On Yuan Chwang's Travels in India, 629–645 A.D. v1.c4.s2.19

v1.c4.s2.19

As a Buddhist monk Yuan-chuang was very rigorous in keeping the rules of his order and strict in all the observances of his religion. But his creed was broad, his piety never became ascetic, and he was by nature tolerant. There were lengths, however, to which he could not go, and even his powerful friend the Emperor T'ai Tsung could not induce him to translate Lao-tzŭ's "Tao-Tê-Ching" into Sanskrit or recognize Lao-tzŭ as in rank above the Buddha. Modest and self-denying for himself Yuan-chuang was always zealous for the dignity of his order and bold for the honour of its founder. He was brave to a marvel, and faced without fear the unknown perils of the visible world and the unimagined terrors of unseen beings. Strong of will and resolute of purpose, confident in himself and the mission on which he was engaged, he also owned dependence on other and higher beings. He bowed in prayer and adoration to these and sued to them for help and protection in all times of despair and distress. His faith was simple and almost unquestioning, and he had an aptitude for belief which has been called credulity. But his was not that credulity which lightly believes the impossible and accepts any statement merely because it is on record and suits the convictions or prejudices of the individual. Yuan-chuang always wanted to have his own personal testimony, the witness of his own senses or at least his personal experience. It is true his faith helped his unbelief, and it was too easy to convince him where a Buddhist miracle was concerned. A hole in the ground without any natural history, a stain on a rock without any explanation apparent, any object held sacred by the old religion of the fathers, and any marvel professing to be substantiated by the narrator, was generally sufficient to drive away his doubts and bring comforting belief. But partly because our pilgrim was thus too ready to believe, though partly also for other reasons, he did not make the best use of his opportunities. He was not a good observer, a careful investigator, or a satisfactory recorder, and consequently he left very much untold which he would have done well to tell.