I am confirmed in my view that the passage on the unconvincing nature of
religions proceeded from Ibn Moqaffa by a few couplets in the
_Shahnama_. (Mohl vol. 5, 53 ff; Macan 1293). The king of India called
Kaid has several dreams which are interpreted to him by the sage Mihran.
The third dream, about four men pulling at a fine piece of cloth, each
towards himself, without tearing it, is thus explained by him:

"Know that the piece of cloth is the religion divine end that the four
men who pull at it have come to preserve it. One of the religions is
that of the Dihkans, the fire-worshippers, who may not take in hand the
Barsom without pronouncing the prayer formula.

"[The Dihkans were properly speaking the small landed nobility of the
Sasanian times and as such were representatives of the ancient Persian
religion; _barsom_ and the prayer formula or _baz_ are well-known
components of their ritual.]

"Another religion is that of Moses, which is called the Jewish religion,
maintaining that none besides itself is worthy of praise; the third
religion is of Greece, belongs to men of piety and brings equity to the
heart of princes (this is Christianity). The fourth is the pure faith of
the Arab which raises the head of the intelligent out of dust. Thus they
struggle for the preservation of their religion and pull the cloth
towards the four sides away from each other and become enemies for the
sake of religion."

[Sidenote: Ibn Moqaffa no sincere Muslim]

This passage the basic principle of which accords with the reflections
on religion in our chapter I would now with greater positiveness than