32 REV. W. ST. CLAIR TISDALL, M.A., D.D._, ON THE INFLUENCE 



(2) Mediaeval Hindu Sects. 



Eamanuja, who flourished about the middle or end of the 

 twelfth century of our era, was one of the chief founders of 

 Hindu sects of the Middle Ages. His influence on those who 

 came after him was immense, and it has by no means ceased in 

 our own day. He, like many other leading Indian religious 

 teachers, ventured to discard Sanskrit, and to use the living 

 vernacular instead. In this matter there is a parallel between 

 the Eeformation in Europe and the attempts to reform Hindu- 

 ism in India. A leading feature in the teaching of all these 

 mediaeval and modern Hindu religions is the great and growing 

 emphasis which they one and all lay upon the necessity of 

 hhakti. In no other way can salvation (mttkti, moksha) be 

 obtained than by this personal devotion to Vishnu in one of his 

 manifestations, usually as Eama or Krishna. As has already 

 been pointed out, the hhakti thus inculcated is very different 

 from that mentioned in the Bhagavad-Gita, It is far nobler and 

 more spiritual, and the development is distinctly due to Christian 

 influence upon the minds of Eamanuja and his followers. There 

 is in their teaching a near approach to belief in a Personal God, 

 Who is full of grace and pity, and with Whom the devotee can 

 attain to spiritual communion. 



Eamananda was one of Eamanuja's most distinguished 

 followers. He chose for himself twelve disciples, taught the 

 brotherhood of all believers, and declared that all castes were 

 equal in the sight of the Deity. Christian influence is here very 

 evident, although it is a well-known fact that from very early 

 times all Indian ascetics have shaken off in their own persons 

 the bonds of caste, in common with all other human ties and 

 obligations. 



Kabir taught about the end of the fourteenth century, and 

 was another of Eamanuja's followers. The details of his life are 

 uncertain and legendary, but it is evident that he was a sincere 

 seeker after truth. He is claimed by both Muslims and Hindus, 

 and he undoubtedly was something of an eclectic. This no' 

 doubt caused him to feel more sympathy with Hinduism than 

 with the cold and exclusive theology of Islam. What we know 

 of his teaching is fragmentary, and is contained in books written 

 long after his death, especially the Bijak (about a.d. 1570), and 

 part of the Adi Granth of the Sikhs, circa 1590). Legends con- 

 cerning him show clear traces of some knowledge of the Gospels 

 among his followers, who mistakenly ascribed to their master 

 things they had heard of Christ. Hence the legendary account 



