the world without making the whole world happy; or for what purpose has he made the world full of injustice, falsehood and conceit; or is the lord of beings evil in that he ordained injustice when there could have been justice? The Pali Bhūridatta Jātaka (No. 543) has the bodhisattva (future Buddha) state: "He who has eyes can see the sickening sight, Why does not Brahmā set his creatures right? If his wide power no limit can restrain, Why is his hand so rarely spread to bless? Why are his creatures all condemned to pain? Why does he not to all give happiness? Why do fraud, lies, and ignorance prevail? Why triumphs falsehood—truth and justice fail? I count you Brahmā one th'unjust among, Who made a world in which to shelter wrong." In the Pali Mahābodhi Jātaka (No. 528), the bodhisattva says: "If there exists some Lord all powerful to fulfil In every creature bliss or woe, and action good or ill; That Lord is stained with sin. Man does but work his will." Medieval philosophers While Early Buddhism was not as concerned with critiquing concepts of God or Īśvara (since theism was not as prominent in India until the medieval era), medieval Indian Buddhists engaged much more thoroughly with the emerging Hindu theisms (mainly by attempting to refute them). According to Matthew Kapstein, medieval Buddhist philosophers deployed a host of arguments, including the argument from evil and other arguments that "stressed formal problems in the conception of a supreme deity." Kapstein outlines this second line of argumentation as follows:God, the theists affirm, must be eternal, and an eternal entity must be supposed to be altogether free from corruption and change. That same eternal being is held to be the creator, that is, the causal basis, of this world of corruption and change. The changing state, however, of a thing that is caused implies there to be change also in its causal basis, for a changeless cause cannot explain alteration in the result. The hypothesis of a creator god, therefore, either fails to explain our changing world, or else God himself must be subject to change and corruption, and hence cannot be eternal. Creation, in other words, entails the impermanence of the creator. Theism, the Buddhist philosophers concluded, could not as a system of thought be saved from such contradictions. Kapstein also notes that by this time, "Buddhism's earlier refusal