Vada in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c11.s7: The Debates by Roy
Vāda in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c11.s7
- Language
- English
The Debates by Roy
c11.s7.1
Raja Rammohun Roy composed a text *Tohfatu-* 'i-*muwahiddin* comprising a discourse on monotheism in Persian with Preface in Arabic. This work must have created a wave of protests and disagreements, as another text *Jawab-i-* *Tuhfat-ul-muwahiddin* in defence of the earlier work came out in 1820. According to Bruce C. Robertson, this second work is falsely attributed to Roy.⁵⁶ *Jñānacarcā* was published in refutation to Rammohun’s ideas in 1821. Roy was accused of using the Islamic argumentative style to refute Islam.⁵⁷
c11.s7.2
He was challenged for a face to face debate by Subrahmanya Shastri of Madras. The meeting was held during December 1816. Rammohun was able to silence his opponent “by the great cogency of his reasoning, as well as by long array of scriptural authorities that he quoted in favour of his views”.⁵⁸ The dispute was reported widely and was attended by a large audience.⁵⁹ *Vedāntacandrikā* by an anonymous author was a public censure for Rammohun. Perhaps the ghost author was Mrityunjaya Vidyalankar.⁶⁰ Radhakanta Dev Bahadur was the man behind the whole campaign against Ram-mohun. An English translation of *Vedāntacandrikā* entitled *An Apology for the Present State of Hindoo Worship* was also published. Roy was criticized by Christian mercenaries for reducing the Christ to a human being. Rammohun gave a strong refutation to *Vedāntavandrikā* in his *Bhaṭṭācārya Sahit Bicār* (in Bengali).⁶¹
c11.s7.3
In order to convince the Christian missionaries that the best of their teachings is already contained in Upaniṣads, Raja Rammohun Roy himself translated a large number of Upaniṣads and also edited the original Upaniṣadic texts.⁶²
c11.s7.4
Consulted by the authorities, the *paṇḍits* upheld the custom of *satī* with the rider that permission for “suttee” is not to be allowed in case of the pregnant women and a lady having very small children, or if she is in a tender age herself. After this, the government issued a directive to magistrates and police officers in 1817 to allow the “suttee”. As a result between 1815 to 1818, as many as 2,365 widows were burnt alive. Alarmed by the enormous number the government issued regulations to place restriction against the practice of *satī*, the orthodox *paṇḍits* opposed these regulations and submitted a petition to the government to repeal the regulations.⁶³ During 1818-19 Rammohun Roy wrote a series of tracts in Bengali and English to show that the practice of *satī* was not approved by Hindu Śāstras. The leaders of Dharma Sabha engaged an attorney of the Calcutta Supreme Court to carry the appeal to England. Roy also finalized his plans to visit England. The appeal of the *paṇḍits* was rejected as Rammohun Roy has been a regular attendant in the Privy Council where it was heard.
c11.s7.5
In the *Brief Remarks Regarding Modern Encroachments on the Ancient Rights of Females: According to Hindoo Law of Inheritance* (1822) Roy pleaded how the plight of Hindu women has become precarious due to modern interferences and that even the *satī* cases had multiplied.⁶⁴
c11.s7.6
Dharma Sabha founded by Radha Kant Deb tried to arrest the progressive movement of Brahmo Samaj. It also started a weekly called *Samācāracandrikā* to give a boost to its opposition to the movements of progressive thinkers like Roy. *Samācāracandrikā* criticized Rammohun Roy for travelling to England for personal gains.
c11.s7.7
Debendranath Tagore, son of Dwarkanath Tagore, was a friend of Rammohun Roy. Debendranath Tagore was drawn to Upaniṣadic philosophy and founded Tattvabodhini Sabha, which was later merged with the Brahmo Samaj in 1842. He also started a monthly journal *Tattvabodhini Patrika*. He also sent five students to Banaras for the study of Veda. Then he drifted from the Vedic and Upaniṣadic lore as well to formulate his own philosophy of intuition.
c11.s7.8
Keshub Chandra Sen joined the Brahmo Samaj at the age of nineteen in 1857. He fell apart from the Brahmo Samaj when Debendranath disallowed some members from wearing the sacred thread and formed the Brahmo Samaj of India. His opposers then formed a third Brahmo Samaj known as the Sādhāraṇa Brahma Samāja. Mahadev Govind Ranade came in contact with him and as an offshoot of the Brahmo Samaj, a Prārthanā Samāj in Maharashtra came into inception.