ReLy Luh, aden, Londons Lures Price, 81 ie nets The author has essayed an ambi tious task, no less than "an examination," analytical, explanatory, Jand critical, of the life of the Founder of Buddhis ligion and philosophy, its influence upon other religions, philosophies, and on the ancient and, modern social and ethical system, social. upheavals, and 'The first chapters—dealing with India before Buddhiém, the faiths and philosophies in the Buddha's time, the authentic as compared with' the legendary' life of the Buddha, the Inter deveployments of the various "schools," and the growth of a specific Buddhist mythology—contain much valuable in" formation, But, comments J.E.E. in the "Manchester Guardian," when, we come to the exposition of the Buddha's teaching we confess to a sense of disappointment, 'This is not Buddhism as the Buddhist understands it, and there are mean ings rend into it with which' no Buddhist would agree. But Sir Hari Singh Gout is a Hindu, and this would seem to explain the matter. He refers to the difficulties of European savants in. arriving at clear understanding of Buddhism, brought up, as they: are, in a different school of thought.' But to Hindu, educated in' Brahmanical theism and dualism, the. essential monism of the Buddha obviously presents equal difficult For example, the god-idea did not enter into the Buddha's system, nor did he specially deny the god Are we ate leawsa cctusans? Most certainly if the doctrine of paticeasamuppado, or "dependent. origination," thoroughly grasped: for it is then realized that there never. was a "frst cause," and that the pheno monal universe, though transitory in its forms, is eternal and never The author will Buddha taught a 5 despite the Buddha's decided denial fof esotericism. It is, of course, true that Buddhism did develop an esoteric side, through the importa. tion of Hindu ideas into the Mahayana, but it formed no part of the Buddha's teaching, and it is not accepted by Buddhists of the older school, nor by those of the modern, the Navayana, "The esoteric doctrine," we are told, invokes the aid of the law of Karma (sic), or predestination, which it tries' to reconcile with' free will But Karma is. not predestination, hor can it be reconciled, with free will, for free will is, from the Buddhist point of view, a metaphysical fiction., The wit! the actions that" come of it are determined by causes like overs thing else. "Indeed the existence a soul was an integral part of is (the Buddha's) system, for upon it he based his theory of reincarnation." This is amazing, for if there was anything that the Buddha categorically denied it was the existence of a soul in the ualistie sense. Furthermore, he had no theory of reincarnation.
There are many other points that might be taken up, but for the exigencies of space, to show that the author's exposition leaves much to be desired; nay, more,, that it is often erroneous and misleading. For this reason, too, his criticisms fare often wide of the mark, also introduces a new method of puzzling to the general reader, for whom the book is primarily infendlice in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking Glass' have recently been translated for the first [time into. German, They were published: im: Yien:
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.