Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

1=

to one of 357, and as, at the end of each year, the difference of hours, minutes, and seconds, was always added, no error in chronology could arise therefrom. And you have already seen that the Menwantara of Meya, or 308448000÷864000 = 357; and that the Menwantara of the Vedas, or 306720000÷864000-355. The Menwantara of Meya, likewise, accords better with the Maha Menwantara. For 355 x 14 = 4970; which rendered an addition of 30 necessary to each Calpa of Brahma. Whereas 357 x 14 = 4998; which corresponds with the Maha Calpa, or 14 Antaras of the Menus (857 × 14 = 11998). The former giving the 5000 years, less by two, and the latter 12000, less by two: there was probably another reason for adopting the Menwantara of Meya. That of the Vedas is so clear and so perfectly explained in the Smirta, that any one possessing the most superficial knowledge of figures, who gave his attention thereto, must have discovered the cypher. Whereas, the Menwantara of Meya being at variance with the other calculations, made it very difficult, if not impossible, to understand the Hindu chronology. The second objection is the absurdity of supposing Valmic and Vyasu contemporary. Mr. Bentley tells us, that "these two poets were ancient and contemporary bards: that the modern Hindus believe Valmic to have VOL. I.

R

reigned towards the close of the Tritajug, and Vyasu towards the close of the Dwaparajug, and to have had frequent conversations together on the subject of their poems; all which the Hindus attempt to account for by supposing a miracle." If this author believed that eight hundred and sixty four thousand years actually elapsed between the birth of these two poets, he might well suppose a miracle to enable them to converse with each other but as the Trita age only contained three hundred, and the Dwapara age two hundred years, it was very possible for two bards, who lived in times when the age of man was averaged at 857 years, and frequently exceeded nine hundred, to have conversed together, without a miracle ; although the one should have been born two hundred years before the other. But the Brahmans tell us further. They inform us that " Vasisht❜ha the son of Swayambhuva was the great ancestor and preceptor of Parasa Rama," in like manner, as the Jewish authors tell us, that Seth was the great ancestor and preceptor of Enoch: that Vyasu was the son of this Rama, and that Valmic, who was the contemporary of Rama Chandra, lived in the time of Vyasu: which is another proof that Rama Chandra, who was the seventh Avatar, was antecedent to Parasa, or the sixth. That Valmic was of the second age, and Vyasu of the third, is

[ocr errors]

established as far as historic records can be admitted as proof. Nevertheless I do not mean that the works now extant in the Sanscrit language were antediluvian but the followers of Vishnu, who profess to believe in the doctrine of the Metempsychosis, and who contend that Crishnu was an incarnation of the Deity, are obliged to admit, that "the great incarnate God, Buddha the son of Máyá became regenerate in the womb of Devaci, who became pregnant by Maha Máyá during the third period of time," or third thousandth or third thousandth year of the world. That "when the parents of Crishnu discovered, from the miracles he performed, that their supposed child was indeed the Lord Heri, Crishnu absorbed their minds in forgetfulness, until he had completed the divine mission, which as an Avatara he began, in the incarnate form of Parasa Rama." Vyasu the son of Parasa is admitted by all the pundits as the arranger of the Vedas. But the author, who put them into Sanscrit, certainly flourished in the postdiluvian world. Yet to support the hypothesis, that Parasa Rama was regenerate in the person of Crishnu, the multitude are amused by being told that his son Vyasu flourished during the time of Moses, the third period, in lieu of the third age, That the books of the revelations of Enoch did exist, no orthodox Christian can deny. For although we

should doubt the accounts transmitted by Origen, Tertullian, and numerous other authors, who affirm that they had seen and read them in Arabia Felix ; or should we dispute, the accounts of Clemens Alexandrinus and Georgius Syncellus, who profess to have possessed the books in the Greek language, we must not deny the accounts given by St. Jude, who speaks of the revelation of Enoch as of a book extant and undisputed in his time. Now it would be just as consonant to reason to dispute the chronology of Moses, because the works of Enoch were extant in the time of St. Jude in the Arabic and Greek languages, as it is to dispute the chronology of the Hindus, because the works of Valmic and Vyasu are still extant in the Sanscrit, the most ancient postdiluvian language in Asia. The Hindus, who are enthusiastic admirers of the poetry of Valmic, represent him as living during the time of the Gods, or divine Menus of the antediluvian world, called by the Egyptians divinities: from which Europeans have erroneously supposed, that they consider poetry a divine art, practised for numberless ages in heaven, before it was revealed on earth whereas the text merely implies that poetry was practised by Valmic, the contemporary of Rama Chandra, in the antediluvian world, and consequently many ages before the Sanscrit language (in which the Mahabharat of Vyasu is now

extant) was known on earth. For the Hindus, as well as the Persians, believe the language of the antediluvian world to have been of divine origin; each representing the Vedas as originally written in a divine language long since extinct. Meya, the first great astronomer, is admitted by all the pundits to have been born about two centuries before Valmic; and they all agree that Meya flourished during the seventh Menwantara which commenced A. M. 420.

Hindu dates are rendered complicated, from each of the six Calpas containing one thousand years, and each thousand years being the sum of the four human ages. Should you enquire of a pundit, when the Antaras of the several Avataras commenced, he would probably place Buddha the son of Jina in the first age, and Buddha the son of Máyá in the second; because the Antara of the former, or Noah, who was born A. M. 1056, answers to the 246240th year of the first age of the second Calpa, or the second thousandth year of the world; while the Antara of the latter, or Enoch, who was born A. M. 623, commenced in the 963360th year of the second age of the first Calpa. And the pundit might intentionally omit the Calpa. Valmic, the author of the Ramayana, was born during the second age of the first Calpa; and was the author of the Sanscrit edition of this poem, in the second

« PredošláPokračovať »