174 
The Alla Upanishad. 
[N 
o. 3, 
of a line at tlie end of the MS. where a female divinity, the destroyer 
of demons, Asurasahlidrini , who is doubtless no other than the 
goddess Kali, is invoked. The text of the Raja, however, is cor¬ 
rupt, and in parts utterly unintelligible to me. 
The use of the mystic syllables hrum, hr in and phat indicates a 
desire to subject the mysticism of the Tantras to the supremacy 
of the Allah of Muhammad Akbar, so as not to let the followers of 
that system escape, or in other words to make the whole of the 
Hindu community bow to the religion of the new prophet. The 
S 3 dlables, as already shown in my paper on certain inscriptions from 
the Chusan Archipelago (ante, vol. xxiv, p. 325), are parts of the 
vija-mantras of the different manifestations of Durga. 
The use of Akbar’s name in the MS. leaves no doubt of its 
having been got up in the time of that emperor by one of his 
courtiers, to give currency to his new faith among his Hindu sub¬ 
jects, but who he was it is impossible now to determine. It 
is impossible, likewise, to ascertain whether it was done at the 
instigation, or with the knowledge, of the emperor, or whether he too 
was deluded by a Yedic prophecy of the superiority of his doctrine. 
It it said in the Ain i AJcbari that Badaoni, the author of the 
Muntahhab ut-tawarilch , was a great Sanskrit scholar, and was em¬ 
ployed by Akbar in translating the Atharvan Yeda into Persian ; 
but as he was a devout Muhammadan who looked with horror upon 
the new faith of his master, and freely stigmatized it in his history 
of Akbar’s reign, it is not at all likely that he would be guilty of 
calling Akbar a prophet, and Allah the Grod of Muhammad Akbar, 
and not that of the Arabian prophet, unless we believe it was 
done with a view to ridicule the religion of Akbar, which is scarcely 
probable. A writer in the Oudh Akhbdr , a Hindustani newspaper 
of Lucknow, says it is the work of the KhdnKhdnan or Lord Cham¬ 
berlain of Akbar, but as there were several such officers during the 
long and prosperous reign of that monarch, it is not possible to 
ascertain which of them was the author of this gross religious 
imposition. 
