But, in respect to the main question of mutual comprehension, there are, at all events in so far as the European is concerned, degrees of difficulty—­degrees which depend very largely on religious differences, for in the theocratic East religion covers the whole social and political field to a far greater extent than in the West.  Now, the religion of the Moslem is, comparatively speaking, very easy to understand.  There are, indeed, a few ritualistic and other minor points as to which a Western may at times have some difficulty in grasping the Oriental point of view.  But the foundations of monotheistic Islam are simplicity itself; indeed, it may be said that they are far more simple than those of Christianity.  The case of the Hindu religion is very different.  Dr. Barth in his Religions of India says: 

Already in the Veda, Hindu thought is profoundly tainted with the malady, of which it will never be able to get rid, of affecting a greater air of mystery the less there is to conceal, of making a parade of symbols which at bottom signify nothing, and of playing with enigmas which are not worth the trouble of trying to unriddle....  At the present time it is next to impossible to say exactly what Hinduism is, where it begins, and where it ends.

I cannot profess to express any valuable opinion on a subject on which I am very imperfectly informed, and which, save as a matter of political necessity, fails to interest me—­for, personally, I think that a book of the Iliad or a play of Aristophanes is far more valuable than all the lucubrations that have ever been spun by the subtle minds of learned Hindu Pundits—­but, so far as I am able to judge, Dr. Barth’s description is quite accurate.  None the less, the importance to the Indian politician of gaining some insight into the inner recesses of the Hindu mind cannot for a moment be doubted.  Lyall said, “I fancy that the Hindu philosophy, which teaches that everything we see or feel is a vast cosmic illusion, projected into space by that which is the manifestation of the infinite and unconscious spirit, has an unsettling effect on their political beliefs.”  Lyall, therefore, rendered a very great political service to his countrymen when he took in hand the duty of expounding to them the true nature of Hindu religious belief.  He did the work very thoroughly.  Passing lightly by the “windy moralities” of Brahmo Somaj teachers of the type of Keshub Chunder Sen, whom he left to “drifting Deans such as Stanley and Alford,” he grasped the full significance of true orthodox Brahmanism, and under the pseudonym of Vamadeo Shastri wrote an essay which has “become a classic for the student of comparative religion, and for all who desire to know, in particular, the religious mind of the Hindu.”  In the course of his enquiries Lyall incidentally performed the useful historical service of showing that Euhemerism is, or very recently was, a living force in India,[49] and that the solar myth theory supported by Max Mueller and others had, to say the least, been pushed much too far.