BY TH E S AME AU TH O R .

TH E E DE PT I N F H E H N A e f R M O O T BRA M A . N o v l o

n an L e . P a es 6 La a e Ve at ch . I di if g 9 . id p p r . g . p

b nd n t to Pa e b nd n 2 i i g , gil p , 75 p r i i g , 5

en s c t .

H L T E O PEN COURT P U B I S H I N G CO . PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENTINDIA

RICHARD GARBE

PROFESSOR I N TH E UNI VERSITY O F TU EB I N GEN

C H I C A G O s THE OPEN COURT PUBLISHING COBI PAN Y

' LON DON : x o uuso u s C F ST . E . ( 7 J OURT" LEET , C «1 897 C O PY R I G H T B Y

P I I TH E O E N C O U RT P U BL S H N G C o .

1 8 97 . AB F T LE O CONTENTS .

Brief O utline o f a Hi sto ry of Indian Philo so phy

Th e Co nne xion B etween Greek and I ndian Philosophy 3 2

n u m Wh I t Au rs es s r arr ors " Mon s . o e e s o P o Hi d i W r th , ri t W i 57

I ndex 87

BRIEF OU TLI NE OF A H ISTORY O F

INDIAN PH ILOSOPHY .

D I STINCTIVE leaning to metaphysical specu lation is noticeable among the Indians from the earliest times . Old hymns of the Rigveda , which in other re s pects are still deeply rooted in the soil of polytheism , show already the inclination to compre hend multifarious phenomena as a unity, and may

' therefore be regarded as th e firs t steps in the path which led the old Indian people to pantheism . Mo n o th e i s tic ideas also occur in the later Vedic hymns , but are not developed with s ufficient logic to displace the multiform world of gods from the consciousness of the people . h The properly philosophical hymns , of whic there are few in the Rigveda , and not many more in the Athar vaved a t , belong to the lates products of the Vedic poe

‘ try . They concern themselves with the problem of

a d the origin of the world , n with the eternal prin c i le s p that create and maintains the world , in obscure

- phraseology, and in unclear, self contradictory trains 2 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCI ENT INDIA .

of thought , as might be expected of the early begin

ni n s . g of speculation The Yajurvedas , also , contain remarkable and highly fantastic cosmogonic legends , in which the world - creator produces things by the all powerful sacrifice . I t is worthy of notice that the ideas of the portions of the Veda are intimately te lated with those of the earlier Upanishads , in fact in 1 many respects are identical ; their connexion is also further evinced by the fact that both in these Upa n ish ad s and in the cosmogonic hymns and legends of the Veda the subjects discussed make their appear

- . S ance absolutely without order till , the pre Bud dhi s tic t Upanishads , and , in part, also their precu

’ B rzi hm an as sors , the , which deal essentially with ritu alis ti c Aran ak as questions , and the more speculative y , are of the greatest importance for our studies ; for they represent a time (beginning we know not when , and ending in the sixth century about) in which the ideas were developed that became determ i native of the 2 whole subsequent direction of Indian thought : first and above all , the doctrine of the transmigration of souls, and the theory intimately connected therewith

a n e of the subsequent effects of actions (lawm ) . The b

' ' l C om are o n s o n u an e man Piz z los o l uscli e H m n”: a us de r p thi p i t L ci Sch r , p y ' ’ ' Rzg a n d A th a r 'va Ved a - Sa nfi z td verg li cken m i t d en t loso/lz em en d er d lter en

U a n i s h a ds as s u - o n o n 188 p , Str b rg L d , 7.

2 o m a e o u Th e P/z i loso Ix f /"e fi a mlrlz a d s a n d A n cien t I n C p r A . E . G gh , / y ef p ’ Meta /z s cs d i a n z o n o n 1 882 . Th e s n u a un a o a e u m e n o f th e p y , L d , i g l r f v r bl j dg t wh o l e phil o s o phy o f th e Up an i s h a d s which G o ugh pro no un ce s i n th e Op en i n o f h i s o e s e a ua e o o m a e a s b e e a n e th e m o g th rwi v l bl b k , y p rh p xpl i d by rbid a e s o n to a l l n s n a n a s o n o s o e e uent ro v r i thi g I di , which b rbi g w rk v ry fr q ly p u es i n u o e an s e n an e f m i n n a d c E r p dw lli g y l ngth o ti e I di . O F OUTLINE A HI STORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY. 3 lief that every individual un ceasingly moves forward after death towards new existences in which it will enjoy the fruits of formerly won merits , and will suf fer the consequences of formerly committed wrongs whether in the bodies of men , animals , or plants , or in heavens and hells— has dominated the Indian peo ple from that early period down to the present day . The idea was never made the subject of philosophical demonstration , but was regarded as something self evident , which , with the exception of the Charvakas , or Materialists , no philosophical school or religious sect of India ever doubted . The origin of the Indian belief in metempsychosis is unfortunately still shrouded in obscurity . In the old Vedic time a joyful view of life prevailed in India in which we discover no germs whatever of the con c eption which subsequently dominated and oppressed the thought of the whole nation as yet the nation did not feel life as a burden but as the supreme good , and its eternal continuance after death was longed for as

l c e the reward of a pious life . In the p a of this inno cent joy of life suddenly enters , without noticeable evidences of transition , the conviction that the exist ence of the individual is a j ourney full of torments from death to death . I t is natural enough , therefore , to suspect foreign influence in this sudden revolution of thought .

’ I do not believe that Voltaire s rationalistic ex pl an ation of the origin of the Indian doctrine of the trans O N . 4. THE PHIL SOPHY OF ANCIENT I DIA migration of souls now counts any adherents in pro fes sio n al circles but it is rem arkable enough to merit a passing notice . According to the theory of the inge n io us Frenchman the knowledge that the use of meat was upon the whole injurious to health in the climate of India was the ground of the prohibition to kill ani a m ls . This originally purely hygienic precept was clothed in religious trappings , and the people thus gradually grew accustomed to reverence and to wor f ship animals . The consequence o the further exten sion of this animal cult then was , that the whole ani mal kingdom was felt as a sort of appurtenance to the human species and was gradually assimilated to man in the imagination of the people ; from there it was simply a step to accept the continuance of human life in the bodies of animals . This whole hypothesis has long since been rejected , and also several subsequent attempts at explanation must be regarded as unsuc

c es si n l .

' A suggestion of Gough ( Til e P /I z losop/zy of Me Upa ‘ ’ — mslz a ar . 2 2 , pp 4 5) alone demands more serious con sideration . It is well known that the belief that the human soul passes after death into the trunks of trees and the bodies of an im als is extremely widespread

- l among half savage tribes . On the basis of this fact ,

“ 1 Th e S o n th al s are s a id to be li ev e th e so ul s o f th e go o d to en t e r in to h e o a an s fruitb e a ri n g tree s . T P wh tt b eli ev ed th e s oul s o f th eir chi efs to p as s

- n o a u a o o s e e e o e s a e . Th e as a a ns f i t p rtic l r w d bird , which th y th r f r p r d Tl c l o M exico th o ught th a t th e s o ul s o f th e ir n o bl es m igra te d a fte r d ea th in t o b ea uti ful s n n - s and th e s s o f e e a n s n o e e es e a se s an d o t e i gi g bird , pirit pl b i i t b tl , w l , h r ns an e a u e s h us i ign ific t cr t r . T e a o f S o uth A frica are s aid to be li eve th e E OUTLI N OF A HISTORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY . 5

Gough assumes that the Aryans , on their amalgama tion with the original indigenous inhabitants of India , received from these the idea of the continuance of life in animals and trees . Although this assumption can 1 hardly ever be made the subject of proof , the idea, in my Opinion , is very probable , because it explains what no other combinations do sufficiently explain . But we must be on our guard lest we overrate the influence of the crude conceptions of the aborigines . With all tribes low in the scale of civilisation the idea implied in such beliefs is not that of a transmigration of souls in the Indian sense , but simply the notion of a contin uanc e of human existence in animals and trees ; with

refl ex ion this , on the subject reaches its goal ; further consequences are not drawn from the idea . Under all circumstances , therefore , the Aryan Indians can have received only the first impetus to the development O f the theory of transmigration from the aboriginal inh ab — itan ts ; the elaboration O f the idea they borrowed the

O f eonsta nt cha n i n assumption a , g g continuance of life , and its connexion with the doctrine of the power of deeds , having in view the satisfaction of the moral con — s c io usne ss must always be regarded as their own p e

ss a e o f th e ea n o s na es o r n o as s a nd z a s . Th e a a s f p a g d d i t k , i t w p li rd D y k o o neo m a ne ems e es to fin d th e sou s o f th e e a a m and o o e B r i gi th lv l d d , d p bl dlik , ” i n th un s o f ee s . o u o o n o P r i m i ti ve Cultur e Vo l e . tr k tr G gh , f ll wi g Tyl r , , . II ,

6 et s e . p . q 1 On e n o tewo rthy p as s a ge b e a ri n g o n thi s p o in t m ay b e foun d i n B audha ' a n a s Dh arm a as tra 8 . 1 . to e e i s es e a um n s o f y q , IL , 4 9 , , wh r it pr crib d th t d pli g fl o u s o u b e o n to th e s us a s e a re o ff e e i n th e usua ah r h ld thr w bird , j t th y r d l o e stra l s a crific es ; fo r it i s sa id th a t o ur ance sto r s h over a b out i n th e sh ap e " o f bird s . 6 TH E r PHILOSOPHY o ANCIENT INDIA .

t culia achievement . The dominating idea of this doc

’ ’ trine is the firm conviction that unmerz tea misfortune can befall no one . On the ground of thi s conviction an explanation was sought for the fact of daily Ob ser

well ; vation that the bad fare , and the good fare ill

- that animals , and often even the new born child , who have had no opportunity to incur guilt, must suffer the greatest agonies ; an d no oth er explanation was found than the assumption that in this life are expiated the good and bad deeds of a former existence . But what held true of that existence must also have held true of the one which preceded it ; again the reason O f for merly experienced happiness and misery could only be found in a preceding life . And thus there was no limit whatever to the existence of the individual in the past .

b e The Samsara , the cycle of life , has , therefore , no “ ac ginning ; for the work (that is , the conduct or ” tions) of beings is beginningless . But what has no beginning has by a universally admitted law also no S a end . The ams ra , therefore , never ceases , no more than it never began . When the individual receives the rewards for his good and his bad deeds , a residuum of merit and guilt is always left which is not consumed and which demands its recompense or its punishment , and , therefore , still acts as the germ of a new exist ence . U nexpiated or unrewarded no deed remains ; for as among a thousand cows a calf finds its mother, ” s so the previou ly done deed follows after the doer, says the Mahabharata, giving in words the view which OUTLINE OF A HISTORY OF I NDIAN PHILOSOPHY . 7

had long since become in India the universal belief .

Now, as the cause of all action is desire , desire was declared to be the motive power of the eternal contin

ua n ce . of life Again , as desire was conceived by the

Indian mind to have its root in a sort of ignorance , in a mistaking of the true nature and value of things ,

s S in ignorance , it was thought , the last cau e of amsara

a w s hidden . Equally as old is the conviction that the law which fetters living beings to the existence of the w orld ca n be broken . There is salvation from the

Samsara ; and the means thereto is the saving knowl

O f edge , which is found by every philosophical school

India in some special form of cognition . The dogma s here developed are summarised by — D eus s e n S s l em dc: Vedanta . 8 1 8 2 , y , pp 3 3 , in the fol

: lowing appropriate words The idea is this , that life ,

in quality as well as in quantity, is the precisely meted , absolutely appropriate expiation of the deeds of the

previous existence . This expiation is accomplished

' ’ b/zokl f z tva m ka r tr z twm by and (enjoying and acting) , where the latter again is converted into works which

must be expiated afresh in a subsequent existence , so that the clock - work O f atonement in running down al ways winds itself up again ; and this unto all eternity — unless the universal knowledge appears which does not rest on merit but breaks into life without connexion with it , to dissolve it in its innermost ele ments , to burn up the seeds of works , and thus to 8 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCI ENT I NDIA . make impossible for all future time a continuance of ” the transmigration . What Deus sen here expounds as a doctrine of the Vedanta system is a body of ideas which belongs alike to all systems of Brahman philosophy an d to Bud dhi sm and Jin i sm . But the power which inheres in the actions of beings extends , according to the Indian idea , still farther than was stated in the preceding exposition . This subsequent effectiveness of guilt and

’ ’ “ ” a an sb a of merit , usually called z , the invisible , also “ ” kar ma ” often simply , deed , work , not only deter mines the measure O i happiness and suffering which

s falls to the lot of each individual , but also determine the origin and evolution of all things in the universe . At bottom this last thought is only a necessary con sequence O f the theory that every being is the architect of its own fate and fortunes into the minutest details ;

s for whatever comes to pa s in the world , some crea ture is inevitably affected by it and must , therefore, by the law of atonement have brought about the event by his previous acts . The operations of nature , there f fore , are the ef ects of the good and bad actions of living beings . When trees bear fruits , or the grain of the fields ripens , the power which is the cause of this , according to the Indian , is human merit .

Even in the systems which accept a God , the sole offi ce of the Deity is to guide the world and the fates of creatures in strict agreement with the law of retri

buti o n . , which even he cannot break For the many F OUTLINE O A HISTORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY . 9

powers to which the rest of the world , orthodox and

unorthodox , ascribe a determinative influence on the lot of individuals and nations as also on the control of — the forces of nature , divine grace and punishment,

— in the order of the world , foresight, fate , accident India there is no place by the side of the power of the

work or deed which rules all with iron necessity . On

these assumptions all I ndian philosophy, with the ex

c e tio n . p of materialism , is founded The most important theme of the early U p ani

hilo so hi shads , which stand at the head of the real p p

l O i cal iterature India , is the question of the E ternal

One . It is true , those works abound in reflexions on theological , ritualistic, and other matters , but all these reflexions are utterly eclipsed by the doctrine of

fi tma n B r a izma n. the Eternal One , the or The word A “ ” “ tman originally meant breathing , then the vital ” ” th e principle , Self ; but soon it was used to signify the Intransient O N E which is without any attribute or

— - S quality, the All Soul, the oul of the world , the

- - in tran sl ate . Thing itself, or whatever you like to it “ ” Brahman , on the other hand , originally the prayer, became a term for the power which is inherent in

every prayer and holy action , and at last for the eter nal , boundless power which is the basis of everything existing . Having attained this stage of development , the word Brahman became completely synonymous A with tman . The objective Brahman and the subjee A tive tm an amalgamated into one , the highest meta 1 0 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA . physical idea ; and this amalgamation comprises the doctrine of the unity of the subject and the object . In numerous parables the Upanishads try to describe the nature of Brahman , but all their reflexions culminate in one point : the inmost S elf of the individual being

- r l a t twam asi is one with that all pervading powe ( , “ thou art This spiritual moni s m challenged the contradiction S l of Kapila , the founder of the amkhya philosophy, who , in a rationalistic way, saw only the diversity, but not the unity of the universe . The S amkhya doc — trine the O ldest real system of Indian philosophy is entirely dualistic . Two things are admitted , both eternal and everlasting , but in their innermost charac f ter totally dif erent namely, matter and soul , or bet ter a boundless plurality of individual s ouls . The ex is ten ce of the creator and ruler of the universe is denied . The world develops according to certain laws out of primitive matter, which first produces those subtile sub s tances of which the internal organs of all creatures are formed , and after that brings forth the gross matter . At the end of a period of the universe the products dissolve by retrogradation into primitive matter ; and this continual cycle of evolution , exist

s ence , and di solution has neither beginning nor end . The psychology of this interesting system is of special importance . All the functions which ordinarily we de

l An exh a us tive exp o s iti on o f th e d o ctri nes o f thi s sy ste m h a s b een given

th e au o i n hi s o o n th e a a o so e s 18 . by th r w rk S mkhy Phil phy, L ip ic , 94 . H

H a e ss el .

1 2 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA . cause of suffering is the desire to live and to enjoy the delights of the world , and in the last instance the “ ignorance from which this desire proceeds ; the means of the abolition of this ignorance , and there

O f re with of suffering , is the annihilation that desire , nunc i atio n of the world , and a most boundless exercise of practical love towards all cre atures . In the sub

it in ism sequent time , is true , Buddhism and j so developed that some of their teachings were stoutly 1 contested in the Samkhya writings . These two pes s imistic religions are so extraordinarily alike that the

J ains , that is , the adherents of J ina, were for a long time regarded as a Buddhi stic sect , until it was dis covered that the founders o i the two religions were contemporaries , who in turn are simply to be regarded as the most eminent of the numerous teachers who in the sixth century before Christ in North Central India opposed the ceremonial doctrines and the caste - sys tem of the Brahmans . The true significance of these

s religions lie in their high development of ethics , which in th e scholastic Indian philosophy is almost

l O ne ques ti on h ere was of th e d o ctrine o f th e [a ims th a t th e soul h as th e — s am e e xten s i o n as th e bo dy a th o ught which i s r e fut e d by th e a rgumen t th a t e e n o un e i s e s a e an d a s o u o o o all th e v rythi g b d d p ri h bl , th t thi w ld h ld g d with m o e o e o f th e s o u a s s i n i ts a ns m a on t ou ff e en o es r f rc l , thi tr igr ti hr gh di r t b di mus b e as s m a e to th e o es a e e e a i s m us e an and t i il t d b di th t r c iv it , th t , t xp d

o n a a ea a e a e on a n m a e u o f a s . B ut th e m a n c tr ct , f t chi v bl ly by thi g d p p rt i a e d ar th e o o n e s f s m Th e a a s i n p o in ts a tt ck e f ll wi g vi w o B uddhi . s mkhy pr c i a ll m u n th e u s en a o f th e s o u as a om a e s s en p y i p g B ddhi tic d i l l c p ct , p r i t t n e u e th e o n e a a ll n s o s s ess on a momen a ex pri cipl , f rth r d ctri th t thi g p ly t ry i s tenc e and a sa a o n i s th e an n a o n o f s e . o m s i s a n , th t lv ti ihil ti lf Fr thi it pl i a th e am as o f th e a e e o s awi n u sm n e e e es s th t S khy l t r p ch B ddhi , which v rth l was es s e n a an o u o o f i ts s s em one o f i ts nc a o on en s . ti lly tgr wth y t , pri ip l pp t N OUTLINE OF A HISTORY OF INDIA PHILOSOPHY . I 3

. i ni sm wholly neglected Buddhism and j agree , how ever, with the latter, in the promise , made by all real systems of India, to redeem man from the torments of continued mundane life , and in their perception of a definite ignorance as the root of all mundane evil ; but in the philosophical establishment O f their princi ples , both method and clearness of thought are want n l i g . I t must also be mentioned in this connexion that the religions of Buddha and Jina have as little broken with the mythological views of the people as the h Bra manic philosophical systems . The existence of

not i s gods , demigods, and demons is doubted , but h of little importance . It is true t e gods are more highly organised and more fortunate beings than men, S but like these they also stand within the amsara , and if they do not acquire the saving knowledge and thus withdraw from mundane existence , must also change their bodies as soon as the power of their formerly

won . merit is exhausted They, too , have not escaped

an d the power of death , they therefore stand lower 2 than th e man who has attained the highest goal . Much eas ier than the attainment of this goal is it to lift oneself by virtue and good works to the divine

I C ompare es p eci a lly th e B uddhi s tic fo rmul a o f th e c ausal ne xus i n ' Old en ber s B udd /ta a a e 2. g , P rt IL , Ch pt r

3 s e e i n d e e o e e eme a o s ha s no n to d o i th e Thi b li f v l p d , ph r l g d thi g w th s o h e us e o f a s e a q ue ti n o f th e eternal G o d a cc epte d i n so m e s y s t ems . T p ci l o i wa r a th e o e u i n th e n an o so a n e o ut o f w rd ( g , p w rf l I di phil phy pl i ly gr w

’ th e e n d eav o r to di s ti n gui s h v erb ally b etw een tlz z : g o d and th e p o pul a r g o ds I 4. THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCI ENT INDIA .

b e plane, and to born again after death on the moon or in the world of Indra or of Brahman , etc . , even in the person of one of these gods but only foolish men yearn after such transitory happiness . In the second cent ury before Christ the Yoga l P a tafi a i . philosophy was founded by j I n part , this event is simply the literary fixation of the views which were held on asceticism and on the mysterious powers which it was assumed could be acquired by asceti

ci s m . The Yoga , that is , the turning away of the senses from the external world , and the concentration of the mind within , was known and practised many centuries previously in India . In the Buddhistic com munion, for example , the state of ecstatic abstraction

P atafi ali was always a highly esteemed condition . j , now, elaborated the doctrine of concentration into a system and described at length the means of attaining that condition , and of carrying it to its highest pitch .

c ac The methodi al performance of the Yoga practice ,

P atafi ali s cording to j , leads not only to the po session

ef of the supernatural powers , but is also the most fective means of attaining the saving knowledge . The metaphysical basis Of the Yoga system is the

S P a tafi ali amkhya philosophy, whose doctrines j so completely incorporated into his system that that phi lo sophy is with justice uniformly regarded in Indian

a . literature as branch of the Samkhya At bottom , all that P atafijali did was to embellish the Samkhya sys

s tem with the Yoga practice, the my terious powers , 1 OUTLI NE OF A HISTORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY . 5

ch ief and the personal god ; his aim had , no doubt , been to render this system acceptable to his fellow countrymen by the eradication of its atheism . But the

s insertion of the personal god , which sub equently de c isivel y determined the character of the Yoga system ,

Y o asfitras - was , to j udge from the g , the text book of

P a tafi ali s u j , at first accomplished in a very loose and

erficial p manner , so that the contents and purpose of the system were not at all affected by it . We can even — Y o asfitras . 2 2 . 1 say that the g I 3 7 , I I , 4 5, which treat of the person of God , are unconnected with the

- other parts of the text book, nay, even contradict the foundations of the system . The ultimate goal of h u man aspiration according to that text - book is not union with or absorption in God , but exactly what it

S fimkh a is in the y philosophy, the absolute isolation

’ ka a l a ( z v y ) of the soul from matter . When L . von

' ' ' ter a l u 6 S I ndz em L z r a wl Cultur . 8 chroeder ( , p 7) says The Yoga bears throughout a theistic character it assumes a primitive soul from which the individual ” i n souls proceed , his statement is incorrect , for the dividual souls are just as much beginningless as the

“ ” ’ ur us/z a - w esfia o as ura Y t . 2 special soul ( p p , g , I 4 ) that i s called God .

In contrast to these two closely related systems , S amkhya and Yoga, the ancient , genuine Brahmanic elements , the ritual and the idealistic speculation of the Upanishads , are developed in a methodical man ner in the two following intimately connected systems I O THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA . whose origin we can place approximately at the b e ginning of the Christian era . ' “ " Pu - o r K a rm a mi mar s a i n The rva ( ) n , the first ” “ ” nin uir quiry, or the q y concerning works , usually

i aimi ni briefly called M mamsa , founded by j , is proba bly counted among the philosophical systems only b e cause o f its form and its connexion with the Vedanta doctrine ; for it is concerned with the interpretation of the Veda, which it holds to be uncreated and exist ent from all eternity : classifying its component parts and treating of the rules for the performance of the ceremonies , as of the rewards which singly follow upon the latter . This last is the main theme of this system , in which the true scriptural scholarship of the fi Brahmans is condensed . "uestions of general s ig ni cance are only incidentally discussed in the Mimamsa . Especial prominence belongs here to the proposition that the articulate sounds are eternal, and to the the

a ory b sed upon it , that the connexion of a word with its significance is independent of human agreement , and , consequently, that the significance of a word is inherent in the word itself, by nature . Hitherto , the Mi mamsa has little occupied the attention of Eu ropean indologists ; the best description of its princi “ pal contents will b e found in the Introductory R e

” ' O f Arth as am rah marks of G . Thibaut s edition the g a

B ena res S a nskr it S er i es ( , ” - o r - i The Uttara ( Brahma ) m mamsa, the second “ ” inquiry, or the inquiry into the Brahman , most I OUTLINE OF A HISTORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY. 7

V commonly called edanta, bears some such relation to the earlier Upanishads as , to use an expression of

’ Deus s en s , Christian dogmatics bear to the New Tes

. B ad ara an a tament I ts founder, y , accepted and fur ther developed the above - discussed doctrines of the

- A Brahman tman , into the system which to the pres ent day determines the world - view of the Indian think ers . This system has received excellent and exhaust

- Deussen ive treatment in the above cited work of , which is to be emphatically recommended to all inter es ted in Indian philosophy . The basis of the Vedanta is the principle of the identity of our S elf with the

Brahman . Since , now, the eternal , infinite Brahman is not made up of parts , and cannot be subject to change , consequently our self is not a part or ema

o i . nation it, but is the whole , indivisible Brahman

Other being besides this there is not, and , accord in l g y, the contents of the Vedanta system are compre

’ “ a dva z ta - véda hended in the expression , the doctrine ” " of non duality . The obj ection which experience and the traditional belief in the transmigration of souls and in retribution raise against this principle , has no weight with B adarayan a experience and the doctrine of retribution are explained by the ignorance inborn in man , which prevents the soul from discrim i natin g between itself, its body and organs, and from d recognising the empirical world as an illusion (mdy ) . The Vedanta philosophy does not inquire into the rea son and origin of this ignorance it simply teaches us 1 8 TH E F PHILOSOPHY O ANCI ENT INDIA . that it exists and that it is annihilated by knowledge

that is , by the universal knowledge which

O f grasps the illusory nature all that is not soul, and the absolute identity of the soul with the Brahman .

With this knowledge , the conditions of the continu ance of the mundane existence of the soul are re moved— for this in truth is only semblance and illu — sion and salvation is attained .

B rah m a sfitras - In this way are the , the text book of

B fid ara an a am y , expounded by the famous exegetist C

800 c o mmen kara (towards after Christ) , upon whose

’

D euss en s . tary exposition is based Now, as this

- text book , like the chief works of the other schools , is clothed in the form of aphorisms not intelligible per se , we are unable to prove from its simple verbal tenor that Camkara was always right in his exegesis ; but intrinsic reasons render it in the highest degree prob able that the expositions of Camk a ra agree in all es s enti al points with the system which was laid down in

ra hm a s ra the B fit s . The subsequent periods produced a long succession of other commentaries on the Brah m asfitras , which in part give expression to the religio philosophical point of view of special sects . The most

Of Ramfinu a important of these commentaries is that j , which dates from the first half of the twelfth century . Ramanuja belonged to one of the oldest sects of In

B h fi av ata s Pfifi ch a rfitras dia, the g or , who professed

un - an originally Brahmanic, popular monotheism , and

Man saw salvation solely in the love of God ( n) . Upon

2 0 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT I NDIA.

Vaice shika system is certainly of much greater antiq uit y than the Nyaya . The former is already attacked — B rahm asfitras . 2 1 2 1 in the , I I , , 7, where at the con elusion the interesting remark is found that it is nu worthy of consideration because no one embraced it .

But in a subsequent period the system , far from being despised , became very popular . Kanada (Kan abh uj or K an abh ak sh a) is considered

Vai e sh ika the founder of the c system ; but this name ,

“ - which signifies etymologically atom eater, appears to have been originally a nickname suggested by the character of th e system ; but which ultimately sup planted the true name of the founder . The strength of the system is contained in its enun c i ation of the categories, under which , as Kanada m thought, everything that existed might be subsu ed substance , quality, motion (or action) , generality, particularity, and inherence . These notions are very sharply defined and broken up into subdivisions . Of especial interest to us is the category of inherence or i n

s sa ma va a . eparability ( y ) This relation , which is rigor o usl y distinguished from accidental, soluble connexion

sa z o a ( ny g ) , exists between the thing and its properties , between the whole and its parts , between motion and the object in motion , between species and genus . Later adherents of the Va icesh ika system added

h as to the six categories a seventh , which exercised a momentous influence on the development of logical inquiries : non - existence With Indian sub OUTLINE OF A HISTORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY .

tlety this category also is divided into subspecies , namely into prior and posterior, mutual and absolute

- P i a non existence . utting it positively, we should say, “ ” “ ” o f - in stead prior non existence , future existence , ” ” “ - “ o f . stead posterior non existence , past existence “ Mutual o r “ reciprocal non existence is that rela tion which obtains between two non - identical things

(for example , the fact that a jug is not a cloth , and “ vi ce vers a) ; absolute non - existence is illustrated by the exam ple of the impossibility of fire in water .

. N ow , Kanada by no means limited himself to the enunciation and specialisation of the categories . He takes pains , in his discussion of them , to solve the

O f most various problems of existence and thought , and thus to reach a comprehensive philosophical view of the world . The category substance , under which notion , according to him , earth , water, light , air, ether, time , space , soul , and the organ of thought fall , affords him the occa s ion of developing his theory of the origin of the world from atoms ; the category qual ity, in which are embraced besides the properties of

: matter also the mental properties cognition , joy, pain , desire , aversion , energy, merit , guilt , and dis position , leads him to the development of his psychol ogy and to the exposition of his theory of the sources of knowledge . The psychological side of this system is very te markable and exhibits some analogies with the cor

o responding views i the S amkhya philosophy . The 2 2 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT I NDIA .

soul , according to Kanada, is beginningless , eternal ,

- and all pervading , that is , limited neither by time nor

space . If, now, the soul could come into immediate

connexion with the objects of knowledge , all Objects

would reach consciousness simultaneously . That this b is not the case , Kanada explains y the assumption

ma nas of the organ of thought or inner sense ( ) , with

which the soul stands in the most intimate connexion .

ma na s The soul knows by means of this alone , and it

s perceive through it not only the external things , but

ma nas c o ntradi stin O wn s . also its qualitie The , as

uish ed a tom g from the soul , is an , and as such only competent to comprehend one object in each given

instant .

The last of the six Brahmanic systems , the Nyaya

philosophy of Gotama , is a development and comple

s i n ifi ment O f the doctrines of Kanada . Its special g cance rests in its extraordinarily exhaustive and acute \' un exposition of formal logic , which has remained

i n touched India down to the present day, and serves

as the basis of all philosophical studies . The doctrine

of the means of knowledge (perception , inference , anal

a ogy, and trustworthy evidence) , of syllogisms , f lla

cies , and the like , is treated with the greatest fulness . The importance which is attributed to logic in the Nyaya system appears from the very first Sfitra of

’ G o tama s text - book in which sixteen logical notions are enumerated with the remark that the attainment of the highest salvation depends upon a correct knowl 2 OUTLINE OF A HISTORY O F I NDIAN PHILOSOPHY . 3

edge of their n ature . The psychology O f the Nyaya

a h agrees fully with that of the V ice s ik a system . The metaphysical foundations , too , are the same here as in that system ; in both , the world is conceived as an agglomeration of eternal , unalterable, and causeless

- atoms . The fundamental text books of the two schools ,

Va i eshik a S fitra s the c and Nyaya , originally did not accept the existence of God ; it was not till a sub s e quent period that the two systems changed to theism , although neither ever went so far as to assume a cre a to r o f matter . Their theology is first developed in

’ U d aya n ach arya s Kusum fifijali (towards 1 300 after

Christ) , as also in the works which treat j ointly of the

Vai es hika . Nyaya and c doctrines Accordin g to them ,

God is a special soul , like all other individual and sim il arl y eternal souls , only with the difference that to him those qualities are wanting that condition the l transmigration of the other sou s , or that are condi tion ed by that transmigration (merit , guilt , aversion ,

a t joy, pain) , and that he alone possesses the special

o i n tributes omnipotence and om iscience , by which he is made competent to be the guide and regulator of the universe . I n the first centuri es after Christ an eeleeti e move ment , which was chiefly occupied with the combina S tion of the amkhya , Yoga , and Vedanta theories , was started in India . The oldest literary production of

veta atara this movement is the C cv Upanishad . com

s U ani posed by a Civite , the upreme being in this p 2 N 4 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIE T INDIA .

iv shad being invested with the nam e of C a . More cel

’ eb rate d i than this Upanishad is the Bhagavadg ta, admired equally in India and in the Occident for its loftiness of thought and expression- an episode of the

’

. B h a avad i tzi be Mahabharata In the g g , the supreme ing appears incarnated in the person of Krishna, who stands at the side of the famous bowman , Arjuna , as his charioteer, expounding to this personage shortly before the beginning of a battle his doctrines . No where i a the philosophical and religious literature of India are the behests of duty so beautifully and strongly emphasised as here . Ever and anon does Krishna revert to the doctrine , that for every man , no matter

z to what caste he may belong , the ealous performance of his duty and the discharge of his obligations is his most important work .

’ Mimfim s zi V The six systems , edanta, Samkhya ,

Vai eshika Yoga , c , and Nyaya, are accepted as ortho

’ d o x (dstz ka) by the Brahmans but the reader will no

s i nifi . tice , that in India this term has a different g cance from what it has with us . In that country, not only has t/ze most a osolute fr eedom of t/z oug /i i always pre vailed , but also philosophical speculation , even in its boldest forms , has placed itself in accord with the popular religion to an extent never again realised on earth between these two hostile powers . One conces sion only the Brahman cas te demanded ; the recog n itio n of its class - prerogatives and of the infallibility

o r of the Veda . Whoever agreed to this passed as 2 OUTLINE OF A HISTORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY . 5

th o do x , and by having done so assured for his teach ings much greater success than if he had openly pro claimed himself a heretic ( nastika ) by a refusal of such recognition . The concession demanded by the

Brahmans , so far as it referred to Scripture , needed only to be a nominal one ; it compelled neither full agreement with the doctrines of the Veda, nor the confession of any belief in the existence of God .

By the side of the Brahmanic and non - Brahmanic systems mentioned in this survey , we find also in In dia that view of the world which is as old as philos ” l o h z p y itself, but not older materialism . The San “ “ s krit word for materialism is lokay a ta ( directed to the world of and the materialists are called loka a tika l a uka a tika y or y , but are usually named , after the founder of their theory, Charvakas . Several ves tiges show that even in pre - Buddhistic India proclaim ers of purely materialistic doctrines appeared ; and there is no doubt that those doctrines had ever after

- wards, as they have to day, numerous secret follow

B hfis karfi c h ar a ers . Although one source ( y on the

’ uona a m B rahm asfitra I I I . 3 . 5 3) attests the g existence

- Sfitras E of a text book of materialism , the of rihas pati (the mythical founder) , yet in all India mate ri alism found no other literary expression . We are re

e f rred, therefore , for an understanding of that philos o h p y, principally to the polemics which were directed against it in the text - books of the other philosophical

’ l e H istor a teri a li sm Th first words of Lange s y of M . 2 6 TH E O F N PHI LOSOPHY A CI ENT I NDIA .

S - schools , and to the first chapter of the arva dar

- s am rah a cana g , a compendium of all philosophical systems, compiled in the fourteenth century by the well - known Vedantic teacher Madh av ach arya (trans

s lated into Engli h by Cowell and Gough, London ,

h av a in which the system is expounded . Mfid ch arya begins his exposition with an expression of re gret that the majority of mankind espouse the mate ri ali m s represented by Charvaka .

S adan and a k Another Vedantic teacher, , spea s in

Vedantas fira 1 8—1 1 o f his , 4 5 , four materialistic schools , which are distinguished from one another by their conception of the soul ; according to the first , the soul is identical with the gross body , according to the second , with the senses , according to the third , with the breath , and according to the fourth , with the organ of thought or the internal sense (ma nas) . No difference in point of principle exists between these four views ; for the senses, the breath , and the inter nal organ are really only attrib utes or parts of the D body . ifferent phases of Indian materialism are, accordingly, not to be thought of . The Charvakas admit perception only as a mean s of knowledge, and reject inference . As the sole real ity they consider the four elements ; that is , matter .

When through the combination of the elements , the body is formed , then by their doctrine the soul also is created exactly as is the power of intoxication from the mixture of certain ingredients . With the ann ihi

2 8 TH E PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT I NDIA .

scales and bones into the bargain , and he who wishes rice takes its stalks . It is absurd , therefore , for fear of pain , to give up pleasure , which we instinctively feel appeals to our nature .

The Vedas are stigmatised as the gossip of knaves ,

- infected with the three faults of falsehood , self con tradi c tion , and useless tautology, and the advocates of Vedic science are denounced as cheats whose doc

‘

o ne . trines annul another For the Charvakas , the

Brahmanic ritual is a swindle, and the costly and la horions sacrifices serve only the purpose of procuring “ for the rogues who perform them a subsistence . If an animal sacrificed gets into heaven , why does not the s acrificer rather slay his own father No wonder that for the orthodox I ndian the doctrine of the Char

- vakas is the worst of all heresies . The text books of

as the orthodox schools seek, was said above , to refute

s . thi dangerous materialism As an example , we may cite the refutation of the doctrine that there is no means of knowledge except perception , given in the “ S - - kaumudi : amkhya tattva , 5 , where we read When the materialist affirms that ‘ inference is not a means “ ’ a of knowledge, how is it th t he can know that a P man is ignorant, or in doubt , or in error For truly “ be ignorance, doubt, and error cannot possibly dis

- co vered in other men by sense perception . Accord “ in l . g y, even by the materialist , ignorance, etc , in other men must be inferred from conduct and from “ speech , and , therefore , inference is recognised as a OUTLINE OF A HISTORY OF I NDIAN PHILOSOPHY .

“ ’ means o f knowledge even against the materialist s “ ” will .

Besides the systems here briefly reviewed , the above - mentioned S arva - d arcan a - s am grah a enumerates

sub ordi six more schools , which on account of their nate importance and their not purely philosophical character may be passed over in this survey . There is question first of a Vi sh n uiti c sect founded by Anan d ati rth a Pfirn a ra fi a (or p j ) , and secondly of four Civite

N akuli a - P fi u sects , the names of whose systems are c c

P rat abh i fia Rase v ara . pata , Caiva , y j , and c The doc trines of these five sects are s trongly impregnated with Vedantic and Samkhya tenets . The sixth system is that of Panini , that is grammatical science , which

’ is ranked in Madh ava s Compendium among the phi lo s o hi es p , because the I ndian grammarians accepted the dogma of the eternity of sound taught in the Mi

’ mamsa, and because they developed in a philosoph ical fashion a theory of the Yoga system , namely the

S h ota theory of the p , or the indivisible , unitary factor latent in every word as the vehicle of its significance . If we pass in review the plenitude of the attempts made in India to explain the enigmas of the world and of our existence , the Samkhya philosophy claims our

first and chief attention , because it alone attempts to solve its problems solely by the means of reason . The genuinely philosophical spirit in which its method is manipulated of rising from the known factors of ex perienc e to the unknown by the path of logical dem 0 3 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA .

onstratio n , thus to reach a knowledge of the final cause, is acknowledged with admiration by all inquir ers who have seriously occupied themselves with this

’ system . In Kapila s doctrine , for the first time in the history of the world , the complete independence and

i ts freedom of the human mind , its full confidence in D own powers were exhibited . Although John avies

S a a a . ( nkhya K rik , p V) slightly exaggerates matters when he says The system of Kapila contains nearly all that India has produced in the department

” ’ of pure philosophy, yet Kapila s system may claim , more than any other product of the fertile Indian mind , the interest of those contemporaries whose view of the world is founded on the results of modern phy i s c al science . As for those who feel inclined to look down slight ingly from a monistic point of view upon a duali s tic

ROe r conception of the world the words of E . in the X B h ash fi ari cch eda . VI Introduction of the p , p , may be quoted “ Though a higher development of phi “ lo s o phy may destroy the distinctions between soul

and matter , that is , may recognise matter, or what “ is perceived as matter, as the same with the soul (as “ z for instance , Leibni did) , it is nevertheless certain that no true knowledge of the soul is possible with “ out first drawing a most decided line of demarca “ tion between the phenomena of matter and of the ” soul . This sharp line of demarcation between the two domains was first drawn by Kapil a. The knowl OUTLINE OF A HISTORY OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY . 3 1 edge of the difference between body and soul is one condition , and it is also an indispensable condition , of arriving at a true monism . Every view of the world which confounds this difference can supply at best a

- one sided henism , be it a spiritualism or an equally

- one sided materialism . TH E CON NEXI ON BETWEEN INDIAN

AN D GREEK PH ILOSOPHY .

H E coincidences between Indian and Greek phi losophy are so numerous that some of them were noticed immediately after the Indian systems became

known to Europeans . The most striking resemblance— J am almost — temp ted to say sameness is that between the doc

th e - O ne \l trine of All in the Upanishads and the phi X l osophy of the Eleatics . enophanes teaches that

God and the Universe are one, eternal , and unchange able and Parmenides holds that reality is due alone

s to thi universal being , neither created nor to be de

stroyed , and omnipresent ; further, that everything which exists in multiplicity and is subject to mutabil

ity is not real that thinking and being are identical . All thes e doctrines are congruent with the chief con

of tents the Upanishads and of the Vedanta system ,

founded upon the latter . "uite remarkable , too , in Parmenides and in the Upanishads i s the agreement

in style of presentation in both we find a lofty, force EE I NDIAN AND GR K PHILOSOPHY. 33

th e ful , graphical mode of expression and employ

ment of verse to this end . It is true , the ideas about the illusive character of the empirical world and about the identity between existence and thought are not yet framed into doctrines in the older Upanishads we only find them in works which doubtlessly are

later than the time of Xenophanes and Parmenides . But ideas from which those doctrines must ultimately

U ani have developed , are met with in the oldest p shads ; for it is there that we find particular stres s laid upon the singleness and immutability of Brahman and upon the identity of thought (oij nana) and Brah

man . I therefore do not consider it an anachronism y to trace the philosophy of the Eleatics to India . But even earlier than this can analogies between I the Greek and Indian Worlds of thought be traced .

Thales , the father of the Grecian philosophy, imagines

everything to have sprung from water . This certainly reminds us of a mythological idea which was very

familiar to the Indians of the Vedic time ; namely, the idea of the primeval water out of which the uni

verse was evolved . Even ia the oldest works of the Vedic literature there are numerous passages in which

this primeval water is mentioned , either producing itself all things or being the matter out of which the

Creator produces them .

a Fundamental ideas of the Samkhy philosophy ,

are h s i ol o ers . Anax i too , found among the Greek p y g

ai r mander assumes, as the foundation ( px j) of all 34 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA .

an d things , a primitive matter, eternal , unfathomable

’ ei n ez o v indefinite , the p , from which the definite sub stances arise and into which they return again . If you S now advert to the amkhya doctrine , that the mate

ri rial world is produced by Prak ti , the primitive mat ter, and , when the time has come , sinks back into it ,

infi the analogy is evident . Likewise the idea of an nite succession of worlds and of natural opposites is common to Anaximander and the S amkhya philo s o phy . Let us proceed to another example . There is “ ” Heraclitus , the dark Ephesian , whose doctrine , it is true , touches Iranian ideas in its main points . Nev erth ele s s it offers several parallels with the views of

mi n er st eracli the Samkhya philosophy . The fi of H tus is a suitable expression for the incessant change of the empirical world , set down by the Samkhya, and his doctrine of the innumerable annihilations and re formations of the Universe is one of the best known r 1 theo ies of the Samkhya system .

h iolo er But let us turn to the p ys g s of later times .

The first with whom we have to deal is Empedocles , whose theories of metempsychosis and evolution may well be compared with the corresponding ideas of the

S amkhya philosophy . But most striking is the agree ment between the following doctrine of his , Nothing can arise which has not existed before, and nothing ” existing can be annihilated , and that most character

1 Mi scell a n eo us s a o e o o e. E s s s e on e on Vo l . . d i s cov C l br k y , c d diti , I , p 4 37 , e rs o th er an al o gi es b e tween th e phil o so phy o f H era clitus a n d th e samkhya ’ f d o c tr i e.

36 TH E PHILO SOPHY o r ANCIENT INDIA .

of ples his metaphysics, which probably are rooted in the doctrines of Empedocles , reminds us of a Sam kh a y tenet , which is in almost literal agreement with ” 1 the following Nothing can rise from nothing .

The same is true of his conception of the gods . To D emocritus they are not immortal, but only happier than men and longer - lived and this is in perfect har mony with the position the gods occupy not only in the S amkhya but in all Indian systems . According to

Indian ideas, the gods are subject to metempsychosis like human beings , and they also must step down , when their store of merit , formerly acquired , is ex

. amk ara hansted Says C , the renowned Vedantist , in

B rah m asfitra . 2 8 his commentary on the ( I 3 , ) “ Words like ‘Indra ’ mean only the holding of a fi ‘ ’ certain of ce , as the word general for instance ; he who at the time occupies this post is called Indra .

The same ideas are met with in Epicurus , whose dependency upon Democritus must needs have brought about a resemblance . But also on matters of other kinds Epicurus has laid down principles which in themselves as well as in their arg uments bear a te markable resemblance to Samkhya doctrines . Epi

b e curns , in denying that the world is ruled by God , cause this hypothesis would necessitate our investing the deity with attributes and functions that are i nco n

ruous g with the idea of the divine nature , gives voice to a doctrine that is repeated by the Samkhya teach

l k h asn C omp . s am y tra , I . , 78 . L P H INDIAN A N D GREEK PH I O SO V. 37

ers with unfatiguing impressiveness . We also occa s io n a ll S y meet , in the systematic works of the amkhya philosophy, a favorite argumentative formula of Epi “ ” c urus . , Everything could rise from everything then I t is a question requiring the m ost careful treat ment to determine whether the doctrines of the Greek 4

s philosophers , both those here mentioned and other , were really first derived from the Indian world of

inde end thought, or whether they were constructed p

re ently of each other in both India and Greece , their semblance being caused by the natural sameness of human thought . For my part , I confess I am inclined

as s V towards the first opinion , without intending to p

Ro e an apodictic decision . The book of Ed . th ( G

’ ’ selz i elzte unser er aoenei /ana is eiz en P fii/oso ki e p , first edition

1 8 6 4 , second edition the numerous works of

l adi ch . h lii te r A ri . G s . S c Aug , and the tract of C B (

’ ' stoteles Al etap/iysik ei ne Toe/z ter der Samk/Iy a -Le/I re a es

K a ila 1 8 — p , 74 ) all go too far in their estimation of Oriental influence and in the presentment of fan tasti cal combinations ; m oreover , they are all founded upon J f 1 a totally insu ficient knowledge of the Oriental sources .

1 m a e as th a s f a o o e e e o o n . s e n e e di e un a e n C p r l tr ti B r v Eck t i , U b r Gr dl g d er I n di scli en Ph i l o s o phi e und d e ren Z us a mm enh an g mi td en Phi l o s oph em e n " ’ Vo e I n d i selz e Stud z en — d e r es en . 6 88 . en e a e an s w tlich lk r , , II . 3 9 3 Ev rli r th thi , s u ues on s e e ea e a s oun n o nes s a a o f ch q ti w r tr t d with t di g b ld . With f cility o n e o n e u a to h i m a m on es o s ua o ed . 1 I . c c pti p c li r , Sir Willi j (W rk , q rt , 799 , , 60 6 1 e e e th e o o n a n a o es : Of th e o s o a s o o s 3 , 3 ) p rc iv d f ll wi g l gi phil phic l ch l it W i ll b e s uffi ci e n t h e re to rem a rk th a t th e firs t Nyaya s e em s an al o gous to th e e a e th e s e o n s o m e m es a e Va i e sh i ka to th e on th e two P rip t tic ; c d , ti c ll d g , I ic ; Mi man sas o f th e s e o n i s o e n s n u s e th e n ame o f Ve an a , which c d ft di ti g i h d by d t , to th e a o n th e s S ti n k h a to th e a an d th e s e on o r Patan a l a Pl t ic ; fir t y , It lic ; c d j , to th e Sto ic phil o s o phy : s o th a t G a ut am a c o rr espo n d s with Ari s to tl e ; Ka 8 TH E F 3 PHILOSOPHY O ANCIENT INDIA .

Nevertheless , I consider them to contain a kernel of

, although it can hardly be hoped that this ker Ytruth nel will ever be laid bare with scientific accuracy . The nistor i ea l poss ibili ty of the Grecian world of thought [being influenced by India through the medium of Per

,sia must unquestionably be granted , and with it the possibility of the above - mentioned ideas being trans

ferred from India to Greece . The connexions between the Ionic inhabitants of Asia Minor and those of the countries to the east of it were so various and numer ous during the time in question that abundant occa sion must have offered itself for the exchange of ideas

between the Greeks and the Indians, then living in l Persia . Add to this the Greek tradition that the greater

part of the philosophers with whom we have dealt, D Thales , Empedocles , Anaxagoras , emocritus, and

others , undertook journeys , sometimes of considerable

duration , into Oriental countries for the sake of mak

ing philosophical studies , and the probability of our

na a a es a imi ni o a es V as a a o a a d , with Th l ; J , with S cr t ; y , with Pl t ; K pil , with m a so n e a o a s an d P ata n al i Z eno . B ut an a u a e o een Pyth g r ; j , with cc r t c p ri b tw m ” th e Gre ci a n a n d I n di a n s ch o o l s w o uld r equir e a c o ns id e ra bl e v o l u e . ' ' ' l I n U eb e rwe s Gr un d r z ss d er Geseh i e/z te d ef t los o /z i e e s e and g p , r vi d

e e e nz e s e on I . 6 am a to fin d th e o o n as dit d by H i , ixth diti , , 3 , I h ppy f ll wi g p s a g e : With m uch b e tt er r e a so n we c o uld supp o s e a c o n s id e r abl e O ri ent a l i n fluenc e i n th e fo rm o f a dire ct co mm un ic ati o n o f th e o ld e r Greci an phil o s ” m s o to s a a nn o on u o h ers en a n a o ns . B ut a p with Ori t l ti I rry y , I c t c c r with th e o n o n o f th e a u o e e s s e o n th e s am e a e a a e e an d d e pi i th r , xpr d p g , th t p rf ct c i si ve s o l uti o n o f thi s pro bl e m m ight b e exp e ct e d fr o m th e pro gr e s s o f O ri en e s Fo r e en th e o s e s a ua n an e th e O en a s s ems an d tal s tudi . v cl t cq i t c with ri t l y t e on s a n no d o a a th e a e na e e o e m en o n e on a e “r ligi c t w y with lt r tiv , b f r ti d p g 37 ; and o n e s n e e e o n s a e s en o n s e th e m eans , with i gl xc pti which I h ll pr tly c id r , fo r fixi n g th e limits o f th es e fo r eign i nfl uen ces up on th e o ld er Gr eci an phi o so h a re u e n n l p y tt rly wa ti g . E INDIAN AND GRE K PHILOSOPHY . 39

supposition that these Grecian philosophers acquired

Indian ideas on Persian ground will be increased . But it cannot be denied that if they really did borrow for - J e i n g ideas , they well understood the art of impressing on them the stamp of the Grecian intellect . Hitherto I have purposely omitted a name which is much more intimately connected with this question

d e than the others I have mentioned . While , for the riv atio n of Indian ideas in the case of the Grecian

h sio lo ers p y g , the Eleatics and Epicurus , I could only

cer ta i n r oba bi li t assume a p y in favor of my hypothesis , there seems to be no doubt about the dependence of Pythagoras upon Indian philosophy and science ; and all the more so , as the Greeks themselves considered

s S ir lz i doctrines as foreign . It was William Jones

8 vo e d . . (Works , , I I I , who first pointed out the analogies between the S amkhya system and the Pyth a

t I n go ean philosophy, starting from the name of the

sa mkh a dian system , which is derived from the word y , “ ” at number , and from the fundamental importance

tach ed u . to n mber by Pythagoras After jones , Cole

Mi scella neous E ssa s I . 6 brooke ( y , second edition , , 4 3 4 37) expressed with even more emphasis the idea that the doctrines of Pythagoras might be rooted in India . He says Advertin g to what has come to us of the history of Pythagoras , I shall not hesitate to acknowledge an inclination to consider the Grecian ” to have been indebted to Indian instructors .

1 S e e o e o o e Mi s cell a neous E ssa s s e on e o n 2 1 . C l br k , y , c d diti , L , 4 0 4 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA .

s loc. ci t. Colebrooke gives the rea on for his opinion ( ,

1 et . 4 4 seq ) in the following passage , which seems to me to be suffi ciently important to quote in full :

“ I t ma b e e e ema ke b th e wa a th e P th a ore y h r r r d , y y , th t y g ans and O ce us in a cu a s n u s as a s of the o , ll p rti l r , di ti g i h p rt w rld . the ea en th e ea t and th e n te a be een em c t e h v , r h , i rv l tw th , whi h h y

erm lo and aéri al e e we a e ec se th ea en t fty . H r h v pr i ly e h v , ea t an d t ans u us n e m d a s r h ( r pic o ) i t r e i t e r e gio n of the Hindu .

P a o as as a te him O ce us eo es th e m e or yth g r , f r ll , p pl iddl aer a e on emo n s as ea en o s and th e e a t i l r gi with d , h v with g d , r h

m n u wh e . e e a a n t e a ee ec se th e n s o with H r g i h y gr pr i ly with Hi d ,

ace th e od s abo e m an b enea and s tua c eatures fl t n pl g v , th , piri l r , it i g u n i n th n te me a t nsee e e e on . , i r di r gi

o bo need s to be em n e t at P a oras and his suc N dy r i d d , h y th g cessors e th e do ct ine of m e em s c os s as the n dus uni h ld r t p y h i , Hi versall do the same tene of ans m at n f u s y t tr igr io o so l .

T e a ree ke se enera in s n u s n th e sens e h y g li wi g lly di ti g i hi g itiv , m aterial o rgan (ma na s ) from th e rationa l and conscio us living soul 1914 169 and poi/v of Py th a go r as ; one pe rishing with th b th t e mm t e o e o o a . dy , h r i r l

L ke th e n us P t a o as o t er reek hil oso i Hi d , y h g r , with h G p

' h ers as s ne a s ub e et e ea c o t n to th e so ul a a om p , ig d tl h r l l hi g p rt fr th e co o eal a t and a osser c o n to i t en un te rp r p r , gr l thi g wh i d with

u s h a zi l the body ; th e s k m (or li ng o.) pa r i r a and s tlz a f a r i r a of th e

S ank s and th e es t I s ou be s ose to conc u e t a hya r . h ld di p d l d h t th e nd ans e e i n t s ns tance teac e s a t e an ea n rs I i w r hi i h r r h r th l r e .

u r t r l t Ma a z i ne a e Or i en a l . 1 1 1 2 Wilson ( " y g , IV , , ,

’

S dnklz a K a r ika . X I s and y , p ) only incidentally touche on the analogies pointed out by J ones and Colebrooke .

Barthelemy S aint - Hilaire goes a little more into

. P r e detail regarding one point He treats , in his

’ é le S ci nk/ a 1 8 2 mier Y ll nz oi r e s ur z . 1 2 y (Paris , 5 , pp 5 , 1 I NDIAN AND GREEK PHILOSOPHY . 4

’ 1 2 1 m etem s 5 3 , 5 , of Pythagoras s theory of p y ch os is , and he is right in observing that the greater probability is on the side of its Indian origin , and not e on its Egyptian one . Further, Barth lemy finds Sam “ ” kh a Ph aedo n a y ideas in Plato , in the Ph edrus , “ R Timaeus , and in the epublic Les analogies

’ sont assez nombreuses e t asse z profondes pour qu il soit impossible de les regarder comme accidentelles

(p . He points out that the ideas of redemption and bondage are doctrines both of Plato and of the

’ S zimkh a y philosophy, inasmuch as they denote the liberation of soul from matter and the confinement of soul by matter and that the idea of metempsychosis is common to both , together with that of the begin

nin le . 2 1 g ss and endless existence of the soul On p . 5 e Barth lemy then says that Plato , the great admirer of o the Pythagorean school , t ok these doctrines from Pythagoras but if we ask where Pythagoras obtained them , all the appearances are , in his opinion , in favor 1 of India . The supposition that Pythagoras derived his the ory of transmigration from I ndia , was several times 2 broached in older works besides . In a much more exhaustive and comprehensive

l ’ ' ‘ O ne ns an e m a b e men o ned e e . ROer B z bl z otheca l nd z ca i t c y ti h r which E ( ,

Vol . XV. . 1 o n e d out a th e s n o n en e o f th e fine c o m , p 9 ) p i t , th t triki g c i cid c a s on o un d i n th e a a an s a of th e o a car th e s ou p ri f K th Up i h d , b dy with , l with ” th e a o ee th e s enses th e o ses th e m n th e e ns etc ch ri t r , with h r , i d with r i , . th e s m a o m a s o i h with i il r c p ri n n t e Phaadrus .

’ ’ ' 2S ee u an e m an Ma ter i a li en z ur Ges cl uclz te der I n a z s clz en Vi s i on s L ci Sch r , i ter a tur . 26 no e 1 . l , p , t 2 4 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCI ENT I NDIA .

m anner, but evidently without knowledge of his pred

e c es sors , Leopold von Schroeder has also treated this

’ P tha oras a nd di e I naer subject in an essay , y g , (Leip

sic , which , notwithstanding the contrary opin 1 Vion of Professor Weber, seems to me to be perfectly

’ correct in its main points . From Schroeder s combi

nations it follows , that almost all the doctrines ascribed

P - to ythagoras , both religio philosophical and mathe

m atical , were current in India as early as the sixth

century before Christ , and even previously . As the most important of these doctrines appear in Pyth a

goras without connexion or explanatory background , whilst in India they are rendered comprehensible by

the intellectual life of the times, Schroeder conclu s ively pronounces India to be the birthplace of the

P . Oi o ythagorean ideas course, no power of convi tion would rest in si ng le traits of agreement — and for that reason I did not venture to give any definite opin ion with regard to the dependence of the other phi

loso h ers — p mentioned on India but with Pythagoras , Wit is the q uanti ty of coincidences that enforces convi c

tion ; and the more so , as the Concordance is also to be noticed in insignificant and arbitrary matters which cannot well be expected to appear independently in

’ two different places . Here I must refer to S chroeder s detailed argumentation and can only indicate the chief features which Pythagoras and the ancient Indians

’ — l ter a r zZsc/z es Centr a lbla tt 1 88 . 1 6 1 6 . o m a e a so Di e e , 4 , p 5 3 5 5 C p r l Gri ” ’ ’ ’ W s n n en S z tz un sber z ch te der K l . Prem si s chen Aka cl emi e der z sen ch en i I di , g g — sch a ten z u B er li n XXX . . 2 26. f , VII . pp 9 3 9

H T E PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA .

First, he holds that Pythagoras acquired his knowl N ed e — an g in India itself, idea excluded at once by 1 reference to the history of ancient traffic . The only country in which Pythagoras could possibly have met P his Indian teachers , is ersia , to which place I above found myself obliged to ascribe the eventual media tion between Indian ideas and the Greek physiologers

and Eleatics . The other point is that of the connex ion between the Pythagorean doctrine and the Sam

kh a . y philosophy, supposed by Schroeder It m ay be that Pythagoras acquired his knowledge of the the o ries of metempsychosis and of the five elements from

adherents of the Samkhya system ; but further rela " tions are not to be discovered . Schroeder tries , on

- . 2 6 P th pp 7 7 , to bring the fundamental idea of the y

a o re an g philosophy, that number is the essence of all

ctiti ous things , into connexion with a fi , older form of kh “ the S fi m ya philosophy . H e says p . 74 : To me it S appears to be evident from the name amkhya , that

sa mhh d number ( y ) originally had a deciding , funda

i n mental importance this system , although the later

system , the books of which appeared more than a

thousand years after the pre - Buddhistic S fimkhya doc

trine of Kapila, has effaced this characteristic trait ” . S h as and entirely lost it In stating this, chroeder overlooked the fact that those Upanishads which are full of samkhya doctrines and which must be dated

l Th e Greci an tr a diti on o f Pyth a g o r a s h avi ng vi s it e d In di a did not a ri se ‘ 4 h e an n befo re t Al ex dri e time . 2 s h i m a A e o e m ones om . a o . b f r Sir Willi J ; c p p . 39 b ve INDIAN AND GREEK PHILOSOPHY . 4 5

only a few hundred years later than Buddha, are, in the passages in question , also wanting in what he calls “ the original characteristic trait , and that they are in harmony with that system which he calls the ‘ later ” one . He himself declares this theory to be a very

h old i s . one , but in reality it perfectly baseless There is not the smallest particle of evidence for the hypoth esis that there ever existed a Samkhya system different from that of our sources , which acquired its name from the mania for enumeration peculiar to it . On the contrary, weighty reasons speak against the sup position that our system has undergone noticeable changes in the course of time . If ever we should try to fabricate some historical link between the S amkhya system and the Pythagorean numeral philosophy , the following idea only could occur to us . The doctrines of Pythagoras Number is the essence of things , the elements of numbers are to be considered as the ele ments of everything existing , the whole universe is harmony and number— these doctrines are unique in the history of human thought , and , if their meaning should be something else than everything existing ” re is ruled by the mathematical law, they might be garded as unphilosophical . It therefore does not ap pear to me as a thing utterly beyond possibility, that those ideas took root in a misunderstanding of Pyth agoras . I t is possible that he mi sinterpreted the words of his Indian teacher “ The Samkhya philosophy is named after the enumeration of the material princi H E 4 6 T PHILOSOPHY O F ANCIENT I NDIA . ples into “ Number is considered the essence of ” the material principles in the S amkhya system . But this surely is nothing but a supposition .

’ It is Lassen who in his [na ische A lter thumshunzle denies every Indian influence upon Grecian philo s o

- phy in ante Christian times , but adopts it (I I I . , p . 379 e - t seq . ) for the Christian Gnosticism and Neo Platon

I n ism . As lively relations between Alexandria and fi dia are suf ciently attested for this time, it is indeed impossible to doubt Indian influence upon the doc

- trines of the Gnostics and Neo Platonists .

s Let us first dwell upon Gnosticism . Lassen hold that the Indian elements in the Gnostic systems were derived from Buddhism which (in the secondary, mod ified form it had assumed at that time) undoubtedly exercised a considerable influence upon the in telle c tual life of Al exandria . This influence is most clearly perceptible in the ideas formed by the Gnostics about the many spiritual worlds and the numerous heavens . These ideas are certainly derived from the fantastical cosmogony of later Buddhism . But I do not admit the great importance which Lassen attributes to Bud dhi sm in the formation of the Gnostic systems . I t i s ’ S my opinion that, in Lassen s expositions the amkhya philosophy does not get all that is due to it . If we keep it in mind that the centuries in which Gnosticism — was developed that is , the second and third century after Christ— are coincident with the period during S which the amkhya philosophy flourished in India , A N D I NDIAN GREEK PHILO SOPHY . 4 7

f many things will appear in a dif erent light to us , than 1 . 8 s was the case with Lassen On p . 3 5 he establishe a connexion between the doctrines of Buddhism and the Gnostic contrast of soul and matter . But is it not more natural to remember here the ideas which form the foundation of the S amkhya philosophy " Another point with which we have to deal is the identification of soul and light, met with among almost all Gnostics . Lassen has brought forward some remote and singu lar speculations from the misty and imaginative realm of later Buddhism , to make plausible the Buddhistic influence upon this Gnostic doctrine . I cannot say that this endeavor has been a successful one . H ow very simple and natural the idea appears with which a mere glance at the S amkhya philosophy furnishes us " For there we are taught something which was

v iz . the soul i s evidently not known to Lassen ; , that li ht g which means , that the mechanical processes of the internal organs are illuminated or am made conscious by the soul . This idea of the S

o r— khyas , that soul and light are the same , to put it

— un otherwise that the soul consists of light, we

1 0n th e o e an mus o n es s a am una e to a e a te th r h d , I t c f th t I bl tr c th t s embl an ce b etween th e S amkhya phil o s o phy and th e d o ctrin e o f th e Va l en tini an s o n th e o n o f ma e i s s a e ass en o n . 00. 01 . Th e rigi tt r , which t t d by L pp 4 4 a eem en s o f th e am a s s em a o f th e O es o e e gr t S khy y t with th t phit , c ll ct d by m e o e n to o ass en i n th e o o n a es e se a ea to u . L f ll wi g p g , lik wi pp r p d bt

“ - fi o m . sam kh as utra I . 1 : S Oul i s e aus e th e n on i ntel l ec c p y , , 4 5 [ "light , b c ’ ua an d d o n o t e o n o e e a nd VI . 0 : e n s n o m th e t l light b l g t g th r , , 5 B i g di ti ct fr no n- n e e ua so u h as th e n a u e o f o u um na e s th e n o n i t ll ct l , [ l"which t r th ght ill i t ” a Th e o mm e n a o Vi nan abh i ksh u m a e s th e o o n re i ntell ectu l . c t t r j k f ll wi g ” h e o u i s i n s ss en e e h e s un ma on th e s as sa e : T s i t e t etc . rk fir t p g l c light lik , 8 TH E O F 4 PHILOSOPHY ANCIENT I NDIA . doubtedly have to regard as the source of the similar idea of the Gnostics . 8 I n regard to another point, Lassen (on pp . 3 4 , 8 39 et seq . ) has rightly acknowledged the influence of the Samkhya philosophy upon Gnosticism . It was

Ferd . Chr . Baur who even before him (in his work ,

D e i chr istli che Gnosi s . 1 8 e t . , pp 54 , 5 seq ) had noticed the remarkable agreement of the classification of men

’ n v ev a r z uoz zsv z uoi into the three classes of y , / x , and

' 157tz uoz S am , peculiar to several Gnostics , with the h k ya doctrin e of the three Gunas . As I have entered in detail upon this theory in my book on the S firnkhya philosophy, I only wish to state here that in this sys tem every individual is considered as appertaining to the sphere of one of the three powers , according as the luminous , serene , and joyful , or the passionate ,

fickle , and painful, or again the dark, motionless , and dull character predominates . There is also another 1 interesting parallel to be found . It is that between

S fimkh a the y doctrine according to which the Buddhi ,

Ahamkara, and Manas , that is , the substrata of the psychic processes , have an independent existence dur ing the first stages of the evolution of the universe , and the Gnostic tenet which allots personal existence to intellect , will , and so on . I am sure that those who are better acquainted with the Gnostic systems than

I am , would be successful in finding some more points

l Menti oned by Fitz - Edwa rd H a ll i n h i s trans l a ti on o f N eh emi ah Ni l a ‘ ’ kan th a S as tri G o r e s A Ra ti on a l Ref utati on cf th e Hi nd u Ph i los oph i ca l Sy s tems a u a 1 862 . 8 . , C lc tt , , p 4 INDIAN AND GREEK PHILOSOPHY . 4 9

ti of contact , upon studying the doctrines of the S m h k ya philosophy in detail .

- find In passing to Neo Platonism , we that here Lassen has valued the influence of the Samkhya doc

2 0 trines to its full extent . The views of Plotinus ( 4

- 2 6 . P 9 A the chief of the Neo latonists , are in part in perfect agreement with those of the S amkhya sys

tem . The following sentences must be placed here

the soul is free from sorrows and passions , untouched by all affections ; for the sufferings of the world be

long to matter . By his philosophy Plotinus promises

‘ to delive r the world from misery, and this is the same purpose as that of the Samkhya system which strives to lead men to discriminative knowledge and with it

to redemption , that is to say, to absolute painlessness . Though all Brahman systems have made it their task to liberate mankind from the miseries of mundane ex

is ten ce by means of some special knowledge , yet none of them have so much emphasised the principle of

this life being a life full of misery, as the Samkhya “ system ; none of them have defined the word te ” “ demption with the same precision as the absolute

‘ cessation of pain . On page 4 2 8 Lassen establishes a connexion be

a tween Vedantic notion and the sentence of Plotinus ,

that one may also be happy when sleeping , because

the soul does not sleep . But there is no neces sity far

it . The same doctrine appertains to the Samkhyasys 0 TH E C E 5 PHILOSOPHY OF AN I NT INDIA .

“D tem . eep dreamless sleep is there , too, stated to be homogeneous with redemption , insomuch as in these two states the affections and functions of the inner organs have stopped , and pain with them . Consider ing the many cases in which the dependence of Ploti

S fimkh a nus upon the y system is established , we need not hesitate to derive this idea from the S fimkhya sys tem as well . These numerous agreements must , how

us ever, make doubly careful not to expand too much the limits of this dependence ; and for that reas on I am bound to say that the parallels which Lassen has drawn (p . 4 1 8 et seq . ) between the theory of emana tion , set up by Plotinus , and the doctrine of develop ment in the Samkhya system appear to me to be out of place in the series of coincidences here treated . Though there is a good evidence of harmony be tween the pur e Samkhya doctrine and the Neo - Platon ism of Plotinus , there exists even a closer connexion between the latter one and tha t branch of the Samkhya philosophy which has assumed a theistical and asceti cal character, and has , under the name of the Yoga philosophy, acquired an independent place among the

Brahman systems . The morality of Plotinus is alto gether of an ascetic nature . This feature might be

u S toi explained , it is tr e , by an inclination towards cism ; but on account of its agreement with the Yoga system in the following points , this ascetic coloring has most probably its foundation in the influence of

1 a 1 S ee Si mkhy sfi tra, V. , 1 6.

2 5 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA . truth by contemplation ; but Porphyry records in a purer way than his master the Samkhya doctrine of the contrast between the spiritual and the material world . His dependency upon the Sfimkhya philo so phy is also to be noticed in his doctrines of the reign of the spiritual over the material , of the omnipresence of the soul when liberated from matter, and of the b e i nn in l es sne ss 1 g g of the world . Here we must also P note the interdiction to kill animals , made by or

h r p y y, and his rej ection of sacrifices . To be sure ,

2 P Lassen says , on page 4 3 , that orphyry here followed the Buddhistic law ; but as we are dealing with things

- 2 which Buddha adopted from the Samkhya system , there is no reason why we should not derive them from the primary, instead of the secondary source . I think we need not enter upon the resemblances which Lassen discovers (p . 4 34 et seq . ) between In dian ideas and the later Neo - Platonist Ab amm o n (about for this fantastical and superstitious teacher, and the ideas peculiar to him , do not offer any but doubtful points of contact with Indian mod

Ab am mon els . Only one opinion of comes into con sideration , and that even was already suggested by his predecessors . I t is the idea that people who are filled with a holy enthusiasm attain miraculous pow u ers . Here we clearly perceive the coincidence with

l n n assen Thi s l ast po in t i s otm e ti oned by L .

' 2Co mp a r e th e pr efa c e to my trans l a ti o n o f Ani ruddh a s Commenta ry o n th e S e kh asutra s etc . a u a 1 8 2. m y , , C lc tt , 9 8 S ee assen . 8 . L , p 4 3 INDIAN A N D GREE K PHILOSOPHY. 5 3

the conviction , universal in India, that miraculous powers are to be acquired by the methodical exercise

- of the Yoga praxis . The Yoga philosophy promises, as the fruit of such exercise , the acquisition of the

’ faculty of making one s self invisible , infinitely large , or infinitely light, of assuming other bodies , of chang ing the course of nature , and the attainment of other supernatural powers .

I c annot take leave of Neo - Platonism without men ti o nin g a highly important point of agreement with w the Indian world of thought , which , it is true , neither n S co cerns the amkhya philosophy nor Buddhism , but which nevertheless impressively supports our argu ments , as it is a most significant link in the series of

P rofes Grecian loans from India . I n a little essay by

V ch un A / s d s tud . d d d O l n i che S i en . I X sor Weber, j , , Vol ,

‘ the author, with great caution without intending in the least to settle this question ”— has put forward the supposition that the I ndian conception of the each

(a feminine noun , meanin g voice , speech , word) may have had some influence upon the idea of the Aoj/ os which appears in Neo - Platonism and passed from there into the Gospel of S t. John . Weber starts from

X . 1 2 e the hymn Rigveda , , 5 , in which the Vach alr ady appears as an active power, and he refers to the per “ ” s o nification of the divine Vach or language, as the vehicle of priestly eloquence and wisdom . He then traces the development of this idea through the Brah

Vfich mana literature , where the becomes more and 54 THE PHILOSOPHY OF AN CI E NT INDIA .

' more similar to the 7toy os in the beginning of the

Gospel of St . John . In the numerous passages quoted by Weber, the Vach appears as the consort of Praja “ pati , the creator, in union with whom and by whom he accomplishes his creation ; yea, the Vach is even ultimately the most spiritual begetter , and now and then she is placed absolutely at the beginning of all things, even above the personal bearer of her own ” self . Weber concludes this pithy article with the fol lowing words ' “ There are certainly no difficulties in understanding the cosmogonical position of the Vach which is simply to be conceived as the culmination of glorifying priestly meditation and knowledge , while ' Ao os the same position of the y , on the other hand , appears without any suggestion as to its origin or de

’ m n velop e t. This idea of Weber s I hold to be an ex ceedin l r g y happy one, and , in my opinion , it dese ves another name than that of a mere supposition . Only

I m ay be allowed , in this connexion , to set one point

- aright . It is not Neo Platonism in which the idea of

Ad / Os the j first appears , but it is derived there from the doctrines of Philo , which to a great extent are the

- basis of Neo Platonism . Philo again adopted the

Ad os S y doctrine from the toics , and they took it from

Ad os Heraclitus , to whom the y already was the eternal 1 law of the course of the world . My opinion , men ti oned above, of Heraclitus being influenced by Indian

1 om Max e nz e Di e Leh r e vom Lo os i n d er r i ech i schen Ph iloso hi e C p . H i , g g p ,

en e 1 8 2. Old b rg , 7 INDIAN AND GRE E K PHILOSOPHY . 55

c o nfirm thought , meets , accordingly, with a welcome — ation . If the whole theory is right and I think it is — ' the derivation of the Aoy os theory from India must be put more than five hundred years earlier than 1

’ would appear from Weber s statement . Among the Indian doctrines which we believed we

Sfimkh a could trace in Greek philosophy, those of the y system occupy the first place ; agreeably to their char f acter , they presented the smallest di ficulties when transplanted to a foreign ground and embodied into a new world of thought . This influence of the Samkhya and Indian philosophy in general upon O ccid ental l

- philosophy does not extend beyond Neo Platonism . And — except the Buddhistic coloring of Schopen hauer ’s and H artmann ’s philosophy— even in our mod ern time we cannot notice any real influence exercised by Indian ideas . Even in the compendiums of the general history of philosophy the Indian systems are usually entirely omitted . It now need not be proved

in d that this is a mistake . An explanation of this iffer ence may be found in the fact that the I ndian systems became known in Europe and America only in their roughest outlines in this century, and that even now

only Buddhism and two Brahman systems , Vedanta

and Samkhya , have been laid open to study by detailed

works .

n I have co fined myself here to seeking out, and so

histor i ca l b e far as possible , to proving the connexion

tween Indian and Greek philosophy . But to follow 6 TH E F 5 PHILOSOPHY O ANCIENT INDIA. up the inter nal relations of the Indian doctrines to the whole Occidental philosophy and to trace the occa si oua l agreements in detail , that would have been a task the performance of which surpasses the limits of this essay. M HINDU MON IS .

R WHO WERE I TS AU TH O RS , PRI ESTS O WARRI ORS "

M ON G all the forms of government , class govern

ment is the worst . Carthage was governed by merchants , and the mercantile spirit of its policy finally led to the destruction of the C ity . Sparta was gov erned by warriors , and in spite of the glory of Ther mopylae it was doomed to stagnation . India was governed by priests , and the weal of the nation was sacrificed to their interests with reckless indifference . It appears that for the welfare of the community the harmonious co - operation of all classes is not only de sirable but also indispensable . Yet it is often claimed that mankind is greatly i a debted to nations or states ruled by class government for having worked out the particular occupation of the ruling Class to a perfection which otherwise it would not have reached . This is at least doubtful .

Carthage was eager to establish monopolies , but she contributed little to the higher development of

nd commerce a trade among mankind . 8 TH E O F 5 PHILOSOPHY ANCIENT INDIA .

Sparta reared brave men , but was not progressive, even in the science of war, and was worsted by so weak an adversary as Thebes . Modern strategists could learn something from Epaminondas , but little ,

a . if anything , from the Laced emonians Priestcraft has attained to a power in I ndia umpat alleled in the history of other nations, and it is no ex aggeration to say that priest - rule was the ruin of the

e country . Yet the wisdom of the Brahmans has b come proverbial . Their philosophy is praised as orig inal and profound , and it is well known that the first monistic world - conception was thought out in ancient

India . But we shall see later on what the real share of the Brahmans was in this great work .

Even in the earliest periods of Indian antiquity, R as revealed to us in the songs of the igveda, we meet priests , who ventured to lay claim to the ability to make sacrifices in a manner peculiarly agreeable to

i n the gods , and who attained to honor, wealth , and

fl uence on account of this ability . Back into this old est period o i I ndian history we can also follow the b e ginnings of the Indian c as te system which at bottom is a product of priestly selfishness and weighs upon the Indian people like a nightmare even to the pres ent day . However , the consolidation of the priesthood

as into a privileged Close corporation , as well the real development of the caste system , did not come until the time represented by the second period of Brahman literature , i . e . by the Yajurvedas , or Vedas of sacri

60 TH E O F PHILOSOPHY ANCI ENT INDIA .

ever, they did it, and were obliged to do it without any reservation . From vague legends in the great Indian epic we can infer that there were bloody strug gles for supremacy, in which the nobility succumbed . Accordingly these epic legends are for us an impor tant supplement to the sources with which we are dealing . bl When this struggle , which the Brahmans proba y o let the people pr per fight out for themselves , is said to originate in the plundering by the warriors of the treasures which the priests had accumulated from the performance of s acrific e s— the details are to be found

’ l ndische A lter th unzshunde in Lassen s , second edition,

1 — I . 7 1 this feature of the legend is so highly prob able that we are scarcely at liberty to consider it an invention , especially when we take into consideration the conditions of the time, on which we are about to throw more light . This , then , would seem to be the

first attempt in history at secularisation , wherein the rulers of the time fared badly enough . The Brahmans did not establish hierarchi cal con centration or ecclesiastical ranks , and wished to share personally in the government only in so far as the king was obliged to appoint a Brahman as Purohit , f or household priest , who as such held also the o fice of prime minister . Nevertheless they were exceed i n gly skilful in keeping the nobility and the whole people in their power, and their chief means to this end was the higher knowledge which they claimed , 6 HI NDU MONISM . 1

especially the conduct of sacrifices . For by means of sacrifices , if rightly performed , the fulfilment of all wishes might in those times be extorted from the gods .

For a scientifically presented sacrifice, which might require weeks , months , and even years , the Brahman of course demanded a fair compensation . Ten thou sand cattle are prescribed as fee for a certain cere mony, for another a hundred thousand , and a later authority on ritual even demands two hundred and forty thousand for the same performance . And yet — this is not the climax of priestly greed , which to use a fitting expression of Professor Weber ’s— indulges in veritable orgies in these texts . When one has worked his way through the endless description of a cere mony one may read at the close the remark that the whole sacrifice is of no avail unless the fee is paid to “ the satisfaction of the priests . And lest perchance — to use a modern phrase— the price be forced down

‘ ’ by competition , the market beared , it was a rule ” that no one might accept a fee refused by another .

(Weber, p . The sacrificial ritual , so dry and wearisome for us— the only literary production of these intellectually barren centuries preceding the awakening of philosophical speculation — has such great historical significance for the very reason that it shows us the moral depravity of the Brahmans in the clearest light . To what extent sexual excesses were customary is seen from the fact that the priest is enj oined as an especial duty not to commit adultery 6 2 TH E PHILO SOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA . with the wife of another during a ceremony regarded as peculiarly sacred . But any one not able to observe such continence during the period of the sacred cere mony absolves himself from all guilt by an offering of curdled milk to Varuna and M itra " An instructive supplement to this indulgence which the Brahmans showed for their own weaknesses , is furnished by the numerous passages in the rituals in which the o fli ci atin g priest is told with perfect frank ness how to proceed in the sacrifice when he wishes to do this or that injury to the man who appoints and richly pays him in what fashion he is to deviate from the prescribed method when he wishes to deprive his employer of sight , hearing , children , property, or power . The mutual confidence which existed under these circumstances is accordingly well illustrated by a ceremony, the introduction of which before a sacri

fic e came to be regarded as necessary, consisting in a solemn oath by which the priest and the client bound themselves to do each other no harm knowingly dur f ing the continuance of the sacred o fice . After such specimens as these we shall no longer be surprised by the strange ethical conceptions which the Brahmans of this period have put on record . Murder of any ” “ one but a Brahman is not really murder, and a judge must always decide in favor of a B rahman as against his adversary who is not a Brahman such and simil ar things are uttered in the ritual texts with delightful coolness . 6 HI NDU MONISM . 3

It is evident that the caste system , developed at the same time as the ritual, served chiefly to strengthen the power and influence of the priests ; for when in the community the various classes are sharply distin g uish ed from one another the priest c an manage most easily to play off one factor against another to suit his own purpose . Next the Brahmans stood , as second caste , the Kshatriyas (literally the rulers , i . e . king ,

Vai as nobility, warriors) , as third the cy (the people

: proper farmers , merchants , and artisans) , while the

- fidras non Aryan , subjected aborigines , known as C , S or ervants , without civil or religious rights, had to fulfil the divine purpose by serving the Aryan castes , “ fidra especially the Brahmans . The C is the servant of the others , and may be cast out and killed at pleas ure that is the humane view applied by the Brah mans to the native population . The priestly caste might well have been content with such a condition of affairs as we find in the early

Indian ritual texts . But the Brahmans were not they continued to work steadily to secure new advan tages for themselves , and to push the rigid caste dis

n io n re ti ct s to the most dreadful consequences . The s ult lies before us in condensed form in the famous

- law book of Manu , the exact date of which is not yet ascertained , but which must have assumed its present form about the beginning of our era . The conditions which I propose to sketch briefly in the following

pages were , therefore , developed in the last centuries 6 H E F 4 T PHILOSOPHY O ANCI ENT I NDIA .

before Christ . And even if various provisions of this law - book remained mere Brahman theory without being put into practice , enough would be left to show the social conditions of that period in a very cheer less light ; and indeed it is not likely that they fell

. KO en in much short of the priestly ideal pp , in the tro duc to r y chapter of his work on Buddhism , has esti mated the social relations shown us in the laws of

Manu severely but j ustly, saving a single error due to the exaggerated estimate of the age of the l a w- book prevalent at that time he places the development of which we are speaking i n the time before Buddha, whereas in fact it took place after Buddha . L . von

S ch rOder l ndi ens Li ter a tur und Cul , also , in his work

tur . a 1 88 (Leipsic , H H ssel , 7) gives in the twenty ninth lecture a clever arrangement of the material on this subject . That the claim of the Brahmans to divine rank had not grown less with the lapse of centuries i s

: “ shown by various passages of the law - book The Brahmans are to be revered at all times ; for they are ” “ the highest divinity, indeed , by his very descent ” the Brahman is a divinity to the gods themselves . Of greater practical value for the Brahmans tha n this recognition as divinities must have been the nu m erous privileges which they enjoyed before the law . They were exempt from taxation under all circum “ ” stances , even if the king should starve the while .

Even for the worst crimes they could not be executed , 6 HINDU MONI SM . 5

chastised , or punished by confiscation of property, while the criminal code was very severe toward the other castes and especially the Cfidras . Penalties were increased in proportion as the caste of the offen der was lower, and similarly fines for injuries were higher as the caste of the one offended rose . The money - lender might take from a Brahman two per

. Vai a cent a month , from a Kshatriya three , from a cy

fidra . four, and from a (; five And so in all provisions of the code it is evident how well the Brahmans took care of their own interests . According to this law

‘ book the Cfidra had no rights whatever in his relations “ with them . The Brahman may regard him wholly as his slave , and is therefore entitled to take away his property ; for the possessions of the slave belong to — . fidra e his master The C is not to acquire wealth , ev n

e s f wh n he is in a position to do so, for thi is of ensive ” " o . to the Brahman (Schr der, p But all these things are comparatively innocent beside th e regulations whereby the Brahmans con dem n ed to the most wretched estate innumerable h u man beings whose only fault was that their descent did not satisfy the conditions of the priestly scheme .

In former times members of the three Aryan castes , when they had taken as first wife a girl of their own caste, had been permitted to take additional wives l from the ower castes, and the children of the latter incurred no reproach from this fact : the son of a Brahman and a Va icya or even a (; fidra woman was 6 6 TH E PHILOSOPHY O F ANCI E NT INDIA .

under these conditions a Brahman . But by the Laws of Manu this was no longer the case . The children of parents of unequal castes take the rank of neither father nor mother, but constitute a mixed caste , and the nature of their occupation is quite definitely pre scribed in the Brahman law . As a result of this theory there arose a great number of mixed castes , all more or less despised . Moreover, the social position of many of these mixed castes was made still worse by an absurd doctrine which reduced the human race in

India to the level of grass and herbs . Good seed in poor soil yields , to be sure , less increase than in good soil , but still the product is endurable . But the seed of weeds in good soil results in the strengthening and increase of the weeds . According to Brahman views , therefore , a man begets by a woman of a higher caste children of less value and rank than himself . But the lowest and mo s t despicable human creature on earth is the child of a (; fidra and a Brahman woman . While

fid ra the lot of the C was a hard one , the misery of the

Ch an dfila , the unhappy creature born of such a union , defies all description . “ He is to dwell far from the abodes of other men , bearing marks whereby every one may recognise and avoid him ; for contact with him is pollution . Only by day may he enter villages , so that he may be avoided . He is to possess only lowly animals , such as dogs and donkeys , eat only from broken dishes , dress only in garments taken from the dead , and so

68 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCI ENT INDIA . and further development of the social system estab li sh ed by the Brahmans . I cannot regard it as my task here to give a com

’ ple te list of the Brahmans sins ; I intended only to

' cite enough to leave no doubt in the mind of the reader of these pages regarding the way in which the

Indian priests cared for the happiness of their people . Now there will be found in general a disposition to con demu severely enough the selfishness and merciless ness of the Brahmans , but at the same time to recog nise with admiration their intellectual achievements much will be forgiven them for the sake of the pro found thoughts with which they have enriched their own country and the world . It is , indeed , the Wis dom of the Brahmans ” that has given to the word India a musical sound which is perpetuated even to day in the hearts of all to whom the endeavor after the highest truth seems to be the most important phe nomenom in the development of mankind . But what will be said if it can be proven that the Brahman ’s

- profoundest wisdom , the doctrine of the All One , which has exercised an unmistakable influence on the intellectual life of even our time , did not have its origin in the circle of Brahmans at al l " Will not the scale - pan in which the Indian priesthood are being weighed rise considerably " Before entering more in detail upon this very im

in th e portant question history of civilisation, I must 6 HINDU M ONI SM . 9 briefly characterise the period in which we meet the thoughts of which I am speaking . For centuries the Brahmans were indefatigable in devising sacrifice after sacrifice , in heaping one upon another symbolical interpretations which bear only too plainly the stamp of priestly sophistry . All at once loftier thoughts appear traditional knowledge and the performance of sacrifices are , to be sure, not yet rejected , but the mind no longer feels satisfied by the “ ” mysteries of the sacrificial compound , and strives toward higher and nobler goals . All minds are domi nafed by a passionate desire to understand the riddle of the world and to comprehend the relation of the ia

i ntellec dividual to the universe . The time of deepest tual decline is followed by a keenly intellectual period quite filled with questionings after the Eternal - One that lies back of fl uctuant phenomena and is found again in the depths of the individual being . It is the im age of the Upanishads , those famous works which mediately on their appearance in Europe filled the greatest thinkers of the Occident with admiration and

s enthusiasm . I am peaking now only of the elder

Upanishads , which originated approximately in the

r . period from the eighth to the sixth centu y B C . , and not of the great mass of writings (more than two hun dred in number) bearing the same name but not of equal worth , the origin of which reaches far into the

Christian era . In the elder Upanishads the struggle for absolute knowledge has found an expression unique 70 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT I NDIA . in its kind ; and accordingly there is cause for rejo i cing in the fact that we now have the most important of them in excellent , faithful translations from the pen k B Oh tlin . of the famous Nestor of Indologians , Otto g

There are indeed in these Upani s hads many specula tions over which we shake our heads in wonder , but 1 — the meditations keep recurring to the Brahman , the “ ” - D i n a n s i ch world soul , the Absolute or g , or how ever the word so full of content may be translated ,

A i n and culminate in the thought that the tman , the ner self of man , is nothing less than the eternal and infinite Brahman . The language of the Upanishads is enlivened in such passage s by a wonderful energy which testifies to the elevated m ood in which the thinkers of that time labored to proclaim the great mystery . New phrases , figures , and similes are con stan tly sought in order to put into words what words are incapable of describing . For instance , the ven erable B rih adfiranyak a Upanishad has this He who dwells in the earth , but is distinct from the earth , of whom the earth knows not , whose body the earth is , — who is the moving power in the earth , this is your ” Self, the inner, immortal ruler . In the same words d r the same eclaration is made rega ding water, fire, ether, wind , sun , moon , and stars , of the regions of earth , of thunder and lightning, of all the worlds , of

l Th e r ea d er will nee d to b e al ert on th e di s ti ncti o n b etwe en Brahm an neu e as e e e ne an d a man m as u n e m e an n th e es o r ( t r) h r d fi d , Br h ( c li ) i g pri t “ ” Fo r th e esen m ean n h e s e n a i m em b er o f th e c as te . pr t i g t p lli g Br hm s — nd i n n s n s Tr . som etimes fou E gli h writi g . 1 HINDU MONISM . 7

all creatures and of many other things , and then the chapter Closes with the words H e who sees with out being seen , hears without being heard , thinks without being thought , knows without being known , besides whom there is nothing else that sees , hears, — im thinks , or knows , this is your own Self , the inner ” mortal ruler . All else is full of sorrow . And just after this there appears in the same famous U p an i

a - shad knowledge craving woman , by name Gargi

Vfich akn avi , and asks the wise Yaj navalkya (I quote

’ “ S ch rOder s translation with some omissions) : That which is above the sky, under the earth , and between

b e — i a sky and earth , which was , is , and is to , what

. e . and with what is this interwoven (i , in what does it

Y fi nav alk a i live and j y answers evas vely , or to ” test the intellectual powers of Gargi z In the ether . But Gargi knows that this does not reach final knowl “ : edge , and asks But in and with what is the ether

Y fi n av alk a 0 interwoven And j y said That , ’ i Garg , the Brahmans call the I mperishable , which is neither large nor small , neither short nor long , with out connexion , without contact , without eye, without

w counte ear, without voice , ithout breath , without

. I m nance , and without name In the power of this perishable are maintained heaven and earth , sun and moon , day and night ; subject to the power of this i Imperishable , O Garg , some rivers flow to the east, some to the west, and in such directions as may be . 2 H 7 T E PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDIA.

0 i He who leaves this world , Garg , without having ” come to know this Imperishable is to be pitied .

Chfindo a In the gy Upanishad , a work of no less importance, the same philosophy is taught in various parables by a man named U ddfilak a to his son (; veta

N a rodh a ketu . We find the two standing before a y g

fi - tree , that species of g tree which keeps constantly sending roots to the earth from its branches , thus de velop ing new trunks until in the course of time the one tree resembles a green hall with many pillars , capable of affording shade to hundreds , and even thou sands of men . And before such a tree , the most beau tiful symbol of the ever self - rej uvenating power of nature , takes place the following conversation between

Deussen S stem des father and son (best rendered by , y V eddnta . , p “ a N a rodh a Fetch me fruit of the y g tree, yon —“ ” ” . . i . der Here it is , venerable one Split t

It is split, venerable one . What do you see "”— “ I 0 . therein see , venerable one , very small seeds ” Split one of them . I t is split, venerable one . “ ” - " 0 What do you see therein Nothing at all , ” venerable one . Then said the father : The minute

0 c thing that you cannot see , lear one , from this mi nute thing sprang this great N yag ro dh a tree . Believe me, O dear one , of the same nature as this minute thing is the universe , it is the (only true) reality, it is ” - 0 vetak etu. the world soul , it is yourself, C

This eternal foundation of all bein g , which every HINDU MONI SM . 7 3

one has within him , the absolute Being , which at the same time is identical with abstract thought, was rec

o nised . g , therefore , as the only reality The whole

fluctuant multiformity of the world of phenomena is , on the other hand , a deception , an illusion (Maya) , a creation of ignorance . We see , it is the most con sistent Monism that is here taught in the Upanishads . To have been the first in the world to proclaim thi s is a service that can scarcely be overestimated . But whether the merit of this belongs to the Brahmans ,

n or is ascribed to them incorrectly , that is the questio which is to be answered in the following paragraphs .

To begin with , be it observed that the closer circle

: Mii ller De us sen Re naud of specialists Weber , Max , , g , B h and arkar and others have for some time been point ing out evidence which suggests that another portion of the Indian people were the dominant factor in the development of the monistic doctrine in the elder

Upanishads . But so far as I know the subject has not been presented to the general educated public in a popularly intelligible form . In the second book of the B rih adfiranyaka U p ani shad , from which I have already quoted two speci mens , occurs the following narrative , of which another and only slightly different version is preserved in the

‘ fourth book of the K aushi taki Upanishad The proud and learned Brahman B filfiki Gfirgya

A fita atru B e comes on his wanderings to j c , prince of “ nares , and says to him I will declare to you the 74 THE PHILOSOPHY OF ANCIENT INDI A .

l " B rah m an . The king is rejoiced , and promises to reward him for it handsomely, with a thousand cows . And now the Brahman begins to deliver his wisdom

e . I worship the spirit (i . , the power) in the sun as ” the Brahman ; but he is interrupted by the king who tells him he already knows that and needs not to be told of it . Then the Brahman speaks of the spirit in the moon , in the lightning , in the ether, in the wind , in fire , water, and the regions of earth ; but the king rej ects all this as being already familiar to him . And

Gfir a whatever else gy presents , it is nothing new to the king . Then , the story goes , the Brahman was “ ” ta a tr : dumb . But Aja c u asked him Is that all " ”

Gfir a . and gy answered Yes , that is all Then the king exclaimed These trifles do not amount to ” Gdr a knowing the Brahman , whereupon gy declares that he will become a disciple of the king and learn of

A fita atru him . And j c replies It is contrary to the natural order that a Brahman receive instruction from a warrior and expect the latter to declare the Brah

” man to him ; however, I will teach you to know it . Then the king took the Brahman by the hand and led him to where a man lay asleep . The king spoke to

A fita a r him ; but he did not arise . But when j c t u touched him with his hand , he rose . Now the king “ ’ : asked the Brahman Where was this man s mind , consisting as it does of knowledge, while he was asleep , and whence has it j ust returned But Gfirgya could

I ee n o e . 0. S t , p 7

6 TH E o r 7 PHILOSOPHY ANCIENT INDI A .

: father answers My son , you know me well enough to know that I have told you all I know . Come , let us ” both go and become disciples of the prince . The prince receives the old Brahman with all honor, and permits him to ask for a gift . But Gautama refuses all earthly possessions , gold , cows , and horses , female slaves and robes , and desires of the prince the answers to the questions which had been addressed to his son , “ ” saying : I come as a disciple of the revered one .

P ravfih an a is at first disposed to put him off, but finally consents to fulfil the wish of the Brahman, and says that no one i n the wor ld outside of the wa r r ior caste ca n ex la i n thes t p e ma t ers . And the following words are “ : 1 would tha t nei ther ou 0 Ga uta ma also significant y , , nor a ny of y our a ncestors ha d pa r t i n tha t si n ag a inst us heca use of whi ch this hnowledg e has until nownever set u ts r esiden e a m n r a hma p i c o g B ns . To you I will reveal it ; for who could refuse one who makes such an ap peal " And thereupon the king imparts to the Brah man all he knows . The same story in all essentials is found in the

K aushi taki beginning of the Upanishad , save that the prince has a different name , to wit, Chitra .

Passing over evidence of less importance , I will only give in condensed form the contents of the elev e n th and following chapters from the fifth book of the

h ndo a C fi gy Upanishad , where again a man of the

A v a ati Keka a warrior caste , c p , prince of the y , appears in possession of the highest wisdom . The book tells HI NDU MONISM . 77

us that a number of very learned Brahmans , referred “ : to by name, are meditating on the question What is our Self "What is the Brahman "” and they de

U ddalaka Aruni cided to go to , of whom they knew that he was at the time investigating the omnipresent ” “ S elf . But he said to himself : They will question me , and I shall not be able to answer all their ques ” tions , and therefore he invited his visitors to go with

A v a ati rI n ce K ek a as in him to c p , p of the y , to request struction from him . The king receives the visitors

r with honor , invites them to ta ry with him , and prom i ses them presents equal in amount to the sacrificial “ : fees . But they said A man must communicate what he is occupied with . You are at present investigating R u ” the Omnipresent Self . eveal it to s . The king

“ - replied I will answer you to morrow morning .

And the next forenoon, without having accepted them

. e . as disciples , i , without going through the formal

ities customary on such an occasion , he asked them “ one after the other : As what do you revere the ” Self " And the Brahmans made answer one after an “ : A S other the sky, as the sun , as the ether, as water,

as earth . Then the king calls attention to the fact

that they are all in error , because they regard the

Omnipresent Self as a single thing , existing by itself ;

I nfinite — at i nflu whereas in truth it is the , once the

e i t ly small and the infinitely great .

The significance of these stories i s evident . Whether real occurrences underlie the separate ac 78 TH E PHILOSOPHY O F ANCIENT INDIA .

e counts , or whether they are to be regarded as l gen dary deposits of a conviction widely current at the time , cannot be determined ; moreover, the question of the historical basis of these stories is of no impor tance for us . The fact that such tales are contained in genuinely Brahman writings which are regarded in

India , and rightly so , as mainstays of Brahmanism , speaks to us in a language not to be misunderstood . It shows that the authors of the elder Upanishads did not try , or did not dare, to veil the situation that was patent in their time , and claim the monistic doctrine of the Brahman - Atman as an inheritance of their caste ; perhaps , even , that they did not consider the establishment of this doctrine as a service of such far reaching importance as to care to Claim it for the

Brahman caste . In later times , it is true, this philos o phy became in the fullest sense the property of the

Brahmans , and has been cultivated by them for twenty

fiv e centuries , down to the present day, so that it is still regarded as the orthodox doctrine of Brahman ism . But this does not alter the fact that it took its rise in the ranks of the warrior caste . To this caste belong s the credit of clearly recognising the hollow ness of the sacrificial system and the absurdity of its symbolism , and , by opening a new world of ideas , of effecting the great revolution in the intellectual life of ancient India . When we see how the Brahmans, even after they had adopted the new doctrine , continued to cultivate the whole ceremonial system— the great HINDU MONISM . 79 milch cow of the priestly caste— and how they com bined in unnatural fashion these two heterogeneous elements by representing a stage of works (c erem o ni als) as the indispensable prerequisite to the stage of knowledge , we are warranted in the assumption that these things developed in ancient India just as they did in the rest of the world . Intellectual enlighten ment is opposed by its natural enemy, the priesthood , until it has become too strong in the people to be suc

c es s full . y opposed any longer Then the priest , too , o professes the new ideas , and tries to harm nise them a s far as possible with his hollow Shams .

But the ideas thus far treated , which are the ones most eminently characteristic of Indian wisdom , are not the only contribution by the Indian warrior caste to the thought and religion of their race . The best known of all I ndians , the noble Gautama of Kapila

five vastu , who founded Buddhism about hundred — years before Christ, was also a Kshatriya, according to later tradition , and formerly the only one known to us , the son of a king , but according to older sources

’ now revealed to us chiefly through O lden berg s meri

ri us . to o labors , the son of a wealthy landholder Bud “ — dha, the Enlightened let us speak of him by this honorable title familiar to all the world — opposed most energetically the whole sacrificial system and all the prejudices of Brahmanism . The ceremonies and the priestly lore were in his eyes a cheat and a fraud , and the caste system of no force for he taught that 80 TH E o r PHILOSOPHY ANCIENT INDI A . the highest good was just as accessible to the hum blest as to the Brahman and the king that every one without distinction of birth could attain to saving

- knowledge by renunciation of the world , by self con

’ quest , and by sacrifice of self for the good of one s

- fellow creatures .

’ O lde n b er s g excellent book on Buddha , which rep

of s resents the standpoint the latest researche , makes it unnecessary to speak in detail of the doctrines of the greatest of all Indians ; only in one point, which is especially important for the connexion of our ob ser vatio n s , I wish to present briefly my deviation from

’

O ldenb er s . g views According to the oldest sources , Buddha ’s method of presentation seems for the most part not adapted to the capacity of the masses it is not popular, but abstract and philosophical . In this the inner probability seems to me to be too much

— b e against the style of these sources , which it not forgotten— are still some centuries later than Buddha himself . Oldenberg himself suggests a doubt whether

’ the dry, tiresome ecclesiastical style of Buddha s alleged speeches is really a faithful reflex ion of the “ 1 8 1 word as first spoken . He says , p . Any one who reads the teachings which the sacred texts put into his mouth will hardly repress the question whether the form in which Buddha himself preached his doctrine can have had any resemblance to these strangely rigid shapes of ab stract and often abstruse categories with their interminable repetitions . In the picture of those 1 HINDU MONISM. 8

elder ages we dislike to think otherwise than that a strong and youthfully alert spirit animated the inter

course of master and disciples , and would therefore gladly exclude from the picture everything that would

introduce the least touch of the forced and artificial .

But then , after considering the conditions of the time , “ 1 8 he concludes that it is plausible (p . 4 ) that the solemnly serious style of Buddha was more closely related to the type of the Speeches preserved by tradi

tion , than to that which our sense of the natural and probable might tempt us to substitute for it "” I have S no t been able to convince myself of this . uch a tre mendons result as followed Buddha ’s career was to be attained eve n in I ndia only by stirring eloquence and by a popular presentation making free use of figures

and parables . If Buddha had addressed himself to the understanding alone of those who stood closest to

him , consisting of aristocratic elements , if he had not spoken to the hearts of the people and carried away

the masses , his monastic order would scarcely have met any other fate than the other monkish communi

ties of his time , which have vanished and left no trace , — all save one . For since the doctrines of all these u orders , or of their fo nders , were essentially alike , and since it will scarcely be attributed to accident that the teaching of Buddha alone developed into a

world - religion that even to - day is the most widespread

of all religions on earth , the only explanation of this

’ is found in the assumpti on that Buddha s manner of E 8 2 TH E PHILOSOPHY O F ANCI NT INDIA .

h teaching is r esponsible for the result, and t at we have to seek in it the germ of the later expansion of

Buddhism . Only recent investigations have refuted the once prevalent view that Buddha ’s appearance and career in India was a phenomenon unique in its kind , and revolutionised the contemporary social con

ditio ns . of the country In fact , Buddha was only a

r imus i nter ar es p p , one of the numerous ascetics who while seeking and teaching the means of release from

rai n smi ration the painful circuit of the t g of the soul , wandered about Northern India and gathered follow ers about them . Only one other community founded in that time has , as above intimated , endured to the present day, that of the J ains , which has numerous members , especially in Western India . The doctrines of the J ains are so extraordinarily like those of the Bud dhists that the Jains were until recently regarded as a Buddhist sect ; but in fact we have to do with an

a other religion , founded by predecessor of Buddha — named Vardh amfina Jfifitaputra or in the language

th e Vaddh aman a N ata utta— i a of people, p the very same region where Buddhism arose . The only essen tial difference between the doctrines of the two men consists in the fact that Vardhamana laid great stre s s

upon castigation , while Buddha, the deeper mind of

ab the two , declared this to be not only useless , but l s o utely harmful . But the point I wish to make here

e is that the founder of the r ligion of the J ains , one

8 H E 4 T PHILOSOPHY o r ANCIENT I NDIA .

t been found , some investiga ors , notably Professor Weber who has won high praise for his investigation

- of the Krishna cult , are inclined to regard the bhakti as borrowed from Christianity . In various publica tions , and especially in a highly interesting article on

’ Krishna s birthday festival , Weber has shown that nu m ero us Christian elements have crept into the later Krishna myths— the outward occasion for this being the similarity in sound of the names Kri shna and Christus the accounts of the birth of Christ among

h is the shepherds , of the stable , of the manger as

- birth place , and many other features of this sort . Nevertheless I cannot adopt the opinion that the bhakti was transplanted from a foreign land into the exceedingly fertile soil of the realm of Indian thought , because its earliest appearance is in a time for which in my opinion Christian influences in India have not yet been demonstrated . As a detailed discussion of this very interesting question is not possible without the introduction of all sorts of erudite material, I must in this place limit myself to the observation that for one who is intimate with the intellectual life of ancient India the doctrine of the bhakti is entirely conceivable as a genuine product of India . Not only are mono theistic ideas demonstrable in India for the earliest

- antiquity, but the I ndian folk soul has always been — ma rked by a powerful aspiration for the Divine and especially so in the times we are here considering— s o that we need not be surprised if this intensely ardent 8 HI N DU MONISM . 5

trait expresses itself, in a popular religion not resting

on a philosophical basis , as devotion to God and love

for God . The founder of this religion was Krishna

Vasudeva , who , though later raised to the rank of a

god , or better , identified with God , was , as his name

a member o and the legends attached to it indicated , f the wa r t r i or ca s e. As early as in the Mahabharata ,

a the great Indian national epic , Brahmanism has p

ro ri ate d s p p the person and doctrine of Kri hna , and made of the deified hero a form of the god Vishnu . Thus in this case also Brahmanism managed to renew its own vitality by appropriating an originally un

Brahmanic element . So we have seen that neither the profound Monism

s of the Upanishad , nor the highly moral religions of the Buddhists and the J ains , nor, finally, the faith of

B h fi av atas the g , founded in pure devotion to God , was originated in the Indian priestly caste . However favorably one may j udge of the achievements aecom

' plish ed by th e B rah m an s during the course of time in the most varied fields of knowledge— and I myself would be far from wishing to belittle their services

i n this much at least is established , that the greatest telle ctual performances , or rather almost all the per form anc es of significance for mankind , in India, have been achieved by men of the warrior caste

D I N EX .

Ab ammo n 2 . a a a s 2 et se , 5 Ch rv k , 3 , 5 q .

o nes n an nfluen e o f e s 8 . Ab rigi , I di , i c th ir Chri t , 4 e as o n th e ans o e o o e id Ary , 5 . C l br k , 39 .

so u e Th e 0. o smo on an en nd an 1 et se Ab l t , , 7 C g y , ci t I i , q

o ns e ff e s of 8 . e of e . Acti , ct , Cycl lif , 7 d va i a -vata A t , 17 .

- O ne o ne o f th e 2 68 . All , d ctri , 3 , eed s an d m s ee s eo of D i d d , th ry , 7 - ou Th e . ll l , , 9 A S seq .

na a o a s . x g r , 3 5 emo us A et se . D crit , 35 q

na man e . xi d , 34 es r e 12. A D ir , 7 ,

n m a o s . i l ip , 4 Deussen w r h 8 I . A , 7 , , 7 an s e oso nfluen e ry , th ir phil phy i c d ua sm 10 et se A D li , q .

h n an a o nes . by t e I di b i i , 5 u r g 2 . D ty , 4

s e sm 1 0. A c tici , 4 , 5

man 0. At , 9, 7 e sm i n n an oso 2 Ecl ctici I di phil phy, 3 oms , 19, 23 . At et seq .

onemen 8 . t t , s as I 1 A Ec t y , 4 , 5 .

Egypt . 4 3 .

B Ed ara an a 1 e a s 2 . y , 7 . El tic , 3 m e o s au . C . 8 . e et se . B r , F , 4 E p d cl , 34 q Bh a avatas 1 8- 1 8 u us 6 et s e g , 9, 3 . Epic r , 3 q .

a 1 8 8 s 12 . Bh kti , , 3 . Ethic , B oh tli n k o 0 e n a O ne o ne o f 6 et se g , Ott , 7 . Et r l , d ctri , 9, 9 q h m a n — u aem on s m B r a 10 16 1 0 o o no e . 2 . , 9 , , 7 , 7 f t t , 77 E d i , 7 - a man as e 2 2 8 et se . a on . Br h c t , 4 5, 5 q Expi ti , 7 a m ans e e ens o ns and Br h , th ir pr t i

o et se . 6 et se . o s ee ou n an 2 . p lity , 59 q , 4 q ; phil Fr th ght , I di , 4 o h o f o na e s i n th e a o p y , rigi t w rri r a s e 8 et s e c t , 7 q . l a i s h G d c , A . , 37 .

a m an sm 1 2 . Br h i , no s sm 6 et s G tici , 4 eq . m 8 u s 1 1 et s e . 6 et se B ddhi , , q , 4 q . , 79 G o d . I s. 19. 25 . 32. 36 et se q . o s n an e uman G d , I di , th ir h ch ar ac

ter, 1 3 . a a e , 57 . ou E . 2 oo no e . C rth g G gh , A , f t t , 4 a e o es f o ou 20. amm a i ans n an 2 . C t g ri th ght , Gr r , I di , 9 as e s s ems i n n d a 8 t e se . 6 ee an d n an oso te C t y t , I i , 5 q , 3 Gr k I di phil phy ,

et se . em an s s e e een et se . q bl c b tw , 32 q E F 88 TH PHILOSOPHY O ANCIENT INDIA .

e 2 . P atan ali 1 et s e . H ll , 7 j , 4 q

en sm 1 . e s a th e n e m e a o o f n an H i , 3 P r i , i t r di t r I di

e a us . o u 8 . H r clit , 34 , 54 th ght , 3

en eo o f th e o n o f es s m sm 1 1 et s e . Hygi ic th ry rigi P i i , q

me em s o s s o . t p ych i , 4 . Phil , 54 o s o e nn n s o f i n an en Phil phy , b gi i g , ci t

n o an e 1 2 1 . n a 1 et s e . in an en ee e Ig r c , 7 , , 7 I di , q ; ci t Gr c

us on 1 . 2 . Ill i , 7 , 73 3

m e s a e Th e 1 . a o 8 o o n o e 1 . I p ri h bl , , 7 Pl t , 3 f t t , 4

n an an d ee o so th e re o nus et s e . I di Gr k phil phy , Pl ti , 4 9 q

s em an e e een 2 et s e . o 1 . bl c b tw , 3 q P rphyry , 5

n a 6 . es o o 8 et s e . . I dr , 3 Pri th d , 5 q , 79

a on a num e s . a o as et se . Irr ti l b r , 4 3 Pyth g r , 39 q

aimi ni 16. e u o n 8 . J , R trib ti ,

a n s 8 1 1 et s e . 82 . ua sm 2 . J i , , q , Rit li ,

o nes am o o no e . R6 er E . 1 o o no e . J , Sir Willi , 37 f t t , , 4 f t t

e B . . R th , , 37

an a a 20 et se . K d , q

a a 1 0 et se . 0. a es a man 61 et s e . 6 K pil , q , 3 S crific , Br h , q , 9

a man eo o f 2 et s e . 8 . 8 e t s e . K r , th ry , q , 7 q — r s n a 2 8 8 . a a o n 1 8 1 22 2 . K i h , 4 , 3 5 S lv ti , 7 , , 9, , 7 m a o so 1 e a 0 t se . 1 S khy phil phy , q , 4

as sen 6 2 et s e . 1 et s e . 6 et s e . L , 4 . 9 q , 4 , 4 3 q , 4 q

e n z 0 S am sfi ra 6 . L ib it , 3 . , , 7

o 22. e m an L. 2 o o no e . L gic , Sch r , , f t t ‘

o o s e t s e . S c h liI ter . B . . L g , 53 q , C , 37

o e e . vo n 1 2 6 . Schr d r , L , 5, 4 , 4

- anu l aw o o o f 6 . e Th e 1 M , b k , 3 S lf, , 9 , 7 , 75 . ’ — a e a sm 2 et s e . 1 . a o r eva 2 2 se s o f 2 . M t ri li , 5 q , 3 Shiv , C , 3 4 ; ct , 9 i a e 10 0 S n n an eo o f 6. M tt r , , 3 . , I di th ry ,

a a 1 . S o n o f Man 8 . M y , 7 , 73 , 3 — e s an d on s eo o f . ou 10 1 1 1 2 oo n o e 22 26 2 0 M rit wr g , th ry , 3 S l , , , f t t , , 7 , 3

e em s os s 2 et s e . et s e . M t p ych i , q , 34 q , 4 7

1 . oun e e n of S e e o s . 4 S d , t r ity . W rd — o n s m 10 . a a M i , 9 , 73 Sp rt , 57 . o n sm n u et se tua sm 1 M i , Hi d , 57 q . Spiri li , 3 .

t am sa o so 16 et s e . . a e a e em 0 phil phy , q St Hil ir , B rth l y , 4 .

s e . u e a nd o e un o f 10 Mi ry , 4 9 S bj ct bj ct , ity , .

e as es 6 et s e . Mix d c t , 5 q Ta t tva m cu t , 1 0.

e es s . a n e N c ity , 9 T w y. 35 - N eo a o n sm e t s e . a es . Pl t i , 4 9 q Th l , 33 - — um e s 6. S ee am a . e sm 8 1 2 . N b r , 4 4 4 s khy Th i , 9 , 5, 3 m 1 t se au a a s s e 22 e . G . 16 . Ny y y t , 9 , q Thib t , , m a ans o n o f s o u s 2 et s e . Tr igr ti l , q , 34

- en e 80 et s e . 1 . Old b rg , 79 q , 4

o o m eani n of i n n a 2 . Orth d xy , g , I di , 4 we U eb er 8 o o no e. g , 3 f t t

an n 2 . an s a s o s o o f 2 10 P i i , 9 Up i h d , phil phy , , 9 ,

men es . 1 1 t a 2 2 6 e se . P r id , 3 5 , 7 , 3 , 9 q INDE X . 89

V ch a et s e . e e 2 8 . , 53 q W b r , 4 , 53 , 59, 4

Vai esh ik a s s em 1 et s e . s o n 0. g y t , 9 q Wil , 4

as u e a 1 . s om o f th e a m ans 8 e t se v d v , 9 Wi d Br h , 5 q V an a m 1 e s s e 8 16 2. 68 et s e . d t y t , 7 , , , 7 , 3 q

e as I e t s e . 28 8 e t s e . o s 1 6 2 . V d , q , , 33 , 5 q W rd , , 9 Ve e o f e o s eo f . o et se . 16. dic vi w lif , 3 W rk , th ry , 7 q , V s n u 1 8 i h , 9, 5 . V n i s h ui ti c s e s 1 2 . ct , 9, 9 Xeno an s e 2 . p , 3 Vo a e . h lt ir , 3

a o as e et s e . W rri r c t , 59 q a f n u o a o s o o s n u a u o s o 1 et s e . 1 W rri r , Hi d , th r Hi d Y g phil phy , 4 q , 5 , 53 . mo n s m et se . i , 73 q CATALOGUE OF PUBLICATIONS

O F THE

R O PEN COU T PUB LI S H IN G CO .

PE O E . . C , D O O F O THE PRIMARY FACT RS RGA NIC EVOLUTION .

1 21 u s . P . . o n et. c t p , xvi , 547 Cl th , M LL F MAX E . . U R , THREE INTRO DUCTORY LECTURES O N THE SCIENCE O F T O UG T . H H “ " a o es on en e o n o u o u o s e een . With c rr p d c Th ght With t W rd , b tw F Max Mfi ll er an d a n s a o n th e u e o f e o e Ro Fr ci G lt , D k Argyll , G rg ". m a n an 2 o e s d o e s . 1 8 a es . en s . a e 2 en s . th r p g Cl th , 7 5 c t P p r , 5 c t E THREE LECTUR S O N THE SCIENCE O F LANGU AGE . Th e O o n e s en s o n e u e s a u em e n xf rd U iv r ity Ext i L ct r , with S ppl t , My ” e e es s o s . 1 1 2 a es . 2nd on . o en s . a e 2 0. Pr d c r p g Editi Cl th , 75 c t P p r , 5 OMA E S E O E O R N , G RG HN . T DARWIN A ND A F ER A RWIN . An Expo s iti o n o f th e D a rwi n i an Th eo ry a n d a Di s cus s i o n o f P o s t

a n an u s wo Vo s . .00. n a s o o s e o ns . T $ D rwi i " ti l 3 Si gly , f ll w

1 TH E Y 60 a es . 1 2 I l lus tratI o n s o . DARWINIAN THEOR . 4 p 5 Cl th , - 2 . . . C . . o an . 8 . C I . POST DARWINIAN "UESTIONS Ed y L M rg . Pp 33 AN EX A MINATION O F WEISMANNISM .

2 6 a e s . o a e 0. 3 p g Cl th , P p r , 35 O TH UGHTS O N RELIGIO N .

m ns . a s o . an n o f s e d e e e . A o e on Edit d by Ch rl G r , M , C W t i t r Thir Editi

a es 1 8 . o to P g , 4 Cl th , gilt p ,

OT T . RIB , H F THE PSYCHOLOGY O ATTENTI O N . O F THE DISEA SES PERSONA LITY. THE DISEA SES O F THE WILL .

u o se ans a ons . o en s ea . a e 2 en s . F ull A th ri d tr l ti Cl th , 75 c t ch P p r , 5 c t s t clot e , h , n et. MA E ST CH , RN . THE SCIENCE O F MECHANICS . p I ans a e A CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL E x o s I T O N OF ITS PRINCIPLES . Tr l t d

. . K . 2 0 u s . 3 a es . 6 m . to . by T J MCCORMAC 5 c t 5 4 p g 5 , gilt p POPULAR SCIENTIFIC LECTURES .

1 a es . u s . o to . N et 3 3 p g 4 4 c t Cl th , gilt p , THE A N A LYSIS O F THE SENSATIONS .

. 208 . o n et. Pp Cl th , R E OO V. T . G DWIN , . A LOVERS THREE THOUSAND YE A RS AGO .

A s n a e th e o n o f o omo n . P . 1 . o a s 00. I dic t d by S g S l p 4 B rd , 5 E OLY OAK . H , G

LA RI M. ENGLISH SEC S A CONFESSION OF BELIEF .

1 6 o 0C . ne t. Pp . 4 . Cl th , 5 , N I LL A L E R . C O , C R H INRICH

THE PRO PHETS O F ISRA EL . m n o o u a e es o m O l d es a e s o . P . 200. P p l r Sk tch fr T t t Hi t ry p , Cl th , F THE RISE O F THE PEO PLE O ISRA EL .

S e e E i tom e: Th r ee Sci en ces e o . p q/ , b l w

E T ALF E . BIN , R D - THE PSYCHIC LIFE O F MICRO ORGA NISMS .

u o s e an s a o n . 1 a es . o en s a e 2 en s . A th ri d tr l ti 35 p g Cl th , 75 c t ; P p r , 5 c t O N DOUBLE CONSCI O USNESS .

u es i n E x erimental s o o . a es . a e 1 en s . St di p P ych l gy 93 p g P p r , 5 c t

TOLSTO OU T LEO . I , C N CHRISTIANITY A ND PA TRIOTISM . n n I pr ep ara ti o .

TH E O PEN C O U RT

A M ON THLY M A G A Z I N E

De ote to th e S c ence of e on th e e on of S c en nd v d i R lig i , R lig i i ce , a th e n n of e e i ous en Exte s io th R lig P a rliam t Idea .

TH E OPE N CO UR T d o es n o t un d e r s t a n d by r e ligi o n a ny cree d o r d o g ’ ma e e but m an s o - o n e o n i n s o fa r a s u a h i o n e es s u . tic b li f, w rld c c pti it r g l t c d ct Th e o l d d o gmatic c o n cepti o n o f r eligi o n i s b a s e d up o n th e s ci en c e o f p a s t a ges ; to b as e re ligi o n up o n th e m a tur es t an d true s t th o ught o f th e pres ent me i s th e o f Th e O en Co ur t Th e en our e o . us th e e o n o f O C t i s ti bj ct p Th , r ligi p h f t e e o n o en e a i s th e e o n o f e e an d e a e u . R ligi Sci c , th t , r ligi v rifi d v rifi bl tr th o u o o se to a o n a o o o a n d n a o o Th e O en A lth gh pp d irr ti l rth d xy rr w big try , p Cour t o e s no t a a th e o e e ous e em en o f th e a o us e o n s d tt ck pr p rly r ligi l t v ri r ligi . s e s e e o s unfli n ch i n l b ut o u a n m o s a n d en ea o s It critici th ir rr r g y with t i ity , d v r to es e e o f e m al l a i s u and o o pr rv th th t tr e g d . Th e curren t numb e r s o f Th e Open Co ur t c o nt ai n v a l ua bl e o rigi na l a rticl es h u a a nd a u o s e tran s l a fr o m t e p en s o f di sti ngui sh e d thi nk e rs . A cc r t e th ri d o n s are m a e i n o s o en e an d sm om th e e a u e o f ti d Phil phy , Sci c , Critici fr lit r t r o n n en a u o e an d e e s o f no e o e en n e s a on s are re C ti t l E r p , r vi w t w rthy r c t i v tig ti p s en e o a s o f em n en o s o e s a n d s en s s a re u s e an d t d . P rtr it i t phil ph r ci ti t p bli h d , a s a n a h appropri t e illu tr ti o s acc o mp n y s o m e o f t e articl es .

a n s i n h o a o n Te rm s : a y e r ; to fo r eign co u tri e t e P st l U n i .

n e o es 10 en s . Si gl C pi , c t T H E MO N I S T

A "U ARTE RLY M A G A Z I N E O F

E PH ILOSOP HY AND SCI ENC .

TH E MON I S T di s cus se s th e fun d am en t a l pro bl e m s o f Phil o s o phy i n e a a e a o n s to th e e o us e a an d s o o o a ues o n s th ir pr ctic l r l ti r ligi , thic l , ci l gic l q ti a Th e o o n a e on u e to i ts o umn s o f th e d y . f ll wi g h v c trib t d c l

. LE . . . PROP JOSEPH CONTE , PROP G ROMANES , PROF . C LOMBROSO ,

DR . . . . Y G . . K W T HARRIS , PROF . C LO D MOR AN , PROF E HAEC EL

. Y Y . . H OP F D I N G M D . CONWA , JAMES SULL , PROF H ,

D R. O CHARLES S . PEIRCE , B . BOSAN"UET , F . SWALD , DE L B CE U F MA x O DR . . PROF . F . M LLER , . A BINET , PROF , PROF . E . D . COPE , PROP . ERNST MACH , PROF . JODL ,

. . Y CARUS STERNE , RABBI EMIL HIRSCH , PROF . H M STANLE ,

MR K . S . . . C LADD FRAN LIN , LESTER F WARD , G FERRERO , V MA x VE RWO RN . . . PROP . , PROF H SCHUBERT , J ENN , M . . VO N . X D R . E D . G Y PROF . FELI KLEIN , MONT OMER , PROF H HOLST

Pe r o 0 en s e a I n n an and al l o un es i n . . C py , 5 c t ; Y rly , E gl d c tri U P U

er o 2s 6d e a s 6d . p C py , ; Y rly , g C H I C A G O

THE OPEN C O U RT P U BLIS HING CO . ,

M ono n u n 2 ea bo n S ee B ildi g , 3 4 D r r tr t ,

’ A : 1 o ns on s ou e e S t. . . LONDON DDRESS 7 J h C rt , Fl t , E C i The Religi on of S cience L hr a ry .

o e o n o f bi -m o n u a o ns mo s o f are e n s 0 A c ll cti thly p blic ti , t which r pri t

o o s u s e Th e O en o u u s n o m an . e a b k p bli h d by p C rt P bli hi g C p y Y rly ,

Th e o o s are n e u o n S ep ara t e co pi es a cco rdin g to price s q uo te d . b k pri t d p

o o a e om a e e . g d p p r , fr l rg typ

Th e e o n o f en e a i ts e ao na easona e e R ligi Sci c Libr ry , by xtr rdi rily r bl pric will pl a ce a l arge numb e r o f v al uabl e b o o k s withi n th e rea ch o f all r e ad er s Th e fo ll o wi n g h av e already app ea re d i n th e s eri es :

T e c c 1 h Rel z i on S i en e. . 2 0. N o . . g of By PAUL CARUS 5 Th r ee I ntr od uctor Lectur es on th e Sc i en ce o Th ou h t MAx 2. y f g . By F .

U 2 0. M LLER . 5 T r c u s n n a e h ee Le t r e on th e ci e ce a u MAx MGLL E R. 0. w S q g g . By F . 25 ' s Th e D i sea ses ( Per so n a l z t TH . . 2 0. f J y . By RIBOT 5 '

n Th e Ps ch olo o Atten tz o n TH . . 2 0. g y gy f . By RIBOT 5 s T s Mi cr o— r a n i s ms c h e P ch i c L e o O 2 0. y if f g . By A LFRED BINET . 5

Th e N a tur e o th e ta te 1 0. v f S . By PAUL CARUS . 5 o o O n Do uble Co n s ci o us nes s 1 0. . By ALFRED BINET . 5 F und a m en ta l Pr oblem s o . . 00. t By PAUL CARUS 5 Th e Di sea ses o th e Wi ll 10. . TH . . 2 0 f By RIBOT 5 . Th e r i n a n O i ua e. G . 1 0. I I . g q g g By LUDWI NOIRE 5 Th e F r ee Tr d e tr u le i n E n la n d 1 . a S . 2 . 2 gg g By M . M . TRUMBULL . 50 Wh eelba r r ow n th e La bor ues ti on 1 o 0. 3 . " . By M . M . TRUMBULL . 35 T s l u h 1 . he Go e o B dd a . 0. 4 p f By PAUL CARUS . 35 ' Th e m er Ph i los o h 1 Pr i . . 2 0 5 qf / y By PAUL CARUS 5 . ’ 16 O n Mem or a nd Th e S ec c E n er i es ( th e N ervous S stem y , p ifi g y y . By PROF

G . 1 0 EWALD HERIN 5 . Th e Red em ti on o th e B r a hm a n a e o f n u e . p f . A T l Hi d Lif By RICHARD

2 0. GARBE . 5 A n E x a m i n a ti on Wei s m a n n zls m 1 8 o 0. f . By G . J . ROMANES . 35 mi na l el ecti o n I On Ger S G . 9 . By AU UST WEISMANN 250. Th r ee Th ousa n s 20 Lover s d Yea r A o . . 1 0. g By T . A GOODWIN . 5

2 1 Po ul a r Sci en ti c Lectur es . 0 p fi By ERNST MACH . 35 . A nci ent I n d i a I ts La n ua e a n d Rel i ous 22 i . O G . 2 0 g g g . By H LDENBER 5 Th e Pr o h ts n i a l 2 e A c en t I s r e . C O RN I LL . 2 0. 3 p of By PROF . C . H . 5 H om i lies Sci en ce 0 of . By PAUL CARUS . 35 . Th ou h ts o n R l i 2 . e i on . 0 en s . 5 g g . By G . J . ROMANES 5 c t The Ph i los o h c n 26 A n i e t I nd i a . 0 p y of . By PROP . RICHARD GAREE 25 .

THE OPEN C O U RT P BLI S HIN U G CO .

2 E B O N ST E ET H G I LL C O . 3 4 D AR R R , C I A ,

' E LO O 1 o nson s ou Flee S ee . . ND N 7 J h C rt , t tr t, C