David, of the tribe of Judah. RAM was the king of the Rughoos and of foreigners, while, in like manner, JESUS was king of the Jews and Gentiles. Both are stated in the respective sacred books handed down to us, to have performed very wonderful miracles, and both ascended up to heaven. Both were tempted by the Devil while on the earth, and both have been worshiped by millions up to the present day. Since God can be born of the tribe of Judah, how, I ask, is it impossible that he should be born of the tribe of Rughoo, or of any other nation or race of men? And as the human form and feelings of RAM afford sceptics no good argument against his omnipresent and divine nature, it must be evident to you that this deluded sect of Unitarianism can lay no stress on the human form and feelings of Jesus Christ as disproving his divinity."

a specimen of "the true agonistic style."

"To RAM Doss,

"I have received your letter, and beg you to receive my best thanks for the trouble you have put yourself to in sending it to me. It was my intention this evening to have proved that Hindu Idolatry and Unitarianism are the same, and that they both proceed from the Devil.Unfortunately, Mr. Robison, in consequence of the number who were anxious to attend, has requested me to postpone the meeting, to which of course I have acceded. But I am ready,-MIND ME, READY,-to meet you and your runnagate friend Rammohun Roy whenever you please, in public and private discussion, and let you know what a humble individual unsupported can do, armed with no other weapon than the sharp sword of the Gospel, in bringing to light the

"You may perhaps urge, that there is a wide difference between a belief in THREE Persons in the Godhead as maintained by you, and a belief in three hundred and thirty millions of Persons in the Godhead, entertained by the Hindoos: but as all such numerical objections are founded on the frail basis of human reason, which we well know is fallible, you must admit that the same Omnipotence which can make THREE ONE and ONE THREE, can equally reconcile the unity and PLURALITY of three hundred and thirty millions; both being supported by a sublime mystery which far transcends all human comprehension."

The Hindoo writer concludes with reminding Dr. Tytler that "the vain and narrow-minded believers in one invisible God, accuse the followers of the Trinity, as well as the sincere worshipers of Ram and other Divine Incarnations, of being idolaters," and that therefore, policy required a good understanding and brotherhood between the two sects, that they "may go hand in hand in opposing and if possible extirpating the abominable notion of God, which strikes equally at the root of Hindooism and Christianity." But it is not too late, he adds, for the Doctor to atone for his indiscretion by expressing his regret at having written any thing calculated "to create dissension among the worshipers of Divine Incarnations."

The reply of the Trinitarian Doctor is worthy of being inserted entire, as

VOL. XIX.

2Q

at present displayed in the damnable heresy of Unitarianism, of which you are the wretched tool. But neither you, Rammohun Roy, nor the second fallen ADAM, dare meet me, because you fear the WORD of TRUTH.

"Your inveterate and determined
"foe in the LORD,
"R. TYTLER.

(Signed)

"May 6th, 1823.".

This Christian epistle the editor of the Hurkaru inserted, with a remark that "there is a wide difference between the belief which maintains God to have appeared in the flesh, and that of the Hindoo who believes the appearance of the omnipotent Being in the shape of a Thakoor, which, (says the Editor,) if we are not mistaken, is composed of stone, metal or wood." Ram Doss replies to the Editor that no Hindoo imagines "that the divine Ram, the son of Dusruth by Houshilya his mother, according to the flesh, was composed either of wood, stone or metal." The images of the Hindoos are, he says, like those of the Roman Catholics; they are not identified with the sacred person they represent, but are mere helps to devotion.-With this letter the Editor inserted some candid explanatory observations upon the controversy, treating Ram Doss as a real person and a sincere Hindoo.

The next letter in the collection is from Ram Doss to the afore-named Editor, and is entitled "Ram Doss's First Challenge to Dr. R. Tytler."

The public are here Informed that "this Goliath" "shrinks from the defence of the charges he has brought against Hindooism, and refuses to co-operate with" Ram Doss "in opposing Unitarianism.”

A reply to this letter appeared in the newspaper from Dr. Tytler; avowing that he at first considered it to have been "written by some Unitarian under a pseudonymous signature," but that, judging from the last letter of the writer to the Editor, he may have been mistaken, and therefore he informs Ram Doss, "if he be a real person," ," that he considers there is no book at present in possession of Hindus-the Mahabharat and Ramayuna not exceptedof higher antiquity than the entrance of the Mussulmans into India, say about 800 years from the present period; and that the legends attached to the Avatars are merely corrupted copies of the Holy Scriptures in the possession of Christians. And the Doctor offers to meet Ram Doss, "if he be a real person and wish to obtain information on these topics," at his own house, or elsewhere, to discuss "the modernness of the religious system at present followed by the Hindus."

Not satisfied with this, nor inclined to meet such an antagonist in person, Ram Doss sent to the Hurkaru a "Second Challenge to Dr. Tytler," calling upon him for a direct answer to the arguments of his former letter. In return, the redoubtable Doctor reminded the Brahmin, by means of the Hurkaru, that whilst he considered Unitarianism to be "a system of damnable heresy proceeding from the Devil," he looked upon Ram Doss's own superstitions in the same light, and declared that it was unreasonable to expect that he would allow this person to " co-operate" with him, when in fact he inaintained "Unitarianism to be nothing more than a new name for Hindoo idolatry."

A "Third Challenge to Dr. Tytler" was now given in the Hurkaru by his unwearied opponent, who inquired, seeing that the Doctor shrunk from entering the field with him against Unitarianisin and left him "to encounter the danger and reap the glory single-handed," whether he also flinched from justifying his insinuations

against the Hindoo religion, and from replying to the letter proving Hindooism and Christianity to rest on the same sacred foundation? The Doctor contented himself with asserting that the charge of shrinking was too absurd to require notice, and that the histories of Buddha, Saluvahana and Chrisna comprised "nothing more than perverted copies of Christianity."

Ram Doss replied to the Doctor by inquiring "whether if any Hindoo were to make insinuations against the Christian religion, when called to defend them he would be justified in merely referring Christians to the books of the Jews (a tribe equally inimical to Christianity), or Gibbon's History of the Roman Empire, or to a whole History of Jesus Christ, without adducing any particular passage?" He then for the fourth time challenged his antagonist to answer his arguments. The only notice Dr. Tytler took of this letter was in a Postscript to one which he sent to the Hurkaru, as follows:

"I request to be informed by your sapient correspondent Ram Doss in what manner he proves Buddha to be the head of a tribe inimical to Hindooism."

This Ram Doss in reply pronounces to be mere evasion; however, “to oblige the Doctor as a fellow-believer in and worshiper of Divine Incarnations," he informs him ("although it has no bearing on the question"),

the head of the sect of Boaddhus, who "that Buddha or Booddha, is derive their name from him in the same manner as Christians do from Christ. That this sect is inimical to Hindooism is proved by the fact that they deny the existence of a Creator of the Universe, in whom the Hindoos believe, and also despise many of the gods worshiped by the latter. There are hundreds of works published by them against each other, which are in general circulation."

But after complying thus far with Dr. Tytler's request, Ram Doss repeats that this has nothing to do with his arguments, which the Doctor by evading confesses he is unable to answer, and therefore denounces him "a defamer of Hindooism, a religion of the principles of which he is (or at least appears to be) totally ignorant." To all this, the Trinitarian champion complacently replies,

which he believes to be all that is venerable and sacred.

"If by the ray of intelligence,' for which the Christian' says we are indebted to the English, he means the introduction of useful mechanical arts, I am ready to express my assent and also my gratltude; but with respect to science, literature, or religion, I do not acknowledge that we are placed under any obligation. For by a reference to history it may be proved that the world was indebted to our ancestors for the first dawn of knowledge, which sprung up in the East, and, thanks to the Goddess of Wisdom, we have still a philosophical and copious language of our own which distinguishes us from other nations, who cannot express scientific or abstract ideas without borrowing the language of foreigners.

"Rammohun Roy's abandonment of Hindoo doctrines (as A Christian' mentions) cannot prove them to be erroneous; no more than the rejection of the Christian religion by hundreds of persons who were originally Christians and more learned than Rammohun Roy, prove the fallacy of Christianity. We Hindoos regard him in the same light as Christians do Hume, Voltaire, Gibbon and other sceptics.

"Before A Christian' indulged in a tirade about persons being degraded by Asiatic effeminacy,' he should have recollected that almost all the ancient prophets and patriarchs venerated by Christians, nay even Jesus Christ himself, a divine incarnation and the founder of the Christian faith, were ASIATICS. that if a Christian thinks it degrading to be born or to reside in Asia, he directly reflects upon them.

So

"First. The Christian' demands, Will RAM Doss or his associates be pleased to inform me if the incarnation of his god was foretold by prophets through a period of four thousand years?' I answer in the affirmative-The incarnation of Ram was foretold in the works of many holy and inspired men for more than four thousand years previous to the event, in the most precise and intelligible language; not in those ambiguous and equivocal terms found in the Old Testament, respecting the incarnation of Jesus Christ, an ambiguity which it is well known has afforded our common enemies the Unitarians, a handle for raising a doubt of Jesus Christ being a real manifestation of God in the flesh.

"Secondly.-The Christian demands of RAM Doss, Will he demonstrate the mission or divine incarnation of his deity by incontestable and stupendous miracles such as Christ wrought?' I -answer, YES: The divine Ram performed

miracles more stupendous, not beforc multitudes of ignorant people only, but in the presence of princes and of thousands of learned men, and of those who were inimical to Hindooism. I admit that the Jeins and other unbelievers ascribed Ram's miraculous power to a demoniacal spirit, in the same manner as the Jews attributed the miracles of Jesus to the power of Beelzebub; but neither of these objections are worthy of notice from believers in divine incarnations; since the performance of the miracles themselves is incontestably proved by tradition.

“Thirdly.—The 'Christian' asks, 'Will he (Ram Doss) assert that the doctrine' of Hindooism is as pure and undefiled as that of Christianity?' Undoubtedly, such is my assertion: and an English translation of the Vedant as well as of Munoo (which contains the essences of the whole Veds) being before the public, I call on all reflecting men to compare the two religions together, and point out in what respect the one excels the other in purity. Should the 'Christian' attempt to ridicule some part of the ritual of the Veds, I shall of course feel myself justified in referring to ceremonies of a similar character in the Christian Scriptures; and if he dwell on the corrupt notions introduced into Hindooism in more modern times, I shall also remind him of the corruptions introduced by various sects into Christianity. But A Christian' must know very well that such corruptions cannot detract from the excellence of genuine religions themselves.

"Fourthly.-The Christian' asks, 'Will he (Ram Doss) prove that the human character has ever been exalted by any system of religion so much as by the sweet influence of Christianity?' In reply, I appeal to history, and call upon the CHRISTIAN' to mention any religion on the face of the earth that has been the cause of so much war and bloodshed, cruelty and oppression for so many hundred years as this whose sweet influence' he celebrates.

"That propriety of conduct found among the better sort of Christians is entirely owing to the superior education they have enjoyed; a proof of which is, that others of the same rank in society, although not believers in Christianity, are distinguished by equal propriety of conduct, which is not the case with the most firm believers, if destitute of education or without the means of improvement, by mixing in company with persons better instructed than themselves.

"It is unjust in the CHRISTIAN' to quarrel with Hindoos because (he says) they cannot comprehend the sublime

mystery of his religion; since he is equally unable to comprehend the sublime mysteries of ours, and since both these mysteries equally transcend the human understanding, one cannot be preferred to the other.

"Let us, however, return to the main question, viz, that THE INCARNATION OF THE DEITY IS THE COMMON BASIS OF HINDOOISM AND CHRISTIANITY. If the manifestation of God in the flesh is possible, such possibility cannot reasonably be confined to Judea or Uyodhya; for God has undoubtedly the power of manifesting himself in either country, and of assuming any colour or name he pleases. If it is impossible, as our common enemies the Unitarians contend, such impossibility must extend to all places and persons. I trust, therefore, the Christian will reflect with great seriousness on this subject, and will be kind enough to let me know the result. "I am, Sir, your most obedt. Servt. "RAM DOSS.

"Calcutta, May 23, 1823."

This extraordinary letter is followed by a notice that "Ram Doss having heard nothing more publicly or privately from Dr. Tytler or A Christian,' the correspondence here concluded, and the arguments adduced in vindication of the Incarnation of the Deity as the Common Basis of Hindooism and Christianity, consequently remain unanswered."

After the specimens that Rammohun Roy has presented to the public of the height of intellectual and theo

logical improvement which a Brahmin in Bengal may reach, it would be idle to say that Ram Doss cannot be the person he represents himself to be. If Rammohun Roy had stopped short at Hindoo Monotheism, he would have been just such a reasoner and writer as Ram Doss. But whether this name be fictitious or real, the controversy is of great, though it may not be of equal, importance. It must have been read by means of the newspaper and the pamphlet by many natives, and it can scarcely have failed of exciting some of them to inquire into the pretensions of Hindooism and Christianity, and of the several forms of Christianity, now exhibited in India. On the European population, its effect must, one should think, have been still greater; since it places the controversy between Trinitarians and Unitarians on the plain ground of the former being akin to polytheism, and of the latter being the only Christian system that militates directly against every principle of idolatry, and every argument of idolaters.

This last remark leads us to say that there has just fallen into our hands another East-India pamphlet in "Vindication of the Hindoo Religion against the Attacks of Christian Missionaries," of which we propose to give an account in the next Number.

Died, at Boston, Mass., U.S., Feb. 5, 1824, Mrs. ELIZABETH W. WARE, aged 31, wife of the Rev. Henry Ware, Junior, and eldest daughter of Benjamin Waterhouse, M.D. There were many qualities in the character of the late Mrs. Ware which gave her a claim to peculiar interest and respect while living, and render her premature death the subject of uncommon regret. To strong natural sense, and more than ordinary powers of mind, she united great energy, firmness, decision and dignity of character. Her feeble health for many years before the sickness which terminated her life, rendered the sphere of her exertions and influence smaller than her disposition would have made it; but even under the pressure of constant indisposition, there are few pos sessed of the full enjoyment of health,

who were capable of so much and of such well-directed exertion. Her life was terminated by a pulmonary consumption, of which the distinct commencement might be dated more than two years before its termination; and during the whole of this long sickness, she suffered far more from bodily distress and pain, than usually falls to the lot of the victims of that disease. With how much cheerful fortitude and Christian resignation she endured all this, can only be known by those who witnessed her days and nights of protracted suffering; who saw her, till within the few last months of her life, perform almost all the duties of a wife and mother, with as much assiduity and fidelity as she had when comparatively in a state of health, and this too with a perfect assurance from the very beginning,