discrepant and prophecies were, in this instance, truly
"invented" by the post-apostolic theologians [or, if preferred, old
prophecies of Isaiah and other Old Testament prophets, irrelevant to
Jesus, were adapted to suit his case--as recent English commentators (in
Holy Orders), the Bible revisers, now concede]; and since, moreover--
always following the Professor's argument, in the cases of Buddhist and
Brahmanical chronologies--Biblical chronology and genealogy are found to
be "traditional and full of absurdities .... every attempt to bring them
into harmony having proved a failure." (p. 266): have we or have we not
a certain right to retort, that if Gautama Buddha is shown on these
lines a false prophet, then Jesus must be likewise "a false prophet?"
And if Jesus was a true prophet despite existing confusion of
authorities, why on the same lines may not Buddha have been one?
Discredit the Buddhist prophecies and the Christian ones must go along
with them.

The utterances of the ancient pythoness now but provoke the scientific
smile: but no tripod ever mounted by the prophetess of old was so shaky
as the chronological trinity of points upon which this Orientalist
stands to deliver his oracles. Moreover, his arguments are
double-edged, as shown. If the citadel of Buddhism can be undermined
by Professor Max Muller's critical engineering, then pari passu that of
Christianity must crumble in the same ruins. Or have the Christians
alone the monopoly of absurd religious "inventions" and the right of
being jealous of any infringement of their patent rights?

To conclude, we say, that the year of Buddha's death is correctly stated
by Mr. Sinnett, "Esoteric Buddhism" having to give its chronological
dates according to esoteric reckoning. And this reckoning would alone,
if explained, make away with every objection urged, from Professor Max
Muller's "Sanskrit Literature" down to the latest "evidence"--the proofs
in the "Reports of the Archeological Survey of India." The Ceylonese
era, as given in Mahavansa, is correct in everything, withholding but
the above given fact of Nirvana, the great mystery of Samma-Sambuddha
and Abhidina remaining to this day unknown to the outsider; and though
certainly known to Bikshu Mahanama--King Dhatusena's uncle--it could not
be explained in a work like the Mahavansa. Moreover, the Singhalese
chronology agrees in every particular with the Burmese chronology.
Independent of the religio