for it is found only in the latest Upanishads (as shown by comparing them with those undoubtedly old).  But on the other hand the pras[=a]da doctrine (of special grace) belongs to a much earlier literature, and there is no reason why the whole theory with its startling resemblance to the doctrine of grace, and its insistence on personal affection for the Lord should not have been self-evolved.  The old omnipotence of inherited knowledge stops with the Upanishads, To their authors the Vedas are but a means.  They desired wisdom, not knowledge.  They postulated the desire for the Supreme Spirit as the true wisdom.  From this it is but a step to yearning and love for the Supreme.  That step is made in the Divine Song.  It is recognized by early Buddhism as a Brahmanic trait.  Is it necessarily imported from Christianity?  The proof is certainly lacking.  Nor, to one accustomed to the middle literature of Hindu religion, is the phraseology so strikingly unique as would appear to be the case.  Taken all in all, the teaching of Christianity certainly may be suspected, but it cannot be shown to exist in the Divine Song.

Quite different is the case with the miraculous matter that grew up about the infant Krishna.  But here one is out of the epic and dealing with the latest literature in regard to the man-god.  This distinction cannot be too much insisted upon, for to point first to the teaching of the Divine Song and then to the Krishna legends as equally reflecting Christianity is to mix up two periods as distinct as periods can be established in Hindu literature.  And the result of the whole investigation shows that the proofs of borrowing are as different as these periods.  The inner Christianity thought to be copied by the re-writer of the Divine Song is doubtful in the last degree.  The outer Christianity reflected in the Puranic legends of Krishna is as palpable as it is shocking.  Shocking, for here not only are miracles treated grotesquely, but everything that is meant spiritually in the Occident is interpreted physically and carnally.  The love of the Bridegroom is sensual; the brides of God are drunken dancing girls.

The ‘coincidences,’ as some scholars marvellously regard them, between the legends of Christ and Krishna are too extraordinary to be accepted as such.  They are direct importations, not accidental coincidences.  Whatever is most marvellous in the accounts of Christianity finds itself here reproduced in Krishnaism.  It is not in the doctrine of avatars, which resembles the doctrine of the Incarnation,[61] it is in the totality of legends connected with Krishna that one is forced to see Christian influence.  The scenes of the nativity, the adoration of the magi, the miracles during the Saviour’s childhood, the transfiguration, and other stories of Christ are reproduced with astonishing similarity.  One may add to this the Christmas festival, where Krishna is born in a stable, and the use of certain church-utensils in the temple-service.