which they contain. We must never lose sight of the fact that the Oriental religion which is commonly and most improperly known as Buddhism falls into three great periods, which correspond pretty closely with the three periods into which Christianity might be divided; namely, Vedism, or the primitive religion, which the Brahmans commented upon, complicating it and corrupting it to their own advantage, until it became the Brahmanism which Siddhartha Gautama Buddha, or Sakyamuni, revolted against and reformed in the fifth century

B. C.

The Indianists, thanks above all to the historical landmarks afforded them by the caste system, and the changes of language and of meter, have learned to distinguish easily enough these three currents in the suspect texts, and beneath the luxuriance and complications of the interpolations the broad outlines and essential truths which are all that matter to us are always visible.

CHAPTER II

INDIA

I

L

ET us first of all consider the conception of Deity which was formed by these ancestors, simultaneously with the Egyptians, or, as is much more probable, before them. Their traditions may lay claim to at least five or six thousand years, and they themselves received these traditions from peoples who to-day have disappeared, their last trace in the memory of man dating back, according to Timæus and the "Critias" of Plato, one hundred and twenty centuries.

I must apologize to the reader for the inextricable nomenclature of Oriental mythology and the multiplicity of those anthropomorphic divinities whom the priests of India, like those of Egypt and of Persia, and indeed of all times and countries, were compelled to create in order to satisfy the demands of popular idolatry. I shall also spare him the ostentation of a facile scholarship, lavish of unpronounceable names, in order at once to proceed to and consider only the essential conception of the First Cause, as we find it in the remotest

sources, which, if not withheld from the common people, ceased gradually to be understood by them, until it became the Great Secret of the elect among the priests and initi

ates.

Let us at once give ear to the "Rig-Veda," the most authentic echo of the most immemorial traditions; let us note how it approaches the formidable problem:

"There was neither Being nor non-Being. There was neither atmosphere nor heavens above the atmosphere. What moved and whither? And in whose care? Were there waters, and the bottomless deep?

"There was then neither death nor immortality. The day was not divided from the night. Only the One breathed, in Himself, without extraneous breath, and apart from Him there was nothing.

"Then for the first time desire awoke within Him; this was the first seed of the Spirit. The sages, full of understanding, striving within their hearts, discovered in non-Being the link with Being.

"Who knoweth and who can tell where creation was born, whence it came, and whether the gods were not born afterwards? Who knoweth whence it hath come?

"Whence this creation hath come, whether it be created or uncreated, He whose eye

watches over it from the highest heaven, He alone knoweth and yet doth He know?" 1

Is it possible to find, in our human annals, words more majestic, more full of solemn anguish, more august in tone, more devout, more terrible? Where could we find at the very foundation of life, a completer and more irreducible confession of ignorance? Where, from the depths of our agnosticism, which thousands of years have augmented, can we point to a wider horizon? At the very outset it surpasses all that has been said, and goes farther than we shall ever dare to go, lest we fall into despair, for it does not fear to ask itself whether the Supreme Being knows what He has done knows whether He is or is not the Creator, and questions whether He has become conscious of Himself.

2

Now let us hear the "Sama-Veda," confirming and elucidating this magnificent confession of ignorance:

"If thou sayest, 'I have perfect knowledge of the Supreme Being,' thou deceivest thyself, for who shall number His attributes? If thou sayest, 'I think I know Him; I do not think I know Him perfectly, nor that I do not know Him at all; but I know Him in part; for he who 1 "Rig-Veda"; X, 129.

knows all the manifestations of the gods who proceed from Him knows the Supreme Being'; if thou sayest this, thou deceivest thyself, for not to be wholly ignorant of Him is not to know Him.

"He, on the contrary, who believes that he does not know Him, is he that does know Him; and he who believes that he knows Him is he that does not know Him. Those who know Him best regard Him as incomprehensible and those who know nothing at all of Him believe that they know Him perfectly."

To this fundamental agnosticism the "Yadjur Veda" brings its absolute pantheism:

"The sage fixes his eyes upon this mysterious Being in whom the universe perpetually exists, for it has no other foundation. In Him

this world is contained; it is from Him that this world has issued. He is entwined and enwoven in all created things, under all the varied forms of life.

"This sole Being, to whom nothing can attain, is swifter than thought; and the gods themselves cannot comprehend this Supreme Mover who has preceded them all. He is remote from all things and close at hand. He fills the entire universe, yet infinitely surpasses it.

"When man has learned to behold all creatures in this Supreme Spirit, and his Supreme