(o2) 
183 REV. RICHARD COLLINS, M.A. 
the third, when, as stated here, the Bhagavad-Gita is supposed to have 
been written ! But, after all, the real point at issue is the third, namely, What 
are the similarities between the Krishna myth and the history of Christ ? 
lt certainly seems to me that these similarities are by no means as great 
as many persons seem to imagine. I believe the best answer to all these 
theories to be that which Mr. Collins makes in the 2nd section of his paper, 
where he shows how we may find myths in almost anything. I am here 
reminded of the various theories adopted to find the number of the Beast, 
666, in the names of historical personages, by which it would not be 
difficult to prove any given person to be the Beast. But let us considera 
few of these supposed similarities. In the first place, we have to deal with 
the idea of incarnation. I do not think that enough stress has been laid on 
the fact that the Christian idea of incarnation is absolutely unknown even 
at the present time in India. I allude to the Christian idea of the incarnation 
of Christ as perfect God and perfect man. In the 5th section of the paper Mr. 
Collins says :—‘‘I believe I am correct in saying that this is the first time 
that the distinct idea of incarnation is to be found in the Hindu writings.” 
TI suppose he means incarnation in the human form, because, as he remarks a 
few pages further on—‘ The legends of the Fish, the T'ortoice, and the Boar 
are found” as far back as “the Satapatha Brahmana.” These legends are 
related as distinct incarnations of Brahma, who is alleged to have come 
down and assumed these forms. Surely, here was the idea of incarnation 
many years before Christ: I am delighted, however, to see that Mr. Collins, 
at the conclusion of his paper, sets aside those absurd ideas with regard to 
the similarity of the Krishna myths with the account of Christ from His 
being born of a virgin, and ina cave, and so forth. Of course, there is 
not the smallest foundation for assertions of this kind, as Mr. Collins has 
clearly shown. It was only the other day that I took up a tract, written by 
Mr. Bradlaugh, and headed, Who was Jesus Christ? in which it was 
ignorantly stated that Krishna was born of a virgin mother. This shows 
the evil of allowing statements of such a nature to pass uncontradicted, and 
I take it that part of the work of this Society is to show that assertions of 
this kind are unhistorical, and without a vestige of proof. Turning to 
a book with which I was familiar in India—Jsis Unveiled-—by Madame 
Blavatsky, I find her idea, which runs through the work from beginning 
to end, to be, that religion is one, and all these myths are one. Where 
she gets some of these ideas, I do not know. — Her imagination is certainly 
culled into play when she says that there are credible traditions that 
Krishna died on a cross, and explains by saying that he was nailed to a 
tree by an arrow, and therefore was crucified. These theories are so 
curiously absurd that they do not needa single word of refutation ; but 
still, it is necessary to refer to them to show that they have no foundation. 
With regard to the similarity between the names of Christ and Krishna, it 
merely comes to this, that they spell Krishna with the letters Chr instead of 
Kr; but the only theory that could stand is that as the name of Krishna 
existed before that of Christ, these stories were grafted upon Krishna, 
