The Reconciliation of Races and Religions Part 2

Buddhism, then, battled for leave to do the world good in its own way, though the intolerance of Islam too soon effaced its footprints. There is still some chance, however, that Sufism may be a record of its activity; in fact, this great religious upgrowth may be of Indian rather than of Neoplatonic origin, so that the only question is whether Sufism developed out of the Vedanta or out of the religious philosophy of Buddhism. That, however, is too complex a question to be discussed here.

All honour to Buddhism for its n.o.ble effort. In some undiscoverable way Buddhists acted as pioneers for the destined Deliverer. Let us, then, consider what precious spiritual jewels its sons and daughters can bring to the new Fraternity. There are many most inadequate statements about Buddhism. Personally, I wish that such expressions as 'the cold metaphysic of Buddhism' might be abandoned; surely metaphysicians, too, have religious needs and may have warm hearts.

At the same time I will not deny that I prefer the northern variety of Buddhism, because I seem to myself to detect in the southern Buddhism a touch of a highly-refined egoism. Self-culture may or may not be combined with self-sacrifice. In the case of the Buddha it was no doubt so combined, as the following pa.s.sage, indited by him, shows--

'All the means that can be used as bases for doing right are not worth one sixteenth part of the emanc.i.p.ation of the heart through love. That takes all those up into itself, outs.h.i.+ning them in radiance and in glory.' [Footnote: Mrs. Rhys Davids, _Buddhism_, p. 229.]

What, then, are the jewels of the Buddhist which he would fain see in the world's spiritual treasury?

He will tell you that he has many jewels, but that three of them stand out conspicuously--the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha. Of these the first is 'Sakya Muni, called the Buddha (the Awakened One).' His life is full of legend and mythology, but how it takes hold of the reader! Must we not p.r.o.nounce it the finest of religious narratives, and thank the scholars who made the _Lalita Vistara_ known to us?

The Buddha was indeed a supernormal man; morally and physically he must have had singular gifts. To an extraordinary intellect he joined the enthusiasm of love, and a thirst for service.

The second of the Buddhist brother's jewels is the Dharma, i.e.

the Law or Essential Rightness revealed by the Buddha. That the Master laid a firm practical foundation for his religion cannot be denied, and if Jews and Christians reverence the Ten Words given through 'Moses,' much more may Buddhists reverence the ten moral precepts of Sakya Muni. Those, however, whose aim is Buddhas.h.i.+p (i.e. those who propose to themselves the more richly developed ideal of northern Buddhists) claim the right to modify those precepts just as Jesus modified the Law of Moses. While, therefore, we recognize that good has sometimes come even out of evil, we should also acknowledge the superiority of Buddhist countries and of India in the treatment both of other human beings and of the lower animals.

The Sangha, or Monastic Community, is the third treasure of Buddhism, and the satisfaction of the Buddhist laity with the monastic body is said to be very great. At any rate, the cause of education in Burma owes much to the monks, but it is hard to realize how the Monastic Community can be in the same sense a 'refuge' from the miseries of the world as the Buddha or Dharmakaya.

The name Dharmakaya [Footnote: Johnston, _Buddhist China_, p. 77.] (Body of Dharma, or system of rightness) may strike strangely upon our ears, but northern Buddhism makes much of it, and even though it may not go back to Sakya Muni himself, it is a development of germs latent in his teaching; and to my own mind there is no more wonderful conception in the great religions than that of Dharmakaya. If any one attacks our Buddhist friends for atheism, they have only to refer (if they can admit a synthesis of northern and southern doctrines) to the conception of Dharmakaya, of Him who is 'for ever Divine and Eternal,' who is 'the One, devoid of all determinations.' 'This Body of Dharma,' we are told, 'has no boundary, no quarters, but is embodied in all bodies.... All forms of corporeality are involved therein; it is able to create all things. a.s.suming any concrete material form, as required by the nature and condition of karma, it illuminates all creations.... There is no place in the universe where this Body does not prevail. The universe becomes dust; this Body for ever remains. It is free from all opposites and contraries, yet it is working in all things to lead them to Nirvana.' [Footnote: Suzuki, _Outlines_, pp. 223-24.]

In fact, this Dharmakaya is the ultimate principle of cosmic energy.

We may call it principle, but it is not, like Brahman, absolutely impersonal. Often it a.s.sumes personality, when it receives the name of Tathagata. It has neither pa.s.sions nor prejudices, but works for the salvation of all sentient beings universally. Love (_karuna_) and intelligence (_bodhi_) are equally its characteristics. It is only the veil of illusion (_maya_) which prevents us from seeing Dharmakaya in its magnificence. When this veil is lifted, individual existences as such will lose their significance; they will become sublimated and enn.o.bled in the oneness of Dharmakaya. [Footnote: _Ibid_. p. 179.]

Will the reader forgive me if I mention some other jewels of the Buddhist faith? One is the Buddha Ami'tabha, and the other Kuanyin or Kwannon, his son or daughter; others will be noted presently. The latter is especially popular in China and j.a.pan, and is generally spoken of by Europeans as the 'G.o.ddess of Mercy.' 'G.o.ddess,' however, is incorrect, [Footnote: Johnston, _Buddhist China_, p. 123.]

just as 'G.o.d' would be incorrect in the case of Ami'tabha. Sakya Muni was considered greater than any of the G.o.ds. All such Beings were saviours and helpers to man, just as Jesus is looked up to by Christian believers as a saviour and deliverer, and perhaps I might add, just as there are, according to the seer-poet Dante, three compa.s.sionate women (_donne_) in heaven. [Footnote: Dante, _D.C., Inf._ ii. 124 _f_. The 'blessed women' seem to be Mary (the mother of Christ), Beatrice, and Lucia.] Kwannon and her Father may surely be retained by Chinese and j.a.panese, not as G.o.ds, but as gracious _bodhisatts_ (i.e. Beings whose essence is intelligence).

I would also mention here as 'jewels' of the Buddhists (1) their tenderness for all living creatures. Legend tells of Sakya Muni that in a previous state of existence he saved the life of a doe and her young one by offering his own life as a subst.i.tute. In one of the priceless panels of Borobudur in Java this legend is beautifully used. [Footnote: Havell, _Indian Sculpture and Painting_, p. 123.] It must indeed have been almost more impressive to the Buddhists even than Buddha's precept.

E'en as a mother watcheth o'er her child, Her only child, as long as life doth last, So let us, for all creatures great or small, Develop such a boundless heart and mind, Ay, let us practise love for all the world, Upward and downward, yonder, thence, Uncramped, free from ill-will and enmity.[a]

[Footnote a: Mrs. Rhys Davids, _Buddhism_, p. 219.]

(2 and 3) Faith in the universality of inspiration and a hearty admission that spiritual pre-eminence is open to women. As to the former, Suzuki has well pointed out that Christ is conceived of by Buddhists quite as the Buddha himself. [Footnote: Suzuki, _Outlines of the Mahayana Buddhism_.] 'The Dharmakaya revealed itself as Sakya Muni to the Indian mind, because that was in harmony with its needs. The Dharmakaya appeared in the person of Christ on the Semitic stage, because it suited their taste best in this way.' As to the latter, there were women in the ranks of the Arahats in early times; and, as the _Psalms of the Brethren_ show, there were even child-Arahats, and, so one may presume, girl-Arahats. And if it is objected that this refers to the earlier and more flouris.h.i.+ng period of the Buddhist religion, yet it is in a perfectly modern summary of doctrine that we find these suggestive words, [Footnote: Omoro in _Oxford Congress of Religions, Transactions_, i. 152.] 'With this desire even a maiden of seven summers [Footnote: 'The age of seven is a.s.signed to all at their ordination' (_Psalms of the Brethren_, p. x.x.x.) The reference is to child-Arahats.] may be a leader of the four mult.i.tudes of beings.' That spirituality has nothing to do with the s.e.xes is the most wonderful law in the teachings of the Buddhas.'

India being the home of philosophy, it is not surprising either that Indian religion should take a predominantly philosophical form, or that there should be a great variety of forms of Indian religion. This is not to say that the feelings were neglected by the framers of Indian theory, or that there is any essential difference between the forms of Indian religion. On the contrary, love and intelligence are inseparably connected in that religion and there are fundamental ideas which impart a unity to all the forms of Hindu religion. That form of religion, however, in which love (_karuna_) receives the highest place, and becomes the centre conjointly with intelligence of a theory of emanc.i.p.ation and of perfect Buddhahood, is neither Vedantism nor primitive Buddhism, but that later development known as the Mahayana. Germs indeed there are of the later theory; and how should there not be, considering the wisdom and goodness of those who framed those systems? How beautiful is that ancient description of him who would win the joy of living in Brahma (Tagore, _Sadhana_, p. 106), and not much behind it is the following pa.s.sage of the Bhagavad-Gita, 'He who hates no single being, who is friendly and compa.s.sionate to all ... whose thought and reason are directed to Me, he who is [thus] devoted to Me is dear to Me' (Discourse xii. 13, 14).

This is a fine utterance, and there are others as fine.

One may therefore expect that most Indian Vedantists will, on entering the Bahai Society, make known as widely as they can the beauties of the Bhagavad-Gita. I cannot myself profess that I admire the contents as much as some Western readers, but much is doubtless lost to me through my ignorance of Sanskrit. Prof. Garbe and Prof. Hopkins, however, confirm me in my view that there is often a falling off in the immediateness of the inspiration, and that many pa.s.sages have been interpolated. It is important to mention this here because it is highly probable that in future the Scriptures of the various churches and sects will be honoured by being read, not less devotionally but more critically. Not the Bibles as they stand at present are revealed, but the immanent Divine Wisdom. Many things in the outward form of the Scriptures are, for us, obsolete. It devolves upon us, in the spirit of filial respect, to criticize them, and so help to clear the ground for a new prophet.

A few more quotations from the fine Indian Scriptures shall be given. Their number could be easily increased, and one cannot blame those Western admirers of the Gita who display almost as fervent an enthusiasm for the unknown author of the Gita as Dante had for his _savio duca_ in his fearsome pilgrimage.

THE BHAGAVAD-GITA AND THE UPANISHADS

Such criticism was hardly possible in England, even ten or twenty years ago, except for the Old Testament. Some scholars, indeed, had had their eyes opened, but even highly cultured persons in the lay-world read the Bhagavad-Gita with enthusiastic admiration but quite uncritically. Much as I sympathize with Margaret n.o.ble (Sister Nivedita), Jane Hay (of St. Abb's, Berwicks.h.i.+re, N.B.), and Rose R. Anthon, I cannot desire that their excessive love for the Gita should find followers. I have it on the best authority that the apparent superiority of the Indian Scriptures to those of the Christian world influenced Margaret n.o.ble to become 'Sister Nivedita'--a great result from a comparatively small cause. And Miss Anthon shows an excess of enthusiasm when she puts these words (without note or comment) into the mouth of an Indian student:--

'But now, O sire, I have found all the wealth and treasure and honour of the universe in these words that were uttered by the King of Kings, the Lover of Love, the Giver of Heritages. There is nothing I ask for; no need is there in my being, no want in my life that this Gita does not fill to overflowing.' [Footnote: _Stories of India_, 1914, p. 138.]

There are in fact numerous pa.s.sages in the Gita which, united, would form a _Holy Living_ and a _Holy Dying_, if we were at the pains to add to the number of the pa.s.sages a few taken from the Upanishads. Vivekananda and Rabindranath Tagore have already studded their lectures with jewels from the Indian Scriptures. The Hindus themselves delight in their holy writings, but if these writings are to become known in the West, the grain must first be sifted. In other words, there must be literary and perhaps also (I say it humbly) moral criticism.

I will venture to add a few quotations:--

'Whenever there is a decay of religion, O Bharatas, and an ascendency of irreligion, then I manifest myself.

'For the protection of the good, for the destruction of evildoers, for the firm establishment of religion, I am born in every age.'

The other pa.s.sages are not less n.o.ble.

'They also who wors.h.i.+p other G.o.ds and make offering to them with faith, O son of Kunti, do verily make offering to me, though not according to ordinance.'

'Never have I not been, never hast thou, and never shall time yet come when we shall not all be. That which pervades this universe is imperishable; there is none can make to perish that changeless being. This never is born, and never dies, nor may it after being come again to be not; this unborn, everlasting, abiding, Ancient, is not slain when the body is slain. Knowing This to be imperishable, everlasting, unborn, changeless, how and whom can a man make to be slain or slay? As a man lays aside outworn garments, and takes others that are new, so the Body-Dweller puts away outworn bodies and goes to others that are new. Everlasting is This, dwelling in all things, firm, motionless, ancient of days.'

JUDAISM

Judaism, too, is so rich in spiritual treasures that I hesitate to single out more than a very few jewels. It is plain, however, that it needs to be reformed, and that this need is present in many of the traditional forms which enshrine so n.o.ble a spiritual experience. The Sabbath, for instance, is as the apple of his eye to every true-hearted Jew; he addresses it in his spiritual songs as a Princess. And he does well; the t.i.tle Princess belongs of right to 'Shabbath.' For the name--be it said in pa.s.sing--is probably a corruption of a t.i.tle of the Mother-G.o.ddess Ashtart, and it would, I think, have been no blameworthy act if the religious transformers of Israelite myths had made a special myth, representing Shabbath as a man. When the Messiah comes, I trust that _He_ will do this. For 'the Son of Man is Lord also of the Sabbath.'

The faith of the Messiah is another of Israel's treasures. Or rather, perhaps I should say, the faith in the Messiahs, for one Messiah will not meet the wants of Israel or the world. The Messiah, or the Being-like-a-man (Dan. vii. 13), is a supernatural Being, who appears on earth when he is wanted, like the Logos. We want Messiah badly now; specially, I should say, we Christians want 'great-souled ones'

(Mahatmas), who can 'guide us into all the truth' (John xvi. 13). That they have come in the past, I doubt not. G.o.d could not have left his human children in the lurch for all these centuries. One thousand Jews of Tihran are said to have accepted Baha'ullah as the expected Messiah. They were right in what they affirmed, and only wrong in what they denied. And are we not all wrong in virtually denying the Messiahs.h.i.+p of women-leaders like Kurratu'l 'Ayn; at least, I have only met with this n.o.ble idea in a work of Fiona Macleod.

CHRISTIANITY

And what of our own religion?

What precious jewels are there which we can share with our Oriental brethren? First of all one may mention that wonderful picture of the divine-human Saviour, which, full of mystery as it is, is capable of attracting to its Hero a fervent and loving loyalty, and melting the hardest heart. We have also a portrait (implicit in the Synoptic Gospels)--the product of nineteenth century criticism--of the same Jesus Christ, and yet who could venture to affirm that He really was the same, or that a subtle aroma had not pa.s.sed away from the Life of lives? In this re-painted portrait we have, no longer a divine man, but simply a great and good Teacher and a n.o.ble Reformer. This portrait too is in its way impressive, and capable of lifting men above their baser selves, but it would obviously be impossible to take this great Teacher and Reformer for the Saviour and Redeemer of mankind.

We have further a pearl of great price in the mysticism of Paul, which presupposes, not the Jesus of modern critics, nor yet the Jesus of the Synoptics, but a splendid heart-uplifting Jesus in the colours of mythology. In this Jesus Paul lived, and had a constant ecstatic joy in the everlasting divine work of creation. He was 'crucified with Christ,' and it was no longer Paul that lived, but Christ that lived in him. And the universe--which was Paul's, inasmuch as it was Christ's--was transformed by the same mysticism. 'It was,' says Evelyn Underhill, [Footnote: _The Mystic Way_, p. 194 (chap. iii.

'St. Paul and the Mystic Way').] 'a universe soaked through and through by the Presence of G.o.d: that transcendent-immanent Reality, "above all, and through all, and in you all" as fontal "Father,"

energising "Son," indwelling "Spirit," in whom every mystic, Christian or non-Christian, is sharply aware that "we live and move and have our being." To his extended consciousness, as first to that of Jesus, this Reality was more actual than anything else--"G.o.d is all in all."'

It is true, this view of the Universe as G.o.d-filled is probably not Paul's, for the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians are hardly that great teacher's work. But it is none the less authentic, 'G.o.d is all and in all'; the whole Universe is temporarily a symbol by which G.o.d is at once manifested and veiled. I fear we have largely lost this. It were therefore better to reconquer this truth by India's help. Probably indeed the initial realization of the divinity of the universe (including man) is due to an increased acquaintance with the East and especially with Persia and India.

And I venture to think that Catholic Christians have conferred a boon on their Protestant brethren by emphasizing the truth of the feminine element (see pp. 31, 37) in the manifestation of the Deity, just as the Chinese and j.a.panese Buddhists have done for China and j.a.pan, and the modern reformers of Indian religion have done for India. This too is a 'gem of purest ray.'

PART II

BIOGRAPHICAL AND HISTORICAL

SEYYID 'ALI MUHAMMAD (THE BAB)

Seyyid 'Ali Muhammad was born at Hafiz' city. It was not his lot, however, to rival that great lyric poet; G.o.d had far other designs for him. Like St. Francis, he had a merchant for his father, but this too was widely apart from 'AH Muhammad's destiny, which was neither more nor less than to be a manifestation of the Most High. His birthday was on the 1st Muharrem, A.H. 1236 (March 26, A.D. 1821). His maternal uncle, [Footnote: This relative of the Bab is mentioned in Baha-'ullah's _Book of Ighan_, among the men of culture who visited Baha-'ullah at Baghdad and laid their difficulties before him. His name was Seyyid 'Ali Muhammad (the same name as the Bab's).] however, had to step in to take a father's place; he was early left an orphan. When eighteen or nineteen years of age he was sent, for commercial reasons, to Bus.h.i.+re, a place with a villainous climate on the Persian Gulf, and there he wrote his first book, still in the spirit of s.h.i.+'ite orthodoxy.

It was in A.D. 1844 that a great change took place, not so much in doctrine as in the outward framework of Ali Muhammad's life. That the twelfth Imam should reappear to set up G.o.d's beneficent kingdom, that his 'Gate' should be born just when tradition would have him to be born, was perhaps not really surprising; but that an ordinary lad of s.h.i.+raz should be chosen for this high honour was exciting, and would make May 23rd a day memorable for ever. [Footnote: _TN_, pp. 3 (n.1), 220 _f_.; cp. _AMB_, p. 204.]

It was, in fact, on this day (at 2.5 A.M.) that, having turned to G.o.d for help, he cried out, 'G.o.d created me to instruct these ignorant ones, and to save them from the error into which they are plunged.'