ON KRISHNA, AND SOLAR MYTHS. 189 
supposition in defiance of all ordinary reason. But the fact of such 
theories having been mooted shows how strong the conviction has 
been of some real connexion between the two. And I cannot see the 
ultimate “danger” that is represented as attending the discussing 
the nature of such‘apparent connexion. That Christianity is the 
real source from which Vaishnavism received its new doctrine of 
the worship of a personal God, seems to me historically consistent. 
The only remaining supposition possible is, that both are indebted 
to some early, and more perfect system; this is apparently a not 
uncommon view of the case: but where, then, is the more perfect 
original from whence both Christianity and Vaishnavism have 
derived their leadmg thoughts ? One position, indeed, remains 
from which my argument might be broken ; and that is the denial 
of the fact that there are so many actual parallelisms between 
Vaishnavism and Christianity as I have stated. And this we must 
leave to the judgment of the individual student, who will study 
Vaishnavism as it develops about the person of Krishna, from the 
Mahabharata on through the Puranic period. The quotations 
that I have given from the Mahabharata and Gita are only samples 
of many, the limits of a paper forbidding more detailed statements, 
And these are not to be taken as mere coincidences, but in 
connexion with the origin and peculiar character of what is called 
Vaishnavism. Since writing this paper I have had the pleasure of 
reading Sir Monier Williams’ Religious Thought and Life in India ; 
and his conclusions with regard to Vaishnavism are so similar, as it 
seems to me, to what I have advanced, that I venture to quote some 
of his remarks. He says (pp. 96 and 97), “ Vaishnavism is, like 
Saivism, a form of monotheism. It is the setting aside of the 
triune equality of Brahma, Siva, and Vishnu in favour of one god, 
Vishnu (often called Hari), especially as manifested in his two 
human incarnations, Rama and Krishna. . ‘ Brahma and Siva,’ said 
the great Vaishnava teacher Madhva, ‘decay with their decaying 
bodies ; greater than these is the undecaying Hari.’ And here, at the 
outset of an important part of our subject, I must declare my belief 
that Vaishnavism, notwithstanding the gross polytheistic super- 
stitions and hideous idolatry to which it gives rise, is the only real 
religion of the Hindu peoples, and has more common ground with 
Christianity than any other form of non-Christian faith. | Vedism 
was little more than reverential awe of the forces of nature and a 
desire to propitiate them, Brahmanism was simply an Indian 
variety of pantheistic philosophy. Buddhism, which was a product 
of Brahmanism, and in many points very similar to Brahmanism, 
gained many followers by its disregard of caste distinctions, and its 
P2 
