isis unveiled, vol 2: chapter iii (religious sects)

“The language of Jesus is unequivocal; it implies not only rebellion but defiance of the Mosaic “Lord God”. “Ye have heard”, he tells us, “That it hath been said, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. Ye have heard that it hath been said – (by the same “Lord God” on Sanai) – Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you; love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you.” (Matthew 5)

And now, open Manu and read:

“Resignation, the action of rendering good for evil, temperance, probity, purity, repression of the senses, the knowledge of the Sastras, (the holy books), that of the supreme soul, truthfulness and abstinence from anger, such are the ten virtues in which consists duty. Those who study these ten precepts of duty, and after having studied them conform their lives thereto, will reach to the supreme condition.” (Manu, book vi., sloka 92)

If Manu did not trace these words many thousands of years before the era of Christianity, at least no voice in the world will dare deny them a less antiquity than several centuries B.C. The same in the case of the precepts of Buddhism.

If we turn to the Pratimokska Sutra and other religious tracts of the Buddhists, we read the ten following commandments:

1. Thou shalt not kill any living creature.

2. Thou shalt not steal.

3. Thou shalt not break thy vow of chastity.

4. Thou shalt not lie.

5. Thou shalt not betray the secrets of others.

6. Thou shalt not wish for the death of thy enemies.

7. Thou shalt not desire the wealth of others.

8. Thou shalt not pronounce injurious and foul words.

9. Thou shalt not indulge in luxury, (sleep on sofa beds or be lazy).

10. Thou shalt not accept gold or silver.

“Good master, what shall I do that I may have eternal life”, asks a man of Jesus. “Keep the commandments.” “Which?” “Thou shalt do no murder. thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness”, is the answer.

“What shall I do to obtain possession of Bhodi, (knowledge of eternal truth), asks a disciple of his Buddhist master. “What way is there to become an Upasaka?” “Keep the commandments.” “What are they?” “Thou shalt abstain all thy life from murder, theft, adultery, and lying”, answers the master.

Identical injunctions are they not? Divine injunctions, the living up to which would purify and exalt humanity. But are they more divine when uttered through one mouth than another? If it is god-like to return good for evil, does the enunciation of the precept by a Nazarene give it any greater force than its enunciation by an Indian, or Tibetan philosopher? We see that the Golden Rule was not original with Jesus; that its birthplace was India.

Do what we may, we cannot deny Sakya-Muni Buddha a less remote antiquity than several centuries before the birth of Jesus. In seeking a model for his system of ethics, why should Jesus have gone to the foot of the Himalayas rather than to the foot of Sanai, but that the doctrines of Manu and Gautama harmonized exactly with his own philosophy, while those of Jehovah were to him abhorrent and terrifying? The Hindus taught to return good for evil, but the Jehovistic command was: An eye for an eye” and “a tooth for a tooth.””

H. P. Blavatsky

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s