so similar as to appear almost identical; in other respects they exhibit such contrasts as to represent two opposite poles; and it is on this account that a study of Buddhism is indispensable for a proper comprehension of Christianity.

But what is true of Buddhism in its relation to Christianity is not less true of Christianity in its relation to Buddhism. When I think that this book may be read by such Buddhists of Japan, Ceylon, or Siam as are only superficially acquainted with Christianity, I feel like adding to its contents another chapter that might easily be extended into a book, in which I would refute their various misconceptions of Christianity and urge them to send emissaries to Christian countries, especially to the Protestants of Germany, England, and North America, for the sake of investigating Christian modes of worship, Christian institutions, and Christian ideals. The importance of Christianity does not consist of its dogmas, but in the spirit in which these dogmas are interpreted and applied to the home life of Christian congregations; and it is on these lines that Buddhists can learn many valuable lessons which Christian missionaries can only imperfectly communicate to them.

The main advantage of Christianity over Buddhism consists in the activity which it inspires. Buddhism has to a great extent (with the exception, perhaps, of some Japanese sects) favored a passive attitude in life. In spite of Buddha's injunction to be untiring and energetic, salvation was still

sought by many Buddhist saints in the suppression of all aspirations. In spite of Buddha's rejection of asceticism, and his declaration that hermit and layman are alike, if they but free themselves of the illusion of self, the ethics of world-flight after the fashion of the old Yoga philosophers continued to be regarded as the highest goal of religion. In spite of Buddha's lessons of compassion, charity, and practically applied love toward all suffering creatures, the bliss of Buddhahood was frequently sought more in the state of an eternal, undisturbed happiness as is afforded only after the riddance of all corporeality in the abstraction of a pure spirituality and not in helpfulness and struggles for further advance. On all these lines Christianity, especially Christianity as it is to-day in the United States, marks a decided advance in the practical applications of Buddha's own principles. In Christianity the principle is dropped that the Buddha, the Christ, the Master, the Blessed One must at the same time be the Happy One. Bliss is not always happiness. In addition to the paradoxes of Buddha's ethics, for instance, that by giving away we gain and that hatred is conquered by love, we learn through Christ that the Blessed One may be the Suffering One, and that the man of peace may be the boldest struggler.

Christianity is less philosophical than Buddhism; Christ proclaims no theory of soul; he says nothing about the nature of things, and never enters into metaphysical inquisitions of any kind. The Christian theories of creation, of God's personality and

trinity, of the nature of the soul and the mode of resurrection were made later on by the church fathers and church councils. Christ expressly declared that he spoke in parables. But this humbler method of popular teaching was more effectual than Buddha's philosophy. Whatever may be said in favor of Buddhism, its profundity, its cosmic universality, and the loftiness of its morality, the great strength of Christianity lies in the lesson of Golgotha, which means, salvation lies not alone in the attainment of the truth, but in struggling for it, in living for it, in suffering for it, and in dying for it.

The heaven of Christian dogmatology is too mythological for a scientist and the Nirvâna of Buddhists too abstract for the mass of the people. The former is in its popular form not acceptable in our present age of scientific exactness, and the latter is after the Asiatic mode of thinking, too much conceived in its negative aspects, and if the attempt is made to show its positive features, Nirvâna appears as mere being instead of doing; as mere rest instead of efficacy, as a state of abstract indifference instead of a definite condition of existence.

A comparison with Christian views will help Buddhists better to define their own faith. But what, above all, is most needful for both parties is the adoption of exact and scientific methods of investigation in the fields of psychology and philosophy.

There is a rivalry between Christianity and Bud

dhism, more so than between other religions, and the question is which will be the first to clarify our conceptions of the religious goal of mankind in plain terms, so as to suit the practical demands of life, the Christians or the Buddhists. Christians can learn much of Buddhism; and Buddhists can learn much of Christianity. The final victory in their competition will be with those who learn most of the other.

Christianity conquered other religions by adopting of them that which was good. It adopted of the Greek the Logos philosophy and of the Teutons the ethics of struggle and energetic endeavor. It is only since Christianity refused to assimilate new truths, that its progress was checked; and the same is true of Buddhism. The religious future of a religion depends upon the spiritual vitality of its representatives, and vitality means capacity of growth.

Mankind does not want Buddhism, nor Islam, nor Christianity; mankind wants the truth, and the truth is best brought out by an impartial comparison. There is probably no human mind free from error, but he who "proves all and keeps the best" is most likely to attain to perfection.

Missionaries are religious ambassadors. Their duty consists not only in the propagation of their own religion, but also in the acquisition of a perfect comprehension of the religion of those people to whom they are sent, and Christians can justly pride themselves on the fact that all their great missionaries, such men as Duff, Judson, Hardy, Beal, Legge,

and others, every one in his field, did an enormous amount of work which served to widen our own knowledge of the religious views that prevail in India, Ceylon, Burmah, and China. Indeed, had it not been for their labors, comparative religion would have made little advance. And I would not hesitate to say that the most successful part of their work consisted, not in making a few converts abroad, but in widening the horizon of the people who had sent them. Such is the advantage of an exchange of thought on the most important questions of life, that it would be a blessing all around if the nonChristian religions also decided, on a larger scale, to send missionaries to Europe and America in order to have among Christians their faith worthily represented, to facilitate comparison and invite investigation.

Mankind is destined to have one religion, as it will have one moral ideal and one universal language, and the decision as to which religion will at last be universally accepted, cannot come about by accident. Science will spread, maybe, slowly but unfailingly, and the universal acceptance of a scientific worldconception bodes the dawn of the Religion of Truth, -a religion based upon plain statements of fact unalloyed with myth or allegory. In the eventual conditions of religious life, there may be a difference of rituals and symbols, nay, even of names, according to taste, historical tradition, and individual preference, but in all essentials there will be one religion only, for there is only one truth, which re