21G 



given in the Old Testament, that we cannot but think that the people of 

 India derived a certain portion of them from the West, — we may say, from 

 the Children of Israel. We are also told in this paper — and I think it is a 

 fact that we ought to bear in mind— that about the time Buddha lived 

 Daniel lived also, and that Judah had then been carried into captivity in 

 Babylon. Therefore it ■will be seen that there were many means and oppor- 

 tunities by which India, at that remote period, could have obtained a certain 

 amount of knowledge with regard to the things contained in the Bible. 

 But, in order to understand Buddhism, we must try to learn what was 

 Buddha's teaching about man ; about his constitution and his nature ; and 

 then we may arrive at some idea as to that which has been the cause of very 

 much discussion, and which, probably, will continue to be so for a long time 

 to come, namely, the great doctrine of Buddhism, called " Nirvana." We 

 cannot understand what is meant by this without knowing what Buddha 

 taught about the nature of man. It is often asserted that Nirviiua only 

 means deliverance from all evil — from all change. But those who have 

 studied the matter are not in agreement on this point; at any rate, 

 they who have studied it most do not generally agree in this assertion. 

 Professor Childers has written a very able article on Nirvana, and he shows, 

 in a manner which I think is unanswerable, that there are two stages which 

 have been looked on as Nirvana; namely, one in which there is existence, 

 and another in which there is no existence. He shows this most learnedly 

 by using tbe two woi'ds which are found in the Buddhist scriptures, 

 saupddiscsa Nibbdna and ninqmdiscsa Nibbdna. The one is the Nirvana, 

 which has something in it, wherein the elements of being still exist, and then 

 after death, there comes the nirupadisesa Nibbana, in which there can be 

 no existence after the powers of the body and mind are dissolved ; which I 

 think is plain from Buddha's own words. It is very difficult to understand 

 all Buddha's teachings about the nature of man, because many of them are self- 

 contradictory ; but we may say that, when he speaks of man's higher nature, 

 it is as of a procession, or, as I have been accustomed to call it, a sequence. 

 There is nothing which you can point to and say, "This is really the higher 

 part of man." He says, man and every creature in the universe consist 

 of two parts — the nama and the rupa. Eupa is the figure ; nama is the 

 name that is given. This is explained, according to Buddhist ideas, as 

 being similar to a chariot. You have all the diflferent portions of the 

 chariot, and then you have the name. Buddha then says, "So is man. 

 Man has a body, man has thoughts ; and these constitute what is the name, 

 which you call, and think of as, man. But there is nothing which you can 

 point to definitely as ego and say that that is permanent." This is illustrated, 

 in another part of the Buddhist scriptures by a lamp. The lamp islighted, and 

 it goes on burning through the night. In the first watch there is a flame, 

 and in the second there is a flame also. Is the flame in the second watch the 

 same as in the first ? The answer given is that it is not the same, neither 

 is it another. And Buddha says, "So it is with man : ho is not the same, 



