The fact of the oldest inscriptions being in the Pali dialect, is favourable to the greater antiquity of Buddhism, but it is not conclusive. The notion that Sanskrit itself is comparatively recent, of course subtracts from that of Brahminism. But this is far from being admitted. Besides which, it by no means follows, that because Brahminism is, comparatively speaking, recent, Buddhism must be ancient.
The best clue in this labyrinth of conflicting[188] opinions is the study of the superstitions of the ruder tribes of the hill-ranges of India itself, of the sub-Himalayas, and of the Indo-Chinese peninsula; the result of which investigation will be that that creed which has most points in common with the primitive and unmodified mythologies of the Tamulian stock, and of those branches of the monosyllabic populations nearest akin thereto, has also the best claim to be considered as the older.
In my own mind, I believe that the Bedo of the Rajmahali mountaineers, is the Batho of the Bodo, the Pennu of the Khonds, and the Potteang of the Kukis,[54]—name for name. I believe this without doubt or hesitation. But if I ask myself the import of this identity, the answer is unsatisfactory. There is doubt and hesitation in abundance. Bedo, Batho, Petto, and Potteang, may represent the germ of what afterwards became Buddh-ism. They may exhibit the Indian creed in its rudiments. True. But they may also represent it in its fragments, so that Bedo and Batho may be but Buddh, distorted in form, and but imperfectly comprehended in import. In our own Gospel, the name for the place of punishment, which the Greeks called Hades, and the Hebrews typified by Gehenna, is the name of a Saxon goddess Hela; and, in this particular instance,[189] a point of our original paganism has been taken up into our present Christianity. The same is the case with the Finnic nation, where Yumala signifies God; Yumala being as truly heathen as Jupiter. On the other hand we find amongst the genuine pagan Gallas of Africa, an object of respect or worship called Miriam. What is this? No true piece of heathendom at all. Dr. Beke has given good reasons for believing that it means the Virgin Mother of the Saviour, the only extant member of the Christian Revelation now known to that once imperfectly Christianized community.
Buddhism, then, may claim a higher antiquity than Brahminism under the two following conditions.
1. That the names Batho, &c., be really a form of Buddh.
2. That they have belonged to superstitions in which they occur from the beginning; and are not in the same category with the Miriam of the Gallas, i.e., recent introductions from a wholly different religion—grafts rather than embryos.
How far this latter is the case must be ascertained by a wide and minute inquiry, foreign to the present work.
It is no wonder that, side by side with a semi-philosophical creed like Buddhism, we should have such a phenomenon as Devil-worship. When[190] the spirit falls short of its due degree of self-sustained hardihood, fear finds its way to the heart. The evil powers are then propitiated; sometimes in a manner savouring of dignity, sometimes with groveling and grotesque cowardice. The Yezid of Mesopotamia, whose belief in the power of an evil spirit is derived from the Manicheism of old, shows his fear of the arch-enemy by simple and not unreasonable acts of negation. He does nothing that may offend; never mentions his name; and dwells on his attributes as little as possible. The devil-worshipper of Ceylon uses such invocations as the following:—
I.
Come, thou sanguinary Devil, at the sixth hour. Come, thou fierce Devil, upon this stage, and accept the offerings made to thee!