favourite saint, accompanied by a donation; and a day or two afterwards, when they re-examined the schedule, the virtues of the saint had converted it into a blank.*

Here we must pause. If these statements be true; if this be the appointment of God, how are we to reconcile with it the declarations of Scripture, that represent the redemption of man as requiring for its accomplishment the richest ransom that the whole universe can provide? Either these ancient teachers were mistaken, or Jesus of Nazareth died in vain. But, as Christ is "the wisdom of God," "in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge," all his acts must be invested with an infinite propriety and fitness; and it must have behoved him to suffer. Therefore, if man would seek to enter heaven, it must be by the method that He has appointed. Our hope of immortality cannot be fixed upon saintly absolution purchased by an obolus; the merits in which we are to trust are those of Him, "in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence." Apart from this trust, and the charity welling up from the purity of principle it instils, I may bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and give my body to be burned, but it will profit me nothing. Yet, how full of all that is beautiful are the arrangements of God! We need not look out for some rahat or Budha upon whom to bestow our alms, lest we fail of receiving an adequate reward. In the day when the eternal crowns shall be distributed to the victors of the cross, "the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto

me.

How affecting the example that is presented for our imitation! "Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.” “Walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us." How exact, how discriminating, how powerfully impressive, are the words of the law! "As ye have opportunity, do good unto all men." "To do good and to communicate forget not, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased." Where little is given, little is required; where much is given, much is required. "Not grudgingly, or of necessity, for God loveth a cheerful giver."

*Fosbroke's British Monachism.

IX. THE DIET.

In taking upon himself the ten obligations, the priest of Budha resolves, according to the fifth, to refrain from the use of intoxicating drinks, as it is said that they lead to indifference towards religion. But the use of animal food is not absolutely forbidden; and in the whole economy of the institute there is a general indifference upon this question, which is in powerful contrast to the requirements of other orders of ascetics. This may have arisen from the fact that Gótama Budha died from eating pork; a circumstance too well known to be set aside by the more rigid of his disciples, who might otherwise have been ready to insist upon a dietetic discipline more extensive in its prohibitions. But although in certain cases, as in times of sickness, animal food is allowed, there are many regulations intended to guard against the abuse of this privilege.

We shall generally find that, when any of our natural desires are debarred the indulgence that they seek, the other appetites, that are not under the same restraint, will exert their liberty with the greater freedom. Hence it is to be supposed that the founder of an ascetic institute will here meet with one of his greatest perplexities. And his task is the more difficult, as eating and drinking cannot, like a luxury or a mere vanity, be entirely forbidden. The laws of the priesthood, as they appear in the Pátimokkhan, are numerous and comprehensive; but there is no rule relative to diet the breach of which is attended with permanent exclusion, suspension, or penance. The people of Ceylon not unfrequently express their displeasure against the priests, on the ground that they urge them to bring meat curries as offerings, whilst vegetable preparations are received with disdain. They appear to have degenerated since the time of Robert Knox, who says, "The people reckon it one of the chief points of godness to abstain from eating any flesh at all, because they would not have any hand, or anything to do, in killing any living thing; they reckon herbs and plants more genial food."

According to the Pátimokkhan, no priest is allowed to partake of food after the sun has passed the meridian. When ghee, butter, oil, honey, sugar, or other articles included in what is regarded as sick diet are received, they may not be kept in store by the priest more than seven days; unless in case of sickness, he may not receive food more than one day at a place where provisions are pre

pared for a number of persons; unless upon authorised occasions, he may not partake of food provided expressly for a number of priests; he may not, unless upon authorised occasions, eat his ordinary meal before going by invitation to any place to receive an offering of food; when, at any place, more than two or three bowls full of rice or other grain are presented to him, he may not accept them, unless he share them with the other priests; when a meal is given at any house, he may not, after receiving it, partake of food given by another person; no priest shall tempt another priest, who has already partaken of a meal given by invitation, to eat more, unless it be of food reserved from the same occasion; the priest may not partake of food reserved from the previous day; unless when sick, he may not solicit such luxuries as ghee, butter, oil, honey, sugar, fish and flesh, milk or curds; he may not with his own hand give food to a naked or wandering ascetic; when going with the alms-bowl, he may not enter a house; when invited, along with other priests, to partake of food at any place, he may not go before or after the appointed time, unless he inform the other priests; when any one offers to provide the proper diet for a priest in case he should be sick, he may not avail himself of it after the lapse of four months from the time it is given; he may not receive food from the alms-bowl of a priestess; unless when sick, he may not go to the house of one of the faithful (out of the ordinary course) to receive refreshments, without an invitation; and the priest who resides in a dangerous place, and has food brought to him, must warn those who bring it of their danger.

The food given in alms to the priest is to be received by him meditatively; it is not to be received carelessly, so that in the act of being poured into the alms-bowl some may fall over the sides; the liquor and the solid food are to be received together, without being separated; and the alms-bowl is not to be piled up above the mouth. The food is also to be eaten meditatively, with care, so that it is not scattered about; without picking and choosing, the particles that come first to hand being first to be eaten; the liquor and the solid food are to be eaten together, not beginning in the centre, and heaping the food up, nor covering the liquor with rice. The priest, unless when sick, may not ask for rice or curry to eat; he may not look with envy into the bowl of another; nor eat mouthfuls larger than a pigeon's egg, but in small round balls; he may not fill the mouth, nor put the hand into the mouth when taking

food; nor talk when his mouth is full; nor allow particles to drop from his mouth; nor swallow his food without being properly masticated; and one mouthful must be swallowed before another is taken. He may not shake his hand to free it from the particles that may be attached to it, nor may the food be scattered about, nor the tongue put out, nor the lips smacked, nor the food sucked up with a noise. He may not lick his hands, nor the bowl, nor his lips, when he eats. A vessel of water may not be taken up when the hand is soiled from eating, and the rincing of the bowl is not to be carelessly thrown away. No priest can partake of food unless he be seated.

It will be remarked, that the rules relative to the manner of eating are here laid down with the utmost precision. We can imagine that, at the commencement of Budhism, as men of all grades were admitted to the priesthood, many rudenesses would be exhibited that would be extremely offensive in the sight of the prince whose doctrines they had embraced; and that it could only be by a series of regulations stooping down to the commonest acts they would be prevented from bringing the priestly character into contempt. It was therefore necessary to make laws, not only as to the quantity and character of the food, but also as to the manner in which it was to be eaten. From this we have an insight into the manners of the times, in reference to a class of society to which the ancient historian seldom directed his attention, owing to whose neglect in this particular we are ignorant of the manners of the mass, even when the conduct of monarchs and nobles is recorded with a fulness that is offensive.

The hours in which it is forbidden to eat food are called wikála. The appointed hours are from sunrise to the end of the fifteenth hour, i. e. until the sun has passed the meridian. The food that is eaten in any other part of the day or night is called wikálabhojana; and by the sixth of the ten obligations the priest professes that he will reject this untimely or unseasonable food.*

The priests are commanded by Budha to be contented with as much as is requisite to appease their hunger, when they take the alms-bowl from house to house, and not to loiter on the ground; as those who eat more than a sufficient quantity will be led to take life and steal, and commit the five deadly sins, whilst those who are temperate will be enabled readily to keep the precepts, and practise *Sadharmmaratnakáré.

all the ordinances that are prescribed. There were a certain number of parrots in the Himalayan forest that went from tree to tree, feeding upon the fruits they found; but there was one parrot that always remained upon the same tree, and when it died, it fed upon the bark. This was seen by Sekra, who as a reward for the moderation of the parrot, caused the tree to live again, and to put forth leaves and fruit. This example is worthy of being imitated by the priests.*

At one time Seriyut and Mugalan (the two principal priests of Gótama Budha) went into a forest for the benefit of solitude; but Mugalan fell sick. When Seriyut asked him if he had ever been attacked in the same way before, he said that he had when young; and when he further asked by what means he had been cured, he said that his mother had made him a confection of certain ingredients. This was overheard by a déwa that resided in a neighbouring tree, who went and informed the persons of a house where Seriyut was accustomed to go to receive alms. The ingredients required for the confection were therefore put into his bowl, and he took them to the sick priest. When Mugalan looked with his divine eyes to see by what means this had been brought about, he saw that it was through what he himself had said. But as it was given through what he had said, and to receive it would have been contrary to the precept, he threw the whole away; in that instant, however, the pain left him, and never returned again, though he lived afterwards forty-five years.

There was a priest in Chíwara Gumba who, when suffering from hunger, would not eat the fruit that had fallen from a tree, because it had not been given him by the owner; rather than break the precept by eating it, he suffered life to become nearly extinct, and was found in this condition by an upásaka, who took him upon his back, and while thus carried he attained rahatship.

On one occasion, when Gótama and his priests were in Weranja, a famine prevailed so extensively that the priests were not able to procure any food from the people when going from house to house with the alms-bowl; and they were compelled to live on some hard barley-cakes used as provender for horses. The priest Mugalan requested permission to exert his supernatural power in order to obtain food, but the exercise was forbidden by Budha.

*Milinda Prasna.

+ Gogerly's Essay on Budhism, Journ. Ceylon Royal As. Soc. i. 79.