It is remarkable that Indian thought, restless and speculative as it is, hardly ever concerns itself with the design, object or end of the world.  The notion of [Greek:  Telos] plays little part in its cosmogony or ethics[135].  The Universe is often regarded as a sport, a passing whim of the divine Being, almost a mistake.  Those legends which describe it as the outcome of a creative act, generally represent the creator as moved by some impulse to multiply himself rather than as executing some deliberate if mysterious plan.  Legends about the end of the world and the establishment of a better order are rare.  Hindu chronology revels in periods, whose enormous length though expressed in figures leaves no real impression on the mind, days and nights of Brahma, Kalpas, Manvantaras and Yugas, in which gods and worlds are absorbed into the supreme essence and born again.  But there is no finality about these catastrophes:  the destruction of the whole universe is as certain as the death of a mouse and to the philosopher not more important[136].  Everything is periodic:  Buddhas, Jinas and incarnations of all sorts are all members of a series.  They all deserve great respect and are of great importance in their own day, but they are none of them final, still less are they able to create a new heaven and earth or to rise above the perpetual flux of Samsara.  The Buddhists look forward to the advent of Maitreya, the future Buddha, and the Hindus to the reappearance of Vishnu as Kalki, who, sword in hand and mounted on a white horse, will purge India of barbarians, but these future apparitions excite only a feeble interest in the popular conscience and cannot be compared in intensity with such ideas as the Jewish Messiah.

It may seem that Indian religion is dreamy, hopeless, and unpractical, but another point of view will show that all Indian systems are intensely practical and hopeful.  They promise happiness and point out the way.  A mode of life is always prescribed, not merely by works on law and ceremony but by theological and metaphysical treatises.  These are not analogous to the writings of Kant or Schopenhauer and to study them as if they were, is like trying to learn riding or cricket by reading handbooks.  The aphorisms of the Sankhya and Vednata are meant to be read under the direction of a teacher who will see that the pupil’s mind is duly prepared not only by explanation but by abstinence and other physical training.  Hindu religions are unpractical only in so far that they decline to subordinate themselves to human life.  It is assumed that the religious man who is striving towards a goal beyond this world is ready to sacrifice the world without regret and in India the assumption is justified surprisingly often.