"  Before  making  some  general  remarks  on  this  whole  subject
of  attempting  to  show  the  character  of  the  Canticles  by  re-
ference to  the  ]3aiitlieistic  poetry  of  the  Mahometan  Sufis,  it
may  be  well  to  mention  that  reference  has  been  made  even  to
the  poets  of  Hindostan  for  the  same  purpose ;  especially  to
the  Gitagovinda,  the  production  of  a  celebrated  Hindoo  poet,
named  Jayadeva.  This  appears  to  be  a  mystical  poem,  de-
signed to  celebrate  the  loves  of  Crishna  and  Kadha,  or  the
reciprocal  attraction  between  the  divine  goodness  and  the
human  soul.  Now,  whatever  may  be  the  resemblance  between
the  Gitagovinda  and  Canticles  in  some  of  their  imagery,  there
is  this  essential  difference,  that,  in  the  former,  Crishna  was  the
chief  incarnate  god  of  the  Hindoos,^  and  that  there  are
references  to  other  gods,  and  to  various  superstitions  of  the
Hindoo  mythology ;  whilst  in  the  Canticles  there  is  no  refer-
ence to  any  but  human  characters.  Besides,  the  author  of  the
Gitagovinda  clearly  intimates  its  religious  character  in  the
conclusion  of  the  poem.
"  We  have  seen,  then,  that  there  are  material  differences
between  the  Canticles  and  the  religious  love-songs  to  which

'  Crishna  continues  to  tliis  hour  the  darling  god  of  the  Indian  women.  The
sect  of  Hindoos,  who  adore  him  with  enthusiastic  and  almost  exclusive
devotion,  have  broached  a  doctrme  which  they  maintain  with  eagerness,  and
which  seems  general  in  those  provinces,  that  he  was  distinct  from  all  the
Avatars,  who  had  only  an  ansa,  or  portion  of  his  divinity ;  while  Crishna  was
the  person  of  Vishnu  himself  in  a  human  form. — Sir  W.  Jones,  Asiatic  Re-
searches, vol.  i.  p.  260.
118  INTRODUCTION.
