PAW. B1G& A LECTURE RAJAH MI MOHUN ROY. BY C. H. A. DALL, m. a., First Pastor of the Unitarian Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in India. “ Rajah Ram Mohun Roy, the great religious reformer of India, under the name of the Brahmo Somaj, or assembly of the worshippers of God, founded his church to ‘ strengthen the bonds of union between men of all religious persuasions and creeds’. ’ Keshub Chunder Sen’s tract—‘ America and India.’ Calcutta: FRED. LEWIS, CALCUTTA CENTRAL PRESS CO., “ LD.,” 5 , COUNCIL HOUSE STliEET. 1871. A LECTURE ON RAJAH RAM MOHUN ROY. BY C. H. A. DALL, m. a., First Fastor of the Unitarian Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in India. -- “ Rajah Ram Mohun Roy, the great religious reformer of India, under the name of the Brahmo Somaj, or assembly of the worshippers of God, founded his church to ‘ strengthen the bonds of union between men of all religious persuasions and creeds’. '’ Keshub Chunder Sen’s tract —‘America and India' -- (Calcutta: FRED. LEWIS, CALCUTTA CENTRAL PRESS CO., “ LD.,” 5 , COUNCIL HOUSE STREET. 1871 A LECTURE ON RAM MOHUN ROY. - + - Ram Monrnsr Roy, the founder of Brahmoism : by a Brahmo follower of Christ, C. H. A. Dali, m. a., given at the Useful Arts Rooms, Calcutta : November 19 , 1871 . No man of common humanity can fail to honor progressive Brahmoism. No man that is a man can scorn its lofty aim ; certainly none who can say with old “ heathen ” Seneca, “ whatever belongs to man belongs to me.” Homo sum, et nihil humanum a me alienum puto” Down with idolatry is the banner-cry of the Brahmos. Shame on caste. It is cruel. Away with India’s million gods and goddesses. Death to atheism, pantheism, polytheism ! Long live Theism, their mdrtal foe! Glory ‘be to God ! One God omnipotent reigneth ! jEham-eva-adwiteeam! Friends of truth, I ask you, can any creature that has a soul fail to honor such a crusade, in which liberated Hindoos are fighting, as “ followers of Christ,” or in his self-sacrificing spirit, for the liber¬ ation of their enslaved countrymen P It were patri¬ otic to fight thus for Bengal. To fight thus nobly for India, Ram Mohun Roy would call “ an essential characteristic of the Christian religion, namely, that man should do unto others as he would wish to be done by.” The words are his. Again I say, he is ( 2 ) not a man, lie is lower than a snake, who would spit his venom on an enterprise like this. You have come to-day to hear of Earn Mohun Eoy, the founder of Brahmoism, and of fidelity to him. To look facts in the face, and by generous and patient hearing and conversation, and study of the works of this truest man that Bengal has produced for centuries, so as to know the truth about him. We would know the bona fide result of his pure and bene¬ ficent and studious life of more than sixty years. We would not copy him servilely in anything. We do not study him that we may agree to agree with him. We would rather explore this mountainous man as we would a new Parisnath, should nature upheave one on these sultry plains, within sight of Calcutta. God help us to do it with judicial imparti¬ ality, and in the modesty of true wisdom. And this especially when we hear him so bravely tell of that “ which renders the modern Hindoo system of religion absurd and detestable”—(Second Appeal, page 817); and close his addendum to that Appeal in the words— “ I now conclude this appendix with repeating my prayer, that a day may soon arrive when every one will regard the precepts of Jesus as the sole guide to peace and happiness.” What our great Earn Mohun calls “ The Precepts of Jesus,” is really the hulk of the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, with six selected portions of the gospel of John, including, of course, the Lord’s Prayer and the Parable of the Prodigal Son, with the Ten Commandments of Moses, simplified by “ the Saviour” into two, in the soul’s uttermost love of God and man. In the first Chris¬ tian century, a single “gospel,” say that of Mark alone, was all that that portion of the Christian world possessed. What Earn Mohun Eoy, therefore, pub¬ lishes to his countrymen as “The Precepts of Jesus” ( 3 ) comprises a much fuller life of Jesus than many Christian converts of the first century were privileged to know. Earn Moliun Roy’s theism, therefore, is distinctively Christian, that is, Unitarian Christian theism, by which I mean, emphatically, a creedless theism which clings to Jesus and his gospel as its moral leader ; Jesus, whose life is a greater power in the world to-day than ever; Jesus, who to-day is the living head of the great family of earth and heaven, as I believe. In my soul I hear Ram Mohun Roy this hour “repeating his prayer” to the only G-od, that “ every one” may accept the truth as it is in Jesus, “ as the sole guide to peace.” The impres¬ sion is not justified by facts that Ram Mohun, because he found some truth, as every Unitarian does, in the Koran and in the Yedant, set Mahomed and the Yyasa entirely on a par with Jesus. Let it be shown when and where he declared the Koran the sole guide to peace, and the Yedant the sole guide to peace; Mahomed, “ the first-born of every crea¬ ture,” and the Yyasa, “ the first-born of every crea¬ tureMahomed, “the founder of true religion,” and the Yyasa, “ the founder of true religion Mahomed, “the final judge of all who have lived since the creation,” and the Yyasa, “ the final judge of all,” as much as Jesus was. No such thing appears, so I believe, in the maturest convictions of the latter twelve or fifteen years of Ram Mohun’s nobly onward and ever-progressive life. In saying this, I have given you the main point and burden of my lecture on “Ram Mohun Roy, the Rounder of Brahmoism,” which you are here to test by these his works. As it will be impossible to do justice to so broad an affirmation, in a single hour, or at this our first meeting, the lecture, one of a series, must, in the nature of the case, be introduc- r 4 ) tory rather than comprehensive. You will fairly expect, in opening so grand a subject, that I should say something of the relation between the lecturer and the man whom we, in Bengal, look to as the pre¬ sent leader of this insurrection of dawning light against the retreating darkness of old Hindooism— o o I mean Babu Keskub Chunder Sen. It has been my good fortune to be somewhat inti¬ mate with him for more than a dozen years. He gladly heard my Unitarian gospel while he was yet an under-graduate in the Presidency College. At his request, I, years ago, arranged for him a voyage, via the Cape of Hood Hope, to America, which circumstances and second thoughts induced him to postpone. More than once have we fought the battle of theism together against dogmas that have overlaid Christianity, but which I never heard from the lips of Jesus. Dear to me were both his “ British India Society” in College, and his “ Good¬ will Fraternity” out of College. Well I remem¬ ber how simply and honestly Keshub rose one eve¬ ning in the “ British India Society ” at College, and in presence of three padrees of us, only one of whom w r as a Unitarian, moved the following resolution :— “ Resolved, that this Society cultivate habits of prayer.” “Why, Keshub!” said the presiding padree , a paternal smile mantling his broad, honest face; “nonsense! You cannot pray; you have no God; unless you pray to the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, your prayer is of no avail.” And in keeping with this his sincere conviction, the good Churchman went into a brief argument to prove that it was of no avail. Another Churchman who sat on the chairman’s right had nothing to say, but kept that silence which consents. When the time came, the Unitarian padree came to his feet. The ( 5 ) chairman—how well I remember it —with a generous laugh cried out, “ Listen now to our brother Dali ! He can’t hurt you. He’s no Christian ; he’s only a Mahomedan ; so mind well what he says !” I said :— “ Keshub, one God created us. He that made me made you; He is equally your father and mine; He cares for you as much as for any of us ; He loves to hear you call His name. Do you want Him ? Ask Him to come, and He will come; He gives His life and love to all that ask it. You have only to want, and your wants will teach you to pray aright.” Such was the substance of my appeal to Keshub and his class-mates at that time. Willing, if possible, to please the chairman, who was a true friend of native progress and conversion, Keshub now changed the wording of his resolution. He made it read as follows :—“ Kesolved, that this Society cultivate habits of devotion.” “ That is not a whit better than you had it at first,” rejoined the chairman ; “nothing of that sort will help you till you come to the true God, who is the triune God—Lather, Son, and Holy Ghost.” So that resolution fell to the ground, and gave place to one that the chairman deemed sensible and practicable : and this was to the effect that each member of that circle of students should set himself to work, from that day, to obliterate obscene passages from any book or shastur which was in a way to be read to or by his wife, sister or mother. These two resolutions of the “ British India Society” sufficiently indicate the high moral and spiritual aims which, by God’s grace, have been in the heart and life of our friend Keshub Chunder Sen from his very boyhood. And, I repeat it, must not any creature higher than a brute be glad to associate with such a man; both in reform labors and in prayer to our common Lather. I ( 6 ) think so. I have thought so since, fourteen years ago, Keshub stood up in that College Hall, the self- ordained Nehemiah of a band of volunteers, pledged to fight against all the devils they could find—and of these the name was legion—and contend for Liberty, Holiness, Love, and Purity, in the spirit of Jesus and in the strength of the only living God. I must be¬ lieve that Keshub is a good man, bent on doing a good work for Bengal and for India. Many a brothers’ controversy have I had with him, and many more do I expect to have with him, as to the expediency of measures and in matters of opinion. In these things God makes men to differ ; and the health of a growing tree is best secured by each leaf keeping its distance from every other, and waving peace to all the rest, while clinging to a stem of its own. I do not expect to convince the creed-bound that in signing my name to the word “ theism,” I have changed no creed, and renounced none; much less that I have now adopted two creeds, who never yet had one. Such as prefer their own prejudices and narrownesses must keep them, the fact being that the founder, and as the acknow¬ ledged founder, of course, the typal man of the Brahmo Somaj, made Jesus of Nazareth his man of men, and the four-fold record of the life of Jesus, his book of books. Deny this who can. From my soul I thank God that my Brahmo brother Keshub— my younger brother in some things—would not, and could not, deny Jesus, auy more than Bam Mohun Boy could, even at the crisis-struggle for union between the Adis and the Progressives a year ago. That critical occasion was to have made the two churches one. But something parted them for ever. What was it ? Keshub’s allegiance to Jesus. Be- presentatives from I know not how many Brahmo ( 7 ) churches were present. They had gathered, rejoic¬ ing in hope, from city and country. The minister of the Adis was bringing to a close the crucial service of that crisis hour. 4 Can we, or can we not be one?’ was the voice upon the air. “Not without we renounce Jesus, and deny the founder of the Somaj ,” was the burden of the Adi minister’s reply. He sat upon the dais ; Keshub on the floor at his feet. Empha¬ tically and repeatedly, in his discourse, had Keshub’s “ father in the ministry” warned him that he was drawing dangerously near to Christ. He besought him never to allow the name of Jesus to be named in the mandir, which had already, so he said (see, the Mirror's Brahmo report of it,) begun to be a Chris¬ tian scare-crow, or “ terror of Christ.” He ceased, and the large congregation were about to disperse in a silence which would have given consent. Then the Spirit of Truth, which is the Spirit of God, moved in the soul of our Keshub, with a power that he did not, and could not, resist. The voice of that Spirit rose clearer and clearer, louder and louder, so as to enchain the attention, not only of the crowd within his chapel, but of the crowd without. He, trembling with emotion, and fighting down the tears, asked of God that he and such as heard him might never be untrue to any one of their great and holy brothers of the past. “ My God, I cannot renounce any one of the true brothers of my soul —ctmer pra- ner bhai .” None that heard that voice of God from the heart of Keshub could misconstrue its meaning or its results. He would be simply true to what God and honest inquiry should show him to be true in Jesus. He would cry with the young prophet Micaiah — 11 As the Lord liveth, what the Lord God saith unto me, that will I speak !” The blow was struck. The deed was done. The con- ( 3 ) gregation dispersed, saying “ from this hour we are two.” The Adis and the Progressives diverge from this day. Jesus said to the one, approach ; to the other, depart. This divergence has but begun to show itself in the Marriage Bill conflict. Prom that time I have yearned more than ever to take Keshub’s hand, and clench it fair and fast in that of Bam Mohun Boy. I have learned that in all his fine library he does not, or, until very recently, did not, possess a copy of that chief work of Bam Mohun Boy—“ The Precepts of Jesus,” with the Three Appeals: which, as I read Bam Mohun was the main work and occupation of the last twelve or fifteen years of his life. I hear it said by intelli¬ gent and thoughtful Adi Brahmos that they are truer to Bam Mohun Boy than the Progressives. Yet the Progressives have not at their book-room, and never had, so far as I can discover, a single copy, even for reference, of the chief work of their found¬ er. Of course, I except such re-printed parts of it as I myself have sent them—in English and Bengali, and which, I believe, are now, this week, for the first time, being sold from their rooms. The subject is too large to be crowded into a single lecture. This discourse has, in the na¬ ture of the case, been somewhat prefatory. Jjet other lectures, say of half an hour each, followed by an hour’s conference of friends in council, bring us together here for a series of Sunday afternoons. With the “ Precepts” before us, of which three edi¬ tions lie here on the table, we must, as truth-seeking and free inquirers, decide each for himself, before God, whether our great Bam Mohun only played with Christianity, as some say he did, for the amuse¬ ment of his leisure hours, or whether he made it his chosen work and business, as you see it here affirm- ( 9 ) ed in his Third Appeal, page 8. Here, he says :—“ I confine myself at present to the task of laying before my fellow-creatures the words of Christ, with a trans¬ lation from the English into Sanscrit and the lan¬ guage of Bengal.” And why in these languages, if, as some say, his defence of, and propagation of the gospel was not intended for the people of Bengal or of India, both the learned aud the unlearned. But, we must come now to free conference and unrestricted conversation. Let each tell what he knows, and bring here, from Sunday to Sunday, any and all the publications of Bam Mohun Boy. God calls us together to a work of discovery aud of simple justice. The Spirit says, let there be light. Let it scatter the darkness, which, by the unfaithfulness of his disciples, has hidden from Bengal a son of whom Bengal ought to be proud. Shame ! shame to us, that his own mother does not know him! Brahmos ! brothers! let us wipe off this opprobrium, to the extent of our individual ability! In the name of patriotism, if not in that of religion, let us purge from the Brahmos’ escutcheon this foul stain. God being our helper, the best labors of the father of our movement shall not much longer lie buried out of sight. We welcome to this patriotic labor, this Bam Mohun Boy Council, every man who is willing to face the naked truth : who knows God is truth; and fears none but God. I have on the table here, for consultation and reference, and in¬ tend to have present at our future meetings, Scrip¬ tures—Hindoo, Mahomedan, Christian ; the Bible, the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita; but our studies must centre for a considerable period on that work which is present here in three editions (American and English,) and was in Bam Mohun’s heart and hand from 1820 till he died in 1833, thirteen years ; and ( 10 )■ the best years of his life. Here is a sermon “ occa¬ sioned by the lamented death of the Rajah Ram Mo- hun Roy, preached on Sunday, 10th November, 1833, at Belfast, by J. Scott Porter, Assistant Pastor” there. A re-print of this brief biography would be of value at this time. Here are the works of Channing, Dewey, Norton, and Parker. Dr. Hedge’s “ Reason in Religon” would be here, had not Keshub Babu and other Brahmos purchased my every copy. Here are Purness, Freeman-Clarke, Andrew Pea¬ body, Collyer’s “ Nature and Life,” Waterston’s “Moral and Spiritual Culture ;” the “ Altar at Home,” or Unitarian Christian Prayer-book, and the Theist’s Prayer-book; also several other Brahmo pamphlets, not omitting our Keshub’s “ Jesus Christ, Europe and Asia,” and his “ Future Church of India.” Here I give you also criticisms on the course of Ram Mohun Roy, by a Voishnub follower of Choitono. God help us to welcome criticism from every quarter, and let the truth go up, whoever goes down ! Next Sunday, the Gospel Theism of Ham Mohun Hoy. Note. —This lecture went to press on the 20th of De¬ cember. On the morning of the 6th, the lecturer sent the following note to Babu Keshub Chunder Sen ; being moved to do so by repeated hints in the Mirror , Keshub’s paper, that the lecturer gave one-sided views. A reply was asked for on the 8th and 19th, but none was given. The note ran as follows:— “ To Keshub Babu.” “ Dec. 6, 1871,” 24, Mott’s Lane. “ My Dear Friend,” “ I am exceedingly anxious to be just to all, and especially so to you, in whatever I say or print. My first lecture on Ram Mohun Roy, is waiting to ( 11 ) be struck off in pamplilet. Now, if I have, in that lecture of which I gave you slips, seemed to misunderstand or un¬ wittingly mis-state your real position, allow me to say so as from y r ou; or in a brief note of your own, deprecating my one-sidedness. Let me print it with the lecture, to go with it wherever it goes. Yours truly, C. H. A. Dall. N.B .—Keshub Babu says his publications show what he is. Extract from the “ Indian Mirror'” of November 14, 1871, par# 6, of Mr. Dall’s “ Response.” “ I was well pleased to hear from the manager of our book-room, that he had since Keshub Babu’s return from England, sold nearly three hundred sets of the works of Dr. Channing, our leading American Unitarian. I was not sorry to see in the (London) “Inquirer” of September 30tli, what seems a complete justification of the step I have taken in joining the church of God theistic in India. It was given to the world, recently, at Liverpool, by a leading English Unitarian, James Martineau ; though the English Unitarians, be it understood, have not for many years had any pecuniary connection with my work in India. Why any of Ram Mohun Roy’s works should be refused a place by the side of Channing’s, I cannot understand. I sent them there for sale, for the good of our cause. As I am informed that no copy is to be had there, even for reference,* of the last and largest and ripest work of Ram Mohun Roy,f and as I have three editions of it here, where I have resided for years, at 24, Mott’s Lane, Dhurrumtollah, may I beg my friends to come and look at this handsome octavo volume of 630 pages ? It will give me pleasure to meet * Babn K. C. Sen confirms this statement December 19th, 1871. t “ The Precepts of Jesus, extracted from the books of the New Testa¬ ment, by Ram Mohun Roy,” with his three “Appeals in their defence.” The Final Appeal, of 379 pages, was printed by Ram Mohun Roy at his own press, “The Unitarian Press, Dhurrumtollah, 1823,” N.B.—About this time Ram Mohun gave (on three occasions) no less than a total of Rs. 10,500 toward the building of a Unitarian Christian church in Cal¬ cutta, and helping the Unitarian Mission in charge of the Rev. Wm, Adam. ( 12 ) them always at 4 o’clock p. M. on Sundays. Let us give it a careful inspection between 3 and 5 p. M. Finally, the “ complete sincerity” of my purpose to aid my brethren, can only he proved by my labors in the cause of that one God without a second, for the preaching of whose gospel I came to India. Ever your friend and brother, Dall. Rev. James Martineau, Said at Liverpool:—“ The great and fundamental principles of all natural piety, and of all natural conscience should be made the actuating principles of the life of multitudes and of nations.” “ Of public events, during the last year or two, one of the most interesting to myself was the visit of an eminent and pious oriental, who brought us a message of a kind altogether new and peculiar, and, I think, singu¬ larly instructive to those who appreciate the position of Keshub Chunder Sen in India (applause). It appeared to me that his visit was a natural occasion to us all, to re-consider whether we appreciate correctly,—whether, I mean the churches appreciated correctly,—what really was the essence of our opinion of Christianity. Here was a man come to us from a nation who might be called, in the vulgar and ordinary sense, a nation of heathens; but who came to visit a Christian country, and who, when he spoke from a platform in London and in various other places, so moved our hearts, so elevated our souls, as to give to us a new revelation of what can be the dignity and the nobleness of a pure and simple and devout religious life. The impression was so powerful upon most of us, at least in London, when we heard him preach, that I venture to say very few of us had ever been under a Christian preacher, and been moved to so deep a sense of Christian conviction and of Christian humility.” “ Here was a soul most congenial to the soul of Jesus ; * * # * and one towards whom Jesus would have a warm and deep affection. Where lies then the essence of our Christianity ? Did this man believe as ( 13 ) Christians believe about the whence Christ had come, and the whither Christ had gone? He did not believe the history of the incarnation; he did not believe the history of the resurrection : yet, at the same time, we could not hut feel that here was an impersonation of the ethics and the spirituality of Christ” (applause). “Well, then, does the essence of Christianity lie in any opinion about the whence and the whither of Jesus Christ? Or does it, on the other hand, lie in the affinity with his spirit, in allegiance to the divine law to which his life was perfectly conformed ? Is it in the similitude to Christ, in the entire sympathy with whatever is characteristic of the personality of Jesus; is it in this that Christianity lies? Or, is it in the opinion that may be formed as to where he was before he entered this world, or whither he went after he departed from it ? It appears to me that the visit of Keshub Chunder Sen, was a demonstration that our churches are wrong in their definition of Christianity (applause); and that the very essence of it lies, not in the doctrinal and historical machinery, but in the spirituality of which this machinery is the mere vehicle to our souls. If this be so, I think it a lesson of the deepest moment to our Christian churches.” . . “ What I want to know is, whether if we dare throw away our artificial supports, we shall find it possible to administer this spiritual theism to mankind, and get hold of the hearts of men. . . The tendency is to fling away a false dependence upon artificial authority and go back to the primitive rights of religion in human nature and in human life. . . . Believe me, it is a most dangerous thing to construct a hardened and chrystalized and vigorous theological organization. It is not then the instrument of life, but it will be the instrument of death and the grave. . . . It is not that I would depress the intellectual life: it is an absolute necessity tbat it should have unlimited freedom, but it does require a balancing power from the strength of the affections and from the energy of the conscience. . . . Depend upon it, the love of God, blends us all into one, and makes us one family together. ... I believe, that when Christianity shall be re-born from its present temporary eclipse, it will rise again with two commandments instead of ten—the love of ( 14 ) God and the love of man; with the beatitudes in place of the creeds; with a doctrine of self-sacrifice of the human heart in the place of a doctrine of atonement; with a belief in the incarnation of God in our humanity, in place of the personal incarnation of God in Jesus Christ; and that by degrees, when that day shall come, man will he united to his Maker by tenderer, deeper and more powerful ties than yet have been known, and that religion will assert a power greater by far, more comprehensive, and more healing to man’s differences, more united to human affections than even the earliest and purest period of its history has at present exemplified.”—(Applause.) Mr. Dali received a Letter from a Brahmo ; as fol¬ lows, in 1869, now given with the consent of the writer:— “ Dear Sir, I enquired of Keshub Babu about your joining the Brahmo Somaj as a member ; and he perfectly agreed with me, every man is welcomed by our Brahmo brethren, if he will only worship Him whom Jesus directed to wor¬ ship : no man or created object is allowed to be adored and glorified there, but we join to love adore and glorify our merciful Father, who is giving us our daily bread. Now, I shall be happy to learn if Jesus will allow you to come and join such an association, and render assistance to your brethren in whatever way you can; at the same time partake of the divine happiness which they enjoy in the congregation. I will call in the evening for your reply ; please favor me with a letter if you are ready to join ; if not, what are your objections. Your obedient servant, “Dec. 27, 1869.” 0. C. Iv.” 1V.B. —Mr. Dali .answered affirmatively the above request, with the proviso that he would sign no creed, would renounce nothing, repudiate nothing that God and his conscience declared to be true. During the subsequent two year’s delay, he has had a brother’s controversy with Babu K. C. ( 15 ) Sen, involving some correspondence, of which the turning point was, ‘a simple cry , or a definite creed .’ Mr Ball stood firmly for no creed. So that, recently, when Babu Keshub Chunder Sen proposed to him the single word ‘ Theism’ as the banner-cry of the movement, Mr. Ball could hold back no longer: “ Theism” to cover “ theists of all na¬ tions,” including “followers of Christ.”—‘Theism’ is now the word “ of such a catholic character as to strengthen the bonds of union between men of all religious persuasions and creeds Mr. Ball on a casual call at the Mirror Office, and without any form or ceremony whatsoever, signed his name to what his friend, Keshub, wrote on a slip of paper; the whole matter accepted and signed being as follows :— “ I do hereby avow my faith in Theism, and become a member of the Brahmo Somaj of India:” “Mission Office, 2nd November, 1871.’> (Signed) C. H. A. Ball. EBED. LEWIS, CALCUTTA CENTBAL PBESS COMPANY, LIMITED. 1 f ' - • - I , V < » • - ■* V 4 . ’ .• • ' • J . ■ • -< 1 * '* ' ;