[Sidenote: Buddhism.
Moral elements of this system.
Conflict with Brahmanism.
Victory of Brahmanism.]
Wherever it extended it effected a vast revolution in Indian thought.
Thus in regard to the institution of caste, Buddha did not attack it; he
did not, it would appear, even formally renounce it; as a mere social
institution he seems to have acknowledged it; but then he held that all
the _religious_ were freed from its restrictions. "My law," said he, "is
a law of mercy for all;" and forthwith he proceeded to admit men of
every caste into the closest fellowship with himself and his followers.
Then, he preached--he, though not a Brahman--in the vernacular
languages--an immense innovation, which made his teachings popular. He
put in the forefront of his system certain great fundamental principles
of morality. He made religion consist in duty, not rites. He reduced
duty mainly to mercy or kindness toward all living beings--a marvelous
generalization. This set aside all slaughter of animals. The mind of the
princes and people was weary of priestcraft and ritualism; and the
teaching of the great reformer was most timely. Accordingly his doctrine
spread with great rapidity, and for a long time it seemed likely to
prevail over Brahmanism. But various causes gradually combined against
it. Partly, it was overwhelmed by its own luxuriance of growth; partly,
Brahmanism, which had all along maintained an intellectual superiority,
adopted, either from conviction or policy, most of the principles of
Buddhism, and skillfully supplied some of its main deficiencies. Thus
the Brahmans retained their position; and, at least nominally, their
religion won the day.