{*}
But are there any traces of these opinions in the accounts which the
Greek and Roman writers have given us of the Brahmins?
But are there any traces of these opinions in the accounts which the
Greek and Roman writers have given us of the Brahmins?
Camoes - Lusiades
The Portuguese have now disfigured it with their
repairs and new buildings.
A view of Portuguese Asia, which must include the labours of the
Jesuits, forms a necessary part in the comment on the Lusiad: this note,
therefore, and some obvious reflections upon it, are in place. It is as
easy to bury an inscription and find it again, as it is to invent a
silly tale; but, though suspicion of fraud on the one hand, and silly
absurdity on the other, lead us to despise the authority of the Jesuits,
yet one fact remains indisputable. Christianity had been much better
known in the East, several centuries before, than it was at the arrival
of GAMA. Where the name was unknown, and where the Jesuits were
unconcerned, crosses were found. The long existence of the Christians of
St. Thomas in the midst of a vast pagan empire, proves that the learned
of that kingdom must have some knowledge of their doctrines. And these
facts give countenance to some material conjectures concerning the
religion of the Brahmins.
[649] _When now the chief who wore the triple thread. _--Of this, thus
Osorius: "_Terna fila ab humero dextero in latus finistrum gerunt, ut
designent trinam in natura divina rationem. _--They (the Brahmins) wear
three threads, which reach from the right shoulder to the left side, as
significant of the trinal distinction in the Divine Nature. " That some
sects of the Brahmins wear a symbolical tessera of three threads is
acknowledged on all hands; but, from whatever the custom arose, it is
not to be supposed that the Brahmins, who have thousands of ridiculous
contradictory legends, should agree in their accounts or explanations of
it. They have various accounts of a Divine Person having assumed human
nature. And the god Brahma, as observed by Cudworth, is generally
mentioned as united in the government of the universe with two others,
sometimes of different names. They have also images with three heads
rising out of one body, which they say represent the Divine Nature.
{*}
But are there any traces of these opinions in the accounts which the
Greek and Roman writers have given us of the Brahmins? And will the wise
pay any credit to the authority of those books which the public never
saw, and which, by the obligation of their keepers, they are never to
see; and some of which, by the confession of their keepers, since the
appearance of Mohammed, have been rejected? The Platonic idea of a
trinity of divine attributes was well known to the ancients, yet perhaps
the Athanasian controversy offers a fairer field to the conjecturist.
That controversy for several ages engrossed the conversation of the
East. All the subtilty of the Greeks was called forth, and no
speculative contest was ever more universally or warmly disputed; so
warmly, that it is a certain fact that Mohammed, by inserting into his
Koran some declarations in favour of the Arians, gained innumerable
proselytes to his new religion. Abyssinia, Egypt, Syria, Persia, and
Armenia were perplexed with this unhappy dispute, and from the earliest
times these countries have had a commercial intercourse with India. The
number, blasphemy, and absurdity of the Jewish legends of the Talmud and
Targums, bear a striking resemblance to the holy legends of the
Brahmins. The Jews also assert the great antiquity of their Talmudical
legends. Adam, Enoch, and Noah are named among their authors; but we
know their date; Jerusalem, ere their birth, was destroyed by Titus. We
also know, that the accounts which the Greek writers give of the
Brahmins fall infinitely short of those extravagances which are
confessed even by their modern admirers. And Mohammedanism does not
differ from Christianity, more than the account which even these
gentlemen give, does from that of Porphyry. That laborious philosopher,
though possessed of all the knowledge of his age, though he mentions
their metempsychosis and penances, has not a word of any of their idols,
or the legends of Brahma or his brothers. On the contrary, he represents
their worship as extremely pure and simple. Strabo's account of them is
similar. And Eusebius has assured us they worshipped no images. {**} Yet,
on the arrival of the modern Europeans in India, innumerable were their
idols; and all the superstition of ancient Egypt, in the adoration of
animals and vegetables, seemed more than revived by the Brahmins.
repairs and new buildings.
A view of Portuguese Asia, which must include the labours of the
Jesuits, forms a necessary part in the comment on the Lusiad: this note,
therefore, and some obvious reflections upon it, are in place. It is as
easy to bury an inscription and find it again, as it is to invent a
silly tale; but, though suspicion of fraud on the one hand, and silly
absurdity on the other, lead us to despise the authority of the Jesuits,
yet one fact remains indisputable. Christianity had been much better
known in the East, several centuries before, than it was at the arrival
of GAMA. Where the name was unknown, and where the Jesuits were
unconcerned, crosses were found. The long existence of the Christians of
St. Thomas in the midst of a vast pagan empire, proves that the learned
of that kingdom must have some knowledge of their doctrines. And these
facts give countenance to some material conjectures concerning the
religion of the Brahmins.
[649] _When now the chief who wore the triple thread. _--Of this, thus
Osorius: "_Terna fila ab humero dextero in latus finistrum gerunt, ut
designent trinam in natura divina rationem. _--They (the Brahmins) wear
three threads, which reach from the right shoulder to the left side, as
significant of the trinal distinction in the Divine Nature. " That some
sects of the Brahmins wear a symbolical tessera of three threads is
acknowledged on all hands; but, from whatever the custom arose, it is
not to be supposed that the Brahmins, who have thousands of ridiculous
contradictory legends, should agree in their accounts or explanations of
it. They have various accounts of a Divine Person having assumed human
nature. And the god Brahma, as observed by Cudworth, is generally
mentioned as united in the government of the universe with two others,
sometimes of different names. They have also images with three heads
rising out of one body, which they say represent the Divine Nature.
{*}
But are there any traces of these opinions in the accounts which the
Greek and Roman writers have given us of the Brahmins? And will the wise
pay any credit to the authority of those books which the public never
saw, and which, by the obligation of their keepers, they are never to
see; and some of which, by the confession of their keepers, since the
appearance of Mohammed, have been rejected? The Platonic idea of a
trinity of divine attributes was well known to the ancients, yet perhaps
the Athanasian controversy offers a fairer field to the conjecturist.
That controversy for several ages engrossed the conversation of the
East. All the subtilty of the Greeks was called forth, and no
speculative contest was ever more universally or warmly disputed; so
warmly, that it is a certain fact that Mohammed, by inserting into his
Koran some declarations in favour of the Arians, gained innumerable
proselytes to his new religion. Abyssinia, Egypt, Syria, Persia, and
Armenia were perplexed with this unhappy dispute, and from the earliest
times these countries have had a commercial intercourse with India. The
number, blasphemy, and absurdity of the Jewish legends of the Talmud and
Targums, bear a striking resemblance to the holy legends of the
Brahmins. The Jews also assert the great antiquity of their Talmudical
legends. Adam, Enoch, and Noah are named among their authors; but we
know their date; Jerusalem, ere their birth, was destroyed by Titus. We
also know, that the accounts which the Greek writers give of the
Brahmins fall infinitely short of those extravagances which are
confessed even by their modern admirers. And Mohammedanism does not
differ from Christianity, more than the account which even these
gentlemen give, does from that of Porphyry. That laborious philosopher,
though possessed of all the knowledge of his age, though he mentions
their metempsychosis and penances, has not a word of any of their idols,
or the legends of Brahma or his brothers. On the contrary, he represents
their worship as extremely pure and simple. Strabo's account of them is
similar. And Eusebius has assured us they worshipped no images. {**} Yet,
on the arrival of the modern Europeans in India, innumerable were their
idols; and all the superstition of ancient Egypt, in the adoration of
animals and vegetables, seemed more than revived by the Brahmins.
