: those languages, before he again ventures to call in question the renderings of competent persons. The proofs from the Old Testament he treats with still less fairness; he passes over some of the most important passages, and under the pretext that many of them apply to Mahommed, he takes the opportunity of advancing a great many others ;* and at last, quite forgetting the object of his book, produces what he considers two irrefragable arguments in substantiation of Mahommed's mission; the first is, the perfection of his religion as a code of morals and director of devotion: the second is, that Mahommed must have been either a true prophet or a mad man. He proves by his many virtues and talents that he was not the latter, and triumphantly asserts that he must have been the former. He forgets that the same argument applies with incalculably greater weight to the apostles; for with them, we have many claimants to inspiration, instead of one, we have pure morals,-and an utter absence of any worldly motive. In taking up the chapter on the Trinity and Divinity of the Holy Ghost, he leaves almost unnoticed the strong passages and reasoning from the New Testament, and dwells upon the uncertain intimations, which Mr. Pfander himself acknowledged, were no more than allusions. He mistakes the gift and influences of the Holy Ghost, for that Divine spirit itself; and asserts that our doctrine would lead to the supposition that Christ was in the womb of Elizabeth and Mary at the same time; for "John was filled with the Holy Ghost from his Like Kazim Ali he applies the glorious promises of the XLII. of Isaiah to Ma hommed; though with greater candour, but less consistency, he allows that the introductory verses" he shall not cry, &c." refer to Jesus. With similar perversity, he holds that part of the second psalm applies to Jesus, and part to Mahommed; but he does not show us how to distinguish between the two. He denies that the 53rd of Isaiah can refer to Christ, because at V. 10, it is said, "He shall see his seed;" on the contrary, he holds, that V. 15, which contains promises of "a portion with the great and spoil with the strong," is an evident token of Mahommed, forgetting the remarkable words that follow," because he hath poured out his soul unto death, &c." The commencement, too, of this chapter he insists could not designate Christ, because the Prophet speaks in the past tense," he was despised, and we esteemed him not;" it can therefore only mean that "we despised and rejected Ishmael," and by a common figure of speech his descendant Mahommed in him: the "root out of a dry ground," is a reference to Hagar, who, to worldly appearance, was an unlikely source for a prophet; -or more probably to the arid plains of Mecca, noted for their dryness and sterility. Truly, when the idea of his prophet gets into a Mussulman's head, it would appear as if all sense and reason got out of it! + The learned Hindu of Lucknow, referred to in a former note, attacks the Maulavi on this point; he asserts that he has omitted a supposition which was much more likely than either of those he mentioned, viz. that of fraud,-which every body but the Mahommedans themselves attribute to their prophet. It is very pleasing to see the subject so soon attract the_notice of the Hindus, and elicit so very pertinent a criticism mother's womb." He holds that it means the gift of repentance, or the spirit of faith, which was imparted by the apostles to those who believed. The Athanasian creed, turned into Arabic by Sabat, is brought forward, and by applying the attributes and nature of one person in the blessed Trinity to another, as he affirms he is warranted to do upon the supposition of real unity, he reduces the doctrine ad absurdum, and holds it up in a variety of lights, as involving contradictions and impossibilities. He wilfully omits, throughout his reply, the orthodox doctrine of the two natures of Christ, which had he approached the subject in a proper spirit,—would have extricated him from many of his dilemmas. The examples and analogies from nature are rejected, because, while the unity is that of figure or substance, the plurality is stated to consist in parts or qualities. He does not fail to take Mr. Pfander to task for the examples of the circle, &c.; but his language is perhaps less strong and improper than that of other Mahommedans upon similar occasions. Our opinion of the disadvantage of these illustrations, is if possible, strengthened by the Maulavi's remarks, and we trust that they will find due consideration with Mr. Pfander.* The disadvantage of metaphysical reasoning on this vitally important subject is strikingly shown at pp. 153, 154, and 229, where it is assumed by our opponent that we consider the Son and the Holy Ghost to be Manifestations of the divine essence; the former being the attribute of wisdom or intelligence, the latter, of power and love. Such views are far from scriptural, and however carefully the language may chosen, are undoubtedly prone to denude the Blessed Persons of that individuality which the Bible attributes to them. be The Maulavi exults that his adversary has been driven for examples of the Trinity, to the tenets of idolatrous nations and heathen philosophers, and quotes the proverb the drowning man catches at الغريق يتشبث بكل حشيش = every straw," to intimate that he could only have adopted so We apprehend that the verbal criticism upon the terms اني and نفس ناطقه : and life, is correct soul جان and روح روح are certainly more in accordance with the oriental idea, although the former, may not perfectly express the meaning of soul: the Maulavi is naturally surprised at the new nomenclature, and asks with wonder what that life is which stands "between" the soul and body; and he enquires whether between applies to place or time; there may however be as much waggery as real surprise, in his remarks. dangerous and fatal an expedient from the badness of his cause. He warns him that religion is a serious and a delicate subject, and that we are not here as in worldly matters, to seek assistance from all by force or by fraud. † If these remarks be the genuine dictates of his mind, they show how totally he misunderstands Mr. Pfander's argument, which is to prove the consistency of a species of plurality in unity with human reason; now, the Grecian philosophers, for instance, had certainly by nature as strong and sound a faculty of reason as our adversaries or we possess; and since it is upon reason, unaided by revelation, that the Mahommedan hangs his cause, it is surely reasonable in us to adduce the evidence of impartial reasoners, whose minds, unwarped by any prejudices we may be supposed to contract, directed the intensest thought towards the discovery of the mode in which the Divine Being exists: such deductions, surely we may safely oppose to the simple ipse dixit of our adversaries, without being suspected of any intention to countenance the doctrines themselves. The sufis are abused by the Maulavi, as unbelievers, still more than ourselves, but he will not admit that their views in any degree assist us, because first, they hold a greater variety of manifestations than mere intelligence and will, and the analogy, therefore, proves too much; and, secondly, their doctrines are not allowed by the orthodox Mussulmans. He likewise accuses Mr. Pfander of inconsistency, in first representing these sufi philosophers as believing in a trinity, and afterwards asserting that absolute metaphysical unity would land its professor in the sufi error of regarding the divinity as a mere existence, and all creation his attributes. tinctly denies that they or any other Mussulmans look upon the deity as a rigid metaphysical unity,-but as a being endowed with attributes and perfections, although absolutely one in person and individuality.‡ He dis He throws the proverb in our teeth, Idolatry and infidelity of every shade, are but one religion,-implying that we and the idolaters are much alike in error He denies that the Hindus hold plurality in unity regarding their deity; asserting that Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesh, represent the angels Asrafael, Michael, and Azrael, and are in fact only the ministers of the deity; and he makes large extracts upon this subject from a Persian writer. He, accordingly, denies that they hold the incarnation of the Deity. On this subject, we may mention that the Persian and English Dictionaries afford little facility for discovering the metaphysical or technical meaning of philosophical terms. If the learned editor of the last edition of Richardson's dictionary, would supply this deficiency, in the new edition which we understand is under preparation, he would confer a vast favour upon the Persian scholar. Such meanings would be of Mr. Pfander's most important concluding chapter he treats with contempt, and allots but six pages to its reply. The knowledge of God, he says, can be obtained only in accordance with reason and revelation, and both he affirms point to unity and not to trinity. That the salvation of man is dependent upon this subject, he ridicules as the height of absurdity, because, he says, we hold that Christ actually descended into Hell, a shocking blasphemy which no other people ever dared to affirm of their prophet.* The all-important doctrine of Christ's vicarious suffering he treats with scorn, and applies to us this proverb, They flee for refuge from the rain, And stand for shelter 'neath the drain,t" that is, in seeking to escape from a slight misfortune, viz. the punishment of our sins, we run into the greater danger of charging God with extreme injustice, in inflicting the punishment of the guilty upon the innocent. Having thus abandoned the atonement, he satisfies himself with saying that faith in Christ, to which pardon is promised, is nothing more nor less than the faith and obedience which every prophet has insisted upon, and in return for which he has promised the same blessings. Upon the whole, we see nothing to discourage us in this production. The fallacy of the greater part of the reasoning must approve itself to the majority of thinking Mussulmans, if they choose to reflect with impartiality; and though it may for a time throw dust unto the eyes of the less candid and intelligent portion of the community, still, as Mr. Pfander's entire work is quoted chapter by chapter, we cannot but rejoice that so great a portion of truth is placed before the Mahommedan reader (if he will but attend to it,) as an antidote to the poison. We understand that Mr. Pfander, at the close of the controversy with Ali Hussain, which he is about to publish, intends to add a few remarks in refutation of the volume we have been considering in this Note. infinitely greater service than a multitude of indecent applications, which serve little practical purpose, but to disfigure the pages of that valuable Lexicon. This popular delusion the Mahommedans have probably picked up from the apostle's creed; it certainly appears to be very generally promulgated among them. -the last word pro الفرار عن العطر و الوقوف تحت الميزاب + perly means parnála or spout. The eleventh page alone is omitted, we cannot see with what object. ART. VII.-Topographical Survey of the River Hooghly from Bandel to Garden Reach, exhibitiny the Principal Buildings, Ghats, and Temples on both banks, executed in the year 1841; by Charles Joseph. WE now resume our brief notices of the places marked down in this map on the Right Bank of the Hooghly, which present any particular claim on the attention of the tourist. The first object which attracts notice is the large three story house, lying almost on the edge of the bank, which forms the residence of the Superintendent of the Honourable Company's Botanical Garden. This noble establishment originated in the enlightened views of Colonel Alexander Kyd, more than half a century ago, and was designed for the collection of plants indigenous in the country, and for the introduction and acclimation of plants from foreign parts. The Garden which is very extensive, is laid out with much taste; but those who have had opportunities of examining similar establishments in England are of opinion that it is susceptible of some improvement in the matter of scientific distribution. It combines the attraction of a Botanic Garden with that of a Park, and is therefore the great lounge of the citizens of Calcutta. The magnificent banian trees which adorn it are the scene of many a merry picnic party on the numerous holidays which the Hindu calendar bestows on the community of the Presidency. It possesses a noble botanical library which has been enriched, from time to time, by the liberality of Government, and the donations of botanists in Europe and America. The annals of the Garden embrace the successive labors of Dr. Roxburgh, Dr. Buchanan, Dr. Wallich, and last, but not least, of the original genius and thoroughly accomplished botanist, the late William Griffith, whose premature death, at the age of thirty-four, has been a source of such deep lamentation to the scientific world. A noble monument to the memory of the founder, who died in 1793, stands in a conspicuous part of the Garden, and arrangements formed in order to open it, from various directions, to public view, have contributed not a little to the improvement of the grounds. Monuments have also been erected in the Garden to commemorate the services of Dr. Roxburgh and Dr. Jack. It is not unworthy of remark, that the Committee assembled during Lord William Bentinck's administration, to curtail the expences of the public establishments, proposed that the salary of the superintendent should be reduced from 1500 Rupees a month to 500 Rupees, on the death |