176 THE REV. R. COLLINS^ ON 



and would he help me. He hesitated, and then said, " Oh, it must 

 have been in the Bahavatghita." I turned to that book — with which 

 I had also provided myself — and said I had been equally unable to 

 find the incident there, whereupon he said, " Well, I am sorry I 

 cannot help you, it might have been taken from the Upanishads." 

 Now this is the name given to a large number of the saci-ed books 

 of the East ! He then added that he must have taken it from a 

 certain book which he named. I asked him if he would let me see 

 it, whereon he told me it was in New York ; and we parted. 

 However, thinking over the matter, I wrote a respectful letter 

 asking him if he could kindly give me a reference to the matter 

 from the notes of his discourse. He replied that "It is not 

 convenient for me to do so." (Sensation.) 



A Visitor. — May I ask if there is any reasonable doubt as to 

 Buddha having really lived ? 



W. H. Robinson, Esq. — I believe there is no doubt about his having 

 existed, but there is some doubt ab(mt the question whether he 

 was a king's son, and the author of the paper seems to admit it is 

 very much disputed. It is disproved, I think, by Dr. Oldenbei'g ; 

 who quotes certain ancient documents in existence nearer the 

 time of the Buddha than the usually quoted legends, and referring 

 to tribes and families near that to which he belonged. In these 

 his father is referred to without the attribute of Rajah, while 

 other small princes have it always carefully affixed to their names. 

 In fact, it is proved that, in the literal sense of the word, he was 

 not a king's son, although it is possible that afterwards it became 

 a certain kind of custoin to attribute to every religious teacher 

 the quality of prince, and hence the Buddha came to be called by 

 that title. 



I quite agree with the author's strictures on Sir E. Arnold's 

 book. It is unfortunate that the goodness of the author's style 

 and construction are the only cause of the book's influence. 



Buddha was a great man there is no doubt; and no doubt he 

 did a great thing in emancipating the down-trodden people of his 

 neighbourhood from their slavery to the Brahminical system. 

 That is one great reason for the success of his teaching. He was 

 furthermore an ascetic, and gave up the world and riches ; but 

 this was a very common thing in India, both before his days, 

 during his days, after his days, and even to the present dav, 

 India is a land of asceticism. Men there will constantly give up 



