Let us now examine the characteristics common to Indian creeds.  They are numerous and striking.  A prolonged study of the multitudinous sects in which Indian religion manifests itself makes the enquirer feel the truth of its own thesis that plurality is an illusion and only the one substratum real.  Still there are divergent lines of thought, the most important of which are Hinduism and Buddhism.  Though decadent Buddhism differed little from the sects which surrounded it, early Buddhism did offer a decided contrast to the Brahmanic schools in its theories as to human nature as well as in ignoring tradition and sacerdotalism.  We may argue that Buddhism is merely Vaishnavism or Saivism in travelling dress, but its rejection of Brahmanic authority is of capital importance.  It is one of the reasons for its success outside India and its disappearance in India meant that it could not maintain this attitude.  Yet many features of Buddhism are due to the fact that Hinduism, and not Islam or Christianity, was the national expression of religion in India and also many features of Hinduism may be explained by the existence of this once vigorous antagonist.

Hinduism[124] has striking peculiarities which distinguish it from Christianity, Islam and even from Buddhism.  It recognizes no one master and all unifying principles known to other creeds seem here to be absent.  Yet its unity and vitality are clear and depend chiefly on its association with the Brahman caste.  We cannot here consider the complex details of the modern caste system but this seems the place to examine the position of the Brahmans, for, from the dawn of Sanskrit literature until now, they have claimed to be the guides of India in all matters intellectual and religious and this persistent claim, though often disputed, has had a great measure of success.

The institution of caste is social rather than religious and has grown gradually:  we know for instance that in the time of the Buddha it had not attained to anything like its present complexity and rigidity.  Its origin is explicable if we imagine that the Indo-Aryans were an invading people with an unusual interest in religion.  The Kshatriyas and Vaisyas mark the distinction between the warriors or nobles and the plebs which is found in other Aryan communities, and the natives whom the Aryans conquered formed a separate class, recognized as inferior to all the conquerors.  This might have happened in any country.  The special feature of India is the numerical, social and intellectual strength of the priestly caste.  It is true that in reading Sanskrit literature we must remember that most of it is the work of Brahmans and discount their proclivity to glorify the priesthood, but still it is clear that in India the sacerdotal families acquired a position without parallel elsewhere and influenced its whole social and political history.  In most countries powerful priesthoods are closely connected with the Government under which they flourish and