creation nor dissolution, the world has existed always in the same visible form which it now exhibits. Jaimini seemed to deny the existence of Paramatma, or the supreme soul, and to admit only that of Jiv Atma, or vital soul; for which reason he was charged with atheism; and in the play we find one of his pupils asking if there be any other being besides those visible beings whom we behold. This tenet, however, was rejected by others of the sect, and accordingly, Kumaril, in reply to the above question, says, that there is a being distinct from the universe, who is the judge of actions, and the dispenser of rewards and punishments."

In the Ayeen Akbery, we are informed, that Buddha,* was son of a Rajah of the province of Magadha, now called Bahar; that his mother was named Maia, that he was born 2962 years before the period at which the author wrote, which was in the

* Buddha is one of the names of the Hindu deity that corresponds with the god Mercury.

40th year of the reign of Akber; consequently he must have been born 3179 years ago, or 1364 years before the Christian æra.*

He

The result of our inquiries shews, that though Buddha denied the Vedas to be of divine origin, and rejected some of the doctrines contained in them, he adhered to others; amongst these, he professed a belief in a future state of rewards and punishments, and in the transmigration of souls. He also preserved a considerable part of the Brahminical mythology. seems to have wished to reform religion, as then practised, not to subvert it. The followers of Buddha dissent from the Brahminical doctrines in two points, namely, in rejecting the history of the creation and destruction of this world; in believing it to be eternal, and in not admitting the division of mankind into casts. This may account

* Akber was born in the year of Christ 1542, and proclaimed Emperor in 1556; the 40th year of his reign, consequently, was 1596 of our æra.

for not finding the division into casts to exist in the Indo-Chinese nations, or countries lying between India and China, in which it appears the tenets of Buddha have been almost universally introduced.* Buddha was the first, it appears, who opposed human sacrifices, or even bloody sacrifices of any kind; and it is, perhaps, owing to his exertions that the former were entirely abolished, and that the latter are very rarely practised.

A supposition has lately been advanced, that the tenets of Buddha were professed, and prevailed, previously to those of the Brahmins; but the arguments, employed against that opinion, prove, we think, in a way perfectly satisfactory, that the Buddhaists are to be considered merely as seceders from the Brahminical faith, many of whose tenets they preserve, in the same manner as is practised by the sectaries of other religions.†

* See pp. 225, 226.

+ See Asiat. Researches, Svo. vol. ix. p. 293, article by Mr. H. T. Colebrooke.

With respect to the hatred borne by the Brahmins to the Buddhaists, alluded to by Sir William Jones, and the animosity and enthusiasm, which we must also suppose to exist in their opponents, we may apply an observation made by General Malcolm, on another sect:-" There is no part of oriental biography, in which it is more difficult to separate truth from falsehood, than that which relates to the history of religious impostors. The account of their lives is generally recorded, either by devoted disciples and warm adherents, or by violent enemies and bigotted persecutors. The former, from enthusiastic admiration, decorate them with every quality and accomplishment that can adorn men; the latter, with equal enthusiasm and aversion, misrepresent their characters, and detract from all their merits and pretensions."*

Another sect, called the Jainas, or Jains, now exists, chiefly in Mysore, Canara, and Guzerat. Having adopted some of the tenets of Buddha, they were for some time,

by strangers, confounded with the Buddhaists. Different, however, from them, they observe the division of the people into four casts, consisting as with the Hindus, of the Brahmin, the Cshatriya, the Vaisya, and Sudra:* but, on the other hand, they agree with the Buddhaists, in denying the sacred origin of the Vedas, and at the same time in observing many of the doctrines contained in them.

They condemn the practice of sacrifices, and some other ceremonies which the followers of the Vedas perform, holding it absurd to expect to obtain thereby any good effects, either in this world, or in a future state. They are said to admit of no opinions, but such as are founded on perception, or established by irrefragable testimony; they say: "A wise man will only believe what he seeth with his own eyes;" hence they might be considered as atheists: but notwithstanding this maxim, which must be taken in a limited sense, and as regarding miracles, we find a positive de