decline two faiths—at first very similar to one another—rose from its ashes, the Jaina and the Vaishnava.” The serpent is almost always found in Jaina temples as an object of worship, while it appears everywhere in Vaishnava tradition.[183] But elsewhere Mr. Fergusson tells us that, although Buddhism owed its establishment to Naga tribes, yet its supporters repressed the worship of the serpent, elevating tree-worship in its place.[184] It is difficult to understand how the Vaishnavas, who are worshippers of the female power,[185] and who hate the _lingam_, can yet so highly esteem the serpent which has indirectly, at least, reference to the male principle. Perhaps, however, we may find an explanation in Mr. Fergusson’s own remarks as to the character and development of Buddhism. According to him, Buddhism was chiefly influential among Naga tribes, and “was little more than a revival of the coarser superstitions of the aboriginal races,[186] purified and refined by the application of Aryan morality, and elevated by doctrines borrowed from the intellectual superiority of the Aryan races.[187]” As to its development, the sculptures on the Sanchi Tope show that at about the beginning of the Christian era, although the _dagoba_, the _chakra_ or wheel, the _tree_, and other emblems, were worshipped, the serpent hardly appears; while at Amravati, three centuries later, this animal had become equal to Buddha himself.[188] Moreover, there can be no doubt that the _lingam_ was an emblem of Buddha, as was also the _lotus_, which represents the same idea—the conjunction of the male and female elements, although in a higher sense perfect wisdom.[189] The association of the same ideas is seen in the noted prayer _Om mani padmi hum_ (“Oh, the Jewel in the Lotus”), which refers to the birth of Padmipani from the sacred lotus flower,[190] but also, there can be little doubt, to the phallus and the yoni. We may suppose, therefore, that whatever the moral doctrine taught by Gautama, he used the old Phallic symbols, although it may be with a peculiar application. If the opinion expressed by Mr. Fergusson as to the introduction into India of the Vaishnava faith by an early immigrant race be correct, it must have existed in the time of Gautama, and indeed the Ion-ism of Western Asia is traditionally connected with India itself at a very early date,[191] although probably the early centre of Ion-ism, the worship of the Dove or Yoni, was, as Bryant supposes, in Chaldea.[192] We see no trace, however, in Buddhism proper of _Sacti Puja_, and I would suggest that, instead of abolishing either, Gautama substituted for the separate symbols of the linga and the yoni, the association of the two in the _lingam_. If this were so, we can well understand how, on the fall of Buddhism, Siva-worship[193] may have retained this compound symbol, with many of the old Naga ideas, although with little actual reference to the serpent itself, other than as a symbol of life and