tem of Hindu philosophy. It seems to admit the personality of the Deity, and to ascribe to Him intelligence, will, and active power. Still the Nyáya is grievously defective. It says nothing whatever of the moral attributes of God, nor of His government. But a Deity without moral attributes and government of the world, is a Deity only in name.

A learned writer who is anxious to speak as kindly of Hindu philosophy as he can consistently with truth, thus expresses himself. "The only one of the six schools which seems to recognize the doctrine of Divine Providence is the Yoga of Patanjali." [Yet the Yoga, we may remark, runs into mysticism, magic, and endless absurdity]. "It thus seems that the consistent followers of these systems can have, in their perfected state, no religion, no action, and no moral character."*

The history of philosophy in India has been somewhat like its history in ancient Greece (See above, p. 98,99). The Hindu philosophers were certainly men of acute and patient thought; but their attempt to solve the problems of the Divine and human natures, human destiny, and human duty has ended in utter failure. Varied systemseach baseless-each absurd,-and all mutually conflicting ;-systems cold and cheerless, that frown on human love and virtuous exertion, and speak of annihilation, or something equivalent, as our highest hope. Sorrowful result of infinite speculation! "The world by wisdom knew not God." Unhappy India! will she now accept the lesson of ages, and consent to become a debtor to the grace of Heaven for that light of life which she can, by no effort of her own, produce?

* North British Review, No. XLIX p. 224.

LETTER XII.

PARSI ISM. EXAMINATION OF ITS EVIDENCE.

MY DEAR YOUNG FRIEND,

WE Come now to consider the evidence in favour of the Pársí Religion. This religion was once extensively diffused, and for that reason it is important to attend to it. The people that profess it are now few in number; but, as they are chiefly settled in Western India, the system which they follow must be specially interesting to residents in Bombay.

External Evidence.

What is Pársíism? ed. It is difficult to sacred by the Pársís. among the Pársís themselves, on this fundamental question. The Pársís possess religious books written in the Zend language; they have others written in the Pahlvi language; and they have others written in the Persian language. Some Pársís believe the religious books written in all these languages, to be inspired. Others hold those written in Zend and Pahlvi to be inspired. Others hold only those written in Zend to be inspired.-This uncertainty must be exceedingly painful to a reflecting Pársí.

That question is not easily answerdiscover what books are accounted In fact there is no agreement,

Generally speaking, the most enlightened Pársís acknowledge only the Zend writings (which they call the Zend-avestá,) as inspired. The Pahlvi and Persian writJings are more recent, and contain many narratives which

educated Pársís generally consider fabulous and absurd. I. The first question we have to discuss, relates to the age of the sacred books of the Parsis.

The Persian writings are all modern. One of the Age of the most noted of them is the Zarosht-Nameh Pársí books. (or, Life of Zoroaster), which was composed about the year 1277.

The Pahlvi writings are also comparatively modern. The most important of these is the Bundeshne, which was probably composed in the 7th century, that is, about 1200 years ago.

We need not dwell long on these. We come next to the books written in Zend.

There is scarcely any literary question more difficult to settle than that of the age and origin of the Zend writings. Vans Kennedy-a distinguished Orientalist whose name is well known in Bombay-maintained that these books had been written in India, since the arrival of the Pársís in this country. Other very able authors think they must have been written in, or soon after, the days of Ardeshír Bábegan, who restored the Persian monarchy and religion in the third century. The Pársís say that the Vendidad-which is the most important part of the Zendavesta is the only one remaining out of twenty-one original sacred books, the rest having been destroyed by Alexander the Great when he conquered Persia. That books existed in the days of the kings who preceded the invasion of Persia by Alexander, may be probable. But what became of those books for the long space of 500 years, during which the Persian kingdom lay prostrate and the Persian religion despised,-i. e. from Alexander the Great to Ardeshír Bábegán,-it is utterly impossible to say. They may have been all lost. Or, fragments may have been preserved. That the Zend-avesta was compiled about the time of Ardeshir Bábegán, as is supposed by most Orien

talists, may be true; but compiled from what? from memory? or from fragments of books? or from imagination? or from all these combined? It is impossible to tell. Many learned men think the Zend-avesta contains occasional genuine fragments, older than the days of Alexander, but mixed with heaps of modern rubbish, that is to say, with additions posterior to the third century. Probably, some farther light will soon be thrown on this very perplexing subject. Several learned men are at present busily studying the antiquities of Persia.

II. Let us next inquire into the genuineness of the Zend-avesta.

It is admitted by all Zend scholars that the text of the Is the Zend- Zend-avesta has been very greatly corruptavesta genuine? ed.* The Pahlvi translation, which was probably executed in the third or fourth century, differs very greatly in its readings from our present Zend text. Passages occur in the Zend, which so grievously mar the sense that they must be interpolations.

III. As to the interpretation of the Zend-avesta. We may fairly declare it quite impossible at well The sense of present for any Pársí to know the Zend-avesta what the Zendavesta contains. The very obscure. difficulty of translating it is exceedingly great. The Zend language is very little known. We have no Grammar of it, and only a most meagre commencement of a Dictionary. We may hope that light will, ere long, be shed on the dark volume; but, in the mean time, it surely must be distressing to every one who believes it to be the word of God, that he knows so little of its real signification. But how can a man be said to believe the doctrines of a book, the grammatical sense of which he does not understand?

* Journal of the German Oriental Society. (Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft.) Vol. I. p. 249. &c.

We have lit

translations.

IV. On the subject of translations (which are so interesting and important in the case of the tle aid from Christian Scriptures), little need be said.• I have already spoken of the Pahlvi translation of the Zend-avesta. It is almost as difficult to interpret as the Zend-avesta itself. Besides this, we have only one other translation of the least antiquity;-it is in Sanskrit, but contains only a very small part of the Zend-avesta.*

Is the Zend

V. As to the general credibility of the Pársí books. Nothing of a satisfactory nature can be advanced on this point. The Vendidád professes to conavesta credi- tain an account of dialogues between the divine Hormazd and Zoroaster. Zoroaster is said to have appeared in the reign of king Gushtasp, and to have persuaded him to embrace the religion of the Zend-avesta.

ble?

But who was Gushtasp? when did he live? where did he live? Who was Zoroaster? was there one Zoroaster, -or two,- -or three,-or four, or five,—or six? † Was there any Zoroaster at all? if there was, did he write a book? if he did, is there any evidence that we have any part of it? Such questions as these have been earnestly discussed by learned men; and scarcely one of them can be satisfactorily settled. Learned men, however, are now pretty well agreed that Gushtasp is not the same as Darius Hystaspes; that we cannot determine when Gushtasp lived; but that it probably was before the time asserted by the Pársís. The name Zarathustra, which is the Zend form of Zoroaster, probably means golden star. Some think that the supposed prophet of the Persians never existed at all, but is a purely fabulous personage.

*That of Nariosangh on the Yagna.-Of recent versions we need not speak at present.

Stanly, in his "History of Philosophy," reckons up six.

Burnouf, Commentaire sur le Yagna p. clxvi. (Additions et Corrections.) So too, Lassen and Windischmann.