Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

is not an impossibility in conceiv

We (Pandits) admit that there वयं तावद् वेदान्तमते प्रामाण्याभावग्रहे व्याघातो ing wrongness in the Vedánta, नास्तीति स्वीकुर्महे तचाthe arguments intended to show प्रामाण्यग्राहकयुक्तीनां श्रits wrongness. But if our oppo- वणाच्च न परावर्तामहे ।

and so do not refuse to listen to

nent will not accept the terms

which occur in Vedánta books, परन्तु तन्मतप्रतिपादन in the same sense in which we use काले तन्मतग्रन्थस्थानिthem when explaining the theory, यानि पदानि यस्यैवार्थस्य to a man of straw framed by him- तात्पर्येण वयं प्रयुज्महे तेषां self. Hence an imaginary refuta- तदर्थमाचपरतां यदि प्र

he is not an opponent to us but

tion of the theory, in the shape in

which we accept it, or his unfit- तिवादी न मन्यते तर्हि स ness to refute it, makes us indif- नास्माकं प्रतिवादी किन्तु कस्यचित् स्वनिर्मिततृण

ferent about what he says of Vedánta, and does not raise a desire

in us to hear what theory of reli - मयपुरुषस्यैवेति हेतोर्याह

gion he himself holds.

ग्रूपं तन्मतमस्माभिरंगीक्रियते तादृशस्य तन्मतस्य

In the Newspaper [the Record]

तेनाभिमन्यमानं खण्डनंवा तदीयं तन्मतखण्डना

नधिकारित्वं वा ऽस्मानुदा

सोनीकरोति तेनच की

दृशं मतं स्वीक्रियत इति

श्रोतुंचमास्माकच्छिां न ज

नयति ।

श्रीमद्भिः प्रदर्शिते वा

says that our theories are the results of delusions brought for

which you showed to me, the writer र्तापचेच तन्निर्माता ऽस्मन्मतस्यास्मदन्धीकरणाय ward by the chief of devils to पिशाचाध्यक्ष प्रयुक्तमाया blind us, and our minds are to be विलसितत्वं तथाऽस्मन्मतीconquered by such peculiarities of

discourse as are not employed to नां वस्तुतः सूक्ष्मबुद्धिसन्तोषा satisfy the subtle intellects, on the याप्रयुक्ताभिः खक्ष्मविचाcontrary which are averse to such र विद्वेषिणो भिर्वाचोभंगीintellect. I think perhaps such भिः पराजययोग्यत्वंच वर्णmouth and a wisdom which their यति । एतास्वच वाचोभंadversaries are not able to gainsay ग्यः प्रतिवादिभिरप्रत्याख्येor resist,” with which he himself, यं विज्ञानं मुखंचेति वाक्ये

modes of discourse are meant by "a

like Missionaries, says that the

Missionaries are able to silence तस्य तात्पर्यविषयीभूता : their opponents. But Missiona- स्युरिति मन्यामहे याभिः

ries mistake our silence. When a reply, which we think nonsense, or not applicable, is offered

discussion is more

meritorious

सृष्टधर्मप्रचारोपजीविन : प्रतिवादिनां मूकीकरणे to us, wethink that to retire silent - शक्ता इति स स्वयं सृष्टly and civilly from such useless धर्मप्रचारोपजीविजनवद् than to continue it. But our si- वदति । परन्तु ख्ष्टधर्मप्र lence is not a sign of our admis- चारोपजीवी जनेा ऽस्मsion of defeat which the Mission- दीयमूकताया हेतौ विपaries think to be so. We are not र्यस्यति तथाहि यदा ऽस्मside of a religion which our mas- न्मतखण्डनोद्देशेन तादृशं ters hold, and we think that there किमप्युत्तरमुच्यते यद् वयwill be an interest, on the at- मनर्थकं वाऽप्रकृतं वा मन्याtempt'sbeing fulfilled,—which you महे तदा सुफलरहितात् skrit Commentary, that Christia- तादृशजल्पात् तृष्णों शिष्ट

averse to hearing reasons on the

undertakc,—to show us, by a San

F.

nity is not so unreasonable as it व्यवहारपुरस्सरं निहूत्तिappears to be when preached मेव तादृशजल्पप्रवृत्त्यपेक्ष

without reasons.

योचिततरां मन्यामहें नतु सोऽस्मदीयस्तूष्णींभावः प

राजयस्वीकारप्रयुक्तो य

यैतं खष्टधर्मप्रचारोपजीविनो मन्यन्ते । नहि वयम

Your most Humble servant

VÍTTHAL SÁSTRÍ.

There concur in this

UMÁRÁO SUKULA,

CHIRANJIVA PARVATIYA,

KĀKĀ RĀMA,

स्मत्प्रभुस्वीकृतमतोपपत्ति-
श्रवणविद्वेषिणः स्मः किन्तु
सृष्टधर्मप्रचारापजीविज
नमुखाच्छ्रयमाणं खुष्टम-
तं यावद्भिरंशैर्नियुक्ति
कमस्माकं भासते तावद्भि-
रंशस्तन्त्रियुक्तिकं न भव-
तीति संस्कृतटीकाद्वारे-
णास्मान् बोधयितुं यो भव-
तां प्रयत्नस्तस्य साफल्ये
सति लाभो भविष्यतीति
सम्भावयाम इतिशम् ।
विट्ठलशास्त्री |
अच सम्मतिः
१. सुकुलापाचामारावश

मणः ।

२ पर्वतीयचिरंजीविशर्म

णः ।

३ काकारामविदुषः ।

[blocks in formation]

If it had been a question of counting votes instead of weighing them, I could have got any number of signatures to the foregoing declaration,—because every one who knows anything about the matter,-i. e., every Hindú with any tincture of education,---knows the fact as I have stated it. The motive for my having selected the signatures here given is this, that no self-puzzled European may have a pretext for conjecturing that perhaps the view here declared is peculiar to Benares, and not universal throughout India. Káká Ráma, is "renowned in the Panjáb and Kashmir," and he ranks here, with Baijanátha, at the top of the tree. Chiranjiva our Law Professor (formerly head Pandit in the Government Courts--), styles himself “ Mountaineer” ( Parvatiya) because he s from Nepaul. Káśínátha (—emeritus professor of the Sánkhya

Philosophy, and unrivalled in Grammatical literature since the death of Mahananda Dúbe—) is a Mahratta; as is also Bápú Deva-a name not unknown to European astronomers. Venkata Ráma (our assistant professor of the Nyáya philosophy) represents the Bráhmans of the South. He is a Tailangí. Badarí Lála (our Hindí teacher) is a Guzarátí. Kálíprasáda Bhattácháryya (—our head professor of the Nyáya [—and a Bengallee professor of the Nyáya is as much "de rigueur" as a "French cook" or a "Scotch gardener,"] is of course a Bengallee. Of the others, Umúrúo is the present professor of the Vedánta in the College; and Hírúnanda, our Professor of the Belles Lettres (súhitya), is one of the most accomplished Pandits and most inquisitive spirits in Benares. Lajjá Sankara is our emeritus professor of Astronomy. The other four signatures I found attached to the paper when it came back from the Rájá Deonáráyan Singh's, the Rájá having heard of it and having requested permission to hold a consultation with his Pandits on it.

Since so many persons, who it is desirable should judge rightly in this matter, are necessarily—and blamelessly-incompetent to form any independent judgment on it, and must rely on the authority of persons qualified to judge; I have the less scruple in citing European authorities in support of the correctness of my representations. A high authority (in the " Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen" of the 4th February 1860–), Dr. Benfey, says of these views, as set forth in the Essay on "Christianity contrasted with Hindú Philosophy,”—“ und es freut mich, sogleich erklären zu können, dass die Angaben des Hrn Verfs durchweg als richtig angenommen werden dürfen. Hr. Ballantyne erweist sich auch hier, wie in den übrigen Schriften, welche er über indische Philosophie veröffentlicht hat, entschieden als den grössten Kenner derselben unter den jetzt lebenden Europäern, und seine Darstellung kann mit vollem Vertrauen zur Berichtigung mancher Irrthümer dienen, welche sich in Bezug auf dieseble noch vielfach verbreitet finden,"

« ElőzőTovább »