১৫8 “ces (which abound in misty metaphysics, but put forth little really deserving the maine of “strictly moral or religious matter)” we “borrow “without acknowledginent from Christianity.” We repudiate, the Idea of having claimed the credit of reforination. Our humble object is inerely to revive and propagate an existing system of truths. We are really at a loss to make out, wher ein we have obtrustled ourselves on the notice ol the world, as reformers, or borrowed any doctrine without acknowledgment, from Christianity. The Valds are now what they were centuries ago: timey declare that the sole regulator of the universe is but ()ne, Oinnipresent, Omnscient. far surpassing our powers of comprehension, beyond external sense, and whose spiritual worship is the chief duty of mankind and the sole cause ofeternal beatitude. * In this brief sentence is contained the essence of our belies. It is the doctrine which was inculcated by the ancient sages, and we entertain too strong a sense of propriety—too socied a regard for truth – to attempt to pass off any peculiar or extraneons views of our own, for the gennine precepts of the ancient and venerated Vaids. Will the Revd. Gentlemen do us the favor to show, without indu!!!ing in dogmatical assertions, wherein we have committed ourselves * With reference to the other part of the charge of borrowing from Christianity, we are equally at a loss, in the absence of explanation, or positive proof of any kind, to find out wherein we have dressed ourselves out in the borrowed plumes of Christianity. It may, however, be reasonably aupposed, that allusion is made to our explanations of the Vaidantic doctrines, upon the principles of natural titeology. It is nevertheless clear that all such illustrations must be founded on তত্ত্ববোধিনী পত্রিকা । Kamschatka! We do not clearly see, therefore, how we can, on such grounds, be fairly stigina-. tized with religious or literary larceny, or with pilfering our illustrations from Christianity. As to the “misty metaphysics” with which the Waids are said to abound, we can say but little, at present ; because our Friends have not ventured to specify the passages they refer to. We will merely remark, that any thing inay appear dium and cloudy, which, by an increase of light, may soon become as transparently clear, as the broad day light , and if the Revd. Gentlemen will excuse us the liberty, we will venture to af. firin, that there are many things even in the Bible itself to which not merely a liindoo but souwe knowledge, however ei cuumscribed, ofnatu- • on religious subjects, whether from a Christian, a Mahomedan or a Hindoo pen, do, and must deal, more or less, in examples derived fi on the records of human science. Chris tian writers, although their religion owed its' parentage to the bearded Rabbins of Jeru salem, are indebted to the Philosophical School of Bacon and his followers for the greater part of their illustrations ; and we see no reason why we should be debarred of the privilege of borrowing from the same source, or why we should be confined to the researches of Goutum and Kumad for our similes and explanations. Has the Baconian Philosophy a more natural connection with Christianity than with Hindooism? Would it not have been received in all Christendom as the means of discovering the hidden paths and ways of nature, even though the ullustrious Bacon had been born in Thibet or + একোবশী ॥ সৰ্ব্বগত ॥ " সর্বজ্ঞঃ সৰ্ববিৎ ॥ य८कांदाcsाबिद#८ष्ठ अश्नागा शमन जश् ॥, न छनूयां शृंछ८ठ माभि दtछां मोठेण्टftदः ॥ चांकनष्यष्टवानीर्थोउ ॥ DDDBBS BBBBBB BBDDH HBBD DDD DBBS
- - شيشندظه A § cos' శీ,
ral and inoral philosophy. Indeed, all writings which has even a Christian may prefer the charge of obscurity, although it is not held by Christians to detract from the credibility which attaches to that work. Thus for instances, the first few verses of John are perfectly mysterious, though they, nevertheless, form part of the Gospel. We are charged, in the next place, by our friend of the Herald with advocating “Itammohun Roy's one-sided view of the Vaidant system of Hindoo Philosophy,” + as our contemporary is pleased to term it. What the writer ineans by such one-sided view of the Vaidant, we confess our utter inability to coinprehend. 11 our Missionary friend intends to insinuate that Rammohun Roy's views of the Waidant are one -sided, in as much as they were set forth, before the world to the best advantage, by ushering into the notice of the public, the excellencies of a few singulal features of that system, without entering into those parts of it which refer to the performance of rites and ceremonies, we thank our friend for the opportunity thus afforded us of redeeming the sarced memory of the deceased Philosoper from the obloquy thus been cast upou it. We shall meet our friend with Raul Mohun Roy's own words. After showing in the most unequivocal terms, the purely monotheistical system of the Vaids, he proceed thus; “These as well as several other texts of the “ same nature,”(meaning such precepts as relate to the practice of rites and ceremonies,) “are not real commands, but only direct those “ who are unfortunately incapable of adoring the “invisible Supreme Being, to apply their minds to “any visible thing, rather than allow them to re“main idle.” “that the worship of the Sun and Fire, together with the whole allegorical sys“ tem, were only inculcated for the 蠶 of those “whose limited understandings rendered them incapable of comprehending and adoring the invisible Supreme Being; so that such persons might not remain in a brutified state, destitute of all religious principles,” and again. “The ‘Waids,not only call the celestial representations,
- We consider ourselves bound to protest against this heterogeneous inixture of the idea of a newe system of philosophical and human doctrines with the religious and sacred helioposed by
تا او را به
