s of the Hebrews which
show similarities with the ideas of other nations were borrowed bodily
from these nations, or, after all, contain elements that were original
with the Hebrews.

In the first place, it must be remembered that similarities between the
customs or beliefs of two peoples do not necessarily imply the
dependence {214} of one upon the other; much less do they indicate
which is the original. Where similarities are found at least four
possibilities should be recognized: A may depend upon B; B may depend
upon A; both A and B may have been derived from a common original; or A
and B may have developed independently, the similarities being merely
coincidence. Which interpretation is the right one in a given case
does not lie on the surface; it is only by careful, patient, unbiased
study that one may arrive at a proper understanding. Take as an
illustration the Decalogue. The Buddhists have "ten prohibitory laws,"
sometimes called the "Buddhist Decalogue." The first five read, "Thou
shalt not kill; Thou shalt not steal; Thou shalt not lie; Thou shalt
not commit adultery; Thou shalt not get drunk." Three of these
correspond exactly to three of the demands in the Jewish Decalogue.
Does it necessarily follow that the Decalogue was borrowed from Buddha?
The Egyptians also had a sacred law. The law itself has not yet come
to light, but the Book of the Dead indicates its existence. In the one
hundred and twenty-fifth chapter of this book we read the
justifications offered by the dead: "I have not acted with deceit or
done evil to men; I have not oppressed the poor; I have not judged
unjustly," etc. These negations seem to imply the existence of a law,
either oral or written, {215} forbidding these things. From the
negations, "I have not acted with deceit; I have not committed murder;
I have not been unchaste," etc., one may infer that the Egyptians had
precepts corresponding substantially to some of the requirements in the
Decalogue. Does logic demand, therefore, the conclusion that the
Decalogue owes its existence to the sacred law of the Egyptians? Among
the Babylonians also we find evidence of the existence of, at least,
some of the requirements of the Hebrew Decalogue: "Thou shalt not break
into the house of thy neighbor; Thou shalt not approach the wife of thy
neighbor; Thou shalt not spill the blood of thy neighbor; Thou shalt
not grasp the garment of thy neighbor." Do these similarities prove
beyo