as to entitle him to receive the office he himself then held as ruler of a celestial world) and destroyed all his remaining substance, except a sickle, a cord, and a yoke. With these Bódhisat went to cut grass, resolving to give half his earnings to the poor; but when he saw so many in destitute circumstances he gave away the whole, and his wife and he had nothing to eat for the space of six days. At last he fainted away, when in the act of cutting grass. At this moment Sekra appeared to him, and offered to return him all his substance if he would cease to give alms; but he refused to make a promise to this effect. However, as Sekra now found out that he did not do this to obtain his throne in Tawutisá, he became propitious to him, and gave him an immensity of wealth.

There was a certain noble who did not keep the precepts, but he one day presented a mango to a priestess. When he died, he was next born, by night a déwa with a thousand beautiful attendants, and by day a préta; by night his body was like a flower of the garden, but by day like fire; by night he had the usual number of fingers, but by day he had two claws. Thus he was alternately punished for his crimes, and rewarded for the giving of the mango.

When Gótama, in the seventh year after he became Budha, went to the Tawutisá déwa-lóka, Ankura and Indaka were the first of the déwas who went to hear bana. Even before the arrival of Sekra, Maha Brahma, Mahéswara, and the other principal déwas, they approached the teacher of the three worlds. Indaka took his station on the right hand, and Ankura on the left; but as the déwas successively arrived, Ankura gradually receded to a greater distance, until he was twelve yojanas from Budha, whilst Indaka remained at his original station. Before Budha commenced the saying of bana to the assembled déwas, he declared to them how it was that this difference had been caused. "In a former birth," said the sage, "Ankura presented an offering twelve yojanas in extent, and gave alms continually during 10,000 years; but he gave always to the unworthy, as there were none in existence at that period who possessed merit. On the other hand, Indaka gave only a single spoonful of rice to the priest Anurudha. It is on account of the difference in the merit of those who received their respective gifts, that Indaka remains at my right hand, whilst Ankura retires to a distance." In like manner, when the husbandman scatters his seed in bad ground, though it be ever so much in quantity, the produce is small; whilst he who scatters his seed in

good ground, though the quantity be small, gains an abundant harvest.

In this manner we might proceed, heaping together in palling profusion similar instances of the fertility of man's imagination, when that which concerns his subsistence is the object of regard. The noble principle implanted in the heart by God of sympathy, charity, or love, has in all ages been seized upon by men, who are either to be charged with selfishness, or with extreme ignorance of the teachings of the word of inspiration. How mournful the feeling that enters the spirit at the reading of such passages as the following, from the page of Chrysostom! "The fire," says he, speaking of the lamps carried by the virgins mentioned in the parable, "is virginity, and the oil is alms-giving. And in like manner as the flame, unless supplied with a stream of oil, disappears, so virginity, unless it have alms-giving, is extinguished. . . . Hast thou a penny, purchase heaven. . . . Heaven is on sale, and in the market, and yet ye mind it not! Give a crust, and take back paradise; give the least, and receive the greatest; give the perishable, and receive the imperishable; give the corruptible, and receive the incorruptible. . . . Alms are the redemption of the soul. . . . Almsgiving, which is able to break the chain of thy sins. . . . Almsgiving, the queen of virtues, and the readiest of all ways of getting into heaven, and the best advocate there." St. Eligius, or Eloi, in the seventh century, exhorts the people to make oblations to the church, that when our Lord comes to judgment they may be able to say, "Da, Domine, quia dedimus."† Again, in a similar strain, Edgar says of this virtue, "Oh, excellent almsgiving! Oh, worthy reward of the soul! Oh, salutary remedy of our sins!" It was usual to recommend this mode of obtaining liberation from guilt. Nor were arguments wanting to set forth the propriety of this course.

"For many a man so hard is of herte,

He may not wepe although him sore smerte:
Therefore in stede of weping and praieres,
Men mote give silver to the poure freres."

Chaucer's Prologue, v. 229.

By the exercise of charity the sick were taught to expect cures. The rich, as well as the poor, were accustomed to put a written schedule of their sins under the cloth which covered the altar of a

Taylor's Ancient Christianity.

+ Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History.

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 imita⚫tion! "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, be

cause 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