155 
There is no such evidence whatever, and the facts appear to be thrown 
overboard because they cannot be made to fit the theory. But, I would ask, 
why should the facts be crushed in order to fit a theory which they can fit 
so little ? I would advise any one who wants the strongest evidence against 
Mr. Max Muller’s “ Hibbert Lecture,” to read M. Renouf’s “ Hibbert 
Lecture.” A more interesting study of the evidence of the early deteriora- 
tion of religion from a higher standard could hardly be obtained. We have 
not the record of the earliest state, but we have evidence^everywhere of the 
religion as it was deteriorating, and we have records of a growth downwards 
from the Vedic period — from the period which the early Yedic hymns give 
us. I am afraid I am almost inclined to challenge the high character given 
to Buddha. He did what reformers are too apt to do — he swept away too 
much, and, in point of fact, left a sort of philosophical nihilism, so that the 
marvel is that it should have had so much power. Thus you have the 
history of a great decadence of religion. Does not this point, as plainly as 
anything could, to the fact that before these records there must have been a 
higher stage ? If you have progress in one direction, you may assume that 
progress has previously been in the same direction, unless there is evidence 
to the contrary. There is no terminus a quo in these early histories ; but 
in the earlier books of the Bible we have a starting-point. Why should 
we, simply because the Bible is believed by Christian men to be the 
Word of God, throw it overboard as a record ? Why should we throw 
overboard deliberately what, as a mere history, would be invaluable 
on the subject in dispute ? We may very well believe that the intel- 
lectual perceptions of man have enlarged and changed, but, perhaps, 
not always improved. We do not, for instance, suppose that Abraham’s 
intellectual attainments were equal to those of Dr. Max Muller : probably 
Abraham* troubled himself little about the study of the words he spoke, 
and probably his logical premises were not those of Dr. Max Muller ; but 
surely that does not show that Abraham’s religious conceptions were 
not all that the religious power of any man now can require. I would 
appeal from Dr. Max Muller’s “ Hibbert Lecture ” to the experience of any 
man who has watched the progress of religion in the human mind ; and I 
would ask him, not only as to the progress of savage races, but also as 
to the progress of religious thought in an English child ; whether religious 
perceptions come before intellectual ones, or whether the intellectual per- 
ceptions come before religious ones, and then, I would ask you to say if you 
believe the religious perceptions are merely intellectual? I confess I 
cannot. It does appear to me that in the experience of any one who 
will watch the progress of the mind, whether in the savage or in the child, 
it will be found that the intellectual perception is a different thing from the 
religious perception, and I might say, for the sake of argument, putting 
* The position held by Abraham is discussed in vol. xii. p. 110. 
