Chapter XI (2)

Had the erudite Archbishop Cave, Grabe, and Dr. Parker, who so zealously contended in their time for the admission of the _Epistles of Jesus Christ and Abgarus, King of Edessa_, into the Canon of the _Scripture_, lived in our days of Max Müller and Sanscrit scholarship, we doubt whether they would have acted as they did. The first mention of these Epistles ever made, was by the famous Eusebius. This pious bishop seems to have been self-appointed to furnish Christianity with the most unexpected proofs to corroborate its wildest fancies. Whether among the many accomplishments of the Bishop of Cæsarea, we must include a knowledge of the Cingalese, Pehlevi, Thibetan, and other languages, we know not; but he surely transcribed the letters of Jesus and Abgarus, and the story of the miraculous portrait of Christ taken on a piece of cloth, by the simple wiping of his face, from the Buddhistical Canon. To be sure, the bishop declared that he found the letter himself written in Syriac, preserved among the registers and records of the city of Edessa, where Abgarus reigned.[1071] We recall the words of Babrias: “Myth, O son of King Alexander, is an ancient human invention of Syrians, who lived in old time under Ninus and Belus.” Edessa was one of the ancient “holy cities.” The Arabs venerate it to this day; and the purest Arabic is there spoken. They call it still by its ancient name Orfa, once the city _Arpha-Kasda_ (Arphaxad) the seat of a College of Chaldeans and Magi; whose missionary, called Orpheus, brought thence the Bacchic Mysteries to Thrace. Very naturally, Eusebius found there the tales which he wrought over into the story of Abgarus, and the sacred picture taken on a cloth; as that of Bhagavat, or the blessed Tathagâta (Buddha)[1072] was obtained by King Binsbisara.[1073] The King having brought it, Bhagavat projected his shadow on it.[1074] This bit of “miraculous stuff,” with its shadow, is still preserved, say the Buddhists; “only the shadow itself is rarely seen.”

In like manner, the Gnostic author of _the Gospel according to John_, copied and metamorphosed the legend of Ananda who asked drink of a Matangha woman--the antitype of the woman met by Jesus at the well,[1075] and was reminded by her that she belongs to a low caste, and may have nothing to do with a holy monk. “I do not ask thee, my sister,” answers Ananda to the woman, “either thy caste or thy family, I only ask thee for water, if thou canst give me some.” This Matangha woman, charmed and moved to tears, repents, joins the monastic Order of Gautama, and becomes a saint, rescued from a life of unchastity by Sakya-muni. Many of her subsequent actions were used by Christian forgers, to endow Mary Magdalen and other female saints and martyrs.

“And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward,” says the Gospel (_Matthew_ x. 42). “Whosoever, with a purely believing heart, offers nothing but a handful of water, or presents so much to the spiritual assembly, or gives drink therewith to the poor and needy, or to a beast of the field; this meritorious action will not be exhausted in many ages,”[1076] says the Buddhist _Canon_.

At the hour of Gautama-Buddha’s birth there were 32,000 wonders performed. The clouds stopped immovable in the sky, the waters of the rivers ceased to flow; the flowers ceased unbudding; the birds remained silent and full of wonder; all nature remained suspended in her course, and was full of expectation. “There was a preternatural light spread all over the world; animals suspended their eating; the blind saw; and the lame and dumb were cured,” etc.[1077]

We now quote from the _Protevangelion_:

“At the hour of the Nativity, as Joseph looked up into the air, ‘I saw,’ he says, ‘_the clouds astonished_, and the fowls of the air stopping in the midst of their flight.... And I beheld the sheep dispersed ... and _yet the sheep stood still_; and I looked into a river, and saw the kids _with their mouths close to the water, and touching it, but they did not drink_.

“_Then a bright cloud overshadowed the cave._ But on a sudden the cloud became _a great light_ in the cave, so that their eyes could not bear it.... The hand of Salomé, which was withered, was straightway cured.... The blind saw; the lame and dumb were cured.”[1078]

When sent to school, the young Gautama, without having ever studied, completely worsted all his competitors; not only in writing, but in arithmetic, mathematics, metaphysics, wrestling, archery, astronomy, geometry, and finally vanquishes his own professors by giving the definition of sixty-four kinds of writings, which were unknown to the masters themselves.[1079]

And this is what is said again in the _Gospel of the Infancy_: “And when he (Jesus) was twelve years old ... a certain principal Rabbi asked him, ‘Hast thou read books?’ and a certain astronomer asked the Lord Jesus whether he had studied astronomy. And Lord Jesus explained to him ... about the spheres ... about the physics and metaphysics. Also things that reason of man had never discovered.... The constitutions of the body, how the soul operated upon the body, ... etc. And at this the master was so surprised that he said: “I believe this boy was born before Noah ... he is more learned than any master.’”[1080]

The precepts of Hillel, who died forty years B.C., appear rather as quotations than original expressions in the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus taught the world nothing that had not been taught as earnestly before by other masters. He begins his sermon with certain purely Buddhistic precepts that had found acceptance among the Essenes, and were generally practiced by the _Orphikoi_, and the Neo-platonists. There were the Philhellenes, who, like Apollonius, had devoted their lives to moral and physical purity, and who practiced asceticism. He tries to imbue the hearts of his audience with a scorn for worldly wealth; a fakir-like unconcern for the morrow; love for humanity, poverty, and chastity. He blesses the poor in spirit, the meek, the hungering and the thirsting after righteousness, the merciful and the peace-makers, and, Buddha-like, leaves but a poor chance for the proud castes to enter into the kingdom of heaven. Every word of his sermon is an echo of the essential principles of monastic Buddhism. The ten commandments of Buddha, as found in an appendix to the _Prâtimoksha Sûtra_ (Pali-Burman text), are elaborated to their full extent in _Matthew_. If we desire to acquaint ourselves with the historical Jesus we have to set the mythical Christ entirely aside, and learn all we can of the man in the first Gospel. His doctrines, religious views, and grandest aspirations will be found concentrated in his sermon.

This is the principal cause of the failure of missionaries to convert Brahmanists and Buddhists. These see that the little of really good that is offered in the new religion is paraded only in theory, while their own faith demands that those identical rules shall be applied in practice. Notwithstanding the impossibility for Christian missionaries to understand clearly the spirit of a religion wholly based on that doctrine of emanation which is so inimical to their own theology, the reasoning powers of some simple Buddhistical preachers are so high, that we see a scholar like Gutzlaff,[1081] utterly silenced and put to great straits by Buddhists. Judson, the famous Baptist missionary in Burmah, confesses, in his _Journal_, the difficulties to which he was often driven by them. Speaking of a certain Ooyan, he remarks that his strong mind was capable of grasping the most difficult subjects. “His words,” he remarks, “are as smooth as oil, as sweet as honey, and as sharp as razors; his mode of reasoning is soft, insinuating, and acute; and so adroitly does he act his part, that _I with the strength of truth_, was scarcely able to keep him down.” It appears though, that at a later period of his mission, Mr. Judson found that he had utterly mistaken the doctrine. “I begin to find,” he says, “that the semi-atheism, which I had sometimes mentioned, is nothing but a refined Buddhism, having its foundation in the Buddhistic Scriptures.” Thus he discovered at last that while there is in Buddhism “a generic term of most exalted perfection actually applied to numerous individuals, a Buddha superior to the whole host of subordinate deities,” there are also lurking in the system “the glimmerings of an _anima mundi_ anterior to, and even superior to, Buddha.”[1082]

This is a happy discovery, indeed!

Even the so-slandered Chinese believe in _One_, Highest God. “The Supreme Ruler of Heavens.” Yuh-Hwang-Shang-ti, has his name inscribed only on the golden tablet before the altar of heaven at the great temple at Pekin, T’Iantan. “This worship,” says Colonel Yule, “is mentioned by the Mahometan narrator of Shah Rukh’s embassy (A.D. 1421): ‘Every year there are some days on which the emperor eats no animal food.... He spends his time in an apartment which contains _no idol_, and says that _he is worshipping the God of Heaven_.”[1083]

Speaking of Shahrastani, the great Arabian scholar, Chwolsohn says that for him Sabaeism was not astrolatry, as many are inclined to think. He thought “that God is too sublime and too great to occupy Himself with the immediate management of this world; that He has, therefore, transferred the government thereof to the gods, and retained only the most important affairs for Himself; that further, man is too weak to be able to apply immediately to the Highest; that he must, therefore, address his prayers and sacrifices to the intermediate divinities, to whom the management of the world has been entrusted by the Highest.” Chwolsohn argues that this idea is as old as the world, and that “in the heathen world this view was universally shared by the cultivated.”[1084]

Father Boori, a Portuguese missionary, who was sent to convert the “poor heathen” of Cochin-China, as early as the sixteenth century, “protests in despair, in his narrative, that there is not a dress, office, or ceremony in the Church of Rome, to which the Devil has not here provided some counterpart. Even when the Father began inveighing against the idols, he was answered that these were the images of departed great men, whom they worshipped exactly on the same principle, and in the same manner, as the Catholics did the images of the apostles and martyrs.”[1085] Moreover, these idols have importance but in the eyes of the ignorant multitudes. The _philosophy_ of Buddhism ignores images and fetishes. Its strongest vitality lies in its psychological conceptions of man’s _inner_ self. The road to the supreme state of felicity, called the Ford of Nirvana, winds its invisible paths through the spiritual, not physical life of a person while on this earth. The sacred Buddhistical literature points the way by stimulating man to follow _practically_ the example of Gautama. Therefore, the Buddhistical writings lay a particular stress on the spiritual privileges of man, advising him to cultivate his powers for the production of _Meipo_ (phenomena) during life, and for the attainment of Nirvana in the hereafter.

But turning again from the historical to the mythical narratives, invented alike about Christna, Buddha, and Christ, we find the following:

Setting a model for the Christian avatar and the archangel Gabriel to follow, the luminous San-tusita (Bodhisat) appeared to Maha-maya ‘like a cloud in the moonlight, coming from the north, and in his hand holding a white lotus.’ He announced to her the birth of her son, and circumambulating the queen’s couch thrice ... passed away from the dewa-loka and was conceived _in the world of men_.[1086] The resemblance will be found still more perfect upon examining the illustrations in mediæval psalters,[1087] and the panel-paintings of the sixteenth century (in the Church of Jouy, for instance, in which the Virgin is represented kneeling, with her hands uplifted toward the Holy Ghost, and the unborn child is miraculously seen through her body), and then finding the same subject treated in the identical way in the sculptures in certain convents in Thibet. In the Pali-Buddhistic annals, and other religious records, it is stated that Maha-devi and all her attendants were constantly gratified with the sight of the infant Bodhisatva quietly developing within his mother’s bosom, and beaming already, from his place of gestation, upon humanity “the resplendent moonshine of his future benevolence.”[1088]

Ananda, the cousin and future disciple of Sakya-muni, is represented as having been born at the same time. He appears to have been the original for the old legends about John the Baptist. For example, the Pali narrative relates that Maha-maya, while pregnant with the sage, paid a visit to his mother, as Mary did to the mother of the Baptist. Immediately, as she entered the apartment, the unborn Ananda greeted the unborn Buddha-Siddhârtha, who also returned the salutation; and in like manner the babe, afterward John the Baptist, leaped in the womb of Elizabeth when Mary came in.[1089] More even than that; for Didron describes a scene of salutation, painted on shutters at Lyons, between Elizabeth and Mary, in which the two unborn infants, both pictured as outside their mothers, are also saluting each other.[1090]

If we turn now to Christna and attentively compare the prophecies respecting him, as collected in the Ramatsariarian traditions of the _Atharva_, the _Vedangas_, and the Vedantas,[1091] with passages in the _Bible_ and apocryphal Gospels, of which it is pretended that some presage the coming of Christ, we shall find very curious facts. Following are examples:

FROM THE HINDU BOOKS. FROM THE CHRISTIAN BOOKS.

1st. “He (the Redeemer) 1st. “The people of Galilee
shall come, _crowned with of the Gentiles which sat in
lights_, the pure fluid darkness saw great light”
issuing from the great soul (_Matthew_ iv. from _Isaiah_
... dispersing darkness” ix. 1, 2).
(_Atharva_).

2d. “In the _early part_ of 2d. “Behold, a virgin shall
the Kali-Yuga shall be born conceive and bear a son”
the son of the Virgin” (_Isaiah_ vii. quoted in
(_Vedanta_). _Matthew_ i. 23).

3d. “The Redeemer shall 3d. “Behold, now, Jesus of
come, and the accursed Nazareth, with the
_Rakhasas_ shall fly for brightness of his glorious
refuge to the deepest hell” divinity, put to flight all
(_Atharva_). the horrid powers of
darkness” (_Nicodemus_).

4th. “He shall come, and 4th. “And I give unto them
life will defy death ... and eternal life, and they shall
he shall revivify the blood never perish” (_John_ x. 28).
of all beings, shall
regenerate all bodies, and
purify all souls.”

5th. “He shall come, and all 5th. “Rejoice greatly, O
animated beings, all the daughter of Zion! shout, O
flowers, plants, men, women, daughter of Jerusalem!
the infants, the slaves ... behold, thy King cometh unto
shall together intone the thee ... he is just ... for
chant of joy, for he is the how great is his goodness,
Lord of all creatures ... he and how great is his beauty!
is infinite, for he is Corn shall make the young
power, for he is wisdom, for men cheerful, and new wine
he is beauty, for he is all the maids” (_Zechariah_ ix.).
and in all.”

6th. “He shall come, more 6th. “Behold the lamb of
sweet than honey and God” (_John_ i. 36). “He was
ambrosia, more pure than brought as a lamb to the
_the lamb_ without spot” slaughter” (_Isaiah_ 53).
(Ibid.).

7th. “Happy the blest womb 7th. “Blessed art thou among
that shall bear him” women, and blessed is the
(Ibid.). fruit of thy womb” (_Luke_
i.); “Blessed is the womb
that bare thee” (xi. 27).

8th. “And God shall manifest 8th. “God manifested forth
His glory, and make His His glory” (_John_, 1st Ep.).
power resound, and shall
reconcile Himself with His “God was in Christ,
creatures” (Ibid.). reconciling the world unto
himself” (_2 Corinth._ v.).

9th. “It is in the bosom of 9th. “Being an unparalleled
a woman that the ray of the instance, without any
Divine splendor will receive pollution or defilement, and
human form, and she shall a virgin shall bring forth a
bring forth, being a virgin, son, and a maid shall bring
for no impure contact shall forth the Lord” (_Gospel of
have defiled her” Mary_, iii.).
(_Vedangas_).

Let there be exaggeration or not in attributing to the _Atharva-Veda_ and the other books such a great antiquity, the fact remains that _these prophecies and their realization preceded Christianity_, and Christna preceded Christ. That is all we need care to inquire.

One is completely overwhelmed with astonishment upon reading Dr. Lundy’s _Monumental Christianity_. It would be difficult to say whether an admiration for the author’s erudition, or amazement at his serene and unparalleled sophistry is stronger. He has gathered a world of facts which prove that the religions, far more ancient than Christianity, of Christna, Buddha, and Osiris had anticipated even its minutest symbols. His materials come from no forged papyri, no interpolated Gospels, but from sculptures on the walls of ancient temples, from monuments, inscriptions, and other archaic relics, only mutilated by the hammers of iconoclasts, the cannon of fanatics, and the effects of time. He shows us Christna and Apollo as good shepherds; Christna holding the cruciform _chank_ and the _chakra_, and Christna “crucified in space,” as he calls it (_Monumental Christianity_, fig. 72). Of this figure--borrowed by Dr. Lundy from Moor’s _Hindu Pantheon_--it may be truly said that it is calculated to petrify a Christian with astonishment, for it is the crucified Christ of Romish art to the last degree of resemblance. Not a feature is lacking; and, the author says of it himself: “This representation I believe to be anterior to Christianity.... It looks like a Christian crucifix in many respects.... The drawing, the attitude, the nail-marks in hands and feet, indicate a Christian origin, while the Parthian coronet of seven points, the absence of the wood, and of the usual inscription, and the rays of glory above, would seem to point to some other than a Christian origin. Can it be the victim-man, or the priest and victim both in one, of the Hindu Mythology, who offered himself a sacrifice before the worlds were? Can it be Plato’s Second God who impressed himself on the universe in the form of the cross? Or is it his divine man who would be scourged, tormented, fettered; have his eyes burnt out; and lastly ... _would be crucified_?” (_Republic_, c. ii., p. 52, _Spens. Trans._). It is all that and much more; _Archaic Religious Philosophy_ was universal.

As it is, Dr. Lundy contradicts Moor, and maintains that this figure is that of _Wittoba_, one of the avatars of Vishnu, hence Christna, and _anterior to Christianity_, which is a fact not very easily to be put down. And yet although he finds it prophetic of Christianity, he thinks it has no relation whatever to Christ! His only reason is that “in a Christian crucifix the glory always comes from the sacred head; here it is from above and beyond.... The Pundit’s Wittoba then, given to Moor, would seem to be the crucified _Krishna_, the shepherd-god of Mathura ... a _Saviour--the Lord of the Covenant, as well as Lord of Heaven and earth--pure and impure, light and dark, good and bad, peaceful and war like, amiable and wrathful, mild and turbulent, forgiving and vindictive, God and a strange mixture of man_, but not the Christ of the Gospels.”

Now all these qualities must pertain to Jesus as well as to Christna. The very fact that Jesus was a man upon the mother’s side--even though he were a _God_, implies as much. His behavior toward the fig-tree, and his self-contradictions, in _Matthew_, where at one time he promises peace on earth, and at another the sword, etc., are proofs in this direction. Undoubtedly this cut was never intended to represent Jesus of Nazareth. It was Wittoba, as Moor was told, and as moreover the Hindu _Sacred Scriptures_ state, Brahma, the sacrificer who is “at once both sacrificer and victim;” it is “Brahma, victim in His Son Christna, who came to die on earth for our salvation, who Himself accomplishes the solemn sacrifice (of the Sarvameda).” And yet, it is the man Jesus as well as the man Christna, for both were united to their _Chrestos_.

Thus we have either to admit periodical “incarnations,” or let Christianity go as the greatest imposture and plagiarism of the ages!

As to the Jewish _Scriptures_, only such men as the Jesuit de Carrière, a convenient representative of the majority of the Catholic clergy, can still command their followers to accept only the chronology established by the Holy Ghost. It is on the authority of the latter that we learn that Jacob went, with a family of seventy persons, all told, to settle in Egypt in A.M. 2298, and that in A.M. 2513--just 215 years afterward--these seventy persons had so increased that they left Egypt 600,000 fighting men strong, “without counting women and children,” which, according to the science of statistics, should represent a total population of between two and three millions!! Natural history affords no parallel to such fecundity, except in red herrings. After this let the Christian missionaries laugh, if they can, at Hindu chronology and computations.

“Happy are those persons, but not to be envied,” exclaims Bunsen, “who have no misgivings about making Moses march out with more than two millions of people at the end of a popular conspiracy and rising, in the sunny days of the eighteenth dynasty; who make the Israelites conquer Kanaan under Joshua, during and previous to the most formidable campaigns of conquering Pharaohs in that same country. The Egyptian and Assyrian annals, combined with the historical criticism of the _Bible_, prove that the exodus could only have taken place under Menephthah, so that Joshua could not have crossed the Jordan before Easter 1280, the last campaign of Ramses III. in Palestine being in 1281.”[1092]

But we must resume the thread of our narrative with Buddha.

Neither he nor Jesus ever wrote one word of their doctrines. We have to take the teachings of the masters on the testimony of the disciples, and therefore it is but fair that we should be allowed to judge both doctrines on their intrinsic value. Where the logical preponderance lies, may be seen in the results of frequent encounters between Christian missionaries and Buddhist theologians (_pungui_). The latter usually, if not invariably, have the better of their opponents. On the other hand, the “Lama of Jehovah” rarely fails to lose his temper, to the great delight of the Lama of Buddha, and practically demonstrates his religion of patience, mercy, and charity, by abusing his disputant in the most uncanonical language. This we have witnessed repeatedly.

Despite the notable similarity of the direct teachings of Gautama and Jesus, we yet find their respective followers starting from two diametrically opposite points. The Buddhist divine, following literally the ethical doctrine of his master, remains thus true to the legacy of Gautama; while the Christian minister, distorting the precepts recorded by the four _Gospels_ beyond recognition, teaches, not that which Jesus taught, but the absurd, too often pernicious, interpretations of fallible men--Popes, Luthers, and Calvins included. The following are two instances selected from both religions, and brought into contrast. Let the reader judge for himself:

“Do not believe in anything because it is rumored and spoken of by many,” says Buddha; “do not think that is a proof of its truth.

“Do not believe merely because the written statement of some old sage is produced; do not be sure that the writing has ever been revised by the said sage, or can be relied on. Do not believe in what you have fancied, thinking that, _because an idea is extraordinary, it must have been implanted by a Deva, or some wonderful being_.

“Do not believe in guesses, that is, assuming something at hap-hazard as a starting-point, and then drawing conclusions from it--reckoning your two and your three and your four _before you have fixed your number one_.

“_Do not believe merely on the authority of your teachers and masters_, or believe and practice merely _because they believe and practice_.

“I [Buddha] tell you all, you must of yourselves know that this is evil, this is punishable, this is censured by wise men; belief in this will bring no advantage to any one, but will cause sorrow; and when you know this, then eschew it.”[1093]

It is impossible to avoid contrasting with these benevolent and human sentiments, the fulminations of the Œcumenical Council and the Pope, against the employment of reason, and the pursuit of science when it clashes with revelation. The atrocious Papal benediction of Moslem arms and cursing of the Russian and Bulgarian Christians have roused the indignation of some of the most devoted Catholic communities. The Catholic Czechs of Prague on the day of the recent semi-centennial jubilee of Pius IX., and again on the 6th of July, the day sacred to the memory of John Huss, the burned martyr, to mark their horror of the Ultramontane policy in this respect, gathered by thousands upon the neighboring Mount Zhishko, and with great ceremony and denunciations, burned the Pope’s portrait, his Syllabus, and last allocution against the Russian Czar, saying that they were good Catholics, but better Slavs. Evidently, the memory of John Huss is more sacred to them than the Vatican Popes.

“The worship of words is more pernicious than the worship of images,” remarks Robert Dale Owen. “Grammatolatry is the worst species of idolatry. We have arrived at an era in which literalism is destroying faith.... The letter killeth.”[1094]

There is not a dogma in the Church to which these words can be better applied than to the doctrine of _transubstantiation_.[1095] “Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life,” Christ is made to say. “This is a hard saying,” repeated his dismayed listeners. The answer _was that of an initiate_. “Doth this offend you? It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing. The words (_remata_, or arcane utterances) that I speak unto you, they are Spirit and they are Life.”

During the Mysteries wine represented Bacchus, and bread Ceres.[1096] The hierophant-initiator presented symbolically before the final _revelation_ wine and bread to the candidate who had to eat and drink of both in token that the spirit was to quicken matter, _i.e._, the divine wisdom was to enter into his body through what was to be revealed to him. Jesus, in his Oriental phraseology, constantly assimilated himself to the true vine (_John_ xv. 1). Furthermore, the hierophant, the discloser of the Petroma, was called “Father.” When Jesus says, “Drink ... this is my blood,” what else was meant, it was simply a metaphorical assimilation of himself to the vine, which bears the grape, whose juice is its blood--wine. It was a hint that as he had himself been initiated by the “Father,” so he desired to initiate others. His “Father” was the husbandman, himself the vine, his disciples the branches. His followers being ignorant of the terminology of the Mysteries, wondered; they even took it as an offense, which is not surprising, considering the Mosaic injunction against blood.

There is quite enough in the four gospels to show what was the secret and most fervent hope of Jesus; the hope in which he began to teach, and in which he died. In his immense and unselfish love for humanity, he considers it unjust to deprive the many of the results of the knowledge acquired by the few. This result he accordingly preaches--the unity of a spiritual God, whose temple is within each of us, and in whom we live as He lives in us--in spirit. This knowledge was in the hands of the Jewish adepts of the school of Hillel and the kabalists. But the “scribes,” or lawyers, having gradually merged into the dogmatism of the dead letter, had long since separated themselves from the Tanaïm, the true spiritual teachers; and the practical kabalists were more or less persecuted by the Synagogue. Hence, we find Jesus exclaiming: “Woe unto you lawyers! _For ye have taken away the key of knowledge_ [the Gnosis]: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering ye prevented” (_Luke_ xi. 52). The meaning here is clear. They did take the key away, and could not even profit by it themselves, for the _Masorah_ (tradition) had become a closed book to themselves as well as to others.

Neither Renan nor Strauss, nor the more modern Viscount Amberley seem to have had the remotest suspicion of the real meaning of many of the parables of Jesus, or even of the character of the great Galilean philosopher. Renan, as we have seen, presented him to us as a Gallicized Rabbi, “_le plus charmant de tous_,” still but a Rabbi; and one, moreover, who does not even come out of the school of Hillel, or any school either, albeit he terms him repeatedly “the charming doctor.”[1097] He shows him as a sentimental young enthusiast, sprung out of the plebeian classes of Galilee, who imagines the ideal kings of his parables the empurpled and jewelled beings of whom one reads in nursery tales.[1098]

Lord Amberley’s Jesus, on the other hand, is an “iconoclastic idealist,” far inferior in subtilty and logic to his critics. Renan looks over at Jesus with the one-sidedness of a Semitomaniac; Viscount Amberley looks down upon him from the social plane of an English lord. _Apropos_ of this marriage-feast parable, which he considers as embodying “a curious theory of social intercourse,” the Viscount says: “Nobody can object to charitable individuals asking poor people or invalids _without rank_ at their houses.... But we cannot admit that this kind action ought to be rendered obligatory ... it is eminently desirable that we should do exactly what Christ would forbid us doing--namely, invite our neighbors and be invited by them as circumstances may require. The fear that we may receive a recompense for the dinner-parties we may give, is surely chimerical.... Jesus, in fact, overlooks entirely the more intellectual side of society.”[1099] All of which unquestionably shows that the “Son of God” was no master of social etiquette, nor fit for “society;” but it is also a fair example of the prevalent misconception of even his most suggestive parables.

The theory of Anquetil du Perron that the _Bagaved-gita_ is an independent work, as it is absent from several manuscripts of the _Mahâ-Bhârata_, may be as much a plea for a still greater antiquity as the reverse. The work is purely metaphysical and ethical, and in a certain sense it is _anti-Vedic_; so far, at least, that it is in opposition with many of the later Brahmanical interpretations of the _Vedas_. How comes it, then, that instead of destroying the work, or, at least, of sentencing it as uncanonical--an expedient to which the Christian Church would never have failed to resort--the Brahmans show it the greatest reverence? Perfectly _unitarian_ in its aim, it clashes with the popular idol-worship. Still, the only precaution taken by the Brahmans to keep its tenets from becoming too well known, is to preserve it more secretly than any other religious book from every caste except the sacerdotal; and, to impose upon that even, in many cases, certain restrictions. The grandest mysteries of the Brahmanical religion are embraced within this magnificent poem; and even the Buddhists recognize it, explaining certain dogmatic difficulties in their own way. “Be unselfish, subdue your senses and passions, which obscure reason and lead to deceit,” says Christna to his disciple Arjuna, thus enunciating a purely Buddhistic principle. “Low men follow examples, great men give them.... The soul ought to free itself from the bonds of action, and act absolutely according to its divine origin. _There is but one God_, and all other devotas are inferior, and mere forms (powers) of Brahma or of myself. _Worship by deeds predominates over that of contemplation._”[1100]

This doctrine coincides perfectly with that of Jesus himself.[1101] Faith alone, unaccompanied by “works,” is reduced to naught in the _Bagaved-gita_. As to the _Atharva-Veda_, it was and is preserved in such secrecy by the Brahmans, that it is a matter of doubt whether the Orientalists have a _complete_ copy of it. One who has read what Abbé Dubois says may well doubt the fact. “Of the last species--the Atharva--there are very few,” he says, writing of the _Vedas_, “and many people suppose they no longer exist. But the truth is, they do exist, though they conceal themselves with more caution than the others, from the fear of being suspected to be initiated in the magic mysteries and other dreaded mysteries which the work is believed to teach.”[1102]

There were even those among the highest _epoptæ_ of the greater _Mysteries_ who knew nothing of their last and dreaded rite--the voluntary transfer of life from hierophant to candidate. In _Ghost-Land_[1103] this mystical operation of the adept’s transfer of his spiritual entity, after the death of his body, into the youth he loves with all the ardent love of a spiritual parent, is superbly described. As in the case of the reïncarnation of the lamas of Thibet, an adept of the highest order may live indefinitely. His mortal casket wears out notwithstanding certain alchemical secrets for prolonging the youthful vigor far beyond the usual limits, yet the body can rarely be kept alive beyond ten or twelve score of years. The old garment is then worn out, and the spiritual Ego forced to leave it, selects for its habitation a new body, fresh and full of healthy vital principle. In case the reader should feel inclined to ridicule this assertion of the possible prolongation of human life, we may as well refer him to the statistics of several countries. The author of an able article in the _Westminster Review_, for October, 1850, is responsible for the statement that in England, they have the authentic instances of one Thomas Jenkins dying at the age of 169, and “Old Parr” at 152; and that in Russia some of the peasants are “known to have reached 242 years.”[1104] There are also cases of centenarianism reported among the Peruvian Indians. We are aware that many able writers have recently discredited these claims to an extreme longevity, but we nevertheless affirm our belief in their truth.

True or false there are “superstitions” among the Eastern people such as have never been dreamed even by an Edgar Poe or a Hoffmann. And these beliefs run in the very blood of the nations with which they originated. Carefully stripped of exaggeration they will be found to embody an universal belief in those restless, wandering, astral souls, which are called ghouls and vampires. An Armenian Bishop of the fifth century, named Yeznik, gives a number of such narratives in a manuscript work (Book i., §§ 20, 30), preserved some thirty years ago in the library of the Monastery of Etchmeadzine.[1105] Among others, there is a tradition dating from the days of heathendom, that whenever a hero whose life is needed yet on earth falls on the battle-field, the Aralez, the popular gods of ancient Armenia, empowered to bring back to life those slaughtered in battle, lick the bleeding wounds of the victim, and breathe on them until they have imparted a new and vigorous life. After that the warrior rises, washes off all traces of his wounds, and resumes his place in the fray. But his immortal spirit has fled; and for the remainder of his days he lives--a deserted temple.

Once that an adept was initiated into the last and most solemn mystery of the life-transfer, the awful _seventh_ rite of the great sacerdotal operation, which is the highest theurgy, he belonged no more to this world. His soul was free thereafter, and the _seven_ mortal sins lying in wait to devour his heart, as the soul, liberated by death, would be crossing the _seven_ halls and _seven_ staircases, could hurt him no more alive or dead; he has passed the “twice seven trials,” the _twelve_ labors of the final hour.[1106]

The High Hierophant alone knew how to perform this solemn operation by infusing his own vital life and astral soul into the adept, chosen by him for his successor, who thus became endowed with a double life.[1107]

“Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man _be born again_, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (_John_ iii. 3). Jesus tells Nicodemus, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the spirit is spirit.”

This allusion, so unintelligible in itself, is explained in the _Satapa-Brâhmana_. It teaches that a man striving after spiritual perfection must have _three_ births: 1st. Physical from his mortal parents; 2d. _Spiritual_, through religious sacrifice (initiation); 3d. His final birth into the world of spirit--at death. Though it may seem strange that we should have to go to the old land of the Punjâb and the banks of the sacred Ganges, for an interpreter of words spoken in Jerusalem and expounded on the banks of the Jordan, the fact is evident. This second birth, or regeneration of spirit, after the natural birth of that which is born of the flesh, might have astonished a Jewish ruler. Nevertheless, it had been taught 3,000 years before the appearance of the great Galilean prophet, not only in old India but to all the _epoptæ_ of the Pagan initiation, who were instructed in the great mysteries of LIFE and DEATH. This secret of secrets, that _soul_ is not knit to flesh, was practically demonstrated in the instance of the Yogis, the followers of Kapila. Having emancipated their souls from the fetters of _Prakriti_, or _Mahat_ (the physical perception of the senses and mind--in one sense, creation), they so developed their soul-power and _will-force_, as to have actually enabled themselves, while on earth, to communicate with the supernal worlds, and perform what is bunglingly termed “miracles.”[1108] Men whose astral spirits have attained on earth the _nehreyasa_, or the _mukti_, are half-gods; disembodied spirits, they reach Moksha or _Nirvana_, and this is their _second_ spiritual birth.

Buddha teaches the doctrine of a new birth as plainly as Jesus does. Desiring to break with the ancient Mysteries, to which it was impossible to admit the ignorant masses, the Hindu reformer, though generally silent upon more than one secret dogma, clearly states his thought in several passages. Thus, he says: “_Some people are born again_; evil-doers go to Hell; righteous people go to Heaven; those who are free from all worldly desires enter Nirvana” (_Precepts of the Dhammapada_, v., 126). Elsewhere Buddha states that “it is better to believe in a future life, in which happiness or misery can be felt; for if the heart believes therein, it will abandon sin and act virtuously; and even if there is no resurrection, such a life will bring a good name and the regard of men. _But those who believe in extinction at death will not fail to commit any sin_ that they may choose, because of their disbelief in a future.”[1109]

The _Epistle to the Hebrews_ treats of the sacrifice of blood. “Where a testament is,” says the writer, “there must be of necessity _the death_ of the testator.... Without the shedding _of blood_ is no remission.” Then again: “Christ glorified not himself to _be made High Priest_; but He that said unto him: Thou art my son; TO-DAY HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE” (_Heb._ v. 5). This is a very clear inference, that, 1, Jesus was considered only in the light of a high priest, like Melchisedek--another _avatar_, or incarnation of Christ, according to the Fathers; and, 2, that the writer thought that Jesus had become a “Son of God” only at the moment of his initiation by water; hence, that he was not born a god, neither was he begotten physically by Him. Every initiate of the “last hour” became, by the very fact of his initiation, a son of God. When Maxime, the Ephesian, initiated the Emperor Julian into the Mithraïc Mysteries, he pronounced as the usual formula of the rite, the following: “By this blood, I wash thee from thy sins. The Word of the Highest has entered unto thee, and His Spirit henceforth will rest upon the NEWLY-BORN, _the now_-begotten of the Highest God.... Thou art the son of Mithra.” “Thou art the ‘_Son of God_,’” repeated the disciples after Christ’s baptism. When Paul shook off the viper into the fire without further injury to himself, the people of Melita said “that he was _a god_” (_Acts_ xxviii.). “He is the son of God, the Beautiful!” was the term used by the disciples of Simon Magus, for they thought they recognized the “great power of God” in him.

A man can have no god that is not bounded by his own human conceptions. The wider the sweep of his spiritual vision, the mightier will be his deity. But where can we find a better demonstration of Him than in man himself; in the spiritual and divine powers lying dormant in every human being? “The very capacity to imagine the possibility of thaumaturgical powers, is itself evidence that they exist,” says the author of _Prophecy_. “The critic, as well as the skeptic, is generally inferior to the person or subject that he is reviewing, and, therefore, is hardly a competent witness. _If there are counterfeits, somewhere there must have been a genuine_ original.”[1110]

Blood begets phantoms, and its emanations furnish certain spirits with the materials required to fashion their temporary appearances. “Blood,” says Levi, “is the first incarnation of the universal fluid; it is the materialized _vital light_. Its birth is the most marvellous of all nature’s marvels; it lives only by perpetually transforming itself, for it is the universal Proteus. The blood issues from principles where there was none of it before, and it becomes flesh, bones, hair, nails ... tears, and perspiration. It can be allied neither to corruption nor death; when life is gone, it begins decomposing; if you know how to reänimate it, to infuse into it life by a new magnetization of its globules, life will return to it again. The universal substance, with its double motion, is the great arcanum of being; blood is the great arcanum of life.”

“Blood,” says the Hindu Ramatsariar, “contains all the mysterious secrets of existence, no living being can exist without. It is profaning the great work of the Creator to eat blood.”

In his turn Moses, following the universal and traditional law, forbids eating blood.

Paracelsus writes that with the fumes of blood one is enabled to call forth any spirit we desire to see; for with its emanations it will build itself an appearance, a _visible_ body--only this is sorcery. The hierophants of Baal made deep incisions all over their bodies and produced apparitions, objective and tangible, with their own blood. The followers of a certain sect in Persia, many of whom may be found around the Russian settlements in Temerchan-Shoura, and Derbent, have their religious mysteries in which they form a large ring, and whirl round in a frantic dance. Their temples are ruined, and they worship in large temporary buildings, securely enclosed, and with the earthen floor deeply strewn with sand. They are all dressed in long white robes, and their heads are bare and closely shaved. Armed with knives, they soon reach a point of furious exaltation, and wound themselves and others until their garments and the sand on the floor are soaked with blood. Before the end of the “Mystery” _every man has a companion_, who whirls round with him. Sometimes the spectral dancers have _hair on their heads_, which makes them quite distinct from their unconscious creators. As we have solemnly promised never to divulge the principal details of this terrible ceremony (which we were allowed to witness but once), we must leave the subject.[1111]

In the days of antiquity the sorceresses of Thessaly added sometimes to the blood of a black lamb that of an infant, and by this means evoked the shadows. The priests were taught the art of calling up the spirits of the dead, as well as those of the elements, but their mode was certainly not that of Thessalian sorceresses.

Among the Yakuts of Siberia there is a tribe dwelling on the very confines of the Transbaïkal regions near the river Vitema (eastern Siberia) which practices sorcery as known in the days of the Thessalian witches. Their religious beliefs are curious as a mixture of philosophy and superstition. They have a chief or supreme god Aij-Taïon, who did not create, they say, but only _presides_ over the creation of all the worlds. He lives on the _ninth_ heaven, and it is but from the _seventh_ that the other minor gods--his servants--can manifest themselves to their creatures. This ninth heaven, according to the revelation of the minor deities (spirits, we suppose), has three suns and three moons, and the ground of this abode is formed of four lakes (the four cardinal points) of “soft air” (ether), instead of water. While they offer no sacrifices to the Supreme Deity, for he needs none, they do try to propitiate both the good and bad deities, which they respectively term the “white” and the “black” gods. They do it, because neither of the two classes are good or bad through personal merit or demerit. As they are all subject to the Supreme Aij-Taïon, and each has to carry on the duty assigned to him from eternity, they are not responsible for either the good or evil they produce in this world. The reason given by the Yakuts for such sacrifices is very curious. Sacrifices, they say, help each class of gods to perform their mission the better, and so please the Supreme; and every mortal that helps either of them in performing his duty must, therefore, please the Supreme as well, for he will have helped justice to take place. As the “black” gods are appointed to bring diseases, evils, and all kinds of calamities to mankind, each of which is a punishment for some transgression, the Yakuts offer to them “bloody” sacrifices of animals; while to the “white” they make pure offerings, consisting generally of an animal consecrated to some special god and taken care of with great ceremony, as having become sacred. According to their ideas the souls of the dead become “shadows,” and are doomed to wander on earth, till a certain change takes place either for the better or worse, which the Yakuts do not pretend to explain. The _light_ shadows, _i.e._, those of good people, become the guardians and protectors of those they loved on earth; the “dark” shadows (the wicked) always seek, on the contrary, to hurt those they knew, by inciting them to crimes, wicked acts, and otherwise injuring mortals. Besides these, like the ancient Chaldees, they reckon seven divine _Sheitans_ (dæmons) or minor gods. It is during the sacrifices of blood, which take place at night, that the Yakuts call forth the wicked or _dark_ shadows, to inquire of them what they can do to arrest their mischief; hence, _blood is necessary_, for without its fumes the ghosts could not make themselves clearly visible, and would become, according to their ideas, but the more dangerous, for they would suck it from living persons by their perspiration.[1112] As to the good, _light_ shadows, they need not be called out; besides that, such an act disturbs them; they can make their presence felt, when needed, without any preparation and ceremonies.

The blood-evocation is also practiced, although with a different purpose, in several parts of Bulgaria and Moldavia, especially in districts in the vicinity of Mussulmans. The fearful oppressions and slavery to which these unfortunate Christians have been subjected for centuries has rendered them a thousand-fold more impressible, and at the same time more superstitious, than those who live in civilized countries. On every seventh of May the inhabitants of every Moldavo-Valachian and Bulgarian city or village, have what they term the “feast of the dead.” After sunset, immense crowds of women and men, each with a lighted wax taper in hand, resort to the burial places, and pray on the tombs of their departed friends. This ancient and solemn ceremony, called _Trizna_, is everywhere a reminiscence of primitive Christian rites, but far more solemn yet, while in Mussulman slavery. Every tomb is furnished with a kind of cupboard, about half a yard high, built of four stones, and with hinged double-doors. These closets contain what is termed the household of the defunct: namely, a few wax tapers, some oil and an earthen lamp, which is lighted on that day, and burns for twenty-four hours. Wealthy people have silver lamps richly chiselled, and bejewelled images, which are secure from thieves, for in the burial ground the closets are even left open. Such is the dread of the population (Mussulman and Christian) of the revenge of the dead that a thief bold enough to commit any murder, would never dare touch the property of a dead person. The Bulgarians have a belief that every Saturday, and especially the eve of Easter Sunday, and until Trinity day (about seven weeks) the souls of the dead descend on earth, some to beg forgiveness from those living whom they had wronged; others to protect and commune with their loved ones. Faithfully following the traditional rites of their forefathers, the natives on each Saturday of these seven weeks keep either lamps or tapers lighted. In addition to that, on the _seventh_ of May they drench the tombs with grape wine, and burn incense around them from sunset to sunrise. With the inhabitants of towns, the ceremony is limited to these simple observances. With some of the rustics though, the rite assumes the proportions of a theurgic evocation. On the eve of Ascension Day, Bulgarian women light a quantity of tapers and lamps; the pots are placed upon tripods, and incense perfumes the atmosphere for miles around; while thick white clouds of smoke envelope each tomb, as though a veil had separated it from the others. During the evening, and until a little before midnight, in memory of the deceased, acquaintances and a certain number of mendicants are fed and treated with wine and _raki_ (grape-whiskey), and money is distributed among the poor according to the means of the surviving relatives. When the feast is ended, the guests approaching the tomb and addressing the defunct by name, thank him or her for the bounties received. When all but the nearest relatives are gone, a woman, usually the most aged, remains alone with the dead, and--some say--resorts to the ceremony of invocation.

After fervent prayers, repeated face downward on the grave-mound, more or less drops of blood are drawn from near the left bosom, and allowed to trickle upon the tomb. This gives strength to the invisible spirit which hovers around, to assume for a few instants a visible form, and whisper his instructions to the Christian theurgist--if he has any to offer, or simply to “bless the mourner” and then disappear again till the following year. So firmly rooted is this belief that we have heard, in a case of family difficulty, a Moldavian woman appeal to her sister to put off every decision till Ascension-night, when their dead father _would be able to tell them of his will and pleasure in person_; to which the sister consented as simply as though their parent were in the next room.

That there are fearful secrets in nature may well be believed when, as we have seen in the case of the Russian _Znachar_, the sorcerer _cannot_ die until he has passed the word to another, and the hierophants of White Magic rarely do. It seems as if the dread power of the “Word” could only be entrusted to one man of a certain district or body of people at a time. When the Brahmâtma was about to lay aside the burden of physical existence, he imparted his secret to his successor, either orally, or by a writing placed in a securely-fastened casket which went into the latter’s hands alone. Moses “lays his hands” upon his neophyte, Joshua, in the solitudes of Nebo and passes away forever. Aaron initiates Eleazar on Mount Hor, and dies. Siddhârtha-Buddha promises his mendicants before his death to live in him who shall deserve it, embraces his favorite disciple, whispers in his ear, and dies; and as John’s head lies upon the bosom of Jesus, he is told that he shall “tarry” until he shall come. Like signal-fires of the olden times, which, lighted and extinguished by turns upon one hill-top after another, conveyed intelligence along a whole stretch of country, so we see a long line of “wise” men from the beginning of history down to our own times communicating the word of wisdom to their direct successors. Passing from seer to seer, the “Word” flashes out like lightning, and while carrying off the initiator from human sight forever, brings the new initiate into view. Meanwhile, whole nations murder each other in the name of another “Word,” an empty substitute accepted literally by each, and misinterpreted by all!