Pantheism, it is well known, lies at the foundation of Hindu Polytheism. It may be indeed doubted if there has ever been a Polytheistic system apart from a Pantheistic element. The Hindus generally cannot work out the Pantheistic theory, as the Pundits do, but the most illiterate are familiar with its commonplaces, and are ready with their avowal. We often hear, "Is not God everywhere? Does He not pervade all? Is He not all? Is not all evolved from Him, as the spider's web is evolved from its body? Does not all emanate from Him, as the stream flows from the fountain and rays from the sun? Are we not all portions of Him? We may worship anything and everything if only we see God in it. There are differences in the sparks from the central fire, some far brighter than others. The gods are the brightest sparks, and therefore they are specially worthy of worship." In reply we have to insist on the difference between the Creator and the creature, between the Ruler and His subject. We are often told it is God that makes us speak and act, and we are puppets dancing as He draws the strings. In protest against this doctrine we appeal to the acknowledgment they themselves make of the essential distinction between right and wrong, the one to be done, the other to be shunned, and show that if their Pantheistic notion be accepted the distinction is obliterated, and the floodgate is open to the commission of all wickedness.
The most advanced thought of Hindu philosophy is that all is Maya, illusion, the play, the amusement of the Supreme, who leads us to believe that we are, that we have a separate existence, which we have not; but at last the illusion will come to an end, all will be absorbed in Brahm, as the water in the clouds falls into the sea; there will be no conscious existence in the universe. Brahm himself will glide into a profound slumber from which he will awake after a vast season of repose. A rope lying on the road is taken for a serpent, but it is only a rope. There are hundreds of suns glancing on the waters, but there is only one sun. In reply we contend that illusion implies reality; that if there was no reality illusion would be impossible. If there was no serpent a rope would not be taken for it. If there was no sun there would be no suns glancing in the waters.
The question has been often discussed, Have the Hindus any idea of a living, personal God? It is unquestionable they often speak as if they had. They often say, "Does not God see? Does He not know? Will He not punish us if we do what is wrong?" It is difficult to say to what degree this notion has been formed and cherished from intercourse for ages with Muhammadans, and how far it comes from the demand of the human spirit for the living God. Some eminent Sanscrit scholars tell us that the Vedas teach Pantheism, while others assert that in their most ancient teaching they assert the doctrine of a living, personal God. From this divided opinion it is plain that the teaching of the Vedas on this vital subject is ambiguous. At any rate there cannot be a doubt that the modern Hindus have some notion of God as a living, conscious One apart from His creatures, although it is held with Pantheistic and Polytheistic notions, which are antagonistic to it, and greatly weaken its influence. Its being held at all is very serviceable to a missionary in the prosecution of his work.
In a city like Benares many have acquired a considerable acquaintance with the Bible, and these endeavour to find flaws in it to show that our religion is as assailable as theirs.
I must not go further into these details of evangelistic work. As I am giving them my past life comes vividly to my remembrance. I remember its pleasures, and also its difficulties and trials. I feel as if I was engaged in preaching to the Hindus among whom I have spent a great part of my life, and discussing with them the great questions which affect God and man. I am consequently in danger of saying more than can be interesting to my readers.
MUHAMMADAN OPPOSITION TO THE GOSPEL.
In Benares it is rare to have only Hindus for our hearers. We very often have Muhammadans also, and, they are our most eager and bitter opponents. All I can now say about them is that they are bent on entrapping us with questions about the Sonship of Christ, the Trinity in the Godhead, the authenticity of the Scriptures as we now have them, the alleged incompleteness of Christ's prophetic office, as proved, they think, by the promise of the Paraclete as well as by the predictions in both the Old and New Testaments. Among Muhammadans we have met individuals who seemed sincere inquirers after truth, who seemed bent on ascertaining what is true and discovering what is false. We have been gratified with their apparent candour, humility, and reasonableness. We must acknowledge these have been a small minority compared with the many whose pride and bigotry have shut up their mind against everything we had to advance, and whose sole aim has been to assail Christianity and Christians.
In the prosecution of the evangelistic work, which I have endeavoured to describe, missionaries come into contact with all classes. The seed of the word thus sown far and wide may remain for a time hidden, but we have every reason to hope it will some time spring up and bring forth abundant fruit.