[Footnote 1:  Hence the indomitable hatred with which the Brahmans pursued the disciples of Buddhism from the fourth century before Christ to its final expulsion from Hindustan.  “Abundant proofs,” says Turnour, “may be adduced to show the fanatical ferocity with which these two great sects persecuted each other; and which, subsided into passive hatred and contempt, only when the parties were no longer placed in the position of actual collision.”—­Introd. Mahawanso, p. xxii.]

[Footnote 2:  In its earliest form Buddhism was equally averse to persecution, and the Mahawanso extols the liberality of Asoca in giving alms indiscriminately to the members of all religions (Mahawanso, ch. v. p. 23).  A sect which is addicted to persecution is not likely to speak approvingly of toleration, but the Mahawanso records with evident satisfaction the courtesy paid to the sacred things of Buddhism by the believers in other doctrines; thus the Nagas did homage to the relics of Buddha and mourned their removal from Mount Meru (Mahawanso, ch. xxxi. p. 189); the Yakkhos assisted at the building of dagobas to enshrine them, and the Brahmans were the first to respect the Bo-tree on its arrival in Ceylon (Ib. ch. xix. p. 119).  COSMAS INDICOPLEUSTES, whose informant, Sopater, visited Ceylon in the sixth century, records that there was then the most extended toleration, and that even the Nestorian Christians had perfect freedom and protection for their worship.

Among the Buddhists of Burmah, however, “although they are tolerant of the practice of other religions by those who profess them, secession from the national faith, is rigidly prohibited, and a convert to any other form of faith incurs the penalty of death.”—­Professor WILSON, Journ.  Roy.  Asiat.  Soc. vol. xvi. p. 261.]

[Sidenote:  A.D. 209.]

This characteristic of the “religion of the Vanquisher” is in strict conformity, not alone with the spirit of his doctrine, but also with the letter of the law laid down for the guidance of his disciples.  Two of the singular rock-inscriptions of India deciphered by Prinsep, inculcate the duty of leaving the profession of different faiths unmolested; on the ground, that “all aim at moral restraint and purity of life, although all cannot be equally successful in attaining to it.”  The sentiments embodied in one of the edicts[1] of King Asoca are very striking:  “A man must honour his own faith, without blaming that of his neighbour, and thus will but little that is wrong occur.  There are even circumstances under which the faith of others should be honoured, and in acting thus a man increases his own faith and weakens that of others.  He who acts differently, diminishes his own faith and injures that of another.  Whoever he may be who honours his own faith and blames that of others out of devotion to his own, and says, ’let us make our faith conspicuous,’ that man merely injures the faith he holds.  Concord alone is to be desired.”