Ceylon.—The inhabitants of the northern part of Ceylon speak the Tamul language, and are Brahminists in creed. They are not, however, the true natives of the island. These latter use a Hindú tongue, called the Singhalese. Its philological relations are exactly those of the Mahratta, Bengali, and Udiya,—neither better nor worse defined, more or less unequivocal. Some make it out to be of Sanskrit, others of Tamulian origin. All that is certain is, that it is more Sanskritic than the proper Tamul, and more Tamul than the Bengali. It is written; and embodies a copious, but worthless literature, its alphabet being derived from that of the Pali language.[184]
This introduces a new characteristic. The Pali has the same relation to Buddhism, that the Sanskrit has to Brahminism. It is the language of the Scriptures, the priest, and the scholar, and, although, at the present moment, it is as little recognized as a holy tongue on the continent of India, as the Greek of the New Testament is at Rome, it divides with the Arabic and Latin, the honour of being the most widely-spread literary language of the world. All the forms of Buddhism in the transgangetic peninsula are embodied in Pali writings. So are those of the Mongols; and so, to a great extent, those of the Tibetans as well. This makes the language and the creed nearly co-extensive. In China, however, and Japan, where great changes have taken place, and where either the development, or the deterioration of Buddhism has gone far enough to abolish the more palpable characteristics of the original Indian doctrine, the Pali language is no longer the medium. It is so, however, for the vast area already indicated.
In Buddhism, as opposed to Brahminism, there is a greater tenderness of animal life in general, whilst less respect is paid to the ox-tribe in particular. There is less also of the system of caste; and, in consequence of this, fewer of those elements of priestly influence, which originate in the ideas of the hereditary transmission of sacro-sanctitude.[185] Buddhism, too, has the credit of running further in the dream-land of subjective metaphysics than Brahminism,—though this, as far as my own very imperfect means of judging go, is doubtful. Into practical pantheism, and into the deification of human reason it does run.
When self-contemplation has reached its highest degree of abstraction, the state of Nirwana is induced. This seems to mean the absorption of the spirit within itself; a condition which at once suggests adjectives like impassive, subjective, exalted, and supra-sensual, or substantives like transcendentalism, egoism, &c., and the like; in some cases with definite ideas to correspond with the term; oftener as mere meaningless words. Such, however, is the nomenclature which is requisite; a nomenclature to which I have recourse, not for the sake of illustrating my subject, but with the view of giving a practical notion of its indistinctness.
Buddha himself is a specimen and model of self-absorption, consummation, perfection, or exaltation rather than a deity, or even a prophet. He shows what purity can effect, rather than teaches what purity consists in. He may even have become what he was, by his own unaided powers of supra-sensual abstraction.
All this is but a series of negations, at least in the way of theology. But his spirit, after the[186] departure of his body from the earth,[52] became incarnate in the body of some successor—and so on ad infinitum. This connects Buddhism with the doctrine of metempsychosis; a doctrine which the incarnations of Brahminism also suggest.
Such are some of the speculative points of Buddhism. Its morality has been greatly, and, perhaps, unduly extolled. So much contemplation can scarcely exist without the condemnation of the more palpable sins of commission. Hence, those vices which are the offspring of passion and ignorance are condemned; as is but natural. The suspension of exertion precludes active vice. Of the active virtues, however, the recognition is as slight as may be; so slight as to make it doubtful whether Buddhism be a better rule for the formation of good citizens than Brahminism. Which has been the most resistant to the influences of Christianity is doubtful.[53]
Just as the Anglo-Saxon language, although it originated in Germany, has survived and developed itself in Britain only, the Buddhist creed, once indigenous to the continent of Hindostan, is now found nowhere between the Himalayas and Cape Comorin; whilst beyond the pale[187] of India, it is as widely extended as the English language is beyond the limits of Germany. The rival religion of the Brahmins expelled it. Which of the two was the older is uncertain. Still more difficult is it to determine how far each is a separate substantive mythological growth, or merely a modification of the rival creed.
I lay but little stress upon the internal evidence derivable from the character of the religions themselves. Both are complicated and artificial—both, perhaps, equally so. In contrast, however, to the more speculative and transcendental points, suggestive of recent development, there are others indicative of great antiquity. Nevertheless, it is as difficult to affirm that the primitive parts of the one creed are older than the most primitive parts of the other, as it is to affirm that the highest transcendentalisms are more recent.