Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, trusted
17,091
edits
HPB-SB-14-28: Difference between revisions
Полный текст по скану
(незначительные правки) |
(Полный текст по скану) |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
}} | }} | ||
... | <center>THE<br>Hindu Reformer and Politician.<br>A<br>MONTHLY MAGAZINE.<br>CONDUCTED UNDER THE PATRONAGE OF<br>THE HINDU SABHA.</center> | ||
{{Style P-Separator custom|width=100%}} | |||
{| style="width:100%; border:0; border-collapse:collapse;" | |||
| style="text-align:left; width:25%;" | Vol. I.] | |||
| style="text-align:center; width:50%;" | NOVEMBER 1882. | |||
| style="text-align:right; width:25%;" | [No. 11. | |||
|} | |||
{{Style P-Separator custom|width=100%}} | |||
My dear Rajah Sir T. Madhava Row. | |||
“I am happy to know that you are again at Madras and prefer for the remainder of the short span of physical life a career of personal usefulness and private benevolence. Our Raghoonatha Row is devoted to the same, though notwithstanding his knowledge of Bhagavat Gita and the Arsham generally he forgets that his appeals to the Text-letter and to material instincts are out of place in dealing with persons who wish to rise above Samsaram and Indriya-badha. I encourage Celibacy in those who wish to be Celibates ''and'' re-marriage in those who cannot stop short of it. There are and even will be divisions of Hindus based on differences of language, acharam, belief, dress and even food. The Bahadurs have unhappily chosen first to confound divisions based on Theosophical and Physical yearnings instead of simply ''recognising'' with me ''a new division'' of Brahmins whom I have dubbed “the uttamas.” It is certainly open to a Hindu to change his language, acharam, belief, dress, and food, and to ''recognise'' the change in others. But it is ludicrous that ''a Mahomedan'' should be ''the Missionary of Christianity'', and such is the procedure of our Rows, if not worse. I say worse because their position forces the widow who seeks the conquest of her lower nature to live in approving contact with the widow who cultivates it. That the widow now lives with the married woman is itself not a favourable condition for the widow’s progress, but that is no reason why she should be further inflicted with the company of the re-married Uttama. There is also a reason for the existing state of co-residence namely that the Sumangaly is watched and benefited by the widow. That ''the President'' of a ''Theosophical'' Society should do little in favour of the widow as a female Theosophical Chela for whom madame. B. is a model but should ''actively'' draw her into marriage is very incredible to me. Male Theosophists in their progress as Chelas often separate themselves from home, wife children, &c., and ''wives'' may do so too. Will you kindly ascertain from Raghoonatha Row why he ''represses Virakti'' or appraises it only as ''Kàma Pravarty''. I recognise as much relative difference between them as between secular and religious education or rather in your happy expression between sublimary and superlunary culture. You see that as I replied in the Athenæum of 28th September my criticism does not affect the meaning of verses of which Rowjee is too fond but goes to ''the principle'' at the root of the caste and social organisation. The Lawyers and Judge Muthusawmy Iyer know how ''apparently contradictory decisions'' and texts are reconciled and adjusted by knowing ''the reason or the life of the law''. Even Mr. Wigram’s recent work on Malabar Law and custom will show you such instances. The Sannyasi or Madhatipati is the man, who studies ''the spirit'' of the sacred writings and the Sastras and best interprets the letter. Raghoonatha Row ignores ''the interdependence'' of the stages of the Brahman’s life and opposes their duties to themselves to their competency to lead those in the lower grades. The rules of the Theosophical Society will show him that the Theosophist in ''the second grade'' is the instructor of the third grade. On all these grounds and on the ground that the Hindu Sabba is a ''National Hindu Association'' to promote ''all the interests'' of the Hindu race and not merely to provide relief for the love-smitten fraction of the fair sex of the Brahman order, I have as yet been denied the pleasure and honor of Raghoonatha Row’s counsels in the Hindu Sabba. I shall be happy if you and Muthusawmi Iyer will kindly get Raghoonatha Row and Chentsal Row just to write what they have to say on the points contained in this and other published letters in which I had to challenge their boast that the Pundits and the nation were with the Uttamas. “The ''Hindu Women’s'' Re-marriage Association” is I repeat a mistake and a scandal. According to their own explanation ''all women'' cannot vedically remarry, and even if they should change “Women” into child-widows or any other more exact phrase, they are ill-advised in perpetuating a schismatic and ''only schismatic'' association. A statesman in Burke’s language is one “who has a disposition to preserve with ability to improve.” I see here only ''a Book learned conceit to reform'' and nothing of the disposition of “to preserve” in the programme on the action. Without inspiring and winning confidence one cannot lead the people but only a clique. | |||
I write thus because I want the real Uttamas in person willing to re-marry widows to do real business and take their seat in the Hindu Sabba Hall along with the other jatis represented in the Sabba. With Jati, which sect, which creed and which anything else will by its merit attract and assimilate the others will be seen when they are all brought together on the basis of toleration. Wordy fight is not the means of settling comparative merits; example, experience, thoughtfulness and the magnetic dark are all powerful though silent and subtle forces. It is not pretended by the party that what they hold to be ''permissive'' is the most meritorious. If all the members of the Hindu Sabba were of one side, it would not be the Hindu Sabba and I should at once add members of the other view. The Hindu Sabba shall not deteriorate into a Party Sabba acting ex-parte, but it is the society in which all societies with ''particular'' objects or of local influence only meet. There is now quite a mania for associations amongst Hindus and all associations can be represented on the Hindu Sabba and its General Council “which transmits power from one to another and collects all without any part going to waste.” | |||
{{Style P-Signature custom|A. SANKARIAH.|1 style=plain|align=right}} | |||
<center>—o—</center> | |||
{{HPB-SB-footer-footnotes}} | {{HPB-SB-footer-footnotes}} | ||