his belief: indeed his declaration may be confidered as the proof of his faith; and his faith to be grounded in proportion to the opennefs of his declaration. That any reafoner could convince him, that Mofes had borrowed his narrative from Indian fources, he never for a moment fuppofed, and if a doubt could be entertained on this fubject, another pafsage in the same dissertation must at once annihilate it. He had indeed no hefitation to acknowledge his perfuafion, that a connection fubfifted between the old idolatrous nations of Egypt, India, Greece, and Italy, long before they migrated to their several fettlements, and confequently before the birth of Moses; but he was equally perfuaded, that the truth of the propofition could in no degree affect the veracity and fanctity of the Mosaic history, which, if any confirmation of it were neceffary, it would rather tend to confirm.

"The divine legate (I now quote his words) "educated by the daughter of a king, and in "all refpects highly accomplished, could not "but know the mythological fyftem of Egypt,

"but he must have condemned the supersti*tions of that people, and defpised the fpecu"lative abfurdities of their priests, though

fome of their traditions concerning the crea"tion and the flood, were founded on truth. "Who was better acquainted with the mytho "logy of Athens, than Socrates? who more

accurately verfed in the rabbinical doctrines, "than Paul? Who poffeffed clearer ideas of "all ancient aftronomical fyftems, than New"ton; or of scholaftic metaphyficks, than "Locke? In whom could the Romish Church "have had a more formidable opponent, than "in Chillingworth, whofe deep knowledge of "its tenets rendered him fo competent to dif66 pute them? In a word, who more exactly "knew the abominable rites and fhocking

66

idolatry of Canaan, than Moses himself? Yet "the learning of those great men only incited "them to feek other fources of truth, piety, "and virtue, than thofe in which they had έσ long been immerfed. There is no fhadow "then of a foundation for an opinion, that "Mofes borrowed the firft nine or ten chap-.

"ters of Genefis from the literature of Egypt; "ftill lefs can the adamantine pillars of our "Christian faith be moved by the refult of any "debates on the comparative antiquity of the "Hindus and Egyptians, or of any enquiries « into the Indian theology."

.

From the fame differtation I felect another paffage, which from its importance is entitled to particular notice, while it evinces the folicitude of Sir William Jones to correct a mifconception, which, in my opinion, has been idly and injudiciously brought forward to support a fundamental tenet of Evangelical Re

velation.

Very refpectable natives have affured me, "that one or two miffionaries have been ab"furd enough, in their zeal for the conversion "of the Gentiles, to urge, that the Hindus "were even now almost Christians, because "their Bramha, Vishnu, and Mahefa, were "no other than the Chriftian Trinity; a fen"tence in which we can only doubt whether "folly, ignorance, or impiety, predominates."

The three Hindu deities, were perhaps ori

ginally perfonifications only of the creating, preferving, and deftroying, or, as it may be understood, the re-producing power of the Supreme Being. By the bulk of the people they are considered as diftinct perfonages, each invested with divine attributes; and the mythological writings of the Hindus contain most ample and abfurd hiftories of them; but in the Vedanti philofophy, which is evidently Flatonic, the Almighty, known by the mys tical and incommunicable appellation of O'M, is the only being, and all others, including Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesa, are only the creatures of idea or perception, which will perish in the general annihilation, whilft O'M alone furvives through all eternity*. Thus,

*On this subject, I shall take the liberty to quote some curious passages from a translation of a Persic version of the Yoog Vashesti, a very ancient composition in Sanscrit. There are several Persian versions of this work; but many pages of that from which the present translation is given, were compared with the original Sanscrit, and found to be substantially accurate.

"The instability of the world, and of every thing con"tained in it, is certain; hence it will one day happen, that "the evil deities who are now so powerful, shall fall into "annihilation, and the Debtas distinguished by the title Life-V. II.

R

whether we confider the vulgar opinion refpecting these three divinities, or that of the Vedanti fect, nothing (to use the words of Sir William Jones) can be more evident, than "that the Indian triad, and that of Plato, "which he calls the Supreme Good, the reafon ❝and the foul, are infinitely removed from the

"of Amrit, or immortal, shall perish. The Bermhand, "on which all nature depends for existence, shall be "broken, and not à trace remain of Bramha, Vishnu, or "Siva. Time, having annihilated all, shall himself perish. "Bramha, Vishnu, and Mahdeva, notwithstanding "their exalted dignity, fall into the jaws of inexistence.

"You are not to consider Vishnu, Bramha, or Mahdeva, "and other incorporate beings as the deity, although they "have each the denomination of deva or divine; these are "all created, whilst the Supreme Being is without begin“ning orend, unformed and uncreated---worship and adore

"him.

"The worship which is paid to the inferior deities and "the representations of them, proceeds from this: man"kind in general are more affected by appearances than "realities; the former they comprehend, but the latter

are difficult to be understood. Hence learned tutors "first place figures before them, that their minds may be "composed, and conducted by degrees to the essential "Unity who survives the annihilation, when the Debtas, " and all created existence are dissolved and absorbed into "his essence."