The Tibetan Book of the Dead — ed. W. Y. Evans-Wentz

Again, if Ishvara be the maker, all living things should silently submit, patient beneath the maker’s powcr, and then what use to practisc virtue? *Twere equal, then, the doing right or wrong,... Thus, you see, the thought of Ishvara is overthrown in this discussion (shéstra).’ 1

Although the Great Teacher has set aside, as being non-essential to mankind’s spiritual enlightenment, the belicf and the non-belief in a Supreme Deity—more especially in an anthropomorphic Supreme Deity—He has, however, made the corner-stone of Buddhism (as it is of Hinduism) the belicf in a Supreme Power or Universal Law, called the Law of Cause and Effect by the Science of the West and, by the Science of the East, Karma. ‘What ye sow, that shall ye reap’, saith the Buddha; even as St. Paul wrote long afterward, ‘ Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap’.

Again, as elsewhere stated, Buddhism denies that there can be a permanent, unchanging, personal entity such as Christian Theology calls ‘soul’. It also denies the possibility of reaching a state of eternal felicity within the Sangsdéra (i.c. the universe of phenomena); for Reality, or Mzrvaua, is for all

? Ct, the Fo-sho-hing-tsan-king (vv. 1455-68), a professed Chinese version of Ashvaghosha’s Buddhakarita, made by an Indian Buddhist priest named Dharmaraksha about the year a.p. 420, trans. by S. Beal in The Sacred Books of the East, xix (Oxford, 1883), pp. 206-8.

p. 237

Schools of Buddhism non-sangsaric, being beyond all heavens, hells, and worlds, in a state only capable of being understood through personal realization of it.

The Buddha has, therefore, not taught of any Father in Heaven, nor of any Only Begotten Son, nor of any method of salvation for mankind save that won by self-exertion léading to Right Knowledge. He, as all Buddhists believe, found the way as a result of innumerable lifetimes of spiritual evolution, and became the Fully Awakened, the Enlightened One, exhausting completely the Sanxgsaéra of Impermanency and of Sorrow. Through His own cxertions alone He reached the Goal of all existence—Supramundaneness. Buddhists vencrate Him, not as Christians do a Saviour, but as a Guide, in whose footsteps each must tread if Truth is to be realized and Salvation attained.

Through His own cxertions alone He reached the Goal of all existence—Supramundaneness. Buddhists vencrate Him, not as Christians do a Saviour, but as a Guide, in whose footsteps each must tread if Truth is to be realized and Salvation attained.

Although, as in the Bardo Thodol, there are prayers addressed to higher than human powers, and although all Buddhists pay what is really a sort of worship to the Buddha, the doctrine of Right Knowledge through self-development is never quite lost sight of; there is never that almost complete dependence upon outside forces which Christianity inculcates, nor is there anywhere a parallel to the Christian belicf in the forgiveness of sins through repentance, or faith in a Saviour, or through vicarious atonement. Some of the rituals of Northern Buddhism may seem to suggest a Christianlike theory of the forgiveness or absolution of sins, which, more than any other subsidiary doctrine peculiar to Northern Buddhism, may possibly yet be shown to have been shaped— if any of the Mahayana doctrines have been—by Christianity. But in their last analysis these rituals really imply,—setting aside any possible transformation due to Christianity,—as the whole of Southern Buddhism more clearly teaches, that it is only merit, or an equal amount of good karma, which can neutralize the same amount of evil karma, as, in physics, two equally balanced opposing forces neutralize one another.

But as in all religions, so in Buddhism, there is apt to be very wide divergency between original teachings and actual doctrines and practices; and, accordingly, the Bardo Thédolp. 238 as a ritual treatise is no exception. Nevertheless, underneath the symbolism of the Bardo Thodol there are to be discovered, by those that have eyes to see, the essential teachings of Northern Buddhism, sometimes called, in contrast with Southern Buddhism, the Higher Buddhism.

VII. THE MEDIEVAL CHRISTIAN JUDGEMENT.

In connexion with the difficult problem of origins, referred to in that part of our Introduction concerning the Judgement (pp. 35-9), and of the probable influences of Buddhism and other Oriental Faiths, including the Osirian Faith, on Christianity, it is interesting to compare with the Bardo Thddol version of the Judgement (pp. 165-9) the similar version in the medieval treatise entitled Te Lamentation of the Dying Creature (date uncertain, but probably of 14th to 15th cent.) contained in the British Museum MS. Harl. 1706 (fol. 96), Comper’s ed. (pp. 137-68) :

165-9) the similar version in
the medieval treatise entitled Te Lamentation of the Dying
Creature (date uncertain, but probably of 14th to 15th cent.)
contained in the British Museum MS. Harl. 1706 (fol. 96),
Comper’s ed. (pp. 137-68) :

‘ The Dying Creature enset with Sickness incurable sorrowfully Complaincth him thus :“ Alas that ever I sinned in my life. To me is come this day the dreadfullest tidings that ever I heard. Here hath been with me a sergeant of arms whose name is Cruelty, from the King of all’ Kings, Lord of all Lords, and Judge of all Judges; laying on me the mace of His office, saying unto me: ‘I arrest thee and warn thee to make ready.... The Judge that shall sit upon thee, He will not be partial, nor He will not be corrupt with goods, but He will minister to thee justice and equity... .”

‘The Lamentation of the Dying Creature: “ Alas! alas! Excuse me I can not, and whom I might desire to speak for me I wot (i.e. know) not. The day and time is so dreadful ; the Judge is so rightful; mine enimies be so evil; my kin, my neighbours, my friends, my servants, be not favourable to mc; and I wot well they shall not be heard there.”

‘The Complaint of the Dying Creature to the Good Angel: “O my Good Angel, to whom our Lord took me to keep, where be thee now? Me thinketh ye should be here, and answer for me; for the dread of death distroubleth me, sop. 239 that I cannot answer for myself. Here is my bad angel ready, and is one of my chief accusers, with legions of fiends with him. I have no creature to answer for me. Alas it is an heavy case!”

‘ The Answer of the Good Angel to the Dying Creature: “ As to your bad deeds, I was never consenting. I saw your natural inclination more disposed to be ruled by your bad angel than by me. Howbeit, ye cannot excuse you, but when ye were purposed to do anything that was contrary to the commandments of God I failed not to remember (i.e. remind) you that it was not well; and counselled thee to fice the place of peril, and the company that should stir or move you thereto. Can ye say nay thereto? Howcan you think that I should answer for you?”’