PKICF as CENTS, 
 
 •riT sT o 
 
 ^ SOCIETY. ,i 
 
 THE VEDAa 
 
 OR 
 
 •» f 
 
 y H E ^ 
 
 ELIGIOUS POOKS 
 
 
 OF THE 
 
 HINDOOS: 
 
 A LECTURE 
 
 DELIVERED IN CENTRAL HALL, BROOKLYN, N. Y., NOV. 11th, 1884, 
 
 BY 
 
 Rev. H. C. SCHMIDT, 
 
 EVANG. LUTH. MISSIONARY AT RAJAHMUNDRY INiINDIA. 
 
 SOLD FOR THE BENEFIT OF 
 
 “OUR SAVIOR’S DANISH EVANG. LUTHERAN CHURCH,” 
 
 BY 
 
 Rev. R. ANDERSEN, 
 
 193 NINTH STREET, near Third Avenue, BKOOKEYN, N. Y 
 
 HAUET & BREEN, PRINTERS, 60 FULTON ST., NEW YORK. 
 

 
 . 4 
 - >5 
 
 MRS. O. SCHMIDT, 
 
REV. H. C. SCUMIRT. 
 
THE VEDAS,. 
 
 OR 
 
 yHE j^ELIGIOUS j^OOKS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 HINDOOS: 
 
 A LECTURE 
 
 DELIVERED IN CENTRAL HALL, BROOKLYN, N. Y., NOV. 11th, 1884, 
 
 BY 
 
 Rev. H. C. SCHMIDT, 
 
 KVANO. I.UTH. MISSIONARY AT RAJAHMUNDRY IN INDIA. 
 
 SOLD FOR THE BENEFIT OF 
 
 “OUR SAVIOR’S DANISH EVANG. LUTHERAN CHURCH,” 
 
 BY 
 
 Rev. R. ANDERSEN, 
 
 193 NINTH STREET, noar Third Avenue, BROOKLYN, N, Y. 
 
 HALLET A. BREEN, PRINTERS, 60 FULTON ST., NEW YORK. 
 
t 
 
THE VEDAS, 
 
 OR 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS BOOKS OF THE HINDOOS. 
 
 The cradle of the Indo-Gerinanic race stood spnie- 
 wlierc between Palestine and tlie Himalaya Mountains. 
 At that time our forefathers aud,the forefathers of the 
 Aryans in East India had the same language and 
 customs. How the Indo-Germanic race found a home 
 to the east of the countries of the liible, we do not 
 know. It was perhaps not long after the death of 
 Noah that the children of Japhet went in this direction 
 and settled in Persiii. The similarity of the words Iran 
 and Aryan seems to indicate that this was their home. 
 We are also ignorant as to the time when they left the 
 mode of worshij) which they practised in the house of 
 Noah. We do not know in what way these changes 
 took place. But it must be taken for granted, that they 
 carried with them many traces of their forefathers’ 
 religion, whither they went. They certainly were a 
 people of culture. We gather this from the influence 
 they afterwards exercised in India. We know that the}’ 
 separated, one branch going towards the Northwest and 
 the other to the East, and over the Himalaya Moun- 
 tains to India. After that separation the religious cul- 
 ture of both parties developed itself separately, and 
 naturally, also, differently. The mythology of the 
 Western Aryans can hardly be traced back to those 
 
8 
 
 ancient days, when they had religion in common with 
 tlieir eastern brethren. Bnt the religion of the Aryans 
 Avho went into India is still about the same itAvas at the 
 time of their arrival. The Hindoo Eeligion is even in 
 our days, in spite of all influence from the "West, as 
 powerful as it Avas in the time when the llishis com- 
 posed their religious songs in sight of the Himalaya 
 Mountains. 
 
 Tlie religious books of the Hindoos, The Vedas, are 
 written in Sanscrit, a language wdiich is still used in 
 India and has a great<jr influence on Indian literature 
 tlian the IlebreAv has on the European languages. 
 Sanscrit literature is still the literature of India. It is 
 therefore of jAeculiar interest to those, who know a little 
 about India, to know something, asAvell, about the con- 
 tents of the oldest Sanscrit books, the Vedas. It is im- 
 lAossible that a single man can obtain a thorough know- 
 ledge of the Hindoo religion as it is rej)resented in its 
 10,000 manuscripts. The Hindoo religion as Ave find it 
 in India in our days, is based on modern books, the so- 
 called Pur anas. The Vedas, howcwer, are still of the 
 greatest importance and especially the oldest part, the 
 Ri(j Veda Santrita, about half the size of our Bible. 
 This is the highest authority on Hindoo religion. 
 
 Max Muller, the famous Sanscrit Professor, says: 
 “ The autliority of The Veda, in respect to all religious 
 questions, is as great in India noAv as it has CA'er been. 
 To the vast majority of orthodox l)clievers, The Veda 
 still forms the highest and only infallible authority, 
 (juite as much so as does the Bible Avith us, or the 
 Koran Avith the Mahoincdans.” The educated Hindoos 
 often tell the missionaries, that the Bible is for the 
 
0 
 
 Western world and tlie Veda for them. They say, that 
 they believe in the Veda and tliink the same is as good, 
 if not better than the Bible. And, yet, most of the 
 learned Hindoos do not even know the contents of their 
 Vedas. It is the learned from Christian countries, who 
 have given access to the religious books of the Hindoos 
 to those who wish to study them, especially the Ger- 
 man ^I.vx Ml’ller, the Englishmen Mciu and Moxiek 
 W iLLi.VMS, and the American Wiiitxey. When the 
 Veda was first brought before the public, the general 
 impression was that it contained moral teaching cx- 
 ])ressed in the finest poetic language, hardly equalled in 
 the Old Testament. In 1807, M.vx iluLLEU recom- 
 mended to missionaries that instead of looking out for 
 ])oints of difference they should “ look more anxiously for 
 any common ground, any spark of the true light that may 
 still be revived, any altar that may be dedicated afresh 
 to the true God.” And Moxieh Willi.vms says that 
 we find in the Veda “high morality often exjiressed 
 in impressive language worthy of Christianity itself.” 
 The Hindoos naturally concluded that the contents of 
 of The Vedas must be very precious, if Christians 
 could exalt them thus. Even the British Government 
 has given the Veda a high position in the University 
 curriculum in India, to the exclusion of the Bible and 
 the Koran. The conservative Hindoo Pundits have 
 much pride in their Veda, of which they, however, 
 know little or nothing. And the modern Hindoo 
 student, who has passed the degree of B. A. or M. A. 
 in the English Universities and has become an associate 
 of the rationalistic students of England or America, 
 gathers large crowds of people in the cities of India, 
 
10 
 
 when he enlarges upon “ the lofty exalted position India 
 occupied in Vedic times, some six thousand years ago, 
 when there was perfect peace and happiness, there being 
 no dissensions as to the form of religion and all men 
 were united by the common ties of a universal religion 
 and fellow feeling.” When the Vedas and Vedic times 
 are surrounded with such fanciful grandeur, it is desir- 
 able that we should become acquainted with the con- 
 tents of the former. 
 
 The book Rig Veda is the oldest ever discovered or 
 ever alluded to in Sanscrit literature. Not many por- 
 tions of the Bible are older than this, “ While the 
 Israelites under the auspicious leadership of Moses were 
 sounding the loud timbrel over Egypt’s dark sea, the 
 Aryan emigrants from the highlands of Central Asia 
 were singing the praises of Agus and Indea on the banks 
 of the Saraswati, in the hymns of the Rig Veda.” 
 
 The word Veda means logos — the word, the spoken 
 word or uttered knowledge. This knowledge, Veda, 
 was transmitted not in writing, but by constant oral 
 repetition from Brahmin to Brahmin. The reading of 
 the Koran is considered a sacred duty by Mahomedans. 
 But not so with the Veda of the Hindoos. Their Veda 
 ,must not be written or read, but repeated from mouth 
 to mouth. The songs of the Vedas are represented as 
 having issued like breath from the self-existent, and, to 
 have been heard and communicated not to a single person, 
 but to thirty inspired sages, the so-called Rishis, who 
 were companions of the Gods and sat with them on the 
 kusi-grass, drinking Soma-juiee. The orthodox Sans- 
 crit Pundit and the English trained Brahmin both be- 
 lieve in the divine insi)iration of the Veda. In the Veda 
 
11 
 
 itself we find no expression to this effect. Tlie Jiishis, 
 whose names are borne by the ditlerent hymns, describe 
 themselves as the makers and composers of the hymns. 
 But in course of time these liymns were differently re- 
 garded. They were considered very ancient and sur- 
 rounded with much mystery. 
 
 T/ie ]'eda contains no historical dates from which we 
 can count its age, and it is impossible to tell the time 
 when the songs were composed. Alexander came to 
 India about 3d0 B. C., and all the hymns of the Iii(/ 
 Veda are mentioned by Sauna K a, who was before that 
 time. The language of the hymns shows that they arc 
 the ])roductions of different periods. It has been cal- 
 culated that the oldest hymns may be from 1,200 B. C. 
 The oldest Sanscrit Manuscripts, however, are not older 
 than about 1,000 A. I)., while there exist Manuscripts 
 of the Bible from the year 400, and perhaps earlier. 
 
 The Vedas are four in number : — 
 
 1. liig Veda. 
 
 2. Yajur Veda, a repetition of Rig Veda hymns ar- 
 ranged for sacrificial feasts. 
 
 3. Soma Veda, the Rig Veda hymns arranged for 
 Soma drink offerings, and, — 
 
 4. Atharva Veda, the cursing Veda, consisting of in- 
 cantations to avert evils. 
 
 The Rig Veda is the most ancient and the most im- 
 portant; it is the Veda and consists of two parts, the 
 Mantras and the Brahinanas. The Mantras or prayers 
 are contained in 1,017 suktas, or hymns or 10,500 verses 
 or ricktas, from whence the name Rick or Rig Veda 
 comes. These hymns are divided into ten books or J/aw- 
 dalas. They begin with hymns in praise of Agni, the 
 
12 
 
 god of fire. Brahmanas are ritualistic precepts for the 
 singing of these hymns during tlie sacrifice. Max 
 Muller says of i\\& Brahmanas : — “ No one would have 
 supposed that at so early a period and in so primitive a 
 state of society, there could liave risen up a literature 
 which for pedantry and downright absurdity can hardly 
 be matched anywhere. These works deserve to be 
 studied as a physician studies the twaddle of idiots, and 
 the raving of madmen. They will disclose to a thought- 
 ful eye the ruins of faded grandeur, the memories of 
 noble aspirations. But let us only try to translate these 
 Avorks into our own language, and Ave shall feel aston- 
 ished that human thought should ever have been used 
 for such i)urposes.” That Avhich strikes the reader almost 
 anywhere, is, to use Moxier Williams’ Avords: — 
 “ tedious rc})etitions, redundant e]hthets and far fetched 
 conceits.” Max Muller after wondering at the high 
 oi)inion many have of The Veda, sa}^s; — “ I haA'clongfelt 
 that it was high time to dispel such illusions, and to place 
 the study of the ancient religions of the Avorld on a 
 more real and sound, on a more truly historical basis. 
 Whether I am myself one of the guilty or not, I cannot 
 help calling attention to the real mischief that has been 
 done and is still being done by the enthusiasm of those 
 pioneers Avho have opened the first avenues through the 
 bcAvildering forest of the sacred literature of the East. 
 What Ave Avant here, as everywhere else, is the truth and 
 the Avholc truth ; and if the Avhole truth must be told, 
 it is, that however radiant the dawn of religious 
 thought, it is not Avithout its dark clouds, its chilling 
 colds, its noxious Auipors. I confess it has been for 
 many years a ])roblem to me, a3'e, and to a great extent 
 
13 
 
 is so still, how the saoretl books of the East should, by 
 the side of so much that is fresh, natural, simple, beau- 
 tiful and true, contain so much that is not only un- 
 meaning, artificial and silly, but even hideous and re- 
 pellent.” 
 
 In looking at the Veda we find that the first hymn is 
 a prayer to Agni, the second to Vayu, Indra and Var- 
 una ; the third is a worshipj)ing of the Asioriis, or the 
 young gods, and so on to the Mariits as storm gods, the 
 river gods, the Soma-juice, which was addressed as a 
 deity, and many others. 
 
 The difference between the religious books of the 
 Hindoos and those of the Jews in this resjiect is very 
 remarkable. Though the Jews now and then became 
 idolaters, still the oiaginal primitive revelation of one 
 God always underlay their religion and their history. 
 But the Veda is not based on Monotheism ; it is a wor- 
 -sliipping of much and many. 
 
 A friend of mine, Mr. J. D. B. Gridble, Collector 
 at Rajahmundry, has versified some parts of the Veda. 
 One portion of the twenty-seventh svlda of the first 
 MatidaJa runs thus : 
 
 We Mrill worship the great gods, 
 
 And worship the smaU ones. 
 
 We will worship the young gods, 
 
 -Vnd worship the old ones. 
 
 We will worship all gods 
 To the best of our power ; 
 
 Nor may I forget to worship 
 The gods of old times. 
 
 Among the multiplicity of gods, the number of three 
 seems to be of great importance. Agni, the god of 
 fire, is the first. Indra, or heaven, the second, and 
 Siirya, or the sun, the third. The favorite number is 
 
14 
 
 however thirty-three. In one Mantra it is said: “come 
 hither together with the thrice eleven gods, to drink 
 Soma.” Many similar sentences are found. At last the 
 number of gods was raised to 330,000,000. 
 
 It is perhaps impossible to analyse the Veda in order 
 to give its religious contents shape and form. At least 
 it never has been done. But it may be of some interest 
 to ask: what do we find in it and what do we not find 
 there? There is no history, as such, to be found in the 
 Rig Veda, no narrative, no biography, no chronology, 
 no science, no religious creed or a system of belief. 
 Nowhere in it are idols referred to, or temples. The 
 names of the present Hindoo deities are not found in 
 the Veda. The Trinity, Brahma, Vishnu and Siva, was 
 unknown then ; also Rama, Krishna, Ganesha, Kali, 
 Gunga, or any of the present gods of the Hindoos. 
 While Gunga is mentioned only as a river, the rivers 
 Indus and Saraswati are called gods. The relationship 
 of the different gods is given differently by the different 
 Rishis. The son is sometimes the father, the daughter 
 the mother, if not the grandmother ; the mother in one 
 hymn is the wife in another, and the husband in one 
 the brother in another. 
 
 Sun, xnoon, day and dawn were worshipped, but not 
 the stars or the constellations of the stars. AVe find 
 no traces of fetish worship, although the Rishis wor- 
 shipped the Soma-juice, the pi-ayer, the sacrificial 
 horse, the kusi-grass and sacrificial instruments. There 
 was no regularly organized jwiesthood in A^edic times, 
 the 'head of each family was also priest. There 
 were no festival days, and the month was hardly 
 divided into weeks of seven days each, with one day of 
 
IT) 
 
 rest. There were then no sacred places of })ilgrimage, 
 and the waters of the Indian rivers were not considered 
 holy or able to })nrify the soul from sin. 
 
 In the Vedas no reference is made to the doctrine of 
 the transmigration of souls at present taught everywhere 
 in India. According to this doctrine a man may be to- 
 day an intelligent rational being, to-morrow he may be 
 a chattering monkey; to-day his mother may be a tender- 
 hearted woman, to-morrow she maybe a ravening wolf ; 
 to-day his son may be a studious youth, next year he 
 may be a stuj)id buffalo ; and his daughter may be to- 
 day a i)layful girl, but next week she may be a skipping 
 goat. The crow watching to snatch a morsel off his 
 dish may be his own deceased father ; the hungry cat 
 his own degraded grandmother and the crawling serpent 
 his late sister. But of this degrading doctrine which 
 now prevails all over India, we find as just said, not 
 even a single trace in the Veda. On the contrary we 
 find that animals were used in sacrifice and also as food, 
 and for that reason alone they could not have believed 
 in the transmigration of the soul. 
 
 The Veda does not indicate the practice of child-mar- 
 riages, now so common in India. We find love-stories, 
 which seem to prove that the girls could not have been 
 children at the age of three or six, at which age they are 
 there now married. 
 
 The horrible rite of Sati, or burning of the living 
 widow with her husband’s corpse, is nowhere alluded to 
 in TheVeda, although many Brahmins argue that it 
 is a rite therein prescribed, a religious rite, which the 
 British Government ought not to prohibit, as they do. 
 Widow marriages are not forbidden in TheVeda. 
 
]0 
 
 The all-prevalent system of Caste did not exist in 
 Vedic times. The different elasses of men were not 
 eonsidered to be different ereations. Caste is now, not 
 merely a designation of soeial or religious rank, or trade 
 — though it is also that. Buteasteis the feature of In- 
 dian nationality hy whicli all soeial eustoms of the Hin- 
 doos and all their lives are governed. It gives to every 
 Hindoo his position in life. By it he is born a priest, or 
 goldsmith, or shoemaker, or whatever his father may 
 be. He need not select his trade. Caste has made him 
 from the day of his birth just that and only that what 
 his forefathers have been, and what his children and 
 children’s children Avill he, including the daughters, be- 
 cause they can only he married to men of the same caste. 
 They cannot change their position in life and cannot 
 have fellowship with pcojde of other castes. Such is 
 caste in our day in India, but of tliis the Jlis/tis knew 
 nothing. They could marry daughters of other })c'ople. 
 There existed already different trades and the priests 
 began to become important people. But no honor or 
 privilege was bestowed uj)on them, because of their 
 birth or their origin. 
 
 , A comparatively modern text in the tenth Mandula 
 is sometimes cpioted hy Brahmins in sujiport of caste, 
 and its origin. It reads: — 
 
 With Parusha a victim, they performed 
 A sacrifice. When tliey divided him, 
 
 How did they cut him up ? What was his mouth 1 
 What were his arms 1 And what his thigli and feet? 
 
 The Brahmin was his mouth, the kingly soldier 
 W'as made his arms, the husbandman his thighs. 
 
 The servile Sudra issued from his feet. 
 
 This text refers to the sacrificial victim and not to the 
 god Brahma. Tiie word B rah in was at that timp only 
 
17 
 
 known as prayer, and was not’j)crsonified. It could not, 
 therefore, liave the meaning that the Brahmins had 
 come from the head of Brahma, the Kshatriyas from 
 his arms, Vaishyas from his belly and the Sudras from 
 his feet, as we are told by the Hindoos. All that this 
 text proves in this respect is, that there existed at that 
 time these four different classes of people. 
 
 !Max Muller wrote in the London Times, in April, 
 1858: — “ does caste, as we find it in Monu and at the 
 present day, form part of the religious teaching of the 
 Vedas ? We answer with a decided ‘Xo ’ There is no 
 authority whatever in the Veda for the complicated 
 system of caste, no authoi-ity for the offensive privileges 
 claimed by the Brahmins; no authority for the degraded 
 position of the Sudras. There is no law to prohibit the 
 different classes of the people from living together; from 
 eating and drinking together; no law to prohibit the 
 marriage of people belonging to different castes; no law 
 to brand the offspring of such marriages with .an indeli- 
 ble stigma.” 
 
 AVe have thus seen what we do not find in The Vedas. 
 Let us now ask, — what do we find there? 
 
 First, the Vedic theory of God. 
 
 De Muir says that the Vedas ‘‘are the productions of 
 simple men, who, under the influence of the most im- 
 pressive phenomena of nature, saw everywhere the 
 presence and agency of divine powers, who imagined 
 that each of the great provinces of the universe was di- 
 rected and animated by its own separate deity, and who 
 had not yet risen to a clear idea of one supreme creator 
 and governor of all things.” 
 
 And Ram Chaxdra Ghose sjivs about the A’edic 
 
18 
 
 idea of God : — “ The whole nature of the ideal and imagi- 
 nary gods was still transparent, they were merely 
 names of natural phenomena and without being; they 
 were the creatures of man and not his creators.” But 
 though this may be taken for granted, still the worship- 
 pers in Vedic times had both gods and goddesses. Varu- 
 na, the sky, had his wife, called and Inclra 
 
 (heaven) had his wife Indrani. They offered Soma and 
 their prayers to personal gods, and expected in return 
 cows, liorses, and sons, and even forgiveness of sin. 
 
 The religion of the Tedas is Polytheism. Though 
 the early worshippers clothed their gods with human 
 forms of their own imagination, still it was no gross 
 idol-worshipping like the religion of the modern Hin- 
 doos. Max Muller believes that this Polytheism had 
 its root in Monotheism. lie says: — “The conscious- 
 ness that all the deities are but different names of one 
 and the same Godhead breaks forth here and there in 
 the Veda, but it is far from general. Only a few of 
 the hymns appear to contain the simple conception of 
 one divine, self-existent Being, and even in those the 
 idea of one God present in all nature is somewhat nebu- 
 lous and undefined.” 
 
 Believing as we do, that the earliest forefathers of the 
 Hindoos knew the worship of the one true God and had 
 })ractised it in the house of Noah, we can understand 
 that traces of monotheism arc and must be discerned 
 in the Vedas. But by the time the hymns came to be com- 
 posed and collected, an undoubted i)olythcism prevailed. 
 This is seen not only in the number of gods worship- 
 ped, but in their se})aratc individuality, their distinct 
 traits of character and their personal histories. 
 
 Co7iscious7iess of si7i is the prominent characteristic 
 
19 
 
 of the religion of tlieVechis, says Ram Ciiaxdka Giiosk. 
 The existence of sin is acknowledged throughout the 
 Vedas. Brahmins in our days generally object to the 
 Christian doctrine of man’s depravity, and argue that 
 there are or at least may be sinless and holy people, but 
 The Veda knows men only as sinners. Max Muller 
 says, that not only is the idea of sin to be found in the 
 Veda, but also the ideas of justice and mercy so con- 
 tradictory to the human understanding, and yet so 
 easily reconciled in every human heart. Even original 
 sin is alluded to. 
 
 The RishiVashisia prays: — 
 
 “ Absolve us from the sins of our fathers. And from 
 those which we committed with our own bodies.” 
 !Max Muller, says that the hymns represent human 
 nature on a low level of selfishness, and worldliness, and 
 ascribe even to the gods sentiments and passions un- 
 worthy of the deity, such as anger, revenge, etc. 
 
 We find in TheVedas, references to Immortality, 
 and even to a Resurrection of the Body. Tama is the god 
 of death, but he is always mentioned in connection with 
 the happiness of the dead. Hell is not often mentioned. 
 Nevertheless the god Tama was always dreaded and 
 even the gods were afraid of death. 
 
 Both burning and burial of the dead was practiced. 
 The burning seems to have been regarded as a kind of 
 sacrifice to Agni, as can be seen from the following 
 prayer: “Do thou, Agni, burn up and consume him. — 
 As for his unborn jiarts, do thou kindle it with thy heat. 
 — Give up again to the Pitris, him who comes offered 
 to thee with oblations. Putting on life, let him ap- 
 proach his remains; let him meet with his body, 0, 
 Yatavedas, {Agni).” 
 
20 
 
 But of all things Sacrifice is the most pi-omiiient 
 feature of the Vedic religion. The Christian doctrine 
 of sacrifice and of Christ as our substitute is at present 
 the greatest stumbling-block of the Hindoo mind. 
 And still it is sacrifice Avhich was of such great impor- 
 tance in tlie Tedic religion. In one Mantra it is said 
 that sacrifice is the nave, the centre of the world-wheel. 
 The very first words of the liigVeda &yq : — “I glorify 
 Agni, the high priest of the sacrifice.” In the Tandy a 
 Malm Brahmana v>'Q find a remarkable passage: — “0 
 thou, animal limb, now being consigned to the fire, 
 thou art the annulment of sins committed by gods. 
 Thou art the annulment of sins committed by the 
 fathers. Thou art the annulment of sins committed by 
 men. Thou art the annulment of sins committed by 
 ourselves. Whatever sins we have committed by day 
 and by night, — thou art the annulment of sin — of sin.” 
 Sacrifice was doubtless regarded as a propitiation for sin. 
 
 The most important sacrifices were those of the Soma- 
 juice, of ghee or clarified butter, and of fire, and these 
 sacrifices wore also regarded as deities and worshipped 
 as such. 
 
 , The juice of the Soma plant was intoxicating, and we 
 are told that both gods and men made use of it. 
 Many of the ancient Aryans were drunkards and beef- 
 eaters. The hymns are loud in praise of the cheering 
 effect of the Soma-juice, and meat is sjiokcn of in such 
 a way that we must conclude that it was used for food 
 as well as for sacrifices. Later on, however, intoxicat- 
 ing drinks were prohibited and Mo7iu orders the Brah- 
 min to be excommunicated who touches such drinks. 
 Animal olTerings are referred to in the so-called horse 
 
21 
 
 hymns,” and the practice was to offer first a goat and 
 then tlie horse. No mention is made of the .sacri- 
 fice of sheep and even in our days the yagnam or meat- 
 offering of tlie Hindoos is always a goat. Not a lamb, 
 hut a young goat is always associated with their ideas 
 of sacrifice. 
 
 Remarkable are the references to human sacrifice. 
 There are only a few ])assages in the Rig Veda on this 
 subject and the most important is the ninetieth hymn 
 of the 10t\\ M a ndala, the so-called “ Parusha hymn.” 
 
 The word Parusha means a man, a male, either a 
 human or divine person. lie is described as a sacrificial 
 victim, cut to ])ieces. In connection with this many 
 read the following passage from the Brahmanas: “The 
 Lord of Creation offered himself a sacrifice for the’ 
 gods.” And in the White Yayur vce read: “To the 
 Devas (gods) the Lord of creatures gave himself. He 
 became their sacrifice.” In connection with the subject 
 of sacrifice nuist also be considered the Yedic idea of 
 Incarnation and Mediation. The Avatarams of Vishmi 
 are very remarkable, although they are not represented 
 as mediators or substitutes for others. The history of 
 Sunasepha, however, is a striking illustration in this 
 respect. King Harish Chandra had no son and 
 vowed to sacrifice him to Varuna, in case he should get 
 one. His desire was fulfilled and when the boy grew 
 up the father told him what he had vowed. But the 
 son did not consent to be sacrificed, and fled, and War- 
 una punished the king with leprosy. After many years 
 the son longed to return home and on meeting a Brah- 
 min who had three sons, he bought one of them for a 
 hundred cows, as a substitute to Varuna. This boy’s 
 
name was Sunasepha. With him the king’s son return- 
 ed to his father and said : — 
 
 “ Father, this boy shall be my substitute. 
 
 Then Harish Chundra went to Varuna, 
 
 And prayed, “ Accept this ransom tor my son.” 
 
 The god replied: *• Let him be sacrificed, 
 
 A Brahmin is worth more than a Kshatriya.” 
 
 Thus the king’s son escaped, but Sunasepha Avas also 
 kept alive on imploring the gods with many verses from 
 the Teda. 
 
 Agni, as the high jn-iest of sacrifice, is the great medi- 
 ator in the Vedic religion. He is the friendly messen- 
 ger between God and men. It is in the person of Agni 
 that we find the doctrine of mediation best represented. 
 But nothing comes nearer to tlie Christian doctrine 
 than the sacrifice of the Lord of creation of himself 
 to himself. We often read about men . having be- 
 come gods, but gods did not become men in order to be 
 their substitutes. And still Parasha’s sacrifice of him- 
 self to himself indicated that he had a human body, 
 which was cut up and sacihficed. 
 
 We read about Narayana ; — “ He saw for five nights 
 that sacrifice. He took it. He sacrificed 
 
 with it. Having sacrificed Avith it, he surpassed all 
 things. He who, knoAving this, sacrifices with the Para- 
 sha Medha becomes everything.” The sacrifice of the 
 Lord of creation of himself to himself reminds ais 
 of the Rune Song found in the ancient North-Western 
 Aryan Mythology. There Odin speaks of himself thus : 
 
 “ I wot that I hung on a wind-rocked tree 
 Nine long nigtits. 
 
 With a spear wounded. 
 
 And to Odin offered, — 
 
 Myself to myself, — 
 
 On that tree of which none knows 
 From what root it springs.” 
 
We see then, that the Northern and Hindoo Mythol- 
 ogy point to tlie great sacrifice of the Lord of creation, 
 the offering of liiniself to himself. We cannot under- 
 stand how these traces of light originated. But in thus 
 looking at the contents of the Vedas we must confess 
 that there are only faint traces of light. No system of 
 religion from which the people can receive lasting 
 earthly or spiritual blessings and benefits, could ever he 
 based upon the contents of the Vedas. We find there an 
 altar unto the unknown God. But him whom they ignor- 
 antly worshipped, they could not know, themselves, nor 
 declare uhto others. The Hindoos have therefore done 
 nothing to reveal their religion unto others ; it conveys 
 no message of salvation unto the Avorld. 
 
 Christian men have even brought the I'edas unto 
 light. The Vedic religion cannot but be of interest to 
 every Christian. We find points of likeness to Christi- 
 ianity in these ancient hymns, but they are only small 
 grains of truth amongst much rubbish filled with poison. 
 The Vedic religion soon developed itself into coarse 
 idolatry, with such immoral and cruel elements as to 
 make us wonder how intelligent people ever could prac- 
 tice such religion. But it is as Paul says about all idol- 
 aters, — when they considered themselves to be wise, 
 they became fools. The grains of truth in the Vedas 
 were not seeds of spiritual blessings to the many mil- 
 lions, in the following ages. These grains were like 
 those of wheat found buried with the mummies of 
 Egypt for thousands of years, — useless, dry and unpro- 
 ductive.