A DEFENCE .X • :■' OF U t N D b O THEISM IN REPLY TO THE ATTACK OF AN ADVOCATE FOR IDOLATRY, AT MADRAS, 00000000000000 - Bt RAM MOHUN ROY. CALCUTTA. •PaEFACE. The following sheets contain some remarks in reply to a publication which appeared in the Madras Courier of :^^r’t.mber last, under the sig- nature of Sankara Sastri, in answer to my abridg- ment of the vedant and my preface to the translation of the Ishopanishad as well as to my Introduction to the Cenopanishad. The leiigtlj, to which the arguments of the controvertist extend- ed, having precluded their appearance in the Calcutta prints, I have taken the liberty of reprinting them along with my own observations on them, in • order that the discussion may be brought fully before the public, to whose decision the merits of the cjiiestion must now be left. *v > Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 \ https://archive.org/details/defenceofhindootOOramm « TiO' ir TO THE EDITOR OF THE MADRAS COURIER, Sir, On reading your Psper, dated 19th November 1S16, I found a publication in it taken from a Calcutta Paper, respecting the Theological Doc- trines of Ram Mohun Roy, on which I shall -lI.efT > ’ : ' r '/ ’.'i proceed to make a few observationa. I In the first part of this publication, it is stated this eminently learned and indefatigable re- former is proceeding, with unremitting exer- tions, in the laudable work of enlightening- his ” Countrymen, and reclaiming them from their debasing system of Idolatry, Having, for the A C 2 J '' ineti’uction of the Hindu population of these provinces, translated into Bengalese ihp prin- cipal chapter^ of the Veds, he has now done a few of them into English for the grati- fication of such European Gentlemen as in® tcrest themselves in the improvement of theiy fello\y-creatures.” In a former paper, also, it was stated that the learned person here mentioned, had discover^ cd” that the Doctrine of the Unity of the God- head was taught in the Puranas and Tautras as well as the Vedas. ‘ ■ ■ ' ’ 'lUfiy The ^yQrship of the All-pervadihg and Supreme ’ ' h w/ajoi Being is the original doctrine founded on the Vedas, Furnas, &c, and is known in general in this, as well as in the other parts of the Peninsula: — ‘.his faith is known by the name of A lioiiiani, which, being derived from dwita ” t , d uhty, bv’ aTiiing the privative a is the oppo- site cl.dmatam, the term usually applied to the belief that admits of more than one first cause: V . * • * . * ^ • it le unopssibU to say whea it vvas first reveal- . •'Ml'. C S ] fd, yet, among various conjectures, the prol)a- bility is that, the revelation of this faith is to be ascribed to Brahma, tlie creating power alone, and that it is as ancient, therefore, as the exis- ■ i tence of the world. People of limited understanding, not being * * able to comprehend the system of worshipping the Invisible being, have adopted doctrines tind by that means confounded weak minds in remote times, but due punishment was inflicted on those Heretics, and Religion was very well established throughout India by the Reverend Senk^racharyam and his Disciples, who, however, did not pretend to reform or discover them Or assume the title of a reformer or discoverer. There are ah imrriense number of book's namd- ly Vedas, Sastras, Puranas A gams, TantraS- Sutras, and Itihas, besides numerous comment- aries compiled by many famous Theologians, both of ancient and riioderh times, respecting the doc- trine of the worship of (he Invisible Being. They are not Only \yritten in Sanscrit, but rendered in- A 2 [ ^ 3 <0 Pracruta, Tenugvi, Tamil, Guzerat, {funlooi* ,tanij Maratta, Canaria &c. languages an d imme- morialiy studied by a g^reat part of the Hindu Nation attached to the Adwaitem faith^ and so our ancestors left no room to any person to make discoveijcs” on the subject, or to proceed with unrciniiting exertion in the laudable Kork of enlightening his countrymen and reclaiming them from their debasing system of Idolatry” From my stating these doctrines to have been anciently translated, I beg it may not be construed that those translations are universally admitted — On the contrary, they are rejected by some and ad- mitted by others for reason recited as follows • 1st. — If the reader of them doubts the truth of the principles explained in the translation, the divine knowledge he acquired by them, becomes a doubtful faith, and that doubt cannot be rc- movsd unless he compare them with the original work, in that case the knowledge he lastly acquir- ed bcccmes superior, and his study in the first in- stance becomes useless^ and the cause of repeat- ing the same work. [ s 3 2nd. — Reading tlie Scriptures in the vulgar Ian'« guages is prohibited by the Puranas. 3d. — These translations are omitted by others as useful and interesting in general, and particularly to those who have not sufficient knowledge in Sanscrit. Not wishing to trouble my readers with the observations necessary to reconcile these three controversial points, I think it proper to leave it to them to judge which of them is admissible. The Sutra Bhashyam, or the Commentary on the Theological Sutrams of Veda Vyasa, and thos® on the Uponishets &c. are in this part of India, constantly read and taught by the Bhramins all over the Country. Lectures ancl Themes are de- livered in the various audiences frequently and purposely held by the Rajahs, Pundits and other respectable men in the Country. The ascribing of the “ discovery” of a religious tenet so well known and celebrated, to a learned Native, cannot therefore, be here admitted by a Hindu, and he will not he more astonished at it, than he would at eahring that a man had one head and two eyes. C 6 3 Previously to my proceeding to make any oh-^ servations respecting Idolatrous Worship, I think it proper to state how the supreme Being i» defired. The Vedas Purans, &c. say that, this Being is infinite, eternal, self-intelligent, indivisible, inconsu* mable, pervading, universal, inconceivable, invisi- r ble, unalterable, and almighty. It is not subject either to the mind or senses. The translation of the following Sanscrit Slokams will serve to form an idea of its nature. ** He is eternal, he is the splendor of splendor,’* He is supreme and glorious*” '' The sun shines not with respect to him, nor the moon nor fire.” Thou hearest without ears,” Thou smellest without a nose,” Thou walkesi without legs.” y Thou seest without eyes,” ** Thou tastest without a tongue.” Thou hast no gotram^ nor births nor name, ff nor shape, nor stale nor place.” “ Though thou art thus, yet thou art the Lord of the Earth and the Heaven.” In the same manner as the illusive appearance of water, produced by the reflection of the raya in the mirage,” So the universe shines in thee, the real and f' intelligent spirit.” Thou canst not be known either by the Organg or by the mind, as thou art self-respleadent and '^'distinct from elemental Being..’ ” If ignorance be annihijiated by knowledge, as '' darkness by the dawn, thy light will shine like " the sun.” " The whole had its birth in thee,” The whole rests in thee.” # '' The whole obtains its destruction in thee like bubbles iu water,” C 8 3 The difficulty of attaining the knowledge of this invisible and Almighty Spirit, is evident from the preceding verses, and all the Scriptures and other Authorities affirm that, the Soul, propelled by Mava towards external objects and obscured by m the ignorance of individuality, cannot obtain Moca- ham (Salvation) unless it is freed from every impression either of vice and virtue, the illusions of Maya ; and until that time, it wilf conti- nue to undergo various transmigrations and par- take of misery and happiness, the result of it* vices and virtues, in the terrestial, celestial and infernal worlds. The eating food, slumbering, fear, love, and other animal functions and propensities, are com- mon and natural both to the^ human, and bruU creation; they both seek for food and are sub- ject to slumber. Out of the fear of death, &c. they either attack or fly when opposed by an ene- m3’, but though the intellectual, powers of both i^ces are the same in general and entirely di- rected towards external objects, yet one human C 9 3 race is endowed with the powers of reason and determination. These^ if applied, serve to rea- son — ^who is himself.^ from whence he is come? what is the connection between him and the Su- preme Being? how the Spirit in him is illusive- ly inspired, and illusively beheld, and illusively divided from the pervading Spirit. The mental powers of every Corporeal Being are, from the time of it’s birth, attracted by ex- ternal objects and they cannot be inverted to- wards the individual Spirit, or the object meant by the word I,” without great labour, practice, mental exercise, purification and the divine assist- ance, or favoring grace, of the Deity, without which a complete knowledge, of his Atma or Spirit cannot be obtained. It is said in the Scripture that the person void of this knowledge does not only remain self- ignorant, but it is decreed by the authorities tha he is a self-deceiver, and his ignorance finally proves fatal to himself. B [ 10 ] In order to save tlie limnan race from the ut- ter destruction occasioned by self-ignorance, Brabama delivered the divine precepts in the Ve- das, both for the use of men of enlightened and Ihnitted understanding’. These precepts are divided into two parts, namely, Carmoc^indain, or works, and Gnanacandam, or knowledge, or faith, as European writers express if ; these words I un- derstand to mean essentially the same thing, for vvhat is faith without adequacy of knowledge ? The first prescribes the mode of performing. Yagatn or Sacrifice, bestowing Danam or Alms, treats of penance, fasting, and of worshipping the Incarnations, in which the Supreme Deity lias appeared on the earth for divine purposes. The ceremonies performed according to these rsiodeSj forsaking their fruits, are affirmed by the Vedas to be mental exercises and mental puyift cations, necoesaiy to obtain the' knowledge of the- divine nature. . The latter part treats on Theology, and Me- taphysics, on the nature of spirit, of mental ab- C n J stractioh, the subjng’fition of the passions^ &c. tlie meaning of which the Student must attain by reasoning', and tnust impress it well on the understanding by reflection ; he must hehoid tiie Supreme Spirit alike in all things, he must constautiy contemplate the union of his own Alma, or Soul, with the Universal Supreme Spirit, which he must consider uticonnected though in all con- nections and inactive in all things in action, and must comprehend the whole universe in . him a’one. The Gnani or the Man that has attained anams, bv pe- nance, worship, reading Theology and compre_ bending and rcasoniisg on its meaning, but the holding of meetings, playing music, singing songs and dancing, which are ranked among car- nal pleasures, are net ordained by scripture as mental purification. [ 13 3 If may be asked why purification cannot be attained by these songs^ music, &c. since they are all intended to be expressive of the tenets of Monotheism ? I answer that the completion of every undertaking in tho world must take place by its respective means, for example the thirst must be cpienched by water, milk and such like, but not with sand. These, the aforesaid means for quenching thirst, are known by human experience and us- age, but the means to purify the unknown and invisible powers of the intellect cannot be ascer tained by human understanding but by the pre- cepts revealed by divine wisdom. Therefore, the setting aside the proper means such as Yagam, penance, worship, &c. and substituting dancing, music, and songs, appear in no way preferable by any doctrine. ^ What has hitherto been said, applies only to the observations of the writer in the Calcutta Paper, for which Ram Mohun Roy cannot be answera- ble ; I must, however, make a few remarks on the y Introduction’' as it is stated to be, to his trnas’' [ H ] lafion of one of the chapters of the SaiTiti Veda.” The author slates that it is "‘’a general characteristic of each Ved, that ” the primary. . chapters of each branch, treat of astronomy, medicine, arms, and other arts and sciencs.” All the Brahmans in this part of the Peninsula are studying the same Vedams as are read in the other part of the country, but I do not recol- lect to have read of heard of one treating on astrouoni}^ medicine, or arms: the first is indeed an Angan of the Vedam, but the two latter are taught in separate Sastras. i The author continues — they also exhibit *’ allegorical representation of the attributes of the Supreme Being by means of earthly ob- jects, &e.” ire then proceeds to state that the ■worship of these, as explained in the Veds, was inculcated only for the sake of those whose limitted understandings rendered them inca- pable of comprehending and adoring the invi- sible Supreme Being be docs not appear satisfied, hoivevM-, with this explanation ; he r 15 ] sftems to think it may not be tboiight suffici- ent to reconcile the doctrines of the two porti- ona of tile Veds, and he admits, that, if it is not— the whole work must,” not only be stripped of iis authority, but looked upon as altogether unintelligible/’ To say the least of ii.P this passage, Ra.m Mohun Roy appears quite . I '■/ as willing to abandon as to defend the Scnpture of his reliii'ion ; but let us examine if it be ne- O (Cessary to abandon them so readily. The attribates in the preceeding extract are affirmed by the Vedas to be the creating pro- tecting, destroying and the like powers or in® carnations of the Supreme Being — Their wor- ship, under various representations, by meant of consecrated objects, is prescribed by the scripture to the human race hy Avay of mental exercise, y, who owing to the waving nature of their mindi ^ cannot, without assistance, fix their thoughts on the incoinprehens hie aud Almighty Being.-— Though the representations of the attributes are allegorical, yet the pervading nature of the C j Supreme Being in the attributes, in their re- presentations and in the objects dedicated to them, is not allegorical, and I legard the same as an ether dlfi'used throughout ten thousand objects. If this reasoning be admitted, why can« not the prayer olfered to the All- pervading Spirit in the dedicated object be considered as pray- er to the universal and Almighty God? — If one part of the ocean be adored, the whole o». cean is adored. If a perso’n be desirous to visit an Earthly Prince, he ough«t to be introduced, in the first instance, by his Ministers, but not of himself to rush in upon him at once regardless of otbend- ing him: — Should a Man wish to ascend a flight of stairs, he ought to proceed step by step and r not to leap up several at a time so as to endan- ger the wounding of his legs; in like manner the grace of God ought to be obtained by de- grees through the worship of his attributes. I have further to observe, by way of example, that, altliough the milk pervades the whole body r n 1 of a Co«: yetu is to be drawn only from the Teats ; so tl.ongh tbe Supreme Be.ns pervades all, yet his racvcy is obtained tlu'ougli the wor ship of his attributes to which a special energy is ascribed by the Scriptuve.-The Worshippers are assured by the Vedas that the particular energy inherent jn the attrihiltes wih cionn their wishes, provided tl.eir zeal and their faith be unaltered and steady. The ohjectiens to worshipping the attributes ore .ipUhlisCactorily stated hy the Author, hut it see.ns that it is his general idea that it is not a worsirip directly to the Supreme Bemg, and ,,,t U ts not presenbed in the Scriptures of eertan. nation,-, as to' the fast object, on -rt clear, however, that the worship of the attributes is not merely t.ot rejected, but prescrubed by the Scriptures of our religion ; I, ere is the d,l. ference, and, as ttie deliverers of the Scripture, of auy religion are not of a natme to be seem or spoken to for the purpose of provinj^' thetv C ^vlid.fy, tlic truU) of either opinion, can cnl}' b» established by analogy, inference, and other modes of logic. }f the worship of the attributes be rejected, vhat means can be substituted to inculcate tiie . truth and to enlighten tlie understanding of an indolent mjan, 'vvho on being told that the Gon is all-peryading and invisible, tbinhs him to be like the air, or tbc sky ; or bearing that, by a figure of speech, he is called the splendor of splendor, helievcs tliat he is of a hiiniitons na- ture ? If these he’pg be denied Iiim, ill he not at last ])ccome ignorant pf the true friitlj, or he induced to folloiy atheistical dootriucs, ralimr than to lyouble lii? head, to attain the difficult Ivtiowlcdo'c of (he divine nature ? 1 Iiave lastly to observe that, according to the Christian Doctrine of llie I'rinity, or the three persons in the Godliead, though one and united yet are personally, or occasionabiy, distinguished, and prayers offered to the Godhead are conclu- ded by the words through Jesuc Christ our L >9 ] Saviour.” 1 though I msy he misfaken/ that the Saviour should be considered a per» sonih cation, of the mercy and kindness of God (! mean actual, not allegorical personification : pure allegory 1 leave to Ram Mohun Rot) — ■ if this be so, is not mercy an attribute of God-? I*; not tlip prayer offered to him, through his attribute, of the same nature as the worship of the Iliiulns ? Do not the votaries of the Chris- tian Religion, like (he IIin(lu«, acknowledge him to be esseTiiinily united to the Godhead, though occasiop.allv separate, a»ul do (liev not bHievc that th'^v are certain of obtaining salvation in this faith ? For those reasons, whv cannot the Hindu Worship of (he nttrilintes, which are affirmed to be essentially united^ but occasionally sepa- rate from the Godhead, be admitted and why may not this be tne means of obtaining Mocsbam or Salvation ? It seems upon the whole that technical terms, modes of worship, and external C 2 t 20 ] I’igbts, tcspeciiveiy observed, oonstifute an ap- parent difl'erehce between the religions of the Earth, though in truth there be none. 1 am. Sir Your most obedient humble servant, B. SENKARA SASTRF, 11(1. EnglUh Alasfer in the College oj Fort Si. George. Madia*, 26tli Decomber, 1^16. Before T attempt to reply to the observations, that (he learned gentleman, avha signs himself Senkara Sastri, has offered in his letter of tha 20ih December last, addressed to the Editor of the Madras Coarier, on the subject of an article, published in the Calcutta Gazette, and on my (rang- lation of an abridgment of the Vedanta and of the two chapters of the Vedas ; I beg to be al- lowed to express the disappointment I have felt, ift receiving from a learned Brahman, controver- sial remarks on Hindoo Theology, written in a foreign language ; as it is the invariable practice of the natives of all Provinces of Hindoostan, to hold (heir discussions on such subjects, in Sangseriti whicb is the learned language com- mon to all of them, and in which fltey may naturally be expected to convey their ideas, with perfect correctness, and greater facility than in any foreign tongue : Nor need it be [alleged that, by adopting this establislied channel of con- troversy, the opportunity of appealing to public A [ s ] opinion on ilie subject must be lost ; as a snbse- qucnltranslation from the Sungscrit into English may suflRciently serve (bat purpose. The iriegula- i lty of this mode of proceeding however^ gives me room to suspect that the letter in question^ is the pro- duction of the pen of an English Gentleman, n hose liberality I svppcse, has induced him to attempt on apology^ even for the absurd idolatry of his fellow-creatures. If this inference be correct^ while I congratulate that Gentleman on his pro- gress in a knowledge ol tlie sublime doctrines of the Vedanta, I must, at tlie same time, take the liberty of entreating that he will for the future, prefer consulting ilie original works writ- ten upon those doctrines, to relying on the se- cond-hand information on the subject, that may be offered him by any person whatsoever. The learned Gentleman commences by object- ing to the ienvi% discoverer 2im\ reformer, in which the Editor of the Calcutta Gazette was j)leased to make mention of me. lie states “ that Peo- pie of limited understanding, not being able c .?■ 3 to comprehend the system of worshipping the invisible Being, have adopted false doctrines and by that means confounded weak minds ” in remote times, but due punishment was in- flicteel on those Heretics, and religion was very well established throughout India by the Reverend Sankaracharia and his disci- pies, who, however, did not pretend to reform “ or discover them or assume the title of a refoihner ov discoverer.” In none of nay writings,' nor in any verbal discussion, have I ever pre- tended to reform or to discover the doctrines of ihe unity of God, nor have I ever assumed the title of reformer or discoverer : so far from such an assumption., I have urged in every work that I have hitherto published, tliat the doctrines of the unity of God are real llin- dooism, as that religion was practised by our ancestors, and as it is welt known even at the present age to many learned Byahinins ; I beg to repeat a few of the passages to which i al- lude. C 4 ] In the injroduc^ioa to the abridgment oi the Vedanta 1 have said In order ^ therefore, to vindicate my own faith and that of our forefathers, I have been endeavouring, for some time past, to convince my counti3men of the true meaning of our sacred hooka: and prove that my aberration deserves not the opprobrium, which some unreflecting pei’sons “ have been so ready to throw upon nfe ” In another place of the same introduction. The present is an endeavour to render an abridg- ment of the same (the Vedanta) into Englihh, by which I expect to prove to my European friends’, that the superstitious practices, which * deform the Hindoo religion, have nothing to ‘‘ do with the pure spirit of its dictates. ” In the introduction of tlie Cenopanishad. Tl\is “ work will, 1 trust, by explaining to my coun- try men the real spirit of the Hindoo scrips ” lures, luhich is but the declaration oj the '• unily of God, tend in a great degree to cor- f lect the erroneous conceptions, which have [,5 ] prevailed with regard to the doctrines they inculcate and in. tlie Preface of the Ishopa- nished, inariy learned Brahmins are perfect- ly aware of the absurdity of idol AVdrship^ and are well informed of the nature of the pure mode of divine luorship.” A reconsideration of these passages will, I hope, convince the learn- ed Gentleman, that I never advanced any claim to the title either, of a reformer, or of a disco- verer of the doctrines of the unity of the Godhead — It is not at all impossible that from the perusal of the Translations above alluded to, the" Editor of the. Calcutta Gazette, finding the system of idolatry into winch Hindoos are now completely sunk, quite inconsistent with the real spirit of their scriptures, may have imagined that their con- tents had become entirely forgotten and unknown ; and that r was the first to point out the absurdi- ty of idol worship and to inculcate the propriety of the pure divine worship, ordained by their vedas, their Smrits and their Poorans. From this idea, and from finding in his intercourse [ 6 ] >\ilh other Hiu do oSj that 1 uas stigmatised by rnft-=< iiy^ however unjustly, as an innovator, he may have i%eiij not imnaturally, in isled to apply to me the epittiets of discoverer and reformer. 2ndl2/. Tlie learned Gentleman states 'I’here • # are an immense number of Ecoks, namely, Fe- das, SastraSj Poorans, Agams, Tantras, Sutras “ and Itilias, besides numerous commentaries compiled by many famous Theologians, both y of ancient and modern times, respecting the doctrines of the worship of the invisible being. “ They are not only written in Sangsciit but ren- dered into the Pracreta, Tenuga, Tamol, Gnjraie, Hindoostani, Marhntta, and Canari languages, and ( iraraemorialy studied by a great part of the I Hindu nation, attached to the adwaitum faith I y &c.” This statement of the learned Gentle- j man, as far as it is correct, corroborates indeed I my assertion, with respect to the doctrines of the I ' worship of the invisible Supreme spirit, being iina-> |1 i nimously inculcated by all the Hindoo Sastras,* i and naturally leads to severe rejections on the \ I I C ’’’ 3 selfishness Avhlch must actuate those Braminical teachers vvho^ not\Astlis(anding the unanimous ; authority of the Sastras^ for the adoption of pure ^vorship, yet, Avith the view of maintaining the title of God wliicli they arrogate to themselves, and of deriving* pecuniary and other advantages from the numerous rites and festivals of idol vvor- t ■ ship, constant]}' advance and encourage idolatry to the utmost of their power. I must remark, how- ever, that, there is no translation of the vedas into any of the modern languages of Hindoostan witli which I am accjuainted, and it is for that reason that I have translated into Bengali the vedanta, the Ceno[)anishad of the Sama veda, Ishopanishad of theYojur veda, &c. with the contents of Avhicli none but the learned among my countrymen Avere nt all acquainted, 2rcVy. The learned Gentleman states that, the translations of the scripture into the vulgar lan- guage, are rejected by some people ; and he as* signs as reasons for their so doing that, if the reader of them doubts the truth of the prince C S ] p!cv explained in the translation, the divine knowledge lie accpiired by them, becomes a ” doubtful faith, and that doubt cannot be re^ moved unless he compare them 'with the ori- ginal work ; In that case the knowIcdg*e he lastly acquired becomes superior, and his study in the first instance becomes useless and the cause of* repeating the same work." Wiien. a translation ' of a work written in a foreign longue is made by a person at allacquairited with that language into his native tongue, and the same translation is sanctioned aiid 'approved of by many natives of the same Country \vho are perfectly conver- sant with that foreign language ; the translation I presume may be received with confidence as a satisfactory interpretation of the original work; both by the vulgar and by men of literature. ; ‘ It must not be supposed, however, that 1 am in- ' dined to assert that, there is not the ' least room to doubt the accuracy of such a trauslation i because the meaning of authors, even in the ori- ginal works is very frequently dubious, especially [91 in 3 laupfuage like Sungs crit; etefy sentence of whicli almost, admits of being explained in different senses — Rnt should the possibility of errors in every translation be admitted as reason for with- holding all confidence in their contents, such a rule would sliake our belief, not only in the prin- ciples explained iri tile translation of the vedant into the current language, but also in all infor- hiation respecting foreign History and theology, Oblained by means of translations; In that case we must either learn all the languages that are spoken by the different nations in the w'Orld, to acquire k knowledge cf their Histories *and religious, or be content to know nothing of any Country be- sides onr own. The second reason which the learned Gentleman assigns for their objection to the translation is, tliat ” Reading the scripture in '' the vulgar languag'es is prohibited by the Poorans'” I have not yet met with any texts of nnv Poorans which prohibit the explanation of the scriptures in the vulgar tongue ; on thes C j Contrary (he Poorans allow that practice frequently. I repeat one of these declarations from the Shiva Dhiirm'a, quoted by the great Bughnund. lie who can interpret, according to' the ratio of the understanding of his pupils, thro* Runscrit, or thro’ the vulgar languagei^, or by means of the current lanaLuajre of the Coun» tr}q is entitled, spirrttial father.” Moreover iri every part of Hindoostan all profe'ssors of the' Sungserit language instructing begmnersr in lh« veds, Poorans, and in other sastras, hiterpret them in the vulgar languages; especially spiritH> al fathers in exp?)sition of those parts of he ved^ and Poorans, which allesrnricallv introduce a plurality of Gods and idol- worship ; doctriires which tend so much to- their own v/orlcfly advantage. The learned Gentleman states that, The first of the veda prescribes the mode' of performing yagam or sacrifice, bestowing daneem or alms, treats of penance, fasting and of worshipping, the incarnations, hi which the supreme Dei^' has appeared on the Earth for divine purposes'. r 11 ] The ceremonies performed according to these “ modes, forsaking their fruits, are affirmed bv ” the vedas to be mental exercises and mental purific 3 tioii 5 necessary to obtain the knowledge of the divine nature/’ I, in common Avith the yedas and the vedant, and Munoo (the first and best pf Hindoo Lawgivers) aa well as with the most celebrated Sankaracharga, deny these ceremonies ^eing necessary to obtain the knowledge of the divine nature ; as the vedant positively declares in tej:t 26th Sec. 4th Chap; 3rd Man may acquire the true knowledge of God even without ob- serving the rules and rites prescribed by the ve4 for each class ; as it is found in the ved that V many persons, who neglected the performance ol the rites and cerem^onies, owing to their per- petnal atte^jtion to the adoration of the suprems being, acquired the true knowledge respecting the supieme spirit.” The ved says Many learned tine Believers never worshipped fire or any celes- tial Gpds through fire.” And also the vedair* B % [ ^ in the 1st text of 3rd Sec. of the 3rd chap. The ^vorsliip authorized by all 'the veds is one, as the directions for the worsliip of the only supreme beinj>; are invariably found in the Vedj and the epithets of the suprerne and onmipreseiit being &c. commonly imply God alone,” Munoo as I have ebewhere quoted, thus declares on the same point chap. 12th text 92rjd ” Thus rntt^t the chief of the twice born, tho’ he neglect the ceremonial “ rites mentioned in the sa&tra, be diligent in ” attaining a knowledge of God, in coutroling his ojgans of sense ami in repealing the ved.” Again chapter 4th text 23rd some constantly sg- ” crifice their breath in their speech, mhen they in- ‘‘ sh'iict others of God aloud and tlieir speech in t|ieii breath, when they meditate in silet^e perceiving in their speech and breath t]jLis employed the imperishable fruit of a sacrificial offering 24th.” '' Other Brahmans incessantly perforin those sa- orifices only; seeing with the Eye of divine learning that the scriptural knowledge is the C ] root of every ceremonial observance.” And al- so the same author declares in the chap, 2nd text Si. ” All rites ordained in the veda^ oblations to Fire and solemn sacrifices, pass away ; but that, which passes not away is declared to be the syllable orn, thence called acshora ; since it is a syrabol . of God, the Lord of created Beings” The learned Gentleman states that, The difficulty of attaining a knowledge of the in- visible and almighty spirit is evident from the *■' preceding verses.” I agree with him in that point; that the attainment of perfect know- ledge of the nature of the Godhead is certainly difficult or rather impossible ; but to read the existence of the almighty being, in his works of na- ture is not, I will dare to say, so difficult to the mind of a man possessed of common sense and unfettered by prejudice, as to conceive artificial im- ages to be possessed, at once, of the opposite na- tures of human and divine Beings, which idola- ters constantly ascribe to their idols strangely t » 3 lielievlng that things so constructed can be con« verted by ceremonies into constructors of the uui<» verse. dthly ’Iphe learned Gentleman objects to ouf introducing songs, altho’ expressing only the pe- culiar tenets of monotheism, ?nd says. But the holding of meetings^, playing muslc^ singing songs, and dancing, which are ranket| among carnal pleasures, are not ordained by ** scripture as mental puriheation.” The practic(| of dancing in divine worship, J agree, is not or-’ dained by the scripture, and accordingly neve" was introduced in our worship : any mention of dancing in the Calcutta Gazette must, there-, fore, have proceeded from misinformation of ihe^ Editor. But respecting the propriety of introduc-^ ing monotheistical songs in the divine worship.^ I beg leave to refer the Gentleman to the text II4th and 115th of the 3rd chapter of Yagnya-. valca, who autliorizes not only scriptural musio in divine contemplation, but also the songs that are composed by the vulgar. It is also evident tlut i 15 ] Snv interesting- Idea is calculated to make mor^ impression upon the mind, when conveyed in mu- sical verses, than when delivered in the form cf tommon conversation. '7lhy. The learned Gentlema[n says All the Bhramins in this Peninsula are studying the same vedom as are read in the other parts of the Country ; but I do not recollect to hate read or heard of one treating on astromony, me- dierne or arms : the lirst is indeed an ongam of the vedam, but the two latter are taught in separate sastras.” lin answer to which I beg to be allowed to refer the Gentleman to the fol- io wing text of the Nelvan. The ved^' while talking of Planets, botany, austere duties, arms rites, natural consequences, and several other subjects, are purihed by the inculcation of ttre doctrines of the supreme spirit.” And also to ?he latter end of the Mahanervana agam. From the perusal of these texts, S tru^f, he xvili be convinced that, vedas not only treat itf Astronomy, Medicine and arms, but also [ .'6 3 of morality and natural Philosophy^ and that all arts and sciences that are treaterl of iri othersastras, \7ere originally introduced by the veds, see also Munoo, chapter \2 verses 97 and 98 . I cannot of course be expected lo be answerable for Brahmans neglecting entirely the study of the scientific parts of the vedj and putting in prac» lice, and promulgating to the utmost of theif power, that part of them which, treating of rites and festivals, is justly considered as the source of their worldly advantages and support of their alledged divinity. Stilly 1 observe, that on the following state*^ ment in my introduction to the Ccmopunished viz. should this explanation given by the ved itself as well as by ks celebrated commentators vyas not be allowed to reconcile these passages which are seemingly at variance with each other, as those that declare the unity of the iuvisible supreme being, with others which describe a plurality of independent visible Gods, the whole work must I am afraid not only be stripped of [ 17 ] its Rutlierity but looked upon a« altogelber unintelligible,” the learned Gentleman has re- marked that To say the least of this passage Ram IMohun Roy appears quite as willing to abandon as to defend the scripture of his Religion.” In the foregoing paragraph, however, I did no more than logically ooufuie the case to two. points viz. that the explanation of the ved and of its commentators nigst either be admitted as suffi- ciently reconciling the apparent contradictions be- tween different passages of the ved, or must not be admitted. In the ‘latter case the ved must ne- cessarily be supposed to be inconsistent with it- self, and therefore altogether unintelligible, which is directly contrary to the faith of Hindoos of every discription ; consequently they must admit, that those explanations do sufficiently reconcile the seeming contradictions between the chapters of the vedas. The learned Gentleman says that Their I (the attributes and incarnations) worship undes C C IS 3 various representations by means of consecrate^ objects, is proscribed by the scripture to the human race by way of rnenttil exercises &c.'- I cannot admit that the worship of these attribute# under various representations by nieans of conse- crated objects, JiHS been presprihed by the Ved to> ihe HUMAN race; as this kind of worship of con- secrated objects is enjoined by the Sastra to tliose only, who arc incapable of raising- their piinds to* •the notion of an invisible supreme Being. I have qiioted several authorities for this assertion in my Preface to the Ishopanishad, and beg tQ repeat here one or two of them. The vulgar look for their God in water, mer^ of more extended knowledge in celestial bodies; the- ignorant '' in wood, bricks and stones ; but learned men in the universal soul.” Thus corre.-jponding to the nature of ditferent Powers or cjualities, numerous figures have been invented for the benefit of those, idio are not possessed of siiffl- “ cient uuderslandhi^.” Permit me in this in- stance to ask, whether every IMiiiSulmau in Tuiki^ r 0 w ] Arabia^ from the highicst to ttie lowest^ everj Protestant Christian at least of Europe, and many followers of Cabeer and Nannek, do worship God without the assistance of consecrated objects ? If ^o, how can ^Ye suppose that the liunian race is hot Capable of adoring the supreme Bein^ with- out the puerile practice of having recourse to visi- fcle objects; lOthly. The learned Gentleman is of opinion that, the attributes of God exist distinctly front God; and be compares tbe relation between God and those attributes to that of a King- to his ministei% as he saySj If a person be desirous to visit an cartldy Prince, he ought to be introduced in the " first instance by his Ministers &c..” and In like manner tbe Grace of God ought to be obtained by tbe grace through the worship of his attrib\ites/' Tiiis opinion I am ex- tremely sorry to find, is directly contrary to all the Vcdai^t doctrines interpreted to ns bv the tnost revered Sankaracharjya, which are real ad^ C % [ 20 ] waita or non-rluality : they afllnn that God lia^ no second (hat may be possessed of eternal ex- istence, either of the sairie nature tvith himself or of a dilferent nature from him’, nor any se- cond of that nature that might be called either his part or his quality. The I6th Text of the 2nd Section of 3rd Chap; The Ved has de- dared the Supreme Being to be mere under- standing." The Ved says God is real existence, wisdohi ahd eternity:" The Ved very often calls the Supreme existence by the epithets of existent, Vvise and eternal ; and as- \ signs as the reason for adopting Such' epithets, (hat the Ved in the first instance speaks of God according to human idea, which views’ quality separately from person, in order to fa- cilhate our comprehension of ohjeCts. Incase* these attributes should be supposed, asr the learn- ed Gentleman asserts, to be separate existences, it necessarily follows, that they must be either eternal or non-eternal ; The former case viz. the existence of a plurality of beings imbued like t 21 1 ( bod himself with the property of Eternal duration, strikes immediately at the io6t of all the doctrines Telative to the unity cf the supreme being contained in the vedant. By the latter sentiment, namely that the power and attributes of God are not eter” tial, We are led at once into the belief that the na- ture of God is susceptible of chang'e, and con- seqiientiy that he is not eternal, which m'akes fio' inconsiderable 6tep toward atheisim itself. These are the obvious and dangerous corisfequences, result” ing front the learned Gentleman’s doctrine that fhe attributes of the supreitie Being are dis, itinct existences, i am quite at a loss to itnovv hov^ these attributes cf* the pure and perfect supreme bemg,N_ (as the learnecJ Gentleman declares them to exist really and separately, and not fictitiously and allegorically) can be so sensual and destitute of mofali- ty, as the creating attribute of Brahma is said to be, by the Poorans ; which represent him in one instance, as attempting to comniit a rape' upon his own daughter ; The Protecting attribute L 2 ? 3 or Vishnu, is in another place aflirmed to havt; 4 ^fraudulently violated the , chastity of Brinda,. in order to kill her husband. Shiva, the de^« troying; attribute, is said to have had a criminal attachment to iMoheni, disregarding all ideas of , decency. And a thousand similar examples must be familiar to every reader of the Paoians. I should be obliged by the learned Gentleman’s shewing, how the contemplation of such circum* stances, which are constantly related By the wor- shippers of these attributes even in their ser- mons, ..;can be: instrunFjental to\vards the purifi- < cation of (he mind, conducive to morality and productive of eternal beatitude. Besides, though tire learned Gentleman in this- instance considert these attributes to be separate existences, yet* in another place beseems to view them as parts of the Supreme Being ; as Ire says, “ If one part of the ocean be adored, the ocean is adored/’ I am somewhat 'at a loss fo imder- Btand, how the learned Gentleman proposes t& itrecoiicile ^ tliis apparent contradiction, i must [ ?3 ] observe, however, "m this place, that the com-< jparison drawn between the relation of God and those attributes, and that of a King and his Minis- ters, is totally inconsistent with the taitli enter- tained by Hindoos of the present day ; who so far from considering these objects, of worship as mere instruments by which they may arrive the power of contemplating the God of na- ture, regard them in the light of independent Gods, to each of whom, however absurdly, they attribute almighty power, and a claim to wor- ship, solely on his own account. Wthl^. The learned Gentleman is dissatisfied with the objection mentioned in my translation to wov- shiping these fictitious representations; and remarks that, “ The objections to worshipping the attributes are not satisfactorily stated by the author." I consequently repeat the following authorities which I hope may answer my purpose. The folloing are the declarations of the ved : “ He, who worships any God exceping the supreme Being, and thinks that he himself is distinct and inferior to that God, C 21 ‘J ■ knows nothing, ami is considered as a domes« tic beast of these Gods.” A state even so ” high as that of Brahma does not atford real bless,” Adore God alone,” None but the supreme being is to be worshipped ; nothing excepting him should be adored by a wise man.” I repeat also the following texts of the yedant : ** The declaration of (he Ved that, those that wor- ship the celestial Gods are the food of such Gods^ is an allegorical expre.ssion, and only means that they are comforts to the celestial Gods, as food to mankind ; for he wh.o has no taith in the supreme Being is rendered subject to these Gods. The Ved affirms the same.” And the revered Sankaracharjya has frequently declared the state of celestial Gods to be that of demons, in the Bhasya of the Ishopanishad and of others. To these authorities a thousand others might be added. But should the learned Gens tleman require some practical grounds for ohjecU ing to the idolatrous wor'jhip of the Hindoos^ [ 25 1 I can be at no toss to give him numberless in= stances^ where the ceremonies that have been instituted under the pretext of honoring the all perfect author of nature, are of a tendency ut» terly subversive of every moral principle. I bea’in with Krishna as the most adored of O • t al! the Incarnations, the number of whose de- votees is exceedingly great. His worship is made to consist in the institution of his image or picture, accompanied by one or more fe- maleSj and in the contemplation of his history and behaviour, such as his perpetration of mur- der upon a female of the name of Pootna j his compelling great number of married and un- married women to stand before him denuded, bis debauching them and several others, to the mortal affliction of their husbands and relations, bis annoying them, by violating the laws of cleanliness and other facts of the same na- ture i The grossness of his worship does not find a limit here. His devotees very often \ [ 26 ] personify (in the same manner as European actors upon stages do) him and his female companions> dancing with indecent gestures and sinking songs^ relative to his love and debaucheries. It it impossi- ble to explain in language fit to meet the pub- lic eye, the mode in which Muhadeva, or the des- troying attribute, is worshipped by the generality of the Hindoos. Suffice it to say that, it is altogether congenial with the iudecent nature of the Image, under whose form he is most commonly adored- The stories respecting him, which, are read by his devotees in the Tuntras, aire of a na- ture that if told of any man, would be offensive to the cars of the most abandoned of either sex. In the worship of Kali, human sacrifices, the use of wine, criminal intercourse and licentious songs are included : the first of these practices has becorne generally extinct ; but it is believed that there are parts of the country where human victims are still offered* Debaucheery, however, universally forms the principle part of the worship of her fol- C 27 ] lowers Nigam and other Tantras may sa- tisfy every reader of the horrible tenets of the worshippers of the two latter deities. The modes of worship of almost all the inferior dieties are pretty mnch the same. Having' so far ex- plained the nature of vvorship adopted by Hindoos t in g’eneral for the propitiation of their allegorical attributes in direct opposition to the mode of pure divine worship inculcated •' by the vcdas^ I cannot but entertain a strong hope that the learned Gentleman, who ranks even monothe'istical songs a- mong carnal pleasures, and consequently rejects their admittance in worship, will no longer stand forward as an advocate for the worship of separate and independent at tributes and Incarnations. . The learned Gentleman says “ That the saviour” meaning Christ, “■ should be consider- ed a personification of the Mercy and kind- ness of God (I mea.n actual not allegorical per- sonificatioti :)” From the little knowledge 1 had acquired of the tenets of Christians and those of D 2 C 28 ] antlchristians, I thought their were only three prevailing opinions respecting the nature of Christ viz. That he was considered by some as the ex- pounder of the laws of God^ and the mediator between God a»id man : by many to be one of tUe three mysterious persons of the Godhead ; whilst others, such as the Jews, say that, he Was a mere man. But to consider Christ as a personification of the mercy of God is, if I mistake not, anew doctrine in Christianity, the discussion of which, however, has no connection with the pre- sent siiliject. I however must observe that this opinion, which the learned Gentleman has formed of Christ being a personification of the mercy of God, is similar to that entertained by Mussulmans, for a period of upwards of a thousand year^, respecting Moluimmud, whom they call mercy of God upon all his creatures. The learned Gentle- man in the conclusion of his observations has left, as he says, the doctrines of pure allegory to me. It would have been more consistent with Justice, had he left pure allegory also to the veJs, [ 59 ] which declare '' appellations and figures of all kinds are innovations.” and which have allegorical- ly represented God in the fig'ure of the universe; ** Fire is his head^ the sun and the moon are his two eyes &c.” and which have also repre- sented all human internal qualities by different earthly objects, and also to Vyas, who has strictly followed the veds in these figurative representa- tions, and to Sankaracharjya, who also adopted the mode of allegory, in his Bhashyn of the vedant and of the upanighadas. i f POSTSCRIPT. Since printing the foregoing observations, I happened to peruse, with the greatest degree of satisfaction, a letter written by a Gentleman, •who signs himself Alexipharmiciis^ to the Editor of the Madras Courier under date the 13th of January last, in reply to tlie arguments ad- duced by Sankara Sastri in^ support of idolatry. The compassion which the gentleman feels towards an unfortunate but large body of his fellow -creatures, tire Inhabitants of India, has induced him not only to abstain from remam- ing neuter on the subject, but to come for- ward and refute every argument urged by- Sankara Sastri in defence of Hindoo Paganism [ 2 ] • — a system of Religion wherein suicide is rec- Iconed one of the most meritovious acts, and hu- man Viciims, as well as dreadful and sang’ui- nary torments, are considered as the sure means of j)ropiliating' their supposed Deities. 1 must therefore beg leave, as iii duty bound, to express the gratitude 1 feel, for the interest ■which the humane and liberal minded Gentle- man has taken, in the welfare of my Country- men.