26 RET. W. ST. CLAIR TISDALL^ M.A.^ D.D., ON THE INFLUENCE 



any way recalls to us the Gospel narrative. On the other hand, 

 in the Sandilya Sutras, which Cowell has shown to be quite 

 modern in date, we find distinct, though grotesque, imitations 

 of the Gospel account of such incidents as the Massacre of the 

 Innocents, the Birth in a stable, and the visit of tlirec AVise 

 Men.* Even in the Puranas, which give marvellous tales about 

 Krishna, these details are not found. They are therefore 

 additions to the Hindu version of the story. Hopkins**- is quite 

 certain that these legends were introduced into India and 

 attached to the Krishna-myth from Christian sources later than 

 A.D. 600. He thinks they were probably brought to India at 

 the time when (in A.D. 639) Kinf^ Siladitya welcomed some 

 Syrian Christians to his Court. Of still later introduction is 

 the account of how Krishna restored to life a believing woman's 

 son, which is recorded only in the quite modern Jaimini- 

 Bharata. 



The Puranas. which give accounts of the mythical life and 

 deeds of Krishna, have exercised and still exercise an almost 

 unbounded influence upon the minds of the masses in India. 

 Hopkins thinks that there can be no doubt that the develop- 

 ment of these legends owes a great deal to garbled accounts 

 of certain incidents in the life of our Lord. " The outer 

 Christianity reflected in the Puranic legends is as palpable as it 

 is shocking. ";[: As Krishna is represented as delighting in 

 murder and adultery, it is no wonder that love is always 

 identified with sensuality and power with cruelty. As Yishnu 

 merely plays a part and does not set a moral example for man's 

 imitation, hence to the Indian mind there is nothing revolting 

 in Krishna's sporting with the Gopis or in his other deeds 

 recorded in the Puranas. He is the Divine Actor, lightheartedly 

 playing a part in the tragic comedy of human life. If we 

 remember that these Sanskrit writers consider that history and 

 fable are one and the same thing (itihdsa), we can understand 

 that garbled, confused, forms of certain Gospel scenes may have 

 been the original sources of these Krishna-legends. 



Here it may be useful to enquire, by what criterion are we to 

 decide whether these legends about Krishna have arisen from 

 corruption of the Gospel narratives, or whether, on the other 

 hand (as some modern opponents have asserted), the Gospel 

 accounts have been derived from the Indian legends about 



* Weber's Krishna's Gehurtsfest (Krishnajanmaslitami). 

 t Rell. of India,' 430, 431, 503, note.' 

 X Ihid., p. 429. 



