Buddhism and Christianity: A Parallel and a ContrastScott, Archibald
Religion
Buddhism and Christianity: A Parallel and a Contrast
Scott, Archibald
Buddhism -- Relations -- Christianity; Christianity and other religions -- Buddhism
no man can show that the legend of Buddha, in a form containing any
coincidence which could be held to argue a borrowing from it by
Christians, was in existence before the Christian era”; “that all the
various versions of the legend in any language date from a time later
than the Christian era”; “that the chief Sanskrit authority for it
cannot be proved in the judgment of the most competent critics to have
existed in its present form nearly as far back as the Christian era”;
and though he does not allege any actual transference from the Gospel to
the Buddha legend, he avers with justifiable confidence that the
opportunity for “such a transference before the Sanskrit version assumed
its present form is an indubitable fact.”[44]
These suggestions, though just as worthy of consideration and support as
the theory that Christianity is either an offshoot of Vedic Brahminism
or a direct product of Buddhist speculation, need not be discussed at
present. We may content ourselves with the conclusions formed by our
most reliable authorities, that Buddhism and Christianity in their
origin and earliest development were perfectly independent of each
other. The births of their founders were separated by centuries, and the
spheres of their ministry by almost the whole extent of Asia. While thus
sundered by the conditions of both time and space, they were still more
so by their intellectual peculiarities and antecedents. The Indian
differed very widely from the Jew in his way of looking at and reasoning
about things. He would be very differently impressed by the same or
similar phenomena, and he would communicate his impressions by a very
different method. Geographically India was shut up from the rest of the
world, and the Aryans who went down into it were left in a manner hardly
paralleled by other peoples to develop their own life out of itself, and
according to its own laws. In far less favourable circumstances, and far
removed from the educational stimulus of contact with alien or cognate
nations, they came to stand alone as a people scarcely intelligible by
others. The Jews, on the other hand, were early brought into the stream
of human movement. Mingled with many peoples, sent from land to land,
they became in spite of their passionate love for their own country the
cosmopolitans of the world. Consequently when the two races came in
contact, the circles of thought and feeling in which they moved could
hardly be said to touch. Solomon’s sailors, as regards religious or
philosophical treasures, could neither give nor take away. They had
almost nothing in common with the strange people whom they met. The
Sanskrit words which they took home to designate the peculiar products
obtained in Ophir indicated how helpless they would have been to
understand the metaphysics of India even had they inquired about them.
The natives of Western India a thousand years before Christ were as
helpless to understand the Jew. You have only to compare a prophecy of
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account