 |
vol. title: Vol Four of The Theosophical Society of The Arya Samaj of Arya-wart vol. period: Sept 1878 – Sept 1879 pages in vol.: 350 |
< Sir,—One who signs... (continued from page 8-271) >
not,” is what I have been told more than once. An hundred thousand merchants in England and America would take the job for half the money. It is plain enough what our young critic means by his glittering generalities. He wants us to use our influence in America to have a ship-load of rupees sent here, done up in packages of one lakh each, and distribute them fairly, (packages unbroken) among our “Well Wishers.” The ‘machines’ might amuse the strugglers and then fetch something as old iron. The proposition is stale to us. Mr. Hurrychund Chintaman having put it to us in a highly ornate phraseology, which involved the use of the expressions “dear brother,” “beloved sister,” “true Aryans,” and such-like goulub. He was one of your Well-Wishers, ready to choke us to death with sugar—at our own expense. Here is a memorandum of the things he wanted us to bring him as his share of the ‘struggle’ money:—
| Items. | Cost Value in N. Y. Dollars. |
|---|---|
| A Bicycle | 90.00 |
| ” Moulding Machine complete | 1.200.00 |
| ” Microscope, best quality | 600.00 |
| ” Photographic Machinery complete, (Say) | 500.00 |
| ” Mechanical revolving pankah | 25.00 |
| ” Number 12 Camera | 100.00 |
| ” Dalmeya lens | 400.00 |
| Complete fittings for a printing office | 5.000. |
| Dollars. | 7,915.00 |
Or about Rs. 18.000! And this is not a complete list! Your correspondent may be more friendly to us than his letter indicates, and a lover of his country—in which case he is free to give us advice every day in the week. But it would be pleasant at least to know that he is making honest efforts out-side a clerkship.
We made an attempt to aid in promoting female education, but could get neither school nor scholars. And Hindu friends, who sent their children to Jesuit and Protestant schools without a question, demanded of us references as they would of a new servant. We treated with a native capitalist for the organization of a manufactory of Indian articles for export on which great and sure profits would be realized; he kept us waiting three months for him to fulfil his promise to begin work, finally abandoned us without a word, and told a third party that he never had an idea to undertake the business. We wanted to purchase, at second hand, a machine that stood idle in a shop with a quantity of wood piled upon it. The dealer said it was too much trouble to move the wood. We offered to pay for its removal, on condition that the coolie hire should be deducted from the bill if the machine proved suitable: he declined, on the score of the trouble. One of the wealthiest American firms commissioned me to buy a certain kind of native goods, and draw for the amount against the bills of lading; a large Hindu capitalist declined, unless I would furnish him the cash in hand to make the purchases with. This is the way we are struggling against apathy, fatalism, and routine. A Jeypore Brahmin came to see us, one evening, at Raj Nursiuglass’s palace, where we were stopping. “I like your talk,” he said; “How much do you pay those who join your society?” Through one of our Fellows, we were asked whether we would agree to pay certain Bible readers, writers, and preachers, as much as, or even less than, they got from the Missionaries, in case they would turn Theosophists, and work against Christianity; which, they said, they followed only for a livelihood!
Some one styling himself “a well wisher” addressed in the “Native Opinion” a “hint to the Theosophists” to the effect that the people of this country have had enough of philosophy and that what is wanted is employment and food and exhorted them to obtain money and machines from America to teach our young men art and trade. Col. Olcott has replied to this in a letter which we think shows much impatience and some want of acquaintance with the true state of things here. The ‘well wisher’ was probably induced to pen his appeal because of the great sympathy professed by the Theosophists toward the fallen condition of this country, but the form of his proposal was gross enough. Even then however the reply might have been more suitable. In the first place, “a well wisher” is wrong in saying we have had enough philosophy. If we really have had it then it must not be true philosophy. It is no use simply talking of the knowledge or wisdom of our ancestors—we must follow the principles and the spirit underlying that knowledge and that wisdom. Instead of that we seem to follow the letter of the thing and content ourselves with a caricature of notions and observances which suited a past state of things; and then we wonder at the sad result. Therefore “a well wisher” might have been told to be sure of his philosophy first, before he thought he has had enough of it. Then the allusion to the struggle for Government clerkships is hardly fair though we are sure it is prompted by Col. Olcott’s strong desire to see our young men follow independant occupation. There was a time when clerkship was the only employment open but since the introduction of railways and telegraphs and the cotton mills and the development of legislation, work of another sort has offered and it has been availed of to the fullest extent and therefore we do not think our young men can be charged with hankering after Government service alone. We are fully aware of the moral value of independant occupations but we do not know how individuals in the position of our young men of the middle classes, without capital and without means can enter such employment. If however anything in this direction can be done and is left undone—it is due to a deficient and not sufficient philosophy of life and duty, and all well wishers of theosophy and of the country ought to take note of the fact.
Next, as to Schools, the principles of the theosophists were found to be so esoteric, and so different from what, rightly or wrongly, was expected; and moreover their organisation was so distant that people who made enquiry on the matter hardly deserve censure and our friends who have suffered so much persecution for their principles ought not to resent the enquiry which proceeded from no carping motive.
Lastly we may observe that our theosophical friends have obtained but a superficial acquaintance with our real condition if they think their presence for a short time among us and interviews and conversations with random visitors will suffice to impart European or American enterprise to our lethargic energies as a people.
10th AUGUST 1879.
“Our Well Wishes”
Editor's notes