165 
friend Mr. Spence Hardy, but I know more of them from his own lips than 
from his book. But I may tell you this much, that it seems to me that in 
Europe we are accustomed to speak very positively about those things 
which, in the East, people who understand them speak very doubtfully 
about. We are accustomed to suppose here that this or that person has 
come to a clear understanding of what my teachers in the East told me they 
knew very little indeed about. On subjects concerning which the Eastern 
people confess they knew so little, I was surprised to find people in England 
so positive. But there is no doubt that there are two or three quite distinct 
sorts of Buddhism. I do not want you to suppose that the Ceylon Buddhism 
is the only correct form : I believe the Buddhisms of Siam and Burmah are 
considered to be the most orthodox. The Chinese Buddhism is a spurious 
form, and so is the Thibetan and Tartar Buddhism ; indeed, it is scarcely the 
Buddhism at all of which I have been speaking, so you must allow for these 
very great varieties. I remember once taking part in an interesting conver- 
sation between the present Bishop of Calcutta and one of the most learned 
of the Siamese priests, on this very subject, as to the difference between the 
Buddhism of Siam, that of Burmah, and that of Ceylon. I was much struck by 
this, that the Siamese priest, who acknowledged our Cingalese Buddhism, 
refused to acknowledge what the bishop brought forward as Burmese Bud- 
dhism. That shows that there is a very great difference. But we do know 
the main features of this interesting religion, and the vast extent of the races 
who are subject to its influence. Now as to the point about right and wrong* 
When I went out to Ceylon I was well versed in one book — Aristotle, — which 
served me in good stead in my experiences amongst the various races I met 
with, and I have seen more of them than Englishmen commonly do, because, 
in my capacity as a missionary bishop I have lived a great deal among them, 
and have talked on this interesting question of right and wrong again and 
again. This is what I always found : there are certain things which we may call 
right and wrong which there are races of men who are quite ignorant of, but 
they all agree in this, that there are some things which are right and some 
things which are wrong, no matter whence we have derived our notions of 
these terms. But if you put before a man who never heard it before that 
which we Christians believe and know to be right, they recognize it. Eight, 
truth, God — wherever you proclaim these things they leave an echo in the 
heart of man, provided he has sufficient intellect to understand them. There 
is the difficulty in the less enlightened races that you have to teach them ; 
but I speak of races who are quite our equals in philosophy and education, 
and with them I have always been struck by one thing, that, when you are 
going over different topics, directly you bring to their minds the great truths 
of religion, they recognize them : the idea seems to come back to them, not 
as a new discovery, but as something they had known before and lost. I 
have preached to heathen men by interpretation, and also in their own 
language, and I have always been struck by what I now speak of. A certain 
chord was touched, and it went through all at once, and that was one of the 
things, among many, that convinced me of the absolute truth of Christianity. 
