Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Vada in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c11.s2: The Role of the Paṇḍit: Vāda Reformulated

Vāda in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c11.s2

Language
English

The Role of the Paṇḍit: Vāda Reformulated

c11.s2.1

The Western subjugation generated a new kind of *vāda* between the *paṇḍits* as informants and the colonizers as rulers. Even though this could not be carried out on an equal footing, the officers of the East India Company and the British judges in the law courts at Calcutta had to depend on the *paṇḍits* for understanding the social institutions under Hinduism.

c11.s2.2

But then the Company started getting manuals of Hindu law prepared with the very help of these *paṇḍits* to break their monopoly. In fact, the attempts at compiling the legel digests from Sanskrit sources and getting them translated into English; or even preparing translations of philosophical and literary Sanskrit texts formed a part of the strategy of Orientalists to “out” the *paṇḍits*.¹² The origins of one of the most passionate and prolonged debates which the trial of Hastings involved are rooted in the image of India in the seventeenth century.¹³

c11.s2.3

Hastings could not find any scholar to translate *Vivādārṇavasetu* (A Bridge on the Sea of Litigation) from Sanskrit into English. It was first translated into Persian and then was translated from the Persian translation into English. The translation was printed in 1770 during Hasting’s regime under the title *A Code of Gentoo Law*.¹⁴ A German translation of the English rendering of the Persian version appeared in 1778.

c11.s2.4

Winternitz names two different translators of *Vivādārṇavasetu* from Persian into English — Nathaniel Brassey Halhed and Rud Eric Raspe.

c11.s2.5

Soon there was a flood of new texts on Dharmaśāstra by the *paṇḍits*. *Vivādabhaṅgārṇava* was authored by Jagannātha Paṇḍita during 1792-94, while Śrīdhara composed *Vyavahāradaśaślokī*. Paṇḍit Durgaprasad wrote a commentary on this work (1825) and A.C. Burnell translated it into English.¹⁵

c11.s2.6

It seems that the Company was availing the services of several *paṇḍits* for preparing the manuals like *Vivādārṇavasetu* and *Vivādabhaṅgārṇavasetu*. Michael Dodson refers to the employment of the well-known *paṇḍit* Bāṇeśvara Vidyālaṁkāra in 1773 to work for Company’s first legal digest, the *Vivādārṇavasetu*. He was hired from Maharaja Nabakrishna, a prominent merchant and bania to Lord Clive. Nabakrishna maintained a *sabhā* of *paṇḍits* and poets. Later Radhakanta Tarkavagish and Jagananth Tarkapanchanan were hired to prepare the second legal digest. Radhakanta Tarkavagish also composed *Purāṇārthaprakāśa* for Hastings.¹⁶

c11.s2.7

Warren Hastings also deputed Charles Wilkins to go to Banaras and learn Sanskrit from the *paṇḍits*. This resulted into the translation of *Bhagavadgītā* by Wilkins which was published in 1785.

c11.s2.8

The debates on property laws with reference to ancient texts on Dharmaśāstra continued and also led to creation of new texts. Raja Rammohun Roy wrote his “Essay on the Rights of Hindoos over Ancestral Property”.¹⁷ William Jones started translating *Vivādabhaṅgārṇavasetu* under the title *A Digest of Hindu Law* which was completed by H.T. Colebrooke after his death and printed from Calcutta in 1798. The whole text is based on the commentary of Jagannātha Pañcānana, “the most widely respected Hindu jurist in eastern India during the late eighteenth century”.¹⁸ Distilling rules from the Dharmaśāstra a number of other texts were brought out.¹⁹

c11.s2.9

The *paṇḍits* also served as Hindu law officers to interpret the rules. Bharat Bhatta, one such officer in the case of Bhola Dhami vs. Nawaju, consulted and cited the prescriptions from *Vīramitrodaya*. There have been debates over the right of widows to inherit the property of their husband, and also over their right to adopt a child. Bhola Dhami was the adopted son of Nawaju, the widow of Krishna Chandra Dhami in 1780. After a few years, there were disputes between her and the adopted son. She disinherited him and went for a second adoption. Bhola Dhami sued her. The case was taken up in 1800 in Gaya court. On the basis of his consultations with local officers, the judge dismissed Bhola Dhami’s claim and upheld the second adoption by Nawaju. But the dispute continued for over twenty years. On the basis of commentaries on *Vīramitrodaya*, Līlādhara who was engaged as law officer this time from Gayā gave the *vyavasthā* (opinion) that the husband’s consent is inferred automatically.²⁰

c11.s2.10

The case was finally heard in the highest Bengal appeal court (*Sadr Diwani Adalat*) in 1831. This time the *paṇḍits* took a different stand and reversed the whole verdict.

c11.s2.11

The concept of *vyavasthā* as discussed earlier (see Chap. 5) generated more debates. Convention and precedence played greater role than the textual rules for reaching at the *vyavasthā*.

c11.s2.12

It was at Bengal that the East India Company first settled and it was in Calcutta that the Asiatic Society was founded by Sir William Jones. Bengal and particularly the city of Calcutta provided platforms for the new dialogues between the traditional scholarship and the Western scientific orientations. There was a section of Sanskit *paṇḍits* who wanted a new educational institution to be established at Calcutta for providing teaching in English and sciences. They held a meeting at the house of Hyde East, magistrate of the Supreme Court of Calcutta on 14 May 1816 for establishing this kind of institution “conceived by the orthodox Hindus and established by the orthodox Hindus, for the orthodox Hindus”. R.C. Majumdar has shown that Raja Rammohun Roy had least to do with the establishment of Hindu College which came into inception as a consequence of this meeting. Rather, the persons assembled in the meeting insisted that the Raja will not be involved in starting this institution and no donation from him will be accepted. The participants of the meeting started collecting donations on the spot itself and were able to raise a handsome amount of one lakh rupees then and there. Majumdar concludes that associating Raja Rammohun Roy with the inception of this college was a fabrication and a part of the sustained process of making him a mythical figure.²¹

c11.s2.13

The process of dialogue with literary traditions of Sanskrit classics was accelerated during the beginning of the nineteenth century and more and more translations of Sanskrit classics were appearing. In Bengal, Mrityunjaya Vidyalankar Bhattacharya published *Batris Simhasan* in 1802, *Hitopadeśa* and *Rājā Bali* (both in 1808) in Bengali.

c11.s2.14

Even the Western scholars and missionaries started preparing new texts in Sanskrit. Revd William Yate’s *Elements of Natural Philosophy and Natural History* was rendered into Sanskrit under the title *Padārthavidyāsāra* and was published by the Calcutta School Book Society in 1828.²²

c11.s2.15

With the continuity of pre-colonial knowledge systems and institutions in colonial period, the *paṇḍits* serving as native informants also participated in the administrative process, and even served as advisers and philsophers for the East India Company and the British rulers later. They actively contributed to building bridges between diverse polarities and creating knowledge systems.²³

c11.s2.16

The emphasis in the new writings during 1850–1947 in Sanskrit was shifted to the presentation and the interpretation of history and contemporary society with a global perspective. Vasudev Sharma Latkar wrote the biography of Shahu Rajaram (1874–1922) in *Śāhucaritam* (1939). Madhusudan Tarkalankar wrote a grammar book of English in Sanskrit — *Iṅglaiṇḍīyavyākaraṇasāraḥ* (1835). Pt. Vinayak Bhatta in *Aṅgrejacandrikā* (Madras, 1801) and *Itihāsatamomaṇiḥ* produced books of history in the modern sense of the term. Attempts to create an understanding of European wisdom were made by the *paṇḍits*. One Sanskrit *paṇḍit* translated Bacon’s book under the title *Bekanīyaśāstravyākhyānam*. *Principles of Human Knowledge* by Burkley was translated under the title *Jñānasiddhāntacandrikā*; Locke’s *Essays Concerning Human Understanding* was translated under the title *Mānavīyajñānaviṣayakaśāstram*. Even the English missionaries started writing in Sanskrit for the propagation of Christianity. Rozario published a monograph on dialogue between a brāhmaṇa and a Catholic entitled *Brāhmaṇaromanakaitholikasamvādaḥ*. Ram Roy Basu vehemently criticized Hinduism in his *Īśāīvivaraṇāmṛtam* and *Jñānodaya*. Around two dozens of translations or adaptations of Bible came out during the nineteenth century.

c11.s2.17

The missionaries in India attempted the early translations in Sanskrit. These translations were obviously from the religious texts. Thus in the first decade of the nineteenth century, William Carry, attached to the Baptist church in Shrirampur in Bengal, rendered the Bible in Sanskrit in three parts which was brought out between 1808-11. K.P. Urmis translated the *Sermons on Mountain* under the title *Girigītā*.

Linked texts (4)