Applications of Big Data in Healthcare:

Theory and Practice 1st Edition Ashish

Khanna (Editor)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/applications-of-big-data-in-healthcare-theory-and-prac
tice-1st-edition-ashish-khanna-editor/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Data Analytics and Management: Proceedings of ICDAM

Ashish Khanna (Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/data-analytics-and-management-
proceedings-of-icdam-ashish-khanna-editor/

Knowledge Modelling and Big Data Analytics in

Healthcare: Advances and Applications 1st Edition
Mayuri Mehta

https://ebookmeta.com/product/knowledge-modelling-and-big-data-
analytics-in-healthcare-advances-and-applications-1st-edition-
mayuri-mehta/

Data Science in Theory and Practice: Techniques for Big

Data Analytics and Complex Data Sets 1st Edition Maria
C. Mariani

https://ebookmeta.com/product/data-science-in-theory-and-
practice-techniques-for-big-data-analytics-and-complex-data-
sets-1st-edition-maria-c-mariani/

Artificial Intelligence and Internet of Things:

Applications in Smart Healthcare (Innovations in Big
Data and Machine Learning) 1st Edition Lalit Mohan
Goyal (Editor)
https://ebookmeta.com/product/artificial-intelligence-and-
internet-of-things-applications-in-smart-healthcare-innovations-
in-big-data-and-machine-learning-1st-edition-lalit-mohan-goyal-
Understanding China through Big Data: Applications of
Theory-oriented Quantitative Approaches Yunsong Chen

https://ebookmeta.com/product/understanding-china-through-big-
data-applications-of-theory-oriented-quantitative-approaches-
yunsong-chen/

Big Data in Healthcare Extracting Knowledge from Point

of Care Machines Pouria Amirian

https://ebookmeta.com/product/big-data-in-healthcare-extracting-
knowledge-from-point-of-care-machines-pouria-amirian/

Physics Galaxy 2020 21 Vol 3A Electrostatics Current

Electricity 2e 2021st Edition Ashish Arora

https://ebookmeta.com/product/physics-
galaxy-2020-21-vol-3a-electrostatics-current-
electricity-2e-2021st-edition-ashish-arora/

Healthcare Data Analytics and Management Advances in

ubiquitous sensing applications for healthcare 1st
Edition Nilanjan Dey (Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/healthcare-data-analytics-and-
management-advances-in-ubiquitous-sensing-applications-for-
healthcare-1st-edition-nilanjan-dey-editor/

International Conference on Innovative Computing and

Communications Proceedings of ICICC 2021 Volume 3 1st
Edition Ashish Khanna

https://ebookmeta.com/product/international-conference-on-
innovative-computing-and-communications-proceedings-of-
icicc-2021-volume-3-1st-edition-ashish-khanna/
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
All things have been delivered unto me of my Father: and no one
knoweth who the Son is, save the Father; and who the Father is,
save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal
him. Luke, 10, 22.

I know the things which have been, those which are, and
those which are to be; but me nobody knows. VII, 26.

Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will
give you rest. Matt., 11, 28.

Forsaking all duties, come to me as thy sole refuge. I will

release thee from all sins: do not grieve. XVIII, 66.

But that ye may know that the Son of Man hath authority on
earth to forgive sins,—Mark, 2, 10.

Of all mortals, he who knows me to be unborn, without

beginning, the great Lord of the world, being free from
delusion, is released from all sins. X, 3.

If any man would come after me, let him deny himself, and take
up his cross, and follow me. Mark, 8, 34.

In thought renouncing all actions unto me, intent on me,

applying thyself to the yoking of thine intellect, be thou
always thinking of me. XVIII, 57.

So, therefore, whosoever he be of you that renounceth not all

that he hath, he cannot be my disciple. Luke, 14, 33.

Having thyself yoked by the yoke of renunciation, thou shalt

come to me. IX, 28.

Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will
give you rest. Matt., 11, 28.

In him seek shelter with all thy might: by his grace thou shalt
attain supreme peace, the eternal dwelling-place. XVIII, 62.
 If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how
much more shall they call them of his household? Matt., 10, 25.

hating me in their own bodies and in those of others. XVI, 18.

And blessed is he, whosoever shall find none occasion of

stumbling in me. Matt., 11, 6.

Deluded people, ... not knowing my highest nature as great

lord of entities, disregard me, as I have assumed a human
body. IX, 11.

My yoke is easy, and my burden is light. Matt., 11, 30.

To the constantly-yoked Yogi, who constantly remembereth

me, never thinking of another, I am easy of access. VIII, 14.

Learn of me. Matt., 11, 29.

Learn from me. XVIII, 50.

It would lead us far afield to set forth in detail all the striking things
that Jesus has to say about His own person and mission, but it may
be well to quote a few passages exhibiting lines of character and
thought not exemplified above:—
(a) His meekness and lowliness.

“I am meek and lowly in heart.” Matt., 11, 29.

(b) The conditions of His earthly life.

“The foxes have holes, and the birds of heaven have nests; but
the Son of Man hath not where to lay His head.” Luke, 9, 58.

(c) The necessity that He should die for men.

“And He began to teach them, that the Son of Man must suffer
many things, and be rejected by the elders, and the chief priests,
 and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.”
Mark, 8, 31.

(d) His spirit of service and self-sacrifice.

“Even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to

minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.” Matt., 20, 28.
“But I am among you as he that doth serve.” Luke, 22, 27.

(e) His claims on the allegiance and love of men.

“Every one who shall confess Me before men, him shall the Son
of Man also confess before the angels of God: but he that
denieth Me in the presence of men shall be denied in the
presence of the angels of God.” Luke, 12, 8-9.
“He that loveth father or mother more than Me is not worthy of
Me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than Me is not
worthy of Me.” Matt., 10, 37-38.

(f) His universal sympathy.

“Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these My brethren, even these

least, ye did it unto Me.” Matt., 25, 40.

(g) His declaration that he will return to judge all men.

“Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy
by Thy name, and by Thy name cast out devils, and by Thy
name do many mighty works? And then will I profess unto them,
I never knew you: depart from Me, ye that work iniquity.” Matt., 7,
22-23.

(h) His presence with his followers.

“For where two or three are gathered together in My name, there

am I in the midst of them.” Matt., 18, 20.
The Gītā is one of the most eloquent possible proofs of the fact that
the human heart cries out for an incarnate Saviour. Scarcely less
impressive is the evidence furnished by the reception of the Gītā by
Hindu readers: not the greatest of the Upanishads, neither the
Chāndogya nor the Katha, has had one quarter of the influence
exercised by this late poem; and the secret undoubtedly is to be
found in the attraction of the man-god Krishna. How many
generations of pious readers have found in the story of the life and
teaching of the incarnate god something to which their deepest and
most persistent religious instincts have responded! How many to-day
turn to Krishna in their trials and troubles!
On the one hand, then, we have the imaginative portrait of Krishna,
surrounded by millions of adoring worshippers—touching spectacle!
On the other, stands the historical Jesus of Nazareth, Son of Man
and Son of God, stretching out His nail-pierced hands to India, as He
says, “Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I
will give you rest.” Rightly read, the Gītā is a clear-tongued prophecy
of Christ, and the hearts that bow down to the idea of Krishna are
really seeking the incarnate Son of God.
IV. We have been able to see some little distance into the self-
consciousness of Jesus, and to realize in part at least that on which
He grounds His claim to the heart of every man; but we have not yet
learned the secret of that most marvellous of His powers, His power
to win human love. To that we must now address ourselves.
It is a well-known fact of history that, shortly after the death of Christ,
His followers began to preach in His name, and that very soon the
new faith began to spread rapidly. We have already learned from
Tacitus that in 64 A. D. there was “an immense multitude” of
Christians in Rome itself. Now the greatest of all the early
missionaries was Paul. He was the apostle of Europe. We mention
his name here, because we wish to refer to one of his Epistles.
These letters are the earliest of our Christian documents. The series
begins with two brief letters, both written, with a short interval
between them, to the church at Thessalonica. The most probable
date for them is 49 A. D., that is, only twenty years after the death of
Christ. But the letter we wish to use is one sent from Ephesus to the
church of Corinth[235] about 55 A. D.,[236] that is, twenty-six years after
the death of Jesus. We must not stay here to speak of the splendour
of the ethical feeling and teaching of the Epistle further than to say
that it manifestly has its source in Jesus. We must direct our
attention to other facts which appear in it.
Christianity, we note, has already spread from Judæa into the
provinces of Asia[237] and Galatia[238] in Asia Minor, and
Macedonia[239] and Achaia[240] in Europe. Phœnicia, Syria, Cilicia and
Cyprus are not mentioned; but we know from other sources[241] that
they too were already evangelized. Thus in twenty-six years the
Church of Christ has become a great organization, extending
through many lands, yet conscious of its unity in Christ.[242] We note
also that then, as to-day, BAPTISM is a solemn ceremonial act, in
which a man through the action of the Holy Spirit becomes a
member of the body of Christ,[243] while THE LORD’S SUPPER is a
recurrent feast, in which the members of the Church have fellowship
with the Lord and with each other.[244]
But what we would call special attention to is the place assigned to
Christ in the Epistle. With reference to the Christian, Christ is THE
LORD;[245] with reference to the Father, He is THE SON;[246] He is
spoken of as the Lord of Glory,[247] the Power of God,[248] and the
Wisdom of God;[249] and prayer is offered to Him.[250] All spiritual
authority and power are attributed to Him.[251] The Church is His
body,[252] and He supplies His grace and power to every member.[253]
He will come back again to earth in glory,[254] and will then reveal all
secrets and judge all men.[255]
But there is another point still more noteworthy, and that is the way in
which the crucifixion of Christ is interpreted. Instead of regarding that
judicial murder as a regrettable incident, like the assassination of
Cæsar or the death of Socrates, Paul and his fellow-believers glory
in it,[256] not only as the crowning event of the divine revelation made
in Christ, but as the consummation of His work as the Saviour of
men.[257] Paul makes it the basis of all his preaching,[258] and in it he
finds all the wealth of spiritual wisdom which Christianity contains.[259]
He contrasts the wisdom of God wrapped up in that divine tragedy
with the worldly wisdom of earthly rulers.[260]
What can be the explanation of this extraordinary attitude to such an
event?—The basis of it is the solemn declaration, which Paul makes
in the Epistle, and which he says he made to his converts first of all,
that ON THE CROSS CHRIST DIED FOR OUR SINS.[261] The
crucifixion, as a bare event in history, is but an act of wicked folly on
the part of the rulers of Judæa; but, viewed from the standpoint of
morality and religion, it is a divine act of world-wide significance. In
the blood of Christ a new covenant had been made between God
and man.[262] This is the Gospel, which all the Apostles teach, and
which all the churches believe.[263] Through faith in Christ, on the
basis of this tremendous assertion, the Corinthian Christians, like the
rest, had been saved,[264] i.e., they had received the forgiveness of
their sins[265] and the sanctifying Spirit.[266] They thus no longer
belonged to themselves: they had been bought with a great price,
the blood of the Son of God.[267] They were no longer part and parcel
of heathen society; each one was a member of the body of Christ.[268]
What led Paul and all the other Apostles and all the early Christians
to form such an extraordinary theory? How did they come to the
conclusion that the crucifixion was not a squalid tragedy, but a divine
sacrifice? This letter tells us quite plainly; the reasons were these:
Jesus Himself declared before He was crucified, that His death was
to be the basis of the New Covenant,[269] and this declaration of His
had been divinely confirmed by His Resurrection.[270]
Now mark: this letter was written within twenty-six years of the event.
The majority of the twelve Apostles, and multitudes of other men
who had known Jesus, were still alive.[271] Paul’s good faith is beyond
all question; and, as he was intimate with Peter and John and the
rest of the Apostles, and also with James the brother of Jesus,[272] he
had access to the very best information possible. Further he had
been one of the most violent opponents of Christianity. His testimony
is, therefore, evidence of the very highest value. We may conclude,
then, with the utmost certitude that we are standing on an
immoveable historical foundation, when we say that Jesus, before
His crucifixion, said He was about to die for the sins of men.
But this evidence does not stand alone. It is a historical fact,
acknowledged by scholars of every school, that all Christian
churches have from the very beginning celebrated the Lord’s
Supper.[273] Now this universal usage in so many churches, divided
not only by long distances but in many cases also by minor
differences in doctrine, cannot be explained at all except as a result
of a command of Jesus Himself. If any single disciple had started
such a practice, it could never have won its way to universal
acceptance. Now consider the significance of this fact: Jesus, on the
night in which He was betrayed, took bread, broke it, and bade His
disciples eat it, saying, ‘This is My body.’ He then took a cup of wine
and bade them drink it, saying, ‘This is My blood.’[274] The scene is
absolutely without a parallel in the history of the world; and it can
have but one meaning, viz., that Jesus regarded His death as a
sacrifice.
But the direct statement of Paul is corroborated, not only by the
institution of the Supper, but also by this fact, that the doctrine, that
Christ died for our sins, is an integral part of the teaching of Jesus as
that is handed down to us in the Gospels. We have already seen that
He held that His death was necessary for the establishment of the
Kingdom. We must now set out His teaching on this subject with a
little more fulness. We shall restrict ourselves to a single Gospel. In
the earliest saying that refers to it, His death is a future event,
coming inevitably, and destined to bring sorrow to His disciples. “And
Jesus said unto them, Can the sons of the bride-chamber mourn, as
long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when
the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then will they
fast.”[275] In the next it is much more clearly defined. Its necessity is
emphasized; we are told that the agents are to be the religious
leaders of Israel; and it is to be followed by the resurrection. “From
that time began Jesus to shew unto His disciples, how that He must
go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief
priests and scribes, and be killed, and the third day be raised up.”[276]
Twice over this same prophecy is repeated, the last time with more
detail.[277] Then follows a most striking saying, in which He speaks of
His death as voluntary: it is a giving away of His life; and it is
explained as the climax of His life of service; for the gift is ‘a ransom
for many,’ that is a price paid, in order to redeem many from sin.
“The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and
to give His life a ransom for many.”[278] We need not linger over the
next sayings, though each has its own interest.[279] The last saying
occurs in the account of the institution of the Supper. In these words
He teaches in the clearest way, first, that His death is to be the
ground of forgiveness, and secondly, that after His death He is to be
the source of the spiritual life and strength of His followers. “And as
they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it; and
He gave to the disciples, and said, ‘Take, eat; this is My body.’ And
He took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, ‘Drink ye
all of it; for this is My blood of the covenant, which is shed for many
unto remission of sins.”[280] The teaching of Jesus is an organic
whole, and is incomplete without this, His own interpretation of His
death of shame.
Jesus, then, gave Himself up to death as the sacrifice for the sins of
men. Our Christian documents go on to declare that He rose from
the dead on the third day, and that this resurrection of His was God’s
confirmation of the sacrifice of His Son. That men should at first sight
disbelieve the astounding assertion, that the crucified Jesus rose
from the dead, is not to be wondered at; but the fact remains.
Sceptical scholars have laboured for centuries to explain away this
extraordinary occurrence, but no one of these scholars themselves
will venture to say that any explanation hitherto given is satisfactory.
The latest attempt, that made by Schmiedel in the Encyclopædia
Biblica, is a farcical failure. The following are the adamantine facts
which no rationalism has ever yet succeeded in crushing or melting:
—(a) the Christians declared that they had seen Christ and spoken
with Him after His resurrection; (b) they were absolutely sincere in
this belief[281]; (c) the Christian Church arose as a result of this
conviction; (d) the grave was empty. The account of Christ’s
appearances given in the fifteenth chapter of our Epistle is well worth
study. Those who wish to look into this question further may consult
Ballard’s Miracles of Unbelief, pp. 135 ff.
We have thus, by a serious historical inquiry, reached the conclusion,
that Jesus of Nazareth, the founder of the Christian religion,
declared, before His crucifixion, that He was about to die for the sins
of men, and that this assertion of His was sealed with the divine
approval by the unique miracle of the resurrection. We have also
seen that this was the Good News, which Paul and all the other
Apostles preached, and on which the early Church was founded. It is
this that has won for Jesus the love of myriads; it is this that has
been the magnet to draw them away from sin. It is the source of the
joy and vital power of the Christian life.
Now let us recollect the poem upon The Servant of Jehovah, which
we considered in our third chapter. How marvellously Jesus
corresponds to the extraordinary idea which that poem discloses, the
despised and oppressed prisoner who endures in uncomplaining
meekness the uttermost shame of a violent death, and is finally
recognized as having been “pierced because of our trangressions,
and crushed because of our iniquities.” That anyone should write
such a poem, seems strange in the extreme; that Jesus should have
fulfilled it, is infinitely more wonderful.
How comes it that this Jewish carpenter, with His three years of
public life and His cross of shame, fulfils so many ideals and
aspirations? He brings in the new age which Virgil and his
contemporaries sighed for; He is Plato’s just man; He utters from His
own self-consciousness such things as the author of the Gītā
imagined an incarnate god would say; He gives Himself up to death,
in sheer love, as a sacrifice for sin, thus fulfilling the deepest needs
of man, as expressed by the old Hebrew seer; and He is the only
human being whom men of every race and clime can heartily admire
and unhesitatingly imitate. Nor is this all: many other convergent
lines of thought might be suggested, in the light of which Jesus
stands out as the ideal of our common humanity and the fountain of
the love of God.
How is all this to be explained? Wide chasms sever the Hindu sage,
the Greek philosopher, the Hebrew prophet and the Roman poet; yet
in Jesus their several ideals are reconciled in a loftier unity. Once in
the course of the centuries East and West have actually met! Nor
was the meeting merely the resolution of antitheses in a wider
conception: what the Jew and the Indian, the Greek and the Roman,
dreamed of as the unattainable, that Jesus actually accomplished in
this work-a-day world of ours, amid storms of the cruellest hatred
and calumny.—What is your candid opinion about Him, brother?
How are you to solve the problem raised by His life, death and place
in history? Can He be better described than in His own words, SON
OF MAN and SON OF GOD?
 APPENDIX.
NEO-KRISHNA LITERATURE.

The Neo-Krishna movement is about twenty years old. Before 1880

Vaishnavism does not seem to have been in great favour with the
higher castes of Bengal. Traditionally they were Saivas or Sāktas
rather than Vaishnavas; and English education, which bore very
heavily for half a century on every form of Hinduism seems to have
told with peculiar severity on Krishnaism. But shortly after 1880 a
great change becomes visible: Krishna begins to be praised on
every hand, and ancient Vaishnava books are read and studied with
avidity. The new movement seems to have owed its origin, on the
one hand, to the teaching and influence of Ramkrishna Paramhansa,
Keshub Chundra Sen, Bijoy Krishna Goswami and Shishir Kumar
Ghose; and on the other, to the efforts of two or three noteworthy
literary men, who threw themselves into the task of painting the
character of Krishna with extraordinary enthusiasm. The Gītā at once
leaped into greater prominence than ever: numberless editions and
translations of it have been published. Many essays have appeared
comparing Krishna with Christ and Vaishnavism with Christianity.
Thus a large Krishna literature, both in English and Bengali, has
sprung up. The following seem to be the more important books of
this literature:—

1884
Essays in Prachār on Krishnacharitra by Bunkim Ch. Chatterji.
1886
1. Krishnacharitra, Bunkim Ch. Chatterji, 1st edition. A volume in
Bengali prose on the character of Krishna.
1887
2. Raivatak, Nobin Ch. Sen. An epic poem in Bengali on
Krishna’s youth. 3. The Bhagavad Gītā, or the Lords Lay, Mohini
M. Chatterji. An English prose translation of the text and of parts
of Sankara’s commentary. An attempt is made to put the Gītā on
the same level as the New Testament.
1888
4. Krishna Jivani, Prosanna Kumar Vidyaratna. A life of Krishna
in Bengali prose.
1889
5. Srikrishner Jivana O Dharma, Gaur Gavinda Ray. The life and
religion of Krishna from the standpoint of the New Dispensation:
Bengali prose.
1890
6. Srimadbhagavadgītā, Krishnananda Swami (i.e. Krishna
Prasanna Sen). The text in the Bengali character with a Bengali
commentary and translation.
1892
Krishnacharitra, Bunkim Ch. Chatterji, 2nd edition. This edition
contains a great deal of new matter.
7. Amiya Nimai Charity, Shishir Kumar Ghose. First part. A life of
Chaitanya in Bengali prose.
1893
Amiya Nimai Charit. Second part.
8. Kurukshetra, Nobin Ch. Sen. An epic poem in Bengali on
Krishna at Kurukshetra.
1894
9. The Landmarks of Ethics according to the Gītā. Bulloram
Mullick.
Amiya Nimai Charit. Third part.
1895
10. Kālā Chānd Gītā, Shishir Kumar Ghose. A sort of Krishnaite
Song of Solomon in Bengali verse. It is said to have been
composed in 1888.
1896
11. Srikrishna, his Life and Teachings, Dhirendra Nath Pal. 3
vols.
12. Srikrishner Kalanka Kena? Nava Kumar Devasarma. A
Bengali prose defence of the character of Krishna.
13. The Bhagavad Gītā, Annie Besant. New and revised edition.
An English prose translation with an introduction and a few
notes.
14. Prabhās, Nobin Ch. Sen. An epic poem in Bengali on the
later years of Krishna’s life.
1897
15. Lord Gaurānga, Shishir Kumar Ghose, 1st volume. A life of
Chaitanya in English prose, with a discussion of the doctrine of
Incarnations.
1898
16. Krishna and Krishnaism, Bulloram Mullick.
Lord Gaurānga, 2nd volume.
17. Hindu Theism, Sitanath Tattvabhushan.
18. An Elementary Treatise on Universal Religion. Kshetra
Mohan Mukerji. The religion of the Gītā is here put forward as the
universal religion.
1899
19. Incarnation, Nanda Krishna Bose. This treatise follows in
most points the theory of Incarnation put forward in Lord
Gaurānga.
1900
 20. The Young Men’s Gītā, Jogindranath Mukharji. An English
prose translation with introduction and notes.
21. Srimadbhagavadgītā, Prasanna Kumar Sastri, 2nd edition.
The text in the Bengali character, with several commentaries,
and a Bengali translation by Sasadhar Tarkachuramani.
1901
22. The Imitation of Sreekrishna, S. C. Mukhopadhaya. A daily
text-book, containing extracts in English from the Gītā, the
Mahābhārata, and the Bhāgavat Purāna.
23. Sree Krishna, Muralidhur Roy. An account, in English prose,
of the life and character of Krishna.
24. Srimadbhagavadgītā, Bhudhur Chattopadhaya, 4th edition.
The text in the Bengali character, with a Bengali commentary.
1903
25. A most elaborate edition of the Gītā, edited by Damudar
Mukerji, is being published in parts.
26. A Bengali verse translation of the Gītā by Satyendra Nath
Tagore is appearing in Bhārati.

This revival of interest in Krishna and his worship is clearly part of

the great national movement which has been so potent in Bengal,
religiously, socially and politically, these last twenty years. This
period has witnessed the appearance of the whole Neo-Hindu
movement, with its literature, lectures, societies and missionary
propaganda, the rise of the Indian National Congress and of the
social reform movement, the advance of native journalism to its
present extraordinary influence, and the establishment of the native
unaided colleges, which have so seriously changed the balance of
influence in Higher Education. Neo-Krishnaism, then, is one result of
the operation of that potent spirit whereby India has become
conscious of her unity, and her sons have been roused to a vigorous
defence of all that they have inherited from the past. This rise of the
national spirit, though it may be troublesome in small matters to the
rulers of India, is undoubtedly the last and greatest justification of
English rule; and, while, with its exaggerations and insincerities and
follies, it cannot fail to provoke criticism,[282] yet its power to awake
self-reliance, self-respect and the passion for freedom ought to win
for it the approval and the encouragement of all good men.
There can be no doubt that among the influences which have
produced Neo-Hinduism, Christianity is one of the most potent, if not
the chief. This is peculiarly evident in the case of the Neo-Krishna
literature we are discussing. In 1899 the Bengal Librarian wrote,
“There is no denying the fact that all this revolution in the religious
belief of the educated Hindu has been brought about as much by the
dissemination of Christian thought by Missionaries as by the study of
Hindu scriptures; for Christian influence is plainly detectable in many
of the Hindu publications of the year.” But beyond this general
influence, which cannot fail to be noticed by anyone who will take the
trouble to read the volumes, it is, we believe, perfectly plain that the
very ideas which have given birth to the literature are the result of
Christian influence. A distinct taste for such books as the Gospels
has sprung up; and men have come to feel the need of a perfect
character, such as Christ’s is, for daily contemplation and imitation.
The Neo-Krishna movement endeavours to supply these needs from
within Hinduism, offering the Gītā instead of the Gospels, and
Krishna instead of Christ.[283]
Nobin Ch. Sen seems to have been the first to conceive the idea of a
modern rendering of the character of Krishna; for he laid the project
before some of his friends in 1882.[284] His famous epic trilogy,
Raivatak, Kurukshetra and Prabhās, are the result of this pregnant
thought. But, while he and Shishir Kumar Ghose have done a great
deal to popularize the movement, there can be no doubt that Bunkim
Ch. Chatterji’s Krishnacharitra has been by far the most influential
volume in the whole of this literature. Gaur Gavinda Ray’s work,
Srikrishner Jivana O Dharma, is a piece of excellent
characterization, and has won the high regard of many thoughtful
men.
The books on our list fall into two classes, Historical and Traditional.
In the Historical class there are only two volumes, Tattvabhusan’s
Hindu Theism, and the Young Men’s Gītā. These two frankly
acknowledge that the Gītā is a late book. In the Young Men’s Gītā[285]
its date is said to be a century or two before, or a century or two
after, the Christian era; while in Hindu Theism[286] the Gītā is
regarded as the point of transition from the old Vedānta to the
religion of the Purānas. The standpoint of these two books is thus
thoroughly historical, but it necessarily implies the abandonment of
the divinity of Krishna.
All the rest of the books on the list fall into the second class; for they
hold the traditional position about Krishna. Most of them make no
attempt at criticism of the sources, but treat the Mahābhārata, the
Gītā, the Harivansa and the Purānas as all historical and all equally
trustworthy. A few of the authors, however, state plainly their own
critical conclusions, and two or three enter into some discussion of
the main problems. These attempts at criticism are the most pitiable
parts of the whole literature. The talented author of Srikrishner
Jivana O Dharma, by far too sincere and candid to ignore the
Puranic elements in the sources, frankly confesses their presence;
yet, believing these books to be genuine representatives of the age
of Kurukshetra, he is driven to the extraordinary conclusion that the
Vedic, the Vedantic, and the Puranic ages were contemporaneous.
[287]
The late Bulloram Mullick, in discussing the eighteen Purānas,
goes so far as to say, “Whatever may be the views of European
savants, there is indubitable proof that some of these Purānas
existed in the eleventh or twelfth century before Christ.”[288] Even
Bunkim Chundra Chatterji himself not only unhesitatingly adopts
Goldstücker’s rash guess, that Pānini’s grammar was written before
the Brāhmanas and the Upanishads, but on the basis of that unwise
conjecture, pushes back Pānini’s date to the tenth or eleventh
century B. C.,[289] i.e., four or five centuries earlier than the pre-
Buddhistic date which Goldstücker[290] wished to establish. Dhirendra
Nath Pal, seeing that Bunkim Babu found it so easy to leap over a
few centuries, goes a little further and suggests the twelfth or
thirteenth.[291] But, indeed, without some such strange perversion of
history, it is impossible to construct an argument for the authenticity
of the Gītā and the historicity of the Mahābhārata that shall have
even the semblance of reason.
We note next that of all the books of the second class, Bunkim
Chundra’s Krishnacharitra is the only work that gives any
independent criticism: all the rest, with the single exception of
Srikrishner Jivana O Dharma, merely echo his arguments. Thus
Bunkim Babu’s theory is the only one we need discuss.
Now the whole critical structure of the Krishnacharitra rests upon the
passage on pages 41 and 42, where the date of Pānini is discussed.
Pānini is pushed back to 1000 B. C.; and, the ‘original’ Mahābhārata
being earlier than Pānini, we are asked to believe that it was
produced within a century or two of Kurukshetra, and that it is in
consequence trustworthy historically. The whole argument thus rests
on the date of Pānini.
We translate this important passage:—

“Goldstücker has proved that, when Pānini’s Sūtra was

composed, Buddha had not arisen. In that case Pānini must
belong to the sixth century B. C. But not only that, in his time the
Brāhmanas, the Aranyakas, the Upanishads and the other parts
of the Vedas had not been composed. Apart from the Rig, the
Yajur, and the Sāma Vedas, nothing else existed. Asvalāyana,
Sānkhāyana and the rest had not appeared. Max Müller says
that the age in which the Brāhmanas were composed began
about 1000 B. C. Dr. Martin Haug says that that was the end of
the age, and that it began in the fourteenth century B. C.
Therefore, if we say that Pānini must belong to the tenth or
eleventh century B. C., we do not say too much.”

Now the first remark we make on this extraordinary piece of criticism

is this, that Goldstücker and Max Müller are most unfairly conjoined
to support a date which both of them would have indignantly
repudiated. For Müller’s date for Pānini is the fourth century B.C.,[292]
and Goldstücker never proposed to push him further back than the
sixth century; indeed all that he claims is that he has brought forward
evidence which affords a strong probability that Pānini preceded the
origin of the Buddhistic creed.[293] Our next remark is that, though
more than forty years have passed since Goldstücker’s book
appeared,[294] he has convinced no one that the Brāhmanas and the
Upanishads are posterior to Pānini’s grammar: opinions still differ as
to Pānini’s precise date, but no scholar to-day puts him before the
Brāhmanas.[295]
Can the grounds for this unanimity among modern scholars be
vividly set forth? We believe they can. Here, as in our first chapter,
we shall not attempt to fix a definite chronology, but shall simply aim
at reaching the relative age of the great books we are dealing with;
and we shall not deal with the meaning of disputed passages, but
shall rest the case altogether on the clear and prominent features of
history which every one can appreciate. There is, then, first of all the
great broad fact that the Sūtras depend on the Brāhmanas, and are,
in general, posterior to them, and that the language and style of
Pānini’s Sūtras show that he belongs to about the middle of the
Sūtra period.[296] All the detailed study of the last forty years has
gone to strengthen this stable conclusion.
But there is another and still more conclusive proof that Pānini
comes long after the early Brāhmanas. These ancient books are
written in Vedic Sanskrit.[297] The early Upanishads are more modern
in character, but even they belong to a stage of the language a good
deal earlier than the Sūtras: Professor Macdonell’s words are, “the
oldest Upanishads occupying a position linguistically midway
between the Brāhmanas and the Sūtras.”[298] Thus the Brāhmanas
were composed while Vedic Sanskrit was still the language of the
Indo-Aryans. Now Pānini’s grammar deals with classical Sanskrit,
not the Vedic speech. He deals with many points of Vedic grammar,
it is true, but he deals with them as exceptions; his subject is
classical Sanskrit. He laid down the law, which has ruled Sanskrit
throughout the centuries since his day. Thus he arose at a time,
when the language of the Brāhmanas had become archaic, and
modern Sanskrit had taken its place.[299] It is thus absolutely
impossible to believe that Pānini lived and wrote before the
Brāhmanas were composed: to propose to put him back before their
composition is much the same as proposing to push Johnson’s
Dictionary back before Chaucer.
Another line of proof may also be indicated. Careful study of the
early Brāhmanas has made it plain that they were composed after
the collection of the hymns of the Rigveda, but before[300] the
formation of the Sanhitā text (i.e., the text in which the words are
joined according to the rules of Sandhi) and the Pada[301] text (i.e. the
word by word text). The author of the Pada text is Sākalya.[302] Now
Yāska refers to Sākalya as a predecessor;[303] and Yāska himself is
earlier than Pānini.[304] Thus the historical order is the early
Brāhmanas, the Sanhitā text, Sākalya, Yāska, Pānini.
Bunkim Babu’s date for Pānini being thus altogether untenable, his
whole argument for the historicity of the Pāndava Mahābhārata and
Krishna’s character as therein pourtrayed tumbles in ruins, and
brings down with it all the rest of this Krishna literature.
We would invite our readers to turn away from these vain attempts to
turn a myth into sober history, and to listen to the teaching of those
really scholarly Indians who study Hinduism from a scientific
standpoint. We have already referred to Sitanath Tattvabhushan’s
Hindu Theism, and we have frequently used Bose’s Hindu
Civilization under British Rule and R. C. Dutt’s works as authorities.
We would now call attention to a monograph by one of the greatest
scholars in Bengal (Comparative Studies in Vaishnavism and
Christianity, by Brajendra Nath Seal), where[305] the growth of the
Krishna legend is frankly discussed;[306] also to a very remarkable
essay on Buddhist and Vishnuite in a recent number of Sāhitya[307]
by the late Umes Chundra Batabyal, in which grave historical
reasons are given for concluding that the Gītā is in part at least a
polemic against Buddhism; and to the late Mr. Justice Telang’s
introduction to his translation of the Gītā (S. B. E., vol. VIII), with
regard to which readers will note, that, although the date is put a little
earlier than most scholars would put it, no attempt is made to defend
the traditional theory of the origin of the Song.

Footnotes
 1. The philosophic basis of the book is primarily the Sānkhya
system which is essentially atheistic.

2. Dr. Lorinser’s attempt (Die Bhagavadgītā, übersetzt und

erläutert von Dr. F. Lorinser, 1869) to prove that the author of
the Gītā borrowed many ideas from the Bible must be
pronounced a failure. Cf. Garbe, 19, 83-85; Max Müller, Natural
Religion, 97-100; Hopkins, R. I., 429.

3. On the religion of the Rigveda see Kaegi, 27-74; Hopkins, R. I.,

Chaps. II-VI; Macdonell, 67-115; Bose, H.C., I, 6-9; Dutt, C.A.I.,
Vol. I, Chap. V; Monier-Williams, Chap. I.

4. Hopkins, R.I., 141; Macdonell, 385; Garbe, 1-2; Kaegi, 87.

5. E.g., X, 90.

6. X, 81; 82; 121.

7. X, 129.

8. Kaegi, 3; Macdonell, 171-174.

9. Kaegi, 4; Macdonell, 174-185.

10. Kaegi, 5; Macdonell, 202 ff.; Müller, A.S.L., Chap. II; Bose,
H.C., I, 9-12.

11. Müller, A.S.L., 389.

12. Hopkins, R.I., 177.

13. Gough, Chap. I; Garbe, 2-7; Macdonell, 223; Hopkins, R.I.,

204.

14. Müller, A.S.L., 313 ff.; Macdonell, 204; Kaegi, 5.

15. Müller, A.S.L., 316 ff.; Macdonell, 218 ff.; Kaegi, 5; Bose, H.C.,
I, 12-19.