of Brahma accord- 
 ing to the Vedanta ; everything hinges upon 
 this! In the Vedanta Brahma is defined as 
 "that from which the production of this uni- 
 verse results." This does not appear to differ 
 from the original theory (explained in Part I.) 
 of the ancient Hindus, who described Brahma 
 as the universal essence from whom all things 
 originally emanated. Other portions of the 
 Vedanta show us, however, that something 
 
Vedantism. 43 
 
 more than this was intended, because we are 
 told that the eternal soul of the Universe 
 exists only, and that all else, including the 
 material world, is illusion. The Pantheistic 
 school regarded matter, force, &c., &c., as 
 things, and they appear first to have con- 
 sidered Brahma's creation of the world as 
 simply a piece of magnificent manipulation, 
 and afterwards that it was the corporeal part 
 of him. 
 
 We gather that the Vedanta went much 
 further than this ; that it was, in fact, the 
 precursor of the comparatively modern notion 
 that everything material is only phenomena, 
 and that we know nothlnof of the '' thinof In it- 
 self," as Kant has termed it, which lies behind 
 phenomena. 
 
 So far as I can understand it, the Vedanta 
 teaches that Brahma was neither a manipu- 
 lator, nor a type of man whose body and soul 
 constituted a dual existence, but that he was 
 merely the embodiment of ideas. By this I 
 mean, that they believed the world to be 
 composed of matter, and matter when analyzed 
 is theoretically ''a fortuitous concourse of 
 atoms," and atoms being absolutely indivisible 
 are simple ideas. It was matter as an idea. 
 
44 Evobttion of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 therefore, that was a part of the essence of 
 Brahma. Again, heat is only an idea in one 
 sense. Latent heat exists in every stick that 
 straws the ground, but it only becomes 
 phenomenal under certain favourable cir- 
 cumstances. Weight is another phenomenon 
 which owes its existence to an ideal power, 
 the attraction of gravitation. Of course it 
 will be said at once that the knowledge we 
 have of the attraction of gravitation, latent 
 heat, &c., &c., was not possessed by the 
 Hindus at the time of which I am writing, 
 and therefore the Vedanta could not be sup- 
 posed to allude to them. But I think systems 
 may be shadowed forth ages before man has 
 been able to find any scientific ground for 
 them. For instance, we can imagine that an 
 ancient philosopher might have defined weight 
 as the power of appearing heavy, and this 
 power would certainly have ranked as an 
 idea. Again, if we argue from nature, we 
 see that under certain conditions an acorn 
 will become an oak, but a pebble under the 
 same condition will never become one. We 
 see also that warmth and moisture produce 
 widely different results when applied to differ- 
 ent specimens of animal and vegetable life. 
 
Veda7itis7n, 45 
 
 Maize does not blossom into roses, grasses do 
 not become vines, palms do not produce dates, 
 and so on. Thus the existence and develop- 
 ment of all things are dependent upon some 
 quality or potentiality inherent in each, and 
 these qualities are ideas, or, as the Vedantists 
 would say, they are God! He was "what 
 gold is to a bracelet," "what curds are to 
 whey," and we may add, what vitality is to 
 orofanic life. 
 
 Again, we see reflected on the surface of 
 a lake the trees that line its banks, and the 
 sky above, — we see, in fact, a representation 
 of natural scenery, but we know that it is a 
 representation only ; metaphorically speaking, 
 this was the Vedantist's notion of the material 
 world ! Neither the world nor the reflections 
 cast on a lake are absolutely illusion, for they 
 both actually exist, but inasmuch as they are 
 not " things in themselves," only things as 
 they appear to us, they are illusive. Visible 
 nature, therefore, was not Brahma according 
 to the Vedantists, but he was the reality which 
 lay behind it, the motive power which per- 
 mitted and regulated its being. Once more, 
 the Brahmans saw as we see the chanire 
 from life to death. A living organism, be it 
 
46 Evolution of A^icient Hindidsin. 
 
 man, or beast, or tree, Is full of marvellous 
 capacities for movement, growth, and develop- 
 ment ; but there comes a time when all these 
 cease to be, when the most active, intelligent 
 of organisms becomes senseless, motionless, 
 dead ! What has brought about this strange 
 transition? What is that which has been 
 lost? 
 
 Nothing visible, nothing tangible, nothing 
 that can be replaced. It is not the blood of 
 the animal or the sap of the tree that has 
 been lost, but the power to circulate it, and 
 give it warmth and vitality, — this is what is 
 wanting. Thus in a philosophic sense life, 
 the most real and forcible phenomena that 
 we know, owes its existence to an ideal 
 power. 
 
 Such reflections as these might easily have 
 been made, as we have seen, after simple 
 observations of nature, without any aid from 
 natural science, or the wisdom of the nine- 
 teenth century. 
 
47 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 We have now to consider the theories of 
 the Vedanta concerning the strictly spiritual 
 aspect of Brahma — a question full of diffi- 
 culties, and one which we cannot pretend to 
 understand except in a very incomplete 
 manner. 
 
 It is, however, the question of all others in 
 Vedantism, the most worthy of study, as it 
 embodies the highest and boldest flights of 
 the human imamnation. 
 
 The creed of the Vedantist briefly stated 
 was as follows. The subjective or spiritual 
 side of Brahma was to man what matter Is 
 to the Universe, what force and vitality are 
 in relation to their manifestations in nature. 
 The old school of Hindus believed, as we have 
 seen, that man was a type of God, — that the 
 one was simply a magnified edition of the 
 other. The Vedantists regarded God as a 
 pure idea, a vast potentiality. 
 
48 Evolution of Anciefit Hindtdsrn. 
 
 He was pure intelligence without reason, 
 pure knowledge without thought, pure con- 
 sciousness without Individuality, pure joy 
 without desire, perfect happiness without 
 attainment or object, perfect love without 
 anything to love, and Omnipotence without 
 volition. 
 
 These definitions certainly read like a 
 string of contradictions, a mass of utter 
 absurdity, and as such they are apt to be 
 regarded by modern scholars. But the 
 extremely patent absurdity of these ideas 
 should teach us that we must look below 
 the surface to see if some hidden meaning 
 has not been attached to them. Let it be 
 our task to discover what that meaning was, 
 or at least what it may have been. To begin 
 with, let us ask ourselves how it Is conceivable 
 that Intelligence could exist without reason, 
 or knowledge without thought ? We must 
 first call to mind the different conditions which 
 might presumably exist between Brahma and 
 man. Man comes Into the world io^norant 
 of all things, but with the aid of purely 
 physical qualities, that Is, with the aid of 
 nerves, brain, senses, &c., he is enabled to 
 learn bit by bit, and then by reasoning upon 
 
Vedaiitism. 49 
 
 this knowledge gained, he attains more. Thus 
 to man reason and thought are the necessary- 
 accompaniments of Intelligence and know- 
 ledge, and therefore man jumps to the con- 
 clusion that these accompaniments would 
 always be necessary under all circumstances. 
 Reason, however, is to the intelligence what 
 spectacles are to the near-sighted, that is to 
 say, it helps man to atone for a natural defect, 
 it gives him in an indirect manner the know- 
 ledge which an unobscured and perfect 
 intelligence would perceive directly without 
 extraneous aid. Here was the great differ- 
 ence which the Vedantists saw between 
 Brahma and man. If Brahma was himself 
 the essence of all knowledge, he could not 
 require those methods of acquiring it which 
 are necessary to man. Our own experience 
 teaches us that we have no need to reason 
 about a thing that we know — as, for instance, 
 we all know that we perceive without any 
 aid from reason ; on the contrary, this is the 
 one great incontrovertible fact upon which 
 reason takes her stand. This being the case, 
 the Vedantists were not Illogical in supposing 
 that Brahma must be independent of the 
 human aids of thought and reason. 
 
 E 
 
50 Evohition of Ancient Hinduis^n. 
 
 A more difficult problem to solve is, how 
 they could suppose Brahma to be pure con- 
 sciousness without the consciousness of '' I 
 and thou!" Here again we must remind 
 ourselves of the natural environment by which 
 we are limited, if we would understand what 
 consciousness might be, unconnected with a 
 human organization. To be conscious of '' I 
 and thou " is the first proof of any conscious- 
 ness at all in creatures who possess separate 
 individuality ; but for Brahma, who was 
 believed to be the only real entity, there 
 could be no sense of more than '' I," because 
 for him no ''thou" existed. 
 
 We must remember also, that in the opinion 
 of the Vedantists Brahma was wholly sub- 
 jective, a state unattainable to man. The 
 highest idealism, the most unreal dreamland, 
 the wildest flights of imagination, all rest on 
 man's objective experiences, because no ideas 
 can be recognized by him until made manifest 
 through the medium of phenomena. Beauty 
 has no meaning for us unless made visible to 
 us, and even our preferences for certain 
 colours and forms are dependent upon our 
 nerves, and physical organization generally. 
 To us, therefore, a purely subjective existence 
 
Vedantism, 5 1 
 
 Is one which we can hardly even Imagine. 
 Brahma, however, was supposed to possess 
 feeling without the necessity of any object to 
 occasion it ; he was conscious of things in 
 themselves, without the aid of phenomena. 
 To such a being (if he existed) consciousness 
 would simply be an intense realization of him- 
 self and his own attributes. Such a state can 
 be pictured by us In a feeble degree. If we re- 
 call the sensations we have occasionally ex- 
 perienced when under the spell of some great 
 mental enjoyment. Those, for Instance, who 
 appreciate music, know that there are mo- 
 ments when all consciousness of I and thou 
 disappears, when objective Individuality is 
 forgotten, and when time, place, and circum- 
 stance seem to vanish like a dream, having 
 only the supreme consciousness of infinite 
 enjoyment. Yet this Is no state of hazy 
 dreamland, of mental repose ; on the contrary, 
 never does consciousness seem more vivid, 
 never does the mind seem more vigorous, 
 than when for a time the shackles that bind 
 us to material life are shaken off, and we are 
 free. 
 
 Those w^ho have at any time experienced 
 the feelings to which I have alluded, can 
 
 E 2 
 
52 Evolution of Ancient Hi^tdziism. 
 
 imagine vaguely what might be the reahza- 
 tion of consciousness attributed to Brahma ; 
 for if we know the buoyancy of air, we can 
 understand how keenly enjoyable a purer 
 medium might be. 
 
 The next question is, how can pure joy be 
 possible without desire, or happiness without 
 change, progression, or attainment ? 
 
 This of course seems to us a contradiction 
 In terms, because to us the goal of joy and 
 happiness, though always striven for, is never 
 attainable. 
 
 *' Earth will never meet the heaven, 
 Never can the There be Here ! " 
 
 Progression is the only criterion of our 
 success, therefore, and becomes the essential 
 element of our happiness. But if we ask 
 ourselves for what we are strivino^ — what is 
 that dim and distant goal which is almost 
 hidden from us even in our dreams ? — we can- 
 not fail to see that desire and progress have 
 there no place. So far as we can perceive it, 
 the goal of happiness is simply the feeling ot 
 Intense joy, quite apart from the things that 
 produce that feeling. Nothing in this world 
 is actually pleasure or happiness, but only the 
 
Vedantisnu 5 3 
 
 means to gain these ends, whilst ideal delight 
 is one long realization of happiness which 
 needs no medium to procure it. We have 
 all of us experienced the fact that a pleasur- 
 able occupation sometimes gives us no gratifi- 
 cation, whilst, on the other hand, there are 
 times when we have a keen sense of enjoy- 
 ment for which we find it difficult to account. 
 Of course we are aware that this uncertainty 
 of response to stimulus, as we may call it, 
 is dependent upon our physical health and 
 mental serenity ; but the fact should teach us 
 that no form of pleasure is a pleasure in itself. 
 Music, poetry, painting, and other things are 
 precious to us, because it is only through 
 them that we are able to perceive the ideas 
 which they embody. 
 
 If we are able to realize what I have been 
 stating, we must see that we need go only 
 one step further to understand how it might 
 be supposed that Brahma might be the essence 
 of love without having an object of affection. 
 
 Love is in the purest sense an intense 
 delight in union, a desire to join, through 
 sympathy, the individual feelings. To be 
 " at one " with a person is an expression often 
 used to signify that blending together, or 
 
54 Evolution of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 unity, of which people of high organization 
 are capable. 
 
 Brahma was therefore the very type of 
 love. To be the harmonious essence of all 
 things and to feel all things was to be of 
 necessity the fountain of love, or, to speak 
 more correctly, he was of all love the pure 
 idea which required no object to make it 
 manifest. 
 
 Two more considerations yet remain before 
 us. The first is, how could Brahma be 
 Omnipotence without volition ? Of all ques- 
 tions, perhaps, that of the freedom of the will, 
 together with the many side issues Involved 
 in it, is one upon which it is the most difficult 
 for people to agree. If there is one thing 
 more distinctly impressed upon our conscious- 
 ness than another, it Is the belief that our 
 wills are free, and thus we find it almost 
 impossible to Imagine Omnipotence without 
 volition. There are many people, however, 
 who hold that no man's will is really free, 
 but that he is bound to obey his strongest 
 motive, whatsoever it may be. Volition, they 
 say, is but the name for the 'preponderant 
 motive which decides his actions, and all he 
 can boast of possessing, more than " the 
 
Vedantism, 5 5 
 
 vexed straw on the wind," is, that his stimukis 
 to movement proceeds from a mental and 
 not a physical compulsion. 
 
 Such theories as these must have been in 
 the minds of the Vedantlsts when they ascribed 
 Omnipotence to Brahma without volition. 
 They must have meant that everything which 
 existed, even in this illusive world, was in ac- 
 cordance with the nature of Brahma ; but as he 
 neither reasoned, nor was even aware of the 
 existence of phenomena, he was conscious of no 
 wish or will concerning it. To put the same 
 idea into other words, it might be said, that 
 thino^s occur and exist in accordance with the 
 nature and potentiality of the ideas which lie 
 behind them, without being consciously and 
 arbitrarily decreed. Brahma, as the personifi- 
 cation of pure ideas, was supposed to influence 
 the universe, just as the nerves or lungs of 
 a man influence his being, namely, in strict 
 conformity with his physique, but without 
 requiring his concurrence, and quite inde- 
 pendent of his volition. Such at least we 
 must suppose to have been the opinions of 
 the Vedantlsts. 
 
56 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 I SUSPECT that no one can have read the 
 preceding chapter without feeling that, ex- 
 plain as we may, the Brahma of the Vedanta 
 is not only a vague, but an unsatisfactory 
 creation of the imagination, and that his 
 attributed qualities do not tally with the 
 character accorded to him. 
 
 It will be asked, perhaps, how could 
 Brahma be perfect knowledge, and yet abso- 
 lutely unaware of the existence of phenomena ? 
 How are we to account for the origin of evil 
 and pain, if everything that is, is of Brahma ? 
 How are we to imagine that the source 
 of all consciousness could be unconscious of 
 ourselves ? 
 
 To these questions I cannot undertake to 
 give the correct answers, but I can at all 
 events offer a few suggestions. With regard 
 to the limits of pure knowledge, we must 
 remind ourselves that if Brahma was purely 
 
Veda7itism. 57 
 
 subjective, his attributes would also be sub- 
 jective. Absolute knowledge of what lies 
 behind phenomena, of the eternal ideas 
 which control the world, was believed to be 
 his, but he had no cognizance of Illusory 
 appearances. To see things as man sees 
 them, to be aware of such facts as individu- 
 ality and thought, it would be necessary, they 
 would suppose, to become as man, that Is, to 
 see with human eyes, and to feel with indi- 
 vidualized self-consciousness, to be bound up, 
 in fact. In objective appearances. To a nature 
 such as the Vedantlsts Imputed to Brahma 
 this was an Impossibility, because it Implies 
 contradiction. For a harmonious whole to 
 be at the same time an isolated part, for 
 pure knowledge to mistake illusions for real- 
 ities, is entirely unthinkable, from a Hindu 
 point of view, at all events. 
 
 In short, according to the Vedanta, Brahma 
 was not a god at all, either personal or Im- 
 personal, but was in truth an ideal state of 
 bemg ! Brahma was the Paradise that lay 
 the other side the great river, and perfect 
 though that land might be, it yet gave no 
 aid to those who desired to reach it. No 
 generous branches stretched across the 
 
58 Evohttio7i of Ancie7it Hi7iduism, 
 
 stream for man to grasp, no shadowy skiff 
 haunted the banks to carry weary souls safe 
 to the haven of rest. Absolutely perfect, 
 absolutely Impassive, the Vedantist's paradise 
 could only be gained by man's endeavour, 
 and his salvation depended on his love for 
 God (which means his desire for eternal happi- 
 ness), and not, as Christianity teaches, on 
 God's love for man. 
 
 But although Brahma was only another 
 name for heaven, the Hindu was not content 
 with the hope of entering it, he desired him- 
 self to become it, — he desired not only to live 
 with Brahma, but to be him. Thus to lose 
 all individuality, and be merged in pure ideas, 
 oblivious of all human ties, does not appear 
 to us a very attractive goal ; and greatly as 
 the Hindus might revere Brahma as the 
 essence of all that is grand and good, we 
 cannot think that to become one with him 
 would be particularly desirable. There seems 
 to be nothing in this cold, solitary, impassive 
 existence to make any one long to share it. 
 Yet we know that this desire has been so 
 strongly felt, that many have suffered tortures 
 for it, and given up life gladly as a worthless 
 thing compared to it. 
 
59 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 We must now fix our attention upon what 
 the Vedanta taught concerning man, his rela- 
 tionship to Brahma, and his code of ethics. 
 Man, the Vedantists considered, was a dual 
 creature, being on the one hand tangible, 
 changeable, and objective, and on the other 
 hand, being an emanation from Brahma, he 
 was immutable, pure, and perfect. Body 
 and soul were two distinct things w^hich 
 were united together, or rather the one was 
 shrouded in the other. In the more ancient 
 forms of Hinduism we have seen that the 
 soul was supposed to mean the entire mental 
 nature, all that is not represented by the 
 corporeal existence. The Vedantists went 
 farther than this. They held that even the 
 mental faculties and individual character were 
 a part of physical life, and perished with the 
 body. All that a man is, or thinks he is, was 
 
6o Evolution of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 considered to be mere Illusion, like all other 
 phenomena, the only external portion of the 
 man being his potentiality and consciousness. 
 To quote a well-known writer, "the living 
 soul of Individuals, when separated off from 
 the supreme soul, Is regarded as enclosed In 
 a succession of cases which envelop it, and, 
 as it were, fold over the other like the coats 
 of an onion." 
 
 The whole question of Identity Is indeed 
 one so difficult to understand, that it is no 
 wonder the Vedanta offers little more than 
 vague terms, and identity without memory, 
 consciousness without self-consciousness, the 
 soul without Intellectual faculties, present 
 problems which are entangled in a thick net- 
 work of possibilities which It would be vain 
 to enter upon here. We are bound to con- 
 clude that self-consciousness was not believed 
 to be the same thing as a sense of identity, 
 but simply as the accidental result of indi- 
 vidual life, a sense of Isolation, caused by 
 material environment, in place of Ideal unity. 
 It may be objected that a true sense of 
 existence, i. e. absolute consciousness, implies 
 memory, and that even if the soul " hath 
 elsewhere Its setting," the ''birth" and the 
 
Vedantism. 6 1 
 
 " forgetting " have practically broken the cord 
 of connection. But the Vedantlsts did not 
 seem to consider the loss of memory as any 
 obstacle to their conscious enjoyment. In- 
 deed, to them memory was a fetter which 
 bound them to their Isolated life In the prison 
 house of the flesh, and they eagerly looked 
 forward to the time when they should fling 
 it off for ever, and enter the region of pure 
 idea. 
 
 The ethics of the Vedanta were singularly 
 simple, as we shall see. 
 
 Since the object of life was to fit man for 
 absorption Into Brahma, all efforts were to be 
 directed towards that end. The Idea that 
 any good might be obtained by a wise and 
 moderate enjoyment of life's pleasures did 
 not enter into this scheme. Earthly life was 
 considered a delusion and a misery, worth 
 absolutely nothing except as a means of ob- 
 taining happiness hereafter. Thus, strangely 
 enough, the adoration of nature led the 
 Hindus at last to despise nature, and a belief 
 In the beauty and perfection of her laws con- 
 sisted contemporaneously with an Indifference 
 to the results of those laws. They looked 
 from nature to God, and then treated with 
 
62 Evohition of A^icient Hinduism. 
 
 contempt the basis upon which their theology 
 was buih. To become fit for absorption these 
 philosophers taught that man must rid him- 
 self of all those things which had rendered 
 possible his separation from Brahma. En- 
 trance upon human existence was considered 
 the cause of the abstraction of the soul 
 from him, and the cause of all pain and 
 ignorance, but at the same time, it was only 
 through living an earthly life in a holy state 
 that the soul could be purified sufficiently to 
 admit of its ultimate reunion. Suicide, there- 
 fore, was out of the question, because the soul 
 would be left in the same impure and clogged 
 condition after death as before, and have still 
 to work out its redemption in some other indi- 
 vidual existence. A living death, however, 
 was not considered equally fruitless. On the 
 contrary, the mortification of the body, and 
 the denial of those mental and physical desires 
 which are bound up with it, was thought to 
 be meretorious and proper. In fact, the 
 physical nature was treated like a poor de- 
 spicable jade who has work to perform, but 
 who receives no honour or commendation for 
 its performance. Some of the people, reputed 
 holiest, lived sad, solitary lives, and tortured 
 
Vedantism. 67, 
 
 themselves in various ways, whilst all believed 
 in the theory of entire self-sacrifice, whether 
 they practised it or not. 
 
 Mistaken though these ideas are, and 
 wholly repugnant to our feelings, they are 
 not without a more pleasing side. The belief 
 in the efficacy of self-torture is at least prefer- 
 able to a belief in the efficacy of torturing 
 others, and a Hindu devotee is a more edify- 
 ing spectacle than the flames of the Inquisi- 
 tion, for instance. Another fact is well worthy 
 of remark, namely, the tolerance of the Hindu 
 spirit. They recognized the fact that men 
 are not all born equal, either in position or 
 disposition, and therefore that the same 
 results could not be expected from all. The 
 philosophical Brahman who eschewed the 
 world, and who was able to soar upwards 
 towards Brahma in his dreams and aspira- 
 tions, was of course considered specially holy ; 
 but the practical, uneducated tiller of the soil, 
 or drawer of water, whose imaginative mind 
 could rise no higher than the worship of the 
 gods, and who built his hopes upon good 
 works, that is, upon fair dealing and almsgiv- 
 ing, &c., &c.,was still encouraged to persevere. 
 For him the way to God was a long one, but 
 
64 Evohitioii of Ancient Hmduism. 
 
 still he could look forward to reaching eventu- 
 ally the desired goal. Even the outcasts and 
 sinners were believed to be followlnof, although 
 afar off, for sin was thought to be the spawn 
 of Ignorance and delusion, rather than the 
 deliberate choice of evil made by an Innately 
 vicious heart. 
 
 In taking leave of Vedantism, It will surely 
 be w^ell for us to extend to the ancient 
 Hindus the same tolerance of spirit which 
 they extended to others. We know that 
 there was much In the vulgar form of their 
 religion which was absurd and even brutal, 
 but behind the common form lay deep and 
 beautiful Ideas which we cannot but admire. 
 More than all, we know that there were 
 many men among them w^ho searched after 
 truth with a devotion and singleness of pur- 
 pose w^hlch may well serve as a beacon light 
 to us all. 
 
PART III.— BUDDHISM. 
 
 F 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 It would be almost impossible to form any 
 clear idea of Buddhism without some slight 
 knowledge of the life and history of Buddha. 
 I shall, however, content myself with quoting 
 the main facts only concerning him, not only 
 because many people are already familiar 
 with the storv of his life, but also because 
 much that is interesting from a biographical 
 point of view would be quite superfluous for 
 those who wish simply to gain an insight into 
 his philosophy. 
 
 Buddha was born about six hundred years 
 B.C., and was the son of Suddhodana, the 
 raja of the Sakyas. With the legends which 
 surround his birth and early life we need not 
 deal, for we know very few reliable facts 
 about him until he reached his twenty-ninth 
 year, when he made up his mind to leave 
 his dearly-loved young wife and child, in 
 
 F 2 
 
68 Evolution of Ancient Hijidtiism. 
 
 order to devote himself to religion, or rather 
 philosophy. Buddha was undoubtedly one 
 of those men who are born far in advance of 
 their time — one of those great spirits who, In 
 spite of personal and domestic happiness, are 
 yet tormented by the knowledge of the suffer- 
 ings of others ; a man to w^hom the problems 
 of life, pain, and death assume an Importance 
 of the highest magnitude, his own individual 
 prosperity and pleasure counting as nothing. 
 We can easily understand also that popular 
 Hinduism, as distinguished from Brahmanism, 
 was a source of dissatisfaction to him. The 
 worship and sacrifices offered to vulgar and 
 Insatiable gods were revolting, and he natur- 
 ally craved for some higher knowledge and 
 nobler belief 
 
 At the age of twenty-eight years he there- 
 fore made up his mind to forsake his home, 
 and withdraw into the jungle. He there 
 remained for six years, In the company of five 
 disciples, with whom he fasted and did pen- 
 ance, according to the Hindu doctrines, 
 which taught the efficacy of suffering In 
 freelnof the soul from the vile fetters of the 
 body. During those six years Buddha no 
 doubt studied the philosophy of Vedantism, 
 
Buddhism, 69 
 
 as well as the other schools of orthodox 
 Hinduism, and from those studies he gathered 
 the fundamental principles of the new religion 
 which he afterwards taught. At the end of 
 his sixth year of penance Buddha found that 
 although he had fasted, and mortified himself 
 in order to be more fit for unity with God, 
 yet he was in no way the better for it. His 
 body was not subdued, his soul not elevated 
 — all had been in vain. 
 
 He then despaired of deriving any benefit 
 from a continuance of the same course of life, 
 and began to take sufficient food, giving up 
 at the same time all forms of penance. Whilst 
 thus emaciated, weary, v/eak, and disap- 
 pointed, his disciples deserted him, for in 
 their opinion he had succumbed to tempta- 
 tion, and was no longer worthy to be their 
 leader. 
 
 Being thus abandoned by his companions, 
 overwhelmed with a sense of failure, not 
 knowing what his next step should be, 
 and entirely without that sense of peace 
 and beatitude which penance was believed 
 to produce, he became grievously afflicted 
 with sorrow. The story of his assailment, 
 his conflict, and final victory is poetically 
 
7o Evolution of Ancient Hindznsnt. 
 
 regarded by his devoted followers of after 
 days as a material one, a battle of thews 
 and sinews, but In reality It was of course a 
 mental conflict. He was not only distracted 
 by doubts and difficulties, but apparently 
 there came upon him one of those violent 
 upheavals of the Inner nature which I can 
 only describe as a nerve-storm. It was a 
 kind of passionate ebullition, a whirlwind of 
 feeling, which for the time being wrenches a 
 man adrift from his moral anchors and flings 
 him about in mad gyrations, until at last 
 the storm seems spent through its own 
 vehemence. 
 
 It is one thing to fail to achieve through 
 frailty of purpose, or to lose sight of our 
 end through our own negligence, but it is 
 widely different, and far more painful, to find 
 that, In spite of unwearying devotion, toil, and 
 watchfulness, the end is no nearer, the goal 
 no more sure. This w^as Buddha's condition 
 when this terrible nerve-storm overtook him. 
 But after the storm came the calm, and 
 whilst sitting under the Bo tree, he saw his 
 way towards formulating a new philosophy, 
 a philosophy which has been briefly summed 
 up as *' the power over the human heart of 
 
Bitddhistn. 71 
 
 Inward culture, and of love to others." People 
 often regard Buddha as the author of a wholly 
 new religion, but this was not the case, and If 
 we try to study It as such, we find It exceed- 
 ingly difficult, if not Impossible, to understand. 
 But If, on the other hand, we are convinced 
 that Buddha was an orthodox Hindu of the 
 Vedantlst school of thought on every subject 
 upon which he does not express a difference 
 of opinion, all that Is perplexing and contra- 
 dictory can be explained away. 
 
 I do not think that Buddha ever questioned 
 the abstract truths of Brahmanism ; his atten- 
 tion was directed entirely to moral philosophy, 
 and to the purification of his religion from 
 the corruptions which the vulgar and super- 
 stitious had nourished within It. 
 
 During that time of calm reflection under 
 the Bo tree, Buddha must have thought 
 out almost the whole of his philosophy, 
 because from that time forward he devoted 
 himself entirely to Its promulgation as a man 
 only could who had no doubts left concerning 
 Its truth and importan^^. 
 
72 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 Now that we are about to take Into con- 
 sideration the main principles of Buddha's 
 philosophy, we instinctively turn our attention 
 first towards his theories concerning the 
 Supreme Deity, and we learn with surprise, 
 that no omniscient God has any place in his 
 religious system. This fact will cease to 
 surprise us, however. If we take It for granted 
 that Buddha was strongly Imbued with the 
 spirit of Vedantism, for, as we have seen, the 
 Vedantists denied that Brahma was a personal 
 deity, or had any cognizance of human life. 
 Presumably Buddha acquiesced In the state- 
 ment that such a being existed, but declined 
 to give to him (or It r) the name of God. He 
 probably recognized the fact, that the physical 
 attributes of Brahma were simply laws of 
 nature of which we know nothing, save when 
 manifested through the medium of phenomena. 
 
Biiddhis77t, 73 
 
 and which are therefore of no Interest to us 
 except when thus manifested. 
 
 With regard to the spiritual side of Brahma, 
 he must have seen, as we see, that pure love, 
 consciousness, joy, and so forth are but con- 
 ditions of existence, and in no sense do they 
 embody the essentials of a deity. He seems 
 to have taken the same view as a more 
 modern philosopher who says, that if a god 
 is to be of any interest to us, he must be a 
 personal one. I shall presently hope to show 
 that Buddha did not disbelieve in the exist- 
 ence of ideal happiness, but for the moment 
 it is only necessary to point out that this 
 ideal was not regarded by him as a god. 
 With reference to the gods in general, he 
 admitted their reality ; for he believed that 
 other worlds — places both of enjoyment and 
 torment — had been evolved in the same 
 manner as this world, and that they were 
 inhabited by creatures of the same genus as 
 man, but perhaps superior, who went by the 
 name of gods, but he did not believe that 
 they had any power over the destinies of 
 men. Man was alone responsible for him- 
 self to himself; no good angel could raise 
 him, neither could any evil fiend drag him 
 
74 Evolution of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 downward. Hence all prayers and sacrifices 
 were abolished by true Buddhists, as being 
 not only superfluous, but revolting to the 
 true dignity of mankind. 
 
 This theory of course must have had great 
 charms for the Hindus. So many must have 
 been led to fancy that it was of no use to try 
 to combat fortune If the gods appeared to be 
 against them, and thus by this very hopeless- 
 ness rendering themselves doubly unfortunate. 
 But when they were taught to rely on them- 
 selves, and to defy the fates, who were power- 
 less to harm them, a feeling of renewed life 
 and energy must have animated them. 
 
 We are now on the threshold of perhaps 
 the most puzzling of Buddhist doctrines, 
 namely, the origin of man, his nature, and his 
 future. I use the word puzzling, because we 
 find some of Buddha's clearest and most 
 emphatic statements seem to be in direct 
 contradiction to the main principles of his 
 teaching. This being the case, we must 
 endeavour to read between the lines, and 
 thus reconcile if we can the conflicting evi- 
 dence. To begin with, I believe it is an 
 indisputable fact, that Buddha denied the 
 immortality of the soul. He taught in plain 
 
Buddhism, 75 
 
 language that man Is but a synthesis of certain 
 objects and forces, as a chariot Is but the 
 combination of certain other objects and 
 forces, and that when these materials are dis- 
 united, the chariot, as such. Is destroyed, the 
 man, as such. Is annihilated. No materialist 
 could preach the destructlblllty of all Indi- 
 vidual things or creatures more emphatically 
 than did Buddha. As to the soul, he asserted 
 positively, that there was no such thing at 
 all, even during a man's life, still less after 
 his death. On the other hand, however. If 
 he really meant what his words imply, his 
 moral precepts, his theories concerning trans- 
 migration, and of Nirvana, appear to be wholly 
 inconsistent with his convictions. 
 
 The time has not yet come for us to con- 
 sider what his moral philosophy was, but we 
 shall presently see that his teaching every- 
 where implied that this life is but a prepara- 
 tion, and not a consummation. Those who 
 believe that Buddha was nothing more or less 
 than a materialist, find no stumbling-block to 
 their theory In his ethics, because they say 
 any Infidel may have good principles and 
 moral qualities. This is of course perfectly 
 true. An atheist or materialist may preach 
 
76 Evolution of Ancierit Hinditis77t. 
 
 the doctrine of kindness, justice, and rectitude, 
 but his reasons for advocating these are and 
 must be based on the conviction, that the 
 exercise of such quaHties would augment the 
 sum of man's happiness In this world. Buddha, 
 on the contrary, called upon men to renounce 
 many enjoyments which were so innocent in 
 themselves, as in no way to detract from the 
 sum of human happiness. If all life ends for 
 the individual when the heart ceases to beat, 
 then surely there could be no harm in a man's 
 enjoying pleasures which could not bring 
 retribution on himself or others. But Buddha 
 despised many innocent pleasures, solely on 
 the ground that they tended to make human 
 life too agreeable, a most unreasonable doc- 
 trine, merely from a materialist's point of 
 view. If, however, he believed that a love 
 of individual life here prevented a man's at- 
 taining far more complete happiness in the 
 future, he was perfectly logical. Some people 
 think he considered it unadvlsable to enjoy 
 the pleasures of life because there is always 
 a possibility of being deprived of them. This 
 appears to be a somewhat far-fetched notion ; 
 and If Buddha had been led to hold such 
 an opinion, how can we account for the fact 
 
Budd/iis77t. 77 
 
 that he encouraged the growth of all loving 
 and kindly feelings? If the object of life Is 
 to avoid pain, then we ought to stifle all 
 feelings of a warmer nature than mere good- 
 natured tolerance ; knowing how much we 
 can be made to suffer through loving others. 
 
 Apart from this, how could a pure mate- 
 rialist believe In the transmigration of souls ? 
 Undoubtedly Buddha did not believe that a 
 man (i. e. all those qualities and characteristics 
 which together make up the Individual) could 
 leave his body at death and enter another 
 body ; but he must have believed that the 
 result of a man's life would continue after his 
 death, and that this result called Karma 
 would Influence a new birth. Karma was, In 
 fact, a heritage. 
 
 But this was not all. Buddha believed 
 that the transmigration of souls was a system 
 of justice, an exemplification of the truth, that 
 a man must reap what he has sown. Now 
 surely If there was nothing of the original 
 man except the harvest of his actions trans- 
 mitted to the newly-born Inheritor of them, 
 where Is the justice ? Why should an Inno- 
 cent child be branded with a disease which 
 was the fruit of evil wrought by a totally 
 
78 Evolution of Ancie7it Hinduism, 
 
 different person ? Or why should a man lead 
 an exemplary life for the sake of benefiting 
 some alien creature to be born after him ? 
 Of course, from a perfectly unselfish point of 
 view, a man might be willing to lead a life of 
 self-denial in order to transmit a good Karma 
 to some one else ; but Buddha does not seem 
 to have founded his religion on any principle 
 of absolute unselfishness. On the contrary, 
 he was continually impressing upon his hearers 
 that the object of life was to secure ultimate 
 happiness, and get rid of all pain. What, 
 then, was the eternal thread which he must 
 have believed to exist through all forms of 
 life, and which might eventually arrive at the 
 perfection of bliss. Nirvana? We should of 
 course answer, the soul, if he had not declared 
 that all belief in a soul was heresy. What, 
 then, could it be ? The only way of escaping 
 this difficulty is by remembering the class of 
 people whom he was addressing, and the 
 nature of the religion he was attempting to 
 reform. He was teachino^ the Hindus who 
 held by the old pantheistic doctrines, and not 
 the Vedantist school, which came into exist- 
 ence but a short time previous to himself. 
 Now we have seen that the old school pro- 
 
Biiddhism. 79 
 
 bably believed the soul to be an indestructible 
 individuality, therefore I think that when 
 Buddha said there was no such thing as a 
 soul, he used the word in the old-fashioned 
 sense, meaning to say, that as a man's indi- 
 viduality is dependent on circumstances, it 
 could not be immortal or indivisible. Never- 
 theless, there is strong reason for the presump- 
 tion that he accepted fully the Vedantist 
 belief in the immortality of the consciousness. 
 He believed, no doubt, that an undying spark 
 of godlike consciousness kindled the flame to 
 which life has been compared, and that when 
 death overtakes the individual, this same 
 spark, still encumbered with the Karma of the 
 departed being, is forced again and again to 
 enter upon individual life, until, by the aid of 
 mortal endeavour, the immortal shall at last 
 regain its freedom, and exist for ever in bliss. 
 
8o 
 
 CHAPTER XL 
 
 Supposing that the conclusions arrived at 
 in the preceding chapter are correct, we may 
 sum up the philosophy of Buddha in a few 
 words. 
 
 He believed with the Vedantists In the 
 real existence of pure love, joy, and con- 
 sciousness, and he believed that from this 
 ideal existence emanated the conscious vital- 
 ity which animates the living creature, and 
 that Its imprisonment in mutable life was the 
 source of all sufferings ; therefore the more a 
 man could wean himself from a love of physical 
 life, the sooner would the vital spark regain 
 its original condition of ideal happiness. 
 
 If It be taken for granted that this is the 
 outline of Buddha's creed, we shall see how 
 admirably his ethical teaching was adapted to 
 the object which he had in view. It will be 
 remembered that Hindu orthodoxy divided 
 
Bitddhis7n, 8 1 
 
 the people Into two classes, the Brahmans 
 and non- Brahmans. To the former belonged 
 philosophy, leisure, and many privileges, 
 whilst the vocation of the latter class was 
 that of the uneducated soldier or citizen. 
 Buddha made the same broad distinction, but 
 on an altered basis. The orthodox Brah- 
 mans were a hereditary priesthood, or aris- 
 tocracy, and the gulf that separated them 
 from the common people was Impassable. 
 Buddha, on the contrary, believed In natural 
 selection, and thought little of the accidents 
 of birth. The following verses from the 
 Buddhist scriptures prove this unmistakably — 
 
 " Not by birth does one become low caste, 
 
 Not by birth does one become a Brahman ; 
 By his actions alone one becomes low caste, 
 By his actions alone one becomes a Brahman." 
 
 In short, Buddha recognized, as every think- 
 ing man must, that, Irrespective of position in 
 life, there are some persons who are born 
 with exceptional brain power, and who prefer 
 Intellectual pleasures to any other. These 
 were. In his opinion, the true Brahmans. 
 There are others, again (and these are of 
 
 course the majority), who are willing to do 
 
 a 
 
82 Evolution of Ancient Hinduism, 
 
 their duty In so far as they see It, but are 
 wholly Incapable of abstract thought. Both 
 these classes seemed good in Buddha's eyes, 
 but In a different degree. For the learned 
 minority — the true Brahmans — he instituted 
 an order of mendicants corresponding very 
 closely to the monks of the Romish Church 
 in many particulars. They were to wear a 
 peculiar dress, to live apart from the world, 
 and depend for their sustenance upon charity. 
 They were to procure for themselves the 
 necessities of life, but luxuries were forbid- 
 den, and celibacy Insisted upon. It must 
 not, however, be supposed from this that 
 Buddha believed In the efficacy either of 
 penance or outward forms ; what he wished to 
 do was to bring about the happiness of his 
 followers, and although he regarded this life 
 as but a preparation for a better one, yet he 
 wished his mendicant monks to be happy 
 even here, provided only that their progress 
 was not retarded. 
 
 It was, as we have seen, Buddha's belief 
 that all sorrow springs from individual life, 
 which Is the author of restless desire, hatred, 
 passion, corruption, disease, and all other Ills. 
 Our love of personal life, he said, was the 
 
Buddhism. 83 
 
 result of egotism, and this egotism must be 
 destroyed before we can hope to arrive at 
 Nirvana. In this he agreed with the Hindus 
 generally, but his method of abolishing this 
 sinful lust after life, as it was called, was 
 entirely new. He had himself experienced 
 the fact that penance and mortification do 
 not necessarily produce a calm and holy state 
 of mind, but, on the contrary, it often makes 
 a man crave all the more for the ordinary 
 comforts of life. Therefore the mendicants 
 were taught to satisfy in moderation their 
 requirements, and when they had slept, 
 washed, dressed, and partaken of food, they 
 w^ere thought to be In the most favourable 
 condition for intellectual work. Luxuries 
 were only forbidden to the mendicants be- 
 cause they were supposed to foster a love of 
 individual life, and to attract the mind away 
 from higher things. 
 
 Although Buddha made these and other 
 rules, he did not attribute the smallest value 
 upon them as mere outward observances. 
 The shaving of the head, the wearing of the 
 orange robe, abstinence from intoxicating 
 liquors, — these and similar prescribed forms 
 
 had no virtue to impart to him who observed 
 
 G 2 
 
84 Evolutio7i of Ancie7it Hindzcism, 
 
 them, they were simply the means by which 
 it was thought that man could best attain to 
 the crowning triumph of life — the mastery 
 over self, and the annihilation of egotism. 
 I have said that Buddha desired the men- 
 dicants to be happy in any way that did not 
 encourage the lust of life. What kind of 
 happiness, then, was open to them ? It was 
 intellectual knowledge, love for others, and 
 contemplation. 
 
 Cold and unattractive as this may seem to 
 us, to many Buddhists it was as the breath 
 of heaven. We must remember, that in old 
 days life was a perpetual struggle, unrelieved 
 by many of the arts of civilization or seasons 
 of peaceful prosperity. To men of quiet, 
 reflective minds, therefore, there must have 
 been much to sicken them of the turmoil, the 
 ostentation, and the coercive practices of 
 ordinary life. To them it must have seemed 
 a beautiful religion, which enabled a man to 
 live apart from the world and indifferent to 
 its excitements. How pleasant to think that 
 the restless, weary, and disappointed could 
 cast off the trials and anxieties which clogged 
 their progress, and breathe an atmosphere of 
 mental serenity and peace. 
 
Bitddhism. 85 
 
 Even in the present prosaic age it is 
 generally acknowledged that the highest 
 pleasures are those which '* carry one out of 
 oneself," as the expression is, and how much 
 more must men less happily circumstanced 
 than ourselves have prized a form of happi- 
 ness which no tyrant could wring from them, 
 no adversity deprive them. To those whose 
 lives are busy, and who spend but little time 
 in contemplation, it may seem impossible to 
 derive any pleasure from a philosophy in 
 which the annihilation of self is the main 
 feature. To us the very idea of pleasure 
 implies personal, individual gratification, but 
 the fact is, that even we do forget for the 
 time being the circumstances which surround 
 us, and the individual cares and anxieties 
 which press upon us. 
 
 The Buddhists felt this just the same, but 
 in a far greater degree. Owing to their 
 climate and other material circumstances, 
 the Hindus were (and are still) more prone 
 to silent thouQ^ht and meditation than are the 
 inhabitants of colder countries, and they were 
 therefore well able to grasp the inner meaning 
 of Buddha's teaching. 
 
 The life of the Buddhist mendicant, 
 
86 Evolutio7i of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 although simple and monotonous, was not 
 without its periods of activity. He was 
 bound to wash, clean his hut, collect his 
 daily food in his alms-bowl, and to study 
 certain books, besides finding time to medi- 
 tate. There were five principal subjects for 
 jnedltatlon, namely, love, pity, joy, impurity, 
 serenity ! 
 
 As these five subjects contain the whole 
 essence of Buddha's philosophy. It may be 
 well, perhaps, for us to consider them 
 separately. 
 
87 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 The subject for the first meditation was 
 love, a subject which has been talked and 
 written about for so many centuries that it 
 may well seem to us to be one with which 
 we are well acquainted ; but we shall see that 
 love, from the Buddhist's point of view, pre- 
 sents an aspect which is most unfamiliar. 
 
 The love of the Buddhist mendicant was 
 not that of the young man for the maiden, 
 nor that of brother for brother, nor yet was 
 it that universal feelino^ of kindliness towards 
 all men which is supposed to be the prevail- 
 ing characteristic of the philanthropist. Love 
 was the Buddhist's religion ! In their opinion 
 hatred was painful, whilst intense love was 
 the highest of all joys, and made them worthy 
 of Nirvana. This exalted passion can only 
 be described as close spiritual sympathy, and 
 a longing for that perfect union with the ideal 
 
88 Evohctio7i of Ancient Hindnism. 
 
 which could only take place when the indi- 
 vidual, as such, existed no more. The Bud- 
 dhist might love one person more than 
 another, because the ideal is more perceptible 
 in some than in others. Appearances, man- 
 ners, and habits were regarded as mere out- 
 ward coverings ; but at the same time, by 
 means of these, it was possible to divine 
 whether the immortal spark within was being 
 developed, or whether it was suffered to 
 stagnate beneath a load of vulgar and sordid 
 passions. Therefore the Buddhist could 
 reverence those superior beings who had 
 grown indifferent to earthly considerations ; 
 he could keenly sympathize with those on 
 the same level as himself, who were still 
 struggling upward, and he could be not 
 merely tolerant, but full of compassion for 
 those whose spiritual emanations were im- 
 prisoned in an earthly character so low as 
 to be lost to recognition. Even the most 
 degraded animals were treated with tender- 
 ness, for the sake of what lay enshrouded in 
 the coarse and bestial frame. There was 
 ample material, then, for the meditation of 
 the devotee when he fixed his thoughts upon 
 love. There were times when he had to rid 
 
Buddhism, 89 
 
 himself of all recollection of his own troubles, 
 and to enter fully into those of others. Times 
 when he must think of the sinful, the ignorant, 
 the unhappy, and learn to find excuse even 
 for those failings which he had himself been 
 able to avoid. There were times when he 
 must look upward to those enlightened ones 
 whom he believed to be treading their last 
 course with earthly feet, and whose angel 
 wrings were half unfolded, ready to bear them 
 to another sphere. Lastly, there were times 
 when the Buddhist must think of love as the 
 ideal of all spiritual union and happiness, the 
 crown of his life's desire. I know not how 
 to put Into words the full meaning of love in 
 its unindivldualized aspect — as a religion. To 
 most of us the Idea of love is so personal, that 
 we can scarcely hear or speak the word with- 
 out mentally photographing, as it were, from 
 memory, the faces and forms of those most 
 dear to us. The well-known countenance, 
 the oft-heard voice, the long-familiar peculi- 
 arities become so endeared to us through 
 associations with the person to whom they 
 belong, that it seems impossible to dis- 
 associate the Idea of love from some kind 
 of physical individuality. We may, however, 
 
90 Evohition of Ancient Hindtcism, 
 
 be aided by the use of an Illustration. When 
 a friend Is long absent from us, we treasure 
 their picture, and look upon It so often that 
 every line Is familiar, and even Its setting 
 becomes dear to us. But when that friend 
 returns to us we no longer need his portrait ; 
 the image is superfluous beside the reality. 
 
 In the same manner love as an Idea is 
 related to love personalized. Hence In this 
 world we can only feel love when It has been 
 imaged In some person or thing, but when 
 earthly life has passed away. It is conceivable 
 that we might recognize the "thing In Itself," 
 the idea in its pristine splendour. Such must 
 have been the opinion of Buddha, and of the 
 purest of his disciples, because love in the 
 ordinary sense of the word could never have 
 been so highly esteemed by a sect who set 
 so little value upon individual life. The pious 
 Buddhist could not grow more and more 
 indifferent to earth if it contained all that 
 he loved, and from whom death must separate 
 him at least for a time. But if, on the other 
 hand, he believed that dear though some indi- 
 viduals might be, the distinction of " I and 
 thou " was not a bridge, but a barrier between 
 him and them, an obstacle to true union of 
 
Buddhism, 9 1 
 
 spirit, he would then long all the more for his 
 emancipation from the body, and await with 
 hope the angel of death, whom he would 
 picture not as a destroyer, but rather as an 
 analyst, to come and separate the immortal 
 from the mortal, the incorruptible from the 
 corrupt, the everlasting truth from the transi- 
 tory illusion. 
 
 The next subject for meditation — pity — is 
 one which requires but little explanation, 
 except to say that in the Buddhist philosophy 
 it w^as not akin to contempt. 
 
 Joy was the third meditation. In it the 
 mendicant was bidden to reflect upon the 
 joys of others, and to rejoice with them, as 
 he had sympathized with the sad. This was 
 Buddha's method of annihilating egotism. 
 
 Fourthly, the mendicant was to meditate 
 upon impurity. Uncier this head all bodily 
 suffering, disease, vice, ignorance, and folly 
 were classed ; and by reflecting on these he 
 would perceive how imperfect is life, how 
 transient its pleasures, compared with its 
 pains, and how quickly the purest and most 
 beautiful earthly product must yield itself up 
 to decay and corruption. 
 
 Serenity is the last meditation for the 
 
92 Evolution of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 Buddhist, who Is then to think of all those 
 things which men prize In this world, such as 
 honour, fame, riches, beauty, and dominion, 
 and strive to regard them with Indifference. 
 The Buddhist's treasure was not to be laid 
 up In this world, and he was to care nothing 
 for the mad Infatuations of the hour. Thus, 
 above the reach of all tumult, though access- 
 ible, through sympathy, to every shade of joy 
 and sorrow, the mendicant was bound to pass 
 through life with quiet dignity, and to be 
 ready, when the time came, to quit It without 
 a shadow either of fear or of regret. 
 
 The philosophy of Buddha also adapted 
 Itself to those who were not suited either 
 by Intellect or disposition to become monks. 
 These were permitted to enter upon almost 
 all those enjoyments of life which are usually 
 considered innocent. They were to be honest, 
 truthful, constant to one wife, kindly in man- 
 ner and speech, sober, diligent In business, 
 and so forth ; but, on the other hand, they 
 were allowed to enjoy domestic life and hos- 
 pitality, and to make use of the comforts or 
 luxuries which fortune might place within 
 their reach. We must not forget that Buddha 
 believed the true object of life to be happi- 
 
Buddhism. 93 
 
 ness, and that although he considered the 
 highest happiness could only be obtained by 
 renunciation of the world, he forced this 
 course upon no one. It was of no use for 
 a man to turn monk except through natural 
 inclination, and the upright householder might 
 still progress along the heavenly way, although 
 afar off. In short, Buddha seems to have 
 regarded the innocent pleasures of life as a 
 parent regards the toys of his children. He 
 knows that the love for these must die out 
 before manhood can be reached, but frivolous 
 though the childish games appear, he does 
 not prohibit them. He is aware that to take 
 away the toys would be to inflict pain without 
 producing the desired development of mind, 
 and so he is content to wait until the time 
 comes when the children will abandon their 
 pastimes of their own accord, because they 
 have grown too old to find pleasure in them. 
 
94 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 This last chapter has been reserved for the 
 examination of the future states, promised by 
 the three forms of Hinduism which we have 
 been reviewing. 
 
 Pantheistic Hinduism, as described in Part 
 I., taught, that man should ultimately be 
 absorbed into Brahma, but as their notions 
 of Brahma were somewhat nebulous and in- 
 definite, their visions of this consummation 
 could not have been very distinct. Inasmuch, 
 however, as they regarded him as a personal 
 deity, they probably supposed that man would 
 become one with him, sharing his rule, and 
 the splendour of his existence. 
 
 The Vedantists, on the other hand, denied 
 that Brahma had a personal existence, and 
 therefore their idea of absorption into him 
 must have been something widely different. 
 It was, in fact, an ideal state of consciousness, 
 
BuddJiism, 95 
 
 necessitating total loss of Individuality. In> 
 tHis we see how buddha, though separate 
 from, yet ran parallel with Vedantism, for 
 his Nirvana and the Vedantist absorption 
 seem to have meant exactly the same thing. 
 Both systems of philosophy appear to have 
 agreed in substance, but differed in the words 
 used. Buddha, using the word soul in the 
 old orthodox sense, denied its existence ; whilst 
 Vedantism, probably for form's sake, retained 
 the word, but divested it of the meaning 
 previously assigned to it. In the same way 
 the two systems differed verbally concerning 
 Brahma. 
 
 Buddha regarded this name in its orthodox 
 sense (signifying a personal deity), and said 
 that no such person as Brahma existed ; 
 whereas the Vedantists believed in Brahma, 
 but stripped him of all personal powers and 
 attributes. The Nirvana of Buddha, there- 
 fore, and the Brahma of the Vedanta meant 
 precisely the same thing. We are told by 
 Professor Max Miiller, that "if we look in 
 the Dhamma-pada at every passage where 
 Nirvana is mentioned, there is not one which 
 would require that its meaning should be 
 annihilation, whilst most, if not all, would 
 
g6 Evohitio7i of Ancient Hinduism. 
 
 become perfectly unintelligible, if we assigned 
 to the word Nirvana that signification." Many 
 other authorities on Indian religions also 
 hold the same opinion, and therefore, although 
 no absolute proof can be furnished, I think 
 we can have little doubt but that entrance 
 upon Nirvana was merely a new expression 
 in place of absorption into Brahma ; that is 
 to say, both signified the loss of individuality, 
 and the realization of ideal happiness. 
 
 Such notions of happiness are so entirely 
 at variance with the views which we of the 
 nineteenth century instinctively hold, that we 
 are apt to think the heaven of the Hindus 
 (whether Vedantist or Buddhist) was very 
 little better than complete annihilation. How, 
 we are inclined to ask, can a man be happy 
 if his individuality is lost ? or rather, how can 
 a man, in such a case, be said to exist at all ? 
 The question is so difficult, and we can under- 
 stand so little of the working of the Hindu 
 mind in old days, that I cannot attempt to 
 say for certain what Nirvana or absorption 
 really meant, or where the attraction in them 
 lay ; but I am so sure that these states did 
 not signify annihilation, that in default of 
 more certain information, I give what might 
 
Buddhism. 97 
 
 very well be a picture of this consummation 
 of happiness for which the pious Hindus 
 were willing to work, to wait, and to die. I 
 believe that If one of these had been ques- 
 tioned, he might have replied somewhat as 
 follows — 
 
 " I believe that the mainspring of my life 
 Is a divine emanation, a spark from the 
 perfect flame which burns for ever. This 
 emanation. Itself containing the elements of 
 pure love, consciousness, and knowledge, be- 
 came Imprisoned In matter, became the life of 
 this earthly body, and I, as an Individual, 
 was produced. 
 
 " My Intellect and personality are temporal, 
 and entirely dependent on the body. By the 
 aid of mutable reason, the immutable cause 
 of life becomes conscious of Itself, and thus 
 the man may work out his own redemption 
 from the prison-house of the body. I believe 
 that I shall pass through a series of trans- 
 migrations, and that although my character 
 will depend upon circumstances, and vary 
 with each birth, the divine portion of me will 
 enter upon a new life In precisely that state 
 of bondage or emancipation in which It 
 quitted the old one ; but wherever or what- 
 
98 Evolution of Ancient Hindttis7n. 
 
 ever I may be, I must ultimately work my 
 way upwards. At last the time will come 
 when I shall be freed from all egotism, all 
 lust of life, all material desires, and I shall 
 long only to join the Ideal from w^hence 
 I came. When I enter upon Nirvana I 
 shall lose all consciousness of I and thou, 
 but I shall be profoundly conscious of love, 
 joy, and peace. The divine thread of con- 
 sciousness which will have run through all 
 past ages, will not desert me when I attain 
 to the light from whence all consciousness 
 has been derived. I shall still feel, although 
 recollection of self will be lost, just as on 
 earth a man may abrogate himself through 
 love. The greatest happiness I have ever 
 known in the world has been at times when 
 I have been so filled with love and adoration 
 that for a time I have become oblivious of 
 myself and my environment. Such Intensity 
 of feeling shall be mine, only deeper and 
 more precious than I can ever dream, when 
 I lose myself in light. Then shall I have 
 cognizance of the realities in their pristine 
 splendour, of which the beauties of earth are 
 but finite and broken reflections ; there shall 
 I meet all the spirits I have ever known 
 
Bicddhism. 99 
 
 and loved, and I shall rush to meet them as 
 the rivers rush toward the sea. I shall not 
 perceive them as with mortal eyes, nor hear 
 their voices as with mortal ears, but I 
 shall feel their presence as my own. Our 
 communion will not be one of sympathy, 
 which is only kinship, but one of absolute 
 unity, as the colours live and mingle in one 
 dazzling gem ! So shall we be throughout 
 the ages — motionless, desireless, changeless, 
 and serene ; for though time be a portion of 
 eternity, eternity does not consist of portions 
 of time. The intense joy of the present, 
 therefore, shall exist for everlasting ages, and 
 the long, long vista of for ever shall flash 
 like a lightning gleam ! " 
 
 THE END. 
 
 Richard Clay ^ Sons, Limited, London &' Biaigay. 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 -«y.'.!»t!<W>''t^y^4^«»i*» 
 
 ■-l^- 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 V 
 
 
 ^^W»»***'fS^i^^ 
 
 t 
 
 
 
 
 !^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 GAYLORD 
 
 
 
 PRINTED IN U.S.A.