Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Vada in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c11.s11: Satyārthaprakāśa: A Text on Debate

Vāda in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c11.s11

Language
English

Satyārthaprakāśa: A Text on Debate

c11.s11.1

Swami Dayananda Saraswati (1824-83) was definitely one of the savants of modern age who resuscitated the *vāda* tradition. Despite the abusives that he hurled at his opponents⁸⁰ and many a time his failure to appreciate their points of view, he remained open to debates and dialogues. He also provoked and challenged the clergy and heads of other religions to enter into debate with them. After Paṇḍitarāja Jagannātha, who has been referred in the previous chapter, none of the traditional *paṇḍits* bothered to have scholarly debates with the followers of alien religions and traditions, even though the infighting between various sects under Vedānta very much continued.

c11.s11.2

Dayānand used the trics of *vāda* (*vāk-chala* and *jātis*) to build up a strategy for his reformist movement. Maulana Mohammad Kasim Nanotavi wrote to him a letter on 14 August 1878 pointing out the inconsistencies in his stands. At one stage he accepted the authority of twenty-one Śāstras and circulated their list. Another time he upheld the authority of only four Vedas. Swamiji replied to Maulana in the letter dated 15 August 1878 — “you should first understand the meaning of *śāstra*”.⁸¹

c11.s11.3

Unfortunately the accounts of Swami Dayananda’s debates are either shrouded in a hazy mass of legends built up by his devotees, or they have been coloured with the spirit of glorifying his *digviyaya* (over-all victory). No authentic biography on him is available. The accounts presented by his rivals (*sanātanīs*) are equally unreliable. One thing about him is certain. The course of his postulations and precepts continued to change because of discussions, dialogues and debates with the followers of diverse faiths, he revised his opinions and stands through *vāda*.

c11.s11.4

He was not against idol worship till he faced the *paṇḍits* of Kāśī in a historical debate. In the same way he was also not through and through against the Purāṇas. At one stage, he refused to accept the authority of *Bhāgavata Purāṇa*, but held *Devībhāgavata Purāṇa* in high respect. He had written a text on refutation of *Bhāgavata*, entitled *Bhagavatakhaṇḍanaṃ*. Here he extoled *Devībhāgavata Purāṇa*. It was perhaps in reaction to the attacks from his rivals that subsequently in 1969 he declared that all Purāṇas are fraudulous.⁸²

c11.s11.5

Swami Dayananda is known for settling the disputes in debates by unusual methods. Madam Blavatsky in her homage to Dayananda has narratated an incident with regard to his dispute with some fanatics. One of whom is said to have hurled a cobra at him, saying “Let this Viṣṇu decide which of us is right!” Swami Dayananda caught the cobra and with a single vigorous movement crushed the head of the reptile, saying “Let him do so . . . your god has been too slow. It is I who have decided the dispute. Now go.”⁸³

c11.s11.6

He wrote *Satyārthaprakāśa* also with a spirit to provoke debates. He revised many of his postulations in the second edition of the text, viz. recommending non-vegetarian food for certain rituals, sanction against the śūdras to study Veda and against the ladies for *yajñopavīta* (sacred thread), the concept of salvation as eternal and unending, etc.

c11.s11.7

Swami Dayananda advocated Advaitic view when he entered into a *vāda* (debate) with a clergy John Robton in 1866. But after one year he changed his position to embrace dualism.⁸⁴

c11.s11.8

In his Preface to *Satyārthaprakāśa*, Swamiji says:⁸⁵

c11.s11.9

My purpose for creating this text is to bring out the *satya* — that which is true — to spell out *satya* as *satya* and falsehood as falsehood. This I understand as the light of *satya*. Telling lies as *satya* and *satya* as lies is not *satya*. To describe something as it really is in writing and to believe in it — is *satya*. A prejudiced person justifies his *asatya* as *satya* and *satya* of other’s as *asatya*. Thus he cannot attain the tenet of *satya*. Therefore this is the duty of reliable scholars that in their discourse as well as in writings they should deliver the real nature of *satya* and *asatya* to the society. After that having understood their own good and bad they will accept *satya* and give up *asatya* and remain happy.⁸⁶

c11.s11.10

Swami Dayananda again and again proclaimed his impartiality and his engagement with a fair debate.⁸⁷ He was open to discussion and amendments. He revised some of his concepts and postulations in the second edition of *Satyārthaprakāśa* — specially about eating of meat and the concept of liberation.

c11.s11.11

Commenting on *Yajurveda* XXVI.2 (*yathā imāṁ vācaṁ kalyāṇīm āvadāni janebhyaḥ brahmarājanyābhyāṁ śūdrāya ca āryāya ca* . . .) he says: Just as the Almighty God has breathed the earth, waters, fire, air, moon, and the sun and crops, etc. for all, in the same way, He has created the Vedas also for all. If there is a restriction (for anyone to study Veda), it is for the specific purpose, i.e. a person who is unable to learn even after being taught, being devoid of intelligence, he is a śūdra. It is of no use to teach him and make him study. And if you impose a ban on women from studying Veda, it is the effect of your foolishness, vested interest and lack of wisdom. See, there is proof of women studying Veda in Veda itself — *brahnacaryeṇa kanyā yuvānaṁ vindate patiṁ*.

c11.s11.12

Question: So, shall the ladies study Veda then?

c11.s11.13

Answer: Definitely they should. See, in Śrautasūtras it is said: *strī mantraṁ paṭhet* (the lady will recite the *mantra*). If the lady has not studied Vedas and Śāstras, how can she recite *mantra* with proper pronunciation? Amongst the ladies of Bhāratavarṣa, there have been gems like Gārgī, who after studying Vedas and Śāstras became scholars. This explicitly said in *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* (Kāṇḍa 14).⁸⁸

c11.s11.14

Citing Kaikeyī’s example that she accompanied her husband to battlefield, he again argues that a brāhmaṇa lady should be taught all *vidyās*, a kṣatriya lady should also be taught all *vidyās*, but she should be specially trained in martial arts and governance; a vaiśya lady should be specially trained in management and a śūdra women *in cooking, etc.* But all ladies should be educated at least in *vyākaraṇa, dharma, vaidyaka, gaṇita* and *śilpavidyā* (*Satyārthaprakāśa*, p. 74).

c11.s11.15

He adopted a novel method of debating taking recourse of *jāti* and *vitaṇḍā*. This is explicit in his advocacy of refutation of child marriage. After deciphering the best age for marriage of a girl is between 16 to 24 years and for a boy between 25 to 48 years, he produces the opponent’s views citing the Smṛti texts which recommend the marriageable age at 8 years for girls. In refutation of these, he produces citations from *Brahma Purāṇa*, which has just been composed (*sadyonirmita*) and challenges his opponents how do they dare to overrule the authority of Brahmā (ibid., p. 79). The opponent draws his attention to the impossible situation which the so-called verses from the so-called *Brahma Purāṇa* describe, Swami Dayananda retorts by saying that if our excerpts present an impossible situation, your citations equally present an impossible situation. Then he shows the impropriety of marrying a girl at the age of eight through scientific notions of modern age — that physically and mentally she is quite unfit for marriage.

c11.s11.16

Here Dayananda in a novel way makes use of *sāmānya-chala* and *jāti* to silence the opponent. He advocates the marriage by mutual consent, seeing the photographs of each other.⁸⁹

c11.s11.17

He construes *mantras* for his purpose. For example: *daśa asyaṁ putrān ādhehi patim ekādaśaṁ kṛdhi* (Ṛgveda X.85.45) says that ten sons should be born from a lawful wife and let her husband become her eleventh son. Dayananda interprets this line as a message that a man should not produce more than ten issues.

c11.s11.18

He views that phenomenal world is a reality. The serpent seen in the rope is also a reality and dreams are also a reality (ibid., p. 290).

Cites (7)