wholly late additions appear the strongest indications of Buddhistic influence.[52] A great deal of the Book of Peace is Puranic, the book as a whole is a Vishnuite addition further enlarged by Civaite interpolation.  The following book is, again, an offset to the Book of Peace, and is as distinctly Civaite in its conception as is the Book of Peace Vishnuite.[53] It is here, in these latest additions, which scarcely deserve to be ranked with the real epic, that are found the most palpable touches of Buddhism.  They stand to the epic proper as stands to them the Genealogy of Vishnu, a further addition which has almost as much claim to be called ‘part of the epic’ as have the books just mentioned, only that it is more evidently the product of a later age, and represents the Krishna-Vishnu sect in its glory after the epic was completed.  Nevertheless, even in these books much that is suspected of being Buddhistic may be Brahmanic; and in any concrete case a decision, one way or the other, is scarcely to be made on objective grounds.  Still more is this the case in earlier books.  Thus, for instance, Holtzmann is sure that a conversation of a slave and a priest in the third book is Buddhistic because the man of low caste would not venture to instruct a Brahman.[54] But it is a command emphasized throughout the later Brahmanism that one must take refuge in the ship that saves; and in passages not suspected of Buddhistic tendency Bh[=i]shma takes up this point, and lays down the rule that, no matter to which caste a man belongs, his teaching if salutary is to be accepted.  It is even said in one passage of the Book of Peace that one ought to learn of a slave, and in another that all the four castes ought to hear the Veda read:[55] “Let him get instruction even from a C[=u]dra if he can thereby attain to salvation”; and again:  “Putting the Brahman first, let the four castes hear (the Veda); for this (giving first place to the priest) is (the rule in) reading the Veda."[56] And in many places are found instructions given by low-caste men.  It may be claimed that every case which resembles Buddhistic teaching is drawn from Buddhism, but this would be to claim more than could be established.  Moreover, just as the non-injury doctrine is prior to Buddhism and yet is a mark of Buddhistic teaching, so between the two religions there are many points of similarity which may be admitted without compromising the genuineness of the Brahmanic teaching.  For Buddhism in its morality is anything but original.[57]

Another bit of instruction from the Book of Peace illustrates the attitude of the slave just referred to.  In sharp contrast to what one would expect from a Buddhist, this slave, who is a hunter, claims that he is justified in keeping on with his murderous occupation because it is his caste-occupation; whereas, as a Buddhist he ought to have renounced it if he thought it sinful, without regard to the caste-rule.  The Book of Peace lays it down as a rule that the giving