149 
upon it, and to those comments which are not altogether 
favourable, I should wish to do entire justice. He accuses me 
—I do not say “accuses” in any unkind sense, but he thinks 
that I have fallen into, a contradiction on one point. He thinks 
that in what I say as to the fault of the Buddhists, that they 
are not taught to do right as right and to avoid wrong as wrong, 
I am inconsistent, since, on my own showing, right is onlv 
right because it is taught us by a higher power— -God Himself. 
But he fails to observe this, that right being right in itself, and 
being, also the will of God, appear to us identical terms. 
Certainly I should quite allow, what Professor Chandler lays 
down as a belief, that there is in man— theist, pantheist, atheist, 
or Christian— an innate sense of right and wrong, and I take 
that to be, just as I take the sun in the firmament to be, 
one of the marvellous proofs of the existence of God. I argue 
from it that there must be One to whom right is His natural 
law. He is our moral governor, and we, being His creatures. 
He has implanted in us that innate sense. Professor Chandler 
says, further, that Christianity would suffer if we were to judge 
of it in the same way that I judge of these Buddhists when 
1 speak of all their natural virtues, not as emanating from 
their religion, but as being what I have called them, merely 
natural virtues. Now I really think that I am not guilty of 
aU ^ S1 j < j 1 as ^ a ^ i m pute any point of excellence 
to Buddhists which comes out of their religion. They are very 
careful in the performance of certain duties, or what they 
consider such. The life of a priest, for instance, is a life of 
mendicancy, self-denial, and austerity, and they carry it out 
because they are taught to do it, not that I believe it is the 
best moral state, or that there is any virtue at all in mendicancy. 
•D jv na ^ u . ra ^ virtues, I had many conversations with the 
Buddhist priests, and I always allowed to them that there was 
y no means a want of many of these natural virtues among 
the Cingalese people; but I maintain that a religion, if it 
)e worth anything, is not to count as the result of its own 
efforts what are called the natural virtues. As Christian 
ministers we do not claim to have produced the natural virtues. 
All men we say have natural virtues which are the gift of God, 
and we tell them to make those natural virtues into Christian 
goo works by dealing with them in a better or truer spirit, 
such as not claiming merit, but rather adding to them humility. 
In that way they assume a different character in a Christian 
man. 1 once said to a Buddhist priest : “ I do not blame your 
re igion for all the vices I see among you, nor do I impute to 
ie good I see, but I want to ask you how do you deal 
